October 23, 2003
More On The OLCC's Rule Against Underage Performers And That 'Paperwork Error'
Yesterday, the Willamette Week got around to covering the mysterious paperwork error which threw the OLCC's rule against underage performers into limbo. Strangely, the paper says this happened last week -- whereas I picked this up from The Oregonian back on October 1.
Even more strangely is that the headline on my item was "OLCC Suffers An Oopsie On Underage Performers Rule," whereas the WW item is headlined "OLCC SAYS OOPS!" But I guess I can't allege they got that from me, otherwise they wouldn't be reporting this news as if it just happened last week, now would they?
Anyway, on to the actual item, which pushes back the possible date for reconsideration back a couple of months from how The Oregonian had it:
But don't grab your guitar case and head down to the local watering hole yet, young man. The OLCC has adopted an "emergency rule," keeping musicians and dancers age 18 to 20 from performing where frothy brews are sold until the governor-appointed commission addresses the issue at its February meeting. In the meantime, opponents of the rule are planning to take advantage of the OLCC's gaffe and convince the five sitting commissioners, two of whom are new to the OLCC since the decision was originally made in August 2002, that the rule is unconstitutional and damaging to the local music scene.
The paper quotes an OLCC representative as anticipating the rule passing its unintentional reconsideration, while opponents of the rule (including the ACLU and the local chapter of the American Federation of Musicians) "hope that with a re-examination, the state commission will retire the rule."
And then there's a recent email I received from Dan Bodi, who manages his son's band Sh!ft, composed entirely of minors. Here's what Bodi claims as to the nature of the mysterious paperwork error:
The OLCC failed to submit their proposed rule change to the Legislative Counsel ... which is required by law. The purpose of the law is to allow the Legislative Counsel to review any possible conflicts that the proposed rule change would have with current State Statutes. The proposed rule change is in direct conflict with Statutes which have been around for decades, and the OLCC knew this, so they just bypassed the law figuring no one would make a big stink about it, as it was just affecting young people that no one cares about anyway.
Bodi also chastises the ACLU for coming to conclusions about this rule that Bodi claims to have reached a year ago through no more than a dozen telephone calls. As for challenging the rule: "If something isn't done to reverse this ridiculous situation by the end of the year," wrote Bodi, "I fully intend to file an unlawful employment discrimination lawsuit against the State of Oregon on behalf of my son, and all of his band members."