Existing law makes it unlawful to dump waste matter in certain locations, such as upon a public or private highway or road, upon private property without the consent of the owner, or in or upon a public park or other public property, as specified. Existing law also makes it unlawful to place, deposit, or dump rocks, concrete, asphalt, or dirt in certain locations, as specified. A person violating these provisions is guilty of an infraction, as specified. Existing law makes a violation of these provisions in commercial quantities, as defined, a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in a county jail and by a fine, as specified. Under existing law, a private owner is not restricted in the use of their own private property, unless the placing, depositing, or dumping of the waste matter on the property creates a public health and safety hazard, a public nuisance, or a fire hazard, as determined by a local health or fire department or the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. This bill would make it a crime to transport waste matter, rocks, concrete, asphalt, dirt, or other construction debris for the purpose of placing, depositing, or dumping it in the locations described above. The bill would increase the maximum fine to $5000 for violating these provisions a 4th or subsequent time. The bill would also make it unlawful to transport for the purpose of placing, depositing, or dumping waste matter, rocks, concrete, asphalt, dirt or other construction debris in commercial quantities, as defined, in the locations described above. The bill would specify that the fact that a person is operating a vehicle with actual or apparent rocks, concrete, asphalt, dirt, or other construction debris in their vehicle does not in itself constitute reasonable suspicion to stop or detain the person, or probable cause to arrest the person. For a person who violates these provisions in commercial quantities in excess of 25 cubic yards, the bill would make that violation a misdemeanor punishable in a county jail for not more than one year and by a fine, as specified. For commercial quantities in excess of 50 cubic yards, the bill would make a violation punishable as a misdemeanor or a felony, as specified. By expanding the application of a crime and creating new crimes, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would specify that a private owner or a person with the owner's permission is prohibited from placing, depositing, dumping, or transporting waste matter, rocks, concrete, asphalt, dirt, or construction debris on their property if the activity requires a permit or license from a state or local agency and one was not obtained, or creates a public health and safety hazard, a public nuisance, or a fire hazard, as determined by specified entities. The bill would prohibit a person from being charged with dumping commercial quantities under these provisions if it was completed during the course of the person's employment and at the direction of their employer, as specified. 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.
Sponsored bills
Existing law, including, but not limited to, property tax law, the Sales and Use Tax Law, the Personal Income Tax Law, the Corporation Tax Law, the Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax Law, the law governing the taxation of insurers, the Use Fuel Tax Law, and the Diesel Fuel Tax Law, provides for tax expenditures, including exemptions, deductions, exclusions, and credits against the taxes imposed by those laws. The bill would require the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) to comprehensively assess the major tax expenditures, as defined, of the state, write and publish a report on each major tax expenditure, and make a recommendation to the Legislature based on each report. In this regard, the bill would require LAO, as part of the comprehensive assessments, to identify any savings that the Legislature can realize by reducing or limiting the major tax expenditures, and require them to consider certain criteria when finalizing each report, including the extent to which the major tax expenditure is a cost-effective use of resources compared to other options to address the same purpose, intent, or goal. The bill would require LAO to complete and publish on its internet website its first report on a major tax expenditure by January 1, 2028, and to complete and publish on its internet website each subsequent report on a major tax expenditure annually in a sequence determined by the office thereafter until the fifth and final report is submitted on January 1, 2032. The bill would require the Senate Committee on Revenue and Taxation and the Assembly Committee on Revenue and Taxation, to hold a joint public hearing on these reports by each August 15 of the second year of the legislative session, as specified. To the extent that LAO needs access to taxpayer data and information, the bill would require the Franchise Tax Board, the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, and the Employment Development Department to ensure that relevant anonymized taxpayer data is made available and ensure that appropriate levels of data security and privacy protections are in place for transferred or sensitive data. The bill would repeal its provisions on January 1, 2033. The bill would make findings and declarations relating to these provisions.
Existing law imposes taxes upon income and real property, and taxes upon certain transactions and excise taxes. The Fee Collection Procedures Law provides procedures for the collection of certain fees and surcharges and is administered by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) . Under existing law, a violation of the Fee Collection Procedures Law is a crime. This bill would, beginning July 1, 2028, establish the Private Detention Facility Tax Law, which would impose an annual tax on each private detention facility operator, as defined, equal to 25% of the operator's gross income, as defined, for the prior fiscal year, as defined. The bill would establish the Due Process for All Fund in the State Treasury, except as provided, and would require all revenues collected, less refunds and reimbursement to the CDTFA, be deposited into the fund. In the event that Assembly Bill 2465 is enacted, the bill would instead require all revenues be deposited into the Due Process for All Fund as established by that bill. The bill would direct moneys in the fund, upon appropriation by the Legislature, be used for immigration-related services. The bill would require the CDTFA to administer and collect the tax pursuant to the Fee Collection Procedures Law. By expanding the application of the crimes associated with the Fee Collection Procedures Law, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax within the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature. 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 take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Existing law, the Permit Streamlining Act, establishes requirements for the review and approval of applications for development projects, as defined, by public agencies, including requiring that a public agency that is the lead agency for the development project approve or disapprove the project within certain time periods, as specified. This bill would prohibit a city, county, or city and county from approving a building permit for cold storage facilities, as defined, unless the owner of the cold storage facility, or the lessee or operator of the cold storage facility, as specified, establishes a contingency fund, as defined, to be used upon declared national, state, or local emergencies in certain circumstances. Until July 1, 2028, the bill would limit the definition of cold storage facilities for purposes of these provisions to facilities located within the geographic boundaries of the Boyle Heights Community Plan. The bill would require an owner of a cold storage facility to provide evidence of the contingency fund at the discretion of the city, county, or city and county, as specified, and authorize an owner to require the lessee or operator of the cold storage facility to establish and maintain the contingency fund. The bill would require a cold storage facility to use the contingency fund for, among other things, providing support during the declared state of emergency or local emergency for affected communities, as specified. By imposing additional requirements on cities and counties, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law, in modified conformity with federal income tax law, generally define "gross income" for purposes of the taxes imposed by those laws as income from whatever source derived, except as specifically excluded, and provide various exclusions from gross income. This bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2027, and before January 1, 2032, exclude from gross income any amount received by a qualified taxpayer, as defined, in settlement for claims relating to the 2026 Boyle Heights fire incident, as defined. Existing law requires that any bill introduced on or after January 1, 2020, that would authorize certain tax expenditures, as defined, contain, among other things, specific goals that the tax expenditure or exemption will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. This bill would include additional information required for any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure. The bill would include findings that specified 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. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Boyle Heights community. 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 designates September 2026 as Childhood Cancer Awareness Month. It directly affects state agencies and organizations by encouraging them to recognize this specific month for awareness activities. The measure does not change laws or allocate funding but serves as a formal commemorative resolution.
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 establishes various programs to promote small businesses operating in nonstandard locations, including cottage food operations and sidewalk vendors, and imposes requirements on, and provides authorizations to, local governments relating to these programs. Existing law authorizes the legislative body of an incorporated city or the board of supervisors of a county, as applicable, to license any kind of business not prohibited by law, transacted and carried on within the limits of the jurisdiction of the city or county, and to fix the rate of the license fee and provide for its collection, as provided. This bill would require a city, including a charter city, county, or city and county, defined as a local jurisdiction to allow temporary commercial activation authorization for a pop-up small business, as those terms are defined, to operate for no more than 120 days in an eligible commercial space without requiring full compliance with standards applicable to permanent occupancy, as specified. The bill would require a local jurisdiction to consider temporarily suspending, deferring, or modifying specified standards and discretionary requirements. The bill would require a temporary commercial activation to comply with health and safety standards governing temporary use and structures, as specified. This bill would further require a local jurisdiction to provide written accessibility compliance guidance materials to an applicant. The bill would authorize a local jurisdiction to establish fees not exceeding the reasonable costs of program administration and create enforcement mechanisms and penalties for noncompliance. By requiring a city, including a charter city, county, or city and county to allow temporary commercial activation authorization for pop-up small businesses, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law, the California Retail Food Code, establishes uniform health and sanitation standards for, and provides for regulation by the State Department of Public Health of, retail food facilities and requires local health agencies to enforce those provisions. A violation of the California Retail Food Code is generally a misdemeanor. Existing law defines "food facility" to include specified permanent and nonpermanent food facilities. This bill would specify that the term "food facility" includes a pop-up small business, as described above, that has been approved for limited food preparation. By changing the definition of a crime and because the bill would impose a higher level of service on local health agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) 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.
The Bergeson-Peace Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank Act creates within the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (bank) and requires it to administer the act, which, among other things, provides for the financing of certain economic development projects. This bill would establish, upon appropriation by the Legislature, the Multifamily Backstop Financing Program (program) , for purposes of supporting multifamily projects through the provision of state-backed credit backstops that would enable surety companies to issue payment and performance bonds to qualified offsite housing factories in the state. The bill would authorize the bank to provide credit backstops to surety companies and surety insurers that issue construction bonds according to specified parameters. The bill would require the bank to adopt rules and regulations necessary to implement the program.
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 authorizes a public transit operator in the state, until January 1, 2027, and authorizes the City and County of San Francisco indefinitely, to enforce parking violations in specified transit-only traffic lanes and at transit stops through the use of video imaging, and to install automated forward facing parking control devices on city-owned public transit vehicles for the purpose of video imaging parking violations occurring in transit-only traffic lanes, as specified. Existing law requires a public transit operator, prior to issuing notices of parking violations, to issue warning notices for the first 60 days and to make a public announcement of the program. Existing law requires a designated employee, or a contracted law enforcement agency, to review video image recordings for the purpose of determining whether a parking violation occurred in a transit-only traffic lane or at a transit stop and to issue a notice of violation to the registered owner of a vehicle within 15 calendar days, as specified. Existing law makes these video image records confidential and provides that these records are available only to public agencies to enforce parking violations. Existing law requires a public transit operator that implements an automated enforcement system to enforce parking violations in transit-only traffic lanes and at transit stops to submit a report to specified committees of the Legislature by no later than January 1, 2025. This bill would extend the authorization for the use of video imaging to enforce parking and stopping violations until January 1, 2034. The bill would require that a public transit operator issue warnings for 60 days prior to issuing notices of violations when it uses video imaging for enforcement of a violation that it has not previously used video imaging to enforce. The bill would require a public transit operator that uses video imaging to enforce parking violations to report to the Legislature, as specified. The bill would exempt the City and County of San Francisco from this requirement. The bill would allow only local agencies to use video image records to enforce parking violations and would prohibit the use or access of these records for general law enforcement purposes or by federal authorities, as specified. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the City and County of San Francisco.