Councilman Faulconer flip-flops again
In regards to “Beach ban will be decided by voters” (Beach & Bay Press, July 24), I would like to point out that this is the third time Kevin Faulconer has changed his position on this issue.
Merely one year ago, he was very much against a ban, taking the advice of his very own Alcohol Task Force.
Just six months ago, he was very much for a permanent alcohol ban on the beach, without a public vote, railroading his newfound position through City Council. It wasn’t until another councilmember looked for a compromise that we ended up with the “temporary” ban we have today.
Now, Kevin announces that he is going to take it to the people, under the guise that he truly wants the city to have a choice.
You may find yourself asking why would Faulconer change position yet again?
Well, that’s because he’s playing politics to wash his hands of his very own alcohol ban. Kevin knows that each councilmember before him who had tried to ban alcohol was soundly defeated in the next election. If indeed the ballot passes, he can then say, “The people decided,” knowing that many would forget he initially did not want them to have the choice at all.
This sham of a political move is nothing more than a maneuver to save his career in city politics. At this point it baffles me why anyone would believe his opinion on any issue, let alone beach alcohol.
Cindy Demma
Pacific Beach
Join the ‘beer flotilla’ to beat the ban
Brad Boyle has been built into a hero by the local media. Actually, his idea was the Dock Block Party, but that was shot, down as fixtures are not allowed in the bay and may cause damage to boats (“July 4th beer flotilla sails by beach ban,” Beach & Bay Press, July 14).
I contacted Brad and told him his idea was stupid and then invited him to join my Facebook group, “How to ban the ban and drink at the beach,” which provides up-to-date news and commentary regarding the legal issues and news as well as step-by-step instructions on what to do, what not to do and how to do it really well.
The response and efforts have been great.
I contacted the City Attorney and environmental attorneys and became the administrator to FreePB-type groups, and we have continued drinking at the bay all year.
The authorities that have problems with the beer flotilla simply need to go to any lake or river in any state or country and see the debauchery. We are responsible, harmless boaters who are putting in the effort. To the fish cops, we are a land-based keg party. Yes, it is a bona-fide loophole.
Well, it is keeping us off the ecstacy.
Ben Sippy
Pacific Beach
Can’t we find middle ground on the ban?
At the risk of being caught in the crossfire between members of the community who both are for and against the alcohol ban. I struggle because I see both sides. I thought I would share with you my recent experience.
Truth be told, initially I was convinced that maybe the alcohol ban wasn’t such a bad idea. Crime was on its way up and there were unnecessary cases of violence and disrespect by 92109 nonresidents drinking at the beach. Drinkers were being rowdy, urinating in residents’ yards, leaving trash on the beach, being vulgar to women, doing beer bongs in front of children, etc.
The intention of the alcohol ban was to clean up the beach and make it more family friendly. And if you ask the residents, many are happy with the ban because this summer has been a lot more peaceful at the beach.
Regardless of what side of the ban you are on, most will agree that this summer has drawn a much more family-oriented crowd. However, I don’t believe the ban has to be so black and white, all or nothing. With the alcohol ban, the beaches are cleaner and the police are doing a great job; I’m not arguing that.
I live on the bay and I am one of the fortunate ones that if I want to I can drink on my patio without getting a ticket. Last Friday at 5:30 p.m., after a busy workday, my best friend from L.A. and I decided to soak in the sun and have a cocktail actually she had a beer in a discreet plastic cup (not the obvious red/blue party cups) and I had a nonalcoholic energy drink. We move from the patio to the sand simply because the sun was setting and the shade had taken over.
I was reading the Union-Tribune; she was reading a novel. We were not being rowdy. We were not being obvious. My best friend got a ticket for possession of alcohol as I sat there shaking my head of how I felt responsible. I even tried to convince the police to give me the ticket, since I felt it was my fault: I gave her the beer knowing the rules.
When this was a hot topic before, I was trying to prevent crime and the rowdy parties that were disturbing the residents. I was not trying to target residents and their guests, who were simply trying to enjoy a little afternoon sun and a newspaper and, yes, a beer. Though I did not personally get a ticket, witnessing my friend’s ticket and families getting ticketed changed my mind. This was not my intention.
You know, I could have been at one of the many happy hours getting wasted, but that’s not what I wanted. All I wanted was to read my paper in the last few hours the sun had to offer. The alcohol ban will only encourage people to go to bars.
I’m not saying I have the solution. All I know is that families and residents shouldn’t have to suffer the consequences of nonresidents actions. I feel that there are other options we can come up with before banning alcohol all together. I believe that we could find a middle ground if both sides were willing to compromise. In a society full of extremists and regulators, couldn’t we at least try to find a balance by supporting moderation? For example, enforcement and strict penalties for those who are drinking in a rowdy, obnoxious, obvious, disrespectful or underage manner?
And simply a nod for those who may be drinking in a discreet, noninvasive, just enjoying a sunny afternoon.
Jasmine Kung
Mission Beach