My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
INFORMATION #1 02-23-2004
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2000 - 2010
>
2004
>
02/23/2004
>
INFORMATION #1 02-23-2004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:33:26 AM
Creation date
3/5/2004 3:27:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
2/23/2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Police Department <br /> <br />MEMORANDUM <br /> <br />TO: <br /> <br />FROM: <br /> <br />DATE: <br /> <br />SUBJECT: <br /> <br />Joan $chmidt, City Clerk <br /> <br />Jeffrey A. Beahen, Chief of Police <br /> <br />1-29-04 <br /> <br />Alcohol Compliance Checks <br /> <br />On 1-28-2004 our department, in cooperation with Sherbume County Public Health <br />conducted alcohol compliance checks at twenty-one licensed establishments in the City of <br />Elk River. Nineteen of those businesses passed the compliance checks. Two of those <br />businesses actually sold alcohol to minors. Those businesses were: <br /> <br />1) <br /> <br />Cenex <br />13374 Highway 10 (Case #04-002504) <br />30-year old clerk sold alcohol to minor. Did check ID and scanned it but thought <br />drinking age was 18. <br /> <br />2) <br /> <br />Elk Bowl <br />13161 Highway 10 (Case//04-002505) <br />46-year old male sold alcohol to minor-did not check ID. Manager and other <br />employees were sitting at the bar when sale took place. Later commented that <br />they thought the person should have been carded. <br /> <br />Compliance checkers made the comment that although the rest of the establishments <br />passed, that in at least two other businesses, the staff person had to go check with a <br />manager or another employee to determine if the person being carded was old enough to <br />drink. In one business the server thought the legal age was 18, in the other they thought it <br />was 19. <br /> <br />Both employees at the two non-compliance locations were charged with sale to minors. <br />Please contact me if you have questions concerning this process and results. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.