California 2017-2018 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB866

Introduced
2/16/17  
Introduced
2/16/17  
Refer
3/2/17  
Refer
4/17/17  
Report Pass
4/25/17  
Report Pass
4/25/17  
Refer
4/25/17  
Refer
4/25/17  
Report Pass
5/3/17  
Engrossed
5/11/17  
Engrossed
5/11/17  
Refer
5/11/17  
Refer
5/11/17  
Refer
5/24/17  
Refer
5/24/17  
Report Pass
6/28/17  
Report Pass
6/28/17  
Refer
6/28/17  
Refer
6/28/17  
Report Pass
7/5/17  
Report Pass
7/5/17  
Refer
7/5/17  
Refer
7/5/17  
Enrolled
8/21/17  
Enrolled
8/21/17  
Chaptered
9/1/17  
Passed
9/1/17  

Caption

State highways: gateway monuments.

Impact

The passage of AB 866 impacts existing state laws concerning the display of flags, enhancing local municipalities' ability to showcase their affiliations and civic pride through physical structures. By defining 'gateway monuments' to include flag displays, the bill provides clarity on the regulations governing such displays and facilitates local signification within state rights-of-way. This change could lead to more visually significant enhancements in local areas, as communities adopt gateway monuments that reflect their unique identities.

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 866 amends Section 670.5 of the Streets and Highways Code to authorize cities or counties in California to display the Flag of the United States and the Flag of California as part of a gateway monument. This legislation allows for a broader interpretation of where flags can be displayed, particularly on or abutting state highways within city limits. The bill aims to enhance the visual representation of civic pride and local identity as communicated through these monuments.

Sentiment

General sentiment surrounding AB 866 appears to be supportive, with strong backing from local government representatives who view the bill as an opportunity to foster community pride and enhance local visibility. The bill's intent to allow localities to express their identity through structures may appeal to constituents and civic groups alike. However, some concerns may arise regarding the implementation and maintenance of these monuments, including the potential costs and responsibilities placed on local governments.

Contention

Not notable points of contention emerged during the discussion of AB 866, largely due to its non-controversial nature and broad support. Nevertheless, the bill does highlight ongoing debates regarding local versus state control of community expression and visual representation. Ensuring proper maintenance and aesthetic standards for displayed flags on these gateway monuments may bring future considerations for legislators and local authorities as they adapt to the new provisions.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CT HB06457

An Act Concerning The Display Of The State Or National Flag At Half-staff And The Placement Of Flags On Cemetery Graves Prior To Memorial Day.

CA AB338

State Capitol grounds.

CA AB1762

State Capitol: Gold Star Families monument.

CA SJR16

The Chuckwalla, Joshua Tree, and Kw’tsán National Monuments.

CA SB463

State Capitol Park: California Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) Civil Rights Monument.

CA SJR17

The Sáttítla National Monument.

CA AJR15

Federal public lands.

CA AB298

Honoring Our Blind Veterans Act.