California Bill Could Shut Down Small Restaurants

[longknife]

by Warner Todd Huston10 Apr 2013

The State of California has one of the worst proposals of any legislature in the country this year with a new bill that would force every restaurant and food service business in the state to commission an expensive "risk assessment" test for every menu item.

Such a test could cost thousands of dollars for every food item sold. This outrageous and cost prohibitive testing would certainly cause all but the biggest chain restaurants to go out of business almost instantly.

In another exercise in nanny-statism, California's State Senate Democrats want this "risk assessment" conducted to determine whether food being sold "contributes significantly to a significant public health epidemic."

The bill, Senate Bill 747, is an addition to the current health and safety codes and is currently set for a hearing on April 17. It was written and introduced by Sen. Mark DeSauliner (D, Concord).

Read more about the ridiculous antics of California politicians @ California Bill Could Shut Down Small Restaurants

But, before you scream “right-wing propaganda,” read the bill @ Bill Text - SB-747 Public Health Impact Report.

 

[boedicca]

Yet another example of government regulation run amok. The cost is borne by the private sector - and the government is not responsible for a proper cost benefit justification...the combination is a job killer.

 

[hjmick]

I lived in California for better than thirty years. SHit like this reminds me why I left and why I don't miss it one iota...

 

[Oldguy]

Down here in Deep Red Texas a few years ago, the Republican Legislature passed a bill which REQUIRED every restaurant in the state to install larger automatic fire extinguishers in the kitchen. The cost was about $2500 and did result in some small restaurants closing. Mind you...automatic extinguishers were already mandatory, but somebody in the business got the Lege make everyone buy a bigger one.

Are you OK with that?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You guys should really learn to read the links that you post before you post them.

The Bill wouldn't require "all" restaurants to do anything - it only applies to items that the department has credible evidence that the product significantly contributes to a significant public epidemic.

I recognize that's a very ambiguously worded law - and I'm not supporting it at all - but you lose credibility when one of the main points of the OP is provably false.

 

[Mad Scientist]

You guys should really learn to read the links that you post before you post them.

The Bill wouldn't require "all" restaurants to do anything - it only applies to items that the department has credible evidence that the product significantly contributes to a significant public epidemic.

I recognize that's a very ambiguously worded law - and I'm not supporting it at all - but you lose credibility when one of the main points of the OP is provably false.

The OP wrote "could" not "would". Ambiguously worded sentences can be interpreted as "could".

Agree?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You guys should really learn to read the links that you post before you post them.

The Bill wouldn't require "all" restaurants to do anything - it only applies to items that the department has credible evidence that the product significantly contributes to a significant public epidemic.

I recognize that's a very ambiguously worded law - and I'm not supporting it at all - but you lose credibility when one of the main points of the OP is provably false.

The OP wrote "could" not "would". Ambiguously worded sentences can be interpreted as "could".

Agree?

From the OP:

The State of California has one of the worst proposals of any legislature in the country this year with a new bill that would force every restaurant and food service business in the state to commission an expensive "risk assessment" test for every menu item.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Well OP said Could, article said Would. I'll split the difference with ya'!

No doubt this is a Trial Balloon.

 

[Clementine]

by Warner Todd Huston10 Apr 2013

The State of California has one of the worst proposals of any legislature in the country this year with a new bill that would force every restaurant and food service business in the state to commission an expensive "risk assessment" test for every menu item.

Such a test could cost thousands of dollars for every food item sold. This outrageous and cost prohibitive testing would certainly cause all but the biggest chain restaurants to go out of business almost instantly.

In another exercise in nanny-statism, California's State Senate Democrats want this "risk assessment" conducted to determine whether food being sold "contributes significantly to a significant public health epidemic."

The bill, Senate Bill 747, is an addition to the current health and safety codes and is currently set for a hearing on April 17. It was written and introduced by Sen. Mark DeSauliner (D, Concord).

Read more about the ridiculous antics of California politicians @ California Bill Could Shut Down Small Restaurants

But, before you scream “right-wing propaganda,” read the bill @ Bill Text - SB-747 Public Health Impact Report.

California can't afford to lose any more tax payers. Why don't they just declare bankruptcy already?

We have crap like this designed to put more small businesses out of business, while at the same time Obama signed the Monsanto protection act, which will allow them to sell us tainted vegetables and fruits and have already been determined to be dangerous to our health. And they won't have to put on the label that the food is crap.

 

[zonly1]

Californians debt is what? just $617B in debt which comes to $16400 resident, who are still here. Most of the $617 is for unfunded liabilities to UNION PENSIONS.

Report: California state debt rises to $617 billion - Data Center - The Sacramento Bee

Californias GDP is $1.9 Trillion yet we have and outstanding debt of 617B.
Report: California slips to world's 9th largest economy ? This Just In - CNN.com Blogs

Didn't they pass prop 30 increase proper tax to support schools?????? Yet Teachers were given notices aprior to Christmas break that they will have lay offs...Prop 30 failed but they will use it anyway the please.

THe signs of autocratic from the Left rather than a constitutional republic.

 

[ScienceRocks]

What right does these asshole have to shut down anything?

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Don't the libtards get it?

California wants to shut down businesses, because that means more people are unemployed and FORCED to live on welfare in order to survive!

Then you'll be forced to vote Democrat, because without the Democratic Plantation Owners, you'll die of either starvation or lack of shelter, or both!

 

[Obamanation]

Down here in Deep Red Texas a few years ago, the Republican Legislature passed a bill which REQUIRED every restaurant in the state to install larger automatic fire extinguishers in the kitchen. The cost was about $2500 and did result in some small restaurants closing. Mind you...automatic extinguishers were already mandatory, but somebody in the business got the Lege make everyone buy a bigger one.

Are you OK with that?

I'd like to see the details on this....

or, in other words - I'm calling BS!!!

Rep Leg.
cost
resulted in closings
reasons for "bigger" extinguishers

Bottom line is that if a Republican thinks we need more regulation --- he is probably right. If a Dem is looking to increase regulations he is probably looking to increase gov't control or just acting for the sake of motion.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Government needs to stay out of private business. period.

 

[Oldguy]

Down here in Deep Red Texas a few years ago, the Republican Legislature passed a bill which REQUIRED every restaurant in the state to install larger automatic fire extinguishers in the kitchen. The cost was about $2500 and did result in some small restaurants closing. Mind you...automatic extinguishers were already mandatory, but somebody in the business got the Lege make everyone buy a bigger one.

Are you OK with that?

I'd like to see the details on this....

or, in other words - I'm calling BS!!!

Rep Leg.
cost
resulted in closings
reasons for "bigger" extinguishers

Bottom line is that if a Republican thinks we need more regulation --- he is probably right. If a Dem is looking to increase regulations he is probably looking to increase gov't control or just acting for the sake of motion.

I can't offer you a story about those changes because it pretty much flew under the news radar. It was in 2006, I think, that a series of amendments to the state fire code and insurance regulations were passed, among which was the referred to upgrading of dry fire extinguisher systems in restaurants.

I did find this, which is a discussion about the effects of what were then proposed amendments:

"....For those property owners choosing to replace or upgrade the fire protection system for their cooking areas, the cost is estimated at $1,000 to $4,000 per system depending on the quantity of appliances and size of the cooking area..." (The choice was to comply or close. Many did.)

"...It is neither legal nor feasible to waive the proposed amendments for small or micro businesses because requirements for installation and service of fire extinguisher systems must be applied consistently to large, small and micro businesses in the interest of safeguarding lives and property as required by the Insurance Code Article 5.43-1..."

I only became aware of this at the time because I was the Post Commander at our local VFW and we had to spend $2500 we did not have to install a larger system or close the kitchen, in spite of the fact that we had never had a fire in the kitchen at all and the system we had was sufficient to put out anything on our limited grill and stove surfaces.

As for that comment that somebody from the fire extinguisher business got the Legislature to pass it? That's my editorial position based upon knowledge of how legislatures work, especially in Texas.




Fire Extinguisher Rules

 

[Wicked Jester]

Down here in Deep Red Texas a few years ago, the Republican Legislature passed a bill which REQUIRED every restaurant in the state to install larger automatic fire extinguishers in the kitchen. The cost was about $2500 and did result in some small restaurants closing. Mind you...automatic extinguishers were already mandatory, but somebody in the business got the Lege make everyone buy a bigger one.

Are you OK with that?

Are you talking about ANSUL systems?

'cause the earlier version FSS's were completely inadequate.

And, if a restaurant can't afford to absorb the $2500.00 cost in system upgrades, then they shouldn't have been in business in the first place.

Link please.

 

[Oldguy]

Down here in Deep Red Texas a few years ago, the Republican Legislature passed a bill which REQUIRED every restaurant in the state to install larger automatic fire extinguishers in the kitchen. The cost was about $2500 and did result in some small restaurants closing. Mind you...automatic extinguishers were already mandatory, but somebody in the business got the Lege make everyone buy a bigger one.

Are you OK with that?

Are you talking about ANSUL systems?

'cause the earlier version FSS's were completely inadequate.

And, if a restaurant can't afford to absorb the $2500.00 cost in system upgrades, then they shouldn't have been in business in the first place.

Link please.

See post #15.

As for those businesses who can't afford it? Why not apply that same logic to the OP's original assertion? If businesses can't absorb the cost of new regulations, they shouldn't be in business either, right?

 

[RoadVirus]

California can't afford to lose any more tax payers. Why don't they just declare bankruptcy already?

Because somewhere in the cobwebbed minds of the State government, everything is fine.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

Don't the libtards get it?

California wants to shut down businesses, because that means more people are unemployed and FORCED to live on welfare in order to survive!

Then you'll be forced to vote Democrat, because without the Democratic Plantation Owners, you'll die of either starvation or lack of shelter, or both!

No, YOU don't get it.

1. Take a look at the person who drafted this bill? See him? Now...
2. Look at who his biggest campaign contributor was (bet you $100 it was a big corporation)
3. Who does this legislation benefit? As usual, said corporation is the sole beneficiary, isn't it... they may have even WRITTEN the bill.
4. Now you see the problem in this country.

It isn't the government stifling competition and taking away our rights, it is the top dogs in the private sector because this country runs on legalized bribery. Until we get money out of politics, nothing will ever change.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Down here in Deep Red Texas a few years ago, the Republican Legislature passed a bill which REQUIRED every restaurant in the state to install larger automatic fire extinguishers in the kitchen. The cost was about $2500 and did result in some small restaurants closing. Mind you...automatic extinguishers were already mandatory, but somebody in the business got the Lege make everyone buy a bigger one.

Are you OK with that?

Are you talking about ANSUL systems?

'cause the earlier version FSS's were completely inadequate.

And, if a restaurant can't afford to absorb the $2500.00 cost in system upgrades, then they shouldn't have been in business in the first place.

Link please.

See post #15.

As for those businesses who can't afford it? Why not apply that same logic to the OP's original assertion? If businesses can't absorb the cost of new regulations, they shouldn't be in business either, right?

I owned a successful restaurant for many years....Again, if a restaurant owner can't afford a $2500.00 upgrade to any of their systems, they shouldn't be in business in the first place.

And, I operated my restaurant in one of the most over-regulated and taxed states in the nation, California, and you ALWAYS plan for increases on everything, along with system upgrades and break downs.

If a restaurant straight up went out of business because they could not absorb a $2500.00 system upgrade, then that business was already on its way out.