Committee approves appeal of operator’s license for bartender Cheryl Sarnish, forwards to common council

The Green Bay Protection Policy Committee voted 3-1 on Sept. 8 to approve an appeal by Cheryl Sarnish of the denial of her operator’s license, forwarding the matter to the Common Council for final approval.

The recommendation came after the committee heard from a police representative who said, “the police are recommending denial as she has a felony conviction on her record,” and from Sarnish, who told the committee she previously held a Green Bay bartender’s license and had worked as a full‑time bartender in Howard for five years without subsequent alcohol‑related violations.

The committee’s action matters because the committee’s vote is a recommendation that the Common Council may accept, reject or pull for further discussion; the chair reminded attendees that final approval occurs at the council meeting on Sept. 16. The procedural step means the council will have the opportunity to review the committee record and Sarnish’s appeal before making a final licensing decision.

At the committee meeting, the police representative summarized the record in the administrative file: a felony conviction (offense dates referenced in meeting materials and testimony as occurring in the 2000s, with an offense date cited as 02/2008) and municipal citations tied to serving alcohol to a person under age in February 2018. The police representative also noted that the applicant did not hold a current Green Bay operator’s license at the time of the denial.

Sarnish told the committee she had previously held a Green Bay bartending license and had worked five years at an establishment called The Avenue in Howard, saying, “I rely on bartending as my sole source of income.” She said she had not had alcohol‑related violations since the 2018 municipal citations and that she let a prior Green Bay license lapse because she was not working in the city at the time.

Committee members asked whether there had been any new violations and whether the applicant had letters of support; Sarnish said she did not submit letters because she believed her employment history and prior licensing record were sufficient. One committee member observed that there had been no alcohol‑related incidents since 2018 and moved to approve the appeal; the motion passed with three members voting yes and one no. The committee’s record states only the numerical tally (3–1); individual vote names were not entered into the meeting transcript.

The committee’s action is a recommendation only. The chair announced the item will be reported to the Common Council, which will make the final licensing decision at its Sept. 16 meeting.

Less critical details: committee discussion touched briefly on the prior council review of the matter and that nothing in the applicant’s record had changed since the previous council consideration. The committee did not adopt new conditions or amendments to the license as part of the recommendation.