3 reasons why allowing food trucks to operate in residential areas is a bad idea

Good news for food truck lovers. Mobile vendors could soon be allowed to operate in private residential areas across Arizona.

The bad news? Arizonans – whether they like food trucks or not – could be stuck with a lot of them in their neighborhoods.

Don’t get me wrong. I love food trucks, and many Arizonans do, too. They aren’t just taco stands on street corners but a growing industry that serves all sorts of delicacies.

However, before you say this is a good idea, consider these three things:

1.   Lawmakers shouldn't make laws for their own benefit

State Rep. Kevin Payne’s House Bill 2636 is on the brink of becoming law, allowing food vendors to operate on private property in residential areas.

Payne owns K Star BBQ food truck, which means the lawmaker is attempting to change the law for his own financial gain. How is this OK?

Under HB 2636, vendors must get written agreement from the property owner, not serve “members of the general public” and can’t operate on his or her own property.

The House green-lighted the bill on a 35-25 vote, and the legislation is now being considered in the Senate. There is still time to kill it – if for no other reason than no lawmaker should push laws for his own financial gain.

Payne didn’t return a call Monday. But he has said that attorneys for the House determined he didn't have a conflict when he pushed HB 2321 last year to cut government regulations on food trucks. That legislation passed.

It all reminds me of Rep. Eddie Farnsworth, the Gilbert Republican who pocketed millions of taxpayer dollars through his charter schools but saw no conflict to abstain on votes relating to charter schools.

C’mon, folks. It may be legal for lawmakers to sponsor and vote on bills that benefit their pocketbooks, but that doesn’t make it morally or ethically right.

2.   Food truck clustering could create neighborhood issues

Payne’s legislation could potentially disrupt an industry with an already rocky history. Cities across Arizona have long struggled to regulate food trucks, from where they're permitted to park and the hours they can do business to setting a minimal distance from restaurants that vendors are allowed to set up shop.  

Activist Salvador Reza is balking at the bill, saying it would override regulations that some cities impose to avoid clustering of the mobile businesses.

“It could create a chaos among vendors,’’ said Reza, speaking on behalf of Mobile Food Vendors, a group of about 60 food truck and hot-dog cart owners. “In the end, everyone will lose.”

Reza further argues that deregulation of clustering in residential areas could create traffic problems – for instance, when food trucks converge near busy street corners.

He notes that while free enterprise in general should be allowed to flourish, “why make a special category for food trucks and open up the possibility for abuse and neighborhood discontent?” 

3.   Has everyone forgotten the sex assault that led to regulations?

Payne’s HB 2636 strips away the fingerprinting requirement that cities can require of employees in the food-vending industry.

This poses a big problem. Payne and his legislative colleagues apparently have forgotten the fingerprint rule stems from a 2004 kidnapping, rape and impregnation of a 9-year-old girl by an ice-cream truck driver in Phoenix. State law allows cities and towns to require fingerprints. Why take any chances?

In the end, Payne’s mission seems nothing more than a desire to loosen government regulations to benefit his private business. That's wrong, and he should know it.

Elvia Díaz is an editorial columnist for The Republic and azcentral. Reach her at 602-444-8606 or elvia.diaz@arizonarepublic.com. Follow her on Twitter, @elviadiaz1.