Downtown Los Angeles could one day join the growing list of places where you can legally walk a few blocks with a drink in hand if a new study backed by City Council member Ysabel Jurado gets the green light.
Jurado filed a motion this week asking the city to explore whether parts of downtown could be designated as regulated “entertainment zones” where participating stores sell alcohol that patrons can then pick up in clearly marked public areas. She presents the idea as a way to revitalize foot traffic in restaurants, bars and cultural corridors that have been battered by the pandemic and more recent disruptions, while emphasizing that any program would need guardrails, neighborhood protections and strong community input.
What the application requires city employees to study
The proposal would direct city officials to look at state law allowing entertainment zones and report on what would actually be needed to implement one in downtown Los Angeles. This includes a deep dive into permitting and zoning requirements, potential impacts on residents and quality of life, as well as fundamental issues such as noise, transportation and mobility, sanitation plans, public safety measures and liability risks.
Jurado’s proposal also calls for public hearings and outreach to allow families and residents to have input before a final decision is made. The application is expected to first go to the city council’s planning and land use management committee, which will review it before going before the full council. Arts District leaders have signaled that a strictly managed zone could help bring back customers and boost local commerce. These details, along with Jurado’s insistence that all zones should be “safe, structured, locally controlled and responsive to community concerns,” were detailed by MyNewsLA.
How state law makes this possible
Jurado’s request relies on SB 969, a state law that expands municipal authority for cities to establish entertainment zones in which licensed establishments can sell alcoholic beverages for consumption in certain public spaces. The bill, authored by State Senator Scott Wiener and passed in 2024, outlines requirements for local oversight, age identification protocols and periodic reviews of how the zones operate.
City staff would have to translate these state-level rules into local permitting systems, signage standards, hours of operation and enforcement plans before a zone could become operational. The statutes and official summaries make it clear that many operational details are left to municipal regulations. The text of the bill can be found in SB 969, along with background information from the bill’s author in the State Senator’s Office.
Where it is already being tried
Los Angeles wouldn’t be starting from scratch. Santa Monica converted the Third Street Promenade into a weekend entertainment zone in 2025 using a city management plan that establishes boundaries, hours of operation and operating rules for participating businesses. San Francisco has established several neighborhood zones, from Castro to Cole Valley and Front Street, and publishes management plans and FAQs for each location.
These local playbooks reveal a common set of tools: clearly marked boundaries, opt-in stores, wristbands or ID checks, and limited hours designed to keep things predictable for neighbors and visitors alike. For a look at how this works locally, see the City of Santa Monica Management Plan at City of Santa Monica and the San Francisco Entertainment Zone Hub at SF.gov.
Proponents and critics weigh compromises
Proponents argue that entertainment zones can boost foot traffic, increase sales at restaurants and bars, and transform streets into programmed, family-friendly public spaces that keep independent retailers afloat. They see this as an opportunity to make the city center more lively and safer at the same time if this is done with clear rules and close coordination.
Critics and some public health advocates see the other side of the story. They worry that SB 969 gives cities broad discretion without firm enforcement standards, raising questions about access for minors, additional burdens on police and security, and basic sanitation logistics. Alcohol Justice’s guidance and similar monitoring analyzes have urged local governments to implement strict ID controls, staff training and reporting protocols before zones become operational. The Los Angeles study will have to confront these tradeoffs head-on as it moves forward.
What happens next?
If the City Council approves Jurado’s request, city officials would be required to provide a full analysis of state law, implementation requirements and recommended protections before drafting an ordinance. The Planning and Land Use Management Board would likely hold hearings and require targeted outreach to neighborhoods that could be affected while staff develops a recommended path.
Jurado’s proposal frames the idea as limited and actively managed, rather than citywide. It points to opt-in rules for businesses and time-limited activations tied to events, rather than a 24/7 party spanning the entire downtown area. The process and outreach expectations were described in MyNewsLA’s reporting.
Legal implications
Any local ordinance would have to comply with the changes to the Business and Professions Code enacted in SB 969, including the authority to permit open containers within clearly established limits, the ability to limit sales to participating licensed vendors, and requirements for signage, hours of operation, and reporting.
Cities that proceed must also weigh the insurance and liability risk to both the community and participating businesses and design clear identification and enforcement protocols aimed at preventing underage drinking and disorderly conduct. Staff are expected to rely on the legislative text and chapter summaries of the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control legislation when developing implementation options. For legal details, see SB 969.
