ORDERS:
ORDER
I. Statement of the Case
The Petitioner, Ruby Robinson, d/b/a The Twi-Lite Inn, (Robinson) of Route 3, Box 171-M
Andrews, South Carolina, filed with the South Carolina Department of Revenue (DOR), the
Respondent, an application for an on-premises beer and wine permit for 5 Chapel Street, South
Carolina. Greater Lane Chapel A.M.E. Church filed a protest seeking to prevent DOR from granting
the permit. 23 S.C. Code Regs. 7-90 (Supp. 1996) requires a hearing with jurisdiction in the
Administrative Law Judge Division (ALJD) under S.C. Code Ann. §§ 1-23-600(B) and 1-23-310
(Supp. 1996). The relevant factors require granting the permit.
II. Issue
Does Robinson meet the statutory requirements for a beer and wine permit?
III. Analysis
1. Positions of Parties:
Robinson asserts she meets the statutory requirements. DOR states that since a protest prevents the
granting of a permit until a hearing is held, DOR awaits the outcome of that hearing. The protestants
assert only one basis for denying the permit: the proposed location is not proper.
2. Findings of Fact:
I find, by a preponderance of the evidence, the following facts:
a. General
1. On or about October 10, 1996, Robinson filed an application with the Department of
Revenue for an on-premises beer and wine permit.
2. The application is identified by DOR as AI111623.
3. The proposed business location and the place where the beer and wine permit will be utilized
is 5 Chapel Street, Lane, South Carolina.
4. The business operates as a night club.
5. A protest to the application was filed by Greater Lane Chapel A.M.E. Church.
6. Except for the unresolved suitability of location issue, DOR would have issued the permit.
7. The hearing was held March 31, 1997, with notice of the date, time, place and subject matter
of the hearing given to the applicant, DOR, and the protestants.
8. No protestant appeared at the hearing.
b. Moral Character
9. The State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) investigated the applicant's criminal
background.
10. The SLED report revealed no criminal violations.
11. The applicant's actions and conduct do not imply the absence of good moral character.
12. Robinson is of good moral character.
c. Legal Resident and Principal Place of Abode
13. Robinson was born in South Carolina and has resided in South Carolina since her birth.
14. Robinson holds a valid South Carolina driver's license.
15. Robinson currently resides at Route 3, Box 171-M, Andrews, South Carolina, and resided
in South Carolina for more than 30 days prior to filing the application for a beer and wine
permit.
16. Robinson is a legal resident of the United States and South Carolina, has held such status for
more than 30 days prior to the application, and has held a principal place of abode in South
Carolina for more than 30 days prior to filing the application.
d. Prior Revocation Of Beer or Wine Permit
17. Robinson has never had a beer and wine permit revoked.
e. Age
18. The date of birth of Robinson is May 13, 1966.
19. Robinson is over twenty-one years of age.
f. Proposed Location
20. The prior owner of the existing location operated with an on-premises beer and wine permit
from 1983 through 1989.
21. Robinson will continue the same business as the prior owner.
22. No reported criminal activity has occurred at the proposed location during the recent past.
23. Greater Lane A.M.E. Church is .4 of a mile from the proposed location.
24. No evidence demonstrates the proposed location is inconsistent with conducting church
activities.
25. The proposed location is not within an improper proximity to churches in the area.
26. No schools are located within the proximity of the proposed location.
27. The location is adequately served by traffic routes of S-45-16 (Lane Hwy.) and Chapel Street
in Lane, South Carolina.
28. Residences are in the area but no evidence demonstrates the proposed location is inconsistent
with residential living.
29. The proposed location is not within an improper proximity to residences in the area.
30. The vicinity is a rural community.
g. Notice
31. Notice of the Robinson application was published in The News, a newspaper published and
distributed in Williamsburg County, with notice published on October 30, November 6, and
13, 1996.
32. Notice of the Robinson application appeared at least once a week for three consecutive weeks
in a newspaper most likely to give notice to interested citizens.
33. Robinson gave notice to the public by displaying a sign for fifteen days at the proposed
business.
34. Robinson gave notice of the application by the required advertising by newspaper and display
of signs.
3. Discussion
a. General Criteria
The applicant satisfies the requirements of having good moral character, being a legal resident of
South Carolina for 30 days, having a principal place of abode in South Carolina for 30 days prior to
filing the application, not having had a beer or wine permit revoked within two years of the date of
the current application, being at least twenty-one years of age, and providing proper notice of the
application by way of newspaper and the display of signs. The only matter disputed is whether the
proposed location is proper. The evidence demonstrates the location is proper.
b. Basis For Decision
Under S.C. Code Ann. § 61-9-320 (Supp. 1995), no beer and wine permit may be granted unless
the proposed location is a proper location. In general, consideration may be given to any factors
that demonstrate the adverse effect the proposed location will have on the community. Palmer v.
S.C. ABC Comm'n, 282 S.C. 246, 317 S.E.2d 476 (Ct. App. 1984).
In deciding whether to grant a permit, an important factor is whether the location has in the recent
past been permitted and whether the location is now more or less suitable than it was in the past.
Taylor v. Lewis, 261 S.C. 168, 198 S.E.2d 801 (1973). Here, prior owners at the proposed location
operated with on-premises beer and wine permits from 1983 through 1989. The evidence does not
demonstrate any problems associated with the location during those prior operations. Since the
applicant will continue essentially the same business as the prior operators, such a factor strongly
supports granting the permit.
Traffic can be a concern. Palmer v. S.C. ABC Comm'n, 282 S.C. 246, 317 S.E.2d 476 (Ct. App.
1984). Here, the traffic patterns will not adversely impact the area since Lane Hwy. and Chapel
Street provide adequate routes for safety concerns. Finally, proximity of a location to a church may
be a factor in examining a permit request. S.C. ABC Comm'n v. William Byers, 305 S.C. 243, 407
S.E.2d 653 (1991); Moore v. S.C. ABC Comm'n, 308 S.C. 160, 417 S.E.2d 555 (1992). Here, the
evidence establishes that the prior years of operation from 1983 through 1989 presented no problem
for church activities. Thus, the current applicant, who will conduct essentially the same business as
the prior operators, will likewise pose no problem.
4. Conclusions of Law
Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Discussion, I conclude the following as a matter of law:
1 The applicant possesses good moral character. S.C. Code Ann. § 61-9-320(1) (Supp. 1995).
2. The applicant is a legal resident of the United States and has been a legal resident of South
Carolina for more than thirty (30) days prior to filing the application and has his principal place
of abode in South Carolina. S.C. Code Ann. § 61-9-320(2) (Supp. 1995).
3. The applicant has not had a beer or wine permit revoked within two years of the date of the current application. S.C. Code Ann. § 61-9-320(4) (Supp. 1995).
4. The applicant is at least twenty-one years old. S.C. Code Ann. § 61-9-320(5) (Supp. 1995).
5. The proximity of a proposed location to churches is a relevant factor in reviewing a permit
application. S.C. ABC Comm'n v. William Byers, 305 S.C. 243, 407 S.E.2d 653 (1991); Moore v. S.C. ABC Comm'n, 308 S.C. 160, 417 S.E.2d 555 (1992).
6. Traffic patterns in the area are relevant to a beer and wine permit. Palmer v. S.C. ABC Comm'n, 282 S.C. 246, 317 S.E.2d 476 (Ct. App. 1984).
7. Considering all relevant factors, the proposed location is a proper location. S.C. Code Ann. § 61-9-320(6) (Supp. 1995).
8. The applicant gave proper notice of the application by way of newspaper and the display of signs. S.C. Code Ann. § 61-9-320(7) and (8) (Supp. 1995).
9 The applicant meets the requirements for the issuance of a beer and wine permit.
IV. ORDER
DOR is ordered to grant to Ruby Robinson, d/b/a The Twi-Lite Inn, an on-premises beer and wine
permit at 5 Chapel Street, Lane, South Carolina.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
__________________________________
RAY N. STEVENS
Administrative Law Judge
This 4th day of April, 1997.
Columbia, South Carolina |
