Sen. Catherine Blakespear

(1) Existing law requires the Department of Transportation to improve and maintain the state's highways, and establishes various programs to fund the development, construction, and repair of local roads, bridges, and other critical transportation infrastructure in the state, including the state highway operation and protection program (SHOPP) . Existing law requires the department, in consultation with the California Transportation Commission, to prepare a robust asset management plan to guide selection of projects for the SHOPP. Existing law requires the commission, in connection with the plan, to adopt targets and performance measures reflecting state transportation goals and objectives. Existing law requires the department to develop, in consultation with the commission, a plain language performance report to increase transparency and accountability of the SHOPP. This bill would require the targets and performance measures adopted by the commission to include targets and performance measures reflecting state transportation goals and objectives for complete streets assets that reflect the existence and conditions of bicycle, pedestrian, and transit priority facilities on the state highway system. The bill would require the department's plain language performance report to include a description of complete streets facilities, including pedestrian, bicycle, and transit priority facilities on each project, as specified. The bill would require the department to commit to specific 4-year targets to incorporate complete streets facilities, including pedestrian and bicycle facilities, into projects funded by the SHOPP, as specified. (2) Existing law creates transit districts in designated areas throughout the state and authorizes the use of various vehicles for the purpose of public and private transit. Existing law authorizes transit buses and other transit vehicles to operate on state highways. This bill would require the Director of Transportation to adopt a transit policy to guide the implementation of transit priority facilities and transit stops on the state highway system, as specified. The bill would require the department to adopt, on or before July 1, 2027, guidance that defines transit performance measures and identifies the department's responsibilities in supporting transit vehicles on the state highway system, as specified. (3) Existing law requires the department to prepare a State Highway System Management Plan (SHSMP) , which includes a 10-year state highway system rehabilitation plan for the rehabilitation or reconstruction by the SHOPP of all state highways and bridges, as provided. Existing law requires the SHSMP to include specific quantifiable accomplishments, goals, objectives, costs, and performance measures consistent with the asset management plan described above. Existing law requires the SHSMP to be updated every 2 years. This bill would expressly require the SHSMP to also include specific quantifiable accomplishments, goals, objectives, costs, and performance measures for complete streets facilities and transit priority facilities, as specified. (4) Existing law authorizes the department to issue encroachment permits and requires the department to either approve or deny an application from an applicant for an encroachment permit within 60 days of receiving a completed application, as provided. This bill would require the department, on or before January 1, 2027, to develop and adopt a project intake, evaluation, and encroachment permit review process for complete streets facilities that are sponsored by a local jurisdiction or a transit agency. The bill would require the department to produce a report regarding project applications submitted through this process, as specified. The bill would require the department to designate an encroachment permit manager in each district to ensure that applications for complete streets facilities are reviewed in accordance with the process, as specified.

(1) Existing law establishes 4 classifications of bikeways and defines a "Class III bikeway" as a bikeway that provides a right-of-way on-street or off-street, designated by signs or permanent markings and shared with pedestrians and motorists. This bill would define "sharrow" as the pavement marking used to inform road users that bicyclists might occupy the travel lane. The bill would prohibit, on and after January 1, 2025, an agency responsible for the development or operation of bikeways or highways where bicycle travel is permitted from installing a new sharrow on a highway that has a posted speed limit greater than 30 miles per hour, except as specified. (2) Existing law establishes the Active Transportation Program in the Department of Transportation for the purpose of encouraging increased use of active modes of transportation, such as biking and walking, with specified available funds to be allocated to eligible projects by the California Transportation Commission and regional transportation agencies through the adoption of a program of projects. Existing law requires the commission to develop guidelines regarding, among other topics, project eligibility and project selection for the program of projects, as provided. This bill would prohibit, on and after January 1, 2026, the commission from adding a project that creates a Class III bikeway or a sharrow to the program of projects, except as specified. The bill would require the commission to make conforming changes to its guidelines regarding project eligibility and project selection for the program of projects, as specified.

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 authorizes the Governor to certify projects meeting certain requirements as infrastructure projects and provides those certified projects with certain streamlining benefits, including requiring the lead agency to prepare the record of proceedings concurrently with the environmental review process and requiring the resolution of an action or proceeding challenging the certification of an EIR for certified projects or the granting of any project approvals, to the extent feasible, within 270 days of the filing of the record of proceedings with the court, as specified. Existing law requires the lead agency, within 10 days of the certification of an infrastructure project, to provide a public notice of the certification, as provided. If a lead agency fails to approve a project certified as an infrastructure project before January 1, 2033, existing law specifies that the certification is no longer valid. This bill would include the San Vicente Energy Storage Facility project proposed by the San Diego County Water Authority and a project for the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of the South Bay Sewage Treatment Plant in the County of San Diego, operated by the International Boundary and Water Commission, as infrastructure projects, thereby providing the above-described streamlining benefits to those 2 projects. To the extent the bill would increase the duties of a lead agency regarding projects proposed by a third party, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of San Diego.

Existing law establishes the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services and under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed by, and funded pursuant to, federal Medicaid program provisions. Under existing law, incontinence medical supplies are covered by the Medi-Cal program. This bill would establish diapers as a covered Medi-Cal benefit for a child greater than 3 years of age who has been diagnosed with a condition, as specified, that contributes to incontinence, and for an individual under 21 years of age if necessary to correct or ameliorate a condition pursuant to certain federal standards. The bill would limit the provided diapers to an appropriate supply based on the diagnosed condition and the age of the Medi-Cal beneficiary. The bill would require the department to seek any necessary federal approvals to implement these provisions. The bill would condition implementation of these provisions on receipt of any necessary federal approvals, the availability of federal financial participation, and an appropriation by the Legislature.

Existing law establishes the Department of Transportation in the Transportation Agency. Existing law authorizes the department subject to approval of the Secretary of Transportation, to enter into an interagency transfer agreement under which a joint powers board assumes responsibility for administering state-funded intercity rail service in certain rail corridors, including the LOSSAN Rail Corridor. Existing law defines the LOSSAN Rail Corridor as the intercity passenger rail corridor between San Diego, Los Angeles, and San Luis Obispo. Pursuant to this authority, the department entered into an interagency transfer agreement with the LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency to administer intercity passenger rail service in the LOSSAN Rail Corridor. This bill would require the Secretary of Transportation to provide guidance and recommendations to, and coordination between, stakeholders as necessary to ensure the performance of the LOSSAN Rail Corridor, as specified. This bill would also require the Secretary of Transportation, with technical and subject matter assistance from the Secretary for Environmental Protection and the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency, to submit a report to the Legislature regarding the LOSSAN Rail Corridor that includes specified information no later than 2 years after an appropriation is made by the Legislature for purposes of this report. The bill would also require the Secretary of Transportation, in coordination with stakeholders responsible for operating rail services along the LOSSAN Rail Corridor, to submit a report to the Legislature on the performance of the LOSSAN Rail Corridor no later than 3 years after an appropriation is made by the Legislature for purposes of this performance report and biennially thereafter. This bill would require the Secretary of Transportation to convene a working group composed of representatives of certain types of entities, including, among others, metropolitan planning organizations from specified counties. The bill would require the working group to submit consensus recommendations and feedback in a report to the Legislature on or before February 1, 2026, on various topics relating to rail service in the LOSSAN Rail Corridor. Before submitting the report to the Legislature, the bill would require the recommendations and feedback to be submitted to the LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency, the Southern California Regional Rail Authority, and the North County Transit District for review and consideration. By adding to the duties of local agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the LOSSAN Rail Corridor. 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.

Under existing law, the Department of Justice is responsible for carrying out several functions related to the sale, delivery, and transfer of firearms, including maintaining a centralized list of all persons licensed to sell firearms and inspecting firearms. The California Constitution establishes the Attorney General as the chief law officer of the state and makes it the duty of the Attorney General to see that the laws of the state are uniformly and adequately enforced. This bill would establish, within the Department of Justice, the Office of Gun Violence Prevention. The bill would require the office to advise the Attorney General on, among other things, gun violence prevention-related matters and the effectiveness of certain gun violence prevention laws and programs. The bill would require the office to consult with specified stakeholders and, on or before July 1, 2026, issue a public report on achieving sustained gun violence reduction, including addressing new legislation and improvements to statutory implementation. The bill would require the office to make its report publicly available and transmit copies to the public safety committees of both houses of the Legislature and the Governor's office, within 60 days of the report's completion.

Existing law prohibits a person subject to specified protective orders from owning a firearm or ammunition. Existing law requires a person subject to those orders to relinquish any firearms or ammunition they own. Commencing January 1, 2026, this bill would require the court, when issuing those orders, to provide the person subject to the order with information on how any firearms or ammunition still in their possession are to be relinquished, as specified. The bill would require the court to review the file to determine whether the receipt has been filed and inquire as to whether the person has complied with the requirement. The bill would require violations of the firearms or ammunition prohibition to be reported to the prosecuting attorney in the jurisdiction where the order has been issued within 2 business days of the court hearing unless the restrained party provides a receipt showing compliance at a subsequent hearing or by direct filing with the clerk of the court. Commencing January 1, 2026, this bill would also require the court, at a noticed hearing relating to these orders, to consider information presented that the restrained person has possession or control of a firearm or ammunition. The bill would authorize the court, upon making this finding, to set a review hearing, as specified, to determine whether the person has possession or control of a firearm or ammunition in violation of the above provisions. Existing law requires specified protective orders related to domestic violence to be served on the respondent at the request of the petitioner, whether or not the respondent has been taken into custody, by a law enforcement officer who is present at the scene of reported domestic violence involving the parties to the proceeding or who receives a request from the petitioner to provide service of the order. Existing law requires the petitioner to provide the officer with an endorsed copy of the order and proof of service that the officer is then required to complete and transmit to the issuing court, as specified. If the law enforcement officer determines that a protective order has been issued but not served, existing law requires the office to immediately notify the respondent of the terms of the order and where a written copy of the order can be obtained, and to enforce the order at that time. Existing law prohibits a fee from being charged to the petitioner for service of those orders. Commencing January 1, 2026, this bill would similarly require a peace officer, as defined, upon the request of a petitioner, to serve and enforce specified protective orders related to, among other things, elder or dependent adult abuse, harassment, workplace violence, or violence in postsecondary educational institutions, on a respondent, whether or not the respondent has been taken into custody. The bill would similarly prohibit the imposition of a fee on a petitioner for service of these orders. By expanding the duties of local law enforcement, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires a family court to determine the best interest of the child for purposes of deciding child custody in proceedings for dissolution of marriage, nullity of marriage, legal separation of the parties, petitions for exclusive custody of a child, and proceedings under the Domestic Violence Prevention Act. Existing law establishes a rebuttable presumption that an award of sole or joint physical or legal custody of a child to a person who has perpetrated domestic violence is detrimental to the best interest of a child and establishes factors to be considered in rebutting that presumption, including that the perpetrator is restrained by a domestic violence prevention order and has, or has not, complied with that order. Commencing January 1, 2026, this bill would additionally establish, as a factor to be considered, whether the perpetrator is restrained by any other protective order and has, or has not, complied with that order. Commencing January 1, 2026, the bill would, for specified protective orders if the respondent declines to relinquish possession of a firearm or ammunition based on the assertion of the right against self-incrimination, authorize the court to grant use immunity for the relinquishment of the firearm. Existing law authorizes the court, as part of a relinquishment order, to grant an exemption from certain relinquishment requirements if the respondent can show that a firearm is necessary as a condition of continued employment and their employer is unable to reassign the respondent to a position where the firearm is unnecessary. Commencing January 1, 2026, this bill would revise the relinquishment process and would instead authorize the court to grant an exemption if the respondent is not precluded from owning, possessing, controlling, or purchasing a firearm and ammunition under state or federal law and specified conditions, depending on whether the respondent is a peace officer, are met. Existing law allows a search warrant to be issued upon probable cause, supported by affidavit, naming or describing the person to be searched or searched for, and particularly describing the property, thing, or things and the place to be searched. Existing law also specifies the grounds upon which a search warrant may be issued, including, among other grounds, that the property or things to be seized include a firearm that is owned by, or in the possession of, or in the custody or control of, a person prohibited from owning that firearm due to a domestic violence restraining order, as specified. Commencing January 1, 2026, this bill would additionally allow a search warrant to be issued for, among other things, ammunition that a person is prohibited from owning due to a domestic violence restraining order, and for a firearm or ammunition that a person is prohibited from owning due to other specified temporary restraining orders or injunctions. Existing law, the Safety For All Act of 2016, approved by the voters as Proposition 63 at the November 8, 2016, statewide general election, requires any person selling specified amounts of ammunition to be licensed as an ammunition vendor. Existing law exempts specified transfers of ammunition from these provisions. Proposition 63 allows its provisions to be amended by a vote of 55% of the Legislature so long as the amendments are consistent with, and further the intent of, the act. This bill would amend Proposition 63 to exempt the sale of ammunition to a licensed ammunition vendor by a person required to relinquish that ammunition due to specified protective orders. The bill would make additional conforming and clarifying changes, as specified. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 6389 of the Family Code proposed by AB 2759 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2759 are enacted and this bill is enacted last, and would also incorporate additional changes to Section 1524 of the Penal Code proposed by SB 1002 to become operative only if this bill and SB 1002 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law prohibits a person who has been taken into custody, assessed, and admitted to a designated facility, or who has been certified for intensive treatment after having been admitted to a designated facility, because the person is a danger to themselves or others as a result of a mental health disorder, from owning a firearm, as specified. Existing law also prohibits a person who has been adjudicated to be a danger to others as a result of a mental disorder or mental illness, or who has been adjudicated to be a mentally disordered sex offender, a person who has been found not guilty by reason of insanity of committing specified crimes, a person found by a court to be mentally incompetent to stand trial, or a person who has been placed under conservatorship by a court because the person is gravely disabled as a result of a mental disorder or impairment by chronic alcoholism from purchasing or receiving, or attempting to purchase or receive, or having possession, custody, or control of a firearm or any other deadly weapon. A violation of these prohibitions is a crime. This bill would, among other things, expand those prohibitions to also prohibit the ownership, possession, custody, or control of ammunition. The bill would require a person subject to the prohibition because they are a danger to themselves or others as a result of a mental health disorder to relinquish a firearm, other deadly weapon, or ammunition they own, possess, or control within 72 hours of discharge from a facility, as specified, and would require a person subject to the prohibition because they are a person who has been adjudicated to be a danger to others as a result of a mental disorder or mental illness, or who has been adjudicated to be a mentally disordered sex offender, or a person who has been found not guilty by reason of insanity of committing specified crimes, to relinquish to law enforcement a firearm, other deadly weapon, or ammunition in their custody or control within 14 days of the court order finding the person to be a person as described. By expanding the application of an existing crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law allows a search warrant to be issued upon probable cause, supported by affidavit, naming or describing the person to be searched or searched for, and particularly describing the property, thing, or things and the place to be searched. Existing law also specifies the grounds upon which a search warrant may be issued, including, among other grounds, when the property or things to be seized include a firearm or other deadly weapon that is owned by, in the possession of, or in the custody or control of specified individuals. This bill would additionally authorize a search warrant to be issued on the grounds that the property to be seized includes ammunition and is owned by, in the possession of, or in the custody or control of specified individuals. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1524 of the Penal Code proposed by SB 899 to be operative only if this bill and SB 899 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code proposed by AB 2629 and SB 1025 to be operative only if this bill and one or both of those bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law requires the destruction of certain firearms, in the possession of a law enforcement agency, that have been confiscated, seized, abandoned, unclaimed, or surrendered. This bill would specify that destruction of a firearm means destroying the firearm in its entirety by smelting, shredding, crushing, or cutting all parts of the firearm, including any attachments. The bill would also require every law enforcement agency, as defined, to develop and maintain a written policy regarding the destruction of firearms and shall make that policy available on its internet website. The bill would exempt from the requirements to destroy a weapon pursuant to the bill's provisions law enforcement agencies that have existing contracts prior to November 1, 2024, with another person or entity for the destruction of firearms if the law enforcement agency would have to breach its existing contract with the other person or entity. By requiring local law enforcement agencies to follow specified requirements for destruction and to create and maintain a written policy on firearm destruction, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires certain officers who possess firearms that were exhibits in a criminal proceeding that were left unclaimed for at least 180 days to destroy the firearm, as specified. This bill would exempt firearms that were stolen or used without the prior knowledge of their lawful owner and that are possessed by a public administrator, public guardian, or public conservator in the performance of their duties as the personal representative of a decedent's estate, or in the performance of the duties of a conservator or guardian over a person or their estate. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 18005 of the Penal Code proposed by AB 2739 and AB 2842 to be operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law generally regulates the possession of firearms, including imposing storage requirements to prevent children from gaining access to firearms. This bill would, beginning on January 1, 2026, require a person who possesses a firearm in a residence to keep the firearm securely stored when the firearm is not being carried or readily controlled by the person or another lawful authorized user. For purposes of these provisions, a firearm is securely stored if the firearm is maintained within, locked by, or disabled using a certified firearm safety device or secure gun safe that meets specified standards. The bill would make a first and 2nd violation of this offense punishable as an infraction, and a 3rd or subsequent violation punishable as a misdemeanor. The bill would exempt unloaded antique firearms, as defined, or firearms that are permanently inoperable from these provisions. The bill would require the Department of Justice to seek to inform residents about these standards for storage of firearms. By creating a new crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor or a felony if a person keeps a firearm within any premises that are under the person's custody or control and the person knows or reasonably should know that a child is likely to gain access to the firearm without the permission of the child's parent or legal guardian, and the child obtains access to the firearm and causes injury, other than great bodily injury, or death or great bodily injury to the child or any other person, or carries that firearm off-premises, as defined, to a public place or a school. Existing law exempts a person from the above provisions if the person has no reasonable expectation, based on objective facts and circumstances, that a child is likely to be present on the premises. This bill would remove these exemptions. 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.