Chairman Rosen Improves the Liquor License Process

By

Gamal Hennessy

The New York State Liquor Authority (SLA) has faced considerable problems in recent years. A new chairman was brought in over the summer to improve the organization on several different levels. Less than 6 months into his term and operators have seen a noticeable improvement in the license application process. It is a rare piece of good news coming from Albany.

The SLA provides licenses to businesses across the state sell alcohol. It is one of the main offices of government that nightlife venues have to interact with in order to stay in business. In recent years, it has become increasingly difficult to obtain a license in a timely manner and operators have lost considerable amounts of money waiting for an SLA decision. The situation became so detrimental that some SLA employees were accused of taking bribes to process applications in a timely manner. The current backlog of outstanding applications is more than 1,200. This prevents businesses from opening, operators from working and patrons from enjoying venues that may never get to open.

Denis Rosen, a former NY State assistant attorney general, took over the SLA in August of this year with a mandate to root out corruption, eliminate waste and streamline the licensing process. A recent New York Times article found that Mr. Rosen is wasting no time making changes to the agency. By hiring more license examiners and creating a system where the attorneys for operators can verify key information in the license application, the SLA has been approving license applications in 2-4 weeks instead of 6-8 months. Attorney’s for nightlife operators confirm that while the new process puts more responsibility on the attorney filling out the application, it can literally shave months off a license application.

There are still many more steps that Mr. Rosen needs to take to improve the SLA. There is still a backlog of more than 1,000 applications that need to be reviewed with the new streamlined process. The Beverage Control Law itself hasn’t been overhauled since Prohibition and needs major revisions. Local community boards and anti-nightlife politicians have already begun their assault on the agency. But the new process is a positive step. Hopefully, Mr. Rosen can continue to take actions that will support a vital aspect of business and culture in New York City.

Have fun.
Gamal

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

A New Fight Over New Bars

By Gamal Hennessy

Hidden away from the major media outlets, a struggle is brewing over the nightlife industry in New York. The fight revolves around the laws that govern bars and the way nightlife is perceived. The latest battle in this conflict concerns the Beverage Control Law and how it is interpreted. Anti nightlife groups are planning to change current SLA law to serve their own interests and if their influence isn’t counterbalanced nightlife will suffer.

The current law requires a public hearing for any potential liquor license opening up within 500 feet of two other licenses. If you consider how dense New York is, you’ll quickly realize that almost every new venue requires a 500 foot hearing. Residents who oppose nightlife venues in general often use the 500 foot rule to protest the opening of new venues.

A judge in a recent court case involving Hudson Terrace held that a 500 foot hearing is only necessary for establishments of the same type, not for any liquor license. For example if a bar wants to open up within 500 feet of three other bars, then a hearing is required. But if a bar wants to open up within 500 feet of three clubs, or two clubs and a restaurant, or a club a restaurant and a cabaret, then no hearing is required.

Anti-nightlife elements within the city don’t plan to lose their main weapon without a fight. Daniel Squadron, a new State Senator who turned his back on nightlife before he was even elected, plans to re-write the law to tighten the restrictions and circumvent the judges ruling. He claims that “the decision undermines the spirit of the law”, so the law needs to be fixed.

There are at least three unspoken concepts that are flawed when it comes to the way anti nightlife elements deal with the 500 foot hearing process. First, they assume that more venues are automatically a problem. However, it is just as likely that more venues could reduce crowding and increase revenue for the city and the state. Second, there is an assumption that the community board is the best forum for making decisions about additional nightlife venues. But that body does not and cannot take in to account the cultural and financial impact of the venue on the city. Third, that the BCL needs to be changed to inhibit and restrict nightlife growth when in fact much of the law dates back to Prohibition and needs to be revised not to inhibit nightlife but to bring the law in line with the realities and needs of nightlife in the 21st century.

The BCL does need to be revised and the 500 foot rule needs to be examined but pro-nightlife and anti-nightlife groups need to weigh in on the subject. People concerned with the character of the individual neighborhoods and the viability of the city overall need to be heard. Hopefully organizations like the NYNA and the NPC will get involved with this issue and prevent further erosion of nightlife in New York.

Have fun.
Gamal

New Political Group Forms to Enhance New York Nightlife

By Gamal Hennessy

Unless you are having a heated political discussion over beers, nightlife and politics don’t usually mix. Think about it, what does politics have to do with grabbing a drink with your friends, chatting up a girl for her phone number and dancing like no one is watching? Why not sit back, have a good time, and leave politics for the politicians?

That isn’t a good idea because if we don’t see nightlife as a political issue, we don’t have a voice. Various groups including community boards, law enforcement agencies, and real estate developers weigh in on what they want in relation to nightlife. The only major group that does not have a seat at the table to push its agenda is us. Patrons do not have an organization that directly represents their needs or even defines what those needs are.

A group of nightlife advocates are taking steps to improve this situation by creating the Nightlife Preservation Committee (NPC). Utilizing their ability to reach voters, their substantial connections in media and entertainment and the financial strength of their industry, the NPC plans to be a forum for nightlife that has not been seen in local politics before.

In the short term, the NPC plans to establish political influence in the New York City primaries by reaching out to almost 500,000 club goers who are also registered voters. That voting block could make or break the career of an aspiring politician, since local primaries are often decided by only a few thousand votes. At the same time, the NPC want to act as a bridge, connecting nightlife patrons to the local community, law enforcement, health agencies and other groups that have not seen eye to eye in the past. In the long term the NPC plans to represent the interests of the nightlife community as the issues and concerns about nightlife evolve.

The members of the NPC were kind enough to let me sit down with them as they planned their inaugural event, which is scheduled for June 22nd at M2. I met with Ariel Palitz (Sutra), Steven Lewis (Good Night Mr. Lewis), David Rabin (the New York Nightlife Association), Paul Seres (Sol), Morgan McLean (Rebel) and Paul Insalaco (BF9 Media). I posed several questions to the group to get a better idea of how they planned to connect nightlife and politics.

NYN: What are the long term goals of the NPC?
David Rabin: “In the broadest sense, we want to have an impact on state and local politics as they relate to the nightlife industry.”

Steven Lewis: “We want to revive the concept that New York is the City That Never Sleeps in the same way that Vegas embraced the concept of What Happens in Vegas Stays in Vegas. We want to spotlight the link between the prosperity of the city and the prosperity of our industry in the same way that the two concepts are connected in Vegas and Miami.”

Are you planning to use the NPC as a pro-nightlife organization to counter anti-nightlife groups within NYC?
Ariel Palitz: “We aren’t trying to polarize the discussion. We don’t want one group of people to automatically vote against any new club. We also don’t want anyone to fight for every venue as a knee jerk reaction. Our goal is to have each venue and each issue judged on its own merits.”

Paul Seres: We are trying to create a more balanced discussion, rather than increase the level of conflict between nightlife and the community. Most of us serve on community boards, so we know there are a lot of things that need to be considered with each club and each operator.

What public relations challenges does the NPC face?
Morgan McLean: “The media paints the entire industry with one broad brush. If one of us is accused of something, then all of us are assumed to be guilty, but an entire industry should not be defined by a few bad operators.”

Rabin: “When someone gets robbed inside a bodega, the cops don’t make the bodega liable. If a fight breaks out in a pizzeria and someone gets hurt, the pizzeria isn’t blamed. In the current environment if those same incidents happen in a club, then it’s the club’s fault. It’s the entire industry’s fault.”

Lewis: “We need to change the way we are perceived. Nightlife brings jobs and taxes and tourism and life to the city. We generate twice the revenue of film and television in New York. Our annual attendance is more than every major sports team and Broadway combined. We want to work with the city and the community boards to continue to do that and more.”

Morgan: “We can’t build our individual businesses or enhance nightlife in general because we spend so much time trying to defend and justify our existence.”

How is the NPC different from NYNA? Both groups are run by operators. Both groups support and advocate local nightlife? Why is a separate group necessary?

Seres: The NYNA is a trade association of nightlife owners. The NPC is a conduit of information for nightlife patrons. It is designed to mobilize people who are interested in the political and policy aspects of nightlife in a manner that is similar to a political action committee.

The NPC will officially kick off on June 22nd. What happens on June 23rd?
Seres: We plan to launch a website on the same day as the initial event and use that as a way to get information out to our people on an ongoing basis. We’d also like to have a series of meetings and events where candidates running for office can meet patrons who are interested in protecting nightlife. Many people never get to meet or talk to the people that they vote for. The NPC will give them a platform to express how important nightlife is to their entire life.

Have fun.
Gamal

The World's Loudest Cigarette: Six Years of the Smoking Ban

Six years ago this week, a smoking ban was imposed on bars, restaurants and other venues in New York City. While the atmosphere inside bars has improved and there are studies that suggest that there has been a significant improvement in the health of nightlife operators and patrons, there have also been secondary effects that threaten the health of the nightlife industry in general. The city has unintentionally (or perhaps unintentionally) created a situation that puts clubs at odds with local residents and ultimately threatens liquor licenses.

History

Before the election of Michael Bloomberg as mayor of New York City, bars and clubs were bastions of smoking. Federal studies found that 61% of heavy alcohol users also smoked, often performing both acts simultaneously. The image entering a smoky bar and approaching a sexual interest by asking for a light were common in many venues in the city. Anyone who went into or worked in a bar accepted the concept that smokers would be there and that they would be able to smell the smoke on their clothes and in their hair long after they left the venue, whether they smoked or not. Back when the world was young and I worked in Webster Hall, I had to sneak outside several times a night for the chance to breathe fresh air. Cigarette smoke triggers my asthma, so for me working in the basement was like working in a burning building. It wasn’t the smartest thing I ever did, but a

hustler does what he has to do, especially when he’s starting out.

In 2002 after Bloomberg became mayor, one of the first things he pushed for was a ban on smoking in restaurants, bars and clubs. The debate leading up to the passage of the law was hotly contested on both sides. Groups that advocated the ban claimed that operators inside the clubs were the most vulnerable to the dangers of second hand smoke because they were exposed to it several hours a night for several nights per week. They claimed a ban would both improve the long term health of operators and improve nightlife business because it would attract people who didn’t smoke into the environment to spend money. Groups that came out against the ban did not deny the health benefits, but they did argue that there would be economic and social effects that the law did not take into account. They also claimed that there would be increased friction from the community because of the noise generated from patrons standing outside to smoke from 5 PM to 4 AM.

The Sound of Smoking

Some people think that a few people standing outside a venue will not substantially increase the level of street noise. But that concept only considers the smokers themselves. They don’t see that smokers, especially female smokers, provide a powerful incentive for groups of fanatics to hang out in front of a club, especially the ones who didn’t get into or got thrown out. In a twisted effort to get noticed and prove their superiority, these individuals will shout, get into fights, honk their horns if they are in their cars, or try to talk to girls from their cars and back up traffic behind them which causes other cars to blow their horns. This sad mating ritual cacophony will die down when the girls finish smoking and go back inside, but it will begin again when the next group of girls comes out of the club to take their place.

The relationship between street noise and smoking outside should not have come as a surprise to anyone involved in the development of the smoking ban since the NYNA informed city that the smoking ban would lead to noise complaints. But when operators requested the ability to hire Paid Detail officers to deal with the inevitable noise the result was the worst of all options. The smoking ban was put in place and the request for Paid Detail was rejected, allowing the smoking ban to become a major contributor of street noise. When street noise increases, 311 complaints from local residents increase. When complaints increase, local community boards can use those complaints to have a venue’s liquor license revoked. Without a liquor license, a bar or a club can’t compete in the market and is forced to close. There is a direct relationship between the smoking ban and the increase in noise complaints against clubs. As the ban enters its 6th year operators need to find a way to keep patrons healthy and stay opened.

Coping Strategies

Different venues use different tactics to deal with the ban. Any venue that has been built or renovated since 2003 could factor the law into their design. The ones that could afford it added heated courtyard lounges like Cielo, rooftop access like Above Allen or fire escape access like APT to give smokers access to the open air without putting them out on the street. Venues that don’t have that option rope off areas in front of the venue to separate the smokers who already made it past the velvet rope from the throngs still trying to get inside.

There are also growing instances of venues that do not rope off areas out front, or create special sections for them. Some operators have come to the conclusion openly or privately that it is easier and more cost effective to simply break the law. Smoking in clubs reported to be on the rise in New York City, either because enforcement has dropped off, or because the fines are low enough that paying them costs less than complying with the law or getting noise complaints. While this minority of operators might not openly reject the law, they have come to the conclusion that the cost of paying the fine is less than the cost of erecting smoking areas or subjecting their liquor licenses to revocation based on noise complaints from smokers standing outside. Some solutions have worked better than others, but one thing the clubs won’t do is discourage smoking by their clientele since by some operator estimates, smokers account for 40% of patrons.

A More Viable Solution

There is an alternative that protects the health of patrons and operators, keeps noise levels down outside of venues and allows patrons to smoke all at the same time. There are air filtration systems on the market that have been approved by the Department of Health and are currently used by infectious disease wards in hospitals to clean the air. These systems reportedly are the size of a humidifier and one of them can keep 1,250 square feet of interior air cleaner than the air in Central Park, even if 60% of the people are smoking inside. The NYNA proposed that if a venue was primarily a bar, lounge or club and not a restaurant then they could have one filter installed for every 1,250 square feet of interior space and become exempt from the ban. This request was not included in the final version of the law.

The best options available for the industry are to continue to lobby officials on the state or and local level that patrons can smoke inside without health risks, through the use of technology like filtration units. They can also try and work with local community leaders and law enforcement to gain the power to control or reduce noise outside the venues through Paid Detail. Finally, they could work to sever the links between street noise and liquor licenses so that loud patrons don’t lead to closed venues. Whatever tactic operators decide to use they need to insure that the smoking ban isn’t harmful to nightlife health.

Have fun.
Gamal

So Where Are the Cops?

By Gamal Hennessy

Several people were stabbed over the weekend outside a TriBeCa club. The violence that occurred is the latest incident involving this venue and is sure to be used as an example of out of control nightlife here in the city. Unfortunately, incidents like this might be inevitable given the current position of the New York Police Department. Until nightlife venues are given the same police protection as other venues, violence will be a part of the nightlife experience.

Deco has several aspects to it that make it a less than ideal example of a New York venue. According to Matthew Chayes of New York Newsday, Deco has been operating without a liquor license since January 3, 2009 and it was the scene of two shootings in 2007. On Saturday night, two people were allegedly slashed with razor blades by Mario Olmedo. Later that same evening there was a report that three more people were attacked with blades outside the same venue.

Newsday wasn’t able to contact the operators of Deco for a statement, but the ripples are already being felt in the industry. Operators who were planning to move the Flatiron performance space Cutting Room to TriBeCa withdrew his scheduled appearance before the community board yesterday because he didn’t want the backlash from Deco to influence the decision on his liquor license.

It is an unfortunate fact of nightlife that fanatics and amateurs get most of the attention when it comes to news stories about nightlife. Very few pages are written about the tens of thousands of patrons who go out, have a good time and get home safely without slicing each other up in the street. It is objectionable that these incidents occur in spite of the fact that nightlife advocates have repeatedly requested the ability to have uniformed police officers patrolling the streets near venues during peak hours. One of the major points that came out of the Nightlife Summit of 2006 was a specific request by the New York Nightlife Association to have paid police patrols outside clubs to enforce laws that club security can’t enforce outside the venue. This request was, and continues to be rejected by the NYPD because it could potentially breed “corruption between the club owners and the cops.”

Serious violence is rare in nightlife, but as long as there are fanatics out there, the potential for violence exists. But while the NYPD protects itself from potential corruption, operators are held responsible for violence that they do not have the authority to control. They suffer the wrath of the irate community board members looking for any reason to shut down our venues. We as patrons are left to fend for ourselves among the fanatics when we go out, creating a situation where some of us will have to go to the hospital when our night is over.

Have fun.
G

Where is New York’s Nightlife District?

By Gamal Hennessy

Many major cities have designated areas where nightlife concentrates. Vegas has the Strip. New Orleans has Bourbon Street. South Beach has Ocean Drive. London has Leicester Square. New York has pockets of venues scattered all over the city, but what if there was a central area that was easy to get to, isolated from local residents, and big enough to house the next generation of mega clubs? Could something like that work here? Would we want it to?

Diane Vacca of Chelsea Now reported last week that members of community boards 4 and 5 in Midtown are in the initial stages of a plan that would designate areas in the Garment District (between 34th and 41st Streets and 6th and 9th Avenues) as a manufacturing zone. By using a non residential area for larger nightclubs like the venues currently in West Chelsea, the boards hope to give the residents of the quality of life they are looking for while providing space for a vital part of New York’s culture and economy.

Clubs have had conflict in recent years with local residents, community boards and police where local residents complain that the club’s activities are detrimental to the neighborhood and club operators complaining that they don’t have the tools or authority to solve the problems and remain in business. The encroachment of residential buildings into traditional nightlife areas has exacerbated the problem, which probably had a lot to do with this proposal.

Creating an Ocean Drive in Midtown wouldn’t radically alter the geography of most of the cities venues. Local bars, live music venues, lounges, speakeasies, and wine bars would still flourish all over New York. But mega clubs like the historic Palladium, Roxy and the Limelight, recent venues like Crobar and Lotus and current clubs like Webster Hall and Home need more space, generate more street noise and cause more late night traffic congestion than the smaller venues. Creating an area for them could help isolate the inevitable issues that come up.

There are at least two issues with the current plan, both turn on economics. The first question is “How do mega clubs fit into the future of New York nightlife?” The desire for operators to sink money into a mega club might not be very strong. Real estate costs are still fairly high, even in a recession. Liquor licenses are still a time intensive process that can tie up an investment for up to a year. Operating costs might be prohibitive in this district if patrons are planning to hop from club to club like in New Orleans, but are unwilling to pay substantial covers five or six times in one night. And the ability to pack a mega club with patrons on a consistent basis might be challenging without a point of difference to set them apart from the club next door. Steven Lewis has noticed a dispersal of nightlife from a few large venues to many small ones. In that kind of environment, can a mega club survive?

The second issue has to do with the zoning of the area itself. Ms. Vacca reports that the city is unwilling at this point to rezone the area for a nightlife district. Altering their position may take some time. Even if they succeed, operators run the risk of sinking investment capital into properties in a nightlife district only to find that the area is rezoned for residential once they make the area trendy enough for residential developers. This pattern has played itself out in the Meatpacking District and West Chelsea. Vegas and South Beach have created nightlife zones and maintain that status. If a similar New York zone is going to exist, local government needs to have the same commitment to maintain it.

Neither of these obstacles is insurmountable. A specific nightlife zone could spark growth in nightlife similar to what we saw in the mid 1970’s with the rise of Studio 54. Fresh capital and new ideas like a nightlife zone could be the start of a new age in the nightlife industry.

Have fun.
Gamal

Sin Taxes, Playing Together and Notorious Crimes

Nightlife News for January 21st, 2009

By Gamal Hennessy

Time for a New Sin Tax
David Kesmodel of the Wall Street Journal reported on the growing trend of lawmakers across the country to increase taxes on liquor to lower state budget deficits. While sin taxes have been used in the past for governments to get through lean economic times, New York might want to couple that tax increase with an increase in liquor licenses so that more jobs and more taxes are created at the same time.

Playing Well Together
Heather Murray of Chelsea Now found a positive story in the residents vs. nightlife situation. Cafeteria in Chelsea has been working with neighbors to install sound proof windows, police the area around the building for noise and amateur behavior and early waste removal. The situation offers good ideas to operators trying to peacefully coexist with people living near their venues.

Notorious Crimes Taint Movie Opening
The Gothamist reported that four people were stabbed at a party thrown to celebrate the hip hop film Notorious. In a separate incident, the Times reported that a teenage girl was shot and killed at a teen only party in the same weekend. If the film was supposed to be a cautionary tale about the connection between hip hop, crime and violence the message didn’t get through to every one.

What do you think? Should we support more liquor taxes? What else can venues do to work with communities? What will it take to separate hip hop from violence? Add a comment and let us know.

Have fun.
Gamal

New York Nights: The Year in Review

Over the past year, New York Nights has offered a unique perspective on the issues that affect the culture and business of nightlife. I’m looking forward to offering you more insight and information in 2009 but if you’ve missed any of our weekly features, don’t worry. I’ve provided links to all of them below.

Let me know what you think; what you want to know more about, where you think nightlife is going in the New Year and what you enjoy about NYN. Thank you for all your support and have a great year.

The New York Nights Weekly Recap for March 28, 2008
The New York Nights Weekly Recap for April 4, 2008
The New York Nights Poll: How has the Smoking Ban Affected You?
The New York Nights Weekly Recap for April 11, 2008
The New York Nights Weekly Recap for April 18, 2008
Last Call: A New York Nights Special Report for April 25, 2008
The NYN Weekly Recap for May 2, 2008
The NYN Weekly Recap for May 9, 2008
The New York Nights Insider for May 23, 2008
The New York Nights Insider for May 30, 2008
The New York Nights Insider for June 6, 2008
The New York Nights Insider for June 13, 2008
The New York Nights Insider for June 20, 2008
New York Nights Insider: The Pride Issue
The New York Nights Insider: The Independence Issue
The New York Nights Insider: The Alternative Venue Issue
New York Nights Insider: The Turning Point Issue
New York Nights Insider: The Mid Summer Issue
New York Nights Insider: The Liquor and Sex Issue
NYN Insider: The Down Market Issue
New York Nights Insider: The Image Issue
The NYN Insider: The Common Sense Issue
The New York Nights Insider: The Outside Influence Issue
New York Nights Insider: The End of Summer Issue
NYN Insider: The Down Side Issue \
NYN Insider: The Economy Issue
NYN Insider: The Sub Culture Issue
NYN Insider: The Controversy Issue
NYN Insider: The Woman’ Issue
NYN Insider: The Food and Wine Issue
NYN Insider: The Future Issue
NYN Insider: The Experience Issue (with Election Update!)
NYN Insider: The Crime Issue
NYN Insider: The Election Holiday Issue
NYN Insider: The Music and Fashion Issue
NYN Insider: The Culture Issue
NYN Insider: The Perception Issue

Have fun
Gamal

Did New York Nightlife Lose the Election?

By Gamal Hennessy

Clubs were full last Tuesday night celebrating the historic victory of this country’s first black president and began counting down the final days of our worst president. While the tears and champagne were flowing, few people realized that a new player is also coming to Brooklyn, one with a distinct anti-nightlife platform and powerful supporters. Did the election we celebrated give rise to a new enemy to nightlife?

On Monday I got an email from a nightlife operator with a link to Daniel Squadron’s Nightlife Control Plan. I didn’t know who Mr. Squadron was, but I read his plan and I didn’t like what he had to say. No one involved in nightlife, who has seen the rise in power of the community boards, or understands the arbitrary way some boards operate would take the position that CB’s need to have more power without accountability or capriciously decide that any area has “too many bars” and essentially cripple on of the few industries that can continue to bring revenue into the city during an economic downturn. I came to the conclusion that I didn’t support Mr. Squadron. I also quickly understood that my support didn’t matter all that much. I didn’t live in his district and I only found out about him a day before the election. There was no time to get the word out and mobilize support against his election.

So spent the next few days following Sun Tzu’s advice and started to find out more about the new state senator.

It appears that Daniel Squadron is the son of influential attorney Howard Squadron and the former aide to U.S. Senator Charles Schumer. His campaign against the 30 year incumbent Martin Connor received endorsements both from political heavyweights like Schumer and Mayor Bloomberg and from local community groups seeking change. The following is a comment taken from The Brooklyn Paper

Daniel Squadron has the endorsement of almost all the Williamsburg leaders and newspapers this week. Folks, we need fresh blood. The coming years will see budget cuts because of lower government incomes. We need young fresh faces that have no old liabilities to fight for our rights...Lets all come out en mass and vote Daniel Squadron

It also appears that Mr. Squadron has links to nightlife that pre-date his Nightlife Control Plan. Based on his account given in July of this year, he once owned a nightlife establishment in the city. This should give him an idea of the pressures and difficulties in owning a New York bar. It should also help him understand the perspective on the community boards and police in relation to the clubs.

But if he does understand what nightlife operators are going through, where does the Nightlife Control Plan come from? Why is it worded to help the community boards restrain bars, but doesn’t openly mention actual standards of proof for them? Does his plan offer the venues protection and support, recognize them for the cultural and financial impact they have on the city? Will his plan build on the strides made by police and operators to keep the city safe or will it drive a deeper wedge between the two sides?

Since Daniel Squadron is the elected senator in Lower Manhattan and he does have substantial political allies, it is not inconceivable that his Nightlife Control Plan will evolve into a law. We can hope that the state senate understands the benefits of New York clubs and reject overly stringent controls. We can hope that lobbyist from the nightlife industry deliver the message that nightlife needs support as well as control. And all of us, especially me, can keep a closer eye on the people who claim to speak for our best interests.

Have fun.
Gamal

Are the Clubs Planning to Take on the Cops?

By Gamal Hennessy

The struggle between the nightlife industry in New York and local government might be moving from the blogsphere to the courtroom. A prominent nightlife figure has reported a lawsuit planned by local clubs against the NYPD. Is this the beginning of a new period of freedom for nightlife, or is the struggle about to take a turn for the worst?

The nature of the conflict
In the nightlife blog Good Night Mr. Lewis, Steven Lewis recently wrote that clubs have recently decided to file suit against the police department. According to the post, the clubs will claim that vice cops staged phony drug buys in their venues in an attempt to implicate the club in the crime. The clubs will then claim that the NYPD abused the Nuisance Abatement Laws (NAL) by selectively choosing to enforce the law in a way that would do the most economic damage to the venues. The combination of these acts results in a situation where the police are “ruining lives and business” and violating due process. The damages sought by the clubs in this suit are said to range in the tens of millions of dollars.

These issues have been simmering for some time. Local nightlife leaders have been aware of this problem since the NAL has been more strictly enforced by the police. While they don’t argue the merits of the law, they think the current enforcement of this law is a problem because it is largely politically motivated.

Robert Bookman, the head of the New York Nightlife Association sees an entity behind the police pulling the strings: “Its not police directly but the Civil Enforcement Unit; they’re not talking amongst themselves. The precinct has no control over it [the closings]; the cops who may have given you the underlying summonses have no control over it. There’s a unit called the Civil Enforcement Unit, they’re the ones who get these complaints from the captains, you know, 'This is a place we want you to consider for NAL.' And it’s the attorneys in this unit that put the papers together, who go to court, get the judge to sign it and choose to serve it almost universally on Friday night. Having said all of that, the situation is better now than a year and a half ago.”

The manipulation of the law might go even deeper than the Civil Enforcement Unit. There is a sense in certain sectors of the nightlife industry that larger real estate developers are trying to manipulate the NAL, the community boards, and using other tactics to reduce nightlife in New York City to make room for more housing construction. If the suit is filed, then all these players and their motivations could potentially be brought to light.

Timing is everything
If this situation has been going on for some time, why are the suits being contemplated now? According to the NYNA, the number of NAL closings has gone down since 2007. The police and the NYNA have made progress in working together to make nightlife safer during that period. In the past, individual clubs were reluctant to take action against community boards, police, or city hall because the backlash could close them down through votes against their liquor licenses, more raids or higher scrutiny from the DOH. So why go to court now?

NYN can only speculate on the actual timing of the suit. It is possible that the recent real estate slump and the political concerns swirling around City Hall make this a good time to go on the offensive with the police, whether or not they are initiating the abuse or just pawns for another group. It could be that the clubs found a way to avoid retaliation, giving them more freedom to act. It is also possible that the economic slowdown makes repeated weekend closures under the NAL impossible to absorb. If clubs are closed for too many weekends they might not reopen at all.

New York nightlife needs the NYPD to maintain the safety of its customers and workers. A protracted court battle between the two groups could lead to a more friction that would ultimately be detrimental to the people who enjoy the nightlife lifestyle. Hopefully, the announcement of a potential suit will induce both sides to come to an amicable agreement before the issue gets dragged through the courts. No matter which direction this goes, NYN will continue to follow the story.

Have fun.
Gamal

Bloomberg’s Nightlife Record

By Gamal Hennessy

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is expected to announce plans to run for a third term in office tomorrow. Various groups are weighing in before the official announcement and the outcome will be controversial no matter how it shakes out. Nightlife, as a distinct facet of the city, also needs to consider the implications of Bloomberg’s tenure. What has the mayor done to support or hinder nightlife during his term? Is nightlife better off with a new mayor?

To get a better picture of how the mayor has impacted nightlife recently, NYN went through all of its past coverage to find Bloomberg’s influence, even though all these events cannot be directly tied to him. Here is a sampling of his programs affecting nightlife since 2003.

Supporting the nightlife industry

October 2007: New York Nightlife Association and New York City Police Department create a new plan to improve security conditions after two separate nightclub murders.

October 2007: New York City launches multi-media campaign to attract tourists to various aspects of New York City, including nightlife.

February 2008: NYC expands its free condom offering to bars and restaurants in the face of rising HIV rates.

July 2008: Mayor signaled willingness to rescind the cabaret law, although that willingness has not been backed up by actions at this point.

Opposing the nightlife industry
March 2003: New York City institutes a smoking ban in bars, clubs and restaurants. While smoking rates have gone down citywide and anecdotal evidence suggests that non smokers now go out more, the ban has amplified issues between local residents and clubs.

June 2007: Mayor’s plan for congestion pricing in midtown threatened to create residual traffic jams on nights and weekends when the tax wouldn’t be in effect.

September 2007: Arguments between the city and local taxi drivers over GPS, credit card, TV screens in the back of all cabs boil over into a cab strike.

April 2008: The NYC Department of Health targets select gay clubs for violations while possibly ignoring a majority of others

Real Estate Issues
The mayor enjoys support in the voting community and in the business sector. Their basic argument is that the extraordinary economic times that we live in call for a mayor that has the business experience to see the city through this difficult time.

When you look at how business has fared in New York recently, it is worth noting that the real estate sector, which experienced a boom under Mr. Bloomberg, is in full retreat now after years of wild profit speculation and uncontrolled growth. It also makes sense to point out that the encroachment of residential real estate into formerly commercial areas where nightlife thrived added to the conflict between clubs and local residents who didn’t want to have their illusion suburban quiet disturbed while they slept in the middle of the city. A more balanced investment by the city between more residential real estate and more support for local nightlife might have been the wiser business strategy.

It is easy to see how Mayor Bloomberg’s term in office was more beneficial to New York nightlife than Mayor Giuliani’s, since Rudy would have preferred to close all clubs. It is difficult to say that his impact on New York nightlife has been wholly negative, given some of his actions. It is impossible to tell if nightlife would be given more support to thrive under a new mayor because we don’t know who the opposing candidate might be. But it is possible to see that he is willing to impose his own lifestyle on others and circumvent or rewrite laws to achieve his goals. If that kind of brazen cowboy attitude to power fails miserably on a national level with Bush/Cheney, what makes us think it will work better on a city level?

Have fun.
Gamal

Source: Michael Barbaro: New York Times

Give us your opinion on what’s going on. Use the comments space below to tell people what you think.

What’s Going on Inside the Box?

By Gamal Hennessy

The future looks uncertain for the downtown cabaret known as The Box. Once seen as a symbol of a new era in nightlife, it quickly became known for celebrity bottle service and risqué burlesque shows. Now it is under attack from local residents and its own staff. Will it weather the current storm? Do we want it to?

Originally conceived as dinner theater and not a club, The Box opened in offering high priced sexually charged performances like “Twincest” from the Porcelain Twinz and other members of the Hammerstein Beauties. It quickly became a magnet for celebrities and celebrity watchers.

But less than two years after its opening, the club (or if you prefer dinner theater) is under siege. From the outside, community board 3 has made threats against its liquor license, claiming that the traffic problems and noise that the Box generates make it undesirable. From the inside, there are threats of a lawsuit from the Twinz who claim the Box has “…unsafe working conditions, prostitutes on staff, in house drug dealing, open drug use throughout the club, and coerced sex with management as a condition of continued employment…”

The owners of the Box have issued a public defense of what they describe as their creative practices, and they are working with the community board to resolve the outstanding issues before their application goes back before the board in October. While a member of the board has stated that the possible employment suit is brought to the attention of the State Liquor Authority, it is not brought before the board in relation to the license.

Is the Box a victim of disgruntled workers and anti-social residents? Or is it an abusive pit of sex and drugs? Or is it both? The problem with cases like the Box is that the truth is often at the mercy of personal perception and it might be impossible to find out. New York Nights is an advocate of the nightlife industry, but we only support venues that add to the quality of nightlife in the city. Clubs that leave our nightlife open to public attack need to close. Anti-nightlife advocates create their own reasons for wanting clubs closed. We don’t have to help them by playing into their stereotypes.

Have fun.
Gamal

Source: Allen Salkin: New York Times

Give us your opinion on what’s going on. Use the comments space below to tell people what you think.

The Age of Drinking

By Gamal Hennessy

The Amethyst Initiative released a statement recently calling for a discussion on the drinking age in America. Battle lines were drawn immediately between the college students who felt that the current law led to dangerous binge drinking and the opponents who claim lowering the drinking law will increase binge drinking. The debate has focused on college campuses, but nightlife has a stake in this debate as well. Does it make sense to set the drinking age at 21? Should it be lowered? Should it be raised? Should drinking be based on age at all?

The Problem
The Amethyst Initiative, which is made up of college presidents and chancellors from around the country, claims that the current drinking age creates segregated communities on campus. The 21-25 group drinks on a regular basis in bars, restaurants and other places liquor is served. Since the 18-20 group can’t legally drink they pre-party heavily to compensate. This binge drinking leads to a host of problems. It promotes to criminal activity to get liquor to causes alcohol poisoning and other health problems once the liquor is consumed.

Officials from various government and civic organizations like Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) claim that the Amethyst Initiative ignores proven data on the benefits of legal drinking at 21. They say a lower drinking age will lead to more alcohol related fatalities and simply push the age of binge drinking down to the high school level. They have also exerted pressure on members of the initiative to withdraw their support.

The Nightlife Impact
Nightclubs and bars have a vested interest in the drinking age law. Once schools open again for the fall semester, the clubs will be teeming with drinkers. Some of them won’t be 21. These are the places that underage drinkers try to get into after the pre-party. These are the places that have to deal with fake IDs. Would it be easier for everyone if the same person who can go to college, get a license, and drive to the club also be allowed to drink there?

From an economic standpoint, there might be short term gains for nightclubs. There would be more potential people coming in and drinking, which means more money for the club. There would be less need for security to check ID’s at the door, which would free them up for other tasks (like dealing with the drunks who are already inside). There would be fewer violations for serving underage patrons, which could lead to fewer threats to liquor licenses since every violation goes on record against the club when it wants to renew its license.

However, the public relations impact outweighs the economic benefit. New York nightlife is already under attack in various parts of the city by community boards, police and possibly real estate interests. It doesn’t need to draw additional fire from MADD or other politically influential groups. It might take just one incident of a 20 year old girl being injured or killed to spark a new crusade against clubs. It probably wouldn’t matter if she was drunk before she got to the club or if she was even in or near the club when the incident occurred. The story would be about a young girl killed after going to a nightclub. The details would probably be missed.

New York Nights supports debate on issues like the relationship between age and drinking, but we don’t feel that lowering the drinking age would benefit New York Nightlife.

Have fun.
Gamal

Housing Slump Could Help New York Clubs

By Gamal Hennessy

There are several new buildings going up in areas that were once very hospitable for nightlife. From the Lower East Side to the Meatpacking District to Grammercy Park to West Chelsea, new buildings are rising every month. Even though the prices for New York real estate are extreme, we’ve largely been spared from the effects of the national housing slump up to now. Some have tied the increase in luxury residences to increased conflict between residents and certain clubs. But the money for condos and co-ops is starting to dry up. Does this mean that there will be fewer calls for nightclub closures and more opportunity for nightlife real estate?

Background

The amount of residential real estate in New York has risen steadily since 2001 when commercial firms moved out of the city following the terrorist attacks. More demand led to increase desire for space. The weakening of the national housing market as a result of the sub prime crisis did little to decrease demand in New York, primarily because financial professionals and foreign buyers taking advantage of the weak dollar continued to buy. As real estate developers looked for more space to build, nightlife venues became attractive targets and the nightlife community became an obstacle to their growth. Some nightlife professionals have suggested that the influx of upscale residents has created an oppressive atmosphere for clubs.

The struggle between residents and nightlife wasn’t created by the housing boom. Clubs can contribute to traffic, noise and incidents requiring a police presence. Previous residents have been vocal about their needs in the past. The difference between the previous situation and the current one is that some luxury residents actively attempt to change the nature of the neighborhoods that they have paid so much to live in. Using the liquor licensing process as a tool, nightclubs and bars have been closed, forced to operate with reduced hours, or they haven’t been able to open at all.

New Situation

But the residential real estate market in New York might be following the rest of the country. Sales to foreign buyers, which recently accounted for up to 33% of new condo sales, is falling. Hedge fund managers and other financial professionals aren’t getting the bonuses that traditionally spurred purchasing. This means that many of the buildings going up today might not have a long list of buyers when they are finished.

What does this mean for New York nightlife? The results might not be immediately apparent. Clubs will still have to work with community boards and current residents who have moved into club neighborhoods. The rents that bars and clubs have to pay will continue to eat up a significant chunk of revenue, which means bottle service and other things we pay for will reflect those prices. But it could mean that there is less desire to convert club spaces into condos and an increased recognition of the continuing economic strength of clubs. Unlike most other types of commercial activity, New York nightlife attracts visitors and money from all over the world and will continue to do so even as the housing market dries up.

Have fun.
Gamal