Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Licensing Applications topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee holds two liquor-license applicants pending documentation, approves remaining applications
Summary
The Wausau Public Health and Safety Committee postponed action on two individual license applicants who were recommended for denial and approved the remainder of staff-recommended licenses by unanimous vote.
Get email alerts on the Licensing Applications topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Wausau Public Health and Safety Committee on March 17 held action on two liquor-license applicants recommended for denial and approved the remainder of licenses recommended by staff.
Committee chair opened item 2 by noting a batch of license applications and said the ordinance permits applicants recommended for denial to present evidence; he asked whether any applicant had factual inaccuracies to raise. The committee paused action on the applicants Kristen Volmer and Taisha Payton and told both they may submit rehabilitation evidence to Police Chief Barnes for review before the committee acts at its April meeting.
The decision to hold Volmer and Payton came after applicants and supporters requested time to submit letters and other documentation. Chief Barnes told the committee he had “received a document” from Volmer and recommended she connect with him to discuss what evidence of rehabilitation would be considered, adding, “1 letter from a probation agent ... falls insufficient given the history that I saw here.” Barnes said he would review any additional materials and that staff could then bring the application back to the committee.
After excluding the two held applicants, committee member Larson moved to “accept or deny licenses as recommended by staff”; Larson’s motion was seconded by Lukens. The committee then voted in favor, with members responding “aye” and none opposed.
The chair said Volmer and Payton will be placed on the April agenda after they submit additional documentation for the chief’s review. The committee did not deny either application at the March meeting.
The committee pulled the minutes approval (agenda item 1) at the start of the meeting because a member did not have the packet copy; that item will be considered at the April meeting.

