The bill also addresses the regulation of the cannabis industry in California, amending the authority granted to the Bureau of Cannabis Control concerning enforcement matters and the hiring of non-peace officer staff to assist in investigations. SB 108 aims to streamline regulatory processes within the cannabis sector and clarifies the licensing responsibilities under the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA). Moreover, it establishes the Data Brokers Registry Fund, thereby enhancing data privacy measures concerning registered data brokers.
Senate Bill 108, introduced by the Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, relates to the Budget Act of 2019 and encompasses various provisions regarding state governance. Among its provisions, SB 108 amends multiple sections of the Business and Professions Code, including the establishment of new requirements for alcoholic beverage server certifications, which will take effect on July 1, 2022. The bill shifts the certification requirement to ensure that alcohol servers successfully obtain their credentials within specified timeframes, thus promoting responsible service in establishments selling alcohol.
Overall, the sentiment surrounding SB 108 is largely supportive among stakeholders in the liquor and cannabis industries, who appreciate the movement towards improved regulatory frameworks that ensure compliance and responsible service. However, some community groups have expressed concern about the data privacy elements and the implications of stricter cannabis regulation. They worry that the expansion of regulatory authority may inadvertently limit access for small entrepreneurs and those trying to enter the workforce.
While SB 108 passes through the legislative process, key points of contention may arise regarding its implications for local governance and community control over alcohol and cannabis-related businesses. Critics argue that the state-level emphasis on regulation could overlook unique local needs and concerns, particularly within communities disproportionately affected by liquor and cannabis policies. Nonetheless, proponents contend that uniformity in regulation is essential for fostering economic development and ensuring safe business practices across California.