Existing law generally regulates classes of insurance, including residential property insurance. Existing law requires an insurer to send various notices to a policyholder at specified intervals.

This bill would require an admitted insurer to notify a residential property insurance policyholder that aerial images may be taken or obtained of the insured property, as specified, unless a claim has been submitted or is pending on the property and the images will be used only for evaluating the claim. The bill would require the insurer to provide the aerial images upon request, as specified, and would require the notice to include instructions regarding how a policyholder may make that request.

This bill would prohibit an admitted insurer from basing a decision to terminate insurance coverage, as defined, on an aerial image of the insured property taken more than 180 days prior to sending notice of that decision to the policyholder, except as specified. The bill would require an admitted insurer that bases a decision to terminate insurance coverage on an aerial image to provide the policyholder with that aerial image, notice of that decision, and the opportunity to dispute the accuracy of the image, and to verify remediation, before the effective date of the decision to terminate insurance coverage.

This bill would make the above-described provisions operative on July 1, 2027.

Existing law generally regulates classes of insurance, including residential property insurance. Existing law requires an insurer to send various notices to a policyholder at specified intervals.

This bill would require an admitted insurer to notify a residential property insurance policyholder that aerial images may be taken or obtained of the insured property, as specified, unless a claim has been submitted or is pending on the property and the images will be used only for evaluating the claim. The bill would require the insurer to provide the aerial images upon request, as specified, and would require the notice to include instructions regarding how a policyholder may make that request.

This bill would prohibit an admitted insurer from basing a decision to terminate insurance coverage, as defined, on an aerial image taken more than 180 days prior to sending notice of that decision to the policyholder, except as specified. The bill would require an admitted insurer that bases a decision to terminate insurance coverage on an aerial image to provide the policyholder with that aerial image, notice of that decision, and the opportunity to dispute the accuracy of the image, and to verify remediation, before the effective date of the decision to terminate insurance coverage.

This bill would make the above-described provisions operative on July 1, 2027.

SENATE COMMITTEE ON INSURANCE

Senator Stephen Padilla, Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular

Bill No: AB 1559 Hearing Date: June 10, 2026

SUBJECT: Residential property insurance images

DIGEST:

Beginning July 1, 2027, requires admitted insurers to notify residential property insurance policyholders in advance of taking aerial images of the insured property, and to provide access to those images upon request, and prohibits insurers from basing decisions to terminate coverage on aerial images older than 180 days. Provides policyholders who have been subject to a decision to terminate coverage based on an aerial image with the right to dispute the accuracy of the image, verify remediation, and request an in-person inspection.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Requires an insurer to provide policyholders with a notice of nonrenewal at least 75 days before policy expiration, including the reasoning for the nonrenewal, the telephone number of the insurer’s representative who handles consumer inquiries or complaints, and a statement of the option of review by the California Department of Insurance (CDI).
2. Provides several rights to persons who are the subject of information collected, received, or maintained in connection with insurance transactions, and policyholders who engage in or seek to engage in these transactions. Among others, the goals of these rights are to maintain a balance between the need for information by those conducting the business of insurance and the public’s need for fairness in insurance information practices, including the need to minimize intrusiveness, to enable persons to ascertain what information is being or has been collected about them in connection with insurance transactions, and to have access to such information for the purpose of verifying or disputing its accuracy.
3. Specifies standards for the collection, use, and disclosure of personal information gathered in connection with insurance transactions by insurance institutions, agents, or insurance support organizations.
4. Requires an insurance institution or agent to provide a notice of information practices to all applicants or policyholders at the time of delivery of the insurance policy when personal information is collected from the applicant, or at the time the collection of personal information is initiated when personal information is collected from a source other than the applicant. In the case of a policy renewal, requires that the notice be provided no later than the policy renewal date, but provides that no notice is required in connection with a policy renewal if personal information is only collected from the policyholder, an insured under the policy, or public records, or if a notice has been given within the previous 24 months.
5. Defines an “insurance transaction” as any interaction involving insurance primarily for personal, family, or household needs, rather than business or professional needs that entails either determinations of an individual’s eligibility for an insurance coverage, benefit, or payment, as well as service of an insurance application, policy, contract, or certificate.
6. Defines “personal information”, for purposes of these rights and standards, to mean, any individually identifiable information gathered in connection with an insurance transaction from which judgments can be made about an individual’s character, habits, avocations, finances, occupation, general reputation, credit, health, or any other personal characteristic.

This bill:

1. Requires an admitted insurer to provide a notice, as specified, to a residential property insurance policyholder at least annually, including with the initial policy issuance and upon each renewal, if any aerial images may be taken or obtained of the insured property.
2. Requires an admitted insurer to provide any aerial images taken or obtained of the insured property to the policyholder upon request within 30 days of receiving such requests, and along with any notice of a decision to cancel, non-renew, or reduce coverage based on the images.
3. Prohibits an admitted insurer from basing a decision to terminate insurance coverage in whole or in part on an aerial image taken more than 180 days prior to sending the notice of a decision to terminate coverage to the policyholder, unless the conditions pertaining to the decision have been verified as accurate, persistent, and valid by an in-person physical inspection of the insured property or an alternative verification process conducted no more than 180 days prior to sending the notice of the decision.
4. Stipulates that the provision above does not apply to an aerial image that solely contributed to the decision to terminate insurance coverage through its use in the development of a probabilistic or predictive risk model, reviewed by CDI and in compliance with all applicable statutory, regulatory, and other legal standards, to project annual aggregate losses due to low-frequency, high-severity events, or to project the likelihood of loss due to wildfire.
5. Provides a policyholder that has been subject to a decision to terminate insurance coverage based in whole or in part on an aerial image, with the right to request that the admitted insurer conduct an in-person physical inspection of the property to verify the accuracy, persistence, and validity of the conditions pertaining to the decision.
6. Requires that the policyholder be provided with the opportunity to dispute the accuracy of the image used in the decision to terminate coverage, and to verify remediation, before the effective date of the decision to terminate coverage. This may be verified by an in-person physical inspection or by a process made available by the insurer to verify the accuracy, persistence, and validity of the conditions pertaining to the decision.
7. Specifies that the bill’s provisions do not authorize aerial imaging that is otherwise prohibited under law.
8. Defines "aerial image" to mean an image or video collected by aircraft or satellite, whether or not that aircraft or satellite is operated with the possibility of direct human intervention.
9. States that a “termination of insurance coverage” means a cancellation or non-renewal of an insurance policy, in whole or in part, for any reason other than the failure to pay a premium as required by the policy.

Background

According to the author:

As the California homeowners' insurance market tightens, insurers are desperate for ways to cut costs and reduce risk exposure. One way insurers are doing so is by conducting aerial inspections of properties using drone, aircraft, and satellite imaging as an alternative to traditional on-site property inspections to evaluate risk and insurability. Unfortunately, this practice has led to a spate of reports of homeowners who were blindsided when their insurance policies were not renewed based on purported evidence from aerial images that they didn't know were taken, and didn't have the opportunity to review. In many of these cases, after weeks or months of back-and-forth with insurers to review the evidence underlying their nonrenewal decision, the aerial images turned out to be inaccurate, outdated, or misleading.

By providing policyholders with notice before taking or obtaining aerial images of their property, granting access to those images, capping the age of images that can be used in non-renewals, and establishing a right to request an in-person inspection to verify the accuracy, timeliness, and validity of aerial images used in non-renewals, insurance companies can contain costs while providing policyholders with critical protections against invalid non-renewals.

Related/Prior Legislation

SB 260 (Wahab) of the current legislative session, would establish new requirements on residential property insurers when using aerial images taken by a remotely unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to gather evidence when evaluating policies, as specified, and creates criminal penalties for the use of UASs in specified locations. This bill is pending referral in the Assembly.

SB 354 (Limón) of the current legislative session would (1) create standards, protections, and duties regarding the processing of consumers’ personal information by insurance licensees and their third-party service providers. (2) Outline specific requirements regarding consumers’ rights to know what personal information is being processed, how it is collected, stored, and shared, and how consumers can correct, amend, or delete such information. (3) Create a right for consumers to consent to the sharing of their personal information by licensees for various purposes. (4) Provide that consumers have a right to be made aware of the reasons for adverse underwriting decisions relating to insurance coverage. This bill is pending in Assembly Insurance Committee.

AB 75 (Calderon, 2025) was nearly identical to AB 1559. This bill was held in Senate Appropriations Committee.

Double Referral

Should this bill pass out of this committee, it will be heard in Senate Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection Committee, which will analyze the issues under its purview.

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT:

According to Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, sponsor of the bill:

“This bill would provide additional consumer protection when aerial images are used to directly make decisions related to an insurance policy. Among other things, it requires an admitted insurer to let homeowners know that aerial images may be taken or collected of their property, requires insurers to provide copies of those images if the policy is terminated or at any time by policyholder request, ensures images used to make these decisions are not over 180 days old.

Media reports and consumer experiences have made it clear that insurers are increasingly relying on aerial imagery to inspect homes. These images can come from drones, satellites, and manned or unmanned aircraft. My Department continues to hear from policyholders who are worried about insurers using these images as a reason to deny issuing a policy or to cancel or nonrenew an existing one. Many consumers are also frustrated that they aren’t given advance notice when their insurer plans to capture or obtain aerial photos of their property, that they do not get to see what is on the images, and that they are often not given time to remedy any issues identified.

Insurers do have the authority to inspect properties and evaluate risk under their underwriting standards, but consumers equally have the right to understand what information is influencing decisions about their coverage. Right now, many homeowners have no idea when these images are being taken or gathered, and current law provides no process for them to request those images.

AB 1559 offers a practical solution by requiring insurers to notify policyholders ahead of time when they intend to take or obtain aerial images of a home, providing that images used must be recent, and by creating a clear process for consumers to request and receive those images. As aerial imaging becomes a more routine part of property underwriting, it’s reasonable for residential policyholders to know when their property is being observed and to have access to the images collected. Increasing transparency in property inspections should also help reduce adverse underwriting decisions from outdated or incorrect aerial photos.”

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION:

None received.

SUPPORT:

Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara / California Department of Insurance (Sponsor)

AARP

California Association of Realtors

California State Association of Counties (CSAC)

League of California Cities

Near Space Labs, INC.

San Bernardino County

Southern California Rental Housing Association

United Policyholders

OPPOSITION:

None.

-- END --

Date of Hearing: May 6, 2026

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Buffy Wicks, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1559

Author:(Calderon) – As Amended Ver:April 13, 2026

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill requires an insurer to notify a homeowners insurance policyholder that aerial images may be taken or obtained of the insured property.

Specifically, this bill, operative July 1, 2027:

1. Requires an admitted insurer to annually notify a residential property insurance policyholder that aerial images may be taken or obtained of the insured property, unless a claim has been submitted on the property and the images will be used only for evaluating the claim.
2. Requires an insurer to provide the policyholder with the aerial images within 30 days of a policyholder’s request.
3. Prohibits an insurer from basing a decision to terminate insurance coverage on an aerial image of the insured property taken more than 180 days prior to sending the termination decision notice to the policyholder, unless the conditions were verified by an in-person physical inspection or alternative verification process within 180 days of the notice.
4. Requires an insurer basing a decision to terminate insurance coverage on an aerial image to provide the policyholder with the image, termination decision notice, and opportunity to dispute the accuracy of the image and verify remediation before the termination effective date, and authorizes the policyholder to request an in-person physical inspection to verify the conditions pertaining to the decision to terminate.

FISCAL EFFECT:

Costs of approximately $130,000 in fiscal year (FY) 2026-27, $31,000 in FY 2027-28, and $35,000 in FY 2028-29 and annually thereafter to the Department of Insurance (CDI) for rate application review and data collection on the use of aerial images in risk models (Insurance Fund).

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. According to the author:

As the California homeowners’ insurance market tightens, insurers are desperate for ways to cut costs and reduce risk exposure. One way insurers are doing so is by conducting aerial inspections…Unfortunately, this practice has led to a spate of reports of homeowners who were blindsided when their insurance policies were not renewed based on purported evidence from aerial images that they didn’t know were taken, and didn’t have the opportunity to review…By providing policyholders with notice before taking or obtaining aerial images of their property, granting access to those images, capping the age of images that can be used in non-renewals, and establishing a right to request an in-person inspection to verify the accuracy, timeliness, and validity of aerial images used in non-renewals, insurance companies can contain costs while providing policyholders with critical protections against invalid non-renewals.

This bill is sponsored by Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara and supported by local government associations, real estate groups, and the AARP.

1. Aerial Images. Historically, aerial images for insurance underwriting purposes were primarily used to assess areas impacted by natural disasters, where debris and hazards made it too dangerous for in-person inspections. However, aerial images captured by flyover planes, drones, or satellites are becoming increasingly commonplace in the home insurance industry’s risk assessment process. In theory, the use of aerial imagery should enable insurers to make better, more accurate decisions regarding policies. However, there have been numerous examples of an aerial image being misused, leading to incorrect policy non-renewals. This bill ensures a policyholder is aware when aerial images are taken, prohibits an insurer from basing a decision to terminate coverage on an aerial image of the insured property taken more than 180 days prior to the notice of the termination decision, and provides a process for a policyholder to dispute the aerial image and demonstrate remediation prior to termination.
2. Related Legislation. AB 75 (Calderon) is substantially similar to this bill, except this bill contains additional language to expressly allow the use of aerial images older than 180 days in relation to a termination decision if the sole reason for the use is in the development of a probabilistic or predictive risk model to project annual aggregate losses or the likelihood of a location burning in the event of a wildfire. AB 75 was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee’s suspense file.

SB 260 (Wahab) regulates the use of unmanned aircraft in a variety of situations, including requiring a 30-day notice before a residential property insurer uses aircraft to take aerial images of the insured property and a 120-day period for a policyholder to remedy identified issues from such images prior to the termination of an insurance contract. SB 260 is pending referral at the Assembly Desk.

Analysis Prepared by: Irene Ho / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: April 21, 2026

Fiscal:

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PRIVACY AND CONSUMER PROTECTION

Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1559 (

Author:Calderon) – As Amended Ver:April 13, 2026

SUBJECT: Residential property insurance images

SYNOPSIS

Recently, insurers have increasingly used aerial images of properties to assess risk and determine policy renewals. Insurers argue that this practice improves safety by reducing evaluator risks (such as climbing a roof or entering a potentially dangerous area). Insurers also claim it is less intrusive than traditional in-home inspections, as it does not require entry into the policyholder’s home.

However, several concerns have been raised surrounding consumer protections and rights to privacy. Aerial photos are often taken without notifying the policyholder, amounting to surveillance and an invasion of privacy. Additionally, these images are frequently used in underwriting and nonrenewal decisions without disclosure to the policyholder, leaving them with little agency in the process. This practice has become increasingly common in California, where insurance nonrenewal is on the rise.

This bill, sponsored by Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, seeks to increase insurer transparency regarding the use of aerial images by requiring adequate notice prior to the collection of aerial images. AB 1559 prohibits an insurer from basing a decision to terminate insurance coverage on an aerial image of the insured property taken more than 180 days prior to the notice of that termination decision. This bill also requires that admitted insurers provide policyholders the opportunity to dispute the accuracy of an aerial image, and to verify remediation, before the effective date of the decision to terminate insurance coverage.

The bill is supported by the California Association of Realtors, California State Association of Counties (CSAC), and League of Cities. This bill has no registered opposition.

This bill was previously heard by the Insurance Committee, where it passed on a 17-0 vote.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires an insurer to provide a notice of nonrenewal at least 75 days before policy expiration that includes the specific reason or reasons for the nonrenewal, the telephone number of the insurer’s representative who handles consumer inquiries or complaints, and a statement pertaining to availability of review by the Department of Insurance (CDI). (Ins. Code § 678.)
2. Provides several rights to natural persons who are the subject of information collected, received, or maintained in connection with insurance transactions, and policyholders who engage in or seek to engage in these transactions. (Ins. Code § 791.01(b).) Prescribes standards for the collection, use, and disclosure of personal information gathered in connection with insurance transactions by insurance institutions, agents, or insurance-support organizations. (Ins. Code § 791 et seq.)
3. Requires an insurance institution or agent to provide a notice of information practices to all applicants or policyholders at the time of delivery of the insurance policy when personal information is collected from the applicant, or at the time the collection of personal information is initiated when personal information is collected from a source other than the applicant. In the case of a policy renewal, requires that the notice be provided no later than the policy renewal date, but provides that no notice is required in connection with a policy renewal if personal information is only collected from the policyholder, an insured under the policy, or public records, or if a notice has been given within the previous 24 months. (Ins. Code § 791.04.)
4. Defines “personal information,” for purposes of these rights and standards, to mean, any individually identifiable information gathered in connection with an insurance transaction from which judgements can be made about an individual’s character, habits, avocations, finances, occupation, general reputation, credit, health, or any other personal characteristic. (Ins. Code § 791.01(s).)
5. Provides that a person is liable for physical invasion of privacy when the person knowingly enters onto the land or into the airspace above the land of another person without permission or otherwise commits a trespass in order to capture any type of visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of the plaintiff engaging in a private, personal, or familial activity and the invasion occurs in a manner that is offensive to a reasonable person. (Civ. Code § 1708.8.)
6. Establishes the CCPA, which grants consumers certain rights with regard to their personal information, including enhanced notice, access, and disclosure; the right to deletion; the right to restrict the sale of information; and protection from discrimination for exercising these rights. Places attendant obligations on businesses to respect those rights. (Civ. Code § 1798.100 et seq.)

THIS BILL:

1. Requires an admitted insurer to notify a residential property insurance policyholder at least annually if any aerial images may be taken or obtained of the insured property during the policy period by, on behalf of, or in service of the insurer, and prescribes the notice.
2. Requires an admitted insurer to provide any aerial images taken or obtained of the insured property to the policyholder upon request and along with any notice of a decision to cancel, non-renew, or reduce coverage based on the images.
3. Prohibits an admitted insurer from basing a decision to cancel, non-renew, or reduce coverage on an aerial image that is more than 180 days old, unless the conditions pertaining to that decision have been verified by in-person inspection no more than 180 days prior to giving notice of the decision, except as specified.
4. Exempts from 3) above any aerial image that is used solely in the development of a probabilistic or predictive risk model, in compliance with law, to predict annual aggregate losses due to wildfire or high-severity events.
5. Provides policyholders that have been subject to a decision to cancel, non-renew, or reduce coverage based on an aerial image with the right to request that the insurer conduct an in-person physical inspection of the property to verify the accuracy, persistence, and validity of the conditions pertaining to that decision.
6. Requires an admitted insurer to provide a policyholder that has been subject to a decision to cancel, non-renew, or reduce their coverage based on an aerial image with the opportunity to dispute the accuracy of the image used in that decision to the extent possible, and to verify remediation by in-person physical inspection or by otherwise providing evidence of remediation in a manner set forth by the insurer.
7. Clarifies that the bill does not authorize aerial imaging that is otherwise prohibited under law.
8. Defines “aerial image” to mean an image or video collected by aircraft or satellite, whether or not that aircraft or satellite is operated with the possibility of direct human intervention.

COMMENTS:

1) Author’s statement. According to the author:

As the California homeowners' insurance market tightens, insurers are desperate for ways to cut costs and reduce risk exposure. One way insurers are doing so is by conducting aerial inspections of properties using drone, aircraft, and satellite imaging as an alternative to traditional on-site property inspections to evaluate risk and insurability. Unfortunately, this practice has led to a spate of reports of homeowners who were blindsided when their insurance policies were not renewed based on purported evidence from aerial images that they didn't know were taken, and didn't have the opportunity to review. In many of these cases, after weeks or months of back-and-forth with insurers to review the evidence underlying their nonrenewal decision, the aerial images turned out to be inaccurate, outdated, or misleading.

By providing policyholders with notice before taking or obtaining aerial images of their property, granting access to those images, capping the age of images that can be used in non-renewals, and establishing a right to request an in-person inspection to verify the accuracy, timeliness, and validity of aerial images used in non-renewals, insurance companies can contain costs while providing policyholders with critical protections against invalid non-renewals.

2) Aerial Images. Actuaries have long used a variety of metrics, including location and the history of a home, to assess risk and issue policies.^[1] Traditionally, these assessments were performed by an insurance agent conducting an in-person inspection of the property. However, with technological advancements, aerial images captured by flyover planes, drones, or satellites have become commonplace in the home insurance industry’s risk assessment process.^[2]

In California, insurers are required to disclose the reason for any adverse underwriting decision, such as a loss of coverage or a nonrenewal of a policy. Yet, many policyholders have been caught off-guard by non-renewals citing issues identified through aerial imagery, a method they were often unaware was being used.

Historically, aerial images were primarily used to assess areas recently impacted by natural disasters, where debris and hazards made it too dangerous for in-person inspections. However, these practices have become routine for many property insurers as a cost-effective way to quickly access vast amounts of information about properties. As Forbes notes, aerial imagery provides insurers with a rapid and inexpensive method of evaluating risk at scale:

When used correctly, [aerial images] are less invasive, cost-effective and provide a high degree of consistency. Insurers can use high-resolution aerial imagery to gain a precise, timely view of a property and capture its condition from multiple angles. Some insurers apply AI to that imagery to gain more comprehensive information than a person could provide.^[3]

In theory, the use of aerial imagery should enable insurers to make better, more accurate decisions regarding policies. However, there have been numerous instances where aerial images have been misused, leading to incorrect non-renewals. For example, a San Francisco resident received a nonrenewal notice based on an aerial photo showing water pooling on her roof. The image, however, had been taken immediately after a rainstorm, making the pooling unsurprising and not indicative of any structural issue. Despite hiring a roofer who confirmed the roof was in good condition and presenting this evidence to the insurer, her policy was still not renewed.^[4] Similarly, a Monterey County resident received a nonrenewal notice based on aerial images, not of their own property, but of their neighbor’s.^[5] Although this case was ultimately resolved, it caused significant, unnecessary stress in a state already grappling with an insurance crisis. Other similar incidents have been reported in San Francisco and San Carlos.^[6],[7]

These decisions are likely further complicated by the use of artificial intelligence, often with minimal human oversight. A report from The Wall Street Journal last year detailed how some homeowners were issued nonrenewal notices based on photos that were two to three years old, meaning that even if a homeowner had replaced a roof or corrected an issue, they could still be unfairly penalized.^[8] In another case, an insurer issued an adverse underwriting notice for “hanging tree limbs,” which upon closer inspection, turned out to be mere shadows captured in the photo.^[9] These circumstances have created widespread uneasiness about how aerial images are used in the property insurance process and whether there is clear human intervention in the process, leaving many policyholders uncertain about how to challenge or navigate these opaque practices.

3) What this bill would do. This bill requires admitted insurers to notify residential property insurance policyholders prior to taking aerial images of the insured property and to make those images available to policyholders upon request. Additionally, AB 1559 prohibits insurers from using aerial images older than 180 days. This bill also requires that any policyholder subject to a decision to terminate coverage based on aerial images have the right to dispute the accuracy of the image, to verify remediation, and to request an in-person inspection.

This bill is substantially similar to AB 75 (Calderon, 2025), which was held on suspense in the Senate Appropriations Committee. In response to AB 75 opposition from Verisk, an analytics firm that compiles databases of aerial images for use by insurance companies, the author amended the current bill in Insurance Committee to create a carve out that would allow the use of aerial images that are older than 180 days if the sole reason for their use is in the development of a probabilistic or predictive risk model. Notably, the exemption does not authorize the use of outdated images as inputs in the deployment of those models, unless they are verified to be reflective of the current state of the pertinent location. This ensures that the model outputs that can significantly impact a homeowners’ coverage are actually predictive of potential risk to the property under present conditions, rather than under conditions that are no longer relevant.

4) Policy Considerations. As the Insurance Committee’s analysis has already evaluated the feasibility of the bill from the insurers’ perspective, this analysis will focus on the bill’s privacy and consumer protection aspects. As outlined above, the bill provides several mechanisms to ensure that consumers have recourse in the event of an adverse underwriting decision, thereby empowering policyholders with greater agency over their insurance coverage.

Regarding privacy, insurers are governed by the Insurance Information and Privacy Protection Act (IIPPA), which sets standards for how personal information is collected and under what circumstances. Under the IIPPA, personal information is defined as “any individually identifiable information gathered in connection with an insurance transaction from which judgments can be made about an individual’s character, habits, avocations, finances, occupation, general reputation, credit, health, or any other personal characteristics.”^[10] As noted in the Insurance Committee’s analysis, it remains unclear whether this definition extends to exterior images of a policyholder’s property. Nevertheless, this bill would align the acquisition of aerial photographs with other types of personal information collection that require consumer notices under the IIPPA.

Providing notice would increase transparency and help maintain consumer privacy during periods when aerial images may be captured. For instance, notice would allow individuals to adjust their behavior to avoid being unintentionally recorded in a compromising situation, such as being nude outdoors. It would also allow policyholders the opportunity to remove any items from their property that they may not wish to have captured in an aerial image. Additionally, the notice allows policyholders a window of time to address potential issues with their property and perform necessary maintenance.

As insurance companies continue to rely on aerial images as a cost-effective alternative to in-person assessments, insurers must strike a careful balance between privacy concerns and consumer welfare. The proposed bill addresses these concerns through advanced notices, the option to obtain in-person validation of images, and the opportunity to remediate the issue.

The data minimization principle, however, may play an even more crucial role in protecting consumers in this context. There is no reason for insurers to collect or use aerial images for purposes beyond assessing risks and adjusting policies. Insurers should not be allowed to sell or share this information, and if aerial photos are being used for purposes beyond risk assessment, such uses should be disclosed in the notices sent to policyholders. Furthermore, establishing a retention period for aerial images would be beneficial. While it is important to understand how insurers use these photos to assess changes in risk and prosecute fraud, there is likely a point at which these images no longer serve any purpose and should be discarded.

Therefore, if this bill passes the Committee, the author may wish to consider incorporating data minimization provisions for aerial photos, as well as ensuring that the annual notice to policyholders explicitly outlines all potential uses of these images.

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: Ricardo Lara, the California Insurance Commissioner and sponsor of the bill, writes in support:

Media reports and consumer experiences have made it clear that insurers are relying on aerial imagery to inspect homes. These images can come from drones, satellites, manned or unmanned aircraft, and even high‑altitude balloons. My Department continues to hear from policyholders who are understandably worried about insurers using these images as a reason to deny issuing a policy or to cancel or nonrenew an existing one. Many consumers are also frustrated that they aren’t given advance notice when their insurer plans to capture or obtain aerial photos of their property, which raises concerns around privacy and transparency.

Insurers do have the authority to inspect properties and evaluate risk under their underwriting standards, but consumers equally have the right to understand what information is influencing decisions about their coverage. Right now, many homeowners have no idea when these images are being taken or gathered, and current law provides no process for them to request those images.

AB 1559 offers a practical solution by requiring insurers to notify policyholders ahead of time when they intend to take or obtain aerial images of a home, and by creating a clear process for consumers to request and receive those images. As aerial imaging becomes a more routine part of property underwriting, it’s reasonable for residential policyholders to know when their property is being observed and to have access to the images collected. Increasing transparency in property inspections should also help reduce adverse underwriting decisions from outdated or incorrect aerial photos.

The California Association of Realtors, supporters of the bill, write:

As the use of aerial imagery becomes more common in insurance underwriting, homeowners are increasingly subject to coverage decisions based on information they may never see or have an opportunity to verify. This lack of transparency can lead to confusion, disputes, and adverse outcomes that raise fairness concerns and undermine confidence in the insurance process.

AB 1559 uses a balanced approach by ensuring that policyholders are clearly informed if and when aerial imagery will be used and are provided with meaningful access to that information. The bill requires insurers to provide notice of aerial imaging practices, furnish images upon request, and include those images when they are relied upon in decisions to cancel, non-renew, or reduce coverage.

Equally important, the bill provides reasonable safeguards to promote accuracy and accountability. Policyholders are afforded the opportunity to dispute the accuracy of aerial images and to verify conditions through an in-person inspection or other appropriate means before coverage is terminated. The bill also ensures that underwriting decisions are not based on outdated information by limiting reliance on aerial images older than 180 days unless independently verified.

Access to stable and reliable property insurance is essential to the functioning of California’s housing market. Unexpected or unsupported insurance disruptions can delay or derail transactions, create financing challenges, and impose significant burdens on homeowners. By promoting transparency, accuracy, and reasonable procedural protections, AB 1559 helps support a more stable and predictable insurance environment.

CSAC, supporters of the bill, argue:

The presence of a competitive, robust, and fair insurance marketplace is an essential component of wildfire readiness and response. We support measures that allow for consumers to have the best possible information about what goes into the assessment of risk scores that affect affordability and accessibility of insurance policies. By making this information readily available, we can more effectively align wildfire risk mitigation efforts with market-based incentives, allowing for residents to recover more quickly from fires and for the proper management of risk in new development.

This bill is a straightforward, reasonable mechanism to provide consumers with more information to guide their risk assessment and mitigation decisions, and for more alignment between wildfire preparedness efforts and market forces.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara / California Department of Insurance (Sponsor)
California Association of Realtors
California State Association of Counties (CSAC)
League of California Cities
Near Space Labs, INC.

Opposition

None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Kate Davis / P. & C.P. / (916) 319-2200

1. “Property Risk Assessments: Then, Now, and the Future,” Disaster-Smart, https://disaster-smart.com/property-risk-assessments-then-now-and-the-future/. ↑

2. Id. ↑

3. David Tobias, “Understanding Aerial Inspections In The Insurance Space,” Forbes (Oct. 14, 2024), https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbesbusinesscouncil/2024/10/14/understanding-aerial-inspections-in-the-insurance-space/ ↑

4. Megan Fan Munce, “Insurers are using satellite images to inspect homes in California — and dropping policies in the process,” San Francisco Chronicle (Oct. 26, 2024), https://www.sfchronicle.com/california/article/home-insurance-satellite-photo-19497336.php. ↑

5. Ibid. ↑

6. Stephanie Sierra, “‘Mold, algae’: Insurer drops SF homeowners, citing aerial footage of roof that didn’t exist,” ABC (Dec. 12, 2024), https://abc7news.com/post/mold-algae-moss-insurance-drops-san-francisco-homeowners-citing-aerial-footage-roof-inspector-refutes-report/15641999/. ↑

7. Max Darrow, “San Carlos family says insurer dropped them without warning after aerial photos,” CBS News (Aug. 13, 2024), https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/san-carlos-family-says-home-insurer-dropped-them-with-no-warning-over-oak-tree/. ↑

8. Jean Eaglesham, “Insurers Are Spying on Your Home From the Sky,” The Wall Street Journal (Apr. 6, 2024), https://www.wsj.com/real-estate/home-insurance-aerial-images-37a18b16. ↑

9. Ibid. ↑

10. Ins. Code § 791 et seq. ↑

Date of Hearing: April 15, 2026

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON INSURANCE

Lisa Calderon, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1559 (

Author:Calderon) – As Amended Ver:April 13, 2026

SUBJECT: Residential property insurance images

SUMMARY: Requires admitted insurers to notify residential property insurance policyholders in advance of taking aerial images of the insured property and to provide access to those images upon request; prohibits insurers from basing decisions to terminate coverage on aerial images older than 180 days; and provides policyholders who have been subject to a decision to terminate coverage based on an aerial image with the right to dispute the accuracy of the image, to verify remediation, and to request an in-person inspection. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires an admitted insurer to notify a residential property insurance policyholder at least annually if any aerial images may be taken or obtained of the insured property during the policy period by, on behalf of, or in service of the insurer, and prescribes the notice.
2. Requires an admitted insurer to provide any aerial images taken or obtained of the insured property to the policyholder upon request and along with any notice of a decision to cancel, non-renew, or reduce coverage based on the images.
3. Prohibits an admitted insurer from basing a decision to cancel, non-renew, or reduce coverage on an aerial image that is more than 180 days old, unless the conditions pertaining to that decision have been verified by in-person inspection no more than 180 days prior to giving notice of the decision, except as specified.
4. Provides policyholders that have been subject to a decision to cancel, non-renew, or reduce coverage based on an aerial image with the right to request that the insurer conduct an in-person physical inspection of the property to verify the accuracy, persistence, and validity of the conditions pertaining to that decision.
5. Requires an admitted insurer to provide a policyholder that has been subject to a decision to cancel, non-renew, or reduce their coverage based on an aerial image with the opportunity to dispute the accuracy of the image used in that decision to the extent possible, and to verify remediation by in-person physical inspection or by otherwise providing evidence of remediation in a manner set forth by the insurer.
6. Clarifies that the bill does not authorize aerial imaging that is otherwise prohibited under law.
7. Defines “aerial image” to mean an image or video collected by aircraft or satellite, whether or not that aircraft or satellite is operated with the possibility of direct human intervention.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires an insurer to provide a notice of nonrenewal at least 75 days before policy expiration that includes the specific reason or reasons for the nonrenewal, the telephone number of the insurer’s representative who handles consumer inquiries or complaints, and a statement pertaining to availability of review by the Department of Insurance (CDI). (Insurance (Ins.) Code Section 678)
2. Provides several rights to natural persons who are the subject of information collected, received, or maintained in connection with insurance transactions, and policyholders who engage in or seek to engage in these transactions (Ins. Code Section 791.01(b)); and prescribes standards for the collection, use, and disclosure of personal information gathered in connection with insurance transactions by insurance institutions, agents, or insurance-support organizations (Ins. Code Section 791, et seq.).
3. Requires an insurance institution or agent to provide a notice of information practices to all applicants or policyholders at the time of delivery of the insurance policy when personal information is collected from the applicant, or at the time the collection of personal information is initiated when personal information is collected from a source other than the applicant. In the case of a policy renewal, requires that the notice be provided no later than the policy renewal date, but provides that no notice is required in connection with a policy renewal if personal information is only collected from the policyholder, an insured under the policy, or public records, or if a notice has been given within the previous 24 months. (Ins. Code Section 791.04)
4. Defines “personal information,” for purposes of these rights and standards, to mean, any individually identifiable information gathered in connection with an insurance transaction from which judgements can be made about an individual’s character, habits, avocations, finances, occupation, general reputation, credit, health, or any other personal characteristic. (Ins. Code Section 791.01(s))
5. Provides that a person is liable for physical invasion of privacy when the person knowingly enters onto the land or into the airspace above the land of another person without permission or otherwise commits a trespass in order to capture any type of visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of the plaintiff engaging in a private, personal, or familial activity and the invasion occurs in a manner that is offensive to a reasonable person. (Civil Code Section 1708.8)

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. According to the author:

As the California homeowners' insurance market tightens, insurers are desperate for ways to cut costs and reduce risk exposure. One way insurers are doing so is by conducting aerial inspections of properties using drone, aircraft, and satellite imaging as an alternative to traditional on-site property inspections to evaluate risk and insurability. Unfortunately, this practice has led to a spate of reports of homeowners who were blindsided when their insurance policies were not renewed based on purported evidence from aerial images that they didn't know were taken, and didn't have the opportunity to review. In many of these cases, after weeks or months of back-and-forth with insurers to review the evidence underlying their nonrenewal decision, the aerial images turned out to be inaccurate, outdated, or misleading.

By providing policyholders with notice before taking or obtaining aerial images of their property, granting access to those images, capping the age of images that can be used in non-renewals, and establishing a right to request an in-person inspection to verify the accuracy, timeliness, and validity of aerial images used in non-renewals, insurance companies can contain costs while providing policyholders with critical protections against invalid non-renewals.

This bill is sponsored by Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara.

1. Aerial Imaging in Insurance. Insurance Code Section 678(a)(1)(B)(i) requires any notice of nonrenewal to include the specific reason or reasons for the nonrenewal. According to various reports, California homeowners have been blindsided by non-renewals citing a range of issues including "a small branch touching the house," "mold, algae on roof," and "outdated paint [and] discoloration which means deterioration." These justifications increasingly rely on purported evidence from aerial images of homes, which the homeowners do not know were taken or obtained prior to receiving the non-renewal notice.

Aerial imaging can be more cost-effective than in-person inspections and presents less risk to the inspector from, e.g., climbing on the roof of the insured property. By reducing overhead, in theory, reasonably conducted aerial inspections could therefore reduce insurance costs during a time when insurance affordability continues to decline along with accessibility. That said, in-person inspections are far more evident to the consumer when they are being conducted, and pose less incidental privacy risk, and less risk of misinterpretation at the expense of the consumer.

Numerous reports document the increasingly prevalent practice of using information from aerial images to justify nonrenewal of residential homeowner’s insurance policies. According to a Wall Street Journal article from April 6, 2024:

Across the U.S., insurance companies are using aerial images of homes as a tool to ditch properties seen as higher risk.

Nearly every building in the country is being photographed, often without the owner’s knowledge. Companies are deploying drones, manned airplanes and high-altitude balloons to take images of properties. […]

The array of photos is being sorted by computer models to spy out underwriting no-nos such as damaged roof shingles, yard debris, overhanging tree branches and undeclared swimming pools or trampolines. The red-flagged images are providing insurers with ammunition for nonrenewal notices nationwide.

In many cases, the reports indicate that the policyholder was not aware the images were taken, and that the images were used erroneously. Nichole Brink, a former Farmers Insurance agent whose departure from the company was spurred by opposition to their aerial imaging policies, told the Wall Street Journal that “the insurer was dropping customers over aerial images that were two or three years old, and in one case even flagged a house for overhanging tree branches that turned out to be shadows.”

Lack of awareness that images were taken, and lack of access to those images, makes it difficult to rectify potential problems that could otherwise reduce risk and maintain insurability, and even more difficult to contest the grounds for nonrenewal. This bill would resolve these problems by ensuring the policyholder is aware aerial images will be taken and by providing them with the opportunity to access those images, to verify the contents of the images, and to contest their accuracy, as appropriate.

The California Association of Realtors, who support the bill, argue:

AB 1559 uses a balanced approach by ensuring that policyholders are clearly informed if and when aerial imagery will be used and are provided with meaningful access to that information. The bill requires insurers to provide notice of aerial imaging practices, furnish images upon request, and include those images when they are relied upon in decisions to cancel, non-renew, or reduce coverage.

Equally important, the bill provides reasonable safeguards to promote accuracy and accountability. Policyholders are afforded the opportunity to dispute the accuracy of aerial images and to verify conditions through an in-person inspection or other appropriate means before coverage is terminated. The bill also ensures that underwriting decisions are not based on outdated information by limiting reliance on aerial images older than 180 days unless independently verified.

1. Existing Rights under the Insurance Information and Privacy Protection Act (IIPPA). In California, the IIPPA primarily governs the collection and use of personal information for insurance purposes. Specifically, the IIPPA provides standards for the "collection, use and disclosure of information gathered in connection with insurance transactions by insurance institutions, agents or insurance-support organizations[…]." The IIPPA applies to "natural persons who are the subject of information collected, received or maintained in connection with insurance transactions involving policies, contracts or certificates of insurance delivered, issued for delivery or renewed in this state" and applicants, individuals, and policyholders who engage in or seek to engage in these transactions.

The IIPPA defines "personal information" to mean "any individually identifiable information gathered in connection with an insurance transaction from which judgments can be made about an individual's character, habits, avocations, finances, occupation, general reputation, credit, health, or any other personal characteristics," but it is not clear whether this includes images of the exterior of a home, nor aerial images in particular. The IIPPA provides several rights with respect to personal information, including rights to receive copies of the information and inclusion by the insurer of their collection practices in mandatory notices.

Still, considering the numerous reports of insurance policyholders unaware of the collection of aerial images that were later used as the basis for non-renewals, it is clear that existing law is not sufficient to provide requisite transparency, let alone privacy rights, with respect to this information. Consumers continue to be blindsided by life-altering non-renewal decisions made on the basis of images they were not aware existed, in many cases using spurious justifications that the consumers cannot easily contest or that could have been rectified were they aware in advance that aerial images would be taken.

1. Insurance Commissioner Bulletins. This bill is sponsored by Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, who argues:

Media reports and consumer experiences have made it clear that insurers are relying on aerial imagery to inspect homes. These images can come from drones, satellites, manned or unmanned aircraft, and even high-altitude balloons. My Department continues to hear from policyholders who are understandably worried about insurers using these images as a reason to deny issuing a policy or to cancel or nonrenew an existing one. Many consumers are also frustrated that they aren’t given advance notice when their insurer plans to capture or obtain aerial photos of their property, which raises concerns around privacy and transparency.

Insurers do have the authority to inspect properties and evaluate risk under their underwriting standards, but consumers equally have the right to understand what information is influencing decisions about their coverage.

Commissioner Lara has not yet issued an explicit bulletin on the matter of aerial imaging, but Insurance Commissioners in several other states, including New Hampshire, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania, have done so, in many cases recommending best practices for insurers conducting or utilizing aerial imaging similar to those required by this bill.

New Hampshire Insurance Commissioner DJ Bettencourt noted in a February 2025 bulletin that "the [New Hampshire] Department [of Insurance] has received several complaints in recent months, in which certain carriers are refusing to renew homeowners' policies, because of poor roof conditions mistakenly identified in aerial photographs." The bulletin asserts that "insurers must understand that aerial imagery, while useful, is not infallible and has its limitations. To safeguard consumers against unsupported underwriting decisions, insurers must implement appropriate checks and balances when using aerial imagery." This bulletin specifically prescribes that insurers conduct a follow-up physical inspection to validate any suspected issues derived from aerial data, and that "if an applicant or insured contests the insurer's findings – even if the insurer believes it has compelling evidence – conducting a physical inspection of the property remains necessary." Similarly, a March 2024 bulletin from the Connecticut Insurance Department provides that:

[T]he Department does not seek to broadly restrict the use of aerial imagery in underwriting as we recognize the value of this tool. However, appropriate guardrails pertaining to the use of aerial imagery are needed to protect consumers from unsupported underwriting action. An example of this type of guardrail is, in the absence of unequivocal material damage shown, a physical inspection to validate the specific type of damage that the aerial image purports to show or receipt of a report prepared by a licensed home improvement contractor or roofer addressing the condition of the subject roof as submitted by the policyholder. The Department expects that this type of guardrail be set forth in each insurer's filed underwriting guidelines if aerial imagery is used.

In many reported cases, homeowners were unaware that aerial images were taken or served as the basis for an adverse underwriting decision such as a nonrenewal, and were not able to independently assess the clarity, validity, or timeliness of those images because they lacked a prescribed mechanism for accessing the images. Providing requisite transparency for consumers to prepare for and, if necessary, contest findings from aerial imaging is an important first step to avoiding problematic uses of aerial imaging in the insurance industry.

1. AB 75 and Impact on the Sustainable Insurance Strategy (SIS). The increasing frequency and magnitude of natural disasters in the face of climate change has put considerable strain on the California homeowners’ insurance market. In 2023, Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, who is sponsoring this bill, announced the initiation of the SIS, a regulatory strategy intended to improve accessibility to insurance and market resilience in the face of climate change.

The SIS is predicated on an arrangement with insurers that allows them to, among other things, use predictive tools such as catastrophe models and wildfire risk models when setting their rates if they agree to write no less than 85% of their statewide market share in high wildfire risk communities that otherwise struggle to find coverage. The commissioner has since approved the first rate filings utilizing these models pursuant to the SIS, and has embarked on a project to develop a publicly available catastrophe model to facilitate implementation. That said, in an informational hearing in this committee held on February 18, 2026, the commissioner suggested that most substantial benefits of the SIS for the market will take roughly three to five years to emerge.

This bill is nearly identical to AB 75 (Calderon, 2025), which was held on suspense in the Senate Appropriations Committee. After considerable negotiation, the insurance trade organizations removed their opposition, confident that the bill’s impacts would be absorbable for the insurance market. However, remaining in opposition was Verisk, an analytics firm that compiles databases of aerial images for use by insurance companies, and is also heavily involved in the development of the types of catastrophe models and wildfire risk models that the SIS contemplates. Verisk’s wildfire risk model was the first such model reviewed and acknowledged by CDI for use in rate filings, and Verisk’s catastrophe model was the first such model submitted for review under the SIS.

Verisk’s oppose unless amended letter for AB 75 read, in part:

[A]s drafted, AB 75 would jeopardize the SIS by effectively prohibiting insurers’ use of catastrophe models and wildfire risk models. […] The SIS’s catastrophe model regulation explicitly contemplates at least a 150-day review process. As such, compliance with AB 75’s 180-day requirement would be virtually impossible given that Verisk’s scientists’ and model builders’ evaluation, processing and incorporation of the satellite imagery data into the models is quite time intensive and cannot be completed in a short enough period of time. Even if it could be done in one month, by the time the model’s review was completed, AB 75 would prevent its use by insurance carriers. […] As is evident, the logistics of model development, coupled with the Department’s model and rate filing review process, creates an impossible scenario whereby usage of the very models the Insurance Commissioner has carefully and intentionally allowed through his Sustainable Insurance Strategy would be prohibited.

Predictive and probabilistic models such as catastrophe and wildfire risk models are typically developed using historical data in order to identify variables that can reliably predict future outcomes. Data reflecting the present state of the location in question, such as fuel availability and dryness in the case of wildfire risk models, is then plugged into the resulting algorithm(s) to determine a risk score.

As AB 75 was in print at the time of this opposition, it was unlikely that the 180-day requirement would have jeopardized the use of catastrophe models and wildfire risk models as contemplated by the SIS. First, AB 75 (and AB 1559) would have only regulated insurers, and not intermediaries such as Verisk. Verisk’s concerns were predicated on the assumption that insurers would not use their models (or similar models) due to risk that they would be determined to be basing their decision to non-renew “in part” on images older than 180 days, even if the contribution was relatively minor. Such concerns were not raised by the insurers themselves.

Additionally, while older images may be used to train or develop the algorithms underlying the models to predict wildfire behavior or events, best practices recommended by experts such as the National Science Foundation’s National Center for Atmospheric Research suggest that the actual variable inputs to those models used to derive risk scores should be up-to-date, as changing weather patterns, topography, and vegetation can mean older images do not reflect the actual risk.

Nonetheless, to ensure that AB 1559 does not result in apprehension toward the use of the predictive and probabilistic models on which the SIS relies, the author has included a clarifying amendment to the requirement that aerial images older than 180 days not be used in decisions to nonrenew coverage unless they are otherwise verified. That amendment reads as follows:

This subdivision does not apply to an aerial image that solely contributed to the decision to terminate insurance coverage through its use in the development of a probabilistic or predictive risk model, reviewed by the department and in compliance with all applicable statutory, regulatory, and other legal standards, to project annual aggregate losses due to low- frequency, high-severity events, or to project the likelihood of a location burning in the event of a wildfire. [Emphasis added.]

The amendment explicitly specifies that historical images may only be used in the development of the models, as historical data is critical to producing the models themselves. Notably, the exemption does not authorize the use of outdated images as inputs in the deployment of those models, unless they are verified to be reflective of the current state of the pertinent location. This ensures that the model outputs that can significantly impact a homeowners’ coverage are actually predictive of potential risk to the property under present conditions, rather than under conditions that are no longer relevant, while addressing concerns that the requirement may impact the implementation of the SIS.

1. Prior and pending legislation:

SB 260 (Wahab, 2025) would institute several rules concerning the use of unmanned aircraft in a variety of domains, including: 1) prohibiting operating an unmanned aerial vehicle or drone within a specified distance of a critical infrastructure facility, school, or the grounds of the California State Capitol, as specified; 2) requiring a residential property insurer to notify a policyholder at least 30 days in advance of the day that a remotely operated unmanned aircraft will be used to take aerial images of the insured property; and 3) requiring a residential property insurer to provide written notice if it has gathered sufficient evidence during inspection using unmanned aircraft to support termination of an insurance contract, to provide the pertinent evidence to the policyholder, and to allow 120 days for the policyholder to remedy the identified issue(s). This bill is awaiting referral in the Assembly Rules Committee.

SB 354 (Limón, 2025) would establish the Insurance Consumer Privacy Protection Act of 2025, which would establish a variety of privacy protections for personal information collected and used by insurers concerning insurance transactions, including data minimization requirements, opt-in consent for the collection of personal information, limitations on the use of sensitive personal information, transparency in data collection and retention, and oversight of third-party service provider arrangements. This bill awaiting hearing in the Assembly Insurance Committee.

AB 75 (Calderon, 2025) was nearly identical to this bill (see Comment 4). This bill was held on suspense in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

AARP
California Association of Realtors
California State Association of Counties (CSAC)
Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara / California Department of Insurance
League of California Cities
Near Space Labs, INC.
Southern California Rental Housing Association

Other

Oakland Privacy

Opposition

None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Landon Klein / INS. / (916) 319-2086