Can a city enact legislation that conflicts with state law?

[208 Cal.App.2d 95] In Abbott v. City of Los Angeles, 53 Cal.2d 674, 681, 3 Cal.Rptr. 158, 163, 349 P.2d 974, 979, 82 A.L.R.2d 385, it was said: 'The power granted by section 11 of article XI is not only a delegation of power by the people to the local body, but it is also a limitation upon the local body * * *. When there is doubt as to whether an attempted regulation relates to a municipal or to a state matter, or if it be the mixed concern of both, the doubt must be resolved in favor of the legislative authority of the state [citations]. These rules are not limited in their application to situations where a local body attempts to enact legislation the actual language of which conflicts with previously enacted state law. These rules also prevent any legislation by a local body (other than in furtherance of the state law) when the entire field, that is the subject matter of the ordinance, has already been fully occupied by the state. Thus the Constitution prohibits a city from imposing additional requirements in a state occupied field * * *.'