Rep. Patrick Ahrens

Existing law requires the governing board of each school district to have general control of, and be responsible for, all aspects of the interscholastic athletic policies, programs, and activities in its school district, as provided, and requires the governing board of a school district to ensure that all interscholastic policies, programs, and activities in the school district are in compliance with state and federal law. Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to enter into associations or consortia with other governing boards for purposes of governing regional or statewide interscholastic athletics, as provided. Existing law describes the California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) as a voluntary organization that consists of school and school-related personnel with responsibility for administering interscholastic athletic activities in secondary schools and states the intent of the Legislature that the CIF, in consultation with the State Department of Education, implement specified policies relating to interscholastic athletics. Existing law, the 1998 California High School Coaching Education and Training Program, declares the intent of the Legislature to establish a California High School Coaching Education and Training Program, to be administered by school districts with an emphasis on specific components, including, among other components, sports psychology. Existing law requires every high school sports coach to complete, at their own expense, a coaching education program that meets the guidelines established by the California High School Coaching Education and Training Program. This bill would require specified trainings for coaches described in AB 1665 of the 2025–26 Regular Session to cover specified mental-health related topics, including, among other topics, trauma-informed care, as provided, and strategies of creating a positive team culture, as provided. The bill would require the department, on or before September 1, 2027, to identify existing training or develop a model youth athletics behavioral and mental health training, as specified, for persons who serve as coaches in youth sports organizations, both for recreational leagues and competitive or club leagues. The bill would require the department to post the training on its internet website and work with local partners to disseminate the training to appropriate youth athletic leagues, youth coaching entities, and relevant statewide organizations and associations. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 35179.1 of the Education Code proposed by AB 1665 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1665 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would make the operation of its provisions contingent upon the enactment of AB 1665 of the 2025–26 Regular Session.

Existing law generally regulates the business of renting passenger vehicles to the public. The law prohibits a rental company from taking various actions, including requiring the purchase of a damage waiver, optional insurance, or another optional good or service, and using electronic surveillance technology to track a renter in order to impose fines or surcharges relating to the renter's use of a rental vehicle. This bill would require any privately owned vehicle rented by, or furnished to, any federal, state, or local law enforcement agency for the use of detaining, arresting, or transporting persons who have violated, or are suspected of having violated, any law, to display a temporary decal displaying the agency name and logo, as specified. The bill would authorize certain attorneys, including the Attorney General, to pursue a civil action against the entity renting the vehicle from the private owner for failure to comply with these provisions. The bill would require the rental car contract to include a term that compliance with state law is mandatory. The bill would exempt privately owned vehicles rented or otherwise furnished or loaned to a law enforcement agency for specified purposes and rental car contracts entered into prior to January 1, 2027, from these provisions. The bill would make related findings and declarations.

Existing law allows for an eligible person to be excused from jury service only for undue hardship upon themselves or the public, as defined by the Judicial Council. Existing rules of court allow a person with a disability or their representative to seek a permanent medical excuse from jury service and require the individual to submit a written request accompanied by a supporting letter, memo, or note from a treating health care provider, as specified. This bill would, commencing January 1, 2028, authorize a person 80 years of age or older to seek a permanent excuse from jury service due to a medical impairment without providing a supporting letter, memorandum, or note from a treating health care provider. The bill would require the court to permanently excuse a person who seeks the above-described permanent excuse from jury service upon the jury commissioner's receipt of a written attestation stating that the person has an impairment, as specified. The bill would authorize the Judicial Council to adopt or amend a rule of court and publish related judicial forms as necessary to implement these provisions.

Under existing law, the Tom Bane Civil Rights Act (act) , if a person or persons, whether or not acting under color of law, interferes or attempts to interfere, by threats, intimidation, or coercion, with the exercise or enjoyment by any individual or individuals of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or of the rights secured by the Constitution or laws of this state, the Attorney General, or any district attorney or city attorney, is authorized to bring a civil action for injunctive and other appropriate equitable relief in the name of the people of the State of California, in order to protect the exercise or enjoyment of the right or rights secured. Under that act, an individual may also institute and prosecute in their own name and on their own behalf a civil action for damages, as described, for any resulting interference or attempt at interference of the individual's exercise or enjoyment of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States or this state. The act authorizes the court to award the petitioner or plaintiff reasonable attorney's fees in addition to any damages, injunction, or other equitable relief awarded in these civil actions (attorney's fees authorization) . Existing federal law provides that every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any state, territory, or the District of Columbia, subjects or causes to be subjected any United States citizen or other person within the jurisdiction to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, is liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except as provided. This bill would also provide that every natural person, as defined, who, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, as defined, subjects or causes to be subjected any citizen of this state or any person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the United States Constitution, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except as specified. The bill would apply the aforementioned attorney's fees authorization, except as specified, to any action brought under these provisions. The bill would authorize a court, in its discretion, to also award costs, except as specified, to the prevailing plaintiff in any action brought under these provisions. This bill would authorize a defendant in an action brought under these provisions to assert and receive the benefit of a defense of absolute or qualified immunity only to the same extent as a person sued under certain federal provisions under like circumstances, as specified, and would specify that nothing in these provisions is to be construed to waive or abrogate any defense of sovereign immunity otherwise available to a party, as specified. The bill would prohibit any civil action brought under these provisions from being commenced later than 2 years after the date that the cause of action accrues. The bill would make its provisions severable. The bill would specify that these provisions apply retroactively to March 1, 2025, as provided. This bill would declare the intent of the Legislature in enacting these provisions. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, the California State University, the University of California, independent institutions of higher education, and private postsecondary educational institutions as the segments of postsecondary education in the state. Existing law establishes various programs that provide financial aid to students attending institutions in each of the segments. This bill would require the California State University, community college districts, and private postsecondary educational institutions and independent institutions of higher education that receive state financial assistance to, and would request the University of California to, for a student who has submitted a specified financial aid application and is a foster youth or former foster youth, as defined, upon the student's initial enrollment at the postsecondary educational institution, either (1) waive the unpaid portion of enrollment fees and costs, or (2) defer the unpaid portion of enrollment fees and costs until the student has received an initial disbursement of the student's financial aid award, as provided. If the postsecondary educational institution is unable to waive or defer costs related to books, supplies, materials, or equipment, the bill would require the institution to provide the student with clear information regarding available campus resources, institutional programs, or community-based assistance to help the student cover those costs. By imposing new duties on community college districts, 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 federal law establishes the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) , known in California as CalFresh, under which supplemental nutrition assistance benefits allocated to the state by the federal government are distributed to eligible individuals by each county. Existing federal law limits a participant who is an able-bodied adult without dependents (ABAWD) to 3 months of CalFresh benefits in a 3-year period unless that participant has met work participation requirements or is otherwise exempt. Existing state law requires the State Department of Social Services to annually seek a federal waiver of this limitation. Existing state law requires the department to ensure that all recipients subject to the federal ABAWD time limit are permitted to meet the work requirements of the time limit through all forms of work, as specified. Existing federal law, Public Law 119-21, enacted on July 4, 2025, sets forth various changes to SNAP benefits, including the removal of an exemption from the time limit for certain former foster youth under 25 years of age, and the narrowing of an exemption for a household with a dependent under 18 years of age to instead a household with a dependent under 14 years of age, as specified. This bill would specify that an ABAWD participant includes a parent or other member of a household with responsibility for a dependent child 14 years of age or older as a result of Public Law 119-21. The bill would make various statements of legislative intent relating to, among other things, maximizing efforts to retain in the program as many eligible CalFresh recipients as possible, providing for the continuation of food benefits, mitigating harm, and streamlining the verification of exemptions for certain populations, in response to Public Law 119-21, as specified. The bill would state the intent of the Legislature that all exemptions provided by the state and the counties under Public Law 119-21, to the extent permitted by federal law and guidance, remain in effect for any recipient until, at the earliest, the next scheduled redetermination for that recipient, when the exemption is reassessed by the county, unless the automated exemption at redetermination allows for the exemption to continue. The bill would state legislative intent that a recipient not be discontinued from the CalFresh program due to the ABAWD work requirements under Public Law 119-21 before October 1, 2026, or until specified administrative activities are complete, whichever is later. The bill would generally require the department to provide data to certain legislative committees and all 58 county welfare departments on the total number of CalFresh recipients subject to, exempted from, or discontinued from the program potentially due to, the CalFresh ABAWD time limit and corresponding work requirements, as specified. Under the bill, prior to the first 2 reports, the data would be furnished to impacted counties with a minimum of 4 weeks for review prior to public reporting in order to ensure accuracy. The bill would also require the department to provide data on the total number of CalFresh recipients discontinued from the program, as specified. The bill would require the department to adopt, provide instructions to counties on, and automate for, compliance with CalFresh work requirements, in accordance with federal law, for individuals participating in extended foster care and who have been determined to be working at least 80 hours per month. To the extent that the bill would increase CalFresh eligibility for certain populations and expand county duties, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law establishes the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program, under which, through a combination of federal, state, and county funds, each county provides cash assistance and other benefits to qualified low-income families. Under existing law, in addition to specified CalWORKs aid amounts, a family is entitled to receive an allowance for recurring special needs relating to, among other things, food, utilities, and transportation. Under existing law, the allowance for each family per month is prohibited from exceeding that amount resulting from multiplying the sum of $10 by the number of recipients in the family who are eligible for assistance. This bill would increase the maximum threshold for the allowance by switching the factor from $10 to $15 within the formula. Existing law continuously appropriates moneys from the General Fund to defray a portion of county costs under the CalWORKs program. This bill would instead provide that the continuous appropriation would not be made for purposes of the bill. 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 declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Existing law authorizes an employer or collective bargaining representative of an employee who has suffered harassment, unlawful violence, or a credible threat of violence from any individual, to seek a workplace violence restraining order on behalf of the employee and, at the discretion of the court, any number of other employees at the workplace or at other workplaces of the employer. Existing law authorizes one or more representative parties to bring suit for the benefit of a class of parties if the question is one of a common or general interest, of many persons, or when the parties are numerous, and it is impracticable to bring them all before the court. This bill would authorize an employer to seek a workplace violence restraining order on behalf of all employees at the employer's workplace or a location at which a group of employees perform their primary job duties if harassment, unlawful violence or a credible threat of violence is directed at that workplace or location. The bill would not require an employer to name any individual employee as a protected party if the employer seeks a workplace violence restraining order on behalf of all employees at the employer's workplace or a location at which a group of employees perform their primary job duties. This bill would require the Judicial Council, on or before January 1, 2028, to adopt or modify its forms, as specified. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 527.8 of the Code of Civil Procedure proposed by AB 2179 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2179 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 527.8 of the Code of Civil Procedure proposed by AB 1753 to be operative only if (1) this bill and AB 1753 are both enacted, (2) AB 2179 is not enacted or as enacted does not amend Section 527.8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and (3) this bill is enacted last.

Existing law establishes the Department of Transportation and vests it with various powers and duties. This bill would require the department to create, on or before June 1, 2027, and with input from transit operators, the California Transit Stop Registry as a centralized, statewide dataset of standardized information regarding transit stops that includes, but is not limited to, each transit stop's name, location, available seating, and unique identifier, and information on whether the transit stop is sheltered, as specified. Existing law provides for the funding of public transit, including under the Mills-Alquist-Deddeh Act, also known as the Transportation Development Act. This bill would require a transit operator, as defined, on or before January 1, 2028, to (1) ensure that the name and location of each of its transit stops conforms with the name and location for the stop in the California Transit Stop Registry, (2) use a transit stop's unique identifier listed in the registry when publishing any dataset with stop information or during publication of agency open datasets, and (3) report, for inclusion in the California Transit Stop Registry, if each of its transit stops has seating and shelter. By requiring a transit operator to perform new duties, 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 authorizes an unmarried person who is under 18 years of age to marry upon obtaining a court order granting permission and the written consent of at least one of the parents or the guardian of each underage party to the marriage, as specified. Existing law requires the court, if it considers it necessary, as part of the court order granting permission to marry, to require the parties to the prospective marriage of a minor to participate in premarital counseling, as specified. Existing law provides that 2 unmarried, unrelated adults who have chosen to share one another's lives in an intimate and committed relationship of mutual caring may establish a domestic partnership by filing a declaration with the Secretary of State, if certain requirements are met. Existing law provides that a person under 18 years of age who, together with the person with whom the person proposes to establish a domestic partnership, meets the requirements for a domestic partnership other than the requirement of being at least 18 years of age, is capable of consenting to and establishing a domestic partnership upon obtaining a court order granting permission to the underage person or persons to establish a domestic partnership. Under existing law, registered domestic partners have the same rights, protections, and benefits as spouses. This bill would repeal the authorization for a person under 18 years of age to be issued a marriage license or to establish a domestic partnership, thereby prohibiting a person under 18 years of age from being issued a marriage license or from establishing a domestic partnership. The bill would make conforming changes. Existing law requires the State Registrar to create a document, no later than March 1, 2020, concerning marriage certificates in which one or both of the parties were minors at the time of solemnization of the marriage. Existing law requires the State Registrar to update that document annually, as specified. Existing law requires the local registrar to submit specified information for the purposes of that report. This bill would repeal those provisions.

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