Mayor Sue Hack discuss her thoughts on possible additional regulations for Lawrence bars and nightclubs.
Mayor Sue Hack discuss her thoughts on possible additional regulations for Lawrence bars and nightclubs.
Steve Gaudreau, owner of Quinton's, discuss his thoughts on possible additional regulations for Lawrence bars and nightclubs.
Steve Gaudreau, owner of Quinton's, discuss his thoughts on possible additional regulations for Lawrence bars and nightclubs.
Bar owners speak out against new regulations
Bar owners speak out against new regulations under consideration at city hall. Enlarge video
Reader poll
This time it wasn't the bartenders giving the friendly advice. Instead they were given it from City Hall: get ready to talk about downtown safety.
City Manager David Corliss told a crowd of about 50 people - many of them local bar and nightclub owners - Wednesday that he's intent on the City Commission having a serious discussion about new regulations that could ease concerns about violence and safety issues around drinking establishments. The new regulations - ranging from special licenses to earlier closing times - would be citywide, but Corliss said safety concerns in downtown were a major reason for the discussion.
"I told the City Commission when I was fortunate enough to be picked as city manager that downtown will not falter on my watch," Corliss said. "I think this is a major issue for downtown."
Courses of action
City staff members have developed a variety of new regulations that city commissioners could adopt. The ideas have been presented to past commissions without any action being taken, but Corliss said he was planning on presenting the options to the current City Commission sometime in August. The options include:
¢ A new city system that would require "entertainment venues" to be licensed by the city. Currently, the city has little legal ability to revoke a bar's liquor license. Only state regulators can revoke a liquor license. But if the city created a new "entertainment license" the city could revoke that license, which would prohibit a bar from playing music or hosting other entertainment events.
¢ A new city ordinance that would create staggered closing times for bars around town, in an effort to limit the surge of people hitting the streets at the traditional 2 a.m. closing time.
¢ A change in the city's zoning laws that would require drinking establishments to obtain a special-use permit to operate in the city. This is the same type of permit, for example, that homeless shelters must receive to operate in the city. The special-use permits are voted on by the City Commission - usually every three to five years - and commissioners can place special conditions on the permit.
¢ A new requirement that would mandate drinking establishments to hire trained security guards to staff their bars.
Limited resources
As in the past, members of the bar industry didn't like what they heard. Several in the crowd told commissioners that the simple solution was to hire more police officers because the city admits most of the problems are not happening inside bars, but rather are the result of actions by patrons after they've left a bar.
"We have to accept that this community is growing, but I just never see in our budget that we're really giving our police department more resources," said Rob Farha, owner of The Wheel. "I get frustrated as a taxpayer. We spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on roundabouts, but there are safety issues greater than that."
Corliss said this year's budget included two new sergeant positions for the police department, but the recommended 2008 budget does not include the department's request for new officers. Police department leaders on Wednesday said they would like to add about 15 officers to their Friday night patrol, for example, to get their staffing levels up to about 30 officers for the busy Friday night shift. Corliss estimated it cost about $60,000 to hire and equip a new police officer.
"I would like to put more resources into law enforcement, but right now we don't have those financial resources," Corliss said. "But at some point you also have to ask how much of it is the taxpayers' responsibility to have that many police officers versus the responsibility of the bars to deal with some of the problems."
Other bar owners asked why the city hasn't tried to talk with owners of problematic bars to correct the problem. Both Corliss and Mayor Sue Hack said they had tried, but have been told that some bar owners feel that problems caused by their patrons outside their establishments are not the bar's responsibility. Corliss said he flatly disagrees with that.
"I think if a business attracts consistent problems, the business has a responsibility to deal with that," Corliss said. "If you don't think you have the resources to deal with it, then I don't think you should be in business."
Too much power?
Bar and nightclub owners said they were concerned the new regulations that have been proposed would give the city too much discretionary power to have their businesses shut down. Peach Madl, an owner of The Sandbar, said many bar owners had become more leery of Lawrence politics following the city's enactment of the smoking ban over objections of bar owners.
"We don't want to feel like our business is dependent on the political atmosphere because this is our livelihood after all," Madl said.
Corliss tried to assure the crowd that no City Commission would take the task of revoking a bar's license lightly.
"This is not some type of 'Footloose' movie where we are trying to squash people from dancing," Corliss said. "We're trying to have wise regulations that allow us to step up and deal with problems."
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
armyguy (anonymous) says…
The problem "entertainment venues" already have security guards, mandating that every other "entertainment venue" is not going to solve anything. Staggering closing times is an option if Last Call is the first to close at 9PM that staggering will cause confusion as well as lawsuits i.e. why does so and so's bar get an extra hour to sale drinks. All these suggestions have issues, Just enforce the current law's perhaps install a fine system like many cities have for the alarm systems in houses, after so many police calls, the fines kick in, exponentially raising.
Sigmund (anonymous) says…
Corliss is proving to be a disaster. This Commission should follow the lead of the previous Kommission and fire him.
coneflower (anonymous) says…
Yup.
Not going to say we told you so, either.
If you promise jobs, you can win an election.
ukillaJJ (anonymous) says…
Everything sounds pretty good except for the staggered closing times. If you
think a bunch of people hitting the street @ 2 AM is bad, wait until a wave of
them all try to simultaneously enter the bars that stay open the latest! That
is a horrible idea; if anything they should just stay open longer like in many
other countries - let people go home when they are tired (and of course sobered
up).
3e8 (anonymous) says…
so try a 4am closing time i.e. *voluntary* staggered closing times.
not all the bars will stay open that late because not every drinker wants to stay up much beyond 2am anyway and bars only stay open if they're making money. not all bars that are open at midnight are open at 2am, and not all bars open at 2am will be open at 4am.
but I digress, how many police officers does a dozen new roundabouts and a new city library buy? and what's this about taxpayer responsibility? maybe the salaries of the city manager and city commissioners should be doubled so those jobs will attract better qualified candidates.
perkins (anonymous) says…
Can we be candid for a moment? Isn't most of the violence coming from hip-hop concerts? If the bar owners would avoid that genre, it would make Lawrence a safer place. Maybe that is what the city manager implied, but of course he could not say it.
merrill (anonymous) says…
Obviously the city needs additional legal tools to take care of business so long as bar owners and commissioners are friends.
*A tool that states a certain number of infractions and it's over would be useful.
*Cities need local control for trouble making bars!
*When one club owner has too clubs that demand too much time from the LPD I'd say is a public nuisance. Perhaps additional tools to fortify the nuisance laws? Bill the club for LPD time
times 10. Attach the fine to their water bill.
If governing bodies will not provide backbone then what do they expect the city manager to do?
*Demand more of Police Chief Olin regarding enforcement of current drinking and driving laws? Set up DUI check zones outside bars?
Mandating additional security people in bars probably would not be effective. They would merely toss their problems into the streets instead of calling the LPD to haul trouble makers off which is the current practice.
Support two new tools:
*The special use permit
*Entertainment license
It is club owners such as Steffes who scream the loudest about regulations that bring on additional laws and regulation.
30 more police officers @ 60,000 = 1,800,000 plus vehicles and gasoline = no end in sight = no way jose.
The trouble is with some club owners. Perhaps other club owners should pressure the trouble bars to clean it up or get out of town? This should not preclude the license and SUP's.
Why patronize a busy bar that cannot protect its' customers?
lunacydetector (anonymous) says…
being an old fuddy duddy, i don't venture downtown at night.
i don't think hip hoppers smoke. blacks and asians don't typically smoke like the whites. are the gang bangers coming to town because of the smoking ban?
it seems that things went south after the smoking ban took effect.
here is an study that is more concise.
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:...
murphy59 (anonymous) says…
"As in the past, members of the bar industry didn't like what they heard. Several in the crowd told commissioners that the simple solution was to hire more police officers because the city admits most of the problems are not happening inside bars, but rather are the result of actions by patrons after they've left a bar.
'We have to accept that this community is growing, but I just never see in our budget that we're really giving our police department more resources," said Rob Farha, owner of The Wheel. "I get frustrated as a taxpayer. We spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on roundabouts, but there are safety issues greater than that.'"
Best part of the article, right there.
Also, it's interesting that this subject has brought out some of the perhaps otherwise hidden racism in some of the LJW forum-goers.
MeeMa8 (anonymous) says…
If the problems are mostly happening outside, what good is it going to do to require bars to hire security? Are the security guards going to stand around outside? Oh wait, then they would be doing the jobs of the Lawrence Police Department!
justthefacts (anonymous) says…
Government's role should be to serve and protect - to jointly do things for the people, not to the people. However, we have become used to a government that tries (and regularly fails) to protect us all from lessons that would have perviously been taught by nature; thus, the impending demise of all common sense.
Despite what we have become conditioned to believe/want, we do not usually need more government regulation, more red tape, more taxes, or more anything. Except common sense and self-reliance. The more we rely upon others to think for us, the less able we are (as individuals and a society) to do our own thinking and protect our own interests.
This is not a highly complicated problem. If a bar is too dangerous - those who think so should not go to them. If you do go to such places, expect to experience danger. If enough people avoid a business it will close down eventually. If enough stupid people continue to go to such places, well then they will get in trouble. We can't protect everyone from their own bad decisions.
Bubbles (anonymous) says…
As long as they are shooting one another, who cares?
If you are dumb enough to venture into a war zone then you deserve what you get.
Jaminrawk (anonymous) says…
This is getting insane. The people who are getting into fights and causing trouble usually are the same that go to places like Last Call. The city commission is trying everything they can to destroy downtown night life, probably because the commission is made up of a bunch of nerds. I agree Corliss needs to be gone.
Holy crap, I actually agree with Marion about something.
TheHeartlessBureaucrat (anonymous) says…
All I've got to say is, What is Stewart Copeland doing in a Lawrence Bar?
THB
getserious (anonymous) says…
I really hope the city doesn't over-react to this. The main problem, the only problem really with downtown is Last Call. The kind of people or element that they bring into town is the problem. This isn't racist or biased. Most of the problems over the last couple of years are directly related to that place. And the owners lack of responsibility and "I'll fight to the end" attitude is what this is all about. He is ruining this for every other law abiding place downtown. I really hope that the city is just looking for a "legal" way to close that place down and this is the first step to doing that.
Moderateguy (anonymous) says…
Enforce the littering ordinance. Steffes is littering our town with the violent trash he is importing from out of town. For him to say that it is not his responsibility is laughable. Perhaps citizens should dump their trash on his property. Since it's not on their own property anymore, it's not their problem. (Not that I'm actually advocating that anyone break the law here..)
This whole discussion is really about one particulary troublesome nightclub. The owner has refused to take any responsibility, so others must suffer. That is unfortunately why the City must now enact some form of ordinance. People should be outraged at the thought of raising taxes to pay for additional police to deal with a single business owner's insistence on thumbing his nose at us.
Andini (anonymous) says…
Just let the bars stay open 24-7. Then there won't be a problem with closing times.
Rationalanimal (anonymous) says…
What we need is comprehensive downtown-control legislation. There needs to be a full ban on all semi-auto downtowns and a 7 day waiting period and background check before one can go downtown. Last, Lawrence should adopt an ordinance banning all concealed downtowns. Concealing downtown is a major problem. That should do it. Peace out from liberal la-la land.
Easy_Does_It (anonymous) says…
"As in the past, members of the bar industry didn't like what they heard. Several in the crowd told commissioners that the simple solution was to hire more police officers because the city admits most of the problems are not happening inside bars, but rather are the result of actions by patrons after they've left a bar.
'We have to accept that this community is growing, but I just never see in our budget that we're really giving our police department more resources," said Rob Farha, owner of The Wheel. "I get frustrated as a taxpayer. We spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on roundabouts, but there are safety issues greater than that.'"
Kind of a chicken or the egg thing? Which comes first the gun toting gang outside a bar or the bar creating an interest for the gun toting gang? Not sure this logic holds much water, wouldn't the lack of police officers also result in gun fire outside of a church or Old Navy for example?
I'd like to see a bar owner run for City Commission based on the platform "I promise to hire more police to clean up the mess outside of my establishment, but I will need more of your tax dollars".
lunacydetector (anonymous) says…
it is a very plausible explanation as to why the trouble started after the smoking ban. read my link above. it backs up as to who smokes and who doesn't. being in this politically correct town, i request some remove their blinders to look at the whole picture - warts and all.
the city of lawrence typically bites the hand that feeds them, in all their ignorance. hey, they might mean well and it might be the happening thing for them to enact some ordinance or make up some rule or change the rules to accomodate some little voices, but in doing so they also create their own karma. the smoking ban has created bad karma and the violence is the result of their actions - just as the fight against walmart has created a shortfall of sales taxes - just as they change other rules (i won't mention at this time).
so, we are going to get our property taxes increased (most likely) because lawrence is short on sales taxes. our governing body can raise the mill without a vote - and they will since they can't live within a budget and a sales tax increase would require a public vote.
over-regulating is BAD for business, period. just as the smoking ban has been bad for business and most likely brought a criminal element to town.
kneejerkreaction (anonymous) says…
More regulations like staggered closing times would be like holding the lid on a boiling pot. Can you imagine the mess when late-night revelers all converge in a staggering rush on the bars that are open late? Ban hip hop? I could care less, but that's like banning violence and some people like it...hip hop, that is. You can't stop violence with city regulations. If it were that easy, all cities would be safe. More regulations will simply create problems that no one foresaw. Of all the suggestions I read, banning hip hop would be the one that would make Lawrence a boring place for a certain genre of individuals.
Bubbles (anonymous) says…
We need to look to places like KCK , Washington DC, and Detroit. Maybe even New Orleans to see how to handle these types of people. They have had alot more expeirence than Lawrence.
Lil_Kitty (anonymous) says…
All I can say is that I hope the commission and all individuals involved in decision making in the city will read these responses.
I don't believe the entertainment venue license would be a good idea. The license would take away freedom of individuals and bars making it twice as hard for artists to be an artist. I really don't think that is what Lawrence is all about. Aren't we a welcoming community? My idea of a welcoming community is not all about rules and regulations. We want venues downtown it is part of the allure.
Staggard closing times.... that is just asking for more violence and drunk driving.... one bar closes early which leaves fewer bars to go to, a greater number of intoxicated people going to few places = trouble. Am I wrong to believe when people are intoxicated they typically would do something they wouldn't do sober, ie - fight? Drunk driving - hello? People usually want to stay out if a bar closes early so if you have one bar closing early then they will want to go to another bar after they have been drinking = drunk driving.
A change in city zoning laws - Again, same concept as the entertainment licence. It is hard enough to be a bar owner in this town.
Security guards - If the bar doesn't have problems inside then what is the purpose of more security guards?
I don't think the city will come up with the funds for more officers and we also can't eliminate certain venues plus it wouldn't be fare to. I do agree with fines though. The problem is how can we prove that certain volence is caused by a certain bar unless of course the troublemakers themselves admit to being at a certain bar. Another condition to allow for fines is changes to ordinaces or regulations stating any violence that requires police envolvment in front of or within a certain amount of feet of an establishment will be fined a certain amount the first and/or secong time and fines there on after will be increased exponential (per armyguy above). Maybe the bar will get enough fines and fines that are too large to put them out of business.
But of course this is just my take and what do I know... I am only a community member
justthefacts (anonymous) says…
MORE regulations??? Like the ones that we have now aren't working well enough so more laws will do the trick????
You cannot legislate common sense or rational behavior. You cannot outlaw stupidity (well you can - but good luck enforcing that ban).
public nuisance laws already exist - and allow a prosecutor to take action against a business that causes harm to the general welfare of the public.
If people do not want to get shot at, then the smart ones don't go downtown in certain areas of town, after certain hours. No amount of extra government red tape (puleeez Mr. Government man, make everyone be nice to and play fairly with each other!!) will prevent stupidity and irrational behaviors. It's just one more layer of people, who will need to be paid salaries, trying to micro-manage businesses and the lives of others.
Let nature take it course.
Kornphlake (anonymous) says…
Great Ideas! Lets make it hard for "troubled" bars to stay open. The rampant problem of bars fighting in parking lots, and shooting up downtown must stop. These bars get drunk and harass innocent bystanders, and pee wherever they please. Ohh wait, you mean the bars aren't shooting,fighting, harassing, and peeing, it's the patrons? Well that makes perfect sense then, let's close down the bars with troubled patrons so they can just go somewhere else. Let's close down Last Call, 508, etc... and watch as those crowds just move to another bar downtown. The next suggestion will then be to close downtown to anybody that doesn't meet the pre-approved requirements. Maybe a nationwide bar I.D. system can be instituted downtown so the "undesirables" can be kept out. I love this town, but the people who run it are a joke.
Kornphlake
emilyhadley (Emily Hadley) says…
It's not hip hop shows.
Bring Hank II to the Granada and I bet you'll see the same testosterone-driven idiocy that you see outside a hip hop show.
The dance clubs with problems tend to simply have a huge number of people, a really HUGE number of people (have you seen the lines?? It's like a sold-out Granada show every night), which logically increases the chance of conflict. Plus, going to a dance club often means putting a lot of effort into impressing people both with one's appearance and behavior, networking with acquaintances, and looking for romance, so people are likely to cross a line and offend one another, and egos can easily get out of control.
It is unfortunate that acting tough is what impresses a lot of people, but it is still the case in many situations, and having a large number of people around always heightens insecurities and desire to protect one's image or reputation.
*
I think staggered times would tell people that there will be a downtown sidewalk presence for a much *longer* time period than there currently is, so one could just stroll around for hours and check out all the different crowds of people, maybe picking fights in all of them.
*
If we can have bust kids making burritos at 2 AM, surely we can have a few coppers stroll around downtown to discourage mob mentality and shootings as well. The police often seem to disappear from downtown from 1:45 to 2:15, as if they are giving the drunk drivers a grace period to attempt to drive home.
Cruising around downtown at 30 mph in a patrol car might seem to cover more area, but two officers walking or biking through downtown can, in my opinion, interact with and observe downtown/sidewalk activity much more effectively than two officers blowing stop lights with their windows up, circling downtown like angry bees. I think creating a known bicycle patrol presence would discourage the unsupervised house-party mentality before it ever boils into violence, and the problem is concentrated into just a few hours, so even additional officers from, say, 11 to 3, couldn't add too much to the budget, especially if we save the cost of having to deal with violent crimes.
*
If you want to deal with downtown, you have to think like downtown: get out of your cars!
irnmadn88 (anonymous) says…
This seems to be the beginning of Dram Shop Laws and Third Party Liability taking away the responsibility of the patron and putting the blame on the establishment. It is not Joe Drunk's fault, it is the bartender fault at Bar X for serving Joe Drunk before the mayhem, and therefore Bar X is liable for Joe Drunk's actions.
mamsir (anonymous) says…
from my oberservations it seems as if last call has been the culprit in the past and present. and whatever in the hell thai house decided to do after hours doesn't help either...
rousseau108 (anonymous) says…
i like how everyone wants the police to do everything: monitor the problem bars, catch drunk drivers, prevent people from fighting, etc. however, the problem is there is a limited number of cops in this town working on any given weekend night. therefore, if they are having to deal with the hundreds of people from Topeka and KC coming to Last Call, they obviously can't be out stopping drunk drivers or dealing with fights at house parties, etc. the city actually did a study documenting the police response to ALL the bars downtown and showed statistically that Last Call is the worst in terms of soaking up police resources and the types of crimes (i.e. fights, guns, drugs, etc). It was not based on race or music type or anything else politically incorrect. the city needs to publicize that study to shut people up and prove that Last Call is the problem. Why do you think all these people drive to Lawrence from Topeka, KC, INdependence, etc? Because the similar types of bars that were in these cities were shut down when they caused the same types of problems that Last Call has been causing the last several years. but this is Lawrence, we're too touchy feely to take a stand to protect our own city. city commission needs to WAKE UP!
Moderateguy (anonymous) says…
Scene, maybe you are willing to accept some outsiders turning our downtown into a "war zone." I don't fall into that category.
Moderateguy (anonymous) says…
Sorry scene. Just realized you were quoting "bubbles." I agree, what a rediculous comment.
George_Braziller (anonymous) says…
Marion - If the "Kommision" was composed of Albert Einstein, Thomas Jefferson, Rosa Parks, and Alexander Hamilton you would still think that they should all be fired.
"oh wait::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::."
You don't actually live in Lawrence do you? You don't get a vote.
"Marion (Marion Lynn) says:
From what I see, the current Kommision needs to be fired.
I am so dissapointed with this Kommission that I could just puke.
oh wait::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::."
RomanNose (anonymous) says…
This legislation is not good for the city and will only bring new social and economic problems. The thought process behind creating "staggered" changes to closing times is ridiculous, and not unlike creating "staggered" changes to public school schedules or business hours to prevent the sudden influx of traffic in the early and late afternoon.
It is easy prey on the citizens at any cost in the hopes of achieving the goal of a Stepford utopia instead of simply taking the time to study a map, mark the areas and times of crimes, and then assigning beat cops to patrol. Regardless of whatever laws are passed, there's always going to be somebody acting like a jerk. We have a fine police force and ought to be looking for better ways to utilize our resources. If you find fault in this, think about Iraq.
The smoking ban struck home, severely decreasing my household income. My partner who was working as a waitress at the time had to begin working a second job and has the records to show exactly how it struck us like a disaster. I personally think the "smoking issue" should be solely up to the owner's discretion.
George_Braziller (anonymous) says…
"Get bent."? Wow that was a totally . . . uhhh, Oh hell why do I even bother responding to your kindergarten trolling.
Marion (Marion Lynn) says:
George:
Get bent.