Gavin Newsom is hitting back at a news report that he pushed for an exception to the state’s new fast-food minimum wage law that benefits a wealthy campaign donor.
California’s minimum wage is $16 per hour. But starting on 1 April, most fast-food restaurants in the state must pay their workers at least $20 an hour under legislation Newsom signed last year. However, the law does not apply to restaurants that have on-site bakeries and sell bread as a standalone menu item.
That exception puzzled some industry watchers, and was never fully explained by Newsom or other supporters of the law. Then on Wednesday, Bloomberg News reported that the exemption was linked to opposition from the Panera Bread franchisee Greg Flynn, whose company owns 24 of the restaurants in California and has donated to Newsom’s campaigns.
“This story is absurd,” the California governor’s spokesman, Alex Stack, said on Thursday.
Stack said that the governor’s legal team believes Panera Bread is not exempt from the law. They said that to be exempt from the minimum wage law as a bakery, restaurants must produce bread for sale on site. The governor’s office said many chain bakeries, such as Panera Bread, mix dough at a centralized off-site location and then ship that dough to the restaurant for baking and sale.
Since last year, Panera Bread has been reported as a restaurant exempt from the law and Newsom’s office has not said otherwise, even when the governor was directly asked why the chain was exempt.
A message left with Panera Bread about their baking process was not immediately returned.
Stack said the governor never met with Flynn about the law. A message left with the Flynn Group was not returned on Thursday. Flynn told Bloomberg he did not play a role in crafting the exemption.
The Bloomberg story, citing anonymous sources, says Flynn urged the governor’s top aides to consider whether chains such as Panera should be considered fast food. It does not say that Newsom and Flynn spoke directly about the law.
The Flynn Group and Flynn Properties operate 2,600 restaurants and fitness centers across 44 states, according to the company’s website. Campaign finance records show Flynn Properties and Greg Flynn – the founder, chairman and chief executive – have donated more than $220,000 to Newsom’s political campaigns since 2017. That included a $100,000 donation to Newsom’s campaign to defeat a recall attempt in 2021.
The minimum wage law passed in 2023. In 2022, Flynn had publicly opposed a similar proposal, writing in an op-ed in Capitol Weekly that it would “effectively kill the franchise business model in the state”.
Republican leaders in the state Legislature on Thursday criticized Newsom for the possible connection.
“Put simply, campaign contributions should not buy carveouts in legislation,” the Republican state senate leader Brian Jones said. “It’s unacceptable.”
Assemblymember James Gallagher, the Republican leader in the assembly, said the attorney general, Rob Bonta, or another entity responsible for investigating conflicts of interest should look into the matter.
“This exemption, there is no explanation for it. Someone had to push for it,” he said.
The law was authored by Assemblymember Chris Holden, a Democrat from Pasadena, who told reporters on Thursday he was not involved in the negotiations over the bill’s final amendments, which included the $20 minimum wage increase and the exemption for bakeries.
He said those talks happened between the business community and labor unions – groups Holden said were brought together “through the governor’s leadership”.
Holden said he did not know Flynn or his status as a Newsom campaign donor. He declined to discuss if there were any legitimate policy reasons for exempting bakeries from the law.
“I’m not going to try to start parceling every individual group,” Holden said. “The way that the bill moved forward, everyone who’s in is in.”
Dan Schnur, who teaches political communications at the University of Southern California and the University of California Berkeley, said the issue had the potential to damage Newsom, much like when Newsom went to dinner at the French Laundry during the pandemic at a time when he was urging people to avoid public gatherings to prevent the spread of the coronavirus. That issue gave momentum to an effort to recall Newsom from office, which eventually qualified for the ballot in 2021 but was ultimately unsuccessful.
“The last time the governor got in the middle of a restaurant-related controversy, his hesitation to address it turned a small problem into a much bigger one,” Schur said. “It’s more than possible that there is a perfectly reasonable substantive policy-based reason for this exception. But if that reason exists, the governor is obligated to share it with the people of California. Otherwise they’ll assume that he did a big favor for a big donor.”
Source: US Politics - theguardian.com
