Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-05-11 (Special) Meeting MinutesSPECIAL MllTIIC: COUICIL CBAMll&S CITY or llCLIWOOD, COLO&ADO May 11, 1981 The Cf ty Couacfl of the City of laalewood, Arapahoe County, Colorado, •et fa •pecfal ••••ion on May ll, 1981, at 7:00 P·•~ Mayor Otf•, pre•idfn1 1 called the •eetiag to order~ The favocation wa• 1fven by Council Me•ber Tho••• Pf tapatrfck. The pled1• of alle1fance wa• led by Mayor Otis~ Mayor Oti• a•k•d for roll call. Upon a call of the roll, the followfn1 were pr•••nt: Council Me•b•r• Bfaday, leal, Pftapatrick, Keena~ If lo, lrad•haw, Otf•~ Ab1ent: lone~ The Mayor declared a quoru• pre•ent~ * * * * * * Al•o pre1ent were: City Mana1er Mccown City Attorney DeWitt Deputy City Clerk Johanni••on Deputy City Clerk Watkin• * * * * * * Council Me•ber leal 1tated he had received nu•erou• telephone call• re1ardfn1 th• petf tfonfn1 proce•• for thf• ap- pl fcatfoa and bee••• involved with the proc•••· Mr. Weal ex- cu•ed hi••elf fro• thf1 •••ting~ * * * * * * Mayor Otf• •tated the public hearfn1 wa• for the pur- po1e of con•iderfa1 a Health Therapy racflfty applfcatfon at 2801 South Broadway~ * * * * * * COUICIL MIMlll BICDAY MOVID TO OPll TRI PUBLIC BIAl- IWG. Council Me•ber Pftapatrfck •ecoaded the •otioa. Upon a call of the roll, the vote re•ulted •• follow•: Council Me•ber• Bigday, Pftapatrfck~ Keena, lilo, lrad•haw, Ott•~ Nay ll, 1981 Pare 2 Raya: Ron el- Abaent: Council Ne•ber Beal The Mayor declared the •otion carried~ levenue Chief /Deputy City Clerk lric Johannia1on ap- peared before Council and provided teati•ony relative to the application of Soon Ye Scott for a Health Therapy racilfty. Mr. Johanniaaon 1ub•itted the followin1 docuaent11 l . 2 • 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. a. '· JO. l l • 12. l 3. 14. 15. City lxhfbft A -Application for Health Therapy Facility~ City lxhibft B -Supple•ent Pora for Health Therapy Ap- plicant• Cf ty lxhfbit C -Backaround Infor•ation leport for the Applicant, Soon Ye Scott Cf ty lxhfbft D -Background Inveatigation Report from the lnalewood Police Depart•ent City lxhfbit I -Pinancfal Report fro• Joaeph L. and Soon Ye Scott Cf ty lxhfbft P -Three letter1 of reference fro• Blair Pedder, lalph Colli1ter, and Beatrice Schlote Cf ty lxhfbft G -The Publi1her'• Affidavit of Notice of Public Bearing in the Englewood Sentinel City lxhibit B -State•ent of Zonina fro• the Co••unity Develop•ent Depart•ent with an attach- •ent de1cribin1 the zo~ing cla11ifica- tion for 1-l and B-2 zone1 City lxhibit I -Leaae for the pre•i•e• pre1ented to the City by the applicant City lxhibit J -Sketch of the layout of the propo1ed licen1ed aite Cf ty lxhibft K -Letter to the applicant required by the Colorado Ma11a1e Parlor Code 12-48.S~ CIS, J 973 City lxhfbit L -Map of the neiahborhood which••• de- 1i1nated by City Council al10 1h~vin1 the propo1ed location and one other Jicen1ed •a11a1e facility in the neigh- borhood City lxhibit M -leport fro• Oedipu1, Inc., the fir• that did the 1urvey for the City Cf ty lxhfbit 12, R3, 54 Cf ty Exhibit 02 Rl~ -Petition• that were pa11ed by Oedipu1 01~ -Petition• received in the City Clerk'• office on May 7, 1981, fro• lill Kline May ll, 1981 Page 3 Mr. Johann1••on po1nted out the ••P he po•ted on the d1•play board beh1nd Council. The ••P •bowed the de•fgnated nefahborhood, the ex1•t1na •••••1• parlor• and the propo•ed •fte for the appl1cant'• •a••aa• parlor~ * * * * * * Max Scott, Oed1pu•, Inc., appeared before Counc1l and provided te•tf•ony re1ardfn1 hf• •urvey. Mr. Scott pre•ented the re•ult• of the •urvey to be 18.641 1n favor of the f••uance and 81.361 oppo•ed fro•• total of 295 el1g1ble people. In re•pon•e to Cf ty Attorney DeWitt'• que•t1on•, Mr~ Scott prov1ded fnfor••t1on concerning hf• bu•1ne••, hf• profea- •fonal background, and the re•pon•fbflftfe• and tra1nfng of hf• •t•ff •e•ber• who conduct the •urvey. Mr. Scott •l•o •t•ted hfa •urvey we• properly conducted and reflected accurately the need• and de•1re• of the nefghborhood~ Mr. Scott noted the •urvey wa• conducted on • Saturday 1n accordance with City Council'• d1rection. The exact date being Aprfl 4, 1981~ Larry Harvey, attorney repre•enting Soon Ye Scott, cro••-exa•1ned Mr. Scott on the co•po•ition of the neighborhood, the rel1ab1l1ty of rando• •••pl1ng, and the chance of error. Mr~ Scott re•ponded the ne1ghborhood wa• coaprf aed of f ndu•trfal and re•1dent1al are••· Bf• pa•t experience ha• proven hia method of •••pl1ng to be reflective of the entire neighborhood with a margin of error le•• than 11. There were no further que•tion• of Mr. Scott at thia tf•e~ * * * * * * Mayor Ot1• a•ked for the appl1cant'• pre•entat1on~ Larry Harvey, attorney for the applfcant, appeared be- fore Councfl. Mr. Harvey •ub•1tted Applicant'• Exh1b1t A, an afffdav1t •faned by Jul1e Paplow •tatfna M•· Paplow~•• an au- thorf&ed •sent for Eden II f n the execut1on of • le••• between Soon Ye Scott and Eden II. Mr. Harvey •ub•1tted 102 letters collected by Joe Scott, Denn1• Paplow, and Julie Paplow. Mr~ Harvey •tated the letter• •t•te and are •ianed by indfv1dual• w1thin the area who feel the need• for •••••ae •ervice• in the City of lnalewood are not befog •et. C1ty Attorney DeW1tt ••ked Mr. Harvey if the letter• were •11aed by per•on• who re•1ded in the defined ne1ghborhood~ May ll, 1981 Paa• 4 Mr. Harvey •tated there were •o•e who did and •o•• who dfd not~ City Attorney DeWitt ••ked ff the people did bu•f- n••• f n the nef&hborhood~ Mr. Harvey •tated •o•• of the• dfd~ City Attorney DeWitt ••ked Mr. Harvey to identify and dfe- tfnau1•h tho•• letter• of people who live in the defined neighborhood~ who do bu•ine•• in the defined nef1hborbood 1 and tho•• who are neither before •ubafttfng the• •• evidence~ Mr. Harvey agreed and 1n•tructed hi• applicant to •eparate the letter•~ Mr. Harvey then called bi• fir•t wftne••~ Mr. Denni• Paplow, 6031 South l•porfa Court, appeared before Council and provided te•tiaony under the que•tionina of Mr. Harvey. Mr. Paplow •tated he owned the buildfna which Mr•~ Scott wanted to rent for the propo•ed parlor. Be ha• known Mr~ and Mr•· Scott for four year• and fn hf• opinion they were bone•t~ Mr. Paplow •tated be dfd not u•• •a••aa• therapy; however, ff the applicant'• lfcen•• wa• araated he would probably u•• that facf lfty. In re•pon•e to Council Meaber Pitzpatrfck'• que•tion~ Mr. Paplow •tated he bouaht the bufldina fro• Mr. and Mr•· Scott approxfaately four year• aao~ Mayor Otfa aaked ff anyone fn the audience had queation• to aak of Mr. Paplow~ Mr. John Real, 2885 South Corona, appeared and a•ked Mr. Paplow if be circulated any letter•· Mr. Paplow •tated he had and that he ••de no atte•Jlt to convince the people to afgn the letter one way or another~ In reaponae to City Attorney DeWitt'• que•tiona, Mr~ Paplow •tated he had owned the buildfna for two year•· Mr. Papl~w I could not re•e•ber the prevfou• renter'• naae but •tated •he waa of Korean nationality. Alao, that the e•tabl1•h•ent waa na•ed Korean Ma••aa• under the prevfoua renter~ Mr. DeWf tt ••ked Mr. Paplow who had been payina the rent aince the prevfoua renter vacated~ Mr. Harvey ob:ected to Mr. DeWitt'• queatfon~ May ll, 1981 Pa1e 5 Mr. Paplow •tated Soon Ye Scott had been paying the rent~ Mr. DeWitt a•ked if there wa• a •ian on the building di- rectiaa patron• to 3154 We•t Ala•eda~ Mr. Paplow •tated he did not know of any •uch •ign. Mr~ Paplow •tated he owned but the renter• controlled the building~ Mr. DeWitt a•ked Mr. Paplow i• he wa• fa•iliar with the bu•ine•• operation• of the prevf ou• tenant~ Mr. Paplow an•wered no~ Mr. DeWitt a•ked Mr. Paplow if he knew why the previou• tenant left~ Mr. Harvey ob:ected to relevancy of the que•tioa~ Mr. Paplow an•wered he did not know~ • • • • * • Mr. Harvey called hi• next witne••~ Julie Paplow, 6031 South l•poria Circle, Inglewood, ap- peared before Council. Under que•tionfng fro• Mr. Harvey, M•~ Paplow provided te•ti•ony in that •he had known the applicant for four year•· M•· Paplow •tated Mr. and Mra. Scott were of good •oral character otherwi•e •he would not have rented the building to th••· M•· Paplow •tated the foraer renter received a citation and •hortly therafter, •h• (M•· Paplow) a•ked the former renter to leave the buildiDI· M•· Paplow •tated •he might have ocaa•ion to u•e the •a••aae facility if the licen•e wa• granted. She stated •h• al•o helped circulate the letter• mentioned previou•ly. She •tated •h• cf rulated the• fa the i••edfate vicinity of the pro- po•ed •f te. She •tated her participation waa conducted fa an unbia• •anner. She further •tated •he found out aoae of the people had already been contacted fa what •he thought _waa in a aeaatfve approach. M•· Paplow •tated tho•e in favor of the •••- •at• parlor •tated they u•ed •a••a1e •ervfce•, that the parlor had been there for the pa•t five or ••ven year• and •eemed not to be botherf n1 anyone~ Council Me•ber If lo a•ked M•· Paplow if •he waa aware that the backarouad 1nve•t1aat1oa report •howed an arre•t record in Denver on Soon Ye Scott~ Mr. Harvey ob:ected to the que•tion on it• relevancy~ M•· Paplow •tated •he wa• aware of the ca•e; and that ft had been di••i••ed. MaJ ll, l98l Pa1e 6 Mr. If lo ••k•d if M•· Paplow wa• aware that Mr•· Scott wae for•erl1 aeeociated with the Kew Tokyo Maeeage Parlor~ M•· Paplow •tated that particular parlor wae originally I Mr•· Scott'•· M•· Paplow •tated when •he purcha•ed the building Mr•· Scott •acated ft. M•· Paplow •tated •he then rented the bufldfa1 to another wo•aa who had a •a••aae lfcen•e· M•· Paplow •tated Mr1. Scott had never received a citation on the proposed location. In re1poa•e to Mr. Barve1'• que1tioa•, M1. Paplow stated •h• had been a relfafou• 1choolteacher for the la1t 14 years. She had tauaht co•paratf ve relfafon fn •o•t of the univer1itie1 in the city •• well a1 fa •01t of the churche1. M•· Paplow 1tated she was pre•ently teachina. Under cro••-••••faatioa fro• City Attorney DeWitt, Ma~ Paplow 1tated ehe operated the buildtaa rather than her hu1band~ The prior tenant• were Youns Soo who operated the prevfou• par- lor under the aa•e Rew Tok10 Ma11a1•· M1. Paplow explained that Youaa Soo purcha1ed the bu1f ne11 aa•• fro• Soon Ye on the condi- t f on that no vfolatfoa• were ••de. If a vfolation wa1 made, then the bu•fne1• na•e reverted to Soon Ye Scott. Mr. DeWitt a•ked M1. Paplow if it wa1 true that Mrs~ Scott had ••de an application u1ing the na~~ New Tokyo Massage the •a•• na•• underwhfch a prevfou• owner ha1 their license re- voked~ Mr. Harvey •tated the lfcea•e wa1 held in the name of the per•oa~ M•· Paplow •tated it wa• her under•tandfng that the lfcen•• had not been revoked~ Mr. DeWitt a•k•d ff 1he had 1een any document• issued by the Licen•fn1 Officer of the City concerning the previous owner of the Rew Tokyo Ma11a1e. M1. Paplow an•wered 1he had not~ In re•pon1e to Councf l Me•ber Bigday'1 que•tion, M1~ Paplow •tated •he did not thfnk Young Soo and Soon Ye Scott were related~ City Attorney DeWitt re•u•ed cro1e-exaafnation of Ma~ Paplow. Mr. DeWitt a•ked ff •he had di•cu••ed the arrangement of the leaee, the backaround of the prfor owner, and the pur- po1e of the buf ldfn1 wfth Mr1. Scott~ May ll, l98l Paa• 7 Ma. Paplow atated ahe had apoken of theae things during the laat four 7ear1. M1. Paplow atated even though Mr1. Scott did not apeak fluent ln1Jfah, ahe belfeved Mr1. Scott under1tood the t•r••~ City Attorney DeWitt aaked ff 1he knew of any other facflftfe1 which Mr1. lcott operated~ Ma. Paplow atated ah• knew of other bu1ine11e1 but did not re•••b•r the addr••••• or the aa•••· M1. Paplow 1tated the other buafne•••• were alao •a11a1• parlor•~ There were no further que1tion1 for M1. Paplow~ * * * * * * Mr. Harvey called hi• next witne1s~ Jack Swallow, 5937 South Bill, Littleton, appeared be- fore Council. Under queationfng fro• Mr. Harvey, Mr. Swallow te1tiffed that he had uaed •a1aage facilitfe1 and would u1e the aub:ect •••••ae facility ff the licen1e wa1 granted. Mr. Swallow atated he did not think hf1 need1 for •••••ae 1ervfce1 in the Ci-ty of lnalewood were betna ••t· Mr. Swallow atated he would use a lfc•n•ed •a••aa• parlor but not a bathhou••~ Under cro•a-exa•faatioa fro• Mr. DeWitt, Mr. Swallow 1tated he wa1 not fa•f lfar with any other •••••ae parlor• in the de1t1nated netahborhood. Mr. Swallow atated he had gone into •e• Tokyo Maaaaae when ft wa1 open. Mr. Swallow atated he had never aone into the •a1aa1e parlor at 2358 South Broadway becau1e it wa1 fa a hou••· In reaponae to Council Me•ber lilo'1 que1tfon, Mr~ Swallow atated he waa at the Par la•t Ma•••ae Parlor in Littleton about three •oath• aao~ Ia re1ponae to Council Me•ber Bf1day'1 que1tfon1, Mr~ Swallow provided infor•ation concerntna the purpoae and opera- tion of a •a••aa• parlor~ * * * * * * Mr. Harvey called hf• next witn•••~ Joe Scott, 2749 Veit Collea•, Denver, ca•e forward and provided teatf•ony relative to the application. Mr. Scott 1tated be circulated approxf•ately 1even Jetter• and did 10 fn an ob:ec- tf ve •anner~ Mey ll, l98l •••• 8 Mr. Hervey then •ubaftted the letter• aentioned pre- vfou•ly. Mr. Hervey •t•ted the letter• were dfvided end the re•ult• were 79 letter• were •ianed by people lfvfna fn the area end 21 letter• were •fined by people who dfd not. (Applicant'• lxhibit• I end C)~ In re•pon•e to queation• fro• Councf l Meaber Bigday~ Mr. Scott •t•ted he owned • ••••aae perlor end hi• wife owned one. loth were fn Denver end licenaed. In reply to Councf l Meaber Keene, Mr. Scott atated the eddr••• of the one he owned w•• 2358 South lroedway. The one owned by hf• wffe wa• at 3154 We•t Aleaede. Mr. Scott •t•ted he wa• not •••ocf eted with any other ••••aae parlor•~ Councf l Meaber Bfadey ••ked Mr. Scott if he knew the prevfou• owner of the •••••I• parlor. Mr. Scott •t•ted he w•• not releted to touna Boo. Be aet her throuah hi• wife, Soon te. City Attorney DeWitt ••ked Mr. Scott if the e•tablf•h- ••nt et 2358 South lroedwey ••• lfcen•ed under Okayaaa Maaaaae end ff ft wa• •o•eti•e• advertf aed •• Orfental Sendy Maaaage or Oriental Su•ie Ma••aae~ Mr. Scott •t•ted the ••tablf•h•ent wa• Okay••• Ma••age and never •dvertf ••d under the other two na•e•~ Mr. DeWitt •t•t•d the Mondey, May llth i••ue of the aocky Mountafn l•w•, contained en advertf••••nt for Oriental Su•f• Ma••aae et 2358 South lroedway. Mr. DeWitt a•ked for an explanation~ Mr. Scott •tated he dfd not aake up the advertf•e- aent•, hf• wffe dfd~ Mr. Harvey ob~ected to the que•tion• a• befna frrele- vent. In re•pon•e to Council Meaber lr•d•h•w'• que•tfon, Mr~ Scott •tated there wa• • •fan on the door on South lroedwey to refer people to the We•t Alaaeda •••••ae perlor~ * * * * * * Mr. Harvey had no further vftne••e• at thia tiae~ * * * * * * MaJ ll, 1981 Paa• 9 Ma7or Oti• a•k•d if anyone in audience wi•hed to speak in favor of the licen•• i••uance~ Charle• 1. Ma•on, 4649 South Pox, appeared before Coun- cil. Mr. Ma•on t••tified he had u••d •a••aae aervicea of Mra~ Scott'• buain••• becauae he i• bothered with lower back problem• and a knee condition. Be further teatified that he had on occaaion tried to aolicit the •a•••u••• for proatitution and waa refuaed~ There were no further witne•••• in favor~ • • • • • • Ma7or Oti• aaked if an7one wiahed to apeak in oppoaition~ John leal, 2885 South Corona, caae forward. Under oath~ Mr. leal atated he beca•• involved peraonally in helpina to coordi- nate the oppo•ition petition proc•••: and aa a reault felt he could not hear the aatter in an !•partial aanner. Mr. Neal aubaitted 32 petf tiona containina approxiaatelJ 568 na•e• of individual• who op- poaed the lfcenae; and that there .waa one individual who aianed in favor of the lic•n••· Mr. Real atated he did not circulate any of the petition•· Council Meaber Pf tspatrick atated he alao waa contacted; however, he felt he could aive an unbia• opinion~ Mr. Barve7 proceeded to queatfon Mr. Real. In reapon•e~ Mr. leal atated the petition foraat• were printed at a Quick Copy Shop on South Colorado Boulevard. Mr. Real atated he conaulted the Cfty Attorney on the foraat. Mr. Harve7 aubaf tted that the foraat waa identical to that u••d bJ Mr. Max Scott~ Mr. Harvey que•tfoned Mr. Real exten•ively on the pro- cedure throuah whfch Mr. leal obtained the petition foraat, had the• reproduced for circulation, and the petitionina proce•• it- •el f~ Mr. Harvey noted that the area covered by the opponent•~ petition• overlapped the area covered by Mr. Scott'• •urveyor•~ Mr. Harvey a•ked Mr. Neal who contacted hi• for the purpo•e of oppoafng the lfcenae. Mr. Neal atated they .were con- cerned cf tisen•· Mr. Real added he did not 1peak to all of the cf rculatora nor df d he apeak to any of the circulator• about any particular inforaation concernina Mra. Scott. May ll, 1981 Pase JO Mr. Real •tated he had no ob:ection• to a aaaaage aad i• bothered by neck probleaa; however, he felt the needa and deair•• of the neishborhood are currently being met~ Mr. Harvey referred to a newapaper article which ap- peared in the March 25, l98l, edition of the Denver Poat written by Mr. Real. (Applicant'• lzhibit D) Mr. Harvey a•ked Mi. Neal what •otivated hi• to write the article. Mr. Real replied there had been coaplafnta in the paat on the nec•••itJ of iaauin1 liquor licenaea or aaaaage par- lor licenaea. Mr. Real atated the article waa to tranaait in- for•ation on how the citi••n •iaht ezpreaa hi• or her need• and deairea when the official pollater caae to the door. Mr. Neal read a part of the para1raph~ At the requeat of Council Me•ber Higday, the entire article fa hereby aade a part of th••• •inutea: GOIST VllWPOINT Stat•'• &ul•• Control Policy on Licenaina, ly John Neal~ lnalewood City Council To the Citiaena of lnalewood: Many cf tisena ha•• ezpr••••d fruatration over the pro- ceaa by which aaaaa1• parlor• are Jicenaed by the City in which they are applyin1 to do buain•••· The !ngl~wood City Council, aa licenain1 authority, fa able to accept informa- tion and ••fdence only alon1 certain atate-•andated guide- l in••· In thi• capactfJ •• operate aa a "quaai-:udictal" body •i•f lar to the court :ud1•~ One of the aoat iaportant thinaa in theae public hear- in1 i• the "opinion poll" taken by an independent coapany to deteratne the "need• and deaf re•" of the netahborhood in which the parlor ta to operate~ You aay be aaked if your "need• and deafrea" for thia aer•ice are been ••t~ Your anawer to thf a queatfon i• very iaportant to the reaulta of the poll~ If you anawer that JOU don't want a aaaaage parlor in your nei1hborhood, your "•ote" cannot and will not be counted MaJ lJ, 1911 •••• JJ •1afaat the Jfcen••· Thfa fa becauae of the atate law that 1overaa how Cf tJ Couacfl MOST decfde, not how City Council •faht VA•T to decfde on a lfcen••~ Ia order for you to have your vote count on the queation of whether you want a •a••aae parlor in your neighborhood~ you •u•t aaawer fa one of two way•~ If you do not want a •a••aae parlor, you muat •ay, "MY •llDI A•D DllillS roa TRIS SllVICI All CURRENTLY BEING MET." If you do want a •a••aae parlor in your ne1ghborhood~ JOU •u•t •aJ, "MY ••IDS ARD DISillS roa TRIS SERVICE ARE NOT llIIG MIT." Th••• are the onlJ anawer• that can be a vote for or aaafaat a new ••••aae parlor licenae 1n lngl~wood~ I thfak you can uaderatand how theae licenaee can be f aaued even when ••DJ people ••Y not want them 1n the1r nef ahborhood. Bow JOU anawer the opin1on poll 1• cr1t1cal to whether we "•u•t' faaue a 11cenae. In ao•e caae•, the atat• court• can force u• to f aaue a licenae~ I hope thf a Jetter help• you when you are contacted for your opinfon. Thfa Jetter i• for your informatfon." Mr. leaJ atated the fntent of the article was to edu- cate the pubJ1c on the petftfonfng proce••~ In re•poaae to Mr. Harvey'• que•tion, Councf l member• atated Mr. Real dfd not dfacuaa hi• preaeat action with them prior to the •••tiDI· Mr. DeWitt atated he had dfacuaaed the •atter with Mr. Real~ Mr. Real refu1ed Mr. Harvey'• requeat to poll the Councf 1 iadfvfduallJ to find out if anyone had talked to Mr~ leal fadfvfdually about thf1 •atter~ Concludfna the queationina Mr. Neal •tated he dfd not P•J for the petition prfatfaa~ * * * * * * leverend v. L. S•fth, 3170 South Broadway, Pir•t laptfat Church, ca•e forward. Under oath, Reverend Safth apoke fn oppo•itioa to the lfcen•e· Mr. Safth •tated he wa• not oppo1ed to anJ certain fndf vidual but to certain type• of bu1fn•••••· * * * * * * May JJ, J98J Pare 12 There were no further co••ent• in oppo•f tion at thi• ti•e~ * * * * * * Mayor Otf1 declared • rece11 at 9:20 P·•· Councfl reconvened at 9:30 P·•· Mayor Otf• a1ked for roll caJJ. Upon a call of the roll, the followina were pre•ent: Counc11 M••b•r• Biaday, Pitapatrick, Keena, Bilo~ lrad1haw 1 Ot11~ Council Me•ber Meal~ The Mayor declared a quoru• pre•ent~ * * * * * * Max Scott, Oedipu1 1 lnc.1 re-appeared before Council~ Mr. Scott atated two of hi• circulator• contacted •o•e people who had already •ian•d a petition agafn•t and one had already •ian•d a petition in favor which •eant •o•e other per•on wa• ahead of th•• that day. Mr. Scott •tated the•e citizen• were not added in the final tally but ff they had been the re•ulta would atfll be the 1aae~ In re1pon1e to Mr. DeWftt 1 1 que1tfon 1 Mr. Scott •tated the report •till reflect• the need• and de•ire• of the nef ghborhood~ * * * * * * In Mr. Barvey 1 1 clo•fng reaark1 1 con•fdered all of the evidence pre•ented. aood •oral character, re•pon•ible 1 and had •everal year•~ * * * * * * he a1ked Council to The applicant _wa• of been in bu•fne•• for Councf J Meaber Biaday a•ked that the applicant come forward for queatf onina~ loon te Scott, 2749 Weat Colleae, Denver, appeared be- fore Council. Under oath Mr1. Scott anawered que•tion• fro• the Council and Cf ty Attorney DeVftt. Mr1. Scott 1tated ahe knew touaa loo on a profe11foaal baafa. Mr1. Scott di1cu•aed the indiacriainate ••thod by which ah• u••d to change the na•e• of the •a••aa• parlor• which ah• and her huaband operated. Mr. DeVftt aaked Mr1. Scott about her arre•t record~ May J J , J 98 J Paa• l3 Mr. Harvey ob:ected to the que•tion~ Mr•· Scott •tated there wa• no arre•t· She wae taken into cu•tod1 but that wa• all~ The •ub:ect of chan1f n1 the na•e• of the •a••age par- ] or• wa• di•cu•••d aaain. Mr. DeWitt esplained the Jaw requf re- ••nt to ff le afffdavft on a bu•fne•• trade na•e~ In replJ to Councfl'• que•tion•, Mr•· Scott explained tb• ••thod throuah which •h• hired e•ploy••• to work at the massage parlor. Mr•· Scott •tated •he required certain fdentfffcatfon such a• a driver'• lfcen••• cf ti••n•hip paper•, and Socfal Security num- ber. She dfd not check alfa•e•~ There were no further co•••nt• or que•tion•~ * * * * * * cou•CIL MIMlll BIGDA! MOVID TO CLOS! TRI PUBLIC BIAR- IRG. Councf l M••b•r If Jo •econded the •otion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote re•ulted a• follow•: •ay•s Ab•ent: Councf J Me•ber• Bfgda7, Pf tapatrfck, Keena~ If Jo, lrad•h~w, Oti•~ lone~ Councf J Me•ber Real~ The Ma7or declared the •otfon carried~ * * * * * * Mayor Oti• •tated Councf J would revfew the evidence and •ake ft• ffndina• wfthfn thf rty day•~ * * * * * * CODICIL MIMllK BIGDA! MOVID TO ADJOURR TB! MEETING~ Mayor Otf • ad:ourned the •eetfna without a vote at 9:55 P·•~ ~CP.{fd~