In simultaneous hearings on August 13, the Senate and Assembly Appropriations Committees acted on approximately 700 bills on their respective suspense files. Measures with cost impacts over the committee-designated Suspense File threshold faced two possible outcomes:
- Passed off the Suspense File – often (but not always) with amendments to reduce the bill’s cost impacts – and moved to the floor for consideration by the full house from which they must pass by the end of August; or,
- Held in Committee – Bills held in committee are effectively dead for the 2025-26 legislative session.
Bills advancing have until August 31 to be passed by the full Legislature and go on to the Governor’s Desk. Below is a recap of the actions of the Appropriations Committees on notable measures.
Passed (moves to a floor vote)
AB 690 (Schultz) would require counties to adhere to recently published standards drafted by the Office of the State Public Defender, establish several expansive new requirements counties must incorporate into any contractual agreement with private firms, and establish a blanket prohibition on the utilization of flat fee or per-case compensation models when contracting out or administering indigent defense services. (OPPOSE)
AB 1198 (Haney) would require, commencing July 1, 2027, that if the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) determines, within a semiannual period, that there is a change in any prevailing rate of per diem wages in a locality, that determination applies to any public works contract that is awarded or for which notice to bidders is published after July 1, 2027. (OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED)
AB 1383 (McKinnor) would make several significant changes to public employees’ retirement benefits undermining PEPRA reform, which would ultimately lead to increased pension liability for state and local agencies. This measure is expected to increase the required contributions of employers and PEPRA members and increase the present value of future benefits by $4.8 billion across State, Schools, and Local Agency plans in just the CalPERS system only. (OPPOSE)
AB 1711 (Connolly) would allow money in the Fair and Exposition Fund to be used on emergency services improvement projects at fairgrounds. (SUPPORT)
AB 1883 (Bryan) would restrict workplace surveillance tools used for security and basic operations, intended to defend employee rights that existing remedies already protect. (OPPOSE)
AB 1961 (Ahrens) would authorize an employer to seek a workplace violence restraining order on behalf of all employees at the employer’s workplace. (SUPPORT)
AB 1964 (Bennett) would require a county recorder to maintain construction records related to home hardening and to share, upon request, construction records related to home hardening in a state or local responsibility area with the Office of the State Fire Marshal. (PENDING)
AB 2218 (Kalra) would impose broad new requirements for government-to-government tribal consultation on water issues. (OPPOSE)
AB 2310 (Carrillo) would allow for prosecution of those dumping on property where a permit for those activities was required but not obtained. Also would impose significant consequences on landowners and transporters who illegally dump more than 25 cubic yards of construction debris. (SUPPORT)
AB 2344 (Haney) would require costly new processes in animal welfare forfeiture cases, duplicative of existing law. (OPPOSE)
AB 2469 (Papan) would prevent cities and counties from approving a discretionary or ministerial permit for new or expanded data centers unless an applicant provides a water supply assessment that describes the project’s water use, and impacts on local water demand. (OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED)
AB 2494 (Rogers) would redefine “management” for purposes of state demonstration forests, in a way that would change the intent of the program and shift away from sustainable timber operations. (OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED)
AB 2656 (Petrie-Norris) would create a broad new mandate for public agencies to serve 45 days’ notice to employee organizations about the use of Generative AI tools. (OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED)
AB 2667 (Hadwick) would require the Department of Toxic Substances Control to evaluate opportunities to increase the safety and convenience related to the management of vapes confiscated by schools from students. Would also allow local household hazardous waste management collection facilities to safely disassemble vapes and separately manage the individual components. Would ban the sale of disguised vapes and video game vapes. (SPONSOR)
SB 222 (Wiener) would require local jurisdictions to offer remote building inspections for the installations of new heat pump water heater or HVAC systems. (OPPOSE)
SB 877 (Pérez) would require home insurers to provide all documents related to a fire insurance claim upon policy holder request (SUPPORT)
SB 894 (Allen) would establish the California Wildfire Resilience Loan Program to administer projects and activities for wildfire mitigation. (SUPPORT)
SB 936 (Blakespear) would ban the sale of all flavored nitrous oxide and unflavored nitrous oxide in cylinders larger than 8 grams, with limited exemption for legitimate business and medical purposes. (SPONSOR)
SB 947 (McNerney) would limit the use of automated decision systems to inform disciplinary and/or termination actions. Reintroduction of a bill vetoed by the Governor last year. (OPPOSE)
SB 951 (Reyes) would impose new notice requirement on job changes due to new technology adoption, with steep civil penalties for violations. Duplicative of existing meet and confer requirements for job changes. (OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED)
SB 1135 (Blakespear) would create the Wildlife Coexistence Program, which would fund a Wolf-Livestock Coexistence and Compensation Program. At least 50 percent of program funding would go to providing equipment and information on practices used to proactively and nonlethally deter wolf attacks on livestock. (PENDING)
Held in Committee
AB 906 (González) would have expanded existing obligations for local jurisdictions affirmatively further fair housing, requiring them to find new sites even after their housing element is certified if the sites inventory fails to meet Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing requirements. (OPPOSE)
AB 1564 (Ahrens) would have restricted public employer ability to conduct internal investigations by essentially mirroring attorney-client privilege protections for communication between an employee and their union rep. Reintroduction of a bill that has failed 6 times previously. (OPPOSE)
AB 1576 (Ortega) was a competing proposal on Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF) reform parallel to the Budget Trailer Bill Language advancing that public agencies are supporting. Unlike the Budget Bill language, this bill did not go far enough to make necessary changes to a program that has inadvertently been expanded far beyond its original intent. (OPPOSE)
AB 1710 (Carrillo) would have included materials requirements, post entitlement permit standards, and any rules, regulations, determinations, and other requirements adopted by public agencies in the Housing Accountability Act. (PENDING)
AB 1754 (Pacheco) would have imposed additional requirements for future General Obligation Bonds, including new metrics and reporting requirements. (OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED)
AB 1859 (Ortega) would have created a new mandate on local agencies to allow representatives of a joint labor-management committee (JLMC) to access active public works job sites to ensure compliance with existing prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements. (OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED)
AB 2026 (Aguiar-Curry) would have made changes to permitting processes for groundwater recharge projects, including changes related to diversion of “floodflows” for groundwater recharge without a permit and minor applications to divert water to underground storage within or upstream of the Delta. (PENDING)
AB 2254 (Addis) would have mandated upon the next update of a local coastal program (LCPs) to incorporate policies to protect the overwintering habitat sites of monarch butterflies. (OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED)
SB 28 (Umberg) would have made significant and concerning changes to the CARE Act, including but not limited to, the requirement for counties to share confidential health information, which could create exposure related to HIPAA violations, and the establishment of new vague and non-clinically-sound thresholds for an expedited CARE assessment. (OPPOSE)
SB 601 (Allen) would have changed NPDES permitting, applying an unclear nexus waters definition, and supersede local government’s ability to permit projects. Operates in response to the Sackett v. EPA (2023) decision. (OPPOSE)
SB 899 (Grove) would have required the Wildfire and Forest Resilience Task Force to study the health costs and impacts of wildfire smoke. (SPONSOR)
SB 1016 (Blakespear) would have allowed a CARE court petitioner to initiate a Lanterman–Petris–Short (LPS) Act proceeding if the subject is unwilling or unable to participate in the CARE court process, duplicating a power that county behavioral health workers already have. (OPPOSE)
SB 1305 (Richardson) would have required the Department of Fish and Wildlife to conduct a feasibility study on the reintroduction of Grizzly Bears to California and develop a plan to implement the reintroduction. (OPPOSE)
SB 1326 (Wahab) would have expanded the universe of tribal cultural resources for purposes of tribal consultation under CEQA and requirements for mitigation of impacts on those resources. (OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED)
SB 1382 (Alvarado-Gil) would have required Caltrans officials to notify local officials about their proposed schedule for reopening mountain pass state highways by April 1 of each year. (SUPPORT)
For more information, contact the RCRC Government Affairs team.