Personally, I thought LA didn't phrase it correctly - if you CAN'T wait a mere hour to have a brew... would seem to make more sense to me.
Secondly, I'm not one to have a brew at 2 PM but I know some who do and that's just fine with me. I also have NO PROBLEM telling someone who is obnoxious or drunk to 'shut up and sit down', if he's disturbing the meeting. I do NOT associate having a mid-day drink to being DRUNK or DISORDERLY. I'd rather see an extra 5 or 6 (or more) members attending our meetings with a brew than to have them boycott the meeting altogether only because we've decided to override their option to imbibe.
It seems to me that we're trying to initiate a new club and as such, we should be looking for ways to encourage as many new members as possible. Putting a ban on drinking during the meeting will only offend some and they will spread the word in a negative fashion. As for me, No Harm, No Foul.
Maybe along with electing a Secretary, Treasurer and Vise President, we should also elect a Sgt. at Arms who is a non-drinker and can keep an eye on those who wish to have a drink.
