My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Local Licensing Authority Minutes 2000 08 28
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
LOCAL LICENSING AUTHORITY
>
2000-2019 Local Licensing Authority Agendas and Minutes
>
2000 Local Licensing Authority Agendas and Minutes
>
Local Licensing Authority Minutes 2000 08 28
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:45:54 PM
Creation date
10/1/2003 2:20:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Signed Date
8/28/2000
Supplemental fields
Test
LAMIN 2000 08 28
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Louisville Local Licensing Authority <br />Meeting Date: August 28, 2000 <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />Sergeant Riggins stated that the training was well received, but stated doubt that the police <br />department could offer the same level of training to all licensed establishments in Louisville. <br /> <br />Chairperson Myers read to members the section concerning training from the Authority's Rules <br />of Procedure stating "all employees involved with sales or service of alcoholic beverages must <br />attend at least one training session provided by the Authority per year and must provide evidence <br />of such attendance to the Authority at the time of license renewal." <br /> <br />Authority members discussed various ways to administer and enforce the requirement. Evans <br />noted that many of the supermarkets and chain restaurants experience high turnover and that an <br />employee could be hired and fired before a quarterly training session was available. Member <br />Lipton suggested that requiring managers and supervisors to attend the training sessions might <br />be an alternative and that they could then perform in-house training and provide the Authority <br />with a list of employees. <br /> <br />Chairperson Myers asked Authority Attorney Kelly to investigate whether she or an Authority <br />designee could be permitted to review in-house liquor training material for suitability under the <br />auspices of a confidentiality agreement. <br /> <br />Attorney Kelly stated that the Authority could require a viewing of the training material at a <br />regularly scheduled meeting that would be open to the public, but then return the training <br />materials to the licensee. If the materials do not remain in the possession of the Authority, they <br />will not be subject to disclosure pursuant to the Open Records Act. <br /> <br />Lipton asked Attorney Kelly to investigate how other municipalities handle the training issue <br />and the subject of confidentiality of materials used by licensees for training. <br /> <br />Deputy City Clerk Bolte stated that providing a checklist to the Authority of items included or <br />not included with a licensee's renewal is not difficult to administer, but that guidelines are <br />needed on the issue of in-house training and local training compliance. <br /> <br />Attorney Kelly stated that the Local Licensing Authority can conditionally approve a renewal <br />license pending completion of the required training. Bolte offered that should the Authority <br />adopt the "conditional approval" method that the Authority mandate the next available training <br />date as to not extend the licensees deadline another year. <br /> <br />Evans suggested that perhaps a letter from the Authority requesting license holders to describe <br />what type of training has been attended or provided be made part of the renewal process. <br /> <br />Sergeant Riggins stated that he was not aware of the training requirement, and has perhaps <br />misled some license holders by stating that the training is suggested but not required. <br /> <br />Deputy City Clerk Bolte stated that many licensees have stopped sending employees due to the <br />repetitiveness of the State program. She continued that, while the current program may be <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.