Status of CLFP Priority Bills

May has been a busy month in the Legislature given the mandated deadlines to move bills through the policy and fiscal committees of each house and off the floors to the other house by May 31, 2013. CLFP staff has been actively engaged on several measures that would have direct impacts to specific member companies and to the industry as a whole. In addition to the busy legislative calendar in May, CLFP has also been engaged on Governor Brown’s proposed reforms to Proposition 65.

CLFP was successful in stopping the milk pricing legislation from advancing this year, which would have adversely impacted our dairy manufacturers. In addition, CLFP was successful in stopping a measure from advancing this year which would have created a new regulatory program for foods deemed to contribute to a "significant health epidemic," including obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and so on. CLFP was also successful in removing language from a bill that would have expanded the size and types of containers under the Beverage Recycling Program. Finally, we were successful in defeating a measure which would have established a targeted tax on sweetened beverages.

Unfortunately, there are still some CLFP opposed measures still moving through the legislative process. One of these measures would increase air quality nuisance violation penalties by 10 fold for Title V facilities. Another measure would expand the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which would further delay projects and increase litigation. CLFP continues to fight these measures and hopes to stop them in the second house.

On May 7, 2013, the Governor released his draft Proposition 65 reform proposals. He stated that "Proposition 65 is a good law that's helped many people, but it's being abused by unscrupulous lawyers. This is an effort to improve the law, so it can do what it was intended to do—protect Californians from harmful chemicals."

Some of the Governor's proposed changes include: imposing limits on attorney's fees; requiring a stronger showing by plaintiffs that they have evidence to support claims before commencing litigation; giving the State of California flexibility to adjust the levels at which warnings are required for chemicals that cause reproductive harm; establishing limits on the amount of funds in an enforcement case that can be earmarked for settlement funds in lieu of penalties; and providing the public better information concerning what substances individuals are being exposed to and how to protect themselves. Brown also has proposed requiring "greater disclosure of plaintiff's information."

The Governor’s Office has been holding a series of stakeholder workshops on these reform proposals. The CLFP Food Safety, Nutrition & Labeling Committee and the CLFP Legislative Affairs Committee are reviewing the Governor’s proposals and will provide feedback and guidance to the CLFP staff throughout the process.