Rep. Patrick Ahrens

Existing law entitles state employees to a paid holiday on specific days, including the 3rd Monday in February, except as specified. 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 specific dates, including the 4th Friday in September, known as "Native American Day," as specified. This bill would, upon appropriation by the Legislature, entitle state employees to a holiday on the 4th Friday in September, known as "Native American Day," as specified, in lieu of the above-described election. The bill would authorize any state bargaining unit to negotiate for a paid holiday on Native American Day, as specified. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Sections 19853 and 19853.1 of the Government Code proposed by AB 2017 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.

Under existing law, a candidate for the United States House of Representatives or local elective office may purchase space in the county voter information guide to make a candidate statement. A candidate for United States Senate may purchase space for a candidate statement in the state voter information guide. A candidate for state elective office may also purchase space to make a candidate statement in the state voter information guide, but only if the candidate accepts certain voluntary campaign expenditure limits. Existing law prohibits these candidate statements from making any reference to the candidate's opponents. This bill would limit a candidate statement to a recitation of the candidate's own education, professional experience, public service, community involvement, and qualifications. The bill would prohibit a candidate statement from including, in addition to references to other candidates, a link or other reference to external content other than the candidate's campaign website; content that is vulgar or profane, or that threatens or incites violence; false statements or misleading claims; or any other content that is unrelated to the candidate's qualifications. The candidate would be required to submit a declaration with the candidate statement that attests that the statement is true and correct. Because a person who willfully makes a false statement in that declaration would be guilty of the crime of perjury, this bill expands the scope of that crime and thereby creates a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the Secretary of State and county elections officials to omit from the voter information guide any portion of a candidate statement that does not comply with the bill, except false statements and misleading claims, and it would require them to print the remainder of the statement if it can stand independently and does not mislead voters. The bill would make a fee paid by a candidate for the printing or inclusion of a candidate statement nonrefundable if any part of the statement is printed in the voter information guide, but the fee would be refunded if the statement is omitted. By increasing the duties of county elections officials, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. Existing law provides for the public examination of state and county voter information guides. During the 20-day examination period for the state guide, an elector may seek a writ of mandate or an injunction requiring any or all of the materials to be amended or deleted. During the 10-day examination period for the county guide, a voter of the relevant jurisdiction in which an election is being held, or the relevant local elections official themselves, may seek a writ of mandate or an injunction requiring any or all of the materials to be amended or deleted. A court will issue such a writ of mandate or injunction only upon clear and convincing proof that the material in question is false, misleading, or inconsistent with law, and that issuance of the writ or injunction will not substantially interfere with the printing or distribution of official election materials as provided by law. This bill would similarly allow any registered voter to seek a writ of mandate or an injunction requiring any or all of the material in a candidate statement in the state or a county voter information guide to be amended or deleted, as specified. This bill would require that, as in current law, the writ of mandate or an injunction only be issued upon clear and convincing proof that the material in question is false, misleading, or inconsistent with the requirements of the bill, and that issuance of the writ or injunction will not substantially interfere with the printing or distribution of official election materials as provided by law. This bill would additionally allow a county elections official to bring such an action for a writ or injunction challenging a candidate statement in the county voter information guide over which they have jurisdiction. 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 mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

This measure would call on Congress to enact legislation that restores and strengthens the full protections of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and it would call on the President to sign the legislation.

Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, the California State University, under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, and the University of California, under the administration of the Regents of the University of California, as the 3 segments of public postsecondary education in the state. Existing law requires, on and after January 1, 2023, a student health center on a California State University or University of California campus to offer abortion by medication techniques, as specified. Existing law establishes the College Student Health Center Sexual and Reproductive Health Preparation Fund to be administered by the Commission on the Status of Women and Girls and continuously appropriates the moneys in that fund to the commission for specified activities related to providing abortion by medication techniques at student health centers. This bill would require a student health center on a California State University or University of California campus, on or before January 1, 2028, to promote awareness of the services for abortion by medication techniques that the student health center offers, provide information on those services to students, and post the availability of those services on its internet website. This bill would require a community college that has a student health center, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to, on and after January 1, 2029, offer access to abortion by medication techniques, promote awareness of those services, provide information on those services to students, and post the availability of those services on its internet website. The bill would require the commission to submit a report to the Legislature, on or before January 1, 2030, that includes, but is not limited to, specified information relating to abortion by medication techniques at or through community college student health centers. The bill would require the commission, in consultation with the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges, to develop a standardized reporting framework that minimizes administrative burden and protects student privacy. The bill would authorize funds appropriated for these provisions to be used for implementation readiness activities and ongoing operational costs, as specified.

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 (EIR) 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 establishes administrative procedures for the review and certification of the EIR for a project and judicial review procedures for any action or proceeding brought to challenge the lead agency's decision to certify the EIR or to grant project approvals. This bill would establish streamlined procedures for the administrative and judicial review of the environmental review and approvals granted for an environmental leadership hospital campus project, defined by the bill as a construction project of a hospital campus in the City of Santa Clara, under certain conditions. The bill would require the city council of the City of Santa Clara to certify the project for the streamlined judicial review, as specified, if it finds the project will meet those conditions. The bill would require the applicant of the environmental leadership hospital campus project to take certain actions in order for those specified procedures to apply to the project. The bill would require a certified project to meet certain labor requirements. The bill would require the Judicial Council, on or before July 1, 2027, to adopt rules of court establishing procedures requiring actions or proceedings seeking judicial review of the certification of an environmental impact report for a certified environmental leadership hospital campus project or the granting of any project approval, including any appeals to the court of appeal or the Supreme Court, to be resolved, to the extent feasible, within 270 calendar days of the filing of the certified record of proceedings with the court. The bill would require the lead agency to concurrently prepare the record of proceedings with the environmental review, as provided. Because the bill would impose additional duties on a local agency, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the City of Santa Clara. 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 requires the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection to establish a local assistance grant program for fire prevention and home hardening education activities in California and extends eligibility for grants to, among others, local agencies, resource conservation districts, fire safe councils, the California Conservation Corps, certified community conservation corps, Native American tribes, and qualified nonprofit organizations. Existing law requires the department, on or before December 31, 2023, and annually thereafter, to post on its internet website certain information regarding hazardous fuel reduction and vegetation management projects funded or conducted by the department for the preceding fiscal year, including projects funded under the department's Wildfire Prevention Grants Program, as provided. Existing law requires the Director of Forestry and Fire Protection to establish a statewide program to allow qualified entities, as defined, who have completed a specific training program developed and administered by the department to support and augment the department in its defensible space and home hardening assessment and education efforts. This bill would require the department, in consultation with the State Fire Marshal's Wildfire Mitigation Advisory Committee, to establish a wildfire mitigation validation program to provide voluntary official recognition to a community that achieves progress toward community-scale wildfire preparedness and mitigations. The bill would require the department, in consultation with the committee, to (1) set the wildfire mitigations, including, among other things, home hardening and defensible space requirements, and (2) set the minimum percentage of mitigations required to achieve recognition and set increases in those percentages, as provided. The bill would authorize the department, commencing with the 2028–29 fiscal year, to disburse funds appropriated for the Wildfire Prevention Grants Program to recognized communities that partner with fire safe councils or other eligible groups, as provided. The bill would authorize the department to prioritize disadvantaged recognized fire communities pursuant to its established procedures for prioritizing disadvantaged applicants for the Wildfire Prevention Grants Program.

Existing law establishes various protections for California Native American tribes, including prohibiting a public agency or private party using or occupying public property or operating on public property from interfering with the free expression or exercise of Native American religion as provided in the United States Constitution and the California Constitution. Existing law also requires a local government to provide formal notification to each California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project site as an invitation to consult on the proposed project, as provided. Existing law requires the local government, during the consultation, to give deference to the tribal information, tribal knowledge and customs, and the significance of the resource to the California Native American tribe. Existing law prohibits any information, as described, that is submitted by a California Native American tribe during the environmental review process from being included in the environmental document or otherwise disclosed by the lead agency or any other public agency to the public, as specified, without the prior consent of the tribe that provided the information. Existing law, the California Public Records Act, requires each state and local agency, as defined, to make its records open to public inspection at all times during office hours, except as specifically exempted from disclosure by law. The act specifically exempts from disclosure records that are exempted or prohibited from disclosure by federal or state law and lists records subject to that exemption, specifying that the listed exemptions are not inclusive of all exemptions under the act. This bill, the California Indian Freedom Act of 2026, would, commencing January 1, 2028, prohibit a governmental agency from substantially burdening a California Indian or California Native American tribe's exercise of religious beliefs or spiritual practices on state lands, except as necessary to protect public safety and security, including their access to and use of sacred sites and objects, and their ability to perform religious ceremonies and rites, even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, unless the governmental agency demonstrates that application of the burden is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest and is in the least restrictive means of furthering that interest. The bill would provide that a California Native American tribe has exclusive standing to assert a violation of these provisions and would authorize a California Native American tribe to assert a violation of these provisions as a claim or defense in any judicial or administrative proceeding, as specified. The bill would require a governmental agency to allow California Indians access to sacred sites on state lands, as specified. The bill would require a governmental agency to seek and document free, prior, and informed consent from affected tribes before undertaking any physical change to a state land, as described, which the agency has actual knowledge is a sacred site where the action may pose a risk to sacred sites, as specified. The bill would require the affirmation of consent from the governing body of the affected tribe to be in writing, as described. This bill would require the Department of General Services, in coordination with the Capitol Protective Section and the Joint Rules Committee, to the greatest extent possible, to uphold the religious freedom, ceremonial practices, sacred sites, cultural patrimony, and cultural landscapes of tribes when accessing the State Capitol grounds. The bill would require the Joint Rules Committee, in coordination with the Capitol Protective Section and the State Senate Capitol Security Program, to the greatest extent possible, to uphold the religious freedom, ceremonial practices, sacred sites, cultural patrimony, and cultural landscapes of tribes when accessing the State Capitol Building, as specified. This bill would provide that the application of the act is strictly limited to a governmental agency's management actions that involve only state lands, as specified. The bill would declare that specified provisions of the bill do not apply to the authority of the State Water Resources Control Board to authorize, curtail, or otherwise regulate the diversion and use of water, or to the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. This bill would require information identifying sacred sites, cultural landscapes, or religious practices obtained by a governmental agency for the purposes of the California Indian Freedom Act of 2026 to be confidential and would exempt this information from public record laws, including the California Public Records Act. The bill would revise the list of exempted records under the California Public Records Act to add the above-described exemption. The bill would prohibit the provisions of the act from being construed to limit or restrict the authority of the state or any state agency to enter into an agreement, memorandum of understanding, or other arrangement with any tribe to allow access to any state lands for the purpose of conducting religious, cultural, or ceremonial practices. The bill would define various terms for these purposes and would make related legislative findings. 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.

The Budget Act of 2026 appropriates, for the 2026–27 fiscal year, $1,000,000,000 from the General Fund to the State Department of Education to administer the California Community Schools Partnership Program to distribute funding to local educational agencies, as defined, in accordance with a specified formula, to support a network of their eligible schoolsites to implement new, and provide ongoing support for existing, community schools, as provided. Existing law authorizes a local educational agency who receives funds under these provisions to retain up to 10% of the total funds awarded for its eligible schoolsites each fiscal year to be used for specified activities, including, among other things, administering community schools established at eligible schoolsites. This bill, to be known as the It Takes a Village Act of 2026, would (1) require any retained funds described above to be used consistent with a specified community schools framework, as provided, and (2) authorize a local educational agency that retains those funds to also use those funds to serve as a network lead for multiple schoolsites located in a Promise Neighborhood, as provided. By expanding the purposes for which previously appropriated moneys may be expended, the bill would make an appropriation. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 8903 of the Education Code proposed by AB 133 or SB 133 to be operative only if this bill and either AB 133 or SB 133 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

(1) Under the Planning and Zoning Law, the legislative body of a city or county may adopt ordinances that, among other things, regulate the use of buildings, structures, and land, as provided. The Subdivision Map Act vests the authority to regulate and control the design and improvement of subdivisions in the legislative body of a local agency and sets forth procedures governing the local agency's processing, approval, conditional approval or disapproval, and filing of tentative, final, and parcel maps. Existing law requires a local agency to ministerially approve a parcel map for an urban lot split if the development or parcel meets specified requirements. Existing law requires the local agency to require an applicant for an urban lot split to sign an affidavit stating that the applicant intends to occupy one of the housing units as their principal residence for a minimum of 3 years from the date of the approval of the urban lot split. Existing law authorizes a local agency to adopt an ordinance to implement these provisions, as provided. This bill would instead require the local agency to require an applicant to select one of 2 sets of owner-occupancy requirements. The first option would be for the applicant to sign, under penalty of perjury, the above-described affidavit stating that the applicant intends to occupy one of the housing units as their principal residence for a minimum of 3 years. The 2nd option would be for the applicant to sign an affidavit, under penalty of perjury, stating they intend to sell both parcels of an urban lot split after issuance of a certificate of occupancy within 3 years from the date of the approval of the urban lot split and to require that one of the units on both parcels of an urban lot split remain owner occupied for 3 years, beginning on the date a parcel or unit is conveyed by the applicant to a home buyer. By expanding the scope of the crime of perjury and increasing the duties of local agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require the home buyer designated by the applicant to satisfy this 2nd owner-occupancy requirement to provide the applicant with an affidavit or declaration, under penalty of perjury, stating the home buyer intends to occupy the parcel as their primary residence for 3 years, as provided. The bill would provide that, for the purposes of either owner-occupancy requirement, an applicant may be a trustee of a living trust of a natural person or a limited liability company of a natural person, except that a limited liability company shall not be an applicant if the parcel being subdivided is within the boundaries of the 2025 Palisades or Eaton Fires in the County of Los Angeles. The bill would provide that an applicant for an urban lot split that is a limited liability company that violates these provisions would be liable for civil penalties. (2) Existing law requires that specified disclosures be made upon any transfer by sale, exchange, real property sales contract, lease with an option to purchase, any other option to purchase, or ground lease coupled with improvements, of any single-family residential property. This bill would require the seller of an urban lot split subject to the second owner-occupancy requirement described above to disclose, in writing, any owner-occupancy requirement for three years after the conveyance of an urban lot split unit. This bill would repeal its provisions on January 1, 2032. (3) This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the boundaries of the 2025 Palisades and Eaton Fires in the County of Los Angeles. (4) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 66411.7 of the Government Code proposed by AB 2601 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2601 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (5) 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 provides that every executive or ministerial officer, employee, or appointee of the State of California, or any county or city therein, or any political subdivision thereof, who knowingly asks, receives, or agrees to receive any emolument, gratuity, or reward, or any promise thereof excepting such as may be authorized by law for doing an official act, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Existing law exempts from that offense certain employment by a peace officer while off duty, as specified. Existing law also provides that a peace officer shall not be prohibited from engaging in other employment while off duty, as specified. This bill would, notwithstanding those provisions, prohibit certain peace officers from engaging in any form of secondary employment, including contract based or as an individual contractor, that involves engaging in arresting, detaining, transporting, or deporting individuals pursuant to federal or out-of-state immigration laws. The bill would provide that failure to comply with this provision may constitute, for certain purposes, an act of serious misconduct and that it is grounds for decertification as a peace officer. The bill would require certain peace officers to report to their employing law enforcement agency any conditional offer of secondary employment relating to immigration enforcement. The bill would require the law enforcement agency to maintain specified records related to secondary employment. By imposing additional duties on local law enforcement agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also explicitly state that these records related to secondary employment of certain peace officers are public records for the purposes of the California Public Records Act. 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.