Asm. Rick Zbur

The California Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act establishes the California Workforce Development Board to assist the Governor in the development, oversight, and continuous improvement of California's workforce investment system and the alignment of the education and workforce investment systems to the needs of the 21st century economy and workforce. Existing law requires the board to administer, promote, expand, and provide field assistance for high road training partnerships, defined as an initiative or project that models strategies for developing industry-based, worker-focused training partnerships, including labor-management partnerships. Existing law requires high road training partnerships to demonstrate job quality standards and employment practices that include, among other things, adoption of mechanisms to include worker voice and agency in the workplace. This bill would require the board, when awarding grants for a high road training partnership program or any successor program, to provide a scoring preference to an applicant that is either a bona fide labor-management cooperation committee, as defined, or is an entity applying on behalf of, or in cooperation with, a bona fide labor-management cooperation committee, as specified. The bill would require the board to determine the amount of the scoring preference provided and to incorporate that preference into program guidelines and grant solicitations.

Existing law provides that reproductive health care services, gender-affirming health care services, and gender-affirming mental health care services are rights secured by the Constitution and laws of California, and interference with these rights, whether or not under the color of law, is against the public policy of California. Existing law defines "gender-affirming health care services" to mean medically necessary health care that respects the gender identity of the patient, as experienced and defined by the patient, as specified. Existing law provides for various protective measures for persons engaging in legally protected health care activity, including prohibiting a provider of health care, health care service plan, health insurer, or contractor from releasing medical information related to, among other things, an individual seeking or obtaining gender-affirming health care or gender-affirming mental health care, and prohibiting a state or local public agency, or any employee thereof acting in their official capacity, from cooperating with or providing information to an individual or agency from another state or a federal law enforcement agency, as specified, regarding a legally protected health care activity that is lawful in this state and performed in this state. Existing law defines "legally protected health care activity" for those purposes to include, among other things, the exercise and enjoyment, or attempted exercise and enjoyment, by a person of rights to the health care services described above and the provision of those health care services by a person duly licensed under the laws of California. This bill would require a person or entity that is located, headquartered, incorporated, or otherwise conducting business in California and receives, is served with, or is subject to a subpoena, discovery request, or other request for information that is part of a legal process related to a civil, criminal, regulatory, or legislative investigation regarding abortion, as defined, or gender-affirming health care services that are legally protected health care activities secured by the Constitution or laws of California to provide specified notice to the Attorney General at least 7 business days prior to producing records in response to the request unless a shorter response time is required by federal law or other federal obligation, as specified. If a shorter response time is required by federal law or other federal obligation, the bill would require the responding person or entity to provide notice to the Attorney General no later than contemporaneously with producing the responsive records. The bill would exempt a person or entity from the notice requirement if the subpoena, discovery request, or other request for information meets certain requirements, including that it is accompanied by an attestation verifying that the use or disclosure of the requested information meets certain requirements, including that the requested information is related to an investigation or proceeding regarding activity that is unlawful under California civil or criminal law, and it identifies the California law under which the activity is unlawful. The bill would prohibit a person or entity receiving, served with, or subject to a subpoena, discovery request, or other request for information described above who is not subject to the above-described exemption from producing the responsive records until at least 7 business days after providing notice to the Attorney General unless a shorter response time is required by federal law or other federal obligation, as specified. If a shorter response time is required by federal law or other federal obligation, the bill would require the responding person or entity to make best efforts to deliver the responsive records on the date on which the person or entity is required to respond to the subpoena, discovery request, or other request for information. The bill would authorize the Attorney General to make reasonable attempts to notify the individual who provided, sought, received, facilitated, or otherwise engaged in the abortion or gender-affirming health care service pertaining to the subpoena, discovery request, or other request for information. The bill would entitle a person or entity subject to these provisions to rely on the representations made in an attestation described above. The bill would authorize the Attorney General to intervene in any civil action instituted by a person or entity to protect against compliance with or providing information in response to the subpoena, discovery request, or other request for information. The bill would authorize the Attorney General to commence certain actions, including a civil action against any person or entity that attaches a false attestation described above, and would make the attachment of a false attestation by a person or entity punishable by a civil penalty of $15,000, as specified. The bill would require any action brought by the Attorney General to be commenced within 6 years of the date on which the Attorney General received the notice of the subpoena, discovery request, or other request for information at issue, and would require the court to award court costs and attorney's fees to the Attorney General in any civil action in which the court imposes any penalty authorized by the bill's provisions.

(1) Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge a child to be a dependent of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered, or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer, serious physical harm. Existing law establishes the grounds for removal of a dependent child from the custody of the child's parents or guardian. Under existing law, a proceeding in the juvenile court to declare a child to be a dependent child of the court is commenced by a social worker who files a petition with the court. Existing law also requires a social worker to investigate whether a petition should be filed with the court whenever any person applies to the social worker to commence proceedings in the juvenile court by affidavit. This bill would require, if an application to commence proceedings is submitted by a minor on their own behalf, or by the minor's attorney, and the minor is currently residing at a residential facility for children and youth, the social worker, when conducting a safety assessment or substitute care provider safety assessment, to also assess the safety of the home of those who hold custodial rights of the minor. The bill would authorize the application to be submitted to the social worker by mail, facsimile, or electronic mail. (2) Existing law authorizes, if the social worker fails to file a petition within 3 weeks of that application, the person to apply to the juvenile court to review the decision of the social worker and affirm the decision or order the social worker to commence juvenile court proceedings. This bill would require, if the initial application to commence proceedings was submitted to the social worker by a minor on their own behalf, or by the minor's attorney, the court to review the decision and either affirm the decision or order the social worker to commence juvenile court proceedings within 14 days of the minor's application to the court for review. (3) Existing law authorizes the juvenile court to retain jurisdiction over any person who is found to be a ward or a dependent child of the juvenile court until the ward or dependent child attains 21 years of age. Existing law also authorizes a nonminor who has not yet attained 21 years of age and who exited foster care at or after the age of majority, to petition the court to assume dependency jurisdiction over the nonminor, if they meet one of several specified criteria, including, among others, that they are a nonminor former dependent who received specified public assistance or adoption assistance benefits after attaining 18 years of age and their former guardian or adoptive parent no longer provides ongoing support and no longer receives aid on behalf of the nonminor. This bill would expand the eligibility criteria for filing that petition by eliminating the requirement that the nonminor's former guardians or adoptive parents, as applicable, no longer receive benefits on their behalf, and instead specify that the nonminor is eligible pursuant to that provision if the nonminor is no longer receiving support from their former guardian or guardians or their adoptive parent or parents, as applicable. This bill would authorize the State Department of Social Services to implement these provisions by means of all-county letters or similar instructions until January 1, 2028. (4) By imposing additional duties on county employees, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 388.1 of the Welfare and Institutions Code proposed by AB 2764 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2764 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (6) 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 requires every city, county, or city and county, whether general law or chartered, that requires the issuance of a permit as a condition precedent to the construction, alteration, improvement, demolition, or repair of any building or structure, to require the execution of a permit application, as specified. Existing law permits a local agency, defined as a city, county, or city and county, to authorize its enforcement agency to contract with or employ a private entity or persons on a temporary basis to perform plan-checking functions for a nonresidential building, but the local agency is not required to do so if it determines that no entities or persons are available or qualified to perform plan-checking services. Under existing law, when there is an excessive delay, as defined, in checking plans submitted as part of an application for specified nonresidential projects, a local agency is required to, upon request of the applicant, contract with or employ a private entity or persons on a temporary basis to perform the plan-checking function. Existing law defines "excessive delay" to mean, among other things, the local agency has taken more than 50 days to check plans and specifications, as provided. This bill would, until January 1, 2032, revise and recast the above-described provisions related to private plan checking. The bill would, upon receipt of a complete application for a nonresidential building permit, require the city or county to provide the applicant with an estimated timeframe in which it will determine if the completed application is compliant with permit standards. This bill would require the local agency to, upon an applicant's request, contract with or employ a private plan-checking entity if the estimated timeframe would result in an excessive delay or if there is excessive delay by the local agency. The bill would prohibit a local agency from reducing, eliminating, or failing to fill budgeted civil service positions within the building department as a result of the use of private professional providers, as provided. If the local agency determines no private entities or persons are available or qualified to perform plan-checking services, the bill would authorize the applicant to retain, at their sole expense, a private professional provider, as specified. The bill would shorten the timeframe constituting an "excessive delay" from 50 days to 30 business days. This 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. This 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, as provided, or notify the applicant that, according to the report prepared by the private professional provider, 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. The bill would authorize a city or county to adopt requirements that limit the size of an eligible nonresidential building, as provided, or specify the eligible types of businesses or occupancy, provided that the requirements do not prohibit or effectively prohibit the use of a private professional provider as authorized by the bill. 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, existing law imposes liability upon the public entity 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 would, notwithstanding existing public entity liability provisions, grant a public entity immunity from liability for an injury caused by their discretionary or ministerial acts or omissions relating to the issuance or denial of any nonresidential building permit pursuant to the bill's provisions. The bill would require the applicant to enter into an agreement to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the local agency and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding brought against the local agency or its agents, officers, or employees relating to 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. Existing law permits the governing body of any county or city, including a charter city, to adopt an ordinance prescribing fees for filing applications for specified building permits, as provided. This bill would broaden the above-described permission and require a county or city that prescribes fees for a nonresidential building permit to prepare a nonresidential building permit fee schedule and post the schedule on the county's or city's internet website. This bill would additionally require a local building department to conduct an inspection of the permitted work for specified new nonresidential buildings or structures within 10 business days of receiving a notice of the completion of the permitted work authorized by a building permit issued for those projects. By expanding the crime of perjury, and by imposing new duties on local agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would include related findings and declarations. 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.

(1) Existing law authorizes the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection to engage in management of state forests and defines "management" for purposes of the state forests as a means of handling forest crop and forest soil to achieve maximum sustained production of high-quality forest products while giving consideration to values relating to, among other values, recreation, watershed, and wildlife, as provided. This bill would redefine "management" for purposes of state forests as the handling of forest vegetation, water, and soils within the demonstration state forest system for public benefits, as described to include, among other things, watershed health and wildfire resilience. (2) Existing law declares it is in the interest of the welfare of the people of the state and their industries and other activities involving the use of wood, lumber, poles, piling, wood pulp, and other forest products that desirable cutover forest lands be made fully productive and that the holding and reforestation of such lands is a necessary measure predicated on waning supplies of original old growth timber, as provided. Existing law further declares it is in the interest of the welfare of the people of the state that the state retain the existing land base of state forests in timber production for research and demonstration. Existing law requires the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency, in consultation with the Secretary for Environmental Protection, to, on or before January 10 of each year, submit to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee a report on the activities of all state departments, agencies, and boards relating to forest and timberland regulation. Existing law requires this report to include, among other things, the number of timber harvest plans reviewed in the most recent fiscal year, as specified, and the average time for plan review. This bill would repeal these provisions and instead declare, among other things, that the purpose of the demonstration state forest system is to acquire lands, the reforestation or restoration of which is not assured under private ownership, to achieve the public benefits as described in paragraph (1) through means that include, but are not limited to, multibenefit forest management. The bill would authorize the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to enter into, and would require the secretary to make good faith efforts to collaboratively develop, comanagement agreements with California Native American tribes, as defined, to incorporate local traditional ecological knowledge and local indigenous knowledge into the management direction of a forest in the demonstration state forest system, as provided. The bill would require the annual report submitted to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee to also include the number of timber harvest plans approved in the most recent fiscal year and the median time for plan review and would make other nonsubstantive changes relating to the report. The bill would require research to be allowed on land in the demonstration state forest system that informs forest management strategies, science-based decisionmaking, biodiversity, durable onsite carbon storage or sequestration, habitat, water and soil quality, watershed health, tribal stewardship, or other goals that further healthy and resilient ecosystems. The bill would authorize timber harvesting within the demonstration state forest system if in furtherance of specified objectives. (3) Existing law requires the management of state forests and the cutting and sale of timber and other forest products from state forests to conform with regulations prepared by the Director of Forestry and Fire Protection and approved by the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection. Existing law requires the regulations to conform with forest management practices designed to achieve maximum sustained production of high-quality forest products while giving consideration to values relating to, among other values, recreation, watershed, and wildlife, as specified. Existing law authorizes state forest lands to be used for grazing and mining purposes pursuant to regulations established by the board. Under existing law, a person who violates the rules and regulations pertaining to the state forests established by the board is guilty of a misdemeanor. The bill would instead require the management of demonstration state forests and the cutting and sale of timber and other forest products from demonstration state forests to conform with regulations prepared by the Director of Forestry and Fire Protection and approved by the board. The bill would repeal the authorization for state forest lands to be used for mining purposes, except as provided. The bill would require the regulations permitting prescribed herbivory, recreation concession, and surface mining for forest-related work and restoration purposes, including, but not limited to, the construction of watercourse crossings, on state forest lands to be updated to reflect the redefinition of management. Because a violation of these regulations would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires the department to prepare a map and data relating to the forest conditions, as provided. Existing law requires the department, in preparing the map and data, to be guided by a specified report. This bill would require the department to be guided by consultation with the board instead of by the specified report. Existing law declares that it is the policy of the state to establish and preserve an intensively managed, multifaceted research forest, known as the Soquel Demonstration State Forest, which is representative of forest activities as a living forest in the County of Santa Cruz, as provided. Existing law establishes the Legislature's intent relating to the demonstration state forest. Existing law requires that income from the demonstration state forest property sustain all costs of operation and provide income for research and educational purposes. Existing law requires the department to adopt a general plan for the demonstration state forest, as provided. This bill would instead declare that it is the policy of the state to establish and conserve the Soquel Demonstration State Forest and would revise the Legislature's intent relating to the demonstration state forest, as provided. The bill would require that income from the demonstration state forest property to additionally provide income for recreation. The bill would require the board, instead of the department, to adopt a forest management plan for the demonstration state forest, as specified. (4) Existing law authorizes the department to collect recreational user fees for overnight camping and reserved group activities in a demonstration state forest. Existing law prohibits the department from charging a fee that exceeds the amount necessary to reimburse the department's costs for maintenance and improvement of campground facilities, associated recreational facilities, natural environment, and access thereto. Existing law requires all user fees collected by the department to be deposited into the Forest Resources Improvement Fund and requires the fees to be used, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to reimburse the department's cost of maintaining and improving the campground facilities, associated recreational facilities, natural environment, and access thereto. Under existing law, the Forest Resources Improvement Fund is the depository for all revenue derived from the receipts from the sale of forest products, as defined, from state forests to support specified operations. Existing law authorizes money in the Forest Resource Improvement Fund to only be expended, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for the cost of operations associated with management of lands held in trust by the state and operated as demonstration state forests, as specified. This bill would repeal the prohibition on the department regarding charging a fee that exceeds the amount necessary to reimburse the department's costs for maintenance and improvement, as provided. The bill would require any other funds generated by a demonstration state forest to be deposited into the Forest Resources Improvement Fund. (5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Sections 4629.6 and 4629.8 of the Public Resources Code proposed by AB 706 to be operative only if this bill and AB 706 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (6) 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 recognize and affirm the important role of artists, arts organizations, creative arts therapists, and arts for health initiatives in supporting behavioral health, promoting recovery, strengthening community resilience, and contributing to public safety. The measure would encourage and recognize exploration, support, and integration of arts and behavioral health within California's health care, behavioral health, and community-based systems.

Existing law, commonly referred to as the Density Bonus Law, requires a city or county to provide a developer that proposes a housing development, as defined, within the city or county with a density bonus, other incentives or concessions, and waivers or reductions of development standards, as specified, if the developer agrees to construct, among other options, specified units and meets other requirements. This bill would prohibit land improved with an operating hotel or motel from being valued, for purposes of establishing, adjusting, or resetting ground rent under an existing lease, based on density bonuses, concessions or incentives, or waivers, as specified, unless those density increases are entitled and vested as of the valuation date, as provided. The bill would also prohibit its provisions from being construed to alter the requirements for obtaining a density bonus, as specified.

Existing law establishes within the office of the Governor, the office of the Governor's Tribal Advisor, which is headed by the Governor's Tribal Advisor who is appointed by and serves at the pleasure of the Governor. This bill would, instead, establish within the Office of the Governor, the Office of Tribal Affairs (office) , which is headed by the Secretary of Tribal Affairs who is appointed by and serves at the pleasure of the Governor, as specified. The bill would require each state agency that engages, or has programs, services, or responsibilities affecting tribal governments to, among other things, designate a tribal liaison, as described. The bill would require the office to be advised by a Tribal Advisory Committee, as described, and would require the committee to, among other things, provide recommendations and tribal perspectives to assist the office in strengthening government-to-government engagement and improving the design, access, and implementation of state programs and services affecting tribal governments. The bill would require the office to, among other things, support the implementation of consultation policies, facilitate direct engagement between state agencies and tribal governments, and provide training, guidance, and technical assistance to tribal liaisons and state agency personnel, as specified.

Existing law requires each school district that has one or more pupils who are English learners, and, to the extent required by federal law, each county office of education and each charter school, to assess the English language development of each pupil in order to determine the pupil's level of proficiency, as specified. Existing law requires the assessment for initial identification to be conducted upon the initial enrollment of a pupil, as provided. Existing law requires the State Department of Education, with the approval of the State Board of Education, to establish procedures for conducting the assessment and for the reclassification of a pupil from English learner to English proficient. Existing law requires those reclassification procedures to use multiple criteria in determining whether to reclassify a pupil as proficient in English, including, (1) an assessment of language proficiency using an objective assessment instrument, including the English language development test that is developed or acquired by the Superintendent of Public Instruction, (2) teacher evaluation, (3) parental opinion and consultation, and (4) a comparison of the performance of the pupil in basic skills against an empirically established range of performance in basic skills based upon the performance of English proficient pupils of the same age that demonstrates whether the pupil is sufficiently proficient in English to participate effectively in a curriculum designed for pupils of the same age whose native language is English. Existing law provides that parents and guardians of children enrolled in public schools have the right and should have the opportunity, as mutually supportive and respectful partners in the education of their children within the public schools, to be informed by the school, and to participate in the education of their children, as specified, including by, among other things, meeting with their child's teacher or teachers and the principal of the school in which their child is enrolled within a reasonable time of their request. This bill would make the provisions related to reclassification procedures inoperative on July 1, 2027, and would repeal them as of January 1, 2028. Commencing July 1, 2027, this bill would require a school district, county office of education, or charter school to communicate to the parent or guardian of a pupil who is determined to be an English learner in a clear, concise, and comprehensible manner specified information regarding the pupil, including, among other things, that the pupil has been classified as an English learner, that the parent or guardian is encouraged to engage as a partner with the school, as provided, and that the pupil will take an assessment each year to measure the pupil's progress toward becoming proficient in English. The bill would instead require that an English learner pupil who, in the 2025–26 school year or any school year thereafter, meets the score established by the state board for purposes of reclassification on an assessment of English language proficiency identified or developed pursuant to specified provisions, or, if applicable, the pupil meets the score established by the state board for purposes of reclassification on the statewide alternate assessment for English language proficiency, as provided, be reclassified as English proficient, as specified. Commencing July 1, 2027, the bill would require the department, as those pupil scores become available, to record the pupils who meet the scores established by the state board as reclassified in the appropriate data system. After a pupil is reclassified, the bill would require a local educational agency to ensure that the pupil's instructional program and placement reflects that the pupil is a reclassified pupil and communicate to the pupil's parent or guardian that their child has been reclassified, as provided. Commencing July 1, 2028, and subject to the availability of rubrics and sample alternate pupil work and performance tasks described below, the bill would require a pupil who (1) is an English learner, (2) has an individualized education program (IEP) , (3) received English language development instruction but has not achieved the proficiency level required for purposes of reclassification, (4) has used all designated supports and accommodations and any domain exemptions required by the pupil's IEP, and (5) either scored an overall performance level that is one level below the level established by the state board for purposes of reclassification, or, as applicable, received any score on the statewide alternate assessment for English language proficiency, and whose local educational agency determines that the pupil has demonstrated, through the use of specified alternate coursework and performance tasks, that the pupil has reached a level of proficiency that is comparable to the threshold for reclassification on the assessment of English language proficiency or the statewide alternate assessment for English language proficiency, to be reported to the department by the local educational agency as reclassified as English proficient. The bill would require a local educational agency, for a pupil who has been reclassified as English proficient, to monitor the pupil's progress to ensure, among other things, that English proficiency is not a barrier to the pupil's academic success, as provided. By imposing additional duties on local educational agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would provide that, commencing January 1, 2027, parents or guardians of children enrolled in public schools also have the right to, among other things, meet with their child's teacher or teachers to discuss their child's progress toward reaching proficiency in English, as provided. By imposing new duties on public schools, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require the state board, on or before January 1, 2028, to identify (1) means of monitoring reclassified pupils for 4 years after reclassification and (2) an appropriate instrument to be used for purposes of monitoring the progress of reclassified English learners, as provided. The bill would require the department, on or before January 1, 2028, to identify appropriate interventions for pupils who have been determined as needing additional support for their English language, as provided. Commencing with the 2027–28 school year, and subject to state and federal law regarding the privacy of pupil information, the bill would require the department to annually post on its internet website the reclassification rates of each local educational agency and charter school, statewide reclassification rates, and outcomes of reclassified pupils, as provided. Existing law requires the Sacramento County Office of Education to utilize specified funding appropriated in the Budget Act of 2026 to develop resources and provide technical assistance to support the implementation of alternative pathways and means to a diploma, as provided. This bill would require the Sacramento County Office of Education to utilize the same funding described above to (1) develop rubrics and sample alternate pupil work and performance tasks to enable pupils who are English learners and have IEPs to demonstrate proficiency for purposes of reclassification, and (2) submit the completed rubrics and sample alternate pupil work and performance tasks to the department on or before January 1, 2028. By expanding the purposes for which previously appropriated funds may be used, this bill would make an appropriation. The bill would require the department to (1) post the completed rubrics and sample alternate pupil work and performance tasks submitted by the Sacramento County Office of Education on its internet website on or before June 30, 2028, and (2) , subject to an appropriation for these purposes, contract for an evaluation of the effects of the changes to the reclassification criteria and process required by the bill to be completed and sent to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature on or before January 1, 2032, as provided. This bill would delete obsolete provisions. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 51101 of the Education Code proposed by SB 1412 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1412 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. 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.

(1) Existing law establishes procedures by which a person may petition the court for certain protective or restraining orders, including civil harassment restraining orders, domestic violence restraining orders, elder or dependent adult abuse restraining orders, gun violence restraining orders, postsecondary school restraining orders, and workplace violence restraining orders, to enjoin a restrained person from taking specified actions. Before a hearing on the issuance or denial of a domestic violence restraining order or gun violence restraining order, existing law requires the court to ensure that a search has been conducted to determine, among other things, if the subject of the proposed order owns or possesses a firearm as reflected in the Department of Justice Automated Firearms System. If after the search, the court finds that the subject of the proposed order owns or possesses a firearm, existing law requires the court to make a written record as to whether the subject has relinquished the firearm and provided proof of the required storage, sale, or relinquishment of the firearm. Upon a court's issuance of such a protective order, existing law requires the restrained person to relinquish any firearm and ammunition in that person's immediate possession or control, according to specified procedures. Existing law prescribes procedures by which the restrained person must certify compliance with the court, and for the court to determine, by a preponderance of the evidence, whether the person has a firearm in violation of the order. This bill would make clarifying and conforming changes to the procedures relating to the protective or restraining orders described above by explicitly requiring the restrained person to relinquish, in addition to any firearm, any ammunition in that person's immediate possession or control. The bill, commencing January 1, 2028, would require courts to permit a party or witness to appear remotely at a hearing for a postsecondary educational institution or workplace violence restraining order at no cost. This bill would also require courts to develop rules and instructions for such remote appearances and to post them on their internet websites. The bill would also, commencing on January 1, 2028, require courts to allow filings related to those protective orders to be submitted electronically, as specified. (2) Existing law prohibits court from granting a temporary restraining order without notice to the respondent, except as specified. Existing law requires a peace officer, upon the request of a petitioner, to serve any civil harassment restraining order, domestic violence restraining order, elder or dependent adult abuse restraining order, gun violence restraining order, postsecondary school restraining order, or workplace violence restraining order on the respondent, whether or not the respondent has been taken into custody. Existing law prescribes procedures that a sheriff or marshal must follow when serving a writ, warrant, summons, order, or other process issued by a superior court in a civil action or proceeding. Existing law requires the Judicial Council, on or before January 1, 2024, to create a statewide form or forms to be used by litigants in civil actions or proceedings to request service of process or notice by a marshal or sheriff. This bill, commencing January 1, 2028, would prohibit a court from requiring notice to be provided to the party to be restrained in advance of accepting a filing for, or deciding, an application for an ex parte restraining order, as specified, if the applicant or the applicant's attorney certifies to the court under oath that providing notice to the party to be restrained in advance of filing the petition would likely endanger the safety of the petitioner or other persons. The bill, commencing January 1, 2028, would require a peace officer, as defined, to follow the procedures that apply to a sheriff or marshal when serving a writ, warrant, summons, order, or other process issued by a superior court, as described above. The bill would require the Judicial Council, on or before January 1, 2028, to create a statewide form or forms to be used by litigants in civil actions or proceedings to request service of process or notice by a marshal or sheriff, or by a peace officer serving any of the restraining or protective orders described above. By expanding the duties of peace officers, which include officers of local law enforcement agencies, and expanding the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law requires, on any charge involving acts of domestic violence, that the district attorney or prosecuting city attorney conduct a search of certain databases for protective or restraining orders, as specified. This bill would additionally require the district attorney or prosecuting city attorney to conduct a search of the Department of Justice Automated Firearms System. By expanding the duties of the district attorney or prosecuting city attorney, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Under existing law, before a hearing on the issuance or denial of a domestic violence restraining order, the court must ensure that a search is or has been conducted to determine if the subject of the proposed order has, among other things, a prior criminal conviction for a violent or serious felony, owns or possesses a firearm, as reflected in the Department of Justice Automated Firearms System, or has a prior restraining order or violation thereof. Existing law requires this search to be conducted of specified records and databases readily available and reasonably accessible to the court. Existing law requires the court, after issuing its ruling, to advise the parties that they may request the information upon which the court relied to conduct the search and information obtained as a result of the search to be maintained in a confidential case file, except as specified. This bill would authorize a court to order any of the searches described above to be conducted before a hearing on the issuance or denial of a civil harassment restraining order, elder or dependent adult abuse restraining order, gun violence restraining order, postsecondary school restraining order, or workplace violence restraining order. The bill would require the court, after issuing its ruling, to provide the advisement to the parties described above, and to keep the information obtained as a result of any search to be maintained in a confidential case file, except as specified. (4) Existing law requires a court, when issuing a gun violence restraining order, to notify the Department of Justice regarding the order. Existing law requires the court, when issuing protective orders and firearm or ammunition relinquishment orders, to notify the prosecuting agency and law enforcement officials, as specified, in order, to enable the prosecuting agency and law enforcement officials to take necessary actions to obtain any firearms or ammunition owned, possessed, or controlled by the subject of the order. This bill would require local law enforcement agencies and prosecuting agencies, as defined, to designate a person responsible for accessing or receiving notifications from the superior court indicating that a person has violated a protective or restraining orders' firearm relinquishment requirement and to regularly ensure that the clerk of the court has updated contact information for the person designated to receive those notifications on behalf of the agency. This bill would also require each prosecuting agency to ensure that a protected person or protected people named in the order are notified about the issuance, terms, and duration of the protective order, except as specified. The bill would require each prosecuting agency to develop, adopt, and implement written policies and standards regarding notification to protected parties on or before January 1, 2028, as specified. By placing new requirements on local law enforcement agencies and prosecuting agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill, commencing January 1, 2028, would authorize a law enforcement agency or officer to seek enforcement of a valid extreme risk protection order issued by another state or jurisdiction. The bill would define an extreme risk protection order as an injunction, restraining order, or other civil or criminal court order issued by another state or jurisdiction that does not name a protected individual, but prohibits the subject of the order from possessing, owning, controlling, purchasing, or receiving firearms for the duration of the order based on evidence that the subject of the order poses a danger to themselves or others. The bill would require a valid extreme risk protection order to be registered with a court in this state if requested by a law enforcement officer or other petitioner. (5) Existing law requires each county to electronically transmit data regarding protective orders through the California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System of the Department of Justice, as specified. Existing law requires the Department of Justice to maintain the California Restraining and Protective Order System that contains detailed information regarding protective and restraining orders and injunctions, as specified, and to make that information available to court clerks and law enforcement personnel. This bill would extend these reporting requirements to include any protective order or restraining orders issued pursuant to specified sections, including a gun violence restraining order or an extreme risk protection order. (6) Existing law, the Uniform Interstate Enforcement of Domestic Violence Protection Orders Act, authorizes the enforcement of a valid foreign protection order in a tribunal of this state under certain conditions. The bill would expand the definition of a protection order to include any injunction or order under the federal Violence Against Women Act and would extend these provisions to orders issued by any state or other jurisdiction. The bill would make conforming changes. (7) Existing law authorizes the Department of Justice, subject to an appropriation by the Legislature, to establish or contract with a vendor to establish an automated protected person information and notification system, as specified. This bill would authorize the department to establish or contract with a vendor to create the above-described notification system through the availability of necessary funding through grants or other sources. (8) Existing law, subject to exceptions, provides that any person who has been convicted of certain misdemeanors may not, within 10 years of the conviction, own, purchase, receive, possess or have under their custody or control, any firearm and makes a violation of that prohibition punishable as a misdemeanor or a felony. This bill would prohibit a person, who is convicted on or after January 1, 2027, of specified offenses, including misdemeanor violations of a gun violence restraining order or other protective orders, or violations that constitute a hate crime, from owning, purchasing, receiving, or having in their possession or under their custody or control any firearm within 10 years of the conviction, and would make conforming changes. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. (9) Existing law requires a peace officer who is at the scene of a domestic violence incident or enforcing a domestic violence restraining order or gun violence restraining order to take temporary custody of any firearm or other deadly weapon in plain sight or discovered pursuant to a consensual or otherwise lawful search, as specified. This bill would additionally require a peace officer to take temporary custody of any ammunition in plain sight or discovered pursuant to such a search. By expanding the duties of local law enforcement agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (10) This bill would provide that its provisions are severable. (11) This bill would provide that if AB 2179 is enacted, then the changes made to Section 527.8 of the Code of Civil Procedure by this bill would not be operative. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 527.8 of the Code of Civil Procedure proposed by AB 1961 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1961 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 527.85 of the Code of Civil Procedure proposed by SB 1374 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1374 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 6383 of the Family Code proposed by SB 99 and SB 1395, to be operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 29805 of the Penal Code proposed by SB 1220 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1220 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (12) 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.