The mortgage meltdown, in particular, has led to a slew of proposed bills. "California, among all the states of the union, is being hit particularly hard," pointed out Senate Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland. Perata was successfully in pushing a bill through the Senate that would require lenders to contact homeowners early in the foreclosure process, and provide 60 days' notice to renters.

Five other bills passed that offer varying degrees of protection to homeowners, and are intended to help clean up the lending industry.

Consumer protection and health care also figured prominently in the minds of legislatures.

Californians could be banned by building owners from smoking in their own apartment units, because of a bill by Sen. Alex Padilla. "Not sharing secondhand smoke with neighbors upstairs or downstairs or next door," Padilla said of his bill.

Another bill that got a nod of approval from lawmakers would require restaurant chains to post nutritional information.

The Assembly approve a bill to limit the amount of lead that could be used in products designed for young children.

The measure by Assemblywoman Fiona Ma, D-San Francisco, was sent to the state Senate on Thursday by a 56-6 vote.

Starting in 2012, the bill would ban products designed for children 12 years and younger if they contained more than 100 parts per million of lead.

Childhood exposure to lead has been linked to decreased intelligence, short-term memory loss, reading problems, limited vocabulary, lack of fine-motor skills and health problems, including cancer.

The Assembly approved legislation that would allow private-sector employees to save for retirement through programs offered by CalPERS.

The bill would require the California Public Employee Retirement System to offer individual accounts to private-sector employees and employers.

CalPERS is the nation's largest public-employee pension fund.

Supporters say the measure will provide a way for 6 million California workers who lack pension plans through their jobs to supplement their retirement incomes.

Thursday's 42-38 vote sent the bill to the state Senate. Its author was Assemblyman Kevin De Leon, a Democrat from Los Angeles.

After a heated debate that included charges of fear-mongering, the Assembly narrowly approved a bill Thursday to require the state to complete an environmental impact report before moving ahead with aerial spraying to eradicate the light brown apple moth.

The bill was sent to the Senate by a 41-32 vote, but it wouldn't take effect until January. That's four months after the Schwarzenegger administration plans to spray in seven San Francisco Bay area counties, starting Aug. 17.

It almost certainly faces a veto if it reaches Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's desk, although the governor's office said he had not taken a position on the measure.

The bill's author, Assemblyman Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, said it would prevent plans for repeated spraying over several years without an environmental impact report.

He said he hoped the Republican governor would "come to the realization that it makes perfect sense to do this" and decide to sign the bill.

"We definitely need an EIR looking at the health effects on humans, animals and the environment before spraying a seven-million-person urban area to eradicate a moth that has likely been in California for decades contained by natural predators," he said.

Leno said he had to remove language that would have made the bill effective immediately in order to get it out of the Assembly without a two-thirds vote. As it was, the measure passed with the bare majority needed to clear the 80-seat house.

The light brown apple month, a native of Australia, feeds on nearly all fruit and vegetable crops. Officials warn of widespread damage to the state's agriculture industry if the pest spreads beyond the San Francisco and Monterey areas.

Several hundred people reported health problems after the state sprayed for the moth last fall in Santa Cruz and Monterey counties. That raised fears of health problems on a broader scale if spraying continues.

"I have had mothers, pregnant women frightened out of their minds, calling my office, meeting with me, suggesting they'd have to leave the state" if more aerial spraying takes place, Leno said. "They are that frightened."

The bill's opponents said they agreed the state had a "public relations disaster" on its hands, but they downplayed the possibility of health risks from spraying and stressed the threat to crops.

Steve Lyle, a spokesman for the state Department of Food and Agriculture, said two studies found no link between health problems and last year's spraying.

"Let's not let fear destroy the economy of the state," said Assemblywoman Jean Fuller, R-Bakersfield.

But Assemblyman Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, questioned how much of a threat the moth poses to agriculture. He said it moves within a range of a few hundred feet during its brief lifetime.

"This is not a herd of locusts that can go across the entire continent of Africa," he said. "The way it gets to different places is through the transfer of nursery stocks."

Assemblyman Todd Spitzer, R-Orange, suggested San Francisco-area legislators supporting the bill were "fanning the flames that are creating turmoil in your communities."

"You are part of the hysteria," he said. "You need to calm down this debate. ... I will bet you $100 that when the EIR comes out and says it's not unsafe, you will still oppose aerial spraying."

Leno said Spitzer "knows of which he speaks when he talks about fanning the flames of hysteria."

"This hysteria is real," Leno added. "Mothers with children are frightened out of their minds because this governor and department don't know what the effects of urban spraying for a three- to five-year period will do."

Judges in Santa Cruz and Monterey counties have issued rulings prohibiting aerial spraying until the state completes an environmental impact report. The Schwarzenegger administration is planning to appeal those decisions, said Lyle, of the Department of Food and Agriculture.

The state, in partnership with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, is planning to use a spray containing a moth pheromone - a sort of "moth perfume" - to spray in Santa Cruz, Monterey, San Mateo, Alameda, Contra Costa and Marin counties. It also would be sprayed in San Francisco.

The pheromone confuses male moths and disrupts their search for mating partners, Lyle said.

The spraying needs to take place as frequently as every 30 days over three to five years to ensure eradication, he added.

"This is an approach that is a progressive approach that is very different than a conventional pesticide," he said. "That's one of the reasons we embraced it."

The Department of Agriculture is conducting toxicology and feasibility tests on four different pheromone products, and the state is voluntarily doing an EIR on aerial spraying, Lyle said.

But Leno said the toxicology tests wouldn't go as far as an environmental impact report and that the administration would not be bound by the findings of a voluntary EIR.

KCBS' Janice Wright reports