All posts in the topic Coffee Unplugged (Short link)
Summary
- There are 11 posts — by 7 authors — in this topic.
- Latest post made by cheryl luger at Nov 02 19:27 UTC
Hello to everyone who has written about the "cease and desist" letter
received by Tillie's Bean. My office has received a number of comments
about this issue. Thank you for writing and letting me know about this
problem.
Currently the city requires a "place of entertainment license" for
coffee shops and restaurants that have up to three performing musicians.
The music can't be amplified if the land is zoned C1, and can be
amplified if it is zoned C2 or higher.
I think this is arcane, and not something the city should be worrying
about. The city needs to care and should still regulate dance floors or
dance clubs that open in neighborhoods and the sound levels of amplified
music, but I don't think the city needs to worry about acoustic
musicians in coffee shops.
To solve this problem, I will be proposing that the city allows the use
of up to three acoustic musicians in a coffee shop without requiring an
additional license.
The "Coffee Unplugged" ordinance will be introduced at the next Council
meeting, and if all goes well should be in effect in six weeks. Up to a
dozen coffee houses currently being charged $400 a year should benefit.
Our small businesses need our support, and I know many residents would
enjoy a warm place to relax with great music this winter. We want more
music in the city.
Thank you for letting me know and please tell your fellow musicians to
write their Council Members in support of "Coffee Unplugged."
Sincerely,
Gary Schiff
City Council Ward 9
Thanks to Heidi for helping inject some common sense into city hall.
Sometimes our rules and laws, although well intentioned, do more damage than
good. I think this was an example of one of many more rules, laws and
regulations that hurt small business in Minneapolis, without a real need to
do so. It's great to see someone inject a human touch with common sense to
these well intentioned, but at the same time excessive and inflexible rules.
Yes we need to regulate dance halls and night clubs. No we don't need to
charge a small cafe, with a guitar player, no cover, one more tax, they
can't afford.
We tend to criticize a lot, but often fail to recognize good actions by our
elected officials and specially their staff. Thanks also to this list for
providing a forum for so many people who often feel ignored. This is truly
e-democracy at it's best.
I do wonder though if simply some of the people who are enforcing these
rules, just need to use more common sense, instead of having to legislate
every single thought we have.
Alberto Monserrate
President CEO
Latino Communications Network (LCN Media)
Print: La Prensa de Minnesota,
Vida y Sabor, Gente de Minnesota, Hispanic Yellow Pages Directory
Radio: La Invasora AM 1400 KMNV
Web: www.gentedeminnesota.com,
www.laprensademn.com,
www.vidaysabor.com,
www.lainvasora1400.com
Events, Marketing
1516 E Lake Street #200
Minneapolis, MN 55407
Office: 612-729-5900
Fax: 612-729-5999
Web: www.lcnmedia.com
> I do wonder though if simply some of the people who are enforcing these
> rules, just need to use more common sense, instead of having to legislate
> every single thought we have.
This seems dangerous to me. Rules should be as black and white as
possible so the enforcers of the rules do not need to interpret the
intent. I believe the system is working as intended. A rule was
agreed upon. A situation has come up that said rule really shouldn't
apply to. The rule is being revisited and most likely changed to
accout for the situation. Papa's pizza is doing this very same thing
in my hood on a rule that shouldn't apply to their situation but does.
and they are doing it without the anger I picked up about this coffee
house issue.
I'm all for common sense but, if the rules are left to common sense,
then you could get 5 different enforcers come thru with 5 different
ideas of how to apply the rule and chaos erupts.
John Harris
webber-camden
John Harris: "This seems dangerous to me. Rules should be as black and white
as possible so the enforcers of the rules do not need to interpret the intent.
I believe the system is working as intended. A rule was
agreed upon."
Sad to say, I think your statement is only a wish. Rules, speaking
specifically, ordinances, are not all that black and white, leaving lots of
room for interpretation by employees of the city. Every different head of
department can enforce his/her interpretation of any particular ordinance or
part of an ordinance.
Further, unfortunately, no human rights department can effectively screen for
some kinds of negative behavior. Bribery can be an issue. Example, in Phillips,
year ago now, an inspector drove up in his car to a corner house which had just
put in some 160 feet of expensive retaining wall. It looked really nice and
improved a prominent intersection. The inspector, never having gotten out of
his car, judged the wall one inch higher than regulation and wrote orders for
the owner to correct it. What does that tell you about the ordinance and the
particular inspector?
Also, Minneapolis is only some 150 years old, already its ordinances run to
over 800 pages. That tells me that the ordinances need a thorough weeding for
outdated, unworkable, foolish, or benighted ordinances or parts of ordinances.
There are also Minneapolis ordinances which contradict each other, so the
offender has a catch 22 dilema. Sometimes, especially when the population is
beating down the council members' doors because of problems, the city council
rushes in and create a Rube Goldberg ordinance, only to find that the
ordinance, as written, cannot solve the problem. They do not necessarily go
back on a scheduled basis and correct the ordinance.
On a past thread, I cited an ordinance that says that no more than 4 unrelated
people can live in a house regardless of size of house or behavior of occupants
(but 37 related people can live in one designed for 10 max--and have). If that
ordinance were evenly applied, there could be no group homes or convents, and
the ability of single people to live collectively is absolutely stunted. Its
particularly counter productive for young, single people and elderly
single/widowed/widowered people, but the ordinance constrins.
"This is a law? a selection of silly laws from around the world," by Nigel
Napier-Andrews. Minnesota is featured. MPL has a copy.
see: http://www.dumblaws.com indexed by state no red cars can drive down lake street? best wishes, cheryl luger nokomis east
Thanks, Cheryl. It's not exactly Minneapolis specific, but it says
you may not cross the state line with a duck on your head or into
Wisconsin with a chicken on your head. Seems ridiculous, but somehow
sensible.
Most of those cited 'laws' are fakes, made up (or exaggerated) to create an
entertaining website.
For example, the actual traffic law will say that it is illegal to drive on a
state highway wearing anything on your head that will obscure your vision. So,
yes, you could say that makes it illegal to drive across the state line with a
duck or a chicken on your head. But that's quite a stretch away from the
actual law, which is a sensible requirement that you not drive with your vision
obstructed.
But if you're a Karl Rove-type Republican, it's a good way to get people upset
with 'interfering government bureaucracy'.
Thanks to Cm Schiff for his proposed adjustment to Coffee Houses' Musicians'
support/resident appreciation ordinance!
Yep... that dumb laws website does expand on the creativity of existing laws
and employs exageration...butit's fun...and serious in its impliedintended and
unintended consequences..
6 or 7 years ago at our neighborhood -wide Night Out, alaw enforcement officer
spoke withone of our state legislators. Asked our rep to support a statute that
would give them an additional tool in their 'tool box'(1st time I had heard of
that term). I could see the point of it but was disturbed by the way it as
presented. The legislator agreed to support this 'tool'.This list demonstrates
the use of 'tools' for expanded purposes..and carried to the comic extreme.
So, maybe, we might want to consider the consequences of these ordinances and
statutes in our political processes? Tools so broad they can beused for just
aboutanything...like the state's 'enabling legislation' that can be used to
eliminate elected officials.And, lest we forget, expansion of ordinances,
statutes and laws can be fodder for litigation...paid by the taxpayer.
Have fun with this creative states' 'list'.
best wishes,
cheryl luger
from the nokomiseast 'flyway'
Tim Bonham: "Most of those cited 'laws' are fakes, made up (or xaggerated) to
create an entertaining website."
I beg to differ. The ones which have a "full text" link are the real ones, (the
others are extrapolations). In cheryl's link post, check the one about
"standing around a building." It purports to identify vagrants by appearance
and/or behavior of 'people standing around a building.' It includes "unemployed
males" and "fortune tellers" as vagrants.
By that standard, intrepid reporter (and fearless leader of this list) Mr.
Brauer could be picked up for vagrancy outside the public library if he's doing
a story on spec.
It is also badly written with loose pronouns and vague nouns, worse yet, it's
grammar is trifling. The specifics, the categories of so called vagrants, lead
one to ask questions about motives.
The funny laws with full text are funny in a different way.
WMarks, Central
From City council actions this morning. Public hearing Nov. 28th. If passed,
will allow coffee shops/etc. to have limited live entertainment. Thank you, cm.
Schiff.
Please forward to the owner(s) of Tillie's bean.
Best wishes,
cheryl luger
nokomis east
**********************************
3. Ordinance Introduction:
Schiff moved to introduce the subject matter of an ordinance amending Title 13,
Chapter 267 of the Minneapolis Code of Ordinances relating to Licenses and
Business Regulations: Amusements, for first reading and referral to the Public
Safety & Regulatory Services Committee for a public hearing to be held November
28, 2007 (exempting certain licensed food establishments providing limited
entertainment from place of entertainment licensing requirements). (Unanimous
consent required)
Action Taken: Referred to Public Safety & Regulatory Services
Posting
Only members who are logged in can post, and you are not logged in.