Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Industry Response topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Industry groups urge caution, say three‑mile standard would amount to a ban
Summary
Representatives of convenience-store and retail associations testified against CB62, saying a three‑mile minimum-distance rule could effectively bar future convenience‑store construction countywide and that modern convenience stores provide community services.
Two industry witnesses told the PHED committee that the proposed distance-based rule in CB62 risks an unintended, sweeping restriction on future convenience-store development.
Ellen Valentino of the Mid Atlantic Petroleum Distributors Association told the committee she saw modern convenience stores as evolving community nodes offering services such as SNAP acceptance and free Wi‑Fi; she warned that a three‑mile radius would function like “a ban” in the county’s geography. “Striking a shade over the convenience store industry... would be a tremendous disservice,” Valentino said.
Sarah Price of the Maryland Retailers Alliance said Draft 2 was an improvement over Draft 1 because it removed hours‑of‑operation limits, but she warned the committee against an industry‑wide cutoff. “It would ostensibly prohibit any future convenience store construction in the county,” Price said, and urged the committee to use existing enforcement tools before enacting a measure that could freeze current patterns of retail redevelopment.
Committee members thanked the speakers and said their testimony had been heard as the committee considered amendments and next steps.
