The Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law authorizes counties and cities to impose a local sales and use tax in accordance with that law for tangible personal property sold at retail in the county or city, or purchased for storage, use, or other consumption in the county or city. Existing law requires the city tax rate to be credited against the county rate so that the combined rate does not exceed 1.25%. Existing law requires the county or city to contract with the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration for the administration of the taxes and requires the department to transmit that tax to the city or county. The Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law provides that for the purpose of a local sales tax adopted pursuant to that law, all retail sales are consummated at the place of business of the retailer unless otherwise specified. Existing law provides that these local sales taxes are allocated to the place where the sale is deemed to take place. This bill would instead provide that, in the case of a sale of tangible personal property by a qualified retailer, as defined, that is transacted online, the place at which the retail sale of that tangible personal property is consummated for the purpose of a local sales tax imposed pursuant to the Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law is the point of the delivery of that tangible personal property to the purchaser's address or any other address designated by the purchaser. The California Constitution prohibits the Legislature from enacting a statute that would change the method of distributing revenues derived under the Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law, as that law read on November 3, 2004, except the Legislature may change that law by statute to allow the state to participate in an interstate compact or to comply with federal law. This bill would become operative only if Senate Constitutional Amendment 20 of the 2017–18 Regular Session is approved by the voters and, in that event, would become operative on January 1, 2020.
Sponsored bills
This measure would provide that the Legislature strongly and unequivocally supports the current federal prohibition on new oil and gas drilling in federal waters offshore California, opposes the Trump administration's proposal to remove safety and environmental protections related to offshore drilling operations, and opposes the Trump administration's proposed leasing plan that would expose the state to new offshore drilling. The measure would also urge the United States Secretary of the Interior to remove California from that proposed leasing plan, and would request that the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management hold more than one public hearing on the plan in the State of California to ensure that all Californians have an opportunity to have their voices heard.
Existing law makes it an infraction punishable by a fine of $250 for a person to smoke a cigarette, cigar, or other tobacco-related product within 25 feet of a playground or tot lot sandbox area. This bill would make it an infraction punishable by a fine of up to $100 for a person to smoke, as defined, on a state coastal beach or in a unit of the state park system or to dispose of used cigar or cigarette waste on a state coastal beach or in a unit of the state park system. The bill would establish a state-mandated local program by creating a new crime. This bill would require the Department of Parks and Recreation to develop and post signs at entrances or strategic locations, as determined by the Director of Parks and Recreation, of state coastal beaches and units of the state park system to provide notice of the smoking prohibition. The bill would require the smoking prohibition to be enforced only after signs have been posted. The bill would authorize the Director of Parks and Recreation to designate, by posted order, areas within units of the state park system as exempt from the smoking prohibition, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law requires the Department of Transportation to designate a state highway segment as a Safety Enhancement-Double Fine Zone if specified conditions are met, including that the governing board of the city or county in which the segment is located has by resolution indicated that it supports the designation. This bill would, notwithstanding these requirements and until January 1, 2021, designate the segment of county highway known as Vasco Road, between the State Highway Route 580 junction in Alameda County and the Marsh Creek Road intersection in Contra Costa County, as a Safety Enhancement-Double Fine Zone upon the approval of the boards of supervisors of Alameda County and Contra Costa County. The bill would also impose specified duties on the department and local governing bodies regarding that double fine zone.
Existing law, as amended by Proposition 21 as approved by the voters at the March 7, 2000, statewide primary election and by Proposition 83 of the November 7, 2006, statewide general election, classifies certain felonies as violent felonies for purposes of various provisions of the Penal Code. Existing law generally imposes an additional one-year term for a felony and 3-year term for a violent felony for each prior separate prison term served for a felony or a violent felony, respectively. The Legislature may amend these initiative statutes by a statute passed in each house by a 2/3 vote. This bill would amend the above initiative statutes by defining additional crimes, including, among others, human trafficking, elder and dependent adult abuse, assault with a deadly weapon, rape under specified circumstances, discharge of a firearm at an occupied building, and specified crimes against peace officers and witnesses, as violent felonies for purposes of the above specified sentence enhancements. The bill would also make conforming changes. By increasing the punishment for these crimes, 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 requires the Department of Water Resources, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to provide funding for a project that substantially conforms to the project description for the Reverse Flow Pump-back Facilities on the Friant-Kern Canal Restoration Project, as specified, provided that certain conditions are met. Existing law requires that the appropriation be no more than $7,000,000. This bill would appropriate $7,000,000 from the General Fund to the department for this project. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Friant-Kern Canal.
Existing law, as amended by the DNA Fingerprint, Unsolved Crime and Innocence Protection Act, Proposition 69, approved by the voters at the November 2, 2004, general election (the DNA act) , requires a person who has been convicted of a felony offense to provide buccal swab samples, right thumbprints, and a full palm print impression of each hand, and any blood specimens or other biological samples required for law enforcement identification analysis. Existing law makes these provisions retroactive, regardless of when the crime charged or committed became a qualifying offense. This bill would expand these provisions to require persons convicted of specified misdemeanors to provide buccal swab samples, right thumbprints, and a full palm print impression of each hand, and any blood specimens or other biological samples required for law enforcement identification analysis. By imposing additional duties on local law enforcement agencies to collect and forward these samples, 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.