by Malcolm Butler
Ruston mayor Ronny Walker wants to answer questions in regards to the upcoming March 25 vote on the alcohol propositions.
As many as he can.
Thursday night Walker will join City of Ruston Attorney Bill Carter and Planning and Zoning Director Jim Hayes at the Ruston Civic Center at 6 p.m.to answer residents questions in regards to the upcoming vote.
“I will answer any questions asked,” said Walker. “I am going to answer the question. That’s the very reason in our City Council meetings –unlike everyone else — I allow people to ask a question. I feel like if a citizen is going to take time to come to a meeting and have a question, then we should answer it. The citizens deserve that in my opinion. If somebody wants to talk about this, then I want to talk to them.”
There are five alcohol referendums on the March 25 ballot, three that are currently allowed in propositions 1, 2 and 5.
However, in the fall, the Louisiana Economic Growth Committee — working closely with Walmart and Brookshires Grocery Company — successfully obtained the Louisiana state law required 25 percent of signatures from registered voters within the City of Ruston.This (Proposition No. 4) was aimed at allowing grocery stores to sell liquor.
“I want to remind people that the City of Ruston did not request this group to come here,” said Walker. “That came directly from the grocery stores.
However, if one of the propositions goes up for a vote then all five of them (even the three that are already allowed) have to go back up for a vote. The Ruston City Council during its December meeting set the March 25 voting date.
Below are the propositions that registered voters in the City of Ruston will be voting on during the upcoming election.
Proposition No. 1 – CURRENTLY ALLOWED (Passed in 2002)
Authority to sell beverages of alcoholic content containing not more than 6% alcohol by volume by package only and not for consumption on the premises in the city.
Proposition No. 2 – CURRENTLY ALLOWED (Passed in 2002)
Authority to sell beverages of alcoholic content containing not more than 6% alcohol by volume for consumption on the premises in the city.
Proposition No. 3 – NOT CURRENTLY ALLOWED
Authority to sell beverage alcohol containing one-half of 1% alcohol by volume and above for consumption on the premises in the city.
Proposition No. 4 – NOT CURRENTLY ALLOWED
Authority to sell beverage containing one half of 1% alcohol by volume and above by package only and not for consumption on the premises in the city.
Proposition No. 5 – CURRENTLY ALLOWED (Passed in 2002)
Authority to sell beverages of high and low alcoholic content permitted only on the premises of restaurant establishments which have been issued an “R” permit as defined by law in the city.
Walker said he wants to make sure voters are well educated on what is what when it comes to all five propositions.
“I want to be sure that everyone knows about the town hall meeting,” said Walker. “We will have everyone from planning and zone to legal to myself to try to get some clarity to the liquor (propositions). It has gotten so confusing to so many people. There is a lot of inaccurate information out there. We need people to show up so we can clarify it and have it come from the horses mouth.
“If you want to keep Ruston Ruston, then you need to vote yes on Number 1, 2 and 5. Bottom line if you want everything like it is today. If you want everything like it is today but you also want to go to the grocery story and pick up a bottle of wine or a bottle of Jack Daniels, then you need to vote (yes) to Number 1, 2, 4 and 5.”
Walker said preliminary numbers based off of Pineville, Louisiana, would have the city financially benefiting by around $1.6 million (2.5 percent plus the 1.78 percent from businesses that are located within the TID). Pineville annually grosses $36 million in alcohol sales.
“There have been three legitimate supermarket chains that have called and said they are interested in coming to Ruston,” said Walker. “First question is can they sell alcohol. No. Then they tell us when we chain the law to call them.I was at the headquarters for a certain grocery store three months ago that we would all love to have here and this subject came up. I told them it was coming up for a vote. They said if it is voted in, they would definitely be looking hard at Ruston.”
Walker openly admits that he isn’t in favor of Proposition No. 3, but he also doesn’t have any fears if passed due to the strict restrictions the city has decided upon that will restrict bars from popping up on street corners.
“Bars … I personally don’t want, but I think we have set restrictions so tight that I would be we don’t have any open,” said Walker. “And contrary to what some people are saying, you can’t have bars all over downtown. It’s impossible (based on the restrictions).”
One thing Walker does fear is what would happen to the city if No. 5 — which is currently allowed — is voted down.
“My concern is that because of confusion, No. 5 could be lost which would be detrimental to our cities growth,” said Walker. “That’s my concern. It creates an incredible amount of revenue for our city.”
Walker said it would cost the city of Ruston a significant number of jobs as well.
He also thinks the loss of No. 5 would have a significant negative impact on both Louisiana Tech University and Grambling State University.
“Absolutely, it would be detrimental,” said Walker. “Show me one college town anywhere that doesn’t have bars or restaurants. I think it would be detrimental to both universities. I can promise you if we lose No. 5, Jade (West’s) job recruiting restaurants is going to be a whole lot harder.”
