Not so fast, please: so fast-food franchise owners pleaded last week before county legislators weighing adoption of a calorie labeling law that would add numerical heft to menus and menu boards at 604 chain restaurants in Westchester.
Legislators held off voting until November on the measure, which follows similar laws adopted by the cities of New York, Seattle and San Francisco and the state of California.
The proposed law, temporarily shelved a year ago after a legal challenge by the New York State Restaurant Association (NYSRA) to the New York City law after which this one was modeled, also had its supporters at last week”™s public hearing of the county Board of Legislators. Representatives from the American Cancer Society, Healthy Kids in Northern Westchester and New York State Healthy Eating and Physical Activity Alliance urged its adoption not as “a magic bullet” but an important measure in the prevention of adult and child obesity and disease. Â Â Â Â Â Â
The labeling law will not usher in “the nanny state” to Westchester, said Dr. Douglas G. Aspros, president of the Westchester County Board of Health. “Providing nutritional information doesn”™t limit anybody”™s choice.” For obesity, “The law isn”™t going to solve the problem but it”™s one small step in the right direction,” the White Plains veterinarian said.
Chains only
Unlike the county”™s similarly health-motivated ban on trans fat cooking oils in restaurants that took effect in January, the law would apply only to chain-food service establishments with 15 or more locations around the world. They make up one-fifth of the approximately 3,000 licensed food service operations in the county.
Those franchises would be required to list calorie values beside each food and beverage item on menus and menu boards. The listings can be rounded to the nearest 10 calories for items of more than 50 calories and to the nearest five calories for items under 50 calories. Violators of the law, which would take effect six months after its adoption, could be fined up to $1,000 for each violation.
Legislators were urged to move cautiously on any menu labeling law by owners of Auntie Anne”™s, Dunkin”™ Donuts, KFC, McDonald”™s and Wendy”™s franchises in the county and corporate representatives from McDonald”™s; ADF Cos., the Fairfield, N.J., operator of Taco Bell, Pizza Hut and KFC restaurants employing 150 workers in Westchester; and Yum Brands Inc., the Louisville, Ky., company whose restaurant brands include Taco Bell, Pizza Hut and KFC.
A state restaurant association official also weighed in, cautioning legislators that NYSRA”™s appeal of a judge”™s decision to allow New York City to implement its labeling law still is pending in a federal court.
Drive away business?
Arthur Windram, whose Windram Enterprises Inc. in Pawling owns four KFC franchises in Westchester, said the law has to be more specific in its labeling provisions. “If we”™re going to spend this kind of thousands of dollars for our restaurants, we want to do it the right way,” he said. “We don”™t want to have to change it a year from now.”
Several franchise owners said their restaurant chains already provide nutritional information that includes calorie counts in their stores and online. Advocates of menu labeling, however, have said that information often is not prominently displayed and is overlooked by customers.
In a study recently published in the American Journal of Public Health, researchers found only 4 percent of patrons at nearly 300 New York City restaurants in 11 fast-food chains reported seeing calorie information provided at the site. At Subway shops, where the information was most conspicuously posted on deli cases near the register, customers who saw the listings purchased an average of 52 fewer calories than those who did not.
Victoria Howard, owner of a Wendy”™s restaurant in Cortlandt Manor, told lawmakers she voluntarily posts calorie information on a two-and-a-half-foot by one-and-a-half-foot poster at the point of purchase. She questioned why a small-business owner like her should be required to specifically post that on the menu board and said she was concerned about the added expense in the current economy. Changing menu boards can cost them from hundreds to thousands of dollars, franchise owners said.
Howard and others said the calorie-posting mandate should not apply to menu boards at drive-through lanes, where numbers-studying customers can hold up and drive away business. California in its new labeling law exempts drive-throughs. Â
”˜Get it right once”™
A calorie-labeling supporter, Nancy Huehnergarth, director of the New York State Healthy Eating and Physical Activity Alliance, cited a research finding that drive-throughs account for 65 percent of fast-food sales.
Susanne Streb, government relations director for McDonald”™s East Division, asked legislators to either hold off voting on the proposed law for one year or delay implementing it until 2011. Streb said McDonald”™s supports recently introduced federal legislation, the Labeling Education and Nutrition (LEAN) Act, that would apply a uniform calorie labeling standard to all chain restaurants and grocery stores.
“There”™s nobody against having calories on the menu board,” Paul Santoro, a Dunkin”™ Donuts franchise owner in the town of Greenburgh, said outside the hearing. “All we”™re saying is get it right once so we don”™t have to do it again.”
At Dunkin”™ Donuts, “Our menu board is the same nationally,” he said. “But if every town and village has a different way of listing the calorie count, how are we going to standardize that?
We can get economies of scale if there”™s one solution to the problem instead of 50 solutions or possibly 100 solutions.”
Santoro said it costs him $3,000 to change a store”™s menu board. “Today we”™re all trying to keep costs to a minimum. Nobody wants to spend money in (a) bad economy. And it”™s hard to get financing,” he said.
County Legislator Judith A. Myers, D-Larchmont, the law”™s sponsor, said the county should act now ahead of any federal legislation. “I don”™t think we”™ll help anybody by holding off,” she said. “I”™m not sure this is top of the mind for the federal government. They”™ve got bigger fish to fry right now.”
