Yesterday was a good day in Ald. Bryon Eagon’s ongoing fight for Madison student privileges. Note that I didn’t say “student rights.”
“Rights” would imply the achievement of equal treatment, or at least the acquisition of a promise of equal treatment. It would imply that in the past, students have been treated unfairly and, through Eagon’s advocacy, they will now be granted something they’re entitled to.
We are not entitled to what Eagon gave us. But we’ll take it anyway. That’s how privileges work.
Yesterday, the Common Council Organization Committee approved language that will direct the mayor to appoint a student as a voting member of the Alcohol License Review Committee. Currently, there is a student representative, but he does not have a vote. The measure still needs to be approved by the full Council, but the Council rarely rebukes a recommendation of the CCOC.
Supporters of the proposal reason that students are a large constituency in Madison and, therefore, should have a say in the development of its alcohol policy.
Students, whether legally or illegally, certainly represent a disproportionately large portion of the alcohol industry’s consumer base. Even the most vigilant ID-checking liquor stores derive large profits from underage drinking.
Yet some, such as Ald. Judy Compton, District 16, see things differently. If students get their own representative, perhaps other large constituencies, such as religious organizations, should get one as well, she wondered aloud at a meeting on the issue.
In fact, according to Ald. Michael Schumacher, District 18 — the other CCOC member who voted against Eagon’s plan — many members of “the industry” were unhappy with the prospect of a student vote on the ALRC. Schumacher himself wasn’t certain why alcohol sellers, including bar owners, would be so reluctant to have their biggest fans at the bargaining table. However, if you take that romanticized image of bar owner — a former Hell’s Angel or perhaps a man who wishes to promote love of fine wine — and replace it with the image of a shrewd businessman, it is clear why the booze dealers don’t want the boozers making decisions.
They don’t want more bars. They don’t want competition. That’s what they assume students will give them.
Take the controversy over the proposed bar at University Square. A developer proposed a enormous Badger-themed restaurant/bar that would cater to both of-age and underage people in the area. Eagon and other student-types were big supporters. Schumacher and other alders who supported more restrictive bar policies were against it. In the end, the nanny-staters, to use a right-wing buzz word, won the day and drove the threat of competition away from existing bars.
However, the bar owners and some members of the Council seem to have missed the point of adding the student vote. The student representation is not necessarily about adding more bars. In fact, it may very well be more about getting current bars more customers — even ones who aren’t there to drink.
As Ald. Shiva Bidar-Sielaff, District 5, explained to me, she supported the measure — which requires the student member be 18 — because she believes the city could use input from the underage constituency, much of which is shut off from a lot of city’s entertainment and social opportunities because of the legal barriers associated with alcohol.
There are very few venues with alcohol licenses that allow underagers in at night. Madison Avenue was one of the only ones that did, and besides being stigmatized as a place where high school kids used fake IDs to pass as 18, it was eventually slapped with a month-long suspension for serving underagers. It has now announced plans to become a boutique bowling alley. But bowling should not be the only social gathering option for law-abiding underage students — and I’m certainly not suggesting that drinking legally is the only drinking option. Too many students are shut off from great live music. Some would like to enjoy a late-night serving of cheese curds. Some would frankly enjoy a game of pool against an older and drunker gambling addict.
But until their voice is heard, few bars will see the advantage of applying for those types of liquor licenses. Few members of the Council will see the benefit of easing restrictions for underage violations and diverting underclassmen (and quite a few upperclassmen) from the relentless cycle of basement keggers to more rewarding investments in city nightlife.
Thank you, Bryon Eagon for this opportunity. It may not be our right to have representation on the ALRC, but we should sure as hell defend it like it’s one.
Jack Craver ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in history and editor of The Sconz (thesconz.com), a local politics and culture blog.
