Published: July 08, 2008 11:30 am         

Alcohol wins initial OK

Proposed change in park policy must pass one more reading to take effect

The Logansport City Council voted Monday in favor of an ordinance allowing alcohol to be sold at Dykeman Park Golf Course and at community events at Little Turtle Waterway.

The 5-2 decision pushed the measure just one vote away from reality. It has to pass another city council reading before it can become a law. Council members Charlie Hastings and Amy Sweet opposed the measure.

Janet Fawley, the city’s parks administrator, said the proposed ordinance, developed as a way to help the city deal with a loss of property tax revenue, would help the parks generate thousands of dollars in revenue. The alcohol sales alone would earn $8,000 to $10,000, and the provision would also help Dykeman book several additional large golf outings each year.

The plan has received criticism from residents who see the ordinance as an endorsement of alcohol abuse.

While Little Turtle Waterway already has events with an alcohol tent in the street nearby, the proposal would be a reversal of policy for Dykeman, and on Monday, the debate centered on the golf course.

Council president Scott Kraud said the ordinance was just another way to generate revenue in a year of budget cuts.

“This isn’t a new concept,” said Kraud, pointing to a report that found a majority of golf courses allow alcohol. “We’re not inventing the wheel. It’s just something that’s out there for us.”

In the course of the debate, both sides claimed to have the support of most of the city.

After the meeting, Sweet said her vote was based on the view of people who had contacted her.

“I had more calls against than I had for,” she said, saying she received about a dozen calls from residents. “I’m speaking for the people.”



Smaller response

The measure, which saw substantial opposition from community residents speaking at last month’s parks and recreation board meeting, saw a more subdued response at the city council meeting.

While more than 30 people attended and 12 people spoke at the meeting last month, just three residents spoke on each side of the debate on Monday.

Still, the speakers were passionate in their opinions.

“Please vote no to this proposal for the families, children and everyone else in Logansport,” said Margaret VanVleet, 74, arguing that allowing alcohol in the parks would send a message to kids that it’s acceptable to drink.

VanVleet read statistics from a letter circulated Monday to council members by the Partners for a Drug Free Cass County. The numbers showed the county far above the state average in alcohol-related accidents, liquor law violations and public intoxication arrests.

“It’s really appalling that they want to put alcohol in the parks,” VanVleet said after the meeting. “Why do you think they don’t run cigarette commercials on TV anymore? If you see it, you think it’s OK.”

But resident Max Padgett, a golfer, said he didn’t see the downside to the ordinance.

“This doesn’t bother me at all,” he said. “The golf course has to stay. If the city can’t afford it, I fully understand that.”

Most people associated with golf didn’t have a problem with the idea, said Terry Doran, a member of the parks board.

“It enhances the experience,” he said. “This doesn’t boil down to us wanting to get a bunch of people drunk, and it doesn’t boil down to us wanting alcohol around our kids. It boils down to getting large groups to come to the golf course.”



Potential lawsuit

While the debate centered on potential benefits or costs to the city, one resident brought up a different point: the city might not have control over Dykeman Park at all.

“Where does the Logansport Parks Department gets its authority to govern and rule Dykeman Park?” asked Michael Berkshire, who brought the will of David Dykeman and the original city contract establishing the park to back his point.

Berkshire’s question concerned a provision in the contract that said the park would be “managed and controlled by three park commissioners,” not the city. By running the park itself, the city might be violating the contract, said Berkshire, who is against the ordinance for other reasons as well.

Mayor Mike Fincher and council members said the city had run the park for a long time and had established control of it.

But in speaking before the council, Berkshire insinuated that a lawsuit was a possibility.

“Anybody can go down to court and sue anybody for anything,” said Berkshire, who ran for Logansport mayor in 2003. “It’d be an interesting thing to put before a judge.”

After the meeting, Berkshire said he wasn’t threatening the city, but could take the matter to court if it could stop the city from allowing alcohol at Dykeman.

“The city is promoting a mindset of ends justifying the means,” said Berkshire, pointing out the city was willing to “promote alcohol” if it would gain revenue. “I can take a page out of that playbook, too. I can call up all the people that signed a petition against the ordinance. Do you think I’d get the money to hire an attorney?”



The next step

Other community residents are preparing to fight the ordinance when it comes up for a final vote at the next city council meeting.

Newspaper and radio advertisements and letters to churches are among the weapons being considered, VanVleet said. Residents have previously run ads in the Pharos-Tribune.

If the group can establish that the citizens are against the ordinance, they might be able to change some of the minds of the city council members, said VanVleet, adding that Monday’s result had been expected.

“We’re not giving up,” she said. “We’re really going to work on it. We need to fill this room to overflowing.”

Brian Rosenthal can be reached at (574) 732-5148, or via e-mail at Brian.Rosenthal@pharostribune.com



Want to go?

What: Logansport City Council meeting

When: 5 p.m. Aug. 4

Where: City council chambers on the third floor of the City Building