Connect with us

California

Last-minute bill aims to protect California restaurants from surcharge ban

Published

on

Last-minute bill aims to protect California restaurants from surcharge ban


Just weeks before the July 1 start of a statewide ban on so-called “hidden fees,” State Sen. Bill Dodd (D-Napa) has proposed a new law to clarify how it applies to the restaurant industry.

If passed, urgency measure Senate Bill 1524 would allow restaurants to continue charging mandatory gratuities, service charges, or other fees, as long as those fees are conspicuously displayed on restaurant menus.

“This will enable restaurants to continue to support increased pay equity and to make contributions to worker health care and other employee benefits,” said Matthew Sutton, senior vice president at the California Restaurant Association. SB 1524 was co-authored by state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) and Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel (D-Encino) and is supported by the California Restaurant Association and Unite Here labor union, according to a press statement.

Dodd is also behind California’s Senate Bill 478, which he co-authored with Sen. Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley) and which Gov. Gavin Newsom signed last year. Starting July 1, it aims to eliminate “junk fees” — hidden costs imposed on customers that raise a bill higher than what was advertised. Concert ticket vendors, hotels and restaurants are among the intended industries. The goal of the legislation is simple, its authors say: The price people see should be the one they pay.

Advertisement

“Restaurant customers shouldn’t be surprised when they get their checks by a slew of extra charges they were not expecting,” Sen. Dodd said in a statement announcing the introduction of SB 1524. “Many restaurants are up-front with their business practices but too many aren’t, necessitating action. This proposal will level the playing field for all restaurants and address confusion and disagreement about what is permissible under state law.”

In the months leading up to the rollout of SB 478, confusion emerged about how it would be implemented. When details about the new policy were released last month in a California Department of Justice FAQ, it triggered alarms around the restaurant community, because it stipulated that no extra restaurant fees — including mandatory tips for large parties (a widespread industry practice), as well as various surcharges, many of which were clearly shown on restaurant menus — would be permitted. That would leave restaurants to try to recoup that income by rolling those costs into the overall price per item on each menu.

And that, in turn, could trigger even more severe sticker shock among restaurant customers, said Darren Matte, owner and managing partner at a number of Bay Area restaurants, including Per Diem in San Francisco, Harvest and Cocina Hermanas in Danville and Los Gatos Parkside.

“There’s an art and a science to menu pricing,” he said. Efforts that restaurants make to, for instance, keep burgers under a ceiling of $20 or entrées under $30, would be in vain if there aren’t other ways to cover the costs of running the restaurant, he said. Without those restaurant fees and required tips from large groups, he said he wasn’t sure what would happen.

“Will people just absorb it? Or will it be the proverbial straw that breaks the back, along with all the other price increases we’ve had?” he said.

Advertisement

In response to learning about the SB 1524 proposal, Matte said, “I think this would be amazing. Hopefully, it goes through.”

Legislation co-author Sen. Wiener added, “Restaurants are vital to the fabric of life in California, and they should be able to cover costs as long as they do so transparently,” he said. “The bill strikes the right balance between supporting restaurants and delivering transparency for consumers, and I’m proud to support it.”

SB 1524 could be adopted within the next month, according to the press statement.



Source link

Advertisement

California

Can’t win in primary election? Drop out, California Democrats say

Published

on

Can’t win in primary election? Drop out, California Democrats say


play

California Democrats running for governor, your party has a message for you. Think carefully about your candidacy and campaign ahead of the swiftly approaching filing deadline.

California Democratic Party Chair Rusty Hicks urged candidates looking to assume the state’s highest office to “honestly assess the viability of their candidacy and campaign” as March 6, the final day to declare candidacy, nears. Hicks said that concerns about the crowded field of Democrat candidates “persist” in an open letter on Tuesday, March 3.

Advertisement

It comes as five leading candidates, several of which are Democrats — Katie Porter, Eric Swalwell, and Tom Steyer — are in a “virtual tie” per a recent poll, the Desert Sun reported, which is part of the USA TODAY Network.

Two Republican candidates pushing out California democrats in the gubernatorial bid may be “implausible,” but “it is not impossible,” Hicks said of the reasoning behind his latest message. Steve Hilton and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, both Republicans, lead in RealClear Polling’s average of various polls.

The party chair spotlighted the need for California Democrats’ leadership, particularly over Proposition 50, the voter-approved measure that will temporarily implement new congressional district maps, paving the way for Democrats to secure more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.

“If in the unlikely event a Democrat failed to proceed to the general election for governor, there could be the potential for depressed Democratic turnout in California in November,” Hicks said. “The result would present a real risk to winning the congressional seats required and imperil Democrats’ chances to retake the House, cut Donald Trump’s term in half, and spare our nation from the pain many have endured since January 2025.”

Advertisement

During a press conference on March 2, Gov. Gavin Newsom said that when he is out in communities, people aren’t talking about the governor’s race. It’s an observation he called “interesting,” considering voting in the primary election starts in May.

“It’s been hard, I think, to focus on that race,” Newsom said, pointing to the attention on President Donald Trump, redistricting, and other matters.

What exactly is California Democratic Party asking of candidates?

In his open letter, Hicks gave directions to candidates.

First, assess your candidacy and campaign. If you don’t have a viable path to the general election, don’t file to get your name on the ballot for the primary election in June. Also, be prepared to suspend your campaign and endorse another candidate by April 15 if you decide to file but can’t show “meaningful progress towards winning the primary election.”

Advertisement

When is the next California election? Primary election in 2026

California voters will trim the field of candidates for governor on June 2. Only the two candidates who receive the most votes, regardless of party preference, will move on to the November election.  

Paris Barraza is a reporter covering Los Angeles and Southern California for the USA TODAY Network. Reach her at pbarraza@usatodayco.com.



Source link

Continue Reading

California

Supreme Court blocks California law limiting schools from telling parents about trans students

Published

on

Supreme Court blocks California law limiting schools from telling parents about trans students


The U.S. Supreme Court has temporarily blocked a California law that limited when schools could require staff to disclose a student’s gender identity, clearing the way for schools to tell parents if their children identify as transgender without getting the students’ approval.

Rear view of multiracial students with hands raised in classroom at high school

The decision came after religious parents and educators, represented by the Thomas More Society, challenged California school policies aimed at preventing staff from disclosing a student’s gender identity.

Erwin Chemerinsky, dean and professor of law at the University of California Berkeley School of Law, said the ruling favors parents’ ability to be informed. “The Supreme Court today rules in favor of the claim of parents to be able to know the gender identity and gender pronoun of the children,” Chemerinsky said.

Advertisement
FILE:{ }transgender flag against blue sky background { }(Photo: AdobeStock)

FILE:{ }transgender flag against blue sky background { }(Photo: AdobeStock)

The decision temporarily blocks a state law that bans automatic parental notification requirements if students change their pronouns or gender expression at school. The Thomas More Society called the decision a major victory for parents, saying the court found California’s policy likely violates constitutional rights.

Chemerinsky said the Supreme Court’s action is an emergency ruling. “This law is now put on hold. So what this means is that schools can require that teachers and other staff inform parents of the gender identity or gender pronouns of children,” he said.

scotus.PNG

Kathie Moehlig, founder and executive director of Trans Family Support Services, said she is concerned about how the ruling could affect students who do not have supportive families.

“I am really concerned about our kids that do come from these non affirming homes, that they know that they’re going to get in trouble, that they’re going to possibly have violence brought against them possibly kicked out of their homes,” Moehlig said.

Moehlig said parents should eventually know, but that the conversation should happen when a student feels safe. “Our students are going to be less inclined to confide in any adults that might be able to help to get them access to mental healthcare, to a support system. They may still tell their peers but they’re certainly not going to tell any other adult,” she said.

Advertisement

Equality California, a LGBTQ+ civil rights organization, shared a statement:

Equality California, the nation’s largest statewide LGBTQ+ civil rights organization, released the following statement from Executive Director Tony Hoang in response to today’s U.S. Supreme Court shadow docket ruling in Mirabelli v. Bonta regarding California’s student privacy protections for transgender youth. Today’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene in this case is deeply disturbing. By stepping in on an emergency basis, the Court has effectively upended California’s student privacy protections without hearing full arguments and before the judicial process has run its course. While not surprising, this move reflects a dangerous willingness to short-circuit the established judicial process to dismantle protections for transgender youth. While this case continues to be litigated, the ruling revives Judge Benitez’s prior decision, which broadly targets numerous California laws protecting transgender and gender-nonconforming students — threatening critical safeguards that prevent forced outing and allow educators to respect a student’s affirmed name and pronouns at school. These protections exist for one reason: to keep students safe and ensure schools remain places where young people can learn and thrive without fear. To be clear: today’s decision does not impact California’s SAFETY Act, which prohibits school districts from adopting policies that forcibly out transgender students. The SAFETY Act remains in full effect, and we will continue defending it. Transgender youth deserve dignity, safety, and the freedom to learn without fear. We will never stop fighting for transgender youth and their families. Equality California will continue working with parents, educators, and advocates to ensure schools remain safe, welcoming, and focused on the success and well-being of every student.

The case now returns to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which will decide whether the California law is constitutional.



Source link

Continue Reading

California

Rep. Kevin Kiley announces run in California’s redrawn 6th Congressional District

Published

on

Rep. Kevin Kiley announces run in California’s redrawn 6th Congressional District



Congressman Kevin Kiley has announced his plan to run in California’s newly redrawn 6th district.

In a statement on Monday, Rep. Kiley revealed he had considered running in the 5th District – which could have set up a possible showdown between two current Republican officeholders.

“It’s true that I was fully prepared to run in the new 5th, having tested the waters and with polls showing a favorable outlook in a “safe” district. But doing what’s easy and what’s right are often not the same,” Kiley stated.

Advertisement

Kiley currently represents California’s 3rd district, which originally comprised counties making up much of the back spine of the state.

As of the Prop. 50 redistricting push, the 3rd district was redrawn for the 2026 midterm election to lean toward the Democratic Party – with those eastern spine of California counties lopped off and more of Sacramento County, including Rancho Cordova, added.

California’s new 6th district is now comprised of Rocklin, Roseville, Citrus Heights, much of North and East Sacramento, and the city of West Sacramento. Democratic Rep. Ami Bera currently represents the district, but will be running for the new 3rd district in 2026.

Advertisement

Other declared candidates for the 6th district include Democrats Lauren Babb Thomlinson, Thien Ho, Richard Pan, Kindra Pring, Tyler Vandenberg, and Republicans Christine Bish, Craig DeLuz, and Raymond Riehle. 

Kiley was first elected to the House in 2022 and was reelected in 2024. 





Source link

Continue Reading

Trending