Summit owner sues city over 21-only
Mike Porter, the owner of the Summit, has filed a lawsuit against the city, claiming his establishment was wrongfully denied an exception to the 21-ordinance.
According to the lawsuit, the Summit Bar & Restaurant, 10 S. Clinton St., has suffered significant economic loss because of the denial of the exception. The business has experienced a roughly 66 percent loss in revenue, and by August, Porter said he will be unable to cover its debts.
Porter's attorneys, Steven Havercamp and Daniel Kresowik of Stanley, Lande, & Hunter in Davenport, state the city should grant the exception and compensate Porter for his losses.
Porter applied for an exception to the 21-ordinance — meaning those underage could enter his bar after 10 p.m. — contending 50.04 percent of his establishment's sales came from nonalcoholic purchases. An establishment must take in more than half of its sales from nonalcohol products to be exempt.
The City Attorney's Office denied Porter's request for an exception on June 15 because Porter excluded cover charges from his calculations. The Summit brought in about $395,000 in cover charges last year, which skewed the math, Assistant City Attorney Eric Goers told The Daily Iowan earlier this month.
The lawsuit contends that the city's decision is "inconsistent with its plain language," saying the description of how to calculate food-to-alcohol sales is "ambiguous."
The lawsuit claims the city's exception policy states that "income from fees charged to gain entry to or remain on the premises, such as cover charges, drink mixes, or any part of an alcoholic beverage" should not be included in food or alcohol sales, yet the city included it in alcohol sales with calculating the Summit's revenue percentage.
But City Councilor Connie Champion said to be granted an exception from the 21-ordinance, a business must demonstrate its primary business purpose is not the sale of alcoholic beverages, and it must include cover charges in its alcoholic revenue.
Champion said cover charges count as alcoholic revenue because bars used them to make up for the money lost from underage customers not buying drinks. But even if they weren't being served alcohol, she said, she believes underage patrons were still drinking in bars.
"The bars don't say they are [drinking], but they obviously are, because they have lost revenue [since the 21-ordinance was enacted]," she said.
Leah Cohen — the president of the Downtown Association and owner of Bo-James, 118 E. Washington St. — said she thinks other bars in Iowa City have charged cover and not filed it under their liquor sales.
"If they bring cover charges into one bar as a criteria, I think it clearly needs to be brought in with others," said Cohen.
The lawsuit, which Porter filed Tuesday, claims the city has always targeted bars that cater primarily to under-21 patrons.
It stated that from 2003 to 2009, police never visited 30 percent of the 158 Class C liquor licensed establishments, but visited the Summit 625 times.
A large portion of the lawsuit also addresses its problems with the city's PAULA-to-police visit ratio, which states bars must maintain a ratio of less than one PAULA handed out per police visit.
The city has denied the liquor-license renewals of five bars under the rule — including the Summit, which filed a separate lawsuit against the city in November 2009 claiming the PAULA-to-police visit measure is unconstitutional. The state agreed there are flaws with the rule when Iowa Alcoholic Beverages Division Administrator Stephen Larson ruled the controversial regulation does not comply with state code.
Porter states in the lawsuit the city further targeted him and attempted "to force [the plaintiffs] out of business" by denying him an exception.
The public can vote on whether to uphold or overturn the city's current 21-ordinance on the Nov. 2 ballot.
comments powered by Disqus
