Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Liquor License Renewal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Florissant council rejects renewal of Plush Lounge liquor license after lengthy debate
Summary
After extended debate about reported ordinance violations and pending court entries, the Florissant City Council voted down the renewal of Liquor License No. 6656 for Plush Lounge (12667), following testimony from the owner and clarifications from city staff about code definitions and permit history.
The Florissant City Council voted on July 28 not to renew Liquor License No. 6656 for Plush Lounge, 12667, after an extended hearing in which council members cited documented ordinance violations and court entries tied to the proprietor.
Council members debated whether the establishment operated primarily as a restaurant or as a lounge and whether multiple entries in Mo CaseNet and police reports met the city code’s renewal criteria. Councilman Egan said he had reviewed case records and videos and that the licensee’s application mischaracterized prior arrests: "When we received the application that Mr. Caroma filled out, he indicated that he had not been arrested. Captain Dehart came in and said that was not true," Egan said when explaining why he opposed renewal.
The petitioner, Prince Caroma, apologized for a social-media post and said Plush operates as a combined restaurant and lounge, with daytime food service and an adults-only lounge at night. "I do apologize for that," Caroma said. He disputed that many of the incident reports were connected to his business and said some CaseNet entries reflect personal matters, including divorce and child-support proceedings: "Majority of that that you're seeing comes from my divorce, and my child support," Caroma said.
City staff told the council the renewal had been referred because of documented police and health-department concerns spanning about three years and that the municipal code lists specific criteria that all applicants must meet. City Attorney Jackie Young and staff clarified that the municipal code does not separately define "lounge" and noted that "the term restaurant shall include a bar and lounge area within the restaurant," advising members to consult earlier minutes for the original permit conditions.
After the petitioner’s testimony and questions from council members about enforcement, serving practices, and alleged lewd conduct shown in promotional videos, the council called the question and conducted a roll-call vote. Multiple members voted "No" on the renewal and the motion failed; council recorded that the motion to renew did not carry. The council discussed options, including approving a license and immediately suspending it, but no such action occurred at the meeting.
The council did not impose an immediate alternate sanction. Staff noted pending court dates and said some matters remain in process. The owner said his attorney is addressing outstanding matters in court. The denial means the city will not renew the municipal liquor license at this time; the owner may pursue remedies through the courts or future applications consistent with code and pending legal proceedings.
The council made its decision at the conclusion of the agenda item; no new vote on the license was scheduled at adjournment.
