[Neighbors] Proposed liquor license variations - Hit the specific problems please

Wed Sep 14 10:18:29 MDT 2016

Spencer - I agree we should stick to the specific issue here - which is: why is our NHNA Board considering a proposal to change a law that will make a portion of Nob Hill (Girard to Carlisle) different from every other neighborhood in the city, except for Downtown. 

The current distance rule that is designed to protect schools and churches from establishments that sale alcohol has been in affect for decades and has not adversely affected the proliferation of bars, etc. along Central Avenue. Why does it need to change now? 

And Charlie, I do believe you should be concerned about this proposal, because if the liquor attorneys who are pushing this waiver here are successful in Nob Hill. It will make it easier for them to move it down Central to your neighborhood in the future, if they see a need. 

Again please stick to the specific issue. Why does this law need to be changed now? 

Susan 

      From: Spencer <spencer at swcp.com>
 To: Charlie Bennett <CB4inNM at gmail.com> 
Cc: Pat Davis <patdavis at cabq.gov>; Sean Foran <seanforan at cabq.gov>; "neighbors at nobhill-nm.com" <neighbors at nobhill-nm.com>; NobHill NA Board <theboard at nobhill-nm.com>; Ron Halbgewachs <ronhalbgewachs at peoplepc.com>; Susan Michie <sgm150 at ymail.com>
 Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 8:37 PM
 Subject: Re[2]: [Neighbors] Proposed liquor license variations - Hit the specific problems please

#yiv0481208575 blockquote.yiv0481208575cite {margin-left:5px;margin-right:0px;padding-left:10px;padding-right:0px;border-left:1px solid #cccccc;}#yiv0481208575 blockquote.yiv0481208575cite2 {margin-left:5px;margin-right:0px;padding-left:10px;padding-right:0px;border-left:1px solid #cccccc;margin-top:3px;padding-top:0px;}#yiv0481208575 .yiv0481208575plain pre, #yiv0481208575 .yiv0481208575plain tt {font-family:monospace;font-size:100%;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;}#yiv0481208575 a img {border:0px;}#yiv0481208575 body {font-family:Tahoma;font-size:12pt;}#yiv0481208575 .yiv0481208575plain pre, #yiv0481208575 .yiv0481208575plain tt {font-family:Tahoma;font-size:12pt;}Charlie, Thanks for your analysis. There could be a way if people are persistent.  The City does provide a police force. And where the officers patrol is up to the police administration. The City also requires business licenses and fees for those licenses, and even has special provisions and taxes associated with specific types of businesses like pawnbrokers and hotels. So it could also be possible to have special provisions for businesses that sell alcoholic drinks which results in payments that could pay for police officers associated with troublesome locations.  Or we could all just take reality into account and decide to each pay a little more for a quantity of police patrols that annoys the drunks and criminals enough to calm things down. Of course, over the years, APD has done special actions in our neighborhood that have resulted in great short-term improvement. They know how. We need to keep this issue on the burner continuously. We won't have an increased police force for years, but APD has some choices each night that officers go out to their jobs. Spencer Nelson   ------ Original Message ------From: "Charlie Bennett" <CB4inNM at gmail.com>To: "Spencer" <spencer at swcp.com>Cc: "Pat Davis" <patdavis at cabq.gov>; "Sean Foran" <seanforan at cabq.gov>; "neighbors at nobhill-nm.com" <neighbors at nobhill-nm.com>; "NobHill NA Board" <theboard at nobhill-nm.com>; "Ron Halbgewachs" <ronhalbgewachs at peoplepc.com>; "Susan Michie" <sgm150 at ymail.com>Sent: 9/13/2016 7:41:55 PMSubject: Re: [Neighbors] Proposed liquor license variations - Hit the specific problems please Spencer. 
None of which is enforceable under City Ordinance or State Statute, in my opinion.  This City has no legal requirement to be socially responsible and it is not addressed in ordinance or code.  Historically, promises during hearings aren't worth the air or ink used to express them.  Any promises from the applicant must be contractual to be considered serious, i.e. a written contract with stated means of enforcement and a method of remediation if the contract is broken.  Anything less is just smoke.
Do remember the rules of the ZHE and EPC:  "It is the burden of the applicant to prove that their project will not be injurious to the adjoining community."  That's the only argument any community has available to them and it's the only one they'll need, all the way to District Court. This comes from a number of successes by Nancy Bearce for our neighborhood and a few others, one involving Moe Chavez's firm.
Do not let this go down the path of State Statute. Since 2006, the Directors of NM Div. of Alcohol & Gaming (AGD) have been political plants chosen by the liquor lobby, one of which is of council to Moe Chavez.  As of 2006, AGD is governed by Rules made by that Division and an advisory board made up of lobbyists.  These Rules are commonly used to circumvent Statute, particularly regarding the number of licenses sold in any particular County.
Again, in my opinion, the only other recourse any community has are metro elections.

Just sayin'Charlie BennettLa Mesa Community Improvement Association

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 5:16 PM, Spencer via Neighbors_nobhill-nm <neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com> wrote:

Pat & Neighbors, The issue of liquor sales near churches seems irrelevant when it comes to the actual problems the neighborhood has had with some drink sales. Most of the actual problems are rowdy people coming out of bars, car crimes related to patrons' cars parked along dark streets late at night, and DWI. So why not try to push for a conditional use tied to granting any alcoholic drink sales, one that requires the business operator to provide neighborhood security until an hour after the business closes? That "security" could be hiring or paying-for actual police officers to continuously patrol the area within a quarter mile radius of the establishment. The rule could allow businesses that are close together, say within the same quarter mile radius, to share the cost for an officer. That would give them some incentive to pool resources.  Right now, liquor selling businesses will claim amazing compliance and security within their walls, but feel no official responsibility for patrons' actions once they leave. That may be a good legal stand, but mighty crumby when it comes to social responsibility and it doesn't recognize the reality of late night drink sales. This would be a tough road to go down, but it sure would be worth it. --Spencer Nelson    
______________________________ _________________
Neighbors_nobhill-nm mailing list
Neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman. swcp.com
http://mailman.swcp.com/cgi- bin/mailman/listinfo/ neighbors_nobhill-nm

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.swcp.com/pipermail/neighbors_nobhill-nm/attachments/20160914/a6308341/attachment.html>