This week’s column is a response to a post made to a thread entitled “State enforcement agency admits that Branson Landing kiosk beer permit vague,” that the Ole Seagull started in the forum of a website he is involved with, www.1Branson.com. The post is under the topic “Other Branson/Tri-Lakes Issues,” was posted on July 26 and has had 27 posts and 309 views as this is being written. The topic is so very timely and pertinent to the events currently going on within the city of Branson that the Ole Seagull wanted to share it with the whole community through the printed medium rather than simply posting it on line to a relatively small segment of that community.
The post is made by an individual who has identified themselves as BransonMoTiger. It very concisely and tightly discusses the alcohol issue that is currently being addressed within our community and asks an apparently rhetorical question about how one can then blame the city administrator and current city attorney “in this so called “liqueor-gate?”
BransonMoTiger then goes on to answer their own question by saying, “Because those who are complaining the loudest are those who either (1) made a campaign pledge as a candidate to, when elected, fire the city administrator and attorney or (2) citizens who supported candidates who promised to do the “firing” if elected.” Oh really, was it even a “candidate” that brought the issue up recently or was it a citizen, during a “Public Comment Meeting” of the board, that had a specific concern? Were the Ole Seagull a betting Seagull he would bet that, at this juncture, BransonMoTiger doesn’t even know the name of that person let alone who they supported in the election.
Even a cursory review of the recordings of the recent meetings, discussing the issue of beer being consumed on the public access areas of Branson Landing, will indicate that one of the most outspoken and sincere individuals regarding this issue is Alderman Jack Purvis. Obviously, as a board member not up for reelection he was not a candidate and surely, BransonMoTiger has to know, or should know, that, to put it mildly, Purvis was not a citizen who, assuming that a candidate did, would have supported any candidate who promised to fire either Dody or Link.
Indeed, is it even possible that Purvis himself also brought up the issue of people carrying open containers of beer at least once prior to the election? And what was the reason no action was taken on his concern at that time?
BransonMoTiger then continues, “Ultimately, the alcohol issue is not important to the “new slate” of aldermen and mayor, who are not driven by a Carrie Nation type of prohibition frenzy.” What is the basis for BransonMoTiger’s conclusion that “the alcohol issue is not important to the “new slate” of aldermen and mayor? Why would it be any more or less important to them than the other three aldermen? You know, the ones who make up the rest of the very board of aldermen that, according to a July 23 press release issued by the city of Branson, unanimously voted and “passed a motion to review and strengthen the city’s liquor ordinances.”
The post continues by stating, “They are just looking for a supposed reason to fire Terry Doty and Paul Link.” That seems contradictory to what the city’s press release says as it goes on to state, “The motion, which unanimously passed, would set up a community task force to review current liquor ordinances for greater control, check other cities’ liquor control ordinances, and then make a recommendation back to the aldermen. The Board also wants to eventually form a city liquor control commission to enforce state and municipal liquor laws.”
To an Ole Seagull, the boards handling of this issue in the professional and efficient manner that it did, in spite of the contradictory advice received from both Dody and Link, speaks for itself and had nothing to do with the firing of either. One would hope, regardless of the outcome, that should such firing become an issue in the future that the board would handle that issue in the same professional and efficient manner.
