Published: July 10, 2008 01:15 pm            

Sanction sends wrong message

Saturday will no doubt be a great day at Club 110 in Clinton. At 6 a.m. that day, the club is allowed to reopen following a 10-day sanction levied by the Clinton City Council following a fight at the bar on Main Avenue in April.

The decision to suspend the club's liquor license from July 2 to July 12 came after discussions by the city's Rules and Regulations Committee and the City Council as a whole, which were presented options that could have ranged anywhere from closing the bar down completely to doing nothing at all.

The background is this: On April 20 during a rap night at the club, one of the performers was cut off during a song and dropped a microphone on the floor. Some thought this sounded like gunfire and before it was over chaos ensued. There was a large fight, mayhem, police called in from other communities to help, injured officers and bar owners, and three arrests for disorderly conduct.

It was a most unfortunate — and we're sure scary — situation for all involved. After it happened, discussions began concerning whether the club's alcohol license — which was facing expiration — should be renewed.

Clinton's police chief came out against the renewal saying that officers had been called there many times in the previous months, although many of those calls were made by the bar staff proactively on the advice of police who said to call if help was needed. The city’s Rules and Regulations Committee discussed the fight and decided the license would be renewed if the bar complied with fire department and DRAM requirements.

That's when things start to get fuzzy.

The issue was brought before the council May 27 but action on the license was postponed. Later, at the June 10 City Council meeting, At Large Councilman Ron Mallicoat said the issue of a proposed sanction was not brought back before the Rules and Regulations Committee and questioned if City Administrator Gary Boden and Clinton Police Chief Brian Guy had the authority to formulate a suspension agreement with the owners of the establishment.

First Ward Councilman and R & R Committee Chairman Bob Soesbe said he believed the motion to postpone action on the license at the previous council meeting included a direction for the police chief and city administrator to discuss potential sanctions and come up with a stipulation. Soesbe said the agreement was approved at the prior committee meeting.

Fourth Ward Councilman Paul Gassman contradicted Soesbe, saying the committee stipulated that the liquor license renewal be approved subject to compliance with the fire department and DRAM requirements. Gassman said he felt the committee decision was circumvented. A 5-2 vote, with Mallicoat and Gassman dissenting, led to the sanction's placement for 10 days.

We think the sanction was heavy handed, considering the owners did nothing wrong, had no previous law violations and after the fight occurred, stated that they were changing the entertainment provided at the bar to prevent further fights from happening.

If something is broke — you fix it. They did.

Then there’s the question of how do you prevent it? Any incident that creates fear in a crowd can lead to anger, fighting and chaos. You can't control everything and no matter what steps are taken, unless you plan to shut down every bar and large venue establishment in town, you can never say without a doubt that it will never happen again.

By trying to make this incident an example, we believe the message is sent to bar owners that it is better to handle fights and other dangerous situations on your own, diffuse the situation and hope the powers that be never find out, that way it can't be used against you when it comes time to renew your license and livelihood.

That is the most dangerous message of all.

        

• Click to discuss this story with other readers on our forums.