(1) Existing law, the Safe, Clean, and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act of 2012, if approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $11,140,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance a safe drinking water and water supply reliability program. Existing law provides for the submission of the bond act to the voters at the November 4, 2014, statewide general election. This bill would repeal these provisions. (2) Under existing law, various measures have been approved by the voters to provide funds for water supply and protection facilities and programs. Existing law, the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006, an initiative measure approved by the voters as Proposition 84 at the November 7, 2006, statewide general election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $5,388,000,000 for the purposes of financing safe drinking water, water quality and supply, flood control, natural resource protection, and park improvements. Existing law, the Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Bond Act of 2006, approved by the voters as Proposition 1E at the November 7, 2006, general statewide election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $4,090,000,000 for the purposes of financing disaster preparedness and flood prevention projects. Existing law, the Water Security, Clean Drinking Water, Coastal and Beach Protection Act of 2002, an initiative measure approved by the voters as Proposition 50 at the November 5, 2002, statewide general election, authorizes, for the purposes of financing a safe drinking water, water quality, and water reliability program, the issuance of bonds in the amount of $3,440,000,000. Existing law, the Costa-Machado Water Act of 2000, approved by the voters as Proposition 13 at the March 7, 2000, statewide primary election, authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds in the amount of $1,970,000,000 for the purposes of financing a safe drinking water, clean water, watershed protection, and flood protection program. Existing law, the Safe, Clean, Reliable Water Supply Act, approved by the voters as Proposition 204 at the November 5, 1996, statewide general election, authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds in the amount of $995,000,000 for the purposes of financing a safe, clean, reliable water supply program. Existing law, the Water Conservation and Water Quality Bond Law of 1986, approved by the voters as Proposition 44 at the June 3, 1986, statewide primary election, authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds in the amount of $150,000,000 for the purposes of financing a water conservation and water quality program. This bill would enact the Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014, which, if approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $7,120,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance a water quality, supply, and infrastructure improvement program. This bill, upon voter approval, would reallocate $425,000,000 of the unissued bonds authorized for the purposes of Propositions 1E, 13, 44, 50, 84, and 204 to finance the purposes of a water quality, supply, and infrastructure improvement program. This bill would provide for the submission of these provisions to the voters at the November 4, 2014, statewide general election. (3) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Sponsored bills
(1) Article XIX of the California Constitution restricts the use of fuel excise tax revenues imposed by the state on fuels used in motor vehicles upon public streets and highways to expenditure on highway and certain mass transit purposes. Existing law provides for the deposit of these revenues in the Highway Users Tax Account, and appropriates those revenues to various purposes. Existing law, with respect to the portion of these revenues that is derived from increases in the motor vehicle fuel excise tax beginning in 2010, requires an allocation to reimburse the State Highway Account for the amount of weight fee revenues that the State Highway Account is not receiving due to use of weight fee revenues to pay debt service on transportation general obligation bonds and to make certain loans, with the remaining amount of this portion of revenues allocated 44% to the State Transportation Improvement Program, 12% to the State Highway Operations and Protection Program, and 44% to city and county streets and roads. This bill would delete the provisions allocating revenues derived from the increased motor vehicle fuel excise tax to State Highway Account reimbursement, the State Transportation Improvement Program, and the State Highway Operations and Protection Program. The bill would instead provide for the Controller to apportion all of these revenues to cities and counties for local streets and roads pursuant to a specified formula, thereby making an appropriation. (2) Existing law, commencing with the 2013–14 fiscal year, requires certain revenues deposited in the State Highway Account that are not restricted as to expenditure by Article XIX of the California Constitution to be transferred to the Transportation Debt Service Fund in the State Transportation Fund for payment of current year debt service on certain transportation general obligation bonds. This bill would delete the transfer of these revenues to the Transportation Debt Service Fund, and would instead provide for appropriation in the annual Budget Act of 44% of these revenues to the State Transportation Improvement Program, 12% to the State Highway Operations and Protection Program, and 44% to city and county streets and roads pursuant to a specified formula.
The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law allow various credits against the taxes imposed by those laws, including a credit for a percentage of specified research expenses. These laws, in modified conformity, apply the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, relating to the election of alternative incremental credit. These laws provide that the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code relating to election of alternative simplified credit shall not apply. This bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2015, not apply the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, relating to the election of alternative incremental credit. This bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2015, and before January 1, 2022, apply the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, relating to election of alternative simplified credit in modified conformity, and for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2015, would apply the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, relating to the inclusion of qualified research expenses and gross receipts of an acquired person and aggregation of expenditures. 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.
(1) Under existing law, when the Department of Motor Vehicles determines that an applicant is lawfully entitled to a driver's license, the department is required to issue that license to the applicant. Existing law specifies the contents of a driver's license and requires the application for a driver's license or identification card to contain a space for an applicant to indicate whether he or she has served in the Armed Forces of the United States and to give his or her consent to be contacted regarding eligibility to receive state or federal veterans' benefits. This bill would, commencing November 11, 2015, allow an applicant for a driver's license or identification card to allow a person to request the driver's license or identification card be printed with the word "VETERAN." The applicant would be required to present to the Department of Motor Vehicles, on a form developed jointly by the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of Motor Vehicles, proof of veteran status. The bill would require county veterans service offices to verify an applicant's veteran status for these purposes, as specified. The department would be required to print the word "VETERAN" on the face of a driver's license or identification card issued to a person who makes that request and presents that verification to the department. (2) Existing law establishes certain fee amounts for the applications for, and renewal of, driver's licenses and identification cards. This bill would authorize the department to charge an additional fee in an unspecified amount to a person who requests that the person's driver's license or identification card be designated as provided above.
(1) Existing law creates the High-Speed Rail Authority with specified powers and duties relating to the development and implementation of an intercity high-speed train system. Existing law authorizes the authority to acquire rights-of-way through purchase or eminent domain. Existing law sets forth the process for acquisition of property by eminent domain, including a requirement for adoption of a resolution of necessity. Before adopting a resolution of necessity, existing law requires a public entity to determine the fair market value of the property to be acquired and to offer that amount to the owner of the property. This bill would prohibit the authority, or the State Public Works Board acting on behalf of the authority, from adopting a resolution of necessity to commence an eminent domain proceeding to acquire a parcel of real property for the high-speed train system unless the resolution identifies the sources of all funds to be invested in the property, and the anticipated time of receipt of those funds, and declares that the authority, or the board, has offered to purchase the property at not less than the fair market value or the amount necessary to discharge the liens against the property, as described, whichever is greater. The bill would require the authority or the board to be responsible for compliance with any environmental protection laws or regulations that are applicable to the property it acquires pursuant to eminent domain. (2) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law requires the Department of Veterans Affairs to disburse funds, appropriated to the department for the purpose of supporting county veterans service officers pursuant to the annual Budget Act, on a pro rata basis, to counties that comply with certain conditions. This bill would authorize the department, in conjunction with the California Association of County Veterans Service Officers, no later than July 1, 2015, to develop an allocation formula based upon performance standards that encourage innovation and reward outstanding service by county veterans service officers, and, if that allocation formula is developed, the bill would require those moneys appropriated for support of county veterans service offices in the annual Budget Act to be allocated in accordance with that formula, as specified.
Existing law, the Child Care and Development Services Act, administered by the State Department of Education, requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to administer child care and development programs that offer a full range of services for eligible children from infancy to 13 years of age. Existing law requires the Superintendent to administer all California state preschool programs, including, but not limited to, part-day and full-day age and developmentally appropriate programs for 3- and 4-year-old children. This bill would, until January 1, 2020, authorize the department, as part of a pilot program, to accept monetary contributions made to the California Preschool Investment Fund, which this bill would create, by a person for purposes of preschool education, as provided. The bill would require the money in the fund to be used to, among other things, fund state preschools part of the California state preschool program located in one of the 5 participating counties, as provided. The bill would require participating counties to report to the department's Early Education & Support Division regarding the county's assessment of how the pilot program is performing. The bill would require any moneys remaining in the fund after January 1, 2020, to be transferred to any other state fund identified by the department that provides funding for increased access to preschool programs for low-income children. The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law allow various credits against the taxes imposed by those laws. This bill, under both laws, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2015, and before January 1, 2019, would allow a credit equal to 40% of the amount contributed by the taxpayer during the taxable year to the California Preschool Investment Fund, as provided. The bill would limit the aggregate amount of credit allowed under both laws to not exceed $250,000,000 and would require the State Department of Education to establish a procedure for a person to obtain from the department a receipt indicating specified information, including the amount of monetary contributions made, for purposes of the tax credits allowed under these provisions. The bill would, until January 1, 2020, require the total annual amount of credits claimed pursuant to these provisions to be treated as though they were proceeds of taxes for purposes of calculating the moneys to be applied by the state for the support of school districts and community college districts pursuant to a specified provision of the California Constitution.
The California Constitution requires the Governor, within the first 10 days of each calendar year, to submit to the Legislature a budget for the ensuing fiscal year containing itemized statements for recommended state expenditures and estimated state revenues. Existing law requires the Director of Finance to provide to the Legislature, on or before May 14 of each year, specified information, including an estimate of General Fund revenues for the current fiscal year and for the ensuing fiscal year. This bill would require the Director of Finance to calculate any increase between the General Fund revenue estimate for the 2013–14 fiscal year in the Governor's Budget Summary 2014–15 and the estimate of General Fund revenue for the 2013–14 fiscal year submitted by the Director of Finance on or before May 14, 2014. The bill would require the Director of Finance to calculate any increase between the General Fund revenue estimate in the budget for the 2014–15 fiscal year submitted by the Governor and the estimate of General Fund revenues for the 2014–15 fiscal year submitted by the Director of Finance on or before May 14, 2014. The bill would prohibit General Fund appropriations other than those made by this bill for the 2013–14 and 2014–15 fiscal years from exceeding the amount of General Fund revenues in the budget approved for the 2013–14 fiscal year and, for the 2014–15 fiscal year, in the budget submitted by the Governor. The bill would appropriate the amount of any increase in General Fund revenues calculated by the Director of Finance necessary to meet the state's minimum funding obligation pursuant to Section 8 of Article XVI of the California Constitution to the Controller for apportionment to school districts and community college districts. If any funds remain after this appropriation, the bill would appropriate 50% of the remaining funds to the Budget Stabilization Account and would appropriate 50% of the funds, up to $2.534 billion, to specified transportation funds and accounts for immediate repayment of outstanding loans made from those transportation funds and accounts to the General Fund. The bill would appropriate certain amounts repaid to specified transportation funds and accounts for local street and road purposes, to be apportioned by the controller according to a specified formula. The bill would appropriate any funds remaining after these appropriations to the Budget Stabilization Account.
Existing law imposes penalties when a taxpayer fails to timely file an income tax return or fails to timely pay the tax due as shown on, or as required to be shown on, the tax return, unless it is shown that the failure is due to reasonable cause and not due to willful neglect. The bill would require the Franchise Tax Board, upon request of a qualified taxpayer, as defined, to abate a failure-to-file or failure-to-pay timeliness penalty when specified circumstances are met, including where the qualified taxpayer has paid, or is in a current arrangement to pay, all tax currently due and the Franchise Tax Board has not imposed a timeliness penalty in the year of the request or prior 4 years. The bill would make a continuous appropriation from the General Fund to the Franchise Tax Board in those amounts necessary to make payments to those qualified taxpayers who have paid the penalty that is being abated before the effective date of this bill. The bill would make a legislative finding and declaration regarding the public purpose served by the bill.
Existing law provides procedures for a person to file a complaint alleging violations of legislative ethics. Existing law also authorizes each house of the Legislature to adopt rules for its proceedings and to select committees necessary for the conduct of its business. This act would prohibit interference with the right of legislative employees, as defined, to make protected disclosures of ethics violations. It would also prohibit retaliation against legislative employees who have made protected disclosures. This act would establish a procedure for legislative employees to report violations of the act to the Legislature. The act would also impose civil and criminal liability on a person who interferes with a legislative employee's right to make a protected disclosure or who engages in retaliatory acts, as specified. By expanding the scope of crimes under the act, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.