Lcb's Best Not Good Enough

Posted: November 29, 1986

The sordid little story of the J & G Tavern in South Philadelphia carries with it a larger lesson concerning the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board. It is this: The argument that the LCB is needed to control bars that become outrageously disruptive influences in their neighborhoods is a false one. The J & G case shows that the LCB can't control them - even when it does everything it can.

We'll spare readers a reiteration of the tawdry details, recounted by neighbors, of the conduct connected with this bar, and merely give a partial list of the actions that have been taken by the LCB. The board has cited the bar at least 14 times since 1983 for violations of state laws. Nine of those citations have been for "lewd behavior" or "deviate sexual behavior." Twice the LCB has revoked the bar's liquor license, but the J &G still is open because the matter is on appeal. "We've done everything we can," says a spokesman for the LCB. "We are as frustrated as the people who live there." He is absolutely right. The LCB has done all it can - and that hasn't been enough.

It now appears that if the bar is to be closed down it will have to be done by the Philadelphia district attorney's office, which has more power under state law than the LCB. If a district attorney can demonstrate in court that a bar is a public nuisance, the bar will be padlocked immediately. The district attorney's office is preparing such a case in regard to the J & G Tavern and expects it to be heard in Common Pleas Court within six weeks.

The LCB has requested, unsuccessfully, that the liquor laws be changed so that bars cited for violations by the LCB are not more or less automatically allowed to remain open once they file an appeal. But wouldn't it be simpler to assign the task of enforcing the liquor laws to other state agencies in the first place, and eliminate the LCB as ineffectual middleman? That is part of what Gov. Thornburgh's plan to dismantle the LCB by executive order would accomplish, and the J & G Tavern case provides one more reason to hope the plan succeeds.

|
|
|
|
|