Maddy summarySenate Resolution 135 is a commemorative measure that formally honors the 40th Infantry Division of the California National Guard for its more than century-long history of service. The resolution highlights the unit's contributions in major conflicts, including World War I, World War II, the Korean War, and post-9/11 operations, as well as its role in responding to natural disasters within California. It specifically acknowledges the division's Medal of Honor recipients and notes that Major General Laura L. Yeager became the first woman to command an infantry division in 2019. The bill directs the Secretary of the Senate to send copies of the resolution to the Adjutant General of California, the division commander, and the author for distribution.
Sponsored bills
Existing law vests the Public Utilities Commission with regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. Existing law requires the commission, in consultation with the Independent System Operator, to establish resource adequacy requirements for all load-serving entities, as provided. Existing law defines load-serving entity, for that purpose, as an electrical corporation, electric service provider, or community choice aggregator. Existing law requires each load-serving entity to be subject to the same requirements for resource adequacy, the renewables portfolio standard program, and the integrated resource planning process that apply to electrical corporations, as provided. This bill would require the commission to authorize a load-serving entity to elect to demonstrate compliance with resource adequacy requirements by selling to, or otherwise making transactions with, another load-serving entity, and would require those transactions to not represent more than 25% of a load-serving entity's compliance obligations and be of a short-term duration. The bill would require the commission to authorize those transactions to be denominated in the same unit of time used to denominate resource adequacy compliance requirements. The bill would authorize the commission to suspend or adjust that authority of a load-serving entity to sell to, or otherwise make transactions with, another load-serving entity, as specified. Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime. Because the above provisions would be a part of the act, and because a violation of a commission action implementing the above prohibition would be 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.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report (EIR) on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA requires a lead agency, before releasing an environmental review document for a project, to begin consultation with a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project, as provided. CEQA authorizes the parties, as a part of the consultation, to propose mitigation measures capable of avoiding or substantially lessening potential significant impacts to a tribal cultural resource or alternatives that would avoid significant impacts to a tribal cultural resource. CEQA defines a tribal cultural resource as including, among other things, a site, feature, place, cultural landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that is included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources or included in a local register of historical resources, as provided. This bill would modify the definition of tribal cultural resource to, among other things, include a site, feature, place, cultural landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that is identified by the Native American Heritage Commission as a sacred place, as provided, or included in a local tribal register and provided to the lead agency by a consulting California Native American tribe. CEQA requires public agencies, when feasible, to avoid damaging effects to tribal cultural resources and specifies mitigation measures that may be considered to avoid or minimize significant adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources if the consultation process fails to result in agreed-upon mitigation measures. This bill would revise and recast those provisions to instead require a lead agency, when feasible, to adopt mitigation measures, as provided, to avoid or minimize the significant adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources. The bill would require avoidance and preservation of the resource in place to be considered when requested by the consulting California Native American tribe, and if avoidance and preservation are determined to not be feasible, the bill would require the lead agency to document the basis for that determination with substantial evidence and, when feasible, to incorporate other measures to avoid or minimize significant adverse impacts to the resource consistent with CEQA. The bill would authorize the consulting California Native American tribe to identify culturally appropriate mitigation measures, which the bill would require the lead agency to consider and incorporate, to the extent feasible, in developing mitigation and treatment measures. This bill would require the lead agency, if archaeological methods and standards are used in the identification of tribal cultural resources instead of tribal methods and standards or tribal traditional knowledge submitted by a California Native American tribe during tribal consultation, to explain its decision to use archaeological methods and standards. The bill would require the lead agency, if treatment and mitigation measures preferred and submitted by a California Native American tribe during tribal consultation are not recommended for adoption by the lead agency, to explain its decision. By imposing additional duties on local agencies in their implementation of CEQA, 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.
The California Constitution provides that all property is taxable and requires that it be assessed at the same percentage of fair market value, unless otherwise provided by the California Constitution or federal law. The California Constitution and existing property tax law provide various exemptions from taxation, including, among others, a disabled veterans' exemption. Under existing law, the disabled veterans' exemption exempts from taxation part of the full value of property that constitutes the principal place of residence of a veteran, the veteran's spouse, or the veteran and veteran's spouse jointly, and the unmarried surviving spouse of a veteran, as provided, if the veteran incurred specified injuries or died while on active duty in military service, as described. Existing law exempts that part of the full value of the residence that does not exceed $100,000, or $150,000 if the household income of the claimant does not exceed $40,000, as adjusted for inflation, as specified. This bill would, until January 1, 2037, exclude service-connected disability payments from the definition of "household income" for purposes of the disabled veterans' exemption. The bill would also correct an erroneous cross-reference in the above-described provisions. By imposing additional duties on local tax officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure to contain, among other things, specific goals, purposes, and objectives that the tax expenditure 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 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 state to reimburse local agencies annually for certain property tax revenues lost as a result of any exemption or classification of property for purposes of ad valorem property taxation. This bill would provide that, notwithstanding those provisions, no appropriation is made and the state shall not reimburse local agencies for property tax revenues lost by them pursuant to the bill. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Existing law prohibits an agency from disclosing personal information that would link the information to the individual unless, among other things, the information is provided to a governmental entity by law, or the disclosure is to the individual to whom the information pertains. Existing law makes vital records related to adoptions, other than a newly issued birth certificate, available only upon the order of the superior court of the county of residence of the adopted child or of the county granting the order of adoption. This bill would authorize, beginning on July 1, 2028, the disclosure of an original birth certificate, as defined, to an adopted person, or descendant, as defined, of a deceased adopted person, would require the State Registrar to provide a copy of the original birth certificate to those persons, and would establish a process to request an original birth certificate, as specified. The bill would also require the State Registrar to create and make available to a birth parent a contact preference form on or before July 1, 2028, containing certain elections that would be available for release when a request for an original birth certificate is made. Existing law requires the clerk of the court to report the decree to the State Registrar within 5 days after a decree of adoption. Existing law requires the State Registrar to generate a new birth certificate when the State Registrar receives a report of adoption from a specified court or when the State Registrar receives a specified court order. Existing law requires the new birth certificate to bear certain information and be identical to the certificate issued to the natural parents, except, when requested by the adopting parents, the certificate is required to omit the facility of birth and the race and color of the parents. This bill would remove the adopted parents exception described above that required the certificate to omit the facility of birth and the race and color of the parents. Existing law authorizes the adopting parents to request an amended certificate that omits, among other things, the city and county of birth, or the color and race of the parents. This bill would repeal that authorization.
Existing law requires a contract entered into by any state agency for the procurement or laundering of apparel, garments, or corresponding accessories, or the procurement of equipment, materials, or supplies, other than procurement related to a public works contract, to require that a contractor certify that nothing furnished to the state pursuant to the contract has been laundered or produced by certain types of labor, including forced labor, as defined. Existing law makes any person who falsely certifies pursuant to these provisions guilty of a misdemeanor. This bill would, for a contract entered into or renewed on or after January 1, 2027, with an estimated value that exceeds $550,000, revise the above contracting requirements to also require a contractor to certify that the contract complies with specified requirements relating to human trafficking, including certain prohibitions on contractors, contractor employees, subcontractors, subcontractor employees, and their agents. The bill would revise the definition of forced labor to mean knowingly providing or obtaining labor or services of a person by, among other things, threats of serious harm to, or physical restraint against, that person or another person. This bill would require contractors and subcontractors to notify employees of specified prohibited activities and the actions that may be taken against them for violations. The bill would provide that a contractor is ineligible for, and shall not bid on, or submit a proposal for, a contract under these provisions if the contractor has failed to certify its compliance. The bill would also require a contractor to exercise due diligence in ensuring that its subcontractors comply with those requirements, including requiring each subcontractor to sign a certification. By expanding the scope of a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would, for a contract that has an estimated value that exceeds $550,000, require, before a contract or subcontract is awarded, a proposed contractor or proposed subcontractor to provide a certification to the contracting officer or contractor, as applicable, that states the contractor or subcontractor has implemented a compliance plan, as specified, and has conducted due diligence that either (1) to the best of the contractor's or subcontractor's knowledge and belief, certain parties have not engaged in any specified prohibited activities or (2) if the contractor or subcontractor is aware of abuses relating to the specified prohibited activities, then certain parties have taken the appropriate remedial and referral actions. This bill would require a contractor or subcontractor to take specified actions to ensure compliance with the above-described provisions, including requiring the contractor or subcontractor to disclose to the contracting officer and the state agency with oversight information sufficient to identify the nature and extent of a violation of a prohibited activity. The bill would specify certain actions a contractor would be required to take if a contractor, contractor employee, subcontractor, subcontractor employee, or agent violates these provisions or specified provisions, including, among others, notifying its employees of the actions that will be taken against the employee or agent for violations. Existing law authorizes certain sanctions to be imposed if a contractor knew or should have known that the apparel, garments, corresponding accessories, equipment, materials, or supplies furnished to the state were laundered or produced in violation of specified conditions, including, among others, voiding the contract under which the prohibited apparel, garments, or corresponding accessories, equipment, materials, or supplies were laundered or provided at the option of the state agency and removing the contractor from the bidder's list for a period not to exceed 360 days. This bill would, for a contract entered into or renewed on or after January 1, 2027, with an estimated value that exceeds $550,000, authorize additional sanctions, including, among others, requiring a contractor to remove a contractor employee from the performance of the contract, requiring the contractor to terminate a subcontractor, and suspending contract payments until the contractor has taken appropriate remedial action. The bill would also specify that these requirements govern contracts and subcontracts entered into by a state agency, regardless of place of performance. Existing law authorizes a contractor to request a hearing before an administrative law judge when sanctions are imposed. Existing law requires the administrative law judge to consider any measures the contractor has taken to ensure compliance with the above-described provisions and authorizes the administrative law judge to waive any or all sanctions if it is determined that the contractor has acted in good faith. This bill would, for a contract entered into or renewed on or after January 1, 2027, with an estimated value that exceeds $550,000, authorize the administrative law judge to additionally consider mitigating factors and aggravating factors, as specified. Existing law authorizes a state agency that investigates a complaint against a contractor for violation of the above-described provisions to limit its investigation to evaluating the information provided by the person or entity submitting the complaint and information provided by the contractor. This bill would, for a contract entered into or renewed on or after January 1, 2027, with an estimated value that exceeds $550,000, authorize the state agency to limit its investigation to credible information. The bill would require the contracting officer, upon receipt of credible information regarding a violation of specified provisions, to promptly notify the state agency with oversight, the agency debarring and suspending official, and law enforcement officials with jurisdiction over the alleged offense, as specified. The bill would authorize the contracting officer to direct the contractor to take specific steps to abate the alleged violation or enforcement of the requirements of its compliance plan. 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.
The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA) grants to a consumer various rights with respect to personal information that is collected by a business, including the right to delete personal information. The California Privacy Rights Act of 2020, approved by the voters as Proposition 24 at the November 3, 2020, statewide general election, amended, added to, and reenacted the CCPA and establishes the California Privacy Protection Agency and vests the agency with full administrative power, authority, and jurisdiction to enforce the CCPA. The CCPA excludes from the definition of "personal information" publicly available information. Existing law defines "publicly available" for these purposes to include 3 types of information. One type is information that a business has a reasonable basis to believe is lawfully made available to the general public by the consumer or from widely distributed media. This bill would revise that part of the definition of "publicly available" by removing the condition that the business have a reasonable basis to believe the information is lawfully made available. The CCPA also includes in that definition of "publicly available" information made available by a person to whom the consumer has disclosed the information if the consumer has not restricted the information to a specific audience. This bill would delete that part of the definition of "publicly available." This bill would declare that its provisions further the purposes and intent of the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020.
This measure would acknowledge and celebrate 50 years of coastal protection and affirm the state's longstanding commitment to protecting its coastal waters, as specified.
This measure would acknowledge and celebrate 50 years of coastal protection and affirm the state's longstanding commitment to protecting its coastal waters, as specified.
This measure would request that the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management hold public hearings in California on the proposed 2026–2031 National Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program, prepare an environmental impact statement to accompany the program, and provide the public the opportunity to comment on a draft programmatic environmental impact statement for potential offshore oil and gas leasing in California. The measure would strongly and unequivocally oppose any new offshore drilling and declare unequivocal support for the current federal prohibition on new oil or gas drilling in federal waters offshore of the Pacific coast.