March 20, 2024 — Beverage Licensing Authority Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:01] Alright, recording started. All right. Call to order the beverages. Licensing authority. Hearing for Wednesday, March twentieth, 2024, at 3 Pm. Thank you. We'll start for with instructions for virtual hearing. share my screen. The city has engaged with community members to co-create a vision for productive, meaningful, and inclusive civic conversation. This vision supports physical and emotional safety for community members, staff and board and commission members as well as democracy for people of all ages. identities, lived experiences and political perspectives. More about this vision and the project's community engagement process can be found on my website. The following are examples of rules of decorum found in this boulder revised code, and other guidelines that support this vision. These will be upheld during this meeting all remarks and testimony shall be limited to matters related to city business. No participant shall make threats or use other forms of intimidation against any person.

[1:05] obscenity, racial epithets, and other speech and behavior that disrupts or otherwise impedes the ability to conduct the meeting are prohibited. Participants are required to sign up to speak, using the name they are commonly known by, and individuals must display their full name before being allowed to speak online. Currently, on the audio testimony is permitted online. The QA. Function should only be used for technical questions to staff, and it should be not used for public comments. Do you have time? And next, we have approval of beverage licensing authority. Minutes from the February 20, first, 2024, hearing. Do any board members have any edits? Member, calif. Remember absolutely. No. I would make a motion to approve the minutes from the February hearing. Member, Roberts. No, I'll second the motion to approve the minutes from February. Here.

[2:00] All in favor. Say, aye, Member California, I. Number Epsilon, I. Member. Robert's eye. Thank you so much, and I apologize. I skipped over roll call here. so I'll just do a quick roll call really fast. You can that they're both but if you'll just speak your presence aloud. Member Absalon. Never Absalom present. Chair, calipano. Chair, California President. Member Roberts. Hmm! We're Robert's present. Thank you. And then Ratar will be joining us. She's gonna be a little late. Okay, I'll skip back down now. Now we have approval of beverage licensing authority. Minutes from October eighteenth, 2024. There was just a slight modification to the minutes. and I can tell you on what page that's on. It was in the the motion for chicken on the hill. So we

[3:02] amended that to reflect what actually happened at the meeting, because there's something. and that is on page 14 of the packet. And it is that second paragraph there, that little function. Alright! Is there a motion to approve this amendment to these minutes for October. Number. Option will approve the minutes for October. Steering. Member. California will second all in favor. Say, aye, member Californ. Remember Absalom, I. Member Roberts, I. Thank you so much. Next is hearing agenda issues from licensing clerk. There are no issues for today. and I will move on to agenda. Item 2, which is matters from Boulder police department, and I'll hand it over to Officer Rec. Good afternoon just a couple of updates. We have done 2 compliance checks. We did one February 20, sixth, one March seventh. We had 16 passes and 4 fails and then also sprinkled in there, not including those 16. We did some tobacco and some marijuana compliance checks as well. And then also today, we keep getting Ids rolling in from 2023

[4:22] so so far we have about 1,544 from 2023, and as of today, we have 182 for 2024. I start inspections with the State on Friday. So I'm looking forward to learning about our and inspections and look forward to giving you guys some updates next month about what I've come up with. Great. Thank you, officer. Back. Is there any questions from the board? Not seeing any? Alright? Well, thank you very much.

[5:03] Thank you. Officer. Rec. Next, we have matters from responsible association of retailers, and Mr. Dewey just got in here. So give me a second to get situated. Sorry? Yeah. Good! I'm good. I'm good. Good afternoon, everybody. not much to report on on the going on of Boulder. We did start a new system. We always just let people kind of pay as we go. But we're kind of stopped that. And of course, boulders like Number one like, we're almost to full membership. So that's awesome. As far as people paying into what what we're doing in boulders. So that's just really good news, because that means I feel it's a reflection of the job I'm doing and we're doing. If they keep signing up. So I'm I'm happy about that. And we are revamping some things such as the id compliance checks. It's just been so hard to keep people hired and wanting to do it. So we're kind of figuring out a new way to do that, but that will be hopefully started in the next quarter. And other than that, I would just say,

[6:13] something I would like to add to today, because there is a member who is going to be facing you guys today, which is Hazel's liquor, and I would just ask the board just to hear me out on this real quick I've been working with hazels since the day after the incident happened. I'm pretty. The. Morning. That's useful. Would ask that you hold this testimony till we call the agenda item in order, and you could speak to it. Then. Oh, cool! I thought I I thought I could do that alright. So that's cool. Can do Button. Say, I don't like to that time. Then things are going really well with the liquor side of things. Oh, we will be hopefully doing. And a fake id training. coming up here in the next few months as well. So I'll I'll keep you guys abreast of that. But other than that, things are going great. So if you have any questions. Let me know.

[7:04] Great. Thank you. Are there any questions for Mr. Dewey from the board? Not seeing any? All right. Well, thank you, Mr. Dee, for all that you do. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Next, we have agenda. Item 4, which is general public comments for future beverage, licensing authority hearings. If you're here to give general public comment on something that is not on the agenda. Please go ahead and raise your hand again. This would be for something that is not on the agenda is the raise hand function to let me know. not seeing any hands. So we will move on here. Next is agenda. Item 5. Bank of Corporation Dva. Chicken on the hill, 1 1 9, 13, street boulder, Colorado, 80302 monthly status. Report to the bla.

[8:00] and I see that Mr. Livest here. Thomas Relo is being promoted to panelists here. I'll just let the belly know that chicken on the hill isn't good standing with sales and occupation Texas. Awesome good job, Mr. Luke. Happy to hear that. Been good standing. And are there any questions for Mr. Lou? Member California? No. We're absolutely no. Member, Robert Snow. Alright. Thank you, Mister Luke. Keep it up. Thank you, sir. Me. You. So I can't hear. Okay. next we have agenda. Item 6 is showcase hearing concerning an alleged violation, and whether the fermented mob beverage and wine. Retailer off premise, type, liquor, license, held by 7 ECO. 2 lc. And 7 11 Inc. Dba. 7, 11, store 3, 5, 0 6 9 c. 1, 0 9, 1 13, street border, Colorado, 80302 should be suspended or revoked here to speak on the center. Please go ahead and raise your hand.

[9:18] I'm going to get everyone in here while they're getting in. I'll just let the board know that this licensee is also in good standing, with sales and occupation tax. and I believe. Hello! I'm Kevin Coates here. Can you hear me? Folks. Yes, hi! The circle. Very good. I'm I'm from Dill and Dale. I'm here on behalf of 7 11. We should also have Don Puck. I see him on the on the video screen here as well. So represented from 7 11. We're here for our show cause matter the agenda item packet does reflect the mitigation packet that we

[10:02] previously filed and prepared to make any statements. When you're ready. Perfect. I'll just go ahead and swear in really, quick, if that's okay. So, Mr. Buck, if you will go ahead and say your name and spy your name for the record. Oh, you're muted. Thank you for that. It's Donald Buck Donald DONA LD last name buck BUCK. Thank you. And can you give an address for the record. 1, 2, 0 7 East Hopkins Drive, Elizabeth, Colorado, 80107. Thank you, and if you'll raise your right hand. do you swear or affirm that the statements you're about to give before the beverage? Licensing authority are true and correct. I do? Thank you. and I will hand it over to the chair. And Mr. Coates, if we could just get you to record your appearance. Again. My name's Kevin Colts. I'm a registration number is 2, 5, 9, 9, 5. I'm the attorney here. I'm or 7 11. I am from deal with Dill.

[11:04] Great. Thank you. And since you're representing his counsel, I'd ask if you'd be willing to waive the reading of the procedures into the record. Absolutely. And thank you. Great. And is there any expertise, communication or conflict of interest from any of the Board members? Member California? No. Remember Absalom, no. Member, Robert Snow. And is there anyone here in the attendees list that wishes to speak to this agenda? Item, if you could please raise your hand. not seeing any. Alright, Mr. Coates, you may proceed. Thank you. Appreciate your time. I'll I'll just make a statement here, and then certainly turn any. Turn this over to you folks for any questions you might have a Mr. Bach. but our mitigation packet has been submitted. Within it is included one of one of our policies and procedures is is to scan all identification

[12:00] or scan scan on every sale and id for the sale. Apparently this individual within the parameters of the compliance check the the clerk took an id out from the drawer. So it was an id that had been left, and they do hold ids for about a 30 day process for folks to come back and pick them up, if if if they if somebody leaves a credit card or an Id or something to that effect, but they do destroy it after the 30 day period, because they don't want them hanging around, but they certainly have to keep them somewhere. This employee apparently knew where it was. grabbed it, and instead of, instead of following the procedures which was to deny the sale, he, he ran that id and and made the sale to to the the underage compliance check officer. So clearly our violation, our employee? We've admitted that with respect to the stipulation with the prosecutor. For the facts in terms of what what occurred for for the compliance check

[13:03] and the employees no longer with us. But if you continue to go through that packet, it it does outline that policies and procedures associated with identification. I believe that we're in compliance with the training requirements for boulder. They also have an internal training requirement annual basis. For individuals to be retrained. They have a bars program. They've been doing pretty well with the bars program over the course of the last year. They didn't have any any red cards with the with the check system for those coming into appear under the age of 50, and whether or not they're being carted or not. they they they passed all of those they they post those those green cards, as you see at the end of the the mitigation packet up in the store for the other employees to see it, and they and they encourage celebration of that. You know the folks are in compliance, and that they're they're doing what they need to do. But this this employee? Obviously so our failure and and it made the sale. They they they do use utilize Su supervision by the the managers of the location to to make sure that they're also watching transactions, and and that employees are utilizing the point of sales system as they're supposed to

[14:12] and that is, is to to to see if they can also monitor and make sure that you know folks are not trying to circumvent the system. But the sale occurred, and we're we're here to to obviously take our our our punishment accordingly. And and understand that again. Sales just like this can't happen. But Mr. Buck is a well equipped here to talk to you about any any additional questions you might have with respect to this particular matter, and I am too. Thank you. And it's been quite a while since we've had a show cause without a stipulate signed stipulation. Mr. Ramirez, can you advise on how to proceed. Yeah, thank you so much. And and I appreciate that the Licenses Council. Admitted the liability without going through that process. But, as I understand it, you do have a stipulation.

[15:08] and if you turn to Page, I think it's 35 in your packet. and assuming that that is correct, and you have that there you should ask the the prosecution to move to accept the stipulation. I'll after you've had a chance to review it. And then you can vote on that and then proceed. Okay. so is there any discussion from the board on this signed stipulation? All right. And I would ask Mr. Reynolds if he would be willing to accept the stipulation.

[16:05] Good afternoon, members of the Board Chris Reynolds with the Boulder City attorney's office prosecution. It did reach a stipulation with 7 11 here, and is on page 35, and I would move the board to except the signed stipulation as the basis for this showcase. Hearing. Thank you, Mr. Reynolds. Is there a motion to accept the stipulation from the board? Member apple in motion to accept the stipulation. Member. Roberts will second the motion to accept the stipulation. Alright! We have a motion all in favor. Say, aye, Member California, I. Number Epsilon, I. Member Roberts, I. Alright. And Mr. Ramirez is, are we able to ask questions of the attorney at this point?

[17:04] You can certainly ask questions this would be the opportunity for them. To provide you any matters in mitigation or in support of whatever they believe is a reasonable outcome. So you can certainly ask the questions. Now, what's on your mind, or allow them to proceed and then ask, follow up questions. Mr. Coates, did you have anything else you wish to present? Oh, you're muted. I'm not sure how I got to the unmute part. I'm sorry about that. But You pointed out it's been some time. It's been some time for me as well in terms of being here on a on a violation matter. So my understanding is, the procedures were followed with respect to the mitigation packet being time, we sent in the stipulation was done, and and and timely sent in as to facts, and then that has always been boulders, practices, is to stipulate just to the facts, but not to the penalty, and that the authority then would decide the penalty.

[18:08] You have the the table as I, as I recall, do we? Do we deviate or go from the table, up, down, around? And and I I certainly remember that process. We are asking that because we have a a mitigation packet that's extensive. That you do deviate and and give us less days down. Then then what are the standard without mitigation packet you know numbers. But but I I did notice in the in the the letter, the licensee letter, and so I guess we followed this to a T. It it it does say that. that you know the the bla. In certain situations situations may petition the the license. You may petition the beverage license authority for permission to pay a monetary fine in lieu.

[19:02] Now I again the process years past where those were. Those are almost never, never. Granted. But I don't know what the authorities take on. Those are at this point we have followed the terms of the letter we have brought with us sales, figures, and Mr. Buck has them. They come to about $687 a day for the preceding 90 day period of overall sales is listed in the letter. So you asked me what if I had anything else to offer. I suppose what I'm I'm requesting, based upon our mitigation, and certainly we'll answer any additional questions you may have. But what we're asking is is for less than the 5 day penalty and the ability to pay a fine and loop, certainly understanding that the authority certainly has the discretion to do whatever penalty it feels is appropriate. And and, as I said, it's been some time since I've been here in front of the authority, and and had a temperature from the authority is is this to how they handle these particular matters in in for terms of a violation? So so we certainly make that request respectively

[20:07] and and am trying to follow essentially the language that comes from from the letter that went out with the the show cost packet. Thank you. So the way it works is we'll come up with a sentencing, and then at that time you can ask for a finding we could discuss as a board. And and I wasn't sure, because, you know, we we were a little out of order to in terms of the stipulation. So I I just wanted to make sure that I was. I was speaking up at the right time. So thank you very much, and appreciate that. We're all a little rusty here. Are there any questions for Mr. Codes or Mr. Buck? I just have one based on the affidavit. That's really concerning that. They had a license that they kept after using a valid license that did not go through. that they took that extra, that license that they had and used it. I mean to me this is a little speculation, but it sounds intentional.

[21:08] Can you speak to what occurred with that. I I can't speak for the employee who's no longer with with the company, and what was going through his, his, his thoughts, and why he did that. But he it it seems like certainly it's not an additional act of the licensee, but that employee from the standpoint, because obviously the policies and procedures intend for that to not to happen in the first place. But the employee did that, and I can't for the life of me give you a reason why? Mr. Buck, I think may be able to add essentially to my comments from that. Yeah, Kevin, I appreciate that. And board member California, we agree with you. There's no reason for an employee to save an id to to use it at a later time. It's our practice to hold on to. As Mr. Coach shared earlier, we hold onto Ids that were left behind, and credit cards that were left behind for up to 30 days, so that we give the a customer a chance to come back and say, Hey, I think I left my Id here. Can I get it back? We've

[22:12] not ever encouraged, nor it's it's against our policy to have anybody use an id that is not the one for the customer making the purchase. So we're with you. 100 we don't get. Why, an employee would think it'll be okay to do that. And just like to add that the employee is kind of representing the licensee in these matters, so I would just say, have a a lot more discretion in your hiring practices. You got your your location is in an area that is notorious for underage drinking, and that's even more call to take a risk and ex caution. So, yeah, that's all I had to add to that. Anything else from the board members. So I may just expand on that real quick, because I was gonna actually include Officer rec in this conversation, because when it comes to when you confiscate an Id or credit card. Isn't it the policy of the city of Boulder to accept those things instead of? I heard during testimony that they get destroyed? Aren't those supposed to be returned to the Boulder police department? Once you confiscate anything.

[23:10] These aren't confiscated. The these are these are ones that, in other words, my understanding is those policies and procedures relate to fake ids and confiscation of fake ids need to then be turned in under a statutory. I I believe it's actually a regulation period of time to the department. That's not what we're talking about. This was an id that W. Was a valid id that somebody left. and same thing with a credit card lost lost card, so they're merely holding onto it for the period of time to allow them to come back, the the correct owner of it, and to pick it up. But it was not a confiscated identification card. It was left card. Sure is left behind. But I know a lot of responsible vendors in town will go ahead and do whatever they can to find the owner of those cards, and then, once that period is over, instead of destroying them, returning them to boulder, Pd. For them to do their diligence to find the owners of those cards. I was just wondering if that was a policy that was in place with this particular license.

[24:00] Well, if that's if that's what the request to the Board is. Certainly it's a reasonable policy. I again unaware of that that procedure. Certainly aware of the procedure associated with the Conf. An Id. That's a false id, you know, that's taken from either a valid id that's not from the person or from, or it's a fake. Id. But if if that is the wish of the board, we certainly I I don't think Mr. Buck would have any objection to to, instead of destroying Iids or credit cards? After they're left? To turning them into the police department. Do you have any objection to that, Mr. Buck. No objection at all. It's not at all. And I'm not saying there's a specific, a regulation around that. I'm saying it's a policy responsible vendors use that as a policy in my experience and getting those things back to Dpd. Once they are confiscated, not or left behind in your license establishment, not saying that that's a regulation, but maybe a practice to help with responsible policies. Moving forward was what I was getting at. And and very much appreciate the comment. And I believe Mr. Buck is is saying that that may be what we should do. Going forward.

[25:05] And I did have another question to Piggyback off that. How many leftover ids are you saying. I don't have a number it. I I don't have a lot that are reported to me that are retained whenever they are discovered. We're we hold on to approximately 30 days. We don't wanna hold onto this for more than 30 days. And so our expectation is that they are destroyed. But I don't have an estimate on how many are left behind. Just seems kind of odd. We're not seeing that with other establishments especially retail. And and I, if I'm speculate, I'm speculating it. And it happened very, very often at all. But this particular Id sat there, and and this employee used it. I I think it probably happened a lot. I wish we could get data on. How many times that I do was scanned? This is a weird situation. What? My my follow up question is, what are you going to do? What? What have you put into place? Since this incident happened. What! Where do those cards now? Go.

[26:11] Yeah, Miss Gross, I'll speak to this. I've asked our manager, Jack, to make sure that those are secured in the safe where only he has access to the safe for that 30 day period of time. That makes sense. I haven't comment. But it's a little on something else in the packet, so. I was just gonna say that and correct me. If I'm wrong I might be wrong on this, but I'm pretty sure you can drop valid id in a dropbox or a mailbox, and it gets mailed back to the address on the Id. You mean in a mailbox. Correct. I I'm I'm unfamiliar with that. Does anybody know if that's actually a thing I've heard? It's a thing so.

[27:01] Well, I'll just reckon back to what I just said earlier. What I was always been noticed with responsible licenses is that when you confiscate an Id, and you try your best to get it back to that person, not confiscate. You find a lost Id. The thing you do is you go to Bpd and hand it to them, and then that's their next responsibility to find the owner of it. And then it's out of your license establishment. I think that was what the policy about I've always noticed responsible licenses, and that's why I wanted to ask Officer Rick. She wanted to chime in on that. Yeah, I would highly recommend that you drop them off or contact an officer. If you see one walking up on the hill and turn that stuff over, because we do take the extra time to try to locate the owner. It could be that the owner of the Id had their vehicle trespass, and that would be a really good way for us to get that back to them, and also try to identify maybe, who a suspect was if they tried to use it at 7 11, or, you know just something along those lines. No officers ever gonna tell you I don't want it. You can absolutely drop it off. We're open 24 HA day. It. It, may I ask? I I assume that

[28:01] does. Does that apply for like? Which I think is probably more often than the identification, but that would be either a debit card or a credit card. Would would the police department take that as well. Absolutely. Very good. Well for the. I would take that best practice back to our store. And in fact, all of our stores here in Colorado, and ask that all of our managers. Turn those over as soon as they identify that they've been left behind in the stores to the police department specifically for Boulder store so great, best practice that I wasn't aware of, and I'll make sure that we follow that bit or introduce that best practice for the store. In addition, the Id that was scanned was expired. So why was it still sitting there. Yeah, I can't speak to why it was still sitting there, because our expectations that shouldn't have been there. And yeah. And if it was expired, why are they so selling liquor with to an expired id like, how? Yeah. The whole thing is very bizarre.

[29:03] And does your pos system accept expired ids. Cause it. Right. I will have to check on that to board members. I, because I don't know the answer right now that it does, or it doesn't accept expired Ids. I I don't think it does, so I'm not really sure how happened. I don't know if they got keep something in or what did. I don't know. We just don't know. And the fact matter is is that that you know. back to the original question of the guy acting intentionally. It sure seems like he did. But from that standpoint it wasn't what he was trying to do. or wasn't what the expectation of of the store was for him to do. And and I think I think Mr. Californos California's original statements of you know, careful who you hire, I guess. But that's that's a that's something, you know, A, we're not saying that to shirk responsibility for it's our responsibility. 100%. But yeah, we're responsible for that employee in his action.

[30:03] Mr. Bucket, it's I think you need to do a deep dive into this store. It sounds like practices aren't occurring that should be occurring. Definitely will. And along. With that, can we look at the there's a page in the packet for mitigating factors. The I think it's page 39. It says, we're like the training and you have about 9, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 people listed. I'm assuming those are the employees, and you have 3 that have been tips, certified, tips trained. Excuse me and their training date, but then you have their higher date is like out in the future. I'm not saying that like like what's going on there. And how can you only have 3 tips trained employees? How do those people work all the hours.

[31:01] So the employees that have not received tips yet are have been are with in the timeframe that we're allowed to get them trained. We have had them complete. A, we've got a computer based training through our 7 11 system. It's called come of age. And we expect all our employees to go through that before they complete before they are signed up to go to tips, so that we do have some training. It's already occurred on the come of age. Acceptance of ids and for the employees that are in a it's only it's in a only because they've not. They've not been with us long enough to get through the training within that timeframe that was allowed. But to answer your question as well. I think there's a mistake in there, because it's talking about higher dates of December sixteenth, 2024, I think that should say 23. Should say. And we're trained within the 60 day period. Same thing. So so that that date and the November date, I believe, should say 23. Just. That's a mistake in terms of the in terms of the

[32:00] higher date that's put there. So they're not hired in the future. They were hired, I believe, last year. Right. Mr. Butt. Your current? Yes. I mean, I figured so. But I just it. It looks to me like, maybe you guys just through this together, really quickly, for this show cause. It's just those things that make me wary about what's going on, you know, just oversighting that just looks really quickly written down. I guess your problem. I took my time to do it, I and I, and I apologize for the error that I made when I was doing this. Alright! Are there any other questions from the board. So sorry if I can interrupt really quickly. I just wanna let everyone know that Member card has joined us, and then I just wanna send a quick reminder to everyone that the QA. Function is only to be used for technical difficulties. It is not to be used for any type of comment. And if you are here to make a comment again, we'll I'll ask you to raise your hand, and we'll swear you want to do through. Go through all that, so please don't use the QA. For anything. Besides, the technical team.

[33:06] Alright, and so no other questions from the board. Mr. Coach, did you have anything final? You wanted to close with. I don't, and again I assume you deliberate, and then we wait to make additional requests, if if applicable. Is that is that the fair statement. That's correct. Thank you. Okay, appreciate it. Thank you. No, I, Mr. Buck, I don't believe we have anything else. Is that correct? And methods. Thank you. Alright at this time we will close for deliberation any comments from the boards. I frankly, I see a lot of aggravating factors here, and worrying factors. I agree. I I'm in full agreement with that statement. Just looking at the aggregating factors versus the mitigating packet that was given to us. I I see more aggravation than mitigation here. And certainly, when it comes to just not understanding how ids are are dealt with when they're left at a store, you know, when you're operating a a license establish in the city of Boulder.

[34:07] All employees should know what happens when a credit card or or license is left, or a password, for that matter, in your establishment, and what to do with that that's concerning to me. And then also the fact that the the actual swipe worked. How did that even work? I mean, there was a mention of someone using keying in a code. Is there a code to override that I don't think there is. So there's a lot of concerning aggregating factors for me here. I'm looking at some of the table values here. I would ask the other Board members to kind of weigh in what they think about aggravating, versating. But one count for this would be 5 days served in 9 days in advance is what I'm seeing correctly. Chair Calvana. That's the base level. Correct. With all this aggravation I'm I'm I'm prone to kind of go a little bit more than that, I'd like to ask the rest of the board what they think.

[35:02] 100% and given their location. That's really concerning to me. That area is notorious, for. you know, underage drinking sales to minors. It's it's a high risk area. And the fact of the matter is is that we have Mr. Buck and no offense to him. But it doesn't sound like he knows what's going on at this store or in control of it. which is kind of scary for that, him himself being the licensee holder. So these these employees are not following law, and they're his license at risk. And I would guarantee this is not a first time. This is a practice. People probably know they can go there and get sold drinks. That's not. You don't have an expired id sitting around for however long. It's yeah. I mean full agreement. Yeah, we we don't know that, though there hasn't been any charges against that. So we probably shouldn't do any speculation on that matter.

[36:03] But yeah. Did you have any? Can can I ask one question? We're we're closed for deliberation at this point. So. The only the only issues is I'm I'm curious on the. Your codes for both. They're delivered. From that it's expired. That was the only that was the only question. I guess, as I'm I'm having trouble, seeing that in the report. I I know that that's the only thing that I that I had a question about. Mr. Codes were closed for deliberation. But to answer your question, it is in the affidavit. Oh, okay, thank you. Okay, I would agree that we definitely go higher than table value. Are there any suggestions one suggestion I might have is that we go a little higher than table value, maybe not a little, but higher than table value. And given the aggravating factors many, many days held in advance. I see that makes sense given as to the location of the licensee and the proclivity for things like that to happen. So I think. To your point, I would say. Looking at the table. Value of 5 days serves, and 9 days in advance, I would say 5 days serves and move that to 20 days in advance, or maybe a month in advance, just because of the risk factor of that location.

[37:19] I was coming back. I was gonna make a suggestion of 8 days served with, I like the 20 held in advance. Yeah. it'll it holds them accountable. Any thoughts on that. I would second the I would second the violation for the code of one count, move it up to 8 days served, and 20 days in advance. For this I would I would second that motion. If that was a motion I'd recalcon. Yeah, I can make the motion and have the executive of 8 days served and 20 days held in advance. Alright. Absolutely what second. All in favor. Say I am Member California. I.

[38:02] Remember Epsilon, I. Member Carl will abstain because I was not present for the testimony. Member Roberts. Aye. Alright, Mr. Coates. this is now your time. Dare I ask? I'm personally not willing to entertain the idea of a fine and low. I'll second the fact that I am not willing to entertain any thought of the final. Member Roberts. I agree. Yes, Member Roberts. May may I ask, then, the question of How is it served and beginning when. So that was my next point. We have to determine those days. Typically we did. We would start on the following Monday from this hearing. But given the aggravating factors that spring break

[39:01] I don't think it would get the point across and the seriousness of their violation. I would make a motion to start the following Monday. Let me get the date. Monday, April first. Is there a second. Number arsenal, with second. All in favour, say, aye, Member Californian. Number, Absalom. I. Member Robert's I. Never Carol Stein. Alright. so, Caitlin. can we have those materials ready. And I just am gonna reiterate that. I know I have the correct information here. So we have 8 days served 20 days in advance. And the 8 day served will begin on Monday, April first, which means a poster will be available. Honestly, I'm gonna make the posters before I leave today. So the posters will be available after today.

[40:03] just so that we can make sure that we have those. But it will need to be posted by Monday, April first. And you say, poster, is it 2 posters? One except. Everyone out. Correct? Yes, it will be 2 posters, one inside, one out, and then they will be available to pick up at our locker system, which is can be accessed 24, 7. And they could pick up in the locker system. That's 24 7. That's that's essentially where they could pick it up. Correct. Will we be sent the the cold, or will it? Yeah, yeah. yeah. alright. Thank you. You'll email that to Mr. Buck. And I. Yes, that's correct. And Roberto chime in here. Thank you, Miss Kellogg. Appreciate it. Thank you. And just so that the record is abundantly clear. The rules of procedure state so you're fine with the date. The suspension dates shall be served within 30 days. So you have that. But the record isn't necessarily clear. I just wanna make sure that it's clear that the suspension will be on consecutive days, and on days when the licensee would otherwise be open for business.

[41:12] Great. Thank you for that, Mr. Ramirez. All right. Thank you very much, Mr. Coates. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Just make sure that everyone is where they're supposed to be be great. Okay. next, we have agenda, item 7. Just show cross hearing concerning an alleged violation, and whether the retail liquor store type, liquor license held at integrity, retail partners, Llc. Dba Hazel's beverage by Bridge, world 1, 9, 5, 5, 28 street boulder, Colorado, 80301 should be suspended or revoked.

[42:00] And if you are here to speak on this matter. Please go ahead and raise your hand and all. Yeah. And while Mr. Dirking is being promote as a panelist here, I will let you guys know that this Licensee isn't concerned with sales occupation tax. And then, Mr. Do, I see about your hand is raised as well? I'm just gonna look. but I will go ahead. I will need to swear you in. So if you'll just turn your camera on. there you go. Second. Okay? And then, Mr. Duking, are you the only one that's gonna be appearing? Besides, Mr. Dewey, for this. Yes, that is correct. Thank you. And you're an attorney. Is that correct? It is. My registration number is 24, 5, 35, and we're willing to waive reading other procedures. Thank you so much. And then, Mr. Dewey, I'll just have you. I'm just gonna spare you, and I'll have you say your name and spell your name for the record and give an address. Record.

[43:01] Nathan Dewey, NATH. A. NDEW. I. 1813, cherry Blossom Drive, Windsor, Colorado. Thank you. If you'll raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the same answer about to give before the beverage licensing authority are true and correct. Yes. Thank you so much. I'm like, get up. Alright! Is there. Just good. Sorry. Sorry. So the way it'll work is we'll go ahead and start the proceeding. We'll have Mr. Deer King give his presentation, and then you'll be able to speak at that point. Cool. alright. Is there any expertise, communication or conflict of interest from any of the Board? Members, member, Califon or no? Remember Absalom, no. Never car, now. Member Roberts, No. All right. And is there anyone here besides, Mr. Dewey that wishes to speak to this agenda? Item, if you could please raise your hand. not seeing anybody. All right, Mr. Dear King, you may proceed.

[44:00] Thank you. Miss Kelly. Are you able to show the security video of the failure? If it's okay with the board, I'd like to show you the security video from the story. It's about 1 min. Mr. Dirking. As I said, it's been a while, so I'm gonna go ahead and get the affidavit. If we're willing to accept it if it comes. Thank you. Chris Reynolds again, with the Boulder City attorney's office prosecution, and our office was able to enter into a stipulation with this Licensee, and it is contained in your materials on page 59, and at this time I would submit it to the Board for potential acceptance. Alright! Is there a motion to accept the affidavit member? California would move to accept. Remember absent the second. All in favor. Say, aye, member Californ. Number, Absalom. I. Member car. I.

[45:00] Member Roberts, I. All right now, Mr. Duke, and you may proceed. Thank you. Miss Kelly, if it's okay to show that video. And if if it's acceptable to the board, it's about a 1 min video. And I'll just narrate what's happening. Yes, that should be fine. Can we get this entered as a Oh, gosh! Why can't I think of it? It's called. No worries. So this, the link to this video is actually in your packet. It's on page 152, so that is the video that Hazel submitted. I did have our it. People put it into a format that was acceptable for the packet. So that's why, you see that link there in that way? But I will go ahead and share my screen now and play this for you. Make sure you happy?

[46:05] Okay? You do. Great. So we're looking at the left hand register. There you can see that a person whose face is blurred out is the undercover police operative. So he presents a 6 pack of beer. The cashier Mr. Simon, asks for his Id. You can probably see that that's a vertical id, and it's a vertical Colorado id he gave him. Mr. Simon is trying to scan it. He tries multiple times, and it won't scan. He gets a little flustered which he shouldn't have. He never does his manual check of the Id for his training like he should. but he does pick up his radio and call for his supervisor. Mr. Simon had been with us less than 2 weeks. He was still being trained, although he was far enough along that our staff had determined he was ready to cashier the woman at the bottom who appears is his supervisor, Miss Maldonado. You can see she takes the Id for 4 s.

[47:05] hands it back to him and says, Proceed. that's really all of the video that you need to see. But I can keep explaining beyond that Mr. Simon goes ahead and proceeds with the illegal sale, never having checked the Id. Himself. And with the id not scanning just based on his supervisor, his boss, coming over and telling him to do the wrong thing. Miss Kelly, you probably could stop sharing the screen if you unless you want to. So when I learned of this, I obviously was incredibly dismayed and shocked, and my question to our staff was, How did this happen? Because we should have had 3 levels of defense to making an illegal sale here. The cashier is supposed to check the Id for their training. The scanner is the technology backstop. It's not supposed to replace their manual scan. And then for a Colorado vertical id or any circumstance where the cashier is not 100% sure what they're supposed to do, they should call their supervisor, and in my mind the thought that we would have had a supervisor or manager respond, and still fail listing or fail. A compliance check I would have thought was nearly impossible, so we had to really do some soul searching, and

[48:24] we open an investigation almost immediately to figure out, okay, wh. Why did this go wrong? What went so wrong here? And generally here. Here's the summary of what we learned. One of the employees. Mr. Simon was cooperative. One. Miss Maldonado was not so. I never really heard her explanation for her behavior. Mr. Simon, said he. He couldn't understand why the Id wouldn't scan and he shouldn't have, because there was a period of time a few years back for about 9 months, where Colorado ids had a printing defect, and those ids from that era just do not scan. We know that it's not an excuse. Some ids are not capable of being scanned like passports, and so

[49:06] the scanner is there as a tool. But he shouldn't have gotten flustered by that. Also he never did his manual check for his training, and when I asked Mr. Simon why his explanation was well, it wouldn't scan, and he knew he was calling a supervisor, and he figured she'd just come over and tell him what to do. So we look at that as a potential training failure of him skipping a very important step, and really the most important step. And yet, despite his mistakes, he did something really important that should have prevented illegal sale of having his boss come over and tell him what to do. What you saw Ms. Maldonano, do there? Was not even remotely close to what she should have done. You know our policy is that when they're responding to cashier asking for help, the manager supervisor should go into the cashier station with them, interact with the customer. Spend some time saying, What have you got here? What's going on?

[50:03] Okay, you've got a Colorado vertical Id. There's only 3 possibilities. And one of them almost never happens. One possibility is it's someone who just had a birthday, and that happens about 4 or 5 day times a week at our store. When people turn 21 in boulder they like to come to hazels. Their id is good for 20 days after their birthday, but we always know that's a high risk sale, because a Colorado vertical id was issued to a minor, which is why it requires additional verification. Neither employee showed the level of recognition that this was a special case that they should have. If the scanner doesn't work if if the Id won't scan, it shows that on the screen. She never took the time to look at the screen or talk to him about what was going on. And when I first saw the video, my my before I knew the operatives birth, date. I thought probably he had a 2,002 birth date, and this happened in 2,023, and maybe she'd only looked at the birth year and done the math and gotten to 21 and never checked the months. But that's not the case. It when we talked with the city attorney's office, and we learned the truth that operatives birth year was 2,003, so there's no way, even if she only looked at the birth year that she could have gotten that wrong.

[51:18] So as we looked at okay, that we had all 3 levels fail here. What can we do about it? At the cashier level? It's really we looked at training. And so in the packet, I've specified some of the changes that we made in our training. And now we still have the focus on calling for your supervisor. But what we realized is inadvertently the focus on that cause Mr. Simon to skip over the important step of him, checking the Id himself. So we're really reiterating that it's got to be both. It's not an either, or that we need this redundancy as a way of making sure we don't make mistakes. We're also training our cashiers very strongly on the fact that they have to decide for themselves, and they should never rely on someone else, even their boss, to tell them to proceed with a sale. That they haven't determined themselves is a legal sale, and they are all empowered to decline to participate in a sale

[52:13] that they're not comfortable with, even if their boss wants to proceed with it. Every single employee has the ability to decline, and there will be no discipline for anyone in good faith says, Hey, I'm not comfortable that this is a legal sale on the scanning it. It troubled me that when it didn't work we just didn't basically had to skip that step. That's what we had. And so we went to our pos provider and said, Is there any way to backstop that? So when we have ids from this year where there was the printing problem, or when we have ids that don't scan, how can we have a technology backup and working with them? We were able to have our software modified, so that now, if an Id will not scan, there's another barrier, and the cacher has to manually input the birth date. From the Id. And so the computer can calculate that for them.

[53:02] Again, looking at this case with a junior employee, Mr. Simon, you know, if if that would have been in place, I think he would have correctly entered the birth date. We wouldn't have made the sale. So that's an improvement that we've made. And then, you know, most troubling is Miss Maldonados behavior. Trying to understand why someone who had been with us a couple of years was well paid in a position of trust and responsibility, would have acted so recklessly. and although she would not cooperate with our investigation, I did learn that she was going through a divorce, and had recently moved out of her home. I did not know that at the time, but our store manager did, and he had spoken with her about the importance of still doing your job and and leaving personal challenges at the door, and it was his assessment that she could and would still do her job confidently. In hindsight. Obviously, I think that was wrong, and on this particular day I believe

[54:01] probably she was so emotionally or mentally checked out that she just completely failed to do her job. So to me, that really suggests. And and, by the way, should say she she had available, paid sick time. She could have had a mental health day, and we would have paid her and had we known she had a compromise state and couldn't do her job, we would have sent her home. But in our training with our management team we've really focused on observing and being aware of what's going on people's lives. And if someone's had some significant life event that could cause emotional distress to be aware that that's a risk factor for us that someone might who who in the past had been competent and and responsible, might just do the wrong thing. And so we focus on that side of our our training at the management level overall. I just want to say I'm completely dismayed that this happened. I'm embarrassed. As a big store, even though we're in case you don't know we're not a chain or anything. This is a family business. My wife and I and some outside investors

[55:06] have this business. It's our only store. But it it is a big store. We do a lot of business. We do a lot of transactions, and and we should be the best. and for us to have a failure is just absolutely, completely unacceptable. And so we have to come away with this saying, we've got to be better, and we can't let it happen again. In the package I did go through, and we pretty much check every single box on the mitigating factors. If now is appropriate, I'm happy to go through that if you'd like, or if the Board has read them, and in the interest of time. You'd like me not to go over them again. that's fine with me as well, but that's generally our assessment of what's happened and what we've done in response. Great. Thank you, Mr. Dear King. Are there any questions from the board for Mr. Dear King? I think we all saw the robust mitigating factors in the packet. So I think we're good with having those on the record already.

[56:07] I have a question. Something that you you I I appreciate all of the detail that you just gave us, including her personal life. But I didn't hear anything I would like for you to comment on. Maybe being under staffed. Are you fully staffed? I know a lot of retail places are understaffed these days. I've been a retail manager. That's a really hard job. Your store is so big. and generally there's not a lot of. It's just up. Can you speak on that? What's what's your staffing situation. Yeah, no, thank you. That's it's a good question. And at the time of the failure I I do not believe under staffing was a factor. I do think rapid turnover, frequent turnover. A staff is a challenge for us, and it's a risk factor because we're constantly training. And and when people are new. Their first few weeks on the job is one of the highest risk times.

[57:07] and we know that. I wish we could get people to stay longer. You know, we've increased wages. We provide benefits. We try to make it a good place to work. But it's just been very, very difficult, really, since the pandemic. to not have a lot of turnover in those positions. we are, you know, we have about 55 employees. I mean, if you compare us to chain businesses, I think we're well staffed. We have no self-checkout we always have at least one supervisor manager there, so the cashiers never on their own. We usually have 3 to 5 supervisor managers in the building. so I I would say the the turnover is probably a bigger factor than understapping. And have you taken some steps to understand why you have a a big turnover, maybe bring in a consultant. Do some exit, interviews anything like that?

[58:04] We do exit interviews that we haven't brought in a consultant. But you know what we hear is, you know, cash sharing is for a lot of people. It's it's a very repetitive job. And we're in a super competitive environment where there are more jobs than there are workers. We only hire over 21 you know our our starting wages, at least $17, and as much as $19 an hour for cashier. We have a 401 K, we contribute 4%. We have health insurance. We pay two-thirds free life, free Eco, pass for uniforms, play discount, paid sick time and vacation. I mean, we try to provide a really robust set of wages and benefits and the reality for us. You know, with prop. 125. And what's happening? Grocery source? We're actually losing money right now. We have not made money this year. We're hoping to turn that. But I I don't have the ability to pay a lot more than we are paying. We're really trying to do the best that we can to keep our business going.

[59:08] Thank you. Thank you so much. Alright. Are there any other questions? Not seeing any Mr. Dewey at this time? We would allow you to give your presentation 3. Guys hear me now. Barbara Rick, and you're. Camera. That would be great. I I don't have control to do that. Oh, there it is! Sorry. There it goes! Alright. Sorry about that. No, I just, you know, as Hazel is an ir member. You know, as you guys know, sometimes I I come to witness to these things sometimes I don't, because sometimes things are super negligent, and it's obvious. And in this case I just wanted to stand next to Bruce on this one in support of just your understanding that he since day one invited R into his store. And I have to tell you his operations are some of the finest I've seen in the whole State of Colorado from my members, and I have

[60:18] well over 20 30 liquor stores, and he has a very large liquor store. So I think everything he said explains everything very well. As far as his operations are concerned, to the fact so much that we even adopted some of the things Bruce does, and have initiated him into other stores. So I just think that says a lot as to how he operates his foresight, his looking ahead to try and stop the problems. I mean, he's even got his. his Po people now to start things, and nobody else does that. That's what I have to say on that. On that level. He's ahead of the game. He's head of everybody else, and just like a couple of the bigger members up in Fort Collins who've gotten similar violations. With similar situations. It's just as an as the Ir director. I just want to express to the bla that I have full faith, and Bruce and his

[61:14] trainings. And I really believe that that moving forward I would shock to see something like this happening into him in the next 20 years, as I don't think it has happened to him in the past. Several, if not exactly that time. The other thing I could say is, you know, just take really take into account the human error aspect. On this we had a very similar thing in in in Fort Collins, where someone had had experienced a suicide in their life, and then, you know, legitimately went out a sabotage against their employer. I'm not saying this young woman did that. That is not my my place or opinion. But I do think that that system with the supervisor for the young. The younger gentleman who's brand new is a great system, and should be really thought about.

[62:02] whereas that was, that was somebody who was having a bad day and decided to not do their job fully. And other than that I did train, or we. We came together at the milk barn, as I mentioned before. With all of the hazels crew on a Sunday night we got together, and I believe I did a 2 h presentation, and really dug into the employees the importance of the of Id, especially because it is such a popular store. We do want to let Bruce get business from those 21 year olds who do come in with verticals that are legitimate verticals, and that are legitimately of age. And so I I truly feel that all of his people during that presentation were very attentive, and it was even at like 9 o'clock at night, and they were very thorough in their questions, and I hope that I put the fear of God into them, or whoever, so that they can understand like it comes down on them as well as Bruce. and I think.

[63:01] as a tips trainer, one of the most valuable things I can do is is, let those people who are supervisors or brand new employees know that their actions cause reactions not only for themselves but others. And so when you guys are just considering what to do with hazels. Just remember that they work closely with Ra. Bruce was with me from this the next day. He let me know what happened, and he and I moved forward with an action plan. And this has actually been very helpful for the Boulder community in general, just to make sure liquor stores and and restaurants and cafes no longer, or really put this sort of action into into place. So I just wanna commend Hazel on what they have done. I think it's unfortunate what happened. And I just wanted you guys to know that AR is behind him, and we've been working hard to make sure that this also does not happen for him. Again. Thank you, Mr. Dewey, appreciate that alright there any questions for Mr. Dewey

[64:01] not seeing any alright. Well, before we close for deliberation, Mr. Dear King, is there anything else you'd like to close with. Yeah. Lastly, and that it tell me if this isn't appropriate, but in terms of the penalty. We are not requesting a fine in lieu. I I don't think that would be appropriate, nor do I believe the Board would do that. But if you will consider fewer days than the penalty schedule calls for we would respectfully and and humbly ask for that. we we will get the message loud and clear. We already have. and in terms of the impact on the store financially and on our employees. If we're not able to have them work, just ask the the authority to please, consider that, and and come up with a penalty that you feel is appropriate. I don't know if this is within your power, but if you are able to allow us to serve a closure beginning April 20 s, which is a Monday. It's slightly out of the 30 days.

[65:03] But if you are able to do that, I would be able to provide hours for almost everyone for one day when we're closed, because we have some shelving coming in, and I would be able to put people to work that day. If that's an option. Well, go ahead and request that once we determine the sentencing and when we decide the days we can. Consider that at that point. All right. Well, thank you, Mr. Dear King. At this point we'll close for deliberation. Is there any discussion. I mean this member Absalom here, and I will just say, in terms of the totality of the mitigation, here is is pretty impressive. Just from being a community member, and understanding what hazels does just by being there. I know the levels. And I also understand that there, there's human error components to this. And actually, people who fail. Compliance checks generally have a manager who fails that we've been going through something. It's just something we've seen over time, so I can. I can totally sympathize with that

[66:07] and to that point, I'm looking at a table value of 3 days. Serve with 6 in advance. I'd be willing to to move that down to one day. Serve to keep the 6 in advance just there. But I would say one day serve would be my suggestion to to the board, and I'm willing to to hear your opinions on that. Just to further your comments. They're mitigating factors. Packet was very robust, and that's really what did it for me? they don't really have any previous violations. They've been taking this very seriously. Changing policy and procedures. So yeah, member car, did you have anything you wanted to add. I mean, you guys have said it but I'll I'll just start it. Which is that I I've never seen quite a mitigating kind of packet like this before. And I, you know, as as someone who's gone to caes before, like I do know, I always get id checked, and I see that they do follow the procedures. So mo more so than even any other place that I go to in town. So I'm all in favor of

[67:07] Member Absalom's suggestion. Is that a second. What was that? Was that? Was that an actual motion? They made Number Absalom. I was gonna see if Member Roberts wanted to chime in, but that I would make that emotion for one day serve with 6 in advance. Member. Robert, did you have any thoughts? I was just in a grants with you guys. And I'm really impressed that they found another tool. This is what did it for me that now that they realize they can enter, they have to enter the birthday. If a car doesn't scan. That's just that's really great. I'm really impressed that they kept digging and digging until they found a solution that could probably prevent this from happening. And I also think that when we talk about human error. This is more human error than other things. So happy. I I I'm fine with with you guys, with that decision.

[68:03] So Member Carl will second that motion. All right, all in favor. Say, aye, member Californ. Remember Absalom, I. Number car. I. Member Roberts, I. Alright! Now we are going to determine when the sentencing is served. Mr. Dear King has made a suggestion. or a request rather of April thirtieth, which is still. It's not within 30 days, though correct. The. Just a correction. April 20, s. It is a. About 33 days. Mr. Ramirez, did you have something you wanted to add. Yeah, I just wanna make it clear that obviously, you guys have discretion in many, many things. However, this is not something that you have discretion in it, it reads, shall so suspension dates shall be served by licensee within 30 days of the show cause hearing so you do lack discretion on that one.

[69:11] Mr. Dirking. If I may, then, would April 15, one week prior, be acceptable. Is there any discussion from the Board. I'm fine. With that date. I mean the only reason, I think Mr. Jerking's reasoning behind keeping people employed, and having, and time to to plan for this, given all the mitigation and all the things that are being placed. The only reason I would suggest that we wouldn't start it next Monday would, because of of the packet presented us today. So I would. I would say, I am totally okay with April fifteenth to serve that day. That's Number Epsilon. That's a motion. There a second. And that motion to approve the April fifteenth date. All in favor. Say I am Member California, High. Remember Absalom, I. Number car. I. Roberts, I.

[70:00] All right. Well, thank you, Mr. Dear King, we'll have that poster ready for you. Thank you all very much, and you all are the representatives of our community. I said it in the packet, but I wanna say it in the hearing. I want to apologize to our community because we let our community down. And just please know we are gonna do our best. To be sure, it never happens again. Thank you very much. We appreciate that. Thank you. And Mr. Jerking, you're free to leave. I'm gonna take you out of the panel. Okay? Next, we have agenda. Item 8, which is hearing pursuant to bla rules of procedure. Section 13. And I'm actually gonna hand this one over to attorneys. and then I'll be back with you when it's my trial.

[71:03] So before we get into it. I provided some attorney client communication. Do any of you have any questions? As I indicated at this point right. I am your attorney. I do not know what the specific allegations are. I do not know which one of the 2 or both of the of the sections of the code provision that the prosecution will be going forward. I don't know how long this is gonna take. I don't know if you want to take a break now, but at least wanted to. Give you an opportunity to ask me any questions with regards to procedure. There any questions from the Board? I think for me personally, I it's been years since we've done a show cause, really. Especially one of that magnitude for the first agenda, the first one that we saw. So I was just a little rusty in the procedures. But it's coming back to me slowly.

[72:09] Is there anything from any of the other board members. I guess my, the question is, are we going to understand what those go? Provisions are today? Yes, so the the prosecution will provide you certain allegations, as it relates to this Licensee. Understood. The prosecution will provide you evidence in the in. It could be testimony. It could be documents. It could be photos. I'm not quite sure what the prosecution has. Then you will deliberate and make findings, and that's why I said, I don't know if you need to take a break. You. We might want to ask Mr. Reynolds. How long he anticipates this process will take. I'm happy to chime in My presentation of the evidence should take something like 30 min, but I'd imagine the Board will have things to discuss after that, so

[73:05] it could be a good point to take a health and comfort break if the board desires. Do we want to take a 5 min breather? We're good to keep power through. I mean. Whatever you guys want to do. I'm good either way. I'm good, too, they just having these for Mr. Ramirez that actually refresh my memory. I don't know if some of the newer board members have been on many show causes. I don't think Member Roberts, remember, Carr have. So we I mean, I've been on show causes that have. You know, there's no stipulation of fact, and it basically becomes a court hearing. And I'm familiar with it. So I'm good. But it if someone wants to take a 5 min break to go through them. Let me know.

[74:00] I think I'm I'm good to go if everyone, if you are member, Robert. Hmm. Yeah, I'm ready. I've been through him as well. Well, if if the board is ready to proceed, I can call my first witness. My only one is today. So I I would call Officer Leah Rec. Of the Boulder police department. and I'm happy to swear her in, unless A board member would like to swear, swear in this witness. Are we able to get Caitlin to do that? I can do it. Officer, recommend, raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the savings you're about to give before the beverage. Licensing authority are true and correct. I do? Thank you so much. I'm sorry. Will you say your name and spell your name? Give it back? Yep. The name is Officer Leak, LEAH. RECH.

[75:02] And I'm with the city of Boulder Police Department. Well, good afternoon, officer. Rec. How long have you worked at the Boulder police Department? I've worked here for 23 years. And what duties have you had during during your tenure at the Boulder police department? I've worked on Pearl Street, Mall for 8 years. I was a school resource officer for 7 years I've been on patrol the remainder of those years. And now in this alcohol enforcement position. And is it accurate to state that you are the alcohol Enforcement officer for the city of Boulder. That is correct. What are some of your duties in that role? My duties as an alcohol Enforcement officer to enforce the rules and regulations of the liquor code. and do some inspections investigations.

[76:00] And how and how long have you been the alcohol Enforcement officer. Since November of 2023. You mentioned investigations. There's another term for that. Compliance checks. Yes, that's accurate. And what is a compliance? Compliance, check. A compliance check consists of sending in an underage operative who's under the age of 21 with their valid id vertical id. To ensure that the liquor establishments are complying with the rules and regulations of their liquor license. And have you had to perform as part of your duties as the alcohol and Enforcement officer? Compliance checks. Yes. And can. Can you tell the board just briefly? Why? Why? Why do you perform compliance? Checks. I was to to reiterate, just to make sure that the reach or the liquor establishments are complying with the rules and regulations as well as the laws surrounding the license and the alcohol related rules.

[77:11] And moving moving on. Have you ever heard of the business known as Taco Junky? Yes. What is taco, junk. I believe, according to their website, they are a taco and tequila bar. And is Taco Junky located in the city of Boulder, State of Colorado. Yes, it is. It's 1149 Thirteenth Street, which is in the city and county of Boulder, State of Colorado. And do they have a liquor license? They do? Do you know what type of license they they possess? They have a hotel restaurant, license. And do you know what license number Taco Junkie has. It is 0 3 dash 4, 5, 7, 8, and that's their city license.

[78:04] And in the course of your duties since November of last year, as the city's alcohol Enforcement officer. did Taco Junkie ever come up. It has several times. And what's sort of the context. I've been notified by the watch 3 supervisor on numerous occasions of violations that are occurring there, as well as issues and concerns that they've had with the establishment. And what are the general nature of the violations that you've you started hearing about going on at Taco? Junkie. So the the the ones that I believe, that have surfaced to the top are the violations of them refusing to allow officers in to do inspections and like bar checks. And are you aware of anything that you that that happened on February sixteenth of this year, and the early morning hours

[79:03] involving Taco jumps. Absolutely our officers were actually called there from a citizen who wanted to report an incident that was occurring there of this is that one that was the they were reporting a lot of underage alcohol being consumed in there and so our officers went to go inspect that, and to check that out. And so did officers arrive at that at the location of Taco Junky on February sixteenth. They did. What time is that? That was the time of call that A, when the original Rp. Called. It was about right after midnight, about 12 min after midnight on February sixteenth. And what is rp. Sorry. That's the reporting party, or the person who's calling in the complaint.

[80:01] And when the officers arrived what did they observe? They? Well, so when our officers arrive there they were. This is going to be the first incident. When they arrive there they were. told that they were not allowed to go in. They had to wait outside until the manager could be contacted inside, and he would come out and talk with the officers, but they were not allowed to be. They were not allowed to come in at that point. And who is not allowing officers to enter Taco junkie. That would be the door staff. And we. And is it accurate that the the employees of Taco junkie. That is correct. And who relayed this information to. That was Sergeant Brun. He's the sergeant for watch 3 or for the officers who had responded to the call that night. And why did officers want to go into Taco junky on February sixteenth, at about just after midnight.

[81:06] They wanted to go in well, to do one to check for the under agers that had been reported to them, and 2 because the bar has been It's it's been a bar that has been kind of on the top of our list. As for calls for service. They wanted to go in and and ensure that the safety of the people who are inside it's been overcrowded. There's been a few issues there, but mostly to go in and check for the underage drinkers, and to make sure that there that this situation was safe. And is it fair to say that they wanted to inspect the premises. Yes. And our liquor licenses allowed to bar entry to peace officers who want to perform an inspection of the premises during business hours. They're required to per their license.

[82:00] Required to admit the peace officers. Yes. And is that per Colorado liquor rule 47 dash 700. Yes. Does it concern? Does it concern you that on that day that they were, they were not, at least initially, allowed in. Oh, absolutely I was able to look on their body worn camera, and it looks like they waited outside from the time they got there until they were allowed entry into the bar into the establishment was 3 min. What could happen during those 3 min? If you watch the body worn camera, you can see excessive amounts of people exiting the bar. And so potential evidence of violations left the bar. And we're not a lot. We're we're not able to be sufficiently inspected by the officers. Correct. I'm

[83:01] was there another incident on February eighteenth, at about 1 45 in the morning at Taco, Junkie. Yes, there was. There was. Do you want me to continue? There was. Yes, please. Yeah. Can you tell the board about that? Absolutely so. On February eighteenth, again, we received a call from a community member reporting party, indicating that there was some underage alcohol being consumed inside the establishment as well as the individuals. There were 2 community members. One had been escorted out, which he felt was unfair. He didn't want to go into too much detail just because he didn't want to technically be considered a victim. From what one of the employees inside the establishment did so. Our officers. based upon that information, again went to go do an inspection or a check a bar check. and at this point. It was 4 min from the time they arrived till the time the manager came out to speak with them.

[84:05] However, in this situation the officers were physically blocked by the door staff. and they would not allow entry as well as one of the door. Staff put his hand in front of the officers Officer Harper's camera so he wasn't allowed to. It wouldn't record video. And just to be clear the the staff you're referring to again our staff of Docker Junkie, that we're not allowing officers to enter on February eighteenth, at about 1 45. In the morning. That is correct. And does this? Does this cause you concern? Does the February eighteenth incident cause you concern. Absolutely. And can you tell the board again what your concerns are? Well if they are not complying, and they are not allowing the officers to do their job by getting into the bar to determine if there is underage violations going on there. On several occasions, even after being explained

[85:03] what the rules and the regulations of their liquor license are, and it's still they're still not allowing it to happen. That's a giant cause for concern for me as a liquor officer. And again on February eighteenth. Was there a violation of State regulation 4,700 that requires licenses to allow peace officers perform inspections during normal business hours. Yes, this time. On February eighteenth. This is when I'm sorry. February twenty-first is when our commander and 2 sergeants responded up to taco junkie, and again we're denied entry. However, the staff at the door who is employed by Taco, Junkie said, Stay outside. I'll go get a manager or someone who is in charge. And so just to back up a little bit, you you've testified to an incident on February sixteenth, at about just after midnight, where officers were not allowed in for 3 min.

[86:03] You testified about an incident on February eighteenth, at about 1 45 in the morning, where officers were not allowed in for 4 min. And now are you talking about a third incident on, did you say? February twenty-first this year? Yes, Yup, February 20. First. It's a Wednesday, I believe. And so can you kind of start from the beginning? About February twenty-first? What what happened on that on that instance? So that was when our commander wanted to go up, and because of the issues that we were having the previous to from the previous weekend and the cause for concern. The commander went up, and as well as 2 sergeants. one of them was the hill sergeant to have a conversation with the manager to explain once again what our causes are, what our concerns are, that we're not harassing them, cause we'd been. The allegation was that the police department was harassing the establishment. And so they went up to have that conversation with the manager. However, there was no manager there at the time it was

[87:04] I guess one was the administration. She identifies herself as an administrator, and the other one said that he was the highest employee there that he would be the one to represent himself as a manager because he was. There was no one else there. And so on. February twenty-first. We're was the commander in the watch. 3. Sergeant allowed immediate entry into the into the establishment. They were never allowed in. The conversation occurred outside. And who owns a taco junkie. I believe, looking at the license. Angela caravello I not able to pronounce her second name without but Angela Caravello is a 91% owner. And Michael Caravello is a 9%. Interest in the Llc. Is what I understand.

[88:03] And on any of these incidents was a manager or a one of the owners ever contacted or present. On the incident. On the sixteenth and the eighteenth Mr. Caravello was there. And how would you characterize his level of cooperation with law enforcement during those 2 incidents. I would say there was no cooperation. He was argumentative. accusing. he had a I would say. yeah, he he called the officers liars And when they were trying to explain to him why they needed to get in there again, he was refusing to let them in his some of his comments where you don't have the right to do that. You're not allowed to do that on multiple occasions. He made those comments.

[89:08] And he was not present on February twenty-first, correct. He was not the commander gave the individual, which I never did catch his name a business card and asked him to call him as well as I had attempted to call Mr. Caravello as well, left him a voicemail, and he never called back. Did the license he ever and any of these incidents. February sixteenth, eighteenth, or the 20 first licensee, or agent of the license, so employee ever tried to put like conditions on officers entry into the establishment, like how many officers, or how long they could be in there. Yes, that happens. On the incident involving when, on the February sixteenth, Officer Diaz and Officer Saziac were there, and they wanted to go in, he said. Only one officer can go in first. First he refused officers to enter, and then, when they said, No, we have the right to go, but that, and he's he's like you're not allow you're not not allowing you in. Then he said. Fine! I'll let one officer in, and for officer. Safety reasons, Officer, Diaz explained to him.

[90:21] We need 2 officers in there for officer safety reasons, and he's like, no, you can have one Then he finally allowed to. And he said, You have 2 min, and I'm following you around. So our officers were like, Okay, that's fine cause there originally, because of the issues that we've had there. 4 officers responded to this call. Only 2 went in. And on when you're saying he and you're the testimony you just you just gave, you know, he said. Only 2 officers. He or he said, only one is that Mr. Carvello making all those regulations? Okay. Yeah, I apologize. It's okay.

[91:00] In the last year. Do you know how many calls for service the police department has had at this address for Taco Junkie. So the last year we've had 69 calls for service there. And those calls are directly related with that address. So that didn't. That doesn't include any calls that you know, if they we're up at Thirteenth, and you know, up, up, up, further on the hill. If it happened there. It wasn't included in that 69. That number of 69 calls, and that includes all sorts of different calls, harassments, alarms, disturbances. We've had some id checks. So not all 69 resulted in a like a report being taken and then, as of I was able to pull the other data as of the day March seventh, when that when we had a compliance check, we've had 11 additional calls. There. And so, Officer Rick, based on the information that you outlined for the board here the incident on February sixteenth, eighteenth, and twenty-first.

[92:07] Did you make any sort of a plan for follow up work. Yes, and to back up. I wanna make sure that I let you know that the the reporting parties are the people that were calling in. We're saying that the door staff employed by Taco Junkie were allowing underage people in without checking ids. They were confiscating ids and willing to sell them back for 40 bucks, or if you handed them 20 with your fake, Id. They were allowing you in which that information we've been getting repeatedly from community, from people in the community. So that is why that information based upon what was going on in included in the officers being refused entry, I felt that it was pretty important that we go ahead and do a compliance check up there to determine if those statements that have been reported to us were accurate.

[93:02] And and thank you for that context, Officer Rick. can you tell the board about the plan that you said that you that that you made based on them. Previous incidents and information that you have been given can tell the Board about your your plan for that. Follow up work. Yes, So what we utilized was we had our 2 under agers. We had a male and a female, and then we had 3 plainclothes officers who are very young officers, and I I call them my chump 21 jump straighters just because they do look like they are college age kids. So I thought that they would fit in really well up there. So we utilized the 3 plainclothes officers, and then the 2 underage officers. The I wanted 2 plainclothes officers inside the establishment. They entered with their real ids to get in there and to get some eyes on what was going on inside the establishment, and I kept one of my UN my plain clothes officers outside with my underage operatives just for safety reasons just based upon what's been going on up there. We weren't sure what you know what would happen. So we wanted to make sure that their safety was our priority.

[94:16] I had a 20 year old male operative and a 19 year old female operative. My 20 year old operative had a a fake id that was so extremely fake. It's it's obviously fake I. And it showed that the operative was 6, 4, 250 pounds. When he's 5, 1150, the female operative, the 19 year old, had no Id. She had nothing. She took a picture of it, and so that was our goal to see if we could get her in if they were actually allowing under agers in without checking Ids. And and and thank you off correct. Did you have any other plans for your mail underage operative? With the with the fake id to to do anything kind of

[95:02] extra. Yes, we gave him. so we gave them each $40 to $20 bills, and those were marked bills, so that we would be able to retrieve those bills. So we gave him the cash to see if he would be able to get gain entry with a fake, id utilizing cash. And so is it accurate to say that the the plan was to see if the male underage operative could basically slip the bouncer at 20, with the obviously fake id in the in to see if that was, in fact, happening at that taco joke. Yes, and he had strict instructions that he wasn't allowed to bring it up. If it was brought up by the door staff, then he could offer the $20. However. our underage operative was not allowed to say, Can will you let me in with 20 bucks. And Officer Rick, you've out you've outlined kind of the the plan

[96:01] did. Was this plan ever executed. Yes, it was on March seventh, at 10 o'clock at night we went ahead, and did the compliance check utilizing the like? I said, my 21 Jump Street plain, close officers as well as the 2 underage operatives. And yeah, I I I guess, are you? I could say that they failed. The compliance. And is this a normal amount of resources to expand on a compliance check. No, absolutely not. And and what what made you come up with this plan and involve patrol officers? And additional security. What what kind of was your thought process there. Well, I was a little bit concerned about what has been going on inside the establishment, based upon the information that we've received from community members and I didn't go into every single thing that we've been told has been going on in there. And so, therefore, when I sent those under agers, and I wanted to make sure that we had security for them if something were to happen. And I also wanted my plain, close officers to get a good idea of what was going on if they could get account. We've had

[97:13] so many complaints that the places is usually crowded shoulder to shoulder and so I wanted them to go in and look for violations ahead of time, and also just kind of keep an eye and monitor, what what they were witnessing. So march seventh this year at about 10 Pm. Can you? Can you walk the board through what happens. So we go ahead. I, 2 plain, close officers get inside with their valid ids. They go in, they purchase a drink, they sit down. They're watching, just keeping their eye on everything that's going on while they're inside. They're able to see many, many underage individuals, females who've told them. Oh, yeah, we're under age. It was a mom daughter weekend there, and so there was a lot of underage at, they admitted again. They didn't know that these were officers, but they admitted that they were, you know, 1920 years old, and they were there with their mom. So we're having them watch.

[98:16] I sent in my mail operative first, because I wanted to keep the other plain clothes officer outside to keep their eye on him while he was trying to while he utilized his fake id to get into the establishment as he approaches. He, he shows his id to the door staff, who were employed by Taco junkie, and they looked at the Id, and they clear, they said, That's obviously a fake Id. However, if you give me 20 bucks, I'll let you in. So he gave him $20. He gave him one of the mark $20 bills, and he entered inside the establishment, went back to the bar area, where he purchased himself a corona beer. He was not id at the bar, and Nope. There was no one else in there who checked his Id. He walked over to where plain clothes officers were, and he set the beer down

[99:07] and after that happened the next 2 we had our under age. 20 year old. Female. she said. She's with one of our plainclothes officers, and she said, I don't have an Id. My car was broken to I my id was stolen, he said. Do you have the app on your phone? The Colorado app? And she said, No, but I do have a picture of my Id. And he said, yeah, just pretend that you're showing it to me. Show me your phone, show me something, and I'll let you in because the managers inside, so she's as she's getting her phone out to show him the vertical picture of her id. He didn't even look at it. He just let her in. So she went in along with the other. Our plain clothes operative, who was one of my 21 jump streeters. They walk straight back to the bar where they are. She orders her alcoholic beverage. She has served the beverage. The plainclothes officer

[100:03] tasted it to confirm that there was alcohol in the beverage. Just because she's not allowed to check it she carried it over, set it on the table where the plain, close officers were sitting, and then the 2 under agers were directed that they needed to come out. At that time. I did not want them inside anymore, for their for safety reasons. And you mentioned that the male underage operative was able to purchase an alcoholic beverage inside the bar without being without having his Id checked the the the female underage operative. You said that she was able to purchase an alcoholic beverage. Do you know, if her idea was checked at the bar. Id was not checked at the bar, and also to note the cache that those 2 used was put into a tip jar. not put into the cash register. and we were able to find that when Officer Jenny and I went in and we asked to get the marked bills back, they were in the tip.

[101:03] the tip container. And officer. Rec. The undercover plain clothes officers, the 21 Jump Street were they able to observe any other sorts of violations while they were in in the bar. When they walked in, they immediately noticed and detected an odor of marijuana. They could see a haze in the air. They could see that people were smoking up towards the front, and there were no there was no direction from any staff for them to stop to go outside. One of my under agers also had a vape, and he lit the vape up just to see if anybody would come contact him. To tell him no smoking inside, and no one made the effort to stop any of that smoking of vapes, marijuana. any any of that. And do you know what the occupancy is of Taco Dumpy?

[102:01] Yes, I reached out to Dave Lowry, the city of Boulder Fire Department. He's our marshal, our fire marshal, and it's 32. And that was also documented in. One of the officers reports that they did see that the occupancy sign is posted, and it says 32. However, when they were inside when they first entered. They counted 40 but they said people were still coming in at that point. And so once the underage operatives were told to leave the bar. What happened next. Once that happened and the operatives were out and they were safe. Officer Jen Yak, and I, who we have a kind of a plain closed police officer. We had our best son that identified us as police officers. We went up to the door met with the door staff again employed by Taco junkie and at first they weren't gonna let us in. And then Sergeant Marquez, he's a he was in a uniform as well as Officer Eric Stevens were in uniform. He stepped around, he said, are you refusing us entry? And the door Guy front and said, Nope, come on in.

[103:05] So at that point Officer Jenny, Ikk and I were able to get in and Sergeant Marquez and Officer Stevens were pretty much our cover. While we were handling the violation. And did you add any tickets that night. Yes, we we ended up entering issuing 2 tickets to the bartenders. There were 2 separate bartenders that were identified by the operatives that served them. Alcohol and they were. It was their identity was confirmed by the underage operatives. Who they were. The description, I should say so. They were each issued a ticket for the sold gave, procured alcohol to a minor the other is. The other part of it is. I went outside right away to deal with the door staff who collected the $20 from my underage operative and He at first denied. Any you know, any knowledge of collecting $20, but when I told him that you know there could be some charges that that are accrued with that, then he got the $20 handed it to me, and sure enough, it was one of the $20 that had been marked.

[104:13] And did you learn from any of the bartenders that night about who they rely on to do id checks. We were told Officer Jenny spoke with one of the bartenders, and he said that they rely on the door staff to ensure that the people that they're letting in there are 21 or over 21 years old, 21 and over. Was it your impression that anybody, a talker, Junkie. based on your reviewing of reports and what happened on March seventh? And what happened 3 times in February that anybody at Taco junkie takes enforcement of underage alcohol laws seriously. I did not get that. Anybody there takes anything serious like that.

[105:03] And did your plain clothes officers feel like based on what they what they saw. That there was any attempt by staff to enforce underage drinking laws. There was no attempt made by anyone inside to check for ids or do that. I did read in one of the reports that after the officers came in some of the staff was escorting people out of the establishment, pushing them out they said they appeared to be underage. However, that wasn't confirmed, but once officers made entry into the building on the seventh. people were being told to leave. And off direct. Do you have concerns about the conduct of Taco Junkie as an establishment with a liquor license based on what you've testified to here today. I do?

[106:01] And what are those concerns. I have a lot of concerns, and and I think that is felt by a lot of my department. My Supervisors command staff, the other officers that there is a lot of a lot of violations that are going on there repeatedly. And it's it's happening, even after they've been talked to and explained what the rules are. And it's it's continuing. And they're just not understanding the severity of what it is that they're doing. And so I'm very concerned. Do you believe that the violations of the law that you've testified here, too, today regarding Taco junkie are deliberate and willful. I do? And what makes you say that. Because they've been told they've been explained what the rules are, and they continue to violate those rules. And do you believe that the the the you know, the bouncers at the at the at Taco junky on March seventh just made mistakes in terms of misreading ids, and letting people in who are underage.

[107:10] No, it's been witnessed time and time again that they've been just allowing people in as one of our plain clothes officers witnessed it that night that people were saying, I forgot my Id, and they're like, Ask just come on in. So it was witnessed the the night of the seventh. And do you believe the conduct of Taco junkie presents dangers to the public health, safety, or welfare that requires swift action. I do. I believe that we need to do something sooner than later before somebody in our community or somebody within that establishment gets hurt from the violations that are occurring there. I I truly believe that. And in addition to it being a violation of State regulation 47, 700, that is like liquor licensees must allow for inspections. Is it also a violation of the Boulder revised code to fail to permit inspections.

[108:09] Yes, it is, and I did. Educate my officers of that. It's 5, 5, 4. It's boulder municipal code 5, 4, 5, 5, 4 refusal to permit inspections, and I have asked my officers to start issuing tickets if that does occur. And is there anything else you that you want to the board to know about your your work regarding Taco junkie? Yeah, either for March seventh, or any of the incidents in February. I do. I want them to know that I did actually speak with Mr. Carollo on last Thursday. So I I'm having to look at what? My! That would have been on the fourteenth. And I explained to him. you know we had a conversation. He was

[109:00] very argumentative with me. He didn't want to hear a whole lot of what I had to say. but I did explain to him, you know, why we did the compliance check. He told me that he was going to work on improving things. However, over the weekend we saw that that that didn't hold true. At this time. I I don't have any other questions for you. Officer Rec. I do believe. That. Perhaps the board members might have some some questions for you, and just for the Board's awareness, Officer Rex, our only witness, and after the boards asked any questions of officer rec. That they that they might have, I would respectfully request the opportunity to give a kind of a closing argument on on what? What the prosecution arm of the city attorney's office thinks the Board should do.

[110:02] Thank you, Mr. Reynolds, and thank you. Also. Rep. I have a quick question. What was the reaction? Well, first of all, I don't know if you can speak to this, so I apologize. If this is an inappropriate question, Are with those violations that you cited the bartenders. Do they have a show cause upcoming. They will. I have not submitted it yet. I wanted to wait until after today's hearing to get that submitted, but they will have a show cause in addition to what's happening today. Thank you. And then what was the reaction when you you kind of spoke to it a little bit? But was there any from the, and this is pure speculation, so I can't say this is, it sounds like the bouncers are hired security. But was there any reaction when you asked for the $20 bill back. Besides what you described. The reaction from the door staff. Well, he he's a ce student. So his he was really. He was scared

[111:07] and he was. He's really afraid his lawyer has reached out to me. We are in the process of issuing a ticket to him for those for that violation. The additionally, the the gal who is the administrator. Her name is Tanner. Then, Venrich, I think she did tell me that she fired those that door staff. While we were standing there. Great. Thank you there. Any other questions for officer from the Board members. I haven't got. Hi Leah! I'm not sure. if this even necessarily matters. I was just kind of trying to get the whole big picture. You comment. Obviously they were not checking Ids at the bar. Did you see or observe like over serving and over consumption as well? Did did you guys happen to take note of that, or

[112:06] I don't know. I'm glad you mentioned that one of our under our 21 jumpstreers, our plainclothes officers used to be a bartender, and she made note in her report of the alcohol amounts that were being served in each drink. And I can't speak to that. I'm I don't know the ounces I should know that. But she did mention that it looked like those. The drinks that were being poured that night were very strong, and she did note that in her report. Okay. Thank you. My question. Was around. I believe if I did math, my math is correct, is around 80 calls for service. In total 69 prior to this event, and 11 since then? Right? So how many of those resulted in reports. I can get that information from you. I had our Dr. Reinhart. He does our data analyst, and he pulled a excel spreadsheet for me, so I just did a quick number of how many calls for service. I can get you that information. It would take me just a little bit to get that for those numbers for you, but I can sure do that.

[113:17] Okay, I I I am curious. What kind of situations happen there. That's important. I can tell you that those calls range from disturbances, alcohol violations, alarms. id disputes, assaults. We've had some people call in saying that there's drugs inside there. So it there's a lot of a lot of calls, and some of them were from Taco junkie asking for police to come help when there's been like fights outside and stuff. And one other question was, the final, I guess. Comment. Here was you or someone on the the police force. Observe them this past weekend, and so they had not made any changes. Could you speak to a little bit more about what happened this past weekend? Were there any of their violations noted.

[114:08] So one of the individuals. There was a a gal outside the establishment who was arrested for Dui. She was contacted and she had her. She was sitting in her car with her car door open, vomiting, and she said she had just left Taco Junkie. So that was one of the calls, and then there's another. There was another report. However, I haven't had time to investigate this. It will take some time of a 17 year old, who was posting on Snapchat a picture of herself inside Taco junkie with the Margarita. so that might take a little bit of time. We may have to have the detectives help me and try to get a search warrant for her Snapchat account, and see if we can. Find that Id, and if that's the case, then we'll be able to pull a case. Report from that. Thank you.

[115:00] Any other questions for Officer Rick. I would just wanna just reiterate what? The line of questioning for Mr. Reynolds? Just to be clear. Officer, right? You do identify that this in the bla rules subsection 13, 2, allow us to suspend a license based on the threat to public health. I just wanna just confirm that you are saying that this in your opinion, this Licensee, it poses a threat to the public health. I absolutely do, and this has been confirmed by my coworkers, my supervisors. We are all we are all concerned. I just wanted to reiterate. Have you reiterated that to the board? So we can kind of see what we, what action we can take based on our rules. Thank you. Next step. All right. Any other questions not seeing any. Mr. Reynolds, if you could give your closing remarks. Thank you very much. Member California.

[116:01] Give me $20 and I'll let you in. Pretend like you're showing me something on your phone and I will let you in. Members of the board. You've heard today from Boulder, police Officer Leah Rec. Who's our alcohol Enforcement officer and has well, over 20 years of experience as a boulder police officer regarding what is currently happening up on the hill at Taco junkie. And it is not a pretty picture. Our community is placed at risk. When liquor establishments make mistakes and do not follow the law. A mistake is when a clerk misreads an id and sells alcohol to somebody who's on underage. Now, what officer rec testified to today was not a single mistake. What you testified to were deliberate and wilful violations of the law committed by the licensee taco junkie. When a liquor establishment commits deliberate and willful violations of the law, our community is placed at extreme risk

[117:03] overservice du eyes. crashes, assaults, and potentially serious injuries and death are the logical and in inevitable result. If this behavior is allowed to continue. we must hold licenses accountable for this type of behavior that's been testified to today for the safety and welfare of the community. because the city has shown that Taco Junkie and its staff were deliberately and willfully violating the law. You now have the opportunity to demonstrate that those actions have consequences. Officer rec testified to at least 4 violations of the law implicating Taco Junkie's license. Older Revised code. Section 5, 7, 3. Selling to minors prohibited 2 documented ticketed violations involving underage operatives. the likely

[118:01] very many more. Boulder revised Code 5, 5, 6. Compounding. That's a that's a violation where somebody receives a pecuniary, a monetary benefit for not reporting a violation of the law. So when the bouncer takes that $20 bill implicit in, that is him saying, just slip me a 20, and we'll be good. Boulder revised Code 5, 5, 4. Refusal to permit inspections. And this one is very, very concerning because we can't enforce the law, we can't investigate it. And per the terms of the liquor license and the Boulder revised code licensees must allow peace officers to conduct inspections during normal operating hours, and that happened 3 times in which officers were not allowed in twice for a period of time. and then on March 20. First they were just not allowed in at all. This is the lead. These are the legal bases by which you can find reasonable grounds

[119:01] to believe that Taco junkies been guilty of deliberate and willful violations of the law and suspend its license for 15 days per the bla rules of procedure. 13, one. You should be alarmed at the conduct of Taco Jones. What's been presented here is also grounds to find that the public health, safety, and welfare imperatively requires the emergency action of suspending Tacos Yumqi's license for 15 days as per 13, 2 of the bla rules of procedure. You have 2 extremely solid grounds to find that the full extent of the potential consequence, 15 days can be summarily imposed. Based on these violations. Our community is made immediately less safe. and the health and welfare of everyone who patronizes or comes into contact with anyone. Who's been to Taco junk junkie

[120:01] that is implicated. If this behavior is allowed to continue based on reports from Officer Rex law enforcement colleagues and members of our community officer, wreck. organized, planned, and executed the March seventh compliance check. and those reports were found to be accurate. That that is actually what was happening at the Taco junk. They didn't need to try multiple times on their very first try. They were able to prove that the bounces were expect accepting payment in return for giving fake ids back that were obviously fake. Give me a $20 bill. I'll let you in. Just pretend like you're showing me something on your phone. and I'll let you in. All of these violations have the backdrop of the manager. Michael Michael Caravello, who on multiple occasions, occasions stalled and hindered law enforcement from conducting bar bar checks which you have no legal right to do. In fact, you have a legal obligation to allow those to happen. but he chose to be argumentative and defiant, and tried to say, only one officer at a time, only 2 min. That is completely ridiculous.

[121:09] This is the person who's in charge of Taco junkie at the moment consider his interactions with law enforcement his violations of the law, and refusing to allow the compliance checks in your deliberations. And considering what what consequence, if I need to impose here. I submit that these facts demonstrate the need for Taco Junkie's license to be summarily suspended for the full 15 days per vla rules of procedure. 13 management and Taco junkie cannot be trusted to fix these issues on their own. In conclusion, the city's presented more than enough evidence to meet the standards. and 10 dash 3, one and 10, dash 3, 2 for the board to move. That Taco Jumped's license should be suspended shall be suspended for the full 15 days. This needs to happen due to the deliberateness, the seriousness of the violations, and the threat to health, safety, and welfare of the community.

[122:02] These actions cannot be tolerated. It must have swift consequences. Thank you very much. Thank you, Miss Reynolds. This point will close for deliberation. In this case. I. My personal opinion is is pretty clear. This is a serious community. Risk. My! The biggest ones for me was the over capacity and the Dui that they issued just outside, who had said that they had been consuming alcohol at the establishment. Prior, this is deeply concerning yeah, what are other opinions from the Board. Oh, this is number absolute, and I'll just say, according to our rules, the preponderance of evidence is is so clear. I mean among those concerning things that member qualifies about just the idea of of bribing someone to get into a place. It's just and not allowing peace officers to come in and expect a place. I mean, there is no question in my mind. There's a preponderance to to suspend Chicago Jackie's license beginning today for the full 15 days.

[123:04] and my suggestion would be. I would like to see a special hearing as soon as possible, so we can get all the full facts in front of us and have them before us to explain what's going on over there. But my suggestion would be, I think we take the La role 10 to 3, dash 2, and go ahead and say they're suspended from now for the full 15 days, and let's set a date to see them as soon as possible. I would concur with that. And it's it's pure arrogance for the law, which is incredibly disturbing. It's so dangerous for the police officers. Just it's just outrageous. Is that 15 days total or 15 days per violation. I think it's 15 days that we can with that specific rule for this special hearing, and then once we get them in front of us that will be a full on showcase show cause hearing, I believe, is the rules. Maybe. Mr. Ramirez can speak to that. Correct. So you'll you'll be voting on both. Because, as I understand the allegations, it's one, the violations of law and 2 the concerns about safety and welfare and health to the community. So even if you find both of those, it's only for the 15 days and it would be so that the police officers can finish their investigation.

[124:23] We give the licensing notice and then have the the show cause hearing in a special meeting. Yeah, I I would agree. Thank you, Mr. Ramirez. I I would agree. I mean, I I I see it's very, very clear that they violated the law willfully, and then it is also definitely in a deep, you know, on the front to public health and safety. So I I would make a motion to suspend the license for 15 days, starting today, and and have a special meeting as soon as reasonably possible.

[125:05] I'll second that motion to suspend the license for 15 days immediately and get a show cause. Hearing the word. I have a quick question on the suspension. Can it start today, or does it need to start tomorrow? Tomorrow. earth. No time. that is not clear, except that we would have to actually prepare the order and provide it to them. How quickly can that. I I can work on it tonight after the hearing. Send it both. Well, I can send to to Chris and tea for review. But before the Board votes on that motion the you first have to find, or you have to vote on whether or not you find, by preponderance of the evidence that there's been a violation of the law, and then separately.

[126:05] the health, safety, and wellness or welfare to to the community. If you find either one of those 2 or both, then you could make a motion for the 15 days. Thank you, Mr. Ramirez. I would make the motion that for the public the community safety violation did they violated it. Is there a second. Member, absent, second. All in favor. Say, I'm Member California, High. Member Absalom. I. Never car. I. Member Roberts, I. Alright! Now we have the second violation. Is there a motion. Member Carl, make a motion to to vote that they have violated. Section 10, dash, 3, dash, 2 public health and safety and welfare there a second. Member as someone's second.

[127:01] All in favor. Say, I remember California, I. Remember Absalom. Number car. Aye. Member Roberts, I. Alright violation is passed. Now is there a motion. Actually, you guys voted on the Health Safety and Welfare Committee twice. That's right. Okay, that's what I thought. So member apps will make a motion that the legacy broke Colorado law. Is there a second. Hey! Ricard! 1 s. All in favor. Say, aye, Member California, Ohi. Number Epsilon, I. Member cara! Hi. Number. Robert's eye. Violation has been passed. Is there a motion for the suspension of the 15 day. Member apps will make a motion depending on how fast city staff can get the paperwork together for the order as soon as possible that the license be suspended as soon as city staff can provide the notification for the full 15 days, and I would make a motion to have the special hearing a week from today on the 20 seventh

[128:14] as long as that's enough time for Bpd. And Staff to get everything together for the show. The special hearing. It's really up to whatever city staff can do for that. I guess. I think it has to be this. 10 days. So I think the the rules and and Kristen Tig, you can correct me if I'm wrong. I think it does require 10 days for a special meeting. That is correct, and we are required to. Then that's because of the public posting requirements. In addition to. So. Oops! So Kristen. How quickly could it be posted to start that 10 day window. Based on research that Miss Kellogg did. I believe we can get that in the paper? we can submit tomorrow for publication, on which which date Caitlin.

[129:01] The twenty-fourth. So Sunday. Sunday is the first day that I could get a publication into it. Right, because that's when they put when the daily camera posts their legal notices. Yeah. So based on that. The the eligible dates we're hearing would be April third, fourth, or fifth to keep it within the app in the 15 days, and after the 10 days. Member California could do the fourth. I thought, she said the third. Oh, you can do the fourth. I'm sorry. Fourth was a Thursday, right. It's a. Yeah. This is a Thursday Yup. We can do them. Third. Can you do? Wednesday. I can do the third. Sorry I had the wrong month pulled up in my calendar. I could also do the third. Member. Absalom is good for the third as well. At 3 Pm.

[130:00] In anticipation that this could be a longer than normal special hearing. Do we want to change that time? I'll make myself free for that day. I I think Member California was making a valid point. If any other of the Board members can start earlier that might be advantageous to our timeline. I could make a motion for one o'clock. I we'll probably not be able to do one o'clock. I think the earliest I could do would be 2 on that day. 2 would work. Better for me, too. One's a little early. Alright. So remember, Absalom, what was your motion? Again? My motion would be to summarily suspend the license, beginning as soon as the city staff can get it ready for the 15 days, and I motion to ha hold a special hearing of the bill. A showcase show call special hearing of the bla on Wednesday, April third, at 2 Pm. For Taco Junky.

[131:03] Member California would second that all in favor say, aye, member, I. Number Epsilon, I. Member Carr. Aye. Member Roberts, I. And Kristen and Caitlin, and Mr. Ramirez, how I know that that puts a lot of pressure on you all. Is it more than likely to happen tomorrow, or would it actually happen tonight? Because I do have concerns? With this establishment, even, you know, staying open for another evening or serving alcohol for another evening. Excuse me. Kristen, who signs off on the order. You do. Yup, that would be me. Does your evening look like. I am wide open for the. Okay. Purpose of city business. No. So for for the health and safety of the community, I'm more than willing to. As soon as we're done, start working on that order, Kristen. Do you happen to have a copy of the last one that was issued.

[132:07] For a summary suspension. I do not. We're going to have to create from scratch. That's fine, that's fine. Can you send me? I know that I sent orders from the last hearing. Those weren't summary, obviously, but just so that I can have the final product to to go by. Sure. Yeah, we can. We can just forward you the email that had all of those And then the other piece is is probably for officer. Rec. Do do you have the no, not a problem. Do you have the bandwidth to if Kristen and I can knock this out this evening to have somebody on your staff to go and post.

[133:02] Yes. Okay. and we'll get it done. Thank you so much. I really appreciate all 3 of your dedication to this. Seriously thank you for doing this so so expeditionally. Yep. I do an additional question. I guess, during this period of suspension. How how do we ensure that? It's you know that they aren't serving alcohol, and is there any enforcement mechanism or any any next step? If we, if officers observe alcohol being served during this enforcement period of a suspension period. Because this would begin immediately upon posting correct. Correct officer. Rick, do you have any plans on? Follow up to see that it is, in fact.

[134:01] Yeah, I can make sure that our officers do some checks up there. Additionally, I would like some guidance on what what should we do? Should they violate and continue serving just because our hands are somewhat tied in that situation? I guess. What are I kind of pose? Yeah, Mr. Reynolds, do you have a suggestion. I do, and I would give that to Officer Rec. Probably outside of the the context of this meeting. Okay, wonderful. Thank you. Alright. Is there anything else we need to do with this great next agenda? Item. Caitlin, before we move on. I think I already mentioned to you, but I do have to leave a little bit early here, and I figure I will just take this as a moment because of retain agenda items. So I do need to to get out of here. But

[135:02] I will follow up, and I'll follow everything after. It's all in the record. And I'll see you guys, it sounds like sooner than later. Go to your fancy dinner. Thanks. I'm razal. Okay? Next we have agenda. Item, 9 letters around Wc. To the attorney. Roberto, do you have anything. I have nothing. Thank you. And a book next, we have agenda. Item 10, which is matters from licensing clerk. We do have 2 boundary settings for you today. The first one is for Og. Fairy's, Lc. dB. Walnut Cafe for a new hotel restaurant type, liquor license at 3 0 7, 3, one at street boulder, Colorado, 80301 for this one. There wasn't anything great, suggested Boundary, so I'll share my screen, and you're asking. choose your own adventure zooming out would be more helpful.

[136:06] Yeah, if you could zoom out just a little more. And you said there were no suggested boundaries. No, there wasn't anything that was close. That would be a good that was close enough, I guess. to this location. I'd suggest at least for the South Arapaho. and then for the North Belmont. and then for the East, maybe 50, Fifth and the West. Could you go over to the West a bit more? I'm sorry. The the other direction. Yeah. Oh, thank you.

[137:02] How do we feel about Folsom Street? So I would second that. Okay, great. So I have just to double check Bama on the north, Arabia on the south, 50, fifth on the east, also on the west. Yes, sir. All in favor. Say, aye, member Californ. Member car. I. Member Roberts. Aye. Thank you. And next we have Ss. Walnut ferries, Llc. dB. Walnut Cafe for a new hotel restaurant type, liquor license at 6 7, 3 South Broadway Street, older Colorado, 80305. And this one did have suggested boundaries, which is from under the sun at 6 27 South Broadway. This area and this is on the North Dartmouth to Broadway. on the South city limits

[138:01] East Highway 36 to Morehead and west, was also the city. And make a motion to approve those boundaries. I'll second the motion. All in favor. Say, aye, remember California. Member car. I quick and. Robert's. I sorry my spacebar wasn't working. No crazy. Sorry about that. Perfect. Okay. for liquor license transfer applications. We didn't have any for this month. We do have one brewery or distillery, permanent application for distillery. So that is, for zephyr spirits, Inc. Dva vapor, distillery, application for our permanent Colorado liquor sales room at 1, 4, 2, 8, Pearl Street, Boulder, Colorado, 80302. And this is a state application, and we are just asking for the bill. If they have any objections, the applicant is here. If you would like to. I can let them in, and you can ask them questions. If you have any anything like that.

[139:01] I don't think I do. Does any other board member. No. Your special event permits. List is in your packet and as well as the renewals for this month. We do have a couple of informational items for you. The first one is the Ble retreat. Agenda is in your packet, and we are moving out to May first. That's on page 169 of your packet. If you have any feedback for that, if there's anything you want to add or change or anything like that. You can let me know now, or feel free to like send an email, or whatever the next thing

[140:00] is. I also sent an email about city Council requesting feedback from the boards. There's an opportunity to see their feedback if anyone would like to. There's a little like Memo template. That oh. person, Shankara said, had made up so. I believe I sent a link to that to you all where you could edit. And that's right. Let me check to see if that. So if feedback is something that you guys would like to give, let me know it's not required Whatever works for you. Great. Thank you. Yeah.

[141:02] And then the last thing here is that the June nineteenth meeting does fall on a city holiday. So you just wanted to get your feedback on if you would like to reschedule that what the Board would like to do for that day. Wednesday, June nineteenth. I would like to reschedule that, because that is also a holiday for me. Yup same for me. I'm good. The week before or the week after. I was gonna say, the same thing. Yeah. I would prefer the week after. Sorry in particular. So that would be June 20 sixth would be one week from that day. That'd be great. Okay, great and I believe that is everything that we have for matters. Room licensing work. So last is members from Madison, chair members of the authority. I'll have anything.

[142:09] I just have woof! What a hearing it's it's been quite a while, as you can see, I'm rusty. And Mr. Ramirez. Thank you so much for working with me on remembering the procedures. Oh, you did really. Great chair have fun! Thank you. Great. It was I. We haven't had a show cause. And yeah, thank God, it wasn't someone contesting the charges again, because that those are. Those are always rough. And thank you, Officer Rex, I appreciate your looking out for the community and really doing your civic service. Really appreciate it. And again. Thank you so much to Kristen Miss Ramirez. and officer, act again for your due diligence in this matter. I it it's very concerning. and I am going to be the most hated old man that lives on the hill.

[143:08] But we appreciate you. Thank you. Alright, Sam. Anything else from the board. Do we know? Did we get any new board members? Thank you so much. I'm so sorry I forgot to talk about that. Thank you so much for bringing that up. Oh, I was like that. Yeah, that's very important. Okay. So for board recruitment, as you know, there was one applicant that ended up interviewing for the Bla and City council chose not to appoint that person, and so board recruitment is actually open again. and it is open until April nineteenth. So a month. So if you know anyone, encourage them to apply and we are doing some extra recruitment. Around trying to get some qualified candidates in here. So

[144:01] yes, thank you so much for reminding. That's the update on that and then Member Appslom did have to leave early. But Member Appslom can continue and see until it is filled. or he can reply. Just for future reference will he be able to vote on minutes since he left early. I will let that. I'll let Roberto answer on. He will be he will be because no matters were decided subsequent to him, leaving other than setting up another meeting. Perfect. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. Course. And with that member California would make a motion to adjourn. Member. Carl seconded that motion. All in favor. Say I, Member California, I. And a car. I. Number, Roberts, I. We are adjourned at 5, 26 PM. Thank you.

[145:01] Oops, guys. Have a good one. Thank you. Everyone.