SB 184 is a procedural resolution that expresses the California Legislature's intent to enact future statutory changes related to the Budget Act of 2025. It does not create new policies or funding mechanisms but formally declares the Legislature's plan to make adjustments to the budget framework in the coming year. The bill directly affects the budget process itself, setting the stage for future legislative action without imposing immediate changes. It has passed the Senate and is now pending in the Assembly.
SB 186 is a procedural bill that expresses the California Legislature's intent to later enact statutory changes related to the upcoming Budget Act of 2025. It does not propose specific budget changes or affect any programs directly; it merely states the legislature's future intention to make adjustments to budget-related statutes. The bill passed the Senate unanimously (28-10) and is now pending in the Assembly Budget Committee. This is a preparatory step, not a substantive policy change.
SB 187, titled "Budget Act of 2025," is a procedural bill that expresses the Legislature's intent to later enact statutory changes to the Budget Act of 2025. It does not create new policies, spending, or budget allocations itself - it merely states the Legislature's future plan to make formal updates to the existing budget framework. This bill directly affects the legislative process by signaling upcoming changes to budget law, but it has no immediate impact on state finances or programs. As a procedural measure, it requires no fiscal committee action and does not mandate local spending.
SB 192 is a procedural bill that expresses the California Legislature's intent to enact future statutory changes related to the Budget Act of 2025. It does not create new budget rules or allocate funds itself - it only declares the Legislature’s future direction for budget-related laws. The bill directly affects the state budget process by signaling that formal revisions to the 2025 Budget Act will be pursued later. This is a non-binding step to guide future legislative action, not a policy change with immediate effect. (Note: The bill passed committee but remains pending further action.)
SB 178, titled "Budget Act of 2025," is a procedural bill that expresses the Legislature's intent to make future statutory changes to the state's budget process. It does not establish new policies or directly affect any specific groups; instead, it formally declares the Legislature's plan to revise the Budget Act of 2025 in upcoming sessions. The bill has no fiscal impact, as it contains no funding provisions or specific budgetary mechanisms. It serves as a preliminary step to guide future budget-related legislation, not as a substantive law. The bill passed the Senate on March 20, 2025, and was referred to the Assembly for further consideration.
SB 194 is a procedural bill that expresses the California Legislature's intent to enact statutory changes related to the Budget Act of 2025. It does not specify any concrete policy changes or affect specific groups; instead, it serves as a formal step to signal future legislative action on budget-related statutes. The bill passed the Senate unanimously (28-10) and was referred to the Assembly for further consideration. As a procedural measure, it has no immediate budgetary impact or fiscal effect.
SB 190 is a procedural bill that expresses the Legislature's intent to enact future statutory changes to the Budget Act of 2025. It does not make immediate budget adjustments or affect specific groups, but sets the stage for the Legislature to propose and pass detailed budget-related legislation later. The bill passed the Senate on March 20, 2025, and is now pending in the Assembly. This step alone does not alter current budget processes or funding.
AB 178 is a procedural bill that expresses the California Legislature's intent to enact future statutory changes related to the Budget Act of 2025. It does not create new policies, allocate funding, or directly affect any individuals or entities. The bill solely serves as a formal statement of legislative intent to modify budget-related statutes in upcoming sessions. This is a preparatory step, not a substantive policy change, and has no fiscal impact as confirmed by the legislative counsel.
AB 196 is a procedural bill that expresses the California Legislature's intent to later enact statutory changes related to the 2025 Budget Act. It does not make any immediate policy changes or affect specific groups; it merely sets the stage for future legislative action. The bill passed the Assembly on March 20, 2025, with 53 votes in favor, and was referred to the Senate Budget and Finance Committee for further review. This is a preparatory step, not a substantive budget measure.
(1) Existing law establishes the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission and prescribes the authorities, duties, and responsibilities of the commission pertaining to energy matters. Existing law requires the commission, on or before January 1, 2019, in consultation with the Contractors State License Board, local building officials, and other stakeholders, to approve a plan that promotes compliance with specified regulations relating to building energy efficiency standards in the installation of central air-conditioning and heat pumps, as specified. Existing law authorizes the commission to adopt regulations to increase compliance with permitting and inspection requirements for central air-conditioning and heat pumps, and associated sales and installations, consistent with the above-described plan. This bill would establish various requirements and authorizations for the installation of a residential heat pump water heater or heat pump HVAC system, as defined, by, among other things, requiring a city, county, or city and county, beginning July 1, 2027, to adopt and offer asynchronous inspections for installations that do not require a licensed contractor and building inspector to be simultaneously present during the inspection. The bill would additionally require a city, county, or city and county, except as specified, to post specific information online, and on or before July 1, 2028, to implement an online automated permitting process for the installation of a residential heat pump water heater or heat pump HVAC system that issues permits in real time to a licensed contractor that meets certain criteria. The bill would require the criteria to include, among others, that the licensed contractor certify under penalty of perjury that they have performed a load calculation to properly size the new equipment, as specified. By expanding the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. By imposing these various new duties on the described local entities, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize a city, county, or city and county, except as specified, to require up to one nondiscretionary permit per installation of a residential heat pump water heater or heat pump HVAC system in which the local entity administratively approves an application to install the residential heat pump water heater or heat pump HVAC system. The bill would additionally authorize a city, county, or city and county to apply only certain planning or zoning or workforce labor standards on the installation of a residential heat pump water heater or heat pump HVAC system that are in addition to any state-level requirements. The bill would prohibit a local entity described above from requiring a permit or inspection for plug-in ready window air-conditioner or window heat pump HVAC systems, provided that certain requirements are met, including that the appliance has a voltage rating of 120 volts or less and the appliance is a self-contained unit. The bill would limit the amount a city, county, or city and county may charge as a permit fee for a residential heat pump water heater or heat pump HVAC system, as specified. The bill would require a local entity described above that applies to receive any funding from the commission to self-certify to the commission its compliance with any applicable portions of the bill's provisions. The above provisions would not apply to new residential construction. The bill would include findings and declarations related to these provisions. (2) Existing law, the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act, defines and regulates common interest developments. Among other things, the act makes a provision of the governing document or architectural or landscaping guidelines or policies void and unenforceable if, among other things, the provision prohibits, or includes conditions that have the effect of prohibiting, the use of low water-using plants as a group or as a replacement of existing turf. This bill would additionally make any provision of the governing documents, architectural guidelines, or policies void and unenforceable if the provision prevents the replacement of a fuel-gas-burning appliance with an electric appliance. The bill would also make any covenant, restriction, or condition contained in any, among other specified agreements, deed, and any provision of a governing document, that effectively prohibits or restricts the installation or use of a residential heat pump water heater or heat pump HVAC system, void and unenforceable. The bill would prohibit an association, among other things, from prohibiting or restricting a member from installing, upgrading, replacing, or using a residential heat pump water heater or heat pump HVAC system in the member's separate interest, except as specified. (3) 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. (4) 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.
Existing law, the Joint Exercise of Powers Act, authorizes 2 or more public agencies, by agreement, to form a joint powers authority to exercise any power common to the contracting parties, as specified. Existing law, for the purposes of that act, defines the term "public agency" to include various federal, state, local, and tribal entities. Existing law requires approval by the Department of General Services of certain joint powers agreements that include the state as a member, as provided. Existing law authorizes a joint powers authority to issue revenue bonds to pay the costs and expenses of acquiring, constructing, or conducting a program for, among other things, low-income housing projects owned or operated by a city, county, city and county, or housing authority. Existing law provides that the Treasurer and the Secretary of State are designated as elected representatives for federal tax purposes of a joint powers agency created to approve or certify the issuance of bonds, notes, or other evidence of indebtedness issued by or on behalf of the joint powers agency to the extent approval is required by federal tax law. This bill would provide that the geographic jurisdiction of a joint powers authority is the area encompassed by the combined geographical boundaries of all of its member public agencies. The bill would declare that these provisions are declaratory of existing law. This bill would additionally authorize the Treasurer to execute an agreement including the state as a member of a joint powers authority without obtaining approval from the Department of General Services only for the Treasurer to provide specified approvals for bonds issued by the joint powers authority to finance specified residential rental projects for which a city, county, or city and county that is a member of the joint powers authority has failed to provide specified approval required by federal tax law, as defined and provided. The bill would provide that its provisions do not expand, limit, or otherwise affect the authority of, among others, the state, or any officer or agency of the state, to enter into a joint exercise of powers agreement or cause the state to become a member of a joint powers authority, as specified. Existing law additionally authorizes, subject to specified limitations, any city or county to issue revenue bonds for the purpose of financing the acquisition, construction, rehabilitation, refinancing, or development of multifamily rental housing and for the provision of capital improvements in connection with, and determined necessary to, that multifamily rental housing. This bill would specify that, for the purposes of the above-described provisions, "city" or "county" is deemed to include the state when the state is a member of a joint powers authority pursuant to the bill's provisions only to provide the state with the power to issue bonds and provide approval, consent, or other action required to finance specified residential rental projects, as provided. Existing law provides that the State of California will not change the composition of a joint powers authority that has issued bonds, unless the change is authorized by a majority vote of applicable legislative bodies, as provided. Existing law defines "change in composition" to include, among others, the addition of a public agency, as defined, to a joint powers authority. This bill would, notwithstanding the above-described definition, provide that the state becoming a member of an existing joint powers authority shall not, in and of itself, constitute a "change in composition." The bill would make additional nonsubstantive and conforming changes. Existing law, the Subdivision Map Act, provides for the approval of tentative and final parcel maps by various local officials, as specified. The act authorizes an appeal of the local official's decision to the local legislative body, as provided. This bill would create an exception from the above-described authority as it applies to appeals by an interested person for maps that meet specified criteria, as provided. The bill would exempt from these provisions an appeal filed by an applicant, subdivider, tenant, advisory agency, or public agency or official, as specified. This bill would make the provisions of the act severable.
The Public Employees' Retirement Law (PERL) establishes the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) to provide a defined benefit to members of the system based on final compensation, credited service, and age at retirement, subject to certain variations. Existing law creates the Public Employees' Retirement Fund, which is continuously appropriated for purposes of PERS, including depositing employer and employee contributions. Under the California Constitution, assets of a public pension or retirement system are trust funds. The California Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA) establishes a variety of requirements and restrictions on public employers offering defined benefit pension plans. In this regard, PEPRA restricts the amount of compensation that may be applied for purposes of calculating a defined pension benefit for a new member, as defined, by restricting it to specified percentages of the contribution and benefit base under a specified federal law with respect to old age, survivors, and disability insurance benefits. Existing law, the Teachers' Retirement Law, establishes the State Teachers' Retirement System (STRS) and creates the Defined Benefit Program of the State Teachers' Retirement Plan, which provides a defined benefit to members of the program, based on final compensation, creditable service, and age at retirement, subject to certain variations. This bill, for service performed on and after January 1, 2027, would prohibit the pensionable compensation for calendar year 2027 used to calculate the defined benefit paid to a new member of a retirement system subject to PEPRA who retires from the system from exceeding specified percentages of the contribution and benefit base under the specified federal law with respect to old age, survivors, and disability insurance benefits. The bill would make related, conforming changes to these provisions on pensionable compensation. The bill also would require a new member of STRS to be subject to specified limits of the Teachers' Retirement Law. PEPRA requires each retirement system that offers a defined benefit plan for safety members of the system to use one of 3 formulas for safety members, 2% at age 57, 2.5% at age 57, or 2.7% at age 57. This bill would establish new retirement formulas, for employees first hired on or after January 1, 2027, as 2.5% at age 55, 2.7% at age 55, or 3% at age 55, subject to certain exceptions. For new members hired on or after January 1, 2013, who are safety members, the bill would require employers to adjust the formulas for service performed on or after January 1, 2027, to offer the formula that has the same fraction at age 55 as the fraction at age 57 in the formula the employer offered pursuant to existing law. The bill would authorize a public employer and a recognized employee organization to negotiate a prospective increase to the retirement benefit formulas for safety members and new safety members, consistent with the formulas permitted under PEPRA, including the new formulas described above. This bill would authorize an employer and its employees to agree in a memorandum of understanding to be subject to a higher safety plan or a lower safety plan, subject to certain requirements, including that the memorandum of understanding is collectively bargained in accordance with applicable laws. By increasing the contribution to continuously appropriated funds, and by increasing expenditures from those funds, this bill would make an appropriation.
