All posts in the topic barrs - long (sorry) (Short link)

Apr 06 19:04 UTC

I've been kind of quiet on this online cuz I have my hands full at work,
but...

Here's the problem.  We don't limit bar activities because we like "blue
laws". One unique aspect of St. Paul is that many of our residential
neighborhoods are dotted with neighborhood bars - bars with peoples homes
next door, beside or behind them.
The nature of bars and alchohol consumption being what it is, patrons
eventually go home and when they do they talk loud, they fight, they squeal
tires, and generally are a pain in the ass on their block.  And of course on
the darker side, bars also have a tendancy to attract  other patrons who
deal drugs in their cars and ocassionaly shoot each other. Yes, sometimes
they puke, too.

We've had them for years. We generally feel that the recreational aspect of
say, Skinners bar or Mancinis are local color and in addition, have great
food. They are also run by owners who put up with no, or little misbehavior
by their patrons. Unfortunately these two are not in the majority when it
comes to good citizenry.  If you have the notion that bars should have no
limits and be open til 4 or never close, then you obviously do not live
here, or perhaps in 3 or 4 smaller parts of the city that have no bars at
all.

But even Downtown - not considered by some as a neighborhood - now has abour
8000 residents. Most of them are fairly near or even above bars and
nightclubs. They chose downtown living because it is fun, convenient and
unique.  They did not choose it because they thought they would enjoy bad
behavior and fighting outside their windows all night. Actually, like most
of you, they'd prefer that intoxicated people not awaken them.  In most
cases co-existence is wonderful. But as I said before, the nature of bars
being bars, means that intoxicated patrons eventually leave.  1 or 2o'clock
in the evening is generally felt to be a reasonable time to conclude an
evening. We who live next to or near bars understand and don't mind a bit of
commotion then... but stretch it out til 4 AM and I believe you are asking
for unreasonable tolerance from neighbors.

Most of you who know me know that I have moderated my bar behavior over the
years, but I started playing music in bars when I was 18.  I know bars
inside and out. I've seen fights, stabbings, drug use, wrecked marriages and
regurgitation, but I've also seen great musicians, fun times, good food and
some cheerful silliness. Unfortunately this isn't a a TV sitcom like Cheers.
You get both the good and the bad. Its a tough business to make a living in.
Its hard work to be a good owner/neighbor, refereeing domestic disputes and
picking up litter and hosing down sidewalks the next morning.  I like bars
(believe it or not) and I like bars to be on our commercial streets and in
our neighborhoods, but I am no fool and I know that:

1.  The adjacent homeowners and neighbors will hate the 4 AM close time.
2. There is no way to rule that only a few "select" bars can be open til 4.
You either let them all, or none. The law protects them all equally.
3. Limiting 4AM closing to downtown still puts them beside residences who
pay as much taxes as you do and did not purchase a condo on Bourbon Street -
they chose Wabasha, Minnesota or Wall Streets.
4. Limiting to downtown is in reality unworkable because you would be
leaving out the popular Mancinis, O'Gara's and Dixie's bars.
5. We've been told that the cost of law enforcement due to extended hours is
upwards to half a million bucks - payable via your property taxes.
6. The test of a great city is not how long you can drink alchohol.  To hear
a legislator say that we just don't want to be a big city is insulting and
obviously the words of a moron.

I also know that ocassionally I speak frankly and with a bit of passion.
But I am angry that this is being suggested, to cater to a "special" group
of conventioneers who will be judging us predominately by our bar hours.  I
am more than a little irritated that cities are being played off against
each other ("we can't be at a competitive disadvantage").

Finally, I may have unfairly sullied the reputation of lobbyists. My friend
Chuck pointed out that lobbyists don't puke, they're professionals who have
experience holding their liquor. Its the amateurs who spew.
He may be right, but the particular lobbyists we'll have in town that week
are the ones who have initiated this whole discussion.
And of course these are the lobbyists who brought us an illegal and tragic
war, a recession, polluted water, expensive drugs, and even the moralists
who preach family values but play "outside the box" themselves.  They are
enough to make me queasy without a snootful...

Sorry Sandy, I don't apologize.

dave thune
ward 2

All posts in the topic barrs - long (sorry) (Short link)

Add to the topic barrs - long (sorry) [?]