Laserfiche WebLink
Councilmember LeTourneau stated a person could still get the application and a license even if <br />the training is not related. <br />City Attorney Langel stated that is correct if everything else is in play but it would provide <br />information that could be used against an establishment if activity not related to massage therapy <br />occurs at the establishment. In addition, it is a defense for the therapist who is properly trained <br />to bolster their application and defense they may have to someone claiming they are not <br />providing massage therapy. City Attorney Langel stated, however, that provision is not as <br />important as other requirements. He referenced the following provision requiring professional <br />information on employees because in a business license, law enforcement will want to know who <br />is working there in the capacity of a massage therapist. <br />Police Captain Katers explained that language will avoid a situation where employees are shifted <br />from one location to another, which the Police Department has seen occur with larger illegal <br />operations when one location is cited for a violation. <br />Councilmember LeTourneau asked if it is the responsibility of the license holder to report new <br />employees in order to maintain the license, which would make it more complicated in who is <br />monitoring that information. <br />City Attorney Langel stated it is the owner's responsibility to monitor their establishment and <br />provide the City with information when there is a new employee. He explained that should there <br />be a raid and it is found there are employees working at that establishment who are not listed on <br />the license, it is another means to enforce. <br />Councilmember Riley stated it was his understanding that requiring both the establishment and <br />masseuse to be licensed would address that problem. He felt requiring a business to keep a list <br />of employees would be burdensome and he does not know of another business that is required to <br />do that. In addition, he is concerned with the City monitoring that information. <br />City Attorney Langel clarified that language is to target the business, not the individual. He <br />stated if the business owner is having a large turn over, that is an indicator that there may be <br />other activity occurring at the establishment. He stated if illegal activity is occurring, the City <br />wants that type of `hook' in the ordinance language. In addition, Anoka County wants to assure <br />there is a mechanism to close the business, not just cite the therapist. <br />Councilmember Johns asked if the individual as well as business licenses would be posted or on <br />file for inspections. <br />Mayor Strommen stated that may be an item to include on a checklist for inspection. <br />City Clerk Thieling explained that the only time the City has asked for prior addresses is for <br />background checks on pawnbrokers, peddlers /solicitors license, and liquor licenses. But, <br />constant updates are not required on any of those licenses. She stated the City renews licenses <br />yearly and at that point, it is asked who is the manager and the owner, but not the names of <br />employees. <br />City Council Work Session / November 25, 2014 <br />Page 3 of 7 <br />