Mayor Nickels’s nightclub license is the bad idea that refused to
die.
The licensing proposal, which went through several iterations before
apparently dying in council member Sally Clark’s neighborhoods
committee last month, has been resurrected in kinder, gentler form by
Clark’s colleagues Richard Conlin and Nick Licata, both of whom had
been staunch opponents of any mandatory licensing scheme.
The new licensing legislation, the details of which Licata and
Conlin have tried to keep under wraps, would reportedly eliminate some
of the more draconian aspects of Nickels’s and Clark’s
proposals—replacing the rule holding clubs responsible for what happens
on nearby sidewalks and in adjacent parking lots, for example, with a
more lenient stipulation holding clubs responsible only for violent
acts that occur inside their doors (previous versions included
nonviolent violations and applied within 50 feet of a club’s front
door). The new rules would also narrow the definition of a nightclub to
include only clubs that make a majority of their profits from alcohol
sales, are open after 10 p.m., and have a large capacity. “This will
not be the license the mayor proposed,” Licata says. The intent,
according to Conlin, is to come up with a licensing scheme that “just
deals with violence and the larger clubs. Personally, I don’t like the
idea of licenses and Nick doesn’t either, but if this is the only way
we can get at the problem… we are open to the idea.”
Club industry representatives, several of whom met with Licata last
week, say they’re very concerned about any license that doesn’t include
a citizen commission with substantial authority to mediate disputes
between the city and clubs—something that has not been a part of any
licensing proposal so far. “If there’s going to be a license, there
needs to be a real commission, like the San Francisco [Entertainment
Commission],” says David Meinert, a local promoter who, along with
other nightlife-industry representatives, met with Licata Friday. The
San Francisco commission has the power to help clubs through the
licensing process, promote the city’s nightlife industry, help clubs
mitigate noise and other violations, and mediate disputes.
Recently, Nickels tried (unsuccessfully) to convince the state
liquor board to shut down Tabella Lounge, a club in Belltown, based on
the number of “incidents” reported to the city’s LiquorStat reporting
system. But that system, which counts as an infraction any incident
reported to the city in or around a club—including 911 calls coming
from the club itself—is notoriously flawed. In fact, a recent police
report said Tabella security did “a very good job” of maintaining order
outside the club; and security tape taken during a recent shooting
revealed that the incident did not, contrary to the mayor’s claims,
originate inside Tabella.
“I think the mayor’s very aggressive PR effort over the last several
weeks has put a fright into some council members, and that’s
unfortunate, because a lot of the stuff they’re hearing is not
correct,” says nightlife lobbyist Tim Hatley, who also met with Licata
last week. “There’s a lot of false information being spread by the
mayor.”
The license proposal remains in Clark’s committee, where it could
come up as early as this Friday, July 27, if enough council members
express support for Licata and Conlin’s compromise. “Until I have
something to show people, I don’t know who [on the council] to target,”
Clark says. 