As explained by Jolly, private clubs and restaurants are mandated to subject their customers to the Unicard System, or a similar state approved record-keeping system, in order to operate under current law.

“According to the Texas Restaurant Association, it costs restaurants between $10,000 to $20,000 per year to comply with the state regulations of being a private club,” says Jolly.

“This does not generate one dime of sales tax revenue for the city, nor does it create any jobs. This is just an expense to the restaurant and a nuisance to our customers," she says.

"We would hope Dallas residents would support an effort to eliminate the private club rules for all Dallas restaurants.”

It's important to understand that previous attempts to get local alcohol option elections on the ballots have been met with fierce resistance.

The enactment of House Bill 1199 also changed the requirement for the total number of signatures needed for local option elections. Under HB 1199, the number of signatures required to move a local option election to the ballot equals 35% of the number of people who voted in the last gubernatorial election.

In the case of a local option election using City of Dallas boundaries, the number of signatures needed is approximately 68,000, and the signatures must be from obtained from voters who are registered in Dallas County.

District 10 Dallas City Councilman Jerry Allen is a proponent of allowing the voters to decide.

“When it comes down to it, the citizens of Dallas should be the ones to decide on the matter,” says Allen. “I do feel like the grocery stores and restaurants are at a disadvantage with the way things are set-up now. With respect to the Lake Highlands community, allowing our local businesses to compete on an even playing field is important.”

Most of that resistance, however, comes from lawyers who are using a very old state statute as a means to keep the local alcohol option election in Dallas County from happening.

The statute basically says that any attempt to change local alcohol options must be done within the same jurisdiction in which the previous election was conducted.

In the case of alcohol elections, that original election - which governs the way beer and wine is distributed in Dallas - dates back to the 1870’s.

The major sticking point in using the boundaries of the original election is the fact that the Justice Precincts boundaries have changed many times over the years.

The disputed boundaries, and subsequent questions on the legality of any circulated petition within those boundaries, have provided enough fodder for opposing lawyers to keep previous elections off the ballots.

The last attempt at a local alcohol option election in Dallas in 2007 was disputed all the way up to the Texas Supreme Court, which ultimately ruled that the petition for election was circulated in the wrong jurisdiction and the attempt failed.

Frankly, attempting to hold a local alcohol option election within the boundaries of the original election is virtually impossible. In fact, up until seven years ago, holding a local option election in a multi-county city was literally impossible.

It took a new law in Texas, House Bill 1199, to make it possible for a multi-county city to hold local option elections - assuming the required signatures have been collected.

Progress Dallas believes that a local alcohol election, using the city limits of Dallas as the new boundaries, is appropriate and will ensure voters the opportunity to have their say in the matter on Election Day.

Allen’s colleague, District 12 Dallas City Councilman Ron Natinsky, is also in favor of letting the voters decide.