Local Licensing Authority Minutes 2001 05 14

Home Browse Search

Louisville Local Licensing Authority Meeting Date: May 14, 2001 3 Attorney Moore stated he was not trying to "split hairs," but that his clients did not use the word "confess" at the April 30, 2001 meeting when they admitted to certain violations. Attorney Harrington asked Attorney Moore if his clients admitted to the violations as contained in the Show Cause Order at the April 30, 2001 meeting. Attorney Moore stated there was a stipulation of fact made in support of a finding that there were violations, which were discussed and read into the record. Moore stated that the findings and conclusions of law were not discussed. Attorney Harrington asked Attorney Moore if it was his intention to contradict the violations his clients admitted to at the April 30, 2001 hearing. Attorney Moore stated that he intended to present mitigating evidence that restitution has been paid to all parties named in the Order to Show Cause. Member I~mmett asked Attorney Moore if he would refer to page 3 of the Findings of Fact. Kimmett noted that secdon IV states that "as discussed below, the evidence at the hearing established that the Licensee Holly & Mike's Ribs, Inc., d/b/a Hickory Sticks, committed violations of the following laws." Member IGmmett stated that it was clear to him at the April 30th meeting that the licensee had admitted to the violations and that this meeting was for the purpose of hearing testimony concerning any penalties. Authority Chairperson Myers stated that he was now very confused by this discussion, and asked Attorney Moore what point he was trying to make. Myers stated that either they admitted to the violations or they did not, and that whether the term "confessed" or "admitted" was used was inconsequential. Moore stated that they did not discuss background and findings or conclusions of law at the last meeting. Moore continued that they admitted only to certain facts that are outlined in section IV. Attorney Moore stated that he was not trying to be difficult and that, as an attorney, he was only trying to clarify certain matters for the record. Moore stated that the discussions at the April 30, 2001 meeting did not entail the kind of detail documented in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law being presented to the Authority. Moore stated he did not object to the document. Chairperson Myers stated that in order for a violation to be alleged, there had to be a law in place to violate. Myers stated he did not understand how Attorney Moore could state that he had no knowledge concerning the details of the Conclusions of Law when they were contained in the original Order to Show Cause. He again asked Attorney Moore what point he was trying to make. Attorney Moore stated that he would withdraw his comments. Member Koertje moved to approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as written. Member IGmmett seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: Lipton - yes, Koertje - yes, IGmmett - yes, Myers - yes, Sackett - yes. All members were in favor, motion carried. Chairperson Myers stated that the Authority would now receive evidence and hear testimony in aggravation and mitigation. Myers called Steven Barnett, attorney representing the City, to come forward. Attorney Barnett stated that he would be calling one witness, Ms. Dianne Ray, Director of Finance for the City, to tesdfy. Barnett stated that Ms. Ray would be testifying to several issues and by way of clarification of terms, requested the Authority take official notice of the November, 2000 minutes concerning the affidavit of Douglas Kowalis that was admitted as evidence at that hearing. Barnett read paragraph four of 3 \\FRED~VARRAN \LIQUOR\2001 \MINUTES~MINUTES051401,DOC