Incident at Downtown Bar Raises Tough Questions

The incident at The last week has unleashed a debate about how to best rein in rowdy bars while not hurting drinking establishments obeying the law and generating revenue for a city badly in need of a cash infusion.

California Alcoholic Beverage Control, or ABC, which grants liquor licenses, is evaluating whether The Rocks should stay in business, following last Monday's incident that began when a drunk patron punched a bouncer and culminated in a near riot of 100 people on Kentucky Street.

The police, meanwhile, have filed a report with the city's administrative hearing process, in an attempt to bring the bar into compliance.

"We cannot continue to ask the citizens of Petaluma to shoulder the responsibilities of this business," said Petaluma Police Department Captain David Sears. "I had every officer downtown as well as from other jurisdictions and all those cities had no one available if someone were to call for an emergency."

The Rocks has generated more than 50 calls for service since opening last October, including one stabbing, and had six noise ordinance violations, according to police. And the bar has already had its alcohol license suspended once, according to a source close to the owners, although this could not be independently verified.

The owners, listed as Daniel Trump, John Personeni and David Thurston, did not return calls for comment to the bar and their home.

So, what is the source of problems for Rocks, a hip lounge on Kentucky Street that attracts patrons from all over the North Bay and offers dancing, live music and comedy shows?

That depends on who you ask.

"It's the crowd that comes there," said a young man named Brad nursing a drink at the Hideaway, who did not want to reveal his last name, saying only that he was a friend of the owners. "It's all the out- of-towners who bring the problems. It's not fair to pin the blame on the bar."

A bartender at a local bar, who also did not want to reveal his name for fear of causing problems with the Rocks' owners, said the real issue was the bouncers the club hired.

"They don't know who their bouncers are," the bartender said about the club's management. "They use a company that recruits the bouncers for them. They don't know if they are ex-felons or what."

The last Monday escalated when a bouncer took out a Taser and fired it into the crowd, according to eyewitnesses. That made people in the crowd angry and a melee ensued.

As police arrived and tried to restore order, partygoers grew more agitated, some even shouting, "Let's start a riot!" and "Down with the police," according to video captured by a bystander. In the end, the incident cost the city $4,200 in fees for outside assistance, Sears said.

Meanwhile, several city officials have floated the idea of reinstating a police officer dedicated to monitoring businesses that serve alcohol, a position that was eliminated in 2009 due to budget cuts.

Called an Alcohol Control Enforcement Officer, or ACE, that person worked with bars to teach bartenders how to spot fake IDs, how to handle rowdy patrons and above all else, how to cut people off when they'd had one too many.

After the position was implemented in 2007, calls for service at downtown establishments were reduced from 460 in 2006 to 272 last year, according to police.

"It's a preventative measure that works and we've seen the costs of not having it," said Councilmember Tiffany Renee, adding that the job could either be part-time or full-time. "But now all people are doing is responding to individual cases and it's not working."

Others say the job of training businesses on safe alcohol practices is the role of the Alcoholic Business Control and not the police department.

"The city should not be paying $100,000 a year for it," said Councilwoman Teresa Barrett, adding that the city is already facing a tight budget that could require further cuts in services.

Another idea is reviewing the city's zoning codes and changing the conditional use permits that would, for example, require a bar to install video cameras, impose guidelines about the types of bouncers hired and require them to use a black light to safeguard against fraudulent identification, favored by underage patrons.

But there's concern that such requirements would be unfair to bars with a stellar safety record, yet which would have to pay more to come into compliance.

"Whatever we do, we must not put any undue hardship on businesses that are doing the right thing," Barrett said, adding that there are existing ordinances on the books to "take out" bad businesses.

Currently, bartenders are encouraged to take ABC's training workshop every two years, which teaches them, among other things, that they are responsible for everyone in the bar, even once the patron has left.

But according to bartenders interviewed for the story, the training is not enforced by ABC, meaning it's up to the owners to decide whether their employees attend or not.

At a recent ABC training, Carla Placencia, a bartender at the Hideaway, said she was surprised that bartenders from the Rocks didn't know many of the basics, including the fact that they are responsible for what went on within 20 feet of their establishment.

"It was apparent that they didn't know as much as they should have from the questions they were asking," Placencia said. "For example, I know that if I serve a guy who's drunk anything, I can be held responsible for what he does when he leaves here…Being a bartender is a lot of babysitting."

Meanwhile, police stress that the overwhelming majority of bars in Petaluma are law-abiding and well-run. Still, as last week's case demonstrates, one rowdy bar can be enough to cause a major disruption for Petaluma's small police force.

"People ask us if what happened that night was unusual and the answer is 'no'," said Petaluma Police Capt. Sears. "But we should still not be allowing behavior like that. We want to create a safe environment where people can come down and enjoy themselves and not have to worry about riots and fights."