Rep. Buffy Wicks

Existing law, the Protecting Our Kids from Social Media Addiction Act, prohibits an operator of an addictive internet-based service or application from providing an addictive feed, as defined, to a user unless the operator does not have actual knowledge that the user is a minor, as specified, or the operator has obtained verifiable parental consent to provide an addictive feed to the user who is a minor. Existing law, the Digital Age Assurance Act, beginning January 1, 2027, requires a person who owns, maintains, or controls a software application, as defined, to request age bracket data sent by a real-time secure application programming interface or operating system with respect to a particular user from an operating system provider or a covered application store when the application is downloaded and launched. This bill would prohibit a covered platform, as defined, from providing an addictive feature, as defined, to a user who is under 16 years of age and would require a covered platform to implement reasonable measures to ensure that users under 16 years of age are not offered or provided any addictive feature on the covered platform. The bill would also authorize the Attorney General to adopt regulations to implement and enforce the bill in order to further the purpose of protecting minors online, including by altering the scope of "covered platform" if the Attorney General determines that doing so is necessary to ensure that "covered platform" applies to internet websites, online services, online applications, or mobile applications that make addictive features, as defined, available to users under 16 years of age. This bill would impose a civil penalty upon a noncompliant platform and would require its provisions to be enforced by a civil action brought only by the Attorney General or a local public prosecutor, as specified. This bill would also establish the e-Safety Advisory Commission within the Department of Justice as an independent advisory body that is only for administrative purposes to advise state government on certain matters related to online safety and would require the commission to, on or before January 1 of each year, report to the Legislature and the Governor on, among other things, its activities under the bill.

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 (EIR) 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. Existing law authorizes the Governor to certify projects meeting certain requirements as infrastructure projects and provide those certified projects with certain streamlining benefits, including requiring the lead agency to prepare the record of proceedings concurrently with the environmental review process and requiring the resolution of an action or proceeding challenging the certification of an EIR for certified projects or the granting of any project approvals, to the extent feasible, within 270 days of the filing of the record of proceedings with the court, as specified. Existing law requires the lead agency, within 10 days of the certification of an infrastructure project, to provide a public notice of the certification, as provided. If a lead agency fails to approve a project certified as an infrastructure project before January 1, 2033, existing law specifies that the certification is no longer valid. Existing law requires the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation to make evidence and materials submitted for the certification of a project available to the public on its internet website at least 15 days before the certification of the project. This bill would also authorize the Governor to certify an essential local fire station project for streamlining as an infrastructure project if the Governor ensures that the project meets specified requirements, including, among others, that the applicant agrees to pay the costs of the trial court and the court of appeal in hearing and deciding any case challenging a lead agency's action on the project, and the applicant agrees to pay the costs of preparing the record of proceedings for the project, as specified. The bill would require a project to meet specified requirements to be eligible for certification as an essential local fire station project, including, among other things, (1) that the project is being undertaken by a city, county, city and county, or local fire agency, as provided, (2) that the project is not located on specified sensitive or hazardous sites, as described, and (3) that the project will employ best practices to avoid or mitigate significant environmental effects, as provided. The bill would require the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, for an essential local fire station project, to provide the Governor's office with evidence and materials to support consideration of the application no later than 45 days after the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation posts the evidence and materials submitted for certification on its internet website.

Existing law, the Contractors State License Law, establishes the Contractors State License Board in the Department of Consumer Affairs to license and regulate contractors. Existing law prohibits a person engaging in the business or acting in the capacity of a contractor from recovering compensation for work performed that requires a contractor's license unless the person was a duly licensed contractor at all times during the performance of the act or contract, except as specified. This bill would further exempt from that prohibition an action for compensation arising from a contract for specified projects, including for a public work of improvement or a commercial or institutional construction project, and would, instead, authorize a person to maintain an action for compensation under one of those contracts if the person was a duly licensed contractor at the time the contract was executed and during the portion of the performance of the contract for which compensation is sought. Existing law authorizes a person who uses the services of an unlicensed contractor to bring an action to recover all compensation paid to the unlicensed contractor for performance of any act or contract, except as provided. This bill would additionally exempt from that authorization an action for compensation arising from a contract for specified projects, including for a public work of improvement or a commercial or institutional construction project, and would, instead, authorize a person to bring an action under one of those contracts to recover the portion of compensation paid to the unlicensed contractor for work performed during the time in which the contractor was unlicensed.

(1) Existing law requires a local agency to declare land either "surplus land" or "exempt surplus land," as supported by written findings, before the local agency may take any action to dispose of it consistent with an agency's policies or procedures and defines terms for these purposes. Existing law generally requires a local agency, before disposing or negotiating to dispose of surplus land, to provide a written notice of the availability of the surplus land to specified entities and housing sponsors. Existing law provides that an agency is not required to follow the requirements for the disposal of surplus land for "exempt surplus land." Existing law defines "exempt surplus land" to include certain types of land, including, surplus land totaling 10 or more acres, consisting of either a single parcel, or 2 or more adjacent or nonadjacent parcels combined for disposition to one or more buyers pursuant to a plan or ordinance adopted by the legislative body of the local agency, or a state statute and certain surplus land that is a former military base, known as the Alameda Naval Air Station, if specified conditions are met. Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each county and each city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, and specified land outside its boundaries, that includes, among other specified mandatory elements, a housing element. That law requires the planning agency of a city or county to provide by April 1 of each year an annual report to, among other entities, the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation. This bill would revise the definition of "exempt surplus land" to remove the reference to buyers and instead mean 2 or more adjacent or nonadjacent parcels combined for disposition to one or more persons or entities, as specified. The bill would also exempt surplus land that is a former military base that was conveyed by the federal government to a local agency or a local reuse authority, and that is all or any portion of the Concord Naval Weapons Station, if certain requirements are met, including that the former military base has an aggregate area greater than 5 acres and that before disposition of the land, the local agency or local reuse authority has entered into a disposition and development agreement that stipulates that at least 25% of the aggregate residential units permitted to be developed will be restricted to lower income households with an affordable housing cost or affordable rent for a minimum of 55 years for rental housing and 45 years for owner-occupied housing, as specified. The bill would regulate actions challenging the disposition and would prescribe penalties for violations of these provisions. The bill would also regulate the actions of the local agency or local reuse authority, including, among other things, requiring the local agency or local reuse authority to include in the annual report the status of development of residential units on the former military base, as specified. (2) 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. This bill would provide that specified environmental review documents satisfy the requirements of CEQA for any project within the portion of the Concord Naval Weapons Station included within the boundaries of the area plan for the Concord Community Reuse Project, as provided, that has land use types that are consistent with the area plan land use types and locations for those land use types that are consistent with the area plan diagram and the project does not cause the aggregate development in the area plan to exceed the area plan maximum planning areawide total, as specified. The bill would further provide that a project that contains land use types that are consistent with the area plan land use types in locations that are not consistent with the area plan diagram would be subject to review pursuant to CEQA, and would be limited to review of the location of land use types that are not consistent with the area plan diagram, as provided. In any action or proceeding challenging a project described above, the bill would require a project applicant to pay any additional costs incurred by the courts in hearing cases relating to the challenge of the project and would require a lead agency to lodge a copy of the certified record of proceedings with the superior court within 10 calendar days after being served with a complaint or a petition for a writ of mandate. Because the bill imposes new duties on local agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the Judicial Council, on or before July 1, 2027, to adopt rules of court that require any action or proceeding brought to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the approval of any project within the plan area or any environmental impact review for any project within the plan area, including any potential appeals to the court of appeal or the California Supreme Court, to be resolved to the extent feasible within 270 calendar days of the filing of the certified record of proceedings with the court. The bill would make these provisions severable. (3) This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the City of Concord. (4) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. (5) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

(1) Existing law, the California Factory-Built Housing Law, generally regulates the design, manufacture, and installation of factory-built housing and defines terms for its purposes. The law authorizes the Department of Housing and Community Development, among other things, to regulate quality assurance agencies to perform inspections of factory-built housing manufacturers. The law requires a local enforcement agency, among other things, to enforce and inspect the installation of factory-built housing. The law provides that any person who violates any of its provisions and other specified law is guilty of a misdemeanor, as specified. This bill would revise these provisions, among other things, to authorize a quality assurance agency to also perform an installation inspection of factory-built housing, at the choice of a first user, after the department adopts regulations regarding the requirements for a quality assurance agency to perform these inspections. The bill would require the department to adopt those regulations by January 1, 2029. The bill would set the maximum fees that a local enforcement agency is authorized to impose for the inspection or permitting of factory-built housing, and prohibit a local enforcement agency from imposing fees under certain circumstances. The bill would prohibit a quality assurance agency or a local enforcement agency from disassembling, damaging, or destroying factory-built housing while inspecting the installation. The bill would make conforming changes and define terms for its purposes. By increasing the duties of local officials, and by expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) 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. (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 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, the California AI Transparency Act, requires, among other things, a person that creates, codes, or otherwise produces a generative artificial intelligence (AI) system that has over 1,000,000 monthly visitors or users and is publicly accessible within the geographic boundaries of the state to make available an AI detection tool at no cost to the user. Existing law requires the AI detection tool to, among other things, allow a user to assess whether the image, video, or audio content was created or altered by that person's generative AI system. Existing law defines terms for these purposes and makes these provisions generally operative on August 2, 2026. Existing law also requires a large online platform to comply with specific duties relating to artificial intelligence, including, among other duties, allowing a user to inspect all available system provenance data that is compliant with widely adopted specifications adopted by an established standards-setting body by specified means. Existing law prohibits a large online platform from knowingly stripping any system provenance data or digital signature that is compliant with widely adopted specifications adopted by an established standards-setting body from content uploaded or distributed on the large online platform. Existing law makes these provisions, relating to a large online platform, operative on January 1, 2027. This bill would revise the duties and prohibitions applicable to a large online platform relating to artificial intelligence, including the requirement for allowing a user to inspect system provenance data. The bill would specify that these provisions do not require a large online platform to take any action with respect to provenance data, system provenance data, or digital signatures that are not compliant with widely adopted specifications issued by an established standards-setting body.

(1) The California Coastal Act of 1976 requires any person wishing to perform or undertake any development in the coastal zone, as defined, in addition to obtaining any other permit required by law from any local government or from any state, regional, or local agency, to obtain a coastal development permit, as provided. The act requires each local government lying in whole or in part within the coastal zone to prepare a local coastal program for that portion of the coastal zone within its jurisdiction. The act requires a land use plan of a proposed local coastal program to be submitted to the California Coastal Commission for certification. The act authorizes the commission to extend, for a period not to exceed one year, certain time limitations relating to local coastal programs for good cause. This bill would authorize the commission to retroactively extend, for good cause and a period not to exceed 5 years, a time limitation established for a local government to act on the commission's suggested modifications to a land use plan amendment that would authorize approval of an affordable housing development, as specified. (2) Existing law establishes the Natural Resources Agency and vests the agency with jurisdiction over various public resources. Existing law establishes the California Environmental Protection Agency and sets out its mission for programs, policies, and standards. Under existing law, various state entities, including the California Coastal Commission, the California Environmental Protection Agency, and the Department of Fish and Wildlife have responsibilities with respect to coastal permitting and development. This bill would require the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency, in consultation with the Secretary for Environmental Protection, to convene a Coastal Resilience Permitting Working Group for the purpose of developing a Coastal Resilience Permitting Roadmap for coastal resilience projects proposed in specified areas. The bill would require the Coastal Resilience Permitting Working Group to consist of representatives from federal, state, and local agencies, including, among others, the California Coastal Commission, the California Environmental Protection Agency, and the Department of Fish and Wildlife. The bill would, on or before July 1, 2028, require the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to submit the Coastal Resilience Permitting Roadmap to the Governor and the relevant fiscal and policy committees of the Legislature. The bill would require, on or before April 1, 2027, the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency, in collaboration with the California Coastal Commission, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, the Department of Fish and Wildlife, the State Water Resources Control Board, and representatives from the Regional Water Quality Control Boards to convene a Coastal Resilience Permit Advisory Group to support the deliberations of the Coastal Resilience Permitting Working Group.

Existing law establishes the Department of Transportation and vests it with full possession and control of the state highway system. This bill would require the department, in consultation with the Transportation Agency and relevant regional and local authorities, to conduct a pilot study in a region or area of the state, as determined by the department, on the impact of third-party navigation applications on the state highway system and local street and road networks. The bill would require the pilot study to analyze how third-party navigation applications affect congestion displacement, local infrastructure, safety metrics, and emergency response, as provided. The bill would require the department, on or before January 1, 2029, to submit the study, and a report of related policy recommendations for regulatory or legislative action to improve the alignment between third-party navigation applications and state and local traffic management goals, to the relevant fiscal and policy committees of the Legislature. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2033.

Existing law defines, for certain school-related purposes, "ultraprocessed food" as any food or beverage that contains a specified substance and either high amounts of saturated fat, sodium, or added sugar or a nonnutritive sweetener or other substance, as specified. Existing law requires the department to adopt regulations, on or before June 1, 2028, to define "ultraprocessed foods of concern" and "restricted school foods," as specified, and requires the department, when defining ultraprocessed foods of concern and restricted school foods, to consider specified factors, including, among others, whether the substance or group of substances are banned or restricted in other state, federal, or international jurisdictions due to concerns about adverse health consequences. This bill would require the department, no later than June 1, 2029, to accredit certification agents that can certify food products as "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified." The bill would prohibit an accredited certification agent from certifying a food product as "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified" if it is an ultraprocessed food, ultraprocessed food of concern, or a restricted school food, as defined. The bill would require the department to create a specified standardized "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified" seal. The bill would authorize a food product to bear the seal only if the product has been certified by an accredited certification agent. The bill would require an accredited certification agent to, among other things, register with the department and provide specified information to the department for each food product certified by the accredited certification agent. The bill would require any registration information submitted by an accredited certification agent to the department to be made available to the public for inspection and copying. This bill would require an accredited certification agent to immediately make specified records available to the department for inspection, as specified, and would authorize the department to audit the accredited certification agent's certification procedures and records at any time. The bill would require any records of the accredited certification agent not otherwise required to be disclosed to be kept confidential by the department. The bill would require the department to maintain a public internet webpage that lists all of the products currently certified as "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified" as reported by the accredited certification agent. This bill would make it unlawful for a person to certify products as "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified" unless duly registered as an accredited certification agent, for a person to willfully make a false statement or representation or knowingly fail to disclose a fact required to be disclosed in registration as an accredited certification agent, for a person to willfully make a false statement or representation or knowingly fail to disclose a fact required to be disclosed to an accredited certification agent, and for a person to use the "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified" seal on a product that does not meet the above-described provisions. The bill would authorize the department, among others, to enjoin a person who engages, has engaged, or proposes to engage in the misuse of the "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified" seal. This bill would create the Public Health Food and Nutrition Education Fund for the purposes of supporting the implementation of the "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified" label requirements and educating the public and stakeholders about the label requirements, food products, and nutrition. The bill would authorize the department to establish fees for the registration and renewal of accredited certification agents and certification of food at levels not exceeding the reasonable costs of administering and enforcing these provisions. The bill would require the fees to be deposited in the Public Health Food and Nutrition Education Fund. Upon appropriation by the Legislature, the bill would make moneys in the Public Health Food and Nutrition Education Fund available to the department for expenditure. Existing law, the California Retail Food Code (Code) , establishes uniform health and sanitation standards for, and provides for regulation by the State Department of Public Health of, retail food facilities, as defined, and requires local enforcement agencies to enforce these provisions. Existing law provides that a violation of the code is punishable as a misdemeanor or a fine. Existing law defines a grocery store as a store primarily engaged in the retail sale of canned food, dry goods, fresh fruits and vegetables, and fresh meats, fish, and poultry and any area that is not separately owned within the store where food is prepared and served, including a bakery, deli, and meat and seafood counter. This bill, upon the creation of the "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified" seal described above, would require a grocery store with gross annual store sales of more than $10,000,000 to make clearly identifiable, as defined, at least 3 or more "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified" items if the grocery store offers for sale more than 25 certified items. The bill would authorize the Attorney General, county counsel, city attorney, or city prosecutor, as specified, to enjoin a grocery store that fails to meet these requirements. The bill would exempt a violation of these provisions from criminal liability under the California Retail Food Code. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2040. By imposing a higher level of service on local enforcement agencies required to enforce these provisions, 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, 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 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, the State Housing Law, establishes statewide construction and occupancy standards for buildings used for human habitation. Existing law requires the building department of every city or county to enforce the provisions of the State Housing Law, the State Building Standards Code, and other specified rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to the State Housing Law pertaining to standards for buildings used for human habitation. Existing law authorizes an officer, employee, or agent of an enforcement agency to enter and inspect any building or premises whenever necessary to secure compliance with, or prevent a violation of, any provision of the State Housing Law, the building standards published in the State Building Standards Code, and other rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to the provisions of the State Housing Law. Existing law provides certain immunities to a public entity or employee immunity relative to an inspection or license, as provided. This bill would require a city, including a charter city, county, or city and county, except as specified, to offer a homeowner or contractor, as described, the option of requesting remote inspections for all or a subset of an inspection required by a building permit for specified works in one- or 2-family dwelling units, by either January 1, 2028, or July 1, 2028, as provided. The bill would authorize these local agencies to adopt reasonable protocols governing the technical conduct of a remote inspection, as specified. The bill would apply the above-described immunities to remote inspections. The bill would authorize these local agencies to temporarily ban the homeowner or contractor from using the remote inspection if a homeowner is found to have willfully misrepresented the work, as provided. By imposing new duties on local agencies, the 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.