transcript of public hearing july 28 2016.txt -...

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

1 BEFORE THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, CITY OF LOS ANGELES

2

IN RE LARESCA (2732-2) )3

))4) No. DIR-2016-1722(RV)

)5

)6

7

8

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS, taken at9

200 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, California,10

at 10:27 a.m., on Thursday, July 28, 2016, before11

Martha M. Magana, CSR 7728.12

13

14


Hutchings Number 32654015

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

¥

1 APPEARANCES:

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt2

3 HEARING OFFICER: ALETA JAMES

4 CITY PLANNER: TIM FARGO

5 ASSOCIATE CITY PLANNER: RONY GIRON

6 DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY: JACKIE LAWSON

7

8 SPEAKERS:

9

10 PALKA, CORY

11 THOMPSON, BENJAMIN

12 TORRES, SUSAN

13 AYAZ, MICHAEL

14 GONZALES, MIKE

15 BLAKE, RICK

16 HALDEN, DANIEL

17 ROMAN, LUMINITA


18 MAZZKO, MATTHEW

19 STINES, JUSTIN

20 LONG, MACE

21 BOWDEN, PERLA

22 FIORELLO, JOSEPH

23 BATTISTONI, KATE

24 RAMIREZ, LUIS

25 McGOWAN, TOM

2

¥

SPEAKERS (CONTINUED):1

2

3 DONOVAN, COLLEEN

4 VALDIVIA, FRANCES

5 DYER, BRIAN


6 BLACKMAN, GAIL

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21


22

23

24

25

3¥

1 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA - THURSDAY, JULY 28, 2016

2 10:27 A.M.

3

4

HEARING OFFICER JAMES: Good morning. Again, I'd5

like to remind everyone to fill out your guest speaker6

cards, and you can walk them up to staff at any time7

you're in this proceeding.8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtMy name is Aleta James. I will be the associate9

zoning administrator here today on case number10

DIR-2016-1722(RV), environmental case number11

2016-1723(CU), project address 1708 North Las Palmas12

13 Avenue.

The public hearing today is for review of14

conditions and possible revocation of use. This15

proceeding is being recorded, and a copy of the16

recording will be available for review and purchase17

through the department's automated records and files18

unit located in City Hall here in room 575.19

And just quickly, an added note, if today you are20

providing a video or any type of tape you'd like to show21

that today, that information will be entered into the22

Only that information that is shown to therecord.23

public today will become part of the public record.24

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt And we'll ask that any transcribers or any25

4

¥

transcripts be provided to the Department of City1

Planning at the person or the -- well, the City is the2

applicant in this case, so the property owner/operator's3

expense for the record. Thank you.4

This meeting will proceed in the following order.5

I will introduce the staff investigator, who will give6

his report of the site investigation and its condition7

compliance report.8

I will then ask for Los Angeles Police Department9

officers to speak, followed by other City departments,10

including neighborhood counsel and other government11

agencies to speak, followed by the respective -- I'm

12


sorry -- followed by the respective property owner or13

operators and their representatives. And last but not14

least, the individual community members will be asked to15

speak.16

After all testimony is given, I will give the17

property owner and/or operators, their representatives,18

an opportunity for rebuttal or to respond to any19

testimony that is heard here today.20

A reminder, any testimony that's given is to be21

directed to myself and not to any other member in the22

Limited cross-examination of any witness willaudience.23

be allowed in this hearing in the following manner.24

If you'd like to ask questions of a witness25

5

¥


following their testimony, please give that information1

to staff, Mr. Rony Giron. And he, in turn, will give2

that information to myself. And that would be entered3

into the record, and that person will be allowed to4

present that information.5

I will ask questions of any testimony that is heard6

here today for the purpose of clarification.7

Just a reminder, a little housekeeping, during the8

course of this hearing, there will be no applause,9

taunting, bullying or you will be asked to leave.10

At the conclusion of this public hearing, it will11

be announced that the record is to remain open for a12

period of time and for what purpose, after which time13

the record will close, and a letter of determination14

will be issued followed by a 15-day appeal period.15

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtThese type of hearings are appealable to the City16

Applicable oath or affirmation will beCouncil.17

administered in the public hearing.18 Everyone in

attendance wishing to participate in the proceedings is19

required to take an oath or affirmation.20

The oath or affirmation is a precaution to21

safeguard the due process and the attendee to these22

proceedings. Consequently, I will administer the23

following oath or affirmation. Please respond24

collectively by stating "I do.25

6

¥

I do solemnly state, under penalty of perjury,1

that the evidence that I shall give in this issue shall2

be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the3

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt truth."4

And the audience shall respond --5

(Audience responds I do.")6

Thank you.7 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

I will now like to introduce planning staff,8

Mr. Tim Fargo, who will give a report of his staff9

investigation and condition of client's report.10

MR. FARGO: Thank you. Good morning. My name is11

Tim Fargo, city planner for the Department of City12

Planning, Nuisance Abatement and Revocation Unit and13

staff investigator for the case. Case number is14

DIR-2016-1722(RV) and ENV-2016-1723(CE) with the use15

location of 1708 North Las Palmas Avenue.16

The property is zoned C42DSM. Located in the17

Hollywood community plan area, the subject property,18

measuring approximately 9,700 square feet, is a level,19


rectangular shaped corner parcel of land having a20

frontage of 90 feet along the north side of Hollywood21

Boulevard and 108 feet along the east side of Las Palmas22

23 Avenue.

The property is developed with a two-story24

commercial building with restaurants and a lounge on the25

7

¥

ground floor and office space located above. The Rusty1

Mullet restaurant occupies a tenant space on the2

southwest corner of the building.3

The site is adjoined on all sides by commercially4

zoned properties and uses including Jameson's Irish Pub5

located adjacent to the Rusty Mullet to the east. There6

is no on-site parking.7


The most recent change in property ownership,8

according to ZIMAS, the Department of City Planning Zone9

Information and Map Access System, was March 19th, 2007.10

On May 23rd, 2013, the zoning administrator, in11

case number ZA-2012-2850(CB), approved a conditional use12

to permit the continued sale and dispensing of a full13

line of alcoholic beverages for on-site consumption in14

conjunction with an existing restaurant with bar use.15

The business conducted at the site has generated16

numerous complaints and has required consistent police17

enforcement as evidenced by submissions from the18

Los Angeles Police Department.19

As the operation may currently jeopardize and20

adversely affect the public health, peace and safety of21

persons residing or working on the premises and in the22

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt surrounding area, the City has responded with the public23

hearing for possible imposition of conditions to abate24

nuisance or to revoke said use.25

8

¥

The Los Angeles Police Department submitted1

investigative reports, arrest reports, notices to2

3 appear, an arrest summary report, a crime summary report

and calls for service, including documentation of4

multiple violations of conditional use permit5

conditions, which include condition numbers 7, 9, 10,6

11, 12, 15, 24, 25, 27 and 32, and include violations7

such as failure to have an operable electronic age8

verification device, failure to implement a designated9

driver program, failure to post mandated hours of10

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt operation, excess number of seats, allowance of11

amplified music to extend beyond the premises, allowance12

of live amplified music, allowance of dancing, allowance13

of loitering and allowance of patrons to queue in line14

outside the premises.15

Other documentation of criminal and nuisance16

activities include murder, rapes, aggravated assaults,17

assault with a deadly weapon, batteries, physical18

altercations, kidnapping, possession of a weapon,19

narcotic drug violations, grand theft auto, robberies,20

burglary, thefts, service of an obviously intoxicated21

person, failure of security guards to possess valid22

security guard license, public drunkenness, disorderly23

conduct, disturbing the peace, vandalism and violation24

of State of California Department of Alcoholic Beverage25

9

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt¥

Control required operating conditions, all taking place1

in or adjacent to the Rusty Mullet between January 20142

and June 2016.3

I conducted a field analysis as a part of condition4

compliance investigation on May 26, 2016, between5

9:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m., accompanied by four6

Los Angeles Police Department officers and one other7

Planning Staff member.8

During the investigation, I looked for physical9

indicators of nuisance activity and spoke with the10

manager and a staff member about compliance with11

operating conditions and business practices. At the12

time of the investigation, the restaurant was open to13

the public.14


While the staff report provides full documentation15

of the investigation, I will speak briefly first to some16

areas of compliance, followed by areas of non- and17

partial compliance at the site.18

As for the areas of compliance, for condition19

number 9, I did find that the hours of operation were20

posted at the establishment's entrance in compliance21

with the required hours of the conditional use permit as22

you can see on the slide.23

Condition number 10, even though this particular24

condition has generated numerous complaints and much25

10¥

documentation from LAPD, at the time of the site visit,1

Transcript of Public Hearin which was a Thursday night

l July 28 2016.txtrom 9:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.,

fg2

sound from the subject establishment did not project3

past the subject premises and did not exceed the ambient4

noise generated by auto and traffic along Hollywood5

As you can see from this image, however,Boulevard.6

business did appear to be quite slow at the time of the7

8 site visit.

Condition number 16, the subject premises is a9

bona-fide restaurant with a full kitchen. They have10

menus with quite an extensive array of options11

available, and we did witness the kitchen on site.12

Condition 23 regarding litter, no litter was13

observed in areas under control of the business.14

And condition 27, also no loitering was observed at15

the time of the field investigation.16

Areas of non- and partial compliance. So, during17

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt the site visit, no dancing and no dance floor were18

However, furtherobserved inside the restaurant.19

upon further investigation, there's evidence in YouTube20

videos posted of dancing inside the restaurant, and21

dancing is not an authorized use for the subject22

establishment under condition 12.23

I'll bring up this video and show a portion of it.24

All right. I'm going to move on because it won't25

11

¥

load the video, but you can see from the still image1

that there is dancing taking place within the2

establishment.3

Conditions number 15 and 24, regarding the4

designated drivers program, the menu did indicate in5


small print at the bottom that taxi transportation6

arrangements can be made by restaurant staff and7

suggested -- and also suggested that nonalcoholic8

beverages would be provided to designated drivers.9 But

it actually didn't specify the type of beverage to be10

provided, which was a stipulation of that condition.11

Condition number 25, the age verification device12

was not available during the time of the field13

And upon consultation with a staffinvestigation.14

member, I was informed that age verification devices15

were not being used. The manager, however, did present16

an electronic receipt of a recently purchased age17

verification device. And this is an image taken of the18

receipt for that device on his cell phone.19

Condition number 28, so that condition requires a20

24-hour hotline. So there was, as you can see, written

21


in pen on the hours of operation that there is a number22

A log of telephone calls received was notlisted there.23

made available to staff during the site visit. The24

manager stated that complaints are resolved as they25

12

¥

1 arrive.

When a call was placed to the 24-hour hotline on2

July 15, 2016, however, there was a reported message3

indicating that voice mail for the number had yet to be4

set up, so not allowing anyone to be able to leave a5

voice message at this -- the number that was provided.6

The case file contains the full staff investigative7

report as well as other submissions to the case file.8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtIf you have any questions regarding the investigation, I9

will be available to answer them. Thank you.10


As you hear your name, when you come forward, would12

you -- for the record, would you spell your name, first13

and last name for the record. And14

Ms. James, the divisional captain15 SPEAKER:

Hollywood is actually --16

MR. FARGO: We do have a card17

Who are we speaking to?18 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

I'm speaking first.19 MR. PALKA:

Thank you.20 HEARING OFFICER JAMES: Have a seat.

I just want to say good morning. Thank21 MR. PALKA:

you for having us. I'm the area captain at LAPD22

Hollywood division. We look at Hollywood, we look at23

how well we're doing in Hollywood. You look at the24

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt business and you look at the economic infrastructure,25

13

¥

use of space, and it's because we have good1

partnerships.2

We have a great councilman, and through his support3

of the partnership with the police department, we've4

been able to sit down and bring massive business into5

Hollywood. Those cranes in Hollywood just didn't show6

The development that's being sustained right now is7 up.

because we've worked hard to put Hollywood in a position8

to be economically successful.9

In order to do that, when we meet with our partners10

in distributing permits, these conditional use permits,11

we need guaranteed compliance. We need a true partner12


who will sit down with us consistently and work toward13

the achievement of those goals so we can continue to14

sustain the economy, create good jobs and, most15

importantly, create an environment of public safety.16

Unfortunately, I'm sad to say the Rusty Mullet has17

As Officer Thompson will presentnot been that partner.18

to you, we had numerous encounters and police resources19

that have been assigned to there that have drained our20

ability to keep public safe in and around that area as a21

result of their noncompliance and nonpartnership as22

directed in the conditional use permits.23

So this morning I ask, as you listen further to the24

police department's presentation to revoke their --25

14

¥


their permits, consider revoking their permits because1

we need the infrastructure to continue. We need the2

In order to do that, we have to have3 economy to grow.

public safety. And unfortunately we haven't had public4

safety in and around that environment due to the5

noncompliance of the Rusty Mullet and their operators.6

Thank you.7

Thank you, Officer.8 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

Who else from the LAPD would like to9 MR. FARGO:

speak?10

Good morning, Madame Zoning11 MR. THOMPSON:

I am Officer Benjamin Thompson.Administrator. It's12

spelled B-E-N-J-A-M-I-N, T-H-O-M-P-S-O-N, serial number13

This is my partner, Susan Torres.14 39467.

S-U-S-A-N, last name T-O-R-R-E-S,15 MS. TORRES:

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt serial number 32569.16

We are here today representing the17 MR. THOMPSON:

Los Angeles Police Department on the revocation matter18

before you. We are both vice investigators for the19

Los Angeles Police Department and currently assigned to20

the Hollywood vice squad.21

I've been investigating vice conditions and22

providing regulatory oversight of the various alcoholic23

beverage retail establishments that operate in the24

Hollywood area for over two years. I have extensive25

15

¥

experience with the Rusty Mullet operation and am the1

lead investigator of a comprehensive and long-term2

investigation related to chronic misuse of the premises.3

Hollywood vice investigators have been negotiatingTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

4

inspections of the Rusty Mullet premises for nearly two5

These compliance inspections were6 years now.

precipitated by a series of community complaints7

concerning nuisance activity associated with the venue8

and pursuant to increases in the occurrence of crimes9

immediately around and inside the subject premises.10

Early inspections of the operation substantiated11

the reported Rusty Mullet nuisance activity, and early12

research indicated that this nuisance activity was a13

contributing factor in the overall amplification of14

criminal activity in the Hollywood entertainment15

district.16

During the initial site examinations, officers17

encountered conspicuous and seemingly blatant18

operational deviations that motivated further scrutiny19


as investigators were compelled to repeatedly examine20

the premises for the purposes of inducing operational21

compliance and mitigating negative impact.22

Over the course of this lengthy investigative23

period, investigators found that the Rusty Mullet24

business was consistently operated in violation of the25

16

¥

following conditional use permit conditions.1

Conditional use permit condition number 10, which2

represents the most frequently violated conditional use3

permit condition, and the most conspicuously4

disregarded, specifies that the disk jockey and karaoke5

is permitted. However, impact on music, sound or noise6

shall not be audible beyond the subject premises.

Noise7


generated on site shall not exceed the decibel levels8

stated in the citywide noise ordinance.9

Conditional use permit condition number 1110

stipulates that no live amplified entertainment of any11

type shall be permitted. Live entertainment shall be12

limited to a small band consisting of four or less13

musicians or entertainers or combination thereof until14

Said band shall not use amplified12:00 midnight.15

Prior to utilization of the subject grant,speakers.16

the applicant shall obtain any necessary live17

entertainment permit from the Los Angeles Police18

Commission.19

Conditional use permit condition number 1220

specifies that No conditional use for dancing has been21

requested or approved herein. The applicant shall not22

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt sublet the premises for any nightclub activity. There23

shall be no renting out of the restaurant to any outside24

ii25 promoters.

17

¥

Conditional use permit condition number 27 states1

that ii Loitering shall be prohibited on or around these2

premises or the area under control of the licensee. The3

applicant owner and on-site managers shall comply with4

all applicable laws and conditions and shall properly5

manage the facility to discourage illegal and criminal6

activity on the subject premises and any accessory7

parking areas over which they exercise control. ii8

And conditional use permit condition number 329

requires that there shall be no line queue to enter the10

Space shall be made available inside theTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtbusiness.11

restaurant to patrons waiting to be seated.12

Close scrutiny of the Rusty Mullet venue has13

revealed that all of these individual conditional use14

permit conditions are routinely disregarded by the15

establishment operator and the operator's agents.16

During the evening hours of operation, the17

establishment consistently features live, amplified and18

excessively loud entertainment that is audible well19

beyond the subject premises, patron dancing20

accommodations, line queues and crowds of loiterers21

lingering in the public areas immediately surrounding22

the involved property.23

The Rusty Mullet conditional use permit is24

comprised of 34 conditions regulating and restricting25

18


use of the property the establishment is connected with.1

The 34 conditions essentially consist of operational2

requirements that were imposed to ensure the mode and3

the character of the establishment remains consistent4

with the restaurant type of operation it was proposed to5

be when the grant was issued.6

The Rusty Mullet commercial function is not only7

directly and individually regulated by the conditional8

use permit, but also by the California State issued9

Alcoholic Beverage Control license which authorizes the10

operator to distribute alcoholic beverages in a11

commercial capacity.12

The Rusty Mullet Alcoholic Beverage Control license13

contains eight operational conditions regulating

14


exercise of the license privilege. The majority of the15

alcoholic beverage license conditions resemble the16

conditions delineated in the establishment conditional17

use permit and restricts the use of the premises to18

restaurant's now function.19

Similar to the fashion in which the Rusty Mullet20

operation is routinely found in negotiating business in21

violation of the governing conditional use permit, the22

venue operations is often functioning in concurrent23

violation of the associated Alcoholic Beverage Control24

license.25

19¥

During the course of this lengthy investigative1

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt period, investigator found that the Rusty Mullet2

business was consistently operating in violation of3

Alcoholic Beverage Control license conditions number 24

and 4.5

Alcoholic Beverage Control license condition6

number 2 stipulates that there should be no exterior7

advertising or sign of any type, including8

advertising -- advertising directed to the exterior from9

within, promoting or indicating the availability of10

alcoholic beverages.11

Alcoholic Beverage condition license -- Sorry.12

Alcoholic Beverage Control license condition13

number 4 mandates that there shall be no dancing allowed14

on the premises.15

Aside from operating in routine violation of these16

regulatory conditions, investigative efforts have17

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtrevealed that the business chronically functions in18

violation of two Los Angeles Municipal Code statutes19

that pertain to Police Commission permit.20

Los Angeles Municipal Code Section 103.106,21

subsection (b), mandates that the legal owners of a22

business must apply for and acquire a Police Commission23

dance hall permit if the subject business represents a24

location that features public dancing accommodations or25

20¥

if the business provides a venue whereupon the general1

public is invited to dance.2


subsection (c), mandates that the legal owners of a4

business must apply for and acquire a Police Commission5


cafe entertainment and show permit. If the subject6

business represents an enterprise that regularly7

provides any form of live entertainment, including8

karaoke.9

Past inspections of the premises have revealed that10

while the loading character of the facility resembles a11

restaurant during daytime operations, the property use12

varies severely during evening and night functions.13

Extensive examination of the establishment during14

the evening and night hours has exposed that the15

premises is routinely operated in a fashion that is more16

consistent with a small nightclub than a restaurant.17

The operation has been observed to routinely18

endorse and accommodate patron -- patron dancing19

features, and the establishment operator consistently20

features live entertainment performances.

21


After 10:00 p.m., the business generally features22

various disk jockeys, whose performances are advertised23

on social media accounts related to the business. These24

disk jockeys organize and circulate loud amplified music25

21

¥

that is disseminated in conjunction with visual1

entertainment elements.2

The venue has demonstrated endorsement of patron3

dancing, not only by implementing stridently loud dance4

music features, which represent impediments to5

conversation and dining experiences, but also by6

routinely relocating establishment furnishings during7

the evening hours of operation to afford the venue with8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt dance floor space.9

The following presentation portions represent a10

chronological record of the past inspections and11

investigative actions commissioned by Hollywood vice12

13 investigators.

On Wednesday, November 12th, 2014, at approximately14

11:00 p.m., Hollywood vice investigators negotiated15

undercover investigation of the Rusty Mullet premises.16

During this inspection, investigators discovered that17

the establishment was being operated in violation of18

condition 10 of the binding conditional use permit.19

Investigators also found that one of the20

establishment employees was working at the Rusty Mullet21

facility as a security guard without a valid Bureau of22

Security Investigative Services state-issued guard card.23

At the conclusion of this investigation, the24

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtbusiness manager was arrested for violation of25

22

¥

Los Angeles Municipal Code Section 12.29, violation of1

conditional use permit operating conditions. And the2

establishment's security guard was arrested for3

violation of Business and Professions Code Section4

16240, performing duties of a security guard while5

unlicensed by the State.6

On Saturday, March 21st, 2015, at approximately7

1:00 in the morning, Hollywood vice investigators8

conducted an undercover inspection of the Rusty Mullet9

premises for Alcoholic Beverage Control and conditional10

use permit compliance. The concerned audit resulted in11

identification of a violation of condition number 10 of12


the establishment's binding conditional use permit.13

At the conclusion of this inspection, the location14

manager was arrested for violation of Municipal Code15

Section 12.29, violation of conditional use permit16

operating conditions.17

On Friday, April 12th, 2015, at approximately18

11:20 p.m., Hollywood vice investigators negotiated an19

undercover audit of the Rusty Mullet premises and, once20

again, found the location to be conducting business in21

violation of condition number 10 of the governing22

conditional use permit.23

The establishment manager was arrested for the24

offense of Municipal Code Section 12.29, violation of25

23

¥


conditional use permit operating conditions.1

On Sunday, April 19th, 2015, at approximately 1:052

in the morning, Hollywood vice investigators negotiated3

an audit of the Rusty Mullet premises. The audit4

revealed the location to be operating in violation of5

condition number 10 of the establishment conditional use6

7 permit.

An administrative declaration that reported the8

observations made and violations detected was completed9

and disseminated to cooperating agencies at the10

conclusion of this inspection.11

On Saturday, April 25th, 2015, at approximately12

11:55 p.m., Hollywood vice investigators conducted an13

undercover inspection of the Rusty Mullet business. The14

concerned inspection resulted in identification of a15

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtviolation of conditional use permit condition number 1016

and a violation of Municipal Code Section 41.57,17

production of loud and raucous noise.18

The establishment manager was arrested for19

violation of Municipal Code Section 12.29, violation of20

conditional use permit operating conditions, while the21

establishment disk jockey was arrested for violation of22

Municipal Code Section 41.57, production of loud and23

24 raucous noise.

On Friday, September 11th, 2015, at approximately25

24

¥

11:30 p.m., Hollywood vice investigators performed an1

undercover inspection of the Rusty Mullet establishment2

and found the establishment to be operating in violation3

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtof several conditional use permit provisional4

requirements, with those being violations of condition5

number 10, noise audible beyond the subject premises,6

and number 12, which prohibits the operator or the7

operator's agents from endorsing or otherwise allowing8

patron dancing.9

The establishment was additionally found to be10

operating in violation of Alcoholic Beverage Control11

license condition number 4, which prohibits patron12

dancing inside the licensed premises. An administrative13

declaration that recorded the observations made and14

violations detected was completed and disseminated to15

cooperating agencies at the conclusion of this16

inspection.17

On Friday, September 25th, 2015, at approximately18



negotiated an undercover inspection of the Rusty Mullet20

establishment and found the location operators to be in21

violation of conditional use permit number 10, interior22

noise audible well beyond the subject premises.23

An administrative declaration that recorded the24


25

¥



On Thursday, October 8th, 2015, at approximately3

9:00 p.m., uniform prostitution enforcement detail4

officers conducted an inspection of the Rusty Mullet5

retail premises finding the business to be operating in6

violation of several binding conditional use permit

7


conditions, with those specifically being violations of8

condition 10, interior noise audible beyond the subject9

premises; condition number 7, premises limited to 7310

patron seats, they had 88 on that day; condition number11

9 mandates that the business operating hours be posted12

at the business entrance and on the restaurant menus;13

condition number 25 requires that an electronic age14

verification device be installed on the premises at each15

point of sales location, as well as alcoholic beverage16

license condition number 2, which prohibits the licensee17

from posting, displaying exterior advertisements18

promoting the availability of alcoholic beverages.19

Hollywood prostitution enforcement detail officers20

completed an administrative declaration regarding their21

findings and notified the location manager of the22

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtinspection results and the adherence failures they23

discerned.24

On Friday, October 9th, 2015, at approximately25

26

¥

1 10:45 p.m.

I'm sorry. I have to object.2 MR. AYAZ:

3 HEARING OFFICER JAMES: Excuse me?

This isn't on the record. These are not4 MR. AYAZ:

in the staff report.5

HEARING OFFICER JAMES: I'm sorry. You cannot6

We have testimony going on at this time.7 interrupt.

MR. AYAZ: That's fine.8


Continue, Officer.I'm sorry.10

Thank you.Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

11 MR. THOMPSON:

On Friday, October 9th, 2015, at approximately12


undercover inspection of the Rusty Mullet establishment,14

finding the business to be operating in violation of15

condition number 10 of the governing conditional use16

17 permit.





On Saturday, November 7th, 2015, at approximately22


negotiated an undercover audit of the Rusty Mullet24

Over the course of this inspection,25 premises.

27


investigators found the site operators to be conducting1

business in violation of conditions number 10, number 122

and number 27 of the binding conditional use permit.3

In addition to these conditional use permit4

violations, Hollywood vice investigators observed the5

site operators to be negotiating business in violation6

of their Alcoholic Beverage Control license conditions7

as the operators were specifically found to be acting in8

violation of Alcoholic Beverage Control conditions9

number 2, which prohibits the licensee from posting or10

displaying exterior advertisements promoting the11

availability of alcoholic beverages, and condition12

number 4, which prohibits the allowance of patron13

dancing.14


At the conclusion of this audit, the location15

manager was arrested for a violation of Municipal Code16

Section 12.29, noncompliance with conditional use permit17

conditions number 10, 12 and 27, as well as Business and18

Professions Code Section 23804, violation of Alcoholic19

Beverage Control license conditions number 2 and 4.20

On Saturday, November 14th, 2015, at approximately21


undercover inspection of the Rusty Mullet establishment23

wherein the involved investigators observed one of the24

location's bartenders provide alcoholic beverage service25

28¥

to an obviously intoxicated patron.1

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtThe involved bartender was arrested following this2

investigation for violation of Business and Professions3

Code Section 25602, subsection (a), alcoholic beverage4

service to an obviously intoxicated person, while the5

intoxicated patron who received the service was taken6

into police custody for Penal Code offense of 647,7

subsection (f), public intoxication.8

On Saturday, November 21st, 2015, at approximately9


undercover audit of the Rusty Mullet premises, finding11

the site operators to be conducting business in12

violation of condition 10, condition 12, condition13

number 27 of the binding conditional use permit.14

In addition to these conditional use permit15

violations, Hollywood vice investigators observed the16

site operators to be negotiating business in violation17

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtof their Alcoholic Beverage Control license conditions,18

as the location operators were found to be acting in19

violation of Alcoholic Beverage Control license20

condition number 2, which prohibits the licensee from21

posting, displaying exterior advertisement promoting22

availability of alcoholic beverages, and number 4, which23

prohibits patrons dancing inside the location.24

At the conclusion of this inspection, the location25

29¥

manager was arrested for violation of Municipal Code1

Section 12.29, violation of conditional use permit2

conditions 10, 12 and 27, and Business and Professions3

Code Section 23804, violation of Alcoholic Beverage4

Control license conditions number 2 and 4.5


On Friday, December 18, 2015, at approximately6


undercover inspection of the Rusty Mullet establishment,8

finding the business to be operated in violation of9

condition number 10 of the governing conditional use10

Condition number 10 prohibits the business11 permit.

operator from circulating amplified music that is12

audible outside the property under the operator's13

control.14

Undercover investigators also found the business to15

be operating in violation of condition number 2 of the16

governing Alcoholic Beverage Control license. Condition17

number 2 prohibits the licensee from posting exterior18

advertisements denoting the availability of alcoholic19

beverages.20

An administrative declaration that reported the

21





On Sunday, December 27th, 2015, at approximately25

30¥



retail premises. The concerned inspection resulted in3

the identification of multiple conditional use permit4

and Alcoholic Beverage Control license violations.5

And the location operators were found to be6

conducting business in violation of conditions7

number 10, number 12 and number 27 of the establishment8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtconditional use permit, as well as conditions number 29

and number 4 of the establishment Alcoholic Beverage10

Control license.11

Investigators documented the observations on an12

administrative declaration at the conclusion of this13

investigation and disseminated that declaration to14

cooperating agencies.15

On Friday, January 29th, 2016, at approximately16


undercover inspection of the Rusty Mullet premises,18

finding the business to be operated in violation of19

conditions number 10 and 12 of the governing conditional20

21 use permit.

Condition number 10 prohibits the business operator22

from circulating amplified music that is audible outside23

the property under the operator's control, while24

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtcondition 12 prohibits the establishment operators from25

31

¥

allowing or otherwise promoting patron dancing.1

Undercover investigators also found the involved2

business to be operated in violation of conditions3

number 2 and 4 of the governing Alcoholic Beverage4

Control license. Condition number 2 prohibits the5

licensee from posting exterior advertisements denoting6

the availability of alcoholic beverages, while7

condition 4 prohibits the licensee from allowing or8

otherwise promoting patron dancing.9






On Sunday, January 31st, 2016, at approximately14



retail premises.17

The concerned inspection resulted in the18

identification of multiple conditional use permit and19

Alcoholic Beverage Control license violations as the20

establishment operators were found to be conducting21

business in violation of conditions number 10 and 12 of22

the establishment conditional use permit, as well as23

conditions number 2 and 4 of the establishment Alcoholic24

Beverage Control license.25

32

¥


An administrative declaration that recorded the1




On Saturday, February 6th, 2016, at approximately5


audit of the Rusty Mullet establishment for Alcoholic7

Beverage Control and conditional use permit compliance.8

The examination resulted in the discovery of numerous9

conditional use permit adherence failures, multiple10

Alcoholic Beverage Control license transgressions and11

additional Los Angeles Municipal Code violations.12

Investigating officers found the establishment to13

be operated in violation of conditional use permit14

conditions number 10, which prohibits the operator from15

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt allowing music or sound to be audible beyond the16

premises; condition number 11 prohibits the operator17

from providing live amplified entertainment; condition18

number 12 prohibits patron dancing; number 27 prohibits19

the operator from allowing loitering around the retail20

premises; and number 32, which proscribes outdoor line21

22 queuing.

Additionally, investigating officers found the site23

to be operated in violation of Alcoholic Beverage24

Control license conditions number 2, proscribes the use25

33

¥

of exterior advertisements indicating or otherwise1

promoting the availability of alcoholic beverages; and2

number 4, which prohibits the operator from allowing or3

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt otherwise endorsing dancing on the licensed premises, as4

well as Los Angeles Municipal Code Sections 103.102,5

subsection (c), posting or otherwise providing live6

entertainment without a valid cafe entertainment and7

show permit, and 103.106, subsection (b), accommodating8

patron dancing without a valid Police Commission dance9

hall permit.10

Investigators arrested the establishment manager11

for these aforementioned offenses at the conclusion of12

this investigation.13

Investigating officers also completed a complaint14

application regarding this inspection, listing the15

licensed operators, the offending party and requesting16

charges be assessed against the operator for violations17

of Penal Code Section 372, public nuisance, and18

Municipal Code Section 12.27.1, violation of city19


imposed land use conditions.20

The concerned complaint application was submitted21

to the city's attorney's office for filing consideration22

upon completion.23



34

¥

undercover inspection of the Rusty Mullet premises. The1

concerned investigation revealed that the business was2

being operated in violation of conditional use permit3

conditions number 10, which prohibits the operator from4

allowing music to be audible beyond the licensed5

property, and number 32, which prohibits the operator6

from line queuing outside the establishment, as well as

7


Alcoholic Beverage Control license condition number 2,8

which prohibits exterior advertising indicating the9

availability of alcoholic beverages.10

Investigating officers completed an administrative11

declaration documenting this inspection and the observed12

violations. That concerned administrative declaration13

was disseminated to cooperating agencies upon14

completion.15



negotiated an undercover examination of the Rusty Mullet18

business operations. The involved inspection revealed19

that the establishment was conducting business in20

violation of governing conditional use permit conditions21

number 10, noise or sound audible beyond the subject22

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt premises; number 12, operator and/or operator's agents23

were observed to be accommodating patron dancing; number24

24, failure to advertise or otherwise notify patrons of25

35

¥

designated driver program; and number 32, line queuing1

patrons for restaurant admission outside the licensed2

3 premises.

In addition to the observed conditional use permit4

violations, investigators found the premises to be5

operated in violation of Los Angeles Municipal Code6

Sections 103.102, subsection (c), hosting, providing7

live entertainment without a valid cafe entertainment8

and show permit, and 103.106, subsection (b),9

accommodating patron dancing without a valid dance hall10

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt11 permit.

The business manager was arrested for the12

conditional use permit and Los Angeles Municipal Code13

violations.14

On Saturday, March 5th, 2016, at approximately15

8:20 p.m., Hollywood prostitution enforcement detail16

officers performed a uniformed inspection of the Rusty17

Mullet facility. During the audit, officers found the18

retail premises to be operating in violation of19

conditional use permit condition number 32, which20

proscribes the establishment operator and/or manager21

from line queuing patrons outside the licensed premises.22

The inspection officers arrested the location23

manager for the observed violation of the Los Angeles24

Municipal Code Section 12.29, violation of conditional25

36


use permit operating conditions.1

Following this inspection, investigators completed2

a complaint application directed at the licensed3

operator for the Municipal Code offense of 12.27.1,4

violation of city imposed land use conditions.5

On Saturday, March 26th, 2016, at approximately6


undercover examination of the Rusty Mullet8

establishment. During the involved inspection,9

investigators observed the Rusty Mullet business to be10

operated in violation of governing conditional use11

permit conditions number 10, noise, sound audible beyond12

the subject premises; and number 11, which prohibits the13

operator and the operator's agents from providing or

14


otherwise allowing live amplified entertainment.15

Investigators also observed the establishment to be16

operated in violation of Alcoholic Beverage Control17

license conditions number 2, which prohibits the18

operator or the operator's agents from posting or19

otherwise arranging exterior advertisements promoting20

the availability of alcoholic beverages, and Los Angeles21

Municipal Code Section 103.102, subsection (c), hosting22

or providing live entertainment without a valid cafe23

entertainment and show Police Commission permit.24

At the conclusion of this examination, the25

37¥

investigators arrested the location manager for1

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtviolation of Los Angeles Municipal Code Sections 12.29,2

noncompliance with conditional use permit conditions 103

and 11, and 103.102, subsection (c), posting or4

providing live entertainment without a valid Police5

Commission cafe entertainment and show permit.6

The manager was also arrested for violation of7

Business and Professions Code Section 23804,8

noncompliance with Alcoholic Beverage Control license9

condition number 2.10

Following the inspection, the investigators11

completed a complaint application directed at the12

licensed operator for the Penal Code offense of 372,13

public nuisance, and the Municipal Code offense of14

12.27.1, violation of city imposed land use conditions.15

On Saturday, April 2nd, 2016, at approximately 1:1016

in the morning, Hollywood vice investigators performed17

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtan undercover inspection of the Rusty Mullet site. The18


being operated in violation of binding conditional use20

permit conditions number 10, which prohibits the21

operator from allowing music to be audible beyond the22

licensed property; number 11, which prohibits the23

operator or the operator's agents from furnishing live24

amplified entertainment; and number 27, which prohibits25

38¥

the operator, the operator's agents from allowing1

persons to loiter on or around the subject premises; as2

well as Alcoholic Beverage Control license condition3

number 2, which prohibits exterior advertisement signs4

indicating the availability of alcoholic beverages, and5



subsection (c), hosting or otherwise providing live7

entertainment without a valid Police Commission cafe8

entertainment and show permit.9



violations. The concerned administrative declaration12


completion.14

On Saturday, April 16th, 2016, at approximately15



establishment. The concerned examination revealed that18

the business was being operated in violation of binding19

conditional use permit conditions number 10, which20

prohibits the operator from allowing music to be audible

21


beyond the licensed property; number 11, which prohibits22

the operator, the operator's agents from furnishing live23

amplified entertainment; number 27, which prohibits the24

operator and the operator's agents from allowing persons25

39¥

to loiter on or about the subject premises; and number1

32, which prohibits the operator and the operator's2

agents from arranging line queues outside the subject3

premises; as well as Alcoholic Beverage Control license4

condition number 2, which prohibits exterior5

advertisement signs indicating the availability of6

alcoholic beverages, and Los Angeles Municipal Code7

Section 103.102, subsection (c), hosting or providing8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtlive entertainment without a valid Police Commission9

cafe entertainment and show permit.10





completion.15

On Thursday, May 5th, 2016, at approximately16

9:40 p.m., Hollywood prostitution enforcement detail17

officers, along with inspectors from Los Angeles18

Department of Building and Safety, and agents from the19

California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control,20

conducted a uniformed compliance inspection of the Rusty21

Mullet venue.22

During the course of this investigation, officers23

found that the business was being operated in blatant24

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt disregard of conditional use permit the operator had25

40

¥

agreed to adhere to. The business manager was arrested1

for conditional use permit in violation as he was2

observed to be violating conditional use permit3

condition number 10, loud noises audible beyond the4

subject premises, and number 25, which requires the5

operator, the operator's agents to maintain a functional6

electronic age verification device, and that that device7

be retained on the premises at each point of sales8

location.9

At the conclusion of this inspection -- Sorry.10 I

lost my place for a minute. Disregard the last11

12 sentence.


Due to the results of this inspection and the13

consideration of past facility examinations squaring14

conspicuous misuse of the involved property, and usage15

permits granted by the city and state was observed,16

coupled with the elevated crime trends associated with17

the venue, investigators determined that the operation18

was contributing to the formation of an environment rife19

with crime, violence and public disorder.20

Investigators completed a complaint application21

directed to the location operator for the Penal Code22

offense of 372, public nuisance, and the Municipal Code23

offense of 12.27.1, violation of city imposed land use24

conditions upon that basis.25

41

¥


Alcoholic Beverage Control agents and Building and1

Safety inspectors conducted concurrent compliance2

inspections of the retail premises, while the involved3

vice investigators negotiated the aforementioned site4

examination.5

Both agencies discovered operational violations6

during their respective establishment audits. Both7

agencies issued the establishment operator orders to8

comply following by completion of their respective9

investigations.10

On Friday, June 10th, 20- -11

12 HEARING OFFICER JAMES: Excuse me. Can you restate

the date of this prior -- the date.13

MR. THOMPSON: Absolutely. The date is Thursday,14

The time of the inspection was 9:40 p.m.May 5th, 2016.15

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt HEARING OFFICER JAMES: Thank you.16

On Friday, June 10th, 2016, at17 MR. THOMPSON:

approximately 9:15 p.m., Hollywood vice investigators18

negotiated an undercover audit of the Rusty Mullet19

establishment. The involved examination resulted in20

identification of numerous violations of the binding21


Over the course of the examination, investigators23

identified violations of conditional use permit24

condition number 10, music was audible beyond the25

42

¥

subject premises, and number 12, establishment operator1

was endorsing or otherwise featuring patron dancing2

activities.3

Additionally, investigators observed that theTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

4

establishment was being operated in violation of the5

associated Alcoholic Beverage Control license conditions6

as investigators identified violations of Alcoholic7

Beverage Control license condition number 2, which8

prohibits the operator from featuring or otherwise9

arranging exterior advertisements indicating the10

availability of the alcoholic beverages, and number 4,11

which prohibits the establishment operator and personnel12

under the operator's employ from endorsing or otherwise13

allowing patron dancing activity.14

During this inspection, investigators also15

identified that the establishment was being operated in16

violation of Los Angeles Municipal Code Section 103.106,17

subsection (b), which prohibits commercial endorsement18

and arrangement of public dancing accommodations or19


features without having obtained a valid Police20

Commission dance hall permit.21





43

¥

completion.1


application directed at the establishment operator for3

continued violations of state -- state and city4

regulations, as well as perpetuation of a public5

nuisance location.6

The complaint applications were related to the

7


ongoing violations observed during the examination and8

submitted to the city attorney's office for filing9

consideration upon completion.10

On Sunday, June 12th, 2016, at approximately 1:0011

in the morning, Hollywood vice investigators performed12

an undercover inspection of the Rusty Mullet site. The13


being operated in blatant violation of binding15

conditional use permit condition number 12, which16

prohibits the allowance or endorsement of patron dancing17

activities, as well as Alcoholic Beverage License18

condition number 4, which prohibits the operator and the19

operator's agents from allowing or otherwise endorsing20

patron dancing at the subject facility.21

Investigators also found the operator to be in22

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt violation of Los Angeles Municipal Code Section 103.106,23

subsection (b), posting or providing dance hall features24

without a valid Police Commission dance hall permit.25

44

¥


declaration documenting this inspection, and the2

observed violations. The concerned administrative3

declaration was disseminated to cooperating agencies4

upon completion.5



continued violations of city and state regulations, as8

well as perpetuation of a public nuisance location. The9

involved complaint applications were related to the land10

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt use violations observed during this examination and11

submitted to city attorney's office for filing12

consideration upon completion.13

On Saturday, June 25th, 2016, approximately 12:4514

in the morning, Hollywood vice investigators negotiated15

an undercover examination of the Rusty Mullet16

establishment.17

During the involved inspection, investigators18

observed the Rusty Mullet business to be operated in19

violation of governing conditional use permit conditions20

number 10, noise and sound audible beyond the subject21

premises; number 11, prohibits the operator and the22

operator's agents from providing or otherwise allowing23

live amplified entertainment; condition number 12, which24

prohibits the operator, the operator's agents from25

45


allowing or otherwise endorsing patron dancing features;1

condition number 15, which mandates that the operator2

and/or the operator's agents make available free coffee3

to establishment patrons, 30 minutes prior to facility4

closure; and condition number 27, which prohibits the5

operator and/or the operator's agents from permitting6

loitering on or around the subject premises.7

Investigators also observed the establishment to be8


license condition number 4, which prohibits the operator10

and the operator's agents from accommodating or11

otherwise featuring patron dancing, and Los Angeles12

Municipal Code Section 103.102, subsection (c), hosting13

or providing live entertainment without a valid Police

14


Commission cafe entertainment and show permit.15

Also observed to be in violation was Municipal Code16

Section 103.106, subsection (b), hosting or endorsing17

patron dancing features without a valid Police18

Commission dance hall permit.19

At the conclusion of this examination,20

investigators arrested the location manager for21

violation of Los Angeles Municipal Code Section 12.29,22

noncompliance with conditional use permit; conditions23

10, 11, 12, 15 and number 27.24

The Rusty Mullet manager was also arrested for25

46¥

violation of Business and Professions Code Section1

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt 23804, noncompliance with Alcoholic Beverage Control2

license condition number 4, and Municipal Code Sections3

103.102, subsection (c), providing live entertainment4

without a valid cafe entertainment show permit, and5

103.106, subsection (b), posting or endorsing patron6

dancing features without a valid Police Commission dance7

hall permit.8

Following this inspection, investigators completed9

complaint applications directed at the licensed operator10

for the offenses of Penal Code Section 372, public11

nuisance, and Municipal Code Section 12.27.1, violation12

of city imposed land use conditions. These complaint13

applications were submitted to city attorney's office14

for filing considerations along with the associated15

16 arrest report.

On Sunday, June 26th, 2016, at approximately17

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt 11:20 p.m., Hollywood vice investigators conducted an18

undercover inspection of the Rusty Mullet operation.19

The concerned inspection resulted in identification of20

multiple conditional use permit adherence failures, as21

where -- as well as an Alcoholic Beverage Control22

license condition adherence failure and violations of23

Los Angeles Municipal Code sections pertaining to Police24

Commission permit requirements.25

47

¥

The facility was specifically found to be operating1

in violation of conditional use permit conditions2

number 10, prohibits the operator from allowing interior3

music to be audible outside; condition number 11, which4

prohibits the operator from featuring or otherwise5


endorsing live amplified entertainment; condition number6

12, prohibits the operator from featuring or otherwise7

endorsing patron dancing in conjunction with subject8

premises, as well as Alcoholic Beverage Control license9

condition number 4, which also prohibits the10

establishment operator from allowing or accommodating11

patron dancing features.12

Also observed to be in violation of Municipal Code13

Section 103.102, subsection (c), providing live14

entertainment without a valid cafe entertainment show15

permit, and 103.106, subsection (b), endorsing or16

otherwise featuring patron dancing without a valid17

Police Commission dance hall permit.18



violations. The concerned administrative declaration

21



completion.23

Investigating officers also completed complaint24

applications directed at the establishment operator for25

48¥



involved complaint application were related to land use3

violations observed during this examination and4

submitted to the city attorney's office for filing5

considerations on completion.6

On Saturday, July 9th, 2016, at approximately 12:307

in the morning, the Hollywood vice investigators8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt negotiated an undercover examination of the Rusty Mullet9

facility. Over the course of the involved inspection,10

vice investigators found that the venue was being11

operated in blatant disregard of conditional use permit12

condition number 12, prohibits the operator from13

allowing or featuring patron dancing, and number 24,14

requires the establishment operator and the operator's15

agents to implement and advertise the designated driver16

17 program.

Investigators also found the establishment as being18


license condition number 4, prohibits the operator, the20

operator's agents from featuring or otherwise endorsing21

patron dancing accommodations, and Municipal Code22

Section 103.106, subsection (b), posting or providing23

dance hall features without a valid Police Commission24

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt dance hall permit.25

49

¥





completion.5





involved complaint application was submitted to the city10

attorney's office for filing consideration at the11



On Saturday, July 16th, 2016, at approximately13

12:30 in the morning, Pacific division vice14

investigators performed an undercover inspection of the15

Rusty Mullet establishment, wherein the involved16

investigators observed one of the location managers17

provide alcoholic beverage service to two obviously18

intoxicated patrons.19

The involved manager was arrested following this20

investigation for the violation of Business and21

Professions Code Section 25602, subsection (a),22

alcoholic beverage service to an obviously intoxicated23

person, while the intoxicated patrons who received the24

service were taken into police custody for the Penal25

50

¥


Code offense of 647, subsection (f), public1

intoxication.2

Following completion of this inspection,3

investigators additionally completed an administrative4

declaration documenting violations of conditional use5

permit conditions 10, 11 and 12 of Alcoholic Beverage6

Control, conditions number 4, and of Los Angeles7

Municipal Code Sections 103.102, subsection (c), and8

103.106, subsection (e), all of which were observed9

during the involved examination.10

Investigators also completed complaint applications11

pursuant to this inspection which were directed at a12

location operator for offenses of Penal Code Section13

372, public nuisance, and Municipal Code Section14

12.27.1, violation of city imposed land use condition.15

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtOn Saturday, July 22nd, 2016, at approximately16


negotiated an undercover examination of the Rusty Mullet18

During this inspection, investigators19 operation.

observed that the business was being operated in20

violation of conditional use permit condition number 10,21

which prohibits the operator from allowing interior22

music to be audible outside the licensed premises, and23

condition number 11, which prohibits the operator from24

featuring or otherwise endorsing live amplified25

51

¥

entertainment.1

In addition to these additional use adherence2

failures, investigators found that the establishment was3

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt being operated in violation of Municipal Code Section4

103.102, subsection (c), hosting or providing live5

entertainment without a valid Police Commission cafe6

entertainment and show permit.7


declaration documenting this inspection and the9



Investigating officers also completedcompletion.12

complaint application directed at the establishment13

operator for continued violation of city and state14

regulations as well as perpetuation of a public nuisance15

location. Involved complaint application were -- was16

related to the land use violations observed during this17

inspection and submitted to the city's attorney's office18

for filing consideration upon completion of this19


inspection.20

Since the initial site inspection that was21

conducted on November 12th, 2014, Hollywood vice22

investigators have completed 18 administrative23

declarations related to individual Rusty Mullet24

compliance inspection that resulted in the25

52

¥

identification of Municipal Code and Business and1

Professions Code violations.2

In that same time frame, investigators have made 173

separate arrests of Rusty Mullet establishment managers4

and staff members for Los Angeles Municipal Code5

violations pertaining to operational conditions6

associated with the venue and Business and Professions

7


Code offenses regulating the business function.8

During this time frame, Hollywood vice9

investigators and Hollywood division administration10

officials made themselves available to the establishment11

operator and the operator's employees.12 On numerous

occasions during this investigative period, Hollywood13

division administrators and Hollywood division officers14

attempted to provide the establishment operator and the15

operator's staff with the education, training and16

support in achieving operational compliance and17

mitigating negative community impact.18

Both of my former supervisors, Lieutenant II Marta19

Bell and Lieutenant II Alex Baez had relationships with20

the Rusty Mullet operator and had regular interactions21

with him wherein compliance issues were discussed and22

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt suggestions to remedy misuse were made.23

The operator and the operator's agents are also24

regularly in attendance at the Hollywood Nightlife25

53

¥

Community Police Advisory board meetings which generally1

offer educational elements related to operational2

compliance.3

Additionally, officers involved in enforcement4

activities that I have delineated, have attempted to5

provide the operator's management team and staff members6

with instructions on achievement of operational7

compliance.8

On more than one occasion, Officer Mascola went9

line by line through entire conditional use permit with10

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt members of the Rusty Mullet management staff and11

provided advice on how compliance with the conditions12

might be achieved.13

On Tuesday, May 31st, 2016, Hollywood vice14

investigators, along with Hollywood vice and Hollywood15

entertainment detail officers in charge, Sergeant Nunez16

and Lieutenant Lane and the Hollywood neighborhood17

prosecutor, Steven Houchin, met in an official capacity18

with the Rusty Mullet operator and a member of his19

During this meeting, Hollywood20 management team.

division representatives discussed rationale behind21

enforcement actions taken against the Rusty Mullet22

23 operation.

HEARING OFFICER JAMES: Excuse me, Officer. Would24

You mentioned a time frameyou go back to one incident.25

54


where you had 18 administrative declarations and 171

What was the time frame of that?arrests were made.2

It was from November 12th, 2014,3 MR. THOMPSON:

till present day.4


During this meeting, Hollywood6 MR. THOMPSON:

division officers listened to the operator's issues with7

current amount of police scrutiny his operation was8

Parties involved also spent a significant9 receiving.

amount of time during the meeting discussing possible10

methods and operating procedures that the operator and11

his agents would institute to achieve compliance with12

municipal and state regulation.13

Since that meeting, Hollywood vice investigators

14


have observed no significant alteration in the15

operational modes featured at the Rusty Mullet16

establishment, as their facility was still observed to17

assume the characteristics of a small nightclub venue18

during the later hours of evening operation.19

My investigation of the Rusty Mullet operation thus20

far has revealed that the operator has and continues to21

operate the Rusty Mullet establishment in willful and22

blatant disregard of the legal requirements imposed on23

the business function and use by the City of Los Angeles24

and the State of California.25

55¥

Outreach attempts and traditional enforcement1

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt methods have proven to be ineffective in this case, and2

it appears that the operator is intent on conducting3

business in violation of the regulations that he4

initially agreed to adhere to, doing so at the risk of5

legal repercussions and public safety.6

Surges in the incidents of violent crime that have7

been connected to the Rusty Mullet operation support8

this characterization, as do continuous deviations from9

the operational requirements that the operator agreed to10

adhere to.11

Based on this comprehensive and long-term12

evaluation, Hollywood vice investigators have determined13

that the imposition of additional land use conditions to14

abate the nuisance that exists in conjunction with this15

business operation will be ineffective as the operator16

and the operator's agents have clearly demonstrated an17

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt unwillingness to comply with the existing conditions.18

Hollywood vice and the Los Angeles Police Department19

assert that revocation of use is the only measure that20

will effectively relieve the community of this nuisance21

and source of criminal activity.22


Thank you, Madame Administrator.24 MR. THOMPSON:

I do have videos. Can I show them at a later25

56¥

portion?1

Will it tie into your2 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

testimony?3

Yes, it will, but I believe it will4 MR. THOMPSON:

kind of interfere with our overall flow.5


HEARING OFFICER JAMES: Okay. We'll look at that6

at a later time.7

Thank you.8 MR. THOMPSON:

I believe we have another speaker, Ray9 MR. FARGO:

Puettmann; is that correct?10

Before we get started,11 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

Officer, let's make a quick announcement again to remind12

the public. In order to keep order in this public13

hearing, as this public testimony is underway, there14

If you wish to speak, pleasewill be no interruptions.15

pull out a speaker card and hand it over to staff.16

In addition, if you are here as the owner or17

operator or representing the owner or operator, you will18

have an opportunity for rebuttal to any testimony that19

you have heard or make any comments after all public20

testimony is given. Thank you.

21


Sorry, Officer.22

Good morning, ma'am.23 MR. PUETTMANN: My name is

The last name is spelled24 Ray Puettman.

I'm currently a sergeant with the25 P-U-E-T-T-M-A-N-N.

57¥

Los Angeles Police Department assigned to Hollywood1

I have worked in the capacity of supervisordivision.2

in the Hollywood entertainment district for3

approximately two years and have been assigned to4

Hollywood division for four years. I have worked very5

closely with Lieutenant Marta Bell and Alex Baez, both6

of whom Officer Thompson previously mentioned were7

responsible for the vice entertainment district public8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt safety standpoint.9

I just want to speak to two points, and I'll try10

and be brief and get to the point, first being public11

nuisance and the problems that are created as a result12

of the Rusty Mullet.13

During the course of my time in the entertainment14

district, many of the problems that have resulted are a15

result of the manner in which they conduct business.16

And to that degree, noise is an enormous part of that in17

that it attracts a lot of attention. It brings people18

to the location. That particular location is not -- is19

not able -- with the capacity to be able to hold20

and/or -- it's not reasonable to it's not reasonable21

to, I guess, have that many people in that small of an22

23 area.

You have one business on the corner. They are not24

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtallowed to go past the queue lines. The crowds that are25

58

¥

generated as a result of music going outside of the1

establishment attracts additional people.2 It creates a

situation where pedestrians actually extend out into3

traffic, the lay traffic, which on Thursday, Friday or4

Saturday night is quite extensive. It will shut down5

traffic at some points.6

Parking and dropping off patrons in front of the7

establishment, even though the location is designated8

red, occurs on a regular and consistent basis which9

contributes to that effect.10

Now, I think it's irresponsible to say that the11

entire problem is a result of the Rusty Mullet, however12


it's equally irresponsible to say that that's not the13

vast majority of the problem and where that stems.14

I try and look at the public nuisance standpoint,15

but the officers that do enforcement action in that16

area, from the standpoint of reasonableness and fairness17

in establishing and working with the folks from the18

Rusty Mullet.19

And I find that during the course of time that20

those particular problems that are generated as a result21

of the patrons of that establishment, whether it be the22

noise, urinating in public, whether it be the fights as23

a result of drunkenness and disorderly conduct outside24

and inside the establishment have not been abated. They25

59

¥


are continually persistent and have been unable to1

provide a more safe and secure location as a result of2

that, which leads into the public safety security3

standpoint.4

And I just want to throw out a couple of statistics5

to you, and I think it bears -- it bears mentioning just6

because of the sheer numbers. Over the course of time7

since probably approximately January 1st, 2014, the8

present time there have been 36 battery investigations9

in or immediately adjacent to the Rusty Mullet10

establishment. And when I say "immediately adjacent11

I mean the sidewalk out front and in the street12 to,

directly in front of or adjacent to that location.13 36

battery investigations, all of which have occurred14

inside.15

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtIn addition, there have been eight robberies, three16

of which have occurred inside, five immediately adjacent17

to or outside. There have been two rapes, two sexual18

There have been two shootings, one of whichassaults.19

has resulted in a homicide. In addition, there are nine20

aggravated assaults and six stolen vehicles. And these21

are all immediately adjacent to or inside that22

In addition, there were four batteriesestablishment.23

on police officers and one on LAFD personnel.24

Now, by any other standards, with all of the other25

60

¥

entertainment-type businesses that we have in the1

entertainment district in Hollywood, those numbers are2

And the vast majority of crimes, based onvery large.3

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtmy experience in the entertainment district,4

particularly with clubs and those that operate as clubs,5

many of those crimes go unreported, a vast majority.6

So these numbers are a result of something7

problematic for a couple reasons from a public safety8

standpoint. Number 1, it attracts or draws this9

particular establishment has drawn or attracted a very10

negative makeup and size of the crowd, specifically gang11

members, those who are on parole and probation and those12

who have a very vast criminal history.13

Many of those folks that we arrest on regular14

occasions outside of the Rusty Mullet are exactly that15

One of the problems that this generates as amakeup.16

result of the alcohol and drunkenness and all of the17

other public nuisance, particularly as I -- as I18

previously mentioned, the noise, the music which19


attracts folks, there are a lot of fights.20

And as a result of those fights, it attracts more21

and more attention to the point where that particular22

intersection is gridlock. And as a result, it causes a23

situation in which it draws resources and personnel from24

every part of this city in order to combat and provide25

61

¥

1 security.

On two particular occasions where we had shootings2

and one homicide, we drew resources from West L.A.,3

Wilshire, Northeast divisions where those police4

officers are needed in those communities in order to5

establish perimeters, look for our suspects, establish6

crime scenes and in order to keep control due to the

7


crowd size and makeup which I previously mentioned.8

On the night where that occurs, we generate or9

request for anywhere from 50 to 150 police officers in10

order to manage that street. That's an enormous draw in11

resources and is completely unacceptable.12

In conclusion, based on a public nuisance13

standpoint and public safety and security standpoint,14

I'd just like to mention that these problems have15

continued. They've persisted. They've been ongoing.16

Lieutenant Alex Baez and Lieutenant Marta Bell worked17

very closely as Mr. Thompson mentioned with this18

establishment in order to ease the compliance, in order19

to alleviate some of the problems that have contributed20

to the public safety issue that we have there.21

During that time we have received absolute --22

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtabsolute noncompliance. Much of the things that they23

have -- Many of the things that they have done in the24

way of appearing to be compliant have been window25

62

¥

dressing and noneffective. This makes a very difficult1

and dangerous situation for the other folks that do wish2

to go to establishments nearby.3

As you know, Hollywood is an enormous first draw,4

and we do get a lot of tourists who are not aware of5

those problems in that area and become instant victims.6

In addition, you have community members that live in7

that area and have to deal with those issues and those8

problems on a regular basis, daily. Whether it's noise,9

whether it's people urinating in public, whether it's10

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtthe fights, whether it's the shootings, that's11

not very -- the local businesses.12

With that being said, all that we've asked and13

continue to ask is for a good community partner as the14

We ask for someone that'scaptain had mentioned.15

willing to work with us, and we have gone, I feel, out16

of our way to attempt to work with that establishment.17

And as I said, we've gotten zero compliance.18

The last thing I want to mention is the current19

state of affairs with -- as it relates to soft targets20

and terrorism because the entertainment district has a21

large number of clubs and establishments within the area22

that would be considered soft targets, places where23

there are a lot of people and maybe minimal security at24

the location.25

63


Anything that draws our resources from those1

locations in order to establish peace, maintain order2

and maintain public safety is an enormous problem for3

those other businesses, those other locations.4 It

doesn't allow for the safety of other residents in the5

city and business owners.6

With that being said, I'd just like to thank you7

for your time. I appreciate the -- I appreciate the8

time to give my side from a public standpoint, from a9

public safety standpoint also.10

Thank you very much,11 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

Officers.12

And for the public, we will be taking a break.13 I

think it's going to be a very lengthy meeting.

So I'd14


like to continue with as much testimony from the15

agencies, departments as possible. And maybe at some16

point we'll take a break before we get into the17

individuals from the community if that's agreeable to18

everyone. I think we'll be here for a while. Okay?19

Okay. Thank you.20

MR. FARGO: Yes. And then we have Hollywood21

Boulevard -- do you wish to speak now or --22

The city attorney.23 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

Would you like to speak?24

25 MS. LAWSON: Yes.

64¥

Good morning. My name is Deputy City Attorney1

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtJackie Lawson, and I was a prosecutor in Hollywood from2

May of 2014 through April of 2016. And during my time3

in conjunction with Hollywood vice, I reviewed and filed4

several cases in regard to the Rusty Mullet location.5

And I'm going to read for the record the case numbers,6

the charges, the dates of the incidents and a7

description of what the charges entail.8

And I'm not commenting on whether or not any9

positions that the city attorney has taken in regard to10

the revocation. I am here only to comment on what's in11

public record as to criminal cases that have been filed12

by my office through April of 2016. Beyond April 2016,13

there are several cases that have been submitted.14 It is

still under filing review. this is not an15 So it

exhaustive list of cases.16

On case number 6CJ08245, the bartender was charged17

for a date of incident of November 15, 2015, of BusinessTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

18

and Professional Code 25602(a) for overservice of an19

intoxicated person.20

Criminal case number 5CA13350, the manager was21

charged with a violation of -- violation date of22

4-25-2015 for a CUP violation of condition, defendant,23

DJ, was acting as a DJ. In case number 5CA13350, also24

on the same date of 4-25-2015, charged with a CUP25

65¥

violation.1

In case number 5CA15744, the manager was charged2

for a date of incident on November 21st, 2015, for a CUP3

violation. On the same date with the same case number,4

the owner was also charged with a CUP violation.5


In another case number 5CA15559, on -- the date of6

the incident was November 7, 2015, the manager was7

charged with a CUP violation. On the same case number8

on the same date, the owner was also charged with a CUP9

violation.10

In another case number, 6CJ08267, the manager, for11

a date of incident of February 6, 2016, was charged with12

a CUP violation. In the same case number, the owner was13

also charged and on the same date of incident with a CUP14

Same case number, the LLC was charged forviolation.15

the same date of incident for a CUP violation.16

On another case, case number 6CJ108267, the17

manager, owner and the LLC were charged for the18

following dates of incident, February 15th, 2016;19

February 20th, 2016 and March 5th of 2016. They -- All20

of the charges arose out of a violation of the CUP.

21


And that concludes my testimony.22


I'm sorry, attorneys, will that be entered into the24

record, or do we have a copy of it?25

66¥

I can certainly -- I can give you -- I1 MS. LAWSON:

can redact the part and provide it to you. So I'll do2

that.3

HEARING OFFICER JAMES: Make that available. Thank4

5 you.

My name is Daniel Halden, and that's6 MR. HALDEN:

Good afternoon, I guess.7 H-A-L-D-E-N. I was going to

say good morning but good afternoon. I serve Council8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtMember Mitch O'Farrell of the 13th District, and I serve9

as Hollywood field deputy as a position since May 2014.10

Thank you for your time, and thank you to all of the11

different agencies and thank you to all the community12

members who are here. I know it's probably going to be13

a long morning and afternoon, so we appreciate14

everybody's time.15

We did submit a letter to the record. I would just16

paraphrase that briefly here today. It's the top17

priority of the councilman and as his representative to18

ensure public safety and the high quality of life,19

whether it's in Hollywood or anywhere in the 13th20

district.21

I just want to point out, underscore some of what22

occurred from the police department earlier things that23

are of utmost concern to the councilman and to our24

office, notably the 46 investigative reports, notices toTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

25

67

¥

appear or arrest reports since January 2014 alone. Also1

troubling are the multiple recurrent violations of the2

conditional use permit, including over a dozen, by my3

count, of condition number 10 alone in that same time4

period.5

Also, there are the 26 crime reports that are --6

that originate from within the venue itself plus four7

others that were outside but involved patrons of the8

And those four incidents were a rape andestablishment.9

assault with a deadly weapon, battery of a police10

officer and a homicide. There are also the 17 arrests11

of managers and the staff members of the Rusty Mullet12


facility that we heard about from LAPD.13

The conditional use permit process is a public14

process, and it's something that we take very seriously.15

Getting a CUP is a privilege, and when you get it you16

have to go through that public process that involves a17

public hearing that is not that dissimilar from this18

And the conditions that the Rusty Mullet has19 one.

repeatedly violated are the conditions that they20

themselves agreed to in the first place.21

So the fact that there are so many different22

violations, as well as the criminal activity that has23

been reported, we find to be very troubling, especially24

since it is our responsibility and, frankly, the25

68

¥


responsibility of any person or business operating in1

Hollywood or anywhere else to do so in a safe manner.2

It's troubling to us that this has gone on for so3

long, and again, that certain things have just been4

repeated -- repeatedly violated over and over and over5

again would suggest that there was not much of an6

attempt or any attempt to correct those violations.7

I want to be clear that we don't like getting to8

this point. Just to get to this point is an enormous9

It's an enormous strain on10 strain on city resources.

There are a lot of people here today,everybody's time.11

and we only get here if there is a real problem, and12

there is a real problem in our eyes as it relates to13

public safety.14

So given all of that, it is the position at our15

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtoffice that the conditional use permit for this location16

should be revoked. Thank you.17


You want me to show videos now or19 MR. FARGO:

Did we hear from any other20 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

public office or agency? All right.21

I think we're all done.22 MR. THOMPSON:

23 HEARING OFFICER JAMES: State your name again.

MR. THOMPSON: Yes, ma'am. Zoning administrator,24

I'm Officer Benjamin Thompson, B-E-N-J-A-M-I-N,25

69

¥

T-H-O-M-P-S-O-N, serial number 39467.1

I have several video files that I would like to2

show to the audience and to you, yourself, Miss, that I3

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtbelieve exemplify the activity that we are looking into.4

I'm -- Let me bring this5 Just give me a minute.

One thing I noticed in assessing the Rusty Mullet6 up.

operation and conducting research into the business7

function was that they identified or otherwise promote8

their facility as a nightclub, which kind of encompassed9

a lot of the issues that we were experiencing with the10

venues in terms of misuse and conditional use permit11

violation.12

In order to kind of encapsulate that, I'd like to13

show a promotional video. Mr. Fargo had brought it up14

prior to all the police department coming up and15

providing testimony when he gave his staff report. It's16

a video that was featured on YouTube, and also I first17

saw it on the Facebook account related to the Rusty18

Mullet operation. And the video appeared to be uploaded19


in May of 2015, and it appeared to be endorsed and20

possibly created by the Rusty Mullet operation or21

someone involved with the operation.22

So without further ado, this does have sound, but I23

don't think it really benefits. The early segments24

depict Rusty Mullet's daytime operation as typically25

70

¥

seen, and then the later are evening hours of operation.1

Could you give us a little2 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

narrative, maybe the time of this occurrence and the3

date.4

These portions of the video depict5 MR. THOMPSON:

what we typically see the facility being used as during6

evening hours after 10:00 p.m.

A lot of the interior7


activity resembles what you see depicted on this video8

to a great deal with sustained patron dancing, alcoholic9

beverage service.10

The facility does offer food, and appears in the11

past -- when I've inspected the establishment, they12

appear to offer food until they close at 2:00. So they13

They appear to be acting as a bona-fidedo that.14

But in addition to that, they incorporate a15 restaurant.

lot of nightclub-type facility features, such as16

sustained patron dancing, live performance acts,17

incredibly loud amplified music.18

The -- The following video, again, was initially19

observed on the on the Facebook account related to20

Rusty Mullet and appeared to come from that21

establishment in some form. This video was taken during22

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txta inspection of the facility on June 25th at 12:50 in23

It was taken by one of our undercoverthe morning.24

25 investigators.

71

¥

For clarity, was it1 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

June 25th of 2016?2

3 MR. THOMPSON: Yes.

And I should note that the Rusty Mullet operations4

have appeared within the last month, I would estimate.5

Since they were provided notice of this upcoming6

revocation of use hearing. The operations have appeared7

Here's what the subdued use of themore subdued.8

facility resembles. On this one, it actually9

probably -- Why don't we get the sound, Mr. Fargo.10

You're going to have to tilt yourTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtSorry everybody.11

head. For whatever reason, I can only get this video12

like sideways or whatever.13

(Showed video.)14

Let me play that video again. All right. Remember15

sideways on it. This is mostly just to depict the16

dancing that is typically featured at the facility, loud17

music, overall use of the facility after 10:00 p.m.18

(Showed video.)19

Again, sideways. Sorry everybody. Video taken the20

same night, approximately 20 minutes after the first21

Again, just to depict typical use and the dancing22 one.

features usually offered at the facility.23

(Showed video.)24

That's the rear of theFrom another view.25

72


establishment. Not as much dancing on that one. Okay.1

I have a couple -- The following series of videos2

does depict something very graphic. So anybody3

squeamishing in the audience that doesn't want to see4

something horrible, right now is your warning.5

I received approval, actually, to display this6

from our west bureau homicide detectivevideo and7

And it does feature a homicide that was8 group.

commissioned essentially outside of the front door of9

the establishment. This occurrence and occurrences that10

resemble this are really our purpose for closely11

scrutinizing the operation and giving the establishment12

a lot of attention that I had discussed earlier in my13

presentation.14


(Showed video.)15

What you see here is the north sidewalk of16

This is the sidewalk that frontsHollywood Boulevard.17

the southern property expanse of the Rusty Mullet18

facility. I've paused it now. The camera is positioned19

under the awning of the Rusty Mullet facility.20

And what you'll see on this video, and this depicts21

activity existent around the premises just prior to the22

occurrence of the crime that you will see, are23

violations of condition number 27.24

This video you'll see the date indicated in the top25

73¥

left corner, February 17th, 2016, and the video was1

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt taken -- it begins at approximately 11:15. This does2

not feature sound. In general, portrays loitering3

activity that is a typical feature of the establishment.4

And according to condition number 27 of the5

conditional use permit, a factor that the operators and6

the operator's agents are supposed to mitigate.7

Another view of the same, just from a different8

angle. Again, the same start time, 11:15. What you're9

looking at is the north sidewalk of Hollywood Boulevard10

directly outside of the Rusty Mullet premises. This is11

the southern wall of the Rusty Mullet property you'll12

see on the left side of your screen.13

And again, if you look at the other retail venues,14

the other expanses of Hollywood Boulevard, you don't see15

these loitering crowds. For the record, there is no bus16

stop there. There is no bus-stop sign. It does17

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtappear -- It does appear on the video that that man is18

looking for a bus, but I have not seen a sign.19

Can you play that again?20 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

Excuse me from the audience. There will be no21

We are taking a public record here.22 comments.

The quality is -- Again, the man on23 MR. THOMPSON:

the street does look like he's looking for a bus, but I24

have not seen a bus-stop sign displayed on that.25 It

74

¥

still doesn't account for the additional people1

remaining unchecked on the sidewalk expanses.2

(Showing videos.)3

This is prior to the eventual homicide as well.4

This depicts the east sidewalk of Las Palmas just north5


of Hollywood Boulevard. It depicts two men that were6

eventually involved in the altercation.7

And the beginning time of this video is 11:15. The8

bus that you see went by, the guy didn't get on it.9 It

kind of indicates to me that he was looking for10

something else, and he remains there.11

You see in the top right hand is the crime that12

You'll see one individual armed with a knife13 occurs.

and then one that was armed with a metal rod. You'll14

see staff from the Rusty Mullet. For edification, the15

man armed with a metal rod perished shortly after.16

From another angle. The homicide occurred at17

approximately 11:17 on February 17th. There is the bus.18

Lower right, you'll finallyIt appears you're right.19

see him there armed with a knife. Staff from the20

establishment. That concludes the videos.

21


Again, in watching the video, I interpreted that as22

a failure on the establishment's part to prevent the23

crime by permitting that kind of excessive loitering24

around the property. Crimes resembling this, not to25

75¥

this exaggerated degree, occur regularly as supported by1

statistical data.2

Other public disorder offenses occur with3

staggering frequency around the subject premises as4

well. From 2014 to the present, Hollywood division5

police officers arrested 23 individuals for violations6

of Los Angeles Municipal Code Section 4127,7

subsection (d), possession of an open alcoholic beverage8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt container beside a licensed Alcoholic Beverage Control9

establishment.10

Hollywood division police officers also arrested 2011

individuals for violations of Los Angeles Municipal Code12

Section 4127, subsection (c), drinking alcoholic13

beverages in public access spaces.14

In the concerned time frame, officers also arrested15

two individuals for violations of Municipal Code Section16

41.18, subsection (e), loitering or otherwise17

obstructing a public sidewalk.18

Hollywood division officers arrested 11 persons for19

violations of Penal Code Section 374.4, subsection (a),20

either that section or Municipal Code Section 41.47.2,21

which both sections pertain to public urination22

offenses.23

Hollywood division officers arrested five24

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt individuals for violations of Health and Safety Code25

76

¥

Section 11357, subsection (b), possessing1 possession

of less than one ounce of marijuana.2

Officers arrested two persons for violations of3

Municipal Code Section 80.73, illegal vending, and 1134

individuals for violations of Business and Professions5

Code Section 25620, subsection (a), possession of an6

open alcoholic beverage container in a public place.7

All of these arrests were effected in public areas8

that immediately surround the Rusty Mullet property, and9

all of these arrests were resolved with the issuance of10

release from custody citations.11

Although Rusty Mullet cannot be directly connected12


to all of these aforementioned incidents of disorderly13

conduct and lawlessness, the deviant operation of the14

premises, the open construction of the facility, have15

contributed substantially to an exacerbation of public16

nuisance conditions and serve to promote the overall17

prevalence of disorder that has become a crime feature18

of the intersection expanse that fronts the19

establishment.20

And that's all I have, Miss. Thank you.21


So that tape will become a part of the public23

record?24

25 MR. THOMPSON: Yes.

77

¥


Miss James, people are -- I just want to1 MR. AYAZ:

make sure. You stated earlier we would have the2

opportunity to submit questions. I just want to make3

sure Officer Thompson doesn't leave.4

I'm not going to go, sir.5 MR. THOMPSON:

HEARING OFFICER JAMES: All right. They have the6

option to leave if they'd like, but Officer Thompson7

will remain. Okay.8

We have an opportunity now to take a quick9

ten-minute break for those who, like myself, may need to10

take a break. And at that time, I will ask the property11

owner or operator and/or their representatives to12

provide testimony and rebuttal to the information they13

heard, the testimony they've heard here today.14

And -- or we can actually -- you want to call the15

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt public individuals first? Would you like to have a16

rebuttal, or would you like to hear first from the17

community, the public testimony?18

The property owner or the applicant can19 SPEAKER:

make their own decision.20

What I'm asking, would you21 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

like to wait until all the testimony is complete?22

That's normally how I would do it. You have no23

preference?24

No, I don't have a preference.25 MR. AYAZ:

78

¥

HEARING OFFICER JAMES: Okay.1

Let's take a ten-minute break.2 12:32.

(Interruption in proceedings.)3

Case number 2016-1723,Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

4 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

project address 1708 Las Palmas Avenue. Now, we'll5 I

think we'll go forward with the testimony from the6

public. And I'll have7

Can we do the property owner?8 MR. AYAZ:

Do you want to hear -- You9 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

don't want to hear -- Okay. I thought we were going to10

do a rebuttal based on what11

The rebuttal from the agencies.12 MR. AYAZ: No.

HEARING OFFICER JAMES: Okay. That's fine.13

MR. FARGO: Okay.14

So we have three representatives here, Mike Ayaz,15

Michael Gonzales.16

Please, for the record,17 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

state your name and spell it and who you're18

representing.19


Mike Gonzales, M-I-K-E,20 MR. GONZALES:

G-O-N-Z-A-L-E-S, Gonzales Law Group, representing the21

22 property owner.


We've recently learned of the series24 MR. GONZALES:

of incidents that are being alleged here today, the25

79

¥

violations, noise issues and many other issues with the1

Are -- My client's leasing attorney has2 operation.

advised my client that these rise to a level of a3

potential violation of the lease, and with that, we are4

moving to notify the tenant of these violations and5

commence eviction proceedings if that becomes necessary.6

The property owner felt embarrassed today, so he

7


left the room. We were unaware of these issues until8

very late in this process. We've spoken with LAPD about9

this, and hopefully, as a landlord, probably we will10

have more cooperation or at least some mechanism to11

alert the property owners that their tenants are not12

behaving as they should be.13

We would encourage the zoning administrator to14

impose very strict conditions on the operation and not15

to revoke the conditional use permit because they are16

land use rights involving the land that do take, as17

noted earlier, public hearings and numerous resources18

from property owners to obtain, and this property owner19

did obtain this land use right and recognizes that there20

are some problems here.21

But we would encourage an imposition of very strict22

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt conditions to prohibit the behavior that is alleged here23

today. Thank you. And I am submitting some letters for24

the record that were transmitted to the tenant.25

80

¥

For the record, could I get1 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

some information as far as the lease agreement, when2

that started and when that will end?3

I do not have those details before4 MR. GONZALES:

me, but I'm happy to submit a letter to the record if it5

6 remains open.


Thank you.8 MR. GONZALES:

We have Mike Ayaz and Rick Blake.9 MR. FARGO: Here

on behalf of the operator.10

MR. BLAKE: Good afternoon. My name is Rick Blake.Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

11

I am an attorney, and I am here on behalf of the12

13 operator.

Can I have the spelling of14 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

your last name, please?15

16 MR. BLAKE: B-L-A-K-E.

I'm going to be very brief. I'll leave most of the17

discussion to Mr. Ayaz. I just wanted to, at this18

point, make a formal objection on the record for -- as19

to the testimony of Officer Thompson. Officer20

Thompson's testimony was entirely hearsay.21

And while I understand hearsay is admissible in an22

administrative proceeding, it is generally admissible23

only for purposes of corroborating other facts. And the24

entire testimony was based upon information that could25

81


only be gleaned by reviewing reports or statistical1

data, and those reports and data are not before us.2 So

it is all hearsay and I don't think the type of hearsay3

that is generally reliable without some other4

corroboration.5

Secondly, in preparation for this hearing, we made6

a request for the file, which Your Honor was very7

cooperative in providing to us. And we've looked8

through the file. None of these incidents that have9

been testified to were set forth in the file that was10

provided to us. It is not possible to respond to or11

explain any of those incidents without having had the12

opportunity to review them prior to today's hearing.13

Thirdly, they also exceed the area of time frame in

14


which we have been given notice that the hearing covers.15

So for those reasons, I'm going to ask that the16

testimony not be considered.17

With that, I'll defer to Mr. Ayaz.18


I'll need just a moment, ma'am.20 MR. AYAZ:


MR. AYAZ: Hello.22

Good afternoon.23 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

MR. AYAZ: Good afternoon. My name is Mike Ayaz,24

If the hearingA-Y-A-Z, Michael traditional spelling.25

82¥

officer would guide me in terms of the rebuttal or would1

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtyou like me to make my presentation first? How would2

you like me to proceed?3

Make your presentation4 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

first, and if you'd like to comment on the testimony5

that you've heard, please proceed with that.6

Very well.7 MR. AYAZ:

Again, my name is Michael Ayaz, and I represent the8

I'd like to start off by saying that weRusty Mullet.9

respect the police officers and the police department of10

Los Angeles Police Department, but that doesn't11

necessarily mean that they always get it right. And12

it's our contention that in this case, they haven't13

gotten it right.14

While the permittee understands and wholly admits15

that there have been some issues, the gravity of those16

issues have not risen to the place where a revocation is17

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt necessitated, nor has the process of the abatement18

proceedings been followed.19

Namely, we haven't had the partnership that we20

seek, and the police officers have not provided to this21

hearing officer any evidence that that -- any outreach22

was made. They haven't provided a single email. They23

haven't provided any kind of correspondence between the24

LAPD and my client in terms of cooperation.25

83¥

In fact, you'll hear today from testimony from the1

manager that they have, in fact, made efforts and2

discussions that they've had with PD, but that all those3

efforts were thwarted and created additional violations.4

Starting there, I'd first like to discuss the5


initiation of this case. My client received notice and6

was given effectively 29 days. In his search for7

counsel, he came to us, and we were retained in or8

around the end of June.9

We made a request for a postponement of the hearing10

and a request for the -- for what's called a Haas11

hearing to determine the objectivity and the potential12

bias of the hearing officer. Not to say that there is13

one, but the law allows us to do that.14 We were

summarily denied both.15

We were provided a nine-day extension to prepare16

for this case. This case -- The case file originally17

included very few pages and shortly after our request18

for the extension ballooned to over a thousand pages.19

The notice on this hearing, in addition to the20

summaril denial of the Haas hearing, as well as the -

21 a


reasonable postponement, we asked for 35 to 45 days, we22

The notice is slanderous, and you23 were given nine.

heard -- and defamatory.24

You heard Officer Thompson discuss several cases,25

84¥

several incidents that are not there is no1

documentation in the file whatsoever that we received in2

order to prepare for this hearing. There is no3

documentation as to the kidnapping, multiple rapes, to4

grand theft. Those were not in our file, and we were5

not adequately afforded the due process to prepare a6

response to those items.7

The murder that -- that we've been talking about8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txthere today, which was shown the unfortunate video that9

we witnessed, that video was provided by the Rusty10

Mullet to LAPD. That individual was 86 and was not11

permitted into the Rusty Mullet.12

If you watch that video very closely, when you take13

this case under submission, you will note that that14

individual came in and went back into the neighboring15

bar. They were never inside the Rusty Mullet.16

In fact, that video and the video that we provided,17

which we regularly provide to PD because that area of18

Las Palmas and Hollywood Boulevard is one of the busiest19

areas of the Hollywood Boulevard stretch, that video20

ultimately exculpated that gentleman, and it was found21

that he -- it was justifiable homicide in self-defense,22

a fact that the LAPD does not mention to you.23

They throw this murder onto our client. They throw24

these allegations into this notice that were sent out toTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

25

85

¥

property owners within 500 feet with crimes that have no1

nexus to the operations of the Rusty Mullet.2

Again, if you will refer to our brief, we've3

outlined specifically what crimes were -- that there was4

And for whateverabsolutely no documentation on.5

reason, the hearing notice was prepared in such a6

fashion that it poisoned the well against my client.7

It provides -- It creates an atmosphere where they8

cannot get a fair hearing, where people from the9

community think that these activities are actually10

occurring on the property which in fact they are not.11

There has not been a murder at the Rusty Mullet. There12


has not been a rape at the Rusty Mullet. There has been13

very few incidents that actually occurred on the14

prop- -- inside the premises.15

You hear the officers talk about in and around.16 In

and around is -- the two largest parts of Hollywood17

Boulevard are behind the Rusty Mullet and to the east of18

the Rusty Mullet. I might have my directions a little19

backwards, but the two major parking lots are within20

that Las Palmas and Hollywood Boulevard.21

And these crimes that happened in and around that22

area could be just as easily, and have been in other23

hearings, associated other businesses. There is no24

nexus between these crimes and the Rusty Mullet.25

86

¥


With -- With regard to some of the crimes that1

we've been discussing today, you know, one would think2

that in the -- And again, with regard to the request for3

postponement, my partner and I, Mr. Blake, both had4

family trips planned. And so we did not have the luxury5

of preparing for this case apparently for 20 months as6

the City and LAPD have.7

But in an effort to prepare the most solid defense,8

we have unlike many members of the public that received9

this notice, unlike many members of boards that may10

receive this notice, council office, we have pored11

through each and every crime, each and every report that12

is before you. And we want to go through them line by13

line as the police did.14

Unfortunately that's time consuming, but it's15

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt important because you're talking about a taking of a16

person's rights and the unemployment of all of these17

people if that should happen. These people are here18

today to show their support not only as employees.19 We

have several neighbors.20

And I believe the file includes several letters of21

support from the community. We have not been afforded22

copies of those letters, although we've heard through23

the grapevine that those letters have come in.24 So it

would be nice if we could be provided those letters so25

87

¥

that perhaps my partner can look them over while I'm1

presenting on it.2

But I'd like to go through the staff report and3

And to my -- to myTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtdiscuss some of these items.4

partner's point, there are several crimes that were5

stated on the record by Officer Thompson that were6

neither in the staff report nor were there reports or7

any documents provided and are new to us.8

So there is no way that we could pull videos or9

prepare adequately considering the fact that those10

things were not included as part of the hearing file11

which, as we were told was, was complete and provided to12

us on July 13.13

I'd like to start with the -- the hearing notice14

But before I do that, Iand go down there. I do also15

have concerns that I'd like to put on the record16

regarding -- regarding the -- the separation of powers17

that be.18

We have concerns that -- And we have to put these19


It's not a reflection on the hearingon the record.20

officer or process, but we have a concern that there21

is -- that there isn't the required legal separation22

between the ZA's office and the code enforcement unit,23

the city planning office and the LAPD.24

I'll highlight that fact by -- by stating on the25

88

¥

record that Rocky Wiles, who heads the CCU, also acts as1

a hearing officer, a zoning administrator and has acted2

So effectively the decisionas a zoning administrator.3

maker is also the person in charge of revoking or4

issuing or imposing additional conditions.5

We put that on the record for future hearings and6

the possibility of court action because we do have a

7


concern that there is not a level of fair hearing8

process within the City of Los Angeles, or there may not9

be. And so because we have to create an administrative10

record, we -- we have to state that.11

Additionally, the -- this case hasn't followed the12

normal abatement procedure process. I believe,13

Ms. James, when you were a planner in 2008, you prepared14

a powerful presentation that outlined the process or15

procedures that go through for the abatement procedure,16

and I believe that's still the case today.17

In fact, we're going to go ahead and admit that18

PowerPoint presentation into evidence as well as our19

brief. But in that presentation to the previous20

notation, it's the zoning administrator that decides21

that there is enough merit to bring a revocation case.22

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtAgain, the zoning administrator's office or the23

chief zoning administrator decides whether or not you're24

going to a revocation hearing and then ultimately makes25

89

¥

the decision on whether to revoke or impose conditions1

upon the license.2

Just for the record, for3 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

those who are just attending, this is a old sign.4 I am,

in fact, an associate zoning administrator for the5

office of zoning administration. So I apologize. This6

has not been updated.7

Again, I think the history of this case8 MR. AYAZ:

is prevalent here. The zoning administrator that9

approved this case in 2013 recognized that this area was10

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt an area of vast entertainment and one of the biggest11

entertainment hubs in the City of Los Angeles.12

This operation, and I would encourage the hearing13

officer to go to this location, is not by any stretch of14

the imagination very different from its neighboring15

In fact, as part of the record, we're going tobars.16

bars or restaurants.17

What we're going to do is include in the record a18

census tract that shows the number of liquor licenses19

In fact, that was onethat are up and down the street.20

of the major concerns of the LAPD at that time.21 But

it's not an unusual operation, and it does not operate22

in any fashion different than any of the neighboring23

bars as we will show on video that we would include into24

the testimony.25

90


The approving ZA recognizes that, again, this1

concept was going to be placed at this location. That2

person had the plans that reflected the open concept.3

It granted them a live entertainment DJ and karaoke.4

You heard Detective Thompson talk about live5

entertainment violations. What evidence? What type of6

live entertainment. From the reports that we've read,7

what he's saying is that live entertainment and the8

tickets that this premises has received or the operators9

have received, are as a result of the DJ playing records10

and having a video playing at the same time or, you11

know, together, or music video playing to the song.12

That's not live entertainment. The code is very clear13

on this issue.14


But again, they keep applying this condition for15

live entertainment, and I would ask the hearing officer16

to ask what live entertainment that they're talking17

about. I believe that there was a one-time drummer that18

they -- a hand drummer that played there. That's not19

amplified music.20

But we have never had, to my knowledge, any live21

entertainment consisting of anything that was amplified22

like a guitar or a violin or anything like that that23

would be in violation of the code.24

The music and the conditions of the original25

91¥

approval are, as you know, a mishmash of conditions that1

Transcript of Public Hearing have been drafted and copied

July 28 2016.txt and applied to businesses2

not specific to that location, but basically chopped up3

from conditions from a liquor store, conditions from a4

restaurant or a nightclub mashed together and put into a5


Particularly I want to talk about the noise7

condition. Condition number 10 says that the noise --8

and I'm paraphrasing -- that the noise cannot be audible9

beyond the premises, and then has the qualifier below10

that that says that the noise shall not violate the11

noise ordinances.12

A reasonable business person cannot determine what13

that's supposed to mean. Obviously the zoning14

administrator at the time understood that entertainment15

was going to be provided. That entertainment consisting16

of a DJ, bands on un-amplified music and karaoke were17

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt going to occur on the property. So she or he understood18

I think the qualifier,that that was going to happen.19

the condition below it that says that it won't violate20

the noise ordinance is what really controls.21

And despite the fact that it seems like a22

repetitive condition violation, the determination that23

it is too loud is a subjective one made by an officer24

which we don't have any idea if he has any training as25

92¥

an acoustical engineer.1

But we have provided to you a -- an acoustical2

engineer report that's part of the administrative3

record, and we're continuing our efforts to provide 3D4

models to show that the ambient noise, which is listed5


inside of the -- inside of the acoustical engineering6

board, is at 85 decibels on Hollywood Boulevard at7

several locations during the test.8

Now, we know in September of 2015 the nuisance --9

the noise abatement program or somebody was out there10

with microphones. The manager would attest to that.11

But we've never been cited by that division, nor have12

any of those reports been made public or part of this13

record. And we believe it's because that there is no14

way to determine one sound from another on Hollywood15

Boulevard.16

Hollywood Boulevard sees thousands and thousands of17

people and cars and motorcycles and musicians and acts18

And for someone to say that they canevery single day.19

hear the Rusty Mullet from 150 feet away while in the20

same report, this is in September, say that they can

21


hear someone inside asking for change through the window22

does not make any sense.23

I mean, how can someone -- At 150 feet away, the24

sound engineer tells us that it would have to be above25

93¥

95 decibels. That is a concert hall. That is where you1

would go to hear any of your favorite musicians play,2

and it would require a sign that says this could cause3

damage to your ears.4

We have video from that day where people are having5

In fact, we have Officers Thompson's ownconversations.6

testimony that he could hear a patron -- I mean a person7

outside asking someone inside for change.8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtYet at 150 feet away, he could discern the Rusty9

Mullet's music above every other music, above Jameson's,10

above Scorpion, above Cabo Cantina, all of those places11

that line the streets they can hear, not to mention the12

ambient traffic noise, the ambient noise of the13

surrounding area, he was able to make that - that clear14

dissertation from that distance.15

Another funny example of how they're applying these16

conditions, and I would point this out to the zoning17

administrator, is condition number 24. I would ask that18

the hearing officer review the tickets or the reports19

that issue -- that talk about the designated driver20

21 program.

We have a designated driver program. Condition22

number 24 says, iiYou will provide a designated driver's23

and in parentheses it says, by way of example,ii24 program,

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt free coffee, free soda, so on and so forth. That is an25

94

¥

example, not a condition. The designated driver program1

that's listed on the menu and two-sided cards and has2

always been since the inception of the Rusty Mullet.3

The fact that it doesn't say free coffee and soda4

is not a violation of that condition. In fact, you'll5

the -- Officer Thompson testified that freehave6

coffee wasn't available at one of the times the officers7

were in there. Well, condition 15 says it has to be8

half an hour before closing, and that report says that9

they asked for that coffee at 11:30, an hour and a half10

before closing time.11

What's happening here is that there is some12


clandestine effort from somewhere to shut this place13

Again, very difficult for me to say because as adown.14

person that does things here in the city and a person15

that has family in law enforcement, this case is a paper16

case and is one that has been at someone's direction17

created to eradicate this business without grounds.18

We know that there is a hit list. There is a hit19

list that has been developed by members of the city.20

And while we have not been able to put our finger on21

that, we have hired investigators to determine where22

that hit list came from and who created that hit list.23

We also, on the record, state that our due process24

and civil rights have been violated. I'll show you25

95

¥


disturbing videos today about how members of1

quasi-governmental agencies called the customers of the2

Las Palmas and Hollywood area blacks, browns and people3

of lower economic strata.4

But nonetheless, you know, there is an underlying5

nefariousness to this entire process that is palatable6

to not only myself but to the people that actually work7

I mean, it is a targeted effort toat the Rusty Mullet.8

put this business out of business.9

You can see by the sheer number and the10

repetitiveness, they come almost every day. July 22nd11

when they came -- when they came in, they told the12

manager that they were doing a splendid job. But today,13

Officer Thompson said that they, in fact, prepared14

another administrative report that they send off to15

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt agencies.16

You heard Officer Thompson also discuss a lot of17

ABC violations or alleged violations that are not within18

their jurisdiction. And I'll note that the hearing19

officers that the ABC has not cited this location a20

There has been no violations ofsingle time since 2013.21

the ABC violations despite the Herculean efforts of the22

Los Angeles Police Department to get ABC to go out23

there, which they do. ABC is very proactive and has not24

cited the location for anything.25

96

¥

The applicant has done everything possible to1

mitigate in spite of what LAPD says. As part of the2

record, you will see that we have hired additional3

Not only have we hired additionalTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtsecurity guards.4

outside security guards at the suggestion of Lieutenant5

Baez, but we've also hired armed security guards,6

motorcycle security guards that not only protect our7

area, but roam and ride their motorcycles in the8

adjacent parking lot and the surrounding area, and we9

have seen a significant impact from the use of those10

facilities or use of those services.11

Included in our administrative record as well as12

our response, you'll see the contracts for those13

You'll see the first year review for those14 services.

And they're completely contradictory to what15 services.

has been testified today about the complete lack of this16

location taking any steps.17

In fact, this location also has a sound meter.18 We

do have the ID check, which we did send to Mr. Giron.19


They have -- They have -- They do star training, and we20

do comply and do our best to comply with every21

condition.22

There is a -- the queuing condition. I'd like to23

discuss that because the police department, in one of24

the meetings with my client -- my clients and the25

97

¥

manager demanded that we harden the door. And they1

demanded that we create an area on Las Palmas where we2

would check IDs and make sure nobody was overly3

intoxicated before they came in. My client immediately4

implemented that suggestion and within a few days got a5

line for queuing.6

My client is truly between a rock and a hard place.

7


They can't do anything to satisfy the requirements of8

the conditional use permit because they are put in a9

place where they are told to do one thing and then cited10

for doing it. They're not getting cooperation that has11

been set, that has been offered. Again, the hearing12

file contains nothing from that.13

We have several emails of correspondence back and14

forth with LAPD. The managers and the employees asked15

detailed questions of when they get cited, when they get16

arrested for violations of conditional use permits,17

alleged violations.18

But again, there is a lot of problems with the way19

There is a lot ofthat this case has been presented.20

problems with the evidentiary -- evidentiary21

documentation that has been provided. We have not been22

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt provided all the information that is necessary for us to23

adequately prepare a defense. However, we've done the24

best that we could.25

98

¥

And with that, I'd like to go through each and1

every one of the allegations on the record that we did2

in fact receive as part of the investigation.3

Also, we'd like to make sure that our responsive4

brief is included as part of the record.5

I have it here.6 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

And we also are going to add a couple of7 MR. AYAZ:

exhibits to that.8

I'd like to go through the staff's report because9

that's what we provide on as well as the information10

So the hearing officer will have toTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtthat was provided.11

Again, we object to any -- any testimony12 excuse me.

that was given here today which we weren't given the13

privy of in reports or any documentation. So I'm going14

to actually start from the back and go to the front.15

Starting at -- And essentially I'm going to start16

at page 33 at line 4 and move my way backwards from17

there. And I know this is painstaking, and I apologize.18

January 28, 2014, at 10:50 a.m., notice to appear.19

Officer issued a notice to appear to two suspects for20

possession of an open container at a parking lot.21

Just for clarification,22 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

you're referring to which document?23

Page 33 of the staff report, item number24 MR. AYAZ:

25 94.

99


Can we get the other part?1


MR. AYAZ: You're welcome.3

January 24th, the -- and Hearing Officer, I'm going4

So -- if you don't mind.to paraphrase.5

HEARING OFFICER JAMES: That's fine.6

94 happened at a parking lot. There is7 MR. AYAZ:

no mention of the Rusty Mullet within the report. It's8

at the intersection of Las Palmas Avenue and Hollywood.9

Apparently anything that happens at that intersection,10

no matter what it is, no matter how it came to be,11

somehow it links onto our client.12

Even though the reports don't list Rusty Mullet,13

they don't say that they came from Rusty Mullet.

There14


is no observation that the people left the Rusty Mullet15

with these alcoholic beverages. Somehow they're16

imputing the general crime in the area to my client, and17

that is a complete violation of civil rights,18

constitutional rights and of due process.19

93, at an intersection of Las Palmas and Hollywood20

Boulevard. Again, nothing related to the Rusty Mullet.21

January 21st, number 92, an open container of Five22

Oaks Bourbon. We don't sell Five Oaks Bourbon, and23

there is no mention of the Rusty Mullet.24

January 29th, this is included as the report -- in25

100¥

the report as part of the reasons to revoke my client's1

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt permit. An officer issued a notice to appear for two2

suspects for illegally -- for an illegal vending from a3

push cart on a public sidewalk near the intersection of4

Las Palmas Avenue and Hollywood Boulevard.5

Number 90, notice to appear issued to a suspect for6

urinating in a public -- in public near the intersection7

of Las Palmas Avenue and Hollywood Boulevard. My client8

There is no reason for my client -- myhas a bathroom.9

client's customers to urinate on a public street.10 We

have a bathroom.11

And there is no indication in any of these reports12

that this urination was as -- a Rusty Mullet customer.13

It could have easily been a customer from any of the 1514

bars or restaurants or nightclubs that pepper that15

But for some reason, it's been imputed again16 street.

onto my client for purposes of this hearing.17

88, notice to appear, again the suspect urinatingTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

18

on Las Palmas Avenue and Hollywood Boulevard.19 I

reiterate my statement that we have a bathroom. Again,20

no -- no evidence that the Rusty Mullet was responsible21

for this individual urinating in public, not to mention22

the homeless problem that exists on Hollywood Boulevard.23

I mean, that's something that is common knowledge in24

that area.25

101¥

In fact, we've received, since we started this1

campaign, emails from hundreds of people, you know,2

I got an email of -- a verysupporting this place.3

graphic email of a homeless man doing unspeakable things4

I assume that if we were toon a public sidewalk.5


believe the police that is somehow Rusty Mullet's fault.6

Notice to appear, number 88, officer in possession7

of open container wine red near the intersection of8

Las Palmas Avenue, Hollywood Boulevard. This occurred9

Again, there is no mention of theon a public sidewalk.10

Rusty Mullet.11

February 27, notice to appear issued. Suspect had12

an open container of Cirok Vodka while in a parked13

vehicle located near the intersection of Las Palmas and14

Hollywood Boulevard. In the report it says in a public15

lot 100 feet west of Las Palmas, but yet this is again16

attributed to my client in this report.17

Officer noticedOn March 8th, notice to appear.18

ticketed someone for open container near the19

intersection of Las Palmas Avenue and Hollywood20

In the report it says south of Hollywood.

Boulevard.21


My client's location is north of Hollywood. Again, we22

don't allow people to leave our premises with any open23

containers.24

Just, again, for the record, the area is has25

102

¥

several liquor stores up and down where the most likely1

place that these are going to be purchased and walked2

around with by these individuals is at a liquor store or3

being brought in from another location but certainly not4

the Rusty Mullet.5

Notice to appear, again, for a suspect for an open6

container of Jagermeister on the -- at the intersection7

of Las Palmas and Hollywood Boulevard, number 85. The8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt report says that it was south of Hollywood, and my9

client's north of Hollywood.10

Officer84, on March 14th, 2014, notice to appear.11

issued a notice for open container Budweiser while in a12

parked vehicle. The report says this was in a public13

lot 40 feet east of Las Palmas, no mention of my client.14

On March 18th, 2014, 11:50, notice to appear, open15

container, Heineken beer inside a vehicle parked on a16

parking lot near the intersection of Las Palmas and17

Hollywood Boulevard.18

I'm reading these into the record because it shows19

that this is simply a pile-on. These crimes can in no20

way connected with, nor is there a nexus within the21

police report that these crimes actually associated my22

client.23

The Police Department is attempting to say that all24

the crime in the area, or a significant portion of theTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

25

103

¥

crime in the area, is as a result of my client's1

They have no evidence that that is actually2 restaurant.

occurring, and they cannot make that nexus.3

I would implore the hearing office to carefully, as4

we did, go through each and every report and note things5

like the location where they just write ii ii6 restaurant" or

They don't write the name of the actualii bar. ii7

location.8

They've done their searches based on the corner of9

this particular address, which again is one of the10

highest-volume traffic locations in the city, certainly11

on that section of Hollywood Boulevard.12


Again, interestingly, if you go to item 79, notice13

Officer issued a suspect open container for14 to appear.

Skyy Vodka. A 750 milliliter vodka was the open15

container. We don't sell 750 milliliters to our16

Those are bought at liquor stores and other17 customers.

facilities.18

April 5th, Modelo Beer, intersection of Las Palmas19

Avenue, Hollywood Boulevard. Again, we don't have any20

documentation that that was purchased or came out of the21

Rusty Mullet.22

It looks like two23 77, again, same same one.

people together. April 25th a 1.- -- while it doesn't24

say this in the report, in the staff's report,25

104

¥


April 25th Skyy Vodka near the intersection of1

Las Palmas Avenue and Hollywood Boulevard, a 1.75 liter2

bottle of Skyy Vodka was what was the open container.3

That's almost a 2 liter bottle of Skyy Vodka. Imagine4

the cost that any restaurant would sell that for.5

This is -- This is obvious that it's not coming6

from the Rusty Mullet. We don't do bottle service.7

There's been no allegation that we do that. We don't8

sell bottles to go. We don't sell beer or wine or9

distilled spirits to go. There is one way in and one10

way out of the Rusty Mullet. That's through the front11

door.12

There is an emergency exit that is -- that is there13

and there is one way in and one way out. And there's a14

security guard at all times. We would never -- And the15

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt security is here today to testify. Never let anyone16

knowingly leave the premises with alcohol because we17

understand the gravity that that has on our ABC liquor18

license.19

April 26, 2014, and we're talking now about things20

that happened over two years ago. Crystal Palace Vodka,21

near the intersection of Las Palmas Avenue and Hollywood22

Again, there is no reference in -Boulevard. to the23

Rusty Mullet.24

74, Hotka Vodka, which I believe is a plastic25

105

¥

bottle of vodka, near the intersection of Las Palmas1

Avenue and Hollywood Boulevard on a public sidewalk.2 No

mention of Rusty Mullet.3

Notice to appear for Tangerine Wheat beer near theTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

4

intersection of Las Palmas and Hollywood Boulevard.5

Again, general crime in the area being imputed on my6

client.7

72, a 40-ounce bottle, again, not stated in the -8

in the report, but it's a 40-ounce bottle of Miller High9

Life beer.10

One has to think, the staff report putAnd okay.11

together, were they able to go through the thousand12

pages of the documentation and be able to pick apart13

these reports so that we can make it -- so it doesn't14

This is just some of the documents thatlook like this?15

But in reality, the file should only bewe received.16

about this thick.17

But I don't know if even the planners had the18

opportunity to go and scan each and every report to19


determine which ones weren't really applicable to this20

location, which ones could really be associated with21

this location. They just included everything because I22

think that's what LAPD wanted them to do.23

On July -- Moving on, July 4th, 2014, another24

750 milliter bottle.25

106

¥

July 11, Colt 45, on a public sidewalk.1 No

reference to my client's location. This is going to2

keep going.3

I mean, Project El Paseo wine on July 9, 2014.4

There is a -- There is a repetitive nature to this, to5

what we're going through here, and I think the hearing6

officer can go through these and see that none of these

7


locations -- and if the hearing officer were to take the8

time to read the reports that were actually provided,9

see that the location of these, there is no nexus10

between the Rusty Mullet.11

There's no actual evidentiary documentation or12

evidence that says that any of these urination charges,13

of which there are many, or any of these open-container14

violations, of which there are many, can be associated15

with or pinned on my client. However, they are being16

used again as a basis for effectively revoking my17

client's permit.18

We've heard from the Los Angeles Police Department19

and the City Council office that they're -- that they20

want the hearing officer to revoke this permit. And21

they're using these basically on -- these ticky-tack22

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt violations that cannot be associated with my client as a23

means to their ultimate goal.24

53, lying across the sidewalk.25 On January 14,

107

¥

2015, they issued a citation to someone blocking the1

If yousidewalk on Las Palmas and Hollywood Boulevard.2

read the report, there was a man lying across the3

sidewalk. Again, how that's associated with our client,4

I have no idea.5

51, drinking a Budweiser adjacent to the subject6

restaurant. Make no mention of the restaurant. They7

just say "subject restaurant," of which there were many.8

50 and 49, 750 milliliter bottles in the reports.9

Again, we don't sell bottle service or bottles to go.10

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt48, four gentlemen sitting in -- four -- I believe11

gentlemen or four suspects sitting in a car drinking12

Pacifico beer at 11:20 p.m. Again, no association or13

connection with my client.14

February 12th, again, in a vehicle, Jack Daniel's15

bourbon, no association or no connection with my client.16

February 13th, Mike's Hard Lemonade on a sidewalk17

near the intersection. This is actually incorrect. The18

report for February 13, 2015, says that it was in a club19

parking lot, not on the sidewalk. I'll note that we20

don't have a -- we don't have a parking lot.21

February 13th, notice to appear, Bombay Sapphire on22

the sidewalk near intersection of Las Palmas, Hollywood23

Boulevard. Again, no -- no connection or nexus to my24

client's business operations.25

108


44, again, Remy Martin at the intersection near1

Las Palmas and Hollywood Boulevard. Las Palmas and2

Hollywood Boulevard seemed like a very popular place.3

But again, there is no mention of my client's business4

operation or a nexus thereto.5

February 14th, urinating in a parking lot adjacent6

to the intersection of Las Palmas and Hollywood7

Boulevard.8

February 15th, Kamata Taaka vodka, while sitting9

inside of a vehicle on an adjacent parking lot at the10

intersection of Las Palmas.11

February 19th, in a parking lot. February 20th, in12

a parking lot. February 21st, on a public sidewalk13

adjacent to the subject restaurant.

February 28th at14


the intersection of Las Palmas and Hollywood, which15

again, no indication or nexus to my client.16

March 5th, a 1.75 liter Ciroc vodka while sitting17

inside in a parking -- in a parked car which is a18

These people hadn't even gotten out of theparking lot.19

They hadn't gone to the Rusty Mullet. They hadn't20 car.

been out of the Rusty Mullet. The report doesn't say21

anything like that. But now, somehow again, it's been22

associated with the operation of the Rusty Mullet and is23

being used as a basis for this hearing.24

March 5th, notice to appear, possession of open25

109¥

container in the public while sitting in a vehicle on an1

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtadjacent parking lot near the intersection of Las Palmas2

and Hollywood Boulevard. Again, incorrect. The report3

says in the rear of supper club, again, a misstatement4

of facts.5

If you read the reports, Hearing Officer, you will6

see that the reflection of what's here in the staff7

report is not exactly what's in the police report.8

The -- They're basically, you know, cherrypicking at9

this point.10

March 6th, 2015, officers issued a notice for11

someone again drinking in a parking lot near the12

intersection of Las Palmas and Hollywood.13

March 14th, public urinating in a public parking14

lot. Again, I'll remind everyone here that we have a15

16 restroom.

March 26th, officer noticed to appear to two17

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtsuspects in an adjacent parking lot for 24-ounce18

Budweiser strawberry drink. No connection or nexus to19

my client's business operations.20

March 28th, officers issued notice to appear to a21

suspect for an open container for steel reserves 211 at22

the intersection of Las Palmas and Hollywood on a23

sidewalk adjacent to the subject restaurant.24

May 1st, notice to appear for, again, a 1.7525

110¥

milliliter Ciroc vodka peach. We don't sell that.1

May 9th, Skyy Vodka in a parking lot at the2


Number 29, again, a Skyy Vodka coconut,4

750 milliliter bottle, which we don't sell at our5


6 restaurant.

On May 10th, number 28, Skyy Vodka 750-millimeter,7

we don't sell. These are all the same ticket,8

obviously, given to four different individuals all the9

way through number 26.10

On May 10th -- Number 25 is interesting, Madam11

Hearing Officer. On May 10th, officer issued a notice12

to appear for a suspect on an open container Budweiser13

while on a public sidewalk near the intersection of14

Las Palmas and Hollywood Boulevard. The report says,15

On a public sidewalk within 50 feet of a liquor store.16

But that is somehow associated with my client.17

May 28th, notice to appear. It's -- While the18

staff report says it's at the intersection of Las Palmas19

and Hollywood Boulevard, the actual police report says20

south of Hollywood.21


May 28, Lagunitas beer while in a parked car at the22

at the intersection of Las Palmas and23 corner

Hollywood Boulevard. Police report actually says it's24

at the south side of Hollywood Boulevard.25

111

¥

May 28th, again, another one that's very1

interesting. Notice to appear, tequila Cuervo while in2

a vehicle on an adjacent parking lot near the3

intersection of Las Palmas and Hollywood Boulevard.4 In

reality, the police report says that it was south of5

Hollywood in a public parking lot at Sadie club, and it6

was a 750 milliliter bottle.7

May 28th, again, Coors Light in a parked vehicle,8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtparking lot near the intersection of Las Palmas and9

It appears that a lot of thisHollywood Boulevard.10

criminal activity is happening in a parking lot.11

Perhaps that's where the police should be focusing.12

June 25th, open container on a sidewalk near the13


There's no indication of whether my client was in any15

way involved in that or there is a nexus.16

July 18th, possession of cocaine. The suspect was17

walking on the sidewalk near the intersection of18

Las Palmas and Hollywood Boulevard. There is no19

indication that that suspect was in the Rusty Mullet.20

There is no indication that that suspect was engaging in21

any criminal activity at the Rusty Mullet.22 He just

happened to get stopped at Las Palmas and Hollywood23

Boulevard, was in possession of cocaine, and that is24

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt somehow associated with my client.25

112

¥

August 18th, number 18, possession of marijuana,1

prescription drugs, walking on the sidewalk near the2


September 6th, open container, VSOP brandy near the4

intersection of Las Palmas and Hollywood Boulevard,5

750 milliter bottle. Again, we do not sell 7506

milliliter bottles. There is only one way in and one7

way out of our restaurant, and that is an impossibility8

to associate that with our use.9

Number 16, another ticket for a parking lot,10

smoking marijuana in a parking lot, not associated with11

my client's use.12


October 1st, 2015, number 15, officer issued a13

notice to appear, again for an open container. The sole14

issue -- issued to a person sitting inside a parked15

vehicle in a parking lot near the intersection of16

Las Palmas and Hollywood Boulevard.17

October 1st, 20 minutes later, suspect with an open18

container in public, Four Loko, which I do not believe19

is part of our product line at the intersection of20

Las Palmas Avenue and Hollywood Boulevard, yet a police21

report actually says south of Hollywood.22

October 1st, 2015, notice to appear, Absolut vodka23

at the intersection of Las Palmas Avenue and Hollywood24

The report says that it was south ofBoulevard.25

113

¥


Hollywood, and it was a 1.75 liter bottle, almost 21

liters, like 2 liter soda bottle of vodka. Again, not2

what we sell from our restaurant.3

October 1st, at 10:45, same time as the previous4

ticket, five suspects, possession of open container,5

Jagermeister, near the intersection of Las Palmas and6

Again, the report south ofHollywood Boulevard.7

Hollywood, 750-millimeter bottle. We don't sell serve8

or give away for that matter 750 milliter bottles.9

Again, October 7th, it's the intersection of10

Las Palmas and Hollywood Boulevard, but no indication11

that it's in any way connected or there's a nexus12

between my client and the crime or the alleged crime.13

We don't know if any of these things were prosecuted.14

November 8th, 2015, notice to appear, suspect for15

Transcript of Public Hearin drinking and possession of

ig July 28 2016.txt drinking Coors near the16

intersection of Las Palmas and Hollywood Boulevard. The17

report says it was south of Hollywood.18

December 13th, notice to appear, again, for -19 at

the intersection of Las Palmas Avenue and Hollywood20

Boulevard as stated in the police report -- I mean in21

the staff report. However, the police report says22

25-ounce Budweiser walking with -- walking with beer on23

the north side of the street.24

Number 8, Santorino tequila, Bullet bourbon, Grand25

114

¥

Legacy vodka inside of a vehicle adjacent to the subject1

restaurant, yet it states that it was south of2

Hollywood, and it was in the larger quantities which we3

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt do not sell.4

Notice to appear, Grand Legacy vodka. Again,5

possession of opened container south of Hollywood.6

None of these haveNumber 6 was in a parking lot.7

any connection with my client's operations.8

Number 5, at a parked vehicle near the intersection9

of Las Palmas. Again, a 750 milliter.10

Number 4, in a parked vehicle. They say adjacent11

to the subject restaurant, yet on the report it says12

Las Palmas south of Hollywood.13

Number 3, sitting in a parked car, that was another14

750 milliter.15

Number 2, another 750 milliter in a parked car.16

And number 1, another parked vehicle at the17

intersection.18

Every one of these things that appears as an19


off-site -- off-site violation or arrest or citation can20

in no way, by any stretch of the imagination, be21

associated with my client's use. I would ask the22

hearing officer to strike all of these as they have no23

empirical or evidentiary value. They do not show that24

the -- that the location itself, not the general area,25

115

¥

but the location itself was responsible in any manner1

whatsoever for these off-site incidents of which we have2

no idea what the outcome was.3

To the more pressing of the issues, I'd like to go4

through the on-site -- on-site violations and and5

would like to discuss some -- some of the testimony that6

was proffered by the Los Angeles Police Department.

7


Conditions that are drafted are normally held8

against the drafting party. That's recognized law and9

known by planning, zoning administrators. These10

conditions that were placed are, as I mentioned before,11

mishmash and then, in some instances, completely12

ambiguous.13

Namely, I'd like to focus in on the sound one under14

condition number 10. Condition number 10 states that15

the noise can't be audible beyond the subject premises16

despite the fact that it's known to be an entertainment17

venue with a DJ and a karaoke concept but has the18

qualifier that says that it has to follow the noise19

ordinance.20

We have prepared a sound report, and that engineer,21

that acoustical engineer, has degrees in that field,22

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtused scientific equipment to measure the decibel levels23

of both the street, neighboring uses and the Rusty24

Mullet. He also determined that certain code provisions25

116

¥

apply, and those code provisions namely as indicated in1

the report say that for commercial uses that anything2

that's audible beyond 2- and 500 feet would be3

considered a violation of that noise ordinance.4

The hearing officer has testified he's never gone5

beyond 150 feet. I mean, the report from September, as6

we can see on the video, he testified that he could7

clearly discern the music at 150 feet away above the8

ambient noise level of the street and the other noises9

from the surrounding uses.10

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt The scientific data that's provided by the11

acoustical engineer, that he stakes his reputation on12

this report and is willing to testify at further13

hearings or in court, has determined that the ambient14

noise level of Hollywood Boulevard in and around that15

area is 85 decibels, 85 decibels.16

The presumed decibel level in a commercial area,17

pursuant to the Los Angeles Municipal Code, is18

60 decibels. My client keeps a decibel reader on site19

and has done so in an effort to maintain appropriate20

noise levels. It has never exceeded the 85-decibel21

mark.22

So I ask you, if the ambient noise outside is23

85 decibels, and we -- we normally in 30-minute24

intervals take decibel readings and we have a sound25

117


engineer that makes scientific determination as to the1

sound levels in the area, that completely refutes the2

testimony that's been given to you today, is it that the3

officers are being objective or subjective? We don't4

We have -- All we have is the testimony of policeknow.5

officers that are saying in their opinion it is loud.6

But they don't talk about the other -- the other7

They don't have sound readings from thelocations.8

If they have, they certainlyambient noise level.9

haven't provided them to us in this record. The noise10

abatement program or unit has not issued a citation.11

And so what we're proffering is scientific data,12

and we are willing to do that, do any follow-up reports.13

In fact, we're doing more in-depth reports.

We weren't14


afforded the time, but we weren't able to get this sound15

report we're performing more as part of our16

investigation.17

But it's clear from the scientific data that it is18

impossible that the testimony given by the officer here19

today could hold water. And again, we have the20

testimony of the engineer who will stake his reputation.21

And I'm sure that the police officer, you know, thinks22

he heard it, but there is scientifically no way that23

that could be possible according to our sound engineer24

and according to a reasonable person.25

118¥

I've been to the location. I, as a normal person,1

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtand I would encourage the hearing officer to do the2

same, is to visit that stretch of Hollywood Boulevard3

and see if at 150 feet away you'd be able to hear or4

discern a specific location of music over the ambient5

noise that's in the area.6

With that being said, I'd like to go over some of7

the video data. But I would like to pose some questions8

of rebuttal because I think the video will attest to9

some of those questions. So at this point, I'd like the10

opportunity to either ask Officer Thompson some11

questions or present them to the hearing officer so they12

can be asked, however that process works.13

I'd like you to present14 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

them to me, and if Officer Thompson would like to15

respond.16

MR. AYAZ: Okay. Very well.17

Rony, could you leave the lights on for a second.Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

18

I hope you can read my scribble.19

Is this the narrative to20 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

our video?21

MR. AYAZ: No. This is the -- the questions I22

would like answered by Officer Thompson.23

Oh, the questions.24 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

MR. AYAZ: I'm -25

119¥

I'm going to take out those1 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

questions that I think would not be appropriate to ask2

the officer and those that wouldn't be relevant in terms3

of enforcement of the CUP conditions and related items.4

But those questions that are -- seem to be framed for5


around ABC and the conditions which they impose.6

If you agree that that's not within our7 MR. AYAZ:

jurisdiction, I'm be happy to -- I'm happy to not ask8

those questions.9

Well, I mean, we can ask --10 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

I can just circle some of those. But some of these are11

not within their jurisdiction, and you really need12

someone from Alcoholic Beverage Control to answer those13

questions.14

Luckily my partner worked there for some15 MR. AYAZ:

years as an investigator and a lawyer.16

Some of these we're having17 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

But some of thea little trouble reading them.18

questions -- some of these that I've "X"d out here19

request -- For the record, I'll allow you to read them20

into the public testimony.

21


However, I will say that Officer Thompson is not22

Some of theserequired to answer these questions.23

questions, probably you should be asking Alcoholic24

Beverage Control, such as definition questions. And25

120¥

then there is one that deals with is there a unit within1

ABC that takes decibel readings.2

MR. AYAZ: I meant the LAPD.3

HEARING OFFICER JAMES: Right. Some of these4

questions are not for LAPD.5

Well, that's intended to say LAPD. It's6 MR. AYAZ:

So if -- if the acronym changes, then I'd like7 not ABC.

to change it to LAPD.8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtAnd the ones that I've Xed9 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

What effects have been made to create aout such as ii10

if you can read thatpartnership between PD and Mullet, ii11

as a question or statement into the record, I'll call12

Officer Thompson up. And if he wishes to respond to13

that, he may.14

MR. AYAZ: Okay.15

So the officer doesn't get16 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

a program because these are planning conditions. These17

are conditions that were written by the zoning18

administrator.19

They're being enforced by the police20 MR. AYAZ:

department.21

HEARING OFFICER JAMES: Correct. I understand22

that.23

A couple of these I'm not quite sure about, but you24

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtcan ask them and read them into the record. And if he25

121

¥

chooses to answer1


So again, just for clarity purposes, the questions3

that are permissible, he will answer as I ask?4

5 HEARING OFFICER JAMES: I

Because it -- some of the questions will6 MR. AYAZ:

relate to the video, so I'd like to have his answer7

before I go to the video.8

Is that agreeable to you,9 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

Officer Thompson?10

It depends on the question and my11 MR. THOMPSON:

exact knowledge.12


HEARING OFFICER JAMES: Right. Okay. We'll play13

it by ear, just question by question, and he can answer14

15 it.


HEARING OFFICER JAMES: So be it. If not, we'll17

just read it into the record.18


Madam Administrator, where would you20 MR. THOMPSON:

like me to situate myself?21

I can move over because I need the22 MR. AYAZ:

video.23


The first question I have, and again,25 MR. AYAZ:

122

¥


1 I

And direct your questions2 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

to me, please.3

4 MR. AYAZ: Yes.

Again, for the record, you know, we're all here5

doing our jobs. And so there is some tough questions6

that I'm going to ask, and it's not a reflection on7

anything more than, you know, my job and trying to8

advocate for my client.9

With that being said, the first question that I'd10

like to read into the record is if Officer Thompson has11

ever exaggerated any facts in his reports or other12

documents as they relate to the investigation of the13

Rusty Mullet.14

You do not need to answer15 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtthat if you feel it's not necessary because I did cross16

that question out.17

MR. AYAZ: That's correct.18

That's okay, Madam Zoning19 MR. THOMPSON:

Administrator.20

With any kind of activity I perform, I try to -- I21

try to do so as precisely and accurately as possible.22

So everything in which I reported on with this23

investigation was done in that fashion where I attempted24

as much accuracy and precision with the investigations25

123

¥

that I possibly could.1

Thank you, Officer.Very well.2 MR. AYAZ:

I want to keep going, but with that being said, I'd3

like to bring the officer's attention to a report thatTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

4

was not included in the hearing file but that we were5

And it is a People of the State ofable to locate.6

California versus Robert Kilner essentially for the7

incident that occurred. I believe this incident8

occurred in February, and I'm going to get to the date9

here. February 7th, 2016. I'd like this to be included10

as part of the record, and it is, in fact, included on11

the flash drive that we provided to the hearing officer.12

So for purposes of this line of questioning or this13

part of the presentation, I'm just going to go down to14

the pertinent part of -- and I believe this is Officer15

Thompson's report, a narrative. And as you can see16

here, starting in this area (indicating), it indicates17

Officer Thompson is the person that is drafting this18

19 report.


And as we go down here, I will just skip through20

some of this because, as we've indicated in our brief,21

most of the investigation reports restate the previous22

investigations over and over again. And these were used23

primarily to send to ABC but in some circumstances to24

get the DA -- to turn over to the DA to charge an25

124

¥

employee or something like that.1

This particular event occurred on February 6th, and2

it was Officer Thompson as well as his partner, Officer3

Cross, which from the police reports he worked with4

quite a bit.5

And I want to draw your attention to the6

highlighted sections of the report.

This is the report7


in which Officer Thompson states that he heard the music8

at 150 feet away, yet he also heard people asking for9

change while he was inside.10

And namely in this report, he indicates that there11

was, at the time of his inspection, 40 to 50 people12

dancing, continually dancing within the premises.13 Now,

Dancing short-term bursts of dancingI will say this.14

do occur at my client's restaurant. We don't believe15

that the intent of the condition was that someone in a16

chair can bob their head or raise their hands or shake17

their hips for a second or two or a minute. It's a fun18

place to go.19

We believe that the condition was so that the place20

would not turn into a nightclub, which it is not.21 We

have testimony from the officers that there is no dance22

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt floor. There never has been. But nonetheless, I want23

to point out the section, and it doesn't look like it24

was color-copied. So there is a section in the report25

125

¥

where he indicates that there was 40 to 50 people1

dancing.2

Can I ask him if he remembers or3

4 HEARING OFFICER JAMES: No.

MR. AYAZ: No. Okay.5

So there's -- In this report, it says there's 40 to6

50 people dancing, and I would encourage, in the sake of7

time, since it wasn't color-copied that you review this8

And then I'll show you the video of the evening9 report.

and Officer Thompson and his colleagues entering the10

And I'd like you to make a determination forTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

11 premises.

yourself if whether in fact 40 or 50 people are dancing.12

We heard Officer Thompson say that he tries his13

best to be as precise as he can. You know, we just14

think that it's not being adequately reflected in his15

And so with that being said, we'll include16 reports.

that as part of the record. If there's any question or17

denial of a statement, we can fish through this.18

But I would like to now go to the video, and we19

have a couple of videos that coincide with the -- with20

the event here. So let me (showing video).21

So this is our front door. This is where people's22

IDs are checked, and I believe they come in in about23

if I'm not mistaken.12:45-ish,24

So this this video will show the time that the25

126


officers enter into the premises. So at this time,1

Officer Thompson is, pursuant to his report, walking to2

the east, north and west of the facility and able to3

hear the music at, again, 150 feet away, 50 feet away.4

These videos don't have don't have sound on them.5 So

these are just our surveillance videos.6

While we wait for Officer Thompson and his7

undercovers to come into frame, I'd like to point out8

something about the Jameson's video that we saw -- not9

the Jameson's -- pardon me -- the homicide video. That10

was our -- That was our video that we provided to LAPD11

as part of a request to provide those videos. That12

wasn't LAPD video. That was our video that we provided13

to assist the LAPD in identifying the individuals who

14


had been 86'd from our restaurant and which the manager15

had repeatedly told the LAPD officers that these guys16

are a problem. But nonetheless, that was another17

another way that we continue to work with LAPD.18

For the record, did you19 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

tell the audience and for the reporter here what you're20

viewing?21

We're viewing -- Right now we're viewing22 MR. AYAZ:

the surveillance video from the incident that occurred23

on -- or for the citations or reports that were issued24

It's about 11:44. I think we're going to25 on 2-6-2016.

127

¥

see Officer Thompson come into frame here.1

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtIs that you?2

That is Officer Thompson walking in at 23:44.3 I

believe that's Officer Cross behind him walking in,4

again, at 23:44. And I believe the two other5

individuals that are coming also are undercover police6

officers. One's a male, shaved head. The other one's a7

blonde female.8

And so this is just to show that, you know, this is9

consistent with the report, this is the time that they10

Just notate the time here. These individuals,11 came in.

undercovers, walk in. You see this I believe an12

undercover cop kind of bobbing his head as he's coming13

She's also an undercover police officer. So they14 in.

come in, and they -- and he's also an undercover police15

officer. So I think there was five undercovers in that16

night. And this is basically to show that they did17

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtenter the premises that evening.18

And then what we'll do now is we'll go to the19

actual video that shows them entering the premises and20

then the activity that's occurring. And it just21

contradicts the written report that there was 40 to 5022

people dancing in a sustained dancing. I mean, there23

as I mentioned, we do have -- my client's place is a fun24

place. We do have people, again, moving themselves a25

128¥

little bit, you know. We're not denying that.1

But as you can see, this is not a nightclub2

atmosphere. This could happen just as easily as in a3

TGI Friday's or a Buffalo Wild Wings or any other4

restaurant that you can imagine that has a night --5


nighttime activity. Again, I'm not going to bore you6

with all of this. It's part of the file. And I would7

encourage you to look. But again, I'm going to go to8

when they -- when they enter until when they leave so9

that you could make a determination for yourself whether10

or not there were 40 to 50 people dancing.11

From the looks of the video right now, again, it's12

about 11:21. It's pretty mundane. There's as you can13

see, open seating. Towards the lower end, closer to the14

bar fixture, there is people around. There is -- The15

walkways are fairly clear. And so it's not the16

atmosphere that is described certainly in the17

corresponding report.18

But let us get to when they enter the premises,19

So the officers are actually --which was at 23:41.20

They're going to be standing in this area here when they

21


walk in. The gentleman with the shaved head is going to22

make it. You see they're walking in now.23

I believe this is Officer Cross right there, the24

Officer Thompson'sgentleman with the shaved head.25

129¥

right here, if you can see my arrow, just looking1

outside. This is perhaps where he heard someone asking2

for change.3

As you can see here, these people are having a4

At 150 feet away would be -- yourconversation.5

eardrums would basically be exploding.6 But as you can

tell, there is people having conversations throughout7

the entire facility.8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtAgain, we're not denying the fact that people shake9

a little bit when they're at our restaurant. This is10

again Officer Thompson and that the report kind of11

speaks for itself. He says there's 40 to 50 people12

dancing. And I hate to bore you with this, but, you13

know, we believe that it was an exaggeration14

unfortunately.15

There -- You see people at the bar fixture kind of16

moving, but by no stretch of the imagination is this 4017

And again, if theto 50 people sustained dancing.18

officer -- at this point he's now signaling his other19

undercovers.20

At this point, you know, we haven't been provided21

all the dates and all the reports. And so we've been22

able to secure some video footage that contradicts the23

statement in the police report, but it has to put into24

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtquestion the rest of the reports because if they were25

130

¥

exaggerated in this report, they -- they taint the rest1

of the testimony.2

And again, I would ask the hearing officer to point3

out or look and see, tell us, we don't see 50 people4

Now, if thedancing or 40 to 50 people dancing.5

estimation was four to five, I would certainly6

understand that. But there is no 40 to 50 people7

sustained dancing. And that's in a report that was used8

to prosecute the manager of this location, that there9

was 40 to 50 people dancing while he was there, and this10

And we can't manufactureis that night.11 I mean, you

know, he's texting now. This is how undercovers12


communicate with uniform patrol officers.13

So we don't know -- I'm not speaking for him, but14

we do know that that's how they communicate, that it's15

very likely that he's communicating with uniformed16

officers as he indicates in the report that he does.17

Have them come in and, you know, effectively arrest the18

manager for the claim of 40 to 50 people dancing.19

And many of the people that are here today are seen20

on this video doing their jobs and trying to make a21

living and, you know, I don't understand how this turns22

into 40 or 50 people. I don't really consider that23

dancing myself. But, you know, I mean, you know, there24

is -- opinions vary on that -- those issues, I guess.25

131

¥


But -- And the purpose of this video is just to1

show that, one, things aren't as dire as they've been2

And we'll show you additional videos of3 put on.

surrounding uses which are identical if not worse than4

this.5

But two, you know, when -- when the the6

enforcement officers write their reports and are coming7

after a specific location, again, it's difficult.8 But

an exaggeration to that degree should raise concerns for9

members of the public, for business owners, for the10

business owners next to this location because you very11

likely could be next and just the business owners and12

these employees.13

I mean, I ask you, where is 40 to 50 people dancing14

He hasn't looked up from his phone foron this video?15

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt the last two minutes, and he's writing this report. And16

he looks up. People raising their hands. There is a17

group in the corner there, but that's not 40 to 5018

people.19

And again, it's not sustained. It's excitement and20

then it's over. It's a little shake, and then it's21

You see this this is the other22 twoover.

undercovers. I believe in the report that said they --23

there was no seating. And as you can see, there is24

And there is quite a bit of space in the area.seating.25

132

¥

This is a Saturday night at almost midnight.1

And luckily for us, this is one of the videos we2

I mean, some ofwere able to save based on the time.3

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtthese charges didn't come out. But we were able to4

secure this video.5

And some of the claims that remain today, you know,6

as we mentioned weren't in the report, and so, you know,7

we haven't been able to secure those videos if they even8

9 exist anymore.

But again, to the hearing officer, I would ask you,10

do you see 40 to 50 people dancing? And is it11

reasonable that this officer would make that wide of a12

gap on this report? I mean, you can he's even13

And, you know, by virtue of bobbingbobbing his head.14

his head, I mean, you know, is that dancing?15 I mean,

that's what the other people are doing.16

There's some people that, yes, they're a little bit17

But by no stretch of the imagination ismore active.18

this fun, continuous nightclub-type activity. There is19


no dance floor. The furniture is all there. All these20

people are sitting down. They're sitting down at21

tables. There's chairs. There's -- I just -- I would22

ask the hearing officer for the -- to have the police23

officer comment on this issue because, you know, that24

this -- they went after a manager.25

133

¥

And by the way, the city attorney, who I'm not sure1

if she's still here or not, she mentioned a bunch of2

But I could tell you that none of thosecase numbers.3

cases have been prosecuted, that there have been no4

misdemeanor charges held against any of the people that5

That the most of the cases havehave been arrested.6

been dismissed, including this one, once we told the

7


city attorney of the video.8

In fact, we -- our criminal attorney appeared in9

the court, and again, given the time constraints here,10

and vacations and things like that, if this matter11

should persist, the judge actually saved all of these12

cases until the outcome of this hearing, because she13

didn't understand how on Hollywood Boulevard people were14

getting tickets for music being too loud. And that was15

a statement that the court made, that a -- that a real16

judge made.17

But I would again -- I would implore the hearing18

officer to ask LAPD about how there could be such a19

discrepancy from hearing -- seeing 40 to 50 people dance20

continuously, how they can hear it 150 feet away but21

still hear someone ask for change, how these people are22

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtconversating as they are.23

The gentleman in the white hat, you know, he's --24

He was talking to her from ahe's talking to that girl.25

134

¥

distance a moment ago. You know, those two individuals,1

You know, if it was so loud that youthey're talking.2

could hear it at 150 feet away, how could people have3

conversations? How could you even order anything at4

that decibel level at 150 feet away?5

You know, they keep referring to hip hop and hip6

hop and hip hop and hip hop. Well, I think someone7

could probably testify from the location that this isn't8

necessarily a hip-hop-type bar. They don't preclude9

music but they play all kinds of music. It's actually10

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtkind of a different-themed restaurant.11

It's not, you know, necessarily hip-hop. You don't12

see -- And that's the first part of the video. And in13

fairness to Officer Thompson we have the second part14

where they're leaving. And again, I'd ask the hearing15

officer if this has been exaggerated to this degree,16

what else could be?17

This is -- This is just following -- You can see18

the time. This is just part two. They are still seated19

At this point, I believe Officer Thompson hashere.20

made his way over here somewhere, and there's - and21

like I said, we're not hiding. We're being transparent.22

There's a few people dancing.23

But again, it's, you know, buddies kind of lifting24

their hands up and then couple seconds later they stop.25

135


It's not continual dancing. It's not a nightclub. I1

don't think it's what the condition intent was because2

the following conditions talk about nightclub3

They haven't provided you one single iota4 promotions.

that they promoted as a nightclub.5

I will talk about that video in short order, which6

was a promotional -- excuse me -- not a promotional7

video, a video that was done by a film student that even8

the property owner and the property owner's9

representative here today could tell you that the shots10

that were showing people dancing were, in fact, at Toros11

The bar itself in that video is theLocos, another bar.12

bar from Toros Locos.13

We provided the video in the administrative file.

14


The whole thing was staged, as you can tell, from the -15

from the onset of the video. That was -- And had we had16

the time, and again, should this matter persist, we will17

find that person. And he was, I believe, a film student18

at UCLA? I believe that's -- and he wanted to do that,19

and it got picked up and it got put on YouTube.20

But there's no there's -- we're not promoting it21

as a nightclub, and there is no -- what you would --22

what you would generally see with nightclub promotions.23

The police officers would have been here with flyers,24

with shots of Facebook pages or their -- or their web25

136¥

page that shows that they're acting as a nightclub.1

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtBut again, I ask -- I keep looking at this video,2

and I wonder where the live entertainment is.3 A DJ

If -- If the police officers say that it's because the4

TVs are connected somehow, then he's flat out wrong.5

That's not what the code says.6

In fact, we have, from the Los Angeles Police7

Commission, a document which has been included in the8

file that says -- And they're the ones that issue the9

CES permit, by the way. They say that we don't need a10

I'm not sure if anyone from LAPD was aware11 CES permit.

of that.12

But we have a document dated January of this year.13

They came and did an inspection, and they -- they said14

that no CES permit was required, and should one be15

required to come apply for it. But this isn't live16

entertainment. The DJ playing the music, that's not the17

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt definition of live entertainment. That's not what the18

LAMC says, and that's not what the condition says. The19

conditions effects of this hearing -- of this -- You say20

we can have a DJ. We can have karaoke, and we can have21

live entertainment that's not amplified.22

So my follow-up question will be, what23

entertainment was observed by this officer because it24

might not fit the definition -- the ticket or violation25

137¥

that he's presenting or proffering as part of taking1

this -- this constitutional right away, this taking,2

which would be a take.3

But again, I don't know how much more of this video4

It's now been over half anyou would want to watch.5


hour of video time, nearing half an hour of video time.6

Do you see 40 or 50 people dancing?7 I mean

Just take your testimony.8 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

MR. AYAZ: Uh-huh. I just want to make sure9

that -- And the hearing officer may guide me.10 I want

the entire video included as part of the record.11 Do you

want to watch the entire video? Because this is what12

you're going to see for the entire video. You're not13

going to see much more than this as described --14

How long is the video?15 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

We got -- It's probably another five to16 MR. AYAZ:

17 six minutes.


So total of --19

Well, this video is it looks like20 MR. AYAZ:

it's 18 minutes. And then that video -- Oh, actually,

21


you know what? They're leaving it looks like, so maybe22

we can cut this short. Well, he's here23

Because you captured pretty24 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

much the essence of what you --25

138¥

MR. AYAZ: Yeah. I mean, I think -- You know, if a1

picture is worth --2

present. I think it's3 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

fair to say that we've seen the video --4

Right.5 MR. AYAZ:

-- playing, yes, and you6 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

can enter that into department testimony.7

MR. AYAZ: Yeah. I mean, if a picture is worth a8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt thousand words, I think this video is worth a million.9

There's no 40 or 50 people dancing, you know.10

And again, the reason we bring that up is because,11

you know, we have to do that for part of the12

administrative record, and we have to do our job. And13

because it does show that there appears to be, at the14

very least, an exaggeration, if not more than that.15

But again, we're not denying the fact that people16

are momentarily moving or have -- In fact, my client has17

now put up signs all over the business premises in a18

continued effort to comply, signs, again, that will be19

If you haveincluded herein in the record that say,20

happy feet, get out. No dancing" posted all over the21

22 premises.

But effectively, the condition says -- we believe23

the intent of the condition was not to turn it into a24

And we think that this video clearly showsTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtnightclub.25

139

¥

that we are not a nightclub, that people do1

intermediately dance, the same people that kind of2

jostle around for a few seconds and they're done. It's3

There is no dance floor.not nightclub activity.4

Again, I think we've beat this to the point where5

we don't have to go any more of it. So we'd like that6

submitted into the record, all of this submitted into7

the record, obviously all three of these videos.8

I think I'll skip the next question, but this is a9

question that you have circled, Hearing Officer, that I10

What exact type of live entertainment didcould ask is,11

Officer Thompson see, a description of the live12


entertainment so that we understand it.13

Will you refer to the date14 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

and time or just in general?15

MR. AYAZ: Just in general. They cited several16

times throughout most of the administrative reports, and17

so since he was one of the lead officers in preparing --18

You wish to answer that?19 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

Yes, I can answer that.20 MR. THOMPSON:

In condition number 11, it specifies live amplified21

And what is usually offered through theentertainment.22

DJs they employ is -- follows the definition of live23

amplified entertainment, something that would24

necessitate a cafe entertainment show permit according25

140

¥


to the commissioning investigation division being that1

the music is amplified, is organized and circulated in2

conjunction with a visual component with light show and3

the various disk jockeys that are featured at the4

establishment have followings and advertise their5

performances.6

I think on the video that you just watched, it7

portrayed DJ Vice on the television screens that circle8

the interior of the establishment. That is a typical9

feature at the premises, and social media, they10

advertise in similar fashion to nightclub venues where11

you'd see advertisements more or less resembling flyers12

or handbills denoting what DJ is performing on which13

nights out of the week.14

So Fridays typically feature DJ Nice.15 I guess

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt Mondays is DJ Missy Mow, flyers such as this, also16

But from what I've observedadvertised drink specials.17

on site when they are featuring a DJ is that it's18

consistent with live entertainment is consistent with19

something that requires a live entertainment show.20


Miss Hearing Officer, may I respond?22 MR. AYAZ:

23 HEARING OFFICER JAMES: Yes.

MR. AYAZ: That's not true. I mean, the conditions24

clearly state that we can have a DJ. Live entertainment25

141

¥

is defined in the Los Angeles Municipal Code and does1

not have a definition that says that a DJ that plays2

basically music videos is considered live entertainment.3

We don't have any idea what Los Angeles PoliceTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

4

But as part ofCommission person that he's talking to.5

the record, we provided a Los Angeles Police Commission6

investigation report that says that no CES permit is7

We can't just make up definitions as we go.required.8

The conditions of approval specifically allow DJs9

and karaoke and live entertainment. It just can't be10

amplified. A DJ, by his very nature, has to play11

amplified music. I mean, that's just common knowledge.12

A DJ doesn't play live. They play it through turntable13

or whatever the case may be.14

But to make the jump that somehow by associating it15

with lights and projection on a screen that that somehow16

morphs it from not qualifying as approval for the17

condition of a DJ is just unfounded in the law or the18

Los Angeles Municipal Code. So every condition that19


he's talking about that talks about live entertainment20

The definition doesn't fit.needs to be stricken.21

Will you move on to your22 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

next question?23

24 MR. AYAZ: Sure.

Our -- The questions are ABC conditions and the25

142

¥

enforcement thereof within the officer's jurisdiction.1

That's within ABC's2 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

jurisdiction --3

But you circled that.4 MR. AYAZ:

But officer will enforce5 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

those. Is that your question?6

I'm just asking if -- because in their

7 MR. AYAZ:


administrative reports that they've been sending to the8

department, they -- or that they provided or proffered9

here as part of the reason to revoke or add conditions,10

you know, there is a lot of talk about ABC conditions, a11

lot of talk about advertising, which is not part of the12

13 CUP.

So what I want to know is, is it within the14

Los Angeles Police Department's jurisdiction to control,15

enforce or otherwise be in charge of conditions placed16

by the state agency of the Department of Alcoholic17

Beverage Control?18

I'll let that go to a19 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

statement for the record, unless you choose to answer20

that.21

Just in the interest of time that you know it's22

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt very possible by 3:00 p.m., we will be asked to move23

from this room.24

MR. AYAZ: That's fine.25

143

¥

And I hope that we can1 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

finish the hearing and finish the testimony.2

We will -- We will present our case to3 MR. AYAZ:

the fullest that we can. Whether that goes to 3:00 or4

I mean, we're going to defend5:00 o'clock, that's -5

We -- We sat through --6 our case.

I'm just letting you7 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

know --8

That's fine, and I appreciate it.9 MR. AYAZ:

That we may need to know.10 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

Thank you.Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtThat's all I'm saying.11

So are we going to -- is he going to12 MR. AYAZ:

answer the question or not?13

No since it's an Alcoholic14 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

Beverage Control question, so no.15

MR. AYAZ: Okay.16

How many -- The next question which you circled,17

How many times have you or LAPD, if you know of,ii18

contacted ABC or submitted reports? ii19

Or submitted reports?20 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

MR. AYAZ: Uh-huh.21

I'm sorry. I should have22 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

crossed that one out. That's an ABC question.23

Unless you want to answer.24

So it's not a -- How many times has LAPD25 MR. AYAZ:

144


contacted ABC with their reports? That's a question for1

him.2

He might not have that3 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

information.4

We generally forward everything that5 MR. THOMPSON:

we do in the context of alcohol -- Alcoholic Beverage6

Control or establishment enforcement inspections to the7

Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.8

MR. AYAZ: Perfect.9

So -- And we've heard in previous testimony that10

they submitted some 14 to 20 reports of that nature.11 I

would just note it for the record that the Department of12

Alcoholic Beverage Control has not cited this location a13

I think I may have said that before.

single time.14


Has the LAPD or any of its related units taken15

decibel readings in and around that area?16

Yes, you can answer that.17 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

I can just attest to what my unit18 MR. THOMPSON:

has accomplished in this investigation, and we have19

20 never.

And so a follow-up, and it's not on21 MR. AYAZ:

here, but -- And again, I think the other question is,22

what evidence is there that the LAPD attempted to work23

with the Rusty Mullet before this revocation proceeding24

and to this extent. And that could be something that25

145¥

I think that's fine.could be answered later.1

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtWith regard to the video for the homicide that you2

showed us, that was shown today, can you just confirm3

that it was actually the Rusty Mullet that provided4

those videos to the LAPD as part of their cooperation5

with the investigation.6

I think you can answer7 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

that.8

Yes, I believe it was. The cameras9 MR. THOMPSON:

are located on the exterior of the Rusty Mullet10

11 premises.

And is an issue that the incident12 MR. AYAZ:

started at a different location than the Rusty Mullet.13

It had nothing to do with the Rusty Mullet.14

You don't need to answer15 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

MR. AYAZ: Well, then fine. I will say it started16

at a neighboring bar. Those -- It's within the report,17

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt and I don't know if you've read the report yet,18

Ms. Hearing Officer. But the actual incident occurred19

at a neighboring bar, actually next door.20

The victim and the -- the person who again21

ultimately was found to have been acting in self-defense22

and was justifiable homicide, not a murder as indicated23

on the notice, were inside Jameson's. They had an24

altercation at Jameson's. They came out. They had25

146

¥

their altercation, an unfortunate incident. And that1

person went back into Jameson's, dropped the bloody2

knife off in Jameson's, cleaned up in Jameson and left3

Jameson's, was never inside the Rusty Mullet.4

So when you will talk about murder, that never5


happened at our location. That's not associated with6

our location. It's not -- There is no nexus with that7

It just happened to be that it was occurring at8 event.

one of the many next-door neighbors and spilled out onto9

the corner of Las Palmas and Hollywood Boulevard.10

Again, I'm going to show with that -- with that11

being said, I want to show some of the neighboring --12

neighboring uses so that the hearing officer can13

understand, if she hasn't been out there already, that14

this location is not unique to the area either in design15

or in operation.16

These -- These photographs, again, show several of17

the other locations. This is Jameson's. Again, shots18

of the availability of alcohol, which is, you know,19

prevalent throughout that neighborhood, which by the20

way, we did work out a amicable resolution with the

21


Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control in terms of the22

outdoor advertising. So that doesn't exist anymore at23

the Rusty Mullet, they were not cited for that.24

This is a speaker that's pointed directly outside25

147

¥

from Jameson's, yet -- and we don't have speakers1

I'm sorry for the -- for thepointed outside.2 We

have speakers actually pointing outside. We don't have3

speakers pointing outside. You can see that the doors4

and the windows are open, just like at our location.5

This is up and down Hollywood Boulevard.6

HEARING OFFICER JAMES: I'm sorry. Would you7

clarify what location?8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt This is directly next door.9 MR. AYAZ:

Adjacent to --10 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

MR. AYAZ: The Rusty Mullet. This is Jameson's.11

This is Cabo Cantina. Again, you see all the windows12

You see the number of people walking on the13 are open.

14 street.

With this picture, I'd like to talk about the15

loitering -- the loitering claims. The condition states16

that, you know, the applicant or the permittee will not17

allow loitering on property under the direct control of18

the permit holder.19

Hollywood Boulevard, as far as I know, is not20

within the control of my client. Hollywood Boulevard is21

a public right of way. People have a constitutional22

right to walk and stand on the streets. There is no23

such thing as a loitering ticket.24

It's interesting, the law of loitering requires anTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

25

148

¥

intent to either panhandle or do something. It's1

interesting that in the -- in the hearing officer's2

reports, that you don't see a single ticket for3

loitering to any member of the public or the people that4

are standing there. But you see them issuing citations5

and making claims that loitering is a basis for the6

revocation.7

Now I ask you, how are we supposed to control8

Hollywood Boulevard, a public right of way, particularly9

when it's now been proven that there is in fact a bus10

stop right in front of the location and there is11

thousands of people that walk that Hollywood Boulevard12


every day? I mean, the Walk of Fame, the stars.13

There's no way that we can control that area.14 We

do our best. Again, as I mentioned, we've hired15

additional security. We've hired the motorcycle cops.16

We've done all that stuff. But there is no way in good17

conscience that anyone, either from LAPD or otherwise,18

can say that this -- this -- that the Rusty Mullet is19

unique in that it has loiterers.20

Hollywood Boulevard is known for people on the21

streets sitting and playing music and loitering and not22

being there for any particular reason except for being23

And some of these videos will just kind of showthere.24

you some of -- some of that type of activity. And I25

149

¥


ask -- This is -- This is the Rusty Mullet as we go1

through here (showing video). Now, this is -2

Could you state the date3 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

and time.4

MR. AYAZ: 11-28-15. You can see this is5 Now,

this is in front of Jameson's. You can tell the music6

So, I mean, that's just fromcompletely changes.7

business to business the audio changes. You really8

can't pin the entire noise level on one use or the9

other.10

This -- This video is Las Palmas and Hollywood11

Boulevard. This video was shot recently. I would point12

to the activity on the street. I would point to the13

drum beat in the background. This is walking the same14

direction that Officer Thompson stated he went 150 feet15

Transcript of Public Hearin and could hear the Rusty Mu

July 28 2016.txtThis is what -- This16 et.

And Officer Thompson said in thatis what happens.17

video that, you know, you don't see anybody else18

standing there around. Well, look at this video,19

Hearing Officer.20 As you can see --

What time and what date are21 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

we looking?22

This video is about 10:30,23 MR. AYAZ:

11:00 o'clock.24

Is that p.m.?25 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

150

¥

Yeah, yes, yes.1 MR. AYAZ:

HEARING OFFICER JAMES: What's the date?2

MR. AYAZ: 11-28-2015. This was as a result of one3

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt of Officer Thompson's reports that he could hear4

150 feet away. As you see walking back, look at the5

sheer number of cars. Look at the people.6 You cannot

hear anything coming out of the Rusty Mullet or7

Jameson's or Cabo, for that matter. What you hear is8

cars, drum beats.9

And you can see the sheer size of this10

intersection, that all the things that happen in this11

intersection are somehow Rusty Mullet's fault? It's12

unfathomable to pin it all on the Rusty Mullet.13 I mean,

there's people standing all up and down the street.14

There is a motorcycle parked there. There is cars15

everywhere.16

You know, how can you attribute everything to this17

one location for a location that's located in the18

entertainment of the City of Los Angeles at the corner19


of Las Palmas and Hollywood Boulevard? These are just20

more examples of this -- the type of sound that's in21

this area that -- that they're dealing with.22

This is the same night, Hearing Officer.23 I mean,

it's -- There is no way that -- that this can be24

validated that -- This is amplified music, you know.25 I

151

¥

mean, this is what I mean, this is a tattoo shop that1

we've been constantly telling PD about when they tell us2

about our music with a loudspeaker outside. This is3

directly across the street. And this is later in the4

You can see traffic has kind of died down.5 evening.

But again, there is no way -- and science6 I

mean, the personal opinion and subjective opinion of a

7


police officer I appreciate, but it can't stand the test8

of scientific data.9

And I think, as I mentioned at the outset of my10

presentation, we believe unfortunately that there is --11

there is a hit list that has been created by city or12

And we believe13 city agencies or quasi-city agencies.

that there is a concerted effort by individuals or14

groups to -- for whatever reason do not like this15

business, do not like the operator. And they are doing16

whatever they can to pile on these type of claims when17

clearly the -- it's not the -- it's not the premises.18

It's the area.19

And instead of sending resources to give my client20

tickets for free coffee, which doesn't make any sense21

because the condition doesn't require it to say it on22

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtthere, it says, by way of example, anyone that can read23

can see that that's what it says, that free coffee is24

available only before, you know, 30 minutes before25

152

¥

closing.1

These aren't good uses of resources. They should2

be cleaning up the streets, not going into this business3

and giving them tickets for -- for not having coffee and4

for noise that is not unusual or not different from any5

of the surrounding uses that are at the location.6

Again, we'll make this part of the record, the - the7

entertainment permit of --8


Thank you, Officer.10 MR. AYAZ:

And I think we're going to submit to you a revisedTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

11

brief that includes all of the additional exhibits.12

Part of those exhibits include the census tract that13

shows the number of licenses up and down the street.14

I'd like to talk about the -- that some of the15

One of the officers indicated twomajor crimes as well.16

But in the -- in the paperwork that was given to17 rapes.

us, there was only one rape, and it occurred outside of18

the Rusty Mullet.19

The report, if you read it, indicates that an20

individual was drinking all day. They took a bus,21

Hollywood and Vine. They ended up at Jameson's then at22

Rusty Mullet. They met someone at Jameson's. They went23

to Rusty Mullet. Later on they allegedly were raped.24

I ask you, how is the - how is either Jameson's or25

153


the Rusty Mullet responsible for this heinous alleged1

crime? It didn't happen on the property. It didn't2

happen as -- There is no indication that the Rusty3

Mullet did anything wrong. They never came into -- And4

if they did, they didn't include it in the report, which5

is why I'm saying this. They never interviewed anyone6

from the Rusty Mullet. They know that we have a7

security camera and HD cameras for that fact as you can8

see on that homicide or justifiable.9

But none of that stuff ever happened. None of10

these crimes ever came to fruition. None of these11

citations have resulted in a conviction of any of the12

employees. You're convicting -- You're condemning them13

before they're convicted.

There's been no conviction of14


any of these things.15

That's why the -- That's why the city attorney's16

office can tell you, I have convicted the manager.17 I

have convicted the bartender. They haven't. And I'm18

pleading with you that you cannot condemn a business19

before they've been convicted of anything.20

Now, if the hearing officer -- And again, I've21

heard a lot of testimony that they -- they want -- they22

try to work with us. They reach out to us. Where?23

When? We -- We would want nothing more than to work24

with LAPD to resolve these issues. They've asked us to25

154¥

do certain things. We've always done them when they've1

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt come in.2

We -- Myself -- We'll make myself available3 We

to the police department to work out anything that we4

can with the police department in terms of5

implementation of additional things that we can do.6

We've included our contract for you to review. We've7

included our first-year review with an outside security8

consultant company. We have them here today. They will9

testify.10

11 THE REPORTER: Excuse me.

12 MR. AYAZ: Sure.

I have to charge my machine.13 THE REPORTER:

MR. AYAZ: Take a short14

How long will that take?15 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

16 THE REPORTER: Just a minute.

Take a one-minute break.17 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt (A recess is taken.)18

You may continue.19 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

I know everyone is tired today, so I'm20 MR. AYAZ:

going to wrap this up with probably the hardest part of21

the presentation, and I'll make it as quick as possible.22

Again, as I've mentioned to you before, in working with23

the City and Planning Department, ZA's office, and the24

Police Department, and as a person myself of color, as a25

155¥

person with family in law enforcement, it's very1

difficult for me to talk about this.2

But again, for purposes of creating the record, we3

also have to say that we don't -- race may be an issue4

here. The race of our patrons. And again, we have to5


put it on the record so it's no disrespect to anyone.6

There was an incident that occurred that's part of the7

It's an assault in September of 2000, I believerecord.8

15, where an off-duty Hollywood police officer that was9

And that off-duty police officer wasassaulted.10

assaulted after he left the Rusty Mullet and was walking11

home to or walking to a Motel 6 up the street.12

I would really encourage, and it's part of our13

electronic file, to review this report. There is going14

to be testimony today from people that were there that15

This individual police officer, who by the reportday.16

does work in Hollywood, was removed from the Rusty17

Mullet because he used a racial epithet. He called18

African Americans the N word while he was inside of the19

premises and while he was outside the premises continued20

his behavior with apparently four individuals standing

21


outside, which later on assaulted him.22

Since that day there has been an incredible spike23

in enforcement at this location.24

And again, without the ability to do the proper25

156¥

investigation, we want to put that on the record as the1

possible reason for the targeted effort to shut this2

You'll hear testimony of that evening.place down.3

Additionally, there is disturbing video, which I4

would like to play, from a quasi-governmental agency5

that basically -- well, I think I'll let the video speak6

for itself.7

But it's a video from the BID, the Business8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt Improvement District. This one's particularly the9

Sunset and Vine BID that works very close with the10

Hollywood BID and the homeowner's association.11

And this also is one of the premises for our12

reasons for bringing up race. And so I want you to13

listen very carefully. And I'm not going to play the14

whole video, but I think then15

Before you start, excuse16 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

Can you state the time and the date and what we're17 me.

looking at.18

We're looking at a March 17th Sunset BID19 MR. AYAZ:

board meeting. And we're looking at a video that was20

shot by a member of the public.21

In this video they're discussing various topics to22

include the corner of Las Palmas and Hollywood Boulevard23

and the surrounding area. Statements are made which are24

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt discouraging, at least to me.25

157

¥

And again, since we haven't had months and months1

of time, which we would -- we would normally take, this2

is the reason that we're bringing this into the record3

to substantiate our concerns that race perhaps is part4

of the underlying issue in this matter.5

I'm going to start it a little6 It starts at 4:41.

bit early.7

(Playing video.)8

Let me play that again because I think9 MR. AYAZ:

it's being missed. I don't know how to control your10

volume here.11

Can you put the microphone.12 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:


I think it's important to hear.13 MR. AYAZ:

(Playing video.)14

Do you want me to repeat it for you?15 MR. AYAZ:

I'll just read it into the record.16

Please.17 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

For those members of the public, we'll18 MR. AYAZ:

be setting up a website where guys can see all this19

stuff. But essentially it's a member of a20

quasi-governmental agency is reading what they believe21

or he believes to be an adequate description of the22

neighborhood and what he says is that the makeup of the23

area, the customers is mostly minority, brown and black.24

And it's not the place -- it's not the - it's not,25

158

¥


It's not the place where the -- Lindsay1 excuse me.

Lohans of the world won't be visiting the Rusty Mullet,2

basically.3

Is that what he said?4 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

That's exactly what he said.5 MR. AYAZ:

Exactly what he said?6 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

That's exactly what he said. He said7 MR. AYAZ:

that minorities, it's mostly minorities, brown and black8

of lower income strata. And not the place that the9

Lindsay Lohans of the world will visit the Rusty Mullet,10

specifically.11

That being said, that's why we're bringing the race12

And with that, obviously I'd like to close13 issue up.

out by thanking the hearing officer as well as the LAPD.14

I would hope that the hearing officer is not swayed by15

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt the size of the hearing file but the contents. And to16

understand that this area is, in fact, an entertainment17

district and the business is being targeted.18

And I want to make a promise to the employees and19

the members of the public that are here to support this20

that the ownership and the management of this location21

are dedicated to fighting the good fight.22 We are going

to see this thing through.23

And we also want to invite at this stage an open24

dialogue between ourselves and the Los Angeles Police25

159

¥

I myself personally will make myself1 Department.

available to the Los Angeles Police Department if they2

feel that they can't get through to ownership.3

But it's been my experience that they're veryTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

4

They've done everything I've asked them to5 proactive.

do. They've gone beyond and above trying to mitigate6

these issues.7

So again, I want to end it with an open door8

And I implore the hearing officer to make thepolicy.9

right decision here and vote to deny the revocation of10

the Rusty Mullet CUP.11

And I'd like to add this to the record officially,12

additional documentation for the record.13

HEARING OFFICER JAMES: And the documentation is?14

The documentation is the report from the15 MR. AYAZ:

40, 50 people dancing. The report that happened on, in16

February 2016. The video we basically watched earlier17

today with Officer Thompson, in which our manager was18

And the follow-up documents that were listedarrested.19


there. Exhibit K, which the -- you already have, the20

The Rusty Mullet first year review from21 reporter.

Southwest Traffic which is a professional security22

company which shows a review of their first year.23

And the last item is actually your nuisance24

abatement program PowerPoint that you crafted back in25

160

¥

1 2008.

And we just, with that I'd like to close out.2

Unless Rick, do you have anything? No? Thank you for3

your patience today, appreciate it.4


Staff, can you see6

Also, everything is on the computer in

7 MR. AYAZ:


terms of our individual videos and things like that.8

And I also believe we gave you, we gave you a flash9

drive as well; correct?10

Did you receive a flash11 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

drive?12

I don't have a flash drive.13 MR. GIRON:

Well, I have 3 floating around then.14 MR. AYAZ:

I'll submit this for the hearing officer. Planning has15

their own. There it is right there.16

This one is mine.17 MR. FARGO:

We will get a copy of the18 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

We've asked for it.transcript; correct? So it will be19

available for the public as well as our recorded20

testimony here today.21

So free of charge to the city?22 MR. AYAZ:

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt Of course, we'll provide it. Very well.23

Then if you can please just send me the letters24

that we have not received. Thank you.25

161

¥


We're now into the public testimony for the general2

public.3

And how many people here by show of hands are4

asking to have testimony? All right. That's5

significantly down from the number I think of speaker6

cards that we have, correct, Tim?7

MR. FARGO: I think so.8

I think we can keep it at9 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

two minutes as I originally said.10

I was going to move it to one minute because we hadTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

11

about 30 plus people who wished to speak.12 So you want

to call them?13

If you're here and you want to start, I won't use14

If you can start lining up andthe word queuing up.15

that way we'll move this along.16

The first 3 are Luminita Roman, Matthew17 MR. FARGO:

Mazzko and Justin Stines.18

You can actually have a19 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

20 seat.

For the record, you can have a seat at the -- if21

there is a chair there, at least two people in.22

And for the record, can you state your name and23

last name, spelling it.24

25 MS. ROMAN: Sure.

162


My name is Luminita Roman, L-U-M-I-N-I-T-A, my last1

I live at 1714 North McCadden Place.2 name R-O-M-A-N. I

live at the Rubix. Our property actually goes all the3

way from McCadden Place to Las Palmas. It's roughly4

between Hollywood Boulevard and Yucca.5

Unfortunately for us, nobody has mentioned at this6

hearing about the implication of all the entertainment7

including this particular location that has upon the8

residents.9

There are hundreds of people who live around that10

Our apartment complex has 260 units.11 area.

Then there is the Jefferson and Hollywood which has12

I have witnessed firsthand peopleabout 270 units.13

coming from those places and, especially from the Rusty

14


And they're just loitering around after theMullet.15

No matter if they have toilets inside, all Icloseout.16

know is I witness people peeing in our bushes. They're17

yelling, they're screaming, they're vomiting on our18

walls.19

When I ask them to just please be respectful, that20

we're trying to get some sleep, excuse my language,21

they're saying, This is Hollywood. What you're22 F-U.

expecting?23

The fact is, Hollywood is changing. A lot of24

residential are moving into the Hollywood entertainment25

163¥

So right now our lives are greatly affected.district.1

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtAnd if I were to have a say, I would just have you2

guys come and live at night there to see the noise, the3

loitering, yelling and screaming, fighting, crime. And4

all the others.5


And I would mention, if you have something prepared7

in writing that you would like to submit, maybe part of8

your statement, you can submit that today for the record9

also.10

Also, in case you didn't have enough time to11

complete your statement. And you have something12

prepared, you can submit it.13

I don't have it with me.14 MS. ROMAN:

Thank you. I appreciate it.15

Matthew Mazzko, M-A-Z-Z-K-O.16 MR. MAZZKO:

And I've worked in Hollywood for five and a half17

And I -- I'm familiar with that freeway.Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

And18 years.

the fact that everybody keeps throwing everything on19

Rusty Mullet. It's Hollywood. People are walking20

around. Everybody is going around. It's the busiest21

Stuff is going tointersection like was said earlier.22

happen. It doesn't have to deal with the bar. It's23

just getting a bad rep and I think it's just people need24

to open their eyes and see that it's just -- it's a25

164

¥

nationwide thing and it's a state thing. It's not a1

specific business that's causing everything. It's the2

people that are around and it's going to happen.3

And I feel like they've been in compliance with4

everything that they've been told.

The people --5


everybody here works for the company or is regular, and6

supports the company. That's why we're coming here with7

30 plus people showing up at 8:00 in the morning because8

we believe in this place and we feel like it's being9

unjust and, you know, I'm keeping it sweet and short.10

Just for clarification,11 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

you, you say, lived in the area for five and a half --12

I worked in Hollywood for five and a13 MR. MAZZKO:

half years. I worked at our other bar.14


Justin Stines, S-T-I-N-E-S.16 MR. STINES:

I'm actually the manager over at the Rusty Mullet.17

I've lived in Hollywood for seven years. I've been18

there since day one.19

Couple points I wanted to bring up where on20

July 22nd, actually last Friday, vice came by and they

21


actually said we were doing a fabulous job. They didn't22

We kind of went over everythinggive us any citations.23

that we've changed for them.24 We are trying to create a

partnership.25

165¥

So I'm not sure why they said that they gave us any1

citations because no one was arrested and I did speak to2

them about that.3

Also, two weekends before that on a Friday night, I4

talked to Sergeant Munoz on the phone. He also said we5

were doing a great job. He was here earlier. We6

basically talked over the phone about some ways that we7

can kind of help with PD and work as a partnership.8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtWe've closed side of the windows for them so the noise9

isn't too bad. We talked about the loitering and how we10

can approach it and obviously we put multiple security11

guards on, trying to get people to move from Hollywood12

Boulevard.13

The hardest thing to do is to tell someone to move14

off a public sidewalk.15

We also talked about the dancing. I went up ahead16

and put up 12 "no dancing" signs. It's another one17

that's hard when you speak to somebody and you tell them18

they ask you about freedom ofiiYou can't dance, ii19

20 expression.

We're in an entertainment district. So obviously21

there's going to be sound all throughout Hollywood.22 You

cannot walk down the street without hearing cars or the23

other bars.24

And like I said, we just feel like we're not beingTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

25

166

¥

treated fairly because the other bars, we know the1

managers and they're not getting the same citations as2

We were constantly just getting these citations3 us.

week after week and I have sat with them and I have4

tried to create a partnership to make things better.5

And I know the staff is really uneasy and scared.6

This is my family. So I'm so happy everybody showed up.7

And that's what I have to say.8


MR. LONG: Hello. My name is Mace Long, M-A-C-E,10

I'm working security at Rusty Mullet for about11 L-O-N-G.

the past year now. The biggest thing that I've noticed

12


is that with the cops complaining there is too many13

resources allocated to the Rusty is that I think that a14

lot of the pressure off of everybody if we sat 2 people15

at a corner and scare them away, everybody that's out16

there loitering, causing problems, fighting, all that17

good stuff is just regulars that are out there that18

aren't there at any of the bars. All of them, drug19

dealers, prostitutes. Just homeless people that can20

easily be scared away, just in the presence of security21

right there. It works on Friday and Saturday nights22

when we have our southwest sector cops there. Nobody23

seems to come around right there.24

So if we can have the LAPD out there, they wouldn't25

167

¥


have to call anywhere else to bring more resources over1

because they'd be sitting right there.2

Also, I've learned through resources that there is3

$94 million a year going to the budget of police and the4

Metro station. And I think that's ridiculous.5 Put a

little bit of that into having some police on the corner6

of Las Palmas and Hollywood. Again, that's mine.7


Hello, I'm Perla, B-O-W-D-E-N. I've9 MS. BOWDEN:

worked at the Rusty Mullet for two and a half years now,10

and I worked in the bar and restaurant industry for11

I feel incredibly luckyabout ten years, a little over.12

to work at the Rusty Mullet not just because it's how I13

make a living but because we are a really diverse group14

of people and we welcome diversity at our bar. The15

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtmajority of the people who come in are either people16

from the neighborhood or a lot of tourists from all17

around the world. We don't discriminate there, and we18

have a fun environment for a reason, because it is19

Hollywood.20

When my mom and my family comes into town, this is21

where I take them because this is where we feel safe.22

My family is aware that a random act of violence could23

occur outside the bar on Hollywood Boulevard just like24

it could occur outside of any bar in any city in any25

168

¥

state when we travel or go anywhere.1

And you assume that risk when you're out at any2

place out in the world unfortunately. And my family and3

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtpeople that I know would never associate that or blame4

the Rusty Mullet as an unsafe environment. It's home to5

a lot of us and it's a place that I feel safe bringing6

my family and the people I know into as a safe7

environment overall with the idea that you are on8

Hollywood Boulevard.9

With that said, I truly believe that the Rusty10

Mullet is a wonderful addition on Hollywood Boulevard11

and to the community as a whole. That's what I have to12

13 say.


MR. FIORELLO: Good afternoon. My name is Joseph15

Fiorello, last name spelled F-I-O-R-E-L-L-O.16 I

currently am the head of security over at the Rusty17

Mullet.18

In addition to that job, I have responsibilities in19


my life where I'm a senior risk manager and business20

consultant to over 30 hospitality companies in Southern21

California as well as a transportation company in the22

City of San Diego.23

My training came from one of the biggest insurance24

companies in the world. I've worked on Wall Street in25

169

¥

the financial district, and I fully understand1

commercial general liability, vicarious liability,2

employer's liability, employer practices liability. And3

I take all of that knowledge and all of that experience,4

and we put that into our security program.5

In February 2015 we had an immediate crackdown in6

terms of security. We fired and got rid of multiple

7


people that worked for us that just weren't up to par.8

We enforced new dress codes. We enforced a new security9

time to close the doors at 1:30 and have everybody out10

by at least 1:45. We hired Southwest Security, a11

representative who will speak on what they do.12

I have seen a dramatic increase in vice activity13

since September 4th, 2015 when an LAPD officer was14

Since then, we have been, for lack of aassaulted.15

better term, you know, harassed by LAPD vice unit. They16

come in with tactical force and expert precision.17 I

know exactly who the team members are. I know what cars18

they drive because that's how often they're around.19

You know, some of Officer Thompson's statements20

regarding Rusty ownership attending the city meetings,21

the meetings of his peers fixing the issues, which is22

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt the direct opposite of what Captain Palka stated. Palka23

said that Rusty had not made any attempts to work with24

LAPD. False. I've been in a meeting. Tried to talk to25

170

¥

them and they came -- I believe it was Sergeant Munoz,1

They came for about twoPalka and somebody else.2

minutes and left. They didn't have time to talk to us.3

When I spoke with Lieutenant Baez, the predecessor4

to Officer Munoz, he made it very distinct, he made it5

very distinct that the sound area had to be 150 feet.6

That's well past any area.7

If you were in -- If you were in the bar and you're8

able to hear anything of that level where you can hear9

150 feet away, you have hearing problems. None of our10

It's just outrage.Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtemployees have hearing problems.11

And then the fact that we cater to a lower income12

individual is completely false. Okay. Our base prices13

are nearly 40 percent above our competitors. We're not14

catering to anyone at that crowd.15

And I don't know, you know, the person speaking is16

talking about lower social economic status. That's17

We don't discriminate, but - but at the same time, we18

don't go after anyone like that. And we do not allow19

that element into our bar.20

I'm just appalled at what's been happening. I'm21

I have myself beennervous every time I go to work.22

ticketed. It's unfair. And I urge you to implore some23

If you look around,reasoning with your decision today.24

all these people, for the most part, live check to25

171


You know, this is our only source of income.check.1

Some of them have families. They feed their kids with2

the money they make from the company.3 I want you to

take that into account. Thank you.4


MS. BATTISTONI: Hi. I'm Kate Battistoni,6

B-A-T-T-I-S-T-O-N-I, one of the managers at the Rusty7

I have been arrested for over-serving anMullet.8

intoxicated patron. I'm going to go quick. I have a9

lot to say.10

Two individuals came in. The whole occurrence11

happened in ten minutes. They walked in, got through12

Two bright red-head girls that everyone13 security.

noticed came to the bar.

Ordered a Scooby Snack.14


Left -- Went to the bathroom. Left the bar. Got taken15

out of another bar which they were then served at and16

then I was ticketed for 10 minutes. Then I was not17

given any information. Any question I asked they did18

not answer, and they were aggressively taking me out.19

And then when I got outside, there is three cop20

About five cops around me.cars, one undercover.21 I am

not a criminal, and I was treated like a criminal. I'm22

treated like a criminal every time I'm at work. All my23

family is treated like criminals when at work, and we're24

so afraid to actually do our job. I am more afraid that25

172

¥

if someone is going to have a breathalyzer.1

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtI've been called asshole on a tip because I'm like2

I can't serve you. I'm sorry. You're okay, but I'm so3

afraid that a cop is gonna You might have had a4

I am so more afraid of thesedrink. I don't know.5

cops than any other murder. And we -- at the Rusty6

Mullet, the murders, the rapes you're saying, the grand7

theft auto, the car was not stolen out of our company.8

I swear that is not the Rusty Mullet. That is years9

before I was born. Los Angeles crime. Hollywood crime.10

What you see behind me is a family. It's a company11

that is trying to give, everybody knows your name type12

of bar. People come there and have their daily chats13

We became friends with our regulars.with us. I've14

been there three years. Most people have been there15

three years. Why? Because we love the bar. We love16

the staff. We love the owner, and we love the manager,17

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt Justin Stines.18

We are a huge family that I cannot imagine being19

closed. The day that closes it's going to be a very sad20

day for me. And we're in front of the other bars on the21

We've all become a united front to helpblock.22

We are here for each other. We're here forHollywood.23

We all want to stand because if we do good,that block.24

they do good. I love Jameson's. I love Cabo. Those25

173¥

are all my friends. We are friends with everybody.1 We

do this together, and we're trying to provide some2

If you take that down, what isHollywood entertainment.3

Hollywood going to be? It's going to be bums in the4

street in front and empty storefronts like you see next5


door. You take us down, it's just going to be a corner6

of emptiness, and guess that is going to happen, piss7

and bums.8

Good afternoon.9 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

My name is Luis Ramirez, L-U-I-S,10 MR. RAMIREZ:

I work for Southwest Traffic Corporation11 R-A-M-I-R-E-Z.

where the company is currently doing security consulting12

and traffic management for Rusty Mullet.13

We've been here at that location since May of 2015.14

Specifically to address any of the issues that were15

brought up throughout the day.16

It's a very unique situation there on Hollywood and17

You have a very heavily trafficked areaLas Palmas.18

On top ofwhich is the Hollywood entertainment area.19

that within 500 feet you have two of the biggest parking20

So a lot of the issues that you heard read today

lots.21


is the big open containers, things like that, urination.22

A lot of it tends to originate from the sheer amount of23

traffic that comes through there. One for walking and24

two for parking vehicles.25

174

¥

As far as what we do for them, we actually are the1

countermeasure for every one of the things the company2

has been accused of. Things such as loitering,3

fighting, even the open containers when I see them walk4

out of another location, or I instruct our other5

officers to make sure that even if it doesn't originate6

with us we stop the problem right then and there the7

moment it's apparent.8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtSo we actually have taken on that standpoint. The9

owner and the manager himself actually initially10

On top ofapproached us about starting this service.11

that, they actually got us connected with all the local12

bars actually to do their service for the entire block.13

So our whole focus as a company has actually been14

to clean and privately assist in helping mitigating all15

these problems that you typically associate with16

Hollywood Boulevard and with night life.17

So a lot of that has already been taken into effect18

as of a year ago. Why the citing is still continuing19

still boggles a lot of people including my staff,20

because the time we're there we have nobody in front of21

the location, and yet we hear a complaint about22

loitering, and it blows our mind. There is bus stops.23

It's a right to pass forIt's a public sidewalk.24

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt everybody. So we are there actively working, trying to25

175

¥

mitigate everything that's currently happening.1


3 MR. McGOWAN: My name is Tom McGowan,

I've been working at Rusty Mullet for4 M-C-G-O-W-A-N.

about six months now, and I've become good friends with5

a lot of people. And I've learned one thing about the6

Rusty Mullet is that we have a very diverse employees7

and people that come in.8

In terms of not being a good business partner to9

the City of Hollywood, the majority of staff is not just10

employees at the Rusty Mullet. We have actors. We have11

We have writers, singers. That's why people12 musicians.


come to Hollywood.13

On top of that, the large majority of our customers14

To say that we facilitate a place that15 are tourists.

encourages crime is simply not true.16

When I'm inside the Rusty Mullet I feel very safe.17

I trust in our security and I feel safe knowing that18

they have our backs. That's why we're all here because19

we have each others back.20

In terms of the area, I live two blocks away from21

the Rusty Mullet on Whitley and Yucca Street. And22

that's about a two-minute walk from the Rusty Mullet.23

The majority of problems that I see happening in24

Hollywood aren't from the corner of Hollywood and Las25

176

¥


It's from the amount of homeless peoplePalmas.1

wandering the area.2

Any type of public urination, that kind of thing3

The majority of it isthat I would see going on.4

homeless people. Maybe there is a larger problem going5

It's not fair to us as staff and as people who live6 on.

in the area in the City of Los Angeles and Hollywood to7

ask them to work and feel targeted against when I'm8

trying to do my job.9

The reason that artists, musicians, singers10

writers, there is a lot of people doing a lot of things,11

but the reason that type of thing is possible is because12

of the Rusty Mullet. We can work and live in the city13

and do the things that we want to be able to do and14

what's been happening recently is impeding upon our15

Transcript of Public Hearin ability to make a living an

July 28 2016.txt to go to work and feel

dg16

safe. And I hope that the outcome is the right one.17

Thanks.18

MS. DONOVAN: Hi. My name is Colleen Donovan,19

I've worked at Rusty Mullet the past20 D-O-N-O-V-A-N.

And it's been a wonderful experience. I've met21 year.

some of the best people in Los Angeles there.22 Customers

and especially the staff.23

I was there the night, I don't know why I'm24

I was there the night that the officer was,emotional.25

177

¥

It was an off-duty officer.came to the Rusty Mullet.1

My co-worker was serving him. She came over to me and2

she said, That man is like super racist. He just asked3

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt me why there is so many niggers here. He said that,4

and he said it again towards security and then again.5

And he went outside and apparently they went up to him6

and they're asking him for a cigarette or something.7

And he started getting verbal and said a racial comment8

even to them. Came back inside. He comes back inside9

and we asked him to leave because we can't have that.10

We're a public wonderful bar. We don't want the11

reputation of being racist like that. We asked him to12

leave. He got his food to go. And security told him,13

and he was upset because he said, I'm a cop.14

And we're like, "Okay. Well, then you probably15

shouldn't be talking like that, and you probably16

shouldn't have that state of mind.17

We asked him to leave, and then we told him not to18

walk home because, you know, you upset people and he19


did. And that's when he got assaulted. Within minutes20

the most cops I've ever seen came to Rusty Mullet and21

just attacked us. And anytime we ever needed them22

otherwise, took them like an hour.23

I feel like we'veIt just since then, it's been -24

been attacked because of that. We're not a club. We're25

178

¥

not trying to like ruin Hollywood. We're trying to give1

We're a family.people a good place to go. When I tell2

people they're trying to shut us down, they really3

laugh. It's like people are like this is the best place4

in Hollywood. What are you talking about? This is the5

only normal place. And6

HEARING OFFICER JAMES: Thank you.

7


My name is Frances Maria Valdivia,8 MS. VALDIVIA:

I'm here to dispel this9 F-R-A-N-C-E-S, V-A-L-D-I-V-I-A.

rumor that we are not a restaurant. I take that as a10

serious offense to four of my crew members who work very11

hard and have done this for the past four years. That12

I've been doing this for 18 yearsis insulting to them.13

Eighteen years of my life I've been doing this.14 now.

And I have never been in this type of situation. I've15

worked at plenty of restaurants, plenty of grills. I've16

had plenty of experiences I've done. I have never ever17

experienced such a loathing for a business from any18

officer, from any city official before like I have19

experienced this.20

And all the incidents that happened, that started21

from this officer. From September and from now on, we22

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txthave been terrified. As a group, as individuals, as a23

business. How much more do we have to be complicit to24

That we're never going to satisfy officers.these bars?25

179

¥

They're willing to take us down because of one racist1

That is not fair to any of us that did nothing2 cop.

wrong. I have four employees. Let me tell you right3

If they lose their jobs, two of them will go into4 now.

That is not fair to them. That is not fairthe system.5

to any of us to lose our jobs because of one systemic6

problem. Thank you very much.7


9 MR. DYER: Brian Dyer, B-R-I-A-N, Dyer, D-Y-E-R.

Although I'm not speaking on behalf of the10

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt Hollywood Hills West Neighborhood council, I am the area11

3 committee chair for the area and I do talk to a lot of12

the residents. From Facebook July 13, 2015, on the13

It's a beautiful night.Rusty Mullet. Don't waste it14

sober. Mondays at the Mullet, DJ Missy Joe, all summer15

long from 10:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m. happy hour. All16

night.17

I don't mind, and I want people to have jobs.18 I

want them to have businesses. But it's only been19

mentioned once before. Immediately behind the Rusty20

Mullet, immediately behind five other bars that are on21

this block, and yes, there are five other bars, are22

We're one of the densest areas and we'reresidents.23

targeted to be one of the biggest growth areas in24

Hollywood. We're residents. Environmentally, the bar25

180


Its address is almost ours. It's on the1 is open air.

The other bars are not. This is a bar corner.2 corner.

You can hear it approaching. It's very loud, especially3

from the hours of 10:00 to 2:00, which usually aren't4

meal times when people get their dinners, but yes, food5

is served.6

The operation is, the operator of this bar also7

operates Jameson's, which is next door. And has come8

before the - and has come before the council, has come9

before the council because they were looking for a CUP10

for Los Tacos which is right behind. And they11

understood at that time that that CUP that they were12

going for was to maintain that they had dancing ability13

there because they wanted their patrons to be able to

14


So if they understood for oneget up and dance.15

property, why don't they understand it for the Rusty16

Mullet?17


Gail Blackman, G-A-I-L,19 MS. BLACKMAN:

20 B-L-A-C-K-M-A-N.

First off, I want to say that if anybody is21

advocating any kind of racism, I'm completely not22

onboard with that.23

My background is in broadcast operations.24 I am

undergrad in communication arts. And I am an M.B.A. in25

181¥

I do understand from a businessbusiness management.1

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt perspective what the business has to do in order to2

I do understand from a business perspective3 operate.

they want to be a good happy employer in the area.4 I

get all that. I moved here in 2011. I lived here and5

then I was here for about six months. I had to go back6

to New York for three years and now I'm back. The crime7

in the area has exponentially increased and that's8

statewide. But especially here in Hollywood it's very,9

I live on Woodley across from twovery concentrated.10

low-rent motels that do not do anything to alleviate the11

crime. I know that firsthand. Okay.12

Where that plays into the Rusty Mullet. You know13

there are various other bars. There is Warner, there's14

Te'Kilas. There is Pig N Whisle, there's King King.15

You walk by those establishments, it's not the same type16

of atmosphere. Let's just say coming out of Las Palmas17

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt and Hollywood Boulevard. Now I've never been into the18

I'm assuming there is great food andRusty Mullet.19

great people working there and that's all fine and good.20

But what I am saying is from -- especially from a21

broadcast operation standpoint. I'm a writer and22

producer. I do edit sound. And I can say on a23

professional expertise experience that the noise level24

that comes out of the Rusty Mullet is, happens to be25

182

¥

exponentially high. I don't experience that at Borders.1

I don't experience that at Te'Kilas, the Pig N Whistle,2

none of that.3

So I would like to see is, I'm not advocating for4

I'm not advocating for the restaurant.the police. I'm5


kind of neutral. What I would like to do is state that6

for the record, if the Rusty Mullet is to continue7

business and I hope that they do and I hope that they8

are a friendly neighbor to us who live in the area,9

I would like to say that if they can possibly dookay.10

something to lower the volume on the streets so that11

people like myself when I'm walking by, I'm not verbally12

accosted.13

HEARING OFFICER JAMES: Okay. I think your time is14

15 up.

MS. BLACKMAN: Thank you.16


That's all the speakers we have here today. Okay.18

First ofLet me try to make some statements here.19

all, just for clarification, I've heard it stated20

several times that this is a revocation hearing.

21


This hearing was noticed as a possible imposition22

of conditions to abate nuisance or revocation of use.23

So let me make that clear.24

It could possibly be a revocation or it could be an25

183¥

imposition of conditions.1

There are already operating conditions on the2

operation which are referred to in the staff report and3

also throughout this hearing and that would be case4

number ZA-2012-2850(CUB) standing for conditional use5

for alcoholic beverages.6

That particular set of conditions, operating7

conditions are still in effect, went into effect8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt effective June 8th of 2013. And they are currently in9

effect on location.10

So you heard that reference to conditions. That's11

what everyone is referencing.12

Also for the record, there is a Type 47 license for13

the premise which allows, as a general evening14

establishment, for on site sale of full line of liquor,15

alcoholic beverages.16

And the permit from Alcoholic Beverage Control is17

valid and will not expire until January 31st of 2017,18

according to the records that I have.19

Also, for matter of record, for the Building and20

Safety side of it, I do have records that show that a21

certificate of occupancy does permit the establishment22

to be a restaurant, a bona-fide restaurant.23

So with that said, there is quite a few things that24

A lot of testimony.Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtI heard here today.25

184

¥

In summary, I heard a lot of documented evidence1

presented by both planning staff, according to their2

site visit which did take place.3

I also heard from LAPD and their investigation and4

their site visits as well as compliance checks for both5

condition compliance and also for Alcoholic Beverage6

Control.7

Obviously today my assignment would be to determine8

if additional or more restrictive conditions on this9

operation need to occur in order to mitigate or in order10

to mitigate these potential problems that are occurring11

to eliminate or to discontinue the use. Based on the12


information that I received here today and in the public13

record.14

I will start by saying that it is disturbing, I15

think, to have this many reports for one location citing16

to evidence that we have in the case filed, the case17

And just as a summary I'll go over a few ofrecord.18

them. Condition number two, which deals with, just a19

I'll refer exactly to the staff report. Number20 moment.

two, which there are several violations and let me state21

the period of time that I'm referring to will be22

March 18, 2014 through June 25th of 2016.23

In that time there was a total of 46 investigative24

reports including notices to appear and arrest report.25

185

¥


There was a combination.1

In that condition number two, which again I'm2

referring to the ZA case number 2012-2850, conditional3

use, where the Zoning Administrator at the time required4

that the property shall remain in substantial5

conformance with the application and the exhibits that6

were submitted at the time.7

Police report show that there are certain8

violations that span the period that I previously9

mentioned showing that there was nonconformance in terms10

of the plot plan that was approved by planning and on11

file.12

Condition number 7, which deals with the restaurant13

shall be limited to 1,808 square feet and 73 patron14

seats as shown on Exhibit A and approved, there was one15

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt violation of that for that period of time.16

And may I mention condition number nine also, which17

was hours of operation. There was one violation during18

that one period of time.19

But for condition number 10, which deals with, ii20 A

disc jockey and karaoke is permitted.21 However,

background music or sound noise shall not be audible22

And that, of course, isbeyond the subject premises. ii23

in -- is not to exceed the decibel levels as laid out by24

the citywide noise ordinance. There are 15 violations25

186

¥

in the reports that were given to us from LAPD directly1

related to the level or the sound of music.2

Condition number 11, which deals with no amplified3

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt entertainment of any type shall be permitted including4

live entertainment shall be limited to a band consisting5

of four or less musicians. Entertainment shall be6

live entertainment shall cease -- I'm paraphrasing --7

shall cease by 12 midnight.8

In addition, any permits that are necessary for9

live entertainment shall be obtained from the Police10

There were four violations for liveCommission.11

amplified entertainment after midnight according to the12

records.13

Condition number 12 which addresses "There shall be14

no dancing as there was no dancing requested by the15

applicant at the time this application was approved.16

Let the record note that there were eight violations17

during this period of time for dancing.18

There is several other conditions noting condition19


number 15 which deals with designated driver program.20

Condition number 24, also dealing with the designated21

driver program. There was one to two violations during22

that period of time.23

And condition number 25 which deals with an24

electronic age verification device. Let the record note25

187

¥

there was two violations for that.1

Condition number 27 which addresses loitering,2

which is prohibited in and around the premises which are3

under the control of the owner or operator. Let the4

record note there was five violations for loitering at5

that, through that period of time. Again the period of6

time being March 18, 2014 through June 26, 2016.

7


And there was one violation of condition number 32,8

which references no line queuing. And again there was9

multiple violations of Alcohol Beverage Control.10

Conditions number two which deals with posting of11

alcoholic beverages and the availability of such, and12

condition number four which Alcohol and Beverage Control13

which deals with dancing on the premises. Let it be14

noted that the zoning administrator, I have no authority15

over these or enforcement over these violations of ABC16

conditions but I just wanted it noted for the record it17

was occurring at the location.18

Based on these multiple violations, and it appears19

to be the same type of conditions that are being20

violated, whether it's noise, it's music or the dancing,21

loitering, those seem to be the prominent ones.22 It

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt appears that the compliance, it occurs as a result of23

the enforcement that's occurring at the location.24 As

opposed to condition compliance which should occur based25

188

¥

on the conditions as written, the property owner and1

operator should be complying with the conditions as2

stated.3

I would say that based on the testimony that I4

heard here today, it appears that on both sides, whether5

it's law enforcement or it's with the property owners or6

operators or the employees of Rusty Mullet, it seems to7

be uniform that everyone is concerned about the public8

health, peace, safety of the persons who reside and work9

in the area. That's clear. But, however, there are10

some apparent nuisances and things that are occurringTranscript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt

11

that are impacting the residential or the neighbors that12

live in the area and again that would be noise probably,13

the traffic, and in some cases the loitering.14

With all of this, I did hear some testimony from15

members of the public which I think it was the security16

personnel that stated if we could only get a couple17

Los Angeles Police Department officers to sit at the18

location all day and monitor that or a portion of the19

time and monitor that, that this problem would possibly20

21 go away.

Let me say that if that was possible for every22

business, we would probably want Los Angeles Police23

Department officers to sit at their location and monitor24

and to shoo away or to discourage any of these type of25

189


activities that were, that may or may not be occurring1

at their location.2

At this time what I want to do is to I think I'm3

going to leave the record open for two weeks. In order4

to receive from LAPD, I believe there was some there5

was some concern that there was testimony given by6

Los Angeles Police Department that was not a part of7

Meaning there was some referencesthis original record.8

to arrest reports and citations or investigations that9

was not a part of this original report.10

And I would like that to be entered into the11

testimony, into the public record so if we could get a12

copy of those reports redacted. That way also other13

members of the public and as well as the owner and

14


operators and their representatives can read through15

those reports.16

did we -- did I get a copy of theAnd I believe17

lease agreement? Okay.18

So I believe Mr. Michael Gonzales is going to19

supply us with a copy or myself a copy of the lease20

agreement so I can understand how long the tenant was21

there and when their lease is up and kind of fit that22

into what's going on here.23

And I did hear that Michael Ayers, is it?24

25 MR. AYAZ: Ayaz.

190¥

Ayaz, was going to provide1 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt a sound report.2

It's within your packet.3 MR. AYAZ:

Then we already have that.4 HEARING OFFICER JAMES:

Again, this is not a decision that I'm going to5

make here today. However, I did want it noted that it6

appears to be a burden of resources or a vast amount of7

resources that are being assigned or, to this particular8

location or operation.9

There are operating conditions from the existing10

grant entitlement that are in place that if complied11

with should allow for a operation or business, as well12

as establishments such as Rusty Mullet, to flourish and13

to prosper and to be successful in the community.14

And speaking of the community, I am aware that this15

is Hollywood. I've heard that several times. I know16

There are certain expectations of living inHollywood.17

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt Hollywood and in working in Hollywood.18

However, there again, on the other side, there are19

expectations that individuals can live in a safe, clean,20

healthy environment and they can frequent these21

restaurants or these establishments not in fear but in22

safety at any time that these businesses are open to the23

public.24

I will note that when staff did go out to the25

191¥

location, it was found that the operators were in1

substantial compliance with the said conditions, but it2

should be noted that that was one visit, one site visit3

and one isolated time as compared to the other reports4

that are two-year-old reports that we have on file of5


complaints and violations of conditions.6

Let it be also noted that condition number 22 which7

deals with STAR training, when staff went out there was8

no evidence of said training and it has not, as I9

understand to this date, it is not in the file. Okay.10

With that said, again, there appears to be very --11

countless amount of violations, but again the violations12

appear to be mostly associated with the music and the13

sound that's actually being, coming from the location.14

It is a difficult location, I know, to manage. And I've15

heard that from both sides even from the employees. I'm16

familiar with the location.17 It is an open air type

establishment where the building as well as the sidewalk18

can appear to be one. Where -- meaning there is no real19

separation between the actual business where people sit20

inside and the sidewalk because of the way the windows

21


are constructed. And because they -- there is an22

opportunity to raise the windows and open up this23

So it is difficult, I understand, toestablishment.24

keep the noise in a certain area based on the25

192

¥

construction of the building.1

I don't have any further comments about this other2

than what I've said here today. I'm going to look at3

this more carefully and make a determination if or why4

the existing conditions are -- appear to not be working.5

Because if they were working, we wouldn't be here today.6

If there was -- if there was not some type of7

problem, we would not all be sitting here today.8

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txtSo apparently the existing conditions are not being9

followed. They're not being complied with, or they're10

being complied with inconsistently.11

I do believe that our Los Angeles Police12

Department, they have other types of enforcement that13

they could and should be doing. This particular14

location is getting quite a bit of attention from our15

law enforcement side. Again, that's about all I can16

really say.17

I've heard a lot of testimony here today. Those18

that are in favor of this particular location staying19

This is your livelihood foropen and I understand why.20

the employees that work there. And you are committed to21

the establishment and to the location. I understand22

that.23

And then I also understand that there are24

Transcript of Public Hearing July 28 2016.txt residents, people who live in close proximity to this25

193

¥

location and they have a different experience than from1

those who are patrons of the business and from those who2

are employees of the business. And that's what needs to3

be weighed out today.4

So with that said I'm going to leave the record5

open for a period of two weeks for any follow up and6

additional information that needs to be submitted today.7

And with that said, that will also open it up to8

members of the public to submit additional information9

because I won't just open it up for LAPD or for the10

owners and operators and their representatives. It will11

be open for additional public testimony.12


So those of you who did not, for whatever reason,13

testify today or provide public comment and you would14

like to submit something in writing, you will have until15

August 11 of 2016 to provide that information.16 You can

either send it directly to me and my email address would17

be Aleta, [email protected] or as indicated on the18

hearing notice, information can be sent to staff which19

And his information iswould be Rony Giron.20

[email protected]

So with that, I would like at this time to close22

the hearing for today. And again, what will happen23

after this point, a decision will be made. Those of you24

who did sign in will receive a copy of the letter of25

194

¥

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


determination, after which point a 15-day appeal period1

will begin, meaning that if you're concerned or you have2

questions or you're not in support of whatever3

determination comes out of this, you have a right to4

appeal and the appeal board will be this L.A. City5

That is only one level and the last level ofCouncil.6

But there is an opportunity for additional,appeal.7

possibly additional testimony. I say possibly. That's8

only if this is appealed. Okay.9

So thank you all very much for your time here10

today. And I appreciate it.11

(The proceedings concluded at 3:56 p.m.)12

13

14

15


17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

195

¥

STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss1

2

I, Martha M. Magana, CSR 7728, do hereby declare:3


That the above foregoing5

) pages contain a full, true and correct(6

transcription of the proceedings.7

8

I further declare that I have no interest in the9

event of the action.10

11

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws12

of the State of California that the foregoing is true13

and correct.14

15

day ofWITNESS my hand this16

17

18

19


20Martha M. Magana, CSR 7728

21

22

23

24

25

196

¥

transcript of public hearing july 28 2016.txt -...

Documents