Local Option Election Set August 19 For City

By Jim Cox

A wet/dry vote is set for
the City of Lancaster on
Tuesday, August 19.

A petition was filed
Monday in the county clerk’s
office calling for a yes/no
vote of whether the voters in
the city are in “favor of the
sale of alcoholic beverages
in the City of Lancaster.”

Passage of the referendum
would allow package sales
and the sale of alcohol by the
drink.

As required by state
statute, the county judgeexecutive
has to set the date
of the special election no
sooner than 60 days and no
later than 90 days after the
time of filing of the petition.

August 19th was selected
because it was the first
Tuesday after the 60-day
requirement, Judge-
Executive John Wilson said.
Tuesday was picked because
the voters are use to going to
the polls on a Tuesday.

The petition had 542 signatures
but only 298 were
valid, according to County
Clerk Stacy May.

Many of the signatures not
certified were people who
reside in the county and
therefore not eligible to vote
in city elections, she said.

The petition required 265
valid signatures or, in other
words, 25 percent of the
number of voters in the last
general election. In the 2007
November general election
1,060 people voted in the
city.

Most of the petitions were
signed between June 3 and
June 15.

“The rapid response and
overwhelming number of
signatures indicate that many
people in our community are
interested in seeing
Lancaster and Garrard
County move forward,”
Garrard Economic
Development Director
Nathan Mick, who helped
facilate circulation of the
petition, said.

“A majority of yes votes
will give us the opportunity
for more restaurants, a larger
tax base and overall positive
economic development,” he
added.

Judge-Exectuive John
Wilson said that his office
has not recieved any calls
from the public since last
week’s newspaper article
about the local option petition.
“No member of the public
has spoken negatively about
the issue to me” Judge
Wilson said.

“I have not heard a lot of
comments either way,”
Mayor Don Rinthen also
said.

The county, as set by state
regulations, would bear the
cost of the election, Judge
Wilson said. He had no idea
what it would cost.

If the local option were
passed, sales of alcoholic
beverages would be allowed
within the city limits. It
would not allow the sale of
alcohol in the county.

It would enable the city to
issue basically two types of
liquor licenses– package
liquor licenses and retail
beer licenses.

The Kentucky Alcoholic
Beverage Commission
(ABC) regulates the sale of
alcohol across the state.
Regulatory statutes are complicated
and complex.

Package Liquors are
defined as whiskey, wine or
anything that is distilled,
according to Nathan Jones of
the ABC. Beer is thought of
as “malt” and is regulated
differently than “hard
liquors.”

There is no limit to the
number of retail beer
licenses the city can issue.
However, state statutes limit
the number of package
liquor licenses according to
a formula based on the population
of the entire county,
although sales are limited to
just the city, he said.

One package liquor
license is issued for every
2,300 people in the county.
With Garrard having
approximately 16,000 people,
the city could issue
about six or seven package
liquor licenses.

State law prevents the
sale of alcohol a certain distance
from businesses that
sell gasoline, lubricating oil
or service or repair motor
vehicles.

Businesses like convenience
stores, grocery and
other businesses that maintain
on their premises for
sale at retail a minimum of
$5,000 of food, groceries
and related products can
have a retail beer license.
If the city goes wet, it can
enact an ordinance to allow
restaurants to sell hard
liquor by the drink, Jones
said.

Applicants for a package
liquor and/or beer license
apply to the city but the
state approves them.
Upon speaking with
Lincoln County Judge
Executive, R.W.
“Buckwheat” Gilbert about
whether Lincoln was considering
going wet, he was
not aware of any local
option drive in the Lincoln
County or Stanford area,
but he believes going wet
would be good for the businesses
there.

“I haven’t seen any or
heard about one,” Judge
Gilbert said about a petition
circulating in his county.
Some people have spoken
to him about the precinct
around the old Wal-Mart
going wet, he said, but nothing
much more than that.

He knows the county loses
a lot of business with people
going to Danville to eat and
shop because they are able to
get a drink with their meal
there.

“It would be good for
Garrard County if they did
it,” he said.