After Santa Fe Café and College Perk failed to comply with city regulations, some College Park City Council members said they remain wary of recommending that the county liquor board renew their liquor licenses in two weeks.
Their concerns about the bars lingered after a four-hour public hearing Monday in which owners of Town Hall, College Perk, Santa Fe and the Thirsty Turtle fought to persuade the council that their liquor licenses should be renewed. Most council members said today they aren’t aiming to shut down any of the bars, but debates about College Perk’s failure to pay mandatory fees to the city and Santa Fe’s failure to install a sprinkler system threw the bars’ futures into doubt.
Council members seemed satisfied when owners of the Thirsty Turtle promised to address concerns about security, crowding and making food available.
District 2 Councilman Jack Perry pointed out that Santa Fe Cafe violated a property-use agreement that called for a sprinkler system to be installed there by 2006, but did not go as far as to say how he planned to vote.
“[Santa Fe owner Mark Srour] always comes in with sob stories about how much it’s going to cost. He’d rather put the money in his pockets than put in his business. I don’t want to be the one the reporters call to ask why the place burned down and all the college kids burned up,” Perry said. “I have an opinion, but how I vote remains to be seen.”
Srour said that the potential $80,000 cost of a sprinkler system – which would have to go into a building he is only leasing – could potentially destroy his business, especially with increased competition from the Thirsty Turtle.
“I told [Perry] when I have money to get a sprinkler system, I will get a sprinkler system in,” Srour said. “Unfortunately, with the competition coming in, it kinda hurts a little bit, and it doesn’t make sense to make me go into deeper debt and possibly go, you know, away.”
While owners of Town Hall, Santa Fe and Thirsty Turtle promised to address any council concerns that they had not already, College Perk owner Chris Gordon came under fire because he refused to pay city licensing and inspection fees over a matter of principle.
“Whether we like them or not, those are the laws of the land,” Perry said. “You don’t say, ‘I’m just not going to comply.'”
The coffeehouse stole the show at the meeting with a crowd of protesters and fiery rhetoric, annoying some council members, like District 4 Councilwoman Mary Cook.
“Let me say I’m glad people have something to be so passionate about,” she said. “However, I’m sad to say they have been misinformed. We have no intention of closing down College Perk.”
Cook said she would personally “lean in the direction” of recommending a revocation of the College Perk’s liquor license until he pays the required $700 for a city liquor license and $210 for an inspection of apartments on the premises.
Other council members seemed largely supportive of the crowd of College Perk supporters, who came to the meeting equipped with signs with such messages as “Make love, not unnecessary taxation” and “If it wasn’t for the Perk, I’d be drinking alone,” and another that accused the “predatory” city council of trying to force out independent businesses in favor of the Birchmere music hall planned for the upcoming East Campus development.
“They handled themselves tremendous[ly] last night,” Perry said. “You could have expected when they came in with their placards and everything, ‘Oh man, this is going to be rowdy.'”
“It was certainly a lot more polite than some of the 15-plus e-mails we got that weekend,” added District 2 Councilman Bob Catlin.
The hearing did not produce any decision from the city about what to do next. The council will discuss the information presented next Tuesday at its regularly scheduled meeting, then vote on what recommendation to make to the liquor board the Tuesday after that.
The bar owners, along with their lawyers and supporters, promised at the meeting to address a slew of other, less controversial concerns.
The city had raised concerns about a perceived lack of required restaurant facilities at the Town Hall, an apparent misunderstanding corrected by owner Ronald Berdoo and his attorney Ron Wilmer. They said that over the past few years, food service has ramped up at the bar to offer a more complete menu. They note that while the food is rarely bought – estimating their food-to-alcohol ratio at 5 to 95 – they are only required to maintain food-preparation facilities.
“We have food available, but we don’t make people eat,” Wilmer said. “Our license says that we have to have restaurant facilities. It doesn’t say we have to sell anything.”
The Thirsty Turtle was also brought before the council to address concerns about a lack of a full menu. Individual council members also asked about overcrowding and security.
Owners Thomas Hall and Alan Wanuck, along with their attorney Linda Carter, said that upgraded kitchen facilities allowed for the bar to offer a full menu from 11 a.m. to 11 p.m., that two Prince George’s County police officers are on the staff at the Thirsty Turtle for security, and that an inspector who said the bar was over capacity “had his perception remedied.”
The city chose to review the Santa Fe because of its unlicensed stage and over-capacity attendance. Srour said he removed the stage, and said he was cooperating with the fire marshal with capacity issues whenever they were brought up.
On the whole, Srour said he was happy with how the hearing went. He said he could relate to Perk owner Gordon’s “circus act” behavior at the meeting but that “I think there’s more diplomatic ways to go.
“I’ve been around here for 28 years, when I first started working in College Park I kinda had a chip on my shoulder also. And you know, you learn from your mistakes. And he’s learning, he’s been around here for three years. He just went about it the wrong way,” Srour said.
For his part, Gordon said he was largely satisfied with how the hearing went, and said that he would “write them a check tomorrow” for the amount he decided was reasonable for the city fees, and hopes for a compromise without the liquor board getting involved. He also encouraged city council members not to be offended by his criticisms.
“Some of the board members took it sort of personally, like I was fighting them,” Gordon said. “But this is what I think citizens do: stand up and question the government when they think it’s wrong.”
holtdbk@gmail.com
