News-Miner Editorial
Keep it out
Council made the right call by protesting liquor license
Published Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!The Fairbanks City Council got it right when it voted Monday night to oppose the transfer of a liquor license to a business owner who wants to open a grocery store in South Fairbanks.
Alcohol is readily available as it is in that part of town — and in other parts of town — and the addition of another outlet clearly isn’t warranted. People already have plenty of options for buying their beer and booze.
The council’s action isn’t without its consequences, however, as the area could certainly use another full-fledged grocery store, if that’s the type of store that the businessman Patrick Kohls has in mind. Mr. Kohls says the liquor sales are needed to make the grocery store’s finances work out.
Grocery shopping in South Fairbanks and the southern part of downtown has been difficult ever since the old Carrs store, later called the Alaska Marketplace, closed. People have to walk or drive either west to the area of University Avenue and Airport Way or northeast to the Bentley Mall and Old Steese Highway.
That, admittedly, is a long way to go.
But it is no reason to exacerbate the already troubling problem of excessive alcohol consumption and the problems that go with it.
Anyone who needs to see how reducing, not increasing, the number of alcohol outlets in a specific area of a community can improve things need only look at downtown Fairbanks. Years of concerted effort by downtown groups and supportive city officials have sharply reduced the number of bars in the city core. As a result, the environment has become cleaner and more inviting for family or business visits.
Those who complain that the City Council’s decision is an example of unwarranted government intervention in the marketplace simply have it wrong. Government does have a role, and there have been repeated examples — here and elsewhere in the nation — of residents wanting their local government to keep big box stores out of certain parts of town, to keep “adult” stores away from residential neighborhoods and schools, and to sequester businesses that generate lots of noise. The list goes on in the name of creating, improving or maintaining a desirable community.
Council members are charged with looking out for the city’s well-being. They got it right in protesting the liquor license transfer. Let’s hope the state Alcoholic Beverage Control Board heeds that protest.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
I DONT WANT ANY ALCOHOL STORE OR BARS WITHIN AREA OF UNIVERSITY AVE AND AIRPORT WAY ...... BECAUSE OF PEOPLE GETTING DRUNK AND BREAK LOCK OR PULL HARD ON DOOR AT OUR APT BUILDING. AND LAY ON FLOOR AND SLEEPING IN OUR APT BUILDING NOW GET OUT OF OUR AREA KEEP IT DRY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
USING CAPS LOCK GETS MY POINT ACROSS!!!
But seriously. What if Safeway wanted to open a new store in the south cushman area, and it happens to have a liquor store, would people object? Does it make any difference having another liquor store in that area? All they have to do is walk another 100 feet for thirfty liquor anyway. I hear theres also a good place to sleep behind that 3 foot high block wall.
More liquor stores.. less liquor stores.. the same drunk people will be drifting into the road either way.
The article above is wrong on many points.
One of them is comparing apples to oranges.
Examples are comparing bars to grocery stores, adult stores to grocery stores, and box stores to a independent grocery store.
The governments role ended once it determined the zoning restrictions for the parcel of land in question.
Want to insure that "Adult" stores cannot be placed near schools?
Perfect then make it a ordinance that every potential business must abide by. The same goes for box stores.
It is hypocritical and smacks of bias for a government body to allow one private business to sell alcohol and take away that right from another.
Allowing more locations in close proximity of each other does not increases alcohol sales. I would venture to say that adding additional locations only reduces the potential income of the stores that already are in place.
Does the fact that another vendor wishes to sell alcohol in close proximity of other sellers make you suddenly and uncontrollably want to start drinking?
I didn't think so, yet the article above seems to make this assumption that everyone is incapable of self control when confronted with more choices.
Yes, there are some people that lack the ability to use alcohol in a responsible manner. We see them on the streets on occasion. But, does this fact mean that majority of responsible citizens should be denied A grocery store within close proximity of there community and the convenience of also purchasing alcohol at the same time if they desire?
I have to agree with brianbb98. It appears that the city council is selecting where people can shop and at what stores. Sounds like the grocery store is needed in the community. Just curious, but did anyone ask the residents of South Fairbanks what they wanted? I have no problem with the decision if it is what the people want. I do have a problem with being dictated to by one group.
I am so happy I do not live in the City!! For one, the council appears to welcome stores like Safeway or Freddies, but on the other hand, a place like Lindy's that happens to sell booze is taboo. What the heck is up with that?? Also, once again I must disagree strongly with the DNM editorial staff:
Anyone who needs to see how reducing, not increasing, the number of alcohol outlets in a specific area of a community can improve things need only look at downtown Fairbanks.
How in the world can you think this is the case??? The FDA RUINED downtown Fairbanks in the 80s, and it is very unlikely to ever recover its original charm and wild west feeling!! Tourist do NOT come to Fairbanks Alaska to see a SpringHill Suites hotel. They can see that in Seattle. Downtown has died, and has been dead for years now. What a pity.
How stupid! This area really could use a grocery store! I think city council should be smart enough to figure out that even if there was only 1 liquor store in S. Fairbanks, that the same amount of people drinking would still be drinking.
If I was on city council I would have told this business man - fine, build your grocery store & fill it with groceries. When you get that far I will happily hand you your liquor license!
Do any of you people have brains?
I say let 'em put the booze store in. After all, it isn't like it's a crack house or anything.
Another grocery store,, NO WAY ,, there are too many FAT people in that area, we must protect them for that nasty food. Thank you city council for helping us keep healthy..after all thats your job.
Gimme a break... What I say to City Council is simple!! Get rid of the van that goes around and picks the drunks off the streets.. Let them die when it hits 50 below. Then we solve two problems. We save the city money because the ineberate programs would soon vanish, and downtown would become a safe place to be. Last question, why are we as tax payers paying for these programs, then when we the people want to open a business with our own $$ can the city step in and (with our same money) tell us No.. So much for free enterprise. I say we all pool our money together and sue the city, but we all know would be stuck with that bill?? Government is getting to big, and it is time for folks like you and me to stand up and put a stop to it!! I for one am sick and tired of it, right along with the New, so called Mayor!!!!
(This comment was removed by the Newsminer.com staff. Please see our User Agreement for further information.)
back to the original topic- no food store in a community of low income prodominatly black low income residents? lots of booze stores? sounds like its planned that way..
Thank you NEWS-CLUELESS. I can not have a grocery store in my neighborhood. So you include this useful article about eating the weeds in my lawn.
Your so special.
jon tucker
I think the readers of the NewsMiner generally disagree with the decision. Glad to know what kind of company I'm around while on here. :)
Limiting the number of liquor stores by license always seemed foolish and likely to increase the incentives for corruption to me. The better option is to allow legal stores to sell liquor but increase consumption taxes and fines for those who sell to minors and others who are prohibited from such purchases (I would create IDs that prohibit purchasing for those with a recent history of abusing alcohol).
This would cut consumption and raise government revenue. The current system of focusing more on limiting locations increases the likely hood of drunk drivers and drunken walkers who freeze to death (but at least do not injure others).
(This comment was removed by the Newsminer.com staff. Please see our User Agreement for further information.)
We are already one of the few states that requires beer and wine to be sold only in liquor stores. Everywhere I go outside the beer and wine is next to the juice and milk in the grocery store and it is no big deal. It's also interesting to note that Alaska has one of the highest alcohol taxes in the US. Let's deregulate beer and wine a little and not make such a big deal about where you can and can't buy it. Less government means more freedom, not the other way around.
It will not cause any more people to use alcohol if a grocery store that also sells alcohol opens. If they want it, they will get it, (and maybe not have to dangerously drive or walk so far). Conversely, many many more people will have, finally, a place to get their groceries by walking or driving a short distance, like in the good old Foodland days! No more cabs to get groceries! How can you disallow this to all these people?
Remeber that this is an advisory to the ABC board. I would love to see another place to buy food and I hope ABC will take that into consideration. Also stopping the van is not only bad for the city but will cost more. Who do you think will be the caregivers to our chronic drunks? Fire and Police and FMH and right now they have their hands full.
The "Detox Van" is run by Fairbanks Native Association-not your tax dollars.
I say, keep it going. They do a great job of helping people that are unable to care for themselves.
Their alcoholism is just a fraction of the big picture. Alot of these people were introduced to alcohol during their childhood and never had a chance to learn the daily living skills. For example, how to budget their money for the month, how to do their shopping, sign a rent agreement, do laundry, cook, eat nutritionally, how to apply for and keep a job.
Walk a mile in their shoes...you would probably end up in the same or worse situation.
Spend your tax dollars on a program to re-educate this population. Teach them the basics of living a clean and sober life...it takes more than taking the alcohol and/or drugs away. It takes knowledge and fortitude.
By the way, I would drive out of my way to shop at a store that is NOT a link in a chain...I would love to see a good ole fashioned "mom and pop store" in Fairbanks.
Get the government out of "free enterprise"!
I remember Lindy's there on Barnett. It was truly a Mom and Pop grocery that shipped orders to the bush. It is a shame that they got old and downtown changed so much!!
goldstreamer- I agree with you on about all of your positions. I just want to make the distinction that while FNA runs the de-tox van not only Natives use it. Alcoholism does not know race boundries, and many people use that van. I know you know that- I just want to make sure others don't all the sudden start shouting Natives. That is one thing that irritates me about this paper- they are very racist! There are problems in our community just like every community, the government CAN NOT fix it, and the News Minus generally makes it worse. That's my two cents here.
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.