CA AB 1430
vetoedCounty recorders: fees.
California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · lower
Quick answers
Did CA AB 1430 pass?
No. CA AB 1430 passed the legislature but was vetoed on 2026-01-22. Latest recorded action (2026-01-22): Consideration of Governor's veto stricken from file.
What is CA AB 1430 about?
Existing law establishes the office of county recorder and requires the county recorder to accept for recordation any instrument, paper, or notice that is authorized or required to be recorded, subject to the collection of specified fees. Existing law prohibits the fee for recording and indexing an instrument, paper, or notice from exceeding $10 for recording the first page and $3 for each additional page, which charges are to reimburse the county for the costs of services rendered. Existing law requires $1 of each $3 fee for each additional page to be deposited in the county general fund. This bill would set the fee for recording and indexing at $15 for recording the first page and $4 for each additional page, but would prohibit the fees from exceeding the reasonable costs of the county recorder's office for providing these services. The bill would provide that these funds are to be dedicated to, and solely utilized for, the county recorder's office, as specified. The bill would delete the provision requiring $1 of each $3 fee for each additional page to be deposited in the county general fund. Existing law specifies that $1 for recording the first page and $1 for each additional page shall be available solely to support, maintain, improve, and provide for the full operation for modernized creation, retention, and retrieval of information in each county's system of recorded documents. This bill would increase the $1 amount for each additional page to $3. Existing law authorizes the county board of supervisors to provide for an additional fee of $1 for each instrument, paper, or notice of record to order to defray the cost of converting the county recorder's document storage system to micrographics. Existing law, until January 1, 2026, authorizes the $1 fee to also be used for restoration and preservation of the county recorder's permanent archival microfilm, to implement and fund a county recorder archive program, or to implement and maintain or utilize a trusted system for the permanent preservation of recorded document images. This bill would delete the January 1, 2026, repeal date, thereby making these provisions operative indefinitely. The bill would replace a reference to "archival microfilm" with "archival mediums" and would repeal related provisions. The bill would include related legislative findings concerning county recorder fees. By imposing new duties on counties relative to recording fees, the 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 a specified reason.
Who sponsors CA AB 1430?
Bennett is the primary sponsor of CA AB 1430.
Description
Existing law establishes the office of county recorder and requires the county recorder to accept for recordation any instrument, paper, or notice that is authorized or required to be recorded, subject to the collection of specified fees. Existing law prohibits the fee for recording and indexing an instrument, paper, or notice from exceeding $10 for recording the first page and $3 for each additional page, which charges are to reimburse the county for the costs of services rendered. Existing law requires $1 of each $3 fee for each additional page to be deposited in the county general fund. This bill would set the fee for recording and indexing at $15 for recording the first page and $4 for each additional page, but would prohibit the fees from exceeding the reasonable costs of the county recorder's office for providing these services. The bill would provide that these funds are to be dedicated to, and solely utilized for, the county recorder's office, as specified. The bill would delete the provision requiring $1 of each $3 fee for each additional page to be deposited in the county general fund. Existing law specifies that $1 for recording the first page and $1 for each additional page shall be available solely to support, maintain, improve, and provide for the full operation for modernized creation, retention, and retrieval of information in each county's system of recorded documents. This bill would increase the $1 amount for each additional page to $3. Existing law authorizes the county board of supervisors to provide for an additional fee of $1 for each instrument, paper, or notice of record to order to defray the cost of converting the county recorder's document storage system to micrographics. Existing law, until January 1, 2026, authorizes the $1 fee to also be used for restoration and preservation of the county recorder's permanent archival microfilm, to implement and fund a county recorder archive program, or to implement and maintain or utilize a trusted system for the permanent preservation of recorded document images. This bill would delete the January 1, 2026, repeal date, thereby making these provisions operative indefinitely. The bill would replace a reference to "archival microfilm" with "archival mediums" and would repeal related provisions. The bill would include related legislative findings concerning county recorder fees. By imposing new duties on counties relative to recording fees, the 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 a specified reason.
- Introduced
- 2025-02-21
- Latest action
- 2026-01-22 — Consideration of Governor's veto stricken from file.
- Bill type
- bill
- Last updated
- —
Subjects
Sponsors
- Bennettauthor
Committees
Not provided by source.
Action timeline
2025-02-21
Introduced. To print.
introduction
2025-02-22
From printer. May be heard in committee March 24.
2025-02-24
Read first time.
reading-1
2025-03-17
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. Read second time and amended.
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-03-17
Referred to Com. on L. GOV.
referral-committee
2025-03-18
Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.
referral-committee
2025-05-01
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (April 30). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-05-14
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 12. Noes 1.) (May 14).
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2025-05-15
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-05-23
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 64. Noes 1. Page 1658.)
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2025-05-23
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
reading-1,referral-committee
2025-06-04
Referred to Com. on L. GOV.
referral-committee
2025-06-18
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (June 18). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-06-30
From committee: Be ordered to second reading pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.
committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2
2025-07-01
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-09-10
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 35. Noes 0. Page 2806.).
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2025-09-10
In Assembly. Ordered to Engrossing and Enrolling.
committee-passage
2025-09-22
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3 p.m.
executive-receipt
2025-10-06
Vetoed by Governor.
executive-veto
2025-10-06
Consideration of Governor's veto pending.
2026-01-22
Consideration of Governor's veto stricken from file.
veto-override-failure
Versions
Documents
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- text/html
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
Votes
Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2025-04-30 · pass · 8-0
Member-level votes (10)
- Stefani: yes
- Ransom: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Ward: yes
- Wilson: yes
- Blanca Rubio: yes
- Carrillo: yes
- Ramos: yes
- Ta: other
- Hoover: other
Do pass.
2025-05-14 · pass · 12-1
Member-level votes (15)
- Fong: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Hart: yes
- Dixon: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Solache: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Arambula: yes
- Sanchez: no
- Ta: other
- Tangipa: other
AB 1430 Bennett Assembly Third Reading
2025-05-23 · pass · 64-1
Member-level votes (79)
- Davies: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Soria: yes
- Lee: yes
- Hadwick: yes
- Valencia: yes
- Rogers: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Bennett: yes
- Blanca Rubio: yes
- Solache: yes
- Zbur: yes
- Alanis: yes
- Carrillo: yes
- Haney: yes
- Flora: yes
- Bonta: yes
- Muratsuchi: yes
- Connolly: yes
- Rivas: yes
- Ahrens: yes
- Patterson: yes
- Petrie-Norris: yes
- Alvarez: yes
- Harabedian: yes
- Dixon: yes
- Addis: yes
- Bauer-Kahan: yes
- Fong: yes
- Ávila Farías: yes
- Jeff Gonzalez: yes
- Berman: yes
- Ward: yes
- Hart: yes
- Gipson: yes
- Irwin: yes
- Jackson: yes
- Arambula: yes
- Lowenthal: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Stefani: yes
- Gabriel: yes
- Boerner: yes
- Ramos: yes
- Wallis: yes
- Ortega: yes
- Papan: yes
- Patel: yes
- Ransom: yes
- Schiavo: yes
- Michelle Rodriguez: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Bains: yes
- Celeste Rodriguez: yes
- Aguiar-Curry: yes
- Garcia: yes
- Krell: yes
- Wilson: yes
- Caloza: yes
- McKinnor: yes
- Quirk-Silva: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- DeMaio: no
- Bryan: other
- Sharp-Collins: other
- Lackey: other
- Nguyen: other
- Ellis: other
- Castillo: other
- Sanchez: other
- Ta: other
- Chen: other
- Hoover: other
- Gallagher: other
- Macedo: other
- Wicks: other
- Tangipa: other
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2025-06-18 · pass · 6-0
Member-level votes (7)
- Cabaldon: yes
- Choi: yes
- Arreguín: yes
- Laird: yes
- Wiener: yes
- Durazo: yes
- Seyarto: other
3rd Reading AB1430 Bennett By Durazo
2025-09-10 · pass · 35-0
Member-level votes (40)
- Umberg: yes
- Grove: yes
- Wiener: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Cortese: yes
- Dahle: yes
- Alvarado-Gil: yes
- Limón: yes
- Durazo: yes
- Choi: yes
- Archuleta: yes
- Gonzalez: yes
- Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Weber Pierson: yes
- Hurtado: yes
- Arreguín: yes
- Laird: yes
- Rubio: yes
- McGuire: yes
- Reyes: yes
- Blakespear: yes
- Padilla: yes
- Valladares: yes
- Menjivar: yes
- Pérez: yes
- Strickland: yes
- Stern: yes
- Allen: yes
- Caballero: yes
- McNerney: yes
- Ashby: yes
- Richardson: yes
- Becker: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Niello: other
- Cervantes: other
- Jones: other
- Ochoa Bogh: other
- Seyarto: other
Related bills
No related bills recorded for this bill.
Official source
Attribution
Data from openstates_bulk_csv, retrieved 2026-07-24T01:34:27.960412Z
Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:
Use this data
Every field on this page is available from the free public API — no key or licence required. Fetch this bill as JSON: GET /api/v1/bills?jurisdiction=CA&identifier=AB 1430. See the API docs or the MCP server for AI assistants.
Known limitations
- Sponsor party and chamber affiliation are not yet captured by this API.
- Committee referrals are not yet captured.
- Some documents have no extracted text yet, so version comparison may be limited.
See the methodology page for data sources and limitations.