Lancaster planning commission pauses revocation hearing for King Bar after owner describes stepped-up security

The Lancaster City Planning Commission opened a public hearing on revoking Conditional Use Permit 23-005 and the deemed-approved status of the alcoholic beverage establishment known as the King Bar at 2822 East Avenue I. Planning Manager Hai Nguyen told the commission staff is recommending adoption of resolution 25-06 to revoke the CUP and the bar’s grandfathered alcohol status, citing a series of incidents and a March 1 event that involved a shooting.

The revocation recommendation stems from staff’s compliance review of conditions attached to CUP 23-005, Nguyen said. "The applicant is found to be in violation of the listed conditions and code sections of the LMC for failure to ensure a nuisance free operation and being detrimental to the public health and safety," he said. Nguyen told the commission the community preservation division received no new complaints but the Lancaster Police Department reported eight calls for service in the last year (staff later clarified related incidents total five), including the March 1 assault with a deadly weapon.

Police Chief Altman described the March incident to the commission as "a serious event" and said "it was actually 3 shooters that night... 2 people who were injured due to that shooting," adding that deputies obtained surveillance footage and witness statements and that an individual identified at the scene cooperated with investigators.

Owner and applicant Haisam "Sam" Maeda addressed the commission and described changes he said he has made since the incidents. "I have now more 5 security guard every night plus the patrolling car plus 2 other. Like, that's mean 7 security guard for this bar," Maeda said. He told commissioners he expanded lighting, installed about 32 cameras recording for 30 days, and has security protocols including ID checks and search procedures.

Multiple speakers from the public urged the commission not to close the business and described the King Bar as a community venue that hosts outreach events. Supporters included longtime customers and employees who said the owner has invested in security and community programming; one frequent patron called the bar "a safe place" that feels like family.

Staff and commissioners spent significant time distinguishing two regulatory questions: A, whether to revoke the CUP that authorizes live indoor (and, with additional approvals, outdoor) entertainment; and B, whether to revoke the establishment’s deemed-approved (grandfathered) status to sell alcohol. Nguyen and building-permit staff explained the applicant submitted tenant-improvement plans; the building-permit application was filed in September 2024, received plan-check comments, the applicant addressed some comments by November 2024, then received subsequent comments in April 2025. Building staff said they returned comments on April 23 and had not yet received the applicant’s resubmittal as of the hearing.

Commissioners debated options including taking no action, revoking one or both approvals, continuing for additional information, or approving staff’s full recommendation. Chair Vos moved to continue the hearing for 90 days to give the applicant time to produce documentation and to allow staff to confirm building-permit progress. "I will make a motion to continue this hearing for 90 days," Vos said. The motion was seconded and passed 6-0 with one commissioner absent. The commission set the next review for Aug. 18, 2025.

The commission record shows staff summarized two written oppositions from nearby residents citing noise and safety; staff included a summary of police reports and the March incident in the staff report. No final revocation was adopted at this meeting; the matter remains active and scheduled for the commission’s August hearing.

What happens next: The commission’s continuance leaves the King Bar permitted to operate as it currently does while staff and the applicant provide additional documentation. The applicant was asked to supply permit resubmittal evidence and other compliance materials for the Aug. 18 meeting. The commission noted that any final decision could be appealed under city procedures.