I expect a little more from the New York Times

It has been months since I have written anything here.  Honestly, the initial panic that the ABC and police were going to drive all my favorite clubs out of business has subsided somewhat with the creation of the California Music and Culture Association, and the empowerment of the Entertainment Commission.  But now today there is a story in the New York Times that truly disappoints.  It deals with the "high costs" of patrolling near nightclubs, with various SFPD folk suggesting that the clubs should be paying extra for patrols. 

Normally, I would think of the NYT as being a bastion of well-researched news.  This story leads me to think otherwise.  Nowhere does it mention the SFPD policy of shutting down traffic on Broadway during the weekends, which of course is killing business.  There is no mention of the man-hours expended by the SFPD in harassing legitimate nightclubs, such as DNA, Butter, Myst and the like.  This article makes North Beach sound like a war zone, when in actuality it is essentially a tourist mecca with strip clubs and expensive restaurants, that is only slightly more dangerous than Disneyland.

What's more, the club that the shooting happened  near was Suede, which is many, many blocks from the heavily-patrolled stretch of Broadway the article talks about. 

Police harassment on Broadway is nothing new.  When I was 19 years old, I drove some friends to the On Broadway because Metallica was rumored to be doing a secret show there.  The show was sold out, so I and my friends were  standing on the sidewalk deciding what to do, when we were approached by one of SFPD's finest.  He demanded our IDs, and when he saw that I did not live in SF, he told me I was not welcome in SF and should go home.  As if I and my dorky teenage pals were a threat to anyone or anything.  It taught me to believe that many policeman treat every human being they see as a potential criminal.  No wonder they see such a threat on Broadway.

Bay Guardian updates, and BAR gives us the District 6 rundown

First off, thanks to the Bay Guardian (and the SF Weekly) for keeping up on the story of the attack on San Francisco nightlife.  The March 23rd Bay Guardian  cover story tackled Mayor Newsom's puzzling behavior and catches up with various politicos and players to keep us informed on what is happening with our local government and the SFPD.  I particularly appreciate the fact that they made Larry Bertrand the cover boy.  This week, they got a response from Captain McDonough that  paints him as a tireless protector of quality of life in San Francisco.  From the sound of things, there is a community meeting being held in SOMA on the 21st of April.  Might be worth attending.

The Bay Area Reporter today, made the valid point that whoever wins District 6 in the next elections will be handed the nightclub hot potato upon entering office.  I myself plan to make it my business to find out each of their opinions and support the candidate who best represents my interests.

supe President Chui steps up, but hey, where's the Chronicle?

Board of Supes president David Chui demonstrated some hyperbole-free leadership today by proposing that the Entertainment Comission (or some other government body) should have the right to permanently shutter problem nightclubs.  This is good news, in my opinion, as the EC is currently hamstrung by its lack of enforcement capabilities.  Since David Chui is not campaigning for the  pale glories of the Lt Governor's office,  his focus seems to be on what is best for San Francisco.  He has earned my interest by this action, and I will certainly attend any public hearings on the subject to support this proposal.

I was interested to note however, that I got this story, not from our local rag, the San Francisco Chronicle, but from the San Jose Mercury News.  the Chron seems to be limping toward oblivion these days. This is the sort of story that seems right up the Chronicle's alley, except it does not conform to their vision of a populace terrified by rampaging nightclub attendees.  I have read reports hither and yon, of reporters leaving the Chronicle like rats leaving a sinking ship.  I end up getting most of my local news from http://sfappeal.com/, http://www.sfbg.com/, http://www.nbcbayarea.com/ and the microscopically local news from Noe Valley Voice and The Mission Blog.  I like having all those diverse opinions available to read, but it saddens me that the once mighty Chronicle's reportage has deteriorated so.

Oh hey, here's the Chronicle story, and its even written by a real person! Glad to note they have not given up entirely on reporting.  For a far more sober and cynical view of these recent events, you should definitely check out Jamie Z's blog today.

We wait on Gavin to speak out for 8 months, and all we get is...

this?  Boy, am I disgusted.  Where was the Gavin when the ABC began hounding every all-ages club in San Francisco?  What is with his failure to mediate that has led a few frustrated nightlife advocates to go after the city with a lawsuit?

And here's a story that simply quadruples my cynicism about effective and informed SF city government.  The SF Appeal found some crazy copy in a grant proposal accepted by the ever-useless Public Safety Commision.  Perhaps if those clowns bothered to read something other than SFGate, they might realize that its been years since anyone has been brave enough to try throwing a rave within the city and county of San Francisco.

Lastly, I appear to be one of the few people that is sorry to see Terrance Alan leave the entertainment commision.  Whatever else his connections or interests, he has been a tireless advocate for free and open nightlife in San Francisco.  As a long time resident of this fair city, I recall the notorious police raid on one of Mr. Alan's parties that prompted the creation of the Entertainment Commission in the first place.  If any of you out there have a good written account of that police raid, please share it with me here. 

I have not been very active in my blog, sorry folks.  I am working on doing something a little more public in the next month or so.  I won't write about it till after the fact, but if you know me, I promise to invite you.

Black Rebel Motorcycle Club @ Slim's

We went in search of rock and roll, and found it last night at Slims.  BRMC was so good I am tempted to go see them again this evening.  You should go see them too.  Tickets are still available for tonight.



I have not been to Slim's since the ABC started their campaign to drive the club out of business, so it was kind of poignant to be at a sold-out, all ages show there.  I have recently been idly speculating that the ABC's vindictive campaign against all ages clubs in San Francisco may be directly tied to the DNA Lounge opting to challenge the ABC ruling against their all-ages liquor license.  The timing is about right.  If that is what actually happened, then this is inappropriate abuse of power by a state agency.

Here's something fun you can do.  As a state agency, the ABC has an online "customer service evaluation form" online.  Why not take a few moments of your day to fill out this online form and let the ABC know how *you* feel about their recent efforts to kill nightlife in San Francisco.  This is re-purposing their mandatory response form for our own purposes, but never for a moment forget that the ABC works for you.  All government agencies do.

Refraining from Mixology, but yes, its related

I am not as wound up about the arbitrary ABC campaign against rectification, as it is not quite the same thing as contemplating the loss of successful and venerated live venues to short-sighted, byzantine bureaucracy. I am glad it is getting so much press, and as I said, I am really curious what Alice Waters thinks about it all.

I have refrained from writing for a bit, but I simply have to share a great commentary written by Ben Van Houten for thebaybridged.com.  Five Ways to Think About the Crackdown on SF Venues.

He sums it up beautifully in my opinion, and I too wonder where the Convention and Visitors Bureau is on this issue.  Surely they must understand that tourists from near and far spend money at San Francisco's wonderful live venues.

This is a big music week for me, what with BRMC at Slim's and the Japonize Elephants and the Bottom of the Hill.  I'll try to get a picture or two and perhaps see what mischief the SFPD is up to with those two great clubs.

I guess the ABC is getting bored with harassing kids, now they are going after foodies!

Today the SF Appeal describes with their typically snarky commentary the latest bit of stupidity by the ABC.  Their target?  The culinary cocktail movement.  I wonder how Alice Waters feels about this. 

Michael Bauer from the Chronicle is all up in arms about this latest, misguided ABC effort.  Though I would hate to see all my favorite creative bartenders put out of business by this effort, one hopes Mr. Bauer connects the dots and links this latest campaign to the attack on nightclubs that serve food.

Let's imagine San Francisco as the ABC and SFPD have envisioned.  All music venues are owned by major entertainment corporations, and are either all ages with no liquor, or 21 and over with no kids allowed.  There will be no place in San Francisco where one can get food, alcohol, and live entertainment.  Also, there will be no private parties with djs.  Any gathering of more than 20 that features turntables, an amp,a band, or an ipod hooked up to speakers will get shut down.  Lastly, say goodbye to the culinary cocktail movement.  The only cocktails served in San Francisco will be sanctioned by Smirnoff.  To be realistic, many of the things that make San Francisco such a vibrant city will disappear, as few independent entrepreneurs  will be able to take a chance on running such businesses at a loss.  San Francisco will become more and more suburban, more like San Ramon than a world class entertainment city.

Is that the San Francisco you want?

Sharing the new reality with an out of town musician friend

I had a couple of beers last night with a dear friend who is a musician and who's parents are ACLU lawyers.  He just moved back here after 4 years of New York, so has missed most of the drama surrounding trying to have nighttime fun in San Francisco.  I told him of the ABC's campaign against all ages clubs here, the notorious party laptop confiscations,  the zero-tolerance policy on underground parties and gatherings, and the SFPD harassment clubs like the DNA Lounge are enduring on a daily basis.  He simply can't believe its happening.  He kept asking "Is this legal?  What laws are being broken?  Has someone contacted the ACLU?"

I am not a lawyer, so I can't say what is legal or not.  It all seems pretty shady, however.  I am a big fan of the rights guaranteed by our Constitution.  There's that bit  in the first amendment about the "right to free assembly" that seems to be getting squished at the private parties that are getting shut down.  The "unreasonable search and seizure" clause of the fourth amendment seems to be where laptop confiscations have gone awry.  Perhaps every party in San Francisco needs to post those two amendments boldly, both for the benefit of cops who might be thinking of ignoring those rights, and the patrons themselves, who need to know their rights when confronted by an angry policeman intent on intimidating them.  Know your rights.

So I have another out-of-town friend here this weekend.  Do I take her to Bootie, who are hosting the Hubba Hubba review tonight?  There's every possibility that what she will get is a police drama on the street instead of a dancing girls in the the club.  I can also walk her over to Slims and show her the incredibly depressing pitch in their window to raise money for their fight against the ABC.

I wonder if I, as a private citizen can get the ACLU in on what is happening here.  The club owners themselves are no doubt scared to death of doing such a thing, as once they win in court, they can guarantee law enforcement will be crawling over their activities with a microscope for as long as they are in the business. I will see what I can do.

This one night at the DNA Lounge...

Last Saturday my hubby and I decided to drop in on Bootie's triumphant return to the DNA Lounge.  We got dropped off by a friend, and noticed two odd things: first, several police cars parked in front of Butter, and lots of officers on the street.  The next thing I noticed was that there was no line at the DNA, even though it was midnight, prime time for people to show up for Bootie.  Knowing what I know is going on with SF nightlife, I just chalked it up to some SFPD BS.  Sure enough, a quick check of the DNA Lounge blog told me the whole ugly story. The DNA is in for weekly harassment, Butter got shut down, and the cops also pestered the patrons of Mist down the street.  Larry Bertrand waved his proverbial nightstick around, and evidently intends to keep doing so till all the clubs on 11th street are driven out of business.

I've testified in front of the board of supervisors on this issue, and now I have written to the mayor as well.  Newsom calls San Francisco an event-positive city.  Evidently, Larry Bertrand and the SFPD are attempting to prove him wrong.  Here is what I said to Mayor Newsom.  If you are reading this, please write to him as well.

"Hi Mayor Newsom,
I will get to the point quickly.  Why are the SFPD officers conducting Gestapo tactics at some of the best run nightclubs and bars in San Francisco?  What on Earth is happening in South of Market?  Is there anything you can do to reign in  officer Larry Bertrand's one-man campaign to kill nightlife in San Francisco?  How do tourists who have heard of Bootie, or other world-class nightclub entertainment in SF, react when the see a police mob?  NOT SPEND MONEY is what.  What's more, why do I even know officer Bertrand's name?  The horror stories I have heard of his tromping on the Constitutional rights of both patrons and club owners is chilling.  And where the Hell was Officer Bertrand during the Suede club killing?  No doubt harassing clubs South of Market.

Are you powerless in the situation, or do you simply not care?  Do you really want the death-knell of nightlife in San Francisco to be your lasting legacy to the city as mayor?  Don't talk to me about Suede.  Badly-run clubs that tolerate thugs are going to have such problems.  But the DNA?  Slims? Butter?  What is particularly fiendish about the targeting of the DNA is that they are a very gay-friendly, nightclub and provide a safe and fun environment to dance and have fun after 10pm.  If this is the way a place like DNA gets treated, (ie, police harassment and weekly "sidewalk-blocking" tickets that get thrown out by a judge), what hope is there for the other legitimate nightlife businesses in San Francisco?

Please do something.  We need leadership from the Mayor's office on this. 

Sincerely,"

Its been a while

The holidays have intervened, and I I have not gotten out much lately, other than a great metal show at the Parkside (that had been moved from the "closed by the ABC" DNA Lounge.  That was  Korplikaanii, Tyr and White Wizard.  It was fun.

But here's to the news.  A party, which was a fundraiser, happened in San Francisco two weekends ago.  January 31, some folks who were trying to raise money for the legal defense of students protesting fee hikes, got busted by the cops and "turned violent"
the violent party in question

Seems some "neighbors" called in a noise complaint, and the attendees got "violent".  Only the attendees tell a different story.  They got bum-rushed and attacked by the cops with little or no warning.  As undercover cops were in attendance, we can be sure that Larry Bertrand was busting heads.  He seems to consider South of Market and the Mission his personal stomping ground.

Too bad for those SFSU students that they did not get the memo, that it is forbidden to throw a party of any kind in San Francisco.  Maybe the school administration should include this information with student schedules: Do not organize any event with music, alcohol and people within the SF city limits. Fun is not allowed in this city.