08/17/1992 Regular - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Session 1576, Minutes August 17, 1992 Page 5 applicant has no criIninal record. Mr. Alan Ridnnan, 7510 Teasdale, the a,wlicant, asked Council to approve a full liquor license for the restaurant with no waitin;J period. He felt their policy did not apply to him for several reasons-he has had a liquor license at Union station for m::>re than four years; he has established the focus of the new facility as primarily a restaurant; am many patrons expect liquor to be Sel:Ved at a restaurant. He said the six-m::>nth waitin;J period coincides with the m::>st critical time for a new restaurant to becane established. He also pointed out that economic times are different than they were when the lDop started its regeneration. Mr. Price was not sure he agreed with the City Manager's statement that the council policy on liquor was "lon;J established. II He thought there had been a mnnber of exceptions in the last fEM years. Mr. Ollerrlorff said Mr. Ridnnan said earlier he was the bookkeeper for the Union station restaurant, hCMeVer, the letter he brought names him as opera- tor. Mr. Ridnnan said he am his father operate the restaurant together. Mr. SChoomer said it has always been Council's prerogative to grant a liquor li- cense inunediately, but the six m::>nth policy has been in effect for many years. Ha.vever, as noted by Mr. Price, there have been same exceptions, usually in a facility where a previous operator had a license. He felt this case quali- fied for two reasons-it is the inunediate successor to an existin;J restaurant am the operator holds a current license in another mmiciPality. He moved approval am Mr. Price secorrled the m::>tion. A roll call vote was taken, ani Councilmembers Price, SChcx:mar am '!hc:mpson voted Aye, am Councilmembers Adams, Wagner, Schuman, am Mayor Majeros voted Nay. '!he m::>tion failed by a vote of four to three. Mr. Price noted there were several instances of a,wlicants bein;J tmned darm initially, only to be approved for a liquor license after three m::>nths. May- or Majeros confinned that statement. APPROPRIATION TRANSFER - GRAFFITI REM'JVAL '!he City Manager said he was asked to present a proposal to transfer $2,000 from council's travel budget to increase the annmt of m::>ney available for graffiti removal. He did not agree with this request since he felt Council already limits its atterrlance at intx>rtant educational meetin;Js am confer- ences. If the transfer is a,wroved, additional graffiti removal equipment would be purchased unless Council directs othel:wise. Mr. Price said he made this request since he felt the issue was so intx>rtant, am that he \IIOUld forgo atterxii.rq any out of town meetin;Js for at least two years so m::>ney \IIOUld be available. He noted the resolution adopted earlier about reallocatin;J defense funjs to cities, am said he thought m::>ney could be found in the budget to reallocate for graffiti removal. He felt it was irresponsible not to give this matter a high priority since it is so ilTIpor- tant to renKWe graffiti as quickly as possible. Mayor Majeros recalled that there was canplete Council ~rt for graffiti