The issue of Philadelphia Weekly that came out yesterday features a lengthy anti-PLCB screed by Tom Cowell; nice work. (There was a good editorial on the wine kiosks the day before in the Lebanon Daily News, too.) The blog got some mention (bottom of page 2), but much much more importantly, Cowell had clearly been reading it and getting ideas: the number of stores compared to Chicago, how relatively little money we actually get from a complete monopoly on booze sales, the stupidity of the rebranding scheme, the way the PLCB is really just the tool of the legislature.
Which is exactly why this blog is here, to inspire thought and action. Cowell took it and ran with it, talked to union head Wendell Young, found some more issues (the patronage inherent in the State Store System, for example), and got a new crowd of folks stirred up. I'm very happy to see it happen.
Keep spreading the word. PRIVATIZE IT NOW!
(And if you feel like supporting me in the comments to this piece...feel free, but remember to keep it on track: it's all about abolishing the PLCB and rewriting The Almighty Liquor Code!)
Showing posts with label citizen protest. Show all posts
Showing posts with label citizen protest. Show all posts
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
One Year Later
I started this blog a year ago today.
In that time we've seen the PLCB propose automated wine-selling 'kiosks' and expensive name changes to their monopoly stores. We've seen Joe "CEO" Conti come out of his planning cave to start taking action; much like that symbol of Pennsylvania's greatness, the groundhog, though it's hard to say whether Conti saw his shadow or not. We've seen a contract let -- under questionable circumstances -- for training that appears to be beneath basic expectations. We've seen failures in the State Store System's on-line ordering system. We've seen the PLCB propose a partnership with individual restaurateurs that would be a breath-taking example of unfair monopolistic power. We saw Conti and PLCB Chairman PJ Stapleton bear up under a largely critical audience on a TV call-in show.
We've also pointed out 15 Reasons why the PLCB should be abolished. We've suggested ways for the State to make money on the process, we've suggested ways to cushion the blow to the system's employees, and we've suggested ways for you, the citizens of Pennsylvania, to help this happen. We've run amusing polls on the site. We've made allies in the general public, in the State government, and in the restaurant business, and we've brought some of those people together. We've linked to numerous stories about the PLCB in Pennsylvania's newspapers. We've even published e-mails from PLCB employees.
I've been interviewed for newspaper and radio stories. I've done a video interview. I've written letters to Pennsylvania newspapers. I've written letters to Pennsylvania legislators, to Governor Rendell, and to the PLCB, and received some responses. Despite being a freelance writer, I've yet to sell a story or make a dime on the issue. (That's okay; this is a hobby.)
Have we had any impact? I believe we have, albeit small. We've fed arguments and ideas to people who can use them with greater leverage. We've created a Web presence around which anti-PLCB/anti-State Store System anger and action can coalesce and concentrate. We've connected people who can now work together. We've given the idea of privatization a bit more impetus and legitimacy.
What do I have planned for the next year? Most importantly, more wine. I want to get some guest bloggers in here, people who know what the PLCB's screwing up in wine sales. That has the potential to bring a lot more people in on our side. More alliances, as we find more people and groups who have a natural antipathy to the PLCB: business groups, political groups, enthusiast groups. More confrontation, as we start to take this fight to Harrisburg. More Reasons, of course: we've only scratched the surface. More outrage, probably, as the PLCB moves to implement its plan for spending more of your money to put more lipstick on its piggish monopoly face. And more hammering away to smash the liquor monopoly the State has held for over 70 years.
The State should not be in the retail booze business. The State has no compelling reason to continue the monopoly sale of wine and spirits. The PLCB Should Be Abolished.
In that time we've seen the PLCB propose automated wine-selling 'kiosks' and expensive name changes to their monopoly stores. We've seen Joe "CEO" Conti come out of his planning cave to start taking action; much like that symbol of Pennsylvania's greatness, the groundhog, though it's hard to say whether Conti saw his shadow or not. We've seen a contract let -- under questionable circumstances -- for training that appears to be beneath basic expectations. We've seen failures in the State Store System's on-line ordering system. We've seen the PLCB propose a partnership with individual restaurateurs that would be a breath-taking example of unfair monopolistic power. We saw Conti and PLCB Chairman PJ Stapleton bear up under a largely critical audience on a TV call-in show.
We've also pointed out 15 Reasons why the PLCB should be abolished. We've suggested ways for the State to make money on the process, we've suggested ways to cushion the blow to the system's employees, and we've suggested ways for you, the citizens of Pennsylvania, to help this happen. We've run amusing polls on the site. We've made allies in the general public, in the State government, and in the restaurant business, and we've brought some of those people together. We've linked to numerous stories about the PLCB in Pennsylvania's newspapers. We've even published e-mails from PLCB employees.
I've been interviewed for newspaper and radio stories. I've done a video interview. I've written letters to Pennsylvania newspapers. I've written letters to Pennsylvania legislators, to Governor Rendell, and to the PLCB, and received some responses. Despite being a freelance writer, I've yet to sell a story or make a dime on the issue. (That's okay; this is a hobby.)
Have we had any impact? I believe we have, albeit small. We've fed arguments and ideas to people who can use them with greater leverage. We've created a Web presence around which anti-PLCB/anti-State Store System anger and action can coalesce and concentrate. We've connected people who can now work together. We've given the idea of privatization a bit more impetus and legitimacy.
What do I have planned for the next year? Most importantly, more wine. I want to get some guest bloggers in here, people who know what the PLCB's screwing up in wine sales. That has the potential to bring a lot more people in on our side. More alliances, as we find more people and groups who have a natural antipathy to the PLCB: business groups, political groups, enthusiast groups. More confrontation, as we start to take this fight to Harrisburg. More Reasons, of course: we've only scratched the surface. More outrage, probably, as the PLCB moves to implement its plan for spending more of your money to put more lipstick on its piggish monopoly face. And more hammering away to smash the liquor monopoly the State has held for over 70 years.
The State should not be in the retail booze business. The State has no compelling reason to continue the monopoly sale of wine and spirits. The PLCB Should Be Abolished.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
A Shot Across the Bow
Time to step things up. I just sent the following to Governor Rendell, Senators Wonderling, Tomlinson (my local senator), Greenleaf, and Rafferty, and Representative Farry (my local rep), cc;'d to the three PLCB Board members. If you feel like it, send them something similar, but don't use my letter; they'll just write it off as kook action. You can get their e-mail addresses (and those of your legislators) easily: here's a list of senators, representatives, and the governor. Have at it.
Gentlemen,
As a Pennsylvania citizen, taxpayer, and native, I strongly believe that the time has come to end the Commonwealth's monopoly on the sale of wine and spirits. This week's reports of a $173,820 consulting contract with Solutions 21 to train State Store clerks and managers "how to greet someone, where to stand, and how to read a customer's cues", and the ensuing concerns over a possible conflict of interest when it was revealed that the head of Solutions 21 is married to one of three PLCB regional managers, put a cap on a building series of questionable decisions by the Board. The people of Pennsylvania deserve better from their state agencies.
But this is almost beside the point. There is no good reason why the State is in the booze business. Approximately 75% of the monies transferred to the general fund from the PLCB are taxes that could just as easily be collected by private businesses, as is done in other states, as is done in Pennsylvania by beer distributors now. The "profits" from the PLCB stores are not insignificant, but it is very likely that any revenue loss from privatization would be more than made up by greater in-state sales when Pennsylvanians ceased going across the borders to buy spirits and wine in other states. There is, after all, a very good reason that there are huge booze superstores right across our borders; people can get the service and selection there that they simply cannot get in the State Stores. Privatization would bring those stores into Pennsylvania, keep those sales and taxes in Pennsylvania, and bring those jobs to Pennsylvania.
It has been argued since Repeal of Prohibition that the Commonwealth's 'control' of liquor and wine sales is in the interests of the citizens, that control serves, in the words of the Pennsylvania Liquor Code, "for the protection of the public welfare, health, peace and morals of the people of the Commonwealth and to prohibit forever the open saloon, and all of the provisions of this act shall be liberally construed for the accomplishment of this purpose." But all control has proven to be is an inconvenience and annoyance to the citizens. Pennsylvania's record with underage drinking, alcoholism, and drunk driving is not significantly better or worse than neighboring states that have fully privatized wine and spirits sales. The State doesn't sell gasoline, guns, or prescription drugs: why does it sell wine and spirits?
If there is no benefit to the citizens in tax revenue, convenience, satisfaction, or safety, there is no compelling reason to continue with the State-controlled retail (or wholesale) of wine and spirits. Indeed, the State's image suffers from the accusations of favoritism and patronage that dog actions like the Solutions 21 contract and the non-competitive appointment of PLCB CEO Joe Conti.
It has been estimated that privatization would bring the State a windfall of over $1 billion from sale of product stocks and other assets, and the sale of new store licenses (and I would urge the Legislature to set up any new licensing structure to benefit the State rather than the holders of licenses; it angers me, as a taxpayer, every time I hear of a restaurant license sold for hundreds of thousands of dollars that the State should be getting). Even if that's generous, and the windfall is only $500 million, that would go a long way towards plugging the current budget deficit, and tax revenues should increase dramatically. It's a win for almost everyone, excepting current PLCB employees. Some of the windfall could perhaps go for early retirement packages and re-training for the clerks and managers, they could be given preference on other state jobs, and perhaps even low-interest loans to open their own, private stores.
There may never be a better time for privatization to succeed; times such as these favor bold solutions. Pennsylvania could find new jobs and new tax revenues while pleasing the majority of the citizenry. Please consider this in the coming session.
Sincerely,
Lewis Bryson
Gentlemen,
As a Pennsylvania citizen, taxpayer, and native, I strongly believe that the time has come to end the Commonwealth's monopoly on the sale of wine and spirits. This week's reports of a $173,820 consulting contract with Solutions 21 to train State Store clerks and managers "how to greet someone, where to stand, and how to read a customer's cues", and the ensuing concerns over a possible conflict of interest when it was revealed that the head of Solutions 21 is married to one of three PLCB regional managers, put a cap on a building series of questionable decisions by the Board. The people of Pennsylvania deserve better from their state agencies.
But this is almost beside the point. There is no good reason why the State is in the booze business. Approximately 75% of the monies transferred to the general fund from the PLCB are taxes that could just as easily be collected by private businesses, as is done in other states, as is done in Pennsylvania by beer distributors now. The "profits" from the PLCB stores are not insignificant, but it is very likely that any revenue loss from privatization would be more than made up by greater in-state sales when Pennsylvanians ceased going across the borders to buy spirits and wine in other states. There is, after all, a very good reason that there are huge booze superstores right across our borders; people can get the service and selection there that they simply cannot get in the State Stores. Privatization would bring those stores into Pennsylvania, keep those sales and taxes in Pennsylvania, and bring those jobs to Pennsylvania.
It has been argued since Repeal of Prohibition that the Commonwealth's 'control' of liquor and wine sales is in the interests of the citizens, that control serves, in the words of the Pennsylvania Liquor Code, "for the protection of the public welfare, health, peace and morals of the people of the Commonwealth and to prohibit forever the open saloon, and all of the provisions of this act shall be liberally construed for the accomplishment of this purpose." But all control has proven to be is an inconvenience and annoyance to the citizens. Pennsylvania's record with underage drinking, alcoholism, and drunk driving is not significantly better or worse than neighboring states that have fully privatized wine and spirits sales. The State doesn't sell gasoline, guns, or prescription drugs: why does it sell wine and spirits?
If there is no benefit to the citizens in tax revenue, convenience, satisfaction, or safety, there is no compelling reason to continue with the State-controlled retail (or wholesale) of wine and spirits. Indeed, the State's image suffers from the accusations of favoritism and patronage that dog actions like the Solutions 21 contract and the non-competitive appointment of PLCB CEO Joe Conti.
It has been estimated that privatization would bring the State a windfall of over $1 billion from sale of product stocks and other assets, and the sale of new store licenses (and I would urge the Legislature to set up any new licensing structure to benefit the State rather than the holders of licenses; it angers me, as a taxpayer, every time I hear of a restaurant license sold for hundreds of thousands of dollars that the State should be getting). Even if that's generous, and the windfall is only $500 million, that would go a long way towards plugging the current budget deficit, and tax revenues should increase dramatically. It's a win for almost everyone, excepting current PLCB employees. Some of the windfall could perhaps go for early retirement packages and re-training for the clerks and managers, they could be given preference on other state jobs, and perhaps even low-interest loans to open their own, private stores.
There may never be a better time for privatization to succeed; times such as these favor bold solutions. Pennsylvania could find new jobs and new tax revenues while pleasing the majority of the citizenry. Please consider this in the coming session.
Sincerely,
Lewis Bryson
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
More People Upset by the PLCB's Latest Off-Pitch Idiocy
It's not just me that thinks the PLCB is crazy, stupid, and wasteful spending $173,000 of Pennsylvania taxpayers' money (in a budget crisis...) on teaching PLCB clerks to say 'hello' and 'thank you' (I hope they're not training them to say "Have a nice day!"). Check out this from the Chambersburg Public Opinion:
NBC affiliate WCAU/Channel 10 in Philadelphia had a proper response, and pointed out that Philadelphia's Department of Licenses & Inspections, another agency with a bad customer service reputation, was getting free customer service training, courtesy of the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in town.
The Lehigh Valley Express-Times was quite a bit more blunt about the whole thing:
But the PLCB -- and the lucky Buddy Hobart of Solutions 21 -- knew people might be skeptical (at least, skeptical of the program; looks like the whole nepotism thing caught them off-guard). From the initial story:
And Conti? "A vast adventure"? "We like that. It only makes us better"? Please! Spare me the happy talk. Learning to say "Please" and "Thank you" is not a vast adventure.
What you should be doing is creating a divestiture plan, a plan to make the most possible money for the State by dismantling the State Store System, selling off its assets, setting up a new licensing system for private liquor stores that will actually benefit the State instead of the store owners, and minimizing the impact on the PLCB clerks and the costs of privatization.
That would be a vast adventure worth taking.
But let us take our own stab at it.Much obliged.
Pennsylvania liquor store employees: When conducting transactions and serving customers during your work hours, be solicitous and respectful, smile, and always say please and thank you.
There! We just fulfilled the fundamental intent of this insane PLCB endeavor, and it cost you less than a buck.
NBC affiliate WCAU/Channel 10 in Philadelphia had a proper response, and pointed out that Philadelphia's Department of Licenses & Inspections, another agency with a bad customer service reputation, was getting free customer service training, courtesy of the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in town.
Shameful.Suuuuure there isn't!
Not only are you (the taxpayer) footing the $175,000 bill for a better experience at your local liquor store in Pennsylvania. Guess who gets that money? Turns out you're padding the pockets of a man who is married to one of the Liquor Control Board's top-level employees, according to the Inky. How convenient.
But there's no conflict.
The Lehigh Valley Express-Times was quite a bit more blunt about the whole thing:
Pennsylvania's antiquated system for selling booze and wine has been out of date for decades. But don't look for the state to give up the cash-cow system and its cache of patronage jobs anytime soon.Ouch!
Maybe the powerful bureaucrats can teach their brothers-in-law how to say hello and thank you before they get the job.
It would save us all a few bucks.
But the PLCB -- and the lucky Buddy Hobart of Solutions 21 -- knew people might be skeptical (at least, skeptical of the program; looks like the whole nepotism thing caught them off-guard). From the initial story:
"What I say to the skeptical," said Buddy Hobart, president of Solutions 21, "to those of us in the world who believe we've arrived and don't need to improve: Look up the word arrogant in the dictionary."Hello? What I say to the Buddy is that it's all about the money his firm is getting paid for these truly questionable services. Because no one on earth believes that the PLCB has "arrived" or doesn't need to improve. Actually, that's not quite true; as I've said before, I don't want the PLCB to improve, I want them to go away.
Added the LCB's Conti: "This is a vast adventure, and it's one we have to take. We know some people will critique us, but we like that. It only makes us better."
And Conti? "A vast adventure"? "We like that. It only makes us better"? Please! Spare me the happy talk. Learning to say "Please" and "Thank you" is not a vast adventure.
What you should be doing is creating a divestiture plan, a plan to make the most possible money for the State by dismantling the State Store System, selling off its assets, setting up a new licensing system for private liquor stores that will actually benefit the State instead of the store owners, and minimizing the impact on the PLCB clerks and the costs of privatization.
That would be a vast adventure worth taking.
Friday, February 13, 2009
One the Inquirer did print
Although the Inky didn't print my 'privatize the PLCB' letter you see below, they did print this one today, which brings up a beautiful point I've made here before. Maybe mine was too long...
Selling a monopoly
With the state trying to balance its budget in these difficult economic times, I would like to know why my tax dollars are being spent on radio advertising campaigns for the wine and spirit liquor stores in Pennsylvania. A monopoly in the marketplace, such as the Liquor Control Board, has no need to solicit for customers. By the way, this state-controlled business should be privatized.
Brenda Webster
Norristown
Go, Brenda! If you see letters like this in your local paper, send me a link. I'll get 'em up here.
(BTW, now that the blog's living and breathing again...I've got my regular reader from the State government in Harrisburg again. Good to have you back, hope you're taking notes! The word for today is privatize.)
Selling a monopoly
With the state trying to balance its budget in these difficult economic times, I would like to know why my tax dollars are being spent on radio advertising campaigns for the wine and spirit liquor stores in Pennsylvania. A monopoly in the marketplace, such as the Liquor Control Board, has no need to solicit for customers. By the way, this state-controlled business should be privatized.
Brenda Webster
Norristown
Go, Brenda! If you see letters like this in your local paper, send me a link. I'll get 'em up here.
(BTW, now that the blog's living and breathing again...I've got my regular reader from the State government in Harrisburg again. Good to have you back, hope you're taking notes! The word for today is privatize.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
