September 5, 2024
Golden State Republican Women
Janet Price, President
Submitted by the GSRW Legislative Analyst Committee
Valerie Evans, Lou Ann Flaherty and Elaine Freeman,
MONTH OF AUGUST IN THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE
August 6, all policy Committees are to be heard and report to fiscal committees on bills introduced in their house. This is where “trailer bills” which are bills not heard by committees in either house but are supposed to deal with only spending issues tied to the budget. However, it has become common for these “trailer bills” to include policy issues.
August 31, the last day for each house to pass bills and the Governor has until September 30 to sign, veto or allow bills to become law without his signature.
As of Aug. 15, Newsom had signed 164 bills and vetoed four.
BILLS SIGNED BY THE GOVERNOR IN AUGUST
- Senate Bill 905 by Sen. Scott Wiener, a San Francisco Democrat, eliminates the “locked door loophole,” which required prosecutors to prove that someone broke into a locked vehicle to convict a suspect of auto burglary.
- Assembly Bill 1779 by Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin, a Thousand Oaks Democrat, lets prosecutors collect crimes across multiple counties into one court so they can be charged as a felony.
- See details below
- Senate Bill 1144 by Sen. Nancy Skinner, a Berkeley Democrat, makes it easier to prosecute organized retail theft rings that sell stolen goods on online platforms.
- Assembly Bill 2943 by Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur, a Los Angeles Democrat, makes it easier for police to arrest people on suspicion of retail theft when officers do not witness a crime. It allows prosecutors to collect thefts by one suspect to reach the $950 threshold for felony theft charges.
- Assembly Bill 1802 by Assemblymember Reggie Jones-Sawyer, a Los Angeles Democrat, would make permanent the crime of organized retail theft and make permanent regional property crime task forces that were expected to expire.
- See details below
- Assembly Bill 3209 by Assemblymember Marc Berman, a Palo Alto Democrat, lets stores obtain restraining orders against people who harass employees, steal from, or vandalize their businesses.
- See details below
- Assembly Bill 1972 by Assembly Member Juan Alanis, a Modesto Republican, directs the California Highway Patrol to work with railroad police and to target cargo theft.
- See details below
- Senate Bill 1242 by Sen. Dave Min, an Irvine Democrat, allows higher criminal sentences for people convicted of starting a fire while committing retail theft.
- Senate Bill 1416 by Sen. Josh Newman, a Fullerton Democrat, creates escalating sentencing enhancements for selling or attempting to exchange stolen goods.
- Senate Bill 982 by Sen. Aisha Wahab, a Fremont Democrat, repeals the sunset on the crime of organized retail theft.
AB 1802, Jones-Sawyer. Crimes: organized theft.
Existing law, until January 1, 2026, makes a person guilty of organized retail theft, punishable as a misdemeanor or a felony, as specified, if the person acts in concert with one or more persons to steal merchandise from one or more merchant’s premises or online marketplaces with the intent to sell or return the merchandise for value, acts in concert with 2 or more persons to receive, purchase, or possess merchandise knowing or believing it to have been stolen, acts as an agent of another to steal merchandise from one or more merchant’s premises or online marketplaces as part of an organized plan to commit theft, or recruits, coordinates, organizes, supervises, directs, manages, or finances another to undertake acts of theft.
This bill extends the operation of the crime of organized retail theft indefinitely. By extending the operation of an existing crime, this bill would create a state-mandated local program.
Existing law, until January 1, 2026, requires the Department of the California Highway Patrol to coordinate with the Department of Justice to convene a regional property crimes task force to identify geographic areas experiencing increased levels of property crimes and assist local law enforcement with resources, such as personnel and equipment.
The bill extends the operation of the regional property crimes task force indefinitely.
AB 1779, Irwin. Theft: jurisdiction.
Existing law defines types of theft, including petty theft, grand theft, and shoplifting. Existing law also defines the crimes of robbery and burglary. Existing law sets forth specific rules relating to the jurisdiction for the prosecution of theft by fraud, organized retail theft, and receiving stolen property, including that the jurisdiction for prosecution includes the county where an offense involving the theft or receipt of the stolen merchandise occurred, the county in which the merchandise was recovered, or the county where any act was done by the defendant in instigating, procuring, promoting, or aiding or abetting in the commission of a theft offense or other qualifying offense. Existing law jurisdictionally limits prosecution of each of the above to criminal actions brought by the Attorney General.
This bill no longer limits the jurisdictional rules for the above crimes to criminal actions brought by the Attorney General. If a case is brought by someone other than the Attorney General and multiple offenses are committed by the same defendant in multiple jurisdictions, the bill would allow a criminal action to be brought in any of those jurisdictions subject to a hearing on consolidation of the offenses, as specified.
The bill requires the prosecution to present written evidence at the hearing that all district attorneys in counties with jurisdiction over the offenses agree to the venue. The bill requires charged offenses from jurisdictions where there is not a written agreement from the district attorney to be returned to that jurisdiction.
AB 1972, Alanis. Regional property crimes task force.
Existing law authorizes the Governor to appoint and commission individuals designated by a railroad company to serve as police officers. Existing law, until January 1, 2026, requires the Department of the California Highway Patrol to coordinate with the Department of Justice to convene a regional property crimes task force to identify geographic areas experiencing increased levels of property crimes and assist local law enforcement with resources, such as personnel and equipment.
This bill requires the task force to assist railroad police and would specify cargo theft as a property crime for consideration by the regional property crimes task force.
This bill declares that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
AB 3209, Berman. Crimes: theft: retail theft restraining orders.
Existing law prohibits the theft of merchandise from a retail establishment. Existing law authorizes a court, upon sentencing a person for specified offenses, including stalking and elder abuse, to issue a criminal protective order prohibiting the person from contacting any victim of their offense.
This bill authorizes a court, when sentencing a person for an offense involving theft from a retail establishment, vandalism of a retail establishment, or battery of an employee of a retail establishment, to issue a criminal protective order prohibiting a person from entering the retail establishment, including any parking lots, and including other franchise or chain locations of the retail establishment, as specified.
The bill also authorizes a prosecuting attorney, city attorney, county counsel, or attorney representing a retail establishment to file a petition for the issuance of a criminal protective order of this type against a person who has been arrested, including, but not limited to, the issuance of a citation in lieu of a custodial arrest, 2 or more times for any of the offenses at the same retail establishment, as specified. The bill would also make conforming changes.
The bill makes a violation of these orders punishable as a misdemeanor. By creating a new crime, this bill imposes a state-mandated local program.
Existing law requires a person arrested for a misdemeanor to be issued a written notice to appear and to be released upon their signed promise to appear, except as otherwise provided.
This bill exempts a violation of a retail establishment restraining order from that requirement.
PLANNING AND ZONING
SB 1123 (Caballero D) Planning and zoning-subdivisions: ministerial review
The Starter-Home Revitalization Act of 2021, among other things, requires a local agency to ministerially consider, without discretionary review or hearing, a parcel map or tentative and final map for a housing development project that meets certain requirements, including that the housing development project on the lot proposed to be subdivided will contain 20 or fewer residential units, is zoned for multifamily residential development, is no larger than 5 acres, and is no smaller than 500 square feet.
Current law prohibits a local agency from imposing on the housing development, an objective zoning standard, objective subdivision standard, or objective design standard that, among other things, physically precludes the development of a project built to specified densities.
This bill would prohibit, if a local agency chooses to permit accessory dwelling units (ADU) and junior dwelling units (JDU), those units from counting as residential units for purposes of the above-described requirements that a housing development project on the lot proposed to be subdivided will contain 10 or fewer residential units.
The bill would revise the requirements that the lot be zoned for multifamily residential dwelling use or vacant and zoned for single family residential developments. This bill would also revise the above-described requirements to instead include that the lot is no larger than 1½ acres and that if the parcels are zoned for single family residential units, the newly created parcels on average are no less than 1,200 square feet.
This may seem confusing but it means that ADUs can be built with single family homes w/o multi-family zoning and the local agency does NOT have discretion.
AB 2729 (Patterson) Development Impact Fees –
This measure, among other things, requires that development impact fees shall be the same amount as would have been paid had the fees and charges been paid prior to the issuance of building permits and the local agency shall not charge interest or other fees on any amount deferred. However, impact fees can be charged at the time the local agency issues a permit if the local agency determines, and provides supporting documentation to the applicant establishing, that construction for the public improvement o facility for which the fee or charge is required has commenced or will commence within 24 months of the issuance of the permit. Failure to do so would require the agency to return the funds until certificate of occupancy.
Legislative Portal links – Express your support or opposition to a bill or directly to the Legislative committee currently reviewing it (as an individual, not as a member of RW or GSRW) – click here, or the bill’s author – click here, enter your bill # and look for tab at top of the bill page labeled “Comments to Author”.
