Good morning, everyone.

We'll call this meeting the order of the Catneck of Beer Board.

And welcome to everyone.

All meeting attendees must sign in at the designated sign in sheet in for to meet the sunshine law requirements.

So if you haven't done so, we ask that you do that.

So as chairman, I'll double check and make sure I won't do that.

All right.

Second.

All in favor, signify by saying aye.

Opposed.

None noted.

At this time, the court reporter will swear in anybody that's coming before the board will need to be sworn in at this time.

Uh TE 130, also Hutton and Smith, Snapdragon Festival 420.

TE 132 TriStar Tap Truck LLC, which is an all-Nashville Road Show.

TE 133, Friends of the Festival.

Wubs under Walnut.

Beer 1369, Vision Hospitality Management, LLC doing business as the Fairfield Inn and Suites of Chattanooga.

Beer 1394, the Hatch Outfitters LLC doing business as the Hatch Outfitters.

Beer 1399.

Shallford's sushi incorporated doing business as Waco Japanese cuisine.

Beer 1400 was a change of ownership.

Uh bona fide hospitality LLC doing business as bona fide.

Uh Palo Duro presents LLC doing business as the Chattanooga market.

Pardon me.

Beer 1403 was a change of ownership.

Council Fire Club Incorporated.

Beer 1405.

Cayley LLC doing business as Toracaya.

Beer 1408, Taco Town LLC doing business as Taco Town 2.

Beer 1409.

Seiko Thai Incorporated doing business as Thai Smile.

And beer 1410, Sheepish Wolf LLC doing business as the sheepish wolf.

All requirements were met for these permits and approved.

Approved by regulatory.

All right, do we have any last minute bertha or anything others?

That's it then.

Okay.

All right.

All right.

Next item on our agenda is new temporary beer permit applications.

And uh Bertha, if you'll read that one, please, ma'am.

Representing the wedding reception, Catherine Wright is making application for a temporary beer permit for 4960 Gan Stor Road.

Ms.

Wright has not had a beer permit in the past.

This event is scheduled for June 13th, 2026, from 3 o'clock p.m.

to 8 o'clock p.m.

The location is owned by the city of Chattanooga and is zoned OS.

All right.

We're kind of in a holding pattern on that one.

Um we're working with the city attorney's office and working with the uh the applicant on the type of application that she actually needs.

We're not 100% at a temporary event permit would be applicable for that particular event.

Okay.

So we're looking further into that and defer it to the next next meeting.

Okay, motion to move temporary beer permit 125 to the next meeting.

All right.

Is there a second?

Second.

All in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Next move, TE 127.

Approved by regulatory.

That is Chattanooga Rinfair.

Next applicant representing MAPCO number 863.

Bonazara Enterprise Inc.

beer number 1401.

Mohammed Jamil is making application to engage in the sale of carry-out beer at 6120 Highway 58.

That application was passed from the last meeting.

And I don't see him.

Okay.

Now excuse me, Bertha, just a second.

Back to uh Chattanooga Renee Fair.

Uh-huh.

Is it what's that?

What are we?

Is it passed?

It was approved by regulatory.

Oh, it was approved by regulatory.

Okay.

Correct.

Thank you.

Sorry, I missed that part.

That's term of hearing aids up.

All right.

Okay.

Is there anyone here for MATCO 863?

All right.

Well, is there a motion to pass this to our next meeting?

I make a motion to pass beer 1401 to our next meeting.

All right.

Is there a second?

Second.

Bessie has a question.

Yes.

Why has it not been approved by regulatory?

What's the change?

Well, I have some questions about the application with the ownership and stuff.

Okay.

So I need to get that straightened out.

Thank you.

All righty.

Sorry, Betsy.

Missed that.

Okay.

He's got a second on the floor.

All right, there's a second.

All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

All right.

That's moved.

Thank you.

Now, before we start our new beer applications, uh Chris Anderson with the mayor's office has asked if he could speak to us.

I'd like to have the permission, board's permission to go ahead and hold our agenda here and let Chris address us if that's okay.

All right, very good.

Good morning, Chairman, members of the board.

Thank you for your time today.

Effective today, Mayor Kelly has issued executive order 2026-05, which extends beer permit renewal amnesty period for another 15 days.

We are also issuing a press release today announcing the order and encouraging even more businesses to come forward and come into compliance.

This is a temporary solution that will bridge the gap while we seek a change in the beer ordinance to comply with state law.

TCA 575103.

With this change, there will no longer be arbitrary expiration dates for beer permits.

This does comply with TCA 57503, which we are bound by as a city.

The ordinance is finished and it's in the queue for consideration by city council.

I can get council staff to run copies of it.

It has not been seen by the city council yet, but it's in the queue to be placed on a council agenda.

I'm happy to share it with you.

It's a pretty short ordinance change.

It is about four paragraphs.

And basically, it removes the arbitrary expiration dates from beer permits to comply with state law, uh, but does still require the annual privilege tax to be paid by the businesses that have the permits.

And uh the only triggers for a an expiration or a renewal on the permit will be what is required by state law again.

Ownership change of five percent or more, a change in the name of the business, a change in the location of the business, or violations of the beer code by the one of the owners or the business itself.

The amnesty period is active now.

For businesses that are currently operating with expired permits, the message from the mayor is clear.

Come forward and renew.

The door is open to everyone.

We are here to bring the entire city into compliance.

That's all I have today.

All right, very good.

Uh any questions of Chris?

Yes.

Yes, go ahead, uh Betsy.

I guess I'm curious.

I thought that the expiration date was December 31st, and we'll for everyone.

That is not correct, and we are not in compliance with state law by having that.

That is what this ordinance seeks to change.

So will there be a new expiration date the same for business?

Is that what I'm hearing?

There will no longer be expiration dates arbitrarily on beer permits.

We are not allowed to have them under this state law.

There will no longer be expiration dates.

They will a permit will expire when or have to be renewed when one of those four trigger events happens that I just mentioned.

Okay.

This is verbatim from state law.

All right, let me let me do this the right way.

Select next.

That will be okay.

You can go back.

Oh, yeah.

Christy, go ahead.

So you mentioned that they have to pay a tax uh they have to pay their taxes.

There's an annual privilege tax of 100 that we still intend to charge businesses that we are allowed by the state to charge.

So they don't be able to that permit.

That is being developed.

We may revoke permits for that.

Um, but that's still in discussion.

So my next question is with this in place.

What happens to was it Cabanas that was cited for this?

I'm glad you brought that up, uh Christy.

Thank you very much.

There's been a lot of misinformation about this floating around as it's common with things that float around the media and are reported by different outlets different ways.

Um cabanas had more.

My understanding is after being briefed by our legal counsel this week.

Cabanas doesn't just have an expiration issue, they have a background check issue and possibly another issue.

So this would not resolve that.

This only resolves expiration issues for anyone that has them or anyone who has not come forward.

Okay.

And it doesn't apply retroactively.

It does not apply retroactively.

That's important to note.

And I understand that people have been fined for this before, but laws are not retroactive.

That's not the way laws work.

Uh we we change the law every Tuesday in this room on various things related to city ordinances, and we can't litigate the past, but what we can do is comply with the state going forward and have a fairer system going forward.

Okay.

JW.

Thanks for coming today, Chris.

Uh no expiration date effective today.

Not well, that's not sorry, sir.

That's not correct.

Once the ordinance passes, there will be no expiration date.

The executive order starts today.

Oh, I took it to give a 15-day period for people to come into compliance while this ordinance is making its way through the public notice and the council debate and the vote and all that.

Because that takes a little while, that takes several weeks.

Chris?

Yes, sir.

I I have a question.

So the renewal of the privilege tax will be what they get.

Is that bill how does the treasurer communicate to them that it's time to renew?

The way we've been doing it previously is we don't feel as effective, and that's what's caused two years of orders to to bridge that gap.

Okay.

Uh so we have six months, actually seven months to institute a new system either through open gov or through another way.

We've already met with Treasury about it, and we're looking at several options.

Excellent.

Very good.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh let's see.

Anybody Christy, do you have another question?

Okay, let me getting back in the groove here, pushing the right buttons.

Any other questions from anybody?

So Chris, let's deal with the elephant in the room.

Uh for those that have been fined before.

Where are we at with this?

I mean, this is a this so what you're bringing to us today is really not effective today.

The executive order is effective today, sir.

I thought it had to go through council.

There are two items today.

The executive order is effective today from Mayor Kelly.

The ordinance change is what is passed by city council.

The executive order bridges that gap between today and when the council will act on it.

And for those that have have been before us before for this issue, it's null and void what I'm hearing.

So as I clearly stated, this this is not retroactive because laws are not retroactive.

All we can do is make it better for the future.

Okay.

Say that one more time for the record.

I just want to make sure.

This is not retroactive.

Laws are not retroactive.

All right.

We can only change the future.

All right.

And this 15-day the executive order by the uh uh mayor is to give put people on notice officially, they have 15 days to submit their to renew their license.

Yes, and and for because of how long the council process takes with public notice and the number of votes required by state law, executive orders can be issued by municipal mayors for up to 15 days, but can be renewed continuously after that for 15-day periods.

We've done it before for several other things unrelated to beer.

So we will likely renew it one or two more times after that, depending on how long the city council process takes.

Till they till they take their final action.

Yes.

Okay.

All right, got it.

Okay.

Further questions?

My hand is in.

Oh, sorry.

Okay, let me get over here and hit it.

Yes, ma'am.

Okay.

So after the 15 days, if somebody whose license is expired and they don't apply, what happens to that person?

Can they be penalized?

Can they be cited?

As I said, after the 15-day period, this will likely be renewed for one or two more 15-day periods.

Okay, so even if you renew it two or three times, if they still don't come in compliance and renew their license, can they still be cited by regulatory?

The executive order will be renewed until what you're describing cannot take place.

So the executive order will be renewed until city council acts on the ordinance, which means we probably extend it one or two more times for 15-day periods.

Our intention is to bridge the gap and end the illegal under state law expiration dates on beer permits.

I cannot stress that enough.

Okay.

So no beer permit expires unless they under state law.

Right.

Unless they violate one of the four things that you stated.

Right.

That would be a change in name, location, owner, more than five five percent or more, uh, or violations of the beer code or other legal violations by one of the owners.

And so how they built each year for their tax deductible thing.

Or for having a license whenever they apply for a license to the pay there renewal fee, or well, it's not a renewal fee anymore.

So the tax information, how does that come about?

Is when someone is good question.

So the annual privilege tax is still uh we still intend to charge the annual privilege tax allowed by the state of 100 per business, uh, but it will not be a permit renewal application process like it has been in the past.

Okay, and those are not due until January of next year, I guess.

Okay, let's see.

All right.

Any other questions?

All right, seeing none.

Chris, thank you very much.

We appreciate your help explaining this and uh appreciate the executive part of government addressing this issue.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you, board.

Thank you.

Okay.

No retro.

Okay.

Now, new beer applications.

Representing W Y Sports Bar.

Willie Cox is making application for a brown bag permit at 2716 Dotson Avenue.

Mr.

Cox has a consumer beer permit for this location.

The location is owned by major paper and zoning has not approved.

Let me just double check that.

Mr.

Cox.

Good morning, I am I just come in for the brown back.

I mean uh I had paid application for it and everything.

And I don't know when I be able to uh uh receive the brown back.

Yeah, so we're still awaiting approval by zoning, is that correct?

Yes, okay.

I've signed off on everything, so after zoning signs off, they should be able to do that.

Okay, so Mr.

Cox, after zoning signs off on it, then it should go through.

Uh not sure what the holdup is, other than probably a manpower issue.

But uh we'll see.

It's a we can't take any action today until zoning has approved it.

Okay.

And maybe Zach will be here later on.

I'm not sure.

Do I need to get in touch with Mr.

Zach?

Yes, sir.

I would.

I would follow up directly with Zach and ask him what the status is and tell him you need some help.

Right.

Appreciate it.

Yes, sir.

Thank you for being here.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Yes, ma'am.

Go ahead.

I open, let me get it there.

Okay.

Question about this applicant right here.

If zoning approved for the beer permit, what's gonna be the difference in the brown back approval?

Well, there shouldn't be, but um they still have to press the button, so to speak, to approve zoning because it still has to go through the same process.

And it's been four weeks at least when he was here the last time.

Right.

And I mean, I don't see I really don't understand why it's taking this long.

He should have gone through something else.

It shouldn't take this long for this brown bag permit, and he was already approved for a beer permit for the same location.

I agree.

Reach out to Zach today.

Okay, all right.

Okay, appreciate it.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Oh, Zach, I'm sorry, and I apologize.

Yes, sir.

Go ahead.

We need to officially move this to the next beer board agenda so it comes up.

Yeah, let's do that just to have it on the record.

I agree.

Yeah, if you we want to make that motion.

Yeah, I'll make a motion to move brown bag applicant number 11 to the next beer board meeting.

All right.

Is there a motion to there's a motion?

Is there a second?

Second.

All in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Opposed.

Okay.

One po one opposed.

The motion carries.

All right, very good.

And hopefully you won't have to come back before us.

It'll be approved online and you'll be done.

Okay.

Appreciate that.

All right.

Thank you for your patience, Mr.

Cox.

Next applicant representing Flat Lines LLC doing business as Champions Chicken.

Seth Champion is making application to engage in the sale of consumer beer at 526 East ML King Boulevard.

Consumer.

All right.

Is there a representative of uh Flatland LLC?

Oh, okay.

Good morning, Lord.

Aaron Marie with Champions.

Um Aaron Murray with Champions.

If I need counsel present, uh have them on call.

But uh I just wanted to come today and answer any questions you guys may have.

And we appreciate all the process we've been through the last few months.

So uh where does this stand right now, Bertha?

Is it been approved by what's what are we waiting on on it?

Uh it has not been approved by regulatory, has not been approved by regulatory.

Okay.

So the that one is pending a violation at the next meeting for a hearing.

Once that hearing is complete, then we can take action.

Regulatory can take action on that application, but okay an application can't be approved until while while you have a pending violation.

Okay, very good.

All right, very good.

Thank you for being here today.

Is my button not working?

It is sorry.

Go ahead.

I guess he answered my question, but I'm I'm pushing this button over here not being heard because that was my question.

If they already have a citation, so why would they?

You know, how can we approve them for a permit if they haven't even been heard on a citation?

So all right, and I don't reason I am on it to okay, all right.

Yes, do we have a date for that here?

It's my understanding it's on the agenda for the next meeting.

Yes, 521.

521.

Is that right, Catherine?

Yes, yes, okay.

All right, all right, uh JW?

Yes, and Chair on that, I guess between you are legal.

I think also as we dealing with them, are we gonna still address where uh the council light under oath?

Are we gonna still address that?

Oh, we're just gonna give them a license and let that just pass.

I'm thinking Catherine, do you have any thoughts on this?

Um stomped.

And you get licensure, licensure is under the purview of the board.

It's for the board to consider all at all facets of the application, any testimony they've heard before it.

Um as of right now, uh the application is on whole pending the violation on 521.

Okay, so I would I would uh suggest that it be passed to the first meeting in June because the violation is going to be heard on 521.

So therefore, I I don't think it could be heard on 521.

You see what you see what I'm saying?

Right.

Yes.

Um, and then it can be uh just at the first meeting in June.

So during the discussion, deliberation or whatever, that's when you can discuss it.

Yeah.

Um still have room to that's all I was gonna say that I would suggest we get all of the information before we discuss or make any decisions.

I agree.

Okay, all right.

Any further discussion to the issue?

All right, is there a motion to pass it to the June first meeting?

Is it okay?

Uh it's on June 4th.

June 4th, excuse me.

Sorry.

Okay.

All right, is there a motion to pass it to the June 4th meeting?

I'll make a motion that we pass beer 1397 14th.

All right, there's a motion.

Is there a second?

June 4th, June.

June 4th.

Yeah.

I second.

All right, there's a second.

So motion by Veronica, second by Brooke.

Any discussion to the motion?

All in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

And uh, all right, one abstention.

Okay, all right.

Okay.

Next applicant representing Har Harbour Inc.

Jignan Patel.

Is there a representative here?

Okay.

Okay.

Since no one's here, is there a motion to pass this to the next meeting?

Make a motion that we pass via 1388 and motion by Veronica.

Is there a second?

Next meeting is May 21st.

May 21st.

May 21st, sorry, May 21st.

All right.

And is there a second?

I'll second it.

All right.

Second by Brooke.

Further discussion to the motion.

All right.

All in favor of approving the motion.

Signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

None noted.

Next applicant representing Cabana's nightclub and event center, LLC, doing business as cabanas.

Gabrielle Sosa and Jesus Esquiville are making application to engage in the sale of consumer beer at 1800 Rossville Avenue Unit 10.

The pending application reflects an ownership change.

Gabriel Sosa has had a beer permit for this location in the past, and it's adding a partner.

The location is owned by Deanna Duncan and is on UCX.

All right.

All right.

If you would uh Mr.

Sosa, tell us what's what's going on.

I think uh oh uh Jesus Serrano.

Um I think the only thing that was I'm sorry, excuse me.

I apologize.

Yeah.

Go ahead.

I think the only thing holding me up was the FBI background check.

Um so I got this uh this paper from a lawyer and I'll upload it to the portal.

I'll make Mr.

Cole a copy as well.

Um that kind of explains a little bit more as far as the the changes uh that needed to be made to the FBI because I was just as confused as you guys, like hey, why did they say that I was this and not this?

Um and that one is also getting fixed too.

So by the time I get to the next meeting for all the restaurants, the FBI one should be taken care of as well.

All right, okay.

I'm gonna need time to review.

All right, so we'll so we'll pass this to the next meeting, then is what we'll do.

All right, is there a motion to pass this uh to the next meeting?

All right, and that's uh by Veronica.

Is there a second?

Second motion, uh second by Jean.

Discussion to the motion, all in favor of approving the motion, signify by saying aye.

Aye, opposed, none noted, okay.

So you need that by judgment.

Okay, thank you very much.

Okay, okay.

All right, now we'll go into uh discussion section of our meeting.

Okay, can we call back to back to that?

Um what I'll do if y'all do have okay, at least go this way.

Please go that way.

I don't got one, so take one and pass it down.

So what I just um passed out to the board is an anonymous packet that we received earlier this week addressed to the board.

Um, so I'm just giving it to y'all to review.

Yeah, it's uh a lot to review, but just take a look here.

Everybody's just always today.

I mean, you don't have to discuss it today.

No, no, I'll tell you what I would recommend to y'all.

Let's let's take this, let's read it, and we will discuss it at the next meeting if that's okay with everybody.

Because this is quite a bit of information that's been submitted to us for consideration and concern.

So let's uh do that if that's the pleasure of the board.

Is there any objection to that?

Okay, great.

Yes.

So okay.

All right.

This time, sir, are you here for an application?

Yes, sir.

All right, so what is your name?

Okay, so you'll need to sign this sign right here.

And then let's see, we pass that where'd you go?

Is that MAPCO?

It's number one.

Yeah, it's MAPCO.

Yeah, it's MAPCO.

Uh if it's the pleasure of the board, we will hear this at the end of the at the end of our discussion at the end of the meeting.

Or should we go ahead and hear it now?

Any thoughts?

If not, I'll go ahead and uh let's hear it now.

All right, sir.

If you'll go ahead and step up here, uh Bertha, if you'll read that again into the record for us, please on Mapco.

Yeah, is there a motion to move this to go ahead and address this now?

What's the further one?

It is number 1401.

Yes, sir.

Hold on just a second.

You have not been sworn in.

Yes.

Thank you.

All right.

And you're Muhammad, you are Muhammad Jamille?

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you.

So uh Mr.

Jamil, if you would tell us, are you having a change of ownership?

Yes, sir.

Are you the new owner?

Yes, sir.

Okay.

All right.

Um, all right, are there any um questions from any of the board members?

It was noted it.

I'm trying to get it back into my all right.

She's I think we're gonna look out on me, and I don't know why.

Ah technology, it's wonderful.

Great.

Wait just a minute, we're looking the records up.

Sure, no problems.

It's okay.

All right, while this is while this is voting, um, there were a couple of entities associated with your application.

It was you and a a couple of different LLCs.

Do you do you know anything about that?

That's on the lease.

Sorry, ma'am.

There like so on the lease that you submitted, it was between MAPCO and your you yourself personally, and two or three other LLCs.

Do you do you know what I'm talking about?

Yeah, MAPCO used to have one uh one uh uh pression for a landlord, and they have one for petroleum, and other one told one of you they have a licenses.

What was what was that last one?

Lessenses, yes, ma'am.

Some looking down they have what are the is that your LLC?

Is that a partner of yours?

MAPCO.

Okay.

All right, Catherine, let you do your thing here.

I emailed um Elizabeth about it.

Okay, so you initially acclaimed 100% ownership, but two different sons have since claimed 95% and 96% ownership, respectively.

Yes, ma'am.

Um so so which is it?

Do you own a hundred percent or or 95% or I am 95%?

You're 95%.

Who's the other five percent?

Is my son?

Okay, and who is your son?

Yes.

Who is your son?

Is Mahomad?

And is he on the application with you?

Yes, ma'am.

So he submitted a background check and everything?

Yes.

Okay.

Spell your son's name, sir.

Mahomad.

Mahoma Dunware.

Mohammed.

Yeah, you'll of your gas station.

We need that also disclosed.

And any persons associated with those LLCs?

Or are you the sole owner of the LLC?

Sorry, ma'am.

Are you the sole owner of any of the LLCs listed on that lease?

In this list?

Yes.

Me and my son.

Okay.

He's the had just a pretty operator.

All right, let me get point of information.

Yes.

I just want to clarify Bertha.

Is his son on the application?

I'm sorry.

Is his son on the application?

The son is not on the application.

Okay.

Okay, so your son has to be on the application.

If anyone owns five percent or more of the business, they have to be on the on the actual application.

Which means that they would have to do the background check and submit the citizenship paperwork as well.

The same as you did.

Your son's gonna have to do.

Well, he's actually less than five percent, but he's not uh uh so I I don't really understand, sir.

You you you first said that he's five percent owner, is it less than five percent five four percent almost and uh are you still ninety-five percent or ninety-six percent?

95, 96, something like that.

1% makes a big difference.

Right, like we we need to know, like for sure.

Okay, 96, sorry, ma'am.

Okay, do you have any like paperwork that delineates your ownership interest and your son's ownership interest, like a partnership agreement, LLC agreement, something like that that lists that?

Yes, ma'am.

Can you submit that to me so that we we have that?

Right now, you know, not my hand uh no, I I I understand that, but I'm gonna need that before I can approve this.

Okay, okay.

But okay, yes, sir.

Go ahead, Mr.

Mohammed.

Are you selling beer right now at your gas station?

No, ma'am.

No, sir.

Okay, no beer at all.

No, okay.

All right, good.

All right, so if you will submit that your paperwork of the partnership showing your percentage of ownership and your son's percentage of ownership, then that's what we need to see.

Right.

That's what she needs to get.

And when you upload it, please send me a message because right now it's on hold, so it's not in my active files.

So I I will need to have some sort of reminder that it's there.

So if you want to call and let either myself or Miss Bertha know that you've uploaded the the appropriate information, we can we can look at that and get you approved.

All right, ma'am.

Okay, thank you.

So I need a uh email address.

Well, you can upload it into the portal that you've uploaded everything else onto your application on open gov.

So you know how you know how you applied through the system?

Sorry, ma'am.

You know how you applied through the system?

My son, no, yeah, the son did.

Okay, so have your son upload that to your application.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yeah, it will do.

Thank you very much.

You're welcome, sir.

That gives me a one.

Okay.

All right.

Now back to our discussion session.

Previous beer violation report and recommendations of hearing officer Rachel Hodge heard on February 19th, 2026.

So the hearing officer recommended a five uh a fine of a thousand dollars for each location, and Cabanas has paid theirs, but doesn't look like the other three fines have not been paid.

Okay.

All right.

Okay.

Any discussion from the board members?

Yeah, got it here.

Let me go.

Uh Christy.

I have a question.

So on those uh operating without a beer permit, when he was issued a violation, was it just Gabriel Sosa name on it, or was it both their names on their original permit?

So under the on the original permits, it was just Gabriel's name on it.

It was just Gabriel's name on it.

And I think he was trying to submit new applications for these others to reflect the accurate ownership split of 8020.

Like that's what he was told to do.

But it's been held up because of the background check issues.

So did he own it 100% at the time he submitted that original permit?

That's a good question, Mr.

Salt.

Mr.

Serrano.

Sabrano.

Can you please come back up to the podium?

So my question was who owned who was on where I guess 100% owner listed at the time of original.

So it's it's it's always been 8020.

I was confused on the percentage part.

I thought if it was 50 or more, that's or 49 or more, then you had to be on there because it originally it was just my brother, but it's always been 8020.

So even though it's been 8020, you submitted these applications saying that your brother was 100% owner.

Knowing that that's that's not true.

No, no, no, but he was at the very beginning, like when we first opened up the first restaurant in in 2014.

But you just said it's always been 8020 split.

No, no, in 2014 he he was the original one.

Okay, and when did the 80-20 split happen?

On that, I can get you an exact date.

I don't I don't know, but I can get it for you.

I can ask the lawyer when we actually made those changes.

Okay, was it this year, last year, a couple years ago?

It's it's been a while.

Okay, so a while, more than five years.

I'd have to check.

I'd have to check, but it's it's been a minute.

Okay.

But when when um when you assumed the 20% ownership, did you read the beer code?

No, no, no, I didn't.

So you assumed 20% ownership of this business, and you didn't read the beer code that you would be bound to?

Correct.

Okay.

All right.

Any further questions?

All right, very good.

Thank you, sir, for answering the quick.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Yes, sir.

Uh I understand the first one, uh, but the other three, would they not fall under the uh same thing as champions?

So the thing with the the EO that that um they've been cited, it happened prior to the executive order, and the executive order does not operate retroactively.

So technically these fines are still due and only right, right.

So Christy.

Did that not go back to January 1st?

I thought that went back to January 1st, the original order, not this one he's finna get ready.

So even though he could have fallen in that period it when that EO went into effect it was after we've dealt with this issue if that makes sense.

When was he originally sighted?

Um it was like November 18th okay right okay all right any other questions or discussion on this all right thank you okay before you do I just want to add where do we go if the fines don't get paid right I mean I mean every other week not only can ban us but if they do not pay the fines they're ordered to pay a fine if they don't do if they don't pay the fine then that's a violation and it would be a violation I feel of the beer code so that that would be I I feel might be another basis for another citation is there a timeline I mean I'm just trying to it was seven days seven days so these are overdue but multiple times a way to clarify at the last meeting we told him not to pay these three fines okay so he technically got our permission to have legal because we were looking for that answer if we could retroactively um enforce the include him in the executive order we've heard today that that's not the case right here right okay right I will also I will also say this so for your consideration this is a fine that's been imposed by the beer board right so the beer board can reconsider any penalty it imposes so if y'all feel like you need to reconsider this fine then you can bring it up appropriately to you know discuss that and and to reconsider the penalty that is an option for the board if you so choose the law okay and I'll make a motion to reconsider the fines for two three and four second all right there is a motion I said uh by Jean and a second bronca did you second okay by the circuit Veronica all right discussion of the to the motion to reconsider the fines would this not be something that we should reconsider after city council makes the changes I mean is that something we can pass along do we have all the information we need at the moment to reconsider this these fines I'm wanting to clear because these fines are operated without a beer permit right is that what these fines are yes only these and we are going to hear another case next week with the same charge so shouldn't we wait to see what decisions we make or what information we get before we discuss this I don't know I'm just putting that before the board I prefer to have all the information possible because whatever we do today we're gonna have to do next time I agree Zach my question is and if legal you have the answer the state statute that was cited that's forced the executive order when has how long has that been in effect I do not have that answer off the top of my head since they hear maybe Chris Chris do you know when that state um uh law went into effect or regulation chairman it's unclear uh in the in the TCA online because that code's been amended like 50 or 60 times uh so it's unclear exactly when that amendment was made okay but 575104 is the statute that we're dealing with today uh that does say nothing in this chapter can be construed as to allowing cities or counties from having arbitrary expiration dates on beer permits okay got it and and just so you know chairman if I may uh Zach Wiley is here now there was an issue with open gov with uh Mr.

Okay, got it.

And and just so you know, Chairman, if I may, uh Zach Wiley is here now.

There was an issue with open gov with uh Mr.

Brown's uh brown bag permit BB-11, so I'm working now to get that issued today.

Good.

Thank you.

All right, very good.

Thank you.

Okay.

Further questions.

Now we do discussion to the motion.

I well, my one thing I agree we need more information, but uh if we can give another blessing to allow the businesses to not pay the fines in the interim while we figure this out because it seems like we've been in violation of state law for a period of time, there would be no reason to you know our hands are tied, so it seems like reconsidering this would be a good idea.

Right, right.

Okay.

Well comment on that if you reconsider that when they come back next week per champions for 2024 to now.

No retro going.

You can't do anything with that neither.

Right.

All right, so we have a motion and a second.

The further discussion to the motion.

All right.

I'll call the question.

I'm gonna call a roll on this one.

Okay.

The motion is to re to reopen.

No, I'm sorry.

Reconsider.

Reconsider the violations.

The uh I guess the fines for the fines for uh the two location bill and cheat she's charged again.

That's correct.

Thank you.

So that is the motion.

All right.

Okay.

All right.

When are we reconsidering is are we doing that today?

Or are we?

This is it.

We have to we have a motion on the floor in a second to reconsider for today.

Oh reconsider.

Now we've had discussion.

Uh I don't know if the chair, if it's positive.

Yeah, I can do this.

We've had a we had a motion to uh reconsider it today.

Uh uh.

And uh we've had discussion both uh to wait until we have further clarification from city council that they pass with the official uh thing will be, or we can reconsider it, and then we have to determine what we do if we reconsider then what do we do, and also the discussion has been then what precedent do we set by doing that.

Now there can be a motion to amend that reconsideration motion.

That's correct.

That's what she's asking over there.

You want to amend to reconsider on a date certain because since we've got champions on 521, um, and then I think that whatever the recommendations of the hearing officer comes up first one in June.

Okay, so just so y'all are aware.

And I uh here Brooklyn recognize you go ahead.

Well, move to amend the motion.

I haven't learned your last name, I'm sorry, Mr.

Dean.

Um, to reconsider I guess the second meeting in June.

What would that mean?

It's the second 17th.

Okay.

That sounds about a second to that amendment.

Yes, amended motion.

Second.

Second.

All right, so let me restate the motion.

The mo the amended motion is now to we're gonna vote to amend it to reconsider on June, what date?

18th on June our June 18th meeting.

All right, got it.

All right, now discussion to the amended motion.

I think I can do that.

Yeah.

I because we have done that and we're reconsidering.

Do we need to make a further motion after this to waive his fees until that discussion has been had, or to make it on the record that we're not gonna penalize him or give him a citation for not paying these fines that we keep telling to wait on?

Do we need to do that or can we just council?

I'll defer that one to you.

I'm thinking.

Okay.

Um you can just not think we do.

I don't think so.

I mean he didn't pay them.

Because of the nature of the reconsideration to because the fines are still under review.

I don't think another motion to stay the fines is necessary.

Okay just because of the nature of the you understand Sir that we're gonna wait.

We're holding on this.

Okay.

All right.

That's all I needed.

Brooke.

Sir.

Oh, you've done it.

Okay, sorry.

Okay.

All right.

Any further discussion?

Yeah.

Yes, sir.

Sorry.

Um, I'm still kind of confused on the uh two, three, and four.

So he's he can't sell beer at two, three, and four uh until we resign until the fines are paid.

I kind of he's been here what four times now.

It's four since November.

So can we make some kind of motion or can I make a motion that he can we have a motion to amend right now?

No, okay.

Okay, because the motion to amend we must vote on that.

So we we motion it's like a motion within a motion right now, right?

And also as a point of information, not only it needs to be amended to reflect their ownership split too.

So it's not just an expired beer permit.

So technically even without this violation pending, he couldn't sell beer because not everybody who owns the business is listed on the light.

So it's not a ballot license either.

Okay.

So thank you, Catherine.

That that clears that up.

All right.

Further discussion.

I'm gonna call the roll, and this is on the amended on the amended motion.

Uh Zach?

Yes, Betsy.

Yes, Reginald, yes.

JW?

Yes.

Gene?

Yes.

Veronica.

Yes.

Brooke.

Yes.

Christy.

Yes.

And the chair votes yes.

All right.

Okay, so now the motion's amended.

Now the motion has been amended now.

Is there on the overarching to reconsider on June 18th?

Right.

Now we have to vote on the original motion that has now been amended to June 18th.

So is I'll call the roll on that one.

Uh Christie.

Yes.

Brooke?

Yes.

Veronica?

Yes.

Gene?

Yes.

JW?

Yes.

Reginald?

Yes.

Betsy.

Yes.

Zach?

Yes.

And the chair votes yes.

All right.

Very good.

So that will revisit this on June 18th.

Okay.

All right.

All right.

Y'all are taxing my Robert's rules of order memory pretty good here this morning, so that's good.

I need that exercise.

All right.

The second item, a previous beer violation, report and recommendation of hearing officer Keisha Cheeks.

Heard on April 16th, 2026.

And uh we have not gotten the um report yet from attorney cheeks.

So my uh suggestion would be to um pass this to the next meeting.

Okay, so she has not submitted her final report.

Okay, very good.

So our motion to uh move this to our next meeting.

I make a motion to remove to move Keisha Cheek's report and recommendation to the next meeting.

All right, sir.

Second.

Second, uh further discussion.

All in favor of that signify by saying aye.

Aye opposed, no more.

Okay.

All right.

Now is there anyone wishing to have a public comment before the board today?

This is now our open public comment section.

Oh, oh right.

Okay, all right, Mr.

Cox.

Let's see here.

I don't know where we did.

We didn't pass his to the end.

He's already gone.

No, he didn't go.

Yeah.

All he was lacking was the approval of zoning, and then the regulatory will approve it.

Yes.

We need to revisit they're working on it now.

Yeah, working on it now.

So do it for other people.

Does that make sense, Bertha?

Yes.

Okay, thank you, ma'am.

All right.

Public comment.

All right, none.

Is there any other comments from board members?

Yes, brother Chair.

I would like to uh ask this board if the manpower, I know they're gonna talk about manpower, but I would like to see if regulatory can make a couple visits.

Uh definitely with the map co make sure they're not selling beer.

Uh to visit champions to make sure they're not selling beer.

Uh I would make look love to see them see Mexieville and the three, making sure that they are not selling beer.

Uh because they do not have JW.

Yes.

I think probably the order covers that, correct?

Right.

They can sell beer because the mayor's extended this.

If they've gotten that letter, um and champions did provide us the letter that they received for the MLK location.

That letter had Champney's name on it.

No.

It didn't have an and we were told if there's a violation, they can't.

That's what we told.

But we haven't heard the can approve a new permit while a violation is being pending.

So when you have a violation, you can still sell beer.

No, well, we haven't seen the violation.

Okay.

But it's the operating.

So normally, if you have a pending violation, they can't approve another permit for that permittee, right?

And you're not selling beer.

However, if you are within the amnesty period and you have that letter, I think you can sell beer.

Even with pending violation.

With a pending violation.

So if they've got that, they're covered.

So what are we here for?

Yeah.

So, yeah.

And I'm just go ahead, Brooke.

But the violation, when you're signed a violation, what is it, 60 or 90 days before you appear before the board?

It's at least 30.

It's 60.

When uh for us, it took 60 days to get on the calendar.

Our license was it's a pending violation.

The board didn't say yes, you messed up or anything like that.

So you do continue to serve beer.

They have a pending violation.

We haven't voted that yes, you broke the rules, and they have amnesty because of the executive order.

So you they can right?

Am I incorrect?

And I also think it depends on the kind of violation, too.

Like if it was something that dealt with the validity of the permit itself, then it would impact your ability to sell beer.

Like let's say um not everybody was on there and it's invalid.

So technically, you don't have a valid uh beer license, so you shouldn't be right.

So you shouldn't be selling until you get a ballot one, right?

That's good.

But if it's for I don't know, operating a disorderly place, that doesn't affect the beer license.

The beer license until you heard so it's not a one-size fits all.

The four things okay.

Yeah, it's and we I'm trying for me.

I guess I'm trying to make sure that it's unified.

Right.

And that's the point we really need to get to because now standard.

Yeah, we're playing.

Uh you don't get a validation, you do get a violation or you do you can't sell beer, you can't.

Right now, we need to be able to unify it.

And right now it's not unified.

Right.

If that makes sense.

Um, and to to bring up uh another uh a point you you were uh saying.

Um you can ask regulatory to look into certain things, but you can't really direct them to go into certain establishments.

Um I don't I don't think that's within the purview of the board.

Um we only hear what is in front of the in front of us.

Okay.

Um and obviously regulatory is here if they hear of you know concerns.

I think it's within their purview to side.

Okay, we need to look into this or what happened.

So yeah.

Okay, thanks for that clarity.

All right.

Yes.

Uh it's more Chris Anderson.

Could you give me that code again?

The TCA code.

5754.

Full violation.

Okay.

I just wrote it down.

TCA 5705-104.

Is that correct, Chris?

575103.

There was an inconsistency in the two documents, but 575103 uh contains the language about cities and counties and expiration dates.

103.

No zero.

Just 575.

I believe so.

I don't think and I don't think the way TCAs are formatted, there's a zero but five.

It's 457-5-03.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you, Chris.

Okay.

Any further inquiries?

Um, so what are we going to do with this packet?

You need to read it.

The one that was handed out.

Study it, and we can discuss it at our next meeting.

Is there further any further business?

Is there a motion to adjourn?

Make a motion to adjourn.

All right, there's a motion.

Is there a second?

Second.

All in favor of adjourning signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

All right.

Thank you all very much for being here.

Appreciate all the members being here.

Thank you.