Jump to content

Cercle Rouge, Tribeca Tavern, Bubble Lounge


Recommended Posts

Now I dont know if that's correct but it seems to me that it has to work both ways if it is.   The SLA and others have open access to tax rolls, etc and should be expected to grant licenses based on dilligent research, no?  Once granted, and a business sinks $$$$ into their operation, how can they just pull the license with no recourse.  Where's the consistant "ignorance is no excuse" part?

State employees. What do you expect? ;)

 

Unfair blow, and not always true.

 

I've found municipal employees to be as helpful, or not, as the average person with whom I deal.

In my early days I worked for the City of New York for 7 years. I figure that ought to buy me some immunity. Besides, it was a gentle (I hope) poke at Steve.

 

Actually, just last week a friend and I were talking about the near miraculous turnaround at NYS Motor Vehicles over the last 10 years. State employees one and all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 40
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

So if the license was recommended with the approval of the community board at the time, and the community board wasn't aware of the mosque (apparently not many people were)...then again, how can the licensee be expected to pay such a severe penalty now?

It wouldn't be beyond the sneakiness of the SLA to ask if there's a nearby HoW on the application. Hence the licensee incorrectly filled out the application and can't complain.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Now I dont know if that's correct but it seems to me that it has to work both ways if it is.   The SLA and others have open access to tax rolls, etc and should be expected to grant licenses based on dilligent research, no?  Once granted, and a business sinks $$$$ into their operation, how can they just pull the license with no recourse.  Where's the consistant "ignorance is no excuse" part?

State employees. What do you expect? ;)

 

Unfair blow, and not always true.

 

I've found municipal employees to be as helpful, or not, as the average person with whom I deal.

In my early days I worked for the City of New York for 7 years. I figure that ought to buy me some immunity. Besides, it was a gentle (I hope) poke at Steve.

 

Actually, just last week a friend and I were talking about the near miraculous turnaround at NYS Motor Vehicles over the last 10 years. State employees one and all.

 

Thanks, and let me apolgize for being too quick to take offense.

 

I think most people try to do a good job, but there are some contact situations which really wear down an employee.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So if the license was recommended with the approval of the community board at the time, and the community board wasn't aware of the mosque (apparently not many people were)...then again, how can the licensee be expected to pay such a severe penalty now?

It wouldn't be beyond the sneakiness of the SLA to ask if there's a nearby HoW on the application. Hence the licensee incorrectly filled out the application and can't complain.

 

You are correct, Dr J.

 

The SLA requires the applicant to certify the presence / absence of houses of worship within the radius, and attach a map of the area in question. It also asks for any other sellers of beer, wine, or liquor within 500 feet of the property.

 

Crafty and Sneaky SLA App

Link to post
Share on other sites
It would be interesting to hear from the lawyers, because on the face of it that looks like negligence causing considerable damage.  Not actionable?

No. Not negligence. But see my post on p. 1 of this thread. Boy, would I love a fat fee to litigate this one! And as for the rest of you, stop playing lawyer. The obligations and responsibilities of private parties such as real estate agents are in no way parallel to the obligations, responsibilities and powers of a governmental agency charged with enforcing the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It would be interesting to hear from the lawyers, because on the face of it that looks like negligence causing considerable damage.  Not actionable?

No. Not negligence. But see my post on p. 1 of this thread. Boy, would I love a fat fee to litigate this one! And as for the rest of you, stop playing lawyer. The obligations and responsibilities of private parties such as real estate agents are in no way parallel to the obligations, responsibilities and powers of a governmental agency charged with enforcing the law.

Parallel in that I generally dont trust either ;) . With some exceptions of course ;) .

 

Moot point anyway, if the application specifically has the applicant attest to there being no houses of worship nearby when s/he applies, isnt it? But, here I go playing lawyer again. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Moot point anyway, if the application specifically has the applicant attest to there being no houses of worship nearby when s/he applies, isnt it?

Yes. But you're all accepting the law as it is. I think it's high time its constitutionality was challenged.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Moot point anyway, if the application specifically has the applicant attest to there being no houses of worship nearby when s/he applies, isnt it?

Yes. But you're all accepting the law as it is. I think it's high time its constitutionality was challenged.

 

It would be an interesting case to bring, and I suspect the licensed spirits distributors could spare a few dollars to help finance the case.

 

The state is clearly setting a religion above the interests of a legal and highly regulated business in a way that other businesses (dry cleaners, taxidermists, cheese stores, etc) are not regulated. The SLA application makes just two proximity distinctions, the other is nearby alcohol purveyors.

 

The Second Circuit gave NY's broad interpretation of the 21st amendment precedence over the interstate commerce clause in the wine shipping case (NY's position was later overturned), so NY would come back with that response. It would probably be worth re-reading that overturning to gauge how much latitude the Supremes might allow NY in a purely domestic case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...