Existing law, the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, otherwise known as the Williamson Act, authorizes a city or county to enter into contracts with owners of agricultural land to preserve the land for agricultural use, as specified, in return for reduced property tax assessments. The act also authorizes a landowner of specified agricultural land to petition the city or county to cancel the Williamson Act contract in order to designate the land as a farmland security zone, whereby the land is eligible for a specified property tax valuation and taxed at a reduced rate for specified special taxes. Existing law authorizes the legislative body of a city or a county to establish an enhanced infrastructure financing district, with a governing body referred to as the public financing authority, to finance public capital facilities or other specified projects of communitywide significance. Existing law requires the public financing authority to prepare and adopt a proposed infrastructure financing plan, as specified. Existing law authorizes the plan to require a certain portion of specified taxes levied upon property within the district to be allocated to the district each year, as specified. Existing law authorizes certain local agencies to form a Community Revitalization and Investment Authority within a community revitalization and investment area to carry out a community revitalization plan in that area for specified purposes. Existing law authorizes the plan to require a certain portion of specified taxes levied upon property within the area to be allocated to the authority to finance improvements, as specified. This bill would exclude the taxes levied upon a parcel of land enrolled in or subject to a Williamson Act contract or a farmland security zone contract, as specified, from the above-described allocations to the district or authority, as applicable. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 53398.75 of the Government Code proposed by SB 516 to be operative only if this bill and SB 516 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law designates the State Water Resources Control Board as the agency responsible for administering specific programs related to drinking water, including, among others, the California Safe Drinking Water Act and the Emerging Contaminants for Small or Disadvantaged Communities Funding Program. This bill, which would become operative upon an appropriation by the Legislature, would enact a perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) mitigation program. As part of that program, the bill would create the PFAS Mitigation Fund in the State Treasury and would authorize certain moneys in the fund to be expended by the state board, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for specified purposes. The bill would authorize the state board to seek out nonstate, federal, and private funds designated for PFAS remediation and treatment and deposit the funds into the PFAS Mitigation Fund. The bill would continuously appropriate these funds to the state board for specified purposes. The bill would authorize the state board to establish accounts within the PFAS Mitigation Fund. The bill would authorize the state board to expend moneys from the fund in the form of a grant, loan, or contract, or to provide assistance services to water suppliers and sewer system providers, as those terms are defined, for multiple purposes, including, among other things, to cover or reduce the costs for water suppliers associated with treating drinking water to meet the applicable state and federal maximum PFAS contaminant levels. The bill would require a water supplier or sewer system provider to include a clear and definite purpose for how the funds will be used to provide public benefits to their community related to safe drinking water, recycled water, stormwater, or treated wastewater in order to be eligible to receive funds. The bill would require the state board to adopt guidelines to implement these provisions, as provided.
Existing law prescribes the procedures by which a proposed ordinance may be submitted to the governing board of a district by an initiative measure. These procedures do not apply to specified districts, including a district formed under a law that does not provide a procedure for elections. This bill would authorize the voters of any district that has authority to impose a transactions and use tax for transportation purposes to impose a retail transactions and use tax by an initiative measure. The bill would prohibit the initiative tax from exceeding the maximum authorized rate for a tax imposed by an ordinance enacted by the governing body of the district, and the bill would require the initiative measure to contain all spending limitations and substantive accountability standards applicable to a tax imposed by an ordinance enacted by the governing body. To the extent the bill would increase the duties of county elections officials, 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, 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.
This measure would urge the United States Congress and the President of the United States to immediately restore and extend the enhanced Affordable Care Act premium tax credits.
(1) The California Constitution authorizes the Legislature to exempt from taxation, in whole or in part, property that is used exclusively for religious, hospital, or charitable purposes, and is owned or held in trust by a nonprofit entity. Pursuant to that authority, existing law provides for a welfare exemption under which property used exclusively for an exempt purpose and owned and operated by specified entities, including foundations, limited liability companies, or corporations meeting certain statutory requirements, is exempt from taxation. Existing law, until the lien date in 2027, also provides that property used exclusively for the preservation of specified natural resources or open-space lands owned or operated by a specified entity meeting specified criteria is deemed to be included within the welfare exemption. This bill would provide that, for purposes of the exemption for property used exclusively for the preservation of specified natural resources or open-space lands, for the property tax lien dates for the 2026–27 fiscal year to the 2031–32 fiscal year, inclusive, property may be owned and operated by a federally recognized Indian tribe or a wholly owned subsidiary of a federally recognized Indian tribe meeting certain requirements. By expanding the duties of local tax officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law authorizes counties and cities and counties to impose a documentary transfer tax at a specified rate upon deeds, instruments, or other writings by which specified property is transferred. Existing law exempts certain transfers from the imposition of that tax, as specified. This bill would, until January 1, 2031, exempt from that tax the transfer of any deed, instrument, or other writing that makes effective a tribal land return transaction, as defined. (3) Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure to contain, among other things, specific goals, purposes, and objectives that the tax expenditure will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. This bill would include additional information required for any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure. (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, 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. (5) This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Existing property tax law provides for the payment of taxes on the secured roll in 2 installments, which are due and payable on November 1 and February 1, respectively. Under existing property tax law, unpaid property taxes become delinquent, and subject to a delinquent penalty of 10%, as provided. Existing property tax law imposes various additional penalties, costs, and interest upon taxpayers that pay their property taxes after specified delinquency dates. Existing property tax law requires a penalty to be canceled when the reason for the delinquency is that the property tax bill was sent to the wrong address, and authorizes county officials to cancel property tax penalties in other circumstances. Existing property tax law provides for a supplemental property tax roll for property tax assessments made after the property tax lien date. Existing property tax law requires the tax collector to mail or electronically transmit a county tax bill or a copy thereof for every property on the secured roll. Under existing property tax law, a failure to receive a tax bill does not relieve the lien of taxes or prevent the imposition of penalties. This bill would suspend the above-described penalties, costs, and interest, as applicable, and would prohibit their collection until April 10, 2026, for property located in a certain area in either the County of Los Angeles or the County of Ventura, unless either the taxes on the property were delinquent as of January 6, 2025, or the taxes on the property are paid through an impound account. Existing property tax law authorizes any person to elect to pay delinquent taxes in installments (installment redemption plan) by a certain date before the tax collector obtains the power to sell the property in order to redeem certain tax-defaulted property. Existing property tax law prohibits restarting installment payments if those payments are started under these provisions and the amount required to be paid in any fiscal year is not paid as required (default) . This bill would prohibit an installment redemption plan, for which all payments due on or before January 7, 2025, have been timely made, from being considered in default until April 10, 2026, for property located in a certain area in either the County of Los Angeles or the County of Ventura. Existing property tax law authorizes, for taxes due on escape assessments for prior fiscal years, those taxes to be paid over a 4-year period (installment plan) at the option of the assessee if the additional tax is over $500 and a written request for installment payment is filed by the assessee with the tax collector by a certain time. This bill would suspend the taxes due on a property making payments pursuant to an installment plan as described above, would prohibit their collection, and would prohibit the taxes from being considered delinquent, all until April 10, 2026, for property located in a certain area in either the County of Los Angeles or the County of Ventura, provided that, on or before January 7, 2025, all payments required by the plan were timely made. Existing property tax law requires each person owning taxable personal property, other than a manufactured home, having an aggregate cost of $100,000 or more for any assessment year to file annually a signed property statement, declared to be true under the penalty of perjury, with the assessor. If a person fails to file that annual statement, existing property tax law requires a penalty of 10% of the assessed value of the unreported taxable tangible property of that person placed on the current roll to be added to the assessment made on the current roll. This bill would suspend that penalty until April 10, 2026, and prohibit it from being imposed if the person files a statement on or before April 10, 2026, and the property is located in a certain area in either the County of Los Angeles or the County of Ventura. By imposing additional duties on local tax officials with respect to the collection of property taxes, including the imposition of penalties, as described above, 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. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Los Angeles and the County of Ventura.
The Personal Income Tax Law allows various credits against the taxes imposed by that law, including a young child tax credit to a qualified taxpayer in a specified amount multiplied by the earned income tax credit adjustment factor, as provided. That law also allows a payment from the continuously appropriated Tax Relief and Refund Account for an amount in excess of tax liability. Existing law defines "qualified taxpayer" for this purpose to include an eligible individual, as defined, who has a qualifying child, defined to be a child younger than 6 years of age as of the last day of the taxable year, and who meets other specified criteria. This bill, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2025, would instead define a "qualifying child" to mean a child younger than a specified age as of the last day of the taxable year, as described. By increasing the payments from the Tax Relief and Refund Account, a continuously appropriated fund, the bill would make an appropriation. Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure to contain, among other things, specific goals that the tax expenditure will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. This bill would include additional information required for any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure.
The Personal Income Tax Law, in modified conformity with federal income tax laws, allows an earned income tax credit against personal income tax and a payment from the Tax Relief and Refund Account, a continuously appropriated fund, 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. The law provides that the amount of the credit is calculated as a percentage of the eligible individual's earned income and is phased out above a specified amount as income increases, and provides alternative calculation factors under specified circumstances. Existing law, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2020, and until and including the taxable year in which the minimum wage is set at $15 per hour, requires the phaseout percentage for eligible individuals to be recalculated by the Franchise Tax Board so that the calculated amount of credit for a taxpayer with an earned income of $30,000 is equal to zero. This bill, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2025, if the amount of credit computed for an eligible individual is less than $355, as specified, would allow the credit for the eligible individual to be $355 instead, except as otherwise specified. By authorizing additional payments from a continuously appropriated account, this bill would make an appropriation. Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure to contain, among other things, specific goals that the tax expenditure will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. This bill also would include additional information required for any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure.
(1) Existing law, the Bergeson-Peace Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank Act, establishes the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (I-Bank) in the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development. Existing law, among other things, authorizes the I-Bank to issue bonds, make loans, and provide financial assistance for various types of projects that qualify as economic development or public development facilities. This bill would enact the Community Stabilization Act. The bill would require the I-Bank to develop and administer a program to issue a security, and to cease issuing a security on January 1, 2030. The bill would specify that the purpose of the program is to help stabilize property values in disaster-affected areas by allowing qualified investors, as defined, to purchase tradable securities, with the funding allocated to qualifying investment entities that purchase and manage residential land until it can be resold at fair market value. The bill would require profits from the land investments to be shared among investors and the I-Bank according to certain percentages, with qualifying investment entities being reimbursed for their administrative costs. This bill would establish various requirements for the security, including that it be tradeable, comply with specified municipal bonding requirements, and that it be funded by investments made by qualified investors using funds available pursuant to the federal Community Reinvestment Act of 1977. The bill would require the security to repay the investment upon a liquidity event and within 7 years of the purchase of an investment property, and would describe a liquidity event as the refinance or sale of the investment property. This bill would require funds raised from the purchase of the security to be deposited in the Community Stabilization Fund, which would be created by the bill, and would require all moneys in the fund to be continuously appropriated to the I-Bank. The bill would require the I-Bank to allocate moneys in the fund to qualifying investment entities to be invested in the Counties of Los Angeles and Ventura and in those areas that are covered by a state of disaster declared by the Governor. The bill would require a qualifying investment entity to meet prescribed requirements, including that it be a specified entity, including, among others, a nonprofit organization, as provided. The bill would also impose various requirements on the qualifying investment entity relating to the purchase, maintenance, and sale of the investment property, including, among other things, limiting the purchase of property to residential property that has been damaged or destroyed by the wildfires that began on January 7, 2025, in the Counties of Los Angeles and Ventura, as specified. The bill would require the I-Bank to submit a final report on the program to the Legislature, the Governor, and the Department of Finance no later than January 1, 2034, as specified. By establishing a new continuously appropriated fund, the Community Stabilization Fund, this bill would make an appropriation. (2) This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Counties of Los Angeles and Ventura. (3) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, establishes the Civil Rights Department within the Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency and sets forth its powers and duties relating to enforcement of civil rights laws and assistance to communities in resolving disputes, disagreements, or difficulties relating to discriminatory practices. This bill, upon appropriation by the Legislature and commencing on or before the later of either July 1, 2026, or one year after the date of the appropriation, would require the department to create and implement statewide and regional radio, social media, and television campaigns for the purposes of discouraging discrimination. The bill would require the department to convene a working group to develop a plan to implement the campaigns above. The bill would exempt the working group from the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act. 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.
