[Vision2020] liquor insurance liability

[Saundra Lund]

Mr. Curley wrote:
"c.  providing liquor at public events in public facilities is 
and has been an issue of not only public debate but city 
council consideration and vote (beer garden at 
Renaissance Fair)--thus, not only the authorization and 
insurance for such events, but their very propriety in 
public facilities . . . "

Boy, I do hate to jump in where a thread has already become a little
heated, but . . . 

If I write anything really stupid, please be gentle with me as my brain
is somewhat congested by the flu  ;-)

I guess my reaction is a little different in that I'd guess MCA likely
reserved the Great Room *not* as a Group 1 -- "City of Moscow sponsored
and co-sponsored events,"  but probably as either "Group II are
non-profit groups and service clubs," or "Group III are private parties,
wedding receptions, commercial activities and for profit organizations."

Also, alcohol is obviously permitted at functions in the Great Room:
"Alcohol Fee
$20/event (does not include required catering permit)
Any group requesting alcohol in conjunction with the use will be
assessed this fee."

Source:
http://ci.moscow.id.us/1912/index.asp


Remind me again what the issue is?

IIRC, one thing I *do* remember is that some private businesses were
less than pleased that the City-owned 1912 Center is now providing
competition with them for space rentals for private parties & such . . .



Respectfully,
Saundra Lund
Moscow, Idaho

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to
do nothing.
Edmund Burke

-----Original Message-----
From: vision2020-admin@moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-admin@moscow.com]
On Behalf Of Mike Curley
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 9:47 AM
To: vision2020@moscow.com
Subject: RE: [Vision2020] liquor insurance liability


Mr. Hansen:
a.  the "public v. private education" issue has not been a 
debate in my opinion
b.  if it has been a debate, it is a debate that was 
conducted once, ad nauseam to many others on the list
c.  providing liquor at public events in public facilities is 
and has been an issue of not only public debate but city 
council consideration and vote (beer garden at 
Renaissance Fair)--thus, not only the authorization and 
insurance for such events, but their very propriety in 
public facilities, seems to me to be largely more relevant 
than a repetitious quarrel,  that was started (should 
anyone actually remember) by a post about an 
"interesting report" that wasn't (interesting) and provided 
nothing in the way of useable data except for purely 
rhetorical purposes.

But thank you for your reply.  It appears that my attempt 
to negotiate both issues off list has failed.  I have no 
interest in further burdening the list on either issue.

Mike Curley




On 11 Feb 03, at 9:00, Thomas Hansen wrote:

From:           	Thomas Hansen <tomh@FNA.fsn.uidaho.edu>
To:             	"'curley@turbonet.com'" <curley@turbonet.com>,
vision2020@moscow.com
Subject:        	RE: [Vision2020] liquor insurance liability
Date sent:      	Tue, 11 Feb 2003 09:00:51 -0800

Mr. Curley (and others) -

I fail to see your logic.  Public versus private education
is a debate that clearly has its pros and cons (on both
sides).  In that manner, it is a debate.

If I were to see logical pros and cons of providing liquor
with or without proper authorization/insurance, I could see openly
discussing this in this forum.

Tom Hansen

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Curley [mailto:curley@turbonet.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 8:59 AM
To: vision2020@moscow.com
Subject: RE: [Vision2020] liquor insurance liability



Mr. Hansen: 

...and, therefore, you and all those others interested in continuing the
sniping, repetitive, and increasingly irrelevant diatribes about public
and private education will likewise continue off list? If you would
agree to that
trade- off, I say this to Mr. Roderick: I think your
question expresses a concern and an issue that are 
properly
addressed on this forum. But, I would greatly appreciate it
if you would make this small sacrifice for the greater good. And, I will
participate with you off list to find the answers to your questions. 


Mike Curley 


On 11 Feb 03, at 5:52, Tom Hansen wrote: 
Send reply to:         <thansen@moscow.com> 
From:         "Tom Hansen" <thansen@moscow.com> 
To:         <Cjsnightclub@aol.com>, <vision2020@moscow.com> 
Subject:         RE: [Vision2020] liquor insurance liability

Date sent:         Tue, 11 Feb 2003 05:52:27 -0800 

I seriously believe that this issue would (and should) be 
better handled off list. E-mails to and from those 
individuals responsible for managing/sponsoring this event 
would better serve the intended purpose than to "air it" to 
everyone on the list serve. 

Thank you, 
Tom Hansen 
Moscow, Idaho 

-----Original Message----- 
From: vision2020-admin@moscow.com 
[mailto:vision2020-admin@moscow.com]On 
Behalf Of Cjsnightclub@aol.com 
Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 6:23 PM 
To: vision2020@moscow.com 

Subject: [Vision2020] liquor insurance liability 

I understand the Red Door is catering their liquor license to the event
tonight at the 1912 building. I think it only appropriate that we all
know and see a copy of the proof of insurance or binder for liquor
liability, "off premise" for tonight's event at the 1912 building or any
other city/county facility. 

Phil Roderick