An extra hour of night?

After floating the idea on his blog earlier this year, Assemblyman Patrick Flynn has introduced an ordinance, AO No. 2009-108(S), which would allow bars to incorporate a “safety hour” after the current closing times (2:30 a.m. on weeknights, 3:00 a.m. on weekends). The bars wouldn’t be able to serve alcohol, but would be able to let customers finish one drink, with the caveat that there can be no music or entertainment, and all the lights are at full brightness. If a bar chose to institute a safety hour, the premises wouldn’t have to be emptied until 3:30 a.m. on weeknights and 4 a.m. on weekends.

Flynn’s plan is meant to combat the problem of all the bars emptying at once, when there just aren’t enough cabs on the street, so revelers are prone to making bad decisions like driving drunk, or taking a ride with a potentially dangerous stranger. As written (a just-completed second draft will be addressed at an assembly work session on Friday), it has provisions for licensing those bars that want to have a safety hour; they’d have to apply to the clerk’s office, and also go before the assembly. That way, if there are concerns from the police or the community about the establishment, there’s a further layer to the approval process.

One looming question is whether bars will want to participate in the program. If a bar institutes the safety hour, that means one more hour of operation with no chance for further revenue, since it can’t serve drinks. Enforcement is an issue too: If a cop comes in a bar at 2:50 a.m. and sees someone with a drink, the cop doesn’t know if it was served at 2:20 a.m., which is legal, or at 2:40 a.m., which is illegal.

Flynn says reaction to the ordinance is mixed, though he’s been working with APD, the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, and CHARR, the hospitality industry’s association, to address concerns that each entity has. His ordinance is also a pilot program; without further assembly action, it has a sunset clause that would end it on November 15, 2010.

“We know the problem exists; maybe this will take a chunk out of it,” Flynn says. He expects the ordinance to be voted on by the assembly at its next meeting on October 13. He says he has no idea what its chances of passing are. “If it fails, it fails; but I think it’s something we should try.”

bjk@anchoragepress.com