Question from Anonymous
Just a few question concerning the moist issue. You have made these statements in the past and possible you can help clarify some of you responses? “I welcome a discussion of the pros and cons of the sale of alcohol in large restaurants.” Are you willing to form a committee of citizens to start the discussion? “I have heard some economic development arguments in favor of selling alcohol in large restaurants. But before I could embrace that concept, I would have to see the crime statistics from Danville, London, Corbin, Burnside, and Harrodsburg on their experience with alcohol sales in restuarants. “ Would you be willing to ask you Police Chief to call these Cities Police Departments and ask or maybe you could call the Mayor in those cities if it is not to much of a problem? “The possibility of a regulatory fee on alcohol would likely only offset the administrative costs of monitoring alcohol sales.” Maybe I just don’t understand but wouldn’t the State Alcohol Beverage Control do this function? That is what this department does. I hope you’re not just blowing smoke on this issue. There are a lot of folks want a frank honest discussion but you seem to weasel out of a straight forward answer.
Steve Connelly answered:
I am willing to participate in such a discussion, I will attend, but I will not organize it. I think that the discussion needs to be among our citizens. If citizens are not interested enough to start talking about the issue, that says a lot about the community interest-level.
My review of KRS 243.075 is the basis for the last statement about regulatory fees only offsetting the administrative costs. I am ready to be educated on this matter through any resulting dicussion on the topic.
If there are "a lot of folks (who) want a frank honest discussion" on this issue," why don't they orgainize it. To me, a discussion implies two sides and a clash of ideas which means that an opposing view might ultimately prevail. Are all these "folks" whom you mention ready to discuss with an open mind?
My review of KRS 243.075 is the basis for the last statement about regulatory fees only offsetting the administrative costs. I am ready to be educated on this matter through any resulting dicussion on the topic.
If there are "a lot of folks (who) want a frank honest discussion" on this issue," why don't they orgainize it. To me, a discussion implies two sides and a clash of ideas which means that an opposing view might ultimately prevail. Are all these "folks" whom you mention ready to discuss with an open mind?