Existing law makes it unlawful for a person who has 0.08% or more, by weight, of alcohol in their blood to drive a vehicle or to drive under the influence of alcohol or drugs and prescribes certain penalties depending on additional facts, such as whether the driving resulted in an injury to another. Existing decisional law holds that the slight volitional movement of the vehicle is sufficient for a driving under the influence violation. This bill would state that for the purposes of a driving under the influence violation, "drive" includes the volitional movement of a vehicle with driver support features engaged that require a person to supervise the vehicle in order to steer, brake, or accelerate, as needed to maintain safety. To the extent that this bill would expand the scope of a crime, it 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) Existing law authorizes a city or county in which a planned transportation facility was to be located on State Highway Route 238 in the City of Hayward and the County of Alameda to develop and file with the California Transportation Commission a local alternative transportation improvement program that addresses transportation problems and opportunities in the county, and provides for the use of revenues from the sale of excess properties acquired for the planned state facility in order to fund the local alternative transportation improvement program. Existing law prohibits the commission from approving a local alternative transportation improvement program submitted under these provisions after July 1, 2010. Existing law requires revenues from excess property sales for State Highway Route 238 to be deposited into a separate account in the Special Deposit Fund, a continuously appropriated fund, to be available for expenditure by local agencies for projects designated in the local alternative transportation improvement program. This bill would authorize the Alameda County Transportation Commission to file an amendment to the local alternative transportation improvement program for approval by the commission, and would authorize that amendment to propose to revise the projects listed in the program. Before filing the proposed amendment with the commission, the bill would require the Alameda County Transportation Commission to obtain the approval of the amendment from the city councils of the Cities of Hayward and San Leandro and the board of supervisors of the County of Alameda. By authorizing the commission to approve a revised list of projects, the bill would expand the purposes for which continuously appropriated funds may be expended, thereby making an appropriation. (2) Existing law makes it a crime for a person to pilot a vessel through the Golden Gate and into or out of a harbor in the Bays of San Francisco, San Pablo, and Suisun, unless the person has a license as a pilot, as provided. Existing law defines "Bays of San Francisco, San Pablo, and Suisun" as all the waters of the Bay of San Francisco, Bay of San Pablo, and Bay of Suisun, and of the tributaries, ports, and harbors of those bays, including the water areas from the south end of San Francisco Bay and from the Ports of Sacramento and Stockton to the Golden Gate Bridge. Existing law requires a pilot that provides pilotage service in the Bays of San Francisco, San Pablo, and Suisun to be insured, as provided, and requires a vessel, owner, operator, or demise or bareboat charterer hiring the pilot to either defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the pilot or provide trip insurance, as provided. This bill would clarify that the Bays of San Francisco, San Pablo, and Suisun includes the Ports of Sacramento and Stockton. The bill would also clarify that those insurance provisions apply to any portion of a vessel transit that occurs within the waters of the Ports of Sacramento and Stockton. To the extent the bill would expand the definition of the Bays of San Francisco, San Pablo, and Suisun, it would increase the scope of a crime and impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law specifies standards and requirements for the equipment of motor vehicles. Existing law generally requires motor carriers, drivers, and vehicles to comply with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations related to safety requirements for commercial motor vehicle operations, subject to department regulations. Under existing law, it is an infraction for a person to violate, or fail to comply with, a provision of the Vehicle Code, unless otherwise specified. This bill would additionally require motor carriers, drivers, vehicles, and shippers to comply with specified federal regulations related to the transportation of hazardous materials to the extent that they relate to transportation by highway unless the motor carrier, driver, vehicle, or shipper is an agency of the federal government. The bill would clarify that motor carriers, drivers, vehicles, and shippers not subject to the federal regulations described above are required to comply with those regulations unless specifically exempted from that compliance pursuant to department regulations. Because a violation of these provisions would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (4) Existing law authorizes a city, county, or city and county to establish an automated traffic enforcement system program to use those systems to detect a violation of a traffic control signal, if the system meets specified requirements. Existing law makes photographic, video, and administrative records made by a system confidential and specifies that data about the number of violations issued is not an administrative record required to be disclosed. Existing law establishes an administrative hearing process for notices of violations issued under these provisions and authorizes a contestant to seek review of the final decision by filing an appeal to the small claims division of the superior court or the traffic division of the superior court, as specified. Existing law provides that the conduct of the hearing on appeal is a subordinate duty that may be performed by a commissioner or other subordinate judicial officer, as specified. This bill would instead specify that data about the number of violations issued is not an administrative record prohibited from disclosure and is subject to disclosure. The bill would delete references to the small claims division or traffic division of a superior court in the above-described provisions and instead authorize a contestant to file an appeal to the superior court. The bill would provide that the conduct of the hearing on appeal may be a subordinate duty. The bill would also make a conforming change. (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 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.
The California High-Speed Rail Act creates the High-Speed Rail Authority to develop and implement a high-speed rail system in the state, with specified powers and duties, including the power to acquire rights-of-way through purchase or eminent domain, as specified. This bill would establish a permit program, administered by the authority, for encroachments on the authority's operating right-of-way. The bill would make any person who installs or performs an encroachment within the authority's operating right-of-way, without a permit, guilty of a misdemeanor, except as provided. The bill would also make any person who willfully damages any feature of the high-speed train system or any portion of the authority's operating right-of-way guilty of a misdemeanor. The bill would provide for civil penalties for specified categories of encroachment and, unless authorized by law or an encroachment permit, would make it unlawful to manage water flows in certain ways that impact the high-speed train system or the authority's operating right-of-way, as specified. The bill would authorize the authority or the Attorney General to recover these civil penalties. The bill would require all moneys, including moneys from permit fees and civil penalties, collected pursuant to its provisions to be deposited into the High-Speed Rail Property Fund, except for the award of any reasonable attorney's fees and costs provided to the recovering agency to recoup the cost of litigation, as provided. The bill would, upon appropriation by the Legislature, make the penalty moneys available to the authority for use in the development, improvement, and maintenance of the high-speed rail system, and the fee revenues collected under the permit program available to the authority to administer the program. By creating new crimes, 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.
Existing law vests the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) with full possession and control of the state highway system and requires Caltrans to improve and maintain the state highways. Existing law requires Caltrans, in consultation with the California Transportation Commission, to prepare a robust asset management plan to guide selection of projects for the state highway operation and protection program (SHOPP) . This bill would require the department, in connection with each revision of the asset management plan, to prepare and publish a supplemental list of wildlife connectivity improvements on the state highway system, as specified, and would require the department to submit the supplemental list to the commission for review and comments before the final list is published. Existing law declares the intent of the Legislature that Caltrans review the full extent of the state highway system, as currently maintained, in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife and with opportunities for the public to provide data input for consideration, to develop a comprehensive approach to address wildlife connectivity needs throughout the state with the goal of implementing measures that protect, conserve, and improve the state's unique wildlife, landscapes, and natural resources. This bill would explicitly require Caltrans to undertake this duty, in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife and with opportunities for the public to provide data and input for consideration, as specified. Existing law requires Caltrans, in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife and other appropriate agencies, to establish an inventory of connectivity needs on the state highway system where the implementation of wildlife passage features could reduce wildlife-vehicle collisions or enhance wildlife connectivity, and to update the inventory on a biennial basis, as specified. This bill would instead require Caltrans, in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife and other appropriate agencies, to assess potential barriers to wildlife to establish an inventory of connectivity needs on the state highway system where the implementation of wildlife passage features could reduce wildlife-vehicle collisions or enhance wildlife connectivity. The bill would require the biennial update to the inventory to be based on an analysis of transportation assets within priority route segments identified by the Department of Fish and Wildlife. The bill would require Caltrans to consult with the Department of Fish and Wildlife on the development of each update to the inventory, as prescribed. Existing law requires Caltrans to prepare a State Highway System Management Plan (SHSMP) , which includes a 10-year rehabilitation plan for the rehabilitation or reconstruction by the SHOPP of all state highways and bridges, and a 5-year maintenance plan that addresses the maintenance needs of the state highway system, as provided. Existing law requires the SHSMP to include specific quantifiable accomplishments, goals, objectives, costs, and performance measures consistent with the asset management plan described above. Existing law requires the SHSMP to be updated every 2 years. This bill would require Caltrans to include wildlife connectivity as an objective in the SHSMP.
Existing law establishes the Department of Transportation and vests it with various powers and duties. This bill would require the department to create, on or before June 1, 2027, and with input from transit operators, the California Transit Stop Registry as a centralized, statewide dataset of standardized information regarding transit stops that includes, but is not limited to, each transit stop's name, location, available seating, and unique identifier, and information on whether the transit stop is sheltered, as specified. Existing law provides for the funding of public transit, including under the Mills-Alquist-Deddeh Act, also known as the Transportation Development Act. This bill would require a transit operator, as defined, on or before January 1, 2028, to (1) ensure that the name and location of each of its transit stops conforms with the name and location for the stop in the California Transit Stop Registry, (2) use a transit stop's unique identifier listed in the registry when publishing any dataset with stop information or during publication of agency open datasets, and (3) report, for inclusion in the California Transit Stop Registry, if each of its transit stops has seating and shelter. By requiring a transit operator to perform new duties, 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, the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act, governs the management and operation of common interest developments. Existing law places various limits and prohibitions on the governing documents, as defined, relative to an owner's separate interest within those developments. This bill would declare void and unenforceable any covenant, restriction, or condition contained in any deed, contract, security instrument, other instrument affecting the transfer or sale of any interest in a common interest development, or provision of a governing document that effectively prohibits or restricts the owner of a separate interest from completing a residential window replacement project or impose any requirements on California Energy Code-compliant windows, as specified. The bill's provisions would not apply to certain provisions that impose reasonable installation restrictions on a residential window replacement project that do not significantly increase the cost of a residential window replacement project or significantly decrease the energy efficiency of a residential window replacement project, except as specified. This bill would prohibit an association from subjecting a residential window replacement project to design review or any other form of approval if the association's governing documents do not place reasonable restrictions on a residential window replacement project. This bill, for specified residential window replacement projects that propose the replacement of windows, would require an association to impose certain conditions on the project, including a requirement that the owner obtain approval from the association. The bill would require an association to approve a project if the owner agrees to certain requirements in writing, including that the owner comply with the association's governing documents, engage a licensed contractor for the installation, obtain any required local or state permits required for the project, and pay for the costs associated with the installation. (2) The Planning and Zoning Law authorizes the legislative body of any county or city to adopt ordinances that regulate the use of buildings, structures, and land as between industry, business, residences, open space, and other purposes. This bill would require a city, county, or city and county to administratively approve an application for a residential window replacement project. The bill would prohibit a city, county, or city and county from requiring discretionary review or a hearing for a residential window replacement project. The bill would also prohibit a city, county, or city and county from denying an application for a residential window replacement project and a local government that is both a city and county from imposing any conditions on certain windows proposed in a housing development project, except as specified. The bill would limit the application of these provisions under certain circumstances, including if a residential building is individually designated on the California Register of Historical Resources prior to the date the application for a residential window replacement project is submitted. By adding to the duties of local governments, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) The bill would make its provisions severable. (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) This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the City and County of San Francisco. (6) 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 Secretary of State is the chief elections officer of the state, and the Attorney General is the chief law officer of the state. Existing law requires a state or local agency that files or is served with an elections-related claim arising under federal law to provide written notice to the Secretary of State and the Attorney General within 3 court days. Existing law requires a state or local agency that intends to enter into a settlement, consent decree, or other court-approved agreement related to the claim to provide a draft copy of the settlement, consent decree, or agreement to the Secretary of State and the Attorney General at least 14 court days before entering into it. This bill would require a local agency, political subdivision, or elections official to provide notice to the Secretary of State and the Attorney General immediately, but no later than one calendar day, after becoming aware of any warrant, subpoena, or active law enforcement investigation pertaining to any election records or certified voting technology under their custody or control. The bill would authorize the Secretary of State or the Attorney General to intervene in, or initiate, any court proceedings to challenge a warrant or subpoena on any valid grounds or seek any other appropriate relief. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2030. By increasing the duties of local elections officials, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law defines an electric bicycle and classifies electric bicycles into 3 classes with different restrictions. Under existing law, a "class 1 electric bicycle" is a bicycle equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling and ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 20 miles per hour. Under existing law, a "class 2 electric bicycle" is a bicycle equipped with a motor that may be used exclusively to propel the bicycle and is not capable of providing assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 20 miles per hour. Under existing law, a "class 3 electric bicycle" is a bicycle equipped with a speedometer and a motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling, and that ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 28 miles per hour. Existing law prohibits a person under 16 years of age from operating a class 3 electric bicycle. This bill, the San Mateo Electric Bicycle Safety Pilot Program, would, until January 1, 2031, authorize a local authority within the County of San Mateo, or the County of San Mateo in unincorporated areas, to adopt an ordinance or resolution that would prohibit a person under 12 years of age from operating a class 1 or 2 electric bicycle. For the first 60 days following the adoption of an ordinance or resolution for this purpose, the bill would make a violation of the ordinance or resolution punishable by a warning notice. After 60 days, the bill would make a violation of the ordinance or resolution punishable by a fine of $25, except as specified. This bill would make a parent or legal guardian with control or custody of an unemancipated minor who violates the ordinance or resolution jointly and severally liable with the minor for the amount of the fine imposed. The bill would, if an ordinance or resolution is adopted, require the county to, by January 1, 2030, submit a report to the Legislature that includes, among other things, the total number of traffic stops initiated for a violation of the ordinance or resolution, the results of those traffic stops, and the actions taken by a peace officer during a traffic stop, as specified. The bill would require a local authority or county to administer a public information campaign for at least 30 calendar days prior to the enactment of the ordinance or resolution, as specified.
Existing law establishes the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) in order to meet the public transit problems of the County of Santa Clara. Existing law authorizes the VTA to purchase or otherwise acquire property for transit-oriented joint development projects, as provided. This bill would authorize the VTA to similarly purchase or acquire property for an employee housing project, as defined, for VTA employees and members of the public, as specified. The bill would authorize the VTA to construct affordable rental housing for employees and affordable for-sale housing that promotes housing opportunities for VTA employees, as specified. The bill would require the VTA to submit an annual report to the Legislature on the use of the bill's provisions to develop housing, as specified. By requiring the VTA to submit a new report, 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.
