Sen. Sabrina Cervantes

Existing law establishes within the office of the Governor, the office of the Governor's Tribal Advisor, which is headed by the Governor's Tribal Advisor who is appointed by and serves at the pleasure of the Governor. This bill would, instead, establish within the Office of the Governor, the Office of Tribal Affairs (office) , which is headed by the Secretary of Tribal Affairs who is appointed by and serves at the pleasure of the Governor, as specified. The bill would require each state agency that engages, or has programs, services, or responsibilities affecting tribal governments to, among other things, designate a tribal liaison, as described. The bill would require the office to be advised by a Tribal Advisory Committee, as described, and would require the committee to, among other things, provide recommendations and tribal perspectives to assist the office in strengthening government-to-government engagement and improving the design, access, and implementation of state programs and services affecting tribal governments. The bill would require the office to, among other things, support the implementation of consultation policies, facilitate direct engagement between state agencies and tribal governments, and provide training, guidance, and technical assistance to tribal liaisons and state agency personnel, as specified.

The California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (CVRA) prohibits a political subdivision from imposing or applying an at-large method of election for members of the political subdivision's governing body in a manner that impairs the ability of a protected class to elect candidates of its choice or its ability to influence the outcome of an election, as specified. Existing law requires courts to implement appropriate remedies, including the imposition of district-based elections, for violations of the CVRA. This bill would revise the CVRA. The bill would prohibit a political subdivision or state agency from implementing, imposing, or enforcing any election policy or practice, as defined, that results in, or is likely to result in, voter suppression. An election policy or practice would result in voter suppression if it (1) causes a material disparity in voter participation, access to voting opportunities, or the opportunity or ability to participate in the political process for members of a protected class, which is defined as any race, color, or language-minority group; or (2) based on the totality of circumstances, causes an impairment of the equal opportunity or ability of members of a protected class to participate in the political process. An election policy or practice would not violate the prohibition on voter suppression if the political subdivision or state agency demonstrates, by clear and convincing evidence, that the election policy or practice is necessary to significantly further a compelling and particularized governmental interest and there is no reasonable alternative that comparably furthers the governmental interest and results in a smaller disparity between members of a protected class and other members of the electorate. The bill would also prohibit a political subdivision from employing any method of election, as defined, that has the effect, or will likely have the effect, of diluting the vote of protected class members. Vote dilution would be established if there is an impairment of the equal opportunity or ability of protected class members to nominate or elect candidates of their choice, as provided, and another method of election or a change to the existing method of election would likely mitigate the impairment. The bill sets forth various factors that courts could, and could not, consider when evaluating whether voter suppression or vote dilution exists within a political subdivision. The Attorney General, or any voter who is a member of a protected class and who resides in a political subdivision where a violation is alleged, would have standing to bring an action in a superior court of competent jurisdiction or any county in which the Attorney General has an office. The bill would require a potential plaintiff, before filing an action alleging voter suppression or vote dilution, to send a notice letter to the political subdivision identifying the potential violation and how the party's proposed remedy would address it. For allegations of voter suppression, the bill would permit the potential plaintiff to file an action if the political subdivision has not enacted a remedy within 45 days of receipt of the notice letter or if the political subdivision's remedy would not redress the alleged violation. For allegations that a political subdivision's method of election results in vote dilution, the bill would permit the potential plaintiff to file an action if the political subdivision has not, within 60 days, passed a resolution outlining its intention to make changes to its method of election or petitioned a court for authorization to implement a different, appropriate remedy. Notwithstanding the notice requirement, the bill would authorize a potential plaintiff to file an action against a political subdivision at any time if the action is for a preliminary injunction with respect to an election that will occur within 180 days, another party has already submitted a notice letter alleging a substantially similar violation arising out of the same set of facts and the required number of days have passed, or the prospect of obtaining relief would otherwise be futile. If the political subdivision provides some or all of the relief sought in a potential plaintiff's notice letter, the bill would authorize the potential plaintiff to recover their costs, which would be capped at an amount equal to the present value of $30,000 in 2016, subject to an annual inflation adjustment. The bill would prohibit any political subdivision from enacting or administering any covered practice without obtaining preapproval from the Attorney General, if the political subdivision, within the previous 10 years, has entered into a settlement agreement admitting liability for a violation of, or been found by a court to have violated, this bill, the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, or any other state law concerning the right to vote for protected class members. Under the bill, covered practices would include new or modified methods of election, annexations and deannexations, or reductions in language assistance. The bill would authorize the Attorney General to grant preapproval to a political subdivision only if the covered practice will not diminish the equal opportunity or ability of members of the protected class to participate in the political process or elect candidates of choice and the covered practice is unlikely to violate the provisions of the bill. The bill would require any law, regulation, charter, ordinance, or other enactment of any political subdivision relating to voting to be construed liberally in favor of the right to vote. Existing law generally prohibits using a voting system unless it has been certified or conditionally approved by the Secretary of State before any election at which it is to be used. This bill would require the Secretary of State to examine and test a voting system and, if the Secretary of State determines that it meets the applicable requirements, certify or conditionally approve the system for use in an election conducted using a method of election adopted to remedy a violation of the CVRA, as provided. Existing law requires the adoption of new election district boundaries for a legislative body that is elected using district-based elections following each federal decennial census. This bill would require a districting body responsible for the adoption of new election district boundaries to comply with the requirements of this bill when adopting new boundaries following the decennial census. By increasing the duties of local elections officials, the bill would create 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.

Existing law, the Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act of 2014, entitles an employee who works in California for the same employer for 30 or more days within a year from the commencement of employment to paid sick days. Under existing law, an employee accrues paid sick days at a rate of not less than one hour per every 30 hours worked, subject to certain use, accrual, and yearly carryover limitations. This bill would require specified fire departments to provide a paid leave of absence of up to 26 weeks to an active firefighting member who requests leave because the firefighter is disabled by pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition, as provided. The bill would apply to an active firefighting member who has at least 1,250 hours of service with the fire department in the 12-month period before the date on which the paid leave begins and would require the leave to be with full pay, except as specified, at the firefighter's regular rate of pay set forth in a collective bargaining agreement and in accordance with their normal pay schedule. The bill would require all benefits to continue to accrue during the paid leave, as specified, and would require a firefighter returning from the paid leave to be restored to their prior position, as provided. The bill would request a fire department of the University of California to comply with these provisions.

Existing law prohibits a public agency, which includes the state, a city, a county, a city and county, or any agency or political subdivision of the state, a city, a county, or a city and county, including, but not limited to, a law enforcement agency, from selling, sharing, or transferring automated license plate recognition (ALPR) information, except to another public agency, and only as otherwise permitted by law. Existing law defines ALPR information as information or data collected through the use of an ALPR system. This bill would provide that "public agency" does not include a transportation agency, a public transit operator, department of transportation, public works department, or campus transportation agency, as specified, a public agency or contracted parking operator when engaging in specified activities in a parking facility, a state agency operating specified parking facilities, or the State Air Resources Board. The bill would require a public agency that accesses or provides access to ALPR information to maintain a record of that access, as provided. The bill would, beginning January 1, 2027, require new, updated, renewed, extended, expansions of, or addendums of contractual agreements with ALPR vendors, manufacturers, or suppliers to mandate that no default access is provided to any national ALPR database and that an agency's collected scans are by default not accessible to any other agency, except as specified, and would impose new requirements on sharing between California state law enforcement agencies. This bill would authorize a law enforcement agency to use ALPR information only for purposes of locating vehicles or persons when either are reasonably suspected of being involved in the commission of a public offense or locating an individual who has been reported as missing to a law enforcement agency. The bill, as of January 1, 2028, would require a public agency to archive all ALPR information that has been held for more than 60 days within 14 days, unless that ALPR information is retained in the evidence file of an active investigation or criminal proceeding or matches information on an authorized hot list, as defined, and retain ALPR information that becomes part of an investigation or criminal proceeding in the evidence file as long as the evidence file is required to be held by state law or court order. The bill would prohibit a public agency from querying any archived information except pursuant to a warrant, as specified. By imposing new requirements on public agencies, which include local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law defines an ALPR operator as a person that operates an ALPR system, which does not include a transportation agency. Existing law defines an ALPR end-user as a person that accesses or uses an ALPR system, which does not include, among other things, a transportation agency. This bill would additionally exclude from the definitions of "ALPR operator" and "ALPR end-user" a public transit operator, department of transportation, public works department, campus transportation agency, or an airport or airport operator, as provided. The bill would also exclude from the definition of "ALPR operator" the Department of General Services and its operators when engaging in specified activities in a parking facility and would exclude from the definition of "ALPR end-user" a state agency operating specified parking facilities and the State Air Resources Board. Existing law requires an ALPR operator and ALPR end-user to maintain reasonable security procedures and practices, including operational, administrative, technical, and physical safeguards, to protect ALPR information from unauthorized access, destruction, use, modification, or disclosure. This bill would require those security procedures and practices to include safeguards for managing which employees can see the data from their systems, as specified, and requiring data security training and data privacy training for all employees that access ALPR information. Existing law requires an ALPR operator and ALPR end-user to implement a usage and privacy policy that includes, among other things, a description of the job title or other designation of the employees and independent contractors who are authorized to access and use ALPR information. This bill would require the usage and privacy policy to identify what purpose employees and independent contractors access and use ALPR information for. The bill would also require the Department of Justice to, beginning October 1, 2029, and contingent upon an appropriation of sufficient funds, conduct annual random audits on a public agency that is an ALPR operator or ALPR end-user to determine whether they have implemented and are adhering to that usage and privacy policy. Existing law requires an ALPR operator that accesses or provides access to ALPR information to require that ALPR information only be used for the authorized purposes described in the usage and privacy policy and to maintain a record of that access that includes, among other things, the purpose for accessing the information. This bill would instead require that record of access maintained by the ALPR operator to include a brief, accurate, specific, and plain language statement describing the purpose for accessing ALPR information. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. 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.

(1) Existing law establishes various grant and loan programs for research, including, among others, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, California Firefighter Cancer Prevention and Research Program, and the Public Interest Research, Development, and Demonstration Program. This bill would establish the California Foundation for Science and Health Research within the Government Operations Agency. The bill would require the Secretary of Government Operations to oversee the process of appointing the director of the foundation, and would authorize the Secretary of Government Operations to delegate the task of hiring and determining the salaries, bonuses, and benefits of additional personnel to the director, as specified. The bill would require the director and personnel of the foundation to be responsible for implementing the strategic objectives of the California Foundation for Science and Health Research Council, as described below, administering grants, loans, and contracts awarded by the council, and all other duties as deemed necessary for the operation of the foundation. This bill would create the California Foundation for Science and Health Research and Innovation Acceleration Fund and require the moneys in the fund to be used by the foundation to award grants and make loans to, and enter into contracts with, public or private research companies, universities, academic medical centers, institutes, and organizations for scientific research and development and for certain economic sectors, as specified, in specific areas of research, including, but not limited to, biomedical, behavioral health, and climate research. The bill would also create the California Foundation for Science and Health Research and Innovation Acceleration Benefit Fund, to consist solely of private donations. The bill would make the moneys in the benefit fund available for the same purposes as the California Foundation for Science and Health Research and Innovation Acceleration Fund. This bill would require that, prior to the first grant from the foundation and no later than one year from the date the bill takes effect, the council develop various provisions and requirements to facilitate the foundation's goals of affordability and equitable access. The foundation shall impose various requirements on the grantees, loan recipients, and contractors, as specified, including, among other things, developing strategies to promote equitable access to the subject invention in various specified communities and making the data resulting from the bond-funded research available to the broader scientific community, except in cases involving national security interests. The council shall also establish standards requiring that all grants, awards, and contracts be subject to intellectual property agreements that balance the opportunity for the State of California to benefit from the inventions, technologies, patents, royalties, and licenses that result from research funded by certain public and private grants, as specified. This bill would create the California Foundation for Science and Health Research Council, as specified, which shall be vested with full power, authority, and jurisdiction over the foundation. The bill would require the council to, among other things, develop the strategic objectives and priorities of the foundation and provide the opportunity for public comment on the foundation's priorities, as specified, determine the research projects that will be funded by the California Foundation for Science and Health Research and Innovation Acceleration Fund, develop objectives and opportunities that offer support to early career researchers, and adopt certain regulations and standards, as specified. The bill would also require the council to consider how the foundation's research priorities relate to or support various economic and industry considerations, as specified. The bill would provide that a majority of the members of the council constitutes a quorum for the transaction of any business, for the performance of any duty, or for the exercise of any power of the council, except as otherwise provided. The bill would authorize the council to establish one or more scientific peer review panels consisting of experts in specified fields of research for the purposes of reviewing and prioritizing proposals on the basis of the scientific merit of the proposal, the potential benefit to the health and well-being of the population, natural resources, and environment of the state, and the demonstrated background, training, and expertise of the researchers and investigators to conduct the proposed work. This bill would require all research and development funded by the California Foundation for Science and Health Research and Innovation Acceleration Fund to be conducted under established standards of open scientific exchange, peer review, and public oversight. The bill would require the funds and contracts to be awarded on the basis of the research priorities established for the foundation by the council and the scientific merit of the proposed research, as determined by an open, competitive, scientific peer review process that ensures objectivity, consistency, and high quality. This bill would enact the California Science and Health Research Bond Act, which, if approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $7,500,000,000, pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law, to finance grants and loans to fund research and operate and maintain facilities for research. The bill would provide for the submission of the bond act to the voters at the March 7, 2028, statewide primary election. (2) Existing law establishes prohibitions and penalties with respect to ethical obligations and conflicts of interest for public officials, including a prohibition on engaging in activities that are incompatible with their official duties and a prohibition on being financially interested in a contract made by them in their official capacity or the board of which they are a part. This bill would authorize a council member to participate in a decision to approve or award a grant, loan, or contract for the purpose of research into a disease in which the member or their immediate family member has a personal interest, as specified. The bill would provide that service with specified educational institutions and organizations is not incompatible with a council member's duties. The bill would provide that the prohibition on being financially interested in a contract, as specified, does not apply if the council member recuses themself from a decision to award or approve a grant, loan, or contract that would otherwise be subject to the prohibition. The bill would provide that council members are subject to certain disclosure requirements relating to personal investments and potential conflicts of interest, as specified. (3) Existing law, the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, requires that all meetings of a state body be open and public and all persons be permitted to attend any meeting of a state body, with specified exceptions for authorized closed sessions. This bill would require the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act to apply to all meetings of the council and scientific peer review panels, except as specified for when the council or scientific peer review panels meet to consider or discuss specified matters in closed sessions, including matters involving information relating to patients or medical or scientific research subjects, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. 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. (4) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Existing law defines "sexual orientation change efforts" as practices by mental health providers that seek to change an individual's sexual orientation, as specified. Existing law prohibits a mental health provider, as defined, from engaging in sexual orientation change efforts with a patient under 18 years of age, and provides that such efforts attempted by a mental health provider are considered unprofessional conduct and must subject the mental health provider to discipline by that provider's licensing entity. This bill would define "sexual orientation or gender identity change efforts" as any practices of a licensed mental health provider that seek, during the provision of mental health services, to direct a patient toward a predetermined sexual orientation or gender identity, as specified, and would apply the prohibitions described above to such efforts. The bill would exclude specified practices, including age-appropriate interventions to address unlawful conduct or unsafe practices that do not seek to direct the patient toward a particular sexual orientation or gender identity, from this definition.

Existing law establishes the California State University, under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in the state. Existing law requires the trustees to provide by rule for the government of their appointees and employees, including, among other things, rules related to appointment, classification, and duties. Existing law requires certain community college employees to be a person who meets specified minimum qualifications, as provided. This bill would explicitly require the instructor of record for a course of instruction to be a person who meets the rule provided by the trustees to serve as a faculty employee, as described, teaching credit instruction or noncredit instruction. The bill would also explicitly require a California State University faculty employee to be a person who meets the rule provided by the trustees to serve in that position.

The California Constitution provides that all property is taxable and requires that it be assessed at the same percentage of fair market value, unless otherwise provided by the California Constitution or federal law. The California Constitution and existing property tax law provide various exemptions from taxation, including, among others, a disabled veterans' exemption and a veterans' organization exemption. This bill would exempt from taxation, as provided, 50% of that part of the full value of the property that does not exceed $1,000,000 that is owned by, and that constitutes the principal place of residence of, a veteran, the veteran's spouse, or the veteran and the veteran's spouse jointly, if, among other things, the veteran is 100% disabled. The bill would provide an unmarried surviving spouse a property exemption in the same amount that they would have been entitled to if the veteran were alive and if certain conditions are met. In the case of a disabled veteran or unmarried surviving spouse whose household income does not exceed a specified amount for the relevant assessment year, as prescribed, the bill would exempt 100% of that part of the full value of the property that does not exceed $1,000,000 from taxation. The bill would require certain documentation to be provided to the county assessor to receive the exemption and would prohibit any other real property tax exemption from being granted to the claimant if receiving the exemption provided by the provisions of this bill. The bill would make these exemptions applicable for property tax lien dates occurring on or after January 1, 2027, but occurring before January 1, 2032. By imposing additional duties on local tax officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure to contain, among other things, specific goals, purposes, and objectives that the tax expenditure will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. This bill also would include additional information required for any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure. 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 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. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.

Under existing law, the Tom Bane Civil Rights Act (act) , if a person or persons, whether or not acting under color of law, interferes or attempts to interfere, by threats, intimidation, or coercion, with the exercise or enjoyment by any individual or individuals of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or of the rights secured by the Constitution or laws of this state, the Attorney General, or any district attorney or city attorney, is authorized to bring a civil action for injunctive and other appropriate equitable relief in the name of the people of the State of California, in order to protect the exercise or enjoyment of the right or rights secured. Under that act, an individual may also institute and prosecute in their own name and on their own behalf a civil action for damages, as described, for any resulting interference or attempt at interference of the individual's exercise or enjoyment of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States or this state. The act authorizes the court to award the petitioner or plaintiff reasonable attorney's fees in addition to any damages, injunction, or other equitable relief awarded in these civil actions (attorney's fees authorization) . Existing federal law provides that every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any state, territory, or the District of Columbia, subjects or causes to be subjected any United States citizen or other person within the jurisdiction to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, is liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except as provided. This bill would also provide that every natural person, as defined, who, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, as defined, subjects or causes to be subjected any citizen of this state or any person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the United States Constitution, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except as specified. The bill would apply the aforementioned attorney's fees authorization, except as specified, to any action brought under these provisions. The bill would authorize a court, in its discretion, to also award costs, except as specified, to the prevailing plaintiff in any action brought under these provisions. This bill would authorize a defendant in an action brought under these provisions to assert and receive the benefit of a defense of absolute or qualified immunity only to the same extent as a person sued under certain federal provisions under like circumstances, as specified, and would specify that nothing in these provisions is to be construed to waive or abrogate any defense of sovereign immunity otherwise available to a party, as specified. The bill would prohibit any civil action brought under these provisions from being commenced later than 2 years after the date that the cause of action accrues. The bill would make its provisions severable. The bill would specify that these provisions apply retroactively to March 1, 2025, as provided. This bill would declare the intent of the Legislature in enacting these provisions. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Existing law generally regulates the government of counties. Existing law authorizes the board of supervisors of a county to consolidate the duties of various county offices in various combinations, including combining the duties of the sheriff and the coroner. Existing law also authorizes the board of supervisors of a county to separate the duties of consolidated offices. Existing law authorizes the board of supervisors to abolish the office of coroner by ordinance and provide instead for the office of medical examiner, to be appointed by the board, as specified. This bill would require the board of supervisors for the County of Riverside to separate the offices of sheriff and coroner, abolish the office of coroner, and provide for the office of medical examiner, pursuant to the provisions described above, by July 1, 2027, as specified. The bill would require the county's board of supervisors to move medicolegal death investigation services to the office of medical examiner. The bill would prohibit a person other than the county's medical examiner from signing specified documents. The bill would require the county to publish specified information regarding in-custody persons on its internet website. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for County of Riverside. 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. By requiring the county to provide a higher level of service, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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.