What happened at the Liquor Board on September 11, 2014.

Commissioner Jones asked the applicants to define their live entertainment request. Mr. Trujillo responded that right now, their plan is just for DJs. The leased space is 10,000 square feet. The front half of the building will be a sports bar, which will be open every day. The “live entertainment” in this front space will be “very negligible.” The back half of the building will be a multifunctional space for private parties, DJs, and dancing. The total capacity of the space will be around 700 people. Commissioner Jones said that the place is too big for him to give a blank okay for live entertainment. Prevas called the proposed DJ forward to testify about his following among young professionals.

Commissioner Moore asked, “has there been any community input?” Mr. Prevas responded that, because the property is located in an industrial zone, the applicants’ outreach has been to the business associations in the neighborhood, not to any community association, because, according to the applicants, “there is no association in that area.” A Cityview search shows eight potentially active business and community associations covering the property: Carroll/Camden Industrial Business Association, Gwynns Falls Trail Council, Southern District Police-Community Relations Council, Southwest Community Council, Inc., Citizens of Pigtown, Key Highway Task Force, Southwest Community Action Center, and Westport/Project T.O.O.U.R., Inc. Youth Council.

Moore pointed out that several parts of the application were not filled out completely, including the purchase price of the business, Mr. Trujillo’s employment history for the past 10 years, and the applicant’s interview form. Mr. Prevas told Commissioner Moore that the purchase price of the license was $50,000 cash. He promised to provide Mr. Trujillo’s employment history in the form of his resume to the Board. And the applicants had been interviewed by Inspector Joann Martin; he was not sure why there was no interview form in the file. The executive secretary confirmed that the interview took place on August 11, 2014.

Applicant Bernard Truesdale testified that he has been active in meeting with the community and has been a licensee at the establishment for seven years with no problems from the Liquor Board. The property has had a liquor license for a long time; Mr. Truesdale said it had been there since 1920. (The 18th amendment to the United States Constitution prohibiting the production, transport and sale of alcohol was in effect from 1920 to 1933.)

Chairman Ward noted that he has a note in the file that the corporate entity is not in good standing. Kodenski responded, “I don’t handle the corporate thing, but I’ll look into it.” Truesdale said, “we’re paid up.” Kodenski added that, before the applicants get final permission for the outdoor tables, they will present a Certificate of Good Standing.

Commissioner Moore pointed out that many of the signatures on the petition submitted look very similar. She asked about two specific addresses associated with many signatures. Mr. Zamanian replied that those signatures came from residents of large apartment buildings nearby. When Moore pointed out five signatures in a row with the same handwriting, Mr. Zamanian replied that there were five or more people in the same family who wanted to sign, and the mother of the family signed for all of them. Moore asked, “do you have receipts for any of the expenditures that you have spent so far? Mr. Zamanian replied that he did not have receipts with him, but he can provide canceled checks in the future. Moore asked the executive secretary, “is that something that we can start having included [with the application]? it’s one thing to put it on a piece of paper and it’s another thing to provide documentation.” Executive Secretary Michelle Bailey-Hedgepeth said that the Board staff could start collecting that documentation for new licenses.

Chairman Ward responded that the establishment already has a license, a 6-day Class D license. They would like to transfer in a BD-7. Kodenski said that was correct, and that the establishemtn would then “dispose of the D” license, possibly by transferring it to someone else in the same shopping center.

Chairman Ward replied that the Liquor Board is not in the position of enforcing debts or securing debts.

Ms. Shirley Gregory, president of the St Helena Community Association, testified in opposition to the hardship extension. She noted that the bar was closed in October 2011 and has never opened since. There were all kinds of problems at the location. The property owners lost their nonconforming use for the bulding on May 1, 2014. The building recently went up for auction. She told the Board that this bar has been a problem for the St Helena community, and they do not want to see the bar become a problem in another community. In response to questioning from Commissioner Jones to Mr. Julian, Ms. Gregory said that the Julians did not try to sell the license until way after the time period had lapsed for both the liquor license and the nonconforming use for the building from zoning. They closed the business in 2011 and didn’t try to sell anything until 2013.

Commissioner Moore stated that there was a note in the file that said that September 21, 2010 was the last date that the establishment was open, not 2011.

Commissioner Moore asked, “how long have they been closed?” Kodenski responded that he was not sure. Moore asked”has it been 180 days?” Executive Secretary Michelle Bailey-Hedgepeth said, no, that it had been between 90 and 180 days, but the licensees did not tell the Board how long it had been or on what date they closed.

Commissioner Moore asked where the stolen bottles came from? Kodenski replied that the thieves who stole the cognac were trying to dump the bottles that they could and that most of the bottles went to New York state. Moore asked again, and more specifically, how the bottles ended up at Apple Tree Liquors? Kodenski replied that some men offered the licensee a case of cognac at half of what the normal price was. Kodenski added that the Comptroller’s agents had seized the stolen bottles. There were 11 bottles on the shelf, and the licensee had bought a case of 12, so he had, presumably, sold one. Kodenski pointed out that the lost tax to the Comptroller is around $10. Moore replied, “it’s not the tax, it’s the taking.”

Kodenski told the Board that the licensee has been at his location since 2008. He was found guilty of having an illegal poker machine earlier in the year, which he got rid of. The licensee was cooperative and admitted his fault to the Comptroller’s inspector. He forfeited the rest of the case of cognac. Kodenski said, “there’s some people that buy it all the time and just never get caught.”

Agent Kevin Burley, from the Comptroller’s office, corroborated Kodenski’s statement. The store owner was cooperative once he was caught, Burley said. He did not try to hide the fact that the bottles were stolen or that he had purchased them illegally from someone who sold the bottles to him out of the back of a white van at a reduced price.

Mr. Hurdle made a preliminary motion to dismiss the petition in opposition to the renewal of the license, because the petition did not say that the signatories are not holders of liquor licenses. Article 2B says that neighbors who wish to protest the renewal of a liquor license must not be liquor license holders. Hurdle also raised the 200-foot rule again. Chairman Ward denied Mr. Hurdle’s preliminary motion. Speaking about the 200-foot rule, Ward said, “it’s the most ridiculous rule I’ve ever heard in my life” and “it’s a rule which makes protests impossible. It’s an impossible rule. It’s an unfair rule.”

Mr. Dickerson then continued with his case. He lives right across the street from the Tilted Pig. The place originally opened up as a sports bar. They have consistently hosted live entertainment without permission from the Board. They are also consistently over the capacity of the building. The licensee has been cited and found guilty of live entertainment without a license and being over capacity. Dickerson submitted many months’ worth of flyers advertising live entertainment, as well as photographs of live entertainment and photographs of DJs who perform at the Tilted Pig. Dickerson said that the live entertainment without permission was on ongoing thing, not a one or two time matter.

Chairman Ward asked, “do you agree that you do not have permission for live entertainment?” Mr. Hurdle answered for his clients that they did understand this. Dickerson said that the Tilted Pig is still violating the law. He submitted information about a CD release party, hosted by DJ Meal Ticket, from a month and a half before the hearing. Dickerson said that he monitors the Twitter feeds of the establishment; he said that there have been other violations which have not been heard before the Board yet. The inspector who wrote the reports is out on medical leave. Executive Secretary Michelle Bailey-Hedgepeth confirmed that there are pending violation charges.

Mr. Dickerson continued with his case. At closing time, the bar ejects “massive amounts of people into the street at 1am. It looks like the Pigtown festival at 1:00 in the morning.” He then provided the Board with video footage, taken from inside his home, of many incidents from April 2013 to March 2014. The footage, shown to Commissioners on a laptop, could not be seen from the audience; Mr. Dickerson described the date of each video and what it showed. The videos showed many patrons on the street: some passed out on the sidewalk, some extremely loud and inebriated, some turning on loud music from parked cars and hanging out with Tilted Pig staff in the doorway of the bar. Multiple videos showed loud arguments and other yelling, and at least one showed a fistfight. Dickerson said that, in the interest of time, he did not show the Board all of the videos that he had, but he was trying to convey a “pattern of flouting the rules of the liquor license.” The licensee’s strategy, according to Dickerson is to pack in as many people as possible into the bar. Since one of the DJs stopped performing at the Tilted Pig, the establishment has been quieter, but Friday nights are now ramping up more. (Previously, Tuesday nights were the problem nights.)

Dickerson then submitted a list of all of the 311 and 911 calls made about the Tilted Pig during the time period in question. He did not have them added up, but Commissioner Jones pointed out that there are around 4 single-spaced pages of requests, all tied to the Tilted Pig’s address.

When asked whether Dickerson had tried to work with the licensee, he replied that he had tried to tell the licensee that the music and patrons were too loud. After the licensee told him on three separate occasions that it would not happen again, the landlord of the building accused Dickerson of libel, and told him that any further communication would have to be through a lawyer. When the Commissioners asked him if there were any improvements to the conditions, Dickerson responded, no and that it had gotten a lot worse.

Dickerson submitted more evidence taken from Facebook, Twitter and Instagram of overcrowding and illegal live entertainment. Mr. Hurdle objected to these screenshots from social media, because he said that anyone could have uploaded them to the Tilted Pig’s page.

On cross-examination, Hurdle asked whether Dickerson had ever been inside the establishment to check whether there was a DJ. Dickerson replied that he had not. Hurdle asked, how many of the 84 calls did you call in yourself? Dickerson replied, maybe 12. Hurdle asked, “do you know what their special is on Tuesdays?” Dickerson said, “it used to be dollar crabs.” Hurdle replied, “that’s correct.” Hurdle then asked whether it was possible that the crowds came from Jigg’s, which is a bar located a block south of the Tilted Pig. Dickerson did not know whether it was possible, because he doesn’t usually witness people coming out of Jigg’s.

Commissioner Moore asked Mr. Bernard Sanders, the manager of the Tilted Pig, whether he recognized the photos and flyers submitted by Mr. Dickerson. Sanders responded that a party promoter could have screenshotted the Tilted Pig’s logo and used it without their permission. Moore responded that the images that Mr. Dickerson had provided match up with the video shown and the complaints. She said, “there is internal consistency. there’s a story that’s being told.” Sanders responded that when they have noise complaints, they turn the noise down. He said that the Tilted Pig staff have been cooperative. He complained that the liquor board inspector “kind of killed our business. The Liquor Board, they came every week for 10-11 weeks straight. Why? We’re not doing anything wrong.” Mr. Hurdle added that the owners of the license are trying now to move the license out of the neighborhood because of the constant complaints.

The Commissioners and Hurdle questioned Dickerson about whether, when and why the nuisance issues have slowed down at the establishment since March 2014. Dickerson responded that the nuisance complaints have lessened since the second Liquor Board violation in March 2014, but they have not stopped.

Ms. Virginia Creek testified next, as a community member protesting the renewal of the license. She lives one block over from Washington Boulevard on Ramsay Street. She took notes on various incidents with the Tilted Pig between June 13, 2013 and February 18, 2014. She told the Board that she has personally experienced nuisances because of the Tilted Pig at least two times per week. Starting at 8:30pm, cars speed through the neighborhood, patrons walk down the street arguing, fighting, and screaming, going to and coming from the bar. They loiter and leave trash in the street and sell and use illegal drugs. The free valet parking that the Tilted Pig offers leads to a lot of outside cars parked in the neighborhood. Residents can’t find parking spots near their own homes. On July 16, 2013, she was awakened by loud cursing and music. There were two intoxicated women in the street, one of whom Ms. Creek saw urinate in the middle of the street. She has witnessed the same thing three other times. Creek has made numerous calls to the police. She has lived in the neighborhood all 60 years of her life. Sometimes, she is afraid to sit on her own steps or walk around the corner because of the Tilted Pig’s patrons. She is tired of being awakened at night. She added, to address Mr. Hurdle’s questions from earlier, Jigg’s is a neighborhood bar that neighborhood people go to; it does not attract same crowd as the Tilted Pig. Creek said that the noise has lessened somewhat, but the neighbors continue to be plagued by noise, trash, and constant disturbances. She said that the Tilted Pig is not a good fit for the neighborhood and is detrimental to the community’s future growth. She asked the Board not to let one bad business chase away residents.

Mr. Hurdle cross-examined Ms. Creek about her testimony. Hurdle asked whether Creek was sure that the women were going to the Tilted Pig. Ms. Creek said that she saw the women go inside the establishment after they urinated in the street. Hurdle clarified, “before she was a patron, she urinated in the street.” Creek replied, “yes.” When asked about Jigg’s, Creek said that it is not a problem for the neighborhood. She said that old men sit around that bar all day and talk and drink a little beer. In comparison, young adults go to the Tilted Pig, and they get out of control. Mr. Hurdle asked the neighbor if the noise and parking irritations could be due to the proximity to the M & T Bank Stadium; Ms. Creek said no, they were because of the Tilted Pig. Creek said that normally, her “neighborhood is very quiet; you can hear a pin drop.”

Mr. Terry Adelsberger testified as one of the owners of the Tilted Pig. He told the Board that he “takes care of organization of [the Tilted Pig]” and does work behind the scenes. After the violations issued by the board in the spring of 2014, he said that he made sure that everybody in the bar changed their ways and complied with the inspectors. He “fired everybody” and replaced all of the security personnel. Adelsberger continued, “we’ve got a few neighbors who don’t want any young black people on that block.” Commissioner Moore interrupted Adelsberger immediately and told him that the Commmissioners would not hear allegations of racism unless Mr. Adelsberger can substantiate them. Chairman Ward added, “let me add on to that. In my courtroom, it was a tactic to raise the issue of race where there was absolutely no evidence that racism existed.” He told Adelsberger that if he knew of specific neighbors who had said something of concern, he could bring it up in the hearing, but for Adelsberger “to make a blanket statement is outrageous” and “only used for purpose of prejudice.”

Adelsberger continued with his testimony. He said that he himself had made most of the 911 and 311 calls that Dickerson submitted to the Board. He said that, in March, when they were very busy, “we got violations for anything we did minutely out of order.” When the establishment received violations, the manager would close down the whole bar and turn everyone out on the street, and the patrons made noise and caused disorder. He then testified that the bar had changed their operations to comply with the law and that “business is down a zillion percent.” One of the Commissioners asked whether the Tilted Pig had had any large crowds lately, and Adelsberger said, “no. If we did, it would be good!” Under questioning from the commissioners, Mr. Adelsberger said that he is at the bar every day, but not in the evenings. He said, “I’m 66 now; I’m in bed at 9:00.” Chairman Ward took another look at the 911 and 311 call list, and said that the documents showed that most of the calls were from the middle of the night, during times that Adelsberger had testified that he was never in the bar.

Adelsberger responded to the evidence provided by the neighbors of large crowds in the street. He said that young people hang out in front of the 7-11 convenience store and the dollar store nearby. He said that the noise and the “hollering” are from young people loitering by those stores, not in front of the Tilted Pig.

During the hearing, Mr. Sanders’ cell phone rang more than once, and Mr. Adelsberger often interrupted the commissioners. After Sanders’ cell phone rang the second time, Ward turned to Mr. Hurdle and said, “you’re in charge of your clients. This is outrageous. What is wrong with him?” Mr. Hurdle apologized for Sanders and said that his daughter was calling him.

Moore said to Adelsberger, “you mentioned that you’re a one-third owner of the bar. Who owns the other two-thirds?” Mr. Adelsberger responded, “Bernard Sanders and Mr. Richard Davis.” Moore asked, “is [Davis] here?” He responded, “no, he’s super sick.” Toward the end of the commissioners’ questions, Moore asked Adelsberger, “have you had anything to drink today?” Adelsberger said, “no.” Moore said, “Your testimony is coming out completely inconsistent.” Adelsberger responded, “I’m telling the truth, I swear to God.”

Mr. Bernard Sanders was the last to testify, as the day to day manager. As he began speaking, Commissioner Moore told him to stand up straight and to speak into the microphone, because he was leaning very heavily on the podium and hunched over. He said that he makes sure that the bar has enough food and liquor to get through the night, and he usually leaves around 7pm to go to his other job in Washington DC. He corroborated Mr. Adelsberger’s testimony, that the licensees did not know that they did not have permission for live entertainment and they did not know that dancing was considered live entertainment.

Commissioners Moore and Jones agreed with Chairman Ward.