Representative Whitehouse's Letter of Objection

On Monday, August 6th, 4th District RTM Representative Michael Whitehouse transmitted this letter to the Town Council.

In summary, these are the reasons why, in my opinion, this the ordinance is flawed, and I would very much like to hear your feedback.

Overly Broad and Vague

The ordinance is so broad and so vague that anyone drinking anywhere other than a private residence could be ticketed by the police.

This includes everything from a wedding reception or holiday party that runs late to an election party at HQ. It could also affect various events.

Police Discretion is Bad Legislation

People should know at any given moment if they are inside of our outside of the law. I have heard the phrase "police discretion" many times. We have a great police department, but a law abiding citizen should obey the law with or without the police, so a midnight drinking curfew means midnight for them. Sometimes police discretion is necessary because of the complexity of real life, but crafting into the legislation in the first place is bad legislation.

Unintended Consequences

Broad rules like this often unexpectedly affect events, conferences, and other events that bring people in from out of town. Finding an unexpected rule that creates fines for drinking after midnight could cause organizations to look elsewhere for their events or create a negative impression of the town.

I have many years of event planning experiences and there are towns, and in some cases entire states, that organizations I work with will not run events in because of broadly worded local rules very much like this one.

It Will Close a Local Business

Midnight Hookah on Rt 12, owned by Hossam Abudawood, a resident of Groton, would be forced to relocate if a 12 AM drinking curfew were to be imposed on them. Their core market after midnight is people who work late such as restaurant and casino workers, business owners, and first responders. Those people enjoy a beer after work as well.

Mr. Abudawood would be quite happy to speak to any member of the Council teach you all about the culture of hookah and what his business is all about, as he did at great length for me. I had the chance to meet with him, and he's a man who loves Groton, whose kids go to our schools, and who just wants to run a safe, fun, profitable business.

Regulations Already Exist

There has been some suggestion that these rules are needed because there is other illegal activity going on at some late night BYOB establishments. If that's the case, then the other activities are illegal and should be prosecuted. Drunk driving is already illegal. Drug dealing is already illegal. We don't need new laws to let us enforce existing laws.

Overreach

At best this appears to be a solution in search of a problem. Alcohol is already regulated at the point of acquisition. BYOB is not regulated by the state because you can't get alcohol there. The only difference between drinking at a lounge and drinking at home is that some people don't have homes that are large enough to accommodate more than a couple people. And even if they can, do we really prefer that people take the party to their house in their residential neighborhood?

The citizens do not need to justify why they should be free to do something. The government must justify why they can curtail that freedom, and yet in multiple meetings, I have yet to hear a single compelling argument as to why such a broad and sweeping new rule is needed.

Conclusion

I believe that the vote should be delayed and a new public hearing should be held, with better public information so that the citizens know how wide reaching the effects will be. When something this far reaching gets only one speaker at a public hearing, that indicates that the hearing was not promoted properly, not that there is no interest in the community. 41,000 residents plus guests will be impacted by this new ordinance, and a business that will be profoundly affected by this only found out about it last week.