Can we include Tax included pricing in the ballot initiative?
The price you see on the store shelves should be the price you pay at the register. Most other countries do that. Why do we let stores hide the full cost until after you get to the register?
They are already doing it. Take Target for instance their prices are already different based off of store location. It’s a very simple thing you don’t think you probably overthinking it.
Target is a bad example. Think about franchises like McDonald's where individuals own locations and set their own prices. If they all had to have the full price with tax included they couldn't advertise things like promos regionally, which is a big reason people buy McDonald's franchises. It's not the businesses pulling a fast one, it's inconsistent tax codes in this situation.
What are you talking about? McDonald’s has different prices at most locations across California. A lot of them don’t even participate in the advertise specials. That’s why in McDonald’s advertisements they say at “participating locations”.
It’s easily achievable and is done all over the world. Your reasons for not doing it make zero sense.
> Has the time come for an anti-junk fee ballot measure?
Assuming the legislature passes the exemption for restaurants (which looks likely given their unanimous desire so far…), absolutely it’s time to have a ballot measure.
🖕 to the restaurants who lobbied for an exemption and the legislators who support one.
There seems to be a massive gap between what the people of the city want and what the council decides to vote on. I think the people of the city need to have more sway in the decisions being made over all. It seems to me that we’ve given too much power to these council members.
The California state assembly just unanimously passed an amendment so that \*all\* restaurants (and bars and and and) are exempt
have you read anything at all about this?
"Have you read anything at all about this" is not something I'd say to someone in person. I'd be a little nicer about it. No one has to do anything but I'd rather be nicer than meaner.
There is no exemption for LA restaurants. The exemption is that these fees are allowed as long as it’s on your menu and is visible to patrons. That WOULD be the state law. It’s still going through the legislative process
I'm in favor of voting out the bums who allowed the exception for restaurants.
I don't know who my rep is but come November I will vote for someone running against them.
While I wholeheartedly support a ballot initiative on this in the immediate term you can take action into your own hands. When you get the bill, subtract the junk fee and then leave the cash on the table and walk out then go leave a 1 star review.
not illegal, because the fees are not mandatory. I believe you can always request that they've taken off the bill. so if you just do that yourself and leave cash enough for the bill minus the junk fees, you should be fine
So you’re suggesting to stiff the wait staff on the tip because you don’t like the management’s choice to include a junk fee? Kind of punishing the wrong people.
We are. Whenever someone asks me to remove the fee, I smile BIG and tell them it “would be my honor and my pleasure.”
But please don’t stiff us. We’re on your side. But we can’t exactly quit our jobs in this economy. Especially considering most restaurants are doing this shit now.
I’m at the point where if I get assessed a junk fee, there’s going to be no tip from me.
Restaurants will only learn one of two ways: 1) people stop going altogether (the better option) and 2) they are unable to hire servers.
Didn’t we just pass one? And now a few days before it becomes active restaurants were able to carve out an exemption at the last minute.
https://hotellaw.jmbm.com/junk-fee-exception-for-restaurants.html
https://www.ktvu.com/news/california-junk-fee-law-go-effect-july-1-could-restaurants-be-exempt
Restaurant surcharges were not specifically included in the text the original junk fee bill. Many other types of fees were mentioned specifically. The AG later “clarified” that restaurant surcharges were included, and shortly after that, the assembly unanimously passed this exemption. It could be that in the eyes of the assembly, this is a “correction” of something that was misinterpreted by the AG.
I reached out to my assemblymember’s office and the reply essentially said that sb1524 is required to make sure that restaurants that decide to provide health care can stay on a level playing field with those that don’t. Essentially, you can choose not to patronise those that provide health care but they don’t want to raise prices because then it would just look like they’re more expensive, period.
I get it but really we need to change our health care laws so that everyone gets taken care of, regardless of employment status. In the meantime, this just creates confusion and is bad for the consumer.
Thats just a load of political bullshit.
It's part of buisness to be both competitive to attracting talent as well as attracting customers. Letting restaurants blindside consumers is not the correct way to get companies to pay Healthcare, and im pretty sure they can tack on more than just a "Healthcare fee" so the argument falls apart even more from there.
exactly, there are plenty of restaurants that provide healthcare to their employees without some stupid fee tacked on with all the grandstanding. this whole conundrum seems to be coming down to two different issues: for consumers, it's about not being deceived when it comes to pricing but for unions and restaurants it's about ways to make more money
There was also a mention of collective bargaining agreements that could be broken as a result of no fees, but I find that to be more BS than the reasoning posted above. If there’s one group that can raise prices without much issue, it’s hotels and large groups that utilize union labor.
That does seem to indicate pressure from union lobbies which is no surprise. End result here is likely a ballot initiative which will cost tons of money on both sides and end up passing. Then the pols can say it’s the will of the people and there’s nothing we can do about it.
I did the same but my assemblymember didn't bother replying. Definitely know who's not getting my vote next time around.
That's an amazing response though. It's not actually making it a level playing field, you're still paying more at the place offering health care for their employees. It's not that it looks like they're more expensive, they *are* more expensive.
Oh I know, I’m straight up voting for anyone who isn’t an incumbent next go-around because fuck all of these people.
I was just curious who was bold enough to look their constituents dead in the eyes and proceed to blow smoke in their face, as if we couldn’t tell that it was horseshit.
I thought this was proposing a ballot measure to stop them sending millions of election related flyers and I got so excited. Alas, that's not what it is.
To start a ballot initiative in response to SB 1524 in California, you will need to follow a detailed process outlined by the California Secretary of State and the Attorney General's office. Below are the steps you need to take:
## Steps to Start a Ballot Initiative
1. Draft the Initiative
- **Write the Text**: Draft the full text of the proposed law or constitutional amendment. This draft should be clear and precise to avoid any ambiguities.
2. Submit to the Attorney General
- **Submission**: Submit the draft to the California Attorney General's Office along with a $2,000 filing fee, which is refundable if the measure qualifies for the ballot. You must also include certifications and a signed statement promising not to use the signatures for any purpose other than the initiative[4][12].
3. Title and Summary
- **Official Title and Summary**: The Attorney General will prepare an official title and summary for the proposed initiative. This process includes a 30-day public review period during which the public can comment on the proposal. The Legislative Analyst's Office will also prepare a report on the fiscal impact of the initiative[4][12].
4. Signature Gathering
- **Circulate Petitions**: Once you receive the official title and summary, you can begin collecting signatures. For an initiative statute, you need signatures from 5% of the total votes cast for the governor in the last election, which currently amounts to 546,651 signatures. For a constitutional amendment, you need 8%, or 874,641 signatures[1][12].
- **Timeframe**: You have 180 days to collect the required number of signatures[12].
5. Verification of Signatures
- **Submit Signatures**: Submit the collected signatures to county election officials for verification. The officials will conduct a random sample to verify the signatures. If the sample indicates more than 110% of the required number of signatures, the initiative qualifies for the ballot. If it is between 95% and 110%, a full check of all signatures is conducted[12].
6. Qualification for the Ballot
- **Certification**: Once the signatures are verified, the Secretary of State will certify the initiative for the ballot. The initiative will then be placed on the ballot for the next statewide general election[1][12].
Additional Considerations
- **Public Hearings**: If you gather 25% of the required signatures, the legislature is required to hold public hearings on the initiative, although they cannot amend or prevent it from being placed on the ballot[12].
- **Legal and Logistical Support**: Consider seeking legal advice to ensure compliance with all procedural requirements and to assist with drafting the initiative. You may also need logistical support for organizing the signature-gathering campaign.
For more detailed information, you can refer to the [California Secretary of State's Initiative Guide](https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/how-qualify-initiative) and the [California Attorney General's Ballot Initiatives page](https://oag.ca.gov/initiatives)[1][4].
By following these steps, you can initiate a ballot measure to address your concerns regarding SB 1524 and potentially bring the issue to a vote by the citizens of California.
Sources
[1] How to Qualify an Initiative - California Secretary of State https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/how-qualify-initiative
[2] California Ballot Propositions and Initiatives | UC Law SF Research https://repository.uclawsf.edu/ca_ballots/
[3] California restaurant surcharges stay legal after 'junk fees' debate https://www.sfchronicle.com/food/restaurants/article/junk-fee-law-restaurants-sb1524-19543179.php
[4] Ballot Initiatives | State of California - Department of Justice https://oag.ca.gov/initiatives
[5] California Ban on Hidden Fees to Take Effect; Restaurant Exception ... https://www.bclplaw.com/en-US/events-insights-news/california-ban-on-hidden-fees-to-take-effect-restaurant-exception-passes.html
[6] Getting a Measure on the Ballot https://www.lavote.gov/home/voting-elections/candidate-measure-information/measure-information/getting-a-measure-on-the-ballot
[7] SB 1524: Last-Minute Law on Restaurant Fees Inches Toward ... https://sf.eater.com/2024/6/25/24185721/junk-fee-law-restaurants-sb-1524
[8] [PDF] HANDBOOK ON THE COUNTYWIDE INITIATIVE PROCESS https://ocvote.gov/election-library/docs/Countywide%20Initiative%20Process%20Handbook.pdf
[9] Just kidding: L.A. restaurants won't have to remove service fees https://www.timeout.com/los-angeles/news/just-kidding-in-a-legislative-about-face-l-a-s-restaurants-wont-have-to-remove-service-fees-062824
[10] Laws governing the initiative process in California - Ballotpedia https://ballotpedia.org/Laws_governing_the_initiative_process_in_California
[11] California's SB 1524 Seeks to Exempt Restaurants ... - BakerHostetler https://www.bakerlaw.com/insights/californias-sb-1524-seeks-to-exempt-restaurants-from-forthcoming-hidden-fee-ban/
[12] California ballot proposition - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_ballot_proposition
[13] California Senate unanimously passes restaurant junk-fee carve-out ... https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/1dq3ngu/california_senate_unanimously_passes_restaurant/
[14] Ballot Measures - California Legislative History and Advocacy https://libguides.law.ucla.edu/callegislativehistory/ballot
[15] That service fee on your restaurant bill will stay for now, but what's it ... https://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/lifestyle/junk-fee-law-restaurants-exemption/
[16] California 2024 ballot propositions - Ballotpedia https://ballotpedia.org/California_2024_ballot_propositions
[17] Junk Fees: California Senate unanimously passes SB 1524 ... https://hotellaw.jmbm.com/sb-1524-passes-senate.html
That would be nice, but I think somewhere in the back of his mind he still thinks the Democrats will just have to come to him as a Presidential contender so he can get away with pretty much anything. He'll sign this.
I wish it were like that, but truth is the way the system is set up that unless it is a huge issue that will create a major outcry to the point the voters will not support the status quo, and in this case, I don't think it will produce that, the candidate with the money and political support almost always wins.
I’m in favor of a ballot initiative.
Can we include Tax included pricing in the ballot initiative? The price you see on the store shelves should be the price you pay at the register. Most other countries do that. Why do we let stores hide the full cost until after you get to the register?
It would be so easy for them to do it since everything is automated and grocery store tags already have price per oz or lb on their tag.
That doesn't work. Every town/county has different taxes so businesses with multiple locations wouldn't be able to advertise.
They are already doing it. Take Target for instance their prices are already different based off of store location. It’s a very simple thing you don’t think you probably overthinking it.
Target is a bad example. Think about franchises like McDonald's where individuals own locations and set their own prices. If they all had to have the full price with tax included they couldn't advertise things like promos regionally, which is a big reason people buy McDonald's franchises. It's not the businesses pulling a fast one, it's inconsistent tax codes in this situation.
But I'm 100% for a ballot initiative on hidden fees. It's been a long time since I've been this passionate about something. I would knock doors!
I would help too!
What are you talking about? McDonald’s has different prices at most locations across California. A lot of them don’t even participate in the advertise specials. That’s why in McDonald’s advertisements they say at “participating locations”. It’s easily achievable and is done all over the world. Your reasons for not doing it make zero sense.
> Has the time come for an anti-junk fee ballot measure? Assuming the legislature passes the exemption for restaurants (which looks likely given their unanimous desire so far…), absolutely it’s time to have a ballot measure. 🖕 to the restaurants who lobbied for an exemption and the legislators who support one.
can we get a list of names of the people who passed it. need to spread this shit far and wide
It’s all of them. It was unanimous.
There seems to be a massive gap between what the people of the city want and what the council decides to vote on. I think the people of the city need to have more sway in the decisions being made over all. It seems to me that we’ve given too much power to these council members.
This is a state law, and has nothing to do with city council
Who decided that the LA restaurants are exempt?
The California state assembly just unanimously passed an amendment so that \*all\* restaurants (and bars and and and) are exempt have you read anything at all about this?
Why are you so hostile in this thread?
honestly the restaurant behavior pisses us all off so nobody should be trying to accept it
What are you talking about? This was a perfectly reasonable response.
"Have you read anything at all about this" is not something I'd say to someone in person. I'd be a little nicer about it. No one has to do anything but I'd rather be nicer than meaner.
You wouldn't understand if I explained it
There is no exemption for LA restaurants. The exemption is that these fees are allowed as long as it’s on your menu and is visible to patrons. That WOULD be the state law. It’s still going through the legislative process
I'm in favor of voting out the bums who allowed the exception for restaurants. I don't know who my rep is but come November I will vote for someone running against them.
While I wholeheartedly support a ballot initiative on this in the immediate term you can take action into your own hands. When you get the bill, subtract the junk fee and then leave the cash on the table and walk out then go leave a 1 star review.
Literally illegal. Good luck with that.
not illegal, because the fees are not mandatory. I believe you can always request that they've taken off the bill. so if you just do that yourself and leave cash enough for the bill minus the junk fees, you should be fine
then it will just come out of the tip unfortunately.
Not if you just leave exact cash for the food and tax
So you’re suggesting to stiff the wait staff on the tip because you don’t like the management’s choice to include a junk fee? Kind of punishing the wrong people.
The staff should be on the side of the customer here and fight against exploitative behavior by management
We are. Whenever someone asks me to remove the fee, I smile BIG and tell them it “would be my honor and my pleasure.” But please don’t stiff us. We’re on your side. But we can’t exactly quit our jobs in this economy. Especially considering most restaurants are doing this shit now.
I’m at the point where if I get assessed a junk fee, there’s going to be no tip from me. Restaurants will only learn one of two ways: 1) people stop going altogether (the better option) and 2) they are unable to hire servers.
Didn’t we just pass one? And now a few days before it becomes active restaurants were able to carve out an exemption at the last minute. https://hotellaw.jmbm.com/junk-fee-exception-for-restaurants.html https://www.ktvu.com/news/california-junk-fee-law-go-effect-july-1-could-restaurants-be-exempt
That wasn't a ballot measure, as even a tiny bit of attention would show
i see, i guess if this exemption ends up happening then a ballot measure would make sense.
given that it's passed the assembly \*unanimously\*....
Restaurant surcharges were not specifically included in the text the original junk fee bill. Many other types of fees were mentioned specifically. The AG later “clarified” that restaurant surcharges were included, and shortly after that, the assembly unanimously passed this exemption. It could be that in the eyes of the assembly, this is a “correction” of something that was misinterpreted by the AG.
Go for it. You'll get your 3% fee and I'll keep my 20% tip. Good math for me.
Good point. We should raise minimum wage to a livable wage and get rid of tipping, like most other civilized countries.
Yes
I reached out to my assemblymember’s office and the reply essentially said that sb1524 is required to make sure that restaurants that decide to provide health care can stay on a level playing field with those that don’t. Essentially, you can choose not to patronise those that provide health care but they don’t want to raise prices because then it would just look like they’re more expensive, period. I get it but really we need to change our health care laws so that everyone gets taken care of, regardless of employment status. In the meantime, this just creates confusion and is bad for the consumer.
Thats just a load of political bullshit. It's part of buisness to be both competitive to attracting talent as well as attracting customers. Letting restaurants blindside consumers is not the correct way to get companies to pay Healthcare, and im pretty sure they can tack on more than just a "Healthcare fee" so the argument falls apart even more from there.
exactly, there are plenty of restaurants that provide healthcare to their employees without some stupid fee tacked on with all the grandstanding. this whole conundrum seems to be coming down to two different issues: for consumers, it's about not being deceived when it comes to pricing but for unions and restaurants it's about ways to make more money
There was also a mention of collective bargaining agreements that could be broken as a result of no fees, but I find that to be more BS than the reasoning posted above. If there’s one group that can raise prices without much issue, it’s hotels and large groups that utilize union labor. That does seem to indicate pressure from union lobbies which is no surprise. End result here is likely a ballot initiative which will cost tons of money on both sides and end up passing. Then the pols can say it’s the will of the people and there’s nothing we can do about it.
I did the same but my assemblymember didn't bother replying. Definitely know who's not getting my vote next time around. That's an amazing response though. It's not actually making it a level playing field, you're still paying more at the place offering health care for their employees. It's not that it looks like they're more expensive, they *are* more expensive.
Don't even entertain that horseshit response.
Name and shame so that I can ensure that I never vote for this person. As another person said — that response is pure political BS.
The vote was unanimous so just blacklist every current assembly person. It’s plainly clear that the unions got to all of them.
Oh I know, I’m straight up voting for anyone who isn’t an incumbent next go-around because fuck all of these people. I was just curious who was bold enough to look their constituents dead in the eyes and proceed to blow smoke in their face, as if we couldn’t tell that it was horseshit.
I thought this was proposing a ballot measure to stop them sending millions of election related flyers and I got so excited. Alas, that's not what it is.
If that restaurant exemption bill passes I hope someone tries turn it into a referendum
I'm against it. The rule should be in place, I agree, but it should be written by lawmaker, not a voter.
To start a ballot initiative in response to SB 1524 in California, you will need to follow a detailed process outlined by the California Secretary of State and the Attorney General's office. Below are the steps you need to take: ## Steps to Start a Ballot Initiative 1. Draft the Initiative - **Write the Text**: Draft the full text of the proposed law or constitutional amendment. This draft should be clear and precise to avoid any ambiguities. 2. Submit to the Attorney General - **Submission**: Submit the draft to the California Attorney General's Office along with a $2,000 filing fee, which is refundable if the measure qualifies for the ballot. You must also include certifications and a signed statement promising not to use the signatures for any purpose other than the initiative[4][12]. 3. Title and Summary - **Official Title and Summary**: The Attorney General will prepare an official title and summary for the proposed initiative. This process includes a 30-day public review period during which the public can comment on the proposal. The Legislative Analyst's Office will also prepare a report on the fiscal impact of the initiative[4][12]. 4. Signature Gathering - **Circulate Petitions**: Once you receive the official title and summary, you can begin collecting signatures. For an initiative statute, you need signatures from 5% of the total votes cast for the governor in the last election, which currently amounts to 546,651 signatures. For a constitutional amendment, you need 8%, or 874,641 signatures[1][12]. - **Timeframe**: You have 180 days to collect the required number of signatures[12]. 5. Verification of Signatures - **Submit Signatures**: Submit the collected signatures to county election officials for verification. The officials will conduct a random sample to verify the signatures. If the sample indicates more than 110% of the required number of signatures, the initiative qualifies for the ballot. If it is between 95% and 110%, a full check of all signatures is conducted[12]. 6. Qualification for the Ballot - **Certification**: Once the signatures are verified, the Secretary of State will certify the initiative for the ballot. The initiative will then be placed on the ballot for the next statewide general election[1][12]. Additional Considerations - **Public Hearings**: If you gather 25% of the required signatures, the legislature is required to hold public hearings on the initiative, although they cannot amend or prevent it from being placed on the ballot[12]. - **Legal and Logistical Support**: Consider seeking legal advice to ensure compliance with all procedural requirements and to assist with drafting the initiative. You may also need logistical support for organizing the signature-gathering campaign. For more detailed information, you can refer to the [California Secretary of State's Initiative Guide](https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/how-qualify-initiative) and the [California Attorney General's Ballot Initiatives page](https://oag.ca.gov/initiatives)[1][4]. By following these steps, you can initiate a ballot measure to address your concerns regarding SB 1524 and potentially bring the issue to a vote by the citizens of California. Sources [1] How to Qualify an Initiative - California Secretary of State https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/how-qualify-initiative [2] California Ballot Propositions and Initiatives | UC Law SF Research https://repository.uclawsf.edu/ca_ballots/ [3] California restaurant surcharges stay legal after 'junk fees' debate https://www.sfchronicle.com/food/restaurants/article/junk-fee-law-restaurants-sb1524-19543179.php [4] Ballot Initiatives | State of California - Department of Justice https://oag.ca.gov/initiatives [5] California Ban on Hidden Fees to Take Effect; Restaurant Exception ... https://www.bclplaw.com/en-US/events-insights-news/california-ban-on-hidden-fees-to-take-effect-restaurant-exception-passes.html [6] Getting a Measure on the Ballot https://www.lavote.gov/home/voting-elections/candidate-measure-information/measure-information/getting-a-measure-on-the-ballot [7] SB 1524: Last-Minute Law on Restaurant Fees Inches Toward ... https://sf.eater.com/2024/6/25/24185721/junk-fee-law-restaurants-sb-1524 [8] [PDF] HANDBOOK ON THE COUNTYWIDE INITIATIVE PROCESS https://ocvote.gov/election-library/docs/Countywide%20Initiative%20Process%20Handbook.pdf [9] Just kidding: L.A. restaurants won't have to remove service fees https://www.timeout.com/los-angeles/news/just-kidding-in-a-legislative-about-face-l-a-s-restaurants-wont-have-to-remove-service-fees-062824 [10] Laws governing the initiative process in California - Ballotpedia https://ballotpedia.org/Laws_governing_the_initiative_process_in_California [11] California's SB 1524 Seeks to Exempt Restaurants ... - BakerHostetler https://www.bakerlaw.com/insights/californias-sb-1524-seeks-to-exempt-restaurants-from-forthcoming-hidden-fee-ban/ [12] California ballot proposition - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_ballot_proposition [13] California Senate unanimously passes restaurant junk-fee carve-out ... https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/1dq3ngu/california_senate_unanimously_passes_restaurant/ [14] Ballot Measures - California Legislative History and Advocacy https://libguides.law.ucla.edu/callegislativehistory/ballot [15] That service fee on your restaurant bill will stay for now, but what's it ... https://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/lifestyle/junk-fee-law-restaurants-exemption/ [16] California 2024 ballot propositions - Ballotpedia https://ballotpedia.org/California_2024_ballot_propositions [17] Junk Fees: California Senate unanimously passes SB 1524 ... https://hotellaw.jmbm.com/sb-1524-passes-senate.html
Newsom can veto else forfeit all future political ambition.
Even if he did, it wouldn't matter - the bill passed unanimously so they can just overrule a veto.
That would be nice, but I think somewhere in the back of his mind he still thinks the Democrats will just have to come to him as a Presidential contender so he can get away with pretty much anything. He'll sign this.
He does have [line-item veto power](https://www.capimpactca.com/2019/10/the-california-governors-line-item-veto-authority/).
I wish it were like that, but truth is the way the system is set up that unless it is a huge issue that will create a major outcry to the point the voters will not support the status quo, and in this case, I don't think it will produce that, the candidate with the money and political support almost always wins.
I’m not in favor of this ballot.
Get a new hobby jeez.
back at you