 I think that's a safe guess. I can hear you. There we go. And Steve invites me at auto changes me to commissioner. Max field, but. Yeah, that, that whole auto invite did not work today for some reason. I just tried doing them again. It won't send them out. So anyway. Okay. Anyway. So shall we start? Pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021. This meeting will be conducted by remote means members of the public who wish to access the meeting may do so in the following manner by emailing Steve McCarthy at McCarthy s at Amherst m a dot gov. That's m c, c a r t h y s at Amherst m a dot gov. No in-person attendance of members of the public will be permitted, but every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access through proceedings in real time via technological means. In the event that we are unable to do so for reasons of economic hardship. And despite best at best efforts. We will post on the town website and audio or video recording transcript or other comprehensive record proceedings as soon as possible after the meeting. And with that done, let's call the meeting to order at five. Oh five p m and take a roll call of attendance. Gaston. Here. Kelly. Here. Doug. Here. Dylan. Here. And I'm here. And we're all here. Great. And then thanks. The next thing is public comment. Is there anyone here for public comment? If so. This is general public comment. Raise your hands. With the raise hand button. And I don't see any. I don't see any. No public comment. Okay. Moving on. Licenses. Oh, okay. So these are the two special short-term alcohol serving license applications. And Steve, you said both of them have been withdrawn. Yes. So they were both withdrawn this afternoon. One of them just 15 minutes ago. Okay. So I guess their plans have changed. So they will. Not be, not be presenting today. Okay. Thanks. So, but in their place in. UMass has a license, which was not noticed in time, but needs to be approved before the 28th. And so Steve sent you the paperwork so that we can kind of preview it and then hopefully have a quick meeting next week. To approve it. If that works out. And it looks like. Mr. Trish pit is here. Is that right? Should we talk about that? Everyone. Need a few minutes. Everybody. Hi. Nice to see you. How are you? Good. Yeah. So the, uh, it's homecoming weekend. Uh, next weekend at the 28th through the 30th. Um, and the, um, external relations is looking to do the, um, beer garden, uh, station, what they did last year, which happens on that a wampai lawn behind the campus center. Um, with a. Tent and, uh, or setup. Um, for the folks coming for, uh, homecoming weekend. To, um, Had like a little block party out there. So. It's the same footprint that they used last year. I believe even the same security here. But, uh, Laura John is also here with me and she's the, um, Conference planner on the event. So if you guys have any specific questions, I wouldn't hurt to be here. Um, because she's more familiar with the, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, knowing that she's more familiar with logistics at the event. Okay. Thank you. Laura, do you have anything to add or does there going to have any questions? And did you want to go over those? We got those. The paperwork, like. About 15 minutes ago. So. Um, yeah, it's the same as last year. There will be one entrance there will be security guards checking IDs and giving out wristbands. There will be other security guards at key entrances and exits of both the lawn and blue wall, so that no one can leave and enter the campus center, or leave and go off to any other part of campus from the lawn with their alcoholic So and this is the one where that it's by the doors to the blue wall which open up and then the seating area is right there is that right and not the one yes with not the back one, kind of like that where you go into the lobby, is that right. Correct. Okay. All right. Any questions about this. It's the last year. If not, can we schedule a quick time, we can meet for maybe five minutes next week. Approve it. Would that be all right. Does anyone have a suggestion to do another Thursday. Does that work for everybody Dylan. Yeah, I've got my meeting at six with the CIA, but as long as it's before six right live that will work with me. Was that, was that okay Halle guest on 545 545. I don't know. I don't care, but that that's seen, you know, that would work fine. Okay, to we say 545 next Thursday. Does that sounds good. Okay, great. So we'll make sure that to schedule a meeting for 545 next Thursday, October 28 and to go approve the license. So I wanted to thank you guys for adding us in such short notice and working with us on it. It's very much appreciated. So thank you. Okay, thank you very much. Thanks for coming in. Okay. See you next week. Bye. Okay, great. So that's it. Next up is our featured discussion item license fee comparison and Steve has also scheduled a public hearing so that we can do a change of fee schedule. Following the comparison discussion, if we would like to exact right ski. So I did, I did get some feedback from I presented guest on comparisons to the finance director and the building commissioner. And if I was very thorough and interesting and they were open to some limited number of fee changes. But before a whole overhaul of them, they wanted to take some more time to do a bit more review and more comparison. And as renewal notices are going out on next Thursday. We will not have enough time to do that. They want to take, you know, a longer period to look into that. So they did have a couple of suggestions. I mean, ultimately the fees schedule does lie entirely within the authority, the board of license commissioners, but. They did have some suggestions of changes that they would recommend if the board was inclined to make them. And so the first one was for the coin operated devices. They're currently $100 a piece with no cap and for some licensees that gets that gets very expensive. And they recommended to change that to be $50 per device with a cap of $500. I did have an interesting conversation with Gaston the other day about whether whether the coin operated device license fee would apply to devices that are that are operated bills or credit cards and Gaston thinks it would still apply. But I think it's an interesting question. And, and they also suggested for all alcohol off premises. It's currently $25 or $2,000. They suggested a increase to $2,500. And the wine and malt off premises is currently 1500 and they suggested a increase to 1750. All right, thanks Steve Dylan. Um, do we know how many businesses actually are using coin operated in town and what's the most anybody's paying for that. Do we know that I can pull that up right now actually give me a second. I off the top of my head I would say probably around 15 but let me let me hangers the the one, you know, arcade in town right. Yes, that is, um, yeah the hanger has a significant burden I think they're usually around 3500 because they have many devices and the other ones. 3500 between the point ops and liquor or. No, just just going up just going up. Wow, so they have 35 machines. Yes, yeah. And then there are 12456 other licensees. I mean, my, my inclination would be rather than just an absolute cap to reduce the price at a certain point. I don't know. I mean I don't know does it do we care if if the hanger has 100 machines or 35. I mean if the the town to when it's beak on each machine. Doug. Yeah I don't know that necessarily I don't disagree with you that there could be sort of an upper limit, you know, like what you know, up to 15 machines and the rest are sort of just in the mix after some some threshold. I don't know what one there would be. I think the other thing that this begs for me is is whether we're getting all of them that we should. Are they are they so Steve maybe a little clarification is a coin operated amusement machines or just any coin operated machine because you know every. Every new stand where you drop 50 cents in and get your hamstring set or every soda machine, all those would count, and I doubt that we're collecting from everybody. All those count, but if it's amusement machines, meaning like pool tables and video games and that sort of stuff that it's a little more narrowly defined but I still has with the guests we don't we're not getting everybody to sign up. It is a, it is only for amusement machines. I'm looking at the statue right here which says I'm a to a person to keep a billiard pool or Cipio table or a bowling alley for higher gain or award. This may be actually the wrong reference but it is I didn't coin operated amusement machines. Yeah, I would still hazard a guess that there are pure, probably a few of them out there that aren't getting aren't getting license, but you know we. We talked about this I think before. Yeah, the jukeboxes that your credit card operated or app operated those counter those don't count. Do count right or they're supposed to my interpretation is that my interpretation was that they that they don't guest on put forward an interesting counter argument that he believes they do. And so I really don't know I mean I think that that's been my interpretation is that they don't but I guess suppose that's an open question that that that the jukeboxes don't that the devices which are not operated by coins in any way or do not. So amusement devices that are better or credit card operation. Yeah, I don't think that I don't think that adding a credit card. The receiver is meant to, I mean that the purpose of the, of the fee and the coin operated definition in the Massachusetts general laws is, is not something that really should hang on the form of payment. I think that it was called coin operated. I mean really what it is is paid machines, the coin operated is incidental to the fact that when that was passed in the, the State House, no such machines would cost more than four quarters, and more over the technology to process a single dollar. So I would hang zero weight on the term coin operated. I think we should just substitute it for paid. Yeah, I did actually find the correct statutory reference is 177 a not 177 if you'd like me to pull it up. Sure. Yeah, let's see it. That is a great question I am going to guess. Well before any of our parents were born. Yeah, yeah. I would I would agree with you that, again, the intention here was about about payment for for the service the other thing I think, and particularly why it may have said coin operated at the time was because Well it doesn't. I don't see quite operate. It may not but I think the idea being that, you know, They were fair that like they've registered your, your coinage properly. And, you know, didn't just sort of take your money and not give you the amusement as it were. You know so that's why you license them so that people keep them in good working order and that they're not sort of taking their money that kind of thing so I mean, I don't think formal payment necessarily changes anything. And the risk now with like a credit card is that is there a skimmer that it reads cards, you know, so that that's a, that's part of by charging a license for we're asking people is to keep their, their stuff in good working order. It's not, you know, taking more money than it should or it's not, you know, subject to some, you know, fraudulent additions and that sort of thing so that the license still matters. I don't think, like you say the form of payment doesn't matter to me. Right, it says deposit of a token, I mean, you know, entering a credit card to take a is is is a is a kind of token. But what what's interesting is this what's a free play pinball machine, and why would that still require the same, the same license. Yeah, I wonder if free play is free isn't for free and there are a lot of very definitions in this section of chapter 140. It's interesting as I get anywhere something is something is set in motion and not. Well, I'm just looking on on the internet and I don't know if this is right but the, there's a website free play pinball arcade that says there are only 140 known to exist in less than 20 public locations to play worldwide. For any of them in Massachusetts. We've got a law for that. Not with this huge regulatory. You know, I got a really interesting rabbit hole you can try to figure out what a sepio table is because that is also something that you regulate and I don't know if anybody is even sure what exactly it is beyond some kind of archaic board game. A sepio table. So actually to this point though, you know one of the interesting things that may be a factor and I was just just we're talking about sort of taking credit cards, you know, a lot of restaurants they now have that for lack of term kind of a kiosk that sets on the table that you can pay your bill, but one of the other things it's doing while sitting there is enticing you to play a game and asking you to pay to play. I mean I think you can answer like one question for free but then they want to sort of engage you in in like a trivia or that sort of thing. I don't know if we have any restaurants with that but I mean certainly places like chilies and Applebee's and you know restaurants of that sort, have those sort of tabletop devices. To my mind that is is a, you know, coin operated amuse machine machine. So, you know, for one thing that we should be getting, you know, have those be licensed for one thing but then the other thing is, because they're on like every single table and it's also part of how they get paid. You know that begs the question, it goes back to the initial question Gaston asked about about, is there some sort of limit or threshold that we want to think about because you know a restaurant there could be 75 of those depending on how many tables they've got. So restaurants I mentioned are all in Hadley, so that's Hadley's problem but I think you know they could come and there may be some in Amherst that have that too but I would, I would beg the question as to whether those those devices qualify as well on this license. Okay I'm finding the definition in the Maryland code for free play pinball machine, a machine that on insertion of one or more coins releases one or more balls for the player to propel by a plunger. And if the player gets a certain score combination of numbers rewards the player with a specified number of free games allowing the player to continue to play the machine without inserting additional coins or tokens. So anyway, I don't see what the difference is with the regular pinball machine. I don't get that now because, yeah, so that's pretty much all pinball machine center. I guess you have a really lame pinball machine that you can't get free plays on. It's just for the glory of the score. Yeah, I mean, I think the question is what's the point of the license here it. There's no. There's no real purpose of a lot of the license except for the town to get us a cut. Unless we think that we're trying to discourage these amusements and I don't think that that's the purpose it's just to get to get a few of the coins that go in the machine each year, as far as I can tell. Yeah, unless, yeah, go ahead, Doug. I was just gonna say I think the rationale is, is, is probably harkening back to what it you, they did take coins and having them be functional and serviceable and so making sure that that they operate in good order and that they're not just taking people's money. You know, that's the intent is that you're like, All right, we're going to license you for this because we want you to keep it in good working order. I think that's really the only reason for it. Which makes me not, I mean $100 sounds like a lot. Personally, I just don't know for a single license on that but but I do think, you know, again, I think that that it's not it's not a certainly bad thing I just don't know if it's it's quite the, you know, sort of proceed problem it might have been once upon a time people may have thought they were gambling type devices which they aren't but I do think some, you know, there may be other types of amusement devices that aren't getting captured here that we want to maybe capture. But again, I think, you know, doesn't need to be $100 I don't know if we necessarily need that. I think you're probably right about the gambling being the purpose of it. I think it says this forbid that they be used for gambling says that they have to be in open view at all times when an operation so I wonder if they're worried about people rigging the pinball machine or something so. Yeah, it could be. It could be. So, do you, is there a way that we could. First of all, find out if any of those machines that you talked about Doug are in Amherst, or how do we go about finding ones that are there. And then to the second point is like is $50 a device up to a cap of $500 is it, you know, maybe $50 for the first, I don't know, 25 and then you drop it to 25 machine do we want to talk about something like that, or. I mean, I think the purpose of, of knowing how many machines there are is a reason not to do. You can eat buffet. Right. And so I, that's, I'd be inclined for that reason to just step it down. $50 for the first for the first 10 $20 for the next 10 $10 for the next 10 I don't know. That's good to me. I mean, is that too low. That's $50 to the first 10 is that too low do we, or too much of a shock to the system at first. I mean, this is not a big revenue item, right. And I mean, it's, you know, it's kind of like we're, we're regulating for one business. Right. Right. And I guess one thing to be clear about is whether it's per, per entity that owns them or per establishment, I would think we're talking about establishment. Right. So if the hangar owners opens a second place, it's, it's per establishment. And then I mean, we're, I don't think we have a policy purpose to try to prevent arcades, right. No, if anything, if someone's going to have a few, then I think having a kind of incentive to add more is seems fine. Right. Yeah, Doug. Yeah, I would agree with that. I think the, I think this is also just sort of talking about ways to sort of scale it. I mean, this is worth, you know, sort of asking a finance director and, and to kind of to see if he has any opinion about it. You know, and it's also kind of a question for Steve and anything about himself and his office staff, you know, sort of management of tracking, when you have a scale, their step thing, you know, just a bit more, more work for Steve than, than is worthwhile. But, but I think, you know, kind of, kind of running it by the, the finance director, you know, kind of the impact because if you cut it in half to $50, you know, in great. I mean, like you say, there's only six license holders to begin with this, maybe it will maybe target it, you know, hundreds of dollars, supposed to thousands or tens of thousands, but, but, you know, I think they might have an opinion about a scale, a scaled system or, you know, a threshold they think makes more sense or. Yeah, he did endorse the figure of 50 per and a cap of 500 he did. That if the board was so inclined. Yeah. Well, you know, if, if hangers wants to give us, you know, free drinks for the year, I'm fine with it. You sure that's illegal. So is that the, are we going to. So are we accepting that price that $50. Do you want to just look at that through the run the scale by them again that we guess I'm just talking about. So I suppose I'm. And is the scale different than that, than that, than that figure I just gave you was that just that it decreases with no cap progressively. Yeah. I mean, I'm just thinking guest on like 50 for the first 10 or. I mean, I mean, I think that, you know, from the, the question whether we're acting in a way that is contrary to the people who are responsible for the town's finances that we have a blessing here. Right. And so I, I mean, do we know how many. The hangar has 30. Is that what we. I believe 35. I can pull that up. Let me take a look. I believe they have 35 and there's a couple other establishments that have them. I do think we used to have more of these licenses, but I know. The VFW used to have some of them. They've closed some of the, and some of the business. I know a high horse used to have a couple and they've closed. So some of the businesses that used to have these have closed. But let me pull that back up and get. So, if we, if we did like the first 10 at 50, the next 10 at 20, the next 10 at 10, it would take, it would take the hangar's bill down from three grand to 800. I mean, just to give, you know, I set up a little spreadsheet here's if we want to mess around with the numbers. I mean, I mean, I guess the other way to look at it is what do we think a place that has 30. How much of the coins that pass through those 30 machines do we think is reasonable to, to kind of charge. I believe that in high school, I managed to call an arcade company to just put some machines in the school, and I was collecting half the money. As long as they're in plain sight visible by the operator at all times I don't have any problem. So I do have the final figures we have six licensees. We have the stackers with one machine. I think Murphy's one machine, the spoke with one machine, the harp with one machine, the hanger with 36, and the American Legion with three. Okay. I mean, I don't, I don't think, I don't think taking, you know, 20 bucks a machine is that seems fine, you know, so I, you know, I, the idea of 50 for the first set of numbers and beyond that. 20. I mean, and if what seems egregious is hanger having to pay 3600. Any of these changes that we're talking about will address that. This is only establishments that sell alcohol subject to this. Oh no, any, anybody, any place. No couple of places I think the, you know, the laundry mat I go to has a point operated pool table and a pinball machine. Don't know if they're licensed or not so. I will say no. Steve you got to go down there to baseball back in like where's our $40. Well, I mean, we could we could make that distinction that the $50 is only if it's a, if it's a licensee that has any alcohol license. And if we want to kind of promote other places, both having them and reporting them, then we could have a, you know, let's say we step down to 20 then that the fee for that place can be 40 bucks then that would be an approach I think we could take a little less you're saying no alcohol license $40. Well I mean so you know one simple scheme would be. If you have a liquor license it's 50 bucks machine up to 10 beyond that 20. If you don't have a liquor license it's 20. Oh I see. Okay. That would be and, and if that were the deal, then the hangers fee would be a thousand 20 from 3000. Yeah, but maybe like proportionate to the revenues, it's insanely expensive to that alcohol licenses. I mean the turnover on alcohol for the $3,000 license or whatever is magnitudes of what these coin ops are. So, if we, if we want to promote this kind of entertainment then. I don't know what different how much difference our fee makes but you know I'm open to thinking that maybe it should be even lower than 50 I don't. I mean, to go back to guest on question before the idea of this fee, like why we're doing it it's it's so people have an incentive to keep the machines and good working order because they're paying a license that's that's the idea of having to be in first place. I think so I think the other thing is is that you know the intent of having, you know, amusements of this sort is to have people hang out longer. Right. And so they're hoping, you know if I'm a bar owner or I'm a restaurant, you hang out longer going to buy it a dessert, having dinner and leaving right you might be like oh I'm going to play pinball for 20 minutes I'll come back and have a cookie, whatever. I think the intention is to have people sort of stay in the business longer, which at a place that serves alcohol makes, you know, a lot of sense because it's like well there's something for them to do. You know, etc, etc, so I think that's a piece of it. So it is. I think it's some of the rationalist why you have those kind of machines in your in your business. And then, and then, but I think for us I think the regulatory pieces just take even good working shape, don't, you know, charge people too much, you know, go from, you know, squeeze them for all their worth kind of thing but also just. There might have been some concern at some point that you know there, there was perhaps some, some less than, than honorable intentions of people having these kind of machines in there in there, you know to sort of take money from people or get them sucked into, you know, sort of addiction based stuff I think that's not really the concern we have but I think you know just having them recognize that they need to take care of machines and they function properly so people want to use them they do get the amusement. But I guess I guess my question here is how, how does a fee do because I mean I can have a busted machine and a the hundred dollars but if I want. It's not like paying it means they have to do it. I would guess it's like that's something that we put that's on the license application or the renewal is to remind us why hey we're we're intending for you to keep this in good working order. I think it also begs the question of enforcement, it's like, you know, because there's clearly maybe some places that haven't been paying it. So, that's the other pieces that if you didn't force to make sure that they're functioning and they're, you know, on the up and up and that is all the places that have them are actually doing their thing so that's, that's the sort of conundrum I think is it is it a complaint driven enforcement or is it a is it an active like it's like we're going to cruise around and check to see who's got what. I don't know, you know, I'll put it out there. I'm. I'm not opposed to completely eliminating this fee. Yeah. Don't get me wrong. I don't mind having high fees for certain things like your licenses especially but like that makes perfect sense why we do it. Were these I don't know it seems like it doesn't really seem a purpose and it doesn't really seem like it's a big revenue driver for the town either just seems kind of nitpicky to have it in there. I wouldn't disagree with you on that. What. If you want to suspend it for a year and see how things go and then eliminate it, or is it better just to eliminate the fee right away. I mean, let's ask it. I think the other besides the fee question is there any significance to knowing where the machines are does that matter to, or should we really just. Do you want to have a coin out machine of it. Yeah, I don't know. Is there a significant stug or Steve. I'm aware of I mean I think it's both in the category of made of points at a point of time it may have mattered to people and they have been an important issue I don't think that's the case anymore. I think the only other thing we would consider is whether, you know, given that it's, it's written into law whether we're required to have a license for it. But if we're required then we need a little bit of something just to kind of off that the cost of Steve's time so we don't want to make it too expensive but seems a permissive right Steve. Yeah, I can pull that up again. Some of these things are kind of. It's just like, you know, are the heavens going to fall if we. We're going to break it down. As long as we have the Cipio tables under control. That's right. Yeah, I mean, you know, may grant. Yeah, may grant and after but noticed the licensee suspended revoke a license. Unless. That's the thing. So the, the, the advantage of having a license is that if somebody's mess is abusing them in some way, we have something to take away. That's right. But I would, I doubt that there's any record of a problem with coinout machines and amherst in the last 10 years. So it says down here, number four, the annual fee for a license into the section for any automatic amusement device shall be $20 unless otherwise established by the town. Yeah. So can we just do that to start with or do we just want to get rid of them. Oh, so we were, we were charging the max. Right. $20. Yeah, which is, you know, like, you know, wet. It's just like the mafia. It's like, we want to taste, we want to taste. Yeah, I mean, these, you know, these establishments are being taxed if they're making more money. That's going to somehow end up affecting their, their leases and property taxes. I don't know I think we need to keep track of them. Dylan suggestion is has appeal. Yeah. I mean, we don't necessarily have it. If the consensus is generally we're all in favor of eliminating this right now. I could take some time, talk to some of the folks at the bars in town. I know the owner of the moan and dub who used to be the owner of the higher Jason DiCaprio, he's usually over there. The owner of the spoke is in town now can talk to a couple of people and see if they have any idea what the value of that might be from the, I don't know, even there. Yeah, I'm sure all we're like, oh yeah, no, it's terrible. We don't, we don't need to spend this money, which might be the case but I don't know maybe somebody has an idea of any value of this. I can't think of any. I think that's where like the, you know, building commissioner or fire chief or for, you know, public safety, somebody in that group as well, you know, might have some inclination as to what this is about. Yeah, that'd be the other group to check. I don't disagree with you Dylan on check with some of the owners and saying, Oh, it was because of this thing that they made us do this, you know, somebody may know the history on this but but right. Okay, here, let me let me give a counterfactual. You know someone. There's some cheap real estate in town that's not being used someone gets a decent lease and they just put in 20 machines that's all it is. Do we care at that point. Do we care anymore, or any less. As long as they're actually paying their taxes and not laundering money through coins. Right. I don't care. Yeah, that I guess that's the other reason to like know who has them is that they are they are a good money laundering device. I didn't even think about that that's clever although if you're wondering money with coins it can't be going too well. You can use credit cards right now. I mean, you know something that we could do that's smaller and less radical would be to go to the go to the $20 and revisit it. We're going to put it to $20 Steve because so we're also under a time constraint here right because these are going to be renewing very shortly. I mean there are so few of these I'm sending everything out on the 27th but there's so few of these that if we really wanted to to to reconsider this on the third it wouldn't really be that much of an issue to delay that in particular. The smaller the smaller it is, you know, besides the hanger, it's like really an annoyance that you have to apply for a whole license for something so trivial. Right. And so the other approach would be that we only charge a fee if you have more than 10 or more than five, but you only need a license if you have more than 10 of these. I'm still I'm still in favor of just just eliminating us entirely. We can agree with Dylan and that I think it creates more work tracking down who has five versus four machines and you know if you have four five machines but once broken. Yeah, it's just another one I think where, you know, if you comply with the law you're effectively punished by paying the fee. And if you don't get you know ignorance I think in the case of somebody who's not selling alcohol doesn't know about the beat. Yeah, yeah, they they're just saving you know 200 bucks a year or whatever, what have you by not telling us about it so it does just seem like cumbersome bureaucracy to me to have it in there. I don't feel good about enforcing it against the violators then we shouldn't have it. That's, I think that that's the other way to look at it. So I mean, do we agree that maybe Steve had Steve talk to. I don't know police fire who everything's might be have an idea of what value this might have weight on that and then. Yeah, they can't think of it, we can eliminate it. I think that's a good idea. Since the finance director gave us the blessing to, to forget about that revenue does anybody else care. Yeah, we'll see. So Steve would you be able to check with those people. Yeah, and we would probably, if we're just going to eliminate the requirement for a license that probably would be a different notice of the public hearing. Okay, license fee change I mean we can set it to $0 but then we would still have to issue them. Yeah, so we'll, so let's, let's, if you can get that information that will notice it accordingly for the next full meeting. Yeah, for the third. Okay. Thank you Steve, and then maybe we'll get coverage from the Amherst Gazette license commission. This pack man takes over Amherst. I did pull in the paper today Doug and you were on the front page. I got a text from my daughter, because a friend of hers sent her the picture of the cover of the, of the reminder. You know, it's basically me like this picture my head. Really quite, quite scary, to be honest. In another role that I was on the cover of the reminder. Okay. I'm going to go in a different direction so we'll deal with cone operated on the third of potentially raising the prices for all alcohol off premises and wine and malt off premises do we want to discuss that now, and that's only going up from 2,000 to 2,500 and then you said 150 to 1750 Steve. Yeah, that's just that were the suggested figures. Which are our beer and wine. Oh, I guess like the Northam her store provisions. Yeah, that one. And, oh no that guy would be Amherst. Yeah. Did they just drop their application for. I think there has been some spirited negotiations going on. And cousins is meeting with me tomorrow morning to look at what they would have to do to be open by November 30. Oh my gosh. Okay. Okay. Yeah, I think we'll really jump out to me from Gaston's Gaston's work there is that I'm and looking at the the quota report where we're able to get a hold of the quotas for every town the Commonwealth and many of them are over quota for section 12. But we are interestingly are not even when many other towns similar to larger sized are which makes me think that due to the very young population of Amherst, we probably have less demand. Yeah, I think what really jumped out to me from Gaston's Gaston's work there is that and looking at the quota report where we're able to get a hold of the quotas for every town in the Commonwealth and many of them are over quota for section 12. So, I think we have more demand for on premises, alcohol service than off premises, which seems to be rather uncommon. But anyway, there certainly seems to be quite a bit of demand for the all alcohol off premises license which is our only one quota. Right. Keep making people check IDs. Yeah. You're saying Dylan that the, the, the rigor of the, of the carding drives people to off premises. Exactly. Just one person 21 fuel party. That makes sense. So, and I don't know if the, I mean, I guess maybe this is a policy issue for us to take up I, I'm not aware of the off premises using the fancy card readers even. I'm not paying the monthly subscriptions anyone aware of an off premises having that level of carding. I think most of the places that I've been to they, they have a card reader there. I'm not a great sample here because when I go and they check my ID I just get a quick look at it and then move along if I'm getting carded, but I know I think spirit house I've seen them do that. I'll say immerse liquors one right next to I think I've seen them use it too but I don't know I it's definitely not the same as the bars where if I go into a bar most of them are going to scan my ID regardless of how old you are they're going to scan your ID. Because they want you in the system, where it's you know less important for the liquor store we're not about to drink it and get rowdy in the store so they don't necessarily need that that leave a record of who was in there. But I do believe they they they have. I've had it done at liquor 44. I think it is a good sort of policy question though because I think it is. You know, it was established much more likely, you know I think about, you know, as someone said sort of spirit house or ever slickers which are both right there on on College Street. You know, they're going to know a lot of people personally because it's the same people come in regularly. But, you know, and, and, but whether we want to, you know, have them sort of up their game to have a scanner or guaranteed they have a scanner they're keeping up today. You know, that's an interesting thing to think about for sure. So I do think they're going to, there is going to be some pressure from books near near appropriate age. Because like you say, you know, it's simpler for them in the sense that if they have some or know someone that 21 that person can purchase for the group, but not always the case but you know I think it's a protection that they want for themselves to so I think that's a good policy question but, but, you know, I think back to the original sort of, you know, two, two recommendations that, you know, we're discussing that that go to 2,500 for the all alcohol off premises in the 1750 for the white emuls. You know, not opposed to raised in both I think the alcohol being higher is probably. I don't know, you know, I don't know the thing is, is this is, if I think about, you know, it's about underage drinking, they're tending to buy a lot more beer and wine, probably more beer, because it's cheaper. Okay. You know, so the, so if you're trying to. So I think that they're, you know, an oriented, you know, place like a convenience store like at the corner of Triangle Street, or at the roundabout there Triangle Street sells that. And again with question three, depending on how it changes there might be a few more that start to press for those kind of licenses are those establishments that are more place like provisions where it's a, you know, it's functionally a core of their business, along with some other things. That's a different approach than like, you know, a convenience store type place that's, it's an add on, you know, their attention to that component of their business is a little different than it is at a place like provisions which is, you know, more, but also, you know, food, establish, you know, food and other things, but their, their focus is different. So I think that's, that's the thing is like, you know, if you're concerned about overconsumption, improper consumption, you know, should we be, you know, asking more from from those, you know, those one mall places because of the, the sort of high risk and so therefore, you know, higher bad outcomes that we're trying to, to keep an eye on and have them be serious about and all that sort of stuff so kind of make a case for both increases but I'm open to. But following your, your point Doug that I think your argument persuades me to maybe be more rigorous about the best practices they're following as rather than the, than the, than the license. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, maybe my, maybe my, my reaction to your comments would be, maybe we're ready to, to increase the all alcohol off premises. And, and we can take up the question of carding best practices at these, at all of the establishments at a future time. And we want to give with regard to that and changing that sort of regulation about, you know, hey, we need you to have, you know, this level of identification verification. We want to give them a little bit of lead time so they can kind of budget and plan and because there's, you know, there's getting the stuff and then there's actually sort of training staff and implementing and you know those kind of things so we want to, you know, hear from them as well, you know, for one thing, but also just give them a little bit of implementation timeline but. So I think it is, it is a valid thing to have it in conversation for sure and I think we should seriously consider it. So Steve did they when you talked to the finance director do you see why they should be raised, or just that they should be. I thought they were probably kind of relatively low considering the amount of demand there is and the amount of business compared to some of those comparable communities. I think I think what what you guys keyed in on, and also me is a big difference between the all alcohol on premises and the wine and malt on premises but he did want to do a little bit more study before giving any recommendations to that. He felt more confident with all alcohol off premises and there is clearly a ton of demand for the all alcohol off premises anyway that's our only type of quota. Okay. There's some. So if we, what does everyone want to do do we want to raise the alcohol want to raise them both more in favor of just the alcohol off premises tonight or waiting another two weeks or like with the coin off. I mean, I'm in favor of raising them both. Okay. All right. Dylan, what do you think. Yeah, I think we can definitely raise them. Okay. If that's the case, should I just make a motion. Oh, I think we have to do we have to open a hearing. I guess we raise them both with that be all right. Yeah, I mean, I just, I, I'm not, I'm not troubled by an extra 250 for the, for the wine and beer but I. So I, I'm okay with the, the, the, the board's general consensus. Okay. Are there any further discussion on this before we, because we have to go into a public hearing right Steve. Yes. To change these. Okay. So do we. Do we just like that 500 and 250 number. I assume the. Do you have any idea of, you know, kind of what was the reasoning for those numbers Steve. Yeah, that's what I was wondering. I mean, I think he just kind of liked him. They might, they might be in line with the other comparables. I don't know off the top of my head, but that was his final recommendation. More money, not concerned about the flak. Yeah. So I guess, yeah, we kind of like those numbers too. Those are, those are good numbers to kind of like, I mean, do we want to talk about the, like, do we want to raise the alcohol more or. I think he does want to do some more, some more, some more when we do, when we look at it next year, do some more research into, you know, what the actual externalities are and what the costs of the town are with these types of things. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I guess Don did try to look into, you know, how are these, these fees set? And I think the, pretty much the way it's done across the entire Commonwealth is, yeah, that sounds like the good number. Okay. So this is just like, maybe we're keeping pace with inflation. We all the alcohol create the nuisance of the nips litter with somebody has to clean up. So that's, Yeah, yeah, yeah. That should definitely go up at least by this. And I think that's the one in malt word. You're slightly worried about the corner pack, like not the package stores, but those marks where they have six packs of beer that anyone can. Yeah, I mean, yeah, I think that's, that's the greater risk of, you know, getting the kind of alcohol consumption we can start, you know, we're concerned about in our community. It'd be problem drinking or behavior that goes with overindulgence, whatever, you know, I think that's, that's the, the sort of. So cousins has it if and when they renew or whatever they're doing, they have a, they have an off premises wine and malt. Is that right? They have an all alcohol. Oh, they have an all alcohol. Okay. Right. All right. Okay. So do we want to open up the hearing? And so we think that these raises for the time being are good. And then we're going to revisit them next year. Is that the idea? Or during throughout the year. Okay. So is there a motion to open the hearing? So moved. Thank you, Doug. Is there a second? Thanks Dylan. All in favor, say I guest on. Hi. Kelly. Hi. Dylan. And I say hi. I mean, I say I. But hello also. The hearing is now open. Okay. Is there any other discussion about potentially raising or not raising or the fees that are presented to us for the prices for all alcohol off premises and wine and malt off premises license fee change? No. Is there a motion to adopt the new license fees of 2,500 for the all alcohol off premises and 1750 for the wine and malt off premises? I have a question first. I'm sorry. Okay. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I didn't hear the actual motion in the hearing. Oh, you're right. Never mind. I mean, I think we sort of pull for any public comment. And that's right. You're absolutely right. Discussing. Yeah, you can discuss in the hearing too. Okay. I'm sorry. I haven't, I haven't done a hearing like this in a while. Okay. So we're not. Can doing a vote. Is there anyone here for comment? Or would we like to discuss this further? Anyone have any objections? Considerations. Okay. Okay. It seems all right to everyone. Okay. So should we close the hearing? I'll move to close the hearing. Thank you, Doug. Is there a second to close the. Thank you, Dylan. We'll take a vote. Gaston. Hi. Kelly. Hi. Dylan. Hi. Doug. Hi. And I vote I that is five to zero. The hearing is now closed. So I will make a motion to. Remove the. All alcohol off-premise license from 2000 to 2500 and the all, the wide and malt. I'll call. Off-premise license from. 100 to 1750. Thank you, Doug. Is there a second? Thank you, Dylan. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none. We'll take a vote. Gaston. Hi. Hi. Dylan. Hi. And I vote I five to zero. The motion has passed. Thank you. And the fees have been raised. Thank you everyone. All right. All right. Well, we are on this topic. I may just suggest. Now I didn't really bring this up with the finance director, but I doubt it'll be very controversial, but the live entertainment license fee of $5 for the annual license. I could just put it out there or something to think about while we have this as a notice meeting. Isn't that like the, how is it different from our conversation about the coin ops. Live entertainment. I think on this one, I actually have some, and I've brought these up before, so I'll be brief. I think there, we just have the one. For five bucks. Right. I think there's, I think we should have a short term. You're going to have an event. You want to notice to your neighbors. Hey, I'm going to have live entertainment so that could be, you know, a little bit of a different kind of volume coming from my location. As opposed to a place that that's their business. You know, you think about like the performance base that chamber put together. That has a lot more to it. And it will have a lot greater impact on, on neighbors and that sort of thing. So I think that license, I mean, to my mind, I'm not saying these need to be, you know, I think the, you know, the sort of short term thing, you know, it's mostly about notification of neighbors, five bucks to cover it. I think for longer, more permanent, you know, if that's part of your establishment, your business model, then I think it's a little more, you know, is appropriate relative to that. I mean, a little more pay for the license, but also just, you know, the, maybe even the requirements of getting a license might be a little more stringent, not like crazy or anything, but at the same time, I think, you know, if you, if, if you have your apartment downtown and suddenly the people that are below you decide to add live entertainment and they're rocking out to 1am every night because they can't, even if they're not serving alcohol, you wouldn't have an opportunity to say something about that if you've got a problem with it. So, and if it's going to be all year round or, you know, whatever, I mean, I think there's just those considerations that it, it's a little wild to explore. And I think that the license as it's currently structured doesn't, doesn't deal with that well, which is so important. All right. Yes, Gaston. I mean, I, I think we have one example recently and that was Garcia's wanting to have a mariachi's once a week. I've never been there when they have the mariachi, but in connection with their business, it is kind of like, do they have a pinball machine or not? Like, I don't have that much concern, but if the point is that it's important to have a hearing where people have a chance to object, then that's about having a license at all. And the amount is not as important. I'm, I'm not at all opposed to saying that instead of five, it's 50 or something like that. I mean, I think that that's still pretty much nominal. Right. I think the thing for me on, on certain cases like that, by the way, I have been to Garcia's when the mariachi's there and, it's fantastic. It's also, it's fairly loud if you're having dinner. But I also, the thing I think about, and I think we also had this happen with, I think it's Mexico, I forget the taco place that's near the bank center. They also got a live entertainment license, you know, in both those circumstances, they have outdoor space. And that sort of changes the dynamic in the neighborhood, like during the warmer weather, if you're doing that, you know, so I think that's where, you know, when you start having either outdoor spaces that can involve live entertainment or, or, you know, your adjacency to apartments above you, that kind of thing. It's just for the conversation, I think. And so it's, again, not to be onerous with it, it's just to be fair to everybody. And I think it's, and it's different when it's a one, you know, short term. Hey, I'm going to have to sing for a weekend because I'm doing a promo it for my business. That's a pretty minor kind of thing. Still want to let your neighbors know it's going to happen just as a courtesy. I mean, it's going to be, it's going to be, it's going to be, you know, every Tuesday night, you know, the doors go open and the, the band plays and it's pretty loud. That could be, you know, we just want to have an opportunity for people to move it, you know, make their point. Yes. I mean, I wonder if the issue is, is that if you're going to get an annual entertainment license, there should be in a butter's notice. So people know that to show up and, and, and show up at the hearing and make their case. And I don't think we have that currently. And we, we came up with. A different approach with the food trucks to have the, the sign at that location. I don't know if that would work. We know there's limitations to a butter's noses with rentals, which we have a lot of in town. But I, I think the idea of, of trying to elicit feedback seems to be the word worthy policy vote. Yes. I would fully agree as well. I think that would be. The, one of the things I would think would be, would go with, you know, sort of. Developing more nuanced licensing would be that kind of thing. I think in particular, because I think. It's part of, you know, the process. You know, I mean, part of what we're evaluating with the liquor license or anything else of that sort is, is a good fit for the neighborhood. You know, and that's, that's I think important with the, with the, with the live entertainment license too. So. That sounds almost like we're moving towards a project. Regulations. Yeah. Okay. The other thing I would say is it's, it's a little different than zoning. I mean, it starts to sound like some of those, you know, I've been zoning meetings and delicate. This is more than, than I can for sure. But, you know, there are, there are times when, when that's a factor in the zoning. Yeah, but kind of get one shot at that sort of when the, and the property is, is being created or, or. You know, turning over and a special permit or something as needed. This gives a review process a little more often, but I agree. It's probably a little bit of a project to kind of, you know, sort of frame the pieces that we need to think about and, and want people to consider around live entertainment. Okay. All right. Well, I'm tearing by the way. Yeah. I'm just going to say, yeah, one of the nice things about having an annual licenses is one of the things that deal with a lot of the CPA is when somebody buys a property and it has a special permanent, a tattoo. Those usually have transfer. The transfer of ownership requires it coming back before the ZBA. And one of the big things that we always find is just how so many of the conditions of the special permit were not being adhered to because there's no enforcement. They're never coming back to us for anything. You get your special permit. Thanks to you later. Time to not adhere to any of the special permit. And then, you know, who's going to do something about it. So it is nice having something that you can have that in the license where if it does start creating problems, there's already mechanism in there. To deal with it. That's right. Okay. All right. Well, that's something we should talk more about. And since we're doing a. We're scheduling our discussion topics, maybe not next time, but maybe. Maybe. The third. Maybe not the third. Maybe more towards the end of the year. Start looking into it. Am I looking? Do you want me to write something down? And. Talk to Steve about it. Put something together. Time to talk, Mary. And there also are a few different statutes that are licensed there. You would consider a live entertainment and I'm not even sure. Okay. Which ones the town has adopted. We've been issuing the one that the type that's on the license, but that we could really go down a rabbit hole, but it probably is a good project to do. Okay. I'm happy to do some, try to do some of the legislative history. If folks want me to look into it. That would be super. Great. Thank you. So Steve, why don't we talk about that in the future. Okay. In your future. Okay. Is that it for the current. Discussion on license fee comparison. And change of schedule. Well, we did that. Okay. Topics not reasonably anticipated 48 hours prior to meeting. So if you're interested in the documentation by law, you've got the current draft from Mandy, Joe, and I don't know if they talked about it on Monday, but there is a hearing. Is there not Steve. Or no, listening listening. Is it a listening session or hearing? There is a community forum on. When was it? I closed the email on Monday, the 24th. At seven PM. So it's on zoom. So we're going to go through that. We're going to go through that. We're going to go through that. We're going to go through that. We're going to go through along that email. That will have to rental property owners. And. Yeah, maybe interesting to see. Okay. And then we should probably put that on our discussion topics for the, that will we have time on the third, about the third. Of November. That's our next meeting. So we have, for next meetings, we have. Next Thursday at 545. And that's the 20. The 27th. And then we've got a full meeting on November 3rd. And then one on the, then the meeting after those the 17th, unless there are extraordinary circumstances. And. Anything else? Are there any other topics? Anyone wants to. Nope. Okay. Is there a motion to adjourn? Thank you, Doug. Is there a second? Thanks Dylan. We'll take a vote. I do have one topic. Sorry. Oh, sorry. You are printed out regulations. We have ordered binders from staples. So. Oh, great. Yeah, that's right. Just, yeah, we approved the, we did the lunch cart and the liquor license. So. Very happy. Okay. So. Thanks, Steve. So. Your Christmas presents. Gaston. Hi. Hi. Doug. Hi. Dylan. Hi. And I vote I five to zero with zero people absent. We're adjourned at 611 p.m. Thanks. Thank you all very much. We'll see you for about two minutes at 545 next Thursday. See you next week. That's great. Bye.