Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Chelsea’s Café’s this week will close at 10 p.m., and the live music has been cancelled.
Here’s the back story: The state office of Alcohol and Tobacco Control raided the restaurant in January. After a court hearing in March, the ATC told owner David Remmetter he needed to change his zoning status within 30 days. Remmetter says he took steps to get rezoning through the Metro Council, but the process usually takes 60 to 90 days (read Councilwoman Tara Wicker’s reaction and about the “Save Chelsea’s” groups that formed as a result).
On April 21 around 4 p.m., ATC agents returned to Chelsea’s this time to yank the restaurant’s liquor license. Remmetter says he tried contacting the ATC, but the office was already closed. The next day—after Remmetter says he left several phone messages with the ATC and couldn’t get any response—Judge Trudy White granted a temporary restraining order so Remmetter could keep his business open. This prompted the ATC to immediately take steps to have the restraining order dissolved.
Remmetter and the ATC met this morning in a crowded courtroom filled with about a hundred young professionals, artists, Perkins Road Overpass-area neighbors and attorneys to show their support of the restaurant.
Brian DeJohn, attorney for the ATC, says the time to get rezoning had lapsed and now Remmetter asked the court to step in to allow this “illegal operation.”
“If it looks like a bar, acts like a bar, smells like a bar, it doesn’t matter what your numbers are,” DeJohn says about the ratio of food and liquor sales, a part of the permit which Remmetter had proven was in compliance. “You can’t thumb your nose at the system and ask for an injunction.”
Brandon Brown, attorney for Chelsea’s Café, says Remmetter had every right to file the order, according to the letter of the law. Brown told the court he and his client went into the March 19 hearing with “a spirit of cooperation,” to see if they could resolve the problem and understand these “poorly written rules.” Brown says Remmetter paid his fees and brought evidence of his rezoning proceedings to the ATC office. “We can’t force the Metro Council into speeding up the process,” Brown says. “I don’t think he (Remmetter) should be punished for that. You can’t take a business of 55 people and suddenly have a different opinion of the rules now. We don’t see this happening at Juban’s.”
After hearing both sides, Judge White decided to dissolve the restraining order. Remmetter must defend his case Monday at 9 a.m.
“It doesn’t surprise me that state government would trump a small business like myself in this particular deal,” says Remmetter. “But I do feel like in the end we still have a fighting chance.”
Remmetter cancelled this week’s music acts at Chelsea’s Café and is only serving lunch and dinner until 10 p.m. “I’m angry because we’re in compliance by the letter of the law, but not in compliance with what (ATC Commissioner) Murphy Painter thinks,” Remmetter says. “If there’s a problem with live music and a cover charge, that should’ve been addressed long ago, but there was no ticket for music. If Murphy Painter wants this place to stop doing live music, fine, give us our liquor license back and we’ll stop the music.”
Meanwhile, Chelsea’s patrons have created a new Web site, ilovechelseas.com, to garner support for the eatery. Remmetter says the restaurant's Web site, chelseascafe.com, will feature contact numbers for Metro Council members and state legislators.
Comments
Posted by littlebird on April 28, 2009 at 2 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I love Chelseas.
Posted by lsukoubi on April 28, 2009 at 2:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I love Chelsea's too.
Posted by laura_joffrion on April 28, 2009 at 3:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
from san francisco to baton rouge..
PLEASE PLEASE keep fighting for the music! chelsea's is one of my staple places for live, original music when i'm home. for a state so enriched in the music culture, i'm shocked and appalled over the way dave has been treated.
THIS IS JUST NOT FAIR!!!!!! i wish i were there to stand by you..
Posted by BRforward on April 28, 2009 at 3:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
So this was the ATC's explanation:
“If it looks like a bar, acts like a bar, smells like a bar, it doesn’t matter what your numbers are,” DeJohn says of the ratio of food and liquor sales"
So basically, if the numbers are in compliance with the parameters determined by state law necessary for Chelsea's to operate in their current situation, it doesn't matter? It only matters, according to Mr. DeJohn, if it "looks" and "smells" like a bar?
Sounds like typical crap to me from those put in a position to uphold the law in Louisiana. Let's just take the statutory out of the equation and call everything discretionary law and procedure. That way, DeJohn and the rest of the ATC officials that want to close down local establishments supported by the local residents and neighborhoods, can continue to act in whatever manner they deem necessary.
This smells of District 12 Metro Council politics.
Posted by bradartigue on April 28, 2009 at 4:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I feel much better now that the ATC has protected us from Chelsea's by interpreting the law to mean whatever the heck they feel like at this moment in time.
And, really, what difference does it make if there were weenies in the boiler at midnight? Who does this protect besides the jobs of the people at the ATC?
This is the mission statement of the ATC: "The Mission of the Louisiana Office of Alcohol and Tobacco Control is to provide the state with an effective regulatory system for the alcoholic beverage and tobacco industries, with emphasis on access to underage individuals through efficient and effective education and enforcement efforts"
By my interpretation the ATC has failed to meet its mission in this case. Nice work, guys, you stopped people from playing music and having a beer because the kitchen was closed. (insert sound of hand clapping).
Posted by Nobama on April 28, 2009 at 4:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This sure is a one sided article. Chelsea's and its ownership have tried to skirt the issue of how they operate and what type of permit they have for quite a while now. They knew what they were doing was wrong and decided to take their chances. They now have to own up to what they did and pay the price for their deeds. Look, I love Chelsea's as much as anyone else but they were/are wrong in this case. The zoning laws are in place for them to operate not as a bar but as a restaurant. They chose to do what they wanted regardless.
Posted by mmoles on April 28, 2009 at 4:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
As many times as me and my family have gone to Chelsea's, it has been for the food. My 15 year old eats the crawfish cakes and my 18 year old eats the hummas. I eat everything from the Tuna steak to the smoked pork sandwich, to the fried grean tomatoes with grilled shrimp.... They have a bar? YEP! and it's good to, but to say it isn't a restaurant is a mistake. My hope is they Chelsea's moves down the street to where the old perkins road hardware was and Dave creates a great new funky bar/restaurant there... he could do some really cool stuff in the new buildings, maybe inlarge the place for larger crowds and bands.... maybe they can put the old colonels club back in the old building, was that a bar or a restaurant?
Posted by BCS49 on April 28, 2009 at 6:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Well, if this doesn't reek of old time Baton Rouge politics, I don't know what does. That building has housed bars in it for decades and now suddenly after all these years, it's not zoned correctly for a bar? Shame on the Metro Council, the ATC, and the Zoning Commission. You should all be embarassed (as I am for you). And I'm really wondering why the ATC has such an impassioned interest in this particular business. I smell a rat.
Posted by bill on April 28, 2009 at 10:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This is embarrassing. The ATC exists only to enforce the law as it's written. The requirements for an R type permit listed in RS 26:73 are straightforward, and don't make any mention of how an establishment must "look" or "smell."
What's important here is that Chelsea's is a locally owned, taxpaying employer of 55 Baton Rouge residents. It adds to our culture by featuring the work of local artists on its walls and attracting quality music acts that you'd normally have to drive to New Orleans to see. In a city dominated by the same chain restaurants you can find anywhere else in America, we should be thankful that a place like Chelsea's has managed to survive for so long.
I hope our community, during an economic crisis no less, is not deprived of such a wonderful place by bureaucratic myopia.
Posted by CowboyinBRLA on April 29, 2009 at 3:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Here's the problem, in a nutshell, as I understand it:
1. Property zoning restricts what kinds of businesses can operate at particular locations. This location is zoned to allow a restaurant (with or without a liqour license) but it is not zoned to allow a bar (which may or may not also serve food).
2. The licensing requirements for operating a bar (and conversely, the privileges that come with that license) are different from those for a restaurant. In general, restaurant licenses are easier to get, and the location is zoned for that purpose.
3. To distinguish between the two, the law sets out (at a minimum) that a restaurant must make a majority of its revenue from sales of food, as opposed to sales of alcohol. That minimum standard was indeed met.
4. However, Chelsea's was closing its kitchen at 10:00 p.m., but continuing to admit patrons until closing time (presumably, 2:00 a.m.). Those patrons also paid a cover charge for the entertainment, and they could purchase alcohol. The problem this presents is: how can a restaurant be open for customers but not serving food? It's not a case of allowing those customers who were served before the kitchen closed to finish. And I've never known a restaurant that levied a cover charge for live music. I have known plenty of bars that do, however; the assumption is that people may go to a bar to listen to the music and not actually drink (hence, make them pay for the music) but you generally can't go to a restaurant, get seated, hang out, and never order anything.
Plain and simple, Chelsea's was essentially ceasing to operate as a restaurant at 10:00 p.m. and operating thereafter as an unlicensed bar. The law may or may not be on their side, but the statutes should really be amended to make it clear that you can't operate under a restaurant license if you're not actively serving food at the time.
Post a comment
(Requires free registration.)