CC_Minutes_2011_1205 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,December 05, 2011 Page 16 Nays: None. Councilmember Pust advised that she didn't have the previously-submitted back- ground information and questioned if the item should be deferred until she had an opportunity to review that information again, or if she could get a copy from Lt. Rosand tonight. Mayor Roe clarified that the issue was whether those two (2) establishments met training requirements as required by the City for their managers and servers. Lt. Rosand concurred with Mayor Roe's summary. Councilmember Pust advised that she needed to know the history of violations at each establishment and review a copy of the City's liquor ordinance and penalty tiers. Mayor Roe advised that action had been taken at a previous meeting regarding the mandatory penalty as recommended by City ordinance; and that tonight's decision was whether or not to renew these licenses based on their failure to meet training Councilmember Pust opined that non-renewal still fit into the City Council's stat- utory scheme unlike the lifetime State of Minnesota ban. City Manager Malinen reviewed provisions of City ordinance versus State statute; and the City Council's intent when it reviewed this ordinance to find a solution between those provisions. Discussion ensued regarding the level of suspension and length of time for such a suspension; timing for reapplication in the future by the applicant(s); and guid- ance for them and staff. City Attorney Mark Gaughan noted the state of City Code as it currently stands; with the City Council having the option of not renewing, but silent on those re- sults and the next step; and suggested that the City could choose not to renew at this time and set a date to reconsider renewal. City Attorney Gaughan noted the City Council's recent amendment to City Code to include renewal as part of the Hearing process and if a licensee is suspended, they are put on notice of potential City Council action and ten (10) days for their request for an independent hearing officer to hear their case. Mr. Gaughan noted that renewal was one of those trig- gering events. Councilmember Pust opined that the ordinance needed further amendment to ad- dress re-application; otherwise the City didn't have any recourse in an applicant reapplying or in a continuous cycle of reapplication.