Sen. Steve Padilla

Existing law establishes the Government Operations Agency, which consists of several state entities, including, but not limited to, the State Personnel Board, the Department of General Services, and the Office of Administrative Law. This bill would establish in the Government Operations Agency the California Education Interagency Council, composed of specified state officers and one nongovernmental entity representative for purposes of evaluating and addressing the changing nature of work and the economy, integrating and aligning education and employment systems, maximizing funding impact, supporting adult skill development, aligning regional education and workforce needs, and serving as a forum for discussing the impacts of intersegmental and cross-sector policy issues, as specified. The bill would require the council, among other duties, to adopt strategic and workforce plans, report on the outcomes of its work and provide recommendations regarding intersegmental, cross-sector, and interagency initiatives and programs to the Governor and the Legislature, and, upon appropriation, establish a faculty and employer advisory committee, as specified. The bill would also establish the Office of the California Education Interagency Council in the Government Operations Agency as a neutral administrative body. This bill would become operative only if Senate Bill 638 of the 2025–26 Regular Session is enacted.

Existing law, the Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law, in conformity with federal income tax law, generally defines "gross income" as income from whatever source derived, except as specifically excluded, and provides various exclusions from gross income. Existing federal law authorizes an applicable entity, as defined, to receive a refund for specified environmental credits against the taxes imposed under federal law and excludes a refund payment made pursuant to that law from gross income. Existing federal law also authorizes an eligible taxpayer, as defined, to transfer the value of that refundable credit and exempts from gross income payment received by the transferor as consideration for the transfer. Existing federal law prohibits the transferee from deducting the amount paid as consideration for the transfer. This bill, in conformity with federal law, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2026, and before January 1, 2031, would exclude from gross income a refund payment made for the specified federal environmental credits described above and any payment received by a transferor as consideration for a transfer, as provided. The bill would also prohibit a transferee from deducting the amount paid as consideration for the transfer, in conformity with federal law. Existing law requires a bill authorizing a new tax expenditure to contain, among other things, specific goals, purposes, and objectives 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. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.

Existing federal law, the 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 authorizes the Governor to negotiate and conclude those compacts, subject to ratification by the Legislature. Existing law expressly ratifies a number of tribal-state gaming compacts, and amendments to tribal-state gaming compacts, between the State of California and specified Indian tribes. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project, as defined, that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment, as defined, or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. This bill would ratify the tribal-state gaming compact entered into between the State of California and the Cher-Ae Heights Indian Community of the Trinidad Rancheria, the first amendment to the compact between the State of California and the Pinoleville Pomo Nation, California, and the first amendment to the compact between the State of California and the Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation. The bill would provide that, in deference to tribal sovereignty, certain actions related to these compacts are not projects for the purposes of CEQA. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

(1) Under existing law, each school district and county office of education is responsible for the overall development, as specified, of a comprehensive school safety plan for each of its schools operating kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive. Existing law requires a comprehensive school safety plan to, among other things, identify appropriate strategies and programs that will provide or maintain a high level of school safety and address the school's procedures for complying with existing laws related to school safety. This bill would additionally require, until January 1, 2031, when a comprehensive school safety plan is next reviewed and updated, or by no later than March 1, 2026, those plans to include procedures specifically designed to notify parents and guardians of pupils, teachers, administrators, and school personnel when the school confirms the presence of immigration enforcement, as defined, on the schoolsite. Existing law prohibits a chartering authority from denying a petition for the establishment of a charter school unless it makes written factual findings supporting at least one of specified bases for denial. One of those bases for denying a petition is if the petition does not contain a reasonably comprehensive description of the development of a school safety plan that includes the same safety topics required in the comprehensive school safety plan of a school district or county office of education. This bill would authorize, until January 1, 2031, a chartering authority to deny a charter school petition that does not include in its proposed development of a school safety plan the same provisions on procedures and policies relating to notifying parents and guardians of pupils, teachers, administrators, and charter school personnel when the charter school confirms the presence of immigration enforcement, as defined, on the schoolsite as are required by the bill in a school district or county office of education comprehensive school safety plan. The bill also would make conforming changes. To the extent that this bill would impose new duties on local educational agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law establishes the California State University, under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, the University of California, under the administration of the Regents of the University of California, the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, and independent institutions of higher education as 4 segments of postsecondary education in the state. Existing law requires the Trustees of the California State University, the governing boards of community college districts, and independent institutions of higher education that are qualifying institutions for purposes of the Cal Grant Program, and requests the Regents of the University of California, to the fullest extent consistent with state and federal law, to implement various precautionary measures when federal immigration enforcement activities are undertaken on campuses of those segments, as specified, including, among others, that those postsecondary entities advise all students, faculty, and staff to notify the office of the chancellor or president, or their designee, as soon as possible, if they are advised that an immigration officer is expected to enter, will enter, or has entered the campus to execute a federal immigration order. This bill would require, until January 1, 2031, those postsecondary educational entities, and each campus of those postsecondary educational entities, to notify, as specified, all students, faculty, staff, and other campus community members who work on campus when the presence of immigration enforcement, as defined, is confirmed on campus. To the extent that the bill would impose new duties on community college districts, 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Existing law prohibits credibly impersonating a peace officer, firefighter, or employee of a public utility, state or local government agency, or search and rescue team, as specified. Existing law also prohibits willfully and credibly impersonating a peace officer, firefighter, or employee of a public utility, state or local government agency, or search and rescue team through or on an internet website, or by other electronic means, for the purposes of defrauding another. A violation of these prohibitions is punishable as a misdemeanor. This bill would revise and recast these provisions to prohibit impersonating a law enforcement officer, and would clarify that a law enforcement officer, for these purposes, includes a federal law enforcement officer. The bill would extend these offenses to include willfully and credibly impersonating any of those entities through any means for the purpose of defrauding another. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would, on and after January 1, 2026, require a law enforcement officer operating in California that is not uniformed to visibly display identification that includes their agency and either a name or badge number to the public when performing their enforcement duties, except as specified. The bill would make a violation of these provisions a misdemeanor. The bill would define personnel of a law enforcement agency as any peace officer under California law and any federal law enforcement officer. By creating a new crime and imposing duties on local law enforcement, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require any law enforcement agency operating in California to, by January 1, 2026, maintain and publicly post a written policy on the visible identification of sworn personnel, including a purpose statement affirming the agency's commitment to specified principles including transparency, accountability, and public trust, and a requirement for sworn personnel to visibly display identification and for specified exceptions. The bill would exempt personnel of any agency from the crime for not displaying identification if an agency maintains a policy pursuant to these provisions. The bill would deem a policy consistent with that exception unless a member of the public, an oversight body, or a local governing authority challenges it. The bill would, if the agency does not address deficiencies within 90 days, authorize the complaining party to proceed to a court of competent jurisdiction for a judicial determination of the exemption, as specified. The bill would also authorize a peace officer, as defined, to request an alleged law enforcement officer to present identification when there is probable cause or reasonable suspicion to believe the alleged law enforcement officer has committed crime, including, but not limited to, impersonating a peace officer. Existing law, the Bail Fugitive Recovery Persons Act, regulates bail fugitive recovery agents, defined as a person given written authorization by the bail or depositor of bail and contracted to investigate, surveil, locate, and arrest a bail fugitive and any person employed to assist the bail or depositor of bail to investigate, surveil, locate, and arrest a bail fugitive. This bill would prohibit a person authorized to apprehend a bail fugitive from using that position for the purposes of immigration enforcement and would prohibit a person authorized to apprehend a bail fugitive from disclosing personally identifiable information of any bail fugitive that is requested for purposes of immigration enforcement, except as specified. This bill would declare these provisions are severable. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to wear a mask, false whiskers, or any personal disguise, as specified, with the purpose of evading or escaping discovery, recognition, or identification while committing a public offense, or for concealment, flight, evasion, or escape from arrest or conviction for any public offense. This bill would make it a crime for a law enforcement officer to wear a facial covering in the performance of their duties, except as specified. The bill would define law enforcement officer as anyone designated by California law as a peace officer who is employed by a city, county, or other local agency, and any officer or agent of a federal law enforcement agency or law enforcement agency of another state, or any person acting on behalf of a federal law enforcement agency or agency of another state. The bill would make a violation of these provisions punishable as an infraction or a misdemeanor, as specified. By creating a new crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require any law enforcement agency operating in California to, by July 1, 2026, maintain and publicly post a written policy limiting the use of facial coverings, as specified. The bill would exempt personnel of any agency from the crime of wearing a facial covering if an agency maintains a policy pursuant to this section no later than July 1, 2026. The bill would deem a policy consistent with these provisions for the purposes of that exception unless a member of the public, an oversight body, or a local governing authority challenges it. The bill would also impose a specified civil penalty against certain officers for tortious conduct, including, but not limited to, false imprisonment or false arrest of an individual while wearing a facial covering. The bill would, if the agency does not address deficiencies within 90 days, authorize the complaining party to proceed to a court of competent jurisdiction for a judicial determination of the exemption, as specified. The bill would define a law enforcement agency for these purposes as any entity of a city, county, or other local agency, that employs anyone designated by California law as a peace officer, any federal law enforcement agency, or any law enforcement agency of another state. By imposing additional duties on local law enforcement agencies, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. This bill would declare its provisions to be severable. This bill would make related findings and declarations. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Maddy summarySCR 85 designates September 20, 2025, as Latino Veterans Day. This ceremonial resolution directly recognizes Latino veterans for their military service. The bill does not create new benefits or policies; it simply formally designates a date for commemoration. The measure is purely symbolic, aiming to honor this group's contributions through official recognition.

This measure would declare October 28, 2025, as First Responders' Day and would urge all Californians to observe and promote the day with appropriate ceremonies and activities that promote awareness of the contributions of first responders in California.

(1) Existing law establishes the In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) program, which is administered by the State Department of Social Services, counties, and other entities, under which qualified aged, blind, or disabled persons are provided with supportive services in order to permit them to remain in their own homes. Existing law authorizes a county board of supervisors to elect to contract with a nonprofit consortium to provide for the delivery of in-home supportive services or to establish, by ordinance, a public authority to provide for the delivery of those services, in accordance with certain procedures. Existing law deems a public authority created under these provisions to be the employer of in-home supportive services personnel under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, which governs labor relations between local public employers and employees. Existing law also deems a nonprofit consortium contracting with a county to be the employer of in-home supportive services personnel for purposes of collective bargaining over wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment. Existing law grants recipients of in-home supportive services the right to hire, fire, and supervise the work of any in-home supportive services personnel providing services for them. Existing law prohibits the state and specified local public employers from deterring or discouraging public employees from becoming or remaining members of an employee organization. Existing law also requires specified public employers to provide exclusive employee representatives access to new employee orientations. Existing law generally grants the Public Employment Relations Board jurisdiction over violations of these provisions. Existing law defines "public employers" who are subject to these provisions as including, among others, public agencies, cities, counties, and districts. This bill would expand the definition of "public employer," for purposes of those provisions, to include an employer who is subject to the In-Home Supportive Services Employer-Employee Relations Act, which the bill would create. The bill would establish a method for resolving disputes regarding wages, benefits, and other terms and conditions of employment between the state and recognized employee organizations representing individual providers. The bill would provide for the right of employees, also known as individual providers under the act, to form, join, and participate in activities of employee organizations for the purposes of representation on all matters within the scope of employee organizations. The bill would define "employee" or "individual provider" for these purposes to mean a person authorized to provide in-home supportive services pursuant to the individual provider mode or waiver personal care services, as prescribed. This bill would, for purposes of collective bargaining, deem the state to be the employer of record of individual providers in each county. The bill would grant the in-home supportive services recipient with the right to hire, fire, and supervise the work of the individual providers providing services to them. Among other things, the bill would specify that individual providers employed by a predecessor agency before January 1, 2026, shall retain employee status and not be required by the state to requalify to receive payment for providing in-home supportive services. Among other things, for purposes of collective bargaining, this bill would provide that existing bargaining units consisting of individual providers in a single county that are represented by the same recognized employee organization shall be deemed merged into the largest possible multicounty bargaining units represented by that employee organization. In counties where no recognized employee organization exists as of January 1, 2026, the bill would specify that a bargaining unit consisting of all employees in that county shall be deemed an appropriate unit for collective bargaining. Under the bill, if individual providers in a county bargaining unit are represented by a recognized employee organization on January 1, 2026, the state would be deemed the successor employer of the predecessor agency for purposes of negotiating a collective bargaining agreement, subject to the obligation to meet and confer in good faith and meet other related legal requirements. This bill would require all recognized employee organizations, as of January 1, 2026, to negotiate jointly on behalf of all bargaining units they represent to reach a single memorandum of understanding with the employer. The bill would authorize the memorandum of understanding to contain addenda reflecting regional or county-level terms and conditions. The bill would establish procedures for voting and ratification of a memorandum of understanding, and for the employer to assume a predecessor agency's rights and obligations under a memorandum of understanding or agreement between a predecessor agency and a recognized employee organization that is in effect on January 1, 2026. This bill would prescribe the duties of the state under the bill, including requiring the Governor to meet and confer in good faith, and to follow specified procedures regarding collective bargaining. If an agreement is reached by a representative of the Governor and the recognized employee organizations, the bill would require those parties to jointly prepare a written memorandum of understanding and present it to the Legislature for determination by majority vote. The bill would require the Governor, for any side letter, appendix, or other addendum to a memorandum of understanding that requires the expenditure of $250,000 or more related to salary and benefits not included in the original memorandum or the Budget Act, to provide that to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee, as specified. The bill would also establish mediation and arbitration procedures that would apply when the parties fail to reach an agreement. This bill would make certain actions by an employer and other entities involved in administering the IHSS program unlawful, including imposing or threatening to impose reprisals on employees or otherwise interfering with the exercise of their rights. The bill would authorize the Public Employment Relations Board to adopt reasonable rules and regulations pursuant to the bill, including the adoption of emergency regulations, as prescribed. (2) Existing law requires the Controller to provide for the administration of payroll deductions and salary reductions, and authorizes the Controller to establish procedures for that purpose. This bill would require the Controller to honor a written authorization for payroll deductions executed by an employee before January 1, 2026, and to make deductions for payments of dues to a recognized employee organization pursuant to the bill consistent with the above-described payroll deduction procedures. (3) Existing law, the California Public Records Act, requires public records to be open to inspection at all times during the office hours of the state or local agency that retains those records, and provides that every person has a right to inspect any public record, except as provided. Existing law provides that certain information regarding persons paid by the state to provide in-home supportive services, or other related public services, are not subject to disclosure under those provisions. Existing law further provides that copies of names, addresses, home telephone numbers, and other identifying information are required to be made available, upon request, to an exclusive bargaining agent and to any employee organization seeking representation rights under specified collective bargaining provisions. This bill would, with respect to the above-described personal identifying information, instead require this information to be made available to the exclusive bargaining agent and any employee organization seeking representation under the bill. The bill would require the state, or a county, public authority, or nonprofit consortium organized pursuant to the IHSS program, to promptly make the information available to the requesting entity. This bill would revise the IHSS program provisions to require the state to assume responsibilities as set forth in the bill. The bill would also require a county or city and county to continue to have certain IHSS program-related functions set forth in county ordinance or contract performed in accordance with specified provisions. (4) Existing law requires prospective providers of in-home supportive services to complete an in-person provider orientation at the time of enrollment that is developed by the department, in consultation with counties, that includes requirements to be an eligible IHSS provider and other related matters. This bill additionally would require that in-person provider orientation include any other information required to be communicated to prospective providers by a memorandum of understanding, appendix, or side letter between recognized employee organizations and the state. Existing law requires a specified mediation process, including a factfinding panel recommending settlement terms, to be held if a public authority or nonprofit consortium and an employee organization fail to reach agreement on a bargaining contract with in-home supportive service (IHSS) workers on or after October 1, 2023. This bill would make that provision inoperative. The bill would also require the department to appoint an IHSS Advisory Committee to provide ongoing advice and recommendations regarding in-home supportive services, as specified. The bill would require the employer, prior to finalizing a memorandum of understanding with one or more organizations that are the designated representatives of in-home services providers, to consult with specified advisory committee representatives to obtain input on county and public authority programmatic and fiscal implications. Existing law requires the state and counties to share the annual cost of providing IHSS pursuant to a specified cost ratio. Existing law requires all counties to have a rebased County IHSS Maintenance of Effort (MOE) , and requires the rebased MOE to be adjusted only by an inflation factor of 4% and for the annualized cost of increases in provider wages, health benefits, or other benefits that are locally negotiated, mediated, or imposed, as prescribed. This bill would prohibit the rebased County IHSS MOE from being adjusted based on any provision of any memorandum of understanding, or addenda, appendices, or side letters thereto, between the state and recognized employee organizations. Existing law requires the state to pay 100% of the allowable nonfederal share of county administration and public authority administration costs for each county, until the county's share of the General Fund moneys appropriated for this purpose is exhausted, and then requires the county to pay 100% of the remaining nonfederal share of county administration and public authority administration costs, as specified. This bill would require the state to also pay 100% of the nonfederal share of county administration and public authority administration costs for each county of any administration costs resulting from the provisions of any memorandum of understanding, or addenda, appendices, or side letters thereto, between the state and recognized employee organizations. Existing law, the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, requires, with specified exceptions, that all meetings of a state body be open and public. This bill would exempt the IHSS Advisory Committee from the act. This bill would make other related changes. By imposing new duties on local government officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (5) This bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern and, therefore, apply to all counties. (6) The California Constitution requires local agencies, for the purpose of ensuring public access to the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies, to comply with a statutory enactment that amends or enacts laws relating to public records or open meetings and contains findings demonstrating that the enactment furthers the constitutional requirements relating to this purpose. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. (7) 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. (8) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

The California Constitution and the Public Utilities Act vest the Public Utilities Commission with regulatory authority over electrical corporations and water corporations. The act requires the commission to ensure that errors in estimates of demand elasticity or sales do not result in material overcollections or undercollections of electrical corporations. This bill would additionally require the commission to ensure that those errors do not result in material overcollections or undercollections of water corporations. Existing law requires the commission, in establishing rates for water service, to consider separate charges for costs associated with customer service, facilities, variable operating costs, or other components of the water service provided to water users. Existing law requires the commission to consider, and authorizes the commission to authorize, a water corporation to establish programs, including rate designs, for achieving conservation of water and recovering the cost of these programs through the rates, as provided. This bill would, for purposes of the above-described rates for water service, require that any changes to rates or implementation of surcharges in accordance with the above-described requirement on the commission to ensure errors in estimates of demand elasticity or sales do not result in material overcollections or undercollections of water corporations do not result in revenues above those approved by the commission. Under existing law, a violation of the act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime. Because the above requirements would be part of the act and a violation of a commission action implementing this bill's requirements 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.