|
Prepared by: Precision Advocacy
The California legislature has concluded the 2025-26 legislative session, shifting attention from the Capitol to the governor’s office as Governor Gavin Newsom considers the hundreds of measures that reached his desk in the final weeks of session. Newsom has until September 30 to sign or veto legislation passed at the end of session; measures on which he takes no action by the deadline will become law without his signature.
For Orange County, the final legislative outcomes include a broad range of measures affecting local government operations, public employment and retirement, housing and land use, transportation, health and human services, public safety, wildfire resilience, water, insurance, and environmental policy. With most of these bills now awaiting gubernatorial action, advocacy has shifted to requests for signature or veto and preparation for implementation of measures that are ultimately enacted. This report provides an updated summary of legislation of particular interest to counties and cities, including the positions taken by CSAC, UCC, RCRC, and Cal Cities.
Local Government Legislation
Below are measures with local government impacts and that county and city associations have taken positions on. Unless otherwise specified, the measures below are awaiting action of the governor.
Government Finance and Administration Legislation
These measures address public employment, workers’ compensation, retirement systems, elections, public records, artificial intelligence, open meetings, taxes, local fees, and administrative responsibilities.
AB 1331 (Elhawary) Workplace surveillance – As amended 8/28/26 – CSAC, UCC, RCRC, and Cal Cities oppose. Would limit the use of workplace surveillance tools by employers, including by prohibiting an employer from monitoring or surveilling employees in a bathroom located in the workplace. The bill would provide an employee with the right to leave behind workplace surveillance tools that are on their person or in their possession when entering a bathroom, except as specified.
Opponents argue that AB 1331 would impose substantial costs, administrative burdens, and legal liability on public agencies while potentially undermining workplace and public safety. The opposition coalition contends that agencies would have to conduct rapid compliance audits, modify hardware and software, and face possible fines for noncompliance. They also argue that the bill is unnecessarily broad because its definition of workplace surveillance could encompass routine tools such as security cameras, ID badges, key fobs, email, and Microsoft Teams.
AB 1383 (McKinnor) Public employees’ retirement benefits – As amended 8/27/26 – CSAC, UCC, RCRC, and Cal Cities oppose. Would change pension rules for new public employees and safety members beginning January 1, 2027, by limiting pensionable compensation, adding new safety retirement formulas, and allowing certain negotiated changes under the Public Employees' Pension Reform Act (PEPRA). It would apply new compensation caps for PERS and STRS members, require new STRS members to follow specified limits, and replace existing safety formulas with new options such as 2.5%, 2.7%, or 3% at age 55. The bill would also let employers and unions negotiate higher or lower safety plans in some cases and would increase appropriations from continuously funded retirement accounts.
Opponents argue that AB 1383 would roll back key cost-containment provisions of PEPRA, significantly increase pension liabilities, and create additional fiscal pressure for local governments, schools, transit agencies, and other public employers. The bill would increase pensionable compensation caps, reduce the retirement age for public safety employees from 57 to 55, create a new bargainable 3% at 55 safety formula, and allow local agencies to prospectively adjust pension formulas. The coalition argues these changes would increase long-term pension obligations at a time when public agencies are already facing significant budget pressures.
AB 1439 (Garcia) Public retirement systems: development projects: labor standards – As amended 8/13/26 – CSAC, UCC, RCRC, and Cal Cities oppose. Would request the University of California, Berkeley, Labor Center to conduct an independent study to analyze the extent of labor standards protections in California real estate and infrastructure development projects funded through the real asset portfolios of PERS and STRS. The bill would request that the study and a report of its findings be completed and provided to the legislature and the Department of Finance by January 1, 2028.
Opponents argue that AB 1439 (Garcia) would improperly invite political interference in the investment decisions of California’s public pension systems and undermine the independent fiduciary authority of CalPERS and CalSTRS. Although the bill was amended to require only a study of labor standards for pension-system investments, the coalition contends that it remains rooted in an effort to restrict pension investments based on labor-policy objectives and could lay the groundwork for future divestment mandates.
AB 1821 (Pacheco) California Public Records Act: agency response time – As amended 6/25/26 – CSAC, UCC, RCRC, and Cal Cities support. Would change the California Public Records Act by requiring agencies to determine whether requested records are disclosable and notify the requester within 10 business days, with a possible 14-business-day extension. It also includes legislative findings to show that the measure complies with constitutional requirements for laws affecting public access to records and open meetings, and for any limits on that right of access.
AB 1883 (Bryan) Workplace surveillance tools – As amended 8/21/26 – CSAC, UCC, RCRC, and Cal Cities oppose. Would, with certain exceptions, prohibit an employer from using a workplace surveillance tool that uses artificial intelligence to, among other things, collect neural data or recognize an individual’s emotional state. The bill would define an employer to include a governmental entity, including, among other entities, charter cities, and the University of California. This bill would authorize the Labor Commissioner or a public prosecutor to enforce the bill’s provisions.
Opponents argue that AB 1883 (Bryan) would impose costly and potentially disruptive restrictions on routine workplace security and safety tools used by public agencies. The coalition is particularly concerned that the bill would prohibit use of workplace surveillance tools that are capable of recognizing or making inferences about an individual’s emotional state, even when those capabilities are incidental to systems used for legitimate health, safety, or security purposes. They warn that state agencies, schools, counties, cities, transit agencies, and special districts could be forced to replace or modify existing systems, conduct rapid compliance reviews, and absorb those costs with little time or additional resources.
The coalition also argues that AB 1883 would expose public agencies to significant litigation and financial risk, including civil actions, punitive damages, and attorney fees, while adding new mandates at a time when local governments and schools are already under substantial fiscal pressure. Opponents contend that existing law and collective bargaining agreements already protect public employees’ civil and labor rights and that the bill could have unintended consequences by limiting tools used to protect employees and the public.
AB 1908 (McKinnor) Settlement agreements: victims’ compensation funding – As amended 6/3/26 – CSAC and UCC support. Would allow certain written settlements of tort claims against local public entities to be enforced in court, even when no civil action is pending, if the claim qualifies for a local victim compensation program and the agreement expressly provides for enforcement under Code of Civil Procedure Section 664.6.
Supporters argue that AB 1908 would give counties an important financing tool to address exceptionally large civil liabilities by clarifying that obligation bonds and other debt financing may be used to fund a county-established victims’ compensation fund. UCC and CSAC contend that counties are facing substantial legal exposure, including very large childhood sexual assault claims, and may not have sufficient cash on hand to pay claimants through a compensation fund.
They argue that current law allows obligation bonds to finance judgments and court-approved settlements but does not clearly authorize their use to finance a victims’ compensation fund. AB 1908 would close that statutory gap, giving counties greater flexibility to establish and finance such funds when liabilities are too large to absorb through existing revenues.
AB 1961 (Ahrens) Civil actions: protective orders: workplace violence – As amended 8/21/26 – CSAC, UCC, RCRC, and Cal Cities support. Would allow an employer to seek a workplace violence restraining order on behalf of all employees at a workplace or primary work location when harassment, unlawful violence, or a credible threat of violence is directed there. It would also remove the need to name individual employees as protected parties in that situation.
AB 2179 (Patel) Workplace violence: restraining orders – As amended 8/21/26 – CSAC supports. Would, beginning on January 1, 2028, allow any party or witness to a petition for a restraining order to appear remotely at a hearing and would prohibit any fee for appearing remotely. The bill would require the court of each county to develop rules and instructions for such remote appearances and post them on its website. The bill would also, commencing on January 1, 2028, require courts to allow filings related to such protective orders to be submitted electronically.
AB 2224 (Hadwick) County recorders: fees – As amended 5/21/26 – CSAC supports. Would increase county recording fees, raising the first-page fee from $10 to $15 and additional-page fees from $3 to $4, while eliminating several supplemental charges. Fees may not exceed the reasonable cost of services and must be used exclusively by the county recorder’s office.
AB 2341 (Fong) Local government: emergency response services: languages other than English – As amended 6/23/26 – CSAC and UCC supported. Requires local agencies providing emergency response services to translate emergency information into each language spoken by at least 5% of residents who speak English less than “very well,” based on American Community Survey or similarly reliable data. Local agencies may adopt broader translation standards.
Status: Signed by the governor; Chapter 170, Statutes of 2026
AB 2529 (Johnson) Civil claims: public entities and employees: declaration – As amended 4/9/26 – CSAC and Cal Cities support. Would require claims against public entities or employees to include a declaration that, on information and belief, the contents are true and correct. It would amend the Government Claims Act by adding this verification requirement to the signature rule for claims.
AB 2640 (Hadwick) Commission on State Mandates: state mandates – As amended 6/18/26 – CSAC, UCC, RCRC, and Cal Cities support. Would change the timing and options for Controller notice and payment adjustments related to state reimbursement claims by local agencies and school districts. Under current law, the Controller must notify a claimant within 30 days after issuing a remittance advice if an audit or review changes a reimbursement claim. The bill would instead require notice within 30 days of any adjustment resulting from an audit or review, and it would let the local agency or school district choose whether the Controller offsets the reduced reimbursement or adjusts the payment of claims.
AB 2656 (Petrie-Norris) Public employees: notice: artificial intelligence performing service within scope of work – As amended 7/1/26 – CSAC, UCC, RCRC, and Cal Cities oppose. Would require certain state and local public employers to provide written notice to a recognized employee organization at least 45 days before taking an action to develop, purchase, or require the use of GenAI to perform a service that is within the scope of work of the job classification represented by the recognized employee organization.
Opponents argue that AB 2656 requirements are overly broad because it could apply to routine tools such as ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, Zoom or Teams note-taking features, and other off-the-shelf software, even when those tools have little or no impact on employees’ terms and conditions of employment. The coalition warns that the bill would delay technology purchases and evaluations, encourage agencies to over-report to avoid unfair labor practice claims, and create additional administrative, legal, and training costs.
Opponents also argue that existing labor law already requires notice and bargaining when technology meaningfully affects wages, hours, or working conditions, making AB 2656 duplicative and unnecessary.
SB 922 (Laird) Vehicles: local agency charges: use of streets or highways – As amended 7/2/26 – CSAC, RCRC, and Cal Cities Supported. Clarifies that local agencies may charge public service providers or ratepayers to recover street maintenance, repair, and related costs caused by using public roads to deliver services such as water, power, refuse collection, and transportation. These charges would not be considered prohibited fees for the privilege of using local streets under the Vehicle Code. The bill is intended to preserve local fee authority and reject the court’s interpretation in Rogers v. City of Redlands.
Status: Signed by the governor; Chapter 148, Statutes of 2026
SB 947 (McNerney) Employment: automated decision systems – As amended 8/21/26 – CSAC, UCC, RCRC, and Cal Cities oppose. Would restrict an employer’s use of automated decision systems starting July 1, 2027, and would create notice, disclosure, enforcement, and anti-retaliation protections for employees affected by disciplinary or termination decisions made with such systems. It would allow employees to request a description of the data used about them, require written post-use notice in certain cases, and authorize enforcement by the Labor Commissioner or a public prosecutor, with remedies and a $500 civil penalty per violation.
Opponents argue that SB 947 would impose broad, costly, and unnecessary requirements on public agencies and schools using automated decision systems and artificial intelligence, even though they say there is no demonstrated pattern of public-sector misuse. They contend the bill’s definitions are so broad that they could capture routine and longstanding technologies, including Microsoft Office tools, water-safety systems, and patient-safety technologies, forcing agencies to review large numbers of existing systems for compliance.
The coalition warns that SB 947 would increase administrative and IT costs, divert staff from essential services, and expose public employers to additional litigation through new notice, documentation, corroboration, and burden-shifting requirements. They also argue that existing collective bargaining laws and public employment protections already provide due process and safeguards against misuse of workplace technology.
SB 1005 (Caballero) Local agency: payment: rounding amount – As amended 7/2/26 – CSAC, UCC, RCRC, and Cal Cities support. Would allow a local agency, if its governing body approves a resolution, to round cash payments, refunds, or other cash amounts to the nearest five cents.
SB 1159 (Cabaldon) Artificial intelligence: transparency and governance – As amended 6/25/26 – CSAC, UCC, RCRC, and Cal Cities support. Would exclude artificial intelligence systems, autonomous agents, and robots from various statutory terms for public participation and access and would bar anyone from using AI to falsely claim that a real person engaged with a government agency. This change would apply to the Public Records Act, open meeting laws, the Administrative Procedure Act, CEQA, and the Coastal Act, while allowing agencies to use verification tools to detect AI.
SB 1187 (Durazo) Open meetings – As amended 7/6/26 – CSAC, UCC, RCRC, and Cal Cities support. Would repeal certain forthcoming Brown Act requirements for eligible local legislative bodies concerning electronic requests for meeting materials, agenda translation, and assistance with public translation or interpretation, while adding legislative findings to support the change.
SB 1244 (Allen) Public Agency Benefits Intermediary Compensation Disclosure Act – As amended 8/19/26 – CSAC, UCC, and RCRC support. Would require brokers, consultants, and other intermediaries serving public agencies to disclose direct and indirect compensation, financial interests, and potential conflicts related to employee health benefit contracts. Disclosures must generally be provided before contracts are entered into or renewed, updated annually and when material changes occur, and supported by records. The requirements apply to contracts entered, extended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2028.
SB 1349 (Gonzalez) Taxation: tax expenditures: Legislative Analyst’s Office: assessment, report, and recommendation – As amended 6/17/26 – CSAC and Cal Cities support. Would require the Legislative Analyst’s Office to comprehensively assess the major tax expenditures of the state, write and publish a report on each major tax expenditure, and make a recommendation to the legislature based on each report.
Housing, Land Use, and Transportation Legislation
These measures address public works, housing development, land use and permitting, transportation, and related local government responsibilities.
AB 1198 (Haney) Public works: prevailing wages – As amended 8/21/26 – CSAC, UCC, and RCRC oppose. Would change how prevailing wage updates apply to certain public works contracts by extending new wage determinations to large contracts and creating a faster process to challenge those rates. Starting July 1, 2027, if the Director of Industrial Relations updates the prevailing wage within a semiannual period, the change would apply to public works contracts awarded or noticed after that date if the contract is worth at least $35 million.
Opponents argue that AB 1198 would create new and potentially unpredictable costs for local public works projects by requiring certain prevailing wage determinations issued after a contract is awarded to apply during the life of that contract. While the coalition supports the recent amendment limiting the bill to projects of $35 million or more, it argues the measure should also be limited to projects lasting more than 24 months and using alternative delivery methods such as Design-Build, Progressive Design-Build, or Construction Manager/General Contractor. Opponents stress that agencies often rely on fixed appropriations, grants, bond proceeds, voter-approved revenues, and adopted budgets, making it difficult to absorb unexpected post-award costs.
AB 1621 (Wilson) Planning and Zoning Law: postentitlement phase permits: Housing Accountability Act – As amended 8/20/26 – CSAC, RCRC, and Cal Cities oppose. Would tighten and speed up local review of postentitlement and building permit applications, limit repeated plan checks, shorten appeal deadlines, and make failures to follow these rules a violation of the Housing Accountability Act. It would allow no more than two plan check and specification reviews for a building permit application, require tolling only when another independent public agency must review the application, and shorten appeal decision deadlines to 30 business days for projects of 25 units or fewer and 45 business days for larger projects.
Opponents argue that AB 1621 would undermine local governments’ ability to thoroughly review residential building permit applications by generally limiting plan checks to two rounds. Complex projects often require three or more review cycles to ensure compliance with state building codes, energy-efficiency requirements, environmental standards, parking rules, and other regulations that are not necessarily tied directly to health and safety. By restricting additional review, the bill could force cities and counties to deny incomplete or noncompliant applications rather than continue working with applicants to resolve outstanding issues, potentially increasing litigation risk under existing housing laws.
AB 1786 (Harabedian) Public contracts: best value construction contracting for counties, cities, and the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments – As amended 6/18/26 – CSAC and Cal Cities support. Would expand and extend a public construction best-value contracting program, allowing counties, cities, and the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments to use it for projects over $500,000 through January 1, 2032. It also updates related reporting and bidding requirements, changes the deadline for the required legislative report to March 1, 2031, and makes conforming changes tied to the expanded program.
AB 1820 (Schiavo) Electric vehicle charging stations: permit fees – As amended 7/2/26 – CSAC, RCRC, and Cal Cities oppose. Would cap local permit fees for level 2 electric vehicle charging stations installed at new or existing multifamily housing developments through January 1, 2036, generally limiting fees to $500 plus specified per-kilowatt amounts unless the local agency makes written findings demonstrating higher reasonable costs.
AB 1976 (Wicks) Streets and highways: pedestrian and bicycle facilities – As amended 8/21/26 – CSAC, UCC, and Cal Cities oppose. Would prohibit a city or county from holding a community input meeting to reconsider, delay, or prevent implementation of a proposed pedestrian or bicycle safety project after that project has passed 90% design. After or upon the award of a contract, or when county or city staff are directed to begin the construction of a pedestrian or bicycle safety project, the bill would prohibit the city or county from terminating the project unless the city or county makes at least one specified finding at a public meeting.
Opponents argue that AB 1976 would unnecessarily restrict public participation and local decision-making for pedestrian and bicycle projects by limiting community input once a project has been incorporated into an approved plan and constraining the ability of local elected officials to stop projects after certain implementation stages. Project-specific engagement remains important because designs and conditions can change substantially between planning and construction, and residents, businesses, emergency responders, and public works professionals may identify new safety or operational concerns.
AB 2015 (Wicks) Department of Transportation: third-party navigation applications: study and report – As amended 8/13/26 – CSAC supports. Would require a pilot study to analyze how third-party navigation applications affect congestion displacement, local infrastructure, safety metrics, and emergency response. The bill would require Caltrans, on or before January 1, 2029, to submit the study, and a report of related policy recommendations for regulatory or legislative action to improve the alignment between third- party navigation applications and state and local traffic management goals, to the relevant fiscal and policy committees of the legislature. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2033.
SB 222 (Wiener) Residential heat pump water heater or heat pump HVAC systems – As amended 8/17/26 – CSAC, RCRC, and Cal Cities oppose. Would create statewide rules to speed approval and reduce barriers for residential heat pump water heater and heat pump HVAC installations, including online permitting, asynchronous inspections, fee limits, and restrictions on local requirements and association rules that block such equipment. It would also bar common interest development rules from preventing electric appliance replacements or limiting heat pump systems.
Opponents argue that SB 222 targets local permitting even though the available evidence suggests that the primary barriers to heat pump adoption are high equipment, installation, and electrical-upgrade costs rather than permit fees or processing times. Most local agencies already process these permits quickly, often over the counter or the same day, while the bill would impose permanent permit-fee caps and require automated permitting systems regardless of local need.
SB 299 (Cabaldon) California Environmental Quality Act: exemption: day care center: zoning – As amended 8/21/26 – CSAC, UCC, RCRC, and Cal Cities support. Would exempt from CEQA, projects consisting exclusively of a day care center located in a residential area, and would add duties for lead agencies to determine whether the exemption applies, creating a state-mandated local program
SB 342 (Umberg) Contractors: unlicensed work – As amended 8/26/26 – CSAC and Cal Cities oppose. Would modify contractor licensing rules for specified construction projects, including public works, commercial and institutional projects, common interest developments, and multifamily projects of four or more units. Under current law, a contractor generally cannot recover compensation for work requiring a license unless properly licensed at all times during performance, and a person who hires an unlicensed contractor may recover all compensation paid. SB 342 would instead allow a contractor on covered projects to recover payment for work performed while properly licensed, provided the contractor was licensed when the contract was executed, and would limit an owner’s recovery to compensation paid for work performed during periods when the contractor was unlicensed.
Opponents argue that SB 342 would weaken a longstanding safeguard against unlicensed contracting by allowing contractors who fail to maintain a valid license to recover compensation for portions of a contract performed while licensed. They also contend that existing law appropriately treats continuous licensure as a fundamental qualification for public works contractors and already provides relief for inadvertent lapses through retroactive renewal. They warn that SB 342 could permit contractors whose licenses are later revoked for serious violations, including project abandonment, failure to pay workers or suppliers, fraud, or lack of workers’ compensation coverage, to still recover payment for earlier work, undermining the deterrent purpose of California’s licensing laws and shifting additional risk to public agencies and taxpayers.
SB 716 (Durazo) Local government: ordinances: penalties for violation: nonresidential structures – As amended 8/28/26 – CSAC, UCC, RCRC, and Cal Cities support. Would give county boards of supervisors broader authority to set penalties for ordinance violations and would establish higher fines for certain health and safety violations involving large nonresidential structures. It would allow fines, penalties, forfeitures, and, in some cases, imprisonment for ordinance violations, and it would set specific escalating fines for violations affecting nonresidential buildings of at least 20,000 square feet when those violations threaten health and safety.
SB 1117 (Cervantes) Accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units – As amended 7/8/26 – CSAC, RCRC, and Cal Cities oppose. Would change how certain fees for accessory dwelling units (ADU) are calculated, requiring charges to apply only to the portion of an ADU that exceeds 750 square feet of interior livable space. It would also update local agency fee-setting duties under the Planning and Zoning Law.
Opponents argue that SB 1117 would arbitrarily cap development impact fees on certain ADUs and undermine the Mitigation Fee Act’s requirement that fees be based on the actual, documented cost of providing infrastructure and public services. The opposition coalition contends that the bill could reduce applicable fees by roughly 75% in many cases, limiting funding for roads, fire facilities and equipment, parks, recreation facilities, and other infrastructure needed to serve new residents. Because local governments have limited general fund resources to make up the difference, opponents warn that the measure would shift more of the cost of new development onto existing residents, could make it harder to fund necessary environmental mitigation, and may invite legal challenges and project delays.
SB 1272 (Menjivar) Local ordinances: administrative fines or penalties – As amended 6/23/26 – CSAC and RCRC oppose. Would require, for any violation pertaining to building, plumbing, electrical, or other similar structural or zoning issues, that do not create an immediate danger to health or safety, of any ordinance enacted by the local agency, the reasonable period of time to correct or otherwise remedy the violation to be no less than 6 months if certain conditions are met, including that the property involved is an owner-occupied residential property containing 4 units or less and the current owner of the property submits a sworn affidavit that the current owner was not responsible for any action that caused the violation and that the current owner had no knowledge of the violation at the time the owner took title to the property.
Opponents argue that SB 1272 would unnecessarily weaken local code-enforcement authority by imposing a six-month to one-year moratorium on administrative fines for certain building, plumbing, electrical, structural, and zoning violations, even though existing law already requires agencies to provide a reasonable opportunity to correct violations before penalties are imposed. Conditions that are not immediately dangerous can worsen into fire, water-quality, or other life-safety hazards during the delay; the bill’s affidavit process could force agencies into time-consuming disputes over notice and ownership history; and restricting administrative remedies could leave jurisdictions with little choice but to pursue more expensive civil or criminal enforcement.
SB 1283 (Ashby) Electric vehicle charging stations: installation: permits – As amended 8/19/26 – CSAC, RCRC, and Cal Cities oppose. Would require local administrative approval of electric vehicle charging station permits to extend to stations with canopies or onsite energy storage systems sized to support charging.
Opponents argue that SB 1283 would expand state-mandated streamlined permitting requirements to more complex electric vehicle charging station projects without adequately accounting for the additional engineering, site review, inspection, and infrastructure challenges these projects can present. Rural counties often have older electrical systems, limited staffing, and unique topographical and environmental conditions that make automatic or nondiscretionary approval inappropriate for all project types.
Health and Human Services Legislation
These measures address child welfare, behavioral health, public health, social services, and county health and human services responsibilities.
AB 871 (Stefani) Mandated reporters of suspected financial abuse of an elder or dependent adult – As amended 6/22/26 – CSAC supports. Would require a financial institution that reports suspected financial abuse of an elder or dependent adult to also submit a report to the FBI Internet Crime Complaint Center within two working days. The institution would also be required to notify the elder or dependent adult identified in the report within 48 hours and provide specified information.
AB 1602 (Blanca Rubio) Foster youth: disaster aid assistance – As introduced 1/16/26 – CSAC and Cal Cities support. Would create a Child Welfare Disaster Response Program and a dedicated account to provide disaster-related support for foster children, youth, and their caregivers. It would be administered by the State Department of Social Services, which would set eligibility rules and allow county child welfare agencies, county probation departments, and specified Indian tribes to apply for funds. The money could be used, with legislative appropriation, for housing, clothing, transportation, and other tangible needs arising within 180 days after a local or state emergency proclamation, and the department could issue written guidance to implement the program.
AB 1607 (Mark González) Emergency medical services – As amended 3/26/26 – CSAC supports. Would extend until January 1, 2037, several provisions governing the Maddy Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Fund that are otherwise scheduled to expire January 1, 2027. The bill would continue to authorize county boards of supervisors to impose an additional $2 penalty for every $10 in fines, penalties, and forfeitures for specified criminal offenses, with the revenues deposited into the Maddy EMS Fund. It would also continue existing fund distribution requirements, including reimbursement to physicians, hospitals, and other emergency medical services, and maintain the requirement that 15% of specified revenues support pediatric trauma centers or, in counties without a pediatric trauma center, improve access to and coordination of pediatric trauma and emergency services. Administrative costs would remain capped at the lesser of actual costs or 10% of the funds collected.
AB 1660 (Schiavo) Public guardians and public administrators – As amended 8/4/26 – CSAC, UCC, and RCRC support. Would expand and streamline the authority of county public guardians, public conservators, and public administrators to identify, protect, and take control of property belonging to proposed conservatees or deceased persons. The bill would extend the validity of written certificates of authority from 30 to 60 days, require those certificates to include additional identifying information, and strengthen requirements that financial institutions and other entities provide information, restrict transfers, grant access to safe-deposit boxes, or surrender property when presented with a valid certificate. It would authorize courts to impose sanctions of at least $1,000 per violation when an institution or other entity fails to comply after receiving at least 30 days’ written notice. For public administrators handling decedents’ estates, the bill would remove certain limitations tied to property or safe-deposit boxes being held solely in the decedent’s name and would clarify procedures for obtaining information and securing estate assets. It would also authorize a public administrator to summarily administer an estate valued at $50,000 or less without prior court authorization, using the new certificate-of-authority process.
AB 1811 (Rogers) Health professionals – As amended 8/20/26 – CSAC and RCRC support. Would make two principal changes related to California’s health care workforce. First, until January 1, 2035, it would broaden the state definition of a “health professional shortage area” to include areas currently designated by the federal government, areas that were federally designated as of January 1, 2025, even if that designation is later removed, and areas independently determined by the Department of Health Care Access and Information (HCAI) to have a shortage of health professionals. HCAI could revoke certain state-recognized designations. Second, the bill would expand health workforce data collection by professional licensing boards, requiring data to be collected or requested when a license or registration is initially issued and adding information such as hours worked in inpatient and outpatient care and whether a provider offers a sliding fee scale. Boards would provide individual-level data to HCAI monthly rather than quarterly, while maintaining confidentiality and releasing information publicly only in aggregate form.
AB 1924 (Gabriel) Statewide homelessness prevention strategy – As amended 8/13/26 – CSAC and Cal Cities support. Would require the California Interagency Council on Homelessness to develop a statewide homelessness prevention strategy by July 1, 2028, as part of its publicly available Action Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness. The strategy would have to include a homelessness prevention action plan for specified state agencies and evidence- based model prevention practices. The council would also be required to review and update the strategy, while each state agency’s role would remain limited to its existing legal authority, activities, data, and responsibilities.
AB 2478 (Schultz) Kinship family approval – As amended 8/21/26 – CSAC supports. Would, among other things, require the Department of Social Services to, on or before July 1, 2028, adopt a kinship family approval process to approve a relative, nonrelative extended family member, or extended family member of an Indian child to be a kinship family, which the bill defines as an individual or family who has successfully met the home environment assessment and family engagement standards, necessary for providing care for a child placed by a county child welfare department or a probation department by court order or voluntarily placed by a parent or legal guardian.
SB 16 (Blakespear) Mental health: involuntary commitment – As amended 8/28/26 – CSAC, UCC, and RCRC oppose. Would require, rather than merely authorize, a county behavioral health director to establish and implement procedures governing the designation and training of professionals authorized to carry out involuntary detention and treatment functions under the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act.
Opponents argue that SB 16 would significantly expand county responsibilities and costs related to involuntary mental health holds. The coalition contends that the amendments create uncertainty over whether counties retain discretion to decide who may be designated to place and release 5150 holds, potentially converting a discretionary county function into a state-mandated responsibility. They also warn that the changes would increase county oversight, administrative, and reporting costs beyond earlier estimates. Finally, opponents argue that the bill could unintentionally increase law enforcement involvement in behavioral health crises because clinicians initiating holds outside treatment facilities would often need officers to detain and transport individuals.
SB 1051 (Menjivar) Foster care: childcare – As amended 8/21/26 – CSAC supports. Would authorize childcare navigators to refer foster children to the county welfare department for eligibility and approval under the Emergency Child Care Bridge Program for Foster Children and would require participating county welfare departments to determine eligibility of that referred child for the program.
Administration of Justice Legislation
AB 690 (Schultz) Criminal procedure: indigent defense compensation – As amended 8/13/26 – CSAC, UCC, and RCRC oppose. Would, commencing with contracts or memoranda of understanding for indigent defense services entered into after January 1, 2028, revise the process and require a county or court, when contracting for the provision or administration of indigent defense services, include certain elements in the contract or other agreement for indigent services. The bill would prohibit a county or court from entering into flat fee contracts or per case compensation contracts in cases involving the death penalty or the potential sentence of life without the possibility of parole.
Opponents argue that the bill would impose new contracting and procurement requirements on counties for indigent defense without providing corresponding state funding. While recent amendments narrowed the bill’s restrictions, the county associations contend that prohibiting flat-fee contracts for certain serious cases could increase costs, reduce local flexibility, complicate recruitment in an already limited pool of qualified defense attorneys, and create uncertain compensation arrangements for complex cases. They argue that California’s broader indigent defense problem stems from inadequate and inconsistent state funding, and that AB 690 could worsen existing fiscal and operational pressures without meaningfully improving attorney recruitment, retention, or the quality of representation. Instead, they urge the state to invest directly in county public defense systems and preserve counties’ ability to structure contracts around local caseloads and workforce conditions.
Agriculture, Environment, and Natural Resources Legislation
These measures address wildfire resilience, water, solid waste, insurance, energy, wildlife, recycling, tribal resources, and environmental permitting.
AB 706 (Aguiar-Curry) Forest Organic Residue, Energy, and Safety Transformation (FOREST) and Wildfire Prevention Fund Act – As amended 8/21/26 – CSAC and RCRC support. Would, upon appropriation by the legislature, make moneys from the Timber Fund or from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund available to implement the Forest Organic Residue Energy and Safety Transformation (FOREST) program in order to maintain and expand biomass power generation in the state, to revitalize idle facilities for biomass power generation, and to support biomass power generation facilities by creating additional capacity for power generation or feedstock utilization in strategically located regions of the state.
AB 1153 (Bonta) Illegal disposal site abatement – As amended 6/18/26 – CSAC, RCRC, and Cal Cities support. Would allow the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, if the legislature appropriates funds, to create regulations and spend money to remove and dispose of recreational vehicles and to strengthen illegal dumping enforcement. It would also let the department develop enforcement strategies, form local enforcement teams, and appoint illegal dumping enforcement officers, building on California’s existing solid waste cleanup program for sites that threaten public health, safety, or the environment.
AB 1577 (Bauer-Kahan) Data centers: reporting – As amended 8/21/26 – CSAC and Cal Cities support. Would require data center owners or operators to report energy, location, size, and fuel-use information to the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission and to local agencies for permitting purposes, while requiring the commission to publish anonymized, aggregated data and include data center load trends in future energy reports. It would also allow owners or operators to identify information protected from disclosure, prohibit release of personally identifiable or customer-specific energy data, exempt certain public and utility facilities, and include legislative findings supporting any limits on public access.
AB 1617 (Alanis) Household hazardous waste: reporting – As amended 7/2/26 – CSAC and RCRC support. Would revise reporting requirements for public agencies responsible for household hazardous waste management. Instead of reporting Form 303 data on a fiscal-year basis, agencies would report information for the prior calendar year, while retaining the October 1 annual submission deadline.
AB 1699 (Rogers) Good Fire Act: Prescribed Fire Liability Pilot Program: burn bosses: California Environmental Quality Act – As amended 8/20/26 – CSAC and RCRC support. Would make several changes intended to expand the use of prescribed fire and cultural burning in California. Most significantly, it would make the Prescribed Fire Liability Program permanent, expand eligibility for the Prescribed Fire Claims Fund to individuals and entities other than Cal Fire or the federal government, and allow coverage for prescribed fires and cultural burns on lands throughout the state. It would also streamline the claims process by allowing a burn plan approved by a certified burn boss to qualify without separate Cal Fire approval, provided the plan is submitted before ignition.
AB 1761 (Rogers) Electricity: calculation methodology: nonbypassable charges: data disclosure – As amended 8/13/26 – CSAC, RCRC, and Cal Cities support. Would require greater transparency in how the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) calculates and applies nonbypassable electricity charges. The bill would require the CPUC, utilities, load-serving entities, and other parties to make available the underlying data used in proposals, analyses, decisions, or rulings that determine those charges, including costs associated with utility contracts, utility-owned generation, and other resources.
AB 1881 (Ramos) California Indian Freedom Act of 2026 – As amended 8/27/26 – CSAC and Cal Cities oppose. Would create the California Indian Freedom Act of 2026, protecting tribal religious exercise on state lands, requiring access to sacred sites and tribal consent for certain land changes, and making related sacred-site information confidential. It would let California Native American tribes challenge violations in court or administrative proceedings, require state agencies to accommodate tribal practices at the Capitol and other state lands, exempt the law from certain water authority powers, and amend public records law to keep sensitive tribal information from disclosure.
Opponents argue that AB 1881 would give California Native American tribes overly broad authority to challenge or halt state land and water management decisions by creating a private right of action, allowing injunctive relief and attorneys’ fees, shifting the burden of proof to the state, and imposing a strict-scrutiny standard. They are particularly concerned that the bill would require state agencies to obtain tribal “informed consent” before making physical changes to state lands that may affect sacred sites, effectively converting existing consultation requirements into potential veto authority without clear timelines or a process for resolving disputes. Opponents contend this could delay or block water infrastructure, wildfire prevention, environmental restoration, permitting, and other state projects, expose agencies to substantial and potentially duplicative litigation, and increase administrative and legal costs. They also argue the bill conflicts with existing CEQA tribal consultation and other state protections and point to the exemption for the State Water Resources Control Board, after it estimated implementation costs exceeding $30 million annually, as evidence that the requirements would be difficult to administer.
AB 1934 (Bennett) State Fire Marshal: home hardening certification program implementation plan – As amended 8/13/26 – CSAC, RCRC, and Cal Cities support. Would require the State Fire Marshal’s Wildfire Mitigation Advisory Committee to develop, by January 1, 2028, an implementation plan for a voluntary home hardening certification program and then require the State Fire Marshal to establish the program by January 1, 2029. The plan would identify home hardening measures, including defensible space, that can be used during renovation or property improvement projects to reduce fire loss and better align existing buildings with wildland-urban interface standards.
AB 1954 (Ward) Municipal golf courses: reservations – As amended 8/4/26 – CSAC and Cal Cities support. Would prohibit third-party golf reservation platforms from listing or selling reservations for publicly owned golf courses without written authorization from the golf course operator, while creating a limited exemption when the operator does not clearly post a cancellation policy online. The bill would preserve existing local authority over property but add this specific restriction on golf reservation services for courses owned by local public agencies.
AB 1964 (Bennett) State Fire Marshal: home hardening – As amended 5/18/26 – CSAC supports. Would require the Office of the State Fire Marshal, on or before January 1, 2028, to develop home hardening standards. The bill would require the State Fire Marshal to, on or before January 1, 2030, compile a report concerning homes in moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones in state and local responsibility areas. The bill would require the State Fire Marshal, on or before July 1, 2030, to make the completed report available on its website and to submit copies to the legislature.
AB 2051 (Wicks) Public resources: coastal resources: Coastal Resilience Permitting Working Group – As amended 8/21/26 – CSAC supports. Would establish a state process to streamline permitting for coastal resilience projects by requiring the Natural Resources Agency, in consultation with CalEPA, to convene a multiagency working group and develop a Coastal Resilience Permitting Roadmap by July 1, 2028. The roadmap would recommend reforms such as unified applications, coordinated multiagency review, standardized mitigation, expanded use of regional or programmatic permits, and possible consolidated permitting or pilot programs. The bill would also create an advisory group that could include local governments, ports, transportation agencies, special districts, stormwater and wastewater agencies, tribes, businesses, and environmental organizations. Separately, it would allow the Coastal Commission to retroactively extend by up to five years certain deadlines for local governments to act on suggested modifications to land use plan amendments for 100% affordable housing developments.
AB 2180 (Ward) Local government: Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act: proportional cost of service – As amended 5/22/26 – CSAC, RCRC, and Cal Cities support. Would clarify how local governments may demonstrate compliance with Proposition 218’s requirement that property-related fees and charges not exceed the proportional cost of service. The bill would allow an agency to use any reasonable method, supported by historic, current, estimated, or projected data, to allocate the ascertainable cost of providing service among parcels. For water and sewer rates, agencies would not have to calculate the exact cost attributable to each parcel and could instead use uniform or tiered rates based on customer classes with common characteristics, such as land use, meter size, plumbing fixtures, or peak use. For tiered water rates, agencies could allocate costs using factors such as water supply costs, system operation and capital costs, peak demand, and conservation-related costs, and would not need a separate cost-based justification for the specific breakpoint between tiers, provided each tier’s rate does not exceed the proportional cost reasonably allocated to that tier.
AB 2218 (Kalra) Water policy: California Native American tribes – As amended 7/2/26 – CSAC, RCRC, and Cal Cities oppose. Would direct state agencies to support California Native American tribes by recognizing tribal inequities, consulting on affected policies, and incorporating tribal knowledge, especially in water-related decisions. It would require agencies such as the State Water Resources Control Board and the Natural Resources Agency to include these priorities when making rules, permits, or grants, to identify financial assistance for tribes when allowed by law, and to use mediation through the Governor’s Office of Tribal Affairs before certain disputes go to court.
Opponents argue that AB 2218 is overly broad and lacks clear standards for how state agencies must address historic inequities in tribal access to and control over water when adopting or revising regulations, policies, permits, and grant criteria. They contend that the bill would subject a wide range of water and natural resource decisions to a costly mediation process and potential litigation, while leaving tribes to determine whether an agency has adequately complied and providing no clear legal benchmark for courts or agencies. Opponents also warn that the measure could affect water rights, the State Water Project, Bay-Delta planning, coastal permitting, wildfire regulations, and major infrastructure projects, creating uncertainty, delays, higher water supply costs, and affordability impacts. They further argue that the Governor’s Office of Tribal Affairs would be given substantial new responsibilities without assurance it has the resources or capacity to manage them, and that existing tribal consultation and shared-decision-making policies already provide a more workable path to addressing the bill’s goals.
AB 2253 (Boerner) Solid waste: products: recycled content claims – As amended 8/21/26 – RCRC and Cal Cities support. Would expand recycled-content marketing rules from plastic food containers to all products starting January 1, 2030, and would add new documentation and verification requirements for those claims. It would require manufacturers and suppliers to keep written records showing the recycled content is properly sourced, based on actual use and third-party certified inputs, and consistent with FTC guidance as of January 1, 2026. For nonfood-container products, the required records would be provided to the Attorney General on request, while confidential business information would remain protected.
AB 2469 (Papan) Data centers: water use disclosures – As amended 8/27/26 – CSAC, RCRC, and Cal Cities oppose. Would restrict cities and counties from approving permits for data center construction or expansion that would increase peak water use unless specified conditions are met, including submission of required water information and acceptance of responsibility for certain water infrastructure costs. It would require a water scarcity plan and water supply assessment, apply statewide including to charter cities, and state that no reimbursement is required despite creating a state-mandated local program.
Opponents argue that AB 2469 would improperly preempt local land-use authority. They also contend the bill is vague and could create delays, confusion, and litigation because it applies to ministerial permits that local governments generally cannot deny or condition; establishes water-scarcity planning requirements that do not align with existing commercial, industrial, and institutional water conservation rules; and requires water suppliers to estimate infrastructure costs without clearly defining who performs the analysis or how it should be conducted. Opponents further note that key terms such as “data center” and “increase in maximum peak water use” are undefined, creating additional uncertainty and potential fiscal impacts for local governments.
AB 2513 (Petrie-Norris) Wildfire: Regional Forest and Fire Capacity Program: local assistance grant program: regional landscape grants – As amended 8/21/26 – CSAC and Cal Cities support. Would expand and extend multiple wildfire and forest resilience grant programs by allowing state agencies to award regional landscape grants, broadening eligible activities, and making advance payment authority permanent. It would let the Department of Conservation, CAL FIRE, and the Wildlife Conservation Board fund regional entities and local entities for priority strategies that support California’s Wildfire and Forest Resilience Action Plan.
AB 2724 (Bauer-Kahan) Insurance: distressed areas – As amended 8/20/26 – CSAC, RCRC, and Cal Cities support. Would require the Department of Insurance to review and update distressed areas each year based on changes to wildland-urban interface (WUI) designations, publish WUI ZIP Codes by January 1, 2028, and increase penalties for insurers that fail to file required fire-risk reports. It also directs the department to hold at least one public meeting during the review process so interested persons can suggest additional factors for evaluating FAIR Plan percentages in WUI areas, and it allows the commissioner to use reporting violations as a basis for other enforcement action.
AB 2728 (Soria) Groundwater: de minimis extractors: fees: exemption – As amended 6/11/26 – CSAC and RCRC support. Would authorize a local government, including a groundwater sustainability agency, to exempt de minimis groundwater extractors from fees, levies, charges, or exactions imposed for groundwater monitoring or management if the local government makes specified findings.
AB 2739 (Soria) Water: affordability and system stabilization – As amended 8/21/26 – CSAC and Cal Cities support. Would create a Water Affordability and System Stabilization Trust and related state funds to provide long-term financing for water rate assistance and community water affordability programs. It would place the trust in the State Treasury under the Treasurer, direct its income to the Water Rate Assistance Fund and a new Community Water Affordability Assistance Fund, and allow limited use for administration and investment.
SB 501 (Allen) Responsible Battery Recycling Act of 2022: covered batteries – As amended 8/17/26 – CSAC, RCRC, and Cal Cities support. Would revise California’s battery recycling law by changing battery definitions, adding new stewardship and inspection requirements, and extending record-retention rules. It would treat certain theft-prevention locks as not affecting whether a battery is considered easily removable, remove existing exclusions for primary and larger rechargeable batteries, divide covered batteries into small and medium formats, and require stewardship plans, audits, and compliance records to follow updated standards and time periods.
SB 894 (Allen) Wildfire resiliency: financial assistance – As amended 8/20/26 – CSAC and RCRC support. Would establish the California Wildfire Resilience Loan Program and would require the authority, upon appropriation by the legislature, to administer the program to provide financial assistance for projects and activities to reduce wildfire-related risks and losses, including home hardening and defensible space improvements, as provided, and would make related changes.
SB 955 (Blakespear) Beverage containers: supermarkets: reverse vending machines – As amended 8/13/26 – CSAC and RCRC support. Would revise California’s beverage container recycling program to expand and stabilize redemption options. The bill would clarify that a certified reverse vending machine does not, by itself, make an otherwise unserved convenience zone “served,” allowing dealer cooperatives, mobile units, and existing recycling centers to continue operating and receiving applicable program payments in the same zone. It would also increase the annual sales threshold used to define a “supermarket” from $2 million to $6 million, preserve handling-fee eligibility for certain existing recycling centers, and extend CalRecycle’s emergency handling-fee methodology through June 30, 2032.
SB 973 (Becker) Wildfire County Coordinator Program – As amended 8/13/26 – CSAC and RCRC support. Would establish the California Wildfire Preparedness Program and codify the existing Wildfire County Coordinator Program to strengthen county-level wildfire prevention, preparedness, mitigation, and recovery. The bill would require Cal Fire to develop guidance and tools for wildfire risk modeling and county-level risk assessments, support local wildfire preparedness planning, and oversee county coordinator activities to align with Community Wildfire Protection Plans and other state and local strategies. The County Coordinator Program, administered through the California Fire Safe Council, would support evacuation and resilience planning, public education, smoke mitigation, home hardening, defensible space, fuels reduction, access to wildfire funding, and coordination among federal, state, tribal, regional, and local partners, while also collecting data on costs and measurable risk-reduction outcomes.
SB 1085 (Durazo) Water supply planning: housing developments – As amended 8/19/26 – CSAC supports. Would require cities and counties to identify potential public water systems earlier in the housing development application process and, within 15 days of receiving a qualifying application, ask each identified system whether the project’s projected water demand was included in its most recently adopted urban water management plan.
SB 1125 (Menjivar) Water Rate Assistance Program – As amended 8/19/26 – CSAC supports. Would establish the Water Rate Assistance Program. As part of the program, the bill would establish the Water Rate Assistance Fund in the State Treasury, available upon appropriation by the legislature, to provide water affordability assistance for residential water services to low- income residential ratepayers.
SB 1370 (Stern) Covered wildfire mitigation projects: consolidated and expedited review – As amended 8/28/26 – CSAC, RCRC, and Cal Cities support. Would create a streamlined state review process for covered wildfire mitigation projects, requiring a single consolidated application and a 60-day authorization timeline, while also allowing expedited approvals that replace certain state permits and reviews. It would assign CAL-FIRE and the California Environmental Protection Agency joint responsibility for the review, impose project size and completion limits, require compliance with local and federal law, authorize civil penalties for violations, require cost-per-unit analysis for publicly funded projects, and mandate a legislative report by July 1, 2029 before the provisions expire in 2030 and are repealed in 2031.
Grant Opportunities
Below is a list of the latest grant opportunities released by the state. All opportunities for local jurisdictions may be found here.
Application Deadline: 10/12/26 23:59
Title: Grant Opportunity: Farmworkers Advancement Program (FAP) Grant for Program Year 2026-27 (PY 26-27)
State Agency / Department: Employment Development Department
Match Funding? No
Estimated Total Funding: $10,000,000
Funding Method: Reimbursement(s)
Application Deadline: 9/30/26 23:59
Title: Forest Legacy Program Capacity and Project Development 2026
State Agency / Department: Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
Match Funding? No
Estimated Total Funding: $500,000
Funding Method: Reimbursement(s)
Governor’s Press Releases
Below is a list of the governor’s press releases beginning September 2.
September 9: Government, made easier. Governor Newsom introduces AskCA, a new AI-powered tool for Californians
September 7: Happy Labor Day! California is the #1 state for workers, #1 economy in the nation
September 7: Governor Newsom proclaims Labor Day
September 4: Governor Gavin Newsom on California securing massive victory for democracy
September 4: California’s public safety strategy works: Governor Newsom’s commitment helps lower crime as new study shows violence prevention saves lives
September 4: Six years after Creek Fire, Governor Newsom recognizes historic nighttime CalGuard rescue that saved 242 lives
September 3: California and the Australian state of Queensland ink new partnership to accelerate climate resilience, agricultural technology, and innovation
September 3: Governor, First Partner statement on the passing of Gloria Steinem
September 3: California prioritized fighting organized retail theft, those results are paying off with 36,000 arrests and $293 million in stolen goods recovered
|
