Food Trucks To Be Legislated Out of Existence?

[thelakelander]

If the demand in the core can be met by 40 food operations, wouldn't you rather that most all be met by 40 B & M operations, which are permanent, adding good ambience and vibrancy, along with tax dollars .. instead of 30 B & M operations and 10 food trucks, which do nothing to reduce building vacancies? Don't you see the value in solid occupation of buildings?  An occasional food truck is okay, but there must be a limit "in the city core".  Whereas food trucks disappear at night and outside of lunch time, permanent B & M show "vibrancy" at midnight, even though they are closed.  Would you rather see vacant buildings at night, or occupied locations, even though closed for the night?

This assumes "demand" is a set number that doesn't grow or decrease. Trucks (nationwide) have been proven to attract more people to a certain area. People who otherwise would have never come or been a part of the "assumed" set number for demand. For example, I've driven to certain areas of town to try specific trucks. Sometimes, I eat at those trucks and other times, I end up eating or picking up take out from a nearby B&M. Without the truck initially drawing me to that specific area of town, I would have never been a part of the "assumed" set number.

[ronchamblin]

Some problems are not solved by depending of firm statistics or evidences, as there might be none on a unique situation, but they are solved via intuition, projection, logic, and common sense.  I'm saying that encouraging food trucks into the core provides a pressure that can only be described as destructive to the effort to achieve progress toward full vibrancy. 

If new food operations are to be in the core, then why not let them be B & M operations?  Why not encourage those food truck heroes to be real heroes, and "open B & M's in the core?  Encouraging food trucks "instead of" B & M's to open in the core works against long-term revitalization efforts. 

Although I support in most cases the free market, there are times when measured guidance is needed from government so that the needs of the community can be met.  There have been occasions when unfettered freedom in the marketplace has been ultimately detrimental to society overall.  And the same applies to issues in affecting our city core.   

[ronchamblin]

If the demand in the core can be met by 40 food operations, wouldn't you rather that most all be met by 40 B & M operations, which are permanent, adding good ambience and vibrancy, along with tax dollars .. instead of 30 B & M operations and 10 food trucks, which do nothing to reduce building vacancies? Don't you see the value in solid occupation of buildings?  An occasional food truck is okay, but there must be a limit "in the city core".  Whereas food trucks disappear at night and outside of lunch time, permanent B & M show "vibrancy" at midnight, even though they are closed.  Would you rather see vacant buildings at night, or occupied locations, even though closed for the night?

This assumes "demand" is a set number that doesn't grow or decrease. Trucks (nationwide) have been proven to attract more people to a certain area. People who otherwise would have never come or been a part of the "assumed" set number for demand. For example, I've driven to certain areas of town to try specific trucks. Sometimes, I eat at those trucks and other times, I end up eating or picking up take out from a nearby B&M. Without the truck initially drawing me to that specific area of town, I would have never been a part of the "assumed" set number.

I see your point.  In other words, overall, the existence of a good number of food trucks will bring a visiting population from out of the core ... to the core.  This alone is good, as it does add a measure of vibrancy.  And, if things work properly, some of those food truck operators, just might like an area, and say "hey, I want to open a restaurant near where my food truck has been doing so well." 

This would be a welcomed and natural progression.  Let's hope that it occurs, preferably many times, because if it doesn't, we might find ourselves with more food trucks, and the same old building vacancies. 

I suppose that we have two opposing pressures, one being the food trucks becoming a draw to the core of people outside of it, and the other being the pressure being applied against the B & M operations.  The strength of each pressure is at present unknown. Only time will tell the outcome.   

[RyeRyeRocco]

that and this imaginary distinction between 'brick and mortar' and 'other'.

In the final analysis, they are all just businesses, and no one owns downtown.

You own your business.  Not the businesses next to you.

Is that why a Quiznos and a Subway can exist in the same downtown everyone so covets?

[thelakelander]

Some problems are not solved by depending of firm statistics or evidences, as there might be none on a unique situation, but they are solved via intuition, projection, logic, and common sense.  I'm saying that encouraging food trucks into the core provides a pressure that can only be described as destructive to the effort to achieve progress toward full vibrancy.

Opinions are like belly buttons, everyone has one. Without evidence or factual data to confirm an opinion, there is no problem worth solving via legal regulation. 

If new food operations are to be in the core, then why not let them be B & M operations?  Why not encourage those food truck heroes to be real heroes, and "open B & M's in the core?  Encouraging food trucks "instead of" B & M's to open in the core works against long-term revitalization efforts.

Why should it matter since it can't be actually proven that trucks are causing B&Ms to close? However, it can be proven that trucks are helping long-term revitalization locally. Besides, anyone willing to spend their own money opening a business in Jacksonville is a hero (especially when not asking for subsidies or regulations to limit competition), regardless of if it's sitting on a concrete foundation or rolling on wheels.

Although I support in most cases the free market, there are times when measured guidance is needed from government so that the needs of the community can be met.  There have been occasions when unfettered freedom in the marketplace has been ultimately detrimental to society overall.  And the same applies to issues in affecting our city core.

How did we arrive to the conclusion that food trucks aren't meeting the needs of the community?  Judging from the response of the overall community on this issue and their growth over the last two years, it seems they have the community's support.

[ronchamblin]

that and this imaginary distinction between 'brick and mortar' and 'other'.

In the final analysis, they are all just businesses, and no one owns downtown.

You own your business.  Not the businesses next to you. 
[/quote]

I've said about all I've got for now.  Thanks for engaging, my MJ friends.  We've made some progress I think.  It's fun to argue the various components of an issue. 

I do own my business, and the building next to me, which will soon be renovated, providing another plus for the core, with six apartments, which are already rented .. and some new operation in the former Gus' location on the first floor. Any ideas as to the best use of the first floor.  I've not a clue yet, as to the best use of it.

I do not own downtown, but I do own my desire to speed along its journey to vibrancy and infill.  Sleep well Stephen, my good friend.   

[ronchamblin]

Please call me Ron.

from Lakelander:

How did we arrive to the conclusion that food trucks aren't meeting the needs of the community?  Judging from the response of the overall community on this issue and their growth over the last two years, it seems they have the community's support.


Fundamentally,  I'm focused on revitalizing the city core, and suspect that progress on that journey is not necessarily aligned with a population's demand for food trucks.

[thelakelander]

If the demand in the core can be met by 40 food operations, wouldn't you rather that most all be met by 40 B & M operations, which are permanent, adding good ambience and vibrancy, along with tax dollars .. instead of 30 B & M operations and 10 food trucks, which do nothing to reduce building vacancies? Don't you see the value in solid occupation of buildings?  An occasional food truck is okay, but there must be a limit "in the city core".  Whereas food trucks disappear at night and outside of lunch time, permanent B & M show "vibrancy" at midnight, even though they are closed.  Would you rather see vacant buildings at night, or occupied locations, even though closed for the night?

This assumes "demand" is a set number that doesn't grow or decrease. Trucks (nationwide) have been proven to attract more people to a certain area. People who otherwise would have never come or been a part of the "assumed" set number for demand. For example, I've driven to certain areas of town to try specific trucks. Sometimes, I eat at those trucks and other times, I end up eating or picking up take out from a nearby B&M. Without the truck initially drawing me to that specific area of town, I would have never been a part of the "assumed" set number.

I see your point.  In other words, overall, the existence of a good number of food trucks will bring a visiting population from out of the core ... to the core.  This alone is good, as it does add a measure of vibrancy.  And, if things work properly, some of those food truck operators, just might like an area, and say "hey, I want to open a restaurant near where my food truck has been doing so well." 

This would be a welcomed and natural progression.  Let's hope that it occurs, preferably many times, because if it doesn't, we might find ourselves with more food trucks, and the same old building vacancies.

Luckily, there's nothing new under the sun and DT Jax's problems aren't unique. Nationally and locally, we've witnessed trucks bring more people into certain areas and those areas economically benefitting as a result. Local jobs are being created, authentic businesses opening and vacant buildings started to get filled in spaces across the city. It's time to facilitate personal innovation and creative for the betterment of Jacksonville.

I suppose that we have two opposing pressures, one being the food trucks becoming a draw to the core of people outside of it, and the other being the pressure being applied against the B & M operations.  The strength of each pressure is at present unknown. Only time will tell the outcome.

At this point, until some numbers start to materialize confirming the accusations, it appears a few B&Ms seem to be more fearful of the potential competition/changing consumer demographics, etc. more than anything else.

[ronchamblin]

There have been times throughout history, when a population didn't know what was good for them.  There have been times when one man is opposed by many, allied against him, and in the end, that one man was right. 

[thelakelander]

Fundamentally,  I'm focused on revitalizing the city core, and suspect that progress on that journey is not necessarily aligned with a population's demand for food trucks.

For legal regulation to limit business growth, consumer choice and people's ability to support their families, suspicions should be converted into hard evidence.

[ronchamblin]

There have been times throughout history, when a population didn't know what was good for them.  There have been times when one man is opposed by many, allied against him, and in the end, that one man was right. 

and then again, there are vastly more times, when the one guy is just out of his gourd.

True.  But its fun.

[ronchamblin]

Fundamentally,  I'm focused on revitalizing the city core, and suspect that progress on that journey is not necessarily aligned with a population's demand for food trucks.

For legal regulation to limit business growth, consumer choice and people's ability to support their families, suspicions should be converted into hard evidence.

Makes sense.  I've expended my current basket of ideas, and so I rest.  If we are lucky, our discussion has produced ideas giving more clarity to the issue.  I'm so pleased that nobody has muddied the water with insults etc.  There is hope.

[ronchamblin]

I agree totally.  I know that I've become less apt to become defensive and to respond with verbal attacks.  And I am very pleased that you and others have, over recent years, responded positively to pressure to avoid unnecessary insults, and wasteful name calling.  We've all been guilty in varying measures.  The forum has gained as a consequence of our changes in this respect. 

I've also learned a few things about engaging forum discussions, especially concerning my often insensitive attacks on Christians.  And I thank my fellow posters for this pressure on me to improve my thinking on the subject.

Overall, the forum is an "exercise" for all of us .... an exercise not conveniently available prior to the Internet.  Ultimately, the issues introduced, are usually given a good debate, and sometimes a good consensus as to solutions.  In any case, the arguments result in increased clarity on issues.   

Onward.

[ben says]

I've also learned a few things about engaging forum discussions, especially concerning my often insensitive attacks on Christians.  And I thank my fellow posters for this pressure on me to improve my thinking on the subject.

Nooooo!!!!! Now I'm the only one throwing insensitive attacks on Christians?! You've failed me Ron! 

[DeadGirlsDontDance]

I just got an email from MoveOn.org this morning:

We received the following statement from Bill Gulliford, President of City Council in response to the petition "Save Jax Truckies" (http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/save-jax-truckies), which you signed. We thought you'd like to see it.

------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't intend to support Brown's legislation if he introduces it and will do everything in my power to defeat it. I would suggest to him we spend our time on much more important issues facing the City at present. It is pretty ridiculous!
Sincerely,
Bill Gulliford,  President
Jacksonville City Council

------------------------------------------------------------------