.jpg)
I don't think so; but that seems to be one of only two arguments to keep the antiquated Wicomico County Liquor Control Board (LCB). The other argument appears to be one of money.
LCB chair Stewart Haemel painted pictures of little kids walking to school and buying liquor on the way. Could it happen? Sure. Will it? Probably not. Despite LCB supporters claims that there will be a liquor store on every corner, this wouldn't be the case if the legislature abolished the LCB. The number of liquor stores would be limited. In addition, the market will regulate the behavior of license holders.
A license to sell liquor isn't cheap. If a license holder is caught selling to minors they can lose their license, possibly forever. This is not the case with the LCB. Despite the arguments of Haemel and fellow board member Ron Alessi to the contrary, the LCB's record on this issue isn't spotless. The LCB has been caught selling to minors. Of course the Liquor Licensing Board can't take the LCB's license away.
LCB proponents also claim that Wicomico County would lose too much money by abolishing the LCB. This is only true in a vacuum. License fees would need to be increased. Current license holders appear to be willing to pay extra for the privilege of other cost savings (and efficiencies) inherent in the abolition of the LCB. Liquor will cost less (to license holders). They can have their product delivered and even get emergency deliveries if necessary.
What really amazes me in this whole affair is how Republicans like Haemel and Alessi can claim that the government not only should compete against private business, but that they are more efficient in doing so.
cross posted at Delmarva Dealings
Technorati Tags: Maryland, Wicomico, politics, Wicomico politics, Stevie Prettyman, Joe Holloway, Rick Pollitt, liquor licensing
LCB chair Stewart Haemel painted pictures of little kids walking to school and buying liquor on the way. Could it happen? Sure. Will it? Probably not. Despite LCB supporters claims that there will be a liquor store on every corner, this wouldn't be the case if the legislature abolished the LCB. The number of liquor stores would be limited. In addition, the market will regulate the behavior of license holders.
A license to sell liquor isn't cheap. If a license holder is caught selling to minors they can lose their license, possibly forever. This is not the case with the LCB. Despite the arguments of Haemel and fellow board member Ron Alessi to the contrary, the LCB's record on this issue isn't spotless. The LCB has been caught selling to minors. Of course the Liquor Licensing Board can't take the LCB's license away.
LCB proponents also claim that Wicomico County would lose too much money by abolishing the LCB. This is only true in a vacuum. License fees would need to be increased. Current license holders appear to be willing to pay extra for the privilege of other cost savings (and efficiencies) inherent in the abolition of the LCB. Liquor will cost less (to license holders). They can have their product delivered and even get emergency deliveries if necessary.
What really amazes me in this whole affair is how Republicans like Haemel and Alessi can claim that the government not only should compete against private business, but that they are more efficient in doing so.
cross posted at Delmarva Dealings
Technorati Tags: Maryland, Wicomico, politics, Wicomico politics, Stevie Prettyman, Joe Holloway, Rick Pollitt, liquor licensing
Obviously Alessi and Haemel are profiting from their positions on the Liqour Board.
ReplyDeleteGA-
ReplyDeleteYou have forgotten (if you ever knew) Ron Reagan's dictum about trashing other Republicans.
Their just grasping at straws in an effort to keep their overpaid positions for doing very little. If there were to be any tax revenue lost, it would be offset from no longer needing those 2 salaries.
ReplyDeleteI'm not up on the LCB and their duties...could someone explain briefly how this works?
ReplyDeleteSalaries? How much?
Term? How long?
Appointed by whom?
Thanks in advance.
I can't believe that the chairman was quoted in the paper to be confiscating ID's. They don't have the authority to do that and in the event of a mistake and they take someone's REAL ID, there is a lawsuit.
ReplyDeleteThey are appointments of the governor, however if you ask him who they are I would bet he couldn't tell you. The board doesn't get paid much, maybe $200 a month to meet twice a month. You have to wonder what else is in it for them besides the 25% employee discount?
The paper was also wrong in the fact that restaurants and bars CAN NOT but their product from any of the three stores, their product has to be purchased from the wholesale department at store #1 in the Giant shopping center. They must also pick up their own product there is no delivery.
ReplyDeleteCAN NOT buy*
ReplyDeleteIf you call $400,000 in revenue for over $3 million in sales efficient when they have a monopoly, what school of business did they go to? How much does it cost to have REGIS do 2 inventories a year and two audits by their accounting firm? I heard someone there screwed up their last inventory and had to have REGIS come back and do it again.
ReplyDeleteIf we do away with the government run establishments and allow business people to own and run liquor stores, wouldn't that add to the tax base making up forr anygovernment loss fromloosing the store revenue? Just how much can these stores be making for the countyanyway? There has to be a reason why these two are so dead set on keeping the county run outlets. Best we delve into what exactly that is?
ReplyDeleteA. Goetz
You also have to consider how much more money non profits like American Legion, VFW's, Moose Lodge, Elks and other places that must buy from the county also. The more money they make, the more they can contribute to the community in the way scholarships and other contributions.
ReplyDeleteAgain, funny that none of yall mention Prettyman and Holloway's motive of personal profit from abolishing the LCB. They get a license, and they keep the profit. Then who is profiting from their position. I can assure you it is not Stewart Haemel right now. His treatment right now is why people stay out of public office. It certainly isn't worth the small amount of money or the stress.
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone know that Councilman Joe Holloway is related to Stewart Haemel? You talk about Reagans dictum about trashing other Republicans, what about a low life like Joe Holloway trashing a relative who happens to be a good Republican. Joe Holloway and Stevie Prettyman are joined at the hip and they have big plans after taking the LCB away from county control. Those two and the Kenney woman are in it for the money and you can bet your life on that. The only thing Holloway knows is running a trashy country store so now running a liquor store is right up his alley. I don't care much for Alessi, but Stewart Haemel doesn't deserved to be trashed like he is.
ReplyDeleteRemember what I told you.
Certainly this is not about Haemel, Holloway or Prettyman. It is about an obselete system that has served its purpose. There are only 4 counties out of the 23 counties in Maryland who still have government run alcohol sales. It is past time that this be privatized for the benefit of the local businesses and citizens.
ReplyDeleteThere was an increase last year and i think the pay is $5000 to $6000 annually. I'm quite sure Mr. Alessi nor Mr. Haemel are not doing it for the money. They are doing it to satisfy their desire to serve the community. I don't think that either one of these men are being targeted personally. Those investigating the change of this system are wanting to make it better for the business community and taxpayers. Government shouldn't be in the business of controlling liquor sales in the year 2008.
ReplyDeleteWell put 5:22pm
ReplyDeletehip.boots
So the board got a bump and get paid $5000 to $6000 a year to meet for about 6 hours a month and sign paychecks? They also have 5 full time people sitting at desks 40 hours a week. That's 200 hours a week of desk sitting and they have paid accountants. That's about $170,000 a year for desk jobs there alone, throw in the benefits and we are looking at about $230,000. That's over half of what they give the county for the entire year.
ReplyDeleteThose figures also don't reflect store branch management pay, full and part time employees that actually stock the shelves and ring up sales, or benefits for those employees. Benefits are estimated at about $10,000 a year per person for full time staff.
And to the person that suggested there would be liquor stores on every corner, license's are a liquor regulation department (Totally separate) thing and they would determine just how many license's to be allowed. How many people out there knew there are 2 liquor boards? One for sales and distribution, and another for license and regulation.
As a matter of fact a few years ago someone from the regulation side was let go for double dipping at the Civic Center (getting paid for two jobs while doing one). Lots of hogs at the trough.
Not a bad side job especially when you get a few construction contracts without having to place a bid, not a bad gig,ah?
I don't think most people have it out for Mr. Haemel, I don't know him, never met him. I do know about Alessi from his unsuccessful run for county executive. I do believe most of it is about government VS business in a antiquated system. It's a new millennium and time to move on and get the program up-to-date.
When I am forced to purchase from the government and pay a great deal more for it, it means my employees get less, and a lower profit percentage for me.
I'll also add that when I can pay my employees better, and I make more money that is more tax revenue. Get over it and bite the dust.
ReplyDeletemost eccellant! 7:14/8:38pm
ReplyDeleteWhat is better for the county? I vote for abolishing the "double function" of the Liquor Control Board and all those salaries it appears to be antiquated, and unnecessary. We are in a critical time financially, so, why is there a question of abolishing an office that is unnecessary. Who cares about the politics involved it should be a decision about necessity. If there is a need for some of the
ReplyDeleteduties then give those duties to the existing licensing board.
If there is discussion abut abolishing a non functioning, costly department, why don't we abolish the Mayor and Council, I see the total trashing of the city by the Mayor, she is going to bankrupt it, in my opinion. Plus soon no one will "own" property since 72% is rented, Lets look at what is and is not good for the folks in this county and city, honestly and truthfully.
We are going to be hit hard and tightening our belts means an honest assessment of what is and what is not financially good for the citizens that the elected officials where sworn to protect. Mr. Pollitt seems to be doing a good job. Barry Tilghman is on a spending spree, hello? Earth to Barry, we are in a depression. STOP spending our money.