Under existing law, the United States Bureau of Reclamation operates the federal Central Valley Project and the Department of Water Resources operates the State Water Project to supply water to persons and entities in the state. Existing law requires the Friant-Kern Canal to be of such capacity as the department determines necessary to furnish an adequate supply of water for beneficial purposes in the area to be served by the canal. This bill would require the Department of Water Resources to report to the Legislature, no later than March 31, 2021, on federal funding approved by the United States Congress in its 2021 Congressional Budget Resolution and related appropriations bills or otherwise provided to the Friant Water Authority or other government agency to restore the capacity of the Friant-Kern Canal, as specified. The bill would require the department to include in its report a proposal for the state to pay a share of the project cost, not to exceed 35%, and how the money will be spent. This bill would make these provisions inoperative on March 31, 2025, and would repeal them as of January 1, 2026.
Sponsored bills
Existing property tax law requires the county auditor, in each fiscal year, to allocate property tax revenue to local jurisdictions in accordance with specified formulas and procedures, and generally provides that each jurisdiction shall be allocated an amount equal to the total of the amount of revenue allocated to that jurisdiction in the prior fiscal year, subject to certain modifications, and that jurisdiction's portion of the annual tax increment, as defined. Existing property tax law also reduces the amounts of ad valorem property tax revenue that would otherwise be annually allocated to the county, cities, and special districts pursuant to these general allocation requirements by requiring, for purposes of determining property tax revenue allocations in each county for the 1992–93 and 1993–94 fiscal years, that the amounts of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to the county, cities, and special districts be reduced in accordance with certain formulas. Existing property tax law requires that the revenues not allocated to the county, cities, and special districts as a result of these reductions be transferred to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) in that county for allocation to school districts, community college districts, and the county office of education. Existing law provides that if it is determined by an audit that an allocation method is required to be adjusted and a reallocation is required for previous fiscal years, the cumulative reallocation or adjustment may not exceed 1% of the total amount levied at a 1% rate of the current year's original secured tax roll, and requires the county auditor to correct the allocation method, as specified. This bill, notwithstanding that reallocation or adjustment limit or any other law, would require the county auditor of the County of Madera to make an allocation adjustment for the 2005–06 through 2013–14 fiscal years in the full amount of $5,856,457 identified in the Controller's September 2015 audit of the County of Madera for the 2005–06 through 2013–14 fiscal years, less the amount of $1,228,734 previously reallocated in accordance with existing law. The bill would require the resulting reallocation and transfer of $4,627,723 to be made from the county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund, as specified. By adding to the duties of the auditor of the County of Madera, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Madera. 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.
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, the California Earned Income Tax Credit (CalEITC) , 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. This bill would require the Franchise Tax Board to analyze and develop a plan to increase the number of claims of the CalEITC and the federal Earned Income Tax Credit. The bill would require the analysis to include an overview of the changes needed to the income tax system that would reduce any barriers to tax filing for non-filers of tax returns who are eligible for the CalEITC and an outline of the necessary changes needed to increase collaboration and coordination among state agencies to reach the greatest number of individuals eligible for the CalEITC. The bill would require the Franchise Tax Board to report to the Legislature on or before January 1, 2022, on its analysis and plan.
This measure would designate a specified portion of State Highway Route 33 in the Counties of Merced and Stanislaus as the Corporal Ronil Singh Memorial Highway. The measure would request the Department of Transportation to determine the cost of appropriate signs showing this special designation and the badge of the Newman Police Department and, upon receiving donations from nonstate sources covering that cost, to erect those signs.
Existing law describes the authorized routes in the state highway system and establishes a process for adoption of a highway on an authorized route by the California Transportation Commission. Existing law requires the commission to relinquish to local agencies state highway segments that have been deleted from the state highway system by legislative enactment or have been superseded by relocation, and in certain other cases. This bill would authorize the commission to relinquish to the City of Salinas a segment of State Highway Route 183, under specific conditions.
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.
(1) Existing law, known as the Density Bonus Law, requires a city or county to provide a developer that proposes a housing development in the city or county 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 agrees to, among other things, construct a specified percentage of units for very low income, low-income, or moderate-income households or qualifying residents, including lower income students. Existing law requires the amount of a density bonus and the number of incentives or concessions a qualifying developer receives to be pursuant to a certain formula based on the total number of units in the housing development, excluding the units added by a density bonus awarded pursuant to the Density Bonus Law or any local law granting a greater density bonus. This bill would require a unit designated to satisfy the inclusionary zoning requirements of a city or county to be included in the total number of units on which a density bonus and the number of incentives or concessions are based. The bill would require a city or county to grant one incentive or concession for a student housing development project that will include at least 20% of the total units for lower income students. (2) Existing law requires a city or county to grant a density bonus and certain incentives or concessions if the developer agrees to construct a common interest development that will contain a specified percentage of units for persons and families of moderate income, as specified, if all units in the development are offered to the public for purchase. This bill instead would require a city or county to grant that density bonus and those incentives or concessions if the developer agrees to construct a housing development that will contain that specified percentage of units for persons and families of low or moderate income, as specified. (3) Existing law requires the planning agency of the city or county to provide to the department, the Office of Planning and Research, and the legislative body of the city or county, by April 1 of each year, an annual report that includes, among other things, the city or county's progress in meeting its share of the regional housing needs. This bill would require the planning agency to include in that report the number of units in a student housing development for lower income students for which the developer was granted a density bonus. (4) Existing law authorizes a city or county to refuse a concession or incentive if the city or county makes a written finding, based upon substantial evidence that the concession or incentive would have a specified adverse impact on public health and safety, the physical environment, or real property listed in the California Register of Historical Resources. This bill would remove the specified adverse impact on the physical environment from the list of reasons for which a city or county is authorized to refuse a concession or incentive. Existing law prohibits a city or county from applying any development standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria for a density bonus at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by certain provisions of the Density Bonus Law. Existing law authorizes an applicant to submit to a city or county a proposal for the waiver or reduction of such a development standard and to request a meeting with the city or county, and requires a court to award reasonable attorney's fees and costs of suit to the plaintiff if the court finds that the refusal to grant a waiver or reduction violates certain provisions of the Density Bonus Law. Existing law prohibits these provisions from being interpreted to require a local government to waive or reduce development standards if the waiver or reduction would have a specified adverse impact upon health, safety, or the physical environment, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact. This bill would remove the specified impact upon the physical environment from the limitations on the above-described requirement that a local government waive or reduce development standards. This bill would make findings and declarations related to the modifications to the Density Bonus Law made by this bill. (5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65400 of the Government Code proposed by AB 168 and AB 2345 to be operative only if this bill and either or both AB 168 and AB 2345 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65915 of the Government Code proposed by AB 2345 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2345 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (6) 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 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 (EIR) 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 authorizes the preparation of a master EIR and authorizes the use of the master EIR to limit the environmental review of subsequent projects that are described in the master EIR, as specified. This bill would require a lead agency to prepare a master EIR for a general plan, plan amendment, plan element, or specified plan for housing projects where the state has provided funding for the preparation of the master EIR. The Jobs and Economic Improvement Through Environmental Leadership Act of 2011 (leadership act) authorizes the Governor, until January 1, 2020, to certify projects that meet certain requirements, including a requirement that the project applicant agrees to pay the costs of the court of appeal in hearing and deciding a case challenging a lead agency's action on a certified project and certain labor-related requirements, for streamlining benefits provided by the leadership act related to compliance with CEQA and streamlining of judicial review of action taken by a public agency to require a judicial action to be resolved within 270 days of the filing of the certified record of proceedings with the court. The leadership act provides that if a lead agency fails to approve a project certified by the Governor before January 1, 2021, the certification expires and is no longer valid. The leadership act requires a lead agency to prepare the record of proceedings for the certified project concurrent with the preparation of the EIR. The leadership act is repealed by its own terms on January 1, 2021. This bill would extend the authority of the Governor to certify a project to January 1, 2024. The bill would authorize the Office of Planning and Research to charge a fee on an applicant seeking certification for costs incurred by the Governor's office in the implementation of the leadership act. The bill would additionally include housing development projects, as defined, meeting certain conditions as projects eligible for certification. The bill would, except for those housing development projects, require the quantification and mitigation of the impacts of a project from the emissions of greenhouse gases, as provided. The bill would provide for the certification by the Governor of a project alternative described in an EIR for a certified project, as provided. The bill would additionally require the project applicant, as a condition of certification, to agree to pay for the costs of the trial court in hearing and deciding the case. The bill would revise and recast the labor-related requirements for projects undertaken by public agencies and for projects undertaken by private entities. The bill would instead specify that the time period for the final resolution of any judicial action is 270 business days after the filing of the record of proceedings with the court. The bill would provide that the certification expires and is no longer valid if the lead agency fails to approve a certified project before January 1, 2025. The bill would instead repeal the leadership act on January 1, 2025. Because the bill would extend the obligation of the lead agency to prepare concurrently the record of proceedings, 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.
Existing law prescribes various requirements to be satisfied before the exercise of a power of sale under a mortgage or deed of trust. Existing law requires that a notice of default and a notice of sale be recorded and that specified periods of time elapse between the recording and the sale. Existing law establishes certain requirements in connection with foreclosures on mortgages and deeds of trust, including restrictions on the actions mortgage servicers may take while a borrower is attempting to secure a loan modification or has submitted a loan modification application. Existing law applies certain of those requirements only to a first lien mortgage or deed of trust that is secured by owner-occupied residential real property containing no more than four dwelling units. This bill, the Tenant, Homeowner, and Small Landlord Relief and Stabilization Act of 2020, would, among other things, until January 1, 2023, additionally apply those protections to a first lien mortgage or deed of trust that is secured by residential real property that is occupied by a tenant, contains no more than four dwelling units, and meets certain criteria, including that a tenant occupying the property is unable to pay rent due to a reduction in income resulting from the novel coronavirus. The bill would also enact the COVID-19 Small Landlord and Homeowner Relief Act of 2020 (Homeowner Act) , which would require a mortgage servicer, as defined, to provide a specified written notice to a borrower, as defined, if the mortgage servicer denies forbearance during the effective time period, as defined, that states the reasons for that denial if the borrower was both current on payments as of February 1, 2020, and is experiencing a financial hardship that prevents the borrower from making timely payments on the mortgage obligation due, directly or indirectly, to the COVID-19 emergency. The Homeowner Act would also require a mortgage servicer to comply with applicable federal guidance regarding borrower options following a COVID-19 related forbearance. Existing law provides that a tenant is guilty of unlawful detainer if the tenant continues to possess the property without permission of the landlord after the tenant defaults on rent or fails to perform a condition or covenant of the lease under which the property is held, among other reasons. Existing law requires a tenant be served a 3 days' notice in writing to cure a default or perform a condition of the lease, or return possession of the property to the landlord, as specified. Existing law, the Mobilehome Residency Law, prohibits a tenancy from being terminated unless specified conditions are met, including that the tenant fails to pay rent, utility charges, or reasonable incidental service charges, and 3 days' notice in writing is provided to the tenant, as specified. This bill would, until February 1, 2025, enact the COVID-19 Tenant Relief Act of 2020 (Tenant Act) . The Tenant Act would require that any 3 days' notice that demands payment of COVID-19 rental debt that is served on a tenant during the covered time period meet specified criteria, including that the notice include an unsigned copy of a declaration of COVID-19-related financial distress and that the notice advise the tenant that the tenant will not be evicted for failure to comply with the notice if the tenant delivers a signed declaration of COVID-19-related financial distress to the landlord, as specified. The Tenant Act would define "covered time period" for purposes of these provisions to mean the time between March 1, 2020, and January 31, 2021. The Tenant Act would deem a 3 days' notice that fails to comply with this criteria void and insufficient to support a judgment for unlawful detainer or to terminate a tenancy under the Mobilehome Residency Law. The Tenant Act would prohibit a tenant that delivers a declaration, under penalty of perjury, of COVID-19-related financial distress pursuant to these provisions from being deemed in default with regard to the COVID-19 rental debt, as specified. By expanding the crime of perjury, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. The Tenant Act would prohibit a court from finding a tenant guilty of an unlawful detainer before February 1, 2021, subject to certain exceptions, including if the tenant was guilty of the unlawful detainer before March 1, 2020. The bill would prohibit, before October 5, 2020, a court from taking specified actions with respect to unlawful detainer actions, including issuing a summons on a complaint for unlawful detainer in any action that seeks possession of residential real property and that is based, in whole or in part, on nonpayment of rent or other charges. The Tenant Act would also authorize a landlord to require a high-income tenant, as defined, to additionally submit documentation supporting the claim that the tenant has suffered COVID-19-related financial distress if the landlord has proof of income showing the tenant is a high-income tenant. The Tenant Act would preempt an ordinance, resolution, regulation, or administrative action adopted by a city, county, or city and county in response to the COVID-19 pandemic to protect tenants from eviction based on nonpayment of rental payments, as specified. The bill would require the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency to, in consultation with the Department of Finance, engage with residential tenants, landlords, property owners, deed-restricted affordable housing providers, and financial sector stakeholders about strategies and approaches to direct potential future federal stimulus funding to most effectively and efficiently provide relief to distressed tenants, landlords, and property owners, as specified. Existing law prohibits a landlord from taking specified actions with intent to terminate the occupancy under any lease or other tenancy or estate at will, however created, of property used by a tenant as the tenant's residence. Existing law makes a violator of those provisions subject to certain damages in a civil action. This bill would, until February 1, 2021, make a violator of those provisions whose tenant has provided to that violator the declaration of COVID-19-related financial distress described above liable for damages in an amount between $1,000 and $2,500. Existing law, The Small Claims Act, grants jurisdiction to a small claims court in cases where the amount demanded does not exceed $5,000, as specified, and prohibits a person from filing more than 2 small claims actions in which the amount demanded exceeds $2,500 anywhere in the state in any calendar year. This bill would instead, until February 1, 2025, provide that a small claims court has jurisdiction in any action for recovery of COVID-19 rental debt, as defined, regardless of the amount demanded and would provide that a claim for recovery of a COVID-19 rental debt is exempt from the prohibition on filing more than 2 small claims actions described above. Existing law, the Tenant Protection Act of 2019, prohibits, with certain exceptions, an owner of residential real property from increasing the gross rental rate for a dwelling or unit more than 5% plus the "percentage change in the cost of living," as defined, or 10%, whichever is lower, of the lowest gross rental rate charged for the immediately preceding 12 months, subject to specified conditions. The act exempts certain types of residential real properties, including dormitories constructed and maintained in connection with any higher education institution within the state for use and occupancy by students in attendance at the institution and housing that has been issued a certificate of occupancy within the previous 15 years. This bill would revise and recast those exemptions to exempt dormitories owned and operated by an institution of higher education or a kindergarten and grades 1 to 12, inclusive, school. The bill would also make clarifying changes to the definition of "percentage change in the cost of living." This bill would also make clarifying and conforming changes. 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. 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 declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.