Thursday, July 14, 2011

Monday Vote Will Decide License Renewals

Owners of two troubled liquor license establishments will learn their fate Monday based on hearings held by the City Council last night.

Acting as the local Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, the governing body heard testimony regarding what attorney David Minchello called “an alarming number of calls” over the past year to Pueblo Viejo, a West Front Street restaurant and bar. Representing the city, Minchello asked Lt. Brian Newman to detail incidents of theft, underage drinking, assault, drug possession and other infractions that brought police to the premises 116 times.

Representing owner Taufik Palacios, attorney Richard Clayton told the council, “We have taken considerable measures to try to prevent incidents,” including monitoring with 80 cameras.

The bar has a capacity of 500 to 600 people and Palacios said a typical crowd numbers about 400.

Newman said he would like to see conditions imposed including screening patrons at the door, increasing security, no serving of alcohol on an outside veranda, security inside the bathrooms and more training for staff on not serving intoxicated persons.

After Newman gave details on 16 incidents, Clayton repeatedly asked whether he had personally been present. But Corporation Counsel Dan Williamson emphasized that the reports themselves were official documents.

In his testimony, Palacios said people were buying liquor at illegal 24-hour houses, showing up at his bar intoxicated and arguing with screeners at door over showing identification, saying they didn’t have to do it elsewhere. He also alluded to gang activity and “people in the parking lot with machetes,” but Williamson reined him in, saying, “We’ve gotten way off track.”

The hearing refocused on what Palacios needed to do at his own premises to get his license renewed and he agreed to most of the terms, balking only at having a drug-sniffing dog because it would not be allowed at the restaurant. Minchello refuted Palacios’ claim that the veranda was part of the building and thus covered under terms of his license.

After more discussion of possible conditions on the license renewal, Clayton said his client would do whatever needed to be done.

The second hearing took far less than the two hours spent on Pueblo Viejo, in part because an attorney for Clinton Deli owner Vadrajan Naicken did not show up. After a brief recess, Clayton offered to help Naicken out, as he faced the possibility of closure if the council made no decision by Monday. Williamson suggested the council could also decide based on police documents.

Naicken said he could not afford to be closed and Williamson asked Minchello to provide some recommendations on conditions for his license renewal.

Minchello said there were 254 police calls to the Clinton Deli and Sgt. Kevin O’Brien said a series of police reports included sale of alcohol to minors, drug possession, fights, assaults weapons offenses and sale of loose cigarettes. He said the most disturbing report to himself and the Police Division was that drugs were found on several occasions “beneath the ice cream freezer” within the store, where ice cream and candy were sold to children.

O’Brien said police recommendations for the Clinton Deli, which is on a large lot, were security cameras inside and out, more cooperation from the owner because “people are breaking the law on the property,” and staff on hand to deter drug use inside and outside the deli.

Naicken agreed to inside security and more cooperation, but said he could not afford to have either off-duty police or armed security guards.

“Then we have a problem,” Minchello said. “These calls are serious.”

“These incidents will not happen again,” Naicken vowed, asking for “six months’ probation.”

Williamson, having previously described the site as a high crime area, said he would not like to see Naicken himself attempt to move neighborhood people off the lot. But he said, “The message has to be clear, that there has to be a new respect.”

Naicken said he guaranteed there would not be a problem any more.

With that, the council members moved into executive session to discuss the hearings. They will vote at Monday’s regular meeting whether to renew, deny or renew the licenses with conditions. The meeting is 8 p.m. in Municipal Court.

--Bernice

5 comments:

  1. Wow. This story makes it sounds like something actually got done among adults. How come? Maybe because the mayor kept out of it? Maybe because one of the owners sounds Latino and the other South Asian therefore neither expected special favors nor were there any friends-and-family municipal jobs on the line? In any case it sounds like a refreshingly decisive Plainfield governmental event even if the precipitating causes sound awful.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Once it was thought that once Moon Face on Muhlenburg place was closed al the problems would go away. Fire Water has an age old scurge on mankind that better parking lot lighting will not remove. You can not buy incadescent light bulbs but liquor is okay.

    ReplyDelete
  3. @10:29 a.m.: This was purely a City Council matter, as the governing body is the local ABC board. I don't think the mayor could or would have any say in it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. What is sounds like is a payoff. Why are we even giving them another chance to clean up their act, this has been going on for several years. They just add to the demise of this city. The city closed all the black owned bars for much less infractions. Clinton Ave and W Front Street should both loss their license. The police calls alone probable cost the city more than what we make in taxes a year.

    what a shame!!

    ReplyDelete
  5. I have a problem with people who get nailed for something like "sale of loose cig's". This is one of the FEW regulations in NJ regarding the sale of tobacco products other than age and pricing. It is a known regulation. This is not a "oh, I forgot I couldn't do it again" issue. Do it once...lose your license.
    Drugs in the ice cream freezer??? You may not have know they were there, but you definitely knew about the activity in your establishment which created the environment that deemed it acceptable for someone to believe they could deal drugs out of your establishment. This is someone taking advantage of a community/neighborhood....they should have been shut down. No more chances. If they weren't "aware" of all these situations to correct them, it's as bad as knowing about it and doing nothing to stop it.
    I am no prude, but the Clinton Deli should be shut down out of refusing to do whats right or ignorance...neither one is a quality needed from a business owner selling alcohol in a neighborhood.

    ReplyDelete