The Buchanan City Council heard arguments in favor of a liquor-by-the-drink ordinance during their regular meeting on Tuesday.

According to Greg Poteet, the economic chair for Downtown Buchanan Revitalization and the Downtown Development Authority, the absence of an ordinance permitting the sale of liquor by the drink is hindering the city’s ability to attract new businesses, specifically low-impact, high-revenue restaurants.

“To me, this ordinance will allow other businesses to come in and it will put us on par with other cities, large and small, to go after the kind of restaurants that I think people want in this area,” Poteet said. “The bigger chain restaurants and the smaller mom-and-pop restaurants that serve alcohol.”

According to Poteet, some Buchanan restaurants support legalizing liquor by the drink. In previous meetings, Alex Melendez of Los Cowboy’s Restaurant has spoken in support of the ordinance.

“Also, the restaurants in town now, they want that, a couple of them want to be able to have alcohol sales for the drink,” Poteet said. “They were kind of promised it when they came into town several years ago.”

According to Poteet, the intersection of U.S. 27 and U.S. 120 averages approximately 1,500 cars per day, which meets the requirements of many chain restaurants, such as Applebee’s, Red Lobster and Longhorn Steakhouse. However, many of these restaurants will not build in Buchanan due to the prohibition on selling liquor by the drink.

Though Poteet stated that he could not guarantee liquor by the drink would attract new businesses, he stated that he knew of two restaurants that had declined to locate in Buchanan specifically due to its absence and that he could easily obtain more letters to that effect from restaurant owners.

Buchanan ordinances allow for the sale of liquor by the package, and, according to Poteet, liquor sales within city limits is nothing new.

“We’ve had alcohol sales, distilled spirits, in Buchanan for 30-plus years, longer than that, with the liquor store,” Poteet said. “It’s not like it’s something new to the area. The by-the-drink thing is now, but I think it would put us on par with other cities of our size to recruit other businesses.”

Buchanan residents voted down a liquor-by-the-drink ordinance in two previous referendums, with the last referendum failing by only seven votes. Poteet stated that if the council cannot place the referendum on the ballot for the Nov. 11 general election, then a called election should be held.

“I know that we talked that it may not be able to be put on a referendum this year, possibly next year, but I think we need to have a called election to put it together,” Poteet said. “We had talked that money may be an issue, but I think that there are businesses in the area who would donate to put this together if that’s legal.”

According to the council, a called election would cost approximately $2,000; however, it is not clear if local businesses could legally donate money to fund a city referendum.

There are two methods of placing the liquor-by-the-drink ordinance on the November ballot. Either the council can pass a motion to hold a referendum or 35 percent of registered and qualified Buchanan voters can sign a petition and force a referendum.

City council member Debbie Johnson summarized the opinion of absent council member Benjamin Westmoreland by stating, “Benny had said that since the citizens had voted it down twice, we shouldn’t put the money out unless we had 35 percent of registered voters,” Johnson said. “Which is kind of a valid argument.”

However, according to Poteet, it is unlikely that a group of citizens will work to gather signatures for a petition.

“I think the city council should realize that it could potentially make a big economic impact to the city of Buchanan. That’s what it boils down to,” said Poteet. “If you’re worried about the dollars, you’ll get the money back.”

The council could not vote on Poteet’s request, as council members Westmoreland and Donna Johnson were absent from the meeting. The city council is planning to hold a called meeting to address agenda items from their regular meeting on Tuesday. However, Poteet stated that it was unlikely that he would represent his argument again, which he summarized by stating:

“To me a restaurant is low-impact on the infrastructure, a little bit of water and a little bit of sewage, but it makes a great big impact in terms of liquor-by-the-drink fees, alcohol fees and beer and wine fees,” Poteet said. “To me it’s a win-win for the city.”