No, sorry.

Is everything else working?

Yes.

So go ahead.

Okay.

I call it the order of the meeting of our common council for Tuesday, July 7th, 2026.

Clerk.

Yes, thank you, Ronor.

We have 11 members in the room.

All the granties on her way.

And 11 members in Civic Clerk.

All right.

Thank you, Clerk.

Now please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance, and then you can be seated for our invocation.

Pledge of allegiance.

Like I said, you can be seated.

We're just gonna do a moment of quiet contemplation.

All right, thank you.

Now on to approval of the minutes.

Motion to approve, made by Elder Presley.

Seconded by Elder Ritterbush.

Any changes.

Seeing none, all in paper say aye.

Aye.

The ayes have it.

Approval of the agenda.

Motion to approve made by Alder Delee.

Seconded by Alder Eck.

Any amendments here or changes.

Seeing none.

All in paper say aye.

Aye.

Pose nay.

The ayes have it.

And the agenda has been approved.

Um a few items here on the report by the mayor.

Um so just wanted to thank everybody for the Fourth of July celebration, especially city staff, uh, but also community members who came together for a celebration during the day, and then of course, uh the fireworks.

Um things uh went off without a hitch, really, as far as I know, um, and just went really smoothly.

Um, so particularly appreciate uh public safety presence as always, um, but also parks and DPW and really just the entire city, I think did a fantastic job um partnering with a lot of community organizations on Broadway in particular, but so many others also played a role um in some of the programming earlier in the day.

So thanks to Michael for coordinating much of that, um, but a great community celebration and um a lot of things to go around for that.

Um also just wanted to mention again, I mentioned this I think at our last council meeting, then we had a rain out.

But we've got City Night over at Joanne's on Thursday uh at 7 30.

So blue ribbons uh baseball game, city employees welcome community community members, welcome.

I and I think first responders are being uh featured and honored at the game.

So inviting everybody to come down and celebrate uh some baseball and appreciate our our city employees.

Uh last but definitely not least, I want to congratulate uh the newest member of the senior staff team here at the city of Green Bay.

Um the only other person maybe that gets his his name mispronounced more often than me, uh Chief Ray Futin Pheeton.

Um I I just proved uh the point, but Chief Ray Pheaton, so congratulations to you.

Uh we're really lucky to have you uh joining the team leading the department and uh as you know you've got a big supportive fan club here in our council and and uh coming from all the rest of us.

So congratulations and thanks for taking the mantle.

Uh and with that we'll go to announcements from the council.

Any announcements.

Yes, Alder delete.

Uh, just wanted to make an announcement.

Grooves on the green this Friday from six to eight over at Badger Park off Badger Street.

Uh zooming in the sonics and come get some food truck food and enjoy some live music.

Excellent.

Thanks, Alder.

The Green Bay Fringe Festival is gonna be taking place next week, uh, the 16th through the 19th at several downtown locations.

Look it up at GBfringe.com is the third one.

Uh people coming from all over the country to do weird art in our city.

Very cool.

Thanks, Alder.

Any other announcements?

All right.

We'll move on to appointments.

Motion to approve.

Uh on the motion on the new appointment to approve made from um Alder Prophet and then Alder Delee with the second.

Any discussion?

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it.

That appointment has been made.

Reappointments.

Motion.

Motion to approve made by Elder Presley.

Seconded by Elder Hinkfis.

Discussion here.

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it.

And those reappointments are made.

Uh we're now on to ordinances.

Second reading for adoption.

Motion to suspend the rules.

Alder Prophet makes a motion to suspend the rules.

Take up these items with one roll call vote.

Second by Alder Delee.

Any discussion?

Seeing none.

All papers say aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it.

The rules are suspended.

Motion to adopt.

Motion to adopt.

Maybe Alder Prophet.

Second by Elder Delee.

Any discussion here.

Seeing none, we will use the board.

You may vote.

And those are adopted 120.

INS committee.

Motion to approve made by Elder Delee.

Second.

Seconded by Elder Act.

Items here to be handled separately.

Hearing none.

All in favor, signify by saying aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it.

That report has been approved.

Protection and policy committee.

Motion to approve.

Motion to approve, made by elder profit.

Second by Elder Presley.

Items here to be handled separately.

None.

All in favor say aye.

Okay.

Oppose nay.

Green Bay Police Department granting operator licenses.

Motion to approve.

Made by Alder Delee.

Second by Elder Rearbush.

Abstentions or names to be handled separately.

Alder Prophet.

I'd like to abstain from myself.

Very good.

Alder Presley.

Very good.

Any others?

Hearing none others.

All in favor of approving the remainder of the report.

Signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed nay.

That report has been approved.

Plan commission.

Motion approved.

Motion to approve by Elder Prophet.

Second.

Seconded by Elder Hutchison.

Items here to be handled separately.

None.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed nay.

The ayes have it.

That report has been approved.

Finance committee.

Motion to approve.

Made by Elder Presley.

Seconded by Alder Orlovsky.

Items here to be handled handled separately.

None.

All in paper say aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it.

That report has been approved.

Park committee.

Motion to approve made by Alder Delee.

Seconded by Alder Ritterbush.

Items here to be handled separately.

Hearing none, all in paper say aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it.

That report has been approved.

Traffic bicycle and pedestrian commission.

Motion to approve made by Alder Prophet.

Seconded by Elder Delee.

Items here for separate consideration.

One, two, three.

One and three.

Any others?

Hearing none others.

All in favor of approving the remainder of the report.

Signified by saying aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it.

That report has been approved with the exception of items one and three on item one.

Alder Hankfus.

I'd like to refer both back to committee.

I was unable to attend the traffic and bike, and I have additional information.

So if we could just refer those two items back to committee uh for the 720 meeting, I would appreciate it.

Is that uh motion to suspend the rules and take up these items with one roll call vote?

Yes, it is on one vote.

Uh Alder Hinkhfus suspends the rules.

Uh Alder Act seconds that motion take up these items with uh sing single vote.

All in favor will say aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it.

Rules are suspended.

Motion refer back.

All right.

Alder Hinkfis makes motion to refer both items one and three back to committee.

Sorry.

Seconded by Elder Sheldon.

Any discussion?

Seeing none, all papers say aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it.

And those items are referred back.

We are on to a couple informational items.

The building report and the municipal court report are both in your packet from June 2026.

And resolutions.

Alder Prophet makes a motion to suspend the rules.

Take up these items with one vote.

Second by Alder Delee.

All in favor will say aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it.

The rules are suspended.

Motion to adopt.

Motion to adopt.

Made by Alder Presley.

Second.

Seconded by Elder Prophet.

Discussion on that.

See none, we'll use the board.

And this is to adopt our resolutions.

Vote.

Those are adopted unanimously.

Ordinances first reading.

Motion to suspend the rules.

Take it the items on phone roll call vote made by Alder Presley.

Second by Elder Hinkfus.

All in favor will say aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

Nice have it.

The rules are suspended.

Motion to advance.

Motion to advance maybe Alder Prophet, seconded by Elder Presley.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

You guys have it.

And those ordinances are advanced to a second and final reading.

So this brings us to our quasi judicial hearing for non-renewal of liquor license.

It's for the non-renewal of a Class Blas B liquor license at Jamrock 700 Bodart Street.

Yes, thank you, Mayor.

So the goal of the Green Bay Common Council to provide and conduct the hearing that is fair and form appearance and substance.

This is a non-renewal for an alcohol license.

The non-renewal is provided for under Green Bay Municipal Code 4-9F non-renewal.

We're here to consider the information and evidence presented by the parties to determine if the grounds for non-renewal have been met or not, and either grant or deny this appeal.

First, I need to just do any of check for conflicts of uh counsel and then the uh staff presentation will go first.

Each party will have approximately 10 minutes.

Um parties will be sworn in.

Uh council can also um open up the floor for public comment.

It's not always customary to do so in quasi-discial hearings, but if you so choose to do so, you may.

Um, and just consider uh keep in mind it's important to consider only the information that's relevant uh relevant to the underlying um arguments, evidence provided by the parties.

Uh we'll allow for a couple uh approximately three minutes of um any final arguments.

Of course, council can ask any questions of the parties at any time um and certainly of other staff as needed.

Um and then it'll be uh we can close the floor and do any deliberation as necessary.

Council.

So first, it's as I said, it's the goal of the Green Bay Common Council to provide and conduct a hearing that is fair and inform appearance and substance to ensure that this hearing satisfies these goals.

Will each elder of the common council please confirm the following for this appeal by stating I confirm.

Um I do not have a conflict of interest in this matter.

Thank you.

And I have not received any communication from any person or party about this matter.

Thank you.

And I understand attorney Mays is representing the city's uh case in this matter and can proceed um start chair and then again then Mr.

The Applicant after.

Okay, sounds good.

Attorney Mays.

All right, good evening.

Sorry, council attorney's Jeff would like to swear you.

Oh so attorney Mays, do you uh swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth?

I do.

Thank all right.

So this is the third time that a non-renewal for Jam Rock has come before council.

Um, in the two prior iterations, um, there was no notice of intent to non-renew issued by council, which is why you've never heard from me before on this matter.

Um, this is an opportunity for um me to provide the basis um through which uh the Green Bay Police Department made their recommendation to non-renew this liquor license in the interest of public safety um and and good order.

So for the the grounds for a non-renewal uh on a liquor license um are laid out in section four-nine of our municipal code, um, subsection B.

There are three different sections that I think apply here.

So as um information is being presented.

Uh the the grounds through which this non-renewal um can happen is through um if there is evidence of activity by any licensee that directly interferes with police officers or otherwise violates the law in a manner substantially related to the operation of the licensed facility.

That's subsection B2.

Um, subsection B6 is any violation of general statutory restrictions pertaining to licensed premises and operations as prescribed by Wisconsin statutes chapter 125 and chapter 4 of our municipal code, and then sub D8 includes any violations of any restriction, stipulation, or agreement entered with the city or signed in consideration of a license issued under this chapter, so chapter 4, uh, or Wisconsin statutes, chapter 125.

So the primary reason why this recommendation for non-renewal has come up before one extremely egregious incident that happened on January 27th of 2024.

So just looking at general context, there was a correction meeting that was held on March 28th of 2024.

So this is our opportunity as the police department and the law department to sit down with the licensee and say, hey, we've got some concerns about what's going on with the business.

We have concerns.

What steps are you willing to take to remedy these issues?

And the correction plan that was submitted is included in the materials in the in the agenda packet.

And based on the handout that was presented by the licensee.

So it was a plan that conformed with the ordinance and met the requirements, but really didn't address the issues that we were seeing at the business.

So on June 16th of 2024, there was a minor disturbance outside of the bar premises, male, male, female physical disturbance.

It's a physical disturbance that happened on premises.

So that one could be considered.

A verbal warning and a written warning were issued as a result of that incident.

So those are those are issues that happened before the current license year.

And I think that they're worth bringing up because the police department has remained consistent with its recommendation to non-renew this license.

Looking at this particular license here, on July 1st, so the first day of the license here, there was a disturbance inside the bar, which then turned physical outside the bar, which goes towards a disorderly house argument or situation.

Notable though, nobody from the bar called to request police assistance.

Um, on October 1st of 2025, um, there was a drug task force call um that the Green Bay Police Department assisted with, and there was a male party um inside the bar um who arranged selling um cocaine inside the bar to a confidential informant.

Um there were transactions of 0.93 grams and 1.53 grams of cocaine, um, which were turned over to law enforcement, and there was a party charged as a result of that call.

On November 7th of last year, there was a um a physical disturbance between two males.

Um male approached officers as they were responding to the disturbance.

Um, there was another male who was walking away from officers, ducked behind another address on Bodart Street, and um located where that male ducked off of Bodart Street were another um two bags of or three bags of of cocaine.

Um that individual was arrested for um intent to deliver cocaine.

Um the other male was arrested for um resisting uh officers, resisting or obstructing.

Then in December of last year, um the Department of Revenue, the State Department of Revenue received a complaint from someone who um admittedly had gone to Jamrock and underage um drank um on her own and had called the special agent at the Department of Revenue in order to report that she had seen other underage individuals um being served at Jamrock.

In response, um the community police officers uh requested um data from the ID card scanners at the at the bar, as well as for video surveillance to be turned over to try to identify the 19 year old who was allegedly on premises.

And the video was of an insufficient quality to properly identify the the alleged underage drinker.

Um but as a result of that um police were informed that Jamrak was not using an ID scanner, and they did not turn over video as requested within five days.

Subsequently, um, the forensics team through the police department was able to extract video from their surveillance system, but the stipulation agreement says that the business is supposed to turn over any surveillance video within five days of demand, and it has to be in a readily readable format.

So the obligation is on the business owner to turn this over within five days, and they failed to do so.

So they had two stipulation agreement violations as a result of that call.

Then community police did a follow-up two months later.

So that call was on um that incident happened on December 19th.

There was a follow-up on February 25th.

There was still no working ID scanner um at the business.

So the licensee was cited for violation of stipulation agreement.

Um the 2024 um major incident.

Um this was an incident in which the licensee observed an intoxicated person outside his bar around um 330 in the morning.

So well after bar close.

Um this individual allegedly had a prior bar tab that was um unresolved.

And the licensee, Mr.

Record O'Neill invited this individual into the business.

That's a violation of chapter 125.

Inviting people off the street to come into a bar at 3:30 in the morning is a violation of 125.

Then to try to diffuse the tension.

Mr.

Neil served this individual a shot.

As we know, living in Green Bay, um, when you have an intoxicated individual adding more alcohol is rarely the solution.

Um I think the time has expired for the representation.

Yeah, I I I would I would ask that the I would ask that the chair uh allow me to play the surveillance video.

Um it's roughly five minutes of video footage.

Yeah.

And the the video more or less speaks for itself regarding this incident.

So this is the licensee behind the bar, and the individual who's being pulled over the bar is the man who is invited in from outside bar.

At this point, two bar employees are leaving the bar area and they are going to hide in the bathroom.

This is the camera angle from where those two employees had been standing.

Goes back into his office, retrieves a firearm, and returns to the office to turn off the lights.

Arranges the chairs, and police are not called.

On that note, I would ask the council to not renew this individual's liquor license.

Thank you, attorney maze.

Time to open the floor if we go on.

All right.

Total of 15 minutes.

If the appellant, Mr.

Neal would like to offer testimony.

Or if he has representation.

Swear again.

And our clerk will swear you both in.

Hi.

Mr.

Neal saying thank you, and then I'll be in another.

Mr.

Neal, do you affirm or swear that the testimony will give is that you're about to give will be the truth?

Yes.

And then can you tell me?

Yes.

Attorney Heather Richmond, R-I-C-H-M-O-N-D.

Thank you so much.

Attorney Richmond, you swear or from the testimony you're about to give to you the truth.

I do.

Thanks.

I guess the first thing we'll start with is the last incident that we saw the video for.

First, that was from 2024.

The license was renewed in the 24-25 and 25-26 years.

That case has since been dismissed.

The 2024 case is no longer pending against Mr.

Neal.

That statement regarding the patron being invited in to have a shot, I think is a hearsay statement.

That's an alleged statement.

There was no cooperation of that statement, no one to back that up.

That was the person that you saw fighting in the videos statement to police.

And I think the uh issue of the uh fight or altercation that did take place was something that if it was going to be an issue, should have been addressed in the 24-25 year or the 25-26 at very least year while that case was still pending.

Um he said that the reason why I went to get my the reason why I went to go get something to protect myself was because he's he saves a killer from Chicago and he killed niggas for less than 20 bucks.

So with everyone that's in the bar, my bartender is in my friend that feel the need to protect myself, but I did not do the things that he said I did.

I did not shot him with him or hit him with a gun or point a gun at him.

And there was a stake in uh precaution to protect myself because of the way he present himself and says I don't know him like that.

And there was no evidence obtained that showed that there was a shot fired off inside the bar.

Um there was a correction meeting um from the uh 328-24 date, and that did address 13 calls that were prior calls of at the bar at that time.

And at the correction meeting, there were issues that were addressed as far as uh cameras and scanners and things like that, and the plan was put into place that was followed.

Um the disturbance that's listed on 616 of 24 again.

The license was renewed in the the 24 year and the 25 year.

Um, with this disturbance, I'm not sure why it's coming up again, but that instance um on the 616-24 uh disturbance, the individuals were no trespassed.

So Mr.

Neal did what he needed to do.

He told those people they were not welcome back there again, do not come to the bar, and he put a no trespass on the individuals.

Um the disturbance on 526-25 again from prior year.

This was uh physical altercation that was going on outside the bar.

There's several bars right in the same uh vicinity.

Um there's one directly next door to uh Mr.

Neal's establishment.

Um the there was no uh cooperation that these individuals had been in the bar prior and gone outside to have a mass brawl.

Um it was something that was taking place outside, and Mr.

Neal should not be held responsible for that.

The July 1st of 2025 incident, um, that one was a male female disturbance.

Those patrons were removed from the bar and they were no trespassed.

Um the one individual, I believe, resides somewhere behind the bar.

So he lives in the vicinity, and he was no, he was not originally no trespassed, even though Mr.

Neal asked him to be no trespass, he was not served with that no trespass.

But Mr.

Neal did ask for him to be no trespass because he did not want the problems in the bar.

The next item, the drug activity, the DTF call.

Um, it states there that these transactions were taking place in front of the bar.

Mr.

Neil can't control what's taking place outside of the bar.

He can control what's going on inside the bar, absolutely, and he needs to be uh cognizant and in control of what's going on in the bar.

These transactions didn't take place in the bar.

Um, he can't control what's going on outside.

Therefore, we don't believe that those should be counted against Mr.

Neil.

Um, the disturbance on 11725, the male mail disturbance that was the mail that was supposed to have been no trespassed.

Um he again lives behind the bar and is out in the vicinity of the area, and just because that individual is in the area doesn't mean he's at the bar.

He's not at the bar, he's not welcome in the bar.

The violations of the stipulation agreement.

Um, there's several issues with that.

Um, first, these ID scanners.

Uh, Mr.

Neal does have the ID scanners.

He did have the ID scanners when this violation occurred, but they were on an app on the bartender and the bouncer's phones.

Apparently, that was a recommendation by one of the law enforcement officers when Mr.

Neil asked about recommendations of where to get scanners.

One of the officers informed him about this app that does the scanning.

So he did comply and got this app for himself, the bartenders, and the bouncer.

And that app had been broken, I believe, or was down, the service was down.

Yeah, the I subscribed to the app, but um, the payment did not go through because I changed my debit card for that one, but then I corrected the next time I saw this the I corrected the next day.

So the next time the officers came in, I had it um on my phone and I I showed it to them, and they said they they described the qualities they wanted in the scanner and the app add that same um qualities and they located it.

As far as the licensee not providing video footage within five days for the agreement, there was a text message with one of the Green Bay police officers about you're welcome to come pick up the video anytime, it's ready.

And the video was not picked up by that officer.

Mr.

Neil was under the impression that that officer was coming to pick up the video, so he did what he was supposed to do under the um agreement.

He made that video available to the officers within five days, as the agreement had stated.

Um the video footage, uh, it says is poor quality and unable to uh verify original underage complaint.

Um, Mr.

Neal has no information regarding the underage complaint.

The scanners were up and working except for that short period of time where there was the issue.

He does not serve underage patrons, and the bouncer at the door stops people and asks for IDs at the door.

Um there were stipulation, uh, two violations that were issued, or I believe there were three violations that were issued based on the violation of the stipulation agreement.

And was that one with the noise complaint?

There was also a noise complaint that was issued against Mr.

Neal for having noise violations based on his camera footage, which we all just saw the camera footage.

There is no volume on the camera.

So I'm not sure how there was even a noise complaint uh issued, but that one was dismissed subsequently.

Um but he did pay now the the two uh violation uh violations are now paid for the violations of the stipulation agreement, and the last thing is liquor law violations 225-26.

Um, the officer conducted the uh bar check with the working ID scanner not obtained, that's when the payment was down, correct?

uh violation uh violations are now paid for the violations of the stipulation agreement and the last thing is liquor law violations 225 26 um the officer conducted the uh bar check with the working ID scanner not obtained that's when the payment was down correct so it was just for that short period of time when it was discovered that the software or the application on the phones were was not working and then that was quickly remedied when it was um discovered that it was a a debit card issue the I think big issue here is we heard about the 13 calls in 2024 but how many calls were there in 2025 that we don't know that because there were very few and the so far in 2026 even fewer if any were there any um there's a handful less than a handful less than a handful and most of that is outside again where there are several bars down the street that are open as well and they're not being held accountable for what's going on outside in the um streets it's only Mr.

Neal that is and not to call out any specific establishments but another facility on Bodart Street 607 had 19 police calls during the calendar year.

718 had 19 police calls during the 2526 year um down the street a short distance at 1100 Main Street there were 34 police calls and those were other than security alarm calls involving warrants thefts disturbances um and those liquor licenses have not been in jeopardy it's only Mr.

Neil being targeted for some reason um there's another bar at 201 North Washington Street less than 0.7 miles from Jam Rock 69 police calls and their liquor license is not in jeopardy so with Mr Neal having just a handful of police calls when he can't control anything outside of his facility and he does uh control what goes on inside his facility and he has been compliant with the police um that just seems very unfair and almost targeted to target him for non-renewal that's all thank you thank you yeah so at this time if uh council has any questions certainly for either parties or if you so choose again it's not a requirement to allow for public comment but council obviously has a choice to do so to allow it if you do again with the understanding that the information to consider is that related to the violations and the information provided by the parties so public comment if you choose any questions to either of the parties um and then following that uh each would have a couple of minutes to conclude any questions for the parties from council you can obviously ask them later too just for clarification just two questions for Mr.

Neil um or the attorney um with the incident we saw the video of um two questions from that first why didn't you call the police after that and second why were the lights turned off um so at night times if that when I got the lights on sometimes my camera flickers I had um receiver problems at that time so sometimes my camera flickers in the light and so I turned the lights off and I didn't want the people outside to be drawn to the what to create more problems than what was going on because originally he was trying to there was other altercation with them on other people and I didn't want that to escalate anywhere else okay thank you.

And then why did you not call the police immediately after I excuse I left the bar right away because I like I said he said that he's uh he's a killer from Chicago and the um he killed niggas for less than 20 bucks so I took my staff and my my my lady out of there and I tried to go hide or hide myself as exciting by problem instead of you know because I think he had lived right down the road you know so I just wanted to get away from that.

Okay thank you.

Any other questions Walder Grant and then older shall thank you.

How long did he spend in the bar before that happened?

Before that happened he was at the bar next door causing trouble and um I know the guy um and then the bar the owner for that bar over there she's a female so she asked me to help help him you know so I went over help her so I went over there and talked to him and um it wasn't bar closed yet there was still bar time so I got him out of that incident take him out of that problematic environment which I thought I could control because I knew the guy and then tell him come over by me and I'll buy the drink.

This was way before bar closed or anything so that's how we end up in my bar it was fighting in another bar.

But that bar or that video was from four in the morning.

So he was there from prior to bar closed all the way up to four.

I wanted to give him a ride home.

Okay.

So but I had to wait till my bartender still we clean up the bar and batched out and stuff like that.

Okay, thanks.

So older something.

Yeah, I just wanted to follow up on Alder Presley's question.

And thanks for being here.

Um so you you mentioned not calling the police because you wanted to get out of there.

Um, can you just take us through your mindset when you stopped and picked up the scrolls?

And I I was terrified, and I I was panicked.

I had a couple other people that I was responsible for.

And um, I like I said, yeah, I don't know what he was capable of, you know.

Like he said, he's you know, like I'm from Jamaica and criminals are murderers or whatever you call him.

You never know what their next movie is going to be.

Well, and I think you could tell from the video there was quite a size difference between Mr.

Neil and the other party.

And for someone to see someone else with a with a with a gun and try to push them in a corner or try to jump on him right away.

It's like he has no fear, he doesn't give it, he doesn't care about anything else, you know.

So I just wanted to take myself out of that that area.

Right.

I'm asking a follow-up question though.

I totally get that.

So you're in a distressed kind of mindset.

Why did you stop and pick up like four stools on the way out?

Uh what you stopped and picked up like four stools.

Yeah.

Because I the gun was on the floor and I was out of breath.

So I'm picking trying to pick up the gun and try to breathe because I was out of breath while I'm moving the chairs.

Because I want to see that I'm out of breath to think I'm weak for him to attack me again or something.

Well, and my guess is.

That's what I was kind of thinking.

My guess is there was probably a lot of adrenaline.

So I wasn't like thinking clearly at the time he was a it was a flight of you know, flight flight mode, get away from the incident and stuff like that.

Yeah, thanks, Alder.

Any other questions?

Oh, heck then, profit.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, so when did the gun go off?

The gun?

There was no gunshot there.

They I didn't fire any gunshot at him.

So when the gun fell on the floor, it's a CM, it's a CM9.

So when the gun fell on the floor, when I picked it up, was everybody was gone.

And when I was leaving, I realized that the gun, when I tried to unload the gun, there was a bullet that was it it stuck in the chamber.

So I I couldn't get it out.

So I was trying to I was fighting with the gun.

There was nobody there, and I was fighting with the gun like this, and it wouldn't move, so I did this, and that's when the gun, the the bullet dropped in the slot and it went off on the floor.

But there was no gunshot fired at anyone else.

It was just the and that's one of the flaws with a CM9.

If you look it up, it uh it the it the bullet gets stuck in the chamber.

So had he left the bar, yes, then the gun went off, and then you straightened out the stools between there.

No, no, no.

When so I picked up the gun, straightened the stools out, put the gun in the back.

I'm not paying attention to it.

And then he left my bar to the left and my lady's using the bathroom.

I'm getting ready to go.

That's what I'm noticing.

That's that was that case.

And I tried to, because I'm not gonna drive with a loaded weapon.

So I took the magazine out, and then I noticed that that bullet was crooked in the chamber.

And that's what I tried to.

He was stuck I couldn't get it out.

Okay.

Well, ca it just sounded like you were you said you were trying to get out, and that's why you didn't call the police.

So yeah, I was like, Sounds like a bit went on after the No, he was gone, but I'm not gonna go outside while he's outside.

I'm waiting till he disappeared so I can't see him for me to be able to leave the building to get away.

Because I'm thinking of getting away.

So I don't want him to be out there for me to run into him for him to do whatever he's gotta do.

His car was outside, I don't know what he's got in it.

You know, and he's according to him and who he is, I don't know what he's capable of hiding around the corner or something like that.

So I wanted the path to be clear for me to escape from this guy that I'm terrified of.

I mean, it could be it could have been much worse if the gun went off while you were all in the alternation.

But that's why I was trying to get rid of the gun over the tape over behind the counter when he jumped on my back and tried, he tried to take the gun from me, so I was trying to put it over the counter.

I'm just because it was behind your back while you were talking to him and and it could be a bigger one.

And then it could have been to the corner and then I tried to reach over the counter to put the gun down, and that's when he had when he was pushing me over there.

Okay, thank you.

Thanks, Alder.

I think Alder Prophet's question has been addressed, Alder Delee.

Thanks for coming.

Um you know, before watching the video and before, you know, the gun hit the floor and you were punching him, and he had you against the lottery machines.

Uh the beginning of the video, there's obviously no sound, but you reach across the bar and grab him by the nap and pull him to the jacket.

Okay, his jacket, and pull him towards you.

So in an altercation where you're involving an individual that's already intoxicated and it's getting escalated.

Why did you feel the need to get physically with him to drag him across the bar?

Because at that point in the video, it didn't show him getting physical with you.

Yeah, there was more to to that video footage before it got that to that point.

So what was took the four off with the counter, the 20 off the counter.

And that's when I was arguing with him.

That's when he said that these it is not because he had ordered he ordered drinks before, before the bar closed.

And I just kept it.

So I thought he was gonna come back and pay for it tomorrow, but it was there.

So he put the 20 on the counter.

And that's when he took it up and said not paying for his drinker.

These bitches don't pay for their shit.

And those are the exact words for give excuse my language.

And um, he took it up and put it back in his jacket.

So that's what I and before that you said that's why I said he killed niggas for less than 20 bucks because of the 20 that he took off the counter.

And that's why I reached up for his jacket because he put it in his jacket.

Okay.

All right, Alder Hinckis.

Can I get direct question to Lacey at this time?

Um, sure.

Maybe we'll just check and see if there are any other questions for Mr.

Neil or his attorney.

Mr.

Morgan, Alder Morgan.

You mentioned you've known this gentleman in the past quite a bit.

Knowing him, what led you to believe that he was some kind of enforcer that would in fact armor kill people?

So when you say you know bar people, you don't really know them.

They're just repeated customers.

Well, you that's my job to make them feel familiar.

And um I've heard his story outside of that, but I never fear him because I thought that I was close to him more than that, you know.

But when he repeated it in my face in a deadly manner, it kind of triggered that fear, you know.

And do you have uh someone that's a reliable person that told you some of this stuff or uh the people that you had heard this from before?

Is this just bar talk?

Or do you have some reliable person that may have told you this?

Yeah.

It was the individual that was making the statements.

That night.

But you knew him in the past.

You heard that in the past?

Yes.

And that he's uh he's a hit by Chicago.

And that people told you that.

He said prior to that, but I said before because I was close to him, I never feared him until he threw that in my face.

Okay.

Thank you.

Anything else for Mr.

Neil?

Alder Hutchison?

Right.

Um spending a lot of time on what happened in 2024.

Um, and we approved his license.

So and the case was dismissed.

So legally, I mean, we saw the video, and it it's concerning, but uh what I saw was a drunk individual and an owner breast lane.

Okay.

It wasn't necessarily call caused by the owner, it was caused by the situation.

Uh what I deem valuable is what just happened in this previous year.

And one of the main things is the scanner.

And it didn't work because you didn't have the pain, but yeah, so I have a bar um bar, and bar app on the phone.

And the the the officer came came in the December, I think.

And I wasn't there.

And I think that's when I got a ticket.

But my bouncer, we have it on the I had uh I had one on the phone.

So then when I did, I made sure I I had them download the app and subscribe to the app so that it could be multiple phones that carry this app.

Okay.

And do you have it on your phone?

Yes.

You have it on your phone right now.

That's my bounce is right there.

He also has it.

Okay.

And it's up and active.

Okay.

Um that's it right there.

Can I come over there?

Uh sure.

I might as well take a look at it.

Because that that's a major contention.

Okay.

And then my answer has it as well.

And all my bartender has on their phone as well.

Okay, thank you.

And then I showed it to the officer the second time we had the encounter, and he made sure that it had the qualities that they required from an ID scanner.

And they said he's that it was okay.

Okay.

Thank you.

Anything else from Mr.

Neil for Elder Debaker?

Yes.

Um, just wondering on the timing of um, just want to figure out why the license was renewed.

Um what when was the case dismissed?

I guess what's the timeline?

You know, the incident happened.

Maybe they gave you the benefit of the doubt.

There was no crazy jump with everything.

Yeah.

Yeah.

This happened in 2024 February, right?

Is it 24 February, I think.

And on the license year of that year, I got renewed.

The case was still pending at the time.

So they didn't use the case against me at the time.

Then the next year was this.

I I complied with everything that a police department initially recommended.

I was at an abatement plan for a year.

I completed that.

And then I the next year I didn't have uh an abatement plan when I came in and the recommended we came here, explained the situation, and I got approved again.

Uh this case was dismissed a few months ago in April.

In April, it was dismissed in April.

Okay.

Well that kind of makes the timeline seem right for you know granting and not holding this necessarily against you.

Right.

Um, I think attorney Mays will have some comments on whether or not this is a dismissal or not.

Okay.

Uh and I guess the one last question I had was um with the scanner.

Was that a stipulation of the correction meeting to have a scanner working at all time?

I'm sorry.

I see further down this list, it's not a requirement for state law, but was that a stipulation in your um correction reading?

And a stipulation agreement from the correctional meeting that you had.

Yeah was that a stipulation that you had to have a working scanner analyst.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any other questions for the appellant?

Yeah.

Yeah.

All right.

I think we're we're good with questions for you all.

Um question for attorney Mays, and then we'll go to Alder Hinkfis, who with the question for attorney coach art on this question of uh case dismissal.

Could you weigh in on that?

Yeah.

Um, so the DA's office had um a witness availability issue.

The the case was scheduled for trial in April.

Um, and because the there was a witness that was unavailable, the DA's office dismissed, but they refiled.

Um, so the incident from January 27th, 2024, the same charges is currently pending.

It's 26 CF 674.

Um, so the matter is still pending, and the reason why the license had been granted in previous years was because counsel was waiting for closure on whether he would be convicted or not in the criminal case.

But this is a licensing decision, and it doesn't rely on the criminal case um in order to make the licensing decision.

This year council voted to non-renew, and that's why we're having the evidentiary hearing today.

Thanks, attorney.

Alder Hinckis.

Question for attorney coachard, because I've been on the council, so this case has come before us multiple times.

Um, and I'm kind of going back where Alder Hutchison was going when we issue a license for a specific year.

What do we it in issuing that license for for that year?

Then we go to the following year and we deny it for something that happened two years ago since we issued that license.

I don't remember issuing it pending results.

Um there has been improvements made.

Um, and I would agree with Elder Hutchinson as far as the reader and that sort of thing.

Um so if I were to get a license and it gets renewed, I'm assuming you know, everything starts over.

Correct.

Yeah.

Well, we genuinely appreciate having you all in the audience, but there's no room for reactions to any comments that we have here.

So if that continues, we'll have to clear the room.

Um, so please just refrain from reacting to comments.

Attorney Closer.

Clarification on your last question.

It isn't there isn't um a portion of the ordinance that prohibits you from considering anything uh that happened prior to the previous licensing year.

In many cases, it's a totality of the circumstances in one year you might have but one violation, the next, it's three.

These are renewal decisions, which are administrative.

Um, as was mentioned before, council has authority over these licensing licenses.

It's not a criminal matter.

Um, the threshold is not the same.

You have the ability to consider the information, determine whether there are violations of any of the 10 grounds, whether it's an activity by the licensee that violates the law and endangers what you believe to be the public health and safety of the city.

Again, it's an administrative action.

You can consider the totality of the circumstances when granting these licenses at any time.

This is not a revocation.

Every year, staff makes recommendations for all licenses in the city of Green Bay and whether we should um issue them.

The police department and others have felt in each of the past several years that this license shouldn't be issued for the reasons that were presented, and they're again asking the same.

In the previous, um, just for clarification, although I think this in the previous matters, uh, there was no approval to issue a notice.

So we haven't previously had a quadratic hearing, I believe, as attorney Mayes said before, so there wasn't a consideration of evidence.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um I'd like to ask a few questions of our chief, please.

Uh do you know on these when you get a liquor license?

I may have to refer this to the clerk.

Isn't there something in there about having a reader?

Uh ID reader all that time in a city license.

She does.

Okay, and then chiefs also I'd like to know.

I assume he did a background or someone might have uh ran the victim in the incident from January of 24.

Was there anything to lead you to believe that this gentleman was a dangerous person or that he has reputation as spoken of here as an enforcer?

Uh so for your first question, Alder, uh the license scanner is a pretty common stipulation agreement um requirement.

Um and especially in cases like this where we have a problem with an establishment, we'll almost always include that in the remediation plant.

And in this case, you know, there's a difference between what we ask of of bars to get a license in the first place versus when we have identified a problem at one.

And in this case, the license plate or the excuse me, the uh uh the ID scanner was intended to address something that had been identified as a problem.

Uh, as far as the victim in this case, I you know, I'm sure someone ran him.

I did not, uh, but just having read through the reports, I don't see anything about enforcers or Chicago or anything like that.

But yeah, it's there's nothing about that in the record, and nothing alleged at the time of the incident that he had said any of the reasons.

Do we have anything to prove that there was a discharge of the weapon that night?

Any evidence or anything?

Uh yes.

We had an officer who found, I believe, four or five, five bullet fragments uh on the floor, I believe, and placed those into evidence.

Do we have any information as to where the bullet may have gone other than the fragments?

I'm just looking at this.

It the report references the officer looking for bullet fragments and locating multiple fragments at what they believe to be a place where the bullet ricocheted off the floor.

So it looks like it probably struck the floor at some point, or a bullet struck the floor.

That's it for now.

Thank you.

Also, question for Chief Davis.

And the police report does it specify when the um when they originally filed the report, when the gun, because I thought when this came before us two years ago that it was noted that the gun fell out of the pocket, but now he's saying that he was clearing the chamber.

On the actual police report, how is it recorded?

So just from perusing this here, what it looks like is we had one statement from the victim that he heard the gun go off.

And then we uh Mr.

Neil did not give a statement, and so did not tell our officers what happened at the time that this came to their attention.

Believe there were a couple other witness statements that were taken.

So for those, so it's kind of convoluted here.

So looks like Mr.

Neal initially said that he uh would give a statement and then decided against it later.

And I don't know how much of this is in the record, but there's some discussion with the officers about from the victim's perspective of what he says happened.

Um he says that he uh Mr.

Neal grabbed a pistol and possibly fired a shot off, and this person was not sure whether the shot was fired at him or just that a shot was fired.

Um and he believed he was actually hit with the weapon, which is not consistent with the video.

Okay.

Um so again, that has that situation has been brought up from 2024, but since the remediation plan, ultimately the ID scanner not working, what I guess what are the main most recent things that you would recommend non-renewal for.

I think it's a collection of things.

I mean, I think if you look taken in total, at least since the beginning of 2024, um, and and attorney Mays has gone over all of the specifics that our recommendation was based on, but I think taken in total, uh, I it's our staff's assessment, and I agree with it that there is considerable risk involved in continuing to renew this establishment.

And this is consistent with recommendations we've made every time their license has come up since this happened, and nothing really that that I'm seeing changes that, and certainly you know nothing that I'm hearing here tonight.

Okay, I just wanted to ask because the comment was made about the a lot of incidents happening outside of the establishment versus incidences inside of the establishment.

So I just wanted to clarify if there was some you know more something more targeted inside the establishment.

Just whatever what is in the record, I think speaks for itself.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

I have a few, um, starting with uh Chief Davis here to just there's been a lot of testimony, a lot of conversation, a lot of back and forth.

It's been nearly an hour for the at least the second time that we've sat through something similar.

So gotta you gotta help me wrap my mind around some of these.

Um so kind of piggybacking off of what Elder Grant just said.

When PD is dispatched to calls that are happening outside of establishments, especially in um it's in my district, so I know 700 bod, there's plenty of establishments in that area.

How do you choose what establishment the call ends up getting quote unquote pinned on for lack of a better term?

Like how is that determined?

Well, I think it's a it's a case-specific analysis.

So one thing I would ask is was it the establishment that called about or a problem in front of their bar?

Well, we would expect them to, and so that might be a good thing.

Uh, were the people involved in the disturbance associated with the establishment?

Had they been drinking there?

Is there evidence that they that there's over service going on and that that the establishment somehow contributed to the problem?

Okay.

Um and then just kind of wanting to look and talk about, you know, these calls versus other establishments that have a lot of police calls as well.

What is kind of the difference when it comes to PD's recommendation for non-renewal with some of the other establishments that we we see high call volume with as well?

Well, the fact that you that a licensed premise has calls doesn't necessarily mean that number one that they are contributing to the problem.

They might be calling to abate the problem.

We've seen some evidence in this case that maybe things are going on in in this establishment where we aren't called.

For example, we had you know video of a fight involving a firearm where we were not called by the establishment.

We found out about it through other means.

Um so or you know, we bring owners of bars in all the time for abatement discussions, and a lot of times it depends on how much they engage in that process, and then how well are they sticking to the terms of any stipulation agreement that comes out of that discussion?

And so it really is a case-specific analysis, and it it's not a matter of sort of comparing how many calls are at one establishment or another.

What kind of calls are they?

Are they calls for theft for cars broken into in the parking lot, or are they calls for you know fights after closing time with people drinking in the establishment and a firearm involved?

That's a lot more significant than some of the other calls that we get.

And thank you.

That kind of naturally brings me to my last question for you before I grab attorney um coach.

Um is there any more recent correction or abatement meetings that have happened post-328-24, which is one of the ones that I was looking at here.

Has there been any more recent meetings or correction plans?

I would have to defer to attorney Mays on that because she's involved directly in those, and I don't usually attend those.

Okay.

This this correction meeting was the first correction meeting that we had after the ordinance changed.

Um there have been no individual meetings requested by Mr.

Neil or held with him to the best of my knowledge.

So we had that initial correction meeting.

And then this license here, we've seen five incidents.

And then my last one, I promise.

Um for attorney coach art.

So just again, want to reiterate and clarify.

The previous two licensing years, the recommendation was non-renewal from PD.

However, is it correct that we reverse that decision at council?

And that is why we've never had evidence presented before tonight.

Yeah, I would just clarify the reverse of the decision because if you recall from our previous council meeting, it was uh this item was on as a notice of non-renewal to approve the notice, which then goes out to the applicant and they have an opportunity to um file this um a request for a hearing.

So the previous decisions were no at the notice, so not necessarily reversing the decision.

It was just the recommended recommendation to provide a notice of non-renewal was not granted by council.

So we we didn't move on to the um hearing, which is what we're having tonight.

If that's just for clarification on the reversal, it was just the uh request to provide a notice wasn't approved.

So we approved instead of uh approving a non-renewal, we approved a renewal, the previous two license years at council.

Yes, thank you.

Right.

Any other questions before we we do rebuttals?

Any other questions before we go?

Elder Morgan?

One other question, uh, either to the clerk or to the chief.

Um when we do have these stipulations that say they must have a ID card reader.

Do we have uh something that says what they have to have?

Uh is it a machine they have to have, or is it just an app on a phone?

Okay for this.

So I'm gonna defer that to the chief.

Either one of those would be acceptable.

We don't tell them what kind of license or Freudian thing, I keep using the wrong term.

Uh what kind of ID scanner they need to have.

Um just something that that works to scan IDs, whether that's an app on your phone, some kind of physical machine, immaterial desk, but it needs to work.

Thank you.

Yeah, all the grant.

One last question.

I'm just looking at the details of these calls.

Um in 2025 in October, it looks like the control substance was in front of the bar, so outside of the bar.

Is that correct?

In October, I don't know who can confirm that.

Do you have the case number for that by any chance?

Yes, 25-249-653.

October 1st, 2025.

It does state the mailed party was inside of the bar to arrange selling controlled substances in front of the bar.

So does that mean outside of the bar?

That's what it looks like to me, yes.

Okay.

And then the following occurrence or incident on November 7th, where two males are resisting arrest.

Uh, there was a physical altercation.

Was that inside the establishment?

Pulling that report up now.

And I can give you the number if you need.

I have it.

Okay, sorry.

Yeah, that's it.

This is a pretty big report, so I may need to I may need a minute to get you the answer to that.

Yeah, yes.

Oh, sorry, I thought it was just this.

Like when the officers got there.

Uh this was happening outside.

Police got there.

Someone turns back towards the bar and screamed, cops run.

Oh, this was not someone who was involved in the disturbance.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

Any questions?

Otherwise, we'll go to rebuttals.

We'll go to Mr.

Neal and his attorney.

There are any rebuttals, anything you'd like to add before council deliberates.

I would just like to reiterate that Mr.

Neil does the best he can to control what happens inside the establishment that he is responsible for, but all of this excess outside of the establishment, and like I said, there's one directly next door and then a couple doors down.

He can't be held accountable for things that are happening outside of the establishment.

That's all.

Thank you.

Thanks for your testimony.

Yeah, there was some discussion about whether the firearm actually um went off for the January 2024 incident.

There there were bullet fragments found, and one of the um staff members also reported in her statement hearing the gun discharge.

Um on the October 1st of 2025 incident, um in his um prepared document um for you to review.

Uh Mr.

Neal indicates that that individual was no trespassed, um, and that he knew that he was no trespassed.

So when someone's entering the bar at midnight and they've been no trespassed, this sounds like an issue that an ID scanner could help address.

Um I I'm not sure why this individual was allowed into the bar if he had already been no trespassed.

Um I think that it's also important to look at the difference between call volume and call severity.

Um you saw with your own eyes um what Mr.

Neil did back in January of 2024.

Um whether this is the type of behavior that you want people running a l licensed alcohol establishment to be exhibiting.

And whether this is the type of behavior that you are condoning um and supporting um to ensure the the safety, the health and safety of our community.

Um there have been five incidents this liquor license year alone.

When you look at the totality of the circumstances, I think there's a very strong argument for non-renewal here.

Um I've been looking at liquor license cases um for a little over eight years now for the city, and this is the most egregious behavior I've seen from um a liquor license holder.

Um I would I would strongly urge you to not renew this liquor license.

Thank you.

Uh yes.

Yeah.

Just clarification.

When you say there's been five calls this licensing year already, the licensing year renewed on January first or July 1st, 2026, right?

It's been six days.

Is that what you're referencing?

Okay.

Because this this renewal is um looking uh it's it's based on the the license from 25 to 26.

So in that liquor license here, there have been five incidents that have impacted the police department's decision to not renew.

Okay, thank you.

I was confused.

I was like, didn't it restart?

I was like, six days, that's a lot of high volume.

Thank you.

Two tips.

Yeah, and I found the answer to your earlier question, Alder.

Uh one of the officers at the disturbance made contact with the staff at Jamrock and was informed by the staff that at least a male and female who were involved in the disturbance outside had been in the bar.

And that they both got up and left.

The male came in, sat by himself, and then the female came back, appeared to be upset, and the officer was told that it looked like this female wanted to fight with the male as she was heading straight toward him, but bar staff interjected and told both to leave, and then they both went out of the bar.

Does not look like police were called at that point.

Any additional questions for attorney mays.

All right.

Entertain discussion from our council for motions, etc.

Alder.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, and I know it that we talk about that it was in January of 2024.

Um, I I think my myself, speaking for myself, we didn't know the we knew it was a pending case, uh, so waiting to for the outcome.

Uh, we didn't see that video before.

That's something new.

Um, and it's disturbing.

Um I I was looking through the police report, and the testimony from Ricardo's girlfriend Jessica says in here that while in the bathroom, she heard a gunshot, which does not match up to what Mr.

Neil had said that it was after everybody was gone because she said when she came out of the bathroom, um let's see, he that Kenny Mack was on the floor.

I don't believe he was moving.

And um Ricardo was throwing water on Kenny Mack uh twice.

So it's not matching up with the testimony, and when I when I hear that, when I see that, I feel like it's hard to um you know completely believe the testimony if it's not matching up with other testimony that was given like right after the incident.

So that makes it difficult.

I and I will I have to say um that I don't feel like there's been um accepting of accountability by Mr.

Neil, like there it's kind of more excuses coming and no accountability for actions that have taken that have happened.

That's my feeling about it.

So I would recommend denial.

Thanks, Alder.

Additional comments, all the grant.

Thank you.

Um, I think what we need to keep in consideration is we did remediation, there was a plan in place.

You know, some things that are sticking out to me is I think intentions are good, but follow-up isn't happening.

We have no trespassing orders put on people, but they're being allowed into the bar.

Um, an ID scanner in one of the reports said the ID scanner had broke a month prior.

He stated he had ordered a new one.

When asked him when he ordered it, he stated he had ordered it that day.

He was aware that part of his agreement was to have a working ID scanner.

So I think I understand that we allowed renewal.

I also know in this council we believe in second chances and an opportunity to fix things.

So I don't want people to judge it based off of things that we've allowed in the past because we do want to see businesses succeed.

We want to see good come of this.

But when we're not seeing follow-up happening and those second chances actually being followed through, we have a tough decision to make.

I've been on this council where we didn't renew licenses for an establishment, and it's not easy.

These are people's livelihoods.

I get that.

But Clerk, how many people or how many licenses do we have available right now for people?

So um as of today, we have I believe three available class B liquor.

So all the other licenses, class A, beer, class A, liquor, class B beer, are not on a quota, but class B liquor is on a quota, and I believe we have three available.

And remind me are those those are more expensive, correct?

So no, no, the reserve licenses are more expensive, but they're just the the class B liquor is a quota.

So the state had imposed a quota on the number of class B liquor licenses we could issue 30 years ago, and so um that's why they're in hot supply.

They're highly demanded because there's a quota.

Sure.

So in the past, we've had zero licenses available.

We have establishments waiting to get licenses.

So, you know, when we offer up second chances and someone's waiting a month knowing that this is a stipulation, are they taking this seriously?

And is the follow-up actually occurring?

And again, I I believe he has been in tensions with no trespass orders, but why are these people being allowed into the establishment then?

So I think we have to keep into mind that follow-up needs the follow-through needs to happen, and I'm not sure we're seeing that here.

Thank you.

Other comments, Alder Morgan.

Going back to some of that and what Alder Hutchison's comments were.

First of all, we have to realize the value of a green bay tavern license.

We have people that are trying to get the reserve ones and are spending, you know, thousands and thousands of dollars just to get that.

And I worked in the tavern history for five years.

If we would have ID scanners there, and I saw that on December of 25, it wasn't working.

And then again on February of 26, it wasn't working.

I would have gone out and found something better.

You can't all trust an app.

The other thing I didn't like is uh when they were asked for their video footage, they weren't supplying it in the five days that is part of the stripulation.

So they're in fact violating the rules of their stripulation and be like violating any other laws.

Um as far as uh this gentleman that was the victim, the enforcer.

I've had to work with two actual enforcers, one with the Casa Nostra and another one, another shogging.

If I saw them out in social, I went the other way.

I didn't invite them in two hours after bar closing.

I didn't invite them in to have a drink.

If I already knew they were inebriated, those are things that as a bar owner, you know you can't do.

And then having a discharge.

I've carried concealed now for 52 years.

38 and a half of them were driving a squad car, and I also carried then, and I still carry today whenever I feel I need it.

I've never had an unwanted discharge in fights in battles with combatants.

I asked the gentleman that owns this bar when we had the first hearing.

Do you have a permit?

I believe he said he had a concealed permit.

I don't know if it was Wisconsin or what.

I asked him what training he had.

He had no training.

I go every September and I get certified by the sheriff's department.

I qualify with the officers so that if I have a gun on me anywhere, I know how to handle it.

I know what not to do.

I wouldn't carry it into my bar in a situation where I thought someone was drinking, and I may have had something myself.

So I think he's just totally given up on what a proprietor of a licensed establishment should be doing to keep his license.

So I will second Alder X proposal.

I don't think that was a formal motion, but uh motion appreciate your comments.

Um additional comments or motions.

Um yeah, um, five disturbances over a year.

Uh I mean, but they're all big, and I understand the attorney's point, they're all outside.

Um in an area where there's a lot going on outside on that block.

Um I've myself have had programs canceled because I did my uh credit card ran out.

I mean, so I had to go back and do that.

So when he said that, I go, Well, that's happened to me.

Um so it this balancing act is so interesting because they're very the five are pretty high magnitude disturbances, yet they all seem to be outside.

They're not it's not like the owners directly involved with either starting these or implementing these or doing this uh these things.

It's always someone coming in and doing it.

As a matter of fact, when the fight between the couple started, they stopped the fight and had them go outside.

So I don't know what else you can do except call the police.

So uh I don't know.

I'm just sitting here.

The magnitude is very high, but again, I just I'm having an issue, especially after seeing the video of pinning everything on the owner of this establishment when it's always been something coming in and causing the green grievance.

So that's where I'm sitting right now.

So the older profit that person.

I watched back and I was a part of the discussion back in 2024.

I'm gonna make some of the similar comments that I made back then.

So this incident, um, it's much different now seeing the video footage in my opinion.

Um the video speaks for itself, and I bring myself back to when I was a bartender at an establishment right next door to a license that got revoked pre-my time on council for some of the similar reasons of of the type of disturbances that would break out.

Um watching the video, if I was the bartender that was in that establishment, and that was what happened, rather than just picking up the phone and calling 911, I would feel unsafe.

And that's what I said two years ago.

But two years ago, I was in favor of letting the court system settle this.

And here we are two and a half years later, post this disturbance, it had been dismissed, charges have been refiled, this license has been renewed time and time again, at least two years.

But now we're seeing something different in the video footage.

And again, I would not feel safe as a bartender at that establishment given that there was anyone in the establishment after hours.

That is a huge red flag that was never allowed when I worked, and that was a huge cause of disturbances in the past, and it makes me wonder if that's leading to some of the more recent disturbances as well.

Um, I am not in favor of granting this license.

Um, that video footage uh I think spoke volumes to me tonight.

Older press lead.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um, I think on the on the point of us renewing it in the past, I think this council has in the past tended to not want to make decisions.

Um so we would wait for the court to sort it out.

Um, I think we've reached a point now where we do have to make a decision on this, and we can't wait any longer.

Um I I do want to reframe it though, it can feel sort of punitive um uh removing a liquor license, but it's not a punishment.

It is a uh it is a privilege that is granted to people.

Uh they have to pay, they have to prove themselves that they can hold this uh license for their establishment and operate in a way that uh is safe for our community and benefits our community.

Um we have to have really high standards on this.

It's alcohol, it is a substance, a mind-altering substance um that can lead to great harm.

Um, so we have to have high standards.

Uh and when something like what happened in 2024 happened, um, you know, there's it seems like there was a lot of nuance to that issue.

Um, I don't know exactly what happened, but what bothers me is that a remediation and abatement plan was put into place, and not all of those places, uh not all of those pieces were met, especially looking at the license scanner.

So I mean, already having sort of this egregious incident, um, and then uh after that being asked, okay, you've you've had this mistake, you've had this issue.

Um, but we're going to now, in order to keep your license, hold you to an even higher standard.

You need to meet that standard, and I don't think they've met that standard.

Um, so it's not punitive.

Um, it's just a matter of risk assessment and risk abatement at this point.

Um, if they're not able to meet the high standards we place on them, can we trust an incident like this isn't going to happen in the future?

And not even, you know, something to this severe uh of the standard, but uh you know, just somebody being uh served underage and getting into an accident.

There are risks that can happen here, and we need to be aware of those risks when we're dealing out licenses like this.

So I would be in favor of the non-renewal, the denial of the appeal.

Thanks, Elder.

Uh direct thing, Grant.

I'd like to make a motion to deny the appeal.

Seconded by Elder Morgan.

Um comments on that motion.

Alder Delee.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I think one of the biggest things, I'm gonna piggyback off of Alder Profit.

But one of the biggest things out of all of these issues that we've seen through this whole report is there was zero accountability for anything that happened.

Um when the gun was discharged, the bullet jammed and apparently it went off.

Um, when he reached across the bar to grab the patron by the neck, the guy had pulled his 20 dollars back, but there was no there's no accountability on like I shouldn't have done that, or why didn't you call the police?

Well, my my emotions were ramped up and I didn't call the police.

So there's you look at all these altercations that have happened, uh, which are substantial.

Um the sale of cocaine, uh, it happened outside.

Uh you know, there's there's no accountability for the issues that have gone on.

And then you look at the the plan that was put in place with PD and things were not followed.

Um I I just can't support it.

Thanks, Holder.

Additional comments, Older Grant.

Uh just a really quick one other point I forgot to make.

Again, I my decision is purely based off of what Mr.

Neil can control.

Remediation happened in March of 24.

In December of 25, he already had a scanner that hadn't been working for a month.

And one thing I missed on that when I initially spoke is he then called the officer back to ask for recommendations.

So did he order us ID scanner?

If he's asking for recommendations when he said he ordered one that day.

Um, if you fast forward then to February, he still doesn't have a working ID scanner.

So that's over a two-month span of not having an ID scanner again.

What are things that Mr.

Neil can control?

Those are things he can control.

And the incident in 2024, let's I don't want to dismiss the fact that he had someone in after the bar was closed, it was four in the morning.

That's not allowed.

Thank you.

Anything else on this motion?

We have a motion to deny in a second.

All in favor will say aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it, and that um that motion succeeds to deny the appeal from Mr.

Neil.

Adjournment.

Motion to adjourn.

Motion to adjourn made by all the coffee.

Second by all direct.

All in favor say aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it, we're adjourned.