Sen. Catherine Blakespear

(1) Existing law establishes procedures by which a person may petition the court for certain protective or restraining orders, including civil harassment restraining orders, domestic violence restraining orders, elder or dependent adult abuse restraining orders, gun violence restraining orders, postsecondary school restraining orders, and workplace violence restraining orders, to enjoin a restrained person from taking specified actions. Before a hearing on the issuance or denial of a domestic violence restraining order or gun violence restraining order, existing law requires the court to ensure that a search has been conducted to determine, among other things, if the subject of the proposed order owns or possesses a firearm as reflected in the Department of Justice Automated Firearms System. If after the search, the court finds that the subject of the proposed order owns or possesses a firearm, existing law requires the court to make a written record as to whether the subject has relinquished the firearm and provided proof of the required storage, sale, or relinquishment of the firearm. Upon a court's issuance of such a protective order, existing law requires the restrained person to relinquish any firearm and ammunition in that person's immediate possession or control, according to specified procedures. Existing law prescribes procedures by which the restrained person must certify compliance with the court, and for the court to determine, by a preponderance of the evidence, whether the person has a firearm in violation of the order. This bill would make clarifying and conforming changes to the procedures relating to the protective or restraining orders described above by explicitly requiring the restrained person to relinquish, in addition to any firearm, any ammunition in that person's immediate possession or control. The bill, commencing January 1, 2028, would require courts to permit a party or witness to appear remotely at a hearing for a postsecondary educational institution or workplace violence restraining order at no cost. This bill would also require courts to develop rules and instructions for such remote appearances and to post them on their internet websites. The bill would also, commencing on January 1, 2028, require courts to allow filings related to those protective orders to be submitted electronically, as specified. (2) Existing law prohibits court from granting a temporary restraining order without notice to the respondent, except as specified. Existing law requires a peace officer, upon the request of a petitioner, to serve any civil harassment restraining order, domestic violence restraining order, elder or dependent adult abuse restraining order, gun violence restraining order, postsecondary school restraining order, or workplace violence restraining order on the respondent, whether or not the respondent has been taken into custody. Existing law prescribes procedures that a sheriff or marshal must follow when serving a writ, warrant, summons, order, or other process issued by a superior court in a civil action or proceeding. Existing law requires the Judicial Council, on or before January 1, 2024, to create a statewide form or forms to be used by litigants in civil actions or proceedings to request service of process or notice by a marshal or sheriff. This bill, commencing January 1, 2028, would prohibit a court from requiring notice to be provided to the party to be restrained in advance of accepting a filing for, or deciding, an application for an ex parte restraining order, as specified, if the applicant or the applicant's attorney certifies to the court under oath that providing notice to the party to be restrained in advance of filing the petition would likely endanger the safety of the petitioner or other persons. The bill, commencing January 1, 2028, would require a peace officer, as defined, to follow the procedures that apply to a sheriff or marshal when serving a writ, warrant, summons, order, or other process issued by a superior court, as described above. The bill would require the Judicial Council, on or before January 1, 2028, to create a statewide form or forms to be used by litigants in civil actions or proceedings to request service of process or notice by a marshal or sheriff, or by a peace officer serving any of the restraining or protective orders described above. By expanding the duties of peace officers, which include officers of local law enforcement agencies, and expanding the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law requires, on any charge involving acts of domestic violence, that the district attorney or prosecuting city attorney conduct a search of certain databases for protective or restraining orders, as specified. This bill would additionally require the district attorney or prosecuting city attorney to conduct a search of the Department of Justice Automated Firearms System. By expanding the duties of the district attorney or prosecuting city attorney, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Under existing law, before a hearing on the issuance or denial of a domestic violence restraining order, the court must ensure that a search is or has been conducted to determine if the subject of the proposed order has, among other things, a prior criminal conviction for a violent or serious felony, owns or possesses a firearm, as reflected in the Department of Justice Automated Firearms System, or has a prior restraining order or violation thereof. Existing law requires this search to be conducted of specified records and databases readily available and reasonably accessible to the court. Existing law requires the court, after issuing its ruling, to advise the parties that they may request the information upon which the court relied to conduct the search and information obtained as a result of the search to be maintained in a confidential case file, except as specified. This bill would authorize a court to order any of the searches described above to be conducted before a hearing on the issuance or denial of a civil harassment restraining order, elder or dependent adult abuse restraining order, gun violence restraining order, postsecondary school restraining order, or workplace violence restraining order. The bill would require the court, after issuing its ruling, to provide the advisement to the parties described above, and to keep the information obtained as a result of any search to be maintained in a confidential case file, except as specified. (4) Existing law requires a court, when issuing a gun violence restraining order, to notify the Department of Justice regarding the order. Existing law requires the court, when issuing protective orders and firearm or ammunition relinquishment orders, to notify the prosecuting agency and law enforcement officials, as specified, in order, to enable the prosecuting agency and law enforcement officials to take necessary actions to obtain any firearms or ammunition owned, possessed, or controlled by the subject of the order. This bill would require local law enforcement agencies and prosecuting agencies, as defined, to designate a person responsible for accessing or receiving notifications from the superior court indicating that a person has violated a protective or restraining orders' firearm relinquishment requirement and to regularly ensure that the clerk of the court has updated contact information for the person designated to receive those notifications on behalf of the agency. This bill would also require each prosecuting agency to ensure that a protected person or protected people named in the order are notified about the issuance, terms, and duration of the protective order, except as specified. The bill would require each prosecuting agency to develop, adopt, and implement written policies and standards regarding notification to protected parties on or before January 1, 2028, as specified. By placing new requirements on local law enforcement agencies and prosecuting agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill, commencing January 1, 2028, would authorize a law enforcement agency or officer to seek enforcement of a valid extreme risk protection order issued by another state or jurisdiction. The bill would define an extreme risk protection order as an injunction, restraining order, or other civil or criminal court order issued by another state or jurisdiction that does not name a protected individual, but prohibits the subject of the order from possessing, owning, controlling, purchasing, or receiving firearms for the duration of the order based on evidence that the subject of the order poses a danger to themselves or others. The bill would require a valid extreme risk protection order to be registered with a court in this state if requested by a law enforcement officer or other petitioner. (5) Existing law requires each county to electronically transmit data regarding protective orders through the California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System of the Department of Justice, as specified. Existing law requires the Department of Justice to maintain the California Restraining and Protective Order System that contains detailed information regarding protective and restraining orders and injunctions, as specified, and to make that information available to court clerks and law enforcement personnel. This bill would extend these reporting requirements to include any protective order or restraining orders issued pursuant to specified sections, including a gun violence restraining order or an extreme risk protection order. (6) Existing law, the Uniform Interstate Enforcement of Domestic Violence Protection Orders Act, authorizes the enforcement of a valid foreign protection order in a tribunal of this state under certain conditions. The bill would expand the definition of a protection order to include any injunction or order under the federal Violence Against Women Act and would extend these provisions to orders issued by any state or other jurisdiction. The bill would make conforming changes. (7) Existing law authorizes the Department of Justice, subject to an appropriation by the Legislature, to establish or contract with a vendor to establish an automated protected person information and notification system, as specified. This bill would authorize the department to establish or contract with a vendor to create the above-described notification system through the availability of necessary funding through grants or other sources. (8) Existing law, subject to exceptions, provides that any person who has been convicted of certain misdemeanors may not, within 10 years of the conviction, own, purchase, receive, possess or have under their custody or control, any firearm and makes a violation of that prohibition punishable as a misdemeanor or a felony. This bill would prohibit a person, who is convicted on or after January 1, 2027, of specified offenses, including misdemeanor violations of a gun violence restraining order or other protective orders, or violations that constitute a hate crime, from owning, purchasing, receiving, or having in their possession or under their custody or control any firearm within 10 years of the conviction, and would make conforming changes. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. (9) Existing law requires a peace officer who is at the scene of a domestic violence incident or enforcing a domestic violence restraining order or gun violence restraining order to take temporary custody of any firearm or other deadly weapon in plain sight or discovered pursuant to a consensual or otherwise lawful search, as specified. This bill would additionally require a peace officer to take temporary custody of any ammunition in plain sight or discovered pursuant to such a search. By expanding the duties of local law enforcement agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (10) This bill would provide that its provisions are severable. (11) This bill would provide that if AB 2179 is enacted, then the changes made to Section 527.8 of the Code of Civil Procedure by this bill would not be operative. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 527.8 of the Code of Civil Procedure proposed by AB 1961 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1961 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 527.85 of the Code of Civil Procedure proposed by SB 1374 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1374 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 6383 of the Family Code proposed by SB 99 and SB 1395, to be operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 29805 of the Penal Code proposed by SB 1220 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1220 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (12) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law defines a request regarding resuscitative measures to mean a written document, signed by an individual with capacity or legally recognized health care decisionmaker and the individual's physician that directs a health care provider regarding resuscitative measures, as prescribed. Existing law includes a prehospital "do not resuscitate" form, as developed by the Emergency Medical Services Authority or other substantially similar form, and Physician Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment form (POLST form) , as approved by the Emergency Medical Services Authority as requests regarding resuscitative measures. This bill would replace the term "Physician Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment" with "POLST," or "Portable Orders Listing Scope of Treatment." The bill would authorize a request regarding resuscitative measures to be entered into by an individual with capacity or a health care agent, conservator with health care decisionmaking authority, or surrogate, as defined, and a physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant, as specified. The bill would specify that a request regarding resuscitative measures is entirely voluntary and the provision of care or admission to a facility cannot be conditioned on completion of or refusal to complete a POLST or prehospital "do not resuscitate" order. Existing law prescribes requirements for forms for requests regarding resuscitative measures, including, among other things, that the form be signed by the executing parties. The bill would specify that an electronic signature, as defined, is sufficient for any signature required for a request regarding resuscitative measures. Under this bill, a request regarding resuscitative measures executed in another state or jurisdiction that complies with the laws of that state or jurisdiction or the laws of California is considered valid and enforceable in California to the same extent as a request regarding resuscitative measures validly executed in California. The bill would specify that, in the absence of knowledge to the contrary, a physician or other health care provider may presume that a request regarding resuscitative measures, whether executed in another state or jurisdiction or in California, is valid and unrevoked. The bill would make conforming changes.

(1) The California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act requires the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery to designate convenience zones annually and to ensure that at least one certified recycling center that meets specific requirements is located within each convenience zone. The act defines a "convenience zone" as the area within a one-mile radius of a supermarket, as defined. Under the act, a reverse vending machine, as defined, may be certified as a recycling center, as prescribed. The act establishes the California Beverage Container Recycling Fund, and continuously appropriates moneys in the fund to the department for specified purposes, including the amount necessary to pay processing payments to recycling centers and to pay handling fees to certain types of recyclers to provide an incentive for the redemption of empty beverage containers in convenience zones. The act prohibits processing payments, handling fees, and administrative fees for dealer cooperatives if a certified recycling center operates in a convenience zone where a dealer participating in the dealer cooperative is located. A violation of the act is a crime. This bill would specify that a reverse vending machine certified to operate as a recycling center does not make an unserved convenience zone served, that a dealer cooperative or a mobile unit is not precluded from operating and receiving program payments in the same convenience zone as a reverse vending machine, and that an existing certified recycling center is not ineligible for handling fees if a reverse vending machine is located in the same convenience zone. (2) The act defines a "supermarket" as a full-line, self-service retail store with gross annual sales of $2,000,000 or more that sells specified items and some perishable items. This bill would revise that definition by increasing the minimum gross annual sales to $6,000,000, revising the description of the required items for sale, causing recycling centers that are supermarkets eligible to receive handling fees under existing law to continue to be eligible to receive handling fees, and requiring the department to consult the most recent annual update to the Progressive Grocer Marketing Guidebook and other relevant updates to the guidebook to determine which dealers are supermarkets, as specified. (3) The act requires, until June 30, 2027, the handling fee to be determined using a methodology established by the department through emergency regulations, and requires those regulations to remain in effect through that date, as specified. This bill would extend the application of those regulations through June 30, 2032. (4) This bill would make an appropriation by expanding the entities that would be eligible at any given time for program payments, and by changing the calculation of handling fees, paid by the department from the continuously appropriated fund. (5) By adding new requirements to the act, this bill would expand the scope of crimes, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

For purposes of state apportionments based on average daily attendance, as provided, if the average daily attendance of a school district, county office of education, or charter school has been materially decreased during a fiscal year because of a specified emergency, including, among others, the imminence of a major safety hazard as determined by a local law enforcement agency, existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to estimate the average daily attendance in a manner that credits to the school district, county office of education, or charter school approximately the total average daily attendance that would have been credited to the school district, county office of education, or charter school had the emergency not occurred. This bill, for the above-described purposes, would additionally allow a local fire agency to make a determination of the imminence of a major safety hazard. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

(1) Existing law establishes various grant and loan programs for research, including, among others, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, California Firefighter Cancer Prevention and Research Program, and the Public Interest Research, Development, and Demonstration Program. This bill would establish the California Foundation for Science and Health Research within the Government Operations Agency. The bill would require the Secretary of Government Operations to oversee the process of appointing the director of the foundation, and would authorize the Secretary of Government Operations to delegate the task of hiring and determining the salaries, bonuses, and benefits of additional personnel to the director, as specified. The bill would require the director and personnel of the foundation to be responsible for implementing the strategic objectives of the California Foundation for Science and Health Research Council, as described below, administering grants, loans, and contracts awarded by the council, and all other duties as deemed necessary for the operation of the foundation. This bill would create the California Foundation for Science and Health Research and Innovation Acceleration Fund and require the moneys in the fund to be used by the foundation to award grants and make loans to, and enter into contracts with, public or private research companies, universities, academic medical centers, institutes, and organizations for scientific research and development and for certain economic sectors, as specified, in specific areas of research, including, but not limited to, biomedical, behavioral health, and climate research. The bill would also create the California Foundation for Science and Health Research and Innovation Acceleration Benefit Fund, to consist solely of private donations. The bill would make the moneys in the benefit fund available for the same purposes as the California Foundation for Science and Health Research and Innovation Acceleration Fund. This bill would require that, prior to the first grant from the foundation and no later than one year from the date the bill takes effect, the council develop various provisions and requirements to facilitate the foundation's goals of affordability and equitable access. The foundation shall impose various requirements on the grantees, loan recipients, and contractors, as specified, including, among other things, developing strategies to promote equitable access to the subject invention in various specified communities and making the data resulting from the bond-funded research available to the broader scientific community, except in cases involving national security interests. The council shall also establish standards requiring that all grants, awards, and contracts be subject to intellectual property agreements that balance the opportunity for the State of California to benefit from the inventions, technologies, patents, royalties, and licenses that result from research funded by certain public and private grants, as specified. This bill would create the California Foundation for Science and Health Research Council, as specified, which shall be vested with full power, authority, and jurisdiction over the foundation. The bill would require the council to, among other things, develop the strategic objectives and priorities of the foundation and provide the opportunity for public comment on the foundation's priorities, as specified, determine the research projects that will be funded by the California Foundation for Science and Health Research and Innovation Acceleration Fund, develop objectives and opportunities that offer support to early career researchers, and adopt certain regulations and standards, as specified. The bill would also require the council to consider how the foundation's research priorities relate to or support various economic and industry considerations, as specified. The bill would provide that a majority of the members of the council constitutes a quorum for the transaction of any business, for the performance of any duty, or for the exercise of any power of the council, except as otherwise provided. The bill would authorize the council to establish one or more scientific peer review panels consisting of experts in specified fields of research for the purposes of reviewing and prioritizing proposals on the basis of the scientific merit of the proposal, the potential benefit to the health and well-being of the population, natural resources, and environment of the state, and the demonstrated background, training, and expertise of the researchers and investigators to conduct the proposed work. This bill would require all research and development funded by the California Foundation for Science and Health Research and Innovation Acceleration Fund to be conducted under established standards of open scientific exchange, peer review, and public oversight. The bill would require the funds and contracts to be awarded on the basis of the research priorities established for the foundation by the council and the scientific merit of the proposed research, as determined by an open, competitive, scientific peer review process that ensures objectivity, consistency, and high quality. This bill would enact the California Science and Health Research Bond Act, which, if approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $7,500,000,000, pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law, to finance grants and loans to fund research and operate and maintain facilities for research. The bill would provide for the submission of the bond act to the voters at the March 7, 2028, statewide primary election. (2) Existing law establishes prohibitions and penalties with respect to ethical obligations and conflicts of interest for public officials, including a prohibition on engaging in activities that are incompatible with their official duties and a prohibition on being financially interested in a contract made by them in their official capacity or the board of which they are a part. This bill would authorize a council member to participate in a decision to approve or award a grant, loan, or contract for the purpose of research into a disease in which the member or their immediate family member has a personal interest, as specified. The bill would provide that service with specified educational institutions and organizations is not incompatible with a council member's duties. The bill would provide that the prohibition on being financially interested in a contract, as specified, does not apply if the council member recuses themself from a decision to award or approve a grant, loan, or contract that would otherwise be subject to the prohibition. The bill would provide that council members are subject to certain disclosure requirements relating to personal investments and potential conflicts of interest, as specified. (3) Existing law, the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, requires that all meetings of a state body be open and public and all persons be permitted to attend any meeting of a state body, with specified exceptions for authorized closed sessions. This bill would require the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act to apply to all meetings of the council and scientific peer review panels, except as specified for when the council or scientific peer review panels meet to consider or discuss specified matters in closed sessions, including matters involving information relating to patients or medical or scientific research subjects, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. (4) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Existing law vests the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) with regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. Existing law requires the PUC, in consultation with the Independent System Operator, to establish resource adequacy requirements for all electrical corporations, electric service providers, and community choice aggregators. Existing law requires that the resource adequacy program achieve specified objectives, including that it establish new or maintain existing demand response products and tariffs, as specified. This bill would require the PUC, in coordination with the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission and the Independent System Operator, on or before June 30, 2028, to enhance existing market-integrated pathways for aggregated distributed energy resources, as defined, to qualify as resource adequacy capacity, as specified. The bill would require the commission to establish conditions for the use of aggregated distributed energy resources while ensuring net energy metering customers and net billing tariff customers do not receive duplicate compensation, as provided. The bill would require the PUC to allow electrical corporations, electric service providers, and community choice aggregators to include aggregated distributed energy resources in resource adequacy filings and PUC-ordered procurement, as specified. The bill would require the PUC, on or before June 30, 2028, to develop recommendations for changes to the Independent System Operator's proxy demand resource and distributed energy resource aggregation participation models to be consistent with the PUC's requirements for aggregated distributed energy resources pursuant to these provisions, and to communicate the recommendations to the Independent System Operator for consideration in a new or existing initiative. Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the PUC is a crime. Because the provisions of this bill would be part of the act and a violation of a PUC action implementing the bill's requirements would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to possess nitrous oxide with the intent of inhaling it for specified purposes, including to cause intoxication. Existing law also makes it a misdemeanor to sell nitrous oxide to any person under 18 years of age. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to dispense nitrous oxide to a person and knowing that the person will use it for specified prohibited purposes, if that person then causes death or great bodily injury to themselves or another person. Under existing law, the Cigarette and Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003, the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) administers and enforces a statewide program to license manufacturers, importers, distributors, wholesalers, and retailers of cigarettes and tobacco products. Existing law specifically requires a retailer, distributor, or wholesaler, as defined, to hold a license from the CDTFA to engage in the sale of cigarettes or tobacco products. Existing law subjects these licenses to suspension or revocation for violations of existing law. Existing law imposes specified noticing and posting requirements for retailer licenses that are revoked. A violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor. This bill would, except as specifically exempted, prohibit the sale and distribution of a nitrous oxide container that is capable of holding more than 8 grams of nitrous oxide or from which an individual may directly inhale nitrous oxide. The bill would also prohibit the sale and distribution of a nitrous oxide that has, or is marketed as having, the taste or smell of any food. The bill would prohibit knowingly selling or distributing a device that allows an individual to inhale nitrous oxide from the container or hold nitrous oxide for the purposes of inhalation. The bill would punish a violation of these provisions as an infraction, as specified. The bill would also authorize a court to suspend a business license if the business has a prior conviction for violating these prohibitions, and to revoke a license to sell tobacco products if the business has 2 prior convictions for violating these prohibitions. The bill would make any person, distributor, or business found to have violated these prohibitions liable for all reasonable costs incurred by a public agency in the investigation, inspection, seizure, storage, transportation, handling, venting, abatement, disposal, or destruction of nitrous oxide products, nitrous oxide containers, inhalation devices, or related materials involved in the violation, as specified. This bill would prohibit a person that is engaged in the business of selling cigarettes or tobacco products in this state from possessing, storing, owning, or selling nitrous oxide, in violation of the criminal provisions outlined above, at any site where cigarettes and tobacco products are stored or sold. The bill would authorize the CDTFA to seize nitrous oxide products, as prescribed. The bill would subject a violator to civil penalties in amounts depending on the aggregate retail value of the seized nitrous oxide and the number of violations within 5 years of the first violation. The bill would require the deposit of collected civil penalties in the Cigarette and Tobacco Products Compliance Fund. The bill would also subject a violator who commits a 2nd violation to license suspension and who commits a 3rd violation to license revocation, as prescribed. This bill would establish procedures for the CDTFA to follow for a court-ordered revocation. The bill would require the CDTFA to assess a $250 civil penalty for each revoked license and to deposit collected civil penalties into the fund, to be made available to the department, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for purposes of administering the bill. The bill would authorize a licensee to apply for a new license at the previously revoked location 6 months after the date of revocation and would authorize the CDTFA, at its discretion, to issue a new license. The bill would apply these noticing and posting requirements to a retailer subject to a court-ordered revocation pursuant to the bill. The California Constitution provides for the establishment of the State Board of Equalization, which, before July 1, 2017, had primary responsibility for most of the state's duties, powers, and responsibilities regarding the administration of taxes and fees. Existing law, on July 1, 2017, transferred to the CDTFA various duties, powers, and responsibilities of the State Board of Equalization, including administration of the Cigarette and Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003, as specified. This bill would change references in the provisions of the Cigarette and Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003 amended by this bill from the "State Board of Equalization" to the "California Department of Tax and Fee Administration" to reflect the transfer of the board's duties, powers, and responsibilities to the CDTFA. Because this bill would create new crimes, it would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Under existing law, the Tom Bane Civil Rights Act (act) , if a person or persons, whether or not acting under color of law, interferes or attempts to interfere, by threats, intimidation, or coercion, with the exercise or enjoyment by any individual or individuals of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or of the rights secured by the Constitution or laws of this state, the Attorney General, or any district attorney or city attorney, is authorized to bring a civil action for injunctive and other appropriate equitable relief in the name of the people of the State of California, in order to protect the exercise or enjoyment of the right or rights secured. Under that act, an individual may also institute and prosecute in their own name and on their own behalf a civil action for damages, as described, for any resulting interference or attempt at interference of the individual's exercise or enjoyment of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States or this state. The act authorizes the court to award the petitioner or plaintiff reasonable attorney's fees in addition to any damages, injunction, or other equitable relief awarded in these civil actions (attorney's fees authorization) . Existing federal law provides that every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any state, territory, or the District of Columbia, subjects or causes to be subjected any United States citizen or other person within the jurisdiction to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, is liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except as provided. This bill would also provide that every natural person, as defined, who, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, as defined, subjects or causes to be subjected any citizen of this state or any person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the United States Constitution, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except as specified. The bill would apply the aforementioned attorney's fees authorization, except as specified, to any action brought under these provisions. The bill would authorize a court, in its discretion, to also award costs, except as specified, to the prevailing plaintiff in any action brought under these provisions. This bill would authorize a defendant in an action brought under these provisions to assert and receive the benefit of a defense of absolute or qualified immunity only to the same extent as a person sued under certain federal provisions under like circumstances, as specified, and would specify that nothing in these provisions is to be construed to waive or abrogate any defense of sovereign immunity otherwise available to a party, as specified. The bill would prohibit any civil action brought under these provisions from being commenced later than 2 years after the date that the cause of action accrues. The bill would make its provisions severable. The bill would specify that these provisions apply retroactively to March 1, 2025, as provided. This bill would declare the intent of the Legislature in enacting these provisions. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

(1) Existing law creates the California Coastal Sanctuary and provides that it includes all state waters subject to tidal influence, except as provided. Existing law authorizes the State Lands Commission to enter into any lease for the extraction of oil or gas from state-owned tidelands and submerged lands in the California Coastal Sanctuary if the commission determines both that oil and gas deposits in the California Coastal Sanctuary are being drained by means of producing wells upon adjacent federal lands and that the lease is in the best interest of the state. This bill would prohibit the commission from entering into leases for the extraction of oil or gas, as described above, in areas designated as California marine protected areas or national marine sanctuaries, as provided. (2) Existing law prohibits the commission or a local trustee, as defined, of granted public trust lands from entering into a new lease or other conveyance authorizing new construction of oil- and gas-related infrastructure upon tidelands and submerged lands within state waters associated with Pacific Outer Continental Shelf leases issued after January 1, 2018, except as provided. Existing law requires the commission or a local trustee when approving or disapproving a lease renewal, extension, amendment, or modification authorizing new construction of oil- and gas-related infrastructure upon tidelands and submerged lands within state waters associated with Pacific Outer Continental Shelf leases issued after January 1, 2018, to follow a specified process. This bill would additionally prohibit leases and oil- and gas-related infrastructure located upon tidelands and submerged lands within state waters from being used to support Pacific Outer Continental Shelf leases issued after January 1, 2026, except as provided. The bill would additionally require the commission or the local trustee, in considering approval or disapproval, to consider additional factors, as specified. By imposing additional duties on local trustees in the consideration of a lease renewal, extension, amendment, or modification, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law provides for the regulation of disability insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law requires a health care service plan or disability insurer to allow an individual to enroll in or change their health benefit plan as a result of a specified triggering event. This bill would make pregnancy a triggering event for purposes of enrollment or changing a health benefit plan. Because a willful violation of this provision by a health care service plan would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.