MINUTES
PROTECTION
& WELFARE COMMITTEE
WEDNESDAY,
JULY 9, 2008
City Hall, Room
207
5:30 P.M.
Members Present:
Ald. Nicholson-Chair, Ald. De Wane-Vice Chair, Ald. Wery, Ald. Zima, Ald. Piton
Members Excused:
Others
Present: Mayor
Schmitt, Tony Wachewicz-Asst. City Attorney, Capt. Galvin-Police Department,
Lt. Runge-Police Department, Lt. Nick – Police
Department, Donna Rosenthal-Recording Secretary, and others.
1.
Roll
Call.
Ald.
De Wane, Ald. Wery and Ald. Piton were present at the start of the
meeting. Ald. Nicholson arrived at 5:34
p.m. and Ald. Zima arrived at 5:42 p.m. (Ald. Zima left the meeting at 7:30
p.m.)
2.
Approval
of the Agenda.
A
motion was made by Ald. Piton and seconded by Ald. Wery to approve the agenda
with the following changes:
After item 3, the committee will hear items 7,
16, 13, 14, 15, 22 and then return to item 4 and continue as submitted. Motion carried.
3.
Approval
of the minutes from the July 1, 2008, meeting.
A
motion was made by Ald. Wery and seconded by Ald. Piton to approve the minutes
from the July 1, 2008, meeting. Motion
carried.
4.
Request by Shenanigans Pub, 1279 Main
Street, to hold an outdoor event on August 16, 2008.
Atty. Wachewicz had no objection.
The Police Department had no
objection.
A motion was made by Ald. Zima and
seconded by Ald. De Wane to approve the request by Shenanigans Pub, 1279 Main
Street, to hold an outdoor event on August 16, 2008, subject to complaint and
with the approval of proper authorities.
Motion carried.
5.
Request by the owners of IQ’s at 2105
University to hold outdoor events on July 26 and August 2.
Atty. Wachewicz had no objection.
The Police Department had no
objection.
A motion was made by Ald. De Wane and
seconded by Ald. Zima to approve the request by the owners of IQ’s at 2105
University to hold outdoor events on July 26 and August 2, 2008, subject to
complaint and with the approval of proper authorities. Motion carried.
6.
Request by Levy Restaurants to hold an
outdoor event in the Lambeau Field parking lot on July 24 and also from July 28
to January 19.
Atty. Wachewicz had no objection.
The Police Department had no
objection.
A motion was made by Ald. De Wane and
seconded by Ald. Piton to approve the request by Levy Restaurants to hold an
outdoor event in the Lambeau Field parking lot on July 2, 2008 and also from
July 28, 2008 to January 19, 2009, subject to complaint and with the approval
of proper authorities. Motion carried.
7.
Appeal by Michael Cygan to the denial
of his Class “B” Combination License at 1238 Main Street and the scheduling of
a quasi-judicial hearing.
Atty. Wachewicz stated that Mr. Cygan
has filed an appeal to the denial of his operator license. He is entitled to a quasi judicial hearing.
A motion was made by Ald. Piton and
seconded by Ald. De Wane to deny the appeal by Michael Cygan to the denial of
his Class “B” Combination License at 1238 Main Street and to refer to the City
Attorney’s office to schedule a quasi-judicial hearing and notify Mr. Cygan. Motion carried.
8.
Application for a Class “B” Combination
License by A. Loch Properties at 1238 State Street. (Transfer from Boot Hill Saloon)
Atty. Wachewicz stated that the
background check was fine. The applicant
has not finished getting approval of the business plan.
A motion was made by Ald. Zima and
seconded by Ald. Wery to approve the application for a Class “B” Combination
License by A. Loch Properties at 1238 State Street, subject to the business
plan being approved by the Police Department and the approval of proper
authorities. Motion carried.
9. Applications by the following for one
of the five available Class “B” Combination Licenses:
A.
Juan Maldonado at 1737 Main Street
(Currently has beer only.)
Atty. Wachewicz stated that the
applicant stated that he was not convicted of any offenses on the
application. After a check of the
applicant, it has been revealed that there is a conviction for depositing human
waste and a conviction from February 12, 2007, for carrying a concealed weapon.
Ald. Nicholson asked what information
there was about the concealed weapon charge.
Atty. Wachewicz and the Police
Department did not have any further information, however this would be looked
at and more information would be provided to the committee.
A motion was made by Ald. Zima and
seconded by Ald. De Wane, to hold this over to the next meeting of the
Protection and Welfare Committee. Motion
carried.
B. Hagermeister Park, Inc. at 301-325 N.
Washington Street
Atty. Wachewicz has no objection.
Lt. Runge stated that they have no
problem with the applicant or the business plan. The concern that the police department does
have is another liquor license in this area.
The business plan does state that it would be 60-40. 60% would be food.
Ald. Wery stated that this is not the
type of operation that has been giving the City trouble. The applicant is making a significant
investment in this business.
Ald. Zima stated that he is concerned
with this. He doesn’t want this to be an
alcohol operation that serves food. The
downtown does not need another bar attraction. He would like to be assured that
this is a restaurant that uses menus and the intent of the establishment is to
serve food with the auxiliary of alcohol.
He would like to hear the owner state that.
Ald. De Wane stated that this is a
restaurant. The applicant has other
establishments just like this.
A motion was made by Ald. Piton and
seconded by Ald. Wery to open the floor.
Motion carried.
Ald. Nicholson asked the applicant when
he would stop serving food.
Jess Miller, 2991 Madrid Drive, stated
they would serve food until approximately 12:30 a.m. He stated that they believe the future of
this business is on the restaurant end and not the bar end. They do have menus. They sell more chicken than Hooters or
Buffalo Wild Wings. They are located
next to the Children’s Museum because they want to capture that crowd with
their expanded children’s menu. They do
plan on having a host or hostess but there would also be times when customers
are able to walk up to the bar or a table.
They have a full time chef and are not just flipping burgers. They would be serving wraps, wings, pizzas
and stir fry. They are like an Applebee’s,
Chili’s or a Buffalo Wild Wings.
Ald. Zima asked if the main attraction
is primarily food.
Mr. Miller replied that they
anticipate 60% food and 40% alcohol, but is hesitant to guarantee that is where
the percentages would fall. Food sales
are what drive their business.
Ald. De Wane stated that he spoke with
Mr. Mirkes, the Executive Director of Downtown Green Bay, Inc. and Olde Main
Street, Inc., and he was very happy with this establishment and felt it would
fit in with what they are looking for in this area.
Sue Robinson, President of the Tavern
League, stated that these people have a good reputation with their other two
businesses.
A motion was made by Ald. Zima and
seconded by Ald. Piton to return to the regular order of business. Motion
carried.
Ald. Wery noted that this
establishment is outside the moratorium area.
Ald. Piton disclosed that in high
school he worked at The Bar, which is also owned by the applicants.
A motion was made by Ald. Wery and
seconded by Ald. Zima to approve the application by Hagermeister Park, Inc. at
301-325 N. Washington Street for a Class “B” Combination License with the
condition that their main business be food and with the approval of proper
authorities. Motion carried.
10. Request by Ald. De Wane to review the
Class “B” Combination License at 500 N. Baird Street.
Ald.
De Wane stated that on March 4, 2008 they were approved for a license. As of this date the license has not been
picked up nor has the $500.00 been paid.
This is someone just hanging onto a license as long as possible. He would like the committee to take back the
license and put it back into our system.
Atty.
Wachewicz asked Mr. Van Sistine if Mr. Schwantes is part of this business.
Mr.
Van Sistine replied that Mr. Schwantes is co-owner.
Atty.
Wachewicz stated that he has a conflict with this because Mr. Schwantes was a
former client of his and he would need to refrain from comment.
Ald.
De Wane stated that is has been over 90 days and no one has picked up the
license.
A
motion was made by Ald. Piton and seconded by Ald. Wery to open the floor. Motion carried.
Gary
Van Sistine, 231 Oak Hill Drive, stated that they have someone they would like
to lease this to who went today and submitted their liquor license
application. He feels this person would
be good for the business. He would like
to transfer the license to her and asks that the applicant be allowed to go
through the process.
A
motion was made by Ald. Piton and seconded by Ald. Wery to return to the
regular order of business. Motion
carried.
Ald.
De Wane stated that he feels it has been long enough. He doesn’t want to keep granting extensions
to applicants.
Ald.
Piton asked what the difference is from applying for a new license or
transferring a license.
Atty.
Wachewicz stated that with a transfer, the original license holder needs to
consent.
Ald.
De Wane stated that time has expired. He
is not sure they even have a license anymore.
Ald.
Wery stated that the committee might want to hold this up to obtain legal
advice regarding this since Atty. Wachewicz is not able to advise the
committee.
A
motion was made by Ald. Wery and seconded by Ald. Piton to hold until the next
meeting of the Protection and Welfare Committee, the request by Ald. De Wane to
review the Class “B” Combination License at 500 N. Baird Street. Motion carried.
11. St. John's Shelter End-of-Year Report.
Ald. Wery stated that he had asked for
this end-of-year report and that St. John’s did a good job of running the
shelter. There are some things that
could be worked on but overall they did a good job.
A motion was made by Ald. Piton and seconded
by Ald. Wery to receive and place on file, the St. John’s Shelter end-of-year
report. Motion carried.
12. Report by Predictive Technologies, Inc.
on the vibration problem at 2048 Mary Queen Road.
Ald. Nicholson stated that
Predictive Technologies, Inc. was hired to detect the vibrations at 2048 Mary
Queen Road. They have put out a report
stating that there is one more piece of the pie that they would like to look
into and that is American Foods. Mr.
Lesperance has written a report to Judge Hanson to obtain an inspection
warrant.
A motion was made by Ald.
De Wane and seconded by Ald. Piton to open the floor. Motion carried.
Robert and Leona Ehrfurth,
2048 Mary Queen Road, wish that this would just go away. They do not know how much more they can
take. It is there 24 hours a day. It comes and goes. They have lived at this house for 42 years
and there was never a problem until almost two years ago. They feel that Predictive Technologies, Inc.
should stay until the job is finished.
The Ehrfurths
thanked Ald. Nicholson for all of his help with this problem. Ald. Nicholson has been their lifeline. They also thanked the Council. They appreciate everything that is being done
to help them.
A motion was made by Ald.
Piton and seconded by Ald. De Wane to return to the regular order of
business. Motion carried.
A motion was made by Ald.
Piton and seconded by Ald. De Wane to hold
until the next meeting of the Protection and Welfare Committee, the report by
Predictive Technologies, Inc. on the vibration problem at 2048 Mary Queen Road. Motion carried.
13. Report by the Green
Bay Police Department on bar compliance checks.
Capt. Galvin stated that between Feb. 22, 2008 and May 2,
2008 the Green Bay Community Police went into 158 establishments that held a Class
B Combination License. 55 establishments
did not pass the compliance checks. A
list of those 55 establishments was distributed to the committee. To conduct the compliance checks, the police
department uses employees who are under 21, NWTC students and high school
students. These individuals are
instructed to go into an establishment and attempt to buy alcohol. If they were questioned, they were told to
hand their current I.D. over. If they
were asked how old they were, the individuals give their real age. If they did make a purchase, they would sit
around for a few minutes and then leave and contact the police by cell phone
and describe the person who served them.
Capt. Galvin
stated that one thing that happens when they are doing the compliance checks is
that once the police go into the establishment to issue a citation, a phone
tree warning system would start. The
underage person would be in a bar and would overhear the bartender receiving a
call from another bar describing the individuals that are part of the
compliance checks. In order to combat
the problem, the police department decided to send these underage individuals
into as many as four or five bars at one time.
Capt. Galvin
clarified that the police department does not use fake identification when they
are doing compliance checks. They had
taken pictures of the licenses of the individuals who were part of the
compliance checks. He passed those
around to the committee and pointed out that right underneath the picture of
the person, the date that the individual turns 21 is listed in red. Also, these licenses are held vertically
instead of horizontally.
Capt. Galvin
stated that this year with the renewal of liquor licenses, they distributed copies
of the “2008 Drivers License Guide”, which is put out by Miller Brewery. This guide is paid for by Miller Brewery and
the Fraternal Order of Police. This
guide lists every I.D. in the United States.
It lists the differences between identification for individuals who are
underage and who are 21 and over. On the
back of the guide are tips for checking I.D. cards.
Capt. Galvin
stated that there are basically only two ways to conduct the compliance
checks. One way would be how they do it
now and the other would be to send 10-15 officers into one establishment and
conduct the check. Taverns only get one
or two compliance checks per year. Other
than that, compliance checks are done on a complaint driven basis.
Ald. Piton
stated that 55 establishments failing out of 158 is
totally unacceptable.
A motion was
made by Ald. Zima and seconded by Ald. De Wane to receive and place on file,
the report by the Green Bay Police Department on bar compliance checks. Motion carried.
14. Request
by Ald. Zima to discuss the dual citations that are issued for serving underage
and then for allowing underage to loiter.
Ald. Zima
stated that he could broaden his request because he feels very strongly about
any double citations that are issued for the same offense. He does not like the fact that a bartender is
given a ticket and then another ticket is given to the owner for the same
offense. Yes, the owner is responsible for their employees who break the law
and it is a mark against their tavern, but one person should get the ticket. It is very unfair. When there are underage individuals in an
establishment and they are not drinking right away, they should be cited for
allowing an underage to loiter. If the
underage individual is being served then they should be given a citation for
serving underage. It is double jeopardy
to give a citation for both.
Ald. Nicholson asked why a citation
is issued to both the server and the owner for the same offense.
Capt. Galvin
responded that it is because the bartender is the one who actually did the
serving and the owner is responsible for everything that takes place within
that establishment. Also, should that
bartender leave and go to apply for their license, if they are never cited and
only the owner is, they could go for years violating
ordinances in the City taverns and never being held accountable for it. The same thing goes for the owner. If only the bartender is ever cited, if we do
a check on the owner if they were to leave and come back and we did a
background check, there would be nothing there.
Everyone would assume that they have been running a clean establishment
all along. There would be no way to hold
them accountable for the way they operated in previous years.
Ald. Wery
stated that the system we use now tracks not only the establishment but who
they hire.
Ald. Zima
stated that the City should be able to come up with a way to track these
violations without double citations.
Ald. Piton
stated that letting an underage loiter and serving an underage are two separate
issues. Each one is a violation.
A motion was
made by Ald. De Wane and seconded by Ald. Piton to open the floor. Motion carried.
Sue
Robinson, President of the Brown County Tavern League, stated that Chapter
125.07(b)(6) states that only one penalty may be
imposed for each underage person. The
City of Green Bay has found a loop hole in giving two different tickets. Finding loopholes in State laws is not
governing in the spirit of the State law.
The State made this law because they had the common sense to know that
bartenders are human beings who cannot be in their place every minute that it
is open. If a violation occurs and an owner is not there, it is not fair to
ticket that owner.
Marcia
Hartstern, 1623 Cass Street, stated that she agrees with Ms. Robinson. She feels that the owners are being picked
on. If all of the bars closed down the
City would lose a lot of revenue. An
owner can’t be there all of the time.
Citizen, 613
Bodart Street, stated that there has been no mention of ticketing the underage
individual who is entering the establishment and/or drinking in the
establishment.
Atty.
Wachewicz stated that there have been tickets issued for underage individuals
who have entered an establishment and/or were caught drinking.
Capt. Galvin
stated that there was an establishment on the 4th of July that
carded an individual, found out they were underage, and called the police. The police arrested the individual. Establishments can call the police if that
occurs and hold the I.D.
Steve
Schadt, 855 Irene Street, stated that all bartenders have to go through the
Responsible Beverage Servers Course. Any bar owner, who hires a bartender,
checks to ensure that individual has taken that course. This bartender is representing the bar
owner.
Sue Robinson
stated that there are several establishments who have told her that they have
hundreds of fake identification cards that they have confiscated and when they
call the police department they are told to throw them away because the police
officers do not have the time to deal with this.
A motion was
made by Ald. Zima and seconded by Ald. De Wane to return to the regular order
of business. Motion carried.
Capt. Galvin
stated that the police department is more than willing to take in the fake
identification cards, but there is a shortage of man hours to be able to
investigate these and issue the citations.
Currently, the police department is in the process of rehiring but that
takes sixteen weeks from start to finish for an officer to be trained and ready
to go.
Ald. Zima stated
that individuals who commit crimes should be held accountable. He would want to refer this to staff to
investigate.
Ald. Wery
stated that he agrees with Ald. Piton that underage loitering and underage
serving are two separate offenses. He
does not feel this needs to be sent anywhere.
Ald. Zima
stated that he wants the system that the City uses to be investigated and see
if changes could be made to the tracking of these offenses.
Ald. Piton
stated that he is fine with referring this to staff to look at but feels the
current system is working. If staff
comes back with a recommendation that works better than the current system, he
would vote for it.
A motion was
made by Ald. Zima and seconded by Ald. De Wane to refer to the City Attorney’s office, the
request by Ald. Zima to discuss the dual citations that are issued for serving
underage and then for allowing underage to loiter, and to bring back
recommendations of how the City could record information to show that citations
were issued for an incident, which occurred in an establishment when the owner
was not present. Motion carried, with
Ald. Wery voting against the motion.
15. Request by Ald. Piton to consider
lowering the demerits in Ordinance 33.07 when an operator takes corrective
action.
Ald. Piton stated that he would like the committee to
take a look at lowering the demerits an establishment has when the operator
takes corrective action. If an owner has
an employee who has been cited for a violation and lets that employee go, maybe
the police department could lower their demerit points.
Ald.
Zima stated that if an establishment stays clean for a certain amount of time, maybe
lower the number of demerit points they have.
Ald.
Wery stated that this request is an excellent idea.
Ald.
De Wane is in agreement.
A
motion was made by Ald. Zima and seconded by Ald. De Wane to refer to the City
Attorney’s office for recommendations, the request by Ald. Piton to consider
lowering the demerits in Ordinance 33.07 when an operator takes corrective
action. Motion carried.
16. Review of the proposed muffler ordinance.
Atty.
Wachewicz distributed a copy of the proposed ordinance to the committee
members. He stated that he drafted this
ordinance based on a request from the Mayor’s office to address loud
mufflers. The proposed ordinance
prohibits any person or owner that creates or allows any unreasonably loud,
disturbing, and unnecessary noise. This
could be any person who is operating the motor vehicle or the owner. This proposed ordinance requires that all
motor vehicles be equipped with a muffler in good working order. It also allows for a citizen complaint to be
submitted to the police department. The
citizen would be required to fill out a form that would include the incident
date, day, time, location, make and model of vehicle, color, license plate,
description of driver, description of the offense and then the citizen is
required to certify that the factual information in the form is correct. The form is then submitted to the police
department where the matter would be evaluated and a citation issued if
warranted.
Ald.
Nicholson asked where the forms would be located.
Atty.
Wachewicz responded that they would be available at the police department and the
City could look in to seeing if these would be available on line.
Ald. De Wane
clarified that the police would look into the complaint before issuing a
ticket.
Atty.
Wachewicz replied that is correct.
Mayor
Schmitt stated that there are a lot of complaints regarding the loud noise from
mufflers. The noise created is
disrespectful. While we have a good
police department, they cannot be everywhere all of the time. This is a way for citizens to get involved
and work with the police department.
This is a good draft and he hopes that the committee supports the
proposed ordinance.
A motion was
made by Ald. De Wane and seconded by Ald. Piton to open the floor. Motion carried.
Cathy
Huntowski, 804 Doty Street, stated that she thought the City already had a
noise ordinance. This ordinance singles
out motorcycles specifically, by having the federal standards listed. She has ridden a motorcycle for many years
and practices throttle management. This
ordinance is redundant given the fact that we already have a noise
ordinance. She also does not like the
fact that this allows citizens to make judgments about other citizens.
Dan Van
Laanen, W1872 Conservation Rd., Brillion, WI stated that the fact that the City
is calling out motorcycles in particular is a problem to him. There isn’t anyone in the City who hasn’t
been woken up by a garbage truck. Some
of the city vehicles are louder than some of the motorcycles. Yes, there is a problem with some loud pipes
but he does not believe that this is the correct way to handle it. There is a $500.00 fine for violators and
there is no fix it ticket. He feels the
City is going way over the top.
Marcia
Hartstern, 1623 Cass Street, stated that City workers are out at 6:30 a.m.
working in front of her property and nothing is done about that. She feels something should be done about that
too.
A motion was
made by Ald. Piton and seconded by Ald. De Wane to return to the regular order
of business. Motion carried.
Ald. Piton
stated that he believes that the noise ordinance changes for summer hours to
begin at 6:00 a.m.
Atty.
Wachewicz stated that he is not sure.
Ald.
Nicholson asked if when a motorcycle is purchased, if there was a level of
silencers on them within the pipes.
Atty.
Wachewicz stated that from his knowledge, if a motorcycle comes from a
manufacturer, there is a stamp on the bottom of the manufactured muffler that
indicates that it is in compliance with the federal EPA standards, which is the
80 decibel limit.
Ald.
Nicholson asked Capt. Galvin about officers using their night stick within the
pipe to see if there was baffling.
Capt. Galvin
stated that is a standard that was taught by the State Patrol to their
cadets. If you can get a regular wooden
baton into the pipe, the baffling has been removed.
Ald.
Nicholson said that Atty. Wachewicz stated that the citizen complaints would be
evaluated by the police department. Does
evaluated equal investigated?
Atty.
Wachewicz stated that the officers would look at the facts that are contained
within the sworn statement. The officer
would be investigating the matter and making contact with the owner. There is an opportunity to fix the problem
before the citation goes to court.
Ald. Piton
clarified that this ordinance could be used for not only motorcycles, but cars
or any vehicle. The specific standards
for motorcycles were included because of the December 31, 1982 date and the
specific stamp on the muffler.
Atty.
Wachewicz replied that was correct.
Ald. Zima
asked what would happen if a person that the complaint is against does not live
in the City of Green Bay.
Atty.
Wachewicz stated that the officer could follow up by contacting the individual
by phone. If a citation is issued, the
individual could come back to Green Bay to defend the citation in court if he
or she decides. A citation would not be
given without verification by the police department.
Ald. Wery
stated that any alderman knows that there are a lot of complaints for
this. This empowers citizens. This is a step in the right direction. If it goes too far it can be corrected.
Ald. Zima
stated that he feels there is some reluctance by the police department to
enforce this. He has been told that many
officers have illegal bikes.
Ald.
Nicholson stated that there are a handful of officers that do enforce this but
each officer uses his or her discretion to enforce certain ordinances. A majority of the police department does not
enforce this ordinance.
Capt. Galvin
informed the committee that there were over 300 citations given for loud
mufflers in 2007.
Ald. Zima
stated that all of the police officers should be called in with their
motorcycles and those should be checked first.
This is where we should start.
There was
discussion amongst the committee members that if someone did receive a citation
and did correct the problem, they could take it to any law enforcement officer
in Green Bay to be verified and then the citation would be taken care of.
A motion was
made by Ald. Wery and seconded by Ald. Zima to approve the proposed muffler
ordinance. Motion carried.
17. Request by Ald. Wery to review the
legality of landlord rights as they pertain to a liquor license.
Ald. Wery questioned if a landlord can have in their
lease that if someone leaves he gets the license.
Atty.
Wachewicz stated that he does not feel that binds the City at all. The license originates with the City. A license is a privilege and is not
necessarily a property right. The landlord’s agreement does not supersede the
conditions under which it is granted.
The license is granted specifically to the license holder.
Atty.
Wachewicz stated that if there is a tenant who is holding the liquor license,
they could hold on to the license until it expires, they could request a
transfer or they could surrender it. The
landlord does not have any rights to the liquor license despite what they put
in their lease agreement.
Ald.
Wery stated that he wanted this on the agenda because every couple of months
this comes up and someone claims the license reverts to them because it’s in
the lease.
Ald.
De Wane clarified that Atty. Wachewicz is stating that the license stays with
the applicant.
Atty.
Wachewicz replied that is correct. The
license has to be issued in the license holder’s name and that is who holds it.
A
motion was made by Ald. Wery and seconded by Ald. Piton to receive and place on
file the request by Ald. Wery to review the legality of landlord rights as they
pertain to a liquor license. Motion
carried.
18. Appeal by Pamela Wilber to the denial of
her public vehicle operator license application.
Atty. Wachewicz stated that Ms. Wilber has been
incarcerated and has asked that this be held over.
A
motion was made by Ald. Wery and seconded by Ald. Piton to hold until the next
meeting of the Protection and Welfare Committee, the appeal by Pamela Wilber to
the denial of her public vehicle operator license application. Motion carried.
19. Appeal by Timothy Hyde, American Shuttle,
to the revocation of his public vehicle license.
Atty. Wachewicz stated that the Chief of Police sent a
notice to Mr. Hyde revoking his public vehicle license. Mr. Hyde has filed an appeal.
A
motion was made by Ald. Zima and seconded by Ald. Wery to deny the appeal by
Timothy Hyde, American Shuttle, to the revocation of his public vehicle license,
move to a quasi judicial hearing for discipline of the license, and refer to
the City Attorney’s office to set up the date for the quasi judicial hearing
and inform Mr. Hyde. Motion carried.
20. Request by Ald. Nicholson to review
Entertainment Licenses in the City.
Ald. Nicholson stated that currently
there is a onetime fee of $10.00 for this license. He does not think the fee has been increased
since the ordinance was established.
This would be a great way to bring in revenue for the City.
Lt. Runge stated that $10.00 does not
even cover the cost of a background check.
Also, they would like the opportunity to review these licenses annually.
A motion was made by Ald. Nicholson
and seconded by Ald. Wery to increase the fee from $10.00 to an annual fee of
$1000.00.
Ald. Wery asked if there are a lot of
police calls to strip clubs.
Lt. Runge stated there are not a lot
of calls. There is just the occasional
call.
Ald. Piton stated that $1000.00 seems like a
lot to him for a legal activity that occurs within the City.
Lt. Runge stated that each entertainer
has to get their own license. It is not
the club.
Ald. Wery stated that he did not
realize that this was the fee for an individual. He thought it was for the establishment. He agreed that $1000.00 was a lot. He asked what the fee is for an
establishment.
Atty.
Wachewicz stated that the establishment has to pay a fee of $750.00, which
would be waived if the adult establishment is operating under or has applied
for an alcohol beverage license and has paid the alcohol beverage licensing
fee.
Ald. De Wane
stated that should be changed also.
Ald. Piton
asked if stings were conducted on these licenses.
Lt. Runge
replied not that he knows of.
Ald. Wery
retracted his second to Ald. Nicholson’s earlier motion.
A motion was
made by Ald. De Wane to increase the fee from $10.00 to $250.00 to be paid
annually.
There was no
2nd for the motion.
A motion was
made by Ald. Piton and seconded by Ald. Wery to increase the Entertainment License fee from $10.00 to an
annual $500.00 license fee. Motion
carried.
A motion was made by Ald. De Wane and
seconded by Ald. Wery to have an Adult Establishment pay annually, a license
fee of $750.00 whether or not the adult establishment is operating under or has
applied for an alcohol beverage license under Chapter 33 of the Code and has
paid the alcohol beverage licensing fee.
Motion carried.
21. Request by
Ald. Nicholson to review the consideration of a moratorium on taverns, bars,
saloons in the downtown area.
Ald. Nicholson stated that there is a problem with too
many bars in the downtown area. Liquor
licenses continue to be granted to new establishments. There are too many police calls to this area
and the police are being monopolized.
The Council wants a plan/reason of why we won’t accept new bars,
taverns, or saloons.
Ald.
De Wane stated that a standard needs to be set and we need to stick by it.
Ald.
Piton stated that he would be in favor of a planned reduction of bars downtown
through attrition. He suggested maybe
requiring an establishment in this area that is approved to have to take two
licenses in order to obtain their license.
This would help make fewer licenses available.
A
motion was made by Ald. De Wane and seconded by Ald. Piton to refer to the City
Attorney’s office and the Police Department, the request by Ald. Nicholson to
review the consideration of a moratorium on taverns, bars, and saloons in the
downtown area and provide recommendations to the committee. Motion carried.
22. Request by the Police Department to amend
Chapter 6 to add an ordinance relating to the resale of tickets for Lambeau
Field events and to repeal Green Bay Municipal Code 6.12 relating to sales at
City Stadium.
Atty.
Wachewicz stated that this originated with a request from the police
department, which resulted in a meeting with Ashwaubenon to develop a joint
enforcement mechanism with respect to scalping Packer tickets. There was a lot of counterfeiting during the
last Packer season and the police department was looking for a way to address
that issue and take some action. This
ordinance was drafted mirroring Ashwaubenon’s ordinance with a few
modifications. Basically, it requires that anyone scalping a ticket shall be
required to have a permit. Scalping is
defined as selling a ticket for more than face value. There is also a requirement for a designated
area in which the scalping of the ticket shall take place. The designated area would be the north bound
lane of Oneida Street down to Armed Forces Drive, and down to the Don Hutson
Center. Visible photo identification
would be required to be worn.
Lt.
Nick, Green Bay Police Department, stated that this has been very difficult to
enforce with the current ordinance. It
was discussed that a uniform ordinance with Ashwaubenon is needed. Ashwaubenon agreed. A designated area is needed because resources
are strapped on a Packer game day and this would make the ordinance easier to
enforce.
Ald.
Zima asked if this would pertain to people who own tickets and can’t go to a
game because something happens like they fall ill.
Lt.
Nick stated that under the permit required it does exempt personal use and not
for resale.
Lt. Nick clarified that a person can
sell their own tickets on game day; they just can’t scalp them on game day.
Ald. Nicholson asked if he went on
game day to a broker and scalped the tickets if that would be in violation of
the ordinance.
Lt. Nick stated that those are not the
people that we are targeting.
Atty. Wachewicz stated that
technically it would be breaking the ordinance.
Ald. Wery stated that he appreciates
the reasons behind this but it is buyer beware.
This could inflate prices for tickets if you can only buy tickets from a
select group. He does not think we
should be infringing on a person’s right to sell. It’s a free market.
Ald. De Wane stated that he thinks
this is a good idea. This helps stop
people from being taken advantage of.
A motion was made by Ald. Zima and
seconded by Ald. De Wane to amend Chapter 6 to add an ordinance relating to the
resale of tickets for Lambeau Field events and to repeal Green Bay Municipal
Code 6.12 relating to sales at City Stadium.
Atty. Wachewicz asked that if the
committee does choose to adopt this, he would like to request the authority to
enter into a mutual aid agreement with Ashwaubenon for enforcement.
Ald. Zima, seconded by Ald. De Wane,
amended the motion to include the authority to enter into a mutual aid
agreement with Ashwaubenon for enforcement.
Ald. Nicholson stated that he has just
received this amended Chapter 6 and he would like to take a closer look. He will not vote for this right now. He wants to hold it until the next meeting.
Atty. Wachewicz stated that if it is
voted on tonight, it would go into effect just before preseason.
Lt. Nick stated that the preseason
game is not a high market game so it would be ok if it did get held over.
Ald. De Wane stated that Ald.
Nicholson could take until the Council meeting on Tuesday to look at this. This way it could be discussed on the Council
floor. There is a timetable that is
trying to be met.
A motion was made by Ald. Nicholson
and seconded by Ald. Piton to hold until the next meeting of the Protection and
Welfare Committee, the request by the Police Department to amend Chapter 6 to
add an ordinance relating to the resale of tickets for Lambeau Field events and
to repeal Green Bay Municipal Code 6.12 relating to sales at City Stadium. Ald. Nicholson and Ald. Piton voted in favor
of the motion. Ald. De Wane voted
against the motion. Ald. Wery and Ald.
Zima remained silent. Motion carried.
23. Appeal by Judy LeMense to the denial of her appeal to keep
seven cats at 146 Alpine Drive.
Ald. De Wane explained that this is
in his area. What happened is that when
the appeal was brought before the committee members the first time, he and most
of the regular committee members were at a Brown County meeting. Ms. LeMense was out of state for an ill
granddaughter and did not get the notice until she came back.
A motion was made by Ald. Nicholson
and seconded by Ald. Piton to open the floor.
Motion carried.
Ms. LeMense stated that she wanted
to respond back to Officer Hensen’s letter dated June 11, 2008. She has submitted a response to Officer
Hensen’s letter and went over that. She
stated that some of things that Ms. Hensen stated in the minutes of the meeting
she was not able to attend were absolutely wrong also. The cats do not stray 6 or 7 blocks like Ms.
Hensen states. The neighbors have signed
letters stating they have no problem with the cats nor did they know that she
had cats.
Ms. LeMense informed the committee
that she would be moving out of the City by the end of the summer. They are currently building a home out in the
country and the cats are going with them. They even told Officer Hensen
this.
Tom Waldorf, owner of 146 Alpine
Drive, stated that this is a unique property because you can’t see onto
it. There is a 100’ frontage with
trees. You can’t see the house from the
road and you can’t see the cats. The
neighbors didn’t even know there were cats there.
Dr. Nicole Gardner, 1729 Deckner
Ave., stated that her sister lives a few houses away from Ms. LeMense. She has never seen a cat when she has driven
around that neighborhood. All of Ms.
LeMense’s cats are neutered and all are vaccinated against rabies and
distemper.
A motion was made by Ald. Nicholson
and seconded by Ald. Piton to return to the regular order of business. Motion carried.
Ald. De Wane stated that this is his
area. Officer Hensen had previous come to him and told him how nice the set up
was at 146 Alpine Drive. Because the
appeal was already heard and lost, he would like the committee to approve an
extension for Ms. LeMense from the July 11th date, which she is
supposed to go down to having only three cats.
Ms. LeMense is moving and the cats will be leaving the area.
Atty. Wachewicz stated that this was
previously denied and feels it is too late to reconsider this. He feels it is not appropriate for this to be
on the agenda.
Ald. De Wane stated that he also has
problems with Officer Hensen returning his calls. She does not return his calls at all, even on
other issues.
Ald. Wery wondered if it would be
appropriate for alderman to request a reconsideration to open this back up.
A motion was made by Ald. Piton and
seconded by Ald. Wery to deny
the appeal by Judy LeMense to the denial of her appeal to keep
seven cats at 146 Alpine Drive, but to grant her an extension until September
1, 2008, to get down to only 3 cats.
Motion carried 4-0.
Ald. Nicholson asked if the
committee is allowed to do this.
Atty. Wachewicz stated that he would
check if this is allowed. If it is not
allowed the motion would be invalid.
Lt. Runge stated that the police
department would not act on this before the council meeting on Tuesday. He will also contact Officer Hensen and speak
with her.
A
motion was made by Ald. Piton and seconded by Ald. Wery to adjourn the meeting
at 9:00 p.m. Motion carried.