Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3-12-20 HappyMINUTES FOR LIQUOR AUTHORITY MEETING CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 7500 West 29th Avenue, Municipal Building March 12, 2020 Chair McIntyre called the Liquor Authority Meeting to order at 9:10 a.m. Liquor Authority Members present: Paul Shaver Anthony Davia Bruce McIntyre Cindy Shaw Lenny Ortiz Absent: Carolyn Peterson, Elizabeth Nazarenus (excused), Rocco Germano Also present: Deputy City Clerk Robin Eaton; Assistant City Attorney Joe Rivera; WRPD Detective Charles Hemming; other guests and interested parties APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF February 27, 2020 Motion by Member Shaver to approve the minutes of February 27, 2020, seconded by Member Davia , Motion carried 4-1 with Member Ortiz abstaining. Attorney Rivera stated that with the Chair being recused the board is unable to have a quorum, and as such we are unable to move forward so Item 1 will be continued until the March 26 hearing. (Due to the COVID emergency, this meeting was continued until April 9, 2020) Member Shaver asked to make sure that they still understand that they cannot sell alcohol until their next hearing was affirmed by Mr. Rivera who would follow that up with a phone call to them. Item 2. Introduced by Chair McIntyre Show Cause Hearing on alleged Liquor Code Violations for POBS LLC. dba Happy Liquors, located at 4141 Kipling Street, Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Staff Presentation by Mr. Rivera started by once more giving a summary report of a show cause hearing establishing that it is a mini-trial with opening statements by both sides, questions and evidence by both sides and the authority can ask questions at any time during the hearing. Chair McIntyre opened the public hearing and swore in Mr. Singh Staff report Mr. Rivera gave a brief opening statement to include the names and job descriptions of two witnesses, Officer Van Veen from WRPD and Officer Devereux from West metro Fire Department. Mr. Rivera read the report of the calls for service that was sent by dispatch to the WRPD of a person who was unconscious at the wheel of a vehicle. WRPD contacted the party, who was unable to be roused, determined to be intoxicated and was transported to Lutheran hospital. WRPD then contacted the owner of the liquor store and spoke with the person on the incident. Mr. Singh gave an overview and described that he didn’t know that she was driving as he was talking to the fire department people doing an inspection. She asked for three shooters of alcohol which he sold to her and only after did he learn that she was driving. Firefighter Devereux was called as the first witness who is a lieutenant with west metro fire rescue and is the officer in charge for the C shift that was working when they were called out on January 31, 2020, first for a building inspection at Happy Liquors and then were called back to the facility for an emergency. He gave an overview that during the building inspection, a customer came in that seemed surprised and nervous who mentioned the odd happenings down in Florida. A statement that he took as awkward, he did not assess the person as being disheveled or slurring her speech. They left and at 4:28 they received a call from dispatch for a medical need and upon arriving back to the facility, they found the party in a vehicle that was parked crooked and was nearly unconscious. They performed a sternum rub which she responded to very weakly. She was unable to speak clearly or at all and was throwing up upon herself. He also reported that later he saw shooter bottles in the back of the car, it was about three hours later after first visit and that he smelled the odor of alcohol along with the vomit afterwards. She was transported by Arvada fire to Lutheran hospital and he was100% sure that this was the same person he had contact with inside of the Happy liquor store. No questions were asked of him by either the Board or by Mr. Singh. WRPD Officer Van Veen (VV) was called as a witness and sworn in. Officer VV testified that she was working the swing shift and was dispatched around 4:40pm to the 4100 blk. of Kipling Street. There she found several other WRPD Officers who arrived before her. These Officers and an individual in a car who was mostly unresponsive, had slurred speech and was unable to stand or walk by herself. Describing the person, she spoke with firefighters on scene who recognized the person from an earlier contact at the Happy liquors. Further investigation involved speaking with the manager Mr. Singh and learned from him that she is a regular at the liquor store and he had sold liquor shooters to her earlier in the day. Shooters were described as being similar to those types of bottles used in airlines. Looking at her report, she did not notice any alcohol in the car but she was informed by other officers that there were shooter bottles inside the vehicle. She later asked Mr. Singh to what level he perceived the person’s alcohol was when he sold the shooters to the person. He responded at or around a six or seven on a scale of 1-10 with 10 being the most intoxicated. She viewed the store security recording and observed a person matching the individual purchasing said alcohol at a timestamp of 2:30. Body worn camera from Officer VV was entered into evidence and shown to the board. Mr. Rivera finished with his questioning and asked if there were others. Member Shaver asked if the car was running and Officer VV stated other officers had turned it off before she had arrived. A DUI doesn’t require it being turned on. Member Davia asked if the person did in fact receive a DUI which was affirmed by the Officer. Mr. Singh did not testify on his behalf or ask any questions but gave a statement that he wanted to guess she wasn’t drunk but had been drinking. She was able to talk to the fire department. Board had no further questions Both the City and defendant rested. Closing statement was given by Mr. Rivera indicating that being there were conflicting facts, the board had to use their best life experiences and common sense to come to a conclusion. He went over the facts of the case and left it to the board’s discretion. Evidence portion was closed Discussion followed Member Davia had a problem with the time line, believing that lots of time had lapsed between when she purchased the alcohol and when she was found slumped over in the car, which was agreed with by Member Shaver. Mr. Rivera asked for more discussion. Member Ortiz stated his concerns with the time line also and expressed his opinion that a lot of time had gone by for her to be so drunk on such little amount of alcohol sold and wondered, along with Mr. Shaver, if she hadn’t gone to the bar next door. Motion by Member Davia that a violation did not occur, seconded by Member Ortiz, motion carried 4-1 with Member Shaw voting no.