LA is proposing a one year ban on new fast food restaurants in poor neighborhoods

spacejamz

Lifer
Mar 31, 2003
10,989
1,723
126
Text

L.A. wants to clamp yearlong ban on fast food
City Council to vote Tuesday on plan for impoverished southern part of city

Los Angeles? city council committee has unanimously approved year-long moratorium on new fast-food restaurants in a 32-square-mile area, mostly in South Los Angeles, pending approval by the full council and the signature of Mayor Villaraigosa.

LOS ANGELES - In the impoverished neighborhood of South Los Angeles, fast food is the easiest cuisine to find ? and that's a problem for elected officials who see it as an unhealthy source of calories and cholesterol.

The City Council was poised to vote Tuesday on a moratorium on new fast-food restaurants in a swath of the city where a proliferation of such eateries goes hand-in-hand with obesity.

"Our communities have an extreme shortage of quality foods," City Councilman Bernard Parks said.

Bid to attract healthier restaurants
The aim of the yearlong moratorium, which won full support from a City Council committee last week, is to give the city time to try to attract restaurants that serve healthier food.

The California Restaurant Association says the moratorium, which could be extended up to two years, is misguided.

Fast food "is the only industry that wants to be in South LA," said association spokesman Andrew Casana. "Sit-down restaurants don't want to go in. If they did, they'd be there. This moratorium isn't going to help them relocate."

The proposed ban comes at a time when governments of all levels are increasingly viewing menus as a matter of public health. Last Friday, California became the first state in the nation to bar trans fats, which lowers levels of good cholesterol and increases bad cholesterol.

Tackling new issues

It also comes as the Los Angeles City Council tackles issues beyond safety, schools and streets. The council last week decided to outlaw plastic bags.

Fast-food restaurants have found themselves in the frying pan in a number of cities. Some places, including Carmel-by-the Sea and Calistoga, have barred "formula" restaurants altogether; others have placed a cap on them ? Arcata allows a maximum of nine fast-food eateries; others have prohibited the restaurants in certain areas, such as Port Jefferson, N.Y., in its waterfront area.

Most initiatives were designed to preserve a city's historic character. The Los Angeles bid is one of few that cite residents' health.

The mounting pressure has caused chains to insert healthier food choices in their menus. McDonalds offers salads and low-fat dressings; Burger King stocks Kids Meals with milk and apple pieces.

That's why the restaurant industry says it's unfair to blame them for fat people.

"What's next ? security guards at the door saying 'You're overweight, you can't have a cheeseburger'?" Casana said.

Officials: Diet key to obesity epidemic
But public health officials say obesity has reached epidemic proportions in low-income areas such as South Los Angeles and diet is the key reason.

According to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health, 30 percent of adults in South Los Angeles area are obese, compared to 19.1 percent for the metropolitan area and 14.1 percent for the affluent westside. Minorities are particularly affected: 28.7 percent of Latinos and 27.7 percent of blacks are obese, compared to 16.6 percent of whites.

Councilwoman Jan Perry, who proposed the measure and represents much of South Los Angeles in her 9th District, says that's no accident. South LA residents lack healthy food options, including grocery stores, fresh produce markets ? and full-service restaurants with wait staff and food prepared to order.

A report by the Community Health Councils found 73 percent of South L.A. restaurants were fast food, compared to 42 percent in West Los Angeles.

If the moratorium is passed, Perry wants to lure restaurateurs and grocery retailers to area.

Rebeca Torres, a South Los Angeles mother of four, said she would welcome more dining choices, even if she had to pay a little more. "They should have better things for children," she said. "This fast-food really fattens them up."


hope the search function didn't fail me...

 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
wow. don't think its going to help. but the business already there gotta love it!
 

Nitemare

Lifer
Feb 8, 2001
35,461
4
81
well as long as they don't get rid of the liquor, gun store and pawn shops...it might be ok
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
I saw the article, it's title is mis-leading.

It's only a moritorium on more NEW fastfood restaurants. Apparently they've got a ton of them, and it's about all they've got there.

Fern
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Originally posted by: MotF Bane
Is that even legal...?

yes because its not really banning resturants. just keepign them from building NEW resturants.


but this is not going to help. if the people wanted to eat healthy stuff they would be in the resturants.

its not like they aren't going to go one of the ones already built.
 

uhohs

Diamond Member
Oct 29, 2005
7,660
44
91
"What's next ? security guards at the door saying 'You're overweight, you can't have a cheeseburger'?" Casana said.
I can has cheezburger? ;_;
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,405
8,585
126
Rebeca Torres, a South Los Angeles mother of four, said she would welcome more dining choices, even if she had to pay a little more. "They should have better things for children," she said. "This fast-food really fattens them up."
maybe they should eat at home?
 

Rickten

Golden Member
Apr 17, 2001
1,607
0
0
the point of this isn't to get people eating healthy at all. They are simply trying to attract businesses besides fast food restaurants. They are simply hoping that by not allowing new land or abandoned buildings to be turned into fast food joints that something else will go in there instead.
 

KeithTalent

Elite Member | Administrator | No Lifer
Administrator
Nov 30, 2005
50,231
118
116
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Rebeca Torres, a South Los Angeles mother of four, said she would welcome more dining choices, even if she had to pay a little more. "They should have better things for children," she said. "This fast-food really fattens them up."
maybe they should eat at home?

Seriously, it's not that hard to prepare something healthy. People are just lazy SOBs.

KT
 

Nitemare

Lifer
Feb 8, 2001
35,461
4
81
Originally posted by: uhohs
"What's next ? security guards at the door saying 'You're overweight, you can't have a cheeseburger'?" Casana said.
I can has cheezburger? ;_;

"?Go and lose some weight before you can come in ? fat people are bad for business.?"
 

DomS

Banned
Jul 15, 2008
1,678
0
0
it's only NEW ones that couldn't be built. Don't stir things up. I think it's a good idea. Nutrition is so awful in those areas.
 

Anubis

No Lifer
Aug 31, 2001
78,712
427
126
tbqhwy.com
so people will drive to the non poor area to get fast food. this would solve nothing


pretty soon theres gonna be a war between fat people and not fat people. much like the Black v White issue in the 50s/60s

 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
63,203
19,554
136
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Rebeca Torres, a South Los Angeles mother of four, said she would welcome more dining choices, even if she had to pay a little more. "They should have better things for children," she said. "This fast-food really fattens them up."
maybe they should eat at home?

No, it's because it's fast food. If they had an Applebee's her kids would not be fat.
 

Zenmervolt

Elite member
Oct 22, 2000
24,514
44
91
Originally posted by: spacejamz
But public health officials say obesity has reached epidemic proportions in low-income areas such as South Los Angeles and diet is the key reason.

Translation: "Our constituents are too stupid to make their own decisions."

Originally posted by: spacejamz
Rebeca Torres, a South Los Angeles mother of four, said she would welcome more dining choices, even if she had to pay a little more. "They should have better things for children," she said. "This fast-food really fattens them up."

Translation: "I'm too lazy to cook a meal at home."

Seriously, when will people realise that it's less expensive (and healthier) to cook your own food at home than it is to go to a fast food restaurant? My job is 100% travel, and I am forced to eat out a lot. I tried, for a couple of weeks, to eat as cheaply as possible. The result was that I spent about $12/day on food for myself at fast-food restaurants (about $60 in 5 days). Stretched out to a week, that's $84 for one person.

If I go to a grocery store, I can buy a week's worth of food for $75 without even trying to buy things on sale or get the most for my money. If I'm trying to conserve, I can buy $25 worth of food and make something like green pepper steak or chicken noodle soup and eat for a week on that. Hell, $10 of ground beef and some spices would make enough spaghetti sauce for me to eat for two weeks if I really got desperate.

I just don't get it.

ZV
 

Zenmervolt

Elite member
Oct 22, 2000
24,514
44
91
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Rebeca Torres, a South Los Angeles mother of four, said she would welcome more dining choices, even if she had to pay a little more. "They should have better things for children," she said. "This fast-food really fattens them up."
maybe they should eat at home?

No, it's because it's fast food. If they had an Applebee's her kids would not be fat.

I know this is sarcasm, but just in case someone tries to take this seriously:

In terms of calories, many meals at places like Applebee's are worse than fast food meals.

ZV
 

Chrono

Diamond Member
Jan 2, 2001
4,959
0
71
Originally posted by: Anubis
so people will drive to the non poor area to get fast food. this would solve nothing


pretty soon theres gonna be a war between fat people and not fat people. much like the Black v White issue in the 50s/60s

Except for this war, the non-fat people will win since they will have much better stamina/endurance for the fight! WOO! Let the non-fat people reign terror on fat people begin!!!!!!
 

Toonces

Golden Member
Feb 5, 2000
1,690
0
76
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: spacejamz
But public health officials say obesity has reached epidemic proportions in low-income areas such as South Los Angeles and diet is the key reason.

Translation: "Our constituents are too stupid to make their own decisions."

Originally posted by: spacejamz
Rebeca Torres, a South Los Angeles mother of four, said she would welcome more dining choices, even if she had to pay a little more. "They should have better things for children," she said. "This fast-food really fattens them up."

Translation: "I'm too lazy to cook a meal at home."

Seriously, when will people realise that it's less expensive (and healthier) to cook your own food at home than it is to go to a fast food restaurant? My job is 100% travel, and I am forced to eat out a lot. I tried, for a couple of weeks, to eat as cheaply as possible. The result was that I spent about $12/day on food for myself at fast-food restaurants (about $60 in 5 days). Stretched out to a week, that's $84 for one person.

If I go to a grocery store, I can buy a week's worth of food for $75 without even trying to buy things on sale or get the most for my money. If I'm trying to conserve, I can buy $25 worth of food and make something like green pepper steak or chicken noodle soup and eat for a week on that. Hell, $10 of ground beef and some spices would make enough spaghetti sauce for me to eat for two weeks if I really got desperate.

I just don't get it.

ZV

I had a friend who refused to cook. Grew up rather sheltered by his parents and never learned or cared to try his hand at making anything at home beyond a cup of ramen.

His justifications were:
"I don't want to buy a refrigerator, dishes, cutlery"
"Doing dishes is a waste of time, going out someone else will do them for me."
"I don't like shopping for groceries, it takes too much time."
"Dining out has better tasting food than I'd ever cook at home, why settle for less?"

Anyways, people can rationalize things using all sorts of ridiculous excuses. Doesn't make them right, but convinces them they are.
 

maddogchen

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2004
8,903
2
76
its amazing how the rest of the world is dealing with starving poor people and we're dealing with fat poor people
 

Anubis

No Lifer
Aug 31, 2001
78,712
427
126
tbqhwy.com
Originally posted by: maddogchen
its amazing how the rest of the world is dealing with starving poor people and we're dealing with fat poor people

our poor people would be skinny and starving if they live in grass huts and had to walk everywhere
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
Originally posted by: Fern
I saw the article, it's title is mis-leading.

It's only a moritorium on more NEW fastfood restaurants. Apparently they've got a ton of them, and it's about all they've got there.

Fern

And when pricier, sit-down establishments open up, you'll get the hear the cries of "Gentrification!"
 

Zenmervolt

Elite member
Oct 22, 2000
24,514
44
91
Originally posted by: toonces
I had a friend who refused to cook. Grew up rather sheltered by his parents and never learned or cared to try his hand at making anything at home beyond a cup of ramen.

His justifications were:
"I don't want to buy a refrigerator, dishes, cutlery"
"Doing dishes is a waste of time, going out someone else will do them for me."
"I don't like shopping for groceries, it takes too much time."
"Dining out has better tasting food than I'd ever cook at home, why settle for less?"

Anyways, people can rationalize things using all sorts of ridiculous excuses. Doesn't make them right, but convinces them they are.

I have yet to eat anywhere that makes better food than I can make at home. And that includes a few very well-reputed steakhouses like Mitchell's.

ZV
 

Gooberlx2

Lifer
May 4, 2001
15,381
6
91
That's not going to do anything. Poor people often don't eat healthy simply because they can't afford it. Banning a new Taco Bell isn't going to encourage a fucking Tofu bar to move in. Both businesses know their markets. That city council is just kidding themselves.

Besides, a fast food joint like Subway is probably as healthy or better than the vast majority of other non-fast-food restaurants they'd try to bring in.
 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
63,203
19,554
136
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Rebeca Torres, a South Los Angeles mother of four, said she would welcome more dining choices, even if she had to pay a little more. "They should have better things for children," she said. "This fast-food really fattens them up."
maybe they should eat at home?

No, it's because it's fast food. If they had an Applebee's her kids would not be fat.

I know this is sarcasm, but just in case someone tries to take this seriously:

In terms of calories, many meals at places like Applebee's are worse than fast food meals.

ZV

Spoilsport! ;)