Local Licensing Authority Minutes 2001 05 14

Home Browse Search

Louisville Local Licensing Authority Meeting Date: May 14, 2001 11 difficult it can be. Sackett stated that she appreciated the effort put forth by the licensee and their courage coming before the Authority and admitting to their difficulties. Member Sackett stated that, although she would defer to the judgement of the senior Authority members, she would advocate mitigating any penalties and revisit the issue in July. Chairperson Myers asked member Sackett what sort of penalty she felt would be appropriate. Sackett stated her opinion that the three days should probably be served but that any additional days should be held until July. Attorney Harrington stated that any days held in abeyance would be held for a period of one year. Harrington stated that the Authority could not impose any of the days held at the time the renewal is considered in July. Only new violations brought to a show cause hearing could trigger the days held in abeyance to be served. Member KSmmett stated that he was not at all in favor of tying this issue in with the renewal application in July. Kimmett stated the Authority should address this issue now and the renewal application in July. Member Kimmett stated his opinion that the three days currently being held should be served and that any further days ordered for the current violation discussed. Member Koertje stated his opinion that the three days held from the previous violation should be served. Koertje stated that it is the standard pracdce of the Authority to impose any days held when another violation occurs within the probationary period. Member Koertje stated that negotiating on this matter could affect the Authority's ability to maintain meaningful enforcement. Koertje suggested the licensee designate what three days will be served. Member Koertje suggested that two days be served for the current violation with a higher number of days held in abeyance, perhaps thirty. Koertje stated Mr. Davis testified that there will be no further issues and that he wanted to believe Mr. Davis; however, if another violation occurs, he feels the penalty should be stiff. Chairperson Myers clarified for members that pursuant to the Authority's guidelines the minimum penalty on a second offense is seven days and the maximum penalty is twenty-one days. Member Koertje suggested one additional day be served for the new violation with up to thirty days held in abeyance. Chairperson Myers stated he would be comfortable with one day served for the new violation and the three days served that were previously held. Member I4Ammett, Sackett and Vice Chairperson Lipton all concurred. Chairperson Myers asked for comment from members on how many days should be held in abeyance. Member Koertje suggested thirty days. Member I~mmett stated that he felt thirty days was a little high. Kimmett suggested a fifteen-day suspension with one day served and fourteen days held in abeyance. Chairperson Myers asked Attorney Moore if his clients desired to choose the days to serve the four day suspension. Moore stated his client's preference would be June 1Th, a Sunday, and July 1st, a Sunday. Myers stated to Attorney Moore that the days had to be consecutive. Attorney Moore stated July 1st through July 4th. Attorney Moore stated that one of the days is a Monday when his client is normally closed. Chairperson Myers stated that the days of suspension can not be served on any day that the licensee is normally closed for business. Attorney Moore stated his clients would serve the suspension July 2nd through July 5~h. Member Kimmett asked what day July 2"a falls on. Deputy City Clerk Bolte stated that it was a Monday. \\FRED\VARRAN\LIQUOR\2001 \MINUTES\M1NUTES051401.DOC 11