HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/20/2009, SS1 - PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT OF ALCOHOL OUTLETS IN SAN LUIS OBISPO counat c
October 20,2009
j acEncu aEpont 6.N..6
m ` sss
C I T Y O F S A N L U I S O B I S P O
FROM: Deborah Linden, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT OF ALCOHOL OUTLETS IN SAN LUIS OBISPO
RECOMMENDATION
1. Receive a report titled, "ASIPS/GIS Community Tour, City of San Luis Obispo' detailing
the police-related problems associated with retail alcohol outlets in the City.
2. Direct staff to develop policy recommendations in collaboration with affected stakeholders.
DISCUSSION
Background
The policy and legal issues involved with regulating retail alcohol outlets are complex and call for a
consistent, coordinated approach that balances the benefits such businesses bring to the community
with the public safety impacts associated with them. This balance becomes even more important as
more mixed use projects are approved in the downtown that promote "urban living" by combining
residential and retail units.
In order to ensure the City can effectively address the impacts of retail alcohol outlets, it is
important to have a more comprehensive understanding of the nature and frequency of public safety
problems associated with alcohol outlets and to consider "best practices" in planning and regulation
that have been found effective to mitigate problems. In May, 2009, staff from Police, Community
Development, Administration, and City Attorney participated in a webinar titled, "Integrating
Safety Data into Local Land Use Planning" presented by Fried Wittman, Ph.D, President of CLEW
Associates, an environmental planning firm located in Berkeley, California. Dr. Wittman
specializes in research and application of planning approaches to prevent and mitigate problems
related to the retail, public, and social availability of alcoholic beverages and drugs in communities.
Dr. Wittman has over thirty years of experience in this field, and has worked with numerous cities
and counties in California.
Dr. Wittman utilizes an analysis tool called Alcohol/drug Sensitive Information Planning System in
a Geographic Information System format, or ASIPS/GIS, to examine alcohol-involved police events
related to retail alcohol outlets. Data from the Police Department incident and arrest databases is
overlaid with the locations of alcohol outlets, and analyzed as to frequency by time of day, day of
week, outlet location and alcohol license type. This creates a foundation for establishing consistent
land-use and regulatory policies regarding alcohol retailers. Examples of ASIPS/GIS studies and
resulting policies for the cities of Garden Grove, Fullerton, and Newport Beach were presented
during the webinar. Based on the information learned during the webinar, the City Manager
approved a contract with CLEW Associates to produce an ASIPS/GIS "Community Tour" retail
alcohol outlet study for San Luis Obispo..
SS 1 -
PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT OF ALCOHOL OUTLETS IN SAN LUIS OBISPO Page 2
This report to the Council will provide an overview of ASIPS/GIS findings for the entire City and
focus on the on-sale retail alcohol outlets, which are mostly clustered downtown. In addition to the
data analysis, CLEW Associates produced eight policy areas for further consideration by the
Council along with general recommendations, based on current best practices in the field, designed
to mitigate the problems identified in each policy area.
Key Findings of ASIPS/GIS Report
The ASIPS/GIS report analyzed police events for calendar year 2008, organizing them into those
involving alcohol and/or or other drugs (called AOD events). The report reviews AOD activity for
the entire City, as well as for the downtown specifically, including correlating police events with
various types of alcohol outlets. The ASIPS/GIS Community Tour is designed to focus on "hot
spots" where AOD events are highly concentrated by location, time, and/or setting. The following
are key findings of the study:
1. AOD Involvement Citywide: Overall, the study examined 21,643 police events throughout the
City in 2008, not including traffic stops. Of these events, 23% involved alcohol and 24%
involved alcohol and/or a drug. The police events included 2,826 arrests of which more than
48% were for alcohol offenses. Events identified as being alcohol and/or drug related include
alcohol and drug law violations, DUIs, and loud party calls (since previous research has
indicated that loud party calls almost always involve alcohol and/or drugs).
The data related to alcohol-specific police events (such as arrests and citation for alcohol
offenses) associated with alcohol outlets is very complete since both the offense and address can
be readily identified as being alcohol-related. However, the Police Department databases are
more limited with regard to alcohol-related involvement in other police calls because this data is
not consistently collected for all types of calls. For example, the Police database does not
indicate whether or not an arrest for battery was alcohol-related. Had Police Department
databases been able to collect more accurate data regarding alcohol-related events, CLEW
Associates consultants believe the number of alcohol-related events would have been more than
double. Police Department staff will work with CLEW Associates consultants to improve this
data collection for future reports.
2. Time and Day: Police calls-for-service and activity tended to peak in the late afternoon and
again late at night. AOD events rose slowly throughout the day and peaked sharply between
10:00 PM and 2:00 AM. Approximately 60% of all AOD events and almost half of AOD arrests
occurred during this four-hour time period. In general, police events remained steady across all
days of the week, increasing from Thursday night through early Sunday morning, and peaking
on Saturday nights. The same trend was seen with AOD events and arrests. Police activity,
especially related to alcohol, was lowest in December and then slowly rose each month before
peaking in May. The activity reduced somewhat during the summer months and then spiked
sharply in September and October.
3. Locations: The distribution of AOD events throughout the City is influenced by the geographic
distribution of alcohol outlets. High densities of alcohol outlets are associated with higher
frequencies of police events overall and with AOD events particularly in the downtown. About
15% of all AOD events citywide occurred in the downtown, with AOD events accounting for
SSl -a
PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT OF ALCOHOL OUTLETS IN SAN LUIS OBISPO Page 3
about 25% of all police calls in the downtown. About 65% of all arrests made in the downtown
were AOD-related (vs. 56% for the entire City). Public intoxication and DUI arrests were
concentrated in the downtown area in association with alcohol outlets, and to a lesser extent in
the neighborhoods near Cal Poly. Loud party events were most prominent in the neighborhoods
near Cal Poly, but were also clustered near downtown and in the Madonna/LOVR area.
4. AOD Events at Retail Alcohol Outlets: In 2008, there were 114 on-sale alcohol outlets (bars
and restaurants with consumption on the premises), 52 off-sale outlets (package stores with no
consumption on site), and seven outlets that held both on and off-sale licenses in the City. The
on-sale outlets accounted for twice as many AOD arrests, and about 60% of AOD events and
total arrests, as the off-sale outlets. On-sale outlets were more likely to generate public
drunkenness, disturbances and DUIs. Off-sale outlets were more likely to experience theft,
robbery and disturbance calls.
The data related to off-sale establishments suggests that AOD events are co-occurring with
police activity, but are not necessarily driving it. This also suggests that prevention strategies
should focus on general crime prevention, not just strategies focused on alcohol sales. In
contrast, the data suggests that AOD events and arrests at on-sale outlets are actually driving
increased police activity, suggesting that prevention and mitigation efforts should be more
focused on management policies and operating practices to control drinking from the start of the
patron's experience rather than after the drinking becomes problematic.
5. Highest AOD Activity at On-sale Outlets: The study showed that in 2008, ten on-sale outlets
generated a majority of police calls to on-sale outlets. These ten outlets each had a minimum of
ten AOD-specific events and ten or more arrests, with some generating more than thirty events
in one year. Four of these outlets are Type 48 outlets (on-sale general — bar/nightclub); five are
Type 47 outlets (on-sale restaurant); and one is a Type 75 (on-sale general— brewpub). Nine of
the ten outlets are in the downtown. These ten outlets represent about one-eighth of the on-sales
outlets in the City; however they account for more than half of all police calls to on-sales
outlets.
The police activity at the four Type 47 outlets (restaurants) was on par with that experienced at
the Type 48 outlets (bars). The ABC requires local zoning approval for both Type 47 and Type
48 licenses; however Type 47 licenses are generally less difficult to obtain partly because the
City's zoning and use permit requirements are less stringent for Type 47s than for Type 48s. In
addition, a City-generated Certificate of Public Convenience or Necessity is not required for
Type 47 licenses in most cases. As such, many communities are experiencing problems
associated with restaurants "morphing" into bars and nightclubs late at night in order to increase
profits. In San Luis Obispo, the data shows evidence of this by some Type 47 outlets.
Best Policy Practices and General Recommendations
Based on the findings of the ASIPS/GIS Community Tour, eight policy areas were identified for
further consideration, along with general recommendations for each policy area. Although these
policy areas mostly pertain to on-sale outlets, they may also be applied to other outlets and alcohol-
related problems. Additional information about each policy area is included in the ASIPS/GIS
report.
SS) -3
PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT OF ALCOHOL OUTLETS IN SAN LUIS OBISPO Page 4
1. Definition of"Restaurant"—Address morphing of restaurants to bars: The City relies on the
California ABC definition for "On-sale General Restaurant"; however, the definition is not
adequate to ensure restaurants with alcohol licenses do not change into bars and nightclubs late
at night and increase police problems. City definitions are needed to clarify the distinction
between a "restaurant" (primarily for service of meals), a "bar" or "tavern" (primarily for the
service of alcohol with or without food), and a "night club" (a place where alcohol is served in
conjunction with live music and dancing).
2. Use Permits for all on-salealcohol outlets. The City currently issues use-permits to restaurants
with alcohol licenses "as of right' rather than on a case-by-case basis, as is required for
bars/taverns and night clubs. This approach makes it difficult for the City to take action on
restaurants that create police problems and neighborhood disturbances. The City could establish
a use permit process requiring approval by the Community Development Director or the
Planning Commission (depending on license type) for all license types.
3. Use of Standard Conditions to guide alcohol outlet performance Most alcohol outlet
operators are ready to follow operating standards that encourage safe and trouble-free
performance. However, the City does not make these standards clear enough to the operators.
This results in confusion and in delays for action against problematic practices. The City can
establish Standard Conditions for operation of on-sale outlets through its zoning ordinance and
use permit process.
4. Communication with current permit holders and with applicants for permits: Alcohol
operators are often unclear about City oversight procedures for management of safe and trouble-
free outlet operation. The City can create information and check-lists that walk the alcohol
outlet operator through each stage of the oversight process.
5. Non-conforming outlets — consider "Deemed Approved Ordinance:" Problematic non-
conforming outlets are a major issue for many cities. Most outlets operate relatively trouble-
free, but it is important to be able to apply current standards of operation to outlets that do not
conform. "Deemed Approved Ordinances" that require problematic non-conforming outlets to
meet current standards are in use a dozen or more California cities and could be explored for
applicability in San Luis Obispo.
6. Compliance and enforcement—Late night operation: The "night-time economy" creates major
late-night police problems in many cities, including in San Luis Obispo. The City's on-sale
outlets with the highest frequency of problems are especially challenged to adopt serving
policies and practices that keep the drinking at manageable levels requiring low levels of police
activity. Efforts are needed to work with these establishments to facilitate education and
training regarding best practices in alcohol service and management and to emphasize
compliance with zoning conditions rather than relying on law enforcement alone to address the
issues.
7. Special fees for City services to oversee alcohol outlets: Most cities treat retail alcohol outlets
as regular businesses with respect to City oversight through land-use and police services. Yet
3S/-Y
PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT OF ALCOHOL OUTLETS IN SAN LUIS OBISPO Page 5
retail alcohol outlets use disproportionate amounts of police service. Focusing greater emphasis
on compliance by alcohol outlets with zoning conditions will require process enhancements and
additional resources dedicated to oversight and education. The City could impose a fee on retail
alcohol outlets to off-set the costs for these additional education and oversight services.
8. Long-range and development planning that includes alcohol outlets: Very few California
cities include retail alcohol outlets as specific elements to be considered in community planning.
Yet research increasingly shows relationships between alcohol problems (crime, public safety,
health) and alcohol outlet density by population and by geographic concentration. San Luis
Obispo has one of the highest population density ratios in the state for on-sale outlets, similar to
the ratios for San Francisco and Newport Beach. The City can develop ways to consider alcohol
outlet density in future planning efforts, in addition to current zoning for retail alcohol outlets.
Next Steps
If the Council directs staff to further develop a strategy for addressing the issues identified in the
ASIPS/GIS Report, using the recommended "best practices" listed above as a guide, staff will work
with representatives from the alcohol outlets and stakeholder groups such as the Downtown
Association and Chamber of Commerce to develop more specific recommendations for the Council
to consider.
CONCURRENCES
The Community Development Department concurs with the recommendations.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with receiving this report. There may be costs associated with
implementing future policy recommendations. If so, an analysis of these fiscal impacts will be
presented in conjunction with specific policy or program recommendations.
ALTERNATIVES
The Council may direct staff to consider other types of regulatory options not outlined in this report.
Should this occur, staff will return with follow-up information at a later date.
AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE
ASIPS/GIS Community Tour, Volumes I and II.
Please note: The two-volume ASIPS/GIS Community Tour will be made available on the City
website for public review prior to the October 20, 2009, City Council meeting.
71
T:\Council Agenda Reports\Police CAR\2009\Alcohol Outlet Study Session 10-20-09.DOC
Page 1 of 1
1
Council,SloCity
From: Mahana604@aol.com [Mahana604@aol.com] Sent: Thu 10/22/2009 1:00 PM
To: Council, SloCity
Cc:
Subject: Public Policy on Downtown Bars and Drinking Establishments
Attachments:
October 22, 2009 MEETING AGENDA
City Council DATE 1F —ITEM # 2s4
City of San Luis Obispo
Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council:
I was very much encouraged to learn of you acting on behalf of the downtown merchants and surrounding
community concerning the actions of the bars and their clients in the downtown core. My understanding is that
on some nights, it is almost a free-for-all in some of these establishments, resulting in the assaults, rowdiness,
and property damage. It is a blight on our community.
I have personally been affected in two ways. First of all, as a physician I have had to provide basically free
health care to persons injured as a result of altercations involving drunken bar patrons. Of course, I am held to
highest standard of medical care and potential liability in providing the free care.
Second of all, my property, the Ah Louis Store has been repeatedly damaged by drunken patrons. I have had
fences tom down, beer bottles and drinks littering my property late at night,windows broken, damage to the
steel shutters, and worse of all, have had drunks urinate, vomit and even defecate (yes, even defecate) on my
property. I am especially upset that the urine has eroded some of the 125 year old bricks on the back of the
building and has forced me to cover them with galvanized steel sheeting to protect them against the erosive
action of the urine. I have made repeated police reports concerning this but they can only do so much.
For the bar owners to say that they are being"picked on" by the rest of the owners is a gross perversion of the
truth. In fact,the majority of the owners are being held hostage by a small group of bar owners.
Although I understand that the bars cannot be summarily shut down, they can be held to a higher standard than
they are presently operating under, and can be made financially responsible for more patrols and supervision of
their customers. I strongly support a financial solution to this problem which can be solved with decisive action
of the city council. I commend you for your courage in addressing this issue.
Yours truly,
William J. Watson, MD
800 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805-545-5665
Fri FOLIED
OCT 2 6 2009
SLO CITY CLERK
https://mail.slocity.org/exchange/slocitycouncil/Inbox/Publ is%2OPol icy%20on%20Down... 10/26/2009
Page 1 of 1
r'
Council,SloCity
From: Tunny Ortali [tunnyo@mclintocks.com] Sent: Thu 10/22/2009 10:53 AM
To: Council,SloCity
Cc:
Subject: ASIPS/GIS Community Tour
Attachments:
Dear Council Members,
Thank You for your presentation on Alcohol outlets and their effects on the downtown
environment. I being a stakeholder and licensee in the downtown area would like to be
considered for any committee formed to effectively approach and solve the perceived or actual
problems that face the City of SLO and the SLO PD. I feel that I have the experience and
knowledge that would be effective in successfully negotiating the important issues that we are
all now facing.
Sincerely,
Tunny Ortali
CEO-Owner
F.McLintocks, Inc.
Office: 773-3050
Cell: 459-0128
VED
OCT 2 6 2003
SLO CITY CLERK
https:Hmail.slocity.org/exchange/slocitycounciUlnbox/ASIPS_xF8FF_GIS%2OCommunit... 10/26/2009
Page 1 of 3
1
Council,SloCity
From: Eric Morgan [eric.morgan@centurionprivatesecurity.com] Sent: Fri 10/23/2009 9:55 PM
To: Council,SloCity
Cc:
Subject: SLOUTIONS FOR ALCOHOL RELATED INCIDENTS/ISSUES DOWNTOWN
Attachments:
Honorable members of the San Luis Obispo City Council,
I have considered with great interest the recent events surrounding the release of
information
from the most recent study funded by the San Luis Obispo Police Department. I
am in complete agreement
that something must be done concerning the number of alcohol related incidents
downtown and believe
that there is much to learn from other Cities that have encountered such issues
in their downtown districts.
I believe that the City of San Luis Obispo has found itself facing some of the
same issues that have plagued larger cities in the past.
The solution to this problem may in fact be something of a hybrid approach. I
would think that some of the suggestions are quite valid
and warrant further discussion.
I would suggest increasing and enforcing fines for certain offenses across the
board. I do not believe that this should be limited to
certain areas as the problems will certainly migrate should a sectored approach
be implemented. I believe that there are other possible
measures that have yet to be considered and would provide great relief to the
citizens and business owners. The City Council might
benefit from studying the impact of Patrol Special Officers within the business
district of San Francisco. These Private Officers are trained
and equipped to deal with situations arising in the business district. They are
not sworn Police Officers however; they have the same
arrest authority and are authorized to issue citations for infractions.
The benefits of such a program are quite obvious:
�E EIVE®
OCT 2 6 2009
SLO CITY CLERK
https://mail.slocity.org/exchange/slocitycouncil/Inbox/SLOUTIONS%20FOR%20ALCO... 10/26/2009
f _
Page 2 of 3
r
1) They are extremely cost effective as opposed to placing sworn Officers in the
affected areas for extended patrols.
2) They free up the sworn Officers to respond to true emergencies.
3) There services are paid for via the businesses that they serve to protect.
4) They are required to complete training and are closely monitored by the Chief
of Police who according to Title 10
has the authority to authorize them to write citations within the city limits
(additional training is required as well just as
would be the case for a sworn officer).
It should also be noted that implementing such a strategy would not negatively
affect the number of sworn Officers patrolling the
streets as there would be no appreciable effect on the Police Departments
budget; for that matter all upheld citations could be used
as a means for supplementing the budget for such an operation (thus reducing
the need for business contributions).
Should you have questions concerning such a program I would be more then
happy to provide any assistance
that I may and look forward to any further discussions.
Very Respectfully,
Eric Morgan
Owner, Centurion Private Security
895 Napa Ave., Suite A-3
Morro Bay, CA 93442-1663
(805) 464-9640
(805) 772-5364 Fax.
eric.morgan@centurionprivatesecurity.com
www.centurionprivatesecurity.com
This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information
intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are
not the intended recipient, you should delete this message. Any disclosure,
copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it,
is strictly prohibited.
https://mail.s locity.org/exchange/slocitycounciUlnbox/SLOUTIONS%20FOR%20ALCO... 10/26/2009
I:eI�����►►� ►�►►"'m Em omn b um
Prty oC san Luis osisp0 --
DATE: October 16, 2009
TO: City Council
RECEIVED
OCT 16 2009
FROM: Deborah Linden, Chief of Police
SLO CITY CLERK
VIA: Ken Hampian, City Manager
SUBJECT: ASIPS/GIS Alcohol Outlet Study Additional Report
Attached to this memo is an additional report related to the Alcohol Outlet Study being received
by the Council during a study session on October 20, 2009. The report was prepared by the study
consultants and contains their recommendations for addressing issues revealed by the
ASIPS/GIS Study data, including examples of strategies implemented in other communities to
address similar issues. The consultant will present and discuss these strategies during the
presentation next Tuesday.
However, it is important to emphasize that the strategies presented in this report are intended to
serve as examples and as a starting point for further engagement with stakeholders - including
outlet operators, other affected businesses and residents, the Chamber of Commerce, the
Downtown Association, Cal Poly and Cuesta College. Thus, we are not recommending action
on the ideas contained in the report; only that the report be referred to staff and stakeholders for
discussion and consideration as we develop plans to address the issues associated with this
important community matter.
1�p�2D COPY
21COUNCIL TCDD DIR
RYZAO C17Vrq&W- [f"FIN DIR
f�AGA9*Wcov/We -FIRE CHIEF
RED FILE ETATTORNEY 0-PW OR
MEETING AGENDA OtLERK/ORIC Q'-POLICE CHF
O DEPT MEADS G'.�"PEC 6iP
DAT ITEM # SS Fe Pr M-UTIL dIA
�� M. -I y-N& SHR DR
�JG'tt) nnt� --Co"AA044-
P.�i4dL
I
Alcohol/drug Sensitive Information Planning System in a
Geographic Information System Format
ASIPSIGIS
ASIPS/GIS Community Tour
City of San Luis Obispo
Report for Calendar Year 2008
Public Oversight for San Luis Obispo
Retail Alcohol Outlets:
Issues for Planning and Zoning
Date of this Report: October 14, 2009
(Data from San Luis Obispo Police Department
January 1, 2008 -December 31, 2008)
Prepared by:
Friedner D. Wittman, Ph.D.
Frank Latcham,M.A.
CLEW Associates
Berkeley, California
Prepared for:
City of San Luis Obispo
Public Oversight for San Luis Obispo On-Sale Retail Alcohol Outlets:
Memorandum on Issues for Planning and Zoning
This applications memorandum accompanies the City of San Luis Obispo ASIPS/GIS
Community Tour report on police events throughout the city for calendar year 2008 (CY 2008).
Police events throughout the city were organized into 51 Problem Groups which range from Part I
crimes,to misdemeanors,to vice activities,to alcohol-specific and drug-specific offenses,to
injuries and accidents,to citizen-assist calls. The ASIPS/GIS Community Tour describes
alcohol-and drug-specific offenses in the context of total police events. Alcohol and other drug
(AOD)police events.are further described in community contexts by time, location (address and
geo-area),and type of setting such as retail alcohol outlets.
This information is provided on a general basis for all settings and in all areas of the city.
A Community Tour sub-report,the Retail Alcohol Outlets Report,provides information about
police events specifically at retail alcohol outlets,that is, at street addresses for establishments
licensed by the State Dept of Alcoholic Beverage Control(ABC). Throughout the city,police
events at retail alcohol outlets contribute about 10%(2,157/21,643)of total police events,and
about 10%(498/5,173)of total alcohol-and drug-specific events. The Retail Alcohol Outlets
Report documents these events in detail by on-sale outlet,off-sale outlet,and type of license
issued by the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control(ABC License Type).
SLO retail alcohol outlets show considerable variation in distribution of police events by
area and by ABC license type in the San Luis Obispo community. Although police events occur
at outlets throughout the city,the elevated level of events at on-sale outlets in the Downtown area
in late evening/night-time hours,and on weekends,are of particular interest. Outlets in this
group include bars(Type 48 license),restaurants(Type 47 license),and a brew-pubs(Type 75
license). The level of police events at these SLO establishments is similar to the levels found in
other California communities with a high proportion of college-age residents and a large nearby
campus(e.g., Fullerton,Berkeley, Santa Barbara,Newport Beach).
The high level of police events at SLO alcohol outlets raises questions for the city about
types and levels of public oversight most effective for reducing public safety disturbances and
health risks associated with these outlets. Over the last decade,a number of California cities have
focused on preventive oversight policies and practices specifically for retail alcohol outlets. The
SLO police department and other city agencies tasked with managing these problems
have asked CLEW Associates to apply SLO ASIPS/GIS Community Tour information to a
review of the city's current policies and practices in this area,and to comment on possible areas
for improvement in light of these experiences in other concerned communities.
California cities are working on eight issue-areas of interest:
(1) Appropriate definitions of"Restaurants"where alcohol sale is permitted,
(2) Conditional Use Permits for on-sale alcohol outlets—.active vs.passive zoning approaches
(3) Standard Operating Conditions to guide alcohol outlet performance.
(4) City and public communication with current permit holders and permit applicants.
(5) Non-conforming outlets—Deemed Approved Ordinances for grandfathered outlets.
(6) Compliance and Enforcement to meet use-permit conditions and neighbor concerns.
(7) Fees for city services specifically for retail alcohol outlets.
(8) Long-range and development planning for retail alcohol outlets.
1
This memo briefly summarizes prevention issues involved in each of these approaches and
outlines current efforts being taken by other communities to establish effective oversight for local
alcohol outlets. The purpose of this memo is to assist the City of San Luis Obispo,outlet
operators,and concerned community members and organizations to determine levels of local
oversight and best practices for alcohol outlet operation to meet SLO community needs. The
accumulation of experience in local oversight of alcohol outlets has lead to major improvements
in this area in other communities. (Local oversight is also called Local Control by researchers
and practitioners in the alcohol/drug prevention field.)
Progress on Local Control has been a boot-strap effort driven largely by local initiative.
The State of California offers no programs dedicated specifically to improve Local Control. Lack
of state support is due partly to a structural division of labor. The California Dept of Alcoholic
Beverage Control(ABC)can do little to assist cities and counties with local oversight. The ABC
is solely responsible for issuing licenses to individuals or corporations for the retail sale of
alcohol through an alcohol outlet at a specific location(address). In its licensing capacity the
ABC places only a few mandatory restrictions,at the county level,on distribution of General
License outlets(Type 47,Type 48). Otherwise the ABC Act explicitly leaves to the local zoning
code the tasks of designating the numbers,.types, locations,building types,sizes,and operating
requirements for the establishments that accommodate the ABC license(S. 23790).
Thus local oversight of alcohol outlets is truly left to local control at the city and county
level through local planning and zoning ordinances; and related oversight policies. Cities and
counties have a choice whether to use their local planning codes in a passive way(impose few
restrictions on alcohol outlet types and locations, and issue use-permits as of right)or for active
oversight to protect public safety and community well-being. The ABC will follow the city's
lead as required by the ABC Act. The ABC will support local zoning constraints in reviewing
license applications,and will almost always deny a license to honor local determinations of over-
crowding according to public convenience or necessity standards(S.23958.4).
The following discussion has been developed to help the San Luis Obispo community—the
City,the retail outlet community,neighbors and concerned local groups and organizations—
review current"best practice"options available to determine appropriate oversight for the SLO
community. The discussion has been developed with reference to:'
(1) Documentation of police events at SLO alcohol outlets(the San Luis Obispo
ASIPS/GIS Community Tour reports);
(2)Review of current SLO city oversight for retail alcohol outlets conducted by CLEW
Associates, including a review of local zoning ordinances and interviews with city officials for
administering those ordinances; and
(3)Analysis of experiences in(2)and(3) against experiences of thirteen California cities
engaged in Local Control to make specific use of local planning and zoning ordinances to manage
health and safety problems at retail alcohol outlets. This analysis is also informed by the research
practice literature on Local Control for alcohol/drug problems—on actions by local public
agencies working closely with outlet operators to manage high-risk environments of alcohol/drug
availability,often coupled with community initiatives to prevent and reduce alcohol and drug
problems.
2
1. Definition of"Restaurant"—Morphing of restaurants into bars
Problem: San Luis Obispo's current definition of"restaurant"does not prevent
"morphing,"a practice where establishments licensed by the state and zoned locally as
"restaurants"behave like bars,especially in the late evening/night-time hours and on
weekends. The California ABC Act definition for"On-sale General Restaurant"is not
adequate to curtail this practice. Examples of morphing are visible in the downtown SLO
area,where some ABC License Type 47 establishments(On-Sale General Restaurant)rival
the high level of police events at some Type 48s(On-Sale Public Premises).
Solution: Tighten city definitions to clarify the distinction between a bona-fide
"restaurant"(primarily for service of meals),a"bar"or"tavem"(primarily for the service
of alcohol with or without food),and a"night club"(a place where alcohol is served in
conjunction with live music and dancing). Then these three land-uses can be appropriately
regulated by type to prevent safety and community problems,and to provide a vehicle for
prompt action as problems emerge,rather than wait for the problems to rise to the level of
severe nuisances and disturbances.
Comments: Problems with restaurant morphing have grown during the last decade as
evolution of the restaurant industry has put greater emphasis on alcohol and on
entertainment activities in conjunction with dining. Local police problems appear when
these places cater to younger clientele later in the evening in ways that often involve
overcrowding and excessive drinking, leading to noise,disruptions, fights,and public
inebriation/DUIs.' These conditions are exacerbated where underage patrons are involved.
The Type 48 ABC License does not permit underaged patrons on the premises,but the
Type 47 License does.
(1) "Restaurant"uses that do not require conditional use permits(CUPS—for more
information see under Item 2 below)are more difficult to regulate when they become
problematic. The conditional use permit provides the city and neighbors with a powerful
tool to address safety and neighborhood problems as they emerge,rather than to wait until
the problems become actionable as major nuisances—police problems that have gotten out
of hand. Cities such as Fullerton2 are now requiring new or stronger CUPS for restaurants
where previously the city had issued permits to restaurants as of right,or with few
conditions.
(2) Typically cities address these problems by requiring gross receipts of the
establishment beat least 51%for food and non-alcohol items. This requirement can be
part of the ABC definition of a"restaurant"if the local jurisdiction demands it,or if the
ABC decides to apply it in the specific case. There are two problems with this approach.
First, this ratio can be achieved by restaurant.income during regular meal hours that equals
or exceeds alcohol sales during late evening/night-time hours. Second,many bona-fide
restaurants (the ABC term for restaurants that serve customary meals at customary times of
K.Graham and R.Homel,"Raising the Bar: Preventing aggression in and around bars,pubs and clubs,"
Willan Publishing Portland OR,2008.
z The City of Fullerton Zoning rewrote its zoning ordinance for restaurants in 2007 to quell mushrooming
problems in the Downtown area—see F.Wittman,Innovations in Planning,Managing and Policing
Hospitality Zones: Issues for Land-Use Planning and Zoning for On-Sale Alcohol Outlets,paper
presented to the California Prevention Collaborative Annual Meeting,March 10,2009.
3
r
day prepared in a kitchen on the premises)emphasize alcohol sales as part of meal service,
thus leading to charges for the meal.that are mostly for the alcohol.
(3) To address these concerns, cities' and community organizations° are now
insisting both on clearer definitions and on conditional use permits that require sales ratios
be maintained during all hours of operation and that prohibit or constrain features of
operation not related to dining(such as large-screen TVs,games,stand-up bars),and that
require placing an order with a wait-person who will offer a menu. For example,the City
of Fullerton recently established such new requirements for restaurants in a community of
approximately 130,000 with a CSU campus of about 25,000 students, similar to the size of
Cal-Poly.
ExMRIe of Management of "Mouthing"by City of Fullerton,California
(1) From City of Fullerton Ordinance No. 3113 (March 18, 2008)
"RESTAURANT means any establishment serving and/or
selling food to the general public. A restaurant may serve alcoholic
beverages for consumption on the premises provided that the
primary business is the serving and/or selling of food and the
business maintains food sales and access to eating areas to within
one hour of closing. At all hours during which the business is
operated as a restaurant the gross sales of food shall exceed the
gross sales of alcoholic beverages...."
(2)Newspaper article on Wednesday, March 5, 2008, Orange County Register
Fullerton Council Approves Stringent Liquor Ordinance
New regulations for the downtown ban live amplified music on patios
and set permit rules for nightclubs.
By BARBARA GIASONE Staff Writer
A sense of urgency to combat crime and drunkenness in downtown Fullerton pushed the City
Council on Tuesday to adopt an ordinance aimed at restaurant,bar and nightclub owners.
The law,which goes into effect in 45 days,calls for noise controls,conditional-use permits
for restaurants that morph into nightclubs after 10 p.m.,stringent security rules and serving
certification for employees in the more than 45 food-and-drink establishments.
Also,no amplified live music would be allowed on patios at any hour except for special
events.
All other music must meet decibel standards.
"The issue is if a person walks into a restaurant at noon and the place looks different at
midnight,that's when there's a problem,"Councilman Shawn Nelson said. "There are
restaurants in Fullerton that are not licensed to be nightclubs that are(operating as)
nightclubs.......(article continues)
3 Examples from California cities Garden Grove and Fullerton in F.Wittman,[bid.
Elmwood Neighborhood.Association(ENA)recommendations for City of Berkeley use-permit
conditions regarding a restaurant CUP. Memo from F. Wittman to ENA members,November 25, 2007.
4
2. Conditional Use Permits for alcohol outlets-Conditional approval for all?
Problem: In the City of San Luis Obispo, restaurants(ABC License Type 41 and License
Type 47)are Allowed Uses"as of right"in five of seven zoning districts. This approach
makes it difficult for the city to take action on restaurants that create police problems and
neighborhood disturbances, such as the"morphing"issues described in Issue Area 1 above.
Without a special use permit or conditional use permit, the city must approach persistent
problem problems at restaurants through nuisance abatement ordinances and code
enforcement, and through filing an accusation with the ABC. These time-consuming
approaches requite a high level of disturbance, extensive procedures,and a history of
continuing problems before they can be applied.
The City of San Luis Obispo currently requires a Director's Use Permit for on-sale
bars/taverns and for nightclubs. While this type of permit provides important opportunities
to hear public comment and to establish conditions of operation,the review process
operates through a single hearing officer. This places considerable pressure on the hearing
officer and minimizes opportunities for debate and deliberation for complex and
controversial applications such as the Downtown area.
Off-sale convenience stores are Allowed Uses in five of six Commercial zones, and
require Director's User Permits in three Residential zones. Off-sale alcohol sales
(groceries, liquors,specialty foods)are Allowed Uses in four of five Commercial. As for
restaurants,absence of conditional use oversight makes it more difficult to address
persistent problems at off-sale outlets that show a high concentration of police events,
including alcohol-and drug-specific offenses. (in CY 2008, each one of ten SLO off-sale
outlets generated more than 40 police events,creating a combined total of 598 police
events, including 107 AOD events and 135 arrests.)
Solution: Experiences of other cities suggest exploring upgrading SLO zoning coverage
to include conditional use permit oversight for all retail alcohol outlets.
On-sale outlets: First,the City could consider Planning Commission oversight for
bars and nightclubs, and for other on-sale food-serving establishments that do not meet new
bona-fide"restaurant"definitions developed under Issue Area I above. Second,the City
could consider Director's Use Permits for establishments meeting the new definition of
"restaurant"and for other infrequent and low-risk ABC License Types(Type 40,Type 42,
Type 51,Type 52, Type 67).
Of-sale outlets: First,the City could consider Director's Use Permits for all off-sale
outlets to support close oversight of alcohol sales and alcohol use on/about the premises.
Strict adherence to responsible sales practices and to diligent management of the premises
is vital to a trouble-free off-sale outlet,particularly outlets located in areas where it is easy
for people to gather,and in settings exposed to high volumes of people and movement.
Second,the City could consider Planning Commission review for off-sale outlets located in
highly sensitive areas such as Downtown, and near the Freeway,that invite purchase for
immediate consumption in the area or in a vehicle,rather than for later consumption.
Comments. Several Local Control communities find it useful to require conditional use
permits as a routine matter for all retail alcohol outlet operations. City agencies and
neighbors find it easier to work with the outlet operator to adopt sound operating practices
that address public safety and neighborhood issues on a continuing preventive basis. This
5
approach is viewed as preferable to sole reliance on a problem-focused,complaint-centered
approach that allows problems to grow and puts the onus for action on the complainant
(e.g. a neighbor who makes repeated service calls to activate the review process).
(1) Features of CUP ordinances and oversight. A valuable guidebook on best
practices for municipal regulation of retail alcohol outlets has been produced to assist
California cities seeking comprehensive information on CUPs, Deemed Approved
Ordinances,non-zoning local authority to regulate alcohol outlets,and use of the"Public
Convenience or Necessity"provision of the ABC Act(S. 23958.4).5
(2) Variations in CUP oversight. A city's general adoption of a CUP requirement
for all alcohol outlets can allow for variation in levels of public oversight based on the fact
that different types of outlets generate different levels of risk for police events and other
problems. For example,uses that typically have low levels of risk could be handled
through an administrative use permit process such as an expedited Director's Permit. This
approach provides the vital opportunity to address safety and neighborhood concerns for
the particularly case,but allows expedited review where none are likely. Although police
problems or neighborhood problems may not be immediately apparent, it is still important
to require responsible beverage service(RBS)for all alcohol outlets. Even a modest Type
41 Beer&Wine restaurant can generate excess drinking; in many communities B&W
restaurants are greater sources of DUIs than bars and taverns.
(3) Convenience of CUP administration. Objections are often made that general
requirements for a CUP requirements are too time consuming,too expensive, and too
intrusive. These objections can be addressed by tailoring the CUP requirements and review
process to levels of risk and complexity associated with the type and the locations for use.
(4) CUPs build community relations regarding alcohol outlets. Adoption of general
CUP requirements for all alcohol outlets provides the locality with regular opportunities for
community review of safety and community" issues, and provides local agencies with a
practical basis for working closely with the outlet operator to establish conditions and
standards of operation that protect community health and safety as a routine matter. Under
these conditions,relations between officials,neighbors, and the community tend to improve.
over time.6
(5) CUPS as community insurance policies for safe operation. Some protection is
infinitely better than no protection. A local CUP is like an insurance policy. If the outlet is
non-problematic and conforming,conditions will have little impact on the operation or the
viability of the establishment. But if the outlet changes ownership, or other unexpected
problems arise,the city,the neighbors,and the operator's peers will have the opportunity to
remedy the situation sooner,and with less fuss,through use permit review of operating
conditions. This is often preferable to having to wait.for a complaint-driven process to rise
to the level of nuisance that justifies formal abatement proceedings and code enforcement,?
5`Best Practices in Municipal Regulation to Reduce Alcohol-Related Harms from Licensed Alcohol
Outlets,"Ventura County Behavioral Health,Alcohol&Drug Programs Prevention Services,Pacific
Institute for Research and Evaluation,Center for Study of Law and Enforcement Policy(January 2008).
6 F.D.Wittman,(2007)'Community Control of Alcohol and Drug Risk Environments:The California
ExPerience', Substance Use&Misuse,42:12, 1835—1849.
7 J. Russo,(May 2004), The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: A Report Card on Liquor Stores in Oakland
City of Oakland,Office of the City Attorney.Oakland,California.
6
3. Use of Standard Conditions to guide alcohol outlet performance
Problem. San Luis Obispo does not have a list of standard conditions for safe and trouble-
free operation of on-sale and off-sale alcohol outlets. Most alcohol outlet operators already
know how to manage safe and trouble-free alcohol sales,and many operators readily follow
standards for safe and trouble-free operation when they learn about them and receive
appropriate training and coaching. But in the absence of standard conditions,the definition
of"safe and trouble-free"operation is open to question. The result can be alcohol
operations which become problematic for the police and for neighbors,and which put
patrons at risk. In SLO,as in other cities,this situation applies for about 10%of outlets
which generate about 50%of all police activity to all outlets of the same type. Correctives
for unsafe and troublesome operation are left to informal negotiations with city officials
and neighbors; and then to the nuisance abatement process. This approach often results in
confusion,rancor,and in delayed action against problematic practices.
Solution. Explore the establishment of separate sets of conditions through the SLO zoning
ordinance,one for on-sale outlets and the other for off-sales,tailored to meet the needs of
different types of outlets(for example,bona-fide restaurants vs.bars/nightclubs,or
convenience stores vs. large stores). Write conditions to meet site conditions,needs of
specific zoning districts,and neighborhood requirements.
Comments. Cities that create standard conditions for retail alcohol outlet CUPs generally
follow one of two basic approaches. The first approach is to promulgate broad categories
for conditions that are supplemented by administrative standards, incorporated into the
CUP by reference,usually written by the planning department in consultation with other
city agencies that have responsibilities for oversight of these standards. The second
approach is to include detailed language delineating the standards directly in the CUP
ordinance. For an example of the latter, see pp.20-23 in the Ventura County Behavioral
Health publication cited in Issue Area 2.
Typical CUP conditions of approval for outlet operation cover the following
• Responsible beverage service(RBS)policies and practices
Training standards and training requirements for management and staff
(RBS training may also be required for pre-existing businesses)
• Complaint response—Community relations program
• Environmental design for preventive surveillance and crime prevention
For example,CPTED(Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design)
• Limits on alcoholic beverage product location and displays
For example, location of alcoholic beverages
• Limits on promotions and giveaway of alcoholic beverage items
For example, limits on happy-hour promotions,
• Limits on signage and advertising
For example, limits on signage and window coverage
• Requirements for premises security and prevention of loitering
For example,surveillance cameras,exterior lighting,security staff operation
• Noise and lighting limits
For example,sound audible outside the building and lighting that annoys neighbors
• Requirements for trash containment,clean-up, and graffiti removal
• Limits on activities at restaurants not related to dining
For example, limits on TV screens and prohibition of pool tables, video games
7
4. Communication with current permit holders and with applicants for permits
Problem. In Local Control communities,alcohol operators sometimes complain they are
not familiar with oversight procedures for management of safe and trouble-free outlet
operation,and that the city could do more to make procedures clear. Clarity and
transparency is important for all phases of the alcohol outlet oversight process including
application for new permits,compliance with conditions on current permits, and mitigation
of problems that create unsafe and troublesome conditions.
Solution. The City of San Luis Obispo is encouraged to explore creation of timely
bulletins,check-lists,and tutorial sessions to walk retail alcohol outlet operator through
each stage of the oversight process. Developing a robust communication program in
support of the oversight process can pay several dividends,examples of which are
described below.
Discussion. Agency staff in other Local Control cities with extensive oversight processes
find that alcohol outlet operators are especially appreciative of knowing the city's rules in
advance,and knowing what levels of effort and resources are required to complete the
application, compliance,or mitigation process. Further,the outlet operators want to have
confidence that the city can do what it says it will do in a timely way,and can help avoid
surprises and delays to the extent possible. The easier it is to participate in the process, the
better the results for all concerned.
(1) General communication from the city describing the purpose and operation of the
program helps create a supportive community environment for the oversight policies and
programs. For example,the city's communication program could include general
awareness components to educate both the retailers and concerned community groups/
organizations about the process,and to provide timely information about new
developments.
(2) Provision of accurate advance notice by the city to alcohol outlet operators
regarding requirements,costs,and timelines for participating in the alcohol outlet oversight
process will help them make appropriate business decisions.
(3) Finally,a check-list provides a convenient framework for going through the
issues involved with a specific outlet,using the same deliberate and systematic approach.
8
5. Non-conforming outlets—DAOs for"Grandfathered"establishments
Problem. Problematic non-conforming outlets are a major issue for Local Control cities.
Because there are so many of them and so few of them cause trouble, it is important to
leave well enough alone for those outlets that operate trouble-free in ways consistent with
the new standards of operation(see Issue Area 3). But it is also important to apply current
standards of operation to outlets that do not conform. There are two kinds of problems to
consider with non-conforming outlets. The first kind involves working with the few"top
ten percent'of current outlets that account for about half of all police events at outlets that
type. SLO ASIPS data are similar to data from other cities in this respect. The second kind
involves problematic long-standing practices among many outlets consistent with long-
standing community norms that have been found troublesome, such as lax ID-checking for
off-sale to minors,or widespread over-pouring at so many on-sale establishments that the
practice has become part of the way business is conducted in the community.
Solution. The City of San Luis Obispo appears similar to other cities regarding non-
conforming outlets. Pioneering work by Oakland,Vallejo,and Ventura make it possible
for all California cities to pass"Deemed Approved ordinances"(DAOs)that require
problematic non-conforming outlets to meet more stringent current operating standards in a
new CUP ordinance for alcohol outlets. Today a dozen or more California cities have
passed DAO ordinances,and we recommend that the City of San Luis Obispo consider
joining them as a general matter for development of effective oversight for all retail alcohol
outlets in the community.
Comment. A thorough review of the features and powers of the Deemed Approved
Ordinance is contained in the guideline,"Best Practices in Municipal Regulation to Reduce
Alcohol-Related Harms from Licensed Alcohol Outlets,"Ventura County Behavioral
Health et. al.,cited above. This guideline is designed to apply on a case-by-case basis to
individual outlets that is,to problems of the first kind described above under Problems. To
summarize briefly(p. 10):
• The DAO ordinance parallels the CUP ordinance, focusing on the public health,safety
and community well-being rationale for bringing problematic non-conforming uses into
compliance with current operating standards found in the CUP ordinance.
• The DAO identifies conditions which trigger application of the DAO provisions to an
existing outlet: Changes in"mode or character"of operation,closure for 90 days or
more,cessation of operation under the current ABC licenses. Under these
circumstances,the existing outlet can be treated as new outlet in the community,thus
requiring conformance with the CUP ordinance and its conditions.
Approaches for working with the second kind of problems described above involve general
nuisance abatement approaches to eliminating(abating)now-problematic uses at many
establishments. The now-problematic uses must be carefully defined to protect rights of
grandfathered permit holders, a clear public purpose must be stated(protection of health,
safety,and community welfare), and a mechanism must be created for effecting the
transition with adequate allowance for time,technical preparation, and economic
considerations. For example, if SLO were to change its definition of"restaurant,"existing
outlets now operating as restaurants would need time and support to adjust accordingly.
9
6. Compliance and enforcement—Late night operation
Problem: The"night-time economy"creates major late-night police problems in many
California cities with entertainment zones(also called"hospitality zones"). San Luis
Obispo shares these problems. SLO ASIPS/GIS data show clearly that police events
(especially disturbances and drunkenness)escalate between 10:00 pm and 2:00 am. This
escalation occurs in a drinking context that generates inebriated behavior which discharges
at closing time into the surrounding Downtown area and puts DUIs on the roads. The city's
current response is to provide police assistance at closing time in the form of sergeant and
three patrol officers. Several establishments with high numbers of police events(four
Type 48s, four Type 47s,and one Type 75)are challenged to adopt serving policies and
practices that keep drinking at manageable levels which require much lower levels of police
activity in late evening hours. The city is challenged to supplement its "thin blue line"with
preventive services to control the escalation of drinking behavior during the evening.
Solution: Late-night operation in entertainment districts is a serious issue area facing all
cities,especially major cities with large night-time economies, in all English-speaking
countries and in Western Europe. Although many cities and operating establishments have
made a start to establish local control policies that provide best practices and public
resources for local control, implementation is lagging. Further design and implementation
of safe and trouble-free late-night operation are at the frontier of effective management by
local public agencies and by outlet operators. The field in general needs more innovation
and fresh thinking in this area.
Comments. In general,outlet operators and local officials both know more can be done to
reduce late-night problems. For example,screening practices and lD-checking need to be
observed inside and outside. Overcrowding ordinances need to be followed. Responsible
serving practices to prevent intoxication need to be strengthened and maintained. Practices
to moderate drinking with food and non-alcohol sales can be strengthened and policies to
taper off drinking during final hours of operation can be adopted.
These issues from a land-use management perspective come down to three choices:
(1)Tolerate the status quo; (2)Devise new modes of operation and business models that
incorporate safe serving and management practices into operations at these establishments;
(3) Disallow problematic land-uses to continue at these locations.
Exploration of option(2)above will be greatly enhanced by detailed study of actual
problems(that is,thorough study of police events and the factors leading up to them), and
by adoption of policies and practices outlined in the first five Items in this memo.
Adoption will encourage invention and local problem-solving with a fresh eye to workable
solutions. The task is to move beyond"Just say No"to"Let's do this instead of that."
This process can also be enhanced by ideas and perspectives from the full host of
community participants concerned about the oversight process—neighboring merchants,
impacted residents,outlet operators,youth-serving organizations,health and social service
organizations,Cal-Poly and Cuesta college—and others concerned about the problems.
Exploration of option(3)will be explored under Issue Area 8 below.
$ K. Graham and R.Homel,"Raising the Bar,"Ibid. ,See also the Responsible Hospitality Institute website
(www:rhiweb.org);RHI specializes in safe serving practices and effective working relationships between
the hospitality industry,local officials and policy-makers,and alcohol researchers.
10
7. Special fees for city services to oversee alcohol outlets—Training and inspection
Problem. Most cities treat retail alcohol outlets as regular businesses with respect to city
oversight through land-use and police services. Yet retail alcohol outlets use
disproportionate amounts of police service and will require additional services to
implement full-service zoning through a CUP process that includes close attention to
compliance. How are these additional services to be paid for? As international alcohol
researchers have observed,alcohol is no common commodity,and as such generates
additional charges for public oversight. Two studies put annual California costs at about 18
billion dollars for alcohol-related health and public safety services,many of which fall on
local public safety services.
Solution. The City of Oakland prevailed in the Califomia Supreme Court, in answer to a
challenge from alcohol outlet retailers,to impose an additional fee on retail alcohol outlets
for the additional services required to staff DAO oversight(see Item 5 above). The Court's
ruling opened the way for other California cities to impose similar fees for local public
services required specifically by local retail alcohol outlets. The City of San Luis Obispo is
encouraged to explore a variety of approaches to imposition of specific fees for city
services related to retail alcohol outlets.
Comments. Again,this is relatively new frontier for California Local Control cities. A
variety of fee systems is being developed based on the types of services involved—no one
approach has emerged as a model, and the fee amount varies. Cities are charging fees for
review of new-use/change-of-use zoning applications,and for oversight of current outlets.
Some examples:
• Many California cities,in addition to Local Control jurisdictions,now impose fees for
review of CUP applications for new permits and for modifications to existing permits
based on time and effort required by the city to process the application.
• City of Oakland: The city charges a flat fee annual fee of$1,500 for each on-sale and
off-sale outlet(except for Full Service Restaurants)to cover a mandatory city-operated
monitoring,education and enforcement program.
• City of Ventura: The city imposes a fee structure based on location in the city (by level
of police activity),by hours of operation,by level of sales,and whether entertainment
is offered. The fee ranges from$250 to$1,700.
• City of Santa Cruz: Similar to City of Ventura
• City of Berkeley: The city is exploring a combination of fees, for example, flat general
inspection fees that vary by ABC License Type($200 for Type 41 &Type 47, $400 for
all other ABC Types), and an additional fee of$1,000 for use permit violations.
I1
8. Long-range and development planning that includes alcohol outlets with other land-
uses—Density and development issues
Problem. Few California cities have included retail alcohol outlets as specific elements to
be considered in master planning and community development planning. Yet research
increasingly shows relationships between alcohol problems(crime,public safety,health)
and alcohol outlet density by population and by geographic concentration. The City of San
Luis Obispo has one of the highest population density ratios in the state for on-sale outlets,
similar to the ratios for San Francisco and Newport Beach. As an attractive tourist
destination and college town, SLO faces alcohol outlet-related development problems. One
example experienced in similar communities is"boom-bust"cycles that over-fill with
alcohol outlets and leave lingering problems after the boom fades. Another example is
commercial and entertainment/sport centers that seek"bundled"local zoning approval for
multiple ABC licenses—in effect pre-approval that weakenslocal control at these large
facilities.
Solution. San Luis Obispo is encouraged to study long-range alcohol outlet density and
development issues in addition to current zoning for retail alcohol outlets. The city is
encouraged to establish an inter-agency working group devoted to principled establishment
of sustainable community-wide land-use policy for retail alcohol outlets.
Comments. Establish community goals and principles for safe and healthy inclusion of
retail alcohol outlets in the mix of development uses for long-range planning and
development,taking into account the community's needs for health, safety,economic,and
social/historical development.
(1) Monitor and study of community experiences with retail alcohol outlets. Create a
community data system on alcohol availability and alcohol use that tracks retail alcohol
outlets according to public health and safety variables, economic variables,and social/
historical impact on a continuing basis. This system will assist both current zoning and
long-range planning by observing trends and conducting studies that link alcohol outlet
activity to these variables. ASIPS/GIS Community Tour data offer a starting point by
making it easy to link alcohol outlet-related police problems to community economic
variable,population health and safety experiences, and land-use variables.
(2) Share planning efforts among community partners. The city can use these data
to engage and support other public partners that also must plan for an alcohol-safe and
alcohol-healthy community,for example as Cal-Poly,Cuesta College,and the SLO County
Alcohol and Drug program. Explore working parallel or in conjunction with the SLO
County Alcohol and Drug Program for AOD prevention;which is required by the State
Dept of Alcohol and Drug Programs to pursue outcome-based planning compatible with
long-range master planning that combines physical, social,and economic variables.
Encourage participation by all stakeholders, including outlet operators,concerned about
safe and healthy alcohol outlets
(3) Public participation and feedback. Periodic reports to City Council and the
public on the distribution and operation of the city's retail alcohol outlets will invigorate
community oversight and clarify community values about outlets, especially when reports
are based on input from all stakeholders affected by the outlets. This exercise,hosted every
two years,will help the SLO community mobilize to manage its alcohol experiences.
12
_ Page 1 of 1
From: John Sherry PohnSherry@elite4loans.com] Sent: Tue 10/20/2009 1:21 PM
To: Marx,Jan
Cc: Romero, Dave; rgn.board@yahoo.com; Settle,Allen; Carter,Andrew;jashbaugh@slocity.org
Subject: Downtown bars
Attachments:
Hi Jan,
Nice job yesterday on the radio show and good luck with the meeting this evening. I cannot make it but I
support your judgment of the issue.
Coincidentally, there was a Dear Abby in the today's Tribune with a letter from a 21 year old college student
that was rather enlightening. He or she said "Most people my age drink only to get drunk and appear unable to
have fun without the aid of alcohol. Every activity must be performed under the influence." The consequences
of "drunken stupors, awful judgment and vomiting all night" are not something to be ashamed of but rather
something to brag about with friends.
I think alcohol consumption and students are so closely intertwined that short of a Prohibition you cannot
expect to change the behavior. It has perhaps always been that way and will probably always be. So the
question is what can be done to protect the quality of life for those in the population of the city that are not
sharing in this revelry?As in the neighborhoods, it comes down to enforcement of laws and ordinances and
putting tough laws and ordinances in place. I think the bars should share the cost of the problem they are
facilitating. Yes, they bring in tax revenue for the city but they also are largely responsible for facilitating the
problem behavior.
We need more police and the City need to address that issue sooner than later. In addition to new fees on the
bars, if everyone in the city was assessed $4/year that would be somewhere around $160,000. Just make
sure it actually buys two more officers and not raises for the existing and I would vote for that.
As an aside, I was downtown on a Friday night several weeks ago. My wife and I had out of town company
that arrived late and we went down to Novo's for a late bite around 9:30 PM. When we came out at 11:00 1
thought we had been transported to New Orleans! Or maybe Spring Break somewhere! This was not the San
Luis Obispo I used to know. It was all students and it was all out party time. I guess it's like that every
weekend? No wonder the police have a hard time answering a noise complaint in the neighborhood.
Thank you for your great work. Hearing you at the council meeting on noise made me glad I voted for you.
Regards,
John Sherry
805-544-3839
RECEIVED MEETING AGENDA
OCT 2 2009 DATE ITEM #
SLO CITY CLERK