TABC ISSUES STATEMENT, MAJOR DELAY IN ALCOHOL SALES

FROM THE TABC:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE   August 20, 2009

Citizen Protests Delay Processing of TABC Permit Applications in Lubbock County

A countywide local option election was held in Lubbock County on May 9, 2009, legalizing the sale of:
-Alcoholic beverages for off-premises consumption (e.g., beer, wine and spirits in grocery stores, convenience stores and liquor stores)
-Alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption in a restaurant that holds a food and beverage certification (e.g., beer, wine and spirits in restaurants)

Following the election, because of zoning issues, a temporary restraining order in the City of Lubbock prevented any permits from being issued within the city limits for several months. That restraining order was lifted on August 10, 2009.

However, delays will continue for businesses in Lubbock County. TABC has received three general protests, as well as several specific protests, regarding applications for new licenses and permits for locations in the county.

The basis for these protests is this: There is some disagreement among the citizens of Lubbock County (including within the City of Lubbock) over how to interpret a law that says that the wet/dry status resulting from a city or Justice of the Peace (JP) precinct election prevails against the status resulting from a countywide election. See Section 251.73 of the Alcoholic Beverage Code below.

Both sides of the disagreement have a legitimate claim, and it is a disagreement that will be settled in a court of law by a judge. TABC will take a neutral stance throughout the process.

Any application in the county for permit types that were not already legal prior to the May election could be subject to a protest hearing which will delay, or possibly stop, the issuance of the permit.

Protest hearings will be held in the City of Lubbock, either before the Lubbock County Judge or before the State Office of Administrative Hearings (SOAH), depending on the type of license or permit involved.

“We recognize the sense of urgency on the part of the business owners and the community when it comes to having this issue settled, and we will move forward as quickly as possible.” said Public Information Officer Carolyn Beck. “Although the ballot measures passed with an overwhelming majority, TABC cannot issue permits without following the law.”

Because of the complexity of the issues, it could be several weeks before a hearing is scheduled. Because of full court dockets, it could be several months before any hearings take place.

“People on both sides of the issue feel very strongly,” continued Beck, “and both the protestants and the applicants will be given the opportunity to be heard by a judge. Our agency is committed to facilitating a fair and transparent process and keeping the citizens of the county informed as it moves forward. Unfortunately, it is unlikely that the issue will be resolved quickly.”

Following the May 9th election, prior to protests being filed, several permits had already been issued in Lubbock County that were new permit types for the communities: Goble Supply Auto & AG Supply in Abernathy (wine and beer off-premises); Rick’s Place – Liquor in Wolfforth (package store and beer off-premises); Kwik Stop in Wolfforth (package store and beer off-premises); Cagle Steaks outside Lubbock city limits (mixed beverage in a restaurant). If a judge rules that these areas are dry, it is unclear at this time what will happen to these permits. However, TABC does not have the legal authority to cancel a permit without the permit holder being given an opportunity to be heard before a judge.

Contact:   Carolyn Beck, Public Information Officer, 512-206-3347

Additional Information

Wet-Dry Certification
Before TABC processes a license or permit application, the city and county must certify the application as being at a location that is wet for that type of permit. TABC issues licenses and permits based on the wet-dry certification from the city and county. TABC’s role is not to determine whether a location is wet or dry. Any disagreement with the city or county’s wet-dry certification will be settled through a hearing process.

Relevant Excerpt from the Alcoholic Beverage Code
Sec. 251.73. Prevailing Status: Resolution of Conflicts. To insure that each voter has the maximum possible control over the status of the sale of alcoholic beverages in the area where he resides:
(1) the status that resulted from or is the result of a duly called election for an incorporated city or town prevails against the status that resulted from or is the result of a duly called election in a justice precinct or county in which the incorporated city or town, or any part of it is contained; and
(2) the status that resulted or is the result of a duly called election for a justice precinct prevails against the status that resulted from or is the result of a duly called election in an incorporated city or town in which the justice precinct is wholly contained or in a county in which the justice precinct is located.

What is a Protest?
The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code provides opportunities for citizens and government officials to object to the issuance of a license or permit. The agency calls this process a protest.

Most of the grounds for refusal or denial of a license or a permit can be determined by TABC as part of the application process. If legal grounds exist and are found during that process, the applicant may be disqualified.

Some grounds exist for refusal or denial that are subject to interpretation on the basis of the facts involved.

What Role Does TABC Play?
It is the policy of TABC to provide every interested person, including TABC employees, government officials and citizens of Texas, a full and fair opportunity to object to the issuance of an alcoholic beverage license or permit based upon legal grounds established under the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code or other law.

In service to this policy, TABC establishes a process by which protests to license and permit applications may be resolved in an efficient, timely, and consistent manner, giving due regard to the legal rights and interests of the agency, industry, other government units, and the public.

TABC’s job is not to take sides but to ensure that applicants meet all qualifications to obtain the license or permit as outlined in the Alcoholic Beverage Code.

Protest Hearings
In this case, protest hearings will be held in Lubbock County. The protesting party will be notified at least 10 days in advance of the time and place of the hearing. The hearing will be held according to the rules of the Texas Administrative Procedures Act, (V.T.C.A., Government Code, §2001 et seq.).

For a liquor permit, a judge designated by the State Office of Administrative Hearings (SOAH) will inform all parties of the time, date, and location for the hearing. The judge will handle all pre-trial matters, make rulings as necessary and conduct the final hearing on its own merits.

For a beer or beer/wine license, the county judge, acting as an administrative law judge, will hold the hearing in the same manner as for permits.

In this case, because TABC will be a neutral party to the protests, both sides will have the opportunity to present evidence to the judge – the protestants and the applicants. A hearing on a single applicant is not likely to last more than a day.

The judge will have up to 60 days to file a ruling (proposal for decision), and then each side will have up to 15 days to file objections, and then another 15 days to respond to the opposing side’s objections. TABC Administrator Alan Steen makes the final decision, typically signing an order that concurs with the judge’s proposal for decision. Both sides are given 20 days to request a rehearing. If the application is denied and a request for rehearing is denied, the applicant may appeal to district court. If the application is approved and a request for rehearing is denied, there is no opportunity for the protestant to appeal.

DON WORKMAN DOESN’T WANT YOU TO BUY ALCOHOL

I will start off by saying I’ve never met Don Workman. I’m sure he’s a nice man who is deeply devoted to God and his Church. I’m sure he means well and only wants the best for his City, State, and Country.

That being said…

He’s trying to rob you of your vote Lubbock. Today I recieved the protest forms from the TABC office in Austin, and Don Workman along with Lauran Collins (both of Lubbock, though Workman used to live in Hockley County) are the 2 people in Lubbock protesting the election.

By the way Don Workman is a liar since he told KCBD that he was doing research for the parties. Turns out he was one of those parties.

Collins is using an ad from a 1950’s era AJ calling for people to vote against intoxicating beverages as her reasoning. Here is part of her statement:

Lubbock a local option election was believed held on August 6, 1950. Complainant has a copy of a petition printed in the Lubbock Avalanche Journal listing citizens requesting a “vote against the sale of all intoxicating beverages Saturday August 6.” The clipping did not have a year nor indicate if it was a county-wide or city of Lubbock option. Thus option was believed to have been held in the early 50’s. This should be of public record but complainant has not obtained the details as of this date.

Nothing solid there. From what I hear the TABC should have on record every election dealing with alcohol on record.

**UPDATE** The Collins protest was prepared by the same attorney that represents the Lubbock Area Baptist Association (LABA). His name, Craig Brummett.

There are also protests from people in Abernathy, Slaton, and New Deal. We will get to those on the show tomorrow.

More on this later and on the show.

CITY OF LUBBOCK NAMES JUDGE SAM MEDINA CITY ATTORNEY

From the City of Lubbock:

Council Hires City Attorney

The Lubbock City Council has named Judge Sam Medina as Lubbock’s City Attorney, effective October 1.  Judge Sam Medina currently serves as the 237th State Judicial District Court Judge.

Medina was raised in Crosbyton, graduated from Texas Tech Law School, was in private practice from 1976 to 1995, and was the first Hispanic to be elected to a county-wide position in Lubbock County when, in 1995, he became judge of the County Court at Law No. 1.  Judge Medina has served as the 237th State Judicial District Court Judge since 1999.

Mayor Tom Martin says, “We are proud to have the judge with us here at the City.  His integrity, demeanor, and experience are a great asset to City staff, the City Council, the Mayor, and the community as a whole.”

LPD INCIDENT REPORT ON PAUL BEANE, JILL KERNS, & GERALD DOLTER

I just got my hands on the LPD Incident Report regarding what really happened on July 18 between Paul Beane and those at the Moonlight Musicals and oh boy it shows a much different story than the email that’s been floating around.

According to Officer John Gomez, Paul Beane was worried about a storm that was approaching with lightning because his granddaughter was on stage. Mr. Dolter had stopped the show but wanted some of the cast and crew to clear the equipment from the stage. Beane approached Dolter and expressed his concern about his granddaughter’s safety, then walked away to wait for her. Dolte made the decision to get the crew off the stage then went over to Beane to apologize. Mr. Beane then told Dolter that is actions were irresponsible and walked away. Jill Kerns, from the top of the stage told Beane that she wanted him to leave the area. Beane replied, “shut up, I’m not going anywhere without my granddaughter.” Another unknown female standing next to Kerns also asked Beane to leave and he told her to “shut up.” Officer John Gomez told all involved to calm down, and that’s when Beane’s granddaughter came out and they left.

According to Officer Gomez, Paul Beane DID NOT use profanity during the incident. Officer Gomez was within 15 feet of Paul Beane during the entire incident. He also did not observe any criminal violations during the incident.

The above is a nutshell version of the incident report which we will discuss on Thursday’s LFN on KFYO.

As I’ve mentioned in previous blog entries this is why I didn’t bring this RUMOR up on my show. Unlike my competitors in the morning, I know what sources are. You can’t run with a story just because a caller says something is true or because you read it on the internet or via email. The email that was being sent around wasn’t even signed by anyone. Now, I don’t blame Jim Douglass for running with the rumor as if it were fact. He has no idea what he’s doing. Being in the media isn’t his first or only job. Jim doesn’t understand that you should get facts and sources before slamming a City Councilman. I do, but then again I do this for real, not for play time to talk about Texas Tech Alumni events. It’s called integrity. Some shows/people have it, some don’t.

However, Jeff Klotzman is a different story. How could a veteran newsman just sit by and let his co-host proceed presenting a rumor as a factual story? Sorry Jeff, you should have known better and you should have told your co-host to stop talking about it. Jeff Klotzman is on the Board of Directors of the Moonlight Musicals and should have known what really happened.

If anyone involved with the Moonlight Musicals was involved with writing or sending this email and starting this rumor, they should resign from the Moonlight Musicals Board immediately. That includes Jill Kerns and Jeff Klotzman. Again, IF they were involved or concealed the truth. Or in the case of Jeff, knowing the truth but allowing his co-host to spread lies.

But maybe I’m wrong. Maybe those spreading the rumors would like to call Officer John Gomez a liar and accuse him of filing a false report. If they are going to call Officer Gomez a liar, then it’s time to speak up.

More on this on Thursday’s Lubbock’s First News on 790 KFYO.

PAUL BEANE FORGOT WHO HE REPRESENTS

I really would like for this whole balloon deal to go away and hopefully after this weekend I won’t have to bring it up again. Unless of course, people keep acting foolish on the City Council. In this mornings AJ we found out that Paul Beane brought up the ordinance banning balloon releases because of a promise he made to a rancher outside of Lubbock County. (link)

Beane is even quoted saying, “The balloon ordinance was not on my top-ten radar,” Beane said. “As a matter of fact, it’s not in the top 50, but a promise is a promise.”

I’ve posted the audio from my thoughts on this in the podcast section of the website (link) but I think this needs to be written as well.

Mr. Beane, you represent District 4 of the City of Lubbock. Not a rancher outside of Lubbock County. You were elected by the people of District 4 of the City of Lubbock. Not a rancher outside of Lubbock County. You serve the PEOPLE of the CITY of LUBBOCK. NOT a rancher outside the County. Do you get it?

If Linda Deleon or Floyd Price had made a promise to someone outside of Lubbock to make an ordinance affecting the citizens of Lubbock, many people would be outraged. And I hope you are now. Paul Beane tried to grow government with an ordinance that was unenforceable, and made Lubbock look bad all because of a promise to some rancher who has no vote in Lubbock, and pays no taxes in Lubbock.

Mr. Beane, you should only make promises to those you serve. You should concentrate on District 4 and the City of Lubbock, nothing else. You serve no one outside of Lubbock County. If you’d like to serve people outside of Lubbock and force laws on people and increase government then it’s time you leave City Hall and run for State Representative.

LUBBOCK CITY HALL NEEDS TO GET IT TOGETHER

Last night the City Planing and Zoning Comission voted 8-0 on new zoning restrictions. In large shopping centers the stores can be any size they want. In other locations they will be limited to 8,750 sq.ft. which is up from the original 3,000. I’m fine with these changes and I think most people will be as well.

The problem I have is with City Hall. Who exactly screwed this thing up? According to Thursday’s AJ, the owner of Pinkies went to Mayor Tom Martin in DECEMBER, EARLY DECEMBER, about this very issue. Martin got ticked and it seems like he refused to sit down at the table with Pinkies. Here’s part of the AJ’s story:

But Majestic Liquor Stores Inc. and Pinkie’s Inc. argued Lubbock violated state laws by setting stricter rules for businesses that sold alcohol than Texas allows.
Pinkie’s representatives said as much in early December, when the city gave final passage to the ordinance and the retailer warned they could “challenge” the size requirements council members eventually passed for the predominant retail zone throughout the city.
The warning frustrated Mayor Tom Martin, who opposed allowing the city’s ordinances on alcohol to fall apart like building restrictions in North Overton before the modern redevelopment project.
“I’m sick of this,” Martin said. “Somebody’s been going around trying to lobby for the whiskey zoning all over town, like we need to have it on every street corner.

That last quote sounds like something a member of TAAS would say, but remember the Mayor didn’t take a side. If Pinkies went to the Mayor in December about this very issue, why did he not listen? This could have been settled long before the election.

Now, lets take a look at what Randy Henson, the chief planner has to say about the Law in the AJ today. Remember the comission passed the new zoning last night.

Package stores could not compete in the same areas as grocery stores, which can soon legally sell beer and wine, under the ordinances, Majestic Liquor Stores Inc. and Pinkie’s Liquor argued in a lawsuit seeking the order.
The retailers’ filing also opposed size restrictions placed on alcohol stores not imposed on other businesses.
City attorneys agreed the objection had merit and will spend the summer changing their ordinances to comply with Texas law.

“It’s about the clearest piece of state law I have ever seen,” Henson said.

So it’s clear today, but in December it wasn’t? If it’s so clear then why did the planing and zoning comission and the City Council BOTH pass these regulations? Why did the Council pass something that was against the law?

I also don’t like the fact that the Mayor seems to be inviting lawsuits over this issue. Remember folks, if the City is sued, then YOUR tax dollars will be used. Shouldn’t the Mayor be saying that this is it and should result in NO lawsuits? It seems like everytime a mic is put in front of him lately he talks about “possible lawsuits”. This from KCBD:

Mayor Tom Martin says regardless of what the council decides there’s nothing stopping anyone from filing a lawsuit. “Whatever the council decides still could be challenged by this group of plaintiffs or any other group of plaintiffs. Hate to say it but, it’s almost a never ending battle because anyone who feels a grief can go pay their few dollars to file a suit. There is no magic bullet,” says Mayor Martin.

Mr. Mayor, many cities have gone through this and they can do it without lawsuits and without their Mayor thinking there might possible be a lawsuit. Why can’t Lubbock?

Someone is to blame for this issue continuing and the longer it takes, the worse it looks for City Hall. So who is to blame? I’m not sure exactly who and maybe (probably) there is more than one person to blame. Could it be that someone is deliberately holding up the process because of their own personal views on alcohol sales?

Another question to ask is, if the Council and Zoning comission folks knowingly voted on zoning that was against the law which meant putting a hold on the process, should they still be around?

Just a few things to think about. Leave your comments.

3 NEW CASES OF SWINE FLU ON THE SOUTH PLAINS

From the City of Lubbock:

Three New Positive Cases of H1N1 Flu

Three new cases of H1N1 flu have been confirmed in the South Plains region.  The three new cases are: a 35-50 year old female from Bailey County, a school-age male from Dawson County, and a school-age male from Arizona visiting relatives in Lubbock.  Healthcare professionals have notified the families of the diagnosis of H1N1 Flu.

Health officials remind you that H1N1 flu is a mild strain of influenza, and if you are exhibiting flu-like symptoms please follow the same precautions that you would for the seasonal flu.

SWINE FLU IN LUBBOCK… ALCOHOL SALES VOTE BLAMED.

From the City of Lubbock:

Positive Case of H1N1 Flu in Region 1

One case of H1N1 flu has been confirmed in Lubbock County.  The case is a small child, less than five years old (not school age).  A healthcare professional has notified the family of the diagnosis of H1N1 Flu.  The child has been treated with Tamiflu and is recovering at home.

The Lubbock Health Department continues to advise everyone to take the following precautions to prevent the spread of any illness:

Wash hands frequently and thoroughly for at least 20 seconds using soap and warm water especially before handling food, after touching potentially contaminated surfaces, and after being around someone who may be sick.
If soap and water are not available, alcohol-based hand cleaners are also effective.
Cough or sneeze into a facial tissue (then dispose of tissue) or into your shirt sleeve if a tissue is not available.
Stay home if you are experiencing flu-like symptoms to prevent spreading the illness to others, or seek medical attention if your symptoms worsen.  Due to overcrowding at emergency rooms, please visit your private physician or an urgent care clinic before trying the emergency room.

So there ya go. Glad the kid is doing okay. Panic if you must.

LUBBOCK COUNTY WET, BUT…

Well it looks as though the election was legal, but of course there are some people out there still trying to cause problems for all of us heathens that would like lower prices and the ability to buy wine at the store. Here is the latest from the county:

No previous elections conflict with the wet status of any area in Lubbock County, according to an opinion sent from the county’s civil division to the clerk’s office.
John Grace, an assistant criminal district attorney in the county’s civil division, wrote in a letter released Monday afternoon that “all areas of Lubbock County should now be considered ‘wet’” for the sale of off-premise alcohol and mixed drinks.
“I note specifically that I can find no record of any election to prohibit any type of alcohol by any jurisdiction within the county,” Grace wrote.
Issues in the state’s alcohol code and a recent attorney general’s ruling had called the wet or dry status of some areas into question after May 9’s landslide vote to allow alcohol sales.
County commissioners certified the results of that vote at a special morning meeting.
The letter refers to a request by County Clerk Kelly Pinion for an analysis on the county’s wet and dry status. (link)

Sounds great right? Time to kick this thing off and start giving out licenses! Wrong. Remember the Strip? Well they are still in negotiations with the City of Lubbock regarding zoning and building size. Should the stores be able to be larger than 3,000 sq. ft.? Maybe, but that’s not MY issue right now. Here is the latest regarding the lawsuit by the strip:

Medina approved a 90-day extension to the temporary restraining order against alcohol licenses he gave in early May. Both sides had agreed to the extension last week.
The lengthy extension covers the amount of time it could take to approve new zoning rules. The ordinance could go before Lubbock’s planning and zoning commission in early June and before the council by July. (full story)

So, it could be August or later before Lubbock starts seeing alcohol sold in stores. Of course the Strip wanted 90 days to figure everything out because they still want the money (I don’t blame them). If you wait until July before the City Council decides anything then the Strip has been able to cash in on all the Summer sales. Memorial Day, 4th of July, weekends at the pool, etc., nice isn’t it? The City of Lubbock needs to get this zoning deal hammered out fast. No one on the Council has any reason to want to see this play out for months. The people of Lubbock have spoken, and it’s time for the City to act. At the end of the day the Mayor nor any of the council members would benefit from the Strip raking in more money while they draw this thing out.

Or could they?

THE AJ IS STILL ALIVE…FOR NOW

Morris Communications, the parent company of the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal, has recieved another extension on their $9.7 million dollar interest payment. They now have until April 24th to pay. Here is the story:

Morris Publishing Obtains Extension of Forbearance Period on Overdue Interest Payment

AUGUSTA, Ga., April 7 /PRNewswire/ — Morris Publishing Group, LLC announced today that it has obtained an extension until April 24, 2009 to make a $9.7 million interest payment on its Senior Subordinated Notes. Holders of more than 80 percent of the outstanding amount of senior subordinated notes have agreed to extend the forbearance period for the payment, which originally was due Feb. 1, 2009.

“We are continuing to address our debt structure,” said William S. Morris IV, chief executive officer of Morris Publishing Group. “We are hopeful that we will reach an agreement that satisfies all parties.”

Morris Publishing’s senior bank group also agreed to extend until April 24, 2009 the waiver of the cross default arising from the overdue interest payment on the senior subordinated notes. The bank group also amended terms of the senior credit agreement to delete the requirement that Morris or related entities consummate a transaction (or at least sign a binding letter of intent to do so) to generate funds to prepay the senior debt by May 30, 2009.

Morris Publishing Group, LLC is a privately held media company based in Augusta, Ga. Morris Publishing currently owns and operates 13 daily newspapers as well as nondaily newspapers, city magazines and free community publications in the Southeast, Midwest, Southwest and Alaska. For more information, visit our Web site, morris.com.

link

tick tick tick tick….