All posts in the topic Keeping bars open longer for the RNC (Short link)
Summary
- There are 26 posts — by 14 authors — in this topic.
- Latest post made by Bob Spaulding at May 09 04:08 UTC
Hi All,
Yesterday, the city council passed a resolution by a vote of 4-3 NOT to support
extending the bar hours during the Republican National Convention.
State lawmakers are proposing to extend bar hours to 4:00 AM during the
Republican National Convention. They will vote on this proposed bill next
week.
Supporters of this measure were, Chris Coleman, Mayor, Kathy Lantry, City
Council President, Dan Bostrom, and Pat Harris, City Council Members.
My hat is off to these above mentioned city leaders.
Lee Helgen says, “This is not Las Vegas. This is the city of St. Paul.”
Dave Thune says, “I got 8,000 people who live downtown who don’t want a bunch
of Republicans lobbyists puking on the streets.”
Well Dave and Lee here is the deal.
1. The state is proposing to allow bars to be open until 4:00 AM ONLY during
the RNC convention. If St. Paul decides they don’t want to stay open that is
fine, but there will be other communities that will accommodate and accept the
money of these good citizens. The larger question for you two would be, would
you be saying the same thing if this were the Democratic National Convention
coming to town?
2. The no smoking ban in bars that you both of you voted for have hurt bars in
St. Paul. By allowing these bars to stay open a little longer during the RNC
convention would allow these bars to recover some of the lost income because of
the no smoking ban. Also this would generate additional tax revenue for the
city.
3. Last year at the end of the legislative session, you had Sen. Mee Moua, with
the blessing of Chris Coleman and others on the city council, proposing to
raise the beverage tax in St. Paul to raise extra revenue for the city. Mind
you this was done in the middle of the night WITHOUT public comment. It seems
it was ok a year ago to try and soak the bars and restaurants for extra money
for the city. By allowing these bars to stay open an extra three hours for a
very short time should be no problem and would benefit both the city and the
bars.
4. What also concerns me greatly is the comments and actions by some on the
city council towards the RNC. It is not St. Paul nice. Would these same
individuals be acting this way if the DNC were coming to town? I don’t think
so.
Pat Harris is correct when he says he does not want RNC planners to look
elsewhere if St. Paul ends up being the only municipality against the longer
bar hours. Mayor Chris Coleman adds, “I am deeply concerned about putting St.
Paul’s restaurant and bar owners at a competitive disadvantage with other
entertainment venues in the area.”
On this issue and this issue alone I stand with Mayor Chris Coleman, Pat Harris
and Dan Bostrom.
Sincerely,
John Krenik
Highland Park, St. Paul, Minnesota
Here is the deal. You can't "Keep bars open longer for the RNC." What you would do if the legislation passed would be to allow ALL bars everywhere in the City to be open until 4 AM for one week in September. So, while the RNC convention is going on downtown and our police coverage is stretched to the max, my 24 year old son and his buddies would be drinking at Joe and Stan's until 4 AM. Now, if you think it is a good idea to let bars be open 24/7 and want to make that a campaign issue, go for it, but at least understand what you are asking for. Yup, I think that hotel bars in every City shouldn't have any restrictions on the hours they are open since they cater to mostly people who are "home" after midnight in their hotel, but every bar owner everywhere else would be upset if hotel bars were able to do something they couldn't do. You are correct that the bars would make a few more bucks that week by having a 2 AM happy hour but I don't know that the thin blue line of our patrol officers would appreciate being stretched that much thinner. Look if bars can't make money without having to cater to someone that still hasn't reached their fill at 3 AM their in the wrong business. JMONTOMEPPOF Chuck Repke **************Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel Guides. (http://travel.aol.com/travel-guide/united-states?ncid=aoltrv00030000000016)
Personally I don't really care about this issue one way or the other. We're all entitled to our own opinions, but I want the conversation based on facts. According to the Pioneer Press article linked below, there was at most one City Council "supporter" of the longer hours, not three as suggested here previously. The Pioneer Press article reported, "Council Member Pat Harris seems to be the only one who isn't against the idea." Bostrom and Lantry said they wanted to look at the issues more. Moreover, Assistant Police Chief Matt Bostrom suggested it would COST the City more than it would gain to stay open those extra hours, and burden a police force already stretched thin by the convention: > Although the 4-3 vote was close, there appears to be broad > opposition on the council to later bar hours. Council Member Dan > Bostrom — whose son, Assistant Chief Matt Bostrom, is head of > convention security for the St. Paul Police Department — said he is > opposed to the legislation extending bar hours even though he did > not support the city's resolution. > > The state proposal would not charge bars for a special license > allowing extended bar hours. That would leave St. Paul paying for > police and other costs associated with the later hours, Bostrom said. The council meeting did produce a colorful quote I woke up to this morning. Council won't drink to later last call http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_8789012
John,
Why are you interested in causing the City of St. Paul taxpayers to
incur an estimated $500,000 in extra overtime police costs?
Are you asking the bars to front this cost? No!
Are you asking the RNC to front this cost? No!
You want the taxpayer to front this cost and I, for one, don't want to
add anything to the way my taxes are spent at the expense of libraries,
street maintenance, and police and fire protection.
Mike Schoenberg
St. Paul
John Krenik wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Yesterday, the city council passed a resolution by a vote of 4-3 NOT to
support extending the bar hours during the Republican National Convention.
>
> State lawmakers are proposing to extend bar hours to 4:00 AM during the
Republican National Convention. They will vote on this proposed bill next
week.
>
> Supporters of this measure were, Chris Coleman, Mayor, Kathy Lantry, City
Council President, Dan Bostrom, and Pat Harris, City Council Members.
>
> My hat is off to these above mentioned city leaders.
>
> Lee Helgen says, “This is not Las Vegas. This is the city of St. Paul.”
>
> Dave Thune says, “I got 8,000 people who live downtown who don’t want a bunch
of Republicans lobbyists puking on the streets.”
>
> Well Dave and Lee here is the deal.
>
> 1. The state is proposing to allow bars to be open until 4:00 AM ONLY during
the RNC convention. If St. Paul decides they don’t want to stay open that is
fine, but there will be other communities that will accommodate and accept the
money of these good citizens. The larger question for you two would be, would
you be saying the same thing if this were the Democratic National Convention
coming to town?
>
> 2. The no smoking ban in bars that you both of you voted for have hurt bars
in St. Paul. By allowing these bars to stay open a little longer during the
RNC convention would allow these bars to recover some of the lost income
because of the no smoking ban. Also this would generate additional tax revenue
for the city.
>
> 3. Last year at the end of the legislative session, you had Sen. Mee Moua,
with the blessing of Chris Coleman and others on the city council, proposing to
raise the beverage tax in St. Paul to raise extra revenue for the city. Mind
you this was done in the middle of the night WITHOUT public comment. It seems
it was ok a year ago to try and soak the bars and restaurants for extra money
for the city. By allowing these bars to stay open an extra three hours for a
very short time should be no problem and would benefit both the city and the
bars.
>
> 4. What also concerns me greatly is the comments and actions by some on the
city council towards the RNC. It is not St. Paul nice. Would these same
individuals be acting this way if the DNC were coming to town? I don’t think
so.
>
> Pat Harris is correct when he says he does not want RNC planners to look
elsewhere if St. Paul ends up being the only municipality against the longer
bar hours. Mayor Chris Coleman adds, “I am deeply concerned about putting St.
Paul’s restaurant and bar owners at a competitive disadvantage with other
entertainment venues in the area.”
>
> On this issue and this issue alone I stand with Mayor Chris Coleman, Pat
Harris and Dan Bostrom.
(This version includes a key line in the Pioneer Press article I left
out of my last post)...
Personally I don't really care about this issue one way or the other.
We're all entitled to our own opinions, but I want the conversation
based on facts. According to the Pioneer Press article linked below,
there was at most one City Council "supporter" of the longer hours,
not three as suggested here previously. The Pioneer Press article
reported, "Council Member Pat Harris seems to be the only one who
isn't against the idea." Bostrom and Lantry said they wanted to look
at the issues more.
Moreover, Assistant Police Chief Matt Bostrom suggested it would COST
the City more than it would gain to stay open those extra hours, and
burden a police force already stretched thin by the convention:
On 4/3/08, <email obscured> <<email obscured>> wrote:
> So, while the RNC
> convention is going on downtown and our police coverage is stretched to the
> max, my 24 year old son and his buddies would be drinking at Joe and Stan's
> until 4 AM.
So would it then be a better idea to close all bars during this week?
I mean with our police coverage stretched to the max and all.
It wasn't that long ago the bar close was changed from 1am to 2am.
Has there been that much more trouble because of that? or did the
usual trouble shift from shortly after 1am to shortly after 2am?
John Harris
webber-camden, mpls
Greetings,
I strongly suspect that the Republican party will want people at private
parties not public parties where citizen journalists like myself might report
observations. The private parties are free, so there is a huge incentive for
attendance at private parties instead of public bars. So I think all of our
bars would have the huge expense of staying open until 4AM without the payback.
And those employees would have to go home at 4AM, so employees would be driving
home tired, or waiting on empty streets for buses or having an expensive taxi
ride. Even if this passed,I don't think bar owners would decide to stay open
unless there was a crowd.
Grace Kelly nicknamed Kelly
Curmudgeon from Merriam Park
How long is it before someone, anyone, makes the point that it's not the convention-goers we have to worry about, it's the drunken protesters the cops'll have to be dealing with at 4:30 in the morning? Anyone? Anyone? Archbishop John Nienstedt weighed in on this issue in his column in this week's Catholic Spirit: http://thecatholicspirit.com/main.asp?SectionID=14&SubSectionID=14&ArticleID=1710&TM=44489.2 -Atom Robinson, Who is working out the difference between lemmings and lemurs...
The reason that no one mentions protesters in the 4AM bar consideration, is
that all St Paul hotel space is reserved for the RNC attendees, so protesters
will be probably be staying with friends throughout the cites.
While 70% of the American people are mad at this Republican party leadership
and everything it stands for, it would be hard to characterize protesters in
any one way. I would expect peacemakers to be a significant portion of the
"Making America Better" vision that protesters share. The peacemakers that I
know come from many religious based social justice groups, which are the
opposite of "drinking" communities. I, myself, haven grown up in Wisconsin,
have experienced the fellowship of bars when young. As I grew older, I am more
inclined to the dinner with friends type of socialization. So based on location
and the culture of ethically based protest, I would totally discount protesters
in making counts for keeping open St Paul bars.
Maybe if we offered 20% discount peacemaker cards, we could draw more business?
Grace Kelly nicknamed Kelly
Peacemaker curmudgeon in Merriam Park
Well, I don't care if we are talking about Republicans, Democrats, Green Party,
or Left Nostril Inhaling Communists for Christ. They knew our rules when they
decided to come here.
Setting aside my particular opinion that there is no real good to be obtained
from events of this type I still wonder just where would this stop. So - say
the VFW or Automobile Safety Council wanted to have their convention in St.
Paul - should we keep the bars open later for them? Where do we draw the line?
Do we keep bars open later for political groups? All political groups? Major
political groups only? How about industry groups? Trade councils? Service
organizations? NGOs?
And why do we want to do this for this event? I suspect that it's because the
eyes of the world will be upon us and we are always afraid of looking like
rubes because we don't do things the same here as they do in New York. Well,
thank God we don't! I don't want to live in New York, or Miami, or any of
those places. I like St. Paul. And, if you look at those perennial lists of
the nation's most livable cities, it seems a lot of other people like St. Paul,
too.
If these folks decided they want to come here for their convention, then I
suppose we can't really stop them. But, they decided to come to our city, not
some other place. If they wanted to have a different experience they shouldn't
have chosen St. Paul.
Oh. And don't even get me started on the kindergartener's having to start
school a week late because of this mess.
Brian Ashley
Macalester
This IS St. Paul, and I'm proud of all my home town has to offer. Neither
St. Paul nor our fair neighbor to the west has ever advertised ourselves
anywhere on the planet as being the hotbed of alcohol-based entertainment,
or most other forms of adult-only entertainment either, for that matter. And
that's just fine with me.
I live here by choice, rather than in any of the various communities I lived
in in the US and W Eur in times past, because we DO have a high quality of
life. Absolutely we have lots of work to do to make it better for everyone,
as we should, but among our tasks is NOT one that encourages thousands of
people to wander around drunk -- inside or outside -- any time of the day or
night.
What a ridiculous notion!
Refusing to do so doesn't make us look or become more sophisticated,
comparable, or anything else. It's just playing to the lowest common
denominator. Our job is to be ourselves, do our best, and be proud of it. We
have a beautiful community full of great people, the vast majority of whom
are educated, welcoming, respectful, and who care about our community, good
government, strong partnerships, and doing the right thing.
Wow.
How lucky any visitors are, especially those fully engaged in our country's
democratic electoral process, to have the chance to do it right here where
the notion of the common good was pretty much invented.
On 4/3/08, Anne R. Carroll <<email obscured>> wrote:
> but among our tasks is NOT one that encourages thousands of
> people to wander around drunk -- inside or outside -- any time of the day or
> night.
How exactly does allowing bars to be open 2 hours later accomplish
this? I'm missing the connection.
John Harris
webber-camden, mpls
Atom, with all due respect, I don't expect that anyone but locals and very few RNC visitors will be in our bars until 2:00 AM, much less 4:00 AM. If they are interested in what they are here for, they will not be getting themselves drunk in a public place. On the other hand, I would bet that there are plenty of hospitality suites that may be open late into the night. Why spend your money if you don't have to. As for the protesters, some of them may hit the local watering holes after their march. I doubt that many of them will be that interested in spending good money for over priced drinks. atom robinson <<email obscured>> wrote: How long is it before someone, anyone, makes the point that it's not the convention-goers we have to worry about, it's the drunken protesters the cops'll have to be dealing with at 4:30 in the morning? Anyone? Anyone? Archbishop John Nienstedt weighed in on this issue in his column in this week's Catholic Spirit: http://thecatholicspirit.com/main.asp?SectionID=14&SubSectionID=14&ArticleID=1710&TM=44489.2 -Atom Robinson, Who is working out the difference between lemmings and lemurs... Atom Robinson Frogtown-ish, St. Paul Info about Atom Robinson: http://forums.e-democracy.org/contacts/atomrobinson This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/r4FIoedFqO0IhmweqIHeS
I can help you there. Lemmings are mammals of the order Rodentia
(think squirrels, guinea pigs, beavers, etc.), and lemurs are
primates, not the catholic sort, but the same order as us humans
along with monkeys, apes, and more obscure primates than the quiet
and nocturnal lemurs. I noticed that one of the Republican state
representatives was having a problem with this distinction as well
yesterday at the Capitol in his acting out the usual histrionics his
party uses for opposing bonding bills, and my representative, Phyllis
Kahn, had to help him out.
We'll see how things go for bonding when Gov. Pawlenty either apes
other Republican governors under the sway of Grover Norquist, et. al,
in nibbling away at needed capital investments in our state or
vetoing the bill outright, or behaves uncharacteristically like a
responsible primate and signs the thing to create jobs and boost our
state's economy. This bonding bill is a whole lot more sensible than
maintenance and other operational stuff Republicans put on the
state's credit card when they were in charge.
Okay. 2nd post today and y'all know what that means.
Anne - I do agree with your posting.
We have decided to have the bar closing time we have because it reflects our
overall values and lifestyle. It is part of who we are. Frankly, having moved
from Chicago (I was actually born here, so I claim right of return) where the
bar closing times were so late as to essentially make Friday and Saturday
nights "non-closing" nights I found it refreshing that we had a 1:00 AM closing
time. Haven't cared for the 2:00 AM closing and don't see why it's needed.
However, I don't quite agree with your email to me in which you addressed the
kindergartner's need to start a week later because new, young students might be
confused with all the bus re-routing necessary for the convention. I don't
believe the busses needed to be re-routed. If the politicians are afraid of
bus loads of 5 year olds they should have their convention somewhere else. We
don't re-route busses for any other convention. We shouldn't for a political
convention.
For those who don't see a connection between the convention, later closing
times, and drunken rowdy behavior, allow me to make the following points:
1) It isn't the politicians, delegates, or their hangers on who will be at the
bars late. It is all the other people. The media, the protesters (yes, the
protesters, too), the hyped up curious locals and all the other interesting
sorts the convention will attract.
2) Later bar times do increase drunken rowdy behavior because it gives patrons
more time to drink. You can talk all you want about bartenders refusing to
serve people who are too drunk, but if that was a foolproof system we wouldn't
have so many drunk driving accidents at bar time.
3) As has been mentioned here by someone else, the later bar times will also
prove attractive to young locals. Even if the club where they are dancing to
their favorite band closes at 2:00, they can, and will, still pile in the car
and head on over to the bars that have opted to stay open until 4:00 just like
we did when we were young and living in places that had access to multiple
closing times. > Ah, I remember the drunken drives through the countryside
trying to make it to Beldenville before last call. The wind blowing the smell
of Danny's regurgitated cheesburger away and leaving the car with that clean
country smell that's a combination of new mown alfalfa and cow manure. [sniff]
good times....<
I'm sorry. Where was I?
It doesn't make sense. It isn't who we are as a community. It's silly to
expect us to make this change after they have already selected our city for
their convention. If they don't have respect for our laws, our culture or our
institutions they shouldn't have chosen St. Paul.
Brian Ashley
Macalester
Just to clarify one piece about bus rerouting...
As we 1) do citywide busing for all of our high schools and 30 or so
elementaries and various special programs, 2) have one downtown school (on
Kellogg just east of the Xcel Center), 3) have many buses that bisect the
downtown area, AND 4) part of the downtown will be closed off or otherwise
result in traffic delays: In order to get our kids to school on time and
ready to learn, we will temporarily reroute some buses during this
convention. It is not a big deal for us to do this, but is essential to
maintain our high safety and operations standards on behalf of our students.
We do the same with other big events, road construction, every time kids
move, etc., so while there are important nuances and security issues
associated with this particular event, staff is accustomed to and fully
prepared to make the necessary changes quickly and efficiently so kids can
be in school every day, on time, to learn. And taking the privilege of the
virtual pen for a moment, our transportation services routinely win national
awards for efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and timeliness because we begin
with good software and then our deeply experienced staff make the final
tweaks and refinements manually. They do good work, and I'm sure that will
continue as we open school next fall during the RNC.
Update: As reported In the Pioneer Press, “Rep. Joe Atkins, an Inver Grove Heights DFLer who sponsored the move to kill the later closing time, said he didn't mind allowing bars to stay open late during the convention — "I want those folks to consume as much alcohol as possible," he said. But he wanted the change to move through his committee so that it could receive a full vetting. His committee will hold a hearing on the late closure next week.” The proposed measure would allow bars within 10 miles of the RNC convention to stay open. It now goes to Rep. Atkins committee. Some of the posts in the Pioneer Press about this subject are interesting. You can read them by clicking on this link: http://www.topix.net/forum/source/twincities-pioneer-press/T0118ADJ5DHD9JAOA To Mike Schoenberg, You said, “John, Why are you interested in causing the City of St. Paul taxpayers to incur an estimated $500,000 in extra overtime police costs?” Mike, FYI, I spent over two hours today looking to your post alone. What model did you use to come up with police expenses will cost $500,000.00 in extra overtime if the bars were to be left open an extra two hours. I have some people at the police department who would like to know where you came up with that figure. What facts do you base your figure of $500,000.00. Did you just pluck a number out of the air? Secondly, this is another reason to hire permanent police officers and staff our police department at 1.1 police officers per 1,000 residents like our neighboring cities. Yes, even Minneapolis has a slightly more police officers than the 1.1 per 1,000 ratio. To Anne Carroll, FYI - This post was revised many times and somethings are just left for another day. We both agree that St. Paul is OUR town and it seems we are proud of all it has to offer. You feel that keeping bars open an extra two hours is a ridiculous notion! Just to remind you this was not MY idea, but it came from the legislature. Even our mayor Chris Coleman supports this. Three city council members voted for this (Kathy Lantry, Dan Bostrom and Pat Harris). In the city where NOTHING is allowed, I say let the bars stay open longer. Let the bars make some extra money during the convention. To Chuck, You said, “You are correct that the bars would make a few more bucks that week by having a 2 AM happy hour.” I AGREE!!!!!!! You go on to added police costs. I disagree, security will be in place and some of the added costs are already covered by police security already in place. I am waiting for Mike Schoenberg’s information where he stated that this added police would be $500,000.00 if the bars stayed open until 4:00 AM. Some very highly placed individuals in the city would also like to know where Mike Schoenberg arrived at this figure. Chuck you said, “Look if bars can't make money without having to cater to someone that still hasn't reached their fill at 3 AM their in the wrong business.” That is the point Chuck, these bars were making a profit before the no smoking ban took effect. I do not want to rehash the no smoking ban, but when will the city stop banning things for our own good. It seems that all of the city council members who voted in favor of the no smoking are in favor of abortion. Go figure, the abortion procedure kills the most defenseless in our society and these council members do not allow us to smoke in a bar. If our city council really felt they are out there to protect us, why would ban abortion. Have a nice day. Sincerely, John Krenik
I think extending the bar closing time for the RNC is silly, but this does
bring me a thought.... What about abolishing legally mandated closing times
*for good*? If there was no legally madated closing time, you wouldn't have the
surge of intoxicated people hitting the streets at once. I rarely stay out till
2 AM, but I remember seeing Hennepin Ave. a few times about 20 years ago at 1
AM, when that was bar closing time. Yikes!
Understand there is a world of difference between "later closing" and "no
closing". Some states have 4 or 5 AM already. That pushes the drunken crowds
into the fringes of the morning rush hour. Not a good idea. No closing means
bars will close when they feel like it (and some might take full advantage and
be open 24/7 like they are in Nevada) and the discharge into the streets will
be staggered. *Any* mandated closing time serves as a challenge to be open the
whole time they can.
If any law change (or more accurately, law enforcement change) should be
made for RNC, there should be a formal suspension of enforcement of
prostitution laws for the duration. One thing that America in general should
consider is having a system like the Netherlands, where certain things remain
technically illegal (like marijuana), but there are formal agreements on the
part of the authorities not to enforce the law as long as business is conducted
a certain way.
In a message dated 4/4/2008 3:39:54 PM Central Daylight Time, <email obscured> writes: If there was no legally madated closing time, you wouldn't have the surge of intoxicated people hitting the streets at once Here is the issue; some bars are close to people's homes at some point 1 AM, 2 AM they should have some relief from the bar. Yes, I understand that everyone should do what they can to make bar owners money because they are so put upon, but don't we believe that anybody else on the planet has some value? JMONTOMEPPOF Chuck Repke **************Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel Guides. (http://travel.aol.com/travel-guide/united-states?ncid=aoltrv00030000000016)
Minneapolis' city council doesn't agree with Dave Thune on this issue: http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/conventions/17312979.html If later closing hours are a good idea for this convention (which they aren't), why aren't they a good idea for other conventions and for the rest of us the rest of the time? Good old Phylis Kahn, that "cold Omaha" phrase works every time. Do we really have so little confidence in our cities that we believe our bar closing times (which aren't that early after all) are all that separates us from other Midwestern towns?
Hi All,
Just an update:
Yesterday, the Minneapolis city council voted 9-3 to allow bars to be open is
the state approved the measure. Below is the article in the St. Paul Pioneer
Press.
It seems Rep. Phyllis Kahn and the Minneapolis City Council feels that keeping
the bars open during the RNC convention this will be good for business in
Minneapolis.
I find Dave Thune’s statement highly offensive, "a bunch of puking Republican
lobbyists on the streets at 4 in the morning." I think St. Paul should be
trying to attract business instead of turning business away.
One call I received yesterday stated the following, “I moved to downtown for
the nightlife, but what I got was a dead city.”
To Mike Schoenberg, I am still waiting for some documentation for your
statement that the added police cost will be $500,000.00 if bars stayed open an
extra two hours during the RNC convention or was this just a number you pulled
out of the air.
It seems that there are some elected officials in St. Paul who are opposed to
everything associated with the RNC just because it is the RNC. This would be a
non-issue if it were the DNC.
Sincerely,
John Krenik
Highland Park, St. Paul, Minnesota
Twin Cities split on late bar closings
Pioneer Press
Article Last Updated: 04/05/2008 12:27:34 AM CDT
Is a bar brawl brewing over Republican National Convention partygoers?
In stark contrast to a decision by St. Paul city leaders days before, the
Minneapolis City Council has voted to approve possible later bar hours during
the RNC.
The idea was introduced at the Legislature last week by Rep. Phyllis Kahn,
DFL-Minneapolis, who put forth a measure to allow bars within a 10-mile radius
of the Xcel Energy Center to remain open until 4 a.m. from Aug. 29 through
Sept. 8. The convention is slated for Sept. 1-4 at the center.
On Friday, the Minneapolis City Council voted 9-3 in support of the later
hours, should the measure pass the Legislature — but retained the right to
decide which days and areas of the city would be included.
On Wednesday, St. Paul's City Council voted 4-3 to nix the late bar hours, if
they pass. At the time, Council Member Dave Thune, who represents downtown,
said he was concerned about "a bunch of puking Republican lobbyists on the
streets at 4 in the morning." Others worried about police costs.
Several St. Paul bar owners have expressed concern over Minneapolis approving
the later hours and St. Paul denying them. They fear a competitive disadvantage
— especially when vying to attract convention-goers looking to book private
parties.
Tad Vezner
Citizen Repke:
You have a good point about bars being close to homes and residents
deserve relief after a certain hour. That said, I wonder if, in at least some
cases, it would be better to have people leave in dribs and drabs throughout
the night than all at once at 1 or 2 or even 4 AM. That was what I was thinking
about when I said maybe there shouldn't be a legally mandated closing time.
Now, I could see a curfew on loud entertainment in residential areas, that's a
different story.
I'm not claiming you're wrong, just trying to get the issue discussed.
Comrade John Wilson
Whittier, Minneapolis
John,
I sent you off list what I remembered about hearing $500,000.00 figure.
Either it was lost in transmission (which I doubt) or it was ignored,
misplaced, etc. So I will waste one of my daily posts on this issue:
I heard it on a newscast, either TV or radio, but most likely TV. I
vaguely recall this figure being associated with Chief John Harrington's
office. Somebody somewhere floated this number. I just picked it up from
the news media in a state of shock. I thought to myself that it was a
lot of money for the City of St. Paul to be uncompensated for. Maybe
somebody was speaking out of school and is now mum on the issue. But
cost is an issue that should be addressed, most likely by the bean
counter types in the SPPD.
My personal feeling is that if this could spark life into the downtown
area, all the better. But we should not be like Dr. Frankenstein
sparking life into his monster, much to our horror.
Mike Schoenberg
MacGroveland
John Krenik wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Just an update:
>
> Yesterday, the Minneapolis city council voted 9-3 to allow bars to be open is
the state approved the measure. Below is the article in the St. Paul Pioneer
Press.
>
> It seems Rep. Phyllis Kahn and the Minneapolis City Council feels that
keeping the bars open during the RNC convention this will be good for business
in Minneapolis.
>
> I find Dave Thune’s statement highly offensive, "a bunch of puking Republican
lobbyists on the streets at 4 in the morning." I think St. Paul should be
trying to attract business instead of turning business away.
>
> One call I received yesterday stated the following, “I moved to downtown for
the nightlife, but what I got was a dead city.”
>
> To Mike Schoenberg, I am still waiting for some documentation for your
statement that the added police cost will be $500,000.00 if bars stayed open an
extra two hours during the RNC convention or was this just a number you pulled
out of the air.
>
> It seems that there are some elected officials in St. Paul who are opposed to
everything associated with the RNC just because it is the RNC. This would be a
non-issue if it were the DNC.
I agree with Thune. The Republican lobbyists will be puking puking puking.
And peeing. Peeing here, peeing there, peeing peeing everywhere. And who
knows what else? (it's called building a small monument to GW Bush). And
where they do, perhaps next year flowers will sprout there, the first and
only good thing to grow out of the rnc occupation.
Except for an unfortunate comment about puking on city streets, I think this
discussion is one of the best this issues forum has had. Most posts offer
opinions,some facts, others counter points for arguments.
Personally, I seldom partake of the toxic elixir from our purveyors of spirits.
When I do its usually with a meal and I am usually home by 10:30. However, I
would argue that a four O'clock closing is much better than 2:00. I would even
opt for a no closing time.
Why you ask. Well first of all, it will eliminate the bar closing issues
associated with "drunks of the road". Second it would help promote the
city/state hospitality industry. Remember, the best way to raise money through
sales taxes is from people who come here to visit.
Now to eliminate all of the issues with St. Paul's neighborhood bars, I think
bar owners or license applicants who want to change to later or no closing
hours should have to get neighboring resident signatures on a city/state
drafted standard petition and a public hearing, if requested by neighbors. I
would propose that public hearings be limited to those neighbors directly
impacted by the restaurant/bar customers. This would include two or three
blocks of residential neighboring streets and maybe four blocks of any roads
that are usually used for access and egress from the area.
The public hearing would include issues related to the specific venue. This
might include sound from entertainment and issues related to specific clientele
like expected bikers or maybe Winter Carnival rowdies.
I would also propose that the downtown bars and restaurants would be treated
different than residential establishments. For instance, there need not be a
public hearing for hotels or any restaurant or bar located in an entertainment
area regardless of the number of residents within two blocks of the
establishment.
In my younger years, I traveled far and wide. I have been to bars that were
open all night long. Some were in college towns. Some were in residential
neighborhoods. I have never seen any of the issues people seem to be concerned
about with this proposal. Of course, in all cases, the attitude toward alcohol
was much less puritan than ours.
As I posted earlier on this subject, I don't think any of the delegates or
those elected politicians will be among those spending their time in our bars
that late at night. First of all most will be taking part in corporate
sponsored hospitality rooms or establishments like McGoverns. Second, others
will be back in their hotel rooms preparing for the next day.
So who will be taking advantage of these late hours? The press? Protesters?
Or will the majority of patrons be from the local area? If the later is
accurate, many would be young, men and women who may currently close the local
bars.
I think this issue is way over blown. Part of it from our the puritanical
nature of our history. Part of it is due to our history of being incapable of
dealing responsibly with alcohol and the result of abusing it. Part of it is
due to our lack of adequate regular frequent public transportation and the
resulting use of personal transportation.
Unfortunately, it doesn't matter whether the Legislature passes this bill and
the Governor signs it. It doesn't matter if the City Council approves or
disapproves of allowing late bar closing. The effort if very short term and
will not be an adequate test of late bar closing for any venue except maybe
entertainment venues like the Myth in Maplewood.
Of course, now that Joe Soucheray has joined this discussion with today's
column, he took this discussion away from one that was somewhat rational to one
that depends on what position a specific politician holds.
John <<email obscured>> wrote: Citizen Repke:
You have a good point about bars being close to homes and residents
deserve relief after a certain hour. That said, I wonder if, in at least some
cases, it would be better to have people leave in dribs and drabs throughout
the night than all at once at 1 or 2 or even 4 AM. That was what I was thinking
about when I said maybe there shouldn't be a legally mandated closing time.
Now, I could see a curfew on loud entertainment in residential areas, that's a
different story.
I'm not claiming you're wrong, just trying to get the issue discussed.
Comrade John Wilson
Whittier, Minneapolis
John Wilson
Whittier, Minneapolis
Info about John Wilson: http://forums.e-democracy.org/contacts/johnwilson
This topic's messages may be viewed at:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/4mt5UBltrr4k2DnGb40LYz
Looks like the Governor's signing legislation allowing cities within
10 miles of the Xcel Center to keep bars open until 4am. If this
passes, perhaps you, me, or one of the Mayors Coleman can hang out at
McGovern's with John McCain to see how he responds to the proverbial
3am phone call.
In dealing with the legislation, the Governor noted, "No good happens
after bar closing time." My councilmember put it a bit, um,
differently, but same dif.
So, I promised myself back when this first came up that I would write
this post. In light of the passage of said legislation (which I still
think tended not to be where I'd spend the public's goodwill), for the
sake of personal integrity, I change my recommendation.
If Minneapolis or Bloomington keeps their bars open til 4am, we should
too. Otherwise this will just become a dumb big media story and hook
in the short-staffed national media about how to compare and contrast
Minneapolis and St. Paul. St. Paul's civic profile will be about that
sleepy and quiet backwater known as St. Paul that is epitomized by not
allowing its bars to stay open late for even the week of the RNC. And
we'll my Councilmember's quote in endless loop, which doesn't exactly
feel like rolling out the red carpet...nothing personal, Dave.
Anyhow, it's only a week, something about putting our best foot
forward, and etcetera, etcetera...