Existing law, the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act, governs the formation and operation of common interest developments, and requires a common interest development to be managed by an association, as specified. Existing law includes provisions that limit the authority of an association or the governing documents, as defined, to regulate the use of a member's separate interest, as defined. Existing law, the Mobilehome Residency Law, governs tenancies in mobilehome parks and includes provisions that are applicable to those who have an ownership interest in a subdivision, cooperative, or condominium for mobilehomes, or a resident-owned mobilehome park, as specified. Existing law makes any covenant, restriction, or condition contained in any rental agreement or other instrument affecting the tenancy of a homeowner or resident that effectively prohibits or restricts the installation, upgrade, replacement, or use of a cooling system in a mobilehome void and unenforceable. Existing law provides that a "cooling system" includes a portable air-conditioning unit, a window air-conditioning unit, a swamp cooler or any evaporative cooler, a cooling fan system, a heat pump, or any other technology that reasonably creates an internal temperature cooling benefit, and meets applicable health and safety standards and requirements imposed by law. This bill would, under the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act, make any provision of the governing documents or architectural guidelines void and unenforceable if the provision prohibits or restricts the installation, upgrade, replacement, or use of a cooling system that complies with all applicable state and local building codes. The bill would also make any covenant, restriction, or condition contained in any, among other specified agreements, deed that effectively prohibits or restricts the installation, upgrade, replacement, or use of a cooling system, void and unenforceable. The bill would make it unlawful for an association to prohibit or restrict a member from installing, upgrading, replacing, or using a cooling system in the member's separate interest, or to take other specified actions in connection with the installation, upgrade, replacement, or use of a cooling system, subject to specified exceptions. This bill would make an association that willfully violates these provisions liable to the member for actual damages occasioned thereby, for a civil penalty paid to the member in an amount not to exceed $2,000, and reasonable attorney's fees and court costs, as provided.
Sponsored bills
Existing law appropriates certain unallocated moneys and other specified moneys deposited into the Fair and Exposition Fund, a continuously appropriated fund, to the Secretary of Food and Agriculture for capital outlay to California fairs for, among other things, fair projects involving public health and safety, fair projects involving major and deferred maintenance, and fair projects necessary due to any emergency, as specified. This bill would instead appropriate those moneys described above to the secretary for capital outlay to California fairs for fair projects involving public health, fire and life safety, and emergency services improvement projects at fairs, California Code of Regulations compliance projects, and maintenance projects at fairgrounds, as specified. By expanding the purposes for which those moneys may be used, the bill would make an appropriation. The bill would require moneys deposited into the fund after November 1 of each year to be allocated within 90 days of the receipt of the moneys, as provided. The bill would require all available moneys in the fund to be allocated to the network of California fairs pursuant to an approved expenditure plan no later than December 31 of each calendar year, except that beginning January 1, 2027, and every year thereafter, a reasonable amount may be retained from year to year as a prudent reserve for contingencies, as specified.
(1) Existing law establishes procedures by which a person may petition the court for certain protective or restraining orders, including civil harassment restraining orders, domestic violence restraining orders, elder or dependent adult abuse restraining orders, gun violence restraining orders, postsecondary school restraining orders, and workplace violence restraining orders, to enjoin a restrained person from taking specified actions. Before a hearing on the issuance or denial of a domestic violence restraining order or gun violence restraining order, existing law requires the court to ensure that a search has been conducted to determine, among other things, if the subject of the proposed order owns or possesses a firearm as reflected in the Department of Justice Automated Firearms System. If after the search, the court finds that the subject of the proposed order owns or possesses a firearm, existing law requires the court to make a written record as to whether the subject has relinquished the firearm and provided proof of the required storage, sale, or relinquishment of the firearm. Upon a court's issuance of such a protective order, existing law requires the restrained person to relinquish any firearm and ammunition in that person's immediate possession or control, according to specified procedures. Existing law prescribes procedures by which the restrained person must certify compliance with the court, and for the court to determine, by a preponderance of the evidence, whether the person has a firearm in violation of the order. This bill would make clarifying and conforming changes to the procedures relating to the protective or restraining orders described above by explicitly requiring the restrained person to relinquish, in addition to any firearm, any ammunition in that person's immediate possession or control. The bill, commencing January 1, 2028, would require courts to permit a party or witness to appear remotely at a hearing for a postsecondary educational institution or workplace violence restraining order at no cost. This bill would also require courts to develop rules and instructions for such remote appearances and to post them on their internet websites. The bill would also, commencing on January 1, 2028, require courts to allow filings related to those protective orders to be submitted electronically, as specified. (2) Existing law prohibits court from granting a temporary restraining order without notice to the respondent, except as specified. Existing law requires a peace officer, upon the request of a petitioner, to serve any civil harassment restraining order, domestic violence restraining order, elder or dependent adult abuse restraining order, gun violence restraining order, postsecondary school restraining order, or workplace violence restraining order on the respondent, whether or not the respondent has been taken into custody. Existing law prescribes procedures that a sheriff or marshal must follow when serving a writ, warrant, summons, order, or other process issued by a superior court in a civil action or proceeding. Existing law requires the Judicial Council, on or before January 1, 2024, to create a statewide form or forms to be used by litigants in civil actions or proceedings to request service of process or notice by a marshal or sheriff. This bill, commencing January 1, 2028, would prohibit a court from requiring notice to be provided to the party to be restrained in advance of accepting a filing for, or deciding, an application for an ex parte restraining order, as specified, if the applicant or the applicant's attorney certifies to the court under oath that providing notice to the party to be restrained in advance of filing the petition would likely endanger the safety of the petitioner or other persons. The bill, commencing January 1, 2028, would require a peace officer, as defined, to follow the procedures that apply to a sheriff or marshal when serving a writ, warrant, summons, order, or other process issued by a superior court, as described above. The bill would require the Judicial Council, on or before January 1, 2028, to create a statewide form or forms to be used by litigants in civil actions or proceedings to request service of process or notice by a marshal or sheriff, or by a peace officer serving any of the restraining or protective orders described above. By expanding the duties of peace officers, which include officers of local law enforcement agencies, and expanding the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law requires, on any charge involving acts of domestic violence, that the district attorney or prosecuting city attorney conduct a search of certain databases for protective or restraining orders, as specified. This bill would additionally require the district attorney or prosecuting city attorney to conduct a search of the Department of Justice Automated Firearms System. By expanding the duties of the district attorney or prosecuting city attorney, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Under existing law, before a hearing on the issuance or denial of a domestic violence restraining order, the court must ensure that a search is or has been conducted to determine if the subject of the proposed order has, among other things, a prior criminal conviction for a violent or serious felony, owns or possesses a firearm, as reflected in the Department of Justice Automated Firearms System, or has a prior restraining order or violation thereof. Existing law requires this search to be conducted of specified records and databases readily available and reasonably accessible to the court. Existing law requires the court, after issuing its ruling, to advise the parties that they may request the information upon which the court relied to conduct the search and information obtained as a result of the search to be maintained in a confidential case file, except as specified. This bill would authorize a court to order any of the searches described above to be conducted before a hearing on the issuance or denial of a civil harassment restraining order, elder or dependent adult abuse restraining order, gun violence restraining order, postsecondary school restraining order, or workplace violence restraining order. The bill would require the court, after issuing its ruling, to provide the advisement to the parties described above, and to keep the information obtained as a result of any search to be maintained in a confidential case file, except as specified. (4) Existing law requires a court, when issuing a gun violence restraining order, to notify the Department of Justice regarding the order. Existing law requires the court, when issuing protective orders and firearm or ammunition relinquishment orders, to notify the prosecuting agency and law enforcement officials, as specified, in order, to enable the prosecuting agency and law enforcement officials to take necessary actions to obtain any firearms or ammunition owned, possessed, or controlled by the subject of the order. This bill would require local law enforcement agencies and prosecuting agencies, as defined, to designate a person responsible for accessing or receiving notifications from the superior court indicating that a person has violated a protective or restraining orders' firearm relinquishment requirement and to regularly ensure that the clerk of the court has updated contact information for the person designated to receive those notifications on behalf of the agency. This bill would also require each prosecuting agency to ensure that a protected person or protected people named in the order are notified about the issuance, terms, and duration of the protective order, except as specified. The bill would require each prosecuting agency to develop, adopt, and implement written policies and standards regarding notification to protected parties on or before January 1, 2028, as specified. By placing new requirements on local law enforcement agencies and prosecuting agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill, commencing January 1, 2028, would authorize a law enforcement agency or officer to seek enforcement of a valid extreme risk protection order issued by another state or jurisdiction. The bill would define an extreme risk protection order as an injunction, restraining order, or other civil or criminal court order issued by another state or jurisdiction that does not name a protected individual, but prohibits the subject of the order from possessing, owning, controlling, purchasing, or receiving firearms for the duration of the order based on evidence that the subject of the order poses a danger to themselves or others. The bill would require a valid extreme risk protection order to be registered with a court in this state if requested by a law enforcement officer or other petitioner. (5) Existing law requires each county to electronically transmit data regarding protective orders through the California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System of the Department of Justice, as specified. Existing law requires the Department of Justice to maintain the California Restraining and Protective Order System that contains detailed information regarding protective and restraining orders and injunctions, as specified, and to make that information available to court clerks and law enforcement personnel. This bill would extend these reporting requirements to include any protective order or restraining orders issued pursuant to specified sections, including a gun violence restraining order or an extreme risk protection order. (6) Existing law, the Uniform Interstate Enforcement of Domestic Violence Protection Orders Act, authorizes the enforcement of a valid foreign protection order in a tribunal of this state under certain conditions. The bill would expand the definition of a protection order to include any injunction or order under the federal Violence Against Women Act and would extend these provisions to orders issued by any state or other jurisdiction. The bill would make conforming changes. (7) Existing law authorizes the Department of Justice, subject to an appropriation by the Legislature, to establish or contract with a vendor to establish an automated protected person information and notification system, as specified. This bill would authorize the department to establish or contract with a vendor to create the above-described notification system through the availability of necessary funding through grants or other sources. (8) Existing law, subject to exceptions, provides that any person who has been convicted of certain misdemeanors may not, within 10 years of the conviction, own, purchase, receive, possess or have under their custody or control, any firearm and makes a violation of that prohibition punishable as a misdemeanor or a felony. This bill would prohibit a person, who is convicted on or after January 1, 2027, of specified offenses, including misdemeanor violations of a gun violence restraining order or other protective orders, or violations that constitute a hate crime, from owning, purchasing, receiving, or having in their possession or under their custody or control any firearm within 10 years of the conviction, and would make conforming changes. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. (9) Existing law requires a peace officer who is at the scene of a domestic violence incident or enforcing a domestic violence restraining order or gun violence restraining order to take temporary custody of any firearm or other deadly weapon in plain sight or discovered pursuant to a consensual or otherwise lawful search, as specified. This bill would additionally require a peace officer to take temporary custody of any ammunition in plain sight or discovered pursuant to such a search. By expanding the duties of local law enforcement agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (10) This bill would provide that its provisions are severable. (11) This bill would provide that if AB 2179 is enacted, then the changes made to Section 527.8 of the Code of Civil Procedure by this bill would not be operative. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 527.8 of the Code of Civil Procedure proposed by AB 1961 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1961 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 527.85 of the Code of Civil Procedure proposed by SB 1374 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1374 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 6383 of the Family Code proposed by SB 99 and SB 1395, to be operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 29805 of the Penal Code proposed by SB 1220 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1220 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (12) 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.
Existing law requires every state agency to develop and implement a telecommuting plan as part of its telecommuting program in work areas where telecommuting is identified as being both practical and beneficial to the organization. Existing law requires the Department of General Services to establish a unit for purposes of overseeing telecommuting programs that is required to, among other things, develop and update policy, procedures, and guidelines to assist agencies in the planning and implementation of telecommuting programs. Existing law requires the department to establish criteria for evaluating the state's telecommuting program. Existing law defines "telecommuting" for purposes of those provisions. This bill would revise and recast those provisions. The bill would replace the term "telecommuting" with "telework," as defined. The bill would also require the Department of General Services to establish a telework dashboard that displays the cost-effectiveness and efficiency benefits of state telework programs, including documenting annual savings to the state of reduced office space and operating costs. The bill would additionally require each state agency, every 10 years, to evaluate its telework program to ensure that it aligns with the state agency's unique operational needs to carry out its programmatic missions and to help recruit and retain a qualified workforce. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law makes it a crime for a law enforcement officer to wear a facial covering in the performance of their duties, except as specified. Existing law defines law enforcement officer for these purposes as anyone designated by California law as a peace officer who is employed by a city, county, or other local agency, and any officer or agent of a federal law enforcement agency, agency or law enforcement agency of another state, or any person acting on behalf of a federal law enforcement agency. This bill would add peace officers employed by a state agency to the definition of law enforcement officers, thereby making those law enforcement officers subject to those criminal penalties. The bill would specify that facial coverings does not include certain items, including, among other things, sunglasses. The bill would, for all of the items excluded from the definition of facial coverings, limit that exclusion if the items are combined or otherwise used in a manner intended to conceal or obscure an officer's identity. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law prohibits any person who is found to have committed an assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, abuse of process, or malicious prosecution, while wearing a facial covering in a knowing and willful violation of these provisions, from asserting any privilege or immunity for their tortious conduct against a claim of civil liability, and makes that person liable for the greater of actual damages or statutory damages of not less than $10,000, whichever is greater. This bill would instead make a person who is found liable for false imprisonment or false arrest liable for those damages if the trier of fact finds that the person knowingly and willfully concealed their identity through the use of a facial covering at the time of the conduct giving rise to liability. Existing law requires a law enforcement agency operating in California to, by July 1, 2026, maintain and publicly post a written policy limiting the use of facial coverings, as specified. Existing law defines a law enforcement agency for these purposes as any entity of a city, county, or other local agency, that employs anyone designated by California law as a peace officer, any federal law enforcement agency, or any law enforcement agency of another state. This bill would add to the definition of law enforcement agency, a state entity that employs a peace officer and would change the date any law enforcement agency has to comply with that requirement to January 1, 2027. The bill would also require those policies to exempt certain surveillance operations related to enforcement of the Fish and Game Code, or similar federal law. 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 defines those persons who are peace officers in the state, grants certain authority to those individuals and their employing entities, and places certain requirements on those individuals and their employing entities. Under existing law, federal criminal investigators and law enforcement officers are not California peace officers but are granted specified limited arrest authority in limited circumstances including when violations of state and local laws occur in their presence, when there is an immediate danger to persons or property, when detaining a person for evaluation or treatment who, due to a mental illness, is a danger to themselves or others, and when requested by a California law enforcement agency to be involved in a joint task force or criminal investigation. Existing law additionally grants peace officer status to federal employees who comply with certain training requirements, while they are engaged in enforcing state or local law on and adjacent to property owned or possessed by the United States Government, with the written consent of local law enforcement officials, as specified. This bill would remove certain arrest authority or peace officer status for federal criminal investigators, law enforcement officers, and federal employees, including for the purposes of executing a warrant for the arrest of a person. The bill would authorize deputized tribal law enforcement officers of the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs to exercise the powers of arrest, as specified, if, among other things, they are engaged in the enforcement of federal criminal law and they are exercising arrest powers that are incidental to the performance of those federal duties. The bill would also authorize certain federal employees of, among other agencies, the National Park Service and the Bureau of Land Management, if they are enforcing specified provisions of state law on property owned by the United States government, to exercise peace officer status with the written consent of the sheriff or the chief of police from the respective jurisdiction. The bill would also prohibit a California law enforcement agency, as defined, from entering into an interagency agreement, unless, among other things, the agreement is in writing and expressly provides that the agency shall not engage in racial or identity profiling, as specified. The bill would deem any interagency agreement in existence on January 1, 2027, valid, and would authorize that agreement to remain in effect until July 1, 2027. The bill would require, by no later than July 1, 2027, that the agreement be amended to include the provisions described above, including a prohibition on engaging in certain conduct, including racial or identity profiling. By increasing the duties on local law enforcement, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would make these provisions severable. 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 make related findings and declarations.
Existing law establishes, until July 1, 2027, the Displaced Oil and Gas Worker Pilot Program, to be administered by the Employment Development Department (department) , for the purpose of addressing employment dislocations associated with oil, gas, and related industries. That program requires the department, using funds to be appropriated by the Legislature for purposes of the program, to award grants on a competitive basis to qualified applicants, as specified, for specified eligible activities. This bill would extend the program indefinitely by removing the July 1, 2027, repeal date. The bill would require the department to implement and administer the program only to the extent that funding is appropriated by the Legislature, as specified.
This measure would proclaim the month of October 2026 as California Firefighter Appreciation Month and October 3, 2026, as California Firefighters Memorial Day.
(1) 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 and propose guidelines for the implementation of CEQA by public agencies and requires the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to certify and adopt the guidelines. CEQA requires the guidelines to include a list of classes of projects that have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and that are exempt from CEQA, commonly known as categorical exemptions. This bill would define "data center" for the purposes of CEQA and prohibit the application of categorical exemption to a project for the development and operation of a data center, as specified. By increasing the duties of a lead agency in relation to the environmental review of a data center project, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) The Jobs and Economic Improvement Through Environmental Leadership Act of 2021 authorizes the Governor, until January 1, 2032, to certify environmental leadership development projects that meet specified requirements for certain streamlining benefits related to CEQA. The act, among other things, requires a lead agency to prepare the record of proceedings for an environmental leadership development project concurrent with the administrative process and to provide a specified notice within 10 days of the Governor certifying the project. The act specifies the process for the quantification and mitigation of impacts from emissions of greenhouse gases of certain environmental leadership projects, as provided. The act is repealed by its own terms on January 1, 2034. This bill would authorize the Governor to certify a data center project that is certified by the lead agency to meet specified conditions as an environmental leadership development project. The bill would require the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, in consultation with the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission and other state agencies, as necessary, to develop uniform statewide standards for satisfying those conditions for data centers, as specified. The bill would also authorize the Governor to certify a geothermal powerplant that is certified by the lead agency to meet certain criteria as an environmental leadership development project. The bill would require the quantification and mitigation of impacts for emissions of greenhouse gases of a data center project and geothermal powerplant projects to be determined in the same manner as for those certain environmental leadership projects. By increasing the duties of a lead agency, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) 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 requires the Secretary for Environmental Protection to implement a unified hazardous waste and hazardous materials management regulatory program, known as the unified program. Existing law requires every county to apply to the secretary to be certified to implement the unified program, and authorizes a city or local agency that meets specified requirements to apply to the secretary to be certified to implement the unified program, as a certified unified program agency. Existing law authorizes a state or local agency that has a written agreement with a certified unified program agency, and is approved by the secretary, to implement or enforce one or more of the unified program elements as a participating agency. Existing law requires the certified unified program agency in each jurisdiction, in conjunction with participating agencies, to develop and implement a single, unified inspection and enforcement program to ensure coordinated, efficient, and effective enforcement of the unified program and any local ordinance or regulation pertaining to the handling of hazardous waste or hazardous materials. Existing law requires the secretary to establish a statewide information management system capable of receiving all data collected by the unified program agencies and reported by regulated businesses and to make all nonconfidential data available on the internet. This bill would prohibit a city or county, or city and county, from approving a building permit for a new reactive chemical storage facility, as defined, with the potential for an explosion, including, but not limited to, due to thermal runaway reaction, that may cause injury or death, unless the proposed facility has a backup cooling system or other contingency system approved by the unified program agency and is not adjacent to a home. The bill would require a city council or county board of supervisors, before approving a building permit for that purpose, to provide the public with notice and the opportunity to comment. If a city or county, or city and county, approves a building permit for that purpose, the bill would require the city or county, or city and county, to notify the Office of Emergency Services and the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. The bill would make the approval of a building permit for certain reactive chemical storage facilities ineligible for a specified exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act. The bill would require a city, county, or city and county to include in the next revision of its emergency operations plan a specific designation for which emergency response department will serve as the lead agency for responding to hazardous materials incidents. By imposing additional requirements on cities and counties, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment to consider reactive chemical storage facilities as a factor in identifying disadvantaged communities for various purposes under existing law. This bill would revise the requirement for the secretary to make available on the internet all nonconfidential data collected by the unified program agencies and reported by regulated businesses to specifically authorize the secretary to determine the form and manner of making that data available on the internet. This bill would require the unified program agency in each jurisdiction to routinely conduct an inspection of each reactive chemical storage facility in its jurisdiction no less than once every 3 years. The bill would require the unified program agency to report the results of the inspection to the California Environmental Protection Agency, the Office of the State Fire Marshal, and the Office of Emergency Services. By imposing additional requirements on unified program agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law requires the California Environmental Protection Agency to obtain and maintain state delegation of, and to implement, the federal accidental release prevention program, with certain amendments specific to the state. Pursuant to these provisions, a stationary source, as defined, with a process that has a regulated substance present in more than a threshold quantity is required to prepare and submit to the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the unified program agency a risk management plan, unless the unified program agency makes a specified determination to exempt the stationary source from the program. Existing law imposes criminal penalties upon a stationary source that knowingly violates the requirements of the program. This bill would expand the program's definition of "regulated substance" to include methyl methacrylate and would require the California Environmental Protection Agency to adopt a state threshold quantity applicable to methyl methacrylate through regulation. By adding an additional substance to the program, the bill would expand the scope of a crime and impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would provide that a stationary source that stores or uses methyl methacrylate is not eligible for exemption from the program. Because the bill would make changes to provisions enforced by unified program agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) 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. (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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for specified reasons. 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.