Licensing is insider game

Crosstown Center has been touted by activists and politicians as a gem in the making, but its development has been stunted by a seemingly insurmountable problem: a persistent lack of liquor.

Allow me to explain. The corner of Melnea Cass Boulevard and Massachusetts Avenue, where Crosstown is planned, is potentially the gateway to Roxbury, and during daylight hours it often feels like it. But the activity dies at sundown, at least partly because the place is plagued by a dearth of entertainment venues: restaurants, clubs, and stores.

Ron Wilborn and his partners thought they had a solution to this. They wanted to start a supper club there. When the city got clearance from the state to issue new liquor licenses this year, they thought they were in line to make it happen.

But that was before Wilborn and company ran into the Boston Licensing Board, which rejected their application on a unanimous vote. Even though the state bill authorizing the new licenses clearly stated that they were to be used to stimulate economic development, many of them went to establishments in the South End and downtown, areas that aren't short on restaurants or bars.

In fact, many neighborhoods were shut out in the feeding frenzy. Purchasing an existing liquor license can cost well in excess of $100,000, making it likely that some of the unsuccessful business owners will never open. Wilborn is a case in point; his lease fell through after his license application went south.

"My concern is that there was not transparency in terms of the process," Wilborn said. "They give licenses to people they know. You see all the new plans for the South End and the Waterfront, and you look at Roxbury, and nothing's happening."

There's not much dispute about the lack of transparency. Though the legislation designated certain zones of the city to get priority, that requirement was effectively unenforceable once the licenses hit City Hall. The city and state have fought over how much control the state should have over who gets licenses. The Boston Licensing Commission -- appointed by the governor, but operating out of City Hall -- basically believes the state should stay out of its business.

The commission's relative independence has led to repeated charges that it functions as an extension of an old boys' network. The chairman of the commission, Daniel Pokaski, rejects the criticism, though it isn't clear why.

He told me the commission's decisions on where to award licenses were based on public need. I asked how he defines public need.

"I've been in this business 12 years, and I give classes on this, and it is whatever the local board determines it to be," he said. How transparent.

Pokaski didn't deny, either, that some areas, in particular the South End, had an easier time than others in the process.

"I wasn't happy about putting some of those licenses down in the South End, but when I have everyone in favor of it -- the community groups, the mayor's office -- I really have no reason to say no to it."

The Crosstown development has assembled its share of supporters. State Senator Dianne Wilkerson and Councilor Chuck Turner have been calling for a public hearing on the licensing process, as well as searching for other avenues to revisit it.

Wilkerson, whose district includes Roxbury and the South End, said a chance to spur development in lower Roxbury had been lost.

"What we all agree is that what is needed is something that would keep the lights on after 6 o'clock," she said. "We think it would spur other businesses to site there, which is where the economic development comes in. That's why it's important."

No one supper club is going to revitalize a neighborhood. Still, the winners and losers in this battle were entirely predictable. Even the same lawyers' names appear on many of the winning applications. It is easy to understand how someone like Wilborn could conclude that the game was rigged from the start.

Adrian Walker is a Globe columnist. He can be reached at walker@globe.com.