NORFOLK, Va. (WAVY) — The Armed Forces Brewing Company’s attorney, Tim Anderson, wrote a letter to Norfolk City Attorney Bernard Pishko to express concerns, and potential consequences, if the Norfolk City Council denies the brewery’s conditional use permit.
This comes after the split vote 4-2 where the Norfolk Planning Commission recommended to the city to deny the conditional use permits for the company on Nov. 16, and speakers pro and against the company gave public comments at the meeting.
Anderson states that the questions asked of CEO Alan Beal were not relevant to the decision on whether the business should operate at the location previously operated by O’Connor Brewing Company.
Norfolk Councilwoman Andria McClellan said, in a Facebook post, that the branding of the company was not right for the culture of the city.
“Keeping it real, why did this company – with this type of branding – think this would play well in NFK?” McClellan wrote on Facebook. “They didn’t reach out to the local leaders, and they obviously don’t know the culture.”
The questions surrounding Beal’s military status, political views, etc. showed bias, and shouldn’t be used to determine whether the company can sell beer, Anderson states. The letter goes on to explain that the city should be focusing on the legality of the company.
“A substantial part of the hearing, including all the public comments in opposition, were focused on whether the theme of Armed Forced Brewing Company is a theme the City of Norfolk could approve of,” the letter reads. “This is not proper or legal standard for members of the City Council to consider next month.”
The controversy for the business sparked after spokesperson Robert O’Neill, the former U.S. Navy SEAL Team 6 member known for shooting and killing Osama Bin Laden, commented on drag queens being used as recruiters.
O’Neill said in response that China was “going to destroy” the U.S., and he couldn’t believe he fought for that. Other instances of Beal supporting right-wing public figures such as Mike Lindell and country singer John Rich led to backlash for the Armed Forces Brewing Company.
“What is 100% clear to me is that if my client was an activist brewery positively engaged in promoting LGBTQ ideas — the application would have sailed through planning, and I would not be writing this letter,” the letter reads. “Instead, my client is facing recommendations for the denial of their applications based on speech and political positions of owners and the pro-military theme Armed Forces Brewing Company stands for.”
The Armed Forces Brewing Company already has several conditional use permits to a brewery out of location where a brewery was previously run. In this case, the location the company was moving to was previously O’Connor Brewing Company.
The letter from the attorney cites Marks v. City of Chesapeake where the city was sued for denying a palm reader conditional use permit to cater to religious rights. The lawsuit was won after the U.S. District Court said the reason for denial was arbitrary and not relevant to the legality of the permit, Anderson states. The implication being that the same standard applies for the brewery.
Since the city had already previously zoned and permitted craft beer to be produced at the site, they can’t deny the permit unless there is a “substantial” impact on the health, safety and welfare of the public under Virginia law § 15.2-2288.3:1.
Continue to check WAVY.com for updates.