Cut-offs and Reality.
Gregg Hanour
(Part of the “Drunk, Drunker, and High-Risk Drunkenness” series)
PRIOR INSIGHT RECAP
- Cutting off service to obviously intoxicated customers is critical. The risk of harm increases dramatically as intoxication rises.
- When a fatal alcohol-related vehicle crash occurs, 70% of the time the driver’s BAC is .15% or higher.
Increasing cut-offs reduces DUI tragedies, sexual assaults, and calls for service.
Short on Time? Skip to the Recap Below!
Serving Obviously Intoxicated Customers is Illegal
In California, it is illegal to serve someone who is obviously intoxicated, whether it's for consumption on or off the premises.
The California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) defines “obviously intoxicated” as when an average person can clearly see signs such as:
- Being overly friendly, argumentative, or belligerent
- Using foul language
- Slurred speech or slow, deliberate movements
- Swaying, stumbling, or drowsiness
- Red, watery eyes
- Noticeable smell of alcohol
Penalties range from staff fines and jail time to business fines, license suspension, and even possible license revocation (for three violations within three years).
Considering such penalties, ABC license holders and their staff must take the cut-offs of those who are obviously intoxicated very seriously.
Said no one in the industry.
(That’s the topic of our next Insight.)
What Hospitality Staff Acknowledge
In my bar management workshops, I ask participants these two questions:
1. If your business actually cut off every obviously intoxicated customer, how many more guests would be cut off per day? Please average your slow days with your busy days.
- The answers are all over the map.
- Security staff always give the highest numbers.
- Servers, managers, and owners consistently report far fewer.
- Excluding security “outliers,” the average is 11 more customers cut off per day.
2. What percentage of obviously intoxicated guests do you think are cut off, according to research?
a. 50%
b. 17.5%
c. 3%
Most professionals guess 3%. Some say 17.5%. Nobody says 50%.
What do research studies tell us? It depends upon the study.
What Research Shows
- McKnight & Streff (Michigan): 17.5% were cut off; 82.5% were served more alcohol.
- Grube, Krevor, & DeJong: Only 10% refused service to drunk patrons.
- San Diego survey: 20% admitted being drunk in the past month, but only 3% reported being cut off—meaning 97% were still served.
- Norwegian Institute: 95% of “drunk” women’s late-night orders were filled; 67% of men’s before midnight. I agree that men are more likely to be cut off due to aggressive behavior, forcing intervention.
From my three decades of interviewing and training thousands of servers, the San Diego study is closest to reality: only about 3% of obviously intoxicated patrons are denied more alcohol.
While we’ll explore how drunk customers create tremendous liability for alcohol businesses in later Insights, let’s examine a few numbers to prove that an establishment can be very profitable by serving responsibly.
Profitably and Responsibility
Per the table below, which ABC uses, most drinkers appear obviously intoxicated at a BAC of .06–.10%. Tolerance among drinkers varies, but here’s what that means in terms of the number of standard drinks (over 2 hours):
Most bars would be thrilled if guests averaged three drinks ordered. In reality, it’s closer to two drinks, late at night.
This means:
- Businesses can stay profitable and responsible by refusing service to those who are obviously intoxicated.
- Yet cut-offs remain rare.
That should make us all angry.
MADD
According to numbers shared by Mothers Against Drunk Driving, “two out of three people will be impacted by drunk driving in their lifetime.”
Not surprising when:
- California has 48,690 on-sale alcohol businesses.
- Staff acknowledge that on average, 535,590 drunk customers leave daily without being cut off.
- Each drunk puts themselves and the public at risk—and drains city resources through excessive calls for service.
This should prompt all of us to be concerned about the safety of those we love.
In the Insights that follow, we’ll explore what each stakeholder can do to significantly increase cut-offs, which will save city public safety dollars and, most importantly, save lives.
FUTURE TOPICS IN THIS SERIES
- How the ABC can influence cut-offs
- How cities can influence cut-offs at new businesses
- How cities can influence cut-offs at existing businesses
- How to guide businesses to increase cut-offs
- How cut-offs reduce customer churn (turnover)
RECAP
It is illegal to serve alcohol to someone who is obviously intoxicated.
Studies suggest only 3% to 17.5% of obviously intoxicated customers are cut off from additional alcohol service.
Businesses can be profitable by only serving customers who are not obviously intoxicated.
Hospitality staff acknowledge that the vast majority of obviously intoxicated customers are not cut off from additional alcohol service.
That's the decision . . .
In our last blog we discussed how the overconsumption of alcohol is the enemy, not the moderate consumption of alcohol. Moderate Drinkers are Safer Multiple research studies have shown that people who consume alcohol and keep their BAC to below .06% are safer. “There is agreement in the scientific community about what defines ‘moderate drinking.’ Also, moderate drinking means limiting how fast you drink and, as a result, keeping your blood alcohol concentration (BAC) below .055.” (Source: Hester) In general, those who drink excessively are more aggressive and also get injured more seriously than those who drink moderately or not at all. Moderate drinkers do not appear to be at significantly higher risk of injury than nondrinkers. (Source: Scott and Dedel) The Higher the BAC, the Greater the Risk of Harm Alcohol follows a dose-response curve— higher BAC leads to higher risk across all major harms, including crashes, injuries, and violence. Harm rises exponentially as demonstrated by this chart from National Highway Traffic Safety Administration on the risk of crashing at given BAC levels.
The Root Cause: Overconsumption of Alcohol T he main purpose of CUP conditions for your on-sale alcohol businesses is to lessen any negative impacts and ensure the operation is in harmony with your community Most problems caused by your bars and restaurants are the direct result of the overconsumption of alcohol—including altercations, nuisance complaints from neighbors, and vehicle crashes. Cities that have calculated the net effect of alcohol businesses on their general fund have discovered a minimum net loss of $1 million dollars—caused mainly by calls for service due to violence and medical problems from overservice. The insurance industry says that 90% of insurance claims at bars and restaurants are the direct result of the overconsumption of alcohol. My experience as an operator and consultant to the hospitality industry suggest that 90% of the time, calls for service are due to one or more customers having consumed too much alcohol. Studies confirm the relationship between higher levels of intoxication and violence. Using Logic to Choose an Action to Solve the Problems Since the goal of writing conditions of approval is to lessen problem . . . And since most problems stem from the overconsumption of alcohol . . . Shouldn’t the conditions aim to lessen overconsumption? In fact, shouldn’t a major focus of your entire approval process—from approving, conditioning, and onboarding—be to message best practices to lessen overconsumption? In reducing the overconsumption of alcohol, all stakeholders benefit: Public safety is improved from less violence and fewer DUI tragedies. City public safety expenses are reduced. Business profits are protected from insurance claims and lawsuits. There are many ways planners and law enforcement can reduce overconsumption in newly-approved on-sale alcohol businesses. In reducing overconsumption, your city saves money—lots of money. This isn’t just our opinion. A Study to Bank On According to this study, for every $1 a city spends to reduce intoxication, it saves $260 (Levy & Miller)
Most city leaders assume their bars and restaurants pay for themselves. The numbers say otherwise—and closing the gap starts with rethinking two common assumptions.
Most city leaders assume their bars and restaurants pay for themselves. The numbers say otherwise — and closing the gap starts with rethinking two common assumptions.
I’ve been known to get a little obsessed with reaching goals — whether it’s catching a trophy brown trout over 10 pounds or hitting a Pick 6 for more than $50,000. Did I accomplish those goals? You’ll find out at the end. Another goal of mine is far more important and challenging: changing how California cities approve, condition, and onboard new on-sale alcohol businesses (restaurants, bars, clubs, and similar establishments). That's why I teamed with retired ABC District Administrator Lauren Tyson to design our upcoming workshop on best practices for conditional use permits (CUPs) and entertainment permits. The current process sucks. Yes, I sometimes use technical language. Who’s Behind This? I’ve spent years training hospitality operators, planners, and law enforcement on exactly this problem, and wrote a book on the topic, A Business Approach to Reducing DUI, along the way. Link to Gregg’s bio Lauren wrote the book on it — literally. As a former ABC District Administrator and author of Perils of Selling Alcohol: A Guide for Bar Owners Facing Legal Trouble, she’s seen exactly what puts ABC-licensed businesses at risk, and what actually protects them and the public. Link to Lauren’s bio How Do I Know the Current Process Isn’t Working? Let Me Count the Ways Personal experience. I went through the process twice — once in Costa Mesa and once in Irvine. In both cases, very smart, dedicated planners, working with law enforcement, created extensive conditions of approval. One business had 32 separate conditions. Both businesses followed every condition, yet both were still public nuisances for years. Working with applicants. Lauren and I have helped dozens of applicants successfully navigate their city’s CUP application process. Yet the operating conditions cities impose rarely (read never) have a meaningful impact on reducing violence or problems. Reviewing city policies statewide. We’ve collected CUP conditions and operating requirements from 35 cities across California, including several known for leading the way in responsible ordinance writing. The reality? A business can follow every specific condition of approval and still become a public nuisance. Training professionals. We’ve conducted in-person workshops for planners and law enforcement on this topic. Presenting at conferences. Together and separately, we’ve presented on these issues at professional conferences. Academic research. While writing my first book, A Business Approach to Reducing DUI, I researched the topic extensively, including contacting five of the leading urban planning universities to review their curriculum. Working directly with operators. I’ve trained over a thousand hospitality owners and managers. I understand their concerns, their daily realities, and why too many close. Revising how cities approve, condition, and onboard new businesses doesn’t just protect city resources and public safety — it also guides businesses toward practices that improve their profitability. The Bottom Line When cities use best practices to approve, condition, and onboard new on-sale alcohol businesses, the outcome looks very different. Applicants who complete the CUP process and open for business will hear consistent messaging — from planners, planning commissioners, code enforcement, and law enforcement — about the operational practices that significantly reduce violence and problems. Applicants will receive meaningful conditions of approval that, when followed, actually reduce risk for all stakeholders. Applicants will experience impactful communication with code enforcement and law enforcement that keeps the operator focused on practices that protect both the business and the community. That’s what effective onboarding looks like. We hope you’ll join us for our upcoming Zoom workshop. And if you twist my arm, I might even share a few brown trout fishing tips. Yes, I did catch that trophy brown — a 17-pound, 7-ounce beauty. I also hit that big Pick 6. If you ask how to hit a $50,000 Pick 6 at the racetrack, my advice is simple: Start with a $100,000 bankroll. WORKSHOP Conditional Use Permits, Entertainment Permits, and On-Sale Alcohol Oversight 📅 Date: Wednesday, October 28, 2026 🕐 Time: 10:00 a.m. – 12 Noon Pacific Time (2 Hours) 📍 Location: Live via Zoom ✅ POST Certification pending | APA Certified 2.0 CM COST -$330 per attendee; or -$990 flat rate per city (up to 10 attendees from your city) Learn more Register for the workshop WHO SHOULD ATTEND This workshop is designed for professionals responsible for reviewing, approving, or monitoring alcohol licenses, including: • City planning officials • Law enforcement personnel • Code enforcement officers • Planning commissioners Everyone involved in approving, conditioning, or onboarding new ABC on-sale licensed businesses must deliver a consistent, informed message at every step of the process — this workshop ensures they can. We offer a significantly reduced tuition for a group because the gains from this workshop grow exponentially when every department is trained together.
Alcohol Best Practices is pleased to announce a new Zoom workshop for public officials and law enforcement professionals involved in alcohol license oversight. Conditional Use Permits, Entertainment Permits, and On-Sale Alcohol Oversight 📅 Date: Wednesday, October 28, 2026 🕐 Time: 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 Noon,Pacific (2 Hours) 📍 Location: Live via Zoom (link emailed upon registration) ✅ POST Certification pending | APA Certified 2.0 CM COST -$330 per attendee -$990 flat rate per city (up to 10 attendees) Learn more Register for Workshop WHO SHOULD ATTEND This workshop is designed for professionals responsible for reviewing, approving, or monitoring alcohol licenses, including: • City planning officials • Law enforcement personnel • Code enforcement officers • Planning commissioners Everyone involved in approving, conditioning, or monitoring new ABC on-sale licensed businesses must deliver a consistent, informed message at every step of the process — this workshop ensures they can. WHY THIS WORKSHOP IS NEEDED After analyzing dozens of Conditional Use Permits (CUPs) from cities across California, we identified critical gaps in how cities handle new alcohol license approvals: Existing CUP processes lack essential messaging to applicants Legacy approval conditions miss the most impactful requirements Newly approved businesses receive little to no meaningful onboarding Until now, there has been no training resource for best practices in approving, conditioning, or monitoring new ABC on-sale licensed businesses. Contracting with us to revise your city's approval and onboarding process is a significant investment. This workshop offers a cost-effective alternative, equipping your team with proven strategies that: ✔ Reduce violence, DUIs and nuisance complaints ✔ Lower public safety expenses and calls for service ✔ Improve the profitability, performance, and professionalism of licensed businesses We look forward to seeing you there. Learn More Register for Workshop
(Insight in the “Drunk, Drunker, and High-Risk Drunkenness” series)
(Insight in the “Drunk, Drunker, and High-Risk Drunkenness” series)
(Insight in the “Drunk, Drunker, and High-Risk Drunkenness” series)
