Laserfiche WebLink
Finding of Fact was refuted under cross-examination of the Officer. He maintained that the evidence <br />clearly established the fraudulent I.D. was a defense in this case. He stated that Mr. Galvin felt that he had <br />done as much as he could do, as what he was instructed to do by the State. Mr. Rennich asked that <br />penalties be as light as possible and that any suspension be delayed to the next month. <br /> <br />There was Authority discussion relative to the number of days served and the days held in abeyance. <br /> <br />Jeff.ers stated that he had struggled with the difficult issues of this hearing. He stated that he believed <br />some testimony was compelling on both sides, but felt the Authority's determination of a violation was <br />appropriate. It was his opinion that a fair penalty would be the licensee serving the two days held in <br />abeyance for the previous violation, and five days held in abeyance for this violation. He preferred that <br />the days served would be served consecutively, and had no problem deferring suspension until next <br />month. <br /> <br />Myers stated that he agreed with Authority Member Jeff.ers comments, but added that he did not want to <br />see the Licensee in another time. He also felt that the days in abeyance should be held for one calendar <br />year. <br /> <br />Lipton concurred that there were many issues to be reviewed, but felt that it was appropriate for the <br />Licensee to serve days and have days held in abeyance. She also thought that the Licensee should attend <br />training so that he is not confused as to the rules and regulations of the liquor laws. <br /> <br />Mr. Rennich was asked to discuss with the Licensee the dates of closures and report to the secretary so <br />that it could be made a part of the amended Finding of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Final Decision and <br />Order. Mr. Rennich agreed to consult with his client and contact the Authority Secretary the following <br />week with the dates the suspension would be served. <br /> <br />Be <br /> <br />Public Hearing - New Liquor License Application - Hotel & Restaurant License - Spice <br />China Inc., d/b/a Spice China, 269 McCaslin Blvd. <br /> <br />Authority Member Lipton opened the public hearing on the application for a Hotel and Restaurant liquor <br />license at 269 McCaslin Blvd, under the business name of Spice China. <br /> <br />The Authority Secretary commented that the application is for a Hotel and Restaurant liquor license. <br />Copies of the completed application were provided to each Authority member. The application is <br />complete, fingerprint reports are already on file with the state. Public notice of the hearing has been <br />posted and published in accordance with state law. The Secretary reported that she was not aware of any <br />reason that would require the authority to deny the application. <br /> <br />Lipton asked if there were any Authority member disclosures. There were none. <br /> <br /> <br />