(1) The California Constitution establishes the Budget Stabilization Account and requires the Controller to transfer from the General Fund to the account, no later than October 1 of each fiscal year, a sum equal to 1.5% of the estimated amount of General Fund revenues for that fiscal year. The Department of Finance is required to report specified information to the Legislature, including (A) an estimate of the amount of General Fund proceeds of taxes that may be appropriated for that fiscal year, (B) an estimate of the portion of that amount that is derived from personal income taxes paid on net capital gains, and (C) the portion of the estimate in (B) that exceeds 8% of the estimate made in (A) . Notwithstanding the requirement for the Controller to transfer 1.5% of General Fund revenues for each fiscal year to the account, for the 2015–16 fiscal year to the 2029–30 fiscal year, inclusive, the California Constitution instead requires 50% of that amount and 50% of the amount described in (C) to be transferred to the Budget Stabilization Account. The California Constitution requires the remaining 50% to be appropriated for unfunded liabilities and other specified purposes. Commencing with the 2027–28 fiscal year, this measure would require the Department of Finance to report the sum of the portion of the estimate in (B) that exceeds 8%, but does not exceed 10%, of the estimate in (A) and 150% of the estimate in (B) that exceeds 10% of the estimate in (A) . The measure would require 50% of that sum and 50% of the amount equal to 1.5% of the estimated amount of General Fund revenues for the fiscal year to be transferred to the Budget Stabilization Account each fiscal year until the 2039–40 fiscal year, and it would require the remaining 50% to be appropriated for unfunded liabilities and other specified purposes. The measure would add repayment of federal loans relating to unemployment insurance to the purposes for which the remaining 50% may be appropriated. The California Constitution limits the amount that is required to be transferred to the Budget Stabilization Account for any fiscal year from exceeding an amount that would result in a balance in the account that, when the transfer is made, exceeds 10% of the estimated amount of the General Fund proceeds of taxes for the fiscal year, as specified. This measure would increase that limit to 20% of the estimated amount of the General Fund proceeds of taxes for the fiscal year. (2) The California Constitution creates the Public School System Stabilization Account in the General Fund and requires the Controller to transfer specified amounts from the General Fund to the account. Upon a proclamation by the Governor declaring a budget emergency, the Legislature may suspend or reduce transfers to the Budget Stabilization Account or Public School System Stabilization Account, return funds in the Budget Stabilization Account to the General Fund, and appropriate funds in the Public School System Stabilization Account for the support of school districts and community college districts. The California Constitution defines "budget emergency" for these purposes to mean (A) the existence of conditions of disaster or extreme peril, as declared by the Governor, or (B) a determination by the Governor that estimated resources are inadequate to fund General Fund expenditures for the current or ensuing fiscal year at a level equal to the highest amount of total General Fund expenditures estimated at the time of enactment of any of the three most recent Budget Acts. The California Constitution requires the Governor, within the first 10 days of each calendar year, to submit to the Legislature a proposed budget for the fiscal year commencing on July 1 of that calendar year. Under existing statutory law, the Director of Finance is required to submit a revised budget proposal to the Legislature on or before May 14. Under this measure, the revised budget proposal submitted on or before May 14, or any other budgetary revision required to be submitted to the Legislature, would constitute the Governor's proclamation of a budget emergency if the above-described conditions for a budget emergency exist, and if the budgetary revision proposes to suspend or reduce transfers from the General Fund to the Budget Stabilization Account or Public School System Stabilization Account, return funds in the Budget Stabilization Account to the General Fund, or appropriate money from the Public School System Stabilization Account. (3) The California Constitution prohibits the total annual appropriations subject to limitation of the State and of each local government from exceeding the appropriations limit of the entity of government for the prior year, adjusted for the change in the cost of living and the change in population. The California Constitution defines "appropriations subject to limitation" of the State for these purposes. This measure would exclude both of the following from the appropriations subject to limitation of the State commencing with the 2027–28 fiscal year: (A) transfers to the Budget Stabilization Account; and (B) transfers to a General Fund reserve account established by the Legislature known as the Projected Surplus Temporary Holding Account, provided that the amount not subject to limitation may not exceed 10% of the amount of General Fund proceeds of taxes for the applicable fiscal year. Funds withdrawn, transferred, or appropriated from those reserve accounts, if they were not counted previously as appropriations subject to limitation of the State when deposited, would constitute appropriations subject to limitation of the State in the fiscal year in which the withdrawal, transfer, or appropriation occurs.
Under existing law, there are programs providing assistance for, among other things, emergency housing, multifamily housing, farmworker housing, home ownership for very low and low-income households, and downpayment assistance for first-time home buyers. Existing law also authorizes the issuance of bonds in specified amounts pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law and requires that proceeds from the sale of these bonds be used to finance various existing housing programs, capital outlay related to infill development, brownfield cleanup that promotes infill development, and housing-related parks. Existing law, the Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2018, authorized, the issuance of bonds in the amount of $4,000,000,000 to finance various existing housing programs, as well as infill infrastructure financing and affordable housing matching grant programs, as well as financing for a specified program for farm, home, and mobilehome purchase assistance for veterans, pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law. This bill would enact the Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2026, which, if adopted, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $11,250,000,000, pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law. Of the proceeds from the sale of these bonds, $10,000,000,000 would be used to finance programs to fund affordable rental housing and home ownership programs, including, among others, the Multifamily Housing Program, the CalHome Program, and the Joe Serna, Jr. Farmworker Housing Grant Program, and $1,250,000,000 would be used to provide additional funding for the above-described program for farm, home, and mobilehome purchase assistance for veterans, as provided. This bill would provide for submission of the bond act to the voters at the November 3, 2026, statewide general election, in accordance with specified law. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law, the Documentary Transfer Tax Act, authorizes the imposition of a tax by a county or city and county, as provided, with respect to specified instruments that transfer specified interests in real property. This bill would, beginning January 1, 2027, prohibit a local jurisdiction, defined to include a city, including a charter city, county, or city and county, from collecting a transfer tax, as defined, levied on the sale or transfer of a real property interest conveyed if the combined transfer tax rate levied by the local jurisdiction exceeds 1.5% of the consideration paid for or value of the real property interest conveyed, except as otherwise provided. The bill would also prohibit a local jurisdiction from levying a transfer tax on the first sale of single-family housing property occurring within 5 years of one or more housing units on the real property being destroyed or made uninhabitable by a natural disaster, as defined. By imposing new duties upon local officials with respect to transfer taxes, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law, the Corporation Tax Law, imposes taxes based upon gross income, and defines "gross income" as all income from whatever source derived, unless specifically excluded. Existing law allows various credits against the taxes imposed by that law. The Corporation Tax Law conforms to federal law in its treatment of certain exclusions and credits. Existing law provides for certain programs for free legal services for indigent persons. This bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2027, and before January 1, 2032, enact the No Tax Breaks for ICE Contractors Act of 2026, which would deny all tax credits otherwise available under the Corporation Tax Law to any taxpayer that contracts with United States Department of Homeland Security, except as provided. The bill would establish the California Immigrant Resilience Fund in the State Treasury. The bill would require the Franchise Tax Board, in consultation with the Department of Finance, to estimate the amount of additional revenue resulting from the provisions of the bill, notify the Controller of that amount, and require the Controller to transfer that amount to the fund. The bill would make moneys in the fund available to provide immigration-related services, including removal defense, as provided, upon appropriation by the Legislature. This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax within the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Existing law authorizes various local governmental entities, subject to certain limitations and approval requirements, to levy a transactions and use tax for general or specific purposes, in accordance with the procedures and requirements set forth in the Transactions and Use Tax Law, including a requirement that the combined rate of all taxes that may be imposed in accordance with that law in any county not exceed 2%. This bill would authorize, until December 31, 2031, the County of Los Angeles, by an ordinance adopted by the county, to levy a tax pursuant to the Transactions and Use Tax Law at a rate not to exceed 0.5% for general and special purposes, subject to voter approval, as specified. The bill would also authorize, until December 31, 2031, the County of Contra Costa, by an ordinance adopted by the county, to levy a tax pursuant to the Transactions and Use Tax Law at a rate not to exceed 0.625% for general or specific purposes, subject to voter approval, as specified. The bill would authorize those taxes to exceed the 2% limit described above. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Counties of Contra Costa and Los Angeles. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law prescribes the procedures by which a proposed ordinance may be submitted to the governing board of a district by an initiative measure. These procedures do not apply to specified districts, including a district formed under a law that does not provide a procedure for elections. This bill would authorize the voters of any district that has authority to impose a transactions and use tax for transportation purposes to impose a retail transactions and use tax by an initiative measure. The bill would prohibit the initiative tax from exceeding the maximum authorized rate for a tax imposed by an ordinance enacted by the governing body of the district, and the bill would require the initiative measure to contain all spending limitations and substantive accountability standards applicable to a tax imposed by an ordinance enacted by the governing body. To the extent the bill would increase the duties of county elections officials, the 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
(1) Existing law creates the Metropolitan Transportation Commission as a local area planning agency for the 9-county San Francisco Bay area with comprehensive regional transportation planning and other related responsibilities. Existing law creates various transit districts located in the San Francisco Bay area, with specified powers and duties relating to providing public transit services. This bill would establish the Public Transit Revenue Measure District with jurisdiction extending throughout the boundaries of the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, and Santa Clara and the City and County of San Francisco and would require the district to be governed by the same board that governs the commission, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize a retail transactions and use tax applicable to the entire district to be imposed by the board of the district or by a qualified voter initiative for a duration of 14 years, and in an amount of 0.5% in each of the above-described counties located within the district and 1% in the City and County of San Francisco, subject to voter approval at the November 3, 2026, statewide general election. After payments are made for various administrative expenses, the bill would require the district to transfer specified portions of the proceeds of the tax to the commission for allocation to certain programs and other purposes and for allocation to the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board, commonly known as Caltrain, the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, and other specified transit agencies, for transit operations expenses, and would require the district to transfer specified portions of the proceeds of the tax directly to other specified local transportation agencies, including the San Mateo County Transit District and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, for public transit expenses, as prescribed. By adding to the duties of local officials with respect to elections procedures for this bill on behalf of the district, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law requires the commission to develop regional transit service objectives, develop performance measures of efficiency and effectiveness, specify uniform data requirements to assess public transit service benefits and costs, and formulate procedures for establishing regional transportation priorities in the allocation of funds for transportation purposes. This bill would require the commission to contract with, and manage, a third-party consultant to conduct a financial efficiency review of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, Caltrain, the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, and the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, as specified. The bill would require the review to be completed in 2 phases, with the analysis for the 2nd phase only required if the tax measure is approved by the voters of the Public Transit Revenue Measure District. The bill would require the consultant to transmit the analysis for each phase to an oversight committee, which the bill would create with a prescribed membership, for review and adoption. The bill would require a transit operator subject to the financial efficiency review to take specified actions in response to the analysis for the first phase and, subject to review of the oversight committee, to adopt an implementation plan that describes the cost-saving measures identified in the analysis for the 2nd phase that the operator plans to implement, as specified. The bill would require a transit operator subject to the financial efficiency review to verify its compliance with the requirements of the review as a condition of receiving funds from the tax measure approved by the voters of the district. The bill would require each transit operator to which the commission allocates funds to comply with a maintenance of effort requirement as a condition of receiving those funds, as provided. This bill would require the commission, if the tax measure is approved by the voters of the district and other conditions are satisfied, to establish an ad hoc adjudication committee for a transit operator subject to the above-described financial efficiency review to assess and adjudicate petitions submitted by a participating county transportation entity, as defined, or a county board of supervisors with regard to the performance of the transit operator within the geographic jurisdiction of the entity submitting the petition, as provided. As part of this process, the bill would require an ad hoc adjudication committee, among other things, to determine whether to direct the commission to withhold funding from the tax measure allocated to the transit operator if the committee agrees with a claim regarding the performance of the transit operator, as specified. This bill would require the commission to submit a report to the Legislature on or before March 31, 2026, on its forecast of the impacts to ridership on the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, Caltrain, the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, and the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency from planned transportation projects and strategies included in its adopted regional transportation plan. By adding to the duties of the commission, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) The Bay Area County Traffic and Transportation Funding Act authorizes the formation of county transportation authorities in each of the 9 bay area counties, and provides for the imposition of a retail transaction and use tax in each of those counties of either 12 of 1% or 1%, subject to voter approval, with revenues to be used for various transportation purposes. This bill would instead provide that a retail transaction and use tax imposed under those provisions in the County of San Mateo or the City and County of San Francisco may be imposed in 18 of 1% increments up to 1%. (4) This bill would declare that its provisions are severable. (5) 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
The Local Transportation Authority and Improvement Act authorizes a county board of supervisors to create or otherwise designate a local transportation authority in the county that may impose a transactions and use tax for transportation purposes subject to voter approval and other specified requirements. Pursuant to that authority, the county board of supervisors of the County of Sacramento created the Sacramento Transportation Authority (STA) . This bill would provide that the allowable expenditure categories for revenues from a tax imposed by STA include the construction, modernization, and improvement of infrastructure, as defined, that supports infill or transit-oriented development in areas nominated by local governments, and included in regionally adopted plans that advance state greenhouse gas emissions reduction objectives, as specified. The bill would also authorize STA to impose a transactions and use tax under the act in a geographic area that comprises less than the total area of the County of Sacramento, subject to the approval of voters within that area and other specified requirements. Existing law authorizes regional transportation agencies and the Department of Transportation to apply to the California Transportation Commission to develop and operate high-occupancy toll lanes or other toll facilities. Under existing law, revenue generated from the operation of a toll facility under these provisions is available to the sponsoring agency for the expenses related to the toll facility and for other uses within the corridor from which the revenue is generated pursuant to an expenditure plan developed by the sponsoring agency. Existing law authorizes a regional transportation agency to issue bonds to finance construction-related expenditures for a toll facility, and construction-related expenditures that are included in the expenditure plan, payable from the revenues generated from the toll facility. Existing law defines regional transportation agency for these purposes to mean, among other things, a joint exercise of powers authority subject to the consent of a transportation planning agency for the jurisdiction in which the transportation project will be developed. For purposes of these provisions, the Sacramento Area Council of Governments, the Yolo Transportation District, and the department formed a joint powers authority, known as the Capital Area Regional Tolling Authority (CARTA) , to apply to the commission to develop and operate toll facilities in the Sacramento region. This bill would authorize STA to issue bonds to finance costs of high-occupancy toll lanes or other toll facilities within the County of Sacramento approved by the commission pursuant to the above-described provisions. The bill would authorize those bonds to be payable from toll revenue or any other funds lawfully available to STA for those purposes, including sales tax revenue. Before STA issues bonds payable from toll revenue for a toll facility operated by CARTA, the bill would require STA to enter into an agreement with CARTA regarding the application of toll revenue to pay for bonds issued by STA and would require the governing board of CARTA to review and approve a toll facility expenditure plan.
Existing law authorizes various local governmental entities, subject to certain limitations and approval requirements, to levy a transactions and use tax for general or specific purposes, in accordance with the procedures and requirements set forth in the Transactions and Use Tax Law, including a requirement that the combined rate of all taxes that may be imposed in accordance with that law in any county not exceed 2%. This bill would authorize the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments, by an ordinance adopted by the council, to levy a tax pursuant to the Transactions and Use Tax Law at a rate not to exceed 1%, for general and special purposes, subject to voter approval on or after January 1, 2026, and before January 1, 2032. The bill would authorize the board to exceed the 2% limit described above to impose the retail transactions and use tax. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of San Luis Obispo.
The Corporation Tax Law, in modified conformity with federal tax law, provides an exemption from the taxes imposed by that law for specified organizations. Existing law references federal tax law to give priority to tax-exempt organizations, or to require tax-exempt status, for the purpose of certain grants and service contracts. This bill would provide that where specified federal tax law is referenced to determine eligibility for any state grant or service contract, or for the disbursement of state or local funds, it is deemed to also refer to the relevant provision of the Corporation Tax Law. Existing law designates the State Department of Social Services as the single agency with full power to supervise every phase of the administration of public social services, including services for refugees, immigrants, and asylees, except as specified. Existing law requires the department to allocate federal funds for refugee social services programs to eligible counties and, in certain circumstances, to qualified nonprofit organizations. Existing law requires the department, subject to an appropriation, to provide grants to qualified nonprofit organizations through contracts to provide certain immigration-related legal services to persons residing in, or formerly residing in, the state. Existing law requires the department to administer a rapid response program to award grants or contracts to entities, including nonprofit organizations, that provide critical assistance to immigrants during times of need. Existing law, subject to an appropriation, establishes the Enhanced Services for Asylees and Vulnerable Noncitizens program to provide resettlement services for persons granted asylum by the United States Attorney General or the United States Secretary of Homeland Security or who are eligible to receive refugee cash assistance and services as victims of crime. Existing law requires a grant or contract awarded pursuant to that program to be executed only with a qualified nonprofit organization. Existing law defines "qualified nonprofit organization" or "nonprofit organization" for purposes of these provisions to include a nonprofit organization that, among other things, is exempt from federal income taxation, as specified. This bill would revise the definition of "qualified nonprofit organization" or "nonprofit organization" under the above-described provisions to additionally include a nonprofit organization that meets specified requirements to qualify for state tax-exempt status. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
