Protests over Six Flags Over Texas alcohol permit begins

Posted Friday, January 4, 2008 11:35 AM | Contributed by Jeff

Citing public safety and concerns about underage drinking, more than 60 people showed up at a town-hall meeting Thursday night to learn how to protest Six Flags' application to sell alcohol at its parks in Arlington. The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission decided to hold the informational meeting after receiving more than 600 phone calls since Six Flags Over Texas and Six Flags Hurricane Harbor posted signs Dec. 17 saying the parks were applying for liquor licenses.

Read more from The Star-Telegram and AP via The Houston Chronicle.

Related parks

Friday, January 4, 2008 11:39 AM
I'm no lawyer, but I don't think the commission has any legal ground to deny the permit.

What irritates me most about this, aside from the asinine assertion that alcohol consumption automatically means drunk people everywhere, is that there isn't even any protest being made in some context that involves the community itself. Usually it's because there's a school nearby or whatever. This is just people who want to tell Six Flags how to run their business.

Here's a thought, if you don't like them selling beer, don't go to the park. That hardly seems complicated to me.

+0
Friday, January 4, 2008 12:26 PM
the 'concerns citizens for whatever' community group opposing it is apparently part of Arlington City according to that website.

I bet the park was there before their houses were ;)*** This post was edited by Rye.D.Ziner 1/4/2008 12:27:19 PM ***

+0
Friday, January 4, 2008 12:43 PM
Opponents of the application to sell alcohol at Six Flags Over Texas and Six Flags Hurricane Harbor must write to the TABC, providing the parks' names and legal grounds for denying the permit, such as a threat to public safety or the public's sense of decency. The TABC cannot deny a permit simply because a protest is filed, and the agency will not take sides.

If the commission's legal department agrees that there are sufficient legal grounds to deny the application, it will order a hearing on the issue before the State Office of Administrative Hearings or the Tarrant County judge.

Concerned citizens who just don't like the idea of alcohol being sold at the park isn't enough, according to the above, to have a permit denied.

And I recall it being mentioned elsewhere, but I wouldn't be surprised that the Pastor of that Baptist Church is behind most of those called in complaints.

+0
Friday, January 4, 2008 3:19 PM
Don't these people have lives somewhere?
+0
Friday, January 4, 2008 3:31 PM
[cue music and Sally Strothers]

Sadly Chris, no.

And that's why we're asking you to give a small part of yourself this holiday season. Give what you can to GNoPAL. GNoPAL (Give Nosy People A Life) helps to provide small town housewives and big town know-it-alls something to do that keeps them from getting in other peoples business. For just pennies a day, you too can help make a difference.

So please call 1-800-4-GNOPAL (1-800-446-6725) and do what you can to stop this pandemic of nosy people disturbing other peoples business.

+0
Friday, January 4, 2008 3:52 PM
Perhaps SIX is listening to a poster on the Yahoo Finance board (dadgolfer1) who had this to say about the success of the company:

"Sexually angled theme parks is the only salvation here. The family thing isn't working. Perhaps they could also set aside one park specifically for gangs and thugs with a lot of violent rides and plenty of alcohol."

+0
Friday, January 4, 2008 4:38 PM
Let's see how many family activities there are that may also involve beer:

Viewing sporting events, picnics, dinner, watching TV at home, any family get together, playing many sports (golf, for instance)...

Since when did family and alcohol become mutually exclusive?

+0
Friday, January 4, 2008 4:56 PM
If they are worried about people getting drunk, I dont think its going to be a problem. Knowing Six Flags, they will be serving $10 watered down beer.

As for underage, how hard is it to card someone. No ID, no sale.

+0
Friday, January 4, 2008 5:45 PM
I find the whole concept of opposing beer sales quite funny. They just need to drive 4 1/2 hours South to Six Flags Fiesta Texas, Schlitterbahn and SeaWorld and see that there is no concern.

We had the best time at all these parks and the beer was awesome. At Fiesta Texas we even walked around with the beer and it was one of the safest places we have been.

Those that are opposing it must not be able to handle their drinks very well.

+0
Friday, January 4, 2008 7:21 PM
No one would even blink if a UK park did this.

R.

+0
Friday, January 4, 2008 8:19 PM
Welcome to the red states Rick!

+0
Friday, January 4, 2008 9:12 PM
Man I'm guessing it's a bunch of retired people who have nothing else better to do with their time than bit*h.

I live in Jerry Falwell land and it's so bad here that our Single A ball team had to start games early when they shot fireworks off. People said that 10 was way to late for that kind of thing. Man maybe some of these brain washed folks rolled down to Texas.. VA didn't kill enough people for their taste.

+0
Friday, January 4, 2008 9:24 PM
^? I'm guessing your referring to the dealth penalty on that last line, incidentally NJ just abolished theirs last week so I think they're safe now from these people relocating to Jackson after they start tapping kegs on The Giant !*** This post was edited by Rye.D.Ziner 1/4/2008 9:26:00 PM ***
+0
Friday, January 4, 2008 10:16 PM
Insane. What more is there to say?
+0
Saturday, January 5, 2008 7:15 AM
An opinion, but an experienced one.

This is a Six flags park. Thats not bad, but its a Six flags park, in Texas. So its clear the company is in debt, which we established this a few years back. New CEO, new game plan, new objectives to accomidate the current financial situation. The objective of any theme park operator is to make money. In some cases, they pour HUGE amounts of money when Ceo A is in position, and then Ceo B steps in to clean up the mess. The debt accumulated is thanks to the high number of attractions installed, parks purchased, and various "guest services" that money was spent on to attempt to better parks throughout the chain, by Ceo A. This was the game plan a few years back and set the company in debt. But along the way, so many variables changed and several things went unforeseen. In PARTICULAR, Park Operations. So you have your full-time managers, your supervisors, who run "the best park in the company" or so the represent themselves as to thier employees. This is drive for a bonus!

Anyway, point being. This drive for bonus, results in some determination to "up" the operation of each (thier) park. However, this requires a tool called "communication" which is essential to maintain a consistent, clean, efficient, and safe operation. As now given, the operation of the *majority* of Six flags parks, is not as...detailed, as other operators. Now, you have a run down operation as a result of overgrown parks, lack of staffing, major budget cuts because paying off your rides became nearly impossible with the economy, and a small percentage of competition. You re-new, re-format, and utilize your employees as your "success'. But think for a moment, If you splurge on feasibility studies, engineering, construction, and materials for mass parks to result in debt, are you really going to achieve "Operations Excellence" by means of your employees, and succeed out of -$2 Billion?

Thats the history in sum, heres our problem thats very forseeable. A company in debt needs to make money. So installing small family attractions is always a good approach, and aiming for a more "family oriented" group is honestly, an excellent idea. This is the theme park industry, thats the focus. I personally love thrills, but this is a good approach. The guy is thinking great, I'll give him points for that. However, again, re-organizing, and personality tests on applications are not going to improve your "operations excellence", but allow the Human Resources manager to work a little less "harder" each day. So, we have the idea now, Operations is not the most organized, or detailed for the size of a typical six flags theme park, as it should be. Think, you're hosting 65,000 people on a weekend, whom you're strapping into a machine that will subject them to not-so-common changes in gravity, both vertically, and laterally; charging them an arm, leg, and/or every part potentially "donor-able" they own to do so; and consuming what life that remains when they decided to grab a bite to eat. When your operations management is nothing close to effective for accommodating high volume, and your employees chose to stop sending trains because a drunk guest is nagging them...the result is not the fact that the operator is now disturbed; the line stops moving, the mass number of guests waiting in line become annoyed, tired, angered, and now, they are drunk. Consequentially, you have a larger-than-usual quantity of intoxicated guests, and you are already struggling to sustain your operation day-in, day out; which needless to say, is still a struggle for Six Flags over Texas.

What is to say, this park will be able to accommodate this new challenge AND support an efficent operation, when doing so for the operation is already a challenge?

This is the state of Texas. Texans love to drink. So you have these 500-600 calls against is, and it effecting the "family oriented" atmosphere. But how certain are we that over what it effects, that six flags can actually handle this new change, with the negative results that are more than guaranteed to come? For being so focused on family themes and financial improvement, why pursue an option with such potential negative results? Has Six Flags not learned from the idea of risk yet? Or, maybe it’s just a good option for the company since it has never been tried…

…still, deeper potential outcomes not being overlooked. Maybe one day the company’s sense for operation will be gauged by someone correctly.

Again, only an opinion..Regarding its application and potential result.

*** This post was edited by 1/5/2008 7:25:02 AM ***

+0
Saturday, January 5, 2008 7:39 AM
...but not that I'm stating everyone who drinks, is "drunk". I'm stating, "drunk" will happen. And when it does, Six flags over Texas will be caught up in a problem within thier park, that they created. A problem that will only accumulate to the consistent problem they refer to as "operations excellence".

(how did my name not show up there, on the first post?)

*** This post was edited by FreezeCoaster 1/5/2008 7:42:00 AM ****** This post was edited by FreezeCoaster 1/5/2008 7:48:03 AM ***

+0
Saturday, January 5, 2008 12:19 PM
Most of the parks I've ever been to serve alcohol, and even when I have seen people that I suspect are drunk, it rarely created any "problem."
+0
Saturday, January 5, 2008 12:49 PM
^seems ridiculus to apply for a permit to sell beer when their family values strategy won't allow for selling it at concerts - the park in Jersey adopted a policy this year banning alcohol from rock shows, I actually got kicked out of a concert for having a brew by some security gaurd pipsqeak and there were no signs posted that it was not allowed, meanwhile they were selling it next door a best-of-west. go figure. Before the Red Zone regime they used to sell it INSIDE the concert venue. I miss the Gary Story era :(*** This post was edited by Rye.D.Ziner 1/5/2008 12:53:01 PM ***
+0
Saturday, January 5, 2008 1:02 PM
I think they should have clearly marked designated drinking zones well away from main midways and paths, that way anyone who doesn't want to be exposed to second hand drinking doesn't have to be. Of course this could lead to spontaneous parties and possibly these zones could be the place to be nearing the end of the night.
*** This post was edited by P18 1/5/2008 1:05:08 PM ***
+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2018, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...