Asm. Miguel Santiago

The Personal Income Tax Law, beginning on or after January 1, 2015, in modified conformity with federal income tax laws, allows an earned income tax credit against personal income tax and a payment from the Tax Relief and Refund Account for an allowable credit in excess of tax liability, 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 specified. For taxable years beginning on and after January 1, 2020, this tax credit is available to any eligible individuals using an individual taxpayer identification number. This bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2021, increase the earned income tax credit available to eligible individuals using a federal individual taxpayer identification number. The Personal Income Tax Law allows, for each taxable year beginning on or after January 1, 2019, a young child tax credit against the taxes imposed under that law and a payment from the Tax Relief and Refund Account for an allowable credit in excess of tax liability to a qualified taxpayer in a specified amount multiplied by the earned income tax credit adjustment factor, as provided. Existing law defines "qualified taxpayer" for this purpose to include an eligible individual who has a qualified child, as defined, and is allowed an earned income tax credit, as specified. This bill would expand the definition of "qualified taxpayer" to also include an eligible individual who has a qualified child and would have received an earned income tax credit but for the fact that the individual has no earned income, as defined, for the taxable year. Existing law establishes the continuously appropriated Tax Relief and Refund Account and provides that payments required to be made to taxpayers or other persons from the Personal Income Tax Fund are to be paid from that account, including any amount to be paid as an earned income tax credit or a young child tax credit in excess of any tax liabilities. By increasing the amounts to be paid with funds from the Tax Relief and Refund Account, and thus, authorizing new payments from that account for additional amounts in excess of personal income tax liabilities, this bill would make an appropriation. Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure, as defined to include tax credits, to contain, among other things, specific goals, purposes, and objectives that the tax credit will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to comply with the additional information requirement for any bill authorizing a new income tax expenditure.

Existing law regulates the terms and conditions of employment and, specifically, the payment of wages. Existing law generally requires that if an employer discharges an employee, the wages earned and unpaid at the time of discharge are due and payable immediately. Existing law authorizes a state employee to provide for certain amounts, including those associated with unpaid vacation, to be contributed to specified supplemental retirement plans. Existing law also authorizes a state employee to defer certain payments until the next calendar year in certain circumstances. This bill would make nonsubstantive changes to these provisions.

Existing law, the Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act) , governs collective bargaining between the state and recognized state public employee organizations. Existing law excludes certain employees from coverage under the Dills Act, including, among others, managerial employees, supervisory employees, and confidential employees, as defined. Existing law creates the Public Employment Relations Board and authorizes it, among other things, to determine appropriate state employee bargaining units, as specified. This bill would enact the Legislature Employer-Employee Relations Act, to provide employees of the Legislature, including some supervisory and managerial employees, the right to form, join, and participate in the activities of employee organizations of their own choosing for the purpose of representation on all matters of employer-employee relations. The bill would prescribe rights, duties, and prohibitions in this context that parallel those in the Dills Act. The bill would prohibit the Public Employment Relations Board from including employees of the Legislature in a bargaining unit that includes employees other than those of the Legislature. The bill would make it a misdemeanor for any person to willfully resist, prevent, impede, or interfere with any member of the board, or any of its agents, in the performance of duties pursuant to its provisions. By expanding the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would provide that the provisions of the Legislature Employer-Employee Relations Act are 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, the California Tourism and Marketing Act, establishes a nonprofit mutual benefit corporation named the California Travel and Tourism Commission under the direction of a board of commissioners composed of 37 members, including the Director of the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development. This bill, the California Tourism Recovery Act, would require the commission to, upon a determination by the State Department of Public Health that it is safe to resume travel in California, implement a strategic media and jobs recovery campaign known as the "Calling All Californians" program for the purpose of reversing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the travel and tourism industry in California, as specified. The bill would require the commission to report to the Legislature, on or before January 1, 2024, regarding the cost of the program and the impact of the program on the tourism industry in California. The bill would require, only upon appropriation by the Legislature, the Controller to transfer $45,000,000 to the commission for the purpose of implementing the "Calling All Californians" program.

Existing law defines the ballot label as the portion of the ballot containing the names of the candidates or a statement of a measure. For statewide measures, existing law requires the Attorney General to prepare a condensed version of the ballot title and summary, including the fiscal impact summary prepared by the Legislative Analyst that is printed in the state voter information guide. This bill would additionally require the ballot label for statewide measures, and, at the option of a county, the ballot label or similar description on the ballot of county, city, district, and school district measures, to include a listing of nonprofit organizations, businesses, or individuals taken from the signers of ballot arguments printed in the voter information guide that support and oppose the measure or from the signers of the rebuttal arguments to the arguments that support and oppose the measure, as specified. The bill would require a nonprofit organization, business, or individual to meet certain criteria before being listed on the ballot label or similar description of the measure on the ballot. The bill would require the signers of the ballot arguments to submit the lists of supporters and opponents to the Secretary of State or the respective elections official and would require the Secretary of State or respective elections official to provide those lists to county elections officials as part of the ballot label. The bill would make conforming changes and related findings and declarations. 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. Because the bill would impose additional duties on local elections officials, and because it would expand the crime of perjury, it 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law requires the Department of Toxic Substances Control, on or before January 1, 2018, to adopt regulations establishing or updating criteria used to issue a new, modified, or renewed hazardous waste facilities permit, which may include criteria for the denial or suspension of a permit. Existing law requires the department to consider for inclusion in the regulations specified criteria, including, but not limited to, the number and types of past violations that will result in a denial of a hazardous waste facilities permit. The department's regulations, known as the Violations Scoring Procedure, require the department to calculate an annual Facility Violations Scoring Procedure Score or Facility VSP Score for a permitted hazardous waste facility by adding the provisional or final inspection violation scores, as described, for each compliance inspection, as defined, conducted during the preceding 10-year period, divided by the number of compliance inspections that occurred during that 10-year period. Existing law requires the department to assign a hazardous waste facility to one of 3 compliance tiers, which consist of acceptable, conditionally acceptable, and unacceptable, based on the facility's Facility VSP Score and to take certain actions, including, but not limited to, taking steps to modify, deny, suspend, or revoke a hazardous waste facilities permit, if the facility falls within a conditionally unacceptable or unacceptable compliance tier. This bill would require the department, by January 1, 2023, to calculate the Facility VSP Score of a hazardous waste facility for the 2022 calendar year, and annually thereafter, by adding the provisional or final inspection violation scores for each compliance inspection conducted during the preceding 10-year period. The bill would prohibit the department from dividing the sum of the provisional and final inspection violation scores by the number of compliance inspections that occurred during that 10-year period. The bill would continue to require the department to assign a hazardous waste facility to a compliance tier based on the facility's Facility VSP Score, but would revise the numerical ranges for each compliance tier. The bill would require the department to revise its Violations Scoring Procedure regulations for consistency with those provisions by July 1, 2022.

Existing federal law, the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) , requires each state to establish an American Health Benefit Exchange to facilitate the purchase of qualified health benefit plans by qualified individuals and qualified small employers. PPACA defines a "qualified health plan" as a plan that, among other requirements, provides an essential health benefits package. Existing state law creates the California Health Benefit Exchange, also known as Covered California, to facilitate the enrollment of qualified individuals and qualified small employers in qualified health plans as required under PPACA. Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care. Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law provides for the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid program provisions. This bill, the California Guaranteed Health Care for All Act, would create the California Guaranteed Health Care for All program, or CalCare, to provide comprehensive universal single-payer health care coverage and a health care cost control system for the benefit of all residents of the state. The bill, among other things, would provide that CalCare cover a wide range of medical benefits and other services and would incorporate the health care benefits and standards of other existing federal and state provisions, including the federal Children's Health Insurance Program, Medi-Cal, ancillary health care or social services covered by regional centers for persons with developmental disabilities, Knox-Keene, and the federal Medicare program. The bill would require the board to seek all necessary waivers, approvals, and agreements to allow various existing federal health care payments to be paid to CalCare, which would then assume responsibility for all benefits and services previously paid for with those funds. This bill would create the CalCare Board to govern CalCare, made up of 9 voting members with demonstrated and acknowledged expertise in health care, and appointed as provided, plus the Secretary of California Health and Human Services or their designee as a nonvoting, ex officio member. The bill would provide the board with all the powers and duties necessary to establish CalCare, including determining when individuals may start enrolling into CalCare, employing necessary staff, negotiating pricing for covered pharmaceuticals and medical supplies, establishing a prescription drug formulary, and negotiating and entering into necessary contracts. The bill would require the board, on or before July 1, 2024, to conduct and deliver a fiscal analysis to determine whether or not CalCare may be implemented and whether revenue is more likely than not to pay for program costs, as specified. The bill would require the board to convene a CalCare Public Advisory Committee with specified members to advise the board on all matters of policy for CalCare. The bill would establish an 11-member Advisory Commission on Long-Term Services and Supports to advise the board on matters of policy related to long-term services and supports. This bill would provide for the participation of health care providers in CalCare, including the requirements of a participation agreement between a health care provider and the board, provide for payment for health care items and services, and specify program participation standards. The bill would prohibit a participating provider from discriminating against a person by, among other things, reducing or denying a person's benefits under CalCare because of a specified characteristic, status, or condition of the person. This bill would prohibit a participating provider from billing or entering into a private contract with an individual eligible for CalCare benefits regarding a covered benefit, but would authorize contracting for a health care item or service that is not a covered benefit if specified criteria are met. The bill would authorize health care providers to collectively negotiate fee-for-service rates of payment for health care items and services using a 3rd-party representative, as provided. The bill would require the board to annually determine an institutional provider's global budget, to be used to cover operating expenses related to covered health care items and services for that fiscal year, and would authorize payments under the global budget. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that would develop a revenue plan, taking into consideration anticipated federal revenue available for CalCare. The bill would create the CalCare Trust Fund in the State Treasury, as a continuously appropriated fund, consisting of any federal and state moneys received for the purposes of the act. Because the bill would create a continuously appropriated fund, it would make an appropriation. This bill would prohibit specified provisions of this act from becoming operative until the Secretary of California Health and Human Services gives written notice to the Secretary of the Senate and the Chief Clerk of the Assembly that the CalCare Trust Fund has the revenues to fund the costs of implementing the act, the people of California have approved the necessary revenue mechanisms, and the Legislature has approved implementation of the CalCare by statute. The California Health and Human Services Agency would be required to publish a copy of the notice on its internet website. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.

Existing law, added by Proposition 184, approved at the November 8, 1994, statewide general election, and amended by the Three Strikes Reform Act of 2012, approved as Proposition 36 at the November 6, 2012, statewide general election, commonly known as the Three Strikes Law, imposes additional years of imprisonment in state prison on a person who commits a serious or violent felony and has been convicted of, or who has a prior conviction for, a serious or violent felony. A prior juvenile adjudication constitutes a prior serious or violent felony conviction for purposes of this sentence enhancement if the juvenile was 16 years of age at the time and other requirements are met. The Legislature may directly amend these initiatives by a statute passed in each house by a 23 vote, or by a statute that becomes effective only when approved by the voters. This bill would amend those initiative statutes by prohibiting a prior juvenile adjudication from being considered a prior serious or violent felony conviction for purposes of sentence enhancement. The bill would provide a means of vacating a prior juvenile conviction enhancement and resentencing a defendant on any remaining counts when specified conditions apply, including when the alleged prior conviction occurred when the defendant was a juvenile and the case was adjudicated in juvenile court. By requiring the participation of district attorneys and public defenders in the resentencing process, 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, 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 imposes taxes upon income and real property, as well as taxes upon certain transactions and excise taxes. This bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2022, impose an annual tax at a rate of 1% of a resident of this state's worldwide net worth in excess of $50,000,000, or in excess of $25,000,000 in the case of a married taxpayer filing separately. The bill would also impose an additional tax at a rate of 0.5% of a resident's worldwide net worth in excess of $1,000,000,000, or in excess of $500,000,000 in the case of a married taxpayer filing separately. The bill would describe worldwide net worth with reference to specific federal provisions and would provide that worldwide net worth does not include specific assets, including personal property situated out of state, directly held real property, or liabilities related to directly held real property. The bill would also authorize the Franchise Tax Board to adopt regulations to carry out these provisions, including regulations regarding the valuation of certain assets that are not publicly traded. Existing law requires the Franchise Tax Board to administer the Personal Income Tax Law. This bill would require the Franchise Tax Board to amend or create returns with regard to the Wealth Tax. Existing law, the False Claims Act, provides that any person who commits specified acts, including, but not limited to, knowingly presenting a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval or knowingly making or using a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim, is liable to the state or to the political subdivision for 3 times the amount of damages that the state or political subdivision sustained because of the act and for the costs of a civil action brought to recover any penalties or damages, and is subject to a civil penalty. That act requires the Attorney General or the prosecuting authority of a political subdivision to diligently investigate violations of those specific acts involving state funds or political subdivision funds, respectively, and authorizes the Attorney General, the prosecuting authority, or a qui tam plaintiff to bring a civil action against a person who commits those acts. That act does not apply to claims, records, or statements made under the Revenue and Taxation Code. This bill would apply the provisions of the False Claims Act to claims, records, or statements made in relation to the wealth tax imposed by the bill, as specified. This bill would specify that the tax imposed by the bill shall only become operative if a specified constitutional amendment is approved by the voters and takes effect. 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. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. 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.