oldernwiser
VIP Member
- Jun 4, 2012
- 780
- 95
- 78
Such a big heart ole Big Brother has, huh?
This summer, 13-year-old Nathan Duszynski wanted to make some money to help out his disabled parentshis mom has epilepsy and his dad has multiple sclerosis. So he decided to open a hot dog stand. He saved $1,200, mostly money made by mowing lawns and shoveling snow. He checked with the city to make sure he didn't need any licenses or permits, even going to city hall in person with his mom. And then he bought a cart. (Yep, that's hot dogs from Nathan's, for those who are keeping score at home.)
He arrived to set up shop on his first day and 10 minutes later, a zoning official arrived to shut him down. The problem: The cart, which is in the parking lot of a sporting goods store, is on the edge of official downtown commercial district of Holland, Michigan. The city bans food carts in that area in order to minimize competition for the eight tax-paying restaurants a couple of blocks away.
As it happens, I've been to Holland. It's a lovely town, but not exactly a booming metropolis. And frankly (ha!), after an evening of Blue Motorcycles Butch's Dry Dock, a hot dog would really have hit the spot. The city says it is willing to work with Nathan, but keeping food carts out of the small, walkable downtown area is pretty much the same thing as banning food carts altogether. Nathan and his family obviously know that: The hot dog cart is now for sale.
The Mackinac Center has made a nice little video about the ridiculous story:
City Shuts Down Teen's Hot Dog Vendor Cart! - YouTube
The big problem for me, was that he checked first, and was given a Green Light. That is poor form. He should be reimbursed all expenses. Maybe the City Council could buy the Cart at Cost, and then Shut Themselves down the first time they use it, paying double fines. Assholes.
I know - it sucks that the kid was out trying to gather cash for his disabled parents and later education. It's not "fair" that the city gave him all the right information except for not telling him all the places he COULDN'T run his business. But, it isn't the job of some clerk to go into all the legal ways the kid could be stopped. I think it's ridiculous to take the position that the city should be held accountable for the costs associated with a failed start up due to current zoning laws. I feel for Nathan, but he failed to ask all the right questions.
Laws don't magically appear - people ask for them or reject them. If this law is unfair, it should be repealed by the same process that got it enacted in the first place - that's just how we do things.