Tuesday, May 06, 2008
WTOP: Possible Singles Ban in 4, 7, and 8
Wards, of course. They are considering singles bans. There has also been talk of expanding the ANC 6A H Street ban [which also covers some surrounding areas] into ANC 6C, as well as talk of some sort of ban in Ward 5. Such a ban could cover limited, or extensive areas. It is not yet clear, but there have been talks involving certain officials. Do residents, or business owners/employees, [please state your ward and approximate location in terms of block and affiliation in terms of resident, business owner/employee/ect.] think there is support? This is, of course, due to be the subject of public meetings, so this is just a simple blog question, and nothing official. Please feel free to provide any additional information you believe may be helpful. You can also email me at inked78[at]hotmail.com, but comments left here can be useful. Please be civil and watch the language [you won't offend me, but you might offend others].
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
74 comments:
why not make this ban effective DC-wide? This seems like a fantastic idea for the slummy areas
Based on my proximity to H Street and the number of Steel Reserve cans I pick up weekly, I'd venture to guess the singles ban hasn't had any impact in Ward 6. Apparently brewers/distillers are going to mitigate the ban on single sales by by offering their products as two-packs...I'd love to see four-packs of "mini" Old English bottles!@
My problem with this is that it applies to all beer and malt liquor under 70oz. I personally like Belgian beer and buy it frequently from Schneider's, amongst other places. Those large wine-bottle size Belgian beers are only 25oz, so this would apply to them too. You'll end up with the situation they had at the P Street Whole Foods where they had to tape two bottles of Belgian beer together (their voluntary agreement has since been changed to allow the sale of singles).
George, it isn't only brewers. You can see where retailers have taped beers together. But the idea is that it mitigates thing somewhat, not totally. I can also cite empty bottles of Hennessey, and various champagnes on the sidewalk. Singles bans are a mitigation issue. They don't erase the issue. That said, I want to make clear that my official stance on any ban in my area will come from community response, not my personal views, which are divided on the issue. I did make a statement at a hearing on the 6A ban to the effect that I believed there was community support based solely on what I received [and I qualified it as such] at meetings, and from individual constituents.
i'm right behind the children's museum. the liquor store on 3rd and H is a nuisance and i would LOVE to see singles banned from that store. there are always individuals loitering nearby, and the surrounding area is filled with trash and urine.
go singles ban! (we are talking alcohol, and not chicks, right?!?!)
This wouldn't happen in Iowa.
What happen to ward 5?
Chris, there are problems, absolutely. How to resolve them is an issue.
Anon, Ward 5 is looking at some stuff, as mentioned above.
And again, please, on this post, provide the info requested in the post. It would be helpful.
I'm a resident, Ward 5, Mr. Hooper's SMD. I completely support any singles ban.
The impact may not be as dramatic as some had hoped. I can say I've witnessed on multiple occasion the drunks pooling their money inside the store so they can get the multipacks and split them up amongst each other. But it's a start. The singles ban is just one prong of a much broader effort to keep our streets safe and clean. And at the risk of sounding elitist, I do think the ban helps send a message and makes things just a little harder for the people who treat our yards/alleys/sidewalks like one big trash can and toilet. What I would really like to see is a permanent loitering law, but this is fraught with so many civil rights and racial issues and the potential for abuse by police that it will probably never come to be.
I am a resident of your SMD, Elise. (I think...1300 block of Trinidad.) And I would definitely support a singles ban in Ward 5. Walking the kids to the Safeway, I don't know how many cans we pass, with the numbers increasing the closer in proximity we get to Rose's on Bladensburg.
I am sick of it.
Ro,
again this is a mitigation effort. The basic idea, as I understand it, it to discourage public drinking. You can't eliminate it. And really this is an about round on loitering, at least in my mind.
I lived in London, where public drinking was totally legal, and at least where I lived/went that wasn't an issue because even though it occurred, it didn't really bring other problems. Whether it does here, to me at least, is still a question. There are people who hang out on the corner and drink all day, and litter, and urinate in people's yards, or in the public space. But I've seen people but O'Doules in paper bags, and I wonder how many people hanging out [whether they are drinking, or not] on the corner are just hanging out, and not causing any problems. Often times, in my opinion, people are too commonly worried about people that hang out that don't cause issues. To reference the controversial April Fools Day Post, some people are afraid of guys who hang out on the corner just because they hang out on the corner. Though it may often be the case that these guys are engaged in troublesome activity, that is not always true.
Ginny, you are indeed in My SMD. I plan to hold an SMD meeting soon to address this and other issues. I will post notice here, on the listserv, and also distribute flyers, as well as post notice on some public points of view.
I live at 3rd and H NE and I completely support the singles ban for ANC6C. The numbers of drunks, the amount of trash and the smell of urine has definitely increased on my block since the ANC6A singles ban went into effect in October. We already had a problem and now the liquor store on the corner of 3rd is the only one left in the vicinity (on H) that sells singles. Please, please new ANC6C Commissioner…get the singles ban going on our west end of H street. The worst flock to this liquor store. It’s really sad for the neighborhood.
Great start to clean up the street. Walk H Street on a Saturday morning and it is littered with LARGE beer bottles in paper bags, take a closer look and you will see drunks sleeping on steps of businesses.
BAN SINGLES - I drink Lambic (Belgian Beer) all the time. I would much rather travel to VA to buy a "single" beer and have clean, safe non drunk, loitered streets
ok. in all seriousness, i live in ANC6C. since the ban went in effect up the road, it's only gotten worse at 3rd and H. i actually had to email senate square headquarters again, because of people hanging out on the steps of ex-mayor williams' new home, drinking. AND recently witnessed a WOMAN urinating on the lawn by the stairs closest to H street and 3rd. she left as i was walking home, and guess where she went? yes, the liquor store on 3rd and H.
inked, i lived in london for 3.5 years. i dig what your saying, but... even britain had a ban on selling alcohol from 12:00 to 3:00 for the longest time. to get rid of drunks. they've lifted that now, but loitering and drunks hanging out are very OBVIOUSLY different. you know exactly what i'm talking about. btw, i lived in watford, north london, but spent a lot of time in central london due to grad school, and of course, the nightlife.
it's pretty distinct here. folks hang out and drink. as a matter of fact, i walked home through an alley off of H a few weekends ago. there were a group of guys sitting around drinking. they tried to sell me a chicken. yes, a live chicken tied to a post. they were drunk, and one guy said they'd give me a discount because they peed on the chicken. that was about 5th and H (alley behind, to the north). this is just not acceptable.
i emailed some DC PETA people.
i figured they'd get on the case, because they're more active than public servants that have to cater to a basic common (public - or "consituent" as you commishes call us) denominator.
if i had the time, i'd do a graph of crime movement/public nuisance movement graph since the singles ban went into effect for the more easterly part of the h street corridor. i, for one, can guarantee it's affected the western part of h street. and that would mean NEGATIVELY.
maybe now that anthony williams lives in our quadrant (senate square) might make a difference. after all, that's how dc works. folks with weight make things happen. transplant commissioners only sorta-kinda get things done.
speaking of which, kudos for adding tony to your list of commissioner candidates. he's been very active in the neighborhood crime watch in the area, and he used to be a cop.
he's someone to consider very seriously.
oh! and wait, i was buying some wine from the 3rd and H liquor store, and i heard one guy in line say, "the faggots are trying to stop single sales on my corner, mother*uckers! what, i have to go to maryland for a 40 ouncer? WTF?"
it's the end all be all for H street drunks, especially since it's next to a bus stop.
if commissioners can't do anything about it, i'm organizing a campaign to get someone who might be able to do something about it (read, anthony williams).
you should spend two hours at third and H.... i know it's not your district - this is for the blog readers that do live around here.
ugh, i could go on, but i don't think i have to.
so, yes. singles ban is just a quick fix to send a message. but it's something.
I live 5 houses down from the liqueur store on 3rd and H. I can tell you that the owners of the store are very nice, and clean up outside their store every night. However, they do not clean the block or the nearby areas that their decision to sell single beers impacts. On a daily basis, I watch their customers walking towards their store, take a big swig of their last beer, throw the can in my yard, or a yard nearby, and go in and buy a new beer.
I am sorry for you lovers of Belgian beers who are worried you can't buy singles anymore, but until you start cleaning up the singles all up and down my block, I am ok with you being without your occasional desire for single belgian beers.
Hi Elise,
I have always thought I support a singles ban in ward 5 but i keep hearing they aren't as effective as I may have thought. BUT I am happy to give it a try and see if it works. I live in India Henderson's SMD. Honestly since we received a trash can on my street is really has cut back on the number of bottles that once lined our street. India/Kathy's next meeting will address a single's ban this Friday, however I have to miss it.
Lucci, Kathy has stopped including me on her emails. It would be great if you could give me the info. I promise not to cause a big stink.
The ban on singles sales on H Street has made an enormous difference. Much less trash and no more stink of urine! The loiterers have gone somewhere else... PLEASE DO extend the ban to Trinidad!
I could use a nice 6 pick of Bass or Guinness right about now =)
One morning around 8am this Spring I was walking out my front door on my way to work, and saw a man across the street walking his dog. I waved hi. He waved back.
Then he had a big gulp of whatever liquor he was drinking.
I support the ban.
500 block of M ST NE. I support the singles ban.
1000 Block of 7th Street.
Support the ban 110%. I'd like to see a city-wide ban.
Whilst I've never been to London, I did go to Ye Olde England at Busch Gardens.
They didn't seem to have a loitering problem.
It's unfortunate, but our populace simply isn't like they apparently are in London.
True, banning singles won't solve all problems. But it's one step in that direction.
In a perfect world we'd be able to get any kind of liquor (or other drug) we want. But we don't live in a perfect world. We simply don't have the discipline, police initiative, or social program expertise in place to handle such a libertarian existence.
And I simply don't buy the 'economic hardship' argument that corner stores and liquor stores use to justify selling singles. If your primary business is selling chilled singles in brown paper bags, obviously meant for immediate consumption on the street outside your store, and you cry about going out of business if that money stream dries up, I'm not really sure you get much sympathy. After all, it's the rest of us that pay the price for your profits.
1600 Block of Montello
Supports the Ban! lets do it.
What if all the FT readers who go to the liquor store at 3rd & H, tell the "friendly owners" (as one person described them), that you will not continue to patronize their store until they voluntarily ban the sale of singles?
It seems kind of hypocritical to continue going while at the same time complaining (in my opinion, legitimately) about the way they're doing business.
1200 block of Staples (on the corner so plenty of trash and loiterers). I do not support the ban.
I would support a drug ban in 5D before a singles ban. If somehow they could make it illegal to sell, buy or use drugs and then pursue and arrest the offenders, I think this would make a bigger difference for the residence of that Ward.
I would support even a city wide ban on singles. On more than one occasion I see people with their brown paper bags taking a swig on a metro bus.
Also I would support the ban of singles to include the store that is at the corner of FL/12th NE. Now that the singles ban has gone into effect on parts of H St NE, I see folks going there to purchase their single beers. We still pick up Steel Reserve cans in black plastic bags on a regular basis in my area, and the peeing in our alley continues..help!!
I support the singles ban in Ward 8. I don't think it is the total solution, but I think it puts a kink in enough people's plans to slow down the problem.
One of my favorite places to buy beer in college was a place called Art of the Table in Grand Rapids, Michigan. I loved it because there was a walk-in fridge in the back where you could select any number of beers --and their collection came from all over the US and the world. But you didn't have to buy a six-pack...
I mean, clearly there is nothing like that in Ward 8 (yet), but would a single's ban hurt such a store? Or does it mean that you can buy singles as long as you buy more than one...?
800 block of 5th Street NE, support the singles ban.
I am also working in 6C for a moratorium on singles sales, as well.
anonymous 9:34
it is hypocritical.
that's why there needs to be a solution.
are you one of those folks that patronizes other areas of DC or MD or VA for your goods?
participate in your community. figure out what's going on, how it's going on, and why it's going on, and then work for a solution.
or just hit some other part of town. if that's the case, you aren't part of the problem OR THE SOLUTION.
have fun outside your neighborhood!
From 3rd and H: Regardless of the ‘friendly’ owners…the liquor store at 3rd & H along with its singles sales is holding back an entire neighborhood. Most people who patronize that store do not live in the neighborhood. Drunks are continually dragging through our neighborhood from elsewhere en route to the store. The store has been robbed several times in the last 3 years and the VERY loud alarm goes off consistently waking/disturbing residents. The owners are not friendly as the alarm is not hooked up to a phone number that calls them in the middle of the night in their far way Maryland neighborhood. They are unreachable to turn the alarm off or even investigate the problem. We have a great set of residents on the West end of H and it just too bad that nasty, good for nothing drunks get to loiter (pass out on our front steps), urinate (and otherwise), throw their disgusting trash in our yard and verbally harass on a daily basis. The residents are indeed paying the price for the profits of a liquor store that mostly sells singles and is incased in plexiglass. It’s a shame. So, yes please ban the sales of singles in ANC6C. Maybe with time the store @ 3rd and H will cater to the residents instead of the drunks. Seems more profitable to me, I certainly spend plenty of money at Schneiders…
5th and H, I support the ban.
the owners that run the store are very 'accomodating'. they deal with a lot of arseholes, but that's in part because they SERVE THEM.
they have no clue about the area.
and they have no clue about how to run a business.
i was behind two VERY YOUNG girls that bought two giant bottles of vodka. the couple that run the joint asked for their ID, but they meandered and said they weren't sure they had one, and weren't sure they were getting a good price on the booze, etc.
in the end, the couple that ran the joint simply sold them the booze to get them out of the store.
if that's any indication of how they do business, it's an indication that they should change the way they do cater to their clients.
As a nearby resident of the liquor store at 3rd and H, I fully support the ban.
It baffles me why anyone who objects to the way the store operates would patronize them. That just encourages the status quo.
Personally, I'd rather walk a few blocks to go to Schneiders.
Have the ANC Candidates taken a position on the ban? That'd be a great way to get my vote.
Kent Place, Ward 5. I support the ban.
Anonymous 6:37. Why don't you read what I wrote instead of just harping on the fact that I called the owners friendly. My point was that despite the fact that they clean their area up, they do not clean up the rest of the neighborhood. Nor did I say that I visit that store. I live 25 yards from the store so I see what is going on.
Please read posts fully before making your statement. I am very much for the ban. I even criticized the BS artists who said they do not support the ban because they want to be able to buy their large Belgian beers.
Once again for those in the cheap seats. I AM FOR THE BAN.
One last thing. About once a month, I go up and down my block and pick up all the garbage. It would be nice if other joined and did the same thing, since we know the drunks who throw the bottles on the street are not going to do it.
j ro -
'bs artists'? are you kidding? you want to ban something and someone who has a legitimate argument as to why they're not a big fan of it is a bs artist?
i understand why people what this ban. it's easy and it won't cost 95% of the people anything. just because something is easy doesn't mean it's the right course of action, especially since this ban isn't directed at the SPECIFIC activities that people want changed, but rather something they believe (and have, so far as I know, NEVER proven) causes it.
if we want to get rid of litter maybe we should also ban rap snacks, doritos, and arizona iced tea. this isn't a straw man argument...i pick up far more of these things than i do liquor/beer cans/bottles.
not sure how to get rid of public urination...maybe help with homelessness, mentally handicapped people who are on the streets and general economic hardship?
this ban won't solve (as many have admitted) any of the problems. they may mitigate some of the issues with only bs artists who like belgian beers suffering, so i guess that makes it ok.
glad people are cavalier with what they're willing to ban, especially if it won't have any negative impact on their lifestyles.
still opposed to the ban (and most bans, because, well, who are you to ban me from using something). sorry, this just really pisses me off.
9th and H/I support the ban/Get the drunks and druggies out
"glad people are cavalier with what they're willing to ban, especially if it won't have any negative impact on their lifestyles."
No one is banning anything. You can still get all the liquor you want.
What they are talking about is simply regulating HOW you can get it.
The regulation (no singles sold individually chilled and obviously for immediate consumption) is a relatively minor inconvenience if you are planning on drinking at home, which is the only legal use for the product.
The substance itself (alcohol) is still quite available.
And, to clarify, what most are saying is that it won't solve all public drinking issues.
But your suggestion that it will have little or no impact is simply not the case.
"No one is banning anything. You can still get all the liquor you want."
It will become much more difficult to get Beligan beers like Chimay which are often sold as singles. Perhaps places will sell 4 packs, or perhaps they'll stop carrying Chimay. They are obviously not banning it per se, but it could have the same effect for certain products.
You mention 'chilled for immediate consumption'. Am I to read from this that they will still stock and sell warm 40s, deuces and the like? My belief was that you would simply not be able to by anything under 70 ozs in a single serving. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
"But your suggestion that it will have little or no impact is simply not the case."
As far as I know this is simply your opinion and is based on little other than a relatively small amount (if any) of anecdotal evidence. I will say your belief that I am wrong is simply not the case until shown some sort of hard evidence to the contrary.
I live near 8th and H. Count me as against. I am bothered by folks that I presume are drunk often-I hate it as much as the next person. I actually recently saw a gentleman peeing on H- facing out into the street rather than on a building or bush or tree or something. Nothing ends a long hard day at work quite like a weird old man penis pointed in your direction... It's kind of funny in that really sad 'the world is an ugly place' sort of way. Anyway, I'm not in favor of regulations of this sort, although if anyone could point me toward some non-anecdotal evidence or a study that shows the way this might actually solve problems in our neighborhoods (in my mind, "solve" does not include displacement) I would be very interested in reading them, though I have to say that I feel very strongly that regulations like this are misguided and scream “Nanny State” to me. Prohibition doesn’t work.
I am one of those who would like for the public urination to stop.
I am also one of those who occasionally buys upscale beers which, when sold in stores, are only sold as singles.
I live in 6A and supported the ban there because the first point matters to me more than the second. But if there's some study (or more than one) that makes a convincing case that singles bans don't help, I'm certainly willing to consider the argument.
Is anyone familiar with a careful study of the effects of singles bans? A quick google didn't turn up anything.
Tim:
No, the regulation would preclude singles regardless of temperature.
But everybody here knows they are sold chilled, in brown bags, for immediate consumption.
As for evidence, the opinions in areas that have enacted the ban (wide enough to have an impact, unlike the current H St ban), the fairly strong consensus is that there is a noticeable drop in public drinking and related problems.
The city-wide ban is coming. It's only a matter of time.
i have a question as a sort of follow up to what chris metzler is asking, but certainly not attacking his comment:
who should shoulder the burden of proof regarding the impact of a ban on singles--those who want to change existing policy and enact a ban or those who oppose the suggested ban?
obviously my opinion is that those who want the change should prove precisely why and how this will alter the current situation, but i'd be interested to hear what others thought on that topic.
hillman:
i appreciate your comments. however, for me to be swayed i need something more than an opinion. i think it's good public policy to be sure of the impact of laws that are created or, at the very least, to conduct some sort of study that will try to estimate the impact of proposed regulation...especially when we're talking about banning a product.
that said, i really do understand where the pro-ban people are coming from, i am just not convinced the benefits will outweigh the costs (which we all perceive differently).
I do understand the libertarian argument against a ban here. And in a perfect world I'd be echoing that libertarian argument.
But DC ain't perfect, and never will be. We simply don't effectively use police or social service resources to cut down on public drinking, and honestly we never will, certainly not to their fullest extent possible. The sooner we admit that the better.
Given that, the libertarian argument has to give way to the more pragmatic one.
I seriously doubt you'd ever be able to quantify the exact results of a ban, in some sort of scientific setting. There are simply too many variables.
You can also add the common sense factor - it just seems to be common sense that these singles (99% of which are obviously meant for immediate street consumption) are going to be a major factor in public urination. I mean, you are literally preparing a product whose primary intended use is to be drunk immediately on the street.
And ask pretty much anyone that lives in the NW neighborhoods where bans have been put in place.... they are enthusiastically supported.
I seriously doubt anyone could actually suggest that the ban would increase public drinking. So as I see it the ban can only either do good (most likely) or be totally ineffective (not likely).
If it's really ineffective it can be undone.
One thing it's done in other areas is cut down on habitual drunks, the same guys you see every day, year in and year out. If they know they can no longer get their singles they will go somewhere else where they can.
Is this debate for real? For the guy who craves Chimay, just buy a case of it. load it up in your fridge, and then get one whenever you want. Or, please walk up and down the 5 blocks surrounding the 3rd and H street store and pick up all the garbage. Until you are willing to do that, I don't care about you not being able to buy your Belgian beer.
Against the ban. Plenty of reasons, but Fancy Beer is not one of them. I'll buy my Rouge Chocolate in a four pack, no problem. To name one reason, putting a ban on singles in the area has not stopped the drug dealers from Maryland from parking in front of my house. They have cars, so if they wanted, they could just go over the border.
I know everybody is going to jump down my throat for this one, but to the Tim's on this board who want to see a study before they support the ban? My question is, do you support the handgun ban? Because every study done shows that the handgun ban has done nothing to reduce crime. In fact DC has a much higher rate of crime with guns then does Texas or Florida which have very gun friendly laws. So if you base everything off study's I assume you are also for dropping the handgun law. Correct?
My other question, is do you plan on financing such a study? Or do you expect DC to divert money away from their social programs they love so much to pay for a study to see what the impact would be on those who lose access to their Belgian beers?
"To name one reason, putting a ban on singles in the area has not stopped the drug dealers from Maryland from parking in front of my house. They have cars, so if they wanted, they could just go over the border."
I will also note that putting a ban on singles in the area has not ended world hunger, or mitigated the spread of AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa.
If these thugs are unable to buy their singles here, they'll simply drive to Maryland and....
Heyyyy...wait a second... maybe this ban isn't such a bad idea after all!
Ask anyone who lived in Mount Pleasant before and after the single-sale ban there. It makes a world of difference in terms of neighborhood cleanliness.
j ro - thanks for not caring about me. certainly your right. thanks, too, for telling me how i should live. glad you know better than me what i should and shouldn't do. no, i won't finance a study because i'm not the one trying to change existing policy. no, i most certainly do not support the handgun ban. it clearly doesn't work. neither do drug laws, anti-abortion laws or anything else where there will still be demand even after the ban. this won't stop drunks from getting drunk. i'll admit it will make it harder, but it won't stop them.
as for picking up your garbage, maybe we should trade streets and see who has more trash to pick up...i'd be hard pressed to believe you've got more at 3rd and h than i do in trinidad, but maybe i'm wrong. either way, good for you for taking a stand and ignoring/marginalizing those who disagree.
They'll still come back to sell drugs on my corner, smartypants. They have Maryland plates, so it's a good possibility they don't live here. Someone related single beer drinkers to "druggies." Don't druggies do drugs? Why would they stop doing drugs in the area, because they can't buy Steel Reserve? Please. I agree with Inked, ban singles won't change anything.
Tim, are you taking this a little personally?
hillman:
your argument is a sound one and one i struggle with...ideals vs. pragmatism. my brother one time said to me 'your ideals won't keep you from starving'. very true, but part of me fears giving in to the pragmatism as it's so easy to do and it could keep what i consider to be real, important and positive change from happening.
i agree that from the perspective of what will make the majority happiest, this is probably it. but, that doesn't mean i think it's the right thing to do. and, yes, i am a libertarian...so i'm obviously a nutjob who should be ignored ;)
8th and el.
i guess so. hard not to. shouldn't we all take personally changes that we don't like or agree with?
How do you write the law to prevent the sale of two-packs?
Tim-
I am neither ignoring or marginalizing those who disagree with me. In fact, I am trying to have a discussion. I did not know you did not live near H Street. Now I understand why you do not support the Ban. I am generally a libertarian and do not believe in unnecessary laws, except when some freedoms impact others rights.
I for one care more about the homeowners who live near the liqueur stores who have their homes turned into garbage dumps and urinals, then I do about the people who want to have the right to buy single Belgian beers.
I just had a great dinner at De. Granville's tonight. For those who crave a single Belgian beer, please feel free to go there, they have plenty of Belgian beers. They also have restrooms and garbage cans you can use to after you are done drinking.
What a novel idea.
There has been research here and there. The most substantive is in the State of Washington. You can check with their equivalent of the ABC.
http://www.liq.wa.gov/releases/pr030716.asp
(There have also been some studies in other places, do a google scholar search on Dennis Gorman and Richard Scribner. Although Gorman's work looked more at the link between alcohol sales and disorder more generally.)
The restriction hasn't worked as well in Seatlle. That's because they wrote the local law badly, focusing on restricting specific brands, rather than the size and type of product more generally.
So the companies just provided different brands of the same kinds of single products that were intended to be banned.
DK if the proposal that FT writes about is to prevent the sale of chilled singles.
That was first proposed maybe 3 or more years ago by Nick Alberti and others.
I thought it was a brilliant move. It doesn't prevent sale, but it does likely limit immediate most often deleterious consumption in the public space.
People countered that drunks don't care, they'll drink it warm, but I don't think so.
I don't think that idea, of restricting the sale of chilled singles, has been tested in the city.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004379844_alcohol29m.html
reports on a study of the impact of the Alcohol Impact Area "ban" in Seattle not having much effect.
From the article:
A ban on the sale of 29 cheap fortified wines and strong beers in several Seattle neighborhoods has been ineffective, according to a report presented to the City Council on Monday.
The liquor industry has skirted the ban by introducing different, but similar wines and beers to those barred in target neighborhoods, the report said.
"The ban has been absolutely meaningless," said Bob Scales, an author of the report and a city policy adviser. "Right now it doesn't do anything because the products have been renamed."
Instead of selling banned products such as Night Train Express and Colt 45 Malt Liquor, stores are now stocking Evil Eye, Johnny Bootlegger and Camo Black Ice, the report said.
sorry, i don't think the link came through, just go to the site or search for this headline:
Ban on 29 cheap, potent beverages falls flat, report says
and you'll get the link.
I haven't been to Trinidad to say for sure, but I would find it difficult to beleive that Trinidad has more trash than what is generated by living just off H St.
ANON - May 9, 2008 9:37:00 AM
AGREED! The homeless from all of the shelters trash H Street, pee on store fronts and deficate in the allys!
After they are dont trashing the cooridore they go back to get their free handouts at 7pm.
CHOWTIME!
"I would find it difficult to believe that Trinidad has more trash than what is generated by living just off H St."
Well I live in Trinidad. Just imagine residential streets full of HT trash, and every single serve liquor bottle, Carryout container and Pizza box imaginable. On my block we routinely find that people who hang out in the alley toss chicken bones, and now chicken bones and bread, in our yards over the 8 foot fence. It's crazy. The only time I've seen it clean, save for the times we've cleaned it, is when the Mayor walks through. So, yes it may be difficult to imagine, but no need to - just take a five-six block stroll north.
I am all for Singles Bans, I am glad ANC SMD's 5B05 5B08 and 5B10 are taking on this issue. Between the three of them are several stores that sale singles in that directly impact Trinidad.
The only MIA ANC SMD on this is 5b06.
Robby, I don't mean to despute your opinion as to who has more trash, H St. or Trinidad, but like other comments here, I don't think there's any way Trinidad (a primarily residential area) generates more trash than H St.(a major commercial corridor). But, either way, something needs to be done.
Here is the question?
How can you teach uneducated, poor people, who don't respect others, property or even themselves to not litter, loiter and do drugs?
Outside of shipping them away like Great Brittan did with the prisoners who established Australia I have no damn ideas. I wish these people knew how detrimental they are to society
Here's an idea, how about a bottle bill, you know a return for beverage bottles. A 5 cent return on beverage bottles is good motivation to cash in your empty rather than improperly disposing of it. As i understand it, there was a bottle bill introduced in the 80's but it was defeated by strong lobbying efforts from local beverage company's. A regional effort ( that is MD, DC and VA) to put pressure on the producer of these things to take them back and recycle them, so that they don't end up littering our streets and rivers is over due. The time is right to revisit a bottle bill like the one found in MA, ME, VT, NY, DE and other states in the Northeast and CA.
This may be an over simplification of the issue, but sometimes simple works. I'd love to see some of this "green washing" thats currently all the rage with corporations and local governments come up with something besides new logos, slogans and websites.
We need a singles ban, we need police giving littering tickets, we need residents to pick up trash. We need a H Street BID, and we need to not forget Bladensburg Road in the development talks. It will do us no good to make H great but around the corner is a blighted hell hole.
5B11 Resident here - 19th & Benning, NE. I support the ban.
tarisdaddy....
agreed, simple is good..word, brah.
While I am not really a fan of instituting these types of bans, I will admit that the amount of discarded, spent paper bag-wrapped beer and liquor can/bottles along 7th between H and I has dropped by at least 30%. I know...I pick them up regularly and I have noticed that the need for massive Saturday morning cleanups has dropped off a bit. Has it reduced the number of McDonald's bags and styrofoam carry out cartons, however? Not so much. Best advice I can give is to adamantly clean up your street on a regular basis, respectfully ask those you see tossing trash onto the street to be a little more courteous, and if you live along an alley - hose it out regularly and tell those offenders caught in mid-pee to have some respect. You'd be surprised how well it works.
Post a Comment