(1) Existing law establishes priorities and procedures that any state agency disposing of surplus property is required to follow. Existing law requires the Department of Transportation to deposit proceeds from the sale of a surplus residential property from the department to a new owner into the SR-710 Rehabilitation Account. Existing law continuously appropriates the funds in the account to the department for the purpose of providing required repairs to certain surplus residential properties that are offered for sale, as provided. Existing law requires that the total funds maintained in the account not exceed a specified amount and that funds exceeding that amount, less any reimbursements due to the federal government, be transferred to the State Highway Account in the State Transportation Fund, to be used for allocation by the California Transportation Commission exclusively to fund projects located in specified cities and in the 90032 postal ZIP Code. Existing law also establishes the Affordable Housing Trust Account within the Housing Finance Fund, a continuously appropriated fund, and requires certain funds to be deposited in the account in accordance with specified provisions for the benefit of income restricted persons and families residing exclusively in the Cities of Pasadena, South Pasadena, Alhambra, La Cañada Flintridge, and the 90032 postal ZIP Code. Existing law sets forth an order of priority for the disposal of specified surplus residential property, including that a state agency disposing of single-family surplus residential property first offer the property at the appraised fair market value to former owners and present occupants, and then offer the property at an affordable price to other present occupants who have occupied the property for a specified number of years and who meet certain income levels. Existing law sets certain parameters for the calculation of an affordable price for purposes of these provisions based on, among other things, the fair market value of the property. This bill would, instead, require the first tier priority offer to be based on the appraised condition-adjusted price of the fair market value and would define "condition-adjusted price of the fair market value" to mean the fair market value of the property as of October 13, 2019, as determined by an independent appraiser and adjusted, as provided. The bill would revise the above-specified parameters for calculating an affordable price. The bill would establish requirements relating to the performance and cost of the inspection of the property, and define various terms for purposes of these provisions, including, among others, "guidelines." The bill would also, for surplus residential property sold at a condition-adjusted fair market value, exempt the selling agency from providing repairs to the property, as specified. This bill, among other changes, would authorize a present occupant or tenant purchasing a residence at an affordable price or condition-adjusted price of the fair market value to receive purchase assistance in accordance with certain procedures. The bill would provide that certain amounts repaid for those purposes constitute deferred proceeds from the department's sale of the property and would be deposited into the Affordable Housing Trust Account, as prescribed. (2) If the surplus residential property is not sold pursuant to the priorities described above, or pursuant to other specified priorities, existing law requires the property to then be sold at fair market value, with priority given first to purchasers who are present tenants in good standing, as provided, and then to former tenants who were in good standing at the time they vacated the premises, as provided. This bill would, instead, require the property to be sold to those present or former tenants at condition-adjusted fair market value. This bill would require the Department of Transportation, upon request, to provide certain documents related to the surplus residential property to all persons or entities offered or purchasing surplus residential property. The bill would require any surplus residential property purchased at the condition-adjusted price of the fair market value pursuant to the bill to be assessed at its condition-adjusted price of the fair market value for property tax purposes, as prescribed. (3) Existing law contains provisions that are specific to the sale of surplus residential property located in the City of Pasadena. Those provisions, among other things, contain a priority requiring surplus residential property located in the city to be offered at fair market value to specified present tenants who are in good standing, as provided. This bill would, instead, require the property to be offered to those present tenants at condition-adjusted price of the fair market value, as defined. Existing law also requires the City of Pasadena to commence the construction, or complete acquisition, of affordable units in an amount at least equal to 3 times the number of unoccupied homes acquired by the city by December 31, 2026. This bill would change the timing for this requirement to within 2 years from the date on which the proceeds from the subsequent sale of the unoccupied homes are received, as specified, and would make other related changes to these provisions. (4) Existing law contains provisions that are specific to the sale of surplus residential property located in the City of South Pasadena. Those provisions, among other things, contain a priority requiring surplus residential property located in the city to be offered at fair market value to specified present tenants who are in good standing, as provided. This bill would, instead, require the property to be offered to those present tenants at condition-adjusted price of the fair market value. Existing law also requires the City of South Pasadena to commence the construction, or complete acquisition, of affordable units in an amount at least equal to three times the number of unoccupied homes acquired by the city by July 1, 2028. This bill would, for unoccupied homes acquired by the City of South Pasadena after July 1, 2026, change the timing for this requirement to within 2 years from the date on which the proceeds from the subsequent sale of the unoccupied homes are received, as specified, and would make other related changes to these provisions. By requiring new deposits into a continuously appropriated account, the bill would make an appropriation. (5) This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Cities of South Pasadena and Pasadena. (6) By imposing new requirements on the Cities of South Pasadena and Pasadena, 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, 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. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law, the California Building Standards Law, establishes the California Building Standards Commission within the Government Operations Agency. Existing law requires the commission to approve and adopt building standards and to codify those standards in the California Building Standards Code. Existing law, the California Factory-Built Housing Law, generally regulates the design, manufacture, and installation of factory-built housing, as defined and specified. That law specifically and entirely reserves to local jurisdictions certain local requirements, including local use zone requirements, snow load requirements, and wind pressure requirements. That law provides that any person who violates any of those provisions and other specified law is guilty of a misdemeanor, as specified. This bill also would prohibit a city, county, city and county, or district from imposing or enforcing local building standards applicable to a factory-built housing structure, as defined, that exceed or differ from the applicable mandatory standards contained in the California Building Standards Code. The bill would authorize a city or county to make changes or modifications in the requirements contained in the provisions published in the California Building Standards Code that are reasonably necessary to maintain minimum health and safety because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions, subject to the city or county making a specified finding. The bill would create a rebuttable presumption in favor of a determination that facilitates the use of factory-built housing and allows a project to qualify as a factory-built housing structure. This bill would define certain key terms for purposes of the California Factory-Built Housing Law. In this regard, the bill would define "building assembly" to mean assembled construction materials, components, subsystems, subassemblies or other systems designed for use in, or as part of, factory-built housing, and "factory-built housing structure" as a residential building where at least 23 of the new or converted square footage is designated for residential use and in which at least 30% of the residential use portion of the building is built using factory-built housing. The bill would recast the definition of "factory-built housing" to mean, among other things, a residential building, dwelling unit, building component, building assembly, or building system that is manufactured in a specified manner. The bill would make other conforming changes to definitions in the California Factory-Built Housing Law, the Sales and Use Tax Law, and the Vehicle Code. By adding to the duties of local officials, and expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would include findings that certain 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for specified reasons.
Existing law designates specific days as holidays in this state. Existing law adopts state holidays as judicial holidays, with certain exceptions, including Admission Day and Columbus Day. Existing law designates holidays on which community colleges and public schools are authorized to close pursuant to a memorandum of understanding between the governing board and represented employees, including "Native American Day" on the 4th Friday in September. This bill would add "Eid al-Fitr" and "Eid al-Adha" to the list of state holidays. The bill would exclude "Eid al-Fitr" and "Eid al-Adha" from designation as judicial holidays. The bill would authorize community colleges and public schools to close on "Eid al-Fitr" and "Eid al-Adha," as specified. Existing law entitles state employees, with specified exceptions, to be given time off with pay for specified holidays. Existing law, in addition, authorizes state employees to elect to use 8 hours of vacation, annual leave, compensating time off, or personal holiday credit corresponding with specified dates. This bill would, similarly, permit the employee to elect to receive the holiday credit for the holidays of "Eid al-Fitr" or "Eid al-Adha," as specified. The bill would, for those holidays whose dates vary annually, instead authorize the above-described election to be made on the date designated by their group. The bill would make findings and declarations related to the purpose of the Eid holidays. The bill would make its provisions severable. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 135 of the Code of Civil Procedure proposed by AB 2294 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2294 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The bill also would incorporate additional changes to Sections 45203, 79020, and 88203 of the Education Code proposed by SB 1394 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1394 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The bill further would incorporate additional changes to Section 6700 of the Government Code proposed by AB 2294 and SB 1394 to be operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The bill further would incorporate additional changes to Sections 19853 and 19853.1 of the Government Code proposed by SB 1394 and AB 1841 to be operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law authorizes a peace officer, humane society officer, or animal control officer to take possession of a stray or abandoned animal in specified circumstances, including when the animal is kept without proper care and attention, as specified. Existing law provides that if an animal is seized pursuant to those provisions or pursuant to a warrant, the owner is personally liable to the seizing agency for the cost of the seizure and care of the animal. Existing law deems the animal to then be abandoned by the owner under specified circumstances, including if the owner, within 14 days of notice of availability of the animal to be returned, fails to pay charges and take possession of the animal. This bill would make those provisions apply to animals seized pursuant to any provision of California law.
Existing law establishes the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) to set minimum standards for the recruitment and training of peace officers and to develop training courses and curriculum. Existing law authorizes POST to suspend or revoke the certification of a peace officer if the peace officer has engaged in any serious misconduct, as specified. Existing law requires POST to adopt by regulation a definition of "serious misconduct" that serves as the criteria to be considered for ineligibility for, or revocation of, certification, as provided. This bill would additionally authorize POST to suspend or revoke the certification of a peace officer who commits specified theft under color of authority, where the peace officer acted with specific intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 13510.8 of the Penal Code proposed by AB 1896 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1896 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law, commencing April 1, 2026, makes a gift certificate with a cash value of less than $15 redeemable in cash for its cash value. This bill would authorize the issuer of a gift certificate that contains printed language on the certificate stating a cash redemption threshold that is lower than the amount described above to sell the gift certificate until December 31, 2028, if certain requirements are met, including that the gift certificate was manufactured or printed before April 1, 2026, and the issuer of the gift certificate displays at specified point-of-sale devices, a notice stating that a gift certificate with a cash value of less than $15 is redeemable in cash for its cash value, as provided.
Existing law divides the state into agricultural districts, and provides for the management of these districts by district agricultural associations. Existing law requires the officers of the association to consist of a board of directors of 9 members, establishes a 4-year term of office for the directors, and requires the directors to be appointed by the Governor, as specified. This bill would, if the Governor has not filled a vacancy on the board of directors within 90 days and the board of directors has insufficient membership to establish a quorum, authorize the board of directors to temporarily appoint a director to fill the vacancy and to establish a quorum, as provided. The bill would authorize the Governor to appoint a different director to fill the vacancy for the unexpired term who would replace the temporary director on the board of directors, as specified.
Existing law requires each law enforcement agency, on or before January 1, 2021, to maintain a policy that provides a minimum standard on the use of force. Existing law requires that the policy include, among other things, training standards and requirements relating to demonstrated knowledge and understanding of the law enforcement agency's use of force policy by officers, investigators, and supervisors. Existing law prohibits a law enforcement agency from authorizing the use of a carotid restraint or choke hold by any peace officer employed by that agency. This bill would, until January 1, 2030, prohibit a law enforcement agency, including a federal law enforcement agency, from using a wearable electroshock device within the State of California. The bill would also prohibit a law enforcement agency from using state funds to purchase a wearable electroshock device. The bill would require a law enforcement agency to update their use of force policies to prohibit the use of a wearable electroshock device. By increasing the duties on local law enforcement, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the Division of Law Enforcement within the Department of Justice to conduct a study on the safety and community impacts of wearable electroshock devices and provide recommendations for appropriate standards and safeguards for their use, and would require the department to report to the Legislature on the findings and recommendations of the study on or before January 1, 2029. 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 establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in this state. Existing law establishes community college districts throughout the state and authorizes these districts to provide instruction at community college campuses. Existing law requires the expenditure, during each fiscal year, for the payment of salaries of classroom instructors by a community college district, of 50% of the district's current expense of education. Existing law defines "current expense of education" as the gross total expended for certain expenses that include academic salaries, classified salaries, employee benefits, and books, supplies, and equipment replacement, but that generally exclude expenses for student transportation, food services, and community services. This bill, notwithstanding the above-described provisions, would authorize a community college district, for a period of 5 fiscal years following the 2025–26 fiscal year, or until specified federal funding is fully restored to every community college district, whichever occurs first, to exclude from its current expense of education any local unrestricted expenditures from the community college district's unrestricted general fund, as provided, and not to exceed a specified amount, that maintain student support functions that were previously funded though federal discretionary grants that have been terminated, nonrenewed, or defunded due to federal action on or after September 10, 2025. If a community college district exercises its authority pursuant to these provisions, the bill would require the community college district to annually certify eligibility to the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges, as specified, and would require the chancellor's office to maintain documentation and include as part of another specified report, any certifications it receives, as provided. The bill would require the above-described action to exclude local unrestricted expenditures from a community college district's current expense of education to be taken at a regular public meeting of the governing board of the community college district, as specified. The bill would make its provisions inoperative on July 1, 2031, or on the first day of the fiscal year following the full restoration of specified federal funding to every community college district, whichever occurs first, and would repeal them on January 1 of the year following the inoperative date.
Existing law authorizes a court to issue various orders relating to criminal investigations, including the interception of wire or electronic communications, the installation and use of a pen register or trap and trace device, or a search warrant upon specified grounds. Existing law prohibits the issuance of any orders or warrants for the purpose of investigating or recovering evidence of a prohibited violation, as defined. Existing law requires an out-of-state warrant for specified records to include an attestation that the evidence sought is not related to an investigation into, or enforcement of, a prohibited violation. Existing law prohibits the production of records by a California corporation when the corporation knows or should know that the out-of-state warrant relates to an investigation into, or enforcement of, a prohibited violation. This bill would include exercising any rights protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution within the definition of "prohibited violation." The bill would expand the prohibition on the production of records relating to investigation into, or enforcement of, prohibited violations to federal court orders.
Existing law requires the Board of Parole Hearings, among other responsibilities, to conduct parole suitability hearings and determine whether an individual is suitable for parole. Existing law establishes the Elderly Parole Program for the purpose of reviewing parole suitability of inmates who are 50 years of age or older and who have served a minimum of 20 years of continuous incarceration on their sentence. Existing law requires the Board of Parole Hearings, when considering the release of qualifying inmates, to give special consideration to whether certain criteria have reduced the elderly inmate's risk for future violence. Existing law excludes various persons from these provisions, including persons sentenced pursuant to existing sentencing provisions commonly known as the 3 strikes law. Under an existing court order, although statutorily excluded, an individual may be eligible for parole under the Elderly Parole Program when they are 60 years of age or older and have been continuously incarcerated for at least 25 years. This bill would instead specify that persons convicted of various sexual offenses, including rape, sodomy, or aggravated sexual assault of a child, or sentenced pursuant to a provision applicable where the crimes involved had multiple victims, as specified, are not eligible for parole under the Elderly Parole Program, unless the person is 65 years of age or older and has served a minimum of 25 years of continuous incarceration on their current sentence. The bill would require the board to review a sexual dangerousness screening of an individual sentenced to an indeterminate sentence for a sexually violent offense, as defined, and would require the board to refer a person whose sexual dangerousness screening indicates that they may qualify as a sexually violent predator to the State Department of State Hospitals for further evaluation, as described. The bill would require commissioners who conduct hearings to undergo training in sex offender behaviors and risks. Existing law defines a sexually violent predator to mean a person who has been convicted of a sexually violent offense against one or more victims and who has a diagnosed mental disorder that makes the person a danger to the health and safety of others in that it is likely that the person will engage in sexually violent criminal behavior. For purposes of this definition, a conviction for a sexually violent offense includes convictions that resulted in either a determinate or an indeterminate prison sentence, as specified. Existing law requires the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to refer a person who is in custody under that department's jurisdiction, and who is serving a determinate sentence or whose parole has been revoked, for evaluation by the State Department of State Hospitals at least 6 months prior to that individual's scheduled date for release from prison if the secretary determines that the person may be a sexually violent predator. Existing law requires a petition for commitment as a sexually violent predator to be filed in the county in which the person was convicted of the sexual offense for which the person was committed to the jurisdiction of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. This bill would also require the Executive Officer of the Board of Parole Hearings to make that referral and revise the criteria for referral to additionally apply to a person who is serving an indeterminate prison sentence. The bill would also authorize the secretary, or the Executive Officer of the Board of Parole Hearings, to refer the person for evaluation if the person's scheduled release date is less than 4 months after the date of the decision to grant parole, or if the person will be scheduled for a parole hearing in the next 6 months. By imposing additional duties on counties regarding commitment of persons as sexually violent predators, 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, 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 grants the legislative body of a city certain powers with respect to city streets and highways, including the power to construct and maintain those streets and highways. Existing law grants the board of supervisors of a county general supervision, management, and control of county highways and authorizes the board of supervisors to lay out, construct, improve, and maintain county highways. This bill would prohibit a city or county from holding a community input meeting to reconsider, delay, or prevent implementation of a proposed pedestrian or bicycle safety project after that project has passed 90% design, as specified. After or upon the award of a contract for, or when county or city staff, as applicable, are directed to begin, the construction of a pedestrian or bicycle safety project, the bill would prohibit the city or county from terminating the project unless the city or county makes at least one specified finding at a public meeting. If a city or county establishes a process for residents of the city or county to submit a petition to request the installation of a traffic-calming measure, the bill would prohibit the city or county from requiring the petition to contain the signatures of more than a majority of the total number of persons whose residences are located, in whole or in part, within 1,000 feet of the proposed traffic-calming measure, as specified. To the extent that the bill increases the duties of local officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law, the Pedestrian Mall Law of 1960, authorizes the legislative body of a city or county to establish a pedestrian mall, as defined, and prohibit vehicular traffic on the mall, upon adoption of an ordinance establishing the mall. 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 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. CEQA, until January 1, 2040, exempts from its requirements certain transportation-related projects, including, among others, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, as specified. CEQA requires, except as provided, those exempted projects to be carried out by a local agency and meet certain requirements, including certain labor requirements. This bill would exempt from the requirements of CEQA the establishment or expansion of a pedestrian mall and would require those projects to comply with the above-described requirements applicable to those exempted CEQA projects. (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, 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.
