ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE REGULATION ADMINISTRATION
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL BOARD
NOTICE OF MEETING
AGENDA
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2013 AT 1:00 PM
2000 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 400S, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009
- Review of Request for Safekeeping. ANC 1B SMD 1B12. Al Crostino, 1324 U Street NW, Retailer CR, Lic#: 86659.
________________________________________________________________________
- Review of Request to Transfer License dated November 4, 2013 from Michael D. Fonseca, Counsel for LEI AG-Embassy Row, LLC. The Embassy Row Hotel, 2015 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Retailer CH.
________________________________________________________________________
- Review for Temporary Operating Retail Permit dated November 4, 2013 from Michael D. Fonseca, Counsel for LEI AG-Embassy Row, LLC. The Embassy Row Hotel, 2015 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Retailer CH.
________________________________________________________________________
- Review of Request for License Application Refund. David H.S. Pattison. *
________________________________________________________________________
- Review of Request to withdraw protest dated November 2, 2013 from Paulette Tilghman representative for ANC 7B, and a group of 61 Ft. Davis Community members. Lee’s Mini Market, 3853 Alabama Avenue SE, Retailer B, Lic#: 32231.
________________________________________________________________________
- Review of Request for Reconsideration of Untimely Protest filing dated October 31, 2013 from Barbara Schauer. The American, 1209-1213 10th Street NW, Retailer CR, Lic#: 092766.*
________________________________________________________________________
- Review of Request for Reconsideration of Denial of Reinstatement dated November 4, 2013 from Dr. Bertha Holliday, Protestant. Red Hen, 1822 1st Street NW, Retailer CR, Lic#: 090832.*
________________________________________________________________________
- Review of Request for Reinstatement of Application for Substantial Change dated October 26, 2013 from Paul Kadlick of BJ’s Enterprises. JP’s, 2412 Wisconsin Avenue NW, Retailer CN, Lic#: 008511.*
________________________________________________________________________
word salad. what does this actually mean?
ReplyDeleteamen! in english, please!
Deletewhat does this mean...what is the issue...that official title tells us nothing. thank you.
ReplyDeleteDoes this help? From October 23 -
ReplyDeleteORDER DENYING A GROUP OF FIVE OR MORE INDIVIDUALS'
REQUEST FOR REINSTATEMENT
The Application filed by Seaton Motor Company, LLC, t/a Red Hen, for renewal of
its Retailer's Class CR License, having been protested, came before the Alcoholic
Beverage Control Board (Board) for a Roll Call Hearing on June 17,2013, a Protest Status
Hearing on August 7, 2013, and a Protest Hearing on September 19,2013, in accordance
with D.C. Official Code § 25-601 (2001).
On September 19,2013, the Board dismissed the Protest of the Group of Five or
More Individuals, because only Dr. Holliday was present at the Protest Hearing after being
advised on numerous occasions by ABRA staff to produce at least four more individuals at
the hearings in order to be granted standing as A Group of Five or More Individuals. See
Board Order No. 2013-415.
1 Seaton Motor Company, LLC
tfa Red Hen
Case No. 13-PRO-00086
License No. ABRA-090832
Page 2
On September 30, 2013, Dr. Holliday, on behalf of the Group of Five or More
Individuals, submitted a Request for Reinstatement indicating that the change in the
scheduling of the day and time of the Protest Hearing scheduled for September 18, 2013 at
5:00 p.m. to September 19,2013 at 1 :30 p.m., with only one week notice, presented a
significant burden for the individuals of the Group of Five or More Individuals to attend
the Protest Hearing. Such a short period of notice precluded the individuals of the Group of
Five or More Individuals from attending the hearing because they could not adjust their
work schedule.
Based upon the above, the Board finds that Dr. Holliday, as a representative of the
Group of Five or More Individuals, made no effort to notify the Board of the inability of
the individuals of the Group of Five or More Individuals to attend the Protest Hearing. Nor
did she request a continuance of the Protest Hearing. Therefore, the Board finds no good
cause to reinstate the Group of Five or More Individuals, pursuant to 23 DCMR §1602.
ORDER
The Board does hereby, this 23rd day of October, 2013, DENY the reinstatement of
the Group of Five or More Individuals as protestant of the Application filed by Seaton
Motor Company, LLC, tla Red Hen, for renewal of its Retailer's Class CR License.
http://abra.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/abra/publication/attachments/Red%20Hen%20-%20Denial%20of%20G5%20Reinstatement%20-%2010%2023%202013.pdf
interesting. Sounds like she is just an obstructionist plain and simple. Looks like ABRA is a bit fed up with her too: "...Dr. Holliday was present at the Protest Hearing after being advised on numerous occasions by ABRA staff to produce at least four more individuals at the hearings in order to be granted standing as A Group of Five or More Individuals."
DeleteThe owner/manager of Red Hen has met with the protest group, The Neighbors of the Unit Block of T St., NW (more than 5 persons) , on several occasions. At the last such meeting, the Neighbors (again) addressed the owner's concern about hours (owner wanted maximum hours to 3 a.m. , while acknowledging he rarely remains open beyond 11 p.m.; Neighbors sought maximum hours of 2 a.m.); and parking (Neighbors sought assurance that current valet service and off-street parking would remain in place). Compromise terms of agreement were reached and a date was agreed upon for transmission of Settlement Agreement to owner for his signature. Submission of signed Settlement Agreement would have stopped all protest and hearing processes. Upon receipt of the document the owner refused to sign and claimed he never agreed to terms or to sign. My question: Who is "the obstructionist plain and simple"?
DeleteWhy does the Unit Block of T Street get to dictate what happens on the corner of Seaton Place?
DeleteI think that it's more of a general approach being taken by neighbors to have some structure around the new businesses coming into the community (includes Firehouse, Public Bar, etc. etc). If any members of the community have concerns surrounding the hours a business is operating then they should voice those concerns. As the above poster noted, ABRA rejected the appeal. It is the neighbors right to protest and ABRA's right to reject.
DeleteNot sure why people are so worked up over how other neighbors feel the community should be developed. Those in support of these businesses NOT having to sign a settlement agreement are more than welcome to write letters in support of those businesses.
You've got to be kidding me!
ReplyDeleteSeems like an continuation of this issue from back in March:
ReplyDeletehttp://bloomingdaleneighborhood.blogspot.com/2013/03/bertha-holliday-statement-on-copy-of.html