The Safe Sidewalk Vending Act is a 2018 California law decriminalizing street vending and legalizing street vending under certain conditions.

The purpose of SB 946 is to decriminalize and legalize street vending throughout the state.

The proposal defines “sidewalk vendor” as a person who sells merchandise or food from a pushcart, stand, display, pedal-driven cart, wagon, showcase, rack, or other non-motorized conveyance on a sidewalk or pedestrian path. SB 946 states a vendor can be a “roaming sidewalk vendor”, which is someone who moves around to vend, or a “stationary vendor”, someone who just stays in one place to vend. SB 946 applies to charter cities in terms of local authority.[1]

The purpose of SB 946 is to let local law enforcement not fine or regulate street vendors where sidewalk traffic is light and is not infringing upon activity within the area. If local authorities wish to regulate sidewalk vending, they have to be consistent with SB 946. If a city does not have any sidewalk vending legislations and wishes to implement new ones, they also have to be consistent with SB 946. If local authorities have regulations that are consistent with SB 946, no further action is needed. If they have regulations that are not consistent with SB 946, adjustments to these laws will have to be adjusted.

Any sidewalk vending regulations that are adopted or enforced by local authority must follow specific standards

"SB 946 also imposes time, place, and manner restrictions on sidewalk street vending."[2]

A local authority is not required to enforce all or some of these restrictions. If any additional restrictions other than the ones above are to be enforced, it must be directly related to objective health, safety, or welfare concerns.

"SB 946 allows but does not require a permitting program for local sidewalk vendors."[2] These programs must accept specific ID documents in lieu of a social security number. The collected number is confidential.

SB 946 does not limit or affect any state food safety laws, including the California retail food code.

SB 946 does not allow any criminal charges, but may allow administrative fines. A violation of the local authority's vending programs is only punishable by the following fines: $100 for the first violation, $200 for the second violation, and $500 for any additional violation within one year of the first violation. If the local authority requires a vending program, the authorities can impose higher fines for vending without a permit: $250 for the first violation, $500 for the second violation, and $1000 for any additional violation within one year of the first violation. On the fourth and any subsequent violation, the local authority can rescind a permit.

SB 946 applies to any pending criminal charges or vindicates any prior convictions.[2]

Controversy

Vendor Cooperation

While the intent of SB 946 is to aid in the “important entrepreneurship and economic development opportunities” street vending may bring to low-income and immigrant communities,[2] the inability to prosecute vendors with criminal charges has led to issues surrounding vendor cooperation. Despite the passing of city ordinances that require vendors to receive permits and follow certain regulations, some vendors “have chosen to ignore these regulations and bypass the permitting program”.[3] A lack of vendor cooperation has led some cities to create stricter ordinances in hopes of gaining compliance through larger fines, relocations, or confiscation of “stalls and wares”.[4]

Health Permit

In many California cities, the permitting process required of vendors may also include receiving a food handler health permit, a document certifying the safe preparation of food by vendors. Outdated state retail food code however has caused issues for vendors seeking to comply with these regulations.[5] In an effort to solve this issue, Senate Bill 972 was passed by the California Senate in order to update the food code to simplify the requirements for street vendors.[6] Specifically, the bill introduces street vending into the food code and limits the equipment requirements originally established for food trucks.[7]

Opposition

The League of California Cities, which has a membership of 476 out of 482 of California's cities, opposed the adoption of SB 946. It argued that the bill went too far in restricting a local jurisdiction's ability to regulate sidewalk vending. It noted that jurisdictions regularly designate areas for specific use, such as for medical facilities and office buildings. The bill's limiting of penalties for violations of regulations on sidewalk vending to administrative fines was criticized as being an inadequate deterrent to unlawful activity.[8]

Criticism

A councilmember of Beverly Hill's City Council characterized SB 946 as a "stupid law". The city's Vice Mayor accused Sacramento of engaging in overreach over local affairs.[9]

On San Francisco's Mission Street, the neighborhood has become a prominent spot for people selling stolen goods. Officials blamed this activity on SB 946 because of how it limits penalties for unpermitted sidewalk vending to administrative fines.[10]

The Santa Ana City Council adopted a resolution blaming state laws for a rise in unpermitted sidewalk vendors selling unsafe food, blocking sidewalks, and undermining public health and safety. Officials in Santa Ana voiced concern that vendors from elsewhere came into the city to establish taco stands on sidewalks under large red umbrellas, taking over large sections of sidewalks, using heating equipment with open flames, and leaving behind grease residue.[11]

A councilmember in Santa Monica's City Council stated that SB 946 has made it more difficult to hold people accountable for violating regulations on sidewalk vending. Because SB 946 prevents criminal penalties for violations of laws around sidewalk vending, vendors choose to ignore those laws. Although vendors can be issued administrative fines for violations, they cannot be compelled to show identification documents when they are cited and can get relief based on their ability to pay.[12] An advocate for California's industry concluded, "What we’re seeing with S.B. 946 is there’s really just no incentive on either side for people to get permitted or for law enforcement to go after unpermitted people."[12]

References

  1. ↑ Holmes, Mona (2019-11-14). "Street vendors face uncertainty while LA officials work out new rules". Eater LA. Retrieved 2020-09-15.
  2. 1 2 3 4 "Bill Text - SB 946 Sidewalk Vendors". leginfo.legislature.ca.gov. Retrieved 2022-05-27.
  3. ↑ "A well intentioned state law kick-started chaos on the Pier – Santa Monica Daily Press". www.smdp.com. 22 January 2022. Retrieved 2022-05-28.
  4. ↑ "San Diego's Passes $5.1M Street-Vendor Plan, Offset By $38,000 Raised By Issuing Permits". NBC 7 San Diego. Retrieved 2022-05-28.
  5. ↑ "L.A.'s sidewalk vendors have been hitting an obstacle: Legalizing their carts". Los Angeles Times. 2021-08-11. Retrieved 2022-05-28.
  6. ↑ "California Lawmakers Pass Bill to Streamline Permitting for Street Vendors". SM Mirror. 2022-04-28. Retrieved 2022-05-28.
  7. ↑ Munoz, Anabel (2022-05-15). "California bill aims to help street food vendors by changing retail code". ABC7 Los Angeles. Retrieved 2022-05-28.
  8. ↑ "Bill Analysis - SB-946 Sidewalk vendors". leginfo.legislature.ca.gov. Retrieved 2024-01-02.
  9. ↑ Harold, Luke (2019-01-03). "Street vendors could be coming to Beverly Hills". Beverly Press & Park Labrea News. Retrieved 2024-01-02.
  10. ↑ Mishanec, Nora (2023-11-27). "S.F.'s Mission Street vending ban takes effect. Will it stop 'the living nightmare'?". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved 2024-01-02.
  11. ↑ "After Santa Ana's crackdown on taco stands, council asks California to amend its street vendor laws". Orange County Register. 2023-03-09. Retrieved 2024-01-02.
  12. 1 2 Harter, Clara (2022-01-22). "A well intentioned state law kick-started chaos on the Pier". Santa Monica Daily Press. Retrieved 2024-01-02.

Further reading

This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.