Wonder of wonders, the OLCC screwed kids and families again. Who would have imagined.

There's flexibility in the no-minors rule in bars; there should be some on events as well. I think it would be fair to ban minors after, say, 6 o'clock. Despite the mostly true claim that participants are there to taste good beer, the truth is that people do in fact get wasted, and it can be a boisterous, crowded environment.

The bottom line is that bluehole is right--I've taken my kids to the Winterfest a couple of times, and after a few minutes of root beer, they're bored stiff, and I'm anxious about pulling them through the crowds and whatnot. And from what I glean of the standing rules of OLCC, that minors have been allowed before was an oversight--it's tru e that there's little to no eating going on, and the focus is on drinking.

Alan,

Your desire is reasonable, and would be worth expressing to the festival organizers. But the OLCC is not there to offer them marketing advice.

Don't "thank" the OLCC, they don't even pretend to make their ruling on your behalf.

Your desire is reasonable, and would be worth expressing to the festival organizers.

Yeah, really. This should be a matter between festival organizers and attendees, not a government-sanctioned kids ban.

Torrid and Alan, that should be your choice. But particularly when you have infants or older kids, this may not be an issue. In any case, the OLCC shouldn't be making that decision--parents should.

I actually think kids are cool at events. It's not like the Beerfest is overrun with them, and it does set a nice tone for the event, which should highlight tasting beer, not slugging it down like it's a kegger.

Jeff--then you should have a beef with the entire system under which OLCC directs who can be in what part of what establishment, when. Not that I'd disagree with you if you did (or that I'm even sure I don't as well), but given that they do currently direct those things, it's fair IMO for them to apply the rules as they have them to the festival.

Torrid, that's a bizarre formulation. If I believe the OLCC should exist, I have to agree with every regulation they make?

No, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that if you agree with the concept of restricting minor access in any way to areas where alcohol is being served, then what happened to the Brewer's Festival is that the rules that previously existed are now being applied to them when they weren't before.

Which is why I prefaced my point by suggesting that maybe you don't think it's OK to restrict access at all. Which, if true, means your beef is not with the rules' application to the Brewfest, but with the rules themselves--and it's not so much a blunder as a broadly inappropriate policy to begin with.

Well, I don't buy it. When the brewfest made its initial appeal, the CCLC looked at their rules and made a judgment. The OBF is one of the most closely-watched events on the OLCC's calendar year, and there's no reason to think they haven't made the same judgment for 18 years following. I think this change reflects poor judgment by someone there now. But we can be shiny happy people and agree that the rule sucks to begin with.

Jeff, I think TJ's on to something. Your original post made a pretty broad assertion - that it's a good thing that

drinking moved from the dark, windowless caves of the corner taverns into well-lit, homey brewpubs.

I'm not saying I disagree with that, and I'm not sure TJ does either...but it's a perspective that clashes with the current regulatory structure. (A structure which might also be interpreted as "the will of the people," since I believe the OLCC was created as the result of a ballot measure. But of course that's off point.)

Kids and parents would be well served if there were some way for them to participate. This doesn't necessarily mean they have to have access to all areas, or at all times. I think a lot more people would agree with that, and if the OLCC isn't open to finding a solution along those lines, THAT would be a true outrage.

The OLCC hasn't taken the choice away from anyone.

Uh, except for the fact that for 19 years families could go or not go, as they saw fit. And now they can't. That's called taking the choice away.

Since when is drinking alcohol a kid-friendly activity? Do we have porno shops that are family friendly? Criminy. Some things are for grown-ups. Period.

Just because you put "period" in there doesn't make it so. Are you saying we should ban children from all restaurants, too? They serve alcohol in restaurants. Ban family-friendly matinees at brewpub theaters? They serve alcohol there, too.

To conflate porn with drinking beer is over-simplifcation to the point of mental stupefaction.

...but I have to guess drunk driving is a common side-effect of these good times on the water front

Yes, let's make broad assumptions without checking any actual data. That will keep the discussion rational.

b!X captures the main points I would have mentioned in reaction to the beer drinking = porn equation, but I would like to push it a little further. Preston surely believes beer drinking is as damaging to children as pornography, and I suspect that's what motivates this new change. And that's exactly where the discussion belongs.

For decades now kids have been watching their parents drink beer, and so far as I know, the moral turpitude of our children isn't on the rise. Instead of making a purely subjective judgment, let's have a discussion and find out if equating beer drinking with obscene images is an apt one. Do Oregonians agree with this? In ruling as it has, I think the OLCC has made a judgment that indeed decency demands that kids should be kept out of eyesight of the corrupting view of parents sipping the nation's best beer.

It's possible that that's where we are as a state, but it would surely be a shame.

Pete--I'd be happy to see kids limited to a time. But I still don't see where the law has actually been changed. What's happened, as far as I can tell, is the implementation of existing law has changed. Help me out if you see something different.

Jeff-

No, I generally agree with you. I've spent a little time at the beer festival, and not seen anything kid-unfriendly.

Unfortunately, there's a lot that's left to the discretion of the OLCC. Since we have a new OLCC director this year (remember that unfortunate drunken-driving episode?) it's not surprising that the new one would interpret things in a different way, and change a long-standing interpretation.

A friend of mine who's recently become a bar owner - and a longtime supporter of regulation and general "lefty" - has been increasingly frustrated with regulatory agencies as he's tried to expand his bar.

His words were more or like this: "I understand that there are guidelines I have to follow. But at least communicate clearly what those guidelines are, and answer basic questions as I attempt to create a plan that complies with them."

The more discretion we leave to regulators, the more they can throw their weight around arbitrarily. This OLCC example illustrates it pretty clearly. I'd think a responsible agency would do due diligence in facilitating compliance that does not conflict with the organizers' vision of the event; but as I see it, there's no incentive for the OLCC to be responsible.

Argh.

I feel bad for the people who are going to show up with their kids, unaware of the new rule. They are in for a pretty unpleasant encounter.

Can we talk about the stupidest OLCC rule of all time?

I discovered it a few years ago when a friend of mine from New York City flew into town. He came here for the sole purpose of visiting the Oregon Brew Festival.

In New York City, he doesn't drive. So, he doesn't have a driver's license. Instead, he has a state ID issued by the New York DMV. It's the same as a driver's license, except it doesn't allow him to drive. Same photo, same hologram, everything.

He was turned away from the Brew Festival. Apparently, under Oregon law, you need an Oregon driver's license, an Oregon i.d., or an out-of-state driver's license. An out-of-state i.d. doesn't count.

As my pal said to the guy, "You mean, I have to have a driver's license in order to drink? How insane is that?"

Either other states' DMVs can be trusted, or they can't. Either we should accept their i.d.'s and driver's licenses, or we should accept neither.

The OLCC is clearly a bunch of morons.

I confess, when I worked the PDX Intl Beerfest 3 years ago, in a weak moment I slipped a beer ticket from the bucket of tickets, into my pocket.

Glad I wasn't searched!

Thanks, Madam Hatter... I'm not sure what the rules are, and - to be fair - the incident happened about five years ago (so maybe things have changed), but it was an "OLCC Alcohol Monitor" in a yellow jacket checking IDs at the front gate.

I'm under no illusions that it was actually an OLCC employee, so maybe there was some bad training.

Since when is drinking alcohol a kid-friendly activity?

In Frankfurt, Germany, close to Xmas, my wife and I walked around old town with cups of warm, spiced wine, sold at many, many stands...actually walked the streets, not exiled to a roped off area where children were verboten!

In Vancouver, Washington, this last weekend, we had lunch at the Salmon Creek Brewery & Pub, but because we had a fifteen yeat old with us, we couldn't sit in the "bar" where there were dozens of people, but were exiled to the separate "restaurant" building where we had to dine alone with our teen.

"No Minors Allowed" is a bizarre infringement on our rights to hang together, where we want, as a family. "Drinking alcohol" (oh my God!) isn't an illicit activity, it's a part of life and living. Instead of teaching responsible drinking, and an appreciation of the pleasures of wine with a good meal, we demonize demon rum, and tell our kids that with age 21 they earn the right to pound down Pabst with impunity. But until then, nary a drop shall pass their lips...

Which, of course, is baloney, since underage drinking is a serious, serious problem untouched by all the weirdness of spectacularly unsuccessful state regulation.

We tell adults that "if you drink and drive the least you will lose is your license," and then plaster this on a billboard by a bar, on the highway, out where everyone drives, and no one walks.

Who are we kidding besides ourselves?

What a dumb, dumb, ruling by the OLCC. But then the OLCC has a monopoly on booze hardly imaginable by Al Capone in his wildest flights of imagination. And let's not even get to "distribution" issues and the shakedown and corruption that's part and parcel of over-regulation...

Heavens (and Paul Romain) forbid.

On a scale from "tasting beer" to "getting slammed" you will always have people all along the continuum at events like the OBF. Peaceful coexistence is perfectly possible. The thing I don't like about barring kids from the OBF even early in the day is that it pushes the event more toward the "getting slammed" end. That makes it a less attractive event even for a lot of us who wouldn't be taking a kid along anyway. A few kids in the mix aren't a drag on "tasting beers seriously". They are a better drag on getting s***-faced and rowdy than anything the OLCC does. Some of us think the drag of civilization can be a good thing--a crowd of nothing but problem drinkers is not my idea of a good time.

The OLCC is also guilty of bizarre under-regulation. While they are busy keeping kids out of the OBF too much of their regulation of permanent establishments is a joke.

Over the years we've discovered by observation here in North Portland what it takes to get the liquor license pulled from a problem establishment. Two murders on the premises and the OLCC will swing right into action.

Anything short of that no matter how disruptive or illegal and they keep their license--up to and including an extensive history of violent incidents involving lethal weapons, one of them fatal.

The former head of the agency, the one subsequently bounced for DUI, came to talk to a neighborhood meeting a few years ago. We asked her about permits and the extensive and expensive bureaucracy that supports them. We asked, for example, how many liquor license applications they typically get in a year and how many of them they deny as well as how many existing licenses get pulled.

She "didn't know". Their "computer system doesn't give us that information."

As far as I can tell, the OLCC is exactly the sort of agency that gives all of government a bad name.

I personally might even be inclined to put up with some over-regulation of things like the OBF if I thought they were getting serious about the real problems they should be addressing. Having observed them in action in the past, however, my guess would be they are over-regulating the OBC instead of tackling those more serious issues.

The OLCC has no business prohibiting parents from taking their kids to an event like the OBF; they have no evidence that children are being damaged by their attendance (other than having to listen to the college boys and their stupid drunken chant). It's merely a reflection of long-term American puritanical attitudes toward alcohol.

On the other hand, as a parent I wouldn't consider taking any child over the age of 1 to the OBF, and any complaints by people like Art Larrance are disingenuous. If the people running the event really wanted to encourage families to attend, they would long ago have provided activities for kids. They could have taken a page from the Laurelwood's book and set off an area, toys, and events. It's not too surprising that the OLCC would determine that the sole purpose of the OBF is to drink beer. A lot of beer. I find it difficult to whip up much sympathy for a parent who couldn't find something better for their kids to do while they attended the event.

Ross Williams: just exactly which progressives and which "other people's behavior"? Sounds like a big old straw man to me.

Generalize wildly much?

This sounds like a "class" argument. Because the Brewfest is a high class bar it should be exempt from the rules other bars have to follow?

Actually, I'm pretty sure that's the bar's decision. I would definitely resist any law that mandated allowing kids. But why do you assume that bar owners want kids and are somehow not allowed to have them? I go to plenty of adults-only bars, and I'm glad they exist, too. A great many of them are high class joints serving nine dollar martinis. How does class relate to this again?

Jeff: It's entirely based on the bar/tavern's decision on which license to buy. The class issue is a non-starter.

We have rules to protect kids from parents who don't have the sense to leave them home when they go out drinking.

Yeah...those 20 year olds just home from a second tour of Iraq, let's get 'em babysitters already, fer christ sakes! What's the matter with these parents! Sheesh...

Yes, I was pretty surprised when I moved here and found out minors were not allowed in certain areas, even with a parent. I'd been in a number of bars with my grandparents and parents growing up. We had a family member who owned one for some years, and I'd go in and have some peanuts and a shirley temple (virgin) while the adults danced. I even rode the bull a few times.

There's nothing like going into a restaurant with your toddler and being denied the ability to order off the happy hour menu because you're not in the bar. Does is matter that most of the people in the bar aren't ordering alcoholic drinks? Or that your husband did? Nope. All that matters is that you're not in the bar-- not by choice, but because you happen to have a child with you who is under 21.

Drinking alcohol is not always to get drunk. I've had alcohol dozens of times in my life and have only been drunk twice-- once when I was about four and my older sister convinced me to drink my papa's entire glass of "beer" (was actually whiskey and some other alcohol mixed) and once at a party with some friends where we rented a place, had a party, and then slept over. The rest of the times I've never had more than about two drinks, tops.

My daughter's seen both my husband and I drink. She knows it's something for adults and is to be had in moderation. Just as my husband I did as children, she is watching as we teach her how to drink responsibly.

Now I am someone who has maybe 2 or 3 drinks a year. My husband typically has a few more, as I'm the designated driver after big family events with wine. So it's not as if we're big drunks or heavy drinkers. It's only just recently that I've finally identified a wine I like (hubby still has to) so we can have a glass of wine with dinner occasionally. And neither of us see a problem with being able to take your children with you to the festival.

Besides, the trouble in finding a babysitter isn't always about money. Often times it's very difficult to find someone. I know I sure run into that problem a lot.

Maybe because there is a big difference between the breweries and being able to go to this large event.

What's so wrong about having a few beer-drinking venues deemed "adult friendly?"

One, that's perfectly fine...but don't use a public park as the venue.

Two, some of us adults consider "adult friendly" to mean we're treated like adults and can decide for ourselves where we take our kids. Or our twenty year olds who aren't exactly "crying babies."

Thank you doretta and jenni.

I'm amazed how many people here seem to associate a beer tasting festival with and only with "getting hammered."

Geez. You're not supposed to get publicly drunk ANYWAY no matter whether you're in the local watering hole or at the OBF.

And let's go all the long way back to Jeff's original point.

For

19

years

they

allowed

minors.

This is not a case of an "adult" location suddenly being overtaken by breeders. This has ALWAYS been a family event and suddenly it is not.

Who is sending the mixed signals here?

Ross said, "We have rules to protect kids from parents who don't have the sense to leave them home when they go out drinking."

I'd like to keep coming back to this one. Ross, exactly how is a kid damaged by watching a parent having a beer or three?

And why are you concerned about it being in public (where other people can stop anything truly horrific) but not concerned about it happening in private (where the parent can get tanked and do god-knows-what to their kids)?

Would someone of the beer-is-bad contingent help me understand the following dilemma?

We have the most restrictive alcohol rules in the world (except for islamic countries).... and yet we have nearly highest alcohol abuse in the world.

Discuss.

Furthermore, one assumes that the executive staff of the OLCC is exposed to more anti-alcohol education and propaganda than most anyone in this community. And yet, the most recent OLCC executive director recently was convicted of driving under the influence.

So tell me, exactly how effective are the OLCC's efforts?

I'd like to keep coming back to this one. Ross, exactly how is a kid damaged by watching a parent having a beer or three?

Maybe I can speak for Ross here, Kari, having raised a now grown son and daughter, with teenage step-sons still around: We need to keep the mystique of drinking alive!

We don't want kids to think that "drinking" is something normal. We want them to think it's some perverse, weird things that "adults" do behind closed doors, something dirty and sordid, like sex.

Besides, if we taught our kids to drink responsibility and actually raised them with an appreciation for Oergon Pinot Noir and great microbrews...how are the marketers going to keep making pounding down PBR --or Tequilla shots-- a "symbol" for reaching the age of maturity and reason. Turned 21? Time to Par-tay!

The folks pretecting our youngins from the dangers of booze --while protecting themselves from tripping over SUV strollers-- still haven't addressed those dang twenty-year-olds who won't, damn it, stay put in their strollers.

You can get married, have sex, have babies, go to war, kill people --or face death and dismemberment yourself-- in the defense of your country...but heaven help you if you want to hang with Mom and Dad at the Beer Fest!

Our laws are ridiculous, period. OLCC's mission, however, is quite effective in that yes, they have succeeded in monopolizing the trade in evil spirits. Well, at least those over a certain alocohol content. We should just be glad we can still buy beer and wine in our supermarkets...something you CAN'T do in that backwater of illiberalism, New York City.

Preston, I think the question is not whether a beer festival is indecent or healthful for kids to see--that's clearly a subjective judgment. The issue is who should have the right to decide. The libertarian-leaning among us (which interesting cuts across lines if you look through the comments) think the parents ought to be able to make that call in this case.

I also think you're wrong about the 20-year-olds. This has long been a very serious concern by the OBF, and they have very strict procedures for checking age. Everyone gets checked coming in (everyone!), and then you get a bracelet if you're 21 or older. Pourers are given the instruction that without exception, you must have a bracelet to get a pour. This rule change by the OLCC looks to me to be far more intentionally directed at protecting the morals of our youth than keeping high schoolers out of the hooch.

Preston wrote, I'm assuming this rule isn't to protect toddlers, but rather to set pretty appropriate guidelines for a more likely scenario. Two 21 year old buddies bring their 18 year old girlfriends or buddies to the beer festival and everyone gets wasted.

Whoa, Preston! Let's not go raising red herrings.

The existing rules already are crystal clear: Minors can come in if, and only if, they are accompanied by their parents. There ain't no way a 21-year-old is going to convince the gate staff that an 18-year-old is their son/daughter.

Well, since it's 6 months away, maybe you can find one if you start calling now. Sheesh. Lame excuse.

For starters, I never go to the festival, so that's not the issue. The issue is that it isn't always easy to find a babysitter. I typically have one, that's one, person who can watch my daughter. And sometimes that person is busy.

Not everyone is lucky enough to have a neighbor they know with a teenager, a co-worker whose daughter does babysitting, etc. Finding a babysitter isn't as easy as it used to be, especially since neighborhoods don't revolve around neighbors like they used to.

Also, to all those that keep talking about babies and toddlers-- there are a lot of others between the ages of 5 and 21 that aren't whining babies, don't need a stroller, etc.