DENVER — A bill that would have pushed back the closing time for bars and nightclubs from 2 a.m. to 3 a.m. was killed off on Thursday after the bill’s sponsors withdrew it in committee.
House Bill 25-1237 “Soft Closing of Alcohol Beverage Establishments” was postponed indefinitely by the House Business Affairs and Labor Committee, after its sponsors, Rep. William Lindstedt, D-Adams County and Rep. Javier Mabrey, D-Denver told the committee they could not get stakeholders to cooperate or agree on the bill “despite a lot of merits.”
The Colorado legislature’s glossary of terms defines a motion to postpone indefinitely as having the “same effect as moving to kill a bill.”
Lindstedt said the bill came out of the Department of Revenue’s Liquor Advisory Committee. It was part of a larger package of recommendations, he said, but was pulled from a bill last year, and brought back this session “thinking we could take on just this little piece of it.”
Current law prohibits the sale of alcohol at retail establishments between the hours of 2 a.m. and 7 a.m. The 2 a.m. timing is legally a hard stop, although, most bars already self-impose a last call of 1:30 a.m. to give them that 1/2 hour to clear the establishment and comply with the law.
Calling the current 2 a.m. law a mad rush and “dangerous,” Lindstedt said giving people another hour to drink would solve that problem.
“We’ve seen a lot of shootings, stabbings, sexual assaults, a lot of drunk driving all at one time,” he said. “It’s hard to enforce; it’s not great for neighborhoods and communities.”
The new law would have allowed the actual sale of alcohol until 2:30 a.m., but consumers would have until 3 a.m. to leave, the idea behind a “soft close.” Linstedt the 30-minute extension of sales a “conservative change.”
“Unfortunately, we didn’t have a great experience getting stakeholders to come together,” he said. “The City of Denver needed to bought in. Law enforcement is still a little bit skeptical on the idea despite a lot of merits.”
He said there was lot of infighting and disagreements, calling it a frustrating experience and adding that he wished people would have engaged because it is a legitimate public safety issue.
Mabrey said he spends a lot of time in downtown Denver and he believes the change in hours makes sense for both public safety and businesses, adding that if given a soft closing option, bars would close at different times.
“Every bar closing at the same time does create problems,” Mabrey said. “Law enforcement in my city believes this makes sense, but I don’t think we are ready to bring the bill to prime time, yet.”
In a news release opposing the bill, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) said a “broad coalition of law enforcement organizations, safety advocates, public health groups, crime victim organizations, and Denver bars and restaurants agreed that this bill was not good for Colorado.”
Mabrey said he did not believe this change would increase drunken driving, instead saying it extends the available time for Ubers.
“That is why we see a lot of drunk driving at the same time, everybody is flagging down an Uber at the same time,” Mabrey said, giving no reason why just extending it an hour wouldn’t push that same scenario to 3 a.m. instead of 2 a.m.
The coalition of opposition disagreed, according to the news release.
“With more deaths and injuries on our Colorado roads and fewer officers across the state, this bill is a risk we can’t afford to take,” the press release said.
