Of regulations, smoking bans and booze on the beach

A recent letter writer said that my column “favors more as opposed to less regulation.”

It was a good letter. Not because I agreed with everything, but because it was about a specific situation that can be examined and discussed.

He referred to a New York Times story that “highlights the regulation battle as well as any I’ve seen.” The article was headlined, “Florida town curbs debauchery, pays the price.”

First, let me be clear: I’m not about to come out against debauchery. Debauchery remains one of our chief economic drivers.

Also, many years ago, Helen and I met at a Bottle & Cork Saturday afternoon jam session. We weren’t participating in any debauchery, of course, but I can’t speak for everyone present.

The story concerned Panama City. It’s a party town, in some ways like Dewey. Every spring it attracted thousands of college-age kids looking for a good time and “leaving mayhem and dollars in their wake.” Business was good.

Then came Spring Break 2015.

As the letter writer noted, “Misbehavior gave the town a black eye and forced action, which came in the form of regulation, both old and new, being enforced with renewed fervor.

“The result? Economic contraction.”

He concluded that when it came to imposing and enforcing regulations, “we should do so in moderation.”

I agree with the sentiment, but defining “moderation” can be difficult.

The Panama City case shows why it’s important to talk about specific situations rather than issue generic calls to cut “job-killing regulations.”

Here’s what happened. The “misbehavior” of Spring Break 2015 included, according to the Times, an alleged “sexual assault on a crowded beach in broad daylight.”

Bay County Sheriff Frank McKeithen said, in an AL.com story, that hundreds of people, some within 10 feet, did nothing while a woman was assaulted on a public beach. The victim was drunk to the point of being incapacitated. She had to be helped off the beach.

In another Spring Break incident, seven people were injured when gunfire erupted at a house party.

Town officials decided they had to take action. The biggest change: no more alcohol on the beach. They also required bars to close at 2 a.m. instead of 4 a.m.

Really?

Dewey bans booze on the beach. Delaware bars can’t serve past 1 a.m.

As far as I can tell - though 1 a.m. is now well past my bedtime - people here manage to revel in about as much debauchery as they can handle.

The letter writer, however, is correct. Business tanked after news of the changes lit up social media. Young people stayed away.

But I don’t agree that the town made a mistake.

How much gunfire, how many sexual assaults should a town allow before it decides enough is enough? According to AL.com, the police considered the situation unacceptable even before the sexual assault.

(This was by no means the only sexual assault, just the most public one.)

This year, despite the new rules, “one college student fell to his death from a parking garage balcony last week after drinking all day, and another died from an alcohol and drug overdose,” according to the Times.

That doesn’t sound like the police have come down too hard on visitors, though the town has become safer.

Given the situation, I don’t think the town overreacted. College kids on social media did. But, unfortunately, there’s no way town officials could have anticipated that and the resulting loss of business.

After all, other Florida towns, including Key West, don’t allow alcohol on the beach.

And there’s no reason the town can’t work to bring the college kids back or to go after new customers who might have been repelled by the out-of-control party atmosphere.

Old-timers remember that Dewey Beach faced a situation similar to Panama City’s. The town decided to ban alcohol on the beach in 1985.

Many lamented the change. A Washington Post story at the time said Dewey had ended “a policy that has given the Atlantic coast municipality a reputation as a party town.”

Despite what seemed like a drastic change, Dewey Beach has managed to regain and maintain its “party town” reputation. The number of visitors and businesses suggests a thriving beach town.

Dewey Beach made the right decision.

So it’s not a simple matter of more regulation equals less business, or vice versa. Regulations can also help the economy.

Rehoboth, for example, now promotes its smoke-free parks, beaches and Boardwalk. The smoking ban, no doubt, bothered some people, but ultimately, I think, it’s good for business.

Non-smokers no longer have to tolerate second-hand smoke, and litter is reduced. Overall, the city becomes a more attractive place to visit.

We live in a resort. We rely on our beaches, parks and bays to attract visitors. Regulations are needed to protect these natural resources.

If we don’t protect them, tourism will decline. And even booze on the beach won’t bring the tourists back.


Don Flood is a former newspaper editor who lives near Lewes. He can be reached at floodpolitics@gmail.com.