[Town Meeting] The Town Moderator suggested I post this to the site that's why I sent it (fwd)

[Rich Carreiro]

Note for future reference -- I'm letting this through because
the Moderator suggested the gentleman send it here.  I think
it treads very close to the "no discussion" line, though (which
is not Mr. Duggan's fault of course, since he has no reason
to know the rules.).  Still, it seems close enough to the character
of a handout to let it go.

(Note to new members -- I'll be sending a background-of-this-list
post out very soon)

-- 
Rich Carreiro                            rlcarr at rlcarr.com


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 12:14:59 -0400
From: Wally Raymond <wallyr123 at gmail.com>
To: townmeeting-owner at arlingtonlist.org
Subject: The Town Moderator suggested I post this to the site that's why I sent
    it

Dear Town Meeting Member:

 

Upfront, I want to apologize for having to contact you again and make a plea
for your support on an issue that seemingly will not go away.  

On the Town Meeting Warrant, Article 22 again requests your authorization to
place upon the ballot the authorization of two additional liquor licenses
for the sale of ALL alcoholic beverages.

This is outrageous!!  

During the last Special Town Meeting Warrant, the Town Meeting approved a
binding question to be placed on the April 10th ballot asking the town's
approval for the three existing liquor stores to be licensed to sell ALL
alcoholic beverages.  Somehow this did not happen.  Somehow the
communication with the State was incorrect.

As I requested in my last letter to you all, the three existing stores need
time to establish themselves as viable businesses.  I told you how much our
startup costs were, how many Arlington residents we employ, how much we are
doing in regards to giving back to the community through charitable
donations and how adding additional stores could affect all of this.  An
Article from the April 4th Boston Sunday Globe strongly makes the case for
protecting the interests of current liquor license holders by limiting
excessive competition.  Our vendors have provided us with documentation
about how much we stand to lose should additional licenses be issued.  Once
again I'll reiterate that the town will only  generate $2500 for each
additional license so in no way can this be used as a revenue generating
tool to help the town during these trying times.

I ask that during the debate, that a motion to remove Article 22 from the
warrant be passed and that you question officials as to why the ballot
question YOU approved in November did not appear on the April 10th town
ballot.  If possible, I ask that you put a 2 year moratorium on the issuance
of additional liquor stores in the town so that existing stores can get the
chance to fully establish themselves and begin to recoup their initial
investments.  The Small Business Association says it takes a good 5 years
for a business to become strong and have the ability to succeed.

It is highly conceivable that if no action is taken, two new stores could
open in town with the ability to sell ALL alcohol and the three existing
store having only the capacity to sell just Beer & Wine.

 

Regards,

Neil J. Duggan

Principal

Menotomy Beer & Wine