Swampscott Select Board Meeting Review: March 3, 2022

1. Agenda

Based on the transcript, the likely agenda for the meeting was as follows:

Call to Order & Pledge of Allegiance 0:10
Public Hearing (Show Cause): Vinnin Square Liquors (371 Paradise Rd) - Alleged service of alcohol to a minor on 11/16/2021. 0:54
Public Hearing (Show Cause): Bertucci’s Restaurant (450 Paradise Rd) - Alleged service of alcohol to a minor on 11/16/2021. 35:43
Public Hearing (Show Cause): Burrill Street Liquors (205 Burrill St) - Alleged service of alcohol to a minor on 11/16/2021. 53:33
Recess 58:18
Reconvene 1:26:13
Public Hearing (Show Cause): Yan’s China Bistro (146 Humphrey St) - Alleged service of alcohol to a minor on 11/16/2021. 1:26:34
Discussion of Decision Documentation & Adjournment 1:35:21

2. Speaking Attendees

Select Board Chair: [Speaker 2] (Leads meeting, calls votes, manages procedure)
Peter Spellios (Select Board Member): [Speaker 3] (Makes motions, raises significant procedural/policy questions)
John McAnany (Town Counsel): [Speaker 1] (Presents town’s case, advises Board on legal procedure)
Ted Delano (Police Detective): [Speaker 5] (Testifies regarding compliance checks)
Andrew Upton (Attorney for Vinnin Square Liquors): [Speaker 8]
Angela Ansara (Owner, Vinnin Square Liquors): [Speaker 10]
David Kerr (Interim Police Chief): [Speaker 9] (Comments on department philosophy/training)
Select Board Member: [Speaker 11] (Makes motions, participates in votes)
Sean Saley (Town Administrator): [Speaker 7] (Comments on process efficiency discussions)
Select Board Member: [Speaker 12] (Brief procedural comments)
Elizabeth Pisano (Attorney for Bertucci’s): [Speaker 6]
Frankie Richies (Area Manager, Bertucci’s): [Speaker 14]
Mr. Vu (Owner/Representative, Burrill Street Liquors): [Speaker 13] (Name inferred from Speaker 11’s motion at 57:40)
Attorney Schutzer (Attorney for Yan’s China Bistro): [Speaker 4] (Name stated by Town Counsel McEnany at 1:27:32)
Select Board Member: [Speaker 16] (Brief comments)
Select Board Member: [Speaker 17] (Makes motion)
Unidentified Speaker: [Speaker 15] (Brief interjection during recess)
Unidentified Speaker: [Speaker 18] (Brief utterance)

(Note: Several speakers tagged as Select Board Member ([Speaker 11], [Speaker 12], [Speaker 16], [Speaker 17]) participated primarily through motions or brief comments. It’s unclear from the transcript if these are distinct individuals or the same person(s) speaking at different times.)

3. Meeting Minutes

Meeting Start: The Select Board Chair called the meeting to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance 0:10.

Hearing 1: Vinnin Square Liquors (371 Paradise Rd)

Opening: Member Spellios moved to open the show-cause hearing regarding an alleged sale to a minor on Nov 16, 2021 0:54. Motion seconded and approved unanimously.
Town Presentation: Town Counsel John McEnany called Detective Ted Delano 1:53. Det. Delano testified about the standard procedures for alcohol compliance checks, including notification, use of an underage operative (16 years old for this check), instructions given, and monitoring [2:33 - 7:15]. He described the specific check at Vinnin Square Liquors, where the operative purchased beer without being asked for ID [7:15 - 8:53]. Det. Delano confirmed he spoke with the owner afterward and there was no dispute about the event at that time [9:00 - 9:47].
Procedural Discussion: Member Spellios questioned the necessity of the detailed testimony if the facts weren’t in dispute, seeking a way to streamline the process 10:31. Town Counsel McEnany and the Chair clarified that while facts could be stipulated, the Board must hold the public hearing to determine findings and potential penalties [11:34 - 13:55].
Licensee Stipulation & Statement: Attorney Andrew Upton, representing Vinnin Square Liquors, stipulated to the facts of the violation 14:02. He stated the owner, Angela Ansara, was present to take responsibility. He described their compliance program, noted the involved employee (a teacher working part-time) was terminated consistent with policy, and highlighted remedial retraining efforts 23:02. Ms. Ansara apologized, calling the incident unacceptable and embarrassing, reiterated their policies (including no cell phones at register, one-strike rule), and confirmed attendance at the upcoming police training 24:39.
Police Chief Statement: Interim Chief David Kerr stated his department’s philosophy emphasizes education and support for businesses operating legally, noting an upcoming training session for all licensees on March 10th and letters sent to compliant businesses 21:29.
Board Action:
- Town Counsel McEnany presented documents: Notice of Violation, Compliance Check Field Report, and Receipt 16:04. He reviewed the ABCC guidance suggesting compliance checks are educational and noted Vinnin Liquors had no recent prior violations [18:03 - 21:08].
- The evidentiary portion was closed 26:47.
- Motion to find a violation occurred: Moved, seconded, and approved unanimously 27:02.
- Member Spellios again raised concerns about the lengthy process for stipulated first offenses 27:32. The Chair reiterated the need to follow the current procedure.
- Motion to adopt the submitted documents (Town Counsel exhibits, licensee policy examples) as findings of fact: Moved, seconded, and approved unanimously 29:31.
- Motion for penalty (mandatory attendance at March 10th training): Moved by a Select Board Member, seconded, and approved unanimously 32:45. Member Spellios commented on the irony of firing the employee who needed the training 33:02.
Hearing Closed.

Hearing 2: Bertucci’s Restaurant (450 Paradise Rd)

Opening: Member Spellios moved to open the show-cause hearing 35:43. Motion seconded and approved unanimously.
Licensee Stipulation & Statement: Attorney Elizabeth Pisano, representing Bertucci’s, introduced Area Manager Frankie Richies. She immediately stipulated that the violation occurred 37:12. She stated Bertucci’s takes responsibility, noted this was their first violation in 30 years in Swampscott, and detailed remedial actions: retraining, pre-shift policy reviews/sign-offs, POS system updates requiring DOB entry for alcohol, email reminders, and commitment to attend the March 10th training 40:49. Mr. Richies apologized on behalf of Bertucci’s 42:48.
Board Action:
- Town Counsel McEnany submitted the Notice of Violation, Field Report, and Receipt for Bertucci’s 39:02.
- Motion to find a violation occurred: Moved, seconded, and approved unanimously 43:20.
- Motion to accept the submitted documents as findings of fact: Moved, seconded, and approved unanimously 43:25.
- Motion for penalty (mandatory attendance of managerial staff at March 10th training): Moved by a Select Board Member, seconded, and approved unanimously 44:23. Member Spellios inquired if the employee was still employed (they were not) and reiterated his preference for training the involved employee if retained 43:55.
Hearing Closed 44:42.

Interim Discussion: Hearing Process Efficiency

During the wait for the next scheduled hearing, Member Spellios initiated a discussion about creating a non-adjudicatory process for stipulated first-time alcohol violations to save time and resources for the town and businesses 45:21. He suggested exploring a policy where police could recommend bypassing a formal hearing if the licensee agreed to specific remedies like training.
Town Counsel McEnany acknowledged the Board’s discretion not to hold hearings but noted potential legal complexities and the need to maintain a record [46:29, 49:43]. He mentioned previously drafted licensing guidelines that the Board could consider adopting 47:12.
The Chair expressed concern about setting policy that might bypass needed scrutiny for certain first offenses or weaken the record for future violations [46:54, 49:55]. She emphasized the Board had voted to hold these specific hearings after prior discussion [31:44, 51:49].
Town Administrator Sean Saley expressed support for finding a more streamlined, potentially administrative process handled by the Police Department, sharing Member Spellios’s frustration with the current formality for these cases 52:28.
The consensus was to potentially add this policy discussion to a future agenda [32:16, 51:49].

Hearing 3: Burrill Street Liquors (205 Burrill St)

Opening: Member Spellios moved to open the show-cause hearing 53:33. Motion seconded and approved unanimously.
Licensee Stipulation & Statement: Mr. Vu, representing Burrill Street Liquors without counsel, stipulated to the violation [54:42 implied, 56:03]. He admitted fault, stating he was rushing, and committed himself and another employee to attend the March 10th training 56:03.
Board Action:
- Town Counsel McEnany submitted the Notice of Violation, Field Report, and Receipt for Burrill Street Liquors 54:42.
- Motion to find a violation occurred: Moved by a Select Board Member, seconded, and approved unanimously 56:32.
- Motion to accept the submitted documents as findings of fact: Moved by a Select Board Member, seconded, and approved unanimously 56:56.
- Motion for penalty (mandatory attendance of Mr. Vu and employee at March 10th training): Moved by a Select Board Member, seconded, and approved unanimously 57:40.
Hearing Closed 58:01.

Recess: The Board voted to recess until 7:30 PM 58:18.

Reconvene: The Board reconvened at 7:30 PM 1:26:13.

Hearing 4: Yan’s China Bistro (146 Humphrey St)

Opening: Member Spellios moved to open the show-cause hearing 1:26:34. Motion seconded and approved unanimously.
Licensee Stipulation & Statement: Attorney Schutzer, representing Yan’s China Bistro (owner Karen present), stipulated that the violation occurred 1:27:32. He provided context about the owner’s history, the difficulty of running the business often with children present, and noted that on the night in question, the owner was distracted assisting her daughter with schoolwork while also serving and bussing 1:28:33. He emphasized this was the first violation in 15 years and that both the owner (Karen) and Leanne Young would attend the March 10th training. He acknowledged the need to be more vigilant, potentially carding everyone [1:28:33 - 1:32:19]. He also praised the Swampscott Police Department’s educational approach 1:32:21.
Board Action:
- Town Counsel McEnany submitted the Notice of Violation, Field Report, and Receipt for Yan’s China Bistro 1:28:06.
- Motion to find a violation occurred: Moved by a Select Board Member, seconded, and approved unanimously 1:33:35.
- Motion to accept the submitted documents as findings of fact: Moved by a Select Board Member, seconded, and approved unanimously 1:33:47.
- Motion for penalty (mandatory attendance of Karen and Leanne Young at March 10th training): Moved by a Select Board Member, seconded, and approved unanimously 1:34:23.
Hearing Closed 1:34:53.

Closing Formalities: Town Counsel McEnany confirmed draft decisions had been prepared and would be finalized for the Chair’s signature and inclusion in the meeting record 1:35:21.

Adjournment: Motion to adjourn moved, seconded, and approved unanimously 1:37:24.

4. Executive Summary

Four Local Businesses Penalized for Alcohol Sales to Minor; Training Mandated

The Swampscott Select Board, acting as the town’s licensing authority, held show-cause hearings on March 3, 2022, for four local businesses alleged to have sold alcohol to a minor during a police compliance check on November 16, 2021. All four establishments – Vinnin Square Liquors, Bertucci’s Restaurant, Burrill Street Liquors, and Yan’s China Bistro – stipulated through their representatives that the violations occurred [e.g., 14:02, 37:12, 56:03, 1:28:03].

Educational Penalty Imposed: In each case, the Board voted unanimously to require relevant personnel (owners/managers/staff) from the establishment to attend an upcoming alcohol server training session hosted by the Swampscott Police Department on March 10, 2022 [e.g., 32:45, 44:23, 57:40, 1:34:23]. This penalty reflects guidance from the state Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission (ABCC) and the Swampscott Police Department’s stated philosophy, which emphasizes education over punitive measures for first-time compliance check violations [18:03, 21:29]. Town Counsel John McEnany noted that none of the establishments had recent prior violations 20:40.

Licensee Responses: Representatives for all four businesses expressed remorse, took responsibility for the errors, and outlined steps taken to prevent recurrence. These included retraining staff, reinforcing ID check policies, terminating the involved employees (in at least two cases [23:02, 43:55]), and updating point-of-sale systems [e.g., 23:02, 40:49, 56:03, 1:28:33]. Several representatives highlighted their long-standing presence and commitment to the Swampscott community.

Debate Over Hearing Process: A significant portion of the meeting involved discussion, initiated by Select Board Member Peter Spellios, questioning the efficiency and necessity of conducting formal, lengthy show-cause hearings when licensees stipulate to the facts of a first-time violation [10:31, 27:32, 45:21]. He argued for exploring a streamlined, potentially administrative process to save time and resources for both the town and small businesses. While the Chair and Town Counsel emphasized the current legal requirements for public hearings to find violations and impose penalties [12:10, 46:29], Town Administrator Sean Saley also voiced support for seeking a more efficient approach 52:28. The Board may revisit this policy issue in the future.

Why This Matters: These hearings underscore the town’s commitment to enforcing underage drinking laws and ensuring licensed establishments follow regulations. The educational approach taken for these first offenses aims to correct behavior without unduly harming local businesses. However, the debate surrounding the hearing process itself highlights ongoing questions about balancing regulatory oversight with administrative efficiency in town government.

5. Analysis

The March 3, 2022, Select Board meeting, while procedural in focus, revealed key dynamics regarding alcohol license enforcement and governance process in Swampscott.

Effectiveness of Enforcement & Stipulation Strategy: The Police Department’s compliance check methodology, as detailed by Detective Delano [2:59-9:47], established a clear factual basis for the violations. However, the licensees’ universal strategy of stipulating to the facts [e.g., 14:02, 37:12, 56:03 (implied), 1:28:03] proved highly effective. By admitting fault, expressing remorse, and detailing remedial actions [e.g., 23:02, 40:49], they aligned themselves with the educational framework promoted by Town Counsel 18:03 and the Interim Police Chief 21:29. This approach preempted lengthy evidentiary disputes and likely contributed significantly to the Board’s consistent adoption of the least punitive option available – mandatory training. The licensees’ arguments centered on responsibility and future compliance, resonating with the Board’s apparent objective for these first-offense cases.

Process vs. Pragmatism: A Central Tension: The most notable dynamic was the recurring debate over the necessity and efficiency of the formal show-cause hearing process itself, spearheaded by Member Spellios [e.g., 10:31, 45:21]. His arguments were grounded in pragmatism – questioning the use of significant time (Board, staff, counsel, business owners) for hearings where the outcome (stipulation and minor penalty) seemed predetermined. This position found sympathy from the Town Administrator 52:28, suggesting an administrative desire for streamlining. However, the Chair, supported by Town Counsel McEnany, consistently upheld the legal necessity of the public hearing process for the Board to officially find a violation and impose a penalty, emphasizing due process and the limits of administrative action under the current structure [e.g., 12:10, 28:23, 49:43]. This tension reflects a common challenge in municipal government: balancing strict adherence to established (and sometimes cumbersome) legal procedures with the practical desire for efficiency and proportionality, especially concerning small businesses and first offenses. While Spellios’s arguments did not alter the course of these hearings (which the Board had already voted to hold), they clearly flagged the issue for future policy consideration 32:16.

Board Consensus on Outcome: Despite the procedural debate, the Board demonstrated complete consensus on the appropriate penalty [e.g., 32:58, 44:36, 57:55, 1:34:49]. The unanimous votes for mandatory training indicate acceptance of the narrative presented by Town Counsel and the licensees: these were regrettable but isolated errors by otherwise compliant businesses, best addressed through education. The Board showed little appetite for suspension or more severe penalties, likely influenced by the lack of prior violations 20:40 and the potential for appeal and reversal by the ABCC, as referenced by Town Counsel 19:14.

Framing and Influence: Town Counsel McEnany played a key role in framing the context, emphasizing the ABCC’s view of compliance checks as primarily educational 18:03 and referencing past (difficult) experiences with appeals on minor suspensions 19:38. This framing effectively set the stage for the training penalty as the logical and defensible outcome. Similarly, Interim Chief Kerr’s statement reinforcing the department’s educational philosophy 21:29 bolstered this approach.