Existing law authorizes counties, cities, and other local agencies to impose various taxes and fees in connection with activity or property within those jurisdictions. The California Constitution also authorizes a charter city to levy local taxes to raise revenues for local purposes, subject to restrictions imposed by that city's charter or preemption in matters of statewide concern. This bill, until January 1, 2023, would prohibit the imposition by a city, city and county, or county, including a chartered city, city and county, or county, of a tax on video streaming services, including, but not limited to, any tax on the sale or use of video streaming services or any utility user tax on video streaming services. This bill would make a legislative finding and declaration regarding the statewide concern of the promotion of uniformity in access throughout the state to video streaming services.
Sponsored bills
The Political Reform Act of 1974 prohibits a person, other than a small contributor committee or political party committee, from making to a candidate for elective state office, for statewide elective office, or for office of the Governor, and prohibits those candidates from accepting from a person, a contribution totaling more than a specified amount per election. For a candidate for elective state office other than a candidate for statewide elective office, the limitation on contributions is $3,000 per election, as that amount is adjusted by the Fair Political Practices Commission in January of every odd-numbered year. Existing law authorizes a county, city, or district to limit campaign contributions in local elections. Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district or of a community college district to limit campaign expenditures or contributions in elections to district offices. The act specifies that it does not prevent the Legislature or any other state or local agency from imposing additional requirements on a person if the requirements do not prevent the person from complying with the act, and that the act does not nullify contribution limitations or prohibitions by any local jurisdiction that apply to elections for local elective office, as specified. This bill, commencing January 1, 2019, instead would prohibit a person from making to a candidate for local elective office, and would prohibit a candidate for local elective office from accepting from a person, a contribution totaling more than the amount set forth in the act for limitations on contributions to a candidate for elective state office. This bill would also authorize a county, city, special district, or school district to impose a limitation that is different from the limitation imposed by this bill. This bill would repeal the authorization for the governing board of a school district or of a community college district to limit campaign expenditures in elections to district offices. This bill would make specified provisions of the act relating to contribution limitations applicable to a candidate for a local elective office, except as specified. The act makes a violation of its provisions punishable as a misdemeanor and subject to specified penalties. This bill would add the contribution limitation imposed by the bill to the act's provisions, thereby making a violation of the limitation punishable as a misdemeanor and subject to specified penalties. However, the bill would specify that a violation of a limitation imposed by a local government is not subject to the act's enforcement provisions. The bill would authorize a local government that imposes a limitation that is different from the limitation imposed by this bill to adopt enforcement standards for a violation of the limitation imposed by the local government agency, including administrative, civil, or criminal penalties. By expanding the scope of an existing crime with regard to a violation of a contribution limitation imposed by the bill, 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. The Political Reform Act of 1974, an initiative measure, provides that the Legislature may amend the act to further the act's purposes upon a 23 vote of each house of the Legislature and compliance with specified procedural requirements. This bill would declare that it furthers the purposes of the act.
Existing law generally requires that a transaction involving a firearm be conducted through a licensed firearms dealer. This requirement does not apply under existing law to the sale or transfer of a firearm to an authorized law enforcement representative for exclusive use by that law enforcement agency if, prior to the transfer of the firearm, written authorization from the head of the agency is presented to the person from whom the transfer is being made. In these cases, existing law requires the firearm to be entered as an institutional weapon into the Automated Firearms System (AFS) via the California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System. This bill would require a law enforcement agency, as defined, to adopt a written procedure to account for firearms that are owned, acquired, maintained, sold, loaned, lost, stolen, or in any way possessed by that agency or by an employee of that agency if used or carried for purposes of carrying out the official duties of his or her employment, as specified. The bill would require that firearms that are lost, stolen, or otherwise disposed of be entered into the AFS. By imposing additional duties on local law enforcement agencies, 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 provisions of the Warren-911-Emergency Assistance Act establish the calling number "911" as the primary emergency telephone number for use in the state and require the providing of enhanced service capable of selective routing, automatic number identification, or automatic location identification. The act requires a telephone corporation serving rural telephone areas that cannot provide enhanced 911 emergency telephone service capable of selective routing, automatic number identification, or automatic location identification to present to the Office of Emergency Services a comprehensive plan detailing a schedule by which their facilities will be converted to be compatible with the enhanced emergency telephone system. This bill would require a facilities-based provider of telecommunications services that the Federal Communications Commission requires to provide access to 911 service to provide responder outage notification by email to the Office of Emergency Services whenever there is a rural outage, as defined, within 60 minutes of discovering the rural outage. The bill would make the Office of Emergency Services responsible for notifying any applicable county office of emergency services and the sheriff of any county affected by the outage. The bill would require the responder outage notification to the Office of Emergency Services to include the telecommunications provider's contact name and calling number and a description of the estimated area affected by the outage. The bill would require the telecommunications services provider to notify the Office of Emergency Services of the estimated time to repair the outage and when service is restored. The bill would require that the telecommunications service provider ensure that the calling number provided to the Office of Emergency Services with the responder outage notification is staffed by the indicated contact person, or by a person qualified to respond to inquiries about the outage, at all times until the provider notifies the office that service has been restored.
Existing law requires the state to have the primary financial responsibility for preventing and suppressing fires in areas that the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection has determined are state responsibility areas, as defined. Existing law requires that a fire prevention fee be charged on each habitable structure on a parcel that is within a state responsibility area, collected annually by the State Board of Equalization, in accordance with specified procedures, and specifies that the annual fee shall be due and payable 30 days from the date of assessment by the state board. Existing law authorizes a petition for redetermination of the fee to be filed within 30 days after service of a notice of determination, as specified. This bill would extend the time when the fire prevention fee is due and payable from 30 to 60 days from the date of assessment by the State Board of Equalization and would authorize the petition for redetermination to be filed within 60 days after service of the notice of determination, as specified. The bill would establish the Fire Prevention Fee Amnesty Program. The bill would require the State Board of Equalization to develop and administer the amnesty program for a person subject to the fees described above. The bill would require the program to be conducted for a 6-month time period, as provided, and would apply to fire prevention fee liabilities due and payable for the fee reporting periods beginning before March 1, 2018. The bill would require the program to apply to a person who meets specified requirements, including the filing of a completed amnesty application under penalty of perjury. By requiring the application to be completed under penalty of perjury, the bill would create a crime, and thus impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the state board to waive all penalties and interest for the specified fee reporting period for which the fire prevention fee amnesty is allowed for the nonpayment or underpayment of fee liabilities for a person who meets the above requirements. The bill would require the state board to adequately publicize the program so as to maximize public awareness of and participation in the 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.
(1) Existing law, the Political Reform Act of 1974, provides for the comprehensive regulation of campaign financing and activities. The act requires a committee that supports or opposes ballot measures to name and identify itself using a name or phrase that clearly identifies the economic or other special interests of its major donors of $50,000 or more. The act also requires that the identity of a common employer shared by major donors be disclosed. This bill would repeal these provisions. (2) The act defines "expenditure" as a payment, a forgiveness of a loan, a payment of a loan by a third party, or an enforceable promise to make a payment, unless it is clear from the surrounding circumstances that it is not made for political purposes. This bill would describe circumstances in which a payment would be made for political purposes within the meaning of the definition of "expenditure." (3) The act prohibits a candidate, committee, or slate mailer organization from expending campaign funds to pay for specified telephone calls that advocate support of, or opposition to, a candidate, ballot measure, or both, unless the name of the organization that authorized or paid for the call is disclosed to the recipient of the call during the course of each call. This bill would instead apply these requirements to a candidate, a candidate controlled committee established for an elective office for the controlling candidate, a political party committee, and a slate mailer organization that expends campaign funds to pay for such telephone calls. (4) The act also requires advertisements, as defined, to include prescribed disclosure statements, including, among others, a requirement that the disclosure statements include the names of the persons who made the 2 highest cumulative contributions, as defined, to the committee paying for the advertisement. This bill would repeal and recast provisions of the act relating to advertisement disclosure statements. The bill would revise the definition of "advertisement" to exclude a number of communications, including communications that involve wearing apparel, sky writing, and certain electronic media communications, as specified. The bill would prohibit specified entities from sending a mass electronic mailing, as defined, unless the name of the candidate or committee are shown in the electronic mailing preceded by the words "Paid for by" in at least the same size font as a majority of the text in the mass electronic mailing. The bill would also replace existing advertisement disclosure statements with newly prescribed disclosure statements that identify the name of the committee paying for the advertisement and the top contributors to that committee. The bill would define "top contributors" for purposes of these provisions as the persons from whom the committee paying for the advertisement received its 3 highest cumulative contributions, as specified. The bill would exempt certain committees, including committees that make independent expenditures totaling $1,000 or more in a calendar year, from the requirement to disclose the top contributors in advertisement disclosure statements. The bill would also prescribe location and format criteria for the disclosure statements that are specific to radio and telephone, television and video, print, and electronic media advertisements. (5) The act prohibits a person from making a contribution as an intermediary on behalf of another person without disclosing to the recipient of the contribution specified information about both the intermediary and the source of the contribution. The act also prohibits a person from making a contribution to a committee on the condition or with the agreement that it will be contributed to a particular candidate unless the contribution is disclosed in compliance with those requirements for contributions made by an intermediary. This bill would prohibit a person from making a contribution to a committee or candidate that is earmarked unless the contribution is disclosed in compliance with the requirements for contributions made by an intermediary. The bill would also describe circumstances in which a contribution is deemed to be earmarked. (6) Because a violation of the act is punishable as a misdemeanor, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. (7) The Political Reform Act of 1974, an initiative measure, provides that the Legislature may amend the act to further the act's purposes upon a 23 vote of each house of the Legislature and compliance with specified procedural requirements. This bill would declare that it furthers the purposes of the act. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
(1) Existing law, the Veterinary Medicine Practice Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of veterinarians and the practice of veterinary medicine by the Veterinary Medical Board. A violation of the act is a crime. The practice of veterinary medicine includes the diagnosing, prescribing, or administering of a drug, medicine, appliance, application, or treatment for the prevention, cure, or relief of a wound, fracture, bodily injury, or disease of animals. Existing law authorizes a registered veterinary technician or a veterinary assistant to administer a drug under the direct or indirect supervision of a licensed veterinarian when done pursuant to the order, control, and full professional responsibility of a licensed veterinarian. Existing law, the Pharmacy Law, authorizes a veterinarian to personally furnish any dangerous drug prescribed by the veterinarian to the patient provided that the drug is properly labeled, as specified. This bill, in nonemergency situations and outpatient settings, would require that each time a veterinarian prescribes, administers, dispenses, or furnishes a dangerous drug or prescription medicine, unless in conjunction with surgery during an anesthetic procedure or emergency services, the veterinarian offer to provide the client with a consultation that includes specified information. The bill would further require a veterinarian to provide along with the consultation pharmaceutical literature or written information, when available, if requested by the client. The bill would authorize a veterinarian to delegate the task of providing the consultation and literature or written information to a registered veterinary technician or veterinary assistant who is employed by and working under the supervision of the veterinarian. In every veterinary practice, the bill would require a poster notifying clients about specified consumer rights and the consultation, literature, and handout requirements. Because the violation of these requirements would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) The Veterinary Medicine Practice Act requires the Veterinary Medical Board to make every effort to inspect at least 20% of veterinary premises on an annual basis. This bill would instead require the board to inspect at least 20% of veterinary premises on an annual basis and also inspect all new veterinary premises within one year of being issued a premises permit. (3) Under existing law, certain veterinarians and other persons are exempt from the Veterinary Medicine Practice Act. Under existing law, these exempt persons include students in the School of Veterinary Medicine of the University of California or the College of Veterinary Medicine of the Western University of Health Sciences who participate in diagnosis and treatment as part of their educational experience, as specified. This bill would additional exempt students of an American Veterinary Medical Association Council on Education accredited veterinary medical program who participate, as part of their formal curriculum, in diagnosis and treatment with direct supervision or in surgery with immediate supervision and who meet other specified requirements. For purposes of both this exemption and the exemption described above, the bill would also require a memorandum of understanding containing specified terms to be in place between the accredited veterinary program and any off-campus or distributive site that provides the formal curriculum. (4) The Veterinary Medicine Practice Act allows a person whose license or registration has been surrendered while under investigation, revoked or who has been placed on probation to petition the Veterinary Medical Board for reinstatement for modification of penalty after a period of not less than one year has elapsed from the effective date of the decision ordering the disciplinary action. This bill would extend that period to 3 years for petitions for reinstatement of a surrendered or revoked license and would extend that period to 2 years for petitions for early termination or modification of probation, unless otherwise authorized by the board in the revocation or surrender order or order imposing probation. (5) 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 electrical corporations and gas corporations. The Public Utilities Act requires the commission to investigate the cause of all accidents occurring upon the property of any public utility or directly or indirectly arising from or connected with its maintenance or operation, resulting in loss of life or injury to person or property and requiring, in the judgment of the commission, investigation by it, and authorizes the commission to make any order or recommendation with respect to the investigation that it determines to be just and reasonable. The California Constitution authorizes the commission to establish rules for all public utilities, subject to control by the Legislature. This bill would require the commission to adopt a commissionwide gas corporation and electrical corporation safety program that includes specified elements and would authorize the commission to adopt an organizationwide safety program for other public utilities and specified nonutilities that are also subject to the commission's regulatory jurisdiction. The bill would require gas corporations and electrical corporations to have effective programs to continually identify safety hazards and to analyze, assess, and mitigate or eliminate safety risks. The bill would specify the safety-related responsibilities with respect to gas corporations and electrical corporations of various entities within the commission. The bill would require the commission to perform a detailed safety management assessment for each gas corporation and electrical corporation not less often than every 5 years and would require the commission to take official notice of the safety management assessment in relevant proceedings, including general rate cases. The bill would require the commission, by March 1, 2018, to contract with one or more consultants to determine the effectiveness of its internal safety communications and decisionmaking processes and the incentives for staff in primarily safety-related roles compared to the incentives and opportunities for attorneys, administrative law judges, and staff in primarily nonsafety, energy-policy-related roles. Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime. Because the provisions of this bill placing additional safety duties upon gas corporations and electrical corporations would be a part of the act, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program by creating a new crime. Existing law requires the commission to appoint an executive director who is responsible for the commission's executive and administrative duties and to organize, coordinate, supervise, and direct the operations and affairs of the commission and expedite all matters within the commission's jurisdiction. Existing law authorizes the executive director to employ those officers, administrative law judges, experts, engineers, statisticians, accountants, inspectors, clerks, and employees as the executive director deems necessary to carry out the provisions of the Public Utilities Act or to perform the duties and exercise the powers conferred upon the commission by law. This bill would require the executive director to provide an engineer to each commissioner to advise him or her on the technical aspects of safety and the technical aspects of other topics within the jurisdiction of the commission. The California Constitution authorizes the commission to establish its own procedures, subject to statutory limitations or directions and constitutional requirements of due process. The Public Utilities Act requires the commission to determine whether a proceeding requires a hearing and, if so, to determine whether the matter requires a quasi-legislative, an adjudication, or a ratesetting hearing. For these purposes, quasi-legislative cases are cases that establish policy rulemakings and investigations which may establish rules affecting an entire industry. Existing law generally permits ex parte communications in quasi-legislative cases. The bill would require that any excess of formality in commission policy or administrative practice not be used to prevent commission staff from submitting findings and evidence relevant to safety into the quasi-legislative proceeding record or from presenting arguments to improve safety in quasi-legislative cases. Pursuant to its existing authority, the commission has issued an interim decision adopting a multiattribute approach and directing certain public utilities to take steps toward a more uniform risk management framework. This bill would void a specified order in that interim decision and direct the Safety and Enforcement Division and executive director of the commission to not implement that order. 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 requires all rigid plastic bottles and rigid plastic containers sold in the state to be labeled with a code that indicates the resin used to produce the rigid plastic bottle or rigid plastic container. The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, administered by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, requires every rigid plastic packaging container, as defined, sold or offered for sale in this state to generally meet one of specified criteria. This bill would enact the Ocean Pollution Reduction Act of 2017. The bill would prohibit a food vendor, as defined, that is subject to specified federal requirements for the posting of calories and nutrients imposed upon restaurants and other retail food establishments, on and after January 1, 2020, from dispensing prepared food to a customer in an expanded polystyrene food service container. The bill would prohibit all food vendors from dispensing prepared food to a customer in an expanded polystyrene food service container on and after January 1, 2022. The bill would authorize a city or county to grant a food vendor an exemption from these prohibitions, as specified, upon request of the food vendor, if the food vendor demonstrates to the satisfaction of the city or county that compliance with the prohibition would impose an undue economic hardship, as defined. The bill would authorize a city, a county, a city and county, or the state to impose civil liability on a person or entity that knowingly violates that prohibition, or reasonably should have known that it was violating that prohibition, in the amount of $1,000 per day for the first violation, $2,000 per day for the 2nd violation, and $5,000 per day for the 3rd and subsequent violations. The bill would require any civil penalties collected to be paid to the office that brought the action and would authorize these penalties, if collected by the Attorney General, to be expended, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to enforce that prohibition. The bill would require the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery to develop an Internet Web page with information on how to comply with, and how to file a complaint for a violation of, that prohibition. The act would also define related terms.
This measure would urge the United States Congress to act swiftly to reauthorize the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) for at least 5 years, as specified.