Sen. Lola Smallwood-Cuevas

(1) The California Constitution generally limits ad valorem taxes on real property to 1% of the full cash value of that property. For purposes of this limitation, "full cash value" is defined as the assessor's valuation of real property as shown on the 1975–76 tax bill under "full cash value" or, thereafter, the appraised value of that real property when purchased, newly constructed, or a change in ownership has occurred. Existing law defines "newly constructed" and "new construction" to mean any addition to real property since the last lien date and any alteration of land or of any improvement since the last lien date that constitutes a major rehabilitation thereof or that converts the property to a different use. Existing law, where real property has been damaged or destroyed by misfortune or calamity, excludes from the definition of "newly constructed" and "new construction" any timely reconstruction of the real property, or portion thereof, where the property after reconstruction is substantially equivalent to the property prior to damage or destruction. Existing law, pursuant to the authorization of the California Constitution, authorizes the transfer of the base year value of property that is substantially damaged or destroyed by a disaster, as declared by the Governor, to comparable replacement property within the same county that is acquired or newly constructed within 5 years after the disaster, as provided. Existing law authorizes the owner of property substantially damaged or destroyed by a disaster, as declared by the Governor, to apply the base year value of that property to replacement property reconstructed on the same site of the damaged or destroyed property within 5 years after the disaster if the reconstructed property is comparable to the substantially damaged or destroyed property, determined as provided. This bill would extend the 5-year time period described above by 3 years if the property was substantially damaged or destroyed by the 2025 Palisades Fire, Eaton Fire, Hurst Fire, Lidia Fire, Sunset Fire, or Woodley Fire, or the 2024 Mountain Fire or Franklin Fire, on or after November 1, 2024, but before February 1, 2025. The bill would make these provisions applicable to the determination of base year values for the 2025–26 fiscal year and fiscal years thereafter. By imposing additional duties on local tax officials, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. (2) The California Constitution authorizes the Legislature to authorize local governments to provide for the assessment or reassessment of taxable property physically damaged or destroyed after the lien date to which the assessment or reassessment relates. Existing property tax law authorizes the board of supervisors of a county, by ordinance, to provide that every assessee of any taxable property, or any person liable for the taxes thereon, whose property was damaged or destroyed without their fault, may apply for reassessment of that property, as provided. Existing property tax law requires, for property to be eligible for reassessment under these provisions, that the damage or destruction be caused by one of 3 specified occurrences, including a major misfortune or calamity in an area or region subsequently proclaimed by the Governor to be in a state of disaster if the property was damaged or destroyed by the misfortune or calamity that caused the Governor to proclaim the region to be in a state of disaster. Existing property tax law generally requires that an application for reassessment be filed within the latter of the time specified in the county's ordinance or within 12 months of the misfortune or calamity and be executed under penalty of perjury. This bill would also authorize a local government to provide for the assessment or reassessment of taxable property damaged by a major misfortune or calamity in an area or regions subsequently proclaimed to be in a state of emergency, as specified. The bill would authorize the local government by ordinance to provide the assessor the discretion to determine the appropriate date of damage for the purposes of reassessment. This bill would, in the case of property damaged or destroyed by the 2025 Palisades Fire, Eaton Fire, Hurst Fire, Lidia Fire, Sunset Fire, or Woodley Fire, or the 2024 Mountain Fire or Franklin Fire, extend the period to file for reassessment to the latter of the time specified in the county's ordinance or within 24 months of the fires. By expanding the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing property tax law provides, pursuant to the authorization of the California Constitution, a disabled veteran's property tax exemption for the principal place of residence of a veteran or a veteran's spouse, including an unmarried surviving spouse, if the veteran, because of an injury incurred in military service, is blind in both eyes, has lost the use of 2 or more limbs, or is totally disabled, as those terms are defined, or if the veteran has, as a result of a service-connected injury or disease, died while on active duty in military service. Existing law, for purposes of this exemption, deems property to be the principal place of residence of a veteran if the veteran is confined to a hospital or other care facility, as provided. This bill would additionally deem property to be the principal place of residence of a veteran if a dwelling on the property was completely destroyed in a disaster for which the Governor proclaimed a state of emergency and specified conditions are met. (4) Existing property tax law, in accordance with the California Constitution, provides for various exemptions for property used exclusively for a specified exempt purpose. This bill, in the case of property impacted by the 2025 Palisades Fire, Eaton Fire, Hurst Fire, Lidia Fire, Sunset Fire, or Woodley Fire, or the 2024 Mountain Fire or Franklin Fire, would deem property to be eligible for a use-based exemption, as specified, if the property received an exemption for the 2025 calendar year, the property is no longer used for an exempt purpose due to damage from the fires, and certain other conditions are met, including that the property has not changed ownership since the commencement date of the applicable disaster. The bill would make these provisions operative only for lien dates prior to January 1, 2033. (5) This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Los Angeles and the County of Ventura. (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 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. (7) Existing law requires the state to reimburse local agencies annually for certain property tax revenues lost as a result of any exemption or classification of property for purposes of ad valorem property taxation. This bill would provide that, notwithstanding those provisions, no appropriation is made and the state shall not reimburse local agencies for property tax revenues lost by them pursuant to the bill. (8) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Existing law establishes the California Career Technical Education Incentive Grant Program, administered as a competitive grant program by the State Department of Education, with the purpose of encouraging, maintaining, and strengthening the delivery of high-quality career technical education programs. Existing law requires an applicant to demonstrate that it, or its career technical education program, as applicable, meets certain minimum eligibility standards. This bill, commencing June 1, 2026, would revise and recast those minimum eligibility standards, as specified, including standards related to (A) collaborating with labor and business entities, (B) ensuring career programs and career pathways are aligned with workforce needs and labor market demand, (C) providing opportunities for certain pupil populations, and (D) reporting information for purposes of program evaluation, as provided. The bill, commencing June 1, 2026, would also require successful applicants to demonstrate a holistic approach to providing career technical education and career pathways, as provided. In developing the request for grant applications and considering grant applications under the program, existing law requires the State Department of Education to consult with the executive director of the State Board of Education and entities having career technical education expertise, including the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges. This bill, commencing June 1, 2026, would require the department to consult with the California Education Interagency Council instead of the chancellor for those purposes. When determining proposed grant recipients, existing law requires positive consideration to be given to specified characteristics in an applicant, including that the applicant is located in an area with a high unemployment rate. This bill, commencing June 1, 2026, would require positive consideration to also be given to an applicant located in an area with a high poverty rate. The bill would define high unemployment rate and high poverty rate. 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 require the California Education Interagency Council established in the Government Operations Agency to perform, in an advisory capacity, certain duties, as specified, including, among others, developing recommendations regarding career technical education, college and career pathways, and workforce development recognizing segmental plans and other pertinent plans, and providing advice and recommending tools designed to support students across their educational careers, as specified. The bill would require the Office of the California Education Interagency Council to support the California Education Interagency Council, as specified, including by, among other things, developing and maintaining an internet website that provides access to the California Education Interagency Council's agendas, reports, work products, and resources. Certain sections of this bill would become operative only if AB 1098 of the 2025–26 Regular Session is enacted.

Existing law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, prohibits various forms of employment and housing discrimination, including various types of discrimination because of national origin. Existing law empowers the Civil Rights Department to investigate and prosecute complaints alleging unlawful practices. This bill would provide that an employee's assessment, testing, admission, or acknowledgment of their own personal bias that was made in good faith and solicited or required as part of a bias mitigation training does not constitute unlawful discrimination, as prescribed.

Existing law declares the public policy of the state regarding labor organization, including, among other things, that it is necessary for a worker to have full freedom of association, self-organization, and designation of representatives of their own choosing, to negotiate the terms and conditions of their employment, and to be free from the interference, restraint, or coercion of employers of labor, or their agents, in the designation of such representatives or in self-organization or in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection. Existing law establishes the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) in state government as a means of resolving disputes and enforcing the statutory duties and rights of specified public employers and employees under various acts regulating collective bargaining. Under existing law, PERB has the power and duty to investigate an unfair practice charge and to determine whether the charge is justified and the appropriate remedy for the unfair practice. Existing law, the federal National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) , establishes a comprehensive statutory scheme regulating unfair labor practices on the part of employers and labor organizations in industries affecting interstate commerce, and vests in the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) the power to conduct elections to determine employee representatives and to prevent unfair labor practices affecting commerce. Existing law, the California Public Records Act, requires that public records, as defined, be available to the public for inspection and made promptly available to any person. This bill would expand PERB's jurisdiction by authorizing a worker, to petition PERB to protect and enforce prescribed rights under specified circumstances, including if the worker is employed in a position subject to the NLRA but the NLRB has expressly or impliedly ceded jurisdiction. The bill would authorize PERB to, among other things, decide unfair labor practice cases pursuant to a specified timeline and order all appropriate relief for a violation, including civil penalties, as prescribed. In order to pursue relief from PERB, the bill would require a covered worker or their representative to file an unfair practice charge or petition that includes specified information, including, where applicable, the original charge or petition filed with the NLRB. The bill would require PERB to hold the supporting documentation and evidence confidential and maintain it as part of its investigatory file and would exempt this documentation and evidence from the California Public Records Act. If PERB determines, among other things, it has insufficient resources to process certain cases or doing so would prevent it from meeting specified statutory deadlines, the bill would require PERB to process and prioritize charges, as specified. The bill would also establish the Public Employment Relations Board Enforcement Fund (fund) in the State Treasury, would require the above-described civil penalties to be deposited into the fund, and would make moneys in the fund available upon appropriation by the Legislature to PERB for the purpose of administering the above-specified provisions. The bill would authorize PERB to rely on its own decisions and precedent under the NLRA and would authorize review of its decisions by a state appellate court, as specified. Existing law, the Alatorre-Zenovich-Dunlap-Berman Agricultural Labor Relations Act of 1975, grants agricultural employees the right to form and join labor organizations and engage in collective bargaining, as specified, and prohibits agricultural employers and labor organizations from engaging in unfair labor practices. Those provisions establish the Agricultural Labor Relations Board (ALRB) and empower the ALRB to prevent any person from engaging in those practices. Existing law establishes various definitions for these purposes. Existing law requires the ALRB to follow applicable precedents of the NLRA. This bill would specify that the ALRB has exclusive jurisdiction in all phases of the administration of the act, and to determine whether any person or entity meets one or more of those definitions. The bill would instead authorize the board to follow applicable precedents of the NLRA, but would not obligate the board to follow precedents where the ALRB deems it inappropriate to do so. This bill would make related findings and declarations and would make its provisions severable. 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.

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 95 is a ceremonial resolution that would establish September 20, 2025, and every September 20 thereafter, as "Soju Day" in the state. It does not create new laws or regulations, nor does it affect any specific individuals or groups. The resolution solely designates an annual date for recognition and celebration. This is purely symbolic, with no concrete policy changes or practical impact beyond the ceremonial observance.

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.

Existing law authorizes a judge in the superior court in which a misdemeanor is being prosecuted to offer misdemeanor diversion to a defendant. Existing law, upon successful completion of the terms, conditions, or programs ordered by the court, makes the arrest upon which the diversion was imposed deemed to have never occurred, except as specified relating to application to be a peace officer. This bill, the Safer Communities Through Opportunities Act, would authorize a court to exercise its discretion to grant pretrial diversion on a felony offense, subject to certain exceptions. The bill would authorize the court to consider information from, among others, the prosecutor and the defense in determining whether or not to grant diversion and would prohibit a court from granting diversion unless it finds that the diversion plan mitigates any unreasonable risk of danger to public safety and that the defendant is likely to benefit from the services provided in the diversion plan. The bill would authorize a court to consider reinstating criminal proceedings in certain circumstances, such as the commission of a misdemeanor committed while the defendant is receiving pretrial diversion services that shows a propensity for violence, among others. The bill would require the court to dismiss the criminal allegations if it finds that the defendant has complied with the terms and conditions during the diversion period. The bill would require the court, if the court reduces the felony to a misdemeanor, to follow existing misdemeanor diversion proceedings.

The California Constitution establishes certain conditions of employment for state officers and employees. Existing law, the Firefighters Procedural Bill of Rights Act, grants specified employment rights to firefighters, as defined, including temporary, seasonal firefighters employed by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) . This bill would require the Department of Human Resources, the State Personnel Board, and any other relevant state agency to take the necessary actions to transition the Firefighter I classification within CAL FIRE to a permanent firefighter employment classification.