Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverage Licensing Blog

Gov. Deval Patrick signed legislation allowing an extra liquor license for Natick so Tilly & Salvy's Bacon Street Farm can sell beer and wine, as encouraged by Natick Town Meeting and the Board of Selectmen last fall, reports patch.com.

Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick has signed legislation allowing Tilly & Salvy's Bacon Street Farm to sell beer and wine, which was not previously possible due to the smaller number of liquor licenses allowed in Natick.

"Tilly's is a Natick institution having served its residents for three generations," said Rep. David Linksy. "It is a well respected and well run local establishment and it is important that we support small businesses and help them meet the needs of their customers. I thank Governor Patrick for signing this important local bill into law."

Linksyy pushed for the legislation along with Sen. Karen Spilka and Rep. Alice Peisch at the request of Natick Town Meeting and the Board of Selectmen.

"Increasing the number of available liquor licenses will provide additional opportunities for economic development in the Town of Natick and ensure continued growth for this thriving community," said Spilka.

Town Meeting members voted in October 2011 in support of a home rule petition to allow a beer and wine license for Tilly & Salvy's, a popular family-run grocery store in town. At that time, many residents spoke in favor of allowing the additional beer and wine license, citing the Ciccarelli's proven positive track record in town, through three generations of ownership. Patch.com reports that Natick Wine & Spirits owner Peter Trulo spoke out against the petition, saying granting the additional license would benefit only one business and could set a dangerous precendent for any business hoping to request a liquor license from the town.

The Boston Globe reports that more than 75 local restaurant owners and residents gathered in front of Waltham's City Council Monday night to oppose adding 15 new liquor licenses to the town's existing 100 licenses.

They said the change could lead to unfair business advantages, depreciate the value of existing licenses, and change the character of Waltham.

If approved in a home rule petition to the state Legislature, the 15 new liquor licenses - 10 full alcohol, and five beer and wine - would be owned by the city and leased to large restaurant chains to keep pace with commercial development in certain areas, like the Watch Factory along the Charles River and certain areas of Totten Pond Road.

Waltham's current 100 alcohol licenses are bought by restaurant owners upfront - usually in the $100,000 range.

More than a dozen people spoke at the public hearing, most railing against the idea presented by the Licensing Commission. Some speakers stated that fifteen licenses will oversaturate the market. Many of those opposed were themselves owners of independently-operated restaurants.

Springfield Mayor Domenic Sarno is proposing a 1 a.m. closing time for all bars and clubs in the city, less than a month after a 1 a.m. curfew on entertainment in such establishments went into effect, as reported by the Springfield Republican.

Sarno is asking the city License Commission to consider a new 1 a.m. closing hour for local bars and clubs, believing the earlier hour would enhance public safety.

The idea drew immediate criticism from local lawyer Thomas J. Rooke, saying it would be the "final nail in the coffin" of local businesses.

Sarno's proposal occurs just two weeks after he imposed a 1 a.m. curfew on bar entertainment.

The curfew, which took effect April 7, allows bars to remain open until 2 a.m., the current closing hour, but requires them to turn off music, television sets and other forms of entertainment by 1 a.m., unless they obtain a "special late night entertainment permit." Ten restaurant-bars successfully applied for the late night permits.

Sarno said he is "supportive of a 1 a.m. closure," rather than the existing 2 a.m. closing time. The change, however, will require a public hearing and would need approval from the five-member License Commission, which is appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the City Council.

"I am in favor of an earlier closing time as it brings continued continuity to closing time and more importantly better overall public safety to visitors, our neighborhood residents and to the business community ...," Sarno said in a prepared statement.

The earlier time "will result into a much more thriving positive business and economic development climate," Sarno said.

The House of Representatives has advanced a bill that would allow package stores to open the day after Christmas - a measure that would remove one of the last remaining Colonial-era blue laws restricting alcohol sales.

Current state law requires package stores to close Monday when Christmas falls on a Sunday, which means package stores this year will need to stay closed for two consecutive days.

"This is one of the quirks in the blue laws we never fixed," said Jon Hurst, president of the Retailers Association of Massachusetts, as quoted by the Patriot Ledger.

Hurst said he hopes to see the bill pass the House and the Senate and be placed on Gov. Deval Patrick's desk soon to give stores ample opportunity to schedule employee shifts and advertise to customers that they will be open Dec. 26.

Stores are still required to be closed Christmas Day, but package stores were left out of the equation in 2005 when the Legislature clarified state laws to make clear that most retail establishments are allowed to open the day after Christmas when the holiday falls on a Sunday.

The once-restrictive Sunday and holiday retail laws in Massachusetts have taken nearly two decades to unravel starting in 1994, when voters approved a ballot question that allowed retail stores for the first time to open on Sundays throughout the year.

Package stores first earned the right to open on Sundays in 2003 when the Legislature voted to allow cities and towns to grant licenses for Sunday alcohol sales.

"There's no real reason why they shouldn't be selling alcohol on the day after Christmas," said Rep. Colleen Garry, D-Dracut, who sponsored the bill, as quoted by the Patriot Ledger. "There's nothing legitimate about it except that it's an old blue law, and this will put stores on a level playing field with surrounding communities in other states."

After alcohol industry insiders struck a deal to permit supermarkets and other large retailers to gradually acquire more alcoholic beverage licenses, their proposal sailed through the Legislature this month and Gov. Deval Patrick agreed to it this week, signing the new legislation.

Under the new law, sponsored by Sen. Michael Rodrigues, D-Westport, the cap on licenses per corporation would be lifted from three to five in 2012, up to seven in 2016, and to nine in 2020. The bill also would assess applicants $5,000 for every license in they obtain in excess of three. This enables supermarkets and liquor stores to increase the number of licenses that each company can hold.

In 2006, Massachusetts voters by a 53-41 margin rejected a ballot question permitting sales of wine at food stores. That question divided the electorate, drawing opposition from package stores and others fearful of increased underage drinking and increased drunk driving.

But the latest proposal spurred no debate or controversy on Beacon Hill. John Stasiowski, president of the Beer Distributors of Massachusetts, which opposed the 2006 ballot question, told the News Service in October that the bill does not create a new category of licenses, stays within the existing quota system and preserves the authority of local officials to approve licenses.

Rodrigues says the idea is to give consumers for buying alcoholic beverages.

"Consumers want choice and consumer want convenience," he said last
month. "In most states beer and wine are available anywhere, anyplace."

A Wellesley Special Town Meeting approved an article that moves the town closer to reducing the number of seats required by a restaurant to apply for a liquor license, as reported by boston.com and local Wellesley media.

Because this item was approved, the Board of Selectmen will now petition the state legislature to write special legislation which will authorize the board to grant special alcohol service licenses to restaurants with between 50 to 99 seats, according to the Advisory Committee's reports to Special Town Meeting.

Currently, a Wellesley restaurant must have 100 seats to qualify for a license to serve any alcohol.

There are now 12 licenses issued to restaurants and six to colleges and social clubs in town, which are each "all-alcohol" licenses. The state has capped the number of total possible liquor licenses for Wellesley at 29 all-alcohol and 12 wine and malt beverages (beer), according to the Virginia Ferko, chair of the Advisory Committee.

Selectman Katherine Babson said the board anticipates that it will only issue beer and wine licenses to restaurants with between 50 and 99 seats, despite the ability to dispense all-alcohol licenses.

According to Advisory Committee reports, the state legislature could act upon a petition as early as January or February of next year. Babson said this item will then likely take shape as a town ballot question during the spring election.

Babson said assuming the state signs off and the town votes to accept this change next year, the board will consider further changes to alcohol regulations after a sufficient public input process.

A proposal to allow bars and restaurants in Massachusetts to sell discounted drinks is on hold, according to its two backers.

Senators James Timilty (D-Walpole) and Robert Hedlund (R-Weymouth), who sponsored the so-called "Happy Hour" amendment, told the State House News Service they are recommending a conference committee spend the next year evaluating current alcohol regulations.

The amendment, passed in October, was attached to the bill that would legalize casinos in Massachusetts.

Critics, including Ron Bersani, claim bringing back "Happy Hours" would encourage drunken driving. Bersani, whose granddaughter was killed by a drunken driver, said the change would widen the availability of alcohol.

Bill supporters disagree. "I'm not so sure having promotional drinks or free drinks is any major inducement to drunk driving," said Sen. Stephen Brewer (D-Barre), chairman of the Ways and Means committee.

Sens. Timility and Hedlund say the original ban on drink discounts, enacted in 1984, did not cause any measurable change in the number of drunken driving-related crashes in Massachusetts.

The Senate has approved and sent to the House a bill that would allow supermarkets and other large retailers to hold more alcoholic beverage licenses. The proposal increases the current cap of three to five in 2012, seven in 2016 and nine in 2020. The measure also would require stores to pay a $5,000 fee for every license they receive above three.

The bill is considered a compromise between opposing sides of a possible 2012 ballot question that would allow local cities and towns to permit grocery stores to sell beer and wine. The ballot question is being pushed by the grocery store lobby, and opposed by the liquor store lobby.

In 2006, voters rejected by a 53-41 margin a similar ballot question that would allow local cities and towns to permit grocery stores to sell beer and wine. Proponents had argued that 34 other states allow this and argued it would end a monopoly and save consumers millions of dollars by fostering more competition. Opponents said the measure would increase underage teens' access to liquor and lead to a hike in drinking-related problems and drunken driving accidents and deaths.

WWLP.com reports that Senator Robert Hedlund, a Republican from Hingham, is backing away from his Senate-passed casino amendment that proposes to return Happy Hour to Massachusetts. Instead, he's suggesting that the Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission review its regulations on bars and restaurants and propose revisions.

Hedlund said the six-member casino bill conference committee tasked with consolidating the House and Senate versions of the expanded gaming bill can certainly make changes to his amendment.

The Hingham Republican's change of tone comes after facing criticism from the public for supporting stronger drunk driving penalties and also discounted drinks in bars and restaurants.

Hedlund says that a Happy Hour will not increase drunk driving statistics and it will help bars and restaurants compete with casinos. But he realizes his amendment is unpopular. Hedlund said the intent of his amendment is to help businesses attract customers and create jobs, and he's willing to try an alternative approach to achieve that end.

Interesting article in the Patriot Ledger about casinos, happy-hour laws, and whether the return of happy hour will have an impact on drunk driving.

The Massachusetts State Senate has included an amendment in their version of the casino bill allowing local bars and restaurants to once again have a "Happy Hour."

The amendment included in the State Senate's version of the Massachusetts expanded gambling bill would bring back "Happy Hour" in the Commonwealth, which has been banned since 1984, in part because of a desire to stem drunk driving incidents.

Currently, Massachusetts law forbids businesses from offering any free or discounted alcoholic beverages.

The new amendment is an attempt for legislators to give local restaurants and bars the same ability that casinos would have in order to compete.

The Massachusetts House of Representatives voted in favor of a casino gambling bill, passing it 132-32 on Sept. 14. The Senate passed their version of the bill 24-14.

But, even though the State Senate passed the bill, the Restaurant Equality Amendment (Happy Hour amendment) will be up for discussion when the Senate bill is reconciled with the House version. Then, Governor Deval Patrick would have to sign the bill into law.

Paul McMorrow had an interesting op-ed piece in Sunday's Globe opposing the amendment.

A Boston Magazine blog was in favor of the bill.

The Boston Globe reports that industry groups have struck a compromise to allow more grocery and package stores to sell alcohol.

I think this is wise. Currently, stores like Whole Foods or Trader Joe's, as well as liquor stores owned by the same company or person, can only sell alcohol at three locations across the entire state.

Under the agreement, the statewide cap on the number of liquor licenses store companies and individuals can own would gradually increase so that they can sell alcohol at more locations. The limit for these "off-premises" licenses, now three per company, would climb to five next year, to seven in 2016, and nine in 2020. Permits would require local approval.

A revised bill reflecting the new agreement was voted out of committee on Thursday, and could come before the full Legislature as soon as next week.

After a campaign over a 2006 ballot measure to allow more food stores to sell wine, supermarkets and liquor stores, along with beer and wine distributors, were reluctant to renew the battle, the Globe reported.

"It was a real motivator," said Jon Hurst, president of the state's retailers association. "It's a good compromise. I give both sides a lot of credit."

The 2006 ballot question was among the costliest in state history, with corporate interests spending more than $11.5 million spent to sway voters.

The measure, which was defeated 56 percent to 44 percent, would have allowed cities and towns to issue new licenses to grocery stores, and allowed them to hold an unlimited number.

The current legislation, however, works within the established quota system.

"It doesn't change the overall number of licenses, just the number you can hold," he said.

The raised cap on licenses would also give package stores more opportunity to grow, and increase the value of their current license should they decide to sell.

Critics have also raised concerns that teenagers will find it easier to buy alcohol from supermarkets than smaller liquor stores. Supporters say that with increased competition, customers will save money and enjoy increased convenience from one-stop shopping.

Good article in southcoasttoday about fake ID's going "high-tech," and the difficulty law enforcement and local business owners have in discerning which ID's are fake. Businesses may want to consider buying a machine that can read the license and help determine whether it is legitimate.

Faced with the realization that Brookline is running out of liquor licenses, an advisory committee is recommending that the town either ask the state for more, or abolish the quota system altogether, the Brookline Tab is reporting.

The Board of Selectmen appointed the license review committee a year ago to address the shortage of available licenses as well as update the town's current 20-year-old laws regarding how beer, wine and liquor can be served in restaurants. The town does not license any establishments to serve alcohol without food.

Under the rules set up by the state's Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission, Brookline is now allowed 63 full and 12 beer and wine only licenses - about one per 1,000 residents. The latest Census earned the city one additional full license.

The Tab reports that town officials are worried that if they run out of licenses, there will be delays in opening new restaurants. Also, if no licenses are available from the town, the existing licenses will become a valuable commodity to be bought and sold between restaurants.

West Tisbury diners on Martha's Vineyard could soon be sipping beer and wine in a popular vacation spot that has long banned the sale of alcohol. Residents of West Tisbury, a "dry'' island community on Martha's Vineyard, hope to decide at Town Meeting if restaurants there will be permitted to serve beer and wine with meals. The proposed ballot question would allow restaurants to serve it only to patrons dining at the establishment. Businesses in the town would still be prohibited from serving liquor.

The Legislature's State Administration and Regulatory Oversight Committee plans to vote to approve the ballot question at a hearing in Boston this week.