Go Home Already: Shouts and Murmurs
Man Stops Traffic at 17th and K to Demand $200 Million
Compromise Uncertain on Same-Sex Marriage Law
Morning Roundup: Second Helpings Edition
Fire at 17th and L NW Forces Evacuations
Every now and then, D.C.’s government inserts itself into the lives of ordinary citizens just out for a little nip with their lunch.
Exhibit A: Our blogger friends over at Washingtonian are reporting the surprise and inconvenience many patrons of "better" dining establishments like 2Amys, Crème, Bistro du Coin, and Asia Nora felt upon seeing temporary liquor license suspension tags in these restaurants' windows recently.
We say it’s a good thing.
Not good, as in we feel any ill will towards these spots, or the poor, law-abiding patrons who had to go elsewhere to get their vodka tonic fix, but good in that we are reassured that the D.C. Alcohol Beverage Regulation Administration (ABRA) doesn’t exclusively target the little mom and pop beer stores and Capitol Hill intern waterholes.
Apparently this summer, some of the better dining establishments in D.C. were busted for serving alcohol to minors. They were forced to choose a couple of alcohol-free days as penance, and many picked days this week, as it is typically a slow one when people swear off drinking after New Year’s excesses. The fact that the restaurants get to choose the days they will be punished for their crimes seems like a pretty sweet deal, but we digress.
“We have found that almost anyone will serve alcohol to a minor, from the corner liquor store to a fine, white tablecloth establishment,” Jeff Coudriet, director of operations for ABRA, told DCist. Coudriet said the stings, which use volunteer minors and involve the close cooperation of D.C. police, occur nearly every weekend and test every type of restaurant and liquor store, not just the “usual suspects.” The summer sting Washingtonian reported was in fact a series of regular visits, but the penalties increased from a one-day suspension to a two-day suspension recently, so the enforcement is “probably a little more visable,” he said. It seems the stings have worked, decreasing from a high of 40 percent of establishments caught selling to minors four years ago to about 20 percent getting caught now.
Such operations have historically been controversial. Massachusetts’ Alcohol Beverages Control Commission brags on its website that while its underage stings have faced “persistent legal challenges,” namely that they violate the Fourth Amendment, a Superior Court justice recently rejected that argument.
Coudriet said no such cases have been filed against the DC ABC board or the commission since the commission became an independent agency four years ago. Complaints and compliments will be welcome, however, at the ABC board's Valentine's Day public hearing on penalties for selling to minors.
Photo by Flickr user griff le riff.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
don't let your wit get in the way of clear writing. the article is wordy, meandering, and difficult to follow.
ryan -- agreed.
When everyone starts getting their mail delivered every day, there are no robberies, rapes, or murders for a few months THEN MPD should be wasting manpower on busting restaurants for serving minors.
I recall my favorite club bartender refusing to serve some patrons who looked to be in their 40s, because they weren't wearing over-21-wristbands.
People don't realize when a business gets busted the bartender is also charged with a misdemeanor, and a hefty fine to boot.
Serving as the underage bait in a booze sting operation has gotta be a pretty sweet deal.
Especially for "repeat visits." Mmmm-hmmmm. Wonder what kind of budget line item that program has.
I think ABRA should stick with busting the "problem" liquor stores that everyone knows about - you know, the ones that serve obviously inebriated homeless people, don't clean up the litter in front, allow/encourage loitering, serve cheap firewater designed for one purpose - to get people drunk as fast as possible. In contrast, you don't see any collateral damage with 2 Amys, Creme or other reputable establishments that are predominantly an ASSET to the city rather than a blight.
My goddamn tax dollars are being wasted on making sure underage drinkers at upscale restaurants- has this been a problem?
Out of curiousity, what does the "mystery boozer" do with the drinks? Do they call the cops in immediately afterwards to bust the place, leave a full drink on the bar, or consume it?
Where do they get the minor volunteers from? I always figured it was forced labor community service for little potheads... but it seems like it'd be kinda fun.
The restaurants have a pretty sweet deal with being able to pick their poison. That's a rare thing in the law. The bartenders certainly don't get that opportunity.
ryan - so is writing in all lower case. You are not e. e. cummings. Let it go.
I don't think MPD is doing this, Hill Rat.
It's NOT the MPD. It's the ABC folks. If you read the linked article, it says the Alcohol Beverage Control board "plants underage customers in bars and restaurants."
Mojo: The underage bait is partnered with a official inspector. As soon as the buy is made, so is the bust.
Ted: Lots of those "problem stores" also have loyal clientelle, who also have political weight. In many places, things like the ban on singles sales or blunts are quite controversial, and pit various segments of the community against each other.
Copperred: You're right. Most of the time ABRA doesn't allow busted establishments to defray the cost of the penalty by choosing the month they serve it. That's very generous. They might allow them to pick one slow day of the week to be closed, and add that to another big-sale day. But I've never before heard of them allowing the owner to choose both the day and the month. It doesn't seem fair to everyone else.
Philip: Every bar I know that's sold to a minor has fired the bartender that did it.
I second Ted's comment. What is the source of the author's view that ABRA tends to "target the little mom and pop beer stores?" DCist offers no support for this view so I will assume it is unfounded. I offer my personal experience -- I have tried to get ABRA to cite Florida Ave. Liquors for months. The store is a blight on 14th street; its plate glass windows have long since been replaced with plywood and duct tape, the building is falling apart, and the store has no patrons (that I have observed) other than individuals who loiter in front drinking from brown paper bags. ABRA sent me a perfunctory letter stating that it found no violations. While I don't dipute that ABRA should curb liquor service to underage patrons, I do dispute that ABRA has neglected this problem because it is overzealously enforcing against "mom and pop beer stores."
YOUR support for ABRA not enforcing against mom and pop stores is that they found no violations against one store you whined about? "Unfounded" indeed, harpy.
I just assumed they never bothered monitoring the nicer restaurants because kids under 21 either couldn't afford the restaurant anyway, or it wasn't their taste. I can understand why you'd want to keep a closer watch on, say, Fuddruckers than Bistro du Coin.
The really silly thing is the whole "nanny state" issue again. If you're old enough to get sent off to fight and possibly die in Iraq, you should be old enough to drink. Europeans can handle this, why can't we?
So, targeting "mom and pop beer stores" isn't okay, but targeting locally-owned businesses that serve decent food is? It's not as if Creme, 2Amys, and Asia Nora are part of the Chilis/Macaroni Grill conglomerate. This post is stupid. Restaurants shouldn't serve to minors, but this post comes off as reverse snobbery, like you are glad that a business that caters to the non-poor finally got caught.
To those that said MPD is uninvolved, I beg to differ. Check it:
To "Been There" who was complaining about Fla. Ave. Liquors. All of the complaints you listed sound like other DCRA departments and not ABRA. Unless that store has a voluntary agreement with the local ANC/community group saying that it will keep it's storefront in a certain way, how they choose to do so does not fall under the purview of ABRA....
Hill Rat - How about that. I skimmed the article but obviously missed it. Not sure why MPD is involved. If it's because they think there's a possible risk to the minor, then they simply shouldn't be doing this.
Been There -- if ABRA isn't responsive, or if the violations aren't ABRA-related, contact your ANC folks. They may either be able to help or know who else to contact to register your complaints.
MPD is involved because ABRA inspectors do not have the authority to make arrests. They may write up violations, but unlike many, many other jurisdictions throughout the country, they do not carry badges that give them the right to enforce laws.
Politburo - It doesn't seem like anyone actually gets arrested when these busts go down, so I'm not sure why the fuzz is there either. Maybe they're there to ensure the security of the ABRA officer that issues the citations or something.
Oh no! A 20-year-old bought a glass of beaujolais at Bistro du Coin. When there's not a single crack-head pissing against the side of my building while holding a barely-concealed 40 in a brown paper bag...then let's go after the underage drinkers.
And before you say, "this was ABRA, not MPD", who gives a crap? Time to cut ABRA funding if they've pissing away their budget on this kind of idiocy.
I've seen fourty-year-olds with babes in their arms denied their God-given right to a pint in this city. When that happens, there's something deeply, deeply dysfunctional going on. Jesus Christ, what a country!
Hill Rat - Yeah, that's what I was thinking.. but that doesn't really make sense. Using that logic, cops should go along with housing inspectors, food inspectors, etc.. and I'm pretty sure they don't.
Adams Morgan - That makes sense, but who is getting arrested here? Aren't they just being issued administrative violations? Can't the MPD issue a misdemeanor charge after the fact for the bartender?