Faith in Action

The room was packed. On one side residents and supporters from Park Heights ready to tell why they didn’t want liquor stores in their community anymore. On the other side, many Korean merchants and a curious rowful of residents who were coming to defend their business.

The hearing started with a disappointment. We who had come to challenge Slaters Market (the grocery market that sells alcohol next to ketchup) were shocked when we learned during the hearing that the attorney from Community Law Center, Inc. (Michelle Pierce, Esq) had made a “gentleman’s agreement” with the attorney representing Slaters. The agreement was that they would take the liquor bottles off of the shelves that had condiments on them and in exchange there would be no protest of their license. What?!

This was news to the resident-activists. We knew absolutely nothing about the “gentleman’s agreement”. Conversations after that hearing revealed that there was a thought that we would “let Slaters off the hook” in exchange for some of the other liquor stores taking a hit.

The hit never came.

After a very interesting round of hearings on each individual liquor establishment…after hearing store owners charge us with discriminating against their businesses because they were Korean…after listening to a Black man stand up and defend one of the stores (a store that he happened to be employed by)…after hearing testimony submitted by Pastor Marlo Hill in support of the liquor stores…

The Baltimore City Liquor Board (Stephen Fogleman-Chair, Harvey Jones - Commissioner, Elizabeth Smith - Commissioner) decided in favor of all of the liquor stores citing a technicality that the petition was poorly worded and that everyone who signed it didn’t have a Park Heights address. The vagueness of the law allows enough wiggle room for merchants to find a loophole and escape consequence. Article 2B states:

Under Article 2B, Section 10-301, if ten or more residents and/or property owners in the immediate vicinity in which the licensed place of business is located object to the renewal of the license based on specific complaints as to the licensees’ establishment during the past license year, the Board may not renew the license until a public hearing has been held. Such protest of renewal hearing must take place during the month of April. At the hearing, it is necessary that the protestants appear to substantiate the basis of their complaints.

Well what is “immediate vicinity”? The lawyer for the merchants used this vagueness of terms and mapquest to point out how far away each signer of the petition was from the liquor stores and based on a rule of thumb and an internet estimation of mileage, he successfully disqualified a significant majority of the petitioners.

I was disgusted. The whole process needs to be revamped and made more clear to citizens. Government makes it so hard for everyday folks to engage and inject themselves in the regulatory and/or legislative process. I looked at three little old ladies who came down to the hearing to protest the liquor stores on their block. I watched as these women hung their heads as decisions came down from the board and I began to understand even better how people get apathetic. They did everything they knew to do. They showed up. They spoke out. They told their story. And they lost.

Though yesterday was a bitter pill to swallow, there were great lessons learned. Over the next couple of weeks, our coalition will evaluate what happened and why. We’ll be prepared next year (one of the things that we must change is that March/April is the only time of year that citizens can protest the renvewal of licenses) to successfully challenge these predatory establishments. I’m encouraged by the scriptures - “the race is not given to the swift nor to the strong, but to she and to he that endure until the end.”

This is our marathon and we’re destined to find the victor’s circle.

I video recorded much of the proceedings and will upload the tape as soon as I can.