Food for thought

7 Comments

1. 

   Mark Marcoplos

    /  January 30, 2012

   Requiring higher fees to discourage people from pursuing a food vending enterprise is elitist and makes it difficult for people of limited means, including young people in many cases, to start a small business. This is the same sort of elitist attitude that many folks like to complain about when it comes to housing and the cost-of-living in Chapel Hill. Food trucks are a sign of our evolving economy as it adjusts to new realities. We should allow these changes to occur and let the marketplace adjust. Local small business activity like this is what Adam Smith was actually writing about, not the perverted corporate capitalism of today.

2. 

   Joe

    /  January 30, 2012

   Mark, I haven’t read anybody trying to discourage people from “pursuing a food vending enterprise”. What I have read, is that those people who wish to “pursue a food vending enterprise” need to pay the associated costs with doing so.

   Or, to turn the argument around, perhaps we should consider dropping all fees and permits required to build in Orange County? These fees are certainly much more onerous than the ones being discusses for those “pursuing a food vending enterprise” and contribute much more to the cost of living in this area than any food truck fees could.

3. 

   Mark Marcoplos

    /  January 30, 2012

   You just read Nancy’s pitch for discouraging food entrepeneurs. Not sure why you don’t think this qualifies as “discouragement”.

   I’m ambivalent about building codes & related eexpenses. I actullay believe it could be privatized, but that is a 2 pitcher of beer conversation.

   My original point was in support of not adding local governmental protection of select businesses, without understanding the consequences.

4. 

   Mark Marcoplos

    /  January 30, 2012

   Just re-read your post & I wonder if current restaraunts are now paying the full associated costs of their impact. It’s a valid point that you raise. Who will provide the facts we need to answer that question?

5. 

   Chris Jones

    /  January 31, 2012

   Mark – fair question, and I’m curious what you mean by “full associated costs.” On a back of a napkin list, without putting much thought into it, a restaurant in Chapel Hill (or the landlord during the upfit process) pays: permitting and inspection fees during upfit, hook-up fees to OWASA, annual business license, annual privelege license to NC ABC (if they serve alcohol), payroll tax, property tax (usually passed thru from landlord), sales tax, unemployment insurance, workers comp. To me, that sounds like a lot of associated costs covered . . . curious if you’re implying more?

6. 

   Nancy Oates

    /  January 31, 2012

   And don’t forget the commercial garbage collection fees they pay as well.

7. 

   Joe

    /  January 31, 2012

   Let’s not forget commercial recycling fees, too.