I don't think I'll ever really understand this law. If you invite someone into your home for a meal (that you don't charge for), you're not subjected to health department regulation. How exactly is it different to prepare food for homeless people in your home? What if you invite them for dinner instead of taking it to them? Why are you subject to regulations in one scenario but not the other, given that the end goal is identical - to give away food to people who want to eat.

Genuine question... I don't get it.

Food regulations are for health. When you feed your own family and friends, fine. When you ramp up to feeding dozens or hundreds, then you can make a whole community sick with one mistake in the kitchen.

Its a practical threshold to help avoid spread of disease. Not an ivory-tower absolute. Local municipalities can and do vary on the details.

Okay, I understand this point.

But I also see community events where they grab half a dozen barbecues and feed thousands of people. Untrained volunteers manning the barbecues, that haven't been inspected and lord knows when they were last cleaned. Nobody seems to care, in fact most people in the community seem to love these, me included - paying for the possibility of getting sick just because "barbecuueeee." </homer>

There seems to be extremely large grey areas where enforcement turns a blind eye, no matter how the regulations are written. I'm not complaining by any means, I love community barbecues and social events and I would hate to see health regulators interfering with their spirit, but it seems as though they pick and choose what they enforce and ignore based entirely on the mood of the supervisor on any given day.

> but it seems as though they pick and choose what they enforce and ignore based entirely on the mood of the supervisor on any given day

More charitably, I'd say they use their professional judgement and assess risk.

I would agree - more charitably :P

I say this as a dispassionate observer - sometimes it seems their professional judgment is less professional and more emotional and their risk assessment based on whether or not they'll catch hell for ignoring it or if anyone will care.

In theory, and at least in my area, you can/should get a temporary permit. My fire department had to do so in order to sell hotdogs at a fundraising bazaar.

I agree... but as they say the gap between theory and practice is less in theory than it is in practice.

>Food regulations are for health.

Some of them maybe, but like with almost all regulations today they have been expanded far far far beyond what is needed just for public safety.

I will need to see if I can find the story again, but I remember a video outlining how the government health inspectors shut down a cheese making outfit because it did not comply with health codes due to the process, and when they switch to the "approved" method the cheese ended up being harmful to eat where it was not under the original process that was not allowed by government.

Further the regulations on feeding homeless are just a method to shut down charity because the city does not want homeless people in their town, these charities keep them around so if they shut down the charities feeding them the city believes the homeless will move on... (or die they don't really care as long as they do not have to see them)

It varies greatly depending on the local jurisdiction but the two most common factors for if you need a health permit are - Are you charging for the food? or Is the size of the portion over a specific size (commonly 2oz).

I have a line of BBQ rubs and sauces. In my area, if I got to a retailer and hand out free samples of product (for example BBQ sauce on pulled pork) then there is no health permit required. However if I sell BBQ sandwiches then a health department permit (and the associated inspections) are required.

In some areas I would be able to sell samples without a permit as long as they were 2oz or less. That is how many chili or "people's choice" type competitions work.

The laws aren't about protecting the honeless against unsafely prepared food. The purpose of the laws is to make it more difficult to provide meals to the homeless.

Localities that pass them do so to encourage the homeless to move to another jurisdiction where they can more easily get food.

The chances of improperly producing lemonade that also doesn't have a bad taste seems de nullis. It's like banning you from putting on a band-aid on a friend, because that's practicing medicine.

New from Johnson & Johnson: "Band-Ade! Tired of all those lonely nights in jail because you helped a friend with a bandage? Here at J&J we've established a legal fund to ensure..."

> improperly producing lemonade that also doesn't have a bad taste

You can't taste food poisoning. Go smell a fresh chicken. It smells like chicken, even if it's riddled with campylobacter or salmonella.

> The same problems exist I believe for volunteers who prepare food for homeless people.

Let's be honest, cities don't want volunteers feeding the homeless because they want them in someone else's back-yard, so they'll use any regulatory tricks and fines they can (inc. arresting the volunteers) to stop it.

in most localities the police won't even stop unless someone calls. usually you see that in a HOA but in the one I am subject to they just asked them to be in the cul de sac, it would only shut down when you guessed it, some anonymous neighbor called the cops.

so yes you can also lay claim to health issues but let us be honest, you don't have to drink it to play along. as long as its obviously just kids having fun and not parents exploiting kids for cuteness to get money where is the harm.

the occupational other license requirements in the US is just insane.

I suspect you are correct - I seem to recall that the last time this landed in the national news it was specific to health code, not business permits.