02-922CouncIl File # oa- aa
ORIGINAL
Presented By
Referred To
Green Sheet # �'�to3'� 4 a..,
RESOLUTION
CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA at
Committee: Date
RESOLVED, that the application by Lucky Staz, Inc., d/b/a Bangkok City Supper Club
for Liquor On-Sale, Sunday On-Sale, Restaurant, Entertaitunent, Liquor Extension of Service
(Patio), Cigazette/Tobacco and Dance Hall licenses for the premises located at 733 Pierce Butler
Route is hereby denied, based upon Saint Paul Legislative Code §310.06(b)(8).
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the findings of fact and conclusions of law contained in the
ALJ Report in this case dated August 2, 2002 are adopted as the written findings and conclusion
of the Council in this matter.
This Resolution is based on the record of the proceedings before the ALJ, including the
hearing on June 5, 2002, the documents and eachibits introduced therein, the findings of fact and
conclusions of law of the ALJ as referenced above and the deliberations of the Council in open
session at the public hearing on August 28, 2002.
A copy of this Resolution, as adopted, shall be sent by first class mail to the
Administrative Law Judge and to Karin L. Fanfulik, attorney for the Applicant.
�
OFFICE oF LIEP Date: GREEN SHEET
Roger Curtis, Director september 19, 2ooz
266-9013 No . 403342
1 BPPRTMSNT DIRHClOR ITY COUNCZL
.ma� 2 ITY ATPORNGY ITY QSRK
ust be on Council Agenda: E'1' DI�croR IN. & MGT. SVC. DIR.
s soon as ossible 3 YOR (OR ASSISTANT)
OTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGSS 1 (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE)
CTION REQUESTED: That the application by Lucky Star, Inc., d/b/a Bangkok City
Supper Club for Liquor On Sale, Sunday On Sale, Restaurant, Entertainment,
iquor Extension of Service (Patio), Cigarette/Tobacco and Dance Hall licenses
for the premises located at 733 Pierce Butler Route be denied, and that the
findings of fact and conclusions of law contained in the A.L.J. Report in this
case dated August 2, 2002 be adopted as the written findings and conclusions of
the Council on this matter
CONuNGNDATIONS: APPROVE (A) OR REJECT m) SRSONAL SBRVICB CONTRACTS MUST ANSWSR TSffi FOLL9WING:
PLPNNING CONAfISSION CIVIL SERVICS CONAtISSION 1. Has the person/£irm ever worked under a contract for this department?
CIB COMNITTEE _ BU31NESS REVIEW COUNCIL YES NO
STAFF _ Has this person/firm ever been a City employee?
DISSRICT COURT _ YES NO
3. Doea this person/firm possess a skill not noxmally possesaed by any
SUPPORTS WHICH WUNCIL oBJ&CTIVE? Current City employee?
YES NO
lain all Y8S aaswers on a aeparate sLeet aad attach.
INITIATING PROBLEM, ISStTE, OPPORTUNITY (Who, What, When, Where, Why): License
Zenial based,on the record of the proceedings before the A.L.J., including the
earing on June 5, 2002, the documents and exhibits introduced therein, the
findings of fact and conclusions of law of the A.L.J. and the deliberations of
the Council in open session at the publia he�ring.on August 28, 2002.
VANTAGES IF APPROVED:
��2�� ��'�a��
ISADVANTAGES IF APPROVED:
��� � � ���
ISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED:
TOTAL AMOUNT OF TR.F�NSACTION $ COST%REVENUE BUDGETED YES NO
FUNDING SOURCE ACTIVITY NUMBER
FINANCIAL INFORMATION: (EXPLAIN)
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORi�IEY �� ^ �� y
MnnuelJ. Cervnrttes, City Artorney
5g _
CITY OF SAINT PAUL c�v,1D;�.r�;a„
RanAy G Kelly, Mnyor 400 City Ha71
I S Wut Kellogg BfvA.
Saini Paul, .4firsnuota 55J0?
AUg115Y �I, 2002.
NOTICE OF COUNCIL HEARING
Karin L. Fanfulik
Attomey at Law
182 Mackubin Street, #6
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
Telephone: 6512668J10
Fncsimife: 651 298-5619
RE: Application for Liquor On-Sale, Sunday On-Sale, Restaurant, Entertainment, Liquor.
Extension of Service, Patio, CigarettelTobacco and Dance Hall Licenses by Lucky Star,
Inc. d/b/a Bangkok City Supper Club for the premises located at 733 Pierce Butler Route
License ID #: 19980009120
Dear Ms. Fanfulik:
Please take notice that a hearing on the report of the Administrative La�v Judge
concerning the above-mentioned violation has been scheduled for 5:30 p.m., R'ednesday,
August 28, 2002, in the City Council Chambers, Third Floor, Saint Paul City Hall and Ramsey
County Courthouse.
You have the opportunity to file exceptions to the report with the City Clerk at any time
during normal business hours. You may also present oral or written argument to the council at
the Hearing. No new evidence will be received or testimony taken at this hearin�. The Council
will base its decision on the record of the proceedings before the Administrative Law Judge and
on the arguments made and exceptions filed, but may depart from the recommendations of such
Judge as permitted by law in the exercise of its judgement and discretion.
Sincerely,
�/ _ �{�c ,��,��
Virgini�Palmer
Assistant City Attomey
cc: Nancy Anderson, Assistant Council Secretary, 310 City Hall
Christine Rozek, LIEP
Kristen Kidder and Tait Danielson, Thomas-Dale/Dist.7 Planning Council, 689 iv'. Dale
St., St. Paul, NN 55103-1644
Johnny Howard, Exec. Director,Thomas Dale Block Clubs, 1034 Lafond Ave., St. Paul,
M1V 55104
Debra Shambo, Block Club Leader, 743 Englewood Ave., St. Paul, �IIvT » 104
Helen Broderick, Block Club Leader, 79� Pierce Butler Route, St. Paul, �1N 55104
AA-ADA-EEO Employer
o�_K a�a-
OAH Docket No. 4-6020-14825-3
STATE OF MINNESOTA
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
FOR THE ST. PAUL CITY COUNCIL
In the Matter of the Applicafion for Liquor On-Sale,
Sunday On-Sale, Restaurant, Entertainment,
Liquor E�ension of Service, Patio, Cigarette/
i obacco and aance i-iaii Licenses by Lucicy Siar,
Inc., d/b/a Bangkok City Supper Club for premises
located at 733 Pierce Butier Route
License ID # 19980009120
FINDINGS OF FACT,
CONCLUSIONS AND
RcCO�ii�itiv�a i ICiniS
Administrative Law Judge Bruce H. Johnson conducted a hearing in this
matter beginning at 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, June 5, 2002, in Room 41-A, St.
Paul City Hall, 15 West Kellogg Boulevard, St. Paul, Minnesota.
Virginia D. Palmer, Assistant City Attorney, 400 City Hall, 15 West Kellogg
Boulevard, St. Paul, MN 55102, represented the City of St. Paul (the City) at the
hearing. Karin L. Fanfulik, Attorney at Law, 182 Mackubin St., #6, St. Paul,
Minnesota 55102, represented the Applicant Lucky Star, Inc., d/b/a Bangkok
City Supper Club. The record closed on July 5, 2002, when all of the parties
post-hearing submissions were due.
This Report is a recommendation, not a final decision. The City Council of
the City of St. Paul will make the final decision after reviewing the hearing record.
?ne Councii may adopt, reject or modify these I=indings of Fact, Conclusions,
and Recommendations. Under the City's Legislative Code,' the Council will not
make its final decision until after it has provided the licensee an opportunity to
present oral or written arguments alleging error on the part of the Administrative
Law Judge in the application of the law or interpretation of the facts and to
present argument related to the recommended adverse action. Parties should
contact the City Clerk's Office, City of St. Paul, 170 City Hall, 15 West Kellogg
Boulevard, St. Paul, MN 55102, to find out how to file objections or present
argument.
' St. Paul Legislative Code, section 310.05 (c) (2001). (Unless otherwise specified, all
references to that code are to the 2001 edition.)
��, �t a a--
STATEMEPIT OF THE ISSUE
Whether the City Council should grant or deny Bangkok City's license
applications.
Based upon the record in this matter, the Administrative Law Judge
makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Phoenix Flight, Inc. (Phoenix Flight), owns certain real property
located at 733 Pierce Butier Route in the City of St. Paul (the City). For several
years, Phoenix Flight held on-sale liquar and other related business licenses
irom the Ci"ry that enaoled ii to opera4e a bar, supper ciub, and `oanquet and
rental hall, on those premises, which was known as Ciub Metro?
2. The premises at 733 Pierce Butler Route are located in what is
known as the Frogtown area of St. Paul, which is part of the St. Paul Police
DepartmenYs Western District patrol area.
3. While Phoenix Flight was operating the premises as Club Metro, it
did not sponsor social events that specifically solicited the attendance of persons
under the age of 21 years. And no parts of the premises were specifically set
aside for use by persons under the age of 21. Rather, Club Metro tended to be
patronized by older adults, including some residents of the immediate
neighborhood."
4. When the business was operated as Club Metro, it often attracted
large numbers of patrons—particularly on Friday and Saturday nights.
Nevertheless, police cails and neighborhood complaints relating to its business
operations were infrequent. The calls that the police received relating to Club
Metro consisted mainly of reports of property crimes, such as break-ins and
damage to the vehicles of customers parked in the adjacent parking lots. There
was one complaint of prostitution that turned out to be unsubstantiated.'
5. Also, when the business was operated as Club Metro, there were
no significant probiems with noise coming from the establishment or with alcohol
2 Exhibit 15; testimony of Kristina Schweinier.
3 Testimony of Commander Tyrone Strickland.
^ Testimony of Helen Broderick.
5 Id.; testimony of Officer Soren Mahowald, O�cer Sue Drutschmann, and Molly Quinn.
6 Testimony of Offcers Saren Mahowaid and Offcer Sue Drutschmann.
' Testimony of Commander Tyrone Strickland.
6��
6 _q �a-a-
containers and other trash associated with the business littering its parking lots
or other properties in the neighborhood 8
6. Lucky Star, Inc., (Lucky Star) doing business as Bangkok Cify
Supper Club, is also a M+nnesota corporatian. On October 31, 2001, Lucky Star
entered info a management agreement to operate Phoenix FlighYs business at
733 Pierce Butler Route under the name of Bangkok City Supper Club (Bangkok
City or the Club). it was the intention of the parties that Lucky Star would
continue to operate the business under the management agreement untii it was
able to obtain liquor and other necessary City licenses in its own name. The
parties then plan to negotiate a sale of the business to Lucky Star.
7. Shortly after the Management agreement between Lucky Star and
Phoenix Flight was signed, the owners of Lucky Star submitted appl+cations to
the Ciky fc; the liq::o� and other relateu� busines� licerses ^cC^cSS2�3 �C BiiGiiJ
Lucky Star to acquire ownership of the business and to operate it in its own
name.
8. On November 9, 2001, Lucky Star, acting under the management
agreement, reopened the establishment at 733 Pierce Butier Route as Bangkok
City and began operating a bar, supper ciub, and dance hall on the premises."
9. Situated on the north side of Pierce Butier Route between St.
Albans and Grotto, Bangkok City is located between two commercial
establishments and across the street from a park and playground. There are,
however, residences immediately west of the Club on Pierce Butier Roufe and
on Englewood Avenue.'
10. There are three relatively large parking lots on the Club's west,
north and east sides. The building has two levels. The first floor contains two
bars from which aicoholic beverages are served, several tables and a dance
floor and stage. The Club's policy is to only permit persons 21 years old and
older to occupy the first floor. A lower floor contains a dance floor area and
recreational area with pool tables and other games. Persons between 18 and 21
years oid areas are permiited in those areas. But the lower floor also confains a
e Testimony of Molly Quinn and Debra Schambo.
9 Exhibit 1.
10 Testimony of Kristina Schweinler; Exhibits 16, 17, and 18.
" Testimony of Chao Lee.
12 Exhibit 13. See a/so photographs attached to Exhibits E and H.
"Id.: ExhibitG.
��
��_� a�-
small bar area where alcoholic beverages are served and that is restricted to
persons 21 years old and older."
11. On the evening of November 9, 2002, Sergeant Eugene Polyak of
the St. Paul Police Department was working in plain ciofhes in the Western
District's Vice Unit on a special defaii that had been assigned to prevent and
curtail underage drinking. During the early evening hours, he saw a long line of
young people lined up to attend fhe Bangkok City's opening night. As he
entered the Club's crowded main floor about 10:30 p.m., a fighf involving about
twenty persons broke out, with several of the participants striking someone on
fhe floor with beer bottles. Three or four security personnel were attempting to
break up the fight. The security personnel were outnumbered and were unable
to control the participants in the fight.
�L. r�.S CG(iGiiiOilS Ii1Siv2 t�'iZ 8$ia�iiiS�'�T2i7i 172Cca�iiE ircre�singly
chaofic, Sergeant Polyak left the building to obtain assistance. As he was
leaving, Sergeant James Misencik, the midnight shift patrol supervisor was
arriving at the scene. Sergeant Misencik calfed for back-up squads to assist in
quelling the disturbance. Then while he and Sergeant Polyak were stiil in the
adjacent parking lot, someone inside the bar sprayed the entire crowd with
mace, causing several dozens of patrons to come out of the bar in acute
distress.
13. When the back-up squads arrived, Sergeants Polyak and Misencik
re-entered the bar with the responding officers, and they were abie to quell the
initial disturbance. As the responding o�cers were preparing to leave, a second
fight broke out. They also succeeded in quelling that second disturbance.
Meanwhile, Sergeant Polyak discovered two minors on the main floor who were
consuming alcohol and cited both for underage drinking. Later, some patrons
attempted to start yet a third fight, and the responding officers, with the owners'
concurrence, closed the bar and directed ail of the patrons out of the premises."
14. In the early morning hours of December 22, 2001 at approximately
12:41 a.m., St. Paul police responded to a call reporting shots fired at Bangkok
Cify.'� Upon investigation, one of the Ciub's security officers reported that he
was attempting to break up a fight in the Club's basement when the fight spilied
out into the adjacent parking lot. While in the parking lot, the security guard saw
an individual get out of a car parked in the lot and fire two rounds from a biack,
'" Exhibit G.
15 Exhibit 2; testimony of Commander Eugene Polyak. Officer Polyak was subsequenUy
promoted to Commander and currently heads the Western DistricYs Investigations Unit.
16 Exhibit 2. Testimony of Commander Eugene Polyak and Sergeant James Misencik.
" Id.
' Testimony of Officer Timothy Bohn; Exhibit 2.
G�
oa_� a-a-
semi-automatic handgun into the air. After that, someone else got out of anofher
car and fired five rounds into the air. Then, both shooters got into their
respective cars and drove away. The police recovered empty shell casings from
fhe parking lot.
15. In the eariy morning hours of January 13, 2002 at about 1:07 a.m.,
Officer Soren Mahowald was on routine patroi in the City's Frogtown
neighborhood when he was dispatched to Bangkok City to respond to another
call of shots fired. Officer Mahowald was unable to substantiate that shots had
been fired. But he did encounter a group of twenty to thirty individuals in the
parking lot who were preparing to engage in a fight. Further investigation
disclosed that there had been about ten fights inside the Club and two in the
adjacent parking lot that evening. Club security officers had used mace to
disperse the crowd inside the Club. Officer Mahowald, six other patrol units, and
one K-9 unit spent about haif an hours dispersing the crowd and clearing the
Club's parking Iots
16. Between November 9, 2001, and January 30, 2002, the St. Paul
Police Department received twenty-nine complaints or requests for assistance at
Bangkok City, involving fights, assaults, other disturbances, or violations of liquor
laws. Those complaints and calis resulted in eight police reports.
17. During the month of January 2002, there were several occasions
when the music being played by bands at Bangkok City was so loud that it
disturbed neighbors through closed windows a block and one-half away. On
occasions, the music has been so loud that it has caused damage to the Club's
sound systems. The bands or disc jockeys that pertorm at the Club have
generaily been aliowed to control the loudness of the sound systems. On
occasions, however, the Club has hired a sound technician to assess the
loudness of the music and to help the bands estabiish loudness at tolerable
levels.
18. Many patrons of Bangkok City park on the streets in ad}'acent
residential neighborhoods. Patrons aiso have been using nearby Englewood
t�venue as an after-hours hangout after the Club closes for business. In that
regard, Ciub patrons frequentiy consume alcoholic beverages in or near vehicles
parked on Englewood Avenue and discard alcoholic beverage containers and
79 Exhibit 3.
20 Exhibit 4.
zt Exhibit 5.
ZZ ld.; testimony of Debra Schambo and Moily Quinn.
23 Testimony of Chao Lee.
za Id.
-5-
o a..-� �-�—
other litter on the lawns of neighborhood residents. Lucky Star has begun
hiring a janitorial service to remove alcoholic beverage containers and other litter
on Saturday and Sunday mornings.
19. On February 5, 2002, fhe St. Paul Department of License,
tnspections & Environmental Protection (L1EP) hefd a meeting with Lucky Star's
owners, which inciuded the Saint Paul Police Department, Iicense inspectors,
and neighbors to discuss the complaints fhat they had been receiving about the
operation of the Bangkok City Supper Ciub?' As a resuft of that meeting, LIEP
proposed that the following eleven conditions be incorporated into any liquor
license that might be granted by the City:
a. Alf patrons will be checked for weapons {wanded) prior to
entry.
b. �xisting exteric� viueo cameras rr�ust be or a�d working
during ai1 hours of operation. Digital images wiif be
maintained for at least 14 days. Date and times must be
correct and available to police and inspectors.
c. Patrons will not be allowed to loiter in the parking area.
d. Licensee will improve the lighting in the rear of the
establishment by October 31, 2002.
e. A locked fence will be built to secure the dumpsters by June
1, 2002.
f. All employees and management will attend alcohol
awareness training.
g. Wristbands will be used to identify patrons over the age of
21. No alcohol will be allowed in the area where patrons
under the age of 21 are allowed.
h. Ail alcohol will be secured and unavailable for display or sale
by 1:00 a.m.
i. Dress codes wiil be enforced at all times. No gang colors or
apparel will be allowed.
j. All advertising for college or under 21 night will contain a
disclaimer indicating that those under the age of 21 will not
be allowed to purchase or consume alcohol.
25 Testimony of Debra Schambo and Molly Quinn; letter of Laurel Arnold and Scott Hreha
(attached to Exhibit 8).
26 Testimony of Chao Lee.
27 Exhibit 7; testimony of Kristina Schweinler.
�
�a- �a
k. Glasses, bottles and beverages will not be allowed to leave
the liquor service area.
20. On February 23, 2002, Officer Sue Drutschmann responded to a
complaint that there was yeiling in the parking lot of Bangkok City and drag
racing in the vicinity. Officer Drutschmann was unable to substantiate any drag
racing, but she did see several people miliing around in the parking lot. Upon
further investigation, she learned from Ciub security staff that a fight had broken
out, that chairs had been thrown, and that security staff had encountered
di�cuity in removing the participants from the premises. Some minor injuries
resulted from the incident. On average, Officer Drutschmann has responded to
twice as many fight calls at Bangkok City as any of the fifty other bars in her
patrol area.
21. Commander Tyrone Strickland is ine St. Faul Pofice Gepa:imeni`s
Patrol Commander for the Western Qistrict. Because of the large number of
police calls and complaints originating from Bangkok City, that estab{ishment has
been designated a"problem bar" within the Western District. Based on his own
observations at the Club and the information he has received from the several
police investigations into incidents, it is Commander Strickland's opinion that
overcrowding is a significant contributing factor in the prob(ems that have
occurred at Bangkok City.
22. On March 19, 2002, a legislative hearing officer employed by the
City conducted a legislative hearing on Lucky Star's license applications in Room
330 of the Ramsey County Courthouse for the purpose of hearing objections to
issuance of Iicenses. At the legislative hearing, Tait Danielson, lead organizer
for the District 7 Planning Council, testified and submitted a petition from the
Council's Social Concerns Committee requesting that five conditions, in addition
to the efeven conditions being proposed by LIEP, be imposed on any liquor
license granted to Lucky Star for operation of Bangkok City. Those additionai
conditions were:
a. No one under 21 allowed on the premises
b. The perimeter plus fifty feet cieaned ciaily
c. At least two off duty St. Paul Police Officers posted outside
the business on Friday and Saturday evenings
d. All music contained inside the buildings
28 Exhibit 5.
29 Exhibit 6; testimony of Officer Sue Drutschmann.
30 Testimony of Offcer Sue Drutschmann.
37 7estimony of Commander Tyrone Strickland.
32 Exhibit 9.
-7-
b �,�`1 a-a'
e. Closing time no later fhan 1:30 a.m.
The petition was signed by thirty-two neighborhood residenfs.
23. !n addition to Mr. Danielson, six neighborhood tesidents appeared
at the hearing and expressed complaints about the Bangkok City's operations.
Kristina Schweinler provided information to the legislative hearing officer about
Lucky Sta�'s dealings with LIEP. Commander Strickland provided information
about the St. Paul Police DepartmenYs dealings with Bangkok City, and he
expressed his opinion that marketing the establishment to young adults between
the ages of 18 and 21 was the cause of many of the police problems that had
occurred there.�'
24. Lucky Star is unwilling to agree to all of the five additional
conditions being prcposed hy th DISiCI 7 Pl��ning Council. !t is pa�ticular{y
reluctant to curtail marketing the establishment to young adults, ages 18 to 21,
because that age group represents forty to fifty percent of all patrons and is the
financial backbone of the business.
25. Lucky Star has been taking the following steps to eliminate or
reduce the problems that have resulted from its operations of Bangkok City:
a. Hiring two off duty police officers for security in the Club's adjacent
parking lots on Friday and Saturday nights;
b. Maintaining a surveillance camera in the parking lot;
c. Maintaining sixteen security personnel inside the premises, with
addit+onal security for special events;
d. Having a metal detector available for wanding patrons when
entering the premises;
e. Requiring a dress code for patrons;
f. Supplying identifying wrist bands for patrons over the age of 21;
g. Having security staff clear out the parking lot after closing;
h. Having the manager monitor the loudness of music and directing
disc jockeys not to alter the loudness settings on sound equipment;
� Exhibit 8.
34 Exhibit 9.
3s Testimony of Chao Lee and Tou Lee Yang.
� Testimony of Chou Lee, Mai Her, and Tou Lee Yang and exhibits as noted below.
37 See also Exhibit D.
3e See also Exhibit B.
�
� a �� a-a—
Hiring two cleaning staff to clean the premises and adjacent
parking lot in the morning. Having fhem remove lifter from the
neighborhood on Saturday and Sunday mornings;
j. Arsanging for an occasiona{ visit from a sound technician to monitor
sound equipment and noise leveis; and
k. Obtained bid for fencing to contain dumpsters.
26. Additiona4ly, in mid-May 2002, Lucky Star contacted Mifes Canning,
an expert in conducting alcohol awareness training, to arrange for such training
for Bangkok City's management and security staff. Mr. Canning conducted that
training on Saturday, June 1, 2002."
27. At the hearing, Mr. Canning expressed his opinion that since
Sangkok Cir,� Supper Club is nct si;ua�ed �iracily in a residen��ai area, �ui ratner
is a free-standing building in the immediate vicinity of a commercial and industrial
area, it is a good location for an enterprise of its kind. It was also his opinion that
it was feasibfe, with proper precautions, for Bangkok City to make its premises
available to 18 to 21 year olds while minimizing any risk of underage drinking or
unruly behavior. Finally, it was Mr. Canning's observation that it was diffcuit for
an establishment to control the behavior of patrons in adjacent parking lots and
probably not feasible for an establishment to control the behavior of patrons in
surrounding neighborhoods.
28. After conducting the legislative hearing on March 19, 2002, the
City's legislative hearing officer considered three options: (1) recommending that
the City Council approve of Lucky Star's license application without conditions;
(2) recommending that the Council approve the application with the conditions
that were proposed by LIEP and the District 7 Pianning Council; and (3) referring
the matter to an administrative law judge for a formai hearing and a report and
recommendetion to the City Council. She fegislative hearing officer rejected the
first options because of all the concerns fhat had been raised by the police
department, LIEP, and neighborhood residents. He rejected the second option
because of a belief that the sixteen conditions being proposed by LIEP and
Dis;rict 7 could no: be ef;eciively monito�ec and enfiorced. So the legisiative
hearing offcer selected the third option.
as See also Exhibit C.
40 See also Exhibit F.
41 Testimony of Miies Canning; see Exhibits J and K.
42 Testimony of Miles Canning.
�
C a--_� � 2 �
29. On April 4, 2002, the City issued a Notice of Hearing in this matter
and this administrative proceeding ensued.
30. These Findings are based on ali of the evidence in the record.
Citafions to portions of the record are not intended to be exclusive references.
31. The Administrative Law Judge adopts as Findings any Conclusions
fhat are more appropriately described as Findings.
32. To the extent that the Memorandum that follows contains findings
of fact, the Administrative Law Judge hereby adopts them as such.
Based upon these Findings of Fact, the Administrative Law Judge makes
the following:
CONGLUSIONS
1. Minnesota law and the St. Paul Legislative Code give fhe
Administrative Law Judge and the St. Paul City Council authority to conduct this
proceeding, to consider whether the license applications of Lucky Star shouid be
granted or denied, and to make findings, conclusions, and recommendations or
orders on that subject, as the case may be.
2. The City gave Lucky Star proper and timely notice of the hearing in
this matter, and the City has complied with all of the law's substantive and
procedural requirements for initiating and proceeding with this matter.
3. The St. Paul Legislative Code authorizes the City Council to take
"adverse action" against an applicant for reasons that are specified by the
Code as
4. "Adverse action" means, among other things, "the denial of an
application for the grant, issuance or renewal of a license." It also inciudes
"disapprovaf of {icenses issued by the state under statutory provisions which
permit the governing body to disapprove the issuance of the license."
43 Exhibit 10.
d Minnesota Statutes, § 14.50 and St. Paul Legisiative Code, § 310.05. Unless otherwise
specified, all references to Minnesota Statutes are to the 2000 edition.
45 St. Paul Legislative Code, § 310.06 (a).
46 St. Paul Legislative Code, § 310.01.
a� !d.
-10-
�a��a�
5. One of the reasons for which the City Council may deny license
appiications is where "[t]he licensed business, or the way in which such business
is operated, maintains or permits conditions that unreasonably annoy, injure or
endanger the safety, health, morals, comfort or repose of any considerable
number of inembers of the public."
6. Also, the Code authorizes the Cify Councii to impose conditions on
licenses that it decides to issue:
When a reasonable basis is found to impose reasonabie conditions
and/or restrictions upon a license issued or held under these
chapters, any one (1) or more such reasonabie conditions and/or
restrictions may be imposed upon such license for the purpose of
promoting public health, safety and welfare, of advancing the public
peace and the eiimination ofi conditions or ac±ions that constitute a
nuisance or a detriment to the peaceful enjoyment of urban life, or
promoting security and safety in nearby neighborhoods. Such
reasonable conditions and/or restrictions may include or pertain to,
but are not limited to:
(1) A limitation on the hours of operation of the licensed business
or establishment, or on particular types of activities conducted in or
on said business or establishment;
(2) A limitation or restriction as to the location within the licensed
business or estabiishment where particular types of activities may
be conducted;
(3) A limitation as to the means of ingress or egress from the
licensed establishment or its parking lot or immediately adjacent
area;
(4) A requirement to provide off-street parking in excess of other
requirements of law;
(5) A limitation on the manner and means of advertising the
operation or merchandise of the licensed establishment;
(6) Any other reasonable condition or restriction limiting the
operation of the licensed business or establishment to ensure that
the business or establishment wiil harmonize with the character of
the area in which it is located, or to prevent the development or
continuation of a nuisance.
4e St. Paul Legislative Code, § 310.06 (b)(8).
49 St. Paul Legislative Code, § 310.06 (c).
-11-
� �.. `� a-�
7. The City has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the
evidence that the way in which Lucky Star has operated Bangkok Ciry mainfains
or permits conditions that unreasonably annoy, injure or endanger the safety,
health, morals, comfort or repose of any considerable number of inembers of the
public. The City met that burden in this proceeding.
8. The way in which Lucky Star Bangkok City has been operating its
music and sound systems in Bangkok City has created an unreasonable
annoyance and nuisance in surrounding neighborhoods.
9. By collocating in its basement a bar where intoxicating liquor is sold
along with entertainment programs aimed at attracting large numbers of young
people under the age of 21, Bangkok City has creafed conditions that facilitate
the potential for underage drinking and, therefore, unreasonably endanger the
safeiy, health, and morals or larye numb2;s of ihose young peoole and other
members of the public.
10. Many of Bangkok City's patrons park on nearby residential streets.
After the Club closes for the night, some patrons who park there continue or
begin drinking alcoholic beverages in their vehicles and litter the neighborhoods
with alcoholic beverage containers and other trash.
11. Lucky Star's business strategy is to solicit the patronage of large
numbers of young adults who are between 18 and 21 years old, as well as 21
years old and older. That business strategy had resulted in patronage by both
groups of young adults in numbers that exceed Bangkok City's ability to control
their conduct and, as a result, has created a nuisance in adjoining residential
neighborhoods.
12. Minnesota law provides that no license to seil alcoholic beverages
may be issued unless the applicant shows, to the satisfaction of the governing
body that issuance would be in the public interest.
13. Lucky Star has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the
eviclence that issuance of liquor licenses to it would be in the public interest.
Lucky Star has failed to meet that burden in this proceeding.
14. Issuing licenses to Lucky Star under prevailing conditions to enable
it to sell alcoholic beverages at Bangkok City would be detrimental to the public
good and would therefore not be in the public interest.
15. The Administrative Law Judge adopts as Conclusions any Findings
that are more appropriately described as Conclusions.
so Minn. Stat. § 340A.412, subd. 1(bj.
-12-
�a._ya
16. The Memorandum that foilows explains the reasons for these
Conclusions, and to fhat extent, the Adminisfrative Law Judge incorporates thaf
Memorandum into these Conclusions.
Based upon these Conclusions, fhe Administrative Law Judge makes the
fiollowing:
RECOMMENDATION
The Administrative Law Judge respectfully recommends that the St. Paui
City Council DENY the license applications of Lucky Star, Inc.
Dated this 2nd day of August 2002.
Administrative Law
-13-
oa -� a-a-
MEMORANDUM
The authority to reguiate the sale ofi alcoholic beverages within the stafe,
including granting licenses to sell them, resides in fhe first instance with the
Iegislature. No one has a right to receive a license to seil alcoholic beverages.
Whether or not fo grant a license "rests in the sound discretion° of the licensing
authority. That discretion is not unlimited. Rejecfion of an appiication for a
liquor license cannot be "arbitrary and capricious"—that is, it must be the resulf
of a process "of examination and consideration ... and not a mere expression of
personal will:'
In Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 340A, the legislature largely delegated the
authority and discretion to grant liquor licenses to municipalities, such as the City
of St. Paul. But when it did so, it placed a number of statutory lim;tations on that
authority and discre�ion, among which �vas the requirement that
(n]o {icense may be issued, transferred, or renewed if the
results of the invesfigation show, to the satisfaction of the
governing body, that issuance, transfer, or renewal would not be in
the public interest. [Emphasis suppiied.]
So, here, the City Council does not have the discretion to issue a liquor license
uniess it is satisfied that issuing the license wili promote the public interest. Put
another way, the Council has an atfirmative duty to ensure that operation ofi a
business so licensed will not be "detrimental to the public good.^ss
Lucky Star relies on Wajda v. City of Minneapolis to support its argument
that denial of its license applications would be an abuse of discretion. In Wajda
the Minnesota Supreme Court found that denial of a liquor license application
was arbitrary and capricious where the premises were a suitable location for a
tavern and where the applicanf had former{y operated a tavern there for severaf
years without complaint or incident. The evidence had only established that an
intervening owner had committed several licensing violations and had allowed
the establishment to become a neighborhood nuisance. 1Nhat fhe court, in
effect, rejected was the city's argument that the reputation of the premises had
become irreparably tainted. But W'a}da is inapposite to fhe facts of this case.
Here, the evidence established that a prior owner had operated a bar on the
premises for several years without it becoming a police probfem or a
51 Paron v. City of Shakopee, 32 N.W.2d 603, 606 (Minn. 7948).
52 Id. at 609;
s ' Id. at 610.
�^ Minn. Stat. § 340A.412, subd. 1(b).
u Sabes v. City of Minneapolis, 120 N.W.2d 871, 875 (Minn. 1963).
s6 246 N.W.2d 455 (Minn. 1976).
-14
� a�����
neighborhood nuisance. And it was only under the current applicant fhat
significant problems have begun fo arise. Subsequently, in Country Liquors, lnc_
v. City of Minneapolis, the Minnesota Supreme Court made if clear thaf it was
entirely appropriate for a licensing authority to base denial of a liquor iicense on
community objections relating directiy fo the proposed operations of the current
applicant, as opposed to acfions or operations of some prior operator of the
establishment:
On the facts of this case, the city council's decision to deny
appellant's transfer application can hardly be described as arbitrary
or capricious. The council's action was fhe resuit of specific
objections raised by community residents whose lives would be
directly affected by the proposed liquor outlet. We would be
seriously misguided to characterize the counci!'s sensitivity toward
the special concerns of t�e nortPz Minneapolis community as
arbitrariness. Indeed, the very reason for allowing the council
substantial latitude in these matters is to permit adequate
consideration of unusual circumstances.
The neighborhood objections in Country Liquors were based on incompatibility of
a tavern with surrounding land uses. But in Anton's, lnc. v. City of Minneapolis,
the court of appeals dealt specifically with neighborhood objections based on the
potentiai for "late night activity which would disturb residents of the
neighborhood." It heid that such potential was a sufficient basis for the
{icensing authority to deny upgrade of a liquor ficense to a license that permitted
on-site entertainment.
This case, unlike either Country Liquors or Anton's, goes beyond the
potential for neighborhood nuisance. tn less than six months, Lucky Star's
operation of the premises has established a history of neighborhood nuisance
activities. There have been repeated fights on the premises that on occasions
have spilled out into the adjacent parking lots. There has been a continuing
problem with music so loud that it can be heard two blocks away through closed
windows and, by Lucky Star's own admission, occasionaily damages its own
sound systems. Although there are three large parking lots immediately adjacent
to the premises, crowds are such that patrons are parking in the adjoining
neighborhood two or more biocks away. Patrons who park there are drinking in
their vehicies after ciosing and are throwing alcoholic beverage containers and
other litter onto residents' lawns. They are also loud and boisterous at times. In
short, uniike earlier cases where denial of liquor license applications has been
5 ' 264 N.W2d 821 (Minn. 1978).
58 Id. at 824.
59 375 N.W.2d 504 (Minn.App. 1985).
G Id. at 507.
-15-
,
�a �°�a a-
upheld, neighborhood objections here are actualiy grounded in fact and not in
speculation or the mere potential for problems.
Past perFormance is generaily acknowiedged to be a reliabie indicator of
future perFormance. By that measure, prospecfs that Lucky Star will be able to
operate the premises located at 733 Pierce Butler Roufe in a way that is
reasonably trouble-free are not encouraging. Although it has taken some
measures to address the problems that have occurred and is proposing ofher
such measures, it has achieved only limited success to date.
In view of the police officers who testified, one of the main problems here
is the format that Lucky Star has chosen for operafion of its establishment. If is
attempting to build its business around attracting large numbers of patrons from
two different groups of young adults whose behavior can be challenging in the
oest of circumstances. About haif of its target clientele are between 18 and 21
years old and are unable to Iegally drink alcoholic beverages. The other half of
its target clientele are older than 21 and are legally able to drink aicohol. Lucky
Star is attempting to segregate the younger group of patrons from the older
group by confining the younger group to the basement. But it still insists on
serving alcohol in the basement to patrons of legal age who may wish to
participate in the entertainment there. Social relationships between young
people tend to cross the barrier of the legal drinking age. The history at the
Bangkok City has been that the interactions between those two groups of young
people have frequentiy resulted in behavior that is out of control and
inappropriate. That behavior has frequently spilied out of the premises and into
the adjoining neighborhood where it has disturbed the peace of residents. In
short, the evidence indicates that the Bangkok City's physical fayout, operational
format, and marketing efforts have attracted large crowds and an age mix of
patrons whose behavior cannot be effectively confrolied. The ALJ therefore
recommends that the City Council deny Lucky Star's applications for a license to
serve alcoholic beverages.
B. H. J.
SI:�