A proposed gun and pawn shop planned for Eureka Springs didn’t get enough votes from the city’s planning commission to receive the needed Conditional Use Permit, but an appeal of the decision is expected.

At a special called meeting on Tuesday, May 23, the planning commission voted 3-3 on a CUP application from Eureka Gun and Pawn, LLC, proposed for a strip mall located at 3022 E. Van Buren. Four votes are needed to approve an item.

Keeling Grubb, who owns Metal Feathers in the same complex as the proposed pawn and gun store, presented his plan of a business that would sell firearms, many of which are collectables, while buying “anything of value.”

“We’re not doing a conventional pawnshop,” Grubb said. “We are not looking to pawn bicycles, lawnmowers and junk. We’re only going to pawn firearms, gold and silver, and we will buy anything of value. We see a big need in our shopping center. … There’s people hurting for money, it looks like, all over Eureka at this time. They cannot get a conventional loan here in town because a majority of them do not have a normal job that a bank is going to consider for them to get a loan.”

Grubb said things sold to his store would be placed in one of the several flea markets in the area.

“We’re not going to have boats, cars, junk sitting out front of the store,” he said. “It’s not going to happen.”

The store would have sporting goods items such as tents, sleeping bags, backpacks and freeze-dried food, Grubb said.

“We’re also trying to get fishing poles,” he said. “We have people all the time trying to by a fishing pole in Eureka and there is not one place to buy one if you’re here to spend the weekend. So we’re going to have fishing poles and everything you would use in the outdoors.”

The main part of the business, however, would be firearms, Grubbs said.

“We’re not going to carry $100 guns,” he said. “I’ve got a pretty extensive gun collection currently and we’re looking to have a more collectible grade of firearms. Of course, if someone brings something in to pawn, and if it’s a firearm and if you make a deal, you make a deal. If it’s something that fits what we’re going to sell, it’ll be cleaned and put on our shelf. If it won’t, it’ll be cleaned and put on the internet and sold and shipped off somewhere.”

Grubb said he’s already gotten approval from the ATF for his planned business, including security measures.

However, some commissioners, along with residents who live nearby, voiced their opposition to selling guns in Eureka Springs.

Clyde Leach, who lives on Shelton Drive, a street just off East Van Buren and just east of where Grubb’s shop would be located, said there are ample places to purchase firearms in nearby communities.

“I don’t like the idea of having a gun shop,” Leach told commissioners. “It’s a temptation for a rowdy crowd to break in and it’s a residential area. I just don’t think we need a gun shop in Eureka Springs. There’s a big gun dealer in Busch … and there’s three gun dealers in Berryville. So, I think if somebody needed guns, they could certainly get some.”

Two letters in opposition were also read while one letter from the owner of Common Sense Technology, also located in the same building as the proposed shop, voiced an opinion “strongly in favor” of the business.

Commissioner Ferguson Stewart, who along with Tom Buford and chair Susan Harman voted in favor of the business, agreed with Grubb that a pawn-type business was needed in the city.

“I deal with a community of individuals that usually don’t have normal jobs and they can’t get loans from banks,” Stewart said. “You’re right, there is a need here. I think your business is timely in terms of what we’re going to be going into this year, I think.”

Grubb said people who are in financial need aren’t going to be able to drive to another city to make a deal.

“They don’t have the money to drive to Berryville, to Green Forest, to Rogers, to Fayetteville to see who is going to give them the best deal because the $20, $50, $100 you give them is all the money they have to their name,” Grubb said. “Otherwise they’re going to go somewhere and sell something that’s worth $100 or $500 for $20 or $50 because that’s all they can get offered to them.

“This way you can make them a decent offer for their merchandise and they have a chance to come back in 30 days and pick it up.”

Commissioner Peter Graham, who along with Ann Tandy-Sallee and Joe Hill voted against the CUP, questioned Grubb about background check waits and a possible increase in thefts for people desperately needing to sell or pawn things to make money.

Grubb said in order to sell or pawn something, extensive identification is required while the business would follow all laws regarding background checks on firearms.

“If you do the background check and the ATF tells us to proceed then we’re going to sell you a firearm and you can walk out,” Grubb said. “Now, they could also tell us to hold it for seven days, three days, 10 days, and they can tell you that you’re on hold and then they can call us back in that 10 days and tell us it’s OK to proceed with the sale. Or, they can call us back and tell us it’s not OK to proceed, that it’s denied.”

Graham said he did like a lot of the other things Grubb’s business model had to offer.

“I do believe that all the other aspects of the company that you did mention, I think, is very valuable in this community,” Graham said. “The camping gear, the fishing gear, the gold and silver.

“My priority here is look out for the safety and well-being of the community…” Hill said he is not in favor of a business selling guns.

“I don’t have a problem with pawnshops … but I do have problems with selling guns,” Hill said.

Grubb responded: “Can I ask why you have a problem selling guns?”

“Well, it sounds like there’s plenty of those around and it’s the fact we live in a special community,” Hill answered. “I just don’t think folks … for me, I just don’t think it’s a great idea.”

Grubb said he felt a business like the one he’s proposing would be a big boost to the city’s sales tax.

“I’m not going to lie to you, we’re estimating a couple of million dollars in sales right off the first year,” he said. “We have a lot of guns that are going to be $10,000, $20,000 that I’ve had for several years. It’s not $200 and $300 sales. I mean, we’re selling collector guns. And a lot of stuff that we have will be online for sale that won’t be shown in a display case.

“The tax incentive on that, I would think for Eureka, would be great.”

Grubb did say that “machine guns” or “suppressors” wouldn’t be sold in the shop, but if the shop purchased one it would be sent to Florida to be sold to a dealer that “does nothing but machine guns.”

ATTEMPT TO DELAY VOTE Stewart made the motion to approve the CUP in a vote that wouldn’t have happened if Tandy- Sallee had gotten her way.

Tandy-Sallee said the agenda for the special meeting did not clearly state to the public specifics about the CUP application and that the topic should have been deferred so the public could clearly understand what was being planned and have time to voice their opinion.

“I would like to make a motion that we postpone this,” she said at the n

beginning of the special meeting. “On the city’s website, it lists the application as ‘a CUP for 3022 East Van Buren.’ It does not list what the CUP is for. I think the public needs to be more notified and we will have to have a public hearing on this since it’s a CUP and I would like to hold off until our next meeting.”

Harman said if anyone questioned the type of CUP they could have inquired more about it.

“Technically, if I wanted to know more about it, I would have a couple of choices,” Harman said. “I would either say, ‘I don’t know what it’s about’ and I could call City Hall and say, ‘What’s exactly the CUP for?’ ” Tandy-Sallee said when most people see CUP on an agenda they likely think of lodging requests.

“I mean, how many CUPs do we do that are not tourist lodging?” Tandy Sallee said. “I just think the public has the right to know exactly what this is and to be able to come back with comments if they so choose.”

Tandy-Sallee’s motion to delay the discussion and vote failed to receive a second and the meeting continued.