Self Storage Bill Watch List

Current Text: Introduced: 2/13/2024 html pdf

Status: 4/16/2024-Set for hearing April 24.

Location: 2/21/2024-S. L., P.E. & R.

Summary: Current law provides for the payment of unemployment compensation benefits and extended benefits to eligible individuals who meet specified requirements. Under current law, unemployment benefits are paid from the Unemployment Fund, which is continuously appropriated for these purposes. Current law makes an employee ineligible for benefits if the employee left work because of a trade dispute and specifies that the employee remains ineligible for the duration of the trade dispute. Existing case law holds that employees who left work due to a lockout by the employer, even if it was in anticipation of a trade dispute, are eligible for benefits. This bill would restore eligibility after the first 2 weeks for an employee who left work because of a trade dispute.

SB 1154 (Hurtado D) California Preventing Algorithmic Collusion Act of 2024.

Current Text: Amended: 3/18/2024 html pdf

Last Amend: 3/18/2024

Status: 4/17/2024-Set for hearing April 23.

Location: 2/21/2024-S. JUD.

Summary: Current law imposes various requirements on the Attorney General related to consumer protection, including, among others, the supervision of charitable trusts and the enforcement of antitrust laws. Current law, commonly known as the Cartwright Act, identifies certain acts that are unlawful restraints of trade and unlawful trusts and prescribes provisions for its enforcement through civil actions. This bill, the California Preventing Algorithmic Collusion Act of 2024 (the act), would require a person, as defined, upon request of the Attorney General, to provide to the Attorney General a written report, as specified, on each pricing algorithm, as defined, identified in the request. The act would require that all information submitted in a report under these provisions be treated as confidential and be considered privileged and confidential trade secrets exempt from disclosure under the California Public Records Act. The act would authorize the Attorney General to share the report with the National Institute of Standards and Technology for technical assistance in understanding the report, as specified. This act would prohibit a person from using or distributing any pricing algorithm that uses, incorporates, or was trained with nonpublic competitor data, as defined. If the Attorney General has reason to believe that a person has violated these provisions, the act would authorize the Attorney General to bring a civil action against the person in any court of competent jurisdiction in this state, as specified.

SB 1486 (Dahle R) Accessibility: internet websites.

Current Text: Amended: 3/20/2024 

Last Amend: 3/20/2024

Status: 4/8/2024-April 23 hearing postponed by committee.

Location: 4/3/2024-S. JUD.

Summary: Current law imposes liability upon a person who denies, aids or incites a denial of, or makes any discrimination or distinction contrary to, rights afforded by law for actual damages suffered, exemplary damages, a civil penalty, and attorney’s fees, as specified, to any person who was denied the specified rights. Current law also imposes liability upon a person, firm, or corporation that denies or interferes with admittance to, or enjoyment of, public facilities or otherwise interferes with the rights of an individual with a disability, as specified, for damages and attorney’s fees to a person who was denied those rights. This bill would provide that statutory damages based upon the inaccessibility of an internet website under these provisions shall only be recovered against an entity, as defined, if the internet website fails to provide equally effective communication or facilitate full and equal enjoyment of the entity’s goods and services to all members of the public. The bill would make statutory damages for internet website inaccessibility contingent on the plaintiff proving that they had one of 2 sets of experiences. Specifically, the plaintiff may prove that they personally encountered a specific barrier that caused a difference in the plaintiff’s access to or use of the internet website as compared to other users, as specified. Alternatively, the plaintiff may prove that they were deterred from accessing all or part of the internet website, as specified, because of the internet website’s failure to provide equally effective communication or to facilitate full and equal enjoyment of the entity’s goods and services offered to the public.