The February 2025 print edition of Urban Times features a report gleaned from the document below, a memo sent by Jeff Stroebel, treasurer of the Mass Ave Cultural Arts District. It summarizes the events of a public information meeting regarding what is known as a DORA – an acronym for Designated Outdoor Refreshment Area.
The Board of Directors of the Mass Ave Cultural Arts District and Mass Ave Merchants Association (MACAD/MAMA) has no current intention of recommending the establishment of a DORA for Mass Ave. Should the MACAD/MAMA Board decide to vote on proposing such an ordinance in the future, the Board will notify stakeholders no less than thirty days prior to the Board meeting where it is to be on the agenda. To facilitate greater public understanding of the ramifications of establishing a DORA on Mass Ave, the Board held a public information session at the Athenaeum on Tuesday, Jan. 14.
Enabled by legislation passed by the 2023 Indiana General Assembly, a DORA allows customers to purchase alcoholic beverages and consume them outside their place of purchase within a defined area during designated times. A DORA can set hour and day limits, require drinks to be in labeled DORA cups, and prohibit consuming alcohol not purchased within its boundaries. Boundaries are set by the establishing body and require clear signage. Businesses within a DORA may choose or not choose to participate. Currently, Indiana has 33 approved DORAs including Carmel, Fort Wayne, Lafayette, Noblesville, and Speedway. Establishing a DORA in Indianapolis would require an ordinance approved by the City Council.
The Jan. 14 meeting was at the regular monthly MAMA meeting time and preceded by a brief MAMA business meeting. Representatives of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department, Indiana Alcohol and Tobacco Commission (ATC), and Indiana Excise were invited to attend. Downtown District Commander Scott Hessong spoke on behalf of IMPD and Chris Serak for ATC.
Thirty-nine people attended. In addition to IMPD and ATC, attendees included residents, business owners, and representatives of community organizations. Community organizations included the Chatham Arch Neighborhood Association, Lockerbie Neighborhood Association, Downtown Indy Inc., Historic Urban Neighborhoods of Indianapolis (HUNI), Mill 9 Resident’s Association, Murat Shrine and Rethink Coalition. MACAD Board members attending included Meg Storrow, Jeff Stroebel, Cris Mize, Marjorie Kienle, Robin Chalmers and David Smitley. Also in attendance were the two city counselors who represent Mass Ave – Jesse Brown and Vop Osili.
Meg Storrow, MACAD/MAMA President, shared that the organization had been asked by businesses on the Avenue to investigate the possibility of establishing a DORA. Interest was due to the belief that it would provide more control of outdoor drinking and facilitate easier community events. For example, a street festival serving alcohol would not need temporary permits or physical barriers. MACAD/MAMA has spoken to three communities that have established DORAs, and their response was primarily positive.
Commander Hessong stated that the police can arrest for public intoxication, but this is rare unless accompanied by another offense. Indiana currently has no open-container prohibitions and businesses can be licensed to sell carryout liquor, but they cannot allow “drinks to go” or patrons to leave their premises with an open alcoholic beverage. IMPD would not have the resources to hire additional officers to enforce the restrictions of a DORA. Other communities have hired off-duty police to patrol their DORA, and this would be a possibility in Indianapolis. Enforcement of DORA regulations would primarily rest with Excise. IMPD would not enforce low-impact DORA violations, such as drinks not being in required cups.
Chris Serak of ATC joined the meeting in progress. He summarized the enabling legislation, emphasizing that DORAs are created by local ordinance, and they have the power to set their own regulations as to boundaries, days, hours, fees and additional alcohol consumption restrictions, etc. Within a DORA boundary, businesses can choose to opt-in or out. Happy Hour legislation is separate and not affected by a DORA. For an event such as First Friday walks, businesses that serve complimentary wine or beer would still need to have a temporary permit, though the DORA allows someone visiting a gallery or shop to walk the street and enter another gallery/shop with their DORA cup. As another example, it was mentioned that the Mass Ave Summerfest would not have to erect a fence to corral people at the beer tent because the DORA allows people to leave the festival block to walk the sidewalk sale with their DORA cup. Excise has the responsibility to enforce DORA regulations, not IMPD.
A question was asked regarding liability if a customer was served in a DORA and became injured. Liability would rest with the permit holder who sold the drink (as it does now). James Dulhanty, an insurance agent who represents over 150 bars and restaurants, agreed with Serak’s statement that insurance companies would look at carryout permits and DORA participation as risk factors. As DORAs are new, projections would be based upon the percentage of a business’ sales that are taken out in a DORA cup. If passed by the City-County Council, DORA legislation could be amended or rescinded in the future.
Residents questioned whether a DORA was a proportional response to concerns regarding outsiders bringing their own alcohol into the district to drink in parking lots or causing loud disturbances after bars closed. Even though ATC stated that DORAs can impose stricter regulation on drinking and more enforcements, an opinion was stated that wider outside consumption of alcohol leads to other problems that may induce non-bar businesses to leave the area. Another opinion stated that a DORA could increase concerns about pedestrian safety. A bar owner commented that he had talked to businesses in Speedway who were unhappy with the DORA, which does not require a marked DORA cup, citing people drinking outside without purchasing alcohol from local businesses. Another resident indicated that they felt a DORA was not appropriate for Mass Ave because they are intended to activate “sleepy areas” that were struggling economically. This person stated that the community did not need to fuel the “drinking economy.” Additional concerns were stated about public urination and other misbehaviors that are happening now.
Several MACAD/MAMA Board members were in attendance and re-emphasized that the organization was investigating the possibility of a DORA and had not adopted a position. MACAD/MAMA will continue to assess public opinion before recommending action. There are currently no plans to recommend a DORA proposal to the City-County Council. Board members emphasized that they would publish a report from the meeting and continue to keep Mass Ave stakeholders informed about any future DORA discussions.
