With 2022 having just come to an end, we wanted to take the opportunity to spotlight some of the most impactful climate change legislative and regulatory actions taken in California.
Continue Reading 2022 in Review – California Climate Change Policy and Legislation
California has approved a new, alternative “Safe Harbor” warning label for foods containing acrylamide, a naturally-occurring byproduct that occurs during high-heat cooking. Whether the new regulation moots the California Chamber of Commerce’s (“CalChamber”) ongoing legal battle against Proposition 65 (“Prop 65”) warning labels[1] remains to be seen.
In an effort to decrease the skyrocketing development costs and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, Assembly Bill 2097 (AB 2097) aims to eliminate a key obstacle for new developments: parking. More specifically, starting on January 1, 2023, this law prohibits public agencies from imposing minimum automobile parking requirements for residential, commercial and other development projects if the project is located within a 1/2-mile of a “High-Quality Transit Corridor”[1] or a “Major Transit Stop.”[2]
Continue Reading More Places, Less Spaces: California is Driving Down Development Costs
Sheppard Mullin is pleased to share the first issue of our quarterly LA Land Use Digest, featuring: updates on the latest legislation from the region (The Council File); exemplary, forthcoming projects (In the Pipeline); and commentary on the latest issues of importance for the land use community (Planning Matters).
This article was originally published at FoodNavigator-USA.
Federal and state agencies are considering restrictions or bans of individual ‘forever chemicals’ PFAS (Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl compounds) or PFAS as a class, while at least 24 putative class actions targeting packaged goods purportedly containing PFAS were filed from January 1 to August 1, 2022 alone. So how widely used are PFAS in the food industry, and how can firms protect themselves from litigation?
The zeitgeist of pandemic-era American politics has been ugly. Really ugly. In an environment where civil disobedience skews uncivil, how do we balance the quintessentially American freedom of speech with the public participation requirements in the Ralph M. Brown Act (“Brown Act.”)? Senate Bill 1100 provides some guidance.
Continue Reading Will Newsom’s Nicety Bill Curb Disruptive Behavior During Public Hearings?
The group of chemicals known as PFAS (per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances) are high on the federal regulatory agenda for 2022, as implementation of EPA’s “PFAS Strategic Roadmap” proceeds. One potential consequence will be new additions to California’s “Prop 65 List” of chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive harm. Already, two PFAS substances are subject to Prop 65 warning and labeling requirements (PFOA and PFOS), with a third (PFNA) subject to enforcement starting in 2023. New federal Health Advisory Levels (HALs) announced on June 15, 2022 may provide the basis to add another two PFAS to the list (PFBS and GenX).
On December 4, 2019, the Los Angeles City Council adopted Ordinance No. 186477 which prohibits a “restricted developer” or “principal” from making contributions to the Mayor, City Attorney, City Councilmember, a candidate from one of these offices, or a City committee controlled by one of these individuals (“Restricted City Officials”), effective June 8, 2022. The contribution ban applies from the date the application of a significant planning entitlement is submitted to the City of Los Angeles Planning Department, and ends 12 months after the Letter of Determination for the project is issued, or the date the decision on the application is final. Contributions made prior to June 8, 2022 are not subject to the ban.
Continue Reading City of Los Angeles Developer Contribution Ban Goes Into Effect
The Biden Administration is amending the federal regulations for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to reverse certain changes made by the Trump Administration. The first set of amendments took effect last Friday on May 20, 2022.
Continue Reading Biden Revisions to the NEPA Regulations Now in Effect
For many in the cannabis industry, April 1, 2022 is seen as a day of reckoning following the July 2021 passage of Assembly Bill 141 and Senate Bill 160 (collectively, the Cannabis Trailer Bill). In an attempt to transition to an annual licensure program, April 1st marked the beginning of the end for provisional cannabis licensure. It also ushered in significant changes to renewal process for previously granted provisional licenses. These modifications now require applicants to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Res. Code §§ 21000 et seq.) (CEQA), a complex statewide policy of environmental protection fraught with potential traps for those unversed in the law, before an operator is eligible to be awarded a cannabis state license. This requirement alone carries the potential to create a much higher barrier to entrance into the cannabis market.
Continue Reading No April Fools: Starting April 1st, Cannabis Operators Face CEQA Compliance Requirements for State Licenses