News Alert!!: Colorado River Tri-State: New California, Arizona, and Nevada Laws for 2017.

zachnews-news-alert.jpg

News Alert!!: Colorado River Tri-State: New California, Arizona, and Nevada Laws for 2017.

As we all welcome in the New Year 2017, here are a few of the new laws for 2017 that will be or is in effect for California, Arizona, and Nevada.

**** California: ****

** (Note: S.B. = Senate Bill and A.B. = Assembly Bill): **

S.B. 3: Leno. Minimum wage: in-home supportive services: paid sick days:

(1) Under existing law, the Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act of 2014, an employee who, on or after July 1, 2015, works in California for the same employer for 30 or more days within a year from the commencement of employment is entitled to paid sick days, as specified. Existing law requires an employee to accrue paid sick days at the rate of not less than one hour per every 30 hours worked subject to specified use and accrual limitations. For the purposes of the act, an “employee” does not include a provider of in-home supportive services, as described.

This bill, on and after July 1, 2018, would entitle a provider of in-home supportive services who works in California for 30 or more days within a year from the commencement of employment to paid sick days, subject to specified full amount of leave time amounts and that rate of accrual. The bill would require the State Department of Social Services, in consultation with stakeholders, to convene a workgroup to implement paid sick leave for in-home supportive services providers and to issue guidance in that regard by December 1, 2017. The bill would authorize the department to implement that paid sick leave without complying with the Administrative Procedure Act.

(2) On and after July 1, 2014, existing law requires the minimum wage for all industries to be not less than $9 per hour. On and after January 1, 2016, existing law requires the minimum wage for all industries to be not less than $10 per hour.

This bill would require the minimum wage for all industries to not be less than specified amounts to be increased from January 1, 2017, to January 1, 2022, inclusive, for employers employing 26 or more employees and from January 1, 2018, to January 1, 2023, inclusive, for employers employing 25 or fewer employees, except when the scheduled increases are temporarily suspended by the Governor, based on certain determinations. The bill would also require the Director of Finance, after the last scheduled minimum wage increase, to annually adjust the minimum wage under a specified formula.

On or before July 28, 2017, and on or before every July 28 thereafter until the minimum wage is a specified amount for employers employing 26 or more employees, the bill would require the Director of Finance to annually determine, based on certain factors, whether economic conditions can support a scheduled minimum wage increase and certify that determination to the Governor and the Legislature. The bill would also require the State Board of Equalization to publish specified retail sales and use tax information on its Internet Web site to be used by the Director of Finance in making that determination.

On or before July 28, 2017, and on or before every July 28 thereafter until the minimum wage is a specified amount for employers employing 26 or more employees, in order to ensure that the General Fund can support the next scheduled minimum wage increase, the bill would also require the Director of Finance to annually determine and certify to the Governor and the Legislature whether the General Fund would be in a deficit in the current fiscal year, or in either of the following 2 fiscal years.

Vote: majority

Appropriation: no

Fiscal Committee: yes

Local Program: no

** More Information on S.B. 3: **

– Official California Legislative Information:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB3

 

S.B. 1446, Hancock. Firearms: Magazine capacity:

According to the California State Legislature, (1) Existing law prohibits the sale, gift, and loan of a large-capacity magazine. A violation of this prohibition is punishable as a misdemeanor with specified penalties or as a felony.

This bill would, commencing July 1, 2017, make it an infraction punishable by a fine not to exceed $100 for the first offense, by a fine not to exceed $250 for the 2nd offense, and by a fine not to exceed $500 for the 3rd or subsequent offense, for a person to possess any large-capacity magazine, regardless of the date the magazine was acquired. The bill would require a person in lawful possession of a large-capacity magazine prior to July 1, 2017, to dispose of the magazine, as provided.

By creating a new crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(2) Existing law creates various exceptions to the crime described in paragraph (1) above, which include, but are not limited to, the sale of, giving of, lending of, importation into this state of, or purchase of, any large-capacity magazine to or by the holder of a special weapons permit for use as a prop for a motion picture, or any federal, state, county, city and county, or city agency that is charged with the enforcement of any law, for use by agency employees in the discharge of their official duties, whether on or off duty, and where the use is authorized by the agency and is within the course and scope of their duties.

This bill would make conforming changes to those exceptions by including possession of a large-capacity magazine in those provisions and would establish additional exceptions to the crime described in paragraph (1) above, including exceptions to allow licensed gunsmiths and honorably retired sworn peace officers to possess a large-capacity magazine.

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.

Vote: majority

Appropriation: no

Fiscal Committee: yes

Local Program: yes

** More Information on S.B. 1446: **

– Official California Legislative Information:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB1446

 

S.B. 869: Hill. Firearms: securing handguns in vehicles.

Existing law prohibits a person who is 18 years of age or older, and who is the owner, lessee, renter, or other legal occupant of a residence, who owns a firearm and who knows or has reason to know that another person also residing there is prohibited by state or federal law from possessing, receiving, owning, or purchasing a firearm from keeping a firearm in that residence, unless the firearm is secured, as specified. A violation of this prohibition is a misdemeanor.

This bill would require a person, when leaving a handgun in an unattended vehicle, to secure the handgun by locking it in the trunk of the vehicle, locking it in a locked container and placing the container out of plain view, or locking the handgun in a locked container that is permanently affixed to the vehicle’s interior and not in plain view. The bill would make a violation of these requirements an infraction punishable by a fine not exceeding $1,000. The bill would expressly make those requirements inapplicable to the transportation of unloaded firearms by a licensed common carrier in conformance with applicable federal law. The bill would also provide that these provisions do not supersede any local ordinance that regulates the storage of handguns in unattended vehicles if the ordinance was in effect before the date of enactment of this bill.

By creating a new crime, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Vote: majority

Appropriation: no

Fiscal Committee: yes

Local Program: yes

** More Information on S.B. 869: **

– Official California Legislative Information:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB869

 

A.B. 2888: Low. Sex crimes: mandatory prison sentence.

Existing law prohibits a court from granting probation or suspending the execution or imposition of a sentence if a person is convicted of violating specified provisions of law, including rape by force, pandering, aggravated sexual assault of a child, and others.

This bill would prohibit a court from granting probation or suspending the execution or imposition of a sentence if a person is convicted of rape, sodomy, penetration with a foreign object, or oral copulation if the victim was either unconscious or incapable of giving consent due to intoxication.

Vote: majority

Appropriation: no

Fiscal Committee: yes

Local Program: no

** More Information on S.B. 2888: **

– Official California Legislative Information:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB2888

 

A.B. 1785: Quirk. Vehicles: use of wireless electronic devices.

Existing law prohibits a person from driving a motor vehicle while using an electronic wireless communications device to write, send, or read a text-based communication, as defined, unless the electronic wireless communications device is specifically designed and configured, and is used, to allow voice-operated and hands-free operation, as specified. A violation of these provisions is an infraction.

This bill would instead prohibit a person from driving a motor vehicle while holding and operating a handheld wireless telephone or a wireless electronic communication device, as defined. The bill would authorize a driver to operate a handheld wireless telephone or a wireless electronic communications device in a manner requiring the use of the driver’s hand only under specified conditions. By changing the definition of 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.

Vote: majority

Appropriation: no

Fiscal Committee: yes

Local Program: yes

** More Information on S.B. 1785: **

– Official California Legislative Information:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1785

 

A.B. 30: Alejo. School or athletic team names: California Racial Mascots Act.

Existing law provides that it is the policy of this state to afford all persons in public schools equal rights and opportunities in the educational institutions of the state, as specified, and further prohibits, and provides remedies for, acts that are contrary to that policy.

This bill would establish the California Racial Mascots Act, which would prohibit public schools from using the term Redskins as a school or athletic team name, mascot, or nickname beginning January 1, 2017, subject to specified exceptions. The bill would also provide that this prohibition may not be waived by the State Board of Education. To the extent that this prohibition would impose additional duties on public schools, 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, 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 these statutory provisions.

Vote: majority

Appropriation: no

Fiscal Committee: yes

Local Program: yes

** More Information on A.B. 30: **

– Official California Legislative Information:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB30

 

A.B. 53: Cristina Garcia. Vehicles: child safety seats.

Existing law requires a parent, legal guardian, or the driver of a motor vehicle to properly secure a child under 8 years of age in an appropriate passenger restraint system while the child is riding in a motor vehicle. A violation of the Vehicle Code is a crime.

This bill would require a parent, legal guardian, or the driver of a motor vehicle to properly secure a child who is under 2 years of age in an appropriate rear-facing child passenger restraint system, unless the child weighs 40 or more pounds or is 40 or more inches in height. Because a violation of these requirements would be a crime, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Vote: majority

Appropriation: no

Fiscal Committee: yes

Local Program: yes

** More Information on A.B. 53: **

– Official California Legislative Information:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB53

 

A.B. 1386: Low. Emergency medical care: epinephrine auto-injectors.

(1) Existing law authorizes a prehospital emergency medical care person, first responder, or lay rescuer to use an epinephrine auto-injector to render emergency care to another person, as specified. Existing law requires the Emergency Medical Services Authority to approve authorized training providers and the minimum standards for training and the use and administration of epinephrine auto-injectors. The existing Pharmacy Law also authorizes a pharmacy to dispense epinephrine auto-injectors to a prehospital emergency medical care person, first responder, or lay rescuer for the purpose of rendering emergency care in accordance with these provisions. A violation of the Pharmacy Law is a crime.

Existing law requires school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools to provide emergency epinephrine auto-injectors, as defined, to school nurses and trained personnel who have volunteered to use epinephrine auto-injectors under emergency circumstances, as specified, and authorizes school nurses and trained personnel to use epinephrine auto-injectors to provide emergency medical aid to persons suffering, or reasonably believed to be suffering, from an anaphylactic reaction.

This bill would permit an “authorized entity,” as defined, to use an epinephrine auto-injector to render emergency care to another person in accordance with these provisions. The bill would also authorize a pharmacy to furnish epinephrine auto-injectors to an authorized entity, as provided. Because a violation of these provisions would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require an authorized entity to create and maintain a specified operations plan relating to its use of epinephrine auto-injectors, and would require those entities to submit a report to the Emergency Medical Services Authority of each incident that involves the administration of an epinephrine auto-injector, not more than 30 days after each use. The bill would also require the authority to publish an annual report summarizing the reports submitted to the authority pursuant to the bill’s provisions. The bill would define the term “epinephrine auto-injector” for purposes of these provisions and other related provisions that authorize the use of epinephrine auto-injectors, as specified.

(2) Under existing law, everyone is generally responsible, not only for the result of his or her willful acts, but also for an injury occasioned to another by his or her want of ordinary care or skill in the management of his or her property or person, except so far as the latter has, willfully or by want of ordinary care, brought the injury upon himself or herself. Existing law also provides that a prehospital emergency care person, first responder, or lay rescuer who administers an epinephrine auto-injector to another person who appears to be experiencing anaphylaxis at the scene of an emergency situation, in good faith and not for compensation, is not liable for any civil damages resulting from his or her acts or omissions in administering the epinephrine auto-injector, if that person has complied with specified certification and training requirements and standards.

This bill would provide that an authorized entity is not liable for any civil damages resulting from any act or omission connected to the administration of an epinephrine auto-injector, as specified. The bill would also exempt an authorizing physician and surgeon from certain sanctions for the issuance of an epinephrine auto-injector under those provisions, except as specified.

(3) 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.

Vote: majority

Appropriation: no

Fiscal Committee: yes

Local Program: yes

** More Information on A.B. 1386: **

– Official California Legislative Information:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1386

 

S.B. 465:  Hill. Building construction: contractors: discipline: reporting: building standards.

(1) Existing law, the Contractors’ State License Law, provides for the licensure, regulation, and discipline of contractors by the Contractors’ State License Board. Existing law requires the board, with the approval of the Director of Consumer Affairs, to appoint a registrar of contractors to serve as the executive officer and secretary of the board. Under existing law, protection of the public is required to be the highest priority for the Contractors’ State License

Board in exercising its licensing, regulatory, and disciplinary functions.

Under existing law, the Division of Occupational Safety and Health has the power, jurisdiction, and supervision over every employment and place of employment in this state, which is necessary to adequately enforce and administer all laws and lawful standards and orders, or special orders requiring such employment and place of employment to be safe, and requiring the protection of the life, safety, and health of every employee in such employment or place of employment. Existing law requires the division to transmit to the Registrar of Contractors copies of any reports made in any investigation, as specified, and authorizes the division, upon its own motion or upon request, to transmit copies of any other reports made in any investigation conducted involving a licensed contractor.
This bill would instead require the Division of Occupational Safety and Health, after consultation with the board, to transmit to the board copies of any citations or other actions taken by the division against a contractor, as defined. The bill would authorize the board to enter into an interagency agreement with any other state or local agency the board deems to be in possession of information relevant to its priority to protect the public.

This bill would require a licensee to report to the registrar within 90 days of the date that the licensee has knowledge of the conviction of the licensee for any felony or any other crime substantially related to the qualifications, functions, and duties of a licensed contractor.
This bill would require the board to consult with licensees, consumers, and other interested stakeholders in order to prepare a study of judgments, arbitration awards, and settlements that were the result of claims for construction defects for rental residential units and, by January 1, 2018, report to the Legislature the results of the study to determine if the board’s ability to protect the public would be enhanced by regulations requiring licensees to report judgments, arbitration awards, or settlement payments of those claims. This bill would specify that participation in the study by licensees and consumers is voluntary. The bill would require records or documents obtained by the board during the course of implementing this study that are exempt from public disclosure to remain exempt from disclosure.

(2) Under existing law, there exists the California Building Standards Commission. Existing law requires the California Building Standards Commission to, among other things, review the standards of adopting state agencies and approve, return for amendment with recommended changes, or reject building standards submitted to the commission for its approval, as provided.

This bill, until January 1, 2018, would require the working group formed by the California Building Standards Commission to study recent exterior elevated element failures in the state to submit a report to the appropriate policy committees of the Legislature containing any findings and possible recommendations for statutory or other changes to the California Building Standards Code and would require the working group to review related documents and reports, as specified. However, if, at any time, it is determined by the working group that one or more changes to the California Building Standards Code are needed as soon as possible in order to protect the public, the bill would, until January 1, 2018, require the working group to submit the recommended changes to the California Building Standards Commission for consideration as soon as possible, as specified.

(3) 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.

Vote: majority

Appropriation: no

Fiscal Committee: yes

Local Program: no

** More Information on S.B. 465: **

– Official California Legislative Information:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB465

 

A.B .1668: Calderon. Investigational drugs, biological products, and devices.

Existing law, the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, prohibits a person from introducing into interstate commerce any new drug unless the drug has been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Existing law requires the sponsor of a new drug to submit to the FDA an investigational new drug application and to then conduct a series of clinical trials to establish the safety and efficacy of the drug in human populations and submit the results to the FDA in a new drug application.

Existing law, the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law, regulates the packaging, labeling, and advertising of drugs and devices and is administered by the State Department of Public Health. A violation of that law is a crime. The Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law prohibits, among other things, the sale, delivery, or giving away of a new drug or new device unless either the department has approved a new drug or device application for that new drug or new device and that approval has not been withdrawn, terminated, or suspended or the drug or device has been approved pursuant to specified provisions of federal law, including the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

The Medical Practice Act provides for the licensure and regulation of physicians and surgeons by the Medical Board of California and requires the board to take action against a licensee who is charged with unprofessional conduct. The Osteopathic Act provides for the licensure and regulation of osteopathic physicians and surgeons by the Osteopathic Medical Board of California and requires the board to enforce the Medical Practice Act with respect to its licensees.
This bill would permit a manufacturer of an investigational drug, biological product, or device to make the product available to eligible patients with an immediately life-threatening disease or condition, as specified.

The bill would authorize, but not require, a health benefit plan, as defined, to provide coverage for any investigational drug, biological product, or device made available pursuant to these provisions.

The bill would prohibit the Medical Board of California and the Osteopathic Medical Board of California from taking any disciplinary action against the license of a physician based on the physician’s recommendation to an eligible patient regarding, or prescription for, or treatment with, an investigational drug, biological product, or device if the recommendation or prescription is consistent with protocol approved by the physician’s institutional review board or an accredited institutional review board, and would require the institutional review board to biannually report specified information to the State Department of Public Health, among others.

The bill would prohibit a state agency from altering any recommendation made to the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services regarding a health care provider’s certification to participate in the Medicare or Medicaid program based solely on the recommendation from an individual health care provider that a patient have access to an investigational drug, biological product, or device.

Vote: majority

Appropriation: no

Fiscal Committee: yes

Local Program: no

** More Information on A.B .1668: **

– Official California Legislative Information:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1668

 

S.B. 1322: Mitchell. Commercial sex acts: minors.

Existing law makes it a crime to solicit or engage in any act of prostitution. Existing law makes it a crime to loiter in any public place with the intent to commit prostitution.

This bill would make the above provisions inapplicable to a child under 18 years of age who is alleged to have engaged in conduct that would, if committed by an adult, violate the above provisions. The bill would authorize the minor to be taken into temporary custody under limited circumstances.

This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 647 of the Penal Code, proposed by SB 420, SB 1129, and AB 1708, that would become operative only if this bill and one or more of those other bills are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2017, and this bill is chaptered last.

This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 653.22 of the Penal Code, proposed by AB 1771, that would become operative only if this bill and AB 1771 are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2017, and this bill is chaptered last.

Vote: majority

Appropriation: no

Fiscal Committee: no

Local Program: no

** More Information on S.B. 1322: **

– Official California Legislative Information:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB1322

 

A.B. 1995, Williams. Community colleges: homeless students: access to shower facilities.

Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, and authorizes the governing board of a community college district to grant the use of college facilities or grounds for specified purposes.

This bill would require a community college campus that has shower facilities for student use to grant access, as specified, to those facilities to any homeless student who is enrolled in coursework, has paid enrollment fees, and is in good standing with the community college district, and would require the community college to determine a plan of action to implement this requirement. By imposing additional duties on community college districts, 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, 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 these statutory provisions.

Vote: majority

Appropriation: no

Fiscal Committee: yes

Local Program: yes

** More Information on A.B. 1995: **

– Official California Legislative Information:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1995

 

– A.B. 1732, Ting. Single-user restrooms.

Existing law requires a public agency, as defined, that serves the public or is open to the public and maintains toilet facilities to make those facilities available to the public free of charge. Existing law requires publicly and privately owned facilities where the public congregates, as defined, to maintain a sufficient number of temporary or permanent toilet facilities to meet the needs of the public at peak hours. Existing law also requires each business establishment to provide, within reasonable access, a sufficient number of toilet facilities for the use of the employees.

This bill would, commencing March 1, 2017, require all single-user toilet facilities in any business establishment, place of public accommodation, or government agency to be identified as all-gender toilet facilities, as specified. The bill would authorize inspectors, building officials, or other local officials responsible for code enforcement to inspect for compliance with these provisions during any inspection.

Vote: majority

Appropriation: no

Fiscal Committee: yes

Local Program: no  

** More Information on A.B. 1732: **

– Official California Legislative Information:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1732

 

A.B. 2007: McCarty. Youth athletics: youth sports organizations: concussions or other head injuries.

Existing law requires a school district, charter school, or private school, if it offers an athletic program, to immediately remove an athlete from an athletic activity for the remainder of the day if the athlete is suspected of sustaining a concussion or head injury, and prohibits the athlete from returning to the athletic activity until the athlete is evaluated by a licensed health care provider, trained in the management of concussions, and acting within the scope of his or her practice, and the athlete receives written clearance from the licensed health care provider to return to the athletic activity. Existing law also requires, on a yearly basis, a concussion and head injury information sheet to be signed and returned by the athlete and athlete’s parent or guardian before the athlete’s initiating practice or competition.

This bill would apply these provisions to athletes participating in youth sports organizations, as defined to include organizations, businesses, nonprofit entities, or local governmental agencies that sponsor or conduct amateur sports competitions, training, camps, or clubs in which persons 17 years of age or younger participate in any of 27 designated sports. The bill would require youth sports organizations to notify the parents or guardians of athletes 17 years of age or younger who have been removed from athletic activities due to suspected concussions, as specified. The bill would require youth sports organizations to offer concussion and head injury education, or related educational materials, or both, to each of their coaches and administrators on a yearly basis, as prescribed. The bill would require each of these coaches and administrators to successfully complete the concussion and head injury education offered under the bill at least once either online or in person.

The bill would also require a youth sports organization to identify procedures for ensuring compliance with the bill’s requirements for providing concussion and head injury education and a concussion and head injury information sheet. The bill would additionally require the youth sports organization to identify procedures to ensure compliance with the athlete removal provisions and the return-to-play protocol, as specified. The bill would specify that it applies to all persons participating in the activities of a youth sports organization, irrespective of their ages.

Vote: majority

Appropriation: no

Fiscal Committee: no

Local Program: no  

** More Information on A.B. 2007: **

– Official California Legislative Information:

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB2007

 

**** Arizona: ****

** (Note: S.B. = Senate Bill): **

Proposition 206: Minimum Wage Increases in Arizona:

Arizona’s minimum wage increases to $10 an hour as of Sunday, January 1st, 2017 both full-time and part-time employees are required by law to be paid $10 per hour.

The changes to minimum wage was approved by voters in November 2016 when they passed Proposition 206.

Proposition 206 includes gradually increasing the minimum wage to $12 per hour by Wednesday, January 1st, 2020, and then it will increase with inflation after that.

Starting on Saturday, July 1st, 2017, employers will also have to provide paid sick time.

In 2016, minimum wage in Arizona was higher than the federal level of $7.25 per hour.

Arizona workers made $8.05 and will receive a raise based on inflation each year.

** More Information on Proposition 206: Minimum Wage Increases in Arizona: **

– Arizona Legislature:

http://www.azleg.gov/jlbc/16novprop206fn.pdf

 

Ballotpedia:

https://ballotpedia.org/Arizona_Minimum_Wage_and_Paid_Time_Off,_Proposition_206_(2016)

 

**** Nevada: ****

** (Note: S.B. = Senate Bill and A.B. = Assembly Bill): **

Question 2: Recreational Marijuana Use in Nevada:

Recreational marijuana use for people who are 21 years old and over will be legal in Nevada on Sunday, January 1st, 2017 after Nevada voters approved a ballot measure in November 2016.

Authorities say that consumption of marijuana is not allowed in public places and should be done at home.

Using pot in public is a misdemeanor that carries a fine of up to $600 and driving under the influence of marijuana is illegal. 

Also, it’s illegal to possess more than one ounce of marijuana or one-eighth of an ounce of concentrated marijuana.

Retail dispensaries are not yet licensed to sell pot for recreational use in Nevada and can only provide their products to people with valid medical marijuana cards.

Nevada Department of Taxation Officials, who crafted regulations for recreational marijuana businesses, have until 2018 to license retail dispensaries.

** More Information on Question 2: Recreational Marijuana Use in Nevada in Nevada: **

Ballotpedia:

https://ballotpedia.org/Nevada_Marijuana_Legalization,_Question_2_(2016)

 

A.B. 162: Body Cameras on Nevada Highway Patrol Officers:

A new law effective on Sunday, January 1st, 2017 requires all Nevada Highway Patrol Officers who regularly interact with the public to wear body cameras.

The Nevada State Legislators passed a bill in 2015 that seeks to hold both officers and the public accountable if their encounters go wrong.

The Nevada State Legislators approved $1.3 million to get the initiative up and running.

The law defines the recordings as a public record but specifies that people who want to see it must request it on a per-incident basis.

The Nevada State Legislators also called on the highway patrol to develop policies that would protect the privacy of people in their homes and those who are trying to report a crime anonymously.

** More Information on A.B. 162: Body Cameras on Nevada Highway Patrol Officers in Nevada: **

– Nevada Legislature:

http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/78th2015/Reports/history.cfm?billname=AB162

****

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s