Existing law requires, from February 1, 2012, to July 1, 2012, inclusive, and for each fiscal year thereafter, the county auditor-controller in each county to allocate property tax revenues in the county's Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund, established to receive revenues equivalent to those that would have been allocated to former redevelopment agencies had those agencies not been dissolved, towards the payment of enforceable obligations and among entities that include, among others, a city, county, or city and county. This bill would authorize a city or county to reject its allocations of property tax revenues that it would otherwise receive pursuant to specified statutory provisions governing the dissolution of redevelopment agencies. The bill would except from this authorization a city, county, or city and county that became the successor agency to the redevelopment agency and did not receive a finding of completion from the Department of Finance, as specified, and any designated local authority of a redevelopment agency, formed as specified, that did not receive the finding of completion from the Department of Finance. The bill would direct those rejected distributions of property tax revenues to an affordable housing special beneficiary district, established as a temporary and distinct local governmental entity for the express purposes of receiving rejected distributions of property tax revenues and providing financing assistance to promote affordable housing within its boundaries. The bill would require a beneficiary district to be governed by a 5-member board and comply with specified open meeting and public record laws. The bill would automatically require a beneficiary district to cease to exist on a specifically calculated date and prohibit a beneficiary district from undertaking any obligation that requires its action past that date. The bill would transfer any funds and public records of a beneficiary district remaining after the date the beneficiary district ceases to exist to the city or county that rejected its distributions of property tax revenues that were thereafter directed to that beneficiary district, as specified.
Sponsored bills
(1) Existing law, the California Finance Lenders Law, generally provides for the licensure and regulation of finance lenders and brokers by the Commissioner of Business Oversight and makes a willful violation of its provisions a crime. That law, until January 1, 2018, establishes the Pilot Program for Increased Access to Responsible Small Dollar Loans, which requires licensees and other entities to file an application and pay a specified fee to the commissioner to participate in the program. The program authorizes a licensee approved by the commissioner to participate in the program to impose specified alternative interest rates and charges, including an administrative fee and delinquency fees, on unsecured loans of at least $300 and less than $2,500, subject to certain requirements. The program requires the commissioner, on or before January 1, 2017, to post a report on his or her Internet Web site summarizing utilization of the program, a recommendation whether the pilot program should be continued after January 1, 2018, and the results of a random sample survey of borrowers. This bill would extend the Pilot Program for Increased Access to Responsible Small Dollar Loans until January 1, 2023, make a conforming change to the requirement for the commissioner to report a recommendation for further continuation of the program, and require additional annual reporting, as specified. The bill would remove the requirement for the commissioner to conduct and report the results of a random sample survey of borrowers. The bill would also make a technical change to a cross-reference within the program provisions. Because a willful violation of these extended provisions would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) 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 authorizes the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District to jointly adopt a commute benefit ordinance that requires covered employers operating within the common area of the 2 agencies with a specified number of covered employees to offer those employees certain commute benefits through a pilot program. Existing law requires that the ordinance specify certain matters, including any consequences for noncompliance, and imposes a specified reporting requirement. Existing law makes these provisions inoperative on January 1, 2017. This bill would extend these provisions indefinitely, thereby establishing the pilot program permanently. The bill would also delete bicycle commuting as a pretax option under the program and instead would authorize a covered employer, at its discretion, to offer commuting by bicycling as an employer-paid benefit in addition to commuting via public transit or by vanpool. The bill would also delete the reporting requirement.
Existing law requires a debt collector that receives a copy of a police report filed by the debtor alleging that the debtor is the victim of an identity theft crime and a written statement in which the debtor claims to be the victim of identity theft to cease collection activities until completion of a review. Existing law requires the debt collector to review and consider all of the information provided by the debtor and other available information and authorizes the debt collector to recommence debt collection activities only upon making a good faith determination that the information does not establish that the debtor is not responsible for the specific debt in question. This bill, the Identity Theft Resolution Act, would require the debt collector, upon receipt of the police report and written statement described above, if it furnished adverse information about the debtor to a consumer credit reporting agency, to notify the consumer credit reporting agency that the account is disputed, and initiate a review, as specified, within 10 business days. The bill would require the debt collector to send notice of its determination to the debtor no later than 10 business days after concluding the review. The bill would require a debt collector that does not recommence collection activities under these provisions to notify the creditor, no later than 10 business days after making its determination, and if it furnished adverse information to a consumer credit reporting agency, to notify the agency to delete that information no later than 10 business days after making its determination. The bill would also prohibit a creditor from selling a consumer debt to a debt collector if the creditor has received notice that the debt collector has terminated debt collection activities, as described above.
Existing 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 provides for various exemptions from those taxes, including an exemption for certain sales of human blood and containers thereof. This bill, until January 1, 2022, would exempt from those taxes the gross receipts from the sale in this state of, and the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of, animal whole blood, plasma, blood products, and blood derivatives, sold by a nonprofit animal blood banking business for use in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of injury or disease in animals pursuant to a specified state law. The bill would define "nonprofit" for its purposes. The Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law authorizes cities and counties 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 incorporated into the local tax laws. Existing law requires the state to reimburse cities and counties for revenue losses caused by the enactment of sales and use tax exemptions. This bill would provide that, notwithstanding these provisions, no appropriation is made and the state shall not reimburse cities and counties for sales and use tax revenues lost by them pursuant to this bill. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
The Personal Income Tax Law allows various credits against the taxes imposed by that law, including certain credits that are allowed in modified conformity to credits allowed by federal income tax laws. Federal income tax laws allow a refundable earned income tax credit for certain low-income individuals who have earned income and who meet certain other requirements. The Personal Income Tax Law, in modified conformity with federal income tax laws, allows an earned income credit against personal income tax, and a payment in excess of that credit amount, to an eligible individual that is equal to that portion of the earned income tax credit allowed by federal law as determined by the earned income tax credit adjustment factor as set forth in the annual Budget Act. Existing law, the Earned Income Tax Credit Information Act, requires an employer, as defined, to notify all employees that they may be eligible for the federal earned income tax credit, as specified. This bill would require those same employers currently required to notify employees who may be eligible for the federal earned income tax credit to also notify these employees that they may be eligible for the California Earned Income Tax Credit under the same conditions.
This measure would designate the interchange at Interstate 10 and Interstate 710 in the County of Los Angeles as the Los Angeles County Deputy Sheriff Thomas H. Pohlman Memorial Interchange. The measure would request that the Department of Transportation determine the cost of appropriate signs showing this special designation and, upon receiving donations from nonstate sources covering that cost, erect those signs.
This measure would recognize the week of October 16, 2016, to October 22, 2016, inclusive, as Digital Citizenship Week.
Existing law, known as the Donahoe Higher Education Act, sets forth, among other things, the missions and functions of California's public and independent segments of higher education, and their respective institutions of higher education. Provisions of the act do not apply to the University of California unless the regents of the university act, by resolution, to make them applicable. Among other things, the act provides that the University of California has exclusive jurisdiction in public higher education to award the doctoral degree in all fields of learning, except that it may agree with the California State University to award joint doctoral degrees in selected fields. With respect to doctoral degrees, the act limits the California State University to awarding these degrees jointly with the University of California, as described above, or, with the approval of the California Postsecondary Education Commission, jointly with independent institutions of higher education. This bill would instead authorize the California State University to award the Doctor of Audiology degree. The bill would require the degree to be distinguished from doctoral degree programs at the University of California. The bill would require that the degree be focused on preparing audiologists to provide health care services and be consistent with the standards for accreditation set forth by the Council on Academic Accreditation in Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology. The bill would require that each student in the programs authorized by the bill be charged fees no higher than the rate charged for students in state-supported programs in audiology at the University of California.
Existing law requires the payment of interest on late payments, or late prepayments, of tax, fee, or surcharge payments at the modified adjusted rate per month under the provisions of the Sales and Use Tax Law, Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax Law, Use Fuel Tax Law, Cigarette and Tobacco Products Tax Law, Alcoholic Beverage Tax Law, Energy Resources Surcharge Law, Emergency Telephone Users Surcharge Act, Hazardous Substances Tax Law, Integrated Waste Management Fee Law, Oil Spill Response, Prevention, and Administration Fees Law, Underground Storage Tank Maintenance Fee Law, Fee Collection Procedures Law, Diesel Fuel Tax Law, and the law governing the taxation of insurance companies. Interest is charged on a per-month basis, with one month's interest charged for each month, or fraction of a month, that a payment or prepayment is unpaid. Existing law, until January 1, 2016, allowed the members of the State Board of Equalization, meeting as a public body, to find, under specified circumstances, that it is inequitable to compute interest on a monthly basis and to instead compute interest on a daily basis with respect to electronic payments or prepayments of taxes, fees, and surcharges. This bill would reinstate those provisions.