Berkshire Eagle 5-29-04
Berkshire Eagle


Where's the cheese?


Saturday, May 29, 2004 - I 've always loved town meetings.
They reaffirm my faith in democra-
cy by demonstrating the wisdom and persuasiveness of ordinary citizens presenting their ideas. I am truly in awe of how well the process works. In the end, there is nothing like direct democracy.

At the Great Barrington town meeting a few weeks back, I watched as a huge budget went sailing through. People know that educating our children is a public responsibility and they vote accordingly. People know that the snow has to be cleared and they vote for that. People almost never vote against the police budget for obvious reasons. But every once in a while, the people dig in their heels and overwhelmingly reject the recommendations of their town fathers and mothers who serve on the Board of Selectmen.

This year, it was "The Case of the Cheerful Cheese Monger," starring Matt Rubiner and his lovely wife, Julie. These young people are doing a great thing for the town. Their cheese shop on our main street serves cheeses of all descriptions and other delicacies too numerous to mention.

They opened their business in a space that had long been shuttered. Now, thanks to Margaret Brownell, the new landlord, Matt and Julie are in and like other merchants, they're trying to make a buck. To do that, they need to sell a few upscale wines. What singles Matt and Julie out is that the folks on the Board of Selectmen don't seem to want to allow them to do that.

For reasons I still can't fathom, the Rubiners were told they could not have a wine license. Rubiner is appealing. At both a special town meeting and at our regular town meeting, the Selectmen asked that the town meeting pass an item on the warrant asking the Legislature to support their interpretation of the state formula used to set the number of liquor licenses. Privately, they're telling people they're afraid of even more liquor stores. They don't want to say that publicly.

In both cases, the townspeople roundly rejected the arguments. People stood up and said that there was room for one more and that another store selling upscale wines would not make for a huge alcoholic problem. Other speakers also pointed out that Matt and Julie were residents of the town (as opposed to absentee landlords) and should be given a chance. Some people even suggested it was dirty pool for the Selectmen to bring the issue to two town meetings.

As a simple citizen sitting in the audience, I kept looking for any good reason why the Selectmen should approach the state Legislature for help. They hand out licenses to restaurants like they are water.

It is clear they're not going to give the Rubiners a chance, so why do they need to send the matter to the state? Something stinks here. What are they afraid of? A lot of us figured that something else was going on and that somehow this gutsy young man, Matt Rubiner, had rubbed someone the wrong way and was now on the outs with the big boys.

I called Selectmen Chairman Douglas Stephenson, who gave me what could only be called "major league attitude." I just tried to get a few answers, but he was angry. Let's just characterize our talk as unfriendly. His attitude toward the Rubiners is palpably hostile and perplexing, even undemocratic.

This is not the first time this board has acted on liquor matters in an enigmatic manner. You will all remember their insistence that all kinds of rules and regulations be thrown out the window to allow a liquor store to be built right next to a synagogue in our town. They lost that fight before the State Liquor Authority, as they should have, but not before they faced a firestorm of protest from just about everyone with a brain. Very curious.

I asked Stephenson whether he thought that all of us at the town meeting would or would not have voted to give Rubiner his license. I can only suggest that his response was undemocratic in nature. Stephenson did say that the board was committed to adhering to a policy established years ago when seasonal alcoholic beverage licenses were converted to all-year licenses. He said that the town promised no licenses would be added.

It is clear that if Rubiner wants a license, he will have to buy an existing business that has a license. It makes no sense. It is not based on the merits of the application, but on an existing economic system where some people will make money by holding things tight.

The town's people seem to want to give the Rubiners their chance, but, as in the case of putting a liquor store next to a synagogue in direct violation of the spirit of a law, the whole thing seems fishy, based on the merits of the argument.

Alan Chartock, a Great Barrington resident, is President of WAMC Northeast Public Radio and a professor of communication at SUNY-Albany.

- posted by Alan @ 5/29/2004 08:54:00 AM