04/11/1977 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Joy Lunsford, 14 West Hilliard, said she had gone to school with Mr. Stompro. She noted Pat Horton's plan to get juveniles off the street and rehabilitate them, and said that Mr. Stompro might still be on the streets if he had not had the chance for rehabili- tation for himself outside of the prison. She noted that he was a good person. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. . Mr. Haws asked Mr. Olson if the determining factor for denial was the additional information of nine arrests received March 15. Mr. Olson said that was correct, that under Section 3.005 of the City Code, failure to disclose information could be grounds for denial. Mr. Haws wondered why it took so long to get the information. Mr. Olson replied that it took three to five days by mail for the infor- , mation to be received. Mr. Olsen noted that the arrests were for a period of 1968 through 1970 and that there had been 14 convictions out of 18 total arrests on 20 charges, but that none of the convictions were as a juvenile. Mr. Obie asked Mr. Olson about the fact that Mr. Stompro had requested the Police Department to secure additional information. Mr. Olson indicated that Mr. Stompro had not taken the initiative, but he himself had taken the initiative to get the additional information. Mr. Lieua11en wondered if it was fair to say that Mr. Stompro had not acted in good faith after he had been offered a second opportunity to offer the information. Mr. Olson replied that was a value judgment ~ and that of the information supplied by Mr. Stompro, only two arrests ,., had been entered of his own accord. He said it would seem that after Mr. Stompro had been asked several times for additional information and he had replied no, that he was not being forthright after being given the opportunity to add the additional information. Mr. Stompro was given an opportunity to reply. He said that when he talked to Mr. Olson, there were 29 arrests listed, and he thought that the Police Department had the whole file and he was not inten- tionally holding back any information. He said to the best of his knowledge, the Police Department had all the information and he expected it was a complete record. He did not try to deny any of the charges and was acting in good faith. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to deny the appeal of a commercial solicitor's license. Mr. Lieuallen indicated that there seemed to be two issues involved here: 1) to simply decide what was the policy of an application not being filled out correctly and whether a Code had been violated; and 2) what happened to people who had been convicted with regard to the community's best interest, whether there were statistics showing that these persons were careful not to get arrested dg41n. Manager said it would take some time to get an answer. Mr. Lieuallen said if it were merely speculative, then he was ready to support the appeal. He questioned whether. there was a time limit in re- 4IIl. . submitting an application. Manager replied there was no time limit, ~ and that previously it had been done within a few months' time. 4/11/77--12 1~1