ORDERS:
ORDER AND DECISION
This matter comes before me pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 61-1-55 (Supp. 1995) and
§§ 1-23-310, et seq. (1986 & Supp. 1995) upon application for an on-premises beer and wine
permit for 150 Jack Jones Street, Aiken, South Carolina, filed by James Harrison with the South
Carolina Department of Revenue and Taxation (hereinafter referred to as "DOR"). A hearing was
held in Aiken at the Aiken County Courthouse on February 27, 1996. At the hearing, the sole
protestant withdrew his protest with the condition that Petitioner stipulate to adhere to certain
restrictions. Petitioner agreed to the stipulations. The permit is hereby granted with restrictions.
FINDINGS OF FACT
By a preponderance of the evidence, I find:
(1) The applicant filed with DOR an on-premises beer and wine permit application for a
location at 150 Jack Jones Street, Aiken, South Carolina, BW #105932.
(2) Notice of the time, date, place, and subject matter of the hearing was given to the
applicant and protestant (by certified mail) and DOR.
(3) DOR did not appear at the hearing and did not express opposition to the issuance of
the permit.
(4) The sole protestant, Major Jody Rowland of the Aiken County Sheriff's Department,
was present at the hearing.
(5) Upon stipulation of James Harrison and Major Rowland, entered into the record of
the hearing, Major Rowland withdrew his protest to the application
(6) Petitioner has operated the proposed location as bar and music hall for approximately
twenty years.
(7) From approximately 1975 until November, 1995, the proposed location was licensed
to sell beer and wine under a permit in the name of Petitioner's mother. Petitioner now seeks to
hold the license in his own name.
(8) The proposed location is often rented out for parties and concerts, with large crowds
congregating at and around the proposed location.
(9) In the past, there has been inadequate outside lighting at the proposed location.
(10) Petitioner has recently installed lights in the parking lot of the proposed location.
(11) Major Rowland has inspected the lighting and found it satisfactory.
(12) Petitioner and Major Rowland stipulated that the following restrictions be placed on
Petitioner's permit:
a. The parking and outdoor pedestrian areas of the licensed
premises must be well lit during night time operating hours;
b. At all times during the operating hours of the licensed
location, whether under the management of James Harrison
or a third party pursuant to a lease or rental contract, an
armed security guard must be on duty and patrolling the
licensed premises.
(13) The applicant is over twenty-one years of age, is a citizen of the State of South
Carolina, and has maintained his principal residence in South Carolina for more than thirty days.
(14) The applicant has not had a permit/license revoked.
(15) The applicant is of good moral character.
(16) Notice of the application appeared in a newspaper of general circulation in the area
of the proposed location for three consecutive weeks and was posted at the proposed location for
fifteen days.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, I conclude as a matter of law the following:
(1) S.C. Code Ann. § 61-1-55 (Supp. 1995) provides that the South Carolina
Administrative Law Judge Division is empowered to hear this case pursuant to Chapter 23 of
Title I of the 1976 Code, as amended.
(2) S.C. Code Ann. § 61-9-320 (Supp. 1995) provides the criteria to be met by an
applicant for a beer and wine permit in South Carolina.
(3) The determination of suitability of a location is not necessarily a function solely of
geography. It involves an infinite variety of considerations related to the nature and operation of
the proposed business and its impact on the community within which it is to be located. Kearney
v. Allen, 287 S.C. 324, 338 S.E.2d 335 (1985).
(4) The proposed location is suitable and proper, in light of the restrictions agreed upon
and imposed herein.
(5) Applicant meets the statutory requirements for issuance of a beer and wine permit.
(6) 23 S.C. Code Ann. Regs. 7-88 (1976) authorizes the imposition of restrictions to
permits by stipulation and/or agreement which is voluntarily entered into by an applicant and
DOR. The restrictions are incorporated into the basic requirements for the enjoyment and
privilege of obtaining and retaining the beer and wine permit.
(7) Permits and licenses issued by the State for the 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).
(8) The proposed location is suitable and proper, in light of the restrictions on the permit
contained in this Order.
(9) Applicant meets the statutory requirements for issuance of a beer and wine permit.
ORDER
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the on-premises beer and wine permit application
of James Harrison, be granted, with the following restrictions and conditions, upon the applicant
signing a written agreement to be filed with DOR to adhere to the stipulations set forth below:
a. The parking and outdoor pedestrian areas of the licensed
premises must be well lit during night time operating hours;
b. At all times during the operating hours of the licensed location,
whether under the management of James Harrison or a third party pursuant to a lease or rental contract, an armed security guard
must be on duty and patrolling the licensed premises.
_____________________________________
STEPHEN P. BATES
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
February 29, 1996
Columbia, South Carolina |
