County in Adirondacks takes step to close bars earlier

Tuesday, April 9, 2013

The Associated Press  

ELIZABETHTOWN — A county in the Adirondacks has taken the first step toward requiring bars to stop serving alcohol at 3 a.m. instead of 4 a.m.

Local media outlets report that the Public Safety Committee of the Essex County Board of Supervisors on Monday approved a measure calling for the earlier closing time. A final vote on the proposal is expected at a board meeting May 6.

If approved, the State Liquor Authority would make the final decision after a public hearing.

The 3 a.m. proposal is a compromise from an earlier recommendation seeking a 2 a.m. closing time, a move opposed by some tavern owners in the village of Lake Placid.

Supporters of the earlier closing time say the move would reduce alcohol-based problems and their related costs. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you don't know why that would be significant in Saratoga Springs, read here.

Essex County is north of Washington and Warren counties. According to my count last April, about two thirds of counties in the state have restricted their last call hours to earlier than the latest the State Liquor Authority allows bars to stay open — 4 a.m. 

The Saratoga County Board of Supervisors shot down a vote similar to the one Essex County took in July before it even made it to a vote of the full board. 

Also, I spoke to Public Safety Commissioner Christian Mathiesen the other day about salaries and overtime for a story over the weekend on City Salaries (which now has a list of the salaries for all city employees who make more than $10,000), and we talked a little about downtown problems. 

 It didn't really fit in the story at the time, but he said according to Public Safety numbers, $135,000 in salary and overtime is "directly attributable to additional patrols needed" for the Caroline Street bar district. 

He added that many of the department's injuries  are caused on Caroline Street late at night "when people become emboldened and offer resistance to police."  (They have at least two officers out right now for it)

Public Safety Commissioner Christian Mathiesen doesn't like this blog

In particular, he didn't like this post from last month and he told the City Council (and anyone else watching last night's meeting) during their meeting that he was "surprised and disappointed" by it.

The post was about Mathiesen's campaign against the late-night chaos of Caroline Street, which he argues can be mitigated by rolling back last call to 3 a.m. from 4 a.m.

It was a failed effort and I said so. I don't think that's up for dispute. It barely made it out of the City Council and It didn't make it out of the committee at the county level (where any change to last call would ultimately have to be decided).

As I pointed out in the blog post, I thought Mathiesen's campaign to change last call was over until the March 19 City Council meeting when he brought it up again under an agenda item labeled: "Lawlessness after 4 a.m." 

He called me last week upset about the post. He accused me of being in the pockets of Caroline Street businesses ("I know The Saratogian gets a lot of advertising from Caroline Street") and of constantly criticizing his efforts.

First off, he is just plain wrong about that. I haven't received any direction from the publisher or advertising department. 

He also asked (not rhetorically, he waited for an answer) if I actually believed his efforts were hurting tourism in the city.

I responded that those weren't my words, that criticism came from the top three leaders of the city's tourism industry. My opinion doesn't matter.

Last night I made it to the big leagues. In an agenda item, "Late night arrests," seemingly solely dedicated to refuting my blog post, he let his criticism be known publicly. Pointing to my post (and me by name, though I had already left and was watching the webcast while filing my articles from the office) he said it was "sarcastic" and undermining his efforts.

I didn't find the post (which by now you should realize I've been linking to as frequently as possible) sarcastic and I'm certainly not ignoring his arguments. 

As I pointed out last week, my post summarized all of his efforts and quoted him extensively throughout. I'm just writing down what he's done and said.