A Step Away from Skid Row Behavior Downtown

[MWisdom]

Jerry,

As a property owner in the area of town you outline in your ordinance, I applaud you for your desire to find a solution to this social issue.  However, I do not think that restricitng alcohol sales to 5:00 PM to 2:00 Am is the solution.  It places an undue burden on business owners who sell alcohol and punishes non-vagrant citizens by denying them the ability to purchase a six-pack when they want to.

The issue goes further than this proposed ordinance can handle.  A multi-facted approach must be taken to resolve the problem.  Pan-handling ordinances must be enforced, open container ordinances must be enforced, vagrancy ordinances must be enforced, social programs must be put into place to give these people meaningful opportunities to contribute to society.

But, therein lies the problem.  JSO is under-manned and over-worked; just try to get someone to respond to a burglery call in less then two hours.  Social agencies are stretched to the max and those who are on the street seem content with their lot in life. 

As I said at the beginning of this reply, I own a number of properties in and around the area in question.  When we have a clean-out or demo job that must be completed we try to hire people from the groups this ordinance is aimed at.  Our thought is that we will pay them a fair wage for a fair day's work and keep them off the streets at least for a little while.  The last time we hired two men, one was very hard-working, had a great attitude and blamed no one but himself for his position in life; the other worked half-heartedly, got in everyone's way and complained that the work was too hard.  Most of the vagrants in the area have the same attitude as the this second guy.  They want money, but they don't want to work for it.

We need to address this entitlement mentality, the city needs to provide social service to assist these people without just shelling out more money that will be spent on alcohol, drugs or worse.  Its a complex problem that cannot be solved by merely ceasing alcohol sales.

[Ocklawaha]

3 Million dollars for a better store, and from what I've seen and heard, we then cut alcohol sales, the stores revenues will plunge by 85% then it will close. A vacant 3 million dollar store that once sold adult beverages, would make a cool place to sleep and hide from the man! Way to go Jacksonville!

Ocklawaha

[downtownparks]

It will match nicely with the 2 million dollar homeless camp in La Villa just down the road.

[walter]

its a reasonable approach.  stop selling chilled singles with a bag and a straw, how would that stop any of you from buying your case on the way to the game?  It wouldn't.

Stop by some of these "stores" sometime and you'll likely see a cooler filled to the brim with chilled 16oz beers, are you buying those? 

I can tell you those same brown bagged beers get strewn around town as litter.  There's a nice little pile of them next to where I live.  Seems that spot is the point at which the beverage has been consumed and is ready for the pitch. 

To the naysayers and doom and gloom predictions, the same was said about restaurants and bars when the smoking ban was proposed....seems they all went out of business just as predicted eh?  NOT.

[thelakelander]

its a reasonable approach.  stop selling chilled singles with a bag and a straw, how would that stop any of you from buying your case on the way to the game?  It wouldn't.

Stop by some of these "stores" sometime and you'll likely see a cooler filled to the brim with chilled 16oz beers, are you buying those? 

I can tell you those same brown bagged beers get strewn around town as litter.  There's a nice little pile of them next to where I live.  Seems that spot is the point at which the beverage has been consumed and is ready for the pitch. 

To the naysayers and doom and gloom predictions, the same was said about restaurants and bars when the smoking ban was proposed....seems they all went out of business just as predicted eh?  NOT.

Here's what Jerry posted...

"A reasonable approach to controlling illegal public drinking in the Northbank would be to prohibit the sale of “singles” or chilled beverages, or to limit how a beverage could be packaged, such as banning brown can bags and straws.  Unfortunately, the only device State Law provides a locality with for controlling the sale of alcoholic beverages is a local option for the hours when alcohol can be sold. That being said, the City can only regulate the sale of alcoholic beverages on the Northbank with an ordinance that contains the following elements:

Prohibit the sale of alcoholic beverages for off premises consumption on the Northbank between the hours of 2 AM and 5 PM.  A two year review and sunset for this ordinance will be in place.

This ordinance will prevent an individual from purchasing a beverage “to go”.  The intended effect of this ordinance is to improve the image of, and quality of life in Jacksonville’s Northbank Neighborhood."

Unless we're reading into it wrong, this covers singles at Scottie stores as well as six packs at Winn-Dixie or imported brews at the proposed grocery market in the old Haydon Burns Library building.

[downtownparks]

The use of the words "to-go sales" is whats throwing everyone off, and I dont believe for a second it was done by mistake. Why not call it what it is. The prohibition of all sales of beer and wine until after 5pm.

[Pavers]

This is probably the best true debate I've seen on this board.  Some thoughts and questions...

What are the counter-proposals of those who disagree with Jerry's policy?  If the reality is that the current laws on the books can't be enforced due to limited police resources, then what's the alternative?

How much of a decrease in "downtown disorder" would result from the policy?  Zero?  Some?  Lots?  Would daytime alcohol simply be substituted by daytime narcotics by causing the disorder?

Which is the greater inconvenience - not being able to buy booze down the street before the Jaguars game or the incremental (downward) change in disorder from implementation of the policy?  (I am assuming that there will still be a level of problem activity post-policy implementation.)  What would citizen's be "buying" in the form of reduced disorder by narrowing their alcohol purchasing/selling privileges?

Would implementation of the policy merely shift disorder to another part of town? What would be the ramifications of such a shift?

I think it's very wise to build in a sunset clause into the policy.  If something gets implemented, monitor and measure the heck out of it, and then reconvene and assess whether the policy is worth renewing.  Perhaps a shorter one-year experiment might suffice?

Best to all,
Pavers

[MWisdom]

its a reasonable approach.  stop selling chilled singles with a bag and a straw, how would that stop any of you from buying your case on the way to the game?  It wouldn't.

Stop by some of these "stores" sometime and you'll likely see a cooler filled to the brim with chilled 16oz beers, are you buying those? 

I can tell you those same brown bagged beers get strewn around town as litter.  There's a nice little pile of them next to where I live.  Seems that spot is the point at which the beverage has been consumed and is ready for the pitch. 

To the naysayers and doom and gloom predictions, the same was said about restaurants and bars when the smoking ban was proposed....seems they all went out of business just as predicted eh?  NOT.

1.) It is never reasonable to punish law-abiding citizens for the crimes of the wrong-doers.  Limiting alcohol sales does just that.  Social issues can never be solved strictly by legislation.

2.) Occassionally, I do prefer to buy a single beer or two as opposed to an entire six-pack.  I am not much of a drinker and do not rarely have more than one beer in a sitting.  And no, I do not drink it with a straw or straight from the bag.

3.) The issue of litter is an entirely different issue that has little to do with the issue of vagrancy and public intoxication.  Jacksonville has long been known as a city that discards its trash on the public thoroughfares -- stand at any busy intersection and try to count the cigarette butts...

4.) Doom and gloom has nothing to do with it -- economics do.  If you take away a man's livelihood under the guise of social reform you are setting a dangerous precident.  This proposal reduces the amount of time a store can legally sell alcohol by half thereby reducing the profits the owner can earn.  This will create business failures which then create vacancies which contribute to blight.  The idea is to attract businesses to these areas, not drive them out.

Gotta run, there's a Ms. Carrie Nation on my other line....

[walter]

I'm not reading the proposed legislation as a complete ban on all alcohol sales until 5pm, but I could be wrong.  If Jerry could clarify this point perhaps..  as I would be against a complete ban.

As to the economic issues, yes a complete ban would impact business no doubt, so I agree with that analysis.  If it is to curb single sales I don't believe the economic impact would be that great as to cause a business to fold.  If they are selling that many singles perhaps the business isn't all that beneficial to downtown anyway.

As to the legality of the product.  A rose in a glass tube is a novelty, by itself its completely legal and should be sold right?  However, it is used for illegal purposes and contributes to drug addiction and blight in the neighborhood, so banning the sale of them is valid no?  Selling single, chilled beers in brown bags contributes to alcoholism and blight, I would say banning their sale during certain hours is equivelant to banning the rose.

bottom line for me though is this proposal should only target the sale of single beers, anything else six-packs etc.. I'm against that.  I know that there is going to be a really cool beer selection in the new city market and I surely don't want to have to wait until 5pm to buy a sixer.

[downtownparks]

We all thought it was singles at first too, Walter, but when Jerry came the SPAR monthly meeting, he made clear it was ALL sales of beer and wine downtown, and he would like to include Springfield north in that too.

I agree, if we could ban singles sales, or at least enforce public drinking laws, and make it illegal to knowingly give those little baggies to singles sales, I would support it.

Go look at hogans creek. Its not filled with empty 12 packs.

[walter]

We all thought it was singles at first too, Walter, but when Jerry came the SPAR monthly meeting, he made clear it was ALL sales of beer and wine downtown, and he would like to include Springfield north in that too.

if thats the case, thats ridiculous, sorry Jerry I can't support that. 

[Jerry Moran]

I don't know how I can further clarify the provisions of the proposed ordinance.  If you have a question, please go back and carefully re-read what I posted.

As for including Springfield (Section B of Zone 1), it was purely an accommodation to Springfield.  If Springfield would like to absorb the daytime inebriates that will leave the Core by not participating in the ordinance, it's Springfield's choice.

As for what other communities do, here is one of many. Unfortunately, all we can do in FL is to limit hours of sales:

Booze ban
Seattle will prohibit fortified wine and malt liquor in Pioneer Square.By Rick Anderson

Saveway was at one time selling 800 gallons of 40-ounce beer per month.
Robin LaananenNO MORE Mr. Nice Guy. City Hall is sacking its longtime good-neighbor program intended to voluntarily limit the sales of cheap, high-alcohol products to chronic street alcoholics in Pioneer Square.

Instead, city officials for the first time will ask the state to impose compulsory product bans and other forcible restrictions by legally declaring Pioneer Square an official Alcohol Impact Area. Similar mandatory changes may also be imposed on the International District, Capitol Hill, and other city neighborhoods where voluntary programs have produced only limited success.

"In a nutshell, our report's going to say we failedâ€"the voluntary system just didn't workâ€"and we're going to ask [the Seattle City Council to] direct us to go to the State Liquor Control Board and ask that restrictions be made mandatory in Pioneer Square," says Gary Johnson of the Department of Neighborhoods.

The council should take action next month. That's the next step in a formal alcohol-impact process that began in August last year when the city's voluntary, good-neighbor areas were drawn up under a new state law (earlier good-neighbor plans dating to the mid-1990s also failed but didn't have the new legal component of eventual mandatory restrictions).

Liquor board spokesperson Bob Riler says that besides forcibly banning to-go sales of specific types and brands of alcohol, formation of a mandatory Alcohol Impact Area under the two-year-old law would allow the city more time to review and comment on liquor applications and limit hours of liquor sales.

Some officials think Seattle could end up with a citywide sales ban on bargain-priced fortified wine and malt liquor that are favored by street drinkers. The voluntary program showed sales restrictions to be unworkable if they're imposed in one area but not in another nearby; that merely moved the problem around.

Most importantly, the city found that one reluctant retailer can single-handedly sink the plan if it's voluntary. In Pioneer Square, officials say, that retailer was the little Saveway Market on Occidental Avenue South, where the biggest sign in its front windows is a beer logo.

"Saveway was the only holdout," says Nancy Woodford, a Pioneer Square community advocate who met with retailers and landlords. "They continue to advertise the sale of prohibited products." That "hurts the good-neighbor stores who are in full compliance," she says.

(One other store had been holding out. But that outlet, the historic Campbell & Fuller deli on Yesler Way, quietly went out of business a few months back.)

A Saveway spokesperson, who wouldn't give her name, says the store owners felt the restrictions were unfairly applied. Though several other Pioneer Square outlets restricted sales, Saveway balked after watching potential customers stroll or ride a free bus a few blocks to the Chinatown/ International District and buy 40-ounce beers, $2 wine, and other items on the city's 24-page list of restricted products.

"It's not like we were the bad people," the Saveway spokesperson says. "We didn't have a problem signing the agreementâ€"if everyone else signed it."

Liquor board records list Saveway's owner/licensee as Jay Y. Hur, who has filed to transfer the license to a family member, Patty Ann Hur.

The store is a half block from Occidental Park, a chronic drinkers' hangout. City records show Saveway was at one time selling 800 gallons of 40-ounce beer per month.

Patrick Vanzo, a supervisor in the King County Department of Community and Human Services, says "It's very easy to walk that neighborhood and see stores that previously sold [cheap booze] and they don't have people coming in and out of them inebriated. Then stand in front of this store [Saveway] and watch the sales, the overservice and the people coming out, and the drinking behavior that begins in that area."

That could change if mandatory controls are imposed, possibly by early next year, officials say. City Council member Margaret Pageler thinks the threat of extending mandatory restrictions and the license hassles that goes with them could cause retailers in other areas to opt for strict voluntary compliance.

"If we enact this ordinance for Pioneer Square," she says, "the merchants in Capitol Hill [for example] will understand that if they continue to contribute to the death of chronic inebriates by feeding their habits, we'll extend the ordinance to Capitol Hill, and it's in their own survival interest as businesses to be good neighbors."

Though treating alcoholism is vastly more complicated than just limiting sales, council member Richard Conlin says restrictions have proved to be a creditable contribution to the effort (each chronic street drunk can cost taxpayers an estimated $100,000 a year in medical and public-safety expenditures). Once reluctant to back the ban, "Right now," Conlin says, "I'm at the stage where I'm saying: How fast can we move?"

Here's a few other links for now:

Seattle:  http://www.cityofseattle.net/BAN/public_safety_AIA.htm

Vallejo, California:   http://www.fight-back.org/vprojects.html

Los Angeles: http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/05-06/bill/sen/sb_0101-0150/sb_148_cfa_20050705_130105_asm_comm.html

Oregon:  http://www.leg.state.or.us/97reg/measures/sb1000.dir/sb1011.int.html

[downtownparks]

Thats great Jerry. Did you actually read the story you posted? They aren't looking for a blanket ban either. They have a list of items they want prohibited. This is in essence some posters on here have said they would support. Ban the sales of singles, and you will get the desired effect.

Please, correct me if I am wrong, what you and Redman are asking for is a prohibition of all non- restaurant alcohol sales until 5pm, correct?

This means that if I want to go to WinnDixie before the jags game to buy some Yingling (hardly the preferred beer on the street) I wont be able to so. Is this correct, or is it not?

[downtownparks]

From Seattle

Beside alcohol content, these products differ from most other beer and wine. They're cheap with a high sugar content: they're sweet. For chronic street inebriates, the sugar kills hunger. They rush and crash.

4000 other brands of beer are available in Washington State.

Beer and Malt Products

    *

      Bull Ice 8%
    *

      Busch Ice 5.9%
    *

      Colt 45 Ice 6.1%
    *

      Colt 45 Malt Liquor 6.4 %
    *

      Hurricane Ice Malt Liquor 7.5%
    *

      Keystone Ice 5.9%
    *

      Lucky Ice Ale Premium 6.1%
    *

      Mickey's Iced Brewed Ale 5.8%
    *

      Mickey's Malt Liquor 5.6%
    *

      Miller High Life Ice 5.9%
    *

      Milwaukee's Best Ice 5.9%
    *

      Milwaukee's Best Premium Ice Beer 5.9%
    *

      Natural Ice 5.6%
    *

      Old Milwaukee Ice 5.9%
    *

      Olde English "800" 7.5%
    *

      Pabst Ice 4.8%
    *

      Rainier Ale 7.3%
    *

      Red Bull Malt Liquor 5.5%
    *

      Red Dog 4.9%
    *

      Schmidt Ice 5.8%
    *

      Special 800 Reserve 6.0%
    *

      St. Ide's Liquor and Special Brews 7.3%
    *

      Steel Reserve (Five different types â€" 8.1% for four types, 5.5% for one type)

Wine Products

    *

      Cisco 18.0%
    *

      Gino's Premium Blend 14.0%
    *

      MD 20/20 13.5%
    *

      Night Train Express 17.0%
    *

      Richard's Wild Irish Rose 13.9%
    *

      Thunderbird 18.0%

[Jerry Moran]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thats great Jerry. Did you actually read the story you posted? They aren't looking for a blanket ban either. They have a list of items they want prohibited. This is in essence some posters on here have said they would support. Ban the sales of singles, and you will get the desired effect.

Please, correct me if I am wrong, what you and Redman are asking for is a prohibition of all non- restaurant alcohol sales until 5pm, correct?

This means that if I want to go to WinnDixie before the jags game to buy some Yingling (hardly the preferred beer on the street) I wont be able to so. Is this correct, or is it not?

One more time... Carefully read my postings.