Existing law authorizes the establishment of the South Bay Regional Housing Trust, a joint powers authority, by the County of Los Angeles and any or all of the cities within the jurisdiction of the South Bay Cities Council of Governments, with the stated purpose of funding housing to assist the homeless population and persons and families of extremely low, very low, and low income within the South Bay Cities region. Existing law authorizes the South Bay Regional Housing Trust to, among other things, fund planning and construction of housing of all types and tenures for the homeless population and persons and families of extremely low, very low, and low income. This bill would expand the authority of the trust to also include funding the preservation of housing for these purposes. The bill would also expand the authority of the trust to include funding planning, construction, and preservation of housing for persons and families of moderate income, as defined, using any private resources and specified public resources. Existing law requires that the South Bay Regional Housing Trust be governed by a board of directors consisting of an appropriate number of directors, to be determined by the governing board of the South Bay Cities Council of Governments. Existing law requires the board of directors to include mayors, council members, or County of Los Angeles supervisors, as described. Existing law requires that the board of directors to elect a chairperson and a vice chairperson from among its members at the first meeting held in each calendar year. Existing law requires the governing board of the South Bay Cities Council of Governments to appoint the board of directors and, in the case of a vacancy on the board of directors, qualified individuals to fill the vacancy, as specified. This bill would instead require the joint powers agreement to establish the number of directors of the trust and the process for appointing directors and filling vacancies. The bill would additionally authorize the board of directors to include persons appointed and designated as alternate members of the board of directors, as specified. The bill would require all directors and alternates to be subject to the board of directors' adopted conflict of interest code. The bill would prohibit each alternate that is currently not an elected official from participating as a voting member in more than 75% of all meetings in a calendar year. The bill would instead require the board of directors to elect a chairperson and a vice chairperson from among its members at the first meeting held in either the calendar or fiscal year. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for South Bay Cities region of the County of Los Angeles.
Sponsored bills
This measure would urge President Donald J. Trump to avoid raising the cost of living for American consumers by rescinding the tariffs that he has imposed since taking office in January 2025 and refunding the American people for the costs passed on to them by his tariffs. The measure would also urge the United States Congress to enact a joint resolution to rescind President Trump's tariffs and to oppose all future unilateral and arbitrary tariff increases imposed by President Trump.
Existing law creates the Department of Insurance, headed by the Insurance Commissioner, and generally regulates classes of insurance, including fire and residential property insurance. Existing regulations prescribe specified deadlines by which an insurer is required to, among other things, respond to a notice of claim, accept or deny a claim, in whole or in part, and, upon acceptance of a claim in whole or in part, tender payment or otherwise take action to perform its obligation, as specified. This bill, with respect to a claim under a policy of residential property insurance, would codify specified provisions of the regulations prescribing the deadlines above. Existing law specifies the measure of indemnity under an open fire insurance policy that requires payment of actual cash value or replacement cost. Under existing law, the measure of the actual cash value recovery is the amount it would cost the insured to repair, rebuild, or replace the thing lost or injured less a fair and reasonable deduction for physical depreciation based upon its condition at the time of the injury or the policy limit, whichever is less. If an open policy requires the insured to repair, rebuild, or replace the damaged property to collect the full replacement cost, under existing law the insurer is required to pay the actual cash value of the damaged property until the damaged property is repaired, rebuilt, or replaced, at which time the insurer is required to pay the difference between the actual cash value payment made and the full replacement cost reasonably paid to replace the damaged property. If there is a total loss to the insured structure, this bill would require, except under specified circumstances, an insurer to pay the actual cash value associated with the primary structure and other insured structures within 30 calendar days from the date the property is determined to be a total loss. After this payment is made, and after the insurer has received adequate proof of loss and documentation reasonably sufficient to determine the amount payable, the bill would require an insurer to pay the undisputed amount of replacement cost associated with the primary structure and other insured structures, up to the limits in the policy, within 30 calendar days from the occurrence of a specified event. This bill would require interest to accrue if payments are not made within 30 calendar days, as specified. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 2051.5 of the Insurance Code proposed by SB 876 to be operative only if this bill and SB 876 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law establishes the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy and prescribes the membership, functions, and duties of the conservancy regarding the acquisition, preservation, and improvement of real property within the Santa Monica Mountains Zone, as defined. Existing law establishes within the conservancy the Upper Los Angeles River and Tributaries Working Group with designated membership of no more than 23 appointed representatives. Existing law requires the working group to develop, through watershed-based planning methods and community engagement, a revitalization plan for the Upper Los Angeles River, the tributaries of the Pacoima Wash, Tujunga Wash, and Verdugo Wash, the Arroyo Seco, and any additional tributary waterway that the working group determines to be necessary. Existing law requires the working group to submit the revitalization plan to the conservancy for adoption, and requires the conservancy to submit a copy of the revitalization plan to the Assembly Committee on Water, Parks, and Wildlife and the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Water, as specified. This bill would add an additional member to the working group, for a total of no more than 25 appointed representatives. The bill would require one of the representatives appointed to the working group to represent the city council district within the City of Los Angeles with the greatest number of Upper Los Angeles River miles. The bill would require the working group to meet at least once each year to evaluate and report on implementation of the revitalization plan to the conservancy, and propose amendments to the revitalization plan to the conservancy for adoption. The bill would require the working group to submit proposed amendments to the revitalization plan to the conservancy, and would require that the conservancy take action to adopt the proposed amendments, as specified.
Under existing law, upon the proclamation of a state of emergency by the President of the United States or the Governor, or upon the declaration of a local emergency by the executive officer of any county, city, or city and county, and for 30 days following the proclamation or declaration of emergency, it is price gouging, a misdemeanor, for any person, business, or other entity, to increase the rental price advertised, offered, or charged for housing, to an existing or prospective tenant, by more than 10%. Existing law exempts an increase from these provisions if the person can prove that the increase is directly attributable to additional costs for repairs or additions beyond normal maintenance that were amortized over the rental term that caused the rent to be increased greater than 10%. This bill would instead make it an affirmative defense to charge of price gouging pursuant to that provision if an increase was directly attributable to additional costs for repairs or additions beyond normal maintenance incurred within the year prior to the proclamation or declaration and either the housing was rented, advertised for rent, or offered for rent at the time the costs were incurred or the person can prove that within a year before the proclamation or declaration, the intent to offer the housing for rent within 6 months of the repair or addition already existed. Existing law also makes the imposition of various other price increases upon the proclamation of a state of emergency by the President of the United States or the Governor, or upon the declaration of a local emergency by the executive officer of any county, city, or city and county, and for 30 days following the proclamation or declaration of emergency, price gouging. Existing law exempts certain price increases from these provisions. This bill would instead frame those exemptions as affirmative defenses. Existing law defines housing for these purposes as any rental housing with an initial lease term of no longer than one year. This bill would expand the definition of "housing" to include any rental housing without regard to the length of the initial lease term. Existing law defines the rental price of housing advertised, offered, or charged at a daily rate at the time of the proclamation or declaration of emergency that is advertised, offered, or charged on a periodic lease agreement after the declaration or proclamation of emergency as being 160% of the fair market rent established by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, which may be increased by 5% if the housing is offered for rent fully furnished. This bill would define the rental price of housing advertised, offered, or charged at a daily rate following a declaration or proclamation of emergency, but that was not advertised, offered, or charged at a daily rate in the year prior to the declaration or proclamation of emergency as being 130 of the amount above. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 396 of the Penal Code proposed by SB 493 to be operative only if this bill and SB 493 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. By expanding the scope of 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.
(1) Existing law generally regulates classes of insurance, including fire and residential property insurance. Existing law prohibits a policy from limiting or denying a payment of building code upgrade cost on the basis that the insured has decided to rebuild at a new location or to purchase an already built home at a new location. If there is a total loss of the insured structure, this bill would require the building code upgrade cost payable to include all costs that would have been incurred if the insured structure been completely rebuilt at its original location. (2) Existing law requires a disclosure to be provided upon an offer of a residential property insurance policy that states policies offering extended replacement cost coverage of at least 50% may be available for that property and that includes the internet website address of the Homeowners Coverage Comparison Tool. Existing law exempts specified insurers, agents, and brokers from this requirement. This bill would instead prohibit a residential property insurance policy from being issued or renewed unless the applicant or insured is offered extended replacement cost coverage in an amount of no less than 50% of coverage above the policy limits for the primary dwelling if the property is eligible for replacement cost coverage. If an applicant or policyholder declines this offer, the bill would require the insurer to record acknowledgment of the declination, as specified. (3) Existing law requires an insurer that provides replacement cost coverage to provide a cost estimate for rebuilding or replacing the structure at specified intervals, but exempts an insurer that meets specified criteria from this requirement. This bill would delete those exemptions and would extend the cost estimate requirements to a policy provided by the California FAIR Plan Association if replacement cost coverage is available under the policy and the policy limit being offered or provided is less than the maximum combined policy limit available under this program. (4) Existing law requires an insurer to provide an insured with a list of items that the insurer believes may be covered under the policy as additional living expenses if there is a loss under a homeowners' insurance policy for which the insured has made a claim for additional living expenses. If there is a covered loss relating to a state of emergency, existing law requires additional living expense coverage to be for a period of no less than 24 months from the inception of the loss. This bill would require the above-described list to be written, and would authorize the list to be transmitted as an electronic document. The bill would require additional living expense coverage to include all reasonable additional expenses incurred by the insured for the insured to maintain a comparable standard of living for the time the insured dwelling is not habitable due to a covered loss, as specified. The bill would authorize an insurer to offer the ability to the insured to choose to collect the monthly fair rental value of the dwelling in lieu of reimbursement for itemized expenses under additional living expense coverage, as specified. If there is a covered total loss relating to a state of emergency, the bill would require loss of use, fair rental value, or similar coverage to be for a period of no less than 24 months from the inception of the loss and would extend additional living expenses 15 calendar days beyond the date upon which the premises is deemed habitable. The bill would prohibit issuing or renewing a homeowners' insurance policy that contains a dollar policy limit for additional living expense coverage without offering extended additional living expense, loss of use, or fair rental value, or similar coverage in an amount of no less than 50% of coverage above the underlying policy limits for additional living expenses. (5) Existing law requires a residential property insurer to provide a written status report to the insured if the insurer assigns a 3rd or subsequent first-party claims adjuster within a 6-month period for a claim arising as a result of a state of emergency. Existing law prescribes the standard form for fire insurance policies covering property and requires the form to include specified statements regarding this status report. Under existing law, it is a misdemeanor to issue or countersign a fire policy that varies from the standard form fire insurance policy. This bill would require an insurer to assign a primary point of contact within 30 calendar days from the date the notice of claim is provided to the insurer to be primarily responsible for a claim that involves one or more coverages under a policy of residential property insurance and is for a loss relating to a state of emergency, and would require an insurer to provide a written report within 15 calendar days of the assignment of a subsequent point of contact. The bill would make conforming changes to the standard form for fire insurance, thus expanding the scope of an existing crime and imposing a state-mandated local program. (6) Existing law prescribes the standard form of the California Residential Insurance Disclosure, which sets forth a description of certain types of insurance coverage. Existing law requires a residential property insurance policy to include specified information about coverage on its declarations page. Existing law requires the disclosure and declarations page to explain that building code upgrade coverage covers additional costs to comply with building codes and zoning laws in effect at the time of loss or rebuilding. This bill would instead require the above-described disclosure and declarations page to explain that building code upgrade coverage covers additional costs to comply with building codes and zoning laws in effect at the time of rebuilding and required for rebuilding. (7) Existing law creates the Department of Insurance, headed by the Insurance Commissioner, and prescribes the commissioner's powers and duties. Existing law requires an admitted insurer to submit various reports and documents to the commissioner or department upon request or at specified intervals and authorizes the commissioner to conduct an examination of an insurer at the commissioner's discretion. This bill would require a residential property insurer to submit a detailed disaster response plan to the department before April 1, 2028, and would require the plan to be updated every 2 years or upon the commissioner's request. The bill would also require a residential property insurer to report to the commissioner the losses, claims, and estimate of total incurred losses no later than 30 calendar days from the date a state of emergency was declared if there is a related covered loss. The bill would make information submitted pursuant to these provisions confidential. (8) Existing law defines certain actions as unfair methods of competition and unfair and deceptive acts or practices in the business of insurance. Under existing law, a person who engages in an unfair method of competition or an unfair or deceptive act or practice is liable to the state for a civil penalty to be fixed by the commissioner, not to exceed $5,000 for each act, or, if the act or practice was willful, a civil penalty not to exceed $10,000 for each act. Existing law authorizes the commissioner to order a respondent to provide restitution for a loss arising from the respondent's conduct, but exempts specified surplus line brokers, production agencies, and administrators from those restitution orders. This bill would additionally make a person who engages in an unfair method of competition or an unfair or deceptive act or practice relating to a state of emergency liable to the state for a civil penalty to be fixed by the commissioner, not to exceed $10,000 for each act, or, if the act or practice was willful, a civil penalty not to exceed $20,000 for each act. The bill would authorize the commissioner to order a person who engages in an unfair claims settlement practice to provide restitution, as specified. The bill would eliminate the restitution order exemption for surplus line brokers, production agencies, and administrators. (9) Existing law requires an admitted insurer with written California premiums totaling $10,000,000 or more to submit a report with specified fire risk information on its residential property policies to the commissioner on or before April 1, 2020, and every 2 years thereafter. This bill would instead require an admitted insurer with written California premiums totaling $20,000,000 or more to submit a report on or before April 1, 2028, and every 2 years thereafter, on its residential property experience data for the previous 3 years for policies written in California, reported by individual policy. (10) This bill would make its provisions operative on January 1, 2028. (11) 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. (12) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 2051.5 of the Insurance Code proposed by SB 878 to be operative only if this bill and SB 878 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 2071 of the Insurance Code proposed by SB 877 to be operatively only if this bill and SB 877 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 12928.7 of the Insurance Code proposed by SB 1206 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1206 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (13) 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 creates the Department of Insurance, headed by the Insurance Commissioner, and generally regulates classes of insurance, including residential property insurance. Existing law requires an insurer to deliver to the named insured an offer of renewal, as specified, at least 45 days before the policy expiration and to deliver a notice of nonrenewal at least 75 days before the policy expiration. If the insurer fails to do so, existing law requires the existing policy, with no change in its terms and conditions, to remain in effect for 75 days from the date that the notice of nonrenewal is delivered or mailed to the named insured. Existing law requires nonrenewal notices to contain specified information. This bill would, beginning January 1, 2028, require an insurer to deliver to the named policyholder a notice of nonrenewal of the policy at least 90 days before the policy expiration, except as provided. The bill would require the notice to contain specified information, including all information related to the basis for the nonrenewal, as specified. If the insurer fails to deliver a notice of nonrenewal to the named policyholder, the bill would require the existing policy to remain in effect for 90 days from the date the notice of nonrenewal is delivered. If an insurer finds that a policy does not meet its underwriting guidelines due to a condition that can be remedied by the policyholder, the bill would require the insurer to deliver or mail to the named policyholder a notice at least 120 days before the policy expiration that includes an explanation of any remediation, additional information, or other change to the property that would qualify the policyholder to obtain renewal of the policy. This bill would, beginning January 1, 2028, require an insurer that refuses to renew a policy to provide the policyholder with a detailed, plain language explanation of the grounds for the nonrenewal and all nonaerial imagery relied upon as a basis for the decision. The bill would require, upon request and within 15 days of that request, an insurer to provide any property inspection findings or property inspection reports relied upon as a basis for the decision. If an insurer finds that a policy does not meet its underwriting guidelines due to a condition that can be remedied by the policyholder, the bill would require the insurer to provide the policyholder with a period of not less than 90 days to perform the necessary remediation or other change to the property or to provide additional information. The bill would prohibit an insurer from refusing to renew a residential property insurance policy solely on the basis of certain claims, on the basis of the policyholder's previous inquiry, or on the basis of the age of the roof under certain circumstances. On or before April 1, 2029, and annually thereafter by that date, this bill would require an insurer to submit to the commissioner a report for the previous calendar year containing specified information. On or before September 1, 2029, and annually thereafter by that date, the bill would require the commissioner to prepare and publish on the department's internet website an aggregated report for the previous calendar year of the information reported by insurers.
Maddy summarySenate Resolution 135 is a commemorative measure that formally honors the 40th Infantry Division of the California National Guard for its more than century-long history of service. The resolution highlights the unit's contributions in major conflicts, including World War I, World War II, the Korean War, and post-9/11 operations, as well as its role in responding to natural disasters within California. It specifically acknowledges the division's Medal of Honor recipients and notes that Major General Laura L. Yeager became the first woman to command an infantry division in 2019. The bill directs the Secretary of the Senate to send copies of the resolution to the Adjutant General of California, the division commander, and the author for distribution.
Existing law, the State General Obligation Bond Law, generally sets forth the procedures for the issuance and sale of bonds governed by its provisions and for the disbursal of the proceeds of the sale of those bonds. Existing law specifies various provisions required for inclusion in a bond act. Existing law requires any state bond measure approved on or after January 1, 2004, to be subject to an annual reporting process, with the head of the lead state agency administering the bond proceeds reporting certain information about the projects being funded to the Legislature and the Department of Finance. Existing law permits this information to be provided on the agency's internet website or the state's open data portal under certain circumstances. Existing law authorizes the costs of the report to be included in the cost of administering the bond act unless prohibited by the bond act. Existing law defines various terms for these purposes, including "board." Existing law defines "board" to mean the state board, department, or agency authorized by a bond act to request the committee to cause bonds to be issued for the purpose of creating a fund that is to be expended by the board for the purposes specified in the bond act. Existing law, the Administrative Procedure Act, sets forth the requirements for the adoption, publication, review, and implementation of regulations by state agencies. For any state general obligation bond measure that is approved by voters on and after January 1, 2027, this bill would require a bond act to include specified information about the objectives of the bond expenditure and related data. The bill would also require the board to post on its internet website a notification that contains, among other information, details about the programs and projects authorized to be funded by the bond. The bill would require the board to provide a short, one page, executive summary style written report to the Department of Finance, the Legislative Analyst, and specified legislative committees that contains certain information regarding the general obligation bond, in accordance with the above-described provision permitting this information to be provided on the board's internet website or the state's online data portal. The bill would require the report to include, among other information, whether the project, grant, or other expenditure of bond proceeds has been done in a timely manner. The bill would require a bond act to include a provision requiring the cost of the report to be included in the cost of administering the bond act and would require the cost of compliance with the above-described report requirements be included in the cost of administering the bond act. The bill would exempt from the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act the development and adoption of program guidelines, recommendations, or criteria pursuant to the bill. The bill would also make nonsubstantive and conforming changes.
Existing law authorizes the Public Utilities Commission to fix the rates and charges for every public utility, and requires that those rates and charges be just and reasonable. Existing law prohibits a public utility from changing a rate or altering a classification, contract, practice, or rule that would result in a new rate, except upon a showing before the commission and a finding by the commission that the new rate is justified and the public utility notifying its customers of the rate change. This bill would require an electrical corporation or gas corporation proposing to change a rate or to alter a classification, contract, practice, or rule that would result in a new rate to include in its proposal certain information, as provided. The bill would require the commission, in approving the rate change, to take into account, and make specific findings related to, wildfire risk reduction efforts taken by the electrical corporation. Existing law requires the commission, by May 1 of each year, to prepare and submit a written report to the Governor and the Legislature that contains the commission's recommendations for actions to limit electrical corporations' and gas corporations' utility costs and rate increases or to substantially reduce monthly electricity and natural gas utility bills, and that considers how the adoption of decarbonization policies may impact the total energy costs borne by consumers. This bill would require that report to additionally include, for each electrical corporation and gas corporation, comparisons for each of the previous 5 years presented by each functional category of operations, across all operations of the corporation, of certain expenditures of the corporation, as specified. The bill would require the commission to make all source data used to produce the report available to the public in an electronic format on its internet website. Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime. Because the above provisions would be part of the act and a violation of a commission action implementing the bill's requirements would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.