(1) Existing law provides that in an action for the breach of an obligation not arising from contract, the measure of damages, except as provided, is the amount that will compensate for all the detriment proximately caused thereby, whether it could have been anticipated or not. This bill, with respect to a civil case, claim, action, or arbitration against a network company, its subsidiary, or an app-based driver, as defined, arising from an automobile accident, would, except as specified, prohibit the maximum recovery of a plaintiff for damages for any medical expense for services rendered by a lien-based provider, as defined, from exceeding the 70th percentile of FAIR Health, Inc.'s billed charges, or the 70th percentile of a comparable commercially recognized billed charges database for the same or similar service in the applicable geographic area at the time the service was rendered. The bill would prohibit certain evidence from being introduced that exceeds the recoverable amount. This bill would provide that if a medical lien, as defined, receivable, or right to payment has been sold or otherwise transferred, the maximum recoverable medical expense damages shall not exceed the total consideration paid or payable in connection with the transaction to acquire the lien, receivable, or right to payment, as provided. The bill would require any agreement relating to the sale or transfer of a medical lien, receivable, or right to payment, and the consideration paid or payable therefor, to be discoverable, and would prohibit an undisclosed lien sale or transfer from being asserted against a defendant, insurer, settlement, judgment, or settlement proceeds. The bill would also require certain medical lien financial relationships and attorney referral information to be discoverable. This bill would make it unlawful for an attorney representing a plaintiff under a contingency fee agreement in a civil claim, action, or arbitration, as described above, to refer a client to a health care provider in which the attorney or a member of the attorney's immediate family has a direct ownership interest. The bill would also make it unlawful for an attorney to fee split or receive other specified compensation in connection with the furnishing of lien-based provider medical treatment for a plaintiff and would make it unlawful for an attorney or law firm to provide specified compensation for referrals of clients to lien-based providers for lien-based treatment. The bill would also make other actions related to the reduction of a medical lien unlawful, as specified. This bill would provide that these provisions are severable. (2) The Passenger Charter-party Carriers' Act defines a transportation network company as an organization, whether a corporation, partnership, sole proprietor, or other form, operating in California that provides prearranged transportation services for compensation using an online-enabled platform to connect passengers with drivers using a personal vehicle. Existing law requires a transportation network company to conduct, or have a third party conduct, a local and national criminal background check for each participating driver, as specified, and prohibits a transportation network company from contracting with, employing, or retaining a driver if the driver, among other things, is currently registered on the United States Department of Justice National Sex Offender Public website, has been convicted of any of certain terrorism-related or human trafficking felonies or a violent felony or, within the previous 7 years, has been convicted of any misdemeanor assault or battery, any domestic violence offense, driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or any of a specified list of felonies. A violation of the act is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine, imprisonment, or both a fine and imprisonment. This bill would additionally prohibit a transportation network company from contracting with, employing, or retaining a driver if the driver has been convicted of specified offenses or, within the previous 7 years, has been convicted of other specified offenses, including driving under the influence of an alcoholic beverage or drug. The bill would require the background check to be performed prior to the activation of a driver's account and once annually thereafter, as provided. By expanding the scope of a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law, the Unruh Civil Rights Act, provides that all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are entitled to full and equal accommodations in all business establishments of every kind whatsoever, regardless of their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status. This bill would provide that notwithstanding that act, a transportation network company or charter-party carrier of passengers, as defined, may allow a woman passenger on its online-enabled application or platform or a participating woman driver to indicate a preference to be matched with a woman driver or woman passenger, respectively, and facilitate passenger-driver matches based on such preferences. The bill would make these provisions apply retroactively, as provided. (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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law creates the High-Speed Rail Authority to develop and implement a high-speed rail system in the state. Existing law requires moneys collected by the State Air Resources Board from the auction or sale of certain allowances as part of a market-based compliance mechanism to be deposited into the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and continuously appropriates a portion of the moneys in the fund for various purposes, including a specified portion to the authority for certain purposes. Existing law prohibits the authority from entering into new funding commitments with those moneys for activities outside of the Merced to Bakersfield segment, until June 30, 2030, or when that segment is fully funded, whichever is sooner. Notwithstanding that prohibition, existing law authorizes the authority to enter into new funding commitments outside of the Merced to Bakersfield segment for certain purposes, including for additional activities, not to cumulatively exceed $500,000,000, that maximize the efficiency of delivering the project, as specified. This bill would revise and recast that authorization to instead authorize the authority to enter into new funding commitments with the above-described moneys outside of the Merced to Bakersfield segment in any amount for activities related to early works, as defined, and for projects developed through public partnership agreements or public-private partnership agreements, subject to the requirements that those funding commitments maximize the efficiency of delivering the project and do not delay the completion of the Merced to Bakersfield segment, as specified. By expanding the purposes for which continuously appropriated moneys may be used, the bill would make an appropriation.
Existing law requires the governing board of each local educational agency to either provide for an audit of the books and accounts of the local educational agency or make arrangements with the respective county superintendent of schools to provide for that auditing. Existing law requires the governing board of each local educational agency, by January 31 of each year, to review, at a public meeting as an item on the agenda, the annual audit of the local educational agency for the prior year, any audit exceptions identified in that audit, the recommendations or findings of any management letter issued by the auditor, and any description of correction or plans to correct any exceptions or management letter issue, as provided. This bill would change the date by which the governing board or body of each school district, educational joint powers authority, county superintendent of schools, or charter school is required to review the above-described annual audit of the local educational agency at a public meeting from January 31 of each year to instead be within 45 days after the issuance of an audit report. The bill would additionally require the governing board or body of the local educational agency, at the public meeting described above, to accept or reject the annual audit report. To the extent the bill would impose additional duties on local educational agencies or other local entities or officials, 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.
(1) Existing law establishes the Office of the State Fire Marshal in the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and establishes the Deputy Director of Community Wildfire Preparedness and Mitigation within the office. Existing law makes the deputy director responsible for fire preparedness and mitigation missions of the department, as provided. Existing law requires the department to establish a local assistance grant program for fire prevention and home hardening education activities in California and specifies eligible activities under the local assistance grant program, as provided. Under existing law, funding for this local assistance grant program is contingent upon an appropriation by the Legislature. This bill would require the deputy director, on or before January 1, 2027, and every 3 years thereafter, in consultation with the state hazard mitigation officer, as defined, to prepare a Wildfire Risk Mitigation Planning Framework sufficient to quantitatively evaluate wildfire risk mitigation actions, as provided. The bill would require the framework to allow for geospatial evaluation and comparison of wildfire risk mitigation actions, as described, sufficient to direct coordinated mitigation efforts and long-term collaborative mitigation planning. The bill would require the deputy director to, each year the framework is completed, submit a copy of the framework to the Legislature, the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety, and the Public Utilities Commission for review and consideration. This bill would require the deputy director, on or before April 1, 2027, and every 3 years thereafter, in consultation with the state hazard mitigation officer, to prepare a Wildfire Risk Baseline and Forecast for the state delineated on a statewide level and by county, as provided. The bill would require the forecast to include geographic specificity as determined by the deputy director to be sufficient to evaluate targeted wildfire risk mitigation actions, and to accomplish specific things, including establishing key risk metrics for wildfire risk for the state as a whole, by county, and by geographic location. The bill would require the deputy director to, each year the forecast is completed, submit a copy of the forecast to the Legislature, the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety, and the Public Utilities Commission for review and consideration. This bill would require the deputy director, on or before August 1, 2027, in consultation with the state hazard mitigation officer, to prepare a Wildfire Mitigation Scenarios Report, to be updated annually. The bill would require the report to contain specified information, including identification of a reasonable range of possible scenarios for overall wildfire risk mitigation spending, as provided. This bill would require the deputy director to contract with a private consultant with special expertise in quantitative evaluation of specified wildfire risk and risk mitigation topics, as provided, to conduct quantitative wildfire risk modeling and for preparation of reports to accomplish the purposes of this act. This bill would, contingent upon an annual appropriation by the Legislature in the annual Budget Act, require the department, beginning in the 2029–30 fiscal year and extending to the 2044–45 fiscal year, inclusive, to make funds available through the local assistance grant program for programs to be implemented by local governments to achieve wildfire risk reduction in a cost-effective manner that is maximally consistent with the Wildfire Risk Mitigation Planning Framework. (2) Existing law requires the State Fire Marshal to identify areas in the state as moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones based on consistent statewide criteria and the severity of the fire hazard. Existing law requires a person who owns, leases, controls, operates, or maintains (A) an occupied dwelling or structure within a very high fire hazard severity zone as designated by a local agency, or (B) a building or structure in the state responsibility area, to comply with specified defensible space requirements, including a requirement to maintain a defensible space of 100 feet from each side and from the front and rear of the structure, and a requirement to create an ember-resistant zone within 5 feet of the structure, based on regulations promulgated by the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection, as provided. Executive Order No. N-18-25 directs the board to complete the formal rulemaking process applicable to these ember-resistant zone requirements no later than December 31, 2025. Under existing law, the requirement for an ember-resistant zone does not take effect for new structures until the board updates the applicable regulations and guidance document, as specified, and does not take effect for existing structures until 3 years after the effective date for the new structures. A violation of these requirements is a crime. This bill would move up the effective date of the ember-resistant zone requirement for certain existing structures in the state responsibility area, as provided. By expanding the scope of a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would revise and recast the local assistance grant program, described above, by, among other things, authorizing funding from the program to be used for projects to plan and carry out risk-targeted wildfire prevention work within a local government's jurisdiction, including costs necessary to use the above-described Wildfire Risk Mitigation Planning Framework to select, plan, and implement projects, and to implement activities consistent with early implementation of the ember-resistant zone rules, as provided. This bill would, upon an annual appropriation by the Legislature in the annual Budget Act, require the department, during the 2025–26 to 2028–29 fiscal years, inclusive, to make funds available through the local assistance grant program for programs to be implemented by local agencies to fund wildfire inspector positions sufficient to conduct inspections in very high fire hazard severity zones, in order to facilitate early implementation of the ember-resistant zone rules for existing commercial and residential structures, as provided. As a condition of receiving funds, the bill would require local agencies to adopt the ember-resistant zone regulations, applicable to very high fire hazard severity zones, as provided. (3) The California Building Standards Law requires any building standard adopted or proposed by state agencies to be submitted to, and approved or adopted by, the California Building Standards Commission before codification. Existing law requires the State Fire Marshal to propose, pursuant to that process, fire protection building standards applicable to buildings in fire hazard severity zones, as provided. Existing law also applies fire protection building standards adopted pursuant to this process to buildings located in urban wildland interface communities, defined as communities identified by the department pursuant to a specified process. From October 1, 2025, to June 1, 2031, inclusive, existing law prohibits proposed building standards affecting residential units from being considered, approved, or adopted by the California Building Standards Commission or any other adopting agency unless a specified condition is met, including that the building standards are amendments by the State Fire Marshal to building standards within the California Wildland-Urban Interface Code. This bill would, notwithstanding that prohibition, require the State Fire Marshal, on or before July 1, 2026, and pursuant to the California Building Standards Law process for state agencies proposing building standards, to propose to extend the applicability of the above-described fire protection building standards to all reconstruction of all buildings destroyed within the perimeters of wildfires that occur on or after July 1, 2026. (4) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 4291 of the Public Resources Code proposed by AB 1455 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1455 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law allow various credits against the taxes imposed by those laws, including numerous motion picture credits. Most recently, existing law, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2025, allows a motion picture credit (motion picture credit 4.0) to be allocated by the California Film Commission on or after July 1, 2025, and before July 1, 2030, in an amount equal to 20% or 25% of qualified expenditures for the production of a qualified motion picture in this state. Existing law establishes the California Film Commission to administer the motion picture credits, to provide services necessary to increase filming in the state, and to implement specified programs related to the motion picture industry, including a program to promote media production in the state. This bill, upon appropriation by the Legislature, would require the California Film Commission to integrate additional data collection requirements, as specified, into the existing motion picture tax credit framework. The bill would require the commission, in consultation with industry stakeholders, payroll companies, and subject matter experts, to adopt definitions, reporting templates, and metrics for the additional data collection, and to develop protocols to reduce nonresponse rates. The bill would require the commission to address noncompliance with the data collection requirements through existing enforcement conditions and procedures of the motion picture tax credits, as provided. The bill would additionally require the commission to publish an annual compliance report summarizing the collected data, trends in diversity and economic impact, and recommendations for program improvements.
The Personal Income Tax Law allows various credits against the tax imposed by that law. This bill, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2026, and before January 1, 2031, would allow a credit against those taxes in an amount equal to 50% of unreimbursed costs paid or incurred by a taxpayer for the purchase of durable medical equipment, as defined, for use by a qualifying dependent, as defined, during the taxable year. The bill would limit the credit to $5,000 per taxable year for each qualifying dependent. Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure to contain, among other things, specific goals that the tax expenditure will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. This bill also would include additional information required for any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Existing state sales and use tax laws impose a tax on retailers measured by the gross receipts from the sale of tangible personal property sold at retail in this state or on the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of tangible personal property purchased from a retailer for storage, use, or other consumption in this state. The Sales and Use Tax Law provides various exemptions from those taxes. This bill would, on and after July 1, 2026, provide an exemption from the taxes imposed by the Sales and Use Tax Law for the gross receipts from the sale in this state of, and the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of, hydrogen fuel, as defined. The Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law authorizes counties and cities to impose local sales and use taxes in conformity with the Sales and Use Tax Law, and existing laws authorize districts, as specified, to impose transactions and use taxes in accordance with the Transactions and Use Tax Law, which generally conforms to the Sales and Use Tax Law. Amendments to the Sales and Use Tax Law are automatically incorporated into the local tax laws. This bill would provide that the exemption created by the bill does not apply to local sales and use taxes or transactions and use taxes. Existing law imposes or dedicates certain state sales and use tax rates for local funding, including through the Local Revenue Fund 2011. This bill would provide that the exemption created by the bill does not apply to those state sales and use tax rates imposed or dedicated for local government funding, including those rates for which revenues are deposited into the Local Revenue Fund 2011. Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure to contain, among other things, specific goals, purposes, and objectives that the tax credit will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. This bill would also include additional information required for any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Existing law, the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, otherwise known as the Williamson Act, authorizes a city or county to enter into contracts with owners of agricultural land to preserve the land for agricultural use, as specified, in return for reduced property tax assessments. The act also authorizes a landowner of specified agricultural land to petition the city or county to cancel the Williamson Act contract in order to designate the land as a farmland security zone, whereby the land is eligible for a specified property tax valuation and taxed at a reduced rate for specified special taxes. Existing law authorizes the legislative body of a city or a county to establish an enhanced infrastructure financing district, with a governing body referred to as the public financing authority, to finance public capital facilities or other specified projects of communitywide significance. Existing law requires the public financing authority to prepare and adopt a proposed infrastructure financing plan, as specified. Existing law authorizes the plan to require a certain portion of specified taxes levied upon property within the district to be allocated to the district each year, as specified. Existing law authorizes certain local agencies to form a Community Revitalization and Investment Authority within a community revitalization and investment area to carry out a community revitalization plan in that area for specified purposes. Existing law authorizes the plan to require a certain portion of specified taxes levied upon property within the area to be allocated to the authority to finance improvements, as specified. This bill would exclude the taxes levied upon a parcel of land enrolled in or subject to a Williamson Act contract or a farmland security zone contract, as specified, from the above-described allocations to the district or authority, as applicable. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 53398.75 of the Government Code proposed by SB 516 to be operative only if this bill and SB 516 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law designates the State Water Resources Control Board as the agency responsible for administering specific programs related to drinking water, including, among others, the California Safe Drinking Water Act and the Emerging Contaminants for Small or Disadvantaged Communities Funding Program. This bill, which would become operative upon an appropriation by the Legislature, would enact a perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) mitigation program. As part of that program, the bill would create the PFAS Mitigation Fund in the State Treasury and would authorize certain moneys in the fund to be expended by the state board, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for specified purposes. The bill would authorize the state board to seek out nonstate, federal, and private funds designated for PFAS remediation and treatment and deposit the funds into the PFAS Mitigation Fund. The bill would continuously appropriate these funds to the state board for specified purposes. The bill would authorize the state board to establish accounts within the PFAS Mitigation Fund. The bill would authorize the state board to expend moneys from the fund in the form of a grant, loan, or contract, or to provide assistance services to water suppliers and sewer system providers, as those terms are defined, for multiple purposes, including, among other things, to cover or reduce the costs for water suppliers associated with treating drinking water to meet the applicable state and federal maximum PFAS contaminant levels. The bill would require a water supplier or sewer system provider to include a clear and definite purpose for how the funds will be used to provide public benefits to their community related to safe drinking water, recycled water, stormwater, or treated wastewater in order to be eligible to receive funds. The bill would require the state board to adopt guidelines to implement these provisions, as provided.
Existing law prescribes the procedures by which a proposed ordinance may be submitted to the governing board of a district by an initiative measure. These procedures do not apply to specified districts, including a district formed under a law that does not provide a procedure for elections. This bill would authorize the voters of any district that has authority to impose a transactions and use tax for transportation purposes to impose a retail transactions and use tax by an initiative measure. The bill would prohibit the initiative tax from exceeding the maximum authorized rate for a tax imposed by an ordinance enacted by the governing body of the district, and the bill would require the initiative measure to contain all spending limitations and substantive accountability standards applicable to a tax imposed by an ordinance enacted by the governing body. To the extent the bill would increase the duties of county elections officials, 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.
