Privacy and Consumer Protection

Existing law authorizes any corporation organized for or engaged in the business of selling, distributing, supplying, or delivering water for irrigation purposes, and requires any corporation organized for or engaged in the business of selling, distributing, supplying, or delivering water for domestic use, to provide in its articles or bylaws that water shall be sold, distributed, supplied, or delivered only to owners of its shares and that those shares are appurtenant to certain lands, as specified. Under existing law, these corporations are known as mutual water companies. This bill would prohibit a mutual water company from charging, issuing a bill, or otherwise seeking to hold tenants of shareholders responsible for the costs of water or its delivery, except for specified tenants, and would require all notices of charges for water to be sent to the last known address of the shareholder or tenant, as applicable, or by electronic mail if the shareholder or tenant, as applicable, has provided and verified the use of an electronic mail address to the company within the last year. Existing law authorizes a mutual water company that is not a public utility to levy assessments upon its shares, except as provided. This bill would require a mutual water company that operates a public water system and that proposes to levy an assessment or to increase the charge for water to shareholders by more than 20% to comply with specified notice and public meeting requirements before it seeks to collect the assessment or increase the water charge. The bill would require the mutual water company to prepare a written proposal at least 45 days before a public meeting to adopt a proposal to collect an assessment or to increase a water charge, as specified, and to convene a public meeting regarding the proposal, as provided. The bill would require the mutual water company to provide or send a copy of the written proposal and the notice of the public meeting, at least 45 days beforehand, to specified persons, along with other information, and to also provide or send a copy of the written proposal and the notice to a newspaper of general circulation or another specified communication outlet. The bill would also require the company to post a copy of the written proposal and the notice, at least 45 days beforehand, on the company's internet websites or social media platforms, as applicable. The bill would require the individual votes of board members of the mutual water company on the assessment or the increase of the water charge to be recorded in the minutes of the board meeting. The bill would prohibit the mutual water company from beginning to collect an assessment or increase a water charge earlier than 30 days after the public meeting where the proposed assessment is adopted. Existing law requires a mutual water company that operates a public water system to make certain records promptly available upon written request to an eligible person, as defined, upon payment of fees covering direct costs of duplication, including, among other documents, agendas and minutes of board meetings and copies of the mutual water company's annual budget and accounting report. Existing law defines "eligible persons" for purposes of this requirement to include, among others, shareholders of the mutual water company, a person who is an occupant, pursuant to a lease or rental agreement, of commercial space or a dwelling unit to which the mutual water company sells, distributes, supplies, or delivers drinking water, and an elected official of a city or county who represents people who receive drinking water directly from the mutual water company, as specified. This bill would additionally require a mutual water company to make available to those eligible persons, upon request, a copy of a written proposal to levy an assessment or to increase a water charge. The bill would also include as an eligible person, for purposes of all of the above-described provisions, the chief administrative officer for each city, county, and government water agency in the mutual water company's service area, as specified. The bill would prohibit a mutual water company that provides the requested records in digital form from charging for any duplication costs, as provided.

Existing law, commencing April 1, 2026, makes a gift certificate with a cash value of less than $15 redeemable in cash for its cash value. This bill would authorize the issuer of a gift certificate that contains printed language on the certificate stating a cash redemption threshold that is lower than the amount described above to sell the gift certificate until December 31, 2028, if certain requirements are met, including that the gift certificate was manufactured or printed before April 1, 2026, and the issuer of the gift certificate displays at specified point-of-sale devices, a notice stating that a gift certificate with a cash value of less than $15 is redeemable in cash for its cash value, as provided.

Existing law prohibits a video streaming service, as defined, that serves consumers in the state from transmitting the audio of commercial advertisements louder than the video content the advertisements accompany, as specified. This bill would clarify that video streaming service includes a user-generated video streaming service, and would additionally prohibit a music streaming service or podcast streaming service that serves consumers in the state from transmitting the audio of commercial advertisements louder than the content the advertisements accompany.

This House Resolution from the California Legislature calls for a federal review of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. The bill argues that the current law, which protects online platforms from liability for third-party content, has become outdated and allows major technology companies to avoid responsibility for harmful user-generated material. It highlights that courts have used this provision to shield platforms from legal action in cases involving harassment, illegal sales, and other serious harms. The resolution contends that the law should be reformed to hold companies accountable for their design choices and content moderation practices while still encouraging them to remove objectionable material.

Existing law establishes the Department of Industrial Relations in the Labor and Workforce Development Agency to administer and enforce various laws relating to employment and working conditions. This bill would require a business, as defined, to annually provide a notice to the department of all the workplace surveillance tools the employer is using in the workplace. The bill would require the notice to include, among other information, a list of the workplace surveillance tools being used that surveil employees and the categories of information being collected on employees by the workplace surveillance. The bill would also require a business to send the notice to employees and any union that represents employees of the business. The bill would make a business that violates these provisions subject to a civil penalty of $500 per violation. This bill would require the department to submit a report to the Legislature by January 1, 2029, compiling the above-described notices provided by businesses. The bill would require that the report include, among other requirements, a breakdown of notices by industry type.