Some say simply ‘questioning’ Wiley’s business practices was out of line. Really?

What short memories people have. Only four years ago, the city council threatened to pull a license for the Vault and put them on warning with a deferral when similar things were going on (city council meeting) and (My post on it) at their establishment that have been going on at Wileys. In fact, after watching the meeting (the discussion went on for 35 minutes), besides the diddling on the cars, the things going on at the Vault pales in comparison to Wileys. It came down to basically not supplying adequate parking. How many private parking spots does Wileys have? I count ZERO. It is also important to note that the Vault had 154 police calls in a 12 month period. In 10 months of this year, Wileys is up to 182 calls. The deferral meeting is here (FF: 11:00). If you watch the meeting, you will see councilors had several meetings with the Vault and the Police department before the vote. Councilor Jamison went on to say that these kind of ‘reviews’ of the establishments was important to establish a public record of the concerns. The council voted 7-1 to renew the license, Rolfing was the dissenting vote. I believe the Vault went out of business in 2013.

Also during the meeting, they try to beat down an immigrant c-store owner in Pettigrew Heights for letting people drink 40’s beside his store. The mayor even said this to the c-store owner’s attorney during the meeting;

“. . . it is the duty of the city council to review all liquor licenses that are up for renewal. If they want to complete some additional due diligence on any of these, whether it be the Vault, whether it be the Mercato or any of the other establishments that serve alcohol in this town, they have the ability to do that. In this case they wanted to ask some questions or do some additional due diligence on the Mercato before they make a decision on that, so before you start to accuse a councilor, or someone else for doing something that is appropriate or not, I would encourage you to use caution. .  .  . I would encourage you to tone it down a bit, the council has a right to ask questions.”

What a short memory our mayor has.

They also beat down a tattoo shop owner for simply wanting a beer license so he can sell during art opening events. And how many complaints has the shop had in the past four years? Not sure. But I would assume if it was major, we would have heard about it by now. I have displayed art at the shop and have attended many other events there. It was no different then an art opening at the Pavilion (which sells alcohol at their art openings). The council voted 4-3 to approve the license with Karsky, Rolfing and Aguliar dissenting.

Seems a bit hypocritical of Michelle and Mike to say they were embarrassed about the very short discussion last night, in which in the end 7 councilors voted to let them keep their license. Let’s talk about embarrassment. It’s embarrassing our city officials have such short memories when regulating liquor licenses.

I also find it ironic that Wiley’s attorney, Drew Duncan is a well known Municipal and State government lobbyist. Seems this story is a lot deeper then we may ever know.



12 comments ↓

#1 Scott on 11.02.16 at 8:18 pm

Hasn’t that crowd moved to the other hoochie mama bar on Phillips?

#2 Warren on 11.02.16 at 8:55 pm

You will never find this kind of journalism and digging for the truth in the pages of the argus, or the hot air of belfrage. Once again, great job Scott.

#3 LJL on 11.02.16 at 9:39 pm

Is Wileys owned by 1 attorney or more? Well a member of the Caldwell, Sanford law office is an old buddy of da mayor.

http://mymanmike.com/huether-earns-another-term-as-mayor/
“For Huether on Tuesday night, he was surrounded by some longtime supporters, including Steve Sanford, an attorney who has known him since his days working for Citibank and Premier Bankcard. He said the vibe this year was different than it was four years ago, when Huether won his first term.
“There was uncertainty,” he said.
Sanford likes Huether’s enthusiasm and ability to accomplish things. “He is a manager and has run the city marvelously,” he said.”

He was picked to be on a committee by our mayor. And Rick Kiley was in that group to.

http://www.argusleader.com/story/news/city/2015/11/09/huether-questions-hotel-tax-status-
quo/75461968/

I think we know why da mayor was uncomfortable with the the scrutiny of his pals bar.

#4 l3wis on 11.02.16 at 9:50 pm

Scott, LOL, you should see their police calls since they opened. I think Wiley’s might have to take the silver metal next year.

#5 l3wis on 11.02.16 at 10:09 pm

LJL, interesting, am I missing something here?

https://sos.sd.gov/business/Documents.aspx?cid=DL012672

#6 Bruce on 11.03.16 at 8:24 am

BRETT A LOVRIEN is the Registered Agent for the corporation. In other words, a person or company responsible for receiving legal documents. This person does not have to be an owner, only they are responsible for accepting legal documents.

#7 LJL on 11.03.16 at 8:50 am

My first post didn’t load.

Wileys is owned by TNT entertainment. TNT’s ownership is registered to Brett Lovrien who works as a lawyer in Caldwell, Sanford law. Do you really think Bret owns this by himself? No

http://www.cadlaw.com/brett-lovrien.html

He’s also listed as the owner of a land development group.
https://sos.sd.gov/business/Documents.aspx?cid=DL015518

I’ve tried to search for all the businesses registered to Brett Lorvien, but each time the SOS site crashes.

#8 LJL on 11.03.16 at 9:05 am

Sure. So if he’s just the lawyer for TNT, why hire another lawyer to represent Wileys at the city meeting.

If someone can find who really owns TNT, you’ll have your answer.

#9 Warren on 11.03.16 at 1:00 pm

More on Wileys and past discetions. Also a little more on who owns the place.

http://www.argusleader.com/story/news/2016/05/21/smoking-patio-downtown-bar-under-scrutiny/84602512/

#10 The Blogger Formerly Known as "Winston" on 11.03.16 at 1:15 pm

Maybe we should pass an ordinance requiring pubs, I mean bars, to close at 11pm. Like they do in England….;-)

#11 Taxpayer on 11.03.16 at 7:45 pm

The article in today’s AL leads me to think that the swim team parents think they bought a piece of a taxpayer-owned and operated facility.

I am glad that our city’s administration is protecting the general public’s access to the new aquatic center. After all, every SF taxpayer owns that facility, not the 200 to 300 kids and their families who happen to belong to the swim team.

Talk about a sense of entitlement (quote taken from AL article): “They agreed to provide the equipment to us and they gifted it to the city. There is no condition for using the facility in return for providing that equipment,” he said.

That didn’t stop the Sioux Falls Swim Team, however, from advertising an upcoming meet as being held at the Midco Aquatic Center. (*without consulting those who manage the facility)

Really.

#12 anominous on 11.04.16 at 10:13 pm

https://www.linkedin.com/in/kirby-muilenburg-0b54092b