CA SB 23
deadProperty taxation: exemption: disabled veteran homeowners.
California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · upper
Quick answers
Did CA SB 23 pass?
No. CA SB 23 did not pass — it was defeated or died in the legislative process (2026-02-02). Latest recorded action (2026-02-02): Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
What is CA SB 23 about?
The California Constitution provides that all property is taxable, and requires that it be assessed at the same percentage of fair market value, unless otherwise provided by the California Constitution or federal law. The California Constitution and existing property tax law provide various exemptions from taxation, including, among others, a disabled veterans' exemption and a veterans' organization exemption. This bill would exempt from taxation, property owned by, and that constitutes the principal place of residence of, a veteran, the veteran's spouse, or the veteran and the veteran's spouse jointly, if the veteran is 100% disabled. The bill would provide an unmarried surviving spouse a property exemption in the same amount that they would have been entitled to if the veteran was alive and if certain conditions are met. The bill would require certain documentation to be provided to the county assessor to receive the exemption and would prohibit any other real property tax exemption from being granted to the claimant if receiving the exemption provided by the provisions of this bill. The bill would make these exemptions applicable for property tax lien dates occurring on or after January 1, 2025, but occurring before January 1, 2035. By imposing additional duties on local tax officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure to contain, among other things, specific goals, purposes, and objectives that the tax expenditure will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. This bill would state that it is the intent of the Legislature to apply those requirements to the bill and would set forth specified information relating to those requirements. 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. Existing law requires the state to reimburse local agencies annually for certain property tax revenues lost as a result of any exemption or classification of property for purposes of ad valorem property taxation. This bill would provide that, notwithstanding those provisions, no appropriation is made and the state shall not reimburse local agencies for property tax revenues lost by them pursuant to the bill. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Who sponsors CA SB 23?
Valladares is the primary sponsor of CA SB 23, joined by 12 cosponsors.
Description
The California Constitution provides that all property is taxable, and requires that it be assessed at the same percentage of fair market value, unless otherwise provided by the California Constitution or federal law. The California Constitution and existing property tax law provide various exemptions from taxation, including, among others, a disabled veterans' exemption and a veterans' organization exemption. This bill would exempt from taxation, property owned by, and that constitutes the principal place of residence of, a veteran, the veteran's spouse, or the veteran and the veteran's spouse jointly, if the veteran is 100% disabled. The bill would provide an unmarried surviving spouse a property exemption in the same amount that they would have been entitled to if the veteran was alive and if certain conditions are met. The bill would require certain documentation to be provided to the county assessor to receive the exemption and would prohibit any other real property tax exemption from being granted to the claimant if receiving the exemption provided by the provisions of this bill. The bill would make these exemptions applicable for property tax lien dates occurring on or after January 1, 2025, but occurring before January 1, 2035. By imposing additional duties on local tax officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure to contain, among other things, specific goals, purposes, and objectives that the tax expenditure will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. This bill would state that it is the intent of the Legislature to apply those requirements to the bill and would set forth specified information relating to those requirements. 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. Existing law requires the state to reimburse local agencies annually for certain property tax revenues lost as a result of any exemption or classification of property for purposes of ad valorem property taxation. This bill would provide that, notwithstanding those provisions, no appropriation is made and the state shall not reimburse local agencies for property tax revenues lost by them pursuant to the bill. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
- Introduced
- 2024-12-02
- Latest action
- 2026-02-02 — Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
- Bill type
- bill
- Last updated
- —
Subjects
Sponsors
- Valladaresauthor
- Groveauthor
- Choicoauthor
- Dahlecoauthor
- Hurtadocoauthor
- Jonescoauthor
- Ochoa Boghcoauthor
- Seyartocoauthor
- Alaniscoauthor
- Hadwickcoauthor
- Hoovercoauthor
- Macedocoauthor
- Walliscoauthor
Committees
Not provided by source.
Action timeline
2024-12-02
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
introduction,reading-1,referral-committee
2024-12-03
From printer. May be acted upon on or after January 2.
2024-12-03
(Corrected December 12).
2025-01-29
Referred to Coms. on REV. & TAX. and M. & V.A.
referral-committee
2025-02-25
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on REV. & TAX.
amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-02-26
Set for hearing March 12.
2025-03-05
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on REV. & TAX.
amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-03-12
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on M. & V.A. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (March 12). Re-referred to Com. on M. & V.A.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-03-28
Set for hearing April 28.
2025-04-28
April 28 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author.
2026-02-02
Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
failure
Versions
Documents
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- text/html
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
Votes
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Military and Veterans Affairs]
2025-03-12 · pass · 5-0
Member-level votes (5)
- Ashby: yes
- Umberg: yes
- McNerney: yes
- Valladares: yes
- Grayson: 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:
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=SB 23. 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.