Has Senator Squadron Started His Anti-Nightlife Campaign?

By Gamal Hennessy

When Daniel Squadron ran for the New York State Senate last year, nightlife control was a pillar of his campaign. Now that the State Liquor Authority has new leadership, Mr. Squadron has initiated a dialogue aimed at "improving" that agency. Left unchecked Mr. Squadron’s "solutions" will prove detrimental to the nightlife industry and harmful to the entire city.

According the Senator Squadron’s website, he hosted a meeting last week that included
State Liquor Authority (SLA) Chairman Dennis Rosen, SLA CEO Trina Mead, SLA Deputy Commissioner of Licensing Kerri O’Brien, SLA Deputy CEO for New York City Michael Jones, Councilmember Rosie Mendez, Margaret Chin, representatives from the offices of Assembly Members Silver, Kavanagh, and Glick, and leaders from district community boards. The agenda of the meeting was to discuss nightlife concerns and according to the press release "to start a dialogue to foster informed licensing decisions, intelligent enforcement actions, and safer communities."

While nightlife is certainly an issue that deserves discussion, a deeper look at the attendance of the meeting and the underlying agenda of the host is disconcerting. The major issue is who was not invited to the meeting. Based on the wording of the press release and inquiries that I have made, members of the nightlife community and members of the New York City Police Department were not invited to the participate. It is hard to imagine any discussion about nightlife concerns or safer communities being productive when the industry itself and the people charged with keeping the community safe aren’t involved in the discussion.

The situation becomes easier to understand when you look at the background of the players involved. Senator Squadron ran on an anti-nightlife platform in 2008. The former operator called for a stronger voice for community boards (CBs) when it comes to liquor licenses. He feels that the CBs role should shift from an advisory role in relation to the SLA to something more binding. Greater community participation in the democratic process is a lofty goal, but that does not mean that the CBs should have more control over New York liquor licenses. CBs don’t take needs of nightlife or economic impact of nightlife on the city into account when they make their determinations. A CB isn’t always representative of the actual community since a small minority of NIMBY (not in my backyard) elements often have stronger voice in the CBs than the silent majority that lives in the area. Giving a greater voice to the CBs while excluding operators from the discussion indicates the Senator might be taking an imbalanced approach to the issue.

The Senator’s path to a weaker nightlife industry goes directly through the SLA. Dennis Rosen was brought in to clean up an agency rife with problems including lack of staff, waste, and possible corruption. Based on the press release, Squadron made it clear that he would push for more community involvement in liquor licensing when he voted for Rosen’s appointment. To Mr. Rosen’s credit, he appears to be tackling problems quickly, adding staff to deal with the licensing backlog and corruption issues. But SLA Chairman is a political appointment. Mr. Rosen has to work within the framework of state politics and that means dealing with the politicians who can vote him in or out. The meeting could be the first step Squadron takes to make his nightlife agenda a reality.

Again, the problem is not that a meeting was held between politicians, CBs and the SLA about nightlife. The problem is that a constructive dialogue would have included more voices at the table. If the police and nightlife are not part of the discussion from the beginning, realistic solutions outcomes are unlikely. Operators are the ones who get the liquor licenses and have to work with the community boards. They can address concerns about their industry and offer solutions if they are invited to the meeting. The police are the only ones that can regulate noise, pollution and other quality of life issues on the streets. Operators have little or no legal control outside the four walls of their venue. If they are not part of the discussion, then the problem can’t be solved. It’s not as if nightlife doesn’t have representatives that could have attended the meeting. Operators have the New York Nightlife Association. Patrons have the Nightlife Preservation Community. There are also think tanks including the Responsible Hospitality Institute. Each one could have brought a unique perspective to a meeting about nightlife concerns if they were actually invited to the meeting.

If Senator Squadron plans to meet with operators and police separately, the question is why not have everyone meet at once, and on an ongoing basis, until a framework for understanding is developed? If Squadron simply plans to continue SLA policies and stifle nightlife growth in New York City, all he needs to do is give more power to the CBs and leave nightlife out of the discussion, which is what it appears he is doing.

If patrons and operators want to see the further decline of nightlife in New York, then they should ignore Squadron’s actions and see how far it goes. If they want to enhance and enjoy an important part of New York living, then we need to get more involved in the community board process to ensure that Squadron can’t use them as a weapon against clubs when he gives the CBs more power over the licensing process.

Have fun
Gamal

The Power of New York’s Nightlife Reputation

By Gamal Hennessy

Time Out Publishing is releasing a book this week entitled “World’s Greatest Cities”. In the book, New York was singled out as the best city in the world when it comes to things like architecture, arts and quality of life. While most New Yorkers might feel nonchalant about this title, nightlife natives should take note of the impact our nightlife has on the city’s reputation and the impact of that reputation on our lives. The writers of this book singled out New York above all others because of our 24 hour culture. It is nightlife that gives New York its unique culture. Any moves to suppress that culture will have a direct effect on the economy and prosperity of the entire city.

Reputation for tourists

New York is known as ‘the city that never sleeps’. That reputation draws millions of tourists to the city every year. But when visitors think of a metropolis opened around the clock, what do you think pops into their minds? Do you think they are dreaming about a 24 hour Duane Reade? I don’t think so. Is it possible that people fly into New York from Sydney and Bali and Johannesburg to visit the all night bodega? Probably not. The concept that draws people to the city that never sleeps is the idea that we work all day and we party all night. Where do we party? If you have to ask that question, please close this page and visit a different site.

In 2004 a research organization called ARA conducted a study on the impact of nightlife on the New York’s economy. ARA found that 77% of all New York visitors identified visiting a nightclub or bar as one of their primary reasons for visiting the city. This means that almost three quarters of all our tourists came to New York to experience our nightlife. How much money would be lost from incoming tour groups, business conventions like the New York Auto Show, award ceremonies like the MTV music awards, and artistic events like Fashion Week if people decided that New York was no better than any other city when it comes to nightlife? It is hard to imagine how the reputation of New York would remain the same if people came to the conclusion that nightlife in New York, Cleveland, and Spokane were substantially similar.

Reputation for talent

It’s not just temporary occupants of the city that are lured by our nightlife. Every year job recruiters go around the country and around the world to find the top people from the top schools and try to lure them to New York. Recruits are seduced with money and the chance to work in the beating heart of their industry. They are also drawn in with images of high class bars, private parties and mega clubs. TV shows filmed in New York like Sex and the City, and Gossip Girl often have young workers hooked before the recruiter even shows up. People want to work in New York to get access to the nightlife.

If New York didn’t have the reputation for nightlife, how many young, bright people would choose to move to here to pursue careers? Other cities have cheaper rents, more space and other advantages. If New York isn’t unique when it comes to bars and clubs, what is the point of suffering thru all the difficulties of making it here? Other cities like Atlanta, Miami, Los Angeles and Las Vegas are trying to use a vibrant nightlife to attract the best and brightest. Can we afford to lose this pool of talent and still be the center of the universe?

It is not coincidental that financial networks like CNBC are focusing on the Time Out book. A city’s reputation can directly influence the economic power of an area. New York City is central to several different industries. We are not dependent on nightlife or any other single business the way Detroit, Orlando or Las Vegas are. But nightlife is still a vital part of the overall dynamic. NIMBY community groups, opportunistic politicians and other anti-nightlife advocates can willfully ignore the contribution that nightlife makes to New York. If we follow their lead or allow them to make decisions for us, we are going to lose more than the title of the best city in the world. We will lose the reputation that drives our economy.

Have fun.
Gamal