Ahh, the charms of living in a state with a rich history. So many things have their origins in those heady days of fleeing religious persecution and founding a new republic – our historic sites, our architecture, our laws…

Questions about the upcoming ballot initiative regarding wine sales in food stores prompted some investigation into the Massachusetts General Laws to figure out the current status of liquor sales regulations. The combined arcana of law, government and Puritanism make for quite an inscrutable document. Want a sample? Click here to learn how taxation “for the privilege” of selling alcohol is determined. Or click here to learn the conditions under which pharmacists may sell wine, beer and other alcoholic beverages as prescribed by doctors.

Pharmacists selling alcohol? Wine prescribed by doctors? Clearly a story for another day.

No surprise though that liquor sales are highly regulated in this state. Every detail related to its manufacture, importation, storage, transport and sale requires multi-level applications, approvals, permits and fees. The category at issue here is Chapter 138, Section 15: “the sale of alcoholic beverages not to be drunk on premises.”

The “not to be drunk on premises” part identifies this as the store license category, as opposed to Section 12, which deals with on-premises consumption, such as bars and restaurants.

In the store license category, there are currently two types: the “all-alcoholic beverages” license and the “wine and malt beverages only” license.

Where things get complicated is the determination of how many of each license are available. According to the law, “No person, firm, corporation, association, … shall be granted, in the aggregate, more than three such licenses in the commonwealth …” That explains why Whole Foods in Hadley sells beer and wine, but many other Whole Foods in the state do not. The law limits all entities to three licenses statewide, in any combination of the “all-alcoholic” and “wine and malt” types.

The question of how many licenses are available in a town or city is determined by a quota system based on population count from the most recent federal census.

According to an explanation of the quota law in the “Blue Book” document issued by the state’s Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission, “Each city or town may issue one off-premise (Section 15) all-alcoholic license for each unit of 5,000 persons (or fraction thereof) with a minimum of 2. One wine and malt license may be granted for each unit of 5,000 persons (or fraction thereof) with a minimum of 5.”

Amherst’s population, according to the 2000 census, was 34,874. According to the numbers above, that entitles the town to seven all-alcohol licenses and seven wine and malt licenses.

A quick check with Town Hall reveals that the town has eight all-alcohol licenses and seven wine and malt licenses.

Why is that? Because in 1990, Amherst’s census count was 35,228, making the town eligible for eight licenses. The quota isn’t reduced by a decrease in population if the license is in use, so the higher number prevails. However, if the holder of one of those all-alcohol licenses were to relinquish it, the current quota would revert to seven.

The eight holders of all-alcohol licenses in Amherst are: Amherst Wines & Spirits, Big Guys Liquors. R & P Package Store, Russell’s Package Store, South Amherst Liquor Mart, Spirit Haus, University Liquors and Watroba’s.

But of Amherst’s seven allowed wine and malt licenses, only two are in use – Cousin’s Food Market and Cushman General Store. That means there is potential for five additional stores in Amherst to be granted wine and malt licenses.

So how does the proposed new law – Question 1 on the ballot – figure into all of this?

If enacted, this law would create a third off-premises license category: “wine at food stores” licenses, which would be distinct from the “all-alcohol" and “wine and malt” licenses. According to the Elections Division of the Secretary of State’s office, the proposal defines food stores as “a retail vendor, such as a grocery store, supermarket, shop, club, outlet, or warehouse-type seller, that sells food to consumers to be eaten elsewhere (which must include meat, poultry, dairy products, eggs, fresh fruit and produce, and other specified items), and that may sell other items usually found in grocery stores.”

It too would be regulated by a quota system: five licenses for the first 5000 people, and one per each additional 5000 and fraction thereof. That would mean 11 potential wine-only licenses for qualifying establishments in Amherst. . A mini-mart at a gas station would not typically qualify for this proposed new license, but generally would qualify for the existing “wine and malt” license category, though it would then be subject to that category’s limitation of three statewide.

The text of the proposed law details how the new licenses would be subject to a statewide limit, but that it would be separate from and not counted as part of the “limit of three” or other existing quotas: “No license holder may hold more than ten percent of the total number of wine at food store licenses this section authorizes local authorities to issue throughout the commonwealth, but wine at food store licenses shall not be considered in applying any limits on the number of licenses this chapter otherwise authorizes applicants to hold or local licensing authorities to issue.”

The application process and oversight for the proposed new licenses would be exactly the same as for the existing licenses.

That’s more than most people ever cared to know about the minutiae of local liquor retailing. And yet, we haven’t even touched on the laws regarding the Select Board’s ability to suspend liquor sales “during times of riot or great public excitement.”

Maybe next time.

Resources for more information on these topics:

M.G.L. Section 38 – Alcoholic Beverages
Mass. Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission’s Blue Book
Proposed wine license law
Supporters of the proposed wine law
Opponents of the proposed wine law

-- Stephanie O’Keeffe