The Personal Income Tax Law allows various credits against the taxes imposed by that law. This bill would allow a credit against those taxes for each taxable year beginning on or after January 1, 2020, and before January 1, 2024, in an amount equal to 25% of the amount paid or incurred during the taxable year, not compensated for by insurance or otherwise, by a qualified taxpayer, as defined, for home care services, not to exceed $5,000. The bill would define "home care services" to mean specified nonmedical services and assistance provided by a registered home care aide, as defined, a licensed home health agency, or a licensed hospice to a qualified taxpayer who, because of advanced age or physical or mental disability, cannot perform these services that enable the qualified taxpayer to remain in the qualified taxpayer's residence. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Sponsored bills
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA exempts certain housing projects from its requirements if the project meets certain criteria, including that the project site is not located within the boundaries of a state conservancy. This bill would delete that specific criteria.
The Personal Income Tax Law allows various credits against the taxes imposed by that law. This bill, for each taxable year beginning on or after January 1, 2020, and before January 1, 2025, would allow a credit against those taxes in an amount equal to 50% of the amount paid or incurred by a family caregiver during the taxable year for eligible expenses related to the care of an eligible family member, not to exceed $5,000. The bill would limit the aggregate amount of these credits to be allocated in each calendar year to $150,000,000 as well as any unused credit amount, if any, allocated in the preceding calendar year. The bill would require the Franchise Tax Board to allocate and certify these tax credits to taxpayers on a first-come-first-served basis. The bill would make these provisions operative on the effective date of any budget measure specifically appropriating funds to the Franchise Tax Board for its costs to administer these provisions. The bill would require an eligible family member to be certified by a physician, registered nurse, advanced practice registered nurse, or physician assistant, under penalty of perjury, as being an individual with long-term care needs and would require the family caregiver to retain, and make available to the Franchise Tax Board upon request, that certification. By expanding the scope of the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would make specified findings detailing the goals, purposes, and objectives of the above-described tax credit, performance indicators for determining whether the credit meets those goals, purposes, and objectives, and data collection requirements. 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. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Existing law establishes within the Health Professions Education Foundation the California Physician Corps Program, which includes the Steven M. Thompson Medical School Scholarship Program. Existing law provides student loan repayments for a physician and surgeon who agrees, in writing, prior to completing an accredited medical or osteopathic school based in the United States, to serve in an eligible practice setting in a medically underserved area for at least 3 years. This bill would establish within the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development the Primary Care Student Loan Repayment Program to provide loan repayment awards of up to $50,000 to physicians and surgeons and registered nurses who provide 32 hours a week or more of direct care service for a period of 2 years in either a federally designated health professional shortage area (HPSA) or primary care shortage area (PCSA) in California. The bill would establish in the State Treasury the Primary Care Student Loan Repayment Program Fund, to be used, upon appropriation by the Legislature, by the office to administer the program.
Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of professions and vocations by various boards that comprise the Department of Consumer Affairs. This bill would require the department, on or before January 1, 2021, to provide a report to the Assembly Committee on Business and Professions and the Senate Committee on Business, Professions and Economic Development that contains specified information relating to licensing examinations for each licensed profession and vocation under the department's jurisdiction.
Existing law, the Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2018, which was approved by the voters as Proposition 1 at the November 6, 2018, statewide general election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $4,000,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law and requires the proceeds from the sale of these bonds to be used to finance various housing programs and a specified program for farm, home, and mobilehome purchase assistance for veterans, as provided. Existing law authorizes a city, county, or city and county to provide for the creation of accessory dwelling units in areas zoned to allow single-family or multifamily use by an ordinance that complies with specified requirements. Existing law requires the city, county, or city and county to ministerially approve or disapprove an application for a permit to create an accessory dwelling unit received pursuant to such an ordinance within 120 days. This bill would enact the Accessory Dwelling Unit Construction Bond Act of 2020 (bond act) , which, if adopted, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $500,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance the Accessory Dwelling Unit Construction Program, established as part of the bond act. The bill would authorize the Department of Housing and Community Development to enter into a contract under that program with a homeowner to provide financing to pay for the eligible costs incurred by the homeowner in constructing an accessory dwelling unit on the homeowner's property, subject to specified terms and conditions. The bill would require that moneys received from a homeowner for the repayment of financing provided under the program to be used to pay debt service when due on bonds issued pursuant to the bond act. This bill would provide for submission of the bond act to the voters at the next statewide general election following its effective date, in accordance with specified law.
(1) Existing law authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for a multifamily housing development that satisfies specified planning objective standards to be subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, as provided, and not subject to a conditional use permit. This bill would authorize a development proponent of a neighborhood multifamily project located on an eligible parcel to submit an application for a streamlined, ministerial approval process that is not subject to a conditional use permit. The bill would define a "neighborhood multifamily project" to mean a project to construct a multifamily structure on vacant land, or to convert an existing structure that does not require substantial exterior alteration into a multifamily structure, consisting of up to 4 residential dwelling units and that meets local height, setback, and lot coverage zoning requirements as they existed on July 1, 2019. The bill would also define "eligible parcel" to mean a parcel that meets specified requirements, including requirements relating to the location of the parcel and restricting the demolition of certain housing development that may already exist on the site. This bill would require a local agency to notify the development proponent in writing if the local agency determines that the development conflicts with any of the requirements provided for streamlined ministerial approval within 60 days of the submission of the development to the local agency. If the local agency does not notify the development proponent within this time period, the development would be deemed to comply with those requirements. The bill would limit the authority of a local agency to impose parking standards or requirements on a streamlined development approved pursuant to these provisions, as provided. The bill would provide that the approval of a project under these provisions expires automatically after 3 years, unless that project qualifies for a one-time, one-year extension of that approval. The bill would provide that approval pursuant to its provisions would remain valid for 3 years and remain valid thereafter, so long as vertical construction of the development has begun and is in progress, and would authorize a discretionary one-year extension, as provided. The bill would prohibit a local agency from adopting any requirement that applies to a project solely or partially on the basis that the project receives ministerial or streamlined approval pursuant to these provisions. This bill would allow a local agency to exempt a project from the streamlined ministerial approval process described above by finding that the project will cause a specific adverse impact to public health and safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects. This bill would establish a streamlined ministerial approval process for neighborhood multifamily projects, thereby exempting these projects from the CEQA approval process. (2) Existing law, known as the density bonus law, requires, when an applicant proposes a housing development within the jurisdiction of a local government, that the city, county, or city and county provide the developer with a density bonus and other incentives or concessions for the production of lower income housing units or for the donation of land within the development if the developer, among other things, agrees to construct a specified percentage of units for very low, low-, or moderate-income households or qualifying residents. This bill, on or after January 1, 2023, would require a specified city, county, or city and county to grant upon request an equitable communities incentive when a development proponent seeks and agrees to construct a residential development, as defined, that satisfies specified criteria, including, among other things, that the residential development is either a job-rich housing project or a transit-rich housing project, as those terms are defined; the site does not contain, or has not contained, housing occupied by tenants or accommodations withdrawn from rent or lease in accordance with specified law within specified time periods; and the residential development complies with specified additional requirements under existing law. The bill would impose additional requirements on a residential development located within a county with a population equal to or less than 600,000. The bill would require that a residential development within a county with a population greater than 600,000 that is eligible for an equitable communities incentive receive, upon request, waivers from maximum controls on density; minimum automobile parking requirements greater than 0.5 parking spots per unit; and specified additional waivers if the residential development is located within a 12-mile or 14-mile radius of a major transit stop, as defined. For a residential development within a county with a population equal to or less than 600,000, the bill would instead require that the incentive provide waivers from maximum controls on density, subject to certain limitations; maximum height limitations less than or equal to one story, or 15 feet, above the highest allowable height for mixed use or residential use; certain requirements governing the size of the parcel and the area that the building may occupy; and minimum automobile parking requirements, as provided. The bill would require a local government to grant an equitable communities incentive unless it makes a specified finding regarding the effects of the incentive on any real property or historic district that is listed on a federal or state register of historical resources. The bill would authorize a local government to modify or expand the terms of an equitable communities incentive, provided that the equitable communities incentive is consistent with these provisions. The bill would delay implementation of these provisions in potentially sensitive communities, as defined, until July 1, 2023. The bill would further delay implementation of these provisions in sensitive communities, determined as provided, until January 1, 2026, unless the city or county in which the area is located votes to make these provisions applicable after a specified petition and public hearing process. On and after January 1, 2026, the bill would apply these provisions to a sensitive community unless the city or county adopts a community plan for the area that meets certain requirements. The bill would also exempt from these provisions a local government that has a local flexibility plan that has been reviewed and certified by the Department of Housing and Community Development, as specified. The bill, on or before July 1, 2021, would require the Governor's Office of Planning and Research, in consultation with the Department of Housing and Community Development, to develop and publish on its internet website rules, regulations, or guidelines for the submission and approval of a local flexibility plan, as specified. The bill, on or after July 1, 2021, would authorize a local government to submit a local flexibility plan for review and approval by the Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to those rules, regulations, or guidelines. The bill would include findings that the changes proposed by these provisions address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The Housing Accountability Act prohibits a local agency from disapproving, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders infeasible, a housing development project that complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria in effect at the time the application for the project is deemed complete unless the local agency makes specified written findings based on a preponderance of the evidence in the record. That law provides that the receipt of a density bonus is not a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision of that act. This bill would additionally provide that the receipt of an equitable communities incentive is not a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision of that act. (3) By adding to the duties of local planning officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (4) 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.
Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission has regulatory authority over public utilities, including telephone corporations. Existing law establishes the California High-Cost Fund-A Administrative Committee Fund, the California High-Cost Fund-B Administrative Committee Fund, the Universal Lifeline Telephone Service Trust Administrative Committee Fund, the Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program Administrative Committee Fund, the Payphone Service Providers Committee Fund, the California Teleconnect Fund Administrative Committee Fund, and the California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) in the State Treasury and provides that moneys in the funds are held in trust and may be expended only to accomplish specified telecommunications universal service programs, upon appropriation in the annual Budget Act or upon supplemental appropriation. This bill would prohibit the commission from collecting, for deposit into any universal service fund, any revenues derived from charges upon the provision of a communications service that the Federal Communications Commission has determined is an information service, as specified. Existing law establishes the Public Utilities Commission Utilities Reimbursement Account and authorizes the commission to annually determine a utility reimbursement fee to be paid by every public utility providing service directly to customers or subscribers and subject to the jurisdiction of the commission, except for a railroad corporation. The commission is required to establish the fee, with the approval of the Department of Finance, to produce a total amount equal to that amount established in the authorized commission budget for the same year, and an appropriate reserve to regulate public utilities, less specified sources of funding. This bill would prohibit the commission from imposing a utility reimbursement fee that is applicable to the provision of a communications service that the Federal Communications Commission has determined is an information service, as specified.
This measure would name the public street, circle, and plaza at 914 and 915 Capitol Mall in the City of Sacramento as the Willie L. Brown, Jr. Circle and Plaza. The measure would request the Department of General Services to determine the cost of erecting the appropriate signage commemorating this special designation and, upon receiving donations from nonstate sources, to cover that cost to erect that signage.