Common Council Votes 8-6 To Approve Bartender License For Applicant With 5 OWI Convictions

The Common Council met 05/01/2024. One of the items they separated out for individual discussion was the Bartender/Operator License application for Miguel. This item was in and out of the Safety and Licensing Committee a couple times over the last month as the committee worked through how much discretion they had in approving or not approving his license application. Miguel has a history of OWI offenses, and the Police Department recommended denial of the license, but the committee ended up voting 3-1 to recommend the license for approval.

The Council spent a little over 20 minutes discussing the issue. Those opposed to approving the license cited Miguel’s history of 5 OWIs, two of which were felonies and expressed concern about allowing someone with a demonstrated history of poor decision-making regarding alcohol being able to serve alcohol to other people.

Those in favor of approve the license wrestled with how long a person’s past decisions should be counted against them and, as evidence of rehabilitation, cited his completion of probation, a criminal record that had been clean for the last 5 years, and his continued participation in a 12 Step program.

Eventually, the Council voted 8-6 in favor of approving Miguel’s bartender license.

I’ve prepared a transcript of the discussion for download:

ARGUMENTS BY THOSE OPPOSED TO APPROVING THE LICENSE:

Alderperson Chris Croatt (District 14) started the discussion off by stating that he had a high bar for approving bartender/operator licenses and then listed a number of reasons why he would not be voting in favor of Miguel’s license application. (1) His criminal record indicated “a clear history of irresponsible beverage consumption.” (2) The Police Department recommended denial. (3) The applicant had 5 OWIs. (4) The applicant had 2 felonies related to the OWIs. (5) There were errors and omissions on the application. (6) Miguel could take this license and work anywhere; the license would not be attached to the restaurant he was currently employed at which seemed to promote accountability. (7) Miguel did not graduate from the treatment court program in Outagamie County. (8) The Council had the freedom to deny the license. (Originally, they had believed that they were required by state law to approve it.) (9) Miguel could continue to work at his current place of employment even if he did not have this license. [He simply wouldn’t be able to be a manager.]

Alderperson Sheri Hartzheim (District 13) agreed with this reasoning. She took the Police Department’s recommendation seriously and could not get past the fact that Miguel’s criminal convictions were substantially related to alcohol. She was worried he would not utilize good judgement when serving people. “It looks as though historically he’s not been able to make those decisions well. That doesn’t mean that he can’t in the future but I have to look at the past because that’s all I have to look at. I just believe it would be unsafe for the city to grant this licensure.”

Alderperson Kristine Alfheim (District 11) asked Police Chief Polly Olson if the Police Department had changed their opinion on the license, and Chief Olson said their opinion had not changed. [i.e., they still recommended denial of the license.]

Alderperson Chad Doran (District 15) said, “I just want to express I guess, disappointed in the committee’s action to recommend this for approval. Based on the information that we have before us, I can understand one OWI being a mistake, but five to me, is a pattern—a pattern of behavior and a pattern of bad choices. And when we add felony convictions, multiple felony convictions, on top of that, I find it just patently absurd that we’re even entertaining the idea of granting a license to someone with substantially related convictions to alcohol the opportunity to continue serving alcohol to people in our community.”

ARGUMENTS BY THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE LICENSE:

Alderperson Denise Fenton (District 6) did not dispute the OWI history, but noted that he had completed probation related to his two felony convictions, and his employer, who had known him for the last 10 years, had spoken strongly about the changes Miguel had made in his life. Alderperson Fenton pointed out that it had been 5 years since his last offense and that his first offense had occurred in his early 20s. “[P]erhaps he did not complete the drug treatment court, but it is my understanding from listening to him that he has continued in his recovery program, and continues to work his program, and I think we should give him an opportunity for success.”

Alderperson Patti Heffernan (District 8) said she provided Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse recovery support in her job. She did not seem to view drug treatment court favorably and said, “It is next to impossible to pass and graduate the drug treatment court. It’s very difficult. Many of the judges are really great, but the people that operate, you know, between times that they’re seen in court—the way that they speak to the participants, I’ve never even had anybody speak to me like that when I was a cashier at Fazoli’s.” She also did not adhere to the concept that once a person was an alcoholic or addict they would always be an alcoholic or addict.

Alderperson William Siebers (District 1) understood that Miguel was seriously involved in a 12-Step program even though he had not completed the drug court program and stated, “I think this individual has shown at least via his record, that he’s made great strides in cleaning up his act so to speak. But the question each of us has to ask ourselves: at one point in time, you know, is the past the past? I think in regards to this individual and what I heard from him, as well as from his employer, the past is the past, and I think he should be given another chance.”

Alderperson Vered Meltzer (District 2) did not think that Miguel was a threat to public safety and thought the Police Department’s recommendation came from a certain perspective, but the Common Council was positioned to consider many different perspectives and there was room to disagree with the police.

Alderperson Patrick Hayden (District 7) pointed out that 18-year-olds could serve alcohol in Wisconsin and said, “I feel like the ability of someone who has been through some challenges and is working on pulling their life together is probably safer than most 18-year-olds out there serving alcohol today.”

The Council went on to approve Miguel’s bartender/operator license application by a vote of 8-6.

View full meeting details and video here: https://cityofappleton.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=1182538&GUID=6336468F-9DC4-44FE-AC94-6DB434D49031