Now It’s Serious: Mayor Mike & the Yankees
Steve Lewis
November 04, 2009
Now it's serious. The re re-election of Michael Bloomberg seemed inevitable until actual election results showed it to be a close call. Although most people I know would have thought he did a great job if he went quietly into the night after his second term, the "redefining" of the election rules allowing him a third term left most squirming. Back in my poli-sci college years -- yes, we used stone tablets, and Fred Flintstone and Barney Rubble were my dorm-mates -- we thought that the best form of government was a benevolent dictatorship. Well, let's hope that is correct, for we certainly have one now. Mayor Mike has certainly been better for clubs than Rudy Giuliani, but despite what most people believe, I say Rudy was way better than David Dinkins. Under Giuliani, there was at least a dialogue, and business considerations were ... considered. You could get the ear of someone making decisions. It wasn't always perfect, but it wasn't usually a disaster. The Dinkins administration was a mess. Community groups and special interests rammed through their agendas, and as I remember it, nightlife fell victim to this bureaucratic anarchy.
The last year under Bloomberg, club life has been better for most. Some clubs, such as Pacha, seemed to be under constant attack by the city’s bulldogs, but a day in court cleared things up, and Pacha thrives once again. Clubs, bars, and fusion restaurant/lounge joints have sprung up all over in the last year as a working relationship between the nightlife industry and the municipal gods seems to have been brokered. A new state liquor authority honcho seems to pave the way for better times. Even community boards, normally a rubber stamp “no” to most new license applications, have mellowed out as of late.
Bloomberg’s monumental act banning smoking in 2003 had more side affects than the secondhand smoke banished by the legislation. As smokers poured out of the clubs and into the streets to enjoy a smoke, neighbors were treated to the loud idle chatter and laughter of revelers outside their windows. Clubs’ security guards have proven ineffective in curtailing the noise, and this conflict needs to be addressed. What I would like to see happen during Mayor Mike’s third term is firstly the allowance, finally, of the “paid detail.” Banks, shoe stores, even private events can hire a uniformed police officer under the “paid detail” program. Clubs have been denied access to these officers, even though they could greatly improve relationships between joints and their neighbors. A man or gal in blue can order a cab to stop honking, he or she can convince loud patrons to keep their banter to a whisper, they can stop disturbances from escalating to a brawl, and they would be a protective entity on blocks deterring pickpockets, litterers, and even those who might want to take a quick tinkle on a lamp post. In the past, the administration cited possible corruption of their officers and denied the availability of the paid detail to night spots. Let’s hope this is reconsidered.
Secondly, the repeal of the nuisance abatement act. Cops go into places undercover, purchase small amounts of drugs, go to court, say that the club is a clear and present danger to the public, and get a judge to shut the joint down. This always happens on a Friday night, so clubs lose their weekend revenues and are therefore punished before a hearing decides the value of the police action. Under this administration, clubs can be shut down and harassed without due process. Armies of city officials basically invade clubs in the middle of a night. Flashlights are pointed in taxpayers’ faces, IDs double-checked, bars inspected for violations, fruit flies are sought out, pounds of paperwork are meticulously pored over. All in all, it’s a very police-state-like happening. The resulting tickets often result in serious fines, suspensions, or even closure. Now, there certainly is a need to regulate nightlife. There are bad eggs operating out there. Here’s hoping this new term brings fair play to the administration of nightlife.
Comments (6)
Posted by steve lewis on Wed Nov 4, 2009 at 09.24 pm
nightlife has done better under the last year of mayor bloomberg, yes the gay pride attack was horrible but i cant believe anyone in the mayors office was aware of it until it was too late. anyway he is our mayor and we must work with him. i dont believe in the repeal of the cabaret laws w/o addressing the serious safety issues that would arise. fire suppression systems etc protect dancers who are in a state less likely to see fire at the early stages. plus these expensive systems alert fdny automatically. there is no cheap solution. manhattan is expensive and clubs need revenues to stay in biz. affordable places to dance may not have a future in midtown, think bk
Posted by anonymous on Thu Nov 5, 2009 at 02.35 pm
What safety features are mandated by the Cabaret Law that are not included in DOB Use Group 12 C of O & PA code, SLA approval process, NYS security guard law, or other regulatory compliance?
If the Cabaret Law disappeared tomorrow, throwing a party in a venue without requisite safety features would still be illegal.
Lots of safety features are built into the DOB code for entertainment venues. The text of the Cabaret Law does not mention much about safety, other than it has to be in compliance with all applicable statutes and regulations. The DCA does look for electrical and fire suppression as part of the application process, but you’re supposed to have those things anyway.
Seems to me like it’s an arbitrary piece of paper you have to get from yet another poorly run city agency. Remember… the original purpose of the law was social control, not safety.
Posted by steve lewis on Thu Nov 5, 2009 at 09.29 pm
most places dont put in the fire systems because they cost too much. i stand by what i said. if a space puts in these systems and safety requirements are met then it should be automatic. but to have dancing in the local bar creates potential disaster if these measures are not built in. the creation of a dance area or open space where people can dance will have a different occupancy than the same place where people are seated. a different ratio is used. im not talking sprinklers btw . im talking systems that alert the fdny automaticaly when sprinklers go on. im talking alarm pull boxes etc. safety !!!
Posted by Sam on Fri Nov 6, 2009 at 02.21 pm
By the way Mr. Racist anonymous person.Blacks and Hispanics are not referred to as “Colored People”. You whites and your racist rhetoric is partly why America is a f**ked up Country
Posted by anonymous on Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 09.49 am
Sam, how can arguing against the stop & frisk policy be construed as “racist rhetoric”? The point is that it is a Ray Kelly / Bloomberg policy that harms poor “non whites” (is that okay?).
I don’t think most people are offended by the use of “colored” to refer to non-whites. For instance, do you consider the NAACP a “racist” organization?
If you’re just hunting for reason to call people “racist”, you can find one for anyone… regardless of their skin tone. Also! Have you been to other countries? Most of them have societal racial prejudices, often far worse than the US.
New York City is probably the most successfully integrated place in the world, even with all of the disparity we still have.
Post a Comment
Anonymous comments are moderated. To comment instantly, register with BlackBook. Click here to login.


Posted by anonymous on Wed Nov 4, 2009 at 03.49 pm
Bloomberg has had eight years in office and has given me no reason to believe that he cares about nightlife.
Number one. We still have the Cabaret Law.
The Department of Buildings is still awful. Where is the business-minded, efficient, customer-oriented government we were promised?
None of his urban planning and rezoning initiatives set aside some areas for nightlife & entertainment.
The NYPD is still out of control. CCRB complaints are at an all time high. Fewer police than ever are being tried. The Stop and Frisk campaign is basically a war of harassment against poor colored people.
The padlocking of Cielo for a month for specious reasons? Bringing Pacha to trial? Arbitrarily shutting down clubs the night before gay pride just to show them who’s boss? Bloomberg could stop these things. But he doesn’t care.
The SLA is going to take a long, long time to get straightened out. (Of course, this is the State’s problem, not the city’s. Not blaming Mike for this one.)
Ultimately… Eight years after Mike, NYC has fewer safe, legal, affordable places to DANCE than ever. All of the fancy hotel bars and lounges for the rich are not going to bring real nightlife and culture back to this city.
Not everyone has as much money to spend on a night out as the readers of this blog. And they deserve a place to dance too. Mike won’t help them.