Bill Talk: Everyone is in suspense
A weekly update from Cal Cities, sorting through the state bill buzz
By Cal Cities Staff
There are just three more weeks of session and one more week of Bill Talk left for the year. On Aug. 13, lawmakers in the powerful appropriations committees will slash their way through a kill-bill spree. The process allows the committees to cull bills with overly large tags and quietly pump the brakes on more controversial measures. Earlier this year, the committees held about a quarter of the bills that came before them.
Lawmakers have until Aug. 31 to get their bills to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk. Things will almost certainly heat up in the last two weeks of session. Keep an eye out for floor alerts from your regional public affairs managers in the coming weeks. Your advocacy could be the determining factor for several key measures.
- Brian Hendershot, Cal Cities Advocate managing editor
Pension reform rollback bill placed on Senate Appropriations suspense file judgment
AB 1383 (McKinnor), a costly measure that would expand pension benefits and roll back key provisions of the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act (PEPRA), remains under consideration in the Legislature. The bill recently advanced to the Senate Appropriations Committee, where lawmakers placed it on the committee’s suspense file due to its significant fiscal impact. Cal Cities opposes the measure due to the long-term costs it would impose on cities.
- Johnnie Piña, legislative advocate
Sponsored housing bill avoids fiscal hurdle, heads to Senate Floor
Cal Cities’ sponsored housing bill, AB 2296 (Papan), moved through the Senate Appropriations Committee and could get a final floor vote as early as this week. The measure allows cities to begin the housing element update process six months earlier than existing law. This would make it easier for local governments to work collaboratively with, and receive technical assistance from, the Department of Housing and Community Development to get their housing elements certified and approved on time.
- Brady Guertin, legislative advocate
Road funding bill heads to Governor for final approval
One of Cal Cities’ sponsored bills, SB 922 (Laird), passed off the Assembly Floor and received its final stamp of approval through Senate concurrence. The bill is now headed to the Governor’s desk for a final decision. The measure seeks to clarify that cities may recover the cost of street maintenance and repair caused by public service operations, such as waste hauling, through service-related fees and charges. City officials can support SB 922 by sending a request for signature letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom.
- Ben Triffo, legislative advocate
Three housing measures await suspense file verdict
Cal Cities is keeping a close eye on three housing measures on the Senate Appropriations’ suspense file. AB 2002 (Solache), which Cal Cities supports, would establish a fund to help local governments with various planning activities related to the Regional Housing Needs Allocation process.
AB 1621 (Wilson), opposed by Cal Cities, generally prohibits local governments from requiring more than two rounds of review for a housing project's building permit application. If an application remains noncompliant after two reviews, local agencies may be forced to deny the permit rather than working with an applicant to resolve any issues. This could increase litigation and appeals by applicants challenging permit denials, including when the denial is based on environmental or building code violations that local governments must enforce under state and local law.
Cal Cities also opposes AB 1751 (Quirk-Silva), which requires cities to automatically approve townhome development projects that are less than three stories tall in multifamily residential zones and vacant single-family lots. A townhome project could qualify even if the site is planned for higher density in a city’s certified housing element, forcing cities to find new housing sites to maintain compliance with state housing element law.
- Brady Guertin, legislative advocate
Cal Cities-supported bills would create a more proactive approach to homelessness
Two homelessness prevention bills supported by Cal Cities are on the Senate Appropriations Committee’s suspense file. AB 1899 (Caloza) creates the Office of Youth Homelessness Prevention to develop a comprehensive framework to address youth homelessness; AB 1924 (Gabriel) requires the California Interagency Council on Homelessness to develop and publicly issue a more general statewide homelessness prevention strategy.
Both measures require the creation of comprehensive homelessness prevention strategies, including guidance and technical assistance for local agencies. They also seek to create coordinated statewide strategies that shift the focus from responding to homelessness to preventing it in the first place.
- Caroline Grinder, legislative advocate
Well-intended bill would expose cities to new litigation
SB 747 (Wiener) is on the Assembly’s suspense file. This bill allows Californians to sue government officials or employees who violate their constitutional rights. The measure is in response to the high-profile cases of excessive force and other abuses by federal immigration agents. Cal Cities does not believe the bill will achieve its intended goal and instead will expose cities to increased litigation, liability, and administrative burdens. Cal Cities opposes the bill; a city sample letter is available online.
- Serena Scott, legislative affairs analyst
Co-sponsored public safety measures on Suspense File
The Senate Appropriations Committee placed AB 1941 (González, Mark), a measure co-sponsored by Cal Cities that strengthens penalties for individuals who collaborate to steal metal materials, on its suspense file. These thefts damage critical city infrastructure and pose significant public safety risks. Cities should submit a letter of support before Aug. 13 using Cal Cities’ sample city support letter.
Another Cal Cities bill, SB 758 (Umberg), is on the Assembly’s suspense file. The measure prevents smoke shops and other specified tobacco retailers from selling nitrous oxide. Recreational use of nitrous oxide can lead to serious adverse health events, including death. A city sample letter is available online; submit before Aug. 13.
AB 758 is part of a broader nitrous oxide legislative package that includes SB 936 (Blakespear) — also supported by Cal Cities. SB 936 would prohibit the sale and distribution of flavored nitrous oxide products and containers capable of holding more than eight grams of nitrous oxide. The bill is on the Assembly’s Appropriations suspense file.
- Serena Scott, legislative affairs analyst
Sponsored recovery housing bills face fiscal hurdle
The Cal Cities-sponsored SB 490 (Umberg) and SB 329 (Blakespear) are awaiting judgment on the Assembly Appropriations Committee’s suspense file. The measures respond to a state audit that found the state failed to thoroughly investigate complaints against residential alcohol and drug treatment facilities.
SB 329 requires DHCS to assign complaints against licensed facilities to an investigator within 10 days and to complete investigations within 120 days. The bill also requires DHCS to publish an annual report detailing the number of investigations conducted and how many exceed the 120-day timeline.
SB 490 applies similar timelines to complaints involving unlicensed sober living homes, while also allowing counties to partner with DHCS to conduct site visits and take a more active role in ensuring compliance. The bill also requires follow-up visits to confirm that violations have been addressed.
More information on Cal Cities’ advocacy on recovery housing can be found in a recently published Cal Cities Advocate article.
- Caroline Grinder, legislative advocate
Proposed license plate reader policy threatens investigations
The Assembly Appropriations Committee placed SB 1013 (Cervantes) on its suspense file. This bill limits automated license plate recognition data access, retention, sharing, and default vendor settings. Cal Cities is especially concerned with the 30-day retention limit and is opposed to SB 1013 unless it is amended to address the data retention timeline.
Many crimes are not reported within 30 days of occurrence; limiting data retention to this time frame could prevent law enforcement from accessing critical evidence needed to investigate and solve crimes. Cities should consider submitting an oppose unless amended letter before Aug. 13.
- Serena Scott, legislative affairs analyst
A quick reminder
Bill Talk is a weekly breakdown of the biggest bills, policy committee hearings, and legislative deadlines that city leaders need to know about. To get this list on Monday, contact your regional public affairs manager. To access old Bill Talks, visit the archive page. To see all tracked bills by issue area or priority, visit the Bill Search page.