CA AB 1965
enactedCannabis: testing: quality assurance.
California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · lower
Subscribe in a feed reader. The feed covers recorded actions from the last 30 days; Bill Commons may record an action after it happened at the legislature.
Quick answers
Did CA AB 1965 pass?
Yes. CA AB 1965 has been enacted into law. Latest recorded action (2026-09-27): Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 564, Statutes of 2026.
What is CA AB 1965 about?
Existing law, the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) , an initiative measure, authorizes a person who obtains a state license under AUMA and any applicable local ordinances to engage in commercial adult-use cannabis activity pursuant to that license, if conducted as prescribed. Existing law, the Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA) , among other things, consolidates the licensure and regulation of commercial medicinal and adult-use cannabis activities, and requires the Department of Cannabis Control to administer its provisions. Existing law prohibits cannabis or cannabis products from being sold by a licensee unless specified quality assurance standards and testing standards are met. Existing law requires representative samples of the cannabis or cannabis products in their final form to be tested by a licensed testing laboratory, and requires the department to develop criteria to determine which batches are tested. Existing law authorizes the testing laboratory to retest a sample if the testing laboratory notifies the department, in writing, that the test was compromised due to equipment malfunction, staff error, or another circumstance authorized by the department, and the department authorizes the retest of that sample. Existing law requires the testing laboratory to issue a certificate of analysis that the cannabis batch has passed the testing requirements, and authorizes the testing laboratory to amend the certificate of analysis to correct minor errors, as specified. This bill would specify that all cannabis or cannabis products are subject to test or retest, and would revise the retest requirements to instead authorize a testing laboratory to retest a sample of cannabis or cannabis products if either the testing laboratory notifies the department, in writing, that the test was compromised due to equipment malfunction or staff error, if the department requires the retest, or if the department authorizes the request. This bill would require the licensee to allow the department to obtain or access any cannabis or cannabis products held or offered for retail sale for the purposes of conducting off-the-shelf laboratory testing. The bill would also require a retailer and any other licensee authorized to engage in the retail sale of cannabis or cannabis products to provide the certificate of analysis associated with any cannabis or cannabis product held or offered for retail sale to a customer upon request. This bill would also require a testing laboratory to be subject to performance testing to ensure consistency of results across laboratories. Existing law authorizes a testing laboratory to receive and test samples of cannabis or cannabis products from state or local law enforcement, or a prosecuting or regulatory agency, as specified, and provides that the testing of that cannabis is not commercial cannabis activity for purposes of MAUCRSA and is not arranged or overseen by the department. This bill would require a licensed testing laboratory to comply with the department's request to evaluate the laboratory's testing practice.
Who sponsors CA AB 1965?
Sharp-Collins is the primary sponsor of CA AB 1965.
Description
Existing law, the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) , an initiative measure, authorizes a person who obtains a state license under AUMA and any applicable local ordinances to engage in commercial adult-use cannabis activity pursuant to that license, if conducted as prescribed. Existing law, the Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA) , among other things, consolidates the licensure and regulation of commercial medicinal and adult-use cannabis activities, and requires the Department of Cannabis Control to administer its provisions. Existing law prohibits cannabis or cannabis products from being sold by a licensee unless specified quality assurance standards and testing standards are met. Existing law requires representative samples of the cannabis or cannabis products in their final form to be tested by a licensed testing laboratory, and requires the department to develop criteria to determine which batches are tested. Existing law authorizes the testing laboratory to retest a sample if the testing laboratory notifies the department, in writing, that the test was compromised due to equipment malfunction, staff error, or another circumstance authorized by the department, and the department authorizes the retest of that sample. Existing law requires the testing laboratory to issue a certificate of analysis that the cannabis batch has passed the testing requirements, and authorizes the testing laboratory to amend the certificate of analysis to correct minor errors, as specified. This bill would specify that all cannabis or cannabis products are subject to test or retest, and would revise the retest requirements to instead authorize a testing laboratory to retest a sample of cannabis or cannabis products if either the testing laboratory notifies the department, in writing, that the test was compromised due to equipment malfunction or staff error, if the department requires the retest, or if the department authorizes the request. This bill would require the licensee to allow the department to obtain or access any cannabis or cannabis products held or offered for retail sale for the purposes of conducting off-the-shelf laboratory testing. The bill would also require a retailer and any other licensee authorized to engage in the retail sale of cannabis or cannabis products to provide the certificate of analysis associated with any cannabis or cannabis product held or offered for retail sale to a customer upon request. This bill would also require a testing laboratory to be subject to performance testing to ensure consistency of results across laboratories. Existing law authorizes a testing laboratory to receive and test samples of cannabis or cannabis products from state or local law enforcement, or a prosecuting or regulatory agency, as specified, and provides that the testing of that cannabis is not commercial cannabis activity for purposes of MAUCRSA and is not arranged or overseen by the department. This bill would require a licensed testing laboratory to comply with the department's request to evaluate the laboratory's testing practice.
- Introduced
- —
- Latest action
- 2026-09-27 — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 564, Statutes of 2026.
- Bill type
- bill
- Last updated
- —
Subjects
Sponsors
- Sharp-Collinsauthor
Committees
Not provided by source.
Action timeline
Newest first
2026-09-27
Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 564, Statutes of 2026.
became-law
2026-09-27
Approved by the Governor.
executive-signature
2026-08-27
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.
2026-08-20
In Assembly. Ordered to Engrossing and Enrolling.
committee-passage
2026-08-20
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 39. Noes 0.).
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2026-08-20
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 39. Noes 0. Page 5590.).
2026-08-18
Ordered to special consent calendar.
2026-08-13
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (August 13).
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2026-08-13
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2026-08-03
In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file.
referral-committee
2026-06-29
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (June 29). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2026-06-03
Referred to Com. on B. P. & E.D.
referral-committee
2026-05-21
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
reading-1,referral-committee
2026-05-21
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 73. Noes 0. Page 5210.)
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2026-05-18
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2026-05-14
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (May 14).
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2026-04-22
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
referral-committee
2026-04-07
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 19. Noes 0.) (April 7). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2026-03-02
Referred to Com. on B. & P.
referral-committee
2026-02-14
From printer. May be heard in committee March 16.
2026-02-13
Read first time. To print.
reading-1
Versions
Documents
- 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)
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
Votes
Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] with recommendation: To Consent Calendar
2026-04-07 · pass · 19-0
Member-level votes (19)
- Elhawary: yes
- Alanis: yes
- Bains: yes
- Chen: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Irwin: yes
- Jackson: yes
- Berman: yes
- Haney: yes
- Nguyen: yes
- Lowenthal: yes
- Addis: yes
- Ahrens: yes
- Johnson: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Macedo: yes
- Aguiar-Curry: yes
- Hadwick: yes
- Hart: yes
Do pass.
2026-05-14 · pass · 15-0
Member-level votes (15)
- Dixon: yes
- Krell: yes
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Tangipa: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Ta: yes
- Fong: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Hoover: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Solache: yes
- Aguiar-Curry: yes
- Mark González: yes
AB 1965 Sharp-Collins Assembly Third Reading
2026-05-21 · pass · 73-0
Member-level votes (80)
- Ta: yes
- Lowenthal: yes
- Stefani: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Soria: yes
- Dixon: yes
- Ortega: yes
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Ávila Farías: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Berman: yes
- Schiavo: yes
- Rogers: yes
- Papan: yes
- Petrie-Norris: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Ahrens: yes
- Ellis: yes
- Haney: yes
- Solache: yes
- Nguyen: yes
- Patel: yes
- Tangipa: yes
- Bonta: yes
- Aguiar-Curry: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Patterson: yes
- Quirk-Silva: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Davies: yes
- Lee: yes
- Wallis: yes
- Alanis: yes
- Michelle Rodriguez: yes
- Gabriel: yes
- Boerner: yes
- Krell: yes
- Ransom: yes
- Bryan: yes
- Castillo: yes
- Rivas: yes
- Wilson: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Bains: yes
- Harabedian: yes
- Zbur: yes
- Valencia: yes
- Carrillo: yes
- Fong: yes
- Addis: yes
- Connolly: yes
- Gipson: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Ward: yes
- Jeff Gonzalez: yes
- McKinnor: yes
- Hadwick: yes
- Bennett: yes
- Hart: yes
- DeMaio: yes
- Gallagher: yes
- Jackson: yes
- Johnson: yes
- Flora: yes
- Macedo: yes
- Muratsuchi: yes
- Blanca Rubio: yes
- Sanchez: yes
- Irwin: yes
- Alvarez: yes
- Bauer-Kahan: yes
- Celeste Rodriguez: other
- Ramos: other
- Garcia: other
- Lackey: other
- Arambula: other
- Hoover: other
- Chen: other
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2026-06-29 · pass · 11-0
Member-level votes (11)
- Strickland: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Archuleta: yes
- Niello: yes
- Choi: yes
- Menjivar: yes
- Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Arreguín: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Umberg: yes
Related bills
No related bills recorded for this bill.
Official source
Attribution
Data from openstates_api_sync, retrieved 2026-09-30T01:26:33.363335Z
Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:
Session-wide evidence can include changes to other bills:
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 1965. 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.