Existing law, the Mobilehome Residency Law, prescribes various terms and conditions of tenancies in mobilehome parks. Existing law authorizes a local agency to be responsible for the enforcement of certain requirements governing mobilehome parks. This bill would specify that, in the event that a mobilehome park operator, owner, or management fails to, or elects not to, comply with federal law or other federal requirements imposed in connection with a federally approved housing program, the mobilehome park operator, owner, or management shall ensure ongoing compliance with the Mobilehome Residency Law, the prescribed provisions of the Unruh Civil Rights Act, and all other applicable state and local laws and ordinances. If a mobilehome park operator, owner, or management fails to, or elects not to, conduct the age verification requirement under prescribed federal law, the bill would authorize a local agency to conduct age verification, as provided, and grant the local agency with the right to access and inspect records of the mobilehome park operator, owner, and management to conduct that verification.
Existing law, the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Act (CARE Act) , authorizes specified persons, including a person with whom the respondent resides, family members, and first responders, among others, to petition a civil court to create a voluntary CARE agreement or a court-ordered CARE plan and implement services, to be provided by county behavioral health agencies, to provide behavioral health care, including stabilization medication, housing, and other enumerated services, to adults who are currently experiencing a severe mental illness and have a diagnosis identified in the disorder class schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, or bipolar I disorder with psychotic features, and who meet other specified criteria. Existing law requires the Judicial Council to develop a mandatory form for use to file a CARE process petition with the court and any other forms necessary for the CARE process, to be signed under the penalty of perjury, and requires the form to contain certain information, including either a specified affidavit of a licensed behavioral health professional or evidence the respondent was detained for a minimum of two intensive treatments pursuant to specified provisions of law. Existing law, the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (LPS Act) , generally provides for the evaluation, treatment, and civil commitment of persons with mental health disorders and other specified persons. Existing law authorizes, under a superior court order, an evaluation of a person alleged, as a result of mental disorder, to be a danger to themselves or others or to be gravely disabled, and provides the forms to use for these evaluations. The CARE Act authorizes a court to terminate a respondent's participation in the CARE process if the court determines that the respondent is not participating in the CARE process or is not adhering to their CARE plan, as specified, and authorizes the court to order the court-ordered evaluation under the LPS Act. If the court finds the petitioner has made a prima facie showing that the respondent is, or may be, a person eligible for the CARE program, the court is required to order the county behavioral health agency, or their designee, as specified, to submit a written report to the court with specified information, including, but not limited to, a determination whether the respondent meets, or is likely to meet, the criteria for the CARE process and conclusions and recommendations about the respondent's ability to voluntarily engage in services. Existing law requires the court to, within 5 days of receiving the report, take one of several actions, including dismissing the petition if the court determines that voluntary engagement with the respondent is effective and the individual has enrolled, or is likely to enroll, in behavioral health treatment. This bill would require the written report to include conclusions about whether the respondent is likely to need a higher level of care than is available under the CARE Act and, if so, recommendations about the appropriate level of care and the necessary steps to obtain that level of care for the respondent and remove the authorization for a court to dismiss the petition if the respondent is only likely to enroll in behavioral health treatment. If the court intends to dismiss a petition because the respondent needs a higher level of services, the bill would authorize the court to order the county to conduct a prepetition screening and hold the CARE petition open until the screening is complete. The bill would also make other technical and conforming changes. By requiring a higher level of service on the county, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires all hearings regarding these provisions to occur in person unless the court, in its discretion, allows a party or witness to appear remotely. This bill would require the court to allow the hearings to be held remotely, unless otherwise ordered by the court or demanded by the respondent. 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.
The Insurance Rate Reduction and Reform Act of 1988, an initiative measure enacted by Proposition 103, as approved by the voters at the November 8, 1988, statewide general election, prohibits specified insurance rates from being approved or remaining in effect that are excessive, inadequate, unfairly discriminatory, or otherwise in violation of the act. Under the act, rates and premiums for automobile insurance are determined based on specified factors, including the insured's driving safety record. Existing law authorizes the provisions of Proposition 103 to be amended by a statute that furthers the purposes of the act and is enacted by the Legislature with a 23 vote. This bill, the Consumer Driving Data Protection Act of 2026, would authorize a consumer to opt to use telematics to establish their driving record, thus amending Proposition 103. The bill would prohibit the use of telematics data for a purpose other than rating private passenger automobile insurance. The bill would require a rate application under which telematics would be used to establish an insured's driving record to include specified materials related to the insurer's telematics program. This bill would prohibit an insurer that uses telematics from taking specified actions, including conditioning eligibility for a discount upon participation in a telematics program, unless the discount is approved by the commissioner. The bill would also set forth written consent and privacy requirements for the collection and use of telematics data. The bill would authorize the commissioner to impose specified penalties for violations of the bill's provisions, including civil penalties and suspension of an insurer's telematics program. This bill would require an insurance provider or third-party vendor to take specified actions with respect to the telematics data, including immediately deleting the data once a rating has been assigned to the consumer and obtaining an express written or electronic signature of a consumer on a notice meeting specified conditions. The bill would additionally prohibit an insurance provider or third-party vendor from keeping the telematics data for longer than 6 months and collecting audio or visual recordings of the occupants of the vehicle or persons outside the vehicle, among other specified prohibitions. The bill would declare that its provisions further the purposes of Proposition 103. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
(1) Existing law, the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Act (the act) , authorizes specified persons, including a person with whom the respondent resides, family members, and first responders, among others, to petition a civil court to create a voluntary CARE agreement or a court-ordered CARE plan and implement services, to be provided by county behavioral health agencies, to provide behavioral health care, including stabilization medication, housing, and other enumerated services, to adults who are currently experiencing a severe mental illness and have a diagnosis identified in the disorder class schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, and who meet other specified criteria. Existing law, the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act, authorizes a conservator of the person, of the estate, or of 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. Existing law requires the officer providing the conservatorship investigation, which may include a public guardian or a county mental health program, to investigate all available alternatives to conservatorship and to recommend conservatorship to the court only if no suitable alternatives are available. Existing law requires a conservatorship under these provisions to terminate after one year and specifies procedures if the conservator determines conservatorship is still required. This bill would authorize a conservator to, upon the termination of a conservatorship, request the court refer the conservatee to CARE court, as specified. (2) The act authorizes services and supports to be provided to adults who are currently experiencing a qualifying severe mental illness and who meet other specified criteria, including that the person is not clinically stabilized in ongoing voluntary treatment and is either unlikely to survive safely in the community without ongoing supervision and the person's condition is substantially deteriorating or the person is in need of services and supports to prevent a relapse or deterioration that would likely result in grave disability or serious harm to the person or others. This bill would authorize the court, beginning July 1, 2028, and if it dismisses a CARE petition because a respondent needs a higher level of services, to order the county to develop an exit plan for the respondent. The bill would require the State Department of Health Care Services, by July 1, 2028, to develop, with input from certain stakeholder groups, a CARE Act model exit plan that identifies appropriate services and ongoing monitoring of an individual with a petition dismissed because the individual needed a higher level of services. This bill would update the definition of a petitioner for the purposes of the act. (3) Existing law requires the Judicial Council to develop a mandatory form or forms to use to file a CARE process petition. Existing law requires the petition to be signed under the penalty of perjury and to contain specified information, including the petitioner's relationship to the respondent and either an affidavit of a licensed behavioral health professional stating the licensed behavioral health professional or their designee has examined or made multiple unsuccessful attempts to examine the respondent within 60 days of submission of the petition, or that the respondent was detained for a minimum of 2 intensive treatments pursuant to state law. This bill would extend the 60-day period for examination of the respondent to 120 days. The bill would also authorize a petition to include evidence that the respondent was either detained for a minimum of 2 involuntary holds in the last 120 days or that they were referred to a full service partnership program more than once, but was not enrolled due to inability or unwillingness to engage in the previous 120 days. (4) Existing law authorizes a court to terminate a respondent's participation in the CARE process if the court determines that the respondent is not participating in the CARE process or is not adhering to their CARE plan, as specified. Existing law authorizes the court to order an evaluation under the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act, as specified, to ensure the respondent's safety. Existing law requires the court to consider the respondent's failure to successfully complete their CARE plan and the reasons for that failure in a subsequent hearing under the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act, provided that the hearing occurs within 6 months of the termination of the CARE plan, and creates a presumption that the respondent needs additional intervention beyond the supports and services provided by the CARE plan. This bill would prohibit the court from terminating a respondent's participation in the CARE process solely due to a failure of the county or other local government entity to properly engage with the CARE process. (5) Existing law requires CARE Act proceedings to occur in person unless the court, in its discretion, allows a party or witness to appear remotely through the use of remote technology. Existing law authorizes the respondent to be in person for all hearings. This bill would instead authorize all parties and witnesses to appear remotely through the use of remotely technology. The bill would authorize the court with discretion to order a party or witness to appear in person if necessary. This bill would authorize the parties to agree to an alternative method of service for all subsequent reports and notices after the notice of initial appearance. This bill would require, by January 1, 2028, all counties to establish a process for electronic submission of CARE Act documents using a secured portal. By increasing the duties on county behavioral health agencies, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. (6) Existing law authorizes a provider of health care or a covered entity, as defined, to disclose to the county behavioral health agency any information, including protected health information, and mental health records excluding psychotherapy notes, in its possession about the respondent that is relevant to the county behavioral health agency's provision, coordination, or management or services or supports. Existing law specifies protections for this information and required procedures when such a disclosure is made. This bill would authorize a county behavioral health agency to disclose to a provider of health care or a covered entity any information, including protected health information, and mental health records, excluding psychotherapy notes, in its possession about the respondent that is relevant to the provider or entity's provision, coordination, or management of services and supports. The bill would also specify protections for this information and required procedures when such a disclosure is made. (7) Existing law requires the department to develop, in consultation with specified entities, an annual CARE Act report that includes specified information on CARE Act petitions, including the number of initial appearances, and information compiled from county behavioral health departments and courts. This bill would expand the information on CARE Act petitions to include the number of petitions submitted electronically as well as other specified information. The bill would also expand the data to be compiled from county behavioral health departments and courts to include the number of individuals who were enrolled in a Full Service Partnership program postreferral, among other things. The bill would also require the data collected from county behavioral health departments and courts to be collected for cases involving dismissed respondents, where available. (8) Existing law requires the California Health and Human Services Agency, or a designated department within the agency, to perform specified functions, including engaging an independent, research-based entity to advise on the development of data-driven process and outcome measures to guide the planning, collaboration, reporting, and evaluation of the CARE Act. This bill would require the agency to annually release a list of overperforming counties and shall annually provide written notice identifying areas of concern and opportunities for improvement to underperforming counties. This bill would also establish within the California Health and Human Services Agency the position of a CARE Court Ombudsperson, as specified. (9) 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) The Planning and Zoning Law requires a city or county to adopt a general plan for land use development that includes, among other things, a housing element. Existing law requires the housing element to include, among other things, an inventory of land suitable and available for residential development, including specified sites, an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public facilities and services to these sites (first analysis) , and an analysis of the relationship of the sites identified in the land inventory to the jurisdiction's duty to affirmatively further fair housing (2nd analysis) . This bill would remove the requirement on cities and counties to include the 2nd analysis in their housing elements. (2) Existing law requires a housing element to include a program that sets forth a schedule of actions during the planning period, each with a timeline for implementation such that there will be beneficial impacts of the programs within the planning period, that the local government is undertaking or intends to undertake to implement the policies and achieve the goals and objectives of the housing element through specified actions. Existing law requires this program to, among other things, identify actions that will be taken to make sites available, as provided, to accommodate that portion of the city's or county's share of the regional housing need for all income levels that could not be accommodated on sites identified in the inventory of sites without rezoning, and to comply with the certain zoning and rezoning requirements. If the inventory of sites does not identify adequate sites to accommodate the need for groups of all household income levels, as provided, existing law requires that the local government rezone those sites within specified time periods and requires the local government housing element program to identify sites that can be developed for housing within the planning period, as specified. Existing law also requires this program to affirmatively further fair housing and include an assessment that consists of specified components, including an analysis of available federal, state, and local data and knowledge to identify integration and segregation patterns and trends, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty and affluence, disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs, including displacement risk. Under the above-described program, existing law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to develop a standardized reporting format for certain programs and actions taken, and requires the standardized reporting format to enable the reporting of all of the assessment components and certain fields, including timelines for implementation. This bill would additionally require the above-described program to identify actions that will be taken to make sites available to ensure that the distribution of sites across the jurisdiction affirmatively furthers fair housing. The bill would require those sites, after any required rezoning and among other things, to be distributed throughout the jurisdiction in a manner that affirmatively furthers fair housing, as specified. The bill would additionally require the local government to rezone the sites within specified time periods, as described above, and identify sites that can be developed for housing within the planning period, as described above, if the inventory of sites does not affirmatively further fair housing, as specified. For those additionally identified sites, the bill would require the jurisdiction to demonstrate that those sites will affirmatively further fair housing, as provided. By imposing additional duties on local entities, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would revise and recast the requirement that the program affirmatively further fair housing. The bill would require that program to include an assessment of fair housing that includes, among other things, an analysis of available federal, state, and local data and knowledge to identify and examine certain patterns, trends, areas, disparities, and needs, as specified. The bill would also require each city or county to make the draft assessment publicly available and solicit public comments for a period of at least 90 days. The bill would require the city or county to include, among other things, in its first draft revision of the housing element, the assessment, including any revisions made in response to the public comments, and specified strategies and actions to implement the jurisdiction's fair housing priorities and goals. By imposing additional duties on local entities, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would instead require the department to develop a standardized format for describing those strategies and actions to be taken, and would require the standardized reporting format to address all of the assessment components and, in addition to the above-described certain fields, a field for which fair housing priority the program is intended to address, the intended impacts, and how the strategies and actions will result in those impacts. (3) Existing law authorizes the Department of Housing and Community Development, in evaluating a proposed or adopted housing element for substantial compliance, to allow a city or county to identify adequate sites by a variety of methods, including, among others, redesignation of property to a more intense land use category. Existing law also authorizes the department to allow a city or county to identify sites for accessory dwelling units based on the number of accessory dwelling units developed in the prior housing element planning period whether or not the units are permitted by right, the need for these units in the community, the resources or incentives available for their development, and any other relevant factors, as determined by the department. This bill would revise the department's authorization to allow a city or county to identify sites for accessory dwelling units in each income category based on the number of accessory dwelling units developed in the prior housing element planning period in that income category whether or not the units are permitted by right, the need for these units in the community, the resources or incentives available for their development, and any other relevant factors, as determined by the department. The bill would also require the jurisdiction to provide proof of a recorded deed restriction requiring the continued affordability of the unit, as specified, for accessory dwelling units developed in the prior housing element period to count towards determining the number of sites for accessory dwelling units a jurisdiction can include in the lower income category. (4) Existing law requires a city's or county's inventory of land suitable for residential development to be used to identify sites throughout the community, consistent with certain fair housing requirements, that can be developed for housing within the planning period, and that are sufficient to provide for the jurisdiction's share of the regional housing need for all income levels. This bill would instead require that a city's or county's inventory of land suitable for residential development be used to identify sites that can be developed for housing within the planning period, that are sufficient to provide for the jurisdiction's share of the regional housing need for all income levels, and that are distributed throughout the community in compliance with the requirement that the distribution affirmatively furthers fair housing, as specified. By imposing additional duties on local entities, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (5) Existing law requires a city or county to determine whether each site in its inventory of suitable land, as described above, can accommodate the development of some portion of its share of the regional housing need by income level during the planning period. Existing law also requires the inventory to, among other things, specify for each site the number of units that can realistically be accommodated on that site. This bill would additionally require those sites identified as described above to be distributed throughout the jurisdiction in a manner that affirmatively furthers fair housing by allowing for a reduction in residential segregation, based on a specified determination procedure. By imposing additional duties on local entities, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require the department, by no later than April 1, 2027, to develop and publish an online tool to serve as the method for determining whether each city's or county's identification of sites adequate to accommodate its share of the regional housing need at all income levels meets the distribution requirement described above. The bill would authorize the department to grant an adjustment to the distribution requirement described above if underlying data for the jurisdiction renders the tool unreliable. The bill would require the department to include in its materials explaining the online tool a procedure for applying for an adjustment and the factors that the department will consider in determining whether or not to grant an adjustment. 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. 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 prescribes various requirements regarding the formation, content, and enforcement of state and local public contracts. Existing law establishes, until January 1, 2027, for contracts entered into on or after January 1, 2017, a claim resolution process applicable to any claim by a contractor in connection with a public works project against a public entity, as specified. For purposes of these provisions, existing law defines "public entity" to include, among others, a city, including a charter city, and county, including a charter county. Existing law imposes various requirements on a public entity in relating to the claim resolution process, including, among other things, conducting a reasonable review of the claim and, within 45 days, providing the claimant a written statement identifying the disputed and undisputed portions of the claim. This bill would repeal the above-described January 1, 2027, repeal date, thereby extending the operation of these provisions indefinitely. By indefinitely extending the duties of local agencies in relation to the above-specified claim resolution process, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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. 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 requires that a housing development project, as defined, within a specified distance of a transit-oriented development stop, as defined, be an allowed use as a transit-oriented housing development on any site zoned for residential, mixed, or commercial development, if the development complies with certain, applicable requirements, as provided. Among these requirements, existing law prohibits a proposed development under these provisions from being located on sites where the development would require demolition of housing, or that was previously used for housing, that is subject to rent or price controls, as provided. This bill would additionally prohibit the development from being located on an existing parcel of land or site governed under the Mobilehome Residency Law, the Recreational Vehicle Park Occupancy Law, the Mobilehome Parks Act, or the Special Occupancy Parks Act. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law, the Documentary Transfer Tax Act, authorizes the imposition of a tax by a county or city and county, as provided, with respect to specified instruments that transfer specified interests in real property. This bill would, beginning January 1, 2027, prohibit a local jurisdiction, defined to include a city, including a charter city, county, or city and county, from collecting a transfer tax, as defined, levied on the sale or transfer of a real property interest conveyed if the combined transfer tax rate levied by the local jurisdiction exceeds 1.5% of the consideration paid for or value of the real property interest conveyed, except as otherwise provided. The bill would also prohibit a local jurisdiction from levying a transfer tax on the first sale of single-family housing property occurring within 5 years of one or more housing units on the real property being destroyed or made uninhabitable by a natural disaster, as defined. By imposing new duties upon local officials with respect to transfer taxes, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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. 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 identifies various types of property of a judgment debtor that are exempt from the enforcement of a money judgment, including material that in good faith is about to be applied to the repair or improvement of a residence, as specified. This bill would specify that this exemption would apply to the judgment debtor's principal place of residence or domicile.
Existing law establishes various advisory boards and commissions in state government with specified duties and responsibilities. This bill would create the California Latino Commission to address the inequities faced by the Latino community in housing, education, economic mobility, labor, and health care. The commission would consist of 9 members who have demonstrated expertise in specified areas, including housing policy and advocacy and economic development. The bill would task the commission with, among other things, collecting and analyzing data, developing recommendations, and monitoring the implementation of state programs and policies affecting the Latino community, as specified. The bill would require the commission to work with other state agencies and to submit an annual report to the Governor and the Legislature. The bill would establish that the commission and its activities would be supported by appropriations by the Legislature from the General Fund and grants from federal and private sources. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2036.
