Legislature(2013 - 2014)
04/07/2014 03:24 PM House L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB357 | |
| HB254 | |
| HB336 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 336-ALCOHOL SALES NEAR SCHOOL/CHURCH
4:18:17 PM
CHAIR OLSON announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 336, "An Act relating to sales of alcoholic
beverages near a school or church."
4:18:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GERAN TARR, Alaska State Legislature, stated that
HB 336 will increase the buffer between premises selling liquor
and schools or churches from 200 to 400 feet. In response to a
question, she acknowledged the bill is not retroactive.
4:19:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT asked how many facilities currently lie
within 200-400 feet of school or church facilities.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR said the department only tracks the current
restrictions, which prohibit alcohol sales within 200 feet of
schools or churches. In response to a question, she agreed that
any existing facility would not be affected, but it would limit
new establishments to 400 feet.
4:20:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT related a scenario in which a church
moves into a mall with a liquor store or bar. He asked how this
bill would affect the existing liquor store or bar.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR answered it would be prohibited within 400
feet of the entrance. She explained the calculations, which may
include walking to the sidewalk, crossing a street, and resuming
walking on a sidewalk so the measurements mirror the typical
pathway to travel to and from the establishment.
4:21:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT related a scenario in which a new
charter school moves into a neighborhood strip mall. He asked
whether the onus would be on the school to find another place or
if the existing alcohol establishment would be displaced.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR answered that the charter school would need
to pick a different location.
4:22:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD related that some charter schools meet
temporarily in churches. She asked for clarification on the
measurement and if it is door to door or from the property line.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR answered by reading language [Section 1,
page 2, lines 13-15], for the restriction, which read: "(B) the
premises would be located in a building having a public entrance
within 400 [200] feet of the boundary line of a school or a
church building in which religious services are being regularly
conducted;...." She clarified that current law is 200 feet and
this bill would increase the limit to 400 feet.
4:23:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD said that there could be a big
difference between door to door and driveway. She asked if the
entrance means the physical entrance or the driveway entrance.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR recalled discussing this point with the
department and related that it viewed it as "door to door" and
not "as the crow flies" or the shortest distance. It would
include the distance and route a person would take to travel
from one establishment to the other.
4:24:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked for further clarification that it
would be a door to door measurement.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR agreed. She read [page 2, lines 6-8] of HB
336, which read, "... is measured from the outer boundary line
of the school or the public entrance of the church building by
the shortest pedestrian route to the nearest public entrance of
the restaurant or eating place;". She highlighted that the
aforementioned is existing language in statute and reflects the
current measurement.
4:24:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON asked if a school could waive this.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR answered no. The intent of the bill is to
extend a buffer for all future schools and churches and it would
apply to both schools and churches.
4:25:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER expressed concern that this bill
represents a statewide solution to a local problem. He said
that this bill might put distance between schools and liquor
establishments, but this bill does not address or fix
alcoholism. It just puts the problem farther out of sight. He
suggested it could be argued that allowing children to see the
effects of alcohol abuse would be a disincentive to take up
drinking. He stated he was glad that bill would only apply to
future construction and is not retroactive. He indicated his
intent and desire is not to have someone come back to the
legislature and expand the buffer and require bars be moved. He
acknowledged that the bill would protect some kids.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR said she appreciated his comments. She
acknowledged the importance of not getting ahead of what the
bill might do. She offered her hope that this bill might be a
part of a bigger effort on the issues of alcoholism although
this bill does not address it.
4:27:00 PM
CHAIR OLSON answered that some of the larger churches have
parking lots which extend to 400 feet. He suggested that 400
feet is probably a good compromise.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR reported that most other states have buffers
greater than 200 feet, with 200 feet being at the low end, and
1,000 feet at upper range. The other states also had a variety
of ways to measure the distance. She stated that Alaska is on
lower end for buffers, which is one reason for the bill.
4:27:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON asked whether the Cabaret, Hotel,
Restaurant & Retailer's Association (CHARR) has taken a position
on this bill.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR answered no. She said that she has been in
close contact with CHARR and does not want this bill to be anti-
business. She related her understanding that the business
owners are responsible and everyone is trying to work on the
same problems without placing fault on anyone. She has kept
CHARR informed and to date no one has responded in that way.
CHAIR OLSON surmised that if the restriction had been increased
to 500 feet or 1,000 feet that someone from CHARR would be
testifying.
4:28:58 PM
CHAIR OLSON, after first determining no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on HB 336.
4:29:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked whether any church groups have
"weighed in" on the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR responded that this bill would affect future
establishments, but she checked with churches but since the bill
doesn't directly impact these churches, it wasn't a concern.
4:29:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD wondered how it affects youth meeting in
churches. She was unsure if the organization would be impacted.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR referred to page 1, lines 14-15, to language
which states, in part, " ... or a church building in which
religious services are being regularly conducted; ...." She
offered her belief that it is enforced based on a building but
not on church youth ministry meeting in a building.
4:30:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON asked whether restaurants that serve
beer and wine would be subject to the additional restrictions
under the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR answered yes, for future locations near a
school or church.
4:31:06 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON related his understanding that
establishments with liquor licenses shouldn't be located within
400 feet of a school or church. He asked how the bill would
affect a church or a school that wants to move into a mall. He
wondered if the liquor license could be renewed.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked for clarification on the question.
CHAIR OLSON suggested clarification on the effect of liquor
license renewals if a school or church moves within 400 feet of
an establishment.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR related her understanding that the liquor
license owner would not be affected. She clarified that the
owner would be "grandfathered in" as an existing licensee. She
believed it would be the church's responsibility to find a
location that is outside the 400 feet.
CHAIR OLSON related his understanding that the church can't
argue against the liquor license renewal if it moved in.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR agreed. She stated that the church would
need to follow the 400-foot buffer.
4:33:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON pointed out that the bill doesn't clearly
state this but only discusses the liquor premises not being
closer than 400 feet to a school or church. He said he
appreciated the intent of the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR explained that [the 200-foot] buffer is
existing statute so it is the way it's being enforced now. She
surmised that when the existing statute was passed it must have
been the most appropriate way to insert the boundaries.
4:34:35 PM
CHAIR OLSON related his understanding that the bill addresses
relocation of the liquor establishment to the church.
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON agreed, but referred to Section 2 line 12,
which relates to restriction of location near churches and
schools. He asked why this language doesn't also provide a
restriction of location near liquor stores.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR responded that these changes fall under the
alcohol section of the statutes. Thus, the context is from the
perspective of the liquor licensees and the owner's relationship
with the church and school. She suggested different statutes
might focus on the perspective of schools or churches.
The committee took an at-ease from 4:35 p.m. to 4:42 p.m.
4:42:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON, as a follow-up to Representative
Chenault's question, asked whether a church or school must
consider being outside a 400-foot buffer from a licensed liquor
establishment under the bill.
SHIRLEY COTE, Director, Alcoholic Beverage Control Board (ABC
Board), Department of Commerce, Community & Economic
Development, explained that under current law if a licensed
premise is at a location and a church or school wants to move
within 200 feet of the premise that the decision would be up to
the church or school to decide. She said that the ABC Board
doesn't have anything in place that would require a licensee to
move out of the location since the business was established in
its location prior to the school or church moving in. She said
that the board would make those types of decisions and it could
be a consideration at the time of liquor license renewal if
objections or protests arise. She acknowledged that mechanisms
are in place if issues or problems arise. However, currently if
a church or school has moved within the prohibited buffer zone,
the board has not made the licensee shut down its business.
4:44:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT related his understanding that even if
the law changed to 400 feet, if a church chose to locate within
that distance it would not affect the liquor licensee unless the
church subsequently decided it didn't like the alcohol sales
nearby and petitioned the ABC Board to try to make liquor
license owners move its establishment. He asked whether this
has happened or could happen.
MS. COTE answered that this has not happened although it doesn't
mean it can't happen. She indicated that every other year
during license renewal any person, including a locally governing
body, can object to the renewal and the board would take it
under consideration.
4:46:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT asked whether a large church could move
within 200 feet or 400 feet of a liquor establishment and create
enough local pressure to cause problems for the liquor license
holder and the establishment could be forced to relocate.
MS. COTE said it is a possibility, in particular, if issues or
problems later arose, that the church could come to the board
and it would consider the issue during renewal, although she did
not recall any situation where that has happened.
4:47:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT recalled reading in an Anchorage paper
that a liquor store was having problems, but he was unsure if it
was a church, school, or local community that had objected. He
did not recall the details but he imagined that public testimony
would be considered by the board.
MS. COTE recalled situations in which a licensed premise would
be well outside the 200 feet but noted if the public outcry has
been substantial the liquor license renewal has not been
approved. She noted that this type of action could happen
regardless of the distance to a school or church.
4:48:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER related his understanding that a church
could raise issues which could affect liquor license renewal.
However, this bill addresses a geographical distance. He
wondered if a church moved within 200 or 400 feet of a business
if the business and church could coexist just fine, but during
the license renewal may raise an objection. He asked whether
the aforementioned objection could be based solely on proximity.
MS. COTE answered yes. She said that even with a new liquor
license application objections could certainly be raised.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked whether anything in state statute
other than renewal provisions would ban a church from moving
into within 200 or 400 feet of [a bar].
MS. COTE answered that is correct.
4:49:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD recalled that local government has
bought out space in malls. She related a scenario in which
government entities, such as a school district or perhaps a
preschool moves into a mall. She asked whether this would
impact preschools and if preschools are considered schools.
MS. COTE said preschools are considered schools. In further
response to a question, Ms. Cote indicated if the licensed
premises were already on location and the school or church moved
in, it would be the school or church's decision to do so. She
indicated that in her experience licensees do not want to lose
their liquor licenses so the owners tend to work to address any
issues. She said if a school subsequently raised an issue about
any premise that ABC Board would consider the issue at the time
of the liquor license renewal.
4:52:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD commented that it is important to
address this issue and identify any parties impacted.
4:52:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON said it seems as though a school or
church could decide to locate within 400 feet of a liquor
establishment, but it couldn't then question the premise selling
liquor located within 400 feet of the school. However, the
school could raise some other issue at the time of the liquor
license renewal. He reiterated that the school or church
couldn't raise the proximity argument since it was created by
the school or church.
MS. COTE answered yes; however, the school could raise the issue
if a problem arises. She said that the board would work with
the licensee to correct any problem, for example, if complaints
arose that underage persons were being served. She said that it
would take a great deal to revoke an active liquor license on a
mere objection. She said, "I mean it just doesn't happen."
4:54:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD moved to report HB 336 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
note. There being no objection, HB 336 was reported from the
House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|