California Science and Health Research Bond Act

If voters approve, the bond would fund California-based research, research facilities, and commercialization across health, climate, agriculture, emerging technology, and other fields. The program prioritizes research affected by federal discretionary funding cuts while imposing public oversight, access, and financial-accountability requirements.

What the law does ​

• Creates the California Foundation for Science and Health Research within the Government Operations Agency, governed by a research council.
• Places a $7.5 billion bond measure on the March 7, 2028, statewide primary-election ballot.
• Authorizes grants, loans, and contracts for California-based research and research facilities, including $1 billion for University of California and California State University research-facility construction and modernization.
• Requires competitive scientific peer review, public disclosure of awards, annual reporting, independent audits, and limits administrative costs to 3 percent of bond funds.
• Prioritizes research hit by federal discretionary funding cuts, commercialization that supports California jobs, higher-risk projects, and early-career researchers.
• Requires funded researchers to plan for equitable access to resulting biomedical inventions, publicly share research data and publications subject to security and foreign-entity limits, and use intellectual-property agreements that may return value to the state.
• Bars awards to foreign entities of concern and generally requires funded research to occur in California.

Who it affects ​

• California universities, academic medical centers, research companies, institutes, nonprofits, and other research organizations.
• Researchers in biomedical, public health, behavioral health, climate, wildfire, agriculture and water, ocean, weather, emerging-technology, and related fields.
• University of California and California State University campuses seeking bond-funded research-facility projects.
• Grantees, loan recipients, and contractors that must meet access, data-sharing, human-subjects review, and intellectual-property conditions.

Context ​

The act takes effect immediately to place the measure on the 2028 ballot, but its foundation, bond program, and related provisions take effect only if voters approve the bond measure.

Breakdown ​

Science and Health Research Foundation ​

The bill creates a new state foundation and council to fund and guide scientific and health research in California. It establishes public and private funding accounts, sets rules for fair access, data sharing, and state benefits from inventions, and requires competitive scientific review. It also places a $7.5 billion research bond before voters in March 2028.

Key takeaways

• The bill creates the California Foundation for Science and Health Research within the Government Operations Agency to carry out the council’s research goals and administer grants, loans, and contracts.
• It creates a council with authority over the foundation, including setting research priorities, choosing projects for funding, seeking public comment, and supporting early-career researchers.
• The foundation may fund public or private research companies, universities, academic medical centers, institutes, and organizations for research in areas including biomedical, behavioral health, and climate research.
• The bill creates a public Innovation Acceleration Fund and a separate Benefit Fund made only of private donations, both of which may support the foundation’s research funding activities.
• Before making its first grant, and within one year after the bill takes effect, the council must establish requirements intended to promote affordability and equitable access to research-supported inventions and technologies.
• Funding recipients must develop equitable-access strategies, generally share bond-funded research data with the scientific community, and comply with intellectual-property agreements that allow California to benefit from resulting inventions and licenses.
• Research awards must follow open scientific exchange, peer review, and public oversight, and must be selected through an open and competitive review process based on scientific merit and the council’s priorities.
• If voters approve it, the California Science and Health Research Bond Act would authorize $7.5 billion in general obligation bonds for research grants and loans and for research facilities, with the measure submitted at the March 7, 2028 statewide primary election.

Council Member Conflict Rules ​

The bill creates tailored conflict-of-interest rules for council members. It allows them, in specified circumstances, to take part in decisions about research funding for a disease affecting them or an immediate family member, while requiring disclosures and recusal in certain financially interested transactions. It also says that service with certain schools and organizations does not conflict with a member’s council duties.

Key takeaways

• A council member may participate in approving or awarding research grants, loans, or contracts concerning a disease in which the member or an immediate family member has a personal interest, as specified.
• Service with specified educational institutions and organizations is not considered incompatible with a council member’s duties.
• A council member with a financial interest in a grant, loan, or contract may avoid the otherwise applicable contract-interest prohibition by recusing themself from the approval or award decision, as specified.
• Council members must meet specified disclosure requirements for personal investments and potential conflicts of interest.

Open Meetings and Privacy ​

The bill makes the council and its scientific peer review panels subject to California’s open-meeting law. Their meetings generally must be open to the public, but they may hold closed sessions for specified matters, including confidential patient or research-subject information whose disclosure would improperly invade privacy. The bill also states legislative findings supporting these limits on public access.

Key takeaways

• The council and scientific peer review panels generally must hold meetings open to the public.
• The bill allows closed sessions for specified matters that require confidentiality.
• Closed sessions may cover patient or medical or scientific research-subject information when disclosure would be an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
• The bill includes legislative findings explaining the need for these limits on public access to meetings.