On the eve of TSI reopening from it’s DARTiness, another urban core nighttime institution is DARTed by the city. I don’t have very many details at this point, just a photo above from an Urban Jacksonville reader. The City really is trying to kill itself! With the impending downtown parking legislation and now this I don’t know WTF they are thinking.
http://www.urbanjacksonville.info/2008/09/12/another-one-bites-the-dust-the-pearl-darted-by-cojjso/
And yet the crack whores and dealers are free to roam at night... It must be so much easier to target one specific building... >:(
this makes no sense to me. as a residnet of Springfield, I actually like seeing the Pearl bring people to the neighborhood. Even though I have never been there, I have no problem with them. With all the other issues we still have in the neighborhood, this blows my mind! what is wrong with our City????
I was going tomorrow too. Maybe somebody was working in the lighthouse and caught people having a good time in close relation to their property.
Unbelievable! >:(
So I guess this makes it clear that the DART program is being misused.
QuoteCommunity Affairs
DART Program
The Jacksonville "Drug Abatement Response Team (DART) was established to combat illegal drugs in Jacksonville by supplementing the traditional approach to solving the drug problem. This program is a partnership between the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office and numerous governmental agencies to focus on the property where drug activity flourishes. By working with landlords/property owners, strategies are developed and resources are brought to bear to reduce drug activity. Actions include bringing the property up to code, because blighted properties foster illegal activities.
For more information regarding this program, please contact
Police Officer Alfred Hooker phone: (904) 630-5954 or e-mail: Alfred Hooker
or Police Officer David Makauskas phone: (904) 630-7635 or e-mail: David Makauskas
That would explain the police parade @ 1st & main last night around 12:30. It truly seems like the city doesn't care at all about it's nightlife or non mainstream establishments. Shanty's blocked off by construction, 9th & main struggles to stay open, tsi was shutdown and now this.
What type of alleged drug use did they shut Pearl down for?
Why can't they "dart' freaking phillips hwy, where the real shit goes down.
Quote from: David on September 12, 2008, 09:49:33 AM
That would explain the police parade @ 1st & main last night around 12:30. It truly seems like the city doesn't care at all about it's nightlife or non mainstream establishments. Shanty's blocked off by construction, 9th & main struggles to stay open, tsi was shutdown and now this.
What type of alleged drug use did they shut Pearl down for?
Why can't they "dart' freaking phillips hwy, where the real shit goes down.
Well Phillips is out of their jurisdiction. And by "their", I mean FBC's. ;)
Quote from: JoeMerchant on September 12, 2008, 09:55:32 AMWell Phillips is out of their jurisdiction. And by "their", I mean FBC's. ;)
I highly doubt it. FBC is far from there. Probably some local (meaning "actually close to the Pearl") residential owners. But - I'm probably wrong. You have proof that it was FBC, right?
Quote from: Driven1 on September 12, 2008, 10:16:02 AM
Quote from: JoeMerchant on September 12, 2008, 09:55:32 AMWell Phillips is out of their jurisdiction. And by "their", I mean FBC's. ;)
I highly doubt it. FBC is far from there. Probably some local (meaning "actually close to the Pearl") residential owners. But - I'm probably wrong. You have proof that it was FBC, right?
Of course not...and no I have no proof at all of FBC ever doing anything to hinder the progress of downtown. So obviously, they are innocent on all fronts.
Quoteto focus on the property where drug activity flourishes.
It did not at TSI nor did it at Pearl...
QuoteBy working with landlords/property owners
Clearly they do not...
This is plain and simple... abuse of power. >:(
So what kind of drugs did they find at the Pearl? If it was another 'bust' like at TSI I think the person choosing the locations needs to be evaluated.
Again, it always turns to blaming FBC....again another easy target. You know how many bars and other similar establishments were around FBC in Downtown Dallas, this is where the current pastor of FBC Jax came from. FBC Dallas, didnt seem to stifle or stop growth in Downtown Dallas. so lets stop blaming FBC Jax for Downtowns failures. I believe it goesway beyound FBC.
Quote from: fsujax on September 12, 2008, 10:32:33 AM
Again, it always turns to blaming FBC....again another easy target. You know how many bars and other similar establishments were around FBC in Downtown Dallas, this is where the current pastor of FBC Jax came from. FBC Dallas, didnt seem to stifle or stop growth in Downtown Dallas. so lets stop blaming FBC Jax for Downtowns failures. I believe it goesway beyound FBC.
Oh, I agree. I was being sarcastic more than anything. Would I be surprised if they are at least a little bit behind this, though? No.
And it certainly does go way beyond FBC. I'm just tired of taking one step forward and about 20 steps back.
I agree with you on the one step forward 20 steps back.....it is getting really old.
Quote from: fsujax on September 12, 2008, 10:32:33 AM
Again, it always turns to blaming FBC....again another easy target. You know how many bars and other similar establishments were around FBC in Downtown Dallas, this is where the current pastor of FBC Jax came from. FBC Dallas, didnt seem to stifle or stop growth in Downtown Dallas. so lets stop blaming FBC Jax for Downtowns failures. I believe it goesway beyound FBC.
Totally off subject so i'll make this quick. Aren't some other city's zoning laws a bit more lax in terms of how far bars/nightlife establishments can be from churches? I definitely saw churchs right in the middle of entertainment districts, hell even gay districts with clubs all around it in Seattle. So if that's true, in a sense FBC does hinder certain growth downtown due to zoning laws, especially given the size of the complex.
Quote from: David on September 12, 2008, 10:52:38 AM
Quote from: fsujax on September 12, 2008, 10:32:33 AM
Again, it always turns to blaming FBC....again another easy target. You know how many bars and other similar establishments were around FBC in Downtown Dallas, this is where the current pastor of FBC Jax came from. FBC Dallas, didnt seem to stifle or stop growth in Downtown Dallas. so lets stop blaming FBC Jax for Downtowns failures. I believe it goesway beyound FBC.
Totally off subject so i'll make this quick. Aren't some other city's zoning laws a bit more lax in terms of how far bars/nightlife establishments can be from churches? I definitely saw churchs right in the middle of entertainment districts, hell even gay districts with clubs all around it in Seattle. So if that's true, in a sense FBC does hinder certain growth downtown due to zoning laws, especially given the size of the complex.
It's a massive development...and it does change the dynamics of downtown.
Does anyone know if any drugs were found? Perhaps there is more to this than we know. Having said that, I have been to the Pearl on numerous occasions and did not notice any suspicious activity (although it is easy to keep deals down low I suppose). I always thought it was a nice, innovative bar which was a net positive for the neighborhood.
wow...I'm not so sure if the city understands what "blighted properties" means exactly...http://www.coj.net/NR/exeres/F4C3CA9A-91BD-4C26-A6DE-AA98DF9D2684.htm?wbc_purpose=Basic&NRMODE=Unpublished (http://www.coj.net/NR/exeres/F4C3CA9A-91BD-4C26-A6DE-AA98DF9D2684.htm?wbc_purpose=Basic&NRMODE=Unpublished)...
And i wouldn't be hesitant to bring fbc into some of the blame of these raids. These sheep do end up influencing election outcomes in choosing our "leaders" that create DART raids. Now I am a little biased against FBC since I see them come in twice a week, block the roads (even though they have parking decks galore and overhead walkways), and then immediately leave the area afterwards without supporting the downtown and surrounding areas.
Oh and someone mentioned something about the proposed parking charges...I would love to see FBC sheep finally have to support the area! (but in reality, I'm totally against that upsurd idea...who the hell thinks of things like this?!)
~annoyed
This is straight from the source. Underage drinking is the reason given. While they were there, they added some other BS violations like no extension cords allowed or Christmas lights in the window. This is going to cost the owners plenty and threaten the viability of their business. Maybe we need a fundraiser. Save The Pearl!
Quote from: Deuce on September 12, 2008, 11:16:36 AM
This is straight from the source. Underage drinking is the reason given. While they were there, they added some other BS violations like no extension cords allowed or Christmas lights in the window. This is going to cost the owners plenty and threaten the viability of their business. Maybe we need a fundraiser. Save The Pearl!
Well, if that's all to it, remove the extension cords and Christmas lights (a probable reason for the extension cords in the first place) and voila, no need for a fundraiser. They are back open in no time.
-fpj
Is there really a need to shut a place down based on these bogus/minor voliations? It seems with all the letigatation they have to go through it really does keep a business down for WAY too long. It's more than taking away a fun place to go and get drunk, it affects peoples livelyhoods.
One guy's got the right idea, contact those in the DART program and ask them politely wtf is their problem! There's also gotta be other people to contact to let them know it's really a dick move on the city/jso's part.
For more information regarding this program (dart) , please contact
Police Officer Alfred Hooker phone: (904) 630-5954 or e-mail: Alfred Hooker
or Police Officer David Makauskas phone: (904) 630-7635 or e-mail: David Makauskas
Any other points of contacts?
Quote from: David on September 12, 2008, 11:43:17 AM
Is there really a need to shut a place down based on these bogus/minor voliations? It seems with all the letigatation they have to go through it really does keep a business down for WAY too long. It's more than taking away a fun place to go and get drunk, it affects peoples livelyhoods.
One guy's got the right idea, contact those in the DART program and ask them politely wtf is their problem! There's also gotta be other people to contact to let them know it's really a dick move on the city/jso's part.
I don't know what you guys are thinking, sure thing that many of the violations are piddly in nature but nonetheless they are violations, should they be ignored? are you guys really in favor of lawlessness? or maybe a tragedy in a nightclub that has things like electric cords ( FYI a good majority of fires start from faulty wiring) to wake you guys up. If there is underage drinking should that be ignored? come on guys, think before ranting
Quote from: apvbguy on September 12, 2008, 11:51:25 AM
Quote from: David on September 12, 2008, 11:43:17 AM
Is there really a need to shut a place down based on these bogus/minor voliations? It seems with all the letigatation they have to go through it really does keep a business down for WAY too long. It's more than taking away a fun place to go and get drunk, it affects peoples livelyhoods.
One guy's got the right idea, contact those in the DART program and ask them politely wtf is their problem! There's also gotta be other people to contact to let them know it's really a dick move on the city/jso's part.
I don't know what you guys are thinking, sure thing that many of the violations are piddly in nature but nonetheless they are violations, should they be ignored? are you guys really in favor of lawlessness? or maybe a tragedy in a nightclub that has things like electric cords ( FYI a good majority of fires start from faulty wiring) to wake you guys up. If there is underage drinking should that be ignored? come on guys, think before ranting
So the fact that they nearly had to trip over hookers and drug dealers on their way to get some under age drinking busts and electric cords...is ok, though?
Quote from: apvbguy on September 12, 2008, 11:51:25 AM
Quote from: David on September 12, 2008, 11:43:17 AM
Is there really a need to shut a place down based on these bogus/minor voliations? It seems with all the letigatation they have to go through it really does keep a business down for WAY too long. It's more than taking away a fun place to go and get drunk, it affects peoples livelyhoods.
One guy's got the right idea, contact those in the DART program and ask them politely wtf is their problem! There's also gotta be other people to contact to let them know it's really a dick move on the city/jso's part.
I don't know what you guys are thinking, sure thing that many of the violations are piddly in nature but nonetheless they are violations, should they be ignored? are you guys really in favor of lawlessness? or maybe a tragedy in a nightclub that has things like electric cords ( FYI a good majority of fires start from faulty wiring) to wake you guys up. If there is underage drinking should that be ignored? come on guys, think before ranting
Violations? Sure, a fine, whatever. but what is the point of the DART program to shut down venues for months at a time? Why condemn a building for total bullshit reasons? C'mon where's the common sense at. This is totally worthy of a rant. Underage drinking isn't too high on my unforgiveable sins list, sorry. There's much worse things going on. I don't buy into the "well it's the law" reasoning. And I'm getting too old to even go to the Pearl! It's just the principle of it.
For a bar and dance club, I've always found the Pearl to be rather stringent with ID checks and the staff quick to catch kids washing off under-age hand markings or swapping bracelets. You couldn't possibly mistake me for underage, yet they always flatter me with an ID check and bracelet.
The Pearl is one of the few businesses here that draws patrons from outside of SPR/downtown. Its success is vital to the long-term success of the neighborhood. SPAR and other neighborhood organizations would do well to voice support for the Pearl, too.
If fines put the Pearl in peril of closing, there are many of patrons and neighbors ready and willing drink some fundraising pints.
Hmmm, getting bounceback emails from Mr. Hooker and Mr. Makausa email addresses. Does anyone else have any other points of contact?
I made a public records request for all info, including emails, on the raid. I've also heard from a Jacksonville.com source that they have a reporter on the story. More details to come...
Quote from: JoeMerchant on September 12, 2008, 11:57:39 AM
So the fact that they nearly had to trip over hookers and drug dealers on their way to get some under age drinking busts and electric cords...is ok, though?
is that what I said? trying to justify the rants by saying they're ignoring other things isn't going to fly
Quote from: apvbguy on September 12, 2008, 12:28:25 PM
Quote from: JoeMerchant on September 12, 2008, 11:57:39 AM
So the fact that they nearly had to trip over hookers and drug dealers on their way to get some under age drinking busts and electric cords...is ok, though?
is that what I said? trying to justify the rants by saying they're ignoring other things isn't going to fly
They went into a neighborhood that constantly has trouble getting JSO to not ignore hookers, thugs, and drug dealers to bust some underage drinkers and christmas lights.
This is what I have a problem with. Priorities seems a little f'd up at this point.
Quote from: David on September 12, 2008, 12:00:18 PM
Quote from: apvbguy on September 12, 2008, 11:51:25 AM
Quote from: David on September 12, 2008, 11:43:17 AM
Is there really a need to shut a place down based on these bogus/minor voliations? It seems with all the letigatation they have to go through it really does keep a business down for WAY too long. It's more than taking away a fun place to go and get drunk, it affects peoples livelyhoods.
One guy's got the right idea, contact those in the DART program and ask them politely wtf is their problem! There's also gotta be other people to contact to let them know it's really a dick move on the city/jso's part.
I don't know what you guys are thinking, sure thing that many of the violations are piddly in nature but nonetheless they are violations, should they be ignored? are you guys really in favor of lawlessness? or maybe a tragedy in a nightclub that has things like electric cords ( FYI a good majority of fires start from faulty wiring) to wake you guys up. If there is underage drinking should that be ignored? come on guys, think before ranting
Violations? Sure, a fine, whatever. but what is the point of the DART program to shut down venues for months at a time? Why condemn a building for total bullshit reasons? C'mon where's the common sense at. This is totally worthy of a rant.
Is sure sounds like a cluster ****, What should have happened is that the place should never been allowed to open in the first place. Isn't there a need for a certificate of occupancy in JAX, if there was an inspection made before this place opened the violations would have been caught and corrected before they opened.
this is lunacy of the whole issue, it looks as if someone was asleep at the switch.
Nonetheless the violations are valid and have to be addressed before allowing a place like this to continue to operate.
Quote from: JoeMerchant on September 12, 2008, 12:34:00 PM
Quote from: apvbguy on September 12, 2008, 12:28:25 PM
Quote from: JoeMerchant on September 12, 2008, 11:57:39 AM
So the fact that they nearly had to trip over hookers and drug dealers on their way to get some under age drinking busts and electric cords...is ok, though?
is that what I said? trying to justify the rants by saying they're ignoring other things isn't going to fly
They went into a neighborhood that constantly has trouble getting JSO to not ignore hookers, thugs, and drug dealers to bust some underage drinkers and christmas lights.
This is what I have a problem with. Priorities seems a little f'd up at this point.
you could be right but the violations shouldn't be ignored, see my other reply
Quote from: apvbguy on September 12, 2008, 12:37:04 PM
Quote from: JoeMerchant on September 12, 2008, 12:34:00 PM
Quote from: apvbguy on September 12, 2008, 12:28:25 PM
Quote from: JoeMerchant on September 12, 2008, 11:57:39 AM
So the fact that they nearly had to trip over hookers and drug dealers on their way to get some under age drinking busts and electric cords...is ok, though?
is that what I said? trying to justify the rants by saying they're ignoring other things isn't going to fly
They went into a neighborhood that constantly has trouble getting JSO to not ignore hookers, thugs, and drug dealers to bust some underage drinkers and christmas lights.
This is what I have a problem with. Priorities seems a little f'd up at this point.
you could be right but the violations shouldn't be ignored, see my other reply
I agree, they shouldn't be ignored, I would just think that they would be a little lower on the to-do-list.
Quote from: JoeMerchant on September 12, 2008, 12:38:39 PM
Quote from: apvbguy on September 12, 2008, 12:37:04 PM
Quote from: JoeMerchant on September 12, 2008, 12:34:00 PM
Quote from: apvbguy on September 12, 2008, 12:28:25 PM
Quote from: JoeMerchant on September 12, 2008, 11:57:39 AM
So the fact that they nearly had to trip over hookers and drug dealers on their way to get some under age drinking busts and electric cords...is ok, though?
is that what I said? trying to justify the rants by saying they're ignoring other things isn't going to fly
They went into a neighborhood that constantly has trouble getting JSO to not ignore hookers, thugs, and drug dealers to bust some underage drinkers and christmas lights.
This is what I have a problem with. Priorities seems a little f'd up at this point.
you could be right but the violations shouldn't be ignored, see my other reply
I agree, they shouldn't be ignored, I would just think that they would be a little lower on the to-do-list.
sorry to say that I don't agree with you, a crowded nightclub with violations like this is a tragedy in the making, there have been many cases of fires in places like this with multiple deaths and injuries, we really wouldn't want that to happen
Armed robberies by crack heads and trannies, ice cream drivers being shot for $20, residents being carjacked by gun and no one doing anything about it is a tragedy.... so someone trips over an extension cord? So what?
I have to agree there are higher priority issues for these people; this is a waste of time and tax payers’ dollars. Just send in an inspector and be done with it, it did not have to happen this way and our police and DART teams should be targeting real criminals and real brothels and real crack houses and there are plenty that they just ignore.
Quote from: uptowngirl on September 12, 2008, 12:54:03 PM
Armed robberies by crack heads and trannies, ice cream drivers being shot for $20, residents being carjacked by gun and no one doing anything about it is a tragedy.... so someone trips over an extension cord? So what?
I have to agree there are higher priority issues for these people; this is a waste of time and tax payers’ dollars. Just send in an inspector and be done with it, it did not have to happen this way and our police and DART teams should be targeting real criminals and real brothels and real crack houses and there are plenty that they just ignore.
I agree. However, I also find it interesting how years ago people had an equally valid point that various government agencies statistically overly targeted minorities and blue collar crime. Now that the pendulum appears to have swung and it hits white collar, all of a sudden, waa waa waa. Without sounding righteous, The Pearl had 90 (or however many days since TSI was shutdown) chances to remove the extension cords and so forth to fix the petty issues every club owner in town knows these kinds of raids or sweeps look for. So, if they didn't even do that, I can't help but wonder what else they didn't care enough about. But, regardless, if it's just petty issues and not major building ones that plagued other places, they should be back open in no time. Nothing brings in business more than a righteous grand reopening party :)
-fpj
Quote from: fpj on September 12, 2008, 01:05:08 PM
Quote from: uptowngirl on September 12, 2008, 12:54:03 PM
Armed robberies by crack heads and trannies, ice cream drivers being shot for $20, residents being carjacked by gun and no one doing anything about it is a tragedy.... so someone trips over an extension cord? So what?
I have to agree there are higher priority issues for these people; this is a waste of time and tax payers’ dollars. Just send in an inspector and be done with it, it did not have to happen this way and our police and DART teams should be targeting real criminals and real brothels and real crack houses and there are plenty that they just ignore.
I agree. However, I also find it interesting how years ago people had an equally valid point that various government agencies statistically overly targeted minorities and blue collar crime. Now that the pendulum appears to have swung and it hits white collar, all of a sudden, waa waa waa. Without sounding righteous, The Pearl had 90 (or however many days since TSI was shutdown) chances to remove the extension cords and so forth to fix the petty issues every club owner in town knows these kinds of raids or sweeps look for. So, if they didn't even do that, I can't help but wonder what else they didn't care enough about. But, regardless, if it's just petty issues and not major building ones that plagued other places, they should be back open in no time. Nothing brings in business more than a righteous grand reopening party :)
-fpj
and I am sure that we can all agree to hope that they enjoy a safe and very successful future
So how many drug and underage drinking violations did they find?
My original email to the DART point of contact was inquiring about the length of the shutdown, and why they feel the need to shutdown businesses for such an extended period of time over relatively minor offenses. I was basically saying the punishment doesn't fit the crime.
I understand the violations and JSO's intent, but if it takes months to open back up, it really is too severe a penalty. Is there a reason it's taken TSI so long to open back up? I know i'm ranting a bit but i'm really curious to find out the facts on this. I have a feeling even with the facts it won't change the overall concensus that it's a misguided effort to control crime & drugs. It's all for show.
You really want to bust all the Whores? Think rehab! Most are trapped, there is no excuse for the City to bust The Pearl as a location or to single out individuals hanging on the lamp post. People should be treated as humans...gosh what a thought.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZivA_f7DRdE
OCKLAWAHA
Sorry for not posting the video, but trying to follow the techie instructions hidden in some thread, was like leaving bread crumbs at a convention of crows.
Quote from: Lunican on September 12, 2008, 01:15:15 PM
So how many drug and underage drinking violations did they find?
None. Code violations only.
Quote from: JoeMerchant on September 12, 2008, 11:57:39 AM
Quote from: apvbguy on September 12, 2008, 11:51:25 AM
Quote from: David on September 12, 2008, 11:43:17 AM
Is there really a need to shut a place down based on these bogus/minor voliations? It seems with all the letigatation they have to go through it really does keep a business down for WAY too long. It's more than taking away a fun place to go and get drunk, it affects peoples livelyhoods.
One guy's got the right idea, contact those in the DART program and ask them politely wtf is their problem! There's also gotta be other people to contact to let them know it's really a dick move on the city/jso's part.
I don't know what you guys are thinking, sure thing that many of the violations are piddly in nature but nonetheless they are violations, should they be ignored? are you guys really in favor of lawlessness? or maybe a tragedy in a nightclub that has things like electric cords ( FYI a good majority of fires start from faulty wiring) to wake you guys up. If there is underage drinking should that be ignored? come on guys, think before ranting
So the fact that they nearly had to trip over hookers and drug dealers on their way to get some under age drinking busts and electric cords...is ok, though?
No, both are wrong and should be corrected.
Quote from: JaxByDefault on September 12, 2008, 12:15:01 PM
For a bar and dance club, I've always found the Pearl to be rather stringent with ID checks and the staff quick to catch kids washing off under-age hand markings or swapping bracelets. You couldn't possibly mistake me for underage, yet they always flatter me with an ID check and bracelet.
Good point. I too have been carded there and I hardly look under 21 anymore. :D
The DART process is clearly broken.
A couple of years back, I was trying to get the slumlord-owned crackhouse next door dealt with through the DART process to no avail. Known drug user living there? Check. Known prostitute living there? Check. Code violations? I'm sure since the property owner never pulled a permit for anything. Record of police calls for offenses ranging from domestic violence, drunk & disorderly, and late night parties? Check. (BTW, at least one of these visits resulted in an arrest for possession of a decent quantity of weed.) Despite all of this and the fact that we offered the police videotaped evidence of drug activity occurring across the street from an elementary school, nothing ever happened. In fact, the cops we dealt with weren't the least bit interested in our video. >:(
Apparently hipster nightclubs are a bigger threat to our community.
Yes, on the night that TSI re-opened, The Pearl gets DARTed. Ironic how that happens. It probably has nothing to do with the former tenants of 1101 N Main being TSI and still bitter that they cannot conduct a proper business. No drugs or underage kids served during the raid, just 2 kids cited for stealing someone's beer. Pitiful TSI.
there have been at least 6 or so clubs raided by dart in a short period of time, i really don't think tsi is the culprit, you have our wonder city of jacksonville to thank for this crap.
I will say this if i was a club owner that caters to any sort of fringe culture crowd I'd be getting my p's and q's in order because except for plush and venue there seems to be a trend growing here and the club scene here doesn't need any more closings.
Quote from: apvbguy on September 12, 2008, 12:28:25 PM
sorry to say that I don't agree with you, a crowded nightclub with violations like this is a tragedy in the making, there have been many cases of fires in places like this with multiple deaths and injuries, we really wouldn't want that to happen
That may be true but why such an overreaction? The problem everyone has with this is how excessive they’re being. This is an extreme example but say something along the lines of the LA riots happened here in Jacksonville. Would you want the majority of your police force out busting underage parties and writing tickets to speeders while the incident is taking place? You take care of what is most urgent then deal with other problems. That doesn’t mean that they should just totally ignore the issues at the Pearl, but what we would all like to see is the energy that they are putting into shutting it down be directed towards something more pressing.
Typically code violations are usually dealt with by code inspectors and fire marshalls, not storm troopers.
I also thought they had to have a significant amount of evidence of drug activity in order to do a DART raid.
There's workers there and it should be reopened if not tonight, soon
To clear up all the rumors and speculations, please read the latest Jaxscene post with info from Ricky and Justin about what really happened.
http://jaxscene.blogspot.com/2008/09/pearl-closed-till.html
i would match up this horrible "destroy downtown development" policy with the following:
despicable pedestrian planning and walkability of the city.
one of the worst rankings in the U.S. for friendliness to cyclists.
poor maintenance of parks.
17th worst graduation rate in the nation (.1% above New York City; about 1 out of every 2 students graduate).
high incidence or road rage due to excessive travel on roads within the city b/c the city is so spread out.
violent crime capital of Florida.
ignoring mass transit planning/options year after year after year.
extremely poor civic leadership that is paralyzed and infested with behind-closed-doors deals and the good ole boy network.
and you start to understand why this city...
a) has gone nowhere
b) will continue going nowhere
you know...we used to say: "Jacksonvillians just have low self-esteem. They need to be more proud of their city." now we see why.
The truth makes me even more furious. I don't understand why our city government has to waste money and resources on these stupid raids. They only alienate the public, business owners and those of us working to revitalize this city. If the sheriff and mayor really want us to work together to solve our crime issues then they need to start trusting us and allowing people to step up and be responsible. Code violations should be addressed and fixed, but a visit to the building on a Monday afternoon and an opportunity to fix the violations isn't too much to ask is it? In my opinion they are abusing their authority and way out of line. The owner of the Pearl is a wonderful person. She is allowing the Springfield Garden Community to use part of her property for free! What other business in this city is allowing citizens to grow food on it's property? Why must we treat her like a piece of shit owner running a shady business. The Pearl always has strict ID enforcement and is very good about kicking obnoxious people out when the time comes. I'm so glad DART went under cover, and the police refused to do training until after they raided the place. This city is really working hard to make me leave!
Good point brainstormer, regarding the community garden. Christy is a wonderful person who has poured her heart into this club and her community. She posted a comment on urbanjacksonville.info tonight: (#40 & 41)
http://www.urbanjacksonville.info/2008/09/12/another-one-bites-the-dust-the-pearl-darted-by-cojjso/#comments
I'm sorry but this is classic Jacksontucky! for years this place (the Pearl) was a seedy dive that sold shots of white lightning for a buck from behind the bar and not once did it get targeted for a stormtrooper style raid. But when a reputable owner comes in, renovates the place and turns it into a popular nightspot, then it gets raided for a few code violations and reports of "underage drinking". Wow, I'm not even sure there is one establishment in this entire city that is free from underagers getting served from time to time. Even seen it at prominent local country club that I'm known to frequent.
Yep, this city would much rather have a blighted urban core. One that contributes little to the tax base. This way they can whine and moan about revenue shortfalls and actually have excuses for crime and whatnot. Remember this city is bought and paid for by suburban developers who have absolutely no interest in bringing people downtown. They need people buying new homes in their developments and they need people buying 'moveups', mcmansions. The urban core is nothing but a thorn in their side here in Jacksontucky.
I wish they would have done this during the Super Bowl or any Florida-Georgia game.
I am trying, but I find it hard to understand what all the ruckus is about. There are sensible valid reasons for most of the things cited in all the above postings. The Pearl, and any other business, should be shut down if they are putting the lives of their patrons on the line. Not to mention all the properties surrounding them. If the violations actually led to a massive fire, would there be this outrage? If the fire caused the unnecessary death of someone there, would there be this outrage? Is it against the law for underage drinking in this and any other type of establishment? If your son or daughter were there would you want that to happen? If they were breaking the law, they should be shut down until they can safely bring the property back online.
I think the right thing was done here. If you really think about it and not take it as a misguided attempt to rid the city of these "legitimate nightlife establishments", then you might agree.
And "The Lighthouse" seems to be shining farther into Springfield every day.... >:(
Quote from: stephendare on September 13, 2008, 03:35:23 PM
City Slicker.
They really arent endangering the lives of their customers.
Any one of the problems listed would have taken an hour to fix at most.
But closing them down means that they will have to pay in the tens (and sometimes hundreds) of thousands in lost revenue and expenses in order to reopen.
All of these 'inspections' can be done under the light of day.
When they do stuff like this, its intended to make a statement.
I agree... if these were simple violations they could have inspected during non business hours, issued a "fix it ticket", give the business 7 or 30 days(hell you pick the term) and if not complied with THEN shut it down. The underage drinkers were not served by the establishment they had gotten them using their own deviousness.
Quote from: Ernest Street on September 13, 2008, 03:47:50 PM
And "The Lighthouse" seems to be shining farther into Springfield every day.... >:(
both sides on this issue are right, the violations were rightly noted and the business closed until they complied by bringing the place up to code and it was a massive misuse of resources used to issue the violations, it could have been handled by one inspector. However how do you know what triggered the response, were they responding to complaints? none of us know. so to recap, the violations and closure were warranted but the way the "raid" was done was absurd.
MayorsOffice@metrojacksonville.com
jpeyton@coj.net
citycouncil@metrojacksonville.com
Thanks for posting those email addresses Stephen. Things like this make me want to go beyond writing a lone email, but hey, it's a start. I also want to know more about the DART process and other variables which I included in my email to the city. I know this isn't about the Jaguars, a Kenney Chesney concert, Jesus or McCain coming to town, so I hope more people really do take an interest in this.
The only valid concern I can see from the raid is occupancy level issues. It can get crowded in there, but wouldn't being over capacity just warrant a one night shutdown? Also the local news sites list the capacity @ 150, but with the back patio open as it usually is on their busy nights, wouldn't that increase the occupancy to handle several hundred more? Either way, I don't see how even that would warrant shutting down a business.
There is something else going on here and I don't wanna get all tinfoilhatty but yes the inspections for fire code etc. should happen during daytime hours in a relaxed atmosphere where the inspectors can take their time with a walk thru and write up detailed citations with a time limit for adherence with the owner of the property by their side rather than at night with flashlights and riot gear. which makes more sense? I know stupid question. The extension cords etc. sound like OOps CYA crap when they can't find anything of substance to peg on the clubs. This is disgraceful and I hope somebody's head ends up on a platter regarding the BS that has been going down. Any investigative journalists want to dive into this mess?
Quote from: Ernest Street on September 13, 2008, 03:47:50 PM
And "The Lighthouse" seems to be shining farther into Springfield every day.... >:(
Any proof that FBC was behind this or is this just a conspiracy theory among those who already hate FBC?
If the violations noted in this article from CBS47 are indeed true, then it was a matter of safety violations that would indeed, validate the closing of the property until those violations have been corrected. To have that many people in that small of a building, which is way over the legal occupancy limits, then that in of itself is a major safety issue.
QuoteThe City of Jacksonville has shut down a popular Springfield night spot. The Pearl on North Main Street was cleared of all its customers early Friday morning by the Drug Abatement Response Team, or DART. The name of the agency implies drugs were the reason for the raid. But that was not the case. DART was called in to investigate reports of underage drinking, then discovered a lot more.
Jason Teal of D.A.R.T. says, "Our building inspection department found 30 major violations." Teal says the building was way over capacity, "When we got there, there was nearly 400 people in the location, which the fire marshall's office has estimated the occupancy should have only been 150."
D.A.R.T. says The Pearl had faulty wiring inside, and only one exit. Both are code violations. Teal says, "There's only one way out of the location for nearly 400 people. And had there been an emergency, it would have really been a bad situation. People would have been trampled trying to get out."
Two things D.A.R.T. didn't find were any serious drug offenses or a major problem with underage drinking. The team says there were only a couple of arrests.
The owner of The Pearl says D.A.R.T.'s raid was all wrong. Christy Frazier-Dailey says, "They took my business away from me. And I'm losing how many night, over permitting, over small violations. Now, I'll just be another business shut down in Springfield."
The City says The Pearl can reopen as soon as everything inside is fixed. Frazier-Dailey says she's not sure when, or if, that will happen.
http://www.cbs47.com/content/topstories/story.aspx?content_id=5b52cb45-5d1e-4361-ba7c-df10c37b6b76 (http://www.cbs47.com/content/topstories/story.aspx?content_id=5b52cb45-5d1e-4361-ba7c-df10c37b6b76)
I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE the Pearl. I wanted to go out to the club before I found out it closed. I've gone there many times and I've never seen anything suspicious and I've felt safer there then anyplace else downtown.
I know that there are laws to protect us, but with this city being the murder capital of the state, I think JSO needs to worry about other area's.
Think on this. With all the murders that happened this and last year, how many of them happened at the Pearl?
So I gather that you don't feel that fire safety violations are important? Perhaps the families of those killed in over crowded bars in other cities, where they died as a result of not only the fire, but being trampled because of panic and too many people with not enough exits...could offer some insight to how important it is.
Yes, there's plenty of crime out there to be handled, but DART involves more than JSO...and they're a separate entity within JSO. All the owner has to do is rectify the violations and reopen. It's a shame she's losing revenue while this takes place, but she has a good business and should be able to bounce back.
Quote from: jbm32206 on September 14, 2008, 09:04:25 AM
So I gather that you don't feel that fire safety violations are important? Perhaps the families of those killed in over crowded bars in other cities, where they died as a result of not only the fire, but being trampled because of panic and too many people with not enough exits...could offer some insight to how important it is.
Yes, there's plenty of crime out there to be handled, but DART involves more than JSO...and they're a separate entity within JSO. All the owner has to do is rectify the violations and reopen. It's a shame she's losing revenue while this takes place, but she has a good business and should be able to bounce back.
If Christmas lights and extention cords are enough to to make the Dart shut a place down then I would NOT recommend a trip to Burbon St or my balcony. How long has that place been open? How many fires have they had? I'm going to take that you've never been to the Pearl. Yes they have one "exit" but if tthere is a fire my first instict wouldn't be to run back into the build when I could just jump over the waist high fence that they have in the outside deck area.
Are they still within JSO? Can they still arrest someone for murder? If I'm speeding can they give me a ticket? Yes? Then do something else that is more important for for the city. Besides doesn't this city have something called a Fire Marshall or is that just for city's with common sense?
Quote from: RiversideGator on September 13, 2008, 11:37:54 PM
Quote from: Ernest Street on September 13, 2008, 03:47:50 PM
And "The Lighthouse" seems to be shining farther into Springfield every day.... >:(
Any proof that FBC was behind this or is this just a conspiracy theory among those who already hate FBC?
A wise man once said, "those that forget the past are condemened to repeat it." Has everyone forgotten the various problems that The Art Bar (and the short-lived Heaven) had with nearby businesses and churches? I bet FBC remembers even if you don't.
People are going off half cocked and moaning about issues which are minuet compared to what the place was closed for. The over crowding is a major safety issue, and it wasn't a matter of just a few people more than the limit, if there were as many as reported (aprox 400) and only one exit, that's totally unacceptable. The law requires a certain amount of exits and an occupancy limit, these were the violations also cited, and what resulted in the place being closed until the owner can bring them under compliance.
It doesn't matter if there's not been a fire there...and God willing, there never will be. However, that argument is without reason...all it takes is one. Do you not recall the horrific fires in New England (The Station) or in New York, where people died as a result of not only the fire, but being trampled by those trying to get out? When people are in that kind of situation, reason goes out and panic sets in...and people die or are seriously injured as a result.
Yes, there's such a thing as the Fire Marshal, and I believe the report says they were part of the DART team, which also consists of ATF, code enforcement and other agencies...and there were only a few JSO officers involved. The DART program is a department within the JSO, and they have a specific cause. They're not the ones patrolling the streets, and they're not the detectives that investigate murders, which are also individual departments. Keep in mind, they were acting upon complaints made to the DART office, so it's not like they simply decided to harass the bar owner.
Quote from: stephendare on September 14, 2008, 10:42:03 AM
jbm
there are actually multiple exits from the Pearl. Not one.
The DART program was conceived as a Drug Abatement Response Team.
Not a jackbooted code enforcement team on steroids.
Also consider the effect that having a closed business will have on Main Street?
Now there are NO nighttime businesses on Main Street from the Main street Bridge until you get to MLK.
So when the drug trade, the shootings and the rapes start again, who will stand up for code enforecement then?
I understand how DART was started, but it does involve code enforcement and other agencies. As for the Pearl, I can only go by what the violations state, and one of them is insufficient exits, which is a fire safety code violation, as well as the over crowding.
Just because I feel these are indeed issues that need to be rectified, doesn't mean that I'm happy to see the placed closed until the owner can get the place into compliance. I feel badly for her, knowing that she's losing revenue while this takes place.
As for jackbooted code enforcement, I don't know what they looked like, but I doubt they looked or acted like anything other than professional. Even statements from those who were there stated that JSO, etc weren't pushy, they weren't out of line and didn't come in like commandos...and that there were only a few cops there. The additives only enhance the feeling of everyone being ticked off, and exaggerating the truth as it happened.
Being a resident of Springfield, I certainly don't like hearing of any business closing, and hope that the owner will bring the building into compliance or fight the violations...whatever she has to do, and then reopen. I know it's a popular bar, and people will return to it once it has reopened. I want to see continued growth, I want to see other businesses open and for Main street to come back to life...which right now, is in serious need of CPR!
As for the drug trade, shootings, etc....there's where part of our problem are...in that the officers that patrol need to handle. Comparing that to the DART program, well they're two different entities.
Quote from: stephendare on September 14, 2008, 11:13:40 AM
Jbm.
The open businesses at night are exactly what put a stop to the crime, which incidentally the police alone strategy was unable to do for the previous thirty years.
The DART program was conceived as an emergency response to drug dealing and related activities.
By their own admission, they didnt catch anyone with drugs at all.
Doesnt that occur to you as odd?
So the idea of squads of cops and closing the business for electrical cords and non serious violations is way out of bounds.
The whole reason that one has to go through permitting and inspections in the first place is to take care of all of supposed safety issues.
SPAR cooperated in the opening of the Pearl didnt they?
So the idea that a place with no drug activity, with none observed prior to the closedown on the Pearl's busiest night (Thursday) is going to be subject to a "Public Safety" closure is a bit ridiculous.
Every single one of the code enforcement agencies that were there had to sign off on the building. Are you suggesting that they didn't do their job in the first place? Meaning that one or all of them allowed a "serious' public safety issue to open for business?
Having been through the process many times I would tend to doubt it.
Most of the 'issues' could have been fixed on the spot.
I agree and even stated that in a much earlier post, that I felt the violations could've been handled much differently...that code enforcement/fire marshall, whomever...could easily have inspected the place during the day, and then cited the owner for the violations. Basically, I feel it was a bit much, and that DART has to prove their worth, you know, justify the existence of that unit.
However, if there really is fire safety issues, and over crowding, then I totally disagree and feel they're very important...think New England (The Station) and New York, where lots of people died at a fire in a bar that was over crowded and not sufficient exits...many of whom were trampled by the panic to get out. So I feel that's a very important issue. The extension cords...that violation could've been handled as just a citation.
Also, from what all I've heard, there weren't complaints about drugs there...which tells me that the DART office should just have forwarded the other complaints of underage patrons and over crowding to the appropriate authorities to handle...which I've also said before....so in a sense, yes, we agree.
It also makes one wonder about the point you've raised...were these issues not addressed when the business first opened up for business...for the most part, yes, they certainly should have been...otherwise, I feel that the business license shouldn't be issued until those inspections have been completed.
You are working off bad information about the occupancy the pearl has an occupancy of 338 and there where 390 people there there are 3 exits from the building
Quote from: stephendare on September 14, 2008, 11:15:11 AM
(btw, you know that I love you. This issue just has me a little hot under the collar. It has the power to set back Springfield by 10 years or so)
I understand the frustration, and agree...that things could certainly have been handled better. I also hope that she can get it all rectified and open back up quickly. I saw workers there yesterday, so it seems like she's on top of it.
Hey, just because we may disagree on some aspects, doesn't impact us getting along....so hugs back at ya!
Quote from: Ricky on September 14, 2008, 11:36:28 AM
You are working off bad information about the occupancy the pearl has an occupancy of 338 and there where 390 people there there are 3 exits from the building
I'm 'working' off information that was cited and what was reported on the news, just like most of us...unless of course, someone is privy to the final report
that would be horrific!
i understand i saw the report too i can see why you would believe it however they are deliberately misrepresenting facts the building occupancy is indeed around 150 but the back patio occupancy is around 180
the fire marshal gave a warning for being 50 over occupancy no fines no warning for not enough exits
Anyone who thinks "there is no drug activity what so ever and only minor code violations" at the pearl is looking through rose colored glass. I think this whole dart situation is rather heavy and ham fisted way of making sure all of the codes and permits are up to date. But you must realize though that the code and permit violations are a bit more serious than just a few stray extension cords and christmas lights.
Should this have been handled during the day without a swat team and with a rapport with the owner? Yes
Is this an anti-gay issue? I seriously doubt it considering all of the other clubs that have been darted. It just seems that it was simply the pearls turn in line.
You gotta play the game by the rules kids or those big meanie fascists will kick you out of the sandbox...
What you guys seem to forget is while there is three exits in the building, two of them lead out to the patio and only one double doors lead to the front. She needed exits on the patio too.
If there's sufficient exits, then couldn't she protest/fight this? Would there be a hearing or something? If the owner feels she's been unjustly closed down, is there no recourse she can take?
Quote from: stephendare on September 14, 2008, 01:57:20 PM
sure she can.
It just takes time. Same amount of time as the repair and then re approval process, with no guarantee that you won't have to do it anyways.
The real damage that these things are intended to inflict is the loss of income.
The repairs themselves are negligible costs in comparison.
Well why is this happening? Or more importantly how do you stop it if it truly is undeserved amd unfair?
Quote from: Chaz1969 on September 14, 2008, 10:00:10 AM
Quote from: RiversideGator on September 13, 2008, 11:37:54 PM
Quote from: Ernest Street on September 13, 2008, 03:47:50 PM
And "The Lighthouse" seems to be shining farther into Springfield every day.... >:(
Any proof that FBC was behind this or is this just a conspiracy theory among those who already hate FBC?
A wise man once said, "those that forget the past are condemened to repeat it." Has everyone forgotten the various problems that The Art Bar (and the short-lived Heaven) had with nearby businesses and churches? I bet FBC remembers even if you don't.
Are you referring to the Art Bar on King Street in Riverside? If so, this had nothing to do with FBC which is downtown a few miles away. It was mainly a problem that the First Guaranty people across the street did not care for Art Bar. I believe one of the employees there then bought the building and evicted Art Bar. FBC had nothing to do with this.
Quote from: stephendare on September 14, 2008, 10:42:03 AM
So when the drug trade, the shootings and the rapes start again, who will stand up for code enforecement then?
These are separate issues which also need to be addressed.
Quote from: stephendare on September 14, 2008, 11:40:34 AM
Btw. Does anyone have a clue what would happen to 10 thousand people on a sunday morning if there were a flash fire at First Baptist?
What you fail to realize is that God would never let something so tragic happen to His people. ...silly! ;)
In all seriousness though, I was there on Thursday. There were a good number of police officers. I saw them inside well before the lights even came on. I saw ONE person having his ID checked and I lingered inside until I absolutely had to leave.
If they were looking for drugs, I don't know how they would have found any. It's not like people would be doing them in the open or carry them in their hands, nonetheless when the police arrived. Hell, there are always police immediately outside. In fact, I saw one person was arrested earlier in the night for fighting in line on the way into the bar--a friend of a friend, actually.
As I was leaving, there was an older guy in plain clothes and a badge counting people. I said, "don't lose count," to which he replied, "f*** you, man." I subsequently shouted some lovely phrases in a slightly buzzed state (I wasn't driving).
To give more anecdotal evidence (and hopefully this will not call into question my credibility), I was kicked out of the Pearl about two years ago for underage drinking, and had a beer in my hand from a friend for less than a minute. I also know many people and have seen many more people get kicked out for underage drinking.
As for the violations that were found, and the concerns over fire, there are indeed three exits, and the patio would allow easy egression. Although important, I believe the argument is moot in this case.
The real bottom line is that this was TOTAL OVERKILL! The only thing that needed to be done at night was the occupancy violation. The bar does not need to be CLOSED! This is just another example of the powers that be, whomever they are, harassing progressive or (in their mind) morally objectionable places.
And although I have no proof other than the stories I've heard from friends who work in City Hall regarding other things, I have a feeling that The Lighthouse has once again exercised its influence.
When is the city council hearing regarding the parking tickets on nights/weekends?
While this was clearly overkill might I suggest eliminating minors from establishments where alcohol is served at all. Seems to me you are just asking for this sort of scrutiny. No matter how stricly you check IDs or secure wristbands the kids will always find a way to get a drink while inside... they always have and always will (I know this since I was kid I can attest to their engenuity and overall sneakiness)
Quote from: BridgeTroll on September 15, 2008, 07:08:14 AM
While this was clearly overkill might I suggest eliminating minors from establishments where alcohol is served at all. Seems to me you are just asking for this sort of scrutiny. No matter how stricly you check IDs or secure wristbands the kids will always find a way to get a drink while inside... they always have and always will (I know this since I was kid I can attest to their engenuity and overall sneakiness)
Brilliant! so I guess I wouldn't be able to bring my kids with me when I go out to dinner? Gee talk about overkill! A few minors get served and now its punish everyone who enjoys a drink and have children, wow. You know some of us actually enjoy getting a burrito and a few beers and sitting outside at the burrito gallery with our chirrens.
Calm down... I should have been more specific. It is altogether different if you accompany your children in a resaraunt. I am not refering to places like Burrito or restaraunts. I am refering to places that employ wristbands or other devices in an attempt to keep unaccomanied minors from drinking. I am also NOT saying the practice should be banned... just that you are opening yourself up for trouble...
Quote from: BridgeTroll on September 15, 2008, 08:36:32 AM
Calm down... I should have been more specific. It is altogether different if you accompany your children in a resaraunt. I am not refering to places like Burrito or restaraunts. I am refering to places that employ wristbands or other devices in an attempt to keep unaccomanied minors from drinking. I am also NOT saying the practice should be banned... just that you are opening yourself up for trouble...
I object!
Actually no I don’t. I've always been in favor of that method. Especially as age 21 gets further and further away in my rearview mirror :D
The counter-point is I was only 20 or so when the pearl’s predecessor, artbar first opened up, so it did provide one of the few places for the under 21 crowd to go.
counter counter point is: I’d always find a way to get a drink in my hands. Thankfully I was only underage for a few months before I got the privilege of legally over-paying for drinks.
Either way, this really wasn’t the issue at Pearl. Several of my family members work for various police departments in the region and I’ve been really digging as much info up in the DART programs as I can find. Every time they describe a “raid†it usually doesn’t involve a popular night spot and citing them for relatively minor violations. Granted, they do not work in Duval country but I’m just trying to gage what it’s used for elsewhere.
It's definitely being misused here though.
QuoteI’d always find a way to get a drink in my hands.
Exactly... me too!
If you dont realize, the Pearl charges $10 if your under 21 to even step foot in the door. The reason for that cost is so they can employee extra security to watch out for underage drinking. And "minors" are not allowed in. You must be atleast 18yrs old. Thats an adult by goverment standards. So if your over 18 you should be able to come and dance your @$$ off. Your just not allowed to partake in drinking alcohol. So to alienate a certain group because i small percentage of them will try and sneak drinks isnt fair. Thats the whole "one bad apple spoils to group". (Or however its said)And the three people that were arrested for drinking under age, the pearl staff turned in two of them for their fake IDs. The other was someone that was sneaking drinks. They were not served by any of the staff members.
The Pearl has a 16ft gate on the patio that exits to the lot on the north side of the property. That night it was locked. Thats why they were warned by the fire marshall. Which is something else. The fire marshall only gave the club a WARNING. Part of that list on the warning was, over capacity(50 people over),outdated service checks on the fire extinguishers and exit sign blocked.(which there are two there because of that.)
Everyone just believes what the news says. These are public records. Go get them and read for youreself.
Its not as easy as fixing these "code violations". They cut the power! All that draft beer will have to be replaced. Lost revenue. The building has a mortgage. How many of you can afford to pay your mortgage without any money coming in and lots of money going out? I bet its not the majority.
The situation was handled entirely wrong. The city should be ashamed.
No drugs
No illegal serving of alcohol
They didnt have permit for a 2004 hotwater heater???? (They didnt own the building in 2004!!!!!!)
Its stupid and i'm sick of this.............
Bt
this is evolving to an issue that needs to be readdressed, a drinking age of 21 is absurd, at 18 you can be in the military, you can vote, you can enter into legally binding contracts you can have all the right of an emancipated adult, but you aren't allowed to have a beer? absurd! recently a group of college presidents called for the lowering of the drinking age and I agree with their reasoning, but the MADD types came out of the woodwork to denounce the idea of lowering the drinking age.
It is time for society to take a new look at this and to think about lowering the drinking age
Quote from: froth on September 15, 2008, 10:32:14 AM
If you dont realize, the Pearl charges $10 if your under 21 to even step foot in the door. The reason for that cost is so they can employee extra security to watch out for underage drinking. And "minors" are not allowed in. You must be atleast 18yrs old. Thats an adult by goverment standards. So if your over 18 you should be able to come and dance your @$$ off. Your just not allowed to partake in drinking alcohol. So to alienate a certain group because i small percentage of them will try and sneak drinks isnt fair. Thats the whole "one bad apple spoils to group". (Or however its said)And the three people that were arrested for drinking under age, the pearl staff turned in two of them for their fake IDs. The other was someone that was sneaking drinks. They were not served by any of the staff members.
The Pearl has a 16ft gate on the patio that exits to the lot on the north side of the property. That night it was locked. Thats why they were warned by the fire marshall. Which is something else. The fire marshall only gave the club a WARNING. Part of that list on the warning was, over capacity(50 people over),outdated service checks on the fire extinguishers and exit sign blocked.(which there are two there because of that.)
Everyone just believes what the news says. These are public records. Go get them and read for youreself.
Its not as easy as fixing these "code violations". They cut the power! All that draft beer will have to be replaced. Lost revenue. The building has a mortgage. How many of you can afford to pay your mortgage without any money coming in and lots of money going out? I bet its not the majority.
The situation was handled entirely wrong. The city should be ashamed.
No drugs
No illegal serving of alcohol
They didnt have permit for a 2004 hotwater heater???? (They didnt own the building in 2004!!!!!!)
Its stupid and i'm sick of this.............
Bt
I agree with everything you are saying... again my choice of words was wrong. When I said minor I meant "those under the legal age to concume alcohol." Minor was just easier to say... :)
I do think ownwers should have a choice to allow 18 and up in their establishment. I just think they are taking on additional risk. An owner the must weigh the risk of 18 year olds sneaking alcohol(they will) or alienating kids who just want to dance and have fun.
Quote from: BridgeTroll on September 15, 2008, 10:53:38 AM
I do think ownwers should have a choice to allow 18 and up in their establishment. I just think they are taking on additional risk. An owner the must weigh the risk of 18 year olds sneaking alcohol(they will) or alienating kids who just want to dance and have fun.
Hence TSI's decision to go 21+ I'd presume.
There always a risk that I can be mugged walking down the street but i will take that chance because its my right. If you start letting the small things in life hender you from what you want to do then you will never fully accomplish anything. Stand up for your rights and face the obstacles ahead of you. Dont settle for things because someone else might screw up. I'm not trying to sound like i'm giving a motivational speech but come on. We fought for these rights and i want to keep them.
Quote from: fpj on September 15, 2008, 11:09:08 AM
Quote from: BridgeTroll on September 15, 2008, 10:53:38 AM
I do think ownwers should have a choice to allow 18 and up in their establishment. I just think they are taking on additional risk. An owner the must weigh the risk of 18 year olds sneaking alcohol(they will) or alienating kids who just want to dance and have fun.
Hence TSI's decision to go 21+ I'd presume.
TSI was actually
cited for selling alcohol to people under 21. I think they are being more strong armed into becoming 21 and up.
Quote from: froth on September 15, 2008, 11:14:45 AM
There always a risk that I can be mugged walking down the street but i will take that chance because its my right. If you start letting the small things in life hender you from what you want to do then you will never fully accomplish anything. Stand up for your rights and face the obstacles ahead of you. Dont settle for things because someone else might screw up. I'm not trying to sound like i'm giving a motivational speech but come on. We fought for these rights and i want to keep them.
I agree with you 100% :)
Quote from: froth on September 15, 2008, 11:18:49 AM
Quote from: fpj on September 15, 2008, 11:09:08 AM
Quote from: BridgeTroll on September 15, 2008, 10:53:38 AM
I do think ownwers should have a choice to allow 18 and up in their establishment. I just think they are taking on additional risk. An owner the must weigh the risk of 18 year olds sneaking alcohol(they will) or alienating kids who just want to dance and have fun.
Hence TSI's decision to go 21+ I'd presume.
TSI was actually cited for selling alcohol to people under 21. I think they are being more strong armed into becoming 21 and up.
I was unaware that TSI changed their policy. It is a shame they decided to do so but I completely understand and support it.
As I said before in this and other threads... DART is misusing its powers. There are better ways to enforce code, fire regs, and under age drinking.
from urbanjacksonville:
"Ryan Rummel Says: 09/13/2008 7:04 pm
I own TSI nightclub with Jason Grimes and manager Brendon Clark. We were DARTed for legitimate code violations, which has since been repaired. The building code department was thorough and polite in the process of making our repairs. As well, all inspectors made appointments with us and worked with us to make repairs that were needed to reopen.
As for the Pearl, according to the cities permit website, it shows that the pearl has an un-finalized permit from three years ago. Three months ago building code enforcement gave the pearl 60 days to comply with city ordinance. From what I understand no one showed up for the inspection so the dart team came in......."
The rest of his comment is here: http://www.urbanjacksonville.info/2008/09/12/another-one-bites-the-dust-the-pearl-darted-by-cojjso/ # 50
Here's the citation details from the building inspector's website:
9/5/2008 "Customer states that the inside of building was completely renovated without an architectural permit, illegally renovated the bathrooms, the walls, allows more than the building can allow , it is two buildings combined into one, no electrical permits for electrical work, please address, and possibly no certificate of occupancy. The Pearl is the name of the business."
https://buildinginspections.coj.net/bid_secure/default.aspx
I'm still not clear on the DART process and how they had to be involved with this. Doesn't make sense to me but obviously some of this is beyond the basic understanding of those not familiar with code enforcement, running a club etc.
There's so many different elements to this thread
1. the underage drinking debate!
2. The purpose of DART and their role in enforcing building codes.
3. conspiracy theories that wouldn't surprise me if they were somehow true.
i'm still sticking with my original argument though: when the public hears DART raided some establishment, it projects a negative light on that place.
Trust me, I went through the actual raids back in the 90's when there was massive amounts of illegal drugs everywhere. (Remember the raves @ club 5 and evolutions?) To have that associated with this is ridiclious, so I'd really like some answers from the city as to why they feel this is the correct way to go about enforcing codes.
HMMMM, Ryan went down there to see how to permit his patio. Sounds fishy to me.
You forgot to quote him when he said was at code the permitting office looking at their stuff. :o
If your looking for weekend plans you don't count us out. We got through the little mess and are reopening tomorrow.
HOORAY!!!!!!!!!
THe Pearl from Myspace
Quote from: froth on September 15, 2008, 05:06:46 PM
You forgot to quote him when he said was at code the permitting office looking at their stuff. :o
I put a link in my last post to the rest of his comment on urbjax. Trying to save space! (that's eco-friendly....right?)
Quote from: apvbguy on September 15, 2008, 10:38:20 AM
this is evolving to an issue that needs to be readdressed, a drinking age of 21 is absurd, at 18 you can be in the military, you can vote, you can enter into legally binding contracts you can have all the right of an emancipated adult, but you aren't allowed to have a beer? absurd! recently a group of college presidents called for the lowering of the drinking age and I agree with their reasoning, but the MADD types came out of the woodwork to denounce the idea of lowering the drinking age.
It is time for society to take a new look at this and to think about lowering the drinking age
exactly. It was 18 when I was growing up and it changed when I was in college, but we were grandfathered in. Back then the federal government wanted the drinking age to be 21, so they came up with a devious plan to withhold federal highway funds if the states refused to increase the drinking age. Not wanting to give up their federal largess all states complied, even Louisiana which originally, from what I can remember, wanted to keep the drinking age 18. Of course, they eventually caved. And now its 21, but it wasn't always. My friends and I turned out ok and we were legal at 18......I guess the current generation is just not as responsible, thus the need for a higher drinking age ;)
Quote from: walter on September 15, 2008, 07:50:37 PM
exactly. It was 18 when I was growing up and it changed when I was in college, but we were grandfathered in. Back then the federal government wanted the drinking age to be 21, so they came up with a devious plan to withhold federal highway funds if the states refused to increase the drinking age. Not wanting to give up their federal largess all states complied, even Louisiana which originally, from what I can remember, wanted to keep the drinking age 18. Of course, they eventually caved. And now its 21, but it wasn't always. My friends and I turned out ok and we were legal at 18......I guess the current generation is just not as responsible, thus the need for a higher drinking age ;)
the current generation isn't responsible because we (society) don't force them to be responsible, they say 26 years old today is yesterday's 18 and in some ways it is very true. I have an 18 year old and there really isn't any reason for him to be banned from drinking, going to bars and clubs. sure some will have problems but many
won't and it is a shame that the majority has to suffer because of a bunch of mad moms
in regards to this most recent generation and their sad lack of work ethic and responsibility, (the Echo Boom generation - that is, they are living off of mom & dad's or grandma and grandpa's $$) perhaps we should consider raising the drinking age to 30.
Quote from: apvbguy on September 15, 2008, 07:55:20 PMthe current generation isn't responsible because we (society) don't force them to be responsible, they say 26 years old today is yesterday's 18 and in some ways it is very true. I have an 18 year old and there really isn't any reason for him to be banned from drinking, going to bars and clubs. sure some will have problems but many won't and it is a shame that the majority has to suffer because of a bunch of mad moms
As if it's only the mothers that have a say in how the child is raised...the fathers are just as guilty in failing in their parental responsibilities. However, I do agree that most of this falls upon poor parenting, as to why the kids aren't responsible.
Quote from: jbm32206 on September 16, 2008, 06:36:46 AM
Quote from: apvbguy on September 15, 2008, 07:55:20 PMthe current generation isn't responsible because we (society) don't force them to be responsible, they say 26 years old today is yesterday's 18 and in some ways it is very true. I have an 18 year old and there really isn't any reason for him to be banned from drinking, going to bars and clubs. sure some will have problems but many won't and it is a shame that the majority has to suffer because of a bunch of mad moms
As if it's only the mothers that have a say in how the child is raised...the fathers are just as guilty in failing in their parental responsibilities. However, I do agree that most of this falls upon poor parenting, as to why the kids aren't responsible.
the mad moms comment was in reference to the temperance group know as mad mothers against drunk driving. they have a cause and it is a good cause, but their getting a blanket prohibition against under 21 drinking is just wrong.
The group is called Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), not mad mothers.
Quote from: Lunican on September 16, 2008, 11:01:15 AM
The group is called Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), not mad mothers.
whatever, the point is that they've foisted their agenda upon everyone, and issues like this are a result of the emotional laws put into place to save us from ourselves
"Emotional laws"...we're loaded with them....Megans Law for one...that was certainly fueled by emotions, and the agenda of those behind it "foisted" their emotions upon law makers.
Many people need to be saved from themselves and the laws are there to do so. Given that teenagers have such a terrible history with driving, and add into that, drinking...so why aren't the insurance companies being more fair? Mainly because of the facts.
Quote from: jbm32206 on September 16, 2008, 11:51:13 AM
"Emotional laws"...we're loaded with them....Megans Law for one...that was certainly fueled by emotions, and the agenda of those behind it "foisted" their emotions upon law makers.
Many people need to be saved from themselves and the laws are there to do so. Given that teenagers have such a terrible history with driving, and add into that, drinking...so why aren't the insurance companies being more fair? Mainly because of the facts.
isn't this the home of the urban pioneers? the ones who fight for walkable, transit orientated communities? why do you assume that every under 21 drinker will get into a car and have problems?
the under 18 alcohol ban is a one size fits all solution, that is overbearing and unfair.
My anecdotal story is that I have an 18 son in college, he cannot legally have a drink, go out to clubs, or even have a glass of wine with dinner. when he and his pals go want to go out it is carless, but they are shut out of the bars/clubs and other venues that would appeal to them, what is their alternative? obtain alcohol illegally then have a party in someone's apt, that is where the real problems begin.
I agree that there are many many teens who misuse alcohol, as there are many adults over 21 who also misuse alcohol but arbitrarily setting an age of 18 for alcohol despite the fact that at 18 these kids are considered adults for everything else is ludicrous.
these kids can vote, sign binding contracts, serve in the military, be held accountable for their acts as an adult in the justice system, but they can't enjoy a beer while watching a football game.
just like many people here are upset about this club being shut down for nonsense violations this prohibition of under 21 drinking is really just nonsense. let the kids have their fun, let them have their experiences of growing up, both the good and the bad, they have rights too and shouldn't be restricted like they are now.
I'm with you in that sentiment apvbguy.
I'm also a believer that many laws do NOT need to be in place to save people from themselves. Just because something is against the law doesn't mean someone will head it for their own sake, they head it because they don't want to go to jail or get a ticket. Laws should be made in order to protect OTHERS from someone's elses stupidity or lack of regard for right or wrong. Education should protect people from their own actions, not laws.
Drunk driving is something that endangers others, "underage" drinking endangers nobody. Not wearing you seatbelt or helmet endangers nobody but yourself, driving too fast or carelessly endangers others around you. Why restrict a legal consenting adult (18 year old) moreso than an older consenting adult? If that is the concern then maybe we should rethink the legal age of consent.
Quote from: Jason on September 16, 2008, 12:58:57 PM
If that is the concern then maybe we should rethink the legal age of consent.
and that is this issue in a nutshell.
one interesting thing is, and my son is ahead of the curve regarding political issues, is that he feels that most kids his age do not possess the maturity needed for many of the rights they receive just for turning 18, for example he feels that the voting age is too low, he feels most kids his age do not have the maturity needed for voting wisely, then again neither do many adults.
In Europe they allow drinking at age 18 but have very strict drunk driving laws and good mass transit. Maybe this is the answer.
Quote from: RiversideGator on September 16, 2008, 02:18:44 PM
In Europe they allow drinking at age 18 but have very strict drunk driving laws and good mass transit. Maybe this is the answer.
actually some countries allow drinking at a younger age, my underage son had no problems ordering wine and have you ever tried to use the tubes in London or the metro in paris after a night out? bzzzzt, you can't they're shut down late at night, there are buses they are sporadic at best at those times, your only choice is a cab ride. It really isn't so rosy over there
Quote from: stephendare on September 16, 2008, 03:00:48 PM
This is true. When I lived in Paris the metro doesnt really run after 3ish.
more like 1sh and on some lines even earlier, the point is that there is this unrealistic romantic view of life in europe, it just isn't true, our standard of living is much higher here and for many people the quality of life in the US far exceeds what can be found in much of europe
Quote from: apvbguy on September 16, 2008, 12:09:08 PM
Quote from: jbm32206 on September 16, 2008, 11:51:13 AM
"Emotional laws"...we're loaded with them....Megans Law for one...that was certainly fueled by emotions, and the agenda of those behind it "foisted" their emotions upon law makers.
Many people need to be saved from themselves and the laws are there to do so. Given that teenagers have such a terrible history with driving, and add into that, drinking...so why aren't the insurance companies being more fair? Mainly because of the facts.
isn't this the home of the urban pioneers? the ones who fight for walkable, transit orientated communities? why do you assume that every under 21 drinker will get into a car and have problems?
the under 18 alcohol ban is a one size fits all solution, that is overbearing and unfair.
First of all, where in my post do I say that I agree? Or where did I say that I agree that every teenager gets behind the wheel and has problems? I pointed out another law that was fueled by emotion...like it or not, they happen. I also pointed out about the insurance companies in relation to teenagers, but yet people only seem to be worried about kids being able to drink and who gives a damn if they end up having to pay triple what most others have to pay for car insurance....guess I see this as a different view on priorities.
I'm also more concerned that teenagers can go to war and come home in boxes, but who gives a damn about that...when all there is to be worried about is whether or not they can legally drink a beer....sorry, but on the scale of what's important in life, lowering the drinking age is pretty close to being on the bottom.
Now back to the underage drinking and the law...personally, I could care less if they lower the age. When I was younger and lived up north, we (teenagers) simply drove over the bridge to New Jersey and drank there, where the age was 18...so I do understand. I remember protesting about kids being old enough to serve in the military, but not old enough to get served at a local tap.
I also was raised within a European family, and we had wine with dinner...and did so for as long as I can recall. Europeans have a much different view, but then again...it's not a matter of taking it to excess as Americans tend to do.
Quote from: jbm32206 on September 16, 2008, 03:20:11 PM
I also pointed out about the insurance companies in relation to teenagers, but yet people only seem to be worried about kids being able to drink and who gives a damn if they end up having to pay triple what most others have to pay for car insurance....guess I see this as a different view on priorities.
you've lost me, right now kids under 18 cannot drink and they do pay 3x more for car insurance, what is your point?
Quote from: jbm32206 on September 16, 2008, 03:20:11 PM
I'm also more concerned that teenagers can go to war and come home in boxes, but who gives a damn about that...when all there is to be worried about is whether or not they can legally drink a beer....sorry, but on the scale of what's important in life, lowering the drinking age is pretty close to being on the bottom.
I am and everyone should be concerned about the horrors of war, but that is the point, at 18 they can volunteer to be in the military, be placed in harm's way but because of a bunch of busy bodies they cannot enjoy a beer.
Quote from: jbm32206 on September 16, 2008, 03:20:11 PM
Now back to the underage drinking and the law...personally, I could care less if they lower the age. When I was younger and lived up north, we (teenagers) simply drove over the bridge to New Jersey and drank there, where the age was 18...so I do understand. I remember protesting about kids being old enough to serve in the military, but not old enough to get served at a local tap.
and that is precisely why the feds got involved, to get rid of the age disparities between states, the disparities were eliminated but somehow we wound up with a universal age of 21 and that is what the complaint is about.
Did anyone else get an email back regarding the DART program? I wrote them on Saturday when the uproar was still fresh. I just inquired about the basics of the program and how they go about their routine...(with a few jabs about how they're helping us remain a national laughing stock)
Here's what I got today:
Mr. Robertson,
The Mayor’s Office has requested that I respond to your inquiry regarding the DART inspection of the business known as The Pearl.
As background information, the Jacksonville Drug Abatement Response Team (DART), a collaborative effort of the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office, the Office of General Counsel, the Building Inspections Division, the Fire/Rescue Department and the Municipal Code Compliance Division, was established in 1996 to combat illegal drugs in Jacksonville by supplementing the traditional approach to solving the drug problem by focusing on properties where drug activities are suspected.
The Pearl was inspected to address concerns of suspected underage drinking and narcotics being sold/used at the club. Of major concern at the time of inspection was the number of patrons present and the limited egress from the building. In addition, multiple code violations, particularly electrical issues, were found by the Building Inspections Division and the Fire/Rescue Department.
In answer to your question, this establishment can reopen for business as soon as all violations cited are corrected which will ensure the safety and well being of all its patrons.
If I can provide additional information please advise.
Derek D. Igou
Deputy Director
Environmental and Compliance Department
Nothing new there.
If they've been watching the place for weeks and suspect drug use/underage drinking, what defense does the Pearl or any business for that matter have? They can just go around saying ::red foreman voice::"yep, we suspected you weird artsy types are dope'n it up at your dopehead clubs with your dopehead friends"
We know there's far more drug use at other places, but like I said..what defense do you have against this? I'd like to see the documented evidence they have that justifed it in the first place.
Quote from: apvbguy on September 16, 2008, 03:58:11 PMQuote from: jbm32206 on September 16, 2008, 03:20:11 PMI also pointed out about the insurance companies in relation to teenagers, but yet people only seem to be worried about kids being able to drink and who gives a damn if they end up having to pay triple what most others have to pay for car insurance....guess I see this as a different view on priorities. Quoteyou've lost me, right now kids under 18 cannot drink and they do pay 3x more for car insurance, what is your point?
I thought that seemed rather clear...my point is that teenagers are treated differently and not just by the legal age to drink.
Quote from: David on September 16, 2008, 04:28:05 PMNothing new there.
If they've been watching the place for weeks and suspect drug use/underage drinking, what defense does the Pearl or any business for that matter have? They can just go around saying ::red foreman voice::"yep, we suspected you weird artsy types are dope'n it up at your dopehead clubs with your dopehead friends"
We know there's far more drug use at other places, but like I said..what defense do you have against this? I'd like to see the documented evidence they have that justifed it in the first place.
Didn't they initially say they had received complaints...so I would assume that was their justification.
I really don't believe they do, it's not like a search warrant.
I think it's cool though that city hall has been getting a lot of feedback from all of this and hopefully something positive will come of all of this.
Well that's why I’m asking. I wasn't sure.
If a complaint is all it takes, without having any solid evidence, let's report the cokeheads on Bay street!
Not really, but it's obvious nothing's really going to change this process. The more I understand the legalities behind it, the more I realize club owners will just have to keep their slate insanely clean. Controlling what the patrons do however, that's another thing.
From what I’ve heard, it doesn't look like the Pearl will be shut down for 3 months. So at least there's a bright side.
They're supposed to be open by the weekend, from what I've heard...
I thought they were back open as of today?
They might be....haven't been by to know for sure
CONFIRMED VIA PEARL MYSPACE BULLETIN - They are open tonight!
(http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/4021/picture1ij7.png)
Great to hear they are back open - good for them.
The code enforcement thing is actually the most laughable to me - if there was a potential code enforcement issue, couldn't it have been handled during the day?
Quote from: Steve on September 16, 2008, 11:43:05 PM
Great to hear they are back open - good for them.
The code enforcement thing is actually the most laughable to me - if there was a potential code enforcement issue, couldn't it have been handled during the day?
it should have been addressed before they were allowed to open
Great! I was afraid at first that they would be shut down for an extended period of time like TSI. I know the violations against TSI were more serious but I still don't understand why it took them so long to open back up. I'd like to think community pressure sped things up, buy maybe Pearl just took care of the violations a bit more quickly. Either way the responses I got back from the city were pretty civil. I'm still very curious about the what warrants DART to go in to a place though, if they need drug evidence or if a complaint and general suspicion will suffice. I'll see if they respond back to that inqury....
Oh yea, one other thing:
Do your drugs BEFORE entering the club people, c'mon! Don't F things up for the rest of us :P
Kidding of course.
Quote from: RiversideGator on September 16, 2008, 02:18:44 PM
In Europe they allow drinking at age 18 but have very strict drunk driving laws and good mass transit. Maybe this is the answer.
Actually the legal drinking age for soft liquor (beer, wine) is 16 years and hard liqour is 18 years. When with your parents even earlier than that.
I saw the Pearl lit up last night. Good to see them back.
Did anyone go last night? was it busy? do tell......
We dropped by the Pearl last night to have a pint and show our support for a great neighborhood establishment.
I would have shown up but unfortunately I have a job that I have to be up early for in St. Augustine and Im a severe alcoholic and when i start drinking I cant stop. So I stayed home.
That was a quick turn around. I cant believe they turned a condemned building into a safe place in just 4 days. According to the sign the city posted that building was an unsafe structure due to be domolished. Hmmmmmm. Maybe things werent as bad as they said on the news. Maybe the city has a little egg on their face for this one.
Quote from: stephendare on September 17, 2008, 12:07:25 PM
Good for you Jax By Default. If the rest of Springfield followed your excellent example it would have a much better chance of becoming a great Community of Location.
Speaking of this, how is your new Community of Location coming on Main Street between 7th and 8th? Any updates on an opening date?
They always say it's to be demolished...so you can't go by that. Anyway, I'm glad she's open and I certainly wish her the best.
As for Springfielders going there....that's not my kind of crowd...so I'll leave it to the younger ones to go show support....
Quote from: jbm32206 on September 17, 2008, 04:32:41 PM
They always say it's to be demolished...so you can't go by that. Anyway, I'm glad she's open and I certainly wish her the best.
As for Springfielders going there....that's not my kind of crowd...so I'll leave it to the younger ones to go show support....
Go on Friday nights! That's the old people's night, so of course i'll be there.
3 cheers for steve on those 3 email links; sharp!!!
Yep yep! I saw some comments on jax.com about how sending emails to the city was a waste of time, but I think if enough people do it and frame their point of view properly and in a civil manor, they might give you a listen. Between that and the owner of Pearl knowing some people that work in the city, I think that helped get through the coj/jso shenanigans with haste! That and the no drugs being found thing. That's also good
I forgot to mention this: the last several times I visited The Pearl, the rear exit was chained and locked (as mentioned in the letter from Igou). I also thought this was odd and a clear safety concern although it wasnt that crowded when I was there so I wasnt personally worried at that time. For some reason (probably neighbor's complaints), they have stopped using the outside area to the rear of the structure which was such a nice place to sit. They also closed off the rear exit to this area in what appears to have been an illegal fashion. I am glad the City did something about this.
The outside patio of the Pearl is presently closed because the new bar in the middle of the patio needs to go through the COA process. From what I understand, there also need to be some upgrades made for handicapped accessibility. Neighbor (or SPAR) complaints likely did draw attention to non-permitted construction on the patio, but the patio is not closed because of neighbor complaints on account of noise or other disturbance. The Pearl's patio is somewhat buffered from residences by commercial property and the Solomon Lodge.
The orange notice will probably remain on the exterior until all of the cited violations (including those for the patio) are remedied. However, the bar is now allowed to open the building.
No one argues with the city inspectors citing a property for multiple code violations. However, it was a poor choice to use a nighttime DART raid on this property.
I am sure it was SPAR. Rumors are running all over the neighborhood that it is SPAR, but what do you epect from a bunch of LOLAS? Mayeb the Pearl did not "give' enough money to the crime fund....more breaking news to come on on that front
I too am often disappointed with SPAR, Sparhater, but --to be fair-- they were not the only complainant here.
Part of their self-stated mission is to make sure historic properties in the district use the COA and permitting process. There was more than one complaint made about the Pearl that triggered code inspections (and an ill-advised DART raid), including at least one CARE request/report that was not filed by SPAR or its leadership.
Any neighborhood organization would be wise to contact business owners directly before taking their laundry list of neighborhood complaints downtown. SPAR would benefit from more direct and pleasant relations with local business owners--and perhaps correct their growing negative reputation with potential investors. A neighborhood organization should call a business owner and say "I notice you're building something...can we help you with the permit process.…" If that fails, "I'm sorry, but we have some concerns about the property that we feel we need to raise with the city. We'll email you a draft of our complaint in advance so that you can correct any of our misstatements and we can add your objections." If SPAR did that in reference to the Pearl, then I applaud them. If they did not, they should change their protocol.
I will say that as a neighborhood resident, I did not appreciate them circulating with their weekly SPAR update a letter from a city official that (1) said that the Pearl was a targeted because of competent evidence of drug activity, (2) contained missing information about the number and nature of the arrests made, and (3) did not provide an update on the status of the Pearl. It seemed a bit lazy and disingenuous with the facts, but probably not maliciously so.
Does anyone remember the Springfield Farmers Market? Lots of complaints....lots of rumors about that one too. Again there are a couple of people making decisions for the whole neighborhood and a LOT of people are not happy about it. The neighborhood vision should not be about a couple of neighbors dreams, it should be for the whole neighborhood, and this is where SAPR fails, miserably. >:(
I agree, that the vision seems to be rather impaired to say the least...and that it's all about a particular few.
Don't know if drugs were being consumed at the Pearl or not but I did see coke being snorted in the bathroom of The Art Bar (one of owner's previous business endeavors). Glad to see her out of our neighborhood! Love to see her leave Jax and never return!
Quote from: jbm32206 on September 19, 2008, 09:20:57 PM
I agree, that the vision seems to be rather impaired to say the least...and that it's all about a particular few.
oh come on now, if you are a proctologist you too can share their vision.
Yea, that was obviously 10 years ago at the fart bar...
My younger brother works there doing security, and I was glad to hear nothing serious happened. I'm glad to hear it re-opened so quickly, yet I hope that other clubs in Jax take notes and get everything up to code before they're targeted next! Over some extension cords!!!
The raid and closure was more than just extension cords