[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6645878,"mediaKeyId","3525311-263d9ac6eff7ff2822f7e3b0d1c61f7b","parentId",3525311,"title","Votes at a glance: key Assembly actions, May 14, 2025","audioSeconds",7496,"startMs",3575000,"endMs",11071000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3525311-263d9ac6eff7ff2822f7e3b0d1c61f7b&start=3575&end=11071","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3525311-263d9ac6eff7ff2822f7e3b0d1c61f7b/thumbnail_3575000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6645878/California/Votes-at-a-glance-key-Assembly-actions-May-14-2025","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6645878-fc980693b5a7730a691400900bccb6e4/orig.mp4?Expires=1770512329&Signature=bp6jdg0Ltn3U4B1kpYkwCKNloM8AT74IgB4YWIZf2K50AKMrRoV4GhGm3Kri81j7YUxoNvR-xdsAvzFNnvRTnze2yd6572BL~H~ZyVvf1~Gr8qLpl7KqX~90sEv3mo9-euuHp6VtBIEyt-ZTgmbQvu5lScv7ck-ar9HuEVytvFMV05v3yF1d~X1-v0E0HL5Boq8~ZDM2pa0whFFDEKmshloWw7OD1ocRrA-kpy74OQSJl0kcubcNY1yi4D3rZzuU6r33JJ3HZ9xHL~U~4dUpeZDAakYZfjf8tiBpJ6YtaJkBdeWN53hgws4Tg4aKpNlEnEYuBm-4QhzVx4e98V770A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","House","date","2025-05-27T00:00:00Z","article","The California State Assembly considered and acted on a large number of measures during its May 14, 2025 floor session. Below are concise summaries of measures that were read on the floor and recorded with roll-call or voice votes on that day.

Votes at a glance (selected measures recorded on the Assembly floor May 14, 2025):

- AB 13 90 (Solace) — Adjust monthly compensation thresholds for county and local school board members; passed (Ayes 46, Noes 1).

- AB 13 38 (Solace) — Allows local air districts to recover costs related to facility-wide fence-line air monitoring; passed (Ayes 59, Noes 2).

- AB 6 48 (Board) — Authorizes community colleges to build housing on certain property within a half-mile of a main or satellite campus to address student/staff housing insecurity; passed (Ayes 53, Noes 5).

- AB 12 07 (Erwin) — Sets a price ceiling in the state's cap-and-trade market tied to the social cost of carbon as referenced on the floor; passed (Ayes 53, Noes 1).

- ACR 66 (Dixon) — Recognizes May as Skin Cancer Awareness Month; adopted (voice vote; 66 coauthors recorded for coauthor roll).

- AB 49 (Muratsuchi) — Declares schools safe havens and limits certain school staff cooperation with immigration enforcement (urgency); passed (Ayes 59, Noes 9). [See separate article for extended debate.]

- AB 3 17 (Jackson) — Measures easing homeownership for first-time buyers by encouraging smaller single-family homes; passed (Ayes 62, Noes 0).

- AB 5 27 (Pappen) — Streamlines permitting for exploratory geothermal wells with environmental standards; passed (Ayes 67, Noes 0).

- AB 6 65 (Chen) — Requires the Department of Financial Institutions to include ombudsman activities in an annual report under the California Consumer Financial Protection Law; passed (Ayes 66, Noes 0).

- AB 9 40 (Wicks) — Allows cities/counties to form quantum innovation zones to coordinate local quantum technology initiatives; passed (Ayes 68, Noes 0).

- AB 10 21 (Wicks) — Allows local education agencies to build workforce housing on land they own; passed (Ayes 51, Noes 3).

- AB 11 12 (Wallace) — District bill adjusting a property tax apportionment provision for Rancho Mirage and Riverside County; passed (Ayes 64, Noes 0).

- AB 13 18 (Bonta) — Clarifies nonprofit eligibility for public funding to serve undocumented immigrants, refugees and asylum seekers; passed on urgency (Ayes 56, Noes 11).

- AB 14 70 (Haney) — Allows up to 20% of certain student housing loan funds to be used for construction of student/faculty/staff housing in downtown or commercial districts; passed (Ayes 65, Noes 0).

- HR 40 (Lackey) — Declares May 25 Rosenda’s Day in memory of Rosenda Smiley; adopted (voice vote; 75 coauthors added).

- HR 42 (El Hawari) — Recognizes May 2025 as Behavioral Health Awareness Month; adopted (voice vote; 65 coauthors added).

- AB 4 08 (Berman) — Creates a physician health and wellness program aligned with best practices to protect patients and support doctors; passed (Ayes 56, Noes 0).

- AB 5 46 (Colosa) — Requires coverage for certain HEPA purifiers for specified enrollees after wildfire disasters; passed with urgency (Ayes 56, Noes 0 on urgency/measure).

- AB 9 67 (Valencia) — Expedited licensing for out-of-state physicians employed at California health entities; passed (Ayes 62, Noes 0).

- AB 9 68 (Berner) — Allows pharmacists to prescribe non-hormonal contraceptives in addition to hormonal options; passed (Ayes 68, Noes 0).

- AB 10 56 (Bennett) — Phases out certain gillnet fishing by restricting permit transfers beginning 2027 with limited family transfer allowances; passed (Ayes 47, Noes 16).

- AB 13 76 (Bonta) — Limits length of juvenile probation and requires six-month review hearings if probation is extended; passed (Ayes 46, Noes 17). [See separate article for extended debate.]

- AB 14 10 (Garcia) — Requires utilities to automatically enroll customers to receive power-shutoff notices and make it easy to update preferred contact methods; passed (Ayes 68, Noes 0).

This list summarizes measures recorded on the floor during the May 14 session and notes the final roll-call results recorded in the transcript. Items were presented in the daily file; some measures were passed with urgency or on the consent calendar. For bills that drew extended debate, separate articles have been produced to capture discussion, concerns, and direct quotes from the floor (for example, AB 49 and AB 13 76). If a measure was read but lacked a roll-call on the transcript excerpt provided, it is not included here.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Assembly Floor Session","oneSentenceSummary","A roundup of bills and resolutions the Assembly acted on May 14, 2025, including vote tallies and brief descriptions for each measure recorded on the floor.","taxTitle","California State Assembly, House, Legislative, California","taxId",17099,"location","California","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6645883,"Assembly approves AB 1376 to limit length of juvenile probation and require reviews",1884,8994000,10878000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3525311-263d9ac6eff7ff2822f7e3b0d1c61f7b&start=8994&end=10878","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3525311-263d9ac6eff7ff2822f7e3b0d1c61f7b/thumbnail_8994000.jpg","/articles/6645883/California/Assembly-approves-AB-1376-to-limit-length-of-juvenile-probation-and-require-reviews","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6645883-19aed2bf2dd8422b8c73caaa05603d22/orig.mp4?Expires=1770512329&Signature=h61wRrjNas1S8ZHRcJ8NTOQGYVxgfSzX83fzTsIRN4k63sRaU6tVl1ICV58xL07ID-1pqjfAb8coqJxpokIY8niV63ARqtQGFKpbl4SiUjnZI36iDLHWzwYMPvhU10yPLMwJ-Xv6gSZMIyuobVET-q2T-BN3c5cJEGLWDTpM8Vj9DxGsFVtAzJOT~VTGpxD2UgKaZpynpoAZiUL34xSnVLrfox-i6rXEZBSx425r8ydy~mi1e2Fer2Wms0anqOkF6vwwwKJELkCQdtMDLN0iYE-7pnMda0LzFzHe9BqhE3hKz50hSRaZ-5sOBkKGPZgrbvatLVYlqrlhm6gAsnsX7Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The California State Assembly on May 14 approved AB 13 76, authored by Assemblymember Rob Bonta, to limit the length of noncustodial wardship probation for youth and to require regular judicial review. The measure passed on a 46-17 roll call.

Under AB 13 76, the bill establishes a presumption that probation for youth under noncustodial wardship should terminate at nine months unless a court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that continued probation is warranted. If extended, the bill requires review hearings every six months and mandates that probation conditions be developmentally appropriate and individualized.

\"Our youth probation system is broken,\" Bonta said on the floor, summarizing the bill’s three principal changes: the nine-month presumption, six-month review hearings when probation is extended, and a requirement that probation conditions be reasonable and tailored. He told colleagues that more than 10,000 young people were placed on wardship probation in California in 2023 and that many youth face dozens of probation conditions that can lead to technical violations.

Supporters argued the reform reduces re‑involvement with the justice system and focuses supervision on rehabilitation. \"This bill supports rehabilitation by establishing essential safeguards to protect kids on community probation from unnecessarily long probation terms,\" said Assemblymember Alhora, citing research that extended probation increases the risk of recidivism.

Opponents raised public-safety concerns and argued probation departments need sufficient time and tools to supervise youth, particularly those who committed violent offenses. \"We have a failed approach to criminal justice reform that the left has been advancing for years with absolutely devastating and dangerous impacts on our communities,\" said Assemblymember De Maio during floor debate, urging a no vote and arguing that longer probation periods can be necessary in some counties.

Floor debate included testimony that some counties already use shorter review cycles. The author noted that 11 counties — Butte, El Dorado, Riverside, Yolo, Amador, Lassen, Mariposa, Santa Clara, Solano, Tulare, and San Diego — had practices aligned with shorter review periods. Supporters also noted racial disproportionality in the juvenile system and cited studies showing extended probation can harm development and prospects for rehabilitation.

Assemblymembers on both sides said they wanted youth to be held accountable while also receiving services to prevent recidivism. The bill allows judges discretion to extend probation if the court finds by the required evidentiary standard that the extension serves the youth’s and the community’s interests.

The Assembly recorded 46 ayes and 17 noes. Proponents said the measure balances public safety and rehabilitation by requiring judicial findings for extensions and by mandating periodic reviews and reasonable conditions.

Outcome: AB 13 76 approved by the Assembly on May 14, 2025; roll call 46-17. The measure now proceeds in the legislative process; floor debate emphasized implementation, county variation in practice, and the need for support services for youth.

","The Assembly passed AB 1376 to create a presumption juvenile probation ends at nine months unless the court finds cause to extend it; the bill passed 46-17 after extensive floor debate about public safety and rehabilitation.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6645888,"Assembly approves urgency bill to declare schools safe havens amid federal immigration enforcement changes",971,4161000,5132000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3525311-263d9ac6eff7ff2822f7e3b0d1c61f7b&start=4161&end=5132","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3525311-263d9ac6eff7ff2822f7e3b0d1c61f7b/thumbnail_4161000.jpg","/articles/6645888/California/Assembly-approves-urgency-bill-to-declare-schools-safe-havens-amid-federal-immigration-enforcement-changes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6645888-840671be22e2a6e8770d1ea01a54a8a8/orig.mp4?Expires=1770512329&Signature=boz9ioj7uFI0NpX-6DFGB5ecNeoDSqtY-Ra4Ii~YQEJ67XDONCxizZCRH4x~lymU03VEYWhbZNdlVWJPOrznZjfWJ6zqEYuxPfatVjA4rtOvaRvMXqIt7ygiSxu1MCy4mTKjvRxls~CppOsctOGl-0uvqmEsTfYVMwZZS0YgACwND5v~Lel5yX4E4qT3UsZCR5Fll9blJSdcmAmfIs28wEB3jDrLRDtxulJhmW~5gAzj9uU92InIvvCO35olkSIFgHEZUOSuXQr5JVQacXh1BFuHimxfdIVVuXBVDn9K1n0i8BY2t-ufsB-qTYjGXOdTJOXyBby1-MHJIauin5gH7g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The California State Assembly on May 14 passed AB 49, an urgency bill that seeks to designate public schools as safe havens for immigrant students and restrict certain cooperation by school staff with federal immigration enforcement. The measure passed on a 59-9 roll call.

Supporters said the bill responds to recent federal policy changes and to incidents in which immigration agents entered schools. “We should do everything we can to make sure that schools are safe learning places for all kids, including our immigrant kids,” said Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi, the bill’s primary author, urging members to vote \"aye.\" He described schools as vital safe spaces and emphasized support from teachers, principals, superintendents and the California State PTA.

Opponents warned of legal exposure and potential loss of federal funding. \"Why are we putting our teachers, our school staff in legal jeopardy? This is unconscionable,\" said Assemblymember De Maio, calling the bill “fear mongering” and arguing there is no evidence of ICE raids targeting children in schools. De Maio said the bill’s language could criminalize compliance with a duly issued federal warrant and expose districts to civil or criminal penalties.

Several other members recounted local incidents and urged passage. \"Immigration officials came to Lillian Street and Russell Elementary Schools in South Central Los Angeles,\" said Assemblymember El Hawari, describing visits she said were misrepresented as \"wellness checks.\" \"It's real life. It's every day. It's how they feel going to school when their parents drop them off,\" she said.

Assemblymember Carrillo, a principal coauthor, said the bill protects immigrant communities and preserves access to education. Assemblymember Ortega said schools and staff were prepared to act when agents arrived without warrants and that resources invested in training helped protect students. Supporters pointed to drops in enrollment in some districts with high percentages of immigrant students as a concern linked to fear of enforcement.

The bill includes language that, according to debate, would make it a violation of state law for a school district employee to comply with a duly issued federal warrant under specified circumstances; members debated how that provision would interact with federal law and whether it could subject local staff or districts to penalties. The bill carried an urgency clause, requiring 54 votes to take effect immediately; the Assembly recorded 59 ayes and 9 noes on the measure.

Implementation questions and legal risk were highlighted during floor debate. Opponents said the measure could risk federal funding and subject local employees to civil or criminal sanction; supporters said the bill does not criminalize schools for protecting students and emphasized district-led training and local safeguards.

AB 49 passed the Assembly on May 14 by a 59-9 vote and will proceed as required by legislative process for any urgency measure.

The Assembly discussion took place during the daily floor session; public comment was not part of this vote. The measure’s supporters included school administrators and the California State PTA; the transcript records direct appeals from members who described local incidents in Los Angeles Unified School District.

Outcome: AB 49 approved, urgency measure invoked; roll call 59-9.

","The California Assembly passed AB 49, an urgency measure to designate public schools as safe havens and limit school staff cooperation with certain federal immigration actions; the vote was 59-9 after a heated floor debate over legal risk and student safety.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: key Assembly actions, May 14, 2025

Assembly approves AB 1376 to limit length of juvenile probation and require reviews

Assembly approves urgency bill to declare schools safe havens amid federal immigration enforcement changes