Politicians and friends of politicians and special friends and "volunteers" (the kind that are helping themselves to what's not all theirs) and favor seekers and relatives, sometimes one in the same, should get faced (blitzed, smashed) if that is their thang on their own party dime and golf club time. O.K.
I believe the County and State and Feds And DART and all the others should not make us pay for things like that either.
I have nothing against drunks as far as being any worse or better than K3heads, or guys who wear wife beaters (or white after Labor Day, or boat shoes when they aren't even near water or fountain around which to frolic), 100% apartment haters, rabid partisans, and so forth. I just don't like them faced (pickled) while on duty representin and making me help pay for it. I do not want to pay for it. I'm seeing it way too much. I am not joking.
If you do not believe me, check the cost to benefit analysis (hire one of those impartial liquor economic development lobbyist to run the numbers even); check the metrics with 13 other cities on the proportional per capita liquor spending per city budget, with appropriate adjustments*; make a Richardson council and staff code of ethics where the politicians (inclusive of all staff politicians and beneficiaries) check each other with a breath o meter or coordination test at tax payer billed booze functions, in a closed door meeting, if necessary.
You can vision what the results will be.
*The numbers should also include money spent on liquor by organizations that have so called free money to spend thanks to being assigned tens of thousands of dollars by a tax program arguably for activity brought into the city. The grant is disproportional to their performance and contribution, tax generation. Not all groups are treated equitably. One in particular gets a lot because the right glasses are filled, repeatedly. The right aesthetics and culture, a board clique. Grants can, in one case, amount to the neighborhood of a million dollars in the last ten years, counting related subsidy, to a group that has liquor gushing yet has trouble paying people for legitimate work performed.
In another case, an arm of local government co-mingled with other roles and conflicts, inbred, has nearly an annual tax payer contribution through the city approaching one million, more if you count the extras.
There is a lot of liquor flowing with local government with tax payers paying the tab, directly and indirectly. It's too much, as with some other things.
