The way that the city of Chattanooga deals with businesses which violate laws pertaining to selling beer, has been changed. It has now become a two-part process that will take two meetings, two weeks apart, and two hearings, to come to a decision about if there was actually a violation and what the punishments should be.
The meeting of the Chattanooga Beer Board on Thursday was the first where this procedure was implemented. At the Feb. 6 meeting, the violation of The Dream, 2308 Glass St., was passed to the beer board’s assigned Administrative Hearing Officer Trevor Atchley.
He heard the violation of chronically operating a disorderly place. The incident when the citation was given, occurred on Dec. 15, 2024.This was the third time that the business had been cited, and one of those previous times was also for running a disorderly place in March 2024.
The recommendation of the administrative hearing officer for the latest violation from Dec. 15, had already resulted in the bar losing its liquor license for three weeks. The recommendation from the beer hearing officer and passed by the board, for the same violation, resulted in the recommendation to suspend the Dream’s beer license for just five days.
The process now is for the beer board to review the recommendation before they vote to sustain it or to revise it. On Thursday, the new procedure was implemented for the first time, and the members of the beer board voted to sustain the recommended punishment. Choosing the exact days that the punishment will be implemented is dictated by the beer board, and because The Dream is not open seven days per week, Beer Board Member Ron Smith proposed and board voted to suspend the beer license for the business, on Feb. 27, 28, and March 1, 2 and 6, the days that the business is open.
During the time of the meeting when citizens are allowed to speak, Calandra Smith, assistant director of the Hamilton County Coalition, spoke to the beer board. The Coalition is an organization that is dedicated to the reduction of substance abuse in Chattanooga. She informed the board about concerns that have been directed to her about the current operation of the city beer board. The composition of the board now consists of a couple of members who also hold active beer licenses themselves, and another member who is the brother of the beer board’s administrative hearing officer.
People have asked her if there is a conflict of interest for a beer board member to also hold a beer permit themselves. And if one of the holders of a beer permit are cited to the board for a violation, how would that affect the voting process of one board member voting on another board member. “Isn’t that a conflict of interest?” she asked. City Assistant Attorney McDonald answered that a member could not vote or sit with the board to discuss it if they are involved in the charge of a violation
A problem could have been taken place today, she said, for example. On one vote, there were three abstentions, said Ms. Smith. Two of the beer permit holders declined to vote because of a conflict of interest and Zach Atchley, who is the brother of the administrative hearing officer, also abstained, and could possibly recuse himself from all violation votes that pass through the administrative hearing officer first. Attorney McDonald said as long as there are five votes, action can be taken. If one remaining member had to recuse themselves, possibly due to an absence, which sometimes happens, then then the vote would have had to be postponed because there would not be a quorum.
Conflicts are dealt with on a case-by-case basis, said Attorney McDonald.