Existing law establishes the Department of Health Care Access and Information to oversee and administer various health programs related to health care infrastructure, such as health policy and planning, health professions development, and facilities design review and construction, among others. Existing law requires the California Health and Human Services Agency to establish the California Health and Human Services Data Exchange Framework to require the exchange of health information among health care entities and government agencies in the state, among other things. Existing law requires the agency to convene a stakeholder advisory group to advise on the development, implementation, and administration of the California Health and Human Services Data Exchange Framework. This bill would require the Department of Health Care Access and Information, on or before January 1, 2026, to take over the establishment, implementation, and all of the functions related to the California Health and Human Services Data Exchange Framework, including the data sharing agreement and policies and procedures, from the agency. The bill would expand the entities that are specifically required to execute a data sharing agreement with the California Health and Human Services Data Exchange Framework. The bill would require the department, no later than July 1, 2026, to establish a process to designate qualified health information organizations as data sharing intermediaries that have demonstrated their ability to meet requirements of the California Health and Human Services Data Exchange Framework. The bill would require the department, by July 1, 2027, and in collaboration with the stakeholder advisory group, to develop and submit a report to the Legislature on the California Health and Human Services Data Exchange Framework, including compliance with data sharing agreements. The bill would expand the membership of the stakeholder advisory group, as specified.
Existing law prohibits a person or business, as defined, from collecting, using, disclosing, or retaining the personal information of a person who is physically located at, or within a precise geolocation of, a family planning center, as defined, except as necessary to perform the services or provide the goods requested and prohibits a person or business from selling or sharing this personal information. Existing law authorizes an aggrieved person or entity to institute and prosecute a civil action against a person or business for a violation of these provisions and specifies the damages and costs authorized to be recovered. This bill would recast the above-described provisions, and instead prohibit the collection, use, disclosure, sale, sharing, or retention of the personal information of a natural person who is physically located at, or within a precise geolocation of, a family planning center, except under certain circumstances, including, among others, for the collection or use as necessary to perform the services or provide the goods requested. The bill would also provide that these provisions do not alter applicable law regarding use by a law enforcement agency, as defined, of personal information generated by an electronic monitoring device. The bill would authorize an aggrieved person to institute and prosecute a civil action against a natural person, association, proprietorship, corporation, trust, foundation, partnership, or any other organization or group of people acting in concert for a violation of these provisions. The bill would also make other nonsubstantive changes. This bill would, subject to specified exceptions, prohibit geofencing, or selling or sharing personal information with a third party to geofence, as defined, an entity that provides in-person health care services in California for specified purposes, and would prohibit the use of personal information obtained in violation of this provision. The bill would provide that violators are subject to an injunction and liable for a civil penalty assessed and recovered in a civil action brought by the Attorney General, and deposited in the California Reproductive Justice and Freedom Fund. The bill would require those penalties to be awarded by the State Department of Public Health for grants to implement a program or to fund an existing program that provides and promotes medically accurate and comprehensive reproductive and sexual health education, as provided. The bill would also provide that a statement signed under penalty of perjury, as specified, that the personal information will not be used for selling or sharing personal information in violation of these geofencing provisions is prima facie evidence that the personal information was not sold or shared in violation of these geofencing provisions. By expanding the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law, the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (CMIA) , generally prohibits a provider of health care, a health care service plan, or a contractor from disclosing medical information regarding a patient, enrollee, or subscriber without first obtaining an authorization, unless a specified exception applies. The CMIA prohibits a provider of health care, a health care service plan, a contractor, or an employer from releasing medical information that would identify an individual or related to an individual seeking or obtaining an abortion in response to a subpoena or a request or to law enforcement if that subpoena, request, or the purpose of law enforcement for the medical information is based on, or for the purpose of enforcement of, either another state's laws that interfere with a person's rights to choose or obtain an abortion or a foreign penal civil action. This bill would, similar to the provisions of the CMIA, prohibit the release of research records, in a personally identifying form, developed or acquired by a person in the course of conducting research relating to anyone seeking or obtaining health care services, or relating to personal information, in response to a subpoena or a request or to law enforcement if that subpoena, request, or the purpose of law enforcement for the medical information is based on, or for the purpose of enforcement of, either another state's laws that interfere with a person's rights to choose or obtain an abortion or a foreign penal civil action. 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 authorizes any municipal corporation to acquire, construct, own, operate, or lease any public utility, and provides that "public utility" for these purposes means to supply the inhabitants of that municipal corporation with specified services, including a means of communication. Existing law similarly authorizes a municipal utility district and a public utility district to acquire, construct, own, operate, control, or use works for supplying the inhabitants of the district with specified services, including a means of communication. Existing law authorizes a county service area to acquire, construct, improve, maintain, and operate broadband internet access services. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation to implement a state standard of traffic control requirements for local governments during broadband deployment.
Existing law, the K–12 Pupil Online Personal Information Protection Act (KOPIPA) , generally protects the personal information of a student enrolled in a K–12 course of instruction, defined as a "pupil," by prescribing requirements and prohibitions applicable to an operator of an internet website, online service, online application, or mobile application with actual knowledge that the site, service, or application is used primarily for K–12 school purposes and was designed and marketed for K–12 school purposes. Existing law, the Early Learning Personal Information Protection Act (ELPIPA) , generally protects the personal information of a child enrolled in a preschool or prekindergarten course of instruction, defined as a "pupil," by prescribing requirements and prohibitions applicable to an operator of an internet website, online service, online application, or mobile application with actual knowledge that the site, service, or application is used primarily for preschool or prekindergarten purposes and was designed and marketed for preschool and prekindergarten purposes. This bill would instead apply the provisions of KOPIPA and ELPIPA to an operator, or an entity working on behalf of the operator, of an internet website, online service, online application, or mobile application with actual knowledge that the site, service, or application is used for the applicable school purposes and was designed or marketed for those purposes, as specified. The bill would, among other changes to KOPIPA and ELPIPA related to protecting the personal information of students, prohibit an operator from using covered information, as defined, including persistent unique identifiers, created or gathered by the operator's site, service, or application to train a generative artificial intelligence system or service or develop an artificial intelligence system. This bill would also enact the Higher Education Student Information Protection Act (HESIPA) , which would generally protect the personal information of a student enrolled in a higher education institution, as defined, in a similar manner as KOPIPA and ELPIPA. The bill would make HESIPA operative on July 1, 2027. This bill would authorize a pupil or student actually harmed by noncompliance with KOPIPA, ELPIPA, or HESIPA to bring a civil action against the noncompliant operator, as prescribed, and would require a person bringing that action to furnish a copy of the complaint to the Attorney General within 10 days after filing the action.
Existing law requires the Attorney General to publish model policies limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible consistent with federal and state law at public schools, public libraries, health facilities operated by the state or a political subdivision of the state, courthouses, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement facilities, the Agricultural Labor Relations Board, the Division of Workers Compensation, and shelters, and ensuring that they remain safe and accessible to all California residents, regardless of immigration status. Existing law requires the Attorney General to publish guidance, audit criteria, and training recommendations aimed at ensuring that any databases operated by state and local law enforcement agencies, including databases maintained for the agency by private vendors, are governed in a manner that limits the availability of information therein to the fullest extent practicable and consistent with federal and state law, to anyone or any entity for the purpose of immigration enforcement. Existing law, the California Values Act, prohibits California law enforcement agencies from using agency or department moneys or personnel to investigate, interrogate, detain, detect, or arrest persons for immigration enforcement purposes, including, among other things, providing personal information about an individual, making or intentionally participating in arrests based on civil immigration warrants, or performing the functions of an immigration officer, as specified. This bill would prohibit a state or local government agency from collecting immigration-related personally identifiable information unless it is explicitly required by law to do so and the collection is justified by a legitimate government purpose. The bill would prohibit a state or local government agency from sharing personally identifiable information with federal immigration enforcement agencies without a judicial warrant or court order. The bill would require any contract, agreement, or memorandum of understanding that facilitate data sharing between a state or local government agency and federal immigration enforcement authorities to comply with oversight mechanisms to ensure compliance with civil rights and privacy protections and be subject to review by the State Auditor, as described below. Because the bill would require local agencies to perform additional duties, it would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would make these provisions enforceable by administrative action or by imposition of a civil penalty recovered by an action brought by the Attorney General. This bill would require the State Auditor to conduct audits of all state and local government agency data-sharing agreements at least every 2 years to ensure compliance with existing laws protecting privacy and civil rights. The bill would require the Office of the Attorney General to establish an oversight task force to review complaints and violations related to unauthorized data collection and sharing that would report to the Legislature annually on data privacy trends, risks, and policy recommendations. 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 Department of Transportation and vests it with full possession and control of all state highways and all property and rights in property for state highway purposes. Existing law authorizes the department to issue a written permit to place an encroachment on the state highway. Existing law requires the department to perform certain actions if the encroachment permit application is for a broadband facility. This bill would require the department to perform additional actions for an encroachment permit application for a broadband facility, including, but not limited to, requiring the application and review process for the application to be uniform throughout the state, and would require a broadband facility encroachment permit application that is deemed complete to be deemed approved.
Existing law generally designates the State Air Resources Board as the state agency with the primary responsibility for the control of vehicular air pollution, and designates air pollution control districts and air quality management districts with the primary responsibility for the control of air pollution from all sources other than vehicular sources. Existing law requires the state board to inventory sources of air pollution within the air basins of the state, determine the kinds and quantity of air pollutants, and monitor air pollutants in cooperation with districts and other agencies. Existing law requires the state board to adopt standards of ambient air quality for each air basin in consideration of the public health, safety, and welfare, including, but not limited to, health, illness, irritation to the senses, aesthetic value, interference with visibility, and effects on the economy. Existing law authorizes these standards to vary from one air basin to another. This bill would require the state board, in consultation with specified entities, to develop, as provided, a response framework that establishes best practices and guidance for addressing fugitive and natural sources of hydrogen sulfide gas and for community preparation and response to hydrogen sulfide exposure events originating from these sources. The bill would require the state board, in developing the response framework, to conduct at least 3 public workshops, including at least one located in the Tijuana River Valley region, at least one located in the Salton Sea region, and at least one selected in consultation with a community that has experienced significant hydrogen sulfide exposure. The bill would require the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment to update the acute and chronic reference exposure levels for hydrogen sulfide and to develop additional health guidance values for hydrogen sulfide, if the need is identified by the state board, in consultation with the office, during development of the response framework.
Existing law, the Digital Equity Bill of Rights, provides that it is the principle of the state to ensure digital equity for all residents of the state, that, among other things, residents have access to broadband that meets specific requirements, and provides that it is the policy of the state that, to the extent technically feasible, broadband internet subscribers benefit from equal access to broadband internet service within the service area of a broadband provider. This bill, contingent upon funding for this purpose, would require a broadband internet service provider, on or before January 1, 2027, and annually thereafter, to submit to the Department of Consumer Affairs, or the Department of Broadband and Digital Equity if Assembly Bill 693 of the 2025–26 Regular Session is enacted, a report containing broadband internet access service pricing and speed data that includes, among other information, the advertised speeds offered to consumers and the advertised and total prices paid by consumers. The bill would require the department to publish an annual broadband internet access service affordability and speed report aggregating and analyzing the data submitted by the broadband internet service providers and would require the department to make the data submitted by broadband internet service providers available to the public, as specified. The bill would make a broadband internet service provider that fails to comply with these provisions subject to an administrative penalty not to exceed $1,000 per violation per day until compliance is achieved. This bill would require a broadband internet service provider to establish and maintain a dedicated consumer complaint resolution process that allows consumers to submit complaints via telephone, email, and an online portal, and would require a broadband internet service provider to respond to a complaint within 7 business days and provide a resolution, explanation, or corrective action within a specified timeframe. The bill would prescribe remedies for a consumer if a broadband internet service provider fails to resolve a complaint within the specified timeframe or refuses to act in good faith, including the issuance of a minimum credit of $50 for a complaint that remains unresolved beyond 60 days without valid justification. The bill would require a broadband internet service provider to disclose the complaint resolution process and remedies clearly and conspicuously in its terms of service, in its billing statements, and on its internet website. The bill would require a broadband internet service provider to report complaint statistics to the department, as specified. 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 California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA) , grants a consumer various rights with respect to personal information, as defined, that is collected or sold by a business, as defined, including the right to direct a business that collects sensitive personal information about the consumer to limit its use, as prescribed. Existing law defines "sensitive personal information" to mean, among other things, personal information that reveals a consumer's precise geolocation. Existing law, the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020, approved by the voters as Proposition 24 at the November 3, 2020, statewide general election, amended, added to, and reenacted the CCPA. This bill would prohibit a covered entity from collecting or processing the location information of an individual unless doing so is necessary to provide goods or services requested by that individual. The bill would impose various other restrictions on covered entities with regard to location information. The bill would define various terms for purposes of these provisions, including "location information" to mean information that pertains to or directly or indirectly reveals the present or past geographical location of an individual or device, as specified. This bill would require a covered entity to prominently display, at the point where location information is being captured, a notice to individuals stating that their location information is being collected, the name of the covered entity and service provider collecting the information, and a phone number and an internet website where the individual can obtain more information. The bill would require a covered entity to maintain and make available to the data subject a location privacy policy that includes specified information on data usage and management and is subject to a specified notice procedure. This bill would make a covered entity that violates these provisions liable for actual or statutory damages and other specified relief. The bill would authorize the Attorney General or other public prosecutors to bring an action to recover a civil penalty against a covered entity that violates these provisions. This bill would require a business, as defined by the CCPA, to comply with the above-described provisions. (2) Existing law, the Information Practices Act of 1977, prescribes a set of requirements, prohibitions, and remedies applicable to agencies, as defined, with regard to their collection, storage, and disclosure of personal information, as defined. This bill would prohibit a state or local agency, including an agency as defined under the Information Practices Act, from monetizing, as defined, location information. By imposing new requirements on local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) 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. (4) The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2020 authorizes the Legislature to amend the act to further the purposes and intent of the act by a majority vote of both houses of the Legislature, as specified. This bill would declare that its provisions further the purposes and intent of the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020.
Existing law requires school districts, county superintendents of schools, and charter schools to adopt and update a local control and accountability plan (LCAP) using a template adopted by the State Board of Education that requires an LCAP to include certain information, including, among other information, (1) a description of the annual goals to be achieved for specified state priorities, including, among others, pupil achievement and pupil outcomes, (2) a description of the specific actions that the local educational agency will take during each year of the LCAP to achieve these goals, and (3) an assessment of the effectiveness of the specific actions described in the existing LCAP toward achieving the goals, as provided. This bill would, among other things, require the State Department of Education, in consultation with the state board and the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence, on or before December 31, 2026, to prepare, and update at least once every 2 years, a compilation of best practices to harness the power of technology to support pupil academic success and accelerate pupil academic achievement for school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools that receive specified federal funding, including a model policy for incorporation of those best practices into their LCAPs. The bill would require the department, in collaboration with the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence, to conduct at least 3 informational webinars in 2027 for those local educational agencies to understand how to incorporate the best practices and model policy into their LCAPs. The bill would require the department to establish a School Technology Empowerment Advisory Committee that includes at least one school board member, administrator, teacher, and representative from the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence, and multiple individuals or organizations that represent the interests of supporting the use of technology in public schools, with experience regarding the effective use of technology in accelerating pupil academic performance, as provided. The bill would require the advisory committee to share with the Superintendent of Public Instruction, and advise the Superintendent on, best practices to harness the power of technology to support pupil academic success and accelerate pupil academic achievement for local educational agencies. The bill would also require the advisory committee, on or before December 31, 2028, and annually thereafter, to prepare an annual report on the progress in harnessing the power of technology to accelerate pupil academic achievement and to submit the report to the department and the state board.
