2021-06-28 00:00:00 - CPPL Hearing 5

2021-06-28 00:00:00 - CPPL Hearing 5

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE


ROBERT MELLION - MASSACHUSETTS PACKAGE STORES ASSOCIATION - SB 247 - SB 196 - Thank you, Chairman Chan and thank you honorable members of the joint committee. You're seeing a lot of me, unfortunately, and that's because there are over 80 Bills that are going to be appearing before you this session that directly impact the alcohol beverages industry as it relates to retail, and that's of about 137 Bills that are impacting our industry. So it's in this context of disruption that MPSA so strongly opposes S 196 and S 247, these are the drinks to go provisions. I say, drinks to go because it's important to clarify before this joint committee that this is not cocktails to go, it is drinks to go as it is written into the statutes. It is not just about restaurants, breweries, tap rooms247 and distillers are all able to do drinks to go under these provisions, they are all now retailers off premise and that's the problem here.

So we have taken Chapter 138 which intentionally divided Section 15 licenses, Section 12 licenses and Section 19 licenses from intermingling and competing against one another and we have taken that aside and we have now created thousands of additional outlets for serving alcohol off the premise and it is having an impact, it is having an impact on the retail trades, it is creating unnecessary competition between off and on premise and producers leading to vertical integration, which is creating additional problems in this industry and it is having health consequences, has substance abuse consequences in the commonwealth and across the country. This is not hyperbole, you're going to hear me talking about this because someone needs to and it's important because the off premise trades care deeply about public safety so much so that I'm the administrator of the alcohol beverage training course for the entire state.

I have a training tomorrow with three329 stores with about 50 people that I'm going to be doing and it's concerning because we are seeing real tangible consequences to expanding alcohol outlets in the state. First, we have seen that Alcohol consumption across the country has increased materially since 2019 going into 2020. Those increases have been noted by they have been noted by prevention magazine and they are getting noted in other publications across the country, it is coming out now because these studies were going on during 2020 and now they're getting released and372 what's coming out is that we are seeing substantive rises in alcohol consumption. Overall, 14% increase from last year has been noted amongst the people across the country. We have seen in binge drinking for women, an increase of 41%.

We have also seen increase in and this is alarming to our industry, we have seen an increase in underage drinking here in the Commonwealth and across the country, that increase is notable because it was going down for 10 years prior to us loosening up our regulations in the state and across the country. Consequences, we're also seeing an increase in DUIs, there were 38,000 fatalities last year in DUIs, and ironically at a time when people were 13% driving less. These are the427 consequences and they're going to be more and we ask that we sensibly stop with these moves towards deregulation and put an end to drinks to go after the provisions expire next year. Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify before you today. Please feel free to ask us any450 questions regarding alcohol beverages industry and any questions concerning these Bills. Thank you again.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE


REP GOUVIEA - Thank you for your testimony. Really truly appreciate you480 being here. You may or may not know that I have an extensive background in addiction prevention, substance abuse prevention, so some of the things that you've highlighted here do resonate with me, but I do have a question as it relates to the data that you just cited. How do you know that it was drinks to497 go that contributed to the increase because in my501 circles, particularly being a woman in my 40s, knowing how much women and moms have struggled through the pandemic, I am not so sure that they're accessing their alcohol from restaurants and then taking it to go but probably visiting a lot of the folks who are members. So do you have more detailed data or is this just a little bit of kind of making some assumptions? So I just would love to understand that data more.

MELLION - It's not making assumptions, there's a great article that was written by it was actually published in JAMA. The article was entitled changes in adult alcohol use and consequences during COVID-19 pandemic in the541 United States where they actually site the loosening of regulations and the only loosening of regulations that have been going on throughout the pandemic was cocktails to go. In their article they cite that in comparison of what had happened, a snapshot of559 the industry in 2018 and 2019, and then looking at 2020 they had observed a 14% increase in alcohol consumption, they570 had570 observed the 41 of increase in women consuming alcohol and binge drinking, binge drink is more than four drinks an hour, that's all cited in that JAMA article. The same thing in prevention magazine, they produced a recent survey and in their survey they were showing ties to substance abuse as well and the same thing, it was the center for alcohol, I have to look that up, and they were the ones who came up with the data on the 10 years of declining alcohol policy. Yes. So they were the ones who had noticed that alcohol consumption amongst minors have been decreasing for the past decade and noticed the rise of minors consuming alcohol, we're at a 20 year high here in 2021. So that's where the data comes from.

GOUVEIA - Got you. So did they control for confounders that, you know, more people at home people not going out? Like I understand that the timing is such that there was a change in in a lifting649 of some of these restrictions but I'm still wondering and I'd love to see the paper, if you could share that with the committee, I'd love to understand that.

MELLION - I have sent, all of these articles that I've cited have been sent to your office is multiple times when I testimony. I can resend to this committee along with several other articles too.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE


SEN DIZOGLIO - SB 196 - Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, and through you to the members. I am testifying today in support of the Bill that I sponsored, Senate Bill 196, an act to expanded take out and delivery options in the commonwealth of Massachusetts. I've had some remarks prepared, but I'm going to switch it up a little bit just due to what I just heard, the absurdity of what I just heard. First and foremost, I think it is not only752 disappointing, I think that it is disgraceful that we have a powerful lobbyist for the package store industry exploiting substance use disorder in our commonwealth to try to line his own pocket to make sure that he continues to make exorbitant money off of representing the package store industry, which saw increases in sales during the pandemic during the state shut down while everybody else was shut down of about 25-35% in some cases in alcohol sales.

To shift the blame for substance use disorder in the commonwealth onto the backs of our small mom and pop shops is absolutely disgraceful. And the lobbyists who just spoke before me should be ashamed of what he just said in trying to809 put that on our local small mom and pop shops. As somebody who has substance use disorder in her immediate family and takes it very, very seriously, I'm very disheartened by what I just heard. The Bill that I filed is not the cause for what the gentleman before me just said. The Bill before me simply seeks to expand takeout and delivery options for cocktails in a limited amount alongside of meal services, take out and delivery for our local restaurants, who saw tremendous850 losses during the pandemic, who had to lay off all of their employees during the pandemic and who have been struggling tremendously to make a comeback to get back to a place where they're not just surviving, but where they are thriving.863

I think if the gentleman before me has some challenges with alcohol being used in the commonwealth at all and he's serious about that, he probably wouldn't be representing the package store industry and trying to monopolize the sale of alcohol in the commonwealth. So I want to put that before888 the committee very candidly that this is not about substance use disorder, this is not about the bogus excuses that the person who just spoke before me shamefully put before this committee as an905 excuse to line his own pocket, this is about having a monopoly on the industry and I'm asking committee members to do what you have been doing. I've been speaking with a lot of you and I'm so grateful for those conversations, continue speaking with your restaurant owners, those who have been struggling and ask them how this has impacted their small business. They've been making a couple $1000 a month in some cases by giving people sealed containers of small drinks alongside meals to take home and enjoy in their homes.

They're not drinking at the restaurant and then driving home, they are taking these drinks home with them and then having a couple of adult beverages at home with their family and their loved ones in response to the drinking and driving suggestion that the gentleman before we just stated. So I would actually argue that this actually makes the commonwealth safer by allowing for these alcoholic beverages to be taken home instead of to be consumed on premise on site. I would also point to the committee that the small businesses, the small mom and pop shops that have been struggling, they've been coming before us, they've been telling us how much of a tremendous impact this has had on them, they have told us that they've been able to keep employees on the payroll, keep their lights on, pay their rent, pay their back grant that just because they're in a state right now where we see people out in the community and they're sitting outside and everybody's looking like they're having fun again and these places look1005 like they're thriving again, they're still in debt, they're still in recovery, they need these options to be expanded in the long term.

And I want to thank my colleagues for the expansion that we already did for 11 months, I think that that was a wonderful thing that we did for the restaurant community to assist them in their recovery but what we're seeing is1024 we're seeing that this is working. It's something that residents and patrons of restaurants enjoy and it's something that is helping our restaurants in their recovery, and it's something that I believe should be kept permanently long after the recovery. The detrimental impacts that the person who spoke before me have suggested are there, are simply not, those are just bogus excuses and I hope that the committee members will see through that and I hope that the committee members will continue alongside of me and the local restaurants in your communities to engage on how important this is and how much revenue it can generate, how much has been helping them and how much residents actually are enjoying this new addition to our restaurant community. I think that this should be made permanent, and I respectfully ask that the members support this and reported it favorably out of committee so that we can work on this through the legislative process. And I of course support working alongside you in that effort. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

REP CHAN - COMMITTEE CO-CHAIR - Thank you, Senator Dizoglio. I'd also like to inform the committee members that I myself have been approached by substance abuse group, state community services regarding the substance abuse issue during the course of the pandemic and have expressed concerns regarding the expansion of alcohol providers in the Commonwealth and we have a number of Bills today that addresses that as well.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE


REP OLIVEIRA - Thank you, Mr. Chairman and thank you, Senator Dizoglio for explaining a little bit about the Bill. My question is, so the Bill has written right now just expands it for these cocktails, beer and wine to be sold to go for two years, is it your intention to go beyond that To make it absolutely permanent because as I read the Bill right now, it's just1163 a two year extension from 2020. So I just want to make sure that your testimony was consistent with1172 what the Bill actually reads as right now.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE


DIZOGLIO - Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, thank you, Rep Oliveira for the question. Yes, for the sake of transparency, I like to put it out there that I do think that these provisions should be made permanent. That's just me being forthcoming about my intentions, I do think these provisions should be made permanent. I have started with two years, I believe that is going to take at least two years, at least for these restaurants to get back to a state where they're thriving again. I did try to pass this as an amendment, the amendment was cut in half, obviously a little bit less than half and we did this only for 11 months. I took it, but I continue to fight for more time for these restaurants to recover. But yes, my intention is eventually to see this become permanent. But yes, you are correct, this Bill does seek to expand this for the next two years instead of 11 months. I would like to just respond to the Chair with this time, as you did mention the substance use groups reaching out to you.

I 1,000% support anything that the substance use advocates have to say about how we can make sure to curb substance use disorder in the Commonwealth but I think that it's very important that we don't pigeonhole our local small restaurants as being the cause of increase in substance use disorder.1265 We had a very tumultuous year last year where people were locked in their homes, separated from their family and friends, isolated, suffering from depression, anxiety, and all sorts of other mental health challenges and physical challenges. It was an unprecedented time one that we've never seen before in my lifetime. To say that any increase in substance use disorder is on the backs of any one group, especially our small struggling restaurant owners is wrong, it's simply wrong. We cannot take all of the data out there and then find a scapegoat, one that's really struggling to recover right now and doesn't have the powerful lobbyists that we just heard testify.

They're relying on us to get this message across. So the advocates that have come to you, Mr. Chairman and others on the committee. I speak with them as well, I advocate for a majority of their Bills and I would say that they know that in this conversation they're also1331 talking about package stores, they're also concerned about the marijuana industry, they're concerned about prescription drugs, they're concerned about a host of these issues in coordination with mental health services. So I think that we need to be really careful, really careful when we take the very serious issue of substance use disorder and try to find a scapegoat for that like the person who just spoke before me is trying to do. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE


CHAN - The Chair would like to inform the good Senator that the substance abuse organizations are yes, are very concerned about the state of circumstances and we all understand the impact the pandemic has had on all of us individually as well as our constituents. That being said, we do take the substance use disorder organizations word and data very very seriously about the impact of all substances as you point out that impacts them. The biggest change in the past year regarding substance access has been alcohol and that is not lost on these organizations as well. So the Chair is very aware of the important issues and also remind the members of committee that the data provided is not solely from the Package stores industry, I have received similar information from my substance abuse groups locally as well as statewide and I suspect as we continue on this conversation, more datasets will be coming in. Although I have to be honest with you, I suspect Rep Oliveira has a high expertise on this data set review than I do, and of course I always lean on members of the committee for the expertise advice on this matter.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE


REP HILL - HB 386 - Thank you, Mr. Chairman and through you to your committee. I will be very very brief, here to support House 386 which is going to I hope if adopted would help our caterers who deal with wedding venues. This would waive the fees that they had to pay to the ABCC during the pandemic. Unfortunately, they were charged those rates but weren't allowed to go and do their job because all the wedding venues in Massachusetts shut down during the pandemic due to the guidelines that were put into place, they just couldn't survive during the pandemic and that meant that the caterers could also not do their job. It's quite a bit of money, it can be up to thousands of dollars for some1834 of these caterers, and all I'm asking is that we had waived the fee for this1839 year1840 and sadly we're already halfway through it.

So I would be willing, Mr. Chairman to sit down and talk with you and your committee folks to see if we could give them some type of relief moving forward and just for that period that they lost, I'm not looking for anything more than that. And that's my testimony and I hope you can support the Bill, and if we can't support the Bill in this committee, maybe as we're debating what to do with the financial Bills1867 from the federal government,1868 you will stand with me and we can put some language in that Bill. Either way I'm happy if we can give some relief to them because the businesses I have around where I am very small and you all know I represent me in New Hampshire and unfortunately new Hampshire took all of those businesses that I just spoke about, all the business1888 that I talked about regarding weddings last summer and I want to do something to help my small businesses and I think this is a good way of doing that. So thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I would take questions and again, as always, thank you for letting me speak out of turn.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
© InstaTrac 2025