Liquor-swilling moneybags can just go party someplace else, Boston official huffs
Seems the thing to do these days is to buy an entire bottle of booze at a high-priced restaurant and then keep it at the table for the evening. Except in Boston, where the licensing board has banned this "bottle service," the Herald reports. Licensing Board Chairman Daniel Pokaski says the practice violates our sacred restrictions on happy hours and adds:
"We're not New York and we're not South Beach," he said. "The city of Boston has a lot more to offer than just getting people inebriated. If all they can offer their clientele is just swilling down alcohol, then perhaps they shouldn't be in the business."
Jay Fitzgerald suggests Pokaski needs a glass or two of chablis with which to unwind:
... What next? Banning sale of expensive bottles of wine at restaurants because the high price might encourage people to drink every last drop? ... I'm not sure it's his place to be lecturing people about what Boston has to 'offer' outside his strict regulatory guidelines. ...
- Add new comment |
- Send to a friend |
| 
| 
Great Point
"The city of Boston has a lot more to offer than just getting people inebriated."
Yeah! Damn straight! Why would you want to drink at a bar, when you could be out be riding the Swan Boats or strolling the Esplanade?
Have there been problems?
Has there been drunk driving related to table bottles? General drunken asshollery? What is the impact here?
Unless he can demonstrate that the rise of this practice has led to an increase in the downside of alcohol, maybe Pokaski should simply take a walk on the esplanade or ride a swan boat and think about how evidence-driven policy is ultimately more effective and enforceable than moralistic screeds about what people *should* be doing with their time and money when they visit the city.
I somehow don't think that those two fine upstanding young visitors from Winchester who brutalized a Habs fan had been sitting at a table in an upscale establishment with a bottle all night ...
And exactly how familiar is Pokaski with South Beach, anyway?
A strange attitude in New England
What does Boston not being New York or South Beach have to do with law-making? I've lived in this region a while and I've heard too many arguments for stupid regulations that start with "This isn't (insert city name here which is usually NY)."
Is it an excuse for being lame and uptight? Is it an excuse for an immature relationship with alcohol followed or caused by more regulations that have no basis in logic and fact? I know there are problems with binge drinking and drunk driving that must be addressed. The problem is that most of what is politically expedient around here doesn't address the problem at all, and in the end does more to hurt the city and punish the law-abiding.
But Boston is Different
Unlike many true world class and emerging cities, we ignore best practices and the learning experience of other municipalities! We avoid the messy openness of democracy and reality of data in favor of our beloved patronage systems.
That way we can delude ourselves that we don't have a regional economy and nothing has changed in 50 years and keep our old boy nepotism network going forevuh.
As for Bloomberg? Well, he didn't grow up in Boston, so his policies don't count. Mefuh is on a different planet.
Regional Economy
I agree with you that Boston too often seems to ignore best practices of other cities and could benefit from some more progressive and worldly politicians. However, Boston does not have a "regional economy." Boston is second only to London in investment/asset management, has multiple world-class law firms, and has a healthcare and biopharma industry second to none, just to name a few examples. Its Boston's political leadership, not its economy, that is behind the times.
I agree
My point wasn't to deny that we are part of the national/global economy.
I was trying to lampoon the rather provincial tendency of civic officials in Boston and its surrounding cities and towns to pretend (or simply not understand) how much their fortunes depend on the regional economy, let alone larger economic forces outside their borders. Any coverage of some "anti-green line expansion" groups are soaking in it!
The "metropolitan statistical area" used by the US Census extends down to Rhode Island and up into New Hampshire. That doesn't even account for the national and international components of our economy.
Best Practices
I'm not certain that liquor bottle service counts as a best practice we should adopt just because New York and South Beach do.
To tell the truth, it's always struck me as sleazy rather than luxe. Maybe it's because the places I've done the bottle-table thing were decidedly down-market. They do it because it's cheap and easy. You only have to visit the table once, drop off the bottle, and get your money. For places that pretend to be high-end to adopt this practice like it's something special seems like putting lipstick on a pig.
Besides which, it's like bragging about what an idiot you are to pay 300 bucks for a 20 dollar bottle of vodka. But there's a sucker born every minute.
Sleaze
Getting a bottle of liquor at a restaurant and sitting around drinking it for hours doesn't sound like my cup of tea either. However, there's no good reason to outlaw it. If people want to pay $300 for a bottle of cheap booze I say let them unless there's some reason to believe it would be different than wine service.
To each their own
By "best practices" I mean "what information is there on effective alcohol control regulation" rather than "what's the latest trend in wasting time and money during a convention or vacation".
Personally, I'd far rather hang out with friends in the neighborhood sipping really good stuff and split the difference than spend it on bar service for something mundane. Although I have to admit to enjoying the purchase of some damn fine Tequilla by the bottle when dining with a large group in Mexico.
(now that's an idea ... a "good stuff" party. I'll bring the good sipping tequilla, our neighbors will bring the good scotch, sapphire gin, cigars ...)
It's not quite wine service
Just pointing out that there's a lot more alcohol in a bottle of booze than in a bottle of wine, so it's not quite the same thing, unless you're traveling with large group that's sharing that bottle... if not, then there is a lot more drunken potential in expensive boozy-bottle service than in a bottle of wine...
I think youre more apt to
I think youre more apt to split a $300 bottle of codka than a $20 bottle of wine
Isn't bottled wine service routine at many restaurants?
Any place I've seen with a wine list, you can get either individual glasses or whole bottles. There was even a recent state law change allowing the restaurant to recork the bottle and send it home with you. Does Boston really intend to ban this?
Not wine
Because nobody can get inebriated on wine, snort.
It's just the hard stuff - whiskey, etc.
Silly
This is rediculous. There's no difference between this an a group of people who order a bottle of wine - or god forbid, many bottles of wine! - with diner. I hate when public officials justify a policy by saying things like "this isn't New York". I get the sense that some of our public policy is driven by the "you think your better than me?" crowd who will reject a policy out of hand because it is implemented in another City that they perceive as "they think they're better than me?". News flash, there are cities that HAVE figured out how to do some things better than Boston! The reverse is true too. Washington has cleaner public transit, but Boston has dealt with violent crime much better. Los Angeles has better maintained public beaches, but we have public transportation.
What a maroon
Daniel Pokaski is the biggest asshole in Boston, and I hope there's some dirt on him that is revealed and destroys his career the same way he tries to destroy Boston businesses.