CC 2016-02-09_10a Supplemental Info No. 2MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: TERESA McCLISH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
AGENDA ITEM 1 O.a. NO. 2 -FEBRUARY 9, 2016 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 15-010; INCIDENTAL ON-
SITE SALE OF BEER AND WINE WITH ASSOCIATED ARCHITECTURAL
MODIFICATIONS; LOCATION -924 WEST BRANCH STREET; APPLICANT -
STARBUCKS COFFEE COMPANY; REPRESENTATIVE -SPENCER
REGNERY, GPA, INC.
DATE: FEBRUARY 9, 2016
Attached is a comment letter received on the proposed project.
cc: City Manager
City Attorney
City Clerk
Public Review Binder
Matt Downing
Subject: RE: Starbucks Petitioning to Sell Alcohol
From: LeAnn Akins
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 2:33 PM
To: Jim Hill; Barbara Harmon; Tim Brown; Kristen Barneich; Jim Guthrie; Dianne Thompson; Matt Horn
Subject: Starbucks Petitioning to Sell Alcohol
To Mayor Hill, City Council, and City Staff,
I am writing this letter in hopes you will read this prior to this evenings city council meeting. I am concerned
about the proposed sale of alcohol at the Starbucks on Branch Street.
I became even more concerned when I read the letter written by Ann Lundeen. In her letter she states she
contacted the main office and asked why they were seeking a use permit at this location, and the answer she
received was, "because there is a need", I ask you, who is determining the need and how was this need
determined? How was this "need" determined? And shouldn't we look at the true definition of the word
"need"? Need means there is a lack, a necessarity, a requirement. Do we lack in sales of alcoholic beverages in
AG? Is there a necessity to have additional stores selling more alcoholic beverages? Do we require more
places to purchase alcoholic drinks? I disagree there is a need as stated by the Starbucks.
Is there truly a need for an additional venue in our community which sells alcohol? Do we not have many other
venues which sell alcohol currently in business in AG? Should Starbucks define what our community needs,
when they are not fully invested in the true needs of our community? Besides coming to the council for this
permit, what are they doing in the community that meets needs beyond providing sales tax? Are they donating
time and resources to our community? Are they donating money to rehab the swining bridge, to upgrade our
parks, to help in the effort to refurbish city buildings which are in disrepair? I can answer all of those questions,
no they are not.
The planning commission states that this permit MIGHT result in higher sales tax revenue for Arroyo Grande---
MIGHT is a farily big word, as it is not definable or measureable. If this is not going to benefit us by making
up for our shortfall in funds to keep our city running, or if this permit will not help Starbucks in creating a
business model where they are demonstrating their committment to the community they do business in, then I
wonder if a decision in their favor for this permit is only something they will gain from in terms of a possible
increase in business, leading to higher profits for a national chain? Do we feel we are held to ensure that a
national chain make more profits for themselves/ Should we not be encouraging independent businesses to start
and flourish in AG? Big box stores and national chains are not the answer to our fiscal issues.
In addition, a reference was made to the fact that the majority of the sales tax generated by the Starbuck
expansion would come from the food sales. If that is the case, then why the need for a permit to sell alcohol?
Do people not buy food unless they can also buy an alcoholic beverage?
While I understand that we need more revenue, are we really going to gain that revenue by granting this
permit? I think you need to ask yourselves the following questions:
1. Is what you are being told the truth?
2. Is it fair to all concerned?
3. Will this build good will in the community?
4. Will this be beneficial to all concerned?
1
Yes, business needs to be developed in AG, but we must ask ourselves what direction we want our city to go?
We need to determine what is best for AG---not a large chain store.
For me, this isn't just about the alcohol, it's about who dictates what our city needs and how those needs are
met. It's about who is controling the agenda for how this city builds and grows. Should those decisions be left
to national chain stores or to us? One final question we need to ask ourselves is this: "Does Starbucks have our
best interests at heart or theirs?"
I hope that you will really consider what this decision means for AG. When you voted against grey-water
systems in new builds, I was shocked. When you voted for the design for Courtland and Grande, I was
disappointed. When the closure of Brisco became an issue again, it was frustrated because you all know that re-
opening that will cost us even more money.
You have an opportunity to make a good decision based on good judgement and hopefully more facts than were
presented. And that brings me to the last question which should be asked, how much revenue does this one
Starbucks bring to AG? Does this one business bring in so much business we cannot possible say no? Ifthere
is no evidence of this, then I think we need to be careful about how we make this decision.
I hope this message finds you all well today. See you at the meeting.
Sincerely,
LeAnnAkins
Resident of Arroyo Grande
The information contained in this email pertains to City business and is intended solely for the use of the
individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, or the
employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient and you have received this
message in error, please advise the sender by reply email or phone and delete the message. Please note that
email correspondence with the City of Arroyo Grande, along with attachments, may be subject to the California
Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt by law.
2