Existing law prohibits a person from interfering with the transport of a vehicle to a storage facility, auction, or dealer by an individual who is employed by a repossession agency or is licensed as a repossession agency once repossession is complete, as provided. Under existing law, a violation of this provision is an infraction, punishable by specified fines. This bill would double the fines, as specified.
The Personal Income Tax Law, in modified conformity with federal income tax laws, allows various deductions from gross income in calculating adjusted gross income. This bill, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2027, and before January 1, 2032, would allow a deduction in determining adjusted gross income for a taxpayer in an amount equal to $3,000 per qualified individual, reduced by 6% of the taxpayer's federal adjusted gross income in excess of specified thresholds. The bill would define "qualified individual" for these purposes to mean the taxpayer if the taxpayer is an elderly senior and, in the case of a married couple filing a joint return, the taxpayer's spouse if the taxpayer's spouse is an elderly senior, and would define "elderly senior" to mean an individual who meets specified age criteria as of the last day of the taxable year. Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure to contain, among other things, specific goals that the tax expenditure will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. This bill would include additional information required for any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Existing law directs the Legislative Counsel to advise the Legislature from time to time as to legislation necessary to maintain the codes. This bill would make nonsubstantive changes in various provisions of the law to effectuate the recommendations made by the Legislative Counsel to the Legislature.
Existing law authorizes a county to use a children's advocacy center to implement a coordinated multidisciplinary response to investigate reports involving child physical or sexual abuse, exploitation, or maltreatment. Existing law requires a county that utilizes a child advocacy center to meet specified standards, including, among other things, that the children's advocacy center must verify that interviews conducted in the course of investigations are conducted in a forensically sound manner and occur in a child-focused setting designed to provide a safe, comfortable, and dedicated place for children and families. Existing law requires the children's advocacy center or other identified multidisciplinary team member custodian to ensure that all recordings of child forensic interviews be released only in response to a court order, or, upon request, to law enforcement agencies authorized to investigate child abuse or agencies authorized to prosecute juvenile or criminal conduct described in the forensic interview, or to county counsel evaluating an allegation of child abuse. Existing law requires files, reports, records, communications, and working papers used or developed in providing services through a children's advocacy center to be confidential and not public records. Existing law authorizes the members of a multidisciplinary team associated with a children's advocacy center to share with other multidisciplinary team members any information or records concerning the child and family and the person who is the subject of the investigation of suspected child abuse or neglect for the sole purpose of facilitating a forensic interview, case discussion, or providing services to the child or family, as specified. This bill would additionally authorize the members of a multidisciplinary team associated with a children's advocacy center to share with child welfare agencies authorized to investigate child abuse and neglect any information or records, as specified, for the purposes mentioned above.
Existing law, the Mitigation Fee Act, imposes various requirements with respect to the establishment, increase, or imposition of a fee by a local agency as a condition of approval of a development project, including requiring the local agency to identify the use to which the fee is to be put and determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the fee's use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed. This bill would require the amount of a fee that is imposed on a development project that demolishes or changes an existing use to be offset to account for the demolition or change so that the amount of the fee is attributable only to the development project's incremental impact on public facilities or services, as provided. Existing law provides that when a local agency imposes a fee for water connections or sewer connections, or imposes a capacity charge, as defined, those fees or charges shall not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee or charge is imposed, except as specified. This bill would provide that when a change in the capacity of an existing water or sewer connection is proposed, a local agency, in calculating the estimated reasonable cost of a capacity charge, shall only calculate an amount attributable to the change in the capacity. If the existing capacity exceeds the proposed capacity, the bill would prohibit any amount from being refunded, credited, transferred, assigned, or otherwise applied to offset any other charge or fee.
Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each county and each city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, and specified land outside its boundaries, that includes, among other specified mandatory elements, a housing element. That law requires the planning agency of a city or county to provide by April 1 of each year an annual report to, among other entities, the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation and the Department of Housing and Community Development, that includes, among other specified information, the status of a development of land disposed, as described, the information each county and city is required to include in its central inventory of surplus land and report, as specified, and the number of applications for parcel maps for urban lot splits, as provided. This bill would make nonsubstantive changes and reorganize various provisions relating to the annual report requirements, including the requirements described above, and would make related nonsubstantive conforming changes. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law requires that the terms of probation granted to a person who has been convicted of domestic violence include, among other things, successful completion of a batterer's program or, if a batterer's program is not available, another appropriate counseling program, as specified. Existing law requires the probation department to design and implement an approval and renewal process for batterer's programs and prescribes the requirements of a batterer's program. Existing law, until July 1, 2026, authorizes the Counties of Napa, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, and Yolo to offer an alternative program for individuals convicted of domestic violence if the program meets specified conditions. This bill would additionally authorize the County of Sacramento to offer an alternative program for individuals convicted of domestic violence. The bill would extend the repeal date of these provisions to July 1, 2030. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Prospective federal law, the federal 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act (H.R. 6644) , prohibits a large institutional investor from purchasing, or entering into a contract to directly or indirectly purchase, any single-family home, except as specified. If the above-described federal legislation is enacted, this bill would authorize the Attorney General, district attorney, or county counsel to coordinate with the Secretary of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Director of the United States Federal Housing Finance Agency, the Chair of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States in the implementation of federal regulations, as described, related to violations of federal law involving tenants residing in properties owned, maintained, and managed by institutional investors. Existing law establishes various real estate disclosure requirements applicable to the transfer of residential real property. Before entering into specified transactions relating to residential real property, including an individual sale of residential real property, this bill would require an institutional investor, as defined, to provide written notice of the institutional investor's intent to sell the property to each tenant at least 90 days before advertising the residential real property for sale in a multiple listing service, as specified. The bill would require the notice to include, among other things, a statement that the tenant has the right to remain in possession until the end of the lease term, except as specified. For sales of residential real property containing 1 to 4 residential dwelling units by an institutional investor, this bill would require the institutional investor to, among other things, only accept offers from prospective owner-occupants, including any tenant in possession, during the first 30 days after the property is listed for sale. The bill would require the prospective owner-occupant to submit with their offer an affidavit or declaration executed under penalty of perjury stating they are purchasing the residential real property as an owner-occupant, as described. The bill would subject a prospective owner-occupant or an institutional investor to criminal or civil liability. The bill would also require an institutional investor that sells residential real property to record, or cause to be recorded, a certification of compliance under penalty of perjury, as specified. The bill would require the failure to record the certificate of compliance to result in a civil penalty, as described. By expanding the scope of existing crimes, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would also authorize the Attorney General, district attorney, city attorney, and tenant to bring an action in the superior court to enforce the bill's provisions, and upon prevailing, would allow for injunctive relief and civil penalties, as specified. The bill would require its provisions to be construed consistently with the above-described federal act, if enacted, and would make its provisions severable. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law sets forth specific rules relating to the jurisdiction for the prosecution of theft by fraud, organized retail theft, and receiving stolen property, including that the jurisdiction for prosecution includes the county where an offense involving the theft or receipt of the stolen merchandise occurred, the county in which the merchandise was recovered, or the county where any act was done by the defendant in instigating, procuring, promoting, or aiding or abetting in the commission of a theft offense or other qualifying offense. This bill would make the jurisdiction of a criminal action for wage theft or labor trafficking, as defined, also include the county in which the victim resided at the time of the wage theft or labor trafficking, the county in which the victim was present at the time the employment contract was entered into, the county in which any portion of the work was performed, or the county in which the business or any of its locations was situated at the time of the wage theft or labor trafficking, as specified.
Existing law authorizes the Secretary of State to appoint and commission notaries public in the number that the secretary deems necessary for the public convenience. Existing law prohibits fees charged by a notary public for certain services, including taking an acknowledgment or proof of a deed, from exceeding specified amounts. This bill would increase those amounts, as specified, and make findings and declarations related to these provisions.
Existing law, the California Bicycle Transportation Act, establishes 4 classifications of facilities, referred to as bikeways, that provide primarily for, and promote, bicycle travel. Existing law requires a person operating a bicycle, which includes an electric bicycle, upon a highway to ride the bicycle upon or astride a permanent and regular seat unless the bicycle was designed by the manufacturer to be ridden without a seat. Existing law requires a person riding as a passenger on a bicycle upon a highway to be upon or astride a seat attached to the bicycle, as specified. A violation of these provisions in punishable as an infraction. This bill would make those provisions applicable to the operation of a bicycle upon a Class I bikeway. By expanding an existing infraction, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law, the Local Agency Public Construction Act, regulates contracting by local agencies, including counties and special districts. The act includes specific provisions for contracting by counties and contracting for county highways, bridges, and subways, and county waterworks districts. Those provisions include change order authorization for contracts, as prescribed, and impose caps on the extra cost of any change order, varying with the value of the original contract. Existing law, until January 1, 2027, authorizes the County of Los Angeles and the County of Santa Clara to add a change order cap of $400,000 for contracts whose original cost exceeds $25,000,000 and of $750,000 for contracts whose original cost exceeds $50,000,000, both of which are adjusted annually to reflect the percentage change in the California Consumer Price Index. Existing law imposes similar caps for both counties with regard to county highways and similar caps for the County of Los Angeles with regard to county bridges, subways, waterworks districts, and the Los Angeles County Flood Control District. That law requires the provisions specific to the County of Los Angeles and the County of Santa Clara modify no more than 7 contracts and requires those counties to provide a review report to the Assembly Committee on Local Government and the Senate Committee on Governance and Finance no later than July 1, 2026. This bill would no longer require the County of Los Angeles and the County of Santa Clara to modify no more than 7 contracts and no longer require those counties to provide a review report, as described above. The bill would delete the January 1, 2027, repeal date, thereby extending these provisions indefinitely. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Santa Clara and the County of Los Angeles.
