By Bruce Curtis The New legislation and a host of ballot measures that some say move California farther from the political center, bode for a year of change across the Golden State in <strong>2017</strong>. This year, we will emphasize the ways we’ll be affected locally. Prop 64: If you thought marijuana was not already big business on the Left Coast, remember that pot has been legal in Washington for a while, but the real surprise is that marijuana is already a multi-billion dollar business in California, it didn’t take voter approval of Proposition 64 for weed to become big business. In Sonoma County, 9,000 pot growers have occupied the nether region between legal and illegal cultivation. That scale of industrial activity validates observations that medical marijuana would eventually open the door to legalization of recreational use. The New York Times compares this grey market to the 1930’s when California’s wine industry began to gear up for production even before repeal of prohibition. But although many are gearing up for “growth," so to speak, the new law created by voters last November won’t bring instant gratification. It is easier to define what pot users cannot do, that what they can do. First, it is legal to have up to an ounce of pot, and up to 8 grams of cannabis oil, but retail sales will wait until regulations governing such stores are in place. In addition, you won’t be able to buy from a medpot dispensary without a doctor’s card. Many unanswered questions remain; will California’s DUI fatality rate double as they did when pot was legalized in Colorado and Washington? Cracking down on intoxicated drivers is prob- lematic because tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the psychoactive ingredient in pot, affects individuals differently. Some may be intoxicated with a very low blood level, while others may be able to function with higher levels. But many employers have indicated they will not tolerate any level of THC. On the federal level, pot is still a class 1 controlled substance, and the new Republican majority could easily undo state marijuana laws. AB 1066: Of course legal agriculture is big business in San Luis Obispo County, so vintners and seasonal employers need to know the new rules regarding overtime for agriculture workers. The new rules require employers to phase in time-and-a-half wages for hours over 10 per day. Maximum weekly limits will also apply, but the good news is that AB 1066 phases in slowly and won’t require full overtime until 2022. AB 1732: All-gender restrooms have been a source of rancor in 2016, and the new law affecting business restrooms will become effective March 1. This is actually not as bad as feared; the bill requires single-use restrooms to be labeled multi-gender, so fears that some, uhh, individual of indeterminate gender might just waltz in the restroom on your five year old, isn’t any more likely than it was before. The new law does authorize building inspectors to make sure the new rule is observed, usually needing only a door sign to comply. Whether this new law motivates businesses to convert to multi-user restrooms only, remains to be seen. Prop 56: Smokers will see more money go up in smoke, literally, with passage of this tobacco tax. The tax will go to help fund healthcare. You may not want to read the rest of this paragraph, because we’ve estimated that at average retail prices, San Luis Obispo County smokers will pay another $730 on top of the $2,372 they already pay per year for their habit. $3,102 will nicely cover a Hawaii vacation for two. Taxes like this have been criticized – not by taxpayers, but by government. Prop 56 puts officials in an odd juxtaposition because they assumedly want people to quit smoking, but they don’t like the fact such laws become their own disincentive: As smokers quit and fewer start, Prop 56 revenue will drop. Prop 51: In their inscrutable wisdom, California voters added $9 billion to the state’s current $85 billion in education bond debt and two outcomes are possible, increased taxes, reduced state services or some combination of both. Critics say the extra $500 million of annual payments puts pressure on the state budget, while impacting California’s credit ratings and interest rates; the traditional argument about government not borrowing more than it can pay back, is cited. They also see such bond measures as de-facto tax hikes, an end-run around a 2010 ballot measure that requires tax hikes be approved by a two-thirds majority of voters. Supporters argue California school infrastructure is antiquated and crumbling. Prop 57: Prop 57 survived widespread concerns from law enforcement statewide. Local law enforcement were in solidarity against prop 57, San Luis Obispo county chief prosecutor Dan Dow acting as front man. Dow says prop 57 will add to rising crime rates by releasing certain “nonviolent” offenders that include rapists, driveby shooters and those who committed assault with a deadly weapon. Rather than speculate, I’ll let Dow’s editorial address public safety issues. “The early release of thousands more career criminals serving prison sentences for very serious crimes will surely lead to a continued increase in crime in our communities and the needless victimization of more Californians. “ Prop 63: Criticized as a vehicle for Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsome’s political ambitions, voters still approved this gun and ammo control measure that makes it harder for legal gun owners to buy guns and ammo. Large capacity magazines are outlawed, ammunition buyers must obtain a four-year permit from the California Department of Justice, and starting in 2018, buyers who purchase ammo out of state must clear it with California dealers or be cited with the equivalent of a traffic ticket. Gun theft becomes a felony. A 2nd amendment challenge seems inevitable, and Newsome has actually been praised by some pro-gun lobbyists. They look at Prop 63 as a direct attack on millions of gun owners, making their job of electing 2nd amendment rights supporters in California, easier. 20 <strong>PASO</strong> <strong>Magazine</strong>, <strong>January</strong> <strong>2017</strong>
<strong>January</strong> <strong>2017</strong>, <strong>PASO</strong> <strong>Magazine</strong> 21