Liquor license conditions banished
Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2019 10:00 am
For those of you that followed the Tom's Town liquor license debacle closely, you'll be interested to know that Regulated Industries has banished all conditions on licenses due to a pending lawsuit. This is not unique to Crossroads, of course, since conditions are allowed everywhere there is a consent requirement. The original goal of these conditions was to allow applicants to open a regulated business if they couldn't get the required consents through the usual means:
"I'm opening X Tavern. Will you consent -- Yes or no?"
...then it became:
"I'm opening X Tavern if I agree to no dancing, live music, or open windows. Will you consent -- Yes or no?"
Of course, the two most egregious examples were Tom's Town (one red wine, one white wine) and West Bottoms (you must rent parking from me) -- both driven by specific individuals who had convinced other consenters to back them.
IMO the problem with this setup from the beginning was that RI didn't narrow the conditions -- it was literally anything someone could come up with that would get consenters to sign. That brought us to some really bizarre outcomes. Good intentions gone awry.
"I'm opening X Tavern. Will you consent -- Yes or no?"
...then it became:
"I'm opening X Tavern if I agree to no dancing, live music, or open windows. Will you consent -- Yes or no?"
Of course, the two most egregious examples were Tom's Town (one red wine, one white wine) and West Bottoms (you must rent parking from me) -- both driven by specific individuals who had convinced other consenters to back them.
IMO the problem with this setup from the beginning was that RI didn't narrow the conditions -- it was literally anything someone could come up with that would get consenters to sign. That brought us to some really bizarre outcomes. Good intentions gone awry.