Transcript Highlights:

• It's my understanding that the tax roll is provided to the County Board of Supervisors annually.
• So Maricopa County and Pima County qualify for the State Board of Equalization; the other 13 counties
• We didn't have income tax. We didn't have sales tax. We had property tax.
• We didn't have income tax. We didn't have sales tax. We had property tax.
• That property tax roll is integral in so many different things: the budget of the county itself, the

Committee: House House Ways & Means Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee began with member, page, and staff introductions, then heard reminders about public testimony limits and moved to bills. House Bill 2016 would remove late-filing penalties from taxpayers who owe zero tax. The sponsor argued it was a fairness measure that would spare small businesses and individuals from automatic penalties for paperwork only. Members generally supported the bill, though one member noted the Department of Revenue already has waiver authority and another raised a fiscal-impact question. The bill passed 8-1 with a due pass recommendation; the lone no vote said current law already allows case-by-case waivers and that an automatic exemption could weaken compliance. The committee then took up House Bill 2104, which would bar county assessors from reclassifying agricultural property for four years after a taxpayer wins an appeal, unless there is a change in use, split, or ownership. The sponsor and supporters from the cattle and farm/ranch community said some owners repeatedly win appeals only to face the same fight the next year, creating unnecessary cost and instability. County Assessor Eddie Cook, speaking for the county assessors, opposed the bill, saying assessors must protect compliance and fairness, that some owners do not meet ag requirements, and that the State Board of Equalization is not the final avenue because further appeals are available. The State Board’s acting chairman said the board is neutral, receives annual training, and applies the law as written. After extensive debate, the bill passed 5-4 with a due pass recommendation. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 2105, which would require advance notice of certain property inspections and provide inspection reports to property owners. Supporters said the bill would give owners a chance to be present and better understand why agricultural status was denied, helping avoid disputes before appeals. Assessor Cook opposed the measure, saying assessors already send notices, use door hangers and business cards, and can share inspection information on request, but there is no standard inspection report and the added mailing burden would be costly. Members also raised concerns about the lack of an appropriation and the absence of a standardized form. The bill was moved for a due pass recommendation, but the transcript cuts off before the final roll call result is fully shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• satellite service tax to state sales tax.
• revenue among the counties.
• positive from a state sales tax, approximately $43 million.
• With the majority of them coming from Miami-Dade County.
• capita and the county per capita.

Committee: Senate Finance and Tax

Summary: The Finance and Tax Committee met with a quorum and considered two Senate proposed bills. The first, SPB 7046, was the Senate tax package. It included changes to Live Local property tax exemptions, charter school distributions from voter-approved property tax levies, limits on special assessments for RV parks, revisions to fiscally constrained county funding and eligibility, a permanent sales tax exemption for small propane tanks, a hunting/fishing/camping sales tax holiday, restrictions on governmental net zero policies, and new voting thresholds for certain local millage actions. Staff estimated the bill would reduce general revenue by about $77 million in FY 2026-27 and about $50 million recurring. An amendment making the charter-school distribution change prospective starting July 1, 2026, was adopted. A late-filed amendment by Senator Gaetz on disability tax exemptions was withdrawn for lack of a fiscal analysis. The charter school provision drew the most debate. Senator Jones and Senator Bernard raised concerns that expanding eligibility to charter schools authorized through alternate authorizers could reduce funding available to traditional neighborhood public schools and that the effective date did not give districts enough time to plan. Senator Avila argued the change corrected an omission from earlier legislation and ensured public schools, including charter schools, were treated equally. Several speakers supported the fiscally constrained county provisions, while the Florida Association of Counties urged grandfathering for counties that could currently opt out of the Live Local exemption and asked the committee to review language on millage thresholds and net zero provisions. SPB 7046 was ultimately reported favorably as a committee bill by a roll call vote. The committee then took up SPB 7048, which updates Florida’s conformity to the Internal Revenue Code as of January 1, 2026, and partially decouples from federal changes in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The bill addresses federal changes to bonus depreciation, Section 179 expensing, research and experimental expenses, business meals, and business interest deductions, with some provisions phased in or adjusted over time. The Florida Chamber testified in support of continued conformity but expressed concerns about administrative burdens and the bill’s partial decoupling structure. After brief debate, the bill was reported favorably as a committee bill by roll call vote, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• County, it's a little personal.
• even taking into account Los Angeles County or other counties in the state of California.
• County; it's letting the voters... ...a tax increase on L.A. or Contra Costa County; it's letting the
• voters of those counties make their own decision about whether to approve a tax increase or not.
• County to have this conversation at all, a county hospital will close.

Summary: The Senate committee heard AB 1768, which would authorize Los Angeles County and Contra Costa County to place local sales tax measures before voters to help offset federal funding cuts affecting Medi-Cal, nutrition assistance, and related health and safety-net services. Assembly Member Brian and supporters argued the bill would preserve local control and allow voters to decide whether to raise revenue to prevent clinic closures, layoffs, and service reductions. Testimony in support came from the California Primary Care Association, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, labor organizations, Contra Costa County, and others, while the cities of Glendale and Burbank opposed the measure. Committee discussion focused on whether the bill was an appropriate response to federal cuts or an unnecessary tax increase. Supporters said the measure did not impose a tax directly but simply let county voters decide how to respond to the funding losses. Opponents argued California and local governments should address spending and affordability concerns without additional taxes, and questioned whether the federal cuts were the sole cause of the budget pressure. Several members also raised broader concerns about cost of living, health care financing, and local versus state responsibility. Senator Arreguín moved the bill for a due pass recommendation. The committee voted 5-2 to send AB 1768 to the Senate floor, with Senators Choi and Seyarto voting no. The bill was briefly held on call before the final tally was announced and the measure was reported out.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 1078 will allow Santa Cruz County voters to decide if combined local tax rate limits should
• However, there are cities within Santa Cruz County that already have a tax rate above or at 2%, so the
• SB 1078 will provide that a transaction and use tax of up to one-half percent imposed by Santa Cruz County
• This is not a tax increase. SB 1078 allows the county to go to the voters.
• I can currently see that the County of Santa Cruz has a 9.5% tax currently, which is the maximum allowed

Committee: Senate Revenue and Taxation

Summary: The committee heard several tax and revenue measures. SB 1277, by Senator Grove, proposed a California Cost of Living Tax Credit modeled on the 2022 middle-class tax refund to provide direct relief to low- and middle-income Californians facing high housing, gas, energy, and general living costs. Supporters said it would help working families, farmworkers, teachers, and others; opponents, including the California Tax Reform Association and the California Teachers Association, argued California already has a progressive tax system, that refundable credits are costly and can be difficult to administer, and that the bill would reduce General Fund revenues and Proposition 98 funding. The bill was held on call after extensive debate and no motion was made at that time. The committee then heard SB 1287, which would create a targeted tax credit to encourage private investment in short-line railroad infrastructure. The author and rail industry witnesses said the credit would support safety, bridge and track upgrades, emissions reductions, freight efficiency, and rural and agricultural supply chains, while opponents argued a direct grant program would be preferable to a tax credit. The bill was accepted with committee amendments and placed on call after a motion to move it forward. SB 1407 would exempt military retirement pay and surviving spouse benefits from state income tax, with the author, State Treasurer Fiona Ma, and veterans’ groups arguing it would help retain veterans in California, support second careers, and keep federal retirement dollars in the state. The California Teachers Association and California Tax Reform Association opposed it as another tax expenditure that would reduce General Fund revenue. The committee approved the bill on a due pass as amended vote to the Senate Committee on Military and Veterans Affairs, with several members voting aye and others not voting, and the bill was placed on call. The committee also heard SB 1349, which directs the Legislative Analyst’s Office to review major tax expenditures and evaluate their costs, beneficiaries, and effectiveness. Supporters, including CTA, AFSCME, cities, counties, and many teachers, said the state needs more accountability for roughly $94 billion in annual tax expenditures and their impact on schools and the budget. The bill was moved with committee amendments and placed on call. Additional measures discussed included SB 1078, authorizing Santa Cruz County to seek voter approval for a temporary local sales tax increase to fund health care and safety-net services; SB 1120, extending the California Competes Tax Credit through 2035 and making it refundable for certain strategic industries; and SB 1275, which would convert the state sales tax on vehicle purchases into a deductible vehicle license fee to reduce Californians’ federal tax burden. SB 1120 and SB 1275 both received support from business and industry witnesses, with no opposition testimony noted, and were moved on call or with a due pass as amended vote as the committee continued through the file.

Transcript Highlights:

• of taxes.
• satellite service tax to state sales tax.
• revenue among the counties.
• Chris Doolan, Small County Coalition.
• capita and the county per capita.

Summary: The Finance and Tax Committee met with a quorum present and took up two bills. The first, SPB 7046, was the Senate tax package. It included changes to Live Local property tax opt-outs, charter school distributions from voter-approved property tax levies, RV park special assessments, fiscally constrained county funding, a permanent sales tax exemption for small propane tanks, a hunting/fishing/camping sales tax holiday, and provisions barring governmental net zero policies. An amendment made the charter-school distribution change prospective starting July 1, 2026. Committee discussion focused heavily on whether the charter-school language would divert money from traditional public schools and on the fiscal-constrained county formula. The bill was reported favorably as a committee bill after a roll call vote, with Senators Bernard and Jones voting no. The committee also considered SPB 7048, which updates Florida’s conformity to the Internal Revenue Code as of January 1, 2026 and partially decouples from federal tax changes in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The bill addresses bonus depreciation, research and experimental expenses, business meal deductions, and the business interest deduction, with the Revenue Estimating Conference expected to review the fiscal impact later in the week. The Florida Chamber testified that the bill should better align with federal tax relief and reduce administrative burdens, while senators emphasized the need to balance business tax relief with state revenue constraints. SPB 7048 was also reported favorably as a committee bill by roll call vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• SB 674, bonuses for employees of county tax collectors and property appraisers, simply permits property
• tax.
• than all the other taxes that are incorporated here, because these are taxes enacted by your county
• that didn't reenact the tax.
• on leases, and we, it's a tax on tax, it's an unfair tax.

Committee: Senate Finance and Tax

Summary: The Finance and Tax Committee met and first heard SB 674, which would allow county property appraisers, like tax collectors already can, to budget for and pay hiring or retention bonuses if approved in their Department of Revenue budget. Support came from property appraiser representatives, who said the bill would help them compete for specialized staff without requiring new funding. The bill was reported favorably. The committee then considered SJR 318, a proposed constitutional amendment on tangible personal property used on agricultural land, along with an amendment clarifying the exemption’s scope and allowing the Legislature to set conditions by general law. Farm Bureau and the Florida Chamber supported the measure, and the committee adopted the amendment and reported the joint resolution favorably. Members also took up CS for SB 1664, which would require voter reapproval of local discretionary taxes when they expire; an amendment changed the bill to require expiration dates and tied reapproval to tax expiration rather than a fixed eight-year cycle. Local government and tourism groups raised concerns about impacts on tourist development taxes, transportation surtaxes, beaches funding, and long-term financing, while supporters argued voters should periodically affirm local taxes. The committee adopted the amendment and reported the bill favorably. Next, the committee considered SJR 1510 and its implementing bill SB 1512, both dealing with a homestead-style property tax benefit for certain long-term leased residential properties. After multiple amendments narrowed the proposal substantially, limiting it to one qualifying property and then to single-family homes, mobile homes, and condominium units, counties and cities still opposed the measures as a tax shift to other taxpayers. The sponsor said the changes reduced the scope and fiscal impact, and both measures were reported favorably. Finally, the committee heard SPB 7034, the Senate tax package, which includes permanent sales tax exemptions, multiple tax holidays, motor vehicle fee reductions, a property tax study, rural investment tax credits, a freeze on local communications services tax rates, and other tax changes, with an estimated $2.1 billion revenue reduction. Testimony was mixed: property appraisers supported the property tax study, while many public commenters opposed the firearm and ammunition tax holiday and urged inclusion of gun safes and locks instead. County, city, tourism, and lodging representatives raised concerns about tourist development tax limits and other local revenue impacts, while supporters emphasized tax relief and the study’s value. After debate, the committee adopted a motion to submit SPB 7034 as a committee bill and reported it favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we have to apply the county-by-county millage rates to determine the ad valorem tax loss that's coming
• And then finally, once we had the tax loss, we've done it by county, we've summed it, and... to be by
• So we have to apply the county by county millage rates to determine the Advilorm tax loss that's coming
• And then finally, once we had the tax loss, we've done it by county, we've summed it. and Tax loss.
• It may be a county that has less reliance on property tax revenues.

Committee: Senate Finance and Tax

Summary: The Senate Committee on Finance and Tax met to hear a presentation from Amy Baker on the state’s ad valorem property tax forecast and how the revenue estimating conference handles property-tax-related impact analyses. Baker explained that the conference process requires unanimous consensus, that the revenue estimating conference produces the state’s official forecast, and that her office recently overhauled the ad valorem model to use a bottom-up, county-by-county approach with separate modeling for county and school rolls, confidential parcels, and detailed categories such as homestead, non-homestead, residential, non-residential, and agricultural property. Baker walked through the current baseline numbers and the main components of taxable value, emphasizing the role of homestead differentials, especially Save Our Homes and portability, and homestead exemptions. She noted that differentials remove a large share of homestead value statewide, with especially large effects in South Florida and along the east coast, while exemptions are concentrated more heavily in northern and fiscally constrained counties. She also explained that many parcels have little or no remaining taxable value, while a smaller number of parcels hold a large share of taxable value, which makes exemption proposals highly uneven in their effects. The committee discussed how impact conferences evaluate proposed constitutional amendments or bills by measuring the change from the baseline forecast, converting taxable-value changes into tax-dollar losses using county millage rates, and then expressing results in cash and recurring terms. Baker stressed that impact analyses do not address broader budgetary effects or local government replacement decisions, and that each proposal is analyzed as a standalone measure rather than in combination with others. Senators asked about seven House property-tax proposals already analyzed, the availability of those reports online, possible interactions if multiple proposals passed, and whether property-tax relief could stimulate the economy enough to offset revenue losses. Baker said the economic effects would be highly proposal- and county-specific and that any budgetary analysis would require separate work beyond the conference process. The committee took no substantive action beyond receiving the presentation and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• But that requires that when voters approve a new tax increase on the ballot, that tax increase has to
• But the irony to this is you were saying the taxing district should tax at a higher level than they need
• Because we don't know what our taxing jurisdictions are actually going to tax at, what the rate's going
• Most taxing jurisdictions, most school boards, most fire districts, those who charge property taxes,
• to offer a tax credit to seniors, it looks like this is now a mandatory requirement for counties.

Transcript Highlights:

• Karen Lang, on behalf of the California Association of County Treasurers and Tax Collectors, the counterpart
• Karen Lang, on behalf of the California Association of County Treasurer and Tax Collectors, the counterpart
• California Association of County Treasors and Tax Collectors, the counterpart to Mr.
• cycle, and make sure that we're not losing tax dollars that would be due to the counties.
• In cases where taxpayers prevail, the county is required to pay interest on overpaid taxes, which now

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Revenue and Taxation heard several bills, most of them referred to the suspense file because of their fiscal impact. AB 2465 and AB 1675 would deny state grants, loans, tax credits, or other benefits to companies doing business with ICE or related immigration-enforcement agencies; both drew strong support from immigrant-rights, labor, and community groups, and opposition from CalChamber and industry groups that argued the bills were overly broad and could affect unrelated federal contracts. AB 1633 would impose a 50% gross receipts tax on for-profit private immigration detention facilities, with supporters saying it would hold companies accountable for dangerous conditions and opponents warning it was punitive and could disrupt detention operations. The committee also heard AB 2089, which would streamline the welfare property tax exemption process for affordable housing, and AB 2250, a cleanup bill to clarify hemp enforcement laws; both were supported by affected industry and advocacy groups, while county assessors and tax collectors opposed AB 2089 unless amended over workload and implementation concerns. AB 2172, which would allow counties to use a single-member assessment appeals commissioner for complex property tax appeals, was the only bill taken up for a vote during the meeting. Supporters, including Los Angeles County Assessor Jeffrey Prang, said the change would reduce a large backlog and speed resolution of appeals; the committee adopted amendments and passed the bill 4-0 to the Assembly Committee on Appropriations. The committee also heard AB 2319, creating a proposed post-production tax credit to keep film and television post-production work in California, with support from labor and industry representatives who said jobs and spending were leaving the state; the author said the bill still needed work on labor standards and the annual credit cap. Finally, AB 2403 was presented to create a commercial production tax credit to keep commercial shoots in California. The author and supporters said commercial production has declined sharply in the state and that other states are winning work through targeted incentives, while labor-backed witnesses argued the bill would protect middle-class jobs and local spending. The transcript ends during the presentation of AB 2403, before any vote or final action on that measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 1078 will allow Santa Cruz County voters to decide if combined local tax rate limits should
• However, there are cities within Santa Cruz County that already have a tax rate at or above 2%, so the
• SB 1078 will provide that transaction and use tax of up to one-half percent imposed by Santa Cruz County
• This is not a tax increase. SB 1078 allows the county to go to the voters.
• I can currently see that the County of Santa Cruz has a 9.5% tax currently, which is the maximum allowed

Committee: Senate Revenue and Taxation

Transcript Highlights:

• So we're moving it to say personal property tax or property tax. Thank you.
• So we are looking to remove the ability to say no tax increase tax proposal.
• Currently in the state, most of the counties have the ability to allow their taxpayers to pay their taxes
• So it is also bringing in the, we heard yesterday about the counties requiring some senior tax recipients
• is a school tax.

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and approval of the House Journal by roll call vote, 120-0. Members then used personal privilege and guest introductions to recognize several groups and visitors, including Alpha Phi Alpha members, students from multiple schools and programs, dental hygienists, public administrators, credit union representatives, National History Day participants, and others. One member also spoke emotionally about a relative killed in a domestic violence incident and requested a moment of silence in her honor. The main floor action centered on House Committee Substitute for House Bills 2780 and 2668, a large property tax reform package. The sponsor described it as the product of extensive statewide hearings and public testimony, aimed at stabilizing Missouri’s property tax system. The bill and amendments would, among other things, require clearer ballot language for tax measures, move tax-related ballot questions to November general elections, eliminate “no tax increase” wording, standardize ballot wording, address assessment and valuation rules, require physical inspections for certain commercial property assessment increases, allow quarterly tax payments in more counties, and make other technical changes. Members debated the size and scope of the bill, local control concerns, voter turnout and “voter fatigue,” and whether the changes were sufficiently vetted. Amendments were adopted to narrow the title to property taxation, add the ballot-language provisions, remove duplicative language, and exempt township counties so their levy elections could still occur on the schedule they need. The House then adopted the substitute as amended and ordered it perfected and printed. The chamber also took up House Bill 1917, a targeted utility/economic development bill involving a Jefferson County water district. The sponsor said the bill was prompted by a dispute in which a water district sought payment or infrastructure contributions from a company planning a roughly $400 million investment and about 250 jobs, despite the district’s inability to serve the site. Supporters said the bill would allow detachment of a ratepayer under specified conditions and prevent water districts from blocking development; the committee vote had been 15-0. Members raised concerns about the bill’s narrow, district-specific scope and possible litigation, but the House ultimately ordered the bill perfected and printed. The House also read three new bills for first reading and later recessed after announcements about committee meetings and a property tax discussion event with FFA students.

Transcript Highlights:

• different tax years.
• Our B&O tax code is as regressive as sales tax is to individuals.
• Raising taxes didn't solve the problem. There is no tax.
• It does not increase or decrease any tax. Eligible for county conservation futures programs.
• Taxes are never good, and it challenges the 1% property tax cap.

Committee: House Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• , Central Valley, LA County, and even Yuba County.
• Senate Bill 1078 will allow Santa Cruz County voters to decide if combined local tax rate limits should
• However, there are cities within Santa Cruz County that already have a tax rate at or above 2%, so the
• SB 1078 will provide that a transaction and use tax of up to one-half percent imposed by Santa Cruz County
• This is not a tax increase. SB 1078 allows the county to go to the voters.

Summary: The committee heard Senate Bill 1277, which would create a California Cost of Living Tax Credit modeled on the 2022 middle-class tax refund to provide refundable relief to low- and middle-income Californians facing high housing, fuel, energy, and general living costs. Senator Grove and supporters, including the California Policy Center and some local government representatives, argued the bill would put direct relief into the hands of working families. Opposition came from the California Tax Reform Association and the California Teachers Association, which said California already has progressive tax credits and that the proposal would be costly to the General Fund and reduce money for schools and other services. After extended debate, the bill was not advanced; a roll call vote on a motion to pass it to Appropriations failed 1-4, and the bill was held/fails on the floor with a request for reconsideration noted. The committee then heard SB 1287, which would create a capped tax credit to encourage private investment in short-line railroad infrastructure. The author and rail industry witnesses said the measure would improve safety, reliability, emissions, and freight movement, especially for rural communities and agriculture, and that it was a public-private partnership rather than a handout. Opposition from CTA and the California Tax Reform Association argued a direct grant program would be preferable to a tax credit. The bill was accepted with committee amendments and placed on call without a final vote in the transcript. Members also considered SB 1407, which would fully exempt military retirement pay and surviving spouse benefits from state income tax, increasing the prior partial exemption. The author, State Treasurer Fiona Ma, and veterans’ groups said the change would help retain veterans in California, support local economies, and align California with most other states. CTA and CTRA opposed on General Fund grounds. The committee approved the bill on a due-pass-as-amended motion to the Committee on Military and Veterans Affairs, with the roll call showing support and the bill placed on call. Later, the committee heard SB 1349, directing the Legislative Analyst’s Office to review major tax expenditures and evaluate their goals, beneficiaries, and effects on revenues and Proposition 98 funding. CTA, CTRA, and several local government and labor supporters backed the bill as a way to improve accountability for roughly $94 billion in annual tax expenditures. The bill was accepted with committee amendments and placed on call. The committee also heard SB 1078, authorizing Santa Cruz County to ask voters for a temporary half-cent sales tax to help fund health care and safety-net services amid federal cuts; it was placed on call. SB 1120, extending the California Competes Tax Credit through 2035 and making it refundable for certain strategic industries, received strong support from business and manufacturing groups and was passed on a due-pass-as-amended motion to Appropriations. Finally, SB 1275, which would replace the state sales tax on vehicle purchases with a vehicle license fee structure intended to increase federal deductibility for Californians, was passed 4-0 as amended to the Committee on Transportation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Primarily occupational tax. And we did this to the whole unincorporated part of the county.
• </c><01:26:34.160><c> Metro</c><01:26:34.480><c> Tax</c> from the Jefferson County Metro Tax from the
• Now, as far as Jefferson County, Jefferson County Metro Tax Commission came and did a presentation in
• ><c> uh</c><01:41:49.800><c> Metro</c><01:41:50.120><c> Tax</c> County, Jefferson County uh Metro Tax
• County, Jefferson County uh Metro Tax Commission<01:41:50.880><c> came</c><01:41:51.160><c> and</c><

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the August 26 minutes, and then took up a discussion of county jail funding. KACO representatives and county officials said jail operations are an ongoing strain for counties because they must pay for inmate care, facilities, and mandated standards, while many counties also rely on jail revenue to offset costs. They described Kentucky’s jail system, including 77 jails, 43 closed counties without jails, and the mix of county, state, federal, and controlled-intake inmates. KACO emphasized that counties remain financially responsible for inmates even when they must contract with other jails, often at costs above the state’s per diem rate, and said it is developing a broader proposal to present later. The testimony focused on rising expenses and shrinking revenue. KACO said counties spent about $374 million on jail operations in FY24, up 24% from FY19, and about $41 million on jail medical costs, up 40%. General fund support for jails was said to total $147 million in FY24, more than double pre-COVID levels. Speakers also noted that state inmate populations in county jails have fallen from about 11,500 in 2019 to 7,212 in 2025, while federal inmates have increased because they are more lucrative for counties. The state jail per diem of $35.34 was described as insufficient to cover actual costs, especially medical care. County judges from Webster, Knox, and Hardin counties gave examples of local budget pressure. Webster County said it now houses 114 state prisoners, 47 county prisoners, and 24 out-of-county prisoners, and that it transferred $512,000 from its general fund to the jail last year, about $77 per taxpayer. Knox County said its jail budget has grown from an initial $2.8 million projection to $5.7 million, with $3 million coming from occupational tax revenue. Hardin County said its jail has an approximate $11 million expense budget against $5 million in revenue, creating a $6 million deficit, driven by higher payroll, medical, and insurance costs and a 29% drop in state prisoner revenue. The judge said the county has responded with property tax increases and an expanded occupational tax district, but still uses reserves to cover other county services. A Grant County magistrate then began speaking from the perspective of magistrates and commissioners, describing her background working at a local jail before serving in county government. The discussion remained centered on the fiscal burden of jails and the need for counties and the legislature to work together on a long-term solution.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 674, bonuses for employees of county tax collectors and property appraisers, simply permits
• tax.
• These are taxes enacted by your county that tax primarily out-of-state visitors and out-of-town visitors
• on leases, and we, it's a tax on tax, it's an unfair tax.
• tax-free and walk into...

Summary: The Finance and Tax Committee considered several tax-related measures. SB 674, allowing county property appraisers to budget for and pay hiring or retention bonuses with Department of Revenue approval, was supported by property appraisers and reported favorably. C.S. for SJR 318, as amended, would create a tangible personal property exemption for agricultural land used in agricultural production or agritourism; the amendment clarified the property’s location and allowed the Legislature to define conditions, and the resolution was reported favorably with support from Farm Bureau and the Florida Chamber. The committee also advanced C.S. for SB 1664, as amended, which requires locally approved discretionary taxes to be reauthorized by voters when they expire and sets rules for taxes tied to revenue bonds. Local government and tourism-related groups raised concerns about impacts on tourist development taxes, beach funding, transportation surtaxes, and long-term planning, while supporters argued voters should periodically reaffirm taxes; the bill was reported favorably. C.S. for SJR 1510 and its implementing bill, SB 1512, were both amended to sharply narrow a proposed long-term lease property tax exemption to one qualifying property and to single-family homes, mobile homes, and condominiums; counties and cities opposed the measures as tax shifts, but both were reported favorably. The committee then took up SPB 7034, the Senate tax package, which includes permanent sales tax exemptions for certain clothing and bullion, multiple tax holidays, a temporary motor vehicle fee reduction, a property tax study, corporate and insurance tax credit changes, a communications services tax freeze, and other tax provisions, with staff estimating $2.1 billion in total revenue reduction. Testimony included support for studying property taxes and strong opposition to the firearm and ammunition tax holiday from students and advocacy groups, who argued it was unsafe and inappropriate; others urged adding combined reporting or removing tourist development tax changes. After debate, the committee reported the package favorably and also approved a motion to submit it as a committee bill. The meeting ended after Senator Bernard recorded an affirmative vote on tab 5 and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• County, it's a little personal.
• even taking account Los Angeles County or other counties in the state of California.
• County; it's letting the voters make their own decision. ...a tax increase on L.A. or Contra Costa County
• ; it's letting the voters of those counties make their own decision about whether to approve a tax increase
• County to have this conversation at all, a county hospital will close.

Committee: Senate Local Government

Transcript Highlights:

• Counties, cities, towns, and port districts may create tax increment areas where community revitalization
• They're required to reimburse the county assessor and county treasurer for their costs.
• I need, no cities or counties. And then I'm curious. I mean, no cities or counties.
• The legislature granted property tax-based tax increment financing authority to cities, counties, and
• We appreciate the changes that have been made, including counties as impacted taxing districts, improved

Committee: Senate Local Government

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill, this tax credit, cost-of-living tax credit, was modeled after the middle-class tax credit
• , Central Valley, LA County, and even Yuba County.
• Senate Bill 1078 will allow Santa Cruz County voters to decide if combined local tax rate limits should
• However, there are cities within Santa Cruz County that already have a tax rate at or above 2%, so the
• tax.

Committee: Senate Revenue and Taxation

Summary: The committee heard several tax and revenue-related bills. SB 1277, by Senator Grove, proposed a California Cost of Living Tax Credit modeled on the 2022 middle-class tax refund to provide direct relief to low- and middle-income Californians facing high housing, fuel, and utility costs. Supporters argued it would help families struggling with affordability, while opponents, including the California Tax Reform Association and CTA members, said California’s tax system already provides relief and that the bill would reduce General Fund revenue and harm schools. After extended debate, the bill was put on call and later failed on a 1-4 vote, though reconsideration was granted. SB 1287, by Senator Retado, would create a performance-based tax credit for short-line rail investments; supporters said it would improve freight efficiency, safety, emissions, and rural access, while opponents preferred direct grants. The bill was placed on call and later passed 5-0 to Transportation. SB 1407, by Senator Archuleta, would exempt military retirement pay and survivor benefits from state taxes; the author, State Treasurer Fiona Ma, and veterans’ groups said it would help retain veterans and their economic contributions in California, while CTA and CTRA opposed on General Fund grounds. The bill passed 5-0 to Military and Veterans Affairs. SB 1349, by Senator Gonzalez, would direct the LAO to review major tax expenditures for effectiveness and impacts on schools and the budget; CTA and CTRA supported it as a way to increase accountability, and it passed 4-1 to Governmental Organization. SB 1120, by Senator McNerney, would extend the California Competes Tax Credit through 2035 and make credits refundable for certain strategic industries; business and industry witnesses said this would help startups and manufacturers monetize credits and attract investment, and it passed 5-0 to Appropriations. SB 1275, also by Senator McNerney, proposed converting the state sales tax on vehicle purchases into a deductible vehicle license fee to reduce Californians’ federal tax burden; the LAO provided technical testimony, and the bill passed 4-0 to Transportation. The committee also heard SB 1078, by Senator Laird, to let Santa Cruz County voters consider a temporary local tax increase for health and safety-net services, but it was put on call. Later, the committee returned to SB 1314, by Senator Min, addressing youth tobacco and illicit smoke shop sales, but the transcript cuts off before final action on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, we do tax those.
• So, we do tax those.
• So, we do tax those.
• </c> and they are taxed.
• They are taxed at and they are taxed.

Bills: SF0024

Committee: Senate Travel, Recreation, Wildlife & Cultural Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• We have Butler County, Breenidge County, and Me County.
• </c> County, Breenidge County, and Me County. County, Breenidge County, and Me County.
• Certainly, in counties like Fayette County, my home county, Jefferson County, counties up where you live
• 09:43.360><c> Jefferson</c> County, my home county, Jefferson County, my home county, Jefferson County
• </c> tax credit under the federal taxes. tax credit under the federal taxes.

Committee: Senate Education