Cal Cities puts local control at the forefront with 12 sponsored bills
By Cal Cities Staff
Cal Cities is proactively working with lawmakers on a series of bills that advance cities' interests. The sponsored measures focus on wildfire preparedness, addiction treatment, emergency medical services, autonomous vehicle services, the Brown Act, and unfunded state mandates.
The 12 bills are just a preview of what's to come. Lawmakers introduced nearly 2,100 bills by Friday's bill introduction deadline. While it's not quite as many as last year's record-breaking count, it's more than enough to keep the Cal Cities advocacy team busy.
To learn about the biggest bills for cities, sign up for next month's new legislation briefing.
Wildfire preparedness and organic waste programs among top environmental priorities for Cal Cities
Cal Cities is sponsoring AB 2330 (Holden), a bill that would make it easier for cities to remove vegetation in fire-risk areas next to urban communities by expediting environmental permits. If the California Department of Fish and Wildlife does not approve the permits within the proposed timeline, then the State Fire Marshal could authorize local vegetation removal efforts to protect life and property. The bill would also require two state agencies to overlay existing critical habitat maps with fire hazard severity zone maps to help local and state officials identify and streamline necessary permits.
Crucially, AB 2330 does not take a shot clock or automatic permit approval approach. Instead, it would maintain the state’s permitting authorities, with a new step in the review process for these routine projects to ensure a balanced approval that prioritizes environmental review and community wildfire preparedness.
Cal Cities is also sponsoring a bill that would strengthen statewide efforts and provide greater accountability to remove organic waste and reduce methane emissions: SB 972 (Min). The bill would support local jurisdictions by further defining the state’s existing assistance efforts. The measure would also require CalRecycle to report back to the Legislature on the progress of diverting organic waste from landfills and how to better align SB 1383 (Lara, 2016) with the state’s other climate goals — including zero-emission vehicles and water conservation goals — where organic waste could be re-used.
The independent Little Hoover Commission released a critical analysis of California’s organic waste laws last June. SB 972 seeks to address some of the concerns outlined in the report and is one of over a dozen related bills introduced this year.
- Melissa Sparks-Kranz, legislative affairs lobbyist, and Zack Cefalu, legislative affairs and policy analyst
Transparency and oversight top of mind in renewed effort to strengthen recovery housing
Cal Cities is sponsoring four addiction treatment bills in response to a potential investment in behavioral health care. Broadly speaking, the measures aim to reduce the overconcentration of drug and alcohol recovery facilities in residential areas and provide reasonable oversight that ensures the safety and success of those receiving services.
AB 2081 (Davies) would require licensed treatment facilities to publicly disclose any violations by the facility or program on their website. AB 2574 (Valencia) would codify existing case law from 2019, which determined that unlicensed recovery homes operating as part of a licensed treatment facility located elsewhere may be considered unlawful business use within a residential zone.
The other two proposals will be amended into existing measures by March 11. A bill by Sen. Tom Umberg would allow cities to investigate and enforce existing licensing laws after getting approval from the state. Asm. Diane Dixon is working on a measure that would require the state to notify cities when they approve a license within their jurisdiction and implement distance requirements from other licensed facilities.
Drug and alcohol recovery facilities are loosely regulated in California. Cities and lawmakers alike have voiced concerns about the overconcentration of recovery homes in certain areas, as well as the misuse of residential homes by profit-driven treatment centers. Cal Cities’ sponsored bills would help address those concerns while protecting residents and helping ensure high-quality treatment.
- Caroline Grinder, legislative affairs lobbyist, and Betsy Montiel, legislative affairs and policy analyst
Cal Cities-sponsored bill would clarify prehospital emergency medical authority
Cal Cities is taking another run at AB 1168 (Bennett). Introduced last year, the bill would clarify that a city or fire district has authority over emergency ambulance services even if it enters into an agreement with a county for the joint exercise of powers for emergency ambulance services.
In 1980, the state implemented a law regulating emergency medical care and created the Emergency Medical Services Authority as the lead agency for emergency ambulance services. This system balances the need for consistent coordination at a statewide level with the need for more granular coordination at the local level. The law recognized that need with a section explicitly allowing cities to administer emergency ambulance services within the city unless they consent to give up their authority over emergency ambulance services — also known as 201 rights.
Since then, the courts have ruled that cities lose their rights when joining a joint powers authority (JPA), an entity composed of multiple public agencies. In City of Oxnard v County of Ventura, a court found that Oxnard did not have 201 rights because it had already given up its right to a JPA that administers emergency ambulance services in the area.
AB 1168 would clarify the law’s original intent regarding JPAs and help return 201 rights to Oxnard. This bill is currently pending on the Senate Inactive File as stakeholders discuss the provisions with the Newsom Administration.
- Jolena Voorhis, legislative affairs lobbyist
Transportation bills would restore local control and protect local revenues
Cal Cities is joining forces with the California Teamsters Public Affairs Council to co-sponsor SB 915 (Cortese). The bill would allow local officials to determine how and when autonomous vehicle services should be deployed in their communities, not the state.
The state’s haphazard approval of driverless vehicles sparked a backlash in San Francisco and elsewhere after a series of traffic snarls and accidents. In one incident, a pedestrian was run over and dragged by a Cruise vehicle. The San Francisco Fire Department indicated that autonomous vehicles interfered with emergency responders over 70 separate times in 2023.
SB 915 would simply allow cities to pass the same rules they already enforce for taxicabs. It would also allow local law enforcement and first responders to intervene when a driverless vehicle interrupts an emergency response.
Additionally, Cal Cities is teaming up with Asm. Kate Sanchez and other local government associations on a bill that would provide flexibility for cities struggling to meet the state’s unfunded Advanced Clean Fleet mandate. The measure is part of a larger legislative and regulatory relief effort by Cal Cities, the California State Association of Counties, and the California Special Districts Association.
The Advanced Clean Fleet rule aims to speed up California’s transition to a net-zero economy. However, it has forced many cities to buy medium- and heavy-duty vehicles (such as street sweepers) regardless of their costs, availability, or supporting infrastructure. Due to the lack of availability, unscrupulous manufacturers and retailers can charge whatever they like and manipulate the price of these vehicles.
Some are selling vehicles that are 400 to 600% higher than their internal combustible counterparts and have a significantly reduced driving range. A municipality may need to buy two or even three zero-emission vehicles to cover the range of one gas-powered vehicle. The Sanchez proposal would recognize that cities must be prudent stewards of taxpayer dollars and would provide temporary delays if the price of these vehicles is higher than usual.
- Damon Conklin, legislative affairs lobbyist
Brown Act modernization, ethics training, and Cities Week
Cal Cities and other local government associations are co-sponsoring AB 817 (Pacheco), which would make it easier for people to serve on local advisory bodies, boards, and commissions. Asm. Blanca Pacheco introduced AB 817 last year, but it did not advance to the Senate. The narrowly tailored measure would allow members of local non-decisionmaking legislative bodies to participate in online public meetings without posting their location and without allowing the public into a private location — just like members of state advisory bodies.
Many local advisory bodies, boards, and commissions face ongoing recruitment and retention challenges. AB 817 would build on pandemic-era rules that helped boost accessibility. The bill includes a 2026 sunset date and requires an in-person location for public comment. It does not include an in-person quorum requirement for members, as this would place a disproportionate burden on the people the bill is trying to help.
Another measure, AB 2631 (Fong), would help ensure that a state-mandated ethics course remains available online for local officials. Many local officials rely on this resource to meet their training requirements. However, the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) may no longer be able to provide the program due to budget restraints. The bill — co-sponsored by Cal Cities, the FPPC, and others — would statutorily require the FPPC to continue providing this resource.
Cal Cities is also working with Asm. Pacheo on ACR 137 (Pacheco). The resolution would proclaim April 14-20 as Cities Week, and encourage all Californians to get involved in their communities and engage with their local government. Cal Cities is sponsoring the resolution, which will coincide with this year’s City Leaders Summit.
Next steps for city leaders
Lawmakers must wait 30 days before they can bring their bills to policy committees, after which they have until April 6 to be heard in their house of origin. In the meantime, sign up for Cal Cities’ new bills briefing to learn about the biggest bills impacting city leaders this legislative session.