My Coffee with Melvin

A lot of people in both Minneapolis and St. Paul have been watching as those of us in the St. Paul hospitality industry have been working toward defeating a proposal by St. Paul City Council Person Melvin Carter III that would, among other things, require all restaurants and caterers to maintain and provide for their guests upon demand an allergen handbook listing all of the ingredients in each and every dish they serve.

Some weeks back, I blogged about this and about how such an ordinance would inevitably drive our restaurant, Heartland, from the environs of St. Paul.  I also gave an interview on that topic to Patrick Reusse for his KSTP AM radio show.  Soon thereafter, I received an email from Council Person Carter requesting a meeting.  We had that meeting at Heartland last Tuesday.  Here's what transpired.

It took about half an hour for Melvin and me to clear the air.  Apparently, he had not received all of the feedback I had sent regarding the initial draft of his bill as well as the feedback on subsequent drafts.  I had been receiving the drafts from an intermediary and returning my comments to that intermediary.  Unbeknown to me, he never received that feedback.  Consequently, we were both of the erroneous opinion that we were ignoring one another.  After clearing up that misunderstanding, we were able to move on in the spirit of cooperation and compromise.

Let me start by saying, that Melvin Carter is very nice person who, if taken at face value, is trying to do nothing more than address what he considers to be a potential health hazard.  Our point of contention centered on how best that could be achieved.  It was around this time in our discussion that we were joined by Molly Grove of the St. Paul Area Chamber of Commerce.  Molly didn't have much to offer the discussion except to caution Melvin about what kind of resistance he could anticipate from her membership should he put forward another proposal.

As our conversation progressed, I found him to be quite receptive to understanding how restaurants of Heartland's ilk operate and how his proposal would stifle our ability to succeed in St. Paul while actually making people less safe.  He expressed that his intention was not to do so.  In addition, it rapidly became clear to him that an allergen handbook such as the one he put forth in his most recent draft was not the best way to address his concerns.  Much like menu labeling of calorie counts or nutritional data on food packaging, the information contained in such a handbook is pretty much useless unless someone is educated enough to put that information to good use.  Furthermore, listing a bunch of ingredients in a handbook does nothing to alleviate the problem at its source.  In other words, it makes more sense to educate and train those involved in the preparation of food as well as those who have allergies or who have loved ones with allergies as to the potential risks and pitfalls associated with allergen contamination.  Why not attempt to stop the problem at its source rather than creating an ineffective band aid that would likely succeed in doing nothing more than handcuff thriving businesses?  Consequently, it took Melvin about forty five minutes to declare that the idea of an allergen handbook is off the table.  The discussion then turned to what steps can the industry voluntarily take to help ensure that people who suffer from food allergies not be fed an offending ingredient and what role, if any, can government play in assisting us in that endeavor.

First of all, let me just say that when I first wrote about this three weeks ago it created quite a firestorm within our industry as well as in the chambers of St. Paul City Hall. Some of those who read my blog decided to post comments either in support of or in opposition to what I had to say.  Some of those comments were quite insightful while others were less so.

Just for the record, to the best of my knowledge Council Member Dave Thune never supported the bill.  Those who suggested that he did are obviously upset with him for other bills he has supported, but I am sorry to disappoint you on this occasion.  Furthermore, to those people who seem to be suffering from either extreme paranoia or a seemingly total lack of knowledge about how a restaurant works as well as how servers get paid for their labor I can tell you with absolute confidence that no one in his or her right mind wishes for anyone to be harmed, let alone killed, by the food one consumes in an eating establishment.  Ownership does not want to suffer the liability that would accompany any sort of behavior that could be construed as grossly negligent, and restaurant servers do not work on commission.  A server has no motivation to knowingly lie to an individual about an ingredient in order to make a sale especially given the fact that patrons appreciate being redirected to something else or, as is the case at Heartland, a preparation can usually be altered to eliminate whatever allergens are in question.  My guess is that in doing so the server would likely garner a more appreciative gratuity.  So I implore you to please not disparage those who work so hard to entertain you when you are dining out.  While they are quite capable of making mistakes, calling for them to be prosecuted or worse for having done so seems like a bit of an overreaction.

So getting back to Melvin and me, I suggested that most restaurateurs probably wouldn't object to adding a statement on their menus reminding their guests to alert their servers of any dietary concerns or constraints.  Servers thus informed could then go to the kitchen and convey that information so that the patron could be better served.  That will not only go a long way toward protecting the customer, but it will also create a more well informed wait staff.

Melvin liked both of those ideas especially when he was enlightened as to the procedures we engage in at Heartland.  He suggested that restaurants and caterers have an action plan similar to what we do.  That's where it gets a little tricky.  Obviously, a fast food restaurant does not operate in the same way that a restaurant such as Heartland does.  I am very connected to the sources of my ingredients, and I can pretty much track our food chain right back to the origins of almost every item we use.  Our action plan when dealing with special diets is pretty straight forward and extremely effective.  Restaurants that do not have the benefit of that kind of transparency could find it very difficult to follow the same procedures we do.  Legislating some sort of mandate requiring them to do so would be unreasonable while solving nothing.  It would be much better to allow restaurants to form their own action plans and create their own policies in response to people with allergy concerns based upon the requirements of each business.  So how do we do it?

I believe that education is the key to creating a safer environment for people who suffer from life threatening allergies.  I would bet that the majority of people who cook or serve food in Minnesota don't realize that vegetable oil almost always contains at least some peanut oil.  I would also contend that the vast majority of the general population doesn’t know that hydrolyzed vegetable protein is, in fact, monosodium glutamate.  As long as a compound is less than ninety nine percent MSG, it can legally be labeled as hydrolyzed protein.  That's the Food&Drug Administration at work on your behalf.  That's not my fault or the fault of anyone else in our industry.  If you have a problem with it, I suggest you take up with the federal government. In the meantime, it would be best if we all took some steps toward educating ourselves about what it is that we are eating.

For the industry, this is a relative simple if somewhat cumbersome thing to achieve.  The FDA has a uniform food code that all states are free to follow in whole or in part.  For instance, here in Minnesota we don't require the use of plastic gloves when handling food since we understand that educating people about proper hand washing is a much more effective and safer way to prevent food contamination.  Consequently, the Minnesota food code differs from that of the federal code.  Adopting such a code is a function of the state legislature.

It seems to me that we could ask our state legislature to add a provision to the food code that would expand the educational requirements concerning food allergens and the risks involved with them that could be added to the Food Manager Certification Class that is already required by state law.  The cost of doing so would be minimal, and the benefits would be profound.

But what about the general public?  How might they become better educated?  First of all, one has to be responsible and motivated enough to seek out the information.  There is no getting away from an individual's personal responsibility when it comes to things like this.  Melvin has told me that he believes in that basic principle.  So what role should government have in helping people do so?  That's a tricky one.  I suggested to Melvin that the city could provide a pamphlet containing pertinent and important information about the subject of food allergens that could be made available upon request to all residents.  While there might be some cost involved in doing such a thing, it would be a fraction of what it would take to mandate some sort of mandatory compliance procedures that would require inspections and enforcement.  Not only that, it would go much farther toward achieving Melvin's intended goal; that is, to make the general public safer.

All of these things are the types of solutions that go to the source of a problem instead trying to catch up with it somewhere downstream when it might already be too late.  And, bonus!  They save money, too, while not crippling a vibrant industry.

Finally, I want to thank Melvin Carter publicly for taking the time to meet with me personally and to listen to my concerns.  By removing his intention to mandate an allergen handbook, he has made it possible for Heartland to remain in St. Paul.  Now all we have to do over the next seven months is decide where the best location for our restaurant might be.  We have a little bit of time to figure that out.  I will continue to keep you posted as we continue that process.