Existing federal law provides for the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) , known in California as CalFresh, under which supplemental nutrition assistance benefits allocated to the state by the federal government are distributed to eligible individuals by each county. Existing federal law establishes eligibility requirements, including specified income eligibility standards, for receipt of CalFresh benefits. This bill would require the State Department of Social Services, on or before April 1, 2027, to submit a request to the United States Department of Agriculture for a waiver to exclude the costs incurred by a veteran associated with the veteran's job search from countable income in the determination of eligibility and benefit level for receiving CalFresh benefits and to exempt specified veterans from the time limit and associated work requirements. The bill would require the waivers to be implemented within 6 months from their approval. To the extent the bill would expand the duties of counties, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law authorizes counties to participate in the CalFresh Employment and Training (CalFresh E&T) program, established by federal law, to provide work experience or training and job search training to CalFresh recipients. Existing law requires, in a county that elects to participate in the program, that a veteran applying for CalFresh benefits who is required to register to work, but who is exempt from mandatory placement in the CalFresh E&T program, be provided with specified referrals to veterans' assistance and job training agencies if those agencies are known to the county. This bill would require a county to provide those referrals to veterans' assistance and job training agencies whether or not the veteran applying for CalFresh benefits is exempt from mandatory placement in the CalFresh E&T 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 requires the Office of Emergency Services to, as appropriate, perform a risk analysis of potential threats posed by the use of generative artificial intelligence to California's critical infrastructure, including those that could lead to mass casualty events. Existing law requires that risk analysis to be provided to the Governor, and, if appropriate, include recommendations reflecting changes to artificial intelligence technology, its applications, and risk management, including further private actions, administrative actions, and collaboration with the Legislature to guard against potential threats and vulnerabilities. This bill would require that recommendations in the risk analysis reflecting changes to artificial intelligence technology include agentic artificial intelligence, as defined. Existing law requires the Department of Technology to annually submit to certain legislative committees a report regarding a specified required comprehensive inventory of all high-risk automated decision systems that have been, or are being, used, developed, or procured by a state agency. Existing law defines "high-risk automated decision system" to mean an automated decision system that is used to assist or replace human discretionary decisions that have a legal or similarly significant effect, including decisions that materially impact access to, or approval for, housing or accommodations, education, employment, credit, health care, and criminal justice. This bill would further require the comprehensive inventory in the report to include agentic artificial intelligence that has been, or is being, used, developed, or procured by a state agency.
Existing law requires a skilled and trained workforce to be used in the construction, alteration, demolition, installation, repair, or maintenance work of certain public works and privately-owned facilities engaged in certain petroleum-related activities, manufacturing hydrogen, biofuels, or certain specified chemicals, or capturing, sequestering, or using carbon dioxide, as specified. Existing law defines "skilled and trained workforce" to include, among other criteria, skilled journeypersons who are paid at least a rate equivalent to the applicable prevailing hourly wage rate. This bill would require an owner, operator, or developer of a facility that will be used for the research, development, or production of pharmaceutical products to, when contracting for the performance of construction, alteration, demolition, installation, repair, or maintenance work on the facility, require that its contractors and subcontractors use a skilled and trained workforce to perform all onsite work within an apprenticeable occupation in the building and construction trades, and would require all contractors and subcontractors performing the work to use a skilled and trained workforce. The bill would require the owner, operator, or developer of the facility to provide to the Labor Commissioner a monthly report demonstrating compliance with the bill's provisions that includes, among other things, the full name and other identifying information relating to each worker relied on to satisfy the apprenticeship graduation percentage requirements. If the Labor Commissioner determines that a contractor or subcontractor failed to use a skilled and trained workforce, the bill would require the contractor or subcontractor to forfeit, as a civil penalty to the state, up to $5,000 per month of work performed for a first violation, and, for a second or subsequent violation, up to $10,000 per month of work performed. The bill would authorize the Labor Commissioner to reduce or waive the penalty under specified circumstances.
The Small Business Procurement and Contract Act permits a state agency or the California State University to award a contract for goods, services, or information technology with an estimated value between $5,000 and $250,000 to a certified small business, including a microbusiness and a disabled veteran business enterprise, without complying with specified competitive bidding requirements. This bill would increase the maximum estimated value of a contract for services or information technology awarded pursuant to the act from $250,000 to $350,000. Commencing January 1, 2029, and biennially thereafter, the bill would require the Director of General Services to conduct a review of that maximum value, and would authorize the director to adjust that value to reflect changes in the California Consumer Price Index.
Existing law establishes the Department of Transportation and requires it to improve and maintain the state highways. Existing law authorizes the department to enter into any contracts required for the performance of its duties, as provided. Existing law establishes bid preferences in public contracting for certain types of bidders, including, but not limited to, small business and microbusiness bidders. This bill would, on and after January 1, 2028, require the department to provide certain bid preferences to a contractor or subcontractor with an employee stock ownership plan (ESOP) in which 30% or more is owned by the ESOP when the contractor or subcontractor bids or is part of a bid on a state-funded construction contract, as specified. The bill would make it unlawful for a person, contractor, or subcontractor to engage in specified behaviors related to the fraudulent obtaining or retaining of an ESOP bid preference and would subject a person, contractor, or subcontractor engaged in those behaviors to a suspension from bidding on or participating in any contract with the department for certain periods and specified civil penalties.
Existing law, the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Act (CARE Act) , authorizes specified persons, including a person with whom the respondent resides, family members, and first responders, among others, to petition a civil court to create a voluntary CARE agreement or a court-ordered CARE plan and implement services, to be provided by county behavioral health agencies, to provide behavioral health care, including stabilization medication, housing, and other enumerated services, to adults who are currently experiencing a severe mental illness and have a diagnosis identified in the disorder class schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, or bipolar I disorder with psychotic features, and who meet other specified criteria. Existing law requires the Judicial Council to develop a mandatory form for use to file a CARE process petition with the court and any other forms necessary for the CARE process, to be signed under the penalty of perjury, and requires the form to contain certain information, including either a specified affidavit of a licensed behavioral health professional or evidence the respondent was detained for a minimum of two intensive treatments pursuant to specified provisions of law. Existing law, the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (LPS Act) , generally provides for the evaluation, treatment, and civil commitment of persons with mental health disorders and other specified persons. Existing law authorizes, under a superior court order, an evaluation of a person alleged, as a result of mental disorder, to be a danger to themselves or others or to be gravely disabled, and provides the forms to use for these evaluations. The CARE Act authorizes a court to terminate a respondent's participation in the CARE process if the court determines that the respondent is not participating in the CARE process or is not adhering to their CARE plan, as specified, and authorizes the court to order the court-ordered evaluation under the LPS Act. If the court finds the petitioner has made a prima facie showing that the respondent is, or may be, a person eligible for the CARE program, the court is required to order the county behavioral health agency, or their designee, as specified, to submit a written report to the court with specified information, including, but not limited to, a determination whether the respondent meets, or is likely to meet, the criteria for the CARE process and conclusions and recommendations about the respondent's ability to voluntarily engage in services. Existing law requires the court to, within 5 days of receiving the report, take one of several actions, including dismissing the petition if the court determines that voluntary engagement with the respondent is effective and the individual has enrolled, or is likely to enroll, in behavioral health treatment. This bill would require the written report to include conclusions about whether the respondent is likely to need a higher level of care than is available under the CARE Act and, if so, recommendations about the appropriate level of care and the necessary steps to obtain that level of care for the respondent and remove the authorization for a court to dismiss the petition if the respondent is only likely to enroll in behavioral health treatment. If the court intends to dismiss a petition because the respondent needs a higher level of services, the bill would authorize the court to order the county to conduct a prepetition screening and hold the CARE petition open until the screening is complete. The bill would also make other technical and conforming changes. By requiring a higher level of service on the county, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires all hearings regarding these provisions to occur in person unless the court, in its discretion, allows a party or witness to appear remotely. This bill would require the court to allow the hearings to be held remotely, unless otherwise ordered by the court or demanded by the respondent. 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 authorizes various conservancies to acquire, manage, direct the management of, and conserve lands in the state. This bill would establish the Grassland Ecological Area Conservancy within the Natural Resources Agency, with jurisdiction over the Grassland Ecological Area and the Grassland Focus Area, as defined, for specified purposes, including to protect, conserve, and restore the physical, cultural, archaeological, historical, and living resources of the Grassland Ecological Area and the Grassland Focus Area and to provide increased opportunities for tourism and recreation. The bill would require the conservancy to be governed by a board composed of designated voting members, including certain members appointed by certain local agencies, and nonvoting liaison advisers. The bill would set forth the powers, duties, and limitations of the governing board and the conservancy, as provided. The bill would create the Grassland Ecological Area Conservancy Fund and would make moneys in the fund available for expenditure by the conservancy, upon appropriation by the Legislature, only for the purposes of these provisions. The bill would require all funds or income received by the conservancy, including proceeds from donations or a lease, rental, sale, exchange, or transfer of an interest or option in real property, to be deposited into the fund. By imposing new duties on local agencies, the bill would create 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.
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 (EIR) on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA requires a lead agency, before releasing an environmental review document for a project, to begin consultation with a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project, as provided. CEQA authorizes the parties, as a part of the consultation, to propose mitigation measures capable of avoiding or substantially lessening potential significant impacts to a tribal cultural resource or alternatives that would avoid significant impacts to a tribal cultural resource. CEQA defines a tribal cultural resource as including, among other things, a site, feature, place, cultural landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that is included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources or included in a local register of historical resources, as provided. This bill would modify the definition of tribal cultural resource to, among other things, include a site, feature, place, cultural landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that is identified by the Native American Heritage Commission as a sacred place, as provided, or included in a local tribal register and provided to the lead agency by a consulting California Native American tribe. CEQA requires public agencies, when feasible, to avoid damaging effects to tribal cultural resources and specifies mitigation measures that may be considered to avoid or minimize significant adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources if the consultation process fails to result in agreed-upon mitigation measures. This bill would revise and recast those provisions to instead require a lead agency, when feasible, to adopt mitigation measures, as provided, to avoid or minimize the significant adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources. The bill would require avoidance and preservation of the resource in place to be considered when requested by the consulting California Native American tribe, and if avoidance and preservation are determined to not be feasible, the bill would require the lead agency to document the basis for that determination with substantial evidence and, when feasible, to incorporate other measures to avoid or minimize significant adverse impacts to the resource consistent with CEQA. The bill would authorize the consulting California Native American tribe to identify culturally appropriate mitigation measures, which the bill would require the lead agency to consider and incorporate, to the extent feasible, in developing mitigation and treatment measures. This bill would require the lead agency, if archaeological methods and standards are used in the identification of tribal cultural resources instead of tribal methods and standards or tribal traditional knowledge submitted by a California Native American tribe during tribal consultation, to explain its decision to use archaeological methods and standards. The bill would require the lead agency, if treatment and mitigation measures preferred and submitted by a California Native American tribe during tribal consultation are not recommended for adoption by the lead agency, to explain its decision. By imposing additional duties on local agencies in their implementation of CEQA, 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, the California Child Day Care Facilities Act, provides for the licensing and regulation of child daycare facilities, including family daycare homes, by the State Department of Social Services. Existing law authorizes a small family daycare home to provide daycare for more than 6 and up to 8 children, including infants, if certain conditions are met. Existing law also authorizes a large family daycare home to provide daycare for more than 12 children and up to and including 14 children, including infants, if certain conditions are met. Existing regulations define infant for these purposes as a child under 2 years of age. This bill would instead define infant for these purposes as a child under 18 months of age.
Under existing law, a court is authorized to suspend the driving privilege of a licensed driver convicted of a violation relating to the speed of vehicles or reckless driving for a period not to exceed 30 days for a first conviction, for a period not to exceed 60 days upon a 2nd conviction, and for a period not to exceed 6 months upon a 3rd or any subsequent conviction. This bill would, commencing on January 1, 2028, authorize a court, for a conviction of reckless driving, to suspend the driving privilege for a period not to exceed 60 days, and for a period of not less than 30 days and not to exceed 6 months when the offense occurred within 10 years of a separate reckless driving violation. The bill would require a court to suspend the driving privilege for a period of not less than 90 days and not to exceed one year if the offense occurred within 10 years of 2 or more separate reckless driving violations. Existing law authorizes a peace officer to arrest a person and seize the motor vehicle of the person if a peace officer determines that the person was engaged in a motor vehicle speed contest, reckless driving, or an exhibition of speed on a highway or in an offstreet parking facility. Existing law allows a vehicle seized under this provision to be impounded for up to 30 days. Existing law requires an impounding agency to release a motor vehicle to the registered owner or their agent prior to the conclusion of the impoundment period if, among other reasons, the person alleged to have been engaged in the motor vehicle speed contest was not authorized by the registered owner to operate the motor vehicle at the time of the commission of the offense, or if the registered owner was neither the driver nor a passenger of the motor vehicle or was unaware that the driver was using the motor vehicle to engage in the prohibited activities. If an impounding agency releases a motor vehicle to the registered owner or agent prior to the conclusion of the impoundment period, this bill would require the registered owner to provide evidence that the driver did not have authorization from the registered owner to operate the motor vehicle, as specified, or require the registered owner to submit a written, signed statement attesting that the registered owner was unaware that the driver was using the vehicle to engage in reckless driving. The bill would allow a registered owner or their agent to obtain their vehicle prior to the conclusion of the impoundment period based on the reason that the registered owner was not the driver or passenger of the motor vehicle or was unaware that the driver was engaging in reckless driving 3 times. The bill would prohibit a registered owner from using this reason to obtain the motor vehicle prior to the conclusion of the impoundment period for a 4th or any subsequent arrest that involves the same driver and vehicle. Existing law requires an impounding agency to release an impounded vehicle before the conclusion of the impound period if the charges against the driver are dismissed. This bill would prohibit the registered owner or driver of the vehicle from being charged any towing or storage fees if the vehicle is released for this reason.
Existing law establishes a system of public elementary and secondary schools operated and maintained by local educational agencies throughout the state. Existing law establishes the State Department of Education in state government, and vests the department with specified powers and duties relating to the state's public school system. This bill would require the department to establish a California Excellence in Service Learning Designation Program to publicly recognize and designate schoolsites, as defined, that meet certain requirements related to service learning, as provided. The bill would require the department to develop an annual application process and adopt application criteria for the California Excellence in Service Learning Designation Program, as specified, and would require a California Excellence in Service Learning designation to be valid for 3 years, after which a schoolsite seeking to renew its designation would be required to reapply pursuant to a renewal process and criteria determined by the department.
Existing law requires an authorized member of a public agency who directs the storage of a vehicle, as specified, to give notice to the legal owners within 48 hours and the opportunity for a poststorage hearing to determine the validity of the storage. Existing law requires an officer or employee, upon the removal of a vehicle from public or private property, to store the vehicle at the nearest garage or place of safety designated by the governmental agency. A violation of the Vehicle Code or a local ordinance adopted pursuant to that code is an infraction. This bill would authorize the registered or legal owner, lienholder, or insurer of a vehicle to post a bond or other adequate security with the clerk of the court in the county where the vehicle is stored before the sale of the vehicle by a towing company, impound yard, or storage facility, as specified. The bill would require the court, upon the posting of the bond, to issue a certificate directing the towing company, impound yard, or storage facility to release the vehicle to the party who posted the bond. The bill would require the party that posted the bond to initiate judicial proceedings within 10 court days after the issuance of the certificate, alleging certain causes of action. The bill would prohibit an auto body shop, impound yard, or towing company from knowingly participating in, or profiting from, specified towing or storage practices. The bill would require the Bureau of Automotive Repair to, by January 1, 2028, develop and distribute a notice that states a vehicle owner's rights pursuant to these provisions. The bill would require a towing company, impound yard, storage facility, or auto body shop to post that notice where it is visible to consumers onsite. The bill would impose a civil fine against a towing company, impound yard, storage facility, or auto body shop, as specified, for a violation of these provisions. The bill would exempt certain towing companies, storage companies, or impound yards from these provisions when a vehicle was towed at the request of the Department of the California Highway Patrol, a local law enforcement agency, the Department of Transportation, or a local transportation department or agency, as specified.
