Elections Have Consequences—For Nightlife

The Mayor Has a Plan to Let You Drink Later, Get Home Safer, and Punish the Rowdy Dickheads Who Ruin Bars for Everyone

Comments

1
None of the proposals about noise or "meatheads" require longer bar hours to be implemented. Those are good ideas that ought to be tried. As for the bartime extension, I am incredulous at the mayor's proposal on a number of levels.

For starters, the city doesn't have the authority to make the change. The state liquor control board is the arbiter, and no one has consulted them. What in hell was McGinn thinking?

Secondly, McGinn consulted his tavern buddies, but not the neighborhood associations. Hey, wasn't this dude supposed to be a liberal? Looks to me like a clone of Nichols, in that he does whatever his campaign backers tell him to do, running roughshod over the neighborhoods in the process. Looks like one more hypocrite to me.

I supported McGinn in the last election, but I see that this was a big mistake. Is there a recall process here?
2
mike "king of town halls" mcginn not consulting neighborhoods? what about the two-month comment period that will, inevitably, involve a slough of town hall meetings?
3
Yeah, there's the 2-month comment period, but McGinn never consulted the neighborhood associations prior to formulating the proposal. The only interested parties he talked to were his hand-picked consultant and the bar owners who funded his campaign.

This kind of thing is the same old shit in a new sandwich. What happens to these jokers when they get into office, anyway? Something in the water, is there?
4
I call bullshit. Mister G is clearly a confederate--he pretends to be a McGinn supporter in order to pull the old "I used to support so-and-so but then I realized..."

One of the oldest political tricks in the book.
5
Hey Mister G,
Did you come to the conference to voice your concerns? It was open to the public and they took questions after presenting the proposals. Yeah, proposals, not laws. Its the basis to start a dialogue. Not one person stepped up to complain about the proposals. The people that asked questions got answers to their questions.
If you dont show up, don't expect to be heard.
6
"The initiative has a very large number of loose ends," says Richard Nordstrom, president of the Belltown Community Council.

What an idiot! Establishments have always, and will continue to be, liable for the trouble caused at their behest. The main difference now, is that the Mayor running the show is NOT a total dick kissing the stenchly asses of downtown muckety-muck knuckleheads who wouldn't know a party if it was stapled to their droopy balls.

And it doesn't help matters when every time some asshole does something stupid after 10:00 pm, the TV and print press go into default cliche mode:
It was an "alcohol-fueled" this or that. What a bunch of yutzes.
7
"Did you come to the conference to voice your concerns? It was open to the public and they took questions after presenting the proposals."

Oh, please. Get serious.

"The main difference now, is that the Mayor running the show is NOT a total dick kissing the stenchly asses of downtown muckety-muck knuckleheads who wouldn't know a party if it was stapled to their droopy balls."

He's not kissing the asses of the downtown real estate interests, but he's kissing the asses of the bar owners. They're both campaign contributors, and what really matters is that McGinn is just one more kiss-ass politician.
8
Funny @7, I'm not part of the bar owner contingent you seem to think Mayor McGinn is "ass-kissing", but regardless, he DID take the time to answer MY question (which, BTW, specifically asked about OTHER non-bar constituencies being involved in the process).

So, in terms of "getting serious", maybe you should have made an effort to show up to ask your own questions; or would that have removed your sense of being entitled to an opinion without any actual facts at your disposal?

And as others have pointed out, these proposals are NOT intended as legislation; they're a starting point to what is going to be a very involved conversation between the various stakeholders, which WILL include residents, establishment owners, patrons, WSLCB, SPD, neighborhood associations, and anyone else who WANTS to participate. McGinn as much as admitted that some of these proposals will no doubt be modified considerably, based on those conversations. But, you have to start somewhere, and these seem (as someone who actually bothered to show up to hear about them,) a reasonably good place to start that conversation.
9
"So, in terms of "getting serious", maybe you should have made an effort to show up to ask your own questions; or would that have removed your sense of being entitled to an opinion without any actual facts at your disposal?"

To have an opinion, I am required to crash the mayor's press conference and/or be part of his rock 'n roll theme party? Get serious, you arrogant smartass.

"And as others have pointed out, these proposals are NOT intended as legislation; they're a starting point to what is going to be a very involved conversation between the various stakeholders"

I supported McGinn, but that was a huge mistake. In this case, he developed these proposals with input from a hand-picked consultant and from his campaign contributors. Sound familiar? McGinn is just as corrupt as anyone else.
10
McGinn is dead in the water. First there was his siding with the derelicts downtown against everyone else. Then there was his stunts on the tunnel, which went 180 degrees against the promise that was key to putting him over the top in the election. And now there is his pandering to cronies in a proposal to keep the bars open 24 hours a day.

I'm not politically active beyond voting, but if someone starts a recall effort I will be happy to pass petitions and to donate money to get this jackass out of office ASAP. McGinn is a corrupt joke.
11
p.s.: It's going to be fun to watch McGinn go out into the neighborhoods and be told, in the politest Seattle way, "F YOU and the horse you rode in on." What a jerk!
12
One more thing: What "questions?" I don't have any. I've seen everything I need to know. The mayor wants to keep this city's bars open all night, and he ignored the neighborhood leaders in the formulation of the idea while spending plenty of time with his campaign contributors.

This is exactly what other politicians here have been since time immemorial. They pow-wow with their cronies and spring their plans on everyone else. Then the people find out about it and drive them back to the cave where they came from.

McGinn is absolutely no different than the jerk he succeeded. True, the contributors are a different set of people, but a special interest is a special interest. Same shit, different sandwich. F YOU, McGinn.
13
If you don't live near "nightlife hotspots" then the hours of operation for a certain club shouldn't be a concern. If you do happen to live in close proximity to a group of clubs you should reasonably expect to encounter noise and street drunks. You don't buy a house or rent a place next to railroad tracks then demand burlington northern makes quieter trains when the noise keeps you up at night. You move somewhere else. Seems simple to me.
14
If you don't live near "nightlife hotspots" then the hours of operation for a certain club shouldn't be a concern. If you do happen to live in close proximity to a group of clubs you should reasonably expect to encounter noise and street drunks. You don't buy a house or rent a place next to railroad tracks then demand burlington northern makes quieter trains when the noise keeps you up at night. You move somewhere else. Seems simple to me.
15
I think Mr. G has an EGO issue.
16
mister g, kindly shut up. it's clear you've already made up your mind. you could email the mayor a question if going to a meeting is too much for you, but apparently even that is out of the question.

anyways, about your original concern about closing times, currently, since all bars have last call at like 145, there is a rush to drink more right before last call, and when people leave the bars, there are problems. first off, there is too high of a demand for cabs and too few in supply. second, with all the drunk people emptying out onto the street at once, fights are prone to happen. it's not mcginn just wanting bars to stay open and serve 24/7, it's trying to keep things like drunk driving and public nuisance down.
17
@everyone, but Mister G

you guys seriously need to get more serious...and have more anger laced in your comments. and then bitch about shit without ever looking at the whole story, just what you want to see.

oh, and don't forget to belittle the ones who don't agree with you.

See, that's how you get your point across...the GOP way
18
Of course the club owners are thrilled. The idea of lengthened hours of operation generating all that 'tax revenue' is, pardon the pun, intoxicating. And the clubs don't have to change a thing. I'd be excited too.

Except I'm a mere resident.

This is the problem:

"But nightlife advocates say there are teeth in several of the proposals. As currently written, noise rules are rarely enforced. McGinn's plan would require proof of a noise violation—not just a complaint or the sense that a club is being too loud—before officers could issue a ticket. New regulations would require a resident to complain and police to go inside the complainant's home, shut all the doors and windows, and then measure the noise levels to see if the business was louder than 80 decibels. If so, the bar could face a fine of $1,000."

Teeth? Not even dentures. Given cuts in police staffing levels on the horizon the idea that cops are going to spend much time dealing with noise complaints which lead to this procedure of responding to a complaint, closing the windows, measuring the sound is preposterous.

It isn't going to happen. Cops already have plenty of real problems to contend with in conjunction with the Seattle nightlife 'industry'.

But we have to start somewhere and this is the time to let your representatives know what you want.

For me at the very minimum this language from Council Member Licata's proposed Nighttime Disturbance Ordinance needs to be adopted before we can even begin to think of expanding club hours of operation:

4. “Unreasonable noise” means loud and raucous, and frequent, repetitive, or continuous sounds that are audible to a person of normal hearing at a distance of seventy-five (75) feet or more from the source of the noise. Unreasonable noise may be created by:
a. The amplified or unamplified human voice;
b. Any horn or siren attached to a motor vehicle, except such sounds that are made to warn of danger or that are specifically permitted or required by law;
c. The starting, operation, repair, rebuilding or testing of any motor vehicle, motorcycle, off-highway vehicle, or internal combustion engine.

Sound metering equipment like alcohol testers requires an initial outlay of capital, training for the operator and ongoing calibration and opens a lucrative new sideline for defense attorneys.

On the other hand in this age of shrinking budgets we can let cops deal with crime and turn loose parking officers (or something like them) to write citations.
19
"mister g, kindly shut up"

Well, I can tell you this much: Next election, a pro-McGinn vote will be an anti-McGinn vote. Just look at the pure politics a second. Did he add any support with this stupid move? I doubt it: The party and play crowd was already in his corner. Many of the others who voted for McGinn to punish Nichols over his mishandling of the snow storm will be switching.

McGinn has very badly misread Seattle voters in general, and the results of his election in particular. People who voted for him because of how Nichols handled the snow storm are people who want a clean, orderly city that works. How many of these same voters are going to support a mayor who sides with derelicts and drunks, and whose supporters tell people to "shut up?"

If there is a credible recall effort, I will participate directly in Seattle politics for the first time. I'll donate money to recall this walking disaster, and pass petitions to recall this walking disaster, and donate money to his opponent, and volunteer for his opponent's campaign.

"Shut up," you say. In your fuckin' dreams, is my reply.
20
@Mister G: You do realize that our former mayor was Greg Nickels, and not Nichols, as you have spelled it. It is kind of hard to take you seriously when you don't know the difference.
21
As if it'd been easy to take him seriously before?

These cranky, popcorn-eating, overweight, Ann-Coulter-picture-licking, obnoxious, politico-masturbateurs shouldn't be acknowledged.

As a musician and a person fairly well involved with this city's nightlife, I'm very excited to see our new Mayor taking steps toward changes I've been wanting to see for a very long time.

From now on, whenever Mister G posts anything, let our only reply be, "Douchebag."
22
Suck it Mister G.
23
i head home late from bars drunk every now and then... i am not a jackass, never have been, never will be. i'm concerned that enacting a law to ticket 'jackasses' will allow the SPD to ticket anyone who is noticably drunk regardless of their behavior. i am not in favor of a discretionary law that allows police to decide when they want to write a citation for any drunk person. it is this kind of vague law that will allow police officers to abuse it in order to create more revenue for the city. no. no no. no. not good....

imagine trying to fight the ticket in court! they wouldn't believe a word of what you have to say because.... you were drunk... case closed pay the fine.

it's funny how such a liberal city wants to further restrict the public freedoms. i don't get it.

24
So we've got an entire city - nightlife promoters, cops, mayor's office - all meeting to make a single proposal, rather than some club going to the liquor board to ask for their license to change. And some people can't see how that can be more effective? Really?
25
"You do realize that our former mayor was Greg Nickels, and not Nichols, as you have spelled it. It is kind of hard to take you seriously when you don't know the difference."

Here is how seriously to take me: I vote, same as you. Whether he was Nichols or Nickels, I voted against him. McGinn is easier to spell, but however it's spelled I'm voting against his corrupt, stupid ass too, except this time I'll be donating money and working for his opponent.

So, you pedantic idiot, were equal. One vote for you, one for me. How ya like that shit?
26
Wow, toss aside the Clearasil--It looks like Seattle might just join the big boys of American cities and grow up! Staying open for business; buses that run during the very same hours people are actually out and don't want to be driving their cars...what's next, privatizing liquor sales? Oh the possibilities! Is it too early for an urban graduation party? I'd better run out & pick up a cheese, ahem salmon, tray! Ms. Hawk
27
It chaps my hide to think that we even have to run to the stupid fucking WSLCB and beg their permission to run our city any way we like. The time has come to eliminate that useless and redundant layer of law enforcement and tax collection bureaucracy.
28
Given that it takes SPD 1-3 hours to respond to a rowdy/noise complaint I think Diaz is sucking up to the person who hired him. It is just not realistic that SPD can handle it.

I think this is going in the wrong direction and that bars or the serving of liquor should be closing earlier.
29
I agree with the idea of keeping bars open later, but the new noise complaint system sounds absurd. If I were a resident who got woken up by noise, I wouldn't want to invite a cop into my home so they could 'take readings'--though, maybe that's just a commentary on the nature of my lifestyle.

Why not just have cops on those little parking enforcement vehicles drive around with a decibel reader and take readings from each corner once or twice a night? Problem solved.

Also, side point: I really hate the rhetoric of 'being involved in Seattle nightlife.' 'Nightlife' isn't one specific thing that one is either 'involved in' or not. Some people go to bars. Some people go to bars late. That doesn't make it a massive community of people with the same interests fighting for their right to have big, mutual parties. Saying you're 'heavily into Seattle nightlife' just makes you sound ignorant.
30
(Just to clarify, I don't ever picture myself being in a situation where I would be calling a noise complaint on any bars, given that I'm usually out at some bar or another until last call. But I think it's preposterous to make a law that requires inviting police into your home to enforce, and then say it's the easiest and fairest way to solve a problem.)
31
@midlander
> You don't buy a house or rent a place next to railroad tracks then demand burlington northern makes quieter trains when the noise keeps you up at night.

You're absolutely right there, but that's not what's happening.

A better analogy is that trains run until 2AM when you move in, then Burlington Northern dumps buckets of cash into politicians' coffers to get the time pushed back to 5AM, easily recouping their money while slashing your sleep time. And if you bought a place, good luck selling now that the law has changed right under you to fuck over anyone who wants to go to bed before 5AM.
32
if you live in an urban area there is going to be noise. it's the city. if you'd like to live somewhere quiet, i'm sure your expensive nightlife centered condo will sell for enough money for you to buy a house somewhere nice and quiet. NOT IN THE DAMN CITY.
if you rent, move.
interesting fact about being alive: your environment may change at any given time. politics or not. remove yourself from the offending environment, adapt or suffer. whining like a little bitch will not do you any good. at all.
33
I'm pessimistic. I also regretably voted for McGinn. (an aside:TUNNEL???!!!)

I am imagining heading downtown to work at 7:00am to find drunks all over as they spill out of bars as the sun rises.

While SPD is hanging out in belltown condos to assess noise levels with the Nordstroms of the city, the rest of the city will become even less safe than it already is.
34
Mayor McGinn seems to have a very narrow "tunnel" vision when it comes to politics. The City of Seattle does not exist in a vacuum, it requires the cooperation of the county and state.

This proposal yet again illustrates McGinn's Seattle only view. The county is required to increase bus service under this plan. Were they consulted? They are looking at service cuts. The state is required to ease liquor laws. They apparently weren't consulted.
35
Walking the fence on this one....I can see where small buisness can make more money...but also see where the drunks and the aftermath of the drunks on a 24 hour basis would be
detrimental...

What I would like to see is these bars turn into grills say after 2:00am, each having their specials and holding the over intoxicated, feeding them good eats and coffee at good prices into the morning...

This would allow a bar to be not only night entertainment but also fill in the non open hours with paying custumers filling the grill, eating, and sobering up while keeping them off the streets....
36
@1 Why consult "the neighborhoods"? It's their job to voice their concerns to the Mayor, not the other way around.

P.S. Fuck the WSLCB. It's a throwback to 1930's prohibitionist croneyism, and about as useful as an infected appendix.

@34 McGinn has a Seattle-only view because, well, that's the scope of his job. The County and State don't cooperate with Seattle about much of anything. At a certain point, fuck 'em. Let 'em pack their bunchy pant suits into a CNG-powered Astro van and come do something about it. This is politics, not Scrabble.
37
Oh wow! I gotta look into this!
38
Heh actually I wish that bars would keep their kitchens open past 11pm. It's the alcohol that makes people into "disturbances"--food just makes us happy.
Ooh or the mayor could mandate Pho Than Bros stay open til 3. Hot dogs get old after a while...
39
Mr. G's clearly trolling btw.
40
Notice that McGin's idea is going nowhere fast. Face it, the guy is toast. One-termer. Just watch.
41
Hello Troll! :/
42
Hi, loser!
43
A lot of wild speculations here. Just because a bar CAN stay open until 3 or 4am doesn't mean everyone's going to stay. Crowds thin out. People leave. Everyone doesn't wait till closing time to be tossed out, like it or not. But 1:30 sure comes fast even if you're not a super-late-night partier.