The Habitat Restoration and Enhancement Act authorizes a project proponent to submit a habitat restoration or enhancement project to the Director of Fish and Wildlife for approval. The act requires the Department of Fish and Wildlife to assess an application fee for a project submitted to the department consistent with specified fees adopted by the department, as provided. Under the act, a habitat restoration or enhancement project is defined as a project with the primary purpose of improving fish and wildlife habitat. The act requires the director to approve a habitat restoration or enhancement project if the director determines that specified conditions are met. The act makes moneys in the Habitat Restoration and Enhancement Account available to the department, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for the purposes of administering and implementing the act. Existing law repeals the act on January 1, 2027. This bill would extend the operation of the act until January 1, 2032, and would require the department to submit a report on the implementation of the act to the Legislature no later than December 31, 2029. The bill would maintain the requirement for the application fee to be consistent with other specified fees adopted by the department until the department establishes, on or before January 1, 2030, an application fee schedule, as specified. The bill would revise the definition of a habitat restoration or enhancement project, would revise the required contents of an application for a habitat restoration or enhancement project, as provided, and would transfer the responsibilities of the director under the act to the department. Under the act, the approval of a habitat restoration or enhancement project is in lieu of any other permit, agreement, license, or other approval issued by the Department of Fish and Wildlife. This bill would provide that the department's approval of a habitat restoration or enhancement project under the act only includes take authorization for the species listed by the project proponent in its application. The bill would require the department to ensure that each approved habitat restoration or enhancement project includes appropriate measures to avoid and minimize its adverse impacts to species protected by state law. The act establishes separate procedures for the approval of a habitat restoration or enhancement project depending on whether the project has received a specified certification pursuant to an order from the State Water Resources Control Board. As part of the procedures applicable to a project that has received that certification, the act requires the director to publish the receipt of certain information from the project proponent, and the director's determination on whether the application is complete, in the California Regulatory Notice Register. This bill would eliminate the requirement to publish that information in the California Regulatory Notice Register. The act requires the director to suspend the implementation of a project under certain circumstances, as specified. This bill would eliminate those provisions.
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 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 the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation to prepare, develop, and transmit to the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency for certification and adoption proposed revisions to the CEQA implementation guidelines to establish criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts of projects within transit priority areas, and requires the criteria to promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses. CEQA requires the office to recommend potential metrics, including, among other metrics, vehicle miles traveled, to measure these transportation impacts. This bill would require the Department of Transportation, in consultation with specified entities, to, on or before December 31, 2030, develop guidance on vehicle-miles-travel mitigation measures for transportation projects in nonmetropolitan counties, as provided. The bill would require the department to publish the guidance on its internet website and add the guidance as an addendum to the Transportation Analysis Framework and the Transportation Analysis under CEQA. The bill would specify that a transportation project for which the lead agency has issued a notice of preparation for the project's environmental impact report on or before December 31, 2031 is presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact as determined by the vehicle-miles-traveled metric if at least 70% of the project lies within one or more nonmetropolitan counties. Because the bill would impose additional duties on a lead agency in its analysis of significant transportation impacts, 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.
(1) Under existing law, if the federal government provides funds for the care of a needy relative with whom a needy child is living, aid to the child for any month includes aid to meet the needs of that relative, except as prescribed. Existing law establishes the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program, under which each county provides cash assistance and other benefits to qualified low-income families using federal, state, and county funds. Existing law provides that the parent or parents are to be considered living with the needy child for a period of up to 6 months, or for a time period as determined by the State Department of Social Services, of the needy child's absence from the family assistance unit, and that the parents are eligible for CalWORKs aid and childcare services if specified conditions are met, including, among others, that the child has been removed from the parent or parents and that the family was receiving aid under when the child was removed. Existing law requires all applicants for or recipients of CalWORKs to ensure and provide documentation that each child in the assistance unit who is not required to be enrolled in school has received all age-appropriate immunizations, as specified. This bill would make technical changes to the provisions regarding a parent's eligibility to receive aid as if the child or children were living with them. The bill would also specify that those provisions do not require all children to be removed from the parent or parents or that some, but not all, of the children have reunified. If a family assistance unit is cooperating in the development of, or participating in, a reunification case plan, the bill would exempt a child that has been removed from the parent or parents from specified immunization requirements. For a family assistance unit receiving state-funded CalWORKs reunification cash aid whose grant was lowered as a sanction for not cooperating with child support enforcement, as specified, the bill would require the sanction to end upon the removal of the child from the assistance unit and their placement into out-of-home care. If an applicant applies for assistance for a child who is currently aided in another assistance unit and the county determines that the applicant has care and control of the child and is otherwise eligible, existing law requires the county to discontinue aid to the child in the existing assistance unit and aid the child in the applicant's assistance unit, as specified. Notwithstanding the above-described requirements to discontinue aid, if a child or children have been removed from their parent or parents and are placed with an adult who, prior to the removal, was a noncustodial parent, the bill would prohibit the county from discontinuing aid to the existing assistance unit if it is otherwise eligible for CalWORKs reunification cash aid, as specified. To the extent that this bill would expand county responsibilities under the CalWORKs program, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law generally requires a recipient of CalWORKs to participate in welfare-to-work activities as a condition of eligibility. Existing law requires the recipient and the county welfare department to enter into a written welfare-to-work plan that includes the activities and services that will move the individual into employment. Existing departmental guidance strongly encourages, for individuals receiving benefits as described in paragraph (1) , counties to use a CalWORKs family reunification plan, which is the case plan developed by the county child welfare services agency for the provision of services to those individuals, in lieu of the welfare-to-work plan. This bill would exempt an individual receiving aid or services for CalWORKs family reunification from the requirement to participate in welfare-to-work activities as a condition of eligibility. To the extent that this bill would expand county responsibilities under the CalWORKs program, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) This bill would make these provisions operative on July 1, 2027, or when the Statewide Automated Welfare System can perform any automation the department deems necessary to implement these provisions, whichever is later. (4) Existing law continuously appropriates moneys from the General Fund to defray a portion of county costs under the CalWORKs program. This bill would provide that the continuous appropriation would not be made for the purposes of implementing the bill. (5) 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 establishes the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services, including pharmacy services and drugs. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid Program provisions. Existing law sets forth a schedule of benefits covered under the Medi-Cal program, including acupuncture, but only to the extent federal matching funds are provided for acupuncture. To the extent federal financial participation is available, this bill would require the Medi-Cal program to cover up to 24 acupuncture visits per beneficiary per calendar year and would state that additional visits per calendar year may be authorized based on medical necessity. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 14132 of the Welfare and Institutions Code proposed by AB 350 and SB 944 to be operative only if this bill and either or both AB 350 and SB 944 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would make certain provisions operative only if both this bill and SB 944 is enacted and takes effect on or before January 1, 2027.
Existing law generally regulates the business of insurance in the state, including the conduct of insurance licensees, and provides for the issuance of bail licenses under the jurisdiction of the Insurance Commissioner. Existing regulations generally prohibit the solicitation of bail except after a bona fide request for bail services has been received from the arrestee or from another specified person. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to impersonate certain personnel, including a law enforcement officer or an officer or member of a fire department, with the intent of fraudulently impersonating such a person, or of fraudulently inducing the belief that they are such a person. This bill, the Bail Consumer Protection Act, would make it a crime for any person to impersonate, or falsely hold themselves out to be, a licensed bail agent, and while doing so solicits or attempts to solicit bail from any individual. The bill would also make it a crime for any person to hire another person or company to solicit bail when the person knew or should have known that the other person or company is impersonating or falsely holding themselves out to be a licensed bail agent, and that other person or company solicits or attempts to solicit bail from any individual. By creating a new 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.
The Donahoe Higher Education Act sets forth, among other things, the missions and functions of California's public and independent segments of higher education and their respective institutions of higher education. The act requests the Regents of the University of California, and requires the Trustees of the California State University, to require each campus in their respective segments to grant students the right to reenroll in their baccalaureate degree program after withdrawing or stopping out, if the student was in good academic standing with the university. This bill, commencing with the 2027–28 academic year, would require a campus of the University of California, the California State University, or the California Community Colleges, a private postsecondary educational institution, or an independent institution of higher education to adopt a written policy to allow a student to take a voluntary medical leave of absence for a period to be determined by the postsecondary educational institution, or for a period of up to one academic year, whichever is longer. The bill would prohibit the leave of absence policy from, among other things, requiring a student who takes a medical leave of absence to submit an official notice of withdrawal to the postsecondary educational institution. The bill would require a postsecondary educational institution, among other things, to post the medical leave of absence policy on the institution's internet website and notify students and faculty of the location of the posted policy on its internet website by sending an email at the beginning of each academic semester or term. These provisions would apply to the University of California only to the extent that the regents, by appropriate resolution, make them applicable. 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 the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law, the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act, governs the management and operation of common interest developments, and requires an association to manage a common interest development, including requiring the association to levy regular and special assessments sufficient to perform its obligations, subject to specified limitations on increases in those assessments. The act requires an association to distribute an annual budget report 30 to 90 days before the end of its fiscal year. Under existing law, that budget report includes, among other things, a summary of the association's reserve accounts. The act requires an association to perform a study of the reserve account requirements, as defined, and, as part of that study, cause to be conducted a visual inspection of the accessible areas of major components that the association is obligated to repair, replace, restore, or maintain. This bill would, beginning January 1, 2032, revise the requirement to perform a study of the reserve account requirements to, among other things, include the minimum reserve contribution level to prevent the projected association reserve account balance from falling below zero over the following 30 years. The bill would require an association to fund the reserve account on an annual basis in at least the minimum reserve contribution level. If an association's reserve balance account is projected to fall below zero at any time over the following 30 years, the bill would require the association to transfer 15% of its gross annual budget to its reserve account each year, as prescribed. If the association is unable to fund the reserve account in at least the minimum reserve contribution level through its gross annual budget, the bill would require the association to levy a reserve funding special assessment, as provided. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 5550 of the Civil Code proposed by SB 1238 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1238 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
(1) Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, which includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. For the 4th and subsequent revisions of the housing element, existing law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development, in consultation with each council of governments, to determine each region's existing and projected need for housing, and requires the appropriate council of governments, or the department for cities and counties without a council of governments, to adopt a final regional housing plan that allocates a share of the regional housing need to each city, county, or city and county, as provided. Existing law authorizes at least 2 or more cities and a county, or counties, at least 28 months prior to the scheduled housing element revision, to form a subregional entity to allocate the subregion's existing and projected housing need among its members. If the council of governments does not receive a notification of this formation at least 28 months prior to the update, existing law requires the council of governments to implement specified requirements regarding the regional housing need process. Existing law requires the council of governments to determine the share of regional housing need assigned to each delegate subregion at least 25 months prior to the scheduled revision. This bill, except with respect to the 7th housing element cycle for councils of governments with a housing element revision due date during the calendar year 2027, 2028, or 2029, would extend the above-described timeline for cities and counties to form a subregional entity to allocate the subregion's housing need, as provided, from 28 months to 34 months, and the above-described timeline for the council of governments to determine the share of regional housing need assigned to each subregion from 25 months to 31 months, respectively. (2) Existing law, at least 2 years before a scheduled revision of the housing element, as specified, requires each council of governments, or delegate subregion as applicable, to develop, in consultation with the department, a proposed methodology for distributing the existing and projected regional housing need to jurisdictions, as specified. Existing law, at least 112 years before a scheduled revision of the housing element, as specified, requires each council of governments and delegate subregion, as applicable, to distribute a draft allocation of regional housing needs to each local government in the region or subregion, where applicable, and the department, as specified. This bill, except with respect to the 7th housing element cycle for councils of governments with a housing element revision due date during the calendar year 2027, 2028, or 2029, would instead require that the above-described methodology be developed at least 212 years before a scheduled revision of the housing element, and that the distribution of the draft allocation plan be made at least 2 years before a scheduled revision of the housing element, respectively. (3) Existing law requires each city, county, and city and county to, among other things, revise its housing element according to a specified schedule. Existing law generally requires local governments within the jurisdiction of certain metropolitan planning organizations or regional transportation planning agencies to update their housing elements 18 months after adoption of every 2nd regional transportation plan update, but not later than 8 years later than the deadline for adoption of the previous 8-year housing element, as specified. For subsequent revisions of the housing element after the 5th revision, existing law requires certain local governments to revise their housing elements at 5-year intervals, as specified. For the 7th revision and subsequent revisions of the housing element, existing law makes subsequent revisions due 24 months after the adoption of the 2nd regional transportation plan update for local governments within the jurisdiction of the Southern California Association of Governments, except as provided. This bill would instead generally require local governments within the above-described metropolitan planning organizations or regional transportation planning agencies to update their housing elements 18 months after the estimated adoption date of every 2nd regional transportation plan update, as specified. The bill would require the 8th revision of the housing elements for the certain local governments previously at 5-year intervals for the 7th revision, to be due by June 30, 2032. The bill would also require, for the 9th and subsequent revisions of the housing elements for those local governments, to be due 18 months after adoption of every 2nd regional transportation plan update, as provided. For the 8th and subsequent revisions, the bill would require a local government within the Southern California Association of Governments to adopt the revised housing no later than 8 years later than the deadline for adoption of the previous 8-year housing element. The housing element law requires a metropolitan planning organization or regional transportation planning agency that has an 8-year revision interval described above to notify the Department of Housing and Community Development and the Department of Transportation in writing of the estimated adoption date for its next regional transportation plan update at least 12 months before the estimated adoption date. This bill would instead require the above-described notification 24 months before the estimated adoption date. (4) 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. (5) By requiring local officials to provide a higher level of service, 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 establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, the California State University, under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, and the University of California, under the administration of the Regents of the University of California as the 3 segments of public postsecondary education in the state. This bill would require the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges and the California State University, and would request the University of California, to (1) as specified, jointly convene and participate in an intersegmental working group to develop and present recommendations for generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) system procurement standards and training, which the bill would require to be submitted on or before January 1, 2028, (2) provide the training to students, faculty, or staff, as applicable, (3) review the training developed by the working group at least once per academic year, update the training as necessary, and maintain records of completed trainings for each student, faculty member, and staff member who receives a training, as provided, and (4) within 60 days following the execution of a systemwide contract for a GenAI system and until procurement standards are adopted, submit a written report to the Legislature and certain legislative policy committees with a description of, among other things, the process used in evaluating and selecting the GenAI system, as provided.
Existing law, the California Emergency Services Act, requires the Office of Emergency Services, in coordination with all interested state agencies with designated response roles in the state emergency plan and interested local emergency management agencies, to jointly establish by regulation a standardized emergency management system for use by all emergency response agencies. The act requires the Office of Emergency Services to complete an after-action report within 180 days of a declared disaster, as provided. This bill would instead require the Office of Emergency Services to complete 2 after-action reports, the first within the first 180 days of a declaration of a state of emergency and the second no later than 180 days after a declared state of emergency ends, as provided. The bill would also require the office to annually draft a written update related to the recovery activities of all open states of emergency, as provided. The bill would require the office to send both reports and any annual recovery updates to the Assembly and Senate Committees on Emergency Management, as provided. This bill would additionally require, no later than 120 days after a declaration of a state of emergency by the Governor ends, that each affected city, county, or city and county provide the Office of Emergency Services with information regarding local recovery efforts. The bill would specify that this information shall include, but not be limited to, any conclusions and recommendations based on a review of the public safety response and disaster recovery efforts. By imposing a new reporting requirement upon local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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, 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 authorizes a borrower who is experiencing financial hardship that prevents the borrower from making timely payments on a specified residential mortgage loan due directly to a specified state of emergency proclaimed by the Governor, or a specified federally declared disaster, to request forbearance on their residential mortgage loan, as prescribed. Existing law requires a mortgage servicer, except as specified, to offer mortgage payment forbearance for an initial 90-day period that may be extended up to a maximum forbearance period of 12 months and prohibits a mortgage servicer from assessing any late fees to the borrower's account or charging a default rate of interest during the forbearance period. This bill would, among other things, similarly authorize a borrower to request forbearance on a residential mortgage loan, as defined, secured by residential real property that has become uninhabitable as a direct result of a disaster, which the bill would define to mean the conditions described in a declaration of a disaster issued by the federal government. The bill would require the borrower to affirm that as a direct result of a disaster, a residential unit is uninhabitable. Because the bill would expand the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would, except as specified, require a mortgage servicer to offer mortgage payment forbearance of a period of up to an initial 180 days, to be extended at the request of the borrower in 90-day increments, up to a maximum forbearance period of 12 months. The bill would provide that the forbearance period includes any period of forbearance related to the disaster that a mortgage servicer has provided to a borrower before the date upon which a declaration of a disaster was issued. The bill would also prohibit a mortgage servicer from assessing any late fees to the borrower's account or charging a default rate of interest during the forbearance period. This bill would require a mortgage servicer to report the credit obligations of borrowers under a disaster-related forbearance plan in compliance with the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act. For an account granted disaster-related mortgage payment relief, the bill would prohibit a mortgage servicer from furnishing information during the forbearance period indicating that the payments are in forbearance and would require the mortgage servicer to report the credit obligation or account as current. This bill would authorize a civil action to enforce these provisions to be brought by the Attorney General, a district attorney, or a county counsel. 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 requires every retail seller and manufacturer doing business in this state and having annual worldwide gross receipts that exceed $100,000,000 to disclose, as specified, its efforts to eradicate slavery and human trafficking from its direct supply chain for tangible goods offered for sale. Existing law also requires a person that submits a bid or proposal to, or otherwise proposes to enter into or renew a contract with, a state agency with respect to any contract in the amount of $100,000 or more to certify, under penalty of perjury, at the time the bid or proposal is submitted or the contract is renewed that they have complied with the Unruh Civil Rights Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, and that any policy that they have adopted against any sovereign nation or peoples recognized by the government of the United States is not used as a pretext for discrimination in violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act or the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. This bill, upon appropriation by the Legislature, would require any business or enterprise that is doing business in the state that was in existence or whose predecessor company was in existence on or before December 31, 1964 and has annual worldwide gross receipts that exceed $100,000,000 to complete an affidavit, under penalty of perjury, verifying that it has searched through any and all records in its and its related entities', as defined, possession, control, and knowledge for records that the covered entity or its related entities bought or sold persons subjected to slavery, used persons subjected to slavery as collateral, provided loans to purchase persons subjected to slavery, insured such transactions or the persons subjected to slavery, or provided related or other services to aid or otherwise facilitate those transactions. The bill would set forth the contents of the affidavit, the timeline and manner of submission, and reporting requirements. This bill would require the Civil Rights Department to create a public, digital platform within one year after an appropriation is made, that would make available affidavits and records made pursuant to the bill and disaggregated data, as described. The bill would additionally require the above-described business or entity, that submits a bid or proposal to, or otherwise proposes to enter into or renew a contract with, a state agency, as described above, to additionally certify, under penalty of perjury, that they have submitted the affidavit in compliance with the above-described provisions. By requiring an affidavit and to certify under penalty of perjury regarding compliance with the above-described affidavit requirements, and thus expanding the crime of perjury, 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.
