Proposed SFPD crackdown on clubs gets a hearing

|
(9)
Visiting a San Francisco nightclub would be more like boarding an airplane if SFPD gets its way.
Jared and Corin/Creative Commons

A draconian proposal by the San Francisco Police Department to require all visitors to nightclubs in the city to scan their identity cards into a database and go through metal detectors while being filmed by security cameras will be held tomorrow night (Tues/12) by the Entertainment Commission, but an expanding coalition of opponents are rallying against it.

As we reported in December, club owners and nightlife defenders (including the California Music and Culture Association) overwhelmingly oppose the plan, which the American Civil Liberties Union says raises constitutional invasion of privacy issues. In addition, a new coalition of young people called Save the Rave – which turned out hundreds of people for a recent commission hearing on a proposed crackdown on dance parties – is also organizing against the new restrictions.

Police representatives have told us that the proposal stems from concerns about violence in and around nightclubs, that the provisions would allow police to more easily identify suspects when crimes occur, and that police should be trusted not to exploit the data that they're collecting.

But critics of the legislation call it a gross overreaction to a handful of incidents that have happened around nightclubs and they say the SFPD has shown unreasonable bias against one of the city's biggest industries. Sup. Scott Wiener recently asked city staff to prepare a study of the economic impact of nightlife in order to defend clubs against crackdowns like this.

The proposal would also require clubs to have one security guard for every 50 patrons, which club owners say would be an economic hardship for an industry opening on thin margins of profitability. The hearing begins at 6:30 pm in City Hall Room 400.

Comments

I get a laugh out of the "war on fun rhetoric" but these rules are plainly stupid. Whoever dreamed this stuff up is an idiot. Trying to scan ID cards, that's not going to cause any fights... And the micro managing of SF's business is over the top again.

===

Proposed Rules

These Conditions shall apply to all EC permitted events with an anticipated occupancy capacity of over one hundred (100) individuals.

1. (a) Security personnel shall be provided in a ratio one (1) guard for every fifty (50) patrons. (b) A security supervisor shall be provided at a ratio of one (1) supervisor for every four (4) guards.

2. All individuals entering the premises shall be scanned by a metal detector.

3. All occupants of the premises shall be ID Scanned (including patrons, promoters, and performers, etc.). ID scanning data shall be maintained on a data storage system for no less than 15 days and shall be made available to local law enforcement upon request.

4. High visibility cameras shall be located at each entrance and exit point of the premises. Said cameras shall maintain a recorded data base for no less than fifteen (15 days) and made available to local law enforcement upon request.

5. The exterior of the premises shall be equipped with lighting of sufficient power to illuminate and make easily discernible the appearance and conduct of all persons on or about the premises. Additionally, the position of such lighting shall not disturb the normal privacy and use of any neighboring residences.

6. The premises shall provide a Security Plan acceptable to the Chief of Police which includes a Security proposal and EC Best Practices, collectively referred to as a Security Plan.

7. All Security personnel that protect life and/or property shall maintain a current and valid California Department of Consumer Affairs Guard Card and shall comply with all rules and regulations governing the Card.

8. At all times the premises is open to the public a readily identifiable Manager employed by the EC permit holder shall be on-site.

9. All Federal, State, and Local permits, required posting, including but not limited to occupancy, shall be posted in a conspicuous location clearly visibly to the public. Said permits shall be maintained valid and current.

Posted by maltlock on Apr. 11, 2011 @ 2:19 pm

Not enuff for this Bulldog,

Not the guys, but the chicks should most definitely have to strip naked and submit to a body cavity search. All in a live web feed which we can access through SFBG?

Work for you?

Works for me.

Giants on in 15 minutes.

h.

Posted by Guest h. brown on Apr. 11, 2011 @ 5:51 pm

Its funny these people act as if they never have got drunk before. When people get drunk people do stupid shit. Just b/c a handful of shit heads do shitty things doesn't mean you have to rain on everyone's parade.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 12, 2011 @ 7:45 am

Who wants a lot of drunks running around with loaded weapons? Anyone who objects to being searched as they enter a club has never been to a Bill Graham concert, where security has always been tight. Don't you have to anyway to carry an ID anyway to be served in a bar? Scanning IDs, requiring security cameras and conducting searches for weapons is a good first step toward ending violence around the clubs, and should go a long way toward helping legitimate clubs stay in business, while helping the police collect evidence when a crime occurs. This is the first smart suggestion I have heard in a long time.

Please note that the shooting that reportedly took place at 16th and Alabama was actually on Mariposa and Alabama. The press is getting that one wrong.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 12, 2011 @ 11:54 am

Nice try.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 13, 2011 @ 12:40 am

this will all be so much easier when we all have RFID's implanted in our asses, then they can just scan our asses instead...no lines, no waiting, just wave your ass over the scanner on your way in...

Posted by Guest on Apr. 19, 2011 @ 7:33 pm

Jesus Christ,

This is so East German. Will they then tie the data taken at the door back into the ICE data base? Worse yet, will my student loan officer have access?

go Giants!

h.

Posted by Guest h. brown on Apr. 19, 2011 @ 8:36 pm

The purpose of these requirements is not to diminish anyone's fun, but rather to protect innocent individuals trying to have fun from the senseless and frequent violence that occurs at nightclubs.

Joe Hernandez was an innocent individual just trying to have fun at Temple nightclub when he was assaulted and killed on January 9, 2011. Such requirements, like increased security may have saved his life. Scanning of IDs and surveillance may have helped to catch the murderer who is still at large.

Please consider the innocent individuals who have been injured or killed due to nightclub violence. Please also view and share the below link which contains police information on the murder of Joe Hernandez, and help to catch the murderer.

http://www.sf-police.org/index.aspx?page=3759

Posted by In memory of Joe Hernandez - killed by nightclub violence on Jun. 21, 2011 @ 9:42 am

The purpose of these requirements is not to diminish anyone's fun, but rather to protect innocent individuals trying to have fun from the senseless and frequent violence that occurs at nightclubs.

Joe Hernandez was an innocent individual just trying to have fun at Temple nightclub when he was assaulted and killed on January 9, 2011. Such requirements, like increased security may have saved his life. Scanning of IDs and surveillance may have helped to catch the murderer who is still at large.

Please consider the innocent individuals who have been injured or killed due to nightclub violence. Please also view and share the below link which contains police information on the murder of Joe Hernandez, and help to catch the murderer.

http://www.sf-police.org/index.aspx?page=3759

Posted by In memory of Joe Hernandez - killed by nightclub violence on Jun. 21, 2011 @ 9:39 am