Today's Globe has a letter to the editor that I wrote
"YOUR OCT. 22 editorial 'High and dry in Boston?' offers a one-sided view on the issue of increasing the number of liquor licenses in Boston. You are correct that having more licenses would make it easier for more business owners to make more money selling beer, wine, and liquor. But what would be the impact on the residents who would have these businesses as their new neighbors? Here in Allston and Brighton our quality of life is continually threatened by an ever-growing number of bars and restaurants whose patrons stroll drunk and loud through our neighborhoods at midnight, two in the morning, or later. If Boston wants more liquor licenses, it should first tell its citizens why we should be confident that our quality of life won't suffer while a small number of people profit."
on a related note: http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2006/10/29/getting_to_the_bottom_line_on_grocery_stores_bid_to_sell_wine/
ReplyDeleteHarry, I agree with you that we should always be concerned about the effects of restaurants, bars and clubs on the neighborhoods around them. However, I don't think that diminishes the fact that Boston is the only city in the Commonwealth where the state controls the number of liquor licenses at its disposal. Boston and its neighborhoods should be in control of these licenses, not the state.
ReplyDeleteI can identify a number of establishments in Allston which would benefit from liquor licenses and are located in areas where there are other restaurants and bars that already have them. Many of the establishments without liquor licenses lose business while customers patronize the places that already serve alcohol. I myself have done this numerous times.
In general, we should be careful not to let neighborhoods turn into loud obnoxious areas full of drunks on the weekends, but we also must do what we can to help local businesses thrive and compete fairly. Otherwise, our neighborhoods will have many empty storefronts.