Comment Details

I support freedom for foodtrucks because every Worcester resident should have amazing choices for eating out, and the opportunity to start delicious small businesses.

Wherever foodtrucks choose to locate, it means there's people there who think their food is the best option. If there are no happy customers, they'll go someplace else. So if a foodtruck can pass a health inspection, why create any barriers at all to where they can do business?

For this reason, I think we should all strongly oppose any regulation on food trucks that goes beyond standard health inspections.

There should be no licensing requirement, and no limits on where or when they can operate.

Any limits on when and where and when we can get food just hurts our choices and keeps us from putting the money we earn back into the local economy.

Some local restaurant owners have cynically backed these bans on foodtrucks to kill other options and corral customers into buying their food. Look, if Worcester's restaurants can't stand on the quality of the food they offer, and have to resort to dirty political tricks for keeping *better* food out of the city, we don't need them.

Worcester is credited as being the birthplace of the diner: cheap good food for all people at all hours of the day, and at a convenient location. Worcester was about foodtrucks back when they were train cars, not trucks! What if local elites had banned the diner, under political pressure from some overpriced restaurants?! This is part of our city's history and identity. Let's not screw it up. Let's let foodtruck operators bring us all the awesome food we can buy.