The URL can be used to link to this page

88-1438 WH17E - CI TY CLERK 1 PIN�. - FINANCE . COIII1C11 G I�jy CANARV - DEPARTMENT G I TY OF SA I NT PAU L /{ / V BLUE - MAYOR File NO. (' City Attny/P�3B _ Ouncil eso u ion R lt Presented By � �� Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date RFSOLVF'D, that the On Sale Intoxicating Liquor, Sunday On Sale, Restaurant and all other licenses held by GMH, Inc. , Anthony F. Gagliardi, President, dba Grand Central, �or the premises at 788 Grand Avenue in Saint Paul, are here�y �uspended for a period of six (6) consecutive days . This susv�nsion shall commence on September 4, 1988 � This Resolution is ba�ed or �he reco�cl of ��roceedings before the Administrative Lat�� Jud�;e, ?ncludin� tlze hearing on June 29- 30, 1988, the documents and exhibits introduced therein, the arguments and statements of counsel for the parties on A.ugust 23 , 1988, and the deli?��rations of the Council in open session. The Council adopts the findings of fact and conclusions. of law of the Administrative La�a Jud�e contained in her Report dated July 28 , 1988, a co�y of which is attached hereto and made a part of this Resolution. A copy of this Resolution, as adoPted, shall be sent by first class mail to the Administrative Law Judge, and to counsel for the licenseholder. COUNCIL MEMBERS , Requested by Department of: Yeas Nays DImond �ng " In Favor Goswitz �e� �_ Against BY Sonnert�"�-^ Wilson AUG 2 51988 Form Approved by City Attorney Adopted by Council: Date Certified Pa s y ncil Se e ry l By _`'��- "�' �`�G S/L 1� By. �'�� App o ed by Mavor. Date — " ' L�-�1 ��_ Appcoved by Mayor Eor Submission to Council By pi��SHEp S EP - � 1988 � -' cF,,... ; , ��O1L8DU�.Q�.. � ��1 .� .� _�: ,. � _. _ ( , ;` ��' � ' ��- RECEIVED ��: ,; � �, - -- . ; .� `�'i;ie�s;. � �� . � �� s''� � �'}`' '��'�� STATEOFMINNESOTA AUG011988 � y � �� OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS CITY CLER�► FIFTH FLOOR,FLOUR EXCHANGE BUILDING 310 FOURTH AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 55415 (612)341-7600 July 28, 1988 St. Paul City Council Attn: Albert B. Olson City Clerk 386 City Hall St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 Re: In the Matter of the Liquor license of Anthony F. Gagliardi, GMH, Inc., d/b/a Grand Central; OAEi Docket Nos. CITY-88-027-PR and 9-2101-2436-6. Dear Mr. Olson: Enclosed and served upon you by mail, please find the Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Recommendation of the Administrative Law Judge in the above-entitled matter. I also enclose the official record, and I am closing our file in this matter. Sincerely, /.,�,�..�G�,�, �. � PHYLLIS A. REHA Administrative Law Judge Telephone: 612/341-7611 PAR vh Encl sures cc: Pnilip B. Byrne Douglas W. Thomson AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY U.S. MAIL Virginia R. Halling, being first duly sworn, hereby deposes and says that on the 28th day of �'n1y , 1968, at the City of Minneapolis, county and state aforementioned, she served the attached FINDINGS OF PACT, CONCLU�TON�a g1ND REC�MMEND�STT�N OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE; OAH Docket Nos. C�T��88�027�-PR and 9�-2101�2436�6. by depositing in the United States mail at said City of Minneapolis, a true and correct copy thereof, properly enveloped, with first class postage prepaid, and addressed to the individuals named on the attached mailing list. � . �-a� �- � AL�� Subscribed and sworn to before me this?Q.� day of , 1988. � � � Notary Public U1 VON REGAN NOTARY PU�IG-�iNNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY W COMMtBSbN EXPIiiES 3�5�0� Service List CITY-88-027-PR 9-2101-2436-6 Julv 28, 1988 Philip B. Byrne Assistant City Attorney City of Saint Paul 647 City Hall St. Paul , MN 55102 Douglas W. Thomson Attorney at Law 345 St. Peter Street St. Paul , MN 55102 St. Paul City Council Attn: Albert 6. Olson City Clerk 386 City Hall St. Paul , Minnesota 55102 . �. CITY-88-027-PR 9-2101-2436-6 STATE OF MINNESOTA OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS FOR THE CITY OF ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA In the Matter of the Liquor FINDINGS OF FACT, License of Anthony F. Gagliardi , CONCLUSIONS AND GMH, Inc. , d/b/a Grand Central . RECOMMENDATION The above-entitled matter came on for hearing before Administrative Law Judge Phyllis A. Reha, at 10:00 A.M. on June 29, 1988 and 9:00 A.M. on June 30, 1988. The record closed on July 18, 1988, upon the receipt of post-hearing memoranda filed by the parties. Philip B. Byrne, Assistant City Attorney, City of St. Paul , 647 City Hall , St. Paul , Minnesota 55102, appeared on behalf of the City of St. Paul . Douglas W. Thomson, Attorney at Law, 345 St. Peter Street, St. Paul , Minnesota 55102, appeared on behalf of Anthony F. Gagliardi , GMH, Inc. , d/b/a Grand Central . This Report is a recommendation, not a final decision. The St. Paul City Council will make the final decision after a review of the record which may adopt, reject or modify the Findings of Fact, Conclusions, and Recommendations contained herein. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 14.61 , the final decision of the Council shall not be made until this Report has been made available to the parties to the proceeding for at least ten days. An opportunity must be afforded to each party adversely affected by this Report to file exceptions and present argument to the Council . Parties should contact Albert B. Olson, City Clerk, St. Paul City Council , 386 City Hall, St. Paul , Minnesota 55102, to ascertain the procedure for filing exceptions or presenting argument. STATEMENT OF ISSUES The issues in this proceeding are whether Anthony F. Gagliardi , GMH, Inc. , or the manager and employees of Grand Central permitted unlawful gambling activities to take place on the licensed premises, including the playing of blackjack, in violation of Minn. Stat. § 340A.410, subd. 5 (1986) and the St. Paul Legislative Code, § 409.08(6) ; and if so, whether the Respondent's liquor license should be revoked, subject to fine, or suspended; and if suspended, for what period of time. Based upon all the proceedings herein, the Administrative Law Judge makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1 . Anthony F. Gagliardi is a principal shareholder and officer of GMH, Inc. doing business under the name of Grand Central . Grand Central is a bar and restaurant establishment located at 788 Grand Avenue, St. Paul , Minnesota 55105. Grand Central is licensed by the City of St. Paul to conduct business as a bar and restaurant with entertainment. It is authorized to sell intoxicating liquors "on-sale" including Sunday "on-sale" liquor. The current • intoxicating liquor licenses were issued on February 23, 1988 and will expire on January 31 , 1989. Grand Central does not hold a gambling license or permit from the City of St. Paul or any other governing entity. 2. During June, July and August of 1987, the vice unit of the St. Paul Police Department conducted an undercover investigation into alleged illegal gambling activities at Grand Central . The investigation was conducted with the assistance of the Special Investigations Unit of the Ramsey County Sheriff's Department. 3. Lt. Caroline Bailey was in charge of the Vice Unit for the City of St. Paul . Lt. Bailey has been employed as a police officer for 26 years. Lt. Bailey was assisted in the investigation by Sgt. Gary Bohn and Sgt. Cheryl Indehar, both experienced police officers with the St. Paul Police Department. Sgt. Bill Thompson, a police officer with the Special Investigation Units of the Ramsey County Sheriff's Department also assisted in the investigation. 4. The undercover investigation consisted of visiting the Grand Central bar during business hours and confirming the presence and location of the blackjack table, observing whether the blackjack table was in operation, and ascertaining how the blackjack table was operated (such as rules of the game, cost of playing, and whether illegal gambling appeared to be taking place) . 5. On or about June 10, 1987, Sgt. Thompson visited the Grand Central bar as part of the undercover investigation. He sat in the front portion of the bar and did not locate the blackjack table immediately. At approximately 9:00 P.M. , the disk jockey (D.J.) employed by Grand Central announced that a blackjack table was open for business. Sgt. Thompson proceeded to the back of the bar and observed various patrons of the bar playing blackjack. He observed the blackjack played during a one to two-hour period during which time he saw several people participate by paying the dealer cash in exchange for poker chips, and using the chips to wager during the game. Sgt. Thompson did not participate in the game, nor did he observe any player receive money for playing or winning. 6. Sgt. Cheryl Indehar accompanied Sgt. Thompson to the Grand Central bar on the first visit on June 10, 1987. Sgt. Indehar also returned to the bar the following evening on June 11 . Sgt. Indehar observed that the participants played the game of blackjack with the chips purchased from the dealer. Sgt. Indehar did not participate in the game (City Ex. 8 and 9) . 7. Sgt. Thompson returned to the Grand Central bar for three consecutive nights on June 16, 17 and 18. He was accompanied by Sgt. Gary Bohn. On at least one occasion, the police officers arrived prior to commencement of the blackjack game. At approximately 9:00 P.M. , the beginning of the game was announced by the D.J. Subsequent announcements were made throughout the evening that the blackjack table was open for play. On July 22, 1987, Sgt. Thompson returned to the Grand Central bar. The blackjack table was open but he did not observe any players. On July 29, 1987, Sgt. Thompson returned to the bar again but the table was not open for business because the dealer had not arrived. 8. On August 5, 1987, Lt. Bailey, Sgt. Thompson, Sgt. Indehar and Sgt. -2- Bohn, entered the Grand Central bar and observed the blackjack table being � �prepared for play. All of the officers were dressed in civilian clothes. At approximately 10:30 P.M. , the D.J. announced that the table was open for play and the patrons could "play to win a trip to Las Vegas". At this time, Sgt. Bohn and Sgt. Indehar approached the blackjack table and Sgt. Bohn purchased chips. Sgt. Bohn gave the dealer $5 and received approximately 10 chips in return. The dealer explained the rules of the game and explained what the chips were worth and what the color of each chip signified. Sgt. Bohn placed a bet (of chips) and the dealer dealt cards from a dealer "card shoe" to Sgt. Bohn. An unidentified patron of the bar also joined the game after purchasing $5 worth of chips. Other patrons of the bar came over to watch the blackjack game. Sgt. Indehar watched the blackjack play for approximately 15 to 20 minutes. She then left the bar and alerted other members of the police department to stand by. Sgt. Bohn then identified himself as a police officer and took the dealer, Christine Sneide, and the other unidentified player into custody. The police confiscated the blacicjack table and the blackjack paraphernalia, and removed the dealer and the other player from the bar. 9. Lt. Bailey and Sgt. Bohn then spoke with Anthony Gagliardi who was present during the arrests. Arrangements were made for Mr. Gagliardi to meet with them the following day at the Vice office of the St. Paul Police Department for an interview. 10. Police interviews with the dealer, Christine Sneide and Mr. Gagliardi , produced information on how the blackjack game was initiated at the Grand Central bar, and how the game was operated.� 11 . Mr. Gagliardi and a Mr. Bartone, the manager of the Grand Central bar, visited an establishment in Minneapolis known as Norma Jean's. Norma Jean's reportedly had been running a similar blackjack table. Mr. Gagliardi was informed that the establishment made no money directly from the game, but that the presence of the game appeared to bring in more customers into the establishment. As a result of this visit, �Ir. Gagliardi was visited by a man named Bob Ruhlend, who was the owner of several blackjack tables. Arrangements were made with Ruhlend to comnence operation of the blackjack tables at the Grand Central bar. 12. Ruhlend furnished everything necessary for the operation of the blackjack table. Ruhlend was responsible for all financial costs associated with the table including personnel , equipment and whatever prizes would be awarded. Mr. Gagliardi was responsible for providing the space in his bar. One of the prizes to be given was a free drink if a player accrued a certain number of chips. The bar would give the customer the "free drink", but Ruhlend would be responsible for reimbursing the bar for the cost of the drinks given away as a result of this arrangement. Mr. Gagliardi did not investigate the possible illegality of having such a blackjack table operating at his bar. Mr. Gagliardi knew of at least two other establishments in the City of St. Paul who ran similar blackjack tables. �Neither Sneide nor Gagliardi testified at the hearing. -3- 13. A patron wishing to play blackjack purchased a number of chips for , , the posted cost. The player then would participate in the game of blackjack. The amount of winnings, though posted by dollar amount, was actually measured by the number and color of chips the player would accrue during play. Whoever won the highest number of chips by the end of the evening would be declared the "winner" of the game for that night. Each winner was eligible to have his or her name entered into a "pot" which contained the names of all previous winners. At some future, but never clearly posted or determined date, a drawing would take place and one name would be selected at random. This person became the "grand winner", and would be awarded a trip to Las Vegas. The drawing for the free trip to Las Vegas was never held. At no time was a player to win cash� nor does it appear that any cash was ever given for winning. 14. The rules of the blackjack game were printed on a card (City Ex. 7) , which was posted on the blackjack table. The card read: MONTE CARLO GAMING BLACKJACK RENTAL CHIPS (MINIMUM BUY-IN $5.00) $5.00 20 CHIPS $10.00 50 CHIPS $20.00 110 CHIPS $40.00 230 CHIPS MINIMUM PLAY $1 .00 NO MAXIMUM PLAY ABSOLUTELY N0: '� WAGERING * DISTRIBUTION OF CASH * REPURCHASE OF CHIPS BY DEALER AWARDS * HIGHEST TOTAL OVER $200 GETS BOTTLE OF CHAMPAGNE '� $100 CAN BE TURNED IN FOR 1 FREE BAR DRINK * NAME ON THE LEADER BOARO MONTE CARLO GAMING IS FOR AMUSEMENT ONLY! 15. The blackjack table was in operation for approximately two and one-half months at the Grand Central bar. The blackjack table was not hidden -4- or obscured by any barriers or walls. The blackjack table was not visible . . unless a patron moved to the back half of the bar. The announcements made by the D.J. were for the purpose of acquainting all the patrons with the presence of the table. All arrangements with the D.J. concerning the announcements were made by Ruhlend. The D.J. is an employee of the Grand Central bar. 16. There is no evidence that Mr. Gagliardi personally, nor on behalf of the establishment received any money as a result of the blackjack game being played at the bar. Nor is their evidence that any employee of the bar received any money as part of the blackjack operation. The dealer, Christine Sneide was an employee of Ruhlend, not of the bar. Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, the Administrative Law Judge makes the following: CONCLUSIONS 1 . The St. Paul City Council and the Administrative Law Judge have jurisdiction in this matter pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 14.50 and 340A.415 (1986) and St. Paul Legislative Code § 310.05 and § 310.06. 2. The City of St. Paul has fulfilled all relevant substantive and procedural requirements of law and rule. 3. The Grand Central bar is licensed by the City of St. Paul to sell intoxicating liquors at its establishment and is, therefore, required to comply with provisions of Minn. Stat. § 340A.415 regarding liquor sales licensure, Minn. Stat. § 340A.410, subd. 5 relating to gambling activities, and 3t. Paul Legislative Code § 409.08(6) relating to gambling activities. 4. The City of St. Paul has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the Respondent engaged in gambling activities at the Grand Central bar during the months of June, July and August of 1987 in violation of Minn. Stat. § 340A.410, subd. 5 and the St. Paul Legislative Code § 409.08(6) . As a result of the violations of Minnesota statutes and the St. Paul Legislative Code, some disciplinary action is warranted. Based upon the foregoing Conclusions, the Administrative Law Judge makes the following: RECOMMENDATION IT IS RESPECTFULLY RECOMMENOED that the St. Paul City Council suspend the intoxicating liquor "on-sale" licenses of Anthony F. Gagliardi , GMH, Inc. , d/b/a Grand Central for a period not exceeding three working days. Dated: July ��' , 1988. � � � �� PHYLLIS A. REHA Administrative Law Judge -5- NOTICE Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 14.62, subd. 1 , the agency is required to serve its final decision upon each party and the Administrative Law Judge by first class mail . Reported: Taped. Three Cassettes. MEMORANDUM Illeqal Gamblinq Activitv The City of St. Paul has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the Respondent violated Minn. Stat. § 340A.410, subd. 5 (1986) , and St. Paul Legislative Code, § 409.08(6) , by permitting the playing of blackjack on the licensed premises. Minn. Stat. § 340A.410, subd. 5 provides, in part, as follows: Gambling prohibited. (a) No retail establishment licensed to sell alcoholic beverages may keep, possess, or operate, or permit the keeping, possession or operation on the licensed premises of dice or any gambling device as defined in § 349.30, or permit qamblinq therein except as provided in this subdivision. (Emphasis added) . St. Paul Legislative Code, § 409.08(6) provides, in part, as follows: No licensee shall keep, possess or operate, or permit the keeping, possession or operation of, on any licensed premises or in any room adjoining the licensed premises any slot machine, dice or any gambling device or apparatus, nor permit any gambling therein (whether or not licensed by the state) , . . . (Emphasis added) . In its closing argument� the City conceded that the blackjack table did not constitute a "gambling device," as that term is defined in Minn. Stat. § 349.30, subd. 2 and § 609.75, subd. 4. The St. Paul Legislative Code prohibits a licenseholder from operating any gambling device or apparatus in the licensed premises, but does not define "gambling device or apparatus. " Since it is clear that the blackjack table does not meet the Minnesota statute definition of "gambling device", the Administrative Law Judge will not reach a decision of what constitutes a gambling device for purposes of the St. Paul Legislative Code. The real issue in this case was whether or not the blackjack game at the Grand Central bar in St. Paul constituted "illegal gambling. " There is sufficient evidence to show that illegal gambling took place at Grand Central , and it is imnaterial to this hearing whether a "gambling device or apparatus" was involved or not. The language of both the statute and the ordinance empowered the City Council to take appropriate disciplinary action against the Licensee on the charge of illegal gambling alone. -6- The Respondent argues that the game conducted on his licensed premises was , . a "contest" under Minn. Stat. § 609.75, subd. 3(3) . There is no Minnesota statute which defines the term "gambling". �inn. Stat. § 609.75 sets forth examples of what does and does not constitute gambling. For example, "lottery" and "sports bookmaking" are examples of gambling and are defined in § 609.75. Section 609.75, subd. 2 defines "bet" as follows: A bet is a bargain whereby the parties mutually agree to a gain or loss by one to the other of specified money, property or benefit dependent upon chance although the chance is accompanied by some element of skill . Section 609.75, subd. 3 sets forth "what are not bets. " The following are not bets: * * �r (3) offers of purses, prizes or premiums to the actual contestants in any bona fide contest for the determination of skill , speed, strength, endurance, or quality or to the bona fide owners of animals or other property entered in such a contest. The Minnesota Supreme Court has defined gambling as "a risking of money or other property between two or more persons on a contest of chance of any kind, where one must be the loser and the the other the gainer. " City of St. Paul v. Stovall , 30 N.W.2d 638, 642 (Minn. 1948) (Quoting State v. Shaw, 39 N.W. 305, 307 (Minn. 1888) . A review of the evidence presented at the hearing demonstrates that the conduct involved in this case was gambling. In the operation of the blackjack game at Respondent's premises� play was initiated by a player purchasing from the dealer a number of chips. These chips were assigned a certain monetary value for the purpose of identifying each chip. The player would bet or wager a certain number of chips on each hand ar round of play. If the player won, the player received from the dealer, a number of chips representing the number of chips the player had bet. If he or she lost, the player gave up the number of chips he or she had bet. Play continued until a player either lost all of the chips and wished to discontinue, or the player won a certain number of chips. Although no money was won, nor could the chips be redeemed for cash, a certain number of chips could be redeemed at the bar for drinks, or a bottle of champagne if the player was the biggest winner of the night. Also, each player who posted the highest score at the end of the entire night's play was eligible to have his or her name placed in a pot with previous winners where that name could be drawn at random at a time in the future. If the name was randomly drawn, that person would receive a free trip to Las Vegas. The fact that free drinks � were awarded on the basis of each player's winnings without any regard to anyone else's totals satisfies the definition of gambling as a "bet". If insufficient chips were won in the game, the player would be the loser and the operator of the game would be the gainer. Thus, the activity constituted gambling as a "bet" as defined in Minnesota Statutes and as gambling as defined by the Minnesota Supreme Court. Second, blackjack is a card game and is dependent upon chance although it -7- is accompanied by some element of skill . The Supreme Court of North Carolina , . described the element of chance in State v. Stroupe, 76 S.E.2d 313, 316 (1953) : A "game of chance" is one in which element of chance predominates over element of skill , while a "game of skill" is one in which element of skill predominates over element of chance. The Respondent argues that the game of blackjack requires more skill than chance. In People on Complaint of Fleming v. Welti , 37 N.Y. S.2d 552, 555 (1942) (reversed on other grounds, 65 So.2d 797) , the Court said "Games of cards do not cease to be 'games of chance' because they call for the exercise of skill ." Similarly, in State ex rel . Gledinnin9 v. Letz, 591 S.W.2d 92, 93 (Mo. 1979) , the Missouri Court of Appeals held: Liquor licensee's sponsoring of gambling promotional games violated regulation of Supervisor of Liquor Control prohibiting a licensee from allowing gambling on his premises since such games included elements of surprise, chance and consideration . . . (Emphasis added) . Letz dealt with games which were printed on a "game card"and were played by the participant attaching markers or tokens to the card in "bingo" fashion in order to score at such games as "luck," "two pair" and "your flush." The winners were paid in cash prizes of $1 .00, $2.00 and $20.00. In addition, the player could win "free" games and, if enough points or wins were accumulated the player could compete for a grand prize of $100.00. The Missouri Court held that these activities constituted prohibited gambling. In rejecting the Respondent's argument in Letz, the Missouri Court of Appeals stated, "that the scheme described in the evidence constitutes "gambling" in the classical sense would be hard to gainsay, it includes the elements of prize, chance and consideration." Letz id. at 100. (Emphasis added) . The Administrative Law Judge has concluded that the blackjack game as operated at the Grand Central bar, constitutes gambling as contemplated in Minn. Stat. § 609.75, subd. 2. By permitting the playing of blackjack on the licensed premises, Respondent has violated Minn. Stat. § 340A.410, subd. 5 and St. Paul Legislative Code § 409.08(6) . This violation constitutes a failure to "comply with a applicable statute, rule or ordinance relating to alcoholic beverages", as provided in Minn. Stat. § 340A.415. Appropriate Penaltv The City of St. Paul urges a recommendation of revocation of the Respondent's license, arguing such a recommendation will give the City Council "maximum flexibility" to take appropriate action. The Administrative Law Judge believes that revocation is too harsh under the circumstances of this case. There are several mitigating factors which require a less severe penalty: (1 ) This is a first-time violation. Under St. Paul Legislative Code § 409.26(b)(7) (1988) , the guidelines recommend a three-day suspension for a first-time gambling violation. (2) This was a single table, sometimes not even frequented by customers, and operated by a outside agent of the owner of the table, notwithstanding that Respondent allocated space on his premises for the table and permitted its operation. The record does not show an effort by Respondent to operate or develop an organized gambling operation. (3) It -8- is concluded that the Respondent posted the table for purposes of entertaining , , bar pat�ons � and perhaps increasing that patronage. The record does not indicate that the table had the desired result. The record does not show, nor has the City introduced evidence to the contrary, that the Respondent gained financially by the presence of the table. (4) Finally, the loss of income resulting from a three-day suspension coupled with whatever financial burden the Respondent has incurred during the present legal action, and attendant notoriety, seems more than sufficient to recommend the penalty prescribed in the ordinance for a first-time offense. P.A.R. -9- s��- CITY OF SAINT PAUL �`o ''� OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY �, �a s,� iiii�i�ii ii �� <;m EDWARD P. STARR, CITY ATTORNEY �`"'m,,,��Q"y��'°� � 647 City Hall, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 612-298-5121 GEORGE LATIMER MAYOR RECEIVED ��'�v� AU G 011988 ��'�- � � 1988 CITY CL�RK H�A� ,:�.�,:` July 14, 1988 Ms . Phyllis A. Reha Office of Administrative Hearings Fifth Floor, Flour Exchange Building 310 Fourth Avenue South Minneapolis , MN 55415 RE: In re the Licenses of the Grand Central Dear Judge Reha: Enclosed is a copy of my brief inemorandum on the above matter. Very truly yours , ' �. Philip B. Byrn Assistant City Attorney PBB : s j s Enclosure cc : Douglas W. Thomson, Esq . STATE OF MINNESOTA _ OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS ��'�� N0. J��, j -� �� IN RE THE LICEN5ES OF THE GRAND CENTRAL , ``' CITY MEMORANDUM This memorandum is addressed to two issues : l. Was the blackjack table and paraphernalia� as operated in the Grand Central bar a "gambling device or apparatus"? 2. Did the blackjack game as operated in the Grand Central bar constitute gambling? Gambling Device or Apparatus It seems clear that the blackjack table and paraphernalia shown in City's Exhibits 3 and 4 do not constitute a gambling device under Minnesota Statute § 349.30, subdivision 2; or Minnesota Statute § 609. 75, subdivision 4: (a) Section 349.30, subdivision 2, defines gambling devices as "...slot machines, roulette wheels, punchboards, and pin ball machines which return coins or slugs, chips or tokens of any kind, which are redeemable in merchandice or cash." (b) Section 6�19.75, subdivision 4, defines a gambling device as a "...contrivance which for a consideration affords the player an opportunity to obtain som ething of value , other than free plays , automatically from the machine or otherwise, the award of which is determined principally by chance." The statutes are not applicable to the particular set of facts in this case. The Saint Paul ordinance, section 409.08 (6) of the Legislative Code, prohibits a licenseholder from operating ". . any slot machines, dice or any �ambling device or apparatus..." in the licensed premises. The terms "gambling device or apparatus" are not defined but appear to be broader than the coverage of the State statutes. The City therefore , while conceding solely for the purpose of this case , the inapplicability of State statutory prohibitions covering gambling devices , maintains that the broader coverage of the ordinance does contemplate a range of different types of equipment and furniture sufficient to include the blackjack table and parapher=- nalia which were the subject of this hearing. The ordinance definition, in contrast to the statute , does not appear to be 1 limited to machines , for example, and includes dice; it goes beyond the phrase "gambling device" to include the word "apparatus." In a Pennsylvania case, a crap table was held to be a gambling device. In re Dice Table, 199 Pa. Super. 525, 186 A. 2d 58 , 59 (1962 ) . A pool tahle in Iowa , when the licensee knowingly allowed it to be used for gambling , was held to be a gambling device and subjected the license to revocation. Jacobs v. City of Chariton, 245 Iowa 1378, 65 N.W. 2d 561, 566, 568 (1954 ) . Gambling The licensee here argues that the game conducted on his licensed premises was a "contest" under Minnesota Statute § 609.75, subdivision 3 (3) , which says : " . . .the following are not bets: (3) Offers of purses, prizes or premiums to the actual contestants in any bona fide contest for the determination of skill . . . . " The argument is that all people playing blackjack were contesting against each other on any given day for the chance to be eligible for a Las Vegas trip or for a chance to win a bottle of champagne. First , this entirely ignores the fact that free drinks were awarded on the basis of each customer's winnings without any regard to anyone else' s totals and by itself satisfies the definition of gambling as a "bet." Minnesota Statute § 609.75, subdivision 2. Second, even assuming this could have been called a "contest," it was not a contest "for the determination of skill." Blackjack is a game dependent upon chance "although accompanied by some ele'= ment of skill." If blackjack was a bona fide contest of skill , it would not be such a significant part of the Las Vegas gambling industry. In playing the game of blackjack in the Grand Central, the element of chance predominated and determined who would win the cham pagne or the spot in the drawing , and in fact, the presence of other eligible recipients heightens the element of chance. The licensee' s argument is ingenious but does not fit the facts as presented here. In the view of the City, the appropriate penalty to be recom mended is revocation. This position is based on the following : l. It will give the Council maximum flexibility to take appropriate action. 2 2. It reflects apparent Council intent as evidenced by recently=enacted guidelines for penalties embodied in Council File No. 87-681, Ordinance No. 17556, which provides for revocation for the third violation. 3. The failure of the licenseholder to respond to the allegations or to present evidence in mitigation. The Council will , if such a recommendation is made , carefully consider the record, the exceptions filed by the parties, if any, and the arguments presented at the hearing required by the APA and determine a final penalty. Respectfully submitted this �`►� day of July, 1988. , , �j. Philip B Byrne Assistant City Attorney 647 City Hall Saint Paul , MN 55102 612-298--5121 Atty. Reg . No. 13961 3 �� ' � � , f�$ THOMSON & ELLIS, LTD. � ' ,+�lII�Ili�li�ilit��"�� L A W Y E R S ��'A'�� DOUGLAS W, THOMSON SUITE 300 DEBORAH ELLIS THREE FORTY FIVE ST. PETER STREET SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 (612) 227-0856 July Fifteenth RECEIVED 1 9 8 8 AUG 01 1988 CITY CLERK Ms. Phyllis A. Reha Office of Administrative Hearings Fifth Floor, Flour Exchange Building Minneapolis, MN 55415 Grand Central Anthony Gagliardi Dear Judge Reha: Enclosed is the Brief of Licensee in the above-referenced matter, along with proof of service thereof. Yours tru ��._ HB/7P encl. � � ) ��I�� ) Anthony Floyd Gagliardi � �� 1 � 1s88 v. j �i�T�� ) �1��11�°`� St. Paul City Council � =�• ) ) ) * * * * * * * * * * * AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAIL STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) James Thomson of the City of St. Paul, County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota, being duly sworn, says that on the 15th day of July , 19 88 , �he served the following: BRIEF OF LICENSEE on• Philip B. Byrne, Assistant City ATtorney by mailing to him a copy thereof, enclosed in an envelope, postage prepaid, and by depositing the same in the Post Office at St. Paul, Minnesota to 647 City Hall, St. Paul, MN 55102 the last known address of said attorney. � ° 1 =�t. Subscribed and sworn o bef re me � � �� , 19 , �~� ,;ENNIFER L. TH SON :� NOTARY PUBLIC - MI ESOTA � � _ � � N 24-�t /% . , ��L� 1 �y,�'� Y�,yq JU? � �� THOMSON & ELLIS. LTD. �r�,�SiiVt�IVE LAWYERS r 2 SUITE 300 �!'l��S THREE FORTY FIVE ST. PETER STREET SAINT PAUL. MINNESOTA 55102 � 3 (61 2l 227-0856 4 � Anthony Floyd Gagliardi, ) 5 � v. ) 6 � St. Paul City Council ) 7 � 8 BRIEF OF LICENSEE 9 On June 30, 1988, a hearing was conducted in this case 10 before the Honorable Phyllis A. Reha. After testimony was 11 taken and arguments were made, Judge Reha requested both 12 parties to submit brief inemoranda addressing only whether 13 14 the conduct involved in this case constituted "gambling" 15 and, if so, what penalty would be appropriate in this case. 16 Judge Reha specifically directed the parties to refrain from � � addressing whether the blackjack table in this case 18 constituted a "gambling device, " since the City had already 19 conceded that it did not. 20 I . Whether the conduct involved in this case constituted gambling. 2� No Minnesota statute defines the term "gambling. " The 22 Minnesota Su reme Court, however has defined p , gambling as "a 23 riskin of mone or other g y property between two or more 24 persons on a contest of chance of any kind, where one must 25 be the loser and the other the gainer . " City of St. Paul v. 26 Stovall, 225 Minn. 309, 30 N.W. 2d 638, 642 (1948 ) (quoting 2� State v. Shaw, 39 Minn. 153, 156, 39 N.W. 305, 307 (1888) ) . 28 A review of the evidence presented at the June 30 hearing, � demonstrates that the conduct involved in this case falls 2 outside the purview of this definition of gambling. 3 The blackjack operation in this case did not involve 4 "a risking of money or other property between two or more 5 persons. " The blackjack players did not risk losing any 6 money or other property. They simply paid an initial entry 7 fee to rent chips which had no intrinsic cash value and 8 could not be repurchased by the dealer . After paying this 9 small entry fee, the player was then permitted to 10 participate in the blackjack tournament . The player could 11 neither lose any money nor regain the already paid entry W 12 o �o fee; hence, the player risked nothing by participating in � N,� 13 J ��' the tournament. WQ vi �� JNOaN� 14 w�m�W� The dealer similarly did not risk any money, but w Nzr �s3FW?N 15 ZJNLL�N awarded only bar drinks to players who redeemed 100 chips o '��° 16 (A r a-- 0 0� and splits (half-sized bottles) of champagne to the player = WQ 17 ~ _`� who redeemed the highest number of chips that night . The ~ 18 degree to which these awards constituted a "risk of losing 19 property, " is equivalent to the "risk" associated in 20 awarding trophies or other items to successful contestants 21 in fishing, bowling or golf tournaments. While awarding 22 such prizes may technically constitute a loss of property, 23 the tournament promoter ( in this case the dealer ) actually 24 loses nothing because the cost of the prizes awarded is paid 25 by the participants ' entry fees . Thus, in reality, the 26 dealer risked neither the loss of money nor property by 27 participating in the blackjack tournament. 28 - 2 - 1 Furthermore, the blackjack operation in this case 2 cannot fairly be charaterized as "a contest of chance. " 3 Such contests include : slot machines; roulette wheels; 4 tossing a coin; throwing dice; and cutting a deck of cards. 5 No element of skill is involved in these contests; they are 6 determined solely by chance. Such contests should be 7 distinguished from contests of skill which include : golf; 8 bowling; billiards; darts; chess; and checkers. These 9 contests are determined solely by skill ; no element of 10 chance is involved in them. Blackjack does not fit neatly 11 into either of these categories. Rather, like most other W 12 �N card games and backgammon, it is a contest principally of ° ~° 13 � �� J W� skill , though accompanied by a small element of chance. `� W~`° 14 � w�m�WO Backgammon is a game which is decided principally by w yzn as3�W?N 15 z��a skill, despite an element of chance introduced by the roll o '�'�° 16 cn �¢� 0 0� of the dice. Card games such as bridge, gin and cribbage = WQ 17 ~ _`� all involve an element of chance--what cards are initially ~ 18 dealt to the players . Nevertheless, these card games are 19 determined principally by the players ' skills : their 20 knowledge of the game's rules ; their familiarity with 21 various strategies; and their ability to remember what cards 22 have already been played (card counting) . 23 Like bridge, gin and cribbage, blackjack involves a 24 small element of chance: what cards are initially dealt to 25 the participants . Yet, like these other card games, 26 blackjack is nonetheless determined principally by the 27 players ' skills . Such skills include knowledge of the basic 28 rules of the game: - 3 - � (1) all cards count as face value, except face 2 cards which count as ten and aces which players can choose to count as either one or eleven; 3 ( 2) the object is to have cards totaling as 4 close to 21 as possible without going over 21 ; 5 ( 3) the player can choose to receive additional cards until his score exceeds 21 ; 6 ( 4) the dealer must continue to take additional � cards until his score exceeds 16; g ( 5) the dealer cannot receive additional cards once his total reaches 17; and 9 ( 6) if the dealer 's score exceeds 21, a player 10 wins unless his score also exceeds 21 . 11 Such skills also include familiarity with various . W 12 blackjack strategies. For example, a player with cards ° N� 13 totaling 11 or less should always take another card. �� WQ � oao� 14 Obviously, a player with cards totaling 21 should never -�NO NO a3�W?N � 5 request another card. Blackjack strategies become more >� Z�NLL�N u�i �a`° 16 complex, however, when a player ' s cards total between 12 and � �a � �z � W� 17 20 . In such situations the player must consider several � _ ~ 18 factors including the total of his cards, the value of the 19 dealer 's card showing and, most importantly, what cards have 20 already been played and what cards, therefore, remain in the 21 deck. This final factor involves the critical skill of card 22 counting--the ability to remember what cards have been 23 played. 24 A player who possesses these skills (knowledge of the 25 rules, familiarity with various strategies and the ability 26 to count cards ) will be far more likely to succeed in 27 blackjack than a player possessing nothing more than the 28 - 4 - � small element of chance. Hence, it is readily apparent that 2 the conduct in this case involved a contest of skill, rather 3 than a contest of chance. 4 The statutory definition of a bet is "a bargain 5 whereby the parties mutually agree to a gain or loss by one 6 to the other of s ecified mone p y, property or benefit � dependent upon chance although chance is accompanied by some 8 element of skill. " Minn. Stat. �609. 75, subd. 2 9 (1987) (emphasis supplied) . Bets do not include offers of 10 Prizes to participants in any contest for the determination 11 of skill . Minn. Stat. �609 .75, subd. 3( 3 ) (1987) . The W 12 blackjack operation in this case constituted nothing more WN ° �� 13 than a tournament in which small prizes were offered to �� W N W�� NgaNO 14 participants in a contest determined by skill . The award of Ww�NZr as3�W?N 15 ZJNLL�N these prizes was determined principally by skill, although � "� 16 cn �a� � oa some element of chance was present. Moreover , the players � LLZ 17 � �N and dealer did not enter into any mutual agreements to gain _ ~ 18 or lose any specified money, property or benefit; the 19 players simply rented chips by paying an entry fee which 20 entitled them to participate in the tournament. If the 21 player either rented or, due to superior blackjack skills, 22 accumulated a sufficient number of chips, the player could 23 then redeem those chips for a small award. Such activity 24 constitutes neither gambling nor betting under the laws of 25 this state. 26 Finally, an activity constitutes gambling in Minnesota 27 only if "one [person] must be the loser and the other 28 - 5 - 1 [person must be] the gainer . " Stovall, 30 N.W. 2d at 642. 2 The blackjack operation in this case does not satisfy this 3 essential requirement. For example, if a player rents 20 4 chips for $5. 00 and, by virtue of his blackjack skills, 5 accumulates another 80 chips he can redeem these 100 chips 6 for a "free" drink . In this situation the player is not a 7 "loser" because he has received an award; yet he is not a 8 "gainer" because he essentially has purchased a $2. 50 drink 9 for $5. 00. Likewise, the dealer is not a "loser" because he 10 he has made a $2. 50 profit ; yet he is not a "gainer" 11 because, due to the player ' s blackjack skills, the dealer � 12 W was required to furnish an award. W ° �° 13 � �� N WQ� Similarly, if a player rents 230 chips for $40 . 00 and, ~ 14 W�o�WO due to his lack of blackjack skills, loses 130 of these as3�W?N 15 ZJNLL�N chips he can nevertheless redeem the remaining 100 chips for u�, �Q`° 16 0 0� a "free" drink . Once again the player is not a "loser" = WQ 17 ~ _�' because he receives an award; yet he is not a "gainer" ~ 18 because he essentially has purchased a $2. 50 drink for 19 $40 .00 . Furthermore the dealer is not a "loser" because he 20 has made a $37. 50 profit; yet he is not a "gainer" because 21 he was required to furnish an award. Hence, many situations 22 exist in which neither person must be the loser and the 23 other the gainer . The blackjack operation, therefore, does 24 not fit within the definition of gambling in Minnesota. 25 II . Appropriate Penalty 26 Since the conduct involved in this case did not 27 consitute gambling, under the laws of this state, no penalty 28 - 6 - . 1 ' is appropriate. Assuming arguendo, however, that the Court 2 concludes that the blackjack operation in this case 3 constituted gambling, serious sanctions are clearly 4 inappropriate. A first-time violation does not justify a 5 license revocation. Sabes v. City of Minneapolis, 265 Minn. 6 166, 120 N.W. 2d 871, 878 ( 1963) . The current presumptive 7 penalty for a first-time gambling violation is a three-day 8 suspension. St. Paul Leg. Code §409. 26 (b) (7 ) (1988) . 9 Anthony Gagliardi , the licensee, has no prior 10 violations--gambling or otherwise. Thus, this blackjack 11 operation would constitute his first violation. Due to the W 12 close questions concerning the legality of the conduct ° �° 13 � �� ' W� involved in this case, a three-day suspension is an `� W~`° 14 ��oaW� O excessive sanction. Mr . Gagilardi (as well as other bar asYW`�ZN 15 3�>�" ZJN�yJN owners) has already learned a painful lesson from his � y�� , �Q_ 16 0 0� unfortunate leqal misjudgment. A small fine would be an Z 17 ~ =N appropriate sanction. If any short suspension is deemed ~ 18 necessary, fundamental fairness and justice require that it 19 be stayed for a reasonable period of time, and executed only 20 if a subsequent violation occurs. 21 Respectfully submitted, 22 THOMSON & ELLIS, LTD. 23 24 25 How s Atty. ic. No. 189340 26 Suite 300 345 St. Peter Street 27 St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 ( 612) 227-0856 28 Dated: July 13, 1988 Attorneys for Defendant - 7 - � - -- ----- -- - ,- - THOMSON & ELLIS, LTD. LAWYERS SUITE 300 . � � - THREE PORTY FIVE ST. PETER STREET � � �� "� SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 Ms. Phyllis :A. Reha Office �f Administrative Hearings Fifth Floor, Flour Exchange Building ' Minneapolis, MN 55415 CBRTIFICATE AS TO TRAN3CRIPT DELIVERY STATE OF MINNLSOTA OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE AEARINGS COUNTY OF RAMSEY . In the Matter of the Liquor License of Anthony F. Gagliardi GMH, Inc. , d/b/a Grand Central COURT OF APPEALS OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS CASE NO. CITY-88-027-PR 9-2101-2436-6 To: Clerk of Appellate Courts 230 State Capitol St. Psul, MN 55155 An Original and one copy of the proceedings in the above- entitled action as requested by counsel for the defendant on September 6, 1988, in accordance with Rule 110.02, Subd. 2, of the Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure, was filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings on September 26, 1958, and a copy transmitted promptly to the attorney representing Anthony f. Gagliardi. Transcript length, 66 pages. Dated at Minneapolis, Minnesota this 26th day of September, 1988. ne I. Hosman, transcriber 281 Sylvan Lane Fridley, MN 55432 (612) 571-8595 cc: Atty. Philip Byrne Assistant City Atty. 647 City Hall St. Paul, MN 55102 ��`0,�NO. " p •••� �./ RECEIVED ___ , �'�+1�}�� SEP 271988 STATE O F M I N N ESOTA CITY CLERK OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS FIFTH FLOOR, FLOUR EXCHANGE BUILDING 310 FOURTH AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 55415 (612)341-7600 September 26, 1988 St. Paul City Council Attn: Albert B. Olson City Clerk 386 City Hall St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 Re: In the Matter of the Liquor License of Anthony F. Gagliardi, GMH, Inc., d/b/a Grand Central; OAH Docket Nos. CITY-88-027-PR, 9-2101-2436-6. Dear Mr. Olson: The transcript in the above-referenced matter was ordered on September 6, 1988, by Mr. Howard Bass for the purposes of appeal. On this date, the transcriber transmitted copies to Mr. Bass, Mr. Philip Byrne and this office. Enclosed are the original and one copy of the transcript which must be filed with the Court of Appeals. Sincerely, �C� ,�?C�"?�_� � � `�✓� �'Yl � SANDRA A. HAVEN Office Services Supervisor Telephone: 612/341-7642 sh Enc. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER , , � �/l� , � v I�V� �� . � �.. .. : t _: Y• .. . ._. . . ... .:,. ...- :..,.. ,, : .-... .. .. . , .. . .. . . ..-. , ... :. � . :: : � •. � . , .:._:,. - :.. _ ... .. _ .. , _ . . . ..:.. ..•, _ . GM & H, INC, - __ .. . . , dba M�.�/��,�r�.��,��/�/��/�1� Gr�� Sa1e Liquor Board oP Director �d Central _�.:`.: '� �� Geor �� ge Montpetit ,� Anthony Ge,glia,rdi 'r Robert g�l Shareholders: George Montpetit Anthony Gagliardi - Robert H$11 � . DBA CHANGE� AT R ENEWAL - 1/31/85 THIS PACKET REPRESENTS TRUE AND EXACT COPIES OF LICENSES AND SUPPORTING PAPERS FOR THE LICENSES HELD BY G M & H, INC. - DBA GRAND CENTRAL AT 788 GRAND AVENUE. .... . � . . .. .� _ __ .. � � T � ��"""'��••:M�R(;ELLq G. SCHILLINGER /� ��±� �� N07ARY.^Ur t!^_ t(/�Q�P� , MINNESOTA . � , v � . y�• ��.�� . �r,i�.�f�J TY r�� .,. . ._. .,, �:.. . �� , r,.•�4ar.21, 1991 ,�,'^d.. M, �,...,�^v ,�.^ti ht,•e.;'��tir.h�!3��y` , o�• C�� _ • ,, � � �i � u r � [� 1 t� '1' r A u L�� LiC-ID: 16375-9 7?.D ��'h�'`�' ` LICENS E RENEWAL NOTICE INV-DT: 12/03/87 R�..IIT TO : CITY OF SAINT PAIIL �� `� 203 CITY HALL, SAINT PAUL, MN 55102 G � PAYMENT DUE DATE ; Ol/31/88 G M & H INC � MINNESOTA TAX ID # : 3057088 GRAND CENTRAL 1j�° LICENSE EXP. DATE : O1/31/88 788 GRAND AV BOND EXP. DATE : Ol/31/88 ST PAUL, MN 55105 INSURANCE EXP. DATE : Ol!3�/88 LICENSE NAME UNIT-COST #UNITS AMOUNT --- ------ --------- 2573 RESTAURANT 14HRS 100S OR MORE-D �41.50 O1 441.50 2579 ENTERTAINMENT-D 1130. 00 O1 1130.00 2168 SUNDAY ON SALE LIQUOR 200. 00 O1 200.00 �� 2080 LIQ-ON SALE-OVER 200 SEATS-A �y � 4128. 00 Ol �$-.-0.0_La � � �(�"�� _ �'~ `� � APPLICATION FEE s 2.5� :..;_: cr �� TOTAL $�9�8�-.�80 ' '�.; �- f�0 .:� �� $�U� = ._- c 10�` �i� %,�, LIC-ID��63 1�5-9 � / . `� � ($15. 00 C�� RETURNED CHECKS) (IF OUT OF BUSINESS, PLEASE INFORM US. ) - c: ( HOND AND/OR INS IF APPLSCABLE MCTST BE SUBMITTED WITH PAYMENT. ) ** ST BE RETVNED r�JITH PAYMENT TO ASSURE PROPER CREDIT. ** ��-,.�;.. ��.�-z�- .� -% -�� . � . � - , � � Room 203, City Hall Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF ON SALE INTO%ICATING LIQUOR LICENSE PLEASE COMPLETE ALL ITEMS LISTED BELOW 1. Applicant/Company Name - ��- /�._ d�7�G. �/,� / .�� ''7�� '�' � �'' Telephone No. 2. Business Name �.�� C..eG�7iri� . 3. Business Address STREET: 79J �^ [�"'�- �'��•�iI� >�� Number Name Direction Type 4. Mail to Address STREET: �y.� �� '�`G�. �Gy '� �'?�i_ _ � Number ' Name Direction Type � _� l� �� - .5��G� /'+ �aR� � City State Zip Code ��11 h on� ��aY� �ra-� 5. Name of Applicant � � Telephone �?�� - �� 7.J Individu �/Partner/Of icer Area Code/Number 6. Applicant Address STREET: �� -� ��a ]-�'��J�� /" �l �� Number Name ;iDirection Type �� 5�� City State Zip Code 7. Type of Business: Restaurant � Club Hotel/Motel � 8. Manager in Charge �C26��G-(-�`�L`�" ��— �-�'� ` First Name Middle Last Date of Birth v 9. Manager Home Address STREET: ��-� �L��' Number Name Direction Type City State Zip Code Telephone - Area Code Number Orig. Date of Employment 10. Are any of the following taxes or charges for the licensed premises unpaid or delinquent? Real Estate Taxes Yes � No Personal Propertq Taxes Yes . No � Special Assessments Yes No � Citq IItility Bills Yes No � �J11. If there have been any changes in interests in premises or finances, or contracts between applicant and any persons, corporation, partnerships, or any new loans since license was last issued, explain in detail: � � Ct�1 �°� V 12. Liquor is served in the following areas (rooms) �� /': _ 13. Seating Capacity: 100 seats or less over 100 seats over 200 �eats White copy - return to License & Permit Division y( ��, � � � Pink copy - retain for your records � � ��''%� '� � Si ature of Appl cant �� ' N 0 T I C E Pursuaat to the Minnesota State Legislature by Chapter 332, Section 47, Laws of 1987, every state and local licens�ng agency is required to withhold the issuaace or re- newal of a license or permit to operate a business in �innesota until the applicant presents acceptable evidence of compliance with the workers' compensation iasurance coverage requirements of Section 176. 181, Subdivision 2. This inrormation is required by law, and licenses and permits to operate a business may not be issued or renewed if it is not provided and/or is falsely re�orted. Furthermore, if the information is not provided and/or is falsely reported, it may result in a $1,000.00 penalty assessed aga�nst the applicant by the Con�issioner oi the Department of Labor and Industry payable to the Special Compensation Fund. Upon request, licensing auchorities are required to furnish workers' compensation insurance coverage information to the Department of Labor and Industry to check for compliance with Minnesota Statute Section 176.181, Subdivision 2. Any questions regarding workers' compensation should be directed to the Kinnesota aepartment of Labor a�d Iadustry - Special Fund Section - 29%-4777. FAILURE TO SLTPPLY REQUESTED INFORMATION WILL DEI.?�Y THE PROCESSING OF YOUR LICENSE OR PERMZT ISSUANCE OR RENEWAL APPLICATION. Please supply the following information and return this form with other �apers if a�plicable, and vour appropriate fee to: City of Saint Paul License and Permit Division, Room 203 City Hall, Saint Paul, 1�1 55102. Insurance Company Name � � �n � i�- - - - - - - - t,t,�6�.G(, u-c� ..�,c�. (vOT the insurance agent) ;,1/N/► G��'�'�'1 � Policy Number or Self-Insurance Permit vumber ; � � , Dates of Coverage � � 3 � � y Y f -3�� effect�ve expiration . OR I am not required to have workers' compensation liability coverage because: ( ) I have no employees covered by �he law. ( ) Other (Specify) I HAVE READ AND U:VDERSTAND ti!Y RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS WITH REGaRD TO BUSIYESS LICE*TSES, PERMITS, AND WORKERS' COMPENSATION COVERAGE, AND I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IS TRUE �TD CORRECT. �f / / �� //,,� �� Business vame �`''� ; �./ �1 /�;�� '�-�%?'✓�L � �%� , ,- � Address 7 f5' Y �'� ,:�,�tfi L��-t--� J'� ,��LGi�. ,��'�'1 �J,t% C�' street city state zip code � r ��-��s �'�, !��,- � -r�;� ��- sigy�ature "� ' date LICE1vsE No. CITY OF SAINT PAUL FEE $412 8.0 0 ' ' � `16 3 7 5 LICENSE & PERMIT DNISION �� LICENSE IIVTOXICATING LIQUORS "ON SALE" 1ST HALFt $2064.00 2ND HALF:$ THIS CERTIFIES THAT G M & H INC HAVING PAID THE ABOVE FEE AND HAVING COMPLIED WITH OTHER ORDINANCE R.EQUIREMENT3 IS HEREBY AUTHORIZED TO SELL INTOXICATING LIQUORS "ON SALE" IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF OR.DINANCE NO.T537,APPROVED JANUARY 18, 1934,BUT SUBJECT TO ANY AMENDMENT OR AMENDMENTS OF SAID OR.DINANCE NO. 7537,IN THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PORTIONS ONLY OF THE BUILDING STRUCTURE KNOWN AS GRAND CENTRAL LOCATED AT 788 GRAND AV ST PAUL MN 55105 THIS LICENSE MUST BE KEPT POSTED IN A CONSPICUOUS PART OF THE ABOVE PLACE OF BUSINESS NOT TRANSFERABLE FROM PERSON TO PERSON OR PLACE TO PLACE THIS LICENSE IS ISSUED SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ALL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF ST. PAUL,MINNESOTA,AND MAY BE REVOKED AT AN T E IF SAI P 0 ION E VIOLATED. THIS LICENSE EXPIRES 01 3 1 8 9 / � �� . � � Q�ly�t--l.� DATE OF ISSUANCE O 2�2 3�8 8 LICENSE INSPECTOR LIQUOR SERVICE AREA: MAIN ROOM L�cE1vsE xo. CITY OF SAINT PAUL FEE $4128.00 16 3 7 5 LICENSE & PERMIT DIVISION LICENS E INTOXICATING UQUORS "ON SALE" 1ST HALF: $2064.00 2ND HALF: $ THIS CERTIFIES THAT G M & H INC HAVING PAID THE ABOVE FEE AND HAVING COMPLIED WITH OTHER ORDINANCE ftEQUIREMENT3 IS HEREBY AUTHORIZED TO SELL INTOXICATING LIQUORS "ON SALE" IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISION3 OF OR.DINANCE NO. 7537,APPROVED JANUAR.Y 18, 1934,BUT SUBJECT TO ANY AMENDMENT OR AMENDMENTS OF SAID OR.DINANCE NO. 7537,IN THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PORTION3 ONLY OF THE BUILDING STRUCTURE KNOWN AS GRAND CENTRAL LOCATED AT 788 GRAND AV ST PAUL MN 55105 THIS LICENSE MUST BE KEPT POSTED IN A CONSPICUOUS PART OF THE ABOVE PLACE OF BUSINESS NOT TRANSFERABLE FROM PERSON TO PERSON OR PLACE TO PLACE THIS LICENSE IS ISSUED SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ALL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF ST.PAUL,MINNESOTA,AND MAY BE REVOKED AT ANY TIME IF SAID PROVISIONS AR.E VIOLATED. THIS LICENSE EXPIRES O 1/31/8 9 DATE OF ISSUANCE 02�23/88 LICENSE IN3PECTOR LIQUOR SERVICE AREA: MAIN ROOM , ,LICEN3E NO. CI?'Y OF SAINT PAUL FEE coL�c�.n 16 3 7 5 LICENSE AND PERMIT DIVISION $17 71.5 0 �� LIC � NSE POST LICENSE IN A CONSPICUOUS PLACE THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT G M & H INC DOING BUSINESS AS GRAND CENTRAL PLACE OF BUSINESS 788 GRAND AV ST PAUL, MN 55105 HAVING PAID THE ABOVE FEE AND COMPLIED WITH OTHER ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE THERETO,I3 HEREBY AUTHORIZED TO CONDUCT THE BUSINE33 OF: RES TAURANT 14 HRS l 0 0 S OR MORE-D (1) - $4 41.5 0 NOT TRANSFERABLE ENTERTAINMENT-D (1) -� $113 0.0 0 FROM PERSON TO PERSON SUNDAY ON SALE LIQUOR (1) - $2 0 0. 0 0 OR PLACE TO PLACE THI3 LICEN3E IS ISSUED SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ALL OR.DINANCES OF THE CITY OF ST.PAUL,MIINNE30TA AND MAY BE REVOKED. � � , ��'(s�;� . -� ��.� Tffi3 LICEN3E E7{PIR.ES O 1�31/8 9 �T�� '%r �1 �%��'� ' DATE OF ISSUANCE 02�23�88 � LICENSE IN3PECTOR LICEN3E NO. CITY OF SAINT PAUL FEE COLLECTED 16375 LICENSE AND PERMIT DIVISION $1771.50 LICENSE POST LICENSE IN A CONSPICUOUS PLACE THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT G M & H INC DOING BUSINESS AS GRAND CENTRAL PLACE OF BUSINESS 7 8 8 GRAND AV ST PAUL, MN 55105 HAVING PAID THE ABOVE FEE AND COMPLIED WITH OTHER OR.DINANCE REQUIRBMENT3 APPLICABLE THERETO,I3 HEREBY AUTHORIZED TO CONDUCT THE BUSINE33 OF: RESTAURANT 14HRS 100S OR MORE-D (1) - $441.50 NOT TRAN3FERABLE ENTERTAINMENT-D (1) - $113 0.0 0 FR.OM PERSON TO PERSON SUNDAY ON SALE LIQUOR (1) - $2 0 0.0 0 OIt PLACE TO PLACE Tffi3 LICENSE IS IS3UED SUBJECT TO THE PROVISION3 OF ALL ORDWANCES OF THE CITY OF ST.PAUL,MINNESOTA AND MAY BE REVOKED. THIS LICENSE EXPIRES 01/31/8 9 DATE OF ISSUANCE 02/23/88 LICEN3E INSPECTOR : . � �xGc , 7 � � . �� . � _ _�=Y-=. s -- - - - . , __ � (�4°��%1�� `� � -_r. �\ =r � =�..`-.�_. �� . . .�. .. _ . BLACKJACK RENTAL CHIPS . - � (MINIMUM BUY-IN $5.00) ; _ -. -- .: _ $5.00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 CH I PS _ _ $10.00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 C H I PS . $20.00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 CH I PS �--- $40.00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230 C H I PS . ; MINIMUM PLAY $1 .00 �i � NO MAXIMUM PLAY - - .� ` ABSOLUTELY NO: - c * WAGERING - - � * DISTRIBUTION OF CASH - ;., A `� � . * REPURCHASE OF CHIPS BY DEALER _ i . _ . _ . i. �� ' _ _ _ . .. AwARDS -. �L. ; ._ * HIGHFST TOTAL OVER $200 G�TS � � j,�,: �� BUTTL� OF CHAMPAGNE �; ' ' - � " * $100 CAN BF TURNFD IN FOR 1 (H I PS _�_ i�'�. � - . * S FR�� BAR DRINK t�TAL . - ''� ' .�._ _ * H * NAM� ON THF L�ADFR BUARD � � -_ _ `- _ __ � � : MONTE CARLO GAMING IS FOR AMUSEMENT ONLY! - -- - � , : �• � � - ` . ,;. ,� . , .. � . _. --- _. �p� V N 'O Q. "•' G7 Cn � �" "' r V O1 . � . - O W r• tn N �' � o+ • iu i 7 • R R I r'S (D ) Q j� O 1 S i ; � ~t �' ►`� rt � y n o � < , R � � � ~ �' fD 7 UI fD ~ O R r+1 � 1 '� � � � �"'� 2 � O. (D �t fD GL O R �I � h+� � • � � s h"a O � r+� O () C OD N r� � � � p� 0 p � C. �' C R ?' Q' N 00 (D � � r A n ♦ Q � a� N W r+� O (D 0� O • • S • � O � rt a t7 � t�i� E < y n r"�n o � n o � � � i 'O r fD r* fD `t C� r• rt � � N = � � � � C � • o 't7 r-� c� r+� G. � f� 7r > > o � w � a C� C� �C £ s. �J rn G fD r• � 't �G rD w S fv 't 7 r � � � < p O w N � R w '1 N r• 'y O 9 l') QO 1 � � � � s w � u, n � E 3 < r� s z � < x + f1 00 r �' C3. ? fD r-+ < C > w w w � a o n z � � v � 'fl C) O f� n `t R S � fD n � w n p v � g w w c cu �- m �o �+ n. co ; o � a ' n n .- n tC C. r�+ � � r a a � �o n. a m �e �-n a � 0 �A O y G. �' (0 (D I--� h-1 7 O r� u� c c� 3 m m x > � � � � � � 0� w w m r- G r-� rn cD � R � (D (!1 r+ (D R W � r IV w � R G. a. rr (D 'S w N � i � i w �{ � !D f) � ? r- �' v 0� 7' rn r• � � _ � � �ll 7 O. fD � 6� W 7 (D O � z c7 M �1 00 w � N 'U 'L7 � 'C n. 'G a O � rT w 3 j ^ � � N r QI r+ �'S R rh (D ? '� fD w n Ol C1 O '�U h'h a. fD r. i �: � • O �C 7C" �C 7 k CT w : ' . r O 7 • r• C1 .-� f1 � O • II� � tD (D (D rn � e � � R �S 00 67 N • rry � � .Mj �' fD l.l� tl1 R W n .�j (/� 7 �o w v� a � x A � E 'e � � w � a w �o � o �+ r* v' � n �-s rt A p N `G n �' m B o ' c ^ � Q' T� (0 OC a � • n rn r ff 1�. (A R W � r � r� n ` � fD � G� 7s' O Z n � fD f� w r ?' � � � ^ o . ' r'• T.' rt O.. w � r � • (1 "� fn ft � x � ,r, � � S • E � � � � a r .o c° C/> > rh C� r- w N 00 Oo o n ; � > U � —1 Q 7 D i't O R R rT � a � � N o C T �"'� ^ � O � ? H S N ; � { � o T � ° ° y 7 (3. rr 'S7 W a Z a s � D G'1 • rT O n. "S fD rt O � n O � C �L � � � � � Q' � C� N f) r r � � z r �n � O t`� (Jl ''S w y � n o v p � 1+ W a � rh rt (�i 7s' Q' �-n 'D = � 0 ♦ 3 ►�. rt w �t 67 W 'O a a � � � c < v ►�c � n ^ � i , r `C co rs v t� ° • o � O (7 � rt C. O r X = � � � w � Z p c�o� co � �' `< ,v ° ; " " ^ z t" i ; o � ' '' .�1 Z r'f ?' N W N !' ; n i r+ � � r`' v p . CT N R r (.J > � n D p�. 0 � A� R Y- w w � � '� 1' � � O n n W � �C n � > w 7C' 7�' fD 7C' S" w G� • 2 � a n . oo � � w � W C (D M W y z < < � O O ° �-' W O A r � � r CA rr rS 7�" � ' ^ � � t�n w � _ � � � � w E (D a a � �.. � � � � � H O � '�O tn � z ^ ^ � RI �' � � n cn � : � n � > 0 � , � � � �G C� X t0 � ' 0 � w � C y � � � � � p � a �"� � � G' CL �• W QO Gl Z ; � (4 � � = r rt 0� � r� � � � (D O f1 'p r ; ❑ z g � 't7 7C' o � r o ^ � � � '• C� r� C �C H � � � N C � C. ft r'S (D S O N Y �V.]7 < � ^ � � fD Gt 'C w > i < ; � .3 ` �i fAD w E tD � p � c c � � "' � �1 � w w � a ul r't CT' 'J' � � ❑ � ^ d r a � rp r ro O co rn � � . � G7 � x r-+ R A1 ? G� O � � � • s � ^ rt � E E a�i � i � s J. z y w � x co � � ^' • o Q � C1. w ►t Cs. G� � Z GL n fD � � o � z .�O o > OO fD n N > � � � E F+� W fD fD • � Z V n SU G Q' 't7 � �C � i p V+ � w U1 fD h-+ 'L7 f7 x � O L� w _ ' 0 x = G 7" m k r C n � � n rt (D (D � � i � � rt a ° O. � j V . � � w � bl •.d H H � .-� r r \O tY "' ^ '� O� A N l ! � � � O O j 2 0 > � � � �. = a ' �' tJ' a D a o ♦ t � T � z y N "' � n °- i y R � H (D (D Q � � 7 '� M ' K �-t � •• D � o ^ ; h"' p > a < C -� � z a o� o r+ n r• (D N O� > n /� ; i a a a � � ; ; � { J 1 � � �"'' ' y 7 M • n Z � O f? 1--� � r 7 � O p i R ".� ,�'�" \ O 7 u Z (D (D QD � r S 111 7 �1 h•a � O � � Q) O JI J !1 G f � < •Y, p � � �� r V N 9 rS r'h w w i n f1 f1 i \ � r'r � R = = q 7. � .'D x 9 r• rT co � ( ,', r'• N E "o s �' ,°� � o Z do � C7 o R7 �' 'Z7 ^ o < z � � N rt w �-t � � n o z 7 rt '-7" R O X O ^ (D rt fD DC 7. ; p �n O � ' � _ i � � p• (D M R � � N r.� _ � � r.' ^ O rr �r. W �. i i a � w '� W �' < r l.n � < (D (D (D . i ' z i O N z � � ;'i � > w ^ n �N ?' w v�, n � •� � fD Vf • r. .�j C � !D � . r � fD faD p � ^ 0 � v w ^ 'o " r r N n i (n a !D w N � . � o r'f � W • 0Q O a � i A n° � o' p" a i a m � � - Cn r ri i � a w �n - z • ' _ ' � � ; ^ °� � � � n x o .,,5'l °p n C V. � ' � 0 �xj a � N �-t P� r-+ � o F-.• � � • � -1 �-t c� p � .o ^ � N � � i D D fD T.' E n a O �O o C rn p ^ -1 � w 3 Q � o P �n o � C� D � � N �C O y O z y j N D � '�D � 3 n < W � r � °_ ^ z r � f�J s s � �, rt ^ i n O w � 1�1 �, � rt ri rt a p � � (A � i () (D N o �1 Z � Z 'Y �' > � O� a � � � n � ~� E � o � n n D Q 'Ll ?' rt � ►-� 1 G� Z �1.� N F,• G7 < a � N p W a � l� O • f7 '� f ; f1 \ D � n .( :��., : m a , c ,� o 00 ' � o � � ° ^ r o v r-� � H � C7 0 � u r• O � w � � � • � _ h-� ) W !D R u A ❑ � � U7 N '"t = H � . � ° w � > 'y a � C r-' ; c. � ❑ n° a —� �^ � t �d rn o v' x a�i > $ i n ; m �j � � r N �t c y � ~' ^ � . ro �C � o D _. ❑ w > { i �, n w n ; , ' rr � � O r-� n o r p.. N < r �I a O � � � N OD i ; x � m C ?' q � !D fn O� Z n 7 H i Z fD (D ; � a y n '� � � o m � Q O �' ? �' � m ° _ �7j ( ° r• �. � ° P � d N c o y a ; � ,. y •` � �• ° C " i `> � c n � rT p' (D a C c • � � W . �' N $ n � a i � rt 'Z7 M � �' p ?' r C7 > a n . . � C" • � cD N G � a � � � G) x � �C �S w N � i � ^ O r• r• q > ^ z � � .�J' QQ �Q .� 2 7 � �! � � " z ^ _ n E �'* ° � o o > � r, �. e ° � n n r• � o �o n r^. �� £ �' m x w ^ � f � O n � �1 y > � • n rt = 1 ln x � �' w � o l� z f''• � �p n � 'O (o 3 ' " �' D ► � • 1 � � A � .y .�.;�-�,/ ► r ;,t��. �: ' � - ^ __ � � .� . .. .:. . � � A `• ' I! � � �� I � � I � �' � � . � . . � . � , � . � � . �a , ��a� �\\ ;::K�.;: , rywf ' P i '��. �---� � �f: ,, M � � � `� v� y" *'' �.� �� '; , � � � . �R f . i► s t �.�' � 'Y • ' `'`�`,H�� ."'�A�1 .2(,f, ,�i;y,_' _ . � . ,``� �.! , ` \. ,�,,"� . t � � _. �'', , . r ` •, .��,' r � F � � � r 1 „��t� 4 Y ��#'' r�e � .r - ��:. / : '�\� � �' � ., '4 �~ . ��,.�: � � � ' � e 1� ; � i�. � � .'� .✓ . � ._ �„_. • +p, . .-� : � � �. �i'. ,t�.. � � j� dY f•/ ti �� ` � �� t �r �. 9�'( ' - ��„ .• . � � � • �� , ' , � '* �► , `' . � � • . Z ,,vy, . /"�tr ,,. . . ,�n� �� / - 4 � � - � / � y �� i ♦ �# •�r / 9 �., �, ,+ � �_ �� pA�� , �' r =:� � ' ,. I �� - � � j �� y�4. .i , • s �I 1 I • �.� . �w�� ' �jJi ' � _ �� / .r+.�y�"l.�, � . N ,r �� ,�� i / r .,;-,*., '� � � � v 'C W C7' h+� r"'h '.0 n Sv 3' CJf W � 131 fT � � p N v • (� � � � O 7 A� � O 'C � � w Z � f0 �--� p = r G. 'T 't 'C C CL 00 [z7 CL X U' Qt � • C ) , � ,�> s r• w o • s T o � � w � � a� o � c. � v ao R °m � � "o °- ' ": H ; � m a y su n v x a m �- 9 ca y �-r � � E � �„� z+_p . y ; � '"'� p � R° � f�D r1 � i... rt 1�1 7C' f� � �I tA C � y t�+. �w 9; w �p ; , l� A� � O O G� m N r y 1 (D � E A r+ ' � � . � O 'C7 O • k 'C 'C r+ �C A1 r+� � fp �y � CZ • s C� � 'L7 < n 'C O O N 'O ln B r* .. � . . � r� �t cD �..• 5" �t 'G rn �' ^t I A cD �' rr E S o o' O n C!] o �-1 H v� w o � O o O� O �n A� O � • � � i � o G� �C �' 1 'O k � A P� k Oo � G O r-�+ 7C' � r o �� w � • • � �"h �-1 r'T fD N Uf • W rn � w � � :U w � � � O N O O N ^� N n 'i7 � (p r+. N j �'f N � W y Q' y �.a �' fT � � ^ fl �fl 1 � � O W E O � � Z N � ln O �D r. p� > > � R O � � w tn O G O c/� � � c i � pg w Jt � �' CC 1 rr (D � r'1 � ? C� G � = 70� z w tD �1 w A �C C (D O 9� :t N A� W rr r. • � °n H o � � � �-+ tn ?' rt rt Cn � C!f "1 "t 'S "J' (> ; o < (/� Z � g tA [*7 • C tD C G� cD 7 �'1 fA r� lD ►-• !D fD � � O � i .c� Z rr . m n � tD � . �-n w O . x � � A � C rr ?' CA � A CL + r'� N N � 7 w � � W 1'f � !0 - 'Sl R fD a0 W h'� > ; = N� � G. 7' r• W 3 �' E cn cn Y tu B s = > r.�_ r Su (D O" f1 C O t9 c9 C� � L� � (D (D � � w w � n i-n r G C x x � w [Tf H r+� � r � M o p W r-r � 't 't �D Z C N H • = r rt � � M � � rar �' v' 7C ;D � "O 1� � ry't rt t�=7 W (�D � A �-c i • Z = � !D G� ��. � oo r- � r. ?� cr r+ r, � w co s ,— ^ • -1 y ti a; � a� a o -s a: r-. " "q m � �t n A � t' O rt Q. � = r � � �c .n n� �r a� m � �o �o � �fD-n r c�`o °�" o c� �. .�", c � �t C � E �'• �. �G r-+ f3. rt '-] W � �'t '+ . o v a. Ov w u, �n a� y x rt � y O 'X. CL 'S�7 fA W !D �. rt � rt � O � � - R �- o a � � w � � a � o � : N U1 (D fD 'L� h+• Q' M p' fD 'S7 rt (_.. n � £ = N 5" � • � � l� hr N A C/f � l7' n � w � ' � C R R fD ft !9 f'1 G � t1� � 7' 7C r'n � � C i p r rt r+� !v .� � 7: rn (� tJ' (D O rr � � n �p p v G. O � O R c.+. rh r p� r � K s 7 � T � � £. M 1: r+ p' lD h-+ N fD fD W � � � ►y (� G� � B N � O n co m v, n c� r-• i � • �i ' ; a � 3 � a � ? t�D x n � f� ° ai ro � w i , o . C � 0 n !D 'C1 rt A r. 't 7 7' 7"' fD f9 ''t G. N � � � Ul bd O O W 'L7 O fD 27 � C. y �-t � � � � w -1 O w r ^t7 3 � rr E � rr C1 0 ' p � �p> � ITt C7 O � �1 Z rt f� t7' � W � < A� R fD M � A G ( S O � �W� N O �T1 O O C O fD O C � rt tD 's C. (D £ rt (D �! � Q O s G� D x . ui rt k v a s -s a y a n o �t o0 0° > ' > . � � a • s O �' < N cn 'O ?' O cn tD Oo � � o � X� s � 7d ^ � O S fD A� rr y 'p � rt rt m p. � � o •1 ;U � s 7�' fL ?' r+ O � Q -t �'S 7 fD G7 = � O C/f� ` ' + O O' (� Su R � � Q X n (D rt �-i � r � i � � C 'y r-+ A T �.� (1 C ... ".7 �' 6� o i 2 z O � �* -s �o � r� �r � �v o �° E c� a a, > � • ; (9 W �• 't N rt (D r1 z a w 7 � a '�'r r �' O � 8 �'* O � 9 ° n � C i 9 i t„� O w O w rt c� �-r O rD �.+. 7 'C 'TJ C j � n G� � � � v� E ra rr v' ar � y y r� fD r ; ^ C I71 ►!�i � � O r �-n fD S N � � f9 � � n � C!�i [� o � � 'G A (D •�t n p n OQ � 0� O o a � : y � � � e-+ H � ?' SU � � ro rt � .. y � r+ � � �A � O� G7 i � h+- n fD � r-+ 9 W � �l G. < `E 00 • ❑ > \ O � fD tED A n CL W (� �' O 4� I • � ❑ v r+ � 9 z 2S < Q � ° rr R cD ' CT' G� (D �C 7' w � 7 r+ O In i �o C � � � p lTl w = O � � C Cf � fD f<D r � ry-t � R � C cn � p o ^ v y a `d rn � � rr � �3 � G � a3i d � E w > , ; s v [� � � f� D' .. rt �i � � cn a. C � C� n p � � G7 � 7 y 7C (D C S � n S fD r, p� fA � [ y O � � � (D A t� O w w � y ; t S ,.,j � a. �•. � a w O ►�. � n E � � � �v ^ s � �, � < 1 � m �D a K x r, �D n � oo v, �e v « o w W t N R H �-t (D C. Z •t � �n O � � R � A a � � o ar � w E � n r- � � D � � H . o �e �o �• m oo w a v� �- x �. � k 1 � E r* a a� �o T m m r-• y �•. m �o z N • f� 7 R •, � < R a R y R N � ❑ � � � a m � � v, fD � � �a ��.- � � �c n �... o � a w w � , � - d c o rw* w A�i � � o rp o n � r, � � a+ � a a : �""� • �t C. O �t C � w • (D ro co �" • • � � ❑ � r,r l� O O � fi► A rc7'-� r. C r� ri w ) > � ; � O v+ S W H v+ fD tD 1 C• E •n � c c • � rT O (9 � C1. � tA y � � � � � �'' ^I G. O 7r (A .j r•. ~ • ❑ � � r+ • cD � Gl p n n r- .. R � � . � Qo p rn O "O �t O ?' O 't by v' ~ � D ' ^ 1 � o. o � n� �o x w w c �* c� a s � o R � ^ y 3 r�+ ►S (A9 Z p. R � �. � ~ rt � � � s � `zi � �"" (7 O r� n O C r-+ C=f 5' < f9 ^' s � j i to n c=f � C «t �' G 3 cn �G to K � O •t 7 :C tn (D x �D fD rr TS � � C3. C o 0 � wO � ; � C1. (D A ;D �-+ C (D � ? � 8 � w t� o � � n � z cn 3 5r a . : � � � O C=f M A 'l7 w r 5' Cj7 G� p' (p x � q � � O � P► P 1 `.7' Z R W W fC f') "l7 r'f 9 � ^t � "',' 1i1 1� ; ; O �o crf �' 'C �e n. 7s' �n ro 2 tn 'o � • i � x , R n -� �o y m �.. n, x a c � � ; � n a � � `� - a � � V n u � . � � C t�1 R7 1 �' 7' O 7' O M O ?� O fD �p �'' S 't ?' E m O fD 9 O tn r� r+ E �.m � fD fD C (D C � (D fD cD 5' �' rn < � C ?' r• O r• r� �D r'' n O. (fl � ►c fD .G �t w . (D rn r• O n O tn f> n I� 't 3 S C A r. C� � 00 h :J M Q. 7' O � � � � �n n r-+ w � £ � £ f) (D �' n � r• rr N 'D � 'Lf E 00 fD ~ � tn N r. 9 W fD 7 fD O � tD O C/� � �'t fD r� .*t a' � 00� � ], �'� Uf rf rt N rt N • n •t O. OG C. � 7 L� � O QO • � :y � fD R rt (D f'� !D rJ r"3 R tn r� ►+� (D O tn O �' (D !u - � R m �, �r � rt n • m �- � rt o y E Q. fD R ffl �p � � � � � r* �" O ►-� .o (D 7C' ? � O O' � '� " R Q• �C O r. ht w fD r � C N CJ r-n bd r-� (D r• R R tr' � m S cn a m � �. r. C a' O su 'C n � ' S O fD � O CA (D O S' N �f A> � R r. w p 'T1 a. C� O Tf `S R x � w � O' r't r+ C � � �p �C w C lD O G�i t7� � A> lD rt rt �"� £ 7C' � r• � fD z � ah � ffl O r�. A> C � O � .� r. f'� W w (� A rt G> G. O o n. � o �. " �' n c � m � �. w 0° � o � fD � `� � w m � o �n n cu �o n �- R � � a� a r+, m r� n cr E �r a � � �G � r-n � � rt 'L7 fD CA � S 7C' � rn O W !U r M M fD (D G. C� Q. n c� fD rt tn fD 7C' w �' O m W C1. N w r+ � r.. p S G� � tn r+. �p G. f9 r� � Q. � A fD rt Z r rt r�. A Gs N rt fD O" fD m G� tD 'O a R3. � O � f3. fD rt C. fD 40 7' Z f9 • � S vr ?' �t O �' � A W E tn rt �-n r fD y v �, � Cr7 �3. w O fD • n Q� fD G. � W �C a 1'7 � � "S �'t R (D (D F.. "j Ul 'O £ r'h S o a .•. «s o o � a c �s- m 5- �' • < «� � o � m �o A� 'p 00 G. i-n rn � O O M tD IIi m p� OG ? w O "r7 O r rt n R �'S w S 7' 4f �'q w R y x � ►e1 L� fD � F.�,. � � ^ fD ''S iv H � � ~ fD fD � . CS. � O r► tn -S fp G' R £ W m C� G. v � O • �-1 v� � fD 7' O � N� [17 a� y ^t uf E � �o � � n o - a E a� a �n � n (D `S O W .�T � (D �S R R r,,,� ►�1 d1 W '� � � {l1 �'1 f9 � C �'Y CA � fD R ~ fp O. A> N ?' �-+ fD fD r� O R ay G. w R �'S fD � c� �C o �— �' � Oo �' d a � n • cn v� «t o 9 ; •o a co cu � a a� v, � � c� m u� °; o0 9 �'• < 7C' C (D �t G> A> n fD VD � �++ Z C 0. z fC C Q> O G. fD rT 4f tD 00 fD fD v �' � w Z N M N H 't rt 7C' C O w A� R � 7' Q. N rr y C ?' G> Q CA [T7 ►+� • r. fD �-+ E n rS O a fD � n r+. 2 n 'a �-3 � Oo O r++ . M c1 � �' � n R an �' E "+f 0o p� �t rr � � 2 O R' •i � CS. fD w � O r�• rt ~ ?C" ?' E N tn GO rr �p � N r� M ►� r� ' p 0� ff � G. tn � � R tn � � d V� O y !� L7 �r-+ � fD (D [=7 C' V� 7C n r-+ � O n rt r+ 9 C r-� a R c � d 5r � r• �c a a� oo a� w � � c o c� c� �► r• rt � rt a� �o �n `e � �e rt m R c E n �n R o � �o a � r c� �- � � rr R� �o co o �o r. o a, � m o � � � � � a ac x' � M fA n � r�Wr ~" � f<D C i-n �' O � O�i Sy � � � 00 �C � R ^t r-+ R f� 00 O :O fD W a � n �, n �c c� o c� �-n v c� tn rt w tD n Cn rr C7' O r. G� rt p r, y C3. rt C=7 �. 7 '� R O' C C W O fD !D 't f9 m 9 w O rh r+ S n � '� `t O. � rt - .� r z � � � h+. N 7' t.... � 5' G� P7 p. v� �,.. 7C O n fD w H E r-' ? C r r• rt o v � u, n r* cr m sv w � o0 5- oo s °rt' �. 3 "' � co w c� � n C �C r- a d � O rt `C A� C' f1� 00 ? fD G� r tl. ? "O r-r r. w x w �, o � n � o °. � � rn �- n o0 0o rt � �' C3. � n < � tfl rt rn C fD rr G. G ^i fD C fD C3. v fD •S l7 rt O O 00 f� � W � (D � t�n fD S � � o m ti O o �n o c � o ►s n r• � n E v� � d a� A n �p y � �. ?' w O C O � rr � rt n C> �' t!� � 6� < £ f� �t � rt r• g rr r� � ~ O II> � � � O �C �T � y ?� y Tf fD � � O X r• 3 '.0 r+• G) Vi G CT' � tn rt ]- r. 0o n x n � a w �+ o a o o cu », cn r. n � �D � •� oo d � � . �o � a M, �- z o o rt -, � o �- o � a cn °' �° :° �o � � a a. r'* `C O rr � � d � W W tu �' 7� f� C (D fD G7 n n A� N fD w �' n o v, � � a � o � � a �• n. m � cn o � o o '� a a o �c � w n� o � v n �, n r v = � � 0 � R a w t� o� �e ¢ v, ro �o o c a �-n o w � "� v '"' n _ � O (D M O fD R m C �+ 'C fD O ?' C R �p y p y � � � " � fD O � rt � C � • S O r y rt w n fD r-+ [) C C fD f) < tD 9 O r� �p m G w C1 Z m Z 9 7 (D W C�i � C� rt rS v �D C3. E Z S w rt O "D C' rt �D �n trJ R" .T r+ r a-� tn fD N f� m O � fD G. � �'1 R � C7 C 7 tn W tU O �' G� O � fD r'+1 fD L3. W R � "J� � (I �'S 'J' V ►ry rJ fT n G. �"1 '.il � CrJ ►C W 'LS R II� n f� � �,,,, � C O 0� O m r• v' O � m (D R 5 tn O C� O �' � f0 - 7C' ^I � rr N � • tn fD �-t rT n ["' t� n A� 9 f£D rr � �C G �' F� � � fD vr f0 �"t ►+. 9 r� ?' 9 `G 't fD R n N �' �' R �C• T.' r*1 R .0 `J� CJ y Cn C7 G � �D �D " O "Z �'h f0 f!1 fD G. C� � O tn (D O H ?' fD G. r+• 7r' rt m � � t7 7C fD � � a � � � G. � � � � fD O fn O� O fD ,� n LTJ E r-� C r�,, � '=7 � �. "S m w '�V R tn II� rt lD H r�-� 't a" w ►t r+� ? cD C. n W n � � 'Y �' (� N � E C' � � � rt N � y R �' fD rr �p �" � t+7 �' Q' ►+. fC C� tT7 m � �' LL � 7 O � !�D G7 tn n a � � O f0 � n y O n W � � w O R O rn 7' A� ►t by H �' O Z L�=1 r+ f� � h-+ N "a' aC' 3 7 r'r fD � � • 00 M M N rJ Z ?' n fD fT � f1. � �C N W ►t O < 0'0• �"i tD � � Cn ?' W 'C �p d' � fD b�1 r+ ~ PJ � Ct7 a� n n. o «-� E �u x � � c.. � �o n� a o o E n a � � � Q. � � r- A�i R (AD .T A�i � r,� � trOJ � � Z H £ Z v�i t�n 0o C" r+ Q� fD A ?' re Cn �-n OQ O w � tn C C� :V C7 p. r+ t�t � � O w B y O I O' G. R� A> r� rt � f9 �p ;h y � a• C N cD C� O tn 9 O - ?' � � C ?' rt R x 'O W lT1 0> f�D C � y � � � rt O 7 � pq1 Q. fD h+. (A Ib .1.' � lfl � .a R W 1'T 41 fT C3. �'l� .'3 .."7 H .'T � r• 00 W n C �' rt � 9 y O � rr t7 rn 00 � O rt p� "G � � �-ref R w rt N � � S G� rr �' 2 r► ri .m ?' O n •t O r tn O 'C �C O C f9 �C f1 � a � � p � r�q d O C� pt � .£J. ►t r+� 7' n r • � W (n f� �' O w 00 ►1 Q 'TJ n � O cD fD n r{ rr I� W ?' 'L7 � �- �. � O rt 0> n t.r t9 G� � rt C. S O A rr L� � w rt fD rn W 5' '�C � M fD rt y 7- ;n < N X N tn G' Ou � fD � � (1 7' .r 5r' G. � tD fD R e� v a w � � w � v, a, a n � ... � co �o rt y w � °' � rt a su �• c w rt �3, n �,,, �,,, � �' fD w n. y y R R "J' • O O 4t Z � �� o w a, 7O �.. • � g � o W m . �° � r$ � < � � � � � � ��" t�o m rn � � fD (1f Vl A � � t� fD � - '� C Q' � � O rt • � fD Q' a o n 7 rt � � 7' lD '' 0� R �'* A� 7 m a �D . [i s � � co c. m -+ � N30 - a 7 f9 wW -„ � R R'� O �^ -� 'ti ao R n �' • D rr �p � C �C �" fD CA A� r• E e 7�C � O � 3 a. � . N� fT (p p, O �' r'S 1'' � A� y � � n � r► O 5' ln C Q �' G (D N (D r+ � n a a � � � o • n � w �v p � � o � �� * x t�z �Z G) c� ° � oCZ ro �v z •� D O r- � �C T � � � � I G1 fD H � Z � `C O Uf C � mO £ � su c�i� r+� 'L7 n H -mi 7 W (D rr I � rn'► a 9 y O 5" H r++ y O 0� n � � rt a° a fD �' � w O 4 (A R f!1 � M fD Y+� R `p 'C -i �p � u� tn O � G C O 'C < m + �s r ° D fD h+� !D '�; � 'T 3 -� � �' E O , m � � G ��-+ � Z � a '' �o m a. -'p � � � � � � • w � � O t � �+ L� r� (o r. (j � 00 pp m 00 w w o i'�' CT E r v. te C f�'f � '' r f'1 r-n O Cl c. o o .�OO Z � �, a n v• �o �•. w �n ° � v�o r► � ti K � � — e �- 3�. THOMSON & ELLIS, LTD. LAWYERS DOUGLAS W. THOMSON SUITE 300 DEBORAH ELLIS THREE FORTY FIVE ST. PETER STREET SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 (612) 227-0856 October Sixth i 9 s s RECEIVED OCT 0 61988 CITY CLERK HAND DELIVERED Albert B. Olson, City Clerk 386 City Hall St. Paul, MN 55102 Gagliardi v. City of St. Paul, et al. Dear Mr. Olson: Enclosed for filing are the original and one copy of the transcript of the August 23 , 1988 City Council hearing in the above matter. Yours truly, ��.��j��rl,i'it,C� C�Y�/� Howard Bass HB/(�p/ enc�is. WMITE - CITV CLERK / PINK - FINANCE COURClI �I q] CANARV - DEPARTMENT G I TY OF SA I NT PAU L /G� /�V BLUE - MAVOR File NO. LJ ��ty Attny/P?3B _ Ouncil Resolution � ��Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date RFSOLVI�D, that the On Sale Intoxicatinb Liquor , Sunday On Sale, Restaurant and all other licenses held by GT�I, Inc . , Anthony F. Gagliardi, President, dba Grand Central , _for the premises at 788 Grand Avenue in Saint Paul , are herehy suspended for a period of six (6) consecutive days . This susnension shall commence on September 4, 1988 This P,.esolution is bas�c�. or.. �he recc��:ci of ��roceedings before the Administrative 7�a�� Jucine, �rcludin� tLze liearing on June 29- 30, 1988 , the documents and exhibits introduced therein, the arguments and statements of counsel for the Parties on A.ugust 23 , 1988 , and the deliherations of the Council in open session. The Council adopts the findings of fact and conclusions of la�� of the Administrative Lata Jud�e contained in her Report dated July 28 , 1988, a cony of which is attached hereto and made a part of this Resolution. A copy of this I?eso�ution, as ado�ted, shall be sent by first class mail to the Administrative Law Judge, and to counsel for the licenseholder. COUNCIL MEMBERS Yeas Nays ` Requested by Department of: Dimond ' ��g In Favor Goswitz Rettman B Scheibel A gai n s t Y Sonnee'�'—^ Wilson AUG 2 5 1988 Form Approved by City Attorney Adopted by Council: Date Certified Ya s y ncil Se e ry gy—�� ' ��G g/l�f � / By App o ed by Mavor: Date L�- �� Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By Pt�1.ISHE9 ��--p _ J 1988 �. � � _�- � �� 1 �-��' � � � 1 CITY OF SAINT PAUL ,.,�,,,.,�,�„�, C�j�GtL' / �.*. o,�, '"� ��"'� OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK _: ': y r I IIIIQ c� s. �= ALBERT B. OLSON, CITY CLERK ��°'��um;„'„��°'�`�' 386 City Hall,Saint Paul,Minnesota 55102 GEORGE UTIMER RECEIVE�-�-a23, M/►YOR OCT 0 71988 INVENTORY OF GRAND CENTRAL LICENSE SUSPENSION FILE CITY CLERK Certi fied copy of St. Paul Resolution (C.F. 88-1438) suspending license Copy of �gust 23, 1988 City Goucil meeting minutes Tape of Pugust 23, 1988 City Council meeting Findings of Fact, Conclusions and (�commendation of the Administrative Law Judge including memorandums, hearing notices, briefs by City Attorney and Licensee, tapes of hearing before Administrative Law Judge and all other evidence s�mitted at Administrative Law Judge hearing and transcripts of the hearing Cost bond for Certiorari P�tition for Writ of Certiorari Writ of Certiorari Nbt i on for Stay on Exp Ed i ted Bas i s Ord er TRANS�IITTED TO STATE OF MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS ON R EC EI VED BY� � , L('�� , . �� J �3 � �°"'�'°��°� CITY OF SAINT PAUL _:`�.,, o,�,,, '" -''� OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK ze �: �� iim ,: ;+� �°� ALBERT B. OLSON, CITY CLERK ��'0��„mR"a�rs 386 City Hall,Saint Paul,Minnesota 55102 CEORGE LATIMER 612-298-4231 MAYOR INVENTORY OF GRAND CE]VTRAL LICFJdSE SUSPENSION FILE Certi fied copy of St. Paul Resolution (C.F. 88-1438) susperding license Copy of Aagust 23, 1988 City Goucil meeting minutes Tape of Pu gu st 23, 1988 Ci ty Cou nc i 1 meet i ng Findings of Fact, Gonclusions and Recommendation of the Administrative Law Judge including memorandums, hearing notices, briefs by City Attorney and Licensee, tapes of hearing before Administrative Law Judge and all other evidence submitted at Administrative Law Judge hearing and transcripts of the hearing Cost bond for Certiorari Petition for Writ of Certiorari Writ of Certiorari Mot i on for Stay on Exp ed i ted Bas i s Ord er TRANSMITTED 1D STATE OF MINNESOTA OURT O�F APPEALS oN �— 3 � -� RECEIVED BY � ��- i�/3� THOMSON & ELLIS, LTD. LAWYERS DOUGLAS W,TFIOMSON gU�TE 300 DEBORAH EL�13 TMREE FORTY FIVE ST.PETER STREET SAINT PAUL,MINNESOTA 55102 (BI21 227-09s6 S�ptember s i xt h RECEIVED 1 9 8 8 SEP 07 1988 CITY CLERK A1 Olson, City Clerk 386 City Hall St. Paul, MN 55102 Anthony F. Gagliardi v. City of Saint Paul, et al Dear Mr. Olson: Enclosed for filing are copies of the following, along with the $10 filing fee: COST BOND FOR CERTIORARI PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI WRIT OF CERTIORARI MOTION FOR STAY ON EXPEDITED BASIS ORDER Yours truly, ��Q2.o GU.�Ti—Grn,odx�� Douglas W. Thomson AB/7P encls. � - - — — THOMSON&ELLIS. LTD. 3 4 6 6 ; � . �� ". � ._ . �LAWYERS �. -.._ . - .�_.. � . -..-- -. � .. ... . . . �� .. � . .� ��: 94b 3T.PEiER STREET.SUITE 900 .. -. .. . � . �`- '.. - � ' . " ... � : : � � 8T.PAUL.MN 65102 . . .._ .. . � . �^�' � 19� . .. . 22-718 �""� B80 ' Pn�� '•�P,rk n4'_('a� s-f �fi, �c��.�.2 a ln, � �Pl/1 � ��Ba o��nRs Aletroeank �� N� .,..,......,�,� K H'003466�i• •�:096001181�: 43��194 5i�' � a.�..�..�...,..... � � . __-� -- --_ _._ _------ - -- --------- ------__ -- ---.___- ---- --- -- -------- --- --- ___ --__ __- -- -- --- - ---- _ �/��' �'-P-� � �'� -�� . - .. , . . . . ._�_ , ._.�:. . ��- _ �� . . . ;:. �. ... . .�. .- ,. . . , . .. . .. '..( .. � , _, .... �•. , . . �.`'.�. . .. . . _ �_ ,_.. . _ ,• : ,.. . .. ; . � � . . ;, . . , . , . <_ ,. . _. : , � . .. . .. .. -, . , . .. .. . ..:.. ...: ._ .::. . ;., . . ,. _ . . .. _ ;t . :; :. ... �, , , � . , . , , _ ; . ..;- :.,... . _ , .:., : ' :, �. ...1. _t . • .....� .. ..:.� 4 .... � . . . . . . ...... . ;• :�-. ' ! :.. � � � 'Q �..;.. . . : �1 ' . .. ' �... . _.I.5. ... . .. .. .! , �.l . , � ..,. � �.�:�.. F'�.-t � .. �_t�,. ?. ..... . � : f�i'�:ti'7: ..��l.i. . . ., ..._ . rZ_,,.. .� .. �i .. , . 'r t_it% . . �.... . i,.. �. ,. ..� . ....� ,��_ ��j... ..,i .._ .. �.. . .. . .. .. . j ... ..,.. ..... . _ . . e .� " "'n,. .,. . . 4i„ -..., . . . � "'; . ...._.,... -i .�. .� ._. 's- -.i-�? � :: ' ' I..�.; 's . . _._. �...'f'... , . __.. , ... . . ....... . . .. , ' . DETACH AND RETAIN THIS STATEMENT . THE ATTAGHEO CHECK IS IN PAYMENT OF ITEMS DESCRIHED BELOW. THOMSON & ELLIS, LTD. �F NOT CORRECT PLEASE NOTIFY US PROMPTLY. NO RECEIPT DESIRED. DELUXE - FORM DVC-3 V-7 -��I,Y,c -�P� �C,r ��v�,�,,�' tI_ l.t�.( �`'� �r�.�Cct.�Q 0 - ��-_� �li��-�t �� orct,�, � ,�� y ,�/�.:t � ASlV :� ,��. :.,r ;�a AT 4 J ' O} 4 '�� '� i{^'U' t ''.t M"' .:.� �t �^i )�.ti't��,1��M d� � 3 '�Q�:` ; '. .h Y aC:'.� � �� aF �i �' ' r a'. : S'f i � r �:`t f x - < < v�"F �t,y� .�s t `:�s.t � sr� k-�"'� �`� � � ` a , `� . � � w�, a � { +C F' � • � � . : -.,�3�� .�.vr� y'k,� �� J" .t .yr 5 i .� i <:� �, 7 e x � r �, � .� � { , i , Y'� i,.. �i s� R z' a�` :e -� ! �.� � �a.� i �� F 3. � . � � a �"'� i �� x 3�< .� �,� �� L. .y� +� . ��, a �t r � � , : � `� ~� ' 7 v 1. � ��. t a� ' I' I � `. ' r r�� 4 � r� y,-_ �r a '��"b,�.� ° q� �C 't �� `+�s � � � �: � � I r.� ` y,`� ,., ¢ l� , „- ,G't _ fw , \ �, � ? i a 'b�"' * q � '� r � !� � � � .� ��a , ` � ) G � ;{' � '�jS :rt; /�, �, �. k E . Y �' i � �� y r q �. + � �� . i� ' � s .� � .'�{ +y �� ' �� ` 1� t � �'f �t �� s r �:a .,rf � x h� } -. t R � ,� � � �� y �.�� tr~>z.� .�� ( t tn � x t�� Xr t i 1.:.�� i .T ��- � "t,�� '1: F � # �� 1��r�, � � � 't b j '-r� 1�. ,r" `, � � ti 1� h ,.- y.� �t . � p;i t�y. " � � � � # 1 �( i � �� l '1� I w�. 4 � x-� }I� ` � ,:4 , . /� 5 `.�Y 5'k 'J +h �=�. ! . ,"� �\ t �a, #� t�' � � 4 T .t�; E j ��4 � ` r � �•i I ( -y �x � � ��5� �' ^ ;. l � ,J t, , ✓ � _ u y x ��, r r .: �! � . :� . �f �t: . ,� � _,, � 4 i, j � . �d ° { 4�� Y t � � ; 1 � �..7 - I� " /�y � � � K� � � b X�� f � �� ,� ,p � �� -� n , " �, -�� 1 �� t � . "�� , ��b t t ; `�� ;1 A .�� , j 'h' r.; �,� -� F 1� � � � �,' � p � � � � / � f 1 � �-' � �� 3 1� /1 d� " } r , � �� .^ v �__ t � � �r � � 2 i t . r � F � ' �J ` : ,� �.: '�. � �'� �;F ` � t �� a "��3� � � � �'� � �� r � �° �w . � ; . J . .. .. � e °� ,� - � i k y '., � � � � I t , x�` 1 r � ' � � 1��1a�' � ` . �� a �y �. �l �� F� ;� y ,{ � �� < <`1�� ? k �i � _ �..' � "� '� n�� I � �� ,� c� � � a t r j � Y _ � ' � �, µ�' "� i t ��. r s.� t j v,: �'� � * .�r - a ,x � �� n:- ' t ' �4:"P� �� f C . �'-�_� 1 :C� :� - , /t ` , 'iy- �sj �, l 4 'u u l #. r� �� { � �"� � ) � -�{ � �, ��P ` i)a � _ �.' J � . . 1� � ! � i `� . _1�I .f .j { f y W Y y _ �� - ,I: � � r �� C Yr ` ? . � = � , ' t � j � � , t�� p � � t � .�.. � ,� �r _ � . � 16 � ,�� . � ; � f�. � � � i � � k 1 li Y I'�r.� :�`'� i�,v � ��r� ��f�• . , u.• .�.t . fc� ;'_. � 1 �t ' � � ��( 1�� ik+l. : �v� + �P- r'� �' : �5 ` .. + . .4 " 7'' �,. i��" �� ,",�' ,J�k./��;� _^/ .. {Y I. � � ,. } �? ',(. s F� 'ay '� �; � � . fl :� F � � 1{ � ,ti Y �,, .� f{ .� �� q""!j� �� ►` �"y "� � . ` �,� '�� _v � ' �, � k n .. '� � �� ki ��'. ! �f '�'i � - r � x \' �`t '� ��F t . . �r t �: . { F .'� .. � �� ' � � l ik ��. •. � ' m � � i F ,h '� i � ��f� � (yi��, ai � „ >�t + �� s I. j - � � � +�R�T �V r" �� 4�� ( . .. 1 i b 1 1 � � 7�r �:.�1 9 :� �� , .,} �. � ..�- � �' f �' � { � � ; ' +`�� _ � '� � � ' � • '! ,� _ r "',,�r �j ��y11 4 ly�� , ."�k�,� ��d�� _�� ,.T"h �y.�yi�� t�p �� 4, ` � t '„i! � ��.. �� a.r'. "'� ( ��7 ��'��t��`�� il�,.�+�� .' 7�� '��F.�I_�i �� ',� _^� ,.q � T � � �� ,�ti�. ,�' g �`�1:� ��'r,�l��!!��{��+'.�` �� '�Ml��1�r,� �� a`—^��' � ': p , ` �!.� J�i�{` �'� �1 7�'iMl��j . ��x�``'�+t�t ��' � ` � k�.Pr: i ...� a�ii ;� �� .7N!!� �� '�'. r i ' � t ai_, 3i k } d�R��^ �� e�"r�, t_ •f{ � ��,� ✓ y } S , , .y� Ty : �� . �,: ,�� t,�p� r9��a��je�init, �['� �4 f:t� �"t o�` r-�: w�� fi�4�r � �: ,, : , �'r � 3 r` 'fR ��'l��}.1[�y'��` yI�,�+� �'.��'.�: � � '�1�� +�� f k� 1 f ' }� ,'p � ! ��M�Y�I K'��#�w. �/M{�`�f�� ' W R �;��- t ��. : 1 �.' �v .. � � � 1 "i� .� '�� '! �a . r � '�x { ' �j ��+ a ��.j� f��? ,M. �,.t � � 2 y�' 'S% /1 { ��F1AM d , � / • � �, 1 � ��, 5�--• 1 • _ � � ._� . � `a. 1� t ' � F .r i �� 1 � p. s� s .n, � � a i i � i o e 1��" � s; r� r V�` , a� '�� l: �� sL � � r. ( ', �' � '_ / i (•� �� r � �: i, 1 � I e 1 .� ! `r _ � .%_ � � ��. G.fP �.. tY�_- 7 i -/ n� ,��` {1 ��ar� _ . , . '. }- � t. -1 �..� �� S �� ` 1 Q�f 4 " ! 4 �Z i �� . ,y x a � � r .. ,,� `� c � � ti f �� r i � � f ��r '�5� ci 1�� ,, .� t.• -�� :, i � � � J * .,p � �� (�r?a t i x .]f��.,,,,,�,y, �,� � r ° i - e ��'r n F x' + � �� P WR`�� f � � � 4 � , � s � I ��f y� � i � � �� ` �4. �� '�: ,� .' � ` � t �' { � � ,� a r � ; ' , � y ��, '�R ,� �• '� i�j �+ : + `' � f 1X E r l�� s �S� i'' §t�• V. "� �� '1' ' r 1 .:.,1 N) r+�.�� Ii'�, � i � (� r r �: s� L � � y �` � � a. � � _ � � �� i a , ' �G �, � -A� 7 r d y . � � _ � � ) � '� ��1 5 4 +.''. �\r P: ; A' �. ��.l ) Y1 , �M . '-Y. � � � M+� � {��8 � Y..� � �! � l t 1 , �: . , .. � ,rv : �'� � r .�� t z �.: ��, r .. �� ;. .;. '. � w` y � ( �� f �.' � � �� K� � .r . �; "'t�. 4.. r T , I i� �., ✓ � �. �k `� � a � � ^. :� � �z°ti °.� � }' � {�� :�� '� , n_ � -� � y s.C. x w d., .il �� s f s �e, y.r.§ 7 � �� ` � ,;� � n I �. ' r �a r r . � <!.�! h �`. � av � y: r ,1 � �.`. }� � y � � i �` ./' 'F � i �' . � . �` � 1 ��M r� f � a 1 ' � �<<�f'� - � _:� �_ � `ti'� �Y�n �`�' ,+�'J 1 :�5t t E. .� � _ � ,r> t +t �,. r a C t :.j� r �,� y .. :, r , � , gp� Ni �,a �.�,, i} � :5 � ��i �:�° .1� '� �} �-1 a f 'S �.4 � .t 4 r � r �� 4 �� c j„ ,� r � �. y � y ,� � , ' � � ; �� i , �.. � �� ) y � �� f�� - � i�t i t �. �rt ��/� � � r � Y S� t� ;h°`�� t n , �i 'i .: r! �:, ; r£ . ' t � ; i r '"�4 � 's � i r .y� � � s:. a .. 5 � �t . +�`' �; i a � .� � % t t."� �' :�/ � j . �,� ,y� �.- � ✓ �� ' �,^�' k' c _ x w � �r � S �" � � � 1 � � f �a: �� t g�� _ ,� ' � � i� t � � , 1��•'? u( 1, a � �,-� ; ' t � r i„u . \ . d .� ,� �i ., / � a � � ,P a i L �� r � .`,� �,: tr '' � ' � ° � ' � �vs a' ��- i; t p�: r x i . � u t > r ,, ,� a , 7 �-' � f' t � t f �� i � ` `�� _ �` � '_ r � , }-y � � r�` 1 �� %�ti � � '' r `� r. " �4` . f � �' '( � : r. � '� ,r = j ' �p: � � �Ci � � r � !s i� " ��n`� E y Y� ..�� i � e I.� � � . � l a .� 1 � � �� /� ; � �I � � 1 l t�"6� , j�� r 7 �1 �t ',I a . r k , r +t � 1i � } `� �,�a1� �'t�'f�; � : iu l d� g. � 0 � { � _ � i�a , � '� , i � t , �r 7 9. *Y' Y ; �� r,} 1 4i� ��g h � .�� a� �{ a 1 r �� y '.�. F ` �.- i ��,t k . �,r,.r� a, -�:.f sFt r� �` �..�j } � y�+fi L R,H�,�� a� ..� �! .�_ Tt � p � ' f" � .� 1 .,�r !� �� ,1` Y ' s ,�[, i � � , � �` 1>X� ., +� 4� ° •� � � �i y�y ."�y� ��e4 3l �t �� r r� ` 3 'i' ' v� 1� !, i �r a �� r�.�� . e x f. `'�. ?�f. ;5 y `�i °2 i„`t .1� P �.: ��i! ! � � �� Y' �J S��t.�� '2 C :� � s � r�.."r y '��,xtr �` s f i'.'� t''�-��et� � � ,ti�'" �A�,q� �, � �,��'� ltr�,d�_�v i� ��'a�,, g ��` � t :r i . 'k r �..� r � �' u � n41.. 3�'�n' l, ; � i•va. t �i: � q• P s� .-�.. ti � Y�� t� �K�' '�"'r ia -� �� M}-.?�l �'T :`/ Jr: i ,e`d'�a.nf •��.,4t i �v -3)J��r �-�^�k k F�� ' 1 £ r.��,�,�}a�.�)i.�`��i�. }ei : ar a t ,:t �.: R Y x t '�..�r S ). S y r�k �. ,b 7 f a''�} Y �''; .t a� y � �t,�q,x � .�� a'.r P � � t i� s y '�p }:`�ri sr .+u. s. y{, 4-��. �'a��,r.'�_.�'�3.. _. . ,�.t.�,4 . , !.`;r..., t`. . . .. .,.��,_'..'�;��'`.,k� . ...- t:.., !w ..._�+.�_,,.�.;'d,t�;i ,..,r.�„�� < �`�,:H�C �'�#;�,�u ..f„��:�'�$v�.�.�t�w,:.a,..,�a�ay`',f,"�zu�.._,i��f�$�^,:��:�_':R,'�'� . THOMSON & ELLIS, LTD. LAWYERS DOUGLAS W, THOMSON SUITE 300 DEBORAH ELLIS THREE FORTY FIVE ST. PETER STREET SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 � (612) 227-0856 RECEIVED sePtember SEP 0 81988 Sixth i 9 s s CITY CLERK Albert B. Olson Clerk of City of St. Paul 386 City Hall St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 Anthony F. Gagliardi v. City of St. Paul, et al. Dear Mr. Olson: I wish to order the transcript of the public hearing conducted in Mr. Gagliardi' s case before the St. Paul City Council on August 23 , 1988 for purposes of appeal. I have enclosed a Certificate As To Transcript for your signature. Please return the completed certificate to me by September 13 , 1988 and let me know if you need a down payment. Thank you. Yours truly, Bass HB/dbt encl. R RECEIVED STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF RAMSEY SEP 0 8 1988 ST. PAUL CITY COUNCIL CITY C��ftK Anthony F. Gagliardi, CERTIFICATE AS TO TRANSCRIPT Relator, v. Trial Court Case Number: City of St. Paul, et al. , Respondents. Appellate Court Case Number: CO-88-1862 TO: Clerk of Appellate Courts 230 State Capitol St. Paul, Minnesota 55012 A transcript of the trial in the above-entitled action was re- quested by counsel for Relator on September 6 , 1988 , in accordance with Rule 110 . 02 , subdivision 2 of the Rules of Civil Appellate Pro- cedure. The estimated number of pages is and the estimated date of completion is , 198 , a date not to exceed 60 days from the date of request. Satisfactory financial arrangements have been made between counsel for Relator and the court reporter for the transcription. Dated: September 6, 1988 � HOW ASS Attorney License No. 189340 Attorney for Relator Dated: ALBERT B. OLSON Clerk of City of St. Paul . �� .. i �..i1" - J THOMSON & ELLIS, LTD. LAWYERS DOUGLAS W, THOMSON SUITE 300 DEBORAH ELLIS THREE FORTY FIVE ST. PETER STREET SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 (612) 227-0856 October Sixth 1 9 8 8 RECEIVE[3 o cT o s �ssa CiTY C�.ER� HAND DELIVERED Albert B. Olson, City Clerk 386 City Hall St. Paul, MN 55102 Gagliardi v. City of St. Paul, et al. Dear Mr. Olson: Enclosed for filing are the original and one copy of the transcript of the August 23 , 1988 City Council hearing in the above matter. Yours truly, . J' _'r.'��'r!.%t- ��'='./,:7� � Howard Bass �/� HB/.jp� enc�Y's. � � �� r � ,�� -._� � O 1 A � �� . . , i • ��-� � ��' � 1 MINNESOTA APPELLATE COIJgTS (612) 297-1904 �� APPELLATE COEIRT N4. �0-88-1862 FILE LOCATION BX Anthony F. Gagliardi , Relator, vs . City of St. Paul , et al . , Respondents. * Received from the Appellate Caurts of the State of Minnesata, the following original files and exhibits in the above entitled matter: Distriot rourt file and exhibits (see attached copy of the Triai Court receipt) . NOTE: When original and capy of transcript are forwarded by the �lerk af the Trial Court, the original goes to the �ugreme Court Law Library at the conclusioM of the ca5e. Dated: PLEASE SIGN AND ��x COPY OF BECEIPT COURT ADMINISTRATOR sy: DEPUTY/ASBISTANT � ( �� ° ��' S ��''�� 3. � , � � ��°""'"'�°� • �" �� "� �� CITY OF SAINT PAUL �-�""�•** o.°w '"�� '-�"''� OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK ;� �; 4+ ��,m wQ� �.,,,. _ ALBERT B. OLSON, CITY CLERK v��°� '••' � 386 City Hall,Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 �"imm�a..o°�`� GEORCE LATIMER 612-298-4231 MAYOR INVENTORY OF GRAND CFJNTRAL LICENSE SUSPENSION FILE Certi fied copy of St. Paul Resolution (C.F. 88-1438) suspending license Copy of Pugust 23, 1988 City Goucil meeting minutes Tape of Pugust 23, 1988 City Council meeting Findings of Fact, Conclusions and f�commendation of the Pdministrative Law Judge including memorandums, hearing notices, briefs by City Attorney and Licensee, tapes of hearing before Administrative Law Judge and all other evidence submitted at Administrative Law Judge hearing and transcripts of the hearing Cost bond for Certiorari Petition for Writ of Certiorari Writ of Certiorari Nbtion for Stay on Expedited Basis Ord er TRANSMITTED Tt� STATE OF MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS ON R EC EI VE D BY . . C� -�s� - � �s��. � __��.*• o;�,, � • CITY OF SAINT PAUL -"� '��''� OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK �� ; ;� i i�" ^�� -,,,. _ ALBERT B. OLSON, CITY CLERK I�`'°� '••• 386 City Hall,Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 '"+mm"...��°```` 612-298-4231 GEORCE LATIMER MAYOR INVENTORY OF THE BELMONT CLUB LICENSE REVOCATION FILE Certi fied Copy of St. Paul Council Resolution (C.F. 88-1426) and Council Findings & Conclusions revoking license Copy of Augu st 11, 1988 Ci ty Couci 1 meet i ng mi nu tes Findin�s of Fact, Cflnclusions and Recommendation of the Administrative Law Judge including all evidence submitted at hearing and transcripts of the hearing Respondent's Objections to City Council 's Proposed Findings, Conclusions & , Adverse Action License Inspector's Exception to Findings, Conclusions and I�comnendations City's Brief in Response to Nbtions and in Final Argument Respondent's Exceptions, Nbtions, Memorandums and Final Argument Cost bond for Certiorari Petition for Writ of Certiorari Statements of the case of petitioners Writ of Certiorari Nbtion for Stay on an expedited basis Affidavit of N�ry F. Seymour TRANSMITTED TO STATE OF MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS ON R EC EI VED BY THOMSON & ELLIS, LTD. LAWYERS DOUGLAS W, THOMSON SUITE 300 DEBORAH ELLIS THREE FORTY FIVE ST. PETER STREET SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 1612) 227-0856 September s i x t h RECEIVED 1 9 8 8 SEP 0 71988 CITY CLERK A1 Olson, City Clerk 386 City Hall St. Paul, MN 55102 Anthony F. Gagliardi v. City of Saint Paul, et al Dear Mr . Olson: Enclosed for filing are copies of the following, along with the $10 filing fee: COST BOND FOR CERTIORARI PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI WRIT OF CERTIORARI MOTION FOR STAY ON EXPEDITED BASIS ORDER Yours truly, _il'�C�'0 w ��:��/,�� Douglas W. Thomson HB/7P encls. � � STATE OF MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS Anthony F. Gagliardi, Petitioner -vs- City of St. Paul, et al, Respondents COST BOND FOR CERTIORARI KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS, That we, Anthony F. Gagliardi by Douglas W. Thomson, his Attorney, as principal (s) and EMPIRE FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY of Omaha, Nebraska, as surety and held and firmly bound unto the Court of Appeals in the sum of ($500. 00) Five Hundred and No/100 Dollars for which payment well and truly to be made we jointly and severally bind ourselves and each of our heirs and legal representatives, firmly by these presents. That the undersigned will at all times indemnify the Surety and save it harmless from and against any and all claims, demands, judgments, liabilities, loss, damage, or expense of every kind and nature, including court costs and attorney fees, which it shall sustain or incur in consequence of it having executed said bond. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, That if the above named principal (s) shall pay all costs and disbursements that may be adjudged against him in said action, this obligation shall become void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, We have hereunto set our hands and seals this 2nd day of September, 1988. Signed, Sealed and Delivered in Presence of: ,-� - Anthon F. Gagliardi ;' �- i � _.l�F��'t_{_ r�� i��i.)i; .��/'�1.� �y: ��J . � Dougla W. Thomson, his Attorney EMPIRE FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE CC. � , j � � s�,,.--' �Cl , Mary K. Ann t, Attorney in �'act STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF RAMSEY BE IT KNOWN, That on this 2nd day of September, 1988, before me personally appeared Douglas W. Thomson to me known to be the same person described in and who executed the foregoing bond, and did acknowledge the same to be his/her own free act and deed. � � � � .�•;�-<— �_�, 3�7,,��(i I�✓ Notary Public �~1 DIANE B. THOMPSON � NOTARY pUg��C - MINNESOTA � MY commla°lo^�xPirea�1-2 91 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this 2nd day of September, 1988, before me, a notary public in and for said County, personally appeared Mary K. Annett to me personally known and being by me duly sworn, did say that he/she is the Attorney in Fact of the EMPIRE FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation of Omaha, Nebraska, created, organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Nebraska, that the said instrument was executed on behalf of the said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors and that the said Mary K. Annett acknowledges said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation and that he/she has authority to sign said instrument without affixing the corporate seal of said corporation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed my official seal at Minneapolis, Minnesota, the day and year last above written. , '""'~ JUUE ANN HILL r ;� .1! • ,�`�-� NOTARY PUBLIC—MINNESOTA ��= HENNEPIN COUNTY Notary P My Commission Expires June 20, 1994 r � a Empire Fire and Marine nsurance Company OMAHA. NEBRASKA POWER DF ATTORNEY No. B ±�,��'�� Know All Men by These Presents: That tha Power of Attorney i� not valid or in effeet unleu attached to the boed which it autho�i:e� executed, but may be de- tached by the approving officer if daired. . That, EMPIRE FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPAIYI', � corpora�ion dulr orsani:ed under the laws of the State of Ncbr��ka, aed havinr its princi�►a) offiu in the Citr of Oa�.M, Countr of Dou�la�, St�te of Nebn�k., doe� hereby make, coosti- tute and appoint Patrick J. Thomas, Richard H. Davies, Shirley Elavsky and Mary K. Annett i�� true +�ed Irwful Attornev(s)•in•f�ct, to make, eaecate, �isn, �esl�nd deliver (or �nd on it� behalf a� �drc1y �nd a� ib aet aed deed any aod •II bond� and undertakings of •uretyship except the Eollowing: NOT VALID FOR I. Bond� GuaranteeinQ P�r(ormance or Payment of Contraet• 6. Lendors' or L.es�or�' Completion Bonds 2. Bank Depo�itory Bondt 7. Lease Bond� 3. �lorigage D�(iciency or Cuarantee Bond� 8. Financial Institution Bonds 4. Note Cuarant�e Bends 9. Warehouiem�n'� Bondi 5. Bonds Cuaranteeing lnstallment Pape� 10. Qualifying Bond� of ln�urance Compsnies NOT EXCEEDING IN AMOUNT Three Hundred 'rt�ousand and 00/100 ,-.._-..,-,.-„-, _-,.._...-..-_ .-.._-....-...- - - - - - .-..Dollan (S 3Q0,000.00.._. .. .. . ... _.... . .. ... . . . . ) . . and to bind Eh1PIRf. F1RE AND MARINE 1NSURANCE COMPAM' thereby �e fully and to the same e:tent s� if such bond� and undertakinRs +�nd oth�r N•ritings ohligatory in the nature �hereof were �iQncd by an Executive Of(icer of EA1PIRE FlRE AND A1ARINF INSURANC�: and seal�d and attest�d to by one other of such officers, and hercby ratifie� and confirm� all that its +aid A�toroey(s)•in-(act may do in pursuance hereof. This po�•er of attorn�y i� granted under and by authority of Article f[(, Section 3.1 of Ihe By-Law� of the EMPiRE FtRE AND M1tARINE INSURANCE COAIPANY and by Resolution of the Boerd of Directon duly adopted a• follow�: "All bonds, polici�s, und�rtakinRs or other obligations oF the corporation shal) be executed in the co�porate name of the Com�any by �he Chairman of th� Board. President, Secretary, any Asei�tant Secretary, Treasurer, or any Vice-President, or bv such other of(iccrs as the Board of Directors may authorize. T�e Chairman of Ihe Board. Pre�ident, eny Vice-President, Secr�tary, any Assistant Secretary, or the Treasurer may appoint Attorneys in Fact or Agents who �hall have authority to issue bonds. F�olici�s, or und�rtakings in the name oF the Company. T�e corporate ieal is not neca�ary for the validity of any bonds, policie�, undertakings or other obligations of the corporation." It is certi(ied that the above is a true and exact copy. In Witn�ss Wher�o(. �h� EMPIRE FIRE AND MARfNE lNSURANCE COMPAtVY ha� caused these presents to be •igned by i1s Presidenl, and il: corporate seal to be hereto affixed, duly atteeted by its Secretary thi� 22nd day of September , 19 8� EMPIRE FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY Acc�st: �' �(� � �� /`�i2��i��7/_ $ecrclsry ✓ '� '�� PRES�DENT SiAi� Ui l�.r].lii��JI�� SS. COUNTY OF DOUGLt�S) On this �� day of ' , A.D. 19 �, before me personally came Frank Kratky, to me known, who being by m duly sworn, did depose and say: that he resides in the County of Douglas, State of Nebraska; that he is the Secretary of the EMPIRE FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, the corporation described in and which executed the above instrument; that he knows the seal of said corporatic�n; that the seal affixed to the said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was so affixed by order of the Board of Directors of said corporation and that he signed his name thereto by like or er. � EM 40 10 (06-88) ��'�� `�' �N��u Notary Public �f�1�Mt Eq�FIk.1Z 1�1 � , , � r THOMSON & ELLIS, LTD. QFFICE OF "�� LAWYERS 2 THREE FORTY FI,VEEST�PETER STREET APPELLATE COU SAINT PAUL. MINNESOTA 55102 3 (612) 227-0856 ��[� O Cl {�f�� - �, 1 J STATE OF MINNESOTA 4 IN COURT OF APPEALS F��ED, 5 Anthony F. Gagliardi, ) 6 ) Petitoner, ) PETITION FOR WRIT � ) OF CERTIORARI vs. ) 8 � City of Saint Paul, a Minne- ) COURT OF APPEALS NUMBER: 9 sota municipal corporation ) and the City Council of ) 10 Saint Paul, Consisting of ) DATE OF MAILING James Schweibel, President, ) NOTICE OF DECISION: 11 Kiki Sonnen, Bob Long, Tom ) August 28, 1988 Dimond, Roger Goswitz, Bill ) �2 Wilson and Janice Rettman, ) ��$— � ��j� 13 � Respondents. ) 14 � 15 T0: THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 16 The above-named petitioner hereby petitions the Court of �� Appeals for a Writ of Certiorari to review a resolution of the �$ City Council of St. Paul to suspend petitioner 's liquor and 19 restaurant licenses for a period of six ( 6) days, commencing 20 September 4, 1988 . This resolution was adopted by the City 2� Council of Saint Paul and approved by the Mayor of Saint Paul 22 on August 25, 1988. 23 This resolution violates petitioner 's constitutional 24 rights to due process of law and the equal protection of the 25 laws. The resolution was not made in conformity with the 26 provisions of Section 409. 26 of the Saint Paul Legislative 2� Code. The resolution is unwarranted by the evidence. 28 I �:� . 1 A copy of the resolution and petitioner 's statement of 2 the case are attached hereto. 3 DATED: September 2, 1988 THOMSON ELLIS, LTD. 4 � �/�5 B �!�1 - ----. . oug s W. Thomson g Atty. ' . No. 109514 Suite 0, 345 St. Peter Street 7 St . Paul, Minnesota 55102 ( 612) 227-0856 8 Attorney for Petitioner 9 10 11 W 12 WN o ~° 13 JN� �� W `� W�`° 14 JN�aN�O W�m�W o as3��N 15 OJ�LL�'N }',� 16 N �a V � oZ �7 = Wa H �� x � 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 - 2 - � STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS Anthony F. Gagliardi, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) WRIT OF CERTIORARI vs. ) ) City of Saint Paul , a Minne- ) COURT OF APPEALS NUMBER: sota municipal corporation ) and the City Council of ) Saint Paul, Consisting of ) DATE OF MAILING James Schweibel , President, ) NOTICE OF DECISION: Kiki Sonnen, Bob Long, Tom ) August 28, 1988 Dimond, Roger Goswitz, Bill ) Wilson and Janice Rettman, ; �O_�4_I '�� O 'J Respondents. ) ) TO: THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF SAINT PAUL: You are hereby ordered to return to the Court of Appeals within 30 days from this date the record, exhibits and proceedings in the above-entitled matter so that this court may review the decision of the City Council of Saint Paul filed on August 25, 1988, and mailed on the date noted above. Copies of this writ and accompanying petition shall be served forthwith either personally or by mail upon the City of Saint Paul and the City Council of Saint Paul, or its attorney at: 647 City Hall , Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102. Proof of service shall be filed with the clerk of appellate courts . DATED: L�-�� -WAYNE-O-:-TSeH��'IPERLE Clerk of Appellate Courts � � • � n By: �, ` ,� �/ 2Zti—. Assistant Clerk . . � ;f i . �� 1 . THOMSON & ELLIS. LTD. ' 2 LAWYERS SUITE 300 : 7NREE FORTY FiVE SL PETER STREET � SAINT PAUL. MINNESOTA 55102 3 , (612) 227�0856 4 ' ' STATE OF MINNESOTA 5 IN COURT OF APPEALS �� v�l�/� �) ��°`. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 " Anthony F. Gagliardi , 7 : Petitioner, 8 9 vs. 10 City of Saint Paul , a Minne- APPELLATE COURT sota municipal corporation CASE NUMBER: 11 and the City Council of Saint Paul, Consisting of 12 James Schweibel, President, Kiki Sonnen, Bob Long, Tom 13 Dimond, Roger Goswitz, Bill Wilson and Janice Rettman, 14 Respondents. 15 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - � �� MOTION FOR STAY ON EXPEDITED BASIS 17 18 Petitioner, Anthony F. Gagliardi , hereby moves this 19 court to stay the enforcement of the suspension of his 20 liquor and restaurant licenses, as ordered by the Saint Paul 21 , - City Council . In support of this motion, petitioner states 22 the following: 23 ' 1 . On August 25, 1988, the Saint Paul City Council 24 ::! adopted a resolution suspending petitioner ' s liquor and 25 ', , restaurant licenses for a period of six ( 6 ) days, commencing 26 ;� on September 4, 1988 . (A copy of the resolution is attached 27 ' hereto as Exhibit A. ) 28 � 1 ' . 2. Petitioner received notice of this resolution on 2 August 29, 1988. 3 3. On September l, 1988, petitioner sought a 4 temporary restraining order to prevent the City from 5. enforcing this resolution. The Honorable Kenneth J. 6 Fitzpatrick denied petitioner 's request, however, on the 7" ground that a writ of certiorari in the Minnesota Court of 8 : Appeals, rather than a temporary injunction in the district 9 court, was the appropriate procedural method for securing 10 judicial review of the City Council 's action. 11 4. Today petitioner has filed his petition for writ � 12 WN of certiorari with the Minnesota Court of Appeals, claiming ° �° 13 J N� _ WN that the City Council 's action: (1 ) violated his N a W�`° 14 � �NOa�o constitutional rights to due process of law and the equal W��,�w }WNZN �<�'�N 15 rotection of the laws - � Z� ,� .N P , ( 2) violated St. Paul Leg. Code O N J� »,� 16 u, �a- o o� �409. 26; and ( 3) was unwarranted by the evidence (a copy of Z 17 = Wa � _�' the petition is attached hereto as Exhibit B) . ~ 18 5. Petitioner ' s counsel also contacted respondents ' 19 counsel, Assistant City of Saint Paul Attorney Phillip 20 . Byrne, today and inquired whether the City would agree to 21 stay the enforcement of its resolution pending a final 22 . decision of this court. Phillip Byrne stated that he had no 23 authority to agree to a stay and that only the City Council, 24 ' � which does not meet again until September 6, 1988, could 25 " agree to stay the enforcement of the resolution pending a 26 � final decision of this court. Nevertheless, Phillip Byrne 27 stated that he would not object to this court ordering a 28 . ;� � . � � stay (see Affidavit of Howard Bass, attached hereto as 2 Exhibit C) . 3 6. Pursuant to section 14. 65 of the Minnesota ' 4 Statutes, this court has the authority to order a stay of 5 the enforcement of the resolution suspending petitioner 's 6 liquor and restaurant licenses. � 7. Petitioner will suffer immediate, real, 8 substantial and irreparable injury if this court refuses to � 9 stay enforcement of the resolution suspending his liquor and 10 restaurant licenses. He will be deQrived of his property 11 �nd livelihood for a period of six (6) days, commencing ~ 12 September 4, 1988. W W N Q �O � �� 13 8. Resoondents will suffer no harm if this court wQ `� W�� 14 �NgaOg stays enforcement of the resolution pending a final decision � �W . � `�Q;>�" 15 of this court. � �J�Y��p `� ~av 9. There is a stron robability that etitioner 0 0� 1 9 P P � �N � � will succeed on the merits when this court reviews the _ � 18 allegedly unlawful actions of the City Council. 19 10. Staying enforcement of the resolution will not 20 . place any administrative burden on this court to supervise 21 the stay. 22 11 . Staying enforcement of the resolution is in the 23 public interest. 24 1r7HEREFORE, for the above-stated reasons, petitioner 25 requests this court to stay the suspension of his liquor and 26 � restaurant licenses pending a final decision by this court. 27 28 ' i � . � � � � ; Respectfully submitted, . 2 THOMSON & ELLIS, LTD. 3 4 � � By l -i<.� .i - 5 Dou as W. Th�mson Atty. I�fc. No. 109514 6 Suite 300 , 345 St. Peter Street . � St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 ; ( 612) 227-0856 8 Attorney for Petitioner Dated: September 2, 1988 9 10 11 � 12 W �'N ° �° 13 }- N� J �� wQ cn w~`° 14 � ao� W��w� w N z r ,�5 dS'�W?N Q]>� � Zp��"JN �, �Q� 16 � �a O OZ �7 = wQ � �N S � �8 19 20 • 21 22 23 24 25 26 ' ` 27 28 � ..��T•. - i.' - �lE�'� . .. . .... . . . . .. . . . . �/y.:::^ ! -�,^•�'�.. ,..... ..,... _.�K49v — t7EPI.A��ti � �T 1� .O l-. �iZ j 1` -T ��a1.�.� . . . . �� Gi/�'`, I� - t 1 ^.i Y��Z i`Ll� /7L �` � .�uE —u.�0*+ . • :�-�y _��`�}•1�_�� s r'l �e�o��z�r� _ �0.��2.,L .°s�nted E'iy ��'_`l..`��i��/� heCe:ced To Co,;�ni:;e`- Da.e Out of Co^r:.i::ee 6y_ ' Date �,=.SOLVT:D, t[12t tze On Sa1e Intotiicatin� Lic;uor, Sunday On Sale, Restaur�nt and a11 other licenses held by GP�i, In�. , . Antho:�y F. Gaoliardi, President, dba Grand Central, for the prem�ses at 788 Grand Avenue in Saint Paul , are here�y suspended . for a �eriod oi six (6) consecutive days . This sus��nsion shall commezce on Septem5er 4, 1988 � ii11S P.esolution is based or_ ��e reco�d of _�roceedings before � the Ae�inistrative Lac•� Jud;;e, �r_cludin� t�e i��aring on June 29- 30, 1°83, the documents and exhibits introduced therein, the argi:=:ents and state�ents of counsel for the parties on A.ugust 23, 1988, and the ;�eli�era�ions of the Council in open session_ The Counc_l adopts the findings of fact and cozclusions. of law of the c,��=stra�i�e Lata Ju:�� contained in her ReDOrt dated July 28, 1°8S, a co�y o= �-Jhicn is atta�hed ^e�e�o and made 2 part of this Reso=•�t�o�_ :_ cop,� o� ��is ?Psoi��tion, as ��on�ed, sha11 be sen� b� ?=�rs= class r�=-1 �o �he Administra�ive Lac.* Judge, and to co�*�sel Tor ��e licensenolder_ � . �� ;t�G `�� g8�3 �O�SON&E�L15,l-TO• T COUNCIL MEMS�.��S . Requcsted by Depaccment of: t� !�ays Dimood � ��e in Favor Goswi�z Rettm�n � Against gY 5�nribd $on ncrr—�' Nilsoo �,iJ�7 L � ��R3 Eorm App�oved by City Attorney i.dopted by Cocacil: Date — � -��,��c, f�/LU�� ' �� B �'Q/�.c,(' �' • � Certified Y�4sod ;�ancil SecteiZ:y Y \ ��i`-�/� I ��, f J' ` - 8'' ��g � �l^ �C� �pproved by Mayo: for Sub:aission to Couneil ;,�p o�ed by 1lavor. Oate � .. I '�- '� �� J EXHIBIT A i� � THOh4SOh & EI�IS. ITD. 2 �c.•:�cRs cL�icE 300 '^��.E FO.ZTY rrvE 5T. PET£R ST�ccT � SAINT oAUI. v�vNE507A 55102 � 3 �e�t� =_�oasF STATE OF tfINNESOTA 4 IN COURT OF APPEALS 5 � Anthony �'. Gagliardi , ) 6 ) Petitoner , ) PETITION FOR WRIT � ) OE CERTIORARI vs. ) 8 � City of Saint Paul , a Minne- ) COURT OF APPEALS NUMBER: g sota munieipal corporation ) and the City Council of ) 10 Saint Paul, Consisting of ) DATE OF MAILING James Schweibel, Preside�t, ) NOTICE OF DECISION: 11 �iki Sonnen, Bob Long, Tom ) August 28, 1988 Dimond, Roger Goswitz, Bill ) 12 �7ilson and Jani�e Rettman, ) ) �3 ResQondents. ) ) 14 �O: THE COORT OF APPLALS 0� T:?E STATE OF t9INNESOTA 15 �� ls The above-named petitioner hereby petitions the Court of » �p�eals for a Writ of Certiorari to review a resolution of the �� City Council of St . Paul to susoend petitioner ' s liquor and �g restauran� licenses for a period of six ( 6) days, commencing 20 Seotember 4, 1988. This resolution was adopted by the City 21 -�ouncil of Saint Paul and approved Qy the Mayor of Saint Paul 22 on August 25, 1988. 23 This resolution violates petitioner 's constitutional 24 -ights to due process of law and the equal protection of the 25 ?aws. The resolution was not made in conformi�y with the 26 �rovisions of Sec�ion 409. 26 of the Saint Paul Legislative 27 Code. The resolution is unwarranted by the evidence. 28 EXHIBIT B 1 A �ooy of the resolution and peti�ioner ' s stater.i�nt of 2 � t}Ze case are attached hereto. -, J DAT�D: S��tember 2, 1988 THO[�lSON � ELLIS, LTD. 4 � i ! . � 5 � / � i l�� "�;-�`-- •� � � ougl s W. Thomson 6 Atty. L,i��. No. 109514 Suite 3U0, 345 St. Peter Street 7 St . Paul, Minnesota 55102 (612) 227-0856 g Attorney for Petitioner 9 10 11 12 L Nti ° -,° 13 �< �' 4`� 14 J C� J'rj N� lt!-,�u;Z� �3��,?ry 15 z�='-�N � O�NLLJ� �� 16 cn �<- � �� O ° `' 17 T 4< , li_� 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 - 2 - ,. .. .;. _... ..:.... .. .:. ..... . .. .. , ,,,. . ..,.., _;.s... - i: ... .y . ` � �� .j _ � ` .��._.. �j��i _• - -•aCn...a � . U � l i t i _' J:� i � . . . ... _� _�.iC K:� if i. _ x . .�C� -....o�+r � • I � ';�� `�; t=_�� '�.��;I ,^€.��S��Y'�Z�;,� _ � ,, ,� . � . � . - i,,, ;;:<. :��,,. _,�� .�:�n:ed i>J Co.:��e.._�. Ja,� :i•�!C'..'� :o _------ Jz�e — Out uf Co::.-..:�e ;i:_ —_— --__--'_ - ------ - —_---_—___- — ^ Lic�or , Su�day �:� =,=.�OI,�TD, �:�at �:le Oa Sa1e ��o_•_ica��n� � 7 t�eLd by Gr:l? , Inc_ . S�G�e� �eSl.�urG::L 2T?tl 4�� othei 11C�:15C�.J Anthc�y F. Gao�iarui, Pr°-sident, dda Gra�d Ceztral, ror t:�e pre^-ses at 7S� Grand �venu° in Sai�t Paul , are ��erehy susperided for � �eriod o= six (6) consecutive da}�s . This sus�°_�sion shall co�°::ce oz S°��r 4, 1988 � _�is P.esol�tion i� ba�ed or. ��e reco�c� o£ -�roceedings beLOre - the �::�inistrative Lac�.* Jud�;e, �r_clu�in� t:�� il�aring on June 29- 3fl, �988, the �ocuments �nd exhibics int�oduced therein, the a_ L:�ats ane s�ate�ents of counsel for �he parties on August 23 , 1958 and �he �elih�ra�io�s of the Council in ope� session_ The Cou�c-1 acoP�s �he �inuinos of fac� and co:�clusions o= 1.2L-I of the ::e-�--_s�-4ti.� �,aca J�� contained �n her Re�or� �a�e� July 28 , 1°SS. 2 coay � _ ;.,�; �� -s aC��ct�ed ^��e�e a�d lr.��e 2 aa�� oi tnis ?�sc'_��io�- COJ'i O_ �:?'_5 `�SO�::i.lOR, �5 cG.'�ni.�U, SE:-,3i 1 (�n S�'i1i. i��' T� r_= cl�ss ��-_1 �o ��e �dmin�strz�_ve L�:. Juc�c , �nc to co•.!*�sel =o= _-� iice�se�old`_. �� '�--.,e�� ^; �_,�� 1�5J �,SOy&E��S.�TO- �Kp�� COUNCIL MEM$=?J P,c:�ucstcc! by Dcpaccc�cnf oF: �•� '�ays Dimood � �„o _ In Favoc Gos�;a Rcttm�n � h�zinst gY $chcibd Soo ncrr—� µ.�� J� � ; 1a°3 ! I io^� Ap�r-o��d by Cicy httorncy ;,do?ced by Coca��8- c7atc — � ...U�t,�y� ✓�lU �j , � 3 v �'!✓.,t!' !:• $ ' �cni.�r�' 1�� ioC �cil �cs�._-�, ` � � � � � � 1�'..•�-.._,,� \ �.�-'.." `� � 8; 1�� - - r L� �� .?�:o�c�' b� h'.ayo: for $ub-��sSao:� to `�L"cil .;�:' I� ;��Cu\^�Ly �ia��o:= `Ja:- _! •• � �� , ��j/ '. °' � ' ._�, , � � �i It � THOMSON & E1L15. �TD. 2 ��.�.�=�5 SU�TE 300 --4EE FJRTY FIV_ 5T. PETEn STREET SAINT PAUL. N��NESOTA 55102 3 c61 2� 227 0056 4 STATE OF t9INNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS 5 � � 6 Anthony F. Gagliardi, ) ) � Petitoner, ) STATEMENT OF THE ) CASE OF PETITIONER 8 vs. ) ) 9 City of Saint Paul , a Minne- ) COURT OE APPEALS NUMBER: sota municipal corporation ) 10 and the City Council of ) Saint Paul, Consisting of ) DATE OF MAILING 11 James Schweibel , President, ) NOTICE OF DECISION: �iki Sonnen, Bob Long, Tom ) August 28, 1988 12 Dimond, Roger Goswitz, Bill ) �ilson and Janice Rettman, ) 13 � Respondents. ) 14 � 15 1. Court of case origination: � 16 City Council of Saint Paul . » 2. Jurisdictional Statement. �g Review is sought, oursuant to writ of certiorari , of a �esolu�ion passed by the Citv Council of Saint �aul wnich �g susoends petitioner ' s liquor and restaurant licenses of six i6 ) days. 20 3. Type of litigation and designate any statutes at 2� issue. 22 Municipal, Constitutional and Criminal. Sections 349. 30 and 609. 75 of the Minnesota Statutes. 23 Section 409 . 26 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. The fourteenth amendment to the United States 24 Constitution. Article 1, section 7 of the Minnesota Constitution. 25 4. BriQf description of claims, defenses, issues 26 : litigated and result below. 27 On August 5, I987, aolice seized a blackjack table from the Grand Central, petitioner 's bar and restaurant. At 28 � a hearing conducted 5efore Administrative Law �udge Phyllis �eha on June 30, 1988, petitioner argued that the blackjack 2 table did not constitu�e a garbling device an� the olaying of blacKjack at the Gran� Central did not constitute � gambling. Judge Reha concluded tha� althougn the blackjack �able k�as no� a gambling device, �he playing of b?ackjack at 4 �he Grand Central did consitute gambling. Due �o several �itigating factors, Judge Rena recommended that the City 5 Council adhere to its guidelines and suspend petitioner 's liquor license for a period of three ( 3) working days. 6 On August 23, 1988, the City Council conducted a oublic hearing on Judge Reha' s report . �espite adopting � Judge Reha ' s findings of fact and conclusions of law, the City Council deviated from the three-day presumptive penalty 8 it had established for first-time gambiing violations and, instead, ordered that petitioner ' s liquor license be 9 suspended for a six ( 6) day period. 10 5. Issues proposed to be raised on appeal . 11 ( 1 ) Whether the City Council violated petitioner 's 12 constitutional rignts to due orocess of law and equal - protection of the laws by dAviating from the thr�e-�ay _- presumptive oenalty witnout substantial a�d compelling - � � reaso�s, as r�quir�d by S�. Paul Leg. Code §a09 . 26 . . �; -�-^ 14 _ ,�_„_ { 2) Whether the City Council ' s failure to provide �=�--� written reasons jus�ifying its deviation from the ��=;�ti � � oresumptive penalty, as required by St. Paul Leg. Code Z`-;�=�" �409 . 26, violated peti�ioner 's right �o due process of k,� � >�� 16 law and equal protection of the lawsby frustrating p °` � � adeq�ate judicial review of the City Council ' s actions. � =r ( 3 ? Whether the �laying of blackjack at Grand Central �g constituted gambling and, tnerefore, provided the City 19 Council with a sufficient legal basis fot suspending petitioner 's liquor lice;�se. 20 6. Is transcript required? If so, full or partial 21 transcript? 22 A full transcript of the nearings before the administrative law judge and the City Council will be 23 requested . 24 7. Is oral argument requested? If so, is argument requested at a location other than that provided in Rule 25 134.09 subd. 2? 26 Oral argument is requested at a regular session of the court in Ramsey County. 27 28 - 2 - 1 � 8. Are formal bri�fs necessary? � ` Yes. 3 9. Names, addresses, zip codes and telephone numbers 4 of attorney for appellant and respondent. � For Petitione: For R2spondents: Antno�riy Gagliardi 6 ;� � , Phillip Byrne �;� ;-;��- �;��—" -- Assistant City Attorney � Dougl�s W. Thomsor, 647 City Hall At�v:' Lic. No. 109514 St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 8 Thomson & Ellis, Ltd. (612) 298-5121 Suite 300 9 345 St. Peter Street St . Paul, Minnesota 55102 10 ( 612) 227-0856 11 �ated: Se�tember 2 , 1988 - 12 � -� IJ - ,.:� ui =�� ?4 `�� ,`;=^_ � ,,,z� ,,,'u z� � � � ;-iF� Z�-' N -U:�-J� � ° �<�' 16 � �� 17 - 18 1° 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 - 3 - � � . � � � 1 THOMSON & ELLIS. LTD. LA�tiYERS 2 SUITE 300 I TMREE FORTY fIVE ST. PETER STREET '� � SAINT PAUL. MiNhE50TA 55102 : 3, c612� 227-08% STATE OF MiNNESOTA 4 IN COURT OF APPEALS 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 Anthony F. Gagliardi , � Petitioner, Court of Appeals No. : 8 vs . 9 City of Saint Paul , a Minne- 10 sota municipal corporation and the City Council of 11 Saint Paul, Consisting of James Schweibel , President, 12 Kiki Sonnen, Bob Long, Tom Dimond, Roger Goswitz, Bill 13 �ilson and Janice Rettman, 14 Respondents . 15 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - � 16 AFFIDAVIT OF HOWARD BASS �� State of Minnesota ) ) ss . 18 County of Ramsey ) 19 Howard Bass, being first duly sworn, states and 20 deposes under oath as follows: 21 � l . He is a lawyer licensed to practice law in the 22 State of Minnesota and is employed by the law firm of 23 Thomson & Ellis, Ltd. 24 2. On the morning of September 2, 1988, he had a 25 telephone conversation with Phillip Byrne, Assistant City of 2g , , Saint Paul Attorney. 27 3. He informed Phillip Byrne that Thomson & Ellis 2S was filing a petition for writ of certiorari with the ' EXHIBIT C ,.. ,.,, _.. .,,...... , ; 1 Minnesota Court of Appeals, to obtain judicial review of the 2 Saint Paui City Council ' s resolution suspending Anthony 3 Gagliardi 's liquor and restaurant licenses, commencing 4 September 4, 1988. 5 4. He asked Phillip Byrne whether , on behalf of the 6 City Council, he would agree to stay the enforcement of the , 7 resolution pending a final decision by the Minnesota Court 8 Appeals. 9 5. Phillip Byrne claimed that neither he nor the 10 City Attorney had the authority to agree to such a stay. 11 According to Phillip Byrne, only the entire City Council � 12 WN could consider whether to agree to stay the enforcement of ° �° 13 F N� J �� the resolution. WQ `� W~`° 14 � J�oaoo 6. Phillip Byrne also indicated that the City Ww`^NZr � 5 dl3�w?N ZJ�LL�N council would not meet again, and therefore could not � � N�Q� 16 0 oa consider our request for a stay, until September 6, Z 17 = WQ ~ �� 1988--two days after the commencement of Anthony Gagliardi ' s _ ~ 18 liquor and restaurant license suspension. 19 7. Phillip Byrne assured affiant that he would not 20 object to a motion for a stay filed on behalf of Anthony 21 Gagliardi in the Minnesota Court of Appeals. 22 FURTHER, AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. 23 24 � -,r' / 25 H ass Subscribed and sworn to befo 26 m this 2nd day of Sept er, 1988. ' 1 � ' 27 , f , � i > ;, ,,. � � � 28 �� T�IOMPSON NOTARV PUBLIC - MINNESpTA °�y�� Y'JASHINGTON COU�JTY �^y Commission ezpires 1-2:-�J7 STATE OF MINNESOTA iN COURT OF APPEALS #CO-88-1862 Anthony F. Gagliardi, Relator, vs . 0 R D E R City� of St. Paul, et al. Respondents. Considered and decided by Wozniak, Chief J. , Lansing, J. , and Kalitowski, J. Based upon the file, records and proceedings herein, and because: 1 . By writ of certiorari issued September 2, relator seeks review of the suspension of his liquor and restaurant licenses; and 2 . The filing of a certiorari appeal does not automatically stay the decision appealed from, but the agency (here, the St. Paul City Council) or this court may grant a stay, Minn. Stat. § 14 .65 (1986) ; and . 3. The council will not meet again until after the six-day suspension takes effect; and 4 . We have determined that a stay is appropriate; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The August 25 suspension resolution is stayed pending appeal . > . ' 2 . This order shall not prevent respondents from seeking reconsideration of the stay. Dated: September 2, 1988 BY THE CO�JRT . � r Chief Judge CLL:mbs (STY) a , STATE OF MINNESOTA ) County of Ramsey ) ss. CITY OF SAINT PAUL ) Albert B. Olson I. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . ... .. . . . . . . . . . .City Clerk of the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have 88-1438 compared the attached copy of Council File No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . as adopted by the City Council. , , August 25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1g88. ` . . and approved by the Mayor. . . . ,, ,. August 25 . . .. . . . . . . . . . .1988. • ! . with the original thereof on file in my office. I further certify that said copy is a true and correct copy of said original and the whole thereof. WITNESS my hand and. the seal of the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota this . . , , ,15th. . _. , day of September. . . , . . . . . ,A.D. 1988. . ; ; . . . . . . . . .. .. ...��:�_��. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. City Clerk. � c� �� 409.07 LEGISLATNE CODE provided, that the licensed establishment (2) No liquor shall be sold or furnished far any is in conformance wzth the Minnesota Clean purpose whatever to any person under Indoor Air Act. twenty-one (21)years of age or to one obvi- (2) If is unlawf� ` � ously intoxicated or to any person to whom directly or ii SP �(�`�DG�P , such sale is prohibited by any law of this icating liquo �O�(.qB�(,� 1 �� or ordinance. Proof of age for purchas- ing or consuming alcoholic beverages may (1) above w: N, 3 be established only by a valid driver's li- special licen 'V`�� cense or Minnesota ident�cation card, or may be issu y0/4.!�{p ►f one year an �,�rj.- � o ia the case of a foreign national by a valid passport. A person who was born on or be- hundred do (jQ�,�f y_ .16� �r fore September 1, 1967, may continue to said speciai uce�� o..,__ __ 1e . p�-chase and consume alcoholic beverages council in the same manner as application a,n,d shall be treated for purposes of this � , for other licenses to sell intoxicating liQuor ��slative Code as a person who is twenty- are made. one(21)years old. (c) No consccmption or display wheu prohibited �3) No sale shall be made in any place or in No person shall consume or d.isplay or allow con- p� of a building where such sales are sumption or display of liquor upon the premises proh;bited by state law or this chapter. of an on-sale licensee at any time when the sale of . such liquor is not permitted. (4) No person under eighteen(18)years of age . (d) Private Christmas parties. I�Totwithsta.nding may be employed in a place where intoxi- � any other provision of the Legislative Code, the cating liquor is sold for consumption on the license holder of premises having an on-sale li- premises,except persons under eighteen(18) cense may once a year during t�e Christmas sea- Years of age may be employed as musicians son have a private party at no charge to the guests or in bussing or washing dishes in a res-- . - - aft.er the lawful closing hours; provided, that a ��'�t or hotel that is licensed to sell in- . written request for said party is submitted to the �xica*.ing liquor and may be employed as _ license inspector thirty (30) days prior to the pra �'�'aiters or waitresses at a restaurant,hotel posed date oi the party; and provided further, or motel where only wine is sold; provided, that no sales as defined by law of intoxicating �at the person under the age of eighteea liquors or nonintoxicating nalt liquor shall be � �18)may not serve or sell any wine. made at or during said party. The inspector shall (5) Every lzcensee is hereby made responsible ' � notify the chief of police of the date of each pro- for the conduct of his place of business and posed party. required to�maintain order and sobriety in . (Code 1956, § 308.20; Ord. No. 16815, 7-23-81; such place of business. Ord. No. 17037, 6-30-83; Ord. Na 17162, 9-27-84) �6) No licensee shall keep, possess or opera�e,.. Sec. 409.08. Regulations generally. or permit the keeping, possession or opera- tion of, on any licensed premises or in any All licensees hereunder are hereby required to room adjoining the licensed premises any observe the following regulations; provided,how- slot machzne, dice or any gambling device ever that any such regulation which spec�cally or apparatus, nor permit any gambling zefers to an on-sale licensee shall not bind an therein(whether or not licensed by the state), off-sale licensee, nor shall any regulation which � nor permit the licensed premises or any specifical2y refers to an off-sale licensee bind an room in the same or in any adjoining build- on-sale licensee: ing directly or indirectly under his controI (1) All sales shall be made in full view of the � be used as a resort for prostitutes or pubIic. other disorderly persons, except that pull- Supp.No.l 2178 � � ' - � - ` � LICENSES • �409.08 ' tabs and tip-boards may be sold on licensed tions until one hour after the parade, to premises when such activity is licensed by ensure that patrons do not enter or exit the state pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, with beer or intoxicating liquor. Chapter 349, and conducted pursuant to regulations contained in this Legislative (11) There shall be provided in all zoning dis- Code. This exception shall not apply to es- tricts, other than B-4 or B-5 Districts, off- tablishments licensed by the city for the street pazking spaces for all on-sale prem- sale of nonintoxicating malt beverages,non- ises as provided herein: intoxicating malt beverages and wine, and a. T�ansfer or new issuance to a struc. noniritoxicating malt beverZges and wine �newly con.structed for that purpose, as menu items only. off-street parking at the rate of one Notwithstanding other provisions of this space for each forty-five(45)square feet Legislative Code to the contrary, the coun- of patron area. cil may permit an on-sale licensee to per- b. �-ansfer or new issuance to.an exist- mit the holding of a single event,such as a ing structure not previously licensed banquet, that includes the sale of raffle for on-sale purposes during the twenty- tickets as a part of the e�ent activity; pro- four (24) months preceding the appli- . vided, that such events are separate from cation, off-street parking at the rate of the public areas of the licensed establish- one space for each forty-five (45)square ment, nor open to the general public, and feet of licensed patron area minus the the raffle conducted by a charitable orga- number of off-street parking spaces nization Iicen�5ed by the State of Minnesota. which would be required for the previ- ous use of the same azea under the (7) No dancing wherein the public par'ticipates, existing zoning code provisions. Exist- _ and no dancing, singing or other vaudeville ing parking which previously served exhibitions or entertainment shall be per- the same area shall not be counted to mitted on the premises'of any on-sale li- meet the requirements unless any are censee unless such pre�ses are duly licensed in exCess of what would have been re- � . for entertainment. quired for the pre�vious use. No acidi- _ . . (8) The license issued to said licensee shall be tional off-street par�ng shall be required posted in a conspicuous place in that por- • if the number of additional spaces re- � tion of the premises for which the license __ �quired is five (5)or fewer spaces. � � has been issued. c. Expansion of licensed area, off-street pazking at the same rate as transfer or (9) No person shall remain in or loiter in the � new issuance to an existing structure � ' parkirig lot of an on-sale licensee after the not previously licensed for on-sale pur. lawful clpsing hour. poses, plus twenty-five (25) percent of � �(10) When a licensee is not�ed by the police any parking shortfall for the existing department that a parade will be held within licensed area. "Parldng shortfall" shall one block of the licensee's establishment, mean the difference between one space , all beer and all intoxicating liquor or liq- for each forty-five (45) square feet of . uid of any type sold during the entire day patron floor area for the exis�ting licensed of said parade shall be sold only in plastic area minus the number of parking spaces or paper containers. In addition, upon re- actually provided for that area. ceiving such notice,the licensee shall place d. "Patron area" shall mean to include . a person at each entrance and each exit of all azeas used by the public, and ex- the establishment at least one hour prior cludes all areas used exclusively by em- to the time of parade, and the licensee shall ployees for work,storage or offce space. require a person to remain at those loca- Supp.No.1 2179 -�-�` M ..-; . � . Y. _ i8� -� �� LJQUOR ACT 3d0A.�11 .^_+ �`• '.. �est �=-� -,;(4) they are holden of temporary wine li�censes issued under law. � � aw :��:. . _.... . _" ;'=�' �"''History: 1985 c 200 s 2; 1985 c 305 art 6 s 9; 1985 c:309 s 7-9; 1Sp198S c 16 art 2 "' the ;u_, s3.y�bd 1; 1Sp1986 c 3 art 1 s 38 - no ��: �: . _ thc '-• . �pp,410 LICENSE RESTRICTIONS; GENERAL. � �_- . . -;' � •= Subdivision 1. Counties; town consent. A county may not issue a retail license the �`°�' . :a.._ . , _ �ar :`" to sell any alcoholic beverage within an organized town unless the governing body of : ;=�'�- the town has consented to the issuance of the license. " the ... ` �:i - `, Subd. 2. Counties;recommendation and review of applicants. (!)No county may � �'�*` issue or renew a retail license to sell any alcoholic beverage until the county board has � .w ax :- hin �r•.r�ived a written recommendation from the sheriff and county attorney stating that .: t a '��'� ��e best of their knowledge that the applicant is eligible to be licensed under section �'� ?�"`� 34pA.402. A copy of the statements must be given to the town board if a town's consent a ��' ' ,?__' is rcquired issuance of the license under subdivision 3. • �:� asc '_ '' == (2) The county board shall consider the recommendations of the sheriff and � �;_-- -� the county attorney, the character and reputation of the applicant, and the nature and � � �:_ location of the business prior to issuance of any license. ��_ � � �.�; ' Subd. 3. License extension; death of licensee.. In the case of the death of a retail ,- ;;� '�:: liansee to sell alcoholic beverages, the personat representative is authorized to contin- -,: ncr ��_ ue operation of the business for not more than 90 days after the death of the licensee. . __, t� � _ . Subd.�4. License post'#ig. A retail license to sell alcoholic beverages must be . �,;. �.--- �� ' posted in a conspicuous place in the premises for which it is used. `� fb::' � thc ��- •�_ Subd. 5. Gambling prohibited. (a) No retail establishment licensed to sell � `� � alcoholic beverages may keep, possess, or operate, or permit the keeping, possession, . � or -�.^.. �� : : or operation on the licensed premises of dice or any gambling device as defined in "�`� settion 34930, or permit gambling therein except as provided in this subdivision. on . ,�: . . : •�:' . . (b) Gambling equipment may be kept or operated and raffiles conducted on licensed 'r �" . prcmises and adjoining rooms when the use of the gambling equipment is authorized "� his '`rt'` �der chapter 349. „ ' u K �.... . �. . :r�_ ._ Subd. 6. Racial discrimination;clubs. No retaii ticense to sell alcoholic beverages , . � �= : may be issued or renewed by a municipality or county to a club which discriminates • � isk i� against members or applicants for membership or guests of inembers on the basis of � ' '� ing . raa. � - Subd. 7. License limited to space specified. A retail'license to sell any alcoholic �— �' �.: ��. bcverag� is only effective for the compact and contiguous space specified in the ' :� '�h� � "°,. approvcd license application. =:� � �'" �� ..Subd. 8. Copy of summons. Every application•fbr the issuance or renewal of '` "51 � -='``: iatoxicating or nonintoxicating liquor licenses must include a copy of each summons �� ' ;;;, recxived by the applicant under section 340A.802 during the preceding year. , �'�` cir • ��:�; rL.History: 1985 c 30S art 6 s 10,• ISp1986 c.�art 1 s 39 '} �°-j:. <<.- . � • :� ;'d 340A.411 LICENSE RESTRICTIONS; NONINTOXICATING A4AL'I' LIQUOR ��:s ��:��LICENSES. - • : '_r.�Subdivision 1. On-sale lieenses. On-sale nonintoxicating liquor licenses may only ,__� or- � be_issued to drugstores, restaurants, hotels, clubs, and estabiishments used exclusively -z� �; for L4e sale of nonintoxicating malt liquor with the incidental sale of tobacco and soft s ho `� ��- drinlcs. = °��- . °. Subd. 2.� License duration. All retail nonintoxicating malt liquor licenses must = ��;. 3n .�:` be issued for one year,except that for the purpose of coordinating the time of expiration • �>. of licenses in general,licenses may be issued for a shorter time,in which case a pro rata r'_ _ 3n �-`>.' tianx fee must be charge�. , ��?�� +.:j...�. .�.. . ' '�-_ . � . History: 1985 c 30S arr 6 s 1! _ ne �=. .... . : . . • . . - �: , >� . ... ... , , .�:: �-rt=-- - - :�.. . . "' � ::. . "_.y�, • , :�.. ..t�: ' �_ �... 3r9.22 BINGO.GAMBLING DEV1C£S.AND V[DEO GAMES OF CHANCE •6gg6 '. �- - t 349.22 PENALTY. � . � .. � . ,- . : _. - : �f' Subdivision 1. Gross misdemeanor. Any other violation of sections 349.I l:to : " 349.214 is a goss misdemeanor. �� . . � ... , �_ : ': Subd. 2.. Other action. This section does not preclude civil or criminal actiuns �`� '� under other applicable )aw or pr�clude any agcnry of government from investitgating, _ =•�_ or.prosecuting violations of the provisions of sections 349.1 I to�349.214.: Caunty .;, .., attorneys have primary responsibility for prosecuting violations of sections 349.1 l to - 349.214, but the attorney general may prosecute any violation of those sections:r-_:�-� .. :;� :� • - . . :._.•, �- ",,:,-- . History: I976 c�61 s 12; 1984 c 502 art 12 s 20 _ . . . .�.� .-`�� .. . -�_�:�-. :�� - 349Z3 VALIDITY OF PRIOR AGREEMENTS. - ° - . .. � " '_'; ;; " . - '�;,: � :..-.�>;_•: .:`:� Nothing in sections 349.I 1 to 349.22 shall be construcd to affect the validity of aDy � = agreement or contract betwcen an organization and any financial or 3ending institutio�' - �2 �� eneered into prior to August 1, 1976. . . : : - ' _ " . , ' :��:�,""';"',-_ � = History: 1976 c 261 s 13 . - . :,. �, l� ;,t,— : . , • -�fi. t • . .. ..... ° � -s ; ,..• - <<:_�. 349.26 (�Repealed, 1984 c 502 art 12 s 25] . _ ._ . . _ � ` .^�:'�^., -�;' �' 34930 DEFINI'I'IONS. ��. `�s •;: ._: . -- Subdivision 1. For thc purposes of sections 349.30 to 349.39, unless�a diff�rent � s?� ,;��_ ,�� — meaning is indicated by the contcxt, the words, tcrms, and phrases dofined in this � = --�-« .. � section sha11 have the meanings given thcm. ' �'' - ; Subd. 2. "Gambling devices"means slot machines,roulette wheels,punchboards; ;� ' and pin ball machines which return coins or slugs, chips, or tokens of any kind,which . are redeemabie in merchandise or cash. � � ' ' _ 6 "' � Su�d. 3. "Person"means an individual,a copannership,an association,a corpo- '�- ' ration, or•any other entity or organization. . "'� s : ' '• Subd. 4. "Municipality" means any county, city, or town. - � : �.:, Subd. 5. "License" includes pernsits of every kind,nature and description issued r-�- - �:-.- pursuant to any statute or ardinance Yor the carrying on of any.•business, trade, _ vocation, commercial enterprise or vndenaking.: 4,' � Subd. 6. "Licensee" means any person to whom a license of any kind is issued, :::- = � - ' � but does not indude a common carricr transporting, or a public warehouse operator s j`"' -��^r storing,any gambling device for hire,or a manufacturer or distributor of such devices :- `�- = keeping the same only for the purpose of sale or distribution to others or repairing of "� `� : : same. � � ' .� .., � . _ - Subd. 7. "Li�ensed business" means any business, trade, vocation, commercial . � -'� `�° - enterprise, or undertaking for which a license is issued. � . . : .. �,,'�� ._ �� _ . ' ` - t�-:- ' � � Subd. 8. "Licensed premises" means the place or building, or the room�in a �`= 't '-=: � building, designated in the license as the place where the licensed busin�ss is to be -_ � i.:='- camed on, and a11 land adjacent thereto and used in connection with and in the :.:;� operation of a licensed business, and aU adjacent or contiguous rooms or buildings ° = . : _ operated or used in connection with the buildings where the licensed business is carried :� �.; . . � on. lf no place is described in any license,then "licensed premises"means the building: `_;� �•" or place where the ]icensed business is carried on under such license. '' . : :.�__ ': ,�.� _,.�: - Subd. 9. "Issuing authority"and"authority issuing the license"mean and includc� :^'__ the officer, board, bureau, department, commission, or agency of the state, or oi any. - _ of its municipalities, by �*+hom any license is issued and include the councils and: . - " � go�erning bodies of all municipalities. . :.; . ,.^,�;:' ;,c T. ' � History: l947 c 586 s 1; I97.�c 1?3 art S s 7; 198/ c 204 s 9,• 1986 c 444��-.: _�_;,; �:;ee_ � . ' _;�. '� � 349.31 GAMBLING DEVICE; POSSESSION OF. . , .., ��:::. . ,�.- � Subdivision 1. Intentional possession;willful keeping. The intentional posscssion ,�_- �., or willful keeping oi a gambling device on a licensed premises is cause for the revoca- _;9�- �'. -ti� �.# : . ,--- . .:;M,. ; J . •. , 9539 _ CRIMINAL CODE OP 1%3 609.75 � .�•__ • . , ; 609.745 PERMTITING PUBLIC NUISANCE. ��;'= � �� '�'-' -^� ��;:r �.- t Whocver having contml of'rcal property permits it to be used to maintain a public nuisana or Icu thc same �owing it will be so uud is guilty of a misdemeanor. --' History: 1963 c 7S3 art 1 s 609.745; 1971 c 23 s 75; 1486 c 444 �''� "�� ' �� . . _ :;.�-� .,. 609.746 IIvTERFERENCE WI'I'Fi PRIVACY. . . , .. : .= .`_�...-. � Any person who enttrs upon another's property and surreptitiously�gazes;stares, . �� or peeps in the window of a house or place of dwelling of another with intent to intrude �� upon or interfere with the privacy of a member of the housebold thereof is guilty of a , _ misdemeanor. . . . . �. . .. ._ ._ ._ Histor}: 1979 c 2S8 s I9 . � '-.� - -• • � •- . �i: .�- - . _ . . _ . . . ._ . . _ .� ..-._ . '`-- �-� " - . . . . __ . �- .�, .. ..:, . .c .� � �i . ... . . � . , GA]viBLING, . '.. -�.. _ ..:�_.:d.T .�.:..,. . .. - _ 609.75 GAMBLING; DEFINTI'IONS. - .�..�..' j�. ' . ' .. ..:�--� . . _�:"..... . � . . Subdivision 1. Lottery. (a)A lottcry.is a plan which provida for thc distribution of moncy, property or other reward or benefit to,persons selected by chanco frum among participants some or all of whom have given a eonsideration for the chance of being selected. .. ..f � . .. - . .. .. . .: , . . ` � (b) An in-package chance promotion is not a lottery if all of the following are met: :� (1) participation is available, frec and without purchase of tbe package, from the rctailer or b�•mail or toil-free telcphone request to the sponsor for entry or for a game . p�� (2) the label of the promotional package and any related advertising clearly states � i) , any method of participation and the scheduled termination date of the promotion; a ; r , (3) the sponsor on request provides a retailer with a supply of entry forms or game '� � ; pieces adequate to permit free panic�palion in the promotion by the retailer's custom- .' � trs; . • I, - (4) thc cponsor dces nol misrepresent a participa�,t's chances of winning any prize; . (5) the sponsor randomly distributes all game pieces and maintains records of " ; random distribution tor at least one year after the termination date of the promotion; . � �` � . , . (6) all prizes are randomly awarded if game pieces are not used in the promotion; '� ; and . ' I •(7) the sponsor provid�s on request of a state agency a record of the names and � addrascs of all winners of prizes valued at$]00 or morc, if the request is made within '� � onc year aftcr the termination date of the promotion. ' , : ;. � .' . (c) Exccpt as provided by section 349.40, acts in this state in funherance of a ' "� � ' lottery conducted outside of this state are mcluded notwithstanding iu validity where '� � conducted.. i� .t Subd. 2. Be� A bet is a bargain whcreby the partia mutually agree to a gain or � �: �• '�� loss by one to the other of specified money,property or benefit dependent upon chance ,; `�; � �i� altbough the chanct is accompanied by some element of ski1L ; �! ' a�{ Subd. 3. What are not bets. The following are not bets: � ` ;: � � (1) A contract to insure, indemnify, guarantee or otherwise compensate anothcr � �; � . for a harm or loss sustained, cven though the ]oss depends upon chance. ~ ; E'� ` � �.; (2) A contract for the purchase or salc at a future date of securities or other ; i' � :;i commodities. • �. . . ; I;i (3) Offcn of purscs, prizes or prcmiums to the actual contestants in any bona 6de " ;! �� : contest for tbe dttermination of skill, speed, strength, endurance, or quality or to the °{ �!i �{ bona fide o�•ners of animals or other property entered in such a contest. : ;i; � ��! (4) Thc game of bingo when conducted in compliance with sections 349.1 1 to' � q � ��' 349.23. � f ;� � (5) A private social bet not part otor incidental to organized, commercialized,or ,; .�± ;: - �� systematic gambling. � � ;� ` ;! F- :� � �r .0 ` ,�� , 1 i ';�� ..� - ; _ ._ ; I �, 609.75 CRIMINAL CODE OF i%3 9540 i . = � j :; �' (6) The�operation of equipment or the conduct of a nf�le under sections 349.11 �: � � '; � to 349.22,by an organization licensed by the charitable gambling control board or an ti�` � �;� �, organization exempt from licensing under section 349.214. (7) Pari-mutuel betting on horse racing when the betting is conducted under chapter 240. �� Subd. 4. Gambling derice. A gambling devicc is a contrivane� which for a consideration af�ords the player an opponunity to obtain.something of value, other than free plays, automaticaily from the machine or otherwise, the award of which is : . determined principally by chance. � � ' � Subd. 5. Gambling place. A gambling place is a location or structure,stationary or movable, or any part thereof, wherein, as one of its uses, betting is permitted or ' promoted, a lottery is conducted or assisted or a gambling device is operated. _ _ Subd. 6.. Bucket shop. A bucket shop is a place wherein the opera[or�is engaged � in making bets in the form of purchases or sales on public exchanges of securities, commodities or other personal property for.future delivery to be settled at pr�ces _ dependent on the chance of those prevailing at the public exchanges without a bona fide purchase or sale being in fact made on a board of trade or exchange. �`� f Subd. 7. Sports bookmaking. Sports bookmaking is the activity of intentionally �� ;�; receiving, recording or forwarding within any 30-day period more than five bets, or • ,• '��j offers to bet, that total more than $2,500 on any one or more sponing events. �i'}�� • History: 1963 c 753 art 1 s 609.75; 1471 c 947 s J; 1976 c 2 s JS2; l976 c 239 s 126; �,j 1976 c 261 s 14; 1978 c 507 s 4,5: 1981 c 126 s .�; 1983 c 214 s 34-36: 1983 c 216 art 2 .�t* � s 17 subd 3: 1984 c S02 art 12 s 22; 1985 c 126 s 2; 1986 c 467 s 29 ' �(Fi � `� � 649.755 ACI'S OF OR RELATING TO GAMBLING. ' � r Whocver docs any of the following is guilty of a misdemeanor. I� k � (1) Makes a bet; or � �� (Z) Sells or transfen a chance to participate in a lottery; or � � j} (3) Disseminates information about a lottery with intent to encourage participa- t { � � tion therein; or . � _ f (4) Pecmits a structure or location owned or occupied by the actor or under the _' actor's control to be used as a gambling place.' ' History: 1963 c 7S3 art 1 s 609.7`SS; 1971 c 23 s 76; 1986 c•444 t� _ ' i 609.76 OTHER ACTS RELATING TO GAMBLING. � ' - Subdivision 1:� Gross misdemeanors. Whcever dces any of the following may be � sentenced to imprisonment for not more than one year or to payment of a fine of not more than�3,000, or both: � . � � � '" (1) Maintains or operates a gambling place or operat�s a bucket shop; . . _ (2) Intentionally participates in the income of a gambling place or bucket shop; � (3) Conducu a.lottery, or,with intent to conduct a lottery, possesses facilities for doing so; . _ . (4) Sets up for use for the purpose of gambling, or collects the procecds of, any gambling device or bucket shop; . . . (5) With intent that it shall be so used, manufactures, selis or c�ffers for sale, in wnole or any part thereof, any gambling device including those defined in section � 349.30, subdivision 2, and any facility for conducting a lottery, except as providcd by section 349.40; or �: (6) Receives, records, or forwards bets or offers to bet or, with intent to receive, � record, or forward bets or ofters to bet, possesses facilities to do so. � Subd. 2. Fe[on ambl�n Whoever en a es in s orts bookmakin y g g.. g g p g is guilty of a a felony. � � � .�. History: 1963 c.7S3 ar! 1 s 609.76; :981 c,126 s 4; 1983 c 214 s�7; 1984 c 628 art 3 s I1 . i .. � � . ,� , �= � . - �= � j�" 9S4I CRIM[NAL CODE OF 1963 609.762 ��_ �_= -- _ I� �� 609.761 OPERATIONS PERMITTED. � "�� Notwithstanding sections 609.755 and 609.76, an organization may conduct law- ful gambling as defincd in section 349.12,if authorized under chapter 349,and a penon ler '��`' may manufacture,sell,or offer for sale a gambling device to an organization authorized • :�.: under chapter 349 to conduct lawful gambling,and pari-mutuel betting on horse racing a 'Y may be conducted under chapter 240. ier �'-. -=� History: 1978 c 507 s 6; 1983 c 214 s 38; 1984 c S02 art 12 s 23; 1986 c 467 s 30 ,..,�- . � --�,=- _ . . . b_: 609.762 FORFETTURE OF GAMBLING DEYICES, PRIZES AND.PROCEEDS. • iry ��. •� Subdivision 1. Forfeiture. The foliowing are subject to forfeiture: . '`��' (a) Devices used or intended for use, including those de6ned in section 349.30, or ,�.:-;. - subdivision 2,as a gambling device,except as authorized in sections 349.1 I to 349.23 ,ed �� " and 349.4Q; � �' `- (b) All moneys,materials,and other property used or intended for use as payment � �5 to participate in gambling or a prize or receipt for gambling; �de � �_�� •� (c) Booia,records,and researchproducu and materials,including formWas,microfilrfl, . • tapes, and data used or intended for use in gambling; and uy �,- � or �� d) ProPeRY used or intended to be used to illegaUy influence the outcome of a . . -` horse race. � . � Subd. 2. Seizure. Rroperty subject to forfeiture under subdivision 1 may be � Z:-. _ .. 16' �,,; seized by any law enforcemerit agency upon process issued by any court having T � _r.z: jurisdiction over the property. Seizure without process may be made if: . . �� :Y�,- -. (a) the seizure is incident to an arrest or a search under a search warrant; . �=' �'•�" (b) the property subject to seizure has been the subject of a prior judgment in favor . �= of the state in a criminal injunction or forfeiture proceeding; or �"' (c) the law enforcement agency has probable cause to believe that the property was �.:. � • ; ;x. - � used or is intended te be used in a gambling violation and the delay occasioned by the . ,F�"`-z-.-= necessity to obtain process would result in the removal, loss, or destruction of the pa" �-=- property, . the :��- Subd. 3. Noi subject to replerin. Property taken or detained under subdivision . 2 is not subject to a replevin action, but is considered to be in the eustody of the law _ enforcement agency subject only to the orders and decrees of the court having jurisdic- �_' tion over the forfeiture proceedings. : - ' =�� Subd. 4. Procedures. Property must be forfeited after a conviction for a gambling � violation according to the following procedure: '- ' ' be � not - (a) a separate complaint must be filed against the property describing it, charging � . y.. = its use in the speci6ed violation,and specifying the time and place of its unlawful use; � - •- (b) if the p�rson charged wiih a gambling offcnse is acquitted, the court shall - dismiss the complaint.and order the property returned ro thepersons legally entitled 'p� - . to it; and ' ' • . . for ��; ;;;.: c) if after conviction the court finds the ro� rt or an � • � p pe y, y part of it, was used in � � violation as specified in the complaiat, it shall order that the property be sold or �Y : c'etained by the law enforcement agency for officia! use. Proceeds from the sale of " forfeited property may be retained for ofi'icial use and shared equally between the law- , in �;: cnforcement agency investigating the offense involved in the forfeiture and the pra ion secuting agency that prosecuted the offense involved in the forfeiture and handled the bY := forfeiture proceedings. • . . . � . .. . �z :.: :K,. . ' � • . �Subd. S. Exceptioa Property may not be seized or forfeited under this section `'�� if the owner shows to thc satisfaction of the court that the ovmer had no notice or c'� knowledge or reason to believe that the property was used or intended to be used in �of ; .,,:-� viotation of this section. • - • �-� � • � � '' '�' History: 1983 c 214 s 39,• 1986 c.444 � " � � � art �. �,�o;:_: • � ,. .• �.. . . . • . ': . . _ --- ,�._. . .. . .�_. _ . ., ._ - • _ _ - . , c�,� ._I.ICENSES � 310.01 SUBTITLE A. IN GE2�'ERAL Legislat.iue Code Cbapter 310. Uniform License Procedures Class 1 Licenses Chapter Automobile Repair Garage and .,r+ec. 310.01. I?efinitions. Bvdy S�hop 315 Animal Foods Manufacturing and For the purposes of this chapter, an��chapter of Distributing 316 the Legislati�=e Code pertaining to licenses as here- Amusement Rides 31 i inafte- rnentioned, and subsequentl5• enacted ordi- hqechanical Amusement Devices 315 nances establishing or relating to the requirernents Bill Posters 319 for Class I, Class II and Class IiI licenses under j3ituminous Contraci:ors 320 authorit� of the City of Saint Paul, the terms goarding and . Roorr�inghouses; definec in this section shall have the meanings Dormitories 321 , ascribed to them: Bowling Al)e�s; Pool Halls 322 Christmas Tree Sales 323 Ad�erse nction means the rertocation or suspen• Cigarettes 324 � sion of� ]icen�, the imposition of conditions upon Close-Out Sales 325 a licen�, the denial of an application for the �*rant, Building Contractors 326 issuance, rene�•al or transfer of a license, and Drv Cleaning and Dr.� Dyeing � ar,�• a�he.- cisciplir,a�� or unfavorable action taken p�ants: Laundries 327 .�•ieh resoect to a license, licensee or applicant for E)ectric=l and Appliance Repair 328 . a license. Fire Alarm—Telep'r,one De��ices; Bc:�� rne;:r.s a bond mee�ing the reouirements APParatus Installers 329 of Section 3�G.07 and indem�if�•ing the �it�� of F)orists �30 . Sain: P�u! z��inst all claims,jud�en� or suits Food License ..31' caLSec b�•. ;e�ulting from or in connection ��ith Fuel Dealers—Liquid Fue1 332 . an�• licensec' business, acti.•it}�, premises, thing, Fuel Dealer—Solid Fuel �33 _ facilit�-, occurrence or otherw�ise t�nder these Fumigating—Pest Conzrol ' �34 Gasoline Filling Stations 33� � cbapte*s. Private Fue] Pumps . 330 . Building uf;irinl means the supervisor o; code �'Hardware Stores �37 enforcernent in thE department of comrnunity House Sewer Contractors 338 services. Tce Cre�m Processing and Distrib- ' • uting � 339 Chapters and these chapters shall mean this I�Zercantile Broker 340 � linilorm License Ordinance, any chapter of the . Milk 341 Legisl�ti��e Code pertaining to licenses as here• Oii—Bulk Storage 342�� inzfter mentioned, and subsequently enacted ordi• Opticians 343 nances est,;:b)ishin�or relating to the requirements Pa«n Shops 344 for Class I, Clzss II and Class III licenses under Peddlers 345 . au�h�rit�• of the City of Saint Paul. Soliciting 346 Pet �hops 347 Clo�s I (iccnscs means those licenses v.•hich can Rad:o and Tele�•ision Repairs 348 be appro��ed and issued or denied by the iaspec• Renial of C)othing 399 tor, suhject to the procedures required by these Rental of Hospital Equipment 350 chapters. The follo�•ing licenses are so classified, Rental of kitchen��are 351 and the numbers shoK�n opposite them correspond Rental of Trai)ers 352 w the chapters in the Legislative Code pertaining Roiler Rinks 353 to each license: Sanitary• Disposal 354 • � � 2027 . , f 310.01 � I.EGLSLA73VE CODE � ' •__- • _ . - � , Secondhsnd Dealers 355 Dance Halls ' �p� Sidewalb Contractors 356 Game Rpoms � 406 Solid VG'aste 35 i Hotel 407 Si�-n anc� Billboard Construction 358 Junk Salvage and Scrap 408� Sound T�uc�s and Broadcasting Intoucating Liquor 409 Vehicles 359 Nonint.ogicating Liquor 410 Public S�-imming Pools 360 Entertain.ment , 411 Toa 'i�-uc��—Service Vehicles 361 Massage Parlors and Saunas 412 �ee Tri.mming� 362 Conversion Parlors 413 Vending Machines 363 Masseur-Masseuse 414 Veterinary Hospital 36� Motion Picture Theatres 415 VJindow Cleaning 365 . Motion Picture Drive-In T'heatres 416 Block Parties 366 � Parking Lots 41? Tat�t,00 Parlors 367 ' Taxicabs 418 �T�'recking of Buildings 368 Gambling License 419 Bui)ding Trades Business Licenses 369 Building Trades Certificates of'�i Director means the director of the department � Competency 370 of finance and management services, unless oth- Finishing Shop 371 erv«se defined in f.be speci.�'ic chaptzr, section or Tire Recapping Plants 3?2 subdivision referred to. ' Transient ?�Zerchants 373 Division means the d:vision of license and pez_ Cle.ss II licenses me2ns those licenses which mit administration in the department of finance must be appro.•ed o* denied b� the director, sub- and management services. r iec: to .he groced�.*es recuired bwrhese chapters. • l The to;;ou-i�g licenses �re so c)�ssi!ied, �nd the Fee me�as and incl�:des both t�e license fee .. �- . numbers shown oppc,site them correspond to tbe and application fee unless otherv�-ise pro�-ided. chapc,ers in thE Legisia�ive Code pert.aining to License means and includes all licenses and eac:��lice:L�e: r.-. permits provided for or covered by tkese chapters. . I.egisla.tive Code Person me�ns �nd includes an�• person, fu-m, Class�II Licenses Chapter corporztion, partnership, company, orgariization, :.uctioneers—Short Ter:n License 390 agency, club or zny gTOUp or zssociation thereof. Soliciting Funds—Tag Days 391 It shall also�include an� executor, administrator, � Class 111 licenses means those licenses which ��' recelver or other- represent:itive appointed by ls��. can be approved or denied only by tbe council, subject to the procedures reouired by these chap- Zorcing administrator means the supervisor of . . ters. The follo��ing licenses nse so class�ed, and code enforcement in the department of commu• the r.tunbers �ho��n opposite them correspoad to nity services, or the o�cial charged with respon- thE chap;zrs in the Legislative Code pertzining to sibility for enforcement of the zoning code. . � � each license: (Code 1956, § 510.01; Ord. No. 17303, � 3, 10-29-8� . Legislati ue . Code �c. 310.02. Application. Cl�ss III Licenses Chapter ($) Form All applicants for Iicenses or permits Auctiuneers 400 issued pursuant to these chapters shall ma.ke both �fotor Vehicle and Parts Dealer 401 original and renewal applications to the inspector Bingo 402 on such torms as are provided by the division. Bingo Halls 403 Such applications shall not be received by the / Private CJubs 404 inspector until completely filled out, accompanied � �2023 � � L]CETSES �310.02 b�� all fees, insurance policies, bonds, deposits, in the business; age; address; description or blue• sureties, and indemn�cations or certificates re• print of the premises,if any,and the owner thereof, qLired by these chapters, together with the certi- and�ocations and addresses of other business lo- fication required in paragraph (b)below. cations in Minnesota. (b) Ta:.es. I�'o person shal) be granted a license, fd) No reapplication u�ithin one year after de� a rene�•al of a license or transfer of a license nial or reuocation. No person may apply for an5� required by the Saint Paul Legislative Code un• license w-ithin one year of the denial or revoca- )ess, prior to and in addition to any other require- tion of the s�xne or similar license by the city ments, ruJes or ordinances heret.ofore or hereafter council, if sucb denial or revocation was based required, the R.amsey County Department of Prop- so]el�� or partially upon misconduct or unfitness ert� Taxation ce:-tifies that said applicant has of the applicant, evidence of��iolations of lav�� in- paid an}• and all taxes, real or personal, before �olving licensed premises, e��dence that the ap- said t,�.xes become delinquent, on any property, plicant had been .involved in the operation of a real or personal, situated w-ithin the CitS> of Saint nuisance, or fraud or deception in the license ap- • Paul and used in connection v�>ith the business plication. Denial of a license, as used in this para• operated under said license. � graph, shall include a refusal of permission to '� transfer a license w the applicant. A license is Not�•ithstanding the previous paragraph, the "similar," �-ithin the meaning of this paragraph, council, the director or the inspector may issue, if the basis upon ��hich the revocztion or denial of rene.�• or transter a license if it is found that: the original license was made wou]d have been a � relevant basis on v.•hich to deny or revoke a ]i- (1.) ?he applicant has �ade an agreement sat- cense of the t��pe subsequent]�� applied for. isfactory• to the P�amsey County attorney to � pay delinouent t,axes in periodic ins�.allment; (E) Recpplication n.��ter aenial; "interest" of a� - pliccrt in revoked Iicer_s�. An application b�� 2 (2i The app)icant h� properly corsmenced a person ha�-ing an interest in, or whose sharehold• . proceeding to contest the amount of tax ers o; o�icers have an interest in, any premises due or the ��a)uation of his property, and or enterorise v�•hose license has been revoked'or has made all partia] payments required by � which a license has been denied shall be treated �- laµ• in connection K�ith such p.roceeding; or as zr. zpplication by the person whose license was (3) The business propert:y w�th respec`�to which oenied or revoked. The term "interest," as used � tz�:es are delinouent is not ovrned by the -� this paragraph, includes any pecuniary inter- applicant; but b�� a lessor, and it would be est in the o��nership, operation, management or ' •inequitable to require the )essee to pay such profits of an establishment, but does not include: taxes. • bona fide loans; bona fide rentz] agreements; bona • fide open accounis or other obligations held with If a license is issued, renewed or transferred be- or v.•ithout security arising out of the ordinary cause of the existence of an agree�ent as des..�-ribed and regular course of business of selling-or leas- in subsection (1) above, the license may be re- ing merchandise, fixtures or supplies to such es- �oked itthe licensee defaults upon such agreement. tablishment; an interest in a corporation uwning or operating a hotel but having at least one hun- • (c) Additional injormation. The inspector shall �ed fifty (150) or more rental units ho)ding a prescribe the intormation required to be subr:zit- license in conjunction therewith; or ten (10) per- ted by� each applicant in his application, in addi- cent or less interest in any other corporation hold- tion to that required by specific sections in these ing a ]icense. chapters, as may be necessary to czrry out and enforce any provision hereunder. He shall require (� Prohibition on renpplication; exception. The in ever�• case the applicant to submit his name; prohibition on reapplication herein provided shall b��siness or corporate name; names of partners, not apply in cases where it is otherwise expressly o�cers,directors,shareholders or tru_stees involved provided by statute or ordinance. . 2029 . , f 310.02 . ' � LEGLSLAT'NE CODE � ___ • _ : � (g) K'Qiiing period afier filing of petition Any department of fire and safety services and to the petitian required to be filed with the application building official for investigation and recom• for any license shall not be considered as ou�c- mendatioa. iall.• filed and irrevocable until seven (7)working (Code 1956, § 510.03; Ord. No. 27361, §.1, 6-b$g} days after a petition is received in the inspecwr's ofiice. During the seven-day waiting period, any Sec. 310.04. Levels of approval;recommenda. signator of any petition may.w-ithdraR� his name tions. � therefrom by written request, aad such request shall be appended to the subject petition and made �a� Class I Iicenses. Where an application for a part thereof. After the seven-day waitin the grant, issuance,renewal or transfer of a Class g �r' I license meets all the requirements of law, a�d od, signatures ma�� not be withdrawn unless it is sho��n they were obtained by fraud or duress. there exists no ground for denial, revocation or Signaf.ures .�•ithdra�•n or obtained by fraud or • S��on of, or the imposition of conditions upon, duress shall not be counted in determining tbe such license,the inspector shall grant, issue,renew sufi"iciency of the petition. This subd.ivision shall or transfer said license in accordance with Lhe � app)y in an�• case K•here the applicant for a li- aPPlication. cense or .license tra:isfer must pre5ent a state- (b) Class II licenses. W�here an application for • ment in µTiting si�r:ed by a specif;ed number or the grant,issuance, renewa] or transfer of a Class percentage of persons that they have given their II license meets all the requirements of law, and corL�ent to the �rant of the lice��e or license v-��nsfer. there exists no ground for denial, revocation or (Code 19�6, § S10.U21 suspension of, o:tae imposition of conditions upon, �uch license, the cirector shal) require ihe inspec- Sec. 310.03. Ir:��estigation and re��ew• of new tor to grant, issue, renew• or transfer said license applications, etc. in accordance w-ita the application. i � �- The inspector sh�11 deLermine the sufliciency (c) Class 1 and Cless II licenses, if denied by .• . and accurac�� of eacn ne�• application and obtain inspector or director. in the even: the inspector, . such crimir.al nistor�• infcrmation as may be used in the case of Class I licenses, or the director, in under ;�linneso� Statutes, Chapter 364, and is the case of Class II licenses, determines that the = otherw-ise a.•ailable b}� )a.+•. The inspector shall applicaiion for grant, issuance, renewal or trans- . �make reasonable and appropriate investigation fer of the license does no� �eet a?I the reouire- of tnE.premises or persona] property, vehic)es or ments cJ'lau� or t}:at there e>_ist grounds for deni- facilities, as mav be involved in or re)ated to the al, revocation, suspension or other adverse action licensed acti.•i��, and shall request, where appro- against the license or the licer.see, the inspecwr priate, the assistance of other city di��isions or or director sha]l r�c�mmend denial ofthe applica- dep�-tments in making additional investigations tion and fol)o�� the procedures for notice and hear- for the purpose of determining whether the appli- ing as set forth in Section 310.05. cant is or w-i11 be in compliance with all applica- �d) Class 111 licenses. Upon receipt of a fully� ble ordinances and statutes. The approval of such completed applicati�n and required fees for a Class other di�-isions or departments is not required for � ��cense, and after the investigation required, issuance of a license unless otherwise required by the inspector shall notify the council. A public • specific sections in ihese chapters. All new appli- hearing shall be held by the council on the grant, cations shall be reviewed by the zoning adminis- ;ssuance or transfer of all Class IL licenses. The trator or his designee for compliance �•ith all re- council may hold a hearing on the r�neK�al of any ouirements of the Saint Pau1 Zoning Code, and Class III license. In any case where the inspector no ne�� )icense shall be granted without full com• recommends denial of Lhe grant, issuance, renewal pliance w�ith said requirements. All ne�� applica- or transfer of a Class III license, or where the � tions involving a premises, )o:..ation, building or council believes that evidence might be received structure shal] be re,erred to the director of the at the public hearing u•hich might result in ac• / tion sdverse to the application, the inspector or � 2030 ' ' - LTCENSES �310.05 c.�uncil shall folloa• tbe procedures for notice and (b) Notice. In each such case wbere adverse ac- bearing � set forth in Section 310.05. Where the tion is or will be considered b} Lhe council, the applicztion for the grant, issuance, renewal or council shall in vc�-itin� notify tbe applicant or transfer of a Class III license meets all the re- licensee that adverse action rsay be tzken against qu.irement of lav:, and wnere tbere e�ists no ground tbe license or application, and that he is entitled for ad��erse action, the counci] shal] b} resolution to a bearing before the council. The notice shall direct that the inspector issue said license in ao- be served or mailed a reasonable time before the cordance u�ith lsa�. . . hearing date, and shall state the place, date and (e) A ppea�• C1ass 1 or Class II li.censes. An ap- time of the hearing. The notice shall state the peal to the city council ma�� be taben by an� issues involved or grounds upon �c•hich the ad- e-�on a ieved b the verse actioa may be sought or based. The council p ._ g�r y grant, issuance, renewal ma�� request that sucb writ�en notice be prepared or �ansfer of a Class I or Class II license; provid- �d served or mailed bc the inspector or by the ed, bo�•ever, that the appeal shall have been�filed city attorney. � �-ith the city c]er� within thirty (30) days after . tbe action b}• the license inspector or director. (c) Hearing. The hearing shall be he)d by the T'he onl�� grounds for appeal shall be that there council, which shall a�'ord the applicant or the has been an error of Ja� in th'e grant, issuance, licensee an opportunity to present e�-idence and � rene�•a? or transfer of the license. Tbe appeal argument as well as meet adverse testimony or shal] be ir w:�iting and shall set fortb in particu- evidence by rea�onable cross�xanunation and re� lar the alieged errors of ]aw. The council shall �utt.�1 e�idence. The cauncil may in it� discretion conriuct a 7e�ring on the appea] v�*ithin thirty(30) perrsit other interested persons the opportunity da�•s of �}�e cate of filing and shall notifj� the to present testimony or e�-idence or oth�rwZSe pzr- � . licer.see a.-;d the appellant at Jeast ten (10) days ticipate in such hearing. p�-ior � t'r.� hea.-ing date. The procedures set forth i� Sectio:: 370.�5, insofar � is practicable, shall «� .Licensee or app�icant may be represented a�pJ�� to :liis hearing. Follow-ing the hearing, the �e licensee or applicant inay represent himself . council ,;;�� "irn or remand the natter to the or choose to be represented b.� another. • inspecu�r c,r director, or may reverse o: place con- (e) Pecord,• euidence The cou.ncil shall receive di:ior.s uF,on the license based on the counci]'s and keep a record of such proceed.ings, includ:ng deter:r.ination that the decision v�•as b�ed on an testimony and exhibits, and shZll receive and give � e:-ror of Ja��•. The filing of an appeal shall not stay weight to�evidence, including hea�-sav evidence, the issuance of the license. � v�hich possesses probative .•alue commor�y aecepted (Code 1°��, � �10.04; Ord. No. 17455, § 1, 5-21-87) by reasonable and prudent pe:sons in the conduct • . of their a5airs. � Sec. 3I0.05.' Hearing procedures. � . (� Council actiort,' resolution to contnin findir►gs. (a? Aduerse action,• notice and hearing require- V��'here the council takes adverse action �-ith re- � ments. In an}• case where the council may� or in- spect to a license, licensee or applicant for. a li- tend.s to consider a.ny adverse action, including cense, the resolution by which such action is taken the revocstion or suspension of a license, the im- shall contzin its findings and determination, in- position of conditions upon a license, or the denial cluding the imposition of conditions, iS any. ' of an app'.ication for the grant, issuance, renewal o: transfe� of a license, the applicant or licensee �� '`��'x''°».a1Procedures where required Where shal] be �iven r,otice and an opportunity to be the provisions of any statute or ordinance require hea�-d as pro.-ided herein. The•council may con- additional notice or he�-ing procedures, such pro- sider such adverse actions when recommended by `'lsioas shall be complied w-ith and shall super- the inspector, by the director, by the director of �e inconsistent provisions ofthese chapters,This an}• executive department established pursuant shall include, without limitation by reason of this to Chapter 9 of the Charter, by the city attorney specific reference, hiinnesota Statutes, Chapter 364, and Minnesota Statutes, Section 340A.415. or on its oK•n initiative. 'S�pp.1`0. 1 ' . 2031 � 4 310.05 LEGLSLATN£CODE �- ' ' . �. (h� Disve:ion to hear notiuiths:ending withdratual cordance R-ith the procedures outlined in Section or surrender of appliccxior. or license The council 310.05. may, at it.s discretion, conduct a hearing regard- �� Basis for a.ction. Such adverse action ma ing re�•ocation or denia] of s license no�-ithstz.nd- y be based on one or more of the following reasons, ing that ;.he applicant or licensee has attempted R,hich are in addition to any other reason specifi- or pu.-p�*-ted to u�itbdrav� or surrenoer said license �ly provided by law or in these chapters: or application, if the attempted v��ithdrawal or surrenrie: took place after tbe applicant or licen- (1) T''be license or permit was procured by mis- :>ee �aC been notified of the hea.ring and potential representation of material facts, by fraud, adverse action. b�� deceit or by bad faith. (i) Continuances. Vv'here a hearing for the pui- (2) The applicant or one acting in his behalf pose of considering zevocation or suspension of a. made or21 or written miss`utements or mis- license or other disciplinary action involving a � representztions of material facts in or ac- license has been scheduled before the council, a companying the application. � , continuation of the hea�-ing may be granted at �3) Tbe license was issued in violation of any the request o, the licensee, license applicant, an of tbe proti-isions of the Saint Paul Zoning • interest,ed person or an attorney repr�senting the Code. foregoi�g, onl� as pro��ided herein: (1) «t,ere the request is made at least taenty- «� �e lilense or permit v�•as issued in •riola- tion o, law �;�t�out authori��, or under a foi:r (24) nours prior to the scheduled bear- ' � :ng, the president o;tne council or the coun- �ateri�] mistake of fact. . cil �a}• continue the hearing upon a show- (5) 'I'he licensee or applic2r,t h� failed to com- � in� o� good cause b}� the pary making the pl�• v.-itn any condition set ;orth in the li- zequest. _ ' cea�e, or set forth in the re�olution grani- � ing o- renewing f.he license. - (2) ��here t�e request is maoe less th�n twenty- � � fo;ir (24) hour� before, bur not or. the day of (6) The licensee or applicznt has �-ic�lated an�• . the scheculed hear:nb, thE council ma�• con• of the proti•isions of tnese chepi.ers, or of tir.ue th� hearing upon z showing of good any statute, ordinanc= or regulation rea- ' cause b�• the par�� making the request. sonablv relatea to the licensed activiiy, re- � (3) «�here the reques: is made on the da� said . gardless of u�hether criminal cha.rges have ne�ring is sch�duled, the council may grant or have not been brc�ught in connec�ion there�•ith. 2 continuance on the condition that the • . . part�= requesting the continuance pay to (7) The acti��ties of the licensee in the licensed the City of Saint Pau] the city's actua] costs acti�-it� create or have created a serious for the cou.*-c reporter and witnesses Rho danger to the public l�,ealth, saf'ety or wel- � apoeared for the hearing, or one hundred fare, or the licensee performs or has pes- , dollars (S100.00), whichever is the lesser. formed his work or acti��it} in an unsafe (Code ?9�6, � 510.05) mannez. (8) Faili:re to keep sidew�lks or pedesh ian wa5�s � Sec. 310.06. R.e�•ocation; suspensioa; adverse reasonably free of snow and ice as required under Chapter 114 of the Saint Paul Legis- nctions. lative Code. (a) Council moy take aduerse action T"ne coun- (9) The licensee or applica:�t has sho�vr, by past cil is authorized to take adverse action against � misconduct, unfair acts or dealings, or by an}• license or permit, licensee or applicant for a the frequent abuse of alcohol or other drugs, license, 2s p:o�-ided in and by these chapters. Such that such licensee or applicant is not a per- . actions shall be initiated and cariied out in�ac- son of the good mora] character or fitness � Supp.?�o.1 . . �. • 2032 � ' ' �.ICENSES # 310.Oi required to engage in a licensed activity, . business or profession. (Code 1956, � 510.06) � Sec. 310.0 i. Termination of licenses; surety - bonds; insurance contracts. (a) A uiomafic terminafi.on, reinstatement; re- sporLSibility of Iicensee All licerL�es or permits which must, by the pro��isions of these chapters or other ordinances or laws, be accompanied b� the filing and maintenance of insurance policies, deposits, gz:arantees, bonds or certifications s:�all aut,omati- . cally terr�inat.� on cancellation or x�thdrav�•al of said policies, deposits, bonds or cert�cations. No licensee ma�• continue to operate or perform the licensed acti.�ty �ft.er such tel-mination. The li- � censee is liable and responsib)e for the filing and ' maint.enance of such policies, deposits, guarantees, bonds or certifications as are required in these cbapters, and snall not be entitled to assert the � acts o: omi�sions of agents, brokers, e�p)oyees, z:t�rnevs oT an�• other persons � a cefense or jus.�S�ca:ion for failure to comply w-ith such filing 2n� m2intenance requi:e�ats. In the event the ' ]icensEe reinstates and files s:�cb policies, depos• it.s, bonds or cer�ifications �•i;.hin thirty (30) days, � � Supp.No. 1 2032.1 • � ._ LICENSES �310.09 the license is automatically reinsLated on tbe same (d) Expiration date.to be concurrent with term terms and conditions, and for the same period as or licerLSe or permit The ea-piration dat,e of all originall�• issued. After thirty (30) days, the ap- sucli policies, bonds, guarantees or certifications plicant must reappl} for a renewal of hic license shall be concurrent with the expiration date of a.s though it v.�ere an original application. the license or permit. (b) Bonds and insurance requirements: (Code 1956, § 510.07) (1) Surety Companies: All surety bonds ru�- Sec. 310.08. Terms of licenses;unifortn dates. ning t,c the City of Saint Pau] shall be writ- (a) All licenses or permits shall be valid for a ten by surety companies authorized to do Period of one yeZr from the date of issuance by business in the State of Minnesotz. All in• �e inspector, except as otherwise provided herein or in these chapters br in cases of revocation surance policies required by these chapters � shall be �Titten by insurance companies suspension or termination under Section 310.06. authorized to do business in tne State of (b) Licensees may continue to operate their busi- Minnesota. ness after the expiration date of their license; provided, that the ]icensee has filed with the in- (2) Approved as to Forra: A'13 bonds fi�ed with spector on or before the expiration date the ap- •� the City of Saint Pau] in connection with propriaLe license application, license fees, insur- the issu2nce of licenses for whatever pur- ance and bonds. The inspector shall process the � pose, and all policies of insurance required renewal Zpplication in the tnanner provided �'or to be filed u•ith or by the Cit}• ot Saint PauJ in this Code. in connection w•ith the issuance of licenses for an�� purpo�e v:hatsoever, shail tirst be �c) ti'henever any licensee is the holde: of the appro��ed as to form by the citv attorne}•. t��o (2) or more licenses of the Ciiy of Saint Paul _ w•hich expire or� dif"terent dates, the inspecwr is (3) Uniform Endorsement: £�ch insur�nce pol- authoriaed, at the reouest of the licensee, to de-., . ic�• required to be filed pursuant to tnese termine a uniform date for the expiration of al) or chapters shall contain the enoorsement set any number of such licenses,not�•ithstanding the � ior��h in Chepter ; of the Saint Paul Legis- terrn and ex-piration dates o;sucb licensec � origi- ,,r )ative Code. nally issued, and notu•ithstariding an}� pro�ZSion as to term of license of any ordinance of the citt� (4) ConditiorLS: all bonds required by th�e cha� heretofore��or hereafter enacted. The provicions �. ters sh::ll be concitioned that the licensee hereof shall govern the issuance of any ne�� li- sha)l observe all ordinances and laws in cense to one already holding a license. reJation to the licensed acti�-it}�, business, �d) In order to conform to the foregoing provi- � ' premises or facilities and that he sball con- sions, new licenses may be issued for a term of duct al] such activities or business in con- )ess than one year, and the license fee therefor iormity therew�ith. Such bonds shall also shall be prorated for the period of issuance. indemnify the City of Saint Paul against (Code 1956, � 510.08; Ord. No. 17360, § 1, 6-5-56) a11 claims, judgments or suits caused by, resulting from or in conr,ection v.•ith the cec. 310.09. Fees. ' licensed business, premises, acti��ry, thing, �y� Appjicati:on charge � facility, occurrence or otherwise licensed ` under these chapters. (1) Amount: In addition to the license or per- mit fees set forth in each chapter of this (c) Termi�ation ojbonds and insurance required Code, each applicant shall pay, at the time bv�citti�. Termination of bonds and insurance re• of filing, a two dolla.r fLFty cent ($2.50) pro- quired to be filed v.�ith the city pursuant to these cessing charge for each and every applica- chapters shall be in accordance w-ith the require- tion for a license or permit to be issuEd by ments oi Chapter S of the Saint Paul Legislative the inspector, director or council of the Ci�y Code. of Saint Paul. • 2033 ' � 310.09 � LEGLSZ.A�YE CODE !2) Refunds: Said tK•o dollar fifty cent ($2.50) met when the license has lapsed by reason of processing charge shall not, under any cir- expiration. cumstances, be refunded. (Code 1956, § 510.09; Ord. No. 16854, 2•11-82) (b) Fee schedule. The council may by ordinance �c. 310.10. Refunds of fees. determine and establish one fee schedule for any or a11 licenses and permits issued pursuant to (a) Refund where application u�ithdro.wn or de. these chapters, and a separate fee schedu)e for nied,• seruice charge. Un)ess otherwise specifically applications for such licenses and permits, which provided b�� the particular licensing provisions may inc]ude fees to cover costs incurred by reason involved, where an application for any license is of tbe late filing. Such fees, in either schedule, withdrawn or denied, the inspector shali refund shall be reasonab]y related to the costs of admin• to the applicant the license.fee submitted less a istration incurred in connection with each such�. service charge to recover in part the costs incurred application, license or permit. Costs of adininis- in processing the application in the amount o� tration sha)) mean and include, but ��ithout limi- twenty•five (25}percent of the annual license fee. � tation b}� this specification, both direct and indi- rect costs ane expenses, such as sala.ries, �•ages, �� Limitaxion on refund oth.er cases. In all other , benefit� and a11 pe�rsonnel costs including train- cases as provided in parag�-aph (c), the inspector ing, seminars and cchooling, expenses of investi- may refund not to exceed one hundred dollars gations and inspections, handling of inquiries and «100.00) of fees received in connection with any requests for assictance, te)ephone and communi- license, permit or application therefo:; pr�vided, cations, st�;ionen•, postage, paper, rEproduction, that he certify in writing that the amount of the o`i�ce capital eeuipment and all o�ice supplies. refund represents a sum over and abo��e the rea- �Such fee schedules as adopted b}• ordinance and sonab]e costs of administration incurred up to � posted ir, the o�ice o` the inspecsor shall super- that time.in connection �•ith said license, permit j or application. The director mGv refunn not to � sede inconsister.t iee pro�•isions in t��ese chapters - or in o:her ordinances or laws. excEed two hundred fi�y doila.rs (�2�0.00)of sucn ' fees upon a like certification b}� the inspector. .' � (c) Fee for one ti•ear; ,moy be prorated UnJess The council mav by resolution authori2e all re- _ o:her��i� s�cific.�ll�� pro��ded,the licerL� f� st,ated funds upon a like certification by the inspector. is for a period of one year. Such fee may be pro- (c) Bases for rejunds. Refunds under paragraph ratea �•here a licenae is issued for a period of less (b) ma}-be made to the licensee or his est�te: than a �•Ear. (1) ��T'h.ere the place of business cf the licensee !d) Late ;t�e linless otherK�ise spec�cally pro- or hic principal equipment is destroyed or .•ided bv the particular licensing provisions in- so damaged by fire or any o�her cause that •�o)��ed, an applicant for the rene�•al of a license the licensee cea�es for tne remainder of the a•ho makes application for such renewal after the license3 period to engage in the licenser� expiration date of such )icense shall be charged a activit}• or business; � late fee for each such license. The late fee shall be �2� V�rhere the business or licensed acti rity ceases . ir� addition to an}� other fee or payment required, by reason of the death or illness of the � and shall be ten (10)percent of the annual license �icensee or the sole employee or manager; fee for such license for each thirty-day period or or portion thereof��hich has eJapsed after the expi- ration date of such license. The late fee shall not (3) Where it has become unla��fu? for the li- exceed fift}• (50? percent af the annual license fee. censee to continue ir: the business or licensed If an�• pro.•ision of these chapters imposes more activity other than by revocation, suspen- strinsent or additional requirernents for.the issu- sion, denial or any criminal activity on the ance of an original license than would be the case part of the licensee. for mere rene�•al, those requirements must be (Code 1956, as amended, § 510.1G) � \ . 2C134 ...._: . '_LTCENSFS .5 310.11 - Sec. 310.11. 'I�-ansfers; general. (fl Transrer; definition. "T1-ansfer," as used in (a) License n priw:lege, nor property. All licen- these chapters, shall include a transfer from per- ses or permits issued bv the City of Saint Paul son to person, or from place to place, or a transfer pursuant to tbese chapters or other ordinances or of stock in a corporate licensee, or of sh�res or la�•s confer a privilege on the licensee to engage interests in a partnership or other )egal entit��. in tbe activit}• or occupation so licensed, a�d do �'ansfer, as used in these chapters, shall not not constitute property or property rights or cre- �nclude the insLance �vhere a license is held by an ate any such rights in any licensee. No such li• individua) or partnership and the transfer is by cense or perm.it may be seized, levied upon, at- said individual or partnership to a corporation in tacbed, executed upon, assessed or in any manner which the majoriry of the stock is held by s�id taken for the purpose of satisfaction of any debt �ndivic3ual or by the members of said partnership. or obligation whatever. '. (g) Assignment and.bond to accompany Qppji_ (b) Licenses transferabl� conditions. Al] licen- cation In the case of a transfer fr�om person to person, the application for transfer shall be ac• ses issued by the City of Sa.int Pau] shall be trans- companied by a wTitten assign�nent of all rights ferable unless the spec�c chapter of the Saint + of the original licensee in znd to the license and Pau1 Legis]ative Code pertainiiig to each spec�c shall be accompanied by a surety bond in amoLnt '� license s:�all specifically prohibit the transfer of and in form required of an original licensee. such license. l�o transfer of any Class IIl license issued b�• the Cit�• of Saint Pau) shall be effective (r►) Public corporations. I�TOt��ithstanding other until the council of the City of Saint Paul has provisions of this chapter, publicly owned corpo• appro�•ec the trar.sfer follow-ing a pub]ic hearing, rations ��hose stock is traded in the open market � znd a re�olution appro�zng s�id transfer is pas..�, may comply with the transfer requirements ger- approvet and published. Both the transferor and ��ning to stock ow�nership and stoc� transfer by trar.sferee s:all make appJication for transfer of a furnishing the inspector on reauest wzth L�e nar.�es license o� such forms as may be prescribed by the and sdcresses o; all stoc�:holders of record uF�on • di�•ision, and in accordance �•ith Section 310.02. each renew•a] of the license. . � fc) Trc:nsfer ta.x. In all cases of transfer of a (i) Afj=�davit of transjeror. No license transfer _ , shal] be efiective unless tne�transferor submits license f-om a presen� licensee to any other per• � son, the�e shali be a tax on said transfer in the an �davit of such trans;ero:, t�en under oath, ' amount ��f t��•entv•five (2;,) percent of the annual stating the�follo��ing: license tee cnarged for said license, said tax to be (1). That in the case of Class III licenses, �he paid b�• the transferee. . transferor-affiant has posted notice to all � ' • (d) Tr�insjer t�ir; de.posit�retained or returned employees in a conspicuous place on the V.'l�enever an ap�lication is made for transfer of a licensed premises notifying all employ�es of the time,place and date of hearing of the license, �he amounf as set out in paragraph (c) transfer of the license to be held befare the shall be deposited ��ith said application. If the Saint Paul City Council; � __-transfez of license is approved, the amount depos- ited sha11 be ret2ined �y the city. If the transfer is (2) That said notice specified in subparagraph denied, the amount deposited shall be returned to (1) above ��as posted continuously for four: the party depositing the sa.me, in accordance with teen (14) days; � the requirement and conditiorLS in Se�ction 310.10. (3) That transferor has paid al) wages due and (e) Transjer tc.z; exception Pazagraphs (c) and o��ing the persons employed by the trans- (d)shall not apply in any case when, by the terms feror or that an agreement has been reached ot these chapters, payment of the full annual li-. between transferor and all employees as to censee fee or a prorated yearly annual license fee the pa�•ment of wages due and owing; is provided for on the part of the transferee before E4) That transferor has made payment to all an�• transfer of license is made effective by the employees in lieu of vacation time earned action of appro��ing the transfer. by said employees or in lieu thereof an • • 2035 � � 310.11 LEGLSLATfVE CODE agreement has been reached between trans- or other ]aw� shall at al) times while open to the feror and all emp]oyees as to paymeat in public oz while being used or occupied for a.ny lieu of ti•acation time earned; purpose b� open also to inspection and eaam.ina- (�) That transieror has satisfactAril�� a.nd com- tion by any police, fire, or healtb officer or any plete]�• complied with his contractual obli• b��g�-�t°r of the city,as well asthe inspeetor, gations pertaining to emp)oyer contributions �Code 1956, � 510.12) to employee benefit programs which include, �c. 310.13. R.enewal. but are not l:mited to, pension programs, hospital,medica] and life in.surance programs, Every license renewa] under these chapters may profit-sharing programs and holiday pay be denied for any licensee who is delinquent in benefits. any payment or contribution to a health and wel- fare trust or pension trust, or similaz program, (j) Dececsed licensee Not�-ithstanding any other�. established for the benefit of his emp)oyees. provision of these chapters, in any case where a (Code 1956, § 510.13) liquor license is held by a person not incorporated � and �•here the license would, by reason of the $ec. 310.14. Savings clause. death of said licensee, lapse to thel city in the absence of this paragraph, the authorized repre- �a) If any provision in these chapters is he]d sentztive of the estate of the decea�ed licensee unconstitutional or invalid by a court of compe- may consent to ane� seek to transfer said license �nt ju-isdiction, the invalidity shall e�.-tend only to the sun•i�•ing spouse of the licensee. The trass- � the provision involved an� the remainder of fer shall be subject to all applicable requirements these chaoter� shall remain in force and effect to . of the�e chapters and existing la��. be construed zs s v��hole. (�:) .�o cpproual under certain conditions. The �} �e repea] of any ordinance by this ordi- ( council shal) not approvE zn.• tra7�sfe: w•here ei- nance (�•nich enacts the liniform License Ordi- ` ther pz��• has not complied with the�terms of any nancei shall not 4fi'ect or impair any act done, , . any rights vested or accrued, or any suit, proceed• contract or agreemer,t regarding employee bene- ing or prosecution had or commenced in any mat• ' fit ur rringe benefit programs; including, but not ter, prior to the date this ordinance beczme efiec- limited to, per.sion, hospitalization, medical and t;ve. Every such act done or right vested or accn�ed ' life insurance, profit•sharing or holida�� pay pro- shall remain in full force and e�ect to all intents grams; pro.•ided, that any perscn or organization and purposes as if the repea)ed ordinances had objecting to a trznsfer.because of failure to pay themselves remained in force and e�ect. Every employee benefit or fringe benefit programs shal] such suit,-proceeding or prosecution may be con- fi)e a �•rittEn notice of objectian �•ith the license tinued after repeal as though the repealed ordi- inspECtor seven (7)• days prior to the scheduled nances were full in e�ect. A suit � pub)ic hearing on'the transfer, and said notice y , proceeding or prosecution Khich is based upon an act done, a shal] contain a comp)ete itemization of the objec- right vested or accrued, or a violation committec� tor's claim. prior to repeal of the repealed ordinances, but � (1) Trnnsfer oj more tharc one license if one is which is commenced or instituted subsequent to Class III. If an application is made to transfer repeal of the repealed ordinances, shall be brought • more than one license at the same time, the in- pursuant to and under the provisions of such re- specior may, if one of the licenses is a Class III pea)ed ordinances as though they continued to be Iicer_ce, handle all said licenses as Class III IicerL�es. in full force and effect. (Code 19�6, § 510.11; Ord. No. 16822, 9•3-81) (Code 1956, § �10.14) Sec. 320.12. Inspection of prentises. Sec. 310.15. Penalty. The premises, fzcilities, place, device or any Any person w�ho violates any provision of these thing named in any license issued pursuant t,o chapters, or other ordinances or laK�s relating to ! an�� pro�•ision of the Saint Paul Legislative Code licensing, or w�ho aids, advises, hires, counsels or � • ,2036 . • _LICENSES t 318.01 �-_ - conspires �-ith or otherazse procures another to Sec. 316.02. Fee. ' �-iolate an�• provision of these chapters or other ' ordinances or la�•s relating to licensing is guilty The fee required is forty-five dollars (�45.00). of z misdemeanor and may be sentenced in ac• (Code 1956, § 384.02) cordance w•ith Section 1.05 of the Saint Paul Leg- islative Code. The term "person," in addition to Chapter 31i. Amusement Rides the definition in Section 310.01, shall for the pur- . pose of this section include the individual part- �c. 317.01. License required. ners or me:nbe:s of any partnership oi corpora- tion, and as to.corporations, the officers, agents or No person shall engage in the business of pro- members thereof, who shall be responsible for the viding zrnusement rides, for charge, to the public violatioa. in Saint Paul without a license. (Code 1956, § 510.15) '. (Code 1956, § 411.01) � Sec. 310.16. License fees, an�oual incresses. �c. 31i.02. Fee. Efiective on January 1 of e,s,ch calendar year, T'be feerequired is one hundred dollars($100.00) , . all license fees, except building trades business for eacb ]ocation at which such person will oper- ' license fee� and fees for building trades certifi- ate and maintzin the business of providing such cates of competenc�•, sha�l incre�se by the per- rides. �ent.aee increase in the budget for the division of (Code 1956, � 411.02) �icense and permit administration of the depart- me�t of finance and management services. Prior �8p�r 31s. Mechanical Amusement I3e�-ices to ?�o�•ember 1 of each vear, the director of fi- nance and management se.;��ices shall file K�ith the ci:ti• clerk a notiee of the percentage increase, �c. 318.01. Lieense required; definitions. ii an�•, in license fees. Tvo person shall own and ailow to be operated (Ord. '•��o. 1688�, 2-11-�2; Ord. No. 1 i059, 14•20-83; for business purposes an�� coir.-operatecl mechani- ' 0.-d. '�o. 17303, § 4, 10-29$�) cal amusement device w•ithot�t a license. A coin• : operated mechanical amu�emznt device is hereby Chapters 311-314. R.eserved defined as:an}� machine w�hich, upon the incertion � ..ef a coin, tioken or slug, operates oT m�y be oper- SUETITLE B. CLASS I LICENS£S ated by the public for use � a game, entertain- ment. or amusement, which amusement de��ice contains no automatic payeff de.*ice for the re- � � Chapter 3I5. R.eserved' turn of money, coins, checks, tokens or merchan- � dise, or which provides no such pay-ofi' by any Chapter 316. Anima] Foods other means or manner. 'I'he �erm "coin-operated Manuiacturing and Distributi.ng mechanical amusement device" shall include sa called pinball machines; music machines; coin- , Sec. 316.01. License required. operated television units; motion picture machin�s; amLSement rides, excepting those provided for �To pe*son shall engage in the business of the under Chapter 317,pertaining to amusement rides � manufacture or distribution of animal foods in of the tvpe used at carnivals; table shufi]eboard Saint Paul �•ithout a license. games or sirsilar games of a�usement for which (Code 1956, § 384.01) a fee is charged to players for the playing thereof; � and all other machines which, by the insertion of 'Editor'c no�,e—ThE licenr•es under th;s chaptxr, deri�ed a coin or token, operate for the entertainment or irom EE 34�.O1-345.03 of tbe city's 1956 Code, were redesig- natrd as Class lI1 licenses by Ord.1Jo.172Q7,sdopt,c-u Jan.31, ��ment of the player,except weig}ung machines. 15b5,and recodifird as Ch.423. (Code 1956, §§ 412.01, 412.02) 2Ci3? .-_ - _....... riie ��v.— — u v ✓ i r � � - - Ordindnce Ordinance N 0. � s� � . ^ � 'r�sented By ' Referred To � Committee: Date Out of Committee By � Date An Ordinance amending Sectio� 310.05 of the Saint Paui Legislative Code pertaining to - license procedures. TNE COUNCIL Or THE CtTY OF SAINT PAUL DOtS ORDAIN: Section 1 . That Section 310.05 (c) of the Saint Paul Legislative Code is here�y . amended to read as foilows: tc) Where the cause for the adverse hearina is based �upon a violation of law and there is no dispute as to the facts under- l�inq the violation, the hearing shall be held by the eadr�e+�; NAtep sha++ effard council 's cortmittee desi4nated to hear � license matters. Otherwise the hearinq shall be conducted before a hearinq examiner appointed bv the council for that puroose. . The applicant or the licensee shall be provided an opporLUnity to present evidence and argument as Nell as meet adverse testimony or evideRCe by reasonable cross-examination and rebuttal evidence. Tne eeer+rt� committee or hearinq examiner may in its dis- cretion permit other interested persons the opportunity to present . testimony or .evidence or otherwise participate ?n such nearing. .. COU�ICII. MEMBERS Yeas . Nays Requested by Department of: Dimond • ��g In Favor �o�c� Rettman s�n�;�t Against BY soon�o µ7lsoo �dopted by Council: Date Fa� AP oved by Cit tomey nified Passed by Council Secretary BY "' O/� �d by Mayor: Date Approved by Mayor for Submiss:on to Council � BY ' - �� .� � �_ _ . C,C�'-5� �7,�'�' � �7��59 Sectian 2. That Section 310.05 of the Seint Paul Legislative Code is hereby amerxied so as to add the following new Subsections thereto to be numbered as 310.05 (c-1) and 310.05 (c-2): . (c-1 ) Procedure; hearinv examiner. The hearinv examiner shali hear all evidence as mav be presented on behaif of the citv and the a�li- cant or licensee, and shall present to the eomn►��ee Council � � written findings of fact and conclusions of law tooether With a recommendation for adverse action. � The eomrntt�ee Council shall consider the evidence contained in the record, the hearinq examiner's recommended findinas of fact and con- clusions, and shall not consider anv factual testimonv not previouslv submitted to and considered bv the hearinq examiner. The eon+mt�tee Council at a public hearina shalt provide the applicant or licensee an opportunitv to present oral or written arquments alleqina error on the part of the examiner in the application of the law or interpretation of • the facts, and to present testimonv related to the recommended adverse action. Upon conclusion of the hearinq, and after considerinq the record, the examiner's findinvs and recomrnendations toaether with such additional arQUments and testimonv vresented at the hearina, �l�e eanmt�tee she�� ebn►tt t�� ftndtng',- eene�a��t�on� eRd r�e�omrnenda- �tan� �o �he fa�� eodne��- �lpen recetp� af �he eommtt�eet� report; �he Eoanet� �he�� p�ece �he r�e��er dpon +�9 regd�ar mee�tng egenda e� rrhteh �tme �he eoane-i-� sha�� ean�td�r �he re�ofd of �he preeeeeltng� trte�t�dtng �he ftr�dtngs; eane�dston� end reeomR+endetfiorts sttbm�t�ed by the exen+}n�r end �he � eammfit�ee- N�t�ten nottee of the �nee�tr►g �F+e�� be proattle� �e �he . epp�teant or }teen�eer �he coane�� ha�� tn ee�ordence Ktth �aK the Council shall determine what, if anY, adverse action shalt be � taken, which action shall be bv resolution. The Council may acceptZ re_iect. or modifv the recommendations of the hearina examiner or � committee. • (c-2} Ex-varte contacts. If a license matter has been scheduled for an adverse hearing, council members shall not discuss the license matter xith each other or with any of the parties or interested persons involved in the matter unless such discussion occurs on the public record durinq the public hearincts of the matter or durinq the , Councii 's final deliberations of the matter. . ` 2 . . n�v c.M r — — — — � � .�.�� . ... � �.. �. �.. p v �/ ° °^ File N U. -� . , . .. . ~ Qrdindnce o�d;nan�� NO. ��.�� Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty days from and after its passage, approval and pubiication. COUNCILMFN � Requested by Department of: Yeas �� Nays � . ,�cL � In Favor Rettma � Seh�ib�l Against BY Sonn�n T.�=p�D v,M+�,. ;' MAY 1 7 �3A Form Appr d by City Atto ney Adopted by Counci(: Date � �ertitied P s ed � ounci e BY �� By � '' 1 WY �,� � Approved by M3yot for Submission to Council �pp ov Mayor: Date gy By �� M AY 2 8198$ . � � . ;� t_ '.-, ;V. ; T . �` Pctcf lG . � � �.— �• � . . . :..; c f _ _,. . tl��:� 2 � ;_�>..r . �� ,��.� � "�'i�/ r, -�•- - ,�: _ _ � , :�. � r'' �i �� - �r •'! ;i:_ STATE OF MI\'\TESOTA ) County of Raasey ) ss. CITY OF SAI�T PAUL ) • I� . . , . . . F�lbert B.. O1son. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..City Clerk of the � � City of Saint Paul, �:innesota, do hereby certify that I h2ve . co�pared the attachEd co�y of Couacil Filz ::o. . �� .��1. . . . . . . . . . . , � Aaril 2�, . 19.s8 as adopted by the City CoLncil. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . azd approl�ed by the *'�yo:. . . . . . . . . . . . .�.pril .��'. . . . . . . . . . . . I9 ,¢.8. . . c:ith the ori.ginal thereoi oa file in my office. I further certify that said copy is a true and correct cvpy � ' of said original an3 the whole trereof. � . ' WITi.i.SS ny hand and the seal of the City of Sair.*_ Pas?, Minnesota this . . , , ?3rd. . . , day of .. . _ . . . MaX . . . . . . .A.D. I9.$$ . ," -� � . . % .�' ��,� . . . . . �..f x��::{. . . �:. .•':- ��!. . .. . . . . . . .. City Clerk. ��; - . r iie r�v.—-- �v V 1 =-3/Ci�� A�`ny . • � � � . ,. � _ � 4r in�zn�ce Ordinance N O. �.�dt . �;�4 . � �� e s e n t ed B y �`t'�. ;—�l/�'��(. • `5��- Re(erred To Committee: Date Out of Cornmittee By � Date An Ordinance �ending Chapter 409 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to Intoxicating Liquor ; nroviding presumptive penalties for liquor . licensed establisr.nents . THE COLI:�CIL OF THE CITY OF SAINT PAU'L DOES OItDAIN : � Section 1 . . That Chapter 409 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code is hereby a�ended so as to add the following new provisions there�o : ' Sec .� 4A9-?§- 409 . 26 . Intoxicating liquor; ad�e�e� °eeY_�gQ; ee��r�e�ie�s��e=E��62`i9; presu.-nptive penalties . a) r�ur�ose . The pu=pose of this section is to es�zbi�s�'— ��a standard by wnich the. City Council ce�e�ines t�e length of license suspensions; �nd =e:�ocaticns , �==es-eA�;ex-�ke-p�ae�xo-E�-esp��e}s t=e�:-�Ge-��.s=�e9s-��ee=se9; znd shG�l Gpply to all • e:�-sale and off-sale licensed prenises . T�ese � �ena�ties are presumed to be a ro ria�e or ever . . � case , :�oc,�ever t e Counci may evizte t ere rou� in �^ �*�dividual case where the Counci� �inds and � ce�er:ines t�at there exist substantial and com- � � - � . �ellin4 reasons makin it more appro riate to do . � . so . t:�hen eviatin rom t ese standar s 'the Council . •' � shal provide �written reasons which spe�ci y why the • pe;alty selected was nore appropriate . COUNCIL MEMBERS - zs Kays Requested by Depa�tment of: • - Diawnd Q ' • �og Jn Favor L'osr�tz Re ttm�n ,./ Scbcibel A gai n s t BY , Sonnen ' ' �tiilson Form Appr ved by Citv Attorney ��ted by Council: Date � - ' � / { '�� {�lo�`� �:i`ied Passed by Council Secretary ' By 7� , � ; � � .•.ved t,v :tavor: D�te Approved by 5layor for Sub:nission to Couneil By � I . . . _ � �� . . . , . ,r� � � -z- b) Presum tive penalties for violations . Adverse penalties zor convictions or violations sha 1 be presumed as follows : TYPE OF VIOLATION 1ST VIOLATION 2ND VIOLATION 3RD VIOLATION 1 . Conmission of Revocation NA NA a felony related to the licensed activity. 2 . Sale of Revocation NA �A ' alcoholic beveraoes while . license is under . suspension. _ 3 . Sale of 5 Consecutive Revocation - NA � '�lconolic Days Sus- beve�z�,es to pension � u�de_-z�e person . 4 . Sale of 5 Cons,ecutive 15 Consecutive P.evocation alcoro�ic beverage Days Sus- Days Sus- �o intoxicated pension pension ' person. � � . 5 . c.`ter hours 3 Consecutive •9 Consecu�ive Revocation � - sale or display Days Sus- Days Sus- ' � c�T alcoholic pension pension beveYages . . 6 . Re`usal to 5 Consecutive 15 Consecutive Revocation allow City ' Days Sus- � Days Sus- ' - inspectors or pension pension . police admission � _ to inspect premises . � ' � 7 . Illegal 3 Consecutive 9 Cor.secutive Revocation � ' � gambling on Days Sus- Days Sus- � �- � premises . pension. pension 8 . Permit person 3 Consecutive 9 Consecutive Revocation � to leave premises Days Sus- Days Sus- with alcoholic pension pension beverage . .� f fi� ci-/ -C�� . n � b� f _ , . �y� � -3- TYPE OF VIOLATZON 1ST VIOLATION 2ND VIOLATION 3RD VIOI.ATIOh 9 . Failure to 15 Consecutive 45 Consecutive Revocation �.ake application Days Sus- Days Sus- for license pension pension renewal prior to license expiration date . 10. Violations of S Consecutive 15 Consecutive Revocation City ordinances Days Sus- Days Sus- � pertaining to pension pension rire or building or health codes . c) Computation of time . For the purpose of determinino the nu�ber of occurrences of violations , the council shall consider a violation as a second occurrence if it occurred �?i;.z�r. 18 calendar months of the first viola�ion; a�d shall consider a violation as a third occurrence ii it occurred t:ithin 30 calendar months of the second violztion. �� Ex-�e�te--eeA�Y�e�9---�--e-�_eePSE-�e`c�e�-1°.a9-beer seAeat�le�-€eK-an-ed�re�9e-�iea��xg,-ee�ne=?-=.e��e�s-9?�al�-Pe� . e�se�ss-��ie-��ee�se-2��e�-F�tk-eeek-e�l�e=-eY-�?�b-�A;-er � tpe-�eY��es-�r�Ye?�e�-�a-�l�e-�a��eY-��ess-st�ek-d�set�9s�eP ' eee��s-efi-the-�xb'-_�e-Yeeex�-�nY�xg-t�:e-r��1=e-keax�Ad9-er LHe-P.B��e�`-63`-�t.'x'sP.o-��iE-eetixez��9-=iA81-flE�i�3exF.'ci6A9-6t • c�:E-ir.2`tcer- ' . e3 d) Other penalties . Nothing in this section shall ' , .� • restrict or limit the authority of the .ccuncil to suspend up to 60 days , revoke the license , e� im�,ose a civil fine not to exce.ed $2 , 000 , to �im ose conditions or take any other adverse action in accor ance wit'-�Iaw, eY-��e�a��eas-e� . Aexee:�� aree-�a��h-aa-egg �ea��e-ste�t��e;-�t��e-e�-s�d�AaAee .- xe�a��Ag-te-a�eeke��e-be�e�eges; provided that the license . •� holder has been afforded an o o�rtunit for a hearing in . �- the manner provided for in Section . of this Code . � ' . , � - '✓;-� . . ,- + �sc �.v. — � � • � ' ' � OYW Z/L'LL!`CG OrdinanCe N�._ l76l�G esenled By Referred To � Conmittee: Date Out of Committee By Date � -4- . Section 2 . This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty days from and after its passage, approval and publication. COUNCIL hiEI�4BERS :as. t�'ays Requcsted by Department of: , - . Dimond � ' � • ��s In Favor � ... GosM iu ' Rrttman B s�nt��t Against Y $onnen ' • "� APR 2 � i�$ Form App oved by C�ty Attorney !opted by Council: Date � � :tif,Pd Pas� d-�bv Council S t � • BY ""--G ` '� �—�� P.y ' ' �,1��\i r .�.f J.ti` �.`��- n`ie �� 1�1,P�' � i�� Approved by 5;ayor for Subrission to Cou�cil �,f%�. �� 1� �`-�.��—" I V f �-e�k�� - — g y -'—....��r� i� i�� / �QQ1� f.. - � � � ��-oa�� - �P�2 . � �, y _ <- ��TT CITY OF SAINT PAUL `,.` ..o. '�.. �• '"' . / OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY �:;. ,�,�� r.= � - �-I o I - � �3�- �v EDWARD P. STARR, CITY ATTORNEY � �;�'.m•,��'`' 647 City Hail, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 j � �2��-� 612-298-5121 GEORGE LATIMER �� .tl M.AYOR Ma y 2 3, 19 8 8 ,�� /��t ��8 �5 ��:� Mt . Anthony F. Gagliardi NOTICE OF HEARING GMH, Inc . dba Grand Central 788 Grand Avenue St. Paul , Mn. 5�105 RE: Grand Central Dear Mr . Gagl iardi : This is to notify you that a hearing will be held concerning the licensed oremises stated above at the following time, date and gl ac e: Date : June 21-22, 1988 �� /• :�: ��.-wf' ,�i�-�`L'�-� ��-�. �c _ /C -/o`'�li Time: 9: 0P1 A. M. �L� ��, � ._ 1-,�:'i�� PZace : 9th Floor Conference R om , ommerce Building Fourth & Wabasha Streets , St. Paul , Mn. 551Pf1 The judge will be an Administrative Law .;udge from the State of Minnesota Office of Administrative Hearings : Name: Ms . Phyll is A. Reha Office of Administrative Hearings � ' Fifth Floor , Flour Exchange Building . Minneapolis, Mn. 55415 Telephone: 341-7611 �The Council of the City of Saint Paul has . the authority to � ` � p.rovide for hearings concerning licensed premises, .and for action against sucn licenses, under Chapter 310, including sections 3i0.05 and 3i(�.f�6 , of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. In thE case of licenses for intoxicating and non- intoxicating liquor , authority is also conveyed by section 34HA.415,of the Minnesota Statutes . Evidence will be presented to the judge which may lead to adverse � � action aga inst the 1 icense or 1 icenseholder as follows : Unlawful gambling activities in violation of Minn. Stat. 1986 , section 340A.419, subd. 5, and section 4P19.08 (6) of � the Saint Paul Legislative Code, took place on the licensed premises , including the playing of blac:kjack , on the following dates : . � � ':i . � � -�� ' �t�1VE� � �� ' t�AY 2 4 19 ;� � `°:' a ° A�� » " ' •� � � . �, � �� .:�r„ , r : � . - _. 1 . June 10, 1987 2 . June 11 , 1987 3. June 17 , 1987 4 . June 18 , 1987 5. August 5 , 1987. You have the right to be represented by an attorney before and during the hearing if you so choose , or you can represent yourself. You may also have a person of your choice represent you , to the extent not prohibited as unauthorized practice of law. The hearing will be conducted in accordance with the requirem ents of sections 14. 57 to 14. 62 of the Minnesota Statutes , and such oarts of the procedures under section 31�J. 05 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code as may be applicable. At hearing , the Administrative Law Judge will have all parties identify themselves for the record. Then the City will present its witnesses and evidence, each of whom the licensee or attarney may cross=�xamine. The li�ense2 may thE�n offer in rebuttal any witnesses or evidence it :nay wish to present , each of whom the �.ity attorney may cross=examine. The A�ministrative Law Judge may in addition hear relevant and material testimony from persons not presented as witnesses who have a su��stantial interest in the outcome of the proceeding; for example, the owners or occupants , of property located in close proximity to the licensed premises may have substantial interest in the � outcome of the proceeding. � Concluding arguments may be made by the pa•rties. Following the hearing , the Judge will prepare Findings of Fact, Conclusions of - Law , and a speci f ic recor�mendation for action to be taken. ' _ � You should bring to the hearing all. documents , records and . • witnesse�s you will or may need to support your position . . Subpoenas may be available to compel the attendance of witnesses or the production of documents in conformity with Minnesota Rules, part 140P1.7600. . If you think that this matter can be resolved or settled without . . a formal hearing , please contact or have your attorney contact , � the undersigned. If a stipulation or agreement can be reached as ' � � to the facts , that stipulation will be presented to tY,e • Administrative Law Judge for incorporation into his or her recommendation for Council action. If you fail to appear at the hearing , the allegations against you which have been stated earlier in this notice may be taken as true and your ability to challenge them iorfeited. If non=public data is received into evidence at the hearing , it may become ► , � � ' � . publ ic unless obj ection is made and rel ief requested under Minnesota Statutes , section 14. 60, subdivision 2. Very truly yours, _ �, . PHILIP . BYRNE Assistant City Attorney (612 ) 298=5121 Attny. Reg . No . 13961 . � cc: Douglas W. Thomson, Esq . Attorney for Licensee Joseph F. Carchedi License Inspector Lt . Donald Winger Vice Linit Albert B. Olson :.ity �lerk � Ms . Phyi 1 is A. Re�a . ► � . `�'� . � . ._ .�� ' . . . � ... . . . . ,t�..� .. � ;�+j�t ��"�`� - ' � 1 S�• �� . ! � r j /��„�Cjt, c�� • 11�u'-f' 310.01 LICENSES . Chap�er Page -a- ilU. l'niti�rni l,icen�c Yr��i•rdur�•�. . ........................ ..... ........... �_� Cla.. 1. . ................................. .. ..... .................. 7as Cl�" I1 ........ ...................9(15 .... . .... ..... . ......... Cla..11l ..... ..................... .............................. ...9(►9 CHAPTER 310.UNIFORM LICENSE PftOCEDURES 310.01. Definitions. Su6dir.�ision 1. Terms. For the purposes of this ordinance, anS• chapter of the Legislative Code pertaining to licenses as hereinafter mentioned, and subsequently enacted ordinances es- tablishing or relating to the requirements for Class I,Class II and Class III licenses under authority of the City of Saint Paul, the terms defined in this section shall have the meanings ascribed to them. Subd. 2. "Division"means the division of license and permit ad- ministration in the department of �nance and management ser- �-ices. Subd. 3. "lnspector" means the license inspector or official in charge of the division of license and permit administration. Subd. 4. "Director" means the director of the department of fi- nance and management sen�ices, unles� otherwise det"ined in the specific chapter, section or subdivision referred to. Subd. 5. "CounciP' means the council of the city of Saint Paul. Su6d. 6. "Chapters" and "these chapters" shall mean this Uniform License Ordinance, any chapter of the Legislative Code pertaining t.o licenses as hereinafter mentioned, and subsequently enacted ordinances establishing or relating to the requirements for Class I, Class II and Class III licenses under authority of the citti� of Saint Paul. Subd. 7."Class I licenses"means those licenses which can be ap- prored and issued or denied b}� the inspector, subject to the pro- cedures required by these chapt.ers. The following licenses are so classified, and the numbers shown in parentheses correspond to 72� �??nxl . . ..� "=' . : k,•l�=.=�� ' .. _ . .. -- -_ _.._ _ __. ------ �'• - _ 310.01 LEGISLATIVE CODE the chapters in the Legislative Code pertaining to each license. Class I Licenses Automobile Repair Garage and Body Shop (315► Animal Foods Manufacturing and Distributing (316) Amusement Rides (317) Mechanical Amusement Devices (318) Bill Posters (319) Bituminous Contractors (320) Boarding and Rooming Houses; Dormitories (321) Bowling Alleys; Pool Halls (322) Christmas 'I�ee Sales _ (323) Cigarettes (324) Close-Out Sales (325) Building Contractors (326) Dry-Cleaning and Dry-Dyeing Plants; Laundries (327) Electrical and Appliance Repair (328) Fire Alarm—Telephone Devices; Apparatus Installers (329) Florists (330) Food License (331) Fuel Dealers—Liquid Fuel (332) Fuel I�alers—Solid Fuel (333) Fumigating—Pest Control (334) Gasoline Filling Stations (335) Private Fuel Pumps (336) Hardware Stores (337) House Sewer Contractors (338) Ice Cream Processing and Distributing (339) Mercantile Broker (340) Milk (341) Oil—Bulk Storage (342) Opticians (343) Pawn Shops (344) Peddlers (345) Soliciting (346) Pet Shops (347) Radio and Television Repairs (348) Rental of Clothing (349) Rental of Hospital Equipment (350) Rental of Kitchenware (351) Rental of'I�ailers (352) Roller Rinks (353) Sanitary Disposal (354) Second Hand Dealers (355) 72b 91.�A;$1 ; . . � . •i f��M1: t ,; �'^�S4 310.01 LICENSE PROCEDURES Sidewalk Contractors (s56) Solid Waste (357) Sign and Billboard Construction (358) Sound 'h�ucks and Broadcasting Vehicles (359) Public Swimming Pools (360) Tow 1'rucks—Service Vehicles (361) 'I�ee 'I�imming (362) - Vending Machines t363) Veterinary Hospital �3�� Window Cleaning (365) Block Parties (366) Tattoo Parlors (36?) Wrecking of Buildings (368) Building 'I�ades Licenses (369) Certificates of Competency (370) Finishing Shop (371) Tire Recapping Plants (372) Transient Merchants (373) Subd. 8. "Class II licenses" means those licenses which must be approved or denied by the director, subject to the procedures re- quired by these chapters. The following licenses are so classified, and the numbers shown in parentheses correspond to the chapters in the Legislative Code pertaining to each license. Class II Licenses Auctioneers—Short Term License (3�� Soliciting Funds—Tag Days (391) Subd 9. "Class III licenses"means those licenses which can be approved or denied only by the council, subject to the procedures required by these chapters.The following licenses are so classified, and the numbers shown in parentheses correspond to the chapters in the Legislative Code pertaining to each license. Class III Licenses Auctioneers �4�� zr?slsi 7� . . , �t yy��_ ,�'�6�i , .? �'�y,''.Z.,: A }�, _.__�-..�.�..I 310.01 LEGISLATIVE CODE Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealer (401) Bingo (402) Bingo Halls (403) Private Clubs Dance Halls (404) Game Rooms (405) Hotel (406) Junk, Salvage and Scrap (407) Intoxicating Liquor (408) Non-Intoxicating Liquor (409) Entertainment (410) Massage Parlors and Saunas (411) Conversation Parlors (412) Masseur-Masseuse (413) Motion Picture Theatres (414) Motion Picture Drive-In Theatres (415) Parking Lots (416) Taxicabs (417) Gambling License (418) (419) Subd. 10. "License"means and includes all licenses and permits provided for or covered by these chapters. Subd 11. "Pereon" means and includes any person, firm, cor- poration,partnership,company,organization, agency,club,or any group or association thereof. It shall also include any executor, administrator, trustee,receiver, or other representative appointed by 1aw. Subd 12. "Bond"means a bond meeting the requirements of Sec- tion 310.07 and indemnifying the city of Saint Paul against all claims,judgments or suits caused by, resulting from or in connec- tion with any licensed business, activity, premises, thing, facility, occurrence or otherwise under these chapters. Subd l3. "Fee" means and includes both the license fee and ap- plication fee unless otherwise provided. Subd 14. "Adverse action"means the revocation or suspension of a license,the imposition of conditions upon a license,the denial 730 '1/28/81 _ _ _�� . r.....,,�.�y�.�.__ _...u. :.._..__ __ . _ ._. : ._.._._._._' �''��`'t{°.`��'_, v: 310.02 LICENSE PROCEDURES of an application for the grant, issua�ce, renewal or transfer of a license, and any other disciplinary or unfavorable action taken with respect to a license, licensee, or applicant for a license. Subd 15. "Zoning administrator"means the supervisor of code enforcement in the department of community services, or the offi- cial charged with responsibility for enforcement of the zoning code. Subd 16. "Building official" means the supervisor of code enfo�ement in the department of community services. (Code 1956, as amended, 951 D.Ol.) 310.02. Application. Subdiuision 1. Form. All applicants for licenses or permits issued pursuant to these chapters shall make both origina] and renewal applications to the inspector on such forms as are pro- vided by the division. Such applications shall not be received by the inspector until completely filled out, accompanied by all fees, insurance policies, bonds, deposits, sureties, and i�demnifications or certificates required by these chapters, together with the cer- ti�cation required in Subdivision 2. Subd 2. Taxes.No person shall be granted a license,a renewal of a license, or transfer of a license required b�the Saint Paul Legis. lative Code unless, prior to and in addition to any other require- ments, rules or ordinances heretofore or hereafter required, the Ramsey county department of property taxation cert�es that said applicant has paid �ny and all taxes, real or personal, before said taxes become delinquent, on any property, real or personal, situ- ated within the city of Saint Paul and used in connection with the business operated under said license. Notwithstanding the previous paragraph,the council,the director or the inspector may issue,renew,or transfer a license if it is found that: (1) 'I'he applicant has made an agreement satisfactory� to the Ramsey county attorney to pay delinquent taxes in periodic . installments, or .,;.,s;t�i �:3� � � ,�, ;�- . - .. �;�'�,�t�` r.` y . 310.02 ' LICENSE PROCEDURES Subd 5. R,eapplication after denial;"interest"of applicant in revoked license. An application by a person having an interest in, or whose shareholders or of�cers have an interest in, any pre_ mises or enterprise whose license has been revoked or to which a license has been denied, shall be treated as an application by the person whose license was denied or revoked. The term "interest" as used in this subdivision includes any pecuniary interest in the ownership,operation,management,or profits of an establishment, but does not include: bona fide Ioans; bona fide rental agree_ tnents; bona fide open accounts or other obligations held with or without security arising out of the ordinary and regular course of business of selling or leasing merchandise, fixtures or supplies to such establishment; an interest in a corporation owning or oper- ating a hotel but having at least 150 or more rental units holding a license in conjunction therewith; or 10 percent or less interest in any other corporation holding a license. Su6d. 6. Prohibition on reapplication;exception.The prohibi- tion on reapplication herein provided shall not apply in cases where it is otherwise expressly provided by statute or ordinance. Subd 7. `L'aiting period after filing of petition.Any petition re- quired to be filed with the application for any license shall not be considered as officially filed and irrevocable until seven working days after a petition is received in the inspector's office.During the seven-da�� waiting period, any signator of any petition may with- draw his name therefrom by written request, and such request shall be appended to the subject petition and made a part thereof. After the seven-day waiting period, signatures may not be with_ drawn unless it is shown they were obtained by fraud or duress. Signatures withdrawn or obtained by fraud or duress shall not be counted in determining the sufficiency of the petition. This sub- division shall apply in any case where the applicant for a license or license transfer must present a statement in writing signed by a speci�ed number or percentage of persons that they have given their consent to the grant of the license or license transfer. (Code 1956, as ¢mended, fi510.02.) 2/'28/81 733 310.03 LEGISLATIVE CODE 310.03. Inveatigation and review of applications,etc.1'he inspec- tor shall determine the sufficiency and accuracy of each applica- tion and obtain such criminal history information as may be used under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 364, and is otherwise availa- ble by law. The inspector shall make reasonable and appropriate investigation of the premises or personal property, vehicles or facilities, as may�be involved in or related to the licenced activity, and shall request, where appropriate, the assistance of other citv divisions or departments in making additional investigations, for the purpose of determining whether the applicant is or will be in compliance with all applicable ordinances and statutes. The ap- proval of such other divisions or departments is not required for issuance of a license unless otherwise required by specific sections in these chapters.All applications shall be reviewed br the zoning administrator or his designee for compliance with all require- ments of the Saint Paul Zoning Code, and no license shall be granted without full compliance with said requirements. All ap- plications involving a premise,s, location, building or structure shall be referred to the director of the department of fire and safety services and to the building official for investigation and recommendation. (Code 1956, as amended, 9510.03.) 310.04. Levels of approval; recommendations. Subdic�ision 1. Class I licenses. V4'here an application for the grant, issuance, renewal or transfer of a Class I license meets all the requirements of law, and there exists no ground for denial, revocation, or suspension of,or the imposition of conditions upon, such license,the inspector shalt grant,issue,renew or transfer said license in accordance with the application. Subd 2. Class II licenses.Where an application for the grant, is- suance, renewal or transfer of a Class II license meets all the re- quirements of law, and there exists no ground for denial, revoca- tion, or suspension of, or the imposition of conditions upon, such license, the d'uector shall require the inspector to grant, issue, renew or transfer said license in accordance K�ith the application. 734 2!381R1 ; � • -a�-`�y�`-'� . r,c:� 310.05 LICENSE PROCEDURES Subd 3. Class I and Class II licenses, if denied by inspector or director. In the event the inspector, in the case of Class I licenses,or the director,in the case of Class II licenses,determines that the application for grant, issuance, renewal or transfer of the license does not meet all the requirements of law or that there ex- ist grounds for denial,revocation, suspension or other adverse ac- tion-against the license or the licensee, the inspector or director shall recommend denial of the application and follow the pro- cedures for notice and hearing as set forth in Section 310.05. Subd.4. Class III licenses.Upon receipt of a fully completed ap- plication and required fees for a Class III license,and after the in- vestigation required, the inspector shall notify the council. A public hearing shall be held by the council on the grant, issuance, or transfer of all Class III licenses. The council may hold a hear- ing on the renewal of any Class III license. In any case where the inspector recommends denial of the grant, �ssuance, renewal or transfer of a Class III license, or where the council believes that evidence might be received at the public hearing which might result in action ad�-erse to the application,the inspector or council shall follow• the procedures for notice and hearing as set forth in Section 310.05. Where the application for the grant, issuance, renewal or transfer of a Class III license meets all the require- ments of law, and where there exist�s no ground for adverse action, the council shall bS�resolution direct that the inspector issue said license in accordance with law. (Code 19�6, as amended, 9510.04.) 310.05. Hearing procedures. (1) Adverse action;notice and hearing requirements.In any case where the council may ur intends to consider any adverse action,including the revocation or suspension of a license,the imposition of conditions upon a license,or the denial of an ap- plication for the grant, issuance, renev��al or transfer of a license, the applicant or licensee shall be given notice and an opportunity to be heard as provided herein. The council ma�• consider such adverse actions when recommended by the in- spector, by the director, b�• the director of any executive department established pursuant to Chapter 9 of the charter, bS� the cit}� attorney, or on its own initiative. .,:.,A�;i �:3, ' . � . ._ . . . �- , ' � - . � . ; . .. _ �..y�.i,.K��:'�' �:' l •fi 310.05 LEGISLATIVE CODE (2) Notice. In each such case where adverse action is or will be considered by the council, the council shall in writing notif�� the applicant or licensee that adverse action may be taken against the license or application, and that he is entitled to a hearing before the council. The notice shall be served or mailed a reasonable time before the hearing date, and shall state the place, date and time of the hearing. The notice shall state the issues involved or grounds upon which the adverse action may be sought or based. The council ma}• request that such written notice be prepared and served or mailed b�� the inspector or by the city attorney. (3) Hearing. The hearing shall be held by the council, which shall afford the applicant or the ]icensee an opportunity to present evidence and argument as well as meet adverse testimony or evidence by reasonable cross-examination and rebuttal evidence. The council may in its discretion permit other interested persons the opportunity to present testimony� or evidence or otherwise participate in such hearing. (4) Licensee or applicant may be represented.The licensee or applicant may represent himself or choose to be represented by another. (5) ftecord; evidence. The council shall receive and keep a record of such proceedings, including testimony and exhibits, and shall receive and give weight to evidence, including hear- say evidence, which possesses probative value commonly ac- cepted b�� reasonable and prudent persons in the conduct of their affairs. (6) Council action; resotution to contain findings. Where the council takes adverse action with respect to a license, licensee or applicant for a license, the res�lution by�which such action is taken shall contain its findings and determination, includ- ing the imposition of conditions, if any. i36 .�,.�8i81 .. . ' ' - . ' 'f , � •��.. . � � .,� i.31`. . . - . .. .. . ., � . . . -... . _ � . : . . . .� _ � � �� a� � � . • '� . �. . �: . .. � '.:l. . ,� • � � � ' _ . . 4. �.�.. �.... .. ' . .. ..�,-+�a.nr�....� e . " � . _.. .. . . . _ . ._ . .. _.._ . . . .. _.__.. .. _ ___ ' . .. .... . y. :� 310.05 LICENSE PROCEDURES (7) Additional procedures where required. Where the provi- sions of any statute or ordinance require additional notice or hearing procedures, sucn provisions shall be complied with and shall supersede inconsistent provisions of these chapters. This shall include,without limitation by reason of this specific reference, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 364., and Minnesota Statutes, Section 340.135. (S) Discretion to hear notwithstanding withdrawal or sur- render of application or licenae. The council may, at its discretion,conduct a hearing regarding revocation or denial of a license notwithstanding that the applicant or licensee has attempted or purported to withdraw or surrender said license or application, if the attempted withdrawal or surrender took place after the applicant or licensee had been notified of the hearing and potential adverse action. (9) Continuances. Where a hearing for the purpose of consider- ing revocation or suspension of a license or other disciplinary action involving a license has been scheduled before the coun- ` cil, a continuation of the hearing may be granted at the re- quest of the licensee,license applicant,an interested person,or an attorney representing the foregoing, only as provided herein. (a) Where the request is made at least 24 hours prior to the scheduled hearing, the president of the council or the council may continue the hearing upon a showing of good cause bti• the party making the request. (b) Where the request is made less than 24 hours before, but not on the day of the scheduled hearing, the council may continue the hearing upon a showing of good cause by the party making the request. (c) Where the request is made on the day said hearing is scheduled, the council may grant a continuance an the condition that the party requesting the continuance pay to the cit� of Saint Paul the city's actual costs for the court reporter and witnesses w�ho appeared for the hearing, or $100, whiche�er is the ]esser. (Cude 1956, ars amended, �510.0�.J .,.,a�� ;:3� , . ' ' -` f �:, `: . . . . � . , � � .. �. ' � . - . `r �`i r.E;? i. ��'�',�,� � 310.06 LEGISLATIVE CODE 310.06. Revocation; auspension; adverse actions. Subdic�ision 1. Council may take adverse action. The council is authorized to take adverse action against any license or permit, licensee or applicant for a license, as provided in and by these chapters. Such actions shall be initiated and carried out in accor- dance with the procedures outlined in Section 310.05. Subd. 2. Basis for action. Such ad��erse action may be based on one or more of the following reasons, which are in addition to any other reason specifically provided by law or in these chapters: (1) The license or permit was procured by misrepresentation of material facts, by fraud, by deceit, or by bad faith. (2) The applicant or one acting in his behalf made oral or wTitten misstatements or misrepresentations of material facts in or accompanying the application. (3) The license was issued in violation of any of the provisions of the Saint Paul Zoning Code. (4) The license or permit was issued in vialation of law, ��ithout authority, or under a material mistake of fact. (5) The licensee or applicant has failed to compl�•with any condi- tion set forth in the license,or set forth in the resolution grant- ing or renewing the license. (6) The licensee or app]icant has violated any of the provisions of these chapters, or of any statute, ordinance, or regulation reasonably related to the licensed activity, regardless of whether crimina] charges have or have not been brought in connection therewith. 73& 2'ZS hc . . . , - : .. � . ..1 q�.''ta'tL♦ ��1,s "-� . i� _ , y�+.t,. a �',; f ".`." ' _ . _ �G i S�r 4_�. . • � . , ��.�e,�fi.�"� * > �•� . . . t� , _"a.. 310.07 LICENSE PROCEDURES (7) 1'he activities of the licensee in the licensed activity create or have created a serious danger to the public health, safety or welfare,or the licensee performs or has performed his work or activity in an unsafe manner. (8) Failure to keep sidewelks or pedestrian ways reasonably free of snow and ice as required under Chapter 114 of the Saint Pau1 Legislative Code. (9) The licensee or applicant has shown by past misconduct, un- fair acts or dealings, or by the frequent abuse of alcohol or other drugs, that such licensee or applicant is not a person of the good moral character or fitness required to engage in a licensed activity, business or profession. (Code 1956, os amended, 8510.06.) 310.07. Terminahon of licenaes; surety bonds; insurance con- tracta. Subdiuision 1. Automatic terminahon� rein8tatement; re- sponaibility of licenaee. All licenses or permits which must, by the provisions of these chapters or other ordinances or laws, be aa companied by the filing and maintenance of insurance policies, deposits, guarantees, bonds, or certifications, shall automatically terminate on cancellation or withdrawal of said policies,deposits, bonds or cert�cations. No licensee may continue to operate or perform the licensed activity after such termination. The licensee is liable and responsible for the filing and maintenance of such pqlicies, deposits, guaranteeS� (wnds or certifications as are re- quired in these chapters,and shall not be entitled to assert the acts or omissions of agents, brokers, employees, attorneys or any other persons as a defense or justification for failure to comply with such filing and maintenance requirements. In the event the licensee reinstates and files such poiicies, deposits, bonds or cert�cations within 30 days,the license is automatically reinstated on the same terms and conditions, and for the same period as originally i.4sued After 30 days, the applicant must reapply for a renewal of his license as though it were an original application. 11l30/8l 739 .. .�� .. r 4 .. .� " •�. 4 _ . " " 4 ;� . � ... . �. � . � 1' � l � � � . , i' . �y 'Y h .�:ry . � . , -. . .. -.. �I'M� � , .., - .. ��:. G . . . .. _�.__... _ _____ .. .. .. ... . _ .__.. ... _ .. .. ._. ._.._.;.t� .. h'f . 1 310.07 LEGISLATIVE CODE Sr�bd S. Bonds and ineurance requiremente. (1) Surety companiee. All eurety bonds running to the city of Saint Paul ahall be written by swety companies authorized to do business in the state of Minnesota. All insurance policies required by these chapters ahall be written by insurance com- . panies suthorized to do business in the state of Minnesota. (2) Approved as to form.All bonds filed with the city of Saint Paul in connection with the issuance of licenses for whabever purpose, and all policies of insurance required to be filed with or by the city of Saint Paul in connection with the issuance of licenses for any pnrpose whatscever,shall first be spproved as to form by the city attorney. (3) Uniform endorsemen�Each insurance policy required to be filed pursuant to these chapters shall contain the endorsement set forth in Chapter 7 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. (4) Conditiona. All bonds required by these chapters shall be conditioned that the licensee shall observe all ordinances and laws in relation to the licensed activity, business, premises or facilities and that he shall conduct all such activities or busi- ness in conformity therewith.Such bonds shall also indemnify the city of Saint Paul against all claims, judgments or suits caused by, sesulting from, or in connection with the licensed business, premises, activity, thing, facility, occwrence or otherwise licensed under these chapters. Subd 3. Termination of bonds and insurance required by city.Termination of bonds and insurance required to be filed with the city pursuant to these chapters shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 8 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. Subd 4. Eapiration date to be concurrent with term of license or permiw The expiration date of all such policies,bonds, guarantees or certifications shall be concurrent with the eapira- tion date of the license or permit. (Code 1956, as amended, 8510.07.J 310.08. Terms of licenses; uniform dates. (1) All licenses or permits shall be valid for a period of one year from the date of issuance by the inspector,except as otherwise 7ao i1;3o/81 , , �.�y� �� `�........�ati:+:.l�,.... r�.._.._ _.._,�. _::... � ..!...�'Lei';�.'i'.��'�'!`��i��.��t' �_ � Kt- ;; �,rk�� r.-C i � � ..iis_f<�. �_ . . �$ :2 't�.• _ �. _. ,...._+...ti'�'..�....s...s.�a:'�:--..+rr.,�'�t..�` '.''!+ � � , 310.09 LICENSE PROCEDURES provided herein or in these chapters or in cases of revocation, suspension, or termination under Section 310.06. (2) Whenever any licensee is the holder of two or more licenses of the city of Saint Paul which expire on different dates, the in_ spector is authorized, at the request of the licensee, to deter- mine a uniform date for the expiration of all or any number of such licenses, notwithstanding the term and expiration dates of auch licenses as originally issued, and notwithstanding any provision as to term of license of any ordinance of the city heretofore or hereafter enacted. The provisions hereof shall govern the issuance of any new license to one already holding a license. (3) In order to conform to the foregoing provisions, new licenses m8Y be issued for a term of less than one year,and the license fee therefor shall be prorated for the period of issuance. (Code 1956, as amended, 8510.08.) 310.09. Feea. Subdiuision 1. Application charge. (1) Amoun� In addition to the license or permit fees set forth in each chapter of this code,each applicant shall pay,at the time of filing,a$2.50 processing charge for each and every applica- tion for a license or permit to be issued by the inspector,direc- tor or council of the city of Saint Paul. (2) Refunda. Said $2.50 processing charge shall not, under any circumstances, be refunded. (Amended, Ord. 16884, Feb. 11, 1982.) Su6d.Y. Fee schedule.The council may by ordinance determine and establish one fee schedule for any or all licenses and permits issued pursuant to these chapters, and a separate fee schedule for applications for such licenses and permits,which may include fees to cover costs incurred by reason of late�ling, Such fees, in either schedule, shall be reasonably related to the costs of administra- tion incurred in connection with each such application, license or permit. Costs of administration shall mesn and include,but with. out limitation by this specification, both direct and indirect costs and expenses, such as salaries, wages, benefits, and all personnel costs including training, seminars and schooling, expenses of in- vestigations and inspections, handling of inquiries and requests for assistance, telephone and communications, stationery, postage, paper, reproduction, office capital equipment and all of- �ce supplies. Such fee schedules as adopted by ordinance and 2,'1183 741 . -. , " ' . I�y� �}`fj";`� y" ' . .� ' . z c r .*s "' '�ar'°- � . . . �i � _ � . . � . �t, yA��',��J ',i ..�' 310.0� LEGISLATIVE CODE Po8ted in the office of the inspector ahall supersede inconaistent fee provisiona in theae chap�� or in other ordinances or lawa. Subd J. Fee for one year; may be prorated. Unleas otherwise epecifically provided, t,he license fee sta� � far a period of one year. Such fee may be prorated ryhere a license is isaued for a period of less than a year, Subd !. Late fee. Unless otherwise spec�cally provided by the particular licenaing provis�on� �volved, an applicant for the renewal of a Iicense who makea application for such renewal after the eapiration date of such license ahall be charged a late fee for each auch license.'I'he late fee shall be in addition to any other fee or payment required,and shall be ten percent of the annual license fee for such license for each 30-day period or portion thereof which has elapsed after the expiration date of such license. 'I�e late fee shall not exceed 50 percent of the annual license fee. If any provi- sion of these chapters imposes more stringent or additional re- quirements for the issuance of an original license than would be the case for mere renewal, those requirements must be met when the licenae has lapsed by rea�on of ezpiration. (Code 1956, css amended, 8510.09;furtheramended: Urd. I�84, Feb. I1, 1982.J 310.10. Befunda of fees. Subdivision l. R.efund where application withdrawn or denied; service eharge. Unless otherwise specifically provided by the particular licensing provisions involved, where an applica- tion for any licenae is withdrawn or denied,the inspector shall re. fund to the applicant the license fee submitted less a service charge,to recover in part the costs incurred in processing the ap- plication, in the amount of 25 percent of the annual license fee. Subd Y LimitaHon on refund,other cases.In all other cases as provided in Subdivision 3,the inspector may refund not to e:ceed 3100 of fees received in connection with any license, permit or ap. plication therefor, provided that he certify in writing that the amount of the refund represents a sum over and above the reasanable costs of administration incurred up to that time in con- nection with said license, permit or application. The director may refund not to exceed E250 of such fees upon a like certification by the inspector.The council may by resolution authorize all refunds upon a like cert�cation by the inspector, Subd 3.Baees for refunds.Refunds under Subdivision 2 may be 7a2 211183 .. . , ... . ... � .,�. � .s . � . . ...:yti ":: `.+.. ' . . . �i ` ��1�j, �� .r'�, . [ '�".�. � ��! � ��. . . . . ,� .� . .� t at � : . , , ,, . -. ' ' :'1'��M � K. .� . , � .« `4� ;. _ _._ ,, � . • _ ..-. _... �.�. _ t,Y`�t�e , _. _ . . :.._�._. _. ..... _ _ - - _ ' . � j 310.11 LICENSE PROCEDURES made to the licensee or his estate: (1) Where the place of business of the licensee or his principal equipment is destroyed or so damaged by fve or any other cause that the licensee ceases for the remainder of the licensed period to engage in the licensed activity or business; (2) Where the business or licensed activity ceases by reason of the death or illness of the licensee or the sole employee or man- ager; or (3) Where it has become unlawful for the licensee to continue in the business or licensed activity other than by revocation, suspension, denial or any criminal activity on the part of the licensee. (Code 1956, as amended, 6510.10.) 310.11. Transfers; general. Su6diuision 1. License a privilege, not property. All licenses or permits issued by the city of Saint Paul pursuant to these chap- ters or other ordinances or laws confer a privilege on the licensee to engage in the activity or occupation so licensed,and do not con- stitute property or property rights or create any such rights in any licensee.No such license or permit may be seized,levied upon, at- tached, executed upon, assessed or in any manner taken for the purpose of satisfaction of any debt or obligation whatever. Subd 2. Licenses transferable;conditions. All licenses issuf by Lhe city of Saint Paul shall be transferable u�sinin e�ch chapter of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pe g specific license shall specifically prohibit the transfe�e city of license. No transfer of any Class III license issued by Saint Paul shall be effective until the council of the city of Saint Paul has approved the transfer following a public hearove�d �and resolution approving said transfer is passed, app published.Both the transferor and transferee shall make applica- tion for transfer of a license on such forms as may be prescribed by the division, and in accordance with Section 310.02. Subd•3.Transfer tax.In all c Tses°there shallf bela tax on�aid present licensee to any other pe transfer in the amount of 25 percent of the annual license fee charged for said license, said tax to be paid by the transferee. Subd. 4. Transfer t ri is made for transferdof a licet senthe Whenever an appl�catio i 4:3 �r�g�gl � . � � � - . , r. ' �`•�YbZ�ti`�i..'�` .,��, s - . � ' ,�,�. j`,. .. ,y - �;� - �. � --c .. - • .V � �.y� . . . � �� r�� 1 �: ° , . . , ' . . .y_:_. � 310.11 LEGISLATIVE CODE amount as set out in Subdivision 3 shall be deposited with said ap- plication. If the transfer of license is approved, the amount deposited shall be retained by the city. If the said transfer is denied, the amount deposited shall be returned to the party depositing the same,in accordance with the requirements and con- ditions in Section 310.10. Subd 5. Transfer tax;exception.Subdivisions 3 and 4 shall not apply in any case when,by the terms of these chapters,payment of the full annual license fee or a prorated yearly annual license fee is provided for on the part of the transferee before any transfer of license is made effective by the action of approving the said transfer. Subd 6.Transfer,definition.'I�ansfer as used in these chapters shall include a transfer from person to person, or from place to place, or a transfer of stock in a corporate licensee, or of shares or interests in a partnership or other lega] entity. 'I�ansfer as used in these chapters shall not include the instance where a license is held by an individual or partnership and the transfer is by said in- dividual or partnership to a corporation in which the majority of the stock is held by said individual or by the members of said partnership. Subd 7. Assignment and bond to accompany application. In the case of a transfer from person to person, the application for transfer shall be accompanied by a w�ritten assignment of all rights of the original licensee in and to the license and shall be accom- panied by a surety bond in amount and in form required of an ori- ginal licensee. Subd 8. Public corporationa.Notwithstanding cther provisions of this chapter, publicly owned corporations whose stock is traded in the open market may comply with the transfer requirements pertaining to stock ownership and stock transfer by furnishing the inspector on request with the names and addresses of all stockholders of record upon each renewal of the license. Subd 9. �davit of transferor. No license transfer shall be effective unless the transferor submits an affidavit of such transferor, taken under oath, stating the following: (1) That in the case of Class III licenses, the transferor-affiant has posted notice to all employees in a con�picuous place on the licensed premises notifying all employees of the time,place and date of hearing of the transfer of the license to be held 744 2(28'SI � ,.� � � . . ' ' . . � � . ,�r�`'8'+'��j,�`r�� } �"T..�Y,�a .,,� -°i� �L..�_'"'�'r�.�; lj•.,}� •Y�-•a _ _., _- y U _ SH� � ' � ,}, 4ylt.�'*�;�'f d:," . �5!! •C ' ' ' r 4'. ..4 iy�� % C.. .^ . , .. ` ' . _ �._r.. . . � ' � � � - . � , " ' 310.11 LICENSE PROCEDURES before the Saint Paul city council; (2) That said notice specified in paragraph(1)was posted contin- uously for fourteen days; (3) That transferor has paid all wages due and owing the persons employed by the transferor or that an agreement has been reached between transferor and all employees as to the pay- ment of wages due and owing; (4) That transferor has made payment to all employees in lieu of vacation tune earned by said employees or in lieu thereof an agreement has been reached between transferor and all employees as to payment in lieu of vacation time earned; (6) That transferor has satisfactorily and completely complied with his contractual obligations pertaininB to employer con- ' tribntions to employee benefit programs which include but are not limited to pension programs,hospital,medical and life in- surance programs, profit sharing programs and holiday pay benefits. Subd 10. Deceased licensee.Notwithstanding any other provi- sion of these chapters,in any case where a liquor license is held by a person not incorporated and where the license would,by reason of the death of said licensee,lapse to the city in the absence of this subdivision, the authorized representative of the estate of the deceased licensee may consent to and seek to transfer said license to the surviving spouse of the licensee. l'he transfer shall be sub- ject to sll applicable requirements of these chapters and existing law. Subd 11. No approval under certain conditions.The council shall not approve any transfer where either party has not com- plied with the terms of any contract or agreement regarding employee benefit or fringe benefit programs, including but not limited to pension, hospitalization, medical and life insurance, profit-sharing,or holiday pay programs,provided that any person or organization objecting to a transfer because of failure to pay employee benefit or fringe benefit programs shall file a written notice of objection with the license inspector seven days prior to the scheduled public hearing on the transfer,and said notice shall contain a complete itemization of the objector's claim. (Amended, Ord. 16822, Sept. 3, 1981.) Subd 12. Transfer of more than one license if one is Class III.If an application is made to transfer more than one license at 11130151 745 , , . . � � - :.�. _ ti . . ��1 �y � . . • .. � .. . . 4 .:. f �e P r�x � , ' . ' S. .�k*+� �rj� ` . . . . '. �'.� �s,'.Y �� '� �� ,t�` ` ? �j#,�j� � ��.5:� �.�� . �.nr� � �i. . - , ....'f ` `e �s, � . . _ .xa ...-�i7� , .. .. �c 4 ..._. __-_.�..�._._.._....� _..-'.'-.' -. ..- ".—..�_i... � � . . _ '�r , �..-.-...t._._'__._.� ..._..._._.____ � '"'_"_"�_'_.� ._.._.—.-' ' . .. . . __� .'._.. __..�..'"_`_'� ... _ t 310.11 LEGISLATIVE CODE the same time, the inspector may, if one of the said licenses is a Class III license, handle all said licenaes as Class III licenses. (Code 1956, as amended, g510.11; jurther ame�eded: O� 16822, Sept. 3, 1981.J 310.12. InspecHon of prezaiaea. The premises, facilities, place, device or anything named in any license issued pursuant to any provision of the Saint Paul Legislative Code or other law shall at all times while open to the public or while being used or occupied for any purpose be open aiso to�p�ion and eaamination by any police, fire, or health officer or any building inspector of the city, as well as the inspector. (Code 1956, as amended, 6510.12.) 510.13.Renewai.Every license renewal under these chapters may be denied for any licensee who is delinquent in any payment or con- tribution to a health and welfare trust or pension trust,or similar program,established for the benefit of his employees. (Code 1956, as amended, 8510.13.) 310.14. Savinge clauae. (1) If any provision in these chapters is held unconstitvtional or irivalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the invalidity shall extend only to the provision involved and the remainder of these chapters shall remain in force and effect to be con- strued as a whole. (2) The repeal of any ordinance by this ordinance (which enacts the Uniform License Ordinance)shall not affect or impair any act done, any rights vested or accrued, or any suit,proceeding or prosecution had or commenced in any matter,prior to the date this ordinance became effective. Every such act done or right vested or accrued shall remain in full force and effect to aIl intents and purposes as if' the repealed ordinances had themselves remained in force and effect. Every such suit,pro- oeeding or prosecution may be continued after repeal as though the repealed ordinances were fully in effect.A suit,procceding or prosecution which is based upon an act done,a right vested or accrued, or a violation committed prior to repeal of the repealed ordinances, but which is commenced or instituted subsequent to repeal of the repealed ordinances, shall be brought pursuant to and under the provisions of such repealed ordinances as though they continued to be in full force and effect. (Code 1956, as amended, 8510.14.J 310.15. Penalty. Any person who violates any provision of these 746 11!30�n1 ; . .. .'...-� .. .. . . - � ,{� .�. �".�JF p ,� f• � y�'1 � J t t 4 Ii J. " � . � ' . ' � , .�\Yty, y�.•'.:. �� . . `�,�� • . � � . 1 a� �� t �l +a ` `�1 4 �.: JF ....*�. . � - • . _ ��.4��5! � . .� . � " . . . . 310.1g , LICENSE PROCEDURES chapters,or other ordinances or laws relating to licensing, ur v�,ho aids, advises, hires, counsels or conspires with or otherwise pro_ cures another to violate any provision of these chapters or other ordinances or laws relating tu licensing is guilty of a misdemeanor and may be senten�ed in accordance with Section 1.05 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. The term ��person�� in addition to the definition in Section 310.01,shall for the purpose of this section in- clude the individual partners or members of any partnership or carporation, and as to corporations, the o�cers, agents or mem- bers thereof, who ahall be responsible for the violation. (Code 1956, as amended, 851 p.15.) 310.16.License fees,annual increasea. That effective on January 1 of each calendar year, ail license fees shall increase by the per- centage increase in the budget for the division of license and per_ mit administration of the department of finance and management ser�'ices• Prior to November 1 of each year,the director of finance and management services shall file with the city clerk a notice of Feb.�11, 1982e us drne��d n0�117059e Oct. 20�e983. ( Orai 16885, ) �C�APTERS 311-314 RESEItVED) 3/1/85 747 - . . . . .. � . ,.�s t �{tii- Y'� � ' _ . "' � . . ' �- ..5: Y � 4V�7.W LEGISLATIVE CODE such person's age and ha.s determined, upon evidence suffi- cient to convince a careful and prudent person,thet such sale is not a violation of this section. Such evidence shall be con- sidered in determining whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty of any violation of this section. It shall be unlawful to permit any person under the age of 19 to loiter or remain in rooms where intoxicating liquor or in- toxicating malt liquor is being sold or served unless accom- panied by his parent or guardian. (3) No sale shall be made in any place or in part of a building where such sa)es are prohibited by state law or this chapter. (4) No person under 18 years of age shall be employed in any rooms constituting the place in which intoxicating liquors are sold at retail"on sale," except that persons under 18 years of age may be employed as musicians or to perform the duties of a busboy or dishwashing services in places defined as a restaurant or hotel or motel serving food in rooms in which in- toxicating liquors are sold at retail "on sale." (5) Every licensee is hereby made responsible for the conduct of his place of business and required to maintain order and sobriety in such place of business. (6) No licensee shall keep,possess or operate, or permit the kee� ing, possession or operation of,on any licensed premises or in any room adjoining the licensed premises, any slot machine, ✓ dice, or any gambling device or apparatus, nor �ermit any gambling therein, nor permii the licensed prem�ses or any room in e same or in any adjoining building directly or in- directly under his control to be used as a resort for prostitutes or other disorderly persons,except that gambling devices may be kept or operated and raffles conducted on licensed premises and adjoining rooms when such activities are licensed pur- suant to Chapter 419 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. (7) No dancing wherein the public participates, and no dancing, singing,or other vaudeville exhibitions or entertairunent shall be permitted on the premises of any"on sale" licensee unless such premises are duly licensed for entertainment. (8) The license issued to said licen�ee shall be posted in a con- spicuous place in that portion of the premises for which the license has been issued. (9) No person shal] remain in or loiter in the parking lot of an on- sale licensee after the lawful closing hour. (Added, Ord. 17043, Aug. 9, 1983.J 948 3!1/85 � . T �..�M�i, "+,� 'l s+�P��.e �S�;J� Cod�, -' _ j -�---- _ �� S3' a�° ' �a�P — � �� S' ��L Se.e: §4 OQ. 0 8 (6) �� = 409.08 `'�, CLASS III LICENSES i�' � $200. Application for said special license shall be made to the council in the same manner as application for other licenses to sell intoxicating liquor are made. Subd 3. No consumption or dieplay when prohibited.No per- son shall consume or display or allow consumption or display of liquor upon the premises of an"on sale" licensee at any time w hen the sale of such liquor is not permitted. Subd 4. Private Christmas parties.Notwithstanding any other provision of the Legislative Code, the license holder of premises having an"on sale" license may once a year during the Christmas season have a private party at no charge to the guests after the lawful closing hours,provided that a written request for said party is submitted to the license inspector 30 days prior to the proposed date of the party,and provided further that no sales as defined by law of intoxicating liquors or non-intoxicating malt liquor shall be made at or during said party. The inspector shall notify the chief of police of the date of each proposed party. (Code 1956, as amended, 8308.20; further amended: Ord. 16815, Jul. 23, 1981; Ord. 17037, Jun. 30, 1983; Ord. 17162, Sept. 27, 1984.) 409.08.Regulations generally.� All licensees hereunder are hereby requir e o owing regulations, provided however, that any such regulation which specifically refers to an"on sale" licensee shal]not bind an"off sale" licensee,nor shall any regula- tion which specifically refers to an "off sale" licensee bind an "on sale" licensee: (1) All sales shall be made in full view of the public. (2) No liquor shall be sold or furnished for any purpose whatever to any person under 19 years of age or to a habitual drunkard or to one obviously intoxicated or to any person to whom such sale is prohibited by any law of this state or this chapter. The provisions of this subsection shall apply to all persons whether or not licensed under this chapter. In defense of any prosecu- tion for a violation hereunder,the defendant ma�•establish by competent e�idence that he has made an investigation of the status of such person's age by complying with the procedures and requirements established by state statutes or by the regulations established by the state liquor control commis- sioner or in lieu thereof, if such statute or regulations do not exist,the defendant may establish by competent evidence that he has made a bona fide careful investigation of the status of 3/1/85 947 4 k �r . . .a, !• '�'°'�vr ..�: ... .. . - . . . � r . � .Sj . �{l:?�.. _~•C�i "�r _ \ �.Vp CLASS III LICENSES (10) When a licensee is notified by the police department that a parade will be held within one block of the licensee's estab- lishment, all beer and all intoxicating liquor or liquid of any type sold during the entire day of said parade shall be sold only in plastic or paper containers. In addition,upon receiving such notice,the licensee shall place a person at each entrance and each exit of the establishment at least one hour prior to the time of parade, and the licensee shall require a person to remain at those locations until one hour after the parade, to insure that patrons do not enter or exit with beer or intoxicat- ing liquor. (Added, O�. 17015, Apr. 28, 1983.) (11) There shall be provided in all zoning districts,other than B-9 or B•5 districts, off-street parking spaces for all on-sale pre- mises as provided herein: (a) 'I�ansfer or new issuance to a structure newly constructed for that purpose,off-street parking at the rate of one space for each 45 square feet of patron area. (b) 'I�-ansfer or new issuance to an existing structure not pre- viously licensed for on-sale purposes,off-street parking at the rate of one space for each 45 square feet of patron area minus the number of off-street parking spaces which would be required for the previous use under the existing zoning code. Existing parking spaces which served the previous use shall not be counted to meet the require- ment, and in no event shall parking be required in excess of what would have been required if the structure were newly constructed. Provided,however,that no additional off-street parking shall be required if the computed difference between the old and new uses is less than 30 percent, or if the number of additional spaces required is five or fewer spaces. (c) Expansion of licensed area, off-street parking at the rate of one space for each 45 square feet of expanded patron area, and in addition, 2�5 percent of any parking shortfall for the existing building. "Parking shortfall" shall mean the difference between the number of parking spaces which would have been required if the building housing the licer:sed establishment had been newly constructed and the number of parking spaces actually provided on the date of completion of the expansion of the licensed area. (d) "Patron area" shall mean to include all areas used by the public, and excludes all areas used eaclusively by 3/1/85 �9 •-- - - -.'- ; --- - ''� t '':� 1 . 409.08 LEGISLATIVE CODE employees for work, storage or office space. (Added, Ord. 171�3, Oct. 23, 1984.) (12) When an existing building is converted to on-sale intoxicating liquor purposes, existing off-street parking facilities which serve the building shall be provided with a visual screen where the parking facility adjoins or abuts across an alley any residential use or residential zoning district.The screen shall be between 4-112 and 6-1/2 feet in height and of su�cient den- sity to visuallv separate the parking facility from the adjacent residential use district. The screen may consist of various fence materials, earth berms, plant materials or a combina- tion thereof. Aceess by patrons to the parking facility from an adjacent alley should generally be prohibited. (Added, Ord. 17173, Oct, 23, 1984.) (Code 1956, as ameruled, 9308.23, (1)-(10);furtherdrnended: Ord. 17015, Apr. 28, 1983; Ord. 17043, Aug. 9, 1983; Orit. 1�173, Oct. 23, 1984.) 409•49• Certain sexual conduct prohibited. The following acts or conduct on licensed premises are unlawful and sha11 be punished as provided by Section 1.05 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code: (1) To employ or use any person in the sale or service of alcoholic beverages in or upon the licensed premises while such person is unclothed or in such attire,costume or clothing as to expose to view any portion of the female breast below the top of the areola or of an�- portion of the pubic hair, anus, cleft of the buttocks, vulva or genitals. (2) To employ or use the services of any hostess while such hostess is unclothed or in such attire,costume or clothing as described in Paragraph (1) above. (3) To encourage or permit any person on the licensed premises to touch, care.ss or fondle the breasts, buttocks, anus or genitals of any other person. (4) To permit any employee or person to wear or use any device or covering exposed to view which simulates the breast,genitals, anus, pubic hair or any portion thereof. (5) 'I'o permit any person to perform acts of or acts which simul- ate: (a) with or upon another person sexual intercourse, sodomy, oral copulation, flagellation or any sexual act which is prohibited by law. 950 3/1l85 A MINUTES OF THE COUNCIL � . � : . 9:00 A.M , , . _ . . . , . . AUGUST 23, 1988 ' COUNCIL CHAMBERS - CITY HALL & COURT HOUSE SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA ' ' . TI� meeting was called to order by President Scheibel at 9:01 A.M. Present - 4 - Councilmembers Dimond, Goswitz,"Rettman, Scheibel � Absent - 3 - Councilmembers Long, Sonnen and Wilson (arrived at points during the'meeting) . • � � �. . APPROVAL OF MINUTES . . 1. Apprnval of minutes of Gity Council meetings for June 16, '21, 23 and 30, �1988. Councilmember Dimond moved a pproval of the minutes. " ' � Adopted � � ` Yeas - 4 Nays - 0 � ORDINANCES . , 2. Second Reading - 88-1338 - An ordinance amendin� Chapter 293 of the Legislative Code pertainin to noise regulations by limiting the defi nition of �mestic power tool s. �FOR ACTION) ` ' � Laid over to August 25th for Third Reading. 3. First Reading - 88-1381 - An ordinance amending Chapter 5 of the Administrative Code to provide that the Department of Finance and Management Services Purchasing Division disseminate and monitor all requests for proposals and assi gn the disposition of surplus materials, supplies and real property. (FOR REFERRAL TO THE FINANCE, MANAGEMENT & PERSONNEL COMMITTEE) Referred to the Finance, Management & Personnel Committee. 4. First Reading - 88-1382 - An ordinance amending Chapter 86 of the Administrative Code by adding a new paragraph pertaining to signing of contracts, deeds, bonds and checks and providing for the execution of contracts in amount of $750 or less by the Director of Finance and Management Services. REFERRAL TO THE FINANCE, MANAGEMENT & PERSONNEL COMMITTEE) Referred to the Finance, Management & Personnel Committee. - 5. First Reading - 88-1383 - An ordinance amending Chapter 86 of the Administrative Code pertaining to the signing of contracts, deeds, bond and checks by providing for t{� Mayor to delegate his authority to sign contracts under $15,000. (FOR REFERRAL TO THE FINANCE, MANAGEMENT & PERSONNEL COMMITTEE) Referred to the Finance, Management & Personnel Committee. Councilmember Sonnen arrived at this point in the meeting. 6. First Reading - 88-1384 - An ordinance repealing Chapter 58 of the Legislative Code in its entirety and reenacting a new Chapter 58 which provides for the establishment of a program dealing with the installation and monitoring of hard wired smoke detectors in singlEEjamily dwellings. (FOR REFERRAL TO THE COMMUNITY & HUMAN SERVICES COMMITT Referred to the Comnunity & Human Services Committee. , Councilm�nber Long arrived at this point in the meeting. - 490 - August 23, 1988 APPLICATIONS - COM�INICATIONS � _ . 7. Claim of Stephanie Cocci,922 W. County Road B, filed August 11, 1988, was read. Referred to the City Attorney's Office. � � � Claim of Rodney Gingrich,11824 Ide, filed August 10, 1988, was read. Referred to the City Attorney's Office. - � Claim of Elizabeth Leurer (John D. Skinkle, attorney), 642 Front St. •#205, filed August 10, 1988, was read. • � - �• Referred to the City Attorney's Office. . � � � Claim of Jose' Lopez Sr. , 1119 W. Minnehaha, filed August 10, 1988, was read. - Referred to the City Attorney's Office. , . .. . , , _ ... _. . . Claim of Melvin Winnick, 1120 S.E. •8th Avenue,� Forest Lake, MN, •filed August 9, 1988, was read. , . � _ Referred to the City Attorney's Office. ` - � - - � � 8. Summons and Complaint in the matter of Rice Street VFW Post 3877 vs the City of St. Pau1. , � . . . . _ Referred to the City Attorney's Office. � - � � � 9. Summons and Complaint in the matter of Mary St. Martin vs the City of St. Paul et al. - Referred to the City Attorney's-0ffice. 10. Summons and Complaint in the matter of Teresa Trampe vs the City of St. Paul. Referred to the City Attorney's Office. - �- - � � 11. Letter of the Valuation Engineer recomm ending a date of hearing for September 29, 1988 to consider the petition of John Scott et al for the vacation of part of Jessamine between Kent and Loeb. Councilmember Rettman moved approval of the date of hearing: � � • • Adopted . - - - Yeas - 6 � � Nays - 0 • - - 12. Letter of the Valuation Engineer recommending a date of hearing for September 29, 1988 to consider the petition of the City of St. �Paul for the vacation of an abandoned sewer easement located between Fourth and Freemont Streets. • � Councilmember Rettman moved approval of the date of hearing. Adopted Yeas - 6 Nays - 0 NEI�I BUSINESS - RESOLUTIONS , � 13. Resolution - 88-1385 - Approving the appointment �by the Mayor of Arlend �Wilson to serve as a member of the Mayor's Ad Hoc Traffic Safety Committee, term to expire March 31,' 1989. (FOR REFERRAL TO THE -COMMUNITY & HUMAN SERVICES C�1I TTEE) _ , Referred to the Community & Human Services Committee. - � 14. Resolution - 88-1386 - Approving the appointment by the Mayor of Craig Wruck to serve as an Alternate on the Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council, term to expire August 16, 1990.' (FOR REFERRAL TO THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE) Referred to the Public Works Comnittee. � � • PUBLIC HFARINGS _ _� � � , , - 491 - August 23, 1988 15. Third Readin� - 88-1137 - An ordinance amending Chapter 183 of the Legislative : Code pertaining to human rights. (Rules & Policy Committee recommends approval with amendments) No one appeared in opposition. Laid over to August 30th for Final Adoption. 16. Resolution - 88-1399 - Granting the petition of the United States Postal Service for the vacati on of al l eys i n B1 k. 6 Lorena Park and B1 k. 14 Densl ows � Rearrangement bounded by Etna, Reaney, Birmingham and Minnehaha. (Public Works Committee recommends approval) No one appeared in opposition. Councilmember Dimond moved approval of the resolution. Adopted _ Yeas - ,7 Nays - 0 17. Resolution - 88-1318 - Ratifying assessm ent for the Edgerton/Bush Area Paving & ' Lighting projects. (Laid over from August 9th - Public Works Committee recommends approval) ' Mr. Vanderleese, representing the Chicago Northwestern Transportation Company, appeared and said they are in opposition to this and the following related resolution. - Chris Nicosia `of the Public Works Department said this matter is being taken up with his department and that the Chicago Northwestern Railroad can make claim to the City. � Councilmember Goswiti moved approval of this and the following related resolution. Adopted Yeas - 6 Nays - 0 18. Resolution - 88-1319 - Ratifying assessment for the Edgerton/Bush Area Storm Sewer�project. (Laid over from August 9th - Public Works Committee recommends approval ) . � . (See discussion above) , Ado pted ' , _ . Yea s - 6 : Nays - 0 19. Final Order - 88-1387 - Sidewalk construction and/or reconstruction for the west side of Otis Avenue from Marshall to Pelham Boulevard with Integral Curb. (Public Works Committee recommends approval) No one appeared in opposition. Councilmember Dimond moved appmval of the order. Roll call . .� _ , _ Adopted " Yeas - 6 , Nays - 0 20. Final Order - 88-1388 - Sidewalk construction and/or reconstruction for both sides of Beechwood from S. Fairview to Davern. (Public Works Committee recommends order be withdrawn) �" "" � � - Councilmember Goswitz withdrew the Order. _ 21. Final Order - 88-1389 - Constructing water main and water service connections in Arundel from Lawson to 110 ft. south of Lawson. No one appeared.in opposition. Councilmember Dimond moved apprnval of the order. - � Adopted Yeas - 6 Nays - 0 22. Resolution - 88-1390 - Ratifying 'assessment for street improvements for parts of Nebraska, Atlantic and Chambers in connection with the Street Paving & Lighting project. (Public Works Committee recommends approval) Fred James, 1530 Chamber, appeared and said he has made several complaints to City staff in the past to no avail and now because of the street im provemerits he has water in his garage, driveway and it's wreckin� the foundation of his Fame and he said he doesn't believe people should be billed for these im provements until they are completed. (Discussion continued on following page) - 492 - � August 23, 1988 (Discusion continued from previous page) Councilmember Nicosia suggested laying this item�over for two weeks and he said they will visit the home and make a report back to Council on their findings. No one else appeared. . . Laid over tw� weeks to September 6th. . . . ", 23. Resolution - 88-1391 - Ratifying assessment for the Jackson/Magnolia Area Paving & Lighting project. (Public Works Committee recommends approval) Councilmember Rettman explained discussion held in Committee and said since that time a meeting has been held in the comnunity. - Florence Lloyd, 119 E. Magnolia, appeared and said she is �in .objection to the way this whole situation has been handled and she referred to a letter she received stating options available for making service connections. � Councilmember Rettman said .this subject was brnught, up at the neighborhood . meeting and she said Peter White was present at that meeting and will be Jooking into the issue. Chris Nicosia said he also will look into the matter. . Councilmember Wilson arrived at this point in the meeting. � Larry Kozlowski, 124 E.. Magnolia, appeared and said he doesn't want to be .billed until the work is complete and not before. � .. . . : No one else appeared. Councilmember Rettman explained the projected completion dates and moved appmval of the resol uti on. _ - Roll call . Adopted Yeas - � Nays - 0 • . _ 24. Resolution - 88-1392 - Ratifying assessment for the Jackson/Sycamore Area Storm Sewer. (Public Works Committee recommends approval) No one appeared in opposition. Councilmember Dimond moved approval of the resolution. � . . Adopted . . - Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 , : 25. Resolution - 88-1393 - Ratify ing assessment for the Jackson/Sycamore Street Paving & Lighting Project. (Public Works Committee recommends approval) , No one appeared in opposition. . , ' Councilmember Dimond moved approval of the resolution. _ Adopted Yeas - 7 . _ Nays�-�0_ . 26. Resolution� - 88-1394 - Approving the renewal of On Sale Liquor, Sunday On Sale Liquor, Off Sale 3.2 Malt and Restaurant Licenses issued to John & Paul's Bar located at 731 W. -Randol ph Avenue. . No one appeared in opposition. Councilmember.Dimond moved a pproval of the resolution. Adopted Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 , , , _ . . 27. Resolution - 88-1323 - Ratifying assessment for Summary ,Abatement (property clean u ) through the month of May 1988.for property located at 63 W. Sycamore only. �Laid over from August 9th) . . It was noted the property owner was not present in the.Council .Chambers. Steve Roy appeared and gave his staff .report. .._ No one appeared in opposition. . � Councilmember Sonnen moved appmval of the assessment. . Roll call . - . . Adopted Yeas - 7.: Nays - 0 - 493 - August 23, 1988 28. Resolution - 88-1395 - Approving the renewal of Off Sale Liquor License issued to JABI Enterprises, Inc. dba Gourmand's Market Deli & Liquor located at 165 N. Western. No one appeared in opposition. . _ _ Councilmember Dimond moved a pproval of the resolution. _. Adopted Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 29. Resolution - 88-1396 - Approving the application for the , renewal of various Class III Licenses as listed. No one appeared in opposition. Councilmember Dimond moved approval of the resolution. Adopted Yeas - 7 , Nays - 0 30. Resolution - 88-1397 - Approving the application for the renewal of various Class III Licenses as listed. No one appeared in opposition. Councilmember Dimond moved a pproval of the resolution. Adopted Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 31. Resolution - 88-1398 - Approving with stipulation the application for the renewal of State Class B Gambling License by the North End American Legion Post 474 located at 72 W. Ivy Street. . . No one appeared in opposition. Councilmember Dimond moved approval of the resolution. Adopted Yeas - 7 Nays -. 0 .. There was some discussion regarding an article in toda,�'s Pioneer Press Dispatch pertaining to the Governor transferr�ng res�nsibilities of the Gambling Board to the Department of Revenue and it was agreed discussion would be held in Committee relating to licensing procedures and gambling. , 32. Report of the Administrative Law Judge, includin� findings of fact, conclusions and recommendation in the matter of adverse hearing.involving the liquor license of Gabe's b the Park located at 991 N. Lexington Parkway. (Laid over from Au�ust 16th� Phil Byrne, .Assistant City Attorney representing the License Division, appeared and gave some background information on this issue and referred to a previous violation at the beginning of the year and he urged Council to suspend the liquor license for three consecutive days. Douglas Thompson appeared representing Gabe's by the Park and gave some background information and urged Council to consider a fine in lieu of a suspension. - _ . Mr. Thompson and Mr. Byrne appeared and answered questions of. Councilmembers. Upon question of Councilmember Rettman, Assistant City Attorney Jane McPeak explained violations that can and cannot be considered by Council when determining suspensions. - - Councilmember Sonnen moved that the other violation that occurred in January of this year be added as an additional finding of fact and she moved that the liquor license be suspended for 14 days. Councilmember Scheibel said he could support the additional finding of fact but not the 14 day suspension. Councilmember Long moved to amend the rr�tion to a 5 day suspension. Councilmember Goswitz recommended a 3 day suspension. Councilmember Rettman referred to the findings of fact of the Administrative Law Judge and said she will support suspending the license for three days. Councilmember Scheibel said he would support no more than a 4 day suspension. Roll call to suspend the liquor license for 5 consecutive days. Yeas - 3 (Dimond/Long/Sonnen) Nays - 4 (Goswitz/Rettman/Scheibel/Wilson) Motion failed of adoption. (Discussion continued on following page) - 494 - � r August 23, 1988 , . (Discussion continued from previous page) Councilmember Dimond moved that the motion be amended to 4 consecutive days. Roll call. - Adopted Yeas - 4 (Dimond/Long/Scheibel/Sonnen) Nays - 3 (Goswi tz/�ettman/Wi 1 son) Councilmember C�switz moved-to amend the motion to suspend the license for 3 consecutive days. - � Yeas - 3 Goswitz/Rettman/Wilson) Nays - 4 �Dimond/Long/Scheibel/Sonnen) Nbtion failed of adoption. It was noted the motion to amend for suspens`ion of 4 consecutive days on the l iquor l icense stands. : ' . = . . - Roll call on the main resolution. ' - Adopted Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 33. Report of the Administrative i�w Judge, including findings of fact, conclusions and recommendation in the matter of adverse hearing involving the liquor license of Grand Central located at 788 Grand Avenue. Assistant City Attorney Phil Byrne appeared representing the License Division and presented background in formation. Douglas Thompson appeared representing (�and Central and presented background information. _ • ` � Mr. Byrne and Mr. Thompson appeared and answered questions of Councilmembers. Councilmember Long moved that the liquor license be suspended for 5 consecutive days. .... . . � : . , ,.. Councilmember Wilson spoke in support of increasing �the level of penalty. Councilmember Rettman amended the motion for suspens�on of the license to 6 days and Councilmerr�ier Long accepted that as a friendly amendment. - �- Councilmember� Sonnen spoke in-opposition to the motion." Councilmember Scheibel supported comments of Councilmember Sonnen and said he could support a 5 day suspension. � Roll call on suspension of.the liquor license for 6 consecutive days. �� Adopted Yeas - 4 Dirrond/Long/Rettman/Wi 1 son) ' Nays - 3 �Goswitz/Scheibel/Sonnen) Cour�cilmember Dimond r�ved approval of the main resolution. � Adopted ' ' Yeas - 5 Nays - 2 (Goswitz/Sonnen) Councilmembers Long and Dimond moved that �the meeting be adjourned. � Adopted Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 ADJOURNED AT ' 10:41A.M. � ' . _ � unci - _res� en - AT7EST: .. . , . . _ Copies sent to Councilmembers - Minutes approved by �Council � - - , � i y er � , _ - . ABO:pmk .� ..�. . .. , . . ._ _ . . . . � . - 495'- ' � `x:: �- : � U.S. SUPI�EME COURT REPORTS 47 L Ed 2d to the contrary, i.e., that he was 87 S Ct 616 (1967); Gardner v Bro- The St entitled to counsel at the hearing derick, 392 US 273, 20 L Ed 2d 1082, Griffin, • and that the State would furnish 88 S Ct 1913 (1968); Sanitation Men use of h counsel if he did not have one of his v Sanitation Comm'r, 392 US 280, 20 � h�'�g own. L Ed 2d 1089, 88 S Ct 191? (1968).In Neither - this li.ne of cases from Garrity to asked t � (425 US sis� Lefkowitz, the States, pursuant to � Fifth A: � statute, sought �o interrogate indi- notified viduals about their job performance remain [sa] Palmigiano was advised that or about their contractual relations also ad� � .�,. - he was not required to testify at his with the State; insisted upon waiver used a€ � disciplinary hearing and that he of the Fifth Amendment privilege mate i could remain silent but that his si- � not to respond or to object to later _- remain lence could be used against him. The use of the incriminating statements heanng Court of Appeals for the First Cir- in criminal prosecutions; and, upon did hert ' cuit held that the self-incrunination. refusal to waive, automatically ter- silence � privilege of the Fifth Amendment, minated the inf " � made applicable to the States by [�US 31'�7 been c reason of the Fourteenth Amend- employment or eligibility to ; law, di ment, forbids drawing adverse infer- contract with the State: Holding b� � ences agai.nst an inmate from his that the State could not constitution- - f�� . failure to testify. The State chal- ally seek to compel testimony that n�' � lenges this determination, a.nd we had not been immunized by threats sono, 3 sustain the challenge. of serious economic reprisal, we in- Imat�e,� validated the challenged statutes. - e. � p, s] As the Court has often held, insuffi� the Fifth Amendment "not only pro- The Court has also plainly`ruled , , cision tects the individual against being that it is constitutional error under � involuntarily called as a witness the Fifth Amendment to instruct a this rf against himself in a criminal pros� jury in a criminal case that it may ent fr cution but also privileges him not to draw an inference of guilt from a , �the C answer official questions put to hi.m defendant's failure to testify about decisi� � in any . other proceeding, civil or facts relevant to his case. Griffin v : interr criminal, formal or informal, where Califomia, 380 US 609, 14 L Ed 2d Amer � the answers might incrim.inate hi.m 106, 85 S Ct 1229, 5 Ohio Misc 127, � alone in future criminal proceedings." Lef- 32 Ohio Ops 2d 437 (1965). This � s other kowitz v �rley, 414 US ?0, 77, 38 L holding par�lleled the existing statu- : emplc `�'�Y' , Ed 2d 274, 94 S Ct 316 (1973). Prison tory policy of the United States, id., ' tract ` � disciplinary hearings are not crimi- at 612, 14 L Ed 2d 106, 85 S Ct 1229, � - t° r '� nal proceedings; but if inmates are 5 Ohio Misc 127, 32: Ohio Ops 2d treat� , =� compelled in those pr�oceedings to 437, and the governing statutory or Here. �:: .- the t �-:::; ; furnish testimonial evidence that constitutional rule in the over- � might incriminate them in later whelmi.ng majority of the States. 8 J. �-` � t-hat cri.minal proceedings, they must be_ Wigmore, Evi.dence 425-439 (Mo- _ , � offered "whatever immunity is re- Naughton rev 1961). t giver. � quired to supplant the privilege" _ t� and may not be required to "waive [9] The Rhode Island prison rules surr� . such immunity." Id., at 85, 38 L Ed do not transgress the foregoing prin- smac 2d 274, 94 S Ct 316; Garrity v New ciples. No criminal proceedings are Statc �"-� . Jersey, 385 US 493, 17 L Ed 2d 562, or were pending against Palmigiano• � gra= �= -. � 820 � . � - • � . - _ � ,�, ,.. :d 2d BAXTER v PALMIGIANO � 425 US 305,47 L Ed Zd 810,96 S Ct 1551 Br�- The State has not, contrary to the exercise of the privilege. The ��2, Griffin, sought to make evidentiary advice given inmates by the decision- Men use of liis silence at the discipli.nary makers is merely a realistic reflec- 0, 20 hearing in any criminal proceeding. tion of the evidentiary significance 3). In Neither has Rhode Island insisted or of the choice to remain silent. . y to asked that Palmigiano waive his � �t to ' Fifth Amendment privilege. He was [�0] Had the State desired Palmi- indi= notified that he was privileged to ��'$ �timony over his Fifth ance remain silent .if he chose. He was �endment objection, we ca.n but . tions also advised that his silence could be �ume that it would have extended �iver � � used against him, but a prison in- �'��ver use immunity is required . ilege mate in Rhode Island electing to by the Federal Constitution. Had I tater remain silent during his disciplinary this occurred and had Palmigiano ►ents � hearing, as respondent Palmigiano nevertheless refused to answer, it apon did here, is not in consequence of his surely would not have violated the ' �r_ silence automatically found guilty of Fifth Amendment to draw whatever ,. . the infraction with which he has inference from his silence that the been charged. Under Rhode Island circumstances warranted. Insofar as ty� , law, disciplinary decisions "must be the privilege is concerned, the situa- �g based on substantial evidence mani- tion is little different where the . tion- , fested in the record of the discipli- State advi.ses the inmate of his right that nary proceeding." Morris v Travi- to sileace but aLso plainly notifies ,e8� ' � sono, 310 F Supp 857, 873 (RI 1970). him that his silence will be weighed ; �_ It is thus undisputed that an in- in the balance. � mate's silence in and of itself is ' insufficient to support an adverse de- �»� 12l 4ur conclusion is consist- uled 1 cision by the Disciplinary Board. In ent with the prevailing rule that the . nder (a25 Us 3�s� Fifth Amendment dces not forbid ct a this respect, this case is very differ- adverse inferences against parties to may � � ent from the circumstances before civil actions when they refuse to ; m a , the Court in the Garrity-Leflcowitz �tify in response to probative evi- bout decisions, where refusal to submit to dence offered agai.nst them: the in v interrogation and to waive the Fifth �endment "dces not preclude the i 2d Amendment privilege, standing �erence where the privilege is 127, - alone and without regard to the claimed by a party t.c� a civil cause." � � other evidence, resulted in loss of 8 J. Wigmore, Evidence 439 (Mc- atu- employment or opportunity to con- Naughton rev 1961). In criminal • id., tract with the State. There, failure �� where the stakes aze 229, to respond to interrogation was t�U3 318] '; : � 2d treated as a final admission of guilt , higher and the ��t y or Here, Palmigiano remained silent at State s sole interest is to convict, ,yer_ the hearing in the face of evidence Griffin prohibits the judge and prose- g J, that incriminated him; and, as far as cutor from suggesting to the jury this record reveals, his silence was that it may treat the defendant's �M�' silence as substantive evidence of given no more evidentiary value �t. Disciplinary proceedings in � than was warra.nted by the facts s�� P�ns, however, involve the ules ` surrounding his case. This does not correctional process and important ��- ' smack of an invalid attempt by the state interests other than conviction �'e State to compel testimony without for crime. We decline to extend the �O• granting immunity or to penalize Griffin rule to this context. 821 j � U.S. SUPREME COURT KEPORTS 47 L Ed 2d . ` It is important to note here that Grunewald v United States, 353 US � the position adopted by the Court of 391, 418-424, 1 L Ed 2d 931, ?7 S Ct f Appeals is rooted in the Fifth 963, 62 ALR.2d 1344 (1957). Indeed, [� ° Amendment and the policies which as Mr. Justice Brandeis declared, t�� it serves. It has little to do with,a speaking for a unanimous court in pra ;; fair trial and derogates rather than the Tod case, supra, which involved improves the chances for acxurate a deportation: "Silence is often evi- �"i� decisions. Thus, aside from the privi- dence of the most persussive charaa e�� ,� lege against compelled self-incrimi- ter." 263 US, at 15�154, 68 L Ed �€ nation, the Court has consistently 221, 44 S Ct 54. And just last Term h� � recognized that. in proper circum- � Hale, supra, the Court'recognized ��' � � stances silence in the face of accusa- that "[fJailure to contest an assertion - �41 :* tion is a relevant fact not barred , , , � ��idered evidence of acqui- �� i ' from evidence by the Due Process �nce . . . if it would have been "�� ` Clause. Adamson v California, 332 natural under the circumstances to e�� US 46, 91 L Ed 1903, 67 S Ct 1672, object to the assertion in question." but � � 171 ALR 1223 (1947); United States 422 US, at 176, 45 L Ed 2d 99, 95 S wit ex rel. Bilokumsky v Tod, 263 US �2133' �' 149, 153-154, 68 L Ed 221, 44 S Ct ' • tioi 54 (1923); Raffel v United States, 271 (42s US a2o) � US 494, 70 L Ed 1054, 46 S Ct 566 [6b] The short of it is that permi� � • (1926); T�vi.ning v New Jersey, 211 ting an adverse inference to be out US 78, 53 L Ed 97, 29 S Ct 14 (1908). drawn from an inmate's silence at �S See also United States v Hale, 422 his disciplinary proceedings is not, �t . US I71, 176-177, 45 L Ed 2d 99, •95 on its face, an invalid practice; and rig S Ct 2133 (1975); Gastelum-Quinones there is no basis in the record for �u., v Kennedy, 374 US 469, 479, 10 L invalidating it as here applied to � tu� Ed 2d 1013, 83 S Ct 1819 (1963); Palmigiano! �o. �� 3. The Court besed it8 statement oa 3A J. "In all of these much depends on the indi- � pr� Wigmore, Evidence §1042 (Ct�adbourn rev vidual circumstanc�s, and in all of them the arE 1970),which reads as follows: underlying test is,wouid it heve beea natural ��E "Silence,omSssions,or negative atatements,as for the pereon to make the asaertion in ques- �1 inconsistent (1) Silence, etc., as conatituting tion?••(Emphssis in original.)(Footnotes omib r0f . the unpeaching statemeat A failurr to assert �•� thf e fact, when it would have beea natural to q, [6C] The reoord in No. 74-1187 shows • S'1� .�„ asaert it, amouata in effect to an asaertion of �t P��o was provided with copies of "';�;;;. . t6e non�xistence of the fact Thia is conceded �e Inmate Dieciplinary Report and the supe� . tht ` . se a genen�l principle of evidence (§1071 rior's investigation report, containing the �� .`;�. infra). There may be explanations, indicating charges and primary evidence against him,on ' . ' w�. ;�,;; that the person had in truth no belief of that the day before the dieciplinary hearing. At -, tenor, but the conduct ia `prima facie' ea the hearing, Captain Bazter read the charge ne inconsistency. to P o and summarized the two re� lII :�`Y,.: "There are eeveral common cleasea of caees: �� __ ports. In the face of the reports,which he had ' Ed ••(1)Omissions in le,gal P��rt eeen,Palmigiano elected to remain sileat.The j � � what would naturally have been aseerted un- Disciplinary Board's deciaion was based on � der the circumstancea. these two reports, Palmigiano'e decision at ' • - ••(2) Omissione to aseert anYshinB. or to the hearing not to apeak to them, and eupple- ' tW speak with such detail or positiveness, when mentary reports made by the o�cials filing + r:_ formerly nvrreting, oa the skand or elae- the initisl reports. All of the documenta were ' ne - where,the matter now deslt with introduced in evidence at the hearing before at "(3)Feilure to take t6e stand at all,when it the District Court in thia caee. App 197-202 ex would have beea natural to do so. , (No.74-1187). . n€ , tic r . 8� . , � 5 � � � I 'yy . ,::.-:`:�,' , ' ;:.�;�`�� 1480 819 FEDERAL REPORTER, 2d SERIES � plicit in Cerro Gordo's argument is the fact tects a mere witness as fully as it does one tions co that if a waiver of the privilege did indeed who is also a party defendant." Id.6 At trial, occur, Dr.� Guerrero should have been �4) Although the privilege applies in the T�ib� called to testify at trial. The record indi• both civil and criminal proceedings, the Su- have hin cates, however, that Cerro Gordo objected preme Court has viewed the assertion of lege in ti at trial to the live testimony of Dr. Guerre- the privilege differently depending on though, ro—even though the insurance companies �,hether a civil or criminal proceeding is Dog's d� were willing to have Dr. Guerrero take the involved. In criminal proceedings, the On ap stand. Cerro Gordo cannot have its cake prosecution is prohibited from commenting im ro er and eat it too. It cannot claim on appeal , � p P on the accused s silence and the trial court T�ibe to . that Dr. Guerrero should have been permit- is forbidden from instructing the jury that him invo - ted to testify if at trial it objected to any ��e defendant's invocation of the privilege ju Id live testimony by Dr. Guerrero. We there- , ry' may be used in the jury s consideration of certain i� fore find that Cerro Gordo waived any the guilt or innocence of the defendant. ness to t hearsay objection it may have had to the Griffin v. California, 380 U.S. 609, 615, 85 has madc introduction of the transcript at trial. $,Ct. 1229, 1233, 14 L.Ed.2d 206 (1965). By FSfth An contrast, the Supreme Court in �oxter v. cial conc III Palmigio.no, 425 U.S. 308, 318, 96 S.Ct. advantag . 1551, 1557, 47 L.Ed.2d 810 (1976), stated permittec The district court permitted the insur- ��that the Fifth Amendment does not forbid Id. at 52 ance companies to call Richards to testify adverse inferences against parties to civil tant to t at trial, even though Richards had made it actions when they refuse to testify in re- sion: (i) known that he would invoke his fifth sponse to probative evidence offered activities amendment pri��ilege against self-incrimina- against them." sition te: tion. Upon taking the stand, Richards tes- ' �jured; ar. � tified only to his name, address, and profes- The question remains regarding the ex- tent to which a nonparty's in�ocation of the of the ru sion, invoking the privilege in response to introduce , other questions which were asked. Ceno fifth amendment privilege mat• be made known to the jury in civil cases. This court and was Gordo asserts that the district court erred any cros: in allowing defendantis to call Richards for touched upon thi� question in Rosebud .Sioux Tribe u A & P Steel, Inc., i33 F.2d the Tribe the sole purpose of having the jury hear by permit him in��oke the fifth amendment privilege. 509 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 tJ.S. 1072, 105 S.Ct. 56;,, 83 L.Ed.2d �06 (1989). have him �;'e disagree. lege befc In Rosebud, A & P Steel entered into a able to � [3) The fifth amendment provides that contract with the Rosebud Sioux Tribe to that A�8 "[n]o person ' ' ' shall be compelled in develop an irrigation s��stem on the Tribe's any crimina] case to be a witness against land. A1legations of fraud, corruption, and The co himself." It is now well settled that the nepotism arose with regard to the project� nounce a privilege is also�available in civil proceed- The Tribe sued A & P for fraud, conspir- attempts ings.• :KcCarthy u. Arndstein, 266 U.S. 34, acy, breach of contract, and breach of war- privilege 40, 45 S.Ct. '16, 17, 69 L.Ed. 158 (1929). ranties arising out of the contract. The 523. Lik The privilege "applies alike to civil and Tribe took the deposition of Richard Long �. Of the t . criminal proceedings, wherever the answer pog, the chairperson of a corporation that , ehe ques: might tend to subject to criminal responsi- managed the Tribe's lands. Long Dog's • W��h �his /xc. v..4r bility him who gives it� The privilege pro- deposition testimony contradi�cted allega- (3d Cir.1 717 F.2d 6. Thc extension of thc privilege to civil cases Pa.1957). Moreover, even if the testimony ' w�as necessary to accomplish the purpose of the could not be �sed as evidence in a criminal . 8. Richar� privilcge. See Nole, Use oJ the Privrlege Againsr proceeding,the testimony may still be employed Februar� Se1J•lncnmrnation in Civi! Liligntion, S2 Va.L to discover other evidcnce that could be used 1983. Rev. 322, 323 (1966). If this wcre not the cax, against the individual in a criminal prosecution. , a witness forced to testify in a civil cau could 9• �� ti� Note,supra. See,e.g., Couruelman v.Hitchcock, Pa /xi � possibly be later convicted in a criminal pro- �q2 U.S. 547, 564, 12 S.Ct. t95, 198, 35 L.Ed. Amendm cceding with that very testimony. !d Sec, e.g., ��Z� �1892� 370, 387 I United S�o�ts v. Eps�tin, 152 F.Supp. 583 (E.D. impropci . �:.: • . , . . ;. . :_-. __, .._ •-� � `.`:w:-::-.' { I '! �:•;� _ � � � '. ! II CERRO GORDO CHARITY v. FIREMAN'S FUND AM. LIFE INS. 1481 � !, ' '�° I ;;,_s� Clte u S19 F2d 147f (8th Clr. 198� .� ' il "j taons contained in"the �ibe's complaint. in this case, prefemng instead to consider `��' At trial, the distriet court refused to allow these questions on a case-by-case basis. � r � �'`�" B S Under the circumstances here present, � ;,.,�} the T�ibe to call Lon Do to the stand to ' i� � ��"�S have him invoke this fifth amendment rivi- '� ; � . �;;#: P we agree with the district court that it was � � °;=�,: lege in the presence of the jury. The court, appropriate to permit the insurance compa- ,► � 4� �"': though, permitted A & P to read Long nies to call Richards to the stand for the ' � `'��" Dog's deposition testimony into evi dence. purpose of having him invoke the privilege ' 4g � `';�. - �' I � ;��•; On appeal, this court held that it was in the jury's presence. ' , � �_� improper for the tria] court not to allow the [5l First, we find that the fact that '� ': � , °;�; T�ibe to call Long Dog to the stand to have Richards may not be presently involved �; � , ;�:; him invoke the fifth amendment before the w,�th Cerro Gordo in an official ca acity � � '�= � u Id. at 523. The court stated that in P '' ` .�;_ J rY• presents no bar to requiring him assert the �'.�� certain instances "a party may call a wit- Pr�vilege before the jury.° In that regard, : � ��; ness to the stand even when that witness this case is analogous to Brink's Inc. v. � has made known an intention to invoke the City oj New York, 717 F.2d 700 (2d Cir. �fth Amendment." !d. at 522.' Of s e- � ' p 1983), and RAD Servs., Inc. v. Aetna Casu- i - cial concern to the court was the un fair dlty&Sur. Co., 808 F.2d 2 i 1 (3d Cir.1986), � ': � _ advantage that A g P had gained b�� being �,herein the Second and Third Circuits, re- �_ permitted to use the deposition testimony. spectively, held that it was permissible to ' � ` Id. at 522-23. Three factors were impor- � � allow the invocation of the privile�e to be ; tant to the court in reaching this conclu- made know�n to the jury when it is invoked ' . ' � sion: (1) Long Dog was a ke� figure in the by a non-party who w�as a former employee � : � acti��ities a t �ssue �n t he case; (2) hi s d e p o- of a company a party to t he litigation. ; € i sition testimony was most probably per- Richards, as a former member of Cerro ; ;f I jured; and (3) through unfair manipulation Gordo, stands in a position similar to the ' . � � . `r of the rules of evidence A & P was able to non-party ex-employees in those cases. ; � .! �� introduce testimony favorable to its side tyloreover, any .concerns that Richards � ; i j " and was also able to effectively prevent �,outd invoke the privilege solely for the ' an� cross-examination of that evidence by purpose of harming Cerro Gordo are not �� '� .:�. the Tribe. Id. The court concluded that present here.9 There is reason to believe ; i, ?� , - by permitting the T�ibe to call Long Dog to �at Richards stiil retains some loyalty to '��' . .';� �;i �r�, ' :�� have him invoke his fifth amendment privi- ��o Gordo. See Heidt, supra., note 9. �. ;� . I -'`�" le e be`ore the u the Tribe would be � =� g 7 rY� These suits were brought in the name of '" '�' i � ; � :'.�:- able to counteract the unfair advantage �no Gordo when Richards was stiU a �• � ; :r. ;=�``� that A 8. P had ained. Id. at 522. ::'' " I ._-:.,-,r S controlling member of the charity. Al- '4 •`� �w� The court in Rosebud declined to an- though it is true that Richards is not pres- !'': 4 �,� ; _- nounce any blanket rule legitimizing al1 ently listed as a director or voting member �' �� ;� ! ..� ;�, �:� . � �� attempts to require a witness to invoke the of the charity, there is some question � �� , privilege in the presence of the jury. Id. at whether he retained some control over the � ; � ti� : � � 523. Likewise, we announce no such rule charity and whether his resignation as a : ' � f� - � : �. 7. Of the two federal circuits that have addressed advvsc inferences from a non•party's invoca- ! ; t ' the qucstion, both are esscntially in agrecment tion of the privilege when at the time of trial ; ; j �I ' with thts circuit on this point. See RAD Servs, that individual stands in no special relationship � : : �. : Inc. v.Aerna Casualty 6r Surety Co., 808 F.2d 271 with a party in the laws�it. The author states � ; �• ;� (3d Cir.1986); Brink's Jnc. v. Ciry o/New York, that, among other things, a non-party witness � ' ' ± � 717 F.2d 700 (2d Cir.1983). may purposefully assert the privilege solely to � � ' + discredit a party that they have fallen into disfa- ; � � � 8. Richards resi g ned as director of the charity in �or u•i t h(e.g.,a n e x•e mp l o y e e a s s e r t i n g t h e p r i v ' `, i February 1982,and as a voting member in June ��ege to hurt a former employer). /d. at 386. � i i � 1983. � ; For the countcn•ailing argument, see RAD, 808 � � 9. See ;vTote, Advene /n/erences Besed on Non• F.2d at 275-76; He'.dt, The Conjurer's Ci�cle— � � � party Invocations: The Real Magic Trick in Ft/th The Fi/th Amendment Priti�ilege in Civil Cases, 91 i j ; Amendmenl Crvil Cases, 60 Notre Dame L.Rev. yale L.J. 1062, 1119 n. 214 (1982). � i - 370, 387 (1985), which argues that it should be I � improper to permit thc tricr of fact to draw � . � ! � ,�� , . . . _ . __ .. . .e•✓f . . . 4:. ',� � . . - r, : . ��f. . - � � �, 1482 819 FEDE�IL REPORTER, 2d SERIES � -• :� �; voting member after these suits were filed to the determination of the action more �:• wide t was not purely a matter of litigation strate- probable or less probable than it would be �`' such c . There is n r•id n " ` �y� 76? F. gy o e e ce that would lead w�thout the ev�dence. Fed.R.Evid. 401. _U, one to believe that Richards would assert ` In order for evidence to be admissible un- the privilege solely to harm Cerro Gordo's der Rule 401, it need not necessarily prove ° �=. (1985). chances of success in this litigation. thai a fact of consequence exists; it need �±�. deterrr. only make it more probable that that fact mitted [6) Second, even if R.ichards retained �� vo]ved. some ties with Cerro Gordo, and could still exists. Under the particular circumstances �. � have possibly benefited, either directly or of this case, Richards' invocation of the _ � indirectly, from a verdict in Cerro Gordo's Privilege made it more probable that Rich- �e ' favor, we hardly think that making it ards had committed the acts in question. �. In addition this evidence was not undul - to intrc known to �the jur5• that Richards invoked ' „ y licie: ; the privilege made the invocation too cost- Prejudicial in the sense of creating an _ P° undue tendency to suggest decision on an the oti j ; ly. See Baxter v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S. aL owned i � 316-20, 96 S.C� at 1557-59; Lefkowit.z v. �mproper basis, commoniy, though r�ot nec- � � Cunningham, 431 U.S. 801, 808 n. 5, 9? essarily, an emotional one." Advisory [7] S.Ct. 2132, 213? n. 5, 53 L.Ed2d 1 (1977). �mmittee Note, Fed.R.�id. 403. This ev- _;�-; under : The fact that Richards chose to invoke the idence was not unduly emphasized by the � ,. $700,OC ' privilege was only one of a number of companies when considered in relation to '� t'� The prc factors that the jury had to consider ir, other key evidence introduced at trial. but in's• �' determining whether a fraud had been com- Also, by no means was it e�er suggested in Richarc mitted. Id. There was other evidence any way at trial that the jury should base ;;- cies ilh „ presented at trial that Richards sought to �� entire decision solely on this evidence, son. 7 perpetrate a fraud on the insurance compa- nor does it appear likely that the jury did _ involve nies. sa. In the light of the foregoing factors, the pa�• we hold that it was proper to call Richards '; 4;:• dling o: Third Richards is also a key figure in 1 � ' to the stand to have him assert his fifth �� panies. $ `! this case. His actions form the very basis amendment privilege in the presence of the >��:.; proceec l� of the affirmative defense of fraud. If '"� ��; anyone knew whether there was an intent �ury� �� de fac! :,�-..,: to commit a fraud, it �vas Richards. Hear- IV .:6�: HIP po �� , ing Richards invoke the pr;vilege informed erly ad; r_ f.! the jury w•hy the parties with the burden of Cerro Gordo argues tnat the district • � '` son wa. �.� proof, i.e., the insurance companies, resort- court erred in admitting into evidence cer- �� of Rich ; ed to less direct and more circumstantial tain purported "other, acts" of Richards �8j , � ' evidence than Richards' own account of pursuant to Rule 404(b) of the Federal what had occurred. See Heidt,supra, note Rules of Evidence.10 This court has held ;: cies we � 9, at 2123-24. Otherwise, the jury might that 4. There have inferred that the companies did not [e]vidence of such other acts is admissi- death c �� . _ - cates ir cail Richards to testify because his testimo- ble when it is relevant to an issue in ;3.5 mi' ny would have damaged their case. Id. at question other than the character of the - ��- time sh 1124. defendant, there is clear and convincing � Finall , we find that the robative value eV�dence that the defendant committed ; envisior :`�r of the evidence substantialy outweighed �e prior acts, and the �potential unfair -�=� '� another -; . � any, danger of unfair prejudice to Cerro prejudice does not substanaally outweigh ??: i�. Cer. ��b'" tion in Gordo. Fed.R.Evid. 403. Evidence is pro- the probative value of [he evidence. ��;� : incider bative if it has "any tendency to make the United Slates v. Galyen, 798 F.2d 331, 332 ".;�;� 207 g � existence of any fact that is of consequence (8th Cir.i986). The district court is given _ :t � o�� ^ an inv S 10. Rule 404(b) provides: thercwith. It may, howc�•cr, be admissiblc •,-�..;' Even t , (b) Other crlmes, wronga,or acts. Evidencc for other purposes, such as proof o[ motive, `". coins, ,;�,. . of othcr crimes,wTOngs,or acts is not admis opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowl• '-f� or eve ..a. sible to prove the character of a person in edge, idrntity, ur absence of mistake or acci- '; - coins � ��: ventor order to show that he acted in conformity dent. . `�� vKM' � 1 � ::�� :. . '`.) _:�w_ : ',:�_.. �'� -1 �3� � RECEIVED OCT 0 6 1988 CITY CLERK IN THE MATTER OF THE LIQUOR LICENSE OF ANTHONY F. GAGLIARDI , GMH, INC. , D/B/A GRAND CENTRAL. Transcript of the proceedings before the City Council of St. Paul on August 23, 1988 . AFPEARANCES• On Behalf of the City of St . Paul Philip Byrne Assistant City Attorney St . Paul , Minnesota On Behalf of Anthony Gagliardi , d/b/a Grand Central Douglas W. Thomson ' {-� St. Paul , Minnesota � i City Cauncil Members President: James Scheibel Kiki Sonnen Bab Long Tom Dimond Roger Goswitz Bill Wilson Janice Rettman � • PHIL BYRNE: Mr . President, members of the Council, this matter relates to the Grand Central, a licensed esta�lishment on Grand Avenue in St . Paul . The hearing was , held before the administrative law judge on June 29tz and the charge was unlawful gambling activities on five dates which were speci€ied in the notice of hearing which occurred over roughly a two month period of time from June to August of 1987 . Basically what was involved is they had a blackjack table in the bar . You paid money to buy chips . If you won a hundred dollars in chips you could get a free drink . If you made higher totals for that day you were eligible for a drawing for a bottle of champagne or potential trip to Las Vegas. ! • Police officers and a sheriff 's deputy undercover investigated that operation and observed and/or participated in the gamblinq on four occassions in June. And then on August 5th with a search warrant , went in and seized and confiscated property, arrested a couple people and toak photographs. The administrative law judge made sixteen findings of fact and four conclusions of law all of which I would strongly urge that you adopt. The final conclusion is the one that sums it all up when it indicates "the city has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that respondent engaged in gambling activities in violation of the law. " The recommendation by the administrative law judge was for a three � day suspension. At pages 8 and 9 of her report, she spelled - 1 - out in some detail , which I found to be very helpful, her • reasoning behind her recommendation and the level at which she placed it . The position of the license division is that we do not disagree with her reasoning and her recommendation and would not necessarily recommend a higher penalty. However , if there was any factor leading toward an upwards departure it would be the fact that this was a fairly well organized, persistent over a two month period of time, operation, and more or less open and blatant gambling effort . It was not . . . there was no evidence that the bar was making any noney off of this--it was another one of these devices to pronote the patrons and to conduct an activity to draw more patronage for the bar . However , it was not just a dice game by a couple � � people sitting at the bar , or a poker game at a backroom table, this was fairly perszstent over a longer period of time. If there were an upward departure, we would recommend that it be somewhere between three and nine days, certainly not of the level that was reached at the Arcade Bar _which was a much more intensive and many more gambling activities than this situation was. I would be happy to answer questions after Mr . Thomson has spoken. COUNCIL MEMBER: We will hear from the counsel for the license holder . DOUGLAS THOMSON: Mr . President and members of the Council , my name is Douglas Thomson, I represent the • license holder . - 2 - The overwhelming mitigation in this is that the • license holder did not believe that this was gambling . The device was run by an independent contractor who had approached them to put it in the bar . The same type of activity went on in other bars in town . . . some of them escape me right now, but I guess there were two others that this same independent contrator had contracted with. As a matter of fact, the device was not very successful . In fact the police reports had indicated that some nights there was no activity at all . Many times the person who contacted the dealers wouldn ' t show up and the customers were not particulary enamoured with the activity. It was a show of good faith on the part of the license holder that did not believe that this was • gambling--that they advertised it . They would announce that it wasn ' t something that was [ inaudible ] or surreptitious or anything behind the scenes. It was out in tfie open mainly because the genuinely believed it to be not gambling. And as they pointed out there was no profit to the bar . In fact I think the administrative law judge points out that it was more or less of a failure as far as trying to pronote any business--and that was thier motiviation--and that ' s the way it was sold . This would be more or less an ideal . It was not gambling in order to encourage people to come in and gamble, and it was a failure. It is true that it was observed on other occassions , they were not approached by any of the police regarding the matter , and I suppose if there was any • fault on their part it was probably that rather than accepting - 3 - __ .__.._ _ _... __ _ the word of the independent contractor that this was not • gambling and probably relying on the fact that it was o.k .ed in other bars in the locality, probably was not good judgment . Perhaps they should have talked to the license inspector or the police department themselves. Other than that I feel that they did operate in good faith and I think that this is established again by the fact that on each night they would publicly announce that it was open in public view, and it was not anything that was being done for their profit or anything that they knew that was gambling that tney were trying to nide. So I feel that there are compelling mitigating factors here regarding that and I would urge the court, ah the council , to take that into consideration. • JAMES SCHEIBEL (president ) : ¢uestions . COUNCIL MEMBER: Yeah . One question Mr . President , for Mr . Thomson. Mr . Tnomson, we talked about the fact that they didn ' t know it was gambling. I guess I 'm a little bit suprised by that statement in that as I read it the D.J. you know was announcing that the blackjack table will now be open for business . It made me feel like I was in Las Vegas a little bit as I was reading this. But the thing that ' s confusing to me is in paragraph 5 on page 2 of the findings of fact . It says that the officer saw several people participate � by paying the dealer cash in excnange for poker chips and using the chips to wager during the game . What were they wagering for , I guess I 'm confused by. They' re paying cash • and getting poker chips. What was the ultimate prize or award that they were winning if they won . - 4 - MR. THOMSON: Well I believe it 's set forth • on page 4 where it indicates . . . COUNCIL MEMBER: This whole thing, o. k. I see, I see . MR. THOMSON: . . . 'absolutely no wagering, distribution of cash, repurchase of chips by the dealer . ' And so for five dollars you get 20 chips and the face value on the chios I believe was five dollars, so that would be a hundred dollars. In other words, if you got 20 chips for five dollars, and you got it for a drink , the drink cost you five dollars . COUNCIL MEMBER: I see . MR. THOMSON: There was really no benefit 1 • apparently to the player and the bar was not making any money on it--it went to the independent contractor . COUNCIL MEt9BER: O.K. I understand. I didn ' t understand how this notice fit in there. O.K. COUNCIL MEMBER: I have a question for Mr . Thomson. MR. SCHEIB�L: Kiki . MS. SONNEN: You said that the license holders did not believe that this was gambling and they had a contract with this outside contractor that brought the game in and that this contractor had the same game going on in t�ao other bars in the city of St . Paul . Is that . . . MR. THOMSON: That 's correct . • - 5 - MS. SONNEN: When the license holder 's at • the Grand Central got the ticket, or whatever the arrest that happened, did they notify the vice officers of the other two games? MR. THOMSON: They were aware of the other two, in fact ane of them had been closed up before without the knowledge of Grand Central . I think maybe a week or two before and I believe the other one . . . uh, what were the names of those two others? A: Plums . MR. THOMSON: Plums was one and then what was the one that was closed before? A: McGuires. • MR. THOMSON: McGuires. And it was my understanding McGuires was closed and that game was confiscated maybe a week or two before they confiscated the one at Grand Central and I believe the one at Plum' s may have continued . In fact I 'm given to believe there 's one operating right now at Bandana Square, the same thing out in, uh, Filberts. MS. SONNEN: So was there any penalty assessed against this so called independent contractor that was franchising these blackjack games? MR. THOMSON: I believe that he pled guilty to a gambling charge and received a $100 fine or something like that . Maybe Phil 's got that . • - 6 - COUNCIL MEMBER: Mr . Thomson, how does your � client define gambling? MR. THOMSON: Gambling is defined in the Minnesota 5tatutes. And a wager is defined in the statute of where there 's a risk created, I 'm paraphrasing it now, of course I have it in front of ine, and the result is the outcome of chance. And there is a question here of whether or not skill--because blackjack is somewhat of a game of skill--and it was more a contest. It was their position that it was contest rather tnan gambling . Because what would happen is that he would play against the other players. As far as the trip to Las Vegas, whoever got the most points, and therefore that was in tne area of a contest . Also if you r�ceived a • certain number of points or chips which would entitle you to a bottle of champagne. I don' t know if they ever did give out a bottle of champagne, but that was more or less a contest too. So it 's a question of whether it was a contest vis a vis gambling, and they were led to believe that it wasn ' t gambling but a contest . COUNCIL MEMBER: In the playing of blackjack , is that recognized as a skill? MR. THOMSON: Pardon? COUNCIL MEMBER: In the playing of blackjack itself, is that recognized in gambling circles as skill? MR. THOMSON: I 'm sorry, I didn ' t hear your last word. • - 7 - COUNCIL MEMBER: Isn ' t that recognized as a � skilled activity? MR. THOMSON: Skill? COUNCIL MEMBER: Yes . MR. THOMSON: There is certai�ly ( inaudible ) in defining gambling can have a certain amount of skill . However , in a straight blackjack game it ' s a matter of chance against the dealer and you win what you bet . But this wasn ' t true here. In other words you accumulated a score and in sense you were competing against the other players rather tnan against the blackjack dealer to see how- many paints you could accumulate to see if you were entitled to a trip to Las Vegas or a bottle of champagne or something of that nature, which � would seem to give it more of an indicia of contest than it would of gambling. And I think this was the persuasive � quality that convinced the bar owners--the others that had it--that it was not gambling, but a contes�. And also the disclaimers that they--although legally that would probably have no effect--b�t at least the disclaimers that tne independent contractor used to the public and to the bar owner would seem to indicate too that they didn ' t feel it was ganbling . COUNCIL MEMBER: Could you or your client give me another idea as to what kind of activity you think would constitute a contest, that would be similar to this. MR. THOMSON: Well I suppose if you had some � kind of contest like bowling where the prize winner could - 8 - maybe put in so much, everybody puts in so mucn, and you bowl • to see has the most score, and then the winner would probably win some type of prize or a trip or something of that nature. In other words substituting a sporting event for the game of blackjack--where you accumulate points rather than winning each time you ah, you ' re betting on whether you ' re going to get a strike or something like that . You just accumulate points and the one with the greatest skill would win the contest . MR. SCHEIBEL: Tom, go ahead. MR. DIMOND: Mr . Thomson, I guess I 'm a bit baffled . Is not blackjack illegal in the state of Minnesota? MR. THOMSON: I imagine blackjack per se � • would be. MR. DIMOND: If I read correctly, the rules af the game, 'Monte Carlo, gaming, blackjack [ inaudible ] chips, blackjack . ' Do they not put money down and they go for a prize. MR. THOMSON: They put chips down. MR. DIMOND: Well they buy the chips . MR. THOMSON: They buy the chips, yes . Then they accumulate the chips . But . . . MR. DIMOND: The same sort of thing you do in Las Vegas, you buy the chips, and you . . . MR. THOMSON: No. In Las Vegas , at a blackjack table, you bet on the outcome of each game, and you � either win or lose depending on the outcome of each game . - 9 - You ' re betting on the chance. Here you just accumulate • chips. You ' re not paid off , you ' re never paid off , you ' re never paid off in �oney. The only thing you could possibly be paid off on would be merchandise, and then depending upon . . . MR. DIMOND: Let me interrupt you . Are you tryinq to say that gambling for prizes is legal where gambling for cash is illegal . Is that your definition? MR. THOMSON: Well the difference nere is the difference between, again you probably have indicia of both, but whether or not it ' s a contest . A contest is not gambling under the �innesota Statutes . And so what you would be doing, rather than you betting the dealer , you are actully competing against the other players in accumlating chips to � � see who accumlates the most to see who gets what prizes . And so by that standard it would have the hallmark of a contest rather than gambling . MR. SCHEIBEL: Bob? MR. LONG: Mr . President . Mr . Thomson, I guess the thing that was confusing in my original question was that the free trip to Las Vegas isn 't listed on the card and so I was reading back tne other paragraphs . That ' s ultimately one of the prizes they could win, right? What ' s the value of that free trip to Las Vegas, I mean how much are we talking about in terms of a prize, do you know. MR. THOMSON: 6�e11 they never gave one and apparently what is was was that everybody was duped in that � belief . In fact they would post the scares o€ other people and the names were all phony names and nobody [ inaudible ] of - la - course. And so I think that perhaps it was in the mind of the • independent contractor that no Las Vegas trip would ever be given, none was given, and the bar and the patrons were duped to that extent . (second side) MR. LONG: I didn ' t see if they were playing for free drinks or a trip to Las Vegas, but it seems to me that the part of the value question was that it was a very large, organized effort and yet I mean, this sounds like a consumer protection issue in the A.G. ' s office where they' re not giving the ultimate prize that they' re asking people to bet on. I '� real troubled by that . We don' t have facts on the record about how much money actually exchanged 'nands in • this whole process . At least I didn ' t see it in here . Is there anything like that? MR. THOMSON: We�l I think at one time , when the confiscated the game, I think there was $5 in the cash box . I may be wrong about that . And I don' t think that from the observations of the officers there was very little activity moneywise. And uh . . . MR. LONG: This went on for three months accordinq to the findings of fact? MR. THOMSON: I think they had the table in the bar for a couple months, but it had very little activity because it wasn ' t that attractive, and plus the fact that the independent contractor was supposed to furnish the dealers • that they didn ' t show up with any high degree of frequency and - 11 - in fact I think that of the four times the police were there, • that on two occassions there wasn 't even an operation . And they left because there wasn ' t a dealer there, there wasn ' t any activity. MR. SCHEIBEL: Other questions? Discussions? Bob? MR. LONG: Mr . president, I guess I ' ll make a motion to adopt the recommendations of the findings of fact , conclusions of law, but a penalty at five days rather than three days . And for this reason, I think the three days would be in concurrence with our matrix. I 'm concerned about, and Phil was not recommending one way or the other , but I think I am concerned about the level of activity here . And � • if, whether the prize was ever given or not, I mean the notion of having organized blackjack table with a prize that could exceed that kind of value and if people, without knowing the fact of haw much money exchanged hands, it gets, this is probably the most organized gambling effort that we 've seen in any of the hearings that we 've heard so far in terms of--at least since I 've been on the council--in terms of over a period of time , very orchestrated, contracted out . I guess that disturbs me. So I feel that it would be appropriate to depart from our matrix, have a slightly more severe penalty for the same reason that Phil offered as a possible departure, which is the organized level of activity and the tine periad over which it occurred . I think there had to be clear � knowledge of violation here. And I guess I have anothe� - 12 - reason which is I think would be the potential value here . • We' re not talking about just playing for free drinks. We' re talking about at least allegedly a free trip to �as. Vegas which should be worth several thousand dollars . So tnat 's my motion and my rationale . COUNCIL MEMBER: I would support increasing the level of penalty too. It just, I can ' t imagine how the owners and managers couldn' t conceive this to be gambling. And contrary to what we 've been told, if gambling is, if it was infrequent that it happened , if three out of five times that the police came if the activity was going on, and just accept, and that was at random, than accept the times that they don' t go in because that 's not a regular stop, than at least � three-fifths of the time gambling was going on whicn strikes me as being rather substantial . If not more than three-fifths of the time . At least we know that much. And I don ' t know, I would think that the attitude basically was that since it ' s in the gray area, the worst can happen is we get caught . Because I just can ' t imagine how he let blackjack tables operate and chips being sold and trips to Las Vegas , and that kind of thing, and assume it doesn ' t have anything to do with gambling. So maybe they were taken by this contractor , but it seems to me that something should have clicked in their minds, that says uh you know, we ought to check with the police department or the license inspector to check this out inasmuch as we 've had issues with gambling, chartible and illegal • gambling in St . Paul far some time. So I would support a - 13 - higher penalty. I ' ll be open to other recommendations , but I • think clearly there was some knowledge that gambling was goinq on here. MR. SCHEIBEL: Any other discussion or motions? MS. RETTMAN: Well . I guess on this one, as I read it , it was perhaps not as Phil said as "bad as the Arcade, " but on three consecutive nights the police were there and then for three consecutive nights it was there. On other occasions it was there . I guess I was thinking of doubling the penalty. And I 'm not going to quibble over one day to be perfectly honest . I just think that I would feel more comfortable daubling the penalty so that it stands out very � • clear . So there ' s a clear rationale. This happened before the matirix was in order , that ' s why I 'm not doubling it to ten days. But I t�ink it was very, very clear . We took a very substantial action against the Arcade, which I tnink was nine days and I think it was six days for the gambling and three additional days for before hours, if I recall correctly, I maybe wrong. Or ten days I believe. Or eleven. Eleven. And so it was the discussion at that time was that, so I would feel a ,little more comfortable saying that we have normally given o�t three days on a gambling violation but since this was so prevalent and on numerous occassions the police were there, and could have made this, but they wanted to basically go back repeatedly so they had a real findings of fact , that I � would feel a little more comfortable just doing a straight doubling of six days . But I . . . - 14 - • MR. LONG: I can accept that as friendly. Mr . President. I think that the question I was very most concerned about was increasing the penalty. I wasn' t clear on what the days should be, but . . . MS. RETTMAN: I just think it makes a little more rationale in terms of just sort of doubling it because of the preponderance of the evidence. And I think that was clearly stated in the findings of the fact . That the evidence was very, very clear . MR. SCHEIBEL: Any other discussion? �iki . MS. SONNEN: I would just make a comment that I know that we have to take these on a case by case basis, but it seems very strange to me that we had a case � � where selling to a minor , who three months ago had a gambling violation which is probably just as blatant, they get four days . And these guys, that it was not only illegal gambling, but it was phony gambling, they weren ' t even paying off on the prizes, so, that, you know, I don't know that six . . . MS. RETTMAN: Do you want it higher? MS. SONNEN: No. I don't want it higher . I don ' t think . . . you know I think what ' s more important--the matrix talks about under age sales as five days, illegal gambling as three. But yet in the previous case they got four days and now this is six . So I 'm not going to vote for the six . I think it ' s a little too high in the context of everything else we 've done. • - 15 - • COUNCIL MEMBER: I would go along with Kiki . Instead of based on, I mean it 's always a judgment, but selling to a minor I have a lot of problems with, and I 've voted that way. I think what they did was wrong and real fact that they were duped . And I think it 's wrong, I mean I think the message should be clear , gambling 's not wrong, I mean gambling is wrong. We don ' t allow it , and that went on. On the other hand, I 'm sure t�ey were told others were doing it, and I don' t completely agree, but I see somewhat the contest . I mean people sponser softball teams, they say if you win, you come in and get a free beer . In a sense people compece . You know people were not [ inaudible] . Acutally I was com€ortable with the five. Because gambling means you win something. And • this was sort of a [ inaudible ) which was gambling, which I could support the five days . But I think people were doing it more as a game to try and qet beer . And there wasn ' t, it wasn ' t very papular . People weren' t really winning anything, so I think smart people were the people who saw this as a scam and paid for their drinks . Roger? MR. GOSWITZ : I can ' t believe these people got away with this game for three months . P.T. Barnum said there was one born every day, but there was evidently one born for ninety days in a row here. I 'm not even sure that I agree that this is gambling . But they did present the side of a gambling place and they announced it as blackjack game and all that kind of stu�f . So I think I 'd be more inclined to go • with a lesser penalty. - 16 - MR. SCHEIBEL: Well there 's six days in front • of us . Are we ready to vote on that? COUNCIL MEMBER: Mr . President, just one comment . Because I think the comments that you and councilperson Sonnen and councilperson Goswitz raised are good ones . My sense of the difference, although I agree with councilperson Sonnen, I think we should have had a tougher penalty in the Gabes case because of the matrix, bu� that be as it may, I think that the difference here is that, and I think Mr . Thomson was representing both clients, in the one case he talked about negligence of the employee being the cause and it was a one time mistake by the bartender and they took action. I think maybe that does mitigate. Here we have � � I think a full knowledge with the whole establishment announcing it to the D.J. I think to me it imparts much greater knowledge, much greater involvement of tne whole establishnent as opposed to one employee maybe having an act of negligence or misconduct for which that employee was later sanctioned . So that ' s how I think it can be distinguished, and the six days before I accept as a friendly amendment so I guess we should go ahead and vote on that . MR. SCHEIBEL: O.K. we ' ll vote on six days . If that fails it would be another motion to be offered . Roll call . Q: Long? MR. LONG: Yes . • Q: Goswitz? MR. GOSWITZ : No. - 17 - g: Rettman? � MS. RETTMAN: Yes . Q: Sonnen? MS. SONNEN: No. Q: Wilson? MR. WILSON: Yes . Q: Dimond? MR. DIMOND: Yes . Q: President Scheibel? MR. SCHEIBEL: No. SECRETARY( ?) Four in favor , three against . MS. RETTMAN: Now da we have to vote again on that? � � MR. SCHEIBEL: You know I 'm not, you see my preference would be, let me ask Jane or , that we vote on the days . I took it that we were voting on the days . . . and my (Discussion among members) : He accepted that as friendly, the findings of fact . My motion was to accept the whole report with the change of the days . . . Mr . President, we had the five days, we did the six, I would suggest that at least on this one we do another vote. Yeah, I would, in the future and I ' ll find a way to • da it, my preference would be is that maybe vote on , � _ - 1 the days, then we would get away from this debate, is ` it three days, four days, five days that we' re voting on instead of vote on all those, have the main motion in front of us. In the next committee we are discussing that exact fact af what is our latitude and all council members are encouraged to attend so we can sort of, maybe that ' s the way that we address it is that we vote on the days and then have a main motion. O.K. Is there a way that we could vote on the entire motion? I made that motion. With the six days? I � The six days . May�e that ' s what ' s here . Q: Long? MR. LONG: Yes. Q: Goswitz? MR. GOSWITZ : No. Q: Rettman? MS. RETTMAN: Yes. Q: Son�nen? MS. SONNEN: No. Q: Wilson? MR. WILSON: Yes. Q: Dimond? � - 19 - MR. DIMOND: Yes . • Q: Mr . President? MR. SCHEIBEL: Yes. SECRETARY( ? ) : Five in favor , two against . COUNCIL MEMBER: Motion to adjourn . ( tape ends ) • � � - 20 - � 1 2 STATE OF MINNESOTA OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS 3 310 South Fourth Avenue 500 Flour Exchange Building 4 Minneapolis, MN 55415 5 FOR THE CITY OF ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 6 7 8 In the Matter of the Liquor License of Anthony F. Gagliardi , 9 GMH, Inc. , d/b/a Grand Central 10 CITY-898-027-PR 11 9-2101-2436-6 12 ''� 13 14 Heard June 29 & 30 , I988 , at St. Paul Public Library 15 before Administrative Law Judge PHYLLIS A. REHA. 16 ].7 18 19 APPEARANCES : 20 Attorney DOUGLAS W. THOMSON, Suite 300 , 345 St. Peter St. 21 St. Paul , MN 55102 , appeared on behalf of the Anthony Gagliardi, GMH, Inc. , d/b/a Grand Central. 22 Assistant St. Paul City Attorney PHILIP B. BYRNE, 23 647 City Hall, St. Paul , MN 55102, appeared on behalf �,r `-C°!�' >'F,. G�3.�� ?.. �� . -, -?aUl . i � 25 � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 � 1 INDEX 2 WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS 3 Joseph Carchedi , 9 4 Carolen Bailey, 14 32 55 5 Gary Bohn, 36 40 6 William Thompson, 41 54 7 8 9 EXHIBITS 10 IDENTIFICATION DESCRIPTION MARKED OFFERED RECEIVED 11 City Ex l Copies of GMH licenses 10 12 12 12 City Ex 2 photo of 'winners ' board 16 16 16 � 13 City Ex 3 photo of blackjack table 18 19 19 14 City Ex 4 photo of paraphernalia 18 19 19 15 City Ex 5 photo of paraphernalia 18 19 19 16 City Ex 6 photo front of bar 40 40 40 17 City Ex 7 photo of game rules 18 19 19 18 City Ex 8 Indehar report 6/10/87 57 57 57 19 City Ex 9 Indehar report 6/11/87 57 57 57 20 City Ex 10 Indehar report 8/5/87 57 57 58 21 22 23 24 25 � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 3 � 1 THE COURT: The hearing is now convened, in the matter of 2 the City of St. Paul versus Anthony S. Gagliardi , GMH, 3 Incorporated, doing business as Grand Central. Docket Number 4 9-2101-2436-6. This hearing is held pursuant to Notice dated 5 May 23, 1988 . The heariny is held at the St. Paul Public 6 Library, 4th floor, St. Paul , Minnesota, at 10 :00 a.m. My 7 name is Phyllis Reha, and I am an Administrative Law Judge 8 with the Minnesota Office of Administrative Hearings. The 9 Office of Administrative Hearings is an independent agency of 10 state government cLeated by the Legislature in 1975 to conduct 11 hearings for state agencies and other governmental units 1.2 within the state pursuant to Chapter 14 , the Administrative � 13 Procedures Act. The St. Paul City Council has authority to 14 provide for hearings concerning licensed premises pursuant to 15 Chapter 310, as amended, of its Legislative Code. Minnesota 16 Statutes Chapter 348 . 415 also provides for a hearing pursuant 77 to Sections 14. 57 through 14 . 70 prior to disciplinary action 18 being taken against the liquor license holder. Now the Rules 19 of the Office of Administrative Hearings apply to contested 20 cases authorized under the Administrative Procedures Act. The 21 St. Paul Legislative Code also has procedural rules, and they 22 also apply where they do not specifically conflict with the 23 Office of Administrative Hearings Rules. Essentially they do 24 not. Both of the procedural rules provide for a due process 25 hearing, providing all the elements of due process, including � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 4 � 1 the right to present evidence, rebuttal testimony, and 2 argument with respect to the issues, and the right to 3 cross-examine witnesses. The Rules of Evidence for this 4 hearing are set out in our procedural rules, and it provides 5 that the judge may admit all evidence which possesses 6 probative value, including hearsay if it is the type of 7 evidence upon which prudent persons are accustomed to rely in 8 the conduct of their serious affairs. Evidence which is 9 incompetent, irrelevant, immaterial or unduly repetitious may 10 be excluded. The party proposing that the action be taken has 11 the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence. Are 12 there any questions about the general procedures of the � 13 hearing? 14 MR. THOMSON: I have none, your Honor. 15 MR. BYRNE: No, your Honor. 16 THE COURT: Al1 right. I will be recording this hearing ]7 by means of this mechanical tape recorder that you see in 18 front of you. So in order that we get an accurate and 19 complete record, I would request that all proper names be 20 spelled the first time you use them, and if there are any 21 technical terms, please spell them as well. Now following the 22 hearing I will be submitting a report that consists of 23 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and a Recommendation to 24 the City Council . This is not a final decision. It is a 25 recommendation. It is the City Council that makes the final � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS155 5 � 1 decision. However, the Council is required to wait at least 2 10 days after the judge ' s decision and afford the party 3 adversely affected an opportunity to file exceptions or 4 argument with respect to the judge ' s report. And then the 5 Council will then issue its final decision by resolution. At 6 this time then would the parties note their appearances on the 7 record, giving their full names, spelling and their business 8 address? We can start with the City. 9 MR. BYRNE: May it please the Court, my name is Philip 10 Byrne, B-y-r-n-e. I 'm an Assistant City Attorney. My 11 business address is 647 City Ha11, St. Paul 55102. 12 MR. THOMSON: My name is Douglas W. Thomson. That ' s � 13 D-o-u-g-l-a-s W. and T-h-o-m-s-o-n. 14 THE COURT: Thank you. Seated to my left is George Wade, 15 W-a-d-e, who is an intern in the Office of Administrative 16 Hearings, and will be assisting me on this case. All right. ]7 At this time does the City have an opening statement? 18 MR. BYRNE: Yes, your Honor. Your Honor, no establishment 19 licensed to sell intoxicating liquor in the State of Minnesota 20 or in the City of St. Paul can permit gambliny on the premises 21 with respect to--except with respect to certain limited 22 categories of charitable gambling , relating to pull tabs and 23 tip boards. The evidence that we will bring forward will show 24 that on several dates in June of 1987 and then again in August 25 of '87, officers of the St. Paul Police Department observed � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNFSOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 6 � 1 and participated in an organized game of blackjack in an 2 establishment known as the Grand Central , which is licensed to 3 sell intoxicating liquors in St. Paul. This yame was 4 conducted under circumstances from which the Court and the 5 Council might draw an inference that gambling occurred not 6 only on those days, but on most every other day during the 7 period of time from early June till August Sth when it was 8 stopped because of the arrest of the dealer and the seizure of 9 the blackjack table and gambling paraphernalia. The owner and 10 manager knew and were aware of it. They allowed it in their 11 establishment for the purpose, as I believe the evidence will 12 show, of stimulating business and encouraging customers and � 13 patrons to patronize the establishment. These violations 14 constitute grounds for adverse action against their license, 15 up to and including revocation of their license. Initially I 16 would submit for the record and the use of the Court a number ]7 of materials relating to the basic statutes or ordinances 18 under which this hearing is conducted, or which might apply to 19 the offenses involved. First, and I 've already given this to 20 the Court, because the question occurred before Mr. Thomson 21 came, a copy of Chapter 310 of the License Code. And this is 22 the same one I gave you in the other hearing . It has attached 23 to it some recent amendments to Chapter 310, which apply to 24 the hearing examiner procedure. Second, I have a copy of a 25 number of statutes and ordinances and in order, they are St. � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 � � 1 Paul Legislative Code, Section 409. 08 , Sub 6 , which relates to 2 gambling on the premises. And then three sections from the 3 Minnesota Statutes which are 340A.410, 349. 30 to . 39 , 609.75 4 to . 762. And all of those are excerpts that relate to the 5 offense of gambling in licensed establishments. I have as 6 well a copy of a newly enacted ordinance, Section 409. 26 , 7 which is a recent enactment setting forth a matrix of 8 penalties for violations in on-sale intoxicating liquor 9 establishments. This ordinance is effective June 7th of 1988 10 so there is a question as to whether or not by its terms it is 11 applicable to the offenses that were involved here, assuming 12 that there are offenses to be found. I introduce it for the � 13 purpose of indicating for the record what the City Council has 14 in mind as the level of severity that it reyards various 15 offenses at the current time, and that it will be in the 16 future presumably applying this matrix with some deyree of ]7 rigor to similar types of offenses. Also not clear, and 18 something that will presumably be addressed in the report of 19 the Administrative Law Judge, is whether or not when there 's a 20 course of conduct consisting of many violations of the 21 ordinance, whether the first time a hearing is held, do you 22 get the first violation penalty; or do you assume that many 23 violations have occurred, and that the most severe penalty 24 should apply. It would be my position urging the 25 Administrative Law Judge to read that as being technically � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL. MN 55155 8 � 1 first violation, second violation, and not first occurrence 2 for disciplinary action, or second occurrence for disciplinary 3 action. So that in this rnatter, the Council might well 4 consider and the Administrative Law Judge mic�ht well recommend 5 revocation of the license. I also submit now and I 've 6 submitted this to Mr. Thomson previously in another matter, 7 excerpts from two cases. One being a U. S. Supreme Court case 8 in 1976 , Baxter versus Palmegiano, which makes clear that 9 exercise of 5th Amendment rights in a civil proceeding does 10 not insulate you from the consequence of the adverse 11 inferences being taken by your silence in the face of 12 accusations or testimony that one would normally expect a � 13 response to. The second case is an 8th Circuit case which 14 deals with the instance where a witness, a non-party, invokes 15 5th Amendment privilege in a civil matter. And it 's to the 16 same general effect. I don' t know whether Mr. Thomson' s 17 clients will be testifying, but they do have pentling against 18 them at the present time criminal cases based on the ig transactions which serve as the basis for this administrative 20 hearing. Those are the matters which I had brouyht for the 21 use of the Court, and this concludes my opening remarks. 22 THE COURT: Are there any objections to my taking 23 administrative notice of the Statutes, Codes and cases that 24 have been presented? 25 MR. THOMSON: No. � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS1S5 9 I � 1 THE COURT: All right. Do you wish to make your opening 2 statement at this time, Mr. Thomson, or would you reserve 3 that? 4 MR. THOMSON: No, I 'd like to make it now. I ' ll be very 5 brief. 6 THE COURT: Go right ahead. 7 MR. THOMSON: Number one, it would be our position that 8 the so-called blackjack table was not owned by the license 9 holder, but by an independent contractor who explained to the 10 license holder that the way the game was conducted, it ' s not 11 gambling. Number two, that other licensed establishments in 12 the area were using the sam� game. Number three, we ' ll � 13 establish that in truth and fact this was not gambling , either 14 factually or legally under any view of an interpretation of 15 the St. Paul Legislative Code or the Minnesota Statutes 16 involving gambling. �7 THE COURT: All right. Thank you. Mr. Bryne, would you 18 like to call your first witness? 19 MR. BYRNE: Mr. Carchedi? 20 JOSEPH F. CARCHEDI, 21 Called by the City and duly sworn, testifies as follows: 22 THE COURT: Please state your full name and spell it on 23 the record? 24 THE WITNESS: Joseph, J-o-s-e-p-h, Frank, F-r-a-n-k, 25 Carchedi, C-a-r-c-h-e-d-i. . OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS155 10 Joseph Carchedi � 1 THE COURT: Thank you. 2 DIRECT EXAMINATION by MR. BYRNE: 3 Q Mr. Carchedi, what is your position with the City of St. 4 Paul? 5 A License inspector for the City of St. Paul. 6 Q And how long have you had that position? 7 A 16 years. g Q Did I ask you to look at the files of the Grand Central, 9 an establishment licensed in the City of St. Paul? 10 A Yes. 11 Q And what kind of establishment is that? 1.2 A That is an on-sale liquor establishment. � 13 Q And where is it located? 14 A I believe in the 700 block on Grand Avenue. 15 4 Did you bring with you a compilation or a number of sheets 16 from your files and records relating to that establishment? �7 A Yes. i8 Q I show you now what ' s been marked for identification as 19 City Exhibit 1 and ask you if you recognize that? 20 A Yes. 21 4 What is it? 22 A This is a packet that represents copies, certified copies 23 of a license and supporting papers for the licenses held by 24 GMR, Inc. ( sic) doing business as Grand Central at 788 Grand 25 Avenue. � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNE50TA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 11 I Joseph Carchedi � 1 Q Would you flip through it and indicate what 's shown by 2 each sheet in this exhibit? 3 A The first sheet is a Xeroxed copy of our card file that 4 gives the information that GM&H, Inc. , hold the on-sale liquor 5 license at 788 Grand. And they ' re doing business as Grand 6 Central. The Board of Directors are George Montpetit, Anthony 7 Gagliardi and Robert Hall. The shareholders being the same. 8 4 Go to page two. What does that purport, without saying in g detail what everything is there, what is that sheet? 10 A This is a renewal notice, for renewal of the license. 11 Q And that goes out to whom? 12 A That goes out to the establishment. � 13 Q Go to the next page. What is page 3? 14 A This is a renewal application filled out by the applicants 15 at time of renewal on February lst, 1988. 16 Q And who filled out and signed that page? ]7 A It appears to be Anthony Gagliardi. 18 Q Do you know him to be the owner of Grand Central? 19 A That is correct. 20 4 Go to page 4, please. 21 A This is a statement stating that he has drarn shop 22 insurance. 23 4 Go to page 5 . 24 A This is a copy of the license itself. 25 Q Is that just one license, or two licenses? � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL. MN 55155 12 Joseph Carchedi � 1 A This is one license. This is a copy, a duplicate ; one for 2 the first half, and I believe one for the second half; I 3 believe would be for the second half. 4 Q Finally page 6? What does that show? 5 A This is a restaurant--This is the supporting licenses. g Q What other licenses does he have? 7 A He has a restaurant license, he has an entertainment 8 license, and a Sunday on-sale license. 9 MR. BYRNE: I 'd offer that as Exhibit 1 . 10 THE COURT: Any objections? 11 MR. THOMSON: No objection. 12 THE COURT: There is--The Exhibit 1 is received. � 13 Q Mr. Carchedi, does Mr. Gagliardi or GMH, Incorporated, or 14 any other entity have any gambling licenses for the premises 15 that are licensed for on-sale intoxicating liquor? 16 A No. �7 Q In order to get those licenses would you come to the City 18 of St. Paul to get them? lg A That is correct. 20 Q So there are not permits issued--Are there any permits 21 issued to any other bodies to conduct charitable gambling or 22 any other type of gambling within that premise? 23 A No. 24 MR. BYRNE: That ' s all I have , your Honor. 25 MR. THOMSON: I have no questions. � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS15S 13 I � 1 THE COURT: All right, thank you. 2 MR. BYRNE: Your Honor, my next witnesses would be in 3 order Sergeant Gary Bohn of the vice unit, a Lieutenant 4 Carolen Bailey, who is now with Volunteer Services in the St. 5 Paul Police Department, and Sergeant Bill Thompson of the 6 Ramsey County Deputy Sheriff 's office, which would get into 7 merits of our case. And I understand Mr. Thomson is reluctant 8 to do that without his clients being here. I may have some 9 minor timing problems with Lieutenant Bailey who has a morning 10 obligation, but I think that if we could recess and see if 11 there 's any hope in getting his clients here, we could do a 12 little bit today. If not, then I 'd suggest we recess. � 13 THE COURT: Okay. I should probably reflect on the record 14 since there 's a mention that the licensee is not here, is that 15 there was a mix-up in terms of the time of the hearing, the 16 hearing having been rescheduled, and we didn' t discover the ]7 lack of communication in terms of the starting time for the 18 hearing today until we got here today. So why don' t we take a 19 short recess and see if the licensee gets here, and we can 20 make a decision as to how to proceed. (break in taping ) Al1 21 right. We ' re back on the record. Mr. Thomson has not been 22 able to reach his client. He was scheduled to come to the 23 hearing at 1 : 00 p.m. , and because of the mix-up we ' re going to 24 adjourn today. And we ' l1 resume the hearing tomorrow morning 25 at 9 : 15. . OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNFSOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 14 Carolen Bailey � 1 COMMENCEMENT OF TESTIMONY ON JUNE 30 , 1988 . 2 CAROLEN BAILEY, 3 Called by the City and duly sworn, testifies as follows: 4 THE COURT: Please state your full name and spell it on 5 the record? g THE WITNESS: Carolen Bailey, C-a-r-o-l-e-n B-a-i-l-e-y. 7 DIRECT EXAMINATION by MR. BYRNE: 8 Q Ms. Bailey, we may be battling with sound of some elevator g repair work here, so speak into the microphone and I think 10 we ' ll all try to keep our voice levels up so we can be heard 11 here. Lieutenant Bailey, you 've been a police officer for how 12 long? � 13 A 26 years. 14 Q And in 1987 , June, July and August of 1987 , what was your 15 assignment? 16 A I was assigned to the vice unit. ]7 Q And you were the lieutenant in charge of that unit; is 18 that correct? 19 A Yes. 20 Q On August 5th, as part of your duties with the vice unit, 21 did you have occasion to go into the Grand Central, an 22 intoxicating liquor establishment in St. Paul? 23 A Yes. 24 4 Would you relate to the Court what time you went there and 25 who you went there with? � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS15S 15 Carolen Bailey ' � 1 A We went there approximately 9 : 30 and I entered with 2 Sergeant Cheryl Indehar and Sergeant Gary Bohn. 3 THE COURT: You ' ll have to spell those names for us, 4 please? 5 THE WITNESS: Cheryl Indehar is C-h-e-r-y-1 6 I-n-d-e-h-a-r. And Gary Bohn, B-o-h-n. 7 Q They' re both of the St. Paul Police Department vice unit? 8 A They were working in the vice unit at the time. 9 Q Were you all in plainclothes on that occasion? 10 A Yes. 11 Q And who else went with you? 12 A Two other officers went in separately from us. They went � 13 in prior to our time and did not sit with us. And it was 14 Ramsey County Deputy Bill Thompson and Sergeant Bruce Mead. 15 Q Deputy Bill Thompson is spelled T-h-o-m-p-s-o-n? 16 A Yes. ]7 Q And Bruce Mead is Bruce M-e-a-d? 18 A Yes. 19 Q What did you do when you went into the establishment? 20 A The three of us went to the far north end of the bar area 21 there, towards the back wall , where we saw what appeared to be 22 a blackjack table set up. And we sat at a table adjacent to 23 it. 24 4 Was the blackjack table at the time being used or operated 25 in any way? � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNBSOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS155 16 Carolen Bailey � 1 A No. 2 Q From where you were sitting next to the blackjack table 3 did you then observe anybody begin to do anything with respect 4 to it? 5 A Yes. Shortly before 10 : 00 o ' clock a woman came over to 6 the table and began to appear to be getting ready to set it 7 up. 8 THE COURT: Please wait. May I interrupt here? My 9 lights--(break in taping) All right. We ' re back on the 10 record. 11 Q Lieutenant Bailey, you had been describing that you 12 observed a young woman begin to do some writing or something � 13 in connection with the blackjack table? 14 A She was writing on a board which indicated 'winners ' and 15 they were numbered and she wrote some names down on those 16 numbers. l7 Q Let me show you what ' s been marked for identification as 1g City's Exhibit 2, and ask you if you can identify that? 19 A Yes. That 's what she was writing on. 20 Q Is that picture, a picture of that board taken the evening 21 you were there? 22 A Yes, it is. 23 MR. THOMSON: No objection. 24 THE COURT: City ' s Exhibit #2 is received. 25 Q Now she was writing on it names and amounts of money? � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS1S5 17 Carolen Bailey � 1 A Yes. 2 Q For what purpose? 3 A She was indicating who were the leaders in the blackjack 4 game. 5 Q Did she later tell you where she had gotten the names and 6 the dollar amounts? 7 A Yes. She told me that she made them up. 8 Q At the time you were watching her put them up, however, 9 was that information conveyed to you? 10 A No, but I noticed that she wasn' t copying from any paper , 11 and yet she knew the names and the amounts. So I questioned 12 it. � 13 Q Then what happened? 14 A Then about 10 : 30 an announcement was made that the 15 blackjack table was open and that you could play blackjack and 16 be eligible for a drawing for a trip to Las Vegas. ]7 Q Now how was that announcement made? 18 A Over their loud speaker by the DJ. 19 Q What happened next? 20 A Then Sergeant Gary Bohn and Sergeant Cheryl Indehar walked 21 over to the blackjack table and Sergeant Bohn gave her $5. 00 22 to buy chips to play blackjack. 23 Q Had the table been set up for action by this young woman 24 before Sergeant Bohn and Sergeant Indehar went over there? 25 A Yes. � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNE50TA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 18 Carolen Bailey � 1 Q And had a sign been set up on the table indicating the 2 rules for the game? 3 A Yes. 4 Q Let rne show you what has been marked for identification as 5 City's Exhibit 7 and ask you if you can identify that? 6 A Yes, it ' s a Xeroxed copy that I made later of the card 7 that we confiscated that she had set up on the table. g Q Let me show you both City Exhibit 3 and 4 , which have been 9 marked for identification, and ask if you can see on those 10 photographs the sign of which you made a Xerox copy as Exhibit 11 7? 12 A No, I don ' t see it here. � 13 Q Let me show you what ' s been marked for identification as 14 City' s Exhibit 5 and ask you if you can recognize that? 15 A Yes. 16 Q What is that? �7 A That' s a photograph of the sign that didn' t come out very 18 we 11. 19 Q What is the base of that sign made out of? 20 A Glass. 21 Q Now do you recognize that as being present in Exhibits 3 22 and 4? 23 A Yes. Now I can see it on the side here. It' s a side 24 view. Yeah, it' s riyht here. It was placed at the front of 25 the table. I just didn' t see it because it was sideways. � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 19 Carolen Bailey � 1 Q Are these photographs, City' s Exhibits 3 , 4 and 5, do they 2 show the blackjack table, pictures taken that ev�ning , August 3 5th, 1987? 4 A Yes, it is. 5 Q And when were they taken? 6 A After we announced who we were and we placed Christine 7 Sneide under arrest. 8 THE COURT: Christine Snite? Could you spell that last 9 name? 10 THE WITNESS: S-n-e-i-d-e. 11 THE COURT: Thank you. 12 MR. THOMSON: I have no objection. � 13 THE COURT: City' s Exhibits 3 , 4 and 5 are received. 14 MR. BYRNE: And I 'd offer 7 as well , your Honor. 15 THE COURT: All right. Any objections to 7? 16 MR. THOMSON: No. ]7 THE COURT: Al1 right. 7 is also received. 18 Q Now let me go back and ask you a few more questions about 19 the announcement that the DJ made about the opening of the 20 game. What had the DJ said about the opening of the game, and 21 What rules or awards would be made, if any? 22 A What I heard was that the blackjack table was now open, 23 and that you could play for a drawing to win a trip to Las 24 Vegas. And that' s all I heard them say about it. 25 4 Could you then observe Sergeants Bohn and Indehar go to � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 20 Carolen Bailey � 1 the table and participate in the game? 2 A Yes. 3 Q What did they do? 4 A Sergeant Indehar watched while Sergeant Bohn played 5 blackjack. 6 Q How was that actually done? 7 A The dealer dealt him a pair of cards and herself a pair of 8 cards, and if he had a score better than she did and he didn ' t 9 go over 21 , then he won. 10 Q Did he have to pay money for the chips? 11 A Yes. He paid $5. 00. 12 4 This was in cash? � 13 A Yes. 14 Q And cash was received by the operator of the table , this 15 Christine Sneide? 16 A Yes. �7 Q Exhibit 7 purports to show that you get awards for winning 18 $200.00 or $100. 00. Did you have any information or 19 conversation with Ms. Sneide about that? 20 A I asked her when they had the drawing for the Las Vegas 21 trip, and she said that they had a drawing once every six 22 months. 23 4 When did you ask her that? Was that before she was 24 arrested? 25 A Correct, yes. � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNE:SOTA ST. PAUL. MN 55155 al I Carolen Bailey � 1 Q Did you ask her about any free drinks or bottles of 2 champagne? 3 A I don' t recall that I did. 4 Q Did you, after Sergeant Bohn began playing, go over to the 5 table and ask about the values of the chips or operation of 6 the game? 7 A Yes. 8 Q What did you ask? 9 A I asked her what the chips were worth, and what colors 10 were worth what, how much. 11 Q Okay. And did she answer your question? 12 A Yes. � 13 Q What did she tell you? 14 A She told me that certain chips were worth $1 , $5, $10 , 15 $20, $50 and so on. $50 I think, and a $100 chip. 16 4 Did anybody not a police officer at that time participate 17 in the game? 18 A Yes. Another man came u� shortly after Sergeant Bohn 19 began playing, and he also purchased chips. 20 Q How much thereafter was the arrest made of the young 21 woman? 22 A Oh, I 'd have to estimate, perhaps he played 15 minutes. 23 Q Did you execute the arrest yourself or transport Ms . 24 Sneide to the police department? 25 A No. � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS155 22 Carolen Bailey � 1 Q Did you talk to any of the owners or managers at the Grand 2 Central after that? 3 A After she was arrested at the bar, yes. 4 Q On August 5th? 5 A Yes. 6 Q And who did you talk to? 7 A To Anthony Gagliardi, who informed me he was the owner. 8 Q Did he comment on the gambling or the blackjack table at g that time? 10 A Yes. He said it was going on all over the twin cities. 11 Q Did you ask him where in the twin cities? 12 A Yes. � 13 Q And what was his response? 14 A He answered Minneapolis. And I asked him if there was 15 specifically any place in St. Paul , and he didn' t answer me. 16 Q Did he say there were none, or he just didn' t answer the �7 question? 18 A He didn ' t give me any place in St. Paul . 19 Q Was the table and the chips and all the paraphernalia for 20 the blackjack playing , was that seized by the St. Paul Police 21 Department? 22 A Yes. 23 4 After Ms. Sneide was arrested you indicated you had a 24 conversation in which she indicated she had made up the names. 25 Had she told you that she had ever rnade a pay-off of any Las � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 23 I Carolen Bailey � 1 Vegas trip? 2 A No. 3 Q What did she indicate in that regard, if you recall? 4 A I recall that she said they hadn' t paid off anything. 5 Q And the reason was? 6 A It hadn' t been in operation six months. That was prior to 7 her arrest. 8 Q Oh, I see. And after her arrest, the only conversation 9 you had was with respect to the names on the board? 10 A Yes. 11 Q And that was that the names were real people? 12 A That she had made the names up. � 13 Q And the amounts as well? 14 A Yes. 15 MR. BYRNE: I have no further questions, your Honor? 16 THE COURT: Mr. Thomson? ]7 MR. BYRNE: Oh, I 'm sorry. I apologize , I actually do 18 have several more. I don' t know what I was thinking of here. 19 Q Lieutenant Bailey, a day later, on August 6th, did you 20 have occasion to have a talk, an interview with Mr. Gagliardi? 21 A Yes. 22 4 And where was that talk? Where did that take place? 23 A In the vice unit office. 24 Q And how was it that he came to be there? Had he asked to 25 meet with you? Or had you asked him to come down? � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 24 Carolen Bailey � 1 A I asked him to come in. 2 Q What was the purpose of the conversation? g A To discuss the previous evening activities. 4 Q Did he indicate how long he had been involved with the 5 Grand Central? 6 A Yes. He said he owned it about three years. 7 Q Did he indicate how he had become involved, first become g involved with this blackjack table? g A Yes. 10 4 Would you relate to the Court what that conversation was? 11 A He said about six months earlier he had asked the owners 12 of Norma Jean ' s about the blackjack operation at their bar. � 13 And that they had told him that they didn' t earn any money 14 from the blackjack table , but that it brought in customers who 15 bought drinks and hung around the bar, and that was fine with 16 him. 17 Q Okay. Continue. lg A He said that about three months later or three months 1g previous to our interview the operator, owner/operator of the 20 blackjack table had come over to, had talked with his manager, 21 Jeno Bartone, and then later with him and Jeno about setting 22 up the operation. 23 THE COURT: Jeno Bartone? Can you spell that for us, 24 please? 25 THE WITNESS: B-a-r-t-o-n-e. � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 25 ( Carolen Bailey � � 1 THE COURT: Thank you. 2 Q The owner or operator of the blackjack table was named g who? q A Bob Rhuland, R-h-u-l-a-n-d. 5 Q My spelling on that is R-u-h-l-a-n-d, which I think is the 6 correct spelling. 7 A Oh, is it? g Q Had Mr. Ruhland approached Mr. Gagliardi and Mr. Bartone g as Gagliardi related to you in that conversation? 10 A Yes. 11 Q And what was the proposal from Mr. Ruhland? 12 A He said that he would run the operation and that they � 13 wouldn' t have to do anything , any work with it. 14 Q And the details of the operation as you recall, would be 15 What? 16 A Mr. Gagliardi said that he would--that Ruhland would pay 17 for any free drinks or--and would take care of all the prizes; ig that he wouldn' t be involved in that. lg Q I gather that Gagliardi accepted the offer and the 20 blackjack table was put in? 21 A Yes. 22 Q How long before August 6th did Mr. Gagliardi say the table 23 had been put in? 24 A He said it was in about one and a half to two months prior 25 to that time. � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 26 Carolen Bailey � 1 Q And did he indicate that free drinks were offered by the 2 bar during the playing of the game? g A No. He said that the bar did not give free drinks for it. 4 Q Where did the drinks come from, or how were they paid? 5 A He said that Bob Ruhland would pay for the drinks. g Q And did he indicate that that is in fact how the drinks 7 were paid for? g A Yes. g Q Did he indicate to you that free drinks actually were 10 awarded? 11 A Yes, he said about one or two drinks a night and it was, 12 the bill was paid at the end of the night by Ruhland. � 13 4 Did he also indicate that bottles of Champagne were given 14 away from time to time to winners of the game? 15 A Yes. 16 Q And who paid for that? �7 A He said that was all arranged with Ruhland. ig Q How about the Las Vegas trip? Whose responsibility was lg that? 20 A He said it was Ruhland as well. 21 Q Did he indicate that any trip had ever actually been 22 awarded to anybody? 23 A He said that he didn ' t know of any trip having been 24 awarded. 25 4 Did he discuss whether or not the bar received any cut out � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL. MN 55155 27 ( Carolen Bailey � 1 out of the actual proceeds of the blackjack game? 2 A Yes. He said that he had not received any money himself 3 for this. 4 Q Did he indicate the possibility that anybody else 5 connected with the bar might have received part of the cut? 6 A Yes. He said it was possible that Jeno Bartone had 7 accepted some money on it, but he didn' t know about that. g Q Had he indicated the names of any other establishments g other than Norma Jean's of Minneapolis, that he had 10 understood, had blackjack as well? 11 A Plum's and McGuire ' s. 12 4 Had McGuires had blackjack to your knowledge? � 13 A I don' t have direct knowledge that they did. 14 Q In terms of hearsay knowledge do you know that they did or 15 d idn' t? 16 A Yes. �7 Q What was the situation there? 18 A I understand that there had been a previous raid out there lg for gambling. 20 Q How long ago previous to August 6 of '87 , if you recall 21 that? 22 A It was prior to the time that I went into the vice unit in 23 June. 24 4 When did you go into the vice unit? 25 A Sometime in June, I 'm not sure of the date. � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNFSOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 zg Carolen Bailey � 1 Q June of 1987? 2 A Correct. 3 4 And the raid of McGuires would have been previous to that? 4 A I believe so. 5 Q Was that �ublicized in the press, as far as you know? g A I think I read about it, too, yes. 7 Q Had you shown to Mr. Gagliardi a copy, a Xeroxed copy of g the sign that had been on the table, that which nas been g received as City 's Exhibit 7? 10 A Yes. 11 4 And did you ask hirn about that in terms of the awards 12 made? � 13 A Yes. 14 Q How did he--What did he have to say about that? 15 A He said it could have been the sign that he was describing 16 to me. 17 Q It could have been the sign that he was describing to you? ig A Yes. ig Q What was he--What was the context of the conversation? 20 A When we were talking about the awards for the game. 21 Q He indicated there was a sign on the table-- 22 A Yes. 23 Q --showing what the awards were? 24 A Yes. 25 Q But stated that the bar didn ' t actually directly fund � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 29 I Carolen Bailey � 1 those; that they were paid for by the operator of the 2 blackjack table? 3 A Correct. 4 Q Did he comment on how the disk jockey, the DJ in the bar, 5 came to be involved in announcing the opening of the game and 6 the award of the free trip? 7 A He said that Bob Ruhland made all the arrangements for any g announcements pertaining to the game directly with the DJ. g Q The DJ, however, was whose employee? 10 A The employee at the bar. 11 Q Did you then, Lieutenant Bailey, on August 20th of 1987 , 12 have a conversation with Mr. Bartone? � 13 A Yes. 14 4 And where was that conversation? Where did that take 15 place? 16 A That was in the vice office. 17 Q At whose request did that meeting take place? lg A I asked him to come in. lg Q And what was the purpose of--Is it fair to call it an 20 interview? 21 A Yes. 22 Q 4�1hat was the purpose of the interview? 23 A To discuss the blackjack operation 24 4 And what did Mr. Bartone tell you about how they first got 25 into this particular operation? � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 30 Carolen Bailey � 1 A He said that he and Anthony Gagliardi visited Norma Jean' s 2 in Minneapolis and had expressed an interest in the blackjack g operation that they had over there. 4 Q Have I asked you what Mr. Bartone ' s role in the bar is as 5 far as you know it? 6 A He ' s manager. He was working as manager of the bar at 7 that time. g Q At that time? g A Yes. 10 4 Did he indicate that Mr. Ruhland then later had come to 11 see them or one of them? 1.2 A Yes. He said that Mr. Ruhland came to see him first, and � 13 then came to see both him and Anthony Gagliardi. 14 4 For what purpose? 15 A To set up the blackjack operation in Grand Central. 16 4 Did he indicate to you whether they had consulted with 17 anyone other than Mr. Ruhland on the legality or the propriety 18 of doing that? 19 A No. He said that they figures that if it was at P1um' s 20 and Norma Jean' s, it must be legal. 21 Q Did they indicate any belief in Mr. Ruhland' s credibility? 22 A They said that he looked like a clean-cut college kid; 23 talked pretty good. 24 4 What was their--What did Mr. Bartone say their point in 25 entering into this transaction was? � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS15S 31 I Carolen Bailey ' � 1 A He said that they had a dead spot in the back of the bar, 2 and that they thought that this might increase business during 3 the week, and that they wouldn' t have to do any work with it. 4 4 How had that met their expectations in that period of time 5 that it was operating? 6 A He said that it didn ' t really do anything for them. That 7 half the time the dealers didn' t show up. g Q Did he indicate how the free drinks were handled? 9 A Yeah, he said that Ruhland ran a tab for the drinks and 10 then paid for them at the end of the night. 11 4 Did you ask him what the number of free drinks that were 12 awarded at the game normally was? Did you get into specific � 13 numbers of drinks at all? 14 A Yes, I did, but I don ' t recall how many he said they 15 awarded a night. 16 Q �1ere there--Was it your recollection that there were �7 drinks awarded on most occasions, or infrequently, or what? ig A That every night there were some free drinks awarded. lg Q How about bottles of champagne? Any discussion of the 20 frequency of that to your recollection? 21 A Well, he said that there was some champagne awarded but he __ 22 didn ' t think there was much given. 23 4 How about anything in terms of whether or not the bar 24 itself or employees of the bar received any cuts from the 25 proceeds of that operation? • OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL. MN 55155 32 Carolen Bailey � 1 A He said that they didn' t--he didn' t receive any money, and 2 to his knowledge they didn ' t receive any money as a part of 3 that operation. 4 Q Did the question come up as to whether or not they 5 consulted--they being Gagliardi and Bartone--consulted the 6 license inspector' s office about the propriety of this game? 7 A He didn' t think that anyone had consulted the license g inspector, and he hadn ' t. g MR. BYRNE: Now I have no further questions. 10 CROSS-EXAMINATION by MR. THOMSON: 11 Q Lieutenant Bailey, when you were talking to Gagliardi in 12 that discussion with Bob Ruhland, did he indicate that, � 13 whether he had asked Ruhland about the propriety of the game? 14 A Yes. 15 4 And what did Ruhland tell him? 16 A Ruhland told him that he thought it was legal. 17 Q And he had it in other establishments? lg A Yes. lg Q And Plum' s was one of them? 20 A Yes. 21 Q And Plum' s is in St. Paul? 22 A I guess it is. But at that time they weren' t--We checked 23 that--At that time they did not have a blackjack table that we 24 knew about. 25 Q Now as far as the table itself, it was open for public � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 33 Carolen Bailey ' � 1 view? 2 A Yes. 3 Q It wasn' t hidden? q A No. 5 Q So anybody that would walk in to Grand Central would see g the table there? 7 A Well , they might not see it if they stayed at the other 8 side of the bar, but if they walked through past the bar, g they'd see it. 10 4 And when the DJ announced that the blackjack table was 11 open, that was to any patron that was in there, who could hear 12 that? � 13 A Wel1 , there was a lot of noise, but under normal 14 conditions any patron could hear it; but there was a lot of 15 noise in the room. 16 Q Do you know how to play blackjack? �7 A Yes. lg Q And is luck involved? ig A Yes. 20 4 And is skill involved? 21 A A little bit? 22 Q Well , there is skill, isn ' t there? 23 A Yeah. 24 4 I mean people become counters, and there ' s certain basic 25 strategy the players use; is that correct? � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL. MN 55155 34 Carolen Bailey � 1 A Yes. 2 Q And as I understand it, the way this game operated, nobody g got cash back; did they? 4 A No. 5 Q And you 'd obtain a certain number of chips and that would g entitle you to a certain award; is that correct? 7 A Yes. g Q And the awards you 'd get would be, number one, a free g drink if you reached a certain level; is that correct? 10 A Yes. 11 Q And if you got to a hiyher level, you would get an award 12 or a bottle of champagne? � 13 A You could be eligible--oh, the champagne, yes. 14 Q And if you got--if you happened to be the top one for the 15 day for the number of chips you yot, then you were entitled to 16 a drawing for a trip to Las Vegas? 17 A Yes. lg Q And then as far as the chips were concerned , according to ig the sign for $5. 00 you 'd get $20. 00 worth of chips; is that 20 correct? The denominations on the chips? 21 A Yes. 22 4 And then for $10 . 00 you 'd get $50 . 00 worth of chips; is 23 that correct? 24 A I 'd have to check their schedule; but there was a certain 25 schedule for how much you could purchase. � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 35 Carolen Bailey � 1 Q Yes, I believe that ' s on an exhibit in evidence? � A Yeah, right here, correct. 3 Q So when it says 50 chips, the designation on the chips 4 would be $50.00 worth of chips; that ' s what it would say on 5 the chip; is that correct? 6 A I don' t recall what the chips said. I think it was a 7 color that showed the amount. g Q And then the sign, did it indicate that there was 9 absolutely no wagering; is that correct? 10 A Yes. 11 Q And absolutely no distribution of cash? A Yes. 12 4 And absolutely no repurchase of chips by the dealer? � 13 A Yes. 14 4 And then it indicates on the awards that the highest total 15 over $200.00 gets a bottle of champagne; is that correct? 16 A Yes. 17 Q So there would be one bottle of champagne awarded , I 18 suppose every day or every week? He didn' t say though? lg A No. 20 Q And that $100 . 00 could be turned in for one free bar 21 drink; is that correct? 22 A Yes. 23 Q And then the main -- 24 THE COURT: Excuse me. I 'm going to interrupt. We ' re at 25 the end of the tape. (change of tapes) All right, go ahead. � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 36 Carolen Bailey � 1 Q From the names that were on the board, ostensibly those 2 were to show who the leaders were, as far as the scores they g made, for the number of chips that they 'd won; is that 4 correct? 5 A Yes. g MR. THOMSON: I have no further questions. 7 THE COURT: Okay, thank you very much. g MR. BYRNE : Sergeant Bohn. g GARY BOHN, 10 Called by the City and duly sworn, testifies as follows: 11 THE COURT: Please state your full name and spell it for 12 the record. � 13 THE WITNESS: Gary Bohn, B-o-h-n. 14 DIRECT EXAMINATION by MR. BYRNE: 15 4 Now Sergeant Bohn, you' re employed as a police sergeant by 16 the City of St. Paul Police Department; is that correct? �7 A Yes. 18 Q And how long have you been an officer with the St. Paul? 19 A About 17 and a half years. 20 Q And currently you ' re assigned to the vice unit? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Were you also assigned as a member of the vice unit in 23 June, July and August of 1987? 24 A Yes. 25 Q And did you have occasion on August 5th of 1987 to go into � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS155 37 Gary Bohn � 1 the Grand Central Restaurant and Bar? 2 A Yes. 3 Q Could you relate to the Court what the purpose of going in 4 there was at that time? 5 A To investigate complaints that they were playing g blackjack. 7 Q And what did you do when you went into the bar on that g evening? 9 A Myself and Sergeant Indehar entered together and sat down 10 at a table at 9 : 30 at night. And at approximately 10 :00 11 o' clock , I believe, a blond female set it up to start playing 12 blackjack. � 13 4 And what did you do then? 14 A I went over with Sergeant Indehar and purchased some chips 15 for $5. 00 from this female and played blackjack. 16 Q And what happened then? �7 A I played for 15 or 20 minutes and another male came over 18 and started playing and at that time I indicated to Sergeant ig Indehar to call for squads which we had outside. Once the 20 squads arrived I identified myself to this female and told her 21 she was under arrest. 22 Q Had it been your intention that if the game was played and 23 you were able to participate that evening that you would make 24 an arrest and shut the game down? 25 A Yes. • OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNFSOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 38 Gary Bohn � 1 Q Did you subsequently, or people under your direction seize 2 the table and all the paraphernalia and confiscate that? g A Yes. 4 Q The table--Let me ask, I have the photo exhibits, Sergeant 5 Bohn, I show you the City's Exhibit 3 and 4, and ask you if g that is the table that you ' re referring to in the Grand 7 Central? g A Yes, it is. g Q And the picture of the young woman, I believe in #4 , is 10 that the person that you arrested? 11 A Yeah, that 's Christine Sn�ide. 12 4 Had you--First let me ask, where this table is, it ' s part � 13 of the general bar area? 14 A Yeah, there 's two sections to the bar, actually two bar 15 areas. If you come in off of Grand, there 's a main bar area. 16 And then this would sit further south, if you came off the 17 parking lot, it would be right to your left along the one end 18 of the bar. ig Q And there ' s no interference or barriers between the 20 patrons and this particular part of the establishment? You 21 Just buy your drink and walk over? 22 A It' s a big bar, but it was in plain view to anybody that 23 was in that area, yes. 24 4 Had you previously gone into the Grand Central with 25 Sergeant Bill Thompson of the Ramsey County Sheriff ' s � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 39 , Gary Bohn � 1 Department? 2 A Yes. 3 Q And do you recall the date? q A No, I don' t. 5 Q If his reports indicated that he and you went there on 6 June 17th, would that be approximately the time you went 7 there? g A Yes. g Q Did you write a report on that particular evening? 10 A I don' t recall if I did or didn' t. 11 Q Do you recall what the point was in going in there in 12 June? � 13 A I believe that was for, to see if they were playing 14 blackjack also. 15 Q Okay. And did you actually play that night, as you 16 recall? �7 A No. 18 Q You don ' t recall? ig A I don' t recall playing that night. 20 Q On August 5th when you were there, did you actually play 21 the game of blackjack after you paid? 22 A Ye s. 23 4 About how many hands did you play? 24 A Oh, I couldn' t say for sure, but I would guess at least 12 25 to 15 hands. � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS155 40 Gary Bohn � 1 Q Did you win or lose? 2 A I was doiny okay for a while, then I think I started to 3 lose at the end. 4 Q Let me show you what for sequence of numbering has been 5 marked as City' s Exhibit 6 , and ask you if you recognize that? g A Yeah, that 's in front of the Grand Central Bar. 7 Q And was that picture taken the night of August 5th, 1987? g A Yes. g Q The same time as the others? 10 A Yes, approximately. 11 MR. BYRNE: I would offer City Exhibit 6 . 12 MR. THOMSON: No objection, your Honor. � 13 THE COURT: Six is received. 14 MR. BYR�E: No further questions. 15 CROSS-EXAMINATION by MR. THOMSON: 16 4 Sergeant, on August 5th did you have an occasion to talk �7 to Gagliardi that night? lg A I talked to one of the people, and i foryet which one 1g off-hand. I think basically we get the name and stuff, but 20 Yeah, it was probably him. 21 4 I 've got a copy of your report here and you indicate that 22 You talked to the owner of the bar, Gagliardi. 23 A Okay, then I did, yes. I remember talking. I 'd have to 24 qet my report here. 25 Q I �m referring to the last two sentences in your report, or � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL. MN 55155 41 Gary Bohn � 1 the second to the last. � A Uh-huh. g Q And then do you indicate that you did indeed talk to 4 Gagliardi? 5 A Yes. g Q And what did he tell you about the game? 7 A He thought it was leyal. g MR. THOMSON: I have no further questions. 9 MR. BYRNE: That's all . 10 THE COURT: Thank you. 11 MR. BYRNE: We 'd call Sergeant Thompson. 12 WILLIAM THOMPSON, � 13 Called by the City and duly sworn, testifies as follows: 14 THE COURT: Please state your full name and spell it for 15 the record? 16 TI3E WITNESS : William Thompson. T-H-O-M-P-S-O-N. �7 DIRECT EXAMINATION by MR. BYRNE; 18 4 Sergeant Thompson, you ' re employed by the Ramsey County 19 Sheriff ' s Department? 20 A That' s correct. 21 Q And how long have you worked there? 22 A Approximately 17 years . 23 4 And your rank currently is that of sergeant? 24 A Correct. 25 4 Are you now assigned to any particular unit or type of � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL. MN 55155 42 William Thompson � 1 investigative work? 2 A I 'm a special operations investigator, assigned directly 3 to the sheriff in administration. 4 Q What kinds of things--Is yambling one of the things that 5 you work on in that particular assignment? g A That 's correct. 7 Q And your role in that is not to work as a uniformed g officer, or deputy, but as undercover; is that correct? g A That 's correct. 10 4 In June, July and August of 1987 were you detailed or 11 assigned to work with the St. Paul Police force vice unit on a 12 gambling investigation at the Grand Central? � 13 A On June lOth I received a complaint or a telephone call 14 from one of our sergeants, Sergeant Dick Dornbusch out in our 15 special investigations unit, reference a blackjack setu� 16 similar to that that had occurred at McGuires Inn in the City �7 of Arden Hills that was going on now at the Grand Central , ig located someplace on Grand Avenue. I was not familiar with ig that at the time. 20 THE COURT: Dornbusch. Could you spell that name for us , 21 Please? 22 THE WITNESS : D-o-r-n-b-u-s-c-h. 23 THE COURT: Thank you. 24 4 Let me just step aside and ask me a little bit about 25 McGuires. Had you been involved in that operation? � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS15S 43 William Thompson � 1 A Correct. 2 Q And what had happened there? Just a thumbnail sketch. 3 MR. THOMSON: I ' ll object as irrelevant, your Honor. 4 THE COURT: Sustained. 5 MR. BYRNE: If I may, your Honor, make an offer of proof. 6 THE COURT: All right, go ahead. 7 MR. BYRNE: It has been suggested that one of the thinys g that Mr. Gagliardi relied upon was the fact that McGuire ' s had g a game, and that he thought it was leyal based on that; but 10 the facts are that the game at McGuires had been held much 11 earlier in point of time, and that it would be reasonable to 12 infer that the people in the bar business would have known � 13 that McGuires had been raided and shut down for that operation 14 long before this incident took place. 15 MR. THOMSON: Well, we 'd object not only to the relevance , 16 but it's speculative. Trying to impute knowledge to Mr. �7 Gagliardi based on what people in the bar business should have 18 known. lg MR. BYRNE: My point is that Mr. Gagliardi himself told 20 one of our officers, and it came up in previous questioning , 21 that he had relied on the fact that the game had taken place 22 at Plum' s and at McGuires. 23 MR. THOMSON: Norma Jean ' s. 24 MR. BYRNE: That' s in addition. 25 THE COURT: I believe I think I recall the testimony being � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL. MN SS15S 44 William Thompson � 1 at Norma Jean' s and Plum' s, and I think that the other 2 testimony--There was other testimony to the officer 's 3 knowledge that it has also taken place at McGuires. If I 'm q mistaken on that testimony I ' ll stand corrected; but that ' s my 5 recollection of the testimony. Therefore, I ' l1 sustain the 6 objection. 7 Q Sergeant Thompson, returning then to June lOth when you 8 had the complaint from Sergeant Dornbusch, what did you do g then? 10 A I went to Grand Central that evening, attempting to 11 observe any blackjack being observed on the premises. 12 Q Did you go there on that occasion alone, or with somebody � 13 else? 14 A I was alone simply because I don ' t believe there was an 15 answer up in the vice office in the City of St. Paul. 16 Q Had you tried to get somebody from the vice unit to go �7 with you? ig A Ye s. ig Q Why would you customarily do that? 20 A We work very closely, the Sheriff 's Department and the St. 21 Paul Police vice unit. 22 Q Okay. What time did you on June lOth go to the Grand 23 Central? 24 A The time at night, I believe it to be somewheres around 25 8 � 00 o' clock at night. � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS15S 45 I William Thompson � 1 Q Okay. And what did you observe when you went in on that 2 occasion? g A I observed that they did have a blackjack table set up for 4 play. I didn' t see the blackjack table right away. I sat at 5 the front bar. I 'd never been in the Grand Central before. I g walked in, sat at the front bar, and didn't see any blackjack 7 table set up for play. It wasn' t until a disk jockey there g announced the game and the location of the game, that I then g went back to the south area, in a back bar area, and observe 10 the game set up for play. 11 4 If you had, when you came in, done a little bit of 12 wandering around, and gone into that back area, would you then � 13 have seen it without any impediment? 14 A Correct. 15 Q When the disk jockey did you go back into that area? 16 A Yes, sir, I did. �7 Q And what did you see then? 18 A I saw a Las Vegas-style blackjack table set up for play. lg There was a white female--I ' d describe her as being 25 to 30 20 Years, tall, medium build, with dark brown hair, dealing the 21 9ame. And I sat there and observed the game for well over an 22 hour. Maybe two hours. Observed many people enter the game 23 and leave the game. 24 4 And how did they participate in the game? 25 A They paid cash money and received chips for the cash � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS155 46 William Thompson � 1 money. 2 Q To your knowledge, did anybody win any free drinks or 3 prizes while you were observing on that occasion? 4 A Not to my knowledge , no, sir. 5 Q Let me ask you a few questions about the game of 6 blackjack. You ' re familiar with the game? 7 A Yes, I am. g Q And have you observed it being played and participated on g other occasions than in this Grand Central investigation? 10 A Yes, sir, I have. 11 4 How would you describe it as a game of chance, as opposed 12 to a game of skill? � 13 A I think both chance and skill are involved in the game of 14 blackjack. The object is to beat the dealer without going 15 over 21. 16 Q The element of chance is involved because you don' t know �7 what the cards are that are coming up? ig A Part of the element of chance is you ' re assuming that the lg dealer' s hold card or the dealer' s down card is having a value 20 of ten. 21 Q And you don' t know what that down card is? 22 A You don' t know what it is for sure, no. 23 Q And you don' t know what--if you ask for cards , to add to 24 your total, you don' t know what 's in there? 25 A You don' t know what the next card is going to be. � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 47 I William Thompson � � 1 Q The element of skill is involved in what part of it? 2 A Knowing when to take cards , when not to take cards. As g Mr. Thompson has stated earlier, card counting. 4 Q What ' s card counting? 5 A Knowinq when the deck is rich or when the deck is poor. 6 When the deck is poor, if the aces and tens, a lot of those 7 are out. The deck is rich if those are still contained in the 8 ' shoe' (ph) . It depends on which card counting method you g use. 10 4 Some people are more skillful than others. Is that 11 correct? 12 A Correct. � 13 4 The average patron--I withdraw that. On the first 14 evening, in terms of total dollars paid into the game, how 15 much money would you estimate that patrons paid to participate 16 in the game, in the period you were watching it? �7 A I would say at least $50 . 00. 18 Q Was the establishment pretty full with people on that lg evening? 20 A I think there was a pretty good crowd in there then. 21 4 And were most of the slots or places at the blackjack 22 table filled up during the period you were watching it? 23 A People would come and go. There were players pretty much 24 at the table on that particular night the entire time I was 25 there. I would say that that was one of the better nights � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 48 William Thompson � 1 that I observed in the place. 2 Q One of the better nights? 3 A As far as the participation in the blackjack is concerned ; 4 correct? 5 A Then you left without participating in the game or taking g any action to make any arrests ; is that correct? 7 A Correct. g Q Did you go into the Grand Central again? g A The following week I believe I was in there Tuesday, 10 Wednesday and Thursday of that week. 11 Q Okay. That would be June 16th, 17th, and 18th? 12 A Correct. � 13 Q Why don ' t you start with June 16th. Who did you go in 14 there with and approximately what time, and for what purpose? 15 A Again all the times are pretty near 9 :00 o 'clock , except 16 for one night that we, Sergeant Bohn and I had gone in there 17 earlier, not knowing what time the blackjack started. And the 18 first night we just went in and after we were in I think we 19 found out that we came into the place too early, and waited 20 there until like 9: 00 o' clock, or a little after 9 : 00 when the 21 dealer showed up and opened the game. At that time we left 22 and then returned the following evening which would have been 23 Wednesday, June 17th, I believe. And went in later that 24 evening and participated in the blackjack. 25 Q On both those occasions you were with Sergeant Bohn of the � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 � . � i 49 I William Thompson � 1 St. Paul Police Department? 2 A I believe so, yes, sir. 3 Q And you were both undercover at that time? 4 A Yes. 5 Q Wearing plainclothes? g A Wearing plainclothes. 7 Q What did you do on Wednesday the 17th when you went in 8 there? Could you describe what you saw and what you did? g A Again the same dealer was controlling the game. We went 10 in and observed the game for a little while and then walked 11 over to the game. I ask�d the dealer how much the chips were, 12 and she gave me the answer that well, if you buy $5. 00 worth � 13 or if you give me $5.00 in cash you get $20 . 00 worth of chips. 14 And so on and so forth. If you paid $10. 00 I believe that you 15 9ot $50. 00 worth of chips. If you paid $20 . 00 you got $100 . 00 16 or $110. 00 worth of chips. �7 Q So on--You 've seen City' s Exhibit 7 before, have you not? lg A Yes, I have. lg Q That ' s a Xeroxed copy of the sign that was on the table? 20 A I think it was, yes, sir, simply because of the value of 21 the chips. 22 Q When that sign that indicates $5. 00 gets you 20 chips, 23 you ' re getting as Mr. Thompson earlier asked the other 24 witness, you ' re getting $20 . 00 worth of chips? 25 A Correct. � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS15S 50 William Thompson � 1 Q Did the disk jockey also announce the presence of the game 2 on Wednesday, June 17th? g A I believe that he did, yes. 4 Q Would that occur only at the start of the game , or 5 throughout the course of the evening? g A I think that it was announced at least twice and maybe 7 several times. So at the start and then during the time the g table was open, I believe it would be announc�d. g Q Did the disk jockey simply announce that the game was open 10 or go farther than that? 11 A I think there were statements made to the effect that you 12 could win free drinks, win a bottle of champagne, win a chance � 13 on a trip to Las Vegas. 14 4 Did both you and Sergeant Bohn play the game of blackjack 15 that evening? 16 A On that Wednesday evening , yes, sir, we did. �7 Q Yes. How long did you play it as best you can recall? ig A Half an hour to an hour. lg Q Did you purchase additional chips during the course of 20 Playing? 21 A No. See, the object of that was just to actually pay 22 money to participate in the game. 23 Q Did you ask the dealPr what you would have to do to win a 24 free drink? 25 A I believe that I did, and the answer was that you had to � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS155 51 William Thompson ' � 1 win a certain value of chips. I think it was $100. 00 was your 2 value for a free drink. 3 Q Did you ask the dealer what you 'd have to do to win the 4 Las Vegas trip? 5 A You 'd have to be the highest point getter that particular 6 evening; have the highest value in chips at the end of play. 7 Q Would that get you a trip for--What would that get you in g terms of-- g A That would get you a chance in the drawing, the trip. 10 4 When would the drawings be held? 11 A I can' t remember if I asked the question, or I can ' t 12 remember if--what the answer was. I 'm not sure. � 13 4 Well , if you had your report from that evening and it was 14 indicated in there, would that help refresh your recollection? 15 A Yes, sir, it would. 16 4 I ' ll show you a report from June 17th, particularly the 17 second page. 18 A Yes, on my report, per my report, she stated that it would 19 be given away a trip every month or two, but that she wasn' t 20 sure. 21 Q Did you or Sergeant Bohn win any free drinks or a bottle 22 of champagne or the highest point total for that night? 23 A No. 24 4 On June 18th did you go back into the Grand Central? 25 A Yes, sir, I did. � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS15S 52 William Thompson � 1 Q Did you play the game of blackjack on that occasion? 2 A No. 3 Q Was it being played on June 18th? 4 A I believe that the table was open for play on that 5 particular evening . I 'm not sure if I observed any g participants or not. 7 Q Let me show you your report for June 18th. And ask you to g look at that and refresh your memory. g A I entered the bar at about 9 ; 00 o' clock. And again that ' s 10 Thursday, June 18th. And it was the same dealer that I 've 11 described in the past, and yes, I was able to observe several 12 patrons participate in the yame. I did not participate in the � 13 qame. I was only in there approximately an hour. On that 1� particular evening it was my--I just wanted to firm up that it 15 Was being conducted each evening. 16 Q Did you have occasion then in July, specifically July 22 �7 and 29 , to stop by and monitor or take a look at the Grand 18 Central and the blackjack table? lg A Yes, sir, we did; simply because I think after that second 20 or third week in June the vice unit was busy with a detail and 21 I was busy with something. We were unable to look at Grand 22 Central any further for a while, and didn' t get back until the 23 latter part of July, to look at the blackjack again. 24 4 And on those occasions, as I take it from your reports, 25 the table was there , but you did not see anybody playing or � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 dd 53 William Thompson � participating in the game? 1 A That ' s correct. I believe on one night the dealer rnay not 2 have shown up, and on another occasion it wasn' t the same g dealer that I had seen in June. This was again a white 4 female, but maybe about five years younger, and extremely thin 5 build, was controlling the game. 6 Q And on that occasion, the game--she was there, but no game 7 was being played? g A I believe that on one occasion. There were no g participants in the game. And I believe on another occasion 10 the table was there, however no dealer showed up to deal the 11 game. 12 4 Have you seen the photographs that have been introduced as � 13 Exhibits 3 , 4 and 5? 14 A Yes, I have. 15 Q 2 , 3 , 4 and 5. Would you just take a look at those 16 briefly now? �7 A Again this first photograph, this would be Exhibit 5 -- 18 Q I 'm only going to ask you if they fairly and accurately 19 represent the blackjack table and what it looked like on the 20 times that you were in the bar in June and July of 1987? 21 A Yes, they do. 22 Q The dealer that ' s pictured in those, I think Exhibit 3 and 23 4 , is Christine Sneide, is the one you' re referring to as the 24 blond dealer? 25 � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS15S 55 William Thompson � A That ' s correct, sir. 1 Q And then you came back a week later and the game wasn' t 2 open? That would be July 29th? g A Yes, sir. 4 MR. THOMSON: I have no further questions. 5 MR. BYRNE: Nothing further. 6 THE COURT: All right. We ' ll take a short recess here , 7 about 20 minutes. (break in taping) All right, back on the g record after a short recess. g MR. BYRNE: I ' d like to recall Lieutenant Bailey just 10 briefly, your Honor. 11 THE COURT: All right. 12 CAROLEN BAILEY, Recalled, � 13 REDIRECT EXAMINATION, Continuing, by MR. BYRNE: 14 4 Lieutenant Bailey, you ' re still under oath from when you 15 previously testified. I have just one thing to inquire into 16 With you. When you interviewed Mr. Gagliardi on August 6th of 17 1987 , did he--He told you that he had understood that Norma 18 Jean' s and Plum' s had a blackjack operation; is that correct? ig A Ye s. 20 Q Did he also tell you anything about McGuires? 21 A Yes. He told me that he had heard that they had blackjack 22 at McGuires also. Then he volunteered that--voluntarily 23 mentioned that there was a raid, but that he had just heard 24 about the raid the night before. 25 � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 56 Carolen Baileyl � Q And was that one of the bases on which he assumed it was 1 okay to have blackjack; that McGuires had it? � A I don' t know. He just said that Ruhland had told him they 3 had it at Norma Jean's and Plum' s, but that he knew they also q had it at McGuires. Yes, I would assume that 's what he was 5 referring to. 6 MR. BYRNE: That's all I have, your Honor. 7 MR. THOMSON: I have no questions. g THE COURT: All right. g MR. BYRNE: Your Honor, at this time I would offer--I have 10 three reports of Sergeant Cheryl Indehar who was an officer of 11 the vice unit in June of 1987 . And they are reports from June 12 lOth of '87 , June llth of ' 87, and August 5th of 1987. These � 13 reports, and I ' ll start with June 10 and 11 , contain 14 observations specifically by Sergeant Indehar, of activities 15 in the Grand Central that she observed, and contain no hearsay 16 or other inadmissible evidence. They all have her direct �7 observations. And I would offer those, the June 10 and 11 , lg under the authority of the 'Sabus ' case (ph) , which permits lg police officers ' reports to be admitted, so long as they are 20 their own written reports, reciting their personal 21 observations and experiences with respect to the events in 22 question and may support--and do not contain otherwise 23 incompetent evidence. 24 MR. THOMSON: Just these two reports? 25 � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 57 � 1 MR. BYRNE: For now. 2 THE COURT: Do you have any objections, Mr. Thomson? 3 MR. THOMSON: Well, just these two? 4 MR. BYRNE: I have another one that ' s a slightly different 5 category, but these two are clearly -- 6 MR. THOMSON: Yeah, I have no objection. 7 MR. BYRNE: I 've marked them as City' s Exhibits 8 and 9 . g THE COURT: All right. Exhibits 8 and 9 are received. g MR. BYRNE: The other report is Officer Indehar' s report 10 of August 5th, 1987 , and it too, at least the first half , 1.1 relates to direct personal observations of events in the Grand 12 Central . The second half, is an extensive half dealing with � 13 her interview with Christine Sneide and relates what Sneide 14 had told her about the game and about the operation there. I 15 believe it ' s fair to say that the Sneide interview is 16 consistent with what you already had in evidence before, and 17 has no evidence that' s additionally damaging to the ig operation--It may have some exculpatory or mitigating 19 statements, but technically it may be without the boundary of 20 the 'Sabus ' case, and so I offer it separately from the other 21 two. I offer it separately from the other two because it has 22 that additional problem. I think it' s probably admissible, 23 and it may not be objected to by Counsel, but I don ' t know. 24 And I would off�r it as the City' s Exhibit 10. 25 MR. THOMSON: I have no objection. � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 58 � � 1 THE COURT: City Exhibit 10 is received. 2 MR. BYRNE: The City rests. � MR. THOMSON: The license holder rests . I � 4 THE COURT: You have no evidence to offer? 5 MR. THOMSON: I 'd like to be heard. 6 THE COURT: All right. Very good. Al1 right. Then I 7 guess I ' l1 entertain closing arguments unless--well, there S wouldn' t be any rebuttal since there ' s no testimony on the g part of the licensee. And so would you like to begin, Mr. 10 BYrne? 11 MR. BYRNE: Yes, your Honor, thank you. In this case I 12 believe there 's not much doubt that the Grand Central � 13 Permitted an open and flagrant violation of 14 gambling and liquor laws. There ' s no doubt but that this was 15 9ambling. What was involved in the game of blackjack fits the 16 criteria of the statute ; an element of chance, consideration �7 paid , and the possibility of a gain or loss or prizes or 18 awards resulting from that. I was interested in Mr. Thomson's 19 remarks in his opening statement that he will show that there 20 is not, that this was not gambling and would not amount to 21 9amblinc�. And I suppose the only basis on which you might be 22 able to make that assertion would be that Ruhland, the 23 operator of the game, never intended to award any prizes or 24 gifts. That the Las Vegas trip would never be awarded; and 25 that the other things were illusory or insignificant. There � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS15S 59 � 1 are two points to be made about that. First that free drinks 2 were awarded. It ' s clear from the evidence. Perhaps not very 3 many, but they were awarded on a consistent basis. Bottles of 4 champagne were awarded. And even if the operators of the game 5 never intended to award a trip to Las Vegas, Minnesota is a 6 state where contractual obligation is the objective formation 7 of contracts. The cases--and I have some cases that I 've 8 prepared in longhand, and would provide that to the Court. g THE COURT: I would probably ask for a written closing 10 memorandurn if you 'd like to include it in that. 1.1 MR. BYRNE: These cases, I don' t think there ' s much 12 dispute with these cases, that Minnesota is an objective � 13 contract formation state; and that the expressed mutual 14 consent is what controls. In this situation of bet, is what ' s 15 at the heart of a blackjack game. It 's a bargain. It' s a 16 contract whereby you ' re paying consideration and the agreement �7 is that if you win, or the element of chance--perhaps there ' s 18 some skill--but the element of chance comes out in your favor, 19 you ' re awarded a prize or a consideration. And so what they 20 Were offering to the people, what the people thought they were 21 entering into is what controls as to the Las Vegas trip. But 22 certainly even if that ' s discounted , they did award free 23 drinks and bottles of champagne. So all of the legal elements 24 of gambling are present. It may be that there ' s an aryument 25 as expressed by the statements by the owners to the police � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS155 60 � 1 officers that they thought it was all right, that it was legal 2 based on what was happening at Norma Jean' s and the clean cut 3 and good looks and assurances of Mr. Ruhland in getting them 4 into this situation. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse, 5 and they have chosen not to rebut or contest the assertions of 6 the City in this regard, so it 's proper to draw inferences 7 against them from their failure to testify here. The Baxter 8 case that I provided the Court with previous to the testimony g being introduced, is that inferences can be drawn in a civil 10 matter from failure to respond to matters you would ordinarily 11 expect people to respond to. I think the inference to be 12 drawn here is that perhaps they knew it was not proper. They � 13 had a pretty good idea it was not proper. That they should 14 not have done it but they felt that perhaps in numbers was 15 safety. And I think that reliance is an improper reliance, 16 and one that they cannot use as a defense to the allegations �7 here. There was no charitable use of the proceeds. This was lg a very organized, systematic, commercialized effort to enhance ig and increase their business. I think the fact that it was an 20 open operation, the fact that they did not apparently receive 21 any cut from the proceeds themselves, the fact that this was 22 definitely not an extensive , high dollar syndicate-type 23 9ambling operation, is definitely in mitigation of the 24 offense. And that the Adrninistrative Law Jud�e and counsel 25 should take that into consideration. On the other side of it, � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS15S 61 � 1 however, is that this occurred for a very long period of time, 2 and presumable would have continued but for the fact that the 3 police finally stepped in and stopped it. 4 THE COURT: Excuse rne. I 'm going to have to interrupt. 5 We ' re at the end of the tape. (change of tape) Go ahead. 6 MR. BYRNE: (continuing) My recommendation, my request to 7 the Court here is to incorporate in its recommendation to the 8 City Council sufficient flexibilities so that the Council can, g if it chooses, revoke the license. The Council has in its 10 ordinance, determininy what the penalties for unlawful 11 9ambling will be, has said that for a first violation it 12 should be a 3-day suspension. Second violation, I think it ' s � 13 a 9-day violation. The third violation, revocation. They did 14 not say for the first hearing , a 3-day, for the second 15 hearing, a 9-day, and so on. It seems to me their intent is , 16 and what they have in mind, is that these offenses are to be �7 regarded as fairly serious. And I think for my client, I lg should ask this tribunal to make available to them that lg possibility, so that the recommendation of the Hearing Officer 20 should be for revocation, to give them that flexibility. If 21 You were to recommend a 3-day suspension, it would be far more 22 difficult, in my view, for them to depart upward than if the 23 reverse were true, if you recommend revocation and then they 24 decided to ameliorate that, and depart downward and only do a 25 Suspension of some indeterminate length. I don' t have any � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 62 � 1 personal recommendation other than to say that I want my 2 client to have the flexibility to go with what I perceive to 3 be the degree of seriousness with which they view this type of 4 violation. Thank you, Judge. 5 THE COURT: Thank you. Mr. Thomson? 6 MR. THOMSON: Yes, your Honor. It ' s my understanding that 7 we would have an opportunity to file a legal memorandum in 8 this regard? g THE COURT: Yes. 10 MR. THOMSON: It is our contention that this is not 11 gambling. What is involved here is the purchase of chips. 12 And it involves a contest rather than a bet. Minnesota � 13 Statutes 609. 75, Subdivision 2, defines a bet. And it states , 14 a bet is a bargain whereby the parties mutually agree to a 15 9ain or loss by one to the other of specified money, property 16 or benefit dependent upon chance, although the chance is �7 accompanied by some element of skill. The general situation ig would be that if you were playing one hand of blackjack, 19 there ' s a mutual agreement that if you win or lose, you' re 20 9oing to win what you ' re betting . This was not true in this 21 case. It was an accumulation of points entered into a 22 contest, where if you were the winner of the day, then your 23 name would go into a hat which ostensibly was a trip to Las 24 Veyas. If you were able to accumulate a number of points 25 through skill, which is a basic element of blackjack, then you � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS155 63 � 1 would get a drink. But in order to get a drink you had to 2 have $100 worth of chips, and the actual cash value, if you 3 had $5 you got 20 chips, you' re talking about $25 for the 4 drink. In other words , if you went and bought $lU0 worth of 5 chips it would cost you $25 and you were entitled to a drink . g So there was absolutely no relationship, and with a mutual 7 understanding of what would comprise a bet. 609. 75 , 8 Subdivision 3 , paragraph 3 , says what are not bets. The g following are not bets. Offers of purses, prizes or premiums 10 to the actual contestants in any bona fide contest for the 1.1 determination of skill, speed or strength. Well this was--the 12 way it was set up was that there was an ofFer of a prize, � �g based upon, between contestants, based upon skill. And all of 14 the players during the day were contestants, and if you were 15 the top one, based upon the skill, then you could get a 16 certain prize. The very exhibits that have been introduced �7 here decry that the--or illuminate that these were not wagers. 18 They were not gambling. You couldn' t have--the chips 19 themselves had no intrinsic value whatsoever, unless--the only 20 time the chip would have a value is if duriny the playiny you 21 Were able to accumulate enough to arrive at a certain level , 22 did those chips have any value. On a normal play of a hand 23 the chips had no intrinsic value because standing alone they 24 Were worthless, unless at the close of the day you turned out 25 to be the number one, or you were able to accumulate enough to � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 64 I � 1 get 100 for a free drink. In order to get the champagne you 2 had to be the number one for that particular day. And you 3 wouldn' t know that until afterwards. And so you were really � 4 competing with all the other players who came i�z there during 5 the day. They were the contestants. So this has more indicia 6 of a contest under 609 Subdivision 3 , paragraph 3 , than it 7 does in any way of a bet. And it' s specifically carved out g not to be a bet. The other--And certainly a blackjack table g per se is not a gambling device. Gambling devices are 10 specifically defined under Subdivision 4 of 6U9. 75 as well as 11 under 349 . 30 , Subdivision 2, defines gambling devices, means 12 slot machines, roulette wheels , punch boards and pinball � 13 machines, with return coins or slugs, chips or tokens of any 14 kind which are redeemable in merchandise or cash. Well, this 15 is not a gambling device under the statutory definition. So 16 our contention is that this did not constitute gambling �7 according to the notice we had that this was a violation of 18 Minnesota Statutes 340A. 410 , Subdivision 5 , and I believe that lg it says 'gambling prohibited, no retail establishment, 20 licensed to s�ll alcoholic beverage may keep, possess or 21 operate or permit the keeping, possession or operation on a 22 licensed premises of dice or any gambling device as defined in 23 Subdivision 349 . 30 , or permit gambling therein, except as 24 Provided in this subdivision. ' It ' s certainly not a gambling 25 device under the definition of device, and it's certainly not M OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN 55155 65 � � 1 gambling under 609. 75. And so we would urge the Tribunal to 2 find that there was no violation here. There was no gambliny . 3 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you very much. I would like a 4 brief inemorandum from the parties. It doesn' t have to be 5 anything in great length. And I would like the parties also 6 to address the issue in their memo of appropriate penalty, if 7 that is what the decision is. I don' t believe you addressed 8 that in your closing remarks, and you may do so in your memo g if you like, Mr. Thomson. And you, Mr. Byrne, might want to 10 address the issue of gambling device as discussed by Mr. 11 Thomson. 12 MR. BYRNE: I would probably concede that it 's not a � 13 9ambling device. I think it is gambling, and I ' ll briefly do 14 that. 15 THE COURT: That ' s fine, if you ' re conceding that issue on 16 the gambling device. Okay, very good. Then we ' ll adjourn the 17 hearing . How much time do you believe we need for memoranda? lg I assume simultaneous memoranda would be sufficient? Fifteen 19 days? 20 MR. BYRNE: I 'm sorry, your Honor? 21 THE COURT: Fifteen days, two weeks for a memorandum? 22 MR. BYRNE: That 'd be fine. 23 MR. THOMSON: Sure. What would that make the last date? 24 THE COURT: I don' t have my calendar out. We ' ll go off 25 the record and discuss the briefing schedule. The hearing is � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS1S5 66 � � 1 adjourned. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 CERTIFICATION 9 10 This is to certify that the preceding pages comprise a true 11 and correct transcription of the audiomagnetic tape recordings 12 made at the hearing herein held June 29 & 30, 1988 , at � 13 Minneapolis, Minnesota. 14 15 Dated at Minneapolis, Minnesota ,. 16 this 26th day of September, 1988 . J ne I. Hosman, transcriber ]7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 � OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MN SS15S