Skip to main content
powered help
header-left header-center header-right
File #: 250776    Version: 0
Type: Motion Status: Passed
File created: 9/2/2025 In control: LICENSES COMMITTEE
On agenda: Final action: 9/23/2025
Effective date:    
Title: Motion relating to the revocation of the Class B Tavern and Public Entertainment Premises licenses of Francisco Gomez-Ortiz, agent for Cantaritos Bar, LLC; for the premises located at 1566-1570 S Muskego Ave doing business as “Passion Nightclub” in the 12th aldermanic district.
Sponsors: THE CHAIR
Indexes: LICENSES
Attachments: 1. Passions Night Club Complaint Summons and Police Report, 2. Proof of Service Passion Nightclub, 3. LI Recommendations, 4. Post Committee Letters, 5. Post Council Letters
Date Ver.Action ByActionResultTallyAction DetailsMeeting DetailsVideo
9/23/20250 COMMON COUNCIL APPROVED

Minutes note: Common Council File Number 250776 recommends the revocation of the Class B Tavern and Public Entertainment Premises licenses for Francisco GOMEZ-ORTIZ, based upon the preponderance of the evidence on the police report and MPD testimony that demonstrates the operation results in threat to health, safety or welfare of the public for failure to comply with the approved plan of operations, the illegal drug activity, the criminal complaint and exhibits; for the premises located at 1566-1570 S MUSKEGO Av. (“PASSION NIGHTCLUB”) in the 12th aldermanic district. (No written objections have been filed).
Pass15:0 Action details Meeting details Video Video
9/9/20250 LICENSES COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL

Minutes note: Atty. Adamson appeared on behalf of MPD who is present in person by Officer Vodicka. Atty. Geoffrey Misfeldt appeared with the licensee Francisco Gomez Ortiz and Marina Mahler as interpreter. The licensee, Ms. Maller and Officer Vodicka were sworn in. Atty. Misfeldt acknowledged the receipt of the revocation notice. Atty. Adamson said that the police report can be accepted as evidence, that he also submitted Exhibit A which is an authenticated copy of the criminal complaint, information and court record of the events associated with criminal charges from the items listed on the premises license report and that Officer Vodicka will testify in order to provide more context. The police report was read. Atty. Adamson requested that Exhibited A is moved as evidence. Atty. Gresham said that it is acceptable. Officer Vodicka was called to testify. Atty, Misfeldt made a standing objection to Officer’s Vodicka as a hearsay testimony. Atty. Adamson said that he would make an exception for hearsay under chapter 908 for this committee to be taken in consideration as part of the determination. As for the standing objection, Atty. Adamson said that Officer Vodicka was the one who wrote the licenses premises report regarding the warrant executed. Officer Vodicka – District 2 – explained that the premises falls within the district and that he was not present but that he wrote the license report. Answering Atty. Adamson’ questions, Officer Vodicka described that in the building there are 5 apartments upstairs and the ground floor is primarily the bar and a single apartment, and the basement area as well. He said that you won’t even know that the apartment is there, that is towards the rear of the location. He said that is an exterior entrance off the side street, there is a hallway with an unknown stairwell that goes up from the storage area in the basement. He added that from the pictures it seems that is underneath another stairwell that leads to the apartment as well. He explained that at this apartment personal identifiers were recovered like a passport, medication, mail and utility bills that belong to the licensee. He explained that the majority of the cocaine was recovered from the utility room which is connected to both: the apartment and the bar. He added that there was cocaine, two fire arms, marijuana and a large amount of US currency were recovered on the apartment. He also said that agent was on scene at the time and the licensee is also the owner of the property and that the licensee indicated that he was the boss for the last 15 years. Officer Vodicka said that to his recollection, there were 107 doses/packages of cocaine totaling 60 grams and that into his personal training an experience 107 doses are not for personal use but for distribution/sale. Atty. Misfeldt asked if the cocaine was concealed in the stove hood. Officer Vodicka answered “yes”. Atty. Misfeldt said that the cocaine doses were not obviously noticed by anyone walking in/around this apartment. Officer Vodicka said that it is correct. Atty. Vodicka asked if the stairwell from the basement was in a separate basement bar storage area. Officer Vodicka said that the photos are not clear but that it seems to lead to what looks like a closet in the apartment area. Atty. Misfeldt asked what would prevent anyone including customers and employees to access to this this storage area/apartment. Officer Vodicka answered “nothing”. Atty. Misfeld asked if the purchase of controlled drugs are from the bar employees and not Mr. Gomez Ortiz. Officer Vodicka said that it is correct. Ald. Burgelis asked if the investigation revealed who occupied the apartment. Officer Vodicka said that the licensee based on the personal identifiers like the passport, mail, utility bills and medication recovered. Ald. Burgelis is there is a direct access from the department to the bar. Officer Vodicka said that he believes there is another door based on what read on the report that it was unknown to the officer when they conducted the search warrant. Atty. Adamson said that he has presented his evidence and that he will reserve any remaining time for arguments. The committee had no further questions about the complaint. The local alderman had no further questions about the complaint. The licensee had no further questions about the complaint Atty. Misfeldt said that his client is facing very serious federal charges and that he cannot answer questions about the pending criminal matter and asked if the committee has questions in regards of the business operation and safety measures. There were no neighbors present to testify. Ald. Chambers asked the licensee if he had services in place for intoxicated people like the ones from the fights on May 17th and June 8th to ensure that they are removed safely. The licensee that his experience tells him when to stop serving patrons but that this particular patron was not happy because they did not serve him more and started to bother other patrons. Ald. Chambers asked the licensee how often he is at the bar. The licensee explained said that he is not there everyday due another businesses occupations. Ald. Perez said that he has very simple rules for all the licenses business at his district (no problems with law, no problems with neighbors) and that this bar has had problems along the years and that he agrees with the revocation because it has met the benchmark. Atty. Adamson said that the criminal case ongoing has no bearing with this committee and whether or not the cocaine was sold by him or his employees, the apartment has been allowed to store cocaine, firearms and cash and that this is not an isolated case. Atty. Misfeldt said that he disagrees because if you know that your employees are selling cocaine, it does not make any sense that the applicant calls the police and cooperates with MPD as the police report says (cooperation with law enforcement, dealing with misbehaviors and checking ids). Atty. Misfeldt said that the licensee has been in Milwaukee for 25 years, has raised 6 kids, pays taxes, that he is a successful business owner, a responsible property owner and that he understands that he is responsible for the items found and that anyone in the bar has access to it. He added that the bar has been closed since the search warrant, that no one from the community is here to complaint that the bar is a nuisance and that he thinks that 90 days suspension is sufficient for his client to figure things out. Mr. Cooney confirmed that the licensee has been the agent since 2011. Ald. Zamarripa wanted to point out that there are items on the police report that not necessarily are cooperative. Mr. Cooney said that the licenses have been granted with a warning letter in 2022, 2019, 2017, 2014 and 2013 and with 10 (ten) day suspensions in 2016 and 2015. Ald. Burgelis said that the licensee is not disputing the charges and moved for revocation of the Class B Tavern and Public Entertainment Premises licenses based upon the preponderance of the evidence on the police report and MPD testimony that demonstrates the operation results in threat to health, safety or welfare of the public for failure to comply with the approved plan of operations, the illegal drug activity, the criminal complaint and evidences. There were no objections. (Prevailed 5-0)
Pass5:0 Action details Meeting details Not available
9/2/20250 COMMON COUNCIL ASSIGNED TO   Action details Meeting details Not available

Number

250776

Version

ORIGINAL

Reference

 

Sponsor

THE CHAIR

Title

Motion relating to the revocation of the Class B Tavern and Public Entertainment Premises licenses of Francisco Gomez-Ortiz, agent for Cantaritos Bar, LLC; for the premises located at 1566-1570 S Muskego Ave doing business as “Passion Nightclub” in the 12th aldermanic district.

Text

It is moved, by the Common Council of the City of Milwaukee, that the Common Council accepts the recommendations of the Licenses Committee as attached to this file.

Requestor

 

Drafter

CC-CC

Laurie Phillip

8/28/2025