State Bills in Brief: June 26-July 3

A weekly primer on the bills and committee hearings that have a direct impact on cities

By Brian Hendershot, Cal Cities Advocate managing editor. Additional contributions by the Cal Cities Advocacy Team

Welcome to the next-to-last State Bills in Brief. (In theory.) Let's celebrate with two recent Cal Cities wins. Sen. Josh Newman and Sen. Lena Gonzalez pulled two bills opposed by Cal Cities.

SB 1164 (Newman) would have temporarily exempted new accessory dwelling units (ADU) from property tax assessments if the owner made a "good faith effort" to ensure the unit was used as housing. This exemption would have made it more difficult for cities to provide critical public services. Newman argued that the taxes were a "substantial disincentive" to new ADUs. However, the number of new ADUs and ADU permits are through the roof.

SB 252 (Gonzalez) would have forced the state's biggest pension funds to divest from fossil fuel companies. Sen. Gonzalez pulled the bill, citing "damaging" amendments from the Assembly Public Employment and Retirement Committee, but vowed to try again next year.

In less positive news, Sen. Dave Cortese is pulling SB 915. The measure would have allowed police and first responders to intervene when a driverless vehicle interrupts an emergency response and created a pathway for local self-driving regulations. Cortese pressed pause after he was forced to water the bill down but says he will reintroduce something similar next year.

Perhaps the most interesting news is what's not (yet) scheduled for a floor vote or committee hearing. A package of retail theft bills has seemingly stalled in the Legislature and a multibillion climate bond vote will likely get pushed back several days.

July 3 is the last day for policy committee hearings, after which lawmakers have until Aug. 16 to get their bills through any final fiscal hearings. For information about bills scheduled for a committee hearing, keep reading. To learn what each section means - or to access a previous State Bills in Brief - visit the archive page.

Hot bills

Lawmakers will hear nine high priority bills this week, including some measures that strike at the heart of local government finances and operations.

Expanded unemployment benefits for striking workers

• For 26 weeks. SB 1116 (Portantino) would allow striking workers to draw unemployment benefits after two weeks. Cal Cities opposes the measure due to the severe, downward pressure it would apply to city budgets.
• Didn't this already fail? When the Governor vetoed a similar measure last year, he said, "Now is not the time to increase costs or incur this sizable debt." This should hold true this year, as the state is grappling with a multibillion-dollar budget shortfall.
• When was the hearing? June 26 in the Assembly Insurance Committee at 1:30 pm.

Burdensome, inflexible, and costly contracting rule

• Disincentivizing contractors. AB 2557 (Ortega) would dramatically curb local agency service contracts due to its onerous obligations and costs. Cal Cities opposes the measure.
• Nearly 5,000 impacted agencies. The bill would require some nonprofits contracting with cities to adopt sweeping new reporting and auditing practices under certain circumstances. If passed, it would directly undercut statewide policy goals and partnerships, including the Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention program.
• When is the hearing? July 3 in the Senate Labor, Public Employment and Retirement Committee at 1:30 p.m.

Keeping ethics training free

• The one you take every two years. AB 2631 (Fong) would ensure that an ethics training course remains free online indefinitely. Cal Cities is sponsoring the measure.
• Why now? The Fair Political Practices Commission may no longer be able to provide the program due to budget restraints. About 2,000 new agencies and several thousand agency officials will become subject to these training requirements starting in 2025.
• When is the hearing? July 2 in the Senate Elections and Constitutional Amendments Committee at 9:30 a.m.

Builder's remedy safeguards come with a price

• What would the bill do?AB 1893 (Wicks) would place some guardrails on builder's remedy projects. However, it would also limit cities' ability to impose objective standards in specific development projects. Cal Cities opposes the measure unless amended.
• Possible changes. Cal Cities is urging lawmakers to require the Department of Housing and Community Development to provide cities with technical assistance and clear guidance on how to substantially comply with housing element law to avoid the builder's remedy altogether. Cities should also be allowed to impose objective standards, just like in other affordable housing laws.
• When is the hearing? July 3 in the Local Government Committee at 9:30 a.m. or upon adjournment of session.

Duplicative housing and homelessness planning bill

• Unnecessary changes.AB 3093 (Ward) would require cities to consider and plan for the needs of homeless residents when developing their housing elements, which cities already do. Cal Cities will oppose the measure unless it is amended.
• Possible changes. Cal Cities requested several amendments that would clarify the bill's proposed new income categories. Without these changes, the bill will set cities up to fail.
• When is the hearing? July 2 in the Senate Housing Committee at 1:30 p.m.

No more self-certification for housing elements

• Builders remedy incentives. AB 1886 (Alvarez) would remove the ability of cities to self-certify housing plans that are "in substantial compliance with housing element law." This would encourage more developers to bypass local zoning laws in favor of the so-called builder's remedy. Cal Cities opposes the measure.
• Complex planning. Housing elements take years to develop. Cities often receive unclear or conflicting guidance about their plans. Instead of punishing good faith efforts, the state should help cities finalize their housing elements and put those plans to work.
• When is the hearing? July 1 in the Senate Appropriations Committee at 10 a.m.

Controlled substance list update

• Proactive update. SB 1502 (Ashby) would create penalties for the illicit position, use, sale, and trafficking of xylazine - also known as "tranq." Cal Cities supports the measure.
• A dangerous combination. A non-opiate sedative and muscle relaxant, xylazine can be deadly when combined with opioids. Officials have linked the drug to a growing number of overdose deaths in California.
• When is the hearing? July 2 in the Assembly Public Safety Committee at 9 a.m.

Enhanced attorney-client privilege endangers government operations

• A one-sided standard. AB 2421 (Low) would restrict internal investigationsinto workplace misconduct by broadly limiting employer-employee communications. Cal Cities opposes the measure.
• But wait there's more. The bill's vague language could create a prohibition on day-to-day internal communications, unintended violations of the proposed bill, and decreased public agency transparency and accountability.
• When is the hearing? Lawmakers will hear AB 2421 in two committees: June 26 in the Senate Labor, Public Employment and Retirement Committee at 1:30 p.m. and again on July 2 in the Senate Judiciary Committee at 9:30 a.m.

Retention bill ignores external factors

• An unfunded mandate.AB 2561 (McKinnor) would force local agencies to produce, implement, and publish plans to reduce union vacancy rates that exceed 10% for over six months. Cal Cities opposes the measure.
• Right problem.Flawed approach. Many cities are actively taking steps to reduce vacancy rates and address retention challenges. Cities are committed to working collaboratively on the issue, but diverting staff away from core service delivery to produce reports on vacancy rates will not fill key city positions.
• When is the hearing? July 3 in the Senate Labor, Public Employment, and Retirement Committee at 1:30 p.m.

Priority bills

Cal Cities is engaging with over 40 other priority measures this week, including several recently elevated zoning, revenue, and community service bills.

Assembly bill shifts housing infrastructure costs to cities

• Developer piggy bank. AB 2729 (Patterson, Joe) would lock in development fees early on, delay their collection until a certificate of occupancy, prohibit interest on deferred fees, and create a shot clock for local governments to spend or return the fees to the developer unless specific conditions are met. Cal Cities opposes the measure.
• Time is money. This is true for developers and cities. Local agencies rely on these fees to pay for essential infrastructure: roads, sidewalks, parks, and lighting.
• When was the hearing? June 26 in the Senate Local Government Committee at 1:30 p.m.

Water fee clarification

• Protecting city revenues.SB 1072 (Padilla) would shield public agencies from costly legal challenges to their water, sewer, and refuse collection service fee structures. Cal Cities supports the measure.
• Credits, not refunds. Water providers cannot make a profit from their services and instead maintain reserves to cover future costs, such as capital improvement projects. Recent, multimillion lawsuits threaten those reserves and would likely force utilities to raise rates to cover refunds.
• When was the hearing? June 26 in the Assembly Local Government Committee at 9:30 a.m.

Property tax postponement for older adults

• Aging in place.AB 2564 (Boerner) would reinstate a program that protects seniors and disabled adults from being priced out of their homes due to high property taxes. Cal Cities supports the measure.
• Dwindling funding. It's unlikely that the program can fund all eligible applicants. AB 2564 would remedy that issue by ensuring the fund's balance is never below $15 million at the start of the fiscal year.
• When was the hearing? June 26 in the Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee at 9:30 a.m.

Expediting homeless responses

• A familiar approach. SB 1361 (Blakespear) would clarify that supportive service programs are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act - just like homeless shelters. Cal Cities supports the measure.
• We need to act faster. SB 1361 would give local agencies another tool to speed up the arrival of these lifesaving services.
• When was the hearing? June 26 in the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee at 9 a.m.

Automatic ADU approval

• Two new ministerial approvals. SB 1211 (Skinner) would force cities to approve up to eight detached accessory dwelling units (ADU) on an existing multifamily dwelling lot. Cities would also need to approve up to two detached ADUs on a proposed multifamily development before construction begins. Cal Cities opposes the measure.
• Developer workaround. The bill would allow a developer to construct ADUs in areas never meant for development and reduce community benefits, such as open space, parks, and parking.
• When was the hearing? June 26 in the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee at 9 a.m.

Automatic single-family unit approval

• Overriding approved housing plans. SB 1123 (Caballero) would force cities to approve up to 10 new vacant units on a parcel that was zoned and planned for one unit. Cal Cities opposes the measure.
• But why? Like many recent legislative efforts, this measure undermines and calls into question the state's regional housing needs allocation process.
• When is the hearing? June 26 in the Assembly Local Government Committee at 9:30 a.m.

Housing element review changes could set cities up to fail

• Impossible standard. AB 2023 (Quirk-Silva) would add over 4 months to the housing element review process by resetting the review times for amendments to housing elements at the state and local level.
• Possible changes. Cal Cities is seeking changes that would make it easier for cities to meet the statutory deadline and make AB 2023 consistent with existing law.
• When is the hearing? July 2 in the Senate Judiciary Committee at 9:30 a.m.

Stiffer fentanyl penalties

• Enhanced sentencing. SB 226 (Alvarado-Gil) would make it a felony to simultaneously possess fentanyl and a loaded gun. Cal Cities supports the measure.
• Why it matters. Fentanyl is one of the most dangerous drugs in the U.S.
• When is the hearing? July 2 in the Assembly Public Safety Committee at 9 a.m.

Unlocking disaster funding

• Focused funding. AB 2776 (Rodriguez) would allow the Office of Emergency Services to prioritize infrastructure and housing projects for communities impacted by major federal, state, and local disasters. Cal Cities supports the measure.
• Why it matters. State and federal disaster funding criteria are very specific. If local governments do not meet those criteria, they must bear the brunt of recovery costs. California has had nearly 30 major federal disasters since 2018.
• When is the hearing? July 1 in the Senate Appropriations Committee at 10 a.m.

Facilitating compost facilities

• Permitting and siting. SB 1045 (Blakespear) would require the Office of Planning and Research and CalRecycle to detail the best practices for siting composting facilities on its website as a resource for local governments.
• 50-100. That's the estimated number of new organic waste recycling facilities needed to meet the state's methane emission reduction goals. Cities need technical assistance to meet this ambitious goal.
• When was the hearing? June 26 in the Assembly Local Government Committee at 9:30 a.m.

Streamlining hydrogen fueling would create a bad precedent and increase costs

• What's the bill number?SB 1418 (Archuleta) would force cities to create a streamlined permitting process for hydrogen-fueling stations. Cal Cities opposes the measure unless the bill includes funding and clarity and ties implementation to local demand.
• But why? This measure proposes a one-size-fits-all approach regardless of market conditions, existing technology, storage complexities, or local resources. Expediting a process involving a highly volatile and difficult-to-contain gas is just plain dangerous.

• What is the next hearing? June 26 in the Assembly Local Government Committee at 9:30 a.m.

Overly broad gate regulation

• Massive number of massive gates.AB 2149 (Connolly) would create new standards for large, rolling gates - and potentially create new litigation risks for cities. Cal Cities will oppose the measure unless it is amended.
• Unfunded mandate. The bill's scale is unworkable. Cal Cities is seeking changes that would lower the legal risks to cities, costs for implementing a new state mandate, and the number of gates that cities would need to regulate.
• When is the hearing? July 2 in the Senate Judiciary Committee at 9:30 a.m.

Thrift store permitting

• Top-down ban. AB 2632 (Wilson) would stop cities from treating thrift stores differently from other stores for zoning and permitting purposes. Cal Cities opposes the measure.
• Weighing options. Although thrift stores are a vital part of many communities, they also come with unique traffic, public health, and noise impacts.
• When was the hearing? June 26 in the Senate Local Government Committee at 1:30 p.m.

Campaign finance update

• Commonsense change. SB 1243 (Dodd) would raise the threshold for contributions regulated by the Levine Act from $250 to $1,000 and give officials more time to correct an unintentional violation. Cities could also choose to set a lower contribution limit. Cal Cities supports the measure.
• Have you seen the inflation rate? The Levine Act does not contain an inflation index and policymakers have not adjusted the contribution limit for over 40 years.
• When was the hearing? June 26 in the Assembly Elections Committee at 9 a.m.

With age comes unique insights

• Older adults.AB 2207 (Reyes) would require six different California state boards, commissions, and advisory committees to include an older adult representative. Cal Cities supports the measure.
• Silver tsunami. By 2030, one in four Californians will be 60 or older. Older Californians should have an avenue to share their unique insights on the issues impacting them the most, like homelessness.
• When is the hearing? July 3 in the Senate Local Government Committee
• at 9:30 a.m. or upon adjournment of the session.

Ending food insecurity

• A meaningful step.AB 1961 (Wicks) would create a task force dedicated to ending hunger across the state. Cal Cities supports the measure.
• Why it matters. The Public Policy Institute of California estimates that one in ten households lack the resources to adequately meet their food needs.
• When is the hearing? July 1 in the Senate Human Services Committee at 3 p.m. or upon adjournment of the session.

Senior meal program expansion

• How? AB 2410 (Wallis) would expand existing senior nutrition programs to include to-go meals. Cal Cities supports the measure.
• Building on success. Some COVID-era programs allowed cities to expand the reach of their senior meal programs. This expansion would be a meaningful step forward in reducing food insecurity among some of the state's most vulnerable residents.
• When is the hearing? July 1 in the Senate Appropriations Committee at 10 a.m.

Cal Cities is engaging on over 20 other key bills through July 3, including SB 937 (Wiener), SB 1046 (Laird), AB 1814 (Ting), SB 689 (Blakespear), SB 1262 (Archuleta), AB 2346 (Lee), AB 2309 (Muratsuchi), AB 2766 (Low), AB 2311 (Bennett), AB 2320 (Irwin), AB 2807 (Villapudua), AB 3241 (Pacheco), SB 820 (Alvarado-Gil), AB 3068 (Haney), AB 2485 (Carrillo, Juan), AB 2243 (Wicks), AB 2922 (Garcia), AB 2643 (Wood), AB 491 (Wallis), AB 2223 (Aguiar-Curry), and AB 2371 (Carrillo, Juan).

Other bills to watch

Here are two more bills - and Cal Cities wins - city leaders need to know about.

Police canine bills advance

• Opposition removed.AB 2042 (Jackson) would require the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) to develop guidelines for K9s. Cal Cities removed its opposition to the bill following several changes.
• A better alternative. AB 3241 (Pacheco) would also require POST to develop standards for K9s that are clearer than the ones proposed by AB 2042 and in line with case law. Cal Cities supports the measure.
• When are the hearings? The Senate Public Safety Committee will hear both bills on July 2 at 8:30 a.m.

Cal Cities moves to neutral on housing fee bill

• What would the bill do?AB 1820 (Schiavo) would require cities to provide an estimated itemized list of fees and taxes during the preliminary application process within 30 days of a developer's request. Cal Cities recently removed its opposition to the bill after the author adopted several helpful, clarifying amendments.
• When is the hearing? July 2 in the Senate Housing Committee Skinner at 1:30 p.m.

View all tracked bill hearings

Public link

Please use the above public link if you want to share this noodl on another website.