Photo of Robert Rivas
D California Assembly · District 29 On the 2026 ballot

Asm. Robert Rivas

Compare
Total votes
20,740
all sessions
Attendance
99%
146 missed
Near the chamber average
With party
99%
of cast votes
Near the chamber average
Bipartisan score
0%
crosses aisle rarely
Near the chamber average
Sponsored
1,617
bills & resolutions
Near the chamber average
Committees
1
assignment
1,617 bills and resolutions

Sponsored bills

Total
1,617
Primary
107
Co-sponsor
1,510
This page
1,617
matching current filters
Primary AB 938
Failed · California Assembly · Lead sponsor
Sales and use taxes: exclusion: low-emission motor vehicle: trade-in.

Existing sales and use tax laws impose taxes on retailers measured by gross receipts from the sale of tangible personal property sold at retail in this state, or on the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of tangible personal property purchased from a retailer for storage, use, or other consumption in this state, measured by sales price. The Sales and Use Tax Law defines the terms "gross receipts" and "sales price." This bill, before January 1, 2025, would exclude from the terms "gross receipts" and "sales price" the value of a qualified trade-in motor vehicle that is traded in for a qualified motor vehicle, as defined, if the value of the qualified trade-in motor vehicle is separately stated on the invoice or bill of sale or similar document provided to the purchaser. The Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law authorizes counties and cities to impose local sales and use taxes in conformity with the Sales and Use Tax Law, and existing laws authorize districts, as specified, to impose transactions and use taxes in accordance with the Transactions and Use Tax Law, which generally conforms to the Sales and Use Tax Law. Amendments to the Sales and Use Tax Law are automatically incorporated into the local tax laws. This bill would specify that this exclusion would not apply to local sales and use taxes, transactions and use taxes, and specified state taxes from which revenues are deposited into the Local Public Safety Fund, the Local Revenue Fund, or the Local Revenue Fund 2011. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy, but its operative date would depend on its effective date.

Failed Feb 3, 2020 0 co-sponsors
Co-sponsor AB 298
Failed · California Assembly · Co-sponsor
Housing: home purchase assistance program: first responders: Legislative Analyst: study and report.

Existing law establishes within the Department of Housing and Community Development the California Housing Finance Agency and provides that the primary purpose of the agency is to meet the housing needs of persons and families of low or moderate income. Existing law requires the California Housing Finance Agency administer the Roberti-Greene Home Purchase Assistance Program, to provide home purchase assistance to low- and moderate-income homebuyers to qualify for the purchase of owner-occupied homes. Existing law authorizes the agency, pursuant to specified objectives, to create its own home purchase assistance programs, home purchase assistance products, or both, on terms and conditions as the agency deems prudent. Existing law requires the agency to provide to the Legislature and the Legislative Analyst an annual report containing information concerning all units produced, assisted, or insured using agency funds. This bill would require the Legislative Analyst to conduct a study, and present the findings thereof to the Legislature, to inform the creation of a low-interest loan program for first responders. The bill would require the report to be submitted on or before January 1, 2024. The bill would require the report to include a recommendation as to which state department is best suited to administer the program, an estimation of the amount of funding that would be necessary to conduct the program, and recommendations for qualifications for participation in the program.

Failed Feb 3, 2020 1 co-sponsor
Co-sponsor SB 50
Failed · California Senate · Co-sponsor
Planning and zoning: housing development: streamlined approval: incentives.

(1) Existing law authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for a multifamily housing development that satisfies specified planning objective standards to be subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, as provided, and not subject to a conditional use permit. This bill would authorize a development proponent of a neighborhood multifamily project located on an eligible parcel to submit an application for a streamlined, ministerial approval process that is not subject to a conditional use permit. The bill would define a "neighborhood multifamily project" to mean a project to construct a multifamily structure on vacant land, or to convert an existing structure that does not require substantial exterior alteration into a multifamily structure, consisting of up to 4 residential dwelling units and that meets local height, setback, and lot coverage zoning requirements as they existed on July 1, 2019. The bill would also define "eligible parcel" to mean a parcel that meets specified requirements, including requirements relating to the location of the parcel and restricting the demolition of certain housing development that may already exist on the site. This bill would require a local agency to notify the development proponent in writing if the local agency determines that the development conflicts with any of the requirements provided for streamlined ministerial approval within 60 days of the submission of the development to the local agency. If the local agency does not notify the development proponent within this time period, the development would be deemed to comply with those requirements. The bill would limit the authority of a local agency to impose parking standards or requirements on a streamlined development approved pursuant to these provisions, as provided. The bill would provide that the approval of a project under these provisions expires automatically after 3 years, unless that project qualifies for a one-time, one-year extension of that approval. The bill would provide that approval pursuant to its provisions would remain valid for 3 years and remain valid thereafter, so long as vertical construction of the development has begun and is in progress, and would authorize a discretionary one-year extension, as provided. The bill would prohibit a local agency from adopting any requirement that applies to a project solely or partially on the basis that the project receives ministerial or streamlined approval pursuant to these provisions. This bill would allow a local agency to exempt a project from the streamlined ministerial approval process described above by finding that the project will cause a specific adverse impact to public health and safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact. 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 does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects. This bill would establish a streamlined ministerial approval process for neighborhood multifamily projects, thereby exempting these projects from the CEQA approval process. (2) Existing law, known as the density bonus law, requires, when an applicant proposes a housing development within the jurisdiction of a local government, that the city, county, or city and county provide the developer with a density bonus and other incentives or concessions for the production of lower income housing units or for the donation of land within the development if the developer, among other things, agrees to construct a specified percentage of units for very low, low-, or moderate-income households or qualifying residents. This bill, on or after January 1, 2023, would require a specified city, county, or city and county to grant upon request an equitable communities incentive when a development proponent seeks and agrees to construct a residential development, as defined, that satisfies specified criteria, including, among other things, that the residential development is either a job-rich housing project or a transit-rich housing project, as those terms are defined; the site does not contain, or has not contained, housing occupied by tenants or accommodations withdrawn from rent or lease in accordance with specified law within specified time periods; and the residential development complies with specified additional requirements under existing law. The bill would impose additional requirements on a residential development located within a county with a population equal to or less than 600,000. The bill would require that a residential development within a county with a population greater than 600,000 that is eligible for an equitable communities incentive receive, upon request, waivers from maximum controls on density; minimum automobile parking requirements greater than 0.5 parking spots per unit; and specified additional waivers if the residential development is located within a 12-mile or 14-mile radius of a major transit stop, as defined. For a residential development within a county with a population equal to or less than 600,000, the bill would instead require that the incentive provide waivers from maximum controls on density, subject to certain limitations; maximum height limitations less than or equal to one story, or 15 feet, above the highest allowable height for mixed use or residential use; certain requirements governing the size of the parcel and the area that the building may occupy; and minimum automobile parking requirements, as provided. The bill would require a local government to grant an equitable communities incentive unless it makes a specified finding regarding the effects of the incentive on any real property or historic district that is listed on a federal or state register of historical resources. The bill would authorize a local government to modify or expand the terms of an equitable communities incentive, provided that the equitable communities incentive is consistent with these provisions. The bill would delay implementation of these provisions in potentially sensitive communities, as defined, until July 1, 2023. The bill would further delay implementation of these provisions in sensitive communities, determined as provided, until January 1, 2026, unless the city or county in which the area is located votes to make these provisions applicable after a specified petition and public hearing process. On and after January 1, 2026, the bill would apply these provisions to a sensitive community unless the city or county adopts a community plan for the area that meets certain requirements. The bill would also exempt from these provisions a local government that has a local flexibility plan that has been reviewed and certified by the Department of Housing and Community Development, as specified. The bill, on or before July 1, 2021, would require the Governor's Office of Planning and Research, in consultation with the Department of Housing and Community Development, to develop and publish on its internet website rules, regulations, or guidelines for the submission and approval of a local flexibility plan, as specified. The bill, on or after July 1, 2021, would authorize a local government to submit a local flexibility plan for review and approval by the Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to those rules, regulations, or guidelines. The bill would include findings that the changes proposed by these provisions address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The Housing Accountability Act prohibits a local agency from disapproving, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders infeasible, a housing development project that complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria in effect at the time the application for the project is deemed complete unless the local agency makes specified written findings based on a preponderance of the evidence in the record. That law provides that the receipt of a density bonus is not a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision of that act. This bill would additionally provide that the receipt of an equitable communities incentive is not a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision of that act. (3) By adding to the duties of local planning officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (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.

Failed Jan 30, 2020 1 co-sponsor
Co-sponsor SCR 31
Signed into law · California Senate · Co-sponsor
Relative to the Willie L. Brown, Jr. Circle and Plaza.

This measure would name the public street, circle, and plaza at 914 and 915 Capitol Mall in the City of Sacramento as the Willie L. Brown, Jr. Circle and Plaza. The measure would request the Department of General Services to determine the cost of erecting the appropriate signage commemorating this special designation and, upon receiving donations from nonstate sources, to cover that cost to erect that signage.

Signed into law Jan 24, 2020 1 co-sponsor
Co-sponsor AB 417
Vetoed · California Assembly · Co-sponsor
Agriculture and Rural Prosperity Act.

Existing law requires the Department of Food and Agriculture, headed by the Secretary of Food and Agriculture, to promote and protect the agricultural industry of the state. Existing law requires the department, among other things, to ensure the inclusion of socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers in developing, adopting, implementing, and enforcing food and agriculture laws, regulations, policies, and programs. This bill would enact the Agriculture and Rural Prosperity Act. The bill would authorize the secretary to carry out various activities to support rural communities and further the development of rural agricultural economies in California, including, among other things, consulting with government agencies and members of the public and private sectors to identify opportunities and partnerships to further the development of rural agricultural economies, and disseminating information on the department's internet website. The bill would require the secretary to create a position within the department's executive office to assist the secretary in carrying out the purposes of these provisions. The bill would create within the Department of Food and Agriculture Fund the Rural Economic Development Account, consisting of public and private moneys that are deposited in the account, and would make moneys in the account available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to carry out the purposes of these provisions.

Vetoed Jan 21, 2020 1 co-sponsor
Primary AB 1252
Vetoed · California Assembly · Lead sponsor
Environmental Justice Small Grant Program: advance payments.

Existing law establishes the Environmental Justice Small Grant Program and authorizes the California Environmental Protection Agency to award grants to eligible community groups, including a nonprofit entity, as defined, and a federally recognized tribal government, located in areas adversely affected by environmental pollution and hazards that work to address environmental justice issues. This bill would additionally authorize the agency to award grants to a nonfederally recognized California Native American tribe with nonprofit status or in partnership with a nonprofit organization and that is located in an area adversely affected by environmental pollution and hazards that works to address environmental justice issues. The bill also would authorize the agency to distribute advance payments, as specified, from a grant awarded under the program for projects providing service to or benefiting disadvantaged or low-income communities.

Vetoed Jan 21, 2020 0 co-sponsors
Co-sponsor AB 1307
Vetoed · California Assembly · Co-sponsor
Student financial aid: Cal Grant program.

Existing law, the Ortiz-Pacheco-Poochigian-Vasconcellos Cal Grant Program, establishes the Cal Grant A and B Entitlement Awards, the California Community College Transfer Entitlement Awards, the Competitive Cal Grant A and B Awards, the Cal Grant C Awards, and the Cal Grant T Awards under the administration of the Student Aid Commission, and establishes eligibility requirements for awards under these programs for participating students attending qualifying institutions. Existing law specifies the amounts of the maximum Cal Grant A and B awards for students attending private nonprofit postsecondary institutions of higher education and private for-profit postsecondary educational institutions that are regionally accredited, as specified. Beginning with the 2020–21 award year, the maximum tuition award is either $9,084 or $8,056, depending upon whether the number of new unduplicated transfer students accepted by private nonprofit postsecondary educational institutions who have been given associate degree for transfer commitments, as defined, in the prior award year meet and exceed specified targets. This bill would change, in accordance with a prescribed formula, the maximum Cal Grant award for tuition for a new recipient attending an independent institution of higher education, commencing with the 2020–21 award year. This bill would provide that the award amount for a student attending an independent institution of higher education may be determined in the annual Budget Act if the independent institutions of higher education, as a group, do not accept the specified number of transfer students who have been given associate degree for transfer commitments.

Vetoed Jan 21, 2020 1 co-sponsor
Co-sponsor ACR 28
Passed · California Assembly · Co-sponsor
Sickle Cell Disease Awareness Month.

This measure would recognize September 2020 as Sickle Cell Disease Awareness Month and encourage the Legislature to appropriate funds for research, treatment, and monitoring of sickle cell disease, and for related education and outreach.

Passed Jan 15, 2020 1 co-sponsor
Showing 1,441 to 1,450 of 1,617 bills