It seems most of the concern regarding increased liquor licenses has focused on the perceived moral issue and the possibility of increased underage drinking due to illegal sales. I won’t get in to the moral issue since I’m not opposed to drinking, although I personally don’t. I also don’t believe large stores will sell liquor to teens (at least until someone sees lost taxes by not selling at gas stations as well). However, advertising has a large impact on youth. I worked in retail for 10 years and stores do not simply set alcohol on shelves and hope it sells. They also advertise within the store which is what I don’t think we need to increase. Advertising highly influences young people and alcohol companies spend a great deal of money for in-store advertising. If you don’t believe advertising sells, consider how the Joe Camel cigarette and Mountain Dew soda advertising campaigns ignited sales of both to teens. In-store advertising works on teens the same way any other advertising works and the teens see it every time they enter a store. By not allowing sales in grocery stores, you reduce the advertising effect on teens.
I’ve long admired our board for being conservative. However, supporters on the board do not seem to want to put this issue up for a referendum, probably because they doubt it would pass. It’s this attitude that will keep me firmly against supporting home rule. This is clearly the most controversial issue I’ve seen in Morton, and if I can’t trust the board to let a referendum decide the issue, then I certainly can’t trust them to act responsibly if they get added authority. Remember the board’s action on this issue the next time the home rule issue surfaces.
Dave and Valerie Messer
Morton
