The City Council on Tuesday voted unanimously to send back to the Economic Development and Technology (EDTECH) Committee a pilot program that would have allowed residents to operate small restaurants from their homes.
Councilmembers Tyron Hampton, Rick Cole, Justin Jones and Gene Masuda supported the item.
“I think the downsides are outweighed by the benefits,” said Cole.
The Microenterprise Home Kitchen Operation program would permit residents to prepare and sell meals from kitchens in houses, apartments and condominiums.
The city’s health department would issue permits, conduct inspections and enforce food-safety requirements.
The opposition did not oppose the idea, but had several reservations about the proposal as is.
“I do see the potential here,” said Mayor Victor Gordo. “I am always leery of anything that comes from Sacramento. I am not sure that all of the unintended circumstances have been hashed out.”
Gordo recommended the item go back to the EDTECH Committee, which is chaired by Hampton, for more exploration, including hours of operations, alcohol and noise regulations.
Hampton said he will recommend the item come back at the next meeting. Staff requested four weeks before the item goes to committee.
Home kitchens are considered “low barrier pathways for small business development” that could increase household income, diversify the city’s food industry and help unpermitted businesses move under regulatory oversight.
State law allows cities and counties with their own health departments to authorize the home restaurants. More than 1,200 permits have been issued by 18 California health jurisdictions since 2019, according to a city staff report.
Los Angeles County authorized the businesses in 2024, but the city must adopt its own program because it operates an independent public health department.
The businesses could be limited to 30 meals daily and 90 meals weekly, with annual gross sales capped at $107,121. Each operation could have one full-time employee in addition to family or household members.
Food would have to be prepared, cooked and served on the same day. Customers could eat at the home or receive meals through pickup or delivery, but third-party delivery services generally would be prohibited.
Operators could not sell certain higher-risk products, including oysters, raw bottled juice and raw milk products. They also could not operate as caterers or temporary food vendors.
Alcohol could be served only with a state Alcoholic Beverage Control license.
Before opening, operators would need food-safety certification, a city health permit, written operating procedures and a successful initial inspection. Each kitchen would receive one routine inspection annually and could be investigated in response to complaints.
No exterior advertising signs would be allowed, and operators would be required to follow Pasadena’s noise ordinance. City departments would handle complaints involving traffic, parking, trash, grease disposal and business licensing.
The program would cost an estimated $225,000 over two years for staffing, training, outreach, software changes, enforcement and informational materials. The Public Health Department would seek General Fund support for startup costs and later return with proposed annual permit fees.
Other Southern California jurisdictions charge between $347 and $673 annually for home-kitchen health permits.
State law would prevent Pasadena from limiting the businesses to particular neighborhoods or imposing additional zoning restrictions.
During the pilot, officials would track complaints, economic benefits and other data. Before the program expires, staff would recommend whether the council should make it permanent, extend it or end it.
“I’d like us to talk to communities that have this program. There are pilots and I’d like to know the real experience other communities are having,” said Cole.
Get our daily Pasadena newspaper in your email box. Free.
Get all the latest Pasadena news, more than 10 fresh stories daily, 7 days a week at 7 a.m.
