Should CA Bars Be Able To Serve Drinks Until 4 A.M.? The Surpising Twist To The Survey

CALIFORNIA — A new California bill unveiled this month could allow bars in some downtowns to keep serving alcohol two hours past the traditional 2 a.m. cutoff.

The proposal, AB 342, is being championed by two Democratic lawmakers and criticized by opponents who call it dangerous.

In a recent, non-scientific Patch survey, we asked readers to share their thoughts on the idea. The survey, which drew over 2,574 respondents, was meant to gather perspectives from Patch readers.

READ MORE: New CA Bill Would Allow Bars To Stay Open Until 4 A.M.: SURVEY

More than 80 percent of respondents said they did not think some designated California areas should allow bars to serve alcohol until 4 a.m. Just 16% were in support of the proposal and 3.8 percent said they were "not sure."

Meanwhile, in an interesting twist, a majority of respondents said they were "very likely" to take advantage of the 4 a.m. alcohol service if their city were to allow it.

On a scale of 1 to 4 — "very likely to definitely not" — 86% said they were very likely to partake.

We also asked: "What concerns you most about extending bar hours?"

An overwhelming amount of respondents (87.6%) reported drunk driving as their biggest concern. See the rest of the results below:

[SCROLL DOWN TO SEE READER COMMENTS ABOUT THE BILL]

Authored by San Francisco Democrats Assemblymember Matt Haney and state Sen. Scott Wiener, the law would give cities the option to designate some areas as "hospitality zones," which would allow establishments within that zone to keep selling drinks for two hours past the 2 a.m. cutoff.

The bill would also allow cities to create temporary 'Special Event Hospitality Zones'—a potential game-changer for Los Angeles as it gears up to host the 2028 Olympics.

To establish these zones, local governments would need to weigh several factors, including proximity to hotels, walkability, transportation access, public safety plans, and whether the area is culturally, historically and economically suited for extended nightlife.

"We need people in our downtowns. We need them to come here, not just during the day, but at night," Haney told reporters last week.

However, not everyone is a fan of the bill.

Advocacy group Alcohol Justice is urging the Assembly to vote against the proposal later this month.

"This bill is a reckless attempt to prioritize alcohol industry profits over the well-being of Californians," said Cruz Avila, Executive Director of Alcohol Justice. "The data is clear: extending last call to 4 a.m. will lead to more drunk driving, more injuries, and more lives lost. California cannot afford to ignore the science or the human cost of this policy."

In an optional portion of the survey, we asked readers to volunteer their thoughts on the bill. Here are some of their responses:

"We need to do everything we can to support our bars, restaurants and food service industry."

"More police, more ER personnel, more deaths, would be the result."

"More road deaths and alcoholism!"

"I go to the clubs dancing a lot. In Chicago the clubs are open to at least 3 a.m. In San Diego it's way earlier. It could really help the club business."

"Terrible idea. Early morning commutes would be filled with drunk drivers. Absolute disaster awaits."

"It's somewhat comical that this proposal is going around when the medical professionals have declared alcoholic beverages to be detrimental to our health. They say it is like a poision."

"No one needs to drink until four in the morning. This is stupid and is a waste of taxpayer dollars. Kind of like the bullet train."

"Our downtowns might need more visitors, but they DON'T need more drinking visitors! Not much good happens after midnight, or 2 a.m., and certainly 4 a.m. To pass this as 'hospitality zones' for the Olympics — which are among the rarest of events, is a joke."

"I have no objections to this bill. It has pros and cons, but we need the business."

"Some people might not get off of work until midnight or longer and then they might want a drink or two and socialize with people before going home."

"This bill is not proposing that all bars in CA be allowed to remain open and serve alcohol until 4a. It’s select zones. Whether a bar serves alcohol until 2 or 4 a.m., there are concerns about drunk driving and excessive noise."

"This is just big business trying to make more money while creating risks for every city. Ridiculous idea as it creates a need for more services for every county."

"LA can’t handle the homeless let alone drunks, stop being so greedy."