Asm. Catherine Stefani

Existing law prohibits public funds from being used in connection with any athletic program conducted under the auspices of a school district governing board or any student organization within the district, which does not provide equal opportunity to both sexes for participation and for use of facilities. Existing law prohibits a city, county, city and county, or special district from discriminating against any person on the basis of gender in the operation, conduct, or administration of community youth athletics programs, as defined, or in the allocation of parks and recreation facilities and resources, as defined, that support or enable these programs. Existing law creates an independent right to bring a civil action for a violation of this prohibition for equitable and monetary relief, as specified. This bill would instead prohibit a city, county, city and county, special district, school district, county office of education, or charter school from discriminating against a person on the basis of sex or gender in the operation, conduct, or administration of community youth athletics programs, or in the allocation of parks and recreation facilities and resources or school and recreation facilities and resources that support or enable these programs. The bill would define various terms for these purposes and make related conforming changes. By imposing a new duties on local agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law requires the Department of Health Care Access and Information, formerly known as the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, to establish a program to contract with programs that train certified nurse-midwives and programs that train licensed midwives in accordance with the global standards for midwifery education and the international definition of "midwife" as established by the International Confederation of Midwives in order to increase the number of students receiving quality education and training as a certified nurse-midwife or as a licensed midwife. Existing law requires these provisions to be implemented only upon an appropriation by the Legislature for these purposes in the annual Budget Act or another act. This bill would require the Department of Health Care Access and Information, upon appropriation from the Legislature for this purpose, to administer funding for a statewide study on midwifery education. The bill would require the study to be conducted by an outside consultant familiar with the health care and midwifery landscapes and workforce in California that would, among other things, identify viable education programs that can serve both rural and urban geographic areas. The bill would require the department to submit a report from the study's findings to the Legislature, to post the report on the department's internet website, and to notify all persons in the department's reproductive health and maternity care electronic mailing list, as specified. The bill would define "reproductive health care professionals" as, among others, medical doctors and licensed midwives.

Existing law makes it a crime for a person to manufacture or cause to be manufactured specified firearms. Existing law prohibits a person, other than a state-licensed firearms manufacturer, from using a computer numerical control (CNC) milling machine or three-dimensional printer to manufacture a firearm. This bill would prohibit a person from knowingly or willfully causing another person to engage in the unlawful manufacture of firearms or knowingly or willfully aiding, abetting, prompting, or facilitating the unlawful manufacture of firearms, including the manufacture of assault weapons or .50 BMG rifles or the manufacture of any firearm using a three-dimensional printer or CNC milling machine, as specified. The bill would make a violation of these provisions a misdemeanor. By creating a new crime, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. Existing law authorizes a civil action against a person who knowingly distributes or causes to be distributed any digital firearm manufacturing code to any person, except as specified. For these purposes, existing law defines "digital firearm manufacturing code" to mean any digital instructions in the form of computer-aided design files or other code or instructions that may be used to program a CNC milling machine, a three-dimensional printer, or a similar machine to manufacture or produce a firearm, including a completed frame or receiver or a firearm precursor part. Existing law authorizes the Attorney General, county counsel, or city attorney to bring an action against this person and seek a civil penalty, as specified, for each violation, as well as injunctive relief. This bill would include computer-aided manufacturing files as a digital instruction and include the manufacture or production of a machinegun and specified firearm components, including large-capacity magazines, as part of the definition of digital firearm manufacturing code. The bill would also authorize a person who has suffered harm in California as a result of a violation of these provisions to seek compensatory damages and injunctive relief. The bill would create a rebuttable presumption that a person violated the provision of unlawfully distributing or causing to be distributed any digital firearm manufacturing code if the person owns or participates in the management of an internet website that makes digital firearm manufacturing code available for purchase, download, or other distribution to individuals, and the internet website, under the totality of the circumstances, encourages individuals to upload, disseminate, or use digital firearm manufacturing code to manufacture firearms, as specified. Existing law establishes a firearm industry standard of conduct, which requires a firearm industry member, as defined, to establish, implement, and enforce reasonable controls, as defined, and to take reasonable precautions to ensure that the member does not sell, distribute, or provide a firearm-related product, as defined, to a downstream distributor or retailer of firearm-related products who fails to establish, implement, and enforce reasonable controls. For these purposes, existing law defines firearm accessory and firearm manufacturing machine. This bill would require, prior to completing the sale or delivery in California or to a California resident of a firearm barrel that is unattached to a firearm, firearm accessory, or a firearm manufacturing machine, a firearm industry member to comply with specified requirements, including providing a prospective purchaser with clear and conspicuous notice that specified conduct is generally a crime in California, including manufacturing firearms to be sold or transferred to an individual without a license to manufacture firearms. 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 a crime. This bill would also prohibit any person convicted of specified misdemeanor violations, including manufacturing an undetectable firearm or knowingly or willfully causing another person to engage in the unlawful manufacture of firearms, on or after January 1, 2026, from owning, purchasing, or receiving any firearm within 10 years of the conviction, and makes a violation of that prohibition a public offense punishable by imprisonment in a county jail, a fine, or by both the fine and imprisonment. Because this bill would expand the application of a crime to a larger class of potential offenders, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would make these provisions severable. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 3273.50 of the Civil Code proposed by AB 1127 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1127 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. 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 authorizes a court to issue a gun violence restraining order to prohibit a person from purchasing or possessing a firearm or ammunition for a period of one to 5 years, subject to renewal for additional one- to 5-year periods, if the subject of the petition poses a significant danger of self-harm or harm to another in the near future by having a firearm and the order is necessary to prevent personal injury to the subject of the petition or another. Existing law also allows a gun violence restraining order to be issued on an ex parte basis for up to 21 days. Existing law allows a petition for these gun violence restraining orders to be made by a law enforcement officer, or an immediate family member, employer, coworker, or teacher, as specified, of the subject of the petition. This bill would authorize the Counties of Alameda, El Dorado, Santa Clara, and Ventura to establish, until January 1, 2032, a pilot program to additionally authorize a district attorney to request that the court issue a temporary emergency gun violence restraining order, as specified. The bill would require the district attorney of a county that establishes a pilot program, commencing April 1, 2027, to annually submit specified data to the California Firearm Violence Research Center at UC Davis, and would authorize the center, commencing July 1, 2027, to conduct an evaluation of the pilot program and annually report that evaluation to the Legislature, as specified. The bill would require the district attorney of a county that establishes a pilot program, commencing April 1, 2027, to make the data described above available upon request to the Department of Justice and the Judicial Council. The bill would make related findings and declarations.

Existing law requires each county to develop a procedure for electronically transmitting, upon the issuance of certain types of protective orders, the contents of the order and other specified information to the Department of Justice through the California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System. Existing law also requires the department to maintain a California Restraining and Protective Order System and to make specified information electronically available to court clerks and law enforcement personnel. This bill, Wyland's Law, would, subject to an appropriation by the Legislature, authorize the department to establish, or contract with a vendor to establish, an automated protected person information and notification system to provide a petitioner or a protected person in a protective order case with automated access to information about their case, as specified. The bill would require a record demonstrating whether the superior court has fulfilled its transmission obligations or a record demonstrating receipt of information about a protective order that the department maintains to be open to public inspection and copying.

Existing law prohibits any person from selling, leasing, or transferring any firearm unless the person is licensed as a firearms dealer, as specified. Existing law prescribes certain requirements and prohibitions for licensed firearms dealers. A violation of any of these requirements or prohibitions is grounds for forfeiture of a firearms dealer's license. For purposes of these provisions, existing law defines "machinegun" to mean, among other definitions, any weapon that shoots or is designed to shoot automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. This bill would, on and after July 1, 2026, prohibit a licensed firearms dealer to sell, offer for sale, exchange, give, transfer, or deliver any semiautomatic machinegun-convertible pistol, except as specified. For these purposes, the bill would define "machinegun-convertible pistol" as any semiautomatic pistol with a cruciform trigger bar that can be readily converted by hand or with common household tools into a machinegun by the installation or attachment of a pistol converter, as specified, and "pistol converter" as any device or instrument that, when installed in or attached to the rear of the slide of a semiautomatic pistol, replaces the backplate and interferes with the trigger mechanism and thereby enables the pistol to shoot automatically more than one shot by a single function of the trigger. The bill would make a violation of these provisions punishable by a fine, a 2nd violation punishable by a fine that may result in a suspension or revocation of the dealer's license and removal from certain centralized lists maintained by the Department of Justice, and a 3rd violation punishable as a misdemeanor that shall result in the revocation of the dealer's license and removal from certain centralized lists. Existing law prohibits the manufacture, sale, possession, or transportation of a machinegun, except as authorized. A violation of these prohibitions is punishable as a felony. This bill would expand the above definition of "machinegun" to include any machinegun-convertible pistol equipped with a pistol converter and, thus, prohibit the manufacture, sale, possession, or transportation of a machinegun-convertible pistol equipped with a pistol converter. Existing law, subject to certain exceptions, generally makes it an offense to manufacture or sell an unsafe handgun, as defined, and requires the Department of Justice to compile a roster listing all of the handguns that have been tested and determined not to be unsafe handguns. Existing law establishes criteria for determining if a handgun is an unsafe handgun, including, for firearms manufactured after a certain date and not already listed on the roster, the lack of a chamber load indicator and a magazine disconnect mechanism. For any pistol listed on the roster on January 1, 2026, that was not subject to the above-described requirements to be on the list because it was submitted for testing before specified dates, that is thereafter only modified to change the design features that brought the pistol within the definition of a machinegun-convertible pistol, and that is submitted to an independent certified laboratory for testing pursuant to the above-described testing provisions before January 1, 2027, this bill would authorize that pistol to be submitted for testing and added to the roster without meeting those requirements. This bill would make these provisions severable. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 3273.50 of the Civil Code proposed by AB 1263 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1263 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. By creating a new crime and expanding the application of an existing crime, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

(1) Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for its physical development, and the development of certain lands outside its boundaries, that includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. That law allows a development proponent to submit an application for a development that is subject to a specified streamlined, ministerial approval process not subject to a conditional use permit, if the development satisfies certain objective planning standards, including that the development is a multifamily housing development that contains two or more residential units. This bill would deem an adaptive reuse project a use by right in all zones, regardless of the zoning of the site, and subject to a streamlined, ministerial review process if the project meets specified requirements, subject to specified exceptions. In this regard, an adaptive reuse project, in order to qualify for the streamlined, ministerial review process, would be required to be proposed for an existing building or structure that is less than 50 years old or meets certain requirements regarding the preservation of historic resources, including the signing of an affidavit declaring that the project will comply with the United States Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation for, among other things, the preservation of exterior facades of a building or structure that face a street, or receive federal or state historic rehabilitation tax credits, as specified. The bill would require an adaptive reuse project to meet specified affordability criteria. In this regard, the bill would require an adaptive reuse project for rental housing to include either 8% of the unit for very low income households and 5% of the units for extremely low income households or 15% of the units for lower income households. For an adaptive reuse project for owner-occupied housing, the bill would require the development to offer either 30% of the units at an affordable housing cost to moderate-income households or 15% of the units at an affordable housing cost to lower income households. For an adaptive reuse project including mixed uses, the bill would require at least one-half of the square footage of the adaptive reuse project to be dedicated to residential uses. The bill would prohibit an adaptive reuse project from being permitted in industrial zones that do not permit residential uses. The bill would provide, among other things relating to projects involving adaptive reuse, that parking is not required for the portion of a project consisting of a building subject to adaptive reuse that does not have existing onsite parking. The bill would authorize an adaptive reuse project subject to these provisions to include the development of new residential or mixed-use structures on undeveloped areas and parking areas located on the same parcel as the proposed repurposed building, or on the parcels adjacent to the proposed adaptive reuse project site if certain conditions are met. The bill would subject an adaptive reuse project approved by a local government pursuant to these provisions to specified labor standards, including certain labor prevailing wage, apprenticeship, skilled and training workforce, and health care expenditure requirements, and would require development proponents to certify compliance with certain labor standards under penalty of perjury. By requiring certain development proponents of an adaptive reuse project to sign an affidavit regarding the preservation of historic resources and requiring development proponents to certify compliance with certain labor standards under penalty of perjury, the bill would expand the crime of perjury and therefore impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize a local government to adopt an ordinance, as specified, to, among other things, specify the process and requirements applicable to adaptive reuse projects, as specified, and would require an adaptive reuse project to comply with all objective planning standards found in the ordinance. The bill would specify that nothing in its provisions relating to adaptive reuse projects is intended to preempt the adoption and implementation of a local ordinance that provides alternative procedures and substantive requirements for adaptive reuse projects, provided that the local ordinance does not prohibit an applicant from electing to pursue an adaptive reuse project, as specified. The bill would require a local agency that has not adopted an above-described ordinance to ministerially without discretionary review approve or disapprove applications for a permit to create or serve an adaptive reuse project, as specified. The bill would, if a local government's planning director or equivalent position determines that the adaptive reuse project submitted pursuant to these provisions is consistent with the objective planning standards, require the local government to approve the adaptive reuse project within specified timeframes. The bill would require the local government staff or relevant local planning and permitting department, upon determining that the adaptive reuse project is in conflict with any of the objective planning standards, to provide the proponent written documentation of, among other things, which standard or standards the development conflicts with within specific timeframes. The bill would prohibit a local government from imposing any local development standard on any project that is an adaptive reuse that would require alteration of the existing building envelope, except as specified, whether or not the local government has adopted an ordinance. By requiring local governments to implement the streamlined, ministerial review process for adaptive reuse projects, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would, except as specified, exempt an adaptive reuse project from all impact fees that are not reasonably related to the impacts resulting from the change of use of the site from nonresidential to residential or mixed use and would require any fees charged to be roughly proportional to the difference in impacts caused by the change of use. This bill would authorize a city or county, or city and county, commencing in the 2026–27 fiscal year, to establish an adaptive reuse investment incentive program to pay adaptive reuse investment incentive funds to the proponent of an adaptive reuse project approved pursuant to the streamlined, ministerial process described above for up to 30 consecutive fiscal years, as specified. The bill would define "adaptive reuse investment incentive funds" to mean an amount up to or equal to the amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated to the participating local agency from the taxation of that portion of the total assessed value of the real and personal property of an adaptive reuse project property that is in excess of the qualified adaptive reuse project property's valuation at the time of the proponent's initial request for funding. The bill would define various other terms for these purposes, and would make findings and declarations related to its provisions. The bill would make its provisions operative on July 1, 2026. (2) Existing law, 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. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects. This bill, by establishing the streamlined, ministerial review process described above, would exempt the approval of adaptive reuse projects subject to those processes from CEQA. The bill would also exempt specified findings regarding industrial uses and ordinances adopted to implement specified provisions from CEQA. (3) Existing law requires each county and 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 mandatory elements, a housing element. Existing law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to notify a city, county, or city and county, and authorizes the department to notify the Attorney General, that a city, county, or city and county is in violation of state law if the department finds that the housing element or an amendment to that element, or any specified action or failure to act, does not substantially comply with the law as it pertains to housing elements or that any local government has taken an action in violation of certain housing laws. This bill would make corrections to a housing law cross-reference relating to the adaptive reuse project process established by the bill, thereby making a violation of that adaptive reuse project process by a city, county, or city and county subject to the above-described notification requirements. (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 incorporate additional changes to Section 65585 of the Government Code proposed by AB 650 to be operative only if this bill and AB 650 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (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 specified reasons.

The California FAIR Plan Association is a joint reinsurance association in which all insurers licensed to write basic property insurance participate in administering a program for the equitable apportionment of basic property insurance for persons who are unable to obtain that coverage through normal channels. Existing law requires the association's plan of operation and any amendment to the plan to be approved by the Insurance Commissioner. Existing law establishes the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank and authorizes it to issue bonds to provide funds for the payment of costs of a project for a participating party or upon request by a state entity. This bill would authorize the association, if granted prior approval from the commissioner, to request the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank to issue bonds, and would authorize the bank to issue those bonds to finance the costs of claims, to increase liquidity and claims-paying capacity of the association, and to refund bonds previously issued for that purpose. The bill would specify that the association is a participating party and that financing all or any portion of the costs of claims or to increase liquidity and the claims-paying capacity of the association is a project for bond purposes. The bill would authorize the bank to loan the proceeds of issued bonds to the association, and would authorize the association to enter into a loan agreement with the bank and to enter into a line of credit agreement or other agreement This bill would require the association, if the above-described bonds, loan agreements, or lines of credit received the prior approval of the commissioner, and if the association is unable to timely and fully meet its repayment obligation, to assess members in the amounts and at the times necessary to timely pay in full all obligations of the association with respect to those bonds, loan agreements, lines of credit, and other agreements, as specified. The bill would authorize the association to secure those bonds, loan agreements, lines of credit, and other agreements by a statutory lien, as specified. Existing law establishes the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank Fund, a continuously appropriated fund, for the purpose of implementing the objectives of the bank. To the extent that the bill would result in additional revenues being deposited into the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank Fund, the bill would make an appropriation. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

The California Health Facilities Financing Authority Act authorizes the California Health Facilities Financing Authority to, among other things, make loans from the continuously appropriated California Health Facilities Financing Authority Fund to participating health institutions for financing or refinancing the acquisition, construction, or remodeling of health facilities. Under existing law, participating health institutions are specified entities authorized by state law to provide or operate a health facility and undertake the financing or refinancing of the construction or acquisition of a project or of working capital, as defined. Existing law defines "working capital" as moneys to be used by, or on behalf of, a participating health institution for specified expenses in connection with the ownership or operation of a health facility, including interest not to exceed 2 years on any loan for working capital made pursuant to these provisions. Existing law requires a participating health institution that is a private nonprofit corporation or association and that borrows money to finance working capital to repay and discharge the loan within 24 months of the loan date. This bill would change the definition of "working capital" to remove the 2-year cap on interest on any loan for working capital. The bill would delete the provision requiring a participating health institution that is a private nonprofit corporation or association to repay and discharge a loan for working capital within 24 months. Existing law requires the authority to establish financial eligibility standards by studying the creditworthiness and earning capacity of each project, together with the amount of pledged revenues, debt service coverage, and basic security. The bill would also require the authority to establish financial eligibility standards for working capital loans by studying the creditworthiness of a participating health institution, along with the amount of pledged venues, debt service coverage, and basic security. The bill would prohibit a participating health institution that is determined to be in financial distress from being deemed financially eligible. By expanding the purpose for which the above-described continuously appropriated fund may be used, the bill would make an appropriation from that fund. The bill would make legislative findings relating to the purpose of the bill.

Under existing law, knowingly buying or receiving stolen property or property that has been obtained in any manner constituting theft or extortion, as specified, is punishable as either a misdemeanor or a felony if the value of the property exceeds $950. Existing law prohibits a local authority from regulating sidewalk vendors, except in accordance with certain provisions, including that a local authority may, by ordinance or resolution, adopt requirements regulating the time, place, and manner of sidewalk vending if the requirements are directly related to objective health, safety, or welfare concerns. This bill, until January 1, 2031, would authorize the City and County of San Francisco to adopt an ordinance requiring a permit for the sale of specified merchandise on public property, if the ordinance includes specified written findings supported by substantial evidence, including, among other things, that there has been a significant pattern of merchandise being the subject of retail theft and then appearing for sale on public property within the City and County of San Francisco. The bill would require an ordinance adopted by the City and County of San Francisco to, among other things, identify a local permitting agency that is responsible for administering a permit system. The bill would authorize the ordinance to provide specified punishments for selling merchandise without a permit, including that 2nd and 3rd violations within 18 months of the first violation would be punishable as infractions, and that subsequent violations after 3 prior violations, that occur within 18 months of the first violation, would be punishable as infractions or misdemeanors by imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed 6 months, or by both that imprisonment and a fine. This bill would authorize the City and County of San Francisco to charge a fee for the cost of issuing a permit, not to exceed the reasonable regulatory costs of implementing the bill, as provided. The bill would authorize the permitting agency to accept specified forms of identification in lieu of a social security number, if the permitting agency otherwise requires a social security number for the issuance of a permit or business license, but would require the number collected from the alternative identification to be confidential, except as provided. The bill would prohibit the permitting agency from inquiring into or collecting certain information, including, information about an individual's immigration or citizenship status or criminal history. This bill would require, if an ordinance is adopted, the permitting agency to submit a report to the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco and the Legislature by January 1 of each year that includes specified information, including, among other things, the list or lists of merchandise that the City and County of San Francisco determined was a common target of retail theft. The bill would require the City and County of San Francisco, at least 60 days prior to the enactment of an ordinance, to hold one or more workshops to inform the development of the ordinance, and would require the City and County of San Francisco to administer a public information campaign for at least 30 calendar days prior to the enactment of the ordinance, including public announcements in major media outlets and press releases. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the City and County of San Francisco. 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. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.