BJ's Wholesale rejected on lease for liquor store
Published on October 29th, 2008
STONEHAM. MA - The town's Board of Selectmen rejected a bid by BJ's Wholesaler on Tuesday night to lease out a portion of its Cedar Street premises for a liquor store.
In a 3-to-1 vote, with Selectmen Richard Gregorio absent, the board denied a request from RWJ Beverages for a package store license after questions arose as to whether the petition was an attempt to circumvent state regulations that prevent any entity from operating more than three liquor stores.
According to local attorney Charles Houghton, representing the petitioners, BJ's was attempting to stay competitive by renting out approximately 2,100 square feet of space.
Houghton further contended that the wholesaler, located just feet away from the Woburn line off of Washington Street, was situated far away from local package store competitors.
"It's not a destination where anyone would go to BJ's just to buy a bottle of liquor. We're not going to carry any small items, like nips," said Houghton. "If you go to a Costco or other BJs, it's largely accepted that this is part of the motif."
"BJs has been there for 15 years and it hasn't put anyone out of business. It's a different kind of buyer that goes to BJs," the Main Street attorney added.
According to Selectmen John DePinto and Robert Sweeney, the attempt to open a liquor store appeared like an attempt to get around state regulations that prohibit any one business from owning more than three liquor stores in Massachusetts.
The two Selectmen further argued that if they granted the license, other smaller businesses would be put at a competitive disadvantage.
"I know [BJs] wants to stay competitive, but do they get a competitive advantage by leasing it out? Technically, if they leased it out, they could have a liquor store at every BJs," said DePinto.
"To me, it just seems like a way to skirt the bylaw, by getting liquor at more than three of their stores," Sweeney added. "To the public, I would think people would think that BJ's has a package store now."
Paul Shahian, the owner of Rapid Liquors on Main Street, later pointed out that RWJ Beverages had just recently changed its name after the Town of Framingham rejected a similar attempt to open a liquor store.
According to Shahian, the petitioner was not a small business entity like most other liquor stores in the area, but rather a large corporation that had over $8 billion in hotel real-estate holdings.
The Andover resident also alleged that BJs was taking advantage of a loophole in the state's alcohol regulations in order to mimic the efforts of other wholesalers to have more than three locations that sell liquor.
"When Framingham voted 5-0 [against a similar request] on August 12, Pyramid then filed with the secretary of state for a change of name and came before this board as RWJ," the local business owner alleged.
"This is a public policy issue. This is nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to circumvent the liquor store limit in the state," Shahian furthered.
Despite assurances from RWJ's vice-president that his company had no direct affiliation with the wholesaler, Sweeney believed that it was inappropriate for Stoneham to allow a large corporation to sell liquor.
"Coming here tonight, when Charlie says it was going to be leased out, I thought it was by three independent guys. This company is probably larger than BJs or similar in size," Sweeney said. "This isn't like other mom and pop businesses in Stoneham. To me, it would leave individual owners behind the eight ball."
Selectman Paul Rotondi, who moved to reject the proposal, agreed that granting the license would conflict with Stoneham's image as a community that welcomes small businesses.
Rotondi further opined that Stoneham already had enough liquor stores and that the Selectmen shouldn't grant the request just because the town has an available package store license available.
Houghton later argued that the Selectmen were essentially pushing to reject the proposal due to concerns about a larger competitor, which is not a legally acceptable standard for rejecting such an application.
"I haven't mentioned the word competition once," shot back Rotondi. "And quite frankly, that's not my concern. My concern is with the type of town we want Stoneham to be."
Although he by and large led the opposition to the petition, Sweeney later voted against the motion to deny. Specifically, the veteran Selectman believed that the matter should be continued, so that Gregorio could have the opportunity to weigh-in on the issue.
Subscribe and get Home Delivery of The Independent
Save 36% off the newstand price — that's like 18 FREE issues!