AGO 1949-51 No. 151.

• Case Date: November 02, 1949
• Court: Washington

Washington Attorney General Opinions 1949. AGO 1949-51 No. 151. November 2, 1949[Orig. Op. Page 1]PRIVATELICENSE FEES UNDER INITIATIVE NO. 171 [CHAPTER 5, LAWS OF 1949].The Liquor Control Board may make refunds on the unearned portion of Class 23-T license fees.The Board may make refunds of deposits for Class H licenses where the applications therefor were ultimately denied or withdrawn.Where beer and wine licenses were surrendered, no probating of fees is provided.Washington State Liquor Control Board Olympia, WashingtonCite as: AGO 1949-51 No. 151Attention: Evro M. Becket, Chairman Gentlemen: You have submitted to us a number of questions relating to license fees which you stated have arisen by reason of certain amendments made to the Washington State Liquor Act by Initiative No. 171. Your specific questions and our conclusions with respect to each are as follows: QUESTION NO. 1. "Prior to June 2, 1949, on which date all Class 23-T licenses were by operation of the initiative terminated, various clubs in the state held such licenses, which permitted the members to keep on the premises a reasonable quantity of liquor for personal consumption thereon. Where a club applied for and received a [Orig. Op. Page 2] Class H license before, on or after June 2, 1949, may the Board make any refund of the 23-T license fee of $300.00 which was previously paid for the fiscal year October 1, 1948 to September 30, 1949, having in mind that a fee of $300.00 was also required for the Class H license for the fiscal year which ends September 30, 1949?" CONCLUSION: The Board may refund the Class 23-T license fee in proportion to the unexpired term, namely, the period June 2, 1949, to September 30, 1949, inclusive. QUESTION NO. 2. "Where a club with a 23-T license was denied a Class H license prior to June 2, 1949, the license fee previously deposited with the application was refunded, and later, upon request for a hearing, a temporary operating permit was granted until the matter could be heard and the Class H license fee was redeposited, and where it was subsequently decided that the permit be cancelled and the prior denial be affirmed, may the Board return the deposit for the Class H license? Is there any difference in this situation where prior to the Board's action affirming the denial of a Class H license, the club withdrew its application?" CONCLUSION: The Board may return the fee deposited in connection with the application for a Class H license, and the fact that the applicant withdrew its application prior to final action being taken thereon by the Board does not alter the situation. QUESTION NO. 3. "May...