Existing law establishes the Olive Oil Commission of California and provides for the board of directors of the commission comprised of 10 voting members, as specified. Existing law further provides for an advisory committee to advise the commission board of directors, provides for the selection of the chair of the advisory committee by the members of the advisory committee, and specifies that the chair of the advisory committee shall be a nonvoting member of the commission board of directors.

This bill would instead establish the chair of the advisory committee to be a member, rather than a nonvoting member, of the commission board of directors. The bill would also require the chair of the advisory committee to designate an alternate advisory committee member to serve in the chairs absence.

Existing law establishes the Olive Oil Commission of California and provides for the board of directors of the commission comprised of 10 voting members, as specified. Existing law further provides for an advisory committee to advise the commission board of directors, provides for the selection of the chair of the advisory committee by the members of the advisory committee, and specifies that the chair of the advisory committee shall be a nonvoting member of the commission board of directors.

This bill would instead establish the chair of the advisory committee to be a member, rather than a nonvoting member, of the commission board of directors. The bill would also require the chair of the advisory committee to designate an alternate advisory committee member to serve in the chairs absence.

Existing law establishes the Olive Oil Commission of California and provides for the establishment of an advisory committee to advise the board of directors of the Olive Oil Commission of California, as specified, and provides that the chair of the advisory committee shall be an ex officio member of the commission board of directors. of the commission comprised of 10 voting members, as specified. Existing law further provides for an advisory committee to advise the commission board of directors, provides for the selection of the chair of the advisory committee by the members of the commission, and specifies that the chair of the advisory committee shall be a nonvoting member of the commission board of directors.

This bill would instead require establish the chair of the advisory committee to be a member, rather than an ex officio a nonvoting member, of the commission board of directors. The bill would also require the chair of the advisory committee to designate an alternate advisory committee member to serve in the chairs absence.

Existing law prohibits, with some exceptions, the manufacture, packing, or holding of processed food without a valid registration from the State Department of Public Health. A violation of these provisions is a crime.

This bill would, beginning January 1, 2018, exempt from the registration requirements the milling, packaging, and selling of grain produced and sold at a water-driven grist mill on the National Register of Historic Places, provided best management practices suitable for a historic water-driven grist mill are followed for the processing and handling of the product, the flour is identified as being produced in a historic mill using traditional methods, and the product meets applicable federal food adulteration purity standards.

Existing law, the California Retail Food Code, provides for the regulation of health and sanitation standards for retail food facilities, as defined, by the department and is primarily enforced by local health agencies. A violation of any provision of the code is a misdemeanor.

This bill would, beginning January 1, 2018, exclude from the definition of a retail food facility a water-driven grist mill that is on the National Register of Historic Places and that has onsite sales of grain that is milled at the facility. The bill would make related findings, declarations, and statements of legislative intent.

 UNFINISHED BUSINESS  

Bill No: SB 746

Author:

:

Vote:

PRIOR VOTES NOT RELEVANT

SENATE AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE: 5-0, 8/17/16 (Pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10)

AYES: Galgiani, Cannella, Berryhill, Pan, Wolk

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 8/11/16 (Consent) - See last page for vote

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Olive Oil Commission of California

DIGEST: This bill changes the chair of the advisory committee from an ex-officio member to a voting member on the Olive Oil Commission of California Board of Directors. This bill also requires the chair of the advisory committee to designate an alternate to serve in the chair’s absence.

Assembly Amendments delete the Senate version of this bill relating to food safety and instead add the current language.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes the Olive Oil Commission of California (OOCC) to engage in olive oil research and to recommend grades and labeling standards. The OOCC is comprised of six producers, three handlers, a public member, and ex-officio members which include the chair of the OOCC Advisory Committee, the secretary of CDFA, and other appropriate persons as determined by the OOCC Board of Directors.
2. Establishes the OOCC Advisory Committee to review issues affecting California olive oil and to advise the OOCC Board of Directors.
3. Prescribes OOCC membership, board of directors, powers and duties, implementing and voting procedures, assessments and recordkeeping, penalties, continuation or termination of the commission, and creation of quality standards.
4. Authorizes the OOCC to levy an annual assessment, not to exceed $0.25 per gallon of olive oil, on producers processing more than 5,000 gallons in one marketing season, as defined.

This bill:

1. Changes the chair of the OOCC Advisory Committee from an ex-officio member to a full voting member of the OOCC Board of Directors.
2. Requires the chair of the OOCC Advisory Committee to designate an alternate member to serve as Chair in the chair’s absence.

Background

The OOCC was created in 2013 to engage in olive oil research and to recommend grading and labeling standards to the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA). After a successful producer referendum, the OOCC developed California olive oil grading and labeling standards that would apply only to California producers processing over 5,000 gallons of olive oil, refined-olive oil, or olive-pomace oil, per year. CDFA approved these recommendations, and they became effective on September 26, 2014.

The OOCC Advisory Committee was created to provide an opportunity for smaller olive oil producers (processing less than 5,000 gallons a year and, therefore, not eligible to participate as “producers” within the OOCC) to advise the OOCC on issues affecting California olive oil.

California produces 99% of the olives grown within the United States. According to the California Olive Oil Council, there are over 400 growers and approximately 38,000 acres dedicated to the production of extra virgin olive oil. With over 75 olive varieties grown in California, it is estimated that the 2015-16 harvest produced over 4 million gallons of extra virgin olive oil.

Comments

Need for this bill. This bill ratifies the action taken by the OOCC board on September 9, 2015. At this meeting, board member participation was discussed, and it was suggested that the advisory committee chair be made a voting member of the OOCC so that small producers effectively will be stakeholders in OOCC activities. The board unanimously approved a motion to begin the process to have “ex-officio” removed from law.

Commissions and Councils. There are approximately 16 active commissions and councils, all of which are governed by boards of directors and overseen by the CDFA. These entities were created to enhance their industries by investing in promotion, advertising, education, marketing research, scientific research, and/or the creation and regulation of quality standards. Generally, commissions and councils are initiated by the industry and go into effect following an affirmative industry referendum vote and, at times, a periodic vote to reaffirm their existence. Once in effect, every member of the industry, as specified, is required to follow all laws and regulations including, but not limited to, the payment of assessment fees.

Unlike marketing orders and marketing agreements, commissions and councils are created through commodity-specific legislation. Generally, councils are advisory to CDFA and all actions are subject to CDFA approval. Commissions have greater autonomy and do not serve an advisory purpose; however, CDFA must concur with their annual budget and activities statement, and CDFA has the authority to issue cease and desist orders for commission actions that CDFA deems to not be in the public interest.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, negligible fiscal impact.

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/17/16)

Olive Oil Commission of California (source)

California Olive Oil Council

Cal Athena

California Olive Ranch

Dickson Napa Ranch

Lodi Farming, Inc.

Olio Nuevo

The Groves on 41

Santa Cruz Olive Tree Nursery

Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/17/16)

None received

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author, “The Olive Oil Commission of California desire[s] to include representation from the small and artisan olive oil producers, as well as large olive oil producers, [and] will promote unity and strength of the California industry as it continues to grow and produce high quality extra virgin olive oil.”

According to those in support, this bill is part of an ongoing effort by the OOCC to give small and artisan producers full participation in policymaking and activities of the commission. Although the OOCC is made up only of larger producers, the decisions of the commission affect the entire industry; therefore, it is fair that smaller producers be represented.

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 8/11/16

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Arambula, Atkins, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon

NO VOTE RECORDED: Roger Hernández, Low

Prepared by:

8/17/16 15:42:39

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE

Senator Cathleen Galgiani, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Bill No: SB 746 Hearing Date: 8/17/16

Subject: Olive Oil Commission of California: voting members: chair of advisory committee

SUMMARY

:

This bill would change the chair of the advisory committee from an ex-officio member to a voting member on the Olive Oil Commission of California Board of Directors. This bill also requires the chair of the advisory committee to designate an alternate to serve in the chair’s absence.

BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW

:

The Olive Oil Commission of California (OOCC) was created in 2013 to engage in olive oil research and to recommend grading and labeling standards to the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA). After a successful producer referendum, the OOCC developed California olive oil grading and labeling standards that would apply only to California producers processing over 5,000 gallons of olive oil, refined-olive oil, or olive-pomace oil, per year. CDFA approved these recommendations, and they became effective on September 26, 2014.

The OOCC Advisory Committee was created to provide an opportunity for smaller olive oil producers (processing less than 5,000 gallons a year and, therefore, not eligible to participate as “producers” within the OOCC) to advise the OOCC on issues affecting California olive oil.

California produces 99% of the olives grown within the United States. According to the California Olive Oil Council, there are over 400 growers and approximately 38,000 acres dedicated to the production of extra virgin olive oil. With over 75 olive varieties grown in California, it is estimated that the 2015-16 harvest produced over 4 million gallons of extra virgin olive oil.

Existing law:

1. Establishes the Olive Oil Commission of California to engage in olive oil research and to recommend grades and labeling standards. The OOCC is comprised of six producers, three handlers, a public member, and ex-officio members which include the chair of the OOCC Advisory Committee, the secretary of CDFA, and other appropriate persons as determined by the board.
2. Establishes the OOCC Advisory Committee to review issues affecting California olive oil and to advise the OOCC Board of Dnirectors.
3. Prescribes OOCC membership, board of directors, powers and duties, implementing and voting procedures, assessments and recordkeeping, penalties, continuation or termination of the commission, and creation of quality standards.
4. Authorizes the OOCC to levy an annual assessment, not to exceed $0.25 per gallon of olive oil, on producers processing more than 5,000 gallons in one marketing season, as defined.

PROPOSED LAW

:

This bill:

1. Changes the chair of the OOCC Advisory Committee from an ex-officio member to a full voting member of the OOCC Board of Directors.
2. Requires the chair of the OOCC Advisory Committee to designate an alternate member to serve as Chair in the chair’s absence.

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT:

According to the author, “The Olive Oil Commission of California desire[s] to include representation from the small and artisan olive oil producers, as well as large olive oil producers, [and] will promote unity and strength of the California industry as it continues to grow and produce high quality extra virgin olive oil.”

According to those in support, this bill is part of an ongoing effort by the OOCC to give small and artisan producers full participation in policymaking and activities of the commission. Although the OOCC is made up only of larger producers, the decisions of the commission affect the entire industry; therefore, it is fair that smaller producers be represented.

COMMENTS

:

Need for this bill. This bill ratifies the action taken by the OOCC board on September 9, 2015. At this meeting, board member participation was discussed, and it was suggested that the advisory committee chair be made a voting member of the OOCC so that small producers effectively will be stakeholders in OOCC activities. The board unanimously approved a motion to begin the process to have “ex-officio” removed from law.

Commissions and Councils. There are approximately 16 active commissions and councils, all of which are governed by boards of directors and overseen by the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA). These entities were created to enhance their industries by investing in promotion, advertising, education, marketing research, scientific research, and/or the creation and regulation of quality standards. Generally, commissions and councils are initiated by the industry and go into effect following an affirmative industry referendum vote and, at times, a periodic vote to reaffirm their existence. Once in effect, every member of the industry, as specified, is required to follow all laws and regulations including, but not limited to, the payment of assessment fees.

Unlike marketing orders and marketing agreements, commissions and councils are created through commodity-specific legislation. Generally, councils are advisory to CDFA and all actions are subject to CDFA approval. Commissions have greater autonomy and do not serve an advisory purpose; however, CDFA must concur with their annual budget and activities statement, and CDFA has the authority to issue cease and desist orders for commission actions that CDFA deems to not be in the public interest.

RELATED LEGISLATION

:

SB 65 (Wolk), Chapter 138, Statutes of 2015. Removes the use of American Viticultural Areas from olive oil labels and instead specifies regions or estates within California to indicate oil source. Requires that olive oil labeled as originating from a specific region of California contain at least 85% oil made from olives grown in that specified region, and if labeled from a specific estate, 95% from olives grown on the specified estate.

SB 250 (Wolk), Chapter 344, Statutes of 2013. Creates the Olive Oil Commission of California to engage in olive oil research and to recommend grades and labeling standards.

SB 818 (Wolk), Chapter 567, Statutes of 2011. Conforms California olive oil labeling requirements to United States labeling standards published in the U.S. Standards for Grade of Olive Oil and Olive-Pomace Oil.

SB 920 (Thompson), Chapter 543, Statutes of 1997. Requires that olive oil sold as “California Olive Oil” must be solely derived from California-grown olives and requires olive oil with an American Viticultural Areas (AVA) label to contain at least 75% oil made from olives grown within the specified AVA.

PRIOR ACTIONS

:

SUPPORT

:

Olive Oil Commission of California (Sponsor)

California Olive Oil Council

Cal Athena

California Olive Ranch

Dickson Napa Ranch

Lodi Farming, Inc.

Olio Nuevo

The Groves on 41

Santa Cruz Olive Tree Nursery

Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation

OPPOSITION

:

None received

-- END --

Date of Hearing: August 3, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Lorena Gonzalez, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 746

Author:(Wolk) – As Amended Ver:June 6, 2016

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill modifies the makeup of the Olive Oil Commission of California (OOCC) board of directors to include the chair of the advisory committee, and allows the chair of the advisory committee to designate an alternative chair.

FISCAL EFFECT:

Negligible fiscal impact.

COMMENTS:

Background and Purpose. SB 476 is intended to fulfill a motion approved by the OOCC board of directors in September 2015. That motion was to include the advisory committee chair as a voting member of the OOCC board.

The OOCC was created by SB 250 (Wolk), Chapter 344, Statutes of 2013, and assesses producers of over 5,000 gallons per year of olive oil for the purposes of conducting research, grade standards and labeling requirements. In an effort to include smaller, non-paying producers, this legislation included an advisory committee of those less than 5,000 gallons a year producers to advise the OOCC board.

Analysis Prepared by: Luke Reidenbach / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: June 29, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE

Bill Dodd, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 746

Author:(Wolk) – As Amended Ver:June 6, 2016

SENATE VOTE: (Not relevant)

SUBJECT: Olive Oil Commission of California: chair of advisory committee.

SUMMARY: Changes the advisory committee (AC) Chair from an ex official non-voting member of the Olive Oil Commission of California (OOCC) to a voting member; permits the AC Chair to designate an alternative OOCC member to act as Chair in his/her absence; and, makes technical non-substantive changes.

EXISTING LAW: Provides for the establishment of an AC to advise the board of directors (board) of OOCC, as specified, and provides that the chair of the AC shall be an ex officio member of the OOCC board.

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown.

COMMENTS: OOCC was created by SB 250 (Wolk), Chapter 344, Statutes of 2013, and assesses producers of over 5,000 gallons per year of olive oil for the purposes of conducting research, grade standards and labeling requirements. In an effort to include smaller, non-paying producers, this legislation included an AC of those less than 5,000 gallons a year producers to advise the OOCC board.

The Chair of AC has acted as an ex officio member of the OOCC board. The OOCC board, at their September 9, 2015, meeting, approved a motion to include the AC Chair as a voting member of the OOCC board. SB 736 is intended to fulfill that motion.

The committee may wish to consider if it is an appropriate policy to have a non-paying producer serving in more than an advisory capacity.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Olive Oil Commission of California (Sponsor)

California Olive Oil Council

Cal Athena

California Olive Ranch

Dickson Napa Ranch

Lodi Farming, Inc.

Olio Nuevo

The Groves on 41

Santa Cruz Olive Tree Nursery

Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation

Opposition

None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Jim Collin / AGRI. / (916) 319-2084

Date of Hearing: July 7, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HEALTH

Rob Bonta, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 746

Author:(Wolk) – As Introduced Ver:February 27, 2015

SENATE VOTE: 34-0

SUBJECT: Food safety: grist mills.

SUMMARY: Exempts from the requirements to register as a food processing facility and also exempts from the definition of a food facility, and therefore provisions of the California Retail Food Code (CRFC), a historic water-driven grist mill in order to allow grain to be milled, packaged and sold at the mill without having to meet the requirements of a food processing facility or a retail food facility. Specifically, this bill:

1. Exempts from the requirement to register as a food processing facility, beginning January 1, 2018, the milling, packaging, and selling of grain produced and sold at a water-driven grist mill on the National Register of Historic Places, provided:
   
   

   1. Best management practices suitable for a historic water-driven grist mill are followed for the processing and handling of the product;
      
      

   2. The flour is identified as being produced in a historic mill using traditional methods; and
      
      

   3. The product meets applicable federal food adulteration purity standards.

2. Exempts from the definition of food facility, beginning January 1, 2018, for purposes of law requiring food facilities to obtain a permit from California Department of Public Health (DPH) or the local health agency having jurisdiction over the food facility, a water-driven grist mill that is on the National Register of Historic Places and that has onsite sales of grain that is milled at the facility.

3. Makes various legislative findings and declarations related to the recent moratorium on the closure of state parks and the use of innovative tools to stabilize the Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) and broaden its financial base, and that a more entrepreneurial and robust revenue-generation strategy must be established for the state parks.

4. States the intent of the Legislature to encourage DPR and DPH to consult with each other to develop and implement additional, reasonable improvements designed to increase public health security at the Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park, without impairing or adversely affecting historical, cultural, or natural resources.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Prohibits any person from engaging in the manufacture, packing, or holding of any processed food unless the person has a valid registration as a food processing facility from DPH.

2. Exempts certain activities that are authorized under specific permits and licenses from the food processing facility registration requirements.

3. Prohibits any food facility from being open for business without a valid permit from DPH or the local health agency having jurisdiction over the food facility.

4. Defines “food facility” as an operation that stores, prepares, packages, serves, vends, or otherwise provides food for human consumption at the retail level.

5. Establishes various requirements that food facilities must meet, including requiring that the interior floor, sides, and top of the food holding area to be constructed of a smooth, washable, impervious material capable of withstanding frequent cleaning.

6. Exempts from the definition of “food facility” certain specified entities, including premises operated by a producer that sells only whole produce grown by the producer, provided the sales are conducted on premises controlled by the producer.

7. Defines, under the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, food purity standards and deems food adulterated, or not fit for human consumption, if that food is prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions.

FISCAL EFFECT: This bill is keyed non-fiscal.

COMMENTS:

1. PURPOSE OF THIS BILL. According to the author, in 2011, as part of the Governor's efforts to cut state expenditures, the Bale Grist Mill and 69 other state parks were selected for closure. The Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District, in partnership with the Napa Valley State Parks Association, is working to keep the mill open to the public. Selling flour produced at the mill is an important element in generating the revenues needed to keep this National Historic Landmark open to the public. Because the mill is not registered as either a retail food facility or a food processing facility, the grain sold at the mill must be labeled as not fit for human consumption. The author states that the grist mill is a very clean, neat and well maintained facility, best management practices are used, and the flour which is produced is safe and healthy.

2. Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park. The Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park is located near St. Helena in Napa County. The water-powered mill was built in 1846. The Bale Grist Mill was registered as a California historical landmark on October 9, 1939. In 1972, Bale's Grist Mill was entered on the National Register of Historic Places. In 1974, it was conveyed to the California State Park System for preservation and eventual restoration as Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park. The mill currently offers flour produced at the mill in exchange for a donation, but it must be labeled as not fit for human consumption because the mill is not registered as either a retail food facility or food processing facility.

AB 1589 (Huffman), Chapter 533, Statutes of 2012, required DPR to develop a plan to increase revenues at state parks, appropriated $10 million in Proposition 84 general obligation bond funds for the installation of revenue collection equipment and other improvements at state parks, and authorized taxpayers to voluntarily contribute to the state park system through the income tax system.

The intention of this bill is to allow the Bale Grist Mill additional revenue in order to make the mill operationally self-sufficient. The total operational expenses of the mill for 2012 were $130,000. Revenues from operation of the Bale Grist Mill (entrance fees, sales of merchandise, donations for flour, and special events at the Bale Grist Mill) for 2012 were $100,634. The revenue currently generated from the sale of milled grain is approximately $19,000 of the total revenue each year. The sponsors of this bill suggest that more grain would be sold if it could be sold without the notice that it is not fit for human consumption.

This bill is nearly identical to SB 170 (Wolk) of 2014, which would have taken effect on January 1, 2016. In vetoing that measure, Governor Brown directed DPH and the DPR to continue working with representatives from the mill on other potential solutions to the ongoing problems. According to DPH, representatives from DPH and DPR met several times with representatives of the mill and the County to discuss possible solutions. Despite everyone’s best effort, these discussions have identified no middle ground, either food is unsafe or the historical integrity of the mill is lost.

3. SUPPORT. The Napa County Board of Supervisors (Napa County) states that the Bale Grist Mill is one of only two remaining water-driven mills west of the Mississippi River. Napa County states that the mill currently sells flour produced at the mill, but it must be labeled as not fit for human consumption because the mill is not registered as either a retail food facility or a food processing facility. Napa County cannot meet the standards for a retail food facility or a food processing facility because the physical historic construction of the mill makes it impossible to comply with current codes. For example, wood floors are not allowed, the porous grinding stone is not allowed, and contact between grain/flour and the wood in the grain chutes and flour bins is not allowed. Napa County supports this bill to allow the Bale Grist Mill to be financially viable and not dependent on state subsidies.

4. OPPOSITION. DPH is opposed to this bill, stating that "unfortunately, given the nature of the mill with wood surfaces and dry ingredients used in the milling of flour, there is no cleaning and sanitation process that will eliminate the bacterial and viral pathogens left behind from the rodent excreta and urine without increasing the opportunity for other pathogens to grow and colonize the area." DPH continues to oppose carving out a narrow exemption in the Health and Safety Code for only one food processing facility that cannot meet current food safety requirements. In addition, despite significant work at both the state and local level, DPH believes the bill would not achieve what the sponsor intends – exemption from food processing requirements.

5. RELATED LEGISLATION.

1. AB 143 (Wood) expands an exemption in the CRFC allowing wine tasting rooms that currently only serve crackers to also serve pretzels or prepackaged non-potentially hazardous foods. AB 143 passed out of this committee on April 21, 2015 with a vote of 16-0 and is currently pending on the Senate floor (consent calendar).

2. AB 1076 (Mayes) exempts from the definition of a food facility, a snack bar operated by a charitable nonprofit organization and authorizes snack bars to undertake limited food preparation, as defined. AB 1076 is pending in Assembly Health Committee.

6. PREVIOUS LEGISLATION. SB 170 (Wolk) of 2014, was nearly identical to this bill, and would have taken effect on January 1, 2016. Unlike SB 746, SB 170 was heard in the Assembly Water, Parks, and Wildlife Committee. SB 170 was vetoed by the Governor, who stated: “Exempting these products by January 1, 2016, is premature, as no best management practices yet exist for historic water-driven grist mills. I will direct the Department of Public Health and the Department of Parks and Recreation to continue working with proponents on this and other potential solutions to help raise needed revenues.”

7. DOUBLE REFERRAL.  A request to refer this bill to the Assembly Appropriations Committee has been approved by the Assembly Rules Committee; upon passage in this Committee, this bill will be referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

8. POLICY CONCERNS

   1. Appropriate best management practices have not yet been developed. This bill requires that the mill follow food processing and handling best management practices suitable for a historic water-driven grist mill, but these practices have not yet been developed. This bill states legislative intent, but does not require, that DPH and DPR develop those practices. The author has attempted to address the Governor's veto message by allowing two years for appropriate best management practices to be developed, but it is unclear whether the parties involved will be able to come agree on practices that protect both food safety and the historical integrity of the mill.

   2. Bats, cats, and rats. The mill's physical historic construction means it cannot meet current-day codes for retail food safety. State law requires that a food facility structure be free of mice, bats, cats, and flies, which both supporters and opponents of this bill agree is not possible without destroying the historic integrity of the mill. The Committee may wish to consider whether it is inconsistent with the policies of this Committee to allow an exemption from food safety standards for a facility that, by definition, cannot possibly meet general food safety protections, in particular exclusion of animals and vermin.

   3. Does this bill achieve its intended goal? The bill requires the flour to meet federal food purity standards. As California adopts all federal food safety regulations as the State’s regulations, it is unlikely the mill will be able to meet the standard proposed by the bill and thus would not be able to achieve exemption from state law as desired. Even if the mill were completely exempt from state regulation, California cannot waive the federal food standards in order to allow the mill to sell the flour directly to consumers or restaurants for use in food. Although the grain at the mill is offered in exchange for a donation, rather than being sold, it is entering into commerce and cannot meet federal or state purity standards. The author may wish to consider whether, even under the provisions of this bill, the grain would still be in violation of federal and state food purity and adulteration standards.

9. SUGGESTED AMENDMENT. Upon vetoing SB 170, the Governor directed DPH and DPR to work with stakeholders to develop best management practices suitable for this mill. This bill, as drafted, only mentions that fact in legislative findings and does not state in statute that the Bale Grist Mill would follow the developed best management practices to protect food safety. To address this, the Committee suggests the author amend this bill as follows:

(11) Beginning January 1, 2018, the milling, packaging, and selling of grain produced and sold at a water-driven grist mill on the National Register of Historic Places, provided best management practices developed in conjunction with Department of Public Health and the Department of Parks and Recreation suitable for a historic water-driven grist mill are followed for the processing and handling of the product, the flour is identified as being produced in a historic mill using traditional methods, and the product meets applicable federal food adulteration purity standards.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District (sponsor)

Napa City Council

Napa County Board of Supervisors

Opposition

Department of Public Health

Analysis Prepared by: Dharia McGrew / HEALTH / (916) 319-2097

Date of Hearing: June 23, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HEALTH

Rob Bonta, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 746

Author:(Wolk) – As Introduced Ver:February 27, 2015

SENATE VOTE: 34-0

SUBJECT: Food safety: grist mills.

SUMMARY: Exempts from the requirements to register as a food processing facility and also exempts from the definition of a food facility, and therefore provisions of the California Retail Food Code (CRFC), a historic water-driven grist mill in order to allow grain to be milled, packaged and sold at the mill without having to meet the requirements of a food processing facility or a retail food facility. Specifically, this bill:

1. Exempts from the requirement to register as a food processing facility, beginning January 1, 2018, the milling, packaging, and selling of grain produced and sold at a water-driven grist mill on the National Register of Historic Places, provided best management practices suitable for a historic water-driven grist mill are followed for the processing and handling of the product, the flour is identified as being produced in a historic mill using traditional methods, and the product meets applicable federal food adulteration purity standards.

2. Exempts from the definition of food facility, beginning January 1, 2018, for purposes of law requiring food facilities to obtain a permit from California Department of Public Health (DPH) or the local health agency having jurisdiction over the food facility, a water-driven grist mill that is on the National Register of Historic Places and that has onsite sales of grain that is milled at the facility.

3. Makes various legislative findings and declarations related to the recent moratorium on the closure of state parks and the use of innovative tools to stabilize the Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) and broaden its financial base, and that a more entrepreneurial and robust revenue-generation strategy must be established for the state parks.

4. States the intent of the Legislature to encourage DPR and DPH to consult with each other to develop and implement additional, reasonable improvements designed to increase public health security at the Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park, without impairing or adversely affecting historical, cultural, or natural resources.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Prohibits any person from engaging in the manufacture, packing, or holding of any processed food unless the person has a valid registration as a food processing facility from DPH.

2. Exempts certain activities that are authorized under specific permits and licenses from the food processing facility registration requirements.

3. Prohibits any food facility from being open for business without a valid permit from DPH or the local health agency having jurisdiction over the food facility.

4. Defines “food facility” as an operation that stores, prepares, packages, serves, vends, or otherwise provides food for human consumption at the retail level.

5. Establishes various requirements that food facilities must meet, including requiring that the interior floor, sides, and top of the food holding area to be constructed of a smooth, washable, impervious material capable of withstanding frequent cleaning.

6. Exempts from the definition of “food facility” certain specified entities, including premises operated by a producer that sells only whole produce grown by the producer, provided the sales are conducted on premises controlled by the producer.

7. Under the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, defines food purity standards and deems food adulterated, or not fit for human consumption, if that food is prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions.

FISCAL EFFECT: None.

COMMENTS:

1. PURPOSE OF THIS BILL. According to the author, in 2011, as part of the Governor's efforts to cut state expenditures, the Bale Grist Mill and 69 other state parks were selected for closure. The Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District, in partnership with the Napa Valley State Parks Association, is working to keep the mill open to the public. Selling flour produced at the mill is an important element in generating the revenues needed to keep this National Historic Landmark open to the public. Because the mill is not registered as either a retail food facility or a food processing facility, the grain sold at the mill must be labeled as not fit for human consumption. The author states that the grist mill is a very clean, neat and well maintained facility, best management practices are used, and the flour which is produced is safe and healthy.

2. Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park. The Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park is located near St. Helena in Napa County. The water-powered mill was built in 1846. Both the mill and its 36-foot water wheel are protected as a state historic landmark and have been partially restored. The mill currently sells flour produced at the mill, but it must be labeled as not fit for human consumption because the mill is not registered as either a retail food facility or food processing facility.

AB 1589 (Huffman), Chapter 533, Statutes of 2012, required DPR to develop a plan to increase revenues at state parks, appropriated $10 million in Proposition 84 general obligation bond funds for the installation of revenue collection equipment and other improvements at state parks, and authorized taxpayers to voluntarily contribute to the state park system through the income tax system.

The intention of this bill is to allow the Bale Grist Mill additional revenue in order to make the mill operationally self-sufficient. This total operational expenses of the mill for 2012 was $130,000. Revenues from operation of the Bale Grist Mill (entrance fees, sales of merchandise, donations for flour, and special events at the Bale Grist Mill) for 2012 were $100,634. The revenue currently generated from the sale of milled grain is approximately $19,000 of the total revenue each year. The sponsors of this bill suggest that more grain would be sold if it could be sold without the notice that it is not fit for human consumption.

This bill is nearly identical to SB 170 (Wolk) of 2014, which would have taken effect on January 1, 2016. Unlike SB 746, SB 170 was heard in the Assembly Water, Parks, and Wildlife Committee. SB 170 was vetoed by the Governor, who stated: “Exempting these products by January 1, 2016, is premature, as no best management practices yet exist for historic water-driven grist mills. I will direct the Department of Public Health and the Department of Parks and Recreation to continue working with proponents on this and other potential solutions to help raise needed revenues.”

3. SUPPORT. The Napa County Board of Supervisors (Napa County) states that the Bale Grist Mill is one of only two remaining water-driven mills west of the Mississippi River. Napa County states that the mill currently sells flour produced at the mill, but it must be labeled as not fit for human consumption because the mill is not registered as either a retail food facility or a food processing facility. Napa County cannot meet the standards for a retail food facility or a food processing facility because the physical historic construction of the mill makes it impossible to comply with current codes. For example, wood floors are not allowed, the porous grinding stone is not allowed, and contact between grain/flour and the wood in the grain chutes and flour bins is not allowed. Napa County supports this bill to allow the Bale Grist Mill to be financially viable and not dependent on state subsidies.

4. RELATED LEGISLATION.

1. AB 143 (Wood) expands an exemption in the CRFC allowing wine tasting rooms that currently only serve crackers to also serve pretzels or prepackaged non-potentially hazardous foods. AB 143 passed out of this committee on April 21, 2015 with a vote of 16-0 and is currently pending in the Senate Appropriations Committee
   .

2. AB 1076 (Mayes) exempts from the definition of a food facility, a snack bar operated by a charitable nonprofit organization and authorizes snack bars to undertake limited food preparation, as defined. AB 1076 is pending in Assembly Health Committee.

5. DOUBLE REFERRAL.  A request to refer this bill to the Assembly Appropriations Committee has been approved by the Assembly Rules Committee; upon passage in this Committee, this bill will be referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

6. POLICY CONCERNS

   1. Appropriate best management practices have not yet been developed. This bill requires that the mill follow best management practices that do not yet exist for a processing and handling suitable for a historic water-driven grist mill. This bill states legislative intent, but does not require, that DPH and DPR develop those practices. Although the author has attempted to address the Governor's veto message by allowing two year for appropriate best management practices to be developed, it is unclear what the timeline of that process is.

   2. Bats, cats, and rats! The mill's physical historic construction means it cannot meet current-day codes for retail food safety. State code requires the entire structure be free of mice, bats, cats, and flies, which is not possible without destroying the historic integrity of the mill. The Committee may wish to consider whether it is inconsistent with the policies of this Committee to allow an exemption from food safety standards for a facility that, by definition, cannot possibly meet general food safety protections, in particular excluding animals and vermin.

7. SUGGESTED AMENDMENT. Upon vetoing SB 170, the Governor directed DPH and DPR to work with stakeholders to develop best management practices suitable for this mill. This bill, as drafted, only mentions that fact in legislative findings and does not state in statute that the Bale Grist Mill would follow the developed best management practices to protect food safety. To address this, the Committee suggests the author amend this bill as follows:

(11) Beginning January 1, 2018, the milling, packaging, and selling of grain produced and sold at a water-driven grist mill on the National Register of Historic Places, provided best management practices developed in conjunction with Department of Public Health and the Department of Parks and Recreation suitable for a historic water-driven grist mill are followed for the processing and handling of the product, the flour is identified as being produced in a historic mill using traditional methods, and the product meets applicable federal food adulteration purity standards.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District (sponsor)

Napa City Council

Napa County Board of Supervisors

Opposition

None on File.

Analysis Prepared by: Dharia McGrew / HEALTH / (916) 319-2097

 CONSENT  

Bill No: SB 746

Author: Wolk (D), et al.

Introduced: 2/27/15

Vote: 21

SENATE NATURAL RES. & WATER COMMITTEE: 7-0, 4/14/15

AYES: Pavley, Stone, Fuller, Hueso, Jackson, Monning, Wolk

NO VOTE RECORDED: Allen, Hertzberg

SENATE HEALTH COMMITTEE: 8-0, 4/22/15

AYES: Hernandez, Nguyen, Mitchell, Monning, Nielsen, Pan, Roth, Wolk

NO VOTE RECORDED: Hall

SUBJECT: Food safety: grist mills

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill allows the Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park to sell flour produced onsite by providing for a specific exemption from existing requirements for processed food and retail food facilities. This exemption would begin January 1, 2018.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. States that it is “imperative that the state commit to a long-term goal of adequately and sustainably funding and maintaining California’s state park system to protect these irreplaceable resources and to preserve California’s legacy for the benefit of all Californians. To this end, it is necessary that the state identify new revenue strategies that will move the state toward that goal, and affirm a state policy that park closures are to occur only as a last resort, and only after all reasonable alternatives have been pursued.” (Public Resources Code Section (PRC) §5019.91)

2. Creates the Park Forward Initiative. Within the Initiative, an independent panel of experts, citizens, and advocates, called the Parks Forward Commission, was designated to assess the state park system and recommend substantial improvements. Specifically, they were tasked to address the “financial, operational, cultural, and population challenges facing state parks to ensure the system’s long-term viability, functionality, and relevance.”

In February, 2015, the Parks Forward Commission released its Final Recommendations. This report suggested, amongst other actions, a “rededication to working with park partners” and a focus on innovative ways to increase revenue.

3. Allows for the sale of “historically authentic” goods at state historical units, such as the Bale Grist Mill, in order to generate revenue. “Certain agricultural, mercantile, or other commercial activities may be permitted if those activities are a part of the history of the individual unit and any developments retain or restore historical authenticity” (PRC §5019.59). Several species of citrus, for example, are grown at the California Citrus State Historic Park.

This bill provides Grist Mill State Historic Park a specific exemption from existing requirements for processed food and retail food facilities. The exemption allows the Park to sell flour produced onsite.

Comments:

Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park: This park includes the mill and its 36-foot water wheel, which are protected as a state historic landmark, as well as Pioneer Cemetery and the site of the first church in the Napa Valley. It is currently being managed through a partnership between Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District and the nonprofit Napa Valley State Parks Association.

Flour would be sold for consumption. This bill allows the Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park to sell flour produced onsite without requiring the flour be labeled “not fit for human consumption,” by providing for a specific exemption from existing requirements for processed food and retail food facilities.

Why was last year’s bill vetoed? A nearly identical bill was vetoed by the governor at the end of the 2014 legislative year. The veto message indicated that the proposed start of the exemption did not provide enough time for best management procedures to be developed. This bill provides more time for that work to be completed, and the author continues to work with the Department of Public Health and the Department of Parks and Recreation on the issue.

Recent related legislation

SB 170 (Wolk, 2013), a nearly identical bill, was vetoed last year. The issues raised in the Governor’s veto message are being addressed by the author’s office, and are reflected in this bill.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local: No

SUPPORT: (Verified 4/28/15)

Napa City Council

Napa County Board of Supervisors

Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District

OPPOSITION: (Verified 4/28/15)

None received

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author, “Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park is a flour mill that predates California’s statehood. The historic construction of the mill prevents it from being altered to comply with the standards for a food processing facility or a retail food facility. Even with the two exemptions provided in SB 746, all grains milled at the facility would meet applicable federal food adulteration standards for cleanliness and safety.”

The author continues, “originally selected for closure along with 69 other state parks, Bale Grist Mill is now operated through a partnership between the Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District and the Napa Valley State Parks Association. Allowing milled flour to be sold for human consumption will help generate revenue necessary to maintain the park and preserve this unique facility for future visitors.”

The Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District adds, “the bill would exempt the unique, National Register of Historic Places-listed Bale Grist Mill from the state’s processed and retail food registration requirements. This would allow grain produced at the grist mill to be sold to park visitors for human consumption. Such sales are an important component of our long-term strategy to preserve the landmark mill and introduce the public to life in the 19th century, without taxpayer subsidy.”

Prepared by: Angee Doerr / N.R. & W. / (916) 651-4116

4/29/15 16:07:39

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON HEALTH

Senator Ed Hernandez, O.D., Chair

BILL NO: SB 746

SUBJECT: Food safety: grist mills

SUMMARY: Exempts from the requirements to register as a food processing facility, and to obtain a permit as a retail food facility, a historic water-driven grist mill, effective January 1, 2018, in order to allow grain to be milled, packaged and sold at the mill without having to meet the requirements of a food processing facility or a retail food facility.

Existing law:

1. Prohibits any person from engaging in the manufacture, packing, or holding of any processed food unless the person has a valid registration as a food processing facility from the Department of Public Health (DPH).

2. Exempts from the food processing facility registration requirements any person whose manufacturing, packing, or holding of processed food is limited solely to temporarily holding processed foods for up to seven days for further transport if the foods are not potentially hazardous foods, or to any person whose manufacturing, packing, or holding of processed food is limited solely to certain activities that are authorized under other specified permits and licenses.

3. Prohibits any food facility from being open for business without a valid permit from DPH or the local health agency having jurisdiction over the food facility.

4. Defines “food facility” as an operation that stores, prepares, packages, serves, vends, or otherwise provides food for human consumption at the retail level.

5. Establishes various requirements that food facilities must meet, including requiring that the interior floor, sides, and top of the food holding area to be constructed of a smooth, washable, impervious material capable of withstanding frequent cleaning.

6. Exempts from the definition of “food facility” certain specified entities, including premises operated by a producer that sells only whole produce grown by the producer, provided the sales are conducted on premises controlled by the producer.

This bill:

1. Exempts from the requirement to register as a food processing facility, beginning January 1, 2018, the milling, packaging, and selling of grain produced and sold at a water-driven grist mill on the National Register of Historic Places, provided best management practices suitable for a historic water-driven grist mill are followed for the processing and handling of the product, the flour is identified as being produced in a historic mill using traditional methods, and the product meets applicable federal food adulteration purity standards.

2. Exempts from the definition of food facility, beginning January 1, 2018, for purposes of law requiring food facilities to obtain a permit from DPH or the local health agency having jurisdiction over the food facility, a water-driven grist mill that is on the National Register of Historic Places and that has onsite sales of grain that is milled at the facility.

3. Makes various legislative findings and declarations related to the recent moratorium on the closure of state parks and the use of innovative tools to stabilize the Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) and broaden its financial base, and that a more entrepreneurial and robust revenue-generation strategy must be established for the state parks.

4. States the intent of the Legislature to encourage DPR and DPH to consult with each other to develop and implement additional, reasonable improvements designed to increase public health security at the Bale Grist Mill State historic Park, without impairing or adversely affecting historical, cultural, or natural resources.

FISCAL EFFECT:

This bill has not been analyzed by a fiscal committee.

COMMENTS:

1. Author’s statement. According to the author, in 2011, as part of the Governor’s efforts to cut state expenditures, the Bale Grist Mill and 69 other state parks were selected for closure. The Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District, in partnership with the Napa Valley State Parks Association, is working to keep the mill open to the public. Being able to sell flour produced at the mill for human consumption is an important element in generating the revenues needed to keep this National Historic landmark open to the public.

2. Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park. The Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park is located near St. Helena in Napa County. According to its website, the water-powered mill was built in 1846. Both the mill and its 36-foot water wheel are protected as a state historic landmark and have been partially restored.

3. Double referral. This bill was heard in the Senate Natural Resources Committee on April 14, 2015, and passed with a 7-0 vote.

4. Support. The Napa County Board of Supervisors (Napa County) writes in support that the Bale Grist Mill is one of only two remaining water-driven mills west of the Mississippi River. Napa County states that the mill currently sells flour produced at the mill, but it must be labeled as not fit for human consumption because the mill is not registered as either a retail food facility or a food processing facility. Napa County cannot meet the standards for a retail food facility or a food processing facility because the physical historic construction of the mill makes it impossible to comply with current codes. For example, wood floors are not allowed, the porous grinding stone is not allowed, and contact between grain/flour and the wood in the grain chutes and flour bins is not allowed. Napa County supports this bill to allow the Bale Grist Mill to be financially viable and not dependent on state subsidies.
   
   This bill is also supported by the Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District and the City of Napa, which makes similar arguments to Napa County.

5. Prior legislation. This bill is nearly identical to SB 170 (Wolk) of 2014, which would have taken effect on January 1, 2016. SB 170 was vetoed by the Governor, who stated: “Exempting these products by January 1, 2016, is premature, as no best management practices yet exist for historic water-driven grist mills. I will direct the Department of Public Health and the Department of Parks and Recreation to continue working with proponents on this and other potential solutions to help raise needed revenues.”
   
   AB 1589 (Huffman), Chapter 533, Statutes of 2012, required DPR to develop a plan to increase revenues at state parks, appropriated $10 million in Proposition 84 general obligation bond funds for the installation of revenue collection equipment and other improvements at state parks, and authorized taxpayers to voluntarily contribute to the state park system through the income tax system.

6. Should a special permit be required? One of the provisions of this bill adds a historic grist mill to the list of entities exempted from the requirement to register as a food processing facility. There are currently 10 exemptions listed in current law, and each of these existing exemptions requires the entity to have a specialized permit or license. For example, the following entities are among those exempted from registering as a food processing facility: a holder of a valid bottled water or water vending machine license; a holder of a valid cold storage license; a holder of a valid cannery license; a holder of a valid winegrower’s license or wine blender’s license; and a holder of a permit issued by a local health department to operate a processing establishment that only holds or warehouses processed food, under specified conditions. The Legislature may wish to consider whether the exemption proposed by this bill should follow the same form, and require a permit to be issued to the grist mill by the local health department.

SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:

Support: Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District (sponsor)

Napa City Council

Napa County Board of Supervisors

Oppose: None received.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER

Senator Fran Pavley, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Bill No: SB 746 Hearing Date: April 14, 2015

Subject: Food safety: grist mills

BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW

In 2011, AB1589 was passed by the California legislature and signed into law. This bill stated that it was “imperative that the state commit to a long-term goal of adequately and sustainably funding and maintaining California’s state park system to protect these irreplaceable resources and to preserve California’s legacy for the benefit of all Californians. To this end, it is necessary that the state identify new revenue strategies that will move the state toward that goal, and affirm a state policy that park closures are to occur only as a last resort, and only after all reasonable alternatives have been pursued.”

Towards this end, the Parks Forward Initiative was created. Within the Initiative, an independent panel of experts, citizens, and advocates, called the Parks Forward Commission, was designated to assess the state park system and recommend substantial improvements. Specifically, they were tasked to address the “financial, operational, cultural, and population challenges facing state parks to ensure the system’s long-term viability, functionality, and relevance.”

In February, 2015, the Parks Forward Commission released its Final Recommendations. This report suggested, amongst other actions, a “rededication to working with park partners” and a focus on innovative ways to increase revenue.

There is precedent in the law for generating revenue through the sale of “historically authentic” goods at state historical units, such as the Bale Grist Mill. “Certain agricultural, mercantile, or other commercial activities may be permitted if those activities are a part of the history of the individual unit and any developments retain or restore historical authenticity” (PRC §5019.59). Several species of citrus, for example, are grown at the California Citrus State Historic Park.

Although the current bill refers to historic grist mills in general, the only location that would qualify for the exemptions stated is Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park. This park includes the mill and its 36-foot water wheel, which are protected as a state historic landmark, as well as Pioneer Cemetery and the site of the first church in the Napa Valley. It is currently being managed through a partnership between Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District and the nonprofit Napa Valley State Parks Association.

A nearly identical bill, SB 170 (Wolk), was vetoed. The issues raised in the Governor’s veto message are being addressed by the author’s office, and are reflected in this bill.

PROPOSED LAW

This bill would allow the Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park to sell flour produced onsite by providing for a specific exemption from existing requirements for processed food and retail food facilities. This exemption would begin January 1, 2018.

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT

According to the author, “Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park is a flour mill that predates California’s statehood. The historic construction of the mill prevents it from being altered to comply with the standards for a food processing facility or a retail food facility. Even with the two exemptions provided in SB 746, all grains milled at the facility would meet applicable federal food adulteration standards for cleanliness and safety.”

The author continues, “originally selected for closure along with 69 other state parks, Bale Grist Mill is now operated through a partnership between the Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District and the Napa Valley State Parks Association. Allowing milled flour to be sold for human consumption will help generate revenue necessary to maintain the park and preserve this unique facility for future visitors.”

The Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District adds, “the bill would exempt the unique, National Register of Historic Places-listed Bale Grist Mill from the state’s processed and retail food registration requirements. This would allow grain produced at the grist mill to be sold to park visitors for human consumption. Such sales are an important component of our long-term strategy to preserve the landmark mill and introduce the public to life in the 19th century, without taxpayer subsidy.”

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION

None Received

COMMENTS

Would allow flour to be sold for consumption. This bill would allow the Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park to sell flour produced onsite without requiring the flour be labeled “not fit for human consumption”, by providing for a specific exemption from existing requirements for processed food and retail food facilities.

Why was last year’s bill vetoed? A nearly identical bill was vetoed by the governor at the end of the 2014 legislative year. The veto message indicated that the proposed start of the exemption did not provide enough time for best management procedures to be developed. This bill would provide more time for that work to be completed, and the author continues to work with the Department of Public Health and the Department of Parks and Recreation on the issue.

Dual-referred to Health Committee. This bill has been dual-referred to the Senate Health Committee. Health and Safety Code and food safety related issues or concerns will be addressed by that committee.

SUPPORT

City of Napa

Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District

OPPOSITION

None Received

-- END --