We're curious as to everyone's thoughts on the Iowa City Council's apparent interest in revisiting the issue of making Iowa City bars 21-only. There's already lots of anonymous discussion on press-citizen.com at http://www.press-citizen.com/article/20100302/NEWS01/3020328/1079
21-only redux - Where will it go this time?
(13 posts) (10 voices)
-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
Two things strike me as I read the anonymous comments. First, a number of commenters seem to suggest that students are "transients" who should have less of a say in local government than other residents. As a matter of constitutional law, though, students are entitled to vote here, and that's a good thing. Beyond very minimal residence requirements, we don't scrutinize each voter's situation before deciding whether he or she has the right to vote; many "over-21s" in town might not end up spending four years here. I'd be very skeptical toward people who advocate taking the vote away from those with whom they disagree.
Second, most of the comments are focused on what effect, if any, the ordinance would have on binge drinking or on the drinking culture among college students. I can see how people would be skeptical that the ordinance would make much of dent in student drinking. But arguably the ordinance is directed not at reducing drinking among college students, but at changing the character of downtown. The city council doesn't have the power to change youth culture, but it probably does have the power to make downtown a different kind of place.
Still, it takes a certain chutzpah (or some would say disrespect) to enact the proposal only a few years after it was voted down by a majority vote. If the council enacts the ordinance itself, rather than holding another referendum, they must be gambling that the opposition voters (many of whom are students) will not be sufficiently organized or motivated to elect their own council members to undo the change. It will be interesting to see whether they are right.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I think Chris is correct the Council is attempting to change the character of downtown IC by making the large bars unprofitable. The issue has been debated for many years so they should know the costs and the benefits of doing so.
I think the difference this time is that people are fed up and they don't care what the costs are.Posted 1 year ago # -
You will see multiple arguments pro & con, what I believe, Dr. Rick Dobyns was & is right.
Posted 1 year ago # -
It's very complicated.
Business owners downtown prefer to keep things as they are, for reasons of commerce, which are perfectly understandable.Old-timers prefer not to change things due to memories of the past.
Others see the rise of Downtown violence linked to the bars, which is realistic.
And of course of there are those who think that any "prohibitive law" is a strike against freedom.
My view is personal, as a citizen of this fair city, and a parent whose kids attend the terrific public schools.
College kids will drink.
Is the best solution to give over part of our city to their habits?
Should the city promote drinking and the subsequent problems of violence, property destruction, and making the ped mall less attractive to families? Will this law suddenly make people change their habits? No.It seems as if 21 & over drinking might create a new "criminal class" of college students. This will also force the law authorities into enforcing a law in which college students are potentially targeted. Will this curb Downtown problems, or simply create further problems for both law enforcement and students?
Some people hope that a 21 & over law will reduce crime.
I believe differently.The proposed new law will create further problems for law enforcement officers.
What will realistically occur is the creation of a surge in false identification from young people who want to drink in bars.I am not in favor of laws that will contribute to the paperwork necessarily filled out by arresting officers; or laws that will automatically promote a surge in the criminal production of false identification.
If the 21 & over law is enacted.... Do it across the board--all bars, regardless of political relationship with City Council. And alert all police officers that there will be a short-term spike in their paperwork. Then 21 & over is fine.
Or else do the obvious--focus on the bars that violate existing laws. Focus on the problem areas, and bars, where drunken patrons violate the law. And police these areas.
As I said at the top--it's a complicated issue.
Do we really wan to criminalize young people?
Or do we want to stop the few who contribute the problems of our city?I love Iowa City. It's my adopted home of 20 years.
Let's preserve our Downtown.chris
Posted 1 year ago # -
“?change the character of downtown IC?”
In raising a child, most parent soon learn that prompting the kind of good behavior that they desire works better than only trying to eliminate what they do not like. This escapes the parent that says after the errant child has torn the drapes from living room windows, “I don’t know what he is going to do next.”
The wise parent does not overlook bad behavior, and punishes and corrects it. However, he and she spend even more time prompting and appreciating good behavior and regularly do it and do not just sit on their **** until they explode in anger over something that can no longer be ignored.
The same is true for the city council trying only to get rid of what they do not like. It is not going to get them what they might like---unless that is more empty stores and tattoo parlors in the downtown.
Also to this end, the University of Iowa (that became hopped up about drinking after the tragic death in a UI sanctioned fraternity) should place the new Hancher right in downtown Iowa City and promote browsing and shopping through art venues, bookstores and after-hours dining that might include live performances by very talented student singers and dancers. I addition the university might want to promote many non-alcoholic events in the Union, rec buildings and auditoriums.
At one time there was a dance a week in the UI Union and also bowling daily. But maybe young people would rather dance in a bar or are attracted to other activities. One might trust that an institution devoted to the education of youth would keep on top of the favored activities of each generation. Is there still and Iowa Mountaineers?
The UI might also want to also bring students and older residents together. At a college at which I taught, there was a very successful home-away-from-home program. Getting to know some of this crop of students is an introduction to a very remarkable generation of young people.
Going 21 is but another example of neglect.
Back in the 1800s an Iowa City minister and representative to the State Legislature objected to a floor discussion that was characterizing Iowa City as a wicked place filled with errant youth. The man from Iowa City said that it was not Sodom and Gomorra; it was Athens of the Midwest. If it isn’t, there ain’t one in I-o-w-a-y.
Posted 1 year ago # -
This is kind of a tangent, but: One thing to think about is that the UI does not allow anyone, regardless of age to possess alcohol in the dorms. I wonder how much it would change Iowa City if this was allowed.
For one, in my opinion, the prohibition on alcohol in UI Dorms drives out of-age students. It seems like most Junior & Senior students live outside the dorms. I bet a major factor in this is prohibition on alcohol in the dorms for of-age students. While the UI cannot be directly compared to smaller lib. arts colleges, my fiancee notes that at Luther College almost everyone lived in the dorms their entire 4 years, and they were allowed to possess alcohol in their residences if they were of-age.
This exodus of 21+ students to the neighborhoods of IC likely contributes to binge drinking at many house parties across town. While it is certainly easy to binge drink at bars downtown, it is much easier to binge drink when the only cost is a $5 or $10 fee for unlimited keg beer or "jungle juice."
The prohibition also impacts things such as affordable housing in near-campus neighborhoods. The high demand for student rental properties drives the rental market in Iowa City and Coralville.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I am a member of the Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission. (Of course, my comments here are my own and are not intended as representing the Commission.)
Fairly recently, the Commission recommended that the Council adopt a space limitation between bars in certain zones. During the public hearings on that proposal several people from the UI presented research results indicating that the density of bars and alcohol retail stores in an area is well correlated with arrests for intoxication and assaults. My interpretation of that data was that decreasing the number of bars in an area would probably decrease violent activity in the area so I supported the proposed ordinance.
Many people have probably read a recent article in "The New Yorker" about the influence of cultural practices on humans who drink to inebriation. The article describes research which suggests that the environment in which a person becomes drunk can have a strong influence on the person’s behavior.
I am most comfortable with ordinances and other policy tools that are intended to influence behaviors associated with the consumption of alcohol when those tools are research based. Increasing the occupancy age for bars may reduce violent behavior but a number of other approaches, some as simple as reducing music volume, may be effective as well.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I'm not comfortable with "ordinances and other policy tools" that are intended to influence behaviors at all. On the other hand, downtown Iowa City has become something of a cesspool. These are terribly difficult issues, with root causes that go way, way beyond the scope of a local city council or zoning commission policy initiative, but have everything to do with the way 21st century Americans live in our ever increasingly anti-human and destructively uninhabitable Empire.
You know that old axiom, "Think globally and act locally"? It's incumbent on anyone who wishes to meaningfully understand the current social pathology playing out at 2 AM to begin by connecting the dots on this level. The devolution of our higher educational system into a mere acquisition-driven licensing commodity might be a good place to start. But at any rate, the creation of yet another layer of mala prohibita isn't going to get it done. Don't we ever learn anything?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Is it true that Iowa is the only big-ten school that does not have an over-21 law?
Posted 1 year ago # -
In Wisconsin 21 is the legal drinking and licensed-establishment occupancy age. However, they serve beer in the University of Wisconsin Madison’s two student unions and obviously under-21 students use the unions.
There is a provision in their law that may cover the situation:
“Underage persons may be in a dance hall or banquet or hospitality room attached to Class B licensed premises for the purpose of attending a banquet, reception, dance or other similar event.”
They have a lot of “similar events” in Wisconsin. Back in the 1940s when in high school I visited my older sisters at the U or W, and sat in the Union Rathskeller having a beer and thinking that there would be nothing the matter with being a Badger.
If one goes to any away Big-Ten football games, they will discover that students at other schools drink. They have so much foam and fun at Penn State that one might suspect that Iowa does not deserved any special recognition.
Under-21 students that want to legally drink can study abroad where the age is 18 in practically all countries and down to 16 in a few. And in Germany 14-year-old kids can drink in public with their parents.
Aside from some Muslim populated countries where drinking is illegal, confined almost exclusively to the United States are young people and drinking put on ice until 21. This is the land in which we mistakenly invent family values and the privileged status of second-class and diminished-responsible citizenship called TEENAGER. I think it all started with Andy Hardy (aka Mickey Rooney) and Betsy Booth (aka Judy Garland).
Posted 1 year ago # -
I may have a simplistic view of this issue, but I keep coming back to one simple fact. I don't believe most of the people who enjoy downtown Iowa City would have any issues with the downtown bars, the students, etc. if the employees of the downtown bars stopped serving people to the point of intoxication and stopped serving people who are already intoxicated. When I viewed the videos posted by the Daily Iowan a few months ago, I was amazed at how drunk the young people in the videos were. I've rarely been downtown after 11 p.m. during the past several years, but I've talked to people who have been on the ped mall when the bars close and they tell me that there are incredible numbers of really drunk people coming out of the bars.
It's illegal to serve beer and liquor to intoxicated patrons and to serve people to the point of intoxication. It doesn't matter whether the person served is 16 or 61---it's the most significant source of the problem we have in downtown Iowa City with binge drinking, violence, etc.
I don't think the police department has the resources to solve this problem and the City Council would be hard pressed to find the money in the budget to hire more officers, pay more overtime, etc. to give the police department the resources it needs to enforce the law.
Any ideas how to address this issue? Do you agree that this is the key to changing the landscape in downtown Iowa City?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Stop treating University of Iowa students as teenagers and address the most pressing public safety issue of drunken violence on the public street. The police should stay out of bars unless there is violence and patrol the downtown streets and arrest the public intoxicated.
As with athletes that are suspended from the team, repeat offenders should be suspended from school. It appears that the university would like to ignore trouble makers, keep them paying tuition and pretend to be concerned about binge drinking.
Downtown Iowa City has long been a great place, and it and university activities are what in retirement brought us back to town. A town in which we too drank, but it was not fashionable to get falling-down drunk , and was a sign of immaturity if one did. However, one might have a drink too many, but it was not a form of rebellion for being pushed around by someone that disaproved of young people..
Posted 1 year ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.