Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-01-29 CC MIN• (148 COUNCIL CHAMBER Stillwater, Minnesota SPECIAL MEETING Present: Absent: Also Present: Press: CITIZENS: January 29, 1979 7:30 P. M. Council Peterson, Councilman n Powell and rMayore Roger Junker None Finance Director, Nile Kriesel; City Attorney, David Magnuson, Public Safety Director, Abrahamson; Stillwater Gazette - Bob Liberty WAVN - Gary Larson Free Press - David Mathes St. Paul Dispatch - Broede Lloyd Bodlovick, Chris Madsen, Jack Walsh, Brad MacDonald, Mr. & Mrs. Vick Ritzer and son; Paul Liberty, Jr., Jerry Mahoney MAYOR between JtheRStillwatertTaxitand had been called for a concerning the hearing proposed revocation of their license. DAVID MAGNUSON: I want to make a brief statement for the record - it involves really power to license and regulate certain activities and it has been to be lawful extension of police calls almost from the beginning of our government hare in the United States - the Commerce Clause which is exercising the police powers which is used to regulate common carriers and the taxi is our common carrier to transport persons for hire. This power delegated by the legislature to local governments and pursuant to that power, Article II, Section 6 of the Charter allows the City to define, license, regulate and restrain the carrying and hauling of persons and property for hire. Pursuant to that authority we enacted Ordinance 303 and amendment schedules - it provides for same. The ordinance does not provide license revocation, but the courts have persistently held that as far licenses apply the governing body can suspend same provided that a good cause be shown. This hearing is really pursuant to a notice of revocation dated January 25, 1979 and served upon the Ritzer Taxi Service which has been really treated by both parties as a notice of hearing on the proposal that we have allowed the Ritzers to operate the taxi service since that time. I think that is enough of a statement. JACK WALSH: I represent Virginia Ritzer in this matter that notice of hearing this evening by virtue of receiving a letter over Mr. Kriesel's signature said letter being dated the 25th of January and setting forth among other things that in the event that one wanted to be hear in connection with the proposed revoation that said hearing must be requestadwithin a five day period. Not counting the date of the notice we would have had until tomorrow to come within the five days and his schedule was such tomorrow that I could not take it - I talked to Mr. Magnuson, your City Attorney, we agreed to appear here this evening. The immediate problem that appears to be based, both my client and the Council, is the intent of the Charter if you want to call it that - the only thing I am on notice of and the only thing that I would assume that we are here to be heard on is whether or not voluntary suspension of service for a period of time one day last week is a violation of the licensee's power and authority to such an extent that it warrants "kill" and I say "kill" not only "overkill" and that is that the license should be revoked. Now if that is the intent of the Council to discuss any matters other than that, it's my judgment that we are not properly on notice and such a hearing would be unfair and if it is the though of the Council that you intend to hear other matters, then I would respectively request that we be given adequate and proper notice so that we can prepare to face these other charges and I ask that we be granted a thirty day continuance for that purpose. I would further ask that and suggest to you that I am waking on potential solutions to his problems for the City as well as for my client and were you to consider other matters and other charges here other than the one that you set forth in to Krisel's leter ad were continuance to now may able to mayserve notice. MAYOR JUNKER: Mr. Magnuson, have there been any other charges except the volun- tary turning over of the license - are t..ere any other arguments that we intend to face? MR. MAGNUSON: I think that the City has, of course, at a public hearing no control over what comlaints may be brought forward, so we have no way of fore - warming what the complaints migut be. It would be discretionary and certainly we could continue it for thirty days, but I don't think it is absolutely necessary to do that in order to have the hearing. r • r • e r 0 • January 29, 1979 MAYOR JUNKER: Well, the only reason being is that they have requested a hearing on why their license was revoked - any other charges - we have no charges against them and there have been times before when anybody had a complaint against the taxi service that wouldn't have been brought out then. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: I think that is the reason that the license was revoked. MAYOR JUNKER: The only reason the license was revoled was because he voluntarily surrended it and we asked that it be revoked. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: She did voluntarly state at a public meeting that they would keep in business until twelve o'clock. Wednesday there was a sign posted indicating that and it is public knowledge also that there was a "closed" sign - did you see the "closed" sign - did anybody else see the "closed" sign? MAYOR JUNKER: Yes. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON: Yes, I saw the 'closed' sign. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: Thursday, I can't relate if there was a "closed" sign or not and I did not see it, but Friday there was an article in the paper that he was reopened and back in business. Yet Friday euening at 20 minutes to eleven and also at 11:00 P. M. two individuals private citizens in the City called 5744 and received the answer "you have the wrong number" when they requested a cab. If Friday's Gazette can have this article "reopened ", why were the calls not taken. MR. WALSH: May 1 address myself to Mrs. Bodlovick. If she wants to bring in the people and wants to give us the right to confront these people, I'll be happy to examine those people and set this forth with particularities to the Council. I suggest that is a false statement - I don't know where she got her information - I am not accusing her of lieing or that her statement is false and we are prepared to address whatever problem, but we are not dealing with Friday. We are dealing with, and she made reference to him, no him as far as I an concerned has any license here and we are not dealing with any "him ". My client is Virginia Ritzer, the licensee. If we've got a problem with one of our employees, we may find that we will have to discharge that employee even if my client is related by blood or marriage to that employee, but my client is Virginia Ritzer and Virginia Ritzer is the licensee and I don't wish at this time to have matters brought before this Council that are two days sub- sequent to the notice letter as part of this proceeding and then expect me to be prepared to respond to those, nor do I wish to have matters brought forward and my client be charged with misconduct on a heresay basis - double heresay as far as I am concerned - heresay to the extent that admittedly it wasn't my client involved - heresay on the other side that the party making the charge isn't the party setting it forth before the hearing body. I don't think that is fair to anybody and I feel we could be here forever. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON: Question, Mr. Mayor of Mr. Walsh - your client then Mr. Walsh voluntarly ceased operation - correct? MR. WALSH: I am not making such an admission at this time, Mr. Peterson. What I am saying is this - that it would seem as if the license was revoked - that is what we are here to have a hearing on - that is the only alleged violation - now if . . . COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON: Along those same lines, Mr. Walsh, if your client, Virginia Ritzer is thelolder of the license, which she apparently is, then it would seem to me only logical that she was the one that voluntarly ceased operation - if she is the holder of the license, I would assume then, being the holder of the license that she was the one that voluntarily ceased operation. MR. WALSH: Of course, that is one of the questions that would have to be deter- mined by the hearing body as to whether or not the licensee did in fact voluntarily cease functioning as said licensee. I an not conceding that. MR. MAGNUSON: Mr. Mayor, in order to get the matter off dead center we should perhaps agree what the charges are. MAYOR: Is there anyone who wishes to be heard from on the Council? (There was no response) LLOYD BODLOVICK, 1511 West Olive Street: Mr. Walsh, stated that Virginia Ritzer owned the license as owner of the Stillwater Taxi, right? Tuesday night at the Council meeting was it Mrs. Ritzer that stated that they were done at 12 o'clock or was it Mr. Ritzer? MAYOR JUNKER: Mr. Ritzer. 0 e • • • 1 3 • '150 January 29, 1979 MR. BODLOVICK: Then Virginia Ritzer at six o'clock in the morning if that "closed" sign was on your door, then Virginia Ritzer had knowledge of it - then I feel they shluld close the place up. - because she did not try to reopen it herself, if her husband did close it and she was the one that the license was issued to. MAYOR JUNKER: Mr. Walsh, does your client still have in her possession the license? MR. WALSH: My client has a valid license which, as I understand it, was taken from the premises by Wally Abrahamson because it was in plain view when he arrived on the premises and my client was not there. That is my understanding. The physical possession of the piece of paper in my judgment has nothing to do with the validity of the license - but "no" we don't have that little piece of paper. COUNCILMAN POWELL: Mr. Mayor. MAYOR JUNKER: Councilman Powell. COUNCILMAN POWELL: I think it would be proper to ask Mrs. Ritzer if she knew that her husband was going to be at the Council meeting last week. MR. WALSH: Mr. Powell, if I may, if one is permitted with Ordinance No.303 - if my client is going to be asked to testify,then I think she should be placed under oath and should be given an opportunity to examine her. I don't believe that without a proper meranda warning regardless of what function you folks hold at this time - somehow you are dealing with law enforcement - this part of your police power as I understand your attorney - I don't believe that she should be questioned without being afforded her constitutional rights. I believe that the City has the burden to come forward and prove that I find Virginia Ritzer voluntarly suspended service and for voluntary suspending service for a short period of time, if you so find it, that the proper remedy is to revoke her license. COUNCILMAN P0WELL: Mr. Mayor, just in order to clear something in my mind - at one rime Dick Ritzer was here and the next meeting Mrs. Ritzer was here - then at the last meeting Dick Ritzer was here 4,ain. It was apparent to me that both of them knew what the other was chinking and that they were arguing the same cause, so it leads me to believe that they were both aware of what was going on. If Mr. Ritzer didn't have the right to be here, he was wasting our time and he should have said, "I have no business being here - I am not the boss or the owner -I am just here defending my wife's business ", which it is what it amounted to. I think that if that is the case that we can't talk to Mr. Ritter, then [eiought to be able to talk to Mrs. Ritzer. If we are going to have a hearing, would seem to me that if you ask a fair question to Mrs. Ritzer you ought to be able to get a fair answer - is that right Dave or not? MR. MAGNUSON: You could ask Mr. Ritzer - he is here - he is not the holder of the license and he could not be properly charged with the crime under it so he doesn't have any possibility of being incriminated as she does. MR. to the the is concerned. 303 is MR. MAGNUSON: Is there anyone else in the audience that acknowledges Ritzer suspending services? MAYOR JUNKER: Do I have knowledge? MR. MAGNUSON: Anyone else? MAYOR JUNKER: Is it improper for me at this time to ask if the Stillwater Taxi is going to continue on in the taxi business? MR. WALSH: We are presently in the taxi business and if anyone read the St. Paul paper yesterday morning we had an ad in there - we put the business up for sale - that is one possible solution to this problem where the Council considers granting me the 30 day continuance that I earlier requested. Had there been consideration of testimony that I was to be given latitude in an area that I was unfamiliar with and unprepared to attempt to review, I would have proposed to that testimony and then ask for a continuance of thirty days for the same purpose. I indicated earlier and I continue to feel the same way I am reasonably satisfied that I can resolve this problem myself, with my client, to the satis- faction of the City and my client, if I am given thirty days to do so. I don't see any useful purpose being served in spending a lot of your time - a lot of my time - a lot of Mr. Magnuson's time and a lot of citizeneries times - 1 believe we an, if you I to it. I resolve made some directicallscan't tell to an attempt to resolve this. (continued on page 151) • • • • • • • • e r I� 0 January 29, 1979 MR. WALSH: I can tell now if we do sell the taxi business, we do not intend to sell the towing business. We have had some contacts as I understand it with three different parties - I have only contacted one party - I am reasonably confident we can dispose of the problem without - either side has recourse and I don't see any useful purpose in spending a lot of time and money - it is a going business - there isn't any knowledge of the fact that the value of the going business ought to exceed the value of the hardware in this kind of a business. I am perfectly aware of the fact that other licenses have been issued. I don't firmly believe that this City can support as many passengers you have licenses you have authorized to issue and I would imagine that somebody isn't going to be in the taxi business in the not too distant future. I just feel that thirty days is not an unreasonable request under these circumstances because what may not have been said that even though you don't have set forth in your ordinance the specific authority to revoke, I would conceive and igree with Mr. Magnuson that when you have the power to regulate or control that you have the power to regulate and control and included in that may be authority to revoke, but revoke for an isolated instance on one particular day may be an abuse of discretion - we may even have to resolve that matter before we can determine the issue. I don't see any purpose being served in all of this - I respectfully again request and urge the Council to consider my initial request for the thirty day continuance and I can't tell you particularly what I expect to get done in that period of time. MAYOR JUNKER: Is the thirty days then after the 30 day's license, then it is back in the City's harms? MR. WALSH: What I would think would be proper and I defer your own Council, is that we adjourn this hearing to thirty days from now, whatever date that would be, or 28 days from now, whatever date that would be, and at that time maybe in the interim we would resolve it and we would certainly put you on notice if we can resdwe it and I would assume and I'll contact Mr. Magnuson as I have been in the last couple of days in connection with this matter. Otherwise if for some reason you might attempt to agree with me to revoke a license for this would be an abuse of the ordinance and there maybe other charges involved that aren't set forth and they wanted to be set forth with more particularity and you wanted answers - I don't have any witnesses here - I didn't intend to put on any witnesses tonite because of the shortness of the time. I am here because I want to cooperate - I feel that five days notice to prepare for a special hearing is somewhat unreasonable - I just wouldn't have time over the weekend to set everything else aside to get here - I was in Federal Court today and I couldn't prepare for it in the period of time - what I didn't have anything to prepare for so I am not pejudice and my client is not prejudice - she maybe the next time around. But I would again ask that we adjourn for at least thirty days. COUNCILMAN POWELL: Mr. Mayor MAYOR JUNKER: Councilman Powell COUNCILMAN POWELL: We have a clear cut case of abuse of a license and I think we should continue the hearing and decide it tonite. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: Is that a motion or a statement? COUNCILMAN POWELL: I don't think that we need a motion - just a statement. LLOYD BODLOVICK: Mr. Mayor and Council - he just stated that you should give them a thirty day period to get rid of the taxi. Mr. Ritzer and Mrs. Ritzer did not give the people of Stillwater thirty hours notice that they weren't going to be in the cab business, so why should the City of Stillwater give them thirty days to sell their business. MR. WALSH: Again, I don't care to comment. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON: Mr. Walsh indicated just a few minutes ago he didn't feel inan isolated instance such as this - as I recall the series of meetings that we had last time with the Ritzers we questioned rate increase we did ask for some additional information which was a long time forthcoming - at that time there was an indication by Mr. Ritzer that he was going to close it - close the cab company, if he did not receive this increase. The increase did come forth and Mr. Ritzer did not close, but at that point and time he indicated that he was going to close. At the meeting Tuesday nite Mr. Ritzer was here stood up in front of the audience indicated that he was closing the business at midnite. The next day the business was closed - if the licenses are in Virginia Ritzer's name then she was made aware of the fact that Mr. Ritzer had told the Council and the public that was here that the business was closing. We did not receive any notice nor isolated license holder was well aware of it. a • • • • 4 of • • January 29, 1979 MR. WALSH: May I comment. MAYOR JUNKER: Certainly. MR. WALSH: I would call Mr. Peterson's attention to the letter of the 25th of January which is what I made reference to earlier - this hearing is on the revoking of the license - this is bond what I have notice of, then I an absolutely entitled to additional time. I am dealing with notice of the sus- pension of service on January 24th. Nothing more - nothing less and to consider other matters that we are not on notice of, is not proper at this time - I am not on notice of any other matters and all I am saying if you want to give me notice on some other matters, notify me of them and give me time to prepare a defense which I am absolutely entitled to do and then let's come back here and do it. COUNCILMAN PETERSON: This is not another matter. MR. WALSH: It is a separate behavorial inciuent - it has nothing to do with the notice letter because it doesn't have anything to do with January 24th unless I misunderstood you, in which case I apologize. MR. MAGNUSON: I think the Council should be aware of Mr. Walsh's experience of criminal matters and I have a great deal of respect for his knowledge and ability in this area and he is trying to apply the rules of criminal procedure to this hearing and I don't think it is fair - I don't think the hearing should be that restrictive and defined - everybody should feel free to speak freely at least get some straight answers on whether or not it was closed - I think that Mr. Walsh is avoid us on that issue whether he did voluntarily suspend service - he hasn't answered that one. MR. WALSH: I am here to -nite - I am not hiding what I intend to do - I came here tonite, I asked for a reasonable continuance. In any court proceeding, civil or criminal, you are given a minimum of twenty days and thereafter in civil matters, and this would certainly be civil, although it would appear to be within your police power, if you are not ready to go you are given another sixty days or eighty days - I am asking for thirty days. I don't regard that as unreasonable at all. MAYOR JUNKER: Mr. Walsh, what I would like to suggest is that the City Council grant the thirty days from this date would be the 28th of February at that time the license - the present holders would be - if it would be revoked - be terminated - that would give you the thirty days to sell the cab with new owners - new license - tha:would be my suggestion. If the City Council don't approve if that, then I don't e know where we are going. I would suggest that in thirty days if you can sell theeir cab and have new licenses and owners, the Stillwater Taxi, the present owners, taxi licenses me. There would be no more taxi service from the 28th day of February. Without MR. WALSH: I would rather proceed tonite than see you in the courthouse. I can't take an arbitrary position that licenses be suspended for a period. Could you put a thirty day cut -off on it and at that point and time the business is out there for grabs. I am not saying it wouldn't happen that we - and we are trying to get that done - but a thirty day cut -off anybody that might now be in the business could exist for that long and I can't go along with that - I would appreciate continuance, but I can't agree that my client - for that matter they could fire me tomorrow if we agreed on that note and you could't be any further than thirty days and you would still have to have the hearing. I think they are entitled to a hearing and I think they are entitled to a fair hearing My argument at the courthouse would be to hold this tonite would be unfair and that is where I will go, if I have to - I am hoping to avoid all that for you and for them and that is why I want the thirty day continuance. MAYOR JUNKER: First, I have to ask our attorney - now that we have revoked their license, can we tomorrow morning stop the Stillwater cab service? MR. MAGNUSON: I think if you revoke it tonite, that you could. The position that we take - we could lawfully revoke without notice. The notice that we sent to them was really a notice of proposed revocation - -to do otherwise seems to me to be unfair to them. Now, I think if you check the notice, I think Mr. Walsh will have to agree, that he and I talked on the telephone, he agreed to come here tonite and I don't to the scoperof five whether ornot especially if we hevol voluntarily service. MR. WALSH indicated that he agreed to this. MR. MAGNUSON: I don't think those arguments of notice will carry any weight in district court. r • L • • • • 1 1 • • tees t • • January 29, 1979 COUNCILMAN POWELL: Question, then David - the fact that Dick came here and said that he was going to suspend operation and the fact that the next morning there was a sign on the door saying that they had, is that reason enough, in your opinion, that we did not act improperly - is it necessary to ask Mrs. Rita r who is the license holder, whehter she knew it was revoked or not? MR. MAGNUSON: You could assume that the sign on the door saying it was closed and people called the taxi and couldn't get service, I am sure she is responsible as the license holder whether she knows about it or not - the fact is that it was closed. MR. BODLOVICK: I would like to recommend you take the license and go to court - at least he will be off the street until you go to court. He is the guy that hung the sign on the door that they were closed - if he wants to be closed - leave him be closed. (Mr. Walsh had attempted to interupt and Mr. Bodlovick asked permission to finish and did so and indicated he was now finished) MR. WALSH: Thank you. MR. BODLOVICK: You are welcome. MR. WALSH: I will comment now. I don't know where he went to law school . . . MR. BODLOVICK: I didn't. MR. WALSH: By you folks revoking this license tonite - by filing notice of appeal the business is back opening and isn't off the street until such a time as he can cause some other sales to occur or whatever other personal reason Mr. Bodlovick may have for feeling the way he does. MR. BODLOVICK: I have no personal reasons - just the people that they haul in this town - that is the reason I've got. MR. WALSH: I find that extremely difficult . . MR. BODLOVICK: Explain your reason then. MAYOR JUNKER at this time asked Mr. Bodlovick to sit down.. Has anyone else that wishes to be heard from - is there anyone from the Council? COUNCILMAN PETERSON: Well, I think Mr. Mayor, if I may, the intent, when we had our special meeting after we became aware of the fact that the cab bompany had closed and closed voluntarily the sign was on the door, I don't know who is responsible for closing and I have to assunethat the license holder is, but I think we have attempted whr.n we had the special hearing that we notified the Ritizers that we were going :o determine tonite whether or not the license should be suspended. At that tin they agreed that five days would be proper and I think that Mr. Walsh indicat . *d that he would be here tonite he was made aware of the fact that we have given them five days and that we should continue the hearing on the one question alone - whether or not they had voluntarily ceased operation on the 24th. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: The reason that we called a special meeting that the license be revoked - he had voluntarily closed and he had a closed sign in the window. COUNCILMAN POWELL: I would like to add that we gave it good consideration Friday morning - Thursday morning - we gave it good consideration then, if it was right then it should still be right today. If it is right one time, it can't be wrong this time, I don't think. MAYOR JUNKER: Back to my question, Mr. Walsh - do you feel that thirty days is enough time to sell the taxi business? MR. WALSH: I did not sa} that. - that may be the way it came out, but that was not my intent. I am saying that, as indicated at the offset, I think that I can resolve the problem^ within thirty days - one of the viable alternatives is to sell the business - e are actively attempting to do that - sell the business that is "out of business" won't happen, so if the license is revoked, the only alternative I have is to re- instate that license. I can do that on a temporary basis immediately at the courthouse, but then I can't sell it - there isn't any way I can sell is because I am out of business then only by virtue of the exist- ence of the appeal and so then we are going to continue to run it in the fashion, at least as I see it, as we are running it - I guess what I am saying is that I can't live with an alternative that says thirty days from now without a hearing your license is revoked period. That is the only thing that I meant to say - I do believe and I do hope that through my efforts that we will be able to resolve this matter within thirty days. In our business we cannot promise results and I can't tell you exactly how it is going to happen, but I believe that I will have it over with within thirty days. 153' • 9 • • January 29, 1979 MAYOR JUNKER: Is there anyone else who wishes to be heard? COUNCILMAN HARRY PETERSON: Mr. Mayor, I would like to ask Mr. Magnuson, is it true that Mr. Walsh indicates that in the event that action is taken here to suspend or cancel the license that his appeal to the court will automatically restore the license pending hearing by the court? MR. WALSH: If I amy - I didn't intend to say "automatically ". MR. MAGNUSON: No, I don't think necessarily the court - under certain circum- stances you are entitled to a temporary restraining order or something of that nature - I think he would be hard pressed to get that because it would take several weeks of a hearing - I don't think he would be able to get that. MR. WALSH: I didn't mean to say it was automatic. I believe I can get it tomorrow, MR. PETERSON. COUNCILMAN HARRY PETERSON,: Possibly I used the word "automatic" incorrectly. MR. WALSH: What is involved is the lawsuit has to be commenced. The City has to be served - I have to go to the court to get an injunction to the stop the enforcing of your withdrawal - probably the court would require me to serve a bond. It is my intention to keep it open. Now, I hope that we can avoid all of this. The Mayor seems to understand what I am saying in that respect by granting me a thirty day continuance. My only problem is that I can't promise results and so I can't tell you absolutely what I will be through with it in thirty days. I believe that this problem will be over with, of no consequence within the next thirty days. MAYOR JUNKER: You possibly mean that the same owners could still be in the cab business in thirty days and our pnblems would be solved. MR. WALSH: That is one possibility - we have to - the company per se - I have talked to some people about it and my clients have talked to some people about it. Of course, if we made any kind of transfer, we would have to come in here and get approval of the transfer. I understand that, but I think we can get this done within the thirty days. COUNCILMAN POWELL: You made the suggestion that you could get more than the actual value of the hard material or whatever you call the capital investment - the hardware - Mr. Ritzer has indicated that they are losing money and that they are pouring money into the taxi business and that is his reason for wanting to close it that night. MR. WALSH: Well, I am an accountant, but I an not going to comment as an account- ant. COUNCILMAN POWELL: That was a statement that Mr. Ritzer made last Tuesday. MR. WALSH: I don't care to comment on that nor do I presently know from what is available to me think that is absolutely correct for the calendar year 1978. COUNCILMAN POWELL. Then probably we were given some mis- information. MR. WALSH: I don't know. MAYOR JUNKER: Is there any other comment someone would like to make? Otherwise is there any more . . . COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON: I think. frankly, Mr. Mayor, we ought to proceed with what we intended to proceed with and that was the hearing on revocation of license based on the fact that the license holder voluntarily ceased operation. MAYOR JUNKER: I understand that fully - was there any other comment. If not, then I'll close the hearing and entertain a motion. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON: David, now if we move to proceed with the hearing on the revocation of the license, or whatever you wish to call it, then are we required to have sworn witnesses, and so forth and so on. MR. MAGNUSON gave a detailed description of this process. MAYOR JUNKER: Did you ask whether we should continue the hearing? XOUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON: No, no, - I say if we continue with the hearing or we continue with the action that was taken - whether it is a hearing for the revocation of the license based on the fact that it was voluntarily closed - or whatever you want to call it. MR. MAGNUSON: I am convinced that we have the absolute power to regulate taxis. r O • • • • • • • r • tr January 29, 1979 MR. MAGNUSON: The ordinance that we are dealing with right now is a very clumsy old ordinance - it doesn't really provide us with the proper tools because it provides just for criminal penalties in the event there is a violation - I don't think that is any way to regulat businesses, and I don't think you do either. Also it provides for no grounds for revocation. Let's fact it, I think it is reasonable from a legal point of view to give them the continuance - merely to continue the hearing on the revocation for another 28 days, by that time he will have no argument that he hadn't received proper notice - by that time something may be resolved to settle the question. Legal arguments aside, I don't think Mr. Walsh would prevail in the long run and rather than have the City be involved in their revocation which is time con- suming and expensive - at least we will be in a better position, perhaps. MAYOR JUNKER: Any other comments. I'll entertain a motion . . COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: The other morning when we sat here they were well aware of the fact there was no cur or provision in our ordinance to revoke the license, if that sort of a hearing was used that we would have to follow through the same trend of thought whatsoever our decision to resolve the problem. Ue can still go ahead and revoke as we did Thursday morning legally. MAYOR JUNKER: It would can saving our face. COUNCILMAN POWELL: What do you mean saving face? I don't see where we are saving face. We do not have any responsibility to do that. MAYOR JUNKER: I mean by saving face by going to court - we are bound to end up in court. COUNCILMAN PETERSON: I don't think that should necessarily be a determining factor in your decision - the decision is based on the right or wrong of what happened, on the ordinance. MR. WALSH: I had a particular reason and Mr. Magnuson and I have discussed the fact that this is the only thing I am on notice of and I concur with Mr. Magnuson - I see, not necessarily good coming out of the continuance, but I can't see any possible ill effect to the City by granting a 28 or 30 day continuance - 1 can see absolutely no bad effect whatsoever to the City - there is a possibility that it would, but it can't possibly hurt you. MAYOR JUNKER: Is there any other comments? If not, I entertain a motion. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON: I have a question of Mr. Walsh before I make a motion - if we agree, Mr. Walsh, to have the hearing on that one issue only, are you prepared to submit testimony on that issue? • MR. WALSH: The way that I view it, Mr. Peterson, is that we are on notice that you were going to take testimony tonite on that one question and that if testimony was taken, that it was to become my duty to attempt to repute it or argue contrary to it or to confront those perons that make the allegations and if you elect to go ahead on one question tonite, I see that I have no alter- native but to proceed and I guess under those circumstances, I would. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON: You are ready then. MR. WALSH: I wouldn't say that categorically that I am ready, but I am here and will go if that is what you want. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON: I think we ough to go on that one issue, Mr. Mayor, and I would so move. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: I will second that motion. MAYOR JUNKER: Your motion is that we revoke the license? COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON: Well, we can't take ti :tion until we have had - as Walsh has submitted, Id to with it. or repute any testi- MAYOR JUNKER: You seconded it - COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK indicated that she had seconded it. MAYOR JUNKER: Yyou heard the motion and the second, all those in favor. AYES - -All Nays- -None MAYOR JUNKER: Ayes gain. (Motion carried) 155 • • • • 1 • Br • • 156 January 29, 19.9 COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON; I don't know if you think the only testimony to be given is the fact that whether or not it was closed on that date. Is that correct? We have all seen the "closed" signs that were in the door - I there was an article in but I believe the cab 1 company was closed. MR. WALSH: Mayor, may I just ask if someone taking minutes of this matter. MAYOR JUNKER: Yes. MR. WALSH: That is all that I was concerned about. COUNCILMAN POWELL: The reporter from the Gazette is here and I am sure he will verify that there was an article in the paper and a picture. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON: Do we have a copy of the article, David? MR. MAGNUSON: We have here two articles from the Gazette, that the Stillwater Taxi has re- opened - the Stillwater Taxi is back in business - I believe the implication is that these articles imply that they have been out of business at one time. MAYOR JUNKER: Are there any other comments - everyone of the Council has seen the "closed" sign on the door. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON & COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK indicated that they had seen the sign. COUNCILMAN HARRY PETERSON: I didn't personally see the sign - only the article in the paper and the picture - I did not go down to the building itself. NILE KRIESEL: On Wednesday, Police Chief Abrahamson ontacted me and stated that they tried to call the Stillwater Taxi Company and the reply that they got the Stillwater Taxi Company was that they had a dispute with the City Council and that they where shut down. I myself personally went down saw the "closed" sign atthe office on Second Street and after having talked with the Mayor, 1 called Mr. Ritzer to find out what his intentions were and Mr. Ritzer stated to me, "That the Stillwater Taxi Company had suspended service and would stay closed until the City Council de- regulated or allowed the Stillwater Taxi Company to increase their rates. people After Council morning. MR. WALSH: I willfirst address myself to Councilwoman Bodlovick mentioned that she saw the sign on the door - when was that mame? COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: I think it was Thursday morning - I am not sure what time. MR. WALSH: Was it before or after you had your Council meeting? COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: It was before it because we were up here before 9 o'clock. MR. WALSH: So, you saw a sign on the door Thursday morning - last Thursday that would have been the 25th. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: That should be the da te. MR. WALSH: Do you recall what the sign said, name? COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: Just "closed" the little sign I saw. MR. WALSH: It just said closed - nothing else on the sign. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: I didn't really read it - I was "closed" as I drove by - I did not stop. MR. WALSH: You did not know if it said Stillwater Taxi Company. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: No. MR. WALSH: You do not ki.ow whether or not the sign was signed by anyone. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: I couldn't tell you - I was in the car, I drove by, I did not stop. MR. WALSH: What door was this on? COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: I couldn't even tell you - I just saw the sign. MR. WALSH: Are you sure that it wasn't on Dale Sicard's business down there? COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: I don't think it was - but I could drive by again and show you where I thought I saw it. r • 0 • • • 1 • • r s January 29, 1979 MR. WALSH: How about - you know, of course, that there are some problems with the back end of that building do you not? COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: No, I do not. MR. WALSH: As far as snowmobiles, etc. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: No, I do not. MR. WALSH: You don't know whether or not it had anything to do with staying out of the back end of that building. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: I am sure it wouldn't. MR. WALSH: Do you know, mame? COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: No, I an not positive. MR. WALSH: Mr. Kriesel, you went down and saw a sign on the door on Second Street - is that correct? MR. KRIESEL: Yes, sir. MR. WALSH: And, was that door locked? MR. KRIESEL: Not to my knowledge. MR. WALSH: Was there anyone inside? MR. KRIESEL: I believe that I did see some people inside, yes sir. MR. WALSH: Di you recognize any of those persons? MR. KRIESEL: No, sir. MR. WALSH: Do you know whether or not they were employees of the Stillwater Taxi Company? MR. KRIESEL: No sir. MR. WALSH: Do you know who the licensee is in this case. MR. KRIESEL: Virginia Ritzer. MR. WALSH: Did you at anytime from the date of the 23rd of January to the 25th of January, I think that was the date of your letter, have contact with Mrs. Virginia Ritzer, the licensee? MR. XRIESEL: Only thru Mr. Ritzer. MR. WALSH: You had no contact with Mrs. Virginia Ritzer, is that right? MR. KRIESEL: I called Stillwater Taxi - I asked to speak to Mrs. Ritzer and Mr. Ritzer was the one that discussed whatever we talked about - apparently Mrs. Ritzer . . . . MR. WALSH: My question is you had no contact with the licensee - is that correct? MR. KRIESEL: No sir, not directly. MR. WALSH: Pardon me. MR. KRIESEL: Not directly with Virginia Ritzer. MR. WALSH: Was there any other persons that testified? COUNCILMAN POWELL AND COUNCILMAN R. PETERSON: I saw the sign. MR. WALSH: I will take Mr. Peterson first - what day did you see the sign sir? COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON: I believe it was Wednesday. MR. WALSH: That was Wednesday the 24th - huh? COUNCILMAN R. PETERSON: I don't remember the date - last Wednesday. MR. WALSH: At that time what door was that sign on? COUNCILMAN R. PETERSON: It was on the door to the Stillwater Taxi. MR. WALSH: That is right across the street from Washington Federal. COUNCILMAN R. PETERSON: That is correct. MR. WALSH: Across Second Street. And what did that sign say? COUNCILMAN R. PETERSON: I think it said "Sorry 'closed' or 'closed'. MR. WALSH: Was it signed? COUNCILMAN R. PETERSON: I don't believe so. MR. WALSH: Did it indicate that was the sign that the Stillwater Taxi, Inc.? COUNCILMAN R. PETERSON: It was on the same door with the Stillwater Taxi on the window. 157 • • • • • • 158 January 29, 1979 MR. WALSH: Did you try the door? COUNCILMAN R. PETERSON: No, I did not. MR. WALSH: Do you know if there were any persons inside? COUN QLMAN R. PETERSON: I don't know that there was. I didn't notice any. MR. WALSH: Did you sir, have any contact on the 23rd, assuming that Wednesday or Thursday, with the licensee herein Virginia Ritzer. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON: No, I did not. MR. WALSH: Mr. Powell. COUNCILMAN POWELL: Yes. MR. WALSH: I understand that you saw a sign. COUNCILMAN POWELL: A -ha. MR. WALSH: The sign that we have been dscussing on the door of the Stillwater Taxi Co on Second Street - is that corredt, sir? COUNCILMAN POWELL: The sign was red and white and it said "SORRY - WE ARE CLOSED ". MR. WALSH: Okay - and when did you see that sign. COUNCILMAN POWELL: Wednesday morning. MR. WALSH: About what time? COUNCILMAN POWELL: Eight o'clock - 8:30, I guess. I was first notified of it by Dale Sicard who told me that the taxi was closed. MR. WALSH: So you went down there. COUNCILMAN POWELL: Dale Sicard has the lease of the whole building. I didn't go look at it at that time - when I went for coffee I noticed that it was there. MR. WALSH: Did you attempt to go in? COUNCILMAN POWELL: No. I have'/g in there since we wereklcked out - in case you want to hear about that. MR. WALSH: Well, as a matter of fact, I don't, but you can't erase that from your thoughts right now either, can you? COUNCILMAN POWELL: I can - a very trivial thing. MR. WALSH: Mr. Powell, did you retract, assuming again that Wednesday was the 24th, did you on the 24th or 25th have any contact with the licensee, Virginia Ritzer? COUNCILMAN POWELL: I would have no reason to - no. MR. WALSH: I don't have any further questions. MAYOR JUNKER: Did anyone else have anything to say? Do we reopen this hearing to the public again? COUNCILMAN R. PETERSON: I think, David, has to answer that. MR. MAGNUSON: I think you should if there is anyone who has anything to say at this time. MAYOR JUNKER: Is there anyone that wishes to be heard? To be heard from with regards to this matter. Would there be any other action necessary? MR. MAGNUSON: Unless you give Mr. Walsh another opportunity. He could call on we are Wall the as firstoha know, the we was closed. MAYOR JUNKER: Mr. Walsh, I guess you are on the line. MR. WALSH: Could I have a couple of minutes? MAYOR JUNKER: We will recess for ten minutes. RECESS FOR TEN MINUTES MAYOR JUNKER: You can sit on that chair right there. MR. WALSH: We are calling the witness Gary Ritzer - do you want to state you full name, Mr. Ritzer? MR. RITZER: Gary Ritzer. MR. WALSH: Mr. Ritzer, how, if at all, are you related to Virginia Ritzer, the licensee and the operator of the Stillwater Taxi Company? GARY RITZER: Son of Virginia. MR. WALSH: Do you have anything at all do with the taxi business? GARY RITZER. Only as a family member helping out. • • • • • • • • • r ON • January 29, 1979 MR. WALSH: Do you have occasion to into the place of business down there? GARY RITZER: Yes. MR. WALSH: Do you have on the premises any signs that are there for putting in the door? GARY RITZER: Yes, we do. MR. WALSH: Do you have more than one or one sign? GARY RITZER: Just one. MR. WALSH: And, is it a two sided sign? GARY RITZER: Yes. MR. WALSH: What does it say on one side? GARY RITZER: It says "SORRY CLOSED" and "YES, WE ARE OPEN ". MR. WALSH: One side says "SORRY CLOSED" and the other side "YES, WE ARE OPEN ". And how long has that sign been around the premises that you are aware of. GARY RITZER: Anywhere from three to six months. MR. WALSH: All right. What is the - are you aware of the purpose and use of that sign? GARY RITZER: Well, it was kind of an idea of just to run basically at night or during the day time when we get busy and I usually have to cabs on most of the time. Well, when we get busy and somebody - the dirve dispatches - we also have a cab waiting so that we can put three on the street and when the dispatcher leaves the o -fice he puts the sign in the window and just closed temporarily until one of them gets back. It is kind of all purpose because most of our dispatchers are drivers and drivers are dispatchers - we have to work it that way. MR. WALSH: You say "our" - you mean your mother? GARY RITZER: Right. MR. WALSH: I have no further questions. MR. MAGNUSON: Gary, can I ask you this - what are your hours of work? GARY RITZER: My hours of work - they have been scheduled when I am needed - any time that I am available. MR. MAGNUSON: Are you a full -time employee? GARY RITZER: No. MR. MAGNUSON: Did you work at all on the 24th or 25th of January? GARY RITZER: I am not sure - I do not know. MR. MAGNUSON: Did you tell cab customers that you were closed. GARY RITZER: I am not sure. COUNCILMAN POWELL: I have a question - where else do you work besides the taxi'' GARY RITZER: I work for C & P Excavating, Oak Park Heights. COUNCILMAN POWELL: That sign that you are talking about - the double faced sign - have you ever seen that used any other time except these past three or four days? You said that the sign has been there for about three months - have you ever seen it in a door yourself? GARY RITZER: Yes, and I put it there myself - if I were dispatching and there was another drive out in a car and we had a call and he was out of town and I had to take the call myself I would lock the office and put the sign on the door, and leave. COUNCILMAN POWELL: Would that be in the daytime that you did that. GARY RITZER: Day or night? COUNCILMAN POWELL: I go by there three or four times a day and I haven't seen it there during the day - I have it at night at nine o'clock or ten o'clock. GARY RITZER: Can I ask you a question? COUNCILMAN POWELL: Sure. GARY RITZER: Waht are your regular business hours? COUNCILMAN POWELL: My regular business hours are from eight to 4:30. GARY RITZER: Okay, usually the times that we are shorhanded are in the mornings - the earlier morning between 5:00 to 9:00 and at night later on - sometimes during the day it gets busy or somebody has got to go out for a dentist appointment or a doctor appointment - it depends. MR. WALSH: Okay, Gary. (He a speaker) to speak up loud as they did not edv MR. WALSH: Will you state your name and address, name? 159 • • • • • • • 160 January 29, 1979 VIRGINIA RITZER: Virginia M. Ritzer, 9707 Stonebridge Trail MR. WALSH: And that is Mrs. Virginia Ritzer, correct? VIRGINIA RITZER: Correct. MR. WALSH: Mrs. Ritzer, you are the licensee, owner, operator of the Stillwater Taxi Co.? VIRGINIA RITZER: Yes. MR. WALSH: Did you advise the City Council that you were going to shut down your business? VIRGINIA RITZER: No, I did not. date was,1 believe eitewaytheo24thiof January, Council whatever business ? VIRGINIA RITZER: No, I did not. MR. WALSH: Did you find out sometime later on January 24th or early on January 25th that your business had been shut down? VIRGINIA RITZER: Yes, I did. MR, WALSH: What did you do when you found out that the business had been shut down? VIRGINIA RITZER: I came to my attorney, John Walsh. MR. WALSH: And what did I advise you to do, mame? VIRGINIA RITZER: You advised me to put the cabs back on the street. MR. WALSH: And what did you do? VIRGINIA RITZER: That is what I did MR. WALSH: I have no further questions. MR. MAGNUSON: Mrs. Ritzer, is Richard Ritzer your husband? VIRGINIA RITZER: Yes, he is. . MR. MAGNUSON: What is his proprietary interest or what ownership interest does he have in the Stillwater Taxi? VIRGINIA RITZER: No ownership interest - no ownership - probably has interest . MR. MAGNUSON: Could you explain that? VIRGINIA RITZER: He is interested whether I am going to make money or not - he is my husband. MR. MAGNUSON: Is he an employee of yours? VIRGINIA RITZER: He is an employee. MR.MAGNUSON: Do you allow him to run and operate the business for you? VIRGINIA RITZER: What do mean by run and operate? MR. MAGNUSON: Does he make decisions concerning the business? VIRGINIA RITZER: No, he does not. MR. MAGNUSON: If your taxi service during the 24th and the 25th of January refused service to any persons in the City of Stillwater, did you personally do that? VIRGINIA RITZER: No, I did not. MR. MAGNUSON: How often do you go down there at the Taxi business? VIRGINIA RITZER: When needed. MR. MANGUSON: I take it that customers would have been refused service. VIRGINIA RITZER: Yes. COUNCILMAN POWELL: Mr. Walsh asked you before if you authorized it and if you authorized Dick to go the meeting and you said "no ". Is that correct? VIRGINIA RITZER: Yes. COUNCILMAN POWELL: But, then did you know that he was going to go? VIRGINIA RITZER: Yes, I did. COUNCILMAN POWELL: You knew that he was gling to go, but you did not authorize it. VIRGINIA RITZER: Right. COUNCILMAN POWELL: Okay. COUNCILMAN R. PETERSON: I have a question. MAYOR JUNKER: Councilman Peterson. r- r • a • • • • • 0 • January 29, 1979 COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON: Mrs. Ritzer, when did you become aware of the fact that your business was closed? VIRGINIA RITZER: Wednesday morning. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON: Wednesday morning and it was closed all day Wednesday. VIRGINIA RITZER: Right. COUNCILMAN R. PETERSON: And then you went to see the attorney after that on Wednesday or Thurdsay? MR. WALSH: It was Friday morning she came to my office, Mr. Peterson. She called early Friday morning and asked to come in and see me and it was Friday when she got there. COUNCILMAN R. PETERSON: You were aware Wednesday morning of the fact that the cab company was closed? VIRGINIA RITZER: Right. COUNCILMAN PETERSON (Roger): You made no effort then to re -open. VIRGINIA RITZER: I didn't want to go to an attorney - I thought things would be settled without going to an attorney. COUNCILMAN PETERSON: But you made no effort to open it Wednesday morning. VIRGINIA RITZER: No, because I heard that I would be thrown in jail. MAYOR JUNKER: Was there any other . . . COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON: Who told you this? VIRGINIA RITZER: Mr. Kriesel told my husband and my husband told me - he called me at work to tell me. MR. KRIESEL: Did I ever contact you diredtly? VIRGINIA RITZER: No, you did not. MAYOR JUNKER: Was it explained to him that in the ordinance it states that there is a hundred dollar fine or ninety day jail sentence? VIRGINIA RITZER: No. MR. WALSH: Mrs. Ritzer, on Wednesday, January 24th or any other Wednesday, are you employed in some other busines other than the taxi business? VIRGINIA RITZER: Yes, I am. MR. WALSH: And what are your normal work hours? VIRGINIA RITZER: Eight to 4:30. MR. WALSH: And were you so employed last Wednesday? VIRGINIA RITZER: Yes, I was. MR. WALSH: And so it is not unusual for you not to be on the premises of your taxi company on Wedneday3 VIRGINIA RITZER: Right. MR. KRIESEL: I talked to Mr. Ritzer severs 1 times - two or three times on the matter and as I indicated before the first time I called Mr. Ritzer was on Wednesday morning after I talked to Mr. Abrahamson and she Mayor and I called Mm and I understood Mr. Ritzer to be spokesman for the Stillwater Taxi Company because he had called me on some other matters relating to the Stillwater Taxi Company. MR. WALSH: Do you recall what was said? MR. KRIESEL: After Mr. Ritzer told me that the Stillwater Taxi Company would remain closed down until the City Council would re- regulate or allow them to increase their rates and also Mr. Ritzer said he was thinking about obtaining a license from another community and operating within the Stillwater area. I stated to Mr. Ritzer - "Dick, okay, you have to be careful here ". I said the ordinance regulating Taxicab Licenses provides for a penalty of, I believe, I did say fifty days or I mean $50.00 fine, and it actually a $100.00 fine and 90 days in jail. MR. WALSH: Did you infer or imply or did you intend to convey the message that they were to begin or continue to go back in the taxi service that they could be so fined? MR. KRIESEL' I told Mr. Ritxer that he would have to be careful because to arbitrarily shut down operation, start up the operation again and then shut down again could be a violation of the ordinance. I told him, in my opinion, I thought it would be a violation of the ordinance, especially with the - and the other statement that he made that he was going to be licensed by another community and operate within the Stillwater area somewhat like an airport tai and St. Pul Subrban. be violation the and t that M I would e contact itheyCi opinion would City Attorney and get back to him. At the time I had no reason to - not to try to help Dick with what he was City that To me - be was and this was official intended 161' • 2 a • • s • 4 62 January 29, 1979 as a threat. I just felt that I should point out to Dick or Mr. Ritzer just what the consequence of his actions could be and because of the other statement that he was going to get a license in another community and still operate within the City. I think Mr. Magnuson, the City Attorney, will also vertify that I did confirm and ask you and in your opinion I do believe that you stated what I related to you that would be violation of the ordinance. I also asked Mr. Ritzer to contact his own lawyer, after that I did state that the City Attorney did relate to me that was his opinion also. MR. WALSH: Should one have basically understood his comments in the following manner - assuming that the taxi service was suspended on Wednesday morning that to start up again would be a violation of the ordinance? MR. KRIESEL: I would like to think not because of the manner in which I talked to Mr. Ritzer it was never meant in such a manner and should have been construed as being advice and not as a warning if he started up the operation on Thursday morning that it would consitute a jail sentence or the outcome would be a jail sentence and /or fine. MR. WALSH: I have no further questions - thank you, Mr. Kriesel. MR. MAGNUSON: I think the City would like to have Wally Abrahamson here. Would you state your full name for the record and the nature, extent and scope of your employment with the City of Stillwater. MR. ABRAHAMSON: Wallace L. Abrahamson - Public Safety Director for the City of Stillwater. MR. MAGNUSON: What, if anything, do you know about the Stillwater Taxi Company suspending service on the 24th of January of this year? MR. ABRAHAMSON: Well, we were receiving calls downtown staris at our police department where people were complaining that they were unable to get a taxi- cab and when I would imagine at about nine o'clock or 9:30 1 went up to Mr. Kriesel's office and advised him that we were getting complaints from the public and that I had two people call down there to make sure that the cab stand was in fact closed. One of my secretaries and one was Gordon Seim, a City Fireman ca -led down - that is when I sent upstairs to see Mr. Kriesel - they had received calls upstairs, too. MR. MAGNUSON: What did you do then? MR. ABRAHAMSON: I contacted the City Attorney. MR. MAGNUSON: Perhaps you could just explain what happened, Mr. Abrahamson. MR. ABRAHAMSON: Well, we talked - Nile Kriesel and I talked things over and then we decided that we would make sure that the City Attorney would in fact give us legal advice. I also called a couple members of the City Council. I was unable to get hold of the Mayor, but I did get hold of Councilperson Bodlovick and Councilmen Powell and Roger Peterson. MR. MAGNUSON: Do you know whether the taxi service was suspended continously from after the morning of the 24th of January for a certain period of time - do you know or could you tell us? MR. ABRAHAMSON: I know that I was gold by Mr. Ritzer that the next morning on the 25th at 10:41 A. M. in the morning that they were in fact closing up or had closed up. MR. MAGNUSON: Was that when the taxi service was served a notice of revocation on Mr. Ritzer? MR. ABRAHAMSON: Yes. MR. MAGNUSON: Did that take place subsequent to the meeting held here in City Hall when the Council decided to revoke the license as they were suspending service? MR. ABRAHAMSON: Yes. MR. MAGNUSON: Did you relay that to the Council? MR. ABRAHAMSON: I hand carried a letter from the City Council to the Stillwater Taxi Towing Company - as I walked in the door, as I recall, there were three or four people in there - one was Red Buck and I recognized Mr. Ritzer and there was one other person- I forget who it was - I believe it was a female. As I walked in Mr. Ritzer said, "Have you come for this ?" and he gave me his licensee I said that I didn't come for that. I came to get you a letter. He said, this back and see if I can get my money back ", and so I gave him the letter that was addressed to his wife, Virginia, and the Stillwater Taxi Company and I left. Came back up to see Mr. Kriesel to see if I could get Mr. Ritzer s $60.00 back that he wanted for five licenses or the five taxi licenses that were on the license. I was advised by Mr. Kriesel that he would ask the Council at the next meeting for their approval to bring Mr. Ritzer's $60.00 down to him at that time. I then returned to the Stillwate r Towing Company - I arrived there at 11 o'clock and Mr. Ritzer requested that his taxicab parking signs be removed from in front of his Towing Company and be replaced with a parking meter. I talked to him about this - I had Officer Conley come down immediately and at Mr. Ritzer's request we removed the taxi sign from the meter post in front of his business place and replaced it with a parking meter. He thanked me and I left. • r r L • • • • • Et • • • • r 0 January 29, 1979 MR. MAGNUSON: Anyone on the Council have any questions for Wally? COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: I have one question on this - you say five cabs are listed on the license? MR. ABRHAMSON: It was one piece of paper with a number "5" on it. MR. KRIESEL: It was License No. 5. MR. ABRAHAMSON: He did tell me that it was $60.00. MAYOR JUNKER: You would like to question Wally, Mr. Walsh? MR. WALSH: Is everybody else through - my turn? Did you happen to look at that license? MR. ABRAHAMSON: As I recall it was a white piece of paper with the No. 5 in the corner. MR. WALSH: Was that license issued to Stillwater Taxi, Inc? MR. ABRAHAMSON: I don't recall - I brought it back and delivered it to Mr. Kriesel - in fact I didn't even look at it other than - he handed it to me and said what's this and he said take it back and try to get my $60.00 back and that is what I did. MR. WALSH: You personally know, Mr. Dick Ritzer, do you not? MR. ABRAHAMSON: Yes. MR. WALSH: Do you know who the owner of the Stillwater Taxi is? MR. ABRAHAMSON: . thought both of them owned it, but . . . MR. WALSH: Do you know who is listed as hte licensee in the initial application and transfer? MR. ABRAHAMSON: No. MR. WALSH: Do you have any independent information that would reflect that somone other than Virginia Ritzer does own the taxi business? Do you . . . MR. ABRAHAMSON: No. MR. WALSH: Thank you, I have no further questions. One further question, did you on the 23rd or 24th or 25th of January talk to Mrs. Virginia Ritzer? MR . ABRAHAMSON: Did I? - no. MR. WALSH: Thank you - I have no further questions. MAYOR JUNKER: Wally would you step down. Mr. Walsh, do you intent' to call any other witnesses? MR. WALSH: I don't intend to call any other witnesses, Mr. Mayor. MAYOR JUNKER: Are there any individuals that would like to be heard from at this time. (there was no response). I understand that this hearing would be closed and a motion would be made. I will close the hearing then, unless there are any comments from the Council. MR.. MAGNUSON: I would just say that the Council should be sure and the person that makes the motion states the reasonf for their actions, so that at the time you make the motion the reasons could ben be found in the hearing. MAYOR JUNKER: I would entertain a motion. COUNCILMAN POWELL: Mr. Mayor. MAYOR JUNKER: Councilman Powell. COUNCILMAN4 POWELL: I would move that we revoke the license of the Stillwater Taxi Company on the grounds that they willingly close down their business for a period of a day and a half and did not provide any service for the City of Stillwater. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: I second the motion. MAYOR JUNKER: You heard the motion - all those in favor. AYES - -A11 Nays- -None COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK: I move that we give them full refund. COUNCILMAN POWELL: I second the motion. MAYOR JUNKER: You heard the motio and second. All those in favor - AYES - -All MR. WALSH: The hearing adjourned? MAYOR JUNKER: Thank you for your time. 163 • • • • • • • 164 COUNCILMAN POWELL: I move that we adjourn. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON: Second. MAYOR JUNRER" You heard the motion and the second and all in favor. Response: All Attest: January 29, 1979 Finance Director /Coordinator Nays - -None Mayor • • • •