Laserfiche WebLink
11/14/01 WED 15:54 FAX 6123402643 121 005 <br /> Clay Montella, et al.,Relators, vs. City of Ottertail,Respondent. C9-01-593, Court of App.. Page 4 of 7 <br /> • Before requiring relators to complete a written application, the city council followed <br /> an informal procedure under which it determined whether Brewster's met the requirements <br /> foureceiving a liquor license. Because Brewster's did not meet the licensure requirements,no <br /> written application was completed. Although the record does not indicate that relators <br /> objected to the informal procedure the city council used, relators argue that the city council <br /> should not have acted without first permitting them to complete a written application. But <br /> relators have not identified any information that would have been provided to the council in a <br /> written application that was not available to the council when it made its decision. Therefore, <br /> relators have not met their burden of demonstrating that acting on their oral application <br /> without providing a written,application form was unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. <br /> Similarly, relators have failed to demonstrate that proceeding with the hearing without <br /> locating the original conditional-use permit or determining that Brewster's was not a <br /> • restaurant without conducting an investigation was unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. <br /> Relators' conditional-use-permit application sought permission to operate a coffee house and <br /> ice cream parlor where espresso, cappuccino, cheesecakes, desserts, and hard ice cream <br /> would be served. The record contains no evidence, and relators make no claim, either that the <br /> conditional-use permit issued for Brewster's differed in any respect from the application or <br /> that the operation of Brewster's differed in any way from the authority requested in the permit <br /> application. And relators have not cited any evidence that would have been discovered if the <br /> council.had conducted an investigation. <br /> Relators have not satisfied their burden of showing that the city council erred when it <br /> denied their request for a liquor-license application without locating their conditional-use <br /> permit or conducting an investigation. <br /> I�. <br /> • Statutory construction is a question of law subject to de novo review. Hibbing Educ. <br /> ,A,ss'n v. Pub. Employment Relations ,8d., 369 N.W.2d 527, 529 (Minn. 1985). This court's <br /> http://www.lawlibrary.state.mn.us/archive/ctappub/0109/c90l593.htin 11/14/2001 <br />