[Neighbors] Proposed liquor license variations - Hit the specific problems please

[Charlie Bennett via Neighbors_nobhill-nm]

Spencer.

None of which is enforceable under City Ordinance or State Statute, in my
opinion.  This City has no legal requirement to be socially responsible and
it is not addressed in ordinance or code.  Historically, promises during
hearings aren't worth the air or ink used to express them.  Any promises
from the applicant must be contractual to be considered serious, i.e. a
*written* contract with stated means of enforcement and a method of
remediation if the contract is broken.  Anything less is just smoke.

Do remember the rules of the ZHE and EPC:  "It is the burden of the
applicant to prove that their project will not be injurious to the
adjoining community."  That's the only argument any community has available
to them and it's the only one they'll need, all the way to District Court.
This comes from a number of successes by Nancy Bearce for our neighborhood
and a few others, one involving Moe Chavez's firm.

Do not let this go down the path of State Statute. Since 2006, the
Directors of NM Div. of Alcohol & Gaming (AGD) have been political plants
chosen by the liquor lobby, one of which is of council to Moe Chavez.  As
of 2006, AGD is governed by Rules made by that Division and an advisory
board made up of lobbyists.  These Rules are commonly used to circumvent
Statute, particularly regarding the number of licenses sold in any
particular County.

Again, in my opinion, the only other recourse any community has are metro
elections.

Just sayin'
Charlie Bennett
La Mesa Community Improvement Association



On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 5:16 PM, Spencer via Neighbors_nobhill-nm <
neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com> wrote:

> Pat & Neighbors,
>
> The issue of liquor sales near churches seems irrelevant when it comes to
> the actual problems the neighborhood has had with some drink sales. Most of
> the actual problems are rowdy people coming out of bars, car crimes related
> to patrons' cars parked along dark streets late at night, and DWI.
>
> So why not try to push for a conditional use tied to granting
> any alcoholic drink sales, one that requires the business operator to
> provide neighborhood security until an hour after the business closes? That
> "security" could be hiring or paying-for actual police officers to
> continuously patrol the area within a quarter mile radius of the
> establishment. The rule could allow businesses that are close together, say
> within the same quarter mile radius, to share the cost for an officer. That
> would give them some incentive to pool resources.
>
> Right now, liquor selling businesses will claim amazing compliance and
> security within their walls, but feel no official responsibility for
> patrons' actions once they leave. That may be a good legal stand, but
> mighty crumby when it comes to social responsibility and it doesn't
> recognize the reality of late night drink sales.
>
> This would be a tough road to go down, but it sure would be worth it.
>
> --
> Spencer Nelson
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Neighbors_nobhill-nm mailing list
> Neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com
> http://mailman.swcp.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/neighbors_nobhill-nm
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.swcp.com/pipermail/neighbors_nobhill-nm/attachments/20160913/b91913a3/attachment.html>