California lawmakers push bills to beat deadline this week

One of the 2024 session’s big deadlines is staring California legislators in the face this week: By Friday, bills that cost money must pass their first policy committee to stay alive this year.

So lawmakers of both parties are busy promoting their proposals with press events and trying to shepherd them through committees. 

On Monday: 

• Animal rights: The Senate committee on business, professions and economic development passed several animal welfare measures. Two bipartisan bills were authored by Republican Sen. Janet Nguyen of Huntington Beach: Senate Bill 1459 to require large county animal control agencies to post online how many animals they take in monthly and how many get euthanized, plus SB 1478 to lay out standards for veterinarians’ notations, including for pain control and treating injuries. Another bill to streamline certification for spaying and neutering pets also passed the committee.

• Fixed charge on utility bills: Senate GOP leader Brian Jones’ proposal to repeal a requirement on the California Public Utilities Commission to impose a fixed charge on electric bills failed to get through the Senate energy committee in the face of Democratic opposition. State regulators are expected to vote on the new pricing structure next month. Another bill to force the commission to cut electricity rates by at least 30% “won’t be getting a hearing,” according to the measure’s co-author, Republican Assemblymember Joe Patterson of Rocklin.
  
  
• Highway protests: A bill to double fines for blocking traffic, including during a protest, and impeding emergency vehicles was approved by the Assembly transportation committee. A series of demonstrations to support a Gaza ceasefire have stopped vehicles, including last week on the Golden Gate Bridge. “Enough is enough,” the bill’s author, Assemblymember Kate Sanchez, a Rancho Santa Margarita Republican, said on social media.  

• Taxes on vacation homes: A proposal to get rid of the state tax break on second homes’ mortgage interest was sent from the Assembly tax committee to the dreaded appropriations committee suspense file. The author, Democratic Assemblymember Chris Ward of San Diego, argued that eliminating the break could raise as much as $200 million a year, when the state faces a multibillion-dollar budget shortfall. 

• Anti-nepotism rules: After making it through the Senate committee on local government last week, an anti-nepotism bill also passed the elections committee. The measure bars state and local officials from voting on public contracts that benefit their relatives. It was introduced after LAist uncovered an Orange County supervisor awarded pandemic relief contracts worth $3.1 million to his daughter’s mental health center. Sen. Dave Min, an Irvine Democrat backing the bill, said the practice of officials awarding “lucrative government contracts” to family members is “simply outrageous.”

And more bills are up today:

• Airport screenings: The Senate Transportation Committee is expected to consider a bill to prohibit airports from allowing travelers using third-party companies such as CLEAR to cut in the security line. Instead, companies would need their own dedicated security lane, reports Politico. Airlines including Delta, JetBlue and Southwest oppose the measure.

• Health care: The latest version of single-payer health care goes before the Assembly health committee. AB 2200 would create CalCare for comprehensive, universal coverage. The California Nurses Association and other supporters plan a rally at the Capitol before the hearing; they say the current patchwork system perpetuates inequities in what should be a basic right. But a coalition led by the California Chamber of Commerce strongly opposes the idea, arguing that a state-run system would lead to monumental tax hikes. Similar single-payer bills have gone nowhere.

As the state faces a budget shortfall of as much as $73 billion, a 2022 law to expand financial aid to 137,000 college students by fall 2024 may not happen as planned, writes CalMatters higher education reporter Mikhail Zinshteyn.

The law depends on one key contingency: That the state has enough cash to do it. But current revenue projections make that prospect “unlikely” according to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office.

Cal Grant fully covers tuition for students at the University of California and California State University, and provides cash awards to some community college students. Currently, about 400,000 students receive some aid from Cal Grant’s eight programs.

On top of the $2.4 billion the state already spends on Cal Grant, expanding the program would cost an additional $245 million. Low-income community college students who currently aren’t eligible would benefit the most, including those who have a lower grade point average than 2.0. Other beneficiaries would be university students 28 and older; students who enroll in university after more than a year of finishing high school; and more low-income students who are parents.

But because of the budget deficit, Cal Grant may grow by increments. One idea: Expand the number of eligible students who are parents receiving cash awards, but lower the amount each student receives.

Assemblymember David Alvarez, a Democrat from Chula Vista and chairperson of the budget subcommittee on education, wants to see Cal Grant expanded in some form by July, but acknowledges the challenges.

• Alvarez, during a March hearing: “We know it will happen, but we are in a budget situation where we need to think about how that is going to happen, but I believe it must start this year.”

For more on Cal Grant, read Mikhail’s story.

Two hot-button California issues surfaced in courts Monday:  

• Homelessness: The U.S. Supreme Court heard a crucial case that could help decide how cities in California and across the country deal with homeless encampments. The arguments created some unusual political alliances. Did the justices hint at their ruling? Find out from CalMatters homelessness reporter Marisa Kendall. 

• Transgender rights: Supporters of a ballot measure to require schools to notify parents if their child identifies as transgender didn’t like the change Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office made to its title — to “Restricts Rights of Transgender Youth.” The proponents went to court to restore their version: “Protect Kids of California Act.” What did the judge decide? Find out from CalMatters K-12 reporter Carolyn Jones.