This measure would declare the month of September 2023 as Childhood Cancer Awareness Month.
This measure would proclaim the month of October 2023 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month.
This measure would declare the month of September 2023 as California Emergency Preparedness Month.
This measure would urge the federal Office of Management and Budget to update its Uniform Guidance in order to improve job creation, quality, and equity.
Existing law requires the Department of Justice, on a monthly basis, to review the records in the statewide criminal justice databases and identify persons who are eligible for automatic conviction record relief. Existing law makes this conviction record relief available for a defendant convicted, on or after January 1, 2005, of a felony for which they did not complete probation without revocation if the defendant appears to have completed all terms of incarceration, probation, mandatory supervision, postrelease community supervision, and parole, and a period of 4 years has elapsed during which the defendant was not convicted of a new felony offense, except as specified. This bill would extend that relief to apply to convictions on or after January 1, 1973.
Existing law requires a person who is directly or indirectly the beneficial owner of more than 10% of any class of stock of a domestic insurer to file in the office of the Insurance Commissioner within 10 days after that person becomes a beneficial owner a statement, in a form prescribed by the commissioner, of the amount of all stock of that insurer of which the person is the beneficial owner, as specified. The General Corporation Law (GCL) requires a domestic corporation and a foreign corporation to file annually, as prescribed, with the Secretary of State, a statement containing certain information, including the names and complete business or residence addresses of its chief executive officer, secretary, and chief financial officer. The GCL requires a domestic corporation to certify that the information it provides in that statement is true and correct. This bill would additionally require those corporations to include in the statement described above the names and complete business or residence addresses of any beneficial owner, as defined. By expanding the scope of the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law, the California Revised Uniform Limited Liability Company Act, requires a limited liability company, and a foreign limited liability company registered to transact intrastate business in this state, to file biennially, as specified, with the Secretary of State, a statement containing certain information, including the name and complete business or residence addresses of any manager or managers and the chief executive officer, if any, appointed or elected in accordance with the articles of organization or operating agreement or, if a manager has not been so elected or appointed, the name and business or residence address of each member. This bill would additionally require those limited liability companies to include in the statement described above the name and complete business or residence addresses of any beneficial owner, as defined. Existing law authorizes an unincorporated association to file with the Secretary of State, on a form prescribed by the Secretary of State, a statement containing either of certain information, including a designation of the location and complete street address of the unincorporated association's principal office in California. This bill would require a real estate investment trust, as defined, to file with the Secretary of State a statement containing the name and complete business or residence address of any beneficial owner, as defined. 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 a local air pollution control district or an air quality management district (local air district) that intends to propose the adoption, amendment, or repeal of a rule or regulation that will significantly affect air quality or emissions limitations to perform, except as specified, an assessment of the socioeconomic impacts of the proposed adoption, amendment, or repeal of the rule or regulation, as provided. Existing law defines "socioeconomic impacts" to include, among other things, the type of industries or business, including small business, affected by the rule or regulation, the impact of the rule or regulation on employment and the economy of the region affected by the adoption of the rule or regulation, and the range of probable costs, including costs to industry or business, including small business, of the rule or regulation. This bill would require a local air district, whenever it intends to propose the adoption, amendment, or repeal of a rule or regulation that will significantly affect air quality or emissions limitations, to perform an assessment of the socioeconomic impacts of the proposed action on the rule or regulation on families living within the jurisdiction whose annual income is less than $100,000. The bill would change the definition of "socioeconomic impacts" to, among other things, remove from consideration the types of industry and business, other than small business, that is affected, to remove from consideration the impact of the proposed change on the economy of the region affected, and to include the range of probable costs for families living within the jurisdiction with an annual income of less than $100,000. By creating an income threshold and changing the parameters of a socioeconomic impacts assessment conducted by a local air district, this bill would increase the requirements on local officials, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. This bill would additionally require the State Air Resources Board, except as specified, to conduct an assessment of the socioeconomic impacts, as defined, on families living within the jurisdiction whose annual income is less than $100,000, of a proposed adoption, amendment, or repeal of a rule or regulation that will significantly affect air quality or emissions limitations, as provided, and similarly authorize the state board to contract with a third party to conduct the required assessment of socioeconomic impacts, or portion thereof, as provided. The bill would specify minimum standards for the assessment of socioeconomic impacts, and would require the state board or a third-party contractor to include in the assessment of socioeconomic impacts specified information and analysis, including an econometric analysis that includes, among other things, a baseline estimate of the costs on families living within the jurisdiction whose annual income is less than $100,000, as provided. The bill would prohibit the state board from approving an assessment of socioeconomic impacts that fails to meet those 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, 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 law generally provides for the compensation of victims and derivative victims of specified types of crimes by the California Victim Compensation Board from the Restitution Fund, which is continuously appropriated to the California Victim Compensation Board. Existing law defines terms for the purpose of determining the eligibility of victims of crime for compensation from the Restitution Fund. This bill would make changes to the definition of "derivative victim" and "victim" and would define "victim of violent crime advocate" for purposes of these provisions. Existing law requires an application for compensation to be filed with the board in a manner determined by the board, authorizes the board to require submission of additional information, and requires the board to communicate any determination made with respect to the adequacy of the information received from the applicant, as specified. Existing law also requires the board to verify information with various entities, including hospitals and law enforcement officials, as specified. Existing law also creates a process for the board's verification of information, including by requiring the applicant to cooperate with the board, as specified. This bill would prohibit the board from requiring submission of additional information solely to verify that a crime occurred, as specified. The bill would also change how the board must communicate with the applicant about the adequacy of the information received from the applicant. The bill would also authorize the board to verify information, but not require the board to do so, and would prohibit the board from seeking or requiring additional information solely to verify that the crime occurred if the board has already received a valid form of verification, as specified. The bill would remove the requirement that an applicant cooperate with the board, and change the verification procedure in various ways, as specified. The bill would also require the board to accept certain information as evidence to verify that a crime occurred, as specified. Existing law specifies how an emergency award may be made to a person eligible for compensation from the board. This bill would establish a presumption of substantial hardship for emergency award requests for relocation or funeral and burial expenses, as specified. Existing law authorizes the board to deny an application based on the nature of the victim's or other applicant's involvement in the events leading up to the crime, as specified, and requires the board to deny an application for compensation if it finds that the victim or derivative victim failed to cooperate reasonably with a law enforcement agency in the apprehension and conviction of a criminal committing the crime. Existing law also prohibits a person who is convicted of a violent felony to receive compensation, as specified. This bill would delete those provisions. Existing law authorizes the board to compensate for pecuniary loss, including a cash payment or reimbursement to a victim for expenses incurred in relocating, subject to specified conditions. This bill would change those conditions for cash payment or reimbursement of relocation expenses, and would authorize a derivative victim to receive this cash payment or reimbursement, as specified. By expanding eligibility for compensation from a continuously appropriated fund, this bill would make an appropriation. Existing law authorizes the board to establish service limitations for reimbursement of medical and medical-related services and for mental health and counseling services. Existing law authorizes the board to request an independent examination and report from any provider of medical or medical-related services or psychological or psychiatric treatment or mental health counseling services, if it believes there is a reasonable basis for requesting an additional evaluation, as specified. This bill would remove the board's authority to establish service limitations and to request an independent examination and report from any provider of medical or medical-related services or psychological or psychiatric treatment or mental health counseling services. By removing limits on compensation from a continuously appropriated fund, this bill would make an appropriation. Existing law requires the board to approve or deny applications within an average of 90 calendar days and no later than 180 calendar days, as specified. This bill would require the board to approve or deny applications within an average of 30 days and no later than 60 calendar days, as specified. The bill would also require the board to communicate a determination made to approve or deny an application in specified ways. The bill would also require the board to adopt guidelines governing the information to include in these communications, as specified. Existing law authorizes judicial review of a final decision made under these provisions by filing a petition for a writ of mandate, as specified. Existing law requires the petition to be filed within 30 calendar days of personal delivery or within 60 calendar days of the mailing of specified documents. This bill would instead require the petition to be filed within 365 calendar days of personal delivery or the mailing of those documents.
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. The Sales and Use Tax Law defines the term "sale" for these purposes. This bill would make nonsubstantive changes to that provision.
Existing law imposes taxes upon income and real property, as well as taxes upon certain transactions and excise taxes. This bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2024, and before January 1, 2026, impose an annual tax at a rate of 1.5% of a resident of this state's worldwide net worth in excess of $1,000,000,000, or in excess of $500,000,000 in the case of a married taxpayer filing separately. The bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2026, impose an annual tax at a rate of 1% of a resident's worldwide net worth in excess of $50,000,000, or in excess of $25,000,000 in the case of a married taxpayer filing separately. The bill would also impose, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2026, an additional tax at a rate of 0.5% of a resident's worldwide net worth in excess of $1,000,000,000, or in excess of $500,000,000 in the case of a married taxpayer filing separately. The bill would describe worldwide net worth with reference to specific federal provisions and would provide that worldwide net worth does not include specific assets, including personal property situated out of state, directly held real property, or liabilities related to directly held real property. The bill would also authorize the Franchise Tax Board to adopt regulations to carry out these provisions, including regulations regarding the valuation of certain assets that are not publicly traded. The bill would require new certifications by taxpayers, made under penalty of perjury. By expanding the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would establish the Wealth Tax Advisory Council. The bill would require the council to determine an adequate level of annual funding and staffing for the administration and collection of the wealth tax imposed by this bill. The bill would provide specific guidelines for what constitutes adequate levels of annual funding and staffing for the administration and collection of a wealth tax. The bill would establish 2 continuously appropriated funds in the State Treasury to cover the expenses of the administration and collection of the wealth tax. Under the bill, the funds would be funded by the greater of either a specified amount or a certain percentage of revenues estimated to be generated by the wealth tax. By establishing new continuously appropriated funds, this bill would make an appropriation. Existing law, the False Claims Act, provides that any person who commits specified acts, including, but not limited to, knowingly presenting a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval or knowingly making or using a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim, is liable to the state or to the political subdivision for 3 times the amount of damages that the state or political subdivision sustained because of the act and for the costs of a civil action brought to recover any penalties or damages, and is subject to a civil penalty. That act requires the Attorney General or the prosecuting authority of a political subdivision to diligently investigate violations of those specific acts involving state funds or political subdivision funds, respectively, and authorizes the Attorney General, the prosecuting authority, or a qui tam plaintiff to bring a civil action against a person who commits those acts. That act does not apply to claims, records, or statements made under the Revenue and Taxation Code. This bill would apply the provisions of the False Claims Act to claims, records, or statements made in relation to the wealth tax imposed by the bill, as specified. Existing law generally makes it a misdemeanor for specified persons, including, among others, officers or employees of the state or its political subdivisions, to disclose information set forth or disclosed in returns, reports, or documents required to be filed under the franchise and income tax laws. This bill would create an exception to these rules in the case of information related to the Wealth Tax, as requested by the University of California or the Wealth Tax Advisory Council, so long as specified information privacy protections are in place, and the request is for a specified purpose. This bill would specify that the tax imposed by the bill shall only become operative if a specified constitutional amendment is approved by the voters and takes effect. This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax within the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. 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.
