07/08/1974 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- Councilman Hershner saw the case before the courts and the request to the Council as separate issues and saw no reason to delay action on the renewal. Mr. Murray was in favor of taking action but wanted more substantial evidence for the denial recommended. Mayor Anderson expressed the opinion that the es- : - tablishment was a continual source of problems for the police department indicating that it was not the type of establishment which deserved a recom- ~ mendation for relicensing. Councilwoman Beal was puzzled about voting against renewal of LaMars license i when it was actually in the process of being transferred to Mr. Nixon. She fel t the Council should make it clear it was voting against both applicants i if neither was desired as an operator of the establishment. Manager explained that the Council recently had recommended approval of Mr. Nixon's application for LaMars (Tiffany Club), that it was a problem of timing. Councilman williams said he would support the motion since the Council's action would probably not be final decision so far as the court case was concerned. Vote was taken on the motion to recommend disapproval of LaMars DA Conim renew.:ll . Motion carried, all council members present voting aye, 6/26/74 except Councilman Murray voting no. -- ' S~~~~tM.~_h- -- -, -.,' .-_. .. - - Be low Larry Sharley, petitioner for the renewal, reviewed the history of hi~- ,connection with LaMars and other business interests. He felt the establishment ~rovided an acceptable form of entertainment and said there was no substantial evidence that it created police problems, that police calls from LaMars were from the owner for ~- help in~~isturEances at the place. He reviewed the action of the GLCC in suspending their liquor license and noted court action remanding the license to GLCC for further action. Mr. Sharley felt the operation contributed to the downtown area and asked fayor~le recommendation on the renewal to enable the operation to continue. (1693) In response to Councilman Williams, Police Chief Dale Allen said that the Court of Appeals had sustained the GLCC allegation~t LaMars was maintaining a lewd establish- ment. The charge that it was an insanitary operation was not upheld and the matter w:as referred back to GLCC for penalty.evaluation. Manager said there were still the two charges pending in municipal court for violation of the city's touching ordinance. In response to Mr. Sharley, Assistant City Attorney said one. was a complaint from a citizen, the other by a police officer. (1721) Councilman McDonald said he would vote against_revewal if there were complaints filed with the police department on the operation. Councilman Murray felt if the recommenda- tion against renewal was based on police problems, then he would have to have more elaborate information to give an opportunity to compare the record of this operation . with other establishments in town. Manager explained that the recommendation against renewal was not based primarily: on tne 'number of police calls, that it was a judgment of whether the operation was adequately run and a desirable one for the community.. He said his recommendation was based on~inany police reports which covered .the kinds of It things which could not be defined as '''topless entertainment". Mr. Long pointed out the difficulty of discussing the investigations with regard to LaMars because of the two court cases pending. He said it was a question of consistency, that,the city in making recommendations to GLCC has taken the position that violations of the city code is one ,reason for a negative recommendation. If the court resolves the two pending issues contrary to LaMars, he said, there would be two separate grounds for denying the renewal. Councilman Murray recognized that it was improper--to divulge information on.cQprt cases but he felt he would be voting without sufficient information. Councilman Williams thought another factor was the question of making moral judgments which he felt was not a matter to be determined by a legislative doby. (1825) Councilwoman Beal agreed that the license renewal should not be based on a moral ;; judgment, but she felt Council was being asked to pass judgment on investigation by staff in which case she thought action should be postponed until there was further information. Manager reminded Council that the Court of Appeals had found in favor of GLCC's charge that the establishment w:as operated as a lewd establishment. Councilman McDonald added that he thought the Council normally acted on recommendations of the police department." , Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Murray that committee action be amended -' to state that the renewal application for LaMars would be transmitted to GLCC without recommendation on the grounds that there had been no opportunity to review appellate court decision and/or to cQnsider cases pending before the municipal court. Councilwoman Campbell inquired about the penalties for violation of city ordinances in this case, whether any had been levied. Mr. Long answered that the matter was set for trial but continued to some future dat~ at the request of the defendant. -- - c...,,'<-'o- -_ .~~-:=-...;o...-:-.~: _~ _~--' '.-"";- -:-...:. -:." , --.....:. 2:.'<-'- - , " ' .... _~-o._.~:'" . - - ---~ " . .."'" '~.-' -..... -,._~ --.' -'._-'" " -- _. '_..c___ ""':""_r .- . 7/8/74 - ~_-'_-''''_~~_~,,_. 240 .. ::.. ~.,== ---,.- - -