Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Alcohol Licensing topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Salinas Planning Commission ties vote on La Corona Market alcohol permit; matter goes to city council

2878826 · April 4, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Salinas Planning Commission on a tied vote did not approve or deny a conditional use permit to transfer an existing Type 20 (off‑sale beer and wine) alcohol license to La Corona Market at 695 East Alisal Street; the matter will be forwarded to the Salinas City Council.

The Salinas Planning Commission on a tied vote did not approve or deny a conditional use permit to transfer an existing Type 20 (off‑sale beer and wine) alcohol license to La Corona Market, a 2,960‑square‑foot food-and‑beverage sales use at 695 East Alisal Street; the matter will be forwarded to the Salinas City Council.

Staff presented the application and recommended approval of the CUP, saying the proposal is eligible for a categorical exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines (section 15061(b)(3)) and that the Planning Department’s findings support the permit if the proposed conditions are applied. Staff noted the site is in the Commercial Retail, Focused Growth overlay (CR FG‑5) and that the property owner is Hebron Properties, LLC.

The project prompted discussion about “undue concentration” of off‑sale alcohol outlets in the census tract and public‑safety data the police department provided. Planning staff said the state Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) formula allows four licenses in the census tract, five are currently active, and a sixth would be active if this CUP is approved. Planning staff summarized the Salinas Police Department memorandum (dated Oct. 18, 2024), saying the department reported on recent crime data for the police reporting district and recommended conditions for approval, including a digital surveillance system and ample exterior lighting.

Public comment opposed the permit. Elleli Shum, listed in the record as a public commenter, said, “in that district, there's close to it's over over, 6 assaults every month in in the last, I guess it was 2023. So that just sounds kind of like adding another alcohol place is probably going to be, because there's already 4, and if you add another 1, it's it's probably going to increase the crime.” Shum asked commissioners to vote against the CUP in light of neighborhood goals to make the area more “neighborhood friendly.”

The applicant’s representative said the market is primarily a grocery store and estimated alcohol would represent “very less, maybe 10, 20, 10 to 20% at the most,” that the store would sell mainly packaged beer and wine (six‑packs, 12‑packs) rather than single cans or single‑serving bottles, and that the space includes a stockroom and produce area rather than functioning as a liquor store.

Commissioners questioned staff and the applicant about distances to nearby schools and parks. Planning staff said the nearest park in the staff report is La Paz Neighborhood Park, which the report lists at about 830 feet from the site; staff indicated the distance to Sherwood School is listed on page 3 of the staff report but the exact figure was not stated aloud in the record. Commissioners also asked about the local history of ABC license limits and the city’s past use of “1 for 1” or “2 for 1” net‑reduction practices; staff summarized that those were past discretionary approaches and that today the finding typically rests on “convenience” for patrons, with proximity and past CUP distances used as a guide rather than a fixed rule.

After discussion, a commissioner moved to accept staff’s recommendation and another commissioner seconded. The roll call vote was: Commissioner Meeks — No; Commissioner Purnell — No; Commissioner Wakamora — Yes; Chairperson Mikko VD — Yes. The 2‑2 tie meant the Planning Commission did not reach a decision; staff advised that the tie will result in the matter being forwarded to the Salinas City Council for resolution.

The record shows staff relied on a 2023 data analysis provided to the police department and a police memorandum dated Oct. 18, 2024. The memorandum identified a range of reported crimes in the district (forgery, embezzlement, fraud, vandalism, theft, drug abuse, DUI, public intoxication, loitering and others) and recommended conditions the department would like to see if the CUP is approved. The Planning Commission did not adopt or modify those conditions before the matter was referred to the council.

The commission noted the item will be included in City Council proceedings on appeal; no date was set for the council hearing in the planning record that was read into the meeting minutes.

Votes at a glance — Conditional Use Permit (CUP 2024‑058) CUP request: Transfer and operation of an existing Type 20 (off‑sale beer and wine) ABC license at La Corona Market, 695 East Alisal Street (existing 2,960 sq. ft. food & beverage sales). Motion: Move to accept staff recommendation (mover/second not specified in transcript). Roll call: Meeks — No; Purnell — No; Wakamora — Yes; Chairperson Mikko VD — Yes. Outcome: Tie (2–2). Planning Commission did not reach a decision; matter forwarded to Salinas City Council.

Next steps: The council will consider the CUP on appeal; the Planning Commission record and staff report, including the police memorandum and the proposed conditions (surveillance, lighting, etc.), will accompany the matter to council.