A Fight Begins Over Liquor Permits In Harvard Square

Even on a Sunday night, the crowds are fairly large, filling the barstools and many of the small tables around the perimeter of the room. Smoke, drink, and the smell of food surround the relatively sedate crowds. An occasional burst of laughter breaks the quiet hum of conversation as the 1 a.m. closing call approaches.

Even the Boathouse Bar on JFK St. seems quiet. One resident has called the establishment one of "the four most notorious bars in the state"--Grendel's, the Harvard Square Sports Club and Shay's are the others.

But the quiet is deceiving. In recent years local residents have been on a crusade against the bars in Harvard Square.

The Harvard Square Defense Fund and many locals are complaining about noise and violence stemming from the bars, and they have launched an effort to fight a wave of applications for pouring licenses before the city's License Commission. Bar owners and restaurants, however, are ready to fight back--they deny any instances of mismanagement and contend that the residents have tainted the image of their bars based on what has happened at other bars.

Grendel's co-owner Sue E. Kuelzer recently sent a letter to the city council refuting Darrel James' accusation that her bar is among the "four most notorious bars in the state." Kuelzer said she was outraged that her establishment, which has an older clientele than other bars on JFK St., was lumped together with "the bar that has caused most of the problems--the one right down the street from us [the Harvard Square Sports Club]."

"People coming from the other bars have to pass Grendel's when they walk down the street, so it may look like they are from Grendel's...but we're closed by then," Kuelzer said.

The 21-year-old bar had to wage its own battle when it went all the way to the Supreme Court for its right to serve alcohol. It was granted its license only eight years ago when the Court declared unconstitutional a Massachusetts law that gave churches and schools veto power over the issuance of pouring licenses within 500 feet of their property.

"It took us over 12 years to get our liquor license. We really try hard to work within the law and not be one of those other bars," Kuelzer said.

Although other bar owners may not have had to overturn laws for the right to serve alcohol, they and Kuelzer concede that JFK St. can get rowdy on Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights. But they place the blame on the management of a couple of bars, and specifically cite a serious fight that occurred last July.

Sports Bar Brawl

The brawl in front of the Harvard Square Sports Club on JFK St. last July provoked the local furor over the bars. According to police reports, the fight erupted among patrons outside the sports bar on July 27, 10 minutes before the 2 a.m. closing time. After several residents complained of the noise and violence from the brawl, the police arrived, broke up the mob and arrested three people.

The police charged the bar with serving alcohol to minors and with not having a manager on the premises. Soon afterwards, the License Commission voted unanimously to suspend the bar's liquor license for 15 days. But this effort to make an example of the Sports Bar was thwarted in the eyes of many locals because the establishment is appealing the suspension. And until the Massachusetts State Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission tries the hearing, scheduled for December 19, the Sports Bar is continuing to serve alcohol.

At last Monday's city council meeting, a hearing about the bars in the Square revealed many residents' complaints of noise, the flooding of JFK St. with rowdy bar patrons at closing time on weekends and occasional violence. But the council voted to postpone the hearing until after the Sports Bar's appeal of the suspension, to allow the police and the License Commission to address the situation without making any statements that might weaken their case.

"That place is completely out of hand," Assistant Manager Todd A. Kay of Leo's Place said about the sports bar. "There are constant fights and there's no control there."

Jim McHugh, manager of the Sports Bar, did not return repeated telephone calls.

Although Kay said he believes mismanagement of the Sports Bar is the cause of most residents' complaints, he defended Harvard Square's drinking establishments.

"There are 400,000 students going to school here, and the reason why they're rambunctious is not only because they drink... I can see the residents' side, but there's nothing you can do about it," Kay said.

Kuelzer also said that although the Square does "get rather rowdy around closing time, especially during the summer," the locals should tolerate the noise because of where they live.

"I don't mean to sound flip," Kuelzer said, "But this is the downtown area, and you can't expect it to be like a quiet suburban street."

But the residents are still steadfast in their demands for a quieter, safer Harvard Square. And their campaign to tighten both the management of the bars and liquor licensing laws has not only become a crusade against noise pollution and an occasional bout of violence, but a fight to clean up their neighborhood.

The Harvard Square Defense Fund, an organization that champions the preservation of a safe, liveable Harvard Square, is crusaded to tighten liquor policies in the Square. Until 1985, when the city council declared the Square a "capped area," there was no limit to the number of area establishments with liquor licenses. Presently, the License Commission only issues beer and wine licenses, the type for which restaurants most commonly apply.

In November 25 letter to Alex Rodriguez, chairman of the License Commission, Harvard Square Defense Fund President Gladys P. Gifford said that there are 35 establishments with pouring licenses in Harvard Square. Twenty-three of the bars and restaurants may serve hard liquor and 12 of them may serve only beer and wine. The Fund contends that Massachusetts law states that a license commission is only authorized to grant licenses "to serve the public need and in such a manner as to protect the common good..."

Too Many Bars?

"Cambridge has over one and one-half times the number of pouring licenses which a city of its size would be authorized to issue...the ratio of licenses to population served is higher for Harvard Square and its adjacent neighborhoods," the letter states.

The Fund sent copies of the letter to the police department, License Commission and two restaurants which are currently applying for pouring licenses: the Stockpot and the Cafe of India. The Fund and its supporters believe that issuing pouring licenses to restaurants will create a domino effect: "as a result [of issuing puoring licenses], these restaurants are likely to change both size and character" and that "they may become seedy establishments."

Lisa Gilman, manager of the Stockpot, said she believed that the residents were overreacting in concluding that restaurants applying for licenses were "going to change,"

"They're against us...They think that the minute we get a license, we're going to change," Gilman said. "Thirteen years is a long enough time, I think, to prove to a town that we won't cause trouble."

Gilman said the Stockpot is applying for a pouring license to attract more business, but that the menu and the hours of operation will not change. She added that she believes other establishments are applying for pouring licenses to bring in more customers to weather the recession.

And the bars, like other businesses, have the right to operate in the Square, owners say, adding that some ethnic restaurants require alcohol to be served with the meal because of the ethnicity's culture.

But even if the License Commission finds those arguments convincing, owners and employees of local bars say, the neighborhood activists' campaign has taken its toll. Sports Bar employee Thomas K. Lindsley said that all of the negative publicity has thinned out the crowds noticeably.

"Business has slowed down because of the hearing," he said.