Liquor Stings - worse than bee stings

When you can't get to sleep one of these nights in Woodstock, go to the City's website and read the transcript of the September 10, 2008, Liquor Commission Special Meeting. Right, that's "transcript"; not Minutes.

Thanks to a lot of nagging from me, the City finally posted the Minutes (and transcript) of that meeting and also of the November 17, 2008, Special Meeting on its website today. To find these documents, go to www.woodstockil.gov and then scroll down to Boards and Commissions. Wait! Don't click yet!

Roll your mouse over Boards and Commissions, then over either Agendas or Minutes and then continuing rolling to the Liquor Commission. Save some clicks and some time.

Then pick the date for which you would like to look at the Minutes.

If you view the July 30, 2008 Minutes, you'll see the traditional format of Minutes as prepared by Cindy Smiley, the City's Chief Deputy Clerk. This meeting involved hearings on several alleged liquor violations and resulted in substantial total fines and business closing penalties, plus costs.

And if you view the November 17, 2008 Minutes, you'll again see the traditional format of Minutes, also prepared by Cindy Smiley. No hearings on violations were held at this meeting.

But then go to the September 10, 2008 Minutes. You may want to get the peanuts and a six-pack before you start reading. At this meeting was a court reporter to record verbatim testimony for two hearings on violations.

The attorney for one licensee stated, "...I had gotten into this for other reasons pretty heavily with other licensees to try to determine some facts because there were some things going on elsewhere with some stings that were very questionable..."

Liquor licensees are in a very delicate position in a city such as Woodstock. If they look cross-eyed at the wrong people, they can quickly end up on the short end of the stick - if you know what I mean.

Liquor licensees are business people. They understand their obligations to comply with liquor laws. And they understand the penalties for violating the liquor laws.

They don't need to be raked over the coals, if a violation occurs. Agreements are usually worked out between the lawyers, and the meetings of a Liquor Commission are merely a formality to "seal the deal."

But not in Woodstock, according to my reading of a number of sets of Minutes and the transcript of the September 10, 2008 Special Meeting.

Somebody is going to have to stand up for the liquor licensees. It is very difficult for them to stand up for themselves, because they have to worry about the thumb of the Liquor Commission squashing them. But We the People can help assure them fair dealings, consideration and respect.

And it's time for the People of Woodstock to step forward and examine carefully how the Liquor Commission operates. Maybe it's not so bad as presented on paper. But maybe it is.

One way to find out is to attend this Monday's Special Meeting (there are all Special Meetings; none is scheduled regularly each month) at 7:00PM at City Hall. That's this Monday, January 26, 2009.

Will you be there?

Miska's - convenience or liquor store?

On March 4, 2008, Councilman Ralph Webster asked a question at the City Council meeting about the percentage of revenues of Miska’s Liquor that were alcohol related. From the Minutes of that meeting: “R. Webster expressed his concern with Miska’s Liquors. They originally approached Council as a convenient (sic) store but have since become a liquor store.”

As I recall, Mayor Sager said that Miska’s alcohol sales were less than 50% of its total revenues. In other words, it was a convenience store that was being allowed to sell liquor, not a liquor store that would also sell convenience store items.

I recall that Mayor Sager, who chairs the Woodstock Liquor Commission, told Councilman Webster that he would get back to him. (Now there’s a phrase that takes on new meaning after this year’s political season! wink, wink)

The next day I went into Miska’s (for the first and only time), and that store is clearly a liquor store. It was hard to find any merchandise that was non-alcoholic. Some bread, some milk, some candy. And rows and rows of liquor. And not only small, lower-priced bottles and brands.

Now, I have nothing against a store that sells liquor. If customers want to buy it, they should be able to. And they should have multiple store choices for their purchases. But if their deal with the City was that less than half of their sales would be liquor, then the City ought to be sitting up, taking notice and acting.

Back on June 22, I emailed Ralph Webster to ask if he had gotten an answer about the sales at Miska’s. Ralph replied that he’d check on it. So, in three months he hadn’t gotten an answer.

Now six more months have passed. When no further information was forthcoming, I emailed City Manager Tim Clifton on December 14 and asked for him to forward my request for information to the Liquor Commission. Tim’s a great City Manager and I’m sure he forwarded my email. However, no one from the Liquor Commission has responded.

Ralph’s concern on March 4th was a valid one and worthy of a prompt answer. I suspect that he had a reason for asking it. Questions like that don’t just come out of the blue. That it apparently hasn’t been answered for months causes me to wonder why.

I could, of course, ask my question about percentage of sales at any regularly-scheduled meeting of the Liquor Commission. Unfortunately, there aren't any Regular Meetings, only Special Meetings announced on the 48 hours’ required notice to members and posted at City Hall. The media (only certain members of the media, not The Woodstock Advocate (at least, not yet)) get notice of Special Meetings.

The blue bird of happiness ...

... flew over the Cuckoo's Nest in Cary and dumped a $750 fine on them for what is very likely not even a violation of Cary's liquor laws. But did the argument of the owner's attorney make it past the coiffed hair of Cary's mayor, Steve Lamal? (Hey, I'm just envious of that full head of white hair.)

Cary's liquor laws apparently prohibit the serving of an alcoholic beverage after 1:00AM. About 1:30AM on October 30th, one of Cary's finest popped into the bar and spotted a person having a drink at the bar.

Did he see the liquor served after 1:00AM? Apparently not. Now, doesn't anyone know that no one can nurse a drink late at night for 30 minutes? Huh? You do know that, don't you? So, therefore, the drink had to have been served after 1:00AM.

Not!

Cary Village President and Liquor Commissioner Lamal is quoted in the Northwest Herald as saying, "I don't care what the ordinance says." He didn't really say that, did he?

A master of the English language, Cary's President is also quoted as saying, "I can't let this go. It's time to clean up some of that crap."

A $750 fine plus the Village's legal fees was imposed on the owner of the Cuckoo's Nest during the 45-minute hearing.

Since the Cuckoo's Nest hadn't had a liquor violation for nine years, I'm wondering just what "crap" the good Village President is referring to.

It's certainly a good thing that the Woodstock Liquor Commission doesn't browbeat or berate liquor licensees in our fair city. It disposed of five violations in 95 minutes on July 30, 2008, and racked up $5,750 in fines, plus the City's legal expense, and continued two other violation charges. Not bad for 95 minutes' work; right?

Those two remaining charges were to be heard and resolved at a Special Meeting of the Woodstock Liquor Commission on September 10, 2008. Hopefully, the City will be posting the Minutes of that Special Meeting this next week, since I nudged them to do so.

And there may be Minutes of yet another Special Meeting of the Liquor Commission lost in the Bermuda Triangle, because D.C. Cobbs has been ordered by the Woodstock City Council to spend money to make an unnecessary change in its Benton Street exit and to change it to an emergency-exit only.

On September 10 the Liquor Commission was to consider a violation of liquor laws charged by the Woodstock Police Department, but the Minutes of this Special Meeting have never been posted on the City's website.

When did the topic of the rear entrance come up? On September 10 or at a subsequent Special Meeting? Did the Liquor Commission hold a Special Meeting in October? If at a different Special Meeting, then the Agenda and the Minutes for that meeting are missing, too.

Woodstock's Mayor and Liquor Commissioner Brian Sager is normally a stickler for detail. Why weren't these Minutes posted promptly?