The City of Seattle objected to the renewal of Waids Liquor license based on some supposed Violations. The Washington State Liquor Control Board asked me to respond. This is what I wrote. Dear Mr. Kevin McCarroll, I have received your letter regarding the citys objection to the renewal of my liquor license. I thank you for the opportunity to respond to the accusations presented in the letter. First, I’m of the opinion that if my establishment was a “High risk place for the community” as Mr. Joseph Kessler, the Assistant chief of Police, the City of Seattle wouldn’t feel the need to embellish their claim? It was my understanding that I complied with ALL the requirements that were asked of me from the settlement I reached a couple years ago with the liquor board. In fact, in order for me to maintain a liquor license for the past 2 years, I had to satisfy all the requirements. A liquor board Officer Mr. Lorn Richie was assigned to this task. All my security personal were required to take a security training class with the Seattle Police Department, and they did. I was required to purchase an ID scanner, and I did. Officer Lorn Richie even came in for an ‘in house’ training for my staff. After all requirements were met, both parties were satisfied and the renewal of my liquor license was approved and issued by the liquor board. The next two years, for the first time since opening Waid’s, I was finally given a moment of peace where I could concentrate on running my business without noise complaints or police interruption. Mr. Still, from WSLCB, says that he told me that I needed to obtain MAST permits for myself and my security staff and that I had a four month grace period to do so. This is untrue. Not once did Mr. Still or Mr. Richie informed me of this during any of their bi-monthly visits. Had I been informed, I would have ensured that the permits were acquired. I only first learned of this requirement last month while in court with Mr. Still. Since then, all security and I have complied. Regarding myself having completed MAST, the city claimed that this was shown to be untrue since Officer Still from the liquor board could find no record of this claim. I have been a bartender in Seattle for over a decade. I have worked in multiple bars and restaurants. No employer would have kept me on as a bartender without such permit. I have done it more than once. Officer Still’s failure to find such record does not indicate that I am lying. Perhaps Mr. Still needs to do better research. The city listed a few incidents that supposedly justify a non-renewal of waid’s liquor license. The following addresses each incident one by one: The first one concerns an undercover officer being sold a controlled substance by a security officer working for the establishment; a Waid’s bartender facilitating the sale of a controlled substance and a promoter hired by the club facilitating the sale of a controlled substance. Let’s start by clarifying what that controlled substance was. It was Marijuana. Two undercover police officers came in on a Sunday night, a reggae themed night. They approached a bartender and said: “How come this is reggae night and no one is smoking pot? Do you know where we could get some pot?” The bartender told them that he doesn’t smoke and pointed to a DJ he knows smoked. Though reluctant, the DJ sold them some Marijuana for $20. The under cover police officers also approached one of the security guards who gave them a joint and, in return, they offered him $10. I was not aware of such activities because I have a zero tolerance policy regarding illegal substance used at my establishment. The security person in question was fired and is no longer an employee. The zero-tolerance policy is posted at the establishment’s entrance. However, there’s a limit to how much a club owner can achieve to mitigate such activities. _Second, SPD incident report #2013-134184 On 4/22/13, police responded to a call of an assault where someone, supposedly, had a gun at Waid’s. The caller also referred to a car and a gun. When police arrived there was a group of people and several vehicles in front of the establishment. No one at the location was willing to talk with the officers. The complainant was called back and stated that the suspect took off as soon as she called 911. The complainant had left the scene and declined further police involvement. As it is, there’s absolutely no evidence that there was a gun at Waid’s. Every patron who comes to Waid’s receives a pat down by the security staff, and a metal detector is in use. No one had ever been inside of Waid’s with any weapon whatsoever. Because Waid’s is in a business district, and is a club, it is not unusual that there are several vehicles in front of the establishment. In what way is this a violation? _Third, SPD incident report #2013-234510 On 7/4/13, police responded to a citizen complaint of five males yelling and sis shots fired at Waid’s. The police discovered that an argument had begun inside the establishment. The argument was taken outside by the parties to engage in mutual fight. According to the training my security staff received, their job is to maintain security and safety for the patrons inside of the club. If two people choose to fight, you make sure to let them know that they’re not welcome anymore and you escort both of them out of the club at different time; that is exactly what my security staff did. And when my staff noticed that the situation was escalated, they called the cops. How is that a violation? Saying that shots were fired at Waid’s is simply not true because NO shots had ever been fired at Waid’s. _Fourth, SPD incident report #2012-400123 On 11/4/13, police reported to Waid’s in reference to gunshots heard. Upon investigation the police discovered that there had been a drive-by shooting on the block of Waid’s. It is unclear what the target was, but the patrons and employees of the establishment provided no information to the police about the incident nor were they concerned about the incident. Who heard these gun shots? Is there evidence that this noise was gunshots? Waid’s Lounge does not own the East Jefferson block; it only operated one business on it. There are two other bars and a very busy gas station on the same block. Six months ago a man got shot inside the restaurant right across the street from Waid’s. Prior to that, another man got shot at the gas station. If gunshots are heard on East Jefferson, it is unfair to assume it is associated with Waid’s, yet, this incident is listed as one of the violations not to renew my liquor license. I do not find this to be fair at all. _Last, SPD incident #2014-36814, #2014-36827, #2014-36836 On 2/3/14 at 3:40 AM, police responded o a call from a concerned citizen that stated there were six people fighting in the alley behind Waid’s. By the time the police had arrived the scene was cleared. At 4:05 AM, police responded to another call of 13 people in a fight on the street next to Waid’s. When police arrived, witnesses reported that a group of people involved were hiding in Waid’s and that a knife was involved. No one reported anything. The officer then circled the block and, when they came back around, they were stopped by 3 people. A dispute about a handbag that was allegedly stolen while at Waid’s and in the process of the dispute a knife was displayed. Police located the person and arrested them. What do these incidents have to do with my establishment? Is the establishment responsible for what people do on their way to their cars a block away? The big lie is that there were multiple shootings at Waid’s. The fact is that there was never a shooting at my establishment, which indicated that the city will go to great lengths to close me down, even if it’s dishonest, unlawful, unfair, and against common sense ethics. Regarding the noise complaints from certain neighbors, that is old news. Neighbors have been complained about Waids for years and it has nothing to do with noise coming from the building. That problem was solved years ago. It cost me more than $80.000 to soundproof the building, which was done working alongside the zoning department. Multiple Sounds tests were conducted in and around the building by sound engineers from the City. And when the work was done, the City approved me for a club permit. The fact that I have never received a noise citation is proof in itself that theres no noise coming from wads. Perhaps the neighbors have hidden motives to complain. Some neighbors have told me in many occasions that they just don’t want to have a club in that area because it diminishes the value of their property. Waid’s is opened six days a week and everyday there’s an event. The only day I receive complaints is on sundays when the majority of my clientele is black. coincidence? The city failed to mention how Waid’s benefits the community. The establishment has held countless fundraisers for causes like funding women’s shelters, Doctors Without borders, rebuilding New Orleans, and Haiti after the earthquake struck, and supporting Africa. We have also hosted after school programs for youth, AIDS prevention, and drug prevention. Each winter we host a blanket drive. Right now, the establishment provides a home away from home for Seattle’s African and Caribbean diaspora. I work hard to make Waid’s a fun and safe place for the community. I comply willingly and quickly with everything the city and Liquor Control Board asks me to do. My life savings is invested in this bar. My family, my two kids, my mother, that I take support financially, all depend on it. I feel like I’m being targeted unfairly. Two years ago, I thought this fight was over. Sadly, two years later, here I am again. The Citys objection to the renewal of Waids Liquor License is preposterous. They solely base their objection on the incidents I listed above which are all unfounded. In conclusion, I would ask you to please consider the renewal of Waids liquor license base on the evidence and the facts I presented. Sincerely Yours, Waid Sainvil
Posted on: Mon, 21 Apr 2014 01:58:51 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015