BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON HEALTH
Senator Ed Hernandez, O.D., Chair
BILL NO: SB 622
AUTHOR: Monning
AMENDED: April 15, 2013
HEARING DATE: May 1, 2013
CONSULTANT: Robinson-Taylor
SUBJECT : Taxation: sweetened beverage tax: Children's Health
Promotion Fund.
SUMMARY : Enacts the Sweetened Beverage Tax Law, which imposes a
one-cent per fluid ounce tax on any beverage that adds caloric
sweeteners, such as sodas, energy drinks, sweet teas, and sports
drinks. Requires funds generated by the Sweetened Beverage Tax to
be directed to the newly created Children's Health Promotion Fund
(Fund) and allocated to statewide childhood obesity prevention
activities and programs.
Existing law:
1.Establishes the Board of Equalization (BOE) to collect
California state sales and use tax, as well as fuel, alcohol,
and tobacco taxes and fees that provide revenue for state
government and essential funding for counties, cities, and
special districts.
2.Imposes sales tax on the retail sale of tangible personal
property. Imposes use tax on the storage, use, or other
consumption of tangible personal property from any retailer.
Requires the sale or use tax to be computed on the retailer's
gross receipts or sales price, respectively, unless the law
provides a specific exemption or exclusion. Provides an
exemption for the sale of, and the storage, use, or other
consumption of, food products for human consumption including,
in part, all fruit juices, vegetable juices and other
beverages, including bottled water, but not to include
carbonated beverages.
3.Establishes the Department of Public Health (DPH) to protect
and improve the health of communities through education,
promotion of healthy lifestyles, and research for disease and
injury prevention.
4.Establishes restrictions on the sale of certain beverages in
schools by placing restrictions on the types of beverages
Continued---
SB 622 | Page 2
allowed to be sold in elementary, middle and junior high
schools and high schools.
5.Requires that at least 35 percent of food choices and
one-third of beverage choices in vending machines on state
property adhere to accepted nutritional guidelines.
6.Creates minimum standards for beverages that are served in
licensed child day care facilities.
7.Requires school districts to provide access to fresh drinking
water during meal times in school food service areas.
This bill:
Children's Health Promotion Fund.
1.Establishes the Children's Health Promotion Fund in the State
Treasury. Requires the Fund to consist of all taxes,
interest, penalties, and other amounts collected under the
Sweetened Beverage Tax Law less refunds and reimbursement to
the BOE for its administrative and tax collection expenses.
2.Provides, upon the Legislature's appropriation, allocations
for statewide childhood obesity prevention activities and
programs, specifically:
a. 20 percent to the California Department of
Public Health (DPH) to coordinate and fund statewide
childhood obesity prevention activities and children's
dental programs. Requires funding to support programs
that achieve the following goals: educational,
environmental, policy, and other public health
approaches that improve access to and consumption of
healthy, safe, and affordable foods and beverages;
reduce access to and consumption of calorie-dense,
nutrient-poor foods; encourage physical activity;
decrease sedentary behavior; and, raise awareness
about the importance of nutrition and physical
activity;
b. 35 percent for community-based childhood
obesity prevention programs. Requires DPH to be
responsible for the distribution of these funds to
community-based organizations and to local health
SB 622| Page
3
departments, with priority given to counties that have
the highest rates of childhood obesity;
c. 10 percent to evidence-based prevention, early
recognition, monitoring, and weight management
intervention activities in the medical setting.
Requires DPH to be responsible for identifying
activities and allocating these funds; and,
d. 35 percent to elementary and secondary schools
for approaches that promote nutrition and physical
activity, like improving recreational facilities used
for recess, hiring qualified physical education
teachers, implementing Safe Routes to Schools
programs, improving the quality and nutrition of
school meals, and incorporating nutrition education
into curriculum. Requires the Superintendent of
Public Instruction to be responsible for these funds'
allocation and distribution.
3.Requires that the Fund be expended only for purposes specified
in the Sweetened Beverage Tax Law and to supplement existing
levels of service. Prohibits any moneys from the Fund from
supplanting current federal, state, or local funding for
existing levels of service.
4.Authorizes the State Public Health Officer and Superintended
of Public Instruction to make rules and regulations, which may
provide specific programs to be funded, to implement the fund
allocation.
Excise Tax.
1.Imposes an excise tax on bottled sweetened beverages and
concentrates in the state using the following formula:
a. One cent ($0.01) per fluid ounce on bottled
sweetened beverages; and
b. One cent ($0.01) per fluid ounce of sweetened
beverages produced from concentrate, based on the
largest volume resulting from the concentrate's use
according to any manufacturer's instructions.
2.Requires a distributor to include on each receipt, invoice, or
other form of accounting for the bottled sweetened beverages
or concentrate's distribution, the following:
SB 622 | Page 4
a. The distributor's name and address;
b. The purchaser's name and address;
c. The date of sale and invoice number;
d. The kind, quantity, size, and capacity of
packages of bottled sweetened beverages, sweetened
beverages, or concentrate;
e. The amount of excise tax due to the BOE from
the distributor; and,
f. Any other information required by the BOE.
3.Requires taxes to be due and payable to the BOE on or before
the last day of the month after each quarterly period.
Tax exemptions and credit.
4.Provides the following exemptions to the tax to prevent
double-taxation and taxation on sales shipped out of state by
a distributor to:
a. A distributor registered with the BOE, as
supported by a completed exemption certificate;
b. A person when the bottled sweetened beverages
or concentrate are required to be shipped outside the
state by the distributor, as specified; or,
c. A person where the state is prohibited from
taxing the sale, use, or consumption under the State
Constitution, United States Laws, or United States
Constitution.
5.Provides that a distributor who has paid an excise tax, either
directly to California or another registered distributor, and
makes a subsequent distribution of bottled sweetened beverages
or concentrate is permitted to claim a credit on its return
for the period when that subsequent sale or distribution
occurs.
BOE's administration.
6.Requires the BOE to administer and collect the tax according
to the Fee Collection Procedures Law in existing law.
Clarifies the following definitions in the Fee Collection
Procedures Law:
a. "Fee" means the tax imposed by the Sweetened
Beverage Tax Law; and,
b. "Feepayer" means a person required to pay the
tax as imposed by the Sweetened Beverage Tax Law.
SB 622| Page
5
7.Authorizes the BOE to prescribe, adopt, and enforce
regulations, including emergency regulations as necessary,
related to the Sweetened Beverage Tax Law's administration and
enforcement, including: collections, reporting, refunds, and
appeals. Requires any emergency regulation to be adopted
according to state law, and requires the Office of
Administrate Law to consider the regulation as necessary for
the immediate preservation of the public peace, health,
safety, and general welfare.
8.Requires that on or before the last day of the month following
each quarterly calendar quarter of three month, a distributor
must file a return for the preceding calendar quarter.
Requires a return for the preceding calendar quarter to be
filed using electronic media. Requires that taxes under the
Sweetened Beverage Tax Law are due on or before the last day
of each month following each calendar quarter.
9.Authorizes the BOE to prescribe forms and reporting
requirements, including information on the total amount of
bottled sweetened beverages and concentrate sold and the
amount of tax due. Requires the BOE to authenticate returns.
10.Requires every person, who must pay the excise tax, to
register with the BOE. Requires every registration
application to include the name under which the applicant
transacts or intends to transact business, the location of the
places of business, and other information as the BOE may
require. Requires the BOE to also authenticate an
application.
Definitions.
11.Provides several definitions including , but not limited, the
following:
a. A "sweetened beverage" means any sweetened
non-alcoholic beverage sold for human consumption that
has caloric sweeteners and contains more than 25
calories per 12 ounces, including soda water, ginger
ale, root beer, beverages referred to as cola, lime,
lemon, lemon-lime, and other flavored beverages
including any fruit or vegetable beverage containing
less than 50 percent natural fruit or vegetable juice;
and, all other drinks referred to as "soda," "soda
SB 622 | Page 6
pop," "soft drinks," "sports drinks," "energy drinks,"
"juice drinks," "iced teas," and "vitamin fortified
waters." Specifies that a sweetened beverage does not
include any of the following:
i. Any product sold in liquid form for
infant consumption, known as "infant formula" or
any product whose purpose is infant rehydration;
ii. Any product sold in liquid form for
weight production;
iii. Water with no added caloric
sweeteners;
iv. Milk or milk products;
v. Medical food; and ,
vi. Any sweetened beverage containing
more than 50 percent of natural fruit or natural
vegetable juice.
b. "Caloric sweetener" means any caloric
substance suitable for consumption that humans
perceive as sweet, including but not limited to
sucrose, fructose, high fructose corn sweetener,
glucose, other sugars, and fruit juice concentrates.
c. "Concentrate" means a syrup, powder, or base
product used for mixing, compounding, or making
sweetened beverages in a dispensing machine.
Concentrate does not include any of the following:
i. Any product used solely in coffee
or tea preparation;
ii. Any product for infant consumption,
known as "infant formula;"
iii. Any product for weight reduction;
iv. Milk or milk products;
v. Any frozen concentrate or
freeze-dried concentrate to which water is added
to produce a sweetened beverage containing more
than 50 percent natural fruit juice or more than
50 percent natural vegetable juice or more than
50 percent combined natural fruit juice and
natural vegetable juice;
vi. Any product sold and intended for
an individual consumer mixing a sweetened
beverage;
vii. Medical food, as defined in state
law and meets the definition under the federal
SB 622| Page
7
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act; and ,
viii. Any product to which no caloric
sweeteners have been added.
d. "Distribution" means:
i. The sale of bottled sweetened
beverages or concentrate to a retailer;
ii. The receipt of untaxed bottled
sweetened beverages or concentrate from an
unregistered, out-of-state distributor by a
retailer;
iii. The retail sale of untaxed bottle
sweetened beverages, sweetened beverages, or
concentrate in California; and,
iv. The use or consumption, as defined,
of untaxed bottled sweetened beverages or
concentrate in California by a distributor or
retailor.
e. "Distributor" means any person who distributes
bottled sweetened beverages, sweetened beverages, or
concentrates in California, whether or not the person
also sells products to consumers.
f. "Natural fruit juice" means the original
liquid from the fruit pressing, the reconstitution of
natural fruit juice concentrate, or the rehydration of
natural fruit juice.
g. "Natural vegetable juice" means the liquid
resulting from pressing vegetables, the reconstitution
of natural vegetable juice concentrate, or the
rehydration of natural vegetable juice.
h. "Non-alcoholic beverage" means any beverage
not subject to the Alcoholic Beverage Tax, like beer,
wine, or distilled spirits.
i. "Person" means an individual, trust, firm,
joint stock company, business concern, business trust,
receiver, trustee, syndicate, social club, fraternal
organization, estate, corporation, including a
government corporation, partnership, limited liability
company, and association or any other group or
combination acting as a unit. "Person" also includes
SB 622 | Page 8
any city, county, city and county, district,
commission, California, or any department, agency, or
political subdivision, any interstate body, and the
United States and its agencies and instrumentalities,
as permitted by law.
j. "Powder" or "base product" means a solid or
liquid mixture of ingredients with added caloric
sweetener used in making, mixing, or compounding
sweetened beverages by mixing powder or the base
product with other ingredients like water, ice, syrup,
simple syrup (a mixture of sugar and water), fruits
vegetables, carbonation, or other gas.
aa. "Retail sale" is the sale of sweetened
beverages to a consumer.
bb. "Retailer" means any person who sells
sweetened beverages to a consumer in California.
cc. "Sale" means the transfer of title or
possession for consideration.
dd. "Simple syrup" means a mixture of sugar and
water.
ee. "Syrup" means the liquid mixture used in
making, mixing, or compounding sweetened beverages
using ingredients like water, ice, powder, simple
syrup, fruits, vegetables, fruit or vegetable juice,
carbonation, or other case.
12.Operative date. Requires this bill to become operative on
July 1, 2014.
13.Findings and declarations. Makes several findings and
declarations to support its purpose.
FISCAL EFFECT : This bill has not been analyzed by a fiscal
committee.
COMMENTS :
1.Author's statement. The medical and scientific evidence is
clear, sweetened beverages are the leading cause of obesity
and preventable chronic diseases among children. These trends
constitute a public health crisis that is costing the State of
SB 622| Page
9
California billions of dollars in health care costs and lost
economic output. SB 622, much like California's world
renowned tobacco taxes, will reduce the prevalence of obesity
and diabetes by increasing the price of sugar-sweetened
beverages (SSB) and generate $1.7 billion annually to fund
childhood obesity and diabetes prevention and treatment
programs.
2.Obesity epidemic. According to the federal Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), more than one-third of
U.S. adults (35.7 percent) are obese and approximately 12.5
million children and adolescents (17 percent) ages 2-19 years
are now obese. Obesity-related conditions include heart
disease, stroke, type-2-diabetes and certain types of cancer,
all among the leading causes of death for Americans. Many
obese children are now diagnosed with health problems
previously considered to be "adult" illnesses, such as type 2
diabetes and high blood pressure. Obesity can affect a
person's joints, breathing, sleep, mood and energy levels. It
can also cause complications for other unrelated health
conditions that may require longer hospital stays, longer
recovery times, and increase risk to patients experiencing
co-morbidities. Mounting evidence suggests that effectively
curbing the epidemic statewide and reversing the upward trend
will require comprehensive approaches across sectors involving
stakeholders at the local, state, and federal level, similar
to the state's efforts to curb tobacco usage.
3.SSBs. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, in
2009, Americans consumed 13.8 billion gallons of SSBs which
equates to nearly 45 gallons per capita annually of soda,
fruit punch, sweetened teas, sports drinks, and other
beverages with added caloric sweeteners. According to the
UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, in California, 62
percent of adolescents ages 12-17 and 41 percent of children
ages 2-11 drink at least one soda or other sweetened beverage
every day. In addition, 24 percent of adults drink at least
one soda or other sweetened beverage on an average day.
Adults who drink soda occasionally (not every day) are 15
percent more likely to be overweight or obese, and adults who
drink one or more sodas per day are 27 percent more likely to
be overweight or obese than adults who do not drink soda.
Academic studies find that raising the price of a soda by
twenty cents would reduce net caloric intake, translating to
weight loss and reduced obesity prevalence among adults and
SB 622 | Page 10
children's at-risk-of-overweight prevalence. According to a
report produced by the Robert Wood Johnsons Scholar's Program,
soft drinks were the single largest contributor to energy
intake during the last decade and soft drink consumption has
increased by almost 500 percent during the past 50 years.
4.Economic benefits of preventing disease. Community-based
prevention saves money and improves lives, according to the
report, Prevention for a Healthier California, produced
through a partnership between the Prevention Institute, Trust
for America's Health and The California Endowment. The report
examined community-based obesity prevention strategies such
as: keeping schools open after hours where children can play
with adult supervision; providing access to fresh produce
through farmers' markets; making nutritious foods more
affordable and accessible in low-income areas; and, requiring
clear calorie and nutrition labeling of foods. The Prevention
for a Healthier California report demonstrated the following:
a. Prevention can produce significant health care
savings in California: An investment of $10 per person
per year, in programs to increase physical activity,
improve nutrition, and prevent tobacco use could save the
state more than $1.7 billion in annual health care costs
within five years.
b. Focusing prevention investments on communities with
the most compromised health status could potentially lead
to even greater returns: The report presents cumulative
savings based on investments made statewide per capita,
but if those investments were targeted toward communities
with the highest rates of target conditions, the return
on investment would likely be much greater.
c. Prevention has a number of financial and health
benefits beyond the heath care sector: improved health
has broad positive economic consequences such as improved
productivity, reduced disability and increased school
attendance.
According to the April 15, 2013 BOE analysis of this
legislation, by levying an excise tax, SB 622 will generate
$2.62 billion in revenue that will directly fund obesity
prevention services, physical activity programs, and nutrition
education. Proponents of a SSB tax find a parallel to tobacco
taxes, which contributed to reduced smoking rates. Public
SB 622| Page
11
health advocates believe that taxation will help reduce SSB
consumption, and in turn, reduce health care costs. Research
estimates that the SSB would reduce the incidence
type-2-diabetes by 2.6 percent and obesity prevalence by 1.5
percent. These percentage reductions would result in 95,000
fewer instances of coronary heart disease, 8,000 fewer
strokes, and 26,000 fewer premature deaths across the nation.
Epidemiological research shows the case for assessing an
excise tax: the societal costs, like lost productivity and
health care costs of obesity are linked with SSBs but not paid
for by the consumer, representing an externality not accounted
in the price system. According to the author, SB 622 attempts
to correct this market failure by taxing SSBs at a price to
account for the societal costs.
5.Smoking Cessation - A Case Study for Community Health
Promotion and Disease Prevention. In the not-so-distant past,
smoking had been a part of everyday life for most Californians
and Americans, primarily due to the popularity of cigarette
smoking pre- and post-World Wars I and II. People could smoke
everywhere, including in restaurants, airplanes, and in
hospitals. According to the American Lung Association, the
incidence and mortality attributed to lung cancer had also
been rising steadily since the 1930s. Lung cancer was quickly
becoming the leading cause of cancer deaths among men in the
early 1950s and, in 1987, surpassed breast cancer to become
the leading cause of cancer deaths among women in the United
States.
In response to growing concerns and awareness about the negative
health effects of tobacco use and smoking, California voters
passed the Tobacco Tax and Health Promotion Act in 1988.
Typically known as Proposition 99, this initiative raised
taxes on cigarettes in an effort to discourage smoking. The
tax revenue was used to create the California Tobacco Control
Program (CTCP), which is currently housed within the
California Department of Public Health. Five cents of the
25-cent tax funds California's tobacco control efforts,
including providing funding for local health departments and
community organizations, supporting a groundbreaking media
campaign and performing tobacco-related evaluation and
surveillance. Since Proposition 99 was passed, California has
implemented a variety of grassroots efforts to educate
consumers about the harmful effects of tobacco use including
aggressive enforcement of anti-tobacco laws, such as, local
SB 622 | Page 12
and statewide policies to limit smoking in public places,
prohibit the incidence of tobacco sales to minors, and
restrictions on tobacco advertising; all designed to address
smoking prevalence.
At CTCP's inception, more than one in five adults in California
smoked cigarettes; today, that number is less than one in
eight. Similarly, the number of cigarettes smoked by
Californians has fallen by more than 62 percent. Estimated
smoking prevalence in California declined on average by 0.35
percentage points per year between 1990 and 2008, compared to
an average 0.24 percentage points per year decline in the rest
of the United States. Several studies have shown tobacco
control efforts in California have effectively decreased the
number of people that start smoking, increased the number of
young adults that quit smoking, and decreased cigarette
consumption among continuing smokers.
California's early efforts have shaped best practices for
comprehensive tobacco control efforts throughout the nation
and the world. According to CTCP, these efforts have so far
saved more than one million lives and over $86 billion in
health care costs. While tobacco use continues to be
pervasive and costly, California has been successful at
significantly curbing the burden of tobacco use on California
families, our health care system and our economy.
6.Tax Implications. SB 622 would impact more than 350 bottled
and fountain beverages in California, including traditional
sodas, sweetened iced teas, fruit drinks, sports drinks, and
energy drinks. According to the Senate Governance and Finance
Committee analysis, the excise tax would add $0.72 per
six-pack, $1.44 per 12-pack, and $2.88 per case of 12 ounce
cans. With the five cent California Redemption Value (CRV)
deposit, a six-pack's additional cost would be $1.02, $2.04
per 12-pack, and $4.08 per case.
7.Double referral. This bill was heard in the Senate Governance
and Finance Committee on April 24, 2013, and passed with a 5-2
vote.
8.Related legislation. AB 38 (Pérez) creates the Office of Farm
to Fork, and a related fund, in the state's Department of Food
and Agriculture, to promote food access. SB 38 is scheduled
to be heard by the Assembly Agriculture Committee on May 1,
SB 622| Page
13
2013.
AB 459 (Mitchell) would require that foods in vending machines
meet accepted nutritional guidelines by specified benchmarks
in 2015, 2016, and 2017. AB 459 is currently in the Assembly
Business, Professions, and Consumer Protection Committee.
9.Prior legislation. AB 669 (Monning, 2011) was this bill's
predecessor. AB 669 was held in the Assembly Revenue and
Taxation Committee.
AB 2100 (Coto) 2010 would have imposed a one cent tax per
teaspoon of added sweetener in a bottled sweetened beverage or
in a sweetened concentrate. AB 2100 was held in the Assembly
Revenue and Taxation Committee.
SB 1210 (Florez) of 2010, was similar measure. SB 1210 was
placed on the former Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee's
suspense file.
SB 1520 (Ortiz) of 2002 would have imposed an excise tax upon
every distributor, manufacturer, or wholesale dealer at a rate
of $2 per gallon of soft drink syrup or simple syrup and $0.21
per gallon of bottled soft drinks, and $0.21 per gallon of
soft drink that may be produced from powder, that is sold in
this state. The soda tax provisions were removed from the
April 29, 2002, version of the bill.
AB 105 (Moore) of 1983 would have imposed an excise tax on the
distribution of non-alcoholic carbonated beverages, except
carbonated water and carbonated fruit juice, at the rate of
seven cents ($0.07) per gallon. The provisions of that bill
also included an excise tax on the distribution of
non-alcoholic carbonated beverage syrup at the rate of fifty
cents ($0.50) per gallon of liquid syrup. AB 105 died in the
Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee.
10.Support. According to the Center for Public Health Advocacy
(CCPHA), the sponsors of this legislation, overweight,
obesity, and physical inactivity cost the state of California
an estimated $52 billion annually in health care costs and
lost productivity. An excess of calorie-dense but nutrient
poor foods in the market, high prices of fresh produce, and
increased consumption of non-satiating SSBs have contributed
to the obesity epidemic among adults and children. According
SB 622 | Page 14
to CCPHA, there is overwhelming evidence linking the obesity
epidemic to the consumption of sugary drinks. Research shows
that in the last 30 years, the average American's daily
caloric intake has increased by nearly 300 calories and 43
percent of those additional calories come from additional soda
consumption. CCPHA maintains that Californians support taxing
sugary drinks. A 2012 Field Poll found that 68 percent of
California voters support a Sweetened Beverage Tax that would
fund childhood obesity prevention programs. Support was even
highest amongst Latino (79 percent) and African American
voters (70 percent). CCPHA asserts that SB 622 is a major
step forward in the fight against the childhood obesity
epidemic. It will reduce the prevalence of obesity and
diabetes by increasing the price of sugary drinks and funding
childhood obesity and diabetes prevention and treatment
programs.
The California Association for Health, Physical Education,
Recreation and Dance (CAHPERD), writes in support that health
education and physical educational programs in our schools can
educate and influence our students to adopt active lifestyles
and healthy nutritional behaviors - only if they are delivered
regularly and by teachers who are well prepared for these
content areas. CAHPERD argues that the proposed tax on SSB
would provide funding for these instructional programs and
other effective strategies for obesity prevention.
11.Opposition. Californians for Food and Beverage Choice
(CFBC), a coalition of citizens, businesses and organizations,
writes in opposition that this tax doesn't just impact soda,
but would ensnare juice drinks, sports drinks, iced teas and
even enhanced waters. CFBC maintains that if SB 622 passes,
the result will be higher prices on hundreds of products sold
at restaurants, convenience stores and grocery stores. CFBC
asserts that increased prices on so many common grocery items
will hit those who can afford it least: middle and lower
income California residents. CFBC argues that singling out
one group of products is discriminatory and it will not reduce
obesity. According to CFBC, obesity is a complex problem that
has a myriad of contributing factors, and it is unfair and
inaccurate to portray SSBs as the main culprit. According to
the California Nevada Soft Drink Association (CNSDA), SB 622
endangers good jobs in California. CNSDA maintains that the
beverage industry supports more than 325,000 jobs in
California, adding up to $13 billion in wages and benefits,
each year. Taxes paid by beverage industry businesses,
SB 622| Page
15
suppliers and employees total over $6.2 billion annually for
the state. CFBC argues that their products are already
subject to the sales tax, the beverage container CRV deposit
and, in the case of plastic and glass containers, the
processing fee.
12.Amendments. To assess whether the Sweetened Beverage Tax
reduces childhood obesity rates and increases funding for
physical activity and nutrition programs, the author committed
to two amendments when SB 622 was before the Senate Governance
and Finance Committee that will provide the Legislature with
an outcome-based performance and process evaluation:
a. A ten year sunset (July 1, 2024), unless extended;
and,
b. A study, conducted by a University of California or
California State University, paid for by proceeds from
the Fund, and provided to the Legislature and relevant
standing policy committees, which examines the SSB Tax's
efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and outcomes, including a
review how moneys in the Fund were allocated annually,
annual and longitudinal data on childhood obesity
prevalence and incidence rates, data on childhood
diabetes prevalence and incidence rates, and longitudinal
information on soda consumption rates across the state
population.
SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION :
Support:California Center for Public Health Advocacy
(sponsor)
American Federation of State, County, and Municipal
Employees, AFL-CIO
American Heart Association
California Academy of Physician Assistants
California Association of Food Banks
California Association for Health, Physical Education,
Recreation and Dance (CAHPERD)
California Association of Nutrition and Activity
Program
California Black Health Network
California Chiropractic Association
California Conference of Local Health Department
Nutritionists
California Food Policy Advocates
California Optometric Association
SB 622 | Page 16
California Pan-Ethnic Health Network
California Public Health Association - North
California Primary Care Association
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
California School Health Centers Association
California WIC Association
Center for Collaborative Solution
Center for Ecoliteracy
Center for Science in the Public Interest
Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula
County of Santa Clara
County of Sonoma Department of Health Services
Edible Schoolyard Project
First 5 Yolo
Health Access California
Health Education Council
Health Officers Association of California
Health Promotion Policy
Latino Coalition for a Healthy California
Latino Health Access
Los Olivos School District
Lucile Packard Children's Hospital
Mayor Andre Quintero, City of El Monte
Mission Hospital
Prevention Institute
Public Health Institute
San Francisco Unified School District
The School Gardens Program
Southern California Public Health Association
Strategic Alliance for Health Food and Activity
Environments
2 individuals
Oppose: Asian Business Association
Brea Chamber of Commerce
California Automatic Vendors Council
California Asian Pacific Chamber of Commerce
California Beer & Beverage Distributors
California Chamber of Commerce
California Distributors Association
California Grocers Association
California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce
California Independent Oil Marketers Association
California League of Food Processors
California Manufacturers and Technology Association
California Nevada Soft Drink Association
SB 622| Page
17
California Restaurant Association
California Retailers Association
California Service Station and Auto Repair Association
California Teamsters Public Affairs Council
Empire Bowling Center
Grocery Manufacturers Association
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
Korean American Chamber of Commerce of Los Angeles
National Organization of Theatre Owners of
California/Nevada
Neighborhood Market Association
PepsiCo
Producers Dairy
-- END --