Existing law prohibits an agency from disclosing personal information that would link the information to the individual unless, among other things, the information is provided to a governmental entity by law, or the disclosure is to the individual to whom the information pertains. Existing law makes vital records related to adoptions, other than a newly issued birth certificate, available only upon the order of the superior court of the county of residence of the adopted child or of the county granting the order of adoption. This bill would authorize, beginning on July 1, 2028, the disclosure of an original birth certificate, as defined, to an adopted person, or descendant, as defined, of a deceased adopted person, would require the State Registrar to provide a copy of the original birth certificate to those persons, and would establish a process to request an original birth certificate, as specified. The bill would also require the State Registrar to create and make available to a birth parent a contact preference form on or before July 1, 2028, containing certain elections that would be available for release when a request for an original birth certificate is made. Existing law requires the clerk of the court to report the decree to the State Registrar within 5 days after a decree of adoption. Existing law requires the State Registrar to generate a new birth certificate when the State Registrar receives a report of adoption from a specified court or when the State Registrar receives a specified court order. Existing law requires the new birth certificate to bear certain information and be identical to the certificate issued to the natural parents, except, when requested by the adopting parents, the certificate is required to omit the facility of birth and the race and color of the parents. This bill would remove the adopted parents exception described above that required the certificate to omit the facility of birth and the race and color of the parents. Existing law authorizes the adopting parents to request an amended certificate that omits, among other things, the city and county of birth, or the color and race of the parents. This bill would repeal that authorization.
Existing law states the intent of the Legislature to ensure that all pupils in foster care and those who are homeless, as defined, have a meaningful opportunity to meet the challenging state pupil academic achievement standards to which all pupils are held. Existing law requires educators, county placing agencies, care providers, advocates, and the juvenile courts to work together to maintain stable school placements and to ensure that each pupil is placed in the least restrictive educational programs and has access to the academic resources, services, and extracurricular and enrichment activities that are available to all pupils, as provided. This bill would require the State Department of Education to administer formula grants as part of a pilot program, to be known as the Unaccompanied Youth Support Grant Program, for school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools to provide supports necessary to improve school attendance, pupil engagement, pupil graduation rates, and pupil wellbeing for unaccompanied youth, as defined, who are 16 or 17 years of age, including connecting youth with resources to find stable housing. The bill would require, subject to an appropriation and subject to specified allocation metrics, 5-year grants that commence with the 2028–29 fiscal year, to be awarded by the Superintendent of Public Instruction to local educational agencies, or consortia of local educational agencies, to support unaccompanied youth, and would require grant funds to be used for, among other things, referrals to existing social services support systems, and providing basic needs and educational support services, as specified. The bill would require, to be eligible to apply for a grant under the program, a local educational agency to have identified at least one unaccompanied youth enrolled during the prior fiscal year, as specified. The bill would require local educational agencies applying for grant funds under the program to submit an application that includes, among other things, a description of how grant funds will be used to identify eligible pupils, the types of supports to be provided based on the eligible uses of grant funds, and the performance measures the local educational agency will use to measure progress towards program goals. The bill would require local educational agencies awarded grant funds under the program to submit annual reports to the department that include, among other things, a description of the expenditure of funds and the number and characteristics of unaccompanied youth served.
The Insurance Rate Reduction and Reform Act of 1988, an initiative measure enacted by Proposition 103, as approved by the voters at the November 8, 1988, statewide general election, prohibits specified insurance rates from being approved or remaining in effect that are excessive, inadequate, unfairly discriminatory, or otherwise in violation of the act. Under the act, rates and premiums for automobile insurance are determined based on specified factors, including the insured's driving safety record. Existing law authorizes the provisions of Proposition 103 to be amended by a statute that furthers the purposes of the act and is enacted by the Legislature with a 23 vote. This bill, the Consumer Driving Data Protection Act of 2026, would authorize a consumer to opt to use telematics to establish their driving record, thus amending Proposition 103. The bill would prohibit the use of telematics data for a purpose other than rating private passenger automobile insurance. The bill would require a rate application under which telematics would be used to establish an insured's driving record to include specified materials related to the insurer's telematics program. This bill would prohibit an insurer that uses telematics from taking specified actions, including conditioning eligibility for a discount upon participation in a telematics program, unless the discount is approved by the commissioner. The bill would also set forth written consent and privacy requirements for the collection and use of telematics data. The bill would authorize the commissioner to impose specified penalties for violations of the bill's provisions, including civil penalties and suspension of an insurer's telematics program. This bill would require an insurance provider or third-party vendor to take specified actions with respect to the telematics data, including immediately deleting the data once a rating has been assigned to the consumer and obtaining an express written or electronic signature of a consumer on a notice meeting specified conditions. The bill would additionally prohibit an insurance provider or third-party vendor from keeping the telematics data for longer than 6 months and collecting audio or visual recordings of the occupants of the vehicle or persons outside the vehicle, among other specified prohibitions. The bill would declare that its provisions further the purposes of Proposition 103. 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.
Existing law authorizes the legislative body of a city or county to designate a proposed enhanced infrastructure financing district to finance public capital facilities or other specified projects of communitywide significance that provide significant benefits to the district or the surrounding community, including, among other things, the acquisition, construction, or rehabilitation of housing for persons of very low, low, and moderate income for rent or purchase, as specified. Existing law authorizes an infrastructure financing plan to contain a provision for the division of taxes levied upon taxable property in the area included within the district and authorizes the public financing authority of the district to issue bonds, as provided. This bill would establish the Workforce Housing Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Act, which would authorize a city or county to establish a workforce housing enhanced infrastructure financing district (district) if certain requirements are met, including the adoption of an infrastructure financing plan as specified. The bill would prescribe requirements applicable to those districts. Among these requirements, the bill would prescribe requirements for the construction of residential housing that meets specified occupancy and affordability criteria. The bill would provide definitions for its provisions. The bill would authorize the governing board to issue bonds, subject to approval by 23 of the voters voting on the proposition. The bill would prescribe requirements for the issuance of the bond pursuant to its provisions. The bill would further require a district, which finances affordable housing units through the bond, to maintain the housing units at affordable housing costs through a recorded covenant or restriction, as specified. By adding to the duties of local elections officials with respect to administering the above-described provisions, 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 prescribes various requirements regarding the formation, content, and enforcement of state and local public contracts. Existing law establishes, until January 1, 2027, for contracts entered into on or after January 1, 2017, a claim resolution process applicable to any claim by a contractor in connection with a public works project against a public entity, as specified. For purposes of these provisions, existing law defines "public entity" to include, among others, a city, including a charter city, and county, including a charter county. Existing law imposes various requirements on a public entity in relating to the claim resolution process, including, among other things, conducting a reasonable review of the claim and, within 45 days, providing the claimant a written statement identifying the disputed and undisputed portions of the claim. This bill would repeal the above-described January 1, 2027, repeal date, thereby extending the operation of these provisions indefinitely. By indefinitely extending the duties of local agencies in relation to the above-specified claim resolution process, 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 requires that a housing development project, as defined, within a specified distance of a transit-oriented development stop, as defined, be an allowed use as a transit-oriented housing development on any site zoned for residential, mixed, or commercial development, if the development complies with certain, applicable requirements, as provided. Among these requirements, existing law prohibits a proposed development under these provisions from being located on sites where the development would require demolition of housing, or that was previously used for housing, that is subject to rent or price controls, as provided. This bill would additionally prohibit the development from being located on an existing parcel of land or site governed under the Mobilehome Residency Law, the Recreational Vehicle Park Occupancy Law, the Mobilehome Parks Act, or the Special Occupancy Parks Act. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
This measure would urge the Governor, relevant state agencies, and all local governments to adopt an urgent and coordinated approach to end and prevent unsheltered homelessness statewide, as specified.
(1) Existing state and federal law provides for the enforcement of laws related to elections. This bill would prohibit a peace officer from interfering with the administration of an election, as specified. This bill would authorize certain persons to enforce those prohibitions by filing a civil action, as specified. This bill would also prohibit any individual from permitting an agent of a law enforcement agency, as specified, to access, disrupt, modify, or take possession of rosters, combined rosters, or voter lists unless authorized by a court order or to investigate certain types of voting fraud. The bill would additionally require the Attorney General to provide guidance and information regarding how to respond to requests by law enforcement, as defined, to access areas where ballots are present. (2) Existing law requires an elections official, upon receiving a vote by mail ballot, to compare the signature on the identification envelope with the voter's prior signatures, and it also provides a mechanism by which a voter can verify their signature and cure this defect. Existing law provides that the processing of vote by mail ballots is open to the public and permits specified persons and organizations to observe this processing. This bill would prohibit a vote by mail observer from challenging a signature on a vote by mail ballot that has been verified by the voter. (3) Under existing law, it is a crime for a person in possession of a firearm, a uniformed peace officer, private guard, or security personnel, or any person wearing the uniform of a peace officer, guard, or security personnel, to be stationed in the immediate vicinity of, or posted at, a polling place without authorization from the appropriate elections official. It is also a crime for a person to hire or arrange for such a person to be stationed in the immediate vicinity of, or posted at, a polling place without authorization from the elections official. This bill would authorize the Secretary of State or Attorney General to object to authorization provided by the appropriate elections official, in which case the person stationed or posted at the polling place, or the person who hired or arranged for such a person to be stationed or posted at the polling place, is guilty of a crime. By expanding the scope of these crimes, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. (4) Existing law authorizes the Secretary of State, Attorney General, and any local elections official in the county in which the act occurs, to bring a civil action against an individual, business, or other legal entity that commits any specified act of tampering with a voting system or voting equipment before, during, or after an election. This bill would additionally authorize the Secretary of State, Attorney General, and the appropriate local elections official to bring a civil action against a person, business, or entity that takes a package containing ballots from the custody of an elections official. (5) Existing law makes it a crime for an individual to undertake a number of enumerated actions that would result in interference with an election, including displaying a container for the purpose of collecting ballots with the intent to deceive a voter into casting a ballot in an unofficial ballot box. This bill would also make it a crime to take a package containing voted ballots out of the custody of an elections official. By expanding the scope of this crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (6) Existing law requires the elections official of any county or city using a voting system to inspect the machines or devices at least once every 2 years. This bill would prohibit an individual from permitting an agent of a law enforcement agency, as defined, to access, disrupt, modify, or take possession of certified voting technology unless authorized by a court order. To the extent this bill would establish new procedures for the conduct of elections, it would create a state-mandated local program. (7) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. (8) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law provides that a tenant is guilty of unlawful detainer if the tenant continues to possess the property without permission of the landlord after the tenant defaults on rent or fails to perform a condition or covenant of the lease under which the property is held, among other reasons. Existing law requires a tenant to be served a 3 days' notice in writing to cure a default or perform a condition of the lease, or return possession of the property to the landlord, as specified. This bill, the Tenant Protections for Immigrant Families Act of 2026 (Act) , would, until January 1, 2030, prohibit an owner of residential real property, as defined, from initiating or continuing an unlawful detainer action to evict a tenant whose income, ability to obtain income, or financial support is impacted by immigration enforcement activities until no sooner than 90 days after the tenant or household member's detention-related hardship ends, as specified. The bill would require a court to stay the proceeding of a pending unlawful detainer action against a covered tenant if certain conditions are satisfied, including that the tenant provides the court with specified documentation, such as a signed declaration of detention-related hardship that includes a specified statement, that the tenant or household member suffered a detention-related hardship that prevented them from paying the unpaid rent alleged in the unlawful detainer action. Any person who knowingly provides false information in the declaration of detention-related hardship would be subject to a civil fine of up to $1,500. Under the bill, if a tenant has raised detention-related hardship as an affirmative defense, an owner of residential real property may request an evidentiary hearing regarding the tenant's detention-related hardship stay of the unlawful detainer action, at which the tenant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence their detention-related hardship. The bill would prohibit the owner from charging or collecting any late fees, interest, or other penalties related to the nonpayment of rent by a tenant subject to these provisions. Within 90 days after the end of the detention-related hardship, the bill would require the tenant to either pay all past due rent or enter into a mutually agreed upon payment plan with the owner of the residential real property. For purposes of the Act, this bill would define "immigration enforcement activities" to include any efforts to investigate, enforce, or assist in the investigation or enforcement of any federal immigration law, including any federal criminal immigration law that penalizes a person's presence in, entry or reentry to, or employment in, the United States. The bill would define "detention-related hardship" to mean, among other things, loss of income or financial support by the tenant or household member due to detention, arrest, or ordered removal of a tenant or household member by any federal law enforcement agency. This bill would prohibit a landlord from charging a tenant subject to these provisions fees assessed for the late payment of that rental debt. The bill would prohibit a person from selling or assigning any unpaid debt as a result of detention-related hardship. The bill would prohibit a housing provider or tenant screening company from using an alleged debt as a result of detention-related hardship as a negative factor for the purpose of evaluating a prospective housing application or as the basis for refusing to rent a dwelling unit to an otherwise qualified prospective tenant. The bill would delete similar provisions related to debts as a result of COVID-19 rental debt. The bill would require the Judicial Council to review its existing forms and develop new forms to effectuate these provisions. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2030.
Existing law regulates the terms and conditions of residential tenancies. Existing law provides that a tenant is guilty of unlawful detainer if the tenant continues to possess the property without permission of the landlord after the tenant defaults on rent, among other reasons. This bill would prohibit a landlord from evicting for nonpayment of rent or nonrent fees, as defined, or charging or collecting late fees to, a tenant who is employed by the federal government or a federal contractor and whose income is materially affected by a government shutdown for the duration of, and 30 days following, a government shutdown. The bill would additionally require a court to stay any pending eviction action against the tenant during that time, as provided. The bill would require the tenant to provide specified documentation to a landlord or court, as applicable. The bill would require the deferred rent to be due and payable within 30 days of the date the tenant receives their first full paycheck containing retroactive backpay, as provided. This bill would impose civil penalties not to exceed $2,000 for any person who knowingly violates its provisions and would permit the tenant to raise a violation of its provisions as an affirmative defense in any action for unlawful detainer. The bill would specify that this affirmative defense does not apply to any unlawful detainer action other than an action based on the nonpayment of rent or nonrent fees. The bill would require the Judicial Council to adopt or modify forms as needed to implement these provisions. The bill would make related findings and declarations.
