BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 667|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 667
Author: Roth (D)
Amended: 8/6/13
Vote: 21
PRIOR SENATE VOTES NOT RELEVANT
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 76-1, 08/26/13 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Retail sale of shelled eggs
SOURCE : California Grocers Association
DIGEST : This bill adds a knowing or should have known clause
to the liability standard for the sale of shelled eggs not in
compliance with California animal welfare standards.
Assembly Amendments delete the Senate version of the bill, which
dealt with a healthy eating program, and instead add the current
language.
ANALYSIS : Existing law prohibits a shelled egg from being
sold or contracted for sale for human consumption in California
if it is the product of an egg-laying hen that was confined on a
farm or place that is not in compliance with animal care
standards, starting January 1, 2015. Violation of this law is a
misdemeanor, with fines up to $1,000 or up to six months in a
county jail.
This bill prohibits, commencing January 1, 2015, a shelled egg
CONTINUED
SB 667
Page
2
from being sold or contracted for sale for human consumption in
California if the seller knows or should have known that the egg
is the product of an egg-laying hen that was confined on a farm
or place that is not in compliance with animal care standards
set forth in existing law.
Prior Legislation
In November 2008, voters passed Proposition 2, which addressed
confinement of farm animals. The law requires that certain farm
animals, including egg-laying hens, have room to move freely.
AB 1473 (Huffman, Chapter 51, Statutes of 2010) requires
out-of-state egg producers to comply with California animal care
standards. These laws take full effect on January 1, 2015.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local:
No
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/27/13)
California Grocers Association (source)
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office,
existing law will leave grocers, who believe they have complied
with the law, open to litigation. The "knowing standard" will
give a level of certainty to grocers, if they can show through
their contract with egg producers, that they in good faith
believe the products they are buying conform to California
animal welfare standards.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 76-1, 8/26/13
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Bigelow, Bloom,
Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian
Calderon, Campos, Chau, Ch�vez, Chesbro, Conway, Cooley,
Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Eggman, Fong, Fox, Frazier, Beth
Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray,
Grove, Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Roger Hern�ndez, Holden,
Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder, Logue, Lowenthal, Maienschein,
Mansoor, Medina, Melendez, Mitchell, Morrell, Mullin,
Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson, Perea,
V. Manuel P�rez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Salas, Skinner,
Stone, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk,
Williams, Yamada, John A. P�rez
NOES: Donnelly
SB 667
Page
3
NO VOTE RECORDED: Jones, Vacancy, Vacancy
JL:nl 8/29/13 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****