Georgetown Business Association: Let the Liquor License Moratorium Expire—No Strings Attached

The Georgetown liquor license moratorium—in effect since 1989 and due to expire April 3, 2016—has garnered opposition from Georgetown’s neighborhood groups, such as the Citizens Association of Georgetown and the Georgetown Business Improvement District.

At the end of December, the Georgetown Business Association, which represents businesses throughout all of Georgetown, added its own unequivocal take on the debate: let the Georgetown liquor license moratorium expire, with no strings attached.

The Georgetown-Burleith Advisory Neighborhood Commission is expected to vote at its Jan. 4 meeting to let the ban expire by spring, according to a source close to the negotiations on a so-called “Georgetown Settlement Agreement Template” between the ANC, the BID and CAG. The BID and CAG are expected to vote up or down on the final version on Jan. 21. (Future agreements between new businesses serving alcohol and the neighborhood are considered to be voluntary.)

Community and business leaders predict that the Georgetown ban, the last active liquor license moratorium in the District of Columbia, to be a thing of the past by the spring of 2016.

The following is a Dec. 28 letter to Fred Moosally, director of D.C.’s Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration from the GBA that details and explains its position on the moratorium.

December 28, 2015

Mr. Fred Moosally

Director Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration

2000 14th Street NW, Suite 400

Washington, D.C. 20009

Dear Director Moosally:

Established in 1976, the Georgetown Business Association (GBA) is a nonprofit membership organization committed to maintaining and improving the climate for conducting business throughout Georgetown.

There is an overlap between GBA and the Georgetown Business improvement District (BID), but the BID covers a limited area of Georgetown and is prohibited under its enabling legislation from “lobbying on legislative or administrative actions with respect to any property or area.” furthermore, in accordance with its bylaws, the Bid is controlled by the owners of the commercial properties in the Bid zone. in contrast, GBa’s bylaws do not provide that any single segment of the Georgetown business community controls the organization’s decisions. it follows that GBA and the BID share similar views on many issues, but may differ on others.

Therefore, GBA is writing on behalf of all the businesses throughout Georgetown con-cerning whether the liquor license moratorium currently in effect should be continued. For the reasons stated below, it should be allowed to expire without the imposition of additional legal restrictions in the form of a template or otherwise.

THE MORATORIUM

Georgetown was perhaps the center of nightlife in the District of Columbia before the late 1980s. It was perceived to have an abundance of drinking places, generating noise, vandalism, and trash. In response, the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board established the first liquor license moratorium in Georgetown in 1989.

However, the conditions which led to the creation of a moratorium in Georgetown no longer exist. ABRA is likely very familiar with the current conditions in Georgetown, com- pared to those in other commercial areas such as U Street, 14th Street, Logan Circle, Adams Morgan, H Street, and Capitol Hill, all of which are adjacent to residential neigh-borhoods and have considerably more vibrant nightlife.

During a public Advisory Neighborhood Commission meeting on November 30, 2015, Commissioner Tom Birch, long the Co-Chair of ABC matters for ANC 2E, openly addressed whether the conditions which led to the imposition of a liquor license moratorium in Georgetown still apply. As reported in the December 2 issue of the Georgetown Current: “During the meeting, Birch acknowledged that the moratorium was created under neighborhood conditions that no longer exist. Concerns about the neighborhood serving as a regional entertainment district to the detriment of residential stability are no longer relevant, he added.”

Georgetown has some very good restaurants, but because virtually all restaurants today serve alcoholic beverages, the moratorium restricts the entry of new restaurants. On December 9, the Washington Post ran an article categorizing Washington, D.C., as one of the “ten best food cities” in the United States. The Post’s food critic wrote: “I have no doubt that the nation’s capital deserves to be on the roster. The sentiment springs from neighborhoods that have recently blossomed into food destinations (Petworth, Shaw, H Street NE in the District and the Mosaic District in Fairfax) and, this year alone, a flurry of impressive restaurant launches that have made headlines outside the beltway.”

The Post then listed 22 restaurants as “Where to Go” in the metropolitan area. Not one of them is in Georgetown.

If the liquor license moratorium in Georgetown is renewed, Georgetown would be the only neighborhood in the city with a restriction on all classes of restaurants. As Commissioner Birch publicly acknowledged, the conditions here clearly do not warrant the unfair and discriminatory continuation of the liquor license moratorium, which impedes competition and discourages the entry of new restaurants.

THE TEMPLATE IN NEGOTIATION

Georgetown residents already have very extensive input into the ABRA process through CAG and ANC 2E, which has exercised great clout for many years, leading to the creation of numerous “voluntary” or “settlement” agreements. This process is sufficient to protect the legitimate concerns of Georgetown residents without super- imposing additional legal requirements that do not pertain in competing neighborhoods.

GBA is especially concerned about limitations on hours of operation that would not be in force District-wide. It is worth noting that Washington, D.C., has experienced extensive growth in its population of millennials, who tend to dine out more often and keep somewhat later hours than the generations ahead of them. They should not be discouraged from frequenting businesses in Georgetown by limits on hours of operation that do not apply to competing businesses elsewhere.

Similarly, the restrictions on noise should be the same in Georgetown as elsewhere. CAG and the ANC are extremely responsive to complaints from residents about noise generated by nearby business, and very effective in addressing them. Adding across-the-board provisions such as forbidding noise generated in a private outdoor space that can be heard inside a residence (presumably even through an open window) are excessive. This type of restriction could preclude relatively quiet outdoor dining at lunchtime, for example.

Other broadly stated noise limitations under the proposed template might apply even if the sound generated is not substantially audible at residences. For instance, if a moderate amount of outdoor noise were generated by a business located near Blues Alley or in many locations south of M Street, it is not likely that residents would be impacted significantly, if at all. Thus, some of the restrictions that the template would impose are overly broad and too onerous. GBA also questions whether it is fair to applicants to accord sole authority in these matters to the discretion of CAG and/or the ANC, though their views will be carefully considered by ABRA.

The proposed template seems especially anomalous in the townhouse environment of Georgetown, where residents are permitted to play amplified music in their outdoor spaces and can otherwise legally generate a range of noise that can be heard by their adjacent neighbors during daytime hours.

Competing commercial areas throughout the District are adjacent to residences; there is no valid reason to impose additional legal restrictions on businesses in Georgetown because residents here are entitled to some “special” treatment. Rather, liquor license applications in Georgetown should continue to be handled on a case- by-case basis under the same general legal requirements that apply District-wide.

If you have questions or would like to discuss these issues further, I would welcome your call.

Very truly yours,

Sonya Bernhardt, President

cc: Georgetown BID
ANC 2E Commissioners
Citizens Association of Georgetown
Ruth Werner, Office of Councilman Jack Evans