BYOB Regulations On Their Way?

At the upcoming August meeting, the city council will discuss an ordinance placing rules and regulations in place for BYOB businesses. If customers are allowed to bring in their own alcohol to a club/restaurant/place of business, that business will be required to obtain a permit. To obtain the permit, businesses must: provide security guards, close at or before 2:15am, and not allow alcohol in the parking lot. This is most likely a response to such places as Chester's Nightclub, where neighbors have repeated complaints about noise and Kevin Brown was shot and killed by a cop in early June. Councilmember Sheryl Cole has pretty much admitted that the city felt that such a response is necessary. She told News8:

"We've been concerned about citizens' public safety. The neighborhoods complained about the noise, and anytime you're talking about public safety I think it's very important that the city decides to act."

If a permit is not obtained, the business/owner will be dealt a Class C Misdemeanor charge. This possible regulation may be the kiss of death (or at least a costly impediment) to some local establishments. Do you think such an ordinance is needed?

Photo by Kristina B on flickr

Contact the author of this article or email tips@austinist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By Elizabeth S. in News on July 24, 2007 1:45 PM 0 Comments

Comments [rss]

Wes

"What's the point of the security guards? Most places that are BYOB are small restaurants that can't afford the alcohol permit to begin with, so how will they afford security?"

Bingo.

guest

One possibly affected business that comes to mind is Ginny's Little Longhorn. I would hate to think that they would lose money. When it is only $2.50 for 2 setups to see Dale Watson perform on a Sunday afternoon,it is obvious they value the simple and inexpensive.

I also know that people go out to the parking lot, because it can get stuffy inside.

The whole crowd is the most friendly and peaceful.

guest

remember how, a month or so ago, on the front page of the Statesman, there was a story about the City's budget report for 2007? And how the City was spending over its budget for this fiscal year?

My guess is there's a crack team of folks over at City Hall figuring out areas where they can squeeze more tax revenue into play. This would represent one of those areas, sadly.

jchapa13

At the August 9th council meeting, we need to tell the council that this is RETARDED. If there are problems at Chester's Night Club, fix Chester's Night Club!

Scooby

I didn't even think of the restaurants. Now I'm definitely against it.

There oughta be a law against saying "there oughta be a law".

greycat

What's the point of the security guards? Most places that are BYOB are small restaurants that can't afford the alcohol permit to begin with, so how will they afford security? Not only that, but I don't see security guards at places that *do* have an alcohol permit.

Sometimes I really wonder if City Council actually thinks about things or if it's really such standard policy that everything needs a knee jerk reaction.

Elizabeth S.

Hey Scooby - Thanks for the link to that article.

Scooby

Link that didn't work in comment above:

http://media.www.dailytexanonline.com/media/storage/paper410/news/2007/07/16/StateLocal/Future.Of.Chesters.Uncertain.Community.Divided-2923975.shtml

Daily Texan article regarding Chester's from 7/16.

heyzeus

Providing security guards is the real financial burden, and the only patently unnecessary provision in the permit. I'm pretty sure drinking in a parking lot is already illegal, and closing at 2:15 matches the rules that apply to other public venues where alcohol is consumed.

Scooby

There are gazillion things going on at and around Chester's that the city can already crack down on. These are things that the neighbors already complain about: noise, public urination, miscellaneous traffic stuff like blocking streets & driveways, littering, trespassing, etc. Just because a cop screwed up while answering a call and capped a guy in the back (allegedly) at this one place doesn't mean we need another useless law. The shooting might not have occured if the cops had been aggressively enforcing nuisance-type crimes in the first place. They are enforcing everything now, and I'm sure Chester's will soon be out of business (whether that enforcement is, at it's base, harrassment is arguable).

Of course, with a new ordinance, council gets to demonstrate that it's "doing something" and isn't just meeting once a week to spew hot air. I'll reserve judgement 'til I see the actual ordinance, but I'm inclined to be against it.