The Urban Grape in the Chestnut Hill Shopping Center is asking customers to oppose a request by Star Market to sell beer and wine. (They even tell you what to say in your letters to the mayor, aldermen and press.)
Apparently the application will come up at a hearing on Feb. 21, 7 :30 pm at Newton City Hall.
[polldaddy poll=”5945916″]
The Star over the Pike [now Shaw’s] had a liquor license for quite a while, and I must say it was convenient one-stop shopping. They no longer have it, but there is a liquor store at the same location so it wasn’t a big deal to have to go elsewhere.
I must say there’s a good argument for allowing small businesses like liquor stores to operate, and I’d have to believe they would do a better job of screening for underage purchasers than a large supermarket would.
Perhaps if there were no places nearby to buy liquor, there would be a stronger case for granting this request, but it sounds like there’s plenty of availability there now.
Technically, this is called rent-seeking: using laws and regulations to increase revenue, rather than provide more or better goods and services.
If Urban Grape has value to add to the purchase of alcoholic beverages, then they will do just fine. If they do not, then they should not be shielded from market forces through government protection.
There are lots of layers to this. I may post more later.
Waban Market, Baza, the former Omni, etc sell (or sold) wine and beer while markets such as Trader Joes, Star, Whole Foods in Newton do not. I’m sure most who read this blog know this is because the liquor lobby convinced Massachusetts that allowing chains unlimited rights to sell liquor would crush their most profitable clients. Well, here Star wants to exercise their LIMITED right. Newton should allow them to do that an in unprejudiced fashion. Any negative ruling other than one with safety concerns would be improper.
Right on Sean and Hoss.
The liquor industry in this state is controlled by a small group that has managed to hang on to a near monopoly at the expense of the public. Most every other state allows for much more available beer and wine licenses resulting in far lower prices with no discernible negative effects. The tightly controlled market only benefits a few stores and their friends on the ABC. This is a corrupt vestige of the old blue laws.
Oh dear, Terry, here we go again! I support any locally owned business whenever possible. That means I drive a few extra miles to Keyes Drug, pay a few extra dollars for a book at N’ville Books or NE Mobil Book Fair, buy clothes at small shops and not the chains, give my business to Schwartz Hardware, and frequent the Waban Market. If we want vibrant villages, we need to support the local businesses in them.
I’m with Sean, with a caveat: My exile to Grafton has made me miss two Newton businesses in particular – Blue Ribbon and Marty’s. And not necessarily in that order.
I used to be an enormous proponent of doing away with the silly requirement that I buy my cereal in one place, and then have to hike over to another spot (arbitrarily) to buy beer. It’s an annoying and archaic law.
But from it has come something unexpected and very, very cool: the high-end beer /wine/alcohol specialty store. I love those places. I want to see them thrive. Would I support an arbitrary law, hindering my own convenience and that of my neighbors, so that a place like Marty’s might continue to be? I’m thinking… still thinking…
Yeah, maybe.
@Jane: Is that an argument for denying Star Market a license or for all of us to redouble out commitment to shopping locally with mom and pop businesses?
Jane writes:
There’s a lot packed into that single sentiment. I address what it means to support local businesses by restrictions on non-local businesses in a new post. More interesting is the notion that vibrant villages require local independents (as Chris Steele also contends). I’m not sure that’s true. In light of the decline of independents, we should be rethinking what vibrant villages mean. But, it if is true, our villages are done in their current incarnation, because the forces threatening their existence are a lot bigger than will be overcome by a few people like Jane sacrificing time and money to keep them afloat.
Local businesses make for more unique villages that draw residents to them from the entire city – not just those who live close by. On a regular basis, I go to Nonantum, Waban, Newton Highlands, A’dale, and West Newton to locally owned restaurants or businesses because I know the people, and can count on them for good advice and quality service and goods. When I’m go to those villages, which have a significant number of locally owned businesses and are all of 5 minutes from my home, there are a few other shops that I’ll stop in on. A few weeks ago, I went to Schwartz’s for a can of paint and ended up spending much more at The Antique Shop across the street.
I support policies that encourage an even playing field for local businesses, and if that means some large corporations are denied a huge edge, that’s fine with me. We just had a shopping mall in the city go out of business in part because it was essentially identical to every other mall in the area – same stores, same old, same old.
Basically, if there’s nothing unique or interesting to draw me to villages other than the one down the street, then I don’t go to them.
There are two important questions that Jane’s comment raises:
* Whatever its charms, is it reasonable to hope for/work towards this vision of a village center filled with small independents?
* If we want to support local independents, what’s the best mechanism?
I’ve addressed the first question elsewhere (and will likely revisit it frequently). Retail will play an ever shrinking role in ordering our civic spaces. Independents are a dying breed, for not altogether bad reasons. The only real cure to diminished village centers is more density.
The second question I address in this post. Jane’s words really get to the heart of the problem:
What policies, though? You can’t level the playing field without someone paying a cost.
There are three ways to help independents:
* As individuals, accept the higher prices and greater inconvenience of patronizing independents
* Use regulatory mechanisms like liquor license applications to protect independents
* Provide direct, transparent, explicit subsidies to independents
The first doesn’t scale. Independents are not going to survive on the kindness of strangers (and not-so-strangers).
The second is just bad policy. It’s so hard to measure the cost and benefit and it’s a mechanism rife for abuse.
The third is the only one that makes sense. If we really want to level the playing field, let’s be explicit, transparent, and direct: provide a tax-financed subsidy.
If we’re not willing to do the third, then independents are not important enough to think about doing the second.
If not businesses, then what will be in the village centers? Restaurants? I like restaurants and go to one every few weeks or so. Chain stores? I sure hope not. The village with the most chains (Newton Centre) is the one I avoid whenever possible.
Maybe I’m missing something here, but why do you think 90% of the people go to a village center? In this day and age, the idea that people have the time to hang around villages may also be a dated concept. I go to village centers to get my daily chores done – pick up the dry cleaning, necessities at a drug store, items to work on the house from a hardware store – very practical stuff. I love to run into people and chat in these various places, but then I leave. I want the village to have a full set of services (Waban does) and the best villages have a few extras.
We’ll agree to disagree on your second point. I like regulations. I’ve supported regulations related to noise, smoking in and around public places, use of roads in the city, leash laws, snow shoveling ordinances, political signage on lawns, etc. Truth be known, there are very few regulations I haven’t supported over the years. In my opinion, Newton’s been reasonable in the regulations it’s passed.
Jane,
I also do my best to support local businesses. One of the great examples is the Waban Hardware. Yes, Home Depot has more variety at cheaper prices. But the Waban Hardware is right up the street, provides convenience, advice, good service and personality so I’m willing to pay a premium for odds and end as are others. He gives me a reason to shop there.
Stationary stores were lovely additions to our villages. But after the advent of Staples, many were driven out because they couldn’t compete on the basis of selling commodity items and gave us little reason to shop there. If there is no value-added to a commodity item don’t expect consumers to keep overpaying.
Allowing a more open licensing process doesn’t have to hurt local business, in fact it can help them. A few months ago the Waban Market obtained a liquor license allowing it to sell spirits, in addition to the beer and wine that it already offered. This helps the market stay competitive by giving people another reason to shop there and “one stop shopping”. There are two sides to this sword but the truth is that any village business will not compete with “big business” on the basis of selling commodities but will compete by providing a service element not provided by the big business; quality of service or variety.
VinoDeVino, Marty’s, Upper Falls Liquors, etc… all provide a higher level of service, product and variety that supermarkets won’t offer so they will survive.
There is no fairness for consumers or vendors in a protectionist monopoly (Alcohol Beverage Commission) that is rife with corruption and favoritism.
What @Jane and @Terry said.
@Sean, you and I (and others) will have a long conversation on this topic, and I think that’s great. I tend to agree with you that retail as retail is going to have a tough time, but I do think it’s worth the effort to re-educate ourselves on what these centers provide and why they are valuable. If they don’t serve our needs, well, that’s something we have to deal with and the centers will have to change. But “change” is the key construct, not “close down.” We need to decide what role these centers will play in our lives, and then we should change our policies (and maybe our behaviors) accordingly.
Let’s see which Center comes up with the next story and we’ll pick up the conversation there.
Terry-I love it when we agree on something, even if it’s a small detail. Of course it makes sense to give the Waban Market a license to sell “spirits”. It means more residents will support a local business that not only provides services and goods to the community, but is a tremendous addition to an industry that can be either drab or a unique or interesting – selling groceries. There’s no need to be rigid about the policy, but goodness, here we have someone trying to make a go of it in Newton, and what do we do? Make it more difficult for them.
If we end up with 11 villages with a bunch of corporate-owned shops, then they die. Why bother to go to a village with one or two corporate chains to do your chores when you can go to a mall and have all the very same chains in one place?
So no comments on regulations?
@Sean. I’d like to learn more about the “layers” you mentioned earlier in this post. This has been one of the most mature and informative posts I have read on either Newton blog. I came away agreeing with at least something that everyone said and everyone seemed to be groping with ways to protect small, independent village businesses. Schwartz Hardware is my all time favorite store in Newton, but I also hit Waban Hardware. Please also think about supporting all the small village coffee and sandwich shops. We need more of these and fewer banks and nail salons. I must admit that I hit the McDonalds on Needham Street for a black senior coffee at 5:15 am to take to the Y for yoga and weights. Can’t get going without it. I also can’t expect Peter Meyer at Village Coffee to get up that early for me, but I’ll certainly hit his place and others during the day.