AOJ Bills of Interest
June 30, 2016
False Advertising: Substantiation of Claims: County Counsel
SB 1130 (Wieckowski) – Signed By Governor
Chapter 38, Statutes 2016
Governor Brown signed SB 1130 by Senator Bob Wieckowski into law on June 27th providing County Counsel’s the ability to request substantiation of an advertising claim before filing a lawsuit. This updates California’s False Advertising Law to help facilitate the correction of false advertising claims and assists in eliminating unnecessary lawsuits.
County Jail Milestone Credits
AB 1597 (Stone, M) – Signed By Governor
Chapter 36, Statutes of 2016
Governor Brown signed Assembly Bill 1597 by Assembly Member Mark Stone into law on June 27th providing county jails the ability to expand existing performance milestone credit earning programs to all prisoners. This expansion includes those convicted of a misdemeanor; and those felons who have not yet been convicted to participate in earning milestone credits that could be applied upon conviction. “Milestone credits” are additional credits an offender can earn for completing education programs in county jail.
Construction Contracts: Indemnity
SB 885(Wolk) – Oppose
As Amended on June 16, 2016
Senate Bill 885 by Senator Lois Wolk was pulled by the Author prior to the Assembly Judiciary Committee hearing on Tuesday, June 28th because Senator Wolk and the sponsors, design professionals, did not want to accept the amendments that the Assembly Judiciary Committee and Assembly Member Stone proposed. The amendments would have required design professionals errors and omissions insurance, be required to cover an additional insured. Since there isn’t another opportunity for an Assembly Judiciary Committee hearing this session, it looks like the bill will not move this session.
State Remote Piloted Aircraft Act
SB 868 (Jackson) – Support
As Amended on May 31, 2016
Senate Bill 868 by Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson failed to receive enough votes during the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee on Tuesday, June 21st. The measure as amended would have established a regulatory framework for unmanned aircraft technology and operations in California.
A coalition of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) manufacturers and industry organizations opposed the measure making it very difficult to get the needed votes out of the Committee. The coalition was led by the California Chamber of Commerce and the Consumer Technology Association. They argued that the bill needlessly addressed already prohibited conduct (e.g., eavesdroppers and Peeping Toms), created new insurance requirements without justification, and preempted federal law.
The coalition stated that “to the extent legislation is adopted, it should clarify the scope of existing law and its application to UAS. State statutes that conflict with federal law, redundantly address already-forbidden conduct, or attach burdensome regulation to UAS operations would undermine innovation and provide a strong disincentive to the UAS industry regarding future developmental and educational activities in California.”
The final vote in Committee was (3-4). Since the deadline to hear bills in policy committees is July 1st it is unlikely this bill will move during the 2015-16 legislative session.