N.Y. Lawmaker Seeks to Ban Salt in Restaurants

Paul Frumkin reports at Nation’s Restaurant News that in an effort to reduce the amount of sodium in consumers’ diets, New York Assemblyman Felix Ortiz has introduced a bill that would ban the use of salt in the preparation of restaurant food across the state.

Ortiz, a Democrat and a longtime proponent of menu labeling, said in his written introduction to the salt ban bill that it would give more control to restaurant customers by allowing them to add salt to their own meals after they have been prepared.

“In this way, consumers have more control over the amount of sodium they intake, and are given the option to exercise healthier diets and healthier lifestyles,” Ortiz said.

Ortiz cited a report by the World Health Organization showing that at least three-quarters of the sodium consumed in the United States comes from prepared or restaurant foods.

“Studies have also proven that lowering the amount of salt people eat, even by small amounts, could reduce cases of heart disease, stroke, and heart attacks as much as reductions in smoking, obesity, and cholesterol levels,” he said.

Ortiz did not return calls for further comment by press time.

Long an advocate of reducing the amount of sodium in the American diet, Michael Jacobson of the Center for Science in the Public Interest did not endorse Ortiz’s proposal.

“Limiting sodium requires more a scalpel than a meat axe,” Jacobson said. “New York City’s proposed targets or strict limits for different categories of food makes more sense. The upcoming report from the Institute of Medicine likely will set the boundaries for debate and provide the Food and Drug Administration with a basis for mounting a national initiative.”

New York City’s health department in January introduced the National Salt Reduction Initiative, a voluntary measure that seeks to cut the levels of sodium in restaurant and packaged foods by 20 percent over the next five years.

The initiative is a partnership between New York City’s Board of Health, 17 national health organizations and 26 cities, including Los Angeles and Seattle.

Melissa Fleischut, vice president of the New York State Restaurant Association in Albany, said Ortiz “doesn’t seem to have all the facts about how salt is used in restaurants and how it is necessary to food preparation.”

“We’ll have to schedule talks with him and try to explain,” she added.

Ortiz’s bill has two sponsors so far: Margaret Markey and N. Nick Perry, both Democrats. There is no companion bill in the Senate currently.

Read more: Nation’s Restaurant News

Gov’t Intervention a Top Industry Concern

Nation’s Restaurant News reports that the increase of government legislation targeting the foodservice industry, on the federal, state and local levels, is one of the largest challenges restaurateurs face, industry executives and operators said Monday during the International Restaurant & Foodservice Show of New York.

Jon Luther, chairman of Canton, Mass.-based Dunkin Brands Inc., the parent to Dunkin Donuts and Baskin-Robbins, said the intrusion of government through such proposed legislative measures as menu labeling, card check and health care reform, would have the most profound effect on the industry’s future cost of doing business.

“Government, that’s the greatest single threat we have,” Luther said Monday during a panel discussion at the New York State Restaurant Association’s trade show. “Every time something happens, it affects the bottom line.”

Luther added that although some of the plans making their way through the Obama administration “are well thought out,” more needs to be done to ensure the success of business “for the long term.”

He told attendees a story about the late Roberto Goizueta, who, he said was “one of the most wonderful CEOs” in the foodservice industry. “The venerable CEO of Coca-Cola,” Luther mused, “was once asked why [the company had] a huge government relations office overlooking the White House. He said, ‘government could put me out of business.’”
Rick Sampson, chief executive of the New York State Restaurant Association, also weighed in on the subject of increased legislation during a presentation on environmentally friendly restaurant initiatives within the New York restaurant community.
“It’s coming,” he said. “We’re already starting to see [mandated] deposits and sales tax on bottled water. You will be paying higher taxes, fees and on and on. The last thing we want is mandates on how to run our business.”
He suggested that restaurants that work to initiate green programs now will get ahead of the legislation curve, as well as manage to do something good for the environment.

Michael Oshman, executive director of the Green Restaurant Association, the Boston-based nonprofit group that assists operators going green through the association’s certification program, agreed with Sampson, saying that initiating green practices before many become law is the smartest way to circumvent future problems.

“California is legislating left and right,” he said. “The question is, do you want to [make changes] now when you can or wait until 2013 when you have to do it? I don’t know of any restaurant [company] that wants to be mandated to by government.”

NYSRA formed a partnership last year with the GRA to increase eco-friendliness among industry members. According to Oshman, there are 120 restaurants in New York that have either obtained or maintained green restaurant certification since the program began and another 40 to 50 locations are on deck. He said there are a total of 650 restaurants throughout the United States that have so far been GRA certified.

Read more: Nation’s Restaurant News

Massachusetts Bill Would Force Paid Sick Leave for Everyone

Amanda Fakhreddine of the Patriot Ledger writes that in order to stay in business in the current economic climate, Richard Meier, owner of Meier & Associates, has had to make drastic cutbacks.

Now, Meier, whose company is based in Abington, has another worry – the Paid Sick Leave Act that’s being considered by the state Legislature.

“I like to give employees everything I can and keep them employed,” Meier said. “The Paid Sick Leave Act will make it that much more difficult.”

However, Mary Tillman, a Mattapan personal-care assistant, recalled a time when she was sick with pneumonia and still had to go to work. “By the time I got her bathed and dressed, I just had to lie on the floor and rest,” Tillman said of her patient.

The bill, which is being considered in the Legislature’s labor committee, would require that all employers offer paid sick leave to their employees. Employees would be able to earn one hour of paid sick leave for every 30 hours of work. The committee’s members are being polled this week to determine the level of support for the bill.

Sen. Patricia Jehlen and Rep. Kay Khan introduced the bill for the first time in 2005. The legislation died both that year and in 2007. However, the Massachusetts Paid Leave Coalition, which is made up of 60 organizations, is optimistic that it will be passed this time around.

Dan Gilbarg, a spokesman for the Brockton-based Coalition for Social Justice, said that more than half of Massachusetts workers do not get paid sick leave. “Working people recognize that it’s a benefit that should be part of any civilized society,” he said.

However, some small-business owners oppose the bill.

Bill Vernon, director of the Massachusetts chapter of the National Federation of Independent Business, said most small businesses have sick leave benefits that are tailored to their company. State mandates could require companies to cut their own benefits.

“I think the danger is the idea that the Massachusetts Legislature can determine what the benefits are for an employee,” said Vernon, who lives in Mansfield, “The employees will find out the hard way that because of this legislation, employers can’t afford to provide these other benefits.” Vernon said that the bill was “anti-business,” and that would make it difficult for small businesses to grow.

Philip Johnston, former chairman of the state’s Democratic Party and the president of the Johnston Associates public affairs firm in Boston, said that as a small business owner he thought the bill was much needed.

“It’s an outrage that working people are not covered when they are sick,” said Johnston, who conceded that the bill would impose a small extra cost to employers.

However, Meier, the business owner from Abington, is worried that the legislation might force him to close.

“I’m at the point where I don’t want to retire, but right now my expenses are slightly more than I’m taking in, and I’m only going to do be able to do it for a little while longer,” Meier said. “But when you add this all together, it’s a killer.”

State Builds an Express Lane for New Businesses

Sarah Shemkus of the Cape Cod Times writes if you are looking to start a business in Massachusetts? You could start at the Web site of the state’s office of Housing and Economic Development. A few clicks could take you to a page describing the regions of the commonwealth and the possible advantages of doing business in each.

Back up a few pages, and choose between links for venture capital, business financing, start-up funding and loans. Each of these choices offer a page with yet more choices: state programs, outside agencies, federal sites.

And you still haven’t even begun to investigate permitting or tax laws.

“It’s very confusing to figure out where you can go for help,” said state Senate President Therese Murray, D-Plymouth. “We need one-stop shopping for business in the commonwealth.”

So Murray and Sen. Karen Spilka, D-Framingham, have filed a bill that would create just such a system. And on the Cape, local stakeholders last week expressed optimism about the impact the proposed changes could have in the region.

“The approach they are taking makes a lot of sense,” said Spyro Mitrokostas, executive director of the Dennis Chamber of Commerce.

The bill will be discussed at a committee hearing in Boston on Tuesday.

The central element of the proposed legislation is a major reorganization of the complex network of offices, departments and agencies — 31 in all, Murray said — that currently provide business development and financing services in the state.

In the long-term, the proposed law would save money by eliminating redundant spending in agencies with overlapping mandates, Murray said. And it would increase both state and municipal revenues by bringing new businesses and jobs to Massachusetts.

The bill would create a system of regional economic development centers, which would each act as a central resource for advice and information about locating, financing and developing a business in the area. These centers would generally be independent nonprofit or private organizations which would contract with the state to provide business development services.

A regional agency, Murray said, would “know better what’s in their own region and what they can find for” prospective businesses.

Read more at: Cape Cod Times

Federal Legislative Initiatives

The recent election of Senator Scott Brown (R-MA) eliminated the Democrat’s hopes of a filibuster-proof majority.  In his first State of the Union speech, President Obama addressed the impact of Senator Brown’s election along with such crucial topics as health care reform, the economy, and jobs. Congress will attempt to pass a jobs bill and introduce immigration reform legislation shortly, so please keep your eyes out for updates. 

Health Care
As noted above, the outcome of the Massachusetts special election in January stripped the Senate of the 60 votes needed to pass its version health care reform. Senator Scott Brown was sworn in on February 4, which means that the options for Democratic leadership have been limited somewhat. While some members are hoping to pass the Senate bill in the House of Representatives and then work on a later “corrections” bill to appease those wishing to make changes, Congressional leadership has not yet ironed out its differences.

With all of the confusion surrounding the issue, President Obama has called for a health care summit to be held on February 25, intended to foster a bipartisan effort to get healthcare reform moving again. Obama’s leadership team has mentioned that the administration will introduce its own version of the legislation prior to the Summit and welcomes a Republican version as well. Republicans are calling on Congress and the President to start from scratch.

 
Jobs Bill
Last week, Senate Majority Leader Reid unveiled the first “jobs” bill. While seen as an “abuse of power” by some Republicans and not sufficiently far-reaching my others, Leader Reid is hoping to get the 60 votes needed to invoke cloture next week. The bill includes two significant provisions affecting franchisees:

•         Tax Holiday – A payroll tax holiday for employers hiring new workers and a tax credit for retaining newly hired Workers. Employers will not be required to pay the worker’s 6.2% Social Security payroll tax, up to the maximum social security taxable wage of $106,800, for the duration of 2010. There are no distinctions for company size and there is no limit on the amount of credit any one company can claim.

The bill also allows employers that retain newly hired employees for a continuous 52 weeks to                claim an additional non-refundable $1,000 tax credit on their 2011 return. In order to qualify for    the retention credit, the employee’s wage for the first 26 weeks of the period must equal at least 80% of the employee’s wage during the second 26 weeks.

Employers are eligible to claim these benefits for employees hired after February 3, 2010, but will still be required to pay the normal payroll taxes until the bill is enacted.
•         Small Business Expensing – For 2008 and 2009, the economic stimulus bill passed by Congress increased the maximum deduction from $125,000 to $250,000 and increased the level of the deduction’s phase-out from $500,000 to $800,000.  Extension of temporary increase for Section 179 small business expensing will continue through 2011.

State by State: Legislative Initiatives

Unemployment Tax
Florida – Florida’s nearly half a million employers are receiving large increases in their unemployment insurance taxes. State legislators are looking for ways to provide relief. House speaker Larry Cretul has called for the Legislature to fast track a bill to delay the tax increase. As of January 1, the minimum tax rose to $100.30 for an employee for 2010, up from $8.40 an employee. More than half of employers pay the minimum rate, according to the State Department of Revenue. The insolvent unemployment insurance trust is one factor; Florida’s Agency for Workforce Innovation has borrowed more than $1 billion from the U.S. Department of Labor to pay for unemployment benefits since last August.

Kentucky – Kentucky employers would gradually pay more in taxes to fix the state’s Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund — but not nearly as much as they would if the state continues borrowing to keep the beleaguered fund afloat. Jobless workers would generally receive slightly less in weekly benefits and would have to wait a short time before receiving the assistance, starting in 2012. Business and labor leaders embraced those concessions in jointly pushing legislation aimed at shoring up the trust fund — under increasing pressure as Kentucky’s unemployment rate mushroomed amid the nation’s worst economic downturn in decades. The bill, a product of a governor’s task force, cleared its first hurdle by winning bipartisan approval from the House Labor and Industry Committee.

Minnesota – With a record 240,000 people collecting jobless benefits in Minnesota, tax hikes to cover mounting costs of the unprecedented payouts are beginning to show up for employers and that bill is expected to keep growing for many years. This year, the increase amounts to $200 million. That will push total annual contributions from employers to jobless benefits to $1.1 billion. State officials anticipate similar increases over at least the next four years as the state grapples with an economy that creates few new jobs and taps the federal government for loans to cover the cost of issuing unemployment checks. The state’s trust fund is paying out more than it takes in, resulting in a deficit at the end of December of $286 million. By the end of 2010, the deficit is expected to sit at $800 million and double that by the end of 2012.

Hawaii – As anticipated, Gov. Linda Lingle proposed a big break in the unemployment insurance tax paid by Hawaii businesses. If approved by the Legislature, Lingle’s plan would allow employers to pay only 60 percent of the amount they were to pay in unemployment tax bills coming due this year. The governor said the plan would save businesses $497 million over the next four years. It would mean the average business would pay unemployment insurance tax of about $600 per year per employee, rather than the $1,000 that is required by the existing law. Businesses are now paying about $90 a year because of a temporary tax break that started in 2008.The Republican governor, who made her remarks during her final state-of-the-state address at the Capitol, urged lawmakers to pass unemployment legislation insurance before mid-March.

New Mexico – Businesses could pay $20 million in higher taxes under a proposal by Gov. Bill Richardson’s administration to shore up the program that provides unemployment benefits to jobless New Mexicans. The unemployment insurance trust fund will run out of money by next year, triggering an even larger tax increase for employers, if the Legislature and governor don’t agree on a rescue plan during the legislative session. The fund is being drained because of rising unemployment during the past year. About 75,000 New Mexicans were unemployed in November — an increase of about 31,000 from a year ago. The Department of Workforce Solutions outlined the administration’s unemployment tax proposal to a Senate committee. The agency recommends that employers pay higher contributions averaging 22 percent.

New Jersey – New Jersey businesses are facing a significant tax hike this summer if the federal government doesn’t help replenish the state’s unemployment fund, Gov. Chris Christie warned last week. New Jersey’s Unemployment Insurance Fund will be $1.6 billion in debt by March, according to Christie. Business taxes are automatically increased by law when the funds balance goes below a certain level as measured every March. The new Republican governor plans to ask the federal government to forgive loans that are keeping the fund solvent, but warned that there was no money in the state budget to stop the tax increase. In a worst-case scenario, employers could see an increase of up to $1,000 per employee in their unemployment tax starting July 1.

Rhode Island – Rhode Island employers saved more than $500 million in the state unemployment tax over the last decade or so. Those savings, the result of a change in state law, also left Rhode Island’s unemployment trust fund vulnerable to a downturn. The trust fund is now depleted, partly because of an increase in demand for jobless benefits amid a punishing recession and persistently high rates of unemployment. As a result, the trust fund has had to borrow more than $140 million so far from Uncle Sam to help pay benefits. And employers are on the hook for higher taxes at a time when they can ill-afford to pay.

Maryland – As the General Assembly launches straight into a fight over ways to keep the state’s unemployment insurance fund solvent, tax rates may skyrocket 50 percent over last year because of the strain that the recession has put on the unemployment fund. For coffers to recover the fund’s losses – caused by the drastic rise in unemployment, now 7.4 percent in Maryland, and the lack of $1.5 billion in taxable wages – the rates will go up for all employers statewide.

Kansas – Legislators questioned how new corporate tax rates are being calculated to raise $209 million for Kansas unemployment benefits. The state is automatically adjusting its tax rates because the Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund expects to run out of money by mid-February. The Department of Labor notified 69,500 businesses in mid-December; the changes took effect with the new year, and the first quarterly payments are due in April. Some businesses are upset by the increases and because they were notified only two weeks in advance of the changes
taking effect.

Paid Sick Leave
Milwaukee, Wisconsin – The future of Milwaukee’s sick leave law might hinge on the wording of a referendum question city voters approved in November 2008. The law requires workers get at least one hour of paid sick leave for every 30 hours worked in Milwaukee. Companies with fewer than 10 workers must offer at least five sick days, and larger companies must let employees accrue at least nine days. Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Thomas Cooper last year struck down the law as unconstitutional, ruling it is invalid because the paid sick days can be used to give recovery days to victims of domestic or sexual violence.

Maine – Maine business groups are lining up in opposition to a bill that would guarantee paid sick time in the state. The bill sponsored by Senate President Elizabeth “Libby” Mitchell received a hearing before the Labor Committee last month. It would provide earned sick leave of up to six paid days annually for workers in large businesses and three for those in smaller businesses. Mitchell is one of several Democrats running for governor. She calls the legislation an act to prevent the spread of H1N1, because it would enable people to stay home when they’re sick. Business groups oppose the bill, saying it imposes new costs while they’re reeling from the recession.

EEOC Compliance
Montana – The Montana Department of Labor and Industry is warning Montana businesses of a scam involving required workplace posters. The posters are available for free, but callers are phoning businesses in an attempt to sell them. “We are getting calls from businesses across the state who are being threatened by these companies that they will be fined unless they purchase updated employment posters from the company. That simply isn’t true,” state Labor Commissioner Keith Kelly said. Updated employment law posters required by federal law are available at Department of Labor and Industry Job Service offices across the state. These new posters include the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act addition to the Equal Employment Opportunity portion of the poster. The 17-inch-by-22-inch glossy poster is available at no cost to employers.

Job Creation
Maryland – Gov. Martin O’Malley’s proposed job-creation tax credit may have the support of several business associations, but some small business owners are saying it won’t help. The proposed legislation would offer a $3,000 tax credit to businesses that hire unemployed Marylanders. Employees would have to be receiving unemployment benefits or have exhausted their benefits within the past 12 months to qualify. Employers could claim the credit for each new employee, up to $250,000.The credit would apply only to employees hired between Jan. 1 and Dec. 31, 2010. The initiative, part of the jobs-creation package heralded in O’Malley’s State of the State address, is estimated to cost $20 million. The House bill and its Senate counterpart have received the support of the Restaurant Association of Maryland, the Greater Baltimore Committee and the Maryland Association of Nonprofit Organizations.

Immigration
Oklahoma – A federal appeals court panel upheld much of an injunction against Oklahoma’s tough anti-illegal immigrant law but said the state can now force public contractors to cross-check employee names against a government list of eligible workers. In a divided opinion, a three-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver ruled that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and several other pro-business groups had legal standing to challenge Oklahoma’s immigration law. The law sought to subject businesses that hire illegal immigrants to financial penalties, dictate who can and cannot be fired and require contractors to withhold taxes for workers without proper documentation. The case will now be returned to the U.S. District Court in Oklahoma City for a judge to decide whether a permanent injunction against the law should be issued.

Health Care
Kansas – Some Kansas lawmakers are pushing a state Constitutional Amendment to exempt Kansas should the U.S. Congress pass a requirement that all Americans have health insurance. The proposed amendment would say no law can require individuals or employers to participate in any health care system. Similar amendments have been proposed in many other states, including Missouri. U.S. Congressmen Todd Tiahrt and Jerry Moran attended a news conference in the Statehouse announcing the legislation’s introduction. Tiahrt predicted legislation like the proposed amendment could be the basis for legal challenges to any health care reform passed by Congress. To be added to the state constitution, the legislation must be passed by a two-thirds majority of the Kansas House and Senate and then be approved by voters next year.

State by State: Legislative Initiatives

Health Care
Georgia -  State legislators proposed an amendment to the state constitution, the “Health Care Freedom of Choice Constitutional Amendment” would allow residents to buy their own medical care and would prohibit anyone from facing punishment for not purchasing government-defined insurance. Should the general assembly pass the proposed legislation, voters statewide would need to approve the amendment. Fourteen other states – including Alabama, Ohio and South Carolina – have filed similar legislation.

Paid Sick Leave
New Hampshire – A House committee made a recommendation last week on a bill that would require employers to provide paid sick leave for their employees. The Labor, Industrial and Rehabilitative Services Committee has been working on the bill this fall. The bill was introduced last session but held over for more work. The full House votes on the measure will vote on the measure this month. The bill would require employers to provide up to 40 hours of paid sick leave in a calendar year to all full and part-time workers employed for at least six months. The bill would not limit companies from providing more sick leave. The paid leave would cover mental or physical illnesses, injuries, time to care for a family member, absence due to domestic or sexual assault or stalking.

Staten Island, New York – A City Council bill that would mandate paid sick days for all employees in the city is almost a lock to become law. Under the bill, those companies would be required to offer five paid sick days per year. Larger companies would be required to offer nine. Violations would result in a $1,000 fine. Councilman Simcha Felder (D-Brooklyn) has suggested the inclusion of a “hardship clause,” to allow businesses under marked financial duress possibly to be exempt or face lesser sick day requirements. The Council also could wait until Congress considers the Healthy Families Act, which seeks to mandate seven paid sick days per year for workers at businesses with 15 or more employees. San Francisco, Milwaukee and Washington, D.C., already mandate paid sick days. Though 15 states have considered similar legislation, none have enacted it.

Unemployment Tax
Nationwide- Rhode Island is one of 25 states that have borrowed a combined total of more than $26 billion so far from the federal government to help cover jobless benefits, U.S. Department of Labor figures show. And more states are preparing to obtain loans. The Labor Department projects total borrowing to more than triple, to $90 billion by late 2012. Meanwhile, 35 states will see some form of increase in state unemployment insurance tax this year, according to a recent survey by the National Association of State Workforce Agencies. About 25 states have increased their state unemployment insurance tax rates, the survey showed. More than 10 states have increased the amount of a worker’s wages to which the tax rate applies according to the survey. And some states have increased both the tax rate and the wage base, resulting in sharply higher taxes for employers.

Hawaii - There’s been a slight brightening of the picture for the state’s unemployment compensation fund, though employers are still facing a more than 1,000 percent jump in unemployment insurance tax rates this year. A recalculation of rates based on a newly released jobless rate forecast shows the fund balance won’t fall as much as originally expected. Because of this, the state may not have to borrow as much from the federal government to get through the next year and a half. But the recalculation doesn’t include better news for employers. The fund balance will still dip to a point that triggers a massive increase in unemployment insurance taxes levied on employers. The average annual rate by employers will spike from $90 to $1,070.That has the state continuing to work on modifications to unemployment fund law that will cut the amount employers will have to pay.

Florida - Sometime in the next few weeks businesses will get a bill for their 2010 unemployment compensation insurance. Rumors have circulated that the bills will be in the range of 200 to 1,200 percent increase. The additional cost almost guarantees many Florida businesses won’t be doing any hiring in 2010, and perhaps well beyond. The tax rate is rising to help fill the coffers of the state’s unemployment compensation trust fund. The trust fund has been decimated by the state’s near-record unemployment in 2009 — 11.9 percent in November, a 35-year high, with more than 1 million Floridians out of work, and the vast majority drawing unemployment checks. The problem is so acute that in late August, the state had to borrow approximately $680 million from the federal government to meet its unemployment trust fund obligations. That money must be paid back, and the Legislature has set up a mechanism for the tax rate increases to kick in automatically.

Immigration
Lancaster, California – Businesses operating in the city of Lancaster will be required to ensure that all new hires are eligible to work in the United States by using an Internet-based federal program to check the immigration and employment eligibility of potential workers. The free online program, called E-Verify, allows participating employers to use federal databases to compare information provided by job seekers with millions of records kept by the Social Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security. According to the Department of Homeland Security, more than 175,000 employers are enrolled in the program, which is compulsory for companies that contract with the federal government. In August, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted to explore the possibility of requiring future contractors to participate in E-Verify.

Colorado – Former U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo wants every Colorado business to verify that new hires are U.S. citizens. Tancredo filed a ballot proposal Friday that would force the 2011 Colorado legislature to pass a law requiring businesses to use a federal program to check the immigration status of all newly hired workers. The proposal is aimed for the 2010 ballot. The measure must pass a number of steps before Tancredo and supporters can begin circulating petitions to have it placed on the ballot.

Plastic Bag Tax
Washington, DC – Starting this week, retailers in Washington, DC, must charge a nickel for each plastic or paper bag a customer wants to use under the Anacostia River Clean Up and Protection Act of 2009. Under the Act, paper and plastic bags also must meet new requirements for disposable carryout bags. However, the city council did pass emergency legislation that gives businesses extra time to use up their 2009 plastic and paper bags. The mayor has not signed the bill yet, but the proposal would allow retailers to sell current plastic and paper bags until April 1, 2010. Also starting April 1, 2010, all retailers who sell food or alcohol must charge 5 cents for paper and plastic bag sold to customers.

Menu Labeling
Tennessee - Nashville’s lead public health official wants to delay an anti-obesity measure that requires restaurant chains to list calorie content on menus because a similar proposal is being considered at the federal level. The Metro Public Health Department’s board had passed a policy last year that would mandate all Davidson County restaurants with 15 or more locations across the country to post calorie data of every food item. The provision was set to take effect March 31. Dr. Bill Paul, director of the health agency, will ask the health board this week to defer the local measure, which had prompted concerns from local business owners, until Congress makes a final ruling on the health bill.

Maryland - Montgomery County Council members passed a measure requiring some restaurants to post calorie counts on menus and menu boards. The law, which was passed by an 8-1 vote, requires restaurants in the Maryland County with 20 or more outlets nationwide to post calorie counts alongside food items and provide additional nutritional information to customers upon request. The county health department estimates that about 640 restaurants in Montgomery County will have to comply. The law goes into effect July 1, 2010

Pennsylvania - In Philadelphia, chain restaurants must change their printed menus to list levels of fat, sodium and carbohydrates. The law went into effect on January 1st but restaurants have a grace period to comply. Calorie counts should be posted on menu boards by February 1st. Other information such as salt content will be required in printed menus by April 1st.

New Hampshire – The New Hampshire Commission on Prevention of Childhood Obesity issued 14 recommendations last month that it felt would increase the likelihood of fighting Childhood Obesity. The recommendations ranged from yearly BMI measurements for children to the adoption of healthier school lunches in public school cafeterias. Among the report was the recommendation to implement menu labeling in chain restaurants to ensure that nutritional information is made available at point of purchase, especially for children’s menus.

New Jersey – A New Jersey ‘Lame Duck’ session passed menu labeling last week. The legislation requires chain restaurants with 20 or more locations to post calories on the menu.  The legislation, as amended to mirror the Assembly version, includes proposes a local preemption clause (state uniformity), liability protection and a year-long implementation period (previously 6 months).

Delaware Moves to Require Menu Labeling

Paul  Frumkin at Nation’s Restaurant News reports that Delaware became the latest state to weigh in on the menu-labeling issue when the Senate passed a measure requiring that restaurants post nutrition data on menus. The bill now moves to the House.

Passed by a 15-5 vote, the measure, SB 81, would require chain restaurants with 20 or more locations nationwide to list the number of calories on menus and menu boards. The information must be provided adjacent to each item in a size and typeface similar to the price and other information.

Additional nutrition information also would have to be available “in writing, to customers upon request,” the measure states.

According to the bill, chain restaurants would not have to provide nutrition data for specials or LTOs that appear on the menu for less than 30 days each year; condiments and other items placed on the table for general use; and food items sold in a manufacturer’s original sealed packages that already contain nutrition information required by federal law.

Restaurateurs who violate any provision of the measure would face a fine of $225 for a first violation and up to $500 for each violation after that.

Many restaurateurs and state association executives have said they oppose mandates at the state and local level, and favor bipartisan federal legislation that instead would establish a uniform standard, block frivolous lawsuits and pre-empt existing state and local laws.

Carrie Leishman, president of the Delaware Restaurant Association, also said she supports uniform menu labeling legislation.

“A local bill can be very detrimental to business,” she said. “An individual franchise owner might have to spend money make certain changes, and then spend more money a year later [if Congress passes a federal measure.]”

Both the current federal House and Senate health care bills have menu-labeling provisions attached that, if enacted, would address those concerns. The model for those provisions — the Labeling Education and Nutrition, or LEAN, Act — was introduced by Delaware’s Sen. Thomas Carper in 2008.

Delaware is the latest state to move seriously to enact menu labeling. Outgoing New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine signed statewide menu-labeling bill earlier this week. The New Jersey bill also impacts restaurant chains with 20 or more outlets and requires them to post calories on menus and menu boards. The Garden State law shields any noncomplying restaurants from legal action from a member of the public, and also provides for pre-emption at the federal level.

Other states and jurisdictions that already have passed menu labeling laws include California; Maine; Massachusetts; Oregon; New York City; Philadelphia; Nashville, Tenn.; Maryland’s Montgomery County; and New York’s Albany, Westchester, Suffolk and Ulster counties.

Read more: Nation’s Restaurant News

IFA Pushes for New Health Care Bill

Paul  Frumkin wrties in Nation’s Restaurant News that in the wake of Scott Brown’s upset victory in the Massachusetts Senate race Tuesday, the International Franchise Association is urging federal lawmakers to forge new bipartisan legislation that will make health care insurance more affordable for small businesses.

“Our message all along was to start over,” said David French, vice president of government affairs for the IFA. “We believe the White House and congressional leadership have crafted a package that is profoundly unpopular and damaging to small businesses. But we see the Massachusetts result as an opportunity to finally get Congress’ attention.”

The surprise election of Brown, a Republican, to Sen. Edward Kennedy’s former seat, gave the GOP 41 votes in the Senate, thereby ending the Democrats’ filibuster-proof supermajority of 60 and leaving the future of President Obama’s health care reform package uncertain.

The election, French said, demonstrated to many lawmakers that the partisan approach to health care reform “was heading down a road that would have eventually been disastrous. This is a time to start over.”

While some Democrats had been holding out hope that the House would accept the Senate bill as written, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said Thursday that there was not enough Democratic support to pass the Senate’s version of the president’s health care legislation in the House.

The prime consideration in the House and Senate bills was access to coverage, not how the economic viability of employers was being impacted, French said.

“While access is important, it doesn’t work if it puts business in a losing situation,” he said.

The congressional bills also presumed that no employer wants to offer health care insurance, French continued.

“That is so wrong. Most know they have to take care of labor,” he said. “Health insurance is one way of being competitive for quality labor.”

The IFA said it supports health care insurance reform that, among other things, will ensure coverage to Americans regardless of pre-existing conditions; provides tax credits and subsidies to help small businesses afford to offer plans; and create national or regional exchanges like association health care plans, where small businesses can pool together.

Read more: Nation’s Restaurant News

N.J. Senate Approves Menu Labeling

Nationwide state legislators and local officials continue to push menu labeling regulations even as the U.S. House and Senate work on health-care reform legislation that include provisions for a national policy.

Recently, Montgomery County, Md., a suburb of Washington D.C., passed such a bill, and now New Jersey legislators are considering regulations for that state. If approved, New Jersey would become the fifth state to pass a menu labeling law.
 
On Dec 10th, the New Jersey state Senate passed a bill that would require restaurants with 20 or more locations nationwide to post calorie information for food and beverages on menu boards, according to a story in The Star-Ledger.
 
From The Star-Ledger:

Chain restaurant owners and Republican legislators called the bill unnecessary because the House and Senate versions of the health care reform bills include very similar menu disclosure requirements. (Sen. Joseph) Vitale said he wanted consumers to have the information sooner than the two to three years it would take for the health care bills to be implemented.
 
If approved by the state Assembly and governor, the bill would go into effect a year after it was passed. Operators who failed to comply would face fines of $50 to $500, with the higher fee for subsequent offences.

Proponents of the menu labeling bill maintain that it will “provide consumers with information that can assist them with their food choices if they care to use it, not unlike most product labeling in our grocery stores,” said state Sen. Joseph Vitale, one of the bill’s sponsors.  The bill now goes to New Jersey’s General Assembly.

 Critics include chain restaurant owners and some Republican lawmakers, who counter that the law would be too expensive for franchisees.

“We don’t believe that menus should be used for public-service announcements,” said Deborah Dowdell, president of the New Jersey Restaurant Association. “They are marketing tools and should be maintained as such.”

They also say that the state law is unnecessary, because the U.S. House and Senate versions of the health-care bills include similar menu labeling requirements. The legislation being considered by Congress would pre-empt all state and local regulations.

DDIFO lobbied in Massachusetts for the State Department of Health to hold off implementing a menu labeling requirement until the US Senate and House passed national menu labeling.

Next Page »