Rewriting state's liquor license
law is bound to stir up hard feelings
By Gordon Garnos
AT ISSUE: It was
recently announced that the South Dakota Legislature may tackle the
rewriting of the state's liquor license law during its next session
just a few months away. When it comes to changing laws relating to
booze there is bound to be a major squabble. A change in the license
law several years ago took away the "bottle clubs" as well as the
so-called "3.2" beer joints. And, as I recall, caused quite a
rumble. Yes, it probably negatively affected a number of businesses
in the state. But, right or wrong, life has gone on since then.
STATE LAW TODAY
says
the number of on-sale liquor licenses available to a community is
based on that town's population of the last census. The proposal for
this law to cap the number of licenses for a community was an
attempt by the state to better control the use of liquor. The "drys"
of the state wanted a much tighter cap on these licenses than the
Legislature decreed. The "wets" were disappointed for the state to
cancel the old law.
Nevertheless, life
has gone on with the new law. But the hue and cry out there now is
that with such limits on liquor licenses it is hurting the
community's attempts at economic development.
The proposed change
in the license law would remove the cap based on population and make
it a local option as to how many liquor licenses would be issued.
The new proposal surfaced during a recent meeting of a legislative
committee reviewing operations of the South Dakota Revenue and
Regulation Department. State Rep. Ed Olson of Mitchell was quoted at
the meeting as saying, "I would like to see the legislation (for
change), and I'll probably bring it myself..."
AS TO THE PRESENT cap
on licenses available being a barrier to economic development, this
argument may be legit as an industry looks at relocating to a South
Dakota community, the number of licensed restaurants are on the
wanted list. Economic development proponents say that with the
present cap, it is keeping the bigger chain restaurants from moving
here primarily because there isn't a liquor license available for
the price they are willing to pay.
The price for an
existing license in South Dakota can be several thousand dollars.
Usually, in a growing community, an existing license being available
for a reasonable price is not much more than a dream to those
wanting one. Municipalities issue the liquor licenses, but once
issued a license becomes a commodity and a major asset to the
holder.
MAKING THE ISSUING of
these licenses a local option has about as many benefits as problems
to a community. As the cry for more licenses goes out, the crying
from existing businesses is starting to be heard because these
licenses are considered an investment for the business. Very often
that license is the largest asset the business may have. I may note
here that the state's liquor industry is one of the strongest lobby
groups in a legislative session in South Dakota.
A community making
more licenses available will reduce the value of existing licenses,
cry current license holders. The bloggers in the state are already
hot on this issue. As one blogger recently wrote, "All investments
have inherent risks. When people buy these (liquor) licenses on
speculation, they assume all risk. Then so be it. The state owes
these people nothing more than the rights conferred to them as
license holders."
Another blogger
wrote, "The current system is broken. Limiting the number of
licenses by population doesnąt allow for different needs at the
local level..."
Still another noted,
"Liquor licenses should be just like any other trade license."
AS THE CRY FOR more
liquor licenses grows more intense, I'm just waiting to read more on
what the "drys" around the state are going to say. One state
senator, not necessarily a "dry," has already showed his opposition
to the local option issue. Senator Gene Abdallah of Sioux Falls
doesn't like the idea at all.
He was recently
quoted in that newspaper in the city near Harrisburg as saying, "We
have the third-highest alcohol highway fatality rate in the nation.
You want to issue more licenses? You want to make it possible for
more outlets to sell more liquor?"
He has a point there.
But, at the same time, it would also be possible, but maybe not
probable that local communities may even shorten the list of liquor
licenses that could be issued by them. Now, that's an interesting
point, isn't it? What ever happens to this proposal in Pierre
remains to be seen. But, what ever happens, life will go on in South
Dakota. Personally, I wouldn't bet either way on this one....
Gordon Garnos was long-time editor of the Watertown Public Opinion and
recently retired after 39 years with that newspaper. Garnos, a
lifelong resident of South Dakota except for his military service in the
U.S. Air Force, was born and raised in Presho.
