* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:01] , [Call to Order] WELCOME TO THE CITY OF GRAND PRAIRIE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OF WHAT IS THIS? AUGUST 26TH, 2024. I'M CHERYL SMITH, CHAIRMAN OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. THIS MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING IS HEREBY CALLED BACK TO ORDER AT 6:30 PM THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETS THE SECOND AND FOURTH MONDAY OF EACH MONTH. ALL MEETINGS ARE VIDEO RECORDED. NO OFFICIAL ACTION CAN BE TAKEN UNLESS PROPER APPLICATION HAS BEEN SUBMITTED THROUGH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOLLOWS A PRINTED AGENDA THAT IS AVAILABLE ONLINE PUBLIC HEARING CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ARE ROUTINE ITEMS WHICH CAN ALL BE APPROVED IN ONE MOTION. HOWEVER, ANY MEMBER OF THE COMMISSION MAY MAKE A MOTION TO INDIVIDUALLY CONSIDER AN ITEM FROM THE PUBLIC HEARING CONSENT AGENDA. INDIVIDUALS MAY ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON ANY ITEMS ON TODAY'S AGENDA. TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM OR NOTE YOUR SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION WITHOUT SPEAKING, PLEASE FILL OUT A REQUEST TO SPEAK CARD. THESE CARDS ARE AVAILABLE AT THE COUNTER AND SHOULD BE TURNED IN AT THE BACK OF THE ROOM PRIOR TO THE FIRST AGENDA. ITEM, ITEM BEING CALLED, I'LL NOW CONDUCT A ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS TO CONFIRM THE PRESENCE OF A QUORUM. AFTER I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE SAY, HERE, CHERYL SMITH. HERE, T CHAPMAN. HERE. MICHELLE MADDEN. CHRISTOPHER COLEY. HERE. FRANK GONZALEZ. HERE. JANIE MENDEZ. ARI HERE. VICTOR MEDINA. JOHN FCO. HERE. ANGELA LUCKY VON. HERE, LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT ALL MEMBERS OF PRESIDENT EXCEPT FOR MICHELLE MADDEN AND VICTOR MEDINO. AND NOW WE WILL HAVE THE INVOCATION BY COMMISSIONER JOHN FKO. AND I'LL LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN THE US AND TEXAS FLAG. PLEASE BOW YOUR HEADS. DEAR GOD, THANK YOU FOR THIS ABILITY AND OPPORTUNITY TO GET TOGETHER TO DILIGENCE THE ITEMS IN FRONT OF THIS, UH, COMMISSION. WE ASK YOU, LORD, THAT WE'RE ABLE TO DEBATE, UH, ITEMS THAT COME BEFORE US IN A, IN A SPIRITED MANNER THAT ONLY GO TO SERVE THE PUBLIC INTERESTS OF THE CITY. ITS CITIZENS, ITS BUSINESSES, ITS VISITORS, AND ITS PUBLIC SERVANTS. AMEN. AMEN. I CONGRATULATE FLAG FROM UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVIDUAL WITH LIBERTY JUSTICE, THE TEXAS FLAG ALLEGIANCE, THE TEXAS ONE STATE ONE, ONE INDIVISIBLE. IN AN EFFORT TO MINIMIZE DISRUPTIONS, THE FOLLOWING MEETING GUIDELINES WILL APPLY. THE STAFF WILL PRESENT FIRST ON ANY AGENDA ITEM FOLLOWING A BRIEF PRESENTATION BY STAFF. APPLICANTS WILL HAVE A COMBINED TOTAL OF 30 MINUTES TO PRESENT. ONCE THE APPLICANT HAS SPOKEN, EACH MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WHO FILLS OUT A SPEAKER CARD WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM. ADDITIONAL SPEAKING TIME MAY BE ALLOWED AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIRMAN BEFORE SPEAKING. SPEAKER SHOULD GIVE THEIR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD ALONG WITH WHOM YOU REPRESENT. IF APPLICABLE, AN INDIVIDUAL WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON A TOPIC NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA SHOULD SPEAK UNDER THE HEADING OF CITIZEN COMMENTS. STAFF WILL BE AVAILABLE TO RESPOND TO QUESTIONS FOLLOWING PRESENTATION OF EACH ITEM AT THIS TIME, DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, CITIZEN COMMENT CARDS? THERE ARE NO CARDS, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THE NEXT MATTER [PUBLIC HEARING CONSENT AGENDA] FOR CONSIDERATION IS APPROVING THE PUBLIC HEARING CONSENT AGENDA. ITEM ONE, UM, COMMISSIONER FEDCO, MADAM CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE VOTE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION AND VOTE TO APPROVE THE REVISED MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 12TH, 2024 MINUTES. I SECOND THAT WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPROVE THE, UH, PUBLIC CONSENT AGENDA. ITEM ONE BY COMMISSIONER ERCO AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. NEXT CASE PLEASE. [2. SUP-24-08-0031 - Specific Use Permit Review - Zaza Hookah Lounge (City Council District 2). Review SUP No. 1125B, a Specific Use Permit for Amusement Services authorizing a Hookah Lounge, for compliance with SUP conditions, and modify, renew, or revoke if deemed appropriate based upon the review. Lot 2, Block 1, Gibsons Addition, City of Grand Prairie, Dallas County, Texas, zoned PD-394, and addressed as 906 W Pioneer Pkwy Suite 250] ITEM NUMBER TWO ON THE AGENDA IS A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT REVIEW FOR DAZA HOOKA. IT'S LOCATED AT 9 0 6 WEST PIONEER PARKWAY. YOU CAN SEE THE LOCATION IS OUTLINED IN YELLOW ON THE SCREEN. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REVIEW IS TO REVIEW SUP NUMBER 1125 B FOR AMUSEMENT SERVICES, WHICH AUTHORIZES THE OPERATION OF THE HOOKAH LOUNGE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SUP CONDITIONS. UM, BASED ON THIS REVIEW, YOU CAN MODIFY, RENEW, OR REVOKE, IF DEEMED APPROPRIATE. SO IN FEBRUARY OF 2022, CITY COUNCIL FIRST APPROVED THE SUP FOR AMUSEMENT SERVICES AND AUTHORIZED A REVIEW OF THE SUP IN SIX MONTHS. IN DECEMBER, 2022, COUNCIL RENEWED THAT SUP FOR AN ADDITIONAL SIX MONTHS, AND IN [00:05:01] JULY OF 2023, CITY COUNCIL REMOVE RENEWED THE SUP FOR ONE YEAR. SO IT IS BACK BEFORE YOU TONIGHT FOR THE PURPOSE OF REVIEW. UM, SO A COUPLE OF ITEMS TO ADDRESS, UH, IN IT WAS BROUGHT TO STAFF'S ATTENTION THAT THERE MIGHT BE SOME CONFUSION OF THE HOURS OF OPERATION. UM, SO ZAZA HOOKAH LOUNGE OPERATES IN SUITE 250. YOU CAN SEE IT HIGHLIGHTED IN, UH, ON THE SCREEN. ZAZA PIZZAS AND WINGS OPERATE AND SUITE 300. UH, THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION OVER THE OPERATIONAL HOURS. THE SUP LIMITS THE HOURS OF OPERATION TO MIDNIGHT FOR THE HOOKAH LOUNGE. UH, STAFF CONFIRMED WITH THE OPERATOR THAT ZAZA HOOKAH LOUNGE DOES NOT EXTEND BEYOND 12 MIDNIGHT. UH, BUT IT'S ONLY THE RESTAURANT PORTION THAT'S OPEN LATE. AND SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDING THAT THE REFERENCES TO THE HOURS BEYOND WHAT'S ALLOWED BY THE SUP BE REMOVED FROM ZAZA HOOKAH LOUNGE TO PREVENT FURTHER, UH, CONFUSION. UM, SO THE OPERATIONS OF ZAZA HOOKA LOUNGE ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THOSE SUP CONDITIONS AND ALL OTHER RULES AND REGULATIONS. SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDING THAT THE SUP BE RENEWED WITHOUT SPECIFYING A DATE FOR FUTURE REVIEW OF THE SUP. UH, THE ONLY REASON IT WOULD GO BACK BEFORE COUNSEL IS IF THERE WERE SIGNIFICANT VIOLATIONS. AND SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDING THAT ALL OTHER EXISTING CONDITIONS FROM THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL AND SUBSEQUENT RENEWALS REMAIN THE SAME. SO SINCE THE OPERATIONS ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS, STAFF RECOMMENDS RENEWAL OF THE SUP WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. THE DEVELOPMENT OPERATIONS SHALL ADHERE TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVED SITE PLAN AND OPERATION PLAN EIGHT LINERS AND ALCOHOL SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED ON THE PREMISES. OPERATING HOURS SHALL BE LIMITED FROM 10:00 AM UNTIL 12:00 AM INDIVIDUALS UNDER THE AGE OF 18 WILL NOT BE ALLOWED IN ESTABLISHMENT. INDIVIDUALS UNDER THE AGE OF 21 WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO SMOKE. UM, THE OPERATOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR IDENTIFYING THE AND CHECKING THE AGES OF PATRONS PRIOR TO ENTERING THE ESTABLISHMENT TO CONFIRM THAT THEY'RE MEETING THAT AGE. UM, AND THEN STATUTE WILL ISSUE A WRISTBAND TO PATRONS THAT ARE AT LEAST 21 YEARS OF AGE AND PREVIOUS SMOKING LOUNGES. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HAS RECOMMENDED MODIFYING THAT AGE OF 18 TO 21. AND IF YOU'D LIKE TO DO THE, SO FOR THIS ITEM, UH, PLEASE INCLUDE IT IN YOUR RECOMMENDATION. UM, SO, UH, AGAIN, BUSINESS SHALL OPERATE IN COMPLIANCE WITH ALL STATE, FEDERAL AND LOCAL LAWS. AND THEN A FOOD ESTABLISHMENT CANNOT BE OPERATED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THIS HOOKAH LOUNGE. USE THE 11TH CONDITION IS NEW TO THIS SUP, AND THAT'S THE OPERATOR SHALL REMOVE ANY AND ALL SIGNAGE REFERENCING HOURS BEYOND WHAT IS AUTHORIZED IN THE SUP FROM ZAZA HOOKAH LOUNGE AND SHALL POST SIGNAGE REFLECTING THE HOURS OF OPERATION AS REQUIRED BY THE SUP CONDITIONS. THIS CONCLUDES STAT'S PRESENTATION. I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE? YOU DID A REALLY GOOD JOB IN, IN THE BRIEFING. THANK YOU. UM, ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER, DO YOU HAVE ANY SPEAKER CARDS? COMMISSIONERS, THERE ARE NO SPEAKER CARDS THAT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED IN THIS ITEM. UM, AS WELL AS I DON'T BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. UH, ONE THING TO CONSIDER, IF YOU WERE TO CONSIDER, UM, RAISING THE AGE FOR THOSE ITEMS OR THOSE CONDITIONS THAT LIST 18 YEARS OF AGE, IS THAT, UH, THE ESTABLISHMENT MIGHT HAVE SOME EMPLOYEES OR STAFF THAT ARE BETWEEN THE AGES OF 18 AND 21. YEAH. MAKES SENSE. MM. DIDN'T THINK ABOUT THAT. BUT HOW DO WE DEAL WITH THAT? I MEAN, I DON'T UNDERSTAND. UH, BECAUSE YOU COULD, IF YOU, IF YOU DO WANT TO CHANGE THAT CONSISTENT TO WHAT YOU HAVE RECOMMENDED IN PAST CASES, UH, YOU MIGHT WANNA CONSIDER, UM, MAKING THAT LIMITATION TO OVER 21 FOR PATRONS ONLY. THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO HAVE STAFF THAT IS BETWEEN 18 AND 21 YEARS OLD. WE MAY NEED TO HAVE A LITTLE DISCUSSION ON THAT. I DON'T REALLY KNOW HOW TO HANDLE THAT. RASHARD, WHAT ARE YOU THINKING ON THAT? THAT WAS MY RECOMMENDATION. UM, NOT NOT HAVING THE APPLICANT HERE TO CLARIFY WHETHER OR NOT THEY HAVE ANY, UH, EMPLOYEES UNDER AGE OF UNDER 21. THE EASIEST APPROACH IS TO SAY PATRONS ONLY 21 AND A GO AHEAD. OR, OR TO KEEP THE, YOU HAVE THE OPTION TO KEEP THE CONDITIONS AS IS GIVEN THAT THEY HAVEN'T HAD ANY NOTED, UM, VIOLATIONS AS WELL. GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER. VER CRITICAL CAN, CAN YOU ALSO DO A THIRD APPROACH, WHICH IS TO GRANDFATHER THOSE PEOPLE THAT ARE EMPLOYED AS OF THIS DATE, THAT IF THEY'RE UNDERNEATH 21, THAT WORKS. BUT ANY FUTURE EMPLOYEES NEED TO BE ABOVE 21. MM-HMM . MY CONCERN, I JUST WANNA SAY FOR, JUST FOR DISCUSSION, I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT WHY WOULDN'T YOU HAVE AN 18-YEAR-OLD IN THE HOOKAH LOUNGE IF THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO PURCHASE OR [00:10:01] SMOKE? I, THAT WILL BE MY ONLY CONCERN IS THE EXPOSURE, THE 18-YEAR-OLD IN THE ESTABLISHMENT. BUT THAT'S JUST MY PERSONAL OPINION. COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT? I DO. WHERE FROM A LEGAL ASPECT, NOW THAT WE'VE CHANGED IT WITH OTHERS AND WE'RE NOT, IF WE WEREN'T TO CHANGE IT WITH THIS ONE, WHERE DOES THAT PUT US LEGALLY? YOU KNOW, YOU CAN, YOUR PAST CASES WERE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNSEL AND THEY WOULD TAKE ACTION ON THAT RECOMMENDATION. SO, UM, WHATEVER YOU CHOOSE TO RECOMMEND IN THIS CASE WOULD GO FORWARD. LEGALLY, YOU, YOU AREN'T HELD TO THAT SAME STANDARD. WHAT IS HERE IS WHAT'S BEEN ESTABLISHED FOR THIS, UM, FOR THIS ESTABLISHMENT AND THE CONDITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN PUT IN PLACE. SO, UM, YOU WOULDN'T BE RESTRICTED FROM ADDING THOSE, THOSE SAME RESTRICTIONS OR CONDITIONS THAT YOU'VE RECOMMENDED IN THE MORE RECENT CASES. BUT COMMISSIONER FEDCO MAKES A GREAT POINT THAT SUPPOSE THERE ARE EMPLOYEES THAT ARE ALREADY UNDER 21 THAT ARE THERE. THEY WOULD NEED TO BE GRANDFATHERED IN IF THEY'RE, IF THAT'S THEIR PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT. I GUESS I LIKE THE GRANDFATHER AND THING. 'CAUSE IF WE GO YOUR APPROACH THAT THERE'S THIS 21 AND 18, THEN THEY CAN EMPLOY PEOPLE UNDER 21 IN PERPETUITY. WELL, INDIVIDUALS UNDER 21 AND OVER 18 CAN SELL THESE TYPE OF QUESTIONS. I UNDERSTAND. BUT I THINK THAT, BUT TO COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN'S POINT, WE'VE BEEN FAIRLY CONSISTENT THAT IN THE PAST WE'VE LIKED THE WORKERS AND THE CUSTOMERS TO BE 21 OR OVER. I'M NOT REALLY SURE. NO, THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THE ESTABLISHMENT, IT'S JUST WE HAVE, UH, BEEN CONSISTENT WITH, YOU KNOW, 21 NOT ALLOWED, YOU KNOW, UH, WORKERS OR PATRONS. BUT I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S JUST THE PATRONS. WELL, WHAT WE'RE DOING IS MAKING A RECOMMENDATION ANYWAY THAT THE CITY COUNCIL'S GONNA DO WHATEVER THEY WANT TO DO WHEN THEY GET IT. YOU KNOW, SO WE'RE JUST MAKING A RECOMMENDATION IS LAY PEOPLE AS CONSTITUENTS. SO, SO ANOTHER THING TO CONSIDER IS THAT THIS IS THE FOURTH REVIEW OF THIS SUP. AND IN THE PREVIOUS THREE REVIEWS THAT 18 YEARS DISTINCTION HAS, HAS GONE FORWARD ALLOWING 18 YEAR OLDS TO COME IN, BUT NOT TO ACTUALLY SMOKE. UM, AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, IN THOSE PREVIOUS CASES WHERE YOU HAVE CHANGED THE TIME FROM 18 OR THE DATE OR THE AGE, SORRY, FROM 18 TO 21, UM, THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN PRESENT AND HAS BEEN ABLE TO CONFIRM THAT THEY DON'T HAVE ANY EMPLOYEES THAT AGE AND THAT THEY WERE OKAY WITH THAT CHANGE. THAT'S THE CONCERN IF THEY HAVE EMPLOYEES. AND I WOULD WANT THEM TO BE ABLE TO ALSO, FROM AN OPERATIONAL STANDPOINT, IF THAT IS PART OF THE BASIS OF, FOR THOSE POSITIONS TO HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO HIRE SOMEBODY WHO'S 18 THAT'S CHANGING THEIR OPERATION. SO I, I WOULD LIKE THEM TO BE ABLE TO SAY YES MOVING FORWARD, WE'LL ONLY DO 21 AND UP. WELL, WE CAN EITHER TABLE IT 'CAUSE I THINK MM-HMM . CHAIRMAN, UH, I'M SORRY. COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN WAS SAYING OR GIVE THE GRANDFATHER FOR ANYBODY THAT'S ALREADY EMPLOYEE. THE, THE PROBLEM I HAVE IS THAT, AS SHE SAID, WE'VE BEEN FAIRLY CONSISTENT THAT GOING FORWARD, EVERYBODY'S BEEN 21, WHETHER YOU'RE A WORKER OR A PATRON MM-HMM . AND THIS, IF WE, IF WE GO WITH JUST A BLANKET HERE, THEN THESE PEOPLE WILL HAVE FOREVER THE I THE ABILITY TO HIRE FOLKS THAT ARE UNDER 21. I MEAN, WE COULD SET A SPECIFIC DATE IF YOU WANT TO GO TO GRANDFATHER ROUTE. UM, THE ISSUE IS ENFORCEMENT WHO'S GONNA GO IN AND ACTUALLY ASK FOR THEIR IDS AND WHATNOT. UM, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF WE'LL BE ABLE TO DO THAT. WELL, MY CONCERN IS TOO, IF THERE ARE PEOPLE IN PLACE THAT ARE 18, UH, UNDER 21, UM, WITHOUT NOTICE, I MEAN, IT JUST SEEMS A BIT UNFAIR TO, FOR THEM TO LOSE THEIR JOB. I DON'T KNOW. I JUST, I I HAVE MIXED EMOTIONS ABOUT IT. THEY SHOULD LOSE THEIR JOB. THAT'S, YEAH. YEAH. YEAH. SO THAT THE GRANDFATHER, THE GRANDFATHER THEN IS PROBABLY THE, THE BEST CASE SCENARIO. BUT IT'S WHATEVER THE GROUP DECIDES. UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, LUCKY VON, DO YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ON IT? I HAVE NOT. MOTIONS. MM-HMM . ARE YOU SPEAKING INTO THE I HAVE A MIX OF MOTIONS, UM, AS WELL. UM, FOR THOSE THAT ARE 18, THAT WAS, UM, HIRED AND THAT'S THEIR PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT. MM-HMM . AND TO SAY YOU LOSING YOUR EMPLOYMENT JUST BECAUSE OF A CHANGE, IT WOULDN'T BE FAIR FOR THEM. I LIKE THE GRANDFATHER. 'CAUSE USUALLY WHEN A POLICY IS BEING CHANGED, USUALLY THOSE PEOPLE THAT ARE ALREADY THERE ARE GRANDFATHER IN. SO I LIKE THE GRANDFATHER IDEA. MM-HMM . [00:15:01] COMMISSIONER, DID YOU HAVE ANY, ANY THOUGHTS ON IT? I HAVE VERY OPPOSITE THOUGHTS ON IT. . OKAY. I, UM, AGREE WITH LETTING IT BE 18 TO 21 BECAUSE AS THEY'VE SAID, YOU KNOW, 18 YEAR OLDS ARE ALSO ALLOWED TO SERVE ALCOHOL AND IF, YOU KNOW, JUST NOT PARTAKE. BUT IT, I JUST DON'T SEE ANYTHING WRONG WITH CHANGING IT. I THINK IT'S FINE. I THINK WITH 18 YEAR OLDS, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT IF THERE WAS AN 18-YEAR-OLD THERE AND WE WERE TRYING TO GRANDFATHER THEM IN, I JUST FEEL LIKE HOW MANY 18 YEAR OLDS STAY AT A JOB, YOU KNOW, LONG, RELATIVELY LONG. UM, I JUST, I JUST FEEL LIKE IF, IF THERE WERE ANY, AND THEY WERE GRANDFATHERED IN, THAT IT COULD CHANGE WITHIN THE NEXT THREE MONTHS, SIX MONTHS JUST BECAUSE OF, YOU KNOW, AN 18 YEAR OLDS. BUT IF IT DID CHANGE, THEN THIS HOOKAH LOUNGE ON PIONEER WOULD BE WORKING UNDER THE SAME CONDITIONS THAT THE OTHER ONES, THE OTHER CONDITIONS THAT WE'VE IMPOSED ON OTHER HOOKAH LOUNGES, WHICH IS THAT YOUR EMPLOYEES HAVE TO BE 21 OR OVER. SO ANYBODY THAT'S 18, 19 OR 20, THEY GET TO KEEP WORKING THERE IF THEY SO CHOOSE. BUT IF THEY QUIT OR GET TERMINATED OR WHATEVER, THE REPLACEMENT HAS TO BE OVER 21. JUST LIKE THE, THEY'RE COMPETITORS OF THIS, OF ZZA. OH, GOTCHA. YEAH. STANDARD PRACTICES ARE IMPORTANT. COMMISSIONER CHAMA? YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR. I, I STRONGLY FEEL CONSISTENCY. I SHOULD BE ABLE TO GO TO A HOOK, A LOUNGE, ANYWHERE IN GRAND PRAIRIE AND IT'D BE THE SAME CONDITIONS. THAT'S THE WAY I FEEL. UM, AS FAR AS THE PERSONS, I, I REALLY THINK WE SHOULD TABLE BECAUSE WE NEED TO KNOW INSTEAD OF ASSUME THAT THERE ARE 18 YEAR OLDS WORKING THEIR YES OR NO. SO I WOULD LOVE FOR US TO TABLE IT AND THEN HAVE THE OWNER BE PRESENT, UH, SO WE CAN REALLY KNOW WHAT WE'RE CONTENDING WITH AND THEN MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION, UH, INFORMED. I THINK IS, IS THE DIFFERENCE. LET'S JUST GO DOWN THE LINE. COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ? YES. YES. YO, LIKE, LIKE I SAID, I'M, I'M ALL FOR CONSISTENCY. I'M JUST NOT SURE WHAT WE'VE AGREED TO IN THE PAST. SO I THINK I'D LIKE TO GET THAT STRAIGHT. AND I, I REALLY DON'T KNOW. I KNOW WE'VE, WE'VE BEEN ESPECIALLY THE LAST, UH, CIGAR LOUNGE, I THOUGHT IT WAS, UM, AND FORGIVE ME, JOHN, I, I CANNOT RECALL IF IT WAS PATRONS ONLY VERSUS EMPLOYEES. I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST EMPLOYEES ACROSS THE BOARD. ACROSS THE BOARD. OKAY. IF THAT'S, AND IF THAT'S WHAT WE DID, THEN WE SHOULD STICK WITH THAT. SO ONE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE, THE PAST FEW CASES WHERE YOU HAVE MADE THAT RECOMMENDATION TO CHANGE IT TO 21 ACROSS THE BOARD, THOSE, UH, BUSINESSES WEREN'T IN OPERATION YET. WHEN WE PUT THOSE CONDITIONS ON, UH, THIS BUSINESS HAS BEEN IN OPERATION FOR A WHILE. UM, IT WILL BE DIFFICULT TO ENFORCE THE GRANDFATHER IF THERE WAS A GRANDFATHERING, UM, OF THEIR EMPLOYEES. UM, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO COME IN AND AUDIT THEIR EMPLOYMENT RECORDS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE EMPLOYING PEOPLE. UM, YOU KNOW, 21 AND UM, OVER, UM, SO THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CASES THAT YOU'VE RECOMMENDED. IN THIS CASE, THIS, THIS BUSINESS HAS BEEN OPERATING FOR SEVERAL YEARS, TWO YEARS I BELIEVE. MM-HMM. UM, WITH THESE CONDITIONS IN PLACE. SO WITHOUT THE ACTUAL APPLICANT HERE TO CONFIRM THAT THEY'RE OKAY WITH IT, UH, WE STILL RUN INTO THOSE SAME ISSUES OF, OF BEING ABLE TO AUDIT THAT OR TO CHECK COMMISSIONER COLEY. YEAH, I'M JUST GONNA SAY FOR THOSE REASONS THEN WE SHOULD JUST TABLE THAT THERE. RIGHT. WE NEED THE, UH, APPLICANT TO BE HERE TO COMMISSIONER COING. LET US JUST GO WITH THE, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION THAT, YOU KNOW, WE LEAVE EVERYTHING THE WAY THAT, OKAY. THAT'S YOUR RECOMMENDATION. UH, ANY MORE DISCUSS? I THINK JOHN, UH, COMMISSIONER FEDDER. GO AHEAD. YEAH, I'M SORRY, I FORGOT YOUR NAME. 'CAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE A, A NAME PLACARD. JULIE, MS. DOSCHER. JULIE. YES, JULIE. BUT IF YOU'RE SAYING THAT THEN EVEN FOR THE NEW BUSINESSES, WE DON'T HAVE THE POWER TO AUDIT WHO THEY, WHAT THE AGE IS OF THEIR EMPLOYEES. IF YOU'RE GONNA USE THAT LOGIC THERE, YOU'RE GONNA USE THE LOGIC AT ZAS TOO. FOR EMPLOYERS. IT'LL, FOR EMPLOYEES, IT'LL BE MORE DIFFICULT TO AUDIT. UM, WHEN IT'S A BLANKET 21 AND OVER, THEN WE CAN JUST COME IN AND ASK ANYBODY IF THEY'RE 21 OR NOT. BUT, BUT TO MAKE THAT DISTINCTION BETWEEN PATRON AND EMPLOYEE WILL BE HARD TO AUDIT. WELL, THIS IS, UH, YOU HAVE COMMISSIONER, UH, VAUGHN, DID YOU HAVE A SOMETHING? YES, MADAM CHAIR. WHAT IS THE STATE AGE, UM, THAT ALLOWS INDIVIDUALS TO WORK AT A HOOK AGE. MM-HMM . IS IT 18? IT'S [00:20:01] 18 YEARS OLD. MM-HMM . OKAY. THANK YOU. WELL, WE HAVE A MIXED BAG HERE, . UM, MAYBE, MAYBE IT MAY BE BETTER TO DO WHAT COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN SAYS TO TABLE AND JUST, AND JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT HERE AND THEY CAN'T SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES AND WE'RE JUST GUESSING WE WANNA MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I BELIEVE IN WE SHOULD, YOU KNOW, THEY SHOULD BE ALL BE THE SAME. LIKE YOU SAID, YOU KNOW, WE SHOULD DO ONE FOR ONE AS WE DO FOR THE OTHER. BUT, UM, SO, UH, DO WE, ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THIS? MADAM CHAIR? IF IT PLEASES THE CHAIR, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE, SORRY, THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION ON ITEM TWO SUP DASH 24 DASH 0 0 8 DASH 0 3 1 AND TABLE IT TO THE NEXT MEETING. SAVANNAH, I THINK IT'S ON SEPTEMBER THE NINTH. YES. AND, UM, HOPEFULLY THE APPLICANT WILL BE IN ATTENDANCE. WE HAVE A MO MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO TABLE ITEM TWO SUP 24 8 3 1 BY COMMISSIONER FEDCO AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ. UH, ALL IN FAVOR OF TABLING THIS ITEM, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THAT BEING THE ONLY ITEM ON THE DOCKET WE, THIS MEETING IS, UH, ADJOURNED AT 6:51 PM . * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.