Maggie O'Brien, OWH wrote:Mayor Jim Suttle says he wants Omaha's bars to stay open until 2 a.m.
Suttle said Wednesday that he has asked the city's Law Department to draft a ordinance to allow an extra hour for alcohol sales, from 1 a.m. to 2 a.m.
“This is an opportunity for our city to stay competitive with other metropolitan areas,” Suttle said.
Suttle's office said he has discussed the proposed ordinance with several City Council members. He said he is committed to working with them on drafting the specific details of the ordinance.
Nebraska's last Call is 1am, every state bordering Nebraska is 2am. Out of those seven states including Nebraska, Nebraska has the highest amount of DUI's per capita.
I think this only applied to those of age. If I remember correctly it was a survey done so anyone asked would have been of legal age to drink. I think the correlation they were trying to make was that earlier closing times give people the idea in their head that they have to drink more quickly since they're on limited time. I know I do this when I go out and more often than not I'm already pre-tanked.
It amazes me to hear a city council member contemplating aloud whether an extra hour is going to provide enough sales tax revenue to justify this. Apparently it never struck them, that on the basis of there being that extra hour... a bar patron might actually consider spending their ENTIRE evening in Omaha... rather than across the river.
Shoot for the Moon... if you miss, you'll land among the stars.
Stargazer wrote:It amazes me to hear a city council member contemplating aloud whether an extra hour is going to provide enough sales tax revenue to justify this. Apparently it never struck them, that on the basis of there being that extra hour... a bar patron might actually consider spending their ENTIRE evening in Omaha... rather than across the river.
That is a stupid question for them to even be asking. The average person spends x amount a month (most of which is probably 100% of their income). What they don't spend in an extra hour at the bar on Friday night will probably be spent somewhere else Saturday afternoon (resulting in no net gain to the city).
Sure, there will be a minuscule change to tax revenues, but this should be an issue judged solely on not limiting people's freedoms.
joeglow wrote:
The average person spends x amount a month (most of which is probably 100% of their income). What they don't spend in an extra hour at the bar on Friday night will probably be spent somewhere else Saturday afternoon (resulting in no net gain to the city).
That may be true for someone within Omaha, but not so for visitors and those coming from CB or the Omaha suburbs. For the latter, it will be money spent in Omaha, period.
Stargazer wrote:It amazes me to hear a city council member contemplating aloud whether an extra hour is going to provide enough sales tax revenue to justify this. Apparently it never struck them, that on the basis of there being that extra hour... a bar patron might actually consider spending their ENTIRE evening in Omaha... rather than across the river.
That is a stupid question for them to even be asking. The average person spends x amount a month (most of which is probably 100% of their income). What they don't spend in an extra hour at the bar on Friday night will probably be spent somewhere else Saturday afternoon (resulting in no net gain to the city).
Sure, there will be a minuscule change to tax revenues, but this should be an issue judged solely on not limiting people's freedoms.
I think you misunderstood Jeff's point. The x number of dollars is being split between Omaha and CB bars. Omaha tax coffers would certainly gain from the extra hour.
Brad wrote:I heard a very interesting stat yesterday...
Nebraska's last Call is 1am, every state bordering Nebraska is 2am. Out of those seven states including Nebraska, Nebraska has the highest amount of DUI's per capita.
Well from my experience working in the restaurant business I can say the number of DUIs among those in the service industry seems especially higher here than in other states. I've wondered if maybe it was because by the time these people are off work there's very little time left to go to a bar, hence when they do most of them binge like crazy. I see this on a nightly basis.
Stargazer wrote:It amazes me to hear a city council member contemplating aloud whether an extra hour is going to provide enough sales tax revenue to justify this. Apparently it never struck them, that on the basis of there being that extra hour... a bar patron might actually consider spending their ENTIRE evening in Omaha... rather than across the river.
That is a stupid question for them to even be asking. The average person spends x amount a month (most of which is probably 100% of their income). What they don't spend in an extra hour at the bar on Friday night will probably be spent somewhere else Saturday afternoon (resulting in no net gain to the city).
Sure, there will be a minuscule change to tax revenues, but this should be an issue judged solely on not limiting people's freedoms.
I think you misunderstood Jeff's point. The x number of dollars is being split between Omaha and CB bars. Omaha tax coffers would certainly gain from the extra hour.
I understood it and that is a very small number. Clearly some people do it, but not enough to make much of a blip. Either way, this is NOT a sales tax question.
Stargazer wrote:It amazes me to hear a city council member contemplating aloud whether an extra hour is going to provide enough sales tax revenue to justify this. Apparently it never struck them, that on the basis of there being that extra hour... a bar patron might actually consider spending their ENTIRE evening in Omaha... rather than across the river.
That is a stupid question for them to even be asking. The average person spends x amount a month (most of which is probably 100% of their income). What they don't spend in an extra hour at the bar on Friday night will probably be spent somewhere else Saturday afternoon (resulting in no net gain to the city).
Sure, there will be a minuscule change to tax revenues, but this should be an issue judged solely on not limiting people's freedoms.
I think you misunderstood Jeff's point. The x number of dollars is being split between Omaha and CB bars. Omaha tax coffers would certainly gain from the extra hour.
I understood it and that is a very small number. Clearly some people do it, but not enough to make much of a blip. Either way, this is NOT a sales tax question.
Joe your assuming that money will be spent somewhere else. And you underestimate the number of dollars we spend in Iowa (not including casinos). What of the people who stay out and have another couple of beers instead of going home to bed? Money that otherwise might've been saved. What of the tourists and conventioneers who spend another hour spending in our city rather than going back to their hotel?
Stargazer wrote:It amazes me to hear a city council member contemplating aloud whether an extra hour is going to provide enough sales tax revenue to justify this. Apparently it never struck them, that on the basis of there being that extra hour... a bar patron might actually consider spending their ENTIRE evening in Omaha... rather than across the river.
That is a stupid question for them to even be asking. The average person spends x amount a month (most of which is probably 100% of their income). What they don't spend in an extra hour at the bar on Friday night will probably be spent somewhere else Saturday afternoon (resulting in no net gain to the city).
Sure, there will be a minuscule change to tax revenues, but this should be an issue judged solely on not limiting people's freedoms.
I think you misunderstood Jeff's point. The x number of dollars is being split between Omaha and CB bars. Omaha tax coffers would certainly gain from the extra hour.
I understood it and that is a very small number. Clearly some people do it, but not enough to make much of a blip. Either way, this is NOT a sales tax question.
Joe your assuming that money will be spent somewhere else. And you underestimate the number of dollars we spend in Iowa (not including casinos). What of the people who stay out and have another couple of beers instead of going home to bed? Money that otherwise might've been saved. What of the tourists and conventioneers who spend another hour spending in our city rather than going back to their hotel?
Time certainly is money.
Well, only one way to find out without moving the time forward.. Let's move it back an hour to midnight or maybe 11pm and see if there is any impact on sales tax. Maybe that will be a fair assessment 'before' we move it forward..
Nah, I hate the idea and would probably move if that ever moved forward.. :)
It is not and "In Omaha" vs a "Not in Omaha" issues. What in what you posted gives any indication of the lady not being FROM Omaha.
Huh? Spell check and punctuation, please (but i think i understand what you're saying )
What, in what i said, indicated that i had said she was from Omaha? If you re-read my post, you'll see i said nothing about where she was from, except for being from Nebraska. When i said, "Omaha needs to secede..." it was based on the fact that if Omaha would do so, the 2 am closing time would most likely pass...keeping in mind that it is not even in the realm of possibility.
thenewguy wrote:some Nebraska people (none on here, I assume) are just a little out of touch. Channel 6 (the authority on news reporting) was discussing it and had some viewers weigh in. There was one person that said 'haven't seen a closing at a bar in a while but it'd be good if you got a late start,' which is understandable. But then this lady that called in (they played the audio recording), and said, "fights break out at bars all the time!! Now they're going to be open an hour LATER!?" Unreal. Isn't 1am too late? Why not close the bars at midnight? That way nothing bad will ever happen at a bar again...because everyone knows that |expletive| only goes down from midnight on.
After spending the weekend in Wyoming and enjoying their 2am bar closing times (AND indoor smoking!!!!!!!!!!!!!) Omaha needs to get on the ball and get into the 1840's with Wyoming.
Maggie O’Brien Omaha World Herald Staff Writer wrote:The council meets at 2 p.m. Tuesday in the legislative chambers of the City-County Building, 1819 Farnam St.
Anyone planning on going to talk down Stothert and the scare-mongers?
EDIT: link repaired
Last edited by nebport5 on Mon Jun 07, 2010 1:38 pm, edited 2 times in total.
If someone from the forum goes to this thing, will you please bring up the tourism/convention angle. The council will warm to the 'tax revenue' issue much more than any other approach. MECA should be all over this----I hope they're at least lobbying behind the scenes. A 2 A.M. closing time will make the city much more attractive to meeting/convention planners. You can bet on it.
KETV wrote:A police deputy chief said a proposed 2 a.m. bar closing time wouldn't negatively affect the department, though he also said police are taking a neutral stance on the proposal. Project Extra Mile, the Alcohol Impact Coalition and PRIDE will protest the plan. The groups are worried about how the additional hour will affect underage drinking.
In the Old Market and at other bars around town, supporters said Omaha needs a later closing time to help the economy and also to make Omaha a more cosmopolitan city. It appeared during the hearing that a majority of City Council members supported a 2 a.m. closing time. But there will be no vote for another two weeks.
KPTM wrote:"The bars in council bluffs don't want this to pass, they know that they are going to lose business," said bar owner Terry O'Halloran. Supporters believe the change would boost the city's economy and improve its image with visitors. "We think it aligns with our vision for a more dynamic community where diverse young professionals want to live, work and play," said Jay Palu of the Omaha Young Professionals Council.
The ordinance could still be amended. A vote is set for June 22nd. It needs the support of five council members to pass. Several other cities in the area are also considering the change. The earliest a 2 a.m. close could go into effect is July 15th.
KPTM wrote:"The bars in council bluffs don't want this to pass, they know that they are going to lose business," said bar owner Terry O'Halloran. Supporters believe the change would boost the city's economy and improve its image with visitors. "We think it aligns with our vision for a more dynamic community where diverse young professionals want to live, work and play," said Jay Palu of the Omaha Young Professionals Council.
The ordinance could still be amended. A vote is set for June 22nd. It needs the support of five council members to pass. Several other cities in the area are also considering the change. The earliest a 2 a.m. close could go into effect is July 15th.
I still don't understand why this isn't a slam dunk. I hope it does work for Omaha. I think it wouldn't hurt CB bars as much as people think, at least not in the long run. There are times when, if we're in Omaha, we'll just go home instead of bar hopping back to CB due to the hour difference (and how it wouldn't necessarily be worth it). If there was more time, and less pressure, we'd be more inclined to stay out later. Strange logic, maybe, but when you're drunk it all makes sense.
Zack Colman WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITER wrote:It’s 10 p.m., and Shaun Neal has three more hours to relax on Nomad Lounge’s black sofa in Omaha’s Old Market...
The nightly rush to slam shots and hit the dance floor before the doors close will soon be put off another hour if the Omaha City Council votes to push last call to 2 a.m. While many young professionals would welcome the change, views are mixed on whether it would help the city attract more young talent.
“Really, it would make us more aligned with other cities,” Neal said. “Welcome to the 21st century.” The City Council is scheduled to vote June 22 on the proposed ordinance. To pass, a supermajority of at least five city council members must approve.
.
I think this only applied to those of age. If I remember correctly it was a survey done so anyone asked would have been of legal age to drink. I think the correlation they were trying to make was that earlier closing times give people the idea in their head that they have to drink more quickly since they're on limited time. I know I do this when I go out and more often than not I'm already pre-tanked.
)
:cheers: 
:dancing: :leek: :woot: :coolwoot: :revival: 
