If you sell a gun to a guy who kills people with it- do they stop you from selling guns? No.
If you sell a car to someone who kills people in it- do they stop you from selling cars? No.
But if you sell liquor to someone, and the police get called to deal with a drunk- then we stop you from selling liquor. Yep.
And then we wonder why there are so few places doing business in Dayton anymore.
Until Christmas day of 2010, for the two years previous, we’ve had the police on our street at least 3 times a week- all to the same house. Did the city charge them extra for the nuisance? Nope. Did they shut the house down? Nope. What finally happened is one person in the house finally went to prison- yet, in those two years the crime rate on this block skyrocketed.
And then we have Cold Beer & Cheeseburgers- a business that bucked the trend 18 years ago and moved downtown when everyone else was moving out. They happen to be just next to the “Private promenade ” of RTA where civil liberties are ignored and the law is carried out with a big stick- which forces people to loiter next door- in front of…. Cold Beer and Cheeseburgers.
They are now being threatened with losing their liquor license:
According to a March 30 letter from the Dayton City Commission to Byers, the Dayton Police Department objected to the Cold Beer & Cheeseburgers liquor permit renewal. Details of the police department’s objection were not available late Monday.
An “informal resolution” objecting to the liquor permit will have its first reading at the city commission meeting scheduled for 8:30 a.m. Wednesday, April 13, and city commissioners will vote on the issue at their April 20 meeting, the letter said.
In his email, Byers asks customers to come to either commission meeting “and speak on our behalf.” Byers wrote, “If I cannot garner support in this matter, then I will accept that (Cold Beer & Cheeseburgers) is no longer viable downtown.”
The restaurant has been open for 18 years.
via Restaurant owner objects to police opposition to liquor license renewal [1].
This is not a rough-neck bar- nor, one that has brawls breaking out either. It’s actually a family friendly kind of place. Yet, somehow, instead of arresting the drunks, we’re going after the business that employs probably 40 people, feeds downtown workers, and pays taxes.
I urge each and every one of you to consider writing an e-mail in support of Cold Beer and Cheeseburgers- or at least adding your comments to this post- which will be read by the members of the City Commission.
Maybe we should use the same logic for our police department? CB&CB pays taxes for the police to do their jobs- arresting the people causing problems. If the police can’t do their job- maybe we should take away their badges and their jobs instead?
There is a group I belong to on FB called Takeover. It is a group of gay men and women and anyone that wants to show support for downtown business. Once a month we go out to eat on a Monday to show support for local business and help boost what normally would be a slow day for a restaurant. Today we are going at 7pm to CBCB to show our support.
Good grief! “Takeover”? By “gay mend & women”? Are there enough here to do that? I though most gays and lesbians with enough get-up-and-go have got up and left (or do so as soon as they can, usually to Columbus or out-of-state).
Let’s end this post, please … Seemingly, we are not getting anywhere until The State / City decide whom to shut down …
Yes, I used to ride the bus when it was cheaper, and had no problems; there was this one pretty bus driver who did not tolerate boom boxes, she was cool!
As for gays taking over, ha, ha! What I meant about they get a lot of jobs is because they do exactly what they are told, IMO–they are meek people who do not rock the boat, so employers love them! Us and Them, Pink Floyd. The aliens are coming now anyway, so beware! Hope they teach us all something, because this world of ours is all about egoes, egoes fighting each other every day and not getting much done by the way of prosperity for our economy …
Has anyone wrote the City Commisioners yet, I did, Nan, she will respond to you …
@ Gary, I did writhe all commissioners and the mayor. Nan is the only one who wrote me back. I am far from meek and if nessary I am not afraid to speak my mind to my bosses. Attend the Pride parade and ralley on Court House Square in June and see just how meek we are. Back to the topic….
Nan Whaley posted on Facebook that fDi Intelligence (whoever they are) has rated Dayton as one of the top 10 Ten Cities of the Future. Actually they name Dayton as the #9 Small City of the Future–Dayton only has to compete in its weight class of cities with population 100,000 to 250,000 and not against large and major cities or against micro cities.
What’s of particular interest in fDi Intelligence’s rankings is their claim that Dayton is #3 among small cities when it comes to “Business Friendliness.” I doubt any regular Esrati.com readers would have predicted that.
Dayton is #2 among small cities when it comes to “FDI Strategy” (whatever that means). In the body of the article fDi mentions having been “impressed by the FDI strategy information submitted by Victoria,” BC, which means that although fDi seems to have a had a panel to judge and do the rankings, what they were judging was information submitted by the cities themselves instead, which might make the rankings seem rather suspect.
Read the full report here (registration required but worth it to be able to see the full PDF with gems such as the Business Friendliness rankings):
http://www.fdiintelligence.com/Locations/Americas/American-Cities-of-the-Future-2011-12
FDI is Foreign Direct Investment. Links with a little more detail.
http://ado.alabama.gov/content/media/press/BN.aspx?ID=4922
http://www.grips.ac.jp/teacher/oono/hp/lecture_F/lec06.htm
Thanks, Joe_Mamma, for pointing out what FDI means.
It makes me wonder. why a city would be ranked on “the FDI strategy information submitted” by its staff rather than by an accounting of the actual foreign direct investment in the city.
Of course, most such annual publishing of rankings, whether of cities’ foreign direct investment strategies or of the best colleges, are geared not primarily to give one objective reporting on whatever’s being ranked but rather to garner readers of a magazine. If the rankings didn’t change from year to year, what motivation would people have to buy the magazines?
There are some exceptions. I think Consumer Reports does a good job of being clear about how it does rankings for the many types of products they evaluate.
David E., Are you going to start a new post referencing the second City Commission results from yesterday? I thought it was pretty lame myself; however, I was surprised to see the daycare manager there!
I thought the Mayor was way too liberal and a little short with Mr. Williams … I thought Cold Beer/Cheese got favored … but I’m happy those other establishments are being written-up to the State for they have had many chances, and the crime is getting out of hand at those places, like at Big E’s! Club 88 I think got shafted, no pun intended!
Jason, Why don’t you ask David E. if he’d like to address gay issues here on his blog; I have many mixed feelings about this issue …
Although it causes me great pain to agree with Nan Whaley, it was brought up by a speaker at the Commission meeting that she had previously (and privately) stated that in order for the Charles Simms condo development at First and Patterson to ever take off, then 88 Club had to go. If she did in fact say that, she’s dead on.
At the risk of sounding a bit culturally insensitive, no suburbanite from Centerville or Beavercreek or wherever is ever going to even consider buying a place around the corner from the 88 Club.
The lure of being incredibly close to the baseball field and Riverscape will be almost entirely negated by the continued existence of the 88 Club in it’s current form.
Brutal, but true.
Make it a sports-themed restaurant. It will be supported by new townhouse residents (amongst other downtowners), and would also help draw potential occupants to the condo project(s) in the area.
LOL @ “Jason, Why don’t you ask David E. if he’d like to address gay issues here on his blog.”
OK…David Esrati. How do yo feel about the gay population in Dayton? We have developed a whole section on downtown. How will you protect us? And if you are running againg, why should I vote for you? What is in it for the LGBT community in Dayton?
How will you protect us? – Jason Boydston
Huh? Why do you need “protecting”? 8 posts earlier you were bragging about how tough you are by saying that you are “far from meek and if nessary (sic) I am not afraid to speak my mind”. Now you want protection????
Or by saying “How will you protect us?” are you actually asking “What kind of special favors will you do for us?” Oh, wait a minute! You already asked about special favors by saying “What is in it for the LGBT community in Dayton?”!! WTF? How come there has to be something special in it for the LGBT community? Isn’t it enough that if David would somehow end up on the Commission or in some real position of leadership, that he does what’s best for the ENTIRE COMMUNITY OF DAYTON???
And, no – I’m not gay bashing. I am however, “Jason bashing”! ;)
@Jason- I guess Bubba beat me to it.
I don’t give a crap what sex you are- what color you are- what you do between consulting adults.
I’ve said that I support equal rights- I don’t discriminate. I called Joey and Dean spineless for their votes against Nan’s precious ordinance- yet, despite all that- the “Stonewall Democrats” still never endorse me- imagine that?
I don’t believe in selective rights- nor do I believe in selectively enforced laws- nor do I believe in selectively given tax breaks.
Speaking of Dayton city commissioners who have hurt rather than helped the gay community, don’t forget that if you value equal rights for gay people, vote against Dean Lovelace in November.
By the way, Bubba, non-discrimination ordinances that ban discrimination based on sexual orientation do not give special rights to queers. They ban discrimination against heterosexuals too. It’s just that discrimination against people for being straight is either really rare or really under-reported. But if someone refuses to hire you or rent to you, Bubba, in Dayton for being straight, you have recourse, no thanks to Dean or Joey.
@ Bubba. aparently I was not clear enough. “Protect” I mean insuring we have the same rights as everyone else. We do not at this point. With the exception of housing in the city of Dayton. Sexual Orientation is a protected class in Dayton. This basicaly covers my whole question up there. I am not asking for any special favors. Just the same rights as you.
@ David Lauri, in your last statement. Ohio is a right to fire state. However you can not be fired or denied a place to live based on race. However in Ohio you can be fired for being gay. You can not be fired for being straigt. With the exception of the city of Dayton, you can be denied housing, rent/purchase if you are gay. But if you are straight you are protected.
Jason, would you care to cite some specific part of Ohio Revised Code that backs up your claim that “you can not be fired for being straigt [sic]”?
And would you care to explain, then, why H.B. 176, the Equal Housing and Employment Act, passed by Ohio’s General Assembly in 2009 but never brought to a vote in the state senate, defined sexual orientation as “actual or perceived, heterosexuality, homosexuality, or bisexuality”? Why would that bill (and every other ordinance and law in the United States banning discrimination based on sexual orientation) have to specify that heterosexuality was included if it wasn’t previously legal in jurisdictions passing such legislation to discriminate against heterosexuals as well as homosexuals?
And you’re wrong about Dayton’s ordinance pertaining only to housing when it comes to sexual orientation, Jason. See the Dayton Human Relations Council page on civil rights enforcement, which says:
http://www.daytondailynews.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/dayton/daytoncrime/entries/2011/04/22/bouncers_jaw_broken_during_ham.html?cxtype=feedbot
Maybe the city commision should look at Hammerjax?!! Selective investigation of the bars downtown it seems. Or the police could have a more noticeable presence downtown and this probably wouldn’t happen.
But if someone refuses to hire you or rent to you, Bubba, in Dayton for being straight, you have recourse, no thanks to Dean or Joey. – DL
If someone refuses to hire me or rent to me because I’m straight, I really don’t care about recourse. Would I really want to work for someone that doesn’t like me because of who I’m sleeping with? That wouldn’t be a good work environment so why would I want to spend over 1/3 of my life there? The same goes for renting from someone that hates straights (or gays). Why should I hand over my hard earned money to someone that’s an ass about my orientation? Just man up and move on! Don’t find excuses to be a victim!
What kind of recourse would you want if you thought someone didn’t hire you because you were gay? Would you want them to force you to hire you anyway? How long would you stay at the job? Would you enjoy the job? Or would you hire a lawyer just to punish them?
I had a couple of queers (your word) that lived in the apartment above me a couple of years ago. If I was a landlord, I wouldn’t have rented to them. Nor would I hire them. But that has nothing to do with their sexual orientation. It has everything to do with them being rude, irresponsible, inconsiderate, emotionally demanding pains in the ass! (no pun or gay reference intended!)
No, Bubba, I wouldn’t want to work for someone who has a problem with my being gay, but I have a hell of a lot of privilege. I can well afford not to work anyplace I don’t want to work at. Not all people have that luxury. For many people, especially in this tough economic climate, it’s better to have a job even working for someone who doesn’t like you and whom you don’t like than it is to have no job at all. And I notice you put “thought” in bold as if discrimination cannot be proven. Let me tell you how discrimination is proven. You have someone with a particular class to inquire about an apartment or a house and then you send someone who has the same background except for one characteristic. For example, you send a white woman making $30,000/year who has a child to inquire about a two bedroom apartment and then you send a white woman making $30,000/year who has no children to inquire about the same apartment. If the first woman is told, “sorry, the apartment’s not available” but the woman after her is told, “sure, the apartment’s available,” then you’ve got some pretty strong evidence that the first woman faced discrimination based on familial status. It’s not rocket science, Bubba, and many times people who discriminate will even say they’re discriminating. People are often unaware of the laws on familial status and will outright say to people with kids, sorry, no kids. People are pretty well schooled that it’s illegal to discriminate based on race, so they don’t usually say to black folks, sorry, no blacks, but they will say to a white person who comes along afterwards, “Yeah, we had a black guy come along earlier this morning and turned him away,” sometimes using uglier language than “black guy.” Discrimination exists in the Miami Valley, whether or not you think it does. What recourse? Requiring people who discriminate to attend classes to learn what’s legal. Requiring people who discriminate to post signs and notices on their forms indicating… Read more »
Oops, that should have said, “Non-discrimination laws do not say you cannot make choices based on valid criteria”
David L – I know that discrimination, both covert and overt, exists in the Miami Valley. I’ve seen it many times. I’ve also taken a stand against it on more than one occasion. But, here’s why I don’t like laws like the ones you’re defending…. I don’t think it’s possible to prove what’s in a person’s mind (or his heart) unless that person openly admits to it. Sure, there may be circumstantial evidence that suggests the person discriminated but it may not be the case. Let’s take your hypothetical example of the white woman (with and without a kid) looking for an apartment. Assume that the woman with the kid brings him along as she’s looking for the apartment. Little Johnny immediately starts ringing doorbells, running up and down the stairs, slamming cabinet doors and generally being a loud, pain in the ass that ignores his mother’s meek request of “Johnny, be good.” If the other 3 tenant’s (assuming it’s a 4-plex) are quiet, childless people that have lived in my building for several years, then I don’t want to rent to this woman with obnoxious kid. He’s going to upset my other tenants possibly causing them to move out. He’s going to tear up my property which increases my costs and diminishes my investment. All in all, not a good situation for me or my long term tenants. So, I don’t rent to her. Am I discriminating because she has a kid? Not in my mind. But, according to the law, I might be. And if she gets a burr up her butt and decides to bring some sort of legal action, then I have to pay for defending myself and my property. Is that “valid criteria”? Who knows, but if she decides to sue, then I have to defend what I think is valid criteria! I could go on with more examples, but I think you get the point. Not to mention that I have to get busy and actually work today! And, I get your point(s) as well. But, that’s why I put “thought” in… Read more »