Who's Going to City Hall???

[coach]

Hey!

Wednesday, April 30
at 4:30pm at City Hall.
1700 Convention Center Drive
Miami Beach, FL 33139

There is a City Council meeting to discuss greater restrictions on our beloved nightlife industry. As you might have guessed by my earlier posts, I am a big supporter of the tourist and nightlife biz. I think they could be the bread and butter of this little island and allow all of us locals to live in style, if they are allowed and encouraged to flourish in a responsible manner. That is my personal pitch for everyone to be there in support. Below is the original email that I received from Crobar.
--------
South Beach night life is being threatened by a small special interest group composed of high-end condominium owners represented by high priced attorneys.* This small group is looking to eliminate night life as we all know it.* They are continuing to put pressure on the City Counsel to change many of the laws that govern nightclubs, restaurants and hotels and bring in hundreds of thousands of tourists to this market every year.* The hospitality industry generated over $900 million in revenue last year alone.* As you all know, the hospitality industry in South Beach supports over 5,000 people and their families and is one of the main reasons that people continue to visit South Beach.

If you care about the Hospitality and Tourist Industry in South Beach, we need your help!* Please show your support at the Miami Beach City Counsel Meeting on Wednesday at 4:30 at City Hall.* We need to represent and support our hospitality industry to keep it alive. Your presence will show our voting strength.

Once again, please join us at the Miami Beach City Counsel Meeting Wednesday, April 30
at 4:30pm at City Hall.

www.crobarnightclub.com
-----------------
Hope to see ya'll there!

[pod]

I'm there....I have no excuse I'm very close by.

[nickjunkie]

present

[pod]

Well, the meeting was quite lively at some points...the City seemed to backpedal a bit when a few hundred people occupied the Commission Chamber.

The head of the Hotel and Restaurant association made a good point, the reason there's been trouble lately is that the City isn't holding up their end of the bargain...they tell the clubs and hotels to promote, and then they don't provide the infrastructure for it, i.e. sanitation and cops that are more proactive....

The City seems to be taking the stance now of that the club industry is using scare tactics to rile up the populace, and that the City is just merely looking to enforce existing laws, and not have a 2 AM closing time or anything draconian. I am going to hold them all to it

[coach]

Actually, much as I hate to say it, I think that the speakers represented our interests rather poorly. Most of them just rambled passionately. Very few of them attacked the point directly. Here are a few questions that I think should have been asked, but were not.

1) My understanding of the situation is that some or all of the residents of the South Pointe condominiums are complaining about the noise from the outdoor venues in that area. If that is correct, my question is why is it the nightclub industry that is being asked to make consessions? Why not the condo industry? My proposed solution would be to restrict the condos from allowing tenants who are annoyed by loud noises. I am sure there are people who can easily sleep through tons of noise. Heck, I know people who have actually dozed off IN a club. Obviously, this is kind of a facetious suggestion, but the point is, why is the city government choosing one side over the other?

2) So, the proponents of the plan kept saying that it would have no impact on current businesses, since they would be grandfathered in. But, that's not the point, is it? They claim to have nothing against the nightlife business and this grandfather clause proves it, but it doesn't, does it? What is the lifespan of your normal club? 5 years? 10 years? (We wish.) Something in that range. So, they say that there are 11-13 clubs that will be grandfathered in. Well, what happens when those clubs close? When Opium eventually closes, do you think they will allow another club of that type in? Of course not. This ordinance prevents it. So, what you will have in not more than 10 years will be the nearly complete absence of any outdoor venues south of 5th Street. Yeah, it may take a while, but this ordinance will have the long term effect of shutting that area down. And if you do not think that they know that, I've got some swamp land for you.

(Continued on next post)

[coach]

(Continued from previous post)

3) I think that they really do not understand the long-term negative overall impact that legislation like this will have on the nightlife industry as a whole. Some of the speakers tried to address this, but did not communicate it very well. So, in 10 years, we have a dozen less clubs pretty much automatically. As all the opponents tried to express, the word is out that South Beach is a difficult place to open a nightlife/tourism business in. If this legislation passes, that perception will be reinforced. Certainly at this point, there are quite a few people who are willing to tolerate that to run businesses in this area. But surely the commission cannot possibly believe this will always be true. Eventually, the current crop of investors/producers will get burned out of fighting for their businesses and leave. Even in a pro-business environment, people get burned out and move on to new projects. This is moreso true in an anti-business environment. And then there is just the normal attrition of people retiring and passing away. So how are you going to recuit new investment to an area that has a reputation of being difficult to succeed in. They need to understand that perception is everything. Did some people overreact? Perhaps. But nobody overreacts to nothing. There IS something there that is getting people up in arms. It may not be as bad as some people think it is, but the problem is that people can only proceed on their own perceptions. Nobody has telepathy. So, if the word gets out that you can't run a viable nightlife business on SoBe, then people will stop trying. And think about 10 years from now, when you will be able to say, "Look, a dozen clubs on South Beach have shut down with NO replacements." How will that look to potential investors? Even if it is ONLY the dozen on South Pointe that are directly affected and cannot be replaced due to the ordinance, that still looks really bad. Once investors start seeing a significant reduction in the number of clubs, they will become more and more skittish, leading, more or less, to a self-fulfilled prophecy.

So, my question is, so some people are complaining, so what? Why do *anything*? Somebody will always complain about something. Sometimes those complaints are reasonable and need actions. Sometimes they aren't. Hell, I'd like for MB to supply me with a free bike. Yeah, and I'd like a pony and an ordinance banning fat men in Speedos. But does that mean that the commission should enact legislation? I am a "resident", just like the "residents" of the Portofino. Hell, I bet I could wrangle together as many people who would support my legislation, probably more, as they have. Does that make it right? Still no. If EVERYBODY on Miami Beach signed a petition to outlaw fat men in Speedos, would that make it right? Still and always no. Just because something annoys someone, or everyone, does not mean it is or should be illegal.

And, don't buy the opponents or the proponents who claim this is a business vs resident thing, because it is not. The commission is NOT anti-business. This particular legislation is *very* pro-business. It pro Condominium business. One thing that seems to have been glossed over is that these condos are businesses, just as the nightclubs are businesses. The commission seems to be siding with one type of business over the other. Why is that?

At the end of the meeting, they mentioned that there would be some sort of open task force committee meeting on May 19th, I think it was. I didn't get all the details. Did anyone get that? I am planning on going and getting to the bottom of this.

Sinc,
James

[digital7]

good points coach

[sarahcj]

Yeah, interesting. I think we will have to increase the word limits on posts for you!!

and thanks for the orginal post about the meeting by the way.

[nickjunkie]

Some very good points there. Regarding the speakers, I was also concerned that it would turn into a forum for anyone who was pissed off with the commission, which it did to an extent.

However I also think it was important for the commission to understand the passion of the nightlife industry - which was certainly communicated.

My suggestion would be for the industry to organize ourselves in the way that the residents have, and appoint a spokesperson (best to have a lawyer) who can eloquently and professionally express our concerns, and also argue points legally with people like Dermer (attorney).

[pod]

It's too bad the only person I wanted to speak, didn't really...Dade Sokoloff has plenty of coherent opinions on the topic, but chose not to speak last night.