Alcoholic beverage licensees: beer and wine importers, beer and wine importers general, and beer and wine w...
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when SB 420 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on SB 420.
You're tracking SB 420
We'll email you the moment it moves.
SB 420 — Alcoholic beverage licensees: beer and wine importers, beer and wine importers general, and beer and wine wholesalers.
Last action — Referred to Com. on G.O.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
3Passed Senate
-
4Passed Assembly
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2019-2020 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Summary
Existing law, the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, which is administered by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, regulates the application, issuance, and suspension of alcoholic beverage licenses. Existing law establishes a beer and wine importer's license, a beer and wine importer's general license, and a beer and wine wholesaler license with specified privileges and restrictions attached to each license, as provided. A violation of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act is a misdemeanor, unless another penalty or punishment is specified. This bill would remove the beer and wine importer, the beer and wine importer's general, and the beer and wine wholesaler licenses and replace them with a separate beer or wine license, as specified, and would make relating changes within the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act with regard to the privileges and restrictions on these licenses. Because the violation of a provision of a license is punishable as a misdemeanor and the bill would create a new category of license, the bill would expand the definition of a crime, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Bill Text
- Amended 03/25/19 - Amended Senate Current pdf March 25, 2019
- Introduced 02/21/19 - Introduced pdf February 21, 2019
- SB420 View text html
Action History
-
Referred to Com. on G.O.
-
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
-
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 38. Noes 0. Page 1275.) Ordered to the Assembly.
-
Ordered to special consent calendar.
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 0. Page 1098.) (May 16).
-
Set for hearing May 16.
-
April 22 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.
-
Set for hearing April 22.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 16. Noes 0. Page 619.) (April 9). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Set for hearing April 9.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on G.O.
-
Referred to Com. on G.O.
-
From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 24.
-
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
Sponsors
- Bob Archuleta · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Archuleta, Bob Democratic
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (121)
121 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 121 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 27 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 38 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (38)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Rubio | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Wilk | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Allen | — | Yea |
| Borgeas | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Hertzberg | — | Yea |
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Glazer | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Chang | — | Yea |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Roth | — | Yea |
| Morrell | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Leyva | — | Yea |
| Dodd | — | Yea |
| Moorlach | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Archuleta, Bob | Democratic | Yea |
| Caballero, Anna M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Durazo, Maria Elena | Democratic | Yea |
| Hurtado, Melissa | Democratic | Yea |
| Jackson, Corey A. | Democratic | Yea |
| McGuire, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Stern, Henry I. | Democratic | Yea |
| Umberg, Thomas J. | Democratic | Yea |
| Wiener, Scott D. | Democratic | Yea |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (6)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (6)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 16 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (16)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Dodd | — | Yea |
| Rubio | — | Yea |
| Allen | — | Yea |
| Borgeas | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Glazer | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Chang | — | Yea |
| Wilk | — | Yea |
| Archuleta, Bob | Democratic | Yea |
| Wiener, Scott D. | Democratic | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 420 do?
- Existing law, the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, which is administered by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, regulates the application, issuance, and suspension of alcoholic beverage licenses. Existing law establishes a beer and wine importer's license, a beer and wine importer's general license, and a beer and wine wholesaler license with specified privileges and restrictions attached to each license, as provided. A violation of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act is a misdemeanor, unless another penalty or punishment is specified. This bill would remove the beer and wine importer, the beer and wine importer's general, and the beer and wine wholesaler licenses and replace them with a separate beer or wine license, as specified, and would make relating changes within the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act with regard to the privileges and restrictions on these licenses. Because the violation of a provision of a license is punishable as a misdemeanor and the bill would create a new category of license, the bill would expand the definition of a crime, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
- Who sponsors SB 420?
- SB 420 is sponsored by Archuleta, Bob (Democratic).
- What is the current status of SB 420?
- This bill died with 2019-2020 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track SB 420?
- Track SB 420 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 420
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of SB 420
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →