SEPTEMBER 2008

your LETTERS
Unbalanced
I am responding to the articles written
in the last month’s edition of the
Chaldean News concerning gas stations
receiving liquor licenses (August
2008: “Guest Column: Keep Beer and
Wine out of Gas Stations” and “A Fill-
Up and a Six-Pack”). I believe that it is
both inappropriate and unreasonable to
criticize the Michigan Liquor Control
Commission (MLCC) and the AFPD for
gas stations who have been lawfully
receiving licenses for beer and wine
and liquor in their establishments.
The Michigan Legislature back in the
‘90s created an exception in the law that
allowed gas stations in Michigan to obtain
liquor licenses. The law was originally
enacted in the ‘90s because of the David
vs. Goliath situation of having big-box retailers
such as Wal-Mart, Costco and Meijer
sell both alcohol and gasoline because
their lots were big enough to subdivide into
separate parcels for gas pumps and grocery
stores, allowing them to skirt any dualuse
prohibition imposed by cities. The law
at that time discriminated against owners
of small stations by giving an unfair edge to
these larger companies. The box stores
could sell gasoline to compete against the
independent retailer, but the independent
retailer could not sell liquor to compete
against them. The change in the law was
an attempt to grant independent stations
the same ability to sell products that the
corporate ones enjoy.
Those who are able to meet certain
criteria are eligible under Michigan law,
and have been since the ‘90s, to apply
for a license. This is no recent phenomenon
as suggested in the articles and
has existed long before the current time.
The service station industry has changed
dramatically over the years. Many service
station retailers have now incorporated
convenience stores into their business
and have sought to expand their
business by seeking a benefit under a
law that may not have been frequently
used previously. As a result of increased
expansion of the service station business,
there has been an increase of
those seeking out liquor licenses for their
establishments. The law has not
changed, however, the industry has.
License approvals for gas stations,
however, are contingent on gas stations
meeting certain requirements. These criteria
require retailers with gas pumps to
have an inventory of $250,000 and be 50
feet away from the building to sell alcohol.
There’s been no change in the state
law, and the same criteria in existence
then are the very ones that licensees and
the MLCC are subject to today. That
there may be abuses and manipulation by
a few retailers should not justify casting a
taint against all gas station retailers.
Those few who are doing wrong should
be held accountable. And the AFPD has
not “stood idly by” as suggested by those
in your articles, as the AFPD has earlier
in this year appeared before the
Commission to discuss abuses and
proper enforcement of the law.
Enforcement action has begun against
those who will not comply with the law.
I find that your articles last month were
distorted and failed to provide a balanced
analysis of what has occurred in this
industry and hope that in the future you will
closely examine articles presented to
ensure their accuracy and fairness, before
allowing attacks against commissioners of
a state agency and a long-established and
reputable trade association such as ours.
– Jane Shallal, President
Associated Food and Petroleum Dealers,
Farmington Hills
Common Sense
I have owned and operated gas stations
since 1993, and had beer and
wine at two of them. My licenses were
grandfathered in due to population from
years ago and I bought them for that
very reason. Just recently, we received
liquor at our present location.
Twenty years ago, most gas stations
had auto repair facilities, not convenience
stores. The industry has since evolved.
Today, it is a completely different concept.
Times are changing and gas stations
are not only convenience stores but
full markets and fast food restaurants.
Michigan is only one in a handful of
states in the country that regulates beer
and wine and liquor at petroleum sites.
When Meijer started putting gas stations
in front of their stores, it devastated the
independent gas stations. We could not
compete. In this challenging economic
time, most of us are scrambling to create
more revenue to make up for the loss in
volume and profit on petroleum.
More than 300 gas stations have
closed in Michigan in the past three
years. Due to convenient locations,
some of us overcame substantial financial
hurdles created by the Meijer law to
even the playing field. We received a
liquor license by purchasing up to
$250,000 worth of inventory and having
the 50-foot requirement from the pumps
— just as it is stated in the Meijer law.
I do believe that the $250,000 inventory
requirement should be lowered by at
least half. However, for anyone to insinuate
that gas stations that received these licenses
are dishonest or that the MLCC is
bending the rules is ridiculous and simply
unfair. If it is okay for large companies like
Meijer to compete with us, then it should
be okay for us to compete with others.
My local township supported my
license application at the local level. If
anyone objects, it should be decided at
the local level similar to the city of
Southfield. I had to be half a mile away
from any other license just the same
way any other party store does. It does
not make sense that anyone would
oppose gas stations getting beer and
wine, especially members of our own
community, especially when every pharmacy
and big-box store like Meijer and
Costco are already competing with us.
The AFPD is all inclusive — gas stations,
party store owners and supermarkets
— that is what they are all about
and that is what I am talking about. It’s
not the AFD anymore. It is the AFPD —
Associated Food and Petroleum
Dealers. Everyone has the right to his
opinion. I am not meaning to insult anyone
but merely state the facts and offer
some common-sense perspective.
– John Abbo, West Bloomfield
No Sympathy
Regarding “Retailers cry foul over gas
station loophole,” excuse me if I don’t
sympathize with Meijer and other giant
retailers. Ever since the “Meijer exception”
was created, Chaldean gas station
owners have felt the pinch from the extra
competition. Meijer, Sam’s Club and
Costco often sell gas at cost or below
cost. If a gas station owner decides selling
alcohol might help make up for dwindling
gas margins and the law gives him
the license, how is that not fair?
As long as it is legal, do not blame
the Chaldean businessman who takes
advantage of a business opportunity
that presents itself — that is why our
community has become successful over
the years. The Meijers of the world can
only blame those who made the law.
– Brent F. Sitto, Bloomfield Hills
Bring in the Lawmakers
Even though I am not involved in the
food and beverage industry, I read with
great interest Mike Sarafa’s column in
the August issue (“Keep Beer and
Wine out of Gas Stations”).
There are some facts that I agree
with regarding the granting of an SDM
and SDD to gas stations. During my
tenure as a board member and then
chairman of the AFD in the ‘90s, AFD
was the lead trade association in advocating
and lobbying against gas stations
obtaining beer and wine licenses.
Joe, and later Mike, Sarafa worked diligently
with the full support of the board
of directors, along with our lobbyist
Kharoub and Associates, to fight and
defeat several House and Senate bills
that were introduced almost every year
to allow the sale of alcohol to gas stations.
We feared the spread and the
exception to what was given to the
Meijer Corporation (The Meijer Bill).
Again that was in the ‘90s. AFD had
no members from any oil companies or
gas stations. Today, things have
changed industry wide. The Associated
Food Dealers (AFD) represents a more
diverse group of retailers since its
merger with the Ohio Petroleum
Association. It is now Associated Food
and Petroleum Dealers (AFPD) and a
great number of their members own
and operate gas stations.
The Michigan Liquor Control
Commission (MLCC) is not to blame for
change in the industry, although I question
the $250,000 inventory ruling and
the 50-feet distance and the distance
from another establishment. It doesn’t
seem it is in compliance (in some cases);
it is somewhat vague and discretionary.
In closing, I do however commend
Mike Sarafa’s courage in writing his column
for the benefit of the community and
the industry as a whole. At the same time
I’d like to acknowledge and support the
great work of the MLCC under the leadership
of our own Nida Samona. I agree it is
a difficult task to implement the rules and
please everyone. If any change is in order
it should be at legislatively, with a bill that
can be more clear in defining the rules and
the guidelines than the current one.
– Nabby Yono
Vice President, Community Relations
Arab American & Chaldean Council
MLCC Responds
As the chair of the Michigan Liquor
Control Commission (MLCC) I was
troubled by criticism from the former
president of the Associated Food
Dealers (AFD) for the MLCC lawfully
issuing gas stations licenses for beer,
wine and liquor in their establishments.
In the early 1990s the Michigan legislature,
not the MLCC, created an
exception for off-premises licenses that
allowed retailers with gas pumps to
have an inventory of $250,000 (independent
retailers without gas pumps
have no such inventory requirement);
and for the site of payment and selection
of alcoholic liquor to be not less
than 50 feet from the point where motor
vehicle fuel is dispensed.
Under the former AFD president’s
leadership, AFD members approached
the MLCC many times seeking to make
the law more lenient or to support new
laws for gas stations to hold licenses. My
fellow commissioners and I refused to
support changes or new laws. We defer
to the legislature to approve legislation that
is signed into law by the governor. What
the MLCC did in issuing licenses to owners/operators
of motor vehicle fuel pumps
was not “dishonest” as was suggested.
Rather, we created boundaries that further
restricted a license being issued to a gas
station business until a very precise inventory
breakdown was met.
We prohibited pre-paid cards and cigarettes
from being the primary accounting
of the $250,000 inventory. The MLCC
created an inventory breakdown and percentage
(%) of goods and how many dollars
($$$) accounted for them. Gas station
owners sued MLCC in circuit court
on the restrictions (Blarney Castle Oil Co.
v MLCC and C-Stores, Inc. v Liquor
Control Commission). The court agreed
with the MLCC that these cards have no
value until purchased.
As to the breakdown and percentage
placed on tobacco and other goods
(Wesco, Inc. v Michigan Liquor Control
Commission), the MLCC lost this case in
court. The court held that the MLCC was
LETTERS
continued on page 17
14 CHALDEAN NEWS SEPTEMBER 2008