What happened at the Liquor Board on December 5, 2013.

Chairman Fogleman noted that there was a big protest of renewal hearing almost three years ago for this address. The licensee replied that he has kept all of the promises he made since then.

Councilwoman Mary Pat Clarke told the Board that the neighborhood is still having trouble at the corner of 34th Street and Greenmount. Police officers are necessary there at closing time to clear patrons out of the area and discourage loitering, when the neighbors would rather have them patrolling.

The Board then heard from Baltimore City Police Detective Shelton Jones, who testified that on October 4, 2013, Police Cadet Phillip Jones ordered and was served a 22-ounce Steel Reserve beer. No one at the store asked the cadet for any identification, and he purchased the beer for $1.62.

Councilman Curran was present for this hearing. Though he does not currently represent the area that includes the establishment, he told the Board that he used to, and that he vouches for the character of the licensees.

Violation of Rule 4.18 “No licensee shall commit or allow the commission on his premises of any act which shall be contrary to any federal, state or local statue, law or ordinance or against the public peace, safety, health, welfare, quiet or morals.” (Re: April 26, 2013, dancer solicited undercover police officer for sexual intercourse)

Violation of Rule 4.17(b) “No licensee shall permit or suffer any person to appear in any act or other performance with breasts or the lower torso uncovered; not shall any licensee knowingly permit or suffer his premises to be used for the conduct, exhibition or performance of an obscene act or other performance” (Re: April 26, 2013, dancer exposed herself to undercover police officer)

Violation of Rule 4.18 “No licensee shall commit or allow the commission on his premises of any act which shall be contrary to any federal, state or local statue, law or ordinance or against the public peace, safety, health, welfare, quiet or morals.” (Re: April 26, 2013, dancer solicited undercover police officer for sexual intercourse; dancer exposed herself to undercover police officer)

Baltimore Police Sergeant Leischer testified that officer who submitted the report for this violation on April 26 did not receive notification of the hearing from the Liquor Board, because of the aforementioned misdirection of the summons to another police district.

Mr. Kodenski told the Board that the case is “stale,” since the incident allegedly occurred in April. He added, “it’s an outrage to do this to people. There were never any criminal charges filed in this case. [The police officers present] have nothing to add to this case. We don’t know what happened when the summons was issued a month ago. Everybody else is here. The one person who brought the charges is not here.” Mr. Kodenski added that to postpone the hearing is violative of the licensees’ right to due process of law.

Violation of Rule 3.12 “Licensees shall operate their establishments in such a manner as to avoid disturbing the peace, safety, health, quiet, and general welfare of the community” (Re: Patron assaulted by another patron-October 5, 2013 and on October 20, 2013, patrons drinking alcoholic beverages in front of establishment)

Baltimore Police Officer Castillo testified that a patron at the establishment was assaulted and chased by a Hispanic male with a knife on October 5, 2013. The suspect, Mr. Ramirez Lopez, was apprehended and identified by the victim, but the police did not find the knife. Because Officer Castillo did not see the incidents himself, but rather relied on the testimony of fellow officers to complete his report, and these fellow officers were not present at the hearing to testify, the Board dismissed the Rule 3.12 charges.

Baltimore Police Detective L.C. Greenhill testified regarding the October 20 violation of Rule 3.03(c). Detective Greenhill had asked the bar management for employee records, and the manager provided employment records for everyone who was working there except for one security guard. The security had no required employment documents on-site except for a photocopy of his identification card. Mr. Malone attempted to argue that the security guard was an independent contractor, not an employee.

Rule 3.12 charge, October 20, 2013: dismissed, because the police officer who witnessed the events did not appear.

Rule 3.03(c) charge: guilty. Chairman Fogleman elaborated that the law requires more employment records than just a driver’s license. The argument that the security guard was an independent contractor is not persuasive, because the security guard is working at the bar during the employer’s work hours. Mr. Fogleman added that the Board has already gone through this with this licensee. Two and a half years ago, the bar’s security staff didn’t have employment records. He added that these violations are serious, because they impede investigations. The Board assessed a $1,500 fine, because the licensee had had three violations within three years. The Chairman instructed the licensee: “Clean up the books. Your record is atrocious. This bar’s been around less than three years. This record’s bad. Any further violation is going to very possibly revoke your license. If you come back again and I’m here, I’m going to vote to revoke your license.”

Violation of Rule 4.18 “No licensee shall commit or allow the commission on his premises of any act which shall be contrary to any federal, state or local statue, law or ordinance or against the public peace, safety, health, welfare, quiet or morals.” (Re: September 25, 2013, Liquor Board Inspector observed patrons dancing and DJ playing music-providing live entertainment without permission from the board; Liquor Board Inspector observed patrons smoking inside establishment)