California 2023-2024 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB2232

Introduced
2/8/24  
Refer
2/26/24  
Refer
2/26/24  
Report Pass
4/1/24  
Report Pass
4/1/24  
Refer
4/2/24  
Refer
4/2/24  
Refer
4/4/24  
Refer
4/4/24  
Report Pass
4/23/24  
Report Pass
4/23/24  
Engrossed
4/29/24  
Engrossed
4/29/24  
Refer
4/29/24  
Refer
4/29/24  
Refer
5/8/24  
Refer
5/8/24  
Report Pass
5/28/24  
Enrolled
6/3/24  
Enrolled
6/3/24  
Chaptered
6/14/24  
Chaptered
6/14/24  
Passed
6/14/24  

Caption

Accessibility to emergency information and services: emergency shelters: persons with pets.

Impact

If enacted, AB 2232 would have a substantial impact on local emergency management policies across California. It mandates that all emergency plans, during updates, ensure the availability of at least one emergency shelter or warming center that can accommodate pets, thereby promoting a more inclusive approach to disaster preparedness. This means cities will have to think critically about how to safely incorporate animals into emergency strategies, which could lead to improved community resilience and response effectiveness during extreme weather conditions and other emergencies.

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 2232, introduced by Maienschein, aims to enhance accessibility to emergency information and services, particularly for individuals who require assistance with their pets during local emergencies. The bill amends Section 8593.10 of the California Government Code, stipulating that cities and counties must designate emergency shelters that can accommodate pets during the next update of their emergency plans. It emphasizes providing safe spaces for individuals with pets, which holds significant importance during disasters, where people are often reluctant to evacuate without their animals.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding AB 2232 appears to be favorable, particularly among advocates for animal rights and public safety. Supporters argue that accommodating pets in emergency plans not only serves the animals' welfare but also addresses the emotional and psychological needs of pet owners, thus encouraging compliance with evacuation orders. While some may express concerns about the logistical implications and costs associated with implementing such measures, overall, the sentiment seems to lean towards enhancing public safety and welfare.

Contention

Notable points of contention may revolve around the feasibility of implementing these mandates within existing budget constraints and frameworks of local governments. Some critics may argue that the bill could divert resources from other critical emergency services or complicate the management of emergency shelters. Nevertheless, proponents assert that including pets in emergency preparedness is essential to ensure that no one is left behind in distressing situations, fostering a community spirit that prioritizes both human and animal welfare.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB781

Accessibility to emergency information and services: emergency shelters: persons with pets.

CA AB2321

Prisons: employee accommodations.

LA HB457

Provides relative to a needs accommodation designation on a license plate

MI SB1090

Insurance: no-fault; utilization reviews; require compliance with decision on appeal. Amends sec. 3157a of 1956 PA 218 (MCL 500.3157a).

CA AB2785

Student services: lactation accommodations.

AZ HB2330

Voluntary disclosure; disability; licenses

CA AB1162

Lodging establishments: personal care products: small plastic bottles.

CA AB1399

Residential real property: rent control: withdrawal of accommodations.