Eastside Defender

A court has ruled that Gabby’s is not responsible for its patrons’ behavior once they leave the property:

In 2006, city licensing officials began meeting with the owners of the bustling business at 1900 NE Marshall St. to discuss customers' littering, urinating in public, yelling, and playing loud music in cars.

In February 2008, the city, backed by a ruling from an administrative law judge, fined Gabby's $25,000, ordered it to reduce maximum occupancy to 438 from 689, eliminate drink specials and create a new management plan.

Gabby's obeyed, but wasn't required to eliminate drink specials or lower the occupancy standards until an appeal was decided.

The Court of Appeals said the city denied due process to Gabby's because the bar took extensive measures to protect patrons and had not broken any laws. The city and administrative law judge relied "solely on the off-premises behavior of Gabby's patrons in imposing conditions," the court said.

"Gabby's did not have adequate notice that the off-premises conduct of its patrons and neighborhood livability issues could be the basis of adverse license action," said the ruling written by Judge Harriet Lansing.

As I see it, Gabby’s now has notice. Should the nuisance return this summer, by the judge’s reasoning, the Council could impose conditions as a new action.

The club's lawyer, Scott Harris, said, "It's a tough situation because Gabby's is a very large club in a fundamentally residential area, but Gabby's is doing nothing wrong."

This argument is frequently used as explanation or justification for the nuisance. It is flawed. Gabby’s is doing nothing wrong by the City’s licensing laws. That’s not the same as doing nothing wrong in a “good neighbor” or moral sense. The City can change its code to better tie harm caused to the source of noxious emissions. Under the code, there is no unlimited right to serve liquor within City limits.

The notion that problems arise because this is a fundamentally residential area has shaky foundations, too. Gabby’s is across the street from a factory. To the south are a collection of commercial properties. It’s a mixed-use neighborhood, not a fundamentally residential one.

Further, if Gabby’s was in an industrial park, the behavior of these patrons would still be a nuisance. Public urination is unacceptable no matter where one whips it out. Assault is a crime in any venue. The lawyer attempts to blur the line between the rambunctious and the criminal. What matters is respect. Those who show none, deserve none.