Bill Commons

CA AB 981

dead

Vehicles: active intelligent speed assist devices.

California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · lower

Follow this bill’s action updates (Atom)

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 981 pass?

No. CA AB 981 did not pass — it was defeated or died in the legislative process. Latest recorded action (2026-02-02): From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

What is CA AB 981 about?

Existing law requires, until January 1, 2026, a person who has been convicted on or after January 1, 2019, of driving a motor vehicle under the influence of an alcoholic beverage, as specified, to install for a period of time, as ordered by the court, an ignition interlock device (IID) on the vehicle they operate. Installation of an IID is discretionary for a first offender, as specified. Existing law also requires persons convicted of driving under the influence of a drug to install an IID. Existing law specifies periods for which a person convicted of one or more prior driving-under-the-influence violations is required to install an IID, as specified. A violation of the Vehicle Code is a crime punishable as an infraction, unless otherwise specified. This bill would require the Department of Motor Vehicles to establish, until January 1, 2033, a pilot program in the Counties of Los Angeles, San Diego, Fresno, Sacramento, and Kern that would impose a similar requirement for persons convicted of specified driving offenses relating to excessive speed, reckless driving, and exhibitions of speed to install for a period of time, as ordered by the court, a certified active intelligent speed assist device (ISA) on any vehicle the person operates. The bill would similarly make the installation of an ISA discretionary for a first offender, as specified. The bill would establish periods for which a person convicted of one or more prior specified driving offenses is required to install an ISA, as specified. The bill would require the Department of Motor Vehicles to create a verification installation form to be submitted by persons subject to these provisions. The bill would impose a fee schedule to be adopted by certified ISA manufacturers and their agents for the ISA and other related costs. By creating new crimes related to the installation and maintenance of an ISA, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require, by July 1, 2030, the department to report data to the Transportation Agency regarding the implementation and efficacy of the pilot program, as specified, and require the Transportation Agency to report to the Legislature on the outcomes of the pilot program by July 1, 2031. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Counties of Los Angeles, San Diego, Fresno, Sacramento, and Kern. 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 981?

Gipson is the primary sponsor of CA AB 981.

Description

Existing law requires, until January 1, 2026, a person who has been convicted on or after January 1, 2019, of driving a motor vehicle under the influence of an alcoholic beverage, as specified, to install for a period of time, as ordered by the court, an ignition interlock device (IID) on the vehicle they operate. Installation of an IID is discretionary for a first offender, as specified. Existing law also requires persons convicted of driving under the influence of a drug to install an IID. Existing law specifies periods for which a person convicted of one or more prior driving-under-the-influence violations is required to install an IID, as specified. A violation of the Vehicle Code is a crime punishable as an infraction, unless otherwise specified. This bill would require the Department of Motor Vehicles to establish, until January 1, 2033, a pilot program in the Counties of Los Angeles, San Diego, Fresno, Sacramento, and Kern that would impose a similar requirement for persons convicted of specified driving offenses relating to excessive speed, reckless driving, and exhibitions of speed to install for a period of time, as ordered by the court, a certified active intelligent speed assist device (ISA) on any vehicle the person operates. The bill would similarly make the installation of an ISA discretionary for a first offender, as specified. The bill would establish periods for which a person convicted of one or more prior specified driving offenses is required to install an ISA, as specified. The bill would require the Department of Motor Vehicles to create a verification installation form to be submitted by persons subject to these provisions. The bill would impose a fee schedule to be adopted by certified ISA manufacturers and their agents for the ISA and other related costs. By creating new crimes related to the installation and maintenance of an ISA, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require, by July 1, 2030, the department to report data to the Transportation Agency regarding the implementation and efficacy of the pilot program, as specified, and require the Transportation Agency to report to the Legislature on the outcomes of the pilot program by July 1, 2031. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Counties of Los Angeles, San Diego, Fresno, Sacramento, and Kern. 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
2025-04-24
Latest action
2026-02-02 — From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
Bill type
bill
Last updated
—

Subjects

Sponsors

  • Gipsonauthor

Committees

Not provided by source.

Action timeline

Newest first

  1. 2026-02-02

    From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

    committee-passage,failure

  2. 2026-01-31

    Died pursuant to Art. IV, Sec. 10(c) of the Constitution.

    failure

  3. 2025-05-23

    In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.

  4. 2025-05-07

    In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.

    referral-committee

  5. 2025-04-29

    Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

    referral-committee

  6. 2025-04-28

    Read second time and amended.

    amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2

  7. 2025-04-24

    From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (April 22).

    amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,referral-committee

  8. 2025-03-28

    Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

    referral-committee

  9. 2025-02-21

    From printer. May be heard in committee March 23.

  10. 2025-02-20

    Read first time. To print.

    reading-1

Versions

Documents

Votes

  • Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

    2025-04-22 · pass · 9-0

    Member-level votes (9)
    • Harabedian: yes
    • Schultz: yes
    • Haney: yes
    • Mark González: yes
    • Alanis: yes
    • Sharp-Collins: yes
    • Lackey: yes
    • Ramos: yes
    • Nguyen: yes

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:

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 981. 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.