(1) Existing law requires a court to determine whether a minor in custody will be released from, or detained in, custody, considering, among other things, whether it is a matter of immediate and urgent necessity for the protection of the minor or reasonably necessary for the protection of the person or property of another and whether continuance in the home is contrary to the minor's welfare. This bill would prohibit the court from ordering that a minor be detained in a juvenile hall unless it makes a finding that a less restrictive alternative to detention in the juvenile hall is unsuitable. The bill would also require the court, upon request, to reconsider whether continued detention in the juvenile hall is necessary based on new or current information and consistent with these provisions. (2) Existing law prohibits a ward or dependent child from being taken from the physical custody of a parent or guardian unless the court makes specified findings. Under existing law, if a minor is removed from the physical custody of the minor's parent or guardian as a result of an order of wardship pursuant to specified provisions, the order is required to specify the period of imprisonment. Existing law authorizes the court to commit a minor to a juvenile hall, juvenile home, ranch, camp, or forestry camp. This bill would prohibit a minor from being committed to physical confinement, unless the court finds that a less restrictive alternative disposition for the ward is unsuitable. The bill would require the court to consider, prior to removing a minor from the physical custody of the minor's parent or guardian, whether reasonable efforts were made to prevent or eliminate the need for removal or continued removal from the home, and whether services could be provided to enable the child's parent or legal guardian to effectively provide the care and control necessary for the child to return home.
Sponsored bills
(1) Existing law authorizes the operation of an autonomous vehicle on public roads for testing purposes by a driver who possesses the proper class of license for the type of vehicle operated if specified requirements are satisfied. Existing law prohibits the operation of an autonomous vehicle on public roads until the manufacturer submits an application to the Department of Motor Vehicles (department) , as specified, and that application is approved. Existing law requires the department to adopt regulations setting forth requirements for the submission and approval of an application, including, among other things, any testing, equipment, and performance standards the department concludes are necessary to ensure the safe operation of autonomous vehicles on public roads, as specified. Existing law requires manufacturers of autonomous vehicles that operate without a human operator physically present in the vehicle, except as provided, to comply with certain requirements, including, among other things, to maintain a dedicated emergency response telephone line that is available for emergency response officials and to equip each autonomous vehicle with a 2-way voice communication device that enables emergency response officials who are near the vehicle to communicate effectively with a remote human operator, as specified. Under existing law, an "emergency response official" includes, but is not limited to, emergency dispatchers, peace officers, as specified, and first responders. This bill would require manufacturers of autonomous vehicles to maintain communications capacity sufficient to support the maximum number of concurrent remote assistance or teleoperations sessions, as specified. The bill would require remote drivers to be located within the United States and hold a driver's license that is valid for operation in California, is of the appropriate class, and includes any required endorsements. The bill would require an autonomous vehicle manufacturer to ensure, through its staffing and assignments, that local incident technicians are immediately dispatched upon notification, electronically or otherwise, of a crash or other incident or upon receiving a request from an emergency response official or 911 dispatch center. The bill would, in the event of a fleetwide emergency or system failure that may create a traffic hazard or impeded emergency response, require an autonomous vehicle manufacturer to immediately notify affected local jurisdictions, including emergency dispatch, of the location and status of their fleet and deploy local incident technicians, where appropriate, whenever affected vehicles cannot be remotely recovered. The bill would require the department, on or before July 1, 2028, to adopt guidelines establishing reasonable response times for local incident technicians to be present at the scene upon the request of an emergency response official or 911 dispatch center. The bill would expand the definition of "emergency response official" for these purposes to also include traffic control, traffic enforcement, and parking enforcement personnel from a public agency in an applicable jurisdiction. The bill would require autonomous vehicle manufacturers, for an autonomous vehicle that operates as a commercial vehicle and that is not equipped with manual controls for completing the dynamic driving task, to ensure that remote assistants or remote drivers have the ability to place the autonomous vehicle in neutral to allow an emergency response official to move the vehicle, cause the autonomous vehicle to move as directed by an emergency response official, or turn off the vehicle and have it remain stationary until otherwise directed by an emergency response official. The bill would require autonomous vehicle manufacturers to maintain data on response times of local incident technicians and responses to fleetwide emergencies or system failures, emergency events, immobilizations, obstructions, crashes, and requests from emergency response officials. The bill would require autonomous vehicle manufacturers to provide this data to the department quarterly and would require the department to publish summary statistics on its internet website, as specified. The bill would authorize the department to share records with the Public Utilities Commission to support regulatory oversight of autonomous vehicle passenger service operations. The bill would specify that a violation of the above provisions is not a crime. The bill would authorize a city attorney or county counsel to bring a civil action on behalf of a city, county, or city and county to enforce specified violations of the above provisions. The bill would authorize a court to impose specified civil penalties payable to the jurisdiction bringing the action, as specified. (2) Existing law establishes the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) within the Department of Justice and requires the commission to develop guidelines and implement courses of instruction regarding specified topics, including, among others, racial profiling, handling domestic violence, and human trafficking. This bill would require POST to develop uniform guidelines and requirements for, and to provide approval of, the training and written guidance required to be provided by autonomous vehicle manufacturers. The bill would authorize POST to impose fees sufficient to cover the reasonable regulatory costs associated with administering these provisions. The bill would require POST to implement a course or courses of instruction for voluntary training of law enforcement officers, as defined, on autonomous vehicles that operate as commercial vehicles as it relates to public safety and to develop related uniform minimum guidelines for voluntary use by California law enforcement agencies, as specified. The bill would require the course or courses, learning and performance objectives, training standards, and guidelines to be developed in consultation with appropriate groups and individuals that have an interest and expertise in the field of the operation of autonomous vehicles, as specified. (3) The bill would make its provisions operative July 1, 2028.
Existing law, commonly known as the Cartwright Act, identifies certain acts as unlawful restraints of trade and unlawful trusts and prescribes provisions for its enforcement. Chapter 338 of the Statutes of 2025 provides that in a complaint for any violation of the Cartwright Act, it is sufficient to contain factual allegations demonstrating that the existence of a contract, combination in the form of a trust, or conspiracy to restrain trade or commerce is plausible. Chapter 338 of the Statutes of 2025 also provides that a complaint for any violation of the Cartwright Act is not required to allege facts tending to exclude the possibility of independent action. Existing case law, In re Cipro Cases I & II (2015) 61 Cal.4th 116, establishes a rule of reason analysis for certain claims under the Cartwright Act, which, among other things, determines whether an act was made for the purpose of avoiding competition and whether the anticompetitive effects of the agreement outweigh any procompetitive justifications. This bill would prohibit any person from monopolizing or monopsonizing any part of trade or commerce, as provided. The bill would require courts to use the analytical framework and guidance provided in In re Cipro Cases I & II. The bill would require a plaintiff bringing an action under its provisions to allege, and prove at trial, substantial market power through either direct or indirect evidence. The bill would exempt a small business, as defined, from these provisions. The bill would provide that its provisions do not prevent, limit, or prohibit certain conduct and legal instruments, including exclusive franchises granted and supervised by a local, state, or federal governmental agency. This bill would require any action brought pursuant to these provisions to be initiated only by the Attorney General or a district attorney, and would, with certain exceptions, preclude an alleged violation under its provisions from serving as a predicate violation under the Unfair Competition Law. The bill would require an action brought pursuant to these provisions to be filed as a "complex case" pursuant to provisions of law requiring the assessment of additional court fees, as specified. The bill would also make related findings and declarations. The bill would require courts to liberally interpret California's antitrust laws to best promote free and fair competition, as provided. Because the bill would expand the scope of activities prohibited by the Cartwright Act, the violation of which is punishable as a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law, commonly referred to as the Density Bonus Law, requires a city or county to provide a developer that proposes a housing development within the city or county with a density bonus, waivers or reductions of development standards, parking ratios, and other incentives or concessions, as specified, if the developer agrees to construct certain types of housing, including, among other types of housing, housing that will include specified percentages of units for rental or sale to lower income households or very low income households, as specified. Existing law requires a city or county to grant incentives or concessions requested by an applicant for a density bonus except under prescribed circumstances. Existing law defines "incentives or concessions" to include, among other things, a reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code requirements or architectural design requirements that exceed the minimum building standards, as specified, and regulatory incentives or concessions proposed by the developer or the city or county that result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for affordable housing costs, as specified. This bill would exclude, for buildings over 85 feet in height above grade, a reduction in site development standards, a modification of zoning code or architectural design requirements, and other regulatory incentives or concessions that include or relate to a labor standard, as defined, that have been adopted by the local government entity from the definition of "incentives or concessions." The bill would provide that, for purposes of these provisions, the applicable labor standards are those that do not exceed certain statutory requirements, as specified, as those requirements existed on December 31, 2025. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65915 of the Government Code proposed by AB 2433, AB 2480, or both, to be operative only if this bill and AB 2433, AB 2480, or both, are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
(1) Under the Planning and Zoning Law, the legislative body of a city or county may adopt ordinances that, among other things, regulate the use of buildings, structures, and land, as provided. The Subdivision Map Act vests the authority to regulate and control the design and improvement of subdivisions in the legislative body of a local agency and sets forth procedures governing the local agency's processing, approval, conditional approval or disapproval, and filing of tentative, final, and parcel maps. Existing law requires a local agency to ministerially approve a parcel map for an urban lot split if the development or parcel meets specified requirements. Existing law requires the local agency to require an applicant for an urban lot split to sign an affidavit stating that the applicant intends to occupy one of the housing units as their principal residence for a minimum of 3 years from the date of the approval of the urban lot split. Existing law authorizes a local agency to adopt an ordinance to implement these provisions, as provided. This bill would instead require the local agency to require an applicant to select one of 2 sets of owner-occupancy requirements. The first option would be for the applicant to sign, under penalty of perjury, the above-described affidavit stating that the applicant intends to occupy one of the housing units as their principal residence for a minimum of 3 years. The 2nd option would be for the applicant to sign an affidavit, under penalty of perjury, stating they intend to sell both parcels of an urban lot split after issuance of a certificate of occupancy within 3 years from the date of the approval of the urban lot split and to require that one of the units on both parcels of an urban lot split remain owner occupied for 3 years, beginning on the date a parcel or unit is conveyed by the applicant to a home buyer. By expanding the scope of the crime of perjury and increasing the duties of local agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require the home buyer designated by the applicant to satisfy this 2nd owner-occupancy requirement to provide the applicant with an affidavit or declaration, under penalty of perjury, stating the home buyer intends to occupy the parcel as their primary residence for 3 years, as provided. The bill would provide that, for the purposes of either owner-occupancy requirement, an applicant may be a trustee of a living trust of a natural person or a limited liability company of a natural person, except that a limited liability company shall not be an applicant if the parcel being subdivided is within the boundaries of the 2025 Palisades or Eaton Fires in the County of Los Angeles. The bill would provide that an applicant for an urban lot split that is a limited liability company that violates these provisions would be liable for civil penalties. (2) Existing law requires that specified disclosures be made upon any transfer by sale, exchange, real property sales contract, lease with an option to purchase, any other option to purchase, or ground lease coupled with improvements, of any single-family residential property. This bill would require the seller of an urban lot split subject to the second owner-occupancy requirement described above to disclose, in writing, any owner-occupancy requirement for three years after the conveyance of an urban lot split unit. This bill would repeal its provisions on January 1, 2032. (3) This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the boundaries of the 2025 Palisades and Eaton Fires in the County of Los Angeles. (4) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 66411.7 of the Government Code proposed by AB 2601 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2601 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (5) 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.
Existing law requires the Governor to proclaim various days as days of remembrance or recognition. This bill would require the Governor to annually proclaim September 25 as Dolly Parton Day. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
The Public Employees' Retirement Law (PERL) establishes the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) to provide a defined benefit to members of the system based on final compensation, credited service, and age at retirement, subject to certain variations. Existing law creates the Public Employees' Retirement Fund, which is continuously appropriated for purposes of PERS, including depositing employer and employee contributions. Under the California Constitution, assets of a public pension or retirement system are trust funds. The California Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA) establishes a variety of requirements and restrictions on public employers offering defined benefit pension plans. In this regard, PEPRA restricts the amount of compensation that may be applied for purposes of calculating a defined pension benefit for a new member, as defined, by restricting it to specified percentages of the contribution and benefit base under a specified federal law with respect to old age, survivors, and disability insurance benefits. Existing law, the Teachers' Retirement Law, establishes the State Teachers' Retirement System (STRS) and creates the Defined Benefit Program of the State Teachers' Retirement Plan, which provides a defined benefit to members of the program, based on final compensation, creditable service, and age at retirement, subject to certain variations. This bill, for service performed on and after January 1, 2027, would prohibit the pensionable compensation for calendar year 2027 used to calculate the defined benefit paid to a new member of a retirement system subject to PEPRA who retires from the system from exceeding specified percentages of the contribution and benefit base under the specified federal law with respect to old age, survivors, and disability insurance benefits. The bill would make related, conforming changes to these provisions on pensionable compensation. The bill also would require a new member of STRS to be subject to specified limits of the Teachers' Retirement Law. PEPRA requires each retirement system that offers a defined benefit plan for safety members of the system to use one of 3 formulas for safety members, 2% at age 57, 2.5% at age 57, or 2.7% at age 57. This bill would establish new retirement formulas, for employees first hired on or after January 1, 2027, as 2.5% at age 55, 2.7% at age 55, or 3% at age 55, subject to certain exceptions. For new members hired on or after January 1, 2013, who are safety members, the bill would require employers to adjust the formulas for service performed on or after January 1, 2027, to offer the formula that has the same fraction at age 55 as the fraction at age 57 in the formula the employer offered pursuant to existing law. The bill would authorize a public employer and a recognized employee organization to negotiate a prospective increase to the retirement benefit formulas for safety members and new safety members, consistent with the formulas permitted under PEPRA, including the new formulas described above. This bill would authorize an employer and its employees to agree in a memorandum of understanding to be subject to a higher safety plan or a lower safety plan, subject to certain requirements, including that the memorandum of understanding is collectively bargained in accordance with applicable laws. By increasing the contribution to continuously appropriated funds, and by increasing expenditures from those funds, this bill would make an appropriation.
(1) Existing law sets forth a method for providing special education and related services to pupils with exceptional needs. Existing law permits, under certain circumstances, contracts to be entered into for the provision of those services by nonpublic, nonsectarian schools or agencies. Existing law defines "nonpublic, nonsectarian school" and "nonpublic, nonsectarian agency" for these purposes. Existing law authorizes a master contract for special education and related services provided by a nonpublic, nonsectarian school or agency only if the school or agency has been certified as meeting specified standards. Existing law sets forth the certification process and procedures for the nonpublic, nonsectarian schools or agencies that seek certification from the Superintendent of Public Instruction, including that the school or agency file an application with specified information. Existing law requires the Superintendent, before certification of a nonpublic, nonsectarian school or agency, to conduct an onsite review of the facility and program for which the applicant seeks certification and authorizes the Superintendent to verify that the school or agency has received a successful criminal background check clearance and has enrolled in subsequent arrest notice service for each owner, operator, and employee of the school or agency. Existing law requires the Superintendent to monitor the facilities, educational environment, and quality of the educational program of an existing certified nonpublic, nonsectarian school or agency on a 3-year cycle, as provided. Existing law requires the master contract for nonpublic, nonsectarian school or agency services to include, among other things, an individual service agreement for each pupil placed by a local educational agency. Existing law requires a contracting local educational agency to pay the full amount of the tuition or fees, as applicable, for individuals with exceptional needs who are enrolled in programs or receiving services provided pursuant to the contract. Existing law requires a master contract for nonpublic, nonsectarian school or agency services to be developed in accordance with specified provisions, including, among others, that the master contract specify the general administrative and financial agreements, including teacher-to-pupil ratios, between the school or agency and the local educational agency to provide the special education and designated instruction services. Existing law requires a certified nonpublic school or agency to provide written notification to the State Department of Education and the local educational agency with which it has a master contract of any pupil-involved incident at the school or agency in which law enforcement was contacted. This bill would eliminate the requirement that nonpublic schools or agencies that enter into contracts for the provision of special education services be nonsectarian. The bill would (A) exclude from the above-described tuition or fees the amount attributable to the provision of religious instruction, which the bill would define for these purposes, (B) prohibit public funds paid pursuant to those contracts from being used to pay for religious instruction at a nonpublic school or agency, (C) prohibit a nonpublic school or agency from providing religious instruction to pupils placed by a local educational agency, as provided, (D) require an applicant seeking an initial or renewal certification to certify, under penalty of perjury, that all educational services provided to pupils placed by a local educational agency under a master contract with a local educational agency are secular, neutral, and respectful regarding religion and religious view, as provided, and (E) notwithstanding any other law, prohibit a nonpublic school or agency, in performing services under a master contract, individual service agreement, or individualized education program, from subjecting any person to discrimination on the basis of specified protected characteristics. By expanding the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require a master contract and individual services agreement for nonpublic school or agency services to contain provisions requiring compliance with those 5 described provisions. The bill would require the above-described application for a nonpublic school seeking certification from the Superintendent to include (A) an assurance that the nonpublic school has requested from the Commission on Teacher Credentialing a list of all credentialholders who have had final adverse action taken against their credential, (B) commencing July 1, 2027, documentation that specified staff and administrators have obtained fingerprint clearance with the commission, as provided, (C) commencing January 1, 2028, a list of staff providing instruction and services to pupils in the state and copies of their credentials, as specified, and (D) affidavits and assurances necessary to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations that include criminal record summaries and subsequent arrest notifications required of all nonpublic school personnel, including contractors, having contact with minor children. The bill would require, instead of authorize, the Superintendent to verify that a nonpublic school or agency seeking certification has received a successful criminal background check clearance and has enrolled in subsequent arrest notice service for each owner, operator, employee, and contractor of the nonpublic school or agency, as applicable. The bill would require the Superintendent, as part of monitoring the quality of the educational program of an existing certified nonpublic school, to also monitor the criminal background checks required for employment and pupils' receipt of any mandated instruction required for all pupils of local educational agencies, as specified. The bill would require the Superintendent, as part of monitoring an existing certified nonpublic agency, to instead monitor the agency for compliance with applicable statutory and regulatory requirements. The bill would require the department to (A) require each person employed by a nonpublic school interacting with a California pupil to undergo a fingerprint-based state and national criminal history background check, (B) submit those fingerprints, and (C) request subsequent arrest records, as specified. The bill would require the Department of Justice to provide a state and federal response to those requests in accordance with specified provisions. The bill would require a certified nonpublic school to additionally provide written notification to the department and the local educational agency with which it has a master contract of any pupil-involved incident at the school resulting in, among other things, a serious injury to a pupil, as specified, or the commencement of an investigation into an employee or contractor involving an allegation of misconduct. The bill would require a nonpublic school employing a person with a credential to report any change in employment status of the credentialholder to the commission within 30 days if the change in status is a result of an allegation of misconduct, as specified. The bill would also make conforming changes. (2) Existing law authorizes the Superintendent to revoke or suspend the certification of a nonpublic, nonsectarian school or agency for specified reasons, including, among other reasons, failure to notify the department in writing within 45 days of certain occurrences, including changes in staff or facilities, failure to notify the Superintendent in writing within 10 days of revocation or suspension of a license or permit, and failure to notify the Superintendent in writing within 10 days of the death of a pupil. This bill would, among other things, require, instead of authorize, the suspension or revocation of the certification of a nonpublic school or agency for any of those specified reasons, and would revise the above-described notification timelines, as specified. If an investigation conducted by the department results in a finding that pupil health or safety has been compromised or is in danger of being compromised at a nonpublic, nonsectarian school or agency, existing law authorizes the department to immediately suspend or revoke the certification of the nonpublic, nonsectarian school or agency. This bill would require, instead of authorize, the department to take the above-described action. (3) Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district or a county board of education to request the State Board of Education to waive all or part of specified education laws or regulations adopted by the state board, as provided, with exceptions. Existing law requires the state board to approve any and all requests for waivers except in those cases where the state board specifically finds, among other things, that the educational needs of the pupils are not adequately addressed. This bill would prohibit the state board from waiving all or part of any laws relating to special education pursuant to the above-described provisions. Existing law authorizes a public agency, as defined, to request the state board to grant a waiver of any provision of education laws or regulations adopted pursuant to those provisions if the waiver (A) is necessary or beneficial to the content and implementation of a pupil's individualized education program and (B) does not abrogate any rights provided to individuals with exceptional needs and their parents or guardians, or affect the compliance of a local educational agency with specified federal regulations. Existing law authorizes the state board to grant, in whole or in part, any of those requests when the facts indicate that a failure to do so would hinder implementation of a pupil's individualized education program or compliance by a local educational agency with specified federal mandates. This bill would prohibit a waiver submitted by a public agency on or after January 1, 2027, that is related to the placement of a pupil other than at a local educational agency to waive specified requirements from being approved unless it includes, among other things, a description of how the public agency requesting the waiver will oversee and evaluate the pupil's placement and that certain requirements are met, as provided. (4) Existing law requires the Commission on Teacher Credentialing to establish standards and procedures for the issuance and renewal of credentials, certificates, and permits. Existing law requires the commission to make available to each private school a listing of all credentialholders who have had final adverse action taken against their credential which is required to be identical to that made available to public schools in the state. This bill would require the commission to also make available the above-described listing to the State Department of Education. The bill would require the department to request notice from the commission regarding the list, monitor the status of the credentialholders at nonpublic schools, and confirm that a credentialholder has been removed from contact with California pupils when a credentialholder has their credential suspended or revoked, and would impose the same requirements on a local educational agency with respect to each nonpublic school that it has a master contract with, as provided. (5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 48986 of the Education Code proposed by AB 1943 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1943 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 51225.2 of the Education Code proposed by AB 1659 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1659 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 establishes the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement within the Department of Industrial Relations. Existing law authorizes the division, which is headed by the Labor Commissioner, to enforce the Labor Code and all labor laws of the state the enforcement of which is not specifically vested in any other officer, board, or commission. This bill would limit the use of workplace surveillance tools, as defined, by employers, including by prohibiting an employer from monitoring or surveilling employees in a bathroom located in the workplace, except as specified. The bill would provide an employee with the right to leave behind workplace surveillance tools that are on their person or in their possession when entering a bathroom, except as specified. This bill would authorize the commissioner to enforce the bill's provisions, as prescribed, and would authorize a public prosecutor to bring specified enforcement actions. The bill would subject an employer who violates the bill to a civil penalty of up to $500 for each violation. 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.
Existing law authorizes the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, in consultation with the California State University and the University of California, to authorize the establishment of community college district baccalaureate degree programs, as provided. Existing law requires a governing board of a community college district that is seeking authorization to offer a baccalaureate degree program to submit specified information for review by the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges and approval by the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges. Beginning January 1, 2028, this bill would additionally require, among other things, a community college district to submit information relating to a determination of unmet current or future projected workforce need and consultation with the California State University and the University of California regarding collaborative approaches to meeting regional workforce needs. The bill would require this information to be submitted for review by the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges and the Chancellor of the California State University, and approval by the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges. Existing law requires the Chancellor of Community Colleges to ensure, for the application and review process for community college districts to participate in the baccalaureate degree program, that only 15 baccalaureate degree programs are approved during each application period and that the total number of baccalaureate degree programs offered by a community college district, at any time, does not exceed 25% of the total number of associate degree programs offered, among other things. This bill would instead prohibit a community college district from submitting more than 3 applications during an academic year and would require a community college district offering a baccalaureate degree program to not displace enrollment opportunities for students seeking associate degrees, associate degrees for transfer, certificates, or noncredit instruction, and maintain access to lower division instructional offerings. Existing law requires the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges to consult with and seek feedback from the Chancellor of the California State University, the President of the University of California, and the President of the Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities on proposed baccalaureate degree programs, as specified. Existing law authorizes the California State University and the University of California to assess whether proposed baccalaureate degree programs are duplicative of existing baccalaureate programs offered by state universities. If the California State University or the University of California believes there is program duplication, existing law requires them to submit written objections with supporting evidence to the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges within 30 working days of receipt of the proposal, and requires the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges, within 30 working days after receiving the written objections, to convene with the applicant and the segment or segments that raised an objection to collaborate and establish a written agreement before the program is approved. This bill would instead require written objections with supporting evidence to be submitted to the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges within 45 working days of receipt of the proposal, except as provided, and would require the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges to provide the application to the Secretary of Labor and Workforce Development within 30 working days, as specified. Upon receipt of a written objection filed by the California State University, the bill would instead require the Secretary of Labor and Workforce Development to determine if the proposed baccalaureate degree program addresses an unmet current or projected future workforce need and if the capacity of the substantially similar academic program of the California State University is sufficient to meet the regional workforce needs, as specified. This bill would require the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges to report annually to the Legislature, no later than March 1, on the status of all baccalaureate degree programs approved under these provisions, as provided. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 78042 of the Education Code proposed by SB 960 to be operative only if this bill and SB 960 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would make the operation of its provisions contingent upon the enactment of SB 960 of the 2025–26 Regular Session.