Well, this started as a topic, ended up as a rant....sorry :roll:
So, last year they pass local legislation so they can shut off your elecrticity for partying, and some other stuff, "to curb partying". That's to go with the TABC task forces, SWT po-po, ad nauseam...
As a seasoned vet of the party scene (the lyrics to Sublime's Tequila were written for me), I can attest that the reason there are so many house parties, is because the damn bars close too damn early!!!
When I lived in Lubbock, even though the town itself is dry (you have to drive 30 mins to buy even a beer unless you're in a restaurant), you can still hang at the bars until 2am any night of the week.
From personal experience, I know that when people stay out at the bars till 2, they get really sloshed, and rarely think of having a house party. House parties, in general, were rare, mainly because everyone knew they could go get tanked at the bars.
I guess what I'm saying is, they should get to the root of the problem, not the symptoms. Treating the symptoms never cures anything.
Well, hopefully that 2am law will pass...I was reading some emails about elections and if certain people get elected, the 2am time will become law? Maybe it was just a generalization...
anyhoo, I do agree it will add to drunk driving. Perhaps since it is a college town, they could run the busses if business picks up that much? I mean, the town is so small I wouldn't see a problem having busses run from the square to a select few spots around town....but hell, even Austin has been slacking on the bus transportation at night from the bars... grr.
There's a banner I saw just yesterday over the Tavern saying something about "come vote to allow us to stay open till 2am", but I was on the way to work and couldn't stop to catch the details...
As far as the later hours contributing to more drunks... well, that may be true, but I know that a good lot of folks that will drink around here till around 10-11, hop on I-35 to Austin or SA, then they drive home all sloshed at 2, 3, 4 or later in the a.m. So, do you want drunks driving 35mph or 65mph? 3 miles or 30?
Also, I heard a really good argument recently from a bar owner on the square talking about the fact that the square closes @ midnight greatly reduces the kind of talent that will perform here. I can see their point...
You do have to consider that I'm Irish, and I'd like to see bars open 24/7, since not everyone works or lives on the "9-5" schedule.....but that's another topic for another day
I've had this discussion several times with a friend of mine who is a Sgt. for SMPD. The city has looked at the tax revenue generated by 2 more hours of alcohol sales versus the amount of money they would have to pay the officers to enforce the additional 2 hours. The city would be loosing money. I think the figure in increased revenue per year was around 24,000 dollars. That isn't jack for the amount of revenue needed to pay overtime and added officers it would take to patrol that extra 2 hours for a year. So, the property tax payers would have to make up the difference. Who are the property tax payers? Not the students who are the ones that want the 2am drinking limit. As a tax payer, I would rather see my money go towards more beneficial things such as roads, city services, better parks for the children of San Marcos, etc. I don't want my tax money to pay for the ability of college kids to drink for 2 more hours. That, in my opinion, would be a complete waste of MY tax money.
the SMPD provides one source of information for opposition, however; SMPD would rather not see change and growth.
In SM we currently have the SMPD, University police, and sheriff. I'm sure something could be worked out to provide an extra 2 hours of patrolling.
The reasoning of costs issues probably assumes that people who visit these bars are inherently bad, and that extra hours will be a shot of adrenaline to their head, thus; enabling them to disrupt order and vandalize the city.
I dont know the statistics for SM on the amount of atrocities that occur that can be attributed to bars being open till 12:00. I think we can say that is fairly safe at those times, because the next day businesses seem to be ready to deliver another night of music, drinks, socializing.
An extra two hours could not possibly be so atrocious that SM would need an extra 5 officers to patrol from 12am-2am in order to supress crowds and thus costing a burden among the community.
As kenman pointed out, having these early limits does inhibit SM growth for a night life. Bands have reservations about coming to play, because they will be forced to move out. This results in less turn out and poor business. People leave bars wanting more, take to the streets and go out of the city to finish wut they have started, this in turn can create more problems than neccessary.
Lets keep our customers here, and promote growth and market for new night life to entertain the city. Tourism provides money and revenue into the city that will offset the costs for maintenance. When limits are imposed upon tourists, and cops are not willing to do their job, then we lose revenue.