Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Today is Thursday, May 8th. This is a meeting of the Chelsea Licensing Commission. I am here this evening with fellow commissioners Ano Lopez, Alexandria Christmas, Emily Churniaak,
and myself, Marty McAlpine, along with Naomi Libron, our licensing clerk, uh be from the licensing department, as well as uh Peter Christopher, our assistant city solicitor, and Sergeant Chung from
the Chelsea Police Department, as well as um Officer Mclofflin from the police department and I know that uh Chief Hton is here with us as well this evening. Um with that we are going to
kick things off to start. Can I get an approval of the minutes from our last two meetings? Are you guys good with doing that in a batch? Okay. an approval for the minutes from the March 20th, 2025 meeting as well as an approval of
the minutes from the April 10th, 2025 meeting. Uh, and a second. A second. All in favor? Can you guys turn on your mics, please? Thank you. I Perfect. Get
those. Okay, moving right along. Um, we're going to move into the clerk's update. I need approval and uh a motion to vote the next six months of licensing meeting dates.
Um, did anybody have any known conflicts already on the dates proposed? I make a motion to approve. So the just to I may have a conflict on the December date. Um outside of that I don't have
any issues. Uh can uh you made a motion to approve and uh second. All in favor? I Okay. Anything else? Nothing else. Thank you. Thank you.
Okay, folks. We um are going to get started. Before we get started, uh matter of housekeeping, please make sure when you come up to speak before us, you step up to the microphone. Speak clearly. State your name and your reason for coming before us. If there are multiple people
speaking, please make sure you each step up to the microphone. Uh so that way not only we can hear you but the members of the community that are watching this um at home are also able to hear uh the conversations that are taking place. Um
can um I I would like to take the agenda out of order this evening and uh start with the um second public hearing. Can I get a motion to go out of order?
Motion and a second. Second. Thank you. That being said, we're going to start off this evening with a public hearing to consider a change of corporation name to Rise Holdings Incorporated and amend the cannabis license application to
include medical marijuana for Rise Holdings Incorporated, DBA Rise at 200 Beum Street, Chelsea, Mass. Silverman here for Rise Holdings, Inc. Um, pretty much says it all where there's a entity that's operating known
as GreenStar Herbals, Inc. It operates adult use. We're looking to add medical. In order to add medical, you have to be what's called vertically integrated. You have to have cultivation uh capability and manufacturing ability. Um, GreenStar doesn't have that. Its sister company,
same ownership, does have that. So, we're changing the name to Rise Holdings, Inc., and we're asking for medical, and that will be compliant with the state's regulations as well. Thank you. Uh, questions from my fellow
commissioners to start things off. No, straightforward. Yeah. Anyone? No. Uh, Sergeant Chung, uh, questions, concerns from the police department? There are none. There's literally zero
calls though. There's one call in the area. It's not even by the establishment. Thank you very much. Are uh is there anybody in the public that would like to speak on this matter?
I see no one. That being said, uh does someone want to make a motion to approve the uh change in the corporation name and approve the medical marijuana?
I'll make a motion to change the name. That's uh what about the second part of that of adding the medical marijuana? I make a motion to change all of it. Okay, perfect. Uh, just wanted to make sure you weren't just saying the name. And a
second. Second. All in favor? I. Thank you very much. Appreciate that. And um continuing out of order um if everybody Yep. Yep. Um, continuing out of order, if um, my fellow
commissioners are in agreement, I'd like to move to the discussion of the Commonwealth's post. Sure. Thank you. Um, uh, Sergeant, if we can um, discuss
the concerns for the constable licenses. Sure. I'm going to defer to the chief. Thank you, Chief Owen. Good evening, uh, Madame Chair and the commission. Uh, I believe this will be quick. Uh, we've come to a resolution with the city attorneys. Uh, back in
2020, uh, the Police Reform Act, uh, made it mandated that constables who have arrest powers need to go to a full-time police academy, putting a huge liability on the police department. Uh, no one has made an arrest as a constable in several years, but they have in the past. We do not have a city ordinance
that mentions it, so there could be a gray area. Um, so I've talked to uh the city attorney, the assistant city attorney. Uh, we've come to an agreement that they will work out of the law office only servant civil process. If they're only serving papers, not
affecting any civil arrest, uh, they don't fall under the police reform act and uh they can continue doing service uh with the city. So we would do just like we do for every licensing packet, we would do a brief back regular background check, send it back to the
law department excl uh not including the Suffach County Sheriffs who have their own civil process. So if the city decided to use the Suffach County uh sheriff's civil division, we don't need to do background checks on them. They're all corlared and we would provide the IDs and we'd be clear. The problem was
that under the law, as uh Representative knows he's uh it's an archaic law that they still have a right to place people in custody and they cannot do that under the news the new police reform act. So uh I believe the resolution Peter I believe that's correct, right? That we're all set on that uh moving forward.
Yep. Uh as you stated that seemed that's going to be the plan moving forward. The the police will still run the cory's and everything for the applicants to be constables throughout the city. Um but there will be no arrest powers um that these individuals would have. Not that
we've run into that. Not for several years. And they would run out of the legal department. Nothing to do with the police except just our legal uh licensing responsibility and that keeps us clear out of the uh uh the police reform act. But other cities like Haveril have it in their ordinance
making them go to a full-time police academy. I think uh gentlemen who uh that we use are very old. They're older gent older than me. So, um I think we're all are all set on uh on this issue. If uh if there's any questions you have about constables, it's mostly ser on
evictions, divorces, nothing to do with law enforcement. It's all the civil side, just the legal paperwork. Legal paper and that's all they can do now. No. Uh you know, I would also suggest I mean if they have a legal right to carry, they can carry a firearm, but they should not have it exposed. In the past, some constiples wear uniforms,
blue lights. I give blue light permits out. No conible in Chelsea has a blue light permit. uh if they do live in Chelsea, we uh we would just I would just warn them during the process that they shouldn't bear a firearm shown like that they're a law enforcement officer. I don't think I can do anything legally
if they have a legal right to carry they can carry to protect themselves. That's the only slight issue. But all good besides that questions for my fellow commissioners. I have a question. So this is being brought to us um because we're going to
issue a certificate or licensing like what is our responsibility in regards of this? So the the constable licenses and everybody please correct me if I'm wrong um but the constable licenses fall underneath the commission uh along with all of the other licenses that we see
before us on a regular basis. Do we have any currently? We have constables in the city. Yeah. Um so the um they would have to come before us if there was any sort of issues just like any other license. So the cons this was brought before us
because there's been concern um with the changes that took place with the law and I would just suggest is is in the past we gave Naomi three years. I would not do three years. I would do every year that they have to reapply. uh a lot lot changes in three years and
they could slip under the radar but a year I think is reasonable. We would still provide the identification for them and supply that uh to the legal department and the licensing but um I would say every year not every three years. Who employs them? They're
self-employed. They basically uh if the city wants to hire because of a public uh issue, they like deliver subpoenas and stuff. Yeah. Yeah. So, any any attorney can call up a a constable and they have a fee that you would pay in order for them to deliver it. Um, and
they do civil process. So, any any type of civil matter, they will be the ones or they can be the ones who go and do it. Like the chief said, uh, the SUFFK, uh, the sheriff's department is also authorized to do it. And there's some special process servers that can be
authorized to do it by the courts as well. But that's um and I think the treasurer someone in the city a portion goes back to the city whatever they collect they have to give I forget the portion the percentage and that is uh logged somewhere I I believe it's in the the treasur's department in city hall so
if they do 30 processes a certain percentage goes back to the city that they must pay yes I have a question uh so in order for a constable to work in the city of Chelsea we have to approve their license or is the state No, because I can this
is for us the city to um city you can probably explain better Peter anybody I could serve you with papers tomorrow being a constable from you know uh Malden it's control of the constables we have working in the city okay are
working who want to work here for property owners and uh for the city to serve papers but anybody can still serve you it's just the regulations for the ones that we oversee the ones that The city would be hiring for any city would Yes. The city would call on at certain times. Yeah. Or any
any for any civil matter. Civil matter. So there's a usually cities will have a list. I I'm sure we have one that um you would just look at and like the chief said, doesn't matter what town you're in. You know, you could serve someone in Holio, but if you lived in Chelsea, you
had to go through our um our process to do it. I see. Okay. Other questions? Is there anyone from the public that would like to speak on this matter? Yes. Just just because you you made reference. If I could just because I'm
more intimately aware of this than I'd like to be. Um about a month and a half, two months ago, Post issued a ruling, a letter that they mailed out across the Commonwealth that said an eviction was an arrest for purposes of postcertificate a post law. And as a result, constables or special process
servers, what they call forc pro special process servers, could no longer do evictions. The trial court, as everybody in the Commonwealth that knew what was going on expected, fired back and said, "You're flat out wrong." There was an appeals court case from 15 years ago that said an arrest is a an eviction is
not an arrest. And so this resulted in the city of Worcester had issued an order to its council, you can't do any evictions. And of course, the housing court was like, "Well, we have orders to do evictions. You're saying we can't someone constables can't do it. There aren't enough sheriffs to do it. So, the trial court pushed back just today. Uh
the housing I mean the uh housing court's chief lawyer and post came up with something where they on the firearms issue where they're going to jointly agree that constables doing evictions should not be carrying a firearm while they're doing an eviction. So, that's something that that everyone's going to get some letter that
comes out whether it's through the cities or towns, but they they just announced that this morning. So um but the trial court has pushed back and said no an eviction is not an arrest. The the only piece of civil process a constable can no longer serve uh because of the post law was if you went got a civil
judgment against someone a money judgment you'd be able to get a caps arrest warrant. It was a civil arrest warrant if somebody refused to show up to court and that was basically for contempt of court that posted and everyone else has agreed that a constable can no longer serve that even though it's a piece of civil process. So
I think you know the I think the chiefs you know the one year thing some conse won't like it but I think it's a smart approach. I think it's a smart approach. No challenge. Thank you. Hopefully it helps. Uh do we need to do anything to make so they have to be renewed every
year versus every three years? Well we've been doing it for the last two years every year. Okay. It used to be every three years but the So now you do every year? Huh? You do every year already? Yes. Okay, great. Well,
perfect. Then it sounds like between the law department and the police department, we've already come to an agreement there. We're already having them renew once a year. So, it sounds like we're all on the same page. Yeah. Okay. Um, then can I get a motion
to close this discussion? Motion. And a second. Second. All in favor? I. Fantastic. Okay, that moves us um back up to um the first public
hearing on our agenda. We have a disciplinary public hearing to consider revoking, suspending, or modifying the all alcoholic beverage off- premise license as non-compliance to the rules and regulations
uh 2.02, 2.03A, 2.04 4 G 2.05 2.08 B Sorry, my eyes did something funny. Q 2.09 A C E H and 2.12A5 of the City of Chelsea Licensing
Commission in regards to police report 25-738- to Unity Beverages Incorporated DBA Helers Liquors at 429 Broadway Chelsea Mass. If you can step up, please. Good evening, members of the commission, madam chair, attorney Jeff Turo on
behalf of Hela's Liquor. With me is the owner and I'm at 378 Broadway in Chelsea Mass. If you would introduce yourself. Good evening, the chair and the commissioners and uh the police sergeant. Yeah, my name is Iog. I was here last month and uh I guess I'm a
familiar face by this time. Thank you so much. Thank you for coming back this evening. Um, Sergeant Chung, are you ready to kick things off? I am. I'm just doing a sound test. I didn't I couldn't do it earlier because
I didn't want to interrupt the, uh, the space. No worries. So, um, we'll just go through this and then when it's ready for the videos then cuz I I heard it, but I want to make sure you guys could hear it. Appreciate that. So, we'll we'll adjust
it as we get to that part. Okay. Sounds good. I get a better of course. Can you hear that? Yes. Yeah. Okay. just to get just just setting just setting the just setting the mood. I appreciate that. Yeah, it's been a long day.
All right, perfect. Good evening, um, council. Hi, good evening. How are you? Good, thank you, commissioners. Uh, this is in reference to incident number
25-738- as mentioned. Um, how I'm going to do this is since it's lengthy, I'm going to go through all of the reports. I'll read them. Um, I'll summarize the rules and regs. Um, and then from there, we'll break it into
videos, start off with the private surveillance videos, and then we'll go to the body one camera. I'll try to keep it as chronological as possible so that way everyone can try to follow and tell me, you can tell me to slow down at any
time. you you guys as well. Thank you. On March 11th at approximately 1300 hours 2025 while assigned to a detail in the area of Broadway in between 5th and 4th I Sergeant Chung observed a possible licensing violation by the staff at Hela's Liquors which is out of 429
Broadway. It should be noted that as a Chelsea police officer in the Commonwealth, I'm duly authorized to enforce the regulations set forth by the ABCC, ensuring compliance with Massachusetts liquor laws. My role includes overseeing the responsible sale, distribution, and consumption of
alcohol within the city and its license establishment to maintain public safety and uphold the rules and regulations. I also am serving currently serving on the city of Chelsea's licensing commission as the representative for the Chelsea PD as a sergeant assigned to the community
services division. I also oversee the downtown task force and I'm familiar with the quality of life issues surrounding substance abuse and the individuals that often fall victim to these dependencies. While I was posted at the front area of their establishment, I observed two male
parties known to me from numerous previous encounters involving protective custodies and public drinking enter into Heler's Liquors. The two parties were identified as Yrian Zoo and Riggerberto Gonzalez. It should be noted that with the details starting at 7:00 a.m. and
with an end time of 1500 hours, which is 300 p.m., I have been observing them in the adjacent area throughout the day and observe their conditions fluctuating between sober and under the influence. Having a history of previous encounters with these individuals, including making
numerous separate unrelated arrests for OUI and alcoholrelated offenses, it is through my training and experience that individuals who are impaired can present themselves with an unsteady gate, bloodshot, glassy eyes, and an odor of alcoholic beverage that can be detected
emanating from their breath and body. To summarize, it should be noted that Zoo currently has five call log entries of being placed into police protective custody and five entries of being sent to the hospital due to being located by officers as a laid out in public due to
his intoxication. These are all date back to the year 2021. To summarize, it should be noted that Gonzalez currently has a total of 193 call log entries of being placed into police protective custody, 21 alcohol-related criminal
charges, and hundreds of medical transports to the hospital due to being located as a laid out in public due to his intoxication. These all date back to the 1990s, excuse me. Both male parties then exited the store. Approximately 3 to 5 minutes
later, I observed them walk over to the adjacent portaotty that was assigned to the detailed crew. I then observed Gonzalez pulled out an item in a brown paper bag from the right pocket of his pants and position himself in the area of the portaotti away from officer's
view. Zoo, who was in position in the area by the portaotti that was still in view by officers, is then observed being passed the item in the brown paper bag. The zoo is then seen taking a swig from the brown paper bag commonly recognized to contain art hard alcohol. It should
be noted that in the city of Chelsea, alcohol newly purchased from a store is often in a brown paper bag or a black plastic bag for larger orders. Officer Cohen Jr., who was also working the detail with me, assisted me in encountering both male parties. As both
male parties observe officers approaching them, the zoo then returned the item back to Gonzalez, who then secured it in the same bright pants pocket and turned their bodies away from officers. They both then began to part ways, and officers were able to encounter Gonzalez prior to him fleeing
the scene. Gonzalez was then informed of officer's observations and admitted that he had alcohol on him and apologized. when asked where it was purchased and without verbally stating pointed over to the direction of Heler's Liquors but denied being the one who purchased it.
Prior to removing the open container of alcohol off of him, I requested through dispatch for an officer with a bodywn camera so that I can document the encounter. Officer Rosetti arrived on scene, activated his bodywn camera.
Gonzalez was then directed to turn over the open container alcohol to me and I was able to see that is it indeed was a pint size which is 375 ml of rubble vodka with 40% alcohol volume of ethanol and is listed as 80
proof. As I held the bottle in my hand, I observed that a quarter of the alcohol of the bottle was already gone. As I was encountering Gonzalez, I could smell alcohol on his breath as he was speaking to me and his eyes were bloodshot and glassy. Gonzalez was then given a verbal warning and was sent on his way. With
the suspicion that liquor was being sold to intoxicated parties, officer then responded to Heler's to investigate further. Upon entry into the establishment, I observed 46 individuals, also known to me from previous encounters involving alcohol,
waiting to purchase alcohol. This one female clerk behind the counter also observed one male party, unidentified, was already at the counter, leaning onto it as if he was using the counter to hold himself up with half of his rear end revealed. I then observed
approximately five $1 bills on top of said counter directly in front of the unidentified male party. I then directed the male party to pull up his pants and cover himself up. When he turned to look at me, he barely could keep his eyes open and appeared disoriented. I also
observed him to have bloodshot and glassy eyes. I then asked who the money belonged to and the unidentified claimed it to be his. The female clerk finished with another patron who was now tending to the disoriented unidentified male party. They engage in conversation and
as she goes to grab his alcohol of choice to complete the sale, officers immediately stop the sale to prevent a second violation of the sale of liquor to intoxicated persons. unidentified male was verbally worn and sent on his way. It should be noted though that in
hindsight I personally encountered this male party again on April 1st being intoxicated and disruptive while riding on an MBTA bus. Male party was ultimately identified during the encounter as Juan Ooa of Everett. He was removed from the bus and ultimately sent
to the hospital prayers request separate from this incident. At this point, I observed the sudden shift of the local patrons that were already in the establishment upon officer's arrival exiting the establishment as if they've changed their mind on purchasing alcohol. I attempted to speak to the female clerk and it was quickly
determined that there was a language barrier. Utilizing Google Translate, I was able to engage with her in functional basic Spanish. She presented a Colombian passport to confirm her ID as Melissa Laura Patino. I also advised her that I needed to speak to the
manager or owner, which she then replied that she did not know him by name and had unsuccessful attempts at reaching him by cell phone. She then inquired on my presence and I informed her that I am suspecting that she sold alcohol to intoxicated parties in which she then claimed that the one she told to sold to
appeared fine and denied any violations. She then called another employee identified as Christina Lasso. Lasso stated that she was on vacation, but was able to provide me a first name for the owner as Ike and a phone number. I then left the note behind for Ike to give me
a call as soon as possible as I was also interested in securing video surveillance from his business. Cleared and returned to my detail. It should be noted that while in the establishment, I also observed the liquor licenses and business permits displayed closest to the ceiling at top of a wall towards the
rear of said space. Its current elevator location is deemed to be a violation as it cannot be read without difficulty and with it being towards the back does not satisfy the conspicuous nature as required by licensing rules and regs. Later on in the day at approximately
2:15 p.m. Ike called me and provided his full name. Ike explained that Patino is a new employee as of only a week ago while Lassa was out on vacation. Ike stated that he was supposed to train her today, but had an emergency eye procedure that is limiting his vision. Ike was advised of my findings today and
was directed that he memorialized surveillance video for March 10th and March 11th from open to close. A written directive was then delivered to the establishment by officer Mclofflin on March 13th advising of the same delivered to an employee identified as
firstn name lady. Ike then called me again on March 13th requesting some more time to secure a video from his security contractor that is out of Rhode Island. Considering that he was recovering from a recent eye exam, I authorized him four additional days, two to three days,
beginning from the start of the delivery of the written directive, I will follow up with him again on March 20th to ensure that he has the video. If he fails to deliver, I will then include the additional violation in accordance with the licensing commission rules and rags section 2.08. 08 subsection G. It
also should be noted that Ike provided me via email all of his current employees per my request without their date of births. Using the limited information I was given, I was began conducting a Corey check on all of his employees, yielding negative results for all employees except Lasso. I was able
to do a run a full Corey on Lasso because I obtained her date of birth myself on March 11th when I spoke to her via phone. is my recommendation that Lasso's board of probate would need to be reviewed further to determine suitability for continuing employment at a license establishment while being
indicted out of SUFFK Superior Court. At this time, I will be recommending a conference for Helish Lurus to the city of Chelsea's licensing commission for the following violations. Section 2.03, license display. Section 2.08, 08
subsection P which is the forbidden to make or sale or delivery of alcoholic beverages and it's MGL equivalent which is chapter 138 section 69 sale or delivery to intoxicated
persons. Uh, next up I do have Officer Barkard Santiago's doctorred report um of our administrative inspection on Tuesday, April 8th. This officer along with Sergeant Star Chung Officer Santiago here. Do you want to
read your report? Okay, he's actually here so I'm going to have him present his report. Thank you, Sergeant. Good evening. Good evening, Officer Santiago. Good evening. Okay. as uh also Santiago Chelsea Police Department signed to
uniform patrol also assigned to the licensing unit uh with uh Sergeant Star Chong and Officer Mclofflin. Uh I'll start off with this uh supplemental report along with Sergeant Chung on Tuesday, April 8, 2025. This
also along with the Sergeant Chung conducted administrative walkthrough of of the Hell's Liquor Store located at 429 Broadway, Chelsea, Mass. prior to their conference in front of the licensing commission schedule on April 10, 2025. The inspection went as follows.
Officers attempt to gain access to the rear door which is located on the Hawthorne Street side, the rear emergency exit, the establishments and were unable to make entry due to the rear door being locked.
It should be noted that on 2013 at uh that in 2013 the licensing commission sanctioned a 14-day suspension against helers for various infractions and were able to get approval for the rear door to no longer
be an entrance or an exit due to the constant trespassing um when hell still had their bottles um bottles in the area after several knocks on the door officers were able to gain uh greeted by one of the employees
identified as Kelly Sapata Usaga. I told Kelly in Spanish that we were that we were here to conduct an inspection of the est of the establishment. I asked Kelly for her boss um and asked where she was where he
was. She said he's not here. Um Kelly didn't uh end up calling um her boss. Uh there was also no advisory that the proper identification is required to the purchase alcohol. Uh advisory was not
posted. It should be noted then report that officers observed several intoxicated customers walking in inside the establishment and attempted to purchase alcohol beverages while in our presence. Kelly turned them away. I also observed several customers attempt to oh
sorry I read that again. uh some way uh without purchase of alcohol without uh country of their country's identification and passports and uh sorry for purchase of alcohol and types
of identification. In other words, um to sum up this paragraph, we were there doing the inspection. Several customers came in, they were intoxicated. She refused service in our presence. Um she did ask for the IDs. That time they
weren't they didn't have IDs on them or they didn't have the proper identification that they need. But in our presence, in fairness, she did turn them away. Does that happen all the time? I don't know. Just maybe because we were there. Um, at that point,
uh, I explained to Kelly that the state of Massachusetts only accepts certain identifications for the purpose of alcohol sales. So, again, I explained to her again, um, the IDs that are acceptable in the state of Massachusetts. Um,
uh, it should be noted that, uh, that in hindsight after the administrative inspection, there was an advisory from the ABCC that the beginning of April 8th, there were new standards put into place. Again, we go back to new IDs now. Um, the ABC came out. I believe Naomi
set that out. Um, what are acceptable now IDs in additional to what's already there. So, pretty much I'm explaining that to her what's going on. I don't think she really understood due to a little language barrier, but um later on I explained to
the to the owner. Um, at this point, officer spoke with the Heler's U owner, Mr. Ike I I can't even pronounce your last name so I don't want to butcher it. Uh sung advice Ike that there were uh we were here to
conduct an administrative inspection of the establishment. Sen advised Ike that of the things that were observed and what have to be corrected. In other words, again like S to piggyback what she said, we were there doing administrative inspection. Um we so I
saw so numerous of violations. So at that point um SH just explained uh what needs to be corrected, what needs to be posted, stuff like that. Um I states that he it did not uh hold on. So trying to advise Ike the things
that were observed and had to be corrected. I asked Ike for a copy of the rules and regulations from the license committee. Ike states he did not have one on the establishment. In closing, the officers explained that he should review a copy of the rules and regulations. We left Ike our contact
information. I thank Ike for the time and explained that he had any questions, feel free to contact uh Sergeant Chong and the CPD. Um, just to go back during during our administrative inspection again, um, Sergeant Chun, you know, word
for word, she explained everything that needed to be corrected from, um, intoxicated personnel work customers walking in, asking for IDs, proper labeling of all the alcohol that's being sold, rules and regulations, a copy of that, posted permits and light and
certificates that need to be posted, uh, hours of operation, the the or 9024 laws, the OUI laws that weren't imposted. Um there's uh there was cases of beer in the in the alleyway going to the rear of
the of the door. So um again, I'm not I'm not going to beat a horse here. I just just numerous numerous of violations. And then she had the conversation with him there and explained to him again, this is what we here. This is what we're doing and it's got to be documented. Gentlemen,
Um, uh, Officer Santiago, would that conclude your report and your testimony? Unless you have any questions for me? Um, questions, um, from yourself? I don't have any questions now. I'll re I'll raise questions regarding his report. Okay. Um, any questions for my fellow commissioners of Officer
Santiago? No. Okay. You know, Madam Chairman, I'm sorry. Can I just Yeah. Yeah. Julie, have you seen this um from the directive JanuaryC from January. No. Yes.
Officer Sarco, could you tell us what Yeah, I'm sorry. Forgive me. Um, so this is a memo from the ABCC saying on January 8, 2025, Governor Haley signed an act further regulating acceptance of c certain types of alcoholic types of identification to purchase alcohol which
changes MGL 138 section 34B. Then it lists the of the law can be found here. And then as a result, beginning April 8, which the officer cited in his report, uh, alcoholic uh, beverage licenses may reasonably rely on the following list. And what I think is important, I think
there was a misunderstanding in his in the report. It says that um, there was a change to allow a passport or ID from another state. In fact, that's wrong. This law confirms or this memo from the ABC confirms the only two additions after the governor signed the law is a
valid license issued by another state in the global entry issued by the United States Custom Border uh protection. the the licenses or the documentation that's allowed by law prior to the change in January was a mass driver's license, a max liquor ID card, a mass
identification card, a passport issued by the United States or a government that is officially recognized by the United States passport card for a passport issued by the United States or US military identification card. So just the question of what what ID was allowed
the only two new additions are global entry and it validated from another state. So I just and I I think you have it, but if I I have that, but So did you still want this question answered? You originally asked your original question. Yeah. No, so I just I
just want to make sure you're you're aware of these guidelines from the governor. Have you seen them before and what the additions are? You you you present you presented to us our own memorandum from the city of Chelsea. No. Okay. Yeah. I was going to say I
only get these. Roger. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. Recent recently when the law when the the changes were made is what I got it. Right. But but you're aware that the only new additions that a passport passport from another country was always acceptable under the law if it's if it's
a passport that we that the United States recognized. Yes. Correct. Right. So did while you were there, did you see any passport from a country? When I was there, there was no one had any ID. Okay. And so I guess my question is you're raising a question about what IDs might have been shown and I'm simply saying that a passport from any other
country in the world as long as our government recognizes. But what I'm saying is there was no ID shown at all. And you also didn't see a seal. Correct. I didn't see any ID. So I don't know if there's any seals or anything like that. Thank you.
Thanks for your time. Thank you. Thank you, Officer Santiago. Sergeant Chun. All right, moving right along here. Quoting the fierce Madame Commissioner. Moving
right along here. Um, I appreciate that description. This month marks a year that I've been here. A welcome anniversary. Congratulations. So, all right. Um,
pleasure. Enough about me. Soft music at the beginning, right? Sets the mood with a little bit of jazz. You said this on a good note. All right. Uh, next up, we are going to go into the videos. Okay. Yes, that's
what we'll do. U before we jump into actually watching the video, please. Um if I recall when you were before us last month, um you had mentioned that your videos are
motion censored. Is that correct? Yes. Okay. Um, so we can get into that after the fact, but um, motion sensored video isn't necessarily providing us with a rolling 30 days worth of footage because
it's only doing it if your cameras get triggered. Um, and motion sensored cameras don't always get triggered. Um, so you could be potentially missing information that could be protecting your business um, if you had an issue.
Uh so I just wanted to make note of that before sergeant gets into that. Can I explain further on my knowledge about motion sensor? If a channel is idle that is no movement it does not
show. And in this circumstance, I provided a 48 hours running. Mhm. Instead of breaking it because we noticed that if we segmented it, I was going to
sleep in the store that night to go to the next day. Yep. So my technician had to download it from 8th of the first day running to midnight of the second day. Mhm. So the dark portions are possibly
that there were no actions or activities and possibly that they were nights. So there was no tampering of that activity or of the video. My my statement is purely motion cameras do
not always go off. So sometimes you can have motion take place and it doesn't trigger the camera. Yes. So, it's not the best system to have in place. Uh, a rolling camera to protect your business
as well as to be in compliance with what the city needs would be a better system to have in place. Okay. I would take that on advisement and see what can happen. I I have uh motion sensored cameras and there's times where there's people right there and they don't
trigger. So, it's it's something that happens with those systems sometimes because it's technology. Okay. Thank you, Sergeant Chung. Thank you. Uh at this
time, councelor, do you have uh the supplemental narrative highlighting the timestamps of videos? I do not. Okay. I'd like to provide. Yes, please. You can follow along. I noticed you were following along with my report. So, in full transparency, I want
you to have it. Do you have an extra Let me put it together for you. Sergeant, you have it. She had it. Oh, perfect. Thank you. Awesome. I Mine's front and back. I just trying to save some trees, so it's a little Only I can
understand it. All right, here we go. Surveillance videos submitted for this incident are in DAT format DAT which stands really for generic data file and was viewed via attached player labeled
superplay provided with the video files. The following narrative will be highlighting video evidence in chronological and summarized order as reviewed through submitted video surveillance by Heler's Liquors. The notes are written in summary format to
assist in simultaneously presenting. The times appear approximate between all cameras. There are three cameras involved. Two interiors um well in this case anyways. There's two interiors. One
is a from entrance from the door view and I've labeled it here as interior. Okay. There is also another view for interior which is cashier view because it gives you the side where the larger
freeze uh fridges are that has a better view of the cashier view. Then the third camera um that I reviewed was the exterior camera and I will do it as chronologically as I
can and um hopefully it will be it will piece it all together. Um the videos are very separate so it took a lot of time to coordinate. Okay. Any questions before we start?
No. No. Start. We're going to start with the exterior views. This is time stamp starting at 8:09 in the morning. As you could see in the narration, looks like you guys have a copy as well at 8:16 in the morning.
So, I will fast forward until then. That's at 8:15 right now. Just for a buffer zone so you guys can draw your attention. Does everyone see the footage? Okay. All right. It's 8:16 a.m. Male wearing a maroon sweater. Another
male wearing a partial maroon sweater and blue jeans, which is our subject here. Here and after referred to by his first name as Juan Wano Choa. All black attire male enters the store. They all buy liquor. They buy a
vodka with black cap which is rubble and a bicardi rumble white cap. This is the first alcohol purchase. So this is them walking out. It's the first of the morning. Howers has a 8 a.m. open.
This is for the interior view. At 8:13 is is when the the group walks in. They're walking. He's fine. Kind of talking. I'll fast forward a little bit until he enters. And then I'll go to the 8:16 time stamp for the interior
view. They enter. forwarding to 8:16. Right now we are at 812. 8:13. They all come in as you could see. Just remember what he's wearing so that way you can recognize him the next time you see him on video. I'll fast
forward in the interest of um of time because we do have quite some video to go through here. As we go through this, just remember the times and the amount of times alcohol is purchased. Okay, they walk
out. Next time stamp 905. Again, I will show the exterior first. And then I will show the interior view. I'll pause it for now while I read. 9:05 a.m. Juan
asks enters Heler's asked to charge phone, engages with clerk, buys liquor, tilts it on the counter as in tipping the bottle of liquor. He puts it in his sweater pocket and walks out. This was the second
alcohol purchase was approximately 45 minutes later from the first purchase. It appears at this time though that his steadiness is different from earlier observations and he is progressively becoming intoxicated. I'm just I'm just looking
for him. Start over. Now he's walking from left to right. Enters the door. I'm going to switch over to interior view. again. And I'm going to fast forward to 95.
He asked the clerk to charge his phone. She passes him the bottle. He makes the purchase. It tilts, stuffs it in his sweater, and walks out.
Did he leave his phone behind? I guess she was charging his phone for him. Okay. I'll be back. He knew he was coming back. He did. Yeah. Okay. Like he also tips her throughout the
day. just chronological order here. We're going to go into 9:24 where it shows the Lord. So at 9:24 a male party wearing a black jacket label Lewis here and after referred to as loiterer enters the store
and just keep track of that time. At 9:24 I want you to remember this loiterer because throughout the review of videos, he's probably hanging at the liquor store at almost 3
hours without being asked to leave. He left in the middle cuz he bought some liquor, but then he came back and hung out for another hour and a half. It does appear to be a friend. I mean, he did you ask the relationship? Yeah.
Do we know the relationship? I did not ask for their relationship. Correct. It would be awful friendly for a random customer to kiss your hand. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, no. Definitely. Um there's some sort of seems appears to be familiarity
there, but if I'm at work, I can't have somebody hanging around me for three hours, you know, especially if we have rules and regs that says lordering this system. Um, sorry for the genre approach, but it's um how it was. It's just just peacemail.
Each clip is about 20 25 minutes. So, I'm just trying to in the interest of time for you guys. Appreciate that, Sergeant. All right. So, we're going to go move on to 928. exterior view. Please pay attention to
this exterior view. I'm not going to fast forward it in the interest of the details that were observed. So, this external camera, it's going to show him, show one unsteady on his feet.
At this point, it is 9:30 pretty much. Um, when he exits, there he is. It's coming on screen pretty soon. It shows him unsettling falling into construction equipment
outside. Appears to be intoxicated at this point. And from 8:16 to about 9:30, which is approximately an hour and 15 minutes, one was able to purchase hard liquor three
times to the point of intoxication. I will provide the interior view after I show him exiting. That's me. I'm going to go into the internal view. Pay attention to this one as well,
please. I'll fast forward till they enter. The loyer is still on scene. He's off camera. He can be seen from the other view. If you wish, I will present that. But he is standing over here by the ATM. He walks in. Just
watch as he walks in. She gives him back his phone. A purchase is made. She's currently bagging the alcohol. He throws the money on the counter. He grabs the bottle, pretty much cracks it
open in front of her cuz she's standing over here. Takes a sip. She's right there. gives him his change. She does not appear phased by it. Never called the police. Those are another tip.
Doesn't look like there was any sort of conversation either telling him he's not supposed to do that. No, she doesn't engage him. She just kind of watches. He then decides to open and crack it up again and take
another sip. She is standing within purview. And now I think it upseted the loiterer cuz the lawer walks over, engages, then he slaps him in the back. He's like, "Come on, man." So he walks away stunned by it a
bit. pulls out his phone. Not sure if he's trying to call us or what not, but they begin to engage in an almost He's packing to square up on him. His friends hold him back. Clerk's still right
there, but she's unfased. She doesn't say a word to him, just watching it go on. They engage a bit. Appears to be intoxicated at this point, staggering as he walks out. Squares up to his friends
now. She's still here. Haven't called us yet. They do ultimately calm him down and then as he walks out, you'll see he'll he uh blow a kiss to the clerk and leaves. They make up. He blows her a
kiss. Two kisses. Oh, I missed that part. Two kisses. Apologies. And walks out. Exits at about 9:32 hours. They remain one of his friends remain on scene. I'm not going to presume the
conversation they're having, but this is pretty much it for this video. Okay. To move on. Yes, please. Um, pardon me. as you were. At 9:34, Zoo, which I referred to him in
the video as Yrium is by his first name, he walks in. Nothing alarming at this point, but I want you to just see him in detail so that way you know who I'm referring to when I say the name. He's identifiable as wearing
jeans, hat, and a blue and white jacket. Here and after referred to just as his first name, Ayrium officers are familiar with him. And the reason why I give in my initial narrative his history is to show that
officers are familiar with him and why we are and the reason why I provided his in-house call and history is to show why we are familiar with him and why we recognize him by name and not not just
to prolong the narrative any further. It's with purpose. I'm going to fast forward until one J one walks back in to make change. and exits at 9:41 the whole time. Loer
is still on scene by the way, but he does make his alcohol purchase and exits for the time being until he returns. Now the party of three, have they come back throughout the day or that was it for them? Oh, they've already came back
three times. But you talking about after this? After the last. So after the first three times, the last final time only one comes back. the fourth time. It's where we simultaneously also encountered
Helers to investigate further for something else. This secondary locate was through video review. With due to the fact that I personally saw him myself when we went into Heler's
post um initial with Rick Roberto and Irium. So that's why it's it's pretty much administrative anyways to request video footage um to investigate further anytime there's a
possible violation of a of a license establishment. All right. Thank you. You're welcome. So, um, you'll see what I wrote in here with the video skipping. I mean, we don't
have Do you need to see them? Okay. Those are just kind of how long they've skipped that I've witnessed, but I'm going to in in the interest of time forego it unless you want to see one of them. Entirely up to you. I don't think that's necessary. Fellow commissioners. No council.
Okay. So we move on to 122 just uh highlight the loiter of returning. Where is it? Go back to the thing. part of my eyes. I'm trying to locate it
here. Lots of files. I'll just use a cashier view between 12:04 to 12:22. That may have been one of the videos that only showed him So that's him right there. Um, through detailed description earlier, can you
affirm that that's him? Yes. Through the black jacket. I'll fast forward a little more until he gets on screen as to fully provide. Can you possibly see that that's him at that point? Yeah, I recognize the jacket. Okay. Just wanted to make sure
that was established. Yep. After exit clearly the same. We got him. All right. Okay. Moving on. 12:21 Let's see. Let me see if any view can be seen from this or if it's the next
footage. Apologies. Yum walks in, grabs from what I could only see from that cooler that has the uh miniature drinks. Just a red black and white can. I'm not going to
say whether it's alcohol or not. I can't tell. Makes that purchase. Then we'll move on to 102. I'll show you the exterior view first. This is the reason why we initially encountered and investigated
Hollers which unraveled other things. I will fast forward let it run. So, this exterior camera, you're going to see it's going to show both Rioberto and Ium um coming into camera
view at the um at the end when they exit. They don't spend a long time in the store in the store. Um but they do walk in at 102 and they exit at about 104. So, For the purposes, let me pause real
quick. For the purposes of identification on the video, the male party that walks in wearing a yellow construction jacket and a hat. Officers are familiar with him and reasons you've already been explained the during the initial report. He will be referred to herein after by
his first name of Riggerberto. They're walking into Helers. I'll start it over. Apologies. So, as he's walking Just keep an eye on his gate. They both walk in. I'm going to keep it at exterior view
for a minute just to so you guys can see them walk out and then I'll explain what's happening outside and then I'll go into the interior camera and present the purchase. Okay. While we have it. I just don't want to keep going back and forth. Okay. I'll fast forward till they walk
out. They come out about 104 or so. So they're walking out. They're out of view, but they start walking together towards the portaotti, which is when the um exchange of bottles and consumption transpired.
And then you'll eventually see officers who are standing beyond the camera a bit and can kind of see obviously from a distance the portaotti. They go out of view a bit where
initially the bottle was passed to Liarium for a swig and then you'll see Rio Roberto standing in this corner right here um taking his
swig which then we just walked as we were walking um and there he is. It's happening right now. And you observed this while you were on detail, correct?
Him wearing the bright jacket, drinking publicly. Yes. Okay. So, you'll see us coming to frame, myself and Officer Cohen. That's me. That's Officer Cohen Jr. We approach them. They see us. they start start to
scatter as I mentioned and and split, but we do encounter them. Um, and you're going to see I'm I'm addressing him at this point. Um, and I'm trying to keep an eye on Yirium at the same time, but he's kind
of already gone at that point. So we're talking as mentioned the initial narrative So simultaneously, do you guys recogn recognize this gentleman? That's one showing up. This
time he is going to be attempting to make a fourth purchase in front of us. He is totally unaware, intoxicated at this point. and the clerk almost sells it to him with us in the store. We had to stop
it. I get to this point and I realize I want to capture this on body one camera so that way there's just full transparency. So I turn to my partner, Officer Cohen Jr., Hey, let's stand by. I'm going to radio in for officer for an
officer to come by with a body one camera which we will transition to after this. So at this point one is in the store. We don't enter the store until 110. We're entering um Heler's once officer
Rosetti gets on scene and after uh we encounter um Rigberto and Juan's inside of the store the whole time. Juan is inside the store until you go in until we get in. So, a good like four or five minutes. The store was very
busy at the time and he was also searching for money. And I'll explain when we get to the interior camera. Is there anything else of importance for us to see in the exterior right now? No, no, no. I'm I'm about to transition.
Okay. Yes. Excuse me. Looking for 1306. Keep in mind the Lord litterer is still there or a friend. I go to open the door then I change my mind cuz I'm like I want a body one camera here.
All right, here we go. This one though, I think I'm going to show you both the the latter view of the interior, so you'll see what he was doing when he was like fidgeting on the floor. He walks in. This is his fourth time today. He's kind of asking him for
money. He goes over the other gentleman. Seems like he's asking him for money. The reason why I want to show you the other view is because it's covered by the Takis. Stand here. He goes over to that gentleman, engages
him in conversation. Counselor, do you feel the need? Do you feel the need to see the other view? No. Okay, we're good. U commissioners, do you want to see the other angle or are you good? We're good. Okay, awesome. Thank you.
So now he's standing there just waiting for a purchase. Um he stumbles, stumbles, puts his five bucks on the counter. And as he's leaning over, he doesn't even realize his rear end is
showing. Officers enter and I tell him to pull up his pants. At this point, I'm going to transition to body warn camera. Yes. Yes. Okay. So, I'll I'll show it until I um have
him exit the store. But at this point, she takes the money, starts to look at the counter behind here, which you'll see in body one camera, and um we pretty
much kick them out. This is when we took the bottle off of um Rioberto. 10. It's okay. In the interest of time, I'm just going to present up to the moment where one is
told to exit the establishment. Um because after that it's just administrative. Perfect. Come on in. quiet. She turns to ask him what he wants. Goes to reach for it. Then we stop it.
Did she not understand why she couldn't sell him alcohol at that point or do you had to explain it to her after? Well, it was ultimate was ultimately determined during our administrative inspection afterwards that there's no rules or regulations that she could refer
to on the premises. Okay. So, I I think this is a training issue. Um, she was also a new employee, so I I will defer that to Ike. Okay. On what she knows or what she doesn't know. But it looked like she appeared to not understand why she couldn't sell it to him at the time.
It does not appear that she does. She understood that she couldn't sell it to intoxicated persons. Okay. Correct. Okay. Um the rest is body one camera with administrative inspections in regards to the um violations already highlighted. Uh
suggestion of forego it in interest of time. I am good with foregoing that counselor. That's fine. Okay. Fellow commissioners. Yeah, I think her report is detailed enough. We could skip it. Thank you. Um conclusion of video evidence then. Thank you. Thank you.
Uh um actually can I do a closing? Yes. Real quick closing. I just had a closing paragraph to my uh investigation. Okay. Not to make a not nothing further evidence. In the conclusion, with the interest of
addressing quality of life issues, especially in the downtown area, when a licensed establishment fails to adhere to the rules and regulation, they no longer act as good neighbors contributing to the success of our community, but they adversely contributing to the perpetual conduct
and issues that ultimately enables individuals who may be already battling with substance dependency medically. The Chelsea Police Department recommends that the licensing commission consider all the facts presented and issue a disciplinary action that is appropriate to these violations additional to any
sanctions of disciplinary actions. Request to include retraining with rules and regulations to all employees in their best understood language. Um out of everything that we mentioned, we did additional to subsection 2.09 9 in
regards to operational video surveillance system uh subsection H in section 2.09 um the continuous 30 days due to the skips. This is just to um maintain transparency. Thank you, Sergeant. Thank you.
Counselor, would you like to speak to what was presented? Yes. Uh just a couple of questions, Sergeant. Um none of the uh people that you came into contact with that day were taken into protective custody, were they? No. Okay. And so none of them the gentleman you
just saw in the body warn camera um was standing perfectly straight when you were when you were telling them you couldn't sell the liquor. Correct. He was standing he was standing straight. Right. He wasn't swaying in the video. I mean if that's what you saw. Yeah. Okay. Uh well is that it's not what I saw.
It's what you saw. Yeah. I saw him standing. Okay. Um and because there's a point where there's about five or six seconds where he's you know you're looking at him, he's looking at you and he's standing like this. It's not moving in either direction. Yeah. Folks usually stand straight. Yeah. Okay. And um the
the loiterer that you've asked about um is do you know what his relationship is with the with the uh the clerk that was working there? No. Do you know what his relationship is with the the people that own the with the gentleman that owns the store? No. Okay. And he didn't cause any problems that day. Correct.
No. Okay. Um that's I'll get to substantive um sort of argument at this point. Okay. Thank you. Can I follow up on on his question though? When you were observing um the person that you denied alcohol, from what I've seen and heard,
it sounds like he was slurring his words to the clerk and that's what she had to ask twice about uh the type of alcohol he was requesting. So from your point of view, did you hear him slurring? And I do understand it was in Spanish. Did you hear him slurring?
Most definitely. It It sounds like he was kind of grumbling cuz it's just almost like sounds at that point. Yeah. And he was sounding very coherent. Correct. He was doing more of like the the nods and than anything. Okay. Thank
you. You're welcome. I will state as an observer of this and as somebody who has taken tips training more times in my life than uh I I think anybody should really have to because it's really long. Um
seeing this gentleman who was denied the purchase at the end throughout the course of the day. He was he's obviously intoxicated. Everything they teach you in tips training of the change in his gate. His eyes are barely open in that last video. Whereas when you see him earlier in the day, they weren't like
that. So you're seeing all of those things that somebody that has gone through that safety or the service of proper alcohol is taught to look for to not serve or sell to u an individual. So
as somebody who again has gone through those trainings that would tell me that this is somebody who should not be being sold to. Um, so whe whether or not you're able to stand up straight at a point in time, you're seeing all of these other signs that over the course
of the day, this person has been coming in front of you and it's the same clerk over and over again. Common sense and those other signs lead you to believe that this person is definitely an intoxicated indivi individual. Um and as we all know
that is against uh the law to sell to um an intoxicated individual. I have a question. Yes. Um so m to Mr. Ike um the person who is behind the counter. Have you ever explained them
that uh her or the other workers that if someone is intoxicated shouldn't be selling any alcohol at all? U excuse me. Yes, Commissioner. I have and just of
importance I've let this cashier go. So uh because I noticed that some people are very trainable some are not trainable. So the moment I observed that in her I let her go. Another question is
the regarding the the guy that was hanging around at the establishment. Is he a worker or? Good observation. Uh, he's not a worker, but he he's I would more or less say he is a help. He comes to help them get
food. Maybe they give him money to go get them coffee. Um, occasionally like in this particular day, uh, permit me to use the word petite. The lady is a little bit new and petite. I didn't want somebody to take advantage
of our size, so I got him to stay around while I was away. So, you're familiar with for safety? Yeah. Okay, I got it. Um, before anybody else has any other questions? I just want to um ask if you had anything else that you would like to say prior to additional questions from
the council. Yes, if I could. I just like to go through I I took the letter um the notice letter and just sort of went through par section by section certainly. And so, if I could um Sure. the on 2 2 uh the violation for not having the rules. Um he acknowledges he didn't have
the rules readily available to give to the sergeant when she asked. He did misunderstand because he had the rules to he has a basement office in Helers. He did have the rules down there but he didn't have them physically available and frankly just you know he didn't think he now has a binder which he's brought here. We just show that binder.
He has as you may or may not know he owns Hela's Liquors and he also owns the liquor m right down the street. So he now has two he now has two binders um one in each location right at the cash register right on that counter which has the licensing rules and commissions training modules clerk information
updates most importantly is the city of Chelsea which we didn't discuss yet but the city of Chelsea police department has in the past issued a do not sale list um to establishments and so that's included in the binder as well as copies of permits and licenses. I'm I'm just going to ask a very silly question
because you said he has two copies, one at each store. Is this a third copy? No. Or did we or do do we have it from the store right now? We stopped at Hela's on the way. He got his glasses out of the car and then came over here. So So Hela's right now would be
non-compliant because it's sitting here, you know, to show you. Um posting of licenses and it's it's interesting the chief is here. Uh my understanding is he was the former I don't want to put you on the spot but I think you were the former uh sergeant in this area and so my client bought this place four years
ago and at the time he bought it the license was originally posted around a corner going down the stairs. the then licensed and commissioned police officer uh now chief um has been related to me has said that sign's not visible you can't leave the license isn't visible
there you can't put it there and then there was a discussion about well you should put the sign here so the license here I keep saying sign the license here so the spot that um s the sergeant did not like was a spot that that has been there for four years that my client's
been a l e and my my client says it was a discuss with the then licensing officer from the Chelsea PD saying that would be an acceptable spot. So other than taking it down, putting up the new one on an annual basis, the location has not changed in four years. My client doesn't care where it goes. If the
sergeant wanted it moved, I have pictures showing I don't know if you've been in there, but I have pictures. He put up a board with all the licenses. I can submit to you the pictures showing where the licenses are now. They're on a board. every one of his licenses and permits are on a board hanging on a pole
when you first go in the store. He didn't want to put it too low so somebody could grab it, but it's all sort of probably my height or a little bit higher level. Um, but that's sort of the background of where that was posted. Um, was frankly it was it's been there for four years since he bought the place
and nobody ever told him it was an issue, you know, and that should be moved. Um, admission to let me just see here. Uh, 2. So that was 2.3 2.03A about posting 2.04G license e may refuse entrance to
the premises and anyone appears intoxicated unruly may evict someone. Um and if you do you should call the police. Can I just pause you for one second back to the posting of the signs. You referenced the licenses. What about the other signs of not selling to an
intoxicated person? Um, and I feel like there's one other one under 21. And the under 21. Are those also? So on on the counter, and I'll submit these to you on the count. I just snapped. Unfortunately, they're not color, but Okay. I don't have a color printer. So I printed them up. I can email the photos
if you want them in color, but right on the counter itself when you go where the guy was leaning that and they exchanged money. This is right underneath the piece of plexiglass on the counter. Okay. You know, under 21, criminal violations. Talk about the cigarette
laws. Um the deep okay so that's there as well as yes but now it's it's compliant you're saying okay I'll have to see this I'll have to see this person. It just has to be
conspicuous. I understand that conspicuous can be very subjective, but I I I oversee this seat now. So, I will make that determination. Okay. I'm going to May I show? Yes. Thank you. Y right when you walk in. Helas on the
left. There's a pole there by the right by the monitor. And that pole holds up the uh camera views. Okay. What I can say it is appears to be a better location than the last.
Okay. That's more. So again, any in anywhere the sergeant wants it, my client has doesn't care where it goes as long as you you're happy with it. Perfect. Sorry to interrupt you. No, no, not at all. Uh admission to the premises. Um again laz e may refuse
entrance to the premises um to a person who appears intoxicated or unruly and may evict such patron. Um arguably we see we saw the scene where with no sound where um the so-called loiterer and the people had some words. I mean, at some
point, I think a worker would have the right to say, you know what, yeah, I'm a little concerned about this, but I think that situation lasted, you know, more than I would have been comfortable with, but it lasted several seconds and ultimately when they did their little fist pumps and went on their way.
Um, the on the fourth attempt to go in and buy liquor when the sergeant was in there, you know, at that point, you could argue based on your comments earlier that she should have said, "Hey, you need to leave the store." Um, but I think the the video evidence on the first ones, I just I don't see them as
evidence. And again, I think it's important the reason I asked the question about the protective custody is police approach them. You know, they make an evaluation that they're certainly under the influence, but there's a difference between under the influence and intoxicated. And so, um,
you know, I'm not going to quibble with you over the fourth one, but I think the the first three, I just don't think that it's a violation, uh, under that rule. uh 2.05 hours of operation. Uh my client has it posted. I have a picture of it with the hours posted, but I would
suggest you if you read 2.05, it doesn't require the hours be posted. You actually read the rule that 2.05 is I think three or four subsections and they all talk about who can be in there and at what hours. But there's nothing in 2.05 that says that
you have to post your hours on the door. It's a good practice. I don't know why you wouldn't do it. He has now done it. But I would just suggest you if you read the rule, there is no violation. It can't be a violation because the rule doesn't require it. Maybe you should change that rule. Um 2.08b
um all lenses shall maintain a schedule of prices charged for all drinks to be served and drunk on the pre licensed premises or in any room or part thereof. I would suggest you this can't be a violation because this is not a store where you are buying alcohol to be
served and drunk. The word is and uh between served and drunk. And so it can't be a violation because this is not a situ. It certainly would apply if you were going to my old client at uh uh what's it called? Um Fanny's place. You know, if you went there, clearly you
have to have prices posted. I will say and and obviously it was not presented as such, but I know that there is a subsection that relates to everything being priced in a liquor store. That's not what was noted here, but as a
technical matter, I say this doesn't apply that he's been. But what I will say, I would agree. The sergeant was wonderful to him. He appreciates her. She pointed it out to him. He is now basically everything is now u price tagged on the shelves. So I think that that solves the problem and so he takes
it used it as a learning experience to make sure that he does it right the next time even though again just as a technical matter I don't think it applies to the rules. Um all alcohol license uh 2.08p all alcoholic uh license I'm sorry beverage license ease are forbidden to make a sale to an
intoxicated person. Again that's the one I think that the the most questionable one is certainly the fourth episode where the sergeant stopped it. I would suggest to you, albeit it looked like the clerk was going to make that sale, she didn't make the sale. The sale never took place because of the sergeant's
intervention. I think in order for there to be a violation of this section, I think the seal would have should have been completed. And then at that point, now you have a completed thing. Again, a learning experience for my client, this clerk no longer works there. Um, and I'll talk about him in a minute if I could.
2.09A. And I don't mean to keep talking before if you have any questions, just let me know. No, I'd like you to kind of present your statements and then we can 2.09A um invite it shall be the obligation of the license to ensure a high degree of supervision is exercised over the conduct of the licensed
premises. Each will be held you'll be account the lency will be held accountable. Again, I'm not sure what that violation would be based on other than the p trying to piggyback on the the fourth guy having his pants down um you know half down. I mean unfortunately
I see it every day and I want to people when I see it, but that's sort of I've given up on society, the way we allow people to walk around like that. Um, so I applaud the sergeant for putting him in his place on it, but I I don't think there's there's any video evidence that shows that the place uh didn't have
supervision in the sense that something happened there. Um, you know, again, there was that incident where it looked like there might be something, but again, it happens all the time. People sort of get hot with each other and then it diffuses itself. Um,
2.09C um act reasonably and diligently to disperse loiterers. I think that's what we're talking about. This the loiterer who we say is a friend of the store. If there's some other allegation of a loiterer, you know, I'm happy to listen to it. But I think even the reality is outside of Hellers, I don't think anybody can be accused of
loitering outside of Hella because the the storefront is relatively small. So they walk out and they saw in the videos they immediately went away from Hela. They either went you know Margolus or they went there's an apartment building right directly abuted. So, nobody was loyering out. No, the I think the I think we're
all in agreement that the only loiterer was that one gentleman dressed all in black stain. I just want to make sure too long. Uh thank you. And then uh 2.09E uh whenever any uh when any noise, disturbance, misconduct occurs
um on threat threatening the health that could affect the protection, health, safety of others. Again, I think at that point 2.9 2.09E I think is a is a judgment call for the clerk. If she felt that there was a danger, then she certainly had the obligation to to call
the police department. But if she had more experience, maybe she would have. If the if the the words that apparently were or the gestures that were being made took place a little bit longer, maybe she would have. If if the the loyer or so-called hadn't stepped in and
said, "Hey, enough." Maybe she would have. But nothing um went beyond sort of the possibilities of of something bad happening there. Um 2.09H the video we take Madam Chair your
uh recommend your concern about the um motion census we're going to bring that back talk to the IT people and figure out how to just put them on continuously so that that alleviates the concerns about the skips. you know, we didn't need to see the skips, you know, but you know, I think we saw extensive video was
provided. I think the sergeant will will acknowledge and thank her for the extension that she gave him, but she gave him a a hard drive with all the files on it. Fully cooperated. We saw extensive videos of the establishment that I think show, in fact, there was another angle that she could have shown,
but we all agreed we didn't need to see it. So, I think this was plenty of video evidence here. I think the bigger concern that the chair raised was so next time he's protected by the video that will show what something good or bad um didn't happen. 2.13 A5 illegal
activity on the premises. Um again, our position is that there was no illegal activity happening on the premises. If there was, we had trained members of the Chelsea Police Department there, somebody would have been arrested. It was wrong. you know, first time we're seeing it. The fact that the
guy opened the bottle and took two sips was outrageous. I mean, that's an illegal act on the premises, right? No. And again, we all saw that after the fact. My client wasn't there. The clerk is no longer working there. Um, in his words, untrainable. Um, and so that was
bad. It was wrong. He acknowledges that. I We're not going to We can't dispute that. Um, and then the CMR violation, which isn't in the official notice, but it is in the report. Um, frankly, we're looking for guidance from the commission
on this. Um, so as the officer uh referenced, officer Baka referenced is that the back door is locked. So, you may or may not know the history here. There was at one point a recycling operation run out of Hellers. Um, and so the back door was open, the front door was open, and then at some point way
back when, they got in trouble. At some point, they made the decision that the uh recycling operation was too much of a a pain in the neck, even though there's money to be made there. And so the l this license commission gave the former owners the authority to keep that back door locked. And so my client doesn't, I
mean, he prefers it locked because it makes it easier to sort of maintain the control over people. There is a crash bar on that back door. So, from an egress standpoint, there is also a deadbolt on it where the key is left in the deadbolt, but I' I've told my client, I haven't spoken to the building department, but I know the building
department would say you can't have that door locked at all. You can just use the crash bar. And so, I've told my client, take unlock it, take the key out until the end of the night, then you can lock the deadbolt. If the commission wants that door open or if the sergeant wants it open, we're happy to keep it open 20, you know, when the business is open. He
prefers to keep it closed. It gives them a better, you know, as the sergeant pointed out, the store, the way it runs, there's a series of refrigerators, freezes down there, and beer is stored there. And so, if you let people come in there, the cashier can't even see down there except on through the video
cameras. I I do believe the larger concern is it being a point of egress. So, obviously, you don't necessarily want something that somebody's going to have to unlock to then hit the crash bar. Totally agree. if it's locked from the outside without that deadbolt being
in place. So, somebody can't enter from that backside of the business. I would think, and I would defer to the police department for safety matters, but that as long as that back door is unlocked from the inside point of view that you can walk out in an
emergency situation without having to think to unlock something, then I think that that is an acceptable point of egress. And I'm going to confirm that with the building. So chief at the time
apologies on duty to keep control. So uh we were told to put a push bar. They were coming in from the backside. There's a little cubby hole. They were urinating, drinking, and we came this is long before in total probably 10 years ago. Uh the emergency eress. We do not
want two entrances. Uh we felt it was better control with one entrance and there's the emergency entrance. Obviously, we don't want a lock, but the push pile was the emergency, which was uh okay by the fire department. And that was the reason why. And I'll confirm with the building department tomorrow
and submit something in writing to the commission to say they're okay with even the deadbolt staying there so long as it's not actually turned, you know, used until the end of the day uh for the overnight. But but we prefer to keep that door closed. But again with the there is a crash already there. So
perfect. Okay. So I think substantively I think I've addressed each of the points. I I did want to just sort of if I could because I think my client uh deserves it. Um so my client's own for four years. He's owned Broadway Lickmont for two and a half years. This is the first time for either one of these establishments since he's owned it that
he's been before the commission for a violation. Very proud of that. Um I just want to give you some quick background. Came from Nigeria in uh September 1997. Uh originally moved to Roxbury, Randolph, worked for Coca-Cola Corporation. Um ultimately wind up buying a gas station uh wind buying two
gas stations. Sort of living the American dream. Gas station business didn't work out. Ultimately decided to sell out of that and wind up coming here buying helas four years ago. Um he lives in Boston. Um as I said, no violations. In the prior liquor store, the prior uh
gas stations, they sold tobacco. Uh he never had a violation for a tobacco violation at any either of those locations. Has never had a violation for tobacco or alcohol here until until this current thing. Um he his wife is a Chelsea school teacher. His wife I mean
he's invested in the city. He's a his wife's a special ed teacher here. They have four children, a daughter 26, three boys 24, 22, and 15. He's got a ma don't ask me why he's here, but he has a master's degree in agricultural economics. Uh and he he employs community residents. 90% of his
customers are Spanish speaking. So obviously you hire Spanish speaking uh employees, but you know to to run the place dayto day. He is there six days a week. He is at one of the two locations. If you go into Hela and you see the the big screen TV with all the video views,
not only does he have video views of Hela's, but when he's at Hela's, he has video views of Broadway Lamont because he wants to make sure his stores are safe and being run properly. He's tried to be a good neighbor. He regrets what's what's going on here. He looks forward to working with the sergeant and her
team to make sure that this this goes uh doesn't happen again. But the other thing I think it's important is city of Chelsea does produce this no sale list. He went on and looked after he saw the litany of the the people's history that the sergeant provided. He went on, interestingly enough, none of those
three people or two people are on that list. He's happy to ban them from the store if the city of Chelsea will add them to the list. And then that list, you I'm not sure if you have ever seen it, but the list actually has names, dates of birth, and actually has pictures of people. Um, I think it just
requires familiarity of of the store workers with who these people are. So, I mean, I think that might have solved it before we got to step one, two, three, or four if they just knew, hey, the city of Chelsea doesn't want your business, and we're going to we're going to tell our licensed establishments you can't sell to these people. So, I would just
urge the city to to look at updating that list because it's helpful. provides him protection as much as it provides the city protection. Of course, um a question that I have is um has anyone um between yourself or your clerks, have
they gone through any sort of alcohol safety training? Yes, but uh recently no. The reason is um people see this job as a
climbing step and um I I've noticed that you you pay and send them to tip training which I did get. Before you know it, they have just quit and moved on to something different. Mhm. And the concern of every
store owner is immediately to fill up the gap at least to keep the stores open. Otherwise, I could still come back to this commission and revoke you will revoke my license for not serving the community. So in that circumstance,
that's what we do to fill up that and then I will train them to tell them basically what is doable and what is not doable. Okay. Um I personally believe that all employees should go through uh tips training. Um and um I think it's a
very important thing and I understand that people move on. Um lots of you you kind of have a choice. Some companies choose to pay for the training. Others just require that the employees do it themselves and pay for it themselves. But it's a very important thing for your
protection um and your clerk's protection because they understand the way things work. Um so it is a very important thing to make sure that everybody has gone through it. Doesn't take a ton of time. Um it isn't super
expensive. Um and the the one for the offremise um I believe is a little shorter even than the onremise one. Um so very important to make sure that's being done. Um so if you can just
very quickly counselor tell me tell me again um which one of the rules and regulations you had conceded to. Well what I said I think I the one let me just pull it up. Hold on
just on the very quickly the the ones that were in agreement. Yes. because I didn't I didn't mark it while you said it and I should have. Gotcha. All right. I mean, well, we acknowledge the 2.02 that we didn't have the Yeah, he had them in the basement.
He didn't really He didn't provide them immediately. Yep. To the We don't believe we violated 2.03A with the posting of the signs. Okay. You know, um admissions to the premises 2.4.04G. We don't believe there was a
violation there. hours of operation. 2.05, we do not believe this that the rule required it uh to post the uh the hours. 2.08b again specifically refers to served in for all drinks to be served and drunk on the
premises, but we do acknowledge your point that there's probably somewhere else in the rules that require it. And we've already saw that that issue at the thanks to the sergeant's uh guidance. Um we acknowledge the violation. I'm taking it out of order. We acknowledge
the violation. The fact that the guy drank uh two sips from the bottle, clearly a violation. We acknowledge that. Um let's see. 2.08, again, we dispute. 2.09A, we dispute. Uh 2.09 C,
we dispute that that applies. 2.09E misconduct. again think that one's more close but we we we think that the clerk exercised judgment not to not to be her concern to be elevated enough to call the police. Uh 2.09H we we don't
think that you know there may be skipping but we think based on the video we've seen we don't think we violated the rule there. Uh 2.1385 again the drinking of alcohol uh from the that's clearly something that shouldn't happened. So that's one that we certainly acknowledge that there was
a violation on. Okay. Uh fellow commissioners, other questions on what has been presented um by the counselor or the sergeant. I think in
good practice especially that you do have alcohol that you're selling alcohol and also being a good community member is the training for your clerks right so again with Marne even though I understand you know someone takes the
tips certification or some um safety course it should be their out of pocket or your out of pocket it's something that's going to be a safeguard for you. All right. Um, the friend of the store. I I think that's really great that he is a friend of the store. What happens in
the instance where it would have been escalated? You don't have he's not an employee, right? So, you can't control him and if he does something to escalate the situation and the police weren't called, it would have been something a danger to the clerk and maybe damages to
your store. So, maybe rethink that. maybe if either hire him or just tell him to check in but not stay the whole day because it could be a danger if things got escalated. Um so that's my only advice in in those two points. Yeah, like if you want security, make it
security. Don't do like a half like just someone in the store. And I agree. I think the last thing I'll say is she just wasn't trained at all. I mean I I understand not tips training, but there's just like basic training that you could train. um she clearly didn't sound like she knew anything about the
rules. Um so I think that just in general even if it's without before they sign up for the tips like there's just still basic things you could have trained her on that she didn't have any idea about. So yeah, if I could, I should have said it and I apologize. You know, I think he may have mentioned at
the the last hearing when he was by himself is he was supposed to be there that day. That was I think her first or second day on the job and so he was supposed to be there to trainer. He had this eye issue come up that he had to go for this exam. So he was up and of course bad things happen at the wrong time. Totally agree. She was completely
untrained. We accept ownership of that. And yeah, also um regarding u the guy who bought the bottle and have those sips inside, you workers now know that they shouldn't allow anybody open a container inside the premises?
Absolutely. Okay. Other comments from my fellow commissioners? Uh is there anybody from the public that would like to speak on this matter? not seeing anyone.
Um I a couple things that I would like to see take place um would be to have a requirement for all employees to undergo TIPS training and to have um their certifications turned in to um the licensing
department. Um, and in addition to have the camera footage, um, or not the camera footage, the camera system adjusted to be a continuous rolling footage for 30 days.
Motion um, cameras would not be a continuous um, rolling 30 days because it would have breaks in the hours. Um, so just to ensure that you are 100% in compliance with having everything that you could possibly be
asked for. Nobody's going to question any breaks in videos on if somebody played with a video, didn't play with a video to ensure that nothing gets missed because the cameras didn't trip because somebody approached the camera from a slightly different angle and it didn't catch it and something's missed on
camera at a point in time where something goes really wrong in your store and you need that video surveillance for your own protection. That's one of the things that you really need to remember is those cameras are there for your protection as much as for the city doing an investigation on
something that's going on. Um, not that we want anything to happen, but it is for your own protection. So, I would expect that um an an upgrade or an adjustment to that camera system takes place um so it is no longer motion and
it is a continuous stream of video. Um and uh the the signs. Um I would ask that the police department makes another visit to confirm that they are
comfortable with where all of the police uh where all of the licensing signs um are all now located. Um to ensure that there's no um violations with the adjustments that have been done.
Um, as we've stated, don't dead deadbolt that door. Make sure that somebody can just walk up and hit that crash bar to get out of the building. Um, but definitely keeping it locked from the back would be okay. Uh
the the the other thing I would ask of the police department during that visit is ensuring that everything now does have pricing on it because um as as I noted there is a section of the rules and regulations that references
um all items uh having price um because we did have another location come before us that had that very violation. Um, so I know it is indeed in the code. I just couldn't cite it to you because I'm I'm not a lawyer and I don't memorize those
things. Um, but u if we can make sure that that is all now in place and everything is priced accordingly. Um, I think those pieces are very important. I am very concerned at the fact that um in my
eyes we clearly see somebody who is intoxicated being sold to. Um and we need to make sure that your team understands the importance of not doing that. Um I do understand that is the
very first infraction that you've had before us. um it being a new employee uh but in that same sense I understand it's her first or second day there you are telling us that there are some
extenduating circumstances do a p due to a personal medical condition but it is so important in a licensed establishment that nobody is left to handle the sale or serving of alcohol that isn't fully trained. So whether that meant that your
store couldn't be open that day or somebody else had to be called in, it is imperative that moving forward, you never have anybody left in your store that is not properly trained in that service of alcohol. Um, again, you're jeopardizing your license by not having
somebody personally trained. and having to close your business for one day because you don't have somebody to staff it that is properly trained is going to affect you far less than having to come before the licensing board and having your license taken away because
something goes wrong. Um, so very important to remember that and obviously as a business owner you you don't want to close, you want to be able to sell, but you have to think the long term of your business and your license. Um
I I do think um seeing the um the concern of the police department, we know we have a lot of individuals in uh the downtown area in particular that um we know have problems with
consumption. Um, so we do need to make sure that all of our liquor stores are keeping their eyes open. Um, and whether it's on the do not sell list, which obviously is a very important tool that our city provides, but we also just need to use our own common sense. Um, and not
sell to people that we see are just hanging out on the street with a little brown paper bag. Um, I saw someone myself coming home the other night um in the general area that had a black uh the
black plastic bags that when they're when the liquor is not in the brown paper bags and it's in the black plastic bag. I saw someone when I was driving home staggering with a black bag, which tells me he just purchased liquor from
somewhere and clearly stumbling crossing the street and is lucky he didn't get hit by a car. Um, so whether that happened at your store or somewhere else, I don't know because I'm just driving back into Chelsea at that point in time, but we do clearly have an issue
that needs to be kept an eye on. Um, in terms of findings, I do agree that the it's too many pages to the report. It's because it's a good report,
but there's a lot of pages. Uh, 15 So, I I do agree that um the the most important violation that I saw there was the um drinking on the
premise. Um which one one of you who knows all of the uh the numbers off the top of your head, if you want to chime in with which ones those are, that would be really helpful. 2.13 2.13. So, I I I think we can all be in agreement that we we find
fault in violating 2.13. Uh because clearly we're seeing somebody drink inside of an off- premise establishment, which I think we're all in agreement is against the rules. Um so that 100% is in violation. Fellow
commissioners, do you agree with that one? Yeah, I do agree with that one. Um I do also believe um that uh section 2.08 would be found in violation because to me again as somebody who has been
trained in observing um people who consume alcohol. Um 2.08p of alcoholic beverage licenses are forbidden to make a sale or delivery of alcoholic beverages or alcohol to a person who is intoxicated. The third time around he was intoxicated. The
fourth time was really obvious, but you're seeing that building the whole time. Um, so I would say um it is my belief um that that would also be in a violation. Fellow commissioners, yep, I
agree. So is that one 2.13? Um and then um as you've uh stated, you agree that we didn't have the rules and regulations in a visible
location. Um so I think we're all in agreement on that one. Um the license being displayed. Um I understand the argument that if you were told it was okay at one point in time, not okay at another point in time. Um but obviously
it it matters where our police department is telling you it is appropriate. Um so if those are being uh adjusted already um that that one I'm less concerned about if they were on site and just not
displayed well and they've been adjusted to be where um the police sergeant um is comfortable with. Again, if the police department goes back and checks and is not okay with where those are placed, um then it needs to be adjusted immediately
to where uh the police department feels is an appropriate location. Wherever the sergeant wants it, it'll be. If she doesn't like tonight where it is now, she will move it wherever she designates. And because it wasn't cited, um we can't note the violation of the non not having
things priced appropriately. Um, but if everything is not priced appropriately, um, I would want when, um, the police department goes back and checks, I would want that to be noted, um, as u, a new violation, um, if that has not been
taken care of before the police department goes in. U, everybody in agreement on that one? U, just because it it is a violation. It just wasn't noted. So, we can't Um, cite that
one. Am I missing anything? Uh I I do believe with the hours of operations um that that is as you would you were saying that you don't find any statement that states that it must be
posted on the door. Um I believe the hours of operations as you noted is talking about who can be on property um outside of the hours of operations. Correct. Correct. You can be there to clean. You can't have family and friends. They're going to be workers. But again, we we've done it anyway. When
the sergeant goes there, she'll see or her team goes there, they'll see that the hours are posted on the door. Just it's good business practice. As we did that one, we did that one, that one, we did that one.
And with the um the CMR violation, um I don't I don't think we have jurisdiction to make a binding on that. So the only other thing that I would state regarding that for your um just
the personal safety of everyone in your store, whether they're clerks or uh customers, making sure that that point of egress is fully clear as well. So um you need to make sure that you don't have anything stored um I I want to say
it has to be a 36 inch clear pathway um to that door u in order to be compliant with building code. U so you want to make sure that anything that you are storing cases of beer or anything else in that rear hallway um does not block
that point of egress um because then that's where you're going to end up getting in trouble. So I would keep that pathway clear and don't deadlock the door. Um, but you had already been granted by the prior board to have the door locked from the exter exterior. And
I think we're all in agreement um that it makes sense um to keep that door locked from the exterior so long as it's just a push bar uh for everyone's safety to get out. Okay. So, have we made a note of
the ones that I I stated? Yeah. So I as far as what we're going to make a definitive finding on that alcohol was consumed on the premises that um alcohol was served to an intoxicated individual and that the rules were not properly um
on site at the time. The other ones I think are more judgment calls and it looks like they've all been addressed but those are the ones I heard uh you want to make the board to make a finding on. Yes. Yes. Okay. I would just ask for a motion for the um for the decision
that I'll write out. Can I get a motion to um find them in violation of um You can do it all at once. Do I have to say them all again? No, you can just say say it
in one motion. um that I ask for a motion that uh alcohol was consumed on the premises and that uh alcohol was served to an intoxicated individual and that the
rules were not on the premises per and then we can go forward with whatever you'd like. And if it'll make it easy if we had 2.02 2.08 8 P and 2 13 13 13 A5. Those are the three. Can we get a motion that
we find them in violation of those three sections? I will make a motion that all three violations and a second. Second. All in favor? I. Thank you. So the next matter is any disciplinary action that
uh the fellow commission thinks is needed for this. So I just want to make a comment before we um think about this. I I understand what you said about the clerk and she's no longer there, but I do worry about the training for your
future for your current and any future um clerks. So since we agree on the violation, I believe if you do the tips training or any safety course that it will address the drinking
on the premises and what to do when that happens to anybody who's working that day and also when um serving alcohol or selling alcohol to someone who's intoxicated. If you could show us that your clerks have taken that course or
certification and provided to the city, I would be inclined to not find them uh or any disciplinary action. I just want them to show that they are going to do due diligence. Okay. Fellow commissioners thoughts.
Um I would also agree with u commissioner here u since there's this there there is the first time that they have this incident. um agree with her with uh to send them
to do all these trainings and certification and provide us that uh that you're going to comply with the freance regulation of the city and the license commission. Emily, yeah, I mean you're lucky that's all
that happened. She was a young woman by herself in a liquor store with no idea what she was doing. And you're lucky that this is the like it could have gotten a lot worse for her. Um yeah, I'm just I don't know. I agree.
You've never been here before, but uh thoughts from the commission on um having a whether we um do a two-day suspension in obeyance um for the
next six months. um if there's no other infractions that come before us um and they turn in um all of the um tips certification
um and the police department has confirmed that they've upgraded their um video surveillance system. Um, but if anything were to happen within those six months, then th that two-day suspension
would be added on to anything of a future violation during that time. So, just to be clear, if they don't provide the tip certification or have no infraction of six months, they will not have to serve those two days suspension.
Correct. But if anything happens or they do not provide the tip certification, then they will have to be before us and they will be issued a two-day suspension. Correct. And if something happens, if a future incident were to happen, it would be whatever
disciplinary action we found plus the two days from this. I I will agree to that. Yeah. Um, can uh do you want me to make a motion? Yes. So, can we get a motion for
a two-day suspension in obeyance um for if tell me if I'm saying it wrong um for six months pending um proof of tips training the proof of the tip certification for all of the employees
of the store. um a correct u upgrade to the surveillance video system to be a continuous rolling 30 days. Um and then no infractions um coming back before us for another disciplinary hearing in the next six
months um at so if we go past that six months, this two-day suspension um disappears. But if something is to happen um at within that six-month period, this um two-day suspension would be added on um to any further
disciplinary action found by the board of a future infraction. Perfect. Motion second. All in favor? I two quick questions. Um do you know my client asked me, do they do tips training in Spanish? I'm assuming they
do. Yes, they do. Okay. Yes, they definitely do. Okay, perfect. And I just I he won't say something, but I want to thank the commission. I want to thank the SE and our team for the professionalism and uh you know the consideration and for that tips training. Um there is online access
nowadays. So you can do the whole thing online. Um it doesn't even require people to have to go um to a class um and take the time that the ease of taking that now is I very simple. I did mine online. Yeah.
Thank you so much uh the chair. Thank you commissioners. Uh Sergeent John, I'm personally grateful to you and Sant Diego because what I think has happened that you have made me a better manager.
So I don't look forward to coming back to this body for ugly situations rather for maybe something better than what it is. We we appreciate that and and we appreciate that you have uh fixed some of those situations. My promise is that
I would have immediately jumped into finishing the few things that are left. Mhm. But the moment I get out of here, we are driving to DC for a niece who is graduating in engineering from Howard. So once we get back next week, I will
try within my possible time and I'm glad you gave me about 6 months, but within a month or there about, I'm looking forward to getting everything fixed. Thank you. And thank you very much. Thank you. I appreciate that. Thank you. I think I can safely say on behalf of
the council that he was here on the uh marijuana bit license. Thank you for taking my turn. Thank you. Um and with that one, our next meeting is scheduled for June 12th,
2025. Meeting adjourned. Yes.