CITY OF CENTRAL FALLS
REGULAR LIQUOR BOARD MEETING
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1991
9:20 P.M.
A Regular Meeting of the Central Falls Liquor Board was held in the City Hall Council Chambers on the above date at 9:20 P.M.
Councilman Charbonneau
Councilman Laroche
Councilwoman Moreau
Councilman Vaudreuil
Mayor Lazieh
Quorum present.
Chairwoman Sandra Moreau presided.
Motion was made by Councilman Charbonneau and seconded by Mayor Lazieh to accept collectively the minutes to the previous meetings and place on file. All Agreed. So Voted
Appeal- Jimbo's Cafe Inc. d/b/a Tropicana Night Club. Liquor Board Decision of Jan. 14, 1991 to Liquor Control Administrator.
Liquor Control Administrator; re: Reschedule of Appeal for Jamro Enterprises Inc./Santander Corp.
Daniel J. Issa, City Clerk - re: Reschedule Hearing for G.A.M. Corp. d/b/a The Sportsman.
Daniel J. Issa, City Clerk - re: Notice of Class Bv License Transfer hearing date for Rustick Brothers Inc.
Summons - Jimbo's Cafe Inc. d/b/a Tropicana Nightclub- 134-138 Cowden St.
Paul Rheaume & Richard Thompson Objection to Transfer of Rustick Brothers for outstanding debt due them in the amount $7,500.00.
Motion to accept collectively and place on file was made by Councilman Charbonneau and seconded by Councilman Laroche All Agreed. So Voted.
Daniel J. Issa, City Clerk report on Liquor License transfers and violations for 1990.
Motion to accept and place on file was made by Councilman Laroche and Charbonneau seconded by Mayor Lazieh. All Agreed So Voted
Rustick Brothers Inc. d/b/a Rustick Cafe
534 Hunt St. C.F.
to
Paul Rheaume& Richard Thompson
d/b/a Pretzel Pub, 534 Hunt St. C.F.
Councilman Vaudreuil questioned City Solicitor Muksian on the status of this transfer.
Mayor Lazieh asked that the owners be summoned before the Board to explain why they haven't come before the Board for this transfer.
Mayor Lazieh motioned that the owners be summoned. Councilman Charbonneau seconded. All Agreed. So Voted.
G.A.M. Corp. d/b/a The Sportsman
55 Sheridan St. C.F.
Probate Judge Louis Azar is present to act as legal counsel for the Board because the City Solicitor is the prosecutor for this hearing.
Chairwoman Moreau read the summons.
Attorney DiMaio denied the charges on behalf of his clients.
Also present to represent G.A.M. Corp. is Attorney Robert Dipippo.
City Solicitor George Muksian asked that Vincent Furtado, DEA Resident Agent in Rhode Island and Brian McCauley of U.S. Marshall Service be sworn in.
Mr. Furtado and Mr. McCauley were sworn in by City Clerk Daniel Issa.
Examination by City Solicitor Muksian of Mr. Furtado of the D.E.A.
City Solicitor Muksian asked that Mr. Furtado explain his occupation and his duties.
Mr. Furtado explained that he is Resident Agent in Charge for the Drug Enforcement Agency in Rhode Island and Bristol County, Ma. a position he has held for the past twenty-one years.
City Solicitor Muksian questioned Mr. Furtado's involvement in a matter concerning G.A.M. Corp. d/b/a The Sportsman.
Mr. Furtado stated that an Investigation by the DEA began in May 1990 cumulative to Nov. 1990 when pursuant to a Federal Search Warrant.
Attorney DiMaio objected to any illegally seized evidence.
Chairwoman Moreau overruled the objection but noted the same for the record.
Mr. Furtado proceeded to explain the proceedings related to the search warrant.
Attorney DiMaio objected stating that a toxicologist report is not in and the use of the word cocaine be stricken from the record as hearsay.
Chairwoman Moreau stated that the objection is correct and that the word cocaine be stricken from the record until we prove the same.
City Solicitor Muksian further questioned Mr. Furtado.
Mr. Furtado explained that several Federal, State and Local Officers were involved and that initially a drug detection dog was used.
Attorney DiMaio objected stating that the question related to Nov. 30, 1990 and the dog relates to before that time.
Chairwoman Moreau overruled the objection.
Mr. Furtado continued to explain the Nov. 30, 1990 and stated that the dog was allowed into the tap and alluded to the safe located in the manager's office.
Attorney DiMaio objected stating that Mr. Furtado could not testify to this event because he was not there.
Mr. Furtado stated that he was not there on the 28th and 29th of Nov. he was present on the 30th with a search warrant for the safe. He further stated that he was the supervising agent in charge on that day. He went on to explain how the safe was opened and where the safe was located. He told the board that some of the contents in the safe were business records.
City Solicitor Muksian asked what was stated in the records.
Attorney DiMaio objected stated that the records were not present and therefore hearsay.
Objection was sustained by Chairwoman Moreau.
City Solicitor Muksian asked Mr. Furtado if he had the documents.
Mr. Furtado replied that he did not have the documents with him.
City Solicitor Muksian asked if the documents were identified.
Attorney DiMaio objected for the same reason as his previous objection.
Objection was sustained.
City Solicitor Muksian asked how access to the safe was gained.
Mr. Furtado stated that a safe expert from Clark's Locksmith Co. opened the safe and the contents were then inventoried. He then stated that he recalled some operating funds, ledgers, a weapon, 3 small packets of a white powder substance, check book for business, stamp used by a notary public and other miscellaneous papers.
City Solicitor Muksian asked if any tests were done at the scene on the white powder substance.
Mr. Furtado explained that a presumtive test for cocaine was done, this is a preliminary test performed at the time and later a spectograph test is done. He went on to describe how this test is done and stated that this type of testing has been done thousands of times. He further stated that small tube of cobalt drancyniade which is a clear substance will react to a white or brown substance when added to them. In this case the color when added to the white substance turned blue.
City Solicitor Muksian asked what the white substance turning blue indicated.
Attorney DiMaio objected stating that the witness is not qualified to make that judgment.
Objection was sustained by Chairwoman Moreau and asked that the witness qualify himself as far as his background in this area.
Mr. Furtado stated that he has 21 years training with the Federal Government Drug Enforcement Agency. He stated that he is not a chemist, however, he has testified in a Court of Law as an expert on the findings of this type of testing. He further explained that this test is cocaine specific.
City Solicitor Muksian questioned the witness further on this testing and asked what indication, if any, did the results of this show.
Mr. Furtado stated that the test indicated the presence of coca.
City Solicitor Muksian asked if there would other reactions for this test.
Mr. Furtado stated that this would be the only result for this test.
City Solicitor Muksian asked what events took place after the search relative to the white substance found in the safe.
Mr. Furtado stated that the substance was immediately forwarded to the New York Field Lab in New York City for further testing.
City Solicitor Muksian asked who performed this task.
Mr. Furtado responded that one of the agents that works with him did this.
City Solicitor Muksian asked how this was forwarded.
Mr. Furtado responded certified mail return receipt requested.
City Solicitor Muksian then asked if Mr. Furtado received the results of this testing and did he have it with him.
Mr. Furtado responded that he did have the results of this test but did not have it with him.
City Solicitor Muksian asked what the results of the test were.
Attorney DiMaio objects stating that any response by the witness would be hearsay.
Chairwoman Moreau, in the absence of the written report, sustains the objection.
City Solicitor Muksian asked Mr. Furtado if he could obtain this report.
Mr. Furtado replied that he could.
City Solicitor Muksian stated that he had no further questions of this witness.
Examination by Attorney DiMaio:
Attorney DiMaio asked Mr. Furtado if, when he left the search warrant at the Sportsman Lounge, he knew that it was under federal seizure at this point.
Mr. Furtado responded that he did.
Attorney DiMaio asked if Mr. Furtado expected someone other than the federal marshals to receive a copy of this warrant.
Mr. Furtado responded that he expected the owner to arrive at some point in time to pick up some clothing and other personal effects.
Attorney DiMaio asked Mr. Furtado who he expected this person to be.
Mr. Furtado responded the wife.
Attorney DiMaio asked if Mr. Furtado expected to serve this on Mrs. Garcia.
Mr. Furtado responded that he expected to give it to Mrs. Garcia because Mr. Garcia was incarcerated at that time.
Attorney DiMaio asked if this business was a corporation and why he didn't serve other officers of the corporation.
Mr. Furtado responded that he believed that Mr. Garcia was the only one who could serve from the corporation at that time.
Attorney DiMaio then asked if Mr. Garcia was the only officer at that time.
Mr. Furtado responded that there were other officers but he believed that they were not local.
Attorney DiMaio then asked questions concerning the field test and testimony in court regarding these test. He stated that Chemists and Toxicologists are required to be present at court hearings.
Mr. Furtado responded that this was true but at probable cause hearings his testimony would be used.
Attorney DiMaio then asked questions pertaining to the safe in the Manager's Office and how many people, besides Mr. Garcia would have the combination or access to the safe.
Mr. Furtado responded that he did not know who, besides the Garcias, had access to the safe.
Mr. DiMaio had no further questions of this witness.
City Solicitor Muksian asked Mr. Furtado if he could obtain the report of the test.
Mr. Furtado responded that he could.
Attorney DiMaio objected that it would not be admissible unless stipulated by an expert witness.
Chairwoman Moreau asked Mr. Furtado why he didn't bring the report to this hearing.
Mr. Furtado responded that he didn't know the Board would require it.
Chairwoman Moreau sustained the objection.
Discussion regarding the report ensued.
Attorney DiMaio suggested that the Board continue this matter until the Federal Court rules on his motion to suppress the evidence obtained in the search. He stated that the Court should act on this in approximately two months.
City Solicitor Muksian stated that he didn't object to this, however, he stated that he felt that the Board was able to hear this case.
Chairwoman Moreau asked the members of the Board for their opinion on the continuance of this case.
Councilman Charbonneau asked for the opinion of the Chief of Police.
Chief Sasso responded that he thought it best to wait on his opinions and not to speak at this time.
Chief Sasso explained that he could not speak at this time because there are undercover officers involved and that it was best to present the case through Mr. Furtado to keep the anonymity of these individuals Councilman Vaudreuil asked how long a continuance was expected.
Attorney DiMaio responded that he thought two months would be sufficient.
Councilman Laroche asked if the cocaine on the premises was the only issue against this establishment.
City Solicitor Muksian responded that there were other issues but the City was not prepared to go forward with them at this time.
Councilman Laroche asked Attorney DiMaio if G.A.M. Corp. was willing to keep the establishment closed for the period of the continuance.
Attorney DiMaio responded that the premises is under federal seizure at any case and that he appreciated the Board's considerations.
City Clerk Daniel Isaa asked if this was a yes for the record.
Attorney DiMaio responded that it was.
Chairwoman Moreau closed the public hearing at 10:15 P.M.
Motion was made by Councilman Charbonneau to table until G.A.M. has their day in court.
City Clerk Daniel Isaa repeated the motion.
Attorney DiMaio commented on the federal court ruling on the admissibility of the evidence in the court.
Councilman Charbonneau commented.
Councilman Charbonneau withdrew his motion.
City Solicitor Muksian commented on the hearing.
Motion was made by Councilman Charbonneau and seconded by Mayor Lazieh to continue the matter until after the federal court rules on the motion to suppress the evidence and subject to the establishment remaining closed. Unanimously Approved.
Attorney DiMaio stated that he would inform the City Solicitor as soon as he receives a decision.
Jimbo's Cafe Inc. d/b/a Tropicana Night Club
134-138 Cowden St. C.F.
Mr. Salazar is representing himself at this hearing and also present are Mrs. Giggonda Salazar and Candy Salazar.
Mayor Lazieh questioned Mr. Salazar on his right to an Attorney.
Mr. Salazar stated that his Attorney was not prepared for this hearing.
Mayor Lazieh asked if Mr. Salazar was prepared to go forward with this hearing without his Attorney.
Mr. Salazar stated that he was prepared to go forward and he waived his right to his Attorney being present for this hearing.
Chairwoman Moreau read the summons and asked Mr. Salazar to enter his plea.
Mr. Salazar entered a plea of Not Guilty to all charges.
Chairwoman Moreau opened the public hearing at 10:25 P.M. City Solicitor Muksian asked that Officer Bruce Ogni be sworn in.
So Sworn by City Clerk Issa.
City Solicitor Muksian asked Officer Ogni to relate the events of Oct, 3, 1990.
Officer Ogni told the Board that he responded to a call of a man who was beaten by a couple of men from the Tropicana and wanted a Policeman to take him there to get his car.
Officer Ogni, found upon arrival, a male passed out in front of the establishment. He then escorted the man to his car in the parking lot at the rear of the building, at this point he enter the rear door of the cafe and found that patrons were still drinking he noted that the time was approximately 1:50 A.M. He spoke to the bartender Mr. Salazar who responded that these people refused to leave for him.
City Solicitor Muksian had no further questions of this witness.
Mr. Salazar asked Officer Ogni if perhaps the man found outside his establishment may have come from another cafe.
Officer Ogni stated that he did not say the person was from his cafe.
Mr. Salazar asked why, when Officer Ogni stated that there were ten patrons left in his bar, Officer Ogni only identifed four in his report.
Officer Ogni responded that some had left before he could question them and because he was alone he didn't want to put himself in danger.
Mr. Salazar commented on the refusal of patrons to leave and stated to Officer Ogni that he never told him that the patrons refused to leave, that he stated that they were waiting for a ride and remained in the cafe because they were afraid to be on the street with the gangs.
Officer Ogni responded.
Chairwoman Moreau warned Mr. Salazar about asking questions of the witness and not to become argumentitive with them.
Mr. Salazar had not further questions for this witness.
City Solicitor Muksian called Officer Carim Tager.
City Clerk Issa swore in the witness.
City Solicitor Muksian asked Officer Tager to relate the events of Dec. 9, 1990 regarding the Tropicana Cafe.
Officer Tager replied that he responded to an emergency 911 call directing him to 134 Cowden St., the Tropicana Cafe. When he arrived at the scene he was told by the owner, Mr. Salazar that there was no problem in the bar. Officer Tager stated that he called the station to confirm that a call had been made from this area to 911. He was told that the call was made from that location. He entered the cafe and asked several people in the cafe for identification, he found that several were underaged, and asked them to leave.
City Solicitor Muksian then asked Officer Tager to relate the events that took place on Nov. 21, 1990 at 11:20 P.M. Officer Tager responded that he was called to the Tropicana for a fight in progress. Officer Tager told the Board that he had difficulty gaining access to the premises from the front door and proceeded to the rear entrance, where he had to knock several time before he finally gained entrance. He further stated that the owner, Mr. Salazar, was not cooperative when he gained entry. He told the Board that a patron was arrested at the bar for assault. City Solicitor Muksian stated he had not further questions of this witness.
Mr. Salazar asked questions of Officer Tager relating to the events on Nov. 21, 1990. He then began to explain that there was trouble with the lock at the front door.
Chairwoman Moreau reminded Mr. Salazar that he must ask questions of the witness and leave statements for the end, when he could make closing statements.
Canday Salazar questioned Officer Tager concerning the Dec. 9, 1990 incident and explained her role regarding the incident.
Councilman Laroche asked Chairwoman Moreau if Miss Salazar was asking a question or making a Statement.
Chairwoman Moreau responded that Miss Salazar could lay a foundation prior to her questions.
Chairwoman Moreau cautioned Miss Salazar to be sure she asked a question of the witness.
Miss Salaraz asked Officer Tager if he actually saw anyone who was underage drinking in the establishment.
Officer Tager responded that he couldn't answer that question and that this was not why he asked these people to leave. He stated that they were asked to leave when they showed their identification card which indicated that they were underaged. This is normal Departmental Procedure.
Chairwoman Moreau stated that since the issue before the Board was not about underaged drinking she would no longer allow this kind of questioning to continue.
Mr. Salazar stated that he had no other questions of this witness.
City Solicitor Muksian called Officer Chaplow.
Officer Chaplow was sworn in by City Clerk Issa.
City Solicitor Muksian asked Officer Chaplow to relate to the Board the events of Nov. 25, 1990.
Officer Chaplow told the Board that at approximately 1:30 A.M. on Nov. 25, 1990 all units responded to the Tropicana Cafe on a report of a large group outside the bar. Officer Chaplow stated that there 75 to 100 people in front of the cafe some had open bottles of beer in their hands and acting disorderly. He also stated that some ehicles were tagged for illegal parking and two men were arrested for failure to move. Officer Chaplow stated that he was assisted by three other Police Officers and it took about thirty minutes to disperse the crowd. He also stated that when this was done he then spoke with Mr. Salazar about complaints from the neighbors. Officer Chaplow stated that Mr. Salazar felt that the Police were picking on him because he was Spanish. Officer Chaplow stated that this was not so.
City Solicitor Muksian stated that he had not further questions of this witness.
Mr. Salazar questioned Officer Chaplow on the number of persons he stated was outside the bar.
Officer Chaplow responded that the number he gave was an approximation not an exact count.
Mr. Salazar asked if Officer Chaplow had the names of the persons he arrested.
Officer Chaplow responded that he did not have this information with him, however, it is in the arrest report.
Mr. Salazar then asked if Officer Chaplow was sure that the persons outside the bar refused to leave or was it that they were having trouble moving their cars.
Officer Chaplow responded that they refused to move.
Mr. Salazar stated that he had no further questions of this witness.
City Solicitor Muksian then called Officer Nadeau who was sworn in by City Clerk Daniel J. Issa.
City Solicitor Muksian asked Officer Nadeau to relate the events that took place on Oct. 7, 1989.
Officer Nadeau told the Board that he was called to the bar about 1:10 A.M. to see about two women fighting. He noted that the bar was still filled with people drinking and playing pool, he stated that in his opinion the bar was filled to capacity. There was loud music also playing at this time. He instructed the owners that the music was to be turned off. He then called for assistance and told the patrons that they had to leave. This took approximately 20 to 25 minutes.
City Solicitor Muksian asked Officer Nadeau to relate events of May 22, 1989.
Officer Nadeau stated that he was on routine patrol in the area of the Tropicana and checking the doors and windows of the local businesses when he noted a woman standing in the doorway of the bar. He asked what the woman was doing and she responded that she was cleaning the bar. He also stated that there were two other people with her. He stated that the time was 2:40 A.M.
City Solicitor Muksian stated that he had no further questions of this witness.
Mrs. Salazar began to make a statement.
Chairwoman Moreau reminded Mrs. Salazar that she must question the witness.
Mrs. Salazar asked Officer Nadeau why he didn't check out the names registered with the station for the cleaning personnel for this establishment. She also remarked that they were cleaning and not drinking at this time.
Chairwoman Moreau addressed Mrs. Salazar and told her that Officer Nadeau did not mention anything about them drinking in his statements.
Miss Salazar then began to question Officer Nadeau.
Councilman Charbonneau addressed the Chair and asked if this questioning was relevant. He also stated that it didn't take three hours to clean the bar.
Chairwoman Moreau called the hearing to order.
Mr. Salazar questioned Officer Nadeau regarding the events on Oct. 7, 1989 relative to closing the bar.
Mr. Salazar had no further questions of this witness.
City Solicitor Muksian called Officer Rene Ogni. Officer Ogni was sworn in by City Clerk Daniel J. Issa.
City Solicitor Muksian asked Officer Ogni to relate the events of July 26, 1990.
Officer Ogni related to the Board that while on routine patrol at approximately 9:35 P.M. on Cowden St. he noted that the door to the Tropicana Cafe was open. He went inside to get information for an incident report and found that the rear door was also open. He stated that the music was very loud and that he informed Mr. Salazar to keep the doors closed. He also stated that he had informed Mr. Salazar just two weeks prior to this event to keep the doors closed.
City Solicitor Muksian then questioned Officer Ogni on events of Feb. 27, 1989.
Officer Ogni stated that he responded to a call at approximately 9:14 P.M. of a fight between brothers in the bar. He stated that one of them was there but did not wish to file a complaint.
City Solicitor Muksian stated that he had no further questions of this witness.
Mrs. Salazar questioned Officer Ogni on the door incidents.
Officer Ogni responded to her questions.
Mrs. Salazar stated that she had no further questions of this witness.
City Solicitor George Muksian called Officer Jay Greenless.
Officer Greenless was sworn in by City Clerk Issa.
City Solicitor Muksian asked Officer Greenless to relate the events of July 3, 1989.
Officer Greenless explained that he was on patrol in the Wasington St. area when he could hear loud music. He then related that he approached the Tropicana Nightclub and saw that the front door to the cafe was open. He went to the rear of the building to find that the rear door was also open. He went inside the cafe and told the owner that the doors must be closed. He stated that he then left the area.
City Solictor Muksian stated that he had no further questions.
Mr. Salazar stated that he had no questions of this witness.
Chairwoman Moreau recessed the hearing at 11:10 P.M.
Meeting reconvened at 11:25 P.M.
City Solicitor Muksian called Officer Gonsalves.
Officer Gonsalves was sworn in by City Clerk Issa.
City Solicitor Muksian asked Officer Gonsalves to relate the events of Oct. 5, 1990.
Officer Gonsalves stated that on 10/5/90 at approximately 10:30 P.M. all units responded to a call from Officer Chaplow of a man with a gun, this man was reportedly in the area of King and Washington Sts., he was chased through yards and was headed in the direction of Cowden St. He stated that he and Lt. Costa entered the Tropicana Nightclub in search of the suspect. Officer Gonsalves noted that when the entered the cafe everything was quiet, however, he was greeted with hostility by the barmaid and the owner of the cafe. He further stated that both asked them why they were there and stated that they had no right to be there.
Officer Gonsalves also told the Board that Mr. Salazar told them that he was going to talk to the Chief about this event. Officer Gonsalves remarked that when he left the cafe he found the antenna to his vehicle had been bent while he was in the cafe. He stated that the search for the suspect was hampered because of interference received from the barmaid and owner.
City Solicitor Muksian stated that he had no further questions.
Mrs. Salazar questioned Officer Gonsalves on the purported hostility of the barmaid and owner.
Officer Gonsalves responded.
Chairwoman Moreau reminded Mrs. Salazar to ask questions.
Mrs. Salazar had no further questions.
City Solicitor Muksian then called Officer Labossiere.
Officer Labossiere was sworn in by City Clerk Issa.
City Solicitor Muksian asked Officer Labossiere to relate the events of Sept. 3, 1989.
Officer Labossiere stated that he responded to a call of a fight at the location of the Tropicana at approximately 2:00 A.M. He stated that the fight started in the cafe and spilled out into the street. He also stated that there were still patron in the bar drinking at this time.
City Solicitor Muksian stated that he had no further questions.
Mr. Salazar questioned Officer Labossiere on Mrs. Lopes.
Officer Labossiere stated that Mrs. Lopes had a cut on the head but refused any treatment.
Mr. Salazar had no other questions.
City Solicitor Muksian rested his case.
Chairwoman Moreau asked Mr. Salazar if he wished to present any witnesses.
He replied no, he just wished to make closing statements.
Candy Salazar read from a prepared statement. In this statement she told of Mr. Salazar's occupation prior to becoming the owner of Jimbo's Cafe. She also related that the cafe had a bad reputation prior to mr. Salazar's purchase and that Mr. Salazar decided to seek the help of the Police Chief so that there would be no further problems of this nature. She stated that Mr. Salazar listened to the recommendations of the Chief and has acted accordingly.
She mentioned the neighbors and stated that there didn't seem to be any complaints from the neighbors.
She stated that Mr. Salazar's primary concern was to change the reputation of the bar. She stated that they were here to clear the air and stated that this is a family owned business.
Chairwoman Moreau stated that the last time Mr. Salazar was before the Board he was represented by an Attorney. The Board, at that time, was under the impression that he was relating the feelings of Mr. Salazar.
City Solicitor Muksian spoke on the duties of the Police Department and remarked that this issue should have been before the Board sooner for many of these violations. He also stated that the Police Department has been giving to many second chances to cafe owners.
Councilman Charbonneau commented on the Jan. 14, 1991 decision of the Liquor Board and on the previous agreement made by the Attorney for Mr. Salazar.
Mr. Salazar responded that he felt that the fine was excessive and that his family was not present to be represented at that time.
Councilman Laroche commented on the Jan. 4, 1991 meeting and reminded Mr. Salazar that at that meeting he was the only member of the Board who felt that Mr. Salazar should be charged for all the violations instead of just the two that was agreed upon. He also commented on the $500.00 fine per violation.
Councilman Charb bureau commented on minors and the responsibilties of the owner.
Mayor Lazieh commented on the charges and the degrees of each charge. He further commented on some of the individuals in the establishment after hours and minors in the bar. He also commented on patrons not only in the bar but outside as well and the responsibility of the owner relative to this. He also commented on the behavior of the owners towards the Police Department and their access to the establishment.
Chairwoman Moreau asked if there were any further questions or comments from the Board and closed the Public Hearing at 11:58 P.M.
Chief Sasso commented on Mr. Salazar's establishment and related to the Board that he has spoken to Mr. Salazar and warned him that this establishment was out of control.
Motion was made by Councilman Laroche and seconded by Councilman Charbonneau that Mr. Salazar is guilty of 8 of the 10 charges.
Mayor Lazieh questioned which of the ten were being left out.
Councilman Laroche stated that charge #5 cleaning the establishment and charge # 8 loud music were being left out.
Vote on the motion of 8 out of 10 charges found to be guilty was unanimous.
Councilman Charbonneau commented that a $500.00 fine for each charge would result in an amount of $4,000. He commented that with the current economic situation he makes the following motion:
Motion was made by Councilman Charbonneau to a fine of $1,000 payable immediately and a four day suspension. No second on the motion. Motion dies.
Councilman Laroche asked what is the cost of having Police Officers at this hearing.
City Solicitor Muksian responded $380.00.
Motion was made by Councilman Laroche that Mr. Salazar be fined $1,000.00 for the violations and $380.00 for the cost of the Police Officers with no suspension.
Councilman Charbonneau commented that he felt this was not justified.
Councilman Vaudreuil seconded the motion.
Roll Call vote on Motion:
Councilman Charbonneau no
Councilman Laroche yes
Councilwoman Moreau yes
Councilman Vaudreuil yes
Mayor Lazieh yes
Motion carries 4 yes 1 no.
Motion was made by Mayor Lazieh and seconded by Councilman Laroche that the Police Chief notify Mr. Salazar if he becomes aware of further problems at the cafe and assign a Police Officer if required.
All Agreed. So Voted.
Councilman Charbonneau questioned how the fine was to be paid.
Chief Sasso commented.
Motion was made by Councilman Laroche and seconded by Councilman Vaudreuil that Mr. Salazar have thirty days from this date to pay fine in full. All Agreed. So Voted.
Chairwoman Moreau commented on after hours cleaning and the late hours kept for cleanings and who allows for this without the consent of the Board.
Chief Sasso commented.
Motion was made by Mayor Lazieh and seconded by Councilman Laroche that the following policy be set as controlled by state law.
1. that all establishments be closed at 1:00 A.M.
2. that everyone must leave no later than 1:30 A.M.
3. that all owners must be out no later that 2:00 A.M.
Unanimously Approved.
Councilman Laroche requested that the City Clerk notify all businesses of this policy.
The City Clerk responded that he would do this in a timely manner.
Motion to adjourn was made Councilman Vaudreuil and seconded by Councilman Laroche. All Agreed. So Voted. Time 12:08 A.M.
Daniel J. Issa, City Clerk