|
|
|
Support
|
|
|
|
AB 280
|
(Aguiar-Curry D) Health care coverage:
provider directories.
|
|
|
Current Text: Amended: 7/15/2025 html pdf
|
|
|
Introduced: 1/21/2025
|
|
|
Last Amend: 7/15/2025
|
|
|
Status: 9/11/2025-Failed Deadline pursuant to Rule
61(a)(14). (Last location was INACTIVE FILE on 9/8/2025)(May be acted upon
Jan 2026)
|
|
|
Location: 9/11/2025-S. 2 YEAR
|
|
|
Summary: Existing law, the Knox-Keene
Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and
regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health
Care, and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law provides
for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance.
Existing law requires a health care service plan and a health insurer that
contracts with providers for alternative rates of payment to publish and
maintain a provider directory or directories with information on contracting
providers that deliver health care services enrollees or insureds, and
requires a health care service plan and health insurer to regularly update
its printed and online provider directory or directories, as specified. Existing
law authorizes the departments to require a plan or insurer to provide
coverage for all covered health care services provided to an enrollee or
insured who reasonably relied on materially inaccurate, incomplete, or
misleading information contained in a plan’s or insurer’s provider directory
or directories. This bill would require a plan or insurer to annually verify
and delete inaccurate listings from its provider directories, and would
require a provider directory to be 60% accurate on July 1, 2026, with
increasing required percentage accuracy benchmarks to be met each year until
the directories are 95% accurate on or before July 1, 2029. The bill would
subject a plan or insurer to administrative penalties for failure to meet the
prescribed benchmarks. The bill would require a plan or insurer to provide
coverage for all covered health care services provided to an enrollee or
insured who reasonably relied on inaccurate, incomplete, or misleading
information contained in a health plan or policy’s provider directory or
directories and to reimburse the provider the out-of-network amount for those
services. The bill would prohibit a provider from collecting an additional
amount from an enrollee or insured other than the applicable in-network cost
sharing, which would count toward the in-network deductible and out-of-pocket
maximum. The bill would require a plan or insurer to provide information
about in-network providers to enrollees and insureds upon request, including
whether the provider is accepting new patients at the time, and would limit
the cost-sharing amounts an enrollee or insured is required to pay for
services from those providers under specified circumstances. The bill would
require the health care service plan or the insurer, as applicable, to ensure
the accuracy of a request to add back a provider who was previously removed
from a directory and approve the request within 10 business days of receipt,
if accurate. The bill would authorize a health care service plan or insurer
to include a specified statement in the provider listing before removing the
provider from the directory if the provider does not respond within 5
calendar days of the plan or insurer’s annual notification. Because a
violation of the bill’s requirements by a health care service plan would be a
crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill
contains other related provisions and other existing laws.
|
|
|
|
|
Memo:
|
|
|
Support letter sent to Author -- 4/23/25
Support letter sent to Asm. APPR -- 4/29/25
Support letter sent to Sen. Health -- 06/27/25
Support letter sent to Sen. APPR -- 08/13/25
|
|
|
|
AB 371
|
(Haney D) Dental coverage.
|
|
|
Current Text: Amended: 4/24/2025 html pdf
|
|
|
Introduced: 2/3/2025
|
|
|
Last Amend: 4/24/2025
|
|
|
Status: 5/23/2025-Failed Deadline pursuant to Rule
61(a)(5). (Last location was APPR. SUSPENSE FILE on 5/14/2025)(May be acted
upon Jan 2026)
|
|
|
Location: 5/23/2025-A. 2 YEAR
|
|
|
Summary: Department of Managed Health
Care and makes a willful violation of the act’s requirements a crime.
Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department
of Insurance. Existing law prohibits a contract between a plan or insurer and
a dentist from requiring a dentist to accept an amount set by the plan or
insurer as payment for dental care services provided to an enrollee or
insured that are not covered services under the enrollee’s contract or the
insured’s policy. Existing law requires a plan or insurer to make specified
disclosures to an enrollee or insured regarding noncovered dental services.
Existing law requires a health care service plan or health insurer to comply
with specified timely access requirements. For a specified plan or insurer
offering coverage for dental services, existing law requires urgent dental
appointments to be offered within 72 hours of a request, nonurgent dental
appointments to be offered within 36 business days of a request, and
preventive dental care appointments to be offered within 40 business days of
a request, as specified. Existing law requires a contract between a health
care service plan and health care provider to ensure compliance with network
adequacy standards and to require reporting by providers to plans to ensure
compliance. Under existing law, a health care service plan is required to
annually report to the Department of Managed Health Care on this compliance.
Existing law authorizes the Department of Insurance to issue guidance to insurers
regarding annual timely access and network reporting methodologies. If a
health care service plan or health insurer pays a contracting dental provider
directly for covered services, this bill would require the plan or insurer to
pay a noncontracting dental provider directly for covered services if the
noncontracting provider submits to the plan or insurer a written assignment
of benefits form signed by the enrollee or insured. The bill would require
the plan or insurer to provide a predetermination or prior authorization to
the dental provider and to reimburse the provider for not less than that
amount, except as specified. The bill would require the plan or insurer to
notify the enrollee or insured that the provider was paid and that the
out-of-network cost may count towards their annual or lifetime maximum. The
bill would require a noncontracting dental provider to make specified
disclosures to an enrollee or insured before accepting an assignment of
benefits. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing
laws.
|
|
|
|
|
Memo:
|
|
|
Support letter sent to Author -- 4/28/25
Support letter sent to Asm. APPR -- 5/8/25
|
|
|
|
ACA 2
|
(Jackson D) Legislature: retirement.
|
|
|
Current Text: Introduced: 12/2/2024 html pdf
|
|
|
Introduced: 12/2/2024
|
|
|
Status: 12/3/2024-From printer. May be heard in
committee January 2.
|
|
|
Location: 12/2/2024-A. PRINT
|
|
|
Summary: The California Constitution
prohibits Members of the Legislature from accruing any pension or retirement
benefit other than participation in the federal Social Security program as a
result of legislative service. This measure, the Legislative Diversification
Act, would repeal that prohibition and instead require the Legislature to
establish a retirement system for Members elected to or serving in the
Legislature on or after November 1, 2010. The measure would require a Member
to serve at least 10 years in the Legislature to be eligible to receive
benefits under the retirement system. The measure would authorize a Member
who serves fewer than 10 years to transfer the service credit earned as a
result of service in the Legislature to any other public employees’ pension
or retirement system in which the Member participates.
|
|
|
|
Watch
|
|
|
|
AB 105
|
(Gabriel D) Budget Acts of 2021, 2023, 2024,
and 2025.
|
|
|
Current Text: Amended: 9/8/2025 html pdf
|
|
|
Introduced: 1/8/2025
|
|
|
Last Amend: 9/8/2025
|
|
|
Status: 9/13/2025-Ordered to inactive file at the
request of Senator Grayson.
|
|
|
Location: 9/13/2025-S. INACTIVE FILE
|
|
|
Summary: The Budget Acts of 2021, 2023,
2024, and 2025 made appropriations for the support of state government for
the 2021–22, 2023–24, 2024–25, and 2025–26 fiscal years, respectively. This
bill would amend those budget acts by amending, adding, and repealing items
of appropriation and making other changes. This bill would declare that it is
to take effect immediately as a Budget Bill.
|
|
|
|
|
|
AB 156
|
(Committee on Budget) Labor.
|
|
|
Current Text: Amended: 9/8/2025 html pdf
|
|
|
Introduced: 1/8/2025
|
|
|
Last Amend: 9/8/2025
|
|
|
Status: 9/13/2025-Ordered to inactive file at the
request of Senator Grayson.
|
|
|
Location: 9/13/2025-S. INACTIVE FILE
|
|
|
Summary: Existing law, the Public
Employees’ Retirement Law (PERL) creates the Public Employees’ Retirement
System (PERS) for the purpose of providing pensions and benefits to state
employees and their beneficiaries and prescribes the rights and duties of
employers participating in the system. Under PERL, benefits are funded by
investment income and employer and employee contributions, which are
deposited into the Public Employees’ Retirement Fund, a continuously
appropriated trust fund administered by the system’s board of administration.
PERL prescribes methods for the calculation and payment of the state employer
contribution for its employees who are PERS members. PERL provides for an
annual adjustment of the state’s contribution in the budget and quarterly
appropriations to the Public Employees’ Retirement Fund from the General Fund
and other funds that are responsible for payment of the employer
contribution. Existing law makes additional General Fund appropriations to
the Public Employees’ Retirement Fund for the 2020–21, 2021–22, 2022–23,
2023–24, and 2024–25 fiscal years. Supplemental payments connected with
appropriations for those fiscal years are to be apportioned to the state
employee member categories generally, as directed by the Department of
Finance, and to specified state employee member categories, including to the
state miscellaneous member category, the industrial member category, the
state safety member category, and the state peace officer/firefighter member
category. The California Constitution establishes the Budget Stabilization
Account in the General Fund and requires the Controller, in each fiscal year,
to transfer from the General Fund to the Budget Stabilization Account amounts
that include a sum equal to 1.5% of the estimated amount of General Fund
revenues for that fiscal year. These provisions further require, until the
2029–30 fiscal year, that the Legislature appropriate a percentage of these
moneys, the amount of which is generated pursuant to specified calculations,
for certain obligations and purposes, including addressing unfunded
liabilities for state-level pension plans. This bill would appropriate
$372,000,000 from the General Fund for the purposes identified in the
constitutional provisions described above, to supplement the state’s
appropriation to the Public Employees’ Retirement Fund. The bill would
specify that this appropriation represents a portion of the amount identified
in a specific provision of the Budget Act of 2025. The bill would require the
Department of Finance to provide the Controller with a schedule establishing
the timing of specific transfers. The bill would require the supplemental
payment to the Public Employees’ Retirement Fund to be apportioned to
specified state employee member categories, not to exceed $174,523,000 to the
state miscellaneous member category, $10,296,000 to the state industrial
member category, $20,479,000 to the state safety member category, and
$166,702,000 to the state peace officer/firefighter member category. The bill
would require the appropriation described above to be applied to the unfunded
state liabilities for the state employee member categories that are in excess
of the base amounts for the 2025–26 fiscal year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
AB 161
|
(Committee on Budget) State employment: state bargaining
units.
|
|
|
Current Text: Amended: 9/8/2025 html pdf
|
|
|
Introduced: 1/8/2025
|
|
|
Last Amend: 9/8/2025
|
|
|
Status: 9/13/2025-Ordered to inactive file at the
request of Senator Grayson.
|
|
|
Location: 9/13/2025-S. INACTIVE FILE
|
|
|
Summary: Existing law provides that a
provision of a memorandum of understanding reached between the state employer
and a recognized employee organization representing state civil service
employees that requires the expenditure of funds does not become effective unless
approved by the Legislature in the annual Budget Act. Existing law requires
the Department of Human Resources to provide a memorandum of understanding to
the Legislative Analyst, who then has 10 calendar days from the date the
tentative agreement is received to issue a fiscal analysis to the
Legislature. Existing law prohibits the memorandum of understanding from
being subject to legislative determination until either the Legislative
Analyst has presented a fiscal analysis of the memorandum of understanding or
until 10 calendar days have elapsed since the memorandum was received by the
Legislative Analyst. This bill, notwithstanding the above-described statutory
provisions, would approve provisions of the agreements entered into by the
state employer and specified state bargaining units. The bill would provide
that the provisions of the agreements that require the expenditure of funds
will not take effect unless funds for these provisions are specifically
appropriated by the Legislature. The bill would authorize the state employer
or the bargaining units to reopen negotiations if funds for these provisions
are not specifically appropriated by the Legislature. The bill would require
the provisions of the agreement that require the expenditure of funds to become
effective even if the provisions are approved by the Legislature in
legislation other than the annual Budget Act. By approving provisions of the
agreements that require the expenditure of funds, this bill would make an
appropriation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
AB 340
|
(Ahrens D) Employer-employee relations:
confidential communications.
|
|
|
Current Text: Amended: 3/5/2025 html pdf
|
|
|
Introduced: 1/28/2025
|
|
|
Last Amend: 3/5/2025
|
|
|
Status: 8/29/2025-Failed Deadline pursuant to Rule
61(a)(11). (Last location was APPR. SUSPENSE FILE on 8/18/2025)(May be acted
upon Jan 2026)
|
|
|
Location: 8/29/2025-S. 2 YEAR
|
|
|
Summary: Existing law that governs the
labor relations of public employees and employers, including, among others,
the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, the Ralph C. Dills Act, provisions relating to
public schools, and provisions relating to higher education, prohibits employers
from taking certain actions relating to employee organization, including
imposing or threatening to impose reprisals on employees, discriminating or
threatening to discriminate against employees, or otherwise interfering with,
restraining, or coercing employees because of their exercise of their
guaranteed rights. Those provisions of existing law further prohibit denying
to employee organizations the rights guaranteed to them by existing law. This
bill would prohibit a public employer from questioning a public employee, a
representative of a recognized employee organization, or an exclusive
representative regarding communications made in confidence between an
employee and an employee representative in connection with representation
relating to any matter within the scope of the recognized employee
organization’s representation. The bill would also prohibit a public employer
from compelling a public employee, a representative of a recognized employee
organization, or an exclusive representative to disclose those confidential
communications to a third party. The bill would not apply to a criminal
investigation or when a public safety officer is under investigation and
certain circumstances exist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
AB 465
|
(Zbur D) Local public employees: memoranda of
understanding.
|
|
|
Current Text: Amended: 3/13/2025 html pdf
|
|
|
Introduced: 2/6/2025
|
|
|
Last Amend: 3/13/2025
|
|
|
Status: 5/23/2025-Failed Deadline pursuant to Rule
61(a)(5). (Last location was APPR. SUSPENSE FILE on 4/23/2025)(May be acted
upon Jan 2026)
|
|
|
Location: 5/23/2025-A. 2 YEAR
|
|
|
Summary: Existing law, the
Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (act), authorizes local public employees, as defined,
to form, join, and participate in the activities of employee organizations of
their own choosing for the purpose of representation on matters of labor
relations and defines various terms for these purposes. The act prohibits a
public agency from, among other things, refusing or failing to meet and
negotiate in good faith with a recognized employee organization. Existing law
states that the Legislature finds and declares that the duties and
responsibilities of local agency employer representatives under the act are
substantially similar to the duties and responsibilities required under
existing collective bargaining enforcement procedures and therefore the costs
incurred by the local agency employer representatives in performing those
duties and responsibilities under that act are not reimbursable as
state-mandated costs. This bill would require, on or after January 1, 2026, a
memorandum of understanding between a public agency and a recognized employee
organization to include specified provisions including, among other things, a
provision providing for a system of progressive discipline that grants due
process to an employee when they are disciplined, upon the request of the
recognized employee organization. The bill would define “progressive
discipline” and “due process” for this purpose. The bill would specify that
the refusal or failure to include those provisions in a memorandum of
understanding upon request of the recognized employee organization
constitutes refusing or failing to meet and negotiate in good faith for
purposes of the above-described prohibition. By imposing new requirements on
public agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The
bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a
matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore,
apply to all cities, including charter cities. This bill contains other
related provisions and other existing laws.
|
|
|
|
|
|
AB 569
|
(Stefani D) California Public Employees’
Pension Reform Act of 2013: exceptions: supplemental defined benefit plans.
|
|
|
Current Text: Amended: 4/24/2025 html pdf
|
|
|
Introduced: 2/12/2025
|
|
|
Last Amend: 4/24/2025
|
|
|
Status: 5/23/2025-Failed Deadline pursuant to Rule
61(a)(5). (Last location was APPR. SUSPENSE FILE on 5/21/2025)(May be acted
upon Jan 2026)
|
|
|
Location: 5/23/2025-A. 2 YEAR
|
|
|
Summary: Existing law, the California
Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA), on and after January 1,
2013, requires a public retirement system, as defined, to modify its plan or
plans to comply with PEPRA, as specified. Among other things, PEPRA prohibits
a public employer from offering a defined benefit pension plan exceeding
specified retirement formulas, requires new members of public retirement
systems to contribute at least a specified amount of the normal cost, as
defined, for their defined benefit plans, and prohibits an enhancement of a
public employee’s retirement formula or benefit adopted after January 1,
2013, from applying to service performed prior to the operative date of the
enhancement. PEPRA prohibits a public employer from offering a supplemental
defined benefit plan if the public employer did not do so before January 1,
2013, or, if it did, from offering that plan to an additional employee group
after that date. This bill would authorize a public employer, as defined, to
bargain over contributions for supplemental retirement benefits administered
by, or on behalf of, an exclusive bargaining representative of one or more of
the public employer’s bargaining units, subject to the limitations specified
above. This bill contains other existing laws.
|
|
|
|
|
|
AB 1054
|
(Gipson D) Public employees’ retirement:
deferred retirement option program.
|
|
|
Current Text: Amended: 1/5/2026 html pdf
|
|
|
Introduced: 2/20/2025
|
|
|
Last Amend: 1/5/2026
|
|
|
Status: 1/14/2026-Coauthors revised. From
committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (January
14). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
|
|
|
Location: 1/14/2026-A. APPR.
|
|
|
Summary: Existing law, the County
Employees Retirement Law of 1937, prescribes retirement benefits for members
of specified county and district retirement systems. Existing law establishes
the Deferred Retirement Option Program as an optional benefit program for specified
safety members of those systems that, by ordinance or resolution by the
county board of supervisors or the governing body, elect to adopt it. The
program provides eligible members access, upon service retirement, to a lump
sum or, in some cases, monthly payments in addition to a monthly retirement
allowance, as specified. This bill would establish the Deferred Retirement
Option Program as a voluntary program within the Public Employees’ Retirement
System (PERS) for employees of State Bargaining Units 5 (Highway Patrol) and
8 (Firefighters). The bill would require certain actions to occur, including
completion of an actuarial analysis to determine the proposed program will be
cost neutral, before the program becomes effective and applicable. The bill
would require members who elect to participate in the program to meet certain
requirements, including waiving any claims with respect to age and other
discrimination in employment laws relative to the program. The bill would
establish a program account for each participant and would require the Board
of Administration of the Public Employees’ Retirement System to, among other
things and at least once annually, provide a statement to the participant
that displays the value or balance of the participant’s program account. The
bill would authorize the participant to designate a person or persons as
beneficiaries of the participant’s program account at any time during the
program period from their election date to the deferred retirement
calculation date. Beginning on July 1, 2027, and on that date every 5
consecutive fiscal years thereafter, the bill would require the Board of
Administration of the Public Employees’ Retirement System to submit a report
of an actuarial analysis to specified entities. The bill would entitle
participants who entered the program prior to the effective date of any
modifications by the Legislature to elect whether to become subject to those
modified provisions or to remain subject to the program as it existed on the
participant’s election date. The bill would require the member’s spouse, as
applicable, to execute a signed statement acknowledging the spouse’s
understanding of, and agreement with, the member’s election to participate in
the program together with an express statement of the spouse’s understanding
and agreement that benefits payable to the spouse may be reduced as a result
of participation in the program. This bill contains other existing laws.
|
|
|
|
|
|
AB 1331
|
(Elhawary D) Workplace surveillance.
|
|
|
Current Text: Amended: 9/4/2025 html pdf
|
|
|
Introduced: 2/21/2025
|
|
|
Last Amend: 9/4/2025
|
|
|
Status: 9/13/2025-Failed Deadline pursuant to Rule
61(a)(14). (Last location was INACTIVE FILE on 9/13/2025)(May be acted upon
Jan 2026)
|
|
|
Location: 9/13/2025-S. 2 YEAR
|
|
|
Summary: Existing law establishes the
Division of Labor Standards Enforcement within the Department of Industrial
Relations. Existing law authorizes the division, which is headed by the Labor
Commissioner, to enforce the Labor Code and all labor laws of the state the
enforcement of which is not specifically vested in any other officer, board
or commission. This bill would limit the use of workplace surveillance tools,
as defined, by employers, including by prohibiting an employer from
monitoring or surveilling workers in employee-only, employer-designated
areas, as specified. The bill would provide workers with the right to leave
behind workplace surveillance tools that are on their person or in their
possession when entering certain employee-only areas and public bathrooms and
during off-duty hours, as specified. The bill would prohibit a worker from
removing or physically tampering with any component of a workplace
surveillance tool that is part of or embedded in employer equipment or
vehicles. This bill would subject an employer who violates the bill to a
civil penalty of $500 per violation and would authorize a public prosecutor
to bring specified enforcement actions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
AB 1383
|
(McKinnor D) Public employees’ retirement
benefits.
|
|
|
Current Text: Amended: 4/11/2025 html pdf
|
|
|
Introduced: 2/21/2025
|
|
|
Last Amend: 4/11/2025
|
|
|
Status: 5/23/2025-Coauthors revised. In committee:
Hearing postponed by committee. (Set for hearing on 01/22/2026)
|
|
|
Location: 1/9/2026-A. APPR. SUSPENSE
FILE
|
|
|
Calendar: 1/22/2026 Upon
adjournment of Session - 1021 O Street, Room 1100
ASSEMBLY APPROPRIATIONS SUSPENSE, WICKS, BUFFY, Chair
|
|
|
Summary: The Public Employees’
Retirement Law (PERL) establishes the Public Employees’ Retirement System
(PERS) to provide a defined benefit to members of the system based on final
compensation, credited service, and age at retirement, subject to certain
variations. Existing law creates the Public Employees’ Retirement Fund, which
is continuously appropriated for purposes of PERS, including depositing
employer and employee contributions. Under the California Constitution,
assets of a public pension or retirement system are trust funds. The
California Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA) establishes a
variety of requirements and restrictions on public employers offering defined
benefit pension plans. In this regard, PEPRA restricts the amount of
compensation that may be applied for purposes of calculating a defined
pension benefit for a new member, as defined, by restricting it to specified
percentages of the contribution and benefit base under a specified federal
law with respect to old age, survivors, and disability insurance benefits.
This bill, on and after January 1, 2026, would require a retirement system to
adjust pensionable compensation limits to be consistent with a defined
benefit limitation established and annually adjusted under federal law with
respect to tax exempt qualified trusts. This bill contains other existing
laws.
|
|
|
|
|
|
AB 1439
|
(Garcia D) Public retirement systems:
development projects: labor standards.
|
|
|
Current Text: Amended: 3/24/2025 html pdf
|
|
|
Introduced: 2/21/2025
|
|
|
Last Amend: 3/24/2025
|
|
|
Status: 1/14/2026-From committee: Do pass and
re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (January 14). Re-referred to Com.
on APPR.
|
|
|
Location: 1/14/2026-A. APPR.
|
|
|
Summary: The California Constitution
grants the retirement board of a public employee retirement system plenary
authority and fiduciary responsibility for investment of moneys and
administration of the retirement fund and system. These provisions qualify
this grant of powers by reserving to the Legislature the authority to
prohibit investments if it is in the public interest and the prohibition
satisfies standards of fiduciary care and loyalty required of a retirement
board. Existing law prohibits the boards of the Public Employees’ Retirement
System and the State Teachers’ Retirement System from making certain new
investments or renewing existing investments of public employee retirement
funds, including in a thermal coal company, as defined. Existing law provides
that a board is not required to take any action regarding those investments
unless the board determines in good faith that the action is consistent with
the board’s fiduciary responsibilities established in the California
Constitution. This bill would prohibit the board of a public pension or
retirement system from making any additional or new investments of public
employee pension or retirement funds in development projects in California or
providing financing for those projects with public employee pension or
retirement funds unless those projects include labor standards protections,
as defined. The bill would provide that a board is not required to take
action pursuant to this provision unless it determines in good faith that the
action is consistent with the board’s fiduciary responsibilities established
in the California Constitution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
AB 1563
|
(Gabriel D) Budget Act of 2026.
|
|
|
Current Text: Introduced: 1/9/2026 html pdf
|
|
|
Introduced: 1/9/2026
|
|
|
Status: 1/10/2026-From printer.
|
|
|
Location: 1/9/2026-A. PRINT
|
|
|
Summary: This bill would make
appropriations for the support of state government for the 2026–27 fiscal
year. This bill contains other related provisions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SB 366
|
(Smallwood-Cuevas D) Employment: artificial
intelligence.
|
|
|
Current Text: Amended: 4/9/2025 html pdf
|
|
|
Introduced: 2/13/2025
|
|
|
Last Amend: 4/9/2025
|
|
|
Status: 5/23/2025-Failed Deadline pursuant to Rule
61(a)(5). (Last location was APPR. SUSPENSE FILE on 5/12/2025)(May be acted
upon Jan 2026)
|
|
|
Location: 5/23/2025-S. 2 YEAR
|
|
|
Summary: Existing law establishes the
Department of General Services in the Government Operations Agency for
purposes of providing centralized services of state government. This bill
would require the Department of General Services to contract with the
University of California, Los Angeles Labor Center to conduct a study
evaluating the impact of artificial intelligence on worker well-being, job
quality, job types, different populations, and state revenues. The bill would
require the department, on or before June 1, 2027, to submit a report of the
findings of the above-described study to the Legislature, as specified, and
would repeal these provisions upon submission of that report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SB 605
|
(Cortese D) State attorneys and administrative
law judges: compensation.
|
|
|
Current Text: Introduced: 2/20/2025 html pdf
|
|
|
Introduced: 2/20/2025
|
|
|
Status: 5/23/2025-Failed Deadline pursuant to Rule
61(a)(5). (Last location was APPR. SUSPENSE FILE on 4/7/2025)(May be acted
upon Jan 2026)
|
|
|
Location: 5/23/2025-S. 2 YEAR
|
|
|
Summary: Existing law requires the
Department of Human Resources to establish and adjust salary ranges for each
class of position in the state civil service. This bill would require that
the salaries of state attorneys and administrative law judges in State Bargaining
Unit 2 be no less than the average salaries of public sector attorneys, as
specified. The bill would require the Department of Human Resources to
annually conduct a survey of salary structures by March 1 of each year, as
specified, and determine the average salary of public sector attorneys for
each attorney classification, including the minimum salaries for entry-level
attorneys, intermediate classifications, and the most senior nonmanagerial
attorneys, noninclusive of negotiated differentials. The bill would require
that state administrative law judges have salaries not less than the maximum
salary of state attorneys classified at a specified level. The bill would
require the department to make a good faith offer of parity in salary with respect
to public sector agency attorneys’ and administrative law judges’ salaries in
any negotiations with the exclusive bargaining representative. The bill would
provide that no state attorney or administrative law judge classification
shall be reduced in salary as a result of these provisions. This bill
contains other related provisions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SB 879
|
(Laird D) Budget Act of 2026.
|
|
|
Current Text: Introduced: 1/9/2026 html pdf
|
|
|
Introduced: 1/9/2026
|
|
|
Status: 1/12/2026-Read first time.
|
|
|
Location: 1/9/2026-S. BUDGET &
F.R.
|
|
|
Summary: This bill would make
appropriations for the support of state government for the 2026–27 fiscal
year. This bill contains other related provisions.
|
|
|