Consider recommendations from the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) relating to State legislation affecting women and girls.

County of Santa Clara Clerk of the Board 129838 DATE: August 11, 2026 TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Curtis Boone, Clerk of the Board SUBJECT: Commission on the Status of Women Policy Recommendations RECOMMENDED ACTION Consider recommendations from the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) relating to State legislation affecting women and girls. Possible action: a. Receive report from CSW. b. Direct Administration to review the recommendations from CSW to support Assembly Bills 464, 1876, 1889, 1906, 2563, and Senate Bill 1192, and report to the Board as part of the monthly legislative update with options for consideration. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS On June 10, 2026 (Item No. 9), the Children, Seniors and Families Committee (CSFC) approved forwarding the recommendation to the Board of Supervisors for approval. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS The recommended action will have no fiscal impact on the general fund. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION AND BACKGROUND At the April 13, 2026 meeting of the Commission on the Status of Women (Item No. 11), the Commission approved forwarding a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors through CSFC to support Assembly Bill (AB) 464, AB 1570, AB 1823, AB 1876,...

Commission on the Status of Women County of Santa Clara 70 West Hedding Street East Wing, 10th Floor San Jose, CA 95110 (408) 299-5001 Transmittal of Policy Recommendations from the Commission on the Status of Women Dear Supervisor Arenas, Chairperson and Supervisor Duong, Vice Chairperson, Children, Seniors and Families Committee, On behalf of the Santa Clara County Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), I am pleased to transmit for your review and consideration a set of policy recommendations on state legislation recently adopted by the Commission. At our most recent meeting, the CSW voted unanimously to advance these recommendations to the Board of Supervisors through your Committee. The package includes a list of 15 state bills recommended for support and 1 state bill recommended for opposition. The CSW is a county advisory body established to promote the Board of Supervisors' policy to take affirmative action to eliminate the practice of discrimination and prejudice based on gender in the areas of housing, employment, education, community services, and related fields. Through research, community engagement, and collaboration with stakeholders, the CSW seeks to promote...

Theme Bill Health care AB 1570 (Wilson) coverage: diagnostic imaging Description Requires health care service plan contracts and health insurance policies issued on or after January 1, 2028, to provide coverage without cost sharing for screening mammography and medically necessary diagnostic breast imaging. Current Legislative Status HELD in Assembly Appropriations. No longer moving forward this year. Health care AB 1906 (Aguiarcoverage: home test Curry) kits Requires health care service plans and health insurers to cover annual cervical cancer screening home test kits without cost sharing, and adds this as a covered benefit under Medi-Cal, effective January 1, 2027. In Senate Appropriations. Triggering event: pregnancy AB 2066 (Rodriguez) Makes pregnancy a qualifying triggering event for enrollment in In the Senate Appropriations. or changing a health benefit plan under Knox-Keene and disability County position: SUPPORT insurance laws. Women's Health AB 2082 (Gonzalez, Jeff) The Rural Farmworker Women's Health Act of 2026 — requires the State Department of Public Health to establish a program beginning July 1, 2027, working with local nonprofits to provide free menstrual...

AB 1906 – Expanding Access to At-Home Cervical Cancer Tests __________________________________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY California law does not require health insurance plans to cover the cost of cervical cancer screening home test kits. AB 1906 would require private plans and Medi-Cal to provide annual coverage of these at-home tests without cost-sharing. BACKGROUND Cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer among women globally, with about 99.7% of cases caused by persistent human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. At least half of sexually active people will contract HPV at some point, so when detected early, cervical cancer has a five-year survival rate of about 91% which drops to about 20% for late-stage diagnoses. Disparities exist with rural women 25% more likely to be diagnosed and 42% more likely to die, while Black and Native women experience mortality rates about 55% and 80% higher than white women. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), widespread screening has reduced cervical cancer incidence and mortality by about 70% since the 1950s. CDC research shows at-home HPV test kits can more than double...

AB 1876: Fair Care for All Act SUMMARY Assembly Bill 1876, the Equitable Care for All Act, codifies federal non-discrimination protections under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act in state law. Given federal threats to scale back these protections, this bill would protect vulnerable groups from discrimination in any health program or activity that receives government funding. BACKGROUND In 2010, Congress passed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care of Act (ACA). The ACA includes Section 1557, which houses the law’s non-discrimination protections. This section makes it unlawful for any health care provider receiving federal funds to refuse to treat an individual on the basis on race, color, national origin, sex, age or disability. These protections have been in effect since the ACA’s passage, but implementation has reflected guidance across different Presidential administrations. In 2024, the federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a final rule implementing Section 1557. The protections outlined in this rule have been essential to ensuring historically vulnerable communities—including LGBTQIA+ individuals, nonEnglish speaking individuals, and...

Assemblymember James C. Ramos 45th Assembly District AB 1889 (RAMOS): CRIMINAL PROTECTIVE ORDERS. [Pick the date] SUMMARY SOLUTION This bill would authorize the court to issue a protective order that is valid for up to 10 years, or 2 years after the defendant’s release, whichever is later. prepare. As a result, many survivors continue to live in fear, often without the necessary tools or protections to prevent unwanted contact from the offender. BACKGROUND A criminal protective order (CPO) is an order issued by a judge to protect a witness or victim of a crime. These orders are routinely issued in cases involving domestic violence, human trafficking, criminal activity related to gang violence, or registerable sex offences. 1 Its purpose is to ensure the offender stays away from the protected victim and witnesses. When a defendant is convicted of a crime, a judge may issue a CPO at the time of sentencing, including if the defendant is put on probation. The CPO may be valid for up to 10 years. AB 1889 would ensure that a CPO issued by a court is valid for up to 10 years or 2 years after their release, whichever is greater. In doing so, we can ensure that in situations where a...

SB 1192 (Rubio) The Reclaim Act Bill Summary SB 1192 will empower survivors of domestic violence and allow them to reclaim their freedom by limiting the ability of their abuser to use the courts to frivolously harass and control them. Existing Law Section 6320 of the Family Code defines “coercive control” as a pattern of behavior that unreasonably interferes with a person’s free will and personal liberty. Courts can grant a restraining order against a domestic violence abuser based on this or other abusive behavior defined in Sections 6203 and 6320 of the Family Code. “Litigation abuse” is also defined in Section 6309 of the Family Code and has been recognized as a form of domestic violence by some courts. Sections 391-391.8 of the Code of Civil Procedure provide for certain ways parties can protect themselves against “vexatious litigants,” as defined by Section 391. For instance, parties can ask the court to declare someone a vexatious litigant, to dismiss a vexatious litigation, and to order a vexatious litigant to furnish security or receive permission from the court before they can file a new action. This last order is typically called a “prefiling order” (Section 391.7) and...

AB 2563 – DEFINING SEX DISCRIMINATION SUMMARY AB 2563 clarifies the definition of sex discrimination across California codes to ensure that Californians of all genders have equal protection under every section of state law. BACKGROUND In 1972, the California legislature ratified the federal Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), which declares, “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.” However, the amendment was not formally added to the U.S. Constitution after disputes over ratification deadlines. Rather than rely on federal action, the California Legislature directed the California Law Revision Commission with conducting a study to determine whether California statutes comply with the ERA. In September 2025, the Commission completed its review. PROBLEM As part of that study, the Commission found that the definitions of sex discrimination are not consistent across California’s many codes. overturning of Roe v. Wade – California must ensure that its laws are clear, consistent, and unequivocal in protecting people from discrimination based on sex. SOLUTION ➢ AB 2563 aligns the definition of sex discrimination...

AB 464 – Justice for Incarcerated Survivors of Sexual Assault __________________________________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY Sexual assault continues to be a widespread issue within California Department of Correction and Rehabilitation (CDCR) facilities, with 86% of incarcerated women in the U.S. having experienced sexual violence prior to incarceration. Assembly Bill (AB) 464 seeks to protect survivors from retaliation, ensure justice, and hold responsible parties accountable. It extends the statute of limitations, allowing survivors assaulted by public employees to file lawsuits up to the end of their sentence. BACKGROUND CDCR maintains a zero-tolerance policy for sexual assault and harassment in state prisons, yet sexual abuse remains a pervasive issue despite the Prison Rape Elimination Act being enacted over two decades ago. Survivors who report abuse often face retaliation, including increased strip searches, solitary confinement, forced transfers, and additional duties. In May 2023, a former corrections officer was charged with 96 counts of rape and sexual assault against over a dozen women at the California Correctional Women’s...