Laserfiche WebLink
Local Licensing Authority <br />Minutes <br />February 22, 2016 <br />Page3of6 <br />preceding the date of the complaint which resulted in the final decision to <br />suspend the license. <br />Lipton moved to approve the petition. She inquired if the Authority had to look <br />at the moneys involved before approving the petition. <br />Authority Attorney Culley noted the ordinance calls for the fine in lieu to equal <br />20% of the estimated gross revenues from the sale of alcohol beverages <br />during the entire period of the proposed suspension. She noted the applicant <br />had provided estimated revenue from last year for a seven day period. <br />Todd Stoneman, attorney for the licensee, noted he had prepared the petition <br />to pay based on the Municipal Code stating it should be based on a <br />reasonable method to calculate. He based it on a similar timeframe from last <br />year's sales and then calculated the 20% of those sales. <br />Chairperson Tennessen noted there was a motion to approve on the table and <br />called for a second. Lipton added the three findings noted by Attorney Culley <br />to her motion. Machado seconded. Roll Call Vote: Machado — yes, Lipton — <br />yes, Carlson — yes, Tennessen — yes and Hervey — yes. <br />Attorney Stoneman asked for the timeline on paying the fine. There was no <br />indication of a timeline in the Code so the Authority instructed the licensee to <br />pay before the next meeting, March 28, 2016. <br />Mr. Stoneman noted Josh Karp, owner of Waterloo was in attendance and <br />wanted to address the Authority. Mr. Karp thanked the Authority and noted the <br />acceptance of the fine was not an admission of guilt. He stated he felt the <br />Authority did not make the right decision in taking the word of patrons of a <br />different establishment over his trained staff. He noted his staff attends the <br />training provided by the Police Department and he continues to require it. <br />Authority member Lipton stated if a hearing had been held, Mr. Karp would <br />have had a chance to present his side of the story. <br />Mr. Stoneman felt he had been cut off at the last meeting when he was trying <br />to speak to the facts of the case. <br />Authority member Machado noted the licensee had reached a stipulation and <br />now wanted to tell the Authority they had made the wrong decision after <br />hearing the evidence, when in fact the Authority heard no evidence; only had <br />the police report to read and determine to order the show cause. In the report, <br />