The Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) , an initiative measure approved as Proposition 64 at the November 8, 2016, statewide general election, authorizes a person who obtains a state license under AUMA to engage in commercial adult-use cannabis activity pursuant to that license and applicable local ordinances. The Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA) , among other things, consolidates the licensure and regulation of commercial medicinal and adult-use cannabis activities. MAUCRSA generally divides responsibility for the state licensure and regulation of commercial cannabis activity among the Bureau of Cannabis Control in the Department of Consumer Affairs, the Department of Food and Agriculture, and the State Department of Public Health. This bill would require the powers and duties of the bureau to be subject to review by the appropriate policy committees of the Legislature and would require the review to be performed as if MAUCRSA were scheduled to be repealed as of January 1, 2023. Existing law establishes the Joint Sunset Review Committee, a legislative committee comprised of 10 Members of the Legislature, to identify and eliminate waste, duplication, and inefficiency in government agencies and to conduct a comprehensive analysis of an eligible agency, as defined, for which a date for repeal has been established, to determine if the agency is still necessary and cost effective. Existing law requires each eligible agency scheduled for repeal to submit a report to the committee containing specified information. Existing law requires the committee to take public testimony and evaluate the eligible agency prior to the date the agency is scheduled to be repealed, and requires that an eligible agency be eliminated unless the Legislature enacts a law to extend, consolidate, or reorganize the agency. Existing law specifies that these provisions do not apply to the Bureau of Cannabis Control. This bill would delete the provision that specifies that these provisions do not apply to the Bureau of Cannabis Control.
Sponsored bills
This measure would designate a specified portion of State Route 50 in the County of El Dorado as the Deputy Sheriff Brian "Ish" Ishmael Memorial Highway. 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.
Existing law authorizes a court to allow a defendant sentenced to county jail for a felony to withdraw their plea of guilty or plea of nolo contendere and enter a plea of not guilty, after the lapse of one or 2 years following the defendant's completion of the sentence, provided that the defendant is not under supervision, and is not serving a sentence for, on probation for, or charged with the commission of any offense. Existing law requires the defendant to be released from all penalties and disabilities resulting from the offense of which the defendant was convicted, except as specified. This bill would allow a defendant who successfully participated in the California Conservation Camp Program or a county incarcerated individual hand crew as an incarcerated individual hand crew member, and has been released from custody, to petition to withdraw their plea of guilty or plea of nolo contendere and enter a plea of not guilty. The bill would make persons convicted of specified violent felonies and sex offenses ineligible for relief. The bill would allow the court, if the defendant is eligible for relief, to dismiss the accusations or information against the defendant at the court's discretion and in the interest of justice and would release the defendant from all penalties and disabilities resulting from the offense, except as provided. In granting this relief, the bill would require the court to order the early termination of probation, parole, or supervised release if the court determines that the defendant has not violated any of the terms or conditions of their release during the pendency of the petition.
Existing law authorizes an agency that processes unpaid parking penalties and related service fees to collect those penalties and fees pursuant to one of 3 specified options, including filing an itemization of unpaid penalties with the Department of Motor Vehicles for the department to collect the penalties along with the registration of the vehicle. Existing law prohibits the agency from filing that itemization with the department unless, among other conditions, the agency provides a payment plan option for indigent persons that, at a minimum, allows payment of unpaid parking penalties and related service fees in monthly installments for total amounts due that are $300 or less and pays those unpaid parking penalties and fees within 18 months, as specified. This bill would increase the total amount that can be paid in installments to $500 and extend the time in which those penalties and fees can be paid to 24 months. Existing law requires that payment plan for indigent persons to allow a person a period of 60 calendar days from the issuance of a notice of parking violation to file a request to participate in a payment plan, as specified. This bill would require the payment plan for indigent persons to instead allow a person a period of 120 calendar days to file that request. Existing law requires the processing agency to include a link to information on the payment program on its internet website. This bill would require that link to be readily accessible in a prominent location on the parking citation payment section of the agency's internet website.
The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law authorize various credits against the taxes imposed by those laws. The Sales and Use Tax Law, in lieu of specified credits allowed under the Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law, allows a qualified taxpayer or affiliate to make an irrevocable election to apply that income tax credit amount against qualified sales and use taxes imposed on the qualified taxpayer in the reporting periods in the 5 years following the reporting period for which the claimant was required to file its most recent sales and use tax return, as specified. Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure to contain, among other things, specific goals, purposes, and objectives the tax expenditure will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. This bill would allow a credit against the personal income and corporate income taxes for each taxable year beginning on or after January 1, 2020, and before January 1, 2021, to a qualified small business employer that receives a tentative credit reservation, in an amount equal to $1,000 for each net increase in qualified employees, not to exceed one $100,000 for any qualified small business employer. The bill would authorize a qualified small business employer that received a tentative credit reservation to irrevocably elect to apply the credit against qualified sales and use taxes imposed on the qualified small business employer in reporting periods commencing on January 1, 2021, and until April 30, 2026, as specified. The bill would require a qualified small business employer to submit an application to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration for a tentative credit reservation under these provisions that includes, among other things, whether the qualified small business employer is making the irrevocable election, and would require the department to allocate the credit reservations on a first-come, first-served basis, not to cumulatively exceed $100,000,000. This bill would create the Small Business Hiring Credit Fund in the State Treasury for the sole purpose of applying the credits allowed by the bill against qualified sales and use taxes and would require any unused money remaining in the fund to be transferred to the General Fund by June 1, 2026. This bill would also include additional information required for any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Existing provisions of the California Constitution establish the University of California as a public trust under the administration of the Regents of the University of California. The California Constitution grants to the regents all the powers necessary or convenient for the effective administration of this public trust. Pursuant to the California Constitution, there are 7 ex officio members of the regents and 18 appointive members appointed by the Governor and approved by the Senate, a majority of the membership concurring. This measure would enact the University of California Equal Employment Opportunity Standards Act, which would, effective January 1, 2021, except as specified, require the regents to ensure that all contract workers, as defined, who are paid to perform support services for students, faculty, patients, or the general public at any campus, dining hall, medical center, clinic, research facility, laboratory, or other university location, are at all times subject to and afforded the same equal employment opportunity standards, as defined, as university employees performing similar services. The measure would authorize the regents, or any campus or other entity of the University of California, to contract for, or otherwise arrange to use, contract labor, as defined, to perform support services only under specified conditions, only if authorized to do so by statute, and only to the extent necessary to address one or more of prescribed needs. The measure would authorize the Legislature to enact statutes to further the purposes of, and to aid the enforcement of, this measure.
This measure would urge each bank with which the State of California has a business relationship to evaluate its commercial relationship with gun manufacturers and to consider the repercussions of that relationship, and urge all banks to discuss their lending practices with their shareholders and to adopt lending practices that mirror the people of California's values of protecting citizens before profit.
Existing law makes garment manufacturers liable for guaranteeing payment of wages to employees of their contractors. This bill would expand the definition of garment manufacturing to include dyeing, altering a garment's design, and affixing a label to a garment. The bill would prohibit any employee engaged in the performance of garment manufacturing to be paid by the piece or unit, or by the piece rate, except as specified. The bill would impose a statutory penalty of $200 against a garment manufacturer or contractor, payable to the employee, for each pay period in which the employee is paid by the piece rate. This bill would define "brand guarantor" for purposes of these provisions as a person contracting for the performance of garment manufacturing, as specified, regardless of whether the person with whom they contract performs manufacturing operations or hires a contractor or subcontractor to perform manufacturing operations. This bill would specify that a garment manufacturer or brand guarantor who contracts with another person for the performance of garment manufacturing operations shares joint and several liability with any manufacturer and contractor for the full amount of unpaid wages, any other compensation, damages, and penalties to any and all employees who performed manufacturing operations for any violation, liquidated damages, attorney's fees, and civil penalties, as specified. This bill would create a rebuttable presumption in a claim filed with the Labor Commissioner to recover unpaid wages, if an employee has provided the Labor Commissioner with labels or other information that the commissioner finds credible relating to the identity of any brand guarantor or garment manufacturer that the brand guarantor or garment manufacturer is liable with the contractor for any amounts found to be due to the employee. The bill would also give the Labor Commissioner authority to enforce these provisions by issuing a stop order or a citation. Existing law requires every employer engaged in the business of garment manufacturing to keep certain records for three years, including, among other things, contract worksheets indicating the price per unit agreed to between the contractor and manufacturer. This bill would also require every employer engaged in the business of garment manufacturing and brand guarantors to keep all contracts, invoices, purchase orders, work orders, style or cut sheets, and any other documentation pursuant to which garment manufacturing work was, or is being, performed for 4 years. Existing law requires the commissioner to deposit $75 of each garment manufacturer's registration fee into a separate account to be disbursed by the commissioner only to persons determined by the commissioner to have been damaged by the failure to pay wages and benefits by a garment manufacturer, contractor, or subcontractor. Existing law requires the commissioner to promulgate all regulations and rules necessary to carry out the provisions of this part. The commissioner, upon good cause, may impose, in their discretion, the terms of penalties, the revocation of registrations, and the confiscation or disposal of goods in accordance with those rules and regulations. This bill would name the separate account into which a portion of a garment manufacturer's registration fee is deposited the Garment Manufacturers Special Account. The bill would require the Labor Commissioner to determine which claims for payment from the Garment Manufacturer's Special Account are accepted, and the amount of money, if any, that is to be disbursed from the account on an accepted claim.