2024 California Legislative Recap
2024 California Legislative Recap
Print the Leagues’ CA Legislative Recap
Click here to print our 2024 legislative recap from Sacramento!
Our Wins, Victories, and Engaged Bills
The 2024 California State Legislative Session was particularly impactful for credit unions, with the introduction, ensuing fight, and eventual defanging of Senate Bill 1075 (Steven Bradford). This bill dealt with overdraft fees for state-chartered credit unions. As introduced, it would have required a five-day waiting period before assessing an overdraft or non-sufficient funds (NSF) fee and would limit the credit union from charging more than three of these fees per month. After months of hard work, grassroots efforts, and direct lobbying at the California Credit Union League’s Government Relations Rally (GRR), the League was able to have the bill completely amended. Now, the bill will require credit unions to notify members when they have been assessed a fee, and then in 2026 to not charge more than $14 dollars per fee or whatever dollar figure the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) chooses for its pending regulation.
The League had been in yearlong negotiations on Senate Bill 278 (Bill Dodd), the bill dealing with financial elder abuse liability. It originally would have held a credit union liable for the financial abuse if it “should have known” the abuse occurred, which would have led to a great deal of litigation. After a year-and-a-half, the League was able to finally remove the opposition. The bill set up an emergency financial contact requirement and would have allowed credit unions to hold a transaction over $5,000 for three days. It was ultimately vetoed by Governor Gavin Newsom, citing concerns with the three-day hold. His veto message can be found here.
We also achieved major wins in two important issue-areas for credit unions: reform to California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) and guaranteed financial literacy for students. After years of advocating for PAGA reform and financial literacy, the legislature finally gained the political will to pass these monumental bills due to increasing pressure from qualified ballot initiatives.
The League supported Assembly Bill 2288 (Ash Kalra) and Senate Bill 92 (Tom Umberg), the two bills containing the PAGA reform agreement that was reached between the business community, legislative leadership, and Governor Newsom. For years, credit unions have been targets for predatory lawsuits under PAGA, where workers ended up receiving very little while lawyers collectively made billions of dollars. The reform agreement ensures workers retain tools to resolve labor claims and receive fair compensation, while limiting shakedown lawsuits that hurt both employers and employees.
On the financial literacy front, the legislature passed not one — but two bills this year! The League supported Assembly Bill 2927 (Kevin McCarty), which adds a one-semester standalone course in personal finance to state high school graduation requirements, beginning with the 2031 graduating class. The League also supported Assembly Bill 1871 (Juan Alanis), which incorporates personal finance into the social sciences area of study for school grades 7 to 12.
League-sponsored legislation Assembly Bill 2062 (Tim Grayson) will help continue modernizing the industry’s state charter. Additionally, the League was successful in helping defeat Assembly Bill 2930 (Rebecca Bauer-Kahan), which would have led to overregulation of automated decision systems and tools at credit unions.
Outside of these top-ticket items, the League engaged nearly 30 bills altogether, while also working on budget issues and the homeowner insurance crisis. It truly was a busy year in Sacramento!
THANK YOU for helping us achieve a successful legislative session. The League is ready for any challenges 2025 may bring as we look forward to serving you and your credit union.
2024 Credit Union Bill Tracker
If you would like to look up how your state senator or assemblymember voted on key credit union bills in the California State Legislature this year, click the button below.
2024 Credit Union Bill Tracker
CA Assembly Wins & Engaged Bills
AB 1757 (Kalra) — Accessibility: Internet Websites
AB 1757 (bill language)
League position: Opposed.
Summary: This bill would provide that statutory damages on the basis of a specific accessibility barrier on an internet website under these provisions shall only be recovered against an entity if the internet website is not accessible. The bill would prohibit the entity from being liable for those damages if the entity establishes, as an affirmative defense to the claim, certain elements, including that the entity identified the specific accessibility barrier in a digital accessibility report (DAR) posted on the accessibility page of its internet website. The League was concerned with the many aspects of the bill, especially the requirement for entities to self-identify in a DAR their own website non-compliance with The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The bill would have given temporary immunity of only 90 days to resolve a website issue before losing the protection from liability. Overall, the League had concerns with the compliance difficulty, short timeframe for resolution, and potential for increased litigation by essentially providing a roadmap for future lawsuits through the DAR.
Status: Failed.
AB 1871 (bill language)
League position: Supported.
Summary: This bill adds instruction on personal financial literacy to the social sciences area of study for grades 7 to 12.
Status: Signed into law.
AB 2004 (Petrie-Norris) — County Recorder: Recordation of Documents
AB 2004 (bill language)
League position: Supported.
Summary: This bill allows for the certification of paper copies of electronic documents, including documents notarized via remote online notarization (RON), so that they may be recorded in California’s real property records. This bill also shortens the time at which recorded documents provide constructive notice if they contain a technical notarial error. This bill acts as a “clean up” to Senate Bill 696 (Anthony Portantino) that was passed and signed in 2023 to ensure all counties in California can utilize remote RON.
Status: Signed into law.
AB 2011 (bill language)
League position: Supported.
Summary: This bill makes the California Civil Rights Department’s small employer family leave mediation program permanent (would have previously sunset on January 1, 2025), helping both workers and small businesses.
Status: Signed into law.
AB 2017 (Grayson) — Banks and Credit Unions: Non-Sufficient Funds Fees
AB 2017 (bill language)
League position: Opposed; then neutral.
Summary: This bill would prohibit state-chartered banks and credit unions from charging a consumer a non-sufficient funds (NSF) fee when the consumer’s attempt to initiate a transaction is declined instantaneously or near instantaneously due to non-sufficient funds, as specified. The League opposed this bill because it was premature with the similar rule pending from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and the lack of definitions. The bill became a political liability with Senate Bill 1075 pending, and our opposition was strategically removed to preserve our consumer friendly standing in the legislature while we worked against SB 1075.
Status: Signed into law.
AB 2062 (Grayson) — Credit Unions
AB 2062 (bill language)
League position: Supported and League-sponsored.
Summary: This bill makes assorted changes to California Credit Union Law, including changes related to membership applications, governance structures, sale of credit union assets, and virtual member meetings.
Status: Signed into law.
AB 2067 (Dixon) — Financial Institutions: Service of Process
AB 2067 (bill language)
League position: Opposed; then neutral.
Summary: As introduced, this bill would have required financial institutions with more than nine branches to designate four or more central locations to receive service of legal process. This was an increase from the one central location that was previously required by law. The League was able to secure amendments to narrow the bill to focus on third-party agents that some large banks use for service of process and would require the financial institution that uses a third party to designate another central location.
Status: Signed into law.
AB 2228 (Villapudua) — Collateral Recovery: Notice
AB 2228 (bill language)
League position: Opposed; then neutral.
Summary: As introduced, Assembly Bill 2228 would clarify that a repossession agency may send a notice of seizure to the debtor’s current address or by email, and prohibits any entity other than the repossession agency from determining charges payable by the debtor for the storage of collateral and personal effects. Amendments taken in the Assembly Judiciary Committee removed the fee and confidentiality provisions, and the bill was limited to the notice provisions.
Status: Failed.
AB 2288 (Kalra) — Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004
AB 2288 (bill language)
League position: Opposed; then supported.
Summary: As introduced, this bill would have expanded the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) by authorizing a court to award injunctive or declaratory relief in addition to penalties. The bill was later amended to include components of the PAGA reform agreement that was reached between the business community, the legislature, and the governor. Some highlights of the PAGA reforms include requiring the aggrieved employee to have personally experienced the alleged violations within the one-year statute of limitations, increased share of penalties for employees, caps penalties on good-acting employers, broadens the employer right to cure, and codifies that a court may limit both the scope of claims and evidence presented at trial.
Status: Signed into law.
AB 2422 (bill language)
League position: Supported.
Summary: This bill requires the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) to make online resources available for financial institutions and the general public related to financial abuse of victims of domestic violence for the purpose of protecting the survivors’ assets and resources.
Status: Signed into law.
AB 2424 (Schiavo) — Mortgages: Foreclosure
AB 2424 (bill language)
League position: Opposed; then neutral.
Summary: This bill adds procedural requirements to the foreclosure process, including notification requirements intended to help a borrower find assistance in navigating the foreclosure process, additional time before a foreclosure auction commences for borrowers who attempt to sell their property, and a minimum sales price, in relation to fair market value, for the initial foreclosure auction. This bill is like a bill in 2022, Senate Bill 1323 (Archuleta), that was similar in its goal but far more problematic.
Status: Signed into law.
AB 2618 (Chen) — Surplus Funds: Investment
AB 2618 (bill language)
League position: Supported.
Summary: This bill extends, until January 1, 2031, the authority for a local agency to invest up to 50 percent (rather than 30 percent) of its surplus funds in deposits at a commercial bank, savings bank, savings and loan association, or credit union under specified conditions.
Status: Signed into law.
AB 2751 (Haney) — Employer Communications During Non-Working Hours
AB 2751 (bill language)
League position: Opposed.
Summary: This “right to disconnect” bill would have required an employer to establish a workplace policy where an employee has the right to ignore communications from the employer during non-working hours, except for cases of an emergency or scheduling change. The League was concerned with the workability, scope, and overly broad nature of the bill, and the potential negative impact on overtime.
Status: Failed.
AB 2908 (Chen) — Shareholders’ Meetings: Remote Communication
AB 2908 (bill language)
League position: Supported.
Summary: This bill removes a sunset provision that applies to an authorization for corporations, including credit unions, to hold remote shareholder or member meetings, as specified, making this authorization apply indefinitely.
Status: Signed into law.
AB 2927 (McCarty) — Pupil Instruction: High School Graduation Requirements; Personal Finance
AB 2927 (bill language)
League position: Supported.
Summary: This bill adds the completion of a separate, stand-alone one-semester course in personal finance to the high school graduation requirement, including charter schools, beginning with the 2030-31 school year. The bill also requires high schools to begin offering the course in personal finance by the 2027-28 school year.
Status: Signed into law.
AB 2930 (Bauer-Kahan) — Automated Decision Systems
AB 2930 (bill language)
League position: Opposed; then neutral.
Summary: This bill would have established a regulatory framework for using automated decision tools (ADTs) in California. It would have required a deployer and a deployer of the technology to submit an impact assessment of the tool, provide the option to consumers to opt-out of using ADT, and would have placed other requirements on both developers and deployers. The bill was significantly amended in the Senate Appropriations Committee to only apply to employment. The bill ultimately did not move off the Senate floor.
Status: Failed.
AB 3048 (Lowenthal) — California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018: Opt-Out Preference Signal
AB 3048 (bill language)
League position: Opposed; then neutral.
Summary: This bill would prohibit a business from developing or maintaining a browser that does not include a setting that enables a consumer to send an opt-out preference signal to businesses with which the consumer interacts through the browser. It would — six months after the adoption of certain regulations by the agency — prohibit a business from developing or maintaining a mobile operating system that does not include a setting that enables a consumer to send an opt-out preference signal to businesses with which the consumer interacts through the mobile operating system. The League was originally concerned about the potential of credit unions getting looped-in under this bill. The bill was amended to narrow and clarify definitions, which confirmed the author’s intended target of the bill being toward internet browsers like Chrome, Safari, and Edge.
Status: Vetoed.
AB 3204 (Bauer-Kahan) — Data Digesters Registration Act
AB 3204 (bill language)
League position: Opposed.
Summary: This bill establishes a “data digester” registry, overseen by the California Privacy Protection Agency (Privacy Agency), that collects and provides to the public information about entities that use personal information to train artificial intelligence (AI) systems. This bill had extremely broad definitions that would have led to credit unions having to register as a data digester.
Status: Failed.
AB 3207 (Patterson and Joe) — The Secure Seniors Protection Act
AB 3207 (bill language)
League position: Supported.
Summary: This bill would require the California Department of Social Services to establish and administer a toll-free hotline to assist all Californians in dealing with scams, with a focus on meeting the needs of individuals who are 60 years of age and older.
Status: Failed.
AB 3279 (Assembly Judiciary Committee) — State Bar of California
AB 3279 (bill language)
League position: Monitored.
Summary: This bill has numerous provisions — and one that applies to credit unions offering trust accounts. That section would require a financial institution, commencing January 1, 2026, to collect an attorney’s license number upon the establishment of a new client trust account. The bill would require a financial institution, on or before March 1, 2026, and annually thereafter, to provide certain information for every client trust account, including the name of the attorney or law firm associated with the client trust account. The bill would require the State Bar of California, on or before July 1, 2026, to require a licensed attorney to furnish the attorney’s State Bar license number to the financial institution where the client trust account is maintained, and would require a financial institution to incorporate that information into its records. The bill would exempt the dissemination of financial information and records pursuant to those provisions from the California Financial Information Privacy Act and the California Right to Financial Privacy Act.
Status: Signed into law.
CA Senate Victories & Engaged Bills
SB 92 (Umberg) — Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004
SB 92 (bill language)
League position: Monitored; then supported.
Summary: This is the second bill which includes the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) reform agreement that was reached between the business community, the legislature, and the governor. Some highlights of the PAGA reforms include requiring the aggrieved employee to have personally experienced the alleged violations within the one-year statute of limitations, increased share of penalties for employees, caps penalties on good-acting employers, broadens the employer right to cure, and codifies that a court may limit both the scope of claims and evidence presented at trial.
Status: Signed into law.
SB 167 (Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee) — Taxation
SB 167 (bill language)
League position: Opposed.
Summary: This bill eliminates the sales-and-use-tax deduction and refund for a lender or retailer’s affiliate related to bad debt, commencing January 1, 2025.
Status: Signed into law.
SB 278 (Dodd) — Elder Abuse: Emergency Financial Contact Program
SB 278 (bill language)
League position: Opposed; then neutral.
Summary: This bill, commencing January 1, 2026, would require a credit union to establish an emergency financial contact program for covered senior accountholders. The bill would require a credit union to notify a joint accountholder or an emergency financial contact, if one has been provided, if the credit union reasonably suspects a covered transaction requested by the covered accountholder is the result of financial abuse. The bill would also require a credit union to delay, by at least three business days, a covered transaction initiated by a covered accountholder if the credit union reasonably suspects the transaction is the result of financial abuse and would make a credit union immune from administrative, civil, or other liability that might arise from a delayed or refused transaction. This bill was a two-year effort by the League and, as introduced, would have held a credit union liable if the credit union “should have known” that elder financial abuse was occurring.
Status: Vetoed (Governor Gavin Newsom’s veto message can be found here).
SB 399 (Wahab) — Employer Communications: Intimidation
SB 399 (bill language)
League position: Opposed.
Summary: This bill would prohibit an employer from subjecting, or threatening to subject, an employee to discharge, discrimination, retaliation, or any other adverse action because the employee declines to attend an employer-sponsored meeting or affirmatively declines to participate in, receive, or listen to any communications with the employer or its agents or representatives, the purpose of which is to communicate the employer’s opinion about religious or political matters. “Political matters” is defined as matters relating to elections for political office, political parties, legislation, regulation, and the decision to join or support any political party or political or labor organization. The League was specifically concerned with the inclusion of the term “regulation” in the definition of “political matters,” as well as the overall broad and ambiguous nature of the bill and its narrow exemptions.
Status: Signed into law.
SB 1061 (Limon) — Consumer Debt: Medical Debt
SB 1061 (bill language)
League position: Monitored.
Summary: This bill would prohibit a consumer credit reporting agency from making a consumer credit report containing information about medical debt. The bill would prohibit a person who uses a consumer credit report in connection with a credit transaction from using medical debt listed on the report as a negative factor when making a credit decision. The bill would prohibit a person from furnishing information regarding a medical debt to a consumer credit reporting agency, make a medical debt void and unenforceable if a person knowingly violates this provision by furnishing information regarding the medical debt to a consumer credit reporting agency. It defines “medical debt” as a debt owed by a consumer to a person whose primary business is providing medical services, products, or devices, or to the person’s agent or assignee, for the provision of medical services, products, or devices.
Status: Signed into law.
SB 1075 (Bradford) — Credit Unions: Overdraft and Non-Sufficient Funds Fees
SB 1075 (bill language)
League position: Opposed; then neutral.
Summary: This bill was introduced on February 12, 2024, and was authored by Senators Steven Bradford and Monique Limon, the former and current chair of the Senate Banking and Financial Institutions Committee. The bill, as introduced, would have required a five-day waiting period before charging a non-sufficient funds (NSF) or overdraft fee, and would limit the number of fees that could be charged in a month to three. The League quickly engaged with state senators on the bill. The bill passed the Senate’s banking committee by a one-vote margin (four “yes” votes, three “no” votes, and one abstention). On the Senate floor, the bill underwent two sets of amendments.
The first set of amendments removed the maximum of three fees and replaced it with language that would index the fee to $14, or the dollar amount that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) lands on within its proposed rules, and would shorten the waiting period from five days to three. The bill was amended again on the Senate floor to put in a delayed implementation for credit unions under $1 billion in assets until 2026. These amendments helped the bill pass the Senate by only four votes. All the while, the League had been engaging in heavy lobbying, grassroots efforts with over 10,000 Connect For The Cause messages sent in the Senate, and 150 attendees at the 2024 California Government Relations Rally (GRR) lobbying against the bill.
Finally, the bill headed to the Assembly Banking and Finance Committee, where the League was able to strike a deal with the author that would remove the waiting period altogether and replace it with a notification system that is modeled after best practices in the industry. The bill will now require a state-chartered credit union to notify members when an overdraft or NSF fee has been assessed and has fee-cap language that will go into effect on January 1, 2026.
Status: Signed into law.
SB 1154 (Hurtado) — California Preventing Algorithmic Collusion Act of 2024
SB 1154 (bill language)
League position: Opposed.
Summary: This bill would require a person, upon request of the state attorney general, to provide to the attorney general a written report on each pricing algorithm identified in the request. The bill would prohibit a person from using or distributing any pricing algorithm that uses, incorporates, or was trained with non-public competitor data. The bill would require a person that has $5 million or more in annual revenue that uses a pricing algorithm to recommend or set a price or commercial term to make certain disclosures (including to a customer), before the customer purchases the relevant product or service, that the price or a commercial term is set or recommended by a pricing algorithm.
Status: Failed.
SB 1286 (Min) — Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act: Covered Debt; Commercial Debts
SB 1286 (bill language)
League position: Opposed.
Summary: This bill expands the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practice Act by including covered commercial debts, as defined, that are entered into, renewed, sold, or assigned on or after July 1, 2025. “Covered commercial debt” and “covered commercial credit” mean money due or owing or alleged to be due or owing from a natural person to a lender, a commercial financing provider, or a debt buyer by reason of one or more covered commercial credit transactions, provided the total amount of all covered commercial credit transactions and all other non-covered commercial credit transactions due and owing by the debtor or other person obligated under the transactions to the same lender, commercial financing provider, or debt buyer is no more than $500,000. “Covered commercial credit transaction” means a transaction between a person and another person in which a total value of no more than $500,000 is acquired on credit by that person from the other person for use primarily for other than personal, family, or household purposes.
Status: Signed into law.
SB 1345 (Smallwood-Cuevas) — Employment Discrimination: Criminal History Information
SB 1345 (bill language)
League position: Opposed.
Summary: This bill would make it an unlawful employment practice for an employer to take an adverse action against an applicant based solely or in part on criminal history information, unless the employer can demonstrate that the applicant’s criminal history has a direct and adverse relationship with one or more specific duties of the job and the employer’s business necessity requires the adverse action. The bill would also make it an unlawful employment practice for an employer to require, as a condition of employment, that an applicant waive the applicant’s right to privacy in criminal history information or otherwise provide an authorization for the employer to obtain the applicant’s criminal history information under specified law, unless the employer can demonstrate a business necessity. The bill would require an employer to provide to an applicant a written notice when requesting an applicant’s authorization to obtain the applicant’s criminal history information.
Status: Failed.
Stay in touch and get involved.
Subscribe to the Advocacy Blog
CLICK TO SUBSCRIBE
Connect for
the Cause
How Can I
Donate to PAC?
Project
Zip Code
CLICK HERE