Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-05-03 Transcription#2 Page 1 ITEM NO. 2 CONSIDER A MOTION APPROVING CLASS C LIQUOR LICENSE FOR DOWNTOWN IOWA CITY ET CETERA, L.L.C., DBA ETC. Lehman/Do we have a motion? Champion/I'll move. Wilburn/Second. Lehman/Moved by Champion, seconded by Wilbum. Discussion. ACA Matthews/ Mr. Mayor before we begin this process I'd like to make a brief statement with respect to what the issues are regarding this license application. Toward that end I provided Council with copies of the relative Iowa Code sections in particular section 123.30 provides that a liquor control license may be issued to any person who is of good moral character as defined by this chapter. On page 2 of that handout I provided a definition of what a person of good moral character means pursuant to the City Code. He means that a person has such financial standing and good reputation as will satisfy the administrator that the person will comply with this chapter, and all laws, ordinances and regulations applicable to the person's operation under this chapter. Accordingly your focus with respect to this liquor license application is whether based on the application and the materials provided to you, you feel that the applicant is a person of good moral character for purposes of obtaining a liquor license pursuant to State Code toward that end you have the option to approve, disapprove or defer the application. Lehman/ I guess I have a questions. In some respects I guess its somewhat of a legal question. The ownership of this property is by Mr. Kip Pohl. Is that correct? Matthews/Yes, Herbert, Kip Pohl I believe is his name. Lehman/ Now there are a couple of other establishments, actually there's more than two, that the Kip family are involved in. Is there any connection between Kip Pohl and any of the other properties so that the ownership could be linked if you would to the other properties? Matthews/ With respect to the legal ownership issues as you can see by the application if you've had the opportunity to review it. The application for this particular liquor license the applicant is Mr. Herbert Kip Pohl who is not at the present time, who does not at the present time have any legal ownership in the other liquor establishments you referred too. There's perhaps sufficient nexus with respect to the applicants present planned activities and past involvement and relationship with some of the other establishments. I believe that nexus is This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001. #2 Page 2 articulated in County Atty. Pat White's memo to and if the Council believes there is sufficient nexus between the two than I believe it would be appropriate for Council to at least consider that fact. Lehman/Does the Council understand exactly what Andy's means by nexus? Champion/No. Pfab/I think that's space between. Lehman/Well, I think that's important that we understand. Matthews/ If there's a sufficient relationship be it direct or indirect with respect to the present applicant and the applicants activities at the other establishments then there would be a sufficient connection for the Council to at least consider that relationship as it would affect the good moral character of the present applicant. Pfab/ I don't think there's much question that it's awful hard to tell where one starts and the other stops or one stops and the other starts here. Matthews/Perhaps that would be something that the applicant would like to address. Vanderhoef/ But Mr. Rooney is the operating manager for Union and will be manager for this new Etc.? Matthews/ Is listed on the applicant as the perspective General Manager for the applicant. Kanner/ Yes, I would agree with Irvin it's quite clear in my mind that there's the connection. We have a late memo from the applicant that he is consultant with the Union Bar and his children have ownership in the bar. My understanding is that Kip Pohl used to have full ownership in the Union Bar and so in my mind that's direct relationship. In addition with the manager Ryan Rooney having relationship with both bars and I think in my mind I' m going to consider a license, a liquor license for the applicant, I'm going to consider circumstances at the Union Bar. I feel it is totally in line to take that into consideration. Lehman/ Now Andy I have a question for you. The action on the part of the Council. We do not grant or deny licenses. We only make recommendations to the State. The State can choose to agree with what we recommend, or not recommend. Is that not correct? Matthews/ The Code provides that the City review and make a determination whether do approve and grant the applicant a liquor license. If the City Council were to choose to approve the liquor license than that approval would be forwarded along with the application to Alcoholic Beverages Division where they would review it This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001. #2 Page 3 to determine whether it is in order and complies with State law. Where the Council to reject or disapprove the applicant administratively pursuant to State Code the applicant would be able to appeal that to the Alcoholic Beverages Division for there independent determination as to whether or not to grant the application. Pfab/Oneofthethingsthatbothermewiththewithholdingofcrucialinformation coming out a little bit at a time and I'm wondering what else now we don't know. Matthews/Perhaps that is something the applicant could address. Kanner/ If we at this point deny a license to the applicant that means that they can not do any business until and if they are successful in their appeal. Is that correct? Matthews/They could not serve any alcohol. Kanner/ They can do other business but they can not serve alcohol in their proposed location. Matthews/ If they get final occupancy permit from the Building and Housing Department they would be able to engage in other activities but would not be able to dispense any alcoholic beverages. Kanner/And what's the typical length of an appeal process to an administrative appeal? Matthews/ I'm not certain whether this is something that they would expedite with respect to liquor law violations that go to the Board. We forwarded on some approximately a month and they're set for a heating in early June. Kanner/ So, typically might say two months or so before they might have a chance of having their case heard. Matthews/ It's very possible that they could expedite it I could not speak for the Alcoholic Beverages Division. Wilbum/ I'd like to hear from ChiefWinkelhake if I could about in your memo it looks like you still did not sign off you referred to some you referred to the County Attomey's memo concerns about the ownership. I was wondering if you could comment on your comfort level with the conditional agreement that the County Attorney has come up with. Have you had a chance to see that? Police ChiefWinkelhake/ What you asked was my comfort level with the memo that Pat White... Wilburn/ You had questions about the ownership and you referred to the County Attorney's memo and you referred to the inaccurate information about the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001. #2 Page 4 criminal history and I just maybe could you comment on your comfort level on the conditional recommendation that the County Attorney's has set forth with the applicant. Do you think that that would provide a degree of comfort for you in terms of enforcement or concerns about potential future of violations? Winkelhake/I think the County Attorney did a great deal of work on that particular agreement that he has there and I think there's some very good thins in there as far as going to a 21 only establishment and so on. I think that's quite an accomplishment. As far as the other parts of the agreement that they have, the concern that I have is the ownership issue. It's very blurred to me and I think you probably have talked about that. It's very difficult to figure out exactly who's where. The other one is there's quite a bit of information that we've gone through from the Clerk of the Court that's not on here. And that is also a concern. That is not in here. According to Andy Matthews and I have spoken about it's supposed to be listed in this application to be a complete application and there's some information that we have received from the Clerk's office that would indicate not all the information is in here the way it is supposed to be. Matthews/ If I might interrupt just for a moment. Chic, I'm not sure you are aware of it but late yesterday this City did receive an additional memo from the County Attomey with respect to a meeting that the County Attorney had with Mr. Rooney the proposed General Manager for the new establishment, and it relates to that criminal history. Wilburn/I wasn't quite sure whether he had seen it or not. Winkelhake/This one I have not. This is the first time I've seen this one. Wilburn/Okay, I apologize for putting you on the spot. Winkelhake/I was looking at the other one. Wilburn/ Yea. Okay. A question for Andy. If this is rejected and goes on to the State what effect or impact might that have on the conditional agreement with the County Attorney? If any? Matthews/ I really can't really speak to that. I really have not been a direct party to those discussions and plea agreements. I do not know from the perspective of the applicant whether those discussions are conditioned upon approval of this application or not. Wilburn/ Um, if it were approved by the State, could they ignore these conditions or these conditions directly related to other items with the applicant? Do you get where I'm coming from? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001. #2 Page 5 Matthews/ I believe the Alcoholic Beverages Division would be able to fashion if they so desire, although there are no specific conditions in the Code that contemplates this, may be able to impose conditions with respect to that license. Likewise it's possible for the City with the agreement of the applicant to impose certain conditions on the application. There's nothing specific to provide for that by law but if it is something that both the applicant and this City and/or the applicant and the Alcoholic Beverages Division wish to enter into I don't know who'd have standing to object to that. Wilburn/Okay. Pfab/ I have a question. Could you go back and reread good morale character according to State Code? Lehman/You have a copy of it in front of you. Champion/Out. Lehman/Highlighted. Matthews/Page two of the two page copy of the City Code. Lehman/ It seems to me that there are probably two issues. For me there are two issues. One is whether the applicant by failing to list some things on his application spoils the application, and the letter from Pat White yesterday frankly resolves that foe me that there probably is no particular difficulty with Mr. Rooney and I think Pat White is satisfied with that. To me the question really becomes whether or not there is a connection, a nexus is that fight between the applicant and the other establishments that are owned by the family here in Iowa City. If we establish that there is a nexus than I think that in my own personal opinion there's no question what so ever that the charges that have been pled guilt to involving the Union Bar absolutely violate the purposes of the State Code which says that the person needs to be of good moral character. If you read that it says will satisfy has a good reputation as will satisfy the administer that the person will comply with this Chapter an all laws, ordinances, and regulations applicable to the person's application nnder this Chapter. If we make that nexus there's another facility in this commtmity that there has been five or four charges that have been pled guilty too in the last couple of days which is to me absolute admission that they have not complied with the laws and ordinances that are applicable and I think that's the question for Council. Is there a nexus there. It is for me and if we establish that there is in fact a nexus there to me that puts a cloud in the sky and I personally feel in view of the situation we have in this community and some of the problems that we have incurred that if we make that nexus that we would be remiss in recommending approval. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001. #2 Page 6 Matthews/ Excuse me, just for the record. I don't think that all those charges have been resolved yet I don't believe there's been a guilty plea at least with respect to some of those charges. I think that is contemplates in the agreement being worked out with the County Attorney and the applicant, Lehman/In any event the charges have been filed and they are pending if not resolved. Pfab/I can see no separation in ownership myself. Kanner/ I have a question for the Police Chief please. If you could come forward and perhaps with the help of Andy our City Attorney. I have no doubt that them is a connection and I just wanted to go over the criminal record of the proposed General Manager on the memo that was received I was wondering RJ could you go through these violations and just explain basically. Elaborate a bit on each one of those. I'm trying to find out what the context of those are. Lehman/ Before we do that is it only, not all violations of any relationship with being able to get a liquor license. Is it felony charges? Champion/Felony right? Matthews/Yes, and in particular focusing on those in the last five years. Lehman/But that should be our focus. Is on felony charges and nothing else. Matthews/ That is what the State Code provides for but in the general overall person of good moral character certainly you can factor in those type of activities in term of how it reflects on the good moral character of the applicant. Champion/ Although Mr. White does point out in here that these charges took place a while ago when the proposed Manager was between 19 and 23 years old, and at this time he is 27 and them hasn't been any current charges. Karmer/Well, I would like to hear what they are for and I think Champion/It says on there. Kanner/ I'd like a little explanation though and I think it does go to management. I don't think most of us have these type of charges and I'd just like to clarify exactly what they were and the severity and I think this goes to the goodwill to the will and moral character of the ownership about the General Manager that they are anticipating hiring and would just like to hear just a little bit if the Police Chief for instance starting at the top "unlawful use" what does that entail? Lehman/Do you have this memo RJ? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001. #2 Page 7 Kanner/ I'm sorry to put you on the spot Chief but maybe Andy could help you with that. I'm talking about memo, Johnson County Attorney's office. Winkelhake/The one he sent yesterday. Lehman/May 2 date on it. O'Donnell/It lists all the charges on the back. Winkelhake/Okay. Lehman/Lists all the charges on page 2. Yea, that's it. Kanner/ If you could just tell me quickly starting at the top "unlawful use" what does that mean? Winkelhake/Unlawful use that would be a drivers license of some sort. I don't have that one in from of me so I can search for that one I don't have that one. The next one "public intox" that was where apparently there was a fight and the officers went to it. Mr. Rooney was one of the participants in that. You have "708.2.sub 2 ACI" that's an assault causing injury. One is one that is listed on the application. I don't know ifthat's been resolved at this point. O'Donnell/One of these is dismissed Chief and the other one is open? Winkelhake/Yes, one was dismissed and the other one is open and I don't know what the results if it has gone to court at this point I don't know. The "3-21-98" I don't know if I have that one. Lehman/It says operating without a registration. Winkelhake/That's usually a license violation. Lehman/Vehicle? Kanner/What's that? Winkelhake/License plate violation. Kanner/License plate or drivers license? Winkelhake/Without registration. Matthews/That would be a drivers license registration violation. Kanner/Okay. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001. #2 Page 8 Pfab/What? Matthews/ Excuse me. Registration pursuant to licensing of the vehicle. Having the appropriate year sticker and registration. Winkelhake/Usually just a sticker that gets put on the plate. That's all that is. "Disorderly house" there are two of those. One of which was at 303 North Ellis. Loud party up there. Disorderly house and that was in 95 which was probably the 6-95 one cause it occurred in April and it was adjudicated in June. There's another one disorderly another loud party and a warning given at 2:30 officers went back and apparently issued a citation at that time. Kanner/Do you know if alcohol was involved in any of those disorderly house? Winkelhake/The place on the complaint doesn't say alcohol but generally the disorderly would be a result of loud parties which generally involve alcohol but I can't tell you that for sure based on what I have in front of me. The obstructing from 9-95 was adjudicated in 9-95 and usually what that involves is getting in the middle of an arrest where somebody is being arrested. Failure to obey a traffic signal that's a traffic violation and then no valid DL or registration in 97 that I don't, I don't have that one in here. That's a traffic ticket. Matthews/ I should mention this, I should have mentioned this at the start, the County Attomey has graciously indicated that he could make himself available by speaker phone if you wish to visit with him or have any questions of him we could get on him online if you so desire. Additionally to be clear the agreement being contemplated with the County Attomey and the owners and employees of the Union Bar in connection with those criminal complaints are still currently being negotiated. They have not been completely resolved. There is no final agreement with respect to those discussions with the County Attorney. There are still actions which need to occur to complete that agreement. Pfab/ So translated into laymen's language that would mean that the applicant is still holding out for a better deal. Matthews/ I couldn't say that. All I can tell you is that there are still contingencies that have to be met, actions that need to occur with respect to that agreement that has been worked out with the County Attomey. Pfab/So at this point we really don't even have a complete application because of that. Matthews/ You have a complete application before you now the County Attorney has been attempting with the owner and some of the employees of the Union Bar to resolve the criminal complaints with respect to those prior incidents and are working toward for lack of a better phase a global resolution of all those issues This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001. #2 Page 9 both with the Union Bar's owner and employees and with Alcoholic Beverages Division but it is my understanding that there is no final agreement signed off on. All of the contingencies have not been met and approved yet. Certainly the Alcoholic Beverages Division would have some say in some of what is being contemplated as part of that agreement. Pfab/But, but stated maybe a slightly different way. The County Attorney at this point is not totally 100 percent comfortable that this is complete. Matthews/ I could not really characterize it in that fashion. I think in your most recent memo to you by the County Attorney, the County Attorney on the next to last paragraph of the May 2 memo the first page has recommended that the license be approved. O'Donnell/ That's why I questioned whether it is necessary that we call him. He recommends approval. He's talking simple misdemeanors and recognizing youthful offenses. Matthews/And that's your prerogative. Lehman/ The other thing though that Pat said in his letter of the first of May "I was unwilling to recommend approval of a new application without acknowledgemerit by ownership and management of the Union of the law violations that occurred in February and appropriate sanctions and without a stronger effort to avoid underage drinking." To me that paragraph creates the nexus. Why is it that we're even discussing violations of the Union Bar when we're talking about application for a new bar if that nexus is not there and recognized by the County Attorney? Matthews/ Not wanting to put words in the County Attomey's mouth I believe that however that the County Attorney felt that there was a sufficient nexus to consider that and that is why he has entered into those negotiations both with the applicant and the owner and employee affected in the Union Bar incidents to resolve in his own mind whether that reflects positively in the efforts being made and the efforts to be made in the future with respect to the acknowledgement of past violations and conduct. Lehman/What's the pleasure of the Council? Vanderhoef/ Am I, just one question for Andy. Am I reading this correctly that there's also Malone's under the same ownership? Matthews/ I, It's my understanding that Malone's is owned by Jim Pohl not by the present applicant. Vanderhoef/Okay, okay. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001. #2 Page lo Kanner/ Well I'd like to give a chance to the applicants to appear before us if they so wish to hear their case. Lehman/They're here If they'd like to speak they certainly may. Kip Pohl/I'm Kip Pohl. Kanner/Hi Kip. Pohl/ I welcome the opportunity to appear before you and appreciate your accommodating us in order for us to present our credentials if you will. I'd like to thank Mr. Matthews for guiding and directing us through this special process so we can appear intellect in front of you. As Andy read the requirements for this State I stand in front of you and I would accept any question as to my morale character. I teach Sunday School. I coach Little League. I've served as President of the Chamber of Commerce. Chairman of the YMCA. I consider myself to be a good Christian man and I entered into this agreement with Pat White because is there a nexus there the question was asked about nexus. I had a heart attack two and a half years ago. I took everything that I owned that my wife and I owned, and I have been married for 33 years. We took everything and divided it among the children. It's there's. We have enough to live on and that's about it. And then something struck me 6 or 7 months ago that I would like to do an adult type place in Iowa City. First of all I've very fond of Iowa City, we're looking for a home here now. I thought it would be a fun thing to do. To have an adult place in Iowa City. In line with that we have spent substantial amounts of, my wife and I, have spent substantial amounts of our money building what we consider to be a very attractive place. The kind of place you could go to after a movie, after dinner, sit down and listen to music that's not full college youngsters. And as far as the word nexus was used. I don't think you can ever get rid of the nexus if it's a blood relative. My son is my son and that's never going to change. However, ifAndy or Pat White on down would have checked the State records Downtown Iowa City Entertainment LLC is organized in the state of Delaware. It does not have my name on it. I have never received a dividend. I have never received a W2. I've never received a 1099. I have been getting not one penny to be part of Union and the only reason that I got involved with Chief Winkelhake's Capt. Johnson was when Jim called me franticly one evening with a problem and he said would you talk to him. I, I'm having trouble, I'm having some difficulty talking to him. Would you please talk to him? And I talked to him about it. And I also talked to Pat White about it and I said what can we do and this is in the way of trying to solve a problem that the Union was having. What can we do to solve this problem? And if that's a consultant my attorney whom I think you've met is an absolute stickler for the letter of the law and as an example my wife, now follow this carefully please. My wife owns about athird of the stock of a company called Little Donkey's. Little Donkey's in turn owns Panchero's. My daughter owns one fifth of two Panchero's franchises one in Cedar Rapids and one on Riverside Drive. She is listed as an owner, I'm listed as a director. There are This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001. #2 Page 11 seven other directors that are listed on there. He says you must declare this because it is a indirect interest in a liquor license so my name, my daughter's name is down there for having an indirect interest. As far as Downtown Iowa City Entertainment is concerned which includes Union and Malone's I have no interest in that at all. None. Zero. And the agreement that we made with Mr. White was that we would voluntarily and it was believe me with his encouragement be a 21 year old establishment. It will never and we're willing to put that on paper that we will never let anyone in the place that is not 21 years old or older. Personally I'd like to see them 41 but I don't think that's in the cards. I don't think there's enough of us out there. So, in an early morning memo that I received from my attorney that he wanted me to call your attention to the fact that this was going to be an upscale facility. We do have I think a lot of our life savings poured into this. We could not bring this to this body and apply for this liquor license before now because the law requires substantial completion of the facility before the inspection process can take place. We're now substantially completed and we're ready to open within two or three days. Please though if you have any questions I'd welcome the opportunity to answer them. Pfab/ Jim, I believe that you talk a great talk but when you look at the walk that's been taken here I find it difficult you say you always have followed the law. Well, this is questionable to me. I think that as a Sunday School teacher you may think you brought it up I didn't "By the fruits you shall know them" and I'm looking at the fruits of what happened previously here and I'm not very comfortable. Pohl/You're talking about past violations at the Union? Pfab/ Well, yes. The whole, this. I find that your fingerprints are over everything here and now you're saying they're not. But Pohl/ Mr. Pfab our corporation is organized and my name is not on it. Let me tell you this, this might help you more than anything else. Pfab/Okay. Pohl/Prior to six months ago it's been a year and a half since I've been in Iowa City. A year and a half. Now that should tell you something about my involvement at the Union. Pfab/ Well you talked about being on the Board of Directors that's kinda of an important part of the business (can't hear) Pohl/I'm not on the Board of Directors. Pfab/Yes, you were as these other things were going on. Lehman/That's Panchero's, that's a different operation. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001. #2 Page 12 Pfab/Yea, but you weren't involved with any of the bars? Pohl/Many years ago yes. Pfab/You said, you stated that Pat White insisted that you name yourself show that Pohl/Indirect association. Pfab/Yes but as a Director of a corporation is not an unrelated issue here. Pohl/For Panchero's. Pfab/Yes, but what about the other bars? Pohl/None. Pfab/Previous you said you divided them up and gave them to the children. Pohl/How far back are we going now? Pfab/You brought it up. I don't know. You said 6 months ago or something like that. Pohl/Well, two and a half years ago was when I switched over the corporate ownership of everything. I have not been involved in. Kanner/ Mr. Pohl let me ask you if I may about the indirect relationship. We have a General Manager that your planning to hire for your new bar who was directly connected to the Union Bar and the activities that are connected with that. Pohl/Yes sir. Kanner/ And why hire and in fact why not fire why not ask your son to fire this person for what was alleged to have taken place at the Union Bar. You're hiring someone with a record. I would think that most of us in this community don't come close to even with youthful indiscretion some that are very current. Assault, issues involving alcohol, that's the least person that I would want to be helping to run a current bar. But just the fact that he was associated in some way with what happened at the Union Bar would be reason enough not to hire this person. Matthews/ If I may interrupt just for a moment just to clear up a matter. It's my understanding with respect to those outstanding criminal issues involving the Union Bar's owner and employees the proposed General Manager for the applicant for this liquor license was not involved in those incidents and was not named on any of the criminal complaints with respect to those incidents. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001. #2 Page 13 Karmer/ No, but we do have letters from the proposed General Manager listing him as management concerned with all the bars including Union. We also had the applicant say that he is connected so I think there is that strong connection so the question would stand. Why would you hire someone like that? Pohl/Would you mind Mr. Kanner if I deferred to I think you should hear..? Karmer/No, I'd like hear you say it because you're the applicant. Pohl/ Why would I? Cause it's my understanding that none of the activity has taken place in the last three years. Which is when I came to know Ryan Rooney. Karmer/We have one case that is open right now. O'Donnell/98 Pfab/ And there's something going on that the County Attorney has made it to work out with some parties here. Can't come to a resolution at this point? I don't know if that involves him directly or indirectly. Pohl/I have no awareness of that. Kanner/ Yea, I just find that the hiring especially of this Manager shows that there is not really a good faith effort on your part to do some of the things that you are talking about. Pohl/ Oh, I beg your pardon. I got to know Ryan Rooney through his stepdad who is the President of the Iowa Bar Association. He comes from a very very fine family. And in my knowledge of him in the last three years he has been like Caesar's wife. And he has done one heck of a fine job and I find him to be a fine young man. Now maybe he sowed his wild oats and he did a number of things that he'd like to have back. I think we all have that. Kanner/ I wasn't assaulting about being accused of assault or disorderly house. I think most of us in this community weren't accused of those things and most of us did not sanction directly or indirectly things that allegedly happened at the Union Bar that are being considered by the State at the present time. Pohl/Nor was he there. Ryan Rooney/If I could just address you. Kanner/That perhaps is the problem Mr. Pohl. Rooney/ If I could just address you please about that. I feel that you really are going after me so I at least want you to get it correct. First of you I don't work at This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001. #2 Page 14 the Union Bar. I don't work there at all. Anytime that you've been presented anything that I have been associated with the Union Bar it's because they are owned by the same corporation. And anytime that I've given you anything with my name being involved with the Union and Malone's has been about trying to work with the issue you were deciding whether or not to raise the entrance age into the bars into the bars to 21. I think we had a lot of discussion and I made some proposals on how to try and curb some of the binge drinking problems that we had in Iowa City. I have not been directly associated with the Union for two years. I was not any part of the charges or allegations that are currently going on against the Union. I was never cited in any complaint. I have never been investigated by that at all and than I feel that you are bringing up these charges and I'd like to explain those too. As far as the last assault charge goes. Myself and my bouncers were all charged with that. You can call Pat White yourself. Those charges were dismissed. Unfortunately on the license application whether you are found innocent or the charges are thrown out or whatever you still have to list them. So it was listed on there. If you look at the assault charge before that that was dismissed as well. Lehman/I don' think this should be a inquisition. Rooney/I don't think their relevant at all because they were dismissed. Lehman/ I'm comfortable with Pat White's memo regarding the Manager of the bar. I don't think this really should be a inquisition of character. I think the question is whether or not for me there is I don't know about the rest of you is there a nexus between the ownership of the Union Bar. I don't really, if we feel there is. If we feel there is enough questions then we should proceed to deny the application. If we do not feel there is than we should approve the application. Is there, we can talk all day and I'm not sure and I don't think that it is the purpose of this meeting to...the purpose of this meeting is to approve the application for a liquor permit. And I think the information that we received from Pat and from RJ is if it's sufficient to raise questions in our minds that our decision probably should be denial. If it isn't sufficient that it should be approval. But it's pretty clear. Pfab/I would check to see if we're ready to vote. PohF Could I make one more con'kment Mr. Mayor? Lehman/You certainly may. Pohl/ I would say this, and maybe Andy will tell you this. This is a matter of law. It's not subjective whether you know I am associated at all with the Union. I'm willing to sign affidavit after affidavit saying I'm not associated. I haven't been in this town for a long time. I don't know what more I can do to assure you that I am not associated with the Union Bar. My name is not on, I can't sign a check. I can't do anything. On that you have my word. It is a matter of State law that I am This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001. #2 Page 15 not listed as an owner, or an employee, or anything more. The consultant portion of it was only at the insistence of my counsel that said you must put down that you have an indirect relationship and that's the only reason. Matthews/ If I may if you're at a point now where you wish to contemplate voting on this application you essentially have three options. You can approve. You can disapprove. And of course as you have done on occassions before you can defer this matter if you believe that the troubling issue for you is this connection between the applicant and past alleged transgressions at the Union Bar. If you're concerned with respect to resolution of those issues certainly you could defer this application until those issues are resolved both with the County Attorney and the Alcohol Beverages Division. I believe what you'll hear from the applicant however is if this delayed they stand losing substantial dollars if they can not open in a timely manner. But if you believe that there is a significant nexus that is troubling you with respect to the applicant and the good moral character of the applicant as it relates to this application by virtue of that connection with the Union Bar you can defer until those issues are resolved. If you believe that is relevant to your determination. Pfab/ At this point I would vote no but I would accept a deferment. I would go along with that. Wilburn/ I would agree with Emie. I'm satisfied with the County Attomey's comments about Mr. Rooney but I need maybe you can help me a little bit more I'm sorry with nexus because the connection is a concern that I have. Is it the relationship of the consultant I'm having when you're talking about nexus it is financial connection? Is it just quote on quote ownership? I'm assuming there may or may not be anything about relative relationship but maybe you could tell me a little bit more so I can think about this. Matthews/ Well, the Code quite frankly isn't a model of clarify with respect to that issue but the Code does require that the applicant disclose all financial interests in any establishment that has a liquor license and you can see from the application that the applicant has no financial interests in any of those other operations. Whether his position as a consultant is a sufficient nexus that is ultimately a decision Council should make. You've heard the input provided by the applicant with respect to what he actually has done as a consultant for the other establishments. If you have any more questions regarding that relationship I believe the applicant is more than willing to try to respond to any questions or concems you have with respect to that relationship. I do not think you an simply as a result of those incidents at the Union Bar without more assume a relationship. Champion/ I think Pat White has put a lot of work into this application, and a lot of thought. Wilburn/Counie, not finished yet. One more thing This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001. #2 Page 16 Champion/Sorry, take your time. Wilburn/ He just pointed out for me and I missed this part of the sentence (END OF SIDE 1) Wilbum (continued quoting from May 1 Pat White memo)/"I believe there is a sufficient commonality of management and ownership between the Union and Etcetera that deciding the current license application at least in part based on performance/practice at the Union is fair." I guess you did say that earlier that you thought. Yea .... I just wanted to point that out. Go ahead Connie. I'm sorry. Vanderhoef/ And he follows up with that he was tinwilling originally to recommend approval but since since that time he has recommended approval. Lehman/ Other comments? The motion that we have is to approve the application. An affirmative vote will approve the application. A negative vote is a denial of the application. Is that correct? Matthews/Yes. Lehman/Are we ready to vote on this? Roll call. Karr/Motion. Lehman/We have a motion. Karr/Yes you do would like to vote on it. Lehman/Yea, that what roll call. Karr/It's a motion. Lehman/ Not a roll call. I'm sorry. Can't plead early in the morning on this one. Okay, all in favor of the motion say "aye". (Champion, O'Donnell, Vanderhoet) Pfab/Now the motion? Lehman/Motion is to approve the application. Pfab/Okay. Lehman/ Let's try this again. I'd like to see a show of hands for the ayes. We have three ayes. (Champion, O'Donnell, Vanderhoef) All opposed say "nay" (Kanner, Lehman, Pfab, Wilbm'n). The application is denied. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001. #3 Page 17 ITEM NO. 3 CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE REZONING 24 ACRES FROM P, PUBLIC TO SAO-5 SENSITIVE AREA OVERLAY AND AMENDING THE PRELIMINARY SAO PLAN OF THE PENINSULA NEIGHBORHOOD, AN 82.1 ACRE DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT THE WEST END OF FOSTER ROAD. (SECOND CONSIDERATION) Lehman/We have been asked to expedite a consideration. Pfab/Move the resolution. Vanderhoef/Ooops. Wait a second. I think you've got it. Wilburn/ Huh, do you have a second consideration first or second. I move that the role requiring that ordinances must be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally passed be suspended. That the second consideration of the vote be waived, and that the ordinance be voted on for final passage at this time. Vanderhoef/Second. Lehman/Moved by Wilbum, seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion. Roll call. Kanner/Yea. Lehman/Sorry. Go ahead. Kanner/ I'm going to be voting against this especially this time even though I understand the needs in wanting to expedite this matter. I feel that especially in this matter where we're contemplating this proposal in response to a lawsuit that we should especially be more deliberate. I think it would be appropriate to have the third and final reading before our special May 8 session. I think we can have a formal session at that time and do the final third vote. Pfab/So when is our next opportunity if we didn't do this? Champion/Tuesday. Pfab/Tuesday. Lehman/ Well I'm not sure we're going to have time. Let me just comment there was not one person that even spoke at the public hearing. This is nothing more than transference of density from one piece of property to the other. I see nothing controversial whatsoever about it. O'Donnell/There absolutely isn't. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001. #3 Page 18 Wilburn/ I would also add. Steven I understand your feelings about condensing them and I respect that but the other side is that it is allowed by State law for us to do this and since this is a project long in the works I don't think the lawsuit is something new or new enough or changes anything about the basic facts involved with this with this project. So that's why I'm comfortable going ahead and condensing the reading. Lehman/ Well, I guess just for, there's not much public here but, just explain the situation. This is referring to the peninsula property which most folks in Iowa City are familiar with. That is a development that has been fostered to some degree by the City. We have entered into any agreement with the Elks Club where they were able to build a golf course adjacent to the peninsula property which will be developed as residential. I believe the Council had every reason to believe that everything was in order and at the time that we started the subdivision there have been some legal challenges from the Elks that we feel are incorrect. This is just a movement to assign density of property so that the project may continue on tract in a timely fashion rather than having it be delayed. And I think it probably represents no change from a operational standpoint but it does make it simpler for the developer to proceed with the project. Roll call. This is on the motion to expedite. Motion carries. Wilburn/Move that the ordinance be finally adopted at this time. O'Dounell/Second Lehman/Moved by Wilbum, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion. Karmer/ On this one I do feel strongly that there should be another opportunity especially since it could be controversial and there should be a few more days for us to possibly hear input. The press is here today and do a report on it and there could be things brought up that we are not aware of. So H1 be voting no on this. Lehman/ Steven, what do you feel is controversial about this motion. The transfer of density. What is controversial about that? Karmer/ First of all it's being done in response to a lawsuit and that in itself I feel is controversial. Now I may not agree with the lawsuit but I think the three reading process even one that is scrunched up where the third one would be next Tuesday I think is appropriate. And I think one of the purposes of the three readings is give people an opportunity to see if there is something else that is controversial that is something that they are not in agreement with. Anytime that you are dealing with especially with this large amount of acreage, sensitive areas, and rezoning I think it is appropriate to have the three readings and give people an opportunity. The whole process was pushed through in a fast fashion and I'm, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001. #3 Page 19 agreeable to some of that but I think that combining the second and third too much in my opinion. Lehman/Well I think the State... O'Donnell/Let's vote. Lehman/ ...for good reason requires three readings. They also recognize there are situations where time is of the essence and that readings may be compressed and this in my opinion is one of those situations. Champion/Let's just vote. Pfab/ I was just going to make a con'unent to Steven. I think that if you stop and if you look back through this process this the opportunity to file this lawsuit hung out there for a long long time and nothing was done until the final you know. They brought, the people that have brought on the lawsuit I think are the people that probably should have been watching and if they were on the ball they should have. I don't think there was ever any attempt to deny them that but they chose not to. Lehman/ No but there was an attempt on the part of the City to resolve this with the Elks on more than one occasion. Pfab/Right. I mean so I don't think I think this lawsuit is well Lehman/Okay let's vote. Roll call. Motion carried 6/1, Lehman voting in the negative. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001. #4 Page 20 ITEM NO. 4 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMENDED PRELIMINARY PLAT AND SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY PLAN OF TIlE PENINSULA NEIGHBORIIOOD. Vanderhoef/Move adoption. O'Dormell/Second. Lehman/ Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion. Roll call (unanimous) I'm really pleased you know this project has been on the board for so long and just to see this thing moving forward is this is really good. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 3, 2001.