Adam Vaughan Gets Tough on Nightclubs
Police officers make an arrest after a fight in a club line-up on Peter St.
In an effort to combat the strain on police resources and disturbance to local residents, Councillor Adam Vaughan (Ward 20) has decided that it's time to change the rules governing Club Land, Jeff Gray reports in The Globe.
We suck police resources from across the city into one little neighbourhood, to police a bunch of basically hooligans," Mr. Vaughan said in an interview. "And I say the club owners have to take responsibility for this."
If you've ever been in the neighborhood shortly after last call you can see how bad the situation can be. Hundreds of people, often with no local ties to the neighborhood are all released on the city at once, and unless you are a hot dog vendor, this is a very bad thing.
An interesting aspect of Vaughan's proposal would require nightclub owners to apply and pay for the a permit to use public sidewalks for lengthy line-ups. This makes so much sense I am surprised it isn't already the law. Restaurants must apply for a patio permit, whether or not they serve liquor on it. How is it any different? Since these clubs are using public space as a holding pen, and they are making money from the space, they should have to pay for it.
The article finishes with a response from the other side:
"Adam Vassos, a lawyer who represents several of the area's nightclubs, said the industry is being treated unfairly and its problems exaggerated. He argued that the nightclubs revitalized a derelict part of the downtown.
"The area was in a complete shambles," he said of the neighbourhood in the late 1980s, before clubs began to spring up."
Can anyone confirm on deny this? I wasn't spending too much time in the area when I was 6.
In all, I think that there needs to be a heightened level of scrutiny governing this area. Too many clubs operate within their own world; self-created kingdoms where they get to govern with impunity. These establishments need to realize that they are a part of a neighborhood and community larger than just themselves, and that they must be responsible members of that community.
Photo by Take More Photos
Comments (31)
I'm not really sure if the place was in shambles or not. All I know is that it's disorienting walking out of a movie at the Paramount (or Scotiabank Theater I guess) and straight into that overly-aggressive atmosphere. It's like taking a wrong turn and ending up in a low-budget hiphop video.
And even worse than that is being stuck in a theater with a couple of club-goers who are just at the movies to pass time until they meet up with friends at a club. They just talk the entire time 'cause they could care less.
This is a horrible idea.
Letting private organization do police' job is basicaly privatazing enforcement law. In this case, I imagine, there would be very few vague regulations what club police can and can't do.
Police office can't just apprehend someone without a cause. Club police is very simple... "you are on private property (since sidewalks will be), here's a bat in the face, now please move your unconscious body to the gutter"
Basicaly, you will need the same amount of police, this time to actually police club police.
This would go well together with Fez Batik turned into a shelter. With reduced police in the area the homeless people will stay away in fear of beatings by drunks.
Alex G, where does your "club police" reference come from?
All I see in the article is a proposal to require club owners who make the sidewalk part of their club pay a licence fee.
If they don't want to pay for the licence, than they can make room for people to wait inside their club, which frees up the police from monitoring the line.
I don't patronize any places in the Clubland, but I have seen exactly what Vaughan is talking about. From a friends condo several floors up, I have seen a club that appears almost empty inside, but with 100 people lined up outside waiting an hour to get in. They are making the sidewalk a part of their business and taxpayers money is being used to monitor people in the line on the sidewalk. That money should be recouped from the club's owners.
I'll confirm it because I'm "old".
Yes, after the garment factories moved overseas, the area was economically a shambles and relatively non-productive.
But who cares? If nightclubs are using excessive city resources, they should pay for it.
This issue is routinely over-blown but some policy tweaking would be a good thing.
I think Vaughan is arguing that a club queue is not temporary if it is there the entire time the club is open. They are running their business on the sidewalk.
It is very easy for someone who does not go clubbing to complain about it. Well, I think that people on the streets before and after film festival events, summer festivities like taste of the Danforth, stuff at Nathan Phillips, conventions, sporting events, much music awards and parades take up too much public sidewalk space. Sometimes they can be more of a nuisance than us clubbers. They also prevent me from getting to my destinations and most of those happen during the day and early evening hours. Is the money spent on policing those events a waste? Of course not, so why pick on something that brings just as much of money into your city's economy on a weekly basis?
Instead of complaining about the people of the side walks why not do something about the fact that the subways don't run after 1:30 am. Just as the clubs are announcing last call and people start drinking more. Let’s make the area safer by having the subway option available.
Adam Vaughn, the next time I see you chilling in a line up Inside Lounge we'll talk more.
"We suck police resources from across the city into one little neighbourhood, to police a bunch of basically hooligans," Mr. Vaughan said in an interview. "And I say the club owners have to take responsibility for this."
What kind of responsibilities does Mr. Vaughan propose clubs take on themselves? Paying fees for somebody to stands on the street? Excuse me, but nobody actually makes the people line up there. Clubs don't sell anything outside nor do they provide any kind of services in those lines.
I would speculate that the amount of liquor tax generated from clubs alone is quite enough to provide money for police presence 3 times a week.
I would like to know why and when did club land became a target for politicians. This seems most of all as a diversion from real issues the city is facing.
It's quite obvious that there are no residents complaining about the area because 1) there aver very few resident buildings in direct connection to club land and 2) nobody in the right mind would buy a place in the club land without actually willing to be in it.
One of the other reasons why you do need more police is stupid last call and people bench drinking. UK is a prime example why bench drinking is a bad idea and that's why they are reconsidering theirs.
I would really like for somebody who knows at least a slightest bit about clubbing to make decisions here. Even a slightest experience is better than somebody who has absolutely zero clue what they are making decisions about.
I hate clubland, personally, and nowadays just stay away from it as much as possible.
I don't think this sidewalk thing makes much sense, though. The sidewalks aren't that overused by lines, I'm around enough to know that... how come no one is barking at the Bloor Cinema to pay up when they have lines of zombies, Rockys or docies taking up precious Bloorspace? Does MuchMusic pay up every time some popular face shines through their windows?
Did anyone see the lineup on free ice cream day at Ben & Jerry's? Fine them! Fiiiine theeeemmmm!!!!
Sidewalks are public space and ought to be open for public usage. If there isn't enough room on them, I say we cut into the roadspace. Hey, what was that idea about drivers having to pay for all the space they take up while we squish by each other?
i'd like the garbage police to start enforcing a no flyer rule or more recycling in the core. these club flyers end up all over the streets where i work. it's both wasteful and disrespectful to our city. can't club kids (who spend so much money in our city) also be clean or a least pay for garbage/recycling services?
The issue has nothing to do with sidewalk useage adn taxing or not taxing it. The fact is that cops have to be there in large numbers during club hours and someone's gottta pay for it. I don't think it should be taxpayers. By the way, as far as I know liquor tax goes to the province, police are paid for by the city, and as far as money flowing between the two goes, well, we all know how well that's been working...
I love it when the chickens come home to roost on 'cool' - inevitably, the very thing that makes an area desirable for yuppies to move into and buy a condo in (the nightlife) is the very thing that they complain about to local representation because they, having moved just beyond their clubbing years with thoughts of raising a family or otherwise living a typical 9-5 lifestyle, can't hack the late-night hijinks they themselves used to indulge in.
That said, I see absolutely nothing wrong with the city compelling fees for clubs that use public space to do business - forced lineups are par for the course in clubland [oh, how many times I would stand in line at a club for 30 mins, 45 mins, get a perfunctory pat-down and then I get in the club to find that it's only 1/4 full or less. It's a joke - on-street marketing, nothing more. I have no sympathy for the clubowning pirates that slither around the entertainment district at night.
I do have one question - Zach mentioned how crazy clubland gets when the clubs let out - Vaughn's proposal doesn't address this issue, does it?
I don't think you can separate between "taxpayers" and people who go to clubs. By the same logic I shouldn't have to pay for schools on my property tax, or road tax because I don't directly use any of those services.
We live in a society where social services are provided to the masses when they are needed and they are paid for by the masses. If you start differentiating from one mass of people to another, you going to get yourself in trouble.
Lines have nothing to do with the problem because people standing in line are mostly sober and don't require policing. It's the people pouring out of clubs at 2am because there's no more alcohol being served who are just now starting to feel those 3 additional beers they put away right before 1:30am.
Some things have to give in. Either more police, or more drinking hours (preferably all 24).
The area was certainly downtrodden at a point but to suggest that it was the clubs that pushed it back up is a bit of a stretch, before clubland emererged it was already underway by virtue of good old conventional commercial development, the Holiday Inn, Metro Hall, Skydome the CBC and CityTV (which had, at that point fairly recently relocated from Queen East)
Food For Thought:
Guess how all those drunk 905-ers get home... car.
The Go trains don't run that late, and they cut the area's they service on the weekends.
I agree that the liquor tax collected could probably pay for the police. However, liquor tax is collected by the province and the city pays for the police.
Conspiracy Theory:
The City of Toronto is trying to give Clubland a hard time because it wants to rent the space it owns at Exhibition Place and move clubland there! Witness Muzik, Gossip, Liberty Grand (technically not a club..but run by a club conglomerate!)
Sorry Chester, but Richmond St was never the beneficiary of King St and South improvements...thats a whole 'nother world down there.
What I meant in my earlier post is that restaurant patios may have railings or other structures which impact the pavement 24/7 as opposed to movable ropelines which are there from 10pm-2am or whatever. This pavement is clear for the vast majority of sidewalk users who would be walking on it by day.
I think a fee might be warranted but maybe not at exactly the same rate as for patios which leave furniture there from spring right through to fall.
A small fee may be warranted.
As any business that represents a net cost to the taxpayer on a persistent basis should, in all fairness, cover some of the cost they are causing.
That said, I don't think any fee will tackle the underlying issue.
Which really is too many people coming out of the clubs all at once, too drunk.
The new City of Toronto Act allows the City to set its own last call.
I think one logical step would be to extend last call to 4am. (the same as New York)
This has several positve effects.
One is that not everyone is going to stay out till 4am, so the crowds should exit a little more evenly throughout the overnight hours.
Second there is less likely to be last-call rush to drink more for most or all of the evening.
Third it will generate additional tourism/tax dollars which can help defray the costs of all the policing etc.
Fourth, it should harm illegal booze cans by allowing the legal, good operators to reamin open, providing better security and lower liklihood of problems.
***
Not directly related, but it should be said both GO and TTC should add beter service Friday and Saturday late nights to serve this area, in the name of reducing drunk driving.
STOP FAKE LINE-UPS. What an irritant to have to wait on a sidewalk outside an empty club. Pure b.s. It's why I hardly ever to go to clubs anymore. Open later and allow competition in the pricing of alcohol and maybe I'll reconsider.
Guztavzorz
The reason the TTC and GO don't have service is they don't want to deal with those drunks spilling into the streets all at once. Then we'd have shootings and stabbings on the subway or streetcars.
I can't stand clubland or Little Italy (college lil' Italy, not St. Clair) which I call Clubland II. If they want to tax the gino 905ers then I say great. Toronto seems to have to pay for all the bad things that having a city means- homelessness, crime, transit costs. While the 905 enjoys economic prosperity as a result of being attached geographically without paying for their share of running a major urban centre.
.... damn ginos... :P
The problem is, it's not just club-land that causes these problems. It's ANY drinking establishment that lacks proper enforcement or simply doesn't abide by what little laws exist. Whether that means stopping fights, not serving to people who are over-inebriated or handling the people who get kicked outside or waiting in line.
I live up the street from the Brunny and the James Joyce, I've experienced the harassment and seen these things on a weekly basis escalate to needing police interaction because the bars don't take responsibility and simply put two fighting drunks outside, or the drunk girl who's half slumped over outside.
I don't think it's simply club-lands fault, although there are many more complicated problems that arise there, especially with consideration to the litter and more frequent violent crimes.
I agree with Adam, I've tried leaving a late show at the Paramount more than once only to be forced to walk on the street because the line ups at the clubs are nuts, plus you know most of the clubs will keep people in line outside as a means of promotion, the more people in line, the more happening the club is.
I say tax em, everyone else will soon be taxed with the city's new taxation powers, why should they be any different?
Ugh, another ageist assault on youth culture from Adam Vaughan, fueled this time by the KSRA, mostly people who moved into the area AFTER the clubs. Move into the club district and yes, it's going to be noisy.
The most offensive part of Vaughan's proposal is not the sidewalk taxation, but the long-term moratorium on new clubs.
I'm not sure if you know what it's like to look for a place to hold an event (and I will remind you that nightlife is really not a profitable industry), but the reason our scenes are struggling is from a lack of venues. We need more. Period.
it probably doesn't help Clubland's problems that it has such a critical mass of venues in a small area - if the city were more willing to permit the licensing of new venues in some other areas, it might take some of the pressure off around closing time.
I'd support taxing huge fake lineups on the grounds that they impose on public use of sidewalks, but not on the grounds that they're not fun to be in. After all, patrons can always exercise their right not to go to these bars.
My main beef is with last call. It really sucks. Ever try to get a cab on a snowy night at 2:15 in a district with lots of nightlife? It's a very hostile environment. Letting a bunch of intoxicated people out on the streets at the same time when it's not necessary is a really dumb idea that causes avoidable altercations.
As well, what business does government have telling people how late they should be out in the first place? Thanks but no thanks, I think I can figure that one out for myself. I'm sure many bar owners feel the exact same way. Let the market decide, just like it is done in most places in the world outside of Canada.
Extend the hours that alcohol can be purchased so that there isn't a mad dash to get your buzz on and so that people leave at various hours rather than all at once.
Right on James. This works WELL in Europe too. Think of all the problems the UK had with 11pm pub closures.
A few thoughts on this topic...
1) Should club owners pay for the use of the sidewalk? Yes - to some degree there should be a pro-rated fee for the time they use it (Thursday - Saturday, 9pm - 3am)...but then it should be applied to ALL businesses who use the sidewalks...INCLUDING the Paramount Theatre on Richmond :)
2) Just FYI - The police CAN & DO charge clubs with "Obstruction Of A Public Passageway" when the line-ups are over the sidewalks or out of control...
3) Adam Vaughan needs to give his head a shake...I loved him when he worked for CityTV, now I would rather he be back there instead of running his mouth at City Hall with the other pompous gas-bags! He seems to be concentrating a lot of time on bashing the club district, club owners and club goers - who are the people who will get him re-elected!!
I'm not saying the club district is anywhere near perfect - as someone in the industry I know it's not, BUT, most of the club owners and managers are just trying to make a living and provide a SERVICE to those customers who wish to receive it. They pay taxes, attend public meetings about area issues, invite the police, city by-law officers, fire inspectors, AGCO Liquor inspectors and others into their clubs without hesitation to show them how they run their business and if there is anything they can do to help.
Maybe Adam should spend a night with a club owner or manager to see what they do to try to ensure the best possible night for everyone!
NH
P.S. and to all the Condo owners who have bought condos AFTER the clubs were already there and now want to complain about the noise - get a grip - you are just as silly as the people who move to the airport and complain about planes flying over your house. You want peace and quiet...move north!
View More Events
Suggest an Event
Join the blogTO Flickr group
Join the blogTO YouTube Group
RSS