Photo of Catherine Blakespear
D California Senate · District 38 On the 2026 ballot

Sen. Catherine Blakespear

Compare
Total votes
8,860
all sessions
Attendance
96%
295 missed
Near the chamber average
With party
99%
of cast votes
Near the chamber average
Bipartisan score
0%
crosses aisle rarely
Near the chamber average
Sponsored
334
bills & resolutions
Near the chamber average
Committees
7
assignments
334 bills and resolutions

Sponsored bills

Total
334
Primary
88
Co-sponsor
246
This page
334
matching current filters
Co-sponsor SB 367
Failed · California Senate · Co-sponsor
Mental health.

(1) Existing law, the Lanterman-Petris-Short (LPS) Act, authorizes the involuntary commitment and treatment of persons with specified mental disorders. Under the act, when a person, as a result of a mental health disorder, is a danger to themselves or others, or is gravely disabled, the person may, upon probable cause, be taken into custody by specified individuals, including, among others, a peace officer and a designated member of a mobile crisis team, and placed in a facility designated by the county and approved by the State Department of Health Care Services for up to 72 hours for evaluation and treatment. Existing law defines "assessment" for those purposes to mean the determination of whether a person shall be evaluated and treated. This bill would require an assessment to consider reasonably available, relevant information as specified. The bill would also authorize an assessment to be used to assist specified individuals in developing an aftercare plan for an individual, if that individual has agreed to an aftercare plan and can be properly served without being detained. (2) Existing law provides a procedure for the appointment of a conservator for a person who is determined to be gravely disabled as a result of a mental disorder or an impairment by chronic alcoholism (hereafter LPS conservatorship) . Under existing law, a professional person in charge of an agency providing comprehensive evaluation or a facility providing intensive treatment may recommend a LPS conservatorship for a gravely disabled person in their care if the professional person determines that the person is unwilling to accept, or is incapable of accepting, treatment voluntarily. Under existing law, a professional person in charge of an agency providing comprehensive evaluation or a facility providing intensive treatment or a professional person in charge of providing mental health treatment at a county jail, or their designee, may recommend a conservatorship for a gravely disabled person without that person being an inpatient in a facility providing comprehensive evaluation or intensive treatment if specified conditions are met. This bill would additionally authorize recommendations for an LPS conservatorship if a determination is made that the gravely disabled person has demonstrated an inability to accept voluntary treatment due to apparent incapacity. The bill would expand the list of individuals or entities that may recommend a conservatorship for a gravely disabled person without that person being an inpatient in a facility providing comprehensive evaluation or intensive treatment to include, among others, the county agency providing investigations for conservatorships of the person. (3) Existing law separately provides for the establishment of a conservatorship for a person who is unable to properly provide for their personal needs or is substantially unable to manage their finances (hereafter probate conservatorship) . Existing law requires the officer providing conservatorship investigation, if they concur with the recommendation of the professional person or facility, to petition the superior court in the patient's county of residence to establish a conservatorship. Existing law requires the officer providing conservator investigation to investigate all available alternatives to conservatorship, including, among other things, assisted outpatient treatment, as specified, and the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment Act program. Existing law requires the officer to recommended conservatorship to the court only if no suitable alternatives are available. Existing law requires the officer to render to the court a comprehensive written report of investigation prior to the hearing and to set forth all alternatives available if the officer recommends either for or against conservatorship. This bill would specify probate conservatorships with or without major neurocognitive disorder powers in the list of available alternatives that the officer providing conservatorship investigation is required to investigate. In a county where probate conservatorship and LPS conservatorship duties are split between separate agencies, the bill would require LPS conservatorship referrals that include the presence of a major neurocognitive disorder to be reviewed by both agencies to ensure the continuity of evaluations. The bill would additionally require an officer providing conservatorship investigation to include a recommended individualized plan for treatment and care drawn from the documented list of less-restrictive alternatives in the written report described above if the officer recommends against an LPS conservatorship. The bill would also make various clarifying changes. By expanding the duties of county agencies that provide services related to probate conservatorships and LPS conservatorships, and by expanding the duties of the county officer providing conservatorship investigation, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (4) Existing law authorizes a conservator of the person, the estate, or the person and the estate to be appointed for a person who is gravely disabled as a result of a mental health disorder or impairment by chronic alcoholism for the purpose of providing individualized treatment, supervision, and placement. Existing law requires the creation of an individualized treatment plan within 10 days of the establishment of a conservatorship, as specified. Existing law requires the treatment plan to specify goals for the conservatee's treatment, the criteria by which the accomplishment of those goals can be adjudged, and a plan for reviewing the progress of the treatment. If a treatment plan is not developed or if the conservator fails to report to the court that the conservatee is no longer gravely disabled, existing law requires specified individuals, including a person designated by the county, to refer the matter to the court. Existing law requires the court, upon report by a person designated by the county that the goals have been reached and the person is no longer gravely disabled, to terminate the conservatorship. This bill would require an individualized treatment plan to specify goals for stabilization, the individual's evidenced-based treatment, and movement to a less-restrictive setting. The bill would require those goals to include the criteria by which accomplishment can be judged. The bill would require the treatment plan to be filed with the court, as specified, after it is developed. The bill would require the court to order the treating agency to remedy any perceived defects in a treatment plan if the plan does not meet the specified goals and criteria and would create procedures for remedying those defects and terminating the conservatorship. The bill would authorize the court, upon termination of the conservatorship, to refer the individual to assisted outpatient treatment or CARE court, as specified. This bill would prohibit the court from terminating the conservatorship prior to the end of the conservator's one-year mark if the conservatee cannot be located at any point during that one-year period, except as specified. The bill would require, when a county is filing a petition and the county is aware that the subject of the petition was, within the prior 6 months, a conservatee whose conservatorship was terminated before the one-year termination date, to include in its petition the circumstances that gave rise to the termination. Because this bill would increase the duties on county personnel, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (5) Existing law, the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Act, authorizes specified people to petition a civil court to create a CARE plan to provide an individualized, appropriate range of community-based services and supports to an eligible individual. Under the CARE Act, all reports, evaluations, diagnoses, and other information filed with the court that are related to the respondent are confidential, except as specified. This bill would authorize that information to be shared only by a court order or as approved by the respondent. If the information is used outside of the above-described proceedings, the bill requires a court order for that information to be shared. This bill would authorize a court, at any point after entry of a CARE agreement or adoption of a CARE plan, to order the respondent to an evaluation under the LPS without a petition from the county if the court believes the respondent has become gravely disabled. The bill would establish the procedures required before a court could issue an order pursuant to these provisions. (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, 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.

Failed Feb 2, 2026 1 co-sponsor
Primary SB 644
Failed · California Senate · Lead sponsor
Political Reform Act of 1974: contribution limits.

The Political Reform Act of 1974 prohibits a person, other than a small contributor committee or political party committee, from making to a candidate for elective state, county, or city office, and prohibits those candidates from accepting, a contribution totaling more than $3,000 per election, as that amount is adjusted by the Fair Political Practices Commission in January of every odd-numbered year to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index. The amount of that contribution limit for an election occurring from January 1, 2025, to December 31, 2026, inclusive, is $5,900. This bill would apply that contribution limit and certain related provisions to candidates for judicial, school district, and community college district office. The bill would authorize the Judicial Council, school districts, and community college districts to impose more restrictive contribution limits on candidates for judicial, school district, and community college district office, respectively. The bill's provisions would become operative on January 1, 2027. Any person who knowingly or willfully violates the Political Reform Act of 1974 is guilty of a misdemeanor. By adding new contribution limits to the act, the bill would expand the scope of an existing crime and thereby 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. The Political Reform Act of 1974, an initiative measure, provides that the Legislature may amend the act to further the act's purposes upon a 23 vote of each house of the Legislature and compliance with specified procedural requirements. This bill would declare that it furthers the purposes of the act.

Failed Feb 2, 2026 0 co-sponsors
Primary SB 455
Failed · California Senate · Lead sponsor
Electric bicycles.

Existing law governs the operation of motor vehicles and other devices, including, among other things, motor-driven cycles and motorized bicycles or mopeds. A violation of the Vehicle Code is a crime. This bill would revise the definitions of the above-described devices and refer to motorized bicycles as mopeds or low-power mopeds, as specified. The bill would, commencing July 1, 2026, require manufacturers and distributors of low-power mopeds to apply an etching, an engraving, or a label that is permanently affixed to each low-power moped that contains, among other things, a statement that the device is a low-power moped and not an electric bicycle. The bill would set forth provisions governing the operation of low-power mopeds, including, among other things, licensing and helmet requirements. The bill would exempt low-power mopeds from being classified as motor vehicles, thereby exempting these devices from specified financial responsibility, registration, and license plate requirements. The bill would authorize a local authority to regulate the parking and operation of low-power mopeds on local streets and highways, as specified. Because a violation of these provisions would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law also governs the operation of electric bicycles and requires manufacturers and distributors of electric bicycles to apply a label that is permanently affixed to each electric bicycle that contains, among other things, the classification number of the electric bicycle, as specified. Existing law prohibits specified vehicles from being advertised, sold, offered for sale, or labeled as electric bicycles, including a vehicle that is modified to attain a speed greater than 20 miles per hour on motor power alone or to have motor power of more than 750 watts. Existing law prohibits the sale of a product or device that can modify the speed capability of an electric bicycle such that it no longer meets the definition of an electric bicycle. This bill would, commencing July 1, 2026, revise the labeling requirements described above to require manufacturers and distributors to apply an etching, an engraving, or label that is permanently affixed to each electric bicycle that contains additional information, including the brand name and manufacturer or distributor of the electric bicycle. The bill would revise the above-described list of vehicles prohibited from being advertised, sold, offered for sale, or labeled as electric bicycles, as specified, and include on the list, among other things, a vehicle that is capable of providing assistance when the bicycle reaches a speed exceeding 28 miles per hour. The bill would require any incident report filed by a peace officer for an injury or crash involving an electric bicycle to include all of the information provided in the etching, engraving, or label described above or to indicate that a marking was not available. The bill would, commencing January 1, 2026, require any product or device sold in the previous 5 years as an electric bicycle that no longer meets the definition of electric bicycle as of January 1, 2026, to be subject to a written customer notification by the retailer or manufacturer that includes among other things, notification that the product or device no longer meets the definition of an electric bicycle under state law. Because the bill would impose new requirements for electric bicycles, the violation of which would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also prohibit 2-wheeled or 3-wheeled devices from operating on any highway or public right-of-way unless the device meets the definition of a device that is explicitly defined in, and authorized for use on a highway or public right-of-way by, the Vehicle Code. The bill would authorize 2-wheeled or 3-wheeled devices that do not meet the above requirements to only be operated on private property or in off-highway environments, as specified. Because a violation of these provisions would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Failed Feb 2, 2026 0 co-sponsors
Primary SB 242
Failed · California Senate · Lead sponsor
Medicare supplement coverage: open enrollment periods.

Existing federal law provides for the Medicare Program, which is a public health insurance program for persons 65 years of age and older and specified persons with disabilities who are under 65 years of age. Existing federal law specifies parts of Medicare that cover specific services, such as Medicare Part B, which generally covers medically necessary services and supplies and preventive services. Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care, and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing federal law additionally provides for the issuance of Medicare supplement policies or certificates, also known as Medigap coverage, which are advertised, marketed, or designed primarily as a supplement to reimbursements under the Medicare Program for the hospital, medical, or surgical expenses of persons eligible for the Medicare Program, including coverage of Medicare deductible, copayment, or coinsurance amounts, as specified. Existing law, among other provisions, requires supplement benefit plans to be uniform in structure, language, designation, and format with the standard benefit plans, as prescribed. Existing law prohibits an issuer from denying or conditioning the offering or effectiveness of any Medicare supplement contract, policy, or certificate available for sale in this state, or discriminating in the pricing of a contract, policy, or certificate because of the health status, claims experience, receipt of health care, or medical condition of an applicant in the case of an application that is submitted prior to or during the 6-month period beginning with the first day of the first month in which an individual is both 65 years of age or older and is enrolled for benefits under Medicare Part B. Existing law requires an issuer to make available specified Medicare supplement benefit plans to a qualifying applicant under those circumstances who is 64 years of age or younger who does not have end stage renal disease. This bill would delete the exclusion of otherwise qualified applicants who have end stage renal disease, thereby making the specified Medicare supplement benefit plans available to those individuals. The bill, on and after January 1, 2027, would prohibit an issuer of Medicare supplement coverage in this state from denying or conditioning the issuance or effectiveness of any Medicare supplement coverage available for sale in the state, or discriminate in the pricing of that coverage because of the health status, claims experience, receipt of health care, medical condition, or age of an applicant, except as specified, if an application for coverage is submitted during an open enrollment period, as specified in the bill. The bill would entitle an individual enrolled in Medicare Part B to a 90-day annual open enrollment period beginning on January 1 of each year, as specified, during which period the bill would require applications to be accepted for any Medicare supplement coverage available from an issuer, as specified. The bill would require the open enrollment period to be a guaranteed issue period. The bill would authorize premium rates offered to applicants during the open enrollment period to vary based on the applicants' age at the time of issue, as specified, but would prohibit the premiums from varying based on age after the contract is issued. Because a violation of the bill's requirements by a health care service plan would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Failed Feb 2, 2026 0 co-sponsors
Primary SB 755
Failed · California Senate · Lead sponsor
California Contractor Climate Transparency Act.

The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 designates the State Air Resources Board as the state agency charged with monitoring and regulating sources of emissions of greenhouse gases. Existing law, the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act, requires, on or before July 1, 2025, the state board to develop and adopt regulations to require a reporting entity to, among other things, annually disclose all of the reporting entity's scope 1 emissions, scope 2 emissions, and scope 3 emissions, as defined. Existing law also requires, on or before January 1, 2026, and biennially thereafter, a covered entity to prepare a climate-related financial risk report disclosing the entity's climate-related financial risk and measures adopted to reduce and adapt to climate-related financial risk. This bill would enact the California Contractor Climate Transparency Act, which would require the state board, beginning one year after the effective date of regulations adopted pursuant to the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act, as specified, to require a large contractor and a significant contractor, as defined, to report annually specified information, including, for large contractors, an annual disclosure of scope 1 emissions, scope 2 emissions, scope 3 emissions, and climate-related financial risk, as specified, and for significant contractors, an annual disclosure of scope 1 emissions and scope 2 emissions, as specified.

Failed Feb 2, 2026 0 co-sponsors
Co-sponsor AB 1083
Failed · California House · Co-sponsor
California Environmental Quality Act: exemptions: housing development projects: natural and protected lands: record of proceedings.

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of an environmental impact report (EIR) on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. Existing law exempts from CEQA a rezoning that implements the schedule of actions contained in an approved housing element, as specified, except, among other things, a rezoning that would allow for the construction of a distribution center or for oil and gas infrastructure. This bill would instead exempt a rezoning to the extent that it is necessary to implement a schedule of actions contained in an approved housing element, except, among other things, a rezoning that would allow for the construction of a distribution center, for a tourism facility, as defined, or for oil and gas infrastructure. Existing law, for a proposed housing development project, as defined, that would otherwise be exempt from CEQA pursuant to a statutory exemption or specified categorical exemptions, but for a single condition, limits the application of CEQA to the effects upon the environment that are caused by that single condition, except as provided. This bill, for purposes of those provisions, would modify the definition of housing development project to exclude a project that has any portion of the project designated for use as a tourism facility, as defined. To the extent that this would create new duties for a lead agency, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law exempts specified projects from CEQA, including a project that consists exclusively of a facility for advanced manufacturing, as defined, if the project is located on a site zoned exclusively for industrial uses. Existing law excludes projects located on natural and protected lands, as defined, from these exemptions, as provided. Existing law includes in the definition of natural and protected lands, lands protected as preserve areas or reserve lands pursuant to an adopted natural community conservation plan or habitat conservation plan, as specified. This bill would instead include, for that portion of the definition of natural and protected lands, lands identified for conservation in an adopted natural community conservation plan, habitat conservation plan, or other adopted natural resource protection plan, as specified. The bill would also expand the definition of natural and protected lands to include habitat for protected species, as specified, fully protected species, or species protected by the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, the California Endangered Species Act, or the Native Plant Protection Act. The bill would eliminate the exemption from CEQA for advanced manufacturing projects. The bill would instead exempt from CEQA, until January 1, 2030, a project that consists exclusively of a facility for semiconductor manufacturing if the project is located on a site that was zoned exclusively for heavy industrial use on or before August 1, 2025, and meets specified criteria, including, among other things, that the project does not involve the storage, use, or discharge of extremely hazardous gases or chemicals above California's accidental release program reporting thresholds, the project applicant demonstrates high road employment standards and certifies to the lead agency that it will maintain those standards in the development, construction, and operation of the facility, and the project applicant has provided a legally binding commitment to comply with specified labor-related requirements with respect to the initial construction of the facility and subsequent maintenance that is contracted out to a contractor in the construction industry, as specified. Because a lead agency would be required to determine the applicability of this exemption, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission to develop and make available to lead agencies guidelines for evaluating whether a project applicant demonstrates high road employment standards. The bill would require the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, on or before January 1, 2029, to report to the Legislature on projects that were exempted from CEQA pursuant to the above exemption, as provided, and require the report to include a list of the projects for semiconductor manufacturing facilities that have been approved for development in the state, as specified. CEQA requires in an action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul certain acts or decisions of a public agency to be commenced according to a specified process and requires the record of proceedings to contain specified information, including all internal agency communications, except as specified. Existing law provides that for those projects that do not include a distribution center or oil and gas infrastructure, internal agency communication does not include staff notes and electronic internal agency communications, including emails, that were not presented to the final decisionmaking body, other than those communications and documents consulted, or reviewed by the lead agency executive or a local agency executive, as provided, thereby limiting what the record of proceeding is required to contain for these projects. This bill would eliminate the above-described limitation on internal agency communication required to be included in the record of proceedings for those projects that do not include a distribution center or oil and gas infrastructure, thereby requiring additional information to be included in the record of proceeding. By imposing new duties on a lead agency in order to comply with this provision, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Failed Feb 2, 2026 1 co-sponsor
Co-sponsor AB 836
Signed into law · California House · Co-sponsor
Midwifery Workforce Training Act.

Existing law requires the Department of Health Care Access and Information, formerly known as the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, to establish a program to contract with programs that train certified nurse-midwives and programs that train licensed midwives in accordance with the global standards for midwifery education and the international definition of "midwife" as established by the International Confederation of Midwives in order to increase the number of students receiving quality education and training as a certified nurse-midwife or as a licensed midwife. Existing law requires these provisions to be implemented only upon an appropriation by the Legislature for these purposes in the annual Budget Act or another act. This bill would require the Department of Health Care Access and Information, upon appropriation from the Legislature for this purpose, to administer funding for a statewide study on midwifery education. The bill would require the study to be conducted by an outside consultant familiar with the health care and midwifery landscapes and workforce in California that would, among other things, identify viable education programs that can serve both rural and urban geographic areas. The bill would require the department to submit a report from the study's findings to the Legislature, to post the report on the department's internet website, and to notify all persons in the department's reproductive health and maternity care electronic mailing list, as specified. The bill would define "reproductive health care professionals" as, among others, medical doctors and licensed midwives.

Signed into law Oct 11, 2025 1 co-sponsor
Co-sponsor SB 19
Signed into law · California Senate · Co-sponsor
Crimes: threats.

Existing law makes it a crime to willfully threaten to commit a crime that will result in death or great bodily injury to another person, with the specific intent that the statement is to be taken as a threat that, on its face and under the circumstances in which it is made, is so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to convey to the person threatened a gravity of purpose and an immediate prospect of execution of the threat, and thereby reasonably causes the threatened person to be in sustained fear for their own safety or the safety of their immediate family, as defined. Under existing law, this crime is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for no more than one year for a misdemeanor, or by imprisonment in state prison for a felony. This bill would make it a crime for a person to willfully threaten, by any means, including, but not limited to, an image or threat posted or published on an internet web page, to commit a crime at specified locations, including a daycare and workplace, with specific intent that the statement is be taken as a threat, even if there is no intent of actually carrying it out, if the threat, on its face and under the circumstances in which it is made is so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to convey to the person or persons threatened a gravity of purpose and an immediate prospect of execution of the threat, and if the threat causes a person or person to reasonably be in sustained fear for their own safety or the safety of others at the specified locations. This bill would make this crime, for a person 18 years of age or older, punishable as a wobbler by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year or by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years. If a person under 18 years of age commits this crime, the bill would require the person to be referred to specified services in lieu of being declared a ward of the court, if eligible. If the person is ineligible, the bill would require the offense to be punished as a misdemeanor. By creating a new crime and imposing additional duties on local governments, this 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 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.

Signed into law Oct 11, 2025 1 co-sponsor
Co-sponsor AB 14
Signed into law · California House · Co-sponsor
Coastal resources: Protecting Blue Whales and Blue Skies Program.

Existing law establishes the Ocean Protection Council in state government to, among other things, establish policies to coordinate the collection, evaluation, and sharing of scientific data related to coastal and ocean resources among agencies. Existing law requires the council to develop and implement a voluntary sustainable seafood promotion program for the state, to consist of specified components, including a competitive grant and loan program for eligible entities, including, but not limited to, fishery groups and associations, for the purpose of assisting California fisheries in qualifying for certification to internationally accepted standards for sustainable seafood. This bill would, subject to the availability of funding, require the council to participate, as a stakeholder and in an advisory capacity, in the Protecting Blue Whales and Blue Skies Program with air pollution control districts and air quality management districts along the coast and other stakeholders to support, in an advisory capacity, coastal air districts in their efforts to implement a statewide voluntary vessel speed reduction and sustainable shipping program for the California coast in order to reduce air pollution, the risk of fatal vessel strikes on whales, and harmful underwater acoustic impacts. The bill would authorize the expansion of the existing Protecting Blue Whales and Blue Skies Program to include specified components, including incentives to program participants based on a percentage of distance traveled by a participating vessel at a reduced speed, as provided. The bill would limit application of the program to vessels that are 300 gross tons or greater. The bill would require the participating air pollution control districts and air quality management districts, on or before December 31, 2029, to submit a report to the Legislature regarding the implementation of the program.

Signed into law Oct 11, 2025 1 co-sponsor
Co-sponsor SB 760
Signed into law · California Senate · Co-sponsor
Behested payments: public appeal for payment.

The Political Reform Act of 1974 provides for the comprehensive regulation of campaign financing, including imposing reporting requirements on elected officials and campaign committees. Under the act, a behested payment is a payment that is made at the behest of a committee, an elected officer, or a member of the Public Utilities Commission, under specified circumstances, that is made principally for personal, charitable, legislative, or governmental purposes. The act requires officers and members of the Public Utilities Commission to report behested payments within 30 days of the payment or payments exceeding $5,000 in the aggregate from the same source in the same calendar year in which they are made. This bill would exempt a behesting officer or member of the Public Utilities Commission from these reporting obligations if they make a public appeal for payment unless the officer or member of the Public Utilities Commission, or a member of their immediate family, campaign staff, or officeholder staff, holds a position with the payee organization, other than a governmental organization, as specified. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 84224 of the Government Code proposed by AB 808, to be operative only if this bill and AB 808 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The Political Reform Act of 1974, an initiative measure, provides that the Legislature may amend the act to further the act's purposes upon a 23 vote of each house of the Legislature and compliance with specified procedural requirements. This bill would declare that it furthers the purposes of the act.

Signed into law Oct 10, 2025 1 co-sponsor
Showing 91 to 100 of 334 bills
Previous 1 9 10 11 34 Next