Pacific Beach Foot Traffic, Retail, Up in Smoke

The author didn’t mention that I do not represent the PB Town Council. I do not serve on the Town Council to address alcohol issues as I do just fine airing observations and thoughts at pbSpirits dot com. Mr. Ligenfelder's statements that I or any PB residents are now set to 'come after the businesses' is an intentional distraction. Problems in the BID and the beach are two entirely different animals. Beach patrons were self-policed and didn’t do that great of a job. Have you been to the beaches lately? Bars are trained to serve responsibly. How are they doing? One recent SDSU study, including observations at several PB bars (linked on my website), stated that servers gave a female patron, who would typically be able to process one shot of alcohol per hour, the equivalent of 8 shots of alcohol in under 50 minutes - over 90% of the time! PB’s enormous levels of drunk driving arrests, alcohol crimes (over 1900% citywide average in PB's core) and the myriad of problems it causes our other good businesses - including I might add the reputation of the good alcohol operators - are inexcusable. These noisy few say they're blameless, that everyone pre-drinks excessively, that it's their patrons fault for getting so drunk... or, laughably that it's the tourists (ROFL). Maybe these guys should change their motto to 'Anybody's fault but ours'. In truth, these operators brag that over 99% of their employees are trained to serve responsibly yet, just how are all these people getting so drunk so consistently in our business district? I support a conditional use permit (CUP) where all alcohol licensees pay into a fund, bigger or problematic ones would pay about $100 a month and the others about $35/month. This money would fund a focused ABC-trained SDPD Vice officer to mediate between the community and alcohol licensees and would enforce conditions designed to mitigate community concerns - things like too much noise, over-serving, chronic problems... things that they know they're responsible for but, openly violate because the state ABC and the SDPD don't have the resources to monitor them. The ABC and police are unable to adequately fund enforcement so shouldn’t the people making all the money (tens of millions in sales in PB alone) be the ones to pay for it? I do not work to remove alcohol from PB's business district nor restrict in any way people's constitutional right to drink and have fun. However, I do work to hold the problematic bars and restaurants accountable for their actions. So, cry me a river. To the BID and problem bars and restaurants - start working with the community and quit fighting it. We won't sit by and watch you continue to turn PB into a toilet while watching all the great businesses in PB get thrashed economically – and others avoiding us like the plague - just so you can continue to profit off of our backs. Enough is enough.
— April 6, 2011 10:48 a.m.

License Creep

Check www.pbSpirits.com for descriptions, stats, stories and more. Feel free to comment on anything. The 19x rate is all the alcohol arrests and citations in the City of San Diego divided by the number of census tracts - which are usually shaped to include approximately 5,000 residents. The 79.01 tract (maps on site) roughly includes Mission Blvd and Garnet up to Fanuel. The guidelines for giving new licenses is only if the area is 1.2 the percentage of the citywide average whereas this tract in PB (79.01) is 19x.
— June 18, 2010 1:10 p.m.

Bring Your Own Concerns

Thanks founder for the head's up to the forum. I've read other's comments about stats etc. and their irrevelance as it relates to number of licenses per population levels. The truth is we have one alcohol license for every 85 residents in census tract 79.01 - the core of PB. Any way you look at it this is extremely high. Also, we have 19 times the citywide average of alcohol related crimes yet more licenses are being piled on. What would you feel comfortable at capping the number of licenses at? One for every 50 residents? 25? 10? When does it stop. In 1996 the ABC had 16 enforcement officers - now they have 4 that cover over 3500 licenses in the San Diego southern region. That's over 850 licenses per employee. A typical 40 hour work week - actually less now with the furloughs - and 280 work days a year yields about 2.5 working hours an ABC officer has to monitor and enforce these licenses - for the entire year. This includes fielding complaints, doing paperwork and any legal-court or other time. The laws were in place to give the ABC the ability to remove problem establishments - in that if they had 3 violations in 3 years they would remove their license. Now they say 'could'. Even so, over a 5-year period the ABC gave out only 16 violations in PB, with only 4 to bars. None of these 16 fit into the 3-strikes laws. So, with no enforcement and no law to back them up the ABC must've realized they didn't need 16 officers so they gutted the staff. Real convenient. Does wonders for community-building. So, save your 'stats are worthless' comments and come up with facts of your own and I'm all ears. Do let me know too so I can tell the families of the many, many people who got severely beat-up, stabbed, shot or killed by drunk drivers why it is they should just tough it out... I'm sure they'll understand.
— June 15, 2010 11:41 a.m.