The hearing began just after 6:30pm with six members of Council (Steve Bond, Rep, Ward 2 was absent), the mayor, the Borough manager, the chief of police, and the Borough solicitor (i.e. the lawyer for the Borough). In response to an offer from the Borough solicitor, several neighbors asked to become "parties to the proceeding" and the applicant's lawyer objected. [NOTE: The objection did not stop them, but it creates an argument that can be used if the applicant decides to appeal the decision.]

Shehwen called witnesses. Zukin described the plan to convert the former Brenda's Vac Shop (at 142 E. Market Street) into "the Market Street theater" that will offer movies two times a week, live music and other types of productions. Mark Perfetto, a "producer and director with Mark Allen Productions," described the need for such a facility in West Chester. The architect, Lee Smith, explained how he intended to use a drywall- like material called "QuietRock 545 THX" to reduce the sounds as loud as a live rock band to the level of a normal conversation. Shehwen concluded the presentation by promising to install security cameras and employ 6-8 "security staff" to prevent the kinds of problems that the Borough has had with other liquor license holders.

The rest of the presentation covered things like the proportion of revenue to be derived from the sale of "high-end burgers," alcohol (Shehwen specifically mentioned "high-end boutique beers") and event ticket sales; and Zukin's offer to include a clause in the lease similar to the one he offered at the public hearing for the Limoncello liquor license. That clause requires the license holder to pay a percentage of the revenue from liquor sales to the landlord, as long as the landlord donates the amount to the Borough to be used for municipal services. Zukin offered five percent for this application, compared to one percent for Limincello, citing the larger size proposed for Bar Blue II.

The owner of this house is concerned about soundproofing and the placement of the dumpster for the proposed Bar Blue II (left)

Neighbors questioned the claims about soundproofing, the location of the restaurant's dumpster, why a theater needs a liquor license, what is meant by a "high-end burger" (cost: $8- 15), why the applicant wants the right to sell liquor from 11am to 2am seven days a week, whether the building is large enough for the proposed use, how the applicant would ensure that his patrons do not contribute to the Borough's quality-of-life problems once they get beyond the range of his security cameras, where the patrons will park, and why the applicant was trying to bring another liquor license into town instead of moving his existing license from the West Gay Street neighborhood to the town center.

Mayor Yoder called on Police Chief Scott Bohn to testify to the increase in all crimes and alcohol-related crimes in the past five years, the period during which liquor licenses began to come into the Borough. Then he asked Borough Manager Ernie McNeely to explain the contribution of new liquor licenses to the Borough's budget situation. Both answers were long, but put simply, there has been a steady and substantial increase in the number of alcohol-related crimes in the past five years, yet during the same period, the Borough was able to hire only two additional officers in 2002 using grant money that no longer exists. On the financial side, the Borough stands to gain a small amount of property tax based on the value of renovations to the building, no more than $150 from the Business Privilege Tax, and up to $52 per employee in the form of the Emergency & Municipal Services Tax (although the state is considering increasing the exemption in a way that would reduce the Borough's share by eliminating receipts from many part-time employees). [For a more detailed version of the Borough Manager's remarks, see paragraphs 2 & 7 of the General Financial Conditions Comments for the 2006 budget.]

The discussion about sound-proofing prompted a comment from lawyer Barry Goldstein, who sat with the applicant's team, to the effect that the Pennsylvania Liquor Code prohibits a licensee from producing any noise that outside of the building. Several neighbors pointed that a number of West Chester's bars fail to meet that standard already, and one questioned how the applicant can reconcile that with his architect's testimony -- that the soundproofing would reduce interior noise to "normal conversational level" outside the building.

After the end of testimony, public comment, and Shehwen's closing remarks, Council went into executive session with the Borough manager and Borough solicitor to discuss their legal alternatives. When they returned, Susan Bayne (Dem, Ward 4) moved to deny the application and immediately got a second. But as each council member commented, it was clear that a least two (Paul Fitzpatrick, Dem, Ward 6, and Holly Brown, Dem, Ward 1) wanted to see if the theater idea could be salvaged by getting the applicant to accept conditions on the liquor license. The Borough solicitor offered to draw up two documents -- one denying the license and the other listing conditions on a license -- if the applicant would agree. That he did, and so Council voted 6-0 to table Bayne's motion to deny until a special meeting on Monday, February 5, at 7pm.

And with that, the meeting adjourned at 11:16pm.

The Historical Society is a great place for a lot of reasons, no least of which is the quality of their collections. In more than a decade of answering questions about local history, WCJIM has almost always found what he was looking for in their library and archives. This time was no exception, thanks to their ownership of a copy of the West Chester Directory, 1966 published by the Daily Local News and Mullin-Kille of Chillicothe, Ohio.

There were five beer distributors listed in 1966. Two were outside of the Borough -- the Beer Mart at 901 Paoli Pike in West Goshen and Twin City Beverages at 201 S. Pottstown Pike in Exton -- but three others were in the Borough. One was the Terrizzi Beverage Company at the corner of W. Chestnut and Wayne Streets, in the building now occupied by the Beer Mill, the only beer distributor left in the Borough. The second was the Spaz Beverage Company located at 319-321 W. Gay St. in the building now occupied by Partners Furniture. Terrizzi is gone, but Spaz is still in business in West Goshen at the intersection of US Route 202 and S. Matlack Street. The third one is also gone -- Launi's Quality Beverages on S. Matlack St., located in what is still the one of the most unusual properties in that neighborhood. The Launi brothers, Martin and Luigi, operated from what appeared to be an Italian villa, with a high stucco wall surrounding an open courtyard.

The laundromat at 400 Hannum Avenue was once the Flat Iron Tavern

One other difference between 1966 and 2007 stands out -- the presence of a state liquor store. In 1966, it was located at 204 W. Market Street in the building now occupied by Rothwell Business Machines. Of course, nowadays the nearest "State Store" is in the West Goshen Shopping Center, [begin irony]although plenty of drinking establishments have sprung up to fill the void.[[end irony]

None of this takes into account other kinds of liquor licenses -- the club, golf club and take-out licences. For instance, the Knights of Columbus and the Italian Social Club have sold liquor to their members for many years, but their club licenses limit the business that hey can do. Also, there were still two large hotels -- the Mansion House and the Turks Head Hotel -- in existence in the Borough in 1966, but the directory doesn't mentioned whether they sold alcohol.

At last count, the Borough has 26 restaurant licenses active or approved, plus one pending. It also has one beer distributor's license (The Beer Mill), one golf club license (the Country Club), one take-out license (Sam's Pizza Island) and eight club licenses (Star Social Club, Elks, Eagles, Moose, etc.). So while it may be true that the type of license is a factor in West Chester's alcohol-related problems, it would be wrong to rule out the number of licenses as a cause.

The event was billed as a concert by former West Chester resident Phil Roy and his band, and he surprised the crowd by inviting Melody Gardot to play an opening set and to join him on several numbers during his own set. Roy also amused the crowd by bringing his dog Travis -- a canine celebrity in his own right -- on stage for one song. Gardot delivered her bluesy originals with a strong and versatile voice while Roy and his band, which included a bass player, drummer and keyboards, presented a mixture of folk, blues and rock made special by witty lyrics. Both performers were exceptional singers and the audience responded enthusiastically.

The attraction of a downtown performing arts center has attracted attention from other people as well. The Borough's latest liquor license applicant invokes the idea by describing his establishment as a theater. West Chester University recently opened its own performing arts center on S. High Street below Rosedale Avenue, although since it is located nearly a mile from the town center, it seems unlikely to draw patrons to the Borough's shops and restaurants.

To manage the Center, the Historical Society has hired Vanessa Nebenfuhr. She can be reached at 610-692-4066, extension 230, by email at rentals@chestercohistorical.org, or by writing to her in care of the Chester County Historical Society, 225 N. High Street, West Chester, PA 19380.

One paper examines how diets changed during the Depression. The approach was quite novel -- the student began by looking at self-help articles in the local newspaper to identify "budget foods" such as cheese, milk, tomatoes, oranges, and potatoes. Next, he examined grocery store advertisements between 1930 and 1932 and observed that the prices of such foods dropped at the same time that they appeared more frequently in advertisements. He concluded that as food prices dropped during the Depression, it probably helped more people in West Chester than it hurt, since most local residents purchased their food in stores, and relatively few still made their living directly from farming.

Term	1st Year	2nd Year	3rd Year	4th Year	Total
1928	566	523	102	48	1239
1929	562	527	138	138	1330
1930	562	517	158	139	1376
1931	509	505	190	158	1362
1932	379	421	221	187	1208
1933	328	365	221	223	1137

A fourth paper examined the consequences of the Depression for the Borough's three movie theaters -- the Warner, the Rialto and the locally-owned Garden. He found that despite the decline in disposable income, movie theaters in general, and West Chester's theaters in particular, recovered quickly after the beginning of the Depression and generally did quite well. He explained this in terms of promotional schemes, the novelty of sound film technology which debuted during this period, and the relative strength of the West Chester economy. Noting that "Over a third of the theatres in America closed during the years of 1929-1934," while none closed in the Borough, he concluded that the Depression's effects were less severe in West Chester than elsewhere in the country.

Other students in the class examined crime, prohibition, private relief efforts and the post office. Working within a fourteen-week semester, each student had about ten weeks from the time s/he chose a topic until the final paper was due -- not much time to collect the raw materials for original research and synthesize a conclusion from them. Yet, together with the four described in this article, the WCU student researchers were able to show that while West Chester did not completely escape the effects of the Depression (losing, among other things, its largest employer, the Sharples Separator Company), it did much better than the rest of the country. Thanks to its diverse economy, which included agriculture, light industry, county offices and the Normal School, enough people remained employed to support those who lost their jobs. The researchers caution, however, that the available sources -- newspaper articles, court cases and oral testimony -- omit many details and probably understate the problems experienced by the Borough's poorest residents. In other words, while most of West Chester's residents did better than most of the American public, some of them probably experienced hardships equal to the worst things felt across the country.

Given that it is not even clear where and how the appeal will be filed, there is no way to know at this point whether any damage was done. Two things may help to minimize it, however. One is that when a judge hears an appeal, normally no new issues can be raised. Although the mayor raised the issue, no one introduced any evidence to support him. Second, if a judge decides to accept evidence on this issue, the Borough should be able to show that Council did in fact take steps as the 2002 law allowed (see timeline).

Despite his gaffe, Mayor Yoder, along with Police Chief Bohn and Borough Manager McNeely, managed to put information on the record that shows the Borough has far more than its share of liquor licenses (defined as one per 3,000 inhabitants by the Liquor Control Board, or a total of six for the Borough), that alcohol-related crime in the Borough increased as the number of liquor licenses grew, and that those licenses have not added to the Borough's tax revenues at the same rate that the Borough's service costs have increased. Now all the Borough can do is wait and see what the appeals judge says. If it is any consolation, municipal officials from all across the state will be watching too.

December 2002: The state legislature amended the State Liquor Code to allow the transfer of liquor licenses from one municipality to another within the same county. Before this, licenses could only be transferred within the same municipality. At the time, the Borough had 20 retail liquor licenses, plus another dozen beer, club, golf club and take-out licenses.
January 2003: Developer Brian McFadden filed the first application to transfer a liquor license into the Borough (from Berwyn to the corner of Darlington and New Streets). Ironically, this location was within 500 feet of St. Agnes Church, and had the Monsignor objected, the Borough could have blocked the transfer.
May 2003: Council's Finance Committee discussed establishing a fee for Liquor License Transfer
June 2003: Council discussed the economic impact of the transfer of additional liquor licenses to West Chester
February 2004: Council discussed Liquor License transfer regulations at the monthly Public Safety Committee meeting.
September 2004: Council discussed a moratorium on license transfers
October 2004: Council created a mission statement for the "Liquor License Transfer Ad Hoc Study Committee" (LLAHSC)
December 2004: Council interviewed applicants for the LLAHSC (including WCJIM)
April 2005: Council received first progress report from the LLAHSC
July 2005: Council discussed the LLAHSC's draft report
November 2005: Council discussed the LLAHSC's final report
December 2005: Council approved a liquor license transfer for Magrogan's Oyster House, the first to have conditions added
April 2006: Council established an official application process for liquor license transfers
July 2006: Council considered zoning changes recommended by the LLAHSC
December 2006: The state legislature amended the State Liquor Code to allow Council to deny the transfer of liquor licenses into the Borough. Council still has no control over transfers within the Borough.
February 2007: Council denied the Bar Blue II liquor license transfer application.