Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995/10/30 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Regular a+ MINUTES ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ST. LOUIS PARK CITY COUNCIL October 30, 1995 An administrative hearing relating to alleged liquor license violations. Classic Cafe Mayor Hanks called the hearing to order at 7.00 p.m. Councilmembers present were: SuesSanger, Ron Latz, Robert Young, Gail Dorfman. Also present were the City Manager(Mr. Meyer); Chief of Police(Mr. Mitchell); Police Captain , (Mr. Walker), Police Officers (Mr Fraser; Mr. Fitzgerald; Mr Baumgartner; Mr. Pieper) and Steve Gold, owner of the Classic Cafe Mr. Meyer noted this was an administrative hearing to consider alleged violations of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Section 13-115 and Minnesota State Statutes 340A 415 having to do with liquor sales to minors that occurred at the Classic Cafe on November 2, 1994 and December 1, 1994 He recommended that the format be that the Council consider the November 2 incident first and then hold a separate hearing on the December 1 incident He said the exhibits incorporated into the hearing and be part of the record include. October 30, 1995 cover memorandum from the City Manager to the City Council, A set of documents related to the November 2, 1994 incident including a memorandum from the Police Chief outlining the events of the incident; a list of the costs incurred related to the incident; a copy of the arrest report; a copy of a memorandum dated November 3, 1994 from Police Chief Mitchell advising the City Manager and City Council about the alleged violation; a copy of a statement taken by Sgt. Fitzgerald given by the minor involved in the incident; a copy of the information related to the guilty plea entered on March 2, 1995 by the minor involved, a copy of a memorandum dated May 11, 1995 from Police Chief Mitchell to the City Manager and City Council advising that adjudication of this incident had been reached in criminal court regarding the minor involved in the incident A set of documents related to the December 1, 1994 incident that would be made part of the record including a memorandum from Police Chief Mitchell outlining the events of December 1, 1994, a list of the costs incurred related to the incident; a copy of the arrest report; a copy of the statement taken by Sgt. Roman given to the minor involved in the incident; a copy of a memorandum dated Jan. 10, 1995 from Police Chief Mitchell advising the City Manager and City Council of the alleged violation, a copy of the information related to the guilty plea entered on April 3, 1995 by the minor involved in the incident; and a copy of a memo- randum dated May 11, 1995 from Police Chief Mitchell to the City Manager and City Council advising that adjudication of this incident had been reached in criminal court 1 0 regarding the minor involved in this incident. In addition, in relation to both incidents, he said there were a set of reports from the Police Department related to false or fake identifications that had been confiscated by Classic employees which the owner had turned over to the police and examples of written daily logs from Mr Gold relating to his and his employees' efforts to document the use of false and/or fake identification by underaged persons to gain entrance to the Classic. He reminded all that this was not a judicial proceeding. The only concern in this hearing is relative to the license that was issued by the City Council. He then suggested the procedure for conducting the hearings. At the end of the hearings, both hearings be closed and the Council to then deliberate and direct staff to prepare a resolution with findings for formal action at the November 6, 1995 Council meeting Capt. Walker presented the details of the November 2, 1994 incident. Mr. Gold responded to Capt Walker's presentation. He said he was not told by anyone of either of the incidents before Council this evening. He said that in May of 1994 he was told of a leak at the front door of the Classic (individuals slipping in past the persons checking I.D.)He did not believe there was a problem today at the Classic with ID checks as they have taken measures to bring the May 1994 problem under control. Capt. Walker presented the details of the December 1, 1994 incident. Mr. Gold talked about the difficulty of checking IDs and that it is his intent not to permit underage persons on the premises and he takes very seriously this responsibility. Councilmember Dorfman asked what sort of communication the police have with bar owners when incidents occur on their premises. Capt. Walker responded the department does not routinely call up the owners to tell them of incidents which have occurred. Councilmember Latz asked what kind of training does Mr Gold give his employees so they can differentiate between valid and false ID. Mr. Gold said manuals are kept at the front desk which show all Minnesota drivers licenses. Those plus Minnesota ID cards are what they look for to validate. They will only take other state drivers licenses, no ID cards, and backup must be presented -- credit card, other cards with the individual's name. He said nobody slips in any more as happened previously as he has 3 men at the door checking ID Councilmember Sanger asked Mr. Gold to describe the training given to his staff with respect to checking IDs. 2 Mr. Gold said he holds 2 staff meetings a month and they talk about ID, what to look for on false IDs, study false identification that has been confiscated There is a calendar with the date at the front door so everyone can know what the date is. Also, there is a list of rules posted at the front door--No one under 21 admitted after 5.00, etc. Mayor Hanks said the police department also offers training to owners of local establishments. Mr. Gold said he had participated in that training as well. Mayor Hanks closed both hearings and opened it up to the Council for discussion. Councilmember Latz was pleased to see that the Classic has apparently brought the previous problem under control He did feel a fine was appropriate for the two incidences being considered and because of the need to set a precedent for appropriate penalties for any future offenses. He felt an appropriate fine should at least cover the costs to the City for enforcing, i.e police officers, investigative time, etc. It was moved by Councilmember Latz, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to impose a fine of $750 per incident. Councilmember Sanger assumed when enforcement costs were determined, it did not include the six officers attending the hearing this evening And if so, she felt the figure of$750 should be 111 revised upward to cover those costs as well. Councilmember Young felt $1000 was too low considering the options available to Council ranging from no action to revocation. He felt it difficult to assign a cost to the time involved in this kind of matter He felt the full civil penalty of$2000 should be charged per violation. Councilmember Dorfman had a problem putting a dollar amount on the incidents. She felt it difficult to determine how serious an incident might be -- either it is in violation or it is not. She concurred with Councilmember Young in setting a fine and that will be the fine that anybody coming before Council would pay for this violation. Mayor Hanks would not like it to be thought that if a bar owner was found guilty the fine would be specific; rather, that each be individually determined on the facts. He would prefer a specific number to be called a fine for an infraction rather than getting into the costs consideration One of the reasons liquor licenses cost what they do is the expectation that there will be increased police activity. Councilmember Dorfman asked how guidelines or benchmarks could be drawn up since this was the first time civil penalities can be imposed Mayor Hanks felt each case had to be examined separately -- some infractions of the law are more blatant than others 3 Councilmember Sanger suggested something along the lines of, hypothetically, $1000 for the first offense, second or subsequent offense $2000 and in addition the other potential penalty of suspension/revocation/probation could be assessed based on the severity of the violation. Councilmember Young asked Mr. Gold if a one-day closure of his business cost him more than $2000. Mr. Gold responsed the issue is closure not the cost. It is very bad for the morale of the employees, for the owner's reputation, especially in light of the fact there was no intent on the owner's part that this happen Mayor Hanks was willing to give the benefit of the doubt that things have improved, although he noted the two incidents under discussion were only a month apart. Councilmember Latz offered as a substitute motion on the first incident to impose a $2000 fine, stay $1000 of that amount for a period of one year on the condition no same or similar incidents occur during that one year. Councilmember Dorfman seconded. Mayor Hanks had a problem with the motion wherein there is now on the books for the Classic a 2-day abeyance holding over from January 3, 1995. He would prefer to see the blotter clean, nothing held over. Councilmember Sanger said she has some concerns that if there is part of a penalty held in abeyance that it puts the Council in an akward position next time, if there were a next time. Would it be construed that whatever is held in abeyance would be the only penalty that could be imposed for any subsequent offense. She would not like Council to be constrained from imposing something more severe if called for. Councilmember Latz said that in criminal matters in the District Court, if someone is put on probation and another offense occurs, they are subject to a new penalty as well as what remains in abeyance. That would be his intent here. Mr. Meyer asked that the motion be clarified so as to request staff to prepare a resolution with findings, the findings be of a violation of the City's liquor licensing ordinance and State Statute and then imposing the fine on top of that and to be placed on the November 6 Council agenda for action. Also, he asked if the part held in abeyance ($1000) is held in abeyance for any incident which occurs one year subsequent to this hearing. Councilmember Latz said that was correct -- any incident of a minor found to have been consuming alcohol at the Classic where the incident itself occurred within one year of the date of final adoption of this civil sanction. The motion passed 4-1 (Mayor Hanks opposed) 4 V It was moved by Councilmember Latz, seconded by Councilmember Dorfman with respect to the December 1 incident, to impose a$2000 fine, stay$1000 for a period of one year on the condition no same or similar incident occurs during that one year period. The motion passed 4-1 (Mayor Hanks opposed). Mayor Hanks adjourned the hearing at 8 30 p.m. Iv 14,11,,, LHanks, Mayor e r pa] ,4/( jli� Cording ecretary I ' I 5