No changes afoot after arrest of Humphreys’ talent buyer

So, 'Insider' suggests employees have been drinking after hours since 1975. Unfortunately, that's against the law if the shift was after 2am: Any on- or off-sale licensee, or agent or employee of that licensee, who sells, gives, or delivers to any persons any alcoholic beverage or any person who knowingly purchases any alcoholic beverage between the hours of 2 o'clock a.m. and 6 o'clock a.m. of the same day, is guilty of a misdemeanor. - http://law.onecle.com/california/business/25631.h… Also, the likely reason the employees were fired is that this licensee will no doubt be sued by the victim's surviving family. From my understanding it will be tough because they will likely have to prove employees knowingly over-served their fellow employee (perpetrator). It's not like that should be hard to prove. A relatively recent SDSU study showed, even after San Diego bar staff are highly trained under the ABC's LEAD program and other Responsible Beverage Service training programs that they will likely chronically over-serve. The study shows that bartenders and staff over-served female pseudo-patrons, who should have been served a single drink an hour, the equivalent of eight drinks - in under fifty minutes - over 90% of the time. (See: http://sandiegoale.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11…) Yet, the odds of a San Diego alcohol licensee getting a citation by the ABC or police is about once every 150 years. (See #4 here: http://www.sandiegoale.com/2012/11/analysis-of-pu…) Unfortunately, this tragedy creates a number of victims, all because bar staff and owners just don't get it. It's not ok to over-serve. Period. California is a no-dram shop law state so bar owners have little to fear. Too bad. For more see: http://www.sandiegoALE.com
— February 17, 2013 6:35 p.m.

State Suspends Portions Of Brown Act

I'm looking for collaborators on a subscription service where citizens can be notified when topics they're interested in are mentioned in San Diego city agendas and minutes. The goal is to expand from there but, let's test it here! Check: http://datajuncture.com/ideas/local-municipality-…
— July 13, 2012 11:26 p.m.

Judgment Finalized In Legal Battle Over Golden Hill Maintenance Assessment District

Hurray for most of the citizens of Golden Hill (excluding those that tried to impose this MAD on their community). From my recollection, this isn't a case of the city imposing its will on the residents and businesses as much as it's a case of a group of citizens who manipulated the system and worked through loopholes (perhaps ones the city could've prevented yes) to do this. Who was involved? Who was trying to spend the money against the community's will? What are they doing now? Congrats to the stubborn few who saw this through! You were right after all :)
— February 10, 2012 12:18 p.m.

SDPD: Conduct Unsporting?

"We're in a recession," said Jerry Hall, blogger at pbSpirits.com. "Even though San Diegans are sick and tired of paying for police, fire-rescue, ambulance, hospital and legal costs for the myriad of DUI drivers that bad bar and 'restaurant' business operators in Pacific Beach cultivate, they persist unabated. Shouldn't the most problematic bars and 'restaurant' owners pay for these costs or, are San Diegans happy subsidizing their profits asks Hall." Hall did exclaim his appreciation for the economic 'revitalization' poor operators create and often brag about. "They've employed not only their crews that follow poor practices but, are also creating opportunities for bottle and can collectors, flyer distributors and trash pickup crews. Ah, revitalization!" says Hall. "Every community in San Diego should aspire to become more like PB!"
— September 8, 2011 2:23 p.m.

DUI Checkpoints in Pacific Beach Result in High Arrest Count

PB is like a loaded gun shooting drunk drivers all throughout the city. Those checkpoints are DUI drivers leaving PB and going to their homes or, other parties or bars and 'restaurants' in your community for that matter and put every one of us in danger. We need controls (not closing bars) but, a process to encourage bad business operators in PB to curtail seeming over-serving practices to many if not most of these DUI drivers.
— September 7, 2011 9:19 p.m.

None

PB is like a loaded gun shooting drunk drivers all throughout the city. Those checkpoints are DUI drivers leaving PB and going to their homes or, other parties or bars and 'restaurants' in your community for that matter and put every one of us in danger. We need controls (not closing bars) but, a process to encourage bad business operators in PB to stop over-serving many if not most of these DUI drivers.
— September 7, 2011 3:44 p.m.

Dueling Ideologies in Pacific Beach

I just discovered your story and do love it as well. Welcome! We hope you never leave :). There are many working to improve conditions in PB insofar as tweaking the business district to get them to start being more responsible in their business practices (i.e. over-serving). If we lose our frat-culture and stretch all those good things you found by day into our evenings this will truly become an even more idyllic place to live and grow young. I have a website at www.pbSpirits.com and hope you'll visit (even though it is revealing other negative portraits of our nightlife the underlying theme is we're not hopeless :). Thanks again!
— August 2, 2011 8:10 a.m.

Waving The White Flag in PB.

Thanks BSP and DH for the story. DH did contact me for some background and I responded too late. I do want to say that I'm trying this approach largely isolated from many other like-minded PB residents... who believe, many with good reason even, that this is not necessarily a viable course. That being said I am still floating the boat to see where it goes. The truth is I'm skeptical too... but, I'm hopeful. Perhaps naive, green, wet behind the ears... but, I'm a believer that the best solution is one that is hammered out by all the affected parties... not one group hammering the other one until they get what they want or get the other one to submit to every demand. Doesn't it make sense to try every possible tact so that one can sit back satisfied that they tried everything possible to improve conditions? Or, does it make sense to just stand there, arms crossed and so stuck on a line in the sand that one can't see any other possible way? Compromises are inevitable--for both sides of the argument--and so as I compromise I'm sucking it up and looking for alternatives. I may be too tainted in the bar owner's minds to be trustworthy in that they may see me as a wolf in sheep's clothing but, I'll make it plain. I support lower outlet density (bars should love that because they value goes up and we all should love it because crime goes down) and problem beverage service (over-pouring, over-serving, selling to obviously intoxicated people), I support doing anything we can to mitigate impaired and drunk driving and I support lowering other levels of alcohol-related crime, especially violent crimes. I can't believe the bars support the opposite of these things. But, I do believe they tolerate them a lot easier than I can. That too being said, I also believe there is a lot of room for improvement. They and I owe this to the people who will be critically injured or killed in PB. We're dodging bullets right now and we've got to address this stuff now more than ever. So, the writer may call this a white flag however, I am not surrendering. I have not quit, I have not relented in documenting what's happening (see www.pbSpirits.com for videos and nearly 400 articles on the subject) and I will not walk around with my tail between my legs (no, I don't have a tail). What I am doing though is trying a different approach, which it appears to the writer as a weakness. Yes, I am told this is a redundant attempt that has been proven wrong over and over again (ostensibly by the bar/restaurant owners) over the last decade. I guess I need to be convinced that I'm on an impossible path. I see the reasoning but, I suppose I need to see it for myself. I hope they're wrong and we end up with a quality, fun and safe PB... day and night 24/365. Stay tuned eh?
— July 20, 2011 11:51 p.m.

Pacific Beach Foot Traffic, Retail, Up in Smoke

The block party was stopped because the last one in 2005 had over 200,000 people (not 100k as in previous years) and councilmember Kevin Faulconer had VERY LITTLE to do with ceasing that event. That was done by the three big PB community groups - starting with the BID oddly enough - who were concerned about the enormous negative effects on the community (http://www.sdnews.com/pages/full_story/push?artic…).
— April 9, 2011 2:45 p.m.

Pacific Beach Foot Traffic, Retail, Up in Smoke

Strange - all the Kevin-bashing sounds just like the people who have told countless others to leave PB if we didn't like it, that we should've known the abuse we'd have to endure by moving here, that the abnormal crime in the evenings is a price we must pay as a neighborhood because of the thriving business economy and the 'millions' that visit PB. Oh, and that if all else fails blame the councilmember. I believe over 250 thousand others, against their own personal interests, voted to remove alcohol from the beaches - not because they are party poopers. I believe it was because that half saw that public safety was paramount to one enjoying a personal luxury of being able to drink peacefully on a public beach. The other half's major proponents just yelled, taunted, belittled and ridiculed those of us that had the cajones to stand up and say that something was wrong that needed to be fixed so that ALL VISITORS TO THEIR BEACHES WOULD BE SAFE. Guess these opponents believe personal liberties only apply to one side - theirs. Amzazing also how people bitter with a sitting councilmember will continue to mis-quote facts with I believe the intention to smear his name long into the future because of personal bitterness. I don't agree with everything he does - and I was one of the vocal ones questioning him at every beach alcohol task force - but, I do respect him for standing up for public safety and not being bullied by the people who harassed him (and other supporting councilmembers) in public forums, council meetings, by email and telephone. Have you been to the beaches lately? I'm betting many tourists avoided PB like the plague because of the past alcohol issues. Our reputation is set. Since the business district has always been the third leg of the issue and as Mr. Ligenfelder stated - he knew they were next - it's time to focus on the last bastion of our negative reputation so that we can start attracting visitors that use many of PB's retail and service businesses - not just one segment at the peril of all others. Many of these bar and 'restaurant' businesses benefited significantly over the past many years but, as the saying goes all good things (the bars making hand over fist income while the rest of the community suffers) must come to an end one day. The party isn't over in PB - we just need to hold the hosts responsible and to have a mechanism to discipline those hosts that abuse their right to do business in our community. Seems they'll fight tooth and nail to claim they are, that if any change would happen it should be someone else paying for it or, if that all doesn't work just continue to attack the heck out of their 'opponents'. If you're happy with PB's business district being a toilet fine. I'm not.
— April 9, 2011 2:44 p.m.