Editorial: Will Aurora's no-sell list curb alcoholism?
The tragedy of chronic, debilitating alcoholism has many faces. Putting aside for a moment the base human tragedy, there is the very public cost of the multiple rides to the emergency room or detox facilities; emergency personnel at risk from unruly persons; medical interventions; homeless and other social agency interventions; court appearances and more — events driven over and over again by many of the same people.
This is the scenario that has prompted Aurora to try an unusual remedy that other suburbs may consider: Forbid businesses to sell liquor to the city's most chronic alcoholics.
To be named to the “chronic” list in Aurora, a habitual alcoholic must been convicted of six or more alcohol-related offenses, or have been transported six or more times due to alcohol, or a combination of the two — all within 180 days.
At present, no one meets the criteria so there is no list. Should one be necessary, liquor stores and taverns will be prohibited from selling to the people on it, on pain of penalty.
We support Aurora's decision to deal head-on with a sensitive issue. If a “no sell” list makes it harder, even a little, for chronic alcoholics to buy liquor, good. If it persuades establishments to stop serving before a person becomes incapacitated, that's best.
Aurora ultimately considers this a quality-of-life issue. There are hard costs absorbed by police and firefighters and emergency rooms — more than $1 million in the last several years — but when repetitive calls related to chronic alcoholism make them slower to respond to other calls, that is everybody's problem.
Strictly looking at the numbers, Madison, Wisconsin's five-year experiment with a “no-sell” list is discouraging on its face. Considered by Aurora to be the model for its own ordinance, Madison's “no sell” program has not shrunk the number of chronic alcoholics clogging the system.
Madison's 2010 program was devised after an analysis identified 80 “habitually intoxicated persons” who were costing Madison and Dane County $4.35 million annually. Some offenders were in the system literally 60-70 times a year. (Aurora's top offender had 90 calls in one year).
Madison's first list had 17 names and photos; today there are 27. A recent follow-up study showed of the 720 transports to either detox or an ER in six months, 43 percent of those calls involved the same 91 individuals.
Bottom line, “We're still seeing a group of people who (are) responsible for a solid chunk of alcohol-related issues,” said Mark Woulf, the mayor's director of food and alcohol policy. Translation: People who need alcohol badly enough will get it.
But there are benefits. Chief among them is the enhanced relationship between substance abuse workers and police, fire and retailers. It has led to at least one person in Madison getting sober.
How successful is the Madison program? “In short, I don't know,” Woulf says.
It depends, it seems, on your expectations. We hope Aurora is willing to adjust its own expectations based on the data it collects. Ideally, though, the very threat of a list could mean they'll never need it.