University Park is About to Look Like Vegas, Only More Bars and Women

If I didn’t already know better, after checking the mail this weekend I’d think my kids were about to bike past strip clubs and blinding neon bar lights to get to school each morning. C’mon guys, all of this is starting to make me think you’re either really paranoid or you haven’t read the propositions.

60 thoughts on “University Park is About to Look Like Vegas, Only More Bars and Women

  • October 25, 2010 at 12:36 pm
    Permalink

    I think it’s neither. There is somebody out there who has a stake in this game, and they are spending plenty of money on it. It’s very telling that the former mayors are climbing on board with that, but it’s happened many times before.

    Anyone who would willingly lend their name to such misleading propaganda clearly is showing their own level of honesty. They’re as dishonest as the mailer that is going out. Not a single one of the things pictured in that mailer would be legal. There was even a picture of people at a topless bar on it!!

    Dick Davis is really trying to tell us that if these propositions pass, there will be topless bars in town? Why do we elect people like this? As mayor, if he is against a proposition, he should be taking a credible approach to it, not a dishonest one. Dishonest approaches are for dishonest people.

    Reply
  • October 25, 2010 at 1:00 pm
    Permalink

    PCP, please clarify for me if you are a newspaper (where journalists report both sides of an issue) or a tabloid that promotes only one side of an issue, usually for shock value. Clearly PCP reporters support the propositions, but doesn’t a newspaper usually offer both points of view?

    Does a newspaper’s blog operate under the same ‘rules’ for journalistic integrity? (I’m asking because I really don’t know the answer to that.) Just seems that this is more about promoting one side of an issue than providing balanced reporting.

    And, for everyone that will say “Merritt is not a journalist”, I know that. But, she is still operating under the PCP and representing them.

    Reply
  • October 25, 2010 at 1:17 pm
    Permalink

    Merritt is a columnist, not a reporter. And the blog is very different than the newspaper. In my opinion, the only shocking thing about this post is that the mailer linked above was ever printed and distributed.

    Reply
  • October 25, 2010 at 1:43 pm
    Permalink

    PCP has never for a moment said they support everything – or anything for that matter – that Merritt says as a columnist and blogger. Just like other newspapers you might notice. The beauty of Merritt is that she puts these things out there, sparking lively debate and entertainment, along with some insight and knowledge being bandied about. And it seems it also sparks the squirming of many that see the light shined on them and their questionable behavior.

    Cheers @UPDad – what you said.

    Reply
  • October 25, 2010 at 2:39 pm
    Permalink

    We need some topless bars closer in than those out on Northwest Highway. It has been a desert around here ever since The Fare and the clubs at Lovers and Greenville closed.

    Reply
  • October 25, 2010 at 3:20 pm
    Permalink

    Oh my! Our town will turn into a den of iniquity, like Highland Park. Property values will plummet and moms and dads will become alcoholics and serve minor children all because they dont have to fill out a rolodex card to be a club member and can buy beer and wine at the SP Tom Thumb instead of the Greenville store. And what will our mayor do with the extra sales tax dollars… maybe cut our property taxes?

    Reply
  • October 25, 2010 at 3:36 pm
    Permalink

    Hypocritical – raising taxes on property values this year in UP, but not willing to support merchants in this endeavor to generate extra tax dollars (no matter how insignificant according to “some” Former Mayors).

    And, rallying folks against these propositions with misinformation but not taking a stand against the massive weekly keg parties going on right in the middle of SMU’s campus. If there’s really a concern over substance abuse there, why don’t the Mayor and SMU President convene a task force to ban alcohol on campus?

    See Dick (Mayor Davis of UP) Mislead
    See Dick Misinform
    See Dick Misguide

    Don’t be a Dick!

    Reply
  • October 25, 2010 at 4:46 pm
    Permalink

    Blackie Holmes for Mayor. My memory could be faulty, but I don’t recall Blackie ever robo-calling citizens’ homes with his own personal opinion, about anything. That was a truly bizarre thing to do, and in my opinion broadcasts the message that Davis doesn’t properly understand the role of Mayor. He is not Dad-in-Chief, nor is he our city pastor. I hope these tactics backfire in a big way.

    As for the propositions themselves, anyone who thinks they’ll turn UP from Bedford Falls into Pottersville is being caught up in the worst kind of misleading hype.

    Reply
  • October 25, 2010 at 6:53 pm
    Permalink

    People, people..reading the propositions won’t get you the information you need. And it is obvious that the PCP has not read or bothered to find out what the law says. Besides the fact that the pro side of this arguement has run an illegal campaign from the beginning. (that is all a matter of puyblic information, as well)

    Check out the TABC website…take a few minutes to read the “liquor code” of our state. The pictures in the mail are actually quite reasonable for what could come. But the most immediate problem is that the businesses already established can begin to sell on or about November 3. Visit your nail salon soon, and you will be able to pick up your favorite bottle of wine along with your mani-pedi! The city is powerless to stop any of it.

    Get ready for the beer barn nearest you, it is coming!

    Reply
  • October 25, 2010 at 7:12 pm
    Permalink

    I did hear an interesting perspective from an older neighbor … what about all the workers that filter into our community and are patrons at our convenience stores during lunch hours and after work. Typically after working, you see many workers buying the beer at the 7-11 at Northwest Highway or on Greenville before heading home. If the beer is available while they are grabbing lunch, will they grab it then, drink and then drive through our community to return to work or home? This is just a thought from an older neighbor, and one that I had not considered. I am not attesting to the validity of the thought, but I have seen guys buying those large beers and drinking them in their trucks after work at that NW Highway 7-11. The thought of anyone drinking (workers, students or for that matter, community members) and then heading back through our already crowded streets does make me pause.

    Reply
  • October 25, 2010 at 7:42 pm
    Permalink

    Lifelong Parkie are you serious? First of all, those are pictures of a world famous party street in Memphis, Beale Street, probably 2nd only to Bourbon Street in notoriety. You say, “The pictures are actually quite reasonable for what could come.” My friend you are out there and I mean really far out there. Let’s talk about the nail salon thing. There are nail salons in nearly every little strip center you pass by–the wet areas all around us. Why aren’t they selling those bottles of wine? Is there going to be some magic dust sprayed upon this town that has only U.P. nail salons retailing vino? I don’t know about you, but I know when I want a 6-pack, I head straight to the PetSmart at Lovers and Greenville. I hear Fed Ex Kinkos has a great bar with friendly stripers over there–think I’ll try that next.

    Reply
  • October 25, 2010 at 8:07 pm
    Permalink

    The BusyGuy hasn’t posted in a while, but “B’s” snarky comments about the blog/Merritt/journalistic integrity were so egregiously annoying that he had to join the verbal fray. Ms. Patterson is a columnist for PCP, whose basis for columns are her personal observations about the community. What exactly is offending you about this blog thread? Is it that her position with PCP permits her to introduce topics which may generate answers you don’t agree with? Is it that on occasion, she shines a uncomfortably bright light into the darker corners of our beloved Bubble? Or do you just want her to shut up and go away so no one gets to enjoy the lively discourse we typically find on here? BusyGuy suggests (with all due respect) that if the blog (& Merritt’s input) gets you cranky and angsty, that perhaps you shouldn’t read it. Or comment on it.

    Reply
  • October 25, 2010 at 8:45 pm
    Permalink

    I envision Alec Guinness in a brown robe, standing on a cliff overlooking U.P., peering down on all the bars and strip joints: “University Park: You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy . . . .” [cue cantina music]

    Reply
  • October 25, 2010 at 9:51 pm
    Permalink

    @ Still thinking- Are you actually still thinking? Go ahead, demonize the “outsiders”, those terrible, unknown and invisible boogiemen. Always a convenient scapegoat aren’t they? While.you.daydream…. the real problem in the Park Cities is PC parents giving alcohol to their own underage children and their underage friends. Read the papers. Get real!

    Some of our past and present civic leaders are defending private club rules that were intentionally designed to be flexible enough to skirt the State mandated dry area rules. Our city doesn’t have one single local ordinance governing the sale of alcohol. Meanwhile the town of Highland Park is making front page news addressing the real problem: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/101710dnmetunderagecriminal.29addfe.html

    Why don’t you put some thought into that?

    Reply
  • October 25, 2010 at 10:17 pm
    Permalink

    Merritt, where is the money coming from to fund the robocalls and mailers?

    Reply
  • October 25, 2010 at 11:37 pm
    Permalink

    Has anybody checked the denomination of at least 4 of the 6 former mayors and the current mayor? Is dancing allowed? Where could this possibly be coming from? No evidence that it is with respect to these particular propositions, but historically where has this come from? I’m sorry but I’m one that believes that the end does not justify the means when it comes to these distortions and I believe the majority of the rank and file of every church, including theirs’, believes that way too. But there are others.

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 1:56 am
    Permalink

    @Max – Actually I am thinking you are incredibly insulting. I am not “scapegoating”, nor demonizing anyone but as I sat outside 7-11 today at 5:30 and watched many brown sacks and 12-packs leave the store, I reflected again on a neighbor’s concerns and was glad that these purchases were made on the other side of NW highway. As my blog comment above mentioned at the end (or perhaps you jumped on your high horse before reading to the end), I am concerned about anyone driving our streets while drinking. As a mom of 5 busy kids, I don’t have the luxury of time to daydream and am more than aware of the problem in the PC with underage drinking. Underage drinking has been, and has remained a problem in the PC long before I graduated from HP in 1988. I was not aware that this current election which we were discussing had any propositions for vote in UP addressing the “social host” laws, and quite frankly believe that Texas state law addresses the distribution by adults to underage “friends” adequately if only it were enforced (or able to be enforced more aggressively). That said, I’d love to see the hammer come down on the kids drinking in the Park Cities and parents allowing or even providing alcohol. Your arrogant implication that I don’t know the “real” problems is clearly demeaning and way off base. Again I was just commenting on one of the 2 propositions at hand (and really not even addressing the private club proposition at all). And yes, Max, I am still thinking. Put that in a yogurt cup please!

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 8:31 am
    Permalink

    It’s times like these that I am glad I live in HP with all of our dives, lounges, congestion, crime, noise, low property values and unsavory parents.

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 9:07 am
    Permalink

    is say vote no,
    then vote yes,
    for turning our
    fair city into
    a gated community.

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 9:23 am
    Permalink

    @Still thinking- How about putting it in a yogurt cup with your name on it? I’d love to treat you, especially since we probably sat in the same classroom together. I’m curious about something, you made the same argument that Kelly Walker, treasurer of the “Former Mayor’s Forum” PAC made to me a couple of weeks ago when I gave away over 1000 yogurts in support of HPHS. It’s wierd cause what you said was practically word for word what she said, only you left out the “Not in MY town! Not in MY town!” part of it. Anyway it’s just bugging me. You never know who you are blogging with these days. Let me know if I can supply frozen yogurt and some hard facts to help you think this through!

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 9:27 am
    Permalink

    If you read the latest Dallas Morning News blog, and go through the postings on this one, you’ll find the pro-bars side has many more problems than just being rude and accusing anyone disagreeing with them of being liars.

    I agree with “I’m thinking it through” about the disrespectful, condescending, and insulting comments by some on that side.

    They might find value in learning to disagree without being disagreeable. Just a thought.

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 9:32 am
    Permalink

    Ah, Another Mother, that’s why I like to go slumming in HP! ; )

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 10:05 am
    Permalink

    I personally don’t see what all the hoopla is about. I have been involved in liquor licensing for certain premises in the state several years ago, so I have a little familiarity with TABC workings and licensing guidelines (including a private club license). It seems to me that getting rid of the private club requirement is a no-brainer. It changes nothing about current workings except that it gets rid of the antiquated paperwork that it requires of private club license holders. That’s it. They will still operate under the same guidelines as any restaurant currently does.

    As for the off-premise question, does anyone really believe that buying alcohol at the 7-11 across from SMU or the Tom Thumb in Snider Plaza is any different from buying at the 7-11 on NW highway? Maybe these brown bag toting guys bring it in a cooler from 10 miles away? If you make the decision to drink and drive, the location of the purchase doesn’t change the equation much for me. After all, we have moms who are busted in the carpool lane for DUI, don’t we? Bet they don’t buy it in a brown bag from the 7-11 either. According to Merritt, they’re sucking it down at an already licensed premise in between ballet and carpool, and I didn’t hear anyone screaming to shut down the restaurant.

    The prediction of strip bars and dives at every corner is ridiculous. For those of you who believe obtaining a liquor license is a picnic, think again. It is more fun to bang your head against a brick wall than to deal with the TABC. The application process is lengthy, expensive, and not always logical.

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 10:23 am
    Permalink

    Ahhh, NF, once again with the distortions.

    “Pro-bars side”? Cute. Wrong, of course, but cute. Now let’s talk facts. The “Pro-bars side” has raised issues with both the facts that the “Pro no control over alchohol sales, hypocrytical SMU president, special interest money backed ex mayors side” have presented, and the manner (Beale Street? Vegas) that they have presented them. Would you care to address those facts?

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 10:37 am
    Permalink

    I hope they build one of those drive thru’s with the skanks out front like the one at Northwest Highway and Lemmon that recently closed and is now a payday loan store.

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 10:40 am
    Permalink

    Just got back from early voting… I voted NO for both. We are a small residential community, and in 2010, it’s refreshing to have some rules and restrictions. I’d vote for shutting down alcohol on the “boulevard” as well – it sets a bad example.
    In a world series region, where our champs have the class to spray each other with ginger ale in public (so awesome) and our MVP gives credit first to his Lord (not mentioned in any of the media reports…) it’s ok to vote no to alcohol sales. No Nascar posters in my Tom Thumb.

    And anyone have insight on why we can’t pray in schools, but we can vote in a church? IJS.

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 11:02 am
    Permalink

    Ok N.F., what would you call it when you use the term “pro-bars side”, when you know for a fact that nothing being voted on allows for bars? You know it’s restaurants only that derive more than 50% of their sales from food. I’ve seen your other blogs–you are totally aware of this. I certainly wouldn’t refer to you as being an honest truthteller. Would you? That last question requires an honest response. Let’s see if we get one.

    Your problem is that you think that you are entitled to intentionally mischaracterize and distort, because you think it is for some greater good. Why do you think that you are entitled to respect when you do that? That mailer showing strippers and Beale Street in Memphis contained so many mischaraterizations, distortions and things that were objectively untrue, yet you don’t distance yourself from it. Have you seen anything like that from the people that are for these Propositions? Nope and you won’t.

    I have a lot of respect for most of the people that disagree with me on this subject, but N.F. your personal actions are not entitled to respect and the actions of the people that produced that mailer are not entitled to respect. And to top it off, I personally don’t like specifically you pontificating after you are among the worst offenders.

    Sorry folks but this guy knows better.

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 11:25 am
    Permalink

    AMD- All good points. I would clarify though that the food and beverage certificate voters are asking to approve in November differs from the private club permit in that it requires an establishment to have a full kitchen, derive more than 50% of income from food and have at least 8 entrees on the menu at all times. It’s a safer alternative.

    Anybody remember the bar called “Ten” on Milton in Snider Plaza about 6-7 years ago? It was where Questcare is now. Anyhoo, one of the Dallas Mavericks thought it would be fun to open a bar in University Park and thanks to our slippery private club rules, he could and did. They had huge parties after the games, young people ended up out in the street, drunk, puking on neighbors yards and leaving beer bottles in front of the health food store. They sold a ton of liquor but not a lot of food BECAUSE PRIVATE CLUB RULES DO NOT REQUIRE FULL FOOD SERVICE. They were in compliance with private club rules and city was powerless to shut them down. They were finally thrown out by the landlord for being late on their rent. All of that courtesy of private club laws and no local ordinances.

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 12:26 pm
    Permalink

    It’s always funny that the holier-than-thou church-going folks are usually the first ones to tell untruths in these political campaigns.

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 12:52 pm
    Permalink

    I do have to agree with M.F. that some of the comments on both sides of this issue can get pretty rude (including my own). I think the power of the anonymity of a blog comment spurs that. And of course, any rude tone tends to exacerbate itself. I’ll try to keep that in mind.

    I’m voting FOR the proposals. I am not “pro-bars”. Nothing in the proposal provides any advantage to a bar opening, and as Max points out, would make it even harder. I do know I don’t like to have my driver’s license swiped when I order a beer at Peggy Sue’s–I’m not sure why I don’t like it, other than it’s an extra step, but I don’t.

    People who say that those pictures are “quite reasonable” are certainly not familiar with the existing codes in the city. I wonder how fast Max Fuqua would get shut down if he put up a neon sign on his store.

    Probably most importantly, history shows me that when the Former Mayor’s Council, or whatever it is called, starts trying to force through some legislation by pounding us with mailings & phone calls–it is because someone else behind them with the big funds is instructing them to, and it is probably NOT for the good of the city as a whole. How can they in once breath say that the increased sales tax would be negligible, and in another say that there would be hundreds of new places selling alcohol and that our city would suffer from increased drinking?

    LifeLong Parkie, I’m very interested in what you say about the illegality of the side in favor of the propositions. Could you give me more information, or just point me to the public information so I can see for myself. So far the only touches they’ve had on me is one mailing and one contact with someone asking me to sign the petition to get it on the ballot. If they’re doing things illegally, I’d like to know what it is as it could change my decision.

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 1:01 pm
    Permalink

    I dunno Eloise, I love going to my church, PCBC ya’ll!!!
    This past Sunday in Bible Study, we ran through a list of Christ’s miracles and of course one of those included turning water into wine. I guess he could have turned the water into milk and it would have been just as miraculous, but Christ chose wine. Makes you think doesn’t it?

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 1:38 pm
    Permalink

    @BusyGuy – it appears that the questions I asked made you “cranky and angsty” – you might want to follow your own advice, unless you’re a hypocrite and that was only advice for others and not yourself.

    the give and take of viewpoints is what makes this blog worth reading. are you suggesting that those with different opinions not participate?

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 3:01 pm
    Permalink

    Who would be funding the “no” vote? I can’t think of any businesses funding the status quo but can think of lots of businesses, existing and potential, that would fund the “yes” vote campaign.

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 3:44 pm
    Permalink

    @up3boymom- Are you kidding? The first amendment, IJS.

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 3:50 pm
    Permalink

    I know Max… sorry to generalize.

    I also do it every time I nearly get run off the road by someone with their silver “fish” emblem on their car.

    So is it the private clubs who are funding the anti campaign? Or the Baptists!?!?!?

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 3:54 pm
    Permalink

    @ Steve,

    I can certainly guess. Any businesses right on the perimeter of UP who sell alcohol to start with. Think the Centennial in Preston Center wants competition? They would certainly fund the status quo (I’m not saying that they funded this, just an example). People who are concerned about SMU students being able to walk to the UP Tom Thumb to get alcohol. People who really don’t understand what the propositions mean (such as my wife, who has not researched the issue and states “I don’t see any benefit to having alchohol in UP”).

    I certainly don’t know exactly who, but I can be certain that this all has to do with money. On both sides, since money is also the reason someone floated this proposition in the first place (tax income, business income, etc.)

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 4:19 pm
    Permalink

    Disclaimer: I’m not accusing anyone or company of anything inappropriate and have no knowledge of who/what is funding the “no” vote.

    Parties that may be unfavorably impacted by a “yes” vote include Sigel, Centennial, Goody Goody and other Class B retailers which buy beer and wine from distributors and sell it to restaurants (private clubs). Instead restaurants will be able to purchase beer and wine from the distributors, cutting out the Class B retailers. Someone please correct me if my understanding is incorrect.

    Other retail entities, including grocery and convenience stores, without establishments in UP may also be unfavorably impacted by a “yes” vote.

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 5:19 pm
    Permalink

    @up3boymom. YOU can pray in a public school, but you can’t make someone else do it (unless it is graduation or 8th grade breakfast, which fall outside the Constitution).

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 5:45 pm
    Permalink

    The level of preposterousness on this anonymous blog is obscene!

    D, how dare you suggest that just because a liquor store chain has locations on the east, west, north and south borders of University Park that they would oppose the propositions.

    And shame on you, Sharpay, to suggest that losing restaurant sales to the big distributors would also be a reason for exisitng liquor stores to oppose the propositions.

    Get real people! The owners of those chains probably live here and just don’t want beer sales in their backyard. It is about integrity and not money.

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 6:39 pm
    Permalink

    4 of the 6 former mayors are Baptists, as is the current mayor. I’m not sure on the remaining 2. I truly hope that the leadership in a particular church has not had undue influence on this issue.

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 6:49 pm
    Permalink

    John: Now what do you think?

    Liquor stores donate to keep Dallas’ dry areas dry
    10:32 AM Tue, Oct 26, 2010
    Steve Thompson/Reporter

    Attorney Andy Siegel, who has led the fight against expanding alcohol sales in Dallas, has said he represents ministers, neighborhood groups and liquor stores.

    But those first two groups are absent from the campaign finance report filed yesterday by the political action committee fighting the Nov. 2 referendum that could make all of Dallas damp.

    The campaign finance report by No Alcohol PAC/Neighborhood For Safety lists two donors: Goody-Goody Liquor and Vantex Enterprises, which is the parent company of Centennial Fine Wine and Spirits.

    Goody-Goody and Vantex donated $15,000 each. The money went mostly to signs, advertising in Elite News and on the radio, and to a southern Dallas company called Workers and Poll Pushers.

    The pro-alcohol expansion group, Keep the Dollars in Dallas, recorded $110,850 in contributions , mostly from people and entities associated with real estate and restaurant groups.

    http://cityhallblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/10/liquor-stores-contribute-to-ke.html

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 7:32 pm
    Permalink

    @ john

    I can’t tell – are you being sarcastic or for real?

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 7:53 pm
    Permalink

    I voted “for” in early voting last weekend. I’ve seen a lot of the comments for and against on here the last few weeks, and I’ve made some myself. The “for” crowd argues with facts, logic and humor, while the “against” people are using emotional appeals, hysteria, distortions and outright lies.

    It’s a shame that Dick Davis, the other former mayors and the president of SMU are following this same pattern. Shame on them. I am embarrassed to share a neighborhood with these scumbags.

    It’s fine to oppose the two propositions, but why do so many of the “against” people feel the need to lie about the consequences if their side loses the vote?

    I hope Park Cities People has the editorial courage to take its coverage beyond the typical “on one hand/on the other hand” stories that practically write themselves. You need to drill down to the facts, separate the facts from the lies, and – most importantly – call out the liars.

    P.S. Snider Plaza had a porno theater in the 70s and early 80s. Whatever happens, we will survive, ok?

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 7:59 pm
    Permalink

    Sorry John. I’m a little slow to recognize what you meant.

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 8:46 pm
    Permalink

    John, love your “dry” sense of humor.

    Reply
  • October 26, 2010 at 11:25 pm
    Permalink

    We voted NO on both and i encourage all my neighbors and fellow citizens to do the same. It has been helpful in deciding to vote NO to read the way that those who favor the measures in these blogs charaterize their reasons…most seem to revolve around convenience, their fear of hypocrites, and their own thinly veiled self interests in being able to sell in their retail outlets. showing pictures of youth drinking on campus and complaining about their behavior by claiming that the president of smu is a hypocrite is hardly a motivation to vote yes…the troubling thing is that our society (or at least the yes proponents in this blog) thinks that the way to solve the problem is name call the leader and make the access easier for the immature youth that are participating. keep UP the way it is…let’s not risk pie in the sky promises by those advocating the measures. Vote NO for what we currently have and what we currently know..UP is a good place and let’s not risk changing it for the benefit of few that will have more to sell for very little postive return for our way of life and living in UP. Max please don’t villify me with a response to this at least allow a few people to post before you go nuts on this…

    Reply
  • October 27, 2010 at 12:04 am
    Permalink

    I don’t think that anybody will villify you. I totally disagree with you but you make an honest and empassioned personal appeal. Thanks for carefully considering.

    Reply
  • October 27, 2010 at 2:11 am
    Permalink

    @Max
    I’ll drop by for some yogurt with the kids. I appreciate your donation to the schools, and I also appreciate your willingness to provide good information on the issues at hand. But in my case, I wish your information was provided in a less condescending manner or with less disdain for those who might (or in my case, for the most part might not) disagree with you. I choose to remain anonymous on blogs and on many political issues in deference to extended family that live in UP. I’d be happy to elaborate more in person (and no, I am not related to any former or current mayors). I don’t think I know Kelly Walker, but as I mentioned in my comment, the concerns with people purchasing beer, consuming it onsite in a parking lot and then driving through the community were originally expressed to me by a neighbor. As for HPHS classrooms, I don’t believe we were ever in the same classes. As I posted above I graduated in 1988 and at HP spent most of my time “thinking it through” back then too so I probably had my head in book or on the court/field. When I stop by, I’ll take the time to introduce myself so my anonymous blogging does not continue to “bug” you.

    Reply
  • October 27, 2010 at 7:26 am
    Permalink

    UP NO et al- This is a blog and it is expected to keep a sense of humor, exhibit a thick skin and to get jostled around a little bit. Sarcasm reins here and people frequently “go nuts” because like you, they feel emboldened by the anonymity. I use my real name because that’s just how I roll.

    I am a third generation Park Cities native and I love UP! My family has done business in Snider Plaza for over 60 years. I was awarded Citizen of The Year this past July for giving back to our commercial areas that are such an important part of who we are as a community. I am not involved in this effort to damage our city, but to make it better.

    Since I have no financial interest in this, the main reason I signed on is because I researched the law and found out just how loose the private club rules really are. They need to be tightened up, plus citizens were asking for relief from Unicard. I also got involved because one of our city’s main goals stated in our master plans is to find ways to increase sales within the limits of UP. The measured step of adding beer and wine to our grocery shelves would accomplish this and as we saw, over 3000 citizens were calling for it.

    I absolutely respect that you have a different opinion and that’s what voting is for. Lets speak the truth, present the facts and allow voters to decide. Meanwhile, we can also have a little fun in the blog while we are at it!

    Reply
  • October 27, 2010 at 8:10 am
    Permalink

    @ UP NO voter

    I can completely understand your logic concerning “keeping things the way they are.”. There’s nothing wrong with that, and if that’s your reason for voting No, then good for you. That’s a perfectly good reason.

    As for your other comments, I can see your point about name calling, but exactly how is anyone supposed to point out the lies and disinformation being put out by these leaders without basically saying “These are lies”. There’s nothing wrong with saying that. They aren’t misspeaking, or being “misquoted” or “taken out of context”, which is always a popular excuse.

    Both Dr. Turner and the former mayors have explicitly distributed written materials that do not tell the truth about what we are voting on. They are “lying”. Simple fact.

    And I don’t have a problem calling them on it, and I don’t feel that it’s a low blow or uncivil to do so.

    Reply
  • October 27, 2010 at 8:32 am
    Permalink

    Vote yes! We have the momentum now. Hundreds of people signed the petition to get this on the ballot. This will get the local government restrictions out of our lives.
    Don’t let the businesses neighboring UP which are funding the robo calls succeed. Support the sales tax revenues and business owners in our city. Blackie for mayor!!!

    Reply
  • October 27, 2010 at 8:55 am
    Permalink

    @Eloise – Agreed.

    Again, if you have a heartfelt opposition to the propositions, then by all means express your view and vote against them. That is respectable. That I can accept. What I won’t accept are people who are – or were – in a position of public trust leaving voicemails and sending flyers to my home that insult my intelligence and lie to me. It is those people who deserve mockery and disrespect. If you have to lie and cheat to win, then you don’t deserve my vote.

    Reply
  • October 27, 2010 at 9:33 am
    Permalink

    Thanks I Want Freedom. The mailer contained so many lies and mischaracterizations, we have all been busy exposing those. It was truly an attempt to manipulate and scare older citizens and people not normally involved in the political process into uninformed voting. It has probably been effective in doing that, just look at the honest but informed reaction of Lifelong Parkie above. She truly believes that alcohol is coming to nail salons, shoe repair shops, J.D.’s Chippery and every single retail business in U.P. It’s sad that such unethical tactics have been employed by Roy Coffee and Dick Davis, the mayor that I voted for.

    That mailer caused such a reaction, that sometimes we forget what this is about and what the true effect will be. We have numerous examples to look at, but the closest to home is Highland Park. It’s not a godless society over there and no, Deno the Cobbler does not sell booze and Starbucks which has locations around the country does not sell booze.

    Some people want to control people and things so much, that they have no problem inconveniencing the rest of us. They think that making us drive a couple of miles is no big deal, primarily because it makes them feel better about themselves, even though the only thing that it accomplishes is inconvenience. Who cares if people are buying other goods besides wine when they are over there and that hurts U.P. businesses? They think that keeping the unicard system in place is ok, because it makes them feel better about themselves, even though the only thing it accomplishes is inconvenience. Who cares if it inconveniences customers by making them fill out a card and the local restaurant smaller restaurants by costing them money? Who cares if some of those little places come and go? Who cares that some people are concerned about their identity being sent to the State when they purchase a drink? The funny thing is that most of them drink also. It is about freedom.

    Reply
  • October 27, 2010 at 10:28 am
    Permalink

    If we don’t allow booze, the terrorists win.

    Reply
  • October 27, 2010 at 11:52 am
    Permalink

    I don’t understand the big deal. I am a former long time resident of University Park. Now I live in Greenwich, Connecticut. Old Greenwich is a lot like Snider Plaza and about 1/4 mile away we have a wine shop and 3 restaurants with bars. There is zoning in place that does not allow for more. Believe me University Park would “look” no different if this law changed. You have only to look at Highland Park to see an example close to home. Max( my former classmate) is right. It will add revenue that is being sucked to surrounding communities. It sounds to me that the good old boy former mayors network has some personal stake in it. Keep the fight up Max and its too bad more people can’t just use their real names!

    Reply
  • October 27, 2010 at 11:52 am
    Permalink

    @UP No Voter:
    I have to honestly say that I didn’t have much opinion on this when it all started out. The ad blast from the “Against” side and all their misrepresentations (which is what Merrit’s original post was about–not whether to vote for or against) did have me leaning. But after reading the facts presented, that’s what convinced me to vote Yes.

    Those facts were not “fear of hypocrites” or “convenience” or “name calling”. They are things such as the fact that this makes selling alcohol HARDER than the current setup. They are things like the fact that a YES vote is how things have been in HP for years and that place is fine.

    Many people have covered the fact that comments in this blog can get negative, but frankly, out of all the comments I’ve seen on four or five different blog entries on this issue, yours has been by far the most offensive to me.

    Reply
  • October 27, 2010 at 2:38 pm
    Permalink

    Thanks Sawnie! That’s a girl who loves her home town. I know you’ll be watching the game tonight, go Rangers!!!

    Reply
  • October 27, 2010 at 3:33 pm
    Permalink

    I may be a lil in love with @Max Fuqua, and I want to have a beer with @Neal. Maybe we can meet at the new strip club across from the middle school when this is over.

    Reply
  • October 27, 2010 at 6:40 pm
    Permalink

    @kmom – Hopefully not during carpool!

    Reply
  • October 27, 2010 at 10:27 pm
    Permalink

    I’ve got a better idea. Vote no, then let’s admend the unicard by getting rid of it. That’s right, let’s have no one serve alcohol at all. And cut out the booze on the boulevard. Maybe then the elementary schools will cut out the booze in their auction mailers. Did I see wine at the cheerleader auction recently? I was pretty suprised I could bid on a case of wine sitting in the cafetorium.

    I can hear you all getting ready to type….before you do, let me put in a plug for HPUMC AA groups…

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.