* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
NEWSLETTER: IN THE LOOP / MAY
In memory of Ray Priest, panel speaker/volunteer, whose daughter Chrissy died in a DUI crash in 1995 just after graduating from OHHS. After a long distinguished career with the U.S. Marine Corps, Ray retired as a Lieutenant Colonel, his last command CO of VMFA 323. He continued his love of flying with UPS. He had a special connect with personnel at NAS Whidbey panels. We miss you Ray.
ALERT!!!
May 13: At the Oak Harbor Park Board, a council member’s suggestion to allow alcohol in City parks was discussed at great length, both FOR and AGAINST. The OHPB is waiting to hear from the public before they decide whether to approve or not. If approved, it then goes to the City, and most of them support it I’m told. If you DO NOT want the ordinance “eased” please let the park board know by emailing The OHPB president Helen Chatfield-Weeks: helencw2@frontier.com
OH Park Mgr Hank Nydam: hnydam@oakharbor.org
Here is the AGAINST:
Thank you for inviting me here today. My understanding from the newspaper last Wed. and Councilmember Hizon’s email to me last Thursday – and please correct me if I’m wrong:
There is currently a proposal to ease restrictions on alcohol in our city parks which would allow beer gardens, wine-tasting, and such on a permit only basis within a designated, fenced-in area. People will have their IDs checked at the entrance and can only be served alcohol by licensed bartenders as stated at the meeting.
I further understand, according to the article, several council members said allowing alcohol in this manner would ‘add to special events.’ Let me state for the record, I’m not against alcohol for those legally old enough to drink it. I’m Italian, I like my amaretto and my wine. And I have worked in the field of DUI / Underage Drinking & Other Substance Abuse for over 20 years.
As the director of an organization that’s mission is to deter driving under the influence and underage drinking in our communities through education and awareness, along with our board of directors, we believe the City of Oak Harbor decades ago had several good reasons for banning alcohol in our parks. They were most likely the same reasons given during the public outcry in 1997 when the ordinance was changed by the City. You see, there was very little notice that was to happen. Then… the ordinance was reversed. Public outcry, it was reversed back. Now it is to be “eased.” This is like bad déjà booze. Easing the ordinance opens the door to the problems which are:
1. First, and foremost, it sends the message to our youth that ‘things go better with booze.’ And remember: the City is an IDIPIC Partner in Prevention. Even with trained servers and police enforcing the rules, you cannot be sure there won’t be youth sneaking drinks. Nor people drinking their allotted number of drinks and possibly others.’
2. Next, when it’s said ‘it adds to special events,’ those of us who drink know what it adds: feelings of warmth and relaxation. One drink – which is any beverage with ½ ounce alcohol – can bring a person to .02 BAC. This can result in some loss of judgment. At this level tests have also shown that drivers experience a decline in visual functions, with a lessening of peripheral vision and the ability to track a moving object. These changes may be very subtle and barely noticable to the person who has had only one drink, let alone noticeable to anyone else, but in an emergency situation, such loss of judgment and reaction, though slight, could cause the driver to not have full control of the vehicle. Therefore it’s simply not a wise choice to get behind the wheel no matter how little one has had to drink.
3. Regarding alcohol served in a Seattle park and quote “there were no problems.” Because there were no disturbances, no fights, no beer brawls? How do you know if anyone drove under the influence? The sad fact is this: most people who DUI don’t get caught; only about 1 in 100. And speaking of Seattle, after the festivities there you can hop on a bus day or night Monday through Sunday. Here you can’t. Here, most people will get in their cars and drive home.
4. As for other “successful” festivals which include alcohol, whether here or elsewhere, the past cannot predict the future. The Hindenburg comes to mind – 76th Anniversary May 6th — it had 30 successful transatlantic crossings–
You can have dozens of such events, and the added profits having alcohol will help to bring in. But that will matter not if someone is injured or killed due to an impaired driver.
5. Finally: in restaurants, bars, in their own homes, people are “personally accountable” if they DUI. With the City approving alcohol in parks, it gives a stamp of approval. And while people are still personally accountable if they DUI, by NOT allowing alcohol in the parks, the City is removing if not its liability, then its culpability. The City is then exhibiting “social accountability:” doing what is best for its citizens. More importantly, it is removing any possibility that by its permission a festival-goer will injure or kill someone by driving impaired.
Public safety should be the City’s highest priority. If what I have shared with you is not enough to keep this from going further, I strongly urge you to loudly ask for public input so that the many can decide if this is actually wanted, not the few. Thank you.
Sources: The National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence, Century Council, among others.
- – -
So PLEASE whether FOR or AGAINST, and as per above, we hope AGAINST, let your voice be heard!!! Contact Helen and Hank and Ms. Hizon, who is pushing the proposal: thizon@oakharbor.org. She’s into social media and is taking input on her Facebook page as well where she is getting LOTS of approval for her idea.
IN FACT, the board was considering if that feedback was enough when I said NO! Not everyone uses Facebook, especially some older folks. I asked the board to PLEASE put out the word via the newspaper, etc.
So it’s up to the public now to decide.
- – -














