|
|
|
 |
A Special Meeting of the Lakewood Liquor and Fermented Malt Beverage Licensing Authority was held on this date in the City Council Chambers.
ITEM 1 - CALL TO ORDER
Chairwoman Hansson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
ITEM 2 - ROLL CALL Kristina Hansson - Presiding
John Danahey
Larry Muniz
Michael O'Neill
Albert Williams
Stanley Wisneski
Absent: Eugene O'Malley
Also present: Paul Kennebeck, Deputy City Attorney
Jennifer Roth, Chief Municipal Prosecutor
Donia Amick, Sergeant, Lakewood Police Department
ITEM 3 - SHOW CAUSE HEARING
Retail Liquor License
Alameda Square Discount Liquor, LLC
d/b/a Alameda Square Discount Liquor
12792 W. Alameda Pkwy
J. Y. Kang, Registration No. 23250, stated he was the attorney for Alameda Square Discount Liquor, LLC. Mr. Kang stated that the licensee would admit to violations 3B and 3C of the complaint. Mr. Kang stated that those were the two sales that occurred on April 6, 2007. Mr. Kang stated they would like to contest violation 3A, which is the sale that occurred on April 5, 2007.
Ms. Roth stated that on April 5, 2007 at approximately 3:20 p.m., Alex Cote, who is 17 years old, entered Alameda Square Discount Liquors and purchased a bottle of alcohol. Ms. Roth stated that Mr. Cote would testify that during this sale, the clerk did not ask for and Mr. Cote did not provide any sort of identification verifying his age. Ms. Roth stated that the licensee has already admitted to two violations that occurred on April 6, 2007, one at 3:20 p.m. in the afternoon and one at 4:30 p.m. in the afternoon, where the clerk at Alameda Square Discount Liquor sold alcohol to minors without checking I.D.'s. Ms. Roth stated that on April 12, 2007, at the Summary Suspension Hearing, the Liquor Licensing Authority heard testimony from Jorge Garcia, who was 19 years old, and Joshua Williams, who was 18 years old, that they purchased alcohol on April 6, 2007 at Alameda Square Discount Liquors and did not provide any form of I.D. and were not asked for any sort of I.D. Ms. Roth stated that Mr. Williams on April 12, 2007, had stated under oath that he knew other kids who had purchased alcohol at that location. Ms. Roth stated there would be more evidence tonight that Alameda Square Discount Liquors was a well-known place for minors to buy alcohol. Ms. Roth stated, that based on the severity of the circumstances, she would be asking the Authority to revoke the liquor license held by Alameda Square Discount Liquors.
Alexander Cote, 13966 W. Wesley Ave., Lakewood, CO 80228, was sworn in.
In response to questions asked by Ms. Roth, Mr. Cote testified that he was at Alameda Square Discount Liquors on April 5, 2007 at approximately 3:20 p.m. to buy alcohol. Mr. Cote testified that he bought a very small flask-sized bottle of Sailor Jerry's Rum and that he was not asked to provide any sort of identification. Mr. Cote testified that he did not show a fake I.D. and that he does not have a fake I.D.
Ms. Roth stated the sale to minors was an ongoing, continuing violation and that it was in the police report.
Mr. Kang stated that prior violations in the police report do not make them relevant for this hearing. Mr. Kang stated the complaint alleges three specific dates and that they have admitted to two of them. Mr. Kang stated that the only thing relevant is what happened on April 5, 2007 and asked that the questions be directed to only that date.
After a brief discussion, the Liquor Authority made the decision to proceed over Mr. Kang's objections and allow the questioning regarding prior violations.
In response to questions asked by Ms. Roth, Mr. Cote testified that he had been inside Alameda Square Discount Liquors about two to three times previously within a two month span prior to April 5, 2007. Mr. Cote testified that on those previous times, he had purchased alcohol and was not asked for an I.D. Mr. Cote testified that he had heard other underage minors talk about buying alcohol at Alameda Square Discount Liquors. Mr. Cote testified that other minors have stated this was the place to go to purchase alcohol.
In response to Mr. Kangs' questions, Mr. Cote testified that on April 5, 2007, he purchased a small flask of Sailor Jerry's Rum. Mr. Cote testified that statements told to him by other minors were based on rumor and not on something that he had actually seen. Mr. Cote testified that he attends school at Green Mountain High School.
There was a question and answer period between the Liquor Authority and Mr. Cote.
Michael Hoglund, 2070 S. Robb Way, Lakewood, CO 80227, was sworn in.
In response to questions asked by Ms. Roth, Mr. Hoglund testified that he was at Alameda Square Discount Liquors on April 5, 2007 at approximately 3:20 p.m. Mr. Hoglund testified that he was in the car with Mr. Cote when Mr. Cote went into Alameda Square Discount Liquors to buy alcohol but he did not go into the store. Mr. Hoglund testified that Mr. Cote did purchase the alcohol at that store and that Mr. Cote told him that he was not I.D.'d. Mr. Hoglund testified to the rumor that no one ever gets I.D.'d at Alameda Square Discount Liquors and that he had heard this rumor at Green Mountain High School. Mr. Hoglund testified that the rumor was that Alameda Square Discount Liquor was the place to go to buy alcohol. Mr. Hoglund stated he had not purchased alcohol at that store. Mr. Hoglund testified that during a prior incident he had gone into the store with Alex Cote, who went in the store to purchase alcohol, but that he was not in the store when Mr. Cote purchased it. Mr. Hoglund testified that that was the only time he was ever in the store.
In response to questions asked by Mr. Kang, Mr. Hoglund testified that he had only been in Alameda Square that one time and that he can't be sure Mr. Cote bought alcohol that day. Mr. Hoglund testified that on April 5, 2007, he did not go in with Mr. Cote to purchase the alcohol. Mr. Hoglund testified that the clerk who works at Alameda Square Discount Liquors was known as an Asian male whose name was Harry or Henry, not Asian Harry.
Kevin Jones, 12650 W. Virginia Ave., Lakewood, CO 80228, was sworn in.
In response to questions asked by Ms. Roth, Mr. Jones testified that he had never been in Alameda Square Discount Liquors. Mr. Jones testified that he knew minors under the age of 21 who have bought alcohol from Alameda Square Discount Liquors. Mr. Jones testified that minors brag about getting the alcohol at that store. Mr. Jones testified that he attends Green Mountain High School. Mr. Jones testified that he knew about 10 to 15 minors who have said they bought alcohol from Alameda Square Discount Liquors. Mr. Jones testified that those minors have said that the clerk never I.D.'s. Mr. Jones testified that he had heard the clerk's name was Harry.
In response to questions asked by Mr. Kang, Mr. Jones testified that he has never been in Alameda Square Discount Liquors and has not personally observed any transaction in that store. Mr. Jones testified that he has not heard the clerk called Asian Harry, just Harry.
There was a question and answer period between the Liquor Authority and Mr. Jones.
Brent Struck, Detective, Special Investigations Unit, Lakewood Police Department, was sworn in.
In response to questions asked by Ms. Roth, Agent Struck stated his history with the Lakewood Police Department and his duties with the department. Agent Struck testified that he was at Alameda Square Discount Liquors on April 5, 2007 at approximately 3:20 p.m. doing follow-up surveillance based on information he had received that the store was selling to underage minors. Agent Struck testified that he was at the store on April 6, 2007 at approximately 1:00 p.m. and was there until approximately 5:00 p.m. Agent Struck testified that on April 5, 2007, he saw a blue Isuzu Trooper pull into the parking lot and park in front of Alameda Square Discount Liquors. Agent Struck testified that he saw three underage males in the car. Agent Struck testified that one of the males, Mr. Cote, went into the store and came back out carrying a brown bag. Agent Struck testified that he followed the Isuzu Trooper and called a marked unit to make a traffic stop. Agent Struck testified that after going to 12650 W. Virginia Ave., he spoke to Mr. Cote and that Mr. Cote stated he had not been asked for an I.D. Agent Struck testified that he asked Mr. Cote if he had a fake I.D. and Mr. Cote stated that he did not. Agent Struck testified that he asked Mr. Cote to give him the alcohol and that Mr. Cote provided him with a bottle of Spiced Jerry's Rum and a brown bag. Agent Struck testified that he talked to Mr. Hoglund and Mr. Jones at the apartment on W. Virginia Ave. Agent Struck testified that the next day, he talked to Mr. Pham, who was the clerk working in the store on April 9, 2007, and that Mr. Pham stated he was the clerk who worked in the store everyday from opening until closing. Agent Struck testified that Mr. Pham stated that nobody else worked in the store. Agent Struck testified that he informed Mr. Pham that he had sold alcohol to underage minors and that Mr. Pham stated that he usually I.D.'d everybody under 30 unless they were a repeat customer.
In response to questions asked by Mr. Kang, Agent Struck testified that on
April 5, 2007, he was in an unmarked patrol car and was in casual clothes. Agent
Struck testified that he was not in the store when Mr. Cote bought the alcohol
and that he did not see anybody enter the store prior to Mr. Cote going into
the store or while he was in the store. Agent Struck testified that Mr. Pham
was in the store on April 5, 2007 when he went in and did a walk-thru of the
store; about 25 minutes after Mr. Cote bought the alcohol. Agent Struck testified
that on April 6, 2007, he met two minors who purchased alcohol at this store.
Agent Struck testified he did not do a walk-thru on April 6, 2007. Agent Struck
testified that he issued the tickets to Mr. Pham on April 9, 2007. Agent Struck
testified that Mr. Garcia and Mr. Williams are the two minors who purchased
alcohol on April 6, 2007. Agent Struck testified that Mr. Hoglund had referred
to the clerk as Harry and Agent Struck testified that upon asking Mr. Hoglund
if he had heard the clerk referred to as Asian Harry, Mr. Hoglund stated that
he had heard him called that. Agent Struck testified that Mr. Jones had called
the clerk Asian Harry. Agent Struck testified that during a compliance check,
the licensee was presented with a summons within an hour. Agent Struck testified
that he was aware that Alameda Square Discount Liquors had passed a compliance
check on March 19, 2007.
Roger Knowles, 12792 W. Alameda Pkwy., Lakewood, CO 80228, was sworn in and
stated he operates his chiropractic business next door to Alameda Square Discount
Liquors. Mr. Knowles stated there are frequent families and youths in the shopping
center. Mr. Knowles stated there is a skate park across the street and there
are many youths from Green Mountain High School and Dunstan Jr. High that use
the park regularly. Mr. Knowles stated that the youths come into the shopping
center complex looking for food, water and restrooms and are frequently passing
back and forth in front of the liquor store. Mr. Knowles stated there have been
repeated occasions where the back of the shopping center has been tagged. Mr.
Knowles stated that he has been told that tagging is an indication of where
minors can go to buy liquor. Mr. Knowles stated that this was a very family-friendly
area and he was very worried about preserving it in that manner.
Ms. Roth stated that on April 5, 2007, alcohol was sold to Mr. Cote, who was under the age of 21. Ms. Roth stated that Mr. Cote testified that he purchased alcohol at Alameda Square Discount Liquors without being asked to show any kind of identification. Ms. Roth stated that Mr. Cote had testified that he does not have a fake I.D. Ms. Roth stated that Mr. Cote had testified that he had been to the store approximately a month to a month and a half prior to the incident on April 5, 2007 and that he had purchased alcohol there at that time, also. Ms. Roth stated that Mr. Hoglund testified that he had gone with Mr. Cote to Alameda Square Discount Liquors previously. Ms. Roth stated that the Board had heard testimony from Mr. Cote, Mr. Hoglund and Mr. Jones that Alameda Square Discount Liquors was known as the place to go to buy alcohol if a person was underage and that the clerk in there did not I.D. individuals. Ms. Roth stated that Detective Struck testified that he arrived at Alameda Square Discount liquors on April 5, 2007 at approximately 3:00 p.m. in the afternoon and that he witnessed Mr. Cote enter the establishment at 3:20 p.m. Ms. Roth stated that Detective Struck had been there for 20 minutes before he observed Mr. Cote enter the store. Ms. Roth stated that Detective Struck testified that on April 6, 2007, he arrived at the store at approximately 1:00 p.m. in the afternoon and he was there until 5:00 p.m. Ms. Roth stated that the licensee had already admitted that during that time period, two minors bought alcohol at that establishment. Ms. Roth stated that the detective went to that store to do surveillance after he found out that Alameda Square Discount Liquors was the place where minors can go to buy alcohol. Detective Struck was there for a five-hour period and during that period three minors bought alcohol at that store. Ms. Roth stated that Mr. Kang had brought up that a summons was not issued until April 9, 2007. Ms. Roth stated this was not a sting operation and the police department did not send these minors into the store to buy liquor. Ms. Roth stated the police department was doing surveillance and it was proper police procedure to wait to issue the summons and, in fact, they could still be doing surveillance at Alameda Square Discount Liquors and not have issued a summons at this point. Ms. Roth stated that Mr. Hoglund and Mr. Jones testified that they are friends of Mr. Cote and they had no reason to testify that Mr. Cote had violated the law if it was not true. Ms. Roth stated that Alameda Square Discount Liquors had passed compliance checks in the past but that it was clear that alcohol was being sold to minors and that we needed to stop this behavior. Ms. Roth stated that due to the seriousness of the offence, the City was asking the Board to revoke the license for Alameda Square Discount Liquors.
J. Y. Kang stated that he can only defend what happened on April 5, 2007 and that he cannot defend rumors and innuendo and what kids are spreading around at Green Mountain High School. Mr. Kang stated that no one asked Mr. Cote if the person who sold him the alcohol was in the Council Chambers and that there had been no testimony as to proof of alcohol. Mr. Kang stated that Sailor Jerry's or some rum had been mentioned but nothing had been admitted, either Mr. Cote or Agent Struck talked about the alcohol. Mr. Kang stated that the Authority had to be convinced that what was sold for $2.99 plus tax was in fact alcohol. Mr. Kang stated the only proof of the purchase of alcohol was from Mr. Cote, who mentioned something that was perhaps about rum. Mr. Kang stated that the Authority must decide whether Mr. Cote was believable and whether Agent Struck had had an opportunity to see through the glass door, saw the image of Mr. Cote and whether it looked like a sale had taken place and no I.D. had been shown. Mr. Kang stated that if the Authority had doubts as to whether Mr. Cote was credible and, if there were doubts as to whether the item purchased was alcohol, then Mr. Kang suggested the findings should be in the negative.
Chairman Hansson called a break at 8:19 p.m.
The meeting reconvened at 8:33 p.m.
Ms. Hansson stated that, procedurally, the Liquor Authority would like Mr. Kang to present whatever mitigating circumstances he had before the Authority actually got into the discussion of whether a violation had occurred.
Thien Van Pham, 6486 W. 96th Dr., Westminster, CO 80021, was sworn in.
Mr. Kang gave each member of the Authority a packet that was titled Licensee's Evidence in Mitigation, which contained a letter from the Lakewood Police Department dated March 19, 2007, copies of confiscated identification cards, a letter from attorney Michael Kupecz dated June 11, 2006 and credit card solicitations from the previous owner of Alameda Square Liquors.
In response to questions from Mr. Kang, Mr. Pham stated that his wife's name was Huyen Tran and that a corporation in his wife's name and his sister's name owned the store. Mr. Pham stated that his wife had held the license for the store for less than a year and that they got the temporary license in May of 2006. Mr. Pham stated that his family bought the liquor store from Harry Shin and that Mr. Shin's attorney was Michael Kupecz. Mr. Pham stated that Mr. Harry Shin was Korean and that Mr. Shin was the owner of the business for three and a half years before his family bought the store. Mr. Pham stated that he had not had any violations except for the three violations discussed during this hearing. Mr. Kang instructed Mr. Pham to look at a letter in the packet that had been given to the Authority. Mr. Pham stated that the letter was from the Lakewood Police Department dated March 19, 2007, which stated that they had successfully passed a sting operation. Mr. Pham stated that they had also received another letter from the Lakewood Police Department sometime in December of 2006 in which they had also passed a sting operation. Mr. Kang asked Mr. Pham to look at copies of five identification cards that were in the packet. Mr. Pham stated that these were copies of identification cards that he had confiscated because they had looked fake. Mr. Kang asked Mr. Pham to look at another letter in the packet. Mr. Pham stated that this was a letter from Mr. Shin's attorney, which refers to the previous owner's name as Harry Shin. Mr. Kang asked Mr. Pham to look at two more pages in the packet. Mr. Pham stated that the pages are copies of credit card solicitations, which are in the name of Alameda Square Liquors and under Alameda Square Liquors; they are addressed to Mr. Harry Shin.
In response to questions by Mr. Paul Kennebeck, Mr. Pham stated that he bought the store 10 months ago and that it had been 10 months since Mr. Harry Shin had been on the premises. Mr. Pham stated that any sales of alcohol that had occurred in the last 10 months were sold by someone from Alameda Square Corporation and not Harry Shin. Mr. Pham stated that he had admitted to the two sales of alcohol that occurred on April 6, 2007. Mr. Pham stated that he was in the store all the time and that the owners of the store did not help him in anyway. Mr. Pham stated that he was the manager and did work by himself in the store.
There was a question and answer period between Mr. Pham and the Liquor Licensing Authority.
In response to a question asked by Mr. Kang, Mr. Pham stated that he had not been referred by anyone as Harry.
Mr. Kang stated that his client had admitted to two of the allegations, counts 3B and 3C. Mr. Kang stated that a revocation of the family's license was excessive and not warranted. Mr. Kang stated the City was seeking revocation of the license, which would cause economic damage to his client, the mall, the liquor store and the landlord. Mr. Kang stated that if there was a revocation of the license, the licensee could not sell the store because there wasn't a license. Mr. Kang stated that whoever would buy the store would be buying it at a bargain basement price and that person would be someone with no training in liquor. Mr. Kang stated that, unfortunately, his client didn't have the training that he should have had and that he was going to get that training. Mr. Kang stated that in the packet entitled Evidence in Mitigation, there were two sting operations that his client had successfully passed. Mr. Kang stated there were five fake I.D.s that his client had confiscated and there was a letter from Michael Kupecz referring to Harry as the seller, who was of Asian decent. Mr. Kang stated there are copies of credit card solicitations that were going to the store in the name of Harry Shin. Mr. Kang stated that if this was a conventional sting, the cadet would have bought the alcohol, the police would have been present and there would have been an outside police force present to come in and issue his client a summons. Mr. Kang stated that when that happens, the immediacy of the summons and the ensuing Show Cause Hearing, puts his client on notice that he did something wrong. Mr. Kang stated that on April 5th and April 6th, that did not happen. Mr. Kang stated that if the sale did take place by Mr. Cote on April 5th, there was no summons issued and no warning was given. Mr. Kang stated that on April 6th, there were two violations and there was no summons given and no tickets issued. Mr. Kang stated that three days later on April 9th, there were three summonses issued to his client. Mr. Kang stated that isn't notice to his client and that should not constitute three violations. Mr. Kang stated that the remedial effect that an instant issuance of a summons brings puts the licensee on alert and that did not happen here. Mr. Kang stated that if his client had a violation in January and then a second one in March and a third one in December of the same year, then revocation might be appropriate but, under these particular facts, it should be treated as a first or a second offense. Mr. Kang stated that Harry Shin was the previous owner for four years and that Green Mountain High School students thought that they could buy liquor from Harry Shin. Mr. Kang stated that whatever reputation was made by Harry Shin had stayed with his client. Mr. Kang stated that the students, who are now Juniors and Seniors at Green Mountain High School, stated that they could go to Harry Shin's and get liquor. Mr. Kang stated that that was no longer the case, which was evidenced by two successful compliance checks and the confiscation of I.D.s. Mr. Kang stated that if the Authority finds in the affirmative on count 3(A) based on rumors and innuendos, then this was not the equivalent of a third or fourth violation. Mr. Kang stated that his client was a good member of the community, he just hadn't been counseled properly and it had finally caught up with him.
Ms. Roth stated that as we learned from the prior CP's case, where the nonrenewal hearing for CP's and the appeal went to district court, CP's argument was similar to Mr. Kang's argument of not putting the licensee on notice of a violation, and the district court threw that argument out. Ms. Roth stated that was not a defense to violating the liquor code. Ms. Roth stated that Mr. Kang had brought in evidence that this licensee had only had this license for 10 months. Ms. Roth stated that these were three violations that the police department caught through surveillance, not through compliance checks, and they were only there for a five-hour period. Ms. Roth stated there had been a lot of talk regarding Asian Harry or somebody named Harry and that any sales in the last 10 months have been by Mr. Pham, not by anyone named Harry.
Mr. Kang stated there had been no timeframe given for when this Asian Harry rumor started or ended. Mr. Kang stated that his client was paying for somebody else's mistakes. Mr. Kang stated his client had made his own mistakes and had admitted to two of them. Mr. Kang asked for less than revocation of the liquor license.
There was discussion among the Liquor Authority members.
Mr. Wisneski made a motion in regard to paragraph 3(A) of the complaint, that the sale to a minor did occur and that Alameda Square Discount Liquor, LLC d/b/a Alameda Square Discount Liquor was guilty of the charge. The motion was seconded. Vote: 6 Ayes and 0 Nays. THE MOTION CARRIED.
There was discussion between the members of the Liquor Authority in regards to sanctions.
Mr. Muniz made a motion that the following penalty be imposed upon Alameda Square Discount Liquor, LLC d/b/a Alameda Square Discount Liquor. A suspension of twenty days be imposed and that zero days be held in abeyance, commencing on April 25, 2007. The suspension will begin at 8:00 a.m. April 25, 2007 and end on May 15, 2007 at 8:00 a.m. The motion was seconded. Vote: 4 Ayes and 2 Nays (Mr. Williams and Mr. Wisneski). THE MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM 4 - GENERAL BUSINESS
There was no general business to be discussed.
ITEM 5 - ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Authority, Chairwoman Hansson adjourned the meeting at 9:07 p.m.
Joyce Wamboldt, Liquor Licensing Specialist
 |
||
Americans with Disability Act (ADA) Notice |
||
