Alcohol Compliance Survey, May 2004
Second Class Licenses
| County |
# Licensees | Licensees that sold alcohol to minors |
Licensees that did not sell alcohol to minors |
| Addison |
3 | 1 | 33.3% |
2 | 66.7% |
| Bennington |
8 | 1 | 12.5% |
7 | 87.5% |
| Caledonia |
6 | 1 | 16.7% |
5 | 83.3% |
| Chittenden |
20 | 3 | 15.0% |
17 | 85.0% |
| Franklin |
2 | 0 | 0.0% |
2 | 100.0% |
| Lamoille |
2 | 0 | 0.0% |
2 | 100.0% |
| Orange |
5 | 0 | 0.0% |
5 | 100.0% |
| Orleans |
8 | 1 | 12.5% |
7 | 87.5% |
| Rutland |
13 | 3 | 23.1% |
10 | 76.9% |
| Washington |
11 | 0 | 0.0% |
11 | 100.0% |
| Windham |
15 | 3 | 20.0% |
12 | 80.0% |
| Windsor |
3 | 0 | 0.0% |
3 | 100.0% |
| TOTAL |
96 | 13 |
13.5% | 83 |
86.5% |
Of the 13 Second Class licensees who sold Alcohol products to a minor (17-20 years old), 11 requested valid photographic
identification from the minor and made the sale; 2 did not ask for identification.
