Council to vote on extended bar hours

Advocate file photo by LIBBY ISENHOWER -- Several patrons enjoy a view of the Mississippi River from the patio on the L'Auberge Casino after the casino's grand opening in September. Officials with Pinnacle Entertainment, which owns L'Auberge, said allowing liquor sales until 4 a.m. would help the casino compete as a regional destination. Show caption
Advocate file photo by LIBBY ISENHOWER -- Several patrons enjoy a view of the Mississippi River from the patio on the L'Auberge Casino after the casino's grand opening in September. Officials with Pinnacle Entertainment, which owns L'Auberge, said allowing liquor sales until 4 a.m. would help the casino compete as a regional destination.

Bar owners who wish to stay open until 4 a.m. on Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays would have to pay a $40,000 fee under a proposal to be considered at Wednesday’s East Baton Rouge Parish Metro Council meeting.

Some bar owners say the proposed annual fee to stay open an additional six hours a week is too onerous for any business other than a casino.

Councilman Ulysses “Bones” Addison, who in the past has supported measures that curb alcohol use, is sponsoring the proposal. He did not return phone calls Wednesday seeking comment.

Kerry Andersen, of Pinnacle Entertainment, which owns the L’Auberge Casino, said in a statement, “The ordinance will clearly help L’Auberge Baton Rouge compete as a regional destination. We compete with New Orleans and Gulf coast casinos where alcohol is served 24/7 as part of the total vacation experience and this effort offers our guests the same amenities.”

Patrick Brown, the general manager of the Belle of Baton Rouge Casino and Hotel, said he wasn’t aware of the ordinance and needed time to think about it before commenting.

Representatives from Hollywood Casino could not be reached Wednesday for comment.

Jack Warner, the owner of Happy’s Irish Pub, Roux House and Walk-Ons Bistreaux and Bar, said the $40,000 fee “eliminates 99 percent of the restaurants and bars out there.”

Warner continued, “It’s meant to help casinos, possibly even strip clubs, but I don’t know if we as restaurant/bar owners could apply for a $40,000 permit.”

Warner said he wasn’t interested in keeping his establishments open that late regardless.

“Nothing good happens after 2 a.m.,” he said, referring to the current closing time for bars.

John Smith, president of the Downtown Business Association, said the association sees the value of allowing businesses to stay open later but opposes the hefty fee that would be required.

“The fee is more of a penalty than anything else,” Smith said. “Some of the businesses are operating on small margins already.”

David Remmetter, the owner of Chelsea’s Cafe, said he couldn’t afford the fee, but still supports the measure.

“I don’t see it being feasible for Chelsea’s, but do I think it would be great for the city? Yeah,” he said.

On Wednesday, the Metro Council’s finance and executive committee forwarded the 4 a.m. closing proposal to the full council without discussion and without a recommendation. The council is expected to vote next week on the measure, which faces opposition from several Metro Council members and the city police chief.

Councilman Trae Welch said he does not support extending the bar hours and took issue with the fee.

“By paying a fee to waive our laws, what that tells me is, what other laws do we have for sale in this parish?” Welch said.

Next week the council also will reconsider Councilwoman Alison Gary’s amendment that would allow bars to open on Sundays from 11 a.m. until midnight and allow grocery and package liquor stores to sell alcohol before 11 a.m. on Sundays.

Councilman Chandler Loupe said he would support Gary’s alcohol ordinance change, but not Addison’s out of concern for public safety.

“I see Sunday sales more of a restaurants and football games and Sunday brunch kind of thing,” he said.

Councilman Scott Wilson also said he could support Gary’s ordinance but not Addison’s.

“I think 2 a.m. is late enough,” he said.

Last week, Wilson was with the majority of council members who initially voted against Gary’s Sunday ordinance. The council ultimately voted to defer the vote to next week.

Wilson said he mistakenly voted against it because he thought they were voting on a different version of the ordinance.

Gary said she doesn’t mind allowing bars to stay open until 4 a.m. but wasn’t sure if she would support Addison’s bill because of the permit fee attached.

She also said she is concerned Addison’s alcohol ordinance change could potentially derail her own proposed change.

“I’m just trying to remind people that mine is different and has nothing to do with this 2 (a.m.) to 4 (a.m.) permit,” she said. “That was not my focus at all.”

Smith said downtown businesses are more concerned that Gary’s amendment passes.

“For our membership, that ability to open on Sundays is more critical than staying open until 4 in the morning,” Smith said.


Please log in to comment on this story

Comments (31)


1) Comment by DeeplyConcerned - 19/10/2012

It's unfortunate how obviously our council members can be bought. Mr Addison has been seen being wined and dined by the management of the penthouse club, and is becoming quite the frequent member. A $40,000 permit is obscene, and is put in place solely for the casinos and strip clubs benefit, as well as Mr Addison's "personal" benefit. This is a significant middle finger to every small business holding this city together. The Mall of Louisiana paid off others in a similar fashion, case in point: the property taxes everyone else pays gets raised for the public transport system. The same public transport system that has two dedicated stops at the mall. The same transport system the mall doesn't pay taxes for because it's mysteriously been written outside the taxation "zone". They don't even try to hide the corruption anymore, and people just keep rolling over and taking it.

2) Comment by jedleland - 18/10/2012

as for the $40,000 its obviously a shakedown and its up to the council to say yay or nay and its up to the voters to replace that council if they dont like the vote. amazing what you can learn when you read beyond militia websites.

3) Comment by jedleland - 18/10/2012

And dang mark for a supposed expert on the constitution (or at least the bit your read, the preamble) you sure dont understand much about federalism. opening hours of bars is a local issue and reserved under the 10 amendment for states to determine. most states have their own constitutions (you might read ours one day) which provide for local control on many issues like, for instance, bar opening times. jefferson would consider it entirely reasonable that a local populace can place its own limits on bar opening times in accordance with the wishes of that community and via an established governmental process of representation and voting in a public manner. In fact he would insist that be the case. seems to me you would subvert or preempt that and insist that our community (which is functioning autonomously in this respect and independent of federal controls imposed from above) adhere to federal standards of constitutionality even though the federal constitution as you so often remind us specifically prohibits the federal government from meddling in affairs it cannot according to its written and enumerated original powers which sure as heck dont include mandating the opening hours of local bars. so ironically youve come full circle and are advocating the subjugation of local controls (via a completely legal local and statutory constitutional process), and the imposition of federal standards over a local people in direct violation of the 10th amendment you claim to revere but obviously cant understand. That would make Jefferson laugh, cry or puke I reckon and thats why you read beyond the preamble.

4) Comment by jedleland - 18/10/2012

remember again mark has never actually read past the preamble as Noel Hammat proved when he embarrassed mark a few weeks back with his utter constitutional ignorance. have you made it past the preamble yet mark?

5) Comment by jedleland - 18/10/2012

mark makes classic mistake again believing that his holy book is actual history cause his parents told him it was. how did the judge settle your claim against the people who locked you up in greenwellsprings for two weeks for making those threatning phone calls? was your case won or thrown out? yeah, thought so. back to your bible and bunker

6) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 18/10/2012

I guess the founders wasted their time arguing over the bill of rights content, as they had no idea today's Amerikans would not understand the concept. If the document cannot be taken at it's word, why bother? As for "balance," LOL, that contradicts Jefferson's concept of "the government which governs least, governs best." Jefferson never met BRmoderate, obviously.

7) Comment by Duckyluve - 18/10/2012

Typical democrat way of thinking. Pass an ordinance and then try and make them pay 40k to some slush fund.....

8) Comment by BRmoderate - 18/10/2012

a government that is too weak is just as dangerous as a government that is too strong. Balance is the key.

9) Comment by J.R.Madden - 18/10/2012

"markedwardmarchiafava" - And who decides where your right end and another's begin? "spiderman" - I agree with you. That's why my comment used 'sarcasm' -- the use of irony to mock or convey contempt. "markedwardmarchiafava" - Just because you try to impose a stridently literal interpretation on the words of the US Constitution, does not make you correct. Also, a state is a form of political association and may be a neighborhood, city, nation, township, county, province, territory, confederation, international organizations, or supranational organizations.

10) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 18/10/2012

During their early history, the nation of Israel had judges to settle disputes. There were no kings. Prior to the death of Samuel, the leaders of the 12 tribes begged Samuel to appoint them a king, as the pagan nations had. Read 1st Samuel, Chapter 8, see what happens when you allow another man to rule over you.

11) Comment by DMJ - 18/10/2012

$40K/year just to stay open for a couple more hours? This is clearly meant to dissuade any small business owner from being able to stay open. Only big shots can throw around $40 grand.

12) Comment by Politivore - 18/10/2012

So ridiculous. In order for a bar to be open 5% longer, it has to pay about 7000% more in permit fees? OK...

13) Comment by jedleland - 18/10/2012

does that include making telephone threats to legislators?

14) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 18/10/2012

"You have the right to do as you please, until it interferes with the rights of others." Think about that profound statement and apply it here.

15) Comment by spiderman - 18/10/2012

J.R. I don't want to smell your burning trash or your outhouse. I would however like to go to my friend's daiquiri shop on Sundays to watch the Saints. Drop the casino clause and stick to the original plan for Sunday.

16) Comment by nimby? - 18/10/2012

I've noticed bars closing at 10 , 11 because there were no customers . it would be more realistic to designate a certain area , say downtown , where bars can stay open later , if they have the business to do so .

17) Comment by nimby? - 18/10/2012

I've noticed bars closing at 10 , 11 because there were no customers . it would be more realistic to designate a certain area , say downtown , where bars can stay open later , if they have the business to do so .

18) Comment by raised.on.robbery - 18/10/2012

I'm glad I don't own a restaurant or bar, because this is some serious *****

19) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 18/10/2012

There's our problem. No, the constitution does not give congress the ability to legislate in areas not expressed in the constitution. Since appx 90% of what congress does is outside it's authority is why Ron Paul introduced the Enumerated Powers Act. Please read it. Are you planning to run for a seat IN congress?

20) Comment by BRmoderate - 18/10/2012

MEM, what are your thoughts on the "General Welfare Clause" and the "Necessary and Proper Clause"? Both are written in the costitution (art 1 sec 8 clause 1 and art 1 sec 8 clause 18). Both give congress the ability to legislative powers in areas not immediately expressed in the constitution. These were written into the constitution because the founding fathers knew that the constitution would have to be elastic enough to address the needs of society as it evolves through history.

21) Comment by Sandy - 18/10/2012

$40k to stay open late? Sounds like nothing more than a cash-grab by the City-Parish to me.

22) Comment by phil - 18/10/2012

Yes, let's make Baton Rouge the No. 1 city in the USA for gambling and getting drunk. By all means let's just sell our souls for a few extra bucks so we can be No. 1 at something and be the next "great" city! Where are all of these political church leaders when you really need them? *( yes this is sarcasm)

23) Comment by NewsReader - 18/10/2012

If Warner thinks nothing good happens after 2:00AM, then he's doing something wrong. Imposing a fee the size of $40K simply makes it only an option for the big guys. And maybe the council should take a note of what they discovered in England many years ago where they used to have silly licensing hours: shorter pub hours simply caused binge drinking to occur in a shorter time period. In 2003 they did away with the restrictive hours which used to be 11:30AM-2:30PM and then 5:00PM to 11:30PM for the most part. There's been no magical increase in dui's or public intoxication or fights or...

24) Comment by foldgers - 18/10/2012

I do not agree with the fee. But, why stop there? Charge businesses $40k a year to allow them to sell the fake weed. Charge me a few thousand a year to own property, wait never mind on that one. Charge me money to go in the woods and hunt my dinner, wait...already done. Charge me money to go pull a fish out of a lake, oh yeah. Charge me money to get married, dang...already done.

25) Comment by Citizen Jane - 18/10/2012

I love Welch's question: " what other laws do we have for sale in this parish?” The answer: all of them.

26) Comment by Being_Stupid - 18/10/2012

Propose a substitute motion to allow bars to stay open until 4 a.m. without the $40,000 fee.

27) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 18/10/2012

Let me try (again) to break it down so even a product of the government-run schools can comprehend it. You mentioned weapons, so let's start there. If you read the united States constitution, there's a section known as article 1, sec 8. It lists the very few powers granted to congress. Please tell me which one of those clauses authorizes the federal government to regulate any property, especially weapons. HINT: there is only one, it deals with counterfeit money. Once you understand this first lesson, we'll move forward.

28) Comment by J.R.Madden - 18/10/2012

If the state can control what you do on your own property (no outhouse, no trash burning, no shooting, no fireworks), it's no longer the land of the free. If the state can control what business you can operate (no "house of pleasure", no unconventional pharmaceutical selling, no gambling houses [gaming houses are legal]), it's no longer the land of the free. If the state can control who may lawfully own firearms (no minors, no felons, no mentally troubled), it's no longer the land of the free. If the state can control what firearms may be lawfully owned (no new machine guns, no field artillery, no rocket-propelled grenades, no mines, no thermonuclear devices), it's no longer the land of the free. Gimme a break!

29) Comment by Chucky - 18/10/2012

This has become a joke, $40,000 to to stay open till 4am, has the mob taken over the city council ? 2am everyone go home no more music no more drinks what you got off work at 11pm sorry.

30) Comment by tball - 18/10/2012

Why $40K, lets make it One million. Also this will help drunk drivers by staying open til 4am... A Win, Win !!!

31) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 18/10/2012

If the state can control the hours of your business, and shake you down for $40,000.00, it's no longer the land of the free. Game over.