Stupidest ordinance Madison has ever passed in my book. Arbitrary lines drawn on a map to increase the value of liquor licenses downtown and limit who can make money. And its about to expire, so they are putting on the full court press to make sure they have the votes to keep it in place. Needless to say, I’d vote against (again) if I had the chance. Tho, I do enjoy the High Noon/Brink/Brass Ring complex and all the new venues that have sprouted up in the Williamson and Atwood areas where they can get a license!
They are doing the dog and pony show, last week they held it at the ALRC meeting, this week Plan Commission and he’s probably done it many other places as well. I suffered through their audio difficulties to see what they are saying about it – here it is. Mark Woulf presents . . . ALDO dog and pony show! (Nothing against Mark, he’s just doing his job.) This is the rush job as he has to get across the street to an ALRC meeting.
(slide)
What did the Alcohol License Density Ordinance (ALDO) set out to accomplish?
– Adopted October 2007.
– Decrease the incidences of alcohol-related problems in the downtown area.
– Maintain or gradually reduce the number and capacity of certain type of alcohol beverage licenses
– Decrease the strain on public resources
– Provide opportunities for businesses that sell alcohol incidental to their principal businesses.
(Mark says)
What is ALDO? Is our Alcohol License Density Ordinance. It was adopted to accomplish two goals, decrease alcohol related problems in the downtown or and maintain or gradually reduce the number of alcohol beverage licenses. They are talking about taverns here. The ordinance says that if you are over 50% alcohol, with a few exceptions, then you are not allowed to locate in the ALDO area. The ALDO area is Blair Street, Park Street, and lake to lake. Basically you have to be a restaurant or have some sort of business concept that is under 50% gross annual revenue from alcohol. There are two secondary goals that are laid out in the ordinance, to decrease strain on public resources and provide opportunities for businesses that sell alcohol incidental to the principal businesses.
(slide)
Changes to ALDO in 2011
– Allowed flexibility for establishments operating as “entertainment venues” to locate within the ALDO area.
– – Up to 70$ gross annual revenue from alcohol
– – Only 7 of these types of licenses available
– Increased the time for property owners to replace tenants from 1 to 2 years
– Allowed for the possibility of capacity increases with physical changes
– Placed a sunset of August 1, 2013 on the ordinance
– Changes to the annual review of ALDO
– Common Council adopted an accompanying resolution
(Mark says)
In 2011 it came up for review again, there were some main changes. He wants to point out one, the ALRC spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to incorporate entertainment venues into ALDO. WE don’t want something that is 100% alcohol, but we want to allow for flexibility for different types of entertainment that weren’t previously allowed. So they came up with a provision that allowed entertainment venues. They could have up to 70% of their gross annual revenue coming from alcohol, but only 7 of these licenses would be available for the downtown. They have not received a single application for a venue. Probably for a variety of reasons, but he will touch on that later. It increased the time to replace tenants from 1 to 2 years. So basically if you go out of business as a tavern, that building owner or developer has 720 days to replace that tenant with a new tavern tenant otherwise the license goes away. What we were worried about there is basically rushing to save the tavern license, replacing it with a bad tenant instead of finding a good tenant for that location. Allowed for the possibility of capacity with physical changes of the space, placed a sunset of August 1, 2013, which is why I am here, changes to the annual review included some extra information and common council adopted an accompanying resolution that is very important to why I am here as well.
(slide)
Resolution #23090
Directs the Food and Alcohol Policy Coordinator, Economic Development staff, Public Health, and Police Department staff to develop an alcohol license management and business development plan for the Central Commercial District including:
– Basic data on downtown alcohol-related and business development
– A review of how alcohol license holders are released and regulated
– A review of best practices in peer cities fr both alcohol license management and downtown business development, including ways in which other cities promote a healthy mix of retail and entertainment and promote locally-owned and non-formula businesses.
– How the city deploys and coordinates its resources (Alcohol Policy Coordinator police, City Attorney’s Office, Alcohol License Review Committee, Economic Development and Business Resources staff, Madison Police Department and Downtown Safety Initiative)
– Recommendations of policies to incentivize recruitment and retention of desired business models, potentially including alcohol license management, planning, zoning and other appropriate tools.
(Brenda sez)
This is what the resolution actually said:
· Basic data on downtown liquor licenses, alcohol-related crime and disorder, population, business mix, relative number of formula and non-formula stores, number of locally-owned businesses, rental rates, and market strengths and weaknesses.
· A review of how alcohol license holders are reviewed and regulated.
· A review of best practices in peer cities for both alcohol license management and downtown business development, including ways in which other cities promote a healthy mix of retail and entertainment and promote locally-owned, and non-formula businesses.
· Recommendations of policies to incentivize recruitment and retention of desired business models, potentially including alcohol license management, planning, zoning and other appropriate tools.
Not sure where the changes come from.
(Mark says)
Basically what the Common Council unanimously adopted 2 years ago along side the changes you just saw was to direct myself, along with Economic Development, Public Health, Police Department, Planning and Zoning were also a part of this as well, to meet and discuss ALDO and basically provide various committees and ultimately the city council recommendations on two fronts, one alcohol license management and business development in the Central Commercial District, or better known for our purposes as the ALDO area. It asked us to review various pieces of information, but ultimately provide a set of recommendations. Just so you know, and in case you are wondering why I am here talking about alcohol, one of the things that became apparent in the process back in 2011 was, and was apparent throughout the staff meetings that are going on since January is that there are land use considerations that involve alcohol that frankly the ALRC isn’t necessarily equipped to handle, they are the experts in the alcohol realm, they are certainly larger land use impacts like noise and considerations that we think you folks should be involved with and ultimately will be one of the committees that we will be recommending see that package of recommendations once we release them.
(slide)
Purpose of Annual Review
– To Review the efficacy of the Alcohol License Density Ordinance (ALDO) throug
– – Alcohol related problems (crime data)
– – Total number of alcohol beverage licenses by type
– – Capacity of establishments with liquor licenses
– – Business mix data
(Mark says)
He says the purpose of the annual review is just to look at our alcohol related problems, total number of licenses and other markers like business mix to see how we are doing in terms of retail vs food and drink vs other types of businesses downtown.
(slide)
Crime Data Set
– 2001 – 2012
– 10 pm – 4 am
– Measuring certain types of calls for service (CFS) by address
– – Liquor law investigation
– – Battery
– – Fight Call
– – Disturbance Call
– – Aggravated Battery
– – Alcohol Conveyance
– – DWI
– – Intoxicated Person
– – Protective Custody Conveyance
– – Local ordinance violation
– – Domestic disturbance
– – Sexual Assaults
– – Noise Complaint
(Mark says)
The first thing we look at is crime data, we go all the way back to 2001 to give you an idea, remember it was 2007 when ALDO was put in place. We are looking in the data set at calls for service, so first of all not indicating necessarily a crime, police just responded to something so there was a log of them responding. WE looked at only 10pm – 4pm typically 1) a time you would assume that there would be alcohol related if there were calls for service and 2) that it may be tied to a licensed establishment in the downtown area. We looked at these markers basically all that you see up there that are alcohol related.
(slide)
Shows the crime, increasing, decreasing back to same level, increasing, decreasing back to same level, increasing, increasing more, decreasing and then cropping quite well in 2008, increasing back to same levels in 2009, then creasing in 2011 and again in 2012 to an overall decrease.
Sorry – I should have a way to capture that, but it looks like crap on my screen.
(Mark says)
He says these are just raw numbers going back in time to 2001, the total number of calls for service, generally we stayed at about the same level from 01 – 07, peaking in 07, we have some general decrease over time, to 2012. We are not really operating a high volume, so the change isn’t too great but they have seen a change over the last 5 years.
(slide)
Heat Maps
– What are heat maps?
– – shows calls for service by address
– – shows where the activity is concentrated in the area
– – gives a more dynamic perspective than just raw numbers
(Mark says)
Heat maps give you a more dynamic perspective of what the numbers mean. It gets at where these calls are occurring, it gives you an aggregation of where there are calls for service. He shows the first map, explaining it is like radar and the redder it is the more severe the volume of calls for service. As you get out here you see the blue, they have a density of calls for service, but not as dense and the areas without doesn’t mean there wasn’t a single call for service, just that is was much less than the other areas. What you are seeing is, for context, a map from 2001. He points out the 600 block of University and the 500 block of State St. which will remain constant. Another blip you notice will be library mall, that is where they put the generic State St. logged calls. It would take too much time to go back and pick those out, so that is the same for each year. He shows maps that show changes. He says the most recent map, the area of concentration is 600 block of University and 500 block of State St. As you see over time, we have even gotten more concentrated into that area. In 2004 we start to see a few other blips, Henry St. and Johnson St. corridor. And this is King ST. Over time, 2005 there is still a blip and by 2007 it pretty much goes away, but there are still calls in the Henry area. Not to belabor the point, but if you remember back at that time we had problem establishments at those locations that changed management and that is consistent with what we see now that one of the biggest factors, if not the biggest factor is that calls for service and blips that get away from there are based on the management of that establishment. Obviously Club Majestic back in 04-05, those doors reopened under different management and we haven’t had that kind of problems there since.
He shows a chart of liquor licenses over time, there is a slight increase in all (restaurant and other establishments included) liquor licenses. He says it stays basically steady over time, they have gone up by about a dozen and the tavern line is back to 2003, it has been about the same level. Since 2007 there is a little drop, just under 40, assuming because no taverns can move into the density area.
He shows another map of licenses to see where they are most dense. State St., University, King St, Main St., he shows maps for 2003, 2007 and 2012. He says it is pretty consistent over time, in terms of where the licenses are, and then he shows the calls for services map again.
Someone asks if we are at the quota for liquor licenses, he says we have about 25 class B liquor licenses, that is all the is capped under state law. So that is your basic liquor license, that is tied to population, so we only added two licenses in the last two years.
He shows national data about crime. He says it has also declined nationally.
(slides)
National Data
– Since 2007, arrested persons have similarly decreased in most alcohol related categories
– – Disorderly conduct, drunkenness, liquor law violations, aggravated assaults
Business Mix Data
– Food and Drink
– Retail
– “other”
– – Services (fitness, salons, banks, etc)
– Complete Business Improvement District (BID) data from 2002, 2008, 2011, 2013
(Mark says)
He says this might be what you are more interested in, they looked at three key areas, food and drink, retail, vs other. The vast majority of other are services, fitness, salons, banks. He shows pie graphs that in 2002 it was roughly 1/3 each. 34.5 food and drink, 36 is retail.
2009, biggest jump in services and other.
He says these two categories have increased their piece of the pie in terms of business mix over the 10 year period.
He says a Gibbs Market study from 1998, this wasn’t a BID area, the went back and looked at the data and they found that retail has declined over time and what has increased is the amount of services located within the downtown.
He shows a graph of locally owned, including Wisconsin which is a big piece of the pie, 75%, doing very well compared to other cities there. He says the reason we have seen the change in business mix is the population of the area has grown from 22,000 to 25,000 from 1990. In the past 12 they have seen the biggest increase. He shows a slide on income for households, not including temporary housing or students, there is an increase in average income downtown, there is an increase in population and expendable income, we are seeing more services downtown, and also more food and drink.
(slide)
National Retail Trends
– For the past three decades the restaurant industry has consistently posted yearly sales gains. today’s consumers regard food prepared away from home as a necessity. Convenience, a need for socialization and gains in real disposable income have led consumers to spend more of their food dollars in restaurants (2003). – Let’s Talk Business, Issue54, Aug 2003
– Despite sluggish recovery by the nation’s economy, the restaurant industry is projected to expand in 2012, according to the Nation Restaurant Association’s 2012 Restaurant Industry Forecast
– – Reports indicate fast food expanded in 2012, while more formal dining was stable (NPO’s Fall 2012 ReCount)
(Mark says)
Looking back at a couple studies, even going back to 2003 and 2012, food and drink stayed strong in a sluggish economy. He shows a survey by the National League of Cities asking if they would report any retail closings by regional mall, neighborhood and downtown/Main St and what type of retail (anchor, large chain, small chain retailer and local) so it won’t be 100% but you get the idea that neighborhood centers and downtwon/Main St., which is kind of like State St. and Capital Square area, locally owned took the biggest hit over that time period. The economy had an impact on that, they have also heard that internet sales have also had an impact on the decrease in retail over time. (Sorry, can’t really recreate those slides)
(slide)
Recent Market Activity
– Vacancy rate slightly up
– – Excludes projects under development (only those currently marketed)
– – A couple retail closings
– – A couple restaurant closings (Logan’s, Quaker Steak, 52)
– – Not unusual for spring data
(Mark says)
He says the vacancy rate was slightly up, he says was, becasuse over the last couple months as he was putting together the data they had a few retail openings, which is a good thing. We are still doing very well compared to national average especially in the Downtown. Couple retail closings, couple restaurant closings, this is not unusual for spring data – typical that when they close they shutter their doors and away they go.
(slide)
Key Take-a-Ways and Observations
– Other initiatives, phenomenons have had impact on downtown crime (DSI, high density housing, etc)
– Increase in licenses is mostly in new restaurants
– Retail has been replaced by a mix of services and food/drink
– Definitions in ALDO have been constraining, inconsistent in application.
(Mark says)
A few key take-aways, there have been other initiatives or phenomenon that have had an impact. One I did not want to get into too much tonight is the Downtown Safety Initiative, that started back in 2007, it was $100,000 set aside for Downtown District Police, over time costs, to focus their efforts on late night alcohol related crime in licensed establishments that has certainly had an effect over time. This year it was $100,000, $50,000 set aside for city-wide initiatives, and $50,000 for central police overtime, that money has gone to security cameras over time as well. High density housing has had an impact downtown, especially given that glob of activity downtown, they think that has to do with more students living downtown in high rises and so they are not as scattered, so that corridor area between Langdon and University and the new highrises area, the S curve, by Frances and up the 500 block of State St. makes sense to us. Landlords that do have those properties do take a little more time in enforcing their lease provisions, that helps the police, the landlords are more engaged on that level as well. They have seen an increase generally in new licenses, not much though. It’s your new restaurants, we have seen retail be replaced but it has been a mix of services and food and drink over time. Definitions in ALDO have been constraining and inconsistent in application. What he means by that they have basically one, if you take away the entertainment license, which hasn’t been successful in attracting new entertainment, we have one definition, if you are over 50% alcohol you’re a bar, if you are under, you are a restaurant. What we have trouble with, ALRC specifically, looking at an application on its merits, and say it looks great, you come to us as a restaurant, we’re taking you at your word, but what happens when you are not operating as a restaurant? Even if you are not generating calls for service or need for police, how do we negotiate that? There is some consideration there, it is something we have been looking into at the staff team level that is looking at ALDO in looking at our general business development downtown.
(slide)
Next Steps
– Staff team will meet through beginning of June
– Recommendations will be provided to all impacted committees in June/July
– Recommendations will be a combination of ordinance, policy and proposed programs
– Goal is to have entire package approved by Common Council before August 1 sunset.
Mark says
Next steps are staff team will meet through beginning of June, they have a couple of meetings left. They are expecting to have the recommendations to all impacted committees through June and July, the recommendations will be a combination of ordinance, policies and proposed programs. They will be typically, we have been asked to look at two very big policies, alcohol license management and business development so it will be a very large package of recommendations that will need a lot of eyes on it. Our goal would be to have a the entire package, at least a blessing to implement the entire package before the August 1 sunset of ALDO. So, we’re still on a tight timeline, but we expect to introduce the recommendations to council on the 18th.
(Questions)
Scott Resnick asks if they have any concrete recommendations, other than they will involved multiple stakeholders. Mark says they are continuing to shape up, and what he can tell us is that their hope is that many of the recommendations will have different paths and timelines. They want the central blessing for the entire package and then knowing that there will be an implementation process they will have negotiate that and work it out but they will have the process settled so it is not confusing, where we have one piece here and another piece there.
Resnick asks when it will be introduced. Mark says June 18th.
(Brenda says)
Seems a little fishy. What’s the big secret? Who’s getting input into this? How did they have all that time and end up rushing it through? And who the hell let this sunset while the students are out of town and won’t have any meaningful input, when they are the biggest stakeholders?
