Later Hours for Bars?

Update on November 4, 2015 — Summary Position and Hearing Notice

I want to thank everyone who has taken the time to comment here or to contact me by email or phone about his legislation. This is a local bill and, especially on local issues, I am heavily guided by the expressed preferences of my constituents.

From all the feedback we have received, it is clear that opinion is divided on the issue of extending bar hours, both among the public in Boston and among my colleagues who represent Boston. It is also clear that there are a number of possible approaches to how to roll out extended hours.

This legislation was filed for the City of Boston, although it is worded broadly to apply to other municipalities. The legislation gives little structure to the extension of hours and regulatory streamlining — leaving the issues entirely up to the affected municipalities. Based on the feedback we have received, the wiser course would seem to be for the Mayor and the City Council to work together to develop a more limited approach with broader support within the city. On the foundation of that support, the legislature would be in a position to pass legislation implementing that approach. My recommendation to the Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure will be to take no action on the bill.

Formal Hearing is set for November 10 at 1PM in Room A-2 in the State House. If you do wish to testify, it is a good idea to arrive a little early and sign up. Witnesses are usually called more or less in the order that they sign up.

Add-on on December 19, 2015

Pretty much absent from the conversation below was a discussion of the public health impacts of a change in bar hours. Limitation of bar hours is part of the panoply of rules that we have in place to prevent harm from alcohol abuse. When and if this issue is revisited by the City Council or the legislature, we should consider the evidence from other jurisdiction as to whether later bar hours can increase various kinds of harms.

Update on July 14, 2015

I was alerted by a constituent that 24/7 language had been tucked in as Section 205 of the pending draft of the municipal modernization bill. I was able to prevent this from going through without full vetting. Instead, there will be a study of the concept.

I’ve received questions about Senate 127, An Act Modernizing the Business Licensing Process (and the identical House companion bill, House 161).

I was pleased to sponsor this bill for the Mayor, because I think it will help some of the city’s neighborhoods become more vital, while at the same time continuing to allow other neighborhoods to express their preferences for less activity.

The aspect of the bill most likely to raise concerns for people is the provision that would allow a municipality to grant or modify licenses to bars to stay open past two AM. Currently, the statewide alcohol licensing rules prohibit any bar from being open between 2AM and 8AM, regardless of local preferences. The change would permit municipalities inside the MBTA service area to decide to grant later licenses.

On this point, the City has stated:

If this legislation is approved, the City would conduct a public process to determine potential locations for a pilot program to explore whether a post-2 a.m. model works in Boston. Any establishment within a pilot program area that applies for a later closing time would be subject to the same community process that is currently in place for licensees, who wish to modify their liquor license agreement.

The bill is just at an early stage and I look forward to your input. The bill does need vetting and I welcome all concerns. Nothing about it is set in stone. It is tentatively scheduled for an initial public hearing on 11/10/15 at 1:00 p.m. in the statehouse.

Below, please find additional explanation authored by Mayor Walsh’s administration. Thank you to Kaitlin Passararo on the Mayor’s team for providing these materials.

Problem: In an attempt to grow and support our small business community, the City of Boston is committed to streamlining the licensing and permitting process. This process will eliminate duplication and unnecessary steps while also maintaining the robust community process we require in the City of Boston for all business establishments. In many instances, however, State Law prohibits the City from taking innovative steps to reform the regulatory process and makes no distinction between a small business and larger chain establishments. This one-size-fits-all licensing model acts as a hindrance to business development in our neighborhoods.

What Would S.127/H.161 Accomplish?

  1. Provide local discretion to eliminate certain licenses that are antiquated such as those for bowling alleys and billiard tables. This portion of the legislation also provides discretion to municipalities to waive the live and non-live entertainment licensing requirements for small establishments on a case by case basis, with community input, for such things as background music or having a single performer at a coffee shop. H.127/H.161 is one part of the Mayor’s larger strategy to better support small businesses in the City of Boston. To date, this strategy includes:
    • The launch of a new permitting system in October of 2015 that will make the process quicker, easier, and more predictable
    • The creation of a separate Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) process for small businesses, doubled the hearing capacity for ZBA applications, which reduced wait times for ZBA hearings by four months
    • Making businesses such as art galleries or bakeries (low-impact) allowed uses in the zoning code in all business districts
  2. Allow municipalities served by the MBTA to allow bars and restaurants to stay open past 2 a.m. should they chose to adopt such a provision. If this legislation is approved, the City would conduct a public process to determine potential locations for a pilot program to explore whether a post-2 a.m. model works in Boston. Any establishment within a pilot program area that applies for a later closing time would be subject to the same community process that is currently in place for licensees, who wish to modify their liquor license agreement.

The Mayor’s office also supplied this Section-by-Section analysis of the bill:

  • Section One: Allows municipalities, served by the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, to be exempt from the state law that prohibits the sale of alcohol at bars and restaurants between the hours of 2 a.m. and 8 a.m.
  • Section Two: Allows municipalities to eliminate the Common Victuallers (CV) license requirement for non-alcohol establishments.
  • Section Three: Allows municipalities to eliminate specialty licenses for billiard tables and bowling alleys.
  • Section Four: Allows municipalities to eliminate specialty licenses for automatic amusement devices.
  • Section Five: Allows municipalities to set a maximum capacity for establishments that charge admission under which live and non- entertainment licenses are not required.
  • Section Six: Allows municipalities to set a maximum capacity for food service or alcohol establishments under which live and non- entertainment licenses are not required.
  • Section Seven: Allow municipalities to eliminate specialty licenses for fortune tellers.

For more background on the various licenses required in the City (and, implicitly, the motivation for streamlining them) see this explanatory document also prepared by the Walsh administration.

Published by Will Brownsberger

Will Brownsberger is State Senator from the Second Suffolk and Middlesex District.

110 replies on “Later Hours for Bars?”

  1. Sounds great if the late hours are for downtown and the seaport area. If this is in my neighborhood of Allston/Brighton we do not need later hours or more taverns on Harvard Ave. We need sit down restaraunts where families and adults can enjoy dinner and a converstation. Bowling alleys are a great idea, we had to go to Somerville to bowl last weekend. I should be spending my $$ in Boston and riding the T. TY

  2. As a resident of Allston I have too often had my sleep disturbed with loud noise coming from inebriated people. A community is not strengthened or made more vital with longer bar hours Aure it could benefit some business people but can only increase crime and Lowe the quality of life doe residents. It is a short-sided idea that ultimately will cause more harm than good.

    1. I don’t blame you at all. Even though Allston/Brighton is home to many young adults, I don’t think late closing hours would be of benefit to anybody

  3. About time Boston catch-up and live up to the world class city accolades that were being thrown out by the Olympic proponents. The Fenway is a great example of where extended hours would be most appropriate as most of the bars and nightclubs are in an area segregated from residential.

  4. I support this initiative providing that sufficient transportation options are available. I believe the T recently ended its late hours program. Perhaps some sort of late hour licensing fee could be used to help the T pay for the extra service?

  5. I think this is a great idea! Neighborhoods should be allowed to decide this for themselves. I agree with the comments that this should be paired with lengthened T hours so that people are able to get home.

  6. I completely oppose Section 1 anywhere near a residential neighborhood.

    No responsible person has any need to buy more bar drinks after 2:00 a.m.

    I live in a residential neighborhood, but just one block away are 3 bars, and we already have too many drunken, out-of-control lunatics shooting out of them after 2:00 a.m.

    The bars and the City can’t control these customers now, so extending hours will only make it worse.

    1. I agree on keeping the late hours away from our more traditionally residential neighborhoods.

  7. The City is best served by limiting late closing hours to certain areas of the City on a permanent basis. Those areas that seem obvious to me are The Seaport, the Boston Garden/North Station area,a tight area around Fenway Park and the Financial District/Downtown Crossing neighborhood. The borders should be kept tight where necessary or at the request of residents.

    Based on my familiarity with the neighborhoods of Back Bay, Beacon Hill, and Bay Village – I recommend considering allowing the hotel bars and restaurants to have the privilege of later hours. I don’t think there will be a big fight over that.

  8. I’m strongly opposed to alcohol hours being extended, even if it’s just a pilot in certain areas. It’s bad for everyone! There is NO positive reason, NONE, for a business to be serving alcoholic beverages beyond two am unless you’re looking to up the death count by alcohol poisoning in our area. Living in Brighton I see the devastation caused by the intoxicated people who’ve puked all over the sidewalk after getting into a fistfight with their equally drunk buddies. Financial motives are a reprehensible reason to endanger the public health and safety of the waterfront, downtown and the region as a whole by allowing people to drink more alcohol for a longer time!
    I wonder what the Massachusetts Department of Public Health thinks about this.

  9. Section 1 is the only proposed section to which I have serious objection. This is on record at Senator Brownsburger’s office as well. Sine we are a “college town,” we already suffer the effects of excessive drinking and the obnoxious behavior that goes with it. No one needs to get more drink in the extra hour or two the place might be able to keep serving. In Cleveland Circle, it would only serve to make the Eye and Nose sore (from the smokers hanging out outside) of Mary Ann’s bar – which the city should be working to shut down, not grant more time to deepen the stupor of its customers. No, I’m not over there at two or three in the morning, but I do go around with gloves and a trash bag to clean up on weekends. The more drunk they are, the more filth on the streets the next morning
    If people can’t get sufficiently stinking drunk by two AM, there’s no reason to give them time to keep trying.
    I’m surprised and sad to see this nonsense coming from the Mayor, who said he was committed to getting the cycle of students and absentee landlords under control. In the neighborhoods, we’ve seen absolutely no changes, no enforcement of promised regulations (no more than four? Nothing. $25 charge for chane of tenants? Nothing) and now the Mayor wants to give this same crowd (working people don’t stay out all night drinking — the students would be the only ones who would be taking advantage of this new “freedom”; we ARE talking about students when we discuss this issue — more time to get more drunk. No, no. This is a terrible idea.
    Thank you

    Janet Kenney
    52 Strathmore Road

    1. Janet, I hear clearly the concerns about later hours in Brighton. And I know other people have similar concerns in other quiet neighborhoods. No one is advocating later hours in Brighton (or Back bay, for that matter). The only neighborhood the Mayor has specifically suggested is the Seaport.

      But do you oppose later hours for all neighborhoods? Or is it that you lack confidence in the process to limit the expansion once it is allowed. We may be able to narrow the proposal or put tighter controls on it to address that concerned about uncontrolled expansion.

  10. I am not in favor of longer bar hours. What makes a neighborhood vital is a variety of offerings for adults and children. Entertainment, shopping, Green space, and restaurants bring people to a neighborhood. A bar that is open until 3 AM, 4 AM or 5 AM is not catering to the majority of the population that would find it more of a public nuisance than a neighborhood enhancement.

  11. I think it makes sense to move in this direction and a pilot program would allow for a measured rollout.

    I do think Boston is at a competitive advantage with such early closing hours.


  12. I agree that allowing bars open past 2 am would benefit the city. In my opinion, it’s not so much about being able to drink until all hours in the night… but when apartments in the city are so small, it would be nice to have somewhere to hang out and end the night while sipping on a beer. I think Seaport would be a great beginning.

  13. I strongly would support this measure. Boston is being kept from becoming a true world-class city by the fact that it has very limited night life that closes much earlier than most other comparable metropolitan areas. This would go a long way toward making Boston more attractive to young people, help businesses, and bring us on par with truly world-class cities. The demand is there, so there really is no downside. Anyone who thinks otherwise, is just scared of change and progress.

  14. No to section 1! In Brighton we already have loud drunks staggering down the street late at night when all the bars close. At least we know this ends at 2am now and we can sleep afterwards. A steady stream all through the night would not be good.

  15. It’s about time Boston joined the 21st century. The city of today shouldn’t be dealing with these antiquated requirements, some of which probably date to the Prohibition era (almost a hundred years ago). I only wish a bill like this was filed decades ago. Senator Brownsberger has my FULL support!!!

  16. Senator, I oppose this for the following reasons:

    1) The state has a serious alcohol addiction problem already. If people need a drink after 2am let it be in their home. Is the added revenue this bill promotes really going to offset the added police, transport and social costs? I dispute the notion that nightclubs & bars not opening past 2 keeps Boston from being world-class. If that is the goal then entice shops and businesses (that close pre 2am) to open in the plethora of vacant commercial space in the city.
    2) The T is stressed, it needs repair, not added expense of transporting more people at times when infrastructure repairs can be made.
    3) If the goal is to increase revenue to the bar/restaurant business then reinstate Happy Hour. The current structure can tolerate the volume and potential disorderly behavior earlier in the day, not late at night.

  17. I’m against the bars and taverns being open past 2 AM. What good can come from having an establishment open after that hour. It’s not fair to the staff and their families nor to anyone who happens to live in the neighborhood or where the patrons are dropped off after leaving the bars.

    We need to encourage social drinking and this would not be in that category.

    I live at 40 St. Botolph St #37B

  18. Boston NEEDS a later curfew for bars/clubs. It makes us look ignorant and uncultured (not to mention old and crotchety). We should be ashamed that there is currently NO place in Boston to go after 2am and hear live music/DJ’s/comedy or anything at all. Lets catch up! I live in Jamaica Plain

  19. I’m not a big fan of this idea in the Fenway, since we have problems already with drunken, loud college kids walking down our residential streets at 2AM. So now they’ll be wreaking their havoc even later into the wee hours? Is the T going to run longer hours as well?

    1. For neighborhoods that are heavily residential, like the Fenway where I am a homeowner, this is a terrible idea. We already have problems with noise and inappropriate behavior (mostly by inebriated college students) with a 2am closing time at the local bar.

      I can see this benefiting just a few areas of the city which are not primarily residential, such as the Seaport district, or Downtown Crossing. I believe the final wording of the bill should allow later closing times ONLY in non-residential neighborhoods.

  20. Dear Senator Brownsberger,

    As a homeowner and lifelong resident of Allston, I strongly oppose the bill allowing bars and liquor licensing establishments to stay open past 2:00 am. My residential home is on the MBTA bus Route 66. From early morning (starting at 5:00 am) we live with speeding trucks, construction vehicles, buses using our street. While waiting for the traffic light to change, we are disturbed by idling trucks downshifting and idling with diesel fumes that we breath, the exceptionally loud MBTA buses (they are so loud, you cannot carry on a conversation until the bus moves away). Having intoxicated people hanging around the streets all hours of the night is a bad idea and I fear it would cause more crime, graffiti, trash and disturbances to those of us who need to have a few hours of peace and quiet. Thank you for any help you may provide to us in voting against this bill.

  21. I fully support this bill! This sounds like an excellent remedy to Boston’s frustrating night life.

    Unfortunately the night life does not suddenly grind to a halt at 2:00 am, but annoying things such as last calls at 1:30 am or prior and not being allowed into bars after 1:00 am happen all too often. The early closing time makes a night out in Boston feel so rushed and people drink faster because of this. I have had more casual nights out in NYC and Miami where it still seems “normal” at 2:00 am (or later), yet I know that Boston is freaking out as everyone is scrambling for their final drinks and a ride home all at once.

    I think that allowing a later closing time (neighborhood appropriate) for bars would boost the activity in the city and incentivize other businesses to stay open later as well (finding convenient quality food after midnight is a disaster). Why live in a city if everything shuts down early? This bill could only have a positive impact on our economy.

    With the late-night T running on weekends and the combination of Uber, Lyft and cabs, I don’t see a transportation problem at all. I would not expect an increase in DUI due to this change. I have numerous “party animal” friends that never drink and drive because it’s so convenient to get around here. Extending bar hours would alleviate the 2 am rush for a ride home. Does everyone forget there are cities open much later that have terrible public transit and do not experience significant issues (Miami, Las Vegas, New Orleans, Atlanta)?

    The changes in this bill will be a great stride towards Boston becoming a world class city that attracts people of all ages. We have a serious problem retaining college students and there is a huge gap in demographics due to the lack of 25-35 year olds. This is because this city is catered to college students and “empty nesters”. This bill will make a significant improvement of our city’s culture and socioeconomic status and I look forward to it becoming law.

  22. As a resident of Brighton (with 3 kids) I absolutely support this bill.

    The current 2AM curfew is not only outdated but exactly the reason why so many drunk loud people run back to the neighborhoods to continue partying after hours — 2am is way too early to stop partying.

    The solution is simple: Let people party inside bars and clubs until they tire out.

    And with lack of legal outlets (bars and clubs are closed) they head back to the neighborhoods for house parties.
    My residential street in Brighton becomes annoyingly loud exactly at 2AM. Let people come home at 5am when they are exhausted and ready to sleep.

    Miami, Nyc, Chicago, most European cities all are 24 hour cities. Boston should join the club.

    Excellent proposal and long overdue!

  23. this is completely irresponsible legislation as no one but the bar owners benefit. Late night closings means more crime, more rowdy early morning drunk behavior, more vandalism. So they want to make Boston into a party city like Miami and Vegas.

    Should this pass I hope 10 new bars operating till 4am open up in Brownsberger’s Belmont neighborhood preferably on his street. Can’t believe I’d ever see the day where an elected official representing Allston-Brighton would push such irresponsible legislation.

  24. Senator Brownsberger
    After reading your proposed legislation and the comments posted here, I think there is a need to clarify what this bill would change. The proposed legislation (S127) would eliminate the requirement for any closing time in communities served by the MBTA. That is what it says. People (including yourself) may not believe that 24 hour licenses would ever be issued, but that’s what your legislation would allow if passed as written. Much of the discussion has been around extending hours beyond 2AM. Under your legislation, it would be up to 2 people (2/3 majority on a 3 member Board in Boston) to determine if and when any licensed premise would have to close at all. If there is a demand for later hours in certain areas of the city then a bill that is more specific in terms of both the areas and times should be filed. This bill goes far beyond that.
    Paul Berkeley

  25. Please consider addressing, in this bill, an adjustment to the limit on alcohol licenses. Let the market determine the need by releasing more non-transferable licenses. This will also address the monopoly system of selling licenses as pieces of equity.

  26. For the city, the Mayor might want to think about more than one pilot at a time. Several pilots might generate useful comparisons.

  27. Letting bars stay open later makes sense if we combine it with: 1) letting non-alcoholic restaurants stay open later, so people can have places to sober up; and 2) imposing heavy penalties on bars who serve people that are already drunk.

  28. I believe it should be up to the local businesses, customers, and residents when hours of operation should be. Many other cities allow bars to be open pay two AM, and it is beneficial both for the local economy and the attractiveness of the city to outsiders.

  29. What we need are expanded hours for the T and for the T to run on time and consistently and for MBTA employees to behave professionally toward their customers. We *do not* need longer hours for bars, especially when the T stops running before the bars close. Why don’t you ask us what we really need instead of trying to get us to sign up for something we don’t need or want?

  30. As an Allston resident since 1981 and a home owner here, I oppose extending bar hours in my community. I believe later bar hours would do little to enhance the quality of life here.

    But first, I have lost count of the number of replies that suggest extending bar hours would make Boston a ‘world class city.’ Our medical facilities, colleges and universities, our cutting edge research centers and businesses and our unique and important history are what I would call world class. I also doubt that any of the folks who come to Boston to attend, visit or be treated at the above mentioned attractions say: “I can only drink until 2 a.m.? Sorry I’m not coming.”

    As for Allston-Brighton specifically, there is more to building community than extending bar hours. The negative effects of alcohol abuse are well known and Allston-Brighton has more than its share.

    Finally, for those who apologize for or are embarrassed by 2 .m. closings (your comments are here), perhaps you’re in the wrong town.

    Bob Pessek
    High Rock Way, Allston

    1. Typical comment of a grumpy old Bostonian. “If you don’t like something here, get out!”. Furthermore, I don’t understand why anyone outside the ages of 18 to 25 lives in Allston.

      Boston is NOT a world class city due to the things you mention (medical facilities, colleges, etc.). Those things do not attract people to live here. I know people that completed a residency at MGH to have it on their resume. They were bored after only a year here and left. And so many of our college student flee to world class cities like NYC and LA once they graduate.

      It’s time for a change! And it can’t hurt to try a pilot program.

      1. Joe writes: “Furthermore, I don’t understand why anyone outside the ages of 18 to 25 lives in Allston.” It’s juvenile and very insulting to the many people who are working hard to make Allston a real neighborhood and home to all demographics. That clueless statement alone discredits the rest of the posting.

  31. I support this legislation in part. I agree that certain areas of the city need more discretion to attract business and improve our city’s image for conventions and entertainment.

    My concern is that Boston is a very blended city with residential and commercial. As one who lives in a business area where there are ample bars and college students, I am concerned about my safety and quality of life should the establishments near my apartment building be open this late.

    I would like to see more deliberate language regarding the types of establishments or the location of such establishments.

  32. As a mid-twenties resident of the greater Boston area I do support extending the business hours. Later closings would allow for people to leave on their own time (many probably at or before 2am) and not rush crowds into the streets right after last call. The crowds of mostly intoxicated people leads to conflicts when taxis can’t meet the sudden demand of everyone trying to get home.

    I know first hand of some New Yorkers that have visited Boston and find it to be juvenile that there is basically a city-wide 2am curfew. I tend to agree with them.

  33. As a lifelong Allston/Brighton resident I would prefer it if the liquor licences would not be changed to a later hour for the Allston/Brighton area regardless of T access. This is a diverse residential area WITH MANY FAMILIES which should receive the same care and respect that our neighboring towns and cities receive. (Watertown, Brookline, Newton,& Cambridge) Those choosing to stay out late can easily go downtown(Boston)to relax and unwind.

  34. Will, I support this bill as I think local communities are in the best position to determine what works for them. For example, the scenes at the Marriot Hotel Bar in the Seaport and Society on High in the financial district are VERY different than college bars in Allston/Brighton.

    1. I do support local self-determination and if the Mayor and the City Council come forward with a consensus plan I am very likely to support it. However, there is no such plan. On the contrary, there appears to be wide disagreement about how this should look in Boston.

  35. Is there anything that allows a municipality to create specific areas where the legislation or any part of it is allowed and to create other areas where none of the legislation or just parts of the rules are not allowed?

    I appreciate this notice, Will.

  36. I agree with some of the comments here,
    esp. those pointing out that, at least to date, the Seaport is a much different scene, much less rowdy, than Allston Brighton or Kenmore.
    That may change as families move to the Seaport.
    As an Audubon Circle resident and activist for 40 years, with students and Red Sox fans here, who do tend to be rowdy, I cannot support extending bar hours in this residential area or any other. Also, I completely agree with the writer who stated
    that Boston does not need later closing hours for bars to be a world-class city. It clearly already is.

    1. When you say Boston “clearly already is” a “world-class city,” I must confess that I haven’t a clue what you mean. There is clearly a demand for later hours in Boston, which you don’t want because you disapprove of people staying out late. We all know that’s the real reason. Stop pretending it’s for “families” and own up to what’s really happening here – Puritanism.

  37. As a street performer who depends solely on Boston’s nightlife scene, I support this bill immensely. This bill also gives local businesses more flexibility in terms of needing an entertainment license, which would open up so much more opportunity for local musicians and DJs who are starving for gigs.

  38. This city needs to extend bar hours. I am a young entrepreneur in Boston and the largest struggle we have is identifying young talent to join the company.

    Older adults cannot see it but most of the college demographic leaves Boston for New York City, which has become “the world-class city.” Young companies are making Boston great. We are the reason the Sea Port has become the new Sea Port, we are the ones that use the MBTA system. We are the ones that work late hours Monday-Friday and even Saturday in all the big banks and consulting firms. We brought the Food Trucks that everyone in the city loves. It is because of us Boston has become so great in the past years.

    To label the majority of Boston citizens that take part in the night life “rowdy” is extremely frustrating. Extending hours even just one more hour would not change the way people behave at night or make the situation any worse. The majority of the city wants bars to be open later they just don’t get represented fairly at city hall.

    I think it’s time to give the group that truly runs this city something they want and frankly deserve for all the work they put in every day. It won’t hurt anyone.

  39. As usual, Massachusetts is re-inventing the wheel. The world is already filled with cities that have later closing hours, and indeed some cities where there are no closing hours at all. The results? Cats and dogs living together? Mass hysteria? Of course not. Nothing happens. The world keeps turning, late licenses are extended to establishments in suitable locations with suitable precautions taken, and grown adults who want to go out later can do so.

    In Berlin there are 24-hour entertainment licenses. The dancing goes on all night, and indeed into the following day, and the impact on “families” is nil because families DON’T DO TO DANCE CLUBS.

  40. Please do not extend the open hours for bars and clubs in Boston. Areas do not become more ‘vital ‘ after 2PM, they become loud and out of control. Actually, nothing is gained for the communities when people are given more time to become intoxicated. The police in these areas will bear this out. This will make bar and club owners happy but virtually no one who is trying to live there. I live at the W residences and we have had many problems with shootings, knifings and even murder. We do not go out on Fri. And Sat. night unless we can be home by 11PM as a result.

Comments are closed.