The city council confirmed a nocturnal alcohol ban on parts of the lake shore in Starnberg on Thursday.
The regulation applies regardless of the current Corona requirements.
Meanwhile, a resident from Percha has withdrawn his lawsuit against the regulation.
Starnberg
- At first it was only about three words.
When the city council's holiday committee imposed a nocturnal alcohol ban on the Böhler Grund, the Steininger property, the lake promenade and the Bucentaurpark in August last year, the words “to the in” got lost in a place in the text of the regulation where they made no sense .
The administration wanted to have the city council cure it on Thursday evening - and thus triggered a fundamental discussion on the pros and cons of the ban.
The ordinance stipulates that no alcoholic beverages may be consumed at the named locations between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. every day - regardless of the current Corona rules.
It is also not permitted to take them with you, “if the beverages are intended for consumption there under the circumstances,” says the regulation.
In August there was a large majority in favor, only the FDP had voted against it at the time.
Now the Greens and the WPS in particular criticized the regulation.
As “completely exaggerated and exaggerated”, the Green Group leader, Dr.
Franz Sengl the ban.
It is all too late, "when you are no longer allowed to drink beer on the lake promenade," he said.
"It has to be an end to the nodding", demanded WPS City Councilor Dr.
Johannes Glogger.
Ludwig Jägerhuber (CSU) saw it differently.
"There are people who are no longer able to behave properly," he said, urging them to try out the alcohol ban and its effects by the end of the year and then to take stock.
There is no such thing as yet, because: "We passed the ordinance in August, then came the weather change, then autumn," said Mayor Patrick Janik.
He, too, spoke out clearly in favor of the ban.
"A large number of citizens" turned to the administration last year and complained about abuses at the lake, he said.
Above all, bottles lying around and partly broken as well as willfully buried shards were mentioned.
“We didn't make the ban without a reason,” said Janik.
Kerstin Täubner-Benicke (Greens) still wanted to change the regulation - and delete the passage in which it is already forbidden to carry alcohol.
“That would be a complete lifting of the ban,” Janik pointed out.
With a stalemate of 15:15 votes, the city council rejected Täubner-Benickes' proposal by a hairstyle and then passed the regulation in the linguistically correct form.
Michael Mignoli (BLS) meanwhile had a completely different concern.
"It doesn't help if we ban everything in the city and the party people then go to Percha," he said and suggested that the police be contacted quickly in this case.
A resident of Percha had exactly the same fears last year.
As only became known at the meeting, on October 1st he had submitted an application for a regulatory review to the Bavarian Administrative Court (VGH).
He wanted to have the regulation declared ineffective and complained, among other things, that the meadow property between Würm and Lüßbach is not recorded and that there could be a relocation of the events there.
On December 7, 2020, the VGH rejected an application by the plaintiff for the issuance of an interim order, said the responsible head of the city hall, Ludwig Beck.
The Senate assumed that the action was unfounded and that the ordinance was legal.
In the absence of any prospect of success, the plaintiff has meanwhile withdrawn his application entirely.