(1) The California Constitution establishes the Budget Stabilization Account and requires the Controller to transfer from the General Fund to the account, no later than October 1 of each fiscal year, a sum equal to 1.5% of the estimated amount of General Fund revenues for that fiscal year. The Department of Finance is required to report specified information to the Legislature, including (A) an estimate of the amount of General Fund proceeds of taxes that may be appropriated for that fiscal year, (B) an estimate of the portion of that amount that is derived from personal income taxes paid on net capital gains, and (C) the portion of the estimate in (B) that exceeds 8% of the estimate made in (A) . Notwithstanding the requirement for the Controller to transfer 1.5% of General Fund revenues for each fiscal year to the account, for the 2015–16 fiscal year to the 2029–30 fiscal year, inclusive, the California Constitution instead requires 50% of that amount and 50% of the amount described in (C) to be transferred to the Budget Stabilization Account. The California Constitution requires the remaining 50% to be appropriated for unfunded liabilities and other specified purposes. Commencing with the 2027–28 fiscal year, this measure would require the Department of Finance to report the sum of the portion of the estimate in (B) that exceeds 8%, but does not exceed 10%, of the estimate in (A) and 150% of the estimate in (B) that exceeds 10% of the estimate in (A) . The measure would require 50% of that sum and 50% of the amount equal to 1.5% of the estimated amount of General Fund revenues for the fiscal year to be transferred to the Budget Stabilization Account each fiscal year until the 2039–40 fiscal year, and it would require the remaining 50% to be appropriated for unfunded liabilities and other specified purposes. The measure would add repayment of federal loans relating to unemployment insurance to the purposes for which the remaining 50% may be appropriated. The California Constitution limits the amount that is required to be transferred to the Budget Stabilization Account for any fiscal year from exceeding an amount that would result in a balance in the account that, when the transfer is made, exceeds 10% of the estimated amount of the General Fund proceeds of taxes for the fiscal year, as specified. This measure would increase that limit to 20% of the estimated amount of the General Fund proceeds of taxes for the fiscal year. (2) The California Constitution creates the Public School System Stabilization Account in the General Fund and requires the Controller to transfer specified amounts from the General Fund to the account. Upon a proclamation by the Governor declaring a budget emergency, the Legislature may suspend or reduce transfers to the Budget Stabilization Account or Public School System Stabilization Account, return funds in the Budget Stabilization Account to the General Fund, and appropriate funds in the Public School System Stabilization Account for the support of school districts and community college districts. The California Constitution defines "budget emergency" for these purposes to mean (A) the existence of conditions of disaster or extreme peril, as declared by the Governor, or (B) a determination by the Governor that estimated resources are inadequate to fund General Fund expenditures for the current or ensuing fiscal year at a level equal to the highest amount of total General Fund expenditures estimated at the time of enactment of any of the three most recent Budget Acts. The California Constitution requires the Governor, within the first 10 days of each calendar year, to submit to the Legislature a proposed budget for the fiscal year commencing on July 1 of that calendar year. Under existing statutory law, the Director of Finance is required to submit a revised budget proposal to the Legislature on or before May 14. Under this measure, the revised budget proposal submitted on or before May 14, or any other budgetary revision required to be submitted to the Legislature, would constitute the Governor's proclamation of a budget emergency if the above-described conditions for a budget emergency exist, and if the budgetary revision proposes to suspend or reduce transfers from the General Fund to the Budget Stabilization Account or Public School System Stabilization Account, return funds in the Budget Stabilization Account to the General Fund, or appropriate money from the Public School System Stabilization Account. (3) The California Constitution prohibits the total annual appropriations subject to limitation of the State and of each local government from exceeding the appropriations limit of the entity of government for the prior year, adjusted for the change in the cost of living and the change in population. The California Constitution defines "appropriations subject to limitation" of the State for these purposes. This measure would exclude both of the following from the appropriations subject to limitation of the State commencing with the 2027–28 fiscal year: (A) transfers to the Budget Stabilization Account; and (B) transfers to a General Fund reserve account established by the Legislature known as the Projected Surplus Temporary Holding Account, provided that the amount not subject to limitation may not exceed 10% of the amount of General Fund proceeds of taxes for the applicable fiscal year. Funds withdrawn, transferred, or appropriated from those reserve accounts, if they were not counted previously as appropriations subject to limitation of the State when deposited, would constitute appropriations subject to limitation of the State in the fiscal year in which the withdrawal, transfer, or appropriation occurs.
Under existing law, the purpose of the California Alternative Energy and Advanced Transportation Financing Authority Act is to advance the state's goals of reducing the levels of greenhouse gas emissions, increasing the deployment of sustainable and renewable energy sources, implementing measures that increase the efficiency of the use of energy, creating high quality employment opportunities, and lessening the state's dependence on fossil fuels and to that end to provide an alternative method of financing in providing and promoting the establishment of facilities utilizing alternative methods and sources of energy and facilities needed for the development and commercialization of advanced transportation technologies. Existing law establishes the California Alternative Energy and Advanced Transportation Financing Authority to carry out that purpose. Existing Public Utilities Commission decisions established the California Hub for Energy Efficiency Financing program, administered by the authority and funded through charges collected by specified electrical corporations and gas corporations from their ratepayers. This bill would require the authority to administer the GoGreen Program, previously known as the California Hub for Energy Efficiency Financing program, and would authorize the authority to use moneys collected from the ratepayers of electrical and gas corporations, as directed by the commission, and other available funding sources, consistent with the program's purposes. The bill would require the program to provide financing assistance to participating lenders to support residents in financing eligible energy efficiency and decarbonization measures at costs that are competitive with or below market rates. The bill would authorize the authority to receive, administer, and deploy additional moneys from federal, state, local, or private sources to support and expand the GoGreen Program, if those moneys are used in a manner consistent with the program's goals and the parameters of the funding source. The bill would create the GoGreen Program Fund in the State Treasury and would make all moneys in the fund available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to the authority for expenditure, as provided.
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 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.
Existing law requires the State Water Resources Control Board to develop a plan for the funding and implementation of the Low-Income Water Rate Assistance Program. Existing law requires the plan to include, among other things, a description of the method for collecting moneys to support and implement the program and a description of the method for determining the amount of moneys that may need to be collected from water ratepayers to fund the program. This bill would establish the Water Rate Assistance Program. As part of the program, the bill would establish the Water Rate Assistance Fund in the State Treasury, available upon appropriation by the Legislature, to provide water affordability assistance, for both residential water and wastewater services, to low-income residential ratepayers, as specified. The bill would require the state board to take various actions in administering the fund, including, among other things, tracking and managing revenue in the fund separately from all other revenue. The bill would require the state board, in consultation with relevant agencies and after a public hearing, to adopt guidelines for implementation of the program and to adopt an annual report to be posted on the state board's internet website identifying how the fund has performed, as specified. The bill would require the guidelines to include minimum requirements for eligible systems, including the ability to confirm eligibility for enrollment through a request for self-certification of eligibility under penalty of perjury. By expanding the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the state board to take various actions in administering the program, including, but not limited to, providing guidance, oversight, and funding for low-income rate assistance for residential ratepayers of eligible systems. The bill would authorize the Attorney General, at the request of the state board, to bring an action in state court to restrain the use of any method, act, or practice in violation of these provisions, except as provided. The bill would make the implementation of all of these provisions contingent upon an appropriation by the Legislature. 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 establishes the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid program provisions. Existing law establishes, under the Medi-Cal program, the Family Planning, Access, Care, and Treatment (Family PACT) Program. If Family PACT becomes inoperative, existing law requires all persons who have received, or are eligible to receive, comprehensive clinical family planning services pursuant to Family PACT to receive family planning services under other specified provisions of the Medi-Cal program or under the State-Only Family Planning Program, which is also established within the department for purposes of family planning services. This bill would require the department, subject to an appropriation, to develop a new program or to expand any existing state-only-funded health programs, in order to provide to Medi-Cal beneficiaries certain services or benefits that are otherwise covered under the Medi-Cal program but for any lack of, elimination of, reduction in, or limitation on, federal financial participation. For purposes of the expansion above, the bill would require the department to determine the services or benefits, which may include, but are not limited to, abortion and gender-affirming care, based on the levels of federal financial participation, as specified. (2) This bill would, subject to an appropriation, require the California Health and Human Services Agency to develop a new program, or to expand an existing state program, as applicable, to provide certain services or benefits that are otherwise covered under the Medi-Cal program but for any lack of, elimination of, reduction in, or limitation on, federal financial participation. Under the bill, these services or benefits would not be limited to the population of Medi-Cal beneficiaries. The bill would require the agency to determine the services or benefits, which may include, but are not limited to, abortion, family planning, and gender-affirming care, based on the needs of target populations and the levels of federal financial participation, as specified. The bill would create the Health Care Maintenance and Expansion Fund for purposes of distributing funding, if appropriated, for these services or benefits. The bill would authorize the agency to receive private donations, for deposit into the fund, to support implementation. (3) The bill would authorize modification and expansion of the State-Only Family Planning Program, subject to an appropriation, to facilitate implementation of the provisions described in paragraphs (1) and (2) , as specified.
(1) Existing law creates the Metropolitan Transportation Commission as a local area planning agency for the 9-county San Francisco Bay area with comprehensive regional transportation planning and other related responsibilities. Existing law creates various transit districts located in the San Francisco Bay area, with specified powers and duties relating to providing public transit services. This bill would establish the Public Transit Revenue Measure District with jurisdiction extending throughout the boundaries of the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, and Santa Clara and the City and County of San Francisco and would require the district to be governed by the same board that governs the commission, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize a retail transactions and use tax applicable to the entire district to be imposed by the board of the district or by a qualified voter initiative for a duration of 14 years, and in an amount of 0.5% in each of the above-described counties located within the district and 1% in the City and County of San Francisco, subject to voter approval at the November 3, 2026, statewide general election. After payments are made for various administrative expenses, the bill would require the district to transfer specified portions of the proceeds of the tax to the commission for allocation to certain programs and other purposes and for allocation to the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board, commonly known as Caltrain, the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, and other specified transit agencies, for transit operations expenses, and would require the district to transfer specified portions of the proceeds of the tax directly to other specified local transportation agencies, including the San Mateo County Transit District and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, for public transit expenses, as prescribed. By adding to the duties of local officials with respect to elections procedures for this bill on behalf of the district, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law requires the commission to develop regional transit service objectives, develop performance measures of efficiency and effectiveness, specify uniform data requirements to assess public transit service benefits and costs, and formulate procedures for establishing regional transportation priorities in the allocation of funds for transportation purposes. This bill would require the commission to contract with, and manage, a third-party consultant to conduct a financial efficiency review of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, Caltrain, the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, and the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, as specified. The bill would require the review to be completed in 2 phases, with the analysis for the 2nd phase only required if the tax measure is approved by the voters of the Public Transit Revenue Measure District. The bill would require the consultant to transmit the analysis for each phase to an oversight committee, which the bill would create with a prescribed membership, for review and adoption. The bill would require a transit operator subject to the financial efficiency review to take specified actions in response to the analysis for the first phase and, subject to review of the oversight committee, to adopt an implementation plan that describes the cost-saving measures identified in the analysis for the 2nd phase that the operator plans to implement, as specified. The bill would require a transit operator subject to the financial efficiency review to verify its compliance with the requirements of the review as a condition of receiving funds from the tax measure approved by the voters of the district. The bill would require each transit operator to which the commission allocates funds to comply with a maintenance of effort requirement as a condition of receiving those funds, as provided. This bill would require the commission, if the tax measure is approved by the voters of the district and other conditions are satisfied, to establish an ad hoc adjudication committee for a transit operator subject to the above-described financial efficiency review to assess and adjudicate petitions submitted by a participating county transportation entity, as defined, or a county board of supervisors with regard to the performance of the transit operator within the geographic jurisdiction of the entity submitting the petition, as provided. As part of this process, the bill would require an ad hoc adjudication committee, among other things, to determine whether to direct the commission to withhold funding from the tax measure allocated to the transit operator if the committee agrees with a claim regarding the performance of the transit operator, as specified. This bill would require the commission to submit a report to the Legislature on or before March 31, 2026, on its forecast of the impacts to ridership on the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, Caltrain, the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, and the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency from planned transportation projects and strategies included in its adopted regional transportation plan. By adding to the duties of the commission, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) The Bay Area County Traffic and Transportation Funding Act authorizes the formation of county transportation authorities in each of the 9 bay area counties, and provides for the imposition of a retail transaction and use tax in each of those counties of either 12 of 1% or 1%, subject to voter approval, with revenues to be used for various transportation purposes. This bill would instead provide that a retail transaction and use tax imposed under those provisions in the County of San Mateo or the City and County of San Francisco may be imposed in 18 of 1% increments up to 1%. (4) This bill would declare that its provisions are severable. (5) 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 Local Transportation Authority and Improvement Act authorizes a county board of supervisors to create or otherwise designate a local transportation authority in the county that may impose a transactions and use tax for transportation purposes subject to voter approval and other specified requirements. Pursuant to that authority, the county board of supervisors of the County of Sacramento created the Sacramento Transportation Authority (STA) . This bill would provide that the allowable expenditure categories for revenues from a tax imposed by STA include the construction, modernization, and improvement of infrastructure, as defined, that supports infill or transit-oriented development in areas nominated by local governments, and included in regionally adopted plans that advance state greenhouse gas emissions reduction objectives, as specified. The bill would also authorize STA to impose a transactions and use tax under the act in a geographic area that comprises less than the total area of the County of Sacramento, subject to the approval of voters within that area and other specified requirements. Existing law authorizes regional transportation agencies and the Department of Transportation to apply to the California Transportation Commission to develop and operate high-occupancy toll lanes or other toll facilities. Under existing law, revenue generated from the operation of a toll facility under these provisions is available to the sponsoring agency for the expenses related to the toll facility and for other uses within the corridor from which the revenue is generated pursuant to an expenditure plan developed by the sponsoring agency. Existing law authorizes a regional transportation agency to issue bonds to finance construction-related expenditures for a toll facility, and construction-related expenditures that are included in the expenditure plan, payable from the revenues generated from the toll facility. Existing law defines regional transportation agency for these purposes to mean, among other things, a joint exercise of powers authority subject to the consent of a transportation planning agency for the jurisdiction in which the transportation project will be developed. For purposes of these provisions, the Sacramento Area Council of Governments, the Yolo Transportation District, and the department formed a joint powers authority, known as the Capital Area Regional Tolling Authority (CARTA) , to apply to the commission to develop and operate toll facilities in the Sacramento region. This bill would authorize STA to issue bonds to finance costs of high-occupancy toll lanes or other toll facilities within the County of Sacramento approved by the commission pursuant to the above-described provisions. The bill would authorize those bonds to be payable from toll revenue or any other funds lawfully available to STA for those purposes, including sales tax revenue. Before STA issues bonds payable from toll revenue for a toll facility operated by CARTA, the bill would require STA to enter into an agreement with CARTA regarding the application of toll revenue to pay for bonds issued by STA and would require the governing board of CARTA to review and approve a toll facility expenditure plan.
Existing law authorizes various local governmental entities, subject to certain limitations and approval requirements, to levy a transactions and use tax for general or specific purposes, in accordance with the procedures and requirements set forth in the Transactions and Use Tax Law, including a requirement that the combined rate of all taxes that may be imposed in accordance with that law in any county not exceed 2%. This bill would authorize the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments, by an ordinance adopted by the council, to levy a tax pursuant to the Transactions and Use Tax Law at a rate not to exceed 1%, for general and special purposes, subject to voter approval on or after January 1, 2026, and before January 1, 2032. The bill would authorize the board to exceed the 2% limit described above to impose the retail transactions and use tax. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of San Luis Obispo.
The Local Prepaid Mobile Telephony Services Collection Act, until January 1, 2026, suspends the authority of a city, county, or city and county to impose a utility user tax on the consumption of prepaid communications service and any charge that applies to prepaid mobile telephony service, as defined, on access to communication services or access to local "911" emergency telephone systems, and instead requires those taxes and charges to be applied during the period beginning January 1, 2016, and ending January 1, 2026, under any local ordinance to be at specified rates. The act requires that these local charges imposed by a city, county, or a city and county on prepaid mobile telephony services be collected from the prepaid consumer by a seller at the time of sale, as specified. Existing law requires that all local charges be collected and paid to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration pursuant to the Fee Collection Procedures Law and be deposited into the Local Charges for Prepaid Mobile Telephony Services Fund, and be transmitted to the city, county, or city and county, as provided. This bill would extend operation of the act until January 1, 2031. By extending the application of the Fee Collection Procedures Law, the violation of which is a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The act authorizes a consumer to rebut the presumed location of a retail transaction for purposes of the collection of the local charges by filing a claim and declaration under penalty of perjury. By extending the act, this bill would expand the crime of perjury, thereby imposing 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.
