Political Reform Act of 1974: travel expenditures.
Summary
Existing law, the Political Reform Act of 1974, requires a nonprofit organization that regularly organizes and hosts travel for elected officials and that makes payments, advances, or reimbursements for their travel that total more than $10,000 per year, or more than $5,000 per year for a single official, to disclose the names of donors to the organization who donated at least $1,000 and accompanied the official on their travel during the preceding year. This bill would additionally require the organization to disclose each payment for travel by the elected state or local official and the name of the person for whom the payment for travel was made. The bill would require the nonprofit organization to maintain detailed accounts, records, bills, and receipts necessary to prepare the disclosures, and to retain these items for at least 5 years. A violation of the Political Reform Act of 1974 is a misdemeanor. By expanding the category of nonprofit organizations subject to the act, and by expanding their disclosure requirements, this bill would expand the scope of a crime and therefore 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. 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.
Bill status
in committee
1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2026
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Feb 10, 2026
Last action May 28, 2026
Maddy AI version diff · 3 comparisons
What changed between versions
05/18/26 - Amended Assembly
→
AB1788
·
1 edit
MINOR
No substantive policy changes were made between these two versions. The difference is entirely in document formatting: the old version is a traditional legislative document with line numbers and page headers, while the new version is a web page rendering of the same bill text with navigation elements, search boxes, and a different layout. The actual statutory language of AB 1788 remains identical.
TECHNICAL
The bill text was re-rendered from a traditional legislative document format (with line numbers, page headers/footers, and superscript fractions) into a web page format with navigation menus, search fields, and standard HTML layout. No changes to the underlying policy language were made.
Floor votes
How they voted
No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
11
Key actions
3
Committee
4
Amendments
4
May 18, 2026
Lower · Passed
Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.
lower
May 14, 2026
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (May 14).
lower
Apr 15, 2026
Committee
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
Apr 6, 2026
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Mar 26, 2026
Lower · Passed
Read second time and amended.
lower
Mar 25, 2026
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (March 25).
lower
Feb 23, 2026
Committee
Referred to Com. on ELECTIONS.
lower
Feb 11, 2026
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 13.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Tasha Boerner
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 1788
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 1788. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline