SamPratt.com

Stinging in Perfect Harmony

This week’s Hudson Common Council meeting on the recent underage drinking sting stirred up even more discussion of how and why this came about. Here are some further thoughts on the topic:

1. Unless you’re Tom Cruise in Minority Report, there’s a big difference between preventing crimes and creating them. Everyone wants crime prevented, and even deterred. But when unusual scenarios are created which induce crimes, people perceive it as a set-up. And to responsible bar owners and their patrons, that’s how the Catholic Charities “program” looked... The simple fact is that underage drinkers hardly ever set foot in most of these establishments—at least, unless they’re hired to do so with grant money. That’s why many viewed these operations as an unnecessary and punitive sting more than any urgent or effective deterrent to underrage drinking.


2. Arguments that the undercover youth involved “didn’t look 30” tend to ignore the facts (a) that the legal drinking age is 9 years lower than 30, and (b) that context and attitude greatly influence the perception of age. Put an undercover agent alongside older drinkers in a high-priced establishment, and that 19-year-old will indeed seem a lot more mature. The situation also gives the server much less reason to suspect the customer. One might argue that just gives all the more justification to card aggressively. But realistically, that’s not how the world works, and the question remains why crimes were instigated in locations where, by officials’ own admission, few if any have been occurring? Where there’s no smoke, there’s no need to pull the fire alarm.


3. The Hudson police chief (a likable and honorable guy) was correct that using fake I.D.s and getting older friends to buy for teenagers are the main ways youths get their hands on alcohol. But to my knowledge, neither method was addressed by this sting. From what’s been reported, it neither tested bartenders’ ability to recognize fake I.D.s. nor was designed to catch adults buying alcohol for minors. Rather, agents lured bartenders into making a transaction that otherwise would not occur over their counters. Problems with fake I.D. and adult surrogate buying would pertain far more in our area to convenience store beer purchases, not Hudson bar/restaurants.


4. Statistics also have been brought forth about the very real problem of teenaged “binge” drinking. But again, since the sting didn’t address that problem, this barely seems relevant to the issue at hand. The undercover agents weren’t ordering six shots of Jager at a clip, and the targeted establishments hardly cater to binge drinkers of any age. After all, what teenaged binge drinker would blow $100-plus dollars on high-priced mixed drinks in a quiet place full of adults, when one could much more easily score a twelve pack at Stewarts or X-Tra Mart for 12-13 bucks? (Moreover, in a tight-knit community like Hudson, someone usually will walk an adult friend home if they’re overdoing it, well before they reach binge levels, or else the bartender will cut them off.)

As such, it remains understandable that many businesspeople and residents got the impression that the Catholic Charities sting was more about the availability of funding to spread around, or even an animus (conscious or unconscious) to certain “types” of places, than about curbing any growing problem. In the context of other hostile City actions, such as punitive tax assessments, such conclusions are all the more likely, and should be anticipated. It would be nice to think there was no animus involved, but the suspicion remains widespread that Hudson officialdom has it in for “those people” they didn’t know in high school.

In the future, sticking to alcohol education and training—rather than instigating crimes which don’t normally occur—would help ensure that everyone can raise a toast together. It’s a lot better than smashing more bottles over each others’ heads, and the Council could avoid that by explicitly specifying the purposes of any future funding of this type.

The Sting, Part II?

By several credible accounts, there appears to have been a second round of “sting” operations last night, seeking to entice Hudson businesses to serve minors.

In January, eight Hudson business owners were astonished to find themselves on the wrong end of an undercover operation. The sting featured mature-looking underage drinkers who attempted, mostly successfully, to get served in local restaurants and bars.

Most of the establishments targeted rarely play host to anyone under 31, let alone under 21, since they mainly serve higher-end drinks that aren’t usually ordered by cash-strapped teenagers. As such, many local bartenders were unlikely to suspect that one of their customers would be too young to drink, especially if they were in the company of other adults.

To be sure, teenagers drink; anyone who claims they never did is either a liar, or a bore... But typically, underage drinking happens in the woods, or in cars, or in the basement of the home of whoever’s parents are away on vacation... not in upscale Hudson bars. Drunk driving is likewise a serious matter. But that’s true no matter what the age of the drinker. In any case, there’s no indication that kids are getting tanked at local establishments. (More usually, it’s a friend’s older brother who gets sent in to buy a case at a convenience store, then passes it along, keeping a six for himself.)

Adding to the business community’s perplexity was the revelation that funding for the sting came via Catholic Charities, a Columbia County nonprofit which had turned over State grant funds for teenage alcohol education and substance abuse prevention to the Hudson Police Department. Local politicians promised to “look into” the situation, and according to several elected officials, no further grants of this type had been authorized.

All this taken together, there was a widespread feeling that rather than having been caught up in a legitimate effort to deal with a problem situation, they were the victims of entrapment. And that the State grant money ought to be spent on genuine education (of both youth and bar staff) rather than “gotcha” operations.

Yet on Thursday night, there were widespread reports that another sting was underway. A bartender at a high-end downtown establishment reported directly to me that a woman in her mid-20s had sat at the bar, acting nervous, and saying that she was “waiting for friends.” After a while, a young man came in and tried to order a Coors Light—something the bar quite obviously did not stock. When carded, the young man proved to be only 20, and left, unserved; the nervous-acting “spotter” left shortly thereafter, with no friends having shown up.

A patron of another establishment farther uptown reported an almost identical story, of out-of-place and ill-at-ease “spotters” leaving right after an unsuccessful attempt by an underage drinker to get served. At this point, any further stings would appear to be redundant—every Hudson establishment is now on the lookout, and carding regularly, and thanks to texting and other social media, word spreads like wildfire if there’s an operation underway.

Given the firm denials by local officials that any new funding has been approved for this purpose, one can only speculate that must have been was some unspent money left over from the prior round of Catholic Charities funding...

Either that, or some local kids have decided that it’s more fun to punk Hudson bartenders than to drink in a musty old van.

Jumped, or pushed?

Sources tell this site that in the wake of yesterday’s botched prosecution of a Hudson shooting case, Assistant District Attorney John Hillman is no longer working at the Columbia County D.A.’s office. So was he fired, or was he asked to resign?* (Or, as one local legal observer gibed, “Maybe he was promoted...”) Whatever the case proves to be, word is that anyone who takes the trouble to obtain a transcript of yesterday's proceedings before Judge Jonathan Nichols will be in for some lively reading, to say the least.

* It’s commonly assumed that the day one takes such a job, an undated letter of resignation is filed in the boss's desk drawer.

The ‘Hole’ Story

According to a Register-Star account of last week’s meeting of the Hudson Common Council Police Committee, members of the audience lodged the following allegations, among others:

Some in attendance at the meeting said they have heard [American Glory owner Joseph] Fierro say he has city officials “in his pocket,” that he “owns the city” and that the police do whatever he wants because he’s “the new sheriff in town.”

The identities of those making the statements were not specified, and the story has set off another long flame war at the Reg-Star site (which regularly allows anonymous, inflammatory and even borderline slanderous comments, even though the paper doesn’t accept unsigned letters in its print edition).

Similar rumors about American Glory were already rampant locally in the weeks leading up to the meeting, circulating almost from the moment the eatery opened. Even in Hudson, it’s rare for a new business to spark so much controversy so quickly. For the most part, local merchants and restaurateurs understand that the more activity, the merrier for everyone, so subsequent countercharges of jealousy or excessive competitiveness seem misplaced.

That said, this site has no direct knowledge of the validity of the rumors, and common sense suggests that it’s highly unlikely that Mr. Fierro actually has anyone in his pocket.

More within the realm of possibility is that one or more persons involved with the restaurant might imagine the establishment has more power than it does. For example, the otherwise innocuous annual event depicted in this Facebook photoset (found by a regular reader) might have been misconstrued as earning American Glory more than the ordinary goodwill.

It’s in the interest of every Hudson establishment to have good relations with its neighbors. The City’s main street businesses depend heavily on positive word of mouth and referrals. Sure, for a few months most any new business in a small town can be popular, since everyone wants to check out the new kid on the block. During that honeymoon period, it may be possible to shrug off the neighbors. But it’s when that novelty wears off—and the slower months of January through March roll around—that quality services and community relations start to really count.

The Law

From the New York State Penal Code, Article 240:

---

§ 240.50 Falsely reporting an incident in the third degree.

A person is guilty of falsely reporting an incident in the third degree when, knowing the information reported, conveyed or circulated to be false or baseless, he:

1. Initiates or circulates a false report or warning of an alleged occurrence or impending occurrence of a crime, catastrophe or emergency under circumstances in which it is not unlikely that public alarm or inconvenience will result; or

2. Reports, by word or action, to an official or quasi-official agency or organization having the function of dealing with emergencies involving danger to life or property, an alleged occurrence or impending occurrence of a catastrophe or emergency which did not in fact occur or does not in fact exist; or

3. Gratuitously reports to a law enforcement officer or agency (a) the alleged occurrence of an offense or incident which did not in fact occur; or (b) an allegedly impending occurrence of an offense or incident which in fact is not about to occur; or (c) false information relating to an actual offense or incident or to the alleged implication of some person therein; [...]

Falsely reporting an incident in the third degree is a class A misdemeanor.

Beemer Wiener

File this one under “accidents waiting to happen” ... Yesterday while driving through Hudson’s congested streets, I noticed a car moving erratically back-and-forth in my rearview mirror. When I stopped to let a pedestrian cross the street on the east side of the 7th Street park, this late-model, black BMW SUV screeched to a halt as it tried to pass me on the left in traffic. Continuing out Green Street, the vehicle kept swerving back and forth, then tried again to pass in traffic—this time on the right. At the light near Stewart’s, I noticed that the BMW had some sort of special plates. Going through two more lights, the driver continued his strange behavior, veering over the yellow center line and white shoulder line as if looking to see if he could pass. Whether this person (who I’m confident was not a law enforcement officer) was in the grip of road rage, driving with impaired senses, or just thinks that special plates give him license to ignore basic road safety rules, let's hope he comes back to those senses before someone else gets hurt.