Existing law, the California Public Records Act, requires state and local agencies to make their records available for public inspection, except as provided. Existing law generally includes in the meaning of "public records" any writing containing information relating to the conduct of the public's business prepared, owned, used, or retained by any state or local agency regardless of physical form or characteristics. Under existing law, certain election petitions are not public records and are not open to inspection except by certain persons. Specifically, existing law authorizes, among other persons, the proponents of a petition found to be insufficient or their designated representative to examine the petition no later than 21 days after certification of the insufficiency. This bill would require the examination to conclude no later than 60 days after it commenced. If the examination does not conclude within 5 business days, the bill would require that the proponents of the examination reimburse the county for any costs incurred to continue the examination, as provided. When an examination continues beyond 5 business days, the bill would require the elections official to estimate at the beginning of each day and the proponent to deposit with the elections official a sum required by the elections official to support the examination for that day. The bill would authorize the return of any money deposited in excess of the cost of the examination and provide that money not required to be refunded be deposited in the appropriate public treasury. By imposing new duties on county elections officials related to examination of petitions, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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. 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. 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.
Sponsored bills
Prior law, the California Voter's Choice Act, required the Secretary of State to establish a taskforce that included certain individuals to review all-mailed ballot or vote center elections and to provide comments and recommendations to the Legislature within 6 months of each all-mailed ballot election or vote center election. The act was repealed by its own provisions on January 1, 2022. This bill would reestablish this taskforce. Existing law requires any county conducting an all-mailed ballot election to meet specified conditions, including that each vote center provide language assistance, that a county elections official establish a language accessibility advisory committee, and that the county elections official develop a draft plan for the administration of elections in consultation with the public. Under existing law, a voter education and outreach plan is required to include at least two direct contacts with voters to inform them of the upcoming election and to promote the toll-free voter assistance hotline. Existing law authorizes the county elections official to adopt a final plan for the administration of elections following a 14-day review and comment period. Existing law requires the Secretary of State to submit a report to the Legislature containing information about, among other things, voter turnout, voter registration, and ballot rejection rates, by specified categories. Existing law requires a county elections official to post on the official's internet website a report that compares the cost of an all-mailed ballot election to the cost of previous elections, as specified. This bill would require each vote center to post information regarding the availability of language assistance services, including language assistance hotlines provided by the county or Secretary of State. The bill would require a language accessibility advisory committee and a voting accessibility advisory committee to hold their first meetings before a public meeting required as part of the development of a draft plan for the administration of elections, and it would also require a county elections official, in a county with more than 500,000 registered voters, to establish a voter education and outreach advisory committee. The bill would repeal the requirement for a voter outreach and advisory committee on December 31, 2029. The bill would, after the first 6 statewide all-mailed ballot elections, authorize a county elections official to make only one direct contact with voters if the county elections official revises the plan for the administration of elections, as specified, and spends at least half the funds saved by not making a second direct contact on targeted outreach to historically underrepresented voters. The bill would require the county elections official to adopt a final plan for the administration of elections no later than 120 days before the election and following the 14-day review and comment period. The bill would require the Secretary of State to submit a final report to the Legislature containing specified information. The bill would require a county elections official to post a report within 9 months of the certification of the results of the election that compares the cost of an all-mailed ballot election with the costs of previous elections, as specified. By increasing the duties of local elections officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 4005 of the Elections Code proposed by AB 884 to be operative only if this bill and AB 884 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law prohibits a store, as defined, from providing a single-use carryout bag to a customer at the point of sale, with specified exceptions, including an exemption for bags used to contain unwrapped food. Existing law defines a "single-use carryout bag" as a bag made of plastic, paper, or other material that is provided by a store to a customer at the point of sale and that is not a recycled paper bag or a reusable grocery bag that meets specified requirements, including that the bag be made by a certified reusable grocery bag producer and meets specified requirements with regard to the bag's durability, material, labeling, heavy metal content, and, with regard to reusable grocery bags made from plastic film, recycled material content. Existing law prohibits a producer of reusable grocery bags made from plastic film from selling or distributing those bags unless the producer is certified by a third-party certification entity, and provides proof of that certification and a certification fee to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, as specified. Existing law also prohibits a store from selling or distributing a recycled paper bag at the point of sale unless the store makes that bag available for purchase for not less than $0.10. Existing law defines "recycled paper bag," in part, as a paper carryout bag that contains a minimum of 40% postconsumer recycled materials, except as provided, and meets other requirements. Existing law allows a retail establishment to voluntarily comply with these requirements, if the retail establishment provides the department with irrevocable notice. This bill would, commencing January 1, 2026, revise and recast those provisions to, among other things, recast the definition of a "single-use carryout bag" to a "carryout bag," and would revise the definition to mean a bag made of plastic, paper, or other material that is provided by a store to a customer at the point of sale for the purpose of carrying purchased goods and that is not a recycled paper bag. The bill would create a carryout bag exception to include a bag provided to a customer before the customer reaches the point of sale, that is designed to protect a purchased item from damaging or contaminating other purchased items in a checkout bag, or to contain an unwrapped food item, as specified. The bill would revise the definition of "recycled paper bag" to require it be made from a minimum of 50% postconsumer recycled materials on and after January 1, 2028, without exception. The bill would also prohibit a store from providing, distributing, or selling a carryout bag to a customer at the point of sale, except as provided. The bill would also repeal the provisions relating to standards for and the certification of reusable grocery bags, and would repeal a provision relating to certain obsolete at-store recycling program requirements. The bill would make related legislative findings and declarations and would make related conforming changes.
Existing law declares the intent of the Legislature to set broad minimum standards and guidelines for educational programs, and to encourage local districts to develop programs that will best fit the needs and interests of the pupils, pursuant to stated philosophy, goals, and objectives. Existing law requires, in each public school, that daily appropriate patriotic exercises be conducted, as specified. This bill would authorize an employee at a public school to conduct a brief period of quiet reflection, with the participation of pupils in attendance. The bill would prohibit an individual from requiring a pupil to participate in a period of quiet reflection. The bill would prohibit the governing board of a school district, a county board of education, or the governing body of a charter school from requiring a certificated or classified employee at a public school to conduct a brief period of quiet reflection. The bill would make legislative findings and declarations relating to these provisions.
Existing law prohibits driving a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent. Existing law also prohibits driving a vehicle in excess of an established speed limit. Existing law requires that specified convictions, violations, and traffic-related incidents count as points against a driver's record for purposes of suspension or revocation of the privilege to drive. This bill, the Negligent Operator Treatment (NOT) in California Act, would, commencing on January 1, 2027, prohibit excessively speeding, defined as driving a vehicle at a speed that exceeds the posted speed limit by 26 miles per hour or more on a highway with a posted speed limit for passenger vehicles of 55 miles per hour or less. The bill would provide that a conviction for excessively speeding is punishable as an infraction and one point shall be assessed against a driver's record for a first violation and 2 points for any subsequent violation that occurs within 3 years after a previous violation for which the driver was convicted. By creating a new infraction, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law establishes enhanced infrastructure financing districts to finance public capital facilities or other specified projects of communitywide significance. Existing law provides for the membership of the governing body of the district, referred to as the public financing authority. Existing law authorizes the legislative body of a city or a county to designate a proposed enhanced infrastructure financing district by adopting a resolution of intention to establish the proposed district which, among other things, is required to state that an enhanced infrastructure financing district is proposed and describe the boundaries of the proposed district. Existing law requires the public financing authority to direct the preparation of and adopt an infrastructure financing plan consistent with the general plan and any relevant specific plan, and consisting of, among other things, a financing section. Existing law requires that the financing section include a plan for financing the public facilities, a limit on the total number of dollars of taxes that may be allocated to the district pursuant to the plan, and a date, either not more than 45 years from the date on which the issuance of the bonds is approved for the plan or the issuance of a loan is approved on which the district will cease to exist, by which time all tax allocation to the district will end, or, where the district is divided into project areas, a date on which the infrastructure financing plan will cease to be in effect and all tax allocations to the district will end and a date on which the district's authority to repay indebtedness with incremental tax revenues will end, as specified. This bill, for plans proposed on or after January 1, 2025, would specify that for the purpose of development and construction of passenger rail projects in the County of Los Angeles where at least 75% of the revenue from the district is used for debt service on a federal Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan, the date on which the district will cease to exist shall not be more than 75 years from the date of the approval of a TIFIA loan, as specified. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for specified districts enacted primarily for the purpose of development and construction of zero-emission mass transit projects.
Existing law, the California Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly Act (act) , requires the State Department of Social Services to license, inspect, and regulate residential care facilities for the elderly, as defined, and imposes criminal penalties on a person who violates the act or who willfully or repeatedly violates any rule or regulation adopted under the act. Existing law gives residents of those facilities specified rights, including, but not limited to, the right to be accorded dignity in their personal relationships with staff, residents, and other persons, and the right to reasonable accommodation of individual needs and preferences in all aspects of life in the facility, except when the health or safety of the individual or other residents would be endangered. This bill would add to those rights the right to request, refuse, or discontinue a service. Existing law requires a licensee of a residential care facility for the elderly that increases the rates of fees for residents or makes increases in any of its rate structures for services to provide at least 60 days' prior written notice to the residents or the residents' representatives of the amount of the increase, the reason for the increase, and a general description of the additional costs, except with respect to an increase in the rate due to a change in the level of care of the resident. This bill would extend the required written notice period to 90 days and would require the licensee to provide the reason or reasons for the increase in the written notice. Because a violation of the bill's requirements by a residential care facility for the elderly 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.
Existing law, the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act, requires, beginning July 1, 2024, a business that provides an online service, product, or feature likely to be accessed by children to comply with certain requirements. The act requires the business to complete a data protection impact assessment addressing, among other things, whether the design could harm children and whether and how the online product, service, or feature uses system design features to increase, sustain, or extend use of the online product, service, or feature by children, including the automatic playing of media, rewards for time spent, and notifications. Existing law prohibits the business from using the personal information of any child in a way that the business knows, or has reason to know, is materially detrimental to the physical health, mental health, or well-being of a child. Existing law, the Privacy Rights for California Minors in the Digital World, prohibits an operator of an internet website, online service, online application, or mobile application from specified conduct when minors are involved, including the marketing or advertising of alcoholic beverages, firearms, or certain other products or services. Existing law sets forth other related protections for minors, including under the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 and the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020. This bill, the Protecting Our Kids from Social Media Addiction Act, would make it unlawful for the operator of an addictive internet-based service or application, as defined, to provide an addictive feed to a user, unless the operator does not have actual knowledge that the user is a minor; commencing January 1, 2027, has reasonably determined that the user is not a minor; or has obtained verifiable parental consent to provide an addictive feed to the user who is a minor. The bill would define "addictive feed" as an internet website, online service, online application, or mobile application, in which multiple pieces of media generated or shared by users are recommended, selected, or prioritized for display to a user based on information provided by the user, or otherwise associated with the user or the user's device, as specified, unless any of certain conditions are met. The bill would make it unlawful for the operator of an addictive internet-based service or application, between the hours of 12 a.m. and 6 a.m., in the user's local time zone, and between the hours of 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday from September through May in the user's local time zone, to send notifications to a user if the operator has actual knowledge that the user is a minor or, commencing January 1, 2027, has not reasonably determined that the user is not a minor, unless the operator has obtained verifiable parental consent to send those notifications, as specified. The bill would set forth related provisions for certain access controls determined by the verified parent through a mechanism provided by the operator. Under the bill, a parent's provision of consent or use of a mechanism, as described above, would not waive, release, otherwise limit, or serve as a defense to, any claim that the parent, or that the user who is a minor or was a minor at the time of using the internet-based service or application, might have against the operator regarding any harm to the mental health or well-being of the user. The bill would require an operator to annually disclose the number of minor users of its addictive internet-based service or application, and of that total the number for whom the operator has received verifiable parental consent to provide an addictive feed, and the number of minor users as to whom the access controls are or are not enabled. Under the bill, these provisions would only be enforced in a civil action brought in the name of the people of the State of California by the Attorney General. The bill would require the Attorney General to adopt regulations to further the purposes of these provisions, including regulations regarding age assurance and parental consent by January 1, 2027. The bill would authorize the Attorney General to adopt regulations that provide for exceptions to these provisions, but only if those exceptions further the purpose of protecting minors. The bill would require the Attorney General, in promulgating regulations, to solicit public comment regarding the impact that any regulation might have based on certain nondiscrimination characteristics set forth in existing law. The bill would make these provisions severable.
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. Existing law, until January 1, 2030, exempts from CEQA a university housing development project carried out by a public university on real property owned by the public university if the project meets certain requirements, including that each building within the project is certified as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Platinum or better by the United States Green Building Council. Existing law requires the lead agency, if the university housing development project is exempt from CEQA under the above provision, to file the LEED certificate for buildings within the project and a notice determining that the construction impacts of the project have been fully mitigated with the Office of Planning and Research and the county clerk of the county in which the project is located. Existing law requires a university housing development project carried out by the University of California, in order to be exempt from CEQA under this law, to be consistent with the most recent long-range development plan EIR certified on or after January 1, 2018, as provided. This bill would extend the application of the university housing development project exemption until January 1, 2032. The bill would instead require a university housing development project carried out by the University of California, in order to be exempt from CEQA under the above-described exemption to be located on a campus site identified for housing in the most recent long-range development plan EIR or an EIR prepared for any subsequent amendment to that plan relating to housing, as specified. The bill would repeal the requirement to file the LEED certificate with the county clerk of the county in which the project is located. Existing law requires a public university or a relevant public agency with authority to issue a certificate of occupancy for a building within an exempt university housing development project to not issue the certificate of occupancy for the building unless the lead agency receives certification of LEED Platinum or better from the United States Green Building Council for the building and the lead agency determines that the construction impacts of the project have been fully mitigated. This bill would instead require a public university to obtain LEED Platinum certification for each building within a university housing development project no later than 18 months from the issuance of the building's certificate of occupancy or an equivalent certification, or its initial usage, and would authorize a public university to obtain 2 extensions for this LEED certification compliance requirement in 6-month increments, as provided. The bill would prohibit a public university that has exempted an approved university housing development project pursuant to the above-described exemption from applying that exemption to a subsequent university housing development project until the public university has obtained LEED Platinum certification for each building within the prior exempted university housing development project, except as specified. The bill would also make other related changes.
Maddy summaryThis bill urges the President of the United States to designate the Sáttítla National Monument using the federal Antiquities Act of 1906. The proposal seeks to protect approximately 205,000 acres in northeastern California, which holds significant cultural, geological, and ecological value for multiple tribes and endangered species. The measure highlights the area's importance as a water source and spiritual center for the Pit River, Modoc, Shasta, Karuk, and Wintu peoples. By calling for this federal action, the legislation aims to align with state and national conservation goals to preserve the land for future generations.