In Preston v. State Bd. of Equalization (2001) 25 Cal. 4th 197, the court based its holding that a statute should be applied retroactively in part on a provision stating: " 'It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this act to clarify the application of an existing law.' " ( Preston v. State Bd. of Equalization, supra, 25 Cal. 4th at p. 222.) That statement "strongly suggests" that the statute should apply to causes of action existing on the date of enactment (i.e. retroactively), but the court did not end its analysis there. (Ibid.) It also concluded that the Legislature intended a retroactive application, but only when, upon examination of the legislative history, it found the Legislature added the intent provision despite (1) knowledge that "the bill may partially change existing law," and (2) awareness that the provision may result in retroactive application. ( Id. at p. 223.)