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.