The city of Greensboro’s proposed bar and restaurant ordinance gives an enormous amount of power to the “city” to determine the punishment meted out when an act of violence occurs.
City Councilmember Justin Outling pointed out in the discussion on Jan. 5 that a bar or restaurant could be doing everything right and still have an act of violence on its premises, triggering the ordinance to go into effect.
Whatever security plan is submitted to the city after a homicide has to be approved by the city before the bar or restaurant can reopen. The ordinance gives the city what is politely called “flexibility” in approving the security plans, setting minimum standards. But there is nothing in the ordinance that states if the minimum standards are met that the proffered “security plan” will be approved.
The ordinance is also silent on what employee or employees of the city will sit as judge and jury over a business that falls under this ordinance, and city councilmembers have different opinions on who makes the decision.
Councilmember Marikay Abuzuaiter said, “Police and Fire departments.”
Outling said, “I have no idea.”
And Outling asked, “What is the criteria by which any plan would be evaluated?”
When asked what happens if someone is arrested for an act of violence, but the district attorney drops the charges, Abuzuaiter said, “I don’t think they thought that out. Basically, they’re shut down for 30 days. If the DA doesn’t press charges are they still shut down for 30 days?”
She also noted that some grocery stores now have ABC onsite consumption licenses, so the city could find itself “shutting down a grocery store that allows beer to be served.”
If the owner of the establishment that serves alcohol that is attempting to comply with the ordinance disagrees with the decision of “the city,” how would that be appealed and who would hear that appeal?
What the ordinance appears to do is give the city the power to close any bar or restaurant that has a qualifying act of violence simply by making the security plan so stringent that the business could not survive or, more simply, by not approving any security plan and forcing the business to remain closed.
The ordinance gives the city the power to pick winners and losers among the establishments that serve alcohol for consumption by only requiring some to meet the minimum standards set forth in the ordinance and requiring others to go far above and beyond the minimum standards.
Leave it to this panel of geniuses to make it that much more difficult for bars and restaurants (and some grocery stores) to survive in this almost impossible environment they’ve mandated upon us.
https://myfox8.com/news/police-investigating-after-person-shot-in-greensboro-2/
Who is served by this proposed unconstitutional proposed ordinance? Only city funded music venues that have been losing tons of taxpayer dollars for almost a year now.
Our Mandate Mayor will only direct folks to house parties and illegal liquor houses where real violence is muchanged more likely. Mayor Vaughan should have first hand knowledge of how unsupervised parties can lead to everything from underage drinking to DWIS and worse.
Discrimination in its purest form.
You can sue the city on any number of grounds. Problem is, they have oodles of extorted taxpayer-cash to defend themselves. You don’t.
I all businesses were to open up when they please, there is nothing the council could do. It would be a strike in reverse. Citizens revolt.
I would personally frequent a restaurant that defied these mandates. Sorta like buying Goya – our pantry is filling up with it. Try the Habas Grandes.
In Greensboro it is always better for LEADERS to look busy and waste TAXPAYERS money, than to actually help Greensboro become a better, nicer place to live. this ordinance is nothing more than a power grab by our comrades on city council.
Sounds like prohibition is slowly making a come back.