Make Your Voice Heard On Chinatown Market’s Liquor License Renewal Application

Not to be contrary because I do also hate the loitering and public drunkeness and the uncomfortable feeling you get walking by, but maybe the issue is less with what the market is selling and more with the city not doing anything about those people who are clearly in violation of the law. Last time I checked, sleeing drunk in the street or urinating on a building or loitering is illegal. Getting rid of their liquor license is an easy one I suppose, but to me, it is the wrong one. We should be appealing to the city to get the trash off the street. If they can’t hang around there because its illegal, maybe the market would have to close on its own since its business would dwindle. I just think the market should have the right to sell what it wants. To regulate it because of how people act after frequenting it is punishing the wrong people.

I think the idea is that the market, which sells the alcohol, is not being a responsible neighbor. The market should be making *some* effort to, say, call the police for loitering or public urination. Instead, the market spray paints a message on the front wall and goes home for the night.

People only loiter outside establishments that tacitly allow them to loiter. And while they are happy to take the people’s money, they aren’t willing to help the neighborhood at all.

Since when do they have some sort of social responsiblity to regulate activities on public sidewalks? I dont see the connection. As a neighbor, why aren’t you calling the police and saying, hey this bum is drunk and is peeing on my building? It’s no more their responsibility to regulate that activity than you or me or anyone.

Yes, it would be nice if they would want to clean up their corner of the block, but I don’t see how you cut off their liquor license for something that ultimately is not their responsibility any more than it is yours or mine.

This city has to stop with this socialist mentality that private businesses have some moral responsibility to the people they serve. They have not violated anyone’s rights by serving their liquor. As much as I hate the trash, I refuse to support the idea that private business should be an open target for government regulation. These are the same types of arguments that say bars and clubs shouldn’t be allowed to stay open certain hours of the night or serve liquor because the people leaving them are loud. Hello people! It’s the people leaving who are being disruptive, not the bar itself. That owner of that bar has no more control over the people on the street than you or I do. Let’s just shut the entire city down and stay home and knit.

I totally agree that it is the patrons who are responsible for their activities, not the business owners, and not the residents.

I think the issue is, if someone loiters on my doorstep, I can call the police because it’s my doorstep. I can’t call the police to complain about someone loitering on someone else’s doorstep. I’m not asking Chinatown Market to keep an eye on things 1 or 2 blocks away. I’m talking about activity directly outside of their windows.

Isn’t the real purpose of liquor licenses to give the residents some leverage over the businesses that attract drunken behavior?

I’m not anti-business, but I also do not believe that a business can crap on a neighborhood and expect residents to be happy about it.

our president of 6th Street Flats has made it her personal mission to fight the renewal of CM’s liquor license. She has attended all of the hearings, gathered signatures from residents to petition not renewing the license, reached out to 400 Mass Ave, The Cosmo, and our ANC Commish to join the cause . . . and has generally put alot of energy into this issue. So almost all residents on the block are plugged into this issue.

Carrie B, this is all a little dance to force CM to stop single-can beer sales. At the meeting I attended, the CM owner allowed he would stop these single-can sales if the other 2 liquor stores in the area would stop selling singles as well. So probably his liquor license will be renewed, just with certain conditions going forward.

As for CM not being responsible for public drunkeness/peeing . . . After intense pressure, CM agreed not to sell any more miniture flower pots . . . which when the end is broken off, is commonly used for a crackpipe. I think CM did the “socially responsible” thing there, and I hope they continue to . . .

dave: Thanks for the note! I am a bit confused with Cynthia’s response to one of my emails: “ANC 6C was dismissed from the protest and denied reconsideration for failure to file a letter which stated the grounds for the protest.”

Your note seems to indicate the opposite.

Since some of us are residents of the “other ANC,” we are not plugged into your efforts!

I am totally appalled that there is an effort here to basically put a local market out of business. i would fear the worst aspects of gentrification with such an effort to drive a local store out of business because it is a remnant of the “former” neighborhood. lets face it, we’re the newcomers here, and this is an evolutionary process. there are examples of much more collaborative efforts in other gentrifying areas where the community has worked with store owners to get them to stop selling singles, appeal to a more diverse clientele, and reasonable efforts to be more responsive to the growing community. if the true goal of the efforts is to pressure the owners to reform their ways, rather than effectively put them out of business, then i am willing to be a bit more sympathetic.

It’s been established that the liquor license process is not a tool to shut down a business – it is a tool to bring a business to the discussion table. Don’t jump to conclusions. The Sept 6 hearing is even appropriately named a “status hearing.”

i know that the first hearing for the renewal was back in February, and our ANC6C Commish. Charlie Doctor attended the hearing. To tell you the truth, I’ve since not been up on any further developments.

Anon 6:19:42, maybe you’ll feel better to learn the latest liquor license revocation was to the new Pearl club instead of to the incumbent CM? no gentrification in that case, just some vile facts, if you read the order.

http://newsroom.dc.gov/list.aspx/agency/abra

When was that picture taken? I think that’s the least number of people standing outside CM that I’ve ever seen.

Scott: Thanks for noticing! I got up at about 6am to take this pic (talk about dedication). I was trying to get a pic with absolutely no one in it, but I’ll settle for one person.

Call the freaking useless police. Oh wait, they are too busy to bother with such unimportant matters.

Lay off the liqour stores. I like to have them around when I need them. Rather, make the stinking police do their freaking jobs or have them fired!

“Oh, but the drunk might puke on me and I might get the scabies if I handle him.” Tough sh$t dude. You didn’t study hard when you had a chance, now this is your job! Get used to it. I pay your salary and I will have you removed if you don’t perform.

An angry DC voter, John of NE.

A business has zero responsibilities to its neighbors so long as they aren’t violating the law…and Chinese Market isn’t violating a law because people choose to loiter. You have every right to call about loitering on the street…you’re the one with the problem with it…why can’t you call? If you can’t, neither can Chinese Market. It’s the most absurd argument for withholding a liquor license I’ve ever heard. Oh we don’t like the people who patronize your business so we’re going to shut you down. It violates pretty much every principle of free markets, capitalism and freedom in general you can come up with. Absurd.

Think about what you’re doing before you advocate something like that. You give the DC government power it has no right to have…your personal preferences have no right to interfere with Chinese Market. If you and the “neighborhood” don’t like the business there or those who patronize it, I suggest you purchase it and close it down. Until you own it, in my opinion you can’t tell them who they can serve or not serve.

Also, one more thing, liquor licensing should not be used as a tool of persuasion such as you all suggest. The ANCs in this city make me sick. Again, considering this is our nation’s capital, it’s probably the least “free” place in the United States. People can’t conduct their business without their neighbors dictating how they do it. You live in a freaking city, not Fairfax. If you want less noise and less of those in an unfortunate socioeconomic class in your neighborhood, I suggest you bridge and tunnel it across the river. It’s perfectly reasonable to ask that your neighborhood be safe and if businesses CHOOSE to be socially responsible, terrific for them, but frankly, your personal preferences on the types of people you should have to encounter in public is of no interest to me or Chinese Market, nor should it be. If someone is doing something illegal, call the cops. Don’t wait for Chinese Market to have to do it. There is ZERO rationale for asking a liquor store to limit the types of liquor it sells simply because the people who drink it are going to do it on the street. Its the DC Police Department’s responsibility to regulate how people act on the sidewalk, not any particular business or resident. THINK people, please, about how irrational your arguments are. Liquor licenses should be revoked/withheld or whatever when the business isn’t following the law. If Chinese Market pays their taxes, sells to only people who legally they should, WHO IN THE WORLD are you to dictate how it does business? Insanity.

GPLiving,

Your blog used to be a nice little site I used to keep up with the cool places and events popping up in ourneighborhood. Now, it’s anti-noise, anti-small business rants have turned this site into a forum for everything a true city dweller despises.

What gives?!

I moved into this neighborhood before MCI center was approved and have seen broad development throughout our neighborhood. When the CM uproar first began, my feelings were mixed (even I have purchased single beers)and did not think that the new development should push out older businesses who were doing nothing more than what they have been selling for years. Thanks to the good work of my neighbors, they have stopped selling the crack-pipes and have agreed to stop selling single beers if their competitors stop selling single beers. So, this reflects some willingness to change to meet the needs of our changing neighborhood.

However, the perspective offerred by some that the business has no responsibility for the acts of its customers once they step out the front door is wrong. By virtue of having a business license and a liquor license the owner has accepted a set of rules that must be met in order to keep the license. With his customers drinking from open containers, making liberal use of the block as a public restroom, and the selling of singles to those already inebriated, the owner is violating the spirit of the license, the basis for the license, and is not being a good nieghbor. Moreover, CM has become the source of the problem on 6th and H Street.

I agree that CM does not have any social responsibility to the community. If all businesses took a social responsible role, we would not need laws, ANC’s, or enforcement. However, this does not mean that neighbors should not take action against those who are bad neighbors. CM is not obligated to be a socially responsiblle nieghbor just as they do not have a particular right to induce the problems they attract. Suggesting that this is a problem that the city or police should handle is putting it back on taxpayers and will not solve the problem.

I would like to see this site start to organize people to do something positive about the numerous shelters in the neighborhood. The fact is the sheltered population is too dense in our neighborhood, and city planners from any city around the country would say that we need to spread these out amoungst the whoe city rather than in just one small neighborhood. Is there any energy out there to take on this issue?

Ah, now I see Carrie B. You think that we haven’t been calling the police. You should know that we HAVE been 911ing folks who drink on our perch, we’ve arrested a trespasser, and we have a restraining order on another guy.

But calling the police hasn’t helped deter bad behavior. So . . . now what? Just keep on calling the police? Seems to me that would be the “absurd” thing to do . . .

Trust me Carrie B, dialing 911 to report a loitering drunk is much easier than taking time off work to attend an ANC meeting to formally protest, or taking time off from work to attend a mediation session with CM to try to work out an agreement. So it’s not that easy as you suggest, and we’re not being lazy bullies.

Trust me: I for one am not looking to put CM out of business. My desparate liver still frequents the corner for ice and Lite, as it is the closest store. If they would replace their single cans with Stella and Guiness, they’d make even more money off of me.

That’s still an absurd argument. A business owner never has a responsibility to do anything but follow the law. The law does not require that they monitor what happens around their business if it is not their property, nor should it any more than it requires you to do so. Again, you are solely placing the responsibility and blame on a business that has zero control over its customers once those customers exit their property. If you don’t like that they are “socially irresponsible business owners,” don’t conduct business there and urge others not to as well. To assume they owe you or the neighborhood anything other than to follow the law is beyond presumptuous and frankly just wrong. If we didn’t have “laws”, then loitering and public urination wouldn’t be illegal and you’d have zero complaint. But we do have laws. Those activities as well as smoking crack are illegal. It is not Chinese Market’s responsibility any more than its mine or yours to enforce those laws. We are simply required to obey them. It’s the government’s responsibility to enforce them. The issue here is that the cops are never going to enforce laws against loitering and public urination because they have other things to deal with. Sad, but true. And since you are powerless to stop it, you’d rather require someone else equally uninvolved to do it because this city actually listens to ANCs for whatever reason. You don’t have to like Chinese Market and I would applaud them if they decided to be more forceful about cleaning up the corner voluntarily (it might be a good decision for them because maybe we as neighbors would frequent their establishment more often), but I do not think you or I or the DC ABC commission has any right to withhold their right to conduct business because they don’t take an active part in enforcing the law on property that does not belong to them. It makes zero sense. If the area is changing so much, the business model for such establishments will as well simply because they cannot survive if they don’t. The market will handle Chinese Market one way or the other. We certainly don’t need uppity neighbors immorally preventing someone from running their own business within the bounds of the law.

I think market forces will eventually cause Chinatown Market to change its practices. Back in 2000, I lived in Logan Circle and bought wine from a guy behind bullet proof glass. Today, that same store (with the same owner) has remodeled, taken down the glass and offers a great selection.

I can understand everyone’s concerns, but I have to agree with Urbandweller. I love this site because it celebrates the great things about our neighborhood. I would hate to see this site become an online citizen’s association where people just complain about tacky signs or noise. We already have the Penn Quarter Neighborhood Association (though I have no idea who they are, how they get elected or what they do).

Dave –
never called you lazy or a bully and didn’t mean that if it came off that way. I simply said in regards to what happens on the streets in your neighborhood, you have no real argument to require a business to clean up the streets. You can certainly appeal to them to change their practices. I just loathe the way this city bows requires such things in order to do business in the city, especially in this case where it is no one’s responsibility but hte city to enforce the laws. Again, because the legal way of doing things doesn’t work does not make complaining as an ANC to the ABC Commission to withhold a liquor license based on what happens outside of the store the right thing to do either. This isn’t an HOA like you’d find in Fairfax. This is a city. The good thing is the decision still has to be made by the DC government and while I have my doubts any logic will be applied to the argument, I hope that the city will realize that they are the responsible party in regards to public loitering and other activities and not the local businesses. CVS is not required to do anything about all the people who loiter on their corner. I cannot stand the CVS on 7th and H (thank God for the new one on 4th and H) but I don’t expect CVS to do anything about those who go in and out of there and hang out around their store. It’s not their problem. They have however lost me as a customer and honestly, in the scheme of things, that’s what changes the neighborhood because then it does become their problem.

There’s a timeline on all this anyway. Chinese Market will eventually be sold and a nice shiny new TJ Maxx or TGIFridays or some other suburban monstrosity will replace it.

Agreed, Andy. And thanks to Dave for posting the info about Pearl’s license being revoked. I read the ABC’s order in that case, and there was some scary stuff there.

I am a big believer in free markets, CB, but remember that there have always been restrictions on the sale of controlled substances (like alcohol). Centuries of common law in free-market countries have shown that merchants of controlled substances are somewhat responsible for how those substances are consumed. It’s illegal to serve a person alcohol when they are obviously intoxicated, for instance. The ability to sell alcohol does come with some form of social contract because of how alcohol can be (ab)used.

But has CM ever been busted for serving people who are intoxicated? Have they any violations of the LAW on the books? If so, as I have argued (to no end evidently), then their license should be up for consideration. If not, then your assumptions that they are doing these things are not important. We do live in a place where you’re innocent until proven guilty. People peeing on the street who MAY have bought liquor at a store when they MAY have been drunk to begin with is not a substantial argument. If CM cares about their liquor license, it is in their best interest to not get caught breaking the law. So until the laws are actually being enforced, there is no genuine argument to withhold their license. It boils down to the fact that you don’t like the people who patronize the liquor store there and hang out on the street. Fine, you’re entitled to that opinion.

As for being overserved in a bar, you are absolutely right. There are laws that require a bar to not overserve its patrons (though even those I question to some degree), but you’d also have to actually prove that you drank only at that bar and that you had enough to drink there that the bar is held responsible for your actions when you left the bar. Again, it would also require that the people in charge of enforcing the law charge them with breaking it. In the case of CM, they aren’t breaking the law so far as any argument that has been made here would hint at. I’m not saying every business should be free of regulation. I just think regulation by the government should be limited and only in cases where the rights of people are being violated. I have not heard one argument here that would say to me that CM is responsible for how the people on the street behave.

Here is some more information about what items our liquor stores are selling: A Fake Rose In A Glass Tube Gives Root To Illegal Activity.

Also, here is info about Ward 8’s campaign to straighten up their liquor stores. (Scroll down to “Anti – Drug Paraphernalia Campaign Targets Liquor Stores”)

Oh yes, let’s preserve the block’s historic character and charm. We wouldn’t want to get in the way of a local business’ ability to sell crack pipes. (Maybe that is one of the areas local businesses can beat the big national chains on! The Bed Bath & Beyonds and Trader Joes of the world have completely ignored the crack pipe market.)

I think we all have to acknowledge that noone is ENTITLED to liquor license. It is regulated and we place additional restrictions and responsibilities on businesses that are granted a liquor license. That particular corner is a blight in the neighborhood. but I am a bit appalled that we are going to take away a family’s primary means of support because we don’t like who they sell beer to.

Frankly, I have had more problems with the belligerent white drunks that come stumbling out of Coyote Ugly than the unkempt black drunks around the CM. I suspect that if the corner market were selling singles to cleancut white guys (even if they were drunk), we would be having a different conversation.

If we think we can exert enough political pressure to shut down that store, why can’t we exert enough political pressure to put a cop on that corner? Why don’t we all go there and buy our groceries and show them that they can support their family by converting to a deli grocery or even a reasonably good wine shop. The least we can do is engage Chinese community leaders to mediate a discussion with them and treat them with a little respect instead of threatening their livelihood.

I disagree with those who are arguing that this is a class, race, or even a gentrification issue. Public intoxication is more than loitering–it creates a variety of safety issues, including the safety of the intoxicated people who may be mentally ill, homeless, or otherwise in need of assistance. We don’t owe any deference to a business owner who is contributing to the problem merely because the owner is making their living off other people’s misfortune.

My spouse and I both sent in letters yesterday–how are you calculating the total of letters sent in? Are we supposed to be notifying you?

anon: I just counted your letter in the tally. Yes, people are notifying us when a letter is sent in. If we aren’t notified, then our tally isn’t updated.

If this isn’t a class/race/gentrification issue then why isn’t there a public uproar over the crowd of loud obvnoxious druhnks that roll out of various bars in the neighborhood on the weekends? Like I said, I’ve had far more trouble with belligerent barhoppers than the people outside of CM.

I certainly agree that we need to solve the problem and I can agree that there is a difference between having a bunch of alcoholic vagrants hanging out on the corner and having obnoxious people in the neighborhood because there is an active nightlife in the area. But I do not see evidence that our first reaction was something other than “Do what we want or we’ll complain so loudly that they will yank your license” Shouldn’t our first reaction have been to engage these people? Is it too late for this or are we basically stuck in an intractible adversarial mode?

Anon: We do have some additional information on the topic, but it’s not appropriate to post online. The general idea is that the owner of the market has been extremely uncooperative with both the MPD and the ANC over the past year.

“Your blog used to be a nice little site I used to keep up with the cool places and events popping up in ourneighborhood. Now, it’s anti-noise, anti-small business rants have turned this site into a forum for everything a true city dweller despises.”

Ditto!

I am the only seated protestant in the Chinatown Market liquor license renewal. I represent about 50 concerned individuals from the community including a number of Chinese property owners and residents. Unfortunately, I was not able to gain an even greater number of supporters from the Chinese community because many are afraid of the owner. After meeting him, you would understand why. So many things have been brought up and lots of misinformation so I will try to address as many of these issues as I can. First, CM breaks the law all the time. He continues to serve alcohol to clearly intoxicated persons which has even resulted in assaults within the store! While it is not illegal for people to congregate in public space, it is illegal for them to “aggressively panhandle” and urinate, he permits this on his property. He has told me that he feels no need to do anything to stop this behavior. He usually starts to scream at me that it is “the black people” and it is not his problem. Too bad he won’t ever say that in front of the alcohol board.

As for the ANC, the ANC wrote their protest letter incorrectly and were dismissed. The ANC has continued to attend hearings, but are not seated. 400 Mass Ave had the same problem.

As for social responsibility, all I have to say is 70% of his business is single beer sales. We all know that the patrons of this type of alcohol tend to be the homeless. His business is making a bad problem worse. We have tried to talk to him about other business ideas. Perhaps more groceries or lunch snacks or more wine. He refused.

I have also had several meetings with the local police. Before I even started working on this issue, they had spoken with him many times about the problems to which he is contributing. Nothing. I have gotten the corner on the special notice board at the AL police office and arrests have gone up.

Anyway, I could go on and on about meetings and lawyers, etc.

The next hearing is October 4th because I will be out of town on the original September 6th date that was mentioned on this blog.

dawn: Thank you *very* much for writing in! I think our first question to you would be: What can we do to help?

Also, please feel free to email us at gpliving (at) gmail.com if you want to brainstorm.

Thanks!

I think the loitering outside of CM and the CVS at H and 7th is partly due to the metro bus stops at these same locations.

With that said, I think the “NO PEE” graffiti is offensive and should be scrubbed off.

I live in the Meridian at Gallery Place building and see men urinate on the back of the Lung Association building every day. I shouldn’t have to put up with that either and please don’t tell me to “close my blinds”.

It’s not just CM. We should really target other single-can sellers in the area.

I’m wondering if the City’s Graffiti removal service would remove the notice.

Anyone want to call them up?

I had gotten a little depressed due to the lack of progress that I have been able to make on this issue. I started working on this project last October and after a dozen meetings with lawyers, Chinatown Market’s owners, alcohol board, ANC, the local police, the BID, etc. I was starting to give up, but knowing that there a people out there who are sending in letters to the alcohol board makes me hopeful. I am going to inform the attorney who works on behalf of the CM about this progress and I will let you all know if this additional pressure results in any attitude changes.

Forcing the store out of business strikes me as the nuclear option. Has anyone tried to negotiate with the owner? Amazing that there is is a loitering problem considering the number of police I see walking around there. I’ll back CB on this one. None of this probably matters long run. Some high-end coffeeshop will take that spot and bring in the laptop latte set. You know, the people who occupy the tables for as long as they can get away with it. They’re far less obnoxious.

my main concern is the sale of single can beers in general for the neighborhood. while i do not back CM, i would rather gpliving’s title link be named something other than Chinatown Market Protest Letter. a bit too specific and inflamatory, IMHO.

anyone notice that Chinatown Market’s liquor license has been suspended?