Bill Aimed At Liquor Store Franchises


Posted: February 8, 2011 at 5:17 a.m.

Macadoodles plans to open three more franchise liquor stores in Arkansas but would not be allowed to under legislation set to be heard today in a state Senate committee, said Roger Gildehaus, company president.


What The Bill Says

House Bill 1282 would "clarify that a liquor permit applies to one location and a person, firm, or corporation shall not use a liquor permit for multiple locations."

Source: Staff Report

This story is only available from our archives.

If Macadoodles is not allowed to open additional stores then they need to close several of the Phillips stores which is the Springdale Liquor Association. What happened to Free Enterprise?

Posted by: Apbacker

February 8, 2011 at 7:14 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

This is crazy, I am sick of the Goverment telling us how to drink, smoke or whatever else we do. Here is another case where the old boy network is forcing out competition. Just plain sick of it.

Posted by: Arkietex

February 8, 2011 at 7:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

More special interest legislation. Free enterprise should prevail and legislators should stick to agendas that are important and not to choke off competition.

Posted by: slamey

February 8, 2011 at 8:18 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Sue Madison, as usual speaking without thinking. In my life I have never seen a town that has a liquor store on every corner. I would, for the sake of argument, like for her to point out such a town.

I bet that Sams Club and Walmart will be all over this bill.

Meanwhile our prisons and county jails are full. Judicial system backed up. Infrastructure is declining. Unemployment is is way to high.

I once heard it said the Jesus wasn't born in Little Rock because they couldn't find three wise men there.

Posted by: Tumblebug

February 8, 2011 at 9:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

I'd guess that the same people sponsoring this end run, are also opposed to Health Care Reform because it represents government intervention in our freedom of choice. Roger Gildehaus should get an award for championing free enterprise DESPITE the best efforts of those who fear free trade and competition.

Posted by: hiwasseguy

February 8, 2011 at 9:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

The number of liqour stores is limited by the population of each county. You'd think that Senator Sue wouild know that and therefore couldn't have one on every corner.

Posted by: RandyC

February 8, 2011 at 9:28 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Springdale Liquor Assoc was grandfathered in by the 1971 legislation or so the article says. If so they were allowed to acquire more locations after that. Maybe someone should challenge their right to have those locations.
Wal-Mart will be on this like a bee on honey except the sting will be greater.


Posted by: cdawg

February 8, 2011 at 9:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

RE: Bill Aimed At Liquor Store Franchises
In reference to a comment by Representative Robert Dale (R) Dover in the Rogers Morning News on Tuesday, February 8, 2011:
“. . . Dale said. With locally owned stores, the proprietor might recognize an underage person trying to buy alcohol and refuse to sell to that person, Dale said."
Does Representative Dale actually believe that the owner of every store in Arkansas that sells alcohol and cigarettes is working at every check-out register in every store during all business hours to ensure that no underage person buys these items?
It is time for our state representatives to vote according to the needs of all their constituents and to stop representing mainly those special interest groups and individuals who contribute to their re-election campaigns.
In this time of high unemployment, to try to block the creation of new businesses in the state at the behest of one of those special-interest groups is indefensible.
“Rep. Robert Dale, R-Dover, who sponsored the House bill . . .” does not even represent any of the communities that would benefit from the new businesses. Perhaps he should focus of the needs of the citizens of Pope county rather than attempting to influence life in other parts of Arkansas.

Posted by: ellen

February 8, 2011 at 10:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

I find it odd that a representative from a small town in a dry county thinks he knows so much about how liquor stores operate-- and that so many members of the House seem to agree with him. That's a very persuasive lobbyist.

Louisiana and Arkansas have entirely different cultures, particularly in regard to drinking. The only Arkansas town I know of that comes close to having "a liquor store on every corner" is Blackwell, which has two liquor stores at its exit from I-40. They are there because Blackwell is right across the Conway County line from Pope County.

Posted by: AlphaCat

February 8, 2011 at 1:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

This is truly the dumbest proposal I've ever seen. Let's limit the number of Wal-Marts, Dillards, Harps, McDonalds, etc. I know there are still people opposed to alcohol and we are in the South, but isn't it time to join the rest of the country? When friends visit from out of state and we explain "dry counties" to them they just laugh. This legislation makes us all look pretty backward. Is this the most pressing matter for our elected representatives?

Posted by: Consultant

February 8, 2011 at 2:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Someone needs to investigate Sue Madison. Every few months she does something to support the Springdale Licquor Assoc. Its funny the law excludes them and two other companies.

Posted by: AutopilotAR

February 8, 2011 at 3:16 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Actually this same group in Springdale tried this before. They had a monopoly in Springdale, and do not want anyone else to have a piece of their pie. Sam's wanted to sell liqour at their club in Springdale, and due to this group Springdale denied Sam's their liquor lincese. Sam's therefore closed their wholesale club in Springdale and moved to Fayetteville. Therefore Sprindale lost all that revenue. These idiots don't care about anyone but themselves. They sure as heck don't care about the citizens of Springdale.

Posted by: mknobles09030852

February 8, 2011 at 3:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

The funny thing is that Arkansas is in need of more employment of any kind where a franchise would give someone to step up and offer more jobs since the state of arkansas wont help at all . That is what this such a stupid bill beacuase it doesn't help anybody accept the liquor stores the were grandfathered in before this bill .Also Northwest arkansas and central Arkansas where franchise liquor stores would promise certain brand of liquor to be sold to their loyal customers. These franchise liquor stores would have regular people selling the beer and the communities that would rather go to a well respected liquor store franchises that you know will have higher requirements in employment to detect underage drinking that would offer more jobs and income than some run down local liquor store that that wont be able to hire or hardly pay much income to anybody and will pay minimum wage to someone who can barely speak english to work at a liquor store.

Posted by: WSJ

February 8, 2011 at 5:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Seems to me that Sue Madison is injecting herself into every issue because it appears she would like to run for Governor! It that the case Sue?

Posted by: MANofFEWwords

February 8, 2011 at 6:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

I suppose I just don't understand what the problem is with having more than one store with the same name?

Would simply naming stores "Macadoodle's Fayetteville" or "Macadoodle's Little Rock" be different enough names?

Posted by: nwlocal

February 8, 2011 at 10:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

I wonder what Springdale Liquor Association is paying Sue Madison? Is she on their payroll?

Posted by: Apbacker

February 9, 2011 at 5:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Sue must be getting something for this. She needs to stick to her issues in Bella Vista like cleaning up roads and making it safer to drive up there than worrying about liquor stores in Springdale.

Posted by: Arkietex

February 12, 2011 at 6:17 a.m. ( | suggest removal )