Last month, administrators announced that Tokyo’s Shibuya Ward would not be holding any New Year’s Eve countdown events this year. It’s part of a continuing effort to eliminate the drunken, rowdy, ill-mannered crowds that used to congregate in the area around Shibuya Station for Halloween and New Year’s, turning much of the neighborhood into a de-facto street party and resulting in damaged property, injuries, and unsightly amounts of litter.
But though we already knew the neighborhood wasn’t going to have anything extra going on for New Year’s Eve, an update now shows that Shibuya Ward is going to be less welcoming on New Year’s Eve than an average night. Not only will there be no special events (and the year-round Shibuya public drinking ban still in place), the statue of faithful dog Hachiko, the most famous landmark and meeting place in the district, will be covered up and sealed off on New Year’s Eve, just as it was on Halloween.
▼ Hachiko’s Halloween covering
Also mirroring this year’s Halloween protocols, barricades and pedestrian traffic flow-restricting partitions will be put up in the area around Shibuya Station for New Year’s.
Regarding the decision, Shibuya Ward Mayor Ken Hasabe said: “We are collaborating with numerous public institutions in order to strengthen security around Shibuya Station on New Year’s Eve and to prevent accidents and injuries. Doing so is difficult with large crowds, so we ask for everyone’s understanding and cooperation in preventing overcrowding.”
The Hachiko covering and other barriers are scheduled to go up at 6 p.m. on December 31, and are currently projected to be in place until 1 a.m. the following morning, so if you want a snap a photo with Hachiko, you’ll need to plan your visit for another time.
Source: Shibuya Keizai Shimbun
Read more stories from SoraNews24.
-- Meet the kind Japanese grandpa who takes photos for tourists at the Hachiko statue in Shibuya
-- Tokyo’s Shibuya district bans public drinking on New Year’s Eve, cancels countdown celebration
-- After cancelling Halloween, Tokyo’s Shibuya neighborhood cancels New Year’s Eve too
© SoraNews24
47 Comments
garypen
At least they could make the signs and barriers less ugly. It's all so hideous.
wallace
Why don't they make it removal instead of building ugly barriers?
gogogo
Every year I post the same comment, just move it down the road to Yoyogi park.
リッチ
Let’s just make it a year-round event that tourist no longer go to Shibuya and see how long it lasts. It’s a dump anyway they don’t clean and it’s filthy. Don’t know why people like going in there anyway. I’m glad that they’ve removed the drugged out cat that they used to place underneath the statue.
Newgirlintown
The dog that kept coming back because there was a butcher or some such who kept giving him bits of meat.
iron man
What, hiding a national hero. I stupidly tired myself out for a full morning (heh new to the place 24yrs ago) b4 g/f waltzed out oh your looking for the Akito dog? Seeing all those barriers, how many yen for an acrylic enclosure, I reckon ~250K yen. Anybody know the current rates for hoardings... at peak time rates??
Speed
They should elect in a new mayor.
cleo
So some poor souls are going to have their holidays marred by having to work till evening on New Year's Eve, and having to start work again when New Year's Day is barely under way? Presumably they'll get paid double time. Out of our taxes.
Ricky Kaminski13
I get the feeling the leadership class has acquired a taste for shutting stuff down and they are now hooked. Level: The Archetypal Evil Stepmother
Next phase idea discussion: we could stop the trains stopping at Shibuya. #Akwardsideglancethenheadnod
Asiaman7
Are people coming to Shibuya on New Year’s Eve to see the statue?
Don’t think so.
gaijintraveller
Why not shut Meiji Shrine as well? It would save a lot of people a thoroughly unpleasant time. I went there once many years ago. It was freezing cold and once you got in the shrine there was a one-way syste, There was noturnback, no escape. You had grin and bear it until you eventually got out again. In contrast many tourists actually enjoy a visit to Hachiko.
NCIS Reruns
Funny you should mention that. Hachiko (according to the autopsy) died because some idiot fed him yakitori with the chicken still on the skewer, which perforated his stomach.
Khuniri
"Why not shut Meiji Shrine as well? It would save a lot of people a thoroughly unpleasant time. I went there once many years ago. It was freezing cold and once you got in the shrine there was a one-way syste, There was noturnback, no escape. You had grin and bear it until you eventually got out again. In contrast many tourists actually enjoy a visit to Hachiko.™
gaijintraveler makes a good point...The obvious problem is overtourism, the tabi-no-haji-wa-kaki-sute mentality, and the inconsistency of Japanese policy, i.e. seeking the tourists and then resenting them.
In my long-lost youth, I used to meet people at Hachiko, but certainly not on New Year's Eve. There is (or at least used to be) something quite special about Japanese o-shougatsu. It is/was a quiet time, a family time. I am not a Buddhist--except for a few minutes when the bells toll after 紅白.
factchecker
Yes, Shibuya is a dump made worse by the fun police.
Fighto!
Good news. Hachiko is a traditional and sacred Japanese statue - so should absolutely be covered up. Hachiko is pretty much like a religious icon to Westerners.
buchailldana
So silly.
But having had the mispleausre of passing by there recently.
So many clowns in the Starbucks filming.
grc
リッチ makes a good point
2 Year Old
Party poopers….
but, no idea why Shibuya is so popular… it was a slum 25 years ago, still a slum today. Very, very Dirty place compared to 80% of Tokyo.
Another ward-ku-city has a golden opportunity now to host a multi day “Nee Yers event”. Family friendly in the day, more for adults at night.
Make money from selling a licnese to have your food truck there.. jumping castles etc etc
And that money helps cover waste removal, security and hiring some first aid responders for the inevitable, even if it sparing ankles in high heels or such.
Garthgoyle
Just ban businesses, people walking and breathing around Shibuya all together.
KariHaruka
Well, damn.... There goes my NYE's plans of cracking open a dozen cans of Strong Zero next to Hachiko....
onedragon
The old Japanese are doing everything in their power to suppress the youth. Shame on you Japan.
Brian Wheway
What is it with this mayor, no Halloween party, no new years celebration, if it's down to drunken behavior, can I remind him of Mr salary man and his co workers it's just ridiculous, is it over crowding? Take a look at the daily commute on the trains, what's wrong with saying goodbye to 2024 and getting to look forward to 2025 and making new friends
TokyoLiving
Good news..
Protect Shibuya..
Don't like it..
Learn how to behave properly in the streets..
Roberto Figari
Good news! I expect no more a rowdy crowd leaving their thrashed cans and filth after they leave.
Patrick
My god, this city is SO lame.
Hercolobus
Good. Celebrate around your neighborhood.
gokai_wo_maneku
Sell viewing tickets for 10,000 yen each. Make a lot of money!
CaptDingleheimer
The revelers should organize a flash mob celebration in mayor Ken Hasabe's neighborhood instead, tens of thousands of them.
They'd hand out free beer in Shibuya next year just to attract people.
Kazuaki Shimazaki
Watch the creeping advance and slippery slope.
Kaowaiinekochanknaw
How to ruin a city's vibrancy - 101
virusrex
When the purpose is to keep people out at that date this would be an effective way to do it.
Because the measure is meant to dissuade people from going at that specific date, not permanently.
The measure is strongly supported by the locals, this is not something the "leadership" is doing against what the people of Shibuya want.
IS Meiji Shrine an attraction for the people that like to go to shibuya at new years to drink and celebrate on the streets?
What slippery slope? Shibuya somehow banning events at any other place of Tokyo? The local government listening even more to what the locals want in the ward?
Negative Nancy
Good news. Down with this sort of thing (careful now!).
Kazuaki Shimazaki
@virusrexDec. 9 03:38 pm JST
I believe the last event they banned, the article at least mentioned that it was claimed to be popular to the locals, but not this article.
But in any case, the same issues continue, and you might also give value to how they are salami slicing these bans. It's hard to not see a line out of these dots and predict their final goal is to ban any bit of public fun on Shibuya. If that is indeed the case, the honest thing to do is to lay this motive up front, but they are banning one event at a time, hoping people would go "Oh well, Halloween isn't THAT popular in Japan, doesn't have THAT long a tradition". Now, in less than one year we are going after New Year Festival.
The way you are phrasing your defense, you don't believe these events are bad for Tokyo, or Japan as a whole. From that premise, those events should be held SOMEWHERE. Yet they can't be if we allow "Local Autonomy" to allow every ward to go Not In My Back Yard and refuse these events. The only way we can hold these events in the age of increasing parochialism is to deprive wards of the right to ban these events on their own initiative.
virusrex
So you have references where the locals declare they are against big congregations of street drinkers but only on halloween, because on new year's they magically become acceptable, right?
Else it makes perfect sense that the date makes no difference for the problems and expenses derived from the activity and both are to a degree equivalent and the measures popular with the locals.
That you feel that public fun is equal to problems for the locals only speak about what you personally do for fun in public, there are plenty of things to do in Shibuya (or anywhere else) that produce no negative effect on the locals and for which no measure has been even planned.
As long as people outside of the location are not trying to force themselves on the locals they don't have to be bad.
Should? because you like them? no. Could? yes, once again as long as the locals are interested in holding them.
Which is not bad at all, trying to impose your personal preference of fun is what would be unacceptable, you are completely free to try and convince the locals that the event is beneficial, or that you can be made personally responsible of the behavior of the people that assist to the event so that they hold it, but simply impose it? that is completely out of the question.
The simple fact that nobody is rushing to replace Shibuya shows the negative image these events have for the locals, pretending you have a right to impose the events is what would be trying to correct a wrong with another wrong.
Blacksamurai
LOL and so the blowback against grown looking men and women running around in costumes drinking alcohol on the streets, filming themselves and the public without permission, continues. Good call - I like Shibuya City's stance which is on the side of the silent majority who like to shop and eat in peace in Shibuya without those who've got away too long with being meiwaku.
Great Bird
Until we finally get a source, no, the measure is not "strongly supported by locals". This has to count as a made up claim until some evidence is provided.
virusrex
The mayor has been reelected (for his third term) after putting in order these measures, there is zero backlash reported from the locals, the previous article here in JT described the measures being put forward by representatives of the local shopping districts.
Pretending something does not exists just because you don't like what the locals want do to with Shibuya only shows that you don't have an argument.
Kazuaki Shimazaki
@virusrexToday 05:41 am JST
First, a declaration of interest. I am NOT one of those who joins street festivities, in Hong Kong, Japan, or elsewhere. The most valuable part of a festival to me is the associated holiday - if it doesn't come with a holiday, it's not special to me. I spend holidays lounging at home. But I do think this is one of those "I might not agree with how you party, but I will defend your right to do so" moments.
But about that holiday. You might notice that in Japan, New Year comes with a holiday. Halloween is a workday. This indicates the Japanese place much more value on New Year than Halloween. Halloween is an event for a minority, while almost every "Wajin" at least gives a nod to New Year (and I think most cultures give a nod to January 1st in some way). Thus it is much less socially acceptable to openly go against New Year (even if they have comparable nuisance levels), and that may be why they cannot say it is actually popular this time around.
If you can't at least slightly trepass on other people's tranquility, you won't be able to even play the piano (I'm not talking about heavy metal guitar or drums) in your apartment, which obviously can put a dent in an aspiring musician's growth. I know the sound from my neighbor's piano does penetrate quite well into my flat. Kids won't be able to play in the local park or bare ground - which is likely to stunt their proper psychological and physical development. The potential harm from intolerance is not insignificant.
As for "outside of the location" remember that localism is relative. Are they Shibuyans? No. But they are Tokyoites. One ring further out they are Kanto-ans, and another ring out makes them Japanese. Also, with this one being New Year's, the number of Shibuyan participants is likely to increase, unlike Halloween.
It's NIMBY.
Mayor Ken Hasebe was re-elected for the third time in April 2023, coinciding with the time when Shibuya could no longer use COVID as a reasonable excuse to not suffer public assemblies. Also, in his first election in 2015, he barely edged out his opponents (36%, the next man having 32.5%). For SoraNews:
After this, in 2019, he got 75% of the vote. In 2023, he retained only 51.4% (in pure numbers he lost about 15K votes - Shibuyans who were deprived of their party, perhaps?). So, are Shibuyans necessarily anti-party? Is it the idea of "representatives of the local shopping districts", meaning shopkeepers and mall-owners which is only a fraction of the population of Shibuya?
I might also note 120K people is more than twice as many Japanese than supporters of Ken Hasebe even in his strongest vote.
TaiwanIsNotChina
Can't have people having fun, now can we?
virusrex
Irrelevant, absolutey no part of the arguments that refute your position depend on you participating, they all depend on your intention to force the locals to do something without justification.
Again irrelevant, pretending you should be able to force a form of having fun do not depend on the day being or not a holiday or something celebrated by a minority or a majority, the problem is still trying to force the locals to do something against their wishes, you are just trying to deflect after your argument was demonstrated without any value.
Still with the slipper slope fallacy? once again, people can be forced to stop playing the piano when they become a nuisance, and the responsibility to do practice in a proper place and even hours reside on those that want to do it. This in no way justifies trying to force public drinking on a location that do not want to support it.
Definitely incorrect, since this is something that actually is protected as an activity that benefits society and much more easily justified, after all the park is not suddenly imposed on the people living on a location, you still have failed to provide a justification to force people to support (with resources, safety, work) public drinking and disorder, this may surprise you but it is not something that society recognizes as worth negating the rights of the locals to decide what kind of events they can or not choose to support.
Again, the only thing you have proved is that you have the right to try to convince the people to renounce their rights or to support what you personally consider important, never that they can be forced to do it.
Again irrelevant, are the people that vote for the local government for or against the event? if they are against then those that do not vote are not even close to be included in the same category, it does not matter if they are in the same solar system, they are not locals for the purpose of the argument. This is grasping at straws.
And therefore it was proved that the people clearly supported what he had done and keep doing it until now, to demonstrate the contrary you would need to prove he reduced his popularity thanks to what he did.
You just proved that his actions were so well received that he increased his popularity, after all he "barely" won before doing anything on Shibuya, and have a much more easier time after he did what the local wanted.
An important fraction, specially when against this clear evidence you present exactly zero references where any fraction of the local population say they are against the measures.
virusrex
Of course it had, enough so the people kept supporting him, claiming disinformation only to confirm that he was elected AFTER putting in order the measures against public drinking and disorder means you are the one that tried to misrepresent the situation when it was completely clear the locals clearly and explicitly support what the local government is doing.
The same thing, the same purpose just a different date,
See? clearly trying to misrepresent clear evidence that your claim was completely wrong.
https://japantoday.com/category/national/after-cancelling-halloween-tokyo%E2%80%99s-shibuya-neighborhood-cancels-new-year%E2%80%99s-eve-too
an executive committee made up of Shibuya Ward legislators and representatives of the shopping districts near the Shibuya Scramble have now said that the resumption has been postponed to 2025, meaning that there will be no official New Year’s Eve countdown party in Shibuya this year.
There is no other interpretation but that the local representatives are on board with the measures, after all you are the one that have brought exactly zero references where anybody in Shibuya protests the measures.
Complete absence of evidence for your claim, plenty of evidence for the contrary, being in denial is not a rational argument, just an excuse to avoid recognizing the locals fully support what is being done.
And yet you comment again without bringing any source to even hint that the locals don't agree with what is being done, as if they would be reelecting the mayor until 2027 if they were not the ones asking him to put the measures in place, after all their profits increase when people are not drinking on the street.
You are the one that pretends to know what the people on Shibuya want better than themselves, that makes no sense.
Great Bird
Ehm, your claim was:
Now you declare victory with this:
Hilarious. Dude are you alright? You just proved me right, this is pretty much what I said. "local officials and business representatives agreed to blablabla" NOT the business representatives put it forward, the government followed. Which is what you claimed originally. Now you researched and have the correct info, thanks to me. Good. We're making progress (slowly, slowly, but better than nothing)
I'm trying to misrepresent by mentioning that the drinking ban was introduced in 2019. Are you sure you're alright? The proof of my misrepresentation is that I wrote down the thing I'm supposed to be misrepresenting?That's simply complete information, as opposed to your misrepresentation. Before you have to research it: Drinking ban on Halloween from 19, from 23 the pleas not to come to Shibuya on Halloween for the street party, from 2024 on night street drinking ban. New Year the same timeline as Halloween (I guess) What am I misrepresenting? Right, nothing, it's you who tried to misrepresent by putting all measures in one basket. And of course after 19 we had a tiny pandemic, maybe you've forgotten it, don't know, most people haven't, so in an election in 23 a drinking ban implemented in 19, overshadowed by more pressing issues in the following years (that tiny pandemic I mentioned might have been a bit bigger than tiny, google it), might not have had such a big effect on the election. Also people in Sasazuka, Yoyogi Uehara, Ebisu, Sendagaya, their daily lives don't really revolve around Shibuya station, the whole issue for them might be absolutely minor. Clearly and explicitly support? Ehm... then show us!
As for the effect, then why the demand/plea to stay away from Shibuya on Halloween? If the simple Halloween (and New Year) street drinking ban was effective? Right, because it didn't work, it didn't have the desired effect. So after 22 when people came in mass for Halloween the big "don't come" campaign started.
New Year the same but a different date? No it isn't.
Halloween was a unorganized spontaneous street party. With no organizer to held responsible for damages, incidents etc.
The countdown was an official party, with an organizer, a point which Hasebe declared as important when talking about Halloween, the lack of organizer. With official closing of the scramble crossing, with events, celebrities. With stands from sponsors (and possibly local businesses, I have no clue, I'm sure you'll claim to know)
If you can't see the differences between an officially sanctioned and approved event and one that isn't. That's why Shibuya can cancel the countdown, they can't cancel Halloween, all they can do is ask people not to show up and make it as uncomfortable as possible for those showing up.
My claim? What claim. I have no claim. Try reading. I'm actually NOT claiming the locals don't support what is done. Neither I am claiming they support it. It's you that keep building your whole argument on that premise. It stands on that. Locals want it, government reacts. Without ever actually showing evidence of this process. So I'm asking for evidence, which still isn't being provided. You seem unable to do that. Once again simply transferring your opinion on the people of Shibuya. Stop trying to impose your will on the locals, and show me the evidence. Not holding my breath btw.
virusrex
On the contrary, the locals are there, obviously agreeing with the measures, meanwhile you have produce zero references where anyone in Shibuya says the measures are negative or that they disagree, zero. This means that until now all the evidence is that the locals obviously support the measures and you have been unable to refute this with anything.
Misrepresenting it by pretending the drinking ban would have nothing to do with stopping people from public drinking when it obvious has, these are measures that amount to similar results so if people were against the ban on Halloween or on New Years they would have plenty to complain about previously to his last reelection, obviously people were fine with it and still support it, why pretend you are not trying to misrepresent the situation just to explain how you are doing it? Once again this comes on top of you never presenting anything that could even hint to the locals disagreeing with the measures, not local groups ever present in the decisions being implemented, etc.
And therefore irrelevant for your argument that was that the people that are actually affected supposedly don't support the measures, (but do this disagreement in secret, so nobody can ever found out?) this is clearly graspoing at straws, next you are going to say the "locals" that disagree are from other wards.
Because THAT are the measures meant to work, and that obviously did the moment it is reported the numbers (and problems, expenses) etc. were greatly reduced
Completely wrong, the ward would be responsible, there is no doubt about this, which is precisely why this is used as an argument to enact the ordinance. If the ward don't want to be made responsible it can't just let people do as they please and wash their hands, since they are responsible they have to make a realistic effort to dissuade the people from going. Which is exactly what the ward did.
So it is suspended reaching the same intended result, no more people drinking on the street. It is terribly easy to understand that many people would still try to attend this even even without an organizer so measures are put in place again to dissuade this precisely because the ward can't just pretend this would be unexpected and that people "surprisingly" ended up in the streets. It is called being held responsible for public safety, you know exactly why authorities were made responsible for the tragedy at itaewon.
That there is no way to know if the people support or not what the local government is doing, that is something that can be proved with evidence, for example actual reports that say this (not just your personal opinion about ignoring clear reports of local organizations supporting the measures or the mayor being reelected after clearly reducing the street drinking at the location) no such report, nothing that even hint to people not being on board. Zero evidence to support your claim, plenty of evidence to prove the people are on board. Which again is nothing surprising since the people living in a location would appreciate not having mountains of garbage and incidents because of the tumult of people and the business owners profit only from people that enter their business to drink instead of doing it on the street.
Kazuaki Shimazaki
@virusrexDec. 10 11:12 pm JST
If you insist. I'd point out that you are painting this in a much more negative light than is usual. For example, anti-discrimination laws force employers, landlords and shopkeepers to contract with people they otherwise (reasonably or not) would prefer not to contract with. They are violations of personal autonomy. Yet this coercion aspect is rarely brought up, if you bring it up often you become the "bad guy", and Japan is constantly criticized by the West or the United Nations for not implementing such coercions into statute.
How do you define "nuisance"? Does nuisance start as soon as the piano leakage is detectable on instruments? When it's manifestly audible to the naked ear? When you can make out the tune? When you can't have a conversation anymore?
Again this needs definition. Most apartments (in Hong Kong or Japan) are not large enough to put the piano in a dedicated room, so this requirement will disqualify many people from starting piano. If you mean a soundproof room (and I've never seen Yamaha put up ads for soundproof rooms in any place but Japan) - a soundproof room big enough to hold a piano costs more than the piano itself.
If your criteria is that it is "protected" as an activity, then do remember that assemblies are constitutionally protected activity (and no one said they MUST be political). And they don't have to be quiet about it. If anything, it's harder to find the exact place in legislation where "kids playing" is a protected activity.
On the essence of the issue, I'd point out in general, learning to live and let live increases the overall happiness of society. My neighbor is happier that I'm not challenging him on his piano, and I'm happier that he's not challenging me on my recent purchase of a digital piano (which had to go in the living room, occupying half a large table). If I'm like some Japanese and force him to build an enclosure ("proper place") for his piano, even if he complies he won't be tolerant with mine (and honestly, if I have to build soundproof then I can't play). Do you see how tolerance makes for a happier society, and thus has intrinsic worth, than intolerance?
How did you come to this conclusion given the information provided? He starts with 36%. He allows parties. His popularity rises to 75%. He is now less friendly to parties (but he can use COVID as an excuse). His popularity drops to 51%. The correlation seems to be that allowing parties strongly increases his popularity, and disallowing them decreases it.
Kazuaki Shimazaki
@virusrexToday 06:06 am JST
Give the man his due. Your original statement was "put forward by representatives of the local shopping districts", making the "local shopping districts" as the active party. "Obviously agreeing" (passive) is a significant downgrade from being the active initiator, especially in Japan. It might mean enthusiastic support (I grant you this possibility) but it can also range down to Grudging Acquiescence.
However, there is a reason to suspect these measures are not as universally popular, even within Shibuyans, as you'd like them to be. If whoever is behind this sincerely believes this is genuinely popular, they won't be salami slicing. If anything, they'd be showing their speed and decisiveness of motion, not salami slicing. Here, they are saying "It's only for December 31 2024". Do you think they are seriously thinking in December 31 2025 they'd be resuming it, or are they just trying to slow boil the frog?
His popularity dropped by over 20% since he "reduced the street drinking". It just hadn't gotten to the point where he lost his lead, at least not by 2023. And 2023 is before this latest offensive. We'd have to wait until 2027 to see how many more percent he'd lose over this.
kappa ko-hi
The tragedy of the thousands who have arranged to meet at Hachiko spending New Years Eve wandering around lost and looking for each other.
virusrex
That is in short your only argument, that you should be able to force something on the locals based exclusively on how positive you consider public intoxication, at least to the same degree of having parks or lack of racial segregation. That is not really a strong argument, it is more like grasping at straws and pretend that forcing locals to accept people making troubles on their neighborhood is somehow equivalent to defend the right of being considered equal no matter the race, it is not present it in a negative light to recognize this attempt is completely invalid and makes no sense.
I don't, their contracts, rules on their neighborhoods, etc. do. Things the population at the site agree with as a group or that new people explicitly accept as a condition to take residence there, the point is that your argument is obviously demonstrated as false by this.
Which is something that the person will have to consider when they choose where to live, something reasonable and even frequent. What is irrational is for those people to unilaterally disregard the rights of everyone else (including for example the building's owner) and do as they please no matter what.
An argument that was already debunked previously when it was demonstrated to you that assemblies are not universally protected, and several examples were provided that you had to accept (like "demonstrating" at the emergency entrance of a hospital). Demonstrating to the point of causing economic damage for the purpose of public intoxication is not something that is protected.
Yet your whole point is that people living in Shibuya should be forced to live according to your own personal satisfaction. You are not arguing about trying to convince them of graciously pay important resources so their neighborhood is puked all over, receives mountains of trash and becomes the scene of fights and destruction. You are arguing that they should be forced to do it, apparently because you think public intoxication is a value equivalent to abolishing segregation.
How else, both 75% and 51% are higher numbers than 36%, there is nothing wrong saying that this represents an increase of popularity from the point he was first elected, even after "stopping parties". The only way that you could have an argument would be if the measures made him win with less than 36% of the votes.
The representatives of the local shopping districts are the primary beneficiaries of the measures, they get to have people drinking exclusively on their business, less trouble in the street that can scare away customers, less trash to take care of, etc. etc. There is nothing illogical in accepting they are the ones that strongly support the measures while the government is only cashing political funds by simply doing what the locals want for their location. Unless you can put a credible scenario where the government is the one that is the primary beneficiary and the locals are just participating willy-nilly this is a perfectly reasonable conclusion.
A very forced and twisted reasoning, after all you have no evidence that the government is trying not to anger are the locals (it can be just a way to more easily enforce obedience from the visitors) or that any other kind of event is being planned for next year. You are simply assuming something that fit with your preconceived idea and take it as a fact.
Yet increased over 15% from the first time he was elected and had yet to do anything, that means it is an increase from that point.
Or gains, crystal ball arguments are not exactly bullet proof.