Maddy summaryThis House Resolution declares January 2026 as School Board Recognition Month to honor the nearly 5,000 school board members across California's 1,000 school districts and county offices of education. The resolution recognizes these locally elected officials for their work in guiding public education and serving diverse communities, emphasizing their role in ensuring students' academic, social-emotional, and health needs are met. It calls on community members to join in acknowledging the dedication of school board members and collaborate to improve the education system. The bill has no operational effect beyond this symbolic recognition and does not change any laws or policies.
Rep. Robert Rivas
Sponsored bills
Maddy summaryThis House Resolution formally recognizes the importance of affordable homeownership for California families, particularly those with lower incomes, and highlights how nonprofit-led programs help build generational wealth and reduce economic disparities. The document emphasizes that existing state programs like CalHome support the construction and preservation of affordable homes through competitive funding to cities, counties, indigenous communities, and nonprofit builders such as Habitat for Humanity. While the resolution does not create new laws or funding, it serves as an official acknowledgment of homeownership's role in improving educational outcomes, health, civic participation, and neighborhood stability. The text also notes California's significant housing deficit and racial wealth gaps as context for why expanding affordable ownership opportunities is a priority for state policy.
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and makes a willful violation of the act's requirements a crime. Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law sets forth specified coverage requirements for plan contracts and insurance policies, and limits the copayment, coinsurance, deductible, and other cost sharing that may be imposed for specified health care services. This bill would require a large group health care service plan contract or large group health insurance policy, except a specialized health care service plan contract or health insurance policy, that is issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2026, to include coverage for one portable high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) purifier for an enrollee or insured who is pregnant or diagnosed with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease if the enrollee or insured is residing in or displaced from a county where a local or state emergency has been declared due to wildfires and the HEPA purifier is prescribed by the enrollee's or insured's health care provider. The bill would prohibit the cost of the HEPA purifier from exceeding $500, adjusted for inflation, as specified. Because a willful violation of these provisions by a health care service plan would be a crime, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care, and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law requires a health care service plan contract or health insurance policy issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2021, to provide coverage for medically necessary treatment of mental health and substance use disorders, as defined, under the same terms and conditions applied to other medical conditions. This bill would generally require a large group health care service plan contract or health insurance policy issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2026, to reimburse an eligible enrollee or insured for up to 12 visits with a behavioral health provider if the enrollee or insured lives in a county where a local or state emergency has been declared due to wildfires and the enrollee or insured has experienced a loss, trauma, or displacement because of the fire. The bill would prohibit these benefits from being subject to utilization review. The bill would require a health care service plan contract or health insurer to provide notice to all affected enrollees of these provisions, as specified. Because a willful violation of these provisions by a health care service plan 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. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Maddy summaryThis bill establishes January as National Human Trafficking Awareness Month in California to raise public awareness about human trafficking. The resolution recognizes the severity of human trafficking as a felony crime and highlights statistics showing its prevalence across the country and specific challenges with identifying male victims and labor trafficking cases. It aims to educate the public and encourage reporting and support for victims during this designated month.
The Political Reform Act of 1974 regulates the use of campaign funds held by candidates for elective office, elected officers, and campaign committees. The act authorizes a candidate or elected officer to use campaign funds to pay or reimburse the state for the reasonable costs of installing and monitoring a home or office electronic security system or for another tangible item related to security, and for the reasonable costs of providing personal security to a candidate, elected officer, or the immediate family or staff of a candidate or elected officer, provided that the threat or potential threat to safety arises from the candidate's or elected officer's activities, duties, or status as a candidate or elected officer or from staff's position as staff of the candidate or elected officer. The act permits a candidate or elected officer to expend a maximum of $10,000 of campaign funds for these purposes during their lifetime. This bill would eliminate that monetary cap until January 1, 2029. Beginning January 1, 2029, the bill would instead permit a candidate or elected officer to expend a maximum of $10,000 of campaign funds for these purposes per calendar year. Existing law exempts payments to a relative, within the third degree of consanguinity, of a candidate or elected officer from the definition of "security expenses." This bill would instead exempt payments to the candidate's or elected officer's spouse, child, parent, grandparent, grandchild, brother, sister, parent-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, nephew, niece, aunt, uncle, or first cousin or the spouse of any such person from the definition of "security expenses." This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 89517.5 of the Government Code proposed by AB 808, to be operative only if this bill and AB 808 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The Political Reform Act of 1974, an initiative measure, provides that the Legislature may amend the act to further the act's purposes upon a 23 vote of each house of the Legislature and compliance with specified procedural requirements. This bill would declare that it furthers the purposes of the act.
Existing law regulates the terms and conditions of tenancies and defines the term "persons who hire" for the purpose of regulating residential tenancies. Existing law excludes from these provisions occupancy at a hotel or motel if certain conditions are met, including that the occupancy is for a period of 30 days or less, as specified. Existing law establishes a procedure, known as an unlawful detainer action, that a landlord must follow in order to evict a tenant. Under this bill, the continued occupancy of a resident of a lodging, as defined, would not be considered a person who hires, nor have their lodging constitute a new tenancy for purposes of an unlawful detainer action, until the guest has resided in the lodging for 270 days, if the guest is residing in the lodging as a result of a disaster, as defined, that substantially damaged, destroyed, or otherwise made uninhabitable their prior housing, as specified. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2031. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for an eligible agricultural employee housing development that is subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, as specified, and is not subject to a conditional use permit if certain requirements are met, including that the development is located on specified land in the County of Santa Clara or the County of Santa Cruz and is within 15 miles of an area designated as farmland or grazing by the Department of Conservation and is not a site or adjoined to a site where more than 13 of the square footage on the site is dedicated to industrial use, as specified. The act defines an eligible agricultural housing development as an agricultural employee housing development that meets certain requirements, including that the development does not contain more than 36 units or spaces, or 150 units or spaces for developments located in the County of Santa Clara or the County of Santa Cruz, designed for use by a single family or household. This bill would expand eligibility for the approval process under these provisions to include a development located in the Counties of Fresno, Madera, or Merced that meets the above-described requirements that it be located within 15 miles of an area designated as farmland or grazing and not on a site or adjoined to a site where more than 13 of the square footage on the site is dedicated to industrial use, as specified. The bill would also increase the maximum number of units in an eligible agricultural employee housing development from 36 units to 150 units if the development is located in the Counties of Fresno, Madera, or Merced. By expanding the scope of developments eligible for approval, thereby increasing the duties of local officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Counties of Fresno, Madera, and Merced. 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 relating to housing development approval requires a local agency to compile a list of information needed to approve or deny a postentitlement phase permit, to post an example of a complete, approved application and an example of a complete set of postentitlement phase permits for at least 5 types of housing development projects in the jurisdiction, as specified, and to make those items available to all applicants for these permits no later than January 1, 2024. Existing law establishes time limits for completing reviews regarding whether an application for a postentitlement phase permit is complete and compliant and consequences for a local agency that fails to meet that timeline, as provided. Existing law defines "postentitlement phase permit" to, among other things, include a range of permits issued by a local agency. This bill would require a state agency to comply with the above-described provisions relating to postentitlement phase permits applicable to a local agency. The bill would require a state agency to make the information list, as described above, and the above-described examples of a complete, approved application and a complete set of postentitlement phase permits available on the agency's internet website by January 1, 2026. The bill would deem a postentitlement phase permit approved, and all related reviews complete, if a state agency fails to meet the time limits for review of an application for that permit. The bill would revise the definition of "postentitlement phase permit" for purposes of these provisions to, among other things, include permits issued by a state agency and any postentitlement review by a state agency that is necessary to begin construction of a development that is intended to be at least 23 residential, excluding certain discretionary and ministerial permits and reviews and subject to specified exceptions, and would define the term "state agency" for these purposes. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law, the State Housing Law, establishes statewide construction and occupancy standards for buildings used for human habitation. Existing law authorizes a county's or city's governing body to prescribe fees for permits, certificates, or other forms or documents required or authorized under the State Housing Law. This bill, the California Residential Private Permitting Review Act, would require a county or city to prepare a residential building permit fee schedule and post the schedule on the county's or city's internet website, if the county or city prescribes residential building permit fees. Existing law requires a county's or city's building department to enforce the State Housing Law and the California Building Standards Code, and other rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to the State Housing Law pertaining to standards for buildings used for human habitation. Existing law requires a county or city, upon the applicant's request, to contract with or employ temporarily a private entity or person to check the plans and specifications submitted with an application for a residential building permit to comply with the State Housing Law or local ordinances adopted pursuant to the State Housing Law, when the building department takes more than 30 days, as specified, to complete the plan check. This bill would remove the above-described requirement for a county or city to contract with or employ temporarily a private entity or person to check the plans when the building department takes more than 30 days to complete the plan check. Until January 1, 2036, the bill would instead, upon an application for a residential building permit being deemed complete, as provided, require the city or county to provide the applicant with an estimated timeframe in which the city or county will determine if the completed application is compliant with permit standards. The bill would authorize an applicant to retain a private professional provider, as defined, to perform the plan check, if the estimated timeframe exceeds 30 business days or the city or county has not determined the completed application is compliant within 30 days of the application being deemed complete. The bill would require an applicant who retains a private professional provider to notify the city or county of their intent to retain the private professional provider within a prescribed timeframe. If a private professional provider performs the plan-checking function, the bill would impose additional requirements, including, among other things, requiring the private professional provider to prepare a specified affidavit, under penalty of perjury, and the applicant to submit to the city or county a specified report of the plan check. The bill would require the city or county, within 10 business days of receiving the report, to consider the report and, based on the report, either issue the residential building permit or notify the applicant that the plans and specifications do not comply, as specified. If the city or county notifies the applicant that the plans and specifications do not comply, the bill would authorize the applicant to resubmit corrected plans and specifications to the city or county, as specified. By expanding the crime of perjury and imposing new duties on local agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires a local agency to determine whether an application for a postentitlement phase permit, as defined, is complete and provide written notice of this determination to the applicant not later than 15 business days after the local agency received the application. If a local agency finds that a complete application is noncompliant, existing law requires the local agency to provide the applicant with a list of items that are noncompliant and a description of how the application can be remedied by the applicant within specified time periods. Existing law requires the local agency to provide a process for an applicant to appeal a finding that the application for a postentitlement phase permit is incomplete or noncompliant, as provided. This bill, until January 1, 2036, if a private professional provider performs the plan-checking function, as described above, would deem the local agency to be in compliance with the above-described requirements governing applications for postentitlement phase permits as those requirements pertain to the residential building permit. Existing law, the Government Claims Act, establishes the liability and immunity of a public entity for its acts or omissions that cause harm to persons. Where a public entity is under a mandatory duty imposed by an enactment that is designed to protect against the risk of a particular kind of injury, the act makes the public entity liable for an injury of that kind proximately caused by its failure to discharge the duty unless the public entity establishes that it exercised reasonable diligence to discharge the duty. This bill, until January 1, 2036, if a private professional provider performs the plan-checking function, as described above, would require the applicant to indemnify the local agency from any property damage or personal injury arising from construction in accordance with the plans checked by a private professional provider under the bill's provisions. Notwithstanding the above-described liability of a public entity for failure to discharge certain mandatory duties, the bill would provide that a public entity or public employee is not liable for an injury caused by their discretionary or ministerial acts or omissions relating to the issuance or denial of any residential building permit pursuant to the bill's provisions. Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each county and each city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, and specified land outside its boundaries, that includes, among other specified mandatory elements, a housing element. Existing law requires the planning agency of the county or city, after the legislative body has adopted a general plan, to submit an annual report to the legislative body, the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, and the Department of Housing and Community Development by April 1 of each year that includes, among other things, the number of units of housing demolished and new units of housing that have been issued a completed entitlement, a building permit, or a certificate of occupancy thus far in the housing element cycle, and the income category, by area median income category, that each unit of housing satisfies. This bill, beginning April, 1, 2027, and until January 1, 2036, would require a city or county to include in the above-described annual report the number of residential building permits reviewed by the city or county, the number reviewed by a private professional provider under the bill's provisions, as described above, and the number of full-time equivalent staff members directly involved in the processing of residential building permits, as provided. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for specified reasons. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.