Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1953-02-28

Bill 70 Tighten
Liquor Permit
.Po|icy|sB|asted
Criticism Greets !.
Neiehborhood' Plan
To Deny Licenses

To Deny Licenses
A bill aimed at tightening laws
regulating the issuance of per-
mits by local liquor boards is
being viewed coldly by some
Montgomery and Prince Georges
officials while a veteran civic
leader gave it his Endorsement.
The bill. scheduled for Mary
land General Assembly commit
tee hearing next week, would
require county liquor boards to
deny an alcoholic beverage Ii
cenSe to any establishment
where a majority of ''neighbor-
hood" property owners oppose it.
Montgomery County Manager
Irving G. McNayr, County At
torney David Macdonald and
James F. Erwin, director Of
Montgomery's Liquor Control
Department. said they consider
the proposed bill bad legislation.
IT don't believe the bill would
have much effect on our county,"
Mr.. McNayr said. Generally, !
don't approve of legislation like
this. If the people have elected
Government officials. those off,
Gals should operate the Govern
ment."
Against Type Of Law.
Mr.. Macdonald said he could
not comment in detail until he
has had time to study the bill.
He. too, said he doesn't like such
legislation.
A Montgomery official who
wanted to remain unnamed. said
Operating a government by a
plebiscite of neighbors is not
good business"
Mr.. Erwin said the bill should
have a provision in it excluding
Montgomery County. He said
that no bars are licensed in the
county.
He also said that he didn't like
legislation like this. II think that
it takes away the control from
the board set up to act in such
matters"
Walter F. Mulligan, long time
president of the Prince Georges
Civic Federation, said he favors
the principle of the bill partly
because it would prevent transfer
of licenses from rural to densely
populated sections without giving
the people a voice in the matter.
Decision BY Residents.
Residents of affected COM
munities," Mr.. Mulligan said,
Should have the say as to
whether or not a permit is
granted and if it is they should
decide whether it is to be for on
or off SALE"
He added that he is opposed to
licenses giving both on and off
sale privileges to the same ap-
plicant.
IF more licenses are to be
issued" Mr.. Mulligan . said,
there should be more package
stores and fewer tavern permits,
in order to reduce the number of
honky- tonks."
Ernest A. Loveless, counsel to
the Prince Georges Liquor Board,
said he has not studied the bill
and is minded. He said,
however, that he questions the
practicability of some Of its pro-
visions.
For instance" he said, Should
ownership or lease of property
be the controlling factor? There
are many other matters which
may have equal weight :"
Difficulty Cited.
It might be difficult at times,
Mr.. Loveless added, to determine
whether a proposed license is to
be used in a suburban or rural
section.
The liquor board attorney en-
phasized that the principle of
the bill has been followed in
the county and that it's citizens
are further protected against
unwarranted liquor spot increases
by the present law freezing the
number of permits at 352.
In Prince Georges laws relat-
ing to applicants have been
frightened. Formerly, any resi-
dent of the county could sign
for an applicant. Then the law
was changed to require residence
in the same election district.
Recently, a court ruling held
that applicants must live in the
same precinct where the license
is desired.
A bill to give the county's
liquor laws major overhauling
is in preparation and will be Of
fered soon in the General AS
sembly. One provision likely to
be adopted would establish a
minimum 1,000-foot separation
between liquor stores or taverns
and churches and schools.