PRESS STATEMENT
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Tiffany Moffatt, Elevate Public Affairs
January 25, 2022 916.837.0643 (cell)
Retailers, Grocers and Restaurants Respond to Sacramento Superior Court Ruling Granting a Delay to Proposition 12 that was Poised to Create a Bacon Crisis
State Regulators Create Uncertainty for Pork Availability in 2022;
Judge Issues Fair Ruling by Siding with California Consumers
Sacramento, CA – The California Retailers Association, California Grocers Association, California Restaurant Association, California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce, and a family processor respond to the Sacramento Superior Court decision to delay implementation of California’s Proposition 12 – the animal housing initiative passed in 2018 that became law on January 1, 2022:
California Restaurant Association:
“We are pleased the court has granted our request to temporarily stay the implementation of Prop 12, and we look forward to working with the California Department of Food and Agriculture to get Proposition 12 implementation right. The court’s decision to ensure regulations are finalized before the enforcement provisions of Proposition 12 take effect was the correct one. California restaurants and families are already struggling with rising food costs and the haphazard implementation of Proposition 12 without any clear rules or certification process in place would have only made it worse. State regulators, due to the complexity of Proposition 12, were unable to adopt regulations in time for the State and food supply chain to implement the new law – creating confusion and uncertainty for restaurants on how to legally serve pork to customers throughout the year. Much work remains to ensure the State implements a workable certification system and the food supply chain is given the necessary time to comply with that new system — the only way to avoid potential skyrocketing prices and shortages on an essential protein that is used in restaurants in every neighborhood across the state.”
California Grocers Association:
“We are grateful for the court’s ruling. Grocers provide essential food that nourishes every family in our state. Since Proposition 12 became law at the beginning of this year, California grocers struggled to determine how to stock and sell pork throughout the year that meets the standards voted on by Californians. Families rely on pork as a staple protein to prepare everyday meals; and because the state had not provided the necessary rules for compliance, we had no choice but to ask the court to intervene. Today’s ruling is a fair decision and we look forward to working with the State of California and the California Department of Food and Agriculture under a more feasible timeline for implementation.”
California Retailers Association:
“Today was a step in the right direction for California consumers across the state. Fact is fact and the final regulations that are needed to effectively implement Proposition 12 are still not in place – leaving the state’s food supply chain in an impossible position of determining how to comply. Moving forward with Proposition 12 in 2022 was the equivalent of posting a ‘speed limit’ sign without telling drivers what the limit is. Without court intervention, Californians would have been forced to pay the price in the form of a potentially limited pork supply and significantly higher costs throughout the year. Proposition 12 specifically required a two-year timeframe for compliance and today’s decision affirms that regulations must be finalized and the supply chain must be given time to implement the changes required by regulations before implementation. We look forward to working with the California Department of Food and Agriculture. The supply chain is extremely complex and the 180-day delay to implement the changes mandated by final regulations is a short timeframe.”
California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce:
“Without court intervention, the rushed implementation of Proposition 12 would have disproportionately impacted the Latino community that relies on pork as an affordable protein. State regulators were significantly delayed in finalizing the rules and regulations that industry stakeholders need to comply with the new law – with 98% of pork coming from outside California. The original ballot measure required regulations to be completed by September 2019, giving the marketplace more than two years to figure out how to comply with the new law. We are pleased the Court recognized that regulations must come before implementation, and we are eager to work with the State of California for the sensible implementation of Proposition 12.”
Kruse & Son:
- “As a private family-owned California processor, I was forced to ask the Court for relief in delaying California’s Proposition 12 because it became clear our supply of pork would be interrupted in 2022. I am grateful the court has stayed the implementation of Prop 12 until the State issues final regulations and begins implementing the nationwide certification system companies like mine will need to rely on once Prop 12 goes into effect. This is a step toward allowing the food supply chain the time necessary to comply with final regulations, which is what voters specifically demanded with the passage of the initiative. Without appropriate time for the supply chain to comply, the State will be leaving hard-working California consumers potentially vulnerable to acute shortages this year.”
Additional Background:
Californians are already reeling from inflation caused by supply chain interruptions, including on their favorite pork products, and the confusion around Proposition 12 is poised to only make it worse. It’s unclear when passed in 2018 if California voters understood the extensive timeframe that Proposition 12 requires to create a nationwide pork certification system, a complicated charge that takes years to establish. Proposition 2, which was passed by California voters in November of 2008, was much narrower in scope in that it only applied to California farmers, and yet Proposition 2 took more than six years to implement.
###
