Local: City willing to risk another lawsuit to protect Big Al’s from competition?
How completely bizarre.
For a little less than five years, the official position of the City of Peoria is that Elliott’s cannot and must not have a liquor license. Because a tiny non-stripper corner of the joint was too close to an apartment complex.
This decision allowed the place to operate as a liquor-free strip joint where anyone above the age of 18 can pay to have naked women sit on his lap and/or rub her boobs in his face.
This separated Elliott’s from Big Al’s in downtown Peoria, which limited such activities to those 21 and above, thanks to its 4 a.m. liquor license. So now that the courts have essentially told cities that it can’t push around strip joints and that it must issue Elliott’s a liquor license, the city is poised to deny them the kind of liquor license that would allow them to stay open as long as Big Al’s. Why? Because the city doesn’t want anyone looking at boobies until they are 21.
None of this is rational. The Class B license is designed for restaurants that also serve liquor. Well, guess what folks: Elliott’s serves food. This isn’t some joint with a microwave and a pizza oven behind the bar. It’s got a full restaurant with a full menu.
When a restaurant applies for a liquor license, the license they get should be the one designed for restaurants that serve booze. Forcing them to take a lesser license because it also offers legal adult entertainment strikes me as spoiling for another court fight that’s just as likely to be decided on free speech grounds as the last one. Remember: The city cannot argue that it seriously wants to protect 18- to 20-year-old adults from naked woman because it allowed that to happen for five years.
So why the continued effort by the city to screw over Elliott’s? Consider that Big Al’s is much more popularly politically. It is generally accepted amongst the movers and shakers that Peoria would not get what convention business it does get without Big Al’s as a draw.
This isn’t about protecting grown-ups below age 21 from seeing boobs. This is about protecting one business at the expense of another.
No doubt Elliott’s license request will be turned down tonight. The Peoria City Council has proven itself completely willing to throw taxpayer cash down the toilet by trying to defend positions in court that it cannot win, and no doubt will do so again. It’s something to consider if you are a voter who wants to be represented by grown-ups who treat voters like grown-ups instead of those who want to pander to those with a narrow mind-set.
Billy Dennis is a former reporter and editor at small daily and weekly newspapers in Illinois and Missouri. He comments on media, news and politics. He also owns and operates 
Bill sez: “Well, guess what folks: Elliott’s serves food. This isn’t some joint with a microwave and a pizza oven behind the bar. It’s got a full restaurant with a full menu.”
I sez: So, how is the food there, Bill? Do they deliver?
I’ve eaten there twice. The potato skins were good, large portions. The second time, I had a sandwich of some sort, don’t remember which one. I wasn’t displeased. I don’t go to strip clubs much these days.
I’m sure it was a chicken breast. Not sure disclosing your choice of dining habits is going to bolster your standing in the community. It’s a dive and they have no desire to serve food … they are all about getting a liquor license so they can fleece men out of their money while parading around a bunch of model wanna-be’s in the buff. If they want the liquor license they need to play by the rules and operate like a bar which means no one under 21 allowed. If they want to be a restaurant, they can play by those rules which means “waitresses” wear shirts.
It’s a blight on that neighborhood and it’s a sad sign for Peoria that we have more of these places opening rather than closing and going out of business.
PeoProud: “Not sure disclosing your choice of dining habits is going to bolster your standing in the community.”
Thank you for your sincere comments and concerns about my standing in the community. My bigger concern, however, is being as transparent as possible about myself as I express my opinion.
I wonder how many of the male council members who voted to deny this license tonight have in fact visited this and other clubs.
And if you want to visit a joint that REALLY does it’s best to separate men from their money by using scantily-clad women, visit Hooters some time.
think my earlier response didn’t make it on here so I’ll try again:
Billy – your comment about the council members visiting the strip club led me down a visualization session that gave me a few chuckles. Just image if the City Council had their meeting at Elliots:
Patrick Nichting turning red with embarassment (right!) when he gets a lap dance and has a few pasties stuck in his face.
Ryan Spain will be trying to convince the bouncer that he’s old enough to enter.
Gary Sandberg will be deep in thought as he drinks his beer and pondering the question of whether the poles are load bearing or not.
Barbara Van Auken will miss the fun, since she’ll have to stay outside to smoke.
George Jacob will miss the fun also since he’ll have to abstain from attending due to liquor issues or will try to sign up a new distribution agreement.
Mayor Ardis can lead a group prayer to save the strippers.
Clyde Gulley will be lamenting in his brew that they don’t have one of the Southside and telling anyone who will listen how that area is always neglected.
Bob Manning will be giving investment insight to the strippers for getting a good return on their tips.
Jim Montelongo can spend some time developing a new computer system to track food sales so we can tell if they meet the requirements for their class of liquor license and help out fellow member Eric Turner who will be counting food sales versus liquor sales by hand.
Bill Spears will just be moping around talking about neglected stormwater issues in his area.