L.A. courting healthier fare

LOS ANGELES — Pointing south from the corner of Figueroa and Adams in South Central Los Angeles, Tanisha Jackson says that when it comes to fast food, her community "has it all."

"If you want it cheap and quick — McDonald's, Burger King, Taco Bell, Kentucky Fried Chicken — we've got it," says the mother of two.

Some city officials see the myriad fast-food outlets as a health problem and are seeking change.

"Fast food is primarily the only option for those who live and work here," says City Councilwoman Jan Perry. "It's become a public-health issue that residents be given healthier choices."

She introduced a two-year moratorium on new fast-food outlets in South Central, where small, single-family homes dominate and gangs thrive in a rough urban landscape.

Many national food and health experts say the measure — scheduled for a vote Tuesday — may be the first example of a health-zoning law in the United States. In 2006, New York health-committee chairman Joel Rivera lobbied against uncontrolled growth of fast-food chains but did not introduce legislation. These observers are applauding the idea as a way to raise awareness about the nation's obesity epidemic, which hits poorer neighborhoods disproportionately.

"Limiting fast food could be a practical solution if it starts to address the imbalance of too many outlets with food that is not nutritious," says Mark Vallianatos, director of the Center for Food & Justice at Occidental College in Los Angeles.

This is "bringing health policy and environmental policy together with land-use planning," he says. "I think that's smart, and it's the wave of the future."

Others say it is a well-meaning but misguided attempt by government to control social behavior, doomed to failure, like Prohibition in the 1920s.

"You can't regulate the supply side of a behavioral problem and expect results," says Dennis Lombardi, executive vice president of Foodservice Strategies, a consulting firm for the restaurant industry.

Perry says she introduced the legislation because statistics show that South Central residents have higher incidence of diseases that doctors link to obesity than the rest of the city and the county. "The side effect of a constant diet of fast food is that society pays in the long run in medical costs," she says.

The ordinance, a moratorium intended to give the city time to come up with a long-term plan, would affect about 700,000 residents of South Central, where a recent Los Angeles Times survey found that 46 percent of restaurants are fast-food chains, compared with 12 percent on the west side of Los Angeles.

Some California cities already regulate fast-food restaurants in certain areas, including Berkeley and Arcata.

Port Jefferson, N.Y.; Concord, Mass.; and Calistoga, Calif., ban fast-food restaurants in certain districts entirely, according to Los Angeles city planner Faisal Roble, who drafted Perry's ordinance.

But those earlier regulations are primarily tied to aesthetics or to the protection of smaller businesses, rather than to health concerns, says David Gay, a principal city planner.

Perry and her supporters acknowledge health zoning raises some questions: Will more healthful restaurants move into the region if new fast-food outlets are prohibited? Can city government aid that transition? Will residents frequent restaurants with more healthful options?

"We should always be very cautious about restricting food and dining options for other groups of people," says Barry Glassner, professor of sociology at the University of Southern California and author of "The Gospel of Food: Everything You Think You Know About Food Is Wrong."

He and others cite several benefits fast-food restaurants offer to those living in poorer neighborhoods: good, inexpensive food; a safe environment for kids; and fast preparation, which is particularly appealing to single parents.

"Calling all fast food evil is just too simplistic," he says.

Material from the Los Angeles Times is included in this report.