Two revocation hearings held this morning
The first had to do with Roosevelt Oil, 2710 Roosevelt Road. After numerous citations for the sale of alcohol to underage persons and a citation for the sale of synthetic marijuana (a banned substance), the establishment accumulated sufficient demerit points to warrant a revocation hearing. There was some confusion as to who the agent was. Apparently, the business had been transferred, but the City Clerk’s Office had not been informed of it. The agent’s lawyer, Larry Keating, argued that the synthetic marijuana citation was dismissed by the courts; therefore, it should not have any demerit points assigned. He also stated that he was not contesting the other citations, merely pleading for the mitigation of points and the lessening of any discipline that the committee may deem necessary.
After nine minutes of the committee meeting in closed session, the committee’s recommendation was that the Class “A” beer license would be suspended for 15 days. Chairman Jesse Downing’s comments were: “The tickets that were issued were issued. At the time the ticket was issued, he was the agent on record. Whether the court dismissed the ticket or not, has no bearing on the city’s demerit tracking system. It doesn’t matter whether the business was running well or not.” After those 15 days, the license would be reinstated; however, it will have 80 demerit points attached to it. During that time, the committee suggested to the agent that he get the proper paper on file with the city. The start of the suspension would, more than likely, not happen until after the new year due to the committee’s lawyer having to draw up the agreement. The committee’s recommendation will now go before the Common Council on Monday, December 19th, for final approval.
The second hearing involved 2901 Pub & Grub. The city’s ordinance states that at least 70% of the projected alcohol sales figures which are submitted on the economic impact statement at the time of the application need to be met or surpassed in the first year of operation. The agents from this establishment were also represented by Keating. They pointed to the fact that they had many problems with gaining access to the establishment from the former owner as the main reason for their failure to comply with the 70% alcohol sales quota. Keating also brought up the fact that these agents had come before the committee requesting an extension of time to get the business in operation. They were allowed a deferral for 90 days. Keating also argued as to the accuracy of the documents provided. There was much confusion as to which numbers were correct and which were incorrect on the sales reports, graphs, and sales tax reports which were presented.
Keating suggested reconvening at a later time and having the agents’ accountant present to explain the numbers. After ten minutes of the committee meeting in closed session with their counsel, Keating stated that, since there were errors found, that the agents would be filing amended tax returns. The committee decided to go along with Keating’s suggestion and deferred this issue until their first meeting in January. They would like to have the accountant present to answer questions and present the required data.