Boulder panel revokes Chicken on the Hill liquor license after police present underage-drinking and occupancy evidence

The Beverage License Authority voted unanimously Wednesday to revoke the hotel-restaurant liquor license held by Panko Corporation, doing business as Chicken on the Hill, after hearing police testimony and reviewing body-worn camera footage that the panel said showed repeated public-safety risks and underage drinking connected to the Thirteenth Street business.

The authority’s action followed testimony from multiple Boulder Police Department officers who described incidents in which underage patrons entered the bar using fraudulent identification, patrons were found unconscious and treated by emergency medical personnel, and the establishment appeared to be substantially over posted occupancy limits on multiple nights.

Members of the panel said the decision was driven by the pattern of incidents described by police officers rather than a single event. “Officer Stevens testified that on January 31 he estimated approximately 200 people inside when the posted occupancy sign indicated 72,” the authority noted in discussion after testimony (Officer Eric Stevens, Boulder Police Department). The panel also relied on follow-up investigations by the department’s liquor-enforcement officer and evidence that furniture and layout changes had been made on the premises.

Officer Eric Stevens, a member of the department’s Neighborhood Impact Team, testified that during a January 31, 2025 inspection he “would say my best estimate was approximately 200 people” inside Chicken on the Hill and described that level of crowding as a safety hazard that could impede egress in an emergency. Stevens also described multiple incidents in 2024 and early 2025 in which intoxicated people associated with the bar required medical transport after being found unconscious nearby; in several of those incidents officers or the follow-up investigation reported that the individuals were underage and that fraudulent identification was seized.

Sergeant Michael Marquez told the panel he observed patrons throwing cups and other items off the bar’s upper patio into the adjacent alley and parking area, and that neighborhood businesses had complained about crowds forming in front of adjacent storefronts. Officer Gustavo Diaz described a January 16, 2025 patrol in which he estimated about 100 people in an exterior line that extended toward the corner of Thirteenth and College; Diaz said he called multiple officers to assist and that he and other officers worked with the bar’s manager and security to close the door and disperse the line.

Liquor-enforcement officer Leah Rek testified that the department had recorded roughly 53 calls for service involving Chicken on the Hill between Jan. 1, 2024 and Feb. 10, 2025 and that her follow-up investigations found repeated instances in which groups of underage patrons had been admitted and later required medical attention. Rek said she reviewed body-worn camera footage and surveillance provided by the bar and identified instances where furniture was repositioned in ways she concluded had the effect of increasing usable capacity without licensing approval.

Defense counsel Veronica Vecchio, of Clark Hill, and owner Duong Lu disputed some factual characterizations and stressed steps the business has taken since the incidents. Lu testified that the bar requires ABT (alcohol-server) training, has a written security policy and has retrained staff since the police inquiry. He said he had met with the owner of a neighboring business after a complaint and that he had consulted the fire marshal about occupancy; Lu told the panel that a fire marshal visit in October 2024 had raised the capacity to 115, and he said any partitions installed were movable and intended to reduce crowding.

Prosecutors urged the authority to revoke the license, pointing to the number of calls for service, testimony that underage patrons were admitted with fraudulent IDs and the safety risks of overcrowding. The defense argued the bar had implemented policies, used ID scanners and that many underage-admission incidents involved falsified identification, which the defense said is an affirmative defense under state law.

After extended deliberations, the authority reached the following findings and actions: it voted that Chicken on the Hill was not in violation of Colorado Liquor Code section 47-3-302(a) and of Beverage License Authority Rule 8-3-1 (modifications to premises), but found violations for (1) conduct of the establishment that allowed disturbances and unsafe conditions, (2) unlawful sale/give/ procuring of alcohol to minors (Boulder Revised Code charge), and (3) fire-code/over-occupancy concerns. The panel then voted 4-0 to revoke the establishment’s liquor license. Member Mike Absalom made the motion to revoke; Chair Califano seconded and the motion carried with all members voting in favor.

As part of the post-hearing process, licensing staff instructed the licensee that no alcohol may be removed from the premises and that licensing staff and a police enforcement officer will meet the licensee the morning after the hearing to witness a full inventory. The licensee was given five working days to arrange returns of stock to suppliers and was told the city will witness destruction of any unreturned inventory no later than March 17, 2025. Licensing staff also informed the licensee it must certify compliance with sales-tax and licensing obligations as a condition of any future relief.

The authority’s decision follows several months of police investigations and community complaints about operations at the Thirteenth Street bar, but it stopped short on two earlier allegations about unpermitted “modifications” to the licensed premises, finding insufficient basis to determine a statutory violation for the specific license-change allegations. The revocation applies only to the establishment’s liquor license; the owner said he intends to cooperate with inventory and compliance steps outlined by city staff.

The Beverage License Authority indicated the record in this matter will remain available for any administrative or judicial review the licensee may pursue; the authority also noted that the city’s and university’s investigative units have been cooperating on related criminal investigations referenced in testimony.