This Year the Legislature Again Sought to Address Concerns Raised by the Current Laws
The second yr of the coronavirus pandemic in California was shaped by two political undercurrents at the state Capitol: a budget awash with cash, cheers to a booming stock market and federal assistance, and a looming recall election asking voters to throw Gov. Gavin Newsom out of role.
The massive budget surplus immune Newsom and legislative Democrats to go large on a progressive agenda they believe will help the state recover from COVID hardships. They passed a $262.6 billion budget that includes preschool for all 4-yr-olds, health insurance for low-income undocumented immigrants age 50 and older, and $600 stimulus payments for most Californians — landing in bank accounts merely weeks earlier the Sept. 14 recall election.
Newsom found himself with so many dollars to spend that he gave away $115 1000000 to encourage Californians to get the COVID-19 vaccine with a serial of game-show style lotteries.
Simply gobs of money and Democrats' supermajority didn't make everything possible. Tensions between moderate and liberal Democrats stymied many proposals. The recall threat also may have doomed some legislation that might accept reflected unfavorably upon California and its governor. Bills that stalled included proposals to create single-payer health care, ban corporate donations to political candidates, legalize psychedelic drugs, sanction clinics where addicts can utilize illegal drugs under medical supervision, and permit people to turn their bodies into garden compost after expiry. Progressive legislation to let more offenders to have their records expunged and overhaul the bond system as well stalled amongst concerns over California's rising murder rate and an specially fell killing in Sacramento.
With ballsy wildfires burning in a state stricken by drought, lawmakers canonical $i billion for wildfire prevention but rejected a bill that called for reducing greenhouse gas emissions beyond current mandates, which officials have said California is already not on step to meet. Autonomous Senate leader Toni Atkins told reporters afterward the last night of the session wrapped up that such ambitious legislation may accept more time to negotiate, and she expects that to continue next yr.
The concluding dark was unusually subdued compared with the anarchy of the final two years. At the end of 2020, Republican senators were forced to vote remotely because of a COVID infection while Assemblymembers were required to vote in person, prompting one to make a late-night flooring oral communication cradling her newborn baby. Not to mention the previous yr, when the Senate was evacuated and a hazmat crew chosen in afterward an anti-vaccine protester tossed a menstrual cup of blood from the overhead gallery, splattering senators.
Amid the relative at-home of 2021, lawmakers managed to send the governor hundreds of bills, which he has until Oct. 10 to sign or veto. With Newsom having defeated the Sept. 14 recollect, the fate of these bills is in his easily. Finishing upwards his decisions on October. ix, he said in a statement: "What we're doing here in California is unprecedented in both nature and scale. We will come back from this pandemic stronger than always before."
Here are 21 of the most interesting or consequential bills.
— Laurel Rosenhall
✅ Changing unmarried-family zoning
By Manuela Tobias
WHAT THE BILLS WOULD DO
SB 9 would allow most homeowners beyond the state to build two houses or a duplex where now just i house is allowed. The beak, carried by a team of Democrats led past Senate leader Toni Atkins of San Diego, would also permit eligible homeowners to carve up their lot and add together 2 more units on the second package — as long as it'due south at least i,200 foursquare feet and outside fire adventure zones or historic districts. Owners would have to stay in their homes for at least 3 years afterward splitting their lots.
SB x by San Francisco Democratic Sen. Scott Wiener would let a local government rezone unmarried-family parcels to allow as many as x units nigh public transit hubs and within urban areas.
Both bills would permit homeowners and developers to skip lengthy review processes, but projects would still ultimately be subject to concluding approval past the city.
WHO SUPPORTS THEM?
The growing Yes in My Backyard movement has been trying to increase density for years, with mostly failed attempts. Realtors, landlords, builders, developers and Facebook all back the bills, which were cardinal to the affordable housing package.
WHO'Due south OPPOSED?
Dozens of California cities, mayors and council members, including the Los Angeles City Council, say the zoning changes take abroad local flexibility, decision-making and community input. Neighborhood groups such equally Livable California as well contend the bill doesn't create affordable housing, and could spur gentrification. Opponents are already organizing a election measure in November 2022 to reassert local command over zoning.
WHY Information technology MATTERS
About two-thirds of California is zoned for single-family homes, and California is short betwixt i.8 million and three.v one thousand thousand homes, which Newsom campaigned on building by 2025. While a zoning change won't magically create the missing units, assuasive building where it'south now illegal would add to the overall housing stock over time. Together, these bills are the near significant in years approved by the Legislature to address California's housing crunch; a sweeping bill to reduce local control over zoning and create more affordable housing failed in 2018, 2019 and 2020.
GOVERNOR'S Phone call: ✅
Newsom signed both bills on Sept. sixteen, merely two days later on beating his recall opponents, who had for the well-nigh part vowed to veto similar efforts. In his signing statement, the governor said: "The housing affordability crisis is undermining the California Dream for families across the state, and threatens our long-term growth and prosperity. Making a meaningful bear upon on this crunch will accept bold investments, strong collaboration across sectors and political courage from our leaders and communities to practice the right thing and build housing for all."
✅ Booting bad cops
By Robert Lewis
WHAT THE BILL WOULD DO
SB 2 would give the country'southward Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Grooming the power to decertify an officer for wrongdoing — effectively kicking them out of the profession. It would also create an advisory board fabricated upward of more often than not civilians without policing experience to expect into serious misconduct allegations and make recommendations to the commission on whether to revoke an officer'due south certification. A decertification bill failed terminal year. This year's version, by Autonomous Sens. Steven Bradford of Gardena and Toni Atkins of San Diego, was amended to partially placate law enforcement, including requiring a college two-thirds threshold vote of commissioners to decertify officers.
WHO SUPPORTS It
The American Civil Liberties Union, California Innocence Coalition and a long list of criminal justice reform organizations are supporting it. An advocacy system formed by Black professional person athletes and artists, including Lebron James, sent an open up letter urging passage. Supporters say the bill would increase accountability, protect the public from bad officers and help restore trust in the system.
WHO'South OPPOSED
Law enforcement groups — notably the Peace Officers Research Association of California and the California Law Chiefs Association. Both have said they support decertification in theory merely worry the advisory board is designed to be biased against police. They also say the definition of "serious misconduct" that could price accused officers their careers is too vague and subjective.
WHY IT MATTERS
Blue California is i of only four states in the state without the power to decertify an officer. Equally a event, stories have been reported through the years of officers involved in questionable killings beingness immune to stay on the street, only to kill once more. And in that location have been cases of officers fired from 1 department, then quietly moving to another section. This bill would modify that. Information technology's also a examination of the degree to which lawmakers are willing to exercise more to rein in police over the opposition of powerful law enforcement associations.
GOVERNOR'S Call: ✅
In signing this and several other constabulary reform bills on Sept. 30, Newsom issued a statement while visiting Rowley Park in Gardena, where he was joined past legislators, customs leaders and families of victims of constabulary violence. "Today marks another footstep toward healing and justice for all," the governor said. "Likewise many lives have been lost due to racial profiling and excessive utilize of force. We cannot change what is by, only we can build accountability, root out racial injustice and fight systemic racism." The park was the scene of a 2018 police shooting in which 25-year-old Kenneth Ross Jr. was killed; the officer, Michael Robbins, was after cleared of wrongdoing.
❌ Massive expansion to higher financial aid
By Mikhail Zinshteyn
WHAT THE BILL WOULD DO
This is a once-in-a-generation overhaul of the already generous Cal Grant, the state'south principal financial help programme. AB 1456 would add more than 100,000 customs college students eligible for the grant'south $ane,650 in annual support. It will too aggrandize eligibility for near 40,000 students at four-yr colleges to have their tuition partially covered at private schools and fully waived at the Cal State University and University of California. The expanded aid volition exist the consequence of loosening eligibility requirements, including getting rid of fourth dimension-out-of-loftier-schoolhouse and historic period restrictions plus either dropping or lowering GPA requirements. Added land cost: estimated between $85 million to $175 million a twelvemonth, plus outset-upward cost of $58 million.
WHO SUPPORTS It
Carried past Autonomous Assemblymembers Jose Medina of Riverside and Kevin McCarty of Sacramento plus Sen. Connie Leyva of Chino. The Chancellor's Office of the California Community Higher is a fan, largely considering Cal Grant eligibility rules have excluded hundreds of thousands of low-income community higher students.
WHO'Southward OPPOSED
The governor's Finance Department, citing college costs than bill backers estimate and fears that country universities volition heighten tuition. Cal State has problems with it, as well.
WHY It MATTERS
This is huge, both on its own merits and how it would mesh with other major new and forthcoming financial aid overhauls. Various expansions of the Cal Grant would coincide with the Legislature's plans to create a debt-free grant for low- and middle-form UC and Cal Country students, though notably those plans would not embrace community college students. Earlier this year, the state budget expanded the Cal Grant to 133,000 more community college students, costing about $235 one thousand thousand annually to kickoff. For years lawmakers take tried to accept large swings at enlarging the land's college affordability programs, but cost stopped them. Now that California's coffers are expected to overflow, lawmakers are seizing the chance to bring college affordability to hundreds of thousands of more students. Whether that commitment remains during lean times is a question.
GOVERNOR'Southward Call: ❌
Newsom vetoed the bill on Oct. 8. In his veto message, he said "this bill results in meaning cost pressures to the state, probable in the hundreds of millions of dollars annually. Future changes to the financial aid system of this magnitude should be considered every bit a part of the annual budget procedure."
✅ Cost-complimentary COVID testing
Past Kristen Hwang
WHAT THE BILL WOULD DO
SB 510 would put a stop to "surprise billing" for COVID-19 tests and vaccinations, ensuring patients face no out-of-pocket fees from health plans and insurers during the public wellness emergency regardless of whether they receive their services through in- or out-of-network providers. The bill, by Sacramento Democratic Sen. Richard Pan, would also require insurers to fully encompass COVID-nineteen screening tests—similar those increasingly required on a regular basis past employers and schools.
WHO SUPPORTS IT
The California Medical Association, which sponsored the beak, and the California Academy of Family Physicians argue federal guidance on cost sharing is unclear and this nib is necessary for patients to quickly receive testing and handling. Another fundamental supporter: the California Teachers Association.
WHO'S OPPOSED
Health insurance groups such as the California Association of Health Plans and the Clan of California Life and Health Insurance Companies oppose the bill provision that makes it retroactive to when the COVID state of emergency was alleged March four, 2020. They also don't want the bill to cover hereafter illness-related states of emergency. The state Finance Department warns that could cause unknown impact to the land's Full general Fund.
WHY IT MATTERS
The two federal laws regulating COVID-19 testing and treatment exempt insurers from covering tests conducted for "public health surveillance or employment purposes." However, even with vaccines widely available, public health experts accept insisted that routine surveillance testing is crucial to slowing and stopping the spread of affliction due to the highly infectious nature of COVID-19 and its variants and the high number of asymptomatic carriers.
GOVERNOR'S Call: ✅
Newsom signed the beak on Oct. eight. In a signing message, he said the bill "will ensure uniformity in testing payment and access rules throughout the state." He too said he is directing the Section of Managed Wellness Intendance to result guidance "to address concerns about how the prevailing market rate is determined. This would help preclude price gouging."
✅ Ending secret settlements
By Grace Gedye
WHAT THE Beak WOULD DO
SB 331 would ban employers from using secret settlements to prevent workers from speaking out almost all kinds of illegal harassment or discrimination, with some express exceptions. Carried by Autonomous Sen. Connie Leyva of Chino, it builds on a police passed in 2018, which limited the apply of not-disclosure agreements to settle cases of sexual bigotry, harassment or set on.
WHO SUPPORTS It
A bevy of legal groups, labor groups, and women's advancement groups support the pecker. It is co-sponsored by California Employment Lawyers Association, Equal Rights Advocates and Ifeoma Ozoma, a former public policy official at Pinterest who broke her non-disclosure agreement to speak out about discrimination she says she faced at the company. They say undercover settlements perpetuate workplace discrimmination and harassment considering they prevent survivors from speaking out.
WHO'S OPPOSED
Initially, objectors included a group of businesses and trade associations, helmed by the California Chamber of Commerce, arguing that the beak would effectively end the use of severance agreements. Businesses that choose to apply severance agreements often do so in part to safeguard against potential reputational impairment. In response to several amendments, such as one that allowed employers to keep the size of severance payments confidential, the Sleeping accommodation and other groups withdrew their formal opposition.
WHY It MATTERS
Non-disclosure agreements are used widely among the earth'southward nigh powerful tech companies, many of which are based in California. Other industries utilize them too. Past allowing workers to come forward with their allegations, this bill could prevent echo offenders from harassing others. It would also allow workers to discuss their experiences with family unit and friends fifty-fifty if they decide non to go public — something many of these agreements prohibit. The flip side: Businesses concerned almost protecting themselves against reputational harm would have one less tool in their toolkit if this beak becomes law.
GOVERNOR'South Call: ✅
Newsom signed the nib on Oct. seven.
✅ Gender-neutral toy sections
By Grace Gedye
WHAT THE Nib WOULD Practice
AB 1084 would require large department stores that sell kids' products to maintain a gender-neutral section of toys and child care items. Stores that do not comply would face a light penalty: a fine of up to $250 for first offenses, and a fine of upward to $500 for second offenses. It's carried by Democratic Assemblymembers Evan Low of San Jose and Cristina Garcia of Bell Gardens.
WHO SUPPORTS It
The Phluid Project, which partners with brands to distribute gender-costless clothing and accessories, argues that the bill volition increment freedom of expression for children and parents. It'south as well backed past Equality California and the Consumer Federation of California, which says that products marketed to girls often have higher price tags.
WHO'S OPPOSED
Socially conservative groups including the Capitol Resource Institute and California Family Council say it's not the state'southward role to mandate how stores market their products. Retailers objected to an earlier version of the bill that included children'southward clothing, a provision since removed from the nib.
WHY Information technology MATTERS
This pecker might not radically alter Californians' shopping experiences: Some large stores already organize their toys by type of product rather than by gender. But it's a foot in the door for advocates who could push for bigger change in the hereafter.
GOVERNOR'Southward CALL: ✅
Newsom signed the bill on Oct. 9.
✅ A costless press at protests
By Robert Lewis
WHAT THE Bill WOULD Practise
SB 98 would forbid police force from blocking journalists covering protests and demonstrations. The nib, by Healdsburg Autonomous Sen. Mike McGuire, would ensure reporters can be in protest areas without being arrested and prohibits police from "intentionally assaulting, interfering with, or obstructing" their newsgathering.
WHO SUPPORTS It
The California News Publishers Clan, American Civil Liberties Union and Kickoff Amendment Coalition say the legislation is necessary subsequently recent loftier-contour incidents in which reporters were arrested and, in some cases, assaulted with less-lethal munitions while roofing demonstrations.
WHO'Southward OPPOSED
The California Constabulary Chiefs Clan wants to be able to control where the media goes during events and worries that costly litigation may event if their officers violate the proposed statutes.
WHY IT MATTERS
Police force take cracked down — sometimes violently — on protests and demonstrations in recent years, including instances in which journalists covering events were arrested and injured. Such tactics limit the ability of news organizations to testify, an of import role in a democracy, and to provide oversight of officers whose employ of force and crowd-control tactics have led to noncombatant injuries and lawsuits.
GOVERNOR'S Telephone call: ✅
Newsom signed the bill on October. ix.
✅ Ethnic studies to graduate
By Joe Hong
WHAT THE Neb WOULD DO
This is the third attempt by Autonomous Assemblymember Jose Medina of Riverside to require ethnic studies for all California public school students, and this time he succeeded. AB 101 makes ethnic studies a graduation requirement. The police will become into effect by the 2024-25 schoolhouse year, beginning with the form of 2030. School districts could either develop their own lessons or use the model curriculum adult by the state board of education.
WHO SUPPORTS IT
Pro-equity advocacy groups, teachers unions and a handful of larger school districts that already have indigenous studies courses. Many didactics researchers say students, especially those of colour, perform ameliorate in school if they see themselves in what they're being taught. Experts also say that requiring teachers to engage with historic oppression and varied student backgrounds could prompt them to rethink the mode they teach other subjects like literature, science and math.
WHO'S OPPOSED
The editorial board at the Los Angeles Times opposed the bill because it provides also much flexibility for local districts to pattern their own curricula that could deviate from the state's own model curriculum. Thousands from California's Jewish customs signed a petition opposing the bill because it would let districts to use a previous typhoon of the model curriculum that has been criticized for containing anti-Semitic content. Some parents across the state keep to fight against indigenous studies, erroneously conflating the form with disquisitional race theory, while other parents have called the curriculum divisive, fearing information technology could ratchet up racial tensions.
WHY It MATTERS
Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed this thought concluding twelvemonth, proverb the state needed to modify a much-criticized model curriculum developed past the California Department of Education. Jewish groups, for instance, condemned previous versions for an alleged bias towards Palestine. The state board assuaged some critics by approving a significantly revised curriculum in March. If the curriculum attains its goal, it would create a more than inclusive California schoolhouse system.
GOVERNOR'Due south Telephone call: ✅
Newsom signed the neb on Oct. 8. In a signing bulletin, he said: "Ethnic studies courses enable students to learn their own stories, and those of their classmates, and a number of studies accept shown that these courses boost pupil achievement over the long run – especially among students of color. I appreciate that the legislation provides a number of guardrails to ensure that courses will be complimentary from bias or bigotry and appropriate for all students. The bill also expresses the Legislature's intent that courses should non include portions of the initial draft curriculum that had been rejected past the Instructional Quality Commission due to concerns related to bias, bigotry, and bigotry."
On Oct. 6, he also launched a Governor'southward Council on Holocaust and Genocide Teaching.
✅ Teaching mental health
By Jocelyn Wiener
WHAT THE Neb WOULD Practise
SB 224 would mandate mental health teaching in centre schools and high schools that have an existing health education class. Supporters hope that such instruction would eventually be required in all schools statewide. Content would embrace a range of topics, including habits that promote mental wellness, signs and symptoms of mutual mental health conditions and ways to seek help.The bill is carried by Autonomous Sens. Anthony Portantino of La Cañada Flintridge and Susan Rubio of Baldwin Park.
WHO SUPPORTS Information technology
A coalition of nigh l organizations that advocate for mental health, children's rights, inability rights and civil rights, along with the California Infirmary Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics, support the bill. They say it's crucial to reduce stigma and normalize conversations well-nigh mental health in schools, since that'southward where children and adolescents spend the bulk of their time.
WHO'S OPPOSED
No current opposition. To address concerns raised by teachers unions, the pecker's scope was reduced to include only schools with current health pedagogy programs, as opposed to all schools in the state.
WHY Information technology MATTERS
Over the by decade, rates of hospitalization for mental wellness emergencies have been skyrocketing among children and adolescents. Betwixt 2012 and 2019, California emergency rooms reported a 42% increase in the number of children they were treating for mental illness. The pandemic has further exacerbated the trend.
GOVERNOR'S Phone call: ✅
Newsom signed the pecker on October. 8. In a argument on this and a series of bills to increase support for 1000-12 students, he said: "Nosotros're implementing the celebrated, transformative measures needed to assist support our students' wellness and wellbeing."
✅ Removing condoms without consent
By Ana B. Ibarra
WHAT THE BILL WOULD DO
AB 453 would make information technology illegal to remove a condom without consent during sexual intercourse. This bill by Democratic Assemblymember Cristina Garcia of Downey would make it so that "stealthing" — nonconsensual condom removal — be considered sexual bombardment nether the state's Civil Code, assuasive victims to sue their sexual partners for damages.
WHO SUPPORTS IT
Erotic Service Providers Legal Educational Enquiry Projection, a legal advocacy group that argues this piece of legislation is of item importance for sex workers.
WHO'S OPPOSED
None known.
WHY IT MATTERS
A 2017 Yale University study that found nonconsensual condom removal is becoming "a common practice among immature, sexually active people." Victims have expressed fears of pregnancy and disease. This measure out, if signed, would make California the first country in the country to outlaw stealthing.
GOVERNOR'South Telephone call: ✅
Newsom signed the bill on Oct. vii.
✅ Dandy down on debt settlement firms
By Erika Paz
WHAT THE Bill WOULD DO
The federal government regulates debt settlement companies only if they service customers across state lines. AB 1405 by Democratic Assemblymember Buffy Wicks of Oakland would give California consumers greater protections, including a three-twenty-four hours cooling off catamenia so they could review the newly required disclosures before committing to a debt settlement service.
WHO SUPPORTS IT
The pecker is sponsored past the California Low-Income Consumer Coalition. Backers include the Consumer Justice Clinic at the East Bay Community Law Center, whose focus is on depression-income consumers facing bug like debt collection and predatory lending, AARP California, the California Association of Collectors, OneMain Financial, and a number of legal aid clinics and consumer advocacy organizations.
WHO'S OPPOSED
The American Fair Credit Quango and the Consumer Debt Relief Initiative, both representatives of debt settlement companies, dropped their opposition after a provision prohibiting referral fees — a master source of income for debt settlement companies — was removed from the pecker. Thurman Legal objected late in the game, wanting exemptions for lawyers providing the same services.
WHY IT MATTERS
Consumers reach out to debt settlement companies when they are almost vulnerable, not ever fully understanding that it exposes them to legal action from their creditors. If this bill achieves its goal, it would assist Californians better assess the risks and costs of debt settlement services.
GOVERNOR'S Call: ✅ The governor signed the beak October. 4.
✅ Legal protection for prescribed burns
By Julie Cart
WHAT THE BILL WOULD Do
The state is more frequently handing off some responsibility for off-flavor prescribed burns to local fire-safe community groups and tribes. SB 332 by Autonomous Sen. Bill Dodd of Napa would provide legal and liability cover to those entities should the fires they set up get away from them.
WHO SUPPORTS It
The beak is supported past a wide base of groups, including farming and ranching advocates, local fire-safe organizations and firefighting professionals. Supporters say the bill would remove a financial disincentive and create more fuel breaks to save lives and structures.
WHO'Southward OPPOSED
Insurer and attorney groups originally opposed the bill, saying in a letter that lowering the legal accountability for those who ready prescribed burns would be "catastrophic for California'due south property and people." They withdrew their objection later the bill was tweaked to limit its attain.
WHY IT MATTERS
Wildfire experts agree that a powerful prescriptive against fires is to safely set them under precise conditions to reduce the fuels — trees and brush — available to burn, especially around communities. The state has agreed to an aggressive prescribed-burn plan and is training local officials and volunteers to conduct out the fires. But fear of liability should the fire accidentally escape has prevented broader adoption of the program.
GOVERNOR'S CALL: ✅ Newsom signed it on October. half dozen.
✅ Easing transfers to UC and Cal State
By Mikhail Zinshteyn
WHAT THE BILL WOULD DO
Assembly Beak 928 by Democrat Marc Berman of Los Altos means to make it easier for customs college students to transfer to a California State Academy or Academy of California campus. It would:
- Accept the UC and Cal Land systems concur on a common set of general-pedagogy courses that community college students must take to get into either organisation
- Crave that community colleges place all would-exist transfer students — fifty-fifty if they want to attend UC or another higher — into the existing "guaranteed transfer path" to get into a Cal Land, unless they opt out.
WHO SUPPORTS Information technology
Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis and a constellation of educatee advocacy groups, including the Campaign for College Opportunity, a research and advancement organization. They view this nib as continuing the promise of a smoother transfer path for community higher students. Cal State and the student associations of the Cal Country and UC systems also back the nib. Some also indicate out that the 2 systems already have common course admissions requirements for high schoolers but not for transfer students.
WHO'S OPPOSED
A lot of heavy hitters: the UC Office of the President, the Chancellor's Office of the California Customs Colleges, the faculty association representing community colleges and the academic senates of the community higher, the UC and Cal State systems. They say it has the right intentions simply the wrong execution. Also opposed: Gov. Gavin Newsom's finance section, which cites costs of at least $130 million. The student senate of the community higher system is neutral.
WHY It MATTERS
Nigh community higher students want to transfer, but after three years, simply about 22% exercise — even though those students are sold on an idea that they can spend two years in customs higher then ii more at a UC or Cal Land to earn their bachelor's. The transfer path is a maze, stalling the ambitions of tens of thousands of students. If this beak achieves its goal, students could accept fewer classes and therefore charge the state less money in community college tuition waivers.
GOVERNOR'South Telephone call: ✅
The governor signed this into police force Oct. half dozen. What'southward side by side: The single set of courses for full general education courses has to be prepare at the UC and Cal States by the 2025-2026 academic year. Customs colleges must start placing afflicted students in the guaranteed transfer pathway for Cal State campuses by August of 2024.
✅ Truth in recycling
By Sameea Kamal
WHAT THE Nib WOULD Do
SB 343 restricts what kinds of plastic packaging can tout the triangular symbol known equally "chasing arrows" under the state'due south truth-in-advertizing law. Under the bill, CalRecycle would become to decide what'due south deemed "recyclable."
WHO SUPPORTS It
Environmentalist groups including California's Sierra Lodge and the National Stewardship Activity Council support the bill as one of several efforts to reduce plastic and waste material.
WHO'S OPPOSED
The plastics industry says the pecker could pile waste in landfills and enhance packaging costs, peculiarly for packaging that ships to different states with different laws. Based on industry concerns, the pecker was amended to give packaging producers more than fourth dimension to update labeling.
WHY Information technology MATTERS
At to the lowest degree 85% of unmarried-use plastics in California do not actually get recycled, and wind upwards in the landfill. Some argue that the bill would increase costs to Californians. Environmentalists debate that they're already paying the price: Local garbage collection rates are escalating considering non-recyclables and recyclables are mixed together in the blue bins, requiring more than sifting and sorting at recycling plants.
GOVERNOR'S CALL: ✅
Newsom signed the bill on October. 5, issuing a statement which read, in part: "With today's activity and assuming investments to transform our recycling systems, the state continues to lead the fashion to a more sustainable and resilient future for the planet and all our communities."
✅ Adding dependent parents to your wellness program
Past Ana B. Ibarra
WHAT THE Nib WOULD DO
AB 570 would require health insurance plans to brand coverage bachelor to their members' dependent parents. Under federal law, people already can add their children upward to age 26 to their health plans. Through this neb, authored by Assemblymember Miguel Santiago, a Los Angeles Democrat, California would be the starting time state to expand this do good to include parents. This nib applies simply to individual country-regulated health plans.
WHO SUPPORTS IT
The neb was sponsored past land Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara and health intendance advocacy and immigrant rights organizations as a way to expand coverage and help a family reduce health care costs by having all family members covered by the same plan.
WHO'S OPPOSED
The California Association of Wellness Plans and the California Chamber of Commerce initially argued that the beak would enhance premiums, but dropped their opposition after the bill was amended to exclude employer-sponsored and group plans.
WHY IT MATTERS
The pecker, which the land estimates would benefit upward to fifteen,000 people, could exist almost helpful to middle-form families with undocumented parents who don't qualify for Medicare or subsidized coverage through the land's marketplace. This yr's country upkeep opened the land'due south Medi-Cal program to low-income undocumented people l and older and removed some barriers for older Californians.
GOVERNOR'South Telephone call: ✅ The governor signed this nib on October. 4.
✅ Greater access to constabulary records
Past Byrhonda Lyons
WHAT THE BILL WOULD Practise
SB 16 past Berkeley Democratic Sen. Nancy Skinner would expand the public's admission to police records — allowing them to view sustained findings in which an officer used unreasonable force, failed to intervene when another officer used excessive force, engaged in racist or biased beliefs, or conducted unlawful arrests and searches. Information technology besides would allow release of records after an officeholder resigns, put a 45-day limit on when agencies must respond to records requests, and remove the time limit on when judges can consider constabulary misconduct complaints to be admissible in criminal cases.
WHO SUPPORTS IT
The American Ceremonious Liberties Union, the California News Publishers Association, the California Public Defenders, the California Police Chiefs Association and a long list of civil rights organizations. Supporters run across this neb every bit a way to hold more constabulary accountable.
WHO'S OPPOSED?
Originally opponents included the League of California Cities, which argued that the neb would place a substantial burden on city budgets, and the California State Sheriffs' Clan, which contended the bill was as well broad. Both dropped their opposition after the beak was amended to limit mandatory release of information only in sustained cases, non every incident.
WHY IT MATTERS
California is one of the most restrictive states in the nation when it comes to releasing police misconduct records. In 2018, the Legislature passed a law giving the public access to police records if officers lied during an investigation, sexually assaulted someone, or used their guns or other force in a instance in which someone was seriously injured or died. This bill would further expand that access.
GOVERNOR'S CALL: ✅
✅ Protecting protesters from rubber bullets
By Robert Lewis
WHAT THE Pecker WOULD Practice
AB 48 would limit law use of rubber bullets and other less lethal weapons at protests and demonstrations to certain situations, such as when someone'south life is in danger or to bring a dangerous situation nether control after other means don't work. Departments would also need to release reports on their employ of such weapons. Its authors include Autonomous Assemblymembers Lorena Gonzalez, Cristina Garcia and Ash Kalra.
WHO SUPPORTS Information technology
The California Faculty Association, news groups, labor organizations and pupil associations like the University of California Student Association are amid those touting the bill as a way to protect people exercising their constitutional correct to assemble and protestation.
WHO'S OPPOSED
The California Land Sheriffs' Association and some local law enforcement groups contend the bill would take away discretion from officers who should have the right to utilize less lethal weapons as they deem necessary.
WHY It MATTERS
Police force in California take resorted to using safety bullets and tear gas against demonstrators and journalists — nigh recently during last summertime's protests in the wake of the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis. In some cases, people were seriously injured, leading to lawsuits contending the officers used such weapons inappropriately.
GOVERNOR'Southward CALL: ✅
❌ Boosting family go out payments
By Sameea Kamal
WHAT THE BILL WOULD DO
AB 123 would gradually increase the percentage of wages replaced when a Californian takes paid family unit leave from at to the lowest degree 60% to 70% to xc% of a worker'due south highest quarterly earnings in the past 12 months. It's carried by Assemblymember Lorena Gonzalez, a San Diego Democrat.
WHO SUPPORTS Information technology
The bill is backed past groups who abet for workers' rights, for retirees, women's wellness and for early babyhood development — all of whom benefit from policies that permit employees to take the time needed to intendance for family unit members. Gov. Gavin Newsom signed bills expanding family unit leave in 2019 and 2020.
WHO'S OPPOSED
Some business organisation groups, although the bill does not increase employer contributions into the state family unit exit fund. The Central Valley Business Federation says the bill is a bad deal for workers considering information technology would take more coin out of paychecks, increasing the amount deducted past 0.1% to 0.ii% per yr.
WHY IT MATTERS
Under current law, California'due south paid family leave is often being used past higher-income employees who can more easily afford going without full pay. In 2019, $287 million of the $1.i billion the state paid out went to those making $100,000 or more a year. This bill would make it more realistic for low-income earners to use the leave that they're required to fund with 1.2% of every paycheck. A worker making the minimum wage would receive $364 a calendar week; the maximum benefit is $i,300 a week for as long as eight weeks.
GOVERNOR'S CALL: ❌
Gov. Newsom vetoed the bill on Sept. 28. In his veto message, he said he had supported expanding family exit, simply said: "This neb would create significant new costs non included in the 2021 Upkeep Human activity and would result in higher disability contributions paid past employees. I wait frontwards to continued partnership with the Legislature to ensure that workers take true access to programs providing family unit get out."
✅ Taking on Amazon's warehouse quotas
By Jackie Botts
WHAT THE BILL WOULD DO
AB 701 would brand California the kickoff state to require warehouses to disembalm to workers any quotas or piece of work speed standards, also every bit the potential consequences for failing to meet them. It would too ban companies from penalizing warehouse workers for complying with health and condom laws that slow the pace of their work — including taking breaks, using the bathroom or following COVID-19 precautions.
WHO SUPPORTS IT
Introduced by Assemblymember Lorena Gonzalez, a San Diego Democrat famous for introducing controversial labor legislation, the bill is backed by a long list of unions, worker centers and legal nonprofits that stand for workers.
WHO'S OPPOSED
Local and statewide chambers of commerce oppose the bill, along with numerous business associations representing retailers, grocers, farmers, manufacturers and truckers. They argue that existing law already protects workers, and that the bill could open employers to plush lawsuits and limit their options to bargain with underperforming workers. The California Chamber of Commerce, nonetheless, took the pecker off of its "task killer" list later on several amendments.
WHY It MATTERS
Though it would apply to all warehouses, this bill takes particular aim at Amazon as online shopping has surged during the pandemic. The eastward-commerce giant has expanded its California operations, particularly in the Inland Empire. Amazon has notoriously high rates of worker injury — in Fresno, the charge per unit was three times the national warehouse average in 2018 — and was sued past the state over allegedly refusing to cooperate with an investigation into COVID-19 safety at warehouses. If passed, the law could accept national ripple effects on how companies rails and employ worker productivity data.
GOVERNOR'South Call: ✅
In signing the nib on Sept. 22, Newsom issued a statement saying,"We cannot allow corporations to put profit over people. The hardworking warehouse employees who have helped sustain u.s. during these unprecedented times should not have to chance injury or face punishment as a result of exploitative quotas that violate basic health and prophylactic."
✅ Holding fashion brands liable for fair wages
By Nigel Duara
WHAT THE BILL WOULD DO
SB 62 would mandate paying garment workers past the hr unless they collectively bargain for a per-piece charge per unit. Carried by LA Autonomous Sen. Maria Elena Duraza, information technology also would innovate the concept of make liability, extending liability for wage theft from the factories to the brands and retailers, as well equally subcontractors in betwixt.
WHO SUPPORTS IT
Labor unions and anti-poverty advocates say it's needed to protect skilled garment workers from exploitation by banning per-piece charge per unit. Co-sponsors, including the California Labor Federation, Garment Worker Center and Western Center on Police and Poverty, say surreptitious operations are able to pay as little as 12 cents per piece, which amounts to wage theft.
WHO'S OPPOSED
The California Chamber of Commerce and other business concern groups object to the brand guarantor provision, which holds fashion brands and retailers liable for wage theft. Business interests debate that existing law is already strong enough; they but have to be enforced.
WHY IT MATTERS
This is both about the number of jobs available and the amount of pay for this type of work. While supporters say information technology's meant to protect pay for a vulnerable workforce, the clothing industry warns it could motion jobs offshore, reversing a recent trend to move jobs back to America during the pandemic. This is labor's 2nd attempt to change how workers are paid in the underground Los Angeles garment industry. A similar bill died last year in the waning hours of the legislative session.
GOVERNOR'Southward CALL: ✅ The governor signed the bill in a virtual ceremony Sept. 27. "These measures protect marginalized low-wage workers, many of whom are women of colour and immigrants, ensuring they are paid what they are due and improving workplace conditions," he said in a argument. "We are committed to having their backs as nosotros work to build a stronger, more inclusive economy."
❌ Vote-by-mail for farmworker spousal relationship elections
By Grace Gedye
WHAT THE BILL WOULD Do
Currently, farmworker spousal relationship elections are held in-person, often on the grower'due south property. AB 616 by Democratic Assemblymember Mark Stone of Santa Cruz would requite farmworkers the option to vote at domicile — or anywhere else they like — in spousal relationship elections. And so they could deliver or send their ballot, sealed in a signed envelope, to the country board that oversees farmworker marriage elections, or they could requite it to an organizer to deliver on their behalf.
WHO SUPPORTS IT
Labor groups and unions, including United Farm Workers, which sponsored the nib. They say it would make union elections more accessible to farmworkers.
WHO'S OPPOSED
Business groups, like California Sleeping accommodation of Commerce, and groups that represent the interests of farm owners, like the Western Growers Association, oppose the bill. They say they're concerned about workers being pressured into voting a certain style if this nib is enacted. Workers are allowed to have a witness nowadays when they vote at abode under this nib.
WHY Information technology MATTERS
The rate of unionization among farm workers is incredibly depression — approximately 0% co-ordinate to analysis from UC Merced. Unions are linked to higher wages and better benefits for workers. This neb would give farm workers another way to participate in matrimony elections and could speed upwards the election process.
GOVERNOR'S Telephone call: ❌
Newsom vetoed the bill on Sept. 22, issuing a statement saying it "contains various inconsistencies" related to the drove and review of ballot cards. "Pregnant changes to California's well-defined agronomical labor laws must be carefully crafted to ensure that both agronomical workers' intent to be represented and the right to collectively deal is protected, and the state can faithfully enforce those fundamental rights," he said. Instead, the governor said he was directing his administration to develop some kind of alternative for the Legislature to consider in the futurity.
Source: https://calmatters.org/explainers/california-legislature-bills-passed-2021/
0 Response to "This Year the Legislature Again Sought to Address Concerns Raised by the Current Laws"
Post a Comment