Lol... its not that simple from a state policy standpoint, but I understand most people don't look at this from a perspective of what is legal and enforceable.I feel it’s simple. If you aren’t eating food GTFO.
Lol... its not that simple from a state policy standpoint, but I understand most people don't look at this from a perspective of what is legal and enforceable.I feel it’s simple. If you aren’t eating food GTFO.
How is it not enforceable that way. I wouldn’t expect it to be enforced really at all but I don’t see how the legal standard couldn’t be places can be open for serving food but not just alcohol.Lol... its not that simple from a state policy standpoint, but I understand most people don't look at this from a perspective of what is legal and enforceable.
How is it not enforceable that way. I wouldn’t expect it to be enforced really at all but I don’t see how the legal standard couldn’t be places can be open for serving food but not just alcohol.
I thought the differentiation between a bar and a restaurant who serves alcohol is based on the percentage of sales between food and alcohol?
I think they have different liquor licenses too don't they? I know some states do and that would make a pretty clear line of distinction.
Wasn't that attached to smoking in some way though? Wasn't there a period when you could smoke in bars but not restaurants and they used percentage of food sales to make that determination?I thought the differentiation between a bar and a restaurant who serves alcohol is based on the percentage of sales between food and alcohol?
Wasn't that attached to smoking in some way though? Wasn't there a period when you could smoke in bars but not restaurants and they used percentage of food sales to make that determination?
From what I can see as far as liquor laws go bars and restaraurants are treated the same with the exception of brew pubs. They are not even defined differently in the code in regards to liquor laws. In fact, when one is mentioned so is the other in almost every instance, meaning they are treated essentially the same. Perhaps there is a difference in public health codes.
Wouldn't city and counties have their own zoning laws and how they define those businesses? There would be a state standards that all local zoning laws would have to follow, and I'm sure those are subject to approval by the state, but if local ordinances are allowed to define that on their own that actually complicates the matter.I think it mainly ends up being a zoning difference, where they can locate. Bars being much more limited.
I can remember a few bars running into issues with that. And then there's tipsy crow which somewhat scammed the city by opening as a restaurant and then phasing out its food shortly thereafter and applying for an exception
Wouldn't city and counties have their own zoning laws and how they define those businesses? There would be a state standards that all local zoning laws would have to follow, and I'm sure those are subject to approval by the state, but if local ordinances are allowed to define that on their own that actually complicates the matter.
I'm not a lawyer, but a quick look at des moines and west des moines ordinances shows each city creating its own definitions in its code.
yes but bars, taverns and restaurants operate under the same licenses.
Wondering how much of this is due to increased testing.
I wonder where those numbers are coming from. The state website has Black Hawk Co. at 844 cases and Woodbury (Sioux City) at 495, either some of Sioux City is counted across the river or the state website has a delay in reporting