The electors of a county may propose an ordinance to the county board of supervisors by submitting an initiative petition containing signatures by registered voters in the county in an amount equal to 10% of the number of votes cast within the county for all candidates for Governor at the preceding gubernatorial election. If the county elections official certifies that an initiative petition has been signed by at least that number of voters, the county board of supervisors is required to either adopt the ordinance or submit it to the voters at the next statewide election occurring not less than 88 days later. This bill would require any Fresno County initiative petition that has been certified as sufficient by the Fresno County Registrar of Voters on or before July 8, 2026, to be submitted, without alteration, to the voters at the November 3, 2026, statewide general election. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Fresno. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law provides for the establishment of the Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District, with specified powers and duties related to the operation of public transit services serving the County of Santa Cruz. Existing law, among other things, authorizes the board of directors of the district to impose transactions and use taxes in accordance with the Transactions and Use Tax Law by an ordinance approved by the electors voting on the measure at a special election called by the board of directors for that purpose. This bill would also authorize those special taxes to be imposed by a qualified voter initiative. The bill would require the special election for a tax measure proposed by the board of directors or a qualified voter initiative to be consolidated with a statewide general election by the board of supervisors of the County of Santa Cruz and would require the tax measure to be submitted to the voters in accordance with specified elections provisions. The bill would also require the county elections official for the County of Santa Cruz to serve as the elections official of the district for purposes of administering the ballot measure process and any election for purposes of specified provisions of law. To the extent that the bill would impose additional duties on a county elections official, 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. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law requires the California Transportation Commission to establish a competitive funding program, commonly known as the Short-Line Railroad Improvement Program, to provide funds to the Department of Transportation or regional transportation planning agencies, or both, for short-line railroad projects such as railroad reconstruction, maintenance, upgrade, or replacement. Existing law appropriates up to $7,200,000 from the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund to the program and makes those moneys available for encumbrance or expenditure until June 30, 2028. This bill would extend the availability of those moneys for expenditure by one year. By extending the expenditure date of those moneys, the bill would make an appropriation. In order to receive funding from the Short-Line Railroad Improvement Program, existing law requires at least 30% of the total project cost to be provided from nongovernmental sources. This bill would authorize, for a project under the program for a publicly owned railroad, those funds to be provided from private funds, local funds, or state or federal funds not allocated by the commission on a project-specific basis.
Existing law prescribes various requirements regarding the formation, content, and enforcement of state and local public contracts. Existing law establishes, until January 1, 2027, for contracts entered into on or after January 1, 2017, a claim resolution process applicable to any claim by a contractor in connection with a public works project against a public entity, as specified. For purposes of these provisions, existing law defines "public entity" to include, among others, a city, including a charter city, and county, including a charter county. Existing law imposes various requirements on a public entity in relating to the claim resolution process, including, among other things, conducting a reasonable review of the claim and, within 45 days, providing the claimant a written statement identifying the disputed and undisputed portions of the claim. This bill would repeal the above-described January 1, 2027, repeal date, thereby extending the operation of these provisions indefinitely. By indefinitely extending the duties of local agencies in relation to the above-specified claim resolution process, 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 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 establishes the Public Transit Revenue Measure District, governed by the same board that governs the commission, 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. Existing law authorizes 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 specified amounts, subject to voter approval at the November 3, 2026, statewide general election. Existing law establishes specified procedures for that election, including a requirement that the elections officials of the counties where the measure will appear on the ballot mutually agree to use the same letter designation for the measure. This bill would revise those election procedures by, among other things, instead requiring the measure to be identified on the ballot by the designation "Regional Transit Measure" in each county included in the district and by requiring each county elections official in the district to select, from among the submissions of proposed arguments in favor of, and against, the measure, the arguments to be included in the county voter information guide of that county, as specified. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing state sales and use tax laws impose a tax on retailers measured by the gross receipts from the sale of tangible personal property sold at retail in this state, or on the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of tangible personal property purchased from a retailer for storage, use, or other consumption in this state. Existing law defines "sale" and "purchase" for these purposes and provides certain exclusions from those definitions. Existing law, until January 1, 2027, excludes the transfer of vested property by a pawnbroker to a person who pledged the property to the pawnbroker as security for a loan, if specified requirements are met, from the definition of "sale" and "purchase," thus excluding that transfer from imposition of sales and use tax. This bill would extend the exclusion of the transfer of vested property by a pawnbroker to the person who pledged it, as described above, until January 1, 2032. Existing law requires a bill authorizing a sales and use tax exemption to contain, among other things, specific goals, purposes, and objectives that the tax expenditure will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. This bill would include that additional information required for the above sales and use tax exclusion. The Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law authorizes counties and cities to impose local sales and use taxes in conformity with the Sales and Use Tax Law, and existing laws authorize districts, as specified, to impose transactions and use taxes in accordance with the Transactions and Use Tax Law, which generally conforms to the Sales and Use Tax Law. Amendments to the Sales and Use Tax Law are automatically incorporated into the local tax laws. Existing law requires the state to reimburse counties and cities for revenue losses caused by the enactment of sales and use tax exemptions. This bill would provide that, notwithstanding Section 2230 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, no appropriation is made and the state shall not reimburse any local agencies for sales and use tax revenues lost by them pursuant to this bill. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Existing law, the Local Agency Public Construction Act, sets forth procedures that a local agency is required to follow when procuring certain services or work. Existing law authorizes certain local agencies to engage in job order contracting, as prescribed. This bill would establish a pilot program to authorize a city to use job order contracting as a procurement method. The bill would impose a $3,000,000 cap on awards under a single job order contract and a $750,000 cap on any single job order. The bill would limit the term of an initial contract to a maximum of 12 months, with extensions as prescribed. The bill would establish various additional procedures and requirements for the use of job order contracting under this authorization. The bill would require the city, on or before January 1, 2030, to submit to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature a report on the use of job order contracting under the bill. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2032.
Existing law establishes the California College Promise, under the administration of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges, to provide funding, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to each community college meeting prescribed requirements. Existing law authorizes a community college to use that funding to waive some or all of the fees for 2 academic years for first-time community college students and returning community college students, as defined, who are enrolled in 12 or more semester units or the equivalent, or less for students certified as "full time," as specified, and who complete and submit either a Free Application for Federal Student Aid or a California Dream Act application, except that a student who has previously earned a degree or certificate from a postsecondary educational institution is not eligible for this fee waiver. This bill would prohibit a certificate awarded to a student by a postsecondary educational institution as part of a course sequence leading to an associate degree from making the student ineligible for that fee waiver.
The California Constitution conditions the imposition of a special tax by a local government upon the approval of 23 of the voters of the local government voting on that tax, and prohibits these entities from imposing an ad valorem tax on real property or a transactions or sales tax on the sale of real property. The Supreme Court of California interpreted this provision and other provisions restricting the authority of local governments to impose, extend, or increase taxes as not restricting the authority of voters to impose taxes via initiative. This measure would, beginning January 1, 2027, prohibit a local government, including the electorate of a local government exercising the initiative power, from imposing, extending, or increasing any special tax, except as provided, unless and until that tax is submitted to the electorate and approved by a 23 vote. The measure would prohibit a local government, including the electorate of a local government exercising the initiative power, from imposing ad valorem taxes on real property, except as provided pursuant to specified constitutional provisions.
(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.
