HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemo - Mail Packet - 11/17/2020 - Memorandum From Josh Birks Re: Temporary Cap On 3Rd Party Food Delivery FeesMEMORANDUM
DATE:November 12, 20202
TO:Mayor and Councilmembers
THRU:Darin Atteberry, City Manager; and
Jacqueline Kozak-Thiel, Chief Sustainability Officer
FROM:Josh Birks, Economic Health and Redevelopment Director
RE: UPDATE: TEMPORARY CAP ON 3RD PARTY FOOD DELIVERY FEES
This memorandum provides an update on a proposed temporary cap on third party food delivery fees
reviewed by the Council Finance Committee (“Finance Committee”) on October 19, 2020. An ordinance
had been scheduled on the Council Agenda for November 17, 2020 but was removed at staff’s request.
Many independently owned restaurants are turning to delivery orders to earn revenue while
simultaneously aiding in the fight against the spread of COVID by limiting access to their dining room
facilities. Many of the third-party food delivery companies charge high rates of between thirty (30%)
and thirty-five (35%) percent erasing the profit a restaurant makes from a delivery order. Staff presented
an ordinance to temporarily cap these fees to the Finance Committee on October 18, 2020.
Based on the concerns voiced by the Finance Committee, City Attorney’s Office (“CAO”), Economic
Advisory Commission (“EAC”) and the City Manager, staff proposes an alternative approach to the
challenge facing our restaurant community related to third party food delivery fees. Staff proposes using
a portion of the Corona Virus Relief Funds (“CVRF”) allocated to the City to cover the restaurant
commission paid for use of third-party delivery between November 30
th to December 30th of this year.
To achieve this outcome staff has issued a Request for Proposals (“RFP”) that is due on November 17,
2020.
Many independently owned restaurants face a daunting task –earning revenues while simultaneously
aiding in the fight against the spread of COVID. As a result, the primary revenue generator for most
restaurants has been significantly diminished –dining room capacity. Restaurants have turned to third
party food delivery companies to capture added revenue from delivery orders. These companies make
money by charging both the restaurant and the customer for the delivery. Many
Based on conversations with numerous restaurateurs, carry-out now accounts for a significant portion of
their business revenue. One restaurant owner stated that previously carry-out and delivery apprised three
to five percent (3-5%) of their revenue. Today, during restricted dining room capacity, delivery and
carry-out accounts for one-third of their revenue. This is a 10x increase. Additionally, this same operator
indicated that outdoor patio dining accounts for another third of their revenue. Numerous restaurant
operators report similar impacts from COVID on the make-up of their sales and thus revenue.
These same operators report that 3rd Party fees are erasing the narrow margin they have traditionally
operated their business upon. Capping these 3rd Party fees would help many independently owned
restaurants retain a greater portion of their sales allowing them to invest in their employees, businesses,
and pay rent/mortgage costs. Restaurants report 3
rd Party Fees that range between 15 and 32%. Larger
operators –national chains or independent businesses with a high number of locations –can negotiate
lower delivery charges. Independent single-location restaurants typically pay the highest fees –upwards
of 30%.
Providing relief to businesses makes sense because the existing remedies to small independent operators
are limited:
1. Many lack the power of scale to negotiate better fees and choosing to forgo food delivery may
impact their revenue during the winter months leading to closure.
2. The cost of starting and operating their own delivery service is high (insurance increase to cover
employee cars, point of sales adjustments, online ordering software, training, etc.)
Past Action
On September 28, 2020 city staff participated in a phone call with the Colorado Restaurant Association
(“CRA”) regarding a recently proposed ordinance in Denver Colorado that would temporarily cap the
fees assessed restaurants by third party food delivery companies (e.g., Postmates, GrubHub, Door Dash,
NoCo Nosh). Staff quickly reviewed the ordinance and proposed the policy be advanced to City Council
for consideration. Staff reached this conclusion after conversations with restauranteurs and learned:
Carry-out now accounts for significant portion of their business revenue –as much as one-third
(33%) compared to historic rates of three (3%) to five (5%) percent.
Typical delivery fees charged by third parties can range as high as thirty (30%) to thirty-five
(35%) percent.
Each operator negotiates fees independently, meaning that small single location establishments
tend to have the highest fees.
A fee over twenty (20%) percent erases all profit from the restaurant.
Concerns & Open Items
On October 18, 2020, the Finance Committee reviewed the proposed ordinance and associated economic
analysis. The Finance Committee had a mixed response to the ordinance but unanimously recognized
the challenge restaurants face trying to adapt their business models. The following challenges were
mentioned by the Finance Committee, CAO, EAC, City Manager, and staff:
Enforcement –Several questions came up about enforcing the cap on fees. Best/common
practice relies on a complaint-based system where the business owner must file a complaint with
the City and then attend a hearing to provide due process. This approach requires significant
resource to develop and operate. There were several concerns about the ability to develop such a
system in a timely fashion. Finally, this still puts the onus on the business owner to invest a
significant amount of time getting a reduced delivery fee a central challenge for the current
approach of negotiating directly with the companies.
Legal Risk –Both the Finance Committee and EAC voiced concerns about the potential legal
exposure to the City of such a temporary cap on fees. Based on staff research, no legal action has
been taken across the Country where these fee caps have been initiated; however, other concerns
remain. Finally, a temporary cap might need to be in place for more than 90-or 120-days to be
effective increasing the potential for legal risk.
Government Role –The Finance Committee raised concerns about the perception of
government “price setting” raised by the proposed ordinance. Nationally there is precedence for
governments to engage in this type of policy and legislation most notably during the 1970s oil
crisis and World War II. However, it’s clear that such action is typically associated with a major
crisis and used sparingly.
Alternative Approach
As staff continued to evaluate the proposed ordinance in advance of a presentation to Council on
November 17, 2020 an alternative approach was discovered by reviewing other front range community
responses. In Boulder, the City chose to partner with existing third-party food delivery companies by
agreeing to fund the restaurant cost of using the service from CVRF dollars between November 17th to
December 30th. Additionally, Boulder was able to secure a commitment from the winning respondent to
their RFP to discount the cost of delivery to participating restaurants through December 31, 2021 or the
lifting of indoor dining restricts, whichever comes first.
This approach addresses the concerns raised by the Finance Committee, CAO, EAC, and City Manager:
Enforcement –As the funding partner, the City will have direct review of the fees charged for
delivery and fund the cost for a limited time –currently proposed to include November 30th
through December 30th. This removes the need to develop and operate a complaint system for
restaurants to report fees exceeding the temporary cap.
Legal Risk –Using a competitive bid process enables for all current third-party food delivery
companies to have equal access to the program. The RFP enables the City to work with multiple
partners if multiple proposals have promise.
Government Role –The proposed approach avoids the concerns around the perception of
government “price setting” as the proposal agrees to fund the current and reasonable delivery
fees charged by the respondents. If a commitment can be secured for a discount to extend beyond
the subsidized period that is achieved through contractual agreement not regulatory mandate.
Staff anticipates the alternative approach will provide needed support for restaurants facing high
delivery charge costs by offering a fee option during the CVRF eligible period. In addition, this
approach will continue to promote a safe customer experience by reducing visits to the dining room.
Next Steps
An RFP for Restaurant Delivery Services was issued by the City on November 7, 2020 due on
November 17, 2020. Staff will work with CAO, Finance –Purchasing, and other colleagues to develop
this solution unless Council indicates preference for a different approach. Updates will be provided on
the status of the work through the regular CVRF reports.