[00:00:01]
WELCOME TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.I'M SHERRY GABO AND I'M HONORED TO SERVE AS A TEMPORARY PRESIDING OFFICER OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS PANEL C.
TODAY IS MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 14TH, 2026 BY THE TIME OF 1:00 PM AND I HEREBY CALL THE MEETING AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS PANEL C TO ORDER FOR OUR PUBLIC HEARING A QUORUM, WHICH IS THE MINIMUM OF FOUR OR FIVE OF OUR PANEL MEMBERS IS PRESENT.
AND THEREFORE, WE CAN PROCEED WITH THIS MEETING.
PRESENT TODAY FOR OUR BOARD ARE MYSELF, LINDA GARDNER, ROD, RODNEY MILLIKEN, AMELIA PEREZ, AND ROGER SINGTON.
OUR STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT ARE THERESA CARLISLE, OUR BOARD ATTORNEY AND ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY CAITLYN BETH, OUR BOARD ATTORNEY AND ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY, DR.
CAMIKA MILLER HAWKINS, OUR BOARD ADMINISTRATOR AND CHIEF PLANNER, AND MARY WILLIAMS, OUR BOARD SECRETARY OF MEETING.
BEFORE WE BEGIN, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MAKE A FEW GENERAL COMMENTS ABOUT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND THE WAY IN WHICH THE HEARINGS WILL BE CONDUCTED.
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD ARE APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
WE GIVE OUR TIME FREELY AND RECEIVE NO FINANCIAL COMPENSATION FOR THAT TIME.
WE OPERATE UNDER THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED RULES OF PROCEDURE THAT ARE POSTED ON OUR WEBSITE CONSISTENT WITH THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
NO ACTION OR DECISION ON A CASE SETS A PRECEDENT.
EACH CASE IS DECIDED UPON ITS OWN MERITS AND CIRCUMSTANCES.
THE APPLICANT HAS THE BURDEN OF PROOF TO ESTABLISH A NECESSARY FACTS TO WARRANT A FAVORABLE ACTION FROM THE BOARD.
WE HAVE BEEN FULLY BRIEFED BY STAFF PRIOR TO THIS HEARING AND HAVE ALSO REVIEWED A DETAILED PUBLIC DOCKET, WHICH EXPLAINS THE CASE AND WAS POSTED SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ANY EVIDENCE YOU WISH TO SUBMIT TO THE BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION ON ANY OF THE CASES THAT WE WILL HEAR TODAY SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD CA SECRETARY, WHEN YOUR CASE IS CALLED.
THIS EVIDENCE MUST BE RETAINED IN THE BOARD'S OFFICE AS PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR EACH CASE APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE, SPECIAL EXCEPTION, OR A REVERSAL OF A BUILDING ADMINISTRATOR OFFICIAL BUILDING OR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL DECISION REQUIRES 75% OR FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES OF THE FULL FIVE MEMBER PANEL.
ALL OTHER MOTIONS REQUIRE A SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE.
A DECISION LETTER ON THE BOARD'S ACTIONS TODAY WILL BE EMAILED TO THE APPLICANT BY OUR BOARD SECRETARY WITHIN TWO DAYS OF THE HEARING.
IT WILL BECOME A PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR EACH CASE.
IN ADDITION, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEBSITE PENDING CASE LOG WILL PAGE WILL BE UPDATED.
ANYONE DESIRING TO SPEAK TODAY MUST REGISTER IN ADVANCE WITH OUR BOARD SECRETARY.
EACH REGISTERED SPEAKER WILL BE ABLE TO SPEAK DURING PUBLIC TESTIMONY FOR A MATTER ON OUR AGENDA FOR A MAXIMUM OF THREE MINUTES.
A SPEAKER MAY ALSO SPEAK WHAT A SPECIFIC CASE IS CALLED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING FOR A MAXIMUM OF FIVE MINUTES.
ALL REGISTERED ONLINE SPEAKERS MUST BE PRESENT ON THEIR VIDEO TO ADDRESS THE BOARD.
NO TELECONFERENCING WILL BE ALLOWED BY A WEBEX.
ALL COMMENTS THAT ARE ALL COMMENTS ARE RE DIRECTED THE PRESIDING OFFICER WHO MAY MODIFY SPEAKING TIMES AS NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN ORDER.
[V. Miscellaneous Items]
START WITH, UM, OUR APPROVAL OF OUR MINUTES.DO I HAVE A, UM, NOMINEE OR MOTION? I TOLD YOU MOTION TO APPROVE THE MEETING MINUTES FOR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL C FOR OUR AUGUST MEETING WITH AS AMENDED, UM, DISCUSSION IN YOUR BRIEFING.
ALL OTHER VOTES WILL BE A ROLL CALL VOTE FROM HERE ON OUT AND WE'LL
[VI.1. 26-2937A Application of Molly Kathryn Davis for (1) a fee waiver for a special exception to the front yard setback regulations for a carport at 1227 SAN PATRICIO DRIVE. This property is more fully described as block A/5363 lot 4 and is zoned R-7.5(A). ]
START WITH OUR FIRST CASE, BO, A 26 DASH 0 0 0 65 FW 1 1 2 2 7 ST.IF THE APPLICANT WILL PLEASE STEP FORWARD TO THE PODIUM.
CAN YOU PLEASE APPROACH? CAN YOU TURN IT ON PLEASE? JUST PRESS, THERE YOU GO.
IS IT ON? CAN YOU, CAN YOU MOVE THE MICROPHONE CLOSER TO YOU PLEASE? YEAH.
IS THAT BETTER? IS IS THE LIGHT ON? YES.
IS THAT BETTER? SHOULD I'M STEP CLOSER? YES.
CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS? YEAH, MY NAME IS MOLLY DAVIS AND MY ADDRESS IS 1 2 2 7 SAN
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES.
UM, IS IT OKAY IF I JUST, IF I READ THE LETTER THAT I SENT IN THE EMAIL? OKAY.
CAN YOU JUST GET A LITTLE CLOSER TO THE MICROPHONE PLEASE? OKAY.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO RESPECTFULLY REQUEST CONSIDERATION OF A FEE WAIVER FOR MY SPECIAL EXEMPTION APPLICATION BECAUSE PAYING THE REQUIRED APPLICATION COSTS WOULD CREATE A FINANCIAL HARDSHIP FOR ME AT THIS TIME.
I PURCHASED MY HOME IN NOVEMBER OF 2023, AND I'VE WORKED DILIGENTLY TO MAINTAIN MY PROPERTY AND COMPLY WITH CITY REQUIREMENTS AS A FIRST TIME HOMEOWNER.
THE UNEXPECTED COSTS, UH, ASSOCIATED WITH HOME OWNERSHIP HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTED MY FINANCES.
AND LATE 2024, I WAS UNEXPECTEDLY LAID OFF FROM MY,
[00:05:01]
UH, PREVIOUS EMPLOYER.I WAS FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO SECURE A NEW POSITION SHORTLY AFTER, BUT ON NEW YEAR'S DAY, A COUPLE OF MONTHS LATER, UH, 2025, UM, I, SHORTLY AFTER STARTING MY NEW JOB, I, I SUFFERED A SE A SEVERE INJURY TO MY LEFT ARM THAT REQUIRED, UH, SURGERY AND THE PLACEMENT OF AN ORTHOPEDIC IMPLANT.
AND I ATTACHED THE MEDICAL RECORDS, UM, AS EVIDENCE TO THAT EMAIL.
UM, AND AS A RESULT OF THAT INJURY, I WAS UNABLE TO WORK FOR, UH, NEARLY THREE MONTHS WHILE RECOVERING.
ALTHOUGH I HAVE SINCE RETURNED TO WORK, THE MEDICAL EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH THE SURGERY AND OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY, UM, LEFT ME WITH, WITH SU SUBSTANTIAL DEBT THAT I'M STILL WORKING TO REPAY.
ADDITIONALLY, DUE TO A CLERICAL ERROR DURING MY HOME PURCHASE, MY DEED HAD TO BE CORRECTED BEFORE I COULD RECEIVE MY HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION.
DURING THAT PROCESS, GALL DALLAS COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT CONTINUED TO LIST THE PREVIOUS OWNER AS THE RESIDENT AND TAX NOTICES WERE SENT TO HIM RATHER THAN ME.
AND I ALSO INCLUDED, UM, A COUPLE OF ATTACHMENTS WITH THE, UH, WARRANTY DEED AFFIDAVIT AND THE CORRECTION, BUT AS A RESULT, I FELL BEHIND ON MY PROPERTY TAXES.
SO NO INTENTIONAL FAULT OF MY OWN.
BUT SINCE THEN, MY MONTHLY MORTGAGE PAYMENT HAS SINCE INCREASED SIGNIFICANTLY TO ACCOUNT FOR THE TAX SHORTAGE AND THE TEMPORARY INTEREST RATE BUY DOWN PROVIDED BY OR PROVIDED AT CLOSING, UM, WHICH HAS NOW EXPIRED.
UM, SO, AND UNFORTUNATELY INTEREST RATES HAVEN'T DROPPED ENOUGH TO MAKE IT FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE TO REFINANCE FOR MY HOUSE.
I ALSO INCLUDED MY MORTGAGE DOCUMENTS SHOWING THAT MY MORTGAGE PAYMENT HAS INCREASED ALMOST $500 A MONTH SINCE I'VE PURCHASED THE HOME.
UM, THIS YEAR HAS ALSO BROUGHT ADDITIONAL FAMILY RESPONSIBILITIES.
UM, MY MOM WAS DIAGNOSED WITH A LS AND UM, I'M JUST DOING MY BEST TO, UM, VISIT HER AS OFTEN AS POSSIBLE.
UM, BUT IT'S HARD TO MANAGE THE INCREASED COST OF TRAVEL.
UM, AND I I UNDERSTAND THAT, UM, PROPERTY OWNERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLYING WITH CITY REGULATIONS AND, AND I'M COMMITTED TO DOING SO.
AND I'M PURSUING THE PROPER LEGAL PROCESS TO SEEK A SPECIAL EXEMPTION FOR MY EXISTING CARPORT BECAUSE I WANNA RESOLVE THE MATTER CORRECTLY.
AND, UM, UH, THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPLICATION BE, ARE QUITE A FINANCIAL BURDEN AT THIS TIME, WHILE I'M STILL RECOVERING FROM THE FINANCIAL EXPENSES FROM THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.
AND MY GOAL IS TO WORK COOPERATIVELY WITH THE CITY AND FOLLOW THE PROPER PROCESS TO LEGALIZE MY EXISTING CARDBOARD.
AND, UM, I WOULD LIKE TO RESPECTFULLY ASK THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS FOR, UM, A FEE WAIVER FOR THE APPLICATION.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? UM, I JUST NEED CLARIFICATION.
UM, WELL, SO YOU BOUGHT THE HOUSE IN 2023.
UM, YOU LOST YOUR JOB IN 20, UH, 2024.
UM, AND THERE WAS A HARDSHIP THERE.
AND, UM, AND JUST SO I'M CLEAR, WERE YOU THAT THE TAXES WERE BEING ESCROWED IN YOUR MORTGAGE PAYMENT RIGHT AT THAT POINT, BUT THE TAX BILL WAS BEING SENT TO SOMEBODY ELSE, BUT THEY WERE STILL ESCROWING YOUR TAXES? YES.
AND THEY WERE CHARGING ME TAXES BASED OFF OF THE PREVIOUS RESIDENT.
WHO WAS 65 YEARS OLD, SO IT WAS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS OH, I SEE.
THAN WHAT I NORMALLY WOULD'VE BEEN ASKED.
SO YOU'RE ESCROWING YOUR TAXES, THEY WERE BASED UPON A LOWER NUMBER, SO THAT MAKES THE, THAT, AND THAT MAKES THE MORTGAGE AFFORDABLE.
UM, AND THEN YOU GET YOUR NEW JOB, YOU, UM, HAVE AN INJURY TO YOUR LEFT WRIST, YOU UNDERGO SURGERY, YOU'RE OFF FOR THREE MONTHS.
UM, THERE'S THAT FINANCIAL COST OF, UM, UH, PAYING, YOU KNOW, YOUR COPAYS AND ALL OF THAT AND YOUR PHYSICAL THERAPY IN ADDITION TO TAKING TIME OFF WORK.
AND THEN, UM, SO YOU'RE RECOVERED, I HOPE, UH, WITH A GOOD ORTHOPEDIC SURGERY.
AND THEN, SO NOW YOU'RE JUST TRYING TO WRITE THE SHIP.
AND IN DOING THAT, YOUR MOTHER
[00:10:01]
IS SICK AND THAT TAKES TIME AWAY TOO.YOU JUST NEED A LITTLE BIT OF A RELIEF TO KIND OF WRITE THE SHIP A LITTLE BIT.
IS THAT CLEAR ON THE TIMELINE AND YES, I'M OKAY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? NO, THE SPEAKERS RIGHT.
DO I HAVE A MOTION CHAIR? I HAVE A MO.
UH, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BO A 2 6 0 0 0 0 6 5 FWI ON APPLICATION OF MOLLY CATHERINE, UH, MOLLY KATHERINE DAVIS.
GRANT THE REQUEST TO WAIVE THE FILING FEES TO BE PAID IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS FOR A CARPORT AS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE PAYMENT OF THE FEE WOULD RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL FINANCIAL HARDSHIP TO THIS APPLICANT.
SECOND HONOR, UM, ANY DISCUSSION? NO.
YOU WANNA TAKE A ROLL CALL? BOTH MS. GARDNER? AYE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR COMING DOWN AND I HOPE EVERYTHING GOES BETTER.
DO I, UM, SIT DOWN OR YOU ARE DONE? YOU MAY LEAVE.
YOU'LL GET SOMETHING IN THE MAIL, UM, UM, THIS WEEK, RIGHT? MARY? YES.
[VI. 2. 26-2938A Application of Craig Berry for (1) a variance to the front-yard setback regulations at 7141 SANTA MONICA DRIVE. This property is more fully described as Block 2708, Tract 10, and is zoned CD-6 (Tract 1), which requires a front-yard setback of 35-feet. The applicant proposes to construct and/or maintain a single-family residential structure and provide a 17-foot 10-inch front yard setback, which will require (1) a 17- foot 2-inch variance to the front yard setback regulations.]
NOW WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR UNCONTESTED DOCKET, UM, BO OA 26 DASH 0 0 0 6 1 71 41 SANTA MONICA DRIVE.DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS OR IT'S UNCONTESTED? SO, YES, THIS IS CRAIG BERRY.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WOULD LIKE TO SAY? YOU'RE ON THE UNCONTESTED DOCKET, SO, UH, WELL, UH, UM, IF YOU'RE, AND IF YOU'RE GONNA SPEAK, WE NEED TO SWEAR YOU IN.
UM, CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS? CRAIG JOSEPH BARRY, 7 1 4 1 SANTA MONICA DRIVE.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES, I DO.
UH, I WILL FOREGO MUCH OF MY PRESENTATION IN SO FAR AS IT WOULD BE REDUNDANT TO WHAT JAMIE MILLER EXPERTLY, UM, RENDERED EARLIER.
UM, HOWEVER, I'LL JUST MAKE A COUPLE POINTS FROM THAT AND THEN, UM, THIS TIME TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
OH, MY CONTENT SHARING IS UNAVAILABLE.
SO I I I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE ON THE UNCONTESTED DOCKET, SO WE'RE GETTING READY TO GRANT APPROVAL.
UM,
THERE IS THOUGH, THAT I WOULDN'T NEED TO RECONSTRUCTING A PORCH OUT OF THE BLUE.
IT'S THE PORCH IS SAGGING FOUR INCHES UNDER A COLUMN AND ABOUT TO COLLAPSE.
I PUT IN JACK POSTS TO TEMPORARILY HOLD IT UP, BUT IN THE MEANTIME, THE CONTRACTOR NEEDS TO TEAR IT DOWN AND NOT ONLY FIX THE PORSCHE, BUT ALL THE PIERS ACROSS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
SO THAT'S THAT, THAT, THAT'S WHAT INSTIGATED ALL THIS.
ONLY TO FIND OUT THAT A 1912 HOUSE WITH NEW RULES, UM, HAS A VARIANCE RUNNING STRAIGHT THROUGH IT.
SO, UM, I I, I APPRECIATE THE ANALYSIS PROVIDED BY JAMIE AND THE UNCONTESTED DOCKET.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? I HAVE A MOTION.
UM, I, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION LISTED ON THE UNCONTESTED DOCKET BECAUSE IT APPEARS FROM OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND ALL RELEVANT EVIDENCE THAT THE APPLICATION SATISFIES ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AND IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE CODE AS APPLICABLE TO WIT BO OA DASH 26 DASH 0 0 0 0 6 1 APPLICATION OF CRAIG BERRY FOR A VARIANCE TO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED.
[00:15:01]
MR. MILLIKEN? AYE.MOTION TO GRANT PASSES? FIVE TO ZERO.
[VI. 3. 26-2939A Application of Steven F Darling to appeal the decision of an administrative official the revocation of a Certificate of Occupancy at 2711 ELM STREET. This property is more fully described as Block C/483, part of Lots 40 and 41, and is zoned PD-269 (Tract A), which requires that the building official shall revoke a certificate of occupancy if the building official determines that the certificate of occupancy was issued in error, was issued on the basis of false, incomplete, or incorrect information supplied, or the use or occupancy is being operated in a manner that is a substantial danger of injury or an adverse health impact to any person or property and is in violation of the codes, the Dallas Development Code, other city ordinances, rules, or regulations, of any country, state, or federal laws or regulations. The applicant proposes to appeal the decision of an administrative official in the revocation of Certificate of Occupancy No. 2502211021_198585071-003 issued on January 02, 2026.]
MOVE ON TO OUR INDIVIDUAL ITEM, BO OA DASH 26 DASH 0 0 0 6 0 27 11 ELM STREET.AND THIS IS IN, UM, AO APPEAL, UM, WHICH, UH, HAS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT RULES THAN BEFORE.
SO I'M GONNA READ THESE RULES FOR EVERYBODY PRESENT.
UM, THE APPLICANT'S CASE WILL LAST FOR 20 MINUTES.
THE APPLICANT MAY GIVE AN OPENING STATEMENT, CALL WITNESSES AND OFFER EVIDENCE.
HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT CALLS A WITNESS.
THE BUILDING OFFICIAL IS ABLE TO CROSS EXAMINE THAT WITNESS FOR UP TO FIVE MINUTES.
THAT DOESN'T COUNT AGAINST, THAT DOES NOT COUNT AGAINST THE TIME LIMIT.
AND THE APPLICANT CAN THEN CONDUCT A REDIRECT OF THAT WITNESS.
THE APPLICANT CAN SUBMIT DOCUMENTS TO THE BOARD SECRETARY AS LONG AS THEY COMPLY WITH THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE.
RULES SET FORTH FROM THE BOARD'S RULES OF PROCEDURES.
THE BOARDS CANNOT, THE BOARD CAN ASK QUESTIONS AT ANY TIME.
BOARD MEMBERS' QUESTIONS WILL NOT COUNT TOWARDS YOUR TIME ALLOTMENT.
THE BUILDING OFFICIAL'S CASE MAY LAST 20 MINUTES.
THE BUILDING OFFICIAL MAY GIVE AN OPENING STATEMENT, CALL WITNESSES AND OFFER EVIDENCE.
HOWEVER, THE BUILDING OFFICIAL CALLS A WITNESS, THE APPLICANT IS ABLE TO CROSS A SAMPLE THAT WITNESS FOR UP TO FIVE MINUTES.
IT DOESN'T COUNT AGAINST YOUR TIME LIMIT.
AND THE BUILDING OFFICIAL CAN THEN REDIRECT THE BUILDING.
OFFICIAL CAN SUBMIT DOCUMENTS TO THE BOARD SECRETARY AS LONG AS THEY COMPLY WITH THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE SET FORTH FROM BOARD'S, RULES AND PROCEDURES.
AGAIN, BOARD CAN ASK QUESTIONS AT ANY TIME AND THE BOARD MEMBERS' QUESTIONS WILL NOT COUNT TOWARDS THAT TIME.
THE APPLICANT WILL BE ALLOWED A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
THE APPLICANT WILL ALSO BE ALLOWED A THREE MINUTE CLOSING STATEMENT AND THEN THE BUILDING OFFICIAL WILL BE ALL ALLOWED ALLOTTED.
A MOTION IS GONNA BE REQUIRED TO AFFIRM, REVERSE OR AMEND THE BUILDING OFFICIAL'S DECISION.
FOLLOWING THE MOTION, THERE WILL BE TIME FOR DISCUSSION AMONG THE BOARD MEMBERS, UM, ALL.
SO IF WE CAN HAVE THE APPLICANT STEP FORWARD.
IS THIS SORRY TO WHAT, UH, WHATEVER IS EASIEST FOR YOU, I THINK IS FINE.
DO WE CARE? NO, I, I I'M OKAY IF Y'ALL NEED MORE SPACE AND I'M THE APPLICANT, SO I'M READY TO GO AND I'M GOOD HERE.
UH, IF I MAY, I AM ROBERT OSE.
I REPRESENT TROPHY LOUNGE LLC IN THE APPEAL OF THE REVOCATION OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, UH, BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL.
UM, OH, YOU NEED ME TO SWEAR? NEED TO SWEAR IN.
ZACH, IF YOU COULD STAND YES, IF WE HAVE ANY WITNESSES, PLEASE SEE.
JUST TRYING TO IDENTIFY 'EM SO WE CAN ALL SWEAR, BUT YOU GOT IT.
AND IF WE CAN HAVE ANYBODY THAT WILL BE, UM, PRESENTING TODAY, EITHER AS AN APPLICANT OR AS A CITY OFFICIAL THAT WILL BE PRESENTING OR GIVING EVIDENCE TODAY.
STAND UP AND WE'LL DO ALL THE SWEARING IN NOW, OR POTENTIAL WITNESSES IF YOU COULD BE A POTENTIAL WITNESS.
IF YOU'RE GONNA BE SPEAKING, STAND UP AND LET'S SWEAR YOU IN.
DO YOU ALL SWEAR OR AFFIRM IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO.
HOW LONG DO I HAVE? YOU HAVE 20 MINUTES.
SO THIS IS AN APPEAL, UH, OF THE REVOCATION OF A RESTAURANT CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, UM, BY TROPHY, BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL.
AND I, I'LL JUST CUT RIGHT TO IT WITH 20 MINUTES.
TROPHY HAS BEEN OPERATING OBJECTIVELY AND LAWFULLY AS A RESTAURANT SINCE IT WAS GRANTED A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR, IN APRIL.
AND SUBSEQUENT TO APRIL, ACTUALLY JANUARY, THE CODE COMPLIANCE DEPARTMENT STARTED TO CITE TROPHY CLAIMING, UH, THAT THEY WERE OPERATING NOT AS A RESTAURANT, BUT THEY WOULD NEVER TELL US WHAT WE WERE OPERATING.
INSTEAD, WE REPEATEDLY ASKED OUR CODE OFFICIALS, WELL, IF WE'RE NOT A RESTAURANT, WHAT ARE WE? AND WE WOULD GET BACK, WELL, WE CAN'T TELL YOU, OR WE DON'T KNOW, OR WE'RE NOT GOING THROUGH THAT.
WHICH MADE IT VERY DIFFICULT TO TRY AND FIGURE OUT HOW TO COMPLY WITH WHAT THEY WERE ASKING US TO DO.
UM, WE'VE JUST BEEN HANDED A PACKET AND I'M BEING ADVISED BY OUR ATTORNEY.
UM, THIS IS, THIS IS YOUR BRIEF THAT WE JUST RECEIVED.
WE HAVE NOT HAD TIME TO REVIEW IT.
[00:20:01]
HAVE NOT SEEN IT.AND IN ORDER TO RECEIVE IT, WE'LL HAVE TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO, TO REVIEW IT AND WE'LL HAVE TO TAKE A BREAK TO REVIEW IT.
'CAUSE WE HAVE NOT HAD ANY, UM, WE HAVE NOT SEEN THIS AT ALL.
UM, OR WE'LL HAVE TO POSTPONE THE HEARING.
UM, IF, IF, IF I MAY, WE RECEIVED THE CITY ATTORNEY'S BRIEF ON WEDNESDAY AND WE RESPONDED WITH A BRIEF ON FRIDAY AND FILED IT AND SENT IT TO THEIR OFFICE AND THE BOARD SECRETARY ON FRIDAY.
SO I WOULD ASK THAT YOU SUSPEND THE RULES AND IF YOU NEED TO TAKE A BREAK TO REVIEW IT, PLEASE DO SO.
IT'S, IT, I I WOULD ASK THAT IT'S VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE THERE ARE OBJECTIVE FACTS THAT ESTABLISH THAT WE WERE OPERATING AS A RESTAURANT AND NOT AS A BAR THAT ARE VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE LEGAL DETERMINATION BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
UM, SO I GUESS THE QUESTION IS TO, TO PANEL, DO WE WANT TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO ACCEPT THIS LATE DOCUMENTATION OR DO WE WANNA POSTPONE THE HEARING? UM, AND WE'LL NEED TO TAKE A VOTE ON WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE GONNA SUSPEND THE RULES OR POSTPONE.
UM, ARE WE ALLOWED TO, CAN WE DO THESE AND, UM, CAN WE SUSPEND THE RULE SO THAT WE CAN REVIEW AND THEN MAYBE TAKE A VOTE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT IT HAS TO, WE HAVE TO DO IT ALL NOW, BUT, UM, IT'S A, IT'S A BIT OF INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE TO DIGEST IT, AND I, I DON'T WANT TO TRY TO, I WANT TO GIVE IT, UH, ADJUSTED AND, AND UNDERSTAND IT.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IF WE CAN CONTINUE ON TODAY AND NOT, UM, UM, RESCHEDULE, THEN I'D LIKE TO DO THAT AS WELL.
SO, SHOULD WE SUSPEND THE RULES? YOUR RULES OF PRE PROCEDURES? STATE THAT ALL PRINTED AND TYPE WRITTEN DOCUMENT DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN EXCESS OF FIVE PAGES TENDERED BY A PRIOR SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD UNLESS IT'S RECEIVED 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED HEARING.
UPON REQUEST, A PANEL OF THE BOARD MAY BOARD CALL TO SUSPEND THE OPERATION, UM, OF THIS ROLE AND CONSIDER THE EXCLUDED EVIDENCE OR POSTPONE THE HEARING ON THE APPLICATION TO A DATE CERTAIN TO ALLOW PANEL SUFFICIENT TIME TO CONSIDER THE TENDER EVIDENCE PRIOR TO THE NEXT SCHEDULED HEARING.
ALTHOUGH IT HAS AN OR, I FEEL LIKE THIS BOARD CAN SUSPEND THE RULES TO REVIEW IT.
AND IF IT'S, IT'S TOO MUCH, THEN THIS BOARD CAN ALSO MAKE THE MOTION TO HOLD THIS CASE OVER.
SO, MAY I HAVE A MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES? UM, CHAIR, I HAVE A MOTION.
UM, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS ON CASE NUMBER BO A 2 6 0 0 0 0 6 0, UM, MOVE TO SUSPEND THE RULE SO THAT WE MAY REVIEW THE INFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED.
ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE, WITH DISCUSSION OR DO WE NEED A DISCUSSION? THIS MOTION IS NOT DEBATABLE.
WITHOUT A CHAIR, THIS MOTION PASSES.
WE ARE GONNA RECESS THE HEARING, UM, WHILE WE TAKE TIME TO REVIEW THIS.
UH, LET, LET'S TAKE 20 MINUTES.
SO IT IS ONE, CAN YOU PLEASE COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE? THE CITY ALSO SUBMITTED SOME DOCUMENTS TODAY.
WE, IT IS A POWERPOINT AND WE'LL BE PRESENTING IT, BUT WE HAVE PROVIDED COPIES FOR EVERYONE.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS WOULD ALSO LIKE TO TAKE ABOVE IS THAT POWERPOINTS ARE NOT PART OF THIS DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE.
SO IT, IT'S NOT REQUIRED TO BE SUSPENDED.
WE CAN ACCEPT YOUR POWERPOINT PRESENTATION.
THERE IS ALSO FOUR PHOTOS AND, UM, A CITATION THAT WE INCLUDED AS WELL AS EVIDENCE, BUT THAT'S UNDER FIVE PAGES.
SO MADAM HERE, I DO HAVE A QUESTION.
ARE WE ALLOWED TO, WE'RE JUST ALLOWED TO REVIEW THIS INDEPENDENTLY.
SO DO YOU FEEL LIKE THE 20 MINUTES IS ENOUGH? AND ALTHOUGH YOU SET FOR 20 MINUTES, SO WE CAN'T START AGAIN UNTIL 1 46, BUT WE CAN, IF YOU NEED MORE TIME, WE CAN START ANYTIME AFTER 1 46.
BUT JUST BECAUSE YOU GAVE 20 MINUTES.
20 MINUTES, WE CAN'T START AGAIN UNTIL 1 46.
WE WILL RECONVENE AT 1 46 WITH AN UPDATE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR LETTING US REVIEW THAT.
UM, WE'LL GIVE YOU YOUR, WE'RE WE'LL START WITH 20 MINUTES.
WE WILL RECONVENE THE MEETING AT 1:47 PM UM, EVERYBODY HAS BEEN SWORN IN.
WE WILL START AGAIN WITH YOUR 20 MINUTES.
UM, JUST TO KIND OF REFRESH, RESTART, WE'RE ALL, WE'RE ALL READY TO ROCK AND ROLL HERE.
[00:25:01]
VERY MUCH.THANK YOU CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
I REPRESENT TROPHY LOUNGE, LLC BEHIND ME AND WHO HAS ALREADY BEEN SWORN IN ARE JD AND ZACH WHO RUN AND ARE THE OPERATORS AND OWNERS OF, UH, TROPHY, WHICH IS A RESTAURANT.
AND BY THE WAY, MY ADDRESS IS 2,500.
DO MY BUSINESS ADDRESS IS 2,500 DALLAS PARKWAY, SUITE 600, UH, PLANO, TEXAS 7 5 0 9 3.
SO I GET TO DRIVE ON PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH TOLL EVERY SINGLE DAY, BACK AND FORTH.
UM, RELEVANT TO THIS, AND THEY SAY DON'T EVER BURY YOUR LEAD, IS THAT THIS ESTABLISHMENT GOT A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR RESTAURANT.
AND IT IS LOCATED AT 27 11 ELM.
AFTER A YEAR OF BACK AND FORTH EMAILS, EXCHANGES, PLANS, UPDATES, IT WAS GRANTED A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR A RESTAURANT WHERE IT DESCRIBED IN VAST DETAIL, DJ DANCING LIGHTS, THE ACTIVITIES THAT WERE GONNA GO ON AT THAT LOCATION.
THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND THEIR RESPONSIVE BRIEF SAID AND SAID THAT ONE OF THE BASISES OF THE REVOCATION IS, IS THAT WE DIDN'T DESCRIBE OR OUTLINE THE ACTIVITIES AT THE LOCATION, BUT YOU SAW VERY SPECIFICALLY WHERE THAT'S NOT TRUE.
AND WE VERY SPECIFICALLY SAID EXACTLY WHAT WE WERE GONNA DO.
THE BUILDING OFFICIAL HAD ALL OF THAT INFORMATION IN HAND PRIOR TO GRANTING US THEIR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
AND WHEN WE OPERATED, WE OPERATED EXACTLY LIKE WE SAID, SAID WE WERE GOING TO.
BUT WHAT'S MOST IMPORTANT IS WE OPERATED AS A RESTAURANT.
WHAT IS MOST IMPORTANT TO THIS AND WHY I AM ASKING YOU TO PLEASE REVERSE THE BUILDING OFFICIAL IS, IS THAT THIS PART OR ELEMENT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND CODE COMPLIANCE IS ASKING YOU TO GRANT THEM ABSOLUTE DISCRETION.
THAT WHEN A CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL WALKS INTO A RESTAURANT AND SAYS, YOU KNOW, THIS DOESN'T FEEL LIKE A RESTAURANT.
IT FEELS LIKE A FILL IN THE BLANK, THAT THEY CAN ISSUE A CITATION, TALK TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL WHO WILL REVOKE YOUR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
BUT THERE'S NO STANDARD, NO PERCENTAGE, NO GUIDANCE, NO DIRECTION TO ANY RESTAURANT OPERATOR IN THE CITY OF DALLAS AS TO HOW THEY CAN COMPLY.
JD AND ZACH WERE THERE WHEN CODE ENFORCEMENT REPEATEDLY CAME TO THEIR ESTABLISHMENT AND SAID, WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO? YOU'RE SAYING WE'RE SELLING TOO MUCH ALCOHOL.
HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH? HOW MUCH IS TOO MUCH? THEY NEVER GOT A RESPONSE EVER.
THERE WAS NO THIS PERCENTAGE OR WHY DON'T YOU DECREASE YOUR SALES? OR WHY DON'T YOU NOT DO THIS? IT WAS JUST, I'M WRITING YOU A TICKET AND LET ME ADD TO THAT.
I'VE BEEN TOLD TO WRITE YOU A TICKET.
THEY WERE TOLD, AND THEY HAD MADE UP THEIR MINDS TO ISSUE A CITATION, TO TROPHY BEFORE THEY HAD EVER GOTTEN THERE, EVER LOOKED AROUND AND EVER DECIDED AND SAW WHAT WAS GOING ON THERE.
I HEARD THAT MYSELF OVER THE PHONE.
AND REMEMBER, I WAS SWORN TO TESTIFY AND TELL THE TRUTH.
I HAVE BEEN DIRECTED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO ISSUE A CITATION.
NOW, NINE TICKETS WERE WRITTEN TO TROPHY OVER THE LAST EIGHT MONTHS FOR ILLEGAL LAND USE.
THREE OF THEM HAVE ALREADY BEEN DISMISSED.
TWO, BECAUSE ANOTHER PART OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE DETERMINED THAT TROPHY ACTUALLY WAS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW, OR AT LEAST THAT WHAT IT SAYS, IT SAYS COMPLIANCE ONE FOR INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE, WHICH MEANS ANOTHER PART OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE DETERMINED THAT THEY DIDN'T EVEN HAVE ENOUGH PROOF TO SUSTAIN THE ALLEGATION.
SO WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON HERE, WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON HERE IS THAT WHAT DIRECTED CODE COMPLIANCE INDIVIDUALS ARE SENT TO TROPHY TO WRITE THEM A TICKET FOR NO CER INCORRECT CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
THEY'RE NOT GIVING ANY DIRECTION AS TO HOW MUCH SALES IS ENOUGH, HOW MUCH SALES IS TOO MUCH.
AND IF YOU THINK IT'S JUST TROPHY THAT'S GOTTEN US, THERE ARE 20 OTHER RESTAURANTS AROUND DALLAS THAT HAVE HAD THE SAME THING, INCLUDING TRUEX.
TRUEX GOT A CITATION FOR THE SAME THING.
CAN YOU IMAGINE TRUEX NOT BEING A RESTAURANT? AND DURING THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, WHEN THEY COME UP AND THEY GIVE THEIR CASE, THEY'RE GONNA BE PICTURES.
[00:30:01]
NEAR THE END, NEAR CLOSING TIME.ONE TIME I GOT A CALL AT 10 30 OR 11 AT NIGHT, I THINK IT WAS 12.
ONE OF MY FAVORITE RESTAURANTS IN DALLAS IS ANGELES.
MY WIFE AND I WOULD ALWAYS GO THERE ON GREENVILLE, THERE'S ABOUT 30% OF THAT.
NOW IF YOU'RE AT THE END OF THE DAY, THOSE TABLES HAVE CLEARED OFF, BUT THE BAR HASN'T.
IF A CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL WALKED IN THERE AND SAID, HEY, IS THIS A BAR OR IS THIS A RESTAURANT? AT 10 MINUTES BEFORE CLOSING, I CAN ALMOST GUARANTEE YOU THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WOULD BE FINISHING THEIR DRINKS.
BUT DURING THAT ENTIRE DAY, IT'S PROBABLY 80 OR 90% FOOD SALES.
SO THE IDEA THAT A CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL CAN WALK IN A CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICIAL CAN WALK IN, GET THE VIBES.
LOOK SIR, I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION REAL QUICK.
UM, HOW DOES TROPHY ADVERTISE OR MARKET ITSELF IN THE, IN THE MARKETPLACE AS A BAR OR AS A RESTAURANT? I'LL LET MY GUYS DO THAT.
'CAUSE I'M THE ATTORNEY AND I PROBABLY MESS IT UP.
DO YOU WANT ONE OF THEM COMING UP HERE AND ANSWERING THAT? JUST, JUST YEAH, REAL QUICK.
HOW, HOW DO YOU MARKET YOURSELF AS A BAR OR AS A RESTAURANT? YEAH, SO WE, WE MARKET OURSELVES AS A RESTAURANT.
90% OF THE STUFF WE ADVERTISE IS TO EITHER RELATED.
I, I JUST DIDN'T WANT TO GUESS.
UM, BUT THE, THE WHOLE POINT IS, IS THAT THE
UM, WHAT ARE THE HOURS OF OPERATION? WE OPEN, UH, EVERY DAY AT SIX O'CLOCK, MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY.
AND THEN SATURDAY AND SUNDAY IT'S NOON.
AND WHAT TIME DO YOU CLOSE? UH, 2:00 AM SO 6:00 PM TO 2:00 AM MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY.
AND THEN WHAT WERE THE WEEKEND HOURS? UH, FRIDAY, SATURDAY, SUNDAY.
AND WHEN DO YOU SEE THE HEAVIEST TRAFFIC? WHAT TIME? UH, TYPICALLY NIGHTTIME.
I MEAN, WE'RE, WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF, CAN YOU DEFINE THAT IN AN HOUR? UH, SLOTTED HOURS.
UM, I WOULD SAY THE HIGHEST VOLUME IS FROM 10 TO TWO.
I MEAN, WE'RE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE DEVELOP ON ELM STREET.
SO I MEAN, IT'S AN ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT.
A LOT OF PEOPLE GO OUT AT NIGHT.
WE HAVE, WE HAVE, UH, UH, PAY PARKING.
SO NOT TYPICALLY, NOT A TON OF PEOPLE GO OUT DURING THE DAY AND SPEND $20 FOR PARKING OUT THERE.
SO IT, THE TRAP'S A LITTLE LIGHTER IN THE DAYTIME.
WELL, THE, THE ONLY SO I, I GUESS WHILE YOU'RE HERE I'LL ASK YOU, UM, I KNOW, UM, YOUR ATTORNEY MENTIONED THAT THE CITY HAS NOT BEEN INSTRUCTIVE AS TO, UM, WHAT DEFINES, UM, A RESTAURANT.
SO I'LL ASK YOU, UH, IN TERMS OF REVENUE BREAKDOWN, UM, CAN YOU, DO YOU HAVE THE NUMBERS? CAN YOU SHARE WHAT'S YOUR REVENUE BREAKDOWN? ALCOHOL TO FOOD? YES.
I, I PROVIDED HIM WITH THE DOCUMENTS THAT SHOW THAT, BUT I GENERALLY KNOW THE, THE ANSWER TO THAT.
YEAH, UH, THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING.
I THINK WE SELL LIKE 35, 30 6% FOOD.
SO 30% FOOD AND SO 70, IT'S 36%.
OKAY, SO 35 65 FOOD, UM, FOOD TO TO ALCOHOL.
AND THAT, AND, AND YOU WOULD SAY FROM A REP, SO FROM A REVENUE STANDPOINT, YOU, HOW WOULD YOU DEFINE THAT AS BEEN BEING MORE OF A RESTAURANT OR MORE OF A BAR? WELL, ACCORDING TO THE STATE LAW, ANYTHING THAT SELLS MORE THAN 25% OF FOOD IS CONSIDERED A RESTAURANT.
SO I'D DEFINITELY CONSIDER IT A RESTAURANT.
AND AGAIN, THOSE ARE ALL GOOD QUESTIONS AND I'M NOT MR. MILLIKEN, DO YOU LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION? YES.
MY QUESTION WOULD BE, UH, DOES YOUR RESTAURANT PROVIDE SECURITY IN THE RESTAURANT? I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.
IS THERE A POLICE OFFICER OR SECURITY IN THE RESTAURANT DURING THE HOURS OF OPERATION IN SOME OF THE HOURS OF OPERATION, YES, THERE ARE.
UH, TROPHY TAKES THEIR SECURITY AND SAFETY VERY SERIOUSLY, WHICH IS WHY YOU SAW A LACK OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY ALLEGED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
FOR OUR LOCATION, WE'RE VERY GOOD AT KEEPING SECURITY AND HAVING IT THERE BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IT'S ONE OR THE OTHER, RIGHT? IF YOU DON'T HAVE SECURITY, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE SOME CRIME THERE IN DEBELL, NO MATTER WHERE YOU ARE.
IF YOU HAVE SECURITY, THEY TAKE IT VERY SERIOUSLY SO THAT THERE ISN'T CRIMINAL ACTIVITY TO MAKE SURE THAT THE ESTABLISHMENT IS SAFE.
WHICH BY THE WAY IS ANOTHER ALLEGATION.
THEY SAID THEY'RE OPERATING DANGEROUSLY AND THEN THEY HAD ABSOLUTELY NO CRIMINAL ACTIVITY LISTED IN THEIR, UH, RESPONSE BECAUSE WE TAKE SECURITY VERY SERIOUSLY.
SO I JUST WANTED TO ANSWER IT THAT WAY.
AND WHAT ARE THE HOURS THAT THAT
[00:35:01]
SECURITY IS USUALLY THERE? UH, IT'S EVERY NIGHT AFTER, AFTER 10 O'CLOCK, BUT WE HAVE SECURITY ON BEFORE THAT, JUST NOT AS MUCH OF A PRESENCE.AND THEN, UH, FRIDAY, SATURDAY AND SUNDAY, WE ALSO EMPLOY OFF-DUTY OFFICERS, UH, DURING THE NIGHTTIME.
UH, NO, NO, DON'T GO AWAY, PLEASE.
UH, AND THOSE ARE OFF-DUTY DVD OFFICERS.
AND SO IS YOUR SECURITY INSIDE YOUR ESTABLISHMENT OR OUTSIDE YOUR ESTABLISHMENT? BOTH.
AND IS THERE A COVER CHARGE? NO, THERE'S NOT.
AND THE LACK OF A COVERAGE, MS. GARNER.
HEY, WE'VE GOT ONE MORE QUESTION, MS. GARDNER.
UM, IN WHEN YOU WERE OPENING, YOU SAID THAT, UM, IT WAS OBVIOUS THAT THERE WOULD BE A DJ IN STANDING ROOM AND WHAT AND WHATNOT.
I SAW THAT IN THE FLOOR PLAN, YES.
ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE FLOOR PLAN IS YOUR EVIDENCE THAT IT WAS GONNA BE SOMETHING A LITTLE MORE THAN THE DEFINITION OF A RESTAURANT? NO, DJ CAN BE PART OF A RESTAURANT.
IN FACT, MANY RESTAURANTS, EVEN RESTAURANTS THAT HAVE 80 OR 90% FOOD SALE.
SO MY QUESTION IS, IS THE FLOOR PLAN WHEN DURING YOUR APPLICATION, WHICH HAD THE DJ BOOTH IN THE STANDING ROOM, AND UM, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS EVIDENCE THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE SOMETHING BEYOND A RESTAURANT? I'M NOT SAYING THAT THAT IS INDI INDICATIVE OF IT BEING BEYOND A RESTAURANT.
I'M SAYING THAT THAT IS PART OF THE RESTAURANT ACTIVITIES BECAUSE A DJ STANDING AREAS CAN BE FUN.
YES, AND I'M GETTING TO IT 'CAUSE I'M TRYING TO ANSWER IT.
UNLIKE MOST ATTORNEYS, I ACTUALLY TRY TO ANSWER THE QUESTION.
YES, IT INDICATES TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL ALL THE ACTIVITIES THAT WE WERE GONNA DO AS A RESTAURANT.
IN FACT, THE DEFINITION OF RESTAURANT HAS ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES IN THE RESTAURANT.
SO IT'S NOT, THIS IS SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN A RESTAURANT.
THIS IS ACTUALLY A FUNCTIONAL PART OF RESTAURANTS.
AND MANY RESTAURANTS WILL HAVE DJS OR MUSIC OR A SMALL STAGE AS PART OF THEIR RESTAURANT ACTIVITIES.
SO IF YOU WERE, IF THE APPLICANT HAD BEEN APPLYING FOR A CO FOR SOMETHING OTHER THAN A RESTAURANT AND IT HAD THE SAME FLOOR PLAN, ARE YOU SAYING THAT THAT FLOOR PLAN IS PART OF, LET'S SAY IT WAS A CO FOR A DOGGY DAYCARE AND BOARDING AND IT'S GRANTED, BUT THE FLOOR PLAN HAS A DJ BOOTH AND IT HAS A STANDING AREA.
DOES THAT GIVE THE APPLICANT OR THE, THE ABILITY TO GO BEYOND ADULT DAYCARE AND BOARDING FACILITY AND USE THOSE DJ BOOTH? NO.
WHAT I'M SAYING, NO, I'M NOT SAYING THAT, BUT I APPRECIATE THE QUESTION.
WHAT I'M SAYING IS, IS THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS ALLEGED THAT WE DID NOT TELL THE BUILDING OFFICIAL THAT THERE WOULD BE DJ THERE.
AND BUT YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU DID BECAUSE OF THE FLOOR PLAN? ABSOLUTELY.
AND ALSO, THE FACT THAT WE HAD A YEAR LONG PROCESS WHERE WE SENT FLOOR PLANS, WE HAD THE INDICATION AND THAT AT ANY TIME THEY WERE DOUBTFUL ABOUT THE ACTIVITY OTHER THAN WHAT WE HAD DEMONSTRATED AND SAID WE WERE GONNA DO.
THEY HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK THAT AND THEY DIDN'T.
AND SO AT SOME POINT, WE CAN'T GUESS AS TO WHAT THRESHOLD OF OF YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH WE'RE SUPPOSED TO FILL OUT TO TELL THEM HERE WE'VE GOT A DJ, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GONNA HAVE DJ ACTIVITIES THERE.
SO WE DID IN FACT SHOW THEM AND TELL THEM THAT WE WERE GONNA HAVE A DJ AT THE LOCATION, A DJ ACTIVITY.
BUT LET ME LET, SO THAT'S IN THE FLOOR PLAN, BUT I DON'T, YEAH, FROM WHAT I'M READING, I WAS ONLY ABLE TO BRIEFLY GET THROUGH THIS, BUT IT, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE BOX WASN'T CHECKED FOR DJ BOOTH.
WAS THE BOX CHECKED FOR DJ BOOTH IN THE APPLICATION? I KNOW, I, I DON'T KNOW.
SO, AND NOW I WAS TRYING TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, SO I LOST MY THREAD ON, UM, HERE'S THE THING ABOUT PERCENTAGES AND PERCENTAGE SALES.
FOR THE LAST 40 SOMETHING YEARS, THE CITY OF DALLAS HAS TRIED TO, AND UNTIL RECENTLY MADE THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN WHAT IS A RESTAURANT AND WHAT IS A BAR LOUNGE OR TAVR.
AND THAT IS THE 25%, 75% THRESHOLD.
AND THEY UNDERSTOOD THAT BECAUSE EXACTLY, AND I GET WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM WITH ALL OF THAT, BUT THERE'S GONNA BE OTHER ACTIVITIES AT RESTAURANTS, BOOK, BREEDINGS, VIOLIN, WHATEVER IT IS, THERE'S GONNA BE, IT'S NOT ALL JUST 100% FOOD ACTIVITIES.
SO THE CITY OF DALLAS BECAME CONCERNED WITH HOW DO WE TELL WHEN SOMETHING IS OPERATING AS A BAR, LOUNGE OR TAVERN INSTEAD? SO IN THE CODE SPECIFICALLY, IT SAYS THAT CODE COMPLIANCE IS THE ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO ASK TO INSPECT YOUR BOOKS.
[00:40:01]
IF AN ESTABLISHMENT SAYS, I'M NOT SHOWING YOU MY BOOKS, THAT IS A BASIS TO REVOKE THEIR CO RIGHT THEN AND THERE.SO THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO SHOW THEIR BOOKS OR THEY'RE GONNA LOSE THEIR CO AND SHUT DOWN CODE.
COMPLIANCE NEVER ASKED US FOR OUR SALES RECEIPTS TO SHOW WHAT PERCENTAGE FOOD SALES VERSUS ALCOHOL SALES WE HAD AT THE ESTABLISHMENT IN THEIR INITIAL BRIEF.
THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE SAID, THAT'S NOT RELEVANT.
EXCEPT IT ABSOLUTELY IS RELEVANT BECAUSE THE CODE REQUIRES IT AS A DEFINITION.
BECAUSE IF WE'RE NOT A RESTAURANT, WHAT ARE WE? RIGHT? AND IF WE'RE NOT A RESTAURANT, IF WE'RE A BAR, BAR REQUIRES US TO BE 75% OR MORE ALCOHOL SALES.
SO DURING THIS ENTIRE PROCESS THROUGH NINE CITATIONS, THREE HAVE BEEN DISMISSED, SIX THAT ARE STILL PENDING AND HAVEN'T HAD A RESOLUTION, THEY WON'T TELL US WHAT WE ARE INSTEAD.
BUT THEY SUGGEST, OH, MAYBE YOU'RE A BAR LOUNGE OR TAVERN.
THEY HAD THE ABILITY TO ASK US FOR OUR BOOKS.
AND THEN WHEN THEY REVOKED OUR CEO, IT WASN'T BECAUSE THEY SHOWED AND COULD HAVE SHOWED THAT WE WERE ABOVE 75% OF ALCOHOL SALES.
INSTEAD OUR CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICER IS ALLOWED TO GO IN AND SAY, IT'S JUST NOT FEELING LIKE A RESTAURANT.
I'M NOT GETTING THE RESTAURANT VIBES.
INSTEAD, WELL CODE COMPLIANCE MAN, ARE YOU ABLE TO SUBPOENA THEIR RECORDS, CHECK THEIR RECORDS AND MAKE A DETERMINATION? ABSOLUTELY.
SO WE PROVIDED YOU OUR SALES RECEIPTS AND RECORDS AND WHAT THAT SHOWED TWO PARTS.
ONE, WHAT'S THE DEFINITION OF RESTAURANT PREDOMINANT FOOD SALES? OUR ITEMS SOLD, OUR NUMBER OF ITEMS SOLD IS A MAJORITY FOOD AND NON-ALCOHOL REVENUE BECAUSE ALCOHOL COSTS MORE THAN FOOD ITEMS WAS AROUND 66% FOR THE ENTIRE TIME AND NOT 75%.
IF I LEFT HERE TODAY AND I TRIED TO GET A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR BAR LOUNGE OR TAVERN BASED UPON WHAT I JUST GAVE YOU, I COULDN'T GET IT.
I CAN'T GET IT BECAUSE I'M NOT 75% OR MORE ALCOHOL SALES.
SO HERE'S THE PROBLEM, AND I'M GONNA WRAP THIS UP BECAUSE I THINK YOU KNOW WHERE IT, WHERE IT IS.
20 OTHER RESTAURANTS ALL WITH THE SAME VAGUE SUBJECTIVE ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY, ALL SUBJECT TO BEING SHUT DOWN BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IN CODE COMPLIANCE WITHOUT EVER CHECKING THE BOOKS, EVER ASKING WHAT THE PERCENTAGE IS EVER LOOKING AT THE SALES.
WE DON'T KNOW IF WHEN YOU'RE LISTENING TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, YOU CAN GET AN IDEA OF WHAT THE OBJECTIVE STANDARD IS FOR WHAT AN ESTABLISHMENT NEEDS TO SELL X VERSUS Y.
IF YOU CAN'T, THEN WHAT WE'VE DONE IS WE'VE HANDED CODE COMPLIANCE IN THIS PORTION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, ABSOLUTE DISCRETION TO SHUT ANY RESTAURANT DOWN IN THE CITY OF DALLAS WHEN THEY FEEL LIKE IT, BECAUSE IT JUST DOESN'T FEEL LIKE A RESTAURANT.
AND EVERY RESTAURANT IN TOWN THAT STARTS GETTING THIS ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY HAS NO ABILITY TO KNOW WHAT TO DO INSTEAD, THEY CAN'T FIX IT.
THE THE NON OBJECTIVENESS, THE SUBJECTIVENESS OF THESE STANDARDS MAKES THIS UNENFORCEABLE.
BUT WHAT IT REALLY IS, IS IN AN ATTEMPT TO REPLACE THE DALLAS CITY CODE AND ITS VERY CLEAR OBJECTIVE STANDARDS AND IT'S VERY CLEAR ENFORCEMENT ABILITY WITH A VIBE AND A FEELING, AND IT JUST DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT.
NOW AT 1130 AT NIGHT, I'M SURE TROPHY LOOKS LESS LIKE A RESTAURANT THAN IT DID AT SIX OR FIVE OR FOUR.
BUT SO WOULD ANGELO'S SO WOULD TRUE LUCK.
SO WOULD EVERY RESTAURANT THAT THEY'VE STARTED TRYING TO ENFORCE ON, ENFORCE EVERY SINGLE ONE.
BUT THE CODE HAS A VERY SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE LEGAL STANDARD THAT I AM ASKING YOU AS THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO FOLLOW.
IF IT'S NOT SOMETHING ELSE AND THEY CAN'T DEMONSTRATE WHAT ELSE IT IS INSTEAD, AND THERE'S NOT ANOTHER DEFINITION THAT IT ABSOLUTELY MEETS, YOU MUST REVERSE THE BUILDING OFFICIAL'S REVOCATION.
[00:45:01]
OBJECTIVELESS UNABLE TO COMPLY, AND WE'RE AT THE MERE WHIM OF WHICH CI UH, CITY CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICER FEELS BAD ABOUT A RESTAURANT ON THAT PARTICULAR DAY.AND JUST ASK YOURSELF WHAT THAT RESULTS IN FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS, PLEASE REVERSE THIS.
IT'S OKAY FOR CODE COMPLIANCE TO ENFORCE WHATEVER SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE STANDARDS THEY WANT.
WE'LL GIVE THEM THE BOOKS WHENEVER WE NEED TO.
ANY OTHER CODE ISSUE WE WILL FOLLOW.
BUT YOU CAN'T ASK US TO FOLLOW A STANDARD THAT THEY WON'T TELL US THAT THEY WON'T FOLLOW THEMSELVES AND THAT THEY SAY IS UP TO THEIR ABSOLUTE DISCRETION.
UH, HEY, WE HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
SO THERE WAS A CITATION ISSUED IN JULY, UH, I'M SORRY, IT WAS REVOKED IN JULY, RIGHT? AND THERE WAS CITATION ISSUED IN YES.
SO THE CITATION WAS ISSUED BECAUSE THE CEO WAS IN NON-COMPLIANCE.
YOU SAID THERE WAS, I'M SORRY? THERE WAS A REVOCATION, A LETTER THAT COMES, WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN CITATIONS.
SO WAS IT A CITATION? THERE WERE NINE CITATIONS ISSUED STARTING IN JANUARY, THREE OF WHICH HAVE BEEN DISMISSED, SECOND SIX OF WHICH HAVE BEEN SET FOR, UH, COURT, NONE OF WHICH HAVE BEEN SUSTAINED.
SO I BELIEVE THERE WAS A CITATION FOR NONCOMPLIANCE WITH THE CO ISSUED IN APRIL AND CAN SEND THEM.
I I DON'T WANNA BASE MY QUESTION ON THAT IF IT'S INCORRECT.
UM, SO YOU'RE SAYING, LEMME JUST DOUBLE CHECK HERE, FIND IT WHILE SHE'S CHECKING THAT, CAN YOU TELL ME, UM, THE REVENUE THAT YOU, UM, PROVIDED, IS THAT, IS THAT THE OTHER DATE? IS THAT MONTH TO DATE? UM, THAT THAT'S, THAT'S ALL OF IT.
THAT'S, THAT'S ALL OF IT SINCE OPENING ALL OF IT SINCE OPENING, YES, SIR.
AND YOU OPENED JANUARY AND SO IT'S IT'S YEAR TO WHATEVER, WHATEVER THIS DATE WAS.
AND THAT'S ABOUT 66% ALCOHOL SALES AND ABOUT 34% JUST LIKE WHAT HE WAS SAYING.
OH, WELL CAN I, I WAS GET A FOLLOW UP ON THIS QUESTION.
YEAH, DO, I'M LOOKING, IT SAYS THAT THAT'S THROUGH JULY 2ND.
SO HAVE Y'ALL BEEN CLOSED SINCE JULY 2ND FOR YOUR, THE THE REVENUE ONLY GOES THROUGH JULY 2ND ON THIS? YEAH, I, I DON'T KNOW WHEN THEY RAN THE REPORT THROUGH, BUT THAT WOULD BE FROM OPENING TO THAT DAY.
WHICH I GUESS WOULD BE RELEVANT TO THE REVOCATION.
UM, I FAILED TO ASK THIS EARLIER, BUT HOW MANY, UH, CERTIFIED PREPARERS OR FOOD HANDLERS DO YOU HAVE DURING PEAK? THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
HOURS ARE, ARE YOU SPEAKING IN TERMS OF SERVERS, UH, COOKS, CHEFS? WHAT EXACTLY DO YOU MEAN? THIS WOULD BE PREPARERS, COOKS, UH, I BELIEVE WE HAVE FIVE COOKS ON STAFF.
AND THEN AS FAR AS SERVERS, WE'VE GOT AROUND 12.
SO ARE YOU USING ALL FIVE OF THOSE MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY OR NO, OBVIOUSLY IT, WHAT'S THE AVERAGE NIGHT AS FAR AS KITCHEN STAFF? USUALLY MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY AROUND ONE OR TWO IN THE, IN THE KITCHEN.
AND THEN, UH, SERVERS? UH, MAYBE FOUR OR FIVE.
UM, QUICK QUESTION ON, TO BUILD ON THAT.
WHAT TIME DOES YOUR KITCHEN CLOSE? WHAT TIME DO YOU SEND YOUR UH, THE, THE KITCHEN'S OPEN KITCHEN STAFF HOME? YEAH, THE KITCHEN'S OPEN AT ALL TIMES OF OPERATIONS.
SO ANYTIME WE'RE OPEN, THE KITCHEN'S OPEN.
UM, SO THANK UH, SO YOU WERE SAYING THAT, SO I'VE GOT A VIOLATION OF NO VALID CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
SO WHAT THAT MEANS TO ME IS THAT THE CERTIFICATE, CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY THAT WAS GRANTED, YOU'RE IN NON-COMPLIANCE.
SO IF YOU ARE ISSUED A CITATION, UM, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE, SIR, THAT YOU WERE ARGUING THAT IT WAS UP TO THE CITY TO TELL YOU, UM, WHAT YOU NEEDED TO BE IN COMPLIANCE FOR A NON-RESTAURANT OR BAR TAVERN.
SO WHAT DID YOU DO TO RESOLVE? DID YOU REAPPLY FOR, YOU KNOW, EXAMINE WHAT YOU COULD PERHAPS DO TO CONTINUE OPERATIONS AS YOU'RE OPERATING? WHICH TO THE CITY WAS NOT RESTAURANT USE? DID YOU EXAMINE THAT? MAYBE GETTING A NEW CO OR TURNING, WALKING AWAY? UM, QUESTION FOR YOU SIR.
I KNOW I CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION 'CAUSE I WAS WORKING WITH HIM AT THE TIME.
SO IN ORDER TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH
[00:50:01]
THE NO VALID CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, WHAT DID YOU DO TO BE IN COMPLIANCE? THE, THE FIRST THING THAT HAPPENED, WHAT STEPS DID YOU TAKE? THE, THE, THE FIRST THING THAT HAPPENED IS THEY WERE TRYING TO FIND OUT WHY THEY WERE MAKING THAT ALLEGATION, RIGHT? LIKE, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE SAYING THAT WE'RE NOT A RESTAURANT, HOW ARE WE NOT A RESTAURANT? AND THEY NEVER GOT A STRAIGHT ANSWER FROM CODE EVER.AND SO THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT CAN YOU TELL ME HOW, WHAT, LIKE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS IF YOU'RE AMBIGUOUS.
THEY DIDN'T TELL YOU HOW, UM, WELL, BUT THEY ALSO DIDN'T, I DON'T REALLY KNOW.
I I IF IF THEY HAD A SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE STANDARD, RIGHT? LIKE, HEY, YOU'RE DOING X STOP DOING X, THEN WE COULD DO THAT.
BUT IF YOU SAY, WHAT ARE WE DOING WRONG? AND THEY SAY, I CAN'T REALLY TELL YOU OR WE'RE NOT GONNA TELL YOU, OR THEY DISAGREE AMONGST THEMSELVES WHILE THEY'RE THERE AND YOU GO AWAY FROM IT AND THEN THEY SEEK LEGAL COUNSEL AND WE SAY, SO I'M LOOKING AT YOUR BOOKS, YOU SEEM FINE.
WHAT SPECIFIC THING ARE THEY TELLING YOU? LIKE, DON'T HAVE A DJ OR DON'T HAVE STROBE LIGHTS, CODE WON'T TELL THEM THAT.
AND SO IF YOU, IF YOUR QUESTION IS, WELL, COULDN'T YOU HAVE GONE IN AND GETTING ANOTHER CO YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT TO GET INSTEAD BECAUSE THEY WON'T TELL YOU WHAT YOU'RE DOING WRONG TO GO GET SOMETHING ELSE INSTEAD.
NUMBER TWO IS SOME THINGS AREN'T ALLOWED BY RIGHT IN PD 2 98, WHICH IS THE DEBELL.
AND SO THEY CAN'T JUST GO GET ANOTHER CO THEY MAY HAVE TO GO GET A ZONING CHANGE IN ORDER TO THEN BE ABLE TO GET A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, IF THEY NEEDED A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE CO OR A BAR LOUNGER TAVERN CO.
BUT BECAUSE THEY WON'T TELL US, HEY, YOU NEED TO GO GET A BAR LOUNGER TAVERN CO.
HOW ARE WE EVER SUPPOSED TO KNOW TO GO DO THAT? CAN YOU OPEN UP THE DALLAS CITY CODE? LOOK, YEAH, WE DID.
WE WERE JUST WAITING FOR THEM TO TELL YOU WE DID.
NO, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE ARGUMENT IS HERE.
WE DIDN'T LOOK, WE DIDN'T JUST SIT THERE AND WAIT FOR THEM.
THE PROBLEM IS, IS THAT THEN WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE BOOKS AND YOU SEE THE SALES, THEY AREN'T A BAR LOUNGER TAVERN BY LAW, THEY HAVE TO HAVE MORE THAN 75% ALCOHOL SALES IN ORDER TO BE A BAR LOUNGER TAVERN.
SO IF TODAY WE WALKED OVER TO, UH, MACH AND TRIED TO GET A CO FOR BAR LOUNGER TAVERN, THEY WOULD REJECT US BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH SALES TO BE A BAR LOUNGER TAVERN.
WE'RE ALSO NOT A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE BECAUSE WE NOW ARE NOT PREDOMINANTLY FOR, UH, ACTIVITIES FOR A FEE.
NEITHER OF THESE POSSIBLE, MAYBE, I DON'T KNOW.
THEY WON'T TELL US ALTERNATIVES THAT WE COULD HAVE GONE.
AND, UH, JUST SO YOU KNOW, I'M INCREDIBLY BORING AND A SUPER NERD AND I READ THE CODES ALL THE TIME.
I COULDN'T TELL YOU WHAT THEY NEEDED TO GO GET.
AND I LOOK AT THE CODE CONSTANTLY, IF I COULDN'T FIGURE IT OUT, THEY COULDN'T FIGURE IT OUT.
AND I REPRESENT ABOUT 20 OTHER RESTAURANTS ON THIS, NONE OF US CAN FIGURE IT OUT BECAUSE THEY WON'T TELL US.
AND WE ARE RESTAURANTS LEGALLY.
WE ARE BEHAVING AND ACTING AND COMPLIANT AS A RESTAURANT.
SO SAYING YOU SHOULD GO GET ANOTHER CO.
THERE ISN'T ANOTHER CO TO GET, AND THAT'S WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON HERE.
THEY DON'T WANT US TO GO GET ANOTHER CO SO WE CAN BE IN COMPLIANCE.
THEY WANNA SHUT ALL THESE PLACES DOWN.
I WANNA MAKE SURE I, I'VE TAKEN SOME NOTES CORRECTLY HERE.
YOU SAY YOU HAVE FIVE COOKS, UH, AND YOU KNOW, DURING A REGULAR WORKDAY YOU HAVE ONE TO TWO OF THOSE COOKS IN THE KITCHEN.
UH, YOU HAVE 12 SERVERS TOTAL, UH, FOUR TO FIVE PER DAY, OR, YOU KNOW, WORKDAY.
UH, WHAT'S YOUR SIGNATURE DISH? WELL, WE SERVE MEXICAN FOOD.
SO OUR BURRITO WHAT'S YOUR SIGNATURE DISH SIGNATURE? I WOULD SAY OUR CARA BURRITO IS EXTREMELY POPULAR.
SO, UM, WE, WE, OBVIOUSLY WE GOT THIS AND WE TRIED TO REVIEW IT AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN SO THAT WE CAN, YOU KNOW, UH, PROCEED.
UM, BUT I HAVE TO LOOK IN AT, UM, THE, WHAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE CITY.
I HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE, UH, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I ASKED ASKED YOU EARLIER IS, UM, HOW ARE YOU PERCEIVING THE MARKETPLACE? UM, I CAN'T, IT'S AGAINST OUR RULES FOR ME TO LOOK UP INFORMATION RIGHT HERE AND DO INDEPENDENT RESEARCH.
BUT IF SOMEONE FROM THE CITY, OR IF I LEAVE HERE TODAY AND I GO
[00:55:01]
AND I LOOK UP TROPHY, UM, UH, LOOK UP YOUR YOUR RESTAURANT, WOULD YOUR MARKETING SAY THAT YOU ARE A RESTAURANT OR WOULD YOUR MARKETING SAY THAT YOU ARE A BAR OR GRILL? SO THAT, THAT, I I JUST WANT TO BE SURE THAT YOU UNDER OATH HERE, YOU ARE CLEAR IN WHAT YOU'RE, YOU ARE SAYING.SO IF YOU, IF YOU WERE TO LOOK AT OUR SOCIAL MEDIA, FOR INSTANCE, SO THAT'S KIND OF OUR MAIN SOURCE OF MARKETING.
WE DON'T, WE ABSOLUTELY DON'T DO ANY OTHER MARKETING OTHER THAN SOCIAL MEDIA.
AND TWO OUT OF EVERY THREE POSTS IS A FOOD POST.
HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHEN YOU MEAN FOOD POSTS.
UH, ADVERTISING OUR, OUR FOOD SPECIAL FOR THE DAY.
SO PICTURES OF FOOD, PICTURES, TACO TUESDAY, WE ALWAYS ADVERTISE TACO TUESDAY, EVERY TUESDAY.
UM, THEY ADVERTISE OUR FOOD EXACTLY TWO OUT OF EVERY THREE.
THE THIRD POST IS, IS IS TYPICALLY A, UH, SORT OF, UM, PERSONALITY TYPE POST SHOWCASING OUR, OUR, OUR SERVERS, OUR HOSTESSES, UH, JUST SOMETHING FUN OR INTERESTING TO GET PEOPLE TO COME IN.
BUT EVERY HARD POST IS DEDICATED TO RESTAURANT FOOD SALES.
UM, DO YOU HAVE ANYBODY ELSE WHO'S GOING TO SPEAK OR YOU WE'LL RESERVE IT FOR REBUTTAL.
IF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, UM, REPRESENTATIVES AND STEP FORWARD, Y'ALL HAVE 20 MINUTES TO PRESENT YOUR CASE.
OH, YOU'D LIKE TO CROSS? OKAY, WE CAN DO THAT.
UM, WE TYPICALLY PUT THE PERSON THERE THAT'S GONNA ANSWER THE QUESTIONS.
UM, SO IF YOU'LL CALL THE WITNESS.
UM, OKAY, SO YOU MENTIONED BEFORE THAT 25% EQUALS A RESTAURANT.
SO WHAT HAPPENS IF ONE QUARTER YOU DON'T REACH THAT 25% SALE? ARE YOU NO LONGER CONSIDERED A RESTAURANT? THAT'D BE CORRECT.
WHAT IF IT DID? IF IT DID, THEN THAT QUARTER I WOULD CONSIDER US NOT TO BE.
WHAT WOULD YOU BE? I HAVE NO CLUE.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE WANNA KNOW.
UM, YOU SAID WHEN YOUR PEAK HOURS ARE BETWEEN 10 TO TWO, RIGHT? CORRECT.
ALL RIGHT, SO WHENEVER COACH SHOWED UP AT 10 O'CLOCK AND TOOK PHOTOS, THEY WERE THERE AT PEAK HOURS.
10 TO TWO IS AT PEAK HOURS, CORRECT? YES.
SO WHENEVER CODE COMPLIANCE CAME AT 10 OR 11 TO TAKE PHOTOS AND CONDUCT INSPECTIONS, THEY WERE THERE DURING PEAK HOURS? YEAH.
WE'RE DEFINING PEAK AS, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE LARGEST VOLUME OF CUSTOMERS, I WOULD SAY.
COULD YOU DESCRIBE THE ATMOSPHERE OF TROPHY BETWEEN THE HOURS OF PEN? COULD YOU, UM, YOU'D HAVE TO BE MORE SPECIFIC IF YOU WALKED IN, WHAT WOULD YOU SEE? IN TERMS OF WHAT? JUST THE WHOLE FILTER.
WHAT DOES THE LIGHTING LOOK LIKE? UM, IN, IN TERMS OF WHAT, WHAT DO YOU MEAN? WHAT DO YOU MEAN? WHAT DOES THE LIGHTING LOOK LIKE IN THE BUILDING? WHICH LIGHT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? THE LIGHTING IN GENERAL.
SO YOU SAID THAT THE SALES OF ALCOHOL IS 65% AND THE FOOD IS 26, RIGHT? CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? YOUR REVENUE SALES, YOU SAID THAT THE AMOUNT FOR ALCOHOL WAS 65 AND THAT THE AMOUNT FOR FOOD WAS 25 OR 26.
35 IS WHAT YOU SAID? CORRECT? 35.
SO DOES THAT YOU AGREE THAT THE NUMBER 65 IS TWICE AS MUCH AS 36? ABOUT, NO.
TWICE 36 WOULD BE 72 CLOSE, LIKE IT'S CLOSE TO NO, NOT, NOT REALLY.
SO YOU SAID THAT THE KITCHEN IS ALWAYS OPEN.
IF I WALKED IN AT 1:58 AM I'D BE ABLE TO ORDER FOOD? ABSOLUTELY.
AND THE WAITERS, YOU SAY YOU HAVE 12 OF THEM, CORRECT? I THINK WE HAVE MORE THAN THAT.
ARE THEY ALSO BARTENDERS? SOME OF THEM, YES.
HOW MANY BARTENDER OR HOW MANY WAITERS ARE BARTENDERS AS WELL? I'M NOT SURE THE EXACT AMOUNT.
YOU, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PEOPLE YOU ARE, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT ON STAFF OR ON A GIVEN NIGHT? ON STAFF? ON STAFF? ALL OF THEM DO BOTH.
AND THEN YOUR, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE PROMOTION
[01:00:01]
OF TROPHY ON SOCIAL MEDIA, AND THAT'S THE ONLY PLACE THAT YOU SAY THAT YOU DO YOUR PROMOTION.IS IT TRUE THAT AT ONE POINT THAT INSTAGRAM OF TROPHY WAS TROPHY? AT TROPHY BAR? NO.
UM, AND IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO, UH, REDIRECT, YOU MAY REDIRECT.
UM, AND I'M SORRY I WALKED OUT.
I WAS LIKE SUPER GUMMY, SO I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT.
OKAY, THEN WE ARE READY FOR THE BUILDING OFFICIALS CASE.
I THINK WE GIVE THEM PERMISSION TO SHARE MY SCREEN.
UM, MY NAME IS VALERIE SANCHEZ.
I'M HERE WITH EMILY KING MORELAND, AND WE REPRESENT THE BUILDING OF BISHOP MYSTERIOUS STANDARD.
SO WE ARE HERE BECAUSE THE QUESTION BEFORE THE PANEL IS, HAS THE APPLICANT MET ITS BURDEN OF PROOF TO ESTABLISH THE NECESSARY FACTS TO SHOW THAT THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AIRED IN REVOKING THE CO FOR TROPHY FOR NOT OPERATING PRIMARILY AS A RESTAURANT? THAT IS THE ONLY QUESTION FOR THE BOARD.
SO DALLAS CITY CODE DEFINES A RESTAURANT AS AN ESTABLISHMENT PRINCIPALLY FOR THE SALE AND CONSUMPTION OF FOOD ON THE PREMISES.
THE BUILDING OFFICIAL IS GIVEN SEVEN.
IS IS THERE A 75% THRESHOLD IN THE, IN THE CODE THAT, THAT THEY HAVE TO MEET? I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT THE, UM, ATTORNEY WAS SAYING, OR IS THERE, IS THERE IS THAT IN THE CODE? NOT WHEN IT APPLIES TO RESTAURANTS, WHICH THE QUESTION BEFORE THE BOARD IS WHETHER TROPHY IS A RESTAURANT? YES.
SO THE CODE EMPOWERS THE BUILDING OFFICIAL REQUIRES A BUILDING OFFICIAL TO REVOKE A CO.
IF IT MEET AT AT LEAST ONE OF THESE SEVEN OPTIONS, WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT THE FIRST THREE.
SO THE FIRST ONE IN THE REVOCATION LETTER IS THAT THE CO WAS ISSUED IN ERROR.
THE SECOND IS THAT IT WAS ISSUED ON THE BASIS OF MATERIALLY INCOMPLETE INFORMATION, AND THAT IT, THE OPERATION OF TROPHY IS IN, WAS IN VIOLATION OF FOOTBALL LAW.
I WAS, I WAS TRYING TO READ, AND, UH, YOU, I THINK YOU DEFINED WHEN YOU FIRST STARTED TALKING, UM, STARTED TALKING.
UM, WELL, YOU, YOU STATED HOW A RESTAURANT IS DEFINED OR WHAT DEFINES THE RESTAURANT.
COULD YOU REPEAT THAT FOR ME, PLEASE? YEAH, I CAN SHOW YOU THAT ON THE SCREEN AS WELL.
UM, A RESTAURANT IS DEFINED AS AN ESTABLISHMENT PRINCIPALLY FOR THE SALE AND CONSUMPTION OF FOOD ON THE PREMISES.
I ALSO DID PROVIDE THE BOARD WITH COPIES OF THE POWERPOINT.
I I WAS READING THE NO PROBLEM.
UH, SO I HAVE TO ASK YOU, UM, DOES TROPHY, UM, PRINCIPALLY, CAN YOU, CAN YOU SPEAK TO ME WHAT, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT IS MEANT BY PRINCIPALLY IN THIS STATEMENT? THAT MEANS THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE, WHAT IS HAPPENING ON THE PREMISE HAS TO DO WITH FOOD ON THE PREMISES.
DJS, UH, DANCING, NIGHTCLUB AMBIANCE OR SOME SORT OF NIGHTTIME AMBIANCE CANNOT BE THE MAJORITY OF WHAT
[01:05:01]
IS HAPPENING ON THE PREMISES.IT HAS TO BE MAINLY TO DO WITH THE FOOD.
AND, AND THIS INFORMATION IS READILY AVAILABLE TO ANYBODY WHO IN, IN THE PUBLIC FACING PUBLICLY AVAILABLE? YES.
THIS IS DALLAS CITY CODE 51, A 4.20.
SO, UM, IN YOUR OPINION, OH, WELL, IN THE OPINION OF THE BUILDING, UH, OFFICIAL MM-HMM
UM, THEY'VE DETERMINED THAT, UH, TROPHY IS NOT PRINCIPLE PRINCIPLE, UM, ACTING AS A RESTAURANT.
AM I, AM I CORRECT IN THAT STATEMENT? CORRECT.
SO, WHEN DETERMINING IF AN ESTABLISHMENT IS A RESTAURANT, THE BUILDING OFFICIAL LOOKS AT VARIOUS FACTORS.
THERE'S NOT ONE SINGLE FACTOR THAT HE'S REQUIRED TO CONSIDER HERE.
WE HAVE 15 FACTORS THAT THE BUILDING OFFICIAL IS ALLOWED TO CONSIDER WHEN DETERMINING IF AN ESTABLISHMENT IS A RESTAURANT.
THE FACTORS THAT THE BUILDING OFFICIAL RELIED ON IN THIS SITUATION WAS THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED PLANS, PHOTOS TAKEN FROM CODE DURING THEIR 27 INSPECTIONS DURING JANUARY AND JUNE, NOTICES OF VIOLATION AND CITATIONS ISSUED AGAIN THROUGH JANUARY AND JUNE.
INSPECTIONS BY DFR AND DPD, THE ESTABLISHMENT NAME, MARKETING MATERIALS, SOCIAL MEDIA PROMOTION, AND ADVERTISE.
AND I'M GONNA QUICKLY SHOW YOU GUYS THOSE ITEMS. IF YOU GUYS NEED ME TO STOP OR TALK ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE, PLEASE LET ME KNOW.
SO HERE WE HAVE, CAN WE PAUSE JUST FOR A SECOND SO I CAN ABSORB WHAT WE'RE CONSIDERING? YES.
SO HERE WE HAVE THE SUBMITTED BUILDING PLANS.
WE HAVE THE BUILDING PLANS FOR THE INSIDE OF THE PROPERTY, FOR THE OUTSIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
WE ALSO HAVE PHOTOS FROM CODE COMPLIANCE.
THESE HERE WE HAVE BEER PONG HAPPENING INDOORS, BOTH INSIDE AND OUTSIDE.
WE HAVE BOTTLE SERVICE BEING GIVEN.
BOTTLE SERVICE IS TAKEN TO SECTIONS.
YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR A BOTTLE OR SOME SORT OF LAR YOU HAVE TO PAY MORE THAN THE REGULAR AMOUNT OF A DRINK.
AND YOU GET PERSONALIZED SERVICE.
SOMETIMES PEOPLE COME OUT WITH SIGNS AND, AND LIKE BLOW UP LIGHTS.
ALL OF THAT'S ALLOWED AT A RESTAURANT THOUGH, RIGHT? THAT CAN HAPPEN AT ANY RESTAURANT.
THE PRINCIPLE ACTIVITY, REVENUE.
THAT AN ACTIVITY THAT HAPPENS AT THE RESTAURANT.
SO WE HAVE BOTTLE SERVICE THERE.
WE SEE A SIGN ANOTHER, THESE IMAGES ARE TAKEN EVERY SINGLE MONTH.
THERE'S PHOTOS FROM FEBRUARY, MARCH, APRIL, MAY, JUNE OF WHAT THE PEAK HOURS LOOK LIKE IN TROPHY.
IF WE CAN SEE HERE, WE HAVE LIGHTS GOING ON.
WE HAVE A LARGE STANDING AREA.
WE HAVE, AGAIN, THIS IS APRIL DARK LIGHTING.
DON'T SEE ANY FOOD CONTAINERS.
AGAIN, LARGE CROWDS OF PEOPLE.
YOU SEE PEOPLE DANCING OVER HERE.
I DON'T SEE TABLES WHERE PEOPLE ARE SEATED.
I DON'T SEE FOOD CONSUMPTIONS, I DON'T SEE CARRY OUT CONTAINERS.
THERE'S GAMING MACHINES IN THE PROPERTY.
DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YEAH.
YOU SAID THAT, UH, CODE INSPECTED TROPHY 27 TIMES BETWEEN JANUARY AND JUNE.
IS THAT TYPICAL FOR RESTAURANTS IN DALLAS? IN THE DEEP ELLUM AREA? THERE IS A SPECIFIC DEEP ELM TASK FORCE UHHUH, UM, IF YOU GUYS HAVE HEARD OF THE SHOOTING THAT HAVE HAPPENED, RIGHT.
THERE'S VARIOUS RESTAURANTS THAT HAVE ALSO BEEN INSPECTED THROUGHOUT THIS TIME.
AND ONCE A VIOLATION HAS BEEN ISSUED THAT SOMEONE IS OUT OF COMPLIANCE AND NO LONGER ACTING IN THEIR CO, THE CITY HAS A RIGHT TO GO BACK AND DOUBLE CHECK THAT THAT ISSUE HAS BEEN RESOLVED.
AND SO IS THIS THE ONLY RESTAURANT DOWN THERE THAT, THAT THE CITY'S HAVING AN ISSUE WITH? NO.
SO I GUESS WHAT I'M, UH, YOU KNOW, I'M ASKING IS, IS THE CITY PICKING ON THESE PEOPLE FOR, I DON'T KNOW, WHATEVER REASON? WELL, THAT MAY BE THIS, THIS NARRATIVE THAT IS BEING EXPENDED BY THE APPELLANT.
[01:10:01]
HAVE HERE VARIOUS DEPARTMENT.THIS HAS BEEN A, A MULTIPLE DEPARTMENT WIDE ISSUE.
IT'S TAKEN A LOT OF RESOURCES.
VARIOUS PEOPLE HAVE BEEN INVOLVED.
THIS IS NOT THE ONLY PROPERTY, THE STEPS THAT OUR CODE DEPARTMENT, D-F-R-D-P-D PLANNING, THE STEPS THAT THEY TOOK ARE ABSOLUTELY THE NORMAL STEPS THAT THEY WOULD'VE TAKEN FOR ANYONE ELSE.
UM, SO WHAT WOULD THE CEO BE TO, TO HAVE GAMBLING, STANDING ROOM, DARK LIGHTS, DJS? IS THERE A CO THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE EVIDENCE THAT WE'RE SEEING THAT DOESN'T SUPPORT A RESTAURANT USE? SO I KNOW THAT THE WHOLE ISSUE OR WHAT THEY'RE CLAIMING IS WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO TELL THEM WHAT THEY ARE.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT'S NOT YOUR, AND WE, WE CANNOT, WITHOUT THE PLANS ALLOWED PROPERLY REFLECTING HOW, HOW THE STANDING AREA IS GONNA BE USED.
UM, IT, THE, THERE'S A, THERE'S A PORTION WHERE YOU CAN IDENTIFY IF THERE IS FIXED OR UNFIXED, UM, TABLES OR CHAIRS.
SO ARE THE TABLES THAT ARE NOT FIXED, FIXED, EVENTUALLY MOVED, ARE THEY, IS A SPACE THAT'S OPEN EVEN MORE OPEN? YES.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT IS THERE A CO THAT WOULD MAKE THESE SCENARIOS THAT WE'RE SEEING, UH, APPROPRIATE? IF YES, THERE ARE.
THEY CAN BE A BAR OR A TAVERN, A NIGHTCLUB.
WE ALSO HAVE A METAL DETECTOR OUTSIDE AND A VIP LINE TO GET INTO THIS RESTAURANT.
UM, THIS IS A LARGELY NON-OPERATIONAL KITCHEN HERE WE HAVE THAT SAYS JANUARY 9TH, NINE DAYS AFTER OPENING OR CLOSE TO THAT, THIS KITCHEN DOES NOT LOOK LIKE IT'S BEING USED.
THIS IS FROM MAY AND JUNE OF, AGAIN, THE KITCHEN EMPTY, DOESN'T LOOK LIKE ANYTHING IS BEING PREPARED.
NEXT WE HAVE NOTICES OF VIOLATIONS THAT WERE GIVEN.
WE HAVE TWO NOTICES OF VIOLATIONS AND EIGHT CITATIONS.
MAJORITY OF THE CITATIONS GIVEN WERE FOR NOT OPERATING PRIMARILY, PRINCIPALLY AS A RESTAURANT.
SO, UM, WOULD IT, WOULD IT BE THE BUILDING OFFICIALS, UM, POSITION THAT THEY, THERE HAS BEEN NO EVIDENCE THAT THE KITCHEN IS BEING USED AT ALL.
HAS THERE BEEN, UM, OCCASIONS WHERE THE BUILDING OR OFFICIAL OR THE CO COMPLIANCE PERSON HAD BEEN THERE AND THEY'VE TAKEN PICTURES AND THERE HAS BEEN FOOD BEING PREPARED THERE OR, OR YOU YEAH, WE ARE, WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT SOME COULD, FOOD MIGHT HAVE BEEN COOKED THERE, BUT WE'RE SAYING LARGELY IT'S NON-OPERATIONAL THAT WHAT WE, WE, WHAT IS THE CODE INSPECTORS HAVE FOUND IN THERE IS NOT REALLY INDICATIVE OF IT SOLELY SELLING.
SO THERE IS EVIDENCE OF FOOD BEING PREPARED AT THIS RESTAURANT? YES.
WE HAVE THE NOTICES, A VIOLATION OF THE CITATION THAT WERE ISSUED.
WE ALSO HAVE PROMOTIONAL MATERIAL AND ESTABLISHMENT NAME.
SO HERE WE HAVE A TEQUILA, TEQUILA TUESDAY.
AT THE VERY BOTTOM WE SEE A LINE THAT SAYS KITCHENS OPEN UNTIL TWO.
OVER HERE WE HAVE A VIDEO AND I CAN PLAY THESE VIDEOS IF YOU'D LIKE, BUT BASICALLY IT'S FOLKS AND THEY'RE NOT POSTED BY TROPHY SURE.
BUT THERE IS WHAT'S, HOW THEY'RE PERCEIVED THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA.
AND THIS IS FREE ADVERTISEMENT THAT'S BEING GIVEN TO THEM.
I'D LIKE TO HEAR ONE OR TWO BECAUSE WE CAN'T DO OUR OWN RESEARCH TO SEE WHAT'S ON SOCIAL MEDIA.
SO I, I DON'T KNOW HOW THE REST OF THE PANEL, BUT PLEASE.
OH, HOW DO WE DO AUDIO? UH, YOU CAN PROBABLY UNMUTE YOUR COMPUTER.
[01:15:19]
THIS IS ROB AND DALLAS.SO TELL ME, WHAT'S YOUR FAVORITE BAR OUT HERE? TROPHY.
BE, IS THERE ANY SOCIALS YOU WANNA PLUG? AND THAT JUST GOES INTO HER TALKING ABOUT HER SOCIAL MEDIA THAT SHE WANTS TO SHARE.
BUT SOMETHING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO GO, THE PANEL IS UP HERE.
THIS GENTLEMAN TAGGED THE BAR, OR I'M SORRY, SORRY, MY APOLOGIES.
AND I HOPE IF YOU GUYS, OR YOU CAN FLIP TO THE POWERPOINT, BUT THERE YOU SEE WHERE IT IS.
THAT IS HOW TROPHY WAS TAGGED.
AND YOU SAW TROPHY SHOW UP THEIR ADDRESS WHERE IT WAS LOCATED.
AND HERE ON SOCIAL MEDIA, THEY'RE TAGGED AS TROPHY BAR.
THEIR HANDLE HAS SINCE CHANGED.
THE TOP ONE SAYS HOW LIFE SOUNDS.
WHEN I'M WALKING INTO THE SAME CLUB I'M AT EVERY WEEKEND WITH MY BEST FRIEND.
AND YOU SEE LIGHTS, SPLASHING, PEOPLE STANDING AROUND.
I JUST CANNOT FIGURE IT FOR THE LIFE OF ME HOW TO DO IT.
AND THEN HERE WE HAVE A VIDEO FROM A DJ FROM THE PROPERTY.
AND THERE YOU SEE THE BOTTLE SERVICE BEING SHOWN.
THEY WALK AROUND AND THEY SHOW THE, THE CONTAINER.
RIGHT? UM, THIS IS PUBLISHED, IF YOU CAN SEE WHERE HE IS STANDING, HE'S STANDING IN THE DJ BOOTH.
SO THIS POST IS COMING FROM SOMEONE WHO IS WORKING AT TROPHY.
THE FIRST POINT BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL WAS THAT THE CO WAS ISSUED AN ERROR WHEN ST WHEN THE BUILDING OFFICIAL REVIEWED THE APPLICATION, THE BUILDING PLANS AND PHOTOS, THE BUILDING OFFICIAL DETERMINED THAT THE CO WAS ISSUED AN ERROR.
THEREFORE, THE DALLAS CITY CODE REQUIRES, THERE IS NO IF, ANDS OR BUTS, HE IS REQUIRED TO REVOKE THE CO.
SO ONCE THAT IS PUT, ONCE HE'S AWARE OF THOSE THINGS, HE HAS TO REVOKE IT.
IT SAYS IT DISTINCTIVELY IN THE CODE.
THE SECOND ISSUE, AS THE CO WAS ISSUED ON THE BASIS OF MATERIALLY INCOMPLETE INFORMATION, APPLICANT CLAIMS THAT THEY DISCLOSED EVERYTHING THAT THEY NEEDED TO DISCLOSE IN THEIR APPLICATION.
THEY ALSO SAID JUST NOW THE TESTIMONY THAT THEIR APPLICATION DISCLOSES THAT THERE WAS GONNA BE DJS AND DANCING AND THE LIGHTS.
UM, I DO NOT SEE IN THE APPLICATION WHERE IT LISTS ANY OF THAT INFORMATION, BUT I WOULD LOVE TO SEE, YOU KNOW, WHERE THAT IS.
WHAT THEY FAILED TO DO IS THEY FORGET, THEY FAILED TO SIGNIFY THAT THE OPEN AREA IN THE PLANS WAS ACTUALLY GONNA BE USED AS A DANCE FLOOR.
BECAUSE THERE'S A SPECIFIC BOX IN THE APPLICATION WHERE IT SAYS DANCE FLOOR, YES OR NO, AND THEY CLICK NO.
YET AS WE SAW FROM THOSE PHOTOS AND THOSE VIDEOS, THAT OPEN AREA IS VERY MUCH BEING USED AS A DANCE FLOOR.
THE DJ BEING THERE, THE MUSIC BEING PLAYED, THE WHAT IS BEING, IT'S, IT'S ENCOURAGING DANCE IN RIGHT.
NEXT, THEY FAILED TO CORRECTLY LIST THE PROPOSED USE OF THE PROPERTY.
THEY HAD TO TELL US WHAT THEY WERE GONNA USE THE PROPERTY FOR.
THEY SAID IT WAS A RESTAURANT WITHOUT A DRIVE-IN.
FROM THE THINGS THAT WE SAW, THE LIGHTING BFP SECTION, THE BOTTLE SERVICE, ALL OF THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY REALLY GIVE CHILI'S ATMOSPHERE.
OR AN IHOP OR GLORIA'S, EVEN IF YOU WILL.
WHAT THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE IS IN THEIR PROPOSED USE, GIVEN DETAIL ON HOW THEY PLAN TO USE THIS SPACE.
FROM THERE, THEY THEN COULD HAVE HAD A CONVERSATION WITH PLANNING AND THE BUILDING OFFICIAL TO FIGURE OUT WHAT CO BEST FITS THEM.
BUT THEY DID NOT IN THEIR APPLICATION STATE WHAT THEY WERE INTENDING TO USE THE SPACE FOR.
THEY CLAIM IN THE APPLICATION THERE'S A BOX THAT SAYS NO CHANGE TO LAND USE.
THE PREVIOUS CO ISSUED IN THE PROPERTY, WHICH WAS FOR ANOTHER BUSINESS WAS A RESTAURANT.
THEY ARE NOT ACTING IN THE RESTAURANT.
SO WHEN THEY CLICKED THAT THERE WAS NO CHANGE IN THE USE THAT WAS INCORRECT.
UM, I I'M GONNA ASK YOU TO SPECULATE.
[01:20:01]
SO WHAT WOULD BE AN ADVANTAGE? WHY WOULD, WHY WOULD YOU, YOU THINK THERE WERE, IS THERE, IS THERE AN ADVANTAGE OR PERCEIVED ADVANTAGE TO BEING, UM, UM, YOU, YOU A RESTAURANT VERSUS A BAR? UH, I, I GUESS SO.A A CO FOR A RESTAURANT IS PROCESSED QUICKER AND DOESN'T REQUIRE ANY EXTRA PERMITS.
IF YOU WERE IDENTIFIED AS SOMETHING ELSE, WHICH WE ARE NOT SAYING WHETHER THEY ARE, BUT IF THEY WERE IDENTIFIED AS BAR PAVR, LOUNGE, DANCE HALL, ENTERTAINMENT FOCUS AREA, THEY WOULD NEED AN SUPA SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
WHICH THOSE ARE NOT NEW THINGS TO DEVELOP.
IT'S DEVELOP VARIOUS PLACES, INCLUDING THE BUSINESS RIGHT NEXT DOOR ACTUALLY SUBMITTED AN SUP.
SO THE SUVS ARE, ARE PRETTY PROMINENT IN DEVELOP, BUT IF I HAD TO SPECULATE, THAT IS WHAT I THINK IT WOULD BE MUCH LONGER.
WE TALK A WEEK TALK MONTHS INDIFFERENCE IN TIME TO, UM, ACHIEVE THE CO FOR A BAR VERSUS A RESTAURANT.
I CAN HAVE SOMEONE FROM OUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT IF YOU OR SO WE HAVE MEGAN WILMER IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WHO WILL BE ABLE, HI MEGAN WEER ASSISTANT DIRECTOR PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT.
UM, A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT PROCESS IS A PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS.
AND SO IT WOULD REQUIRE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION REVIEW BY STAFF AND THEN CITY PLAN COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL WOULD HAVE FIVE FINAL ACTION.
UM, WE ARE CURRENTLY PROCESSING THOSE AND GETTING THEM THROUGH THE COMPLETE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS IN ABOUT FOUR MONTHS, THREE TO FOUR MONTHS.
IS THAT OPTIMISTIC OR IS THAT AVERAGE? I THINK, UH, WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW.
I MEAN, THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES IN THE PAST WHERE WE WERE BACKLOGGED AND MAYBE UNDERSTAFFED AND WE'RE MOVING MORE SLOWLY, BUT I WOULD SAY ABOUT FOUR MONTHS IS PRETTY TYPICAL THESE DAYS.
OH, AND SO JUST GETTING A CO FOR A RESTAURANT THERE, IT'S NOT A DISCRETIONARY APPROVAL PROCESS.
IT DOESN'T GO TO PUBLIC HEARINGS.
IT'S JUST, UM, I'M NOT SURE HOW LONG THOSE ARE TAKING THESE DAYS, BUT IT'S A STAFF LEVEL REVIEW.
MR. MILLIKEN, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YES.
UH, MS. SANCHEZ, MY QUESTION IS ON PAGE 23 OF YOUR PRESENTATION, UM, THE TOP IS LARGELY NON-OPERATIONAL KITCHEN AND THE FIRST, UM, PICTURE AT 1133 ON FRIDAY MM-HMM
UM, IN THE RESTAURANT, I'M, I'M SORRY, IN THE KITCHEN, UM, THE GRILL DOESN'T LOOK VERY BUSY, BUT WHAT KIND OF PUZZLES ME IS THE ALCOHOL DOWN AT THE END OF THE KITCHEN DOOR RIGHT HERE BY THE DOOR WHERE YOU'RE SAYING THE LARGE STACK YES.
OF ALCOHOL THAT YOU COULD OBSERVE.
SO IS THIS A-T-A-B-C VIOLATION OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S PERMITTED FROM FOR STORAGE? I CANNOT TESTIFY TO THE TABC.
WE DO HAVE SOMEONE AND FROM OUR DPD DEPARTMENT AND VICE WHO CAN HOPEFULLY ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
OH, AND JUST TO, SO THE PANEL KNOWS, WE DO HAVE REPRESENTATIVES FROM D-P-D-D-F-R PLANNING OUR BUILDING OFFICIAL AND THEN CODE COMPLIANCE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION YOU GUYS MIGHT HAVE.
I'VE BEEN WAITING FOR THESE GUYS.
HELLO, MY NAME'S SERGEANT HASSEY.
I'M A SUPERVISOR OVER THE VICE LICENSING UNIT WITH DP.
SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YES, THAT WOULD BE A VIOLATION TO HAVE OPEN ALCOHOL BOTTLES IN THE KITCHEN, UNLESS COURSE THEY'RE BEING USED FOR FOOD PREPARATION, BUT IT IS NOT A, A CRIMINAL COMPLAINT.
THAT WOULD BE A, UH, ADMINISTRATIVE VIOLATION IS ARE YOU ALLOWED TO HAVE CLOTHES, ALCOHOL BOTTLES? SURE.
THEY CAN BE STORED ANYWHERE, BUT I WOULDN'T SAY THAT THAT'S AN IDEAL LOCATION, UH, FOR, BUT OKAY, THANK YOU.
THE SECOND REASON FOR, OH, WE DISCUSSED THAT BECAUSE THE BUILDING OFFICIAL BECAME AWARE THAT THERE IS MATERIALLY IMPORTANT INFORMATION THAT WAS MISSING IN THE APPLICATION.
[01:25:01]
TO REVOKE THE CO AND THEREFORE THE REVOCATION UNDER 3 0 6 POINT 13 TWO WAS PROPER.THE THIRD REASON IS THAT TROPHY OPERATED IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAW.
SO TROPHY WHEN THEY FAILED TO IDENTIFY THEMSELVES, OR SORRY, WHEN THEY MISCLASSIFIED THEMSELVES AS A RESTAURANT AS THEIR OPERATION, AND FAILED TO DESIGNATE WHAT THAT OPEN AREA ACTUALLY WAS BEING USED AT.
AND AS THE PHOTO SHOW SEEMS, IT WAS BEING MOVED MORE OF A DANCE FLOOR, THEY PREVENTED FROM THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AND DFR FROM PROPERLY CALCULATING THAT OCCUPANCY LOAD AND OCCUPANCY LOAD IS VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE THAT IS THE NUMBER THAT WAS DETERMINED.
IT, THE, THE NUMBER 2 25 MEANS THAT 225 PEOPLE CAN SAFELY EXIT THE BUILDING SHOULD SOMETHING HAPPEN.
BEING JUST EVEN ONE PERSON OVER CAN VERY MUCH CAUSE PROBLEMS AND POSES A DANGER TO EVERYONE LOCATED INSIDE THE, THE APPELLANT IN THEIR BRIEF SAYS THAT WE ARE SPECULATING AND THAT THERE IS NO ACTUAL VIOLATION OF THE LAW.
WELL, ON APRIL 9TH, 2026, DPD CITED TROPHY FOR SELLING TOBACCO PRODUCTS WITHOUT A TOBACCO LICENSE AND FOR ILLEGAL LAND USE, NO DANCEHALL PERMITS OR NEW CHAPTER 14.
IN THE PHOTOS THAT I PROVIDED YOU GUYS WITH TODAY, THAT'S THE VERY LAST PAGE.
IT SHOWS YOU THE CITATION FROM DPD.
AND SO OPERATING WITHOUT A LICENSE AND SELLING TOBACCO PRODUCTS IS VERY MUCH A DANGER TO THE PATRON THAN THE INCIDENTS OF DALLAS.
SO FOR THE INTERIOR OF THIS RESTAURANT MM-HMM
THE CITY SAID 225 PEOPLE, THAT'S THE MAX LOAD YOU CAN HAVE IN THERE, RIGHT? YES.
SO IF THERE'S, YOU KNOW, GOD FORBID AN EMERGENCY, PEOPLE CONNECT IT SAFELY.
DID THE, UH, CODE ENFORCEMENT OR FIRE DEPARTMENT, ANYBODY DURING ONE OF THEIR PEAK HOURS WERE, WERE THEY ABLE TO DETERMINE HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE IN THAT RESTAURANT, LIKE STANDING OR DANCING OR WATCHING OR GAMING OR WHATEVER? SO DURING THE TIME BEFORE THE REVOCATION, NO OCCUPANCY, UM, OVER THE OCCUPANCY WAS ISSUED.
THERE WAS ONE ISSUED AFTER THE REVOCATION, BUT WE ARE ONLY HERE TO TALK ABOUT PRE REVOCATION.
UM, SO THERE'S ALSO, AS YOU SAID, AN INDOOR AND AN OUTDOOR AND TRAFFIC REALLY DOES MILLE IN AND OUT, BUT NO, NO VIOLATION WAS ISSUED DURING THAT TIME FOR BEING OVER OCCUPANCY.
YOU HAVE SOMEONE FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HERE? YES, WE DO HAVE SOME FROM DFR.
WELL, 'CAUSE I'D LIKE TO KNOW IF, IF YOU HAVE, IF YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE ISSUED A CO FOR A RESTAURANT, THE IDEA IS THAT, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE ARE SEATED IN EATING, RIGHT? IF YOU HAVE PEOPLE STANDING AND DANCING AND GAMING AND WHATNOT.
SIR, WHAT IS THE DANGER OF THAT? IF, IF AN EMERGENCY HAPPENS, WHAT, WHAT DO YOU HAVE AN ISSUE WITH? THIS, I GUESS IS MY QUESTION TO YOU.
THERE'S GILBERT PADILLA, CAPTAIN, UH, FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE.
THERE'S A COUPLE QUESTIONS THERE.
SO, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, I WANNA STATE THAT THE BUILDING OFFICIALS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, UH, THEY RECEIVED THE PLANS AND THEY CALCULATE THE OCCUPANT LOAD.
FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE ENFORCES THOSE OCCUPANT LOADS OUT IN THE FIELD.
UM, FOR STANDING ROOM, UM, THERE'S A DIFFERENT FACTOR THAT'S USED.
SO FOR INSTANCE, FOR THIS AREA, IT WOULD BE A NET SQUARE FOOTAGE, UH, CALCULATION.
AND EACH PERSON WOULD BE ATTRIBUTABLE, UH, IF THIS WERE STANDING ROOM FIVE SQUARE FEET PER NET, UH, IF THERE WAS TABLES AND CHAIRS, IT'D BE 15.
RIGHT? THERE'S MORE, UH, SPACE PER PERSON WHEN THERE'S TABLES AND CHAIRS.
SO I, I WOULDN'T SAY WHAT IT CHANGES.
WHAT, WHAT CHANGES THE DANGER LEVEL OR THE PERCEIVED DANGER LEVEL IS USUALLY THE ACTIVITY.
UM, THE BUILDING CODE AND FIRE CODE ARE PRETTY MUCH THE SAME WHEN IT COMES TO MEANS OF EGRESS.
AND WHEN IT COMES TO ASSEMBLIES LIKE BARS, RESTAURANTS, ET CETERA, THEY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT, UH, THE FACT THAT ALCOHOL IS BEING SERVED, UM, THAT THERE ARE LOW LIGHTS, UM, WITHSTANDING ROOM, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE MORE PEOPLE BECAUSE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENT IS LESS, SO IT'S FIVE MINUTES AS OPPOSED TO TABLES AND CHAIRS, WHICH MAY BE A 15.
SO THERE'S, UH, POSSIBILITY OF A HIGHER OCCUPANT LOAD WHEN STANDING ROOM IS THE FACTOR THAT YOU USE.
WHAT FACTOR DID YOU USE TO DETERMINE THE 225? I DID NOT.
I'M GONNA, THAT'S ACTUALLY STABLE DEVELOPMENT THAT, THAT DETERMINES THAT.
SO WE'D HAVE TO DEPEND ON THEM FOR THE, THE FACTOR THAT WAS APPLIED.
LET'S GET, THANK YOU, PATRICK.
[01:30:01]
I I WANT THE ANSWER TO HER QUESTION.SO, SAM ISKANDER, I'M THE BUILDING OFFICIAL.
COULD YOU PLEASE REPEAT THE QUESTION ONE MORE TIME? HOW WAS THE 225 OCCUPANCY DETERMINED? WAS IT STANDING ROOM OR WAS IT, WERE YOU THE FIVE FEET OR THE 15 FEET? IT'S, IT'S BASED ON ALL OF THAT.
EACH, EACH, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE ABLE TO GO BACK TO THAT, TO THAT SCREEN.
WITH THE MAPS, THERE'S THESE SHADED AREAS ON THE PLANS THAT SHOW STANDING AREA VERSUS SITTING AREA STAFF DOES A CALCULATION OF WHAT THE OCCUPANCY LOAD IS BASED OFF OF EACH OF THOSE AREAS.
AND YEAH, IT'S BROKEN DOWN IN, IN THOSE SHADED AREAS RIGHT THERE.
YOU'RE THINKING THAT HERE'S THE KEY TO IT.
UM, YOU SEE THE LINES THAT SIGNIFIES WHAT THEY ARE BEING SHOWN AS.
SO YOU WOULD LOOK AT THE PLAN HERE, AND SO BRING THIS RIGHT THERE, RIGHT DOWN.
LET'S THINK
AND DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? I THINK SO.
I, IT'S, UM, SO THOSE TABLES ON THE SIDE, THEY WERE NOT FIXED.
SO THERE WAS NEVER A QUESTION IN THE BUILDING OFFICIAL'S MIND THAT THIS WAS NOT GOING TO BE A BAR.
SO THAT, THAT'S A LOT OF STANDING ROOM FOR A RESTAURANT.
SO AS TO THE FIRST REASON THAT IT WAS REVOKED IS THAT THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WAS ISSUED IN ERROR.
DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE BUILDING OFFICIAL? NO.
ALL RIGHT, BEAR, WE'VE GOT A LOT OF CLICKING TO GET BACK.
COULD I GET A CHECK ON MY TIME? YOU HAVE SIX AND A HALF MINUTES.
SO, AS I SAID, TROPHY WAS OPERATING IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAW.
THERE WAS A DANGER POST TO PERSONS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
SO AGAIN, THE REVOCATION IS PROPER.
THE OTHER SIDE WANTS TO KEEP HARPING ON.
THEY ARE NOT A BAR, THEY DON'T MAKE THE DEFINITION OF A BAR.
THE QUESTION BEFORE THE BOARD IS WHETHER TROPHY PRINCIPALLY USED THE PROPERTY AS A RESTAURANT.
BUILDING OFFICIAL DOESN'T HAVE TO IDENTIFY TROPH IS PRIMARY USE, ESPECIALLY WHENEVER HOW THEY PLAN TO USE A PROPERTY WASN'T, WASN'T ACTUALLY GIVEN IN THE APPLICATION.
SO WHAT TROPHY COULD HAVE DONE, AND WHAT OUR DEPARTMENT IS VERY WILLING TO DO IS SPOKEN TO THE BUILDING OFFICIALS, SPOKEN TO PLANNING.
LET'S GO THROUGH, ONCE THEY FILLED OUT THEIR APPLICATION CORRECTLY, LET'S GO THROUGH AND FIGURE OUT, OKAY, DO YOU QUALIFY FOR BARN? ARE YOU A LOUNGE? UM, THE GENTLEMAN UP HERE SAID THAT HE COULDN'T INTERPRET THE CODE.
WELL, WE HAVE EXPERTS, WE HAVE PLANNING EXPERTS, WE HAVE OUR BUILDING OFFICIAL.
THEY ARE THE FOLKS WHO CAN GO THROUGH AND HELP THE APPLICANT DETERMINE WHAT THE PROPERTY WILL BE.
UM, I'M GONNA ASK, UM, UH, THE, THE BOARD'S ATTORNEY, I JUST WANNA CHECK THE QUESTION.
WHAT, WHAT IS THE QUESTION? I'M SORRY.
CAN YOU RESTATE IT? UM, WHAT IS, WHAT? WHY, WHAT, WHAT'S THE BEFORE THE QUESTION IS WHETHER OR NOT THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AIRED WHEN THEY REVOKED THE CERTIFICATE OF CERTIFIC.
I JUST WANNA BE CERTIFICATE, CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
UH, I JUST WANNA BE SURE THAT THEY MATCH.
YEAH, MINE'S A BIT OF A SIMPLIFIED REASON BECAUSE WE GET AIRED, REVOKED, APPROVED, AND IT CAN KIND OF GET A BIT CONFUSING.
UM, SO IF THEY HAD CLASSIFIED THEMSELVES CORRECTLY, THEY WOULD'VE GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS TO FIGURE OUT IF THEY NEEDED EXTRA PERMITS, WHAT THEY WOULD BE CONSIDERED IF THEY NEEDED TO GET A SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
[01:35:03]
THEY'RE TRYING TO AVOID THE RELEVANT QUESTION HERE OF ARE THEY OPERATING PRINCIPALLY AS A RESTAURANT? THE BUILDING OFFICIAL WASN'T REQUIRED TO REQUEST THEIR BOOKS IN THE FACTORS GIVEN.IN THE INTERPRETATION, IT SAYS THAT REVENUE CAN BE CONSIDERED, BUT AS I STATED, IT IS NOT THE MAIN FOCUS.
THE BUILDING OFFICIAL IS NOT REQUIRED TO ASK FOR THE BOOKS IN ANY WAY.
THEY'RE IN THEIR BRIEF, THEY SAY 75% IS PART OF THE LAW THAT THEY HAVE TO ADHERE, AND THEY FAILED TO DO SO.
BUT AGAIN, WE ARE NOT HERE TO SAY THAT TROPHY IS A BAR.
WE ARE SAYING TROPHY ISN'T A RESTAURANT.
THEIR PRINCIPLE USE IS NOT THAT OF A RESTAURANT.
SO THEIR HYPER FOCUS IN THE 75 IS REALLY A DISTRACTION OF, OF WHAT IS GOING ON UNDER THE DALLAS CITY CODE.
THE, THE BUILDING OFFICIAL HAS THE AUTHORITY TO INTERPRET.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE CLAIMING THAT THE BUILDING OFFICIAL'S INTERPRETATION IS NEW LAW AND TRYING TO CIRCUMVENT COUNSEL'S APPROVAL.
COUNSEL GAVE THE BUILDING OFFICIAL THE POWER TO INTERPRET THE CODE.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN HAPPENING.
IT'S NOT THE FIRST, IT'S NOT THE LAST.
HE IS ALLOWED TO PROVIDE STAFF WITH A CONSISTENT FRAMEWORK FOR APPLYING THE EXISTING DEFINITION OF A RESTAURANT.
FINALLY, THEIR TROPHY MAKES A POINT ABOUT, UH, THEIR RELATIONSHIP WITH THEIR LANDLORD AND HABITUAL NEW STUDENT'S PROPERTY.
THAT IS NOT WHAT IS IN FRONT OF THE BOARD AT THIS TIME.
AGAIN, THE ISSUE IS BEFORE THE BOARD IS WHETHER THE APPLICANT MET ITS BURDEN OF PROOF TO SHOW THAT THE BOARD AIRED OR THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AIRED IN REVOKING TROPHIES RESTAURANT CO.
SO FOR THESE REASONS, THE BUILDING OFFICIAL ASKED THE BOARD TO DENY TROPHIES, APPEAL AND AFFIRM AND WHOLE THE BUILDING OFFICIAL'S REVOCATION OF TROPHY CO FOR RESTAURANT WITHOUT DRIVE THROUGH SERVICE.
THAT IS THE END OF OUR PRESENTATION.
BUT AS I SAID, WE HAVE MEMBERS OF T-P-D-D-F-R PLANNING, THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AND CODE ENFORCEMENT TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I HAVE ONE.
UH, FOR YOUR, YOUR RESTAURANT, A RESTAURANT, WHAT SECURITY DO YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE? UH, I'M ASKING THE CITY PERSON.
THERE IS NO SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF SECURITY THAT THERE, UH, A REQUIRED TO HAVE.
SO IF I GO TO DEEP EL AND OPEN UP A RESTAURANT, I DON'T HAVE TO SAY I DON'T HAVE TO HAVE SECURITY THERE.
I CAN CHOOSE TO DO IT, BUT I DON'T HAVE TO.
UH, I DON'T THINK IT'S EXPLICITLY LISTED, LIKE LISTED ONE PERSON PER 20 PEOPLE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IT IS UP TO THE DISCRETION OF THE OWNER.
IF, IF I'M GONNA HAVE A BAR, DO I NEED TO HAVE SECURITY? WE HAVE SOME, HEY AGAIN.
SO IN TERMS OF DPD POLICY, OFF-DUTY OFFICERS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO BE IN, THEY CAN PROVIDE SECURITY OUTSIDE THE LOCATION, BUT IF IT'S A BUSINESS THAT SELLS ALCOHOL AND THE THE PERCENTAGES THAT THEY DO, THEY'RE ACTUALLY NOT ALLOWED TO BE INSIDE.
SO FOR THE MOST PART, WHAT THEY'RE THERE TO DO IS KEEP THE PEACE, YOU KNOW, MAKE SURE THERE'S NO DISTURBANCES RELATED TO ENTRANCE OR EGRESS TO THE LOCATION.
ANYTHING HAPPENING INSIDE WOULD BE PRIVATE SECURITY.
SO THE SECURITY THEY HAVE INSIDE THEIR ESTABLISHMENT ARE NOT OFF DUTY, DPD IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? NO, NO.
UH, SO I ALSO AM THE ONE THAT, UH, APPROVED WHAT THEY CALL A LONG FORM.
SO THE WHOLE CITY OF DALLAS, IF YOU WANNA WORK OFF DUTY AT A BAR, LOUNGE, WHATEVER THAT SERVES ALCOHOL, BASICALLY THE, THE BAROMETER I HAVE TO APPROVE.
AND I HAVE APPROVED OFFICERS WHO WORK THEIR OFF DUTY, BUT THEY ARE ONLY ALLOWED TO WORK OUTSIDE THE ASSEMBLY.
AND SO WHAT DO YOUR OFFICERS, HOW DO THEY VIEW THIS ESTABLISHMENT AS A RESTAURANT? LIKE, HEY, I'M GONNA GO AND I'M GONNA PICK UP SOME EXTRA HOURS AT THIS RESTAURANT BOSS, OR I'M GONNA GO WORK AT THIS BAR.
HOW DO YOU LOOK AT HOW THEY ASK YOU FOR THAT? SO THAT IS A BIT OF SPECULATION.
IT IS ASKING FOR HIM TO RELAY THE AMOUNT.
I MEAN, IF YOU'RE ASKING ME MY OPINION, YES SIR, I CAN'T, I DON'T WANNA SPECULATE ON ANYBODY THAT WOULD WORK THEIR OFF DUTY.
BUT I HAVE PERFORMED, UH, AN INSPECTION THERE ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS.
WE'RE ACTUALLY THERE ON JANUARY 1ST, THE DAY THAT THEY OPENED.
UH, AND THEN THE DAY THAT THAT CITATION WAS WRITTEN, WE WERE THERE.
[01:40:01]
THAT SAGE, THE OPINIONS OF SERGEANT HASSEY OF THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT IS THAT THIS LOCATION IS OPERATING IS A DANCE HALL.THAT'S WHAT THE CITATION WAS WRITTEN FOR.
UH, THE PERCENTAGES OF ALCOHOL.
IF YOU LOOK AT SECTION 14 DASH TWO FOR THE DANCEHALL, IT'S ACTUALLY 50%.
SO IN TERMS OF ALCOHOL SALES VERSUS FOOD SALES, I THINK WE'RE PRETTY WELL ESTABLISHED THAT ALCOHOL IS THE DRIVING FACTOR HERE.
UH, THE DAY THAT WE WERE THERE ON JANUARY ONE, WE JUST HAD THAT CONVERSATION, HEY, THIS LOOKS LIKE A DANCEHALL.
WE DIDN'T WRITE ANY CITATIONS AND WE HAD THAT COMMUNICATION.
AND THE ONE THING THAT I WANNA STRESS IS DPDS POLICY IS NOT TO SHUT ANYBODY DOWN.
WE WANT EVERYBODY TO BE SUCCESSFUL.
AND WHAT I FIND IS THAT I RESPOND TO ALL LOCATIONS THAT ARE BARS, RESTAURANTS THAT HAVE A LOSS OF LIFE.
AND ON THOSE OCCASIONS WHEN WE HAVE TO DO A PRESS BRIEFING, YOU KNOW, THE BUILDING OFFICIAL'S NOT OUT THERE ASKING, ANSWERING WHY, WHY, WHAT, WHAT HAPPENED? HOW DID WE LOSE SOMEBODY THAT'S
AND I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN LEAD YOU WITH ANYTHING MORE IMPORTANT.
SO, AND AND THAT PERCENTAGE, YOU SAID THAT 50% IS, IS SO IF YOU GET A DANCEHALL LICENSE, AND THAT'S HOW YOU WANNA OPERATE, RIGHT? UHHUH
OF COURSE, THE CITY OF DALLAS CAN, CAN ENACT THINGS THAT, THAT IT WANTS TO.
AND THE CITY OF DALLAS DETERMINED THAT IF 50% OF YOUR SALES ARE, UH, ALCOHOL AND ABOVE THAT, THAT'S WHAT YOU'D BE.
BUT THE CITY OF DALLAS HASN'T SET WHAT THAT PERCENTAGE IS? 50%.
BUT LIKE I SAID, WE, WE HAD THAT CONVERSATION ON JANUARY ONE, AND I BELIEVE IT WAS MAY 8TH WHEN WE WENT BACK OUT THERE, WE HAD THAT SAME CONVERSATION AGAIN AND THAT'S WHEN WE VOTED.
BUT AGAIN, WE ARE NOT SAYING THAT TROPHY IS, BUT DVD GAVE THEIR THEIR POINT.
NOT ANYTHING TO DO WITH WHAT THE BUILDING OFFICIAL HAD BEEN.
AND CAN I ASK QUESTIONS OF MY WITNESS? OKAY, GREAT.
UM, SO DO YOU SEE IN PLACES OF DEVELOPMENT VIEW OFTEN SEE A LARGE AMOUNT SECURITY PERSONNEL INSIDE AND OUTSIDE, NOT INCLUDED? YEAH.
IS IT COMMON PRACTICE FOR THERE TO BE DPD OFFICERS OUTSIDE OF THE IN NEWS? UH, YEAH.
I MEAN YOUR A LOCATION THAT, THAT WANTS TO KEEP BEAT, SOMEONE WANTS TO TAKE CARE OF ITS, ITS CONSTITUENTS, THEN WE WOULD YOU NOT ONLY HAVE YOUR PRIVATE SECURITY, BUT YOU WOULD HAVE
I'M, I'M TRYING TO RECALL, AND I'M NOT SURE IF I CAN, UM, THE, THE APPLICANT, OH, THE APPELLANT, IF I CAN ASK THIS QUESTION WITH HIM.
UM, DID YOU SAY THAT YOU HAVE OFF-DUTY POLICE OFFICERS INSIDE AND OUTSIDE YOUR ESTABLISHMENT OBJECT? UH, NO.
KEN, I'M JUST, I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER WHAT WAS SAID.
DID YOU SAY THAT YOU HAVE OFF-DUTY POLICE OFFICERS INSIDE AND OUTSIDE YOUR ESTABLISHMENT? YES.
INSIDE WE HAVE, UM, SIR, UM, DO YOUR OFF-DUTY POLICE OFFICERS UNDERSTAND THAT THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED TO ENTER THE PREMISES? THAT IS.
SO I'M TRYING TO RECONCILE THAT AT THE MOMENT.
IT SEEMS THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE CLARIFYING BACK THERE.
OH, HE STATED TWICE THAT OFF-DUTY POLICE OFFICERS ARE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE HIS ESTABLISHMENT.
THEN I ACTUALLY WOULD REVOKE THEIR ABILITY TO RUN
I I, SO WHEN I SAY INSIDE AND OUTSIDE, I MEANT THEIR, I MEANT THEIR, AT THE VENUE, UH, THEY STAND OUTSIDE MOST OF THE TIME.
MAYBE THEY COME IN AND GRAB WATERS, BUT THEY'RE AT THE FRONT DOOR PHYSICALLY, PROBABLY 95% OF THE NIGHT THEY'RE AT THE FRONT DOOR, BUT TWICE YOU SIT INSIDE AND OUTSIDE.
SO THEY, THEY DO COME INSIDE OCCASIONALLY, BUT ARE THEY ALLOWED TO GO INSIDE FOR WATER AND WHATNOT? I DON'T KNOW.
I GOT ONE USE THE BATHROOM AND STUFF, OFFICER.
I'M JUST TRYING TO, I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF, IF THIS IS WHAT I MEAN, I TRY TO USE COMMON SENSE.
IF 103 OUT, IF AN OFFICER WANTED TO GO INSIDE, GRAB BOTTLE AND COME BACK, THAT'S PERFECT.
IF THEY WANT TO MINGLE WITH THE, THE CLIENTELE OF PEOPLE THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE WHATEVER THEIR, THEIR LEVEL OF, WHEN I SAY INTOXICATION, I DON'T KNOW IT'S DPD POLICY
[01:45:01]
FOR THEM TO NOT WORK THEMSELVES.LIKE I SAID, IF THEY WANT TO GO IN, DO THE BATHROOM, GRAB A BOTTLE OF WATER, I THINK THAT THAT ANSWER.
ARE THEY IN UNIFORM? YES, A HUNDRED PERCENT.
THAT'S WHAT NOW WHEN WE DID OUR INSPECTION, I WASN'T IN UNIFORM.
WE ADVICE, BUT YOU KNOW, WE HAD MARKINGS AND WE PRESENTED OURSELVES IMMEDIATELY TO THE GENTLEMAN WHO WAS THE MANAGER ON DUTY AND YOU KNOW, HOLD THEM UP.
UM, DO RESTAURANTS AND DEEP ELLUM TYPICALLY HAVE DPD OFFICERS OUTSIDE OR JUST BARS? UH, SO TO WORK OFF DUTY AT A RESTAURANT THEORETICALLY SHOULDN'T NEED WHAT THEY CALL A LONG FORM.
I WOULDN'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION.
UM, SO THEY MAY, I MEAN, IF YOU WERE DOWN IN DEEP ELLUM, I MEAN, I KNOW IF I WENT TO A RESTAURANT IN DEEP ELLUM, LIKE KIND OF ROUSSEAU, WOULD THERE BE DP ODPD OFFICERS DOWN THERE GUARDING THE DOOR? I MEAN, I KNOW NICK AND SAMS HAS DPD OFFICERS THERE.
AND THEN YOU SAID THAT IN THE DALLAS CITY CODE, IT SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT 50% BREAD DANCE HALL, BUT IT DOES NOT SPECIFICALLY SAY 75% FOR A BAR THAT IS TABC? THAT'S CORRECT.
UM, LAW, AND WE HAVE THAT DANCE HALL 14 DASH TWO, IT SAYS 50%.
SORRY, COULD YOU CLARIFY? THE 75% WAS YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT IN CONCERNING THE DANCE HALL OR A BAR? OH, WELL, HE SAID THAT FOR A DANCE HALL IT SAYS 50% SPECIFICALLY IN THE CODE.
I THINK YOU SAID THAT IT DOESN'T SAY 75% IN THE CODE.
AND HE MENTIONED THAT THAT'S A-T-A-B-C RULE, THAT THAT WOULD BE FOR TB, TABC, NOT NECESSARILY THE CITY OF DALLAS.
THE CITY OF DALLAS COULD DEFINE A BAR IN A DIFFERENT WAY.
IS THAT CORRECT OR DID I MISINTERPRET THAT? SO THE CITY CLASSIFIED BARS, AND I THINK THEY ADOPT A, B, C STATUTE, THE BARS.
IS THAT CORRECT? SO WHEN IT COMES TO THINGS THAT I REGULATE, WHICH COULD BE DANCE HALLS, SOBS, THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT'S WHEN THE 50%, UH, PERCENTAGE AND THEN THAT'S ALSO STATEWIDE.
YOU ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR OKAY.
UM, WE NOW HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE APPLICANT TO CROSS-EXAMINE THE WITNESSES.
YOU HAVE, UM, YOU HAVE UP TO FIVE MINUTES TO CROSS-EXAMINE THE WITNESSES.
I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION, SERGEANT.
IS IT TYPICAL FOR A DPD TO ENTER AND DO COMPLIANCE ACTIVITIES FOR THE VERY FIRST DAY THAT A RESTAURANT OPENS THEIR DOORS? IS THAT A TYPICAL THING THAT YOU ALL DO FOR RESTAURANTS? OR IS THIS UNIQUE FOR TR UM, WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST IS THAT AFTER THE, THE SOCIAL MEDIA, UH, WOULD BE THAT BRAND OPENING.
I APOLOGIZE, CAN YOU PLEASE GET CLOSER TO THE MIC? YEP.
UM, SO WHAT WE DID IS LOOKED AT SOCIAL MEDIA AND WHAT WE OBSERVED WAS SOMETHING THAT'S PROBABLY NOT A RESTAURANT, WHICH IS, WE'LL PUT IT ON, PUT IT ON.
DO YOU HAVE ANY, DO YOU WANNA REDIRECT ANY QUESTIONS OR YOU, UH, I, THE, FOR THE BUILDING OFFICIALS CASE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO REDIRECT ANY QUESTIONS? CHU NO, I, I, I, WELL SHE HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO REDIRECT IF SHE WANTED TO.
MS. SANCHEZ? YEAH, I DON'T NEED TO, I, MS. SANCHEZ, WOULD YOU LIKE TO REDIRECT ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY.
CHANCE? WELL, YOU'RE, YOU'LL BE BACK, BUT SHE HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO REDIRECT AFTER YOU'VE ASKED THE QUESTION OF HER WITNESS.
SO HAVE, IS IT YOUR PRACTICE, IS IT PBS PRACTICE TO GO AROUND AND INSPECT THE PROPERTY? HUNDRED PERCENT.
AND HAVE YOU EVER INSPECTED THE PROPERTIES ON THE DAY? A HUNDRED PERCENT.
I WOULD SAY TROPHY WAS NOT SINGLE OUT THAT NIGHT.
YOU EXPECT TO SET ANOTHER DISTRICT.
ANOTHER UH, POINT, WE NEVER GOT THE, UM, PUBLIC SPEAKERS.
THEY NEVER, THERE WERE, WE, WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY WAY TO APPLY FOR PUBLIC TURNED ANY SLIPS PUBLIC, DID WE? THEY, UM, THEY SIGN UP AFTER, LIKE BECAUSE THEY'RE PUBLIC SPEAKER.
[01:50:19]
I AM ASSUMING THAT THEY WERE NOT HERE AT THE TIME.PUBLIC TESTIMONY WAS CALLED FOR AO FIELDS.
WE DO NOT HEAR PUBLIC INPUT ONCE THE CASE HAS BEEN CALLED.
THEY HEAR ACTUALLY
THEY ONLY SPEAK ON PUBLIC TESTIMONY AT 7 7 30 RIGHT WHEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CALLED AT ONE O'CLOCK.
SO RIGHT BEFORE THE APPLICANT GAVE HIS TESTIMONY, UM, RIGHT BEFORE WE EVEN STARTED, THEY SHOULD HAVE COME UP FOR PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
UM, I, THEY, SO WHEN SHE ASKED FOR IF THERE WERE ANY, UM, ANYONE HERE FOR PUBLIC TESTIMONY, THE, WHEN THE, UH, WHEN THE BOARD CHAIR CALLED, IF THERE WERE, IF THERE WAS ANYBODY FOR PUBLIC TESTIMONY, THEY, THAT'S WHEN THEY NEEDED TO APPROACH AND, AND NOT WHEN THE CASE IS CALLED BECAUSE THEY, THEY ARE AN AO APPEAL DOESN'T HAVE, UM, THEY DON'T HAVE, UM, AN, UH, UM, I'M SORRY, UH, OPPOSITION OR SUPPORT BECAUSE THIS IS BETWEEN THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AND THE APPLICANT.
SO THEY SHOULD HAVE, IF, UM, I DO HAVE THE FORMS THAT THEY ARE OPPOSED.
HOWEVER, THEY SHOULD HAVE COME UP AT THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
NOT FOR, NOT FOR ACTUALLY SPEAKING AT THE TIME OF THE, OF THE CA WHEN THE CASE IS CALLED.
SO WHAT STAFF WAS SAYING IS CORRECT.
UM, THIS IS NOT A TYPICAL PUBLIC HEARING CASE.
THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL APPEAL.
SO IT'S NOT CONSIDERED A PUBLIC HEARING IN WHICH WE WOULD HAVE PUBLIC SPEAKERS WHEN THE CASE IS CALLED.
WE WOULD TAKE SPEAKERS, UM, AT THE, THE PART OF THE, THE MEETING THAT IS PUBLIC TESTIMONY, WHICH IS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING.
AND, AND WITH TALKING TO THE CHAIR, THE CHAIR IS GOING, BECAUSE THIS IS HER MEETING, SHE WILL ALLOW, UM, PUBLIC TESTIMONY ON THIS CASE.
AND WE'RE GONNA LIMIT IT TO A MINUTE.
BUT I WANT THIS BOARD TO UNDERSTAND THAT BECAUSE IT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING, THESE SPEAKERS CAN COME AND PRESENT AND GIVE THEIR COMMENTS.
BUT YOU SHOULD NOT TAKE THEIR TEST.
THIS, IT'S NOT TESTIMONY, IT'S NOT PART OF THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT OR OF THE CITY.
SO YOU SHOULDN'T TAKE WHAT THEY SAY INTO CONSIDERATION.
UM, WHEN YOU ARE MAKING YOUR DETERMINATION HOW TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS CASE, IT IS NOT PART OF THE, IT'S NOT EVIDENCE GERMANE TO CORRECT.
IF THE CITY OR THE APPELLANT IS NOT CALLING THEM AS A WITNESS.
YOU SHOULD NOT CONSIDER THAT THEIR TESTIMONY IN WEIGHING THE EVIDENCE.
BUT SINCE THEY'RE HERE, WE'LL GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT.
IT'D BE WHEN WE COMPLETED, THAT'S, I THINK IT WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE TIME.
DO WE'LL, WE'LL WAIT TILL THE END.
YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES FOR YOUR REBUTTAL.
HOW, HOW MUCH? TWO MINUTES, THREE, THEN I'D START TALKING REALLY FAST.
ALRIGHT, SO THREE MINUTES FOR A REDDLE, THREE MINUTES FOR A CLOSING STATEMENT.
I'M GONNA TRY AND SMUSH IT ALL TOGETHER.
'CAUSE I THINK I, I THINK WE GOT IN OUR HEAD WHAT'S GOING ON, AT LEAST THE FACTUAL ELEMENTS OF IT.
BUT WHEN I CAME BACK FROM GETTING WATER AND I HEARD, UH, THE CITY, INCLUDING SERGEANT HALSEY, UH, UH, AND ALL OF THIS, I FIGURED OUT EXACTLY WHAT THE PROBLEM IS.
AND, UH, UNDER TEXAS LAW, YOU'RE WONDERING WHAT THE DEFINITION OF FOOD IS, RIGHT? THE DEFINITION OF FOOD IS INCLUDES SIMPLE MIXED OR COMPOUND ARTICLES USED FOR FOOD, DRINK, FLAVORING, CONFECTIONARY, AND CONDIMENT FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION.
IT DOESN'T MAKE A DISTINCTION.
IT DOESN'T SAY FOOD IS ONLY NON-ALCOHOLIC OR NON-WATER OR NOTHING
[01:55:01]
NON TO DRINK.AND WHAT'S HAPPENED, AND I CAN TELL THAT'S THAT, THAT'S WHY THIS GOT ALL MESSED UP WITH SAM GANDER AND, UH, UH, ALL OF THIS, THE CODE WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN SPECIFICALLY WITH A RESTAURANT IS PREDOMINANTLY SERVING AS A RESTAURANT.
AND THAT INCLUDES ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES.
IT'S NOT DISTINCT FROM ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES.
THE MISTAKE THAT THE CITY HAS DONE, AND I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THIS IS, IS THEY SAT THERE AND WENT, WELL, IF YOU ONLY SELL 49% FOOD, YOU'RE NOT A, YOU'RE NOT A RESTAURANT.
WELL, IF YOU SELL ANOTHER 20% OF ALCOHOL, OH, LET'S REVOKE YOUR CO.
AND YOU NOTICE THROUGH THAT WHOLE THING AND I ASKED YOU TO SAY, SO WHAT ARE YOU INSTEAD? AND YOU NOTICE THEY COULDN'T TELL YOU WHAT THEY WERE INSTEAD.
AND THAT'S BECAUSE THEIR INTERPRETATION AND THEIR ENFORCEMENT IS INCORRECT.
WHAT THE CODE DOES IS IT SAYS A RESTAURANT FOOD, ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, EVERYTHING.
IF IT'S PREDOMINANTLY A RESTAURANT THAT INCLUDES ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, THAT INCLUDES A LITTLE BIT OF SHIMMING ON AN OPEN FLOOR, THAT INCLUDES A DJ THAT INCLUDES ALL OF THAT.
IF IT'S PREDOMINANTLY A RESTAURANT, THEN IT'S SUPPOSED TO HAVE A RESTAURANT CO WHAT CHANGES WHAT THE CITY GOES AND GOES, OH WOW, THIS IS NOT A RESTAURANT.
IS IF THEIR ALCOHOL SALES GO ABOVE 75%, THAT'S HOW THAT STRUCTURE IS SET UP.
THEY'VE ACTUALLY JUST PROVEN OUR CASE.
NOW, AS LONG AS I CAN DESCRIBE THIS CORRECTLY TO YOU ALL TO WIN THIS CASE HERE, THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THEY JUST PROVED WE WERE A RESTAURANT BECAUSE THEY'VE SHOWN, AND WE HAVE EVIDENCE THAT WE DIDN'T SELL MORE THAN WE'RE NOT EVEN NEAR 75% ALCOHOL SALES.
NOW, THE WHOLE DANCE HALL FLOOR THING WHERE THEY SAID, WELL, IT SAYS HERE 50 50, IT'S 50% ALCOHOL SALES, YOU AND YOU HAVE DANCING AS AN ACTIVITY, YOU MAY NEED TO GO GET A DANCE HALL LICENSE, WHICH IS COMPLETELY SEPARATE AND DIFFERENT THAN A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
THERE ARE PLENTY OF RESTAURANTS THAT ALSO HAVE A DANCE HALL LICENSE OR MAY OR MAY NOT.
JUST LIKE, THERE ARE A LOT OF RESTAURANTS OR, OR BARS THAT HAVE LATE HOURS PERMITS.
DO YOU WANT THOSE SIX MINUTES OR THREE MINUTES? I'M JUST GONNA SMUSH IT INTO MY CLOSING.
SO THE WHOLE POINT OF THIS IS, IS THAT THEY, AND WE ARE SAYING THE SAME THINGS ABOUT THE FACTUAL ELEMENTS, AND THAT IS, IS THAT WE HAVEN'T SOLD 75%, WE HAVEN'T BEEN DOING GAMING ACTIVITIES OR ANY OF THOSE ISSUES OR A FEE.
WE'RE NOT A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE.
THE ONLY THING WE CAN BE IS A RESTAURANT.
RIGHT NOW UNDER THE DALLAS CITY CODE, IF YOU UPHOLD THE REVOCATION, YOU HAVE CHANGED AND TRANSFORMED THE DALLAS CITY CODE INTO SOMETHING THAT IT IS NOT UNDER WHAT WE'RE SAYING, WHAT I'M SAYING, WE HAVE AN ABSOLUTE OBJECTIVE STANDARD AND A CODE ABILITY TO ENFORCE THOSE OBJECTIVE STANDARDS.
IF YOU GO BY WHAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND THIS PART OF, NOT ALL OF IT, YOU HAVE A SUBJECTIVE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO.
I CAN'T GO GET A CO FOR ANYTHING.
AND THAT OBVIOUSLY CAN'T LOGICALLY BE WHAT'S REQUIRED.
IF I CAN'T LOOK AT THE CODE AND SIT THERE AND GO, WERE THAT INSTEAD FOR SURE, THEN YOU KNOW, YOU'RE INTERPRETING YOUR CODE WRONG.
THIS HAS BEEN THE WAY IT HAS BEEN FOR OVER 40 YEARS, AND THE FACT THAT YOU HAVEN'T HAD THESE ISSUES BEFORE THAT, BUT YOU WILL FROM NOW ON IS BECAUSE THEY'RE MAKING A MISTAKE.
THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT ALCOHOL SALES AND ALCOHOL SERVICE IS PART OF A RESTAURANT ACTIVITY AND COUNTS AS THE PREDOMINANT RESTAURANT ACTION.
THAT'S THE MISTAKE THAT THEY'RE MAKING.
THEY'RE THINKING THAT IT'S SEPARATE.
AND SO WHAT THEY'VE GOT IS THIS INCREDIBLE GRAY ZONE WHERE, WELL, YOU'RE NOT 75% ALCOHOL SALES, BUT YOU'RE 50 OR ABOVE.
SO WE DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE, BUT LET'S GO AHEAD AND SHUT YOU DOWN UNTIL WE FIGURE IT OUT.
THAT'S WHY, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE INTERPRETING IT INCORRECTLY.
THAT'S WHY YOU NEED TO, UH, UH, UH, UH, OVERTURN THE BUILDING OFFICIALS REVOCATION.
AND IF THE CITY COUNCIL WANTS TO CHANGE THIS, MORE POWER TO 'EM, IF
[02:00:01]
THEY FEEL LIKE 65% OR 60% OR 55% OF ALCOHOL SALES MAKES YOU NOT A RESTAURANT, THAT'S UP TO THEM.BUT THEY HAVEN'T DONE THAT YET.
AND A REVOCATION OF THIS CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY TO SUSTAIN THAT IS TO CHANGE THE CODE WHEN IT'S IN BLACK AND WHITE AND IT'S VERY CLEAR.
SO I'M ASKING YOU TO OVERTURN THE BILLING OFFICIALS REVOCATION.
UM, I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS THE THING MR. KOS? UM, I THINK I JUST HAVE TWO QUESTIONS.
UM, ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE DALLAS CITY CODE? UH, 51 A FOUR DASH TWO, UH, FOUR DASH 4.210 B 24? ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THAT? UM, PROBABLY NOT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT IF YOU READ IT TO ME, I'D PROBABLY KNOW IT.
WELL, IT, IT'S IN THE PRESENTATION FROM, UM, UH, THE CITY'S ATTORNEY AND IT DEFINE THE RESTAURANT AS AN ESTABLISHMENT PRINCIPLE YEAH.
FOR THE SALE AND CONSUMPTION OF FOOD ON THE PREMISES.
SO LET ME, LEMME FINISH THE QUESTION.
SO I'M GONNA ASK YOU, DOES YOUR CLIENT'S ESTABLISHMENT PRINCIPALLY OPERATE AS AN ESTABLISHMENT TO, TO, UH, FOR THE SALE AND CONSUMPTION OF FOOD ON THE PREMISES FOR FOOD? ABSOLUTELY.
$3.1 MILLION OF SALES FROM JANUARY, PRINCIPALLY, PRINCIPALLY FOR THE SALE AND CONSUMPTION OF FOOD.
AND REMEMBER, I'M INCLUDING ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN THE DEFINITION OF FOOD.
WELL, I'LL MAKE A DISTINCTION IF YOU WANT, WHICH IS, SIR, OVER A MILLION DOLLARS OF JUST FOOD AND NON-ALCOHOLIC, UH, UH, DRINK AND 1.8 OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES.
SO I'M TRYING TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION AS DIRECTLY AS I CAN.
THANK, THANK, THANK YOU FOR THAT AND, UM, THE NO OTHER QUESTIONS.
AND IF THE, UM, MS. SANCHEZ WILL COME FORWARD, YOU HAVE A THREE MINUTE CLOSING STATEMENT.
WE ARE NOT SAYING THEY CAN'T SELL ALCOHOL, WE ARE SAYING THAT ALCOHOL SALES CANNOT BE THE PRINCIPLE, BUT THE PRINCIPLE ASPECT OF THE BUSINESS, ALCOHOL IS NOT FOOD.
THE PRINCIPAL USE HAS TO BE THE SALE OF FOOD.
HERE, THE OWNER TESTIFIED THAT IT IS 36% AND ALCOHOL SALES ARE 64%.
64% FEELS LIKE A MUCH LARGER NUMBER THAN 34.
WE DON'T, AGAIN, THE FOCUS HAS BEEN THAT WE ARE NOT A BAR.
WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT A TROPH AS A BAR.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IF THEY ARE A RESTAURANT, WE DO NOT HAVE TO ADHERE TO THE 75% STANDARD.
THAT IS NOT WHAT IS BEFORE US.
THAT IS NOT THE ISSUE AT HAND.
THE BUILDING OFFICIAL DID NOT HAVE TO TAKE THAT INFORMATION IN.
THEY'RE NOT DENYING THAT THEIR SALE OF ALCOHOL IS LARGER THAN THEIR SALE OF FOOD.
AGAIN, WE NEVER SAID IT WAS A BAR THERE.
THE EXPERTS GET TO DETERMINE WHAT IT SHOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS.
BUT THE EXPERTS CAN'T JUST OFF THE CUFF BESIDE SOMETHING.
THEY NEED THE PROPER PAPERWORK.
THEY NEED THE PROPER IDENTIFICATION.
THEY NEED TO KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON TO SIT THERE AND, AND BASE THEIR CASE ON THE FACT THAT WE CANNOT IDENTIFY WHAT THEY ARE.
WELL, WE DON'T HAVE THE PROPER INFORMATION.
AND AGAIN, THE, WHAT THE BO DECIDED WAS THAT THIS WAS NOT OPERATING AS A RESTAURANT.
AND SO WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR THE BOARD TO DO IS TO AFFIRM THE BO'S DECISION.
WE ARE NOT TRYING TO STOP BUSINESS IN DALLAS.
TROPHY CAN COME SPEAK TO PLANNING, THEY CAN COME SPEAK TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL.
IF THEY GET THE RIGHT CO AFTER IT COULD DETERMINE WHAT THAT CO WILL BE LIKE.
THEY'RE ALLOWED TO OPERATE AGAIN.
THERE'S BARS, THERE'S TAVERNS LOUNGES, THERE'S CLUBS.
IT'S NOT SOME UNKNOWN THING THAT THEY'RE APPLYING FOR.
THEY ARE JUST REFUSING TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS INSTEAD SITTING THERE AND POINTING A FINGER AT THE CITY WHEN IT SEEMS THAT WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS WORK WITH THEM, BUT THEY DON'T SEEM TO WANNA WORK WITH US AGAIN.
WE REQUEST THAT YOU GUYS AFFIRM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL.
DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? I WAS GONNA CALL THE OH, UM, YOU CAN ASK QUESTION.
ARE YOU COMPLETE? UH, IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION I CAN ANSWER.
[02:05:03]
OKAY.WELL, I PROMISE THE PEOPLE THAT CAME DOWN HERE TO GIVE THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY THAT THEY COULD, WE HAVE FIVE PUBLIC TESTIMONY SPEAKERS AND YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE EACH.
SO IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND GIVE YOUR PUBLIC TESTIMONY, MR. SACKMAN OR ZACH, MAN.
OBJECT THAT, HOW ARE YOU GUYS? YOU CAN JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
UH, ZACH MANN, MY PERSONAL ADDRESS OR PERSONAL ADDRESS OR BUSINESS ADDRESS.
MAY I START, UH, CAN I SPEAK TO MY ATTORNEY REALLY QUICK? SURE.
BUT YES, THIS IS NOT TESTIMONY.
IT DOES NOT PUBLIC PUBLIC COMMENT.
SO, UM, AS JUST MY PUBLIC TESTIMONY, I'VE, YOU KNOW, BEEN IN THIS INDUSTRY, THE HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY FOR A LONG TIME.
IT'S A VERY HARD INDUSTRY AS YOU GUYS HAVE SEEN A LOT OF RESTAURANTS CLOSE WITH UNDER TWO YEARS.
AND A BIG THING I WANTED TO POINT OUT, YOU GUYS ACTUALLY CALLED IT OUT YOURSELVES, IS 27 VISITS IN A SIX MONTH PERIOD IS UNPRECEDENTED.
AND IT'S, UH, I DON'T KNOW, IT JUST SHOWS TARGETING AND PICKING IN MY OPINION.
AND, YOU KNOW, THE DAY ONE OPERATIONS OF THEM STOPPING BY DAY ONE WITH A FULL VICE SQUAD LIKE THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN ANYWHERE.
UM, I FEEL LIKE, AS YOU KNOW, OWNER OPERATORS OF AN ESTABLISHMENT, WE HAVE OUR, OUR BACKS AGAINST THE WALL AND WE DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO TRY AND OPERATE AS WELL AS WE CAN WITH WE CODE TO THE CITY.
I'VE GONE TO PERSONAL MEETINGS WITH HALF OF THESE GENTLEMEN.
I'VE GONE TO THEIR OFFICES AND ASKED THEM WHAT CAN WE DO? WHAT CAN WE, WHAT I'M, DO ANYTHING AND THERE'S NO ANSWERS.
AND SO WE'RE WILLING TO COMPLY, WILLING TO DO WHATEVER YOU GUYS LIKE.
UH, JOHN HETZEL, 26 22 COMMERCE STREET.
I'M MANAGING PARTNER OF MADISON PARTNERS, BIG PROPERTY OWNER DEBO IN LOWER GREENVILLE.
UH, ALSO, UH, VOLUNTEER PRESIDENT DEBO FOUNDATION.
I'VE BEEN DEALING WITH THIS STUFF FOR OVER 20 YEARS.
IT'S AS MUCH OF A CLUB AS I'VE EVER SEEN.
UH, WE HAVE MULTIPLE RESTAURANTS AND BARTEND TENANTS.
I NEVER WANT TO SEE SOMEBODY SHUT DOWN AS A LANDLORD WITH PENNANTS WHO MAKE LIVELIHOOD OFF OF IT.
AND WE HAVE MANY, MANY DEPOT BUSINESSES THAT CODE HAVE BEEN GOING TO WITH THE IMPROPER RESTAURANT.
CO E HALF A DOZEN AND MORE ARE GOING TO GET THEIR SUP AS WE SPEAK.
I AM CO-OWNER OF, UH, 27 14 ELM STREET ARMORY DE DEEP ELLUM RIGHT ACROSS FROM TROPHY AND ALSO CO-OWNER OF 2 6 5 AND COMMON STREET RUINS.
UH, I'VE BEEN IN THE INDUSTRY FOR ABOUT 20 YEARS, UM, AND I WELCOME ALL KINDS OF PLACES DOWN DEEP ELLUM CLUB, BAR, RESTAURANT, DOESN'T MATTER, BUT FOR OBSERVATION, UH, TROPHY DOES NOT OPERATE AT THE RESTAURANT.
IT OPERATES, UH, OPERATES AS A CLUB.
I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE DEBELL FOUNDATION.
WE OPERATE THE DEBELL PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, WHICH PROVIDES SECURITY SERVICES.
THIS IS ABOUT SAFETY ENFORCEMENT MUST MATCH POLICY, OR WE HAVE A LOOPHOLE THAT ALLOWS A LOWER STANDARD THAT CAUSES UE RISK.
WE ADOPTED A SAFETY PLAN IN 22, AND AGAIN IN 25, A MULTI-PLAN POINT PLAN.
WE CONVENED STAKEHOLDERS, BARS, RESTAURANTS, EVERYBODY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND WHAT THEY FOUND IS THERE'S THREE POLICIES THAT NEED TO HELP.
ONE POLICE NEED TO DO WHAT THEIR ENFORCEMENT IS, BUT ONE OF 'EM IS BUSINESSES NEED TO BE PLAYING ON THE SAME PLAYING FIELD.
BARS HAVE TO HAVE A SIGN THAT SAYS NO GUNS IN THE ESTABLISHMENT.
SUVS CAN MAKE YOU REQUIRE SECURITY.
RESTAURANTS DON'T HAVE TO FOLLOW THAT.
LATE NIGHT ESTABLISHMENTS WITH LARGE CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOL HAVE GREATER RISK, WHICH REQUIRES HEIGHTENED SECURITY TRAINING, ET THAT UP.
SO ALL OPERATORS SHOULD BE SERVING IN THE SAME STANDARD.
THIS IS A PRIORITY OF OUR COMMUNITY.
AND THAT INCLUDES TROPHY? NO, THAT'S SPEAKER REGISTER.
[02:10:01]
OKAY.UH, SO THE FIRST THING I WANNA SAY IS HE SAID WE DIDN'T APPLY FOR AN SCP, WE'RE ACTUALLY IN THE PROCESS OF APPLYING FOR AN SCP.
UM, THE SECOND THING I HAVE TO SAY IS, YOU KNOW, WHY ARE WE ACTUALLY HERE? AND I THINK, UH, IT'S PRETTY CLEAR THAT WE'VE BEEN TARGETED SINCE DAY ZERO.
I DON'T THINK I'VE EVER HEARD ADVICE IN THE WHOLE SPOT OF POLICE GOING TO A RESTAURANT THE FIRST DAY THEY'VE OPENED, INVADING PLACE LIKE THEY DID IN THE HISTORY OF TIME.
UM, AND, AND WHY ARE THEY DOING THAT TO US? UH, TO ME IT'S, IT'S REALLY, REALLY CLEAR.
THEY WANT OUR BUSINESS SHUT DOWN.
AND WHY IS THAT? BECAUSE THESE DEVELOPERS SITTING HERE DON'T LIKE THE WAY OUR CROWD LOOKS.
YOU GO TO HENDERSON AVENUE AND ALL YOU'LL SEE IS CROWDS OF WHITE PEOPLE, BUT THEY DON'T WANT THE MEXICANS AND BLACKS IN THIS AREA.
I MADAM CHAIR, I HAVE A MOTION.
UM, HAVING FULLY REVIEWED THE DECISION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL OF THE CITY OF DALLAS IN APPEAL, NUMBER BO A DASH 26 DASH 0 0 0 6 0 ON APPLICATION OF STEPHEN F DARLING, AND HAVING EVALUATED THE EVIDENCE PERTAINING TO THE PROPERTY AND HEARD ALL TESTIMONY AND FACTS SUPPORTING THE APPLICATION, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AFFIRM THE DECISION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL AND DENY THE RELIEF REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? UH, I SECOND.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? UM, I THINK THE QUESTION FOR US IS, ARE THEY OPERATING AS A RESTAURANT? EVIDENCE FOR US SUPPORTS THAT THEY ARE NOT, UM, AND THEIR, THEIR PRINCIPAL SALES ARE ALCOHOL.
THEY HAVE STATED, AND, YOU KNOW, WE WANT BUSINESSES, WE WANT BUSINESSES TO SUCCEED, BUT THERE ARE PROCESSES IN PLACE THAT WE HAVE TO UNDERTAKE SO THAT FAIRNESS IS ESTABLISHED.
AND I WAS THINKING IF THIS, IF THE RESTAURANT WAS OPENING NEXT DOOR TO MY HOME AND I LIVED, YOU KNOW, IN AN AREA WHERE IT COULD HAPPEN, UM, AND THEIR COS FOR A RESTAURANT AND THIS WAS HAPPENING, UM, I WOULD, IT WOULD, IT'S NOT, THIS ISN'T LEGAL WITH THE CO.
SO, UM, I WOULD BE VERY UNHAPPY AND SAY, WE JUST NEED TO LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD AND MAKE ALL ESTABLISHMENTS AND DEEP DEVELOP COMPLIANT WITH WHATEVER THEIR CO IS AND NOT STEP OUTSIDE THEIR BOUNDARIES.
SO, UM, I WANT TO THANK ALL OF THE, UH, PUBLIC AND THE APPLICANT AS WELL AS, UM, THE CITY ATTORNEY FOR, UM, SHARING INFORMATION AND GIVING US, UH, YOU KNOW, ALL THAT WE NEED TO MAKE A, AN INFORMED, UH, DECISION, UM, TO THE APPLICANT.
UH, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST, UH, SAY, I'M GLAD TO HEAR THAT YOU ARE PURSUING YOUR SSUP 'CAUSE YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY UP HERE, WE, WE WANT BUSINESSES TO SURVIVE AND, AND TO THRIVE, BUT, UM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH, UM, UM, WHAT THE CODE REQUIRES AND, UM, ALLOWS.
SO I, I'M GLAD TO KNOW THAT YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, PURSUING, UM, WHAT I BELIEVE AND PROBABLY, UM, I THINK MY FELLOW, UH, PANELISTS WOULD, WOULD AGREE IS THE APPROPRIATE CEO FOR YOUR, UH, UH, PARTICULAR BUSINESS.
AND I HOPE THAT IT PROCEEDS THROUGH THE PROCESS, UH, DILIGENTLY, UH, AND EXPEDITIOUSLY SO THAT YOU CAN, UH, BE BACK IN, IN, UM, UH, THRIVING IN BUSINESS, UM, QUICKLY.
UM, SO, UH, YOU KNOW, I'M, YOU KNOW, SURE THAT I'M WILL BE CONVINCED TO SUPPORT THE MOTION, UM, AS IT'S, UH, STATED.
UH, I'M CONCERNED WITH, UH, THE WAY IT'S BEING RUN NOW WITH THERE'S AN EMERGENCY WHATNOT.
UH, I HAVE LITTLE DOUBT THAT, UH, IT WILL BE A GREAT SUCCESS ONCE YOU HAVE THE SUP SINCE ALL THE PHOTOS SHOW THERE'S A HUGE FOLLOWING RIGHT NOW, BUT YEAH, I, I CAN'T, UH, I'M GONNA BACK THE MOTION.
I JUST WANNA ADD ONE MORE THING AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ALL DOING THIS, YOU KNOW, EXAMINING THE EVIDENCE AND, AND WHATNOT, BUT I, I DO WANT TO TELL A, YOU KNOW, THE, THE OPERATOR APPELLANT THAT, YOU KNOW, UM, PEOPLE AREN'T AFTER YOU.
WE'RE JUST, WE JUST WANT, YOU KNOW, THAT WE,
[02:15:01]
IF I, I HOPE THAT WE FIND A MOMENT TO, UM, BE, YOU KNOW, COMFORTABLE AND RELAXED.REVIEW THIS, UH, IF YOU CAN AND SEE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FACTS AND EVIDENCE.
WE'RE NOT ATTACKING YOU AS, AS A OWNER AND OPERATOR.
WE WANT, EVERYBODY WANTS YOU TO SUCCEED.
I WANNA SEE, DEVELOP, SUCCEED, AND, UH, THERE'S JUST, UM, POLICIES AND CODE AND IN PLACE TO, TO MAKE EVERYONE THRIVE.
AND, AND, UM, I WOULD HOPE THAT, YOU KNOW, ONCE YOU HAVE A MOMENT TO KINDA STEP AWAY THAT YOU CAN VIEW THIS AND GO THAT, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE AREN'T NOT IN THE WAY THAT MAYBE WE PROCEED AND, AND WE WANT YOU TO SUCCEED.
SO, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE, YOU'RE TAKING STEPS RIGHT NOW TO BE SUCCESSFUL AS A BAR DANCE HALL, AND, AND THAT'S GREAT.
LET'S CALL ROLL CALL VOTE MS. GARDNER.
MOTION TO DENY PASSES FIVE TO ZERO AND THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED AT 3:38 PM THANK YOU.