By Matt Raymond (2F04), on February 3rd, 2012%
On Wednesday, The Ethiopian Times, which describes itself as “the only English newspaper in the United State serving the Ethiopian community,” published a little jeremiad under the headline “Mood Lounge was not found quilty [sic]“:
“The Mood Lounge has been under much scrutiny by the ANC and a select group of neighbors, some of whom have been very vocal in their mission of shutting down Mood Lounge amidst allegations of noise violations. Despite these accusations and the relentless harassment by this group of neighbors that accompany them, to date, the Mood Lounge has not been found in violation of any noise provisions.”
The editorial began by expressing “shock” and “sadness” over the double stabbing that occurred at the de facto nightclub on Dec. 30, 2011, despite ample evidence that Mood Lounge knew very well what was going on there, did very little to put in place the measures to have prevented it, and then impeded investigators, according to the ABC Board.
While published without a byline, the post speaks in the first person:
“We are compelled to make this statement because much of what has been speculated or reported on blogs and to some media outlets related to this incident, and Mood Lounge in general, is wrong.”
One might logically question whether this “newspaper” was relying on a ghost writer with extremely close connections to the editorial’s subject, if you know what I mean. But that’s beside the point.
And yet, Mood Lounge The Ethiopian Times was just winding up with its caterwauling about the nonexistent harassment:
“The true issue appears to be the perception perpetuated by select neighbors that the Lounge’s patrons are undesirable. It is unfortunate that in 2011 and 2012 that a person’s skin color or attire can cause them to be prejudged as undesirable and somehow unsafe. The Mood Lounge is patronized primarily by Ethiopians and African Americans over the age of 21.”
(Slight digression. “Primarily” must be the operative phrase, because police discovered a 19-year-old was among the patrons on the night of the stabbings.)
Ah, yes, the nuclear option of modern politics: utterly baseless charges of racism. It’s craven, dishonest and disgusting. It’s intellectual laziness, a sure sign that you’re losing the argument.
You’ve heard of Godwin’s Law, right? It states with only mild irony that every online discussion will eventually degenerate into somebody comparing somebody else to Nazis or Hitler. Maybe it’s time to propose “Mimi’s Corollary,” named for the scofflaw owner of Mood Lounge, Ababa “Mimi” Beyene.
There are a host of establishments within the boundaries of ANC 2F, past and present, that have had primarily African American or minority clientele. Not a single one of them in recent memory has generated even a sliver of a slice of the complaints, pandemonium, and violations of law and regulations that Mood Lounge has inflicted on the community with relative impunity.
I have received literally hundreds if not, by now, thousands of emails from neighbors who have been on the receiving end of this abuse. ANC 2F has heard from them at multiple meetings, and many commissioners have spoken with them outside the context of official meetings. Not once have I heard any of them utter a single word that would call their motives into question. It’s awfully rich that Mood Lounge The Ethiopian Times would brilliantly deduce that ”skin color” is at the root of this, when the neighbors themselves are an extremely diverse lot.
So let’s put this putrid little canard to rest, stop putting the accusers on trial, and start focusing on the issues at hand, shall we?
Instead, let’s get back to the exquisite timing alluded to above.
Just one day–one day–after this pathetic and invidiously crafted protestation of innocence, the ABC Board released its ruling on noise violations at Mood Lounge, stemming from a “show cause” hearing on Dec. 7, 2011. To put it mildly, the Board wasn’t buying it. Let’s skip to the ironic dessert before we enjoy the tasty entree:
“[W]e find that the Respondent guilty [sic] of the violation described in Charge I.”
In its Conclusions of Law, the ABC Board put the smack-down on Mood’s see-no-evil, hear-no-evil shtick:
“We find that the Government has shown through substantial evidence that the Respondent violated the terms of its Voluntary Agreement by playing music audible in The Nine condominiums and failing to cure the noise issues within the 30-day cure period. [...]
“[T]he Board can only conclude that the Respondent has failed to cure the violation.
“We are not persuaded by the Respondent’s arguments that its actions in this matter were reasonable or that the noise and vibrations observed in The Nine are not a material violation of the agreement. The Respondent’s arguments regarding reasonableness are irrelevant in this matter. Section 6 of the Voluntary Agreement is clear that the neighboring residents should not hear noise or vibrations from the establishment in their residences. The establishment had 30 days after receiving notice from The Nine condominium owners to resolve the problem; yet, the noise issues returned two to three weeks after the sound test on May 19, 2011. As such, because the establishment failed to cure the violation, it is liable for violating the Voluntary Agreement.
“In addition, we also find that the noise experienced by The Nine condominium owners is a material violation of the Voluntary Agreement. [...]
“The Voluntary Agreement is clear that the establishment’s neighbors have a right not to hear noise and vibrations in their residences. Thus, this prohibition is an essential term of the agreement, and necessary to ensure the neighborhood ‘s peace, order, and quiet. Any other interpretation would deny ANC 2F the benefit of its bargain with the Respondent.”
Sadly, despite the tongue-lashing, the ABC Board has been far too timid and, in the opinion of at least some ANC commissioners, is breaking the law by not permitting the commission to offer the advice to which we are statutorially entitled during last month’s hearing–not to be confused with the December hearing–in the wake of a double stabbing outside Mood Lounge. The Board’s response to that bloody night in December was essentially to ask Mood Lounge to abide by the security plan that they were required to have in the first place. Their response to the noise violations ruled upon today: a $500 fine.
Clearly something is wrong with this picture.
Meanwhile, the hits just keep on coming: Yet another show-cause hearing is in the offing for additional noise violations, and ABC actions regarding still more violations are also pending. One of these is Mood’s failure to keep a required log of the multitude of complaints that have been lodged against them.
Another, which the ANC voted upon this past Wednesday, relates to an assault that took place on Oct. 30, 2011, the alleged perpetrator of which was the promoter of the event that evening at Mood Lounge. Teferi Getu Desta has reportedly been arrested in connection with the incident.
So ANC 2F has been engaging in “harassment”? Nonsense. We’re just doing our job.
By Matt Raymond (2F04), on February 2nd, 2012%
I’m pleased to announce that last night my colleagues elected me the new chairman of Advisory Neighborhood Commission 2F’s Community Development Committee. It’s in some ways a return for me (and not a “comeback,” as Norma Desmond would say). During my first term, I served as CDC chairman for several months before work took me on a brief diversion to New York.
I have been also a member of the CDC for all three of my terms on the ANC. (According to our bylaws, commissioners may appoint up to two CDC members from within their own Single Member Districts. My other appointee is Helen Kramer. She previously served for many years on ANC 2F, including stints as both chair of the CDC and of the full commission. For those of you who know her, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that I am swimming in her wake, as it were, when it comes to her sheer breadth of experience and institutional memory.)
During all of those years, I had the pleasure of serving with Mike Benardo, first as a CDC member prior to his election to the ANC, and then in his role as commissioner chairman of the CDC.
Mike was recently elected chairman of the full ANC after longtime chairman Charles Reed stepped aside because of health reasons, although Charles remains on the commission–thankfully for us and the community. The increased demands on Mike make it understandable that he wouldn’t be expected to chair both the commission and ANC’s busiest and longest-standing committee.
Mike has been an active, knowledgable and outstanding committee chairman, and I have no doubt he will bring those same qualities to ANC 2F’s chairmanship. In many ways, I will also be swimming in his wake. (That’s a lot of swimming! Maybe I should attempt a channel crossing.)
So please contact me if you have issues that will be coming before the commission, such as historic preservation applications, zoning exceptions and variances, public space permits, DDOT traffic plans, etc. My contact info is here, and you can add my cell phone to the list: 202-744-1921. However, often when I talk to people on the phone, I’ll ask them to send an email anyway. I rely heavily on my electronic archives!
Oh, and by the way, the CDC meets on the fourth Wednesday of every month, with the exception of months like July that don’t have a corresponding ANC meeting in the following month. (Like the rest of Washington, we flee town in August.) You can always find agendas on this website, and you can learn more about the CDC in our bylaws.
One last thing: ANC 2F is trying to inventory what are known as ”deteriorated properties” or “properties with significant maintenance problems” for DC’s Historic Preservation Office. If you think any properties within ANC 2F boundaries fit that description, please contact me as your soonest opportunity.
By Matt Raymond (2F04), on January 5th, 2012%
The views below are mine alone and are not intended to speak for the entire ANC 2F.
So Councilmember Harry Thomas Jr. has resigned.
Good.
I blogged about this a couple of months ago. However, I didn’t call for Thomas’s resignation. Yes, it was the right thing to do, but as a resident of Ward 2, I felt the opinions of his own constituents and his colleagues were more important than mine.
What is surprising and disappointing is that prior to today, only one-quarter of Thomas’s fellow councilmembers had publicly called on him to resign.
While everyone is entitled to a presumption of innocence, there is nothing different about today’s announcement of criminal charges than what we already knew this past summer. The District’s attorney general made the same allegations in June, yet other councilmembers didn’t add their names to the “resign now” list until news about a pending plea bargain and Thomas’s offer to resign were already well known.
The Council failed to seize this golden opportunity to bolster its integrity and to regain the public trust. In short, it was a failure of courage.
My blogging lately has focused on both this issue and the pressing need to revoke the liquor license of Mood Lounge. Ethics and regulation of liquor licensees might seem unrelated, but for me, a common thread runs through them both. I moved into the District from the ‘burbs because I was proud of and impressed by the progress DC was making toward good governance, lower crime and economic development.
But the current ethical climate, and the blight Mood Lounge has brought to my neighborhood, are both examples of “two steps forward and one step back”–maybe even one step forward and two steps back.
I don’t want Washington to return to the bad ol’ days. We have come way too far to go back there.
While I’m at it, why on earth are DC councilmembers allowed to continue serving in office even after a felony conviction (albeit, not while in prison)? Under federal law, if you commit a felony, you lose your right to own a gun.
In other words, if you commit a felony, the government wants to ensure that you won’t threaten your neighbor with physical violence at the barrel of a firearm.
But if you’re a member of the Council of the District of Columbia and you commit a felony, your government will still allow you to threaten 600,000 people with corruption, malfeasance and gross abdication of your oath of office.
Am I alone in thinking that any councilmember who takes up this cause could almost write the ticket for his or her own reelection?
By Matt Raymond (2F04), on January 3rd, 2012%
 This photograph (taken by my ANC 2F-06 colleague Mike Benardo) is one of the most beautiful–and surprising–images I have seen in a long time.
By way of background, Mood Lounge took over the liquor license of a former bar at the same location, along with the accompanying voluntary agreement (VA) almost one year ago.
Under DC law, ANCs and–in some cases–groups of citizens can negotiate VAs that provide additional protections for neighborhoods, such as operating hours that are more compatible with residences in the immediate vicinity. (ANC 2F generally doesn’t seek voluntary agreements with licensees in the central business district.)
Within a few weeks of Mood’s opening, the complaints came flooding in at a volume (literally) and level of seriousness that no current ANC 2F commissioner could recall previously during our various years of service. There was the noise, greatly in excess of what was permitted under the voluntary agreement and DC law, essentially every night that Mood was open, often until at least 3 a.m., and then even later when boisterous patrons spilled onto the streets and loitered long after closing time. (From this came public bodily emanations of many kinds, and even one incident of sex on the hood of a car.) Emails poured in from sleepless residents, often with time stamps around 4 or 5 a.m., detailing the BOOM BOOM BOOM of the bass levels, items literally shaking in their homes from the decibels.
(There had been a couple of issues with the previous licensee, BeBar, but they were reportedly resolved quickly.)
This happened with Swiss timepiece-like precision and predictability when Mood was open. Management was almost entirely unresponsive to complaints, and on the small number of occasions they did respond, conditions rapidly degenerated.
Infractions were not limited to noise: vermin, trash, almost every provision of the VA possible. Mood was transforming itself from a CT licensee (tavern) into a de facto CN licensee (nightclub). Furthermore, Mood was operating on an improperly issued certificate of occupancy. This may be an arcane issue to some, but Mood was essentially occupying fully one-third more square feet than they were entitled to.
Fights regularly broke out in front of the establishment. And then, in the early morning hours this past Friday, the coup de grace: a double stabbing after a fight broke out inside the lounge. Neighbors knew it was a matter of when, not if, assault with deadly weapons would occur–as it turns out, barely one month after I last blogged about this. And they even feared fatalities like the one that occurred recently at Heritage India.
Neighbors, government officials and others have felt stymied by a bureaucracy that seemed incapable of responding adequately. The first “show cause hearing” for a Mood violation didn’t even occur until a few weeks ago, and even more are in the offing, including yet another VA breach the ANC voted on last month. The ABC Board has 90 days to issue a ruling in what is inarguably an open-and-shut case, yet we were told by those familiar with the process to expect it to take most if not all of those 90 days.
Even worse, despite the incessant noise and other violations, each infraction was being treated discretely. It seemed an impossible task to portray to the District the full dimensions of the problem, which spanned not only months on the calendar and various sections of the VA, but also multiple agencies of DC government. ”Second-tier violations,” such as noise, could be penalized as little as $250, and it takes four of those to reach the status of a “primary violation.” It reminded me of Dwight Schrute’s disciplinary system, wherein five “citations” equal one “violation,” four of which lead to a “verbal warning,” etc.
The Metropolitan Police Department (props to Sgt. David Terestre, and also to Chief Lanier for getting involved), Jack Evans, the mayor’s office, this ANC, ABRA and others were already ratcheting up the pressure before last Friday. After the violence occurred, MPD used emergency powers it has to shut Mood down for 96 hours–and over the New Year’s Day weekend, it was going to send a clear and balance sheet-affecting message.
And then today, up went the sign in Mike’s photo above. Mood is closed “indefinitely.” For just about everyone besides Mood’s owners and patrons, we hope that also means “permanently.”
I have to commend the affeced residents for their tenacity–which is understandable, of course, when your restfulness and mental health are at stake. They documented their complaints. They went through the proper channels, as frustrating as those channels often were. By and large, they maintained a high level of civility. And they went out of their way to work constructively with Mood to bring it into line with its obligations. But one by one, Mood lost all of their allies and any goodwill the neighborhood had left.
And they have no one but themselves to blame.
UPDATE: In the middle of writing this post, I received from the mayor’s office the ABC Board’s “notice of summary suspension.” In short, Mood has 72 hours to request a hearing, the ABC Board then has 48 hours to conduct the hearing, and 24 more hours to issue its decision.
In the document, Chief Lanier states that “the continued operation of the licensed establishment presents an imminent danger to the health and safety of the public” and that ”there would be an additional imminent danger to the health and welfare of the public if the establishment was not closed, and that there is no other immediately available measure that would ameliorate the threat to public safety.”
Among the more shocking findings, no one from Mood called the police to report the stabbings, and that “the establishment made several attempts to hinder [ABRA's] investigation.” Read the full paragraph regarding those “attempts.” It would be laughable if it weren’t so outrageous.
By Matt Raymond (2F04), on November 28th, 2011%
A post on Shaw Deserves Better that Nick brought to my attention asks the following: “Why do problematic bars not get closed before people die?” The question at hand was the deadly violence yesterday at Heritage India in Dupont Circle:
Anybody familiar with the “broken windows” theory of urban planning knows that, in summary, small, unenforced violations of the law lead to bigger violations. So, as these three previous violations did not (that I am aware) result in a fatality, using that theory, it becomes increasingly evident that there was some reasonable expectation that it might escalate to that level. [...]
So, the question is really this: almost every bar that’s been affiliated with a fatality in my recent memory had been before the ABRA Board more than once. Certainly, there are many establishments who appear multiple times and still have no body count years later. However, it begs the question – with so many solid liquor licensed establishments in the city, why not put in a “three (or five, or ten) strikes you’re out” style law to kill off these repeat offenders? As is, even when ABRA gets an establishment permanently closed, often times a new establishment opens under the same license in the same location, prolonging suffering, and risk, to the surrounding residential community.
The blog post goes on to mention the ongoing problems at MOOD Lounge on Ninth Street NW, with which this ANC is very well acquainted, and concerns that the establishment might follow the same violent path as the one in Dupont. The author notes, accurately, that some neighbors are so fed up with the situation–literally sick and tired–that they intend to oppose all new liquor licenses.
The following is a comment I added to the blog post:
Ask anyone on Advisory Neighborhood Commission 2F, and they will tell you that MOOD Lounge has been the worst of the bad liquor-license actors in the entire history of our service on the commission.
The license transferred to MOOD in January 2011, and only weeks later, the complaints began pouring in, the worst of which being noise violations. You would know that MOOD had a CT (tavern) license, because it is operating–illegally–as a CN (nightclub).
Other issues include drunken and disorderly conduct and loitering long after closing hours, fights and assaults, public urination and vomiting, and even one reported case of sexual intercourse on the hood of a car. These incidents happen again and again and again, and the management routinely disregards and fails to respond to the entreaties of nearby residents who lose untold hours of sleep.
The ANC has tried for months to get the city to sit up and take notice, but it has been incredibly frustrating, and the processes and bureaucracy that are put in place make it far too difficult to deal with even such a blatant scofflaw. One would think that after even a fraction of these kinds of instances that some sort of summary action could be taken against the licensee.
The ANC has been working with Councilmember Jack Evans, the MPD, ABRA and DCRA to address this. Thankfully, it is now squarely on the radar of those such as the ABRA director and MPD Chief Lanier. But it should not have taken this long.
I have long contended that the situation is unacceptable and out of control and, as the post above indicates, it is a matter of when, not if, a killing occurs that is tied to the activities in and around MOOD. Shaw and Logan Circle have made far too much forward progress in the last several years to allow our neighborhoods to slip back down the slope again.
That being said, blanket opposition to all future licensees won’t be a helpful or, frankly, a successful approach. As a matter of course, ANC 2F will “protest” new liquor licenses. I don’t like the term “protest” because it implies an adversarial relationship between the licensee and the community from the outset. But a protest is the only way the ANC or neighbors can have standing to ensure a licensee operates in a way that’s compatible with nearby residences. (As a general rule, we tend not to protest licenses in the downtown business district, unless there are extenuating circumstances such as an operator with a poor track record. We also don’t protest if a Voluntary Agreement can be reached before the ABC Board considers the application.)
Protests and Voluntary Vgreements (another term that I dislike, in that the hurdle for a licensee becomes much higher if they don’t take this “voluntary” action) allow us to balance the needs of businesses and residents. But without them, we cede any input that we might have to the ABC Board, which unfortunately sometimes without enough regard for or knowledge of the needs of the community.
Protests should be undergirded by the law, ABRA regulations, logic and a solid basis for the terms sought in a VA. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t seek additional safeguards, such as new laws that make it easier to deal with bad actors. But if protests are arbitrary or seen as based upon whims, the ABC Board will begin to tune us out, and the problem might actually get worse–the law of unintended consequences, if you will.
By Matt Raymond (2F04), on October 29th, 2011%
The views below are mine alone and are not intended to speak for the entire ANC 2F.
While I do not necessarily agree with every single point, Colbert King’s latest column on the dire and growing need for ethical reforms in the Council of the District of Columbia is something that needed to be said.
Ethics—or lack thereof—is at the core of the disintegrating comity, increasing dysfunction and costly distractions that plague the Council. Nearly half of the entire Council is under an ethical cloud, and two members—Council President Kwame Brown and Council Member Harry Thomas Jr.—are even under federal investigation. If that weren’t bad enough, most of their Council colleagues have been essentially sotto voce on the subject, stoking public suspicions that corruption is simply par for the course in the John A. Wilson Building.
Of course, not to be outdone, Mayor Vincent Gray faces several troubling allegations of his own.
This is not simply a matter of concluding the pending investigations and answering the unanswered questions. Everyone agrees on the need for ethics reforms, but unfortunately, far too few voices are speaking up for the sweeping, comprehensive and structural changes that are desperately needed.
I served for almost 15 years in the federal government. The type of behavior that is countenanced among D.C. officials would get you ridden out of town on a rail in Congress. A congressional lobbyist can scarcely buy you a cup of coffee without setting off flashing lights and Klaxons. While public esteem of Congress is at all-time lows, caused in part by various scandals and ethical lapses, the D.C. Council is making Congress look as chaste as Caesar’s wife.
Everyone says that something needs to be done, but I’m concerned that they’re just preparing for yet another kabuki dance. At a bare minimum, the Council should pass sweeping reforms not only for themselves, but also in the Mayor’s office and District-wide.
For a start, they should eliminate or seriously circumscribe the so-called “Constituent Services Funds,” which in many cases operate as slush funds and mechanisms to confer political favors. Crack down on nepotism, “pay to play,” procurement abuses. Implement greater transparency and reporting requirements.
The current, laughable fines and penalties, which Council Member Jack Evans derides as the “cost of doing business,” need to be significantly increased—tenfold or more. Expulsion should be a very real threat. Should it really take a criminal conviction to give someone the boot? The watchdogs should be given teeth, not just “gums,” in Colbert King’s words.
The D.C. Council alone (short of congressional action, which few of us would stomach) has the power to drain the swamp. Unfortunately, they’re the ones who filled the swamp in the first place. But if the current trajectory continues, don’t be surprised if the gains the District has made during times of relatively “good government”—economic development, lower crime, fiscal responsibility—aren’t reversed.
They can go a long way toward restoring the public trust by seizing this moment.
By Matt Raymond (2F04), on November 17th, 2010%
Did you know that ANC2F is now on Twitter? You can find us — you guessed it @anc2f.
Increasing public outreach and community involvement has been a greater and greater priority of the commission. We hope you’ll include us among the sources from which you find out about what’s going on in Logan Circle (and the rest of 2F).
By Matt Raymond (2F04), on November 17th, 2010%
We are hearing from more and more constituents who have interest in or are concerned about education issues in our neighborhoods. If the growing numbers of strollers and young faces on our streets are any indication, it’s a feeling that is shared by many more residents. As education reforms move forward in the District, it’s more crucial than ever that we have a voice in charting the future course of schools in our community. We also want to keep our community vibrant by ensuring that fewer parents feel they need to move to the suburbs in order for their children to get a quality education.
That’s why ANC2F and the Logan Circle Community Association are holding a special joint meeting at 7 p.m. on Wednesday, Dec. 1., at the Washington Plaza Hotel (on Thomas Circle).
At our monthly meeting on Nov. 3, the ANC also amended its bylaws to establish a standing Education Committee, which is chaired energetically by Evelyn Boyd Simmons. If you would like to learn more about the committee or get involved, contact us here at this website.
And turn out, if you can, at our Dec. 1 meeting!
|
ANC 2F Map
(Click to Enlarge)ANC 2F serves Logan Circle, Thomas Circle, Old City, Blagden Alley, Franklin Square, and parts of Shaw and Downtown.
|
