Existing law creates the Department of Insurance, headed by the Insurance Commissioner, and prescribes the department's powers and duties. Existing law directs the department and commissioner to administer various grant programs that, among other things, defray property retrofitting costs. This bill would establish the California Safe Homes grant program to be developed by the department to reduce local and statewide wildfire losses, among other things. The bill would require the department to prioritize specified needs when awarding grant funds, and would require eligible program applicants, which would include individuals, cities, counties, and special districts, to meet specified criteria. The bill would establish the Sustainable Insurance Account within the Insurance Fund and would make the funds available to the department for the program upon appropriation by the Legislature or upon receipt of federal or other grants or funds. The bill would require the department to collect specified information about the performance of the program and, on or before January 1, 2027, and every 2 years thereafter, to publish a performance report that would be posted to its internet website and submitted to the Legislature.
(1) Existing law, the Respiratory Care Practice Act, establishes the Respiratory Care Board of California to license and regulate the practice of respiratory care. The act authorizes, among other things, a licensed vocational nurse who is employed by a home health agency to perform respiratory tasks and services identified by the board, as specified. This bill would also authorize the performance of suctioning and other basic respiratory tasks and services by a licensed vocational nurse under the supervision of a credentialed school nurse. (2) Existing law authorizes an individual with exceptional needs who requires specialized physical health care services, as defined, during the regular schoolday, to be assisted by individuals meeting specified requirements. This bill would also authorize an individual with exceptional needs who requires specialized physical health care services to be assisted by a licensed vocational nurse under the supervision of a credentialed school nurse for the above-described basic respiratory services.
The Elder California Pipeline Safety Act of 1981 requires the State Fire Marshal to administer provisions regulating the inspection of intrastate pipelines that transport hazardous liquids. A person who willfully and knowingly violates the act or a regulation issued pursuant to the act is, upon conviction, subject to a fine, imprisonment, or both a fine and imprisonment, as provided. The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 establishes the State Air Resources Board as the state agency responsible for monitoring and regulating sources emitting greenhouse gases. The act requires the state board to ensure that statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 40% below the statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit, as defined, no later than December 31, 2030. 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. This bill would revise the definition of "pipeline," for purposes of the Elder California Pipeline Safety Act of 1981, to include intrastate pipelines used for the transportation of carbon dioxide. The bill would require the State Fire Marshal, by July 1, 2026, to adopt regulations governing the safe transportation of carbon dioxide in pipelines that, at a minimum, are as protective as certain draft regulations issued by the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration on January 10, 2025. The bill would authorize the State Fire Marshal to amend those regulations, as provided. The bill would prohibit the approval of a pipeline for use in transporting carbon dioxide if the pipeline is originally constructed to transport any other liquid or gas, and would prohibit the construction of those pipelines using previously used pipe or components. The bill would prohibit an operator from constructing a pipeline transporting carbon dioxide in a location where one or more sensitive receptors, as defined, are located within the emergency planning zone of the pipeline, which is defined as an area within 2 miles of either side of the pipeline, except as provided. The bill would require an operator of a pipeline transporting carbon dioxide to submit to the State Fire Marshal and the public agency that is the lead agency for the project that includes the pipeline an emergency planning zone inventory and map, as provided, and would require the State Fire Marshal and the lead agency to review, at least once every 3 years, the inventory and map for completeness and accuracy. The bill would require the operator, at least once every 3 years, to provide to local governments providing emergency response services to sensitive receptors within an emergency planning zone the inventory and map determined by the State Fire Marshal and the lead agency to be complete and accurate and any updates to the inventory and map. The bill would require the State Fire Marshal and the lead agency to make publicly available on its internet website all inventories and maps determined to be current, complete, and accurate and would require the State Fire Marshal and the lead agency to redact any personally identifiable information from the publicly available inventories and maps. To the extent this requirement imposes additional duties on a local agency regarding the posting of, and the redaction of information from, the inventories and maps, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the operator to annually provide the map to sensitive receptors within the emergency planning zone of the pipeline. The bill would authorize the State Fire Marshal, for a pipeline transporting carbon dioxide, to order a pipeline shutdown for violations of state or federal laws, or if continued pipeline operations present an immediate danger to health, welfare, or the environment. The bill would, in the event of a pipeline rupture, require the pipeline to remain nonoperational until an investigation into the pipeline rupture is completed and the origin and cause of the pipeline rupture is determined. Because the bill would expand the application of a crime to pipelines transporting carbon dioxide and because a violation of the regulations adopted by the State Fire Marshal related to pipelines transporting carbon dioxide would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require that to be recognized by the state board for meeting any requirement under the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, carbon dioxide transported by pipeline be transported only by pipelines meeting or exceeding the standards adopted by the State Fire Marshal. This bill would, for a project that includes the construction of a pipeline transporting carbon dioxide subject to the requirements of the Elder California Pipeline Safety Act of 1981, require the lead agency to prepare or cause to be prepared an EIR or equivalent documentation, as defined, and to certify or adopt those documents for the project. The bill would require the lead agency, upon the completion of a draft EIR or draft equivalent documentation, to notify owners and operators of sensitive receptors within 14 mile of the proposed pipeline and the State Fire Marshal, as provided. The bill would require the lead agency, at least 60 days before the certification of the EIR or the adoption of the equivalent documentation, to notify the State Fire Marshal of the project. By imposing additional duties on a lead agency, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require that the State Fire Marshal provide to the lead agency, in writing, its confirmation that the pipeline is constructed consistent with the Elder California Pipeline Safety Act of 1981 and to make the determination publicly available on its internet website. Existing law requires that pipelines only be used to transport carbon dioxide to or from a carbon dioxide capture, removal, or sequestration project once the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration has concluded its rulemaking regarding minimum federal safety standards for transportation of carbon dioxide by pipeline. This bill would limit the language restricting the transportation of carbon dioxide by pipeline to apply only to federally regulated interstate pipelines, and would require that intrastate pipelines be used to transport carbon dioxide to or from a carbon dioxide capture, removal, or sequestration project only after the State Fire Marshal adopts its regulations pursuant to the bill and only once the project operator demonstrates that the pipelines meet the standards in those regulations. Existing law assesses a civil penalty for a violation of the act or regulations adopted pursuant to the act. Existing law requires civil penalties assessed for violation, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to be available to the State Fire Marshal to provide hazardous liquid fire suppression training to local fire departments. This bill would additionally authorize the assessed civil penalties to be used to provide fire responder training for hazardous gas response and suppression training to local fire departments. 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. 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 specified reasons. 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, the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act, defines and regulates common interest developments, which include community apartment projects, condominium projects, planned developments, and stock cooperatives. Existing law imposes various requirements regarding the installation and use of an electric vehicle (EV) charging station placed in a common area or an exclusive use common area of a common interest development, including that the owner is required to provide a certificate of insurance that names the association as an additional insured party. This bill would delete the requirement that the insurance policy name the association as an additional insured party, and would correct an erroneous cross-reference regarding the amount of that insurance.
Existing law sets forth an expedited procedure for judicial review of decisions by a local public agency regarding the issuance, revocation, suspension, or denial of a permit involving expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, as specified. This bill would provide similar expedited judicial review for denials of permits or other entitlements for housing development projects or residential units at the trial and appellate level, as specified. The bill would authorize a petitioner, the Attorney General, or the Department of Housing and Community Development to file a petition for writ of mandate under these provisions. The bill would require a local agency, upon the request of an applicant or notice from the department or the Attorney General, to compile a record of its proceedings as they occur and to certify the record within 15 days of the service of a writ. The bill would require that a hearing be set no later than 45 days after the filing of the writ and that the court issue a decision no later than 30 days after the matter is submitted or 75 days after the writ was filed, whichever is earlier. The bill would authorize the temporary assignment of judicial officers to ensure the timelines are met.
(1) The California Constitution generally limits ad valorem taxes on real property to 1% of the full cash value of that property, defined as the county assessor's valuation of real property as shown on the 1975–76 tax bill and, thereafter, the appraised value of the property when purchased, newly constructed, or a change in ownership occurs after the 1975 assessment, subject to an annual inflation adjustment not to exceed 2%. Existing property tax law provides that the purchase or transfer of the principal residence, and the first $1,000,000 of other real property, of a transferor in the case of a transfer between parents and their children, or between grandparents and their grandchildren if all the parents of those grandchildren are deceased, is not a "purchase" or "change in ownership" for purposes of determining the "full cash value" of property for taxation. The California Constitution, pursuant to Proposition 19, adopted by the voters at the November 3, 2020, general election, beginning on and after February 16, 2021, excludes from the terms "purchase" and "change in ownership," for purposes of determining the "full cash value" of property, the purchase or transfer of a family home or family farm, as those terms are defined, of the transferor in the case of a transfer between parents and their children, or between grandparents and their grandchildren if all the parents of those grandchildren are deceased, as specified. Existing law requires a filing to be made with regard to a transfer that is eligible for the above-referenced exclusions, and sets various deadlines, including a requirement to file six months after the date of mailing of a notice of supplemental or escape assessment, issued as a result of the purchase or transfer of real property for which the claim is filed. This bill would require a filing for a transfer that is eligible for the above-referenced exclusions to be treated as timely if the filing is made within three years of the date of mailing of a notice of supplemental or escape assessment if specified requirements are met, including a requirement that the assessor reassesses the property as a result of that property being damaged or destroyed by the 2025 Palisades Fire, Eaton Fire, Hurst Fire, Lidia Fire, Sunset Fire, or Woodley Fire, for which the Governor proclaimed a state of emergency. The bill would only apply this exception to claims filed before January 1, 2031. By expanding the duties of local tax officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) The California Constitution declares that all property is taxable, except as provided, and establishes or authorizes various exemptions from tax for real property, including a homeowners' exemption in the amount of $7,000 of the full value of a dwelling that may be applied unless the dwelling receives another real property exemption. The California Constitution and existing property tax law establish a disabled veterans' exemption in the amount of $100,000 or $150,000 for the principal place of residence of a veteran or a veteran's spouse, as specified. Existing law requires a transferee to file for the homeowners' or disabled veterans' exemption within a year of the transfer. This bill would instead require that a filing for the homeowners' or disabled veterans' exemption be treated as timely if it is filed within a year of the date of mailing of a notice of supplemental or escape assessment if specified requirements are met. The bill would only apply this exception to claims filed before January 1, 2031. (3) This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Los Angeles. (4) 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 creates the Department of Insurance and prescribes the department's powers and duties. Existing law generally regulates the business of insurance in the state, including the underwriting and ongoing monitoring of insured risks. Existing law generally requires an insurer or insurance producer to have underwriting guidelines that establish the criteria and process under which an insurer makes its decision to provide or to deny coverage. Existing law requires an admitted insurer with written California premiums totaling $10,000,000 or more, to submit a report, as specified, to the commissioner with specified fire risk information on its residential property policies. Existing law requires the commissioner to post on the department's internet website a report on wildfire risk compiled from data collected from specified insurers. This bill, upon appropriation for these purposes, would establish the Wildfire Safety and Risk Mitigation Program to fund the development, demonstration, and deployment of a public wildfire catastrophe model, as defined, and to provide grant funding to one or more universities for eligible projects with specified criteria for the purpose of creating a research and educational center responsible for developing, demonstrating, and deploying a public wildfire catastrophe model that provides significant wildfire safety benefits to California communities and assists alignment of federal, state, and local wildfire risk reduction efforts. The bill would create the Wildfire Safety and Risk Mitigation Account within the Insurance Fund for these purposes. The bill, also upon appropriation for these purposes, would require the department to create a framework and multiyear plan with available data for the development, demonstration, and deployment of a public wildfire catastrophe model that includes specified information and to publish the plan on the department's internet website. The bill would require the department to provide recommendations to the Senate Committee on Insurance, Assembly Committee on Insurance, Assembly Committee on Emergency Management, Budget Committees, and the Governor for future budget allocations related to these provisions before September 1, 2026.
(1) Existing law requires the State Department of Education, on or before March 1, 2025, to provide a report to the Superintendent of Public Instruction, the Governor, and the Legislature on the number and types of reports that school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools are required to annually submit. Existing law requires the report to include, among other things, the purpose of each report and recommendations for which reports can be consolidated, eliminated, or truncated, as provided. Existing law repeals these provisions on January 1, 2026. This bill would extend the repeal date of the above-described reporting requirements by one year, to instead be January 1, 2027. (2) Existing law requires the State Board of Education to, on or before January 31, 2027, adopt an IDEA Addendum relating to improvements in services for individuals with exceptional needs, as specified. Existing law requires certain school districts, charter schools, and county offices of education identified by the department, as provided, to complete the IDEA Addendum and to undertake certain activities related to the addendum on or before July 1, 2027. This bill would eliminate the above-described IDEA Addendum requirements.
(1) Existing law establishes the Department of Insurance, headed by the Insurance Commissioner, which regulates insurers and insurance practices. When an insurer obtains reinsurance, existing law requires them to communicate all the representations of the original insured, and also all the knowledge and information they possess, as specified, which are material to the risk. This bill would require, on or before March 1, 2026, and on or before March 1 every year thereafter, an admitted insurer in a group with written premiums in the prior year from specified lines of insurance totaling $50,000,000 to submit a report to the commissioner that includes data and information necessary to understand its reinsurance program placement data and use of probabilistic catastrophic models for the previous year. The bill would require the report to include data from the latest available reinsurance treaty year. The bill would require the insurer to promptly respond to inquiries from the commissioner upon submission of the report. The bill would require the commissioner to post to the department's internet website an aggregated report of the data in the report from insurers. The bill would require all other information submitted to the commissioner under these provisions be confidential, among other things, and exempt from the California Public Records Act. The bill would require an admitted insurer to pay a civil penalty, to be fixed by the commissioner, but not to exceed $5,000 for each 30-day period the insurer is not in compliance with the reporting provisions. The bill would authorize an insurer to request, and the commissioner to grant, a 30-day extension to submit the report if needed due to unintended or unforeseen circumstances. The bill would authorize the commissioner to find that the failure to submit the report on time was willful and to increase the civil penalty to an amount not to exceed $10,000 for each 30-day period, up to a maximum of $100,000. The bill would allow the penalty to be appealed under specified provisions. 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. The bill would make related findings and declarations. (2) Existing law defines the measure of indemnity for a loss under an open fire insurance policy and specifies time limits under which an insured must collect the full replacement cost of the loss. For a residential property insurance policy, existing law requires the measure of damages available to a policyholder to use to rebuild or replace the insured home at another location to be the amount that would have been recoverable had the insured dwelling been rebuilt at its original location, as specified. In the event of a total loss of an insured structure, existing law prohibits a policy issued or delivered in this state from containing a provision that limits or denies payment of the building code upgrade cost or the replacement cost on the basis that the insured has decided to rebuild at a new location or to purchase a built home at a new location. Existing law requires the insured to give written notice to the insurer of any loss within 60 days after the loss unless the time is extended in writing by the insurer. The bill would prohibit an insurer from requiring an insured to provide a proof of loss less than 100 days after a loss relating to a state of emergency, as defined. The bill would require the insurer to provide the insured one or more extensions of 3 months for good cause, if the insured, acting in good faith and with reasonable diligence, encounters a delay in providing a proof of loss in specified circumstances beyond the control of the insured. Existing law requires a residential property insurer to allow an insured that has suffered a loss relating to a declared state of emergency to combine the policy limits for primary dwelling and other structures, and to use the combined amount to rebuild or replace the dwelling, as specified. For a total loss of a furnished residence related to a declared state of emergency, existing law requires an insurer to provide an advance partial payment for contents of no less than 30% of the policy limit, as specified, without requiring an itemized claim. The bill would instead require the insurer to provide 60% of the policy limit applicable to the personal property covered under the policy, up to a maximum of $350,000, when the loss is relating to a declared state of emergency, without requiring an itemized claim. The bill would also authorize an insurer to require an insured to sign an attestation form as a condition of receiving the advance payment for personal property loss stating that the insured acknowledges the residence was furnished and that they reasonably believe the personal property damaged or destroyed had a value that equates or exceeded the amount of the advance payment.
Existing law authorizes a utility to bring a civil action for damages against any person who commits, authorizes, solicits, aids, abets, or attempts certain acts, including, diverting or causing to be diverted, utility services by any means whatsoever. Existing law creates a rebuttable presumption that there is violation of these provisions if, on premises controlled by the customer or by the person using or receiving the direct benefit of utility service, certain actions occur, including that there is an instrument, apparatus, or device primarily designed to be used to obtain utility service without paying the full lawful charge for the utility. This bill would add to the list of acts for which a utility may bring a civil cause of action under these circumstances to include tampering with a fire hydrant, fire hydrant meter, or fire detector check, or connecting to, diverting water from, or causing water to be diverted from, a fire hydrant without authorization from the utility that owns the fire hydrant, except as provided. The bill would also expand the rebuttable presumption for a violation of these provisions to include, among other things, if a person tampers with or uses a fire hydrant, fire hydrant meter, or fire detector check without authorization to obtain water and without paying the full lawful charge of the water. Existing law authorizes the legislative body of a local agency, as defined, that provides water services to adopt an ordinance that prohibits water theft, as defined, and makes a violation of the ordinance subject to an administrative fine or penalty, as specified. Existing law sets forth a schedule of fines for a violation of an ordinance adopted pursuant to these provisions, including, if the violation is committed via meter tampering, a fine not exceeding $1,300 for a third or additional violation of the same ordinance within one year of the first violation, and for a violation of all other forms of water theft, a fine not exceeding $3,000 for a third or additional violation of the same ordinance within one year. This bill would revise those fines to apply to the third or additional violation without regard to whether the violation occurred within one year of the first violation. This bill would authorize a legislative body of a local agency, as defined, that provides retail water services, to adopt an ordinance that prohibits unauthorized connection to a fire hydrant, as defined, subject to an administrative fine or penalty, as specified. The bill would set forth a schedule of fines for a violation of the ordinance. The bill would prohibit a local agency from imposing a fine for the same offense under both an ordinance adopted by a local agency pursuant to these provisions that prohibits unauthorized connection to a fire hydrant and an ordinance adopted by the local agency pursuant to the provisions described above that prohibits water theft.
Existing law, the Veterinary Medicine Practice Act, establishes the California Veterinary Medical Board within the Department of Consumer Affairs for the licensure and regulation of veterinarians and the practice of veterinary medicine and makes a violation of the act a crime. Existing law authorizes a veterinarian to allow a registered veterinary technician to act as an agent of the veterinarian for the purpose of establishing the veterinarian-client-patient relationship to administer preventive or prophylactic vaccines or medications for the control or eradication of apparent or anticipated internal or external parasites by satisfying specified conditions, including, among other things, imposing different requirements relating to the proximity of the veterinarian depending upon where the registered veterinarian technician is administering the vaccine or medication. Specifically, existing law requires either that the veterinarian is physically present at the premises when the registered veterinary technician is working at a registered veterinary premises, or, if working at a location other than a registered veterinary premises, that the veterinarian is in the general vicinity or available by telephone and is quickly and easily available. This bill would revise the above-described condition to authorize a registered veterinary technician to administer the vaccine or medication in a registered veterinary premises that is a public animal control agency or shelter, private animal shelter, humane society shelter, or society for the prevention of cruelty to animals shelter when the veterinarian is in the general vicinity or available by telephone and is quickly and easily available. Because a violation of the bill's provisions would be a crime under the Veterinary Medicine Practice Act, 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.
The Permit Streamlining Act requires a public agency that is the lead agency for a development project to approve or disapprove that project within specified time periods. Existing law requires a city or county that has an internet website to, among other things, make a fee estimate tool that the public can use to calculate an estimate of fees and exactions for a proposed housing development project available on its internet website. This bill would require a city or county with a population of 150,000 or more persons to make a centralized application portal available on its internet website to applicants for housing development projects, as prescribed. The bill would, notwithstanding that provision, authorize a city or county described above to make a centralized application portal available on its internet website no later than January 1, 2030, if the legislative body of the city or county, on or before January 1, 2028, takes certain action, including initiating a procurement process to make a centralized application portal available on its internet website. The bill would require the centralized application portal to allow for tracking of the status of an application. The bill would specify that a city or county is not required to provide the status of any permit or inspection required by another local agency, a state agency, or a utility provider. The bill would define various terms for purposes of its provisions. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
