Existing sales and use tax laws impose a tax on retailers measured by the gross receipts from the sale of tangible personal property sold at retail in this state, or on the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of tangible personal property purchased from a retailer for storage, use, or other consumption in this state. Existing law requires a seller or person subject to sales and use tax to file, on or before the last day of the month following each quarterly period, a return for the preceding quarterly period. Existing law provides that if the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (the department) finds that a person's failure to make a timely return or payment is due to reasonable cause and circumstances beyond the person's control, and occurred notwithstanding the exercise of ordinary care and the absence of willful neglect, the person shall be relieved of the penalties for failing to file a return. This bill would require an aviation fuel retailer to provide a quarterly information return, as specified, and would subject a retailer who fails to file that information return or who files an inaccurate information return to a penalty of $5,000. The bill would exempt from those penalties a person who fails to file a return or provides information or files an inaccurate return, if that person's failure is due to reasonable cause and circumstances beyond the person's control, notwithstanding the exercise of ordinary care and the absence of willful neglect. The bill would require the department to collect and disseminate, as specified, information from those information returns and calculate the amount of revenue collected from the sale, storage, use, or consumption of aviation fuel in the state. This bill would also require the department to report corresponding tax revenue information to local tax entities.
Sponsored bills
Existing law establishes in state government the Transportation Agency, which includes various departments and state entities, including the California Transportation Commission. The Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 establishes a comprehensive transportation funding program by increasing fuel taxes and imposing certain vehicle fees. The act allocates revenues from those sources to various transportation programs, including, among others, to the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Program, which the act created to address deferred maintenance on the state highway system and the local street and road system. This bill would require the Transportation Agency to oversee the development and implementation of a comprehensive one-stop reporting interface available to the public through an internet website maintained by the agency. The bill would require the interface to provide timely fiscal information regarding the development and implementation status of each transportation program or project funded, at least in part, by revenues from the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017.
The Personal Income Tax Law allows various credits against the tax imposed by that law. Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax credit 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 allow credits against the tax imposed by the Personal Income Tax Law for each taxable year beginning on or after January 1, 2021, and before January 1, 2026, to a qualified taxpayer for qualified costs relating to qualified home hardening, as defined, and for qualified costs relating to qualified vegetation management, as defined, in specified amounts, not to exceed an aggregate amount of $500,000,000 per taxable year. This bill would authorize a qualified taxpayer to reserve a credit for qualified costs relating to qualified home hardening or qualified vegetation management prior to incurring those costs, as specified. The bill would require a qualified taxpayer that reserved a credit to submit a copy of the receipts showing the total qualified costs incurred and a certification by the qualified taxpayer, signed under penalty of perjury, that the qualified taxpayer incurred the qualified costs claimed, as specified. By requiring qualified taxpayers to submit a certification under penalty of perjury, the bill would expand the crime of perjury and impose a state-mandated local program. The bill also would include additional information required for any bill authorizing a new income tax credit and would require the Legislative Analyst's Office to prepare a written report regarding the credits, as provided. 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.
(1) The Planning and Zoning Law requires a city or county to adopt a general plan for land use development within its boundaries that includes, among other things, a housing element. Existing law requires an attached housing development to be a permitted use, not subject to a conditional use permit, on any parcel zoned for multifamily housing if at least certain percentages of the units are available at affordable housing costs to very low income, lower income, and moderate-income households for at least 30 years and if the project meets specified conditions relating to location and being subject to a discretionary decision other than a conditional use permit. Existing law provides for various incentives intended to facilitate and expedite the construction of affordable housing. 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 or eligible transit-oriented development (TOD) 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 unit of up to 2 residential dwelling units in a nonurban community, as defined, or up to 4 residential dwelling units in an urban community, as defined, that meets local height, setback, and lot coverage zoning requirements as they existed on July 1, 2019. The bill would define an "eligible TOD project" as a project located in an urban community, as defined, that meets specified height requirements, is located within 12 mile of an existing or planned transit station parcel or entrance, and meets other floor area ratio, density, parking, and zoning requirements. The bill also requires an eligible TOD project development proponent to develop a plan that ensures transit accessibility to the residents of the development in coordination with the applicable local transit agency. The bill would require specified TOD projects to comply with specified affordability, prevailing wage, and skilled and trained workforce requirements. The bill would also define "eligible parcel" to mean a parcel located within a city or county that has unmet regional housing needs and has produced fewer housing units than jobs over a specified period; is zoned to allow residential use and qualifies as an infill site; is not located within a historic district, coastal zone, very high fire hazard severity zone, or a flood plain; the development would not require the demolition of specified types of affordable housing; the parcel is not eligible for development under existing specified transit-oriented development authorizations; and the parcel in question has been fully reassessed on or after January 1, 2021, to reflect its full cash value, following a change in ownership. 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; otherwise, the development is 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 if a local agency approves a project pursuant to that process, that approval will not expire if that project includes investment in housing affordability, and would otherwise provide that the approval of a project expire 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. (2) 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 and transit-oriented projects, thereby exempting these projects from the CEQA approval process. (3) The bill would make findings that ensuring access to affordable housing is a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, applies to all cities, including a charter city and a charter city and county. (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.
(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.
The California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection, and Outdoor Access For All Act of 2018, approved by the voters as Proposition 68 at the June 5, 2018, statewide primary direct election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $4,100,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance a drought, water, parks, climate, coastal protection, and outdoor access for all program. This bill would enact the Wildfire Prevention, Safe Drinking Water, Drought Preparation, and Flood Protection Bond Act of 2020, which, if approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $5,510,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance projects for a wildfire prevention, safe drinking water, drought preparation, and flood protection program. This bill would provide for the submission of these provisions to the voters at the November 3, 2020, statewide general election. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law establishes categories of peace officers with varying powers and authority to make arrests and carry firearms. Under existing law, in certain counties, a deputy sheriff, who is employed to perform duties exclusively or initially relating to custodial assignments with responsibilities for maintaining the operations of county custodial facilities, is a peace officer whose authority extends to any place in the state only while engaged in the performance of the duties of the officer's employment and for the purpose of carrying out the primary function of employment relating to the officer's custodial assignments, or when performing other law enforcement duties directed by the officer's employing agency during a local state of emergency. This bill would include a deputy sheriff employed by the County of Del Norte, the County of Mono, or the County of San Mateo within that definition of peace officers.
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, subject to certain modifications. Existing law requires an annual reallocation of property tax revenue from local agencies in each county to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) in that county for allocation to specified educational entities. Existing law authorizes certain local agencies to form an enhanced infrastructure financing district, affordable housing authority, transit village development district, or community revitalization and investment authority for purposes of, among other things, infrastructure, affordable housing, and economic revitalization. This bill would establish in state government the Affordable Housing and Community Development Investment Program, which would be administered by the Affordable Housing and Community Development Investment Committee. The bill would authorize a city, county, city and county, joint powers agency, enhanced infrastructure financing district, affordable housing authority, community revitalization and investment authority, transit village development district, or a combination of those entities, to apply to the Affordable Housing and Community Development Investment Committee to participate in the program and would authorize the committee to approve or deny plans for projects meeting specific criteria. The bill would also authorize certain local agencies to establish an affordable housing and community development investment agency and authorize an agency to apply for funding under the program and issue bonds, as provided, to carry out a project under the program. The bill would require the Affordable Housing and Community Development Investment Committee to adopt guidelines for plans. Subject to the Legislature enacting a budget bill for the applicable fiscal year that specifies the amount for the committee to allocate pursuant to the program, the bill would require the committee to approve no more than $200,000,000 per year from July 1, 2021, to June 30, 2026, and $250,000,000 per year from July 1, 2026, to June 30, 2030, in transfers from a county's ERAF for applicants for plans approved pursuant to this program. This bill would provide that eligible projects include, among other things, the predevelopment, development, acquisition, rehabilitation, and preservation of workforce and affordable housing, certain transit-oriented development, and projects promoting strong neighborhoods. The bill would require the Affordable Housing and Community Development Investment Committee, upon approval of a plan and subject to specified conditions, to issue an order directing the county auditor to transfer an amount of ad valorem property tax revenue that is equal to the affordable housing and community development investment amount approved by the committee, except as provided, from the county's ERAF. The bill would require the county auditor to either deposit that amount into the Affordable Housing and Community Development Investment Fund, which this bill would create in the treasury of each county, or, if the applicant is a specified type of authority or special district to transfer to the city or county that created the authority or district an amount of property tax revenue equal to the amount approved by the Affordable Housing and Community Development Investment Committee for that authority or district. The bill would require the city or county that created the district to, upon receipt, transfer those funds to the authority or district in an amount equal to the affordable housing and community development investment amount for that authority or district. By imposing additional duties on local officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize applicants to use approved amounts to incur debt or issue bonds or other financing to support an approved project. The bill also would require each applicant that has received funding to submit annual reports, as specified, and would require the Affordable Housing and Community Development Investment Committee to provide a report to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee, if it approves funding under the program, that includes certain project information. Section 8 of Article XVI of the California Constitution sets forth a formula for computing the minimum amount of revenues that the state is required to appropriate for the support of school districts and community college districts for each fiscal year. This bill would require the Director of Finance to adjust the percentage of General Fund revenues appropriated for school districts and community college districts for these purposes in a manner that ensures that the transfers from a county's ERAF pursuant to the Affordable Housing and Community Development Investment Program have no net fiscal impact upon the total amount of the General Fund revenue and local property tax revenue allocated to school districts and community college districts pursuant to Section 8 of Article XVI of the California Constitution, as specified. 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.
(1) Existing law, the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) , approved by the voters at the November 8, 2016, statewide general election, regulates the cultivation, distribution, transport, storage, manufacturing, testing, processing, sale, and use of marijuana for nonmedical purposes by individuals 21 years of age and older. 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. (2) MAUCRSA requires the department, no later than January 1, 2018, to establish standards by which a licensed cultivator may designate a county of origin for cannabis. MAUCRSA requires the department, no later than January 1, 2021, to establish a process by which cultivators may establish appellations for cannabis grown in certain geographical areas of California, instead of by county. MAUCRSA prohibits cannabis from being represented to consumers, as specified, as grown in a California county unless the cannabis was grown in that county. MAUCRSA prohibits the name of a California county or any similar name that is likely to mislead consumers as to the origin of cannabis products from being used, as specified, unless the cannabis contained in the product was grown in that county. Existing law defines the term "kind" to mean the applicable type or designation regarding a particular cannabis variant or cannabis product type, including, but not limited to, strain name or other grower trademark, or growing area designation. This bill would use the term "appellations of origin" instead of "appellations" and would apply the same prohibitions against misrepresentation of county of origin to misuse of appellations of origin established pursuant to the above-described process. The bill would apply the same prohibitions against misrepresentation of county of origin and appellation of origin to the use of names that are likely to mislead consumers as to the kind of cannabis. The bill would alter the definition of "kind" to include the applicable type or designation of a particular cannabis origin. (3) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 26001 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by SB 34 to be operative only if this bill and SB 34 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (4) AUMA authorizes the Legislature to amend by majority vote certain provisions of the act to implement specified substantive provisions, provided that the amendments are consistent with, and further the purposes and intent of, AUMA. This bill would declare that its provisions implement specified substantive provisions of AUMA and are consistent with, and further the purposes and intent of, AUMA.