2008_0616_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

6. The Roseville city Council reset to consider the presumptive penalty at its meeting on February 11, 2008. Jennifer Weinh.a ndl, the manager of Davanni's, appeared on its behalf. she admitted that she had sold alcohol on the day of the suspension. The suspension had been written on the restaurant's pla -nner for the day, but alcohol was not ordinarily sold during the early hours of the day, and the beer had not been removed. she had not remembered that the license was suspended on that day. Ills. Weinhand.l apologized for her error. There was also discussion at the council meeting about Davanni's continued interest in selling beer, and its limited alcohol sales. 7.. some members of the city council expressed the view that revocation for five years was a disproportionate penalty for the violation, and that the city council may not have been aware at the time that it en-acted the presumptive penalty that the state statute would- prevent licensing for five years following revocation. In the course of the discussion, the City Manager recommended a o- to 0 -day- suspension. and a 1 000 fine. 8. After some discussion, a motion was brought to impose a 30 -d-ay suspension and a 1000 fire, accompanied by a finding that it was not clear that the City council had been mare when it enacted the presumptive penalty that revocation would prevent- Davanni's from holding a liquor license. for five gears. After more discussion and public comment., the motion was amended to impose a 60 -day suspension an -d a coo fire. The city council voted (4 ayes; 1 nay) in support of the motion.. 9. By letter dated February +1, penalty and its right to request a hearing. heari-ng on February 21, 2008. 2008,. Davanni's was sent notice of the Mr. stenson filed Davanni's request for 10. At this hearing, . Mr. stenson requested reduction- of the imposed suspension and fire, Again,- he apologized for Ms. Weinhandl1s error, and stressed that Davanni's, has instituted. new procedures to assure that no such mistake will occur in the future. He requested reduction of the penalty because it is disproportion -ally high relative to the volume of Davanni's liquor sales. On average, it sells fewer than 4 bottles of beer per. day. Its total. revenue from the sale of alcohol is approximately $4500 per year. Thus, the penalty will have a disproportionate effect on Davanni's, beyond the effect- that the same penalty would have on a business with higher alcohol sales. Mr. stenson believed that the city council had been improperly influenced by the public comments, and that the city Manag-er's recommendation for a 30-day suspension and $100.0 fine was more appropriate for his business. 11. Although Mr. stenson's name and address are on the license, the suspension was sent to the restaurant at 1905 vilest Perimeter Drive, Roseville, MN 55113 and not sent to his address as the license holder-. Mr. stenson did not deny that Davanni's had receilved notice of the suspension, but he emphasized that he should have been personally received notice of the suspension as the license holder. Had he received notice of the suspension, he would have taken steps to assure that Davanni: "s fully complied with its terms. 3