HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-04-17 Ordinance /
Prepared by: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5240
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF 4.01 ACRES LOCATED EAST
OF HARLOCKE STREET FROM HIGH-DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RM-44) TO
SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY-44 (OSA-44).
WHEREAS, Southgate Development has made application for a Sensitive Areas rezoning and
approval of the Sensitive Areas Development Plan for 4.01 acres located east of Harlocke Street; and WHEREAS, the property contains steep, critical, and protected slopes; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a Sensitive Areas Development Plan which minimizes
disturbance of the critical and protected slopes; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Sensitive Areas Development Plan
and found it to be in compliance with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Sensitive Areas Development Plan also complies with the development regulations of
the High-Density Multi-Family (RM-44) zone.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDA1NED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY,
IOWA:
SECTION I. APPROVAL. The property legally described below is hereby redesignated from its
current zoning of RM-44 to OSA-44 and the associated development plan is approved:
LOT 25, WEEBER'S THIRD ADDITION TO IOWA CI'j~, IOWA, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT
RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 9, AT PAGE 14, OF THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY
RECORDER'S OFFICE.
SECTION II. ZONING HAP. The Building Inspector is hereby authorized and directed to change the
zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to conform to this amendment upon the final passage, approval
and publication of this ordinance as provided by law.
SECTION III. CERTIFICATION AND RECORDING. Upon passage and approval of the Ordinance,
the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this ordinance and to record the same
at the office of the County Recorder of Johnson County, Iowa, all as provided by law.
SECTION IV. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this
Ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION V. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to
be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or
any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION VI. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval
and publication, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this day of ,2001
MAYOR ~
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
City A~or~..~ _/~'~
ppdadm/orddharlocke.doc
OrdinanceNo. DEFEATED
Page__
It was moved by and seconded by that the Ordinance
as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were:
AYES: NAYS: ABSENT:
Champion
Kanner
Lehman
O'Donnell
Pfab
Vanderhoef
Wilbum
First Consideration 4/17 / 0 1
Voteforpassage:AYE5: Champion, 0'Donne]'l, Vender'hoef, Wi]burn. NAYS: Kanner,
Pfab. ABSENT: Lehman
Second Consideration
Vote for passage:
Date published
WEEBER-HARLOCKE
NEIGHBORHOOD
A NEIGHBORLY PERSPECTIVE
Prepared by: Eleanor M. Dilkes, City Attorney, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5030
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, BY
ENACTING NEW SECTIONS NUMBERED 4-2-3, ENTITLED "LOCAL REVIEW OF
APPLICATION/INVESTIGATION OF APPLICANT"; SECTION 4-2-4, ENTITLED "NOTICE
AND HEARING"; AND SECTION 4-2-5, ENTITLED "CIVIL PENALTIES"; REVISING
SECTION 4-5-4 ENTITLED "REGULATION OF PERSONS UNDER LEGAL AGE";
ENACTING A NEW SECTION 4-5-6 ENTITLED "SALES TO INTOXICATED PERSONS";
AND ENACTING A NEW SECTION 4-5-7 ENTITLED "LIMITATIONS ON SALES", ALL OF
WHICH PROVIDE FOR THE REGULATION OF ALCOHOL SALES.
WHEREAS, underage drinking, binge drinking, and the over consumption of alcohol in Iowa City
have a significant and negative impact on the health, welfare and morals of its citizens, and result in
increased burdens on Iowa City's criminal justice system and social services agencies; and
WHEREAB, it is the intent of the Iowa City City Council to address and discourage underage
drinking, binge drinking, and the over consumption of alcohol and the negative externalities associated
with such behaviors and activities; and
WHEREAS, Btate law authorizes the City Council as the licensing authority to impose
administrative penalties for, among other things, violations of the Alcoholic Beverage Control provisions
of the Iowa Code and ordinances of the City; and
WHEREAB, it is the intent of the Iowa City City Council to hold holders of liquor control licenses,
wine, or beer permits accountable and responsible for fully and effectively complying with all state laws
and city ordinances with respect to the selling and serving of alcohol to patrons; and
WHEREAB, the City Council desires to address negative impacts associated with such activity
and conduct through accountability, enforcement, and penalties; and
WHEREAS, such accountability, enforcement and penalties are in the best interests of the health,
welfare and morals of the citizens of Iowa City, Iowa for the reasons stated above.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY,
IOWA:
SECTION I. AMENDMENT. Title 4 of the City Code, entitled "Alcoholic Beverages" is amended, as
follows:
I. Adding a new section 4-2-3, entitled "Local Review of Application/Investigation of Applicant" as
follows:
Section 4-2-3: Local Review of Application/Investigation of Applicant
A. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant for a liquor control license, beer permit, or wine
permit, or a renewal of any of those, to obtain the appropriate application from the City Clerk.
B. Prior to submission to the City Council, the application must be submitted to the Iowa City
Fire Chief, the Iowa City Chief of Police, the Iowa City Building Official, and the Johnson County
Health Department and the County Attorney, each of whom will approve or disapprove the
application. It shall be the responsibility of the Fire Chief, Building Official, and Health Department
to inspect the premises and determine if it complies with all applicable state and local laws, rules,
and regulations. The Chief of Police and County Attorney shall each make an investigation to
determine if the applicant is of good moral character as defined in Section 123.3(26) of the Iowa
Code and the Rules of the Iowa Alcoholic Beverages Division. With regard to renewal applications,
that investigation shall include any relevant information about prior operations under the license or
permit. Disapproval of the application by any of the above must be in writing and must set fodh the
reasons therefore. Each official reviewing the application must complete the investigation and, if
applicable, the memo setting forth the reasons for disapproval within five working days following
receipt of the application.
II. Adding a new section 4-2-4, entitled "Notice and Hearing" as follows:
4-2-4: Notice and Hearing:
The City Council shall provide the licensee or permittee an opportunity to be heard prior to the
imposition of a civil penalty, suspension or revocation or disapproval of an application for renewal.
Notice may be given by personal service or first-class mail directed to the manager or contact
person of the applicant as listed on the application. Notice by personal service must be given at
least five days before the hearing. Notice by first-class mail is effective on mailing and must be
given at least six days before the hearing.
Ill. Adding a new section 4-2-5, entitled "Civil Penalties" as follows:
Section 4-2-5: Civil Penalties
A. Any violation of state law, local ordinance, or the rules of the Alcoholic Beverages Division
by any employee, agent, or servant of a licensee or permittee shall be deemed to be the act of the
licensee or the permittee and shall subject the license or permit of said licensee or permittee to civil
penalties, including suspension or revocation.
B. The City Council may suspend a license or permit for a period not to exceed one year,
revoke the license or permit, or impose a civil penalty not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000)
per violation. Before suspension, revocation. or imposition of a civil penalty the license or permit
holder shali be given written notice and opportunity for a hearing in accordance with Section 4-2-4.
C. A license or permit issued may be suspended or revoked, or a civil penalty may be imposed
on the license or permit holder by the City Council for any of the following causes:
1) Misrepresentation of any material fact in the application for such license or permit.
2) Violation of any of the provisions of Chapter 123, the Alcoholic Beverages Control provisions
of the Iowa Code.
3) Any change in the ownership or interest in the business operated under a Class "A," Class
"B," or Class "C' liquor control license, or any wine or beer permit, which change was not
previously reported to and approved by the City Council.
4) Any event which would have resulted in disqualification from receiving a license or permit
when originally issued.
5) Any sale, hypothecation, or transfer of the license or permit.
6) The failure or refusal on the part of any licensee or permittee to render any report or remit
any taxes due under Chapter 123 of the Iowa Code.
D. A license or permit issued may be suspended for a period not to exceed one year for
violation of any ordinance or regulation of the City of Iowa City relating to the purchase, possession,
sale, supply, dispensing or giving of alcohol when such ordinance or regulation has no counterpart
under State law.
E. When a liquor license or wine or beer permit is suspended after a hearing as a result of
violation by the licensee, permittee, or the licensee's or permittee's agents or employees, the
premises which were licensed by the license or permit shall not be relicensed for a new applicant
until the suspension has terminated or time of suspension has elapsed, or ninety days have
elapsed since the commencement of the suspension, whichever occurs first. However, this section
does not prohibit the premises from being relicensed to a new applicant before the suspension has
terminated or before the time of suspension has elapsed or before ninety days have elapsed from
the commencement of the suspension, if the premises prior to the time of the suspension have
been purchased under contract, and the vendor under that contract had exercised the person's
rights under Chapter 656 of the Iowa Code and sold the property to a different person who is not
related to the previous licensee or permittee by marriage or within the third degree of consanguinity
or affinity and if the previous licensee or permittee does not have a financial interest in the business
of the new applicant.
2
F. A criminal conviction is not a prerequisite to a suspension, revocation, or imposition of a civil
penalty pursuant to this section.
G. If the cause for suspension is a first offense violation of section 123.49, subsection 2,
paragraph "h" of the Iowa Code or section 4-5-4(B) of the City Code, the City Council shall impose a
civil penalty in the amount of five hundred dollars in lieu of suspension of the license or permit.
H. The City Council shall notify the Alcoholic Beverages Division of any action taken under this
section and shall notify the licensee or permit holder of the right to appeal a suspension, revocation,
or imposition of a civil penalty to the Alcoholic Beverages Division.
I. If any licensee, wine permittee, beer permittee, or employee of a licensee or permittee is
convicted of selling, giving, or otherwise supplying any alcoholic beverage, wine, or beer to any
person in violation of section 123.49, subsection 2, paragraph "h' of the Iowa Code or section 4-5-
4(B) of the City Code, in addition to criminal penalties fixed for such violations, the City Council shall
assess a civil penalty as follows:
a. Upon a first conviction, the violator's liquor control license or wine permit or beer permit shall
not be suspended, but rather, the violator shall be assessed a civil penalty in the amount of
$500. Failure to pay the civil penalty will result in automatic suspension of the license or permit
for a period of fourteen days.
b. Upon a second conviction within a period of two years, the violator's liquor control license,
wine permit, or beer permit shall be suspended for a period of thirty days and the violator shall
also be assessed a civil penalty in the amount of $1,500.
c. Upon a third conviction within a period of three years, the violators liquor control license,
wine permit, or beer permit shall be suspended for a period of sixty days and the violator shall
also be assessed a civil penalty in the amount of $1,500.
d. Upon a fourth conviction within a period of three years, the violators' liquor control license,
wine permit, or beer permit shall be revoked
IV. Repealing in its entirety section 4-5-4 and substituting in-lieu-thereof a new section 4-5-4,
entitled "Regulation of Persons Under Legal Age" as follows:
Section 4-5-4: Regulation of Persons Under Legal Age
A. A person or person under legal age shall not pumhase or attempt to purchase, or individually
or jointly have alcoholic liquor, wine, or beer in their possession or control; except in the case of
liquor, wine, or beer given or dispensed to a person under legal age within a private home and with
the knowledge, presence, and consent of the parent or guardian, for beverage or medicinal
purposes or as administered to the person by either a physician or dentist for medicinal purposes
and except to the extent that a person under legal age may handle alcoholic beverages, wine, or
beer during the regular course of the persoWs employment by a liquor control licensee, or wine or
beer permittee under this chapter.
1. A person who is under legal age, other than a licensee or permittee, who violates this
section regarding the purchase of or attempt to purchase alcoholic liquor, wine, or beer, or
possessing or having control of alcoholic liquor, wine, or beer, commits a simple misdemeanor
punishable by a fine of one hundred dollars for the first offense. A second or subsequent
offense shall be a simple misdemeanor punishable by a fine of two hundred dollars and the
suspension of the person's motor vehicle operating privileges for a period not to exceed one
year. The court may, at its discretion, order the person who is under legal age to perform
community service work under section 909.3A of the Iowa Code, or an equivalent value to the
fine imposed under this section.
B. 1. An employee or agent of a person or club holding a liquor control license or retail
wine or beer permit shall not sell, give, or otherwise supply any alcoholic beverage, wine, or
beer to any person, knowing or failing to exercise reasonable care to ascertain whether the
person is under legal age, or permit any person, knowing or failing to exercise reasonable care
to ascertain whether the person is under legal age, to consume any alcoholic beverage, wine, or
beer.
2. Any person who violates this section commits a simple misdemeanor punishable as a
scheduled violation under section 805.8, subsection 10, paragraph "a" of the Iowa Code.
3. A person under legal age shall not misrepresent the person's age for the purpose of
purchasing or attempting to purchase any alcoholic beverages, wine, or beer from any licensee
or permittee. If any person under legal age misrepresents the person's age, and the licensee or
permittee establishes that the licensee or permittee made reasonable inquiry to determine
whether the prospective purchaser was over legal age, the licensee or permittee is not guilty of
selling alcoholic liquor, wine, or beer to a person under legal age.
V. Adding a new section 4-5-6, entitled "Sales to Intoxicated Persons" as follows:
Section 4-5-6: Sales To Intoxicated Persons
A person shall not sell, dispense, or give to an intoxicated person, or one simulating intoxication,
any alcoholic liquor, wine, or beer. A person who violates this provision shall be guilty of a simple
misdemeanor.
VI. Adding a new section 4-5-7, entitled "Limitations on Sales", as follows:
Section 4-6-7: Limitations On Sales
A. It shall be unlawful for a holder of a liquor control license, or wine permit or beer permit, or its
employees or agents, to do any of the following:
1. Sell, offer to sell, dispense or serve for on-premises consumption, two or more servings of
any alcoholic liquor, wine, or beer to any one person for the price of one such drink.
2. Sell, offer to sell, dispense or serve for on-premises consumption an unlimited number of
servings of alcoholic liquor, wine, or beer for a fixed price.
3. Increase the volume of alcoholic liquor, wine, or beer contained in a serving, for on-premises
consumption, without proportionally increasing the price charged for such serving.
4. Sell, offer to sell, dispense or serve for on-premises consumption any alcoholic liquor, wine,
or beer at a reduced price from that normally or customarily charged by the licensee or
permittee.
5. Sell, offer to sell, dispense or serve for on-premises consumption, more than two (2)
servings of any alcoholic liquor, wine, or beer at any one time to any one person. With
respect to alcoholic liquor, beer or wine customarily sold in quantity, such as pitchers of beer
and bottles of wine, the permittee, licensee, employee or agent shall not sell, offer to sell,
dispense or serve such alcoholic liquor, wine, or beer unless he or she can verify that the
person or persons who will consume such alcoholic liquor, wine, or beer are of legal age.
6. Encourage or permit any game or contest or tournament of any kind which involves drinking
any alcoholic liquor, wine, or beer or the awarding of alcoholic liquor, wine, or beer as a
prize.
7. Dispense, pour, or otherwise serve any alcoholic liquor, wine, or beer directly into a person's
mouth.
B. Exceptions: Nothing in subsection A shall be construed to prohibit a holder of a liquor control
license, or wine, or beer permit, or its employees or agents, from:
1. Including servings or drinks of alcoholic liquor, wine, or beer as part of a hotel or motel package
which includes overnight accommodations.
4
2. Providing a fixed price for an unlimited or indefinite amount of drinks for private catered events.
SECTION II. Violations; Penalty. Violations of this ordinance may be prosecuted as a simple
misdemeanor or as a municipal infraction, as provided for in this chapter, or as provided for in Title 1,
Chapter 4 of this Code, as amended.
SECTION II. Repealer. All ordinances and pads of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this
Ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION Ill. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or pad of the Ordinance shall be adjudged
to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a
whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudicated invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION IV. EFFECTIVE DATE: This Ordinance shall take effect on July 1, 2001.
Passed and approved this __ day of ,2001.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
rove :
City Attorney's Office
Andy. Ord. Alcohol Prohibitions. 12-15-00
Ordinance No.
Page
It was moved by and seconded by that the Ordinance
as mad be adopted, and upon roll cell them were:
AYES: NAYS: ABSENT:
Champion
Kanner
Lehman
O'Donnell
Pfab
Vanderhoef
Wilbum
First Consideration 4/3/01
Voteforpassage:AYES: Lehman, 0'Donnell, Pfab, Vande~'hoef, W'i]bu~'n, Champ'ion,
Kannet'. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None.
Second Consideration
Vote for passage:
Date published
04-17-01
Madan Karr ~
From: hlarew [hlarew@brue.weeg.uiowa.edu]
Sent: Tuesday. April 03, 2001 12:04 AM
To: council@iowa-city.org
Subject: prease respond... i've had enough silence!!!!!!
do you folks take representing me as a citizen seriously?
if so, why don't you drop me an email and tell me how you are working to serve
my interests?
i have heard nothing from any of you, i know you are busy, so am i... and i
still have 2 minutes to write you,
seriously, you work for all of us, the least you could do is acknowledge us
when we write to you?
are you the iowa city city council or... are you working to increase fines
imposed on students, raise the standard of living in this town where it is
already higher than it should be, take money for a water treatment plant that
produces water that has to settle like guiness...
okay, tell me this, if i feel that you are not representing my concerns, nor
acknowleding me, who do i complain too? represent me, talk to me, donIt fine
me, and marginalize me, and make me hate the town i was born in and have lived
my whole life and where i want to always be able to call home...
why don't you send me an email that says, "dear concerned citizen, i am sorry
i have not responded to any of your prior emails, i am busy but i have 2
minutes to talk to you, what is on your mind, i am here to work for you, i am
listening."
a concerned CITIZEN that you serve and represent
hart-larew@uiowa.edu
ps, if you don't think we have enough police, go to kum and go on a friday or
saturday nite and watch the cop sit there and look at magazines all nite! i
don't want to pay for this, why don't you pay for this cop to do nothing
except harass college students, why don't you spend your time helping the
homeless? i want answers
i am extremely irate, and i want a prompt response from which ever of you has
the decency to communicate with the people they represent, not just those who
have the leisure time to go to your meetings, this is our meeting,
anxiously waiting for some answers
I
04-17-0'1
Marian Karr 10
From: Nancy Davin [davinn@home.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 7:13 PM
To: 'council@iowa-city.org'
Subject: Alcohol Proposal
Dear Council,
I was pleased to read in this morningIs paper that Councilors Champion and
OIDonnell have changed their minds with regard to the alcohol proposal. I
hope others follow suit.
I watched last Tuesdayls City Council meeting in anticipation of the
discussion. I became even more annoyed with the proposal when I listened
to debate about situations that would have to be individually deciphered
with regard to the proposal (i.e. 4 guys on a golf cart want to buy a six
pack, can they do it?).
Folks, no ordinance should ever be so complicated! I suggest you allow 19
and 20 year olds in the bar (that's a concession on my part). The *BIG*
change is that I propose you consider is a hefty (and I do mean hefty, i.e.
minimum of $500) fine for the first offense of underage drinking or public
intoxication. If the underage drinker used a fake ID to purchase the
alcohol, the fine should be doubled. Second offense draws a $1000 fine.
Have fines posted at the doors of the bars. This will put the
responsibility totally on the underage drinker. It truly allows a young
adult to weigh the consequences of doing something against the law. It
does not allow for the potential for ANY loophole. It is black and white.
One other thing you may consider: Mandate the scanners at every facility
issued an alcohol permit. This again will strengthen the argument that the
responsibility totally falls upon the underage drinker.
I urge you all to drop the current proposal and quickly move to the much
simpler and more effective proposal I suggest.
Thank you for your consideration.
Nancy Davin
Iowa City Resident
Marjan Karr
From: Ruth Baker [ruth-baker@uiowa.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 1:24 PM
To: councii@iowa-city.org
Subject: Alcohol proposal
I just want to commend Conhie and Mike for taking the time to think
through all the ramifications that would result from passing an
ordinance which would not solve the underage drinking problem and would
be a nightmare for bar owners and police to enforce. It takes courage
to take a stand on what you know in your gut is right, but which others
on the council don't agree. Connie, I genuinely feel you're on the
right track to propose a local law which would ban anyone under the
legal drinking age from establishments that sell alcohol for
on-the-premise consumption. I hope some of the other members on the
council realize the ordinance now being voted on is not worthy of
"tweaking." Tweaking generally means fine-tuning or making "small
adjustments," but it does not make sense to start off with a proposal
full of holes to begin with and then try to make sense out of it.
Thank you for your service on the council.
Ruth E. Baker
515 West Benton Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52246
319/354-0443
Marian Karr
From: Adam Johnston [johnstonae@prodigy.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 10:08 AM
To: council@iowa-city.org
Subject: The way it should be
Dear members,
I am no longer a resident of Iowa City, but I am an employee of one of the
major business downtown. You want to bring more money into downtown, this is
not the way. By enforcing the options that you already voted on once, you
are making the bars hire more staff to serve and also serve less. This will
take away revenues. Why not just make all of the bars 21 and up and be
enforce the laws we currently have. I see the minors downtown getting
punished for drinking as they should, but you rarely here of the bars being
closed or fined for allowing this activity. If you make everything 21 and
up, it is better for everyone. If these other laws pass, it is another step
in the wrong direction for Iowa City. This town only survives because of
students and the U employees. Otherwise it is just another town. Iowa City
is successful at only one thing and that is driving business out of town.
Bob Elliott
1108 Dover Street, Iowa City, Iowa 52240
April 9, 2001
E mie Lehman
Mayor, City of Iowa City
Civic Center
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240 2!.; ·
Hello Mayor Lehman:
University students and a bar owner/operator who addressed the alcohol debate at last
Tuesday' s council meeting were late with their observations and expressions of concern.
With this message, I'm in the same category. However late on the scene we are, I hope
our input is helprid.
Regarding the alcohol situation, I commend you, other members of the council, and city
staff for your concern; for long, hard work; and for the best of intentions. That said, I
think the resulting suggested ordinance is inappropriate and overreaching. My reasons for
that are philosophical and reality-based.
1 ) Philosophical -- The concem appears to be that some individuals (perhaps
mostly UI students) and some downtown bars have created problems resulting in
part from excess/binge drinking. The problem, of course, will never be eliminated.
The intent is to alleviate it. Bars and students were provided ample opportunity to
do that; and have not.
I've never been a fan of creating laws or policies that impact everyone in order to
change the behavior of a few. That appears to be what the council is doing.
2) Reality -- From my perspective, the proposed ordinance is overly complex and
far-reaching to the extent it will restrict the pleasure and enjoyment of the
majority of bar patrons who are not causing the problems. Perhaps even more
important, the ordinance appears to have too many loopholes to be enforceable.
The bar owner/operator who appeared at last week's council meeting indicated a
couple areas where the proposed ordinance can be circumvented. He said it would
be a pity to legally prohibit private gatherings/celebrations at some of the bars.
That would include employee holiday parties, post-game and/or post-season events
for everything fi'om sotSball teams to bowling leagues, or convention events
recruited for our city.
Mayor Ernie Lehman
April g, 2001
Page 2
I speak from experience, because our daughter's wedding reception several years
ago was held at the Fieldhouse Bar. It was a perfect location for refreshments and
a dance.
So how many people constitute a special event? 50? 25? 107 57 What advance
or other special arrangements and/or permission requests need to be made?
Or how about when a bar makes a business decision to decrease the regular price
of alcoholic drinks. If the decision is not a good one, how soon could the bar
return to the previous price? A day? A week? A month?
People, especially inventive college students and bar operators, will fund loopholes.
My first thought was dump the other restrictions and have a simple, straight-forward
ordinance making it illegal for anyone under 21 to be in a bar between 9 p.m. and closing
time. That would include all establishments where alcoholic drinks represent half or more
of the gross retail sales.
But then, I'm personally aware of several good young people under the age of 21 who like
to see and hear the bands and other music performers who come to town. Those bands
almost always play the local bars.
So I changed my mind again, took another look. I determined the probtem's bottom line
is not so much underage drinking as it is binge d~nking.....though teenagers may be
responsible for an inordinate amount of the problems resulting from binge drinking.
Allow me to digress. I was a college studentin the 1950s, first at a small school in
Illinois and then The University oflowa. The problem was with us then, also. I well
remember the St. Patrick' s Day at the curbside along the Pentacrest watching a very pretty
coed lean out from an open car door and barf green beer. Not pretty. But not unique.
How about taking a good look at our existing laws coveting the types of activities causing
problems with individuals inside and outside our downtown bars. Fine the bars serving
minors and also fine the minors being served. Arrest and fine persons who cause the
personal or property damages or disturbances and fine them to the extent allowable by
law.
Hayor Emie Lehman
April 9, 2001
Page 3
In that respect, ifa bar can be fined up to $500 for knowingly serving a minor, we need to
pressure our legislatures to change the state law to enable fines of the same amount
against the minors involved.
This has been long and somewhat rambling. I hope it will also be helpful.
Whatever your decisions on this controversial alcohol-related problem, I thank you for the
responsibility you have accepted and the difficult work you do.
Sincerely,
Bob Elliott
CC: Council members, Champion, Kanner, O'Donnell, Pfab, Vanderhoef, Wilburn
Marjan Karr
From: J W [jenwen@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 5:11 PM
To: council@iowa-city.org
Subject: New Ordinance
Dear Council Memebers,
I heard about the taks and propostions to reduce underage drinking in the
campus area. I was a little confused on the logic of curbing the specials.
For example, some friends of mine about twenty of us at any given time and
no less than six, go out to one of the local bars. We order beer for some
and drinks for others. We can keep a waitress hopping all night with our
drink orders. We're all 24+ we always pick a designated driver and we
always have a place to sleep or cab fare if a designated driver isn't
available. Why should we, who drink resonably/responsibly be punished for
others lack of discretion? So now not only will we be paying double plus
tips when we go out, if that happens. This is something of an idea and
wondered if it crossed your minds. What happens when your 24+ crowd takes
it's business to Cedar Rapids or to the Triangle in Cedar Falls? Some of us
even drive to Burlington on our long weekends and give them our business.
Why not think of what will happen to the precious miinors you're trying to
save. The house parties, the keg parties at frat house, the conceaed indoor
crimes that can't be seen in a dark room, back alley or janitors closet of
the dorms? Was that even on your minds when this vote was introduced? One
thing that bothers me is more residences are going to see damage and renters
will raise there rates. So now I have to pay more rent to live father away
because they think I will party like these peole who can't hold their
liquor. Has anyone thought of that? I can't even have a pet because of bad
renters prior to me, now I will pay higher rent once the house parties
start. I don't think anyone thought of those of us who actually drink
resonably and resposnibly when this decision was made. If I am wrong, tell
me and show me where we were thought of in the midst of this debate. Then
in the year or to to come I will show you our sexual assault crime sky
rocket, rent hikes, battry charges and more criminal mischeif than your
newly staffed ICPD can handle. Just my honest opinion.
~j
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Alcohol Ordinance Page 1 of 2
Marjan Karr
from: UarOi DeProsse [cdeprosse@earthlink.net]
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 8:16 PM
To: jcnews@yosemite.leepfrog.com
Cc: Connie_Champion@iowa-city.org; Ernie_Lehman@iowa-city.org; Ross_Wilburn@iowa-city.org;
Dee_Vanderhoef@iowa-city.org; ipfab@avalon.net; Steve_Atkins@iowa-city.org; jpwhite@co.johnson.ia.us;
cthompso@co.johnson.ia.us; mlehrnan@co.johnson.ia.us; sstutsma@co.johnson.ia.us;
pharney@co.johnson.ia.us; tneuzil@co.johnson.ia.us; tjneuzil@msn.corn; Jim Fausett; Harry Herwig; John
Weihe; Diana Lundell; Dave Jacoby; Jean Schnake; IcM-ELCA@UIOWA. EDU; revMarsh@AOLCOM;
sIP@list. uiowa.edu
Subject: JCNEWS: Alcohol Ordinance
Charlie,
i thought the person who raised the point about bars not being able to add more liquor to a drink than they
normally would (EXACTLY ONE SHOT PER AND NOT A DROP MORE OR YOU GO TO JAIL, DAMN
IT) made a good point by wondering if the bars would be able to subtract less mixer from the normal proscribed
amount. this was no doubt prompted by the thought that the less mixer the bar added the quicker it would take a
patron to down the drink and the sooner the bar could sell another drink and thus make tons more money.
i also loved the stunned silence brought about by the fieldhouse's dave moore when he wanted to know what the
policy on private parties was going to be and no one had even thought about it, except for eleanor dilkes who, it
became clear, hadn't thought about it enough. that simply inquiry on moore's part caused a near riot until ross
wilburn brought things under control by arguing that just because they didn't know how the ordinance was
going to work didn't mean they shouldn't pass it and in any event it could be tweaked in the coming century to
learn how to make it work effectively.
by the end of the evening i think all 7 councilors had atmounced the ordinance was useless, but that they looked
forward to tweaking it, and how they all supported it halfheartedly as something that needed to be done in order
to control the small percentage of people who make fools of themselves if given half an opportunity.
not a single councilor except kanner was worried about the possibility of more undemover work in the bars, and
he wasn't very convincing in his worry. certainly not as worried as he was when he voted against a little monitor
that is being installed on traffic poles which are designed to monitor the flow of traffic and regulate the traffic
lights. then he was concerned the cops might bury a camera inside the thing and he didn't want to start down a
slippery slope to spying unnecessarily on citizens. i guess bar patrons don't fill the bill for the citizenship
category.
as if the cops running around in their college wannabe clothes and doing all their current spying isn't enough.
after july 1st they will be forced to do more since there will now be yet ANOTHER LAW that needs to be
enforced. and NO law must go unenforced, especially if it produces big revenue for a cash-strapped city.
praise the lord, hallelujah, and pass the individual 6 ounce glass of beer for the urnpteenth time.
Marjan Karr
From: Kate Newberg [fighting4truth2@yahoo.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 2:21 AM
To: council@iowa-city.org
Subject: QUESTION
To whom it may concern:
I understand the City is trying to crack down on
underage and hinge drinking because of the associated
problems of vandalism and violence; but why are the
police not arresting the troublemakers?
On four separate occassions (within a 2 month span)
while visiting downtown Iowa City, I have seen 4
different fights. Two on the pod mall and two in
front of the Airliner. ALL 4 TIMES THE POLICE SHOWED
UP AND TOLD EVERYONE TO GO HOME. NOT A SINGLE ARREST!
During one of the fights, as soon as the police left
the scene the fight started again. When the police
came back, NOT A SINGLE ARREST! The officer told the
fighters to go their separate ways.
During another fight in front of the Airliner, I
overhead the manager of One Eyed Jakes tell the police
to arrest on of the individuals involved in the fight
because he had been thrown out of the bar for fighting
and that that individual had a criminal tresspass on
file against him. AND STILL THE POLICE LET EVERYONE
INVOLVED IN THE FIGHT WALK AWAY!
Haybe the violence and vandalism continues to become a
problem, not because people are drinking or are
underage, but due to the fact there are absolutely NO
REPERCUSSION for being violent.
It makes me wonder what the REAL AGENDA is of the Iowa
City Council and the Iowa City Police Department.
Yours truly,
Concerned Citizen
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Page 1 of 1
Marian Karr
From: Michael J. Crane [mcmne@netins.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:10 PM
To: council@iowa-city.org
Subject: congratulations and a great big thank you!!!
Congratulation and a Big Thank You to the Iowa City Mayor and City Council for their actions to curb under age drinking in
the Iowa City area. Continue to be strong and determined in this endless battle and do whatever it takes to win!l! What
you have done is RIGHT and you will be thanked and rewarded numerous times in the coming years for your actions!!!
Michael Crane
4/3/01
Madan Karr
From: slibert [slibert@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 6:06 PM
To: council@iowa-city.org
Subject: alcohol ordinance
My name is Sarah Libert and I'm a junior at University of Iowa. My roommates
and I have been following the ideas for the alcohol ordinance in the Daily
Iowan, and we have noticed several things that bother us. Many of these
problems have already been addressed such as the idea that increasing the bar
age or restricting drinks will increase house/apartment parties. There was a
comment in the DI on Monday, April 2 in the front page article, "Last Call on
drink specials?" that really bothered me. The article states that the council
"delayed drafting the proposal because of the timing" when students wouldn't
be around. It goes on to describe how the students deserved input in the
discussions, which I think would have been a very good idea. However, within
the next few paragraphs, the article states that the support they received was
from over "200 letters and e-mails from PARENTS of UI students." First of
all, parents of students aren't the ones who should be involved in making
these decisions, mainly because the majority of them don't live in Iowa City,
and these decisions are not really going to affect them. My parents know I
have been going to the bars here since I was 18 and have never had a problem
with it because they know I'm not going to be one of the binge drinkers. If
parents have problems with their kids drinking, they should address their
kids, not the city, because the bartenders and bar owners are not forcing
drinks on people. Second of all, 200 people expressing dissatisfaction is
such a minuscule number compared to how many students attend this university.
To say the council received support, I would think a majority of the
population would be represented rather than a very small percentage. I know
there is somewhat of a drinking problem at this school, but this ordinance,
and creating alternative activities to drinking is not going to help the
problem. People go out to drink with their friends because it is a fun way to
let go after hard weeks of classes and studying. Changing the rules IS NOT
going to make people stop drinking; they will continue to drink and find was
to get alcohol because it is their choice. My main point for this letter is
that if you want to make such a law that is going to affect mainly students at
this university, and you say you want student input, then ask the students,
not the parents. I guarantee if you took a poll of the majority of the
students at University of Iowa, you would find that this alcohol ordinance
could cause more problems than solutions. Thank you for your time in reading
this letter.
Sincerely,
Sarah Libert
Marian Karr
From: Ben Lewis [benlewis@avalon.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 9:01 PM
To: council@iowa-city.org
Cc: ross_wilburn@iowa-city.org
Subject: Static smaller
Dear Council,
I appreciate that you have decided against raising the age limit to
enter bars, however, I hope you will consider starting smaller.
Agreed: binge drinking is a serious health problem as well as a
behavioral problem.
Agreed: students need incentives to find activities other than drinking.
Agreed: limiting the number of drinks an individual can purchase may help.
My issue: economic effects of eliminating all drink specials.
I would like you to consider this: why not allow drink specials on weekdays?
If you look at police statistics and residential complaints, I'm sure
you'll find that most of these problems occur on weekends. If you
would simply choose to regulate pricing on weekends (Thursday
included) you would be more successful and receive less backlash from
the community.
Low-rate drinking that occurs during the week at establishments like
The Sanctuary, The Mill, Fitzpatrick's, and others -- especially
those that also serve food -- does not cause the problems you are
trying to curb. After dragging downtown businesses through a long
period of remodeling, an unsuccessful bid to compete with the Coral
Ridge Mall, and other economic problems downtown, this ordinance is
going to kill downtown business. What's going to replace it?
There are several mandatory things you can do to curb binge and
underage drinking:
* require wristbands
~ publish guides for bar owners about complying with already-existing laws
* raise fines when possible for public urination and vandalism
* selectively limit drink specials - specifically - all-you-can-drink
specials (this doesn't hurt those who aren't part of the problem)
* require bar owners to attend workshops (which they would) as an
alternative to hurting their business
* use zoning requirements to limit number of bars
* use zoning and tax incentives to create a low-alcohol, 18-age-limit
dance club
* enforce laws already on the books!
Eliminating all drink specials takes the fun out of going out for
dinner and purchasing an import instead of a domestic brand with
dinner. There are smarter ways to tackle this -- ways that don't hurt
downtown businesses and keep students downtown where they can be
regulated.
Ben Lewis
benlewis@avalon.net
RPR-10-2001 15:57 U OF ZOLdR PRESZDENT'S OFC 3193350S07 P.02/02
THIi UNIVERSITY OF IOWA
Memorandum
TO: Iowa City City Council Members
FROM: Mary Sue Colema~"'l'~A (~b')UL
President ' ~
DATE: April 10, 2001
AS members of the City Council, you deserve groat crodit for seriously examining
how we can reduce the harmful effects of excessive drinking. Thanks to your leadership, we
have had a significant community discussion that has been vigorous, thorough and open.
You have encouraged and accepted input from students, merchants, bar owners. law
enforcement officials, University officials, and the community at large. You have also
carofully considered the ramifications of the many different proposed courses of action.
Your efforts are greatly approciated,
I write to expross, once again, my support for the ordinances currently under
consideration. I believe these ordinances hold out the promise of roducing the harmful
effects of excessive drinking. The price specials we see advertised in The Daily lowan
clearly encourage people to drink to get drunk. I believe we can prohibit them from doing so
without infringing on the rights of adults to ddnk rosponsibly. Likewise. the proposed
ordinances give greater emphasis to rotailers' responsibility for keeping alcohol out of the
hands of minors. Studies have consistently shown that roducing minors' access to alcohol
reduces death and injury among that age group.
Clearly, adopting these ordinances may be only the first step taken to achieve our
goal of increasing the safety of our community and improving our quality of life. It is
gratifying to know that Council members are willing to take additional steps if necessary,
including an ordinance limiting entrance to bars to people who aro 21 years of age or older.
The important point is to take some action now. Forthat reason, I urge you to vote "yes" on
the second and third readings of the ordinances under consideration.
We have many reasons to be optimistic. We are seeing proogross on many fronts. I
was delighted to learn this week that Planet X will rolocate in the Old Capitol Centre. Other
business people have exprossed interost in providing additional entertainment venues that
do not focus on alcohol. These efforts directly roepond to students' concerns about having
alternatives to the bar scene. I believe that your deliberations have contributed to
entrepreneurs' interest in developing those yenuse_
I am proud that we have had the opportunity to work together over the past five years
to confront this public health problem. I look forward to working with you in the futuro.
Off~ceo/rhePresldem 10l]essupHial IowaClty, lowa53342-131~ 319/335-3549 FAX319/335-0807
Marian Karr
From: Kent Carlson [kdcarls@engineering.uiowa.edu]
Sent: Thursday. April 12, 2001 10:36 AM
To: marian-karr@iowa-city.org
Subject: input for the City Council on happy hour...
Marian Hart,
This message is for the City Council. I was given your
e-mail address by a waitress who works at the Fieldhouse.
She told me that if I wrote you, you could pass this
along to the Council. If this is incorrect, please
let me know. Thank you.
Kent Carlson
To the Iowa City City Council:
I am writing this e-mail to register my opinion on the
proposed alcohol ordinance. Specifically, I'm writing
this to try to save happy hour. I am a 31-year-old
research engineer and adjunct faculty member at the
University of Iowa. Every Friday, I meet a group of
my friends, all in their late 20's to early 30's, for
happy hour at the Fieldhouse. We sit around for a
couple of hours, discussing anything on our minds over
a few beers and a burger basket. And we are generally
among the younger patrons at Friday happy hour.
(Actually, this has changed in the last few weeks, I
think because students are trying to squeeze in a few
last happy hours before they become extinct in Iowa
City.)
My point is, we relax, enjoy the food and drink specials,
and have a good time. We don't stagger out of the
Fieldhouse drunk, and we don't see other people doing
this either. And there are definitely no minors drinking
there during happy hour.
I understand the impetus behind the alcohol ordinance,
but I think the Council is going too far. The ordinance
is aimed at reducing overindulgence and underage drinking.
Happy hours, which generally run between 5 and 8 pm, are
not when the problems you're trying to stop are occurring.
You don't generally see 18-year-olds staggering drunk
through the pod mall at 7 pm on Friday night. The lion's
share of what the Council is trying to stop is occurring
after 10 pm (mostly midnight to 2 am). It has been my
experience that happy hours are frequented mostly by
working people, in their mid-20's or later. If happy
hour is eliminated, the main effect will be to increase
what patrons have to pay for after-work gatherings.
This is not your intent, I'm sure.
Furthermore, this increase in cost may motivate happy
hour patrons to take their business elsewhere (to
Coralvilla, mainly), where happy hour still exists.
In a recent Viewpoints Web Poll in the Daily Iowan, the
question was asked: "How would you react to a local
ordinance limiting drink specials?" Of the 647 people
who responded, 87% said they would just drink somewhere
else. 87 percent. You are fooling yourselves if you
think people won't drive an extra five minutes to
Coralville. I certainly will. This is simple
economics. There has been a great deal of discussion
lately about how much businesses are struggling in
downtown Iowa City. Considering the fact that bars
constitute a significant percentage of the businesses
in downtown Iowa City, driving away legitimate bar
business makes absolutely no sense. It will only
add momentum to the downward spiral already occurring.
I don't have a problem with the intent of the proposed
alcohol ordinance. In fact, I agree with eliminating
all-you-can-drink specials, because this definitely
promotes overindulgence. However, lumping happy hour
into this ordinance in your war on alcohol abuse is
akin to carpet bombing, when a surgical strike would
be more appropriate.
Thank you for your time and consideration. I hope you
reconsider the banning of happy hour. This will not
help you accomplish your goal of reducing overindulgence
and underage drinking, and will only serve to hurt the
legitimate, law-abiding happy hour patrons. Or worse
yet, it will drive business away from Iowa City.
Sincerely,
Kent Carlson
++++++++++++
Kent Carlson, Ph.D.
Assistant Research Engineer
2430 SC, Solidification Laboratory
Department of Mechanical Engineering
The University of iowa
Iowa City, Iowa 52242
Tel: (319) 335-6075
Fax: (319) 335-5669
Marjan Karr
From: Nigel DV Gomez [ndgomez@engineeringuiowa.edu]
Sent: Thursday, April 12. 2001 2:22 PM
To: marian-karr@iowa-city.org
Subject: The Proposed Alcohol Ordinance
Dear iowa City Council:
I have recently started taking notice of the proposed alcohol
ordinance. Its stated aim is to put a stop to underage drinking.
Unfortunately the ordinance seems to take the position that if one makes
drinks more expensive then underage drinking will stop. However no
studies have been carried out to determine what price the under-21's are
willing to pay. Obviously they are willing to break the law; one
should always keep in mind that there is ALREADY a law on the books. In
addition they are willing to risk the $100 fine (if the amount is
different then I stand corrected). That to me is a lot of money.
Perhaps the difference between me and these lawbreakers is that for many
of them the cost of their drinks (and fines) is subsidized by an
external monetary fund {parents, loans, etc.,) rather than their own
salary. The direct cost of excessive and/or underage drinking is not
borne by them except in the least intrusive way.
If anyone still doubts that underage drinkers are willing to pay higher
prices for alcohol a simple poll or study will illustrate the obvious.
Most occurances of underage drinking occur during late night hours; when
the lowest drink prices are usually given, eg., happy hours, are usually
much earlier in the evening. This in effect negates the idea that
removing drink specials and ultimately raising the costs of drinks will
stop underage drinking.
In effect the Council is trying to defeat the problem (and I do agree
that it is a problem) by attacking everything. I believe that this is
a forlorn hope, ultimately doomed to failure. It is akin to trying to
solve the deer overpopulation problem by bombing the neighbouring
forests. In that case the Council~s solution was much simpler and more
elegant: Target the actual problem by hiring sharpshooters to kill the
deer. Yes, I know this solution was controversial, but no one could
argue that it hurt raccoons, trees and hawks inordinately. In the case
of this proposed ordinance ordinary drinkers will be hurt by rising
costs, whereas many underage drinkers will not be hurt at all.
To conclude: I believe that the proposed ordinance, as it stands now,
will do little to nothing to stem the tide of underage drinking here in
Iowa City. I honestly do not know if the ordinance will do more than
make the Council look anything other than concerned but ineffectual. In
my opinion simply raising the fines and/or immediately revoking their
driving licenses will have more effect than what is proposed now.
Perhaps arresting the lawbreakers or sending notification of the tickets
home to their parents will help. I truly wish you all well in solving
the problem and will wholeheartedly support an effective plan;
unfortunately the current one is NOT such a plan.
Sincerely yours,
Nigel Gomez
Page 1 of 1
Marian Karr
From: APTJPAGS@aol.com
Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2001 11:40 AM
To: council@iowa-city.org
Subject: alcohol proposal
Dear Members of the Iowa City City Council;
Thank you for beginning to take action regarding the problems of binge
drinking and underage drinking.
We hope that you will consider seriously passing a "21" ordinance. This is a
common sense approach, albeit not a solution, but a good beginning.
Increasing the under-age fine would be a positive move also, but we realize
this may have to be done at the State level.
Through continued awareness, education and additiona~ non-drinking activities
for our community, we should begin to feel the positive results! We realize
change takes time, but your continued effor~ toward attempting to resolve the
problem is important.
Thank you for your efforts.
Sincerely,
Polly and Armond Pagliai
4/16/01