The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has published a new regulation defining the term “gluten-free” for voluntary food labeling. This will provide a uniform standard definition to help the up to 3 million Americans who have celiac disease, an autoimmune digestive condition that can be effectively managed only by eating a gluten free diet.

“Adherence to a gluten-free diet is the key to treating celiac disease, which can be very disruptive to everyday life,” said FDA Commissioner Margaret A. Hamburg, M.D. “The FDA’s new ‘gluten-free’ definition will help people with this condition make food choices with confidence and allow them to better manage their health.”

This new federal definition standardizes the meaning of “gluten-free” claims across the food industry. It requires that, in order to use the term “gluten-free” on its label, a food must meet all of the requirements of the definition, including that the food must contain less than 20 parts per million of gluten. The rule also requires foods with the claims “no gluten,” “free of gluten,” and “without gluten” to meet the definition for “gluten-free.”

The FDA recognizes that many foods currently labeled as “gluten-free” may be able to meet the new federal definition already. Food manufacturers will have a year after the rule is published to bring their labels into compliance with the new requirements.

“We encourage the food industry to come into compliance with the new definition as soon as possible and help us make it as easy as possible for people with celiac disease to identify foods that meet the federal definition of ‘gluten-free’” said Michael R. Taylor, the FDA’s deputy commissioner for foods and veterinary medicine.

The term “gluten” refers to proteins that occur naturally in wheat, rye, barley and cross-bred hybrids of these grains. In people with celiac disease, foods that contain gluten trigger production of antibodies that attack and damage the lining of the small intestine. Such damage limits the ability of celiac disease patients to absorb nutrients and puts them at risk of other very serious health problems, including nutritional deficiencies, osteoporosis, growth retardation, infertility, miscarriages, short stature, and intestinal cancers.

The FDA was directed to issue the new regulation by the Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act (FALCPA), which directed FDA to set guidelines for the use of the term “gluten-free” to help people with celiac disease maintain a gluten-free diet.

The regulation was published August 2, in the Federal Register.

FDA News Release »

WASHINGTON — A federal judge has struck down a rule setting a cap on the fees that banks can charge merchants for handling debit card purchases, saying the Federal Reserve didn’t have the authority to set the limit in 2011.
The ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon Wednesday handed a victory to a coalition of retail groups.

They had sued the Fed over its setting the cap at an average of about 24 cents per debit-card transaction. The previously unregulated “swipe” fee averaged 44 cents. The Fed initially proposed a 12-cent cap, and the retailers had argued that the Fed buckled under pressure from bank lobbyists when it set the cap higher.

FMI Applauds Swipe Fee Ruling

In response to the ruling in the case of NACS v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, The Food Marketing Institute released the following statement:

“We are delighted that the court agreed that the Federal Reserve Board exceeded its authority under the law in nearly doubling the interchange fees banks are allowed to charge merchants for debit transactions. This ruling marks a major a victory for supermarket shoppers and will ultimately result in lower costs at the checkout line by billions.”

The Fed now must craft a new rule. The current one will remain in effect in the meantime.

A Fed spokesman said there was no immediate comment on the ruling.

The cap is the first-ever limit on debit card fees. Before it took effect in October 2011, banks had negotiated such fees with merchants. A big chain like Starbucks would likely get a better rate than a local coffee shop because it handles more customers. The fees were typically based on a percentage of the purchase price.

The Fed rule was called for by the 2010 financial overhaul law, which was enacted in response to the 2008 crisis. But Leon said in his ruling that the Fed disregarded Congress’s intent in passing the law by “inappropriately inflating all debit-card transaction fees by billions of dollars and failing to provide merchants with multiple unaffiliated networks for each debit-card transaction.”

The retailers’ lawsuit maintained that the cap is an “unreasonable interpretation” that exceeds the authority given to the Fed by the 2010 law. It also asserted that the Fed wrongly interpreted a provision of the law that requires that merchants have a choice of which bank network handles their transactions.

The retailers complained that the Fed had deviated from the law’s intent by allowing additional costs to be factored into setting the level of the cap, costs which exceeded reasonable expenses incurred by banks in debit transactions.

Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., the author of the provision of the 2010 law mandating a cap on swipe fees, called Leon’s ruling a “victory for consumers and small business around the country (that) will lead to lower interchange rates for billions of debit-card transactions each year.”

Durbin, who is the assistant majority leader in the Senate, had filed a legal brief supporting the retail groups’ suit in the case.

Reprinted from The Washington Post (7/31/2013)

An appeals court on Tuesday unanimously upheld a decision striking down New York City’s restrictions on the sale of large, sugary drinks, dealing a serious blow to Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s hopes of reviving the rule before his term runs out.

The court, the First Department of the Appellate Division of State Supreme Court in Manhattan, concurred with a lower court’s ruling that the city’s Board of Health, appointed by the mayor, overstepped its bounds as a nonlegislative body by approving the rule. The justices also said that the various exceptions and carve-outs in the rule demonstrated that the board was concerned with matters beyond its core mission to improve public health.

“Such mechanism necessarily looks beyond health concerns, in that it manipulates choices to try to change consumer norms,” Justice Dianne T. Renwick wrote. The board, the decision stated, “violated the state principle of separation of powers.”

Seeking to reduce runaway obesity rates, the rule was announced by Mr. Bloomberg last May and approved by the health panel in September. The measure would have prohibited the sale of many sweetened drinks in containers larger than 16 ounces, but the appeals court wrote that the rule was laden with confusing loopholes and exemptions.

Only establishments that received inspection grades from the city’s health department, including movie theaters and stadium concession stands, would have been subject to the ban. Those with self-service drink fountains, like most fast-food restaurants, would be prohibited from stocking cups larger than 16 ounces. Meanwhile, vending machines and some newsstands would be exempt, along with convenience stores. The signature 64-ounce Big Gulp at 7-Eleven would escape the soda ban unscathed.

The rule also would not have affected fruit juices, dairy-based beverages like milkshakes and mixed coffee drinks, no-calorie diet sodas or alcoholic beverages.

Opposition to the limitations has been vocal, as city business owners and consumers deemed the rule and its loopholes unworkable and unenforceable. These concerns were voiced by Justice Milton A. Tingling of State Supreme Court in March, when he struck down the soda ban a day before it was scheduled to go into effect, calling the restrictions “arbitrary and capricious” and an overreach of the Board of Health’s power. Justice Tingling said the City Council would have to approve such a measure.

The argument against the ban has raised intriguing questions about the power held by the health panel, which has traditionally enjoyed a broad purview; the board has placed restrictions on lead paint and prohibited trans fats in food at city restaurants. The Bloomberg administration has argued that the city’s unchecked obesity epidemic should be similarly categorized as a broad and serious public health matter.

The ruling on Tuesday could mean the end of a signature effort of the Bloomberg administration and a centerpiece of the mayor’s third-term public health agenda, and leaves little time for the city to bring the plan back to life given Mr. Bloomberg’s waning time in office.

The city plans to appeal to the Court of Appeals, the highest appellate court in New York State. Officials in the city’s legal department could try to have the appeal argued — and, potentially, decided — before the end of the year, when Mr. Bloomberg’s term ends. But such an expedited appeal would be dependent on a number of procedural factors breaking in the city’s favor. Lawyers for the soda industry may also try to drag out any proceedings so the case would spill into the administration of a new mayor, and none of the current candidates for City Hall have expressed significant interest in continuing to fight for the restrictions.

In a statement on Tuesday, Mr. Bloomberg called the ruling “a temporary setback” and referred to “the irreversible health impacts of obesity and Type 2 diabetes – both of which are disproportionately linked to sugary drink consumption.” He said his office would “continue the fight against the obesity epidemic” and appeal the case.

Critics of the ban, however, do not seem to think that such an appeal would stand a chance. “With this ruling behind us,” said Christopher Gindlesperger, a spokesman for the American Beverage Association, “we look forward to collaborating with city leaders on solutions that will have a meaningful and lasting impact on the people of New York City.”

Michael M. Grynbaum contributed reporting.

Reprinted from The New York Times (7/30/2013)

The California Conference for Equality and Justice (CCEJ) is eternally grateful to the Food and Beverage industry for its support and friendship over the past 39 years.

CCEJ is a human relations organization dedicated to eliminating bias, bigotry and racism in America. CCEJ breaks down the distance between people by promoting understanding and respect among all races, religions and cultures through education, conflict resolution and advocacy.

CCEJ’s flagship program is our Building Bridges Human Relations Camps. Each year CCEJ takes more than 500 high school students to the mountains for a three-day residential camp program.

The Building Bridges campers engage in open and honest dialogue about human relations issues related to race and culture and examine how these issues impact their schools. These diverse groups of students develop skills in team-building, conflict resolution and effective communication.

Each camp culminates with students making a personal, sustainable commitment to reduce violence and promote an inclusive community at school in their neighborhoods. Professional, external evaluation shows that Building Bridges increases students self-esteem, reduces prejudice and encourages students to be advocates for positive human relations in their schools. Put simply, Building Bridges opens minds.

For the last 39 years CCEJ has been privileged to receive the support of the Food and Beverage industry by hosting a Humanitarian Awards Dinner. Each year, CCEJ recognizes three outstanding humanitarians from the industry for their spirit of philanthropy, good will and contribution to the community.

Each year the Food and Beverage Industries’ Humanitarian Awards Dinner raises funds to support CCEJ’s critical work, including raising enough funds to support a full Building Bridges Camp. The cost to take 135 high school students to camp is $40, 000

This year we honor three deserving individuals:

• Kevin Davis, President & CEO, Bristol Farms;
• Walter Cybulski, Director or Retail-Grocery, PepsiCo; and
• Willie Crocker, Senior Portfolio Development Manager, BBU/Earthgrains Baking Company.

The dinner is Thursday, Sept. 12, 2013, at the Hilton-Anaheim and will be chaired by former Humanitarian Award recipient Jim Lee, who recently retired from Stater Bros. Markets.

Please support CCEJ and help honor these humanitarians by attending, donating in their honor, or supplying an auction item. For further information, please contact Katherine McIlquham at (562) 435-8184 or visit www.cacej.org.

The California Independent System Operator (ISO) has issued a Flex Alert in Northern California for July 1, 2 due to high temperatures.

A Flex Alert is an urgent call to Californians to immediately conserve electricity and to shift demand to off-peak hours (after 6 p.m.). The Flex Alert campaign is an educational and emergency alert program that informs consumers about how and when to conserve electricity. The public awareness campaign is critical to achieving high levels of conservation during heat waves and other challenging grid conditions such as wildfires or when major power plant or power lines are unavailable

View more information on today’s Flex Alert, including real-time electricity usage and programs designed to provide businesses with incentives to reduce power.

By Dick Gong, John Lloyd and Ron Fong

Local governments often tackle similar issues with different solutions. The result is usually a patchwork of laws in neighboring cities, increasing the difficulty and cost of compliance for businesses and confusing consumers. We applaud all 10 Sonoma County jurisdictions for addressing carryout bag regulation in unison.

Through the Sonoma County Waste Management Agency, all 10 county jurisdictions are simultaneously working to regulate carryout bags. This regional approach has included numerous opportunities to discuss and review the proposal, both with the agency and in each jurisdiction.

The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors on June 18 gave its formal support to an ordinance that would ban carryout plastic bags at checkout lines countywide. It would also add a 10-cent charge for each paper bag.

By employing a regional and measured approach, Sonoma County elected officials have respected the public and businesses while working to achieve their environmental goals. This level of regional cooperation should be recognized and rewarded.

More than 75 jurisdictions in California have already regulated carryout bags. The proposed Sonoma County regulation, similar to other California ordinances, would maximize environmental gain and minimize impacts to business.

Since passing a similar ordinance in 2010, Los Angeles County has seen single-use bag consumption reduced by more than 90 percent. They also found that consumers quickly adapted and businesses felt minimal impact.

We agree with many that this is an issue of statewide concern and the state Legislature should step up and regulate bags. This would create the most environmental benefit and eliminate the patchwork of local legislation. As an industry, we continue to push for a reasonable statewide law in order to remove the difficulty of implementing dozens of varying local bag laws.

Unfortunately, the state Legislature has failed us and left the task to cities and counties. The Legislature’s inaction makes the county’s regional effort even more valuable to consumers and businesses.

We urge each jurisdiction to remain committed to the regional process and regulate carryout bags in unison. We believe the proposed ordinance is respectful of consumers and businesses, as proven in dozens of other California cities and counties.

The process is often just as important as the policy being considered. In this case, Sonoma County elected officials got it right by pursuing a regional bag ordinance.

Dick Gong is co-owner of G&G Supermarkets. John Lloyd is president of Big John’s Market in Healdsburg. Ron Fong is president and chief executive officer of the California Grocers Association.

Reprinted from The Press Democrat (6/26/2013)

Company Cited for its Service and Support for Employees in the National Guard and Reserve

PLEASANTON, Calif., June 25, 2013 – Safeway Inc. has been selected to receive the 2013 Secretary of Defense Employer Support Freedom Award, the nation’s highest honor given to employers for exceptional support of National Guard and Reserve employees. Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve (ESGR), an office of the Department of Defense, announced the award recipients today.

Safeway is one of six large companies to be honored with the prestigious Freedom Award. Nine other award recipients are small- to mid-sized businesses or public-sector employers. The recipients, who were chosen from a pool of nearly 3,000 nominated private and public sector employers, were selected for their demonstrated programs, policies and achievements in support and hiring members of the National Guard and Reserve.

“I commend and thank the 15 recipients of the 2013 Secretary of Defense Employer Support Freedom Award for providing exceptional support to our Citizen Warriors,” said Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel. “So many of our Nation’s employers are finding ways to contribute to our Nation’s security, but these employers stand out for their commitment to our Guardsmen and Reservists. They have the gratitude and thanks of the entire Department of Defense.”

“Providing employment opportunities and training to our men and women in uniform and veterans are among the most important public services we perform,” said Safeway’s President and Chief Executive Officer, Robert Edwards. “We are honored to be among a select group of private and public sector organizations who can now call themselves Freedom Award recipients.”

Safeway has a long history of commitment to men and women in the military. The company was among the first employers to commit (more than 10 years ago) to cover the pay differential and extend full benefits to employees in the Reserve and National Guard called to active duty. Safeway continues to provide this benefit. The company has aggressively responded to the need for employment with returning veterans through its Junior Military Officer and Non-Commissioned Officer (JMO/NCO) Program.

In 2012, Safeway hired nearly 1,500 veterans with over 1,300 of them hired into the company’s retail stores. Safeway has also committed to hiring at least another 1,500 veterans by the end of 2013. While the majority of Safeway’s Store Managers and Assistant Managers are promoted from its internal ranks, the company’s Human Resources team recognized the untapped talent pool in the military.

“We saw an opportunity to recruit new kinds of leaders who will become an important and critical part of our future,” said Larree Renda, Safeway Executive Vice President. “Our JMO and NCO recruiting program officially launched in 2010. We accept applicants who have been officers or non-commissioned officers in the military and place them in an accelerated leadership program.”

Graduates qualify for Store Manager and Assistant Manager jobs and a range of other manager-level positions in the distribution and backstage departments at Safeway. The 41-week intensive training program includes a combination of on-the-job training, mentoring, classroom seminars, job shadowing and independent study, as well as participating in numerous department and key leadership strategy sessions. At the end of the program, participants are qualified to hold a number of leadership positions, including Store Manager and Warehouse Superintendent.

In addition to Safeway’s JMO/NCO program, Safeway’s Retail Military Recruiting efforts were launched in 2012 to increase efforts in hiring veterans of all backgrounds into our retail store environment.

In 2011, the company launched an annual Veterans Day weekend fundraiser. To date, Safeway has collected and donated more than $2 million to benefit the Wounded Warrior Project and other organizations that help veterans recover from service-related injuries and/or return to the civilian workforce. Our various divisions also participate in local fundraisers and community service initiatives to support our country’s heroes. These programs are in addition to ongoing commitments to continue full benefits for Safeway employees who are called to active duty, and to ship care packages — more than 2,000 to date — to soldiers overseas.

The 2013 Freedom Award recipients will be honored at the 18th annual Secretary of Defense Employer Support Freedom Award ceremony in Washington, D.C. on September 26, 2013.

Reprinted from Reuters (6/25/2013)

Los Angeles on Tuesday became the largest city in the nation to move toward a ban on plastic grocery bags, with the City Council barring them in supermarkets, convenience stores and any big retailer that sells groceries.

Nearly three weeks after a similar measure was defeated in the California Legislature, the City Council voted 11-1 to prohibit the so-called “single use” plastic bags in pharmacies, food markets and any large store — including Target and Wal-Mart — that has a grocery section.

Councilman Paul Koretz described the ban as one of several environmental initiatives that have been embraced by the city, including a clean-truck program at the Port of Los Angeles and a push to build new rail lines. “Today we’re taking another big step forward,” he said.

Added Councilman Paul Krekorian: “Enough waiting for the Legislature to act on this.”

Tuesday’s vote offered a sweeping victory for environmental activists. Once the ban goes into effect, around one-fourth of California’s population will be covered by laws that will move consumers toward reusable bags, said Kirsten James, who handles water policy for the advocacy group Heal the Bay.

“This is the biggest city in the nation to tackle the single-use bag addiction,” James said. “It sends a strong signal to Sacramento that we need a statewide policy.”

L.A.’s ordinance, first embraced by the council in March 2012, will be phased in over the next year, reaching large stores on Jan. 1 and smaller ones on July 1, 2014. Customers who want paper bags will have to pay 10 cents for each one, according to the ordinance.

Opponents of the ban referred to the paper bag fee as an unfair tax. And they argued that it will hurt business in the region, particularly the plastic-bag makers that operate in the southeast section of Los Angeles County.

Cathy Browne, general manager at Huntington Park-based bag maker Crown Poly, said an unspecified number of employees will lose their jobs if the law passes. More than 50% of the plant’s business is in plastic grocery bags used in Los Angeles and other localities, she said.

Browne, whose company has 300 employees, said the measure also would create a new burden to Angelenos who reuse plastic bags for trash and pet waste. “Consumers like plastic bags,” she said. “So when they shop at a retail store that has a ban they’ll shop elsewhere.”

Because Councilman Bernard C. Parks voted against the measure, a second vote will be needed next week. But no one involved in Tuesday’s debate expects the outcome to change. A signature from the mayor — whether it be the outgoing Antonio Villaraigosa or his successor, Eric Garcetti — is also expected.

Businesses that fail to comply with the law would face a fine of $100 for the first violation, $200 after the second and $500 after the third. Fines would be imposed for each day the violation continues.

Backers of the measure contend it will create jobs, fueling such programs as the nonprofit Green Vets LA, which has put veterans to work manufacturing reusable cloth bags. Jim Cragg, the group’s director, said he had hired 100 people to sew those bags.

“I’ve actually hired one person from the plastic bag [industry],” he said.

Sanitation officials estimate that 2 billion plastic bags are distributed in the city each year.

Reprinted from The Los Angeles Times (6/18/2013)

Savvy, confident organized retail crime gangs – who steal billions of dollars worth of merchandise each year only to sell that merchandise online or at physical fence locations – continue to test retailers to the core, oftentimes stopping at nothing to profit from their criminal behavior.

The National Retail Federation’s ninth annual Organized Retail Crime (ORC) Survey found that 93.5 percent of retailers say they have been a victim of organized retail crime in the past year, down slightly from 96.0 percent in 2012. For the replika óra past three years, more than 90 percent of the retailers surveyed have admitted to being victims of ORC. Equally disturbing: eight in 10 (81.3%) believe that ORC activity in general in the United States has increased over the past three years.

“We are extremely concerned by the organized patterns that are taking place in the retail industry right now as these crime gangs continue to find ways to maneuver the system,” said NRF Vice President of Loss Prevention Rich Mellor. “Though retailers continue to make great strides in their fight against organized retail crime, savvy, unconscionable criminals are selling stolen merchandise for a profit that doesn’t belong to them. With the types of organized retail crimes changing in severity each year, retailers remain vigilant in their fight against ORC.”

Store merchandise credit/gift card fraud poses new threat to retailers

For the first time, NRF asked the senior loss prevention executives surveyed about their experience with store credit merchandise/gift card fraud, and the results are troubling: when asked specifically if they’ve experienced boosters who return stolen merchandise without a receipt for the sole purpose of receiving store credit via a gift card, who then turn around and sell that merchandise credit for cash to secondary markets that include kiosks, pawn shops and check cashing stores, 77.8 percent said they have experienced this.

“This is an important crime to keep an eye on, as this could easily turn from being an organized tactic to one that amateurs could adopt,” continued Mellor. “In conversations with retailers and law enforcement, we’ve learned that there are expresssgiftz already defrauding processes being put in place, but retailers continue to lose millions of dollars to this enterprise scheme.”

Survey finds increases in violence, connection to “gateway crimes”

One of the most distressing trends in organized crime activity is the propensity for thieves to resort to violence to avoid being apprehended, putting store personnel, law enforcement and customers at risk. According to the survey, retailers say on replica horloges average two in 10 (18.3%) apprehensions lead to some level of violence, up from 15.2 percent last year and 13.0 percent in 2011.

Individuals connected to “gateway crimes,” or crimes that are known to lead to bigger crimes, such as the use of or sale of drugs and weapons, are often found to be associated with organized crime gangs. According to the survey, retailers say on average 44.8 percent of those apprehended for ORC are involved in gateway crimes.

Law enforcement understanding of issue grows

Thanks to organized methods of communication between retailers and law enforcement, awareness among law enforcement officials is at an replicas relojes all-time high. According to the survey, nearly half (48.1%) of retailers say they believe law enforcement understands the complexity and severity of ORC, up from 40.0 percent last year and the highest percent reported in the five years of asking this question.

Nearly six in 10 (58.4%) believe top management at their organization understands the severity of ORC, up from 54.4 percent last year.

Top cities for organized retail crime activity

Organized retail crime gangs wreak havoc throughout the country, but many cities have remained top locations for ORC activity for the past several years, including Dallas, Houston, Miami and Los Angeles. The top 10 locations that retailers say have the most criminal activity are (in alphabetical order):

Atlanta
Baltimore
Chicago
Dallas
Houston
Los Angeles
Miami
New York
Northern New Jersey
San Francisco/Oakland

Federal Legislation Still Needed to Combat Growing Problem

For years, retailers and other vested parties have worked together to tackle organized retail crime. These partnerships include regional groups and associations who host meetings to share intelligence and work with local, state and federal law enforcement agencies. Even with the success of these partnerships, organized retail crime remains a Federal matter because of the jurisdictional issues with criminals crossing state lines. NRF strongly believes that organized retail crime must be addressed through Federal legislation by amending the Federal Criminal Code to effectively address the organized and serious nature of this issue and, be properly defined as a Federal crime with appropriate sentencing guidelines.

Gov. Jerry Brown and legislative leaders have reached agreement on major elements of the state budget, including a controversial school funding proposal and other issues, sources said.

In a victory for the Democratic governor, sources said the agreement will largely assume the more conservative revenue estimates proposed by Brown.

Gov. Jerry Brown and legislative leaders have reached agreement on major elements of the state budget, including a controversial school funding proposal and other issues, sources said.

In a victory for the Democratic governor, sources said the agreement will largely assume the more conservative revenue estimates proposed by Brown. Legislative Democrats had urged about $2 billion more in spending on state services and programs than Brown proposed, after the state’s nonpartisan legislative analyst issued a rosier economic forecast than Brown’s.

In a compromise on Brown’s proposal to overhaul the state education system and to shift more money to poor and English-learning students, all school districts would receive additional base revenue.

In addition, Senate Democrats are poised to get $206 million to improve mental health services, including $142 million in one-time general fund money. They are also expected to receive about $80 million to restore Medi-Cal adult dental benefits.

Assembly Democrats would receive approval for implementation of middle-class college scholarships, a priority of Assembly Speaker John A. Pérez.

The college scholarship and mental health programs are expected to take effect next year.

Money was freed up for expanded programs by reducing the amount of money Brown proposed to give schools to pay down debts owed under Proposition 98, California’s school-funding guarantee, the sources said. The agreement also assumes nearly $300 million in higher property tax revenue and savings of about $85 million to $90 million in the state expansion of Medi-Cal.

Legislative Democrats had urged about $2 billion more in spending on state services and programs than Brown proposed, after the state’s nonpartisan legislative analyst issued a rosier economic forecast than Brown’s.

In a compromise on Brown’s proposal to overhaul the state education system and to shift more money to poor and English-learning students, all school districts would receive additional base revenue.

In addition, Senate Democrats are poised to get $206 million to improve mental health services, including $142 million in one-time general fund money. They are also expected to receive about $80 million to restore Medi-Cal adult dental benefits.

Assembly Democrats would receive approval for implementation of middle-class college scholarships, a priority of Assembly Speaker John A. Pérez.

The college scholarship and mental health programs are expected to take effect next year.

Money was freed up for expanded programs by reducing the amount of money Brown proposed to give schools to pay down debts owed under Proposition 98, California’s school-funding guarantee, the sources said. The agreement also assumes nearly $300 million in higher property tax revenue and savings of about $85 million to $90 million in the state expansion of Medi-Cal.

Reprinted from The Sacramento Bee (6/10/2013)