STOP AB 3195

• Email

Test test

---

STOP AB 840

• Email

STUDENTS SHOULD BE OFF-LIMITS TO ALCOHOL ADS

AB 840 is intended to suspend three-tier regulations and open up the sporting facilities of a large number of Cal State campuses to alcohol advertising.

AB 840's reckless strategy crosses multiple domains:

1) Unlike most deregulation, it selectively targets underage youth. By our conservative estimates, there are at least 180,000 Cal State students under the age of 21.

2) The scope of these exemptions is an extraordinary case of overreach. By ramping up alcohol advertising in nearly every campus, AB 840 is excusing local legislators of the obligation of making the request and opening themselves up to feedback from constituents.

3) The three-tier system exists for a reason: to prevent monopolization and corporate price controls that lead to the most harmful alcohol consumption patterns. By hurting Cal State students, this bill rewards the mega-corporations who least need a leg up.

4) Raising funds for education by selling a product that hurts or kills a significant number of students is self-defeating.

The consequences of youth consumption should be self-evident: alcohol-related fatalities (fatal accidents including motor vehicle crashes, suicides, and homicides) are the leading killers of youth ages 15-19 (CDC 2023) and 3 of the 4 leading causes of death for college students between 18 and 24 years of age (Turner 2013; the fourth cause on that list is cancer, some forms of which are also alcohol related).

The facts that exposure to advertising makes a child more likely to start drinking younger and increases the amount consumed when they do drink (Anderson et al., 2009; Smith & Foxcroft, 2009) is well established, and recent research suggests it may be associated with more binge drinking (Jernigan et al. 2017). The stature of California’s higher education system should be protected and nurtured. However, there is every reason to believe that increasing the penetration of alcohol corporations into student lives does the opposite.

California students deserve to be healthy, engaged, and alive. For this reason, we must demand that the legislature VOTE NO ON AB 840.

VETO SB 76

• Email

STOP Wiener & Haney's SB 76 - "Entertainment Zones" are not healthy for San Francisco!

SB 76 is terrible public policy for San Francisco.

• There are no safety guardrails in this bill

• This bill creates conditions of total unaccountability for licensees

• This bill incentivizes a “pump and chug” form of service that is unsafe

• There is no inherent accountability in this bill to residents of the areas declared “entertainment zones”

SB 76 is designed to help businesses by ignoring the public health and safety issues we already face--and ignoring the most tragic events of Gavin Newsom's term as Mayor of San Francisco.

Every year thousands of California lives are cut short or forever damaged due to alcohol, the human toll and the economic costs are truly staggering.

According to the CA Dept. of Public Health there has been a 140% increase in alcohol-related deaths over the past 5 years. The increase is seen across all causes, including accident-related motor vehicle crashes, chronic conditions such as liver disease and cancers, and poisonings.

The CDC tells us that alcohol-related harms cost the state $14.47 billion annually.

SB 76 can only make these horrible statistics worse. Helping businesses that stay profitable by selling alcohol subsidizes and promotes the businesses and all the harm that follows at the expense of public health and safety.

TAKE ACTION TODAY, join Alcohol Justice and the California Alcohol Policy Alliance (CAPA), TELL GOVERNOR NEWSOM to VETO SB 76, learn from the past, and focus on reducing current levels of alcohol-related harm in California instead of repeating the same tragedies from 20 years ago.

Parklets Are Going Permanent - Nov. 1 Is Your Last Chance to Be Heard

• Email

As we have all noticed, the in-street bar and restaurant expansions--often called "parklets," though they are controlled by private businesses--have become ubiquitous in California cities. They were originally one of a number of emergency, COVID-deregulatory measures meant to keep small businesses afloat. The legislature, however, keeps extending them, and now the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) is being asked to create final rules for how parklets can be operated in perpetuity.

The public hearing regarding these final rules will be held TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 1, from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. CLICK HERE FOR MORE DETAILS.

Any California resident is welcome to attend, in person at the ABC offices at 3927 Lennane Dr., Ste. 100, Sacramento (CLICK HERE FOR MAP) or via Zoom online conferencing. CLICK HERE TO RSVP FOR THE ZOOM HEARING.

If you cannot attend, you are also welcome to submit a written comment on or before November 1. EMAIL YOUR COMMENT DIRECTLY TO This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

We know the industry will be there--we need to count on people to drown them out.

We encourage anyone who has been affected negatively by the expansion to share those stories. In addition, Alcohol Justice will be addressing a few health and safety concerns in the bill, including:

* Does the operation of these "non-contiguous areas" affect public access to the sidewalk?

* Do they create noise and disruption for residents that was not present before they were approved?

* Is pedestrian, customer, bicyclist, disabled, and/or driver safety negatively affected by proximity to traffic or other fixed hazards?

* Do the expanded footprints still align with any conditions originally placed on that license, either by ABC or local approval processes?

* Are nearby residents and nearby business owners aware that they have a right to protest changed conditions, and that ABC has the power to modify conditions in response to changes to the physical space?

>>> READ MORE about possible concerns around expanded footprints in our FIELD GUIDE TO REGULATORY RELIEF.

We encourage attendees to respond in their own words and from their own experiences. Feel free to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. if you have any questions about constructing your response.

Alcohol harm is on the rise in California. We were told parklets were a temporary, emergency action--when will helping those harmed or killed by alcohol use warrant its own emergency measures? 

---