##VIDEO ID:fGlD43dUNxw## good morning we'll give just a moment to clear the waiting room good morning this is the voting hearing of the licensing board for the city of Boston today is Thursday November 14th 2024 today's hearing is being recorded and will be posted to the city of Boston's website while the public is encouraged to attend there will be no additional testimony accepted this morning begin with the licensed prise inspection hearing which occurred on Tuesday November 12th 2024 item number one mrj Inc doing business as the Hub Pub located at 18 Province Street dat of the incident August 3rd 2024 assault and battery Patron on employee in violation of Mass general laws chapter 138 section 64 and chapter 265 section 13A and assault and battery employee on Patron in violation of Mass general laws chapter 138 section 64 and chapter 265 section 13A thanks Danny um for number one I see no violation um I had a violation um they you know they put their hands on this Patron um I think they can confus the issue by talking about spinning but in the police report it was clear that it was the patron who said said he was spit on they never mentioned being spit on in the police report I I they admitted to putting their hands on them and to me they didn't justify the need for it if you have a patron who's refusing to leave and you know they're not physically threatening you the answer is to call the police not to grab them and throw them out so I had a violation yeah I actually agree the um the the they said the the kind of hold that they on him and it sounded like some sort of tackle or I can't remember the terminology they Ed but I remember it it didn't sound like something that was um befitting of a of a security person and they also mentioned that he was on the Spectrum so they they they recognized that he like looked past them and I think there's it was probably pretty obvious that he wasn't um that he's on the Spectrum so commissioner car and commissioner Saxon vote for a viol violation chairman Joyce no violation from you uh yeah I'll hold on to my vote okay and then as for the uh disposition of the violation there is um no history at this location yeah I would vote for a warning and especially correspondence that that talks about those kinds of policies of being able to call the police and and not using physical Force unnecessary physical Force yep reminder to call police and uh use of for course so violation with a warning in correspondence item number two GST Investment Group LLC doing business as beu and rock and Ry located at 51 Stewart Street date of the incident October 6th 2024 person under 21 in possession of alcohol on premise in violation of Mass general laws chapter 138 section 34A 34 C and 64 to 64a um we did hear from the licy that there is no video available from that evening they did offer to provide video of their ID checking procedures on other evenings if the board is interested I am not interested but I do have some comments um I find it peculiar that they have video of other nights but just can't seem to find the video from this evening um despite all that uh I mean with that being said I do see a violation here um and I felt like they were evasive in their answers to the questions about what their procedures were or whether they were followed that night they just kept repeating they were our procedures are X Y and Z I think my direct questions were were they followed that night and you know they didn't seem to be able to respond specifically and they didn't have any video to to back that up um I see a violation I second all that um they're well aware uh that evidence has to be particular to the alleged you know incident not generality so um I definitely Sor a violation with both of you violation uh as to the disposition the history there uh the most recent violation for a person 21 I believe was March of 2022 I feel like that's long enough um in the past this would be another first warning um but I do want to send correspondence regarding preserving video especially when they've been written up for something I agree I mean preserving video like we said is an indic ation of how serious they're taking it uh so in this instance once again I feel like not preserving it as an indication that they didn't take this seriously good point violation uh with a warning correspondence about preserving video we can also send a copy of the board's advisory about preserving video item number three big Causeway LLC doing business as Big Night Live Studio B play located at 110 Causeway Street date of the incident October 19th 201 24 assault and battery Patron on police times 2 in violation of M General law CH 138 section 64 and chapter 265 section 13d and assault and battery on an EMT in violation of Mass general laws chapter 138 section 64 and chapter 265 section 13d I want to start off by saying that we ask um lenes to submit video and any evidence prior to our hearing I need to get this on the record that it is completely unfair Fair um to us the job we're trying to do here to receive video they agreed to send video at the hearing on Tuesday and it was only after executive secretary green reached out to them yesterday afternoon that we received three videos and then 10 minutes and 9: this morning we received an additional un uh without a timestamp Tik Tok video thank you but that does not allow us to do our job um I can't I also can't remember the last time as many police officers showed up to testify um on Zoom at a hearing um to me I want to keep the record open on this one I'm not satisfied with the um the evidence that was submitted we do not have a dispersal plan um they kept talking about well we did our job according to our dispersal plan it was up to the security after that I want to see a written dispersal plan that actually demonstrates in writing how um big KN Night Live um interacts with the private security plan if the landlord um hires and with Boston police even watching 2 seconds of the street video I couldn't even count how many police officers had to respond and the testimony was that every single police officer from A1 responded this night um I think the testimony was trying to tell us that oh this this fight in the corner by the staircase inside um is the only thing that happened that night um that fight inside in my professional opinion has nothing to do with the way dispersal was done that night um something happened I I don't know what that is yet um but I don't think dispersal went well I want additional video the video that they submitted it had to do with dispersal I couldn't even see a single staff member it was just the empty escalators and some people at the lower end of the video unless you want tell me what that was supposed to be um I'm left to conclude that you're not sharing information that would be helpful to us I'd like to see additional video of all dispersal of people leaving the building people clearing the escalator area or clearing that Pavilion area um something is lacking um I don't know what that is yet but it was a complete nightmare what happened that night and I there has to be some internal reports this particular group was a you know I I don't they had been there before um I don't know if it was a new promoter but it's disingenuous to me as chair of the board to to hear that you're trying to say that the fight inside by the staircase is the only that happened and oh we did a great job it's um it's the private Security's um basically responsibility after that it's not um so I want to keep the record open on this I'm going to request additional information and I'm going to request a written dispersal plan and I'm going to put all lies on notice that to receive video 10 minutes before a voting hearing is just not acceptable and it's not going to be looked at and favorably in the eyes of the board moving forward um videos can help explain situations can help um explain exactly what happened in a particular night but to send video when I know it's available I know there's tons of Video available there um the afternoon before a vote and only after being um after the request was made again is just completely unacceptable especially for a lensey if this caliber those are my comments uh so first of all uh I would adopt everything you said I couple things jumped out of me so I my own comments I don't know how you all will feel about them but the first one is uh the the lenses seems to have a misapprehension about the expectation regarding uh dispersal the board is well establish that we expect the adjacent area including the sidewalks uh in front of the building is power of their responsibility at the end of the night um they I think they were trying to say that it ended at the sidewalk they if they once they got everyone out of their Courtyard onto the sidewalk that they were absolved um that's not our expectation from my understanding in the past so that's what I'm saying about that uh Second uh the third party thing uh you know that's a that expectation we have that they they should be making efforts to clear the sidewalk after during dispersal uh that's a non-delegable Duty um if they delegated to a third party we're going to impute that back onto them so you know if if their third party didn't meet the standard then then they that's between them and their third party uh not us uh you know they can't just throw up their hands and say we gave it to a third party and it's it's their fault um third is um the idea that they don't have you know legal authority to to chastise people on the sidewalk they not the police they can't you know order them away I mean we understand what where they authorities you know the limitations on it but it doesn't mean they can't be out there making efforts okay that's the expectation that they're out there making reasonable efforts encouraging people to move along and in addition to that if they're out there having been in the club and and witness who their patrons are they can directly State these were our patrons or these were not our patrons so them just pushing everyone to the sidewalk and then turning around walking away and locking themselves in the building they're not able to say with certainty and it was very clear during the hearing that they they wanted to imply that oh there's people from other places you know and and those are patrons of other establishments they can't say that because they weren't there okay they weren't out on the sidewalk and they can't say that no these these P the these people in this fight came from somewhere else because they weren't there they weren't W doing their job they weren't clearing the sidewalk they turned around they turned their back and you know once again it's another instance of uh willful ignorance so I think that's all I have regarding that right now so those are my thoughts in addition thank you yeah I agree with both of you I think um the the entities lack of prompt cooperation um allows the board complete discretion to make a negative inference um on that so I think um chairman you're you're actually being generous by keeping the record open I was prepared to um to say that there's a violation so um I completely um you know will yield to to your to your uh discretion there but um really just because they're such a an operator that have that that has operated for such a long time they actually do know the rules and regulations they are familiar with how we operate and so to um to to not call operate with the board in a prompt manner I think is um it does not speak and it's not bode well thank you I appreciate your comments uh I don't want this to drag on for a long time so I'd like to put a time limit I know the video is available um I want to be able to see the dispersal from all angles I I didn't see any dispersal I just saw basically an empty Pavilion so Jer Joyce so it sounds like you are requesting a written dispersal plan with specific attention paid to the uh relationship with Northeast security and Boston police at dispersal time as well as any videos all videos interior and exterior showing dispersal at closing time did you also mention internal reports I thought I heard you say that I don't know I would be surprised if there were not internal reports okay by this liy I want to see them anything else them and again I'm going to say they know better to show up at a hearing and to not have the stuff in front of the board beforehand it's impossible for us to do our job I'm left to think that this is a real public safety issue the fact that they weren't able to present this with us beforehand um and putting them on notice that it's not acceptable to send the videos for us to chase down videos and to receive them the morning of vote is there anything additional you would like to see beyond the uh dispersal plan videos of dispersal and internal reports and then if you want to put a time limit on uh receiving those I would like them within a what's today today's Thursday I would like them by next Tuesday so we can review them Tuesday the 19th yeah if there are any any agreements between um the leny and the third party um there the person who also does the security I don't know whether it's a company or whatever but I think there's probably maybe there's an agreement but we need to see as far as how dispersal is um the coordination of dispersal between the entity and right I I did have one more thing I kind of wanted uh your thoughts on I guess is where you know I I think it's clearly right out in front of that courtyard on the sidewalk it that's a that's a that's a no doubter in my mind how does it do you guys have an an opinion as to how far down the sidewalks is in the entire width of that building they should be making sure it's clear on dispersal like because if you go all the way down towards the the parking garage I feel like they should be covering that because I believe that that is an amenity for their patrons um I don't know what in the opposite direction all the way down to the other end of the building there or or what I I just I don't have an opinion right now I I I tend to agree with you I think people like lenses like to think oh we're only responsible for our front door it's not the case the board takes a very broad view of that um we want to see the I would like to see the building cleared the sidewalk in fromont the building cleared whether that's their primary responsibility or that of the security thir PR security I don't know but in the end the L is responsible for that whether they delate that it's up to them that was part of the reason why I was asking whether there was an agreement between that the entity and and the security because you know maybe they've talked about it but if they haven't that's that's that's also something that we should take into consideration yeah we will request that as well if there are any written agreements between the licy and Northeast security regarding coordination of dispersal that's a good point commissioner Saxon so all of that will be requested to be submitted by end of day Tuesday November 19th for the board's review thank you anything else on that matter okay item number four uh was not heard and will be continued to the December 10th uh LIC teros inspection hearing moving on to the transactional hearing which occurred yesterday Wednesday November 13th 2024 item number one 107 Salem Street Inc doing business as Bako located at 107 Salem Street has petitioned to change the manager to Dario Danielle buban Garcia I vote to approve Mr Garcia as manager of record I believe he has the appropriate character and fitness to serve sorry I vote to approve as well I agree it number two 99 Restaurants of Boston LLC doing business as 99 Restaurant and Pub located at 29 to 31 Austin Street in Charlestown has petitioned to change the manager to Brian chuch chiolo I vote to prove Mr chilo as manager record I believe he is the appropriate character and fitness to serve I agree I agree add number three mwg W Carver Grand Lodge Inc located at 70 to 80 talut AB in Dorchester as PE to change the manager to Glenn Williams and has petion for a change of officers directors I vote to approve Mr Williams as manager of record and to approve the change of officers and directors I agree I agree item number four DW French LLC doing business as maida located at 1391 Boyston Street as petition to amend the description of the licens business to 4,276 Ft interior floor area including 3,397 square feet on the first floor with main dining area bar and bar area kitchen and storage 879 s ft on second floor with kitchen and office space 750t seasonal April to October outdoor patio on private property closing hour 11: p.m. I vote to approve the amended description I vote to approve um that's the only change thank you I votes approve as well I agree thank you item five Roden Inc doing business as Beacon Capital Market located at 32 Myrtle Street has petition to transfer the license to Beacon Capital markets Inc doing business as Beacon Capital Market at the same location L Verma manager 11:00 p.m. closing hour and has also petitioned to pledge the license and inventory to rod in Inc I vote to approve the transfer and the pledge and Mr Verma who I think is already approved but in case he's not vote to approve him I agree I agree you item six lantis Boston Inc doing business as lanties located at 116 Salem Street has petitioned to transfer the license to Brook Egg Farm Inc doing business as Lanes at the same location Carlo loan manager 11: p.m. closing hour vote to approve I agree items seven eight and nine have been withdrawn in their uh current iteration and we expect they will be back with revised descriptions of premise items 10 through 16 are all new license applications uh chairman Joyce I assume you will request defer a vote on these but I'll leave that to you I am requesting a deferral on the on the remainder of the applications I second yeah moving on to the non-hearing transactions the following are applying for a new common vit license at a previously licensed location item number one Joe's Pizza and Wings LLC doing business as Joe's Pizza and Wings located at 111 Brighton a in Alon manager Omare yalin hours of operation 7:00 a.m. to 2: a.m. I vote to approve I agree I agree item two Hest takaria LLC doing business as be good located at 84 Summer Street manager Magner cardoso hours of operation 10: a.m. to 9:00 p.m. I vote to approve I agree I agree item three Nia 95 summer LLC doing business as NAA located at 91 Summer Street manager agz Gomez hours of operation 11:00 a.m. to 9:00 P p.m. I vote to approve I agree I agree and item number four pnh boss go LL C doing business as Buffalo Wild Wings go located at 500 Logan Airport within Terminal A in East Boston manager Robert Le Point hours of operation 5: am to 10 pm I vote to approve I agree I agree the following are have applied to make changes to their existing common vitler license item one sedexo operations LLC doing business as sedexo at Young Family Cafe at 111 Francis Street uh has petitioned to change the manager to Donna Spina Thomas I vote to approve I agree and item number two Lady M Newbury LLC doing business as Lady M located at 304 Newbury Street has petitioned to remove Kevin J he as national manager I vot to approve I agree agree following have applied for a one-day amendment to their existing license a d Inc doing business as Ned divines at 2201 Fel Hall Marketplace has applied to extend their license to the contiguous space in the upper rotunda of quinsey Market for the Helms Brisco holiday reception on November 20th from 4 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. I vote to approve I agree board has before them a list of applications for special one-day alcoholic beverage licenses which have been administratively reviewed by staff and approved by the board and there are no items on old and new business this week so those are all of the items before the board um we will meet uh next Wednesday for the next transactional hearing notice will be posted to the city of Boston's website that will adjourn this morning's hearing thank you all thank you