I agree about ancillary facilities is enough to say no to them in that area, but an office park or industrial/ factory setting is a big plus. I remember years worked at crane co. on south second st. and they had "catering trucks" at lunch time Nicks catering service was the most popular

I think these are good points that could be mitigated by having a designated area of the public street whee food trucks could operate. Rather than mire it down in complex formulas as to who can operate where and when (and I dont think you are doing this) a simple area or areas where food trucks can pull over and operate (like a no parking zone except a food truck parking zone). I'm also not against your idea below of creating a handwashing station or benches or landscaping, the only question is who should provide it. I'm not opposed to having each food truck pay a per diem fee for renting the 'space' and then using that for upkeep. A better choice to administer the system besides the government would be the downtown business association or some neutral concern. In one city, I think it's LA, food vendors also must get permission to use a restroom within a certain number of feet. So a restaurant could earn twenty bucks (or something) that day by allowing food truck patrons to use theirs. That's a regulation that has a free market answer :)

I like that idea. Also perhaps a designated food truck bay where all food truck business could go to keep it a little more reliable.

I think that's a reasonable alternative - to license food trucks similar to any business, with pro-rated costs. And not just pro-rated to the two hours a day a food truck operates before it vacates the area, but on a day-by-day basis. If a food truck wants to siphon customers for the two most profitable hours a day, it should have to pay for the infrastructure that is there for the other twenty-two hours.

As stated above, I also think a special pull-out area, perhaps big enough for two or three trucks, would also help the food trucks be a more reliable fixture. If people don't follow thirty Twitter feeds, they could at least know where food trucks are likely to be. The business licenses could pay to create and maintain the "food truck bay" which might also have other amenities like tables and a sink to wash hands.

Really, Mike? I've found most of Chris's views to be one-sided against the food truck operators. My guess is Chris is a restaraunteur who feels threatened by the trucks existence.

Food trucks have plenty of "infrastructure costs" - gasoline, for one. How about the food they purchase from local markets to cook and serve to their customers?

Hey, do you think local labor is an infrastructure cost? Maybe the jobs the provide that help fund the local tax base is a cost for the food truck owners.

Maintenance on the vehicles also goes back into the local community.

Your "argument" seems to ignore the many situation in which a food truck visits a business. I used to buy lunch from a food truck when I worked at MiTek in Earth City. The restrooms were paid for by my company, so I wasn't worried about the food truck's lack of a potty. Water and electricity weren't an issue, since the truck produced its own.

Mike, you and Chris want to argue from a tunnel vision perspective. You're carefully ignoring a lot of facts in this issue. On its own, I wouldn't care, but you're trying to shut down individual citizen's businesses. That's wrong, sir.

Now I'm completely convinced that you haven't bothered to read our views.

Not only that, but you've made the assertion twice now that I own a restaurant. That clearly doesn't fit in with what I've posted so far, and is obviously reaching toward an ad hominem attack.

I'm actually, ultimately, arguing against an outright ban, but am taking into account what cities like Maplewood are concerned with. Perhaps you could address the pie-in-the-sky proposal several of us have put forward concerning a designated food truck area in Maplewood. Even if you hate the idea, at least we could have a discussion instead of your appearing, attacking, and accusing people of having ulterior motives.

There's a difference between an assertion and a guess. As concerned as you seem to be, Chris, I have to wonder exactly what is your keen interest in this topic?

Are you just a busy-body who wants to dictate to others how they can conduct their business? Exactly how does a "food truck area" mesh with the freedom of the food truck owners to pursue business where they can find it?

Every single one of your suggestions, Chris, entail the curbing of the food truck owners' rights. That seems to be the opposite of someone seeking a solution. It's interesting to me that you describe your suggestions as "pie-in-the-sky", as if your goals are visionary, lofty, and unattainable, as opposed to brutish and bullying in terms of the freedoms of the food truck owners and those who would patronize them.

Your first comment to Mike K., in fact, lists a myriad of requirements in terms of time and money on the part of the food truck owners that are simply onerous. That you don't like my responses or feel unhappy about the fact that I vehemently disagree with you does not push my comments into the realm of ad hominem, but hey - the suggestion is consistent with your previous behavior, Chris. Don't like something or someone? Try to use the power of the local authorities to shut them up!

"Exactly how does a 'food truck area' mesh with the freedom of the food truck owners to pursue business where they can find it?"

I'm not sure. Perhaps in the same way that a regular business seeks a license and follows local zoning laws that allow businesses to operate. Maybe ask the food truck operators who came up with the idea of dedicated food truck areas in Portland.

Chris, your insistance that if Portland does it, we should do it is an illogical fallacy. It's the same thought process as "But Mom, all the other kids are doin' it!"

Your belief that this type of regulation is "an extension of zoning law" is frightening. When we begin telling food truck operators where they can drive their trucks, when will you start telling me where and when I can drive my car? Can I only use the highway at certain times on certain days?

Chris, I would never presume to tell you when and where you could operate your business. I don't know why you're so excited to tell me where and when I can operate mine. Unless public health or safety are involved, it's absolutely no one's business but the business owner and his consumers.

And here I thought customers CHOSE which store to frequent, and as a result, free citizen's choices either put stores out of business or kept them open. Silly me.

So, what you're saying is "big corporations", as well as "little mom-and-pop" food truck operations, put small restaraunts out of business. Sounds like you've got a solid grasp of economics, Tim.

But most food trucks are small "mom & pop" restaurants so your argument doesn't hold water.

Roger, I'm not sure which food trucks you usually visit, but a meal at any of the ones I've ever been to in St. Louis (and I've been to at least 20) cost right around that. Owners really enjoy (to their credit) the fact that food trucks have low overhead - most are quoted as saying that - but none that I've been to qualify as cheap meal-for-meal.

Roger, it seems to me the city isn't the problem. The problem is the business owners who want to use the force of government to push out potential competition.

I doubt the city can overcome its own inertia on issues like this without help from an outside force.

I would like to point out that in "mainstream " LA, "if a truck is parked for longer than one hour, they must have permission to use an appropriate restroom that’s within 200 feet."

And of course you have to pay to park. And have a current health inspection just like those in St. Louis. And have a certified food handler. And a business tax license for every city, in addition to a seller's permit.

To me most of those are logical.

To some, perhaps to those who don't understand the difference between federal and local government, or to certain mildly informed tea partiers, they could be seen as heavy-handed, draconian, and overbearing.

Can you imagine - a thriving scene, with food trucks that not only follow the rules but give back through charity events? How is that possible with all that totalitarian regulation?

Matt G, I don't know if Blockbuster or any of the smaller video stores went to city councils and tried to have Redbox regulated or banned outright, do you?

Chris, your snide remarks in the face of complaining about snide remarks aside - of course you find all of this logical. Your post is mostly illogical.

What does LA have to do with St. Louis? What does a "thriving scene" have to do with charitable events? Is your wandering point somehow trying to connect totalitarianism to success? That's a stretch. Ask the survivors of 100 million dead people how successful your philosophy has been in the last 80 years.

Paying to park makes sense if it's required, but since many food trucks are visiting the parking lots of private businesses, maybe it's a non-sequiter.

A health inspection seems reasonable, if it makes a difference. How often is it just an excuse to collect revenue? In St. Charles County, I'd bet it works. In St. Louis...?

Why do you need a "certified foodhandler"? Chris, are you certified to cook your own meals and feed yourself? Is your mother? And yet, here you are...typing away.

The issue is whether food trucks should be banned. They shouldn't be. Should they be regulated? From what I can tell, they are already regulated.

Does Chris want more regulation? It sounds like Chris does. Chris supports Karl Marx and Totalitarianism - by his own admission. How nice for Chris. Most of us don't, but at least we know where your mind is.

Gee, here I am agreeing with Matt G that food trucks are innovative, that the marketplace changes, that food vendors have done positive things, and that a ban on food trucks is not any answer - and you can't bring yourself to understand that there is common ground without foaming at the mouth.

I'm sorry to say it, but from the moment you made one of your very first comments on this article - derailing what had been a polite discussion by addressing me as "pal" within the first sentence - it was easy to see that you have no intention of having a polite discussion.

What does L.A. have to do with it? Matt G, someone whom I presume you agree with, held it up as an example of how well food trucks can work. No more, no less.

And, on top of that, I said "MOST" (you did see that, didn't you) of the regulations in L.A. were reasonable. I don't think having certifying a food handler is one of them. I think it's useless, pointless, and a waste of time, and an burdensome restriction. But again, you assume the worst of anyone who has a disagreement with you. I'm not surprised.

You can agree on whatever you like. I'm sticking to your own points in terms of what is anecdotal and what is factual, Chris.

There's not much common ground between us, if allowing food trucks to operate requires excessive regulation. That's straight-forward.

If you don't want to be my pal, then don't be. I didn't call you a bad name, I did my best to be friendly.

Just because food trucks are allowed in LA (or anywhere else) along with onerous regulation, doesn't make it right. We're right back to the "But the other kids are doing it"-Fallacy.

I don't know about "most" regulations, I'm trying to stick to the ones you list.

Good luck.

Now I agree with a lot of what you say Jaycen but lets not pretend you were just trying to be friendly. The whole pal thing would irk me too.

Hah, true enough, Tony. "Pal" was just the nicest thing I could come up with at the time. I was trying not to resort to name-calling.

I'm not sure when people talk about brick-and-mortar places in relation to this conversation that they're referring to Best Buy and Costco. I agree with you on TIF, but it doesn't really affect my view one way or another on, say, Manchester Ave and Sutton Ave in Maplewood, unless the businesses that line that are the recipients of TIF.

I think your facts are a little backwards unless I'm misreading. Food trucks do get inspected. They do pay sales taxes. So do brick and mortar places (it sounded like you said they don't, above). However, food trucks don't pay property tax and they don't get a business license, which is usually quite expensive. They usually have a peddler's permit which is what ice cream trucks have. They also, as I pointed out above, don't contribute to the city's well being as a pedestrian environment. Most food trucks park for two hours. While they are present, they don't provide trash cans, a place to sit, restrooms, or much street interest. When they pack up and leave, they provide no 'eyes on the street' like businesses that are located there permanently.

As far as government banning businesses, I think it really comes down to city codes and zoning, which are a valid function of local government (of course this has nothing to do with federal or state government).

They actually don't have business licenses. They have peddler licenses which is what ice cream trucks have.

You are right that they pay sales taxes. But they do not pay property taxes, nor do they pay utility taxes to the cities providing them infrastructure.

I think a reasonable solution would be for a city like Maplewood to create - or allow the food truck coalition to create - a food truck bay with minimal facilities (like handwashing facilities, trash cans, and tables) - where the trucks can freely operate. Then, trucks using the facilities cover the upkeep of the facilities.

What infrastructure is being provided, Chris? Does the truck hook up to free water or free electricity? Does the truck hook up to a free sewage point?

You keep trying to make the food trucks sound like leeches on city utilities, but so far, I'm at a loss to understand exactly how you make the logical leap.

I never said utilities, although I mentioned utility taxes.

I clearly outlined a list of infrastructure above. I am really quite loathe to enumerate it again, given your hostile tone. You may feel that you fit in better at the Post-Dispatch web site.

Chris P
9:15 am on Monday, June 25, 2012

I clearly outlined a list of infrastructure above.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I missed that, Chris. I see a list of amenities in a previous post above, but I don't see a list of utilities. Maybe you could copy/paste for me, so you don't have to type it all out.

I never said anything about utilities. Ever. I mentioned utility taxes but never said so much as a word about utilities. In my reply to you, I said, "I never said utilities".

And now you're asking me to copy and paste a list of utilities. I can't, because I never said it. Don't know how to be more clear.

Chris P

9:15 am on Monday, June 25, 2012

I clearly outlined a list of infrastructure above.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Chris - Infrastructure = utilities in this context. The city doesn't pay to put bike racks in front of shops, the shop owners do.

So, unless you want to force food truck owners to provide something other shop owners aren't forced to provide, I have to assume you mean utilities. Based on your other comments, perhaps you DO intent to force the food truck owners to provide special amenities.

That's not freedom, Chris. You're describing a Totalitarian State.

There we go. Some honesty. I'm not at all surprised you're a Communist, Chris.

How nice for you.

But restaurants are regulated by zoning code. One can't, for example, set up a restaurant on a residential street, or the sidewalk, or the city park.

What if you owned a pizza shop, and a local entrepreneur set up a table every day in the shade of your awning, on the public sidewalk, and sold pizzas to customers? Zoning laws prohibit that kind of business, and the same can be reasonably applied (in my opinion) to food trucks.

You pay property tax? Or personal property tax?
My property taxes are $3000 a year on a modest house. My personal property taxes are about $400.

What's your point, Chis?

Exactly what does it matter how much Brian pays in taxes, or the type of taxes he pays? Brian is a business man. Brian's business probably employes at least 1 or 2 other people. It provides a service for which other citizens are willing to pay.

What else matters?

I think the point, as several of us have pointed out so far, that food trucks use infrastructure without contributing a proportionate amount toward infrastructure.

Also, as I noted above, this is really an issue of zoning. As free market as I am, zoning is a legitimate function of local government.

You keep saying "infrastructure", Chris, but you never define that. What infrastructure (i.e. utilities) do food trucks use that the owners don't already pay the costs through taxation?

Is it the street? That should be covered in Gasoline taxes or personal property taxes or license and tag fees.

What else? The truck generates its own electricity. The truck doesn't provide a restroom (sewage). The owner has to fill the truck with water from his own source (presumably paid for by the owner). The owner pays for his labor.

I guess I'm just missing the entire connection to "infrastructure".

Since you now want to change the subject to "zoning", please tell me how you plan to "zone" driving habits. I'd like to know where I'm free to drive in the future, based on zoning rules.

You'd be more inclined to check out a restaurant if a food truck was parked out front?

Maybe, Chris. Let me tell you something, pal - you can't read my mind or know what's in my heart.

Maybe I want to sit inside and enjoy the heat/air conditioning. Maybe I want more choices, or friendly service. Maybe I want a table and plenty of room to spread out. Perhaps I want to use free wi-fi. Perhaps I'd prefer to drink a beer with my meal.

There are thousands of reasons an individual might have for choosing a restraunt over a food truck parked right outside. There are thousands or reasons to choose the food truck over the restraunt. The critical point is this - free choice.

It's not your place to dictate to me my reasoning or my choices. It's my right to decide, unless you can convince the government to strip that right from me by banning the food trucks in the first place.

I have to wonder why you don't post your entire last name, Chris. Which restraunts do you own and operate?

Jaycen, I'm not your pal that I'm aware.

You've obviously taken on a hostile tone. A number of posters, including me, if you had read, were having a productive conversation about ways that food trucks can work in an environment like Maplewood, without resorting to the discussed ban.

I don't own any restaurants, or work at a restaurant, or hold stock in restaurants. I can't imagine anyone further from "the business" than me. In fact, I work downtown - which has some reasonable regulations that allows food trucks to co-exist with other businesses - and have patronized over twenty food trucks, some of them many times each.

I don't publish my last name because I really prefer being anonymous due to the rare unstable person that tends to show up on various social media sites -- for example, calling people "pal" simply because they disagree with a viewpoint.

Chris, my tone is irelevant to the discussion. That's a strawman. Please stick to the discussion.

It's funny that you've addressed every single sentence from my comment you find so offensive EXCEPT the portion that matters. You ignore the part where I ask you what business is it of yours why I or anyone else would choose a restraunt over a food truck or vice-versa.

You asked the question, Chris - "You'd be more inclined to check out a restaurant if a food truck was parked out front?"

Presumably, you had a point. What exactly was your point?

Actually, your tone has nothing to do with a straw man. I'm not sure you realize what that is.

A straw man would be something like, "Well Jaycen, since you think that every business should be able to operate anywhere, I guess you're fine with them setting up on your front lawn. Well, you might be OK with that, but I for one am for property rights!"

(See the difference?)

To answer your question in a completely dedicated post, I do not care. I was asking a clarifying question; I have not heard that particular argument before. Now I have.

A strawman is a logical fallacy where one party twists the other's argument, or inserts an argument the other person didn't make and then rails against that argument.

In this case, you're arguing with my "tone" to the exclusion of my actual logical points, which as I said, is irrelevant to the argument. I'm sure you don't know or care what a Strawman is, but that too, is irrelevant, except as it demonstrates an unwillingness to debate honestly or coherently.

Best of luck.

I gave a perfectly good example of what a strawman is. Me making a point of your tone is not a strawman. Your attempted explanation really failed, and I was just trying to steer you straight. You can man up and say, you're right, that's not a strawman, or you can continue to argue that anything you deem irrelevant is a strawman.

Again, you've carefully ignored the critical points of the argument, Chris. Saul Alinsky would be proud of you. Derail the conversation by focusing on a meaningless point.

Why can't you just answer the question, Chris? You said you don't care, but you're the one who asked the question. Your question was a "yes" or "no" question, and left little room for explanation. Somehow, your claim seeking clarity seems suspicious.

Nice, Jeff. Your facts sure blow Chris's distortions out of the water. Well done, sir!

What's so interesting, Jaycen, is that I actually made these points before Jeff - both about sales taxes and peddlers' licenses. But after responding to about eight of your misleading, accusatory posts, I'm not surprised that you got this one wrong, unfortunately.

No, Chris, you've made the opposite points. You're the one who said earlier that food trucks don't have business licenses, but have peddler's licenses. Jeff took you to task on that.

Chris, focusing on my tone and how it makes you feel allows you to ignore my logic and facts, but it does nothing to bolster your own argument. Would you mind just sticking to the topic at hand, please? Your condescension is thoroughly annoying.

Regards.

I'm not here for your pleasure or enjoyment. Since I annoy you, perhaps you'd be annoyed by food truck and pushcart operators in other cities who have proposed exactly what I'm proposing above. If you are, then I guess that's your problem.

Jeff, which cities require a business license (equivalent to a brick and mortar license) to operate, vs. a peddler license? As of March, I was not aware of any.

Sauce for the goose, Chris.

I have gone to Kirkwood (from Saint Charles) specifically for cupcakes multiples times and have checked out businesses around the station area and made purchases from several of those businesses, including Station Brewery/Restaurant, Kaldi's, Cornucopia (a LOT of $ there), and Global Foods, Qdoba & McDonald's as a vehicle stop coming or going. I like to buy my "exotic" ingredients from Global Foods, but it's a long drive just for a bottle of tahini (for example) and I end up buying other things as well.

@Jeff Have you thought about opening a brick and mortar shop for your cupcakes? Why did you decide a food truck was the best route for your business? Would you consider doing both?

Kalen,
We do have a brick and mortar for the cupcakes as well as other cakes and baked items. We are located at 10 Clarkson Wilson Center in Chesterfield MO.

Jeff P.

@Jeff You do! I didn't know :) Which came first, the store or the food truck? Why did you decide to expand like that?

@Kalen, I can't speak for Jeff, but I do know the store has been around for a while. It was over near Wildwood before moving to Clarkson/Wilson. The truck has (mostly) different and many more flavors than the shop, or I'd just go there.

Oh Chris, your anecdotes are less about business freedom, and more about railing against the free market.

"I could potentially provide a dozen about a food truck luring workers from going to a regular establishment."

Aw...poor Chris. How dare those evil food trucks "lure" people away from your establishment! How can the city allow citizens the right to make their own choices?!

This so-called "freedom" is getting out of hand. Someone MUST put a stop to it.

Fair point, Tony. Your comment is the best reasoned I've read in favor of some regulation.

My problem with Chris's points is that I haven't heard regulations that make sense, only regulations designed to add expense and time to the food truck owners. Signs prohibiting a food truck during certain periods of the day, or within such a distance of a particular business seem legitimate.

In the instances I've brought up, I've mostly seen food trucks pull up to manufacturing plants. No issues there, since they're operating on private property. In the case of a downtown district, a certain amount of regulation makes sense.

Forcing the truck owners to provide extra amenities, be certified as food handlers, etc, are ridiculous in the extreme - just as it would be to force restaraunt owners to do.

Thanks for pointing all that out. The private property argument is exactly what I was pointing out with the pizza table on the sidewalk example. Yes, a food truck operating on the street can be regulated.