Asm. Chris Rogers

Existing law authorizes the Public Utilities Commission to fix the rates and charges for public utilities, including electrical corporations and gas corporations, and requires those rates and charges to be just and reasonable. Under existing law, a regulated public utility is prohibited from using ratepayer funds for advocacy-related activities that are political or do not otherwise benefit ratepayers. This bill would prohibit, except as provided, each electrical corporation or gas corporation from recording to accounts that contain expenses that the electrical corporation or gas corporation recovers from ratepayers, or otherwise recovering from ratepayers, various expenses, including those associated with political influence activities or promotional advertising, as specified. The bill would require each electrical corporation or gas corporation to clearly and conspicuously disclose in all of its public messages whether the costs of the public messages are paid for by the corporation's shareholders or ratepayers. The bill would require each electrical corporation or gas corporation, on or before May 31, 2026, and annually thereafter, to report, as part of a specified statement to the commission, certain related information. The bill would require the commission to make the reports publicly available, as provided. This bill would require the commission to assess a civil penalty, based on the severity of the violation, against an electrical corporation or gas corporation that violates the prohibition described above, or that neglects to comply with any part or provision of any order, decision, decree, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission related to implementing that prohibition, as provided. Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime. Because the above provisions would be part of the act and a violation of a commission action implementing this bill's requirements would be a crime, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law, the California Coastal Act of 1976 (the Coastal Act) , among other things, requires anyone wishing to perform or undertake any development in the coastal zone, except as specified, 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 Coastal Act generally requires each local government, as specified, to prepare a local coastal program, for certification by the California Coastal Commission. Existing law also imposes an analogous requirement on port governing bodies to prepare port master plans, for certification by the commission. With regard to local coastal programs and port master plans, existing law provides that an amendment determined to be de minimis by the executive director of the commission, after notice in the agenda of the next scheduled commission meeting, becomes a part of the certified program or plan 10 days after the commission meeting if 3 or more members of the commission do not object to the de minimis determination. This bill would make de minimis amendments to local coastal programs and port master plans effective upon adjournment of that meeting if 3 or more members of the commission do not object to the de minimis determination. The Coastal Act authorizes the commission to impose specified administrative penalties on a person, including a landowner, who is in violation of any provision of the act other than public access, and separate administrative penalties for violations relating to public access. Regarding the violations of the act unrelated to public access, existing law requires the commission staff to annually prepare and present a written report to the full commission that includes specified information related to the imposition of those penalties and to annually provide the written report to the Legislature, as prescribed. This bill would require the commission staff to prepare and present a written report to the full commission every 5 years instead of annually, as specified, and would require the report to address public access violations as well. The bill would require the report to include, in addition, the number of violations referred to the Attorney General, the number of pending violations at the end of the reporting period, and summaries of violations that were resolved that are both illustrative of the commission's enforcement workload and that provided significant public benefit. This bill would repeal an obsolete reporting requirement that concerned violations of the act related to public access.

The Local Prepaid Mobile Telephony Services Collection Act, until January 1, 2026, suspends the authority of a city, county, or city and county to impose a utility user tax on the consumption of prepaid communications service and any charge that applies to prepaid mobile telephony service, as defined, on access to communication services or access to local "911" emergency telephone systems, and instead requires those taxes and charges to be applied during the period beginning January 1, 2016, and ending January 1, 2026, under any local ordinance to be at specified rates. The act requires that these local charges imposed by a city, county, or a city and county on prepaid mobile telephony services be collected from the prepaid consumer by a seller at the time of sale, as specified. Existing law requires that all local charges be collected and paid to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration pursuant to the Fee Collection Procedures Law and be deposited into the Local Charges for Prepaid Mobile Telephony Services Fund, and be transmitted to the city, county, or city and county, as provided. This bill would extend operation of the act until January 1, 2031. By extending the application of the Fee Collection Procedures Law, the violation of which is a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The act authorizes a consumer to rebut the presumed location of a retail transaction for purposes of the collection of the local charges by filing a claim and declaration under penalty of perjury. By extending the act, this bill would expand the crime of perjury, thereby imposing 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 Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, which is administered by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, regulates the application, issuance, and suspension of alcoholic beverage licenses. Existing law authorizes licensed winegrowers and brandy manufacturers to exercise their license privileges away from their licensed premises at, or from, branch offices or warehouses or United States bonded wine cellars located away from the place of production or manufacture, subject to specified exceptions. One of the exceptions to this authorization is production or manufacture. This bill would specify that the exception of production or manufacture does not include mere storage of wine or topping of wine barrels, as specified. Existing law generally prohibits any person or licensee from having alcoholic beverages at a licensed premises other than those beverages that the license authorizes for sale, except as specified. Existing law authorizes the holder of any combination of a beer manufacturer's license, winegrower's license, craft distilled spirits manufacturer's license, or a brandy manufacturer's license for a single premises to have alcoholic beverages authorized under those licenses at the same time anywhere within the premises, as specified, if certain conditions are met, including that the manufacturer's licenses for the single premises are either all master licenses or all branch offices, and not a combination of a master license and a branch office. This bill would, notwithstanding the above-described provision, authorize the holder of a winegrower's license and a brandy manufacturer's license for the same premises, where one license is a master license and the other is a branch license, to store, age, conduct brandy tastings, and engage in sales for off-premises consumption. Existing law authorizes the issuance of a caterer's permit, upon application to the department, to a licensee under an on-sale general license, an on-sale beer and wine license, a club license, or a veterans' club license, that authorizes the holder of the permit to sell alcoholic beverages at specified locations and events. Existing law requires the permitholder to obtain consent from the department for each event in the form of a catering authorization and imposes a fee for the authorization based on the estimated attendance at each day of the event. Existing law imposes various limitations on the permits, including prohibiting a catering authorization from being issued for use at any one premises for more than 36 events in one calendar year, except as specified. This bill would similarly authorize a licensed winegrower to apply for, and the department to issue, an estate tasting event permit that would authorize the winegrower to exercise its tasting room privileges for wine manufactured by or for the winegrower at specified locations and all of the same privileges allowed under their license for the duration of the event, subject to local land use authority, as specified. The bill would require a permitholder to obtain consent from the department for each event in the form of an estate tasting event authorization and would impose a fee of $100 for each estate tasting event. The bill would prohibit an estate tasting event authorization from being issued for more than 36 events per licensee per calendar year. The bill would impose an annual fee for an estate tasting event permit of $200 and would authorize the permit to be transferable as part of the winegrower's license. (2) The California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act requires a beverage manufacturer to label a beverage container sold or offered for sale by that beverage manufacturer in the state with one of several specified redemption value messages by printing or embossing the beverage container or by affixing a clear stamp, label, or other device, as specified. This bill would authorize a beverage manufacturer to etch a required redemption value message on a beverage container. The act authorizes the department to require a beverage container intended for sale in the state to be printed, embossed, stamped, labeled, or otherwise marked with a scan code, a quick response (QR) code, or a universal product code (UPC) , or similar machine-readable indicia. The act prohibits a person from offering to sell, or selling, to a consumer a beverage container that has not been labeled as required by the act. Existing law provides that a violation of the act or a regulation adopted pursuant to the act is a crime. This bill would require those markings to be at least 12 inch in size. The bill would authorize the use of a chasing arrows symbol for a recyclable beverage container on the inside of a machine-readable label, as specified. By expanding the scope of a crime, the bill would impose state-mandated local program. The act exempts a beverage container included within the scope of the act beginning on January 1, 2024, from the act's labeling requirements until July 1, 2025. This bill would extend that exemption until July 1, 2026. The act exempts a beverage container included within the scope of the act beginning on January 1, 2024, that was filled and labeled before January 1, 2024, from the act's labeling requirements. This bill would instead exempt a beverage container included within the scope of the act beginning on January 1, 2024, that was filled and labeled before July 1, 2025. (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.

Existing law generally regulates classes of insurance, including property and fire insurance. Existing law creates the Department of Insurance, headed by the Insurance Commissioner, and prescribes the department's powers and duties. Existing department regulations prohibit an insurer from using a rating plan that does not take into account and reflect specified wildfire risk mitigation, including property-level building hardening measures. This bill would require the department, on or before January 1, 2030, and every 5 years thereafter, to consider whether or not to update its regulations to include additional building hardening measures for property-level mitigation efforts and communitywide wildfire mitigation programs. As part of this consideration, the bill would require the department to consult with specified agencies to identify additional building hardening measures to consider, as well as to develop and implement a public participation process during the evaluation.

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 exempts from its requirements a change in use approved by a lead agency that is a park district or the Great Redwood Trail Agency to allow public access to preexisting paved and natural surface roads, preexisting trails, preexisting pathways, preexisting disturbed areas for vehicle parking, as specified, and rail lines converted by the Great Redwood Trail Agency into trails known as the Great Redwood Trail, in areas used exclusively for nonmotorized recreation, if certain conditions are met, including that the change in use is consistent with a plan adopted by the park district or the Great Redwood Trail Agency, as applicable, and does not involve a physical alteration of the affected area. Existing law requires, before making a determination to approve or carry out a change in use that is determined to be exempt from CEQA, the lead agency to, among other things, make a finding that the above-described criteria are met. Existing law requires the lead agency, if the lead agency determines that a change in use is not subject to CEQA pursuant to this exemption and determines to approve or carry out the activity, to file a notice with the State Clearinghouse in the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation and with the county clerk of the county in which the land is located, as provided. This bill would extend the above exemption to a lead agency that is a county park agency. The bill would remove the condition that the change in use is consistent with a plan adopted by the park district or the Great Redwood Trail Agency, as applicable, and would instead require the lead agency, before making the exemption determination, to adopt a natural resource management plan, or equivalent document, that includes appropriate identification of resources and management strategies for the affected area, as specified. The bill would instead require, as a condition of this exemption, that the change in use only involves minimal physical alterations and minimal improvements to the affected area, as specified. The bill would require the lead agency to make an additional finding that there is sufficient funding to implement the natural resource management plan, or equivalent document, and would require the finding, as well as the finding that the above-described criteria are met, to be based on substantial evidence. The bill would provide that its provisions do not apply where it is reasonably foreseeable that the provision of public access within a park or open space area will have a significant or cumulatively considerable effect on the environment. By imposing duties on public agencies related to the exemption, 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 establishes the California State University, under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, as one of the segments of postsecondary education in the state. Existing law requires the California State University to establish a model uniform set of academic standards for purposes of recognition for admission to the California State University. Under existing law, the University of California and the California State University are expected to plan that adequate spaces are available to accommodate all California resident students who are eligible and likely to apply to attend an appropriate place within the system. This bill would establish the CSU Direct Admission Program under which a pupil graduating from a high school of a participating local educational agency is deemed eligible for enrollment into a designated California State University campus. The bill would require, upon the implementation of transcript-informed pupil accounts, the reporting available on the CaliforniaColleges.edu platform to be used to provide the data required to determine eligibility for the program, as specified. The bill would require the California College Guidance Initiative, on behalf of the California State University, to transmit a letter of direct admission to each eligible pupil that notifies the pupil that they have been directly admitted, as specified. (2) Existing law, until the 2026–27 academic year, requires the trustees to offer for first-time freshman applicants meeting certain criteria a dual admissions program, and authorizes eligible first-time freshman applicants to enter into a dual admissions agreement with the California State University that guarantees the student's admission to a specific campus of the segment selected by the student at the time of the agreement if the student completes transfer requirements, which may include completion of an associate degree for transfer (ADT) or another established course of study for transfer within 2 academic years at a California community college. This bill would extend the above-described dual admission program until the 2035–36 academic year, and would instead require a student to complete an ADT or another established course of study for transfer within 3 academic years at a California community college. The bill would also require the California Community Colleges to take certain actions to promote the program. (3) By imposing new duties on community college districts, 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 law vests the Public Utilities Commission with regulatory authority over public utilities, including telephone corporations. The Moore Universal Telephone Service Act establishes the Universal Lifeline Telephone Service program in order to provide low-income households with access to affordable basic residential telephone service. Existing law requires the commission to accept applications for lifeline telephone service according to procedures specified by the commission. This bill would prohibit the commission, its staff, the lifeline program's third-party administrator, and lifeline service providers, and their contractors, agents, successors, or assignees, from sharing, disclosing, or otherwise making accessible any information provided by an applicant or subscriber to the lifeline program, or a subprogram or pilot program of the lifeline program, to any agency of a local government, a state government, or the federal government, or to an immigration authority, as defined, without a court-ordered subpoena or valid judicial warrant, except as specified. The bill would authorize the commission, its staff, the lifeline program's third-party administrator, and lifeline service providers, and the providers' agents, successors, or assignees, to request, but would prohibit those entities from requiring, applicants and subscribers to provide social security numbers to apply to, or participate in, the lifeline program. Existing law prohibits a telephone or telegraph corporation from making certain categories of personal information available to any other person or corporation without first obtaining the residential subscriber's consent in writing. Existing law exempts information provided to a law enforcement agency in response to lawful process from that prohibition. This bill would define "lawful process," for that purpose, to mean an action taken pursuant to a court-ordered subpoena or judicial warrant. Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime. Because certain provisions of this bill would be part of the act and therefore a violation of the bill's requirements, or a violation of a commission action implementing its requirements, would be a crime, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law establishes and vests in the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (Energy Commission) various responsibilities with respect to developing and implementing the state's energy policies. Existing law authorizes persons proposing specified electrical generation, electrical transmission, hydrogen production, and energy storage projects to apply, on or before June 30, 2029, to the Energy Commission to certify sites and related facilities as environmental leadership development projects, as specified. Existing law makes a site and related facility certified by the Energy Commission subject to streamlining benefits related to CEQA with no further action by the applicant or the Governor. Under existing law, the Energy Commission's certification is in lieu of any permit, certificate, or similar document required by any governmental agency and supersedes any applicable statute, ordinance, or regulation, except as specified. This bill would expand the types of facilities eligible to be certified as environmental leadership development projects by the Energy Commission to include geothermal powerplants and projects that comprise multiple geothermal powerplants on a single site. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 25545 of the Public Resources Code proposed by SB 254 to be operative only if this bill and SB 254 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

Existing law establishes various default speed limits for vehicles upon highways, as specified. Existing law requires the Department of Transportation, by regulation, to require speed limits to be rounded up or down to the nearest 5 miles per hour of the 85th percentile of free-flowing traffic. Existing law authorizes a local authority to additionally lower the speed limit in specified circumstances, or retain the currently adopted speed limit in certain circumstances. This bill would authorize the department to additionally lower or retain the speed limit in those specified circumstances. Existing law authorizes a local authority, if it finds the speed limit derived from the 85th percentile to be higher than reasonable or safe, to reduce the speed limit an additional 5 miles per hour for specified reasons, including, but not limited to, that the portion of highway is designated as a safety corridor, as defined by the department. Existing law also authorizes a local authority to retain or restore the immediately prior adopted speed limit under specified circumstances. This bill would similarly authorize the department to set, on a highway that is not a freeway, a speed limit, or retain or restore the immediately prior adopted speed limit under those specified circumstances. Under certain circumstances, existing law authorizes a local authority to set, by ordinance, a 25- or 20-mile-per-hour facie speed limit on specified highways. This bill would similarly authorize the department to set, by regulation, for a highway that is not a freeway, a 25- or 20-mile-per-hour prima facie speed limit. Existing law requires a local authority to issue only warning citations for specified speed limit violations for the first 30 days that a lower speed limit is in effect. This bill would instead impose this requirement on any peace officer.