The alcohol license application for Delaire’s is still unresolved over 3 months after it first appeared before the Safety and Licensing Committee.
The Common Council met 01/15/2025, and, after received public comments from two people who opposed the granting of the license the Council voted unanimously to refer the license application back to the Safety and Licensing Committee for further work. Alderperson William Siebers (District 1) specifically mentioned his desire that some stipulations that could be attached to the license be provided in writing for the committee to consider.
I’ve prepared a transcript of the discussion for download:
This item has been subject to a protracted approval process as the Safety and Licensing Committee and the Common Council have wrestled with concerns that the owner David Boulanger has unspoken plans to operate illegal gambling machines on the premises. While these plans are unverified and have been denied by Mr. Boulanger, he tried to open an illegal gambling lounge in Grafton, a person working on his business told the salon owner next door that the business was going to offer gambling, Mr. Boulanger’s brother-in-law runs a business in West Bend that advertises gambling machines, and when people in Appleton started voicing concerns about the prospect of Delaire’s offering illegal gambling, Mr. Boulanger hired an attorney who has specific knowledge of the loopholes in Wisconsin’s laws regarding gambling.
Jamie Pappenfuss and Ellie Ronsman of Violet Social Club Salon both attended the meeting and voiced opposition to granting Delaire’s an alcohol license. Violet Social Club Salon is located next door to Delaire’s and they share a hallway and bathrooms. Ms. Pappenfuss is the salon’s owner and was specifically told by a man doing work on the Delaire’s space that the business would have gambling machines. She told the Common Council, “One of my greatest shocks is that I truly feel what Mr. Boulanger is doing is a bait and switch. I feel like he’s trying to hide crime in plain sight, not only because someone who worked for him himself told me, and where would an electrician working for Mr. Boulanger get the idea of illegal gambling machines if not from Mr. Boulanger himself?”
She found multiple aspects of the situation suspicious, including Mr. Boulanger’s previous attempt to open a gambling lounge, his attempt to open this business in Appleton where he does not live, his brother-in-law’s association with gambling, his lawyer’s focus on gambling, and the way he entirely revamped his business plan when people started raising concerns.
She finished up by saying, “I worry that it serves no value to the community, and additionally, it’s unsafe, because not only will my young stylists and young clients be sharing back hallway isolated bathrooms with Mister Boulanger’s bar patrons, also will the minor employees at Uni Uni, and as a whole, I think it’s a shady way to do business, and it takes away from the integrity of this community that I love being a part of as a small business owner.”
Ms. Ronsman expressed safety concerns about sharing hallways and bathrooms with Delaire bar patrons and said, “I just think that, after everything that came out about him and his business, which Jamie said, I just don’t think that he’s a very trustworthy person to have next door.” She was in favor of attaching stipulations to the license so that the license could be easily revoked if he was found to have gambling machines in the business. “I think that that would be a good idea to prevent it from happening, because inevitably, I feel like it will happen.”
These were the only two members of the public to speak, but there were other people who attended and applauded their speeches.
Alderperson Siebers asked for the item to be referred back to the Safety and Licensing Committee, saying, “I voted for this based on stipulations being set. Tonight there’s no stipulations before me that I see, and therefore I’m going to refer it back and hope that the next time it appears in committee we have some conditions in writing.”
In what sounded like a unanimous voice vote, the Council voted to send the item back to committee for further work.
[I’m a little baffled by Alderperson Sieber’s statement that he voted for this at committee with the expectation that there would be stipulations brought to the Common Council for them to vote on, because the committee very clearly voted to approve the license application as submitted without any kind of amendment, and they did not direct staff to put together stipulations for them to deliberate on at the Council meeting.
The conversation at the time of the vote literally went as follows:
Alderperson Alex Schultz: Motion to approve.
Alderperson Chris Croatt: Okay. Is there a second?
Alderperson Chad Doran: I’ll second.
Alderperson Chris Croatt: Okay, we have a motion and a second to approve the license without restrictions.
Alderperson Alex Schultz: Correct.
It’s seems like at that point Alderperson Siebers should have been jumping in and clarifying that he was approving the license “as is” in the interim but expected the Attorney’s Office to come to the Common Council meeting with some stipulations that they could vote on.]
View full meeting details and video here: https://cityofappleton.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=1245454&GUID=8EF6FBA5-F2E7-4481-B4F6-4911589F38F4
Be the first to reply