As I predicted, the overreaction was swift and comprehensive.
Among the suggested ordinances are
- a "zero tolerance for quality of life infractions that occur in downtown."
- abolition of "loitering" within 50 feet of places that sell booze and in city-owned parking decks
- more security cameras
- A $5 parking fee in city decks after 9 p.m.
- a curfew of 11 p.m. for those under 18 in the downtown district, and possibly citywide
- Regulations for security personnel at downtown nightclubs
- an Entertainment License for all clubs with capacities greater than 100, in order to help pay for these new measures
Some of these measures, at first blush, make sense. We already have cameras downtown, so why not cover as much territory with them as we can in order to keep the streets safer?
And it makes sense to require tighter security at nightclubs — including protocol that keeps GPS informed of potentially dangerous situations.
But some of this just creeps me out.
Eliminating free parking downtown will definitely keep away people who won't spend $5 for parking, but it will add to the (false) perception that there is not enough parking downtown.
There is enough parking downtown, for the record, just probably not directly in front of the place you want to go. That's life in the big city, people. Nothing anyoine can do about it.
Charging for parking also complicates the 'loitering' issue. If a guy pays $5 to park his car downtown, will he be free to walk or stand wherever he wants? What if he's cited for loitering? Will the police escort him to the parking garage and make him go home?
The curfew also gives me pause. For one, the incident that precipitated these actions did not involve in any way anyone under 18 years of age. For another, it has been my experience that citywide curfews are not evenly enforced. My kids are not quite teenagers yet, but as a parent I want my kids to be able to go out at night and enjoy the things the city has to offer -- like all-ages rock concerts, nighttime street fairs, First Friday, art gallery events and the like.
And what about the new IMax theater and bowling alley and the ice-skating rink and the dolphinarium we're getting downtown? What about that? Are minors not welcome after 11 p.m.?
Heh.
About the smartest thing I heard all morning came from Greensboro Police Chief Ken Miller, who had this to say about downtown's role in the greater scheme of things.
"The core of this city is very, very important... whether people realize or accept it or not," he said.
"Perception is reality" he continued, and he saw his role as reinforcing the perception that "downtown is a safe place to be."
Very true: We can't have people scared to go downtown -- which is actually one of the safer neighborhoods in the city. Plus we've been practically begging people to go down there for like six years now.
The real problem, as I see it, is guns, which are perfectly legal.
Yes, most people who carry do so responsibly, and I'd wager that on any given night in downtown Greensboro there are at least 100 guns tucked under car seats, in purses and otherwise concealed that generally go unfired.
But sometimes they go off.
"People have a constitutional right to bear arms," the chief said.
Anyway, all of this ust happened. I'll do some thinking on it this week and see what I come up with.
1 comment:
When it comes to the recent ordinance, it's a reactionary measure that does nothing to address the real issues. As a maater of fact, the curfew could eventually lead to downtown Greensboro back to the sorry shape that it was in not too long ago.
Now, on the N Club shooting itself, it is obvious to me that Scarfone himself overreacted by shutting the place down. While he DID fire the security team that failed to catch the goons with the guns, he went way overboard by outlawing hip hop music at his place.
Post a Comment