My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Agenda and Packet 1982 11 16
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
AGENDAS & PACKETS (45.010)
>
1973-1989 City Council Agendas and Packets
>
1982 City Council Agendas and Packets
>
City Council Agenda and Packet 1982 11 16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 1:46:50 PM
Creation date
12/29/2009 12:08:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Packet
Signed Date
11/16/1982
Supplemental fields
Test
CCAGPKT 1982 11 16
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
59
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
1 111 <br /> 11/3/82 Page -5- <br /> Should there be an emergency or fire the <br /> bikes would create a problem. Referred to <br /> the ordinance"Prohibited Acts," 3. relating <br /> to narcotics , dangerous drugs, beer and <br /> spiritous beverages - inquired how this section <br /> applied to bars? <br /> Attorney Rautenstraus advised that if a bar <br /> continuously allowed this type of activitiy <br /> not only would their liquor license be subject <br /> to review but their video game license as well. <br /> Councilwoman Morris Commented that she too would be flexible on <br /> the fee and was sensitive to the owner's con- <br /> cerns and after reviewing the information <br /> given council on revenues and expenditures <br /> was aware the profit was not as great as <br /> discussed. Referred to the section in the <br /> ordinance d. regarding general description <br /> of the machine to be covered by the license - <br /> how would this effect the fact that the owner <br /> maybe changing the machines every 3 or 4 <br /> months. She inquired if she was correct that <br /> the same fee would be charged for the number <br /> of machines , not the type of machine . <br /> Rautenstraus advised this was correct. The <br /> owner would not have to come in if the machine <br /> was being replaced; but would have to come <br /> in if an additional machine was added. <br /> Councilwoman Morris referred to hours of opera- <br /> Hours Arcade Is Operating tion as states in the ordinance - did not re- <br /> call discussion by council. <br /> Attorney Rautenstraus commented it was his <br /> feeling this had been discussed before the <br /> ordinance was drafted; however the hours as <br /> stated appeared to be if not a consensus at <br /> least an average. <br /> Morris inquired what hours the arcade was <br /> open. <br /> Co-owner Kelly replied: <br /> Weekdays - 11 :00 A.M. - 11 :00 P.M. <br /> Fridays - 11:00 A.M. - Midnight <br /> Saturdays - 10:00 A.M. - Midnight <br /> Sundays - 10:00 A.M. - 10:00 P.M. <br /> Councilman Cummings Wished to re-emphasize his statements . It <br /> was his opinion this was not a revenue issue. <br /> If the fee was reduced to $25 . 00 per machine <br /> the revenue would be $2.00 per month per <br /> machine or $168.00 a year. He, too sympathized <br /> with the situation; it was his feeling Council <br /> was addressing a problem that perhaps unknowing <br /> people get involved. It was his opinion. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.