Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 08/02/04 Special Public Meeting August 2, 2004 Present: Tom Stone Am Menconi Michael Gallagher Jack Ingstad Diane Mauriello Bryan Treu Teak Simonton Don DuBois Chairman Commissioner Commissioner County Administrator County Attorney Assistant County Attorney Clerk to the Board Cortlrr1iSsionerMenconi motioned to convene as Eagle County Liquor Licensing Authority Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous. Executive Session Commissioner Gallagher moved that Liquor Licensing Authority adjoum into Executive Session pursuant to C.R.S. 24~6A02(4)(b) for purposes of receiving legal advice concerning the Liquor application of drink!, Inc. Cortlrr1issioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimolls. Cortlrr1issioner Gallagher moved that the authority adjourn from executive session. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Bryan Treu, County Attol1leyasked that all people make introductions to the Commissioners if they planned to speak at cro.ss-examination or testify. Dan Wolf, att$rney fOr the applicant, introduced himself and Chris Irving, the applicant. Larry Eskwith'iI1ttoduced himself as an interested party and reserved the right to cross-exam~.a;n:yone who 111ight testify and might testify himself as a witness. Mr. Treu addTessed the public with various concerns. He asked that a sign-up sheet for public comment be passed around. He stressed that the Board would be dealing with needs and desires of a particular neighborhood,. and only those that resided or did business in the neighborhood would be allowed to speak. He pointed out the map that showed the intended neighborhood for this application. All people who planned to give comment or be called as a witness were asked swear an oath. He then proposed a group swearing. Mr. Eskwith asked for the distinction between cross-examination and public comment. Mr. Treu replied there would he no differences, and told the public that they would all be subject to cross~ examination from Mr. Wolf and Mr. Eskwith. Mr. Treu gave the public swearing, "Do you swear, affirm, and declare that any information and testimony given todayhefore the Eagle County Liquor Licensing Authority shall be truthful?" The public intending to speak rose, had right hands raised, and replied, "Yes." APPLICANT: DBA: LOCATION: YEAR LICENSE ISSUED: REPRESENTATIVE': DESCRIPTION: Drink, Inc. Drink! 56 Edwards Village Blvd #103, EdwardS N/A Chris living, owner This is a new application for a retail liquor store license. This establishment will be in the new Edwards Comer building in Edwards. ESTABLISH NEIGHBORHOOD: The first order of business is to establish the neighborhood. During prior discussions the board determined that the neighborhood would be based on a two mile radius to the proposed location. This area was determined by the board to be insufficient, and the possibility of a five mile radius was discussed. Staff recommends the definition of the "neighborhood" include the area within a five mile radius of the proposed license location. Staff recommends the following: A five mile radius including, but not limited to the major subdivisions of Singletree, Lake Creek, Homestead, Berry Creek, Arrowhead, Riverwalk, Cordillera, and Beaver Creek. Also included in the five mile radius are all of unincorporated Edwards and parts of Avon. Mr. Wolf agreed with the establishment of the neighborhood and encouraged adoption; and was aware that the neighborhood includes liquor establishments located within the town of Avon. Chairman Stone asked for comment from the commissioners, as there was no public comment. Commissioner Gallagher found this neighborhood establishment to be reasonable, especially since it is a unique establishment to the neighborhood. Commissioner Menconi had no comment. Chairman Stone agreed with Commissioner Gallagher's statements. He stated that as Edwards is becoming a retail magnet, the neighborhood may even increase in size. MOTION: CommissionerGallagher move the Board establish the neighborhood to include the area within a five mile radius from the proposed location of DriI1k!, including but not limited to the major subdivisions of Singletree, Lake Creek, Homestead, Berry Creek, Arrowhead, Riverwalk, Cordillera, and Beaver Creek. Also included in the five mile radius are all of unincorporated Edwards and parts of Avon. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The motion was declared unanimous. ESTABLISH NEEDS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD: The next item would be to establish the needs ofthe neighborhood. The board will consider the reasonable requirements of the neighborhood, the desire of the neighborhood and whether the existing licenses are adequate to meet these needs and desires All members of the board have been provided with copies of the petition submitted by the applicant along with various letters in support of and opposing the issuance of this license. Mr. Wolf gave a history of the application of driI1k!, Inc. He stated that they had been here in May and due to a technical defect that prevented the application from being heard. He mentioned that there was opposition to this application. He asked that the application file be made part of the official record. Chairman Stone took administrative notice of the application file. Mr. Irving spoke and gave a brief background of who he is, identified himself as President, Secretary, and sole shareholder of drink!, Inc., and discussed his research into and reasoning for this application. He wants to sell fine, unique wines, typically found nowhere else in the Vail Valley. His employees will be knowledgeable 'about the wine to give extensive customer service, and they will be TIPS-trained, as he has been for 5 years. Chairman Stone went over the documents briefly that Mr. Wolf handed to the board and others and stated that they would be accepted into the record. Mr. Wolf went over the posting in the front door and the publication of notice of the proposed establishment and asked a series of questions to Mr. Irving about it. He showed photographs depicting the front ofdriI1k!, Inc., the front door, and asked where he received the sign and ifhe posted it for 10 days prior to the schedllled first hearing. Mr. Irving replied that the posting was received from the county clerk and answered affrrmatively to the other qllestions. Mr. Wolf showed the proof of publications in the Eagle Valley Enterprise that fulfilled the publication requirements ofthe statute. Mr. Treu went over the county's application's contents. He listed the posting, the proof of publication in the Eagle Valley Enterprise for the July 19th hearing and for the re-scheduled hearing oftoday's date, the proof of publication in the Vail Daily for today's hearing, the posted agenda for today's date, the minutes for the July 19th hearing, and the posting on the door for the July 19th notifying of the meeting being rescheduled. All were 'submitted into the record. Mr. Wolf asked that Mr. Eskwith be established as a party of interest before his testimony be allowed. Mr. Eskwith gave his address as a resident (683 Eagle Crest Road, Lake Creek) in the area, and his business is South Forty Liquors in Edwards. He introduced into the record the photograph of the posting of the premises, believing that it was incorrect and inadequate. The posting was for a Retail Liquor License, there is no such thing. There is only a Retail Liquor Store license. Mr. Wolf contended that the second posting was unnecessary as the first posting was correct. As this hearing is a continuation of the first hearing, only the first posting was needed. The only other license with "retail" in the name is a Retail Gaming Tavern License, and that doesn't exist in Eagle County. The public could not have been confused. Mr. Eskwith contended that the purpose is to notify the public. He went over the specific rules for the posting, and believed that the County had not met the statute. Mr. Treu asked that the board accept all publications and acknowledged Mr. Eskwith's comments. He stated that there was a posting on July 19th for a Retail Liquor Store License. Chairman Stone asked the b<,>ard to discuss the findings and concerns of the applicant and Mr. Eskwith. Cortlrr1issioner Menconi believed the notices had been met, and Commissioner Gallagher concurred. Chairman Stone agreed, believing the wording to be a hyper-technicality. Mr. Wolf addressed the needs of the neighborhood. He went over the two petitions that are part of the application. These are on the Eagle County prescribed forms that identify the type of license, and they include the map with the 5"mile radius. . The 267 signatures indicate a need and desire of the neighborhood for issuance of this license. He went oVer the history, stating that, at one time there were 4 liquor stores in this neighborhood many years ago, when the population was significantly lower. The board should consider future population growth projections, based on the Edwards Master Plan. There is no issue with over concentration with respect to other areas of the county, Eagle has 4 stores and Vail has 5 stores. The board should take into consideration of part-time residents and visitors to the area. The applicant is of good moral character, no criminal or liquor violations. Mr. Irving confirmed this under oath. The applicant has possession of the premises, per the application. Mr. Wolf addressed the undue concentration portion of the statute and gave Undersheriff Ken Wilson's letter as evidence stating no additional burden on the law as a result of issllance of the license. They have established the neighborhood and there is no basis for denial. Granting a license to drink! is good for the neighborhood and the neighborhood has expressed desire for issuance of the license. He asked the board to limit cross-examination if repetitive and cumulative. Chairman Stone asked Mr. Treu for help about taking petitions into public record and when to have public comment. Mr. Treu aSked the Mr. Wolf finish and then allow Mr. Eskwith to crqss-examine and give his presentation. Then we take public comment and allow both parties to cross-examine. Mr. Treu asked Mr. Irving to turn to Page 4 of his application and asked the applicant's address and position within the company. Mr.W olf stated that the application has been amended to include City and State and once again stated his company position. Mr. Treu asked aboutthe other retail liquor store licenses in Edwards and Avon. Mr. Irving responded with the names ofthe other license locations within the Avon, Beaver Creek, and Edwards areas. Chairman StOne asked for clarifications on the amended application, with regards to address and positions. Mr. Wolf stated that they wanted the application so amended. Mr. Treu asked about missing dates on the two petitions submitted. Mr. Irving stated that they were group signatures on the specific date, under the heading of that date. All signatures were considered to have been collected on the first listed date, until the next date was listed. Chairman Stone asked for Pollyanna Forster to testify about her petition. Pollyanna Forster testified that she circulated the petition and the dates are correct and the headings represent that all signatures were on that date, until the new date is listed. She had previously affirmed under oath that all statements are truthful. 8/2/2004 3 Mr. Treu had follow up questions to Mr. Irving concerning the Colorado Business Registration that is not part of the application, but is part of the file submitted, stating that question 3 that was left blank and should be amended, along with questions 6 and 7B. Mr. Irving properly amended the application. Responding to Chairman Stone's question as to whether there was a Colorado statute that allows amended applications, he said there was: c.R.S. 12-47-309. Mr. Eskwith then cross-examined Mr. Irving. He asked if Mr. Irving would be selling wine and beer. Mr. Irving said he wOllld sell wine and beer, if the beer is handcrafted or artisanal. Fat Tire is not handcrafted, in his opinion. lIe had not determined which beers he would stock as of yet. Mr. Eskwith asked about what the other liquor stores ate carrying in their inventory, specifically targeting the ha.ndcrafted beers. Mr. Irving believes that the majority of the stores carry mass-produced but not the beers he intends to sell. These stores do have access to the same beers that he intends to carry. Mr. Eskwith asked for a definition of an artisanal wine. Mr. Irving defined it as handcrafted, smaller-produced, and not mass-produced. He also stated that Edwards Liquor and Riverwalk do not carry many artisanal or boutique wines. Most liquor stores carry mass produced wines; not the ones he intends to carry. Beaver Liquors carries a few of the wines that he intends to stock, and gave an example. Mr. Eskwith asked if Vodka and Whiskey would be stocked. Mr. Irving said no. Mr. Eskwith referred to a Vail Valley Magazine article, and read from it where it stated that he would carry "boutique flavored vodkas, unusual whiskeys, tequilas and such, and asked if it was a mis-quote. Mr. Irving stated that it was. Mr. Eskwith then stated that there would be no liquor in this store. Mr. Irving asked to define liquor, because he is carrying grapas (?), ports, and lemoncello(?), but no tequilas and no boutique vodkas unless there is a need somewhere down the road, but would never sell Jim Beam or the like, as it is not in his business plan. Mr. Wolf objected to cross examination as being argumentative and cumulative. Chairman Stone believes the point was made as to types of wine and liquor will be carried, and whether those liquors are in other establishments. The point was also established as to current and future business plans. Mr. Eskwith asked about the number ofliquor stores that ate in Edwards, across the street, and within J;2 mile. Mr. . Irving answered there were 2 others within a block, another within 100 yards, and 3 within ~ mile. Mr. Eskwith commented about the physical premises, as being one single premise with eat! He also asked about ctirrent Colorado liquor statute where funds from one tavern licensed premises can't be co-mingled with funds from a retail liquor Store. Mr. Irving explained the two are split with each getting their own bills, and two entrances. where you must walk out one and enter the other to access each other. Not one person will tub both stores, simultaneously. Mr. Eskwith asked about the question Mr. Irving asked of his petitioners. Mr. Irving replied that he was only opening a retail wine shop and Pollyanna Forster was opening a cheese shop, with a tavern license. He clarified that the two shops would be totally separate from one another to clear up confusion to the petitioners. Mr. Wolf asked Mr. Irving about adding an educational element to the store. Mr. Irving explained about the cards describing the wine, its taste, and explaining food that would go with the wine. Mr. Wolf asked about zoning limitations in the Edwards area. Mr. Irving stated that there were none and no other places in Edwards that would prevent him from opening his store. He included his petition a copy of the statutory definition of retaiIIiquor store license. Mr. Eskwith had a brief presentation about the posting information. He was told prior to the July 19th hearing that there was no hearing and he told others not to show up because he was told not to show up. Chairman Stone had the meeting minutes and offered to give them to Mr. Eskwith. There was no full hearing that day, but it was continued to today's date. Mr. Treu went over the minutes of the July 19th meeting: Chairman pro-tern Gallagher stated that the only item before the board was the liquor license by drink!, Inc. The legal staff advised this should be postponed. Since staff reports were not prepared the required five days before the meeting, they moved that the motion be tabled until August 2nd. 8/2/2004 4 Mr. Eskwith stated for the record that his attorney was told not to show up, though he did show up anyway. Mr. Eskwith introduced a letter from Brook Jones stating her opposition to a petition. The board accepted it with the other numerous letters that also exist. Chairman Stone read the following letter into the record, and noted that this was for a previous and vacated application. The board would give it the weight it deserved: "To Whom It May Concern: In early May I was approached by two persons, one male, one female, asked me if I would sign my name on a petition. They stated that the petition was fora cheese and wine tasting shop. After signing my name I askedifI could sign for my husband as he is a real cheese lover. They stated that this would be OK and I went ahead and signed on his behalf. I realize now that I should not have done this as I was misrepresenting him and I know that he would not have supported this application for a retail liquor store license in Edwards, signed, Brook Jones, Apartment QlOI, The Reserve, 39999 Hwy. 6, Edwards, Colorado." Chairman Stone opened it up for Public Comment. It was limited to three minutes per person, and Walter Mathews of the County Attorney's Office was the official timekeeper. All involved with Public Comment were asked if they had affirmed under oath that their testimony would be truthful, their age, and if they drink alcohol. All answered yes to these questions. Anne Marie Finn was the first person called for public comment. She thinks it will be a benefit to the community. It win keep prices down, give a wider variety of choices, and keep people from going to Denver. Nicole Magistro spoke on behalf of the character of Mr. Irving. She wanted the board to be aware of the way MI. Irving has worked within the community to help other businesses succeed. He is ethical and knowledgeable. He will add friendliness and personality to the Edwards business community. Kevin Clair resident of Lake Creek has known Chris for over 5 years and believes the existing shops are not meeting the current needs of Edwards. Chris is aiming for a different clientele than currently being targeted by the current stores. Chairman Stone asked abollt the "thirst" for the type of liquor that will be available for sale. He asked as to what specific types of wines will be available that aren't currently available for sale. Mr. Clair brollght IIp Spanish wines, New Zealand wines, and South African wines that are not comprehensively available. Patty Cuny has knoWh applicants for many years and wouldn't have signed the petition because she was under impressionitwollld be a wine and cheese bar, not a liquor store. Chairman Stone asked if Ms. Cuny thought she was misled as to signing the petition because it would have been competition for het business. Ms. Cuny agreed with that statement. The market doesn't need another liquor store on another comer. Mr. Wolf Mked if she was given an oppo~ity to read the petition. She replied that she had. / Rick Cuny, owner of Beaver Liquors in Avon asked if the petition had been amended with the change of the neighborhood. He was concerned about the half-wall between the two premises, which is prohibited by Colorado statute. He doesn't believe the store will be unique as the applicant states, and Mr. Irving will not procure the hard-to-get wines except by doing volume. Mr. Eskwith asked about the half-wall that Mr. Cuny was denied by the state. Mr. Cuny wanted to put up a half-wall between his liquor store and his t-shirt shop. The state mentioned that this Was in violation of state law. Mr. Eskwith asked if New Zealand wines were sold at his store, and Mr. Cuny said they were, along with Spanish wines. Simone Fodde.;Crotzer spoke on behalf a group of concerned parents who want to know what type of store was going to be located in the neighborhood. The neighborhood does not need a fourth liquor store. Terry Benedickt is part-owner of Riverwalk Wine and Spirits. She gave handouts to the Board of Commissioners. Chairman Stone accepted these into Public Record and stated what they were. Ms. Benedickt then explained her findings. She spoke of the professional, independent survey of the Edwards area that showed the area expressing no desire for a new liquor store, and asked that the Board deny the application. Mr. Wolf questioned Ms. Benedickt about % ownership and about the survey as to who paid for it and whether Ms. Grantham was present. 8/2/2004 5 Ms. Benedickt stated she owned 50% of Riverwalk Wine and Spirits and she paid $2,300 for it. She did not participate in the survey herself, and Ms. Grantham was not present at the meeting. She performed no statistical analysis of the results of the survey. Mr . Wolf asked that the survey be stricken. Chairman Stone stated that the board will give it the same weight as other testimony, as Ms. Benedickt had swom an oath. Mr. Wolf asked if the survey company identified the applicant or described the nature of the proposed business. She replied that the applicant was not identified nor was the nature of the stored described, either. Chairman Stone went over the questions that were asked in the survey. These are part of the official record. Beverly DeMoss is co-owner of Riverwalk Wine and Spirits. She doesn't think the applicant has demonstrated the needs of community are not being met. There are currently3 stores and they all have access to the same wines. Her store has 1,265 different wine labels and the ability to special order more, as needed. The public's big concern is pricing issues, and that will be helped by an established ftrm doing large volume, not a new store. There is an undue concentration of liquor stores, as growth happens, there will be a need in the future, not now. Commissioner Gallagher wanted clarification as to access to the specialty wines and whether or not the new store will actually get it. Ms. DeMoss replied that by law a distributor can set volume minimums within brands, but cannot pit brands against each other. Mr. Wolf asked if Riverwalk stocked all wines that are currently available to Colorado distributors, and if she thought that driI1k! could possibly cut into her business. She replied no to both questions. Bobby Hernreich is the prospective landlord of drink!, Inc. He spoke well of Mr. Irving's character and his space plan. Todd Layton in Singletree believes it will greatly enhance Edwards because it is targeting a unique market. Chairman Stone asked Mr. Layton to specify about what is not currently being served in the neighborhood that this applicant will serve. -.--.. --""--Mf':'~L'aYf6n1iKed~tlit:feaiic-afion-factot-aboITffine-Wifies-fhat-Wi:nK!~--Iiic~--WIllpfoviae'~'-' .'- _._______u.,__~___ Colleen McCarthy of Vail with a business is in Riverwalk, The Baggage Check, stated that she has been on Vail's Local Liquor Licensing Authority and is the President of the Edwards Business Association. She spoke of the growth of Edwards and believes driI1k! will not oversaturate the cortlrr1unity, due to its uniqueness. This complies with Edwards' Master Plan. Mr . Wolf asked how many members there were of the Edwards Business Association. Ms. McCarthy answered that there were 64 111embers and was representing them as well. Mike Cacciop<> lives in the area and knows Mr. Eskwith, personally. He never has met the applicant. Said Mr. Cacciopo, "we should promote capitalism and avoid protectionism.". He questioned where the 79% of the people that don't agree with the applicant were, as they were not present Chairman Stone closed Public Comment. Mr. Wolf addressed the public comments. He stated that this is an attempt by the other liquor stores to limit competition. The ones that fully understand the license application support it. The applicant has fulfilled the criteria. Mr. Eskwith had final statements. He said the Local Licensing Authority did not post properly, and the needs are being met for the community. This store will do nothing to add to the service of the community. The survey was the only legitimate findings and should be given heavy weighting by the board. Mr. Treu questioned Ms. Simonton about when the staffreport was prepared. Ms. Simonton replied that the staff report was prepared on July 16th and met the requirements. Mr. Treu had questions about the publication in the Aspen Times. Ms. Simonton replied that it was not posted in the Aspen Times, though direction was given that it be published. 81212004 6 Mr. Treu asked if the premise was within 500 feet of a location for which within the two years preceding the application a license of the same class was denied for the reason that the reasonable requirements of the neighborhood and the desires of the existing inhabitants were satisfied by existing outlets. Ms. Simonton said no. Mr. Treu asked if this premise is in a location for sale of fermented malt beverages at retail where within one year preceding the date of the application a license had been denied at the same location for reason that the reasonable requirements ofthe neighborhood and the desires of the adult inhabitants were satisfied by existing outlets. Ms. Simonton said no. Mr. Treu asked if the premises is within 500 feet of any public or parochial school or any campus of any college, llhiversity or seminary. Ms. Simonton said no. The Commissioners then discussed the request. Chairman Stone asked if there is a need and desire for a license in the neighborhood, and if the existing liquor licenses in the neighborhood are not adequate to meet the needs and desires of the neighborhood Cortlrr1issioner Menconi answered Chairman Stone's statements that he feels there is a need and the needs are not being met, based on what he heard today through testimony, e-mails, and letters, and not prior to today. COmll1issioner Gallagher spoke of the survey submitted by Ms. Benedickt. Only 44% of the cortlrr1ents are negative; inconsistent with the 79% given in the study. The idea of protecting a business belongs to the consumers. He spoke of the need to protect the children, which is a matter for parenting, not the liquor licensing authority. He finds that there is a need in the neighborhood based on testimony and the evidence presented today. Chairman Stone asked the applicant about availability of wines to business owners, and the choices available for sale, the type of wines he would sell, and how many people signed the petition and whether they lived within the established neighborhood. Mr. Irving stated that he is still researching which specific wines to stock, but reaffIrmed that he will be selling wines that are not being currently sold in the area, and that all people who signed the petition lived in the area, specifically. EdwardS. Mr. Wolf stated that 263 people signed the petition. Chairman Stone spoke of need and lack of educational component at the other liquor facilities. He spoke of the fallacies of the survey that Ms. Benedickt presented. He spoke of the ability of Mr. Irving to sell whatever he wants, in reality, as it is a retail liquor store license. He found the testimony from Ms. McCarthy to be very compelling, as it contrasts the petition submitted by Ms. Benedickt Mr. Treu asked the board to include everything spoke of and shown today to be included in the official record. STAFF FINDINGS: ~ This application is in order, all application requirements have been met, and all fees have been paid. ~ Public notice has been given by the posting of a sign in a conspicuous place on the premises and by publication in the Eagle Valley Enterprise on July I, and July 8, and July 22,2004 and the Aspen Times Daily and the Vail Daily on July 22 and 23,2004. ~ The applicant is reported to be of good moral character. ~ Mr. Irving has been server trained. ~ There are currently three liquor stores in Edwards; South Forty, Riverwalk Wines & Spirits and Edwards Liquors. ~ Section 12~47-301 (2) (b) of the Colorado Liquor Code reads as follows: "A local licensing authority or the state on stated owned property, may deny the issuance of any new tavern or retail liquor store license whenever such authority determines that the issuance of such license would result in or add to an undue concentration of the same class of license and, as a result, require the use of additional law enforcement resources. " The board has a copy of a letter from Ken Wilson, Eagle County Under sheriff which states that it is his belief that the addition of this license will not result in the need for additional law enforcement resource. ~ At one time there were four liquor stores in Edwards but on February 24, 1998 the Commissioners revoked one of these licenses. 8/2/2004 7 CONCERNS / ISSUES: None MOTIONS: NEEDS: Commissioner Gallagher moved the Local Liquor Licensing Authority for Eagle County find that there is a reasonable requirement for the issuance of this license, and that there is a desire for the issuance of this license, and that the existing licenses do not adequately satisfy these needs and desires as evidenced by the submitted testimony, petitions, and evidence at the hearing for Drink, Inc., d/b/a DriI1k!. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unani1110us. APPROVAL: Commissioner Menconi moved the Board approve a new retail liquor store license forDrink, Inc., d/b/a DriI1k! based on the testimony today, the staff findings, and this Board's findings that 1) the premises are not w/in 500 feet of a location for which, within 2 years preceding the application, a license of the same class was denied for the reason that thereasonable requirements of the neighborhood and the desires of the adult inhabitants were satisfied by existing outlets 2) the premises is not for the sale of fermented malt beverages at retail where, within one year preceding the date of the application, a license has been denied at the same location for the reason that the reasonable requirements of the neighborhood and the desires of the adult iI1habitants were satisfied by existing olltlets and 3) the premises are not within 500 feet of any public or parochial school or the campus of any college, university, or seminary. Such license to be issued upon 'written findings and decision of this Board and upon a final inspection of the premises by our Clerk and Recorder to determine that the applicant has complied with the site information provided today and as may be required by the Colorado Liquor Code. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Chairman Stone asked the attorney's office to prepare 'written findings and orders for the Board. Commissioner Gallagher moved to adjourn as the Local Liquor Licensing Authority. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous. Attest: . uss, thlJimeeting was adjourned. ~~ "-";;';4 ~.,_;~-.:;~ ~,! <;.' 8/212004 8