Another Bar Fight In Downtown Walnut Creek

The violence at the Redux Bar came just days after the City Council approved a new alcohol nuisance ordinance

A fight rocked the in Walnut Creek this weekend, ending in two arrests and one hospitalization.

According to the Walnut Creek Police Department, a patrolling officer saw a man leaving the Locust Street bar with bleeding head injuries at approximately 1 a.m, on Sunday.

The victim, 26, later identified as a Vacaville resident, said another bar patron, identified as a 29-year-old Oakland resident, had attacked him inside the establishment with a bottle. Both men had been drinking prior to the incident, police said.

After further investigation, police arrested the Oakland resident on charges of assault with a deadly weapon and possession of cocaine.

Authorities say another Vacaville man, 25, who had accompanied the victim to the bar, failed to comply with orders given by the officer and was arrested for resisting arrest. The victim was taken to Kaiser Medical Center for treatment of his injuries.

The owner of Redux Lounge did not return phone calls seeking comment.

The violence came only five days after the Walnut Creek City Council unanimously approved a new on first reading.  The ordinance is slated for final approval on May 15 and would take effect 30 days afer that.

The new ordinance proposes a protocol where police will first open a dialogue with establishment owners after multiple incidents have taken place. If incidents continue to occur, the city will have the option to impose restrictions, such as curtailing the hours during which the establishment may sell alcohol.

Mayor Bob Simmons said that a single incident like the one that occurred Sunday would not be sufficient cause for imposing the kinds of penalties laid out in the proposed ordinance. However, he argued the ordinance is likely to discourage bars and restaurants from fostering an environment that can promote violence.

"The nature of the ordinance envisions multiple events that create a nuisance within the city," Simmons said. "The police and the city would ask if there is anything a bar has done to incite an event."

In the past, the owners of bars and restaurants in Walnut Creek have to the new ordinance, arguing it holds them responsible for events that are out of their control.

Guy Louie, an attorney representing bars and restaurants in Walnut Creek, also believes the ordinance is unnecessary.

"The ordinance wouldn't make a difference because the local penal code already handles these events," Louie said.

thedubc May 08, 2012 at 04:05 PM
Good write up Mike Steele. Random statements from the other posters here makes no sense.
Aprohaska May 08, 2012 at 05:04 PM
I've managed,owned and consulted bars,restaurants,and hotels for 14 years, from Los Angeles to the Mission, and this is completely baffling to me. One of the first things i did was to become T.I.P.S trained (a program that teaches intervention so that these things dont happen). The number one reason that fights break out in bars, plain and simple, is OVERSERVING of alcohol. It's the staff in these places that have to be re-trained, along with the owners, managers, etc. A good nights profits will be trumped by a peaceful night at a bar any day of the week! At least when i manage a place. But that might be too pragmatic. It's no coincidence that whenever i read an article about downtown violence, over 90 percent of the participants are not from WC. If this continues, the reputation will preceed WC for a place that barfights are tolerated. As for the WCPD, i applaude them, and suggest they start working, (another consumption of their time due to barowners greediness & laziness) with the liquor control board, to send people in to these places to randomly monitor over serving to an obviously intoxicated patron. This is a basic rule and premise all across the state. Maybe someone should explain that to the owners. Instead of putting all the effort into fighting city hall concerning the restrictions on serving hours, they should be focusing of their serving rules. Pretty basic stuff.
Aprohaska May 08, 2012 at 05:18 PM
As for Guy Louie's comments, & the local owners association stating "events that are out of their control", maybe they should do some better research. If you overserve someone who's obviously impaired due to alcohol, and they either hurt someone else, or themselves due to that impairment, you're liable. It doesnt happen often, but it's happened that more than one owner has been bankrupted due to litigation for negligence. So, it's your establishment, who else should be in control?
AJ Buttacavoli May 08, 2012 at 06:32 PM
The City of Walnut Creek is really something. On the one hand the city aspires to being the "Rodeo Drive of Northern California" which in itself is absurd, yet the city supports a cluster of rowdy bars which has turned the city into the laughing stock of the county. Yet the city has not passed a single smoking ordinance nor has it done a thing about siren violations of emergency vehicles.
Triple Canopy May 09, 2012 at 12:48 AM
SR - I get it more than you know. That's my jab at the City Council who, for the most part, is all about these artsy "ambiance", "character", and "quality of life" facilities. They fail to acknowledge their sleepy little town is all grown up and requires more of a big city approach and, of course, commensurate spending. However, I hate the way WCPD gets 3% at 50. That is total BS. It is one reason that many jurisdictions are going broke - the big fat exorbitant retirement packages public safety officials get. Capital costs vs operating costs vs retiremetn benefits cost. Guess which one is a runaway freight train. Uh-huh.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »