Asm. Ali Macedo

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. This bill would require, on and after January 1, 2027, for a project, located in a geographic area for which the Governor declared a state of emergency on or after January 1, 2023, that is to maintain, repair, restore, demolish, or replace property or facilities damaged or destroyed by wildfire, and the project is not otherwise exempt from CEQA, as specified, the lead agency to prepare the record of proceeding concurrently with the administrative process. The bill would also require an action or proceeding brought to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the certification of an environmental impact report, or the adoption of a negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration, for the project to be resolved, to the extent feasible, within 270 calendar days of the filing of the certified record of proceedings. The bill would require an applicant to agree to pay the costs of the trial court and court of appeal in hearing and deciding any action or proceeding brought under these provisions, as provided. The bill would require the Judicial Council to adopt rules of court to implement these requirements. The bill would require the project to be consistent with the applicable zoning and land use ordinances. By requiring a lead agency to prepare the record of proceedings concurrently with the administrative process, 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.

Under existing law, a neglected or abandoned plant or crop is a public nuisance if it is a menace to the agriculture of the county, district, or vicinity because of the existence of any pest, in or on it, or other condition, or if it is a host plant of, or provides a favorable or likely harbor for, any pest. Existing law defines "pest" for these purposes as an infectious, transmissible, or contagious disease of a plant, disorder of a plant that manifests symptoms or behavior characteristic of an infectious, transmissible, or contagious disease, form of animal life, or form of vegetable life, that is, or is liable to be, dangerous or detrimental to the agricultural industry of the state. Existing law prohibits a person from maintaining a neglected or abandoned plant or crop that is a public nuisance. Existing law requires a county agricultural commissioner, in writing, to notify the owner of record or person in charge of a property that has a neglected or abandoned plant or crop that the commissioner has found to be a public nuisance, of the need to remove or destroy the neglected or abandoned plant or crop, as specified. If the removal or destruction of the neglected or abandoned plant or crop is undertaken by a commissioner, existing law requires the commissioner to cause a notice of lien that describes the land on which the public nuisance exists to be recorded and subjects the land to a lien for any expense that is incurred by the county subsequent to the recording of the notice in the abatement of the nuisance. This bill would authorize a county agricultural commissioner, in lieu of imposing a lien, as described above, to levy a civil penalty against a person who maintains a pest-related public nuisance in violation of the above-described prohibition, and would exclude from the definition of pest a beneficial organism that is used as a biological control agent or a conservation practice standard or on-farm management practice, as specified. The bill would require the civil penalty to be levied in accordance with specified procedures, including a requirement that the person charged with the violation receive notice of the nature of the violation and be given an opportunity to be heard. If the person takes a good faith action, as defined, to rectify the violation within 30 days of receiving notice, the bill would provide that the person is not liable for that civil penalty. The bill would require that civil penalty to be in an amount of up to $500 for each acre of property found to be in violation and would authorize that amount to be increased to up to $1,000 per acre if the person does not take a good faith action to rectify the public nuisance within 45 days of issuance of the original civil penalty. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2035.

Existing law establishes the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services and under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid program provisions. Existing law requires the department, subject to any necessary federal approvals and the availability of federal financial participation, to make Medi-Cal payments to designated public hospitals (DPHs) and their affiliated government entities, as defined, in recognition of the Medi-Cal managed care share of graduate medical education (GME) costs. Existing law requires that the payments consist of direct and indirect GME payments made in recognition and support of the direct costs incurred in the operation of GME programs and the increased operating and patient care costs associated with teaching programs, respectively. Under existing law, the nonfederal share of these payments consists of voluntary intergovernmental transfers (IGTs) of funds provided by DPHs or their affiliated government entities, or other eligible public entities, as specified. Under existing law, the continuously appropriated DPH GME Special Fund is established for these purposes. This bill would require the department, subject to any necessary federal approvals and the availability of federal financial participation, to make additional Medi-Cal payments to district and municipal public hospitals (DMPHs) , defined as nondesignated public hospitals, and to their affiliated government entities, in recognition of the Medi-Cal managed care share of GME costs. Under the bill, these payments would be made in a manner consistent with the methodology for GME payments to DPHs and their affiliated government entities and would consist of the above-described direct and indirect GME payment components. The bill would authorize the department to seek federal approval for other forms of GME payments to DMPHs and their affiliated government entities, as specified. Under the bill, the nonfederal share of payments under these provisions would consist of voluntary IGTs of funds provided by DMPHs or their affiliated government entities, or other eligible public entities, to the extent permitted under certain federal regulations and other applicable federal Medicaid laws, and with no state General Fund moneys being used to fund the nonfederal share of payments. The bill would establish the DMPH GME Special Fund, with moneys deposited being continuously appropriated to the department for purposes of these provisions. The bill would require the department to seek any necessary federal approvals for GME payments, effective no sooner than January 1, 2026. The bill would authorize the Director of Health Care Services to modify the requirements set forth in these provisions to the extent necessary to meet federal requirements or to maximize federal financial participation, as specified.

The California Safe Drinking Water Act provides for the operation of public water systems and imposes on the State Water Resources Control Board various duties and responsibilities for the regulation and control of drinking water in the State of California. The act requires the state board to adopt primary drinking water standards for contaminants in drinking water based upon specified criteria, and requires a primary drinking water standard to be established for hexavalent chromium. Existing law authorizes the state board to grant a variance from primary drinking water standards to a public water system. This bill would prohibit a public water system that meets the total chromium maximum contaminant level (MCL) enforceable standard for drinking water in California from being determined, held, considered, or otherwise deemed in violation of the primary drinking water standard for hexavalent chromium while implementing a state board approved compliance plan or while state board action on the proposed and submitted compliance plan is pending, except as provided.

Existing law, the legislative code of ethics, prohibits Members of the Legislature and legislative employees from having financial conflicts of interest and engaging in activities that are in substantial conflict with their official duties. This bill would prohibit Members of the Legislature from entering into, or requesting that another party enter into, a nondisclosure agreement relating to the drafting, negotiation, or discussion of proposed legislation. The bill would also make any nondisclosure agreement relating to the drafting, negotiation, or discussion of proposed legislation entered into after the effective date of this bill void and unenforceable. The bill would provide an exception for nondisclosure agreements, or portions thereof, that prevent only the disclosure of trade secrets, financial information, or proprietary information, as specified. A violation of the legislative code of ethics is punishable as a crime, as specified. By creating a new crime under the act, 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 measure would designate November 1, 2025, as Fernando Valenzuela Day, to highlight the positive impact his legacy created in the Latino and Hispanic community.

This measure would recognize the importance of California Native American Day, celebrated this year on September 26, 2025, and the annual California Indian Cultural Awareness Conference, to the enhancement of awareness of California Indian culture.

Maddy summaryACR 95 designates June 21, 2025, as the International Day of Yoga in California. This ceremonial resolution formally recognizes the day for public awareness but has no legal effect or policy changes. It directly affects California residents by encouraging community observances of the international event. The measure is purely symbolic, with no funding, regulations, or new obligations for state agencies or individuals.

This measure would recognize March 21, 2025, as the United Nations International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and declare racism as a public health crisis.

Maddy summaryACR 100 is a symbolic resolution recognizing August 15, 2025, as India's Independence Day in California. It urges all Californians to participate in celebrating India's independence on that date. This resolution does not create new laws or affect specific groups, but formally acknowledges the historical significance of India's independence day. It serves as a ceremonial gesture by the California legislature to honor this event.