OPINION: Maysville should say ‘No’ to pouring license idea
The controversy in Maysville over whether or not the city should create an alcohol pouring license is reaching a critical point.
In the coming weeks, the Maysville City Council will be voting on the proposal.
But before the council votes, it should be clear about what it’s really voting on. When this issue comes up in small towns, it’s always the same: Some say vote for it because it will bring in high-class restaurants; some say vote against it because alcohol is morally wrong; and others say vote against/for it for financial reasons.
The answer to this issue depends on the town, its geographic location and the demographic profile of the likely customer base.
Based on that in Maysville, the best answer is a “No” vote on the proposal.
For one thing, any idea that approving a pouring license in Maysville would bring in high-class, national restaurants is wrong. Just a few miles from downtown Maysville are dozens of national chain restaurants along I-85. Maysville doesn’t have the population density to support such restaurants and those along the interstate certainly aren’t going to relocate off that corridor to the town.
Rather than luring “classy” restaurants, a pouring license in Maysville is more likely to lure honky-tonks that attempt to masquerade as restaurants, but are really just bars.
In addition, Maysville doesn’t have the financial strength to police local juke-joints. Somebody has to oversee the food-to-alcohol sales ratio and such places often require direct police intervention. Maysville is simply too small to absorb such additional costs.
There are places where pouring licenses for restaurants are certainly appropriate. But every situation is unique and Maysville simply does not need to implement a pouring license until it has the ability to adequately deal with the consequences.
That’s not the case today.
But before the council votes, it should be clear about what it’s really voting on. When this issue comes up in small towns, it’s always the same: Some say vote for it because it will bring in high-class restaurants; some say vote against it because alcohol is morally wrong; and others say vote against/for it for financial reasons.
The answer to this issue depends on the town, its geographic location and the demographic profile of the likely customer base.
Based on that in Maysville, the best answer is a “No” vote on the proposal.
For one thing, any idea that approving a pouring license in Maysville would bring in high-class, national restaurants is wrong. Just a few miles from downtown Maysville are dozens of national chain restaurants along I-85. Maysville doesn’t have the population density to support such restaurants and those along the interstate certainly aren’t going to relocate off that corridor to the town.
Rather than luring “classy” restaurants, a pouring license in Maysville is more likely to lure honky-tonks that attempt to masquerade as restaurants, but are really just bars.
In addition, Maysville doesn’t have the financial strength to police local juke-joints. Somebody has to oversee the food-to-alcohol sales ratio and such places often require direct police intervention. Maysville is simply too small to absorb such additional costs.
There are places where pouring licenses for restaurants are certainly appropriate. But every situation is unique and Maysville simply does not need to implement a pouring license until it has the ability to adequately deal with the consequences.
That’s not the case today.
I could not agree with you more. I actually reside within the city limits of Maysville. I have followed your columns closely with the Pendergrass scandal and now the Maysville alcohol issue. I applaud you for a job well done. Keep up the good work and keep us informed.
If they do pass this Maysville will never be the same again they will need alot more cops round the clock and the number of alcohol related crimes will go up.
Hey I got an ideal if they want to open a bar go to Ila and try to open it? If Maysville needs one then why not Ila?
Certainly the few eating establishments that we have labor along valiantly to keep in business. They make it because they do offer something different from bigger fancier ventures elsewhere.
Even in 2009, there are still many people who prefer good customer service, consistent food quality, and a clean table over decor and an extensive drink menu. The genuine down home personal touch will always be a draw.
I've wondered for a long time if allowing a pouring license in ANY community brings in enough revenue to handle additional police needed by those who abuse the privilege. You can't tell me that intoxicated people don't leave the Red Lobsters and Outbacks of this world every hour of operation, get in their vehicles, and drive amongst all of us.
Yes people do leave Outback and Red Lobster drunk and put us in danger on the roads and I wondered why the law wouldn't sit accross the road and stop the people for DUI when they left? Then I found out that they can't because they say that is entrapment and the people sitting there getting drunk know it.
What really doesn't make sense is Georgia's no Sunday sales of alcohol in stores. This law encourages driving after drinking.
The statement about kids playing safely in Maysville: Most predators are not drunk when they kidnap kids. Better watch them closely. Alcohol has nothing to do with it.
Just how does no Sunday sales of alcohol encourage driving after drinking? That is such a stupid comment I bet you think that gun sales encourages murder?
I don't think they are worried about their kids being kidnapped by drunks? They are worried about their kids being run over by drunks.
Now do you understand Jr?
I'm glad you can read people's minds. You must be proud of yourself.