Groups challenge liquor application

 

Two community groups are asking county and local officials why the public wasn’t made aware of a recent application for a liquor license by the Chumash Casino Resort. They also are protesting the application, which asks for an expansion of alcohol sales at the resort.

The groups’ objections were filed as protests during a 20-day extension period after the formal period for public comment on the application was closed.

Leslie Pond, a local supervising investigator for Alcoholic Beverage Control, said the application asks for a “premises-to-premises transfer,” indicating the license could “be moved from its current location.

 

“In fact the application is an effort to extend the license’s privileges, currently exercised in the Willows Restaurant, to the adjacent hotel,” she said.

Pond added that the tribe insists it is asking only to consolidate its licenses and that it does not expect to serve alcohol on the gaming floor. It currently has three licenses, and the application asks to combine the licenses for the Willows Restaurant, the Nojoqui Lounge and the hotel room mini bars.

In a press release Jan. 24, Preservation of Los Olivos and Preservation of Santa Ynez objected “to any expansion of the sales of alcohol at the Chumash Casino and Resort.” The groups claimed that the resort “currently averages 10,000 visitors daily.” It also claimed that there has been a “reported 1100 percent increase in crime” since the original terms with the casino were made in 2000.

 

“The original terms of the casino project were that no alcohol would be served due to the danger of the roads and proximity to multiple schools, youth centers, and churches,” the groups stated. “Ignoring public protest … the Willows Restaurant was granted an alcohol license and is still not in complete compliance with the original conditions of the license.”

Stating that ABC does not have the staff to ensure compliance with the current license, the groups are asking “Why would they consider an expansion of the license?”

The statement continued, “POLO and POSY further object to the expansion of the Santa Ynez Band alcohol license due to the high crime statistics, which, according to the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Department, includes over 671 calls for service and reports written in 2006 alone.

 

“POLO has since received documentation that the internal Chumash Casino Surveillance Department is at times ‘averaging more than 4,200 calls for service per month,’ including data of ‘a sensitive nature, involving fights, drug sales, accidents, injuries, arrests and other offensive behavior.’”

 

After a formal request by POLO that ABC investigate the incidents of crime, representatives from POLO said that ABC officials reported that the application would allow more alcohol sales, that it was a “major” expansion, but that the request has not been “clearly defined.”

“ABC replied that finalization was not required for [the application] process – how can there be a deadline for public comment before the terms of the application are finalized?” the POLO statement asked.

 

The groups also criticized local and county officials for having received the information about the expansion of the alcohol license in June and again on Dec. 4 but not having made an announcement of the application designed to catch public attention in the communities near the Casino. Instead the county placed a brief public notice in the classified legal advertising section of a newspaper in the City of Santa Barbara.

“POLO and POSY take issue with the obscure public noticing of this proposed expansion. We were informed about this alcohol expansion permit by an educator who heard about it just days before the deadline for public comment.”

 

They added, “The fact that ABC would even consider expanding alcohol sales, and that our government allows gambling entities of this size and with this level of negative impact on the public to regulate themselves, shows the government’s complete disregard for the health and safety of the public.”

In a statement issued Jan. 17, POLO and POSY listed 35 reasons why they are protesting the application for the expanded liquor license and the minimal exposure the application request received.

 

Pond noted that the period for public comment ended Jan. 18, but a local governing body could submit a protest under Business and Professions code section 23987, which allows a 20-day extension with a written request from “any local law enforcement agency that states proper grounds for extension. Proper grounds for extension are limited to the requesting agency or official being in the process of preparing either a protest or proposed conditions with respect to the issuance or transfer of a license.”

“We try to apply common sense to statutes that often are confusing,” Pond said. “We consider the input of a local governing body and the public insofar as statues allow.”

In the press release, POLO formally requested that ABC investigate crime statistics from the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Department detailing “incidents that further jeopardize the health and safety of the surrounding community” and are “considered a public nuisance and should be grounds for revoking the current alcohol license.”