Posted Jan 5, 2009, 5:53 PM
|
|
Hindrance to Development
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,402
|
|
Remember, this was not a city event, but a private one. It was kind of thrown together on very short notice, and yes, they very much underestimated the attendance, and thus the need for both security and multiple sources of entertainment for the crowd.
More activities, more stages, and more places to focus the crowd's attention would have been good. Video screens and other stuff going on would have been nice too. Those things, plus security, would have cost more money, and I suppose that the businesses who were paying for the event only wanted to fork over so much. They expected a crowd of 2000-3000, with a worst-case scenario of about 10,000.
People just assume that Sacramento is not a party town. Those people are wrong. The pervasive lie that we're a stodgy old cow-town still convinces people that nobody will show up to a street party. And when they do, and act as though it was a street party, there's an automatic reaction to "ghetto hoodlums" or whatever when basically it's just exactly the behavior one would expect at such an event. So it becomes no-win: either we're a quiet little cow town where nothing happens, or we're a hoodlum-infested riot in progress. The truth is, we're neither, and the New Year's Eve event was a success, but it was a qualified sort of success that we should learn from if we're going to make it a city tradition.
I was there, at least from a distance, and the crowd did not look particularly rowdy or violent, but then I wasn't in the middle of it. Basically, we were lucky it went as well as it did. It certainly wasn't a riot or a giant street brawl, after midnight the crowd slowly dispersed with no major incidents. Next year, it will need more security, some sort of crowd control measures, and yes, more stages and more entertainment so people aren't all gathering around one corner.
|