Rep. Jesse Gabriel

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 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 establishes the Department of Housing and Community Development and requires it to administer various programs intended to promote the development of housing, as specified, pursuant to which the department provides financial assistance in the form of deferred payment loans to pay for the eligible costs of development of specified types of housing projects. Existing law sets forth various general powers of the department in implementing these programs, including authorizing the department to enter into long-term contracts or agreements of up to 30 years for the purpose of servicing loans or grants or enforcing regulatory agreements or other security documents. This bill would permit the department to, subject to prescribed requirements, authorize the transfer of the department residual receipts share or excess reserves, as defined, from one rental housing development to another rental housing development with the same owner, as specified.

Existing law, the Protecting Our Kids from Social Media Addiction Act, prohibits an operator of an addictive internet-based service or application from providing an addictive feed, as defined, to a user unless the operator does not have actual knowledge that the user is a minor, as specified, or the operator has obtained verifiable parental consent to provide an addictive feed to the user who is a minor. Existing law, the Digital Age Assurance Act, beginning January 1, 2027, requires a person who owns, maintains, or controls a software application, as defined, to request age bracket data sent by a real-time secure application programming interface or operating system with respect to a particular user from an operating system provider or a covered application store when the application is downloaded and launched. This bill would prohibit a covered platform, as defined, from providing an addictive feature, as defined, to a user who is under 16 years of age and would require a covered platform to implement reasonable measures to ensure that users under 16 years of age are not offered or provided any addictive feature on the covered platform. The bill would also authorize the Attorney General to adopt regulations to implement and enforce the bill in order to further the purpose of protecting minors online, including by altering the scope of "covered platform" if the Attorney General determines that doing so is necessary to ensure that "covered platform" applies to internet websites, online services, online applications, or mobile applications that make addictive features, as defined, available to users under 16 years of age. This bill would impose a civil penalty upon a noncompliant platform and would require its provisions to be enforced by a civil action brought only by the Attorney General or a local public prosecutor, as specified. This bill would also establish the e-Safety Advisory Commission within the Department of Justice as an independent advisory body that is only for administrative purposes to advise state government on certain matters related to online safety and would require the commission to, on or before January 1 of each year, report to the Legislature and the Governor on, among other things, its activities under the bill.

Existing law makes it a crime to, by force, threat of force, or physical obstruction that is a crime of violence, intentionally injure, intimidate, interfere with, or attempt to injure, intimidate, or interfere with any person lawfully exercising or seeking to exercise the First Amendment right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship. This bill would make it unlawful for a person to, within a radius of 100 feet from an entrance or exit of a place of religious worship, as defined, intentionally approach another person seeking to enter or exit a place of religious worship within 8 feet of that person to either pass a leaflet or handbill to, display a sign to, or engage in oral protest or education or to harass, obstruct, threaten, or intimidate the person or occupant. The bill would, for the purposes of determining that distance, measure from the body of the person seeking to enter or exit, or the exterior of a motor vehicle they occupy, to the body of, or any sign or object held by, the other person. The bill would prescribe specified fines, imprisonment, or fine and imprisonment for a violation of these provisions. By creating a new crime, the 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law defines, for certain school-related purposes, "ultraprocessed food" as any food or beverage that contains a specified substance and either high amounts of saturated fat, sodium, or added sugar or a nonnutritive sweetener or other substance, as specified. Existing law requires the department to adopt regulations, on or before June 1, 2028, to define "ultraprocessed foods of concern" and "restricted school foods," as specified, and requires the department, when defining ultraprocessed foods of concern and restricted school foods, to consider specified factors, including, among others, whether the substance or group of substances are banned or restricted in other state, federal, or international jurisdictions due to concerns about adverse health consequences. This bill would require the department, no later than June 1, 2029, to accredit certification agents that can certify food products as "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified." The bill would prohibit an accredited certification agent from certifying a food product as "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified" if it is an ultraprocessed food, ultraprocessed food of concern, or a restricted school food, as defined. The bill would require the department to create a specified standardized "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified" seal. The bill would authorize a food product to bear the seal only if the product has been certified by an accredited certification agent. The bill would require an accredited certification agent to, among other things, register with the department and provide specified information to the department for each food product certified by the accredited certification agent. The bill would require any registration information submitted by an accredited certification agent to the department to be made available to the public for inspection and copying. This bill would require an accredited certification agent to immediately make specified records available to the department for inspection, as specified, and would authorize the department to audit the accredited certification agent's certification procedures and records at any time. The bill would require any records of the accredited certification agent not otherwise required to be disclosed to be kept confidential by the department. The bill would require the department to maintain a public internet webpage that lists all of the products currently certified as "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified" as reported by the accredited certification agent. This bill would make it unlawful for a person to certify products as "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified" unless duly registered as an accredited certification agent, for a person to willfully make a false statement or representation or knowingly fail to disclose a fact required to be disclosed in registration as an accredited certification agent, for a person to willfully make a false statement or representation or knowingly fail to disclose a fact required to be disclosed to an accredited certification agent, and for a person to use the "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified" seal on a product that does not meet the above-described provisions. The bill would authorize the department, among others, to enjoin a person who engages, has engaged, or proposes to engage in the misuse of the "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified" seal. This bill would create the Public Health Food and Nutrition Education Fund for the purposes of supporting the implementation of the "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified" label requirements and educating the public and stakeholders about the label requirements, food products, and nutrition. The bill would authorize the department to establish fees for the registration and renewal of accredited certification agents and certification of food at levels not exceeding the reasonable costs of administering and enforcing these provisions. The bill would require the fees to be deposited in the Public Health Food and Nutrition Education Fund. Upon appropriation by the Legislature, the bill would make moneys in the Public Health Food and Nutrition Education Fund available to the department for expenditure. Existing law, the California Retail Food Code (Code) , establishes uniform health and sanitation standards for, and provides for regulation by the State Department of Public Health of, retail food facilities, as defined, and requires local enforcement agencies to enforce these provisions. Existing law provides that a violation of the code is punishable as a misdemeanor or a fine. Existing law defines a grocery store as a store primarily engaged in the retail sale of canned food, dry goods, fresh fruits and vegetables, and fresh meats, fish, and poultry and any area that is not separately owned within the store where food is prepared and served, including a bakery, deli, and meat and seafood counter. This bill, upon the creation of the "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified" seal described above, would require a grocery store with gross annual store sales of more than $10,000,000 to make clearly identifiable, as defined, at least 3 or more "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified" items if the grocery store offers for sale more than 25 certified items. The bill would authorize the Attorney General, county counsel, city attorney, or city prosecutor, as specified, to enjoin a grocery store that fails to meet these requirements. The bill would exempt a violation of these provisions from criminal liability under the California Retail Food Code. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2040. By imposing a higher level of service on local enforcement agencies required to enforce these provisions, 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. 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.

Maddy summaryAB 114, titled "Budget Act of 2025," is a procedural bill that expresses the Legislature's intent to enact statutory changes related to the state's budget process for fiscal year 2025. It does not specify any concrete policy changes or directly affect particular groups, as it serves only as a preliminary step toward future budget legislation. This bill sets the stage for subsequent legislative action but contains no operational provisions or budgetary mechanisms. It is not a substantive budget measure but a formal declaration of intent.

Maddy summaryAB 113, titled "Budget Act of 2025," is a procedural bill that expresses the Legislature's intent to enact statutory changes related to the 2025 state budget. The official abstract does not specify the exact nature of these changes or identify any specific affected entities. As a bill stating legislative intent rather than detailing policy mechanisms, it does not outline concrete budgetary provisions or impacts. This bill serves as a preliminary step to guide future budget legislation but does not itself enact any new policies or affect any groups directly. (Per the provided official abstract: "This bill would express the intent of the Legislature to enact statutory changes relating to the Budget Act of 2025.")

Existing law establishes the California State Nonprofit Security Grant Program under the administration of the Director of Emergency Services to improve the physical security of nonprofit organizations that are at high risk of violent attacks or hate crimes due to ideology, beliefs, or mission. Existing law authorizes applicants to use grant funds for prescribed security enhancements, including security training. Existing law makes the operation of the program contingent upon appropriation in the annual Budget Act. This bill would instead establish the California State Nonprofit Security Grant Program to improve the physical security of nonprofit organizations and events hosted by nonprofit organizations that are at a high risk of violent attacks or hate crimes, as described above. The bill would also authorize the grant money to be used by applicants for security enhancements for security for onsite or offsite events hosted by a nonprofit organization, as defined and specified. The bill would prohibit these provisions from limiting a nonprofit organization without a physical site from being eligible for funding for offsite events, as specified. The bill would limit security for offsite events to $25,000 of the grant funds awarded. The bill would prohibit the Office of Emergency Services from imposing monetary and percentile limits on any individual eligible security enhancement, except as specified.