2006_0424_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City Council Regular Meeting — 04/�0/06 DRAFT Minutes - Page 15 analysis for Council consideration of whether the City's existing Code is consistent with the Council's expectations in processing liquor violations. Mr. Anderson also reviewed Minnesota State Statute, Chapter 340A related to City Code, Chapter 302 regarding licensing standaxds, processes, fees, and operational conditions and limits; and subsequent failures to comply addressed in City Code, Section 302.15; and the provision for adequate appeal rights and public hearing for violatar(s). Councilmember Ihlan clarified that, setting aside past practice, City Code provides for the City Council to be the sanctioning body for appeals. City Attorney Anderson recommended the following process, and amendment of City Code, to provide more consistency with Minnesota Statue, Chapter 340A.415; with the City required to provide a hearing process for revocation or suspension appeals. I_ A violation involving a presumptive revocation or suspension would, like violations involving a presumptive fine only, be the subject of a staff recommendation to Council. Staff would notify the violator of its proposed recommendation. �' , The Council, based on �ta�f's recommendation, would determine the appropriate length of the license suspension, or resolve to revoke the license. '�, The violator would be given notice of the proposed action of the Council, and would be given an opportunity to appeal the penalty within ten days of the notice. �. If an appeal is properly taken, an independent hearing examiner would be designated by the Council to hear the appeal, and make a report and recommendation to the Council per Sections 14.57 to 14.69 of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). �_ The Council would consider the Independent Hearing Officer's (IHO's) recommendation and issue its final decision on the appeal.