AG 2002 04 15 (Regular) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

March 18, 2002 Page 305 as concerts; and (5) the need to restrict the serving of alcohol as much as possible but still respect the rights of citizens who choose to drink, within the laws of the City of Concord where the facility is located. Commissioners Prive~te and Suggs opposed the proposal and discussed liability issues related to the set-ring of alcohol at the facility. Also, Commissioner Privette indicated that it would be hypocritical to allow alcohol at the Expo when the County funds DARE officers to teach students not to drink and drive. After discussion, Commissioner Privette withdrew his substitute motion and again cited concerns about liability issues. Commissioner Suggs stated for the record his opposition to the motion by Vice Chairman Carruth. He said he was not on the Board when the County agreed to build the facility and that the project had turned more into a civic center than an agricultural fairgrounds. Also, he expressed concern about the Expo cost, stating it was $15 million when he came on the Board but the budget had now been revised up to $20 million. UPON MOTION of Vice Chairman Carruth,- seconded by Commissioner Fennel with Vice Chairman Carruth, Commissioner Fennel and Chairman Freeman voting for and Commissioners Privette and Suggs voting against, the Board approved the following Food and Beverage (F & B) Proposal as included in the Agenda II=em D-l(c)] with the addition of Item D stating that alcohol would not be served at County-sponsored events. Food & Beverage Proposal Food and beverage is .the single biggest revenue source available to a public assembly facility. A carefully thought out F & B plan is essential to the operations success. Without a plan to fully maximize the .income potential of all elements of a fiscally responsible food and beverage plan, the facility is almost doomed to failure without subsidies from the taxpayer. Herewith are the recommendations. A. Hire an outside foodservice management company to handle the F & B operation. ~his option offers professional management with a proven history of success. It also provides the benefits of a significant reduction in initial start-up costs. This approach shifts the burden of primary liability from the County to the foodservice provider. The County can expect a percentage of gross sales somewhere in the 30% tO 42% range. To maximize income potential, no food may be brought on to the property. In the event that satisfactory terms can not be agreed upon with a licensed foodservice company, the facility manager will authorize, with Board approval, a list of pre-approved caterers to do business within the facility. The pre-approved caterers will pay a percentage of total'food and beverage sales to the facility in return for the use of space and amenities. An effective alcohol management policy must be part of a successful program and should strongly be considered. This plan is outlined as follows: 1. Alcohol will only be served through the licensed foodservice provider. Alcohol shall be defined as beer, wine and mixed drinks when served by the licensed in-house food & beverage provider. No brown bagging will be allowed. 3. Food must be provided at any event where alcohol is offered. Alcohol may only be served in the meeting, banquet, entertainment and reception areas. Drinks would only be provided at the request =f the renting party with consent from the renter. Drinks may only be served by the licensed foodservice provider. Said provider may NOT require that alcohol be served as a condition of renting the meeting and/or banquet space. No beverages of any kind may be carried on to the grounds or buildings of the facility. An effective alcohol management policy will be implemented and enforced. Violators will be removed from the facility and/or incarcerated. Portions of an effective beer and wine only policy might include some of the following: a) Ejection of guests observed drinking in the parking b) Reject intoxicated patrons from entering the facilities.