12-06-1971 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

AMENDMENT APPLICATION 691 J. EUGENE ROHRS - (Continued) Councilman Herrin's motion, seconded by Councilman Patterson, to receive and file the communication, was unanimously carried. There were no further proponents or opponents in the matter, and the Mayor closed the public hearing. Councilman Patterson's motion, seconded by Councilman Herrin, to approve Amendment Application 691 and pass to second reading ORDINANCE NS-1103 CHANGING ZONING CLASSIFICATION ON AMENDMENT APPLICATION 691, FILED BY J. EUGENE ROHRS AND AMENDING SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP 6-5-9 (EXHIBIT A.A. 691-A), carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Patterson, Herrin, Villa, Evans, Griset, Markel None Yamamoto APPLICATION FOR The Mayor opened the public PAWNBROKER'S CERTIFICATE hearing on the appeal filed by Rober Borgerson from Police Cheif's denial of a Certificate to engage in the business of a pawnbroker in the City of Santa Ana, which had been continued from November 15 in order that the applicant might file an amended application. Mr. Thomas Murphy, 401 Civic Center Drive, 'Attorney representing the applicant, stated that a second application had been filed with certain attach- ments to explain his clients' position, and that the original application was in error due to a misunderstanding as to the original financial arrangement. Detective Lacy of the Santa Ana Police Department stated that when Mr. Holland made his original application for a pawn shop in the City of Santa Ana~ Mr. Borgerson was with him, and was asked if he would be a silent partner; that Mr. Borgerson said he was merely furnishing funds in the form of a loan, but it was later determined that he was, in fact, a partner in the business; that he was denied the license for two reasons -- a prior conviction and misrepre- sentation on the application. The City Attorney stated that only after Mr. Borgerson's true capacity in the business was discovered did he reveal himself as a partner; that the essence of requiring a business permit in this circumstance is to assure that the operators of the business are free from question in the receipt of goods. In response to Councilman Villa's suggestion that the misrepresentation was on the application filed by Mr. Holland, and not by Mr. Borgerson, the ~tty Attorney stated that Mr. Borgerson was present when the application wa~iled and certain oral representations were made; and that fred of One par~Jcu4~r par~.j~j fra(~i o? 'ttre entire partnership. ~,~ CITY COUNCIL -408- December 6, 1971