Rep. Lori Wilson

Existing law authorizes an unmarried person who is under 18 years of age to marry upon obtaining a court order granting permission and the written consent of at least one of the parents or the guardian of each underage party to the marriage, as specified. Existing law requires the court, if it considers it necessary, as part of the court order granting permission to marry, to require the parties to the prospective marriage of a minor to participate in premarital counseling, as specified. Existing law provides that 2 unmarried, unrelated adults who have chosen to share one another's lives in an intimate and committed relationship of mutual caring may establish a domestic partnership by filing a declaration with the Secretary of State, if certain requirements are met. Existing law provides that a person under 18 years of age who, together with the person with whom the person proposes to establish a domestic partnership, meets the requirements for a domestic partnership other than the requirement of being at least 18 years of age, is capable of consenting to and establishing a domestic partnership upon obtaining a court order granting permission to the underage person or persons to establish a domestic partnership. Under existing law, registered domestic partners have the same rights, protections, and benefits as spouses. This bill would repeal the authorization for a person under 18 years of age to be issued a marriage license or to establish a domestic partnership, thereby prohibiting a person under 18 years of age from being issued a marriage license or from establishing a domestic partnership. The bill would make conforming changes. Existing law requires the State Registrar to create a document, no later than March 1, 2020, concerning marriage certificates in which one or both of the parties were minors at the time of solemnization of the marriage. Existing law requires the State Registrar to update that document annually, as specified. Existing law requires the local registrar to submit specified information for the purposes of that report. This bill would repeal those provisions.

Existing law establishes the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation under the direction of the Commissioner of Financial Protection and Innovation. Existing law makes the department responsible for administering various laws relating to financial institutions, including the Banking Law, the California Credit Union Law (CCUL) , and the California Residential Mortgage Lending Act (CRMLA) , a willful violation of which is punishable as a misdemeanor. The CRMLA requires, as often as the commissioner deems necessary and appropriate, but at least once every 48 months, the commissioner to examine the affairs of each residential mortgage lender and servicer licensee for compliance with the CRMLA. The CRMLA authorizes the commissioner to examine the licensee's officers, directors, employees, or agents under oath regarding the licensee's operations. The CRMLA requires the commissioner to provide a written statement, the disclosure of which is subject to certain restrictions, of the findings of the examination, issue a copy of that statement to each licensee's principals, officers, or directors, and take appropriate steps to ensure correction of any violations of the CRMLA. This bill, the California Fair Lending Examination Act, would require, under the Banking Law and the CCUL, the commissioner to, at least once every 4 years, examine, as prescribed, the books and records of certain entities subject to the commissioner's examination authority under those laws for compliance with any nondiscrimination law applicable to mortgage lending, as specified, and would require the commissioner to provide a written statement of the findings of that examination, issue a copy of that statement to the subject's principals, officers, or directors, and take appropriate steps to ensure correction of any violations of applicable nondiscrimination laws. The bill would prohibit disclosure of that statement to anyone other than the subject entity, law enforcement officials, or other state or federal regulatory agencies for further investigation and enforcement. This bill would, as part of the above-described examination required by the CRMLA, require the commissioner to additionally examine the licensee for compliance with any nondiscrimination law applicable to mortgage lending, as prescribed. This bill would make a violation of an applicable nondiscrimination law a violation of the Banking Law, the CCUL, or the CRMLA, as applicable, and would authorize, under the Banking Law and the CCUL, the commissioner to examine the applicable entity's officers, directors, employees, or agents under oath regarding the entity's operations. By expanding the scope of the crimes of perjury and of violating the CRMLA, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

The California Constitution confers the right to vote on a United States citizen who is 18 years of age and a resident of this state, except as specified. The California Constitution requires candidates for congressional and state elective offices in California to be selected via a voter-nominated primary election at which all voters may vote for any candidate without regard to the political party preference disclosed by the candidate or the voter. The top two vote-getters at a voter-nominated primary election for a congressional or state elective office, regardless of party preference, are nominated to compete in the ensuing general election. The California Constitution requires the Legislature to provide for partisan elections for presidential candidates, and political party and party central committees, including an open presidential primary whereby the candidates on the ballot are those found by the Secretary of State to be recognized candidates throughout the nation or throughout California for the office of President of the United States. This measure would prohibit an eligible voter from being excluded from meaningful participation at any integral stage of any publicly funded election, including a primary election, on any basis, including political party preference.

Existing law, the Reproductive Privacy Act, declares as contrary to the public policy of this state a law of another state that authorizes a person to bring a civil action against a person or entity that engages in certain activities relating to obtaining or performing an abortion. Existing law prohibits the state from applying an out-of-state law to a case or controversy in state court or enforcing or satisfying a civil judgment under the out-of-state law. This bill would specify that the protections applicable to persons who engage in legally protected health care activity, as defined, apply to a person who previously has undertaken one or more acts or omissions while in another United States jurisdiction to aid or encourage, or attempt to aid or encourage, any person in the exercise and enjoyment, or attempted exercise and enjoyment, of rights to reproductive health care services or gender affirming health care services if the acts or omissions were permissible under the laws of the jurisdiction in which the person was located at the time of the acts or omissions. Existing law prohibits a state or local law enforcement agency or officer from knowingly arresting or knowingly participating in the arrest of any person for performing, supporting, or aiding in the performance of legally protected health care activity, if the health care activity is lawful in this state. Existing law prohibits a state or local public agency from cooperating with or providing information to an individual or agency from another state or a federal law enforcement agency, as specified, regarding a legally protected health care activity that is lawful in this state. Under existing law, the Governor may surrender, on demand of executive authority of any other state, any person in this state charged in the other state, as specified, with committing an act in this state, or in a 3rd state, intentionally resulting in a crime in the state whose executive authority is making the demand. This bill would prohibit the Governor from recognizing a request for extradition of a person subject to criminal liability based on the alleged provision or receipt of, assistance in the provision or receipt of, material support for, or in any theory of vicarious, joint, several, or conspiracy liability for any legally protected health care activity, except as specified.

(1) Existing law defines an electric bicycle as a bicycle equipped with fully operable pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts, and classifies electric bicycles into 3 classes with different restrictions for various purposes. This bill would require all class 2 electric bicycles manufactured, sold, or offered for sale on or after January 1, 2029, to be equipped with a speedometer. The bill would also require all electric bicycles manufactured, sold, or offered for sale on or after January 1, 2029, to be equipped with an integrated or detachable front lamp and a rear lamp, as specified. The bill would also require sellers and distributors of electric bicycles to disclose specified information at or before the point of sale, including, among other things, the classification and maximum speed of the electric bicycle and a recommendation that persons under 16 years of age should not ride an electric bicycle at a speed greater than 15 miles per hour. The bill would make a violation of these provisions punishable as an infraction, as specified. (2) Existing law regulates the operation of bicycles on highways and authorizes local authorities to, among other things, prohibit, by ordinance, the operation of an electric bicycle or any class of electric bicycle on equestrian trails or hiking or recreational trails. This bill would authorize a local authority to set a speed limit on a bicycle path of 10, 15, or 20 miles an hour or on a multiuse trail to 10, 15, or 20 miles per hour, as specified, subject to specified signage requirements. However, the bill would specify that speed limits on a bicycle path or multiuse trail established prior to January 1, 2027, shall remain in effect. The bill would also make technical, nonsubstantive changes to these provisions. (3) Existing law establishes various prima facie speed limits. Existing law establishes that specified convictions and violations under the Vehicle Code and traffic-related incidents count as points against a driver's record for purposes of the suspension or revocation of the privilege to drive, except as specified. This bill would additionally set a prima facie speed limit of 10 miles per hour on a sidewalk and specify that a conviction of a violation of that speed limit shall not result in a violation point count. (4) Under existing law, a violation of the Vehicle Code is a crime. By creating new requirements within the Vehicle Code, the violation of which would be a crime, 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) The Planning and Zoning Law requires a local agency or state agency to compile one or more lists that specify in detail the information required from any applicant for a postentitlement phase permit, as defined. Existing law also establishes time limits for completing reviews regarding whether an application for a postentitlement phase permit is complete and compliant, and whether to approve or deny an application. Existing law requires the time limits to be tolled, if the local agency or state agency requires review of the application by an outside entity, until the outside entity completes the review and returns the application, as specified. This bill would prohibit a local agency or state agency from requiring or requesting more than 2 plan check and specification reviews in connection with an application for a building permit, as part of its review. The bill would authorize a local agency or state agency to deny an application that is not compliant with the permit standards following 2 plan check and specification reviews. The bill would also authorize an applicant to request additional submittals of applications that are not compliant with the permit standards. The bill, if a local agency or state agency finds that a complete application is noncompliant, would prohibit a local agency or state agency from requesting or requiring any action or inaction as a result of a building inspection undertaken to assess compliance with the applicable building permit standards that would represent a deviation from a previously approved building plan or similar approval for the building permit, except as specified. This bill would remove the above-described tolling requirements relating to outside entity reviews and, instead, would require, if federal or state law requires review of the application by another public agency that is independent of the local agency or state agency before the local agency or state agency is authorized to act on the application, the time limits to be tolled for the application until the public agency completes the review and returns the application to the local agency or state agency. The bill would require the local agency or state agency to notify the applicant of the tolling, as specified. (2) Existing law, if a postentitlement phase permit is determined to be incomplete or noncompliant, requires a local agency or state agency to provide a process for an applicant to appeal that decision in writing to the governing body of the agency or, if there is no governing body, to the director of the agency, as provided by that agency. Existing law requires the city or county to provide that the right of appeal is to the governing body or, at their option, the planning commission, or both. Existing law requires a local agency or state agency to provide a final written determination on the appeal not later than 60 business days after receipt of the applicant's written appeal, for housing development projects with 25 units or fewer, and not later than 90 business days for a housing development projects with 26 units or more. Existing law also specifies that the fact that an appeal is permitted to both the planning commission and to the governing body does not extend the specified time period. This bill would revise those timelines to not later than 30 business days for housing development projects with 25 units or fewer and 45 business days for housing development projects with 26 units or more. The bill would remove the specification that the fact that an appeal is permitted to both the planning commission and to the governing body does not extend the specified time period. The bill would remove the requirement that, if a postentitlement phase permit is determined to be incomplete or noncompliant, a local agency or state agency provide a process for an applicant to appeal that decision to the director of the agency if there is no governing body, as provided by that agency. The bill would remove the requirement that a city or county provide that the right of appeal is to the governing body or, at their option, the planning commission, or both. This bill would authorize the applicant to seek a writ of mandate to compel approval of the application, if the applicant's appeal is denied, or a decision on the appeal is not made within the timelines provided, or an appeals process is not provided as required. By imposing additional duties on local agencies regarding postentitlement phase permits, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law, the Housing Accountability Act, among other things, prohibits a local agency from disapproving, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders infeasible, a housing development project for very low, low-, or moderate-income households unless the local agency makes written findings as to one of certain sets of conditions, as specified. The act also requires, when a proposed housing development project complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria in effect at the time that the application was deemed complete, but the local agency proposes to disapprove the project or to impose a condition that the project be developed at a lower density, that the local agency base its decision regarding the proposed housing development project upon written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence on the record that 2 specified conditions exist. Existing law defines the term "disapprove the housing development project" for these purposes to include any instance in which a local agency takes certain actions or fails to comply with certain requirements, including the time limits described above. Existing law makes a local agency's failure to meet the above-described time limits relating to postentitlement phase permits a violation of the Housing Accountability Act. This bill would, instead, make a violation of the above-described provisions relating to postentitlement phase permits, among others, a violation of the Housing Accountability Act. The bill would also revise the definition of "disapprove the housing development project" under the Housing Accountability Act to include any instance in which a local agency fails to comply with any of the provisions described above relating to postentitlement phase permits. By requiring local agencies to take certain actions, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (4) The bill would make other conforming changes and would provide that certain changes are declaratory of existing law. (5) 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. (6) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65589.5 of the Government Code proposed by SB 1072 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1072 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

This measure would urge the President of the United States and Congress of the United States to immediately restore full and consistent funding and staffing for the National Park Service.

Maddy summaryCalifornia Assembly Resolution 140 designates August 2026 as Children's Get Offline and Get Outdoors Month to promote awareness of the benefits of screen-free play for child development. The resolution cites research linking excessive social media use and reduced free play time to increased rates of anxiety, depression, and other behavioral issues among teenagers. It encourages families and communities to support unstructured outdoor activities and highlights ongoing federal efforts to protect children's mental health through technology guardrails.

Existing law requires the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to maintain a canteen at its active facilities, and until January 1, 2028, prohibits the sale prices of the articles offered for sale in a canteen from exceeding a 35% markup above the price of the articles paid to the vendors. Existing law, commencing on January 1, 2028, requires the sale amounts of the articles to be offered for sale to be fixed by the secretary at amounts that will render each canteen self-supporting. This bill would prohibit the sale price of an article offered for sale in a commissary, as defined, at a private detention facility, defined as a detention facility that is operated by a private, nongovernmental, for-profit entity, and operating pursuant to a contract or agreement with a governmental entity, from exceeding a 35% markup above the amount paid to a vendor for that article.

This measure would urge President Donald J. Trump to avoid raising the cost of living for American consumers by rescinding the tariffs that he has imposed since taking office in January 2025 and refunding the American people for the costs passed on to them by his tariffs. The measure would also urge the United States Congress to enact a joint resolution to rescind President Trump's tariffs and to oppose all future unilateral and arbitrary tariff increases imposed by President Trump.