Madison panel suspends Cello's entertainment license, renews it under six-month suspension and new sound rules

The Alcohol License Review Committee on June 17, 2026 found that amplified music from Cello, a nightclub at 118 State Street, had a substantial adverse effect on the immediate neighborhood and took a series of disciplinary steps: it immediately suspended the business's current entertainment license, renewed but suspended the license for six months and added new conditions that limit sound and ban low‑frequency amplification.

The committee's decision followed a multi‑hour quasijudicial hearing in which neighbors, building owners and business operators gave detailed, sometimes emotional testimony about the effect of deep bass and vibrations seeping through shared walls. Tenant Kimberly Cho told the panel she and her partner had been forced to move units after weeks of sleep disruption and reported a period in late January and early February when she and her partner became physically ill and experienced prolonged migraines. "It felt like the entire apartment was just pulsating," Cho said in testimony, describing repeated night‑time events she said regularly interrupted sleep.

Why it mattered: The committee's remit is to decide whether entertainment activity has been exercised in a manner inconsistent with the privilege of an entertainment license. Members said they were persuaded by repeated, consistent testimony from the building owner and tenants that the music's low frequencies had more than a transient nuisance effect on residential life and commercial operations in the immediately adjacent property.

What the committee decided: The ALRC voted to: (1) immediately suspend the currently active entertainment license through the end of the licensing year; (2) renew the entertainment license for the 2026–27 period but place it on a six‑month formal suspension; and (3) impose conditions to control sound and operating hours. The conditions agreed by the committee require the establishment to limit sound amplification to no more than 75 dB at the source, prohibit subwoofers or bass boosters in a manner that allows bass or rhythm to be audible or felt outside the premises, and to cease entertainment by 1:00 a.m. daily. Committee roll call recorded a 5–0 vote to find the city met its burden and a 4–1 vote on the renewal with suspension (one member voted no on that motion).

What owners and technical witnesses said: Owners and staff at Cello acknowledged the complaints and described a program of mitigation measures implemented since opening in late 2025. Owner Susan McKini said the business moved DJ equipment and removed subwoofers after complaints; she said the venue contracted R.J. Savic (Lake Effect Productions) and engaged Bachmann Construction, which recommended consultant John Westerra for an acoustical assessment. Sound technician R.J. Savic told the panel he ran frequency sweeps, applied equalization to tame problematic bands, installed limiters on amplifiers and relocated the DJ position to add distance and structural barriers. "We pulled down problematic frequencies and put a limiter on the system," Savic said; he and Bachmann agreed that a full Noise Criterion (NC) study on the residential side is required to design permanent structural remediation.

What neighbors said: Property owner Ellen Despens and tenants Greg and Kimberly Cho testified that opening‑night sound and subsequent DJ nights caused windows and dishes to rattle, rattling and steady bass to be heard in multiple rooms of upper apartments. Despens said she was unable to rent three short‑term units while complaints persisted. "Since the DJ music, we could not sign leases," Despens testified. Michelangelo's owner Tony Moors testified he could hear and feel the music in his basement office on at least two occasions.

Enforcement and evidence: Police officers testified the downtown policing environment complicates measurement and enforcement; patrol officers said on some calls they could not detect excessive bass from outside, and that weekend downtown policing priorities often displace noise follow‑up. The committee accepted the city's evidence and the neighbors' testimony as meeting a preponderance threshold that the entertainment operations had been conducted in a manner inconsistent with the neighborhood's health, safety or welfare.

Next steps and remedies: The venue told the committee it has committed to commissioning a full NC noise survey and structural remediation plan that requires access to the adjacent residential property (114 State Street) to measure transmitted sound. Bachmann Construction and consultant John Westerra told the panel they are prepared to design and implement fixes once they can measure inside the affected apartments; Bachmann emphasized the work needed will vary from relatively minor treatments to potentially invasive construction depending on test results. The committee's conditions remain in place while remediation is completed; the venue may petition the ALRC to lift conditions after remediation is documented and verified.

What to watch: The ALRC placed equal weight on both neighbor testimony about ongoing health and livability impacts and the venue's willingness to fund and schedule an acoustic study and progressive mitigation. The next immediate milestones are (a) the NC study and structural remediation plan that requires landlord cooperation to permit interior testing, and (b) any petition Cello files asking the committee to lift or modify the suspension once remediation is implemented and verified.

The hearing record and the committee's motions and votes are public; the committee adjourned after the votes. The ALRC will monitor compliance with the new conditions and can take additional action if evidence shows the venue has not followed the imposed restrictions.