1982-09-20 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Session 1315, Minutes Page 4 September 20, 1982 have been denied liquor licenses, since the Council believed it was not appropriate for an establishment in a residential area to have a liquor license. He noted the shop was near several other businesses which sold beer. He asked the location of the closest stores that sold packaged liquor, and also wished to know who was noti- fied that an application was pending. Mr. Ollendorff said notices were not re- quired for this type of license. He did not know specifically which nearby stores were licensed to sell beer. Mr. Lieberman thought there were three nearby stores that sold packaged beer. He felt there should be a public hearing to let those in the neighborhood have a chance to comment on this application. Mrs. Elsie Glickert, 6712 Etzel, asked to address the Council. She was opposed to granting a liquor license to the above shop. She said the Council has had a con- sistent policy for quite some time, with the idea being to prevent a proliferation of neighborhood stores selling liquor. She noted there were several facilities near the above store which sold liquor, and that adding another package facility was not necessary and would be detrimental to the neighborhood. Mrs. Metcalfe said it was her understanding that the Council has not granted full package liquor licenses to neighborhood markets, a policy with which she fully agreed; however, a package beer license was not the same thing. She thought the licenses held by the businesses close to the applicant were full package licenses and not just beer. Mr, Ollendorff interjected that the policy as Mrs. Metcalfe just described it was exactly as explained to him by councilmembers some time ago, and the application under discussion did meet that policy. Mr. Lieberman pointed out several fairly recent applicants who had asked for only a package beer li- cense and were turned down because of being primarily a neighborhood store, often used by children. Mr. Rubin Schlafman, 747 Yale, asked to address the Council. Mr. Schlafman said he did not think it was Council policy to control competition, but that was what they were doing by turning down this applicant. He pointed out that packaged liquor or beer was not consumed on the premises. Mrs. Thompson concurred with that point, and while agreeing it would be desirable to hear from the neighborhood, she also thought the Council could not limit competition by denying the applicant the right to sell packaged beer. Mr. Levy moved approval. Mrs. Thompson seconded the motion. The voice vote was unclear, and a roll call vote was taken, with the results as follows: AYES: Coun- cilmembers Levy, Schoomer, Thompson and Mayor Mooney. NAYS: Councilmembers Lie- berman, Adams and Metcalfe. The motion carried by a vote of four to three. (Please refer to page 16 of these minutes where Council reconsidered this matter and called for a postponement pending a public hearing.) Mrs. Metcalfe said the Council should review the record so this matter can be clari- fied and Council policy confirmed for the future. She thought the Council had been reasonably consistent in the past, but noted there had been some turnover on the Council and it seemed like an excellent idea to spell it all out again. Mayor Moon- ey asked Mr. Ollendorff to research this matter and report back to Council. RETURN TO DISCUSSION ON BEER AND WINE LICENSE FOR KOH-I-NOOR RESTAURANT Mr. Kay reported that there were no restrictions in regard to the proximity of a like or unlike license; in other words, establishments with liquor licenses may be