MINUTES OF THE MEETING BUSINESS AND LABOR COMMITTEE

49TH LEGISLATIVE SESSION HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

March 26, 1986

The meeting of the Business and Labor Committee was called to order by Chairman Bob Pavlovich on March 26, 1986, at 2:30 p.m. in Room 312-3 of the State Capitol.

ROLL CALL: All members were present with the exception of Reps. Kitselman and Schultz who were excused by the Chair­man.

CONSIDERATION OF HOUSE BILL NO. 14: Rep. Jerry Driscoll, District 92, sponsor of the bill, presented it to the com­mittee. He explained the bill and stated that the Legis­lature last year set the policy that they didn't want state liquor stores closed. The Revenue Oversight Committee asked the department not to ~lose. The only cost to reopening is the freight back from the warehouse to the store. They are still paying the lease and paying their employees. The con­tract the employees have is that they have 15 days' notice and they are still sitting at home collecting pay.

PROPONENTS: Rep. Budd Gould, District 61, Missoula, passed out an amendment, which is attached as exhibit 1. When the department looked at the stores in Missoula, it was decided that the Lolo store was to be closed. This store has done a fantastic job, and it is one of the few stores in the state that has had increases in sales. People are convenience oriented. Letters have gone out to people that have liquor stores to lower their margin from 10% to 8%. After the legislature passes this, which I hope that you will, a way to get around the agency stores is to drop to 2%. One of the things this committee should be aware of is that the agency liquor stores are looking at the same problems as Rep. Brown's bill is. They are being treated the same as a tavern as far as liability is concerned. We .should have a set contract and it is something the legislature should be looking into. Rep. Simon may go to the idea of Oregon's all­agencies type of stores. And we should be looking at the amount of profit that those stores should be making.

Rep. Harrington of District 68, Butte, stated he came to support HB 14, as this is a very important piece of legis­lation because it gives the Legislature the opportunity to tell the department of revenue that we want something to say about running the liquor stores in Montana. The revenue oversight committee has voted unanimously to wait until the next session before closing any liquor stores. The director of the department of revenue said he would do whatever he wanted to do. Rep. Harrington stated he was in favor of the amendment by Rep. Gould, and hoped the committee would adopt

Business and Labor Committee March 26, 1986 Page ~.

this amendment. It is important to keep the liquor stores open in the state of Montana. There are leases that only run from month to month, and this is an issue that came up before the revenue oversight committee. Rep. Harrington asked the committee to give this bill a Do Pass~ and take it to the next legislative session and give it a lot of consideration.

Senator Manning also appeared as a proponent and stated he is an employee of the State Liquor Division. The original bill came about because of the closing of a store in Great Falls. He stated he had gotten many phone calls from people who are upset because they were not able to give their opinion on this issue.

Rep. Nelson of District 6 stated he had received a telephone call from Tim Birk of Kalispell, and asked Mr. Birk to give his testimony. Mr. Birk read his written testimony, exhibit 2, which is attached. He stated store 195 in Kalispell is one of the stores which was closed and asked the Liquor Division to reconsider the decision to close profitable stores.

Rep. Marks of District 75 stated he was not appearing as ei~her a proponent or an opponent. He submitted a letter from the Legislative Auditor, Scott A. Seacat, which is attached as Exhibit 3, along with a review of support for liquor store closures by the Department of Revenue. As far as the figures the Department gave them are, the calculations are sound. He stated he was not defending the Department, but thought the committee might be able to use the informa­tion.

Don Judge, representing the Montana AFL-CIO, stated this is a foul time to take this up, very inappropriate to do this at this time. He further stated Rep. Gould's amend­ment should be approved by the committee.

Rep. Paul Pistoria, District 36, Great Falls, also appeared in support of the bill. He stated he never thought this bill would ever come up, and that he attended the OVer-sight Committee. He said he challenges anyone, especially the Governor and John LaFaver where they could compare 2% with revenue. It is just like earmarking funds. He stated he is against closing of stores, as right now it is the only thing that is giving revenue~ and suggested telling the Governor and John LaFaver to take orders from the Legislature. He asked that this bill be passed and do a favor to the people of Montana. Rep. Pistoria submitted written testi­mony (Exhibit 4) of his testimony before the Revenue OVer­sight Committee on February 21, 1986. This is attached.

Business and Labor Committee March 26, 1986 Page 3

patti Scott, co-owner of the building that leases the state store in East Helena, appeared as a proponent of the bill. She presented written testimony (Exhibit 5) asking for support of this legislation and to stop Mr. LaFaver from closing of the liquor stores. She felt this is a decision for the Legislature to make, not a monthly paid state employee. Senator Fuller is going to be meet­ing with the committee on audits. There are so many other options other than closing the stores. She further stated that she feels the reason her store was closed is that they were so vocal in opposing the plan, and they wanted them out of the way. She finished by saying that if the Legislature supports this bill, it is saying that they will wait until the 1987 session to vote on it.

Ray Trudel of the United Food & Commercial Workers In­ternational Union, appeared as a proponent of HB 14. They have displaced nineteen or twenty employees, six or seven will be transferred to other stores and will have reduced hours. It is contrary to the Governor's "Build Montana" by putting people on welfare. He does not agree with the reasoning for some of the stores closing, especially those stores that are showing profit.

Mike Grunow, the Lolo agent, appeared in support of the bill. He provided written testimony which is attached as Exhibit 6. This shows that his store has produced al­most $1/2 million revenue to the state, and he felt it was not very good business to close his business. He stated that the problem is that two or three people in Montana have said he is expendable, and that it is not fair that they have the right to control someone's livelihood. He also presented a petition with over 1,400 signatures from people who want his store to remain open (Exhibit 7). In closing he said he has always heard that the small business­man is the backbone of this state, and that the legislature would lose a lot of pride from their constituents if they let this happen. He proposed that this be addressed in the 1987 Legislature.

Robert VanDerVere, representing himself, also appeared in support of HB 14. He stated he does not drink, but the liquor stores are making a profit for the state. He asked that this bill be passed as the state needs the revenue.

Hal Bevins of Walkerville, appeared in support of HB 14. He said Walkerville is an incorporated city, and he doesn't think it was really looked up which store should be closed. I~ is the only store in the area that has handi­capped parking. They have only got four businesses up there now.

Dan Faulkner, Agent, Walkerville Liquor Store, presented

~usiness and Labor Committee March 26, 1986 Page 4

written testimony (Exhibit 8) in support of HB 14. He said that in two years he had converted the store to a profitable one. He is open six days a week - he is open on Mondays. It is a convenience to the public, and Mon­days are the best days, but no one seems to be listening when he says Mondays are the best days.

OPPONENTS: John LaFaver, Director of the Department of Revenue, appeared in opposition to HB 14. He presented written testimony, which is attached as Exhibit 9. He stated that it is true that the Department is earning a profit. Thirteen years ago they started a slide, and liquor profits have fallen every year. The liquor system has worked hard within the confines they had to keep it from falling. He further stated he sympathizes with the sponsors of the bill, and the people outnumber him 20 to 1. It is not a happy situation. These kinds of decisions will be presented in a statewide way.

There were no further opponents to HB 14. Rep. Driscoll closed by asking the committee to put this off until the 1987 session to address it. There were a lot of laws passed in the last session on drunk driving and they caused the liquor sales to decline. HB 500 said a 13% profit must be made. It is a policy decision and there are a lot of businesses in the state making money. People are getting laid off, they are scared, and they have no other place to go.

DISCUSSION OF HOUSE BILL NO. 14: Rep. Simon asked Rep. Driscoll if Page 2, line 5 suggests that every time the Department wants to close a store, the Legislature would have to take each one at a time, and approve each one individually. Rep. Driscoll replied that something has to be done in the 1987 session, different than the last session, and felt it was important to wait until the next session so that the situation could be reviewed.

Rep. Simon then asked Patti Scott if during the last four years she had some information that the state did an analysis of her store, and that if it had been an agency store it would show more profit. Ms. Scott replied yes, that if it were an agency store, they could have given more profit to the State, and that she doesn't know why they didn't let them become an Agency store vs. a State store.

Rep. Simon asked her how many square feet she had in her store, and she replied 2,500, with a total sales of $296,000 for FY 1985. Rep. Simon also asked the gentleman from the Lo10 store the same question. Mr. Grunow replied that he had 1,000 square feet, with total sales of $383,000 for FY 1985.

Business and Labor Committee March 26, 1986 Page 5

Rep. Simon asked Mr. LaFaver if all the assumptions made on the auditor's analysis are correct, and he also wanted to know what happens to the leases that are on the exist-ing stores. Can the Department just cut them off? Mr. LaFaver stated that there is a provision that the state has a thirty day out if they are not going to operate a liquor store. The Department has to layout the rationale. From a legal standpoint, most of the leases can be stepped out of with a thirty-day notice.

Rep. Simon then asked if the Department is proposing to change Agency stores from 10% to 8%, how many stores would survive. Mr. LaFaver replied he hoped all would be able to. There might be some that might have to combine with a grocery store.

Rep. Simon also asked why the Department chose the Walker­ville store in lieu of the Butte #2 store. Mr. LaFaver re­plied that instead of closing two stores in Kalispell, Helena, Butte, they closed only one in those areas. They listened a lot to the letters and phone calls they received, and there was much more concern with closing the uptown store. If any store should close, it should not be that one.

Rep. Simon said he had heard testimony in Rep. Quilici's committee on how important it was to keep Walkerville open. Mr. LaFaver replied that closing the Walkerville store im­proves the profit picture in a big way. The public would be much more inconvenienced by closing the uptown store than the Walkerville store.

Rep. Simon asked what sort of liability the Department has for their employees, and what sort of requirements will they have. Mr. LaFaver replied that when they have a reduction in force, these people have a priority in terms of state­wide. The Department has been able to find work for most of those people. They have laid out that same sort of com­mitment to those people involved here.

Rep. Simon also asked how many Agents can survive on 8%, to which Mr. LaFaver replied that he can't answer.

Chairman Pavlovich adjourned at 4:00 p. m., and told the committee they would reconvene ten minutes after the Floor is adjourned for the day.

Rep. Harrington wanted it known that he did not want either store to be closed.

The meeting was called back to order at 5:00 p. m.

Rep. Thomas commented to Mr. LaFaver about the Missoula stores, and stated he had made it clear to the Department of Revenue that he feels cutting profit back to 8% is the

Business and Labor Committee March 26, 1986 Page 6

wrong way of going about it. That by going through with the 8% commission, it would bring the Lolo store within the same ration as the two Missoula stores. He wished one of the two Missoula stores could have been closed. It would have been more cost effective than the Lolo store. The problem with the Lolo store is that it is being taken out of a community. There is a demand, and now it is not available there. Everyone of those towns are a separate entity. The store is in a perfect spot and is building into a nucleus. If the commission cut goes through, it is negligible for a small community.

Mr. LaFaver answered that the bottom line is that profits are falling and if the Department doesn't do it soon, it is going to be every store in the state. If the stores don't make a profit, there won't be a liquor system. W.i,1i:hin three to four years they will be out of business and it won't be just the seven stores, but all the stores.

Rep. Thomas said his question was what would we go to, would we go to an Agency store? Mr. LaFaver replied no, that only the state of Oregon has done this and they are very unhappy with it. The entire system has very serious problems. The alternative from a cost effective stand­point that would make any sense is to go to Wyoming, where the state wholesales and the bars and taverns are the only sellers of liquor.

Rep. Bachini asked Mr. LaFaver if it is possible that the Department will have a liquor store operating at a lower percentage than they are now. Mr. LaFaver answered that there are two types of stores. Some of the stores that they are recommending to close have a higher profit mar­gin than others. They are going to do everything they can to operate the system. When looking at multi-outlet towns where there are only five blocks from one store to the other, that is where the sales would migrate to other stores. You can't use as a criteria only profit but you have to $'ee where the store will move to.

Rep. Bachini then asked Mr. LaFaver what he considers an inconvenience to the j "public as to mileage to go to the liquor store, and what is the Department looking for as a maximum. Mr. LaFaver replied that the maximum is the Lolo store. From the Southgate to Lolo is the furthest.

Rep. Ellerd told Mr. LaFaver that he doesn't find any ob­jection with the action, and asked if the 10% to 8% would be offset by increasing the price of liquor in the liquor store. Hr. LaFaver replied that part of this proposal is to restrict the price markup. Right now there is a 40% markup, but they do not cover their administrative expenses on many of the products that they sellon that 40%.

Business and Labor Committee March 26, 1986 Page 7

Rep. Ellerd then asked if the Department has the right to raise prices or does it have to be through the Legislature. Mr. LaFaver answered that it has to be through the rule~ making process. Oregon and Washington are higher than Mon­tana, Wyoming is marginally lower on certain products. How­ever, Mr. LaFaver said he had not seen a recent price com­pilation. Rep. Pavlovich said that basically Montana is high.

Rep. Driscoll said that in the audit, $500,000 was used to pay inspectors of liquor stores. Mr. LaFaver said that is a matter of legislative action. It does not make any difference if it is put in the general fund. The Legis­lature has looked at it and has chosen to leave it as it is.

Mr. Driscoll said that in the original proposal, the Ever­green store was proposed to be closed, and he wondered why the Department changed to the Lolo store.

Mr. LaFaver replied that the Evergreen store was not shut because a policy decision was made.

Rep. Driscoll asked Mr. Grunow of the Lolo store what the terms of his lease is, how many years. Mr. Grunow answered that it was ten years, to expire in 1989. He said there is a written contract between himself and the state of Montana and that is going to be tested. He further stated he bought space, hired people, etc., based on this agreement, and he feels he has some rights.

Rep. Kadas asked Mr. LaFaver what his next step would be, following his logic. Would he close more stores to get all the marketing down to one store. Mr. LaFaver replied that there is no way they would do that. It isn't going to work to serve Missoula out of one store. That issue was posed to him at a special hearing. Th.i? strategy will do what the Department wants to do. If they can get this down this year and next year, they have solved this situation of falling sales and falling profits. If they move this way for a long term, they will have it solved. They are not looking at closing more stores but they are going to be saving $2 million. Nationwide, the projections are not that sales will fail.

Rep. Kadas asked if he was basing this on the Kalispell graph or something else. Mr. LaFaver said they are basing it on Helena, Kalispell, Missoula, Bozeman, and Great Falls sales continuing in those market areas, the Legislative Auditor took a good look at that analysis that by alter­ing the number, you do very little to the sales volume.

Rep. McCormick asked Mr. LaFaver who came up with the 13%.

Business and Labor Committee March 26, 1986 Page 8

Mr. LaFaver answered that the Fiscal Analyst, in writing in the Appropriations Act, wrote in the 13%. The Liquor Division, unlike any other operation in the state, does not have a dollar limit on what it can spend, but they can't spend more than 15% of sales.

Rep. Glaser asked Mr. Faulkner from Walkerville if he felt he had a good faith with the state, and Mr. Faulkner replied yes. He said his contract was a five year con­tract. Rep. Glaser asked him if he had planned his life around this contract, to which Mr. Faulkner also replied yes. Rep. Glaser then asked Mr. Faulkner what kind of warning he had from the Department of Revenue, and Mr. Faulkner said he received a sixty-day notice, and that the media was his source of information.

Rep. Glaser asked Patti Scott of East Helena if she had good faith with the state, to which she replied yes, and that she had a five year agreement, and a five year lease. It was a good investment at the time. Rep. Glaser asked her also what kind of warning she had of the change. She replied that she learned about it in September through the grapevine, and in November the Oversight Committee unani­mously rejected the proposal and moved that no stores be closed until the 1987 session had a chance to review the matter. Two weeks ago today she received official notice for thirty days.

Rep. Simon asked Mr. LaFaver if he was aware of the study that the Department had done in comparing the East Helena store, if it had been an agency store. Mr. LaFaver said if it had been converted to an agency store, it would be marginal as .to the margin of profit even if they pay ten percent to the agency.

Rep. Simon stated to Mr. LaFaver that the Department ~new it would make more profit for the next four years if it would have made more money, so why didn't they convert it to an agency store. Mr. LaFaver replied that he wasn't here four years ago, and that they are following the ad­vise of the Legislative Auditor.

Rep. Simon asked Mr. Seacat, Legislative Auditor, what his findings mean so that they understand if he is supporting their criteria or defining their criteria. Mr. Seacat re­plied that they received a request from Rep. Marks. They have not looked at specific numbers, if these numbers are true, the calculations are accurate.

Rep. Simon said that the assumption in the report that the Department used is a monopoly that if one store is closed, all the business would go to the other store. Mr. Seacat answered that it is a summary, and that they did not re­commend closing the East Helena store, and that this report is only an audit.

Business and Labor Committee March 26, 1986 Page 9

Chairman Pavlovich asked Mr. LaFaver when the $11 million was mandated, to which Mr. LaFaver replied he believed it was 1977. Rep. Pavlovich then asked him when he worked for the Legislative Fiscal Analyst and Mr. LaFaver replied 1974 to 1981. Rep. Pavlovich also asked Mr. LaFaver if when he worked in the Department, did he bring up the $13 million mandate, and Mr. LaFaver replied yes.

Rep. Pavlovich then asked Mr. LaFaver if he would have any objections if the Legislature took away the $13 million and 13% and only say 'making a pltJ'ofit', to which Mr. LaFaver replied that he would have strong objections to it.

DISPOSITION OF HOUSE BILL NO. 14: that HB 14 DO PASS. He explained language was stricken from 13% to Schwinden requested it.

Rep. Driscoll moved that the reason the 15% was because Governor

Rep. Driscoll then moved to amend page 2, line 4 by strik­ing 'and', and inserting 'or. Question being called for, motion PASSED unanimously.

Rep. Driscoll then moved Rep. Gould's amendment. Question being called for, motion PASSED with Rep. Ellerd and Rep. Brandewie voting no. Rep. Kitselman, who was excused, wanted it on record that he had voted yes on both issues.

Rep. Glaser said that in less than 90 days we are going to be back here, and that it is essential that we remain in go covenant with the people that we represent. It appears we have a man out there who can't keep in good covenent with these people we represent, and it bothers me. He said he was going to support Rep. Driscoll's bill.

Rep. Kadas moved to use the same termination as Rep. Gould for the whole bill, of July 1, 1987.

Rep. Ellerd said he doesn't want to raise people's taxes to offset these programs~ and he said he was going to vote against this bill. When we come back in June it has to be by cutting expenditures or raising taxes. He further stated that he felt sure that John LaFaver doesn't like the posi­tion he has been put into. Rep. Ellerd also said it was hard for him to vote against the young man whose livelihood is being taken away, or the farmer.

Question was called for on Rep. Kadas amendment on termina­tion date, and motion PASSED unanimously. The record shows that Rep. Kitselman also voted yes.

Rep. Simon stated he was concerned about the stricken language on page 3. Rep. Brandewie said that we are tak­ing away all the other opbions. We are not requiring show­ing profit, and he sympathizes with all the people who are

Business and Labor Committee March 26, 1986 Page 10

going to lose their jobs. The Legislature gave them the mandate to try to do it, and now we are wanting them to do it in a businesslike manner.

Rep. Simon questioned if we had stricken the ability for the Department to create agency stores if we strike all the language, and wondered if there would be any problem with reinserting the language.

Rep. Driscoll said that marginally profitable is hard to define.

Rep. Kadas suggested reinserting rest of line 4, page 3, except 'and the number', and following'a~e~~ftee~, insert and location of stores may be converted to agency stores in an orderly manner. Rep. Simon moved the amendment. Question being called for, motion PASSED unanimously.

Rep. Kadas stated he agreed with Rep. Brandewie, bhat we are going to be back in two months and we are going to be laying off more people than what we are looking at here. There has been so little notification to the people in­volved and that disturbs me the most.

Rep. Simon said he was distu.t1bed about the potential in­come being given up. There is a potential loss with the state for potential lawsuits. He felt the Legislature should look at it at the next session, and said he does not like the bill, but would support it.

Rep. Glaser said that in June every state employee in the state of Montana wit.l be in jeopardy. The others think that what the Department has done is no better than BN.

Rep. Driscoll said that the people have been told if they work hard and make the state a profit, they will have a job, and they did that. They thought they had a job, they were friendly, and now they don't have the job because they are not making the desired profit even if they are making a profit. He ~uestioned how many people are in fact making what they want to make. Laying off people is not the answer. The Auditors have made a glorified fiscal note, $20 - 80,000 is not recognized in the fiscal note.

Rep. Bachini said that in looking at these figures, which figures are correct. He said( he has seen different figures, and that he has to go with the bill.

Rep. Ellerd said that we know the bill is going to pass, but I am not supporting the bill. He suggested to Rep. Driscoll to go down to the second floor and blame the Governor. Rep. Ellerd said he was sticking up for the Governor, that he is only talking about John LaFaver. He felt the Legislature will be sick when they get back here

Business and Labor March 26, 1986 Page 11

for the next special session. We are going to have to cut our own wages. We can't operate the way we are.

Rep. Wallin said that if this bill passes, it is a good way to get Rep. Simons' bill back. If the liquor business doesn't make any money, he is doomed.

Question was called for on the motion of DO PASS AS AMENDED. Motion CARRIED, with Representatives Wallin, Thomas, Brandewie, Keller and Ellerd voting no. Rep. Kitselrnan, who was excused, voted yes.

There being no further business to corne before this committee, the hearing was adjourned at 6:45 p.m.

DAILY ROLL CALL

BUSINESS AND LABOR

49th LEGISLATIVE SESSION SECOND SPECIAL SESSION

COMNITTEE

1986

Date

r------------------------------- ---------"- -- -----------------------NAME PRESENT ABSENT EXCUSED

Rep. Bob Pavlovich, Chairman / Rep. Les Kitselman, V-Chairman

Rep. Bob Bachini / Rep. Ray Brandewie / Rep. Jan Brown /" Rep. Jerry Driscoll 7 Rep. Robert Ellerd V

Rep. William Glaser / Rep. Stella Jean Hansen / Rep. Marj orie Hart ~

Rep. Ramona Howe V' Rep. Torn Jones ~ Rep. Mike Kadas / Rep. Vernon Keller / Rep. Lloyd McCormick t/ Rep. Jerry Nisbet / Rep. James Schultz ~ Rep. Bruce Simon / Rep. Fred Thomas ~

Rep. Norm Wallin ~

CS-30

STANDING COMMITTEE REPORT

______ .. ~rab __ ~2~'~,~----__ 19.'

" Mr. Speaker:; We, the committeeon _1JUS_Dl_-.JIWJSIIIL-..<IAm_ ....... LAIOJt _____________________ _

report ~ . au,J;, . m~ 1'4 .. ~ ,,""

iJ do pass o be concurred in XJ as amended o do not pass o be not concurred in o statement of intent attached ,... I .f 2

Chairman e~ REVEJrrDkJ mE CLOSUU C'8 Llouoa S'fOUS ObM'f'ED ISY -mE D2PAJmiID'! OP

BEYEliUS OlfLESS A STORE IS ~ OPERA'l'DJC A~ A PROF 1'1' •

BE AMDiDSD AS I'OI..LO~S:

1. Titl., line 10. PoUowiDq: .:. Inaert I -P1tOVIDDIG 'l'1lA'r TIl!! D~PAJ.lrl(Eft CJP UYEJltJB MAY !lCftl CBUCB ~

ltAD OP CQfMISSI~S PAY.l13U J'0J11'BE OPUHIOH '" IGElICY L%QICa S'1'OUS tm'1'IL JULY 1, 1987, '1'0 ALLOW ftB lOT. t..:ICISL&ft8-'lO BXAlUlm 'lBB ISSUE OF AGDC't S!'Ou CaaaSSIOBS,·

2. Title, lice 12. Strike: -AliD-

3. Title, liee 13. ,Po llol(inq : .. ~~.1De-l,2 Strilte: -AIm· Insert.: • r· PolloviJlCJ: "nATE" Insert: -, AJID A tt.."U!IHATIOB DAn-

4. Page 2, 1iDe 4. Strike: "and-Insert: -of""

s. Page 3. liD. 10. "0110,,1DJ' .......... . IIleart t e ... 1oca~ of IItIDree aDd .-plcye... Nonprofitabl. atate

o .... _7 be COD.,ertecl to aqaDCy stor.. in an orderly •• IUIeZ'.·

6 •. paq. ~ •... . FollowiDg: lJ.De 10 . IuU't: -u:v SEC:rIOJl. Section 3. ChaD4J4tproblbl1:e4 ID rat. ot

ca.al.s£Ou. payable tor operat1oD of aqency liqaor .tores -­le9ialati.,. con.WaratioD. ~ facilitate legblati~ eza.1Da­tioD of t.he operat.ion of aqency l1qoor store., the 4aputltela~ of r..,emae IlAY not. chaDCJ. ~ rate of cc.ai •• ioD8 PAl'8ble for sach operation. until July 1, 19.7. All aucb c:c..l •• 1Dn. InIft

f r.eJ.a in effect: .. 'they were OD. Jam:aary l, 198'_· ~. lieIl1abUI SaJ::aequent MctioD.

~p=Ill=ft_=__ ___ reading copy ( WID color

~2"1

.. 14 • .,~~ ... ~ r"· "!"#':' ~

','1-:.

7. Page 3, 1iDe 18. 1'o1101fiA9s • appllcuili~y­IA..rt: -- t .. 1Datio.­FollowiDCJ ,c; •••

lDartt ·U)·

8. hc;e 3 , rollow1a9 , 11_ 20

.............. lIaJ:'CJl .. .2.t ............................... 19 •••.....

lA_rt:f • (2) ~i. act tuaiBat .. Oft July 1. 19.7.·

STATE PUB. CO. He'ena, Mont.

.. _~ .. ·;;···~~i~1~~··· .. · .. ·· .. · .. ·····Ch~i~~~~:·· .... ···

AMEND HOUSE BILL 14 INTRODUCED COPY:

1. Title, line 10. Following: n:n

(Y)p. rt-h zit;' ! q 'i? L H6 /t-I ) Ref' Dr} SC-o J

Insert: "PROVIDING THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MAY NOT CHANGE THE RATE OF COMMISSIONS PAYABLE FOR THE OPERATION OF AGENCY LIQUOR STORES UNTIL JULY 1, 1987, TO ALLOW THE FIFTIETH LEGISLATURE TO EXAMINE THE ISSUE OF AGENCY STORE COMMISSIONS:"

2. Title, line 12. Strike: "AND"

3. Title, line 13. Following: "line 12 Strike: "AND" Insert: "," Following: "DATE" Insert: ", AND A TERMINATION DATE FOR COMMISSION PROVISIONS"

4. Page 3. Following: line 10 Insert: "NEW SECTION. Section 3. Change prohibited in rate

of commissions payable for operation of agency liquor stores -- legislative consideration. To facilitate legislative examination of the operation of agency liquor stores, the department of revenue may not change the rate of commissions payable for such operations until July 1, 1987. All such commissions must remain in effect as they were on January 1, 1986."

Renumber: Subsequent sections

5. Page 3, line 18. Following: "applicability" Insert: "-- termination" Following "." Insert: "( 1) "

6. Page 3. Following: line 20 Insert: "(2) Section 3 terminates on July 1, 1987."

lh:AT1\DW3\LEE\HB14AMD.SS2

March 22. 1986

Administrator. Liquor Division Montana State Dept. of Revenue Room 375 Sam W. Mitchell Buildin~ Helena. Mont. 59601

Dear sir:

Durin~ the summer of 1980 my partner Bob Arndt and I responded to a soli­citation for space to build and lease a special purpose buildin~ as a state liquor store on Kalispell's South Side. This area was selected because of the concentration of tourist facilities within the area. Since its openin~. this store has shown continous profits.

On September 1. 1984 the initial lease expired. Since that time Bob and I have ~otten contradictor¥ reports as to what was actuall¥ ~oin~ to happen with the State and our buildin~.

We were lead to believe that while the store was profitable there was little doubt that the lease would continue as lon~ as the State remained in the liquor business.

On the 14th of March I had the opportunit¥ to talk with John LaFaver when he visited store 195 in Kalispell. After reviewin~ the store we talked briefl¥ and he indicated that he would review the closure of this store. Three davs later I received an unsi~ned cop¥ of a letter dated March 14 terminatin~ the lease and closin~ the store.

I fee~ that the Liquor Division is dama~in~ itse~f in two wavs:

(1) The loss of revenue from sales of liquor from this store.

(2) Dama~e to the credibilit¥ of the State for dealin~ such a cavalier manner with the lessor and its own employees.

If the State of Montana feels that the closure of this store is necessar¥. I would ask two thin~s:

(1) That sufficient notice of the termination of lease be ~iven to find a suitable tenant for such a special purpose buildin~.

I I

(2) That intormation re~ardin~ leases not released to the press betor~ lessors are notitied. I The State ot Montana has been advocatin~ the "Build Montana" pro~ram tor the past several vears. The purpose ot this campai~n is to encoura~e eco- ~ nomic development and investment. With this sin~le closure two and one- i halt jobs have been eliminated. and this buildin~. constructed tor the State. taces toreclosure.

I hope that the Liquor Division will reconsider the decision to close pro­titable stores.

TRB:cm

I

SCOTT A_ SEACAT LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR

Representative Bob Marks House of Representatives State Capitol Helena, MT 59620

STATE OF MONTANA

STATE CAPITOL HELENA, MONTANA 59620

406/444-3122

March 26, 1986

Dear Representative Marks:

DEPUTY LEGISLATIVE AUDITORS:

JAMES GILLETT FINANCIAL-COMPLIANCE AUDITS

JIM PELLEGRINI PERFORMANCE AUDITS

LEGAL COUNSEL:

JOHN W_ NORTHEY

Attached is our preliminary analysis of the documentation and support provided by the Department of Revenue for the closing of seven state liquor stores.

In addition, we have been requested to do a follow-up to the performance audit done by our staff of the Liquor Division in 1982. This follow-up will be completed before the Legislative Audit Committee meeting in May 1986.

If I can provide further assistance regarding this matter, please contact me.

Sincerely,

kA.acat Legislative Auditor

SAS/js2i

Attachment

OFFICE OF THE LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR

REVIEW OF SUPPORT FOR LIQUOR STORE CLOSURES

BY THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

March 1986

JW402a

BACKGROUND

State liquor profits as measured in 1985 dollars are the

lowest they have been since the establishment of the state liquor

enterprise in 1934. The primary reason cited for the reduction in

liquor profits is the decline in sales and consumption of alcohol.

The decline is considered a result of lost table wine sales, drunk

driving laws, third-party liability decisions, increased competi­

tion from other beverages, emphasis on health and fitness and

intensified publicity surrounding the social and economic costs of

alcohol abuse. In an attempt to reverse the decline in liquor

profits. the Department of Revenue has adopted a four-part plan

comprised of the following:

1. close stores in multi-store market areas,

2. restructure prices,

3. inventory control, and

4. reduction in store hours

This report addresses the action to close stores in multi-store

market areas.

Liquor Division Analysis

First of all, an analysis by the Department of Revenue was

done to identify the relationship between the number of liquor

store and total sales in each of the seven major market areas. The

analysis plotted the following:

1. total sales.

2. sales of the initial store(s). and

3. sales of the additional stores.

The results showed that in all seven areas there appeared to

be no significant increase in total sales following the opening of

a new store in the area. Rises in sales at the new stores appeared

to be strongly associated with declines in sales at the other

stores. Therefore, evidence suggests that the opening of new

stores merely shifted. rather than increased sales (see Attach­

ment A).

1

JW402a

Criteria Used to Identify Stores

The department identified seven multi-store market areas in

which store performance would be analyzed:

1. Butte market area - 3 stores

2. Kalispell market area - 3 stores

3. Billings market area - 4 stores

4. Helena market area - 3 stores

5. Bozeman market area - 2 stores

6. Great Falls market area - 3 stores

7. Missoula market area - 2 stores

A profit margin (net profit divided by net sales) and expense ratio

(total expense divided by net sales) was calculated for each store

in the seven market areas. In five of the market areas, the store

with the lowest profit margin and highest expense ratio was picked

for closure. In two of the market areas (Butte and Great Falls),

the store with the second lowest profit margin and second highest

expense ratio was selected rather than the lowest. The decision

was based on public comment, community support, liquor licensee

sales (taverns, bars, etc.) and licensee support.

Analysis and Assumptions

An analysis was done by the department to calculate the

savings the division would have realized during fiscal year 1984-85

if the seven stores identified had been closed (see Attachment B).

The division used the following assumptions:

1. The trend identified when additional stores were opened will be reversed and operating costs will be saved with very little loss in sales.

2. A total of 3~ FTE from the closed stores will be assigned to the remaining stores in the seven market areas.

3. Administrative overhead will be reallocated from the stores closed to the remaining stores.

4. Freight expense for closed stores will be reallocated to the remaining stores.

2

JW402a

5. The Bozeman store's lease would have to be paid until the end of the lease term (1990).

Using the same assumptions, the division calculated the

savings for the remainder of fiscal year 1985-86 and all of fiscal

year 1986-87. The division also assumed all stores would be closed

on May 15, 1986, and expenses would increase by 4 percent due to

inflation (see Attachment C).

Based on this analysis the Liquor Division would save $90,800

in fiscal year 1985-86 and an additional $471,300 in fiscal year

1986-87.

Conclusion

Based on the calculations presented and if all of the assump­

tions hold true, we believe the projected analysis done by the

Liquor Division is accurate.

3

til a ~ t; n !l

) .. t::1

!l)

'1:l III

t; " a !l

) ::l " a H'I

I'd

!l) <: !l)

~,..

...

::l

~

'w'~

!l)

c:

fA .2

~=

<~

(I)"

'"

C

3

2.8

2.6

2 ...

.

2.2.

2.

1.8

1.6

1.4-

1.2.

1

0.8

0.6

0.4-

0.2.

1976

INIT

IAL

SA

LES

TOTA

L LI

QU

OR

S

TOR

E

SA

LES

1978

+

HE

LEN

A L

OC

ATI

ON

1980

YEA

R A

OD

L. S

ALE

S

, .",

-,

I

1982

<>

:>

.....,

1984

-.....

, :>

("

) g;;

M

z TO

TAL

SA

LES

.....

,

:>

" TO

TAL

LIQ

UO

R -

STO

RE

-SA

LES

-..

'"' ,

BI L

UN

GS

LO

CA

TIO

N

Ul

8 0 ~

t1 n (0 .. t:I

7 (0

":

:I III t1

rt S

6-'

(0

----

---

::l

rt 0 I-t!

::tI

5 (0

<

(0

::l

M'"

~

(0

"""I)

C

(I

) .~

4-~=

<~

(I)"

""

3 2 1 o 1976

1

97

8

1980

19

82

19

84

YEA

R C

IN

ITIA

L S

ALE

S

+

AO

DL

SA

LES

o

TOTA

L S

ALE

S

TO-T

AL L

IQU

OR

S

TOR

E

SA

LES

, B

OZE

MA

N

LOC

ATI

ON

U

l 2.

6 0 c:: t1

n 2.

4-II

) .. t;

2.2

II)

"d

1\1

t1 11

2 (1

) ::s rt 0

1.8

H1 l:ld

(1)

1.6

<: (1)

~'"

::s c:: II)

,,*

,8)

1.4-

c fA

.2

~=

1.2

<~

fA"*

' I

'i~ ,.

1 --

-+--

-0

.8

0.6

0.4-

0.2

0 -, ~

--~-

-.-

------~l

1976

1

97

8

19

80

19

82

198+

YEA

R C

IN

ITIA

L S

ALE

S

+

AO

DL

SA

LES

o

TOTA

L S

ALE

S

TOTA

L LI

QU

OR

S

TOR

E

SA

LES

K

ALI

SP

ELL

LO

CAT

ION

U

l 2.

6 0 c: 11

0

2.4-

(l) .. t:1

2.2

(l)

'1:1 III

11

rt

2 s (l

) ::s rt

1.8

0 t-n

~

1.6

(l) <

(l)

~'"

::s c: ..

..,1

1)

1.4-

(l)

c fA

.2

~=

1.2

<~

fA"'"

1

0.8

0.6

0.4-

0.2

0

1976

19

78

1980

19

82

1984

-

YEA

R C

IN

ITIA

L SA

LES

+

AD

DL

SA

LES

<>

TOTA

L S

ALE

S

ATTACHMENT B

CLOSUR[ or 5 SlRlf STORrs Afu1 Tun AGrHCIfS OUTLfTS

CLOSE -7 rv95 rV85 rV8S rV85 rY85 rY85 ESTIMATED [STIMATrO STORE UHIT HfT HrT PROfIT TOTRL EXPfHSf PROfIT COST

SAlES 5f\J.ES PRom MAR6IH EXPEHSES RATIO IHCR£AS£ D£CREAS[ *****O*IH •• *IHHI ••• I ... * ......................... I*** ....... ***** ........... * ••• * ..... ~.** ....... ***********H •• * KALISPELL MARKET RREA

KAlISPELL 12 162,975 $967,615 $110,371 11.50% S13S,916 11.35% KALtSP£l.L 195 8Q,539 5536,010 537,825 7.06% SlH,6B6 2.1.10% EUrRGRrF.H 67 31,996 S205,288 $26,529 13.90X $31,922 15.55%

282,410 51,709,113 $206,728 12.10% $285,151 1&.70%

KRLISPfLL 12 217 ,511 $1,503,625 5280,m 18.62% $151,685 10.09% rUERGRm 67 31,8% $205,288 $25,577 12J6% $31,871 16.997.

282,110 51,709,113 S305,626 17 .88% 5186,559 10.92% $98,898 598,895

jUtltM-.>t**-****"**I.****I.IIHf**********lIlfltll****_*_IHIIHHH***_*********IIIIIH***II1II11»****_**** BUTTE MARKfT AREA

Bum 2 101,599 5586,956 553,304 9.06% 5118,112 20.l6X Bum 116 177,150 $1,121,156 5157,402 14.00% 5161,531 11.61% URLKERUILLE 137 50,581 5306,792 535,HZ 11.15% 551,823 16.89%

329,333 $2,017,904 $215,818 12.18X 5331,796 16.59%

BUTTE 2 152,183 5893,718 $130,821 11.61% 5127,891 11.31% Bum 11& 177,150 51,124,156 5157,102 14 .00% 5164,531 11.64%

329,333 S2,017,90i $288,223 11.28% 5m,122 11.19% S12,375 512,371

*****.-**H*IIIII*._H_H** .. t****IIIIIH"'****"********_ItIllll**III*ItIIIII ..... IIIIUIII.IIIII_*IIII .. ** BILLIHG MRRKET RRER

BILLIHGS 3 261,318 $1,618,198 525i,298 15.13% S216,011 13.11% BILLIHGS 1 325,959 51,691,781 5233,547 13 .80% sm,728 13 .87% BILLIHGS 5 126,696 $748,875 $80,277 10.72% $130,525 17.m BILLIHGS 196 179,959 $1,071,553 $156,682 11.62% S117,973 13.81%

896,932 $5,160,107 5721,801 11.05% $729,267 lU3%

BILLIHGS 3 327,666 S2,022,636 1341,215 16.87% sm,525 11.60% BILLIHGS 1 389,307 52,066,219 5319,770 15.18%· S253,927 12.29% BILLIHGS 196 179,959 51,071,553 S151,019 H.09% $153,636 14.31%

896,932 $5,160,107 5812,005 15.71% 5612,088 12.11% S87,201 S87,179

*********.*******111 •• __ • __ .* ••••••• * .......... * ••••• _»***_. ____ **._ BOZEMRH MARKET RRER

BOZD1RH 9 173,i16 $995,367 $131,189 13.Z1I $153,713 15.15% BOZ£I1AH 193 111,977 $661,570 S71,1H 11.21% 5l15,S87 17.17%

285,393 $1,656,937 $205,633 12.m 5269,330 16.25%

BOZEMRH 9 285,393 S1 ,656,937 5280,660 16.91% sm,306 11.73% $75,027 $75,021

**1I1I1IIIo ....... ****I .. *******III*****III**** ... ' .... _ .... UIllIHHl ___ .** .. IHHI ... ***.*** ..... **** __ *

Source: Department of Revenue

' .. ~' -" , .. ,. ...

CLOSURE Of 5 STATE STORES RHO TUO AGEHCIES OUTLrrS

CLOSE·? fVBS ryes rV8S rves rY8S flr'8S ESTIMATED ESTIMATED STO~E UNIT NET NET PROfIT TOTRL EXPENSE PROm COST

SALES SALES mm MARGIH EXPENSES RATIO IHCREASE DECREASE **."***I**H***********~~***"*llt***«***iHi*I~H*ltnltlt.******n.*l**n*H*****,,1t1t*,************.*******Itlt*******

HELEHA MARKET AREA

HElENR 1 202,376 $1,211,702 5163,861 13.524 5181,6-10 11.99% HElEHA 197 130,221 $776,69'1 5103,565 13.33% $119,884 15.m EAST HELEHA 83 39,762 5236,378 SH,266 6.0n 553,579 Z2 .67%

372,365 $2,22'1,77i 5281,695 12.66% $355,103 15.96%

HElEHA 1 202,376 $1,211,702 5159,392 13 .15% 5186,m 15.36% HELEHA 197 169,989 $1,013,072 S168,159 16.63% 5122,837 12.134

372,365 $2,m,771 $327,851 H.71% $308,951 13 .89% 516,156 $%,152

*JIlI.*W****.* •• »**H**»*H*****************_*_**Itlt***H********.IHI*lH'******"~*lt**H.*************H**iHHI** GREAT fRllS MARKET RRER

GRERT fAllS 139 199,167 $1,192,575 5159,481 13.377. $185,617 15.56% GREAT fALLS 110 186,361 $1,096,606 5161,060 11.82% Sl49,161 13.m GREAT fRlLS 1 n 210,129 $1,225,140 $178,671 11.58% $168,955 13 .79%

595,957 $3,5011,621 $499,212 11.m S503,733 11.37%

GREAT fRLLS 139 301,382 $1,805,295 $305,275 16.91% $213,63B 11.834 GREAT fALLS 11 1 291,576 $1,699,326 $283,609 16.98% m5,126 11.50% S91,672 $91,669

595,957 $3,501,621 5593,881 16.95% $109,061 11.67%

It ........ n**>>lI*H****** ... ******JHi.II*lI*****>>lf>> .... *********''***** ... ** ...... ****"***"'*»HII*lI* •• ~******_*" IUSSOULA MARKET ARER

111SS0UlR 170 227,008 $1,105,918 5201,249 11.31% 5201,917 lU6X 111 SSOULR 171 299,214 Sl, 743, 776 $261,731 15.014 $239,896 13.76% ~ LOlO 192 52,855 $306, liO 532,825 10.72% 551,181 17.70%

579,077 53,-155,834 5195,805 11.35% $495,997 11.35%

MISSOULR 170 279,863 51,712,058 5278,826 16.29% $211,352 12.HI 111 SSOUlA 171 299,211 SI,m,776 $251,170 11.127. $250,159 11.35%

579,077 53,155,631 5530,296 15.31% . S161,511 13.35% $31,191 $31,186

..... * ••• * ........ __ H***tHHI .. ******* ... _ ... ********************* ...... ***** .... *******»**** .. *tHHI ...

CLOSURE RSSIJ'IPTIOHS: $178,820 $178,779 IIH"",* ***tUt******

1. 112 fT[ RUOeRTEO EACH TO BILLIHGS 13 & BILLIHGS .., ROI11K1STRRTIU£ COST 59,858 $9,858 LOLO 192

z. lIZ fT[ ALLOCRTED EACH TO GREAT fALLS 1m a GREAT fALLS 1111 $34,812 534,812 GREAT fALLS 140 57,127 $7, m ERST HELfHR 83

3. 1 fT[ RLLOCATED TO BOZ('~AH 520,883 S20,883 BOZEMAH 193 $23,666 523,66& 8IlLIHGS 5

1. 1/4 m ALLOCATED EACH TO MIS~OULA 1170 S MISSOULR 1171 59,449 59,149 UALKERUILLE 137 S15,791 515,791 KRLISPELL 195

5. fUJ'1IHISTRRTIU[ DUERHEAO HAS BEEH RERlLOCATEO fROM CLOSED STORE TO REMRIKIH6 STORES 5121,886 $121,886 TOTRL Rill COST5

Source: Department of Revenue

ATTACHHENT C

*************************************************************************** •• * *LIQSUM-l * * * *03/16/86 CD· F • H • *09:52 AM •• * **********.*****.******.*************************.***************** ••• ***.**** • LIQUOR DIVISION * FISCAL 1986 * FISCAL 1987 * * **********.**************.*** * REVENUE ESTIMATE ............................... * $5,319,000 * $5,174,000 * * * * * * LESS PROJECTED LIQUOR NET PROFITS ........... * $4,561,000 * $3,983,000 * * * • * * PROJECTED REVENUE SHORTFALL ....•............... * ($758,000)* ($1,191,000)* * * * * * LESS PROJECTED LIQUOR SAVINGS .......•.......• $192,100 * $1,758,300 • * * * * * REVISED REVENUE SHORTFALL/SURPLUS .............. * ($565,900)* $567,300 * * * * * * TOTAL BIENNIAL REVENUE ESTIMATE SURPLUS ..... * * $1,400 * * * * * * TOTAL BI~NNIAI I TOllnR SAlJINhS ............ * * $1,950,400. *********************II¥****************************************************** * • ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE REDUCTIONS *

* * * • ELIMINATE ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK $8,500 •

$17,000 * * ELIMINATE STAFF TRAINING • * * TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE REDUCTIONS $25,500 * * * LIQUOR STORE EXPENSE REDUCTIONS *

* • • • • • * •

* * 1. CLOSE 7 STORES-MAY 15, 1986 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

EAST HELENA #83 GREAT FALLS #140 KALISPELL #195 BILLINGS #S BOZEMAN #195 WALKERVILLE #137 LOLO #192

* it

* it

TOTAL ANNUALIZED STORE SAVINGS .•.•....••••. * LESS: *

it

RETAINED STAFF ..•..•..•...•.•.•.••.•. * BOZEMAN LEASE ...••.•....•..•.....•...• FRE IGHT OUT •....••••.•••..•••....••.••

TOTAL STORE SAVINGS ........................• it

2. REDUCE HOURS 1 HOUR PER DAY * EFFECTIVE MARCH 4,1986 ..•..••.•••.......... *

*

* * * $8,500 *

$17,000 * * $25,500 * * * • • •

$11 ,600 • $26,200 • $25,400 • $24,900 • $23,400 * $4,400 * $4,500 *

* $120,400 * • * ($16,900)*

($3,700)* ($9,000)* $90,800 *

* * $72,000 * it

* * * * * * it

it

* it

it

it

$53,200 it

$119,000 * $107,000 * $112,600 • $104,200 it

$52,900 • $54,600 it

it

$603,500 it

* * ($69,300)·

($17,900)* ($45,000 )* $471,300 it

• it

$230,000 * * 3. PRICE RESTRUCTURING ........................ * $0 * $870,000 *

* it it

* * * * 4. REDUCE COMMISSIONS TO 8% * * • * EFFECTIVE MAY I, 1986 ....•..•...•.......... * $3,800 * $187,000. ******************.*.********************************************************* * PROJECTED LIQUOR ENTERPRISE SAVINGS .........•.• * $192,100 * $1,758,300 * * PROJECTED BIENNIAL LIQUOR ENTERPRISE SAVINGS ... * * $1,950,400 * **************************************************************************.*.*

Source: Department of Revenue

. 12u.L ... <A.uL.- ~. /3 Itj~6 -"\ ~ rr;~ , . i1t/J:~1 at 'r;":",IJ').I)q'fl{,;~ ~(Representative Paul Pistoria requested staff of the Legislative

Council to prepare this verbatim transcript of his testimony before the Revenue Oversight Committee on February 21, 1986.)

oP~: I am state Representative Paul Pistoria. I'm happy to be here •

. I know each and everyone of them. And, if you don't know Paul

Pistoria by now you never will.

Chairman Williams: I've got five minutes for you Paul.

Representative Pistoria: Oh God. Now to start out with, we just

I brought this along; I'm not going to go allover it. This

is only half of it. It deals with the quota -- no -- the wine,

the quota, and closing down stores -- liquor stores -- in the

state of Montana.

I am entirely against closing all these profitable stores. Now,

it seems funny that I'm a Democrat that I would go against our

Democratic Governor and a fine gentleman like John LaFaver. But

if you -- like I said before -- that's the kind of person I am.

I'm my own man. If a Democrat's wrong I go against him, if a

Republican is wrong I go against him, and vice-versa. And I

think they all know that. Even Gerry Devlin knows that.

Chairman Williams: Let's get back to the story.

Representative Pistoria: Yeah. So you see this is one time I go

against the Governor. And I've always had good dealings with

John [LaFaver], but I just have to go against him on this issue.

And it's nice that he sent me this report, but I'll tell you, I

went over it and I know a little math myself. And, you just

can't make up that profit, just like this fine piece of, what

would you call it?

Okay. Now, to start off with I want to

primarily, to start out with, nobody here

of, I think it was with an initiative

tell you people here,

today has ever thought

84. Yeah, by the

Libertarians. You ever heard of them before? They're kind of

getting slow you know, I'm seeing they are less trying to run

this year, so I guess they got scared out, by not only my friend­

ly Republicans, but also my friendly Democrats. See?

Chairman Williams: We're getting off the topic of the business.

Paul, I'd like to call your attention, we haven't got too much

time, so--

Representative Pistoria: Yeah, but anyhow I've got to bring this

up. All right, you know what happened to the wine business. The

issue passed, and as you all know, what happened at that time. I

was one of the promoters against it along with the Montana Tavern

Association. And, I put out a cartoon. And, I'm going to pass

it around. It shows you the-- (pause in tape.) . .. how often

this jibberish they told us if you give us this, we'll make up

that $3 or $4 million dollars. Well, we've lost $3 or $4

million. They didn't live up to that and it has been going on

since 1978, so that would be eight years. So, what we should do

is consider taxing these distributors, some way where they -- the

wine is taxed, some way where we make up this revenue. See ••

Chairman Williams: Paul, I'm going to have to call your atten­

tion to the fact that you have got to stick to the subject of the

topic.

Representative Pistoria: Well, I'm leading up to that -- why we

shouldn't lose that. Now ..

Chairman Williams: Let's stick to the topic. NOw, we're talking

about closures, so stick to that, please.

Representative Pistoria: Okay. Okay, well, I'm bringing it up

as something for us to think about. The other thing is, on

closing, there's four times -- four times -- the issue of closing

our liquor stores. One was in -- a -- November 2, which failed,

2

and then in the Revenue Oversight Committee on November 13 -- you

weren't there. Bruce Simon and Spring, who was representing the

Governor's Council on Management, -- and of course I spoke there.

And, it failed. Then Senator Dover, in 1983, he had a Senate

bill 405, and it failed in Senate Administration. It failed

badly. Then last session, Bruce Simon had HB 527 to get the

state out of the liquor business. You know what happened? It

failed in committee so bad. But it was brought back on the floor

and what happened? It got defeated 79 to 20. And, you know what

happened? A fine Republican like Tom Jones made a motion, "do

not pass". Imagine that, and by God it did fail, so I think the

closing of the stores that are profitable ought to be the end of

the subject.

Now, here's another thing, I've been a -- I just can't go along

with John LaFaver and our fine Governor that we've got to lower

the expenses two percent. This is revenue; this is not an

expense. And I praise him for trying to use expense to run our

government because it is tax money. This is not tax money; this

is revenue. So I can't see where they can try to compare the two

together. Now, there's no way that you can compare it. And, I

think it's foolish to compare that we're going to meet up that 2

percent. Now, I don't want to really duplicate some of the

things said here. But it -- more finally -- why, I took the

sheets out of the -- out of the financial report by the revenue

department and it was done by a fine tooth comb -- and what I did for you people, I made it so to show you I'm not just saying that

I want to keep the stores closed in -- keep the stores open in

Great Falls. I want all the stores that's profitable in the

state. This right here shows that -- they -- why in the heck did

they want to fool around with it? I'm going to pass these

around. I got enough here to pass around to you people.

Chairman Williams: I believe that's already been passed around,

Paul.

3

Representative Pistoria: Well I don't think it's passed around

like this. No -- no sir. Because I got the -- the amount -- you

know no one thinks like Pistoria, I'll tell you that right now -­

so I want this passed around so you'll have it. I did ita

little different. See?

Chairman Williams: It is not authentic.

Representative Pistoria: Well it is authentic, and then they're

going to guess to what this darn sheet says. I tell you, I can't

get over it.

a profit.

I really can't. It's amazing where they're making

There's no business there's no business

practically any business in the state of Montana that's making

over 10 percent. Anybody that's making 10 percent or less has a

Ii ttle problem. But when we're making that -- that amount of

revenue to the state of Montana -- even if it's less, the state

needs that money. And you know I don't do much drinking, you

know I go around to all the parties, you never see me drinking

much. But I am one that's for this particular thing, and by God

if we don't have you people have the power to tell the

Governor, and John LaFaver, "drop this whole matter until the

Legislature meets in '87". And, in '87 we'll even defeat it

again to not close our stores, only the profitable ones. We want

to stay in the liquor business, because that's about the only

thing that we've got giving revenue to the state of Montana.

Thank you.

OPEN DISCUSSION PORTION OF THE MEETING:

Representative Pistoria: I want to make three or four seconds.

People on -- even the west side didn't even say. How many been

herein Great Falls? I'll bet there's -- everybody is familiar

with this one. You know by closing-- now as 1-- before I say

that I -- I don't want the west side closed, I'm in favor of not

closing all stores. But the west side store -- a lot of people

4

~. never brought that up today -- that store is everything west of

i the Missouri and north of the Missouri. And, I would -- I don't

know if I'm accurate, but a third of Great Falls would be out of

liquor. That's a fact. A -- Helen [O'Connell], do you think

that everything on the west third of Great Falls, the country

club and all of that and Black Eagle -- and ... Okay, that's

all I've got to say.

6055b:BOHYER:jj

5

•

•

•

,

... ,_, ..... ' '!f£Favei:i:' LPs.Je"l:-aiming tIie'LiCiudt1~eration,,' \ fravEtI.Y'01X;belfeve tn~pr<tf}::'i§:;.'¢art!nff, "

.......,''Ii'''' ... A'iI(''U ... '"Y1iIf:!''"' ~ lMr-i Ltia:F aver pre serite'd'):el¥il3ciiBt,> ;, <

~F~6i1fa'ry 2'1', 1ge6inHeleifa£,~:"H'. ' ~~!:salie ~;'~he-sy-'stem' whIch incifud;ed ":'0' IoJin»ila

, ".gj[',' '~I&C' ,- (. ' ':, ' ' I', - ."." ""1 )~~ ."uu:.&.$na:~"'~1.F'>Efu..tte- #2:,. Kalis,pell,.'t~g::;):~:.~: ~

...... ,oIjJ.~!t_ ..... .I&II='Y\'j-.. ..... en!Mi 'f9'/' Gfeat'F'a:'lt~'#l.f-:F/ Missoula .171, Evergreed;:Wg\{riey Agency. Other stores ,orr·the "hit list"· are Hungry Horse,'

....... '..L"ll ... , ade, Ronan, and Victor. ":l<! J- 6 ,:~,+ 't ·H'.",',' '., .; , .. ' ' ·":;11

": ! auol\.~i~'~tirhs 01.£t:, LaFave'r decided' to 'close '1 stores:E~st He'lewa ':~f8ji, KaHs~l':r tl~P G'rea1=" Falls #140, Bozeman' #193", J4i~~ot:lte: 'l+~ 'walkerville a~~'~e:~;A<1ehe"fes- •. " . , /<"{)~'~:'" ': .<::,,,,' 9"'4" ,~O.t " .... '. __ ,,' .' --..---.p:,~) '" ',""-

1;'" '\ rPii!';~heHFebrb-arY' 21st meeting, the Revenue oversight" Commfttee ::;).;~::' UNAN:1K>USLY" re '-ected the ro osal and moved that no stores be- cIo-ietfhntil

--S"es-sion ad a chance to review the matter. Members' 'of -the C -,::;r::-:

mittef!-'are::-'"'Rep-. Mel Williams, Chairman, Rep. Gerry Devlirf,,'Rei""J'omf: .• ~' Harp'# Rep'. Dan lfa-rrrngton, Sen. Tom Hager, Sen. Joe MazureK':, Sen. B±I:f't)I., Norman, Sen ... Bruce Crippen, and Sen. Bob Brown.' Absent fTOif'thiS:me were Rep. Jack Ramirez and Sen. Tom Towe.

\ ~~}I~·.i 1 ~3-t'·. , .i

'Re&s:onSi f'o~'rejection of LaFaverS" proposal were vatieif, b'ut 10winciUfacts'played' an important part: .

'i"-,,,~~:/\"~~'_4''';''>,,~~ -_ ... ,_. ~ _ .. '.. '.' (>:1J." • . ~ ,.". , <.~' ~ -.: • .-...' ':

1. ?> Revenue Department document verified ,~heJ!.~rC?fitda-_~,::",g.t.::~~:..;-:-" wi December 31, 1985 (ha~f:-w'7Y through FYJL6L~_~§.~?_.92%. The legi<~~.~tj.le

language- states the Dl.vl.sl.on "shall attempt" to return a, 13%- p'fof"l.t".:: It was obvi,olls .. profits were at the required level. ' c", I ,U: '. "'.l.

2. LaFaver claimed 100% (all) of the sales in the stores p+,opqsed for closttre'~would immediately go to the remaining stores-~ The·COmmittee questioned this "assumption." At a time when revenue is sorely needed by the State General Fund, now is not the time to test LaFaver's theory.

3. Declining sales"at:: e.," a prob,lem, but the State is still,..1!!ak~!La... prOi:-it~.;. It ,is 'not' the' same' prof'it it made 10 years ago, nor will it ever be again. But there is clearly no emergency that merits closing profitable stores. Closing stores and makingthe product less available will not help declining sales .".,'; f,

I. '.~ . -" .. , '

,.: "~-:' 't .,;,." \' .,

LaFaver ha".J10~ done' any kind of "economic impact" study regarding all these clos\lfes'if::,.There is no plan for private industry to take over. Loss of sales:'will mean less tax revenues for cities and counties. East Helena lost approx. $3000 per year when they shut the doors to tRe public. This is based on our walk-in traffic. Normally, ,East Helena would re-ceive $10,000 per year from tax revenues off the liquor, beer and wine sales. If sales go down state-wide, East Helena will lose more, as will every city and county in Montana.

And sales will....,g£-.-9own, .. Q~_~E:}l.~~.~j;0!;'~L,,91Q~~res ,will not:_,§~c?E .. :wi..s..£l these seven stores. We believe Helena, #197 will close in November, when

., its' lease expires. Why should Helena have 1;:wo~stores, when there will only be one store left in Missoula, Bozeman, and Great Falls. We believe LaFaver has a minimum of 20 more stores targeted for closure between now and thaend of, FY'87 .. Just ask him and see what he says.

~.~ : <~

ficial closure date is April IJ, 1986 ... , And ye~, '1"'l. :~tn" the pub~ic on Ivlarch 18, and COMPLETELY CLEARED «' •

.. " .... ~ .. ~ State. is ,payin9;,for a vacant bu.ilding for the J ",:i . , n4.:,tJ'X~ mana'lel=' s wages for another 10 days.. We asswne_t

she" 11 sf . <l~ building:... We believe LaFaver wanted us closest ~ before we could get helf from. the Special Session. East Helena gave" I LaFaver a.qqressive opos~tion befor.e the Revenue Oversight Comritittee, so he is getting us out of the way now.

I~·· ¥

How is it a salaried employee can have so much power to affect so many people, Why is he allowed to defy the Legislature? LaFaver obviously has nothing to. lose - the Legislature can't fire him. We don't know John· I .• LaFaver personally" or his background. We have always believed a person is only as good as his word. The State made a committment to us for five years in a. l.ease agreement. In return, we built the State a new building in East. Helena- front which the State could operate the East Helena: Liquor iii Store ... we still have 2~ years left on the lease.. We feel the State has< I an obligation in this matter. LaFaver has chosen to ignore this ob­ligation. To some it might be "good" business that LaFaver did not pay, off these leases... To us, we feel we were "shafted." <

Fj na l ly. ever~ store ..IrrJmQ~ed" fo£. .<=.l9.§.ure, including East Helena'.;,:,~;, is. malting' a profit. Rep. Joe Quilici" Chairman '-of--Ehe ApproprTatioirS;';.J\;":;,~, Sub-Committee on Revenue issued a statement to the Revenue oversigh'b;.,~~~~:~~ Committee reitterating it is NOT LEGISLATIVE INTENT TO CLOSE PROFITABLE" """ STORES" especially since no eme'rgencyexists ...... ," -.. - " ... - "- "'- ,

At some point, declining sales may not return enough of make it feasible for the State to stay in the business. BUT DECISION OF THE LEGISLATURE, NOT A SALARIED_EMPLQ~.

...... a profit. to," THIS IS A, I

PLEASE SUPPORT LEGISLATION TO STOP LAFAVER AND STORE CLOSURES:

Over

, '

--~'

~~~

East Helena, ~rr 59635 227-5740

I i i i , i

, ..

", .

Most Sales: Between 5-6pm and Saturdays, when the population is at home.

II J6 il

16-1-101 "for the protection I

of the welfare, health, peace, J-'i ,morals, and safety of the people i

of the state ••• "

39,938 population 3 stores 1 Store / 12,312.66 people

I' ,/ I -

t '0 :

WALK-IN 56%

"

r " ,\

i (

to 0992 -- 'c,

" .. ~ ! . .

Helena and Helena Valley Population as of

1980 Census

Valley - 13,000 (30% of

..

total County population. Increased 12% since 1970.) ~

Helena - 23,938 (55% of total County population. Decreased 13% since 19701

13,000 Helena Valley 23,938 Helena 36,938

6,115 Rest of County

43,053 County Pop. Lewis & Clark

~ __ J I ' .. "

ED 0991 j'

i~3%o~ ~ "

HELENA • V!I.J '~.:1 ~f'",\~+,'0''\

City Limits Boundary

I

.~.

CENSUS ENUMERATION

DISTRICTS Scale • Helena Valley

o 2000 4000 • .. -1000 3000 FEET Figure 7

TO"

EDo999A- ~ ~''77 C / '1& cP basi" lk/ef)cL - _ I : ~ tt

L/,3;{/../

Census Enumeration District Boundaries (1980)

1"1 I

I Revenues received to Counties and Cities from Liquor Sales

Missoula County Wine Liquor

Missoula (City) Wine Beer Liquor

Yellowstone County Wine Liquor

Billings Wine Beer Liquor

Cascade County Wine Liquor

Great Falls Wine Beer Liquor

Silver Bow County Wine Liquor

Butte Wine Beer Liquor

Lewis & Clark Wine Liquor

Helena Wine Beer Liquor

.East Helena Beer-Wine Liquor

County

$

FY84

7,297 17,376

5,766 91,939

115,844

10,371 26,331

11,536 183,940 164,145

7,747 18,977

9,796 156,201 122,460

3,656 9,618

6,425 102,450

59,359

4,131 10,899

4,134 65,916 67,536

4,820 5,123

$

FY85

7,303 16,458

5,771 88,271

109,720

10,380 24,415

11,546 176,601 152,292

7,753 17,204

9,804 149,969 110,861

3,659 8,916

6,430 98,362 53,084

4,135 10,340

4,137 63,286 63,544

I

walkerVille,

FY83 ' -6.2%

L~q-$4, 281 I'" Wl.ne- $2,65'-

FY84 +8.8 pro

Liq$4,764J Wine $2,595

~1 I FY85 +9.1 pre

i1 Liq $ 6,357:, Wine $2,4~

I I

~;~~~*Received morJl because sales t

East Helena would only receive approximately half or less of the Liquor Tax if we had no store in East Helena. This is because 51% of the profit is walk-in. Without a store, we would have no walk-in sales, only tax money received from our three bar purchases and a portion of county-wide sales, which is based on population for the city. If stores are closed, and the sales are not picked up 100% in the other stores, cities and counties as well as the General Fund will lose, because these figures are

I·~·· "

I '1 based on S3.:Es.

I

'\ \,

sto

res

Pro

po

sed

fo

r C

losu

re

-sta

tus fo

r F

Y85

Net

Pro

fit

Nam

e T

ota

l S

ale

s T

ax

$ +

to

S

tate

=

.. T

ota

l R

even

ue

.. . '

Ex

pen

ses

(Sav

ing

s)

.. •

• "

• N

et

Pro

fit

FY

85

/ C

losu

re

#1

40

G

r.F

all

s

$1

,35

9,6

96

.75

$ 8

25

,15

9.7

5

$ 6

71

,99

5.2

6

$ 9

36

,39

9.6

7

$2

73

,09

0.6

3

$1

63

,58

9.4

4

$1

35

,98

5.5

2

$1

87

,52

4.7

5

$1

61

,06

0.5

8

$4

34

,15

1.2

1

$1

49

.16

1.2

7

$2

37

,73

3.9

4

$1

15

,58

7.9

7

$1

73

,81

1.4

1

$1

14

,68

6.3

8

$2

67

,80

2.0

8

$1

30

,52

5.5

8

11

.8%

/

12

.9%

9.0

%

/ 1

0.2

%

5.6

%

/7.3

%

8.6

%

/10

.3%

#1

93

B

oze

man

$

74

,14

4.5

0

#1

95

K

ali

sp

ell

$

37

,82

5.8

9

#5

Bil

lin

gs

Walk

erv

ille

A

gen

cy

Lo

l0

Ag

ency

$ 3

84

,96

9.8

5

$ 7

8,1

77

.88

$ 8

0,2

77

.33

$ 3

5,1

42

.16

$

11

3,3

20

.04

$

51

,82

3.0

9

9.1

%

/ 1

0.2

%

$1

09

,61

0.5

4

$ 5

4,1

84

.17

#83

East

Hele

na

$ 3

82

,92

5.7

5

$ 2

96

,46

9.0

9

$ 7

6,7

85

.78

$ 6

0,0

91

.25

$ 3

2,8

24

.76

$ 1

4,2

66

.41

$

74

,35

7.6

6

$ 5

3,5

79

.60

8.6

%

/ 9.

6%

4.8

%

/ 7.

7%

$4

,85

7,6

16

.12

$

97

5,2

45

.25

$

43

5,5

41

.63

$

1,4

10

,78

6.8

8

$6

69

,54

8.0

6

Mo

nth

to

M

on

th L

ease

s 1

. b

eer

Lo

dg

e #

11

2

. M

alt

a

#2

2

3.

Fo

rsy

th

#2

3

4.

Fo

rt B

en

ton

#

31

5

. C

on

rad

#3

3 6

. T

roy

#

70

7

. R

on

an

#1

01

8

. V

icto

r #

17

2

9.

Bu

tte

#2

1

0.

Lib

by

#6

1

1.

Kali

sp

ell

#

19

5

as

of

1-2

-86

S

ince

Dec

1

98

5

Sin

ce Ja

n

19

85

"

Dec

1

98

5

.. 'A

ug

19

85

"

Sep

t 1

98

5

Ju

ly

19

85

N

ov

19

85

S

ep

t 1

98

5

Nov

1

98

5

Nov

1

98

5

Jun

e

19

85

(e

arl

iest)

Why

are

all

th

ese

leases

mo

nth

to

mo

nth

?

Ev

ery

sto

re

pro

po

sed

fo

r clo

su

re is

m

akin

g

a p

rofi

t.

Rep

. Jo

e Q

uil

ici,

C

hair

man

o

f th

e

Ap

pro

pri

ati

on

s S

ub

-Co

mm

itte

e o

n

Rev

enu

e is

su

ed

a

state

men

t to

th

e

Rev

enu

e O

vers

igh

t C

om

mit

tee

an

d

Joh

n

LaF

av

er

reit

tera

tin

g it is

N

OT

LE

GIS

LA

TIV

E

INT

EN

T

TO

CL

OSE

PR

OFI

TA

BL

E

ST

OR

ES

, E

SP

EC

IAL

LY

S

INC

E

NO

EM

ERG

ENC

Y

Ex

isT

S.

He

ask

ed

th

at

clo

su

res

be d

ela

yed

u

nti

l th

e

19

87

S

ess

ion

h

as

a ch

an

ce to

re

vie

w.

Sen

. D

ave

Fu

ller

-ask

ed

fo

r fo

llo

w-u

p

au

dit

to

re

vie

w all

o

pti

on

s

befo

re clo

su

res.

I~~~ ttiJ II G<"~ "(\ I.

I I

I

1]0 W ~6M -IT lV\'Ay <;OrYCC~N,' _ . il -r/1iJ if To St/MM~~/2~ l-h£~E" 5-rR7irrxnl.r:

....! F/Y.l )11 LL~_ 'I 1 E~t<. E ".10 c/)·(/~z.. == L/(JO 6f'l ~ II 6/~o/fJ. .::. 3s.i, IS.bCB. !i C I)'()/~,:: 58) So 2- ~ i! 6/l o/fS-:: 5f~ 4/t~ II 711/fS - /2./.jljtl- ~ 0'(">J-6 ,'L/I~-oJ 11 ebov!Z -rCTAJ- ShjJ;.: r _ ~~ I) ?7'J /!"J- ~ 11 :. ~

1FtX~S: ?~O", I:>fD To _S(~7i; 'F~~M .. "Lo ut:: :. II W ~,,~Ol\ S"L~r • (S""'E t(:too~)

II \)

PIt 'It:~'( ~~~- ... . 6/~O/f2.. ~7R') ~S ,/<:2. : 6 /~'(/f~ :: 6r; 188' L~ j c/ ~(J/G'I ::: /6 '-Io:s. ~ !. 6/ ~r':J- a. '6)1 )tJ.-~

... i! '}/'/tl-- 1;';/5If~-::: SO, ?()6 ~ roT~/.. T(ft~s.£. To S~T,;: -p<:'01~ ¢.. 00

fdso Yf L ',11.0 ~ S />..I-t:.l : "T .J. 4 f) 117 -. I. ,. .

("lET ~O'l=""'T To ~IE fr-FTE& ftl-l- 0r>E"'-~"f\l~ Et-.. \>& ~ S e.t f\N. 'I) bSE1="of\":\i.. If.T)(~' N~ ~ Vteb'u,lE. b 't:kCili ,1\£ ~clU£..5N.E.S =. /1- ~b '}o

.. -

' .. . ,

NET ?ROt:=,T TD ~-mTE ~o~ SALe,j j.:: ~ · I. fT~t- t e~ P\-l-\.- E:~y?'~NS~~ D~DL~~'. · 2. f¥FTe~ T~~S' ME. DE£UCT~b JR~ SptLE

.. ".

NET PRoF,T: ' · F'/cl) E~D : 6/:S D/;2. = ~ /) S99~:

6/~dj8'l :: cB6 I /~'1~;' 6/.3oj~Lj = ..sD, 468 -.<

61:so/~J- == 3 2 J 8.1'/.· ~ 7 /1 /~J.- -/:2/31/tr:::. c::<?) '13/ ~ \

IOTA-I- ~€f~OF;T t\~e:'k. . '* IS:?, /I?~ .. fd .. \- Ei",r~!'t: J '¥- ... -A-L.l- ~Y£r '. :. .~ ..

~"I.- ..:

~Vc~"'~E ~€T ~O¢-'T ::: p. 88 /0;

I. IJlE ~\IE C!n\\R·'~L.l~~ ~.3 'I 't,,117 ~ iN --m i~ ~6 1"€ ~~~ 'FR('N\(\ O~\ L~u..~c. SIt/'£'.f,'/

( ~ -rh£ ps.f~;o~ ~~OLU~ ;: , ~

~ .. ~ ~~U= ~O ~f:',i5u~~)) ~J S-?J //6 ~ i~ ~E.I 1~Cl>mE) ~~~ I7t-x ~UEN L.lJ4 To, thE: ~11=: ~O'M o~'\ ~l~ t; ~

~ :

jf:' you ~ '"D7::> ...., he~'1(} TIIt.t (h r;; .2 ~$ o..t ;N \< .. un-u ... J ~·~iD D \ \\ t D t=: ts1 ToTitJ.- Sit'LEl (I)' 7~ I r~-C!!) 711 C#. 10 ~ R~lft'Y1U~ '!Q:;TI .. re.N~/:> ~ --r~~ STItT~ el t 0\,("" STo~€ IS ;(s.s3i6:;.

~.

'.

, J

f09

D

ah

r.§

.fIW

ph

a.

STO

RE I

C)

, en

ET

AT

E

or ~ONTANA

DE"A~THENT

OF

R

EV

EN

UE

[ I

, U

0 I

t

I V

I S

I O~

SlOltE~ ~T

!1t:

.."

c:-!It~Tlf«.: ~AtBefT '~"-1ge5

LOCA

TIO

N

LOLD

M

AD

E A

& LE

ASE ~1E 0

9"4

/19

'Si

awe,

&: -,-

Zfl

l) 1

UiO

tttJ

\ -,-

)lU

I aw

cts

: -.-

4Ttl

WiU

t,U

-:-

fT T

tl D

ATE

-.-

ptU

(I; -n;1tJ~

• (1

)

SALE

S lN

IlS

",

64

2

",5

55

~,'97--

ZIt,,,,

li.4

.

TOT~

SA

LES

12

7,4

?t.5

0

'n,9

37

.!C

~'m'fi

119«m

'1E le

ef %

D

Ist:

lJit

,-

,34 •

• $)

• ,,61

•• t

il

~,

• ~,...t. t

A

D.!

&RO

SS

SAI..

ES

125,

130.

95

127 .

. 320

.30

25

, .. 45

,\.25

1

1c.

,a:.

.50

16

.' t

COO

T O

l" ~

r'~Ze*

~.!

tf.'iI

f;'i

'e'~

'E t"

'::

GIitC

JSS

Plb

fl1

~,

~.

I.

...

• .,

• c.

.3 t

~EXfIBGES

• CZ

) •

a'

• CZ

) •

CZ)

• (2

) •

CZ)

~lES

~"1'ED S

ER

VIC

ES

' .. '

761.

13

s.c u~...

t..

,t,.".

Jl 7.

'11

",""..

7.11

$

!!I!

!: ~

at:.

d t,

t!

tf 5C

,~

if ~"cD

CCJII

rIl :t

RitC

S i"..

i,i.

.

t;,.

....

. 1

,6

1.

TRAV

EL

R!!N

T lI

:'lU

TIE

S

IIB

'IUR

S

DlM

!:P. ~

~1HDRTAGE

14.9

6 ,

-----~---

--

-14~96-

l~~ --·~-----z7.10-

I

taI~=.

,!:a!

:i l:¥

! ,!:

IE:tt

,!.

! 2~:m

:l;

,~.;

z::

Itt:i ,~

ZAD.

I SA

LE

1.7

u.

s ".0

".2

TO

TAL.

ItE

VE

NE

42

;31S

.1O

31

,160

.71

~---------

-1C

.,Jt

;:S

1

61.,5

14.9

1

%W

SI!"

no

2

'7

S!7

"6

TAXE

S 25

,116

.13

25,5

29.9

0 so

,'PD

LGS

43

,:M

S."

N

!T P

IIOF'n

17

,199

.67

,,,23

0:11

----

~~--

~;4!b~"

2S

,m.7

1

mes

a o

r !l

OO

T

13 7

t

6 "

7 ".6

~··'h

.. [U

~ ~~

M ,.

..a.

('L

~ _t

Wa.

f-L

M

~ ~ ~ ~ .

'In

IIo

ltt

'ftI

~ t:

l..w

r 'Y~ 'f

tI b

l.w

,

~:

• (2

), M

E P

BC

Bn'

MD

or

£XI

L .~ ~ 1

ME

M.I

UIT

D ~

IAL

D A

IR 1

ME ..

.ra

. N

)n-!

: A

IIU

Hl$

l1tA

TIV

E C

OST

S M

E C

CJI

P\1

T'E

I) ... 1

L6I

1 O

F &

IUT

IA

I..n

;

/1

I ,,

I J

.~,., ...

,~

" .•

1 ••

.,. .1

J

_,.u4#_~'~;,

.J

S T

AT

E

0

f M

0

H T

A

H A

D

EP

AR

TM

EH

T

OF

R

EV

EH

U[

L rC

iU 0

Ii

I>-r

v-l

' lu

lij

. __

_ .

STOf

tE~

IUM

mL

" eM

TlN

; S

IAl!

PIJ

!! D

e=]M

9B5

STO

ftE

N)

19

2

LOC

ATI

OH

LO

U)

IiIW

IE A

li LE

ASE

D4

lt 0

9 ".m

:I 0

-,

$1

CiJ

AR

Tfi

-0

-ZM

I C

iJAR

fV(

-0

-S

ilt!

iUii

t m:

-0

-4T

h U

lW iU

-0

-"

1tl

DA

n:

-0

-~1

c.;

w,-

c -

.rr

• (1

)

SA.L

.ES

lJtt

1S

1

, .. 3«

1 17

.. 3'\

11

le,'"

\,

,65

4

5 .. ,1

15:'

5':

','''

' ,.

;60l

t

TOT~

SAlE

S 9'

1,9'

1!..4

5 1

lt,0

07

.65

7

4,5

84

.55

9!

.,9'lZ

.5D

.... U

.15

3B

7' ,5

re.5

0

.? %

: D

ISau

n

~,zt

t;.4

S '.,~. 1

S .,

OF

ten

• ..

. !L

.SZ

:'

,.~~

.ctl

~,W;." "'3"~

IAD

J G

ROSS

SA

LES

9C.,7

tX..D

O

12t.

,171

..5D

T

J.,5

U.2

7

~,5z;...

E,9

ZS

.7S

3B

'.,1I

O:..

19

.3 X

I C

OST

o~

SA

LE

S ~~'i

f!'~'F.

f..~

,G.1

j ih

"t,,;

e"

~'94

~~ '2

:'0'

~.~

~ N

Orr

t ~;:.".~

~_.",~,t...t...,.4.,.~

i:Z

...

0P

EJ0

01

II[I

E

iFE

NS

£S

• (2

) •

(l)

•

(2)

• (2

) •

(2)

SA

tN.:

£S

.

CCHT

RA.::

TED

SER

VIC

ES

6,0

.9.5

3

6.7

1

10

,66

1.1

5

t.U

1

0,9

".0

5

14

.ft

",6

83

.56

1

Z.6

t ~,m.99

1C.3

%

=-!E.~Mif

J~'~.l

~U·~

'l!

. 1l~'~

1,J

• n~·~

".~

I m

·:t

'I.~

'T

RAV

El..

• (2

)

3t,

D7

t.Z

6

1n

.Q:

2'It

..15

,1:

4,69

"0.6

2 'Z

-tW

t&ff

ES

-------

Re"

UIt

S

20

.60

I

20

.60

I

42.~

%:

_OTle.~~

8REN

CAG

!:-sH

OR:

.T .... ~::-

=_=-

----

....... lI .

...

F ...

......

----

....

..---.

.r---&

>,...

---.-

'Y

' 9

Y

"P

. 1

9

• .. ..

...

c: •

AD

I" .. t

OS

TS

TO

TA:..

EJ

tI'B

CSE

lAD

J SA

LE

10

.2

1'.

9

".c

16

.1

14

.2

lOTA

l ItE

VEN

JE

29,3

83.7

5 ~,'9' •.

16

",9

47

.95

24

,D!7

.6&

10

';,61

0.54

~

SA! E

S 3

2,4

3

1,1

Z

l,1

U

,D

2£

,6

TAX

ES

1&,2

27.6

0 2

5,1

17

.53

1

4,n

S.J

e

1&,7

2S.2

7 7

t .• 7

IS.?

I

~;zs

14

.4

1li

I;m

;67

~--

76,4

03.1

2

Nn

PW

tOr%

T 1i;1~:1S

1~,D7.).63

,,~.57

5,3

6Z

.4'

3Z;1

24. 7

6

lU,4

6L.8

5

PERC

ENT

0" P

IOn

T

12

.3

".2

Z.D

5

.!

t.6

t.O

rmE

-1'

• C1

> M

£ P

ER

cert

¥E!

0"

DC

!"!fA

SC

' (

).

Of

otC

ItW

E (-

).

DC'

IJC

CI'E

fR

WI

TEAt

lP

DtJ

E T

tl M

C

UIt!

tfHt

nAA

TO ~

NJTE-~:

.. ~),

ME

"ER

CEN

TAG

ES

OF

EP

BC

SE

S,

TO T

HE

AD

JUST

ED t

IiIlO

SS

IAL.

ES

FO

R 1

lE I

UM

'TB

.

NJT

E-3

: A

Il'U

HIS

TR

AT

IVE

co

m M

E

CC

I'PlIT

ElI

Oti

it.6

&!

Of'

lid

T ~.

L _

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

_ ~

t«J9

D

ob

r§/'"

op

hM

.·

STO

llE

110

SALE

S U

NIT

S

TOTA

L. SA

LES

A10

C

U/o

.ffl

"op

hd

'

STO

IIEt

IUA

IITEI

LT O~E'ATJ.'

ITA

Tf.l

IIT

a.-Jf~''''

'92

LO

CATI

ON L

OLO

•• A

If

.,

LE

Alt

.ATE

Dt-

1 ..

..

liT

III

~--Cfi an

S

it I

Tl

4n; In

n

ft U

Tt

PI'

K n

: ~ N

T[

14

,'3

5

____

____

'~J'

6 7.

1G

,'"

",,'7

S~,f"

~~.

,or.~f7~.90

"S~'

9fo.

'O

7.,

'27

.40

8(."a~ ••

o II

T .. S

GZ.

SO

JX,'

''.'S

D

ISC

OU

Nts

i~t:S!.74

.~s.".zs

~~1l ...

. "

'i .. l

....

~

--~~.~ -

---

4'7

X.l

i

ADJ

'1I0

U

IAL

ES

tOST

O

F SA

LES

'07

,04

1."

"3~61C.15

1S,7

94.4

7 .~,J51...

1I~,aa~.,.

~,J77."

61.1~.Z~.

____

_ ,~~1.

----

-t~.

SZ~ ••

~ ".

S!l

.Zi.

Z

lS."

'-ZZ

-11

;.51S

,,7

Clo

st H

otl

T

4:.. ..

14!.

•• 'I

~ ..

. o ..

.. ,

3 ...

.. ZQ

;.'t

)4

; ...

z"'.zlj------,lr~.9Z

'4O;~;U-

OPEI

ATIN

W E

XPE

NSE

'

IAL

Att

I!S

Ca.

TIA

tTE

D I

EIV

ICE

S

',,"

,::I

n

c:_

-n

AIls

nA

VE

L

turf

UT

.lU

TJE

t

. IE

PA

lI'

011l

EP

.ExP

EN

IE

' .. J

ll.9

' 11

.. 121

•• '

t .. 5

K.O

f 1

C,'

''.IS

K

,o".

16

~JJS.u

7S.1

G

"1.1

2

n.H

---n~~u-----~ ----~

95

2.1

7

1 .. i

6C

.6!

. '.!

?'."

1.1Z~."

_ . _

4.M

4.67

4

A1

T.M

_

21

.a

10.6

6 4Z

."

IkE8

KA

'f-IM

OZT

AC

E !~

.'5

10.1

1 '1

.4S

"t

.11

.'PI

S A

M.C

OIT

I J,

26

1.7

0

3 ..

.. '.'.

1 .

. 3'3

3."

1 .

. '75.

74

"..a2

Z.5I

tQ

,7tS

••

TOTA

L El

(PEN

SE

11;;

71,.

" 1S

.. 9JL.3~

1~ .. J

'~.ZS

1~ .. '

''.D

O

'n;tn~--------~..Df

% A

DJ

.AU

1Q

.0

14

.0

17

.6

17

.'

11..

3 _

.11.

.4

TOTA

L. I£

YEJ

NE

SS~'33.ZS

JZ~"1.5Z

U ..

'71

.72

19

.. "'.

20

'''

..an

.''

r ... 7

U.'

S

, AD

.! S

AL

U

l~ ••

Z~~O

24~t

U~l·--------

lj.t

----

-------~zr.I

Tu

n

21

.42

7.1

3

22

.65

4.'

( 1

$.Z

1t.

U

11

.D3

1.0

[I

n.W

.1l

AS

,!It

.J5

lIaP

RO

nT

1

l .. 6

Jt..

10

,c

.. ,,,.u

3"

K."

1,15

7.10

JC

Aa.

1S

K

.. """

PUC

EN

T

OF

PRO

FIT

16

.:7

~.'\

4.&

1.

S

'.0

'.

0

.. ~~.

';

.~.p

.;

...

:.~

.. ,,

;.\

'~

":.-

-",:

~ 4

' ,"

',,

( ',

..

" ..

.. ~

" .!~~ ..

': .

. ..... ~

.. "

,"

I..------~~~~~~~:;.~'~~"~.~~-------------------

~. -"

' .. ~ " .~.~"., ... ,

.:I .eI

J

.aI

:JD

.m.f

ff.h

d::.

I ,:.

1 ,.,

J I

, .. : .. ,,1

,:1

I .... 1

,I

.. 1

ITO

I'I

IUA

ITII

LY

O

"IA

Tl.

' IT

AT

'.'W

T

o.-J~'''3

ST

oat

.0

192

LO

CA

Tr..

LO

LO

,IAD

E

A'

LlA

IL .A

ll O

Y-'.'

" -----

lit

Itt

ti

t: ift

I.'

itl

in

: i1

l n

ft 1

1ft

,.

JOt:

ft

U-.

1T

E

SALE

S U

NIT

S

TOTA

L SA

LES

13,5

42

1Sc"6

~,:su

1Cc,"

",.

!!5

S4

.~7S

",4

20

.15

10

,,77

4.45

64

,6Z

7.Z

5 74

,.J1

4.10

1

.,1

16

.'5

6C

XiM

4.JO

DJ5

tOO

Nft

.,

19

1.1

0

\,Z

5 ..

. "

'll.

OS

"

... 0

3 4

,"'"

.&

;,5

1 ••

-U-

ADJ

.IO

SS

SALE

S 9

4 .. 7

23.1

5 1

0t,

SZ

'.9

7

63,."

C.Z

O

13 .. J

Z~.07

11

3,]

77

."

Jfl

.. 1n

.'1

COST

OF

SALE

S -----J~!ZIaJ6_

__ __

-S'-IZ~&I~_

_____J,&ZZ~&.'_

____

_ ' ...

~al'_

2Z!.AtC._.~

CR

OSS

N

OF

lT

4(i,Z~.39

4 ..

,66C

O.1

4 Z

. ,W

I .Il

3 ..

,.7:0

.'"

, ... ~;W------

----

,-.r

#»

O;u

t

OP

ER

AU

R ..

""D

l"P

l5U

IAL

'''tl

ES

CGNT

aACT

ED

IEIV

ICE

S ',

31

3.7

6

',9

n • .

, ',6

40.1

' ',

M1

.'7

5

S',

5JS

.ZJ

~,_.13

IUPP~IE'

-_

.

5:'.""

_

. -""4~ --_

... ---

-".T

l ---

U.C

KI

Z ..

... l

Jl

•• Z1

1

C~

-T

... S

99

3.4

5

',29

S.4

4

"OO~.'5

','97.

'0 4

,4I7

.M

4 .. 'K

.1'

TaA

VEL

'I'n

'r"

UT

ILIT

IES

IE'A

IIS

OT

Rn

D'E

NE

E

"EAKA'~-IMO.TA'E

41

.23

41

.Z3

24.2

9

AIM

. con

s i,

91

9.2

4

3,32

5.52

i,

06

S.J

6

Z,]

1S.1

I 10

,745

.90

r,u

z ••

TOTA

i. OJI"~

-------,~ ..

. 3S

U

,.".

HI

11,5

11>

.93

1 .. ,

..5

•••

3 a,o

rs.V

l 5

.,..

.; .P

% A

OJ

SALE

1

0.9

1

3.4

1

&.1

" ..

14

.4

U.1

TOTa

l IE

VE

NU

E

Zt,"

".04

u,

.n.0

4 1

5,5

1'.1

9

1&,4

1&.Z

I .i

,71

l.1

S

"5.,

1Jl

.1.

~

AO

J SA

LOE'

3

•• s

Z

L.S

Z

4.l

Z

S.,

Z

I.I

ft.5

TAXE

S ",

'64

..6

0

n,9

Sl.

17

~._ '~'~.:SL

. ___

_ 14

,.SJC

l.Z'

AS

,tIt

.JS

",m

.ss

.ET

NO

F'I

T

",0

19

.44

9

,01

'.1

7

i,'''.

42

1

"".0

7

Z,,~.ID

ST

,"'.

" PE

RC

ENT

Of

No

n 1

1'

i .6

'.f

4

.5

S.l

C

.G

t ••

... -~ .. :,.;:,.~---

__

_ -;,;---"-=---~~.....,-o--~

.;".:

•• #

.-

C10

J7

aM

§rH

ph

a.

51

U

84m

§JW

pn.e

r.

ITO

IIJ

IUA

IT.IL

T O~.IATI~

ITA

TI.

r.r

O .. -

Il'-

'"l

STO

lE

leO

'9

2

LOtA

TIO

W

LOLO

'l

.tE

A

' LE

AIE

'A

Tt

0 .. '

...

.

,.1

IT

a t.1

J iT

l S

t ... i

Tl

U ..

in

" n:

iAT

E .. n

o, n

,,,

.IT

t

"lE

! U

NIT

! H

....

1

I.Q

Jt)

ti .H

O

1!.

'u

".fT

! ti

.25

1

TOTA

L SA

LES

" .. 5

tZ.0

0

117 .

. 6U

•• S

'S .. S

1r .0

0

" .. 9

2'.

JS

_.,

.61

4.1

0

"1...

,r.o5

o I

S to

",,"

~;o6· ••

Jti

\ .. H

... 4

Ci

' ....

. :..

J~

\ .. 7

5(.

'\

i ... S

1 ..

;n

-.-~ -.

;il~

';fi

AP'

: 'B

Olt

IA

L,:

'''

.!Je

tte

1l~'

''!i

.'5

1:.

"'.

'(

!7.1

f7.0

' U

;,lT

j .'

1

n4"~.,/,

COlT

Of

ilL

ES

__

___ S

~.11~.1~.

____

.".tr

z.G

z.

____

_ 'Z.I~'.f:.

___ .

.J~.llk.1Q.

___ z

z~"' •• !

. --

-ZQ

;'ZJ:

.lC.

'IO'

~ fl

on

t '~ ... 15~.5S

" .. '

5'.5

.>

, ...

.. "'

.D.

I' .... :s~....

....

,..-

;sT

t.o,

--''' .

. lIr ...

~

o.-E

lA T

JIII

rE ..

. lli

lSlS

IAl&

Urr

_

__

__

_ .. ~ _

_ .

CONT

RACT

EO

IEIY

ICE

S ' ..

"'2.4

' t

.. 1!~.JO

10

.. 4" .7

4

1: .

... U

.60

n

... Z06."

It

....

....

I..,

LIU

\

.. 40'.~

S:'.J

Ci

1 ...

Hi

~ ... 1

I~.7I1·

--

'Tr."~-ZV-~---

----

1Z4.

o5

ClI

P -

TlA

IC

HZ

...

1.!

1',

"

",re,

p,

flA

VE

L

3 .,!C

." 4

,92

t,"

s.zo

r.o

.Een

U

TIL

.lTIE

!

....

'I.S

OTM

Et. .

'.ld

I

.IEAKAI~-IMORTAI£

'5."

, .••

A".

CO

ITI

' ... 5

64.5

1 Z

... 2".1

1

1 ... 5

n •

• 5

1 .. U

1.J

S

14

.l'

".,,,

7...z

2:.o

. , ...

.......

fO'TAl£.rNU~···-U_-

--'(

; .. 7

«.2

5

1.,

... 6£

.15

1_.Z2~.JT

1:'

;U1

i.1

l _.,.~w-n~

~,...-;;n

z: A

DJ

JA

L.[

_

tl..

1_

_

__

_

'10

.'

1S

."

u.s

n.

1 n.

, TO

TAL

.EY

EIU

E

SC

""S

l.JO

"

... 2K

.0I

ZZ

,65

4."

"

... 247

.12

11S

.,.I

J1.1

t tO

Ut,."

IJ

.:iJ

sAl:

R

' __

~H"""~.;T

:s~.

:s

li.1

i Z

.. "

n.'

"';0

;}

TA

in

U.J!C.4~

t;,I

56

.'"

Ucnc.~

1tcJ

O' •

• ~

",Z

J4.5

J X

.St:

.66

IIIET

~IO

F'IT

1

1.,

.2".

'5

U .

... '.1

4 S

... 'U

.11

,

... MC

.70

IT .. '''_

''

J7.,

.Q'.6

1

'Ele

EN

i' O~OFIT

----

-',;

T

,. .6

t .

1

.. ,

, ••

n

•• i

'.''

'.~

....

·f··

~ ···

:·· .. .

'··.

·:·~

t:··

~'

,: •

'I

••

4 ....

~'

•••••• ,-:......

.~.~ ••

h.~

•••• ~....

..'."~',

~_,.\,;

"":;0

-: .:

.. '."

-:,:

·t.

: : -

.' ,

: ""\

',~

~.'

. ... ': .

. ~ .. ;

.. '.'

i:

'~::"""'I--"':'''''''''''' ..

.... : .

• ~~: .. ~

: ...

. ~ ...

. ':.'

,-...

.. !.'~·.··.:.·;··~.·f. ·f

",-:

:

~ :

' ....

~. :.

-..... '

.~

,. ~...

~ ."

", -·

t·,·

:.

".,.

,.,0

".

::.

-:'<"

•.••

:.

, '

DIA:'p~A:'

" •

• ,.

\.

' .

.,,;.:-

E><-h ,')"J ,'1- '/ " _ 1Y1Pr:VL-.~) 2{p J Cj S{ (

liB ~. J

~e\ ~YI:)Q)\\ PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

1. c L.·,t

2 • ~ (n.-i: .s7e veL/.J1h

3. £4 4:wu .. < L.J''iO Treater WHstdA) 4'~~~~~~~~~~~ ____ ~~~~~~~~ ________ -F ____ ~~~

5.~~~~~~~~ ____ ~~~~~~~~~~ ______ ~~~ ____ __

1

17.

19.

20. --~~~~~~~~~ ____ ~~~~~~~~~~~ __ ~J:~C~U~R __ ~\~OLll

2 ,r- l ?() I ·-~~F.....:::~~.c.:.."----""':"".ll.!."':"':"~~+-..L....!...:..I....:."";':'~-"""~-I-....l.."--::"';'~"';"';'--'-~5 1f/I.lK

2 5 '_~~~""""""_..4-~~~~---!~-:;""'-:"'';;'''';''...;;;:;.l..~ __ . .:,.)...:'' I..:.oL.:,." I,:..' "~.;;;..1> ..;..<1...;;.6..;,-,"'--____ """""'<d~"~t-~J

~£~_.l~, L v It IJ t' c! b \~ ,.: T ?'" -t ""-26. t d

$ i J ,

I ( , I /~"/;;/~"I- i"l/ i;;i ~

C£ ~ ~1Ar+~~tT ~ {?j, ~p'~

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS

.IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MON'l' .. NA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

SIGNATURE ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

9. __ ~~~~ ________________________ ~~ ____ ~ ____________________ _

12. __ ~~~~~~~~ ___________ 1_7 __ 0 ____ ~~~&-________ ~(~:_·R_'_~'_~L_/_E-__ __

26. /I 'I . i (

-- / ." , -( (

6If17C/~Ly

I

/ ( <' L t y' \ /.- J? -) f I k (- ,<C' t.,'

1 I", ::.' • - • I

27._~ __ ~ ____ '_-1~,,~~~,_/~ __ ~ ________ ~_L_' _(_/_~·_(~_i_-·~'_I'. __ '_(_,_~' __ /G ________ ~ __ ~ __ __ .J

• 29. ~~~~~--~~~~--------------~----~=-------~----~-----

•

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

SIGNATURE ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

/3 ZJ-c:Ja C/t l-?f 4~ Iv .. ;--, a:-.()£ /c.,

B (; >/ .") ctJ-.}(/ L flc: /'J de y,i (' /VI

d d1 G t'At-WJ -;-AO Jo I fYlT VVoods eu hlP

! I. 111 "t - , f it I '" i

;.~ 1_ i i/;j ;. t.. L T d (11 >'j/V

Ee«~- )1&/. )

&5 t./J /YJ/

14.~~~~~~~~ __ ~~~_~~~~.~. ~~~ ________ ~~~~~~~

15.~~~~~~~~~.",.~.~~,~C~w+~ ______ ~~~~~~ __ __

16. -:j-u /11-1. J'l /1 IJ! . <7 -; 'i.?, C-/ /;-t, J .

17. Id,</ 7(.(Lc!;/ld0(./ ZC; ..:J0(2 Uy,kA,-./ ~ ~ 18. - .. r'y~ v- J~~''-rtJ~ I CJ I t J U q lel :Jku;7= 9 -; ~/c(;~ 191w\k~/;(i/v.... j~4v.1ata. I ? z')-s 7J!(~< (40 L/ ~) . .!Nte/;; ri fS/J(),

20. ' )I ~/. 'II.. '-.) [~LLt! u . '6,~ ~-6 '-

{Yj

•

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

I \ ': ':( S L)· !. (,) I 'p \ h L/ u 5 Lt(Et( 1 (' 10 i'A'Y

i j . ! / 16.~~~ __ ~~~~~,'~,~)~l)~,_· ____ ~~~~~ __ ~-~·_.~. I~<,~~~ __ ~~~~ __ ~ __

17.~~~~~~~~~~~c-~~~~~~~~~ __ ~~~~~~~~~ S;v() krl/\lD7

180~~~~~~~~~~~ ______ ~/~~/)~~)~L<~'~(~~F~"/~' ~~~~~~_~~~~O~~~'L~-A~/~l~I:~/~Y.'~' y

19 O'~/ t '.'

':)'L rk/ ~.J <> r 'C:-/-.CF'/;-(lCc' ft,'

I J 200 ____________________________________________________________ _

21. ____________________________________________________________ _

220 ______________________________________________________________ _

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

ADDRESS

( \~

10.~~~~_:.~J.~~'~·~~~ ______ ~ __ ~~~~~~~~ __ ~ __ ~~~~ ______ _

11.~~~~~;1~~~1~'t= __ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ____ _

. .. +- ~-~ 20.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~r~.~_=-__

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES: IT WILL CF~ATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

1.~~~~ __ ~~~~ ______ ~~~~~C~.! __ ~~~~ ______ ~~~~~

~ d·"l.K S7e Vc.1./.J'Ih Q:-

3.£4 4='~1cr lJ'7a T tr'fl1/ec (iu,SSI1f//A) -4.~~~~~~~~~~~ ____ ~~4-~~ __ ~~ ________ -F ____ ~~~

5.~~~~~~~~ ____ ~~~~~~~~~~~ ____ ~~~ ____ __

1

~~~~~~~~~~~------~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

17. I Ylcnd 18 10L{----(

._...()i.:.~;.S;...;..-,G~'-'-!:"-.....J~..J-__ --"~~r;.;....,~:....:::.t.---:'...!--~~---L;.....L ____ ....L.:.~L~"~,~:I....;

i:~ .'-:;( () '7 ];{I b {'-J /2 ? 6i {' I J 19.

!?21 c: ;;L" } ~

20. ,/2;"1--tk--C-7e~, a's! ->n <-?" ;

----To (,.f Q \ OL~("'

2 r/y/f)!

__ ~~~~~~~ ____ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ __ ~~/DL S({/(Ff

25 • -~~~~---'b....:.-:r~~~_\\,:,,;;, .. :,:;;,L,-:x:...-.L.;..I <'4_(..;..., ..;..L.,~~...:.Col;o;L.'....I.:..:..)...:..".,:;;,C.:..;/l~-1~.{;;...> ';...7 b;;...·<· ..... ' -'--_____ --:.."f-'>-'~C c:;

J;.-J:'-c, [vft.;4 et? b \~ d L i?4. L_ 26. I ( , ,

11 .

•

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED,STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

SIGNATURE

3·~1J~ 4. Cc~ fi,wVC-.1. 5.~1~.

, LD

ADDRESS "1 .1 I ( " ( k£: ~<

i I

12 J IS- (,,-J ,) d (("V II....... ~ V

12 ~ JS- l\C tJ t/ .. t (l", '" \?y,

,fc,IJv,.4 I / 73 ~"/~'i /Pc . ." I!;;~tf-ell

PRINTED LAST NAME

8.~~~~~ _____ ~~C~/~O~Lw~~~k~~~~kd~._b~;~~~~~~<~~~~m~(~C~r_u~~o~

9.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ____ ~~~ __ __

20.~~~~~~~~~~L-~~~~~~~~ __ ~~~~ __ ~~~~~_

21·~~~~~~~~~~~ __ ~~~~~ __ ~~~~~~~~~~LW~

• f

•

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED IJIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL ~EAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE·OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RRTAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES: IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUL HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

~~L-~~~~~~~ __ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ______ ~~~~~~~ . tf·:1-t r (, • c, d I fa .yl.tJ.Ar ( ~I X) ~', ~; o-;f:r E Rtf

I {~. (~, E' fo'fi -. ,

~·~···ncy)'{

30.~~~~~~~~~~~ __ ~~~~~~~~~ ____ ~~~~~~

31.

•

•

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY~ IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL

• RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

ADDRESS PRINTED LAST. NAME

1.~=.J..~--=:-;;""";;;"~~~.....l5--,--,-9....:;",3~O"",,----=Pc~6hn~~ __ D~' C..;;;;,.' ~K...;,.~~o~,j 2·-LLh~~F=~~~~ ____________ -=~ ______ ~ ____ ~~=-~e_J~S~o~·~ __

9.~~~\i: lO.t . 11. ________ ~ __ --_·~·/~'--------~----~----~--~------------~~,-.·~,---

,'1 ... , /-'

, sq,,t '.,/ ,,,,/ . ~/

/. / /' , .. ::5c:·/( "3 V ",

/' - 1 ,- . , ... ; i' ("' i (~ /;f'

r y/ ./-.<"" .<f'

< " /' , j:,~ \

•

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLYpPE~D" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

SIGNATU / i" ')

23.~~~~~~~ ________ ~~~~~~~~~~ __ ~~~~~~ ______ _

2,l. -4~~~~~~~------~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--~~~----~

25.~~~ __ ~~~~~ __ ~~~~~~ __________ ~ __ ~~~~~ ____ _

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE' OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

SIGNATURE ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

~ '-,.1 'l :\ ..... ~ ... \ (,.I I' ' .. _.,(:,~ J) (( j /-~,

&V/~/~A2 - It/ Ii 'frIE~5'OaJ

'0

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13. (

14. t] S~ tj~"~ ~{J 15 •. ~~~~~~~~~ ________ /_2~~~f_Z_~~~~~~~~ __ ~~~~~/~~ ____ ~~~~ __ __

16-?fJ~ ;f~ 17. -) \ - '.: j / ) ,',1

26

(.

.- . .. ---'

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMIN;',"!'E ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

SIGNATURE ADDRESS

; ; ;

};4 ) t:) /~ K <lc L '1

"

PRINTED LAST NAME

Ii ' .' L~, '",.: .. ~

i / / r ...

3. __ --(-.~,-.~-· '~}I_HK~I.~-J-~.--------__ /~'_j~/~\"~'/~~~~-~.,~/~;~, ______________ ~,_>-~,!~~,;_·.!~,i_·'~(:. __ __

9.~C~. 10. C/~i.,.//--< / :~- "/->~~5'--:>---

11.

12. J '. , "

l

13 • ./

14. /1

/' .' /

J , ,I

> No@?! s

•

(

19.~~~~/.~(~.~J~~L~~~·--t~~-~-·~------~(~~-O~~--~----~~--------~fi1~F~L=~N_·~A_~_j,_J __ _

20. <,;J:i '7 'S ?t;4J 21.~~~~~~~~~~~~--~~~~~~~~~/~,~~~------~~~r+~-­

'f' 22.~~~~~~~~~~~~--~~~~~~~~----------~--~~~

2 4~ ~4_:'....!;.!;;::::.....::!:.;;;;!;;;;;::.::...l-~:....--'-.lt.../..l.~..;.;;.:;:..4.!-~-~"""-~~;;;:.;:..~+_----,-O::=_~r_:.,,........~~~ I

•

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

4 •

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

•

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

SIGNATURE ADDRESS

J 3 2r~7 I!..? CJ? de ci~ l B a y :, h'}f! L

d ~ G ba.u) -i~OJ() I mr

PRINTED LAST NAME

J Ii-~)£ ,'c;

fie .. v d r t .. () /\)

Woods (j? C3 . I;jey2 t <: £4. 'W e it .Nt P c ~ ( Dc /( 1 c i!Jll / '/' ft1T '- 4 ! it I .

e'/lSt./l /J?r ?;vt--ll.~~~~~~~ ________ ~~~~~~~~ ______ -w~~~~ ______ _

'v~

,/ '))} I/) 27 C I\, ,/·.1/ , •.•. ,·r •. '.",' ,1_ ,,' '. /" ", ;::, .• /1..,1 '>: I. / .... .),-..... ,VII",}

• __ ~~-~/~V~\L'~"~!~'·~--~~~~~'~ __ ~'~(~l~~r7~~\~('~~~'~------~-~----~*~.~'7 ;~~i

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

. ~f; j /! Ii- h ~ /1.- ~ t ((/~ ~

18·~~~~~~ __________ ~h~\\~\+\~\·~)·~~~~K~. __ ~~ __ ~~~~_ • 19. j/((/./3fuA 6-/ C !/},f/c--c~~~~~~~~ ________ ~~~~~~~~~~ ______ ~~~~ __ _

2 0 ;~+"""'::::':""",..j...-..i.....1:.-..LW..~~~ ___ --'--L-..LO.~;";;';:;';~:-'-__ --:;;~~~~";;'-~ __

26~ __ ~ __________________________________________________ __

27. __________________________________________________________ _

28. ________________________ ~ _____________________________ _

29. ________________________________________________________ __

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT

-WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

ADDRESS PRINTED NAME

5. ______________________________ ----------------__________________ _

60 ________________________________________________________________ _

70 ______________________________________________________________ _

80 ________________________________________________________ __

90 ____________________________________________________________ _

100 __________________________________________________________ _

110 __________________________________________________________ _

12. __________________________________________________________ _

130 ________________________________________________________ __

14. __________________________________________________________ _

15. ________________________________________________________ __

16. ________________________________________________________ __

17. ____________________________________________________________ _

18. ______________________________________________________ __

19. ________________________________________________________ __

200 __________________________________________________________ _

210 ______________________________________________________ __

22. ________________________________________________________ __

•

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

4.~~~~~~~ __ ~~~~~~~ ____ ~~·~J~r __ __ 5.~~~ __ ~~~~~~~~~~~ ____ ~~~(_~~N~d~

,!>~/n~

__ 'T·~~~~~~~~~ __ ~~~·~~<~)_C~(_·~~~~~~ __ ~~~~~ ______ ~~~~C~

t(Jl( 't:4f

,), ~CA' ''.A.A~~ --~+U~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~LU~----------------~~~~

26.~,~~~~ __ ~~~~~ __ ~,.~~~~~\~\ ___ (~·;~: ~\~l~( ________ ~~~~~~

2 7 • t'\ ;t~- ~'

28. i /1,[wl}( . if1 ' ,-

29 I". i,/J 'I • r,-.J(;..-'L.,J.. .. ..;..-r __ A_' "'-.. ~

/iC(2Bl/C ,r /l:t r -&tl"t<: , 'Jilt-

30 • --'--~......;...l.lA._L--,,--L~ Yu t c'>

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANAj AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

13.~~~~~~ __ ~~ ______ ~~ ____ ~~~ __ ~ ____________ ~ ______ _

/ I)

,_

•

•

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS All ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

SIGNATURE ADDRESS

,

PRINTED LAST NAME

:: / J\ C( -e( 7 -<;;

7 5'7' f .:? ..:;;' m ,] II c- /..-v'

/ .: I ; .--. r

c~ i '> 'i~' La f(xl)c

23 !'/,~, i . • I .. .':' ~ ; I ' /~~, ,: , J ., .. {-> /~'-(/ .. -.' . r . , t '; /c,_ ;' '" : CcorY}UitJ

;.-; 1"'- -S'!I />-to'

(

.--\2- K~\\ \ ~~~~~~~~~--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--~~~~~----~

30. ,)-i./t':2 Ik, h ' H .... · ()( ,/,I

,..-"

"

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTE~T THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICTT\NTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

. 1 .1 4. ____ ~~~~~~~~----~~~~~~~~~~----------~~--~---

6. __ ~~~~~~~~~ ______ ~~ ________________________ ~-+~~~_

13.~~~~ ______ -* ____ ~ __________ ~ __ ~~ ____ ~~~~~~ ____ _

24.

25:

26.

•

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY~ IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANAi AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

SIGNATURE ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

5. ~l

~;~fiJ/u iJA '

9.~'~~~~~~~~~~ ______ ~~~~~~~ ________ ~~~~~~~

10.~~~~_~~J~/~~l~~~~f~A~ ______ ~~~~~~~~ ______ ~ __ ~ ____ ~~l\OY~ \' 0 t / _I C't.,J I

11.Y;'1 fr~ -'?/t;///~,'rI1 Ltf " CJ4-5f-Crl:"'-t )Ld 1(0 f n

12.~_~~~!J. =7JJ:M.. fJ4 ~ Vl;qS'()'1b~ 13. :;;:t; P=:v £2.:;( p~ ~Z I C 1Y1 rY)

14. 21/ 1L-!ClL:?'U./:.JAH ~~,O!.~ IJ II) --J.l/ / r:I~~ S b n ~ c: r

15. 7~ i\C"""'1".p» M. 4;j V-oLo ,&,,£1'1 Kamp_s . 16. . I!j 7 ~ \ / des ~d .'-./~ ~~).-d /;-(\ 'ctIC~

17.' ) ~l-C(/II ~~~~--~~~~~~~--~~~~~~~~~----~~~~~~~

20.~~~~~~~~ ____________ ~~~ __________________ ~~~~~

~~~~~~ ____ ...L..M~--I.~~ ____ ~~~..;....t.._--...:.rYl dh ~ .

~~~~'~~~)~ .. ~~v'~~~ __ ~ __ ' ____________________________ ~~~~~~~~I\ns

28. ~o",J~ J(JL-€~7r=: D's ~Yedy 29.- : _; r ." (, '" f'{, );,. .. 1 ~ -; > \-, t--._- ,I '/.-4>/~» -l ~ :) ->f - " l-lP U

30 .'l;f~ ~.t ""-- (I, .. , "X::, I;>' ~ ,II LX c? 7 f C ;/I{ C \ [C I'-'.J' (y'-' ,,,) 1 J 1 / J.L -_,.,.t

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED I,IQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

SIGNATURE ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

1 • / J ~ ,j. { ) <; I A r W, .1101 c,.

2 Y 'J:VYJA'~'< uJ,jJ;~--) yl -it:; r(f6 {",4 ft': t':(./ e( r~,u'''C(---lait (I),' ilfJIY} S

~~Jz9lc'kr/?(h1A;-c :;-'3 L( ~~ ::fo~ fl1wTllolfIJ/E

:flfz,:;!:: k- ~:;~,~/(X~<~~. ~~ /)](XJre,

6. //}/::?l--< i~-(>( (~:~'O- /.) [' /~ It < ( ,,' d Ie (~' /'/ T 'rj-/ {I, " ==.- , / / (1/ ) j / .;: / j-- I

7 /\ - .. \ " . ',( t ·rL '-.. ;;;<....(~·t,' ',' d /.- (, c' 1// 1,1/1/1""', ". ---/' '-. ) } c l. '- . - "'- \ "" "- I t.....J

8 .'~ )y,. eJ ~ .. ~1\1'iT t,\_"2N<2k.~ S

9.GJld ~af/ /: c&.zi.!!?l6 /(eoneiJ{'1 10 .c[{)--a1c:I..MR 7:.1&..«! z:z ( Fnc:s

• 11.~~~~~~~~ ____ ~~~~~~~~~~ __ ~~~·~

,..--' /;'vc!M.-C 00"1AJ"7c,

--? ~

26.~~~~~~~~~ ________ ~~'~~.~/~!~;~~,,~~~~,~~· ____________ ~~~~~ __ __

,~:A~ t{.IKui';{J!&

)c:> /0 {/Cee;{:J t:L /1 A~ ....

/UiADALL

N e. ?lmC? J20 'n //l. _ II

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED I,IQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY: IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE: IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF Mf"\l\'TANA: AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

SH~pATURE ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

6.~~~~ __ ~~~ ____________ ~ ________________ -=~~~ ______ _

~

~

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, TP~ UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

• -/

5. ,.:j'// utt

1 .', I

7 /] ,/ ~1(,. ~ 1 .r' 'ttuL Jfl ~

24.

ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

~ 1/10 tkJ0:#JV--- &I (1< k/r;6!:.J. /3UMhary.f r ~o _ 71 -3 LcJW _M \ MAr

c hf 1/ /\ -:-./.:' -'. '.' .. , / /, ~~:.. . j/ iC) ~

H . (' ?~ I /-- b La " ') 2 6 • h}( tl.. ..A. , '"\..I( I' _

~~~--~~------------~---~~------Jr-~----------~--------~

27 I' If

.'~~~~~~~~~~~------------------~------------~~~~-

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT

.WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY: IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FO:: ~'E LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

ADDRESS PRINTED NAME

7.~~~~~~ __ ~ ____ ~~~b~ ______________ ~~~ ____ ~ 8.~~~~~~~~ _____ ~~~4~~~·~ ____________ ~~~~~~---

12.-+~~~ ____ ~~~~~ ____ ~~~~ ________ ~~~-~~~ __ ~_

13.~~~~~~~~~~ ______ ~~~ ________ ~<~~-~·~~~~ __

14.~Jf+~~~~~~~~~~7A/~·~\_~.~~~~{ ______ (~;(~~~ __________ ~L~/.n.(~/_-__ __ ~.. r / --/ /

15.... " 'k ..i /f: h'-q _-.":"?~- /J tL t~"; ~ aAdl-S " //

~\c

-j. / , .... .",. , .. / } ;-19. ___ +-~~~+·~ __ 7~l~( __________ ~/r/~·~~~~~'~_~ ______________ ~/_--~/_,_-'~( ______ _ ; I

28.-4~~~~~~~ __________ ~~~~ __________________ ~~~ ______ _

•

•

,..--_. "' .... ~

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS Of BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CO!," '.ARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE, OF MONTANA; ANn IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY Ol-"::;Rl\TED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

ADDRESS

l. ~~~~~~~==--~~~--~~~--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

2.~~~~~-A~~~~ ____ ~~~~~~~~~ ______ -L~~~~ ____ _

20.

J' /

•

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE C0MMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

PRINTED LAST NAME

28.~~~~~~~~~~~~ __ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

29.""G.:.:v\ ('\ ~'~"" __ ,,' \...:.: ~tj),\"" -(~' '7

.'MS- Gf"<Y..t.t<Z. <2.£ hA) -zzld2Y,y y? - . , \ f) I r I ,,1\ ,', -n. r' .

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE CO~~UNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GQPD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

3. -

10.

Pc"'i' !; li'd,i.

PRINTED LAST NAME

17'~~~~~~~~~-4~~~~ __________ ~vl~e~-~h~~~ ___ 18 • {,Au4dlt~ZK\ WAITeK' :.

Be \ c ''(){ ¥.

•

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE CO~~UNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

16.

20.

2l.

22

23.

24.

25. '.. •. 1 , ) \1 ' L I Yl LLkc·.( J

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COl-f..MUNITYi IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINE~SES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA~ AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

SIGNATURE PRINTED LAST NAME

1/

d-., J" i

IJ:;~' e 'I Ii l'Me,

13.

,):J

/z.rf~ 044 {"'n ,1'#/ C/f D /h t.v ~ / /

19.~~~~~~~~~~ ______ ~j~/~/~~~~ .. ________ ~~~~~ __ _

~~~/WiE 20.~~~~~~~~~~~~~ __ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 011&

21 .... ....,-........ ......,;.-.Ip....:.:...,.~_~ ____ ........ /:,...;....L..:;........LJ.-;.......a._-.:....4-.A....;...;..;......;.,1;_.......:::111~ ____ ..... -.;;;;.;:;:..-. __ ~.;-.( eLf,....(T

22.~~~~~~~~~~ __ ~~'./~f~~~··.;-.}-~~~~~~~~ ____ ~~ __ ~~L_(~ln}k~/ /J &,/ /1~a,\: t? ( . .c yg'1 c{, 4c -&:Tl!o f-P

24.~~~~~~~~_~~ ____ ~_J_~_i/_'_:)_r ___________ /\_/_(_<~'t_; _________ _

i.oL(l

1 " ! ~ I

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BE~AUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE CO~MUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMtmITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

SIGNATURE ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

11

25.~I-L':~;~'~~'i~~'~'~~7~,~(_·t:~~2~{~%~~~/~,~, ______ ~i~~~,,~,(~O~C~/~~(~"~c-~'C_s~'_< ______ ~J2~l~(_'~~~/~-~/~t~/~).l __

26 .~~~..::.o...;.;~.....,.;.;.:;(~r)=~~~, ,;....;'..j_,._ {)/l>,'< -

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LCCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTl\Nl\~ AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

• SIGNATURE ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

L:.v L fie SZ-

:~:~te:. ".~ =!:~!~ ;;;L:;:~¢ree'1~J Ii ,'/) / 5' (7t ( 'Ir () i

1 7 • ~+-,:"..L.J~'-A-....j.:;..--iL-{.....;....J~:""'::"' __ ..,I.,!...+-1 .....;LJ:......:.~~., ~/+., _;;;;.::;...;, I:-.:;..~...u.~_:h' -1-' 1-:;, tr'_: ~') ;.....;.J ..... ' ~,·~I.JCJ( C)

~~~~ __ ----,.-~~~~~--;---~~---~II s - 'iiu

~~~~~~~~~--~~~~~~~~~--~~~---~~~~~~

20~~~~~~~~ ________ ~~~~ __________ ~ ____ ~~~~r.r~

21.~~~~~~~~~~~_~~~~~~~~~~ ____ ~~~~~~~

22'~-L~~~~~~~ _________ ~~ __ ~ __ ~ ________ ~~ ________ ~

24.

27.~~~~~~~~~~~ ________ ~~~~ __________ ~~ __ ~+,~/~\_ .

2 8 '--'~~--...:-+..,.,..-.:;:;:,;;......_.:...-_-:--_~~~~~:.r:-:~----T:"""-__ ~':"'-_____ I-:'_/_1v{fj~~~ )' Y/? 7 IZ- f/ ~/;·-. 'l~'5- ~S~ c.J /

IYoS ;tb ~ et "/ )fIt a~i,7

•

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

SIGNATURE ADJ)RESS PRINTED LAST NAME /~. -r::..- <:. ;.- < c').1-2---'

/

-)

,/ )//< (:. , ,: / . /

!") , {~

"'1 7t$71~1k erp/ /~//-6~~eL

-, '. .( / ' ) r J"" .r', )

!. "- >'

..

..

•

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE k~ UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA: AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTJ ... Y OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

30.~~~~~A-~~~~~ __ ~~~~~~~~h-~~ ____ ~~~~~~ / 1/ ./

- .

r'

•

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN ~HE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

SIGNATURE PRINTED LAST NAME

6.

7.

8.

9 .

10. iJ-I.

1 9 r-d.~~z.:::::=;"""":"'....J,...JJ.~~~----:;'-'-:!--I-.,I-I-""""1--t-S~~";"-~fL-~~----:..f-I~~ Sc j I ,-

20.~~~~~~~~~ ____ ~ __ ~~~~ ______ ~ __ ~~~~~ ______ _

O('j~'()() L{\ " ') (, r7

2S·J)rl:/JJ. n~ /laX!, kiD ~Q!:-fd kW,rl'rb· -::U;ll(d&ol\. 29. X, 1\ \\/\ f \os I. 1\.' 0 Q"-".... II q Q:t> C\ ;. -1 Dx' '( / d Ql 00 ,\'

30. CL~1<' ~ce=-' {oL)u,c 2:C5 L,to ??tz. oA _ _/7 .' I .

-PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT

.~ WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF • BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL ~ RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES: IT WILL CREATE ~4 AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO

j'_/ LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE 'It OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST

i: ~ ~ EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUPR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA: iIIIIi~0 ~ // ~ ~ SIG;~lcrURE PRINTED

- X 1-_i ~ 1.t-~~~~~~~~~~t/J~,f~{~/ __ ~-+~~~~~~ ______ ~~~~ I' 2.~~~~~~~~-=~ ____ ~~-u~~~~~~~~~ ________ ~~--~/-~. {~-~~

Io (k())tJo 1

30.

•

PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED • IJIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS

IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

NAME

l.~~~~~~ __ ~~~~ ____ ~~~~~~~~ ______ ~~~~~ __ ~_

2· __ ~~~~~uu~~ ________ ~~~~~~~~~ ______ ~~~~=-~~

9. __ ~~~~~~~ __________ ~(~~~·~~~ ____________ ~cYJ~(~·4~C~1~I~O lO.~~~~~~~ ______ ~~~~~L~o~Lo~ ____ ~B~(~D_'~I)~Q+-

I

27.~~~~~~~~~~ ______ ~~ ____________________ ~~~ ____ _

•

·PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE LOLO AGENCY LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MT.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, STRONGLY PROTEST THE CLOSURE OF THE ABOVE NAMED LIQUOR STORE, IN LOLO, MONTANA, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEAN A LOSS OF SERIVCES FOR THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL MEk~ A LOSS OF BUSINESS TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY; IT WILL FORCE LOCAL RETAIL BUYERS TO GO TO MISSOULA AGAINST THEIR WISHES; IT WILL CREATE A~ UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT BUY FROM THE LOLO LIQUOR STORE; IT IS CONTRARY TO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES BY THE STATE OF MONTANA; AND IT WILL ELIMINATE ONE OF THE "FRIENDLIEST" AND "MOST EFFICIENTLY OPERATED" LIQUOR STORES IN THE STATE ON MONTANA:

SIGNATURE ADDRESS PRINTED LAST NAME

T -, . liJ.';

3~~~~~~~~~~~~~ __ ~~~~~~ /; l.t--{ }l-

24.. . >/

March 20, 1986

TO: Revenue Oversight Committee

FROM: Dan Faulkner, Agent, Walkerville Liquor Store

Reasoning behind a state store converting to an agency is, it's no longer profitable to be operated by the state. We were converted July 1, 1983, with a profit margin of negative 6.2%, and sales of $168,000.

I took this store knowing it was not profitable, but had one thing in mind-to turn it around. Fiscal year 1984, adjusted gross sales were $233,176 a profit of positive 8.8%, fiscal year 1985 adjusted gross sales were $384,970, a profit of 9.1%, this fiscal to date sales are $351,183 with projected sales of $440,000, yet I have been "picked" for closure. I ask-why? What's the reasoning when sales and profits are increasing?

Walkerville is a small community, an incorporated city seperate from Butte Silver Bow. The loss of revenue is crucial to our community.

The closure of my store means my livelihood. As a private contractor there are no unemployment benefits-my means of support will have ended.

Sincerely,

Daniel P. Faulkner

_..Jill""

" ,1

, ST

U'"

1# ~

#".

"l\t\_

fo~.£.

¥~

.. r~,

'N'S

~ ,.

f+.

fl·;

. ~,I

f4,.

t.k ,.

~ales

Un

it.5

F

Y1

98

5

50

,58

4

rY1

9S

4

31

,48

3

FY

19

83

2

4,3

68

F

)'l:

ibL

3o~'297-

Tu

tal

Sale

s

39

2,4

77

.60

2

36

,43

5.8

0

16

8,4

02

.50

2

13

,61

5.2

5

Di~cc:unt

" 7

,50

7.7

5

3,2

59

.11

1

,79

0.0

0

3,0

38

.29

A

d]

Gro

ss

Sale

s

38

4,9

69

.85

2

33

,17

6.6

9

166'

9~~'

~8

21

0,5

76

.96

C

ost

of

Sale

s

21

9.8

26

.72

1

32

,22

0.I

O

95

,.

11

9.7

26

.36

G

r os

s -P

ro'f

i t

-r 65

, I 4

3 •

13

1

00

, 9

5 6

• 5

9 ...

0 8 a 8

• 0

".q

9

0,8

50

.00

Op

era

tin

g

Ex

pen

ses

Sala

ries

Co

nt

Serv

ices

Su

pp

lies

Com

m-'

l'ra

ns,

Tra

vel

Ren

t U

tili

ties

Rep

air

s O

ther

Ex

pen

se

Break~ge-Shortage

Adm

C

osts

T

OT

AL

E

XP

EN

SE

TO

TA

L

REV

ENU

E

,Less T

ran

sfe

rs

Ou

t fo

r T

ax

es

Net

Pro

fit

afte

r

Tax

es

an

d P

ro

fit

to

G

en

era

l F

und

PE

RC

EN

T

OF

P

RO

FIT

38

,9'6

1.0

3

21

1 •

62

· '.l

-t.:

JjG

-f'a

...p

3,0

71

.47

-D,

~·.5

10."

'f' .....

.. r

, 7

24

.15

2

3,2

88

.23

1

74

.12

2

,21

6.2

0

34

,14

3.4

2

3,0

97

.50

2

96

.42

1

,90

7.6

8

1,2

00

.00

1

,56

6.1

4

12

9.9

0-~~

1ci-

e.-S

~...

...

39

.93

()

. 4

4-'

1. 07

-f>.

vi_s

lt~~

I."'

~ 6

I 9

26

.26

5

36

0

96

~---.-----------

..

--'

-.

51

,82

3.0

9

33

,36

8.8

9

47

,57

2.2

8

11

3,3

20

.04

6

7,5

87

.70

2

3,3

16

.28

78

,17

7.8

8

, 4

7,1

68

.61

3

3,6

56

.54

..

"

35

,14

2.1

6

20

,41

9.0

9

10

,34

0.2

6-

9.1

8

.8

lor'

6.2

-

Ag

ency

S

tore

s

are

ch

arg

ed

1

8.6

8¢

o

f u

nit

sale~.

Th

is

is

Itle

sa

me

ch

arg

e

the:

Dep

.:ll:

:tm

2nt

3S

SC

SS

2S

C

ioja

ir.,

·;L

~tat.(;

::';

l':.

l'::

'~'

A,>~'-,,_"/

~U~;

c~ 1

· t·~

1 ~ S

E:

\.

l I

'" ~

t :

1 i

1"--

' i i

t : I' '.~

11

1_

,

'_!

! !

,.1 :~.

! :'

.:

, .'

34

,01

5.7

9

2,9

70

.60

7

62

.67

2

,10

8.9

7

15

8.0

0

1,2

00

.00

1

,53

2.9

2

98

.25

4

87

.05

5

3.0

3

3,8

47

.87

47

,26

5.1

5

43

,58

5.4

5

42

,45

2.2

2

1,1

33

.23

.5

f!B

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

TEO SCHWINOEN, GOVERNOR MITCHELL BUILDING

- STATE OF MONTANA----HELENA, MONTANA 59620

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

INFORMATION FOR LEGISLATORS

ON

Liquor Store Closures

The Department has taken action to close 7 liquor stores to help earn revenue planned last session.

The store closures are just one part of a five part plan to overcome what would be a $2 million short fall if nothing is done. Store closures will contribute $560,000 to this plan.

The Department is working within Legislative criteria enacted in HB500 last session.

The Liquor Division operates under an open ended appropria­tion. The only limits to what the Division can spend are performance criteria written in HB500. Authority to close stores is granted.

"During the 1987 biennium, the division shall attempt to return at least 13 percent of net sales. Net sales are gross sales less discounts and all taxes collected. The division shall limit operational expenses of the liquor merchandising system to not more than 15 percent of net sales. Operational expenses may not include product costs, freight charges, or expenses allocable to other divisions or licensing bureau expenses.

"The division retains full authority to determine store oper­ating hours and the number and location of stores and employ­ees. Nonprofitable or marginally profitable state stores shall be closed or converted to agency stores in an orderly manner. Agency stores shall be closed if the division con­siders them marginally profitable and other state stores or agencies are located within a reasonable distance."

··AN EOUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER··

The 1982 performance audit (Office of the Legislative Auditor) urged the legislature to clarify the mission of the Liquor Mer­chandising Program.

The audit report stated: Division confusing signals as a service organization or believe the Legislature needs sion's role."

"The Legislature has given the to whether it should operate as a profit-making business. We to statutorily define the Divi-

The audit report listed 4 questions that the Legislature needed to answer:

Should the Division try to maximize profits to the Gen­eral Fund?

Should the state operate its own or agency stores in each community regardless of profitability?

Should the state advertise prices?

Should the state stock a wide variety of products in each store regardless of profitability?

The Department has taken the position to maximize profit to the General Fund service. This means, among other costs in multi-store market areas.

that its responsibility is consistent with adequate actions, reducing overhead

After carefully examining the major Liquor market areas, we have concluded General Fund revenues can be significantly enhanced by closing seven state liquor stores and agencies. Two basic factors underlay this action. First, dollars sales declined by 11.5% from Fiscal 1982 to 1985, representinq a reduction of $6,375,325. During the same period, unit sales (actual number of bottles) dropped 17.6%, from 8,071,108 in Fiscal 1982 to 6,651,387 in Fiscal 1985. Clearly the market­ing structure appropriate for selling 8 million units does not work for selling only 6.6 million~

Second, in our larger market areas throughout the state there are several state retail liquor outlets. The distance between them generally ranges from several blocks to a few miles. By closing one store in each market area, local cus­tomers will not be inconvenienced by having to travel a short added distance to purchase spirits or" wine at the state price. Total sales in these areas are expected to shift to the remaining outlets thus increasing the market area profit­ability and state revenues.

2

The following describes the basis for restructuring our retail outlets in seven primary market areas.

Butte Market Area

The Butte market area is served by three #2, Harrison Avenue #116, and Walkerville three stores sold $2 million of liquor in of $245,848 or 12.18 percent of sales.

stores: Uptown Butte Agency Store #137. The FY85 earning a profit

We are closing the Walkerville Agency. If this action had been taken in FY85, profits would have increased to $288,223 annually or 14.28 percent of sales. The Table below illustrates the effect of this closure.

fYSl fVS5 rYes fVSS rYes STORE liHIT Hfl HET PROfIT TOTRL

SALrS SAL[S PROfIT MARGIH EXP[HSrS BEroRE:

Bum 2 101,599 $586,956 $53,304 9.08% $118,m BUTTE 116 177,150 $l,W,IS6 $157,102 14 .00% $16~, 531 WALKERUILLE 137 50,584 $306,792 $35,112 lUST. $51,823

329,333 $2,017,904 $2·15,8'18 12.18% $334,796 AfTfR:

Bum 2 152,183 $893,740 $130,821 14.m $127,891 BUTTE 116 177,150 $1,124,156 $157,402 14 .oox $161,531

329,333 $2,017,901 $288,223 14.28X $292,m

Bozeman Market Area

The Bozeman market area is served by two store #9 and the 7th Avenue store #193. million in FY85 and earned profits of sales.

rYBS ESTIMAT[O EXPENSE PROfIT

RAllO IHCRERsr

20.18% 11.64X 16.89% 16.59%

14.31% 14.m 11.49% M2,375

stores: the downtown The two stores sold $1.7 $205,633 or 12.41% of

We are closing Store #193. If this action had been taken in FY8S, profits would have increased to $280,660 annually or 16.94 percent of sales.

3

rYSS rYBS rY8S rY8S rYBS rYes ESTIMATEO STORE UNIT HET NfT PROfIT TOTAL EXPENSE PROfIT

SALES SALES PROfIT MRRGIH EXPENSES RATIO INCRERsr BEfORE:

BOZEI1RH 9 173,m 5995,367 S131,1B9 13 .21% $153,7t3 15.m BOZLl1AN 193 111,977 $661,570 m,tH 11.21% $115,5B7 17.m

285,393 51,656,937 5205,633 12.m $269,330 16.25% AfTER:

BOZEMRH 9 285,393 $1,656,937 $280,660 16.91% $191,306 11.m $15,027

Kalispell Market Area

The Kalispell market area is served by three stores: The Store #12, located in the shopping center, Store #195 located adjacent to the Outlaw Inn, and the Evergreen Agency located two miles from the number 12 store. The three stores sold $1.7 million of liquor in FY85 earned and profits of $206,728 or 12.1% of sales.

We are closing Store #195. If this action had been taken in FY85, profits would have incr.eased to $305,626 annually or 17.88 percent of sales. The table below illustrates the effect of this closure.

fye5 rY85 rYes rYe5 rY85 rY85 ESTIMATEO STORE UNIT NET HET PROfIT TOTAL EXPENSE PRom

SAl[S SALES PROfIT MRRGIN EXPEHsrs RATIO INCREASE BEfORE:

KALISPELL 12 162,975 5967,815 $140,371 11.50% $138,816 lU5X KALISPELL 195 81,539 $536,010 $37,825 7.06% $1H,686 21.40% EUERGREEH 67 31,896 5205,288 $28,529 13.90% 531,922 15.55%

RfT£R;

KALISPELL 12 2;7,514 $1,503,825 5280,019 18.62% $151,685 10.09% EU£RGRIEH 67 31,896 $205,288 $25,577 12.46% m,87; 16.99X

Z8Z,UD $1,709,113 $305,626 17.88% $196,559 10.92% 598,898

Billings Market Area

The Billings area is served by four stores: two downtown and two in shopping centers in the western part of town. The area had liquor.sales of $5.1 million in FY85, earning profits of $724,804 or 14.05 percent of sales.

4

We are closing Store #5 located in a parking facility in downtown Billings. If this action had been taken in FY85, profits would have increased to $812,005 annually, or 15.74 percent of sales. The table below illustrates the effect of the closure.

fV85 ryes rve5 rYes fyeS rYBS ESTIMATED STORE UNIT NET HET PROfIT TOTAL EXPENSE PROfIT

SALES SRLES PROfIT MARGIN EXPENsrs RATIO INCRERSE BEfORE:

BILLIHG5 3 264,319 $1,648,198 $25~,Z98 1S.m $216,011 13.m BILLING:; 1 325,959 $1,691,781 $233,5'17 13 .SOX $234,728 13.m BILLIHGS 5 126,696 $718,875 $Bn,Z77 10.72% $130,525 17.m BILLINGS 196 179,959 $1,071,553 $156,682 lU2X $147,973 13.m

996,932 $5,160,407 $124,90; 14 .05% $729,267 H.m AfTER:

BILLIHGS 3 327,666 $2,022,636 $3U,215 16.m $234,525 11.60% BILLINGS 4 389,307 $2,066,219 $319,770 15.'18% $253,927 12.m BILLINGS 196 179,959 $1,071,553 $151,019 14.09% $153,636 lU4X

836,932 $5,160,'107 $812,005 15.m $m,088 12.m $87,201

Helena Market Area

The Helena market area is served by three stores: downtown Store #1, Northgate shopping center Store #197, and East Helena Store #83. The area sold $2.2 million of liquor in FY85 and earned profits of $281,695 or 12.66 percent of sales.

We are closing the East Helena store. If this action had been taken in FY85, profits would have increased to $327,851 annually, or 14.74 percent of sales. The table below illustrates the effect of this closure.

rVBS rYes rY8S rYflS rves r~85 [STIMAT[o STORE UNIT NET Hn PROfIT TOTAL EXPENSE PROfIT

SALES SALES PROfIT MARGIN EXPENSES RATIO INCREASE BffORE:

HElEHR 1 202,376 $1,211,702 $163,86~ 13.52% SlB1,6iO 1U9% HELENA 197 130,227 $716,691 $103,565 13 .33% $119,881 15.m EAST H[LENR 83 39,762 $236.378 SH,266 6.0U $53,5"19 22.m

312,365 $2,22'1, m $281,695 12.66% $355,103 15.96% RrTER:

HELEHR 1 202,376 $1,211,702 $159,392 13.15% $186,111 15.36% HELEtIA 197 169,989 $1,013,072 S168, '159 16.m $122,837 12.m

372,365 $2,224, m $327,851 1U;% $309,951 13.83% $46,156

5

Great Falls Market Area

The Great Falls market area is served by three stores: #140 downtown, #141 on the west side, and #139 on Tenth Avenue South. The area sold $3.5 million of liquor in FY85 and earned $499,212 in profits, or 14.25% of sales.

We are closing Store #140 downtown. If this action had been taken i~ FY85, profits would have increased to $593,884 or 16.95% of sales. The table below illustrates the effect of this clo­sure.

rYBS rvas rV8S rV8S rV8S fY8S ESTIMATED STORE UNIT N£T NfT PROfIT TOTAL EXPENSE PROfIT

SALES SRLES PROm MARGIH EXPEHS[S RATIO INCREAS[ BEfORE:

GREAT fALLS 139 199,167 $1,192,575 $15,,491 13.37% $185,617 15.56% GREAT fALLS 110 186,361 $1,086,606 $161,060 H.92% $119,161 13.m GRERT fRLlS 1 i1 210,129 $1,225, 4~0 S17S,671 14.59% Sl69,9S5 13.79%

595,957 $3,50'1,621 $199,212 11.24% $503,733 11.37% AfT£R:

GREAT fALLS 139 301,382 $1,805,295 $305,275 16.91% $213,63a 11.m GREAT fALLS 111 291,576 $1,699,326 $298,609 16.98% $195,126 11.50%

595,957 53,501,621 $593,88~ 16.95% $109,061 11.67% $91,6'12

Missoula Market Area

The Missoula market area is served by three stores: the downtown Store #170, the south side Store #171, and the Lolo aqency Store #192. The area sold $3.5 million of liquor in FY85 earning a profit of $495,805, or 14.35 percent of sales.

We are closing the Lolo agency. If this action had been taken in FY85, profits would have increased to $530,296, or 15.34 percent of sales. The table below illustrates the effect of this clo­sure.

fyaS rY85 rY85 rY85 rV95 rYa5 ESTIMAT EO STORE UNIT NET HET PROfIT TOTRL EXPENSE PROfIT

SALES SRlES PROm MARGIN EXPEHSES RAT! ° . I NCREHSE mORE:

MISSOULA 170 227,009 $1,105,919 S201,219 11.31% S201,917 H .36% MISSOULA 171 299,214 $1,7'13,776 $261,731 15.01% $239,896 13 .76% LOLC 192 52,855 $306,140 $32,825 10.72% 551,181 17 .70%

579,077 $3,155,934 $195,805 14.35% $195,997 lU5% AfTER:

tlISSOULA 170 279,863 Sl,712,058 $278,826 16.29% $211,352 12.34% MISSOULR 171 299,211 $1,713,776 $251, '170 14.12% $250,159 11.35%

519,077 S3,455,m $530,296 15.m $161,511 13 .35% m,m

6

I •

• '"

•

2 .. 6

2.4

.) .2

• •

• .,

., ,

• .,

EX

HIB

IT

C

TO

TA

L

LIQ

UO

R

ST

OR

E S/~LES

KA

LIS

PE

LL

LO

C.A

TIO

N

2

-1 p.

.u

-1.6

~

/ /'

"'..

~

-1.4

""

-/c

(flo

w

:: -1

.2

-I!,

,:;:

«

2

(fl"

"-/

1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0 19

76

o I t

~ IT

IAL

S

AL

ES

19

78

1

98

0

YE

AR

~_--I-----

19

82

~--~

~ --

19

84

+

AD

DL

. S

AL

ES

<:.

T

OT

AL

S

AL

ES

~. ,t

. ~

(L

, -

WITNESS STATEMENT

ADDRESS

WHOM DO YOU REPRESENT?~~~~~ ~~.~==~~~--------------------------------

SUPPORT _____ ~ ______________ OPPOSE _______________ AMEND

PLEASE LEAVE PREPARED STATEMENT WITH SECRETARY.

cornments~

CS-34

VISITORS' REGISTER

., BUSINESS AND LABOR COMMITTEE ------------------------------BILL NO. HB 14 DATE Barch 26, 1986

SPONSOR

NAME (please print) RESIDENCE SUPPORT OPPOSE

COMMENTS, ASK SECRETARY FOR WITNESS STATE~1ENT FORM.

PLEASE LEAVE PREPARED STATEMENT WITH SECRETARY.

CS-33

VISITORS' REGISTER

BUSINESS AND LABOR COMMITTEE --------~~~~-=~~~--------

BILL NO. lIB 14

SPONSOR __ R_e~p_. __ D_r_i_s_c_o_1_1 ________ _

-----------------------------NAME (please print)

ymond Jdel ess Rf'presentatlve

f :>rJemPle 2 - 7th Street South . Box 2925 at Falls, Montana 59403

(406) 452-4262 (406) 453-1781 (406) 453-1506,

DATE March 26, 1986

RESIDENCE SUPPORT OPPOSE

IF YOU CARE TO WRITE COMMENTS, ASK SECRETARY FOR WITNESS STATEMENT FORM.

PLEASE LEAVE PREPARED STATEMENT WITH SECRETARY.

CS-33