►
From YouTube: Boston Licensing Board Voting Hearing - 02/16/23
Description
Date: 16 February, 2023
A
A
A
Testimony
accepted
today
begin
with
the
licensed
purpose:
inspection
hearing
which
occurred
on
Tuesday
February,
14
2023
item
number
one
JJ,
Donovan
Inc
doing
business
as
Donovan's
Tavern
located
at
27
Clinton
Street
dated
the
incident
December
4th
2022
assault
and
battery
patronum
Patron
in
violation
of
Mass
general
laws,
chapter
138,
section
64
and
chapter
265,
section
13
a
and
failure
to
notify
police
in
violation
of
national
laws.
Chapter
138,
section,
64
and
Boards
rule
1.14b.
B
Thanks
Danny
I'll
start:
this
was
a
really
hard.
One.
I
was
able
to
review
the
videos
several
times.
This
is
an
example
of
where
I
think
the
video
is
very
helpful
in
our
deliberation
and
in
our
decision
making
I
had
a
lot
of
questions
at
the
hearing
on
Tuesday
as
to
the
responsibility
of
the
bartender
and
the
doorman,
and
whether
or
not
they
should
have
or
could
have
done
more.
B
After
reviewing
the
videos,
perhaps
I
should
have
called
the
police
so
could
have
called
the
police,
but
I.
Don't
really
think
there
was
an
opportunity
for
them
to
really
foresee
what
was
going
to
happen.
Perhaps
it
could
have
taken
more
actions
to
remove
the
man
and
the
Blazer
from
the
area
that
man
was
a
complete
menace
to
the
people
outside
the
bar.
B
B
C
B
Foreseeing
what
ended
up
being
a
terrible,
a
terrible
battery
at
the
end
of
the
evening?
So
for
those
reasons,
I
do
not
see
a
violation
on
the
parliament
licensing.
D
I
second,
your
sentiment
that
it
was
a
tough
one,
I
think
there
was
a
lot
of
like
close
calls
throughout
the
the
time
that
this
all
kind
of
transpired,
I
I,
feel
pretty
much
the
same
way
like
should
should
they
have
called
the
police
I
I,
don't
know
if
it
was
what
was
happening
with
regard
to
like
the
first
fight
was
so
bad
that
they,
you
know
it
was
a
violation
to
have
not
called
the
police
like
they
could
have
called
the
police,
maybe
if
they
called
the
police,
things
might
have
been
a
little
bit
different,
but
I
think
that's
far
too
speculative
really
what
was
happening
was
carrying
on,
but
it
wasn't
so
violent
or
Vicious
Kind
of
the
man
in
the
in
the
suit.
D
D
If
you
watch
him,
there's
no
reason
to
believe
that
he
would
do
something
as
as
really
bizarre
is
this
I
mean
it
was
a
bizarre
watching
him
walk
down
the
street
and
grab
this
older
gentleman
by
the
back
and
throw
him
at
the
ground
was
just
I,
couldn't
make
any
sense
of
it.
Like
I,
said
with
regard
to
failure,
the
notify
fail
and
nullify
the
police
with
the
second
incident.
I
think
the
evidence
shows
that
somebody
was
on
the
phone
even
before
the
Mr
Steele
was
thrown
to
the
ground.
D
So
I
think
that
was
credible,
that
they
said
that
someone
was
already
calling
the
police,
so
we
had
kind
of
like
two
instances
where
they
could
have
called
the
police
and
for
two
different
reasons.
I
I
really
wasn't
able
to
find
a
violation
with
regard
and,
finally,
with
regard
to
the
assault
and
battery
I
mean
what
I'm
evaluating
is
the
Assange
batter
and
Mr
Steele,
not
any
assault
and
battery
that
happened
between
the
man
in
the
suit
and
the
and
the
the
third
party
who
went
the
other
direction?
D
Really
that
fight
that
the
first
fight
that
happened.
It
was
over,
I
saw
a
couple
things
in
there
with
regard
to
the
doorman
I
think
you
should
be
on
notice
before
I
didn't
love
the
the
I
think,
the
third
time
that
the
man
in
the
suit
goes
after
that
guy
he
was
nowhere
to
be
found.
No
one
had
eyes
on
it.
I
think,
maybe
if
they
were
written
up
for
that,
that
that's
where
I
would
have
found
the
violation.
D
I
think
that
was
the
one
clear
really
failure
on
the
part
of
the
bar,
but
that's
really
not
what
that's
not
what
we're
talking
about
here,
we're
talking
about
the
assault
and
battery
Mr
Steele
and
really
when
it
comes
down
to
it,
is
the
person
who
battered
him.
There
was
no
indication
that
he
was
was
a
danger
to
anyone
and
I.
Don't
think
that
the
overall
situation
was
so
out
of
control
that
it
was
foreseeable
that
something
like
that
would
happen.
D
There's
other
situations
you
can
see
where
it's
so
crazy
that
you
can
see
a
third
party
getting
caught
up
in
like
the
crossfire.
This
wasn't
that
situation
as
far
as
I
saw
so
lots
of
close
calls,
but
I
didn't
get
over
the
line
on
any
of
this
stuff,
so
that
that's
where
I
was
at
with
how
you
know
what
they
were
written
up
for,
so
I
found
no
violation
either.
E
Did
not
find
a
violation
either
I
did
watch
the
the
video
I
think
if
there
was
anything
that
we
could
I
guess
the
sending
correspondence
about
just
making
sure
that
the
dispersal
plan
includes
removing
the
the
problem.
Parties,
like
literally
out
of
the
way
I
mean
we've.
We've
had
some
other
we've
had
some
other
matters
where
we've
asked
that
they
not
just
be
removed
from
the
premises,
but
they
would
be
removed
from
the
area
because
we
know
that
they
were
causing
a
problem
not
just
inside
but
also
outside.
E
So
there
were
a
couple
of
incidences
where
the
the
the
doorman
didn't
see
exactly
what
went
on
I.
Think,
like
the
kit
kick,
he
didn't
see
the
kick,
but
he
did
see
some
things
happening
outside,
so
he
could
have
actually
had
them
to
go
like
you
know,
out
of
eyesight
or
just
just
away
and
I
think
maybe
that
could
have.
But
who
knows
I
mean
it's
it.
E
The
the
actual
incident
just
happened
out
of
the
blue
by
the
perpetrator
that
just
wasn't
in
the
melee
at
all
before
so,
but
maybe
just
some
correspondence
about
just
removing
the
problem.
Parties
away
from
the
area.
E
And
I
think
that
the
correspondence
could
also
include
calling
the
police,
even
if
there's
doubt
as
to
the
the
level
of
the
actual
altercation.
It's
not
really
up
to
the
the
bar
just
to
say:
oh
well,
that
altercation
wasn't
as
as
violent
as
some
other
altercations.
Just
call
the
police
when
in
doubt
so.
B
The
motion
is
to
find
no
violation
for
the
salt
battery
and
no
violation
for
failure
to
notify
the
police
but
correspondence
from
the
board
asking
the
licensee
to
submit
a
written
dispersal
plan
that
includes
acknowledgment
that
they
should
attempt
to
remove
people
from
the
general
premise,
not
just
the
front
door.
General
area
I
promise
not
just
the
front
door.
D
Yeah
and
just
that's
their,
you
know,
there's
a
certain
area
that
we
expect
them
to
to
police.
It's
not.
It
doesn't
have
to
be
right
in
front
of
their
front
door,
so
they
made
a
point
to
say
you
know
it
happened
this
far
down,
and
maybe
it
was
far
enough
away,
but
I
I
think
it's.
You
know
it
was
right
on
that
line.
The
guy
in
the
suit
wasn't
quite
yeah,
I
mean
he
was
far
enough
away
from
the
other,
the
original
combatants
but
yeah
he
was
still
like.
D
You
said
he
was
a
bit
menacing.
He
was,
he
still
was
a
potential
problem,
but
in
the
end
he
wasn't
the
the
batter
of
Mr
Steele,
so
I
think
if
he
had
been,
we
might
be
talking
about
it
outcome
here
for
as
far
as
our
decision,
but
that
that's
not
what
happened
so.
B
And
I
think
he
was
such
a
menace.
Even
his
own
friends
were
concerned
that
he
was
going
to
end
up
causing
more
of
an
issue
and
perhaps
that's
why
the
assailant
went
to
sort
of
break
up
what
was
a
fight.
So
that
is
my
motion.
A
Thank
you
so,
just
to
sum
up
with
devotees,
it
sounds
like
it
is
a
no
violation
on
either
of
the
counts,
with
a
correspondence
from
the
board,
reminding
the
licensee
of
the
requirement
to
monitor
the
outside
of
their
premise,
to
call
the
police
in
situations
like
this
and
requesting
a
written
dispersal
plan
from
the
licensee
as
well.
That's.
A
A
D
B
E
A
A
Items
five
and
six
are
from
the
same
incident:
paga
ain't
doing
business
as
Nick's
venue
located
at
100
Warrington
Street
data.
The
incident
was
October
28
2022
item
five
failure
to
ID
patrons
properly
with
a
Colombian
license
in
violation
of
Mass
general
laws;
chapter
138,
section,
64.
and
item
six
person
under
21
in
possession
of
alcohol
on
premise,
in
violation
of
Mass
general
laws;
chapter
138,
section
34,
a
34C
and
6464a.
B
So,
taking
these
two
together,
the
first
one
alone,
I,
don't
see
as
a
violation.
However,
I
do
see
a
violation.
The
second
one
person
under
21
in
possession
to
me
that's
clear
violation,
I
found
the
testimony
confusing
as
to
what
they
accept
and
don't
accept
in
my
request.
Is
that
not
only
do
they
retrain
the
staff,
but
they
submit
something
I'm.
Writing
that
explains
to
the
board
what
they
do,
except
for
identification.
D
D
D
Six,
yes,
do
we
have
history
reason
with.
E
C
B
I
see
no
violation.
I
was
persuaded
by
the
detectives
testimony
that
this
was
just
one
table
that,
together
with
the
testimony
that
they
were
showing
so
in
the
bottle,
there
was
no
promoter
involved.
I
see
no
violation.
E
C
B
D
I
I
was
persuaded
by
the
quality
of
it
being
a
Massachusetts
ID.
They
id'd
the
person,
they
were
20
and
a
half
I
was
willing
to
say
reasonable.
Reliance
I
know
it
was
fake
ultimately,
but
it.
D
B
B
Okay,
I
think
you
make
a
good
point.
The
board
would
not
it's
not
a
defense
that
it's
a
good
idea
if
it's
out
of
state
I
think
for
Massachusetts,
it's
a
different
level
of
scrutiny.
That's
applied
and
based
upon
the
testimony,
I
would
agree
with
you,
commissioner.
Curran.
B
D
I
mean
they
are,
and
they
said,
they're
getting
the
scanner
and
everything
so
I
I
took
that
into
account
too
I.
I
just
didn't
quite
get
there
in
this
one.
Okay,
so
the
correspondence
seems
good.
A
Great
and
chairman
Joyce,
just
your
vote
is
now
is
for
no
violation
correspondence
for
the
board.
I.
A
B
I
will
begin
I
see
a
deliberate
flagrant,
clear
violation
on
the
overcrowding
and
on
the
bottle
service.
I
was
very
surprised
that
the
manager
stated
that
a
promoter
wasn't
being
used
and
that
she
was
aware
of
this.
The
pictures
that
were
submitted
to
the
board
further
emphasized
that
this
was
flagrant.
They
were
advertising
bottle
service.
They
had
a
whole
bottle
service
set
up
in
the
back.
B
First
time
we've
had
a
written
violation,
but
I
I,
don't
I,
don't
believe
it's
an
excuse
that
you
know
you
would
just
hope
you
don't
get
caught
and
apologize
later
and
then
apply.
B
D
And
also
I'd
like
to
note
that,
even
if
they
had
some
sort
of
misunderstanding
about
being
able
to
do
bottle
service,
they
weren't
doing
it
in
a
manner
that
would
have
been
in
in
compliance
with
our
rules.
If
she
had
permission
to
do
bottle,
service
right
and
then
the
overcrowding
we
have
a
remote
history
on.
But
they've
done
the
exact
same
thing
in
the
past
really
loaded.
This
place
out
well
past
their
yeah.
B
So
I
see
a
violation
on
each
individual
one
and
my
vote
is
for
the
no
application
for
bottle
service
for
a
year.
D
A
Thanks
to
our
violation
on
each
as
to
the
bottle
service,
no
consideration
of
an
application
for
bottle
service
for
one
year
from
this
date,
any
any
warning
or
or
suspension
or
any
disposition
has
to
be
overcrowding.
Or
was
this
all
wrapped
into
one
from
the.
B
A
The
overcrowding
with
a
written
warning
and
a
violation
on
the
bottle
service,
with
no
consideration
for
model
service
application
for
one
year.
Yes,
thank
you
moving.
B
B
A
E
D
D
D
C
E
A
A
E
A
Closing
our
1am
has
updated
the
description
of
the
premise
to
2357
square
feet
on
one
floor
in
two
rooms
at
the
front,
with
standing
and
the
seating
in
a
bar
for
customer
with
kitchen
storage
and
restrooms
in
the
rear
and
seasonal
patio
and
private
property,
with
seating
for
48
closing
hour
10
pm
and,
lastly,
is
petition
to
pledge
the
license
to
267
to
269.
Nsr
LLC
I
will
note
that
the
applicant
has
requested
the
board
to
further
the
vote
until
they've
had
a
chance
to
meet
with
the
neighborhood
association
of
the
back
Bank.
D
A
C
D
A
Item
nine
Victoria's
seafood,
restaurant
doing
business
as
Victoria's
Secret
restaurant
located
at
1029,
Commonwealth
Ave
as
permission
to
transfer
the
license
from
the
above
to
Joe's,
Gourmet,
dining,
Systems
Inc
at
just
Joe's.
For
me,
Systems
Inc,
doing
business
as
Victoria's
Secret
restaurant
at
the
same
location,
Jan,
bingshu
manager,
1am
closing
hour.
B
A
D
A
D
E
B
The
testimony
was
that
only
10
of
their
sales
would
be
for
takeout
or
delivery
by
third
party
apps
I'm,
going
to
request
just
so.
We
can
take
a
a
look
at
this
issue
in
this
neighborhood
and
others
request
they
submit
in
writing
a
plan
as
to
how
they're
going
to
deal
with
these
third-party
delivery
apps.
So
we
have
it
as
part
of
the
record.
C
A
D
B
About
to
approve
the
transfer
and
Mr
Mr,
akari
I
think
is
already
An,
approved
manager
record
by
this
board,
and
again
it
was
confusing
from
the
testimony
about
whether
or
not
that
easement
for
deliveries
was
for,
like
deliveries
to
the
restaurant
or
if
it
was
for
third-party
app
deliveries.
So
I'm
also
going
to
request
that
they
submit
a
written
plan.
D
A
B
A
Item
15
had
been
previously
approved
by
this
board
and
was
correcting
illegal
defect
in
the
advertising
and
item.
16
has
been
continued
to
the
March
29th
transactional
hearing
moving
on
to
non-hearing
transactions.
The
following
are
applying
for
a
new
common
Bachelor
license
at
a
previously
licensed
location
item
1
G
and
V
Cambridge
Street
Restaurant
Inc,
doing
business
as
Shahs
halal
food
located
at
106
to
120
Cambridge
Street
near
all,
Patel
manager
of
record
hours
of
operation,
11
A.M
to
11
pm.
D
D
D
A
D
A
E
A
Agree
following
have
applied
for
a
one-day
amendment
to
their
existing
license
item
one
Mass,
Bay
Brewing,
Company
Inc,
doing
business
as
Harpoon
Brewery
located
at
306,
Northern
Ave
has
applied
to
481
day
amendment
to
include
the
parking
surrounding
the
brewery
will
be
defined
by
a
fence,
have
controlled
entrance
and
exit
for
the
Harpoon
brewery's
30th
annual
St
Patrick's
Day
Festival
on
March
3rd
and
4th
from
6
pm
to
11
p.m.
On
the
third
and
12
pm
to
7
pm
on
the
4th.
D
A
Okay
and
the
board
has
before
them
a
list
of
applications
for
special
one-day
alcohol
licenses,
which
have
been
administratively
reviewed
by
staff
and
approved
by
the
board,
and
we
have
no
items
on
old
and
new
business
this
week,
so
that
is
all
of
the
items
before
the
board
today.
Thank
you,
everyone
that
will
adjourn
this
morning's
hearing.
Thank
you.