Asm. Greg Wallis

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 generally prohibits a health care service plan, excluding a Medi-Cal managed care plan, or health insurer from subjecting antiretroviral drugs that are medically necessary for the prevention of HIV/AIDS, including preexposure prophylaxis or postexposure prophylaxis, to prior authorization or step therapy. Under existing law, a health care service plan or health insurer is not required to cover all the therapeutically equivalent versions of those drugs without prior authorization or step therapy if at least one is covered without prior authorization or step therapy. This bill, the Protecting Rights, Expanding Prevention, and Advancing Reimbursement for Equity (PrEPARE) Act of 2025, would instead prohibit a health care service plan, excluding a Medi-Cal managed care plan, or health insurer from subjecting antiretroviral drugs, drug devices, or drug products that are medically necessary for the prevention of HIV/AIDS, to prior authorization or step therapy, but would authorize prior authorization or step therapy if at least one therapeutically equivalent version is covered without prior authorization or step therapy. The bill would specify that, for therapeutically equivalent coverage purposes, a long-acting drug, drug device, or drug product is not therapeutically equivalent to a long-acting drug, drug device, or drug product with a different duration. The bill would require a plan or insurer that covers non-self-administered antiretroviral drugs, drug devices, or drug products that are approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the prevention of HIV/AIDS as a medical benefit to also include those non-self-administered antiretroviral drugs, drug devices, or drug products as an outpatient prescription drug benefit. This bill would require a nongrandfathered health care service plan contract or health insurance policy to provide coverage for antiretroviral drugs, drug devices, or drug products that are approved by the FDA for HIV preexposure prophylaxis, and would prohibit a nongrandfathered health care service plan contract or health insurance policy from imposing any cost sharing for those drugs, drug devices, or drug products. The bill would prohibit a plan or insurer from imposing cost sharing on a nonformulary antiretroviral drug, drug device, or drug product that is approved by the FDA for HIV preexposure prophylaxis and is covered pursuant to an exception request if the nonformulary antiretroviral drug, drug device, or drug product is therapeutically equivalent to a formulary antiretroviral drug, drug device, or drug product that is approved by the FDA for HIV preexposure prophylaxis and is covered by the plan or insurer without cost sharing. The bill would exempt Medi-Cal managed care plans from these provisions. 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.

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.

This measure would call upon Congress to reauthorize the enhanced premium tax credits and would urge Congress to continue exploring the concept of bolstering health savings accounts, as specified.

Existing law, commencing January 1, 2019, made various changes to the law governing ignition interlock devices (IID) , including, among other things, requiring a person who has been convicted of driving a motor vehicle under the influence of an alcoholic beverage, as specified, to install for a specified period of time as ordered by the court, an IID on the vehicle they operate, provided however that installation of an IID is discretionary for a first offender, as specified; authorizing a person convicted of driving a motor vehicle under the influence, if all other requirements are satisfied, including the installation of an IID, to apply for a restricted driver's license without completing a period of license suspension or revocation; and requiring ignition interlock device manufacturers to be in compliance with specified provisions relating to payment for the costs of an ignition interlock device. Existing law makes these changes operative until January 1, 2026. On January 1, 2026, existing law, as it relates to these provisions, is generally reinstated to read as it read prior to January 1, 2019. Existing law makes it a crime to violate certain provisions relating to IIDs and motor vehicles equipped with IIDs. This bill would extend the operation of these provisions until January 1, 2033, and would instead reinstate the law to how it read prior to January 1, 2019, on January 1, 2033. By extending the application of 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 a workers' compensation system, administered by the Administrative Director of the Division of Workers' Compensation, to compensate an employee for injuries sustained in the course of employment. Existing law requires an employer to provide all medical services reasonably required to cure or relieve the injured worker from the effects of the injury. Existing law establishes a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board and sets forth various proceedings that are required to be brought forth before the board. Existing law authorizes an employer who pays or becomes obligated to pay compensation, salary in lieu of compensation, or an amount to the Department of Industrial Relations to make a claim or bring an action against a third person who caused the injury or death of an employee that gave rise to the employer's obligations. Existing law relieves the employer from an obligation to pay further compensation to or on behalf of the employee if the employer has paid litigation expenses, attorney's fees, and the employer's lien. Existing law requires any release or settlement of a claim to include notice to both the employer and employee, as specified, and the written consent of both the employer and employee, in order for the release or settlement to be valid. Existing law authorizes the appeals board to credit the employer with an amount equal to the recovery by the employee that has not been applied to certain expenses, to be applied against the employer's liability for compensation, as specified. Existing law authorizes an employer to enforce payment of a lien against a third party, or against the employee, if damages have been paid to the employee, in the manner provided for enforcement of money judgments. This bill would state that when the injured employee is a peace officer, as defined, or a firefighter, the employer will be entitled to receive no more than 13 of the third-party defendant's liability insurance policy limit, if the employee establishes that their total damages exceed the net recovery after satisfaction of the employer's claim and that the total liability insurance limits available are insufficient to fully compensate the employer and employee's proven damages. The bill would limit an employer's right to reimbursement, subrogation, or lien to the maximum recovery threshold, as specified. The bill would prohibit an employer from asserting any recovery by one of these injured employees as a credit or offset against future workers' compensation benefits and would require a settlement or release to limit an employer's claim for reimbursement to the portion of the settlement not allocated to the employee pursuant to these provisions. The bill would limit these provisions to those peace officers and firefighters who are employed by certain local entities, such as a city or county, among others.

Existing law creates the Department of Insurance, headed by the Insurance Commissioner, and prescribes the department's powers and duties. Existing law directs the department and commissioner to administer various grant programs that, among other things, defray property retrofitting costs. This bill would establish the California Safe Homes grant program to be developed by the department to reduce local and statewide wildfire losses, among other things. The bill would require the department to prioritize specified needs when awarding grant funds, and would require eligible program applicants, which would include individuals, cities, counties, and special districts, to meet specified criteria. The bill would establish the Sustainable Insurance Account within the Insurance Fund and would make the funds available to the department for the program upon appropriation by the Legislature or upon receipt of federal or other grants or funds. The bill would require the department to collect specified information about the performance of the program and, on or before January 1, 2027, and every 2 years thereafter, to publish a performance report that would be posted to its internet website and submitted to the Legislature.

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.

Existing law defines the crime of burglary as entering specified buildings, places, or vehicles with the intent to commit grand or petty theft or a felony. Existing law clarifies that a structure designed for habitation is being used for dwelling purposes if, at the time of the burglary, it was not occupied solely because a disaster caused the occupants to leave the premises. This bill would specify that neither the fact that the structure entered has been damaged by a natural or other disaster, nor the extent of the damage, shall preclude conviction. Existing law defines looting as the commission of certain offenses during and within an affected county in a state of emergency or local emergency, as specified. Existing law includes any 2nd-degree burglary or grand theft in the definition of looting, and makes looting based on those offenses punishable by either imprisonment in a county jail for one year or as a felony. Existing law also makes the crime of looting based on petty theft punishable as a misdemeanor. Existing regulations define an "evacuation area" as a geographic area from which civilians have been evacuated pursuant to an evacuation order and where movement and entry are controlled by fire and law enforcement personnel having jurisdictional authority. Existing regulations define an "evacuation warning" as alerting community members in a defined area of a potential threat to life or property. This bill would recast the offense of looting to include first degree burglary, 2nd degree burglary, grand theft, trespass, and theft from a vehicle, when those offenses are committed in an evacuation zone, to the crime of looting. The bill would also, for the purposes of the offense of looting, define an evacuation zone to include an evacuation area or an area subject to an evacuation warning, and to include any residential dwelling units in such an area for a period of one year after the evacuation order, or up to 3 years if the property is undergoing construction. The bill would impose increased penalties for these offenses committed within an evacuation zone, as specified. By increasing the punishment of specified crimes, 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 make the operation of its provisions contingent upon the enactment of Senate Bill 571 of the 2025–26 Regular Session.

(1) The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 prohibits a person, with exceptions, from conducting surface mining operations unless, among other things, a permit is obtained from, a specified reclamation plan is submitted to and approved by, and financial assurances for reclamation have been approved by, the lead agency for the operation of the surface mining operation. Existing law authorizes the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) to prepare a master reclamation plan, as provided, that identifies each individual surface mining operation in specified counties and satisfies all reclamation plan requirements for each individual surface mining site. Existing law requires the State Mining and Geology Board to act as the lead agency for surface mining operations conducted by the MWD and authorizes the board to conduct an inspection of an individual surface mining operation once every 2 calendar years during a period when that individual surface mining operation is idle or the site has no mineral production. Existing law requires the MWD to be the lead agency for any environmental review of the master reclamation plan. Existing law repeals the provisions authorizing the preparation and approval of the master reclamation plan for the MWD on January 1, 2026. This bill would extend the operation of those provisions until January 1, 2041. To the extent this bill would require a local government acting as a lead agency for environmental review of the master reclamation plan to perform those additional duties for a longer period of time, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. (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 establishes a workers' compensation system, administered by the Administrative Director of the Division of Workers' Compensation, to compensate an employee for injuries arising out of and in the course of their employment. Existing law establishes procedures for the resolution of disputes regarding the compensability of an injury, including the use of a qualified medical evaluator (QME) to perform a comprehensive medical-legal evaluation to address all contested medical issues arising from all injuries reported in a claim. Existing law requires all communications with a panel QME before a medical evaluation to be in writing served on the opposing party 20 days in advance of the evaluation, and any subsequent communication with the QME to be in writing and served on the opposing party when the communication is sent to the QME. This bill would require the administrative director to develop and make available a medical evaluation request form for communicating with a panel qualified medical evaluator in advance of an evaluation obtained pursuant to the above provisions. The bill would require the administrative director to develop and make available a template QME report form, which will include all necessary statutory and regulatory requirements for a QME report. The bill would require the Division of Workers' Compensation to adopt regulations to implement these provisions by January 1, 2027.