Font ResizeIf two San Mateo County supervisors get their way, people who walk into a Burger King and order up a Whopper and large fries will know exactly how fattening their meal is — the menu will spell it out.
But if they eat a similar greasy combination at a non-chain restaurant, chances are they won't have the nutrition information staring them in the face.
Supervisors Jerry Hill and Rose Jacobs Gibson, who have proposed a menu-labeling ordinance that goes to the full board for consideration Aug. 12, explained that they are targeting chain restaurants because requiring smaller, independently owned eateries to display nutrition information on their menus would prove too much of an economic burden.
Like two similar proposals at the state level, the county ordinance targets chains, defined as restaurants that share the same name with at least 14 other eateries in California.
Restaurants meeting that description in unincorporated areas of San Mateo County would have to list figures for calories, saturated and trans fats, carbohydrates and sodium on the menu beginning Jan. 1, 2009.
Hill said requiring small businesses to send their products to nutritional labs would be an "impossible burden." He said it would be easier and cost-efficient for larger chains, whose menus are generally fixed to comply with such a mandate.
"If you're going to go into a Burger King, you're going to find the same menu day in and day out," said
Jacobs Gibson agreed that the financial burden of testing food items would be greater for small businesses.
Still, she said she wouldn't be opposed to having the mom and pop shops display food facts if they could do so without significantly impacting the business.
"Right now we figure this is the way to get started," she said. "Naturally, it's important for everyone to provide that information. The more people see it, the more they're going to pay attention to it."
The county's effort comes as two nutrition labeling bills make their way through the state Legislature. One would require labeling on menus and the other would require that nutrition information be available to customers, though not necessarily on the menu.
In either case, forcing small businesses to participate could strain struggling eateries, said Lara Dunbar, senior vice president of government affairs for the California Restaurant Association.
"They make very, very narrow profit margins and would be the least able to absorb the costs associated with menu labeling," Dunbar said.
While less than a dozen restaurants will be effected, Hill said he thinks the labeling for chain restaurants will "attack the problem where a large segment of the population receives their nutrition. In today's economy, more and more people will be frequenting those chains."
San Mateo County's proposed ordinance comes on the heels of a similar effort in Santa Clara County, where the board of supervisors passed a menu-labeling law for chains last month. It goes into effect Sept. 1.
Santa Clara County Supervisor Liz Kniss, who authored the ordinance, said she wanted to send a message to lawmakers in Sacramento that there is demand for a statewide standard.
"We really want there to be consistency in the state," she said. "I think that's everybody's goal."
Shaun Bishop can be reached at sbishop@dailynewsgroup.com.
