Paul Bass Photo
Duc Nguyen with pooch pee DNA samples.
Fed up with pooches peeing in the flowerpot outside his restaurant, banh mi maestro Duc Nguyen decided to take action — then ended up being declared a public nuisance.
He received a visit Tuesday at his Orange Street Vietnamese restaurant, Duc’s Place, from a city public health inspector, who fined him $250 for a poster he put in his restaurant window aimed at owners of the urinating pets.
Nguyen promises to fight the fine. And he’s fighting mad.
“I’m trying to keep the city clean,” he said Tuesday afternoon. “And I’m a ‘nuisance’?”
Meanwhile, he said, “these dog owners think they own the city. They can roam their dogs and pee and shit everywhere.”
Nguyen took action after watching too many dogs relieving themselves in this flowerpot outside the restaurant, which is known for its crunchy, flavorful banh mi and other specialties from his native Vietnam.
“It’s disgusting. It’s right out the doorstep,” he said. “it attracts flies. Every time the door opens, flies come in. This is a food establishment! It’s unsanitary.
“Every night I have to clean the sidewalk. It’s like a river. I’m just fed up with this.”
So two weeks ago he took action. He put a surveillance camera in the window to catch the critters in the act. And he posted this tongue-in-cheek sign. It invited dog-owners to come inside either to “pay” for the privilege of soiling the dirt in the flowerpot, or else have Nguyen “return the favor.”
Indeed, he did catch a pooch in the act. He posted this picture of the offender and the offender’s handler in the window.
He also gathered DNA samples of the pee, in case the dog owner ever challenges his verison of events. Nguyen knows from DNA; before opening his restaurant two years ago, he was a Yale genetics researcher.
Tuesday morning Honda Smith came to the restaurant, not to order a banh mi, but to instruct Nguyen he couldn’t post that sign. Smith is a public space enforcer for the city’s public works department. She wrote Nguyen a ticket for $250 for violating section 18 – 20 of the city Code of Ordinances by creating a public nuisance. (The section reads: “Whenever the director of public works shall have notice of a public nuisance in said city, if the same be in any public street, square or grounds, or in or upon any flat, slip, quay, dock or public landing, he shall cause the same to be abated or removed at once.”)
Nguyen, incredulous, demanded to know the reason.
“The nuisance,” Smith told him, “is you having people pay to pee.”
“No one has paid me yet,” Nguyen responded.
Why, Nguyen asked, is he a “nuisance?”
“You have a pee pot sitting out here,” Smith responded.
“It’s not a pee pot. It’s a flower pot!” Nguyen insisted. “People are peeing in it!”
You can watch the entire encounter, in which Nguyen grew heated, in the above video, which he took and then posted on the restaurant’s Facebook page.
Smith advised him that he has 10 days to file an appeal of the ticket. Which he plans to do. (The ticket cited a second section of the city code, 27 – 31, as well. It reads: “Nuisances on streets. No person shall commit any nuisance in any street in the city. This shall include but not be limited to any impediment, obstruction or interference with the free flow of movement within the public right-of-way. Any violation of this section shall constitute an infraction, and, upon conviction, shall result in a fine of up to one hundred dollars ($100.00), or an amount up to the maximum allowed under state statute, for each day that the violation continues. Such person shall be required to abate the violation.”
Later Tuesday afternoon, Smith told the Independent that she had received a call from a woman objecting to the sign that seemed to offer money in exchange for pee. The caller feared that more pee would worsen the smell on Orange Street.
Asked how it felt to have been on the end of Nguyen’s anger, Smith said she encounters upset people all the time.
“It doesn’t affect me,” she said. “I’m a public servant. I have to handle it. I’ve got to do a job.”
She said she felt “very sympathetic” to Nguyen’s concerns about dogs peeing in his pot. She suggested he contact the police.
Nguyen said he called the police, and they told him they can’t do anything about it.
He also said he never intended to encourage people to pee by posting his satirical sign.
“I was being sarcastic,” he said of the sign that earned him the fine. “But I do want to talk to these people face to face. That’s why I posted the picture of that woman. I’m not asking anyone to pee.”
"The nuisance," Smith told him, "is you having people pay to pee."
You can't make up a more perfect example of government arrogance and incompetence. They should be chasing after the irresponsible pet owners instead of the merchant, who is the real victim in this case.