Who is a member?
Our members are the local governments of Massachusetts and their elected and appointed leadership.
Last December, Gov. Charlie Baker invited the municipal leaders of the Commonwealth to the State House as he unveiled his “municipal modernization” bill. As he and Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito listed the key provisions of the bill, none received more vocal support than the sections providing local control of liquor licenses.
Liquor licenses are considered an essential tool for economic development in communities, small and large, that are seeking to revitalize economically disadvantaged areas and bring new vibrancy to downtowns. But the state-controlled process to obtain licenses is lengthy and inefficient, local officials assert.
A beginning entrepreneur or small-business owner seeking to open a new restaurant or alcoholic establishment faces a nearly insurmountable array of challenges. They must first go to their local licensing authority. The licensing authority then publishes a legal notice within 10 days of the application. At least 10 days after the ad is posted, the applicant is granted a hearing. The local authority must act within 30 days of the filing date to approve or deny the application. Once the local board approves the application, it is sent to the Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission, which assigns an investigator to go over every aspect of the application, while also forwarding the application to the Department of Revenue and Department of Unemployment Insurance to investigate potential tax liabilities. The ABCC then goes through a lengthy review to determine approval or denial of licensure.
The process takes, on average, three months – if, and only if, there is a liquor license available.
If a license isn’t available, the municipality must ask the Legislature to approve a home rule petition granting an additional license for the new business – setting into motion an additional process.
The legislator for the municipality typically files the bill requesting the home rule petition. The bill is then assigned to a committee, where it is debated and eventually passed. It then receives a full vote by the Legislature and goes on to the governor for signature.
The Legislature receives many of these requests each year. In 2013, lawmakers approved 18 bills with a total of 40 licenses. In 2014, they approved 35 bills requesting 130 licenses. In 2015, the Legislature passed 19 bills for 22 new licenses.
Liquor license requests accounted for an average of 12 percent of all home rule petitions passed in 2013 through 2015 and have accounted for nearly 7 percent of all bills passed by the Legislature since 2001, according to an MMA analysis of legislative data.
Local officials argue that the time-consuming process is not efficient for municipalities, lawmakers, or the small businesses of the Commonwealth. For a business seeking to move to a community where there are no licenses available, the timeframe can stretch to over a year.
On top of the local licensing process, the MMA calculated that the average wait time for legislative approval was 7.5 months in 2013, 7.8 months in 2014, and 6 months in 2015 – though some requests waited much longer. The city of Gardner, when seeking approval for the popular Gardner Ale House, waited 11 months for legislative approval.
Local officials argue that they are in the best position to determine what’s needed in the communities they serve. Indeed, before the Legislature even hears their case, municipal officials have to go through the process of determining the impact an additional license would have on their communities.
A proposal to give cities and towns control over liquor licenses is part of H. 3906, currently before the Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government. There are also two active bills (H. 255 and S. 144), filed by the MMA, that would give communities control over liquor licenses.