Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the License Transfer Dispute topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears contested liquor-license transfer where creditor has sued; staff point to discretionary statute
Summary
A transfer request for a Class BB liquor license tied to a pending creditor lawsuit prompted legal explanation of the council's discretion under state law; the claimant urged a contingency to ensure proceeds would satisfy her claim.
The council heard a contested request to transfer a Class BB liquor license for a business identified as KI Bar and Grill/Kali Bar and Grill after a creditor filed a claim against the licensee. Attorney Christopher Kabi urged the council to use its statutory discretion to permit the transfer because the licensee filed a sworn answer disputing the indebtedness.
Town solicitor Amy advised the council that the cited statute (identified in the discussion as "section title 3 se chapter 5 section 19 of the general laws") provides discretion to allow a transfer where the indebtedness is genuinely disputed and the statement under oath is not offered to induce transfer. Amy explained past practice is to make transfers contingent on satisfaction of debts but that the statute permits exceptions in disputed cases.
A speaker who identified herself as Matina (Matina Peshili) said she had filed the creditor claim and was seeking roughly $12,000 for operational costs, renovations and unpaid wages; she said the business generated proceeds that could be used to pay creditors if the sale went forward. She told the council she had not been contacted directly to try to resolve the claim before going to court and that she wished the parties had negotiated first.
Kabi and others in favor of transfer argued the litigation could take months or years and that a contested claim does not necessarily mean the transfer should be denied; Amy said the council could, if it wished, approve a transfer conditioned on resolution of the claim or a demonstration that creditor concerns were addressed.
Councilors said they would consider the matter at the upcoming agenda item and noted the council’s typical practice is to require debts be satisfied prior to transfer, or to make transfers contingent on resolution of creditor claims. No final transfer vote was recorded at the public-hearing portion; the council discussed an agenda motion later to grant transfers subject to claim resolution in a specific motion on the transfer item.
