(1) Existing law, the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, is administered by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control and regulates the granting of licenses for the manufacture, distribution, and sale of alcoholic beverages within the state. The act requires the department to make and prescribe rules to carry out the purposes and intent of existing state constitutional provisions on the regulation of alcoholic beverages, and to enable the department to exercise the powers and perform the duties conferred upon it by the state constitution and the act, not inconsistent with any statute of this state. The act makes it unlawful for any person other than a licensee of the department to sell, manufacture, or import alcoholic beverages in this state, with exceptions. The department, pursuant to its powers and in furtherance of emergency declarations and orders of the Governor under the California Emergency Services Act regarding the spread of the COVID-19 virus, established prescribed temporary relief measures to suspend certain legal restrictions relating to, among other things, the expansion of a licensed footprint, sales of alcoholic beverages to-go, and delivery privileges. Existing law authorizes the department, for a period of 365 days following the end of the state of emergency proclaimed by the Governor on March 4, 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, to permit licensees to exercise license privileges in an expanded license area authorized pursuant to a COVID-19 Temporary Catering Authorization approved in accordance with the Fourth Notice of Regulatory Relief issued by the department, as specified. Existing law makes these provisions effective only until July 1, 2026, and repeals them as of that date. This bill, instead, would make those provisions operative until January 1, 2029, repeal those provisions on that date, and make conforming changes. The bill would also prohibit the department from issuing any new COVID-19 Temporary Catering Authorizations on or after January 1, 2027. (2) The Planning and Zoning Law authorizes the legislative body of any city or county to adopt ordinances that regulate zoning within its jurisdiction, as specified. Under that law, variances and conditional use permits may be granted if provided for by the zoning ordinance. Existing law, to the extent that an outdoor expansion of a business to mitigate COVID-19 pandemic restrictions on indoor dining interferes with, reduces, eliminates, or impacts required parking for existing uses, requires a local jurisdiction that has not adopted an ordinance that provides relief from parking restrictions for expanded outdoor dining areas to reduce the number of required parking spaces for existing uses by the number of spaces that the local jurisdiction determines are needed to accommodate an expanded outdoor dining area. Existing law makes these provisions operative only until July 1, 2026, and repeals them on that date. This bill, instead, would make those provisions operative indefinitely. Because the bill would require local officials to perform additional duties for an extended period, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law, the California Retail Food Code, establishes uniform health and sanitation standards for, and provides for regulation by the State Department of Public Health of, retail food facilities. Existing law provides that these standards are primarily enforced by local enforcement agencies. Existing law restricts satellite food service to limited food preparation in a fully enclosed permanent food facility that meets specified requirements. Existing law requires a permanent food facility, before conducting satellite food service, to submit to the enforcement agency written operating standards. Existing law, until July 1, 2026, authorizes a permitted food facility within any local jurisdiction that is subject to retail food operation restrictions related to a COVID-19 public health response to prepare and serve food as a temporary satellite food service without obtaining a separate satellite food service permit or submitting written operating procedures. With regard to those provisions that authorize a permitted food facility to prepare and serve food as a temporary satellite food service, this bill, instead, would make those provisions operative indefinitely. (4) Existing law requires permanent food facilities to be fully enclosed in a building consisting of permanent floors, walls, and an overhead structure that meet prescribed minimum standards. This bill would, notwithstanding the requirements described above, authorize a restaurant to operate using open windows, folding doors, or nonfixed store fronts during hours of operation if the restaurant develops, and submits to the enforcement agency for approval, an integrated pest management and food safety risk mitigation plan and meets certain requirements, as specified. The bill would require the plan to be documented in writing, made available upon request to local environmental health enforcement officers, and updated annually or whenever there is a change to the facility or operation. The bill would require the restaurant to self-close upon observation of vermin activity inside the facility and remain closed until all vermin are eliminated. The bill would prohibit a local enforcement agency from unreasonably withholding approval of a proposed pest management and food safety risk mitigation plan and would require approval to be granted unless unique circumstances exist such that no reasonable conditions or measures can sufficiently mitigate a significant risk to public health or safety. (5) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Sponsored bills
Existing law requires a person seeking to bring a dog into this state, or importing a dog into this state, for the purpose of resale or change of ownership to obtain a health certificate with respect to the dog that has been completed by a licensed veterinarian and is dated within 10 days before the date on which the dog is brought into the state. Existing law requires the person to submit the health certificate to the applicable county health department, as specified. This bill would repeal the above-described requirements, and would instead require a person selling, transporting, or importing a dog into the state for the purpose of resale or change of ownership to obtain, and submit to the Department of Food and Agriculture and the buyer, a health certificate for the dog that has been completed by a licensed veterinarian and is dated no more than 10 days before the date on which the dog is brought into the state, as specified. The bill would require that the health certificate contain specified information. The bill would designate the health certificate as a public record, and require the department to retain a health certificate for 5 years. Under existing law, a violation of the Food and Agricultural Code is a misdemeanor, except as specified. Because the requirements of this bill would be part of the Food and Agricultural Code, the violation of which would be a crime, the bill would create 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.
Existing law, the Veterinary Medicine Practice Act, establishes the California Veterinary Medical Board to regulate the practice of veterinary medicine, and specifies acts the performance of which constitutes the practice of veterinary medicine, surgery, and dentistry, including performing a surgical operation upon an animal. Existing law provides that nothing in the act prohibits a person from practicing veterinary medicine as a bona fide owner of one's own animals. A violation of the act is a crime. This bill would include the performance of a tendonectomy, onychectomy, or any type of claw removal on a feline within the practice of veterinary medicine, surgery, and dentistry. The bill would require those procedures to be performed only for a therapeutic purpose, as defined, and would authorize the board to deny, revoke, or suspend a license or registration or assess a fine for performing those procedures for any reason other than a therapeutic purpose. This bill would exclude the performance of those procedures from the provisions authorizing a person to practice veterinary medicine as an owner of one's own animals. The bill would specify that the bill's provision shall not be interpreted to preempt a local ordinance adopted before January 1, 2026, limiting the performance of the feline declawing procedures identified in the bill. Because a violation of these provisions would be a crime under the act, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Sections 4827 and 4883 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by AB 1502 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1502 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
(1) Existing law, the California Nutrition Monitoring Development Act of 1986, requires the State Department of Public Health to assess the availability and adequacy of existing state and local food and nutrition data systems. The act requires different state departments, including the State Department of Education, to provide to the State Department of Public Health, upon request, nutrition-related data collection forms, documentation, and reports of various programs. This bill would define "ultraprocessed food" for certain school-related purposes and would require the State Department of Public Health to adopt regulations, on or before June 1, 2028, to define "ultraprocessed foods of concern" and "restricted school foods," as specified. The bill would require the department, when defining ultraprocessed foods of concern and restricted school foods, to consider specified factors, including, among others, whether, based on reputable peer-reviewed scientific evidence, a substance or group of substances are linked to health harms or adverse health consequences, as specified. The bill would require schools, as defined, to begin to phase out restricted school foods and ultraprocessed foods of concern by no later than July 1, 2029. Beginning July 1, 2032, the bill would prohibit a vendor from offering restricted school foods and ultraprocessed foods of concern to a school. This bill, on or before February 1, 2028, and on or before February 1 of each year thereafter through February 1, 2032, would require a vendor to report specified information to the State Department of Public Health for each food product sold to a school in the past calendar year, including, among others, the total quantity of food product sold to schools and whether that food product is an ultraprocessed food, a restricted school food, or an ultraprocessed food of concern. The bill, on or before July 1, 2028, and on or before July 1 of each year thereafter through July 1, 2032, would require the State Department of Public Health, in consultation with the State Department of Education, to submit to the Legislature and the Governor a report that contains, among other things, a summary and analysis of the information reported to the State Department of Public Health by vendors and recommendations for state and local legislative actions that could reduce the consumption of ultraprocessed foods, restricted school foods, and ultraprocessed foods of concern in schools. The bill would require the State Department of Public Health to consult with the State Department of Education regarding compliance training and technical assistance for school food service and procurement staff for these purposes and would require the State Department of Public Health to establish a structure to deliver training and technical assistance to local educational agencies. (2) Existing law requires the State Department of Education to develop and maintain nutrition guidelines for school lunches and breakfasts, and for all food and beverages sold on public school campuses, consistent with the requirements for a nutritionally adequate breakfast and a nutritionally adequate lunch. Existing law defines a nutritionally adequate breakfast and a nutritionally adequate lunch for these purposes to mean those that qualify for reimbursement under the most current meal pattern for the federal School Breakfast Program and the federal National School Lunch Program, respectively. Existing law requires a school district, county superintendent of schools, or charter school maintaining kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive, to make available a nutritionally adequate breakfast and a nutritionally adequate lunch, free of charge, during each schoolday to any pupil who requests a meal without consideration of the pupil's eligibility for a federally funded free or reduced-price meal. Existing law authorizes a school operated and maintained by a school district or county office of education, from the midnight before to 30 minutes after the end of the official schoolday, to sell food and beverages other than meals reimbursed by specified federal nutrition programs, only if the food or beverages meet dietary guidelines, as specified, depending on grade level. This bill, beginning July 1, 2035, would prohibit a school district, county superintendent of schools, or charter school maintaining kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive, from offering a nutritionally adequate breakfast or lunch that includes restricted school foods or ultraprocessed foods of concern, as provided, and would prohibit a school operated and maintained by a school district or county office of education from selling food or beverages, except for food items sold as part of a school fundraising event, containing those restricted school foods or ultraprocessed foods of concern, as provided. (3) To the extent this bill would impose additional requirements on public schools, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (4) 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.
(1) Existing law authorizes a local authority, as defined, to adopt a program to regulate sidewalk vendors if the program complies with specified standards. These standards include restricting the local authority from requiring a sidewalk vendor to operate within specific parts of the public right-of-way, except when that restriction is directly related to objective health, safety, or welfare concerns. A violation of these provisions is punishable only by an administrative fine, as specified. This bill would prohibit a local authority, except as otherwise required by state or federal law, from providing voluntary consent to any individual to access, review, or obtain certain records of the local authority that include personally identifiable information of any sidewalk vendors in the jurisdiction without a subpoena or judicial warrant. The bill would also prohibit a local authority and its personnel from disclosing or providing in writing, verbally, or in any other manner personally identifiable information of any sidewalk vendor that is requested, except pursuant to a subpoena or a valid judicial warrant. The bill would define "personally identifiable information," for these purposes, to include an individual's name, business name, home address, business address, birthdate, telephone number, California driver's license or identification, and other related information. The bill would also define "immigration enforcement" for these purposes. Existing law authorizes a local authority to adopt additional requirements regulating the time, place, and manner of sidewalk vending if the requirements are directly related to objective health, safety, or welfare concerns. These include requiring the sidewalk vendor to obtain from the local authority a permit or valid business license, provided that the local authority issuing the permit or business license accepts a California driver's license or identification number, an individual taxpayer identification number, or a municipal identification number in lieu of a social security number for the issuance of a permit or business license, and that the number collected is not disclosed, except as specified. This bill would also prohibit a local authority, in the above-described circumstances, from inquiring into or collecting information about an individual's immigration or citizenship status, place of birth, or individual criminal history, or requiring an applicant to submit fingerprints, complete a LiveScan fingerprinting, or submit to a background check as part of an application for a permit or business license. The bill would require a local authority that inquired into or collected information or documentation regarding an individual's place of birth or criminal history, required an applicant to submit fingerprints or complete a LiveScan fingerprinting, or performed a background check before January 1, 2026, to destroy those records on or before March 1, 2026, unless those records are expressly required by law to be preserved. The bill would provide that specified personally identifiable information collected by a local authority is exempt from disclosure under the California Public Records Act. This bill would prohibit an agency or department of a local authority, including any nonpublic entity working on the local authority's behalf, as provided, from using local authority moneys or personnel to investigate, interrogate, detain, detect, or arrest persons for certain purposes, and from engaging in specified activities related to immigration enforcement, when enforcing certain provisions regulating sidewalk vendors. The bill, for specified contracts between a nonpublic entity and a local authority entered into or modified on or after January 1, 2026, would require a nonpublic entity to explicitly agree to adhere to these provisions and would immediately terminate the contract if it is found that the nonpublic entity has violated these provisions. (2) Existing law, the California Retail Food Code (the code) , establishes uniform health and sanitation standards for, and provides for regulation by the State Department of Public Health of, retail food facilities and requires local health agencies to enforce these provisions. Existing law requires compact mobile food operations to meet specified health and safety standards. For purposes of the code, a "compact mobile food operation," means a mobile food facility that operates from an individual or from a pushcart, stand, display, pedal-driven cart, wagon, showcase, rack, or other nonmotorized conveyance. Existing law makes a violation of these provisions by an operator or employee of a compact mobile food operation or a sidewalk vendor punishable only by an administrative fine, as specified. This bill would prohibit an enforcement agency, including any nonpublic entity working on the enforcement agency's behalf, as provided, from using enforcement agency moneys or personnel to investigate, interrogate, detain, detect, or arrest persons for certain purposes, and from engaging in specified activities related to immigration enforcement, when enforcing certain provisions regulating compact mobile food operations. The bill, for specified contracts between a nonpublic entity and an enforcement agency entered into or modified on or after January 1, 2026, would require a nonpublic entity to explicitly agree to adhere to these provisions and would immediately terminate the contract if it is found that the nonpublic entity has violated these provisions. This bill would also prohibit an enforcement agency from providing voluntary consent to any individual to access, review, or obtain certain records of the enforcement agency that include personally identifiable information of any sidewalk vendor or operator or employee of a compact mobile food operation in the jurisdiction without a subpoena or judicial warrant. The bill would further prohibit a local authority and its personnel from disclosing or providing in writing, verbally, or in any other manner personally identifiable information of any sidewalk vendor that is requested, except pursuant to a subpoena or a valid judicial warrant. Existing law prohibits a food facility from being open for business without a valid permit and requires a permit to be issued by the enforcement agency when investigation has determined that the proposed facility and its methods of operation conform to code requirements. This bill would require a permit application for a compact mobile food operation to comply with specified requirements. In this regard, the bill would require an enforcement agency to accept a California driver's license or identification number, an individual taxpayer identification, or a municipal identification number in lieu of a social security number. The bill would also prohibit an enforcement agency from, among other things, inquiring into the individual's immigration status, citizenship status, or criminal history, as prescribed. The bill would further require an enforcement agency that inquired into or collected information or documentation regarding an individual's place of birth or criminal history, required an applicant to submit fingerprints or complete a LiveScan fingerprinting, or performed a background check before January 1, 2026, to destroy those records on or before March 1, 2026, unless those records are expressly required by law to be preserved. The bill would provide that specified personally identifiable information collected by an enforcement agency is exempt from disclosure under the California Public Records Act. The bill would make other related changes to these provisions. To the extent the bill would impose new requirements on local governmental agencies, it would create a state-mandated local program. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. 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.
(1) Existing law states the policy of the State of California is to afford all persons in public schools, regardless of their disability, gender, gender identity, gender expression, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or any other specified characteristic, equal rights and opportunities in the educational institutions of the state. Existing law prohibits the governing board of a school district, a county board of education, or the governing body of a charter school from adopting or approving the use of any textbook, instructional material, supplemental instructional material, or curriculum if its use would subject a pupil to unlawful discrimination, as specified. This bill would additionally prohibit the adoption or approval of the use of any professional development materials if the use of the material would subject a pupil to unlawful discrimination, as specified. The bill would similarly prohibit the adoption or approval of the use of professional development materials or services that promote, endorse, or otherwise support actions or the use of textbooks, instructional materials, supplemental instructional materials, or curriculum that would subject a pupil to unlawful discrimination, as specified. If the governing board of a school district, a county board of education, or the governing body of a charter school knows or has reason to know that materials were used in a classroom or an action occurred that resulted in unlawful discrimination, or knows or has reason to know that professional development materials or services were used that resulted in unlawful discrimination, the bill would require investigation and remediation of the action, as provided. This bill would establish the Office of Civil Rights, under the administration of the Government Operations Agency, with the purpose of working directly with local educational agencies to prevent and address discrimination and bias, as specified. The bill would require the Director of the Office of Civil Rights to be appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. The bill would require the Office of Civil Rights, in consultation with the State Department of Education and under the supervision of the Government Operations Agency, to, among other things, (A) provide education and educational resources to identify and prevent antisemitism and other forms of discrimination and bias, (B) share relevant laws and regulations with educational state agencies, school districts, county offices of education, charter schools, and community stakeholders, and (C) annually submit a report to the Government Operations Agency, the Superintendent of Public Instruction, the executive director of the State Board of Education, and the Legislature on the state of discrimination and bias in all local educational agencies, as specified. The bill would also require the Office of Civil Rights to employ the Antisemitism Prevention Coordinator to be appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. The bill would require the Antisemitism Prevention Coordinator to, among other things, develop, consult, and provide antisemitism education to school personnel to identify and proactively prevent antisemitism and to make recommendations, in coordination with the executive director of the state board, to the Legislature on legislation necessary for the prevention of antisemitism in educational settings. (2) Existing law authorizes a party to a written complaint of prohibited discrimination to appeal the action taken by the governing board of a school district to the State Department of Education. This bill would authorize a party to a written complaint of prohibited discrimination to appeal to the department based on the governing board of a school district's failure to issue an investigation report within a certain timeline. Existing law authorizes a person to file a complaint of an alleged violation with the local educational agency using the uniform complaint process or directly with the Superintendent as provided. If the Superintendent determines that a local educational agency has violated that prohibition and has not taken corrective action within 60 days, existing law authorizes the department to use any means authorized to effect compliance. This bill would authorize the department to require local educational agencies to take specified corrective actions, including obtaining technical assistance from the Office of Civil Rights and requiring the local educational agency to engage in regular reporting to the Office of Civil Rights and to use alternative instructional materials. The bill would prohibit instructional materials found to have resulted in unlawful discrimination, as provided, to be used in any current course offerings or any subsequent course offerings. If the unlawful discrimination involves antisemitism, the bill would require an improvement plan to be created in consultation with the Antisemitism Prevention Coordinator. If a determination is made that an organization has contracted to provide any textbook, instructional material, professional development material, supplemental instructional material, or curriculum that violates specified laws that prohibit subjecting a pupil to unlawful discrimination, the bill would require a local educational agency or the Superintendent to notify the organization that it must take corrective action, as provided, and would require the organization found to be in violation to, among other things, reimburse all funds received for their services from the local educational agency. (3) Existing law prohibits instruction or school-sponsored activities that promote a discriminatory bias on the basis of race or ethnicity, gender, religion, disability, nationality, sexual orientation, or other characteristics, as provided. This bill would establish that discriminatory bias in instruction and school-sponsored activities does not require a showing of direct harm to members of a protected group and would not require members of a protected group to be present while the discriminatory bias is occurring for the act to be considered discriminatory bias. If the governing board or body of the local educational agency finds that instruction or school-sponsored activities are discriminatory, as provided, the bill would require corrective action to be taken, as provided. (4) Existing law requires the governing board of a school district to annually notify parents or guardians of minor pupils of specified rights and responsibilities of the parent or guardian and of specified school district policies and procedures. This bill would require the notification to additionally advise the parent or guardian of the protections, requirements, and responsibilities prescribed in this bill. (5) This bill would require the department, by October 1 of each year, to issue a management bulletin to all local educational agencies describing the protections, requirements, and responsibilities prescribed in certain laws. The bill would require the Superintendent, in consultation with the executive director of the state board and the Antisemitism Prevention Coordinator, to develop and maintain a distinct internet web page containing resources and information specific to antisemitism on its internet website. (6) This bill would make the operation of its provisions contingent upon the enactment of SB 48 of the 2025–26 Regular Session. (7) By imposing additional duties on local educational agencies, 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.
(1) Existing law, the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) , an initiative measure, authorizes a person who obtains a state license under AUMA and any applicable local ordinances to engage in commercial adult-use cannabis activity pursuant to that license, if conducted as prescribed. Existing law, the Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA) , among other things, consolidates the licensure and regulation of commercial medicinal and adult-use cannabis activities, and requires the Department of Cannabis Control to administer its provisions. Existing law, until January 1, 2028, requires a social media platform to create and post a policy statement regarding the use of the social media platform to illegally distribute controlled substances, including a link to the social media platform's reporting mechanism for illegal or harmful content or behavior on the social media platform, if one exists, and a general description of its policies and procedures for responding to law enforcement inquiries. This bill, beginning on July 1, 2026, would require an online cannabis marketplace, as defined, to address in its terms of service whether it permits Californians to view the advertisements and business information of unlicensed sellers of cannabis or cannabis products on its marketplace and whether the marketplace verifies the licenses of sellers of cannabis or cannabis products whose advertisements and business information are viewable on its marketplace, as specified. The bill would require an online cannabis marketplace that does not verify those licenses to display a clear and conspicuous graphic that warns the consumer that the marketplace may be displaying, storing, or hosting unlicensed sellers of cannabis or cannabis products. This bill would require an online cannabis marketplace to establish a clear and conspicuous mechanism within its internet-based service that allows an individual to report to the online cannabis marketplace the display, storing, or hosting on the marketplace of advertisements from, or business information about, an unlicensed seller of cannabis or cannabis products. The bill would require the mechanism to provide the individual who submits a report with written confirmation of receipt of the report, periodic updates, and final written determination, as specified. This bill would impose certain penalties and relief depending on the violation of these provisions, as specified. (2) The Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law regulates the packaging, labeling, and advertising of food, beverages, and cosmetics and authorizes the State Department of Public Health to adopt regulations for the enforcement of that law, as specified. That law imposes various requirements specific to the manufacture and sale of industrial hemp products that are food or beverages, including a requirement for a certificate of analysis from an independent testing laboratory that confirms that the THC concentration does not exceed a specified amount. Existing emergency regulations require that industrial hemp food, food additives, beverages, and dietary supplements intended for human consumption have no detectable THC per serving. This bill, beginning July 1, 2026, would require an online hemp marketplace, as defined, to establish a clear and conspicuous mechanism within its internet-based service that allows an individual to report to the online hemp marketplace an advertisement for an intoxicating hemp product on the marketplace, as specified. The bill would define "intoxicating hemp product" to include an inhalable hemp product, as further defined, with a detectable THC concentration. The bill would require the mechanism to provide the individual who submits a report with written confirmation of receipt of the report, periodic updates, and final written determination, as specified. The bill would impose specified penalties and relief for violations of these provisions. (3) Existing law imposes strict liability upon persons who place a defective product on the market, including retailers engaged in the business of distributing goods to the public, for injuries caused by the product. Existing law also provides that each person is responsible for an injury occasioned to another by that person's want of ordinary care or skill, commonly known as negligence, in the management of their property or person, unless the injured person has, willfully or by want of ordinary care, brought the injury upon themselves. This bill, beginning July 1, 2026, would prohibit an online marketplace from engaging in unlawful paid online advertising related to unlicensed sellers of cannabis or cannabis products or intoxicating hemp products, as specified. The bill would impose joint and several liability on an online marketplace that violates that prohibition, and is a substantial factor in an unlawful transaction between a consumer and an unlicensed seller of cannabis or a cannabis product, or between a consumer and a seller of an intoxicating hemp product, for damages caused to the consumer by the cannabis, cannabis product, or intoxicating hemp product, unless specified conditions are met. The bill would increase the amount that a prevailing plaintiff may recover depending on what the online marketplace had actual knowledge at the time of the unlawful transaction and whether the harm was suffered by a child, as described. The bill would provide various affirmative defenses to an action brought under these provisions, and would authorize an online marketplace to seek indemnification against an advertiser of cannabis, cannabis products, or intoxicating hemp products that misrepresented to the online marketplace that they were licensed or registered to sell that product, as specified. (4) This bill would state that its provisions are severable.
Existing law, the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, administered by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, regulates the sale and distribution of alcoholic beverages and the granting of licenses for the manufacture, distribution, and sale of alcoholic beverages within the state. Existing law limits the amount of on-sale general licenses that may be issued by the department based on the population of the county in which the licensed premises are located. This bill would provide an exception to the limitation described above by authorizing the issuance of up to 20 additional new original on-sale general licenses, as specified, for bona fide public eating places located within a designated hospitality zone in the City and County of San Francisco, as defined. In order to authorize the issuance of additional licenses as described above, the bill would require an ordinance adopted by the local governing body of the City and County of San Francisco to designate or modify a hospitality zone to include specified information and findings. The bill would authorize the local governing body, in an ordinance designating or modifying a hospitality zone, to further limit, among other things, the maximum number of additional licenses to be issued within its hospitality zone. The bill would require the local governing body to submit the ordinance to the department upon the adoption of an ordinance to modify or repeal a hospitality zone. The bill would require any ordinance to establish, modify, or repeal a hospitality zone to be effective commencing the following July 1. The bill would require the department to follow specified procedures concerning the issuance of these licenses, and would authorize the department to designate these licenses as on-sale general for special use. The bill would prohibit licenses issued under its provisions from being, among other things, transferred from one county to another. If one of those licenses is canceled or revoked, the bill would authorize the department to issue an additional license. The bill would prohibit the department from issuing any license under these provisions after July 1, 2033. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the City and County of San Francisco.
Under existing law, knowingly buying or receiving stolen property or property that has been obtained in any manner constituting theft or extortion, as specified, is punishable as either a misdemeanor or a felony if the value of the property exceeds $950. Existing law prohibits a local authority from regulating sidewalk vendors, except in accordance with certain provisions, including that a local authority may, by ordinance or resolution, adopt requirements regulating the time, place, and manner of sidewalk vending if the requirements are directly related to objective health, safety, or welfare concerns. This bill, until January 1, 2031, would authorize the City and County of San Francisco to adopt an ordinance requiring a permit for the sale of specified merchandise on public property, if the ordinance includes specified written findings supported by substantial evidence, including, among other things, that there has been a significant pattern of merchandise being the subject of retail theft and then appearing for sale on public property within the City and County of San Francisco. The bill would require an ordinance adopted by the City and County of San Francisco to, among other things, identify a local permitting agency that is responsible for administering a permit system. The bill would authorize the ordinance to provide specified punishments for selling merchandise without a permit, including that 2nd and 3rd violations within 18 months of the first violation would be punishable as infractions, and that subsequent violations after 3 prior violations, that occur within 18 months of the first violation, would be punishable as infractions or misdemeanors by imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed 6 months, or by both that imprisonment and a fine. This bill would authorize the City and County of San Francisco to charge a fee for the cost of issuing a permit, not to exceed the reasonable regulatory costs of implementing the bill, as provided. The bill would authorize the permitting agency to accept specified forms of identification in lieu of a social security number, if the permitting agency otherwise requires a social security number for the issuance of a permit or business license, but would require the number collected from the alternative identification to be confidential, except as provided. The bill would prohibit the permitting agency from inquiring into or collecting certain information, including, information about an individual's immigration or citizenship status or criminal history. This bill would require, if an ordinance is adopted, the permitting agency to submit a report to the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco and the Legislature by January 1 of each year that includes specified information, including, among other things, the list or lists of merchandise that the City and County of San Francisco determined was a common target of retail theft. The bill would require the City and County of San Francisco, at least 60 days prior to the enactment of an ordinance, to hold one or more workshops to inform the development of the ordinance, and would require the City and County of San Francisco to administer a public information campaign for at least 30 calendar days prior to the enactment of the ordinance, including public announcements in major media outlets and press releases. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the City and County of San Francisco. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law, the Political Reform Act of 1974, prohibits a public officer from expending, and a candidate from accepting, public moneys for the purpose of seeking elective office. This bill would remove prohibitions imposed on a public officer or candidate to expend or accept public funds, as defined, for the purpose of seeking elective office unless the funds are earmarked by a state or local entity for education, transportation, or public safety. The bill would require candidates to abide by specified expenditure limits and meet strict criteria, as defined, to qualify for public funds. The bill would prohibit public funds from being used to pay legal defense fees or fines or to repay personal loans to their campaign. The bill would permit a statute, ordinance, or charter to establish standards to increase the expenditure limits for each qualified, voluntarily participating candidate pursuant to a specified formula. The bill would provide that the Fair Political Practices Commission is not responsible for administering or enforcing a system of public funding of candidates established by a local governmental agency. Existing law prohibits a foreign government or foreign principal, as defined, from making a contribution, expenditure, or independent expenditure in connection with the qualification or support of, or opposition to, any state or local ballot measure or in connection with the election of a candidate to state or local office. Under existing law, a person who violates this prohibition is guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a fine equal to the amount contributed or expended. This bill would instead require that a person guilty of that misdemeanor, in addition to other penalties, be fined an amount at least equal to the amount contributed or expended, but not exceeding a maximum amount of 3 times the amount contributed or expended. The Political Reform Act of 1974, an initiative measure, provides that the act may be amended by a statute that becomes effective upon approval of the voters. This bill would require the Secretary of State to submit the provisions of the bill, as specified, to the voters for approval at the November 3, 2026, statewide general election. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 85320 of the Government Code proposed by AB 953 to be operative pursuant to specified conditions.