I am writing in response to the article entitled “Council nixes wine on grocery store shelf” in the Oct. 21 issue.
What right do council and Mayor Hawes have to prohibit grocery stores from selling alcohol if they wish to do so? They say they were convinced that this was a bad idea because of a presentation given by Mr. Hick who told council “… that allowing expanded wine sales will have a major impact on small liquor store owners and create more harm on the social side. The more available you make alcohol, the greater the social costs resulting from alcohol.”
First of all, by allowing grocery stores to sell alcohol it should help to keep the price of alcohol uniform among grocery stores, government-run liquor stores, and privately owned liquor stores.
The claim that making alcohol more easily available increases social costs from alcohol is quite a brazen statement and should be backed up with some facts – if there are any – that this has been proven to be true.
This statement, and statements like this one, is a way for some people – like Mr. Hick who gave the council presentation – to patronize other people and treat them as if they are irresponsible children rather than rational adults. Shame on council for going along with this negative kind of thinking.
Mayor Hawes says that he “could not see any benefit to selling wine in grocery stores.” Well, I think the only reason to sell liquor products in grocery stores is to make purchasing it more convenient for the customer.
Perhaps the District of Mission should organize a voting opportunity for Mission residents and let the people decide for themselves
Council is supposed to make decisions based on what the public who voted them into office wants. Council is not supposed to dictate to the public what they think is best. The council members are not our parents; the Mission public are not children.
Karen Gardner
Mission