The Safety and Licensing Committee met 01/22/2025. One of the items they took up was the bartender/operator license for Kelly. Kelly was recently convicted of possession of cocaine and is charged with another drug related offense that has yet to go to trial. The police department requested that the bartender license be denied.
During the last Safety and Licensing Committee the committee voted to hold the item in order to provide Kelly time to provide documentation demonstrating rehabilitation.
Much of the documentation Kelly provided did not seem to pertain to her case, and she did not attend the meeting. The committee ended up unanimously recommending that the license application be denied.
I’ve prepared a transcript of the discussion for download:
Kelly did not attend the meeting. She had contacted the City Clerk prior to the meeting and indicated that she had a scheduling conflict and asked for the item to be held. The committee declined to hold the item.
Kelly had also provided documentation that, in theory, was intended to demonstrate her rehabilitation. The first page of the documentation was a letter from a substance abuse counselor indicating that Kelly had been attending sessions since 09/17/2024.
The second two pages were printouts showing appointment dates, the last of which took place on 11/11/2024.
The remaining 19 pages of documentation had no discernible connection to Kelly but, instead, pertained to Cindy Reed a prior bartender license applicant whose license application was denied by the Common Council back in October of 2024.
Alderperson Chris Croatt (District 14) asked if the inclusion of Cindy’s documentation was the result of a scanning mistake by city staff, but Clerk Kami Lynch responded these were the documents Kelly had provided and they had confirmed that that is what she wanted to submit.
Assistant City Attorney Zak Buruin told the committee, “The documentation pertaining to this applicant’s rehabilitation consists of a series of appointment notifications or appointment summaries, and a scant, I think, three sentence summary indicating that this person is in some type of treatment with no information regarding the nature, prognosis, diagnosis, anything substantive beyond that.
“There’s nothing contained within this that would require the committee to grant the license. The committee could grant the license if it finds the documentation provided convincing, but it is going to be a discretionary decision by the committee at this point based on this information.”
The committee ended up voting 5-0 to recommend the license application for denial.
View full meeting details and video here: https://cityofappleton.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=1237593&GUID=34546250-9397-40C9-977A-B4FFF07828D5
Be the first to reply