Safety And Licensing Committee Votes Unanimously To Deny Beer License To Core’s Lounge – Points To Ongoing Noise Complaints And Code Violations As Reason For Denial

The Safety and Licensing Committee met 06/28/2023. They spent about 15 minutes discussing the Class “B” Beer License application from Core’s Lounge.

Its alcohol license had been revoked in April of 2022, due to having accrued over 200 demerit points on their license. Now, a year later, they submitted an application for a new license. Neither Kor Xiong, the owner, nor another representative of the bar attended the meeting, and after listening to complaints from the neighbors as well as an explanation from the Police Department as to why the license application should be denied, the committee voted unanimously to deny the application citing the establishment’s history of noise complaints and license violations as well the fact that it had been found guilty of serving alcohol on the premises even after their previous alcohol license had been revoked. Per one of the assistant city attorney’s, Section 9-52(10) specifically barred granting an alcohol license to any applicant that had been convicted of selling alcoholic beverages without the proper retail license within the last 18 months. So, municipal code would have prevented the committee from approving the application even if they had wanted to do so.

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

This item had first appeared on the agenda of the 06/14/2023 Safety and Licensing Committee meeting. At the time, although the committee members clearly wanted to deny the application, they decided to hold the item until this meeting because the Police Department had not had the opportunity to submit a memo outlining reasons for the denial and no member of the City Attorney’s Office was present at the meeting and available to offer legal advice.

For the 06/28/2023 meeting, Police Lieutenant Adam Nagel was able to submit a very thorough memo outlining the multiple reasons why the Police Department was recommending denial, including a history of liquor law violations as well as a lack of evidence demonstrating the licensee’s rehabilitation and fitness to sell alcohol.

Additionally, Lieutenant Nagel told the committee during the meeting, “Under Wisconsin law, no license related to alcohol beverages may be issued to a habitual law offender where the circumstances of the habitual law offenses substantially relate to the circumstances to the particular license activity, I think every single one of these violations has that substantial relation to the service of alcohol.”

Two members of the neighborhood that backed up to the Core’s Lounge location appeared at the meeting and spoke against approving it, citing the ongoing noise problems and other violations originating from the bar.

Alderperson Vaya Jones (District 10), the alderperson who represented both the residents as well as Core’s Lounge spoke out against approving the license. She said that after the meeting on 06/14/2023, representatives from Core’s Lounge did reach out to both her and Alderperson Katie Van Zeeland (District 5) offering to have them come and talk and get to know Core’s. The date/time Core’s had suggested had not worked out for either alderperson, but when Alderperson Jones emailed back asking for another time, she received no response back.

Overall, although the issues with Core’s Lounge started before she was an alderperson, they had not stopped. She was concerned about the disregard shown for the residents of the neighborhood as well as the continued violations that took police time and resources away from other areas of the city.

Additionally, she noted that Core’s still had unpaid court fees related to various incidents. “So clearly, even these violations have not been taken care of moving forward.”

Finally, she was concerned that on the license application, Mr. Xiong had answered “No” to the question “Have you or any member of your organization ever been convicted of a misdemeanor or ordinance violation” when that was clearly not the case.

Alderperson Alex Schultz (District 9) said, “I don’t think there’s any question that this should be supported for denial given the litany of violations and also the failure of the business owners to respond to. I think, as a committee, we want to see businesses take responsibility for their actions and show us that they are […] responding to citations and taking appropriate action to better themselves, better the business, and better the community that they operate in. But we’re not seeing that at all, and there’s no indication that we will.” He also thought it was telling that no representative from Core’s attended the meeting.

Alderperson William Siebers (District 1) was in favor of the denial but did not think a denial that evening would cause the problem to go away forever. “At some point in time, somebody can come and apply for a license, somebody who’s more responsible. And then it’s going to be a little bit more difficult for the committee to say ‘No.’”

Alderperson Nate Wolff (District 12) noted that there were other bars that operated near and within residential neighborhoods. “I’m going to vote no on this as well because it is clear that they have not shown a pattern of respect for the city, the police department, or the people living nearby, whereas other places have.”

One of the assistant city attorneys was asked to comment on the issue. Although she was not in attendance for this meeting, Alderperson Van Zeeland had wanted to know what the committee was allowed to consider when denying a license application. Per the attorney, “In the light of this being a new application, the committee can consider anything that’s relevant to the to the total circumstances, including actions that led to the original revocation or suspension. There’s no issue with considering that stuff.” He went on to say that the issue with Core’s being an habitual offender was in and of itself enough for the committee to base a denial on. Finally, because the applicant had been convicted within the last 18 months of selling alcohol beverages without a proper retail license, municipal code 9-52(10) specifically prevented him from being granted a license.

The committee went on to vote 4-0 to deny the license.

View full meeting details and video here: https://cityofappleton.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=1099732&GUID=8D2D9E21-E538-4FFD-AAF5-31478650D37B