A city recommendation to regulate drink specials at downtown bars was received by the Alcohol License Review Committee Thursday. The committee’s action to receive the report, without making any further recommendations, sends the report to the City Council, which will consider the report at its May 7 meeting.
Though the entire report, drafted by the ALRC subcommittee, contained several recommendations that attempt to curb binge-drinking, the most widely publicized and debated recommendation was a restriction on drink specials in bars within the proposed “entertainment district.”
Supporters of the drink-special regulation suggested two-for-one and happy-hour deals in bars increase the amount of alcohol patrons consume and therefore is a direct link to binge-drinking.
“As price goes up, consumption goes down. There is a direct correlation,” Susan Crowley, director of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, testified at the meeting.
But opponents of the regulation said prohibiting bars from advertising and having drink specials is an infringement on the rights of the tavern owners.
“I don’t think anyone has the right to tell me at what price to sell drinks, any more than they can tell me how much to charge for a hamburger,” commented Marsh Shapiro, owner of the Nitty Gritty, 223 N. Frances St.
UW-Madison students in attendance argued that the regulation gives the city a “babysitter” presence and would hurt the average student’s pocketbook.
“I don’t have much money, my friends don’t have much money, and we want to go out and have a good time,” UW graduate student Ryan Heinemann said. “This is America. We have rights. This isn’t socialism.”
Many opponents suggested limiting drink specials would not lead to a reduction in binge-drinking but would instead increase the amount of consumption at unregulated house parties.
“Students are just going to drink [before going to bars],” UW sophomore Charlie Sieb said. “They’re just not going to spend as much money, which doesn’t solve anything. As students, we are already strapped for cash; [we should be] allowed to relax.”
Members of the Dane County Tavern League criticized the university’s role in the drink-special recommendation, calling the administration hypocritical for proposing to regulate businesses downtown while continuing to sell beer to students at Memorial Union. William Lugo, the onsite evaluator of the RWJ project, said the proposed entertainment district would only encompass a small portion of downtown taverns. “Seventy-five percent of all drink specials are occurring in that hotspot,” Lugo said.
Defenders of the recommendation said legislation regulating drink specials is necessary to deterring binge-drinking.
“We’re not trying to punish or regulate the establishments,”
Noel Radomski, an aide to Chancellor Wiley, said.
Kent Palmer, chair of the subcommittee that drafted the report, said although he does not necessarily agree with all of the report’s recommendations, the suggestions have been instrumental in focusing attention on binge-drinking.
“If the least thing this report does is generate a dialogue, the hard work has been worth it,” Palmer said.
ALRC member Jessica Kachur said she would not support the recommendations until further research into alternatives is conducted.
“We need to enforce the laws we have now, not create more,” Kachur said. “We have plenty of laws on the books now. I won’t support any legislation until we know what other cities are doing.”
