Labor, Technology and Regulatory Bills Move to Appropriations Suspense
Published Friday, May 1, 2026
A number of labor, technology and regulatory proposals with significant fiscal impacts were placed on the state Senate and Assembly appropriations committees’ suspense files this week, reflecting growing concern over their cost and implementation implications. Assembly Bill 1890, authored by Assemblymember Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, D–Winters, which would establish state matching grants to support Napa County Farmworker Housing Centers historically funded through grower self-assessments, was heard by the committee April 22 and placed on the suspense file. The California Farm Bureau supports the measure.
Several bills impacting workplace technology and employer operations were also placed on suspense following April 29 committee hearings. AB 1883, authored by Assemblymember Isaac Bryan, D–Los Angeles, would significantly restrict the use of workplace safety and management tools, including productivity monitoring and access tracking technologies, while creating new enforcement authority and private rights of action. AB 1898, authored by Assemblymember Nick Schultz, D–Burbank, would require employers to disclose and track the use of AI-assisted workplace tools and similarly allows for enforcement through state agencies and litigation. Appropriations staff flagged potentially significant costs to the state as an employer under both measures. Also placed on suspense, AB 1776, authored by Aguiar-Curry, would expand California’s anti-trust laws in ways that could disrupt common business practices, including those used by agricultural cooperatives for price discovery. Staff analysis cited unknown but potentially significant costs related to state enforcement and litigation. The California Farm Bureau opposes all three measures.
Additional labor-related legislation was also referred to suspense. AB 2321, authored by Assemblymember Liz Ortega, D–San Leandro, would require the California Division of Occupational Health and Safety, or Cal/OSHA, to refer workplace incidents involving death or disability to local prosecutors for potential criminal charges. While Cal/OSHA already has this authority, the bill would make referrals mandatory. The fiscal analysis estimated implementation costs likely in the tens of millions of dollars annually. The California Farm Bureau opposes the measure.
Senate Bill 1123, authored by Scott Wiener, D–San Francisco, was also placed on suspense. The bill would allow agencies to bypass Standard Regulatory Impact Analysis requirements for major regulations if they determine benefits outweigh costs. The California Farm Bureau opposes, citing concerns about reduced transparency and accountability in the regulatory process, and continues to actively engage with legislators and coalition partners to advocate on these measures as they move through the process.
Staff contact: Bryan Little, blittle@cfbf.com.
.svg.png?cacheid=0.9616018850896426)
