ORDERS:
ORDER AND DECISION
This matter comes before the Administrative Law Judge Division on the application of James
L. Williams and JLW & Associates for an off-premises beer and wine permit for a convenience store
located at 1697 Goff Avenue, Orangeburg, South Carolina. After notice to the parties and protestors,
a hearing was conducted on December 9, 1994. At the hearing the Orangeburg County Sheriff
Department moved to be made a party protestor without objection. Based upon the testimony and
evidence presented, I make the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. James L. Williams is over the age of twenty-one and is a legal resident of the United
States and of South Carolina. He has been a resident of this state since returning from New York in
May 1994.
2. He has never had a license relating to the sale of beer, wine or alcoholic liquors in this
state and has never had one suspended or revoked in this state.
3. He was convicted of a misdemeanor in New York relating to the consumption of
alcoholic liquors on his fortieth birthday over ten years ago. There have been no other convictions.
Williams is a person of good moral character.
4. The proposed location is a convenience store on Goff Street in Orangeburg, South
Carolina. The location is outside the city limits of Orangeburg. It sells groceries, hot dogs and
sandwiches and maintains a kitchen. The hours of operation are 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Sunday thru
Saturday. Attached to the store is a Laundromat.
5. The store is located in the New Brookland neighborhood. This is an area which has
been targeted by local and state law enforcement officers to reduce the flow, sale and use of illegal
drugs and other criminal activity. This neighborhood has also been the subject of a target program
to improve the conditions in the area. Abandoned houses have been demolished, additional lighting
has been added, police patrol and protection have increased and the residents have played an active
role in the plan. Part of that program has been to protest the issuance of any permit or license to sell
any beverages containing alcohol.
6. The store is an asset to the community providing food and groceries and it participates
in the food stamp program. Williams can make a profit without the sale of beer or wine. He wants
to provide competition to Green's.
7. One other store one block from the proposed location, "Green's", is the only store in
the area that sells beer, wine, or distilled spirits. It has been licensed for many years before the plan
was developed to reduce criminal activity in the neighborhood. The neighborhood intends to protest
any renewal of licenses for that store as well.
8. The long-term residents of the area opposed the issuance of the permit because they
have been actively involved in the plan with state and local officials to increase police protection,
reduce the illegal drug activity, and to prevent further erosion of the area. Their complaints center
on the loitering outside of the store by people who do not live in the area. Adding a location that sells
beer and wine to go would only add to the problems already existing and they fear will increase
potential criminal activity in the neighborhood.
9. Notice of the application was posted at the location and published in The Times and
Democrat newspaper in Orangeburg for the required time.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The Administrative Law Judge Division is vested with the powers, duties and
responsibilities exercised by the former Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission and hearing officers
pursuant to Chapter 23 of Title 1. S.C. Code of Laws §61-1-55 (Supp. 1993).
2. S. C. Code §61-9-320 (Supp. 1993) provides the statutory requirements for the
issuance of beer and wine permits. It states in part:
No permit authorizing the sale of beer or wine may be issued unless:
...
(6) The location of the proposed place of business of the applicant
is in the opinion of the department a proper one. The department
may consider among other factors, as indications of unsuitable
location, the proximity to residences, schools, playgrounds, and
churches. This item does not apply to locations licensed before its
effective date.
S.C. Code §61-9-320 (6) (Supp. 1993).
3. Although "proper location" is not statutorily defined, "rather broad discretion is vested
in the Commission in determining the fitness or suitability of a particular location." Fast Stops, Inc.
v. Ingram, 276 S.C. 593, 281 S.E.2d 181 (S.C. 1981). This determination of suitability is not solely
a function of geography, but involves an infinite variety of considerations related to the nature and
operation of the proposed business and its impact upon the community where it is to be situated.
Kearney v. Allen, 287 S.C. 324, 338 S.E.2d 335 (S.C. 1985); Schudel v. S.C. ABC Commission, 276
S.C. 138, 276 S.E.2d 308 (S.C. 1981).
4. The business is a suitable business for the area however, the existence of a beer and
wine permit at this location or any location in the New Brookland neighborhood is not a proper one.
The evidence clearly reveals the struggle by the neighborhood to rid it of criminal activity. The
partnership formed with local and state law enforcement officers and other officials to develop a
comprehensive plan to solve the problems of the neighborhood can not be disregarded or discounted.
The result of their activities has been positive for the community and it would be detrimental to this
area to increase the number of businesses able to sell beer, wine, or alcoholic liquors.
ORDER
Based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Goff Avenue Convenience Store
located at 1697 Goff Avenue in Orangeburg is not a suitable location for the issuance of an off-premises beer and wine permit. It is therefore,
ORDERED, that the application of James L. Williams and JLW & Associates is DENIED.
_________________________________
ALISON RENEE LEE
Administrative Law Judge
January _____, 1995
Columbia, South Carolina |
