Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Administrative Hearings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Beer board defers a violation to hearing officer; members debate officer’s authority and appeal process
Summary
The board moved a pending beer violation to the city’s newly created hearing officer process, scheduling it for Feb. 6, and discussed how the hearing officer’s recommendations interact with the board’s authority and statutory requirements for timelines.
The Chattanooga Beer Board on Jan. 16, 2024 voted to defer a pending beer-violation matter to the city’s hearing officer and rescheduled the item for the Feb. 6 meeting while the city fills the hearing-officer position.
Board members and staff explained the new procedure under recently passed ordinances and discussed the interaction between the hearing officer’s findings and the board’s authority to review or modify those findings.
A motion to pass the violation to the Feb. 6 meeting carried by roll call; board members Christie, Brooke, Ron, Roger, Rachel, Jesse, Zach and two additional votes were recorded as “yes.” The board recorded that the city’s new ordinances require violations to be heard within 60 days after the citation is served; the speaker noted the citation in this case appeared to have been issued in mid-December, which would place the 60-day deadline in mid-February.
Several board members asked whether the hearing officer’s determinations are final or merely recommendations to the board. One board member expressed concern that if evidentiary findings made before the hearing officer are not final, appeals to the board could re-litigate facts and create inefficiency.
A staff speaker summarized the process described in the transcript: the hearing officer conducts an in-person hearing and issues findings; those findings are presented to the Beer Board, which may sustain, modify or reject the hearing officer’s recommendation. If a party disagrees with the board’s final action, the transcript noted, the matter may be appealed to chancery court.
The board discussed that the ordinance allows appointment of up to five hearing officers to allow rotation. Board members also raised that proceedings are subject to the Tennessee sunshine/open meetings law, and so deliberations in public hearings will be visible to the public.
The board carried the motion to move the violation to Feb. 6 and noted it would return to the board after the hearing officer issues findings or recommendations.
