Tampa City Council Rejects Proposal to Require Licenses For Serving Liquor After Midnight, Will Try Again
Nanny staters always keep trying


The nanny staters might lose a battle, but they can always be counted on to keep trying.
In a hail of opposition from business owners, a Tampa City Council proposal to curb crime by requiring special permits for alcohol sales after midnight died Thursday morning.
The measure could be reborn with input from a committee of business owners, neighborhood residents and government officials.
Council Chairman Charlie Miranda called for the community-wide effort after opposition mounted against the proposal by Councilwoman Yvonne Yolie Capin for late-night permits.
Council members arrived at Old City Hall on Thursday morning to find a roomful of angry business owners facing them across the dais.
Opponents of the proposal spent more than an hour telling council members the proposal is a threat to their livelihoods. They also said it would punish well-behaved businesses just to catch a few bad operators.
The Tribune helpfully noted it wasn't "clear the people in the crowd on Thursday understood the finer points of the proposal," because, for example, the proposal did not seek to actually ban bars from staying open after midnight. But for nanny staters regulations are like Lay's, you can't have just one.
Follow these stories and more at Reason 24/7 and don't forget you can e-mail stories to us at 24_7@reason.com and tweet us at @reason247.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
But what would Nelson Mandela have thought of this?
Hopefully they're still going to charge the permit fees.
The nanny staters might lose a battle, but they can always be counted on to keep trying.
It's not just the nanny staters, it's the parasites too. In the town I lived in in Orange County, NY, a vote was held about whether to build a completely new high school. Now, keep in mind there was already a perfectly good high school; it's just that the town administrators and the school administrators wanted a new one. The proposal would raise property taxes significantly.
So, they held a vote. It was voted down. Was that the end? Nope. A few weeks later, they just held the vote again. It was voted down. Was that the end? Nope. A few weeks later, they had another vote but somehow managed to not make it widely known it was being held. It passed! And now they could build their new, unnecessary school.
My property taxes went from $8,000/year to $10,000/year because of that "vote".
So, the lesson is: when they don't get what they want, they can just put it up for a vote again and again and again until opponents get fatigued and they win. However, if it passes, that's it and it's permanent and final. So, there's that vaunted rule of law and democracy for you.
Maybe a sunrise provision alongside sunset laws: if your measure fails, you must wait x weeks to reintroduce it. If you change the measure, you must publicly advertise the changes in addition to waiting x weeks to reintroduce it.
My HOA pulled the same trick. With the same results.
... Hobbit
Liquor business laws are so gay. Just leave it at no sales to minors, maybe drunkard liability, and be done with it.
you lost me at "Just"
Well, yeah. Taxes should be a flat 0%, too.
This was a way to let the city counsel shut down the wrong type of clubs frequented by the wrong types of people. Although judging from the crowds I've seen lately I think we'll be seeing more dehydration related deaths this summer. That whole raver thing seems to be coming full circle... So go long on glow sticks.
Because people stick around for the ambiance, right.
Also, this prohibition simply moves forward the last call. People order more drinks more quickly, down 'em, and clear out. Congratulations, drunker drivers earlier in the evening.
This is exactly what happens in England. Most bars have to close at 11, except for those with "King's Licenses" (this might only apply to London) which they may have had for a very long time and means they can close at midnight instead. After the 11PM places close, those who want to stay out go to the midnight places. Then, as midnight grows closer, people start ordering drinks faster and downing them before they get cut off. Then, at midnight, every person in every bar is dumped into the streets just as they are getting hit by the barrage of final drinking they just did. Recipe for success.
One thing I did note in London was that people who owned/worked in a bar would often close it down at 11 or 12, but their friends would stay on and they'd continue drinking and socializing, just with the bar to themselves, technically "closed".
It really is just raw, indiscreet exercise of power for these people. No sense of propriety, precious little forethought, and above all, no restraint. First-order effects? Constitutional protections? Ain't nobody got time for that shit.
Midnight? Whopping.
Is "drink-driving" what they always call drunk driving in England, or does it refer specifically to road pops?
From late 2005, drinking establishments could apply for licences to stay open and serve alcohol for 24 hours a day. This means that round-the-clock drinking (in England and Wales) is now a reality, although many establishments do in fact still close between 11pm and midnight (especially during the working week).
Within the first month of it becoming law, over 1,000 pubs, clubs and supermarkets had been granted 24-hour licences to sell alcohol. A further 40 per cent of premises had applied to vary their licences to either extend opening times by an hour or two, or to offer late food or entertainment. Many more establishments have since renewed their licences. In 2008/9 Scotland joined England and Wales when new licensing laws came into effect.
I thought this happened under Blair, but apparently it did under Brown.
I manage and tend bar at 2 bars in Brooklyn. NYC closing time is 4am. We usually do last call at 3:30.
Of course NYC people use the trains and taxis a lot, so there's usually not a lot of drivers.
Still, by having last call that late the night usually dies down of it's own accord. I grew up in NJ and they do last call, lights up at like 1:20. By 1:45 there's a bunch of drunk fucks in the parking lot looking to either fight or drive somewhere.
OT: I just saw on TV that Nickleback is hawking their greatest hits album... Volume 1!!!!!!??
The Tribune helpfully noted it wasn't "clear the people in the crowd on Thursday understood the finer points of the proposal,"
but enough about Democratcare for today.
After midnight
Gotta whip that license out
After midnight
Blah blah blah blah scream and shout.
Love to stay and polish, but I want to check out the Mandela thread.