California bills · 2025-2026 Regular Session
California AB 671
Accelerated restaurant building plan approval: California Retail Food Code: tenant improvements.
- Introduced
- In committee
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became law
Sponsors
- Wicks (Democratic)
Cosponsors (6)
- Gabriel (Democratic)
- Mark González (Democratic)
- Haney (Democratic)
- Blanca Rubio (Democratic)
- Ward (Democratic)
- Grayson (Democratic)
Summary
Official abstract published by the California legislature· summary
Existing law, the California Building Standards Law, establishes the California Building Standards Commission within the Department of General Services. Existing law requires the commission to approve and adopt building standards and to codify those standards in the California Building Standards Code. Existing law authorizes local governments to enact ordinances or regulations that make building standards amendments to the California Building Standards Code, as specified.
This bill would establish a streamlined approval process for a local permit for a tenant improvement, as defined, relating to a restaurant. In this regard, the bill would require a local building department, upon the request and at the expense of the permit applicant, to allow a qualified professional certifier, defined as a licensed architect or engineer who meets certain requirements, to certify that the plans and specifications of the tenant improvement comply with all applicable building, health, and safety codes, as specified. The bill would require a qualified professional certifier, or the applicant, as applicable, to prepare certain affidavits related to the tenant improvement under penalty of perjury. The bill would require the local building department to approve or deny the permit application within 20 business days of receiving a complete application and would deem the plan approved for permitting purposes if the local building department does not approve or deny the application within that timeframe. The bill would also authorize the applicant to resubmit corrected plans addressing the deficiencies identified in the initial denial, would limit the local building department's review of each subsequent resubmission to the deficiencies identified in the initial denial, and would require the local building department to approve or deny each subsequent resubmission within 10 business days of receipt. The bill would require each local building department to conduct audits of tenant improvements submitted for certification, as specified. The bill would authorize a city or county to adopt additional qualifications or requirements for qualified professional certifiers, including penalties or reasonable administrative fines for certain actions. The bill would make qualified professional certifiers liable for any damages arising from negligent plan review. The bill would also require the applicant to indemnify the local agency from any property damage or personal injury arising from construction permitted under the above-described provisions.
Existing law establishes the California Architects Board and the Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists to administer the licensure and regulation of architects and engineers, respectively. Existing law specifies grounds for disciplinary action by the boards.
This bill would deem making a false statement in a certification described above to be grounds for disciplinary action against a licensee who serves as a qualified professional certifier.
Existing law, the Government Claims Act, establishes the liability and immunity of a public entity for its acts or omissions that cause harm to persons. Where a public entity is under a mandatory duty imposed by an enactment that is designed to protect against the risk of a particular kind of injury, the act makes the public entity liable for an injury of that kind proximately caused by its failure to discharge the duty unless the public entity establishes that it exercised reasonable diligence to discharge the duty.
This bill, notwithstanding the above-described liability of a public entity for failure to discharge certain mandatory duties, would provide that a public entity or public employee is not liable for an injury caused by their discretionary or ministerial acts or omissions relating to the issuance or denial of a permit pursuant to the bill's provisions.
Existing law, the California Retail Food Code, establishes uniform health and sanitation standards for retail food facilities for regulation by the State Department of Public Health, and requires local enforcement agencies to enforce those provisions. The California Retail Food Code requires a person proposing to build or remodel a food facility to submit complete, easily readable plans drawn to scale, and specifications to the enforcement agency for review, and to receive plan approval before starting any new construction or remodeling of a facility for use as a retail food facility. The California Retail Food Code requires the plans to be approved or rejected within 20 working days after receipt by the enforcement agency and, unless the plans are approved or rejected within 20 working days, deems those plans approved. A violation of the California Retail Food Code is generally a misdemeanor.
This bill would require that a tenant improvement plan for a restaurant be deemed approved for permitting purposes if the enforcement agency does not approve or deny the application within 20 business days of receiving a complete plan. The bill would also authorize the applicant to resubmit a corrected plan addressing the deficiencies identified in the initial denial, would limit the enforcement agency's review of each subsequent resubmission to the deficiencies identified in the initial denial, and would require the enforcement agency to approve or deny each subsequent resubmission within 10 business days.
Existing law, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects.
To the extent that the streamlined, ministerial review processes established by the bill would apply to final, discretionary approval of a tenant improvement, the bill would exempt those projects from CEQA.
This bill would also make related findings and declarations.
The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities.
By adding to the duties of local officials with respect to the review and approval of tenant improvements for restaurants, and by expanding the scope of various crimes related to these provisions, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for specified reasons.
Text versions
- 10/09/25 - Chaptered· Oct 9, 2025
- 09/11/25 - Enrolled· Sep 11, 2025
- 08/25/25 - Amended Senate· Aug 25, 2025
- 07/16/25 - Amended Senate· Jul 16, 2025
- 07/09/25 - Amended Senate· Jul 9, 2025
- 07/02/25 - Amended Senate· Jul 2, 2025
- 05/22/25 - Amended Assembly· May 22, 2025
- 04/24/25 - Amended Assembly· Apr 24, 2025
- 03/24/25 - Amended Assembly· Mar 24, 2025
- 02/14/25 - Introduced· Feb 14, 2025
- AB671
Roll-call votes
State vote data last updated Oct 15, 2026, 8:04 PM.
| Date | Vote | Result | Your legislators |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 9, 2025 House | AB 671 Wicks Concurrence in Senate Amendments | pass | Set your home in California to see |
| Sep 2, 2025 Senate | 3rd Reading AB671 Wicks et al. By Grayson | pass | Set your home in California to see |
| Jul 14, 2025 Senate | Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Appropriations] | pass | Set your home in California to see |
| Jul 9, 2025 Senate | Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Business, Professions and Economic Development] | pass | Set your home in California to see |
| May 29, 2025 House | AB 671 Wicks Assembly Third Reading | pass | Set your home in California to see |
| May 21, 2025 House | Do pass as amended. | pass | Set your home in California to see |
| Apr 29, 2025 House | Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] | pass | Set your home in California to see |
| Apr 23, 2025 House | Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Business and Professions] | pass | Set your home in California to see |
Actions
- Oct 9, 2025 · Legislature
Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 470, Statutes of 2025. - Oct 9, 2025 · Legislature
Approved by the Governor. - Sep 23, 2025 · Legislature
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m. - Sep 15, 2025 · House
Enrolled measure version corrected. - Sep 9, 2025 · House
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 80. Noes 0. Page 3094.). - Sep 2, 2025 · House
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. - Sep 2, 2025 · Senate
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 40. Noes 0. Page 2397.). - Aug 26, 2025 · Senate
Read second time. Ordered to third reading. - Aug 25, 2025 · Senate
Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading. - Aug 20, 2025 · Senate
Read second time. Ordered to third reading. - Aug 19, 2025 · Senate
From committee: Be ordered to second reading pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8. - Jul 16, 2025 · Senate
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR. - Jul 15, 2025 · Senate
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (July 14). - Jul 9, 2025 · Senate
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on B. P. & E.D. - Jul 9, 2025 · Senate
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on B. P. & E.D. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (July 9). Re-referred to Com. on B. P. & E.D. - Jul 2, 2025 · Senate
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on L. GOV. - Jun 11, 2025 · Senate
Referred to Coms. on L. GOV. and B. P. & E.D. - May 29, 2025 · Senate
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. - May 29, 2025 · House
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 72. Noes 0. Page 1772.) - May 23, 2025 · House
Read second time. Ordered to third reading. - May 22, 2025 · House
Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading. - May 21, 2025 · House
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (May 21). - May 14, 2025 · House
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee. - Apr 29, 2025 · House
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (April 29). Re-referred to Com. on APPR. - Apr 28, 2025 · House
Re-referred to Com. on B. & P. - Apr 24, 2025 · House
Read second time and amended. - Apr 23, 2025 · House
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on B. & P. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (April 23). - Mar 25, 2025 · House
Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV. - Mar 24, 2025 · House
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. Read second time and amended. - Mar 24, 2025 · House
Referred to Coms. on L. GOV. and B. & P. - Feb 15, 2025 · House
From printer. May be heard in committee March 17. - Feb 14, 2025 · House
Read first time. To print.