Peter Wood and Jake Faleschini: The time is right to change tavern restrictions in Adams Morgan

Adams Morgan has a complicated relationship with alcohol. While many love the neighborhood for its nightlife offerings, others find its bars and restaurants to be nuisances worth restricting. And for decades, Adams Morgan has been the punch line of bad jokes about how bar culture supposedly ruins cities. Whether through listserv rants about the perceived intrusion of a “Bourbon Street” atmosphere or fears about the “Adams Morganization” of other neighborhoods, a relatively small but vocal subset of Washingtonians has lamented many of DC’s problems by blaming establishments that serve alcohol. 

That discourse has resurfaced now that the moratorium on tavern and nightclub liquor licenses in Adams Morgan is due to expire. The ongoing policy has offered important lessons on the effectiveness and limitations of moratorium zones. We believe that now is the time to act on these lessons and allow the Adams Morgan moratorium on new tavern licenses to become less restrictive.

Adams Morgan’s moratorium zone has shown checkered results and brought unintended consequences. Even so, the impetus for pursuing a moratorium zone in Adams Morgan was understandable. In the late 1990s, the neighborhood, like much of Washington, DC, was still experiencing troubling crime rates despite several years of improvement. While much of this crime was unrelated to alcohol consumption, it is impossible to deny that acts of violent crime did occasionally occur in or near bars and nightclubs.

In early 2000, anti-bar sentiment gained enough momentum to successfully lobby for a moratorium on liquor licenses in Adams Morgan. Similar policies were already in place in other neighborhoods, namely Dupont Circle, Georgetown and Glover Park. But in the decades since, restrictions for each of these moratorium zones have either been modified or lifted entirely. Additional attempts to establish moratorium zones took place in the Trinidad and U Street neighborhoods — both of which failed. The one successful creation of a new moratorium zone, this time in Langdon Park, was specifically focused on preventing nightclubs from entering the area. 

Beyond violence, these moratorium zones purportedly address more mundane questions particular to how food and beverage establishments affect neighboring residential areas. Trash, rats, noise pollution, and destructive behavior of patrons under the influence of alcohol were and are key points of contention raised in conversations about liquor license restrictions. Interestingly, each time Adams Morgan’s moratorium zone has been considered for renewal, proponents of extending the moratorium affirmed that these problems had not been resolved by the moratorium. The problem, as has been repeatedly claimed, was that a few more years were needed to truly get the problem under control. The moratorium on tavern licenses in Adams Morgan has been in place for over 22 years.

Ironically, many of the concerns that spurred calls for a moratorium zone have since been addressed in Adams Morgan by unrelated measures. Voluntary agreements — now called “settlement agreements” — between businesses and affected parties are a common example of this. In Adams Morgan these documents frequently prohibit pub crawls, cover charges and promoters. Furthermore, they commonly establish legally binding restrictions on how often dumpsters are emptied, when alcohol can be served, and on which floors live music can be performed. Other provisions address related issues that could potentially affect the quality of life for neighbors. Enforcement is not always flawless, but it’s nonetheless an available mechanism for regulation.

Besides settlement agreements, the increased number of streateries and similar outdoor seating arrangements has affected the ways liquor-serving businesses operate. In a neighborhood with a reputation for rowdy crowds and fisticuffs, streateries have arguably created a visible buffer outside Adams Morgan’s bars and restaurants. When there are tables of patrons calmly eating dinner or conversing over cocktails, those prone to becoming obnoxious tend to curtail their behavior. Public visibility is a powerful tool.

The arguments against modifying the Adams Morgan moratorium zone this time around have been predictable. And they predominantly come from a predictable source: longtime property owners who regularly organize to oppose most other proposals for change in the neighborhood. Many of these organizations and individuals argued in 2014 that lifting the cap on liquor licenses for restaurants would irreparably damage Adams Morgan. In 2023, some of the same people have made nearly identical arguments regarding tavern licenses.

Rather than give new life to claims which time has proved to be, at best, inaccurate, Adams Morgan residents deserve to see their neighborhood thrive. This means adapting rules to meet the current challenges of business retention, quality of life, and the risk of deviant behavior associated with widespread vacant real estate.

On May 3, Advisory Neighborhood Commission 1C did exactly that: We passed a resolution to officially urge the DC government to loosen the restrictions on how many taverns can exist in Adams Morgan. Public input — through 10 public meetings and countless conversations — was crucial to making this decision. On July 13, the DC Alcoholic Beverage Cannabis Board will hold a virtual public hearing to discuss the recommendations our commission made in that resolution. As a result of this process, we hope other neighborhoods take note of what we’ve learned and apply it to similar decisions about liquor sales and neighborhood well-being. DC is at a crucial moment in its pandemic-related recovery, and we need to utilize our collective knowledge to create a future that is fruitful for all.

Peter Wood and Jake Faleschini are elected members of Advisory Neighborhood Commission 1C in Adams Morgan.

---

About commentaries

The DC Line welcomes commentaries representing various viewpoints on local issues of concern, but the opinions expressed do not represent those of The DC Line. Submissions of up to 850 words may be sent to editor Chris Kain at chriskain@thedcline.org.