California 2017-2018 Regular Session Status: Enacted

AB 2138 — Licensing boards: denial of application: revocation or suspension of licensure: criminal conviction.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 995, Statutes of 2018.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. ✓
    Passed Assembly
  4. ✓
    Passed Senate
  5. ✓
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 12, 2018. Enacted.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 72% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

High

How often bills like it became law.

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 2 sponsors

    1 primary, 1 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 9 recorded votes so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

Summary

Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of various professions and vocations by boards within the Department of Consumer Affairs. Existing law authorizes a board to deny, suspend, or revoke a license or take disciplinary action against a licensee on the grounds that the applicant or licensee has, among other things, been convicted of a crime, as specified. Existing law provides that a person shall not be denied a license solely on the basis that the person has been convicted of a felony if he or she has obtained a certificate of rehabilitation or that the person has been convicted of a misdemeanor if he or she has met applicable requirements of rehabilitation developed by the board, as specified. Existing law also prohibits a person from being denied a license solely on the basis of a conviction that has been dismissed, as specified. Existing law requires a board to develop criteria to aid it when considering the denial, suspension, or revocation of a license to determine whether a crime is substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of the business or profession the board regulates and requires a board to develop criteria to evaluate the rehabilitation of a person when considering the denial, suspension, or revocation of a license. This bill would revise and recast those provisions to instead authorize a board to, among other things, deny, revoke, or suspend a license on the grounds that the applicant or licensee has been subject to formal discipline, as specified, or convicted of a crime only if the applicant or licensee has been convicted of a crime within the preceding 7 years from the date of application that is substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of the business or profession for which the application is made, regardless of whether the applicant was incarcerated for that crime, or if the applicant has been convicted of a crime that is substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of the business or profession for which the application is made and for which the applicant is presently incarcerated or for which the applicant was released from incarceration within the preceding 7 years, except as specified. The bill would prohibit a board from denying a person a license based on the conviction of a crime, or on the basis of acts underlying a conviction, as defined, for a crime, if the conviction has been dismissed or expunged, if the person has provided evidence of rehabilitation, if the person has been granted clemency or a pardon, or if an arrest resulted in a disposition other than a conviction. The bill would require the board to develop criteria for determining whether a crime is substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of the business or profession. The bill would require a board to consider whether a person has made a showing of rehabilitation if certain conditions are met. The bill would require a board to follow certain procedures when requesting or acting on an applicant's or licensee's criminal history information. The bill would also require a board to annually submit a report to the Legislature and post the report on its Internet Web site containing specified deidentified information regarding actions taken by a board based on an applicant or licensee's criminal history information. Existing law authorizes a board to deny a license on the grounds that an applicant knowingly made a false statement of fact that is required to be revealed in the application for licensure. This bill would prohibit a board from denying a license based solely on an applicant's failure to disclose a fact that would not have been cause for denial of the license had the fact been disclosed. Existing law authorizes a board, after a specified hearing requested by an applicant for licensure to take various actions in relation to denying or granting the applicant the license. This bill would revise and recast those provisions to eliminate some of the more specific options that the board may take in these circumstances. This bill would clarify that the existing above-described provisions continue to apply to the State Athletic Commission, the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education, and the California Horse Racing Board. This bill would also make necessary conforming changes. This bill would make these provisions operative on July 1, 2020.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 995, Statutes of 2018.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4:30 p.m.

  4. Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 47. Noes 29. Page 6991.).

  5. Assembly Rule 77 suspended. (Page 6773.)

  6. In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 30 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.

  7. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 24. Noes 13. Page 5902.).

  8. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  9. Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

  10. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  11. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (August 16).

  12. In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file.

  13. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 4. Noes 2.) (June 26). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  14. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  15. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. (Ayes 6. Noes 3.) (June 18). Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  16. Referred to Coms. on B., P. & E.D. and PUB. S.

  17. In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

  18. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 45. Noes 29. Page 5633.)

  19. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  20. Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.

  21. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 12. Noes 4.) (May 25).

  22. Joint Rule 62(a), file notice suspended. (Page 5298.)

  23. In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.

  24. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 5.) (April 24). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  25. Re-referred to Com. on B. & P.

  26. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on B. & P. Read second time and amended.

  27. Referred to Com. on B. & P.

  28. From printer. May be heard in committee March 15.

  29. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Chiu · Primary
  • Low · Cosponsor

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 1 co-sponsors · 120 not signed on · 13 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Chiu

Co-sponsors (1)

  • Low

Not signed on (120)

120 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 120 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

AB 2138 CHIU Concurrence in Senate Amendments

Passed 47 Yea · 29 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 13201
Unaffiliated 342103
Republican 0600
Total 472904
% of votes cast 59%36%0%5%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Bloom — Yea
Kiley — Yea
Mathis — Nay
Melendez — Nay
Medina — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Steinorth — Nay
Wood — Yea
Holden — Yea
Kamlager-Dove — Yea
Levine — Yea
Low — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Thurmond — Yea
Ting — Yea
Weber — Yea
Gonzalez Fletcher — Yea
Burke — Yea
Chau — Yea
Chu — Yea
Rubio — Yea
Rivas — Yea
Fong — Nay
Salas — Nay
Harper — Nay
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Gray — Nay
Maienschein — Nay
Mayes — Nay
McCarty — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Obernolte — Nay
Rodriguez — Not Voting
Voepel — Nay
Waldron — Nay
Acosta — Nay
Baker — Nay
Bigelow — Nay
Brough — Nay
Chávez — Nay
Cooley — Yea
Cooper — Not Voting
Eggman — Yea
Cunningham — Nay
Daly — Not Voting
Frazier — Nay
Friedman — Yea
Gloria — Yea
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Nay
Mark Stone — Yea
Travis Allen — Nay
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Not Voting
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Nay
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Nay
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Nay
Choi, Steven S. Republican Nay
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay
Flora, Heath Republican Nay
Gallagher, James Republican Nay
Lackey, Tom Republican Nay

Official roll call →

3rd Reading AB2138 Chiu et al. By Skinner

Passed 24 Yea · 13 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 201203
Democratic 4100
Total 241303
% of votes cast 60%33%0%8%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Nay
Bates — Nay
Beall — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Pan — Yea
Wilk — Nay
Galgiani — Not Voting
Glazer — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Cannella — Nay
Allen — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Hill — Yea
De León — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Chang — Nay
Lara — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Monning — Yea
Roth — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Delgado — Not Voting
Fuller — Nay
Moorlach — Nay
Morrell — Nay
Nielsen — Nay
Vidak — Nay
Beth Gaines — Nay
Bill Berryhill — Not Voting
Mark Stone — Nay
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Nay
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass

Passed 5 Yea · 2 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 4200
Democratic 1000
Total 5200
% of votes cast 71%29%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Bates — Nay
Bradford — Yea
Hill — Yea
Nielsen — Nay
Portantino — Yea
Beall — Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Placed on suspense file

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 6000
Democratic 1000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Bates — Yea
Beall — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Hill — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

AB 2138 CHIU Assembly Third Reading

Passed 45 Yea · 29 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 332202
Democratic 12102
Republican 0600
Total 452904
% of votes cast 58%37%0%5%
How each member voted (78)
Member Party Vote
Acosta — Nay
Baker — Nay
Bloom — Yea
Brough — Nay
Harper — Nay
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Kiley — Nay
Maienschein — Nay
Mathis — Nay
Medina — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Voepel — Nay
Weber — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Chu — Yea
Chau — Yea
Gonzalez Fletcher — Yea
Burke — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Rubio — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Holden — Yea
Fong — Nay
Salas — Nay
Kamlager-Dove — Yea
Gray — Nay
Levine — Yea
Low — Yea
Mayes — Nay
McCarty — Yea
Melendez — Nay
Bigelow — Nay
Chiu — Yea
Chávez — Nay
Cooley — Yea
Mullin — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Obernolte — Nay
Quirk — Yea
Rodriguez — Not Voting
Steinorth — Nay
Thurmond — Yea
Ting — Yea
Waldron — Nay
Wood — Yea
Cooper — Nay
Cunningham — Nay
Daly — Not Voting
Gloria — Yea
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Nay
Mark Stone — Yea
Travis Allen — Nay
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Not Voting
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Nay
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Not Voting
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Nay
Choi, Steven S. Republican Nay
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay
Flora, Heath Republican Nay
Gallagher, James Republican Nay
Lackey, Tom Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended.

Passed 12 Yea · 4 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 9301
Democratic 3000
Republican 0100
Total 12401
% of votes cast 71%24%0%6%
How each member voted (17)
Member Party Vote
Bigelow — Nay
Bloom — Yea
Brough — Not Voting
Nazarian — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Gonzalez Fletcher — Yea
Fong — Nay
Chau — Yea
Obernolte — Nay
Quirk — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

Passed 11 Yea · 5 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 7400
Democratic 4000
Republican 0100
Total 11500
% of votes cast 69%31%0%0%
How each member voted (16)
Member Party Vote
Baker — Nay
Brough — Nay
Mullin — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Fong — Nay
Holden — Yea
Low — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Cunningham — Nay
Ting — Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Subjects

civil-rights labor
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 2138 do?
Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of various professions and vocations by boards within the Department of Consumer Affairs. Existing law authorizes a board to deny, suspend, or revoke a license or take disciplinary action against a licensee on the grounds that the applicant or licensee has, among other things, been convicted of a crime, as specified. Existing law provides that a person shall not be denied a license solely on the basis that the person has been convicted of a felony if he or she has obtained a certificate of rehabilitation or that the person has been convicted of a misdemeanor if he or she has met applicable requirements of rehabilitation developed by the board, as specified. Existing law also prohibits a person from being denied a license solely on the basis of a conviction that has been dismissed, as specified. Existing law requires a board to develop criteria to aid it when considering the denial, suspension, or revocation of a license to determine whether a crime is substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of the business or profession the board regulates and requires a board to develop criteria to evaluate the rehabilitation of a person when considering the denial, suspension, or revocation of a license. This bill would revise and recast those provisions to instead authorize a board to, among other things, deny, revoke, or suspend a license on the grounds that the applicant or licensee has been subject to formal discipline, as specified, or convicted of a crime only if the applicant or licensee has been convicted of a crime within the preceding 7 years from the date of application that is substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of the business or profession for which the application is made, regardless of whether the applicant was incarcerated for that crime, or if the applicant has been convicted of a crime that is substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of the business or profession for which the application is made and for which the applicant is presently incarcerated or for which the applicant was released from incarceration within the preceding 7 years, except as specified. The bill would prohibit a board from denying a person a license based on the conviction of a crime, or on the basis of acts underlying a conviction, as defined, for a crime, if the conviction has been dismissed or expunged, if the person has provided evidence of rehabilitation, if the person has been granted clemency or a pardon, or if an arrest resulted in a disposition other than a conviction. The bill would require the board to develop criteria for determining whether a crime is substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of the business or profession. The bill would require a board to consider whether a person has made a showing of rehabilitation if certain conditions are met. The bill would require a board to follow certain procedures when requesting or acting on an applicant's or licensee's criminal history information. The bill would also require a board to annually submit a report to the Legislature and post the report on its Internet Web site containing specified deidentified information regarding actions taken by a board based on an applicant or licensee's criminal history information. Existing law authorizes a board to deny a license on the grounds that an applicant knowingly made a false statement of fact that is required to be revealed in the application for licensure. This bill would prohibit a board from denying a license based solely on an applicant's failure to disclose a fact that would not have been cause for denial of the license had the fact been disclosed. Existing law authorizes a board, after a specified hearing requested by an applicant for licensure to take various actions in relation to denying or granting the applicant the license. This bill would revise and recast those provisions to eliminate some of the more specific options that the board may take in these circumstances. This bill would clarify that the existing above-described provisions continue to apply to the State Athletic Commission, the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education, and the California Horse Racing Board. This bill would also make necessary conforming changes. This bill would make these provisions operative on July 1, 2020.
Who sponsors AB 2138?
AB 2138 is sponsored by Chiu and Low.
What is the current status of AB 2138?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 12, 2018. Enacted.
Where can I track AB 2138?
Track AB 2138 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 2138

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 2138

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →