Tag Archives: Taki Amira

Missing characters in City management?

From the Cape Argus, by Monique Duval
, 4th February 2013

Long Street is the centre of Cape Town’s nightlife but noise issues are turning nightclub and hotel owners against each other. At a meeting hosted at the Pepper Club hotel this week to discuss noise in the Long Street area, Bettie Leedo from the city’s Health Department said they were looking at a new by-law to counter problems faced by the municipality in licensing nightclubs under the Business Act.

The meeting, attended by city officials, the Western Cape Liquor Authority, property developers, residents and nightclub owners, erupted in heated debate over the noise, with some bar owners accusing developers of not researching the area before building hotels. But developers and property owners hit back, saying many of them had spent millions investing in the area and were not prepared to sit back and let their investments slide.

Lawyer Derek Wille, who represents the Pepper Club, said his client was losing millions of rand as guests often checked out or demanded refunds as they could not get sleep over weekends. Leedo said under the Business Act the city could not close clubs that traded without the necessary licences and instead took legal action through the municipal courts. “This is a lengthy process. In one instance the city started legal proceedings against a nightclub in December 2011. The case has been postponed five times.

Since 2009, the city has received an increase in noise complaints from the Long Street area. We sought legal opinion on whether the municipality could write its own by-law pertaining to business licences and we’ve recently received feedback.” Good Hope sub-council chairman Taki Amira said the issues in Long Street were a result of the “retro-fitting of nightclubs into old buildings”. He said that a brief haul been sent to the mayor’s office for a new by-law and said the first draft was expected to be completed at the end of this month.

Byron Qually, convener of the Long Street Residents’ Association said: “The city has a comprehensive break-down on the effects of noise pollution ranging from health and work performance and behaviour. While these points are valid, they provide negligible documentation on how property investments are losing value due to an area being considered uninhabitable. Mayoral committee member for health Lungiswa James confirmed the City would be proposing a new by-law but said it was difficult to put a time frame on the process as it required public participation.

Copyright Cape Argus Newspaper

Data gathered cannot be appropriately assessed …

From the CapeTowner, by Monique Duval, 20th September 2012

An impressive 81% percent of businesses in the central city are happy with being located here – and 78% of them are likely to stay. These are the findings included in the latest report of the Central City Improvement District (CCID). The glowing report states that the CCID has invested R290 million in levies into the central city over the past 12 years.

In his presentation, CCID chairman Rob Kane said the report was done to get an independent objective view of the city and set a benchmark for progress. Mr Kane says the report is intended to be an authoritative guide for investors, business decision makers and government officials, who are looking for current information on the economic state of the Cape Town CBD. “The report is intended to be an authoritative guide for investors, business decision makers and government officials, who are looking for current information on the economic state of the Cape Town CBD. “The CBD contributes 24.5% of business turnover into the larger Cape Town metro region. This world class business district is strategically placed as an investment link to the rest of South Africa and a gateway into the African continent,” he said.

The report was welcomed by Good Hope Sub-council chairman Taki Amira who said the efforts of the CCID have added value to the central city. Mr Kane said they had invited 1 800 businesses to participate in an online survey and 244 businesses participated. “The profile of the 244 is a fair representation of the profile of businesses in Cape Town CBD. In a second survey, we interviewed 1 567 users of the CBD. These are people who are using the CBD for either retail, entertainment or business purposes. It is a representative sample of the people that you see walking in the CBD,” he said.

For the report, Mr Kane said they also interviewed a mix of people who moved around the CBD, including tourists. “In order to ensure that we end up with a representative sample, we divided the CBD into geographic areas and allocated interviewers to each area. They interviewed people between 8am and 2am from Wednesday March 14 until Tuesday March 20. By doing this we could control for any bias – whether it was from a time of day, day of the week or area point of view,” he said. Mr Kane said the on-street survey was designed to find out what people thought of the Cape Town CBD as a geographic location and was aimed at “The business user survey was designed to find out what business users thought of the services of the CBD in general and the CCID’s services in particular. The findings presented were a summary of the opinions of both groups of respondents,” he said. Mr Kane said the business survey focussed only on businesses, while the user survey may have involved business owners who were walking at street level and who were intercepted by interviewers.

Byron Qually, convenor of the Long Street Residents’ Association (LSRA) said residents should have been included in the survey because they contribute to CCID levies and are part of the fabric of the city. He said the association considered the report to be highly valuable for both residents and developers wishing to enter the CBD. “The LSRA, being a residential platform, has the reach and intimate understanding of the state of the CBD, and it is surprising that we were not contacted to contribute to the report. “However, if the report is intended to complement the CCID’s marketing collateral, then there was no need to include the LSRA,” he said. Mr Qually said one concern was the research methodology used. “The summary on page 38 should point to an addendum illustrating the survey itself, where and how the respondents were canvassed, the demographics of those interviewed.

“Without this information, the relevance of data gathered cannot be appropriately assessed. “Although the report is an interesting read, it’s has an overtly positive tone akin to a marketing document. Surely the challenges facing a growing Cape Town CBD also warrant surveying and measurement in order to identify appropriate solutions,” he said. However, Mr Kane said the report was the beginning of a strong research footprint. “We will be building on the success of this initial survey in which we engage with residents and property owners in the CBD so that we have a better picture of the CCID and the CBD for residents. Residents are vital to the success of the CBD. “We have always welcomed any approaches by the LSRA or other associations, and encourage greater partnerships for effective collaboration in building our knowledge,” Mr Kane said.

Copyright Cape Community Newspapers, part of Independent News and Media.

Unwitting contradiction in the City wanting residents to …

From the CapeTowner, by Monique Duval, 19th April 2012

There have been mixed reactions to the new liquor policy which will allow pubs, clubs and other establishments to apply to extend their trading hours. The policy, which was explained to councillors at the Good Hope Sub-council meeting, on Monday April 16, will allow for establishments to extend their trading hours to no later than 4am, provided they fulfil certain requirements.

Sub-council chairman, Taki Amira, said the policy followed the amendments to the Liquor Trading Days and Hours By-Law which came into effect on Sunday April 1. According to the Act the trading hours for the sale of liquor are to be stipulated by the municipality. The cut-off time was 2am but the bylaw was amended to allow onconsumption premises to apply for an extension to trade until 4am, provided they meet the criteria set out by the City. But the City has to consult with the ward councillor, ratepayers’ associations and residents before it can grant an extension.

Christa Hugo from the City’s health department explained how the policy will work. She said only establishments which fall in business or industrial nodes may apply for the extensions. “The application will work in two parts, the first part will require establishments to go to the Land Use Management Department to ensure that their property is zoned correctly. “If they are not, their application will not be considered.

The applicant will then have to go to the Metro Police and Law Enforcement to get clearance from these departments to see whether they have contravened any laws regarding noise, liquor or whether there have been complaints against their business,” she said. Establishments will then have to pay a R5 000 application fee which will be processed by the health department. City health will then forward the application to the subcouncil, who will get feedback from the community before making a decision on whether to grant the application,” Ms Hugo said. Mr Amira said the policy will apply to new liquor licences and renewals.

Ward councillor Dave Bryant said: “This is a positive step. In areas such as Long Street there are legitimate businesses who would qualify for the extension.” “The City will not be granting extensions willy nilly and will consult the community on these applications. The new laws call for liquor traders to become more responsible,” Mr Bryant said.

Vusa Mazula, co-owner of Zula Bar in Long Street said he felt he had no choice but to apply for the extension. “With the way business is in Cape Town, we must apply for the extension. The 2am cut-off time was simply too early and would have killed our business. I think the application fee of R5 000 is a bit steep but I welcome the policy and the amendments to the by-law as it is giving us a fair chance,” he said.

Residents however, have slammed the new policy as they feared it would not be policed properly. Buiten Street resident Geoff Madsen said he thought the extension should only be given to compliant businesses. “The extension policy adds noise, security and criminal activity to the area. “Research should be done on who the patrons are at that time of morning and what economic value the city and businesses achieve for the extra two hours of operation,” he said.

Residents had enough problems with clubs that traded until 2am, said one woman who did not want to be identified. “This refers to the noise and music a nightclub produces, but also to noise generated by patrons inside and outside the venue. “Patrons tend to be loud while walking to their cars, they laugh, giggle and shout. I often find myself looking forward to 2am because I know that the music will be turned off and that there will be fewer people shouting in the street “If the City did grant an extension till 4am, I think that this could only be done if venues with full soundproofing and a venue that has never had a noise complaint. “I don’t know of a single properly soundproof venue in the city and I also cannot think of a single venue that has not been complained about. “Further, if the City is already struggling to control and enforce the law on existing clubs with a 2am cut-off time, I sincerely doubt they will be able to enforce further laws to a 4 am cut-off time. Plain and simple, bad idea,” she said.

Byron Qually, convenor of the Long Street Residents’ Association said the knock-on effect of the liquor trading hours was the problem not the by-law. “In principle, the extension seems to suit bars, clubs and residents. “However, from our experience with City by-laws and even basic licensing, the management and follow through of policy, particularly if it involves City Health, is highly questionable,” he said.

Janis Ross, said the trustees of the Ross Family Trust which and owns Maremoto in Long Street will object vehemently and rigorously to any extension of trading hours for the clubs surrounding their business which are causing severe noise problems.

A hotel manger who refused to be named due to threats from nearby clubs, said the extensions should not be granted. “I don’t see why there is a need for people to drink until 4am. There are businesses in Long Street that already trade until 4am without having any of the special licenses. I doubt very much that it will be policed properly or whether our complaints and objections will be taken seriously.

Clearly the bars, pubs and nightclubs are more important than the residents and accommodation establishments,” she said. Community Police Forum (CPF) chairman, Henry Giddy, said the extension was a good idea as it helped give residents a better chance to have their say. “Residents now need to empower themselves and make their voices heard on applications. The extension policy gives the power to residents and I would definitely label it as an enabler. “The liquor forum will also look closely at these applications and communicate with the community and when necessary, we will object,” he said.

Copyright Cape Community Newspapers, part of Independent News and Media.

In a follow up letter to the article above, Liquor policy Patrick Labrosse, Vicechairman, City Bowl Ratepayers’ and Residents’ Association Regarding the Liquor extension policy. As usual, the devil is in the detail. Whether the cut-off time is 2am or 4am is only a question of degree in the inconvenience to residents.

In theory, this policy reads as reasonable and workable. But the club owners – the prime source of complaints – have been exceedingly good at ignoring the law and dragging any process on to their advantage (unlike the affected residents, club owners can afford the legal teams for dilatory tactics).

Some events organisers have also been guilty of ignoring agreed-upon hours and noise levels. The City needs the will to enforce the regulations; the muscle to enforce them; quick reaction times to discourage tentative offenders to try their luck.

Latest information indicates that this is the intention and the policy should lead to better coordination between the SAPS, the City and other parties. Added pluses are that the community will have to be consulted through the ward councillors, the ward committees, the ratepayers, and advertising to directly affected neighbours.

There is also the new ALF (Area Liquor Forum) just coming into life. And, together with a couple of added legal changes that should help, the maximum fine has been increased to R1 million. So it does seem that the City is giving itself the legal muscle to deal with problem establishments. It is also understood that the effect will not be felt immediately but progressively through liquor licence renewal applications.

There is an unwitting contradiction in the City wanting residents to return to the CBD but failing to date to ensure the conditions for residential life there and allowing clubs to defeat that aim. In the name of property redevelopment and bringing life back to parts of the CBD areas, the City has allowed after-hours leisure businesses to proliferate to the point where residents are considering moving out.

A single, wild-cat club can affect several blocks and hundreds of residents, so property developers should – and most likely do – welcome a policy that appears to want to deal with the problem. But only experience will show how effective these measures are. The other side – the errant club owners – are often brazen and do not lack resources and the affected residents are the ones on the front lines in this long battle.

Effectiveness will therefore require every part to function as intended and sustainably, including, of course, last but not least, the courts.

Copyright Cape Community Newspapers, part of Independent News and Media.

Understanding the law and how clubs operate without a license …

From the CapeTowner, by Monique Duval, 15th August 2011

Business licences, trading hours and lack of enforcement were the topics of discussion when residents met with City officials to tackle noise battles in the CBD. The Long Street Residents’ Association (LSRA) requested a meeting with Councillor Dave Bryant and other roleplayers including the Central City Improvement District (CCID) to raise concerns about clubs trading without the necessary licences and causing a noise disturbance. LSRA convenor Byron Qually said after two years of complaints there was no longer a question about whether there was a noise problem. He asked why bars and nightclubs were allowed to continue operating without health and entertainment licences. He highlighted O’Driscoll’s Irish Pub in Burg Street, where the owner had been found guilty in court for causing a noise nuisance, but continued to operate.

Mr Bryant read a response given by health director, Dr Ivan Bromfield which said the City did not allow or condone business that operated without a licence despite being fined or convicted in court. “The law enforcers are, however, reliant on either successful noise level readings or affidavits from affected persons before the repeat offenders can be summonsed back to court,” Mr Bryant said. Good Hope Sub-council chairperson, Taki Amira, said many of the problems faced by the City were a result of the municipality being tasked with carrying out national legislation. “To start, we must note that in order to operate a nightclub, you need two things. A liquor licence and a health and entertainment licence. The issue is that the Business Act is national legislation and the sub-council cannot refuse applications if all the requirements are met. For instance, we receive applications for adult entertainment businesses and while we would like to reject them we can’t if they meet the requirements,” Mr Amira said. He said among the problems faced by the City was the granting of temporary liquor licences. “Once they have that they start operating. We contact law enforcement agencies who visit the premises to check if their paperwork is in order. When we find that they do not have the appropriate licences they are fined. In some cases this deters them from trading but in other cases this is petty cash for them,” he said.

CCID security manager, Muneeb Hendricks said one way in which residents could assist was by keeping an eye on liquor licence applications. “We conducted an ‘exploratory mission’ to take a look at the noise problem. “What we found is that it is often difficult to single out a club because of the ambient noise. We should look into the possibility of compiling a report for residents which looks at what they can do to help. This issue was also discussed in the Cape Town Central Community Police Forum Meeting (CPF) and it’s important to remember that residents can make objections to the Liquor Board in the granting of liquor licences to problem clubs,” he said. Burg Street resident Ashley Lillie said in his opinion the biggest problem was the lack of co-ordination between City departments dealing with noise issues. Residents also questioned the methodology used when conducting noise readings.

Geoff Madsen, one of the developers of Flatrock Suites in Loop Street said that when he first decided to develop the residential block which also consists of hotels suites he loved the idea of bars, pubs and clubs in the area. Mr Madsen invited the CapeTowner to hear the noise emanating from Chez Ntemba nightclub in August. During the visit, the CapeTowner witnessed the roof of the club lifting and heard heavy bass coming from the premises (“Noise raises the roof”, CapeTowner, August 11). “Our residents and guests support these establishments and we have no intention of closing them. All, we ask is for them to comply with the law. “Now we have to spend R2.5 million on soundproofing. We have been complaining for more than four years about a certain club and it seems our concerns have fallen on deaf ears,” he said.

Mr Bryant said that after assessing the problems faced by Mr Madsen he too had some concerns. “How can a building which has a tin roof provide any kind of soundproofing,” he asked. At the meeting residents and officials also discussed the possibility of accompanying officials from the City’s Health Department when noise readings are done in the CBD as well as the possibility of funding additional law enforcement officers to inspect clubs when complaints are received.

Copyright Cape Community Newspapers, part of Independent News and Media.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————

The following outlines the minutes taken by the LSRA at the aforementioned meeting:

Attendees: City: Councillor David Bryant and Subcouncil Chair Taki Amira
City Health Department: Lavinia Petersen and colleague
CCID: Mo Hendricks
CapeTowner: Monique Duval
LSRA: Approximately 10 individuals.

Document provided by the City Health Department on the LSRA questions:

Why are bars still able to operate knowingly without a license?

No answer provided.

Why are convicted bars owners allowed to continue with their illegal behaviour?

Some operators continue despite being fined or convicted in an court of law. The City does not allow or condone this type of behaviour. The law enforcers are, however, reliant on either successful noise level readings or affidavits from affected persons before the repeat offenders can be summonsed back to court.

Since 2009, what systems have the City Health Department introduced to assist residents with noise concerns?

The City enforces the Noise Control Regulations which allow for offenders to be fined in terms of exceeding the allowable noise limits and/ or to be summonsed to a court of law. The following systems are currently in place:
– Procedure for summonsing an alleged offender to court via the ‘noise nuisance” procedure in terms of the Noise Control Regulations. This procedure is based on affidavits from affected persons.
– Procedure for summonsing an offender to court when exceeding the noise limits – ‘causing a disturbing noise’. This procedure is based on successful noise level readings.
– Mandatory soundproofing via the Business licensing system.
– Arrangements for combined actions from various Departments are in place. Examples of these are where City Health with Law Enforcement or even SAPS. The CIDS are also included — especially on night-time surveys.
– Availability of staff in the Western district for night inspections increased from once every 6 weeks to every two weeks. This is especially useful where complainants do not want to provide affidavits.
– Increased the level of health court action against premises trading without business licences.
– Agreement reached that health would be informed of all complaints regarding noise that is received from the Call Centres. (Shannon and myself would receive and interrogate and forward as needed if action from City Health is needed – still in infancy and needs refinement as we have only received 6 complaints so far.)
– Regular meeting are held with all role-players involved in enforcement and legal actions where it relates to unlicensed business premises to enable better co-ordination and clear frames of reference.

Primary actions from the meeting:

– CCID and City: Exploring the option of a full time and dedicated sound task team, who are trained and authorised to intervene in noise disputes when they occur at night.
– City Health Department: To provide noise measurement test specifications, test procedure and acoustic report to the LSRA, and to invite members to a testing session.
– CCID: Provide a digital copy of their brochure on noise awareness to the LSRA for posting on the website.

Councillors reject City Health departments report …

From the CapeTowner, by Monique Duval, 29th March 2012

Inconsiderate clubs who continue to trade despite noise complaints will not be tolerated, said Good Hope Sub-council chairman, Taki Amira at the meeting on Monday March 19. Mr Amira said the sub-council was concerned about the number of noise complaints and would be taking a firm stance. “The City promotes mixed use developments and we encourage people to rent and buy property in the city, but residents are constantly faced with inconsiderate clubs who continue to violate their rights,” he said.

In March last year, Mayco member for safety and security, JP Smith broke the news that an amendment to the Public Places and the Prevention of Noise Nuisance By-law, would see the sound equipment of noisy clubs impounded if they don’t heed warnings to turn down the volume. The amendment was lauded by residents who said they hoped it would help to deal with noise pollution in the city centre. Using this amendment, Mr Amira said clubs which continued to cause a nuisance would be issued with warnings. “We will be issuing final warnings and if we receive any noise complaints, we will ensure that club’s sound equipment is impounded. Following this we also received many requests from clubs asking what they need to do to comply. This sub-council is not against clubs but we want businesses to trade responsibly and we hope this warning is taken seriously,” he said.

The Long Street Residents’ Association (LSRA) has welcomed Mr Amira’s statement. LSRA convenor Byron Qually said it was clear that fines for noise transgressions have not worked in the past. “The costs incurred are just incorporated into a club’s operating budget. “Although this updated by-law will directly help residents resolve noise pollution, it places the onus on nightclubs to mange their sound equipment and DJs, and ultimately listen to the community that surrounds them,” he said. In a separate report submitted to the sub-council by the City’s health department about noise complaints in the area covered by the sub-council which includes the entire City Bowl, the Atlantic Seaboard and Hout Bay, 23 warnings were issued for noise contraventions and two fines issued between December 2011 and February 2012. But councillors rejected the report and said they they wanted to know how many complaints were made during the same period and how many.

Copyright Cape Community Newspapers, part of Independent News and Media.

There are also people urinating in the street and on the pavement around …

From the CapeTowner, by Monique Duval, 14th January 2011

A group of businesses that includes pubs, clubs and restaurants in the city centre will be applying for an interdict to prevent the City of Cape Town from implementing the controversial Liquor Trading Hours By-law. The group has met with its lawyers and will be questioning the constitutionality of the by-law. The group known as the Club, Bar and Restaurant Association (CBRA) held a meeting at the Chrome nightclub last week to discuss the issues. Shaan Nordien, owner of Chrome nightclub, said although the association had made submissions and presentations during the comment period, it had not received a response from the City. Mr Nordien met with the association’s legal team on Monday January 10 to discuss the case. “Our lawyers believe we have a strong case and we will be handing a letter to the City soon highlighting the association’s intentions,” Mr Nordien said. He said the main concern of the association was the stipulated cutoff time, which will force all establishments to stop selling alcohol at 2am. He said this will lead to a reduction of trading hours for all establishments. “We are not against the regulation of liquor sales, but this by-law will kill the industry and lead to loss of jobs. We are all licensed establishments and have been operating for years. This is going to cost us millions of rand but we have the funds and we are going to fight this,” Mr Nordien said. He said the interdict would only protect the association’s members. “It is a blanket interdict and will protect all members and establishments who are part of the association, others will not be included,” he said. He said the association’s legal team had found several loop-holes in the by-law and would be proceeding with the application. He said the association would also be suing the City for loss of income following the announcement that the by-law would be enforced on New Year’s Eve.

In a statement released by the City on Tuesday December 28, Councillor Taki Amira, chairperson of the Liquor Policy task team, said that at midnight on New Year’s Eve the bylaw would come into effect. “This means that bars and clubs in business areas will have to close by 2am on Saturday January 1. Those watering holes in or close to residential areas, which may currently enjoy late trading hours, will have to abide by the new legislation and close by 11pm,” he said. However, on Thursday December 30 the City said the by-law would not be implemented immediately but would be “phased in”. “The City would like to allay fears of club and restaurant owners with regards to the enforcement of the City’s new Liquor Trading Days and Hours By-Law. “The by-law will be phased in over the next few months and will not be stringently enforced until all role players have been extensively educated and informed about the new legislation.”

City Safety and Security executive director Richard Bosman said during the initial implementation of the by-law the City’s law enforcement agencies will register complaints from the public and keep a record for future reference. “The City will also register and review the complaints of those affected by the by-law to see how these can best be addressed. “With the implementation of the new smoking regulations the approach taken by law enforcement was first education, support and warning during the initial phase. “This is the approach we will follow with this legislation as well,” Mr Bosman said. However, club owners claim the “damage had already been done” as the initial statement was widely published and deterred party goers from coming into the city.

Vusa Mazula, owner of Zula Sound Bar, said he was annoyed that the first statement was made. “It feels like the whole thing was engineered. How can the City make such a huge statement and then turn around and change its tune? “This by-law will not only have a negative impact on businesses in the city centre but will negatively impact on tourism. “Most party goers only come into the city at 11pm. The busiest time for most clubs is between 1am and 4am. By reducing the hours for the sale of liquor most establishments will effectively only have one hour of trading,” Mr Mazula said. He said the by-law would see businesses run at a loss and in his view clubs will have to implement staff cuts. Mr Amira confirmed that the association had made submissions to about the by-law, but said he was not informed of the letter. He said the by-law was modelled on the Liquor Bill and based on research conducted in other cities around the world.

And while clubs, pubs and restaurants are in a froth over the new by-law, residents have welcomed it. Siranne Ungerer said she hoped the implementation of the by-law would lead to less drunken behaviour and noise in Long Street “We experience noise from the drunken patrons leaving the clubs and pubs and we also have a lot of fights. There are also people urinating in the street and on the pavement around us. “We’ve had our windows broken four times in the last two years due to people fighting and then falling against them,” Ms Ungerer said. One resident, who asked not to be named as she was currently involved in a dispute with a club in Long Street, said she supported the by-law as she hoped it would help to reduce the nuisance caused by noisy party goers.

Piers Allen, who has been living in Long Street since 1997, said he “whole-heartedly” supported the by-law and hoped it would improve the quality of life for residents.“It is with increasing dismay that we have experienced the night-environment being taken over by raucous clubs and bars that have no regard whatsoever for residents or passersby. “We have been fighting a losing battle, together with others including hotels and hostelries, trying to gain the support and assistance of the City to control excessive public noise and nuisance, which arises from so many drinking venues and the excessive consumption of alcohol. “This community-minded effort has seemingly had little appreciable effect on officers of the council: on the contrary – things have worsened considerably over the last 14 years,” Mr Allen said.

In his blog, Constitutionally Speaking, constitutional law expert, Pierre de Vos labels the by-law as “reactionary, misguided and counter productive”. “It is reactionary because it is based on a Christian Nationalist attitude which assumes that we should all go to bed at 2am, that having access to alcohol in a public place after 2am would somehow turn us all into evil sinners and that God will punish us if we were allowed to buy liquor on a Sunday,” he said. The by-law was misguided, in that, “it assumes that if one prohibits the sale of liquor after 2am this will somehow address the scourge of alcoholism and drugs in our community. This is, of course, a completely irrational and mistaken assumption. “Anyone who had visited the United Kingdom at the time when all bars were forced to close at 11pm would know that earlier closing times for bars and pubs do not necessarily prevent people from getting very drunk and making fools of themselves. “There is no evidence to back up the assumptions underlying this by-law,” he said. CBRA members met at Chrome nightclub yesterday, Wednesday January 12, to further discuss the issue, but at the time of going to print the outcome of this meeting was not known.

Copyright Cape Community Newspapers, part of Independent News and Media.