HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-06-09 (Special) Meeting Minutes [1]SPECIAL MEETING:
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO
June 9, 1980
The City Council of the City of Englewood, Arapahoe
County, Colorado, met in special session at 7:20 p.m. on June 9,
1980.
Mayor Otis, presiding, called the meeting to order.
The invocation was fiven by Council Member Thomas
Fitzpatrick. The pledge of a legiance was led by Mayor Otis.
Mayor Otis asked for roll call. Upon a call of the
roll, the following were present:
Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Keena,
Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis.
Absent: None.
The Mayor declared a quorum present.
* * * * * *
Also present were: City Manager Mccown
Assistant City Manager Wanush
City Attorney Berardini
Deputy City Clerk Johannisson
Deputy City Clerk Watkins
* * * * * *
COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEAR-
ING FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE REQUEST FOR A 3.2 BEER LICENSE
SOUTHLAND CORPORATION, D/B/A 7-ELEVEN FOOD, 3501 SOUTH LOGAN.
Council Member Keena seconded the motion. Upon a call of the
roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes:
Nays:
Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick,
Keena, Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis.
None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
Deputy City Clerk Johannisson appeared before Coun-
cil and presented the second survey that was done of the neigh-
borhood. Mr. Johannisson stated the second survey was ordered
June 9, 1980
Page 2
by the City Council. Mr. Johannisson submitted the petitions
from the survey which were marked City Exhibit E (1) -(6) and
the report of the survey which was marked City Exhibit F.
Mayor Otis entered into the record a letter from Max
Scott, Oedipus, Inc., dated May 14, 1980, which discussed the
second survey. The letter was marked City Exhibit G.
City Attorney Berardini asked Bob Matthews, the at-
torney for the applicant, if he had received copies of the ex-
hibits for the City.
Mr. Matthews stated he had.
Max Scott, 2902 -5th, Boulder, appeared before Coun-
cil. Mr. Scott stated he was owner and operator of Oedipus,
Inc. Mr. Scott gave testimony concerning the second survey and
the differences between the first and the second one. Mr. Scott
noted the second survey was taken on a Saturday; whereas, the
first one was taken on a Sunday. The "not-at-home" rate was lower
on the second survey taken on Saturday than the first one taken
on Sunday. Mr. Scott attributed the difference to that particular
Sunday as being the first nice day in a series of bad weather days;
hence, many people were not at home. Mr. Scott added there were
several multi-units in the neighborhood some of which were vacant.
Mr. Scott stated if enough contacts were made in both surveys,
the "not-at-home" rate was actually irrelevant.
Mr. Scott stated of those contacted in the second sur-
vey, 58.151 indicated the needs and desires were not being met
and 41.851 indicated the needs and desires were being met. Mr.
Scott stated the figures were down compared to the first survey
because the second survey was somewhat biased and not as fresh
and candid a response as when the survey was taken for the first
time.
Bob Matthews, 1911 -11th Street, Boulder, attorney
for the law firm Chrisman, Bynum & Johnson, representing the
applicant, came forward. Mr. Matthews asked Mr. Scott ques-
tions concerning his business background and experience in
performing surveys for other municipalities. Mr. Scott pro-
vided the information.
Mr. Matthews asked Mr. Scott if the original survey
was more accurate than the second survey.
Mr. Scott stated he thought it was in terms of candid
responses.
June 9, 1980
Page 3
Mr. Matthews asked Mr. Scott for an opinion of what the
results would have been if the original survey had been done on
a Saturday as far as percentages of "not-at-homes" and approval.
Council Member Neal objected to Mr. Matthews's ques-
tions on the basis the questioning was calling for an opinion on
the validity of the surveys.
City Attorney Berardini explained the questioning was
being directed on the basis that Mr. Scott has been qualified
as an expert in this field and an opinion can be illicited. Mr.
Berardini stated Mr. Neal's objection was being raised on the
basis that it was improper to make a comparison between the two
surveys and both surveys should be accorded whatever weight Coun-
cil deemed necessary.
City Attorney Berardini asked Mr. Scott if he con-
sidered the second survey reliable.
Mr. Scott stated he did not consider the second
survey as reliable as the first.
Council granted Mr. Matthews's request to explain the
his line of questioning.
Mr. Matthews argued there had been two separate sur-
veys in this case, one with approval of approximately 70t and
one with sei. He did not know how much weight was going to be
given to each one. He wanted to illicit as much testimony from
Mr. Scott aa poaaible which would substantiate Southland's con-
tention that the original s1~rvey with the 70t approval was the
more accurate and the one that should be relied upon by the
authority.
Council Member Neal continued his objection. Mr. Neal
stated Mr. Scott represented his opinion in the letter marked City
Exhibit G. Mr. Neal stated he did hot see any purpose in further
questioning to which the answers were given in the letter. Mr. Neal
asked Mr. Matthews to get to the point quickly.
Mr. Matthews asked Mr. Scott if the original survey had
been done on a Saturday, would the approval percentage of 70t
have been the same.
Mr. Scott stated he would have expected it to be the
same.
Mr. Matthews asked Mr. Scott if he had checked on the
traffic count in this particular case.
June 9, 1980
Page 4
Mr. Scott stated he had.
Mr. Matthews asked Mr. Scott to elaborate on the traf-
fie count.
Mr. Scott explained that a traffic count was part of
the research his company did of a neighborhood prior to
surveying it. Mr. Scott then gave the traffic count figures
for the neighborhood.
Mr. Matthews asked Mr. Scott how the 70\ approval
rate compared with other surveys.
Mr. Scott stated 70\ was a standard figure in terms
of the number of surveys that he had done for this type of li-
cense.
City Attorney Berardini asked Mr. Scott if he had had
discussions concerning the statistical data with Mr. Matthews.
Mr. Scott stated he had some discussion with Mr.
Matthews over the telephone. He had furnished a copy of the
second survey and a copy of his letter to Mr. Matthews. Mr.
Scott stated Mr. Matthews had copies of other surveys that his
firm had done for Southland; and further stated his company did
work for 7-11 outside the City of Englewood.
Mr. Berardini asked Mr. Scott if his income received
from Southland affected his testimony.
Mr. Scott stated it did not because his company just
did a survey for another client and the statistics came out sub-
stantially against his client who happened to be the applicant.
Mr. Scott stated he could not control the response received at
the door nor offer incentives for one answer or another. Mr.
Scott stated he felt the objectivity of the report was intact.
Mr. Scott explained his professional philosophy in
conducting the surveys and the method under which he conducted
the surveys.
There were no further questions to ask of Mr. Scott.
Mayor Otis asked for closing remarks from Mr. Matthews.
Mr. Matthews stated evidence had been presented to
assure there were no problems in the store's operation. Mr.
Matthews argued that none of the four witnesses appearing in
June 9, 1980
Page 5
opposition were qualified to testify. Mr. Matthews stated the
store manager had received requests for 3.2 beer and cited the
courts have recognized requests to be a valid item of considera-
tion in determining what the needs and desires of the neighbor-
hood were. Two surveys were conducted and both showed a majority
in favor of the granting of the license. Mr. Matthews stated
he felt the evidence indicated the needs and desires were not
being met and concluded be requesting that the license be grant-
ed.
There was no one else wishing to speak regarding the
survey.
COUNCIL MEMBER NEAL MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEAR-
ING. Council Member Higday seconded the motion. Upon a call
of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes:
Nays:
Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick,
Keena, Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis.
None.
Mayor Otis declared the motion carried and closed the
public hearing at 7:50 p.m.