Appeal heard over Brookhaven's $100,000 entertainment venue license fee; decision reserved
March 01, 2026 | Brookhaven, DeKalb County, Georgia
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Brookhaven Alcohol Review Board on Jan. 22 heard an appeal from Rush Lounge after the city denied the establishment's 2018 alcohol license renewal, saying the renewal application admitted facts that make it an "entertainment venue" under a 2017 ordinance and therefore subject to a $100,000 annual entertainment-venue licensing fee.
City counsel told the board that Rush hecked boxes on its renewal application indicating it has a DJ, a stage and a dance floor, and that under the amended ordinance any place with at least one of those characteristics is defined as an entertainment venue and subject to the higher fee. "They are then required to pay $100,000 plus the $300 administrative fee for their distilled spirits, malt beverage, and wine license within the city of Brookhaven," the city attorney said.
Why it matters: The appeal raises both statutory and constitutional questions. Rush Lounge's attorney argued the state alcohol code limits local license fees and that the city's data and ordinance are overbroad, while the city contended the state provision cited by the applicant applies to package (off-premise) sales, not on-premise consumption, and said the fee was set to recoup identifiable police costs.
What the board heard: Rush Lounge's lawyer, Alan Begner, submitted a written list of objections and offered several exhibits, including a citation to OCGA and correspondence with the Georgia Department of Revenue. Begner argued the state statute (cited in his submissions) limits municipal license fees to $5,000 and said the Brookhaven ordinance's new entertainment-venue definition, created in October 2017, could have sweeping effects on events such as wedding receptions, reunions and fundraisers if it is applied literally to any location with a DJ or dance floor.
The city presented two witnesses. Shaun (Sean) Suggs, the city's licensing officer, testified that Rush hecked distilled spirits, malt beverage and Sunday sales on its renewal form and, separately, indicated a DJ, a stage and a dance floor; Suggs said that under the city's new definitions those characteristics place Rush in the entertainment-venue class rather than the restaurant class. "The entertainment venue fee is a $100,000 if you do distilled spirits, malt beverage, and wine," Suggs testified.
Stephen Chapman II, Brookhaven's assistant city manager and chief financial officer, described the data and methodology the city used to set the fee. Chapman said the city relied on police call-for-service data for the top 10 locations and used an existing agreement with a large venue (which pays about $225,000 annually) as a model. "Sixty-nine percent of the incidents occurred between 12AM and 6AM," Chapman said, and he testified that Rush had 204 calls for service and 77 incidents in the city's data set for the period Jan. 1, 2016, through May 15, 2017, versus a median baseline business with 116 calls and 49 incidents.
Challenges and disputes: Begner told the board that calls-for-service data are an imperfect basis for singling out businesses and characterized the ordinance as overbroad and potentially destructive for small businesses. "It will ruin the jobs of hundreds of employees," Begner said, arguing that many events that include music or dancing are temporary or incidental and that the ordinance's mechanics could force businesses to close.
The city's counsel responded that the state statute Begner cited governs package (off-premise) sales and does not limit local fees for on-premise consumption; the city also emphasized that Rush's own signed application asserts the features that trigger the entertainment-venue classification. The city asked the board to uphold the administrative denial of the renewal application.
Other evidence and issues: During cross-examination Chapman acknowledged the police report (dated June 29, 2017) listed ten locations by calls for service (Rush Lounge; Medusa; MPR Inc.; Remix Lounge; Sunrise Bistro; Pegasus; Pink Pony; XS Lounge; Confetti's; Josephine's Lounge) and that the data were not limited to specific types of calls such as assaults or fights. Witnesses and counsel discussed the ordinance's dinner-theater exception, hotel/motel licensing distinctions and the possibility of special-event permits for one-off events.
What happens next: After closing arguments the board voted to move into executive session to deliberate; the chair said a decision would not be issued that night and the parties would receive a ruling later. The hearing record was left open for the board's deliberation.
(Reporting note: court-style statutory citations and ordinance language were taken from exhibits and witness testimony submitted during the hearing.)
City counsel told the board that Rush hecked boxes on its renewal application indicating it has a DJ, a stage and a dance floor, and that under the amended ordinance any place with at least one of those characteristics is defined as an entertainment venue and subject to the higher fee. "They are then required to pay $100,000 plus the $300 administrative fee for their distilled spirits, malt beverage, and wine license within the city of Brookhaven," the city attorney said.
Why it matters: The appeal raises both statutory and constitutional questions. Rush Lounge's attorney argued the state alcohol code limits local license fees and that the city's data and ordinance are overbroad, while the city contended the state provision cited by the applicant applies to package (off-premise) sales, not on-premise consumption, and said the fee was set to recoup identifiable police costs.
What the board heard: Rush Lounge's lawyer, Alan Begner, submitted a written list of objections and offered several exhibits, including a citation to OCGA and correspondence with the Georgia Department of Revenue. Begner argued the state statute (cited in his submissions) limits municipal license fees to $5,000 and said the Brookhaven ordinance's new entertainment-venue definition, created in October 2017, could have sweeping effects on events such as wedding receptions, reunions and fundraisers if it is applied literally to any location with a DJ or dance floor.
The city presented two witnesses. Shaun (Sean) Suggs, the city's licensing officer, testified that Rush hecked distilled spirits, malt beverage and Sunday sales on its renewal form and, separately, indicated a DJ, a stage and a dance floor; Suggs said that under the city's new definitions those characteristics place Rush in the entertainment-venue class rather than the restaurant class. "The entertainment venue fee is a $100,000 if you do distilled spirits, malt beverage, and wine," Suggs testified.
Stephen Chapman II, Brookhaven's assistant city manager and chief financial officer, described the data and methodology the city used to set the fee. Chapman said the city relied on police call-for-service data for the top 10 locations and used an existing agreement with a large venue (which pays about $225,000 annually) as a model. "Sixty-nine percent of the incidents occurred between 12AM and 6AM," Chapman said, and he testified that Rush had 204 calls for service and 77 incidents in the city's data set for the period Jan. 1, 2016, through May 15, 2017, versus a median baseline business with 116 calls and 49 incidents.
Challenges and disputes: Begner told the board that calls-for-service data are an imperfect basis for singling out businesses and characterized the ordinance as overbroad and potentially destructive for small businesses. "It will ruin the jobs of hundreds of employees," Begner said, arguing that many events that include music or dancing are temporary or incidental and that the ordinance's mechanics could force businesses to close.
The city's counsel responded that the state statute Begner cited governs package (off-premise) sales and does not limit local fees for on-premise consumption; the city also emphasized that Rush's own signed application asserts the features that trigger the entertainment-venue classification. The city asked the board to uphold the administrative denial of the renewal application.
Other evidence and issues: During cross-examination Chapman acknowledged the police report (dated June 29, 2017) listed ten locations by calls for service (Rush Lounge; Medusa; MPR Inc.; Remix Lounge; Sunrise Bistro; Pegasus; Pink Pony; XS Lounge; Confetti's; Josephine's Lounge) and that the data were not limited to specific types of calls such as assaults or fights. Witnesses and counsel discussed the ordinance's dinner-theater exception, hotel/motel licensing distinctions and the possibility of special-event permits for one-off events.
What happens next: After closing arguments the board voted to move into executive session to deliberate; the chair said a decision would not be issued that night and the parties would receive a ruling later. The hearing record was left open for the board's deliberation.
(Reporting note: court-style statutory citations and ordinance language were taken from exhibits and witness testimony submitted during the hearing.)
Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!
Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.
✓
Get instant access to full meeting videos
✓
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
✓
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
✓
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
30-day money-back guarantee
