Laserfiche WebLink
<br />12/20/83 <br /> <br />Page -3- <br /> <br />~ouncilman Leary <br /> <br />Commented along with the violations pro- <br />vided he noted several incidents reported <br />in the paper at Waldo's, are these iegitimate <br />community concerns to base licensing decisions <br />on also? <br />Attorney Rautenstraus advised that the latter <br />would not be; specific pieces of evidence <br />on those facts, i.e. specific testimony re- <br />garding what you were suggesting that might <br />be. Merely reading something in the news- <br />paper or having a general perception that <br />a lot of people are coming out of the establish- <br />ment and getting involved in fights would <br />not be proper evidence. <br /> <br />Mayor Meier <br /> <br />Commented this is not the first time that <br />these problems have occured and come before <br />council when the license is up for renewal. <br />Stated that the owners have been before <br />council on similar matters and felt that <br />they were aware of the implications, and <br />know that they should report the incidents. <br />Suggested that council pass on the license <br />temporarily and set a public hearing for <br />final determination. <br /> <br />Councilman Cummings <br /> <br />Commented since the owners were not present, <br />felt that the license should be tabled; a <br />public hearing set and no license renewed <br />until January 3, 1984. <br /> <br />Councilman Fauson <br /> <br />Commented he didn't feel it appropriate to <br />condemn the owners until they have an oppor- <br />tunity to come before council and give their <br />side of the situation. Realized that the <br />reports provided council were accurate; but <br />did not feel their business should be shut <br />down until they have been given proper notice. <br />A temporary renewal of the license should be <br />given until the owners have had the opportunity <br />to speak at the hearing. <br /> <br />Councilwoman Morris <br /> <br />Commented she felt it was deceptive that it <br />was being called a public hearing. Certainly <br />the pubic could have input; but felt that <br />the main purpose was to have the owners present <br />to discuss the problems with council and <br />this need not be published as all other public <br />hearing. The terminology - Liquor License <br />Hearing would be more suitable. <br />