We're Mad as hell and we're not gonna take this anymore

oobie · Post by **oobie** » Friday Dec 10, 2004

Somebody talked about getting video of the Gestapo tactics, man wouldn't that be nice, good luck but if you or any of your IMF team are caught or captured,

thats funny you say that, because 1 night a few months back i was sitting at my local friday night watering hole and in walked a man sat down drank 2(note i said 2) Shmirnoff's and then left. when he walked out the bar the bartender told me that he was PLCB, funny huh?!!(wonder how many stops he made this night) i guess he is a frequent stopper since a guy right up the road seems to think the F@#$ing JUKEBOX, the F@#$ing JUKEBOX that you can barely here sitting in the bar, is to loud!!! they have to keep the door closed if the jukebox is on. All for one guy that can pile up junk cars and build garages without permits etc., etc. what a bunch of shit.

DMFJ03 · Post by **DMFJ03** » Friday Dec 10, 2004

I wasn't looking for an easy way out of this, all I am saying is that this isn't going to happen quickly. Hell, look at ABATE. It took us almost 30 years to get the helmet law changed in PA. Trying to find someone who is willing to throw themselves out to the wolves to represent this is going to hard. I'm mean, I all for trying to get things changed, but I don't know how many of us really know how long and hard this battle is going to be. It has to get worse before it gets better - that is just the way of things.

Post by **Ron** » Friday Dec 10, 2004

DMFJ03 wrote:It was probably said before, but... why couldn't we just all turn down? It's an easy solution to a annoying problem? Isn't?

Actually J, No. I wish it was that easy.

The law is vague enough that if you use any kind of speaker that can be heard outside of the premises you are in violation.
There have been citations issued because of juke boxes and TV's. You can't turn down a band down that far. The law needs to be changed. Not because we want to be loud, but because we want the option to turn down and comply. Currently the only physical way to truly comply (at 90% of the venues), is to quit for the night. And that's usually what happens after the LCB arrives.

There is a small loop hole in all of this. The PLCB officer has to actually observe the loudspeaker device in order for it to be proven in court. In every case, the officer's statement will include that he saw the actual device.

Here's an excerpt from a case (Citation No. 98-0489) where an LCB officer, Susan Benner, forgot to play 'find the speaker' and the case was overturned.

Section 5.32(a) of the Board’s regulations provides that:

A licensee may not use or permit to be used inside or outside of the licensed premises a loudspeaker or similar device whereby the sound of music or other entertainment, or the advertisement thereof, can be heard on the outside of the licensed premises.

[40 Pa. Code §5.32(a)]. The Bureau has the burden of proving the elements of the alleged violation. Here, the Bureau presented no evidence that Licensee used or permitted a loudspeaker or similar device. Ms. Brenner only claimed that she "heard" an amplification system. As a result, Finding of Fact No. 3 that the music heard by Ms. Brenner was recorded music played through an amplification system was not supported by substantial evidence. Since an element of the Bureau’s charge has not been proven, the decision of the ALJ must be reversed.

O R D E R

The decision of the ALJ is reversed.
The appeal of Licensee is sustained.
The citation against Licensee is dismissed.

These reversals and dismissals are very rare.

Usually the cases go like this:
"Did you hear sound coming from the premises?"
"YES"
"Did you see that it was caused by a loudspeaker?"
"YES"
"Guilty!"

songsmith · Post by **songsmith** » Friday Dec 10, 2004

Very Interesting. Using loopholes is the American political way. There are some pretty smart people here... perhaps we can figure a way to capitalize on this. If they continue to abuse a statute because of the "letter of the law," perhaps we can do the same. What if we simply cover our speakers with a black dropcloth (some bands do that anyway)?------>JMS

Post by **Ron** » Friday Dec 10, 2004

Good thinking John,

It may not prevent anything long term, since an LCB officer has the right to warrantless searches on licensed property, but it would be a good smokescreen at first.

I'm sure that your idea could overturn a few convictions.

homerski · Post by **homerski** » Friday Dec 10, 2004

Late February - Early March would be great because that would be AFTER the STEELERS WIN THE SUPERBOWL!!

One question, Is Aldo's open on Sunday for liquor sales?

John Homerski Jr. - Homer's Army

Punkinhead · Post by **Punkinhead** » Friday Dec 10, 2004

Martyrdom is in to help on this anyway possible

TJ Kelly · Post by **TJ Kelly** » Friday Dec 10, 2004

Vinny, I wasn't purposing that we actually play at The Victory Lane but rather get Nancy involved because this has caused her to cancel all bands.

To pull this off folks we can't go about this half cocked. We need every the musicians/band, club owner/manager, respected community leader involved as we can muster. No disrespect meant but If this gets the same turn out as the last RP jam I went to we'll do nothing more than draw attention to ourselves under the PLCB's radar.

This has to be a united front. What about involving the Beer Distributors, music stores and radio stations as this affects them as well.

I purpose we pick a week night and get together at a local watering hole and come up with a game plan.

tonefight · Post by **tonefight** » Saturday Dec 11, 2004

I think it may be a more " winable " and worthwhile battle to use the loophole that Ron mentioned and go to local authorities and get a local noise ordinance put into effect.

I don't know much about how to work that either, does "local" mean each boro and each township would need to put this into effect ? If so that is a task also.

Maybe that isn't the best long term goal but for a short term goal if a particular club is being harassed they could go to local officials and try to get something done.

getclosertothemusic · Post by **getclosertothemusic** » Saturday Dec 11, 2004

Hey Vinny,

As for the tv coverage, I know when we were wanting coverage for the workshop, I called all the stations and was told that they didn't have anyone to cover stories like "that" on weekends. Not too many people were willing to do stories like "that" on their time off. We do know one of the reporters from channel 6, we can give her a call, see if she would do some coverage for us. Just a thought, let me know.

Cathy

FatVin · Post by **FatVin** » Saturday Dec 11, 2004

I like TJ's idea, about a meeting and a game plan, when and where TJ?

There is a lot of merit to the thought that this is a local problem, I chat frequently with our brothers in Harrisburg and they don't have half the problems with the PLCB that we do so maybe the local angle is the one to look at, also local politicians might be easier to persuade, we can hit them on several fronts.

As to TV Coverage, Get closer to the music is a cause I believe in but it is STRICLTY a Charity is it not? What we are attempting to do here is POLITICAL PROTEST and Therefore actual News as opposed to a human interest story. No disrespect to Get Closer to the music and If you know somebody at Channel 6 we'd appreciate the help Cause We NEED TV, Local radio barely covers local music (Thanks JP, God Bless you) The rear-view mirror barely covers local stories. Most people get local happening from TV and we need to be on it.

This is the kind of thing we should be talking about at TJ's meeting

HurricaneBob · Post by **HurricaneBob** » Saturday Dec 11, 2004

Canes are in!

Sounds like a plan!

Post by **Jim Price** » Saturday Dec 11, 2004

I agree that the local angle might bring more immediate results. Ultimately, any organized effort to change the Liquor Code itself is going to take a while on the statewide level, especially if the state police enforcement feeding frenzy isn't as extreme in other areas of the state as it is here, and there isn't a sense of urgency elsewhere to want to change the Code. While I still would like to see the Liquor Code changed and we should look at that as a long term goal, focusing on local noise laws that might override the Liquor Code might bring quicker results.

But as Tonefight asked earlier, I think going after it on the local level would be on a town-to-town basis. Changing the law in Altoona would not affect Duncansville, Hollidaysburg, Cambria County or even Logan Township (part of Altoona, but not under the City of Altoona's jurisdiction). And for out-of-town venues affected, those municipalities, townships or other local laws would need to be the ones targeted. It might take a series of little fights to change each local noise ordinance one by one, on a town-to-town basis.

Some questions that dawned on me...Is Blair County Ballpark within the city of Altoona or in Logan Township? If it is in the township, perhaps that is part of why it is not getting popped for noise. And are licensed live music establishments in Logan Township getting popped for noise like the venues within the Altoona city limits? (I don't recall City Limits ever getting busted for noise levels, but I believe they're just outside the Altoona city limits (thus the name) and in Logan Township. Burgi's Roundhouse I think is Logan Township too (or possibly Antis Township, I'm not sure where the boundary between those two actually is). Note that Peter C's, Victory Lane, Pellegrine's (which has been warned) and Lombardo's (also busted) are all within the Altoona city limits. I'm thinking perhaps - at least for the places within Altoona - this is a strictly Altoona problem, and battling to change the laws on the Altoona level may be the way to go.

Of course, count me in as far as any effort to change these situations. If a meeting is organized, and we can assemble an organized action group to go after these problems, as long as it is nonprofit, I should be able to give it some on-air mentions on the "Backyard Rocker" at least, as well as PSA's; and I can also write about it in Pennsylvania Musician. (An organized action group with a specific title would be best, it would give more credibility to any organized action, rather than an unnamed random group of musicians and people trying to organize something.)

Another point - Bands and musicians, try to mention Rockpage at your shows and invite people to check out this website. If we can get people to check this site out, they can read and become more aware about things affecting the local music scene, such as this issue. We need to keep building public awareness of this problem; and educate people not just about the problem, but the potential long-term effects it can have on people's jobs, careers, livelihoods and quality of life and entertainment around here.

songsmith · Post by **songsmith** » Sunday Dec 12, 2004

Done and done JP.

Also, I think we need to record these so-called violations. I'll volunteer to compile this record. Please PM me with actual anecdotal evidence regarding these warnings and citations. Include name of the venue, date or approximate date of the incident, name of the entertainment provider involved, what action was taken by the PLCB or its agents (what they did), how the situation was resolved (did you shut down?), and whether you feel this action was deserved (be honest).
Any press involved will want details, so we need to record details. Please have venues contact me directly, if possible, as this benefits them directly.
I would caution those involved here NOT to appear all pissed-off to the press... it WILL NOT make you look tough, or strong, or right... it will make the talking heads look saner by comparison. The image we need to project is one of businessmen and women having our rights to earn a living usurped, which is exactly what is happening. You must come off as smart, or they will see to it that you look stupid, trust me on this one.
Again, please PM me or e-mail me at songsmith63@atlanticbb.net with this info, and I will research and compile it.----->JMS

lonewolf · Post by **lonewolf** » Sunday Dec 12, 2004

songsmith wrote:Very Interesting. Using loopholes is the American political way. There are some pretty smart people here... perhaps we can figure a way to capitalize on this. If they continue to abuse a statute because of the "letter of the law," perhaps we can do the same. What if we simply cover our speakers with a black dropcloth (some bands do that anyway)?------>JMS

There's no loophole in this rule. "Loudspeaker or similar device" covers just about anything--LCB court could define "similar device" as any device that makes sound. The point of the case stated above is that the witness never saw the device in question, so she couldn't confirm that it was a " loudspeaker or similar device" that was making the noise. If we cover our speakers with black dropcloth then we will have black covered speakers. They are still loudspeakers. It would not be enough to overturn a ruling unless the enforcing officer was too dumb to know where the sound was coming from.

This law is soooo vague that they can make it anything they want it to be. I've been in PLCB court. It has nothing to do with justice.

lonewolf · Post by **lonewolf** » Sunday Dec 12, 2004

Jim Price wrote:While I still would like to see the Liquor Code changed and we should look at that as a long term goal, focusing on local noise laws that might override the Liquor Code might bring quicker results.

A local noise ordinance cannot override PLCB noise rule enforcement of a licensed establishment. Local laws take precedence over the PLCB only when PLCB regulations would inhibit the enforcement of the local law.

In other words, a licensee cannot use compliance with PLCB regs to justify actions that otherwise violate a local ordinance. On the other hand, a licensed establishment located in a municipality with a 100db noise ordinance is still subject to the PLCB reg that we all know and hate.

There are only 3 legal ways that I can think of to change this situation:

1. Change the rule (legislative)
2. Apply political pressure in the right places to call off the dogs (executive)
3. Gather evidence of abuses, take legal action and persuade the court system to put the PLCB under restraint (judicial)

lonewolf · Post by **lonewolf** » Sunday Dec 12, 2004

Ooops, almost forgot. There is a 2nd judicial alternative. We could find a licensee who would like to challenge the rule as vague and appeal it to the commonwealth and then supreme court of PA and have it thrown out. The problem with this is that the courts would probably order the LCB to write a new one. Then, we'd probably end up with a really bad non-vague rule that would be very tough to change.

Skate Toad · Post by **Skate Toad** » Monday Dec 13, 2004

I talked to Aldo this weekend and he is cool with a sunday show. So just about any sunday will work for him. So if we can agree on a date i will go ahead and book it. Then the rest will fall into place i'm sure.
Todd

ZappasXWife · Post by **ZappasXWife** » Monday Dec 13, 2004

Found this great quote:
The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced.

~ Frank Zappa

Post by **Ron** » Monday Dec 13, 2004

ZappasWife wrote:Found this great quote:
The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced.

~ Frank Zappa

Haha... that used to be my sig.

Post by **Jim Price** » Monday Dec 13, 2004

Lonewolf said:

A local noise ordinance cannot override PLCB noise rule enforcement of a licensed establishment. Local laws take precedence over the PLCB only when PLCB regulations would inhibit the enforcement of the local law.

Actually, this is what I was thinking of...this is from "New Changes to the Liquor Code Resulting from the Passage of Acts 1 and 15 of 2003;" the same series of changes that settled the chaperone/minors fiasco last year:

MUNICIPALITIES - NOISE EXEMPTION PROVISIONS

Effective July 17, 2003, the Liquor Code was amended to provide that municipalities that wish to file for an exemption from the Board's noise regulation must file a petition with the Board, rather than an application, for such exemption. The petition shall include a map of the area to be exempted, along with a copy of the municipality's noise ordinance and resolution.

The Board can deny a noise exemption petition, or approve a limited area, if it finds that granting the petition will have an adverse effect on the health, welfare, peace and morals of residents living in the identified area. The Board is also authorized to place conditions on its approval of a noise exemption petition, as it deems appropriate. [Section 493.1(b)].

A municipality that wishes to rescind an existing exemption must do so by notifying the Board of its intent in writing. Such request shall be accompanied by an ordinance or resolution authorizing the rescission. If the rescission involves the entire excepted area, it will go into effect fifteen (15) days after receipt of the notice by the Board. A request to rescind only part of the area shall be treated as a new petition for exemption and shall follow the normal procedure. [Section 493.1(c)].

I guess technically, municipalities can petition for a noise exemption, but the PLCB must approve it first.

FatVin · Post by **FatVin** » Monday Dec 13, 2004

I think we need to all sit down together and set an agenda

What exactly needs doing and how do we want to go about it.

Are we gonna go after local laws or are we gonna go after the State reg.

Can we accomplish our goals in a public demonstration or do these things need to take place behind closed legislative doors.

We're all running out of places to play in the Altoona area.

We need to get together and talk about it

When and where?

Skate Toad · Post by **Skate Toad** » Monday Dec 13, 2004

Sunday at Aldo's????

DennySD · Post by **DennySD** » Monday Dec 13, 2004

Hey JP, this is Denny from Sound Driven... we were on your show about a year ago. Anyway I was cleaning out my "favorites" folder the other day and found rockpage, and remembered how cool it was.

One of the foremost reasons we don't play anymore is that so much of our fan base was under 21. And as we all know with all that legislation a few years ago, all-age shows in Altoona are non-existant. Long story short, we resigned to staging our own show once every few months and all got regular jobs. I'm moving out of the Altoona area for good this summer and I really feel it's a shame that we never had the opportunity to do more.

Anyway, that's all long winded and beside my point... This is such an important thread to any local musician, perhaps it would be better if it was given its own topic instead getting lost in "General Discussion." Or better yet put a big link on the front page immediately attracting the attention of any casual visitor to the site. If an official organization with a name and a catchy acronym is formed as JP suggested, then all the bands in the organization (hopefully every band in the area!) could give a shout out at their shows to rockpage. Maybe even flyers if they so choose. Not only would it then alert people to the crisis local musicians face, but also create a sort of local music "hub" that it was originally intended to be!

lonewolf · Post by **lonewolf** » Tuesday Dec 14, 2004

Hey Jim, that exemption looks like something that might work in specific locations, like the city of Altoona, where several bars have been hit. As tax-paying city businesses, the bar owners would have a lot more clout with the council. If we could convince Big John, Nancy and a few others to bring this to the council, it might fly.

That is all contingent upon the city of Altoona having a suitable noise ordinance for the LCB to approve. They don't appear to have the city ordinances online. Can anybody get a copy?