Asm. Kate Sanchez

The Budget Act of 2024 made appropriations for the support of state government for the 2024–25 fiscal year. This bill would amend the Budget Act of 2024 to exempt wildfire prevention projects from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as a Budget Bill.

The Personal Income Tax Law allows various credits against the taxes imposed by that law. This bill would allow a credit against those taxes for each taxable year beginning on or after January 1, 2025, and before January 1, 2030, to a qualified taxpayer, as defined, in an amount equal to 40% of the taxpayer's qualified expenses, as defined, not to exceed $400 per taxable year, or $2,000 cumulatively. Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax credit to contain, among other things, specific goals, purposes, and objectives that the tax credit will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. The bill would also include additional information required for any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.

The Budget Act of 2024 made appropriations for the support of state government for the 2024–25 fiscal year. This bill would amend the Budget Act of 2024 to require the State Air Resources Board to designate public fire protection agencies or other equivalent agencies to oversee controlled burning activities and to exempt wildland vegetation management burning, as defined, from permitting requirements if conducted by or under the supervision of a public fire protection agency or other equivalent agency designated by the state board. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as a Budget Bill.

The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 establishes the State Air Resources Board as the state agency responsible for monitoring and regulating sources emitting greenhouse gases. The act requires the state board to approve a statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit equivalent to the statewide greenhouse gas emissions level in 1990 and to ensure the statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 40% below the statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit by 2030. The act authorizes the state board to include the use of market-based compliance mechanisms in its regulation of greenhouse gas emissions. This bill would specify that transportation fuels are not subject to regulations implementing a market-based compliance mechanism for greenhouse gas emissions. Existing law authorizes the state board to adopt and implement motor vehicle fuel specifications for the control of air contaminants and sources of air pollution. Existing law authorizes the state board to grant variances from the gasoline specifications, as provided. This bill would require the state board to grant variances from gasoline specifications, including for gasoline imported from outside the state, whenever a refinery outage or other supply interruption would result in substantial short-term price increases, as specified. Existing law requires the state board to establish, by regulation, maximum standards for volatility of gasoline, as provided. Pursuant to these authorities, the state board has adopted the California Reformulated Gasoline regulations, which include regulations establishing the maximum Reid vapor pressure of gasoline for various regions of the state at specified time periods. This bill would require the state board to waive the Reid vapor pressure requirement on summer-blend gasoline under the California Reformulated Gasoline regulations and to allow for the early transition to winter-blend gasoline if the state board determines that the gasoline market is experiencing a sudden and unusual increase in gasoline prices.

The Petroleum Industry Information Reporting Act of 1980 requires operators of refineries in the state that produce gasoline meeting California specifications, within 30 days of the end of each calendar month, to submit a report to the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission that contains certain information regarding its refining activities related to the production of gasoline that month. Existing law requires the commission to post, among other things, the reported data, in aggregate, on its internet website within 45 calendar days of the end of each calendar month. This bill would additionally require the commission to post, and regularly update, a dashboard on its internet website that includes the difference in average gasoline prices in California compared to national average gasoline prices, California-specific taxes, fees, regulations, and policies that directly or indirectly contribute to higher gasoline prices within the state and their individual contribution to the difference in average gasoline prices, and any substantiated evidence of price gouging or other anticompetitive behavior within the petroleum industry and its contribution to the difference in average gasoline prices, as specified.

Existing law prohibits the production, development, duplication, distribution, or possession, as specified, of matter, in specified formats, that depicts a person under 18 years of age engaging in or simulating sexual conduct, as defined. Existing law separately prohibits this conduct where it is done for consideration or where such matter is shared with a minor. Existing law provides an enhanced punishment when these offenses are committed using government property. This bill would expand the scope of certain of these provisions to include matter that is digitally altered or generated by the use of artificial intelligence, as such matter is defined. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. This bill would become operative only if SB 1381 of the 2023–24 Regular Session is enacted and takes effect on or before January 1, 2025.

Existing law requires the adopted course of study for grades 7 to 12, inclusive, to offer courses in specified areas of study, including, among others, social sciences, drawing upon the disciplines of anthropology, economics, geography, history, political science, psychology, and sociology, designed to fit the maturity of the pupils. Existing law requires social science instruction to include, among other things, instruction that provides a foundation for understanding the development of the American economic system, including the role of the entrepreneur and labor. This bill, with respect to the adopted course of study for grades 7 to 12, inclusive, would require the social sciences area of study to also include instruction on personal financial literacy, as provided. By imposing additional duties on school officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 51220 of the Education Code proposed by AB 1821 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1821 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.

Existing law requires the governing board of any school district to give diligent care to the health and physical development of pupils. Existing law authorizes a school district, county office of education, and charter school to provide emergency naloxone hydrochloride or another opioid antagonist to school nurses or trained personnel who have volunteered, and authorizes school nurses or trained personnel to use naloxone hydrochloride or another opioid antagonist to provide emergency medical aid to persons suffering, or reasonably believed to be suffering, from an opioid overdose, as provided. This bill would prohibit school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools from prohibiting pupils in middle schools, junior high schools, high schools, or adult schools, while on a schoolsite or participating in school activities, from carrying fentanyl test strips or a federally approved opioid antagonist, as provided, for the emergency treatment of persons suffering, or reasonably believed to be suffering, from an opioid overdose.

Existing law generally requires that the prosecution of a felony sex offense be commenced within 10 years after the commission of the offense. Existing law requires specified sex offenses that are committed when the victim is under 18 years of age and under certain circumstances, such as rape of a person with a mental disorder or disability or sodomy with force or fear, to be commenced by the victim's 40th birthday. This bill would clarify that if the conditions authorizing prosecution for these crimes are not met, the prosecuting agency may nevertheless provide victim assistance to the person, including support with pursuing restorative justice.

The existing federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 provides for the negotiation and execution of tribal-state gaming compacts for the purpose of authorizing certain types of gaming on Indian lands within a state. The California Constitution prohibits the Legislature from authorizing casinos of the type operating in Nevada and New Jersey and authorizes the Governor to negotiate and conclude tribal-state gaming compacts, subject to ratification by the Legislature. Existing law expressly ratifies a number of tribal-state gaming compacts between the State of California and specified Indian tribes. Existing law, the Gambling Control Act, provides for the regulation, oversight, and licensure of gambling establishments by the California Gambling Control Commission. Existing law prohibits a list of specified gambling games or any banking or percentage game played with cards, dice, or any device, for money, checks, credit, or any representative of value, and provides that any person who offers for play or participates in these games is guilty of a misdemeanor and is punishable as specified. Existing law authorizes gambling establishments to operate controlled games utilizing a player-dealer position, as defined, and to contract with a third party for the provision of proposition player services subject to specified conditions and regulatory requirements. Existing law generally specifies the persons or entities that may bring a civil action as prescribed for relief. Existing law authorizes a court to grant a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order at any time prior to judgment, if the verified complaint or affidavits provide sufficient grounds to do so and the opposing party has been given notice. This bill would authorize a California Indian tribe, under certain conditions, to bring an action solely against licensed California card clubs and third-party proposition player services providers to seek a declaration as to whether a controlled game operated by a licensed California card club and banked by a third-party proposition player services provider constitutes a banking card game that violates state law, including tribal gaming rights under the constitutional provisions described above, and to request injunctive relief. The bill would require that any review of such a challenge be conducted de novo. The bill would prohibit a claim for money damages, penalties, or attorney's fees and would require that actions be filed no later than April 1, 2025, as specified. The bill would clarify that it does not intend to authorize an action, or otherwise impose any liability, against the state and would prohibit a court from issuing a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order under certain circumstances. This bill would provide that its provisions are severable.