Legislation watch
2007 House Bill 4956: Impose additional regulations on food service establishments
Public Act 113 of 2007
Comments on this legislation Post new comment Text and Analysis Add to Watch List
Previous Next
- Introduced by Rep. Jeff Mayes (D) on June 20, 2007, to revise the state food code adopted in 2000 to require all food service establishments to have present at all times an employee who is certified under American National Standards Institute standards as having passed an accredited food safety training course; raising a number of fees; removing a licensure exemption for schools; revising various inspection requirements (including more "risk-based" rather than strict calendar-based inspection frequency); and more.
- Referred to the House Agriculture Committee on June 20, 2007.
- Reported in the House on July 19, 2007, with the recommendation that the substitute (H-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
- Substitute offered in the House on July 24, 2007, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that revises details but does not change the substance of the bill as previously described. The substitute passed by voice vote in the House on July 24, 2007.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Barb Byrum (D) on July 24, 2007, to make various techcical clarifications and corrections of terms used in the bill. The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on July 24, 2007.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Lee Gonzales (D) on July 24, 2007, to insert in statute a statement that a restaurant may but is not required to place on it's menu whether or not there are trans-fatty acids in any of its food items. Nothing in current law prevents a restaurant from posting this now. The amendment passed 65 to 41 in the House on July 24, 2007.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
- Referred to the House Agriculture Committee on June 20, 2007.
- Passed 106 to 0 in the House on July 25, 2007.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the Senate on August 1, 2007.
- Referred to the Senate Agriculture and Bioeconomy Committee on August 1, 2007.
- Reported in the Senate on August 30, 2007, with the recommendation that the substitute (S-2) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
- Substitute offered in the Senate on August 30, 2007, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that divides the bill's provisions between it and Senate Bill 595. The substitute passed by voice vote in the Senate on August 30, 2007.
- Referred to the Senate Agriculture and Bioeconomy Committee on August 1, 2007.
- Passed 34 to 0 in the Senate on October 9, 2007, to revise the state food code adopted in 2000 to require all food service establishments to have managers certified as having passed an accredited food safety exams, clarifying when to restrict ill employees from work, requiring managers to demonstrate knowledge of the control of food allergens, increasing regulations restricting bare-hand contact with food, increasing various inspection requirements, raising a number of fees, and more.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the House on October 9, 2007.
- Passed 103 to 7 in the House on October 10, 2007, to concur with the Senate-passed version of the bill.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Signed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm on October 16, 2007.
Comments
1) Been There by jeffreyskm on October 11, 2007I worked 10 years in food service and the kitchen standards in even the most clean and respected restaurants are bad. I was told to report to work to serve and cook food with the flu or be fired. I have seen employees with open cuts and sores mixing salad and forming hamburger patties with their bare hands because the restaurant ran out of hand gloves or finger cots. I have found bloody bandaids in my food. The law needs to severely hurt the food establishment where these behaviors are found. Public health is at risk here. They need to shut down the establishment where these behaviors occur. I encourage more laws concerning food safety and establishment compliance.
Another example of legislators with too much time on their hands. How about we let people know it is up to them to choose a clean place to eat?
This one is not needed it's just more hoops and hassle for small restaurants. (Small businesses - the backbone of Michigan) The laws on the books are good now and if followed do keep the food safe.
Your new comments should be made in the box below.
