A Missouri grandmother who began serving free breakfast from her home after a local gas station stopped offering morning meals received a warning from the Columbia/Boone County Department of Public Health and Human Services that she could face legal action if she continued without a permit, The Center Square reported.
The complaint and the code
The Center Square reported that an anonymous complaint alleged people got sick after eating at Kathy Kite’s home and claimed her house was dirty with many cats. Kite told The Center Square she has no cats and is unaware of anyone getting sick. She said her daughter, who owns a cleaning company, helps keep the home clean.
According to a July letter described by The Center Square, the department cited City of Columbia Food Code 8-301.11 and warned Kite not to operate a “food establishment” without a permit. The letter language quoted in the report states: “A person shall not operate a food establishment without a valid permit to operate issued by the regulatory authority.” The outlet also reported the letter warned she needed a permit or a commercial kitchen, which it said would likely cost tens of thousands of dollars.
When asked if the rules would apply to family dinners, department spokesperson Austin Krohn wrote, “It is not illegal to serve food to family and friends. Food establishments are required to have a permit,” per The Center Square. Krohn said that when the first complaint arrived, Kite’s home had an open sign, a tip jar, advertised food on social media, and a sign in her yard—“all things typically associated with a food establishment,” according to The Center Square.
The Center Square noted Missouri’s cottage food law allows the sale of certain items like baked goods and jams, but the law does not appear to distinguish between providing unapproved foods for free versus for sale.
Goldwater Institute challenges the warning
The Center Square reported that the Goldwater Institute took up Kite’s cause. “Citizens should not be required to get the government’s permission before offering passers-by some coffee and a bite to eat while they socialize,” Dave Roland, the Institute’s Director of Allied Litigation, told The Center Square.
Roland argued on a local radio show that a widely adopted model food code “is written so broadly that it can indeed be applied outside of commercial contexts,” according to The Center Square. The department told the outlet that the framework for the current food code dates to 1962, with state policies predating that.
The Center Square reported that Roland sent a letter to the Columbia/Boone County health department asserting that Kite’s free, in-home food service is protected by Supreme Court precedent and that Missouri’s food code may violate the state and federal constitutions. The outlet said the letter gave the department until Friday, Aug. 28, to respond and that the Institute may file a lawsuit if the department maintains its position.
The Center Square also reported that similar conflicts have arisen elsewhere and that, in some cases, health departments have bleached unpermitted food. The outlet said Roland previously defended a St. Louis pastor who served food to the homeless for roughly 40 years before facing scrutiny from local health officials.
Inside Kite’s kitchen
Kite told The Center Square her breakfast effort began in May after a gas station stopped serving morning meals and an owner joked that she should cook at home and send locals over. “I said, OK, come on over, guys. I’ll make you breakfast,” she recalled. She said she now prepares 20–25 servings for about eight to 10 people, six days a week, free of charge. A jar for donations is available but voluntary, according to The Center Square.
She told the outlet her parents’ Depression-era stories shaped her view of hospitality: “My mom once told me, she said, ‘You never know when you’re entertaining an angel. So if someone comes to your door, you welcome them in, and you give them something to drink. If they’re hungry, you feed them.’”
What’s unresolved
Per The Center Square, Kite has continued serving breakfast since the July letter. The department maintains that operations resembling a food establishment require a permit under code 8-301.11, while the Goldwater Institute is questioning the code’s application and constitutionality in a private home setting.
