CC Minutes - 07/23/08 Work Session

Home Browse Search

Ms. Taylor agreed that it should be equal, though she found it ironic that there would be drinking in a parking lot for cars, given that someone would have to drive the car out of the lot, possibly after having consumed alcohol. Mr. Clark indicated his support for the ordinance. He asked how the permitting process would work. Capt. Kerns said the details had yet to be worked out. He added that part of the reason for permitting was to determine who would be the responsible party for the property. In response to a question from Mr. Clark, Ms. Miller explained that the registration for a permit would “simply be paper shuffling.” She said the City would give a permit to anyone who came in for one. The reason they went with the registration was in order to have a contact name in case there were problems. Ms. Bettman opined that the ordinance was a “morally bankrupt public policy” because she believed it endorsed intoxication and drinking. She asserted that there were 56,000 traffic deaths per year nationwide and the majority of those involved alcohol. She felt the argument that some properties were making money from the tailgating parties made it okay brought up the issue of some of the property being public property. She pointed out that the Willamette Institute for Science and Technology (WISTEC) was publicly owned. She wanted to know what the City’s liability would be in the event that something happened. Ms. Bettman also took issue with the “special treatment” that allowed rules to be broken for football games. She asked how it would be different if it was a rock and roll concert or the Oregon Country Fair. She said she would not even support sending the ordinance to a public hearing. She declared that it would create more problems without creating more capacity to enforce the laws. Mr. Poling said he had brought the issue before the City Council based on suggestions from some of the non-profit organizations’ directors and members. He stressed that the ordinance was not about endorsing alcohol, it was about equalizing the rules for the non-profit organizations. He stated that otherwise the City should ban alcohol altogether for game days. He noted that many of the organizations already had rules in place and enforced them. He added that most of the people who park on these lots were known by property owners and had been there for a long time. Mr. Poling related that he had seen firsthand the results of alcohol consumption and what happened after people had been drinking and driving. He underscored that this did not stop young people from having parties when their parents were away on vacation and it did not stop the designated driver from having a few drinks. He noted that he had arrested designated drivers numerous times. Mr. Poling approved of the proposed geographic area for the ordinance. Mr. Zelenka related that he had “gone tailgating.” He was torn between encouraging drinking and driving and leveling the field for the surrounding non-profit-owned parking lots. He was not certain that it was a good public policy. He said he would welcome testimony from Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) and other groups indicating how they would modify the ordinance. He was not necessarily in favor of banning alcohol at this point. Mr. Zelenka expressed some uncertainty as to whether putting the property owners into the enforcement role would work. He thought having them enforce rules and potentially kick someone off the property would be challenging. He hoped that the council would review this after the football season and see what happened. MINUTES—Eugene City Council July 23, 2007 Page 11 Work Session