Richardson v. Richmond County

County commission's denial of plaintiffs' application for a beer and wine license was not arbitrary or capricious, because it was based on specific criteria set forth in county's code.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Richardson applied for a license for the off-premise retail sale of beer and wine at a convenience store Richardson proposed to build on Waynesboro Road in Richmond County. The site for the store1 is less than one mile from a high school and approximately two-tenths of a mile from an elementary school. Although Richardson’s application received a recommendation of approval from the Augusta-Richmond County Commission’s public services committee, the Commission denied the application after hearing from local residents who expressed concerns about the store’s proximity to schools, minors frequenting the store, increased traffic, and damage to the residential character of the neighborhood. The Commission denied the application relying upon the provisions set forth in § 6-2-65 a 4, 5, and 9 of the Augusta-Richmond County Code. After the Commission effectively denied Richardson’s motion for reconsideration, he petitioned the superior court for a writ of mandamus. The superior court ruled in favor of the Commission and Richardson appealed to this Court. Finding no error, we affirm.

1. Although Richardson contends that the standards articulated in § 6-2-65 a 5 and 9 of the Augusta-Richmond County Code are unconstitutionally vague,2 this Court has previously considered the challenged language and held that these provisions constitute “sufficient objective standards to control the discretion of the governing authority and adequate notice to applicants of the criteria for issuance of a license.” Punctuation and citation omitted. Chu v. Augusta-Richmond County, 269 Ga. 822, 825 1 504 SE2d 693 1998. Accordingly, we find no merit in these contentions.

Richardson v. Richmond County

County commission's denial of plaintiffs' application for a beer and wine license was not arbitrary or capricious, because it was based on specific criteria set forth in county's code.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report