Legislature(1995 - 1996)
02/21/1995 02:35 PM House ITT
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HITT - 02/21/95 HB 180 - LIQUOR LICENSES FOR HOTELS/RESORTS Number 030 REPRESENTATIVE JEANNETTE JAMES, PRIME SPONSOR, stated that HB 180 was a direct result of Michael Tittle, owner of McClaren River Lodge, and others being unable to obtain a liquor license within the Mat-Su Borough as his lodge does not have at least 40 rooms. This is a cooperative effort between remote lodge owners and the Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) Board to correct an inequity. Under current law, some small lodges which happen to be located in a remote corner of a large unified population area cannot get a liquor license. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES explained that the law now reads if a person wants to develop a small lodge or tourist facility in a remote or inaccessible area of the Mat-Su or Kenai Borough, the lodge would be required to have 40 rental rooms to obtain a full-service liquor license. This requirement is excessive and unfair. Without a liquor license, a lodge has very little chance of success. This is not a liquor issue; this is an effort to remove a roadblock created by an inequity in our laws. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES noted a letter from the ABC Board Director, Patrick Sharrock (may be found in the House International Trade and Tourism Committee Room, Capitol Building, Room 418, and after adjournment of the second session of the 19th Alaska State Legislature, in the Legislative Reference Library). She worked with the ABC Board to draft this legislation and the ABC Board is in support of it. The ABC Board knew of this loophole, but there wasn't anything the ABC Board could do about it. The exact wording of this bill allows a liquor license to "a hotel, motel, resort or similar business, that is inside a unified municipality or organized borough, has at least ten rooms available to the public for rent, and from the nearest first or second-class city or established village, cannot be reached by highway, or could be reached by highway during no more than 10 of the 12 months in the calendar year preceding the year in which the issuance or transfer is requested; in this paragraph, `highway' has the meaning given in AS 28.40.100." Number 089 REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER asked if she wanted to say on line 8, page two "a hotel, motel, resort, or similar business `outside' a unified municipality..." REPRESENTATIVE JAMES responded that's the problem. The existing law says if you are within a municipality, that [status] dictates how many rooms you have to have. There's not a problem currently with the people outside of an organized borough. Had Tittle's lodge been a mile further north, he would've been in the Denali borough. That borough's population is so low that he would have been able to get a license. The law is established by the population within the municipality. REPRESENTATIVE PORTER expressed concern for the effect on his district. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES doubted that a small business in Anchorage would meet the accessibility criteria that this bill covers. She reiterated the ABC Board's support. REPRESENTATIVE ALAN AUSTERMAN took exception to the sponsor's statement that lodges aren't likely to succeed without liquor licenses; that's not the case. Secondly, he had a lodge within his district that applied for a license. The problem was that the lodge was within a 20 minute-skiff ride from one of the villages. The village didn't have a liquor license within it and didn't want one that close. Number 147 REPRESENTATIVE JAMES said that since those villages have populations of less than 1500, this bill doesn't change anything for them. She recognized that the villages, as part of the Kodiak borough, would be held to the minimum number of rooms for Kodiak's population and then conceded that this bill may adversely affect his district. REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN said this bill lets anyone with 10 rooms available to the public obtain a liquor license. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES stressed that any issuance is an ABC Board decision, it's not automatic. In Tittle's case, the ABC Board was willing to issue the license, but was unable to under the existing law. Although someone might qualify, the ABC Board could still deny it. She emphasized they're only reducing the number of rooms that one has to provide to the traveling public. REPRESENTATIVE CAREN ROBINSON affirmed that the ABC Board makes thoroughly-researched decisions and feels that this is a minor change. REPRESENTATIVE PORTER would like to hear from the ABC Board. He agrees that while normal licensing has to meet many stringent requirements, this particular license is a convenience license as it is an exception to nine-tenths of those requirements. Once someone qualifies under this provision, i.e., the licensee is a felon, he'll get the license. Number 215 REPRESENTATIVE JAMES felt there's not a case wherein a license would be granted by the ABC Board over area residents' objections/opposition. REPRESENTATIVE PORTER responded that the way this is crafted, the ABC Board doesn't have a choice. In his experience, the board would only be beholden to meeting the requirement of the statute. If the statute requirements are met, that's it. A hundred people living in close proximity not liking it are not included for consideration by the ABC Board in this bill. CHAIRMAN BEVERLY MASEK noted that this bill will encourage economic development of small businesses in rural areas and offer incentives to tourists. She referenced the letter from Pat Sharrock and the support of the ABC Board. She asked Representative Porter what additional information he wanted from the Board. Number 269 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER wanted to know if this bill would provide someone in Anchorage with the opportunity to get a liquor license they otherwise would not be able to get. He doesn't want to pass a law that accommodates one person that has an adverse impact on ten others. REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN concurred in wanting to clarify his concern with the ABC Board. REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT reflected that this is a fairly isolated case. He further stated that under AS 04.11.400(d) it says, "The board `may' approve the issuance..."; it doesn't say shall. If those questions need to be answered by the ABC Board, they will be resolved in Labor and Commerce. They don't need to hold it up in this special committee. REPRESENTATIVE IRENE NICHOLIA felt the committee should resolve the questions before the ABC Board before passing it out of committee. REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON suggested that since they are not comfortable with passing this out of committee, they should get Mr. Sharrock on-line in the next meeting to settle these concerns to enable moving this next week. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT reiterated that this is a small issue. If this issue is in fact as serious as could be portrayed, then he would not be willing to push it out of Labor and Commerce. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES felt that if they passed this on to the next committee with their concerns put forth, that would move it along. CHAIRMAN MASEK moved to adopt the zero fiscal note. REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN moved that they forward this bill on to Community and Regional Affairs with individual recommendations and the zero fiscal note. Number 364 Hearing no objection, CHAIRMAN MASEK stated they will move this bill out of committee to Community and Regional Affairs.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|