California Assembly Bill AB1836

California 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/11/26
• Refer: 3/19/26
• Report Pass: 3/19/26
• Refer: 3/23/26
• Report Pass: 4/14/26
• Refer: 4/14/26
• Refer: 4/29/26
• Report Pass: 5/14/26
• Engrossed: 5/27/26
• Refer: 5/28/26

Caption

An act to amend Section 8588.9 of the Government Code, relating to state government.

Summary

AB 1836 revises the California State Nonprofit Security Grant Program, which is administered by the Office of Emergency Services to help nonprofit organizations at elevated risk of violent attacks or hate crimes improve physical security. The bill expands the program’s stated purpose to include not only nonprofit facilities but also events hosted by nonprofits, and it clarifies that grant funds may be used for security measures tied to onsite or offsite events. It also specifies that nonprofits without a physical site may still qualify for funding when the grant is for an offsite event that faces a high risk of violence or hate crimes. The bill also restates and organizes existing program rules on eligible uses of funds, including security guards, reinforced doors and gates, lighting and alarms, security training, vulnerability assessments, mass notification systems, monitoring and response systems, lifesaving emergency equipment, and limited construction or renovation for target hardening. It preserves the $500,000 maximum award, caps administrative spending at 5 percent, and limits construction or renovation costs to $100,000. The bill continues to require that the program operate only if funded in the annual Budget Act and keeps the director’s authority to adopt application procedures and administrative guidelines exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act.

Impact

AB 1836 would amend Government Code Section 8588.9 governing the California State Nonprofit Security Grant Program. Its main legal effect is to broaden and clarify eligible grant uses and eligible applicants, especially for nonprofits that host events away from a fixed facility and for organizations without a physical site. It would also reinforce the Office of Emergency Services’ role in providing technical assistance and maintaining resources for vulnerability assessments. Because the bill is framed as an amendment to an existing program and the digest describes the changes as largely nonsubstantive, it would not create a new program so much as refine the administration and scope of the current one.

Sentiment

The available voting history suggests broad bipartisan or at least cross-member support, with unanimous committee votes reported and a recommendation to place the bill on the consent calendar. The bill’s subject matter—protecting nonprofits from hate-motivated violence and helping them secure events and facilities—appears to have been viewed favorably and without recorded opposition in the materials provided. No committee transcript excerpts were available, so there is no evidence of significant debate in the record supplied.

Contention

No major contention is reflected in the provided materials. The only potentially sensitive policy issue apparent from the text is the expansion of eligible uses to offsite events and to nonprofits without a physical location, which could raise questions about program scope and grant administration. However, the bill’s unanimous committee votes and consent-calendar recommendation indicate that any such concerns were not prominent in the recorded proceedings.