Existing law generally designates the State Air Resources Board as the state agency with the primary responsibility for the control of vehicular air pollution, and designates air pollution control districts and air quality management districts with the primary responsibility for the control of air pollution from all sources other than vehicular sources. Existing law requires the state board to inventory sources of air pollution within the air basins of the state, determine the kinds and quantity of air pollutants, and monitor air pollutants in cooperation with districts and other agencies. Existing law requires the state board to adopt standards of ambient air quality for each air basin in consideration of the public health, safety, and welfare, including, but not limited to, health, illness, irritation to the senses, aesthetic value, interference with visibility, and effects on the economy. Existing law authorizes these standards to vary from one air basin to another. This bill would require the state board, in consultation with specified entities, to develop, as provided, a response framework that establishes best practices and guidance for addressing fugitive and natural sources of hydrogen sulfide gas and for community preparation and response to hydrogen sulfide exposure events originating from these sources. The bill would require the state board, in developing the response framework, to conduct at least 3 public workshops, including at least one located in the Tijuana River Valley region, at least one located in the Salton Sea region, and at least one selected in consultation with a community that has experienced significant hydrogen sulfide exposure. The bill would require the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment to update the acute and chronic reference exposure levels for hydrogen sulfide and to develop additional health guidance values for hydrogen sulfide, if the need is identified by the state board, in consultation with the office, during development of the response framework.
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 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. Existing law makes that provision operative up to, and including, the lien date in 2027 and repeals that provision on January 1, 2028. This bill would extend the above-described operative date up to, and including, the lien date in 2032 and would extend the corresponding repeal date to January 1, 2033. By imposing additional duties upon local tax officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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 state that it is the intent of the Legislature to apply those requirements to the bill and would set forth specified information relating to 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 requires the state to reimburse local agencies annually for certain property tax revenues lost as a result of any exemption or classification of property for purposes of ad valorem property taxation. This bill would provide that, notwithstanding those provisions, no appropriation is made and the state shall not reimburse local agencies for property tax revenues lost by them pursuant to the bill. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Existing law generally provides various benefits, including grant programs and tax credits. Existing law, the California Values Act, generally prohibits California law enforcement agencies from using their moneys or personnel for immigration enforcement purposes, except as specified. This bill would prohibit a business entity that is directly invested in, owns, operates, or manages a private detention facility, or that contracts with the federal government for immigration enforcement purposes, as specified, from receiving any state-provided grant or loan, as specified. The bill would also prohibit a disqualified taxpayer, as defined, from receiving any tax credits, except as provided. The bill would define "disqualified taxpayer" to mean a taxpayer that is directly invested in, owns, operates, or manages a private detention facility, or a taxpayer that contracts with a private detention facility or agency engaging in immigration enforcement, as specified. The bill would not apply these provisions to a provider of health care, as defined, that contracts with a private detention facility or agency engaging in immigration enforcement, as specified. The bill would establish the Due Process for All Fund and would require the Controller to transfer each year from the General Fund to the Due Process for All Fund the amount of tax collected that is attributable to business entities being made ineligible for tax credits by this bill. The bill would make moneys in the fund available upon appropriation by the Legislature for immigration-related services and programs. 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 property tax law requires the auditor of each county with qualifying cities, as defined, to make certain property tax revenue allocations to those cities in accordance with an established Tax Equity Allocation formula. In any fiscal year in which a qualifying city is to receive a distribution under these provisions, existing law requires the auditor to reduce the actual amount distributed to the qualifying city by the sum of specified amounts, including any amount of property tax revenues that has been exchanged pursuant to specified law between the City of Rancho Mirage and a community services district. This bill would remove the above-described property tax revenues from the reductions to the actual amount distributed. By changing the duties on local officials to administer Tax Equity Allocation, 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. By removing the above-described property tax revenues from the reductions to the actual amount distributed, this bill would change the pro rata shares in which ad valorem property tax revenues are allocated among local agencies in a county, within the meaning of paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 25.5 of Article XIII of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature.
The California Constitution generally limits the maximum rate of ad valorem tax on real property to 1% of the full cash value of the property and defines "full cash value" for these purposes as the appraised value of real property when purchased, newly constructed, or a change in ownership has occurred after the 1975 assessment. Pursuant to constitutional authorization, existing property tax law excludes from the definition of "newly constructed" for these purposes the construction or addition of any active solar energy system, as defined, through the 2025–26 fiscal year, except as specified. This bill would prescribe rules for the valuation of an active solar energy system under certain valuation methods, including a requirement that, under the income method, the assessor exclude from income the benefit from, among other things, renewable energy credits, as defined. By expanding the duties of local tax officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires the state to reimburse local agencies annually for certain property tax revenues lost as a result of any exemption or classification of property for purposes of ad valorem property taxation. This bill would provide that, notwithstanding those provisions, no appropriation is made and the state shall not reimburse local agencies for property tax revenues lost by them pursuant to the bill. 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 take effect immediately as a tax levy. 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.
The California Constitution conditions the imposition of a special tax by a local government upon the approval of 23 of the voters of the local government voting on that tax, and prohibits these entities from imposing an ad valorem tax on real property or a transactions or sales tax on the sale of real property. The Supreme Court of California interpreted this provision and other provisions restricting the authority of local governments to impose, extend, or increase taxes as not restricting the authority of voters to impose taxes via initiative. This measure would, beginning January 1, 2027, prohibit a local government, including the electorate of a local government exercising the initiative power, from imposing, extending, or increasing any special tax, except as provided, unless and until that tax is submitted to the electorate and approved by a 23 vote. The measure would prohibit a local government, including the electorate of a local government exercising the initiative power, from imposing ad valorem taxes on real property, except as provided pursuant to specified constitutional provisions.
(1) The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 establishes the State Air Resources Board as the state agency responsible for monitoring and regulating sources emitting greenhouse gases. The act requires the state board to adopt rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective greenhouse gas emissions reductions to ensure that the statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 40% below the statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit, as defined, no later than December 31, 2030. Pursuant to the act, the state board has adopted the Low Carbon Fuel Standard regulations. The act authorizes the state board to include in its regulation of those emissions the use of market-based compliance mechanisms. Existing law requires all moneys, except for fines and penalties, collected by the state board from the auction or sale of allowances as part of a market-based compliance mechanism to be deposited in the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. This bill would suspend the Low Carbon Fuel Standard regulations for one year. The bill would also exempt suppliers of transportation fuels from regulations for the use of market-based compliance mechanisms for one year. This bill would direct the Controller to transfer a specified amount from the General Fund to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. By transferring General Fund moneys to a partially continuously appropriated fund, this bill would make an appropriation. (2) Existing law, the Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax Law, imposes a tax upon each gallon of motor vehicle fuel removed from a refinery or terminal rack in this state, entered into this state, or sold in this state, at a specified rate per gallon. This bill would suspend the imposition of the tax on motor vehicle fuels for one year. The bill would require a seller of motor vehicle fuels to provide a receipt to a purchaser that indicates the amount of tax that would have otherwise applied to the transaction. This bill would also direct the Controller to transfer a specified amount from the General Fund to the Motor Vehicle Fuel Account in the Transportation Tax Fund. By transferring General Fund moneys to a continuously appropriated account, this bill would make an appropriation. (3) Existing unfair competition laws establish a statutory cause of action for unfair competition, including any unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business act or practice and unfair, deceptive, untrue, or misleading advertising and acts prohibited by false advertisement laws. This bill would require that all savings realized based on the suspension of the motor vehicle fuels tax, the suspension of the Low Carbon Fuel Standard regulations, and the exemption of suppliers of transportation fuels from regulations for use of market-based compliance mechanisms by a person other than an end consumer, as defined, be passed on to the end consumer, and would make the violation of this requirement an unfair business practice, in violation of unfair competition laws, as provided. (4) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, until January 1, 2031, authorizes the State Air Resources Board to adopt a regulation establishing a system of market-based declining aggregate emissions limits for sources or categories of sources that emit greenhouse gases (market-based compliance mechanism) that meets certain requirements. Existing law establishes the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and requires all moneys, except for fines and penalties, collected by the state board from the auction or sales of allowances as a part of a market-based compliance mechanism to be deposited into the fund and requires the Legislature to appropriate moneys in the fund for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the state, as provided. Existing law, the California Climate Crisis Act, declares that it is the policy of the state both to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible, but no later than 2045, and achieve and maintain net-negative greenhouse gas emissions thereafter, and to ensure that by 2045, statewide anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 85% below the 1990 levels. This bill would enact the Polluters Pay Climate Superfund Act of 2025 and would establish the Polluters Pay Climate Superfund Program to be administered by the California Environmental Protection Agency to require fossil fuel polluters to pay their fair share of the damage caused by greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere during the covered period, which the bill would define as the time period between the 1990 and 2024 calendar years, inclusive, resulting from the extraction, production, refining, sale, or combustion of fossil fuels or petroleum products, to relieve a portion of the burden to address cost borne by current and future California taxpayers. The bill would require the agency, within 90 days of the effective date of the act, to determine and publish a list of responsible parties, which the bill would define as an entity with a majority ownership interest in a business engaged in extracting or refining fossil fuels that, during the covered period, did business in the state or otherwise had sufficient contact with the state, and is determined by the agency to be responsible for more than 1,000,000,000 metric tons of covered fossil fuel emissions, as defined, in aggregate globally, during the covered period. This bill would require the agency, within one year of the effective date of the act, to conduct and complete a climate cost study to, among other things, quantify the total damage amount, which the bill would define as all past and future climate harms and damages to the state from January 1, 1990, through December 31, 2045, inclusive. The bill would require the agency to update the climate cost study, not less frequently than every 5 years, through January 1, 2045, as provided. The bill would require the agency, within 60 days of the completion of the climate cost study, to determine and assess, as provided, a cost recovery demand for each responsible party listed, which represents the responsible party's proportionate share of the total damage amount. The bill would require responsible parties to pay their cost recovery demand, as provided. The bill would require the collected cost recovery demands to be deposited in the Polluters Pay Climate Superfund, which the bill would create in the State Treasury. The bill would, upon appropriation by the Legislature, require moneys in the Polluters Pay Climate Superfund be expended for, among other things, qualifying expenditures, which the bill would define to include expenditures for projects and programs to mitigate, adapt, or respond to the damages and costs caused to the state from climate change. The bill would require the agency to determine the initial implementation costs for the act, as provided, and would require the agency to assess an amount allocated equitably among responsible parties to cover those costs. This bill would require the Director of Finance, within 45 days of the effective date of the act, to perform an initial assessment of the reasonable and appropriate initial implementation costs that will be incurred by the agency. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law creates the Monterey-Salinas Transit District to include all of the County of Monterey, with specified powers and duties related to public transit service. Existing law prohibits the district from imposing sales or special taxes, but authorizes the district, with the concurrence of a majority of the member jurisdictions represented on the board of directors, to submit a ballot measure for the imposition of those taxes to voters of the district. This bill would prohibit the submission of a measure for the imposition of a sales or special tax to the voters of the district under this authority on or after January 1, 2026. Existing law authorizes various local governmental entities, subject to certain limitations and approval requirements, to levy a transactions and use tax, 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 the county not exceed 2%. This bill would authorize the Monterey-Salinas Transit District, upon the affirmative vote of at least 23 of the board of directors, to submit to the voters of the district a measure proposing a retail transactions and use tax ordinance in accordance with the Transactions and Use Tax Law. The bill would also separately authorize the district to impose a transactions and use tax for the support of its transportation services at a rate of no more than 0.25% that would, in combination with other transactions and use taxes, exceed the above-described combined rate limit of 2%, if the ordinance proposing the tax is approved by the voters before January 1, 2035, subject to applicable voter approval requirements, as specified. The bill would prohibit a transactions and use tax rate imposed pursuant to this authority from being considered for purposes of that combined rate limit described above.
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.
