Intent to dine to remain
March 4, 2014
"Will you be dining with us tonight?"
The legally-mandated query for restaurants to verbally confirm their diners will be dining will not be done away with this year.
Park City’s state representative, Kraig Powell, R-Heber City, introduced a bill for the current legislative session that would amend Utah’s unique liquor laws – in particular, the "intent to dine" and "Zion Curtain" provisions.
Last week, Powell dropped the "intent to dine" reform from his bill, "so that the focus can be on the most onerous aspect of restaurant liquor regulation, the separate dispensing wall," he stated at the time.
"It’s always difficult to decide what to spend your energy on and what to sacrifice," Powell told The Park Record on Monday. "And as I’ve talked to many restaurant owners and operators, they have said that the separate dispensing wall is the most important issue to them. And in fact, the intent to dine issue has become less pressing, primarily because of the way it’s being enforced. Restaurants say that they are able to deal with it, that it’s not as much of a concern, not as imposing on customers because the enforcement has not been as strict and rigorous as far as sting operations and ‘gotchas.’"
Powell indicated that, in addition to the input of those restaurateurs, he dropped the intent to dine requirement for pragmatic reasons – he thinks it will give him the best chance to reform Utah’s liquor laws in any meaningful way.
Recommended Stories For You
"We already know that the Utah House voted to remove the wall last year, so I think that I can count on most of those votes, but if I put a different issue in, I would not be able to predict whether they would support that combination," he said.
The separate dispensing area law, also known as the "Zion Curtain," requires restaurants to literally build walls so that diners cannot view the mixing or preparation of alcoholic drinks.
Powell’s current bill is different from previously proposed reforms, in that it would allow a restaurant to opt out of the wall requirement if it posts a notice on its entrances and menus that reads: "Notice: This establishment dispenses and serves alcoholic products in public view."
"I think that we need to change the debate a little bit from just the stark yes or no, do we leave the wall or remove the wall," Powell said.
He seems optimistic about the bill’s chances in the House of Representatives, but less so about its prospects with the Senate.
"I’ve had several House members tell me that that is an interesting approach that they could support," he said. "I will be honest with you, I have not had any senators tell me that they support either version of the bill and I think that is because the senators have a mindset that it would be easier not to discuss the restaurant alcohol restrictions at all this year, and they don’t want to show any cracks in the fortress."
"I can see a path forward here, but it involves a few forks in the road and some open minds and willingness to discuss on several people’s parts," he said.
Trending In: Summit County
- Summit County joins discussion about state’s roadless rules petition
- Owner of Karaoke Cab sentenced, still maintains innocence
- Court Report: Kamas man pleads guilty to unlawful sexual activity with a minor
- Master plan submitted to Wasatch County for Mayflower property
- Sheriff’s report: Deputies respond to five suspected cases of domestic violence
- Tom Clyde: The beef over the McPolin Farm cattle misses the point
- Park City begins to outline major Park Avenue roadwork
- Wasatch County approves major development tied to Deer Valley
- Park City attorney, skier husband arrested as hunting equipment taken
- California man pleads guilty to human trafficking charge in Summit County