• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Spokane Mission St liquor store

hermannr

hermannr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,327
Location
Okanogan Highland
However, in Sequim, it was leesed use of government owned facility. (even if I do not agree with the court decision)

The contract liquor store is not a government owned building. One other difference, contract is silent on customer, only puts requirements on the contractor.

If I was to contract a liquor store, I do not think I would sign that contract unless the contractor firearms clause was stricken. I would argue as you did with Yakima Co. I don't think they can legally do that.
 
amlevin

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
hermannr said:
However, in Sequim, it was leesed use of government owned facility. (even if I do not agree with the court decision)

The contract liquor store is not a government owned building. One other difference, contract is silent on customer, only puts requirements on the contractor.

If I was to contract a liquor store, I do not think I would sign that contract unless the contractor firearms clause was stricken. I would argue as you did with Yakima Co. I don't think they can legally do that.
Click to expand...

When the WSLCB controls whether or not you get that contract, based on their terms, you either sign or you don't get the store. There is no "Right" to a contract.
 
BigDave

BigDave

Opt-Out Members
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
3,456
Location
Yakima, Washington, USA
amlevin said:
When the WSLCB controls whether or not you get that contract, based on their terms, you either sign or you don't get the store. There is no "Right" to a contract.
Click to expand...

And I guess this is where the rub is, why is a State Agency not conforming to our WA State Const and State Law in these contracts along with employees for that matter?

The issue I am dealing with right now ie Correctional Facilities in WA State are in violation of State Law since the inception of the statute in 1979, why from what I can tell, because no one pushed the issue.

Just because they are doing it does not make it legal nor right even though the public seems to accept status quo.

In this case I would not pursue as I stated before. Post #18
 
Last edited:
hermannr

hermannr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,327
Location
Okanogan Highland
All contracts are negotiable, with the state or otherwise. One sided contract conditions that are imposed are by the larger entity upon the smaller entity can be declared invalid. (if you want to fight it out in court) UCC has very specific rules of engagement, that give the small guy some muscle when negotiating with a larger bully entity.

If there is no valid legal reason for the state to impose the "no guns retained in store by contractor", you just strike that section out, initial it, sign it, and send it back. If the accept it, they have accepted the change you made. If they don't accept the change, they have to come up with a reason.
 
amlevin

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
hermannr said:
All contracts are negotiable, with the state or otherwise. One sided contract conditions that are imposed are by the larger entity upon the smaller entity can be declared invalid. (if you want to fight it out in court) UCC has very specific rules of engagement, that give the small guy some muscle when negotiating with a larger bully entity.

If there is no valid legal reason for the state to impose the "no guns retained in store by contractor", you just strike that section out, initial it, sign it, and send it back. If the accept it, they have accepted the change you made. If they don't accept the change, they have to come up with a reason.
Click to expand...

Just remember that you are dealing with a State Monopoly when it comes to liquor. By definition that will be a one sided transaction. Good luck on getting that voided.
 
hermannr

hermannr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,327
Location
Okanogan Highland
A lot easier to amend the contract before it is signed, rather than after. A simple strike through can rid a contract of almost everything, if done before you sign.
 
amlevin

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
hermannr said:
A lot easier to amend the contract before it is signed, rather than after. A simple strike through can rid a contract of almost everything, if done before you sign.
Click to expand...

And then the State refuses to sign it. The Liquor Store then goes to someone else. Ever notice how contracts are submitted to the Lesse UNSIGNED. You have to sign first.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top