If the stupid city wants to lose sales tax revenus so be it.
1 posted on
07/04/2010 7:47:10 AM PDT by
C19fan
To: C19fan
California should be re-named...to “Sillyville”...what childish people, completely devoid of reality.
2 posted on
07/04/2010 7:51:49 AM PDT by
FrankR
( If we don't stand up to tyranny, the tyrants win, and we're enslaved.)
To: C19fan
Never, never, never underestimate the stupidity of a liberals.
3 posted on
07/04/2010 7:53:07 AM PDT by
Da Coyote
To: C19fan
More like local control rather then the Nanny State. Not my cup of tea demanding businesses close down their drive through access, but I don't have to live there.
4 posted on
07/04/2010 7:54:03 AM PDT by
Colvin
(Proud Owner '66 Binder PU, '66 Binder Travelall,)
To: C19fan
Of course, the next thing the town should do is ban any other additional businesses. More businesses means more cars clogging things up. Can’t have that. High unemployment is much better. Less cars zipping around and clogging things up. Less kids getting fat from excess money. (smirk)
5 posted on
07/04/2010 7:54:43 AM PDT by
driftless2
(For long term happiness, learn how to play the accordion.)
To: C19fan
In-N-Out has the BEST hamburgers of any fast food joint. You can get them wrapped in lettuce instead of a bun if you so choose. California has been controlled by hard Leftists since implementing their Motor-Voter Law (Register to vote when you get your driver's license without having to prove citizenship. Just tick a box that says ‘I am eligible to vote’)in the 90’s. And, no, Arnold isn't conservative. He was just more Conservative than his election opponents. California is going down the tubes and the Nation should wake up and see it's future if we continue with Democrat rule.
To: C19fan
From 1992:
Drive-thru study clears air but ban plans died in 1990 LOS ANGELES - A scientific study commissioned by the California Restaurant Association and nine fast-food chains has found that cars idling in restaurants' drive-thru lanes produce less air pollution than do cars that are parked and later restarted.
But contrary to published reports, the $125,000 study - which originally sought to undermine a plan to outlaw the construction of drive-thrus in Southern California - was released almost two years after state air quality regulators withdrew the threatened ban.
"The proposal was dropped back in '90" and never resurrected, said William Kelly, a spokesman for the South Coast Air Quality Management District, which had considered restrictions on drive-thrus because of now-contradicted findings that idling cars burn fuel inefficiently and generate excessive carbon monoxide.
[...excerpt...]
7 posted on
07/04/2010 8:01:50 AM PDT by
Gondring
(Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
To: C19fan
Smoking. Plastic bags. Light bulbs. Now the drive-thru. All outlawed.
And at the same time, hostile alien invaders are welcomed, homosexuals are held in exceptional esteem, and America-hating double digit IQ stars are worshiped as wise men.
Is it out of the question to ask Mexico to finish taking Kalifornication off our hands?
Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.
9 posted on
07/04/2010 8:09:01 AM PDT by
The Comedian
(Evil can only succeed if good men don't point at it and laugh.)
To: C19fan
Amid complaints of obesity.............
When someone approaches a governmental official with a complaint of obesity, they should be told to mind their own business.
12 posted on
07/04/2010 8:12:56 AM PDT by
whence911
(Here illegally? Go home. Get in line!)
To: C19fan
If the stupid city wants to lose sales tax revenus so be it.More feelings-based public policy...
18 posted on
07/04/2010 8:29:11 AM PDT by
jonno
(Having an opinion is not the same as having the answer...)
To: C19fan
It seems that city officials are advancing two reasons for banning new drive-ins: 1) the food they serve is (allegedly) unhealthy; and 2) they cause traffic to back up onto streets.
The first reason is absurd. If someone decides to open a tofu and salad with fat-free dressing drive-through, I'd bet they'd have no better chance of getting a permit than a place selling double bacon cheeseburgers -- nor should they.
The second reason may be valid, at least to an extent. So, mandate that new establishments have "stacking room" for cars on their property, rather than banning the establishments outright.
19 posted on
07/04/2010 8:32:18 AM PDT by
southernnorthcarolina
("Better be wise by the misfortunes of others than by your own." -- Aesop)
To: C19fan
This could be ideology driven but may be just old Chicago style politics as so well practiced by the Baraqqis in the White House.
It’s possible the chain did not come up with the required under the table payoff to make the deal happen.
To: C19fan
It is a 9 month ban on new drive thru’s. Nobody is going to build a new drive thru’s around there in the next 9 months even if there were no ban.
27 posted on
07/04/2010 9:22:22 AM PDT by
ThomasThomas
(Isn't enough always enough?)
To: C19fan
In-N-Out makes a great burger. And their employees are awesome. It amazes me how their employees all look like my neighbor’s kids... and they are.
28 posted on
07/04/2010 9:29:07 AM PDT by
MarineBrat
(Better dead than red!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson