Food safety: cottage food operations.
Summary
Existing law, the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law (Sherman Law) , requires the State Department of Public Health to regulate the manufacture, sale, labeling, and advertising activities related to food, drugs, devices, and cosmetics in conformity with the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. The Sherman Law makes it unlawful to manufacture, sell, deliver, hold, or offer for sale any food that is misbranded. Food is misbranded if its labeling does not conform to specified federal labeling requirements regarding nutrition, nutrient content or health claims, and food allergens. Violation of this law is a misdemeanor. The existing California Retail Food Code provides for the regulation of health and sanitation standards for retail food facilities, as defined, by the State Department of Public Health. Under existing law, local health agencies are primarily responsible for enforcing the California Retail Food Code. That law exempts private homes from the definition of a food facility, and prohibits food stored or prepared in a private home from being used or offered for sale in a food facility. That law also requires food that is offered for human consumption to be honestly presented, as specified. A violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor. This bill would include a cottage food operation, as defined, that is registered or has a permit within the private home exemption of the California Retail Food Code. The bill would also exclude a cottage food operation from specified food processing establishment and Sherman Law requirements. This bill would require a cottage food operation to meet specified requirements relating to training, sanitation, preparation, labeling, and permissible types of sales and would subject a cottage food operation to inspections under specified circumstances. The bill would require a food facility that serves a cottage food product without packaging or labeling to identify it as homemade. The bill would establish various zoning and permit requirements relating to cottage food operations. This bill would incorporate additional changes in Section 113789 of the Health and Safety Code, proposed by AB 2297, to be operative only if AB 2297 and this bill are both chaptered and become effective January 1, 2013, and this bill is chaptered last. By imposing duties on local officials and adding new crimes, this bill would create 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2012
Committee Review
Aug 2012
Assembly Passage
May 2012
Senate Passage
Aug 2012
Signed into Law
Sep 2012
Introduced Feb 8, 2012
Signed Sep 21, 2012
Floor votes · Senate Aug 31, 2012 · Assembly May 29, 2012
How they voted
26–0
Passed · 5 other
Total votes 31
Aug 31, 2012
D
Democratic20
80% Yea
R
Republican11
90% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
37
Key actions
11
Committee
12
Amendments
4
Sep 21, 2012
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Aug 31, 2012
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (26-0-5)
senate
Aug 30, 2012
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 60. Noes 16. Page 6691.).
lower
Aug 30, 2012
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
lower
Aug 20, 2012
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (August 16).
upper
Aug 6, 2012
Committee
In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file.
upper
Jul 2, 2012
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (June 27).
upper
Jun 7, 2012
Committee
Referred to Com. on HEALTH.
upper
May 29, 2012
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (48-18-4)
assembly
May 25, 2012
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 12. Noes 5.) (May 25).
lower
May 16, 2012
Committee
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
May 7, 2012
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Apr 26, 2012
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Apr 24, 2012
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (April 17).
lower
Apr 11, 2012
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.
lower
Apr 9, 2012
Lower · Passed
In committee: Set, second hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
lower
Mar 27, 2012
Lower · Passed
In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
lower
Feb 23, 2012
Committee
Referred to Com. on HEALTH.
lower
Feb 9, 2012
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 10.
lower
1 primary · 6 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 1616
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 1616. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline