Roundup: Latest actions from the Commission on State Mandates and what it means for counties

Since our last update in October, the Commission on State Mandates is ending 2025 with a flurry of actions on a variety of matters pending before the Commission. Detailed below are four recent actions from the Commission and their staff or the State Controller’s Office that are notable for counties and future potential opportunities for reimbursement for state-mandated programs. A complete list of all matters pending before the Commission and recent actions is available on the pending caseload webpage. 

To receive updates directly from the Commission, subscribe to their email lists. Questions about the Commission on State Mandates or the state mandate reimbursement process in general? Contact Jessica Sankus, Principal Fiscal and Policy Analyst, at jsankus@counties.org.  

Background: The Commission on State Mandates and the Reimbursement Process 
While counties are required to comply with all state mandates, counties only receive funding to carry out a select group of state-mandated programs in the form of after-the-fact reimbursement payments from the state. After a bill is signed into law, reimbursement for counties to comply with state-mandated programs is not automatic. Rather, counties initiate the process to receive reimbursement via filing a “test claim” for reimbursement with the Commission on State Mandates. The Commission on State Mandates deliberates and determines whether the new law meets the criteria for reimbursement. If the Commission determines that it does, the Commission begins work on Parameters and Guidelines, which establish a process and rate for reimbursement for the program. For more information about state mandates and the Commission on State Mandates, see CSAC’s Issue Brief on State-Mandated Programs and CSAC’s publication, Meeting the Mandate: Counties Respond to Shifting Costs, Responsibilities, and Outcomes. 

Internet Websites and Email Addresses (24-TC-04) 
Summary: AB 1637 (Chapter 877, Statues of 2023) requires cities and counties to ensure that their Internet website utilizes a “.gov” domain or a “.ca.gov” domain, and to ensure that each email address provided to its employees utilizes a “.gov” or a “.ca.gov” domain name by January 1, 2029. The test claim for reimbursement argues that the costs for local governments to comply with this new requirement are reimbursable pursuant to the California Constitution, which requires the state to reimburse local governments for the expense of carrying out new programs mandated by the state. 

Recent Action: On Friday, December 5, the Commission voted to adopt this test claim, and shortly thereafter published draft expedited parameters and guidelines to reimburse local governments for the activities required to comply with the newly adopted state-mandated program.  

Next Steps: Counties can file written comments on the draft expedited parameters and guidelines by 5:00pm on Wednesday, December 31. The Commission plans to hear this matter on either Friday, February 13 or Friday, April 10 depending on the nature and quantity of comments filed with the Commission.  

Criminal Procedure: Discrimination (24-TC-02) aka The Racial Justice Act
Summary: AB 256 (Chapter 739, Statutes of 2022) expanded the provisions of AB 2542 (Chapter 317, Statues of 2020), the original Racial Justice Act, and made these requirements retroactive as well as prospective. The Racial Justice Act provides that individuals charged with or convicted of a crime may file habeas corpus petitions to raise issues of bias or discrimination based on race, ethnicity, or national origin in their cases. The test claim for reimbursement argues that counties should be reimbursed by the state for the costs of Public Defenders to comply with AB 256, specifically the obligation to represent individuals who allege issues of bias or discrimination in their cases.   

Recent Action: On Tuesday, November 25, the Commission on State Mandates’ staff published the draft proposed decision and parameters and guidelines for reimbursement for this recently adopted state-mandated program.  

Next Steps: Counties can file written comments on the draft proposed decision and parameters and guidelines by 5:00 pm on Tuesday, December 16. The Commission intends to hear this matter on Friday, February 13, 2026. 

Elections: Ballot Label (24-TC-01) 
Summary: AB 1416 (Chapter 751, Statutes of 2022), titled the Ballot DISCLOSE Act, requires lists of “supporters” and “opponents” also be listed on the ballot label for statewide measures, as defined. A ballot label is the portion of the ballot that includes information about the candidate or the measure for consideration before the voter. This includes a title and a brief summary or description. The new activities and subsequent costs identified as a result of AB 1416 in the test claim are the increased printing costs for additional ballot cards. 

Recent Action: On Friday, December 5, the Commission on State Mandates voted to adopt the parameters and guidelines to reimburse counties for costs incurred to comply with the Ballot DISCLOSE Act. 

Next Steps: Once the Commission adopts the Parameters and Guidelines and the State Controller’s Office publishes the subsequent claiming instructions, counties must submit claims for costs incurred during the “initial fiscal years” to the State Controller’s Office within 120 days of the issuance of the claiming instructions (Government Code Section 17561). The “initial reimbursement claim process” is for costs to be reimbursed for the fiscal years specified in the first claiming instructions and Parameters and Guidelines.  

Child Abduction and Recovery (25-4237-I-05) 
Summary: The Custody of Minors – Child Abduction and Recovery Program is one of the first programs to be deemed a reimbursable state mandate after Proposition 4 (1979) required the state to reimburse local governments for the costs to comply with state-mandated programs. Since 1979, the state has reimbursed counties for the state-mandated requirement that county district attorneys’ offices actively assist in the resolution of child custody problems including visitation disputes, the enforcement of custody decrees, and of any other order of the court in child custody proceedings. The State Controller’s Office is authorized to perform audits of counties’ claims for reimbursement for state-mandated programs to verify the actual amount of the mandated costs, to determine whether costs claimed are supported by appropriate documentation, and to ensure that claims are not unreasonable or excessive (Government Code Sections 17558.5, 17561, and 12410).  

When the State Controller’s Office disallows costs previously claimed by counties, the affected county may choose to either remit the disallowed amount to the state, or the State Controller’s Office offsets (withholds) commensurate amounts from state-mandated costs reimbursements filed by that county in subsequent fiscal years.  

In July 2025, Los Angeles County submitted an Incorrect Reduction Claim with the Commission to contest the disallowance of their reimbursement claims by the SCO for this program.  

Recent Action: On Tuesday, December 9, the State Controller’s Office filed their comments in response to the Incorrect Reduction Claim and the county’s arguments therein.  

Next Steps: The test claimant and all interested parties (including county governments) may file rebuttal comments to the State Controller’s comment letter within 30 days of the date State Controller’s submission to the Commission (by 5:00pm on January 8, 2026).