Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Liquor License topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Split debate, temporary extension sought for Spring Creek liquor license after contested references
Summary
The Elko County Liquor Board heard hours of testimony about DZ’s 3 Putts LLC’s application before splitting 2–2 on a motion; the applicant was given an extra window to provide geographically required recommendation letters and the county attorney later advised the recusal reduced the quorum and the motion carried.
The Elko County Liquor Board heard public testimony and scrutiny on April 16 over an application by Colleen Thompson for a liquor license at DZ’s 3 Putts LLC in Spring Creek. Staff recommended denial because the application lacked three letters of recommendation that meet the county’s geographic requirement; the sheriff’s office also raised payroll and check‑return concerns and flagged an apparent third party with an undocumented financial interest.
Applicant Colleen Thompson disputed that the application reflected improper conduct, saying she had relied on friends who later withdrew references amid a separate business dispute. “The 3 people that gave me letters of recommendation… they are members of this community who I entrusted wrongfully,” Thompson said, explaining two checks had bounced during an acute medical emergency and were immediately rectified. Commissioners expressed competing views: one commissioner moved to deny, while another said there was no evidence of liquor‑law violations and favored granting the license or extending the temporary permit so the business could remain viable for the coming season.
Following prolonged discussion and a motion to extend time for the applicant to submit three locally‑sourced letters of recommendation, the board recorded a split voice vote. At the meeting those present reported the roll as two Aye, two No and one recusal; no final definitive action was entered on the record at that moment. The county attorney advised the board during the meeting that when a member recuses, the required quorum and majority may be reduced under state statute; he said that, on review, the motion instructing staff to allow an extension and require compliance with the letters subsequently met the threshold to carry. The board asked staff to return with any required written guidance before the temporary window expires.
Next steps: the applicant was given 30 days past April 24 to provide three geographically‑compliant letters and the item was to be placed on the May agenda for follow‑up. The sheriff’s office will also prepare an updated background report for the board’s review.
