The San Jose Downtown Association (SJDA) has called for an investigation into whether the city’s police department targeted the nonprofit for an enforcement action by the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC), presumably in retaliation for SJDA’s advocacy of after-hours club closings, which SJPD opposed. The ABC ferreted out two or three minors drinking in the concert crowd, though it doesn’t appear that the alcohol was sold by the concert organizers. The police department often works closely with other agencies, including the ABC, to regulate entertainment activities downtown. PD flak Michael Sullivan said he wasn’t aware that the department had been blamed for shutting down the beer taps at Music In The Other Park when Fly caught up with him Tuesday. But Sullivan did not hesitate to point out that the cops had nothing to do with the beer ban. “We weren’t involved at all,” he said. “We like the event. We think it’s good for the city.” The SJDA, which runs the event, is taking a five-figure bath on the dry dates. (Metro is the media sponsor, but not financially involved, other than buying a beer now and then.) On Monday, SJDA president Art Bernstein sent a letter to City Manager Debra Figone, chastising the police department for initiating the clampdown by the state Alcohol Beverage Control agency. The memo calls for “a full review of the San Jose Police role” in “helping to bring about this heavy-handed action.”
San Jose Inside
San Jose Inside (https://www.sanjoseinside.com)
Lets all just move to Salt Lake City and get it over with.
#1
Let’s get the Taliban involved so that we can get rid of the music, and any kite flying, at the same time.
Let’s see… the SJDA president chastises the police department for initiating the clampdown at same time calling for an investigation to determine whether or not the department was even involved? And then refers to ABC enforcement of misdemeanor ABC laws as “heavy-handed? What, did the beer cops press down extra hard when writing the citations?
If this report is true then may I inquire as to when Mr Bernstein graduated from Rick Callender’s Tantrum Academy?
Actually, it says he called for a full review of the San Jose Police roll. Apparently you’ve never worked in any sort of bureaucracy. You want a formal explanation on paper then you can slap hands.
There. Take THAT, finfan!
Three people were cited, for two violations. One minor smuggled hard liquor into the event and poured it into a cup. SJDA does not sell hard alcohol at the concerts, but is expected to enforce every violation in a public park. In the other case a parent and 20-year old daughter were cited after the parent purchased two beers and passed on to the child.
The action places in jeopardy all the great events downtown, from fourth of July fireworks to the Jazz Festival, the promoters of which could be pushed to insolvency by actions over which they have no control.
The conspiracy theorists at the SJDA have a warped sense of what a police officer should do when he witnesses a crime. Reading the letter, it appears Mr. Bernstein wants SJPD to “communicate” with the SJDA when the violations are discovered. What does this really mean? SJPD should hand over the lawbreakers to a security guard? SJPD is doing exactly what it should be doing. SJDA needs to stop crying and find a better business model that does not depend solely on selling the maximum amount of beer possible.
I am not surprised that this has occured nor am I shocked to learn that PD Spokesperson, Michael Sullivan knew nothing about this. The Police Department has many officers within its department who have their own agendas and like to play “Cowboy” in enforcing their own agenda with no regulation from the Chief.
What’s truly sad is that those we entrust to protect us have now become those we must protect ourselves against. The mentality of retaliation is not acceptable nor is the notion that now this issue is taken seriously because it happened to a partially City funded Organization. Actions such as this have been occuring all along to many within the nightlife industry on a consistent basis all of which has fallen on deaf ears.
Unfortunately, it took a cowboy mission against the Downtown Association to bring this issue and mentality to the forefront of local politics and to the center of importance. The San Jose Police Department needs to be reminded of their role in our society and they need to be regulated in their personal agendas that is to say, they should not be allowed to follow their own agenda.
I hope the public and local politicians finally get a clue about the police department and do something to put an end to cowboy missions such as these against all venues and public events in San Jose. A little morals and sensitivity training would be nice too. I think it time that we stop fearing those we pay with our hard earned tax dollars to protect us.
I attend most of the free concerts and was pretty shocked that a relatively
benign event was targeted by the police for minor infractions and then
handed over to the ABC to have their beer and wine sales stopped.
SJPD will do two things in the aftermath of this huge overreaction: they’ll
do a complete 180 on the spokesman’s comments that they ‘think the event is
great for the city’ and try to show it in the worst possible light…AND
they’ll try to prove that they didn’t selectively target the downtown
association by calling in the dogs on the America Fest or the Jazz Fest
and shutting either of them down. If the America Fest is unable to sell beer
and wine because a 20 year old kid snuck a drink through the gates- as 20
year olds are often inclined to do- they will cancel the fireworks show and go bankrupt.
In both cases the general public is the loser. Apparently SJPD felt the
need to “get” the downtown association rather than communicate, despite having eight officers on the event payroll. Why
can’t SJPD play fair? How many times do we have to read the same thing over
and over- that the police overstep their boundaries especially when it comes
to downtown?
Thank you, SJPD, for helping to make this city fun-free.
It is an everyday occurrence in our state that a hardworking owner of a small store must pay a heavy price for a minor violation of our liquor laws. Not infrequently the violation is of the arguably unpreventable type, such as when the store owner or someone in his employ is fooled by a well-crafted, fake ID, or makes a mistake in judgement when overwhelmed by a rush of demanding customers.
But guess what? In response to these everyday incidents no one in the community screams in protest, chastises the law enforcement agency involved, questions the motives of its officers, or implies that the law is not important enough to enforce. No, what happens is that the store owner pays the price, accepts his fine and suspension as the price of being in the very lucrative business of selling alcohol, and gets on with his life.
But my, how things are different when the someone facing the music (pun intended) has some big league pull. Suddenly, a friendly warning—not rigid enforcement, is presented as the expected and reasonable reaction to violations that are, of course, isolated and understandable. Suddenly, it is the enforcement agency—not the law violator, whose behavior must be punished and corrected. Suddenly, the enforcement of the law is newsworthy and controversial—not just business as usual in the liquor sales industry.
From here this looks like just another example of a connected someone, or in this case, an association of connected someones, expecting, demanding, and trying to set itself up for a future of special treatment. And that, fellow readers, is the exact opposite of fair and impartial justice. What it is is bullshit of the highest order.
If the SJDA doesn’t like the liquor laws then it has three legitimate courses of action from which to choose: get out of the liquor business; fight to get the laws changed; or pay the price, correct the situation, and shut the hell up.
It may be a moot point.
The liquor license has been re-instated for tomorrow’s concert.
Aww, finfan’s totalitarian dream has been crushed…
Frustrated Finfan,
“From here this looks like just another example of a connected someone, or in this case, an association of connected someone’s, expecting, demanding, and trying to set itself up for a future of special treatment. And that, fellow readers, is the exact opposite of fair and impartial justice. What it is, is bullshit of the highest order.”
You’ve got that exactly right! And unfortunately, that is probably exactly what will happen. I’m sick and tired of these business owners refusing to take responsibility for their actions and the actions of their patrons. They need to man up and get real.
I’m sick and tired of the Police being blamed for everything. Now they are doing their job and they are being made to look like they are selectively harassing these privileged few. Give me a break!
You summed it up perfectly for me Frusted Finfan, “If the SJDA doesn’t like the liquor laws then it has three legitimate courses of action from which to choose: get out of the liquor business; fight to get the laws changed; or pay the price, correct the situation, and shut the hell up.”
#11-MC,
“The liquor license has been re-instated for tomorrow’s concert.”
Now there is a stunner! Thanks for proving my point!
Finfan #10,
Very well stated. Those that think there are only a few minor alcohol violations occurring are wrong. Almost every weekend there is a melee of some sort downtown. The police come in and take care of the mess, and then are blamed by both the drunks and SJDA for somehow causing the problem, or being called “cowboys” and in need of “morals and sensitivity training” (see #5). I have taken my family to a Music In The Other Park event once, and never again. Drunks were everywhere. If the Chief has the power to temporarily pull a liquor license I wish he would do so more often. I doubt this will ever happen as money talks and is unfortunately the reigning factor at the end of the day.
Nothing new! The chief has appointed his golden boy “Cowboy Sgt. Brian Kneis” and his “7 man posse” to go around the entire Downtown using there “license to harrass” thuglike skills to ruffle up the feathers of those in the entertainment industry.
so far…
Angels (closed)
Blue Monkey (closed)
Taste (closed)
Sabor = Taste (poor guys CLOSED)
Azucar (PD doesnt know the difference between EP, SUP & CUP)
Bar & Grill (built a fortress to avoid drinks getting passed)
Tres Gringos (fortress in planning)
Voodoo Lounge (on the radar)
Wet (not gonna happen)
Motif (on the radar)
Agenda (on the radar)
Vault (Occupancy reduced)
Vivid (Lawsuit against City & PD)
It doesnt stop…
Now it seems that SJPD has earned the ABC license to shut down and prior to that have picked up there Junior Fire Fighters badge.
Should we talk more about the scope of work SJPD does?
While we have real thugs running the streets and flashing there COLORS…
All the while the police are playing “GOTCHA” with Bars & Nightclubs JUST ADDED San Jose Downtown Association…
#5 Political Cowboy…GOOD POINTS!
I always marvel at how the police don’t notice the other ‘funny smell’ at music in the park.
Can we get some stats on how many lives are being saved via keeping 20-year olds with underformed livers from consuming toxic beverages?
#17
Yes, we must save the “children” from demon rum so that we can send them to Iraq and be killed for nothing.
As a working downtown professional that occasionally stays after work I’ve noticed a few things. When I go out to lunch with the other 60,000 workers downtown I have never seen or encountered a crime of significance. However, after hours, (when there’s 2,000 music in the park listeners or 6,000 club goers) I have routinely seen drunks vomiting in the alleys and streets, fights, loud disturbances, and even once saw a guy who got thrown off the 3rd Street garage. And I’ve heard of numerous assaults. I want to stay after work and enjoy a nice evening with coworkers or on a date. But, there are a lot more pleasant places to spend my income. I applaud the SJPD and Sgt. Kneis for trying to clean up downtown after all the working professionals go home. I prefer to think of his officers not as the 7-man posse, rather to me they are “The Magnificent Seven”! Go ahead- SJPD- make my day – and clean up downtown!
19: The aim should then be to eliminate the drunk and rowdy, not the source of their behavior and intoxicated state. That may be the policy of terminators from the year 2029, but the SJPD should not be mechanically working its way up the chain of causation. What’s next, blowing up the planet so that there can never be drunk people?
20 – You write a lot of silly extrapolations and seem to blame the SJPD for the problem. What’s your solution to dealing with a group who drink too much and cause trouble and make life miserable for the rest of us because of they are irresponsible?
Concerned Downtowner,
You also forgot:
Emmas – closed
Sofa Lounge – closed
Club Miami – closed, moved to new place to get closed
Glo – closed, harrassed out of business
Scores – closed, only one that really made sense to close
Its all about condos. The police are doing RDA / city dirty work!
There’s nothing more dangerous than a bored cop. They should keep busy by protecting and serving. Protecting us from bad drivers on the light rail tracks and serving us beer.
Is it really possible that one can refer in one post to bars and clubs as “the source” of the troublemaker’s behavior and intoxicated state
(“The aim should then be to eliminate the drunk and rowdy, not the source of their behavior and intoxicated state.”)
and then fail to understand my use of the word “produce” in describing the cause and effect relationship between clubs’ violating serving laws and the presence of drunk idiots in the street?
Nam Turk asks “what more” can clubs do than bouncing rowdy drunks out onto the street. “What more” is to obey the law and refuse to serve patrons who’ve had one too many, something history has shown will not be done absent the expectation of enforcement and painful fiscal consequences. “What more” is to avoid creating an environment that encourages chaos and overindulgence—especially in clubs catering to the piss and vinegar crowd.
Quality analysis, Nammy (#20) —in your world, we should have a cop available to collar every single rowdy drunk that the greedy club owners can produce, which, if we follow your formula and suspend the enforcement of the alcohol beverage control act in the bars and clubs, should number in the thousands.
SJPD better start recruiting now; taxpayers, take out your wallets.
Or better yet, why don’t you and the other impaired bloggers start thinking now. Why not consider that our society’s determination to control the distribution of alcohol, as evidenced by our laws and customs, is the result of generations of societal experience and wisdom, and not, as you keep insisting, the result of white cops trying to spoil the fun of people they don’t like? Why not consider that the risk implicit in the public consumption of alcohol can only be controlled by law enforcement controlling the bars and clubs where it is served? That’s why it is important that our police and state agents do their jobs as dictated by the laws on the books, and not as blogged about by immature morons as SanJoseInside.
FinFan,
The only “piss and vinegar crowd” downtown are the pathethic sissy police officers who can’t do a thing about gang members; but can spend millions chasing 20 year old skirts around.
Keep up the brave work!
Finfan, you think in idealist fantasy that is impossible to enforce. Either you deal with drunks or you outlaw alcohol. You can’t weasel some kind of case on specific clubs that cater to a crowd you don’t like. There’s nothing concrete there, other than the fact that you hate “thugs.” Are these people legally defined? Does a club break the law when serving drinks to a guy with his jeans sagging below his ass? No. This whole thing is just a witch hunt to prepare downtown for the luxury condo invasion.
Please tell me how clubs “produce” these people? How can an establishment keep from “producing” this crowd? They already regulate themselves. If someone’s being a jerk, they get 86ed. What can they do beyond that? Go back in time and keep the person from walking in the doors of their business? That’s not how business works, picking out people beforehand. It’s really stupid to blame bars for the actions of patrons. It’s the same culture which spawned the frivolous lawsuit. Why take personal responsibility when blame can be passed higher up, right? Get real.
Once again there were several people beat up a the “Other Music in the Park” (June 26th). The event drew more thugs & gangsters, per square foot than San Jose has ever seen in one place. “What a wonderful family event”. I heard that a security guard was almost beaten to death by a group of these wonderful free concert goers. I saw hundreds of people running away from the concert I’m surprised no one got killed!
I think it’s time the city gives a vote of no confidence to Scott Knies and the SJDA. It’s time for someone else with a better plan to run an event for the downtown workers to stay after 5pm ,and attract families.
I’ve already got an idea, how about “Jazz in the Park”. Lets have the sponsors be Coca-Cola & frito lay. (No more booze… No more thugs…No more problems)!
Turk,
Nowhere did I suggest that forcing the clubs to follow the rules would eliminate drunks, but of course it is to your advantage to suggest that I did so that you can then show me how wrong I am. This, the straw man tactic, is exactly what I expect from someone accustomed to losing arguments.
Taking action against a problematic club is no great challenge. The ABC act and local ordinances make it quite simple for the authorities to tabulate law violations, bar fights, parking lot brawls, and other complaints against a club and then take action against it. And it matters not the race or creed of the clientele as, absent any problems, there can be no enforcement action. San Jose has had bars and nightclubs doing business for decades catering to one particular race or another. What they all have in common is a demonstrated commitment to following the rules and avoiding trouble.
But I waste my breath. For one reason or another (known only to your therapist), you will continue to see the cops as all white—which they aren’t, all bad—which they certainly aren’t, and our city’s understandable exasperation with club-goers who lack civility as a kind of class warfare.
#28,
From today’s Mercury News [1]:
“There were numerous fights at the crowded Music in the Other Park concert, according to police. They made four arrests, including one of a suspect who was Tased by police and then taken into custody. At one point a security guard was beaten and injured by a crowd as he tried to fend them off with a bicycle.
Soon after Midnight Star stopped playing their retro R&B around 9 p.m. officers called for a “Code Three Fill” – an emergency call that had officers leaving their usual patrols and racing to St. James Park from all points of the city.”
Mr. Knies needs to first apologize to the SJPD for his temper tantrum last week and then resign.
http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_9728022?nclick_check=1
Its about the type of music they sometimes program. When the music is rock or reggae; there are no significant issues. Just a diverse crowd have a good time.
But when they play R and B or oldies; the event attracts hispanic gang members from the valley who come to square off with the nortenos etc up here.
Why do they have to play R and B and Oldies?
31 – That may be partially true, but not completely. I was at the Dan Hicks show, hardly R&B or Oldies, and it was a pretty rough crowd and a fair number of bikers, etc. Not the most comfortable atmosphere for a family.
Finfan, you cannot quantify the trouble a club causes based on any fights that take place there. Once again, these are citizens taking part in illegal activity, not businesses. You’re still placing the responsibility where it doesn’t belong. If a club actively invited this behavior then I could see reprimanding them. However, “come listen to hip hop” does not mean “come beat the shit out of people.” You’re making too many associations. Hell, if you want more people to blame, their parents are more responsible than any club owner.
Also, resorting to ad hominem arguments when criticizing my alleged straw man tactics is quite hypocritical. I treat your arguments as you’ve commanded they be treated, via your multiple references to Mexicans with ice cream carts and your cries of racism at the MHP.
At some point you Police haters are going to have to admit that the fault lies with the behavior of the public, and the lack of responsibility taken by these business owners. Booze, fights, and fun do not go hand and hand. Family events and a fun evening in DT should never end up like this:
http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_9728022
I, personally, am looking forward to seeing DT get a serious face lift!
Turk,
Your capacity for relieving club owners of their responsibility for what takes place on their premises apparently knows no bounds. In a culture where we hold the grocer responsible for the microscopic bacteria on his tomatoes, and are now on the verge of punishing fast food businesses for the gluttony of their clients, you seem to have found unlimited immunity for those whose sole business is supplying intoxicants to young people.
What you ignore is that selling alcohol is unlike any other legal business, in that its consumption, sale, and manufacture is controlled by the government (you can’t cook up your own vodka, or roll yourself a homegrown Corona). And alcohol is controlled because history has demonstrated the need for controls. Those licensed to sell represent the only game in town, and when one considers the mark-up and addictive nature of the product, it is easy to $ee why businessmen are willing to jump through the considerable hoops required of them by all three levels of government.
You may be convinced that that clubs have no culpability, but the government and the club owners themselves—by virtue of their understanding of the licensing agreement, disagree with you.
Where I do agree with you is that it is unfortunate that “come listen to hip hop” has become an invitation to mayhem. Somewhere in the annals of SJI is a post of mine about this very thing, where I noted the frustration of young black promoters who, because of the behavior of patrons they tried not to attract, went out of business due to their inability to rent suitable venues. In one case, the promoter opened up a members only club only to have his law-abiding patrons ambushed in the surrounding streets by envious and resentful thugs. Nevertheless, however “unfortunate” it is it is still reality, and a club owner who decides to enter the hip hop minefield will—and should—have a lot to answer for when things start blowing up.
That said, in reviewing your post I see that you saved the best for last. I now, to my surprise, learn that I have, due to my prior posts, “commanded” that anything I say, even if true beyond dispute, is dismissible. In other words, because I have in the past used some references that you found offensive, you believe I should take my place amongst the millions who’ve been silenced and isolated behind the Iron Curtain of Political Correctness. Since you’ve bared your totalitarian chops, why not take it one step further and brand me an equality-denier. You could start a whole new thought-victim movement and make a fortune.
In what sense should they be held responsible? All you can really say is “they attract bad people” and I’m not fully disagreeing with that. No place is immune. But how should they control this, beyond simply closing up shop? You can say that they’re to shoulder some of the responsibility, but it’s much more difficult to say how they should go about doing so.
I mentioned before that clubs do regulate behavior within, but you view that as merely herding drunks into the streets. Well, maybe the SJPD should get on good terms with these club owners to coordinate control instead of extreme measures like shutting down. However, this just puts police power in the hands of ordinary citizens.
It comes back to policing those that command it. You can’t simply “go to the source” and cut off their supply like this is warfare. If that was the case, why not close schools that don’t provide great educations to everyone? That’s a bigger factor in delinquency than night clubs.
Prosecute those who commit crimes when they commit them. This is not “Minority Report.”
Turk,
One of the most important skills for a club owner is the ability to give his place the desired “feel.” An owner setting up a club for smooth jazz is going to use his skills to create the sophisticated, well-mannered atmosphere expected by his target clientele (who appreciate and respect the music and the mood). The majority of the clientele he seeks to attract will be mature (in behavior) and come already coupled. Contrast that to the situation faced by the owner opening a country and western dance club, whose target clientele will be burning up lots of energy, drinking lots of beer, and looking to hook-up (which brings competition and conflict). Two owners, two clubs, two very different security needs. Decisions about the entertainment, lighting, floor plan, last call routine, etc., not to mention the size and attitude of the staff, will determine the club’s success or failure.
The owner of a club catering to hip hop will be confronted with an additional problem, one unique to the genre, which is that some hip hop styles attracts a following so volatile that violence is all but guaranteed. This leaves the club owner the choice of trying to make a lucrative score from of the underserved, thug audience (and rush the inevitable trouble out the door for the cops to deal with), or being careful not to play the music or book the acts.
The responsible decision is to avoid attracting thugs. A club owner who chooses greed over responsibility deserves to have his business shut down.
Any club owner who allows his young, exuberant clientele to drink to excess is doing two things: asking for trouble and ringing up profits. These owners are not a victims, not incapable of denying service to the over-imbibed, not prohibited from setting a standard of conduct, and should not be excused from responsibility for the problems they bring to the community.
We are never going to agree on this, but I can say with absolute certainty that should a prospective club owner ever echo to the authorities your version of owner helplessness (post #36) he would never get a liquor license.
I have friends who are part of the “Bikers” a club (Henchmen MC) who have attended the Music in the Other Park and Music in the Park for the past three to four years. They don’t miss a Thursday. They come downtown to listen to music, have a beer maybe get something to eat. Spend some money and support downtown, the city we are all from. Ask how many of them have been arrested? Answer “NONE”! Why? There is normally 10 to 15 San Jose PD standing next to them. They left before any of the stuff started last week, yet they’re lumped into it. No one came in with anything, yet one of the other “Biker” clubs (I use that term, even though you have to ride to be a biker) comes in through a security guard they know and none of them have to remove their knives. I quess because they weren’t wearing their patches until their old ladies brought them in for them. Let’s be fair, you decide to have alcohol again. You choose to fence in the park craming everyone closer together. Funneling people into one area. You were bound to have problems. Do you wait for something to happen to say “I told you so”! or do over react and go after innocent people.