Video: Los Angeles bans new fast-food restaurants in South LA

posted at 10:12 am on December 10, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

“This is not an attempt to control what food people put in their mouths,” LA city council member Jan Perry insists, but of course the new ban on new fast-food restaurants in South LA is exactly that.  Perry just wants to “diversify their food options,” but apparently doesn’t trust residents to do that for themselves and so wants to limit their options — presumably to higher-priced restaurants that may or may not open in their neighborhoods.  After all, it’s not as though there is a shortage of leasing space in these parts of America’s #2 city.  Nor will this help the already-high unemployment in these low-income neighborhoods, as the ban will prevent a steady source of part-time work for students:

Perry’s new plan bans new so-called “stand alone” fast food restaurants opening within half a mile of existing restaurants.

Such stand-alone establishments are on their own property, but those same restaurants are OK if they’re a part of a strip mall, according to the new rules.

“Give a grocery store and a housing combination a chance to come in,” Perry said.

What, there aren’t any high-priced French restaurants in South LA?  Sacre bleu! That might have something to do with the high unemployment and low incomes in the area.  Perry complains that 72% of the restaurants in the area are fast food compared to West LA’s concentration being in the mid-40s, but the obvious explanation is that higher income areas can support higher-priced restaurants.  If Olive Garden could make a profit in South LA, they’d already be there.  The issue isn’t that fast-food restaurants are hogging the commercial space, but that other establishments aren’t moving into the area.

The people Perry treats as idiots aren’t terribly happy about the new ban, either:

“People don’t need to be told what to eat or what they want to eat. To me, it’s not right, especially with employment right now,” said South L.A. resident Joel Rodriguez.

What about the jobs?  Left Coast Rebel wonders, too:

Where liberal policies abound, massive economic failure is not far behind. As previously reported, BLS places LA’s unemployment rate at 11.7% at the end of October. However, here are some more fun facts according to LA publications. To give you an idea of the job market, here is the LA Times:

In California, the construction industry has lost 323,100 jobs since the beginning of the recession; manufacturing has lost 209,700.

Wouldn’t it be nice for some jobs for low-skill labor in LA? Apparently, LA’s unemployed think so, later in the article, there is a report that focuses on an unemployed convict looking for work in…wait for it…a restaurant:

He knows he’s competing against thousands of other men as he applies for low-end jobs in restaurants and factories, even though the South Los Angeles resident would love to return to driving a truck, which he did before he went to prison.

A whopping 20% of LA’s black community has not worked in the past year, proving once again, the wonders of liberal policies for the African American community.

I’d guess Perry will be in the running for a Reason TV Nanny of the Month.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

That’s your responsibility. You were there, even if you don’t remember being there.

I’m not going to enable you. But, I will give you a clue.

You should be embarassed.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:03 PM

You’re the one making the claim that such a thread exists. I believe you’re confused. What was the subject of the thread?

AsianGirlInTights on December 10, 2010 at 12:06 PM

It’s backwards and arrogant no matter if it’s in the city, the suburbs, or the country (but it’s usually the worst in the suburbs).

I agree, but do understand, LA includes the San Fernando Valley, which is all suburbs.

That’s what I meant by that’s the “strength.” It’s got a huge tax base due to the suburbs.

It’s long been contested, but I suspect the move to separate the Valley from LA may actually be in the works.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:06 PM

You were posting back, there, and it was into the wee hours.

I’m not surprised you don’t recall.

But you know what? The real post of the night for me was when a regular poster said,

“We’ve learned a lot about this poster tonight.”

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 11:54 AM

true

tinkerthinker on December 10, 2010 at 12:06 PM

I believe you’re confused

You’re wrong. Your problem. And your issue.

But, you really haven’t posted a single thing on topic for what now…10 posts?

Time to log off, dear.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:08 PM

The anti-fast foodies are liberal elitism at its worst. What’s next, force Whole Foods and Salad-2Go to move into the neighborhood? What happens when they can’t make a go of it there? TARP money maybe?

slickwillie2001 on December 10, 2010 at 12:08 PM

If you take away bad choices then all that will be left are good choices! Intentions are super!!

emerson7 on December 10, 2010 at 12:08 PM

tinkerthinker on December 10, 2010 at 12:06 PM

Thanks, but I’m not sure that validation should even be necessary.

Nevertheless, thanks.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:09 PM

You’re wrong. Your problem. And your issue.

But, you really haven’t posted a single thing on topic for what now…10 posts?

Time to log off, dear.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:08 PM

What thread? Or at least, what was the subject of the thread?

AsianGirlInTights on December 10, 2010 at 12:11 PM

The inner city in LA is one of my own haunting grounds. I don’t live in LA proper anymore, but I drove into the heart of the city for 5 years. The biggest issue was, honestly, carjackings and hold-ups.

A restaurant was a natural target, requiring extra police.

I personally think that the debate about land and businesses in this area is about 10 years-old. There are no real grocery stores, for example, for miles. They just don’t have protection, they get held up. Heck, anyone having to work there is sure to be traumatized.

So I’m fairly sure that this isn’t quite as simple as some people think. I think that the nanny state argument was exploited, but the real issue is the protection issue.

What sickens me, as a former LA resident?

You’re more than willing to let minority business owners be killed.

You just don’t want the “mess” of a McDonald’s type shoot-out, and you know it’s that bad. It’ll happen.

That’s what annoys me.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:14 PM

Sorry you’re not following me. I did catch a thread the other night where nearly every regular poster here blasted you out to the ozone.

Having been your target more than once, I truly enjoyed that thread.

Boy, did people pull you down off your self-proclaimed pedestal.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 11:46 AM

As usual, you have your “Asian Girls” confused with your nonstop babbling.

Knucklehead on December 10, 2010 at 12:18 PM

What thread? Or at least, what was the subject of the thread?

AsianGirlInTights on December 10, 2010 at 12:11 PM

I think they are talking about ‘Aslan’s Girl’. Ann is not bright, remember?

ladyingray on December 10, 2010 at 12:20 PM

This has nothing to do with fast food. This simply a way to drive business to strip mall owners. Follow the money.

pedestrian on December 10, 2010 at 12:24 PM

Nope, Knucklehead, I don’t have it confused.

But whatever.

It’s inconsquential to the real discussion.

What’s real?

This issue is actually interesting in one respect. It’s about protection.

And these areas are targets.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:26 PM

The areas they are talking about is familiar to me. This area is dominated by gangs. They would shoot up a fast-food joint in a heartbeat.

I think this is more about protection than diet, frankly.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:28 PM

LA City Council : “Let them eat steak!”

taznar on December 10, 2010 at 12:29 PM

Nope, Knucklehead, I don’t have it confused.

But whatever.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:26 PM

I believe you do have it confused. Why can’t you provide the thread or even the topic if claim this happened?

AsianGirlInTights on December 10, 2010 at 12:29 PM

So I’m fairly sure that this isn’t quite as simple as some people think. I think that the nanny state argument was exploited, but the real issue is the protection issue.

What sickens me, as a former LA resident?

You’re more than willing to let minority business owners be killed.

You just don’t want the “mess” of a McDonald’s type shoot-out, and you know it’s that bad. It’ll happen.

That’s what annoys me.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:14 PM

What a silly argument. By you’re logic, they should just ban all new businesses in L.A. because it costs too much to protect them.

JavelinaBomb on December 10, 2010 at 12:30 PM

Nope, Knucklehead, I don’t have it confused.
But whatever.

It’s inconsquential to the real discussion.

Sorry, but you are confused and wrong this time.

Coming from the Queen of derailing threads.

Knucklehead on December 10, 2010 at 12:31 PM

The problem is a bit like what we see with the AK election, in my opinion.

There are a lot of these local issues which are honestly, local, based on realities that people in Des Moines might not get.

I personally think conservative thinkers should sort of get that every issue isn’t national, doesn’t lend itself to national debate.

I’m personally also going to follow any political figure who truly understands this, and if that person doesn’t fall into the pit of national over-exploitation, then they win a point with me for being sensible.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:33 PM

There are no real grocery stores, for example, for miles.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:14 PM

Then you don’t know what you are talking about….There are plenty of chain stores in South Central…one chain was even called the “Gelson’s of the ghetto”…

right2bright on December 10, 2010 at 12:33 PM

Hey, the city council can take a page out of Obamacare and start providing waivers to loyal constituents.

mossberg500 on December 10, 2010 at 12:34 PM

You just don’t want the “mess” of a McDonald’s type shoot-out, and you know it’s that bad. It’ll happen.

That’s what annoys me.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:14 PM

Then you do what the McDonald’s did in Inglewood, bullet proof glass, they are right on Century Blvd. and they have been there for decades.

right2bright on December 10, 2010 at 12:35 PM

Then you don’t know what you are talking about….There are plenty of chain stores in South Central…one chain was even called the “Gelson’s of the ghetto”…

right2bright on December 10, 2010 at 12:33 PM

A few, true, but boy, they have a lock on the competition.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:35 PM

You just don’t want the “mess” of a McDonald’s type shoot-out, and you know it’s that bad. It’ll happen.

That’s what annoys me.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:14 PM

In fact, to even show how naive you are…it is the chains that know and have the resources to protect their employees and it’s the independents who are at the mercy of these thugs.

right2bright on December 10, 2010 at 12:37 PM

I lived in the burbs of LA for over 30 years. I also drove to this area for over 5 years as a volunteer. I loved that personal effort. And I never, ever once was attacked, btw.

I did park in front of the institution where they kept a camera eye, so my car wouldn’t get jacked.

But anyway, I know this area well. There are 7-11′s, a few fast foods, one grocery store, and not much else.

It’s just a high-crime area, so you wouldn’t even want to move in there unless you thought you could overcome to the loss-ratio.

That rather bothers me. How many chicken eggs does it take to overcome regular hold-ups?

Anyway, I don’t think this is really about diet. I think it’s about the loss ratio of big chains.

I still say…….truck foods are the solution. The real issue is the gangs, the influx of Central American gangs, which are horribly aggressive.

It truly is an area that everyone should suspend judgment upon for awhile.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:42 PM

They’ve banned new stand alone fast food restaurants but I’d be willing to bet good money they don’t have a good definition for ‘fast food’.

Is it literally just the time it takes for the food to come out? So, if you make healthy food but you do it quickly, are you ‘fast food’? If McDonald’s made sure it took 15 minutes to get the food to the customers, are they no longer ‘fast food’?

Is it the nutritional value of the food? Almost every restaurant has at least one thing on the menu that’s not very healthy (they’re usually called desserts!), so, it doesn’t seem to be the case that it could be any unhealthy food that qualifies you as ‘fast food’. Perhaps it’s a certain percentage of the menu….If X% of the items on the menu are ‘unhealthy’ you are ‘fast food’. What if you run a soul food restaurant. It’s a nice, sit-down establishment but nothing on the menu is that healthy. Are you fast food?

Did they just make a list of well-known fast food chains and say that those were prohibited? Are they allowed to make laws that only target certain establishments?

Is ‘fast food’ like ‘porn’. You can’t define it but you know it when you see it?

Should our politicians be banning things that they can’t define?

JadeNYU on December 10, 2010 at 12:43 PM

A few, true, but boy, they have a lock on the competition.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:35 PM

Then don’t make false statements, the “lock” is because they have been there for years, have the prime locations, and they have learned how to “defend”. Along with that is the new small chains that specialize in ethnic foods, since the ethnic diversity in the area around South Central has changed and is changing….Black/Hispanic/Asian, none of them demand “major” chains, but more regional type stores.
Let’s see them keep a Popeyes out of the area, since that markets mainly to the black ethnic, and McDonalds has had a program for years encouraging and helping minority ownership.
This will backfire…Magic Johnson brought Starbuck’s to the inner city…

right2bright on December 10, 2010 at 12:44 PM

This line in the article:

“Give a grocery store and a housing combination a chance to come in,” Perry said.

Followed later by this:

The city council also discussed the possible addition of a Fresh & Easy grocery store at 54th Street and Crenshaw Boulevard.

However, there are zoning concerns for the area that may stop the store from ever being built.

struck me as very funny.

They want to give grocery stores a chance so they ban new stand-alone fast food restaurants. However, a grocery store chain that wants to come into the area is in danger of not being built because of the very zoning laws that the council itself is responsible for.

Perhaps they should give grocery stores a chance by getting out of the way and actually allowing them to be built!

JadeNYU on December 10, 2010 at 12:46 PM

As for the other “sub-issue” in this thread?

I really don’t have to discuss it further.

It will, obviously, happen again in probably the near future.

That’s really a given.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:46 PM

I suppose the available pool of possible candidates for office is simply a reflection of CA’s out look on life. Things will never change since they have only each other to choose from. lol

jeanie on December 10, 2010 at 12:47 PM

Actually, as someone said, there are national grocery store chains in this area now.

And they get held up regularly. It’s dangerous to work there.

Every business with any sign of success is dangerous for workers.

This is a drug-infested area.

It’s absolutely lethal.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:48 PM

We’re really discussing inner-city ghetto stuff. It’s questionable what this councilperson’s real motives were.

I don’t think it was about diet, though.

I know this area. It is highly dangerous. It’s not about diet.

I do think diet backed by the WH gave this councilperson a platform.

But I think the real issue is the violence.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:51 PM

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:48 PM

Still talking nonsense to yourself I see. Whatever happened to your boyfriend Liam?

Knucklehead on December 10, 2010 at 12:51 PM

But anyway, I know this area well. There are 7-11′s, a few fast foods, one grocery store, and not much else.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:42 PM

Then you don’t know the area…you missed one little small item on your radar….USC, with about 40,000 students and faculty, along with the Coliseum, so besides that and the Hilton, several chains, eatery’s, and one of the busiest and nicest grocery stores in the U.S. 32nd Street, owned by Morey Nortrica for the past 40 years…yeah, it’s a real desert.
Gee, you are a real expert in the area…
The Hilton, several chains, and one of the busiest and nicest grocery stores, 32nd Street Market, owned by Morey Nortica.

right2bright on December 10, 2010 at 12:52 PM

This is a drug-infested area.

It’s absolutely lethal.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:48 PM

You don’t know what you are talking about…sit down and read and learn…

right2bright on December 10, 2010 at 12:53 PM

I still say…….truck foods are the solution. The real issue is the gangs, the influx of Central American gangs, which are horribly aggressive.

Could be. Entrepreneurs will do it if it is. The city still does not have a right to ban brick and mortar fast food joints or any other category of business.

It truly is an area that everyone should suspend judgment upon for awhile.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:42 PM

The area you describe does not sound the least bit unique. In fact, if there are still any businesses functioning there, it’s not the bottom of the barrel. But the degree of degeneracy in any particular neighborhood does not change the fact that municipalities should not be attempting to dictate what type of restaurant should be forbidden or mandated.

forest on December 10, 2010 at 12:55 PM

This action is purely a class warfare…nothing else.
As long as they keep the black society seperated, and on the plantation, they will have their vote.
But give them opportunities, a steady job, and a high percentage moves towards conservative values.

right2bright on December 10, 2010 at 12:56 PM

Then don’t make false statements, the “lock” is because they have been there for years, have the prime locations, and they have learned how to “defend”. Along with that is the new small chains that specialize in ethnic foods, since the ethnic diversity in the area around South Central has changed and is changing….Black/Hispanic/Asian, none of them demand “major” chains, but more regional type stores.
Let’s see them keep a Popeyes out of the area, since that markets mainly to the black ethnic, and McDonalds has had a program for years encouraging and helping minority ownership.
This will backfire…Magic Johnson brought Starbuck’s to the inner city…

right2bright on December 10, 2010 at 12:44 PM

I agree.

I do think it was a losing plan.

But then again, I remain amazed that even the SF mayor lost his veto about Happy Meals.

Seriously, I think this is about safety versus rebuilding the community.

I think this jerk is all about keeping that area a black hole of businesses.

I think the more businesses, the better.

But then, as I say, I drove to this area for 5 years. There’s nothing like hitting one 7-11 and then, that’s it.

You enter into the bowels of LA.

It’s honestly pretty freaky stuff.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:56 PM

As usual, you have your “Asian Girls” confused with your nonstop babbling.

Knucklehead on December 10, 2010 at 12:18 PM

You hit the nail on the head! She knows a little about everything!

theaddora on December 10, 2010 at 12:59 PM

area you describe does not sound the least bit unique. In fact, if there are still any businesses functioning there, it’s not the bottom of the barrel. But the degree of degeneracy in any particular neighborhood does not change the fact that municipalities should not be attempting to dictate what type of restaurant should be forbidden or mandated.

forest on December 10, 2010 at 12:55 PM

Here is the question. LA is NOT Detroit. That is a city completely devastated by ghettos.

LA is different. That’s a city that is a real mix. There are segments that are actually growing, thriving, etc.

It’s just different.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 1:00 PM

As usual, you have your “Asian Girls” confused with your nonstop babbling.

Knucklehead on December 10, 2010 at 12:18 PM

You hit the nail on the head! She knows a little about everything!

theaddora on December 10, 2010 at 12:59 PM

Ann knows little about anything…and she’s confusing AsianGirlInTights with Aslan’s Girl. Two different posters who are nothing alike.

ladyingray on December 10, 2010 at 1:05 PM

Really? What thread was that?

AsianGirlInTights on December 10, 2010 at 11:58 AM

I think the dingbat means jenfidel and garywhoeverthehell.Hardly “everyone”.

katy the mean old lady on December 10, 2010 at 1:05 PM

As for the other “sub-issue” in this thread?

I really don’t have to discuss it further.

It will, obviously, happen again in probably the near future.

That’s really a given.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:46 PM

It never happened in the first place. You’re just confused, as usual.

AsianGirlInTights on December 10, 2010 at 1:05 PM

Seriously, I think this is about safety versus rebuilding the community.

I think this jerk is all about keeping that area a black hole of businesses.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:56 PM

WTH? What does this even mean?

ladyingray on December 10, 2010 at 1:07 PM

Here is the question. LA is NOT Detroit. That is a city completely devastated by ghettos.

LA is different. That’s a city that is a real mix. There are segments that are actually growing, thriving, etc.

It’s just different.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 1:00 PM

I was actually thinking of Philly, which does have abandoned areas moving into urban meadows, but also areas like West Philly and Frankford which are more like what you describe.

But so what? No matter the condition of a particular neighborhood, it doesn’t give the idiots in city hall who helped to create the problem to revoke private property rights.

forest on December 10, 2010 at 1:12 PM

So when will Alice Waters (Chez Panise owner and locavore evangelist) or Wolfgang Puck be opening up joint with organic, locally-grown, gluten-free portobella mushroom burgers and grilled, free-range chicken sandwiches with price points near McDonald’s? Or In-n-Out burger. Actually, Wolfgang Puck has a fast-casual “Wolfgang Puck Express” chain serving pizza, so I guess he’s outlawed to.

kd6rxl on December 10, 2010 at 1:16 PM

Isn’t this a rather transparent attempt to ensure windfall profits for those who already operate fast-food outlets in this area? Dare I wonder whose lobbyists are paying the local pols to push this?

materialist on December 10, 2010 at 1:21 PM

Perhaps the city council should consider giving Whole Foods (aka Whole Paycheck) a fat subsidy to open a store in South Central LA. That is, if they and the local leftist community organizers can forgive the fact that it is a big, proftable corporation and the CEO very publicly opposed the Obamamessiah’s health care schemes.

kd6rxl on December 10, 2010 at 1:21 PM

I think they are talking about ‘Aslan’s Girl’. Ann is not bright, remember?

ladyingray on December 10, 2010 at 12:20 PM

You’re correct-It was Aslan’s Girl and it was on one of the Palin threads.
She’s a pretty cool cat actually.

annoyinglittletwerp on December 10, 2010 at 1:45 PM

It bans new stores, vastly increasing the value of existing ones.

Akzed on December 10, 2010 at 1:53 PM

Ask all your African Americans to Google Margaret Sanger, weeds and Eugenics.


The Progressive Ruling Class thinks the poor (and blacks in particular) are weeds!!

PappyD61 on December 10, 2010 at 1:53 PM

Isn’t this a rather transparent attempt to ensure windfall profits for those who already operate fast-food outlets in this area? Dare I wonder whose lobbyists are paying the local pols to push this?

materialist on December 10, 2010 at 1:21 PM

No doubt, Magic Johnson has his fingers into most every pot in the inner city.
But this area is different, with USC and the 40,000 students (upscale private college) there is a lot of businesses in that area that cater to the students and the faculty.
I have no idea where Annin gets that there is not much else there. I had a business just two miles from Exposition Park for ten years. Almost all the fast foods are owned by minorities, but the new stores would almost have to be corporate owned because of the added expense and insurance of doing business in that area.

right2bright on December 10, 2010 at 1:54 PM

When Trader Joes moves into South Central, the area will have arrived. Check their locations map. Still expanding.

Didn’t I see that Gelson’s is closing three of four locations?

Caststeel on December 10, 2010 at 1:59 PM

The second city to ban food while claiming to not ban food.

Or something. Yeah, this is what liberalism is all about – control and misery.

http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-spokane/los-angeles-places-ban-on-new-fast-food-restaurants

jdawg on December 10, 2010 at 2:17 PM

When Trader Joes moves into South Central, the area will have arrived. Check their locations map. Still expanding.

Didn’t I see that Gelson’s is closing three of four locations?

Caststeel on December 10, 2010 at 1:59 PM

That’s a good standard, we can’t even get them here in Wilmington, NC.
Gelson’s is in trouble a quite a few of their stores…Whole Foods and others have put a lot of pressure on them.

right2bright on December 10, 2010 at 2:20 PM

Yeah, open up some Farmer’s Markets and some Whole Food outlets.

Maybe some Hippie-Stlye Co-Op’s

And watch the food rot.

Opposite Day on December 10, 2010 at 2:26 PM

The voters of California get the government they deserve.

rollthedice on December 10, 2010 at 3:50 PM

Personally, I refer to them as the Los Angeles City Clowncil.

13% unemployment and this is what our city leaders are concerning themselves with.

No matter …she’ll be reelected next year along with all the other bozos.

Voters in this town are incredibly disconnected, uniformed or just downright lazy.

The Ugly American on December 10, 2010 at 3:54 PM

If a store doesn’t want to open, they won’t.
If this place has bad neighborhoods (I confess, IDK) then what biz would want to put up with what comes with that.
I watched, through my friends that still live there, Columbus, OH bcm a PIT.
Businesses started pulling out & leaving bcs of crime.
That place is a huge dump now.

Badger40 on December 10, 2010 at 3:59 PM

From a press release in Planet Bizarro Daily News:
Safeway announces plan to build worlds largest grocery store in South Los Angeles. A spokesman for the company said the move was in direct response to the ban on new fast food restaurants in the area. When asked if Safeway thought the store could survive in that area, the spokesperson said “We don’t know. All of our modelling suggests we’ll never make a dime of profit, even if the store is open for 50 years. But we’re looking forward to being able to provide healthy food choices to the eating public in that area.”

BobMbx on December 10, 2010 at 4:00 PM

What about a ban on new liquor stores?

Lottery machines?

Sidewalk crack stores?

Suggestive music (violence/sex/racism)?

Carrying more than 1 loaded firearm or 5 rounds of ammuntion (gotta start small…a total ban would be racist, no, unconstitutional..yeah thats it)?

More than 2 children from different fathers?

They must think that if they control the fries, it’ll improve. That’s why its so bad in SoCal.

BobMbx on December 10, 2010 at 4:06 PM

BTW …for anyone living in District 10 …Althea Shaw is now officially a candidate for city council.

She’ll be running against career-politician Herb Wesson next spring.

The Ugly American on December 10, 2010 at 4:12 PM

If Olive Garden could make a profit in South LA, they’d already be there.

Well, that, and the getting-shot-by-thugs thing.

Squiggy on December 10, 2010 at 4:13 PM

This is a drug-infested area.

It’s absolutely lethal.

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:48 PM

You don’t know what you are talking about…sit down and read and learn…

right2bright on December 10, 2010 at 12:53 PM

Oh please. I’m from L.A., and Ann is totally correct.

Shambhala on December 10, 2010 at 4:22 PM

d guess Perry will be in the running for a Reason TV Nanny of the Month.

And, unfortunately, she’ll undoubtedly win re-election time and time again.

Midas on December 10, 2010 at 4:57 PM

jobs, south LA don’t need no steenkin jobs…….or food either apparently………

Hmmmm now if they’d just ban electricity and running water it would be a utopian vegan dimocRAT PARADISE……..

sheesh……what could go wrong….?

and you KNOW the vast majority voted for the morons doing this to them…….consequences and karma……..

B….E….A…..utiful.

RealMc on December 10, 2010 at 5:01 PM

Just wait until welfare queens with a herd of kids from gummint subsidized recreational breeding realize this means sometimes having to raise a finger and cook to feed those rug rats and then it will hit the fan. An Inconvenient Skillet.

viking01 on December 10, 2010 at 5:20 PM

The sooner those districts starve themselves the better. Nothing but a waste of resources.

Ronnie on December 10, 2010 at 5:23 PM

“People don’t need to be told what to eat or what they want to eat. To me, it’s not right”

Or be told which diswasher detergent they’re allowed to manufacture and purchase.

Or be told which light bult they’re allowed to manufacture and purchase.

I’ve had it with these nannies. None. Of. Your. Business.

winoceros on December 10, 2010 at 5:35 PM

viking01 on December 10, 2010 at 5:20 PM

You might be onto something there. Conservative answer to banning restaurants: Opening free home economics classes to youth in a community, and teach them how to cook their own food.
Followed up by service to Meals on Wheels or a soup kitchen.

winoceros on December 10, 2010 at 5:36 PM

You voted her in, folks!

Enjoy! :)

RedNewEnglander on December 10, 2010 at 5:40 PM

When asked if Safeway thought the store could survive in that area, the spokesperson said “We don’t know. All of our modelling suggests we’ll never make a dime of profit, even if the store is open for 50 years. But we’re looking forward to being able to provide healthy food choices to the eating public in that area.”

BobMbx on December 10, 2010 at 4:00 PM

If I shopped at Safeway, I would stop. Why the hell would I want to subsidize this store?

ladyingray on December 10, 2010 at 5:51 PM

As Jonathan Edwards put it so well:

He can’t even run his own life, be damned if he’ll run mine, Sunshine.
The Monster on December 10, 2010 at 10:45 AM

For the wholestory behind the song, and the song:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyTJqn7GT5s

odat on December 10, 2010 at 5:52 PM

AnninCA on December 10, 2010 at 12:33 PM

I agree with you on this. Its not a national issue its local. I get down that-away (Crenshaw) from time to time. The fastfood restuarants attract the gangs. The bus stops can be bad too at times. The police can’t be everywhere, just too costly. Its a war zone.

jbh45 on December 10, 2010 at 5:56 PM

right2bright on December 10, 2010 at 2:20 PM

I think south LA has its crime and violent crime at that, but it can happen anywhere. Like at the USC – UCLA game last week.

jbh45 on December 10, 2010 at 6:09 PM

Food Desert Federal Subsidy coming from Mrs. DOTUS in 5…..4…..3….

Clearly Food is a right and really shouldn’t the poor have Organic Artisan breads available thru Federal Subsidy? I mean can’t the “Rich” afford this?

PappyD61 on December 10, 2010 at 6:17 PM

Keep voting democrat, minorities.

SouthernGent on December 10, 2010 at 7:29 PM

Maybe they can “Section 8″ eating establishments and the city or county will pay an entrepreneur above market value to open an eatery. ‘Bout as logical as anything else the pathetic L. A. City Council and L. A. County Board of Supervisors proposes. Is there no one left in L. A. government with a brain?

Mae on December 10, 2010 at 8:10 PM

The suggestion that this is about anything other than using food (and business) as a tool of social engineering is just plain silly, even by the standard measurement of silliness used for the person making the suggestion.

If even the politicians responsible aren’t making any “It’s to protect the businesses from TEH GANGS!!eleventyone!!1!” claims, it’s pretty safe to say that saving business wasn’t their motivation.

Besides, isn’t a lack of opportunity supposed to be the primary motivation to join a gang? By that logic, having tons of minimum wage jobs available– like those provided by fast food restaurants– would be the best possible solution to ending gang control over an area.

It’s also worth mentioning that Safeway employees, unlike fast food workers, are unionized. Which goes a long way toward explaining the company’s eagerness to take a loss in order to accomplish a little bit of social engineering.

RachDubya on December 10, 2010 at 8:47 PM

LA’s fried chickens are coming home to roost.

bitsy on December 11, 2010 at 12:33 AM

We’re from the Government: No cheeseburger for you! Now shut up and eat your tofu…

TN Mom on December 11, 2010 at 7:57 AM

RachDubya on December 10, 2010 at 8:47 PM

Excellent!

ladyingray on December 11, 2010 at 9:28 AM

This does nothing to encourage salad bars to open in S. L.A… It’s an attempt to look like they’re doing something for the people/children… and it is a theft of freedom in the process. That is all.
-

RalphyBoy on December 11, 2010 at 10:45 AM

“This is not an attempt to control what food people put in their mouths,”

This plan has nothing to do with controlling what people put in their mouths,it’s the citizens own faults for electing idiots. This moron city councilwoman thinks her district doesn’t look like beverly hills because of racism. Racist business owners who only put harmful businesses in her district. People like her, and they go all the way to the white house, think they can just make laws and the entire world changes. They have no concept of human nature, economics or sociology (honest sociology not the stupid, agenda influenced stuff taught in colleges now).

peacenprosperity on December 11, 2010 at 11:31 AM

Honestly, living in southern California is a constant “WTF” anytime you turn on the news or read the paper.

Of all communities in L.A. county, “south-central” (laugh my ass off every-time some politically correct dope calls it “South L.A.”) needs all the national businesses it can get. They bring jobs and benefits to a group that needs them badly.

Jan Perry is a well known liberal ding-bat adored by the L.A. Times (that should tell you all you need to know).

This is a true pity for two reasons:

1. These idiots are now legislating our diets and this sets an unneeded precedent.

2. The loss of jobs with benefits in south-central L.A.

Tim_CA on December 11, 2010 at 6:28 PM

““People don’t need to be told what to eat or what they want to eat. To me, it’s not right, especially with employment right now,” said South L.A. resident Joel Rodriguez.”

So Joel, who do you expect to pay for your healthcare? Well, why shouldn’t the people paying for your healthcare get to determine your diet? Oh, and don’t be surprised when the next step is mandatory morning jogs. As long as you want me, via the government, to pay for your healthcare, I’m all in favor of the government controlling your diet.

Over50 on December 12, 2010 at 12:54 PM

Comment pages: 1 2