I have been away for a few days, prepping for a big event we are throwing on Saturday.
Tonight Ice Cube was supposed to be playing at the Regency Ballroom on Van Ness. However, the show was canceled due to the shooting that occurred at the Regency Ballroom November 16th. The police and the Entertainment Commission had come to an agreement earlier wherein the cops would have the authority to cancel events if a felony occurred at the venue during an event. I suspect that there is not a policeman in San Francisco who does not know who Ice Cube is. NWA authored a searing indictment of police brutality that made them famous and also made it virtually impossible for them to play live anywhere in the United States. I suspect that if say, Arcade Fire were the artist in question, they would not have had their show canceled by the police.
In reading up for this little entry, I found a great history of NWA online, originally written by Terry McDermott for the LA Times. Its definitely worth checking out.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Friday, December 4, 2009
Wherin the CMCA comes into being
On Wednesday December 2nd, I attended a meeting at the Mezzanine nightclub in SOMA that was the foundation meeting for the California Music and Culture Association, or CMCA. Their goal is to seek standardized enforcement of alcohol and venue regulations throughout the state. This group had been meeting in a rather ad hoc fashion for a few months, but were inspired to open the meeting up to the public by the recent reports of DJ laptop seizures. Most of the attendees were either nightclub owners, or employees. There were also a few djs and people like myself. And Chicken John. :)
Much of the night was taken up by procedural hoo-ha, but as layman, I learned some very interesting things that I must share.
The most dramatic revelation concerned the criminal activity that occurs outside nightclubs.
In 2003, as a result of a mayor's summit on nightlife and safety, the Entertainment Commission was formed to act as a liaison between club owners and the police. Evidently, this arrangement did not sit too well with police brass. The result has been that the police have taken a "hands off" policy to nightclubs in town. In other words, in spite of the fact that there are laws on the books that prohibit loitering outside nightclubs, the SFPD is refusing to enforce these laws. I say this because the 50 or so people that were at the meeting wee pretty much in consensus that this was happening. It was described as the police simply ignoring calls from club owners for enforcement.
What this has done is demonize the nightclubs as crime magnets, when in fact the police are choosing to ignore crime around clubs so that public opinion turns against the clubs and the Entertainment Commission. This is where the weekend street closure policy on Broadway has come from. San Francisco's venues are actually the victims of a lack of police enforcement. It all makes sense to me now.
Another bit of information I have learned is that California, unlike Washington, Oregon, and New York, has no citizen oversight of the ABC. What this means is that they can execute their mandate to police alcohol sales and associated nightlife activities with zero input from the very people they are policing. You, as a citizen, have no redress save the courts if the ABC takes issue with your activities. For example, the various clubs in town who have been cited by the ABC for ridiculous, made-up rules that they claim have been broken, have no other recourse than to spend thousands contesting the issue in court. Tim Benetti from Bottom of the Hill, told us that his club has thus far spent over $60,000 defending itself against the ABC's outrageous charge that they must make at least 50% of their revenue from food if they want to keep their all-ages liquor license.
http://sflnc.com/articleGallery/state-clubs.html
It seems self-evident that every club that has been targeted by the ABC and is fighting is spending something similar. So if you see these clubs fold in the next year, recognize that it is not the economy, but a government agency that has driven them out of business.
Something I found most interesting was learning that it is virtually impossible to throw a licensed private party in San Francisco, as there is no procedure on the books to get licensing. That means if you decide to have a party and invite friends to dj, there is a good chance you will be busted, your party killed, and your music equipment confiscated in this new, incredibly hostile police environment. Laptop seizures have been happening at private parties and non-profit fundraisers. So unless you are willing to shell out thousands of dollars to rent a licensed venue and pay a bar deposit, you cannot gather more than a few of your friends together to listen to music, dance and drink.
As to the laptop seizures, that effort, it appears, is being driven by one officer, Larry Bertrand (SFPD badge number 414), who's name came up again and again during the meeting. All the club owners know who he is, and he is the officer responsible for the laptop seizures. Bertrand has been described as "an officer out of control", and at least three attendees as the meeting have reported his violent actions to the Office of Citizen Complaints. Perhaps party and nightlife organizers should post copies of the 1st and 4th amendments to the Constitution on their front doors. If you Google his name and SFPD, the first 20 links are all articles and stories about laptop seizures. This man is an undercover cop, who has said he is taking it upon himself to shut down every illegal party in San Francisco:
http://www.dnalounge.com/backstage/log/2009/11/
Other police officers who's names we all should be aware of are:
Commander Jim Dudley: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimdudley1946
Before he took this job, he was responsible for North Beach and drove the effort to shut down Broadway to weekend traffic, which is killing the nightclubs along that corridor. For more on him and his reactionary views, read here:
http://www.dnalounge.com/backstage/log/2009/10/23.html
Chief George Gascon: http://cbs5.com/local/san.francisco.police.2.1048566.html
The new chief comes to us from Mesa, Arizona. While his resume appears somewhat tolerant, he seems to condone the laptop seizures.
Michelle Ott, who is an inspector for the ABC, and is notorious among the club owners. I could not find anything about her online in a cursory search, so let me know if you learn anything.
The holiday season is upon us. Parties are the norm this time of year. Know you rights, and be aware of who these people are. They work for you and you pay their salaries with your taxes.
Much of the night was taken up by procedural hoo-ha, but as layman, I learned some very interesting things that I must share.
The most dramatic revelation concerned the criminal activity that occurs outside nightclubs.
In 2003, as a result of a mayor's summit on nightlife and safety, the Entertainment Commission was formed to act as a liaison between club owners and the police. Evidently, this arrangement did not sit too well with police brass. The result has been that the police have taken a "hands off" policy to nightclubs in town. In other words, in spite of the fact that there are laws on the books that prohibit loitering outside nightclubs, the SFPD is refusing to enforce these laws. I say this because the 50 or so people that were at the meeting wee pretty much in consensus that this was happening. It was described as the police simply ignoring calls from club owners for enforcement.
What this has done is demonize the nightclubs as crime magnets, when in fact the police are choosing to ignore crime around clubs so that public opinion turns against the clubs and the Entertainment Commission. This is where the weekend street closure policy on Broadway has come from. San Francisco's venues are actually the victims of a lack of police enforcement. It all makes sense to me now.
Another bit of information I have learned is that California, unlike Washington, Oregon, and New York, has no citizen oversight of the ABC. What this means is that they can execute their mandate to police alcohol sales and associated nightlife activities with zero input from the very people they are policing. You, as a citizen, have no redress save the courts if the ABC takes issue with your activities. For example, the various clubs in town who have been cited by the ABC for ridiculous, made-up rules that they claim have been broken, have no other recourse than to spend thousands contesting the issue in court. Tim Benetti from Bottom of the Hill, told us that his club has thus far spent over $60,000 defending itself against the ABC's outrageous charge that they must make at least 50% of their revenue from food if they want to keep their all-ages liquor license.
http://sflnc.com/articleGallery/state-clubs.html
It seems self-evident that every club that has been targeted by the ABC and is fighting is spending something similar. So if you see these clubs fold in the next year, recognize that it is not the economy, but a government agency that has driven them out of business.
Something I found most interesting was learning that it is virtually impossible to throw a licensed private party in San Francisco, as there is no procedure on the books to get licensing. That means if you decide to have a party and invite friends to dj, there is a good chance you will be busted, your party killed, and your music equipment confiscated in this new, incredibly hostile police environment. Laptop seizures have been happening at private parties and non-profit fundraisers. So unless you are willing to shell out thousands of dollars to rent a licensed venue and pay a bar deposit, you cannot gather more than a few of your friends together to listen to music, dance and drink.
As to the laptop seizures, that effort, it appears, is being driven by one officer, Larry Bertrand (SFPD badge number 414), who's name came up again and again during the meeting. All the club owners know who he is, and he is the officer responsible for the laptop seizures. Bertrand has been described as "an officer out of control", and at least three attendees as the meeting have reported his violent actions to the Office of Citizen Complaints. Perhaps party and nightlife organizers should post copies of the 1st and 4th amendments to the Constitution on their front doors. If you Google his name and SFPD, the first 20 links are all articles and stories about laptop seizures. This man is an undercover cop, who has said he is taking it upon himself to shut down every illegal party in San Francisco:
http://www.dnalounge.com/backstage/log/2009/11/
Other police officers who's names we all should be aware of are:
Commander Jim Dudley: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimdudley1946
Before he took this job, he was responsible for North Beach and drove the effort to shut down Broadway to weekend traffic, which is killing the nightclubs along that corridor. For more on him and his reactionary views, read here:
http://www.dnalounge.com/backstage/log/2009/10/23.html
Chief George Gascon: http://cbs5.com/local/san.francisco.police.2.1048566.html
The new chief comes to us from Mesa, Arizona. While his resume appears somewhat tolerant, he seems to condone the laptop seizures.
Michelle Ott, who is an inspector for the ABC, and is notorious among the club owners. I could not find anything about her online in a cursory search, so let me know if you learn anything.
The holiday season is upon us. Parties are the norm this time of year. Know you rights, and be aware of who these people are. They work for you and you pay their salaries with your taxes.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
EFF wins one for the DJs
This morning, Jennifer Granick, legal counsel for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, argued successfully for the return of DJ laptops that had been confiscated from private parties in San Francisco. Hooray for Jennifer and the EFF!
Read her version of events here:
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/side-djs-win-laptops-back
For a little background, check out the Bay Guardian's report on the new police tactics:
http://www.sfbg.com/entry.php?entry_id=9462&catid=&volume_id=452&issue_id=460&volume_num=44&issue_num=08
Read her version of events here:
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/side-djs-win-laptops-back
For a little background, check out the Bay Guardian's report on the new police tactics:
http://www.sfbg.com/entry.php?entry_id=9462&catid=&volume_id=452&issue_id=460&volume_num=44&issue_num=08
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
