ORDERS:
ORDER AND DECISION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This matter comes before the Administrative Law Judge Division pursuant to S.C. Code Ann.
§§ 61-1-55, et seq. (Supp. 1995) and S.C. Code Ann. §§ 1-23-310 et seq. (Rev. 1986 and Supp.
1995) for a hearing pursuant to the application of Thelma R. Bryant, d/b/a T's Bar, (applicant) for an
on-premise beer and wine permit (AI 105516) at 2103 Westminister Highway, Oconee County, South
Carolina (location).
A hearing was held on January 22, 1996, at the Anderson County Courthouse, Anderson,
South Carolina. The Oconee County Sheriff's Office and numerous other protestants were
represented at the hearing by Sheriff James Singleton, Reverend Jimmy Boggs and Ray Thomas. The
South Carolina Department of Revenue and Taxation ("Department") was not represented at the
hearing, having been excused from attending pursuant to its filed motion. However, the position of
the Department, as outlined in correspondence with the applicant, was that based upon the protests
of interested persons, it was denying the application request.
The issues considered were: 1) the suitability of the proposed location, and 2) the nature of
the proposed business activity.
Petitioner's application request is granted with restrictions.
DISCUSSION
Prior to opening the record, Sheriff Singleton and the applicant announced to the Court they
had resolved their differences. Sheriff Singleton, Reverend Jimmy Boggs and Ray Thomas, acting
as spokesmen for all the protestants who appeared at the hearing, agreed to withdraw their protest
of the application if certain restrictions and conditions were made a part of the permit. They are:
1. No nude or semi-nude dancing will be allowed or authorized at the location.
2. The hours of operation at the location are 4:00 p.m. to 3:00 a.m. Monday through Friday
and 12:00 p.m. through 12:00 a.m. on Saturday. The bar will be closed on Sunday.
3. The applicant will provide ample parking areas at the location sufficient to accommodate
all her patrons and customers. No parking by agents or customers/patrons will be allowed
in or alongside the roadways of Highway 183 (Westminister Highway) or Flatrock Road.
EVIDENCE
1. Exhibits
Without objection, the certified portions of the Department's file (AI 105516) sent to and
received by the Administrative Law Judge Division were made a part of the record in this case.
2. Testimony
The applicant and Sheriff Singleton both testified that they were in agreement that the on-
premise beer and wine permit should be granted with the restrictions and conditions, as numbered
above, incorporated therein. Reverend Jimmy Boggs and Ray Thomas also affirmed this agreement.
FINDINGS OF FACT
After consideration and review of all the evidence and testimony and having judged the
credibility of the witnesses, by a preponderance of the evidence, I make the following findings:
1. This Division has personal and subject matter jurisdiction.
2. Notice of the date, time, place and nature of the hearing was timely given to all parties,
including the protestant.
3. The applicant is seeking an on-premise beer and wine permit for a bar located at 2103
Westminister Highway, Oconee County, South Carolina.
4. All provisions of S.C. Code Ann. § 61-9-320 (Supp. 1995) have been complied with.
5. The concerns of the protestants consisted of traffic congestion, safety of residents,
operation of a topless bar and hours of operation at the location. However, those concerns are
addressed in the conditions to be incorporated as part of the permit, as agreed to by the applicant
Upon applicant agreeing to these conditions and restrictions, all protests were withdrawn.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, I conclude as a matter of law, the following:
1. S.C. Code Ann. § 1-23-600 (Supp. 1995) grants jurisdiction to the Administrative
Law Judge Division to hear contested cases under the Administrative Procedures Act.
2. S.C. Code Ann. § 61-1-55 (Supp. 1995) grants to the Administrative Law Judge
Division the powers, duties and responsibilities as a hearing officer in protested and contested matters
governing alcoholic beverages, beer and wine.
3. S.C. Code Ann. § 61-9-320 (Supp. 1993) sets forth the requirements for the issuance
of a beer and wine permit which provides in part:
No permit authorizing the sale of beer or wine may be issued unless:
1. The applicant, any partner or co-shareholder of the applicant, and each agent,
employee and servant of the applicant to be employed on the licensed premises, are
of good moral character.
2. The retail applicant is a legal resident of the United States and has been a legal
resident of this Sate for at least thirty days before the date of application and has
maintained his principal place of abode in South Carolina for at least thirty days before
the date of application.
3. The wholesale applicant is a legal resident of the United States and has been a legal
resident of the United States and has been a legal resident of this State for at least thirty days
before the date of application or has been licensed previously under the laws of this State.
4. The applicant, within two years before the date of application, has not had revoked a beer
or a wine permit issued to him.
5. The applicant is twenty-one years of age or older.
6. The location of the proposed place of business of the applicant is in the opinion of the
department a proper one. The department may consider, among other factors, as indications
of unsuitable location the proximity to residences, schools, playgrounds and churches.
7. Notice of application has appeared at least once a week for three consecutive weeks in a
newspaper most likely to give notice to interested citizens of the county, city, or community
in which the applicant proposes to engage in business.
8. Notice has been given by displaying the required sign for fifteen days at the site of
the proposed business.
4. S.C. Code Ann. Regs. 7-88 (1976), authorizing the imposition of restrictions to
permits, provides:
Any stipulation and/or agreement which is voluntarily entered into by an
applicant in writing for a beer and wine permit between the applicant and the South
Carolina Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission, if accepted by the Commission,
will be incorporated into the basic requirements for the enjoyment and privilege of
obtaining and retaining the beer and wine permit and which shall have the same effect
as any and all laws and any and all other regulations pertaining to the effective
administration of beer and wine permittees.
In the event that evidence is presented to this Commission that any part of the
stipulation or agreement is or has been knowingly broken by the permittee will be a
violation against the permit and shall constitute sufficient grounds to suspend or
revoke said beer and wine permit.
5. Permits and licenses issued by the State for sale of liquor, beer, and wine are not rights
or property, but are rather privileges granted in the exercise of the police power of the State to be
used and enjoyed only so long as the restrictions and conditions governing them are complied with.
As the tribunal authorized to grant the issuance of a permit is also authorized, for cause, to revoke
it, that tribunal is likewise authorized to place restrictions or conditions on the permit or license. See
Feldman v. South Carolina Tax Commission, 203 S.C. 49, 26 S.E. 2d 22 (1943).
6. In considering suitability of location, it is relevant to consider previous history of the
location and to determine whether the testimony in opposition to the granting of a permit is opinions
and conclusions or supported by facts. Taylor v. Lewis, et al., 198 S.E. 2d 801 (1973). In this
instance, there is presently issued by the Department an on-premise beer and wine permit (BW
628565) at the location to David Robert "Bobby" Bryant. Based upon the withdrawal of the protests
as to the nature of the activity and suitability of the location by the protestants, the agreement to
incorporate certain conditions and restrictions in the requested permit, a satisfactory showing by
applicant of having met all the requirements of S.C. Code Ann. § 61-9-320 (Supp. 1995) and
evidence that the Department has previously issued an on-premise beer and wine permit at this
location, I conclude that the on-premise beer and wine permit, as restricted herein, should be granted.
ORDER
Based upon the above Discussion, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is hereby:
ORDERED that the application of Thelma R. Bryant, d/b/a T's Bar for an on-premise beer
and wine permit for the premises located at 2103 Westminister Highway, Oconee County, South
Carolina is granted with the following restrictions, upon the applicant signing a written agreement to
be filed with the South Carolina Department of Revenue and Taxation to adhere to the stipulations
set forth below:
1. No nude or semi-nude dancing will be allowed or authorized at the location.
2. The hours of operation at the location are 4:00 p.m. to 3:00 a.m. Monday through Friday
and 12:00 p.m. through 12:00 a.m. on Saturday. The bar will be closed on Sunday.
3. The applicant will provide ample parking areas at the location sufficient to accommodate
all her patrons and customers. No parking by agents or customers/patrons will be allowed
in or alongside the roadways of Highway 183 (Westminister highway) or Flatrock Road.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a violation of any one of the above conditions is
considered a violation against the permit and may result in a fine, suspension, or revocation.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Department of Revenue and Taxation shall issue the
permit upon payment of the required fees and costs by the applicants.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
______________________________________
Marvin F. Kittrell
Chief Judge
Columbia, South Carolina
January 25, 1996 |
