Ms. Inez Robb, president of the Fulton Community Association and the Western District Community Relations Council, testified that her community does have issues with Whispers and would like for it to be closed. She did not have any data to present about specific incidents within the past year.

Mr. Fogleman then moved to dismiss the case, saying that the petition is legally insufficient on a number of grounds. The petitioners who signed the protest of renewal, argued Fogleman, do not live or own property in the “immediate vicinity,” as required by state law. Some of the petitioners live several miles away. Chairman Matricciani responded that the Liquor Board has never defined the term “immediate vicinity.” He noted that there were only ten signatories to the petition, and the law requires at least ten, so if any one of the signatories is too far away to be in the “immediate vicinity,” the petition may not be sufficient. Fogleman continued with his second argument, that the petition itself is not specific in its complaints. All of the petitions submitted to the Board are quite similar to each other and are vague.

Councilman Leon Pinkett testified briefly that his role was to be in support of the community members who were supposed to be presenting specific information, but he is in opposition to the renewal. He noted that the Baltimore Police Department has created Transformation Zones in the city, within which this establishment falls. He submitted a letter of opposition to the renewal of the license.

Commissioner Greenfield asked both parties whether they would be willing to meet and try to come to an agreement that would address the community’s concerns. Both sides agreed that they would be willing to meet. Ms. Robb said that she often finds it difficult to communicate with licensees because of the language barrier. Chairman Matricciani and Commissioner Jones both echoed Greenfield’s suggestion.

Mr. Fogleman interjected to add that his clients have only owned the bar since 2015; in that time, they have made donations of money and sodas and snacks to the Matthew Henson Neighborhood Association. Fogleman presented a letter from the prior president of the association, Doc Cheatham, saying that they are great neighbors. He also submitted a petition with 100 signatures of people in favor of the renewal of the license.

Ms. Inez Robb, president of the Fulton Community Association and of the Western District Community Relations Council, testified that she lives about eight blocks from the establishment. She says that she receives complaints at her meetings about this establishment. She noted that she would be willing to meet with the licensees to try to come up with an agreement.

The Druid Heights Community Development Corporation submitted a letter in support of renewal.

Shawn Owens, from the No Boundaries Coalition, testified that his organization has tried to reach out to the merchants along Pennsylvania Avenue to try to address the violence and crime in the area. Specifically, Mr. Owens reached out to Mel’s, but they have not come to the meetings they’ve been invited to. According to Mr. Owens, all of the other merchants in the area have been cleaning up their block except Mel’s. Owens wants Mel’s to do more, including trying to address the drug trafficking on the block. He explained, under Commissioner Greenfield’s questioning, that the No Boundaries Coalition works on public safety, youth programming, and food access in the Sandtown neighborhood.

Mr. Prevas responded that any lack of cooperation must be a miscommunication, because they’ve been involved with the Druid Heights CDC, among other groups.

Mr. Edward Brown testified that he and his fiance own a store across the street from Mel’s; he also has a lot of issues with drug trafficking in the store, which, he says, is a police matter. Brown testified that the owners of Mel’s have been good neighbors to him. Brown emphasized that this specific block is particularly dangerous, and it’s dangerous to tell people in your store not to sell drugs or that they have to leave.

Mr. Anthony Pressley Director of Community Resources for Druid Heights CDC, testified that he has known Mel’s for many years. He said that one of the signatories did not realize that she was signing a petition against Mel’s. Pressley stated that he did not think that the petition against Mel’s represented the will of the community residents.

Prevas submitted a petition with several hundred signatures in favor of the establishment.

Ms. Ruby Purnell, president of the Smallwood Street Association, testified in opposition to the renewal of the license, stating that she has been in the neighborhood since 1955, and that her neighborhood has too many liquor establishments. Property values are going down, because businesses are not being kept up properly. She said, “I think it’s time for us to live in a place decent.”

Ms. Adeline Hutchinson, of the Greater Mondawmin Coordinating Council and the Robert W. Coleman Community Organization, also testified in opposition to the renewal. She testified that she sees people loitering outside from open to close, every day except Sunday, since this establishment has a six-day license. She stated that this liquor store has not provided any resources to the community, comparing it with other businesses and nonprofits that have invested nearby, like Sagamore and the Neighborhood Design Center. Hutchinson pointed out the significant health disparities between her community and the city as a whole and suggested that alcohol is not a healthy product to consume.

Mr. Keith Bailey also testified in opposition to the renewal. He said he stopped by recently to buy a soda and there was a crowd of perhaps fifty people inside the store, drinking and selling drugs.

Councilman Leon Pinkett submitted a letter of opposition to the renewal of the license. Pinkett echoed Ms. Hutchinson’s testimony about the tens of millions of dollars in investment that has been happening along West North Avenue. He has seen the negative impacts of Uptown Liquors on the community. At some point, said Pinkett, the city and its agencies need to make decisions that will help the economic revitalization of West Baltimore, or we will continue to see the health disparities that Hutchinson mentioned. Matricciani replied that he sympathized with the community complaints, but that the Board was not invested with the authority to do much about it. Pinkett said that this community has been dealing with these problems for so long that they don’t have the capacity to advocate for themselves.

Baltimore Police Vice Unit Detective Abraham Gatto testified about fifteen complaints, most of which related to disorderly behavior and loitering. Gatto explained that these calls are dealt with by patrol officers, who do not routinely forward their reports to the Liquor Board. He further explained that any establishment that sells liquor tends to draw a crowd and when this happens it becomes a strain on the neighborhood and “other things occur.” Some of the fifteen calls were from the licensee himself.

Ms. Robb reiterated her organizations’ opposition to the renewal of the license.

Mr. Prevas submitted a petition in support of the renewal of the license as well as a sign in sheet from some individuals who were present to support the renewal. He offered to try to facilitate communication between the community representatives and his clients.

Rev. Keith Bailey, president of the Fulton Heights Community Association, testified that he lives across the street from Oxford Tavern. During the 2015 unrest, protesters destroyed that bar, he said; Mr. Bailey said that the people who destroyed the bar are the ones who hang out there, selling cigarettes in the doorway. The police are often at the bar to clear it out at the end of the night, which he knows because he lives across the street. Mr. Bailey suffers from some medical conditions, and the lost sleep from this establishment is harmful to his health. One night, he witnessed a person “beating the devil” out of an ATM with a sledgehammer in the middle of the street. He submitted a letter from Councilman Leon Pinkett in opposition to the renewal of the license.

Mr. Fogleman pointed out that the licensee donates to the Matthew A Henson community association as well as the elementary school and a local church. Bailey responded, “I donate too.”

Ms. Inez Robb testified on behalf of the Western District Community Relations Council and the Fulton Community Association. She noted that the licensee does donate to some community events, but that does not absolve him of the responsibility to take care of his business. From 6am to 2am, people hang out there, every day. When Mr. Fogleman asked her about the lack of 311 calls for this business, Ms. Robb responded that 311 is not open after 10pm, which could account for it. Residents call 911 instead.

Ms. Adeline Hutchinson, from Robert W Coleman Community Organization and the Greater Mondawmin Coordinating Council. She lives within four blocks of Oxford Tavern, and she said “the hangout is atrocious.” Fogleman asked Hutchinson about the bus stop in front of Oxford Tavern; she responded that it is the business’s responsibility to monitor who is coming and going at the bus stop and make sure they’re not just loitering. “But if you’re standing behind a plate glass window and you don’t come out and you’re shooting things through a turnstile, you don’t know what’s going out there anyway,” she said.

Mr. Kang, one of the three licensees, submitted a petition of his customers in favor of the business. Kang has been operating the bar for two and a half years. When he bought it, he found that the bar side of the tavern has been unused by the previous owner. He admitted that there is loitering in front of the business but that he tells them to leave. There is a bus stop in front of the bar, and they tell the licensee that they’re waiting for the bus. He calls the police occasionally and keeps a log book. He donates to local causes and churches. Fogleman submitted an email of support from local leader Doc Cheatham. The licensee, through Fogleman, agreed to meet with the nearby neighbors and with the Matthew Henson neighborhood association to discuss how they can work together to address the issues they raised.

Ms. Robb testified again that Fulton Heights is closer to the establishment than the Matthew Henson community. She emphasized that providing drinks for a community event outside of the immediate neighborhood does not make up for the daily struggles that the community has from 6:00am to 2:00am.

Mr. Peter Prevas proffered that his client has been in business for nine years without a liquor license and is now requesting a new Class B license with outdoor seating and live entertainment. The BMZA has already approved the outdoor tables and live entertainment. The restaurant owner has owned the building for eighteen years and lives above the restaurant. The live entertainment plans range from open mic poetry nights to jazz to fundraisers. After the liquor license is approved, the applicant plans to expand and change the menu. Mr. Dickson testified that the establishment, years ago, was called the Red Door, and they hosted jazz nights, which excluded non-white patrons; now, Mr. Dickson says, everyone is welcome.

The applicant submitted some articles about his restaurant and the various community outreach initiatives he has participated in. He also submitted petitions with written and online signatures in support of his application as well as some letters of support.

Mr. Dickson testified that he met with the Old Goucher Community Association as well as the Charles Village Civic Association. CVCA, through its president Sandy Sparks, requested that Mr. Dickson sign a Memorandum of Understanding, but he did not agree to the terms of the agreement. After some questioning, he testified further that he did not agree with the suggested hours restrictions and believed that the businesses in his area had not been treated fairly, compared with the businesses further north.

Commissioner Greenfield told the applicant that he needs to make sure to follow the rules with respect to keeping employee records, buying from wholesalers only, and avoiding sales to minors. Mr. Dickson replied that his business has always primarily served a mature crowd.

Commissioner Moore asked whether Mr. Dickson understands and is willing to abide by the restrictions placed on the live entertainment by BMZA, and she reiterated the underage drinking concern.

The commissioners, as in this case, never refer to this section of the code, much less cite it during the hearings or read it out loud to try to apply it to the situation before them.

Violation of Rule 4.14(a): Live Entertainment without Authorization- March 18, 2017- At approximately 11:11 pm Officer Timothy Haefner of the Baltimore City Police Department conducted a routine business check of the establishment. At this time,Officer Haefner observed the liquor license and noted that the establishment was not authorized to provide ulive entertainment.” After review the license, Officer Haefner observed a live Disc Jockey playing music within the establishment and approximately 10-15 people dancing to the music played by the Disc Jockey. Officer Haefner informed the manager/bartender of the violation and left the establishment.

Chairman Matricciani noted that this licensee has been cited for this violation before. Kodenski replied, “you know that saying, once bitten, twice shy? Well now it’s twice bitten… not shy anymore.” Mr. Karelas testified that they had eliminated the DJ, which helps to discourage people from dancing. The licensees have had this license since around 2010, with one prior violation.

Baltimore Police Officer Rico Perry then testified to the same information already presented by Greenhill. He exited his patrol vehicle after noticing several individuals at the side entrance: some were running out, some were running in, and he heard shouting. He saw the fight, including punches and thrown chairs. The dispatcher couldn’t raise Officer Perry on the radio, when he was inside the bar, because of the commotion, so the dispatcher issued the Signal 13. Perry discharged the pepper spray, and the bar cleared out and people calmed down. Under questioning by the licensees’ attorney, Perry testified further that he didn’t make any arrests, because he was by himself and the fight was out of control.

Liquor Board Inspector John Chrissomallis then testified that, when he arrived, he asked the bartender whether the bar has security. She laughed and said that they didn’t. He then told her that the bar owner should consider hiring security to prevent and/or address fights and loitering.

The bartender, Jennifer, testified that one of her patrons that night has “been having problems with the girls in the neighborhood.” The patron who started the fight drank two Malibu and pineapple juice mixed drinks that night, but, according to the bartender, was not drunk. There were two families involved in the fight, which happened after last call, and there were too many people to break it up. Jennifer said that the bar hasn’t really had an issue with fights, and that “they usually go outside and I call 911.” There are a lot of drug dealers, she explained, in the neighborhood, and sometimes they come inside and start problems, so you have to call 911 to have them removed. They were closed after the incident for almost a month. There is no plan to get security for the bar. All of the women involved in the fight were banned from the bar.

Commissioner Moore noted that calling 911 when troublesome people come in to the bar is not a sustainable strategy. “That’s not why the police department is here,” she added.

Mr. Popa, the licensee, then testified that there aren’t too many issues with fights in his bar. Popa stated that at the time of the incident, “my security was sitting at the curb, right in front of the door: an armed police officer. This police officer was overwhelmed, to the point that he had to use pepper spray to get these people under control. The people that were outside are not my customers. I don’t allow them in my bar. The bar holds 30 people. I haven’t had 30 people in my bar in the last five to six years, because of drug dealers, who infest Curtis Bay and chase them all away. They hang on the corner – I have a record book here of how often I call 911, because that’s the only thing I can do. I spoke to the last four commanding officers of the Southern District; they’ve all told me the same thing: “don’t put yourself in harm’s way; call 911.” It makes sense to me; that’s what I pay taxes for. So we call 911. Now I did inquire one time about hiring an off-duty police officer. … It didn’t go nowhere at that time. … I had to stop cashing checks because I could see what was happening to the neighborhood. It’s infested by drug dealers. Throughout our nation, these drug dealers prefer the corners to do their business. They particularly like mine because they have a sight line for 10 blocks down Pennington Avenue where they can see any police car coming. … I need this business. … It is of diminishing value as long as I am plagued by these drug dealers. … They’re like roaches. You turn on the lights, they scatter. You turn off the lights, they come back. … I’m the victim here. Not the perpetrator.” He added that the police officers provide enough security for his business, “within the limits of what Baltimore City can afford to spend.” Later, he added that politicians refuse to do what needs to be done to address the drug problem, “because it harms their constituents.”

Commissioner Moore noted that there is a significant history of violations, including multiple sales to minors, charter not in good standing, and gambling. She noted that this is a very troubled business. Mr. Popa interrupted Moore many times throughout her statement, in a combative tone of voice, insisting that he had no control over any of the violations or situations that she listed from the file.

The proposed site for the brewery and restaurant is across the street from the Baltimore Montessori Public Charter School. Hurdle said that the building has been “underutilized” but that his clients hope to open in September or October. Custom equipment has to be ordered and installed.

The applicants testified briefly about their hopes for the project and to be involved in the community.

The current plan is to be open for lunch and dinner and to not be open much in the morning. Once the business gets going, they may extend their evening hours later, until midnight.

Commissioner Moore expressed concern about the proximity to the Baltimore Design School and the Montessori School. Deputy Executive Secretary Thomas Akras explained that new and transferred Class B licenses are allowed within 300 feet of a school or church outside of the 46th legislative district. Commissioner Moore noted that she lives not far from this block and the school drop off and pick up traffic issues are significant in the morning and afternoons.

Commissioner Moore also noted that Mr. Popescu lives in Florida and asked about how he plans to operate the business from so far away. Mr. Hurdle responded that Mr. Popescu will be moving to Baltimore full time by the time that the business opens, six to nine months from its approval.

Moore asked the applicants what the public need and desire is for another brewery in this neighborhood, noting that the Peabody Heights Brewery is also not far away. Hurdle responded that the brewery license is through the state, not the local liquor board. He pointed Moore back to the community’s letter of support, the jobs created, and a business open in the evening. One of the applicants responded that breweries in general are a boon to the community. Breweries work together to do community outreach and fundraisers. It’s one of the industries that gives the most back to the community, in his opinion.

Commissioner Greenfield echoed Moore’s concern about Mr. Popescu’s absence from the state.

Commissioner Moore noted that the license had recently transferred, in August 2016, and she asked why the license was being transferred again so soon. Mr. Shaulis responded, “truthfully?” Moore laughed, “yes!” Shaulis responded that the current licensee found out that it’s harder to run a bar than he thought it would be.

Violation of Rule 4.16: Illegal Conduct – October 16, 2016 – At approximately 12:04 pm, BLLC staff conducted a review of the corporate status of the entity known as “SNS Liquor Corporation.” and found that the entity was deemed “forfeited” by the State Department of Assessments and Taxation. Also at that time, staff conducted a review and determined that a 2016-2017 trader’s license had not yet been issued to the establishment.

Violation of Rule 4.20(c)(ii): Class BD7 Licensees: Open and Operating Tavern at all Times – October 18, 2016 – At approximately 3:00 pm, Inspector John Howard of the BLLC visited the location for the purposes of issuing notice to the establishment for an upcoming hearing. Upon entering the establishment, Howard observed trash, stock, and other materials on the bar. He also noticed that the bar stools were turned upside down and on top of the bar. Further investigation revealed that the hallway leading to the restrooms were filled with stock and there was cleaning equipment and buckets in the women’s restroom that made it inaccessible to the any female patron that wanted to the use the restroom area. Based on the Inspector’s observations the tavern portion of the establishment was incapable of allowing for patrons to consume beverages on-site. As the package goods area was open and operating, Inspector Howard violated the establishment for not having a non-functioning tavern.

Commissioner Moore expressed concern about the pattern and history of violations and the lack of oversight. Oh responded, “I will take a more active role as soon as the fall.” Commissioner Greenfield replied, “that’s not good enough.” He told Ms. Oh that she is not understanding the seriousness of the violations, and she has come to the commissioners without any specific plan, other than to be present in the fall. The photos from the inspector are troubling to Greenfield. The other two commissioners agreed that the violations were troubling, and Ms. Oh’s plans to fix the situation were insufficient.

Violation of Rule 4.05(b): Prohibited Hours – February 11, 2017 – At approximately 2:05 am, members of the Baltimore City Police Department – Det. Abraham Gatto and Det. L.C. Greenhill – conducted a special investigation based on anonymous information that the establishment was operating and serving alcoholic beverages during prohibited hours. While on location at the aforementioned date and time, detectives observed enter and exit the establishment. Upon making these observations Detectives entered the establishment and observed 10 to 12 patrons seated at the bar portion of the establishment and standing around the entrance. Detectives also observed seven (7) plastic cups containing mixed alcoholic beverages on the bar, which were being consumed by patrons. Detectives noted that there were also two (2) bartenders working at the time. At this time, detectives cleared the establishment of all patrons and informed the bartender on duty, Ms. Sarah English-Williams, of the violation.

Commissioner Matricciani asked Mr. Akras the difference between Rules 4.05(a) and 4.05(b). Akras responded that subsection (a) refers to a licensee permitting consumption of alcohol after hours, and subsection (b) refers to serving and/or dispensing alcohol after hours.

Violation of Alc. Bev. Art. 6-311(B)(3) Storage of Alcoholic Beverages – January 19, 2017 – At approximately 1:15 pm, members of the Field Enforcement Division of the Comptroller of Maryland, which included Agent Pyle, were conducting a routine inspections in the area of Dock Street and Randall Street in Annapolis, Maryland. While conducting inspections, Agent Pyle noticed individuals exiting the location of 132 Dock Street, t/a Armadillos Restaurant, in Annapolis, Maryland carrying cases of Bud Light beer and loading them into the back of a waiting pick-up truck. Agent Pyle observed this activity for approximately 15 minutes. After the pick-up truck was loaded, a male entered the vehicle and drove it away from the location. Agent Pyle followed the vehicle to Baltimore City from Annapolis where it parked in the alley directly behind the establishment. At that time, Agent Pyle observed individuals begin to off-load the cases of alcohol from the vehicle and into the establishment. Upon making this observation, Agent Pyle, along with other members of the Field Enforcement Division identified themselves to the individuals and conducted an inspection. As per the inspection, Agents discovered numerous cases of alcoholic beverages located within the establishment, all of which were purchased from a wholesaler by “Aramadillos Restaurant” and not the establishment. These items were seized. Further investigation by Agent Pyle revealed that the owner of “Armadillos Restaurant” purchased a number of alcoholic beverages from a wholesaler and made a verbal agreement with the licensee of the establishment to shae the products.

Agent Pyle testified that he decided to follow the truck loaded full of alcoholic beverages, because it’s very unusual to see a licensee load up his truck in that way.

The licensee testified that he used to work at the bar in Annapolis; this product was close to its expiration date, so he bought it to use at his business in order to do the Annapolis bar owner a favor. He was not aware that selling alcohol from one licensee to another within the state was illegal, but once he was caught, he applied for and received a bulk transfer permit.

Chief Inspector Fosler testified that he had received a call from a community member that this bar did not allow African Americans into the tavern portion of the building. Fosler asked Inspector John Howard, who is African American, to go to the establishment and attempt to gain entrance to the building; as the licensees admitted, Howard was turned away. Agent Howard then testified that when he entered the establishment, Mr. Boarman was waiting on some other customers in the package goods portion of the store. Howard asked Boarman if he could get into the tavern, and Boarman told Howard that they were closed, so Howard left the business and came back in a few minutes later with Inspector Fosler. At that point, Boarman let them in to the tavern, because he realized who they were. Inspector Howard did a routine inspection and found that the men’s bathroom’s water faucet was broken; he gave the business five days to get it repaired.

Mr. Rocky Brown from the Bocek Madison Eastend Community Association testified in favor of the licensees. He said that the bar has been a great asset in the community.

Commissioner Greenfield pointed out that the community allegation was confirmed by the licensee refusing service to Inspector Howard; he suggested that Mr. Boarman rethink his staffing.

Commissioner Moore asked Mr. Habtezghi why there are so many Eritreans who are applying for liquor licenses in Baltimore. He replied that Baltimore is a beautiful city for immigrants. He added that there is a US military base in Eritrea, so there is a ship route between Baltimore and Eritrea.

The attorney for the organization, Barry Casanova, showed up to the hearing about halfway through.

Mr. Whitehead explained that he had tried to contact Mr. Geoffrey Veale, Zoning Administrator, for over ten months and had never received a response about whether his club was required to get zoning permission for live entertainment. Tom Akras, Deputy Executive Secretary of the Liquor Board, testified that Veale sent him an email stating that the use of the property for live entertainment had been going on since at least the 1960s. Because of the long term use, it was grandfathered in, so zoning is not an issue.

Commissioner Moore expressed confusion at the documents submitted to the Board. She noted that it looked like they were paying overdue taxes in April. Kodenski replied that the taxes paid were for alcohol purchased in the prior month. Chairman Matricciani said that the affidavit from the current owner, which was submitted to the Board, stated that he was only open sporadically in order to keep his license alive through the spring of 2016.

The landlord for the building testified that he would sometimes visit during the day to pick up rent and they seemed to be open occasionally in the spring of 2016.

Commissioner Moore concluded that there are three questions before the Board: (1) whether the license is unexpired (2) whether to approve the hardship extension filed by the current licensee and (3) whether to approve the transfer to the new applicant. There was no information provided to the Board about whether there was an undue hardship that caused the cessation of the business at the location. Moore said, “so basically the hardship is the inability to complete the transfer. … Okay.”

This bill was introduced by Senator Joan Carter Conway (43rd district) at the request of the Liquor Board, without any notice to the community. The first time that the agency sent out its letter of support for the bill was at 10pm the night before the bill’s scheduled hearing in the Senate.

Commissioner Greenfield noted that, in the inspectors’ comments in an October report, that there was trash behind the store. Greenfield said that trash would be a significant issue that the licensee will have to address at his new location.

Commissioner Moore asked whether the Glover Street location is open and operating. Mavi replied that he did not know. Kodenski also did not know when or if the current owners stopped operating, though there was an inspector’s report in the file saying that the business was open in November 2015.

Inspector Mark Fosler interviewed a neighbor of the Glover Street business in October 2016, who said that the business had not been open since January or February 2016 and there had been people doing renovations. The general appearance, according to Fosler, was that the business had been closed for some time. Fosler asked the licensee to present taxes paid, receipts or invoices from wholesalers. The Chairman said that the information before them, then, was inaccurate. Fosler agreed. Commissioner Moore said that the Board cannot transfer a license that is expired.

Deputy Executive Secretary Tom Akras testified briefly that there was an open question of whether the license was valid, so the commissioners decided to postpone their decision until they could get some more information.

Councilwoman Mary Pat Clarke testified in favor of the hardship extension request, noting that half of City Hall and all of her family insisted that she be present at the hearing to support the hardship extension request. She said that permits are coming out slowly from the City, since she is waiting for permits for the Book Thing’s rebuilding. Moore and Clarke both commiserated about their trunks full of books that need to be dropped off at the Book Thing.

The licensees’ attorney, Mr. Richard Karceski, objected to Gatto’s testimony about the poker machines, because the charge against his clients was related to the bets on the football games, not the illegal payoff from the poker machines.

Marie Oakes testified that she had previously told Chuck, a patron at the bar, that he was not allowed to do football pools at her bar. On the day that the police executed the search warrant, Ms. Oakes was not at the bar, but the bartender told Oakes afterward that Chuck had asked the bartender to put the money from the pool in her purse. Instead, she put the money in the register.

Commissioner Moore questioned the licensees further about Chuck and the bar. Oakes testified that she doesn’t know Chuck well, but he is in the bar two or three times per week. She added that the neighborhood around the bar has degenerated. Ms. Anderson lives upstairs and Ms. Oakes is at the bar most days. They testified that they told Chuck that he is not welcome at the bar anymore.

Mr. Karceski argued, in conclusion, that his clients could not be held responsible for the violation, because they did not “allow” the illegal activity to happen. Ms. Oakes and Ms. Anderson testified that they told Chuck before the Vice Unit investigation that he could not run betting pools and he did it anyway. Chairman Matricciani rejected this argument, stating that the Court of Appeals has recently held that the Liquor Board can hold licensees responsible for violations even when there is no evidence that they knew about the illegal activity. Commissioner Moore added that it is sufficient to hold them accountable, in her opinion, that the licensees were neglecting the management of their establishment. Karceski argued that in the Court of Appeals case, it was “a woman on a pole,” whereas in his clients’ case, the illegal situation was bets taken on a football game (the implication being that the illegal activity was out in the open in the former case but was hidden in his clients’ case). Matricciani disagreed, saying that the illegal activity was actually solitication for prostitution in the Court of Appeals case, which is not entirely different from solicitation for gambling. Moore agreed with Matricciani, underlining the point that “a woman on a pole” is legal, unlike the football pool.

After two following cases, this case was re-called after Mr. Karceski asked for a reconsideration of the suspension of the license, since the two upcoming days are very busy for his clients. He asked that the suspension take place during the week, perhaps Monday and Tuesday. The Chairman indicated that it would be acceptable to him to change the suspension dates. Commissioner Moore disagreed; she pointed out that the licensees had avoided responsibility on the illegal payouts from the poker machines and they got a pretty light penalty. The penalty isn’t imposed as a convenience, she said. The licensees were brought back in and Ms. Anderson testified that they have scheduled meetings at their bar over the next two days. Commissioner Greenfield suggested that the suspension be lengthened to three days and scheduled for the following week. The other commissioners agreed.

Violation of Rule 4.20(c)(ii): Class BD7 Licensees: Open and Operating Tavern at all Times – January 19, 2017 – At approximately 10:00 PM, the Baltimore Sheriff’s Office, and the BLLC conducted random, joint investigations of establishments to determine if licensees would sell alcoholic beverages to minors. Upon the conclusion of the underage purchase investigation, the BLLC conducted a routine inspection of the establishment. BLLC inspectors observed that the tavern portion of the establishment was filled with stock and personal items, the coolers were not plugged in and operating, and the public were barred from use of the restroom. As the package goods area was open and operating, BLLC officials violated the establishment for not having a non-functioning tavern.

Five years ago, the licensees were held responsible for the same violation for having the tavern portion of the business closed. Seven years ago, the licensees were held responsible for a sale to minors violation.

There is a history of violations, but they were several years ago.

Commissioner Moore asked for more information about where the alcohol will be served. The applicants responded that there will be a bar inside, so the alcohol will be sold from inside.

The applicants were previously on a liquor license, without any violations over their 15 year history.

Commissioner Greenfield asked about the cost of the renovations of the facility and whether it meets the $200,000 threshold. He also asked about parking. The applicants testified that there are 17 spots for the property, as well as street parking.

Commissioner Moore noted that Karzai is currently on the liquor license at the Helmand; he testified that he has had zero violations at that establishment, and he will remove himself from the license if he is granted this new Class B.

Later on in the hearings, Commissioner Moore went back on the record to say that the Board considers Helmand Kabobi to be a “fast casual” restaurant, not a “fast food” restaurant. Fast food restaurants are prohibited from owning liquor licenses in Baltimore City. The Board has never really explained the difference between those two categories, if any.

The Fells Point Community Organization and the Fells Point Residents Association both support the license request and submitted letters of support to the agency. FPRA had asked that a condition be included that required outdoor live entertainment at the pool area to end at 9pm. Hecker said, “respectfully, we don’t believe that that condition is necessary” since the project is a “ultra high end super luxury hotel” with “expensive hotel rooms” right above the pool area. Since the management will be obsessively focused on the comfort and convenience of their guests, they won’t be allowing entertainment that would bother them. Hecker said that her client will self-police with respect to noise. Under questioning, she elaborated that the live entertainment will take a variety of forms, including DJs, live music, etc. in various places in the facility, both inside and outside.

There was some confusion during the hearing about whether the applicant had intended to apply for permission to deliver alcoholic beverages along with food delivery. The applicant clarified that he did want alcohol delivery, if possible.

The licensee, Mr. Efstathios Dosis, who goes by Steve, owns 1% of the business. The day to day manager of the business, Rudy, who will not be a licensee, owns 99% of the business. Rudy is not a licensee at Jimmy’s because he is a licensee at a restaurant in Howard County, called Rudy’s Mediterranean Grill, which his wife runs.

The existing business is 70% grocery and 30% alcohol. It was recently closed for Health Department reasons, and the seller does not intend to reopen. The establishment has one prior violation under the seller’s ownership in 2007.

Mr. Haile currently works at a liquor store. It will be a one-person operation, with Ms. Solomon filling in occasionally.

Mr. Prevas noted that the purchase price is low, reflecting the fact that it’s a Class A license in a residential district. Under the current Transform Baltimore zoning code, Class A licenses in residential zones will have two years to stop selling alcohol. Mr. Haile plans to sell his license if possible.

Fogleman noted that he checked the file and found an anonymous letter from a group called the Victimized Residents of Curtis Bay, in opposition to the transfer. Fogleman said that he sympathizes with the letter and deals in generalities about conditions in the community.

Chairman Matricciani noted that it is difficult to know what weight to give the letter, since it is unsigned, the organization is not formally organized with the state, and there is no one at the hearing to represent them. Fogleman noted that he had volunteered in Curtis Bay, and he agreed that there was not a lot of investment. Mr. Stansbury testified that he was open to meeting with members of the community. Fogleman said that he put the address of the bar into the city’s website to look for community associations, and nothing came up. Later in the hearing, Fogleman said that he did reach out to someone but could not remember which person he emailed. Cityview Baltimore shows several organizations that cover this address: Community of Curtis Bay Association, Southern District Police-Community Relations Council, Brooklyn and Curtis Bay Coalition, and Southwest Community Action Center.

Commissioner Moore said that the allegations were very very concerning to her. There were photos of a person who was assaulted and trash left. It’s hard for the commissioners to vet the allegations, but she had voted to close the establishment for three weeks under the Ward chairmanship. “Something was happening there,” she said. She would have suggested that the Board postpone their decision until the applicant met with the letter writer(s), but that’s not possible here. She said that the letter is “worse than anonymous.”

Chairman Matricciani also encouraged the applicant to reach out to the community.

The applicant testified that he will have around four security staff both inside and outside the property to ensure safety. Fogleman noted that the capacity is around 200 people. Mr. Stansbury said that opening a sports bar is something he’s been wanting to do for a long time.

Violation of Rule 4.16: Illegal Conduct – January 18, 2017 – At approximately 12:44 pm, BLLC staff conducted a review of the corporate status of the entity known as “ERS, Incorporated” and found that the entity was deemed “forfeited” by the State Department of Assessments and Taxation.

Violation of Rule 4.16: Illegal Conduct – October 16, 2016 – At approximately 1:20 am, members of the Baltimore City Police Department (BCPD) and BLLC inspection staff conducted a special investigation into the operations of the establishment. At approximately 1:30 am, BLLC inspectors and BCPD officers observed an individual, later identified as Richard Alexander, exiting the establishment with an open “bud light” can of beer. BLLC inspectors and BCPD stopped Mr. Alexander, identified him, secured the beer can, and then emptied out its contents.

Violation of Rule 4.16: Illegal Conduct – October 16, 2016 – At approximately 1:20 am, members of the Baltimore City Police Department (BCPD) and BLLC inspection staff conducted a special investigation into the operations of the establishment. At approximately 1:30 am, BLLC inspectors and BCPD officers observed an individual, later identified as Kiana Lenker, exiting the establishment with an open “bud light” can of beer. BLLC inspectors and BCPD stopped Ms. Lenker, identified her, secured the beer can, and then emptied out its contents.

Violation of Rule 4.16: Illegal Conduct – October 16, 2016 – At approximately 1:20 am, members of the Baltimore City Police Department (BCPD) and BLLC inspection staff conducted a special investigation into the operations of the establishment. At approximately 1:30 am, BLLC inspectors and BCPD officers observed an individual, later identified as Craig Zrinski, exiting the establishment with an open “bud light” can of beer. BLLC inspectors and BCPD stopped Mr. Zrinski, identified him, secured the beer can, and then emptied out its contents.

Violation of Alc. Bev. Art. §6-309: Minor in Possession – October 16, 2016 – At approximately 1:20 am, members of the Baltimore City Police Department (BCPD) and BLLC inspection staff conducted a special investigation into the operations of the establishment. At approximately 1:30 am, BLLC inspectors and BCPD officers observed an individual, later identified as Richard Alexander, exiting the establishment with an open “bud light” can of beer. BLLC inspectors and BCPD stopped Mr. Alexander, identified him as an individual under the age of 21, secured the beer can, and then emptied out its contents.

Violation of Alc. Bev. Art. §6-309: Minor in Possession – October 16, 2016 – At approximately 1:20 am, members of the Baltimore City Police Department (BCPD) and BLLC inspection staff conducted a special investigation into the operations of the establishment. At approximately 1:30 am, BLLC inspectors and BCPD officers observed an individual, later identified as Kiana Lenker, exiting the establishment with an open “bud light” can of beer. BLLC inspectors and BCPD stopped Ms. Lenker, identified her as an individual under the age of 21, secured the beer can, and then emptied out its contents.

Violation of Alc. Bev. Art. §6-309: Minor in Possession – October 16, 2016 – At approximately 1:20 am, members of the Baltimore City Police Department (BCPD) and BLLC inspection staff conducted a special investigation into the operations of the establishment. At approximately 1:30 am, BLLC inspectors and BCPD officers observed an individual, later identified as Craig Zrinski, exiting the establishment with an open “bud light” can of beer. BLLC inspectors and BCPD stopped Mr. Zrinski, identified him as an individual under the age of 21, secured the beer can, and then emptied out its contents.

Inspector John Chrissomallis testified that he was at the club with Detective Greenhill and Detective Gatto from Baltimore City Vice. The police officers and inspector saw that the club was over capacity, according to their own clickers. They also witnessed several individuals leaving the bar with open containers in their hands, one of whom was under 21.

Mr. Miller testified that the club was not over capacity; he said that some of the patrons were outside in a courtyard. Detective Gatto replied that people started moving outside because the police had to shut the bar down because it was over capacity. Miller has had the license five years and has never had a violation. He says that he doesn’t sell alcohol to minors, because they have a wristband system. On the night in question, his club was hosting an “18 and over rave event.” At first, Miller said that if patrons are under 18, they get a wristband. Then he said that if they’re over 18, they get a wristband. “Which is it?” Commissioner Moore asked. Miller replied that “sometimes they get a wristband.” He said that they also card patrons at the bar. Moore asked why patrons under 21 should be allowed in at all. Miller responded that his bar has since changed their policies: now there are separate drinking areas for people over 21.

Commissioner Greenfield asked Miller whether it was possible that the individuals listed by the police in their report walked out of the building with a drink in their hands. Miller responded that it was possible. It’s also possible that he could have served someone underage. Greenfield replied that Miller had a special responsibility to make sure that no one underage got served when there is an event for 18-21 year olds.

On the issue of capacity, Commissioner Greenfield asked whether the security company had ever had an issue with accuracy in the past. Miller replied that he was not sure what the count was on the clicker on the night in question, so it was possible that it could have been over capacity. The commissioners expressed concern about the seriousness of being over capacity for a large venue holding hundreds of young people.

Violation of Rule 4.20(c)(i)(4)(a): Class BD7 Licensees – December 13, 2016 – At approximately 12:30 PM, BLLC Darryl Clark arrived at the establishment to conduct a regularly scheduled routine inspection. Upon conducting his inspection, Clark observed that the entire establishment was under renovation/construction. Inspector Clark observed the construction of a new package goods section, a new walk-in refrigerator, shelving, and the construction of a lounge section in the rest of the establishment. On December 14, 2016 BLLC Chief Inspector Mark Fosler visited the establishment and made observations for himself. Chief Fosler, who was familiar with the layout of the establishment, observed that due to the renovations the package goods space had increased while the bar/tavern portion of the location had been reduced. In addition, Chief Fosler saw that additional plexi-glass/bulletproof windows had been installed in the expanded package goods section.

Mr. Kodenski argued with the inspector that there is no definition of “alterations” in the Liquor Board’s Rules and Regulations. Chairman Matricciani noted that this is a legal argument, not a question for the inspector. Commissioner Moore said, “plain meaning of the word,” meaning that the Board can use the dictionary meaning of the term “alterations” – it’s not necessary to define the term.

Inspector Fosler corroborated Clark’s testimony and said that the business was closed for extensive renovations when he visited. The licensees expanded the floor space for package goods compared to the tavern portion of the business. The cooler boxes took up three times the space, and the bar had been removed entirely.

Mr. Kodenski submitted building permits for the renovations to replace the floor, among other improvements. The former owner testified that the coolers had been old and in need of replacement. The tavern area, he said, was reduced in size, but they’re going to expand it again. The current licensee testified that, when she started cleaning the place up, she saw that the floor was in bad shape and decided to replace them as well as the old coolers. She testified that she’s been selling 50/50 from the bar and the package goods side of the business.