Back to Top

Legislation

The legislation tracker link below displays all legislation that the California State Senate has approved in its most recent legislative session—this includes legislation that has been sent from the Senate to the House and legislation that has already been approved by both chambers and signed by the governor. Information on legislation provided below includes the bill number, its name, progress, most recent action date, and sponsor. Click the bill number to read its text in full and see its voting history. Check back regularly as I will be posting my position SUPPORT or OPPOSE  the bills. If there is a particular bill you would like to see addressed please contact me. 

https://ballotpedia.org/California_State_Senate 

 

SB-1280 APPROVE

SB 1280, Small house skilled nursing facilities.

 

Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of health facilities, including skilled nursing facilities, as defined, by the State Department of Public Health. Violation of these provisions is a crime.
Existing law, until January 1, 2020, establishes the Small House Skilled Nursing Facilities Pilot Program within the department for the purposes of providing skilled nursing care in a homelike, noninstitutional setting. Existing law requires pilot facilities, as defined, to meet specified requirements and pay specified fees. Existing law required the department, by July 1, 2013, to issue one or more all-facility letters to provide the standards for the development and operation of all pilot facilities.
This bill would extend operation of the pilot program to January 1, 2026, and would delete the obsolete July 1, 2013, deadline for the department’s issuance of the all-facility letters. By extending the operation of the pilot program, the bill would expand the scope of a crime, and thus 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.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB1280


SB-145 - OPPOSE

SB 145, Wiener. Sex offenders: registration.

Existing law, the Sex Offender Registration Act, requires a person convicted of one of certain crimes, as specified, to register with law enforcement as a sex offender while residing in California or while attending school or working in California, as specified. A willful failure to register, as required by the act, is a misdemeanor or felony, depending on the underlying offense.

This bill would exempt from mandatory registration under the act a person convicted of certain offenses involving minors if the person is not more than 10 years older than the minor and if that offense is the only one requiring the person to register.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200SB145

 


AB-5 OPPOSE

AB 5, Gonzalez. Worker status: employees and independent contractors.

 

Existing law, as established in the case of Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903 (Dynamex), creates a presumption that a worker who performs services for a hirer is an employee for purposes of claims for wages and benefits arising under wage orders issued by the Industrial Welfare Commission. Existing law requires a 3-part test, commonly known as the “ABC” test, to establish that a worker is an independent contractor for those purposes.
Existing law, for purposes of unemployment insurance provisions, requires employers to make contributions with respect to unemployment insurance and disability insurance from the wages paid to their employees. Existing law defines “employee” for those purposes to include, among other individuals, any individual who, under the usual common law rules applicable in determining the employer-employee relationship, has the status of an employee.
This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to codify the decision in the Dynamex case and clarify its application. The bill would provide that for purposes of the provisions of the Labor Code, the Unemployment Insurance Code, and the wage orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission, a person providing labor or services for remuneration shall be considered an employee rather than an independent contractor unless the hiring entity demonstrates that the person is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, the person performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business, and the person is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business. The bill, notwithstanding this provision, would provide that any statutory exception from employment status or any extension of employer status or liability remains in effect, and that if a court rules that the 3-part test cannot be applied, then the determination of employee or independent contractor status shall be governed by the test adopted in S. G. Borello & Sons, Inc. v. Department of Industrial Relations (1989) 48 Cal.3d 341 (Borello). The bill would exempt specified occupations from the application of Dynamex, and would instead provide that these occupations are governed by Borello. These exempt occupations would include, among others, licensed insurance agents, certain licensed health care professionals, registered securities broker-dealers or investment advisers, direct sales salespersons, real estate licensees, commercial fishermen, workers providing licensed barber or cosmetology services, and others performing work under a contract for professional services, with another business entity, or pursuant to a subcontract in the construction industry.
The bill would also require the Employment Development Department, on or before March 1, 2021, and each March 1 thereafter, to issue an annual report to the Legislature on the use of unemployment insurance in the commercial fishing industry. The bill would make the exemption for commercial fishermen applicable only until January 1, 2023, and the exemption for licensed manicurists applicable only until January 1, 2022. The bill would authorize an action for injunctive relief to prevent employee misclassification to be brought by the Attorney General and specified local prosecuting agencies.
This bill would also redefine the definition of “employee” described above, for purposes of unemployment insurance provisions, to include an individual providing labor or services for remuneration who has the status of an employee rather than an independent contractor, unless the hiring entity demonstrates that the individual meets all of specified conditions, including that the individual performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business. Because this bill would increase the categories of individuals eligible to receive benefits from, and thus would result in additional moneys being deposited into, the Unemployment Fund, a continuously appropriated fund, the bill would make an appropriation. The bill would state that addition of the provision to the Labor Code does not constitute a change in, but is declaratory of, existing law with regard to violations of the Labor Code relating to wage orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission. The bill would also state that specified Labor Code provisions of the bill apply retroactively to existing claims and actions to the maximum extent permitted by law while other provisions apply to work performed on or after January 1, 2020. The bill would additionally provide that the bill’s provisions do not permit an employer to reclassify an individual who was an employee on January 1, 2019, to an independent contractor due to the bill’s enactment.
Existing provisions of the Labor Code make it a crime for an employer to violate specified provisions of law with regard to an employee. The Unemployment Insurance Code also makes it a crime to violate specified provisions of law with regard to benefits and payments.
By expanding the definition of an employee for purposes of these provisions, the bill would expand the definition of a crime, 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.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB5


SB-1120 - OPPOSE

SB 1120, as amended, Atkins. Subdivisions: tentative maps.

 

The Planning and Zoning Law provides for the creation of accessory dwelling units by local ordinance, or, if a local agency has not adopted an ordinance, by ministerial approval, in accordance with specified standards and conditions.
This bill, among other things, would require a proposed housing development containing 2 residential units within a single-family residential zone to be considered ministerially, without discretionary review or hearing, within a single-family residential zone, if the proposed housing development meets certain requirements, including, but not limited to, that the proposed housing development would not require demolition or alteration of housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income, that the proposed housing development does not allow for the demolition of more than 25% of the existing exterior structural walls, except as provided, and that the development is not located within a historic district, is not included on the State Historic Resources Inventory, or is not within a site that is legally designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district.
The bill would set forth what a local agency can and cannot require in approving the construction of 2 residential units, including, but not limited to, authorizing a city or county to impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards, as defined, unless those standards would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of up to 2 units, prohibiting the imposition of setback requirements under certain circumstances, and setting maximum setback requirements under all other circumstances.
The Subdivision Map Act vests the authority to regulate and control the design and improvement of subdivisions in the legislative body of a local agency and sets forth procedures governing the local agency’s processing, approval, conditional approval or disapproval, and filing of tentative, final, and parcel maps, and the modification of those maps. Under the Subdivision Map Act, an approved or conditionally approved tentative map expires 24 months after its approval or conditional approval or after any additional period of time as prescribed by local ordinance, not to exceed an additional 12 months, except as provided.
This bill, among other things, would require a city or county to ministerially approve a parcel map or tentative and final map for an urban lot split that meets certain requirements, including, but not limited to, that the urban lot split would not require the demolition or alteration of housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income, that the parcel is located within a residential zone, and that the parcel is not located within a historic district, is not included on the State Historic Resources Inventory, or is not within a site that is legally designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district.
The bill would set forth what a local agency can and cannot require in approving an urban lot split, including, but not limited to, authorizing a city or county to impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards, as defined, unless those standards would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of 2 units on either of the resulting parcels, prohibiting the imposition of setback requirements under certain circumstances, and setting maximum setback requirements under all other circumstances.
The bill would also extend the limit on the additional period that may be provided by ordinance, as described above, from 12 months to 24 months and would make other conforming or nonsubstantive changes.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects.
This bill, by establishing the ministerial review processes described above, would thereby exempt the approval of projects subject to those processes from CEQA.
By increasing the duties of local agencies with respect to land use regulations, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities.
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.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200SB1120


TAYLOR FOR STATE SENATE 2020 - 1426129
Powered by CampaignPartner.com - Political Websites
Close Menu