Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Attorney Hoeft indicated that the options Council had at the December meeting, based on <br />information received from the Police Chief, were to either fine the establishments or hold <br />up renewal of the license to allow for comment from the license holders at the first <br />meeting of the year. He then indicated that Council had opted to fine the establishments <br />and that would allow the issuance of the licenses in order to allow those businesses to <br />remain open come January 1, 2002. He further indicated that due process was provided <br />by fining the establishments in order to allow them to remain open and issue the license <br />for 2002 and by allowing the owners to come to the first meeting of the Council in <br />January to discuss the matter. <br /> <br />City Attorney Hoeft indicated that the City's policy and process has been very informal <br />in the past and said that, while there is nothing wrong with an informal process, the <br />decision of Council in December indicates that the new administration would like to see a <br />more formalized process that more closely follows the statute. <br /> <br />City Attorney Hoeft indicated that, in his personal opinion, the license holders need to <br />contact the Police Chief in October or November to ask if there has been any violations <br />rather than waiting for the Chief to call them because the Chief may not have time to do <br />so. He then indicated that had any of the owners contacted the Chief there would not be a <br />problem. <br /> <br />Council Member Capra pointed out that the renewal form clearly states that failure to <br />report a violation will result in fines. City Attorney Hoeft indicated that the form does <br />require the applicant to make an interpretation of what they feel amounts to a violation <br />that needs to be reported. He then indicated that it is better to err on the side of caution <br />and contact an attorney to ask whether or not a specific violation needs to be disclosed. <br /> <br />Council Member Nelson confirmed that the due process was that the fine was issued in <br />December and Council let the owners come to the next regular meeting to discuss the <br />matter if they disagreed with the fine. City Attorney Hoeft concurred and indicated that <br />the City did not revoke or suspend any licenses. He then indicated that the other option <br />was that the City could have refused to renew the license and that would have had a much <br />larger impact on the license holders. <br /> <br />Council Member Capra indicated Council levied the fine in order to allow the licenses to <br />be renewed. <br /> <br />Mayor Swedberg indicated he appreciated the tenor of the comments and the cooperation <br />displayed by the license holders. He commented that there is an absence of policy in the <br />City on liquor license renewal. He then commented that the City needs to work on its <br />procedure. He further commented that he had voted against fining the establishments in <br />December because he feels there is a lack of procedure. <br /> <br />Council Member Broussard Vickers indicated she had made the motion to fine the license <br />holders in order to allow the licenses to be renewed. She then indicated that it was her <br />assumption that the Police Chief would have reported any incidents. Ms. Moore-Sykes <br /> <br />Page 7 of24 <br />