Legislating Against the Clock: CSAC Advocacy and Final Days of Session

With the passing of the legendary Dolly Parton this week, it seems fitting to borrow from one of her most enduring hits: “9 to 5.” 

Of course, anyone who has experienced the final weeks of a California legislative session knows there is very little “9 to 5” about it. As the clock winds down, the days get longer, the nights get later and, to borrow a few words from Dolly, everyone is “barely gettin’ by.” Bills are amended and re-amended, negotiations shift by the hour, and months of work come down to a mad dash before the final gavel.

After many late nights – and with several more ahead –  we write today with an update from Sacramento on the status of several key issues as the 2025–2026 Legislative Session enters its final days. Hundreds of bills hang in the balance as the Legislature’s deadline to conclude its business—midnight on Monday, August 31—quickly approaches.  

A Note About Timing 

Like most people, even lawmakers can sometimes procrastinate, leaving important decisions and consequential policies to the final hours; with major proposals butting up against the 72-hour rule. 

• What is the “72-hour rule”?  

Pursuant to Proposition 54 (2016), bills must be in print for three days (72 hours) before a vote can be taken. This includes any amendments made to a bill as it moves through the legislative process. All bills, even the budget bill and budget trailer bills, must follow this rule. Therefore, the legislature must consider their timeline for introduction and passage of the budget bill to comply with the 72-hour rule ahead of the August 31 deadline (i.e., the final form of a bill must be in print at least 72 hours prior to midnight on August 31).  

Following the end of the legislative session, the Governor has until Wednesday, September 30 to sign or veto bills that passed out of the Legislature.  

Follow legislative activity and CSAC advocacy on our Legislative Tracking page. Questions? Contact CSAC legislative staff. 

Things move fast and are subject to change during the final days of the legislative session. The information below is current as of 12 p.m. on Thursday, August 27. CSAC will continue to provide legislative updates as developments occur.

CSAC’s End-of-Session Legislative Update

State Budget and Protect Our Safety Net coalition: The enacted 2026 Budget Act includes $420 million in one-time funding for county eligibility related to the impacts of H.R. 1 and $250 million in grants to support public hospital finances. CSAC continues to advocate for an additional $100 million in funding to support county indigent care programs in the current year, as well as technical statutory changes to protect counties from inadvertent redirections realignment funding. 

Prop 4/GGRF Allocations: Negotiations are expected to continue until the last minute over allocations from the $10 billion Proposition 4 climate resilience bond and the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF). Of particular urgency is the condition of GGRF, which has seen an approximately $1 billion shortfall due to regulatory actions taken by the California Air Resources Board. The Senate has proposed backfilling the GGRF funds with a $1.128 billion package, which includes allocations restoring baseline funding to wildfire resilience, transportation, housing, and drinking water priorities. Included in the Senate’s proposal is a $100 million allocation from Prop 4 to the SAFER drinking water program.

Artificial Intelligence and Automated Decision Systems: Over the last week several key bills have undergone major amendments. Notably, amendments to SB 951 (Reyes) removed the provisions requiring public employers to report a “technological cessation in hiring” to the Employment Development Department (EDD), along with the associated Labor Code enforcement and penalties, leading our coalition to remove its opposition and adopt a neutral position on the bill. Not all developments have been as favorable. Following the August 21 amendment deadline, two major bills that generated significant county concerns reemerged: AB 1018 (Bauer-Kahan) and AB 1331 (Elhawary).  

In its current form AB 1018 (Bauer-Kahan) would continue to impose significant operational and financial burdens on local governments that could hinder the delivery of essential services and discourage the use of tools that can improve access and government efficiency. The measure continues to broadly apply to automated decision-making systems that assist or facilitate consequential decisions, imposes significant and costly compliance obligations without providing funding or implementation support, and maintains a duplicative appeals process that creates redundancy and legal uncertainty. Read CSAC’s most recent opposition letter here.

Amendments to AB 1331 (Elhawary) substantially narrow the scope of the bill by prohibiting the use of specific workplace surveillance tools in bathrooms. These amendments address several of our previous concerns including local governments’ ability to perform essential public services, respond to workplace violence threats, and prevent waste, fraud, and abuse of public resources. CSAC is advocating for amendments that protect worker privacy while addressing address our security concerns.  

Higher Pension Costs: CSAC is continuing to advocate against legislation that would substantially increase pension costs. AB 1383 (McKinnor) would reduce the retirement age for public safety members, establish a new bargainable benefit tier of 3% at 55, and increase compensation caps for any highly compensated member.

Indigent Defense Compensation: CSAC, alongside the Urban Counties of California (UCC) and Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC), remain opposed to AB 690 (Schultz), despite recent amendments. The proposed changes most notably limit the prohibition on the use of flat-fee payment models for cases that carry a life-without-the-possibility-of-parole or death penalty sentence, and change compliance with indigent defense workload standards to consideration of the workload standards, among other changes, which will result in administrative and fiscal impacts to counties statewide. Read the coalition’s most recent floor alert here.

Tribal Water Bills: CSAC is opposing AB 1881 (Ramos) and AB 2218 (Kalra) as part of a wide coalition of local government and water agencies. While we support efforts to include tribal governments as part of land use and water decision making, these bills in their current forms would result in substantial legal exposure to counties and create delays and barriers across almost all relevant permitting programs, while also creating uncertainty in existing permits such as established water rights. 

In its current form, AB 1881 (Ramos) establishes a private right of action, allowing tribes and individual tribal members to challenge state decisions involving state lands and waterways, thereby increasing potential litigation risk. The measure further prioritizes tribal governmental interests through a strict scrutiny standard and overlaps with, or conflicts with, existing state and federal frameworks that already govern tribal consultation and protections. Amendments to this measure were introduced today using a rule waiver, however, they do not rectify our concerns. 

AB 2218 (Kalra) seeks to address longstanding inequities faced by California Native American Tribes due to the loss of access to and control over water resources. However, the bill’s policy statement and directive introduce substantial uncertainty into existing water management processes by establishing a broad policy framework without providing clear direction, safeguards, or limitations to ensure the continued reliability of water supplies. This measure would also have unclear, but potentially far-reaching impacts on surface water rights. 

AB 218 Liability: SB 577 (Laird) addresses public agency liability due to AB 218 (Gonzalez, 2019). Amendments to the bill are now in print and include provisions regarding evidence and knowledge standards, joint and several liability, and a variety of provisions regarding assault prevention plans and heightened state oversight and investigations roles.