Bill Talk: Which bills important to cities survived the suspense file slash?

May 20, 2026

By Cal Cities Staff

May 14 wasn’t just the Governor’s May Revision. It also marked the inauspicious death of nearly 260 bills in both chambers. Last Thursday, the powerful appropriations committees quickly culled dozens and dozens of bills, citing their impact on the state budget, as part of the Legislature’s biannual suspense file hearings. It was a mixed bag for cities, with the committees holding several of Cal Cities’ sponsored measures, but also holding a few less-than-ideal bills for cities.

It is a controversial process that sometimes results in some rather contradictory results. For example, the committees this year held a bill that would have given cities increased access to state funding and passed a bill that targets those same cities with additional reporting requirements in their housing elements.

But the process cuts both ways. Lawmakers also held a measure that would have spiked pension costs for cities and two bills that would have exposed cities to (even more) litigation under the state’s environmental review law.

Gov. Gavin Newsom projected a rosy budget picture in his May Revision. But the state’s revenue increases are notoriously fickle. And the Legislative Analyst's Office is warning that the revised budget leaves the state "ill-prepared for even a slip-up in revenues."

-Brian Hendershot, Cal Cities Advocate managing editor

Community Services

Assembly Appropriations held Cal Cities’ AB 1708 (Solache), even though the bill sailed through two policy committees with zero no votes and was supported by over 80 cities. The Cal Cities-sponsored bill sought to increase access to existing state homelessness funding for cities with populations under 300,000. While the measure did not require the state to allocate any new funding, the estimated cost to the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to help cities access these funds was in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

However, projected HCD costs in the hundreds of thousands did not stop SB 866 (Blakespear) from moving forward to the Senate floor. Cal Cities opposes SB 866 because it would require all but 14 cities to add extensive homelessness reporting requirements to their housing elements, targeting cities that do not receive state homelessness funding.

In essence: The committees held a bill that would have given cities increased access to state funding and passed a bill that targets those same cities with additional reporting requirements in their housing elements. Cal Cities is urging cities to submit a letter and call their senators to urge them to vote no on SB 866.

Cal Cities will continue to fight for increased funding for small and mid-sized cities. Other priority bills include:

  • AB 1924 (Gabriel) Statewide homelessness prevention strategy
    Cal Cities Position: Support (Status: Passed)
  • AB 2072 (Solache) CalFresh and WIC Contingency Fund

    Cal Cities Position: Support (Status: Held)  

  • AB 2574 (Alanis) Potentially dangerous and vicious dogs

    Cal Cities Position: Concerns (Status: Held)

  • SB 1314 (Menjivar) Smoke shops: locations, hours of operation, and nitrous oxide.
    Cal Cities Position: Support (Status: Passed)

- Caroline Grinder, legislative advocate

Housing, Community, and Economic Development

Two important housing measures survived the suspense gauntlet this week, including a Cal Cities-sponsored bill. AB 2296 (Papan), which allows cities to begin the housing element update process six months early and provides greater certainty in the review process, passed with amendments. The changes should reduce the amount of analysis HCD would need to include in its finding letters to cities. Although the amendments may limit the amount of information cities receive, the measure still provides greater clarity than what currently exists. The measure passed 11-0 and is headed to the Assembly floor.

SB 417 (Cabaldon), which creates a $10 billion housing bond on the November ballot, passed out of the committee by a vote of 12-3. The bond, if it makes it to the ballot and passes, would help support the development of much-needed affordable housing across California.

Other priority bills include:

  • AB 1738 (Carrillo) State Housing Law: remote inspections
    Cal Cities Position: Oppose (Status: Passed)
  • AB 1751 (Quirk-Silva) Missing Middle Townhome Ownership Act
    Cal Cities Position: Oppose Unless Amended (Status: Passed with Amendments)
  • AB 2002 (Solache) Local government assistance: Regional Early Action Planning Fund
    Cal Cities Position: Support (Status: Passed)
  • AB 1567 (Ta) General plan: annual report: congregate and residential care for the elderly
    Cal Cities Position: Support (Status: Passed)

- Brady Guertin, legislative advocate

Revenue and Taxation

Cities notched a clear win on state mandate reimbursements. AB 2640 (Hadwick), supported by Cal Cities, unanimously sailed through Assembly Appropriations and advanced to the Assembly floor. The bill would prevent the state from clawing back reimbursement funds from a city while still owing that same city money for other state-mandated costs. This is a common-sense fix that protects local budgets and gives cities more flexibility over how state reimbursement disputes are resolved.

Cal Cities also secured key protections on a tax bill before it was held in Assembly Appropriations. AB 2389 (Irwin) would have extended a solar energy system property tax exemption. Cal Cities was able to score important changes that would have helped ensure that when solar projects on public property receive a tax benefit, that benefit goes back to the public agency through lower or more affordable lease costs. This allowed Cal Cities to adopt a neutral position on the bill.

- Leila Romero, legislative affairs analyst, and Ben Triffo, legislative advocate

Environmental Quality

Environmental legislation was on the chopping block in the appropriations committees. Assembly Appropriations held two Cal Cities-sponsored bills for the year. The state fire marshal claimed that AB 2517 (Calderon), which sought to improve the fire hazard severity zone designation process, would cost the state $6 million annually. The bill would have required the state fire marshal to provide timely, updated maps that cities and local fire protection agencies could use to designate high fire areas and to implement defensible space and home hardening requirements.

AB 1866 (Rogers) would have required the state to offer greater consideration for cities that do not qualify for federal reimbursement when allocating state disaster aid. The Office of Emergency Services suggested the bill would require more staff time to review reimbursements and would result in cost pressures on the state disaster assistance funding program of an unknown, but likely significant amount.

Other bills caught up in the bill slashing include AB 2569 (Hart), which would have changed the standard of review under CEQA, and AB 2170 (Boerner), which would have required written and live translation for CEQA documents and hearings. The committee held both bills, ensuring cities do not face new legal exposure under the state’s already litigious environmental law.  

As the Legislature and Governor turn their disaster discussions to focus on wildfire recovery, insurance, and liability for the second half of the session, Cal Cities will fight for an improved fire hazard severity designation process while protecting cities from shouldering the blame when utilities cause catastrophic wildfires.   

Other priority bills include:

  • AB 2373 (Dixon): Local coastal programs: neighborhood scale adaptation approach

    Cal Cities Position: Sponsor/Support (Status: Held)

  • SB 1313 (McNerney): PFAS: Drinking Water: State Revolving Fund Program
     Cal Cities Position: Sponsor/Support (Status: Held)
  • AB 2739 (Soria): Water: Affordability and system stabilization
    Cal Cities Position: Support (Status: Passed)
  • SB 1218 (Arreguín) Refusal of registration: illegal dumping violation penalties
    Cal Cities Position: Support (Status: Passed)
  • AB 2462 (Pellerin): Unsafe products: disposal: penalties
    Cal Cities Position: Support (Status: Held)
  • SB 1081 (Laird): Waste discharge requirements: minimum penalties: exceptions
    Cal Cities Position: Support (Status: Held)
  • AB 1577 (Bauer-Kahan): Data centers: reporting
    Cal Cities Position: Support (Status: Passed)

- Melissa Sparks-Kranz, legislative advocate

Public Safety

Most of Cal Cities’ key public safety bills passed out of both appropriations committees and are awaiting floor votes, including Cal Cities’ AB 1941 (Gonzlez, Mark). The bill, which increases penalties for organized metal theft, passed with no amendments.

Companion bills to Cal Cities’ other sponsored public safety bill, SB 758 (Umberg), also passed. SB 758 addresses the rise in illicit nitrous oxide use by closing a loophole in state law. AB 2076 (Lowenthal) and SB 936 (Blakespear), both supported by Cal Cities, increase penalties for companies that sell nitrous oxide for recreational use.

SB 1013 (Cervantes), which prohibits local governments from holding automatic license plate reader data beyond 30 days, passed with amendments. The changes clarify that cities can use the data for missing persons and can hold data for any active case. Cal Cities still has an oppose unless amended position on the bill and is urging the author to take amendments to address the limited data retention provisions and the ability to use automatic license plate readers without significant restrictions.

Almost every DUI measure passed appropriations except AB 1605 (Ransom), which would have prohibited people with multiple DUIs from buying alcohol. However, a Senate version of the proposal, SB 1156 (Caballero), passed and is now on the Senate floor. Assembly Appropriations also held AB 1874 (Wilson), a bill focused on closing a gap in the state’s laws that undermines driver license suspension. Cal Cities supported the bill.

Other priority bills include:

  • AB 1934 (Bennett) State Fire Marshall: home hardening certification program
     Cal Cities Position: Support (Status: Passed)
  • AB 1667 (Boerner) Fentanyl
     Cal Cities Position: Support (Status: Passed as Amended)
  • AB 2405 (Gipson) Emergency Medical Services

    Cal Cities Position: Oppose (Status: Passed as Amended)

  • SB 877 (Perez) Residential Property Insurance: loss estimate transparency

    Cal Cities Position: Support (Status: Passed)

  • SB 926 (Strickland) Public Safety: Funding of Proposition 36 Act

    Cal Cities Position: Support (Status: Held)

  • SB 1266 (Stern) Crimes: theft

    Cal Cities Position: Support (Status: Passed as Amended)

  • SB 1301 (Allen) Residential property insurance: nonrenewals
     Cal Cities Position: Support (Status: Passed as Amended)

- Jolena Voorhis, legislative advocate

Transportation, Communications, and Public Works

It was a mixed bag for Cal Cities’ priority e-bike measures. AB 2346 (Wilson) and SB 1167 (Blakespear) both advanced to their respective floors for a full vote. AB 2346 establishes basic equipment standards for Class 1 and 2 e-bikes, including speedometers and integrated lights, and requires manufacturers to provide consumers with a summary of California e-bike laws. SB 1167 reclassifies higher speed devices as mopeds and establishes clearer standards for how e-bikes are marketed and sold. Together, the bills seek to address growing safety and enforcement concerns caused by high-powered devices marketed as e-bikes despite exceeding California’s legal definitions. Outcomes for other e-bike bills include:

Despite unanimous support from two separate policy committees, Senate Appropriations held the Cal Cities-sponsored SB 1001 (Archuleta). This measure would have required Cal OES to issue identification badges for public works professionals, allowing them to enter closed-off areas when responding to emergencies to restore critical infrastructure.

Two measures opposed by Cal Cities due to their increase in legal and operational risks for cities also passed off suspense. AB 1859 (Ortega) would expose cities to litigation and penalties over contractor-controlled worksites by granting labor representatives expanded site access and legal standing. SB 1283 (Ashby) creates a pathway for automatic approval of electric vehicle charging projects if cities miss permitting timelines, potentially bypassing critical safety and site-specific review for major infrastructure installations.

Cal Cities did secure the removal of language in SB 1283 that would have allowed applicants to legally compel local governments to approve such permits. However, Cal Cities still has serious concerns about the bill’s impact.

- Damon Conklin, legislative advocate

Governance, Transparency, and Labor Relations

Cal Cities secured a key win in Senate Appropriations, where lawmakers held SB 1319 (Durazo). The bill would have forced public pension systems to disclose sensitive investment information, limiting access to high‑performing alternative investments and ultimately raising pension costs for local agencies and their employees. Keeping the bill on hold protects cities from higher long‑term financial obligations.

AB 1564 (Ahrens), however, passed off suspense, despite posing significant challenges for local governments. The bill restricts employers’ ability to conduct internal investigations, making it harder for cities to address misconduct, protect employees, and maintain safe workplaces. By increasing liability exposure and limiting essential investigative tools, the measure would create operational and financial risks for cities already working to ensure accountability and public trust.

In contrast, AB 1961 (Ahrens), which passed off suspense, could create a meaningful benefit for cities. The bill strengthens tools to prevent and respond to workplace violence without imposing new mandates or costly programs. As cities continue to face rising hostility and threats directed at public employees, AB 1961 would provide practical support to help local agencies keep their workers safe.

Other priority bills include:

  • AB 1883 (Bryan) Workplace surveillance tools

    Cal Cities Position: Oppose (Status: Passed)

  • AB 2530 (Caloza) Employment: Cal/WARN Act: plant closings and mass layoffs

    Cal Cities Position: Oppose (Status: Held)

  • AB 2656 (Petrie-Norris) Public employees: notice: artificial intelligence performing service within scope of work

    Cal Cities Position: Oppose (Status: Passed)

  • AB 1898 (Schultz) Workplace artificial intelligence tools

    Cal Cities Position: Oppose (Status: Held)

  • AB 2027 (Ward) Worker data: prohibitions: artificial intelligence

    Cal Cities Position: Oppose (Status: Held)

  • SB 947 (McNerney) Employment: automated decision systems.

    Cal Cities Position: Oppose (Status: Passed with Amendments)

  • SB 951 (Reyes) Employment: technological displacement: notice.  
    Cal Cities Position: Oppose Unless Amended (Status: Passed with Amendments)

- Johnnie Piña, legislative advocate

Next steps

Lawmakers have until May 29 to get their bills to their colleagues in the other house. After that, legislators repeat the policy committee process, with July 2 marking the last day for committees to meet.

Bills that make it to the floor of the second house usually make it to the Governor’s desk. That means this summer is the best time to stop bad bills in their tracks and ensure helpful bills pass. To learn how you can make your voice heard, contact your regional public affairs manager.