It’s funny what people will get worked up about sometimes. I’d been tending to ignore this dogs-on-patios issue because I thought it was such a silly thing to have a debate about. Apparently, it’s big enough to get City Council members to have press conferences and local attention grabbers to take the opportunity to grandstand. Why the hell does Marc Katz have an opinion on this anyway? Is he intending to run for mayor again this year? Good luck with that.
The issue? Whether or not restaurants should be allowed to have dogs on their patios. Not whether or not they should be able to have them on tables or in the restaurant, but if they’re allowed on an outside patio. I think this whole ruckus started last year when Austin/Travis County Health inspectors started issuing warnings to Freddie’s Place and Austin Java Company among others for having dogs on the patio. This prompted Freddie’s to begin deputizing dogs in an attempt to get around the rule. Now, the City Council has taken up the issue and will have a hearing tomorrow night on whether or not to change the city law and explicitly allow restaurants to choose to allow or not allow dogs on outdoor patios.
I’m wondering who would have a problem with this? I remember several years ago that Gingerman stopped allowing dogs after an incident at Lovejoy’s where a patron was bitten in the face by a dog, but that’s not a health issue. Several people have pointed out as part of the debate that it’s ok to have a grackle shit in your food, but it’s not ok for a dog to be sitting on the ground anywhere near your table? Makes perfect sense.
BTW, that photogenic fellow in the photo is my housemate of nearly 10 years and he has no problem with dogs on the patio as long as they stay away from his ball.
