As the Utah Legislature wrapped up its session this week, it appears that a battle is brewing between the House and Senate over alcohol reform. Citing a concern with the “culture of alcohol,” the Senate declined to support many of the measures the House approved this session. The House voted to eliminate the so-called “Zion

Only two proposed amendments to Utah’s Alcoholic Beverage Control Act passed during the most recent session of the Utah Legislature, which concluded on March 14th.  H.B. 240 passed earlier in the session and addresses the “intent to dine” issue we reported on previously.  Under the change, a restaurant licensee must confirm that a patron has

If you plan to be in Napa, California, this week, we encourage you to join Stoel Rives partner Chris Hermann and other presenters in their discussion of risks and rewards of winery operations at the 7th Annual Best Practices in Winery Operations this Thursday and Friday.

On Friday, Chris will discuss the pitfalls of relying

As we discussed in our December 19, 2012, and January 14, 2013, blog posts here and here, there is inherent tension between I-502’s marijuana legalization policy and federal law. Under the Controlled Substances Act (“Act”), marijuana is classified as a Schedule I drug, making the possession and sale of marijuana illegal under federal law. Since the passage of legalization measures in both Washington State and Colorado, federal authorities have undertaken to review the new laws and issue a response. Although the Obama Administration has been reviewing its options for some time, it has not yet taken a position on the issue.

However, despite the delay in a decision from the federal government, the Washington State Liquor Control Board has not shown any hesitation in moving forward with implementation. The agency is currently progressing along its proposed implementation timeline and expects to begin issuing marijuana producer licenses as early as mid-August of this year.  

In remarks before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, March 6, Attorney General Eric Holder confirmed that the Administration was “still considering” the federal government’s reaction to the Washington and Colorado legalization initiatives, though he asserted that it would be completed soon. Continue Reading U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder Still Silent on Federal Government’s Response to I-502

S.B. 261 passed out of the Senate Business and Labor Committee this morning.  The amendments address many industry concerns we reported on earlier this week.  Notably, the requirement that a patron must be “seated” to be served or consume alcohol has been removed from the bill.  The amendments also clarify that the new enforcement provisions

Utah State Senator John Valentine (R) (Orem) has introduced a bill (S.B. 261) that may significantly affect alcohol operations if adopted.  S.B. 261 would require that all restaurant patrons must be “seated” to be served or consume a drink. Current law allows a patron to be served and consume a drink while standing at a counter, for instance, while waiting for a table or when proposing a toast. The change would require many restaurants to remodel waiting areas to add seats and frustrate patrons who are denied service if they cannot obtain a seat.

The seating requirement, along with other proposed changes in the bill, also would prevent restaurants from hosting private functions where guests remain standing while drinking, such as during a cocktail party, wedding reception or holiday party. Utah restaurants likely would experience a significant loss of sales as a result. Businesses and individuals who look to restaurants for private functions services also would be negatively affected by the loss of such services.

Additionally, S.B. 261 limits the DABC’s powers to waive or vary the requirements imposed under the statute. Unless expressly authorized under the statute, the DABC no longer would be able to grant variances based on long-standing interpretations of various provisions. For example, the bill would prohibit the change the DABC recently adopted to reverse its position on whether a restaurant patron must place an order for food prior to being served a drink as discussed here. If DABC were required to enforce the express provisions of the statute – a “licensee may not sell, offer for sale, or furnish an alcoholic product except in connection with an order for food” – it would not have been able to reverse course to read this provision as requiring that a patron may be served if an “intent to dine” is demonstrated.

S.B.261 also might eliminate other DABC practices that are not expressly articulated in the statute. For example, DABC currently allows a management agreement between a former owner and a new owner to bridge the gap between a change of ownership and the DABC’s review of the new owner’s license application. Such practice prevents a business from going dry for a short period of time while the new owner’s application is pending. If S.B. 261 passes, it is unclear whether the DABC could continue this practice.Continue Reading Utah Legislature Considers Amendments to Alcohol Beverage Control Act

On February 5, 2013, the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (“TTB”) published a final rule establishing the 74,900-acre "Elkton Oregon" American viticultural area in Douglas County, Oregon. TTB issued this regulation in response to a petition filed by local vintners and grape growers and will allow the use of the name "Elkton, OR"

We are pleased to announce that we have opened a satellite office in Washington, D.C. Our new address, effective immediately:

Stoel Rives LLP
1020 19th Street NW, Suite 375
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 398-1795 / Fax: (202) 621-6394

The new office is headed by firm partner Greg Jenner, a former Deputy Assistant Secretary

This week, the Washington State Liquor Control Board (WSLCB) held the first two of six public forums it intends to host across Washington State regarding the implementation of Initiative 502. The first forum was held at the WSLCB Headquarters in Olympia on Tuesday night. According to news reports, hundreds of people flocked to the event to not only provide comments, but to be part of history. Board members were surprised to see that there was standing room only at the event. WSLCB Chair Sharon Foster opened the forum with one word, “Wow!” The Board admitted that they had underestimated how many people would attend the public forums.

Last night’s I-502 public forum in Seattle had a similar turnout. As an article in this morning’s Seattle Times put it, “They came in suits and cowboy hats, with cropped gray hair and long ponytails, and they filled one room at Seattle City Hall and spilled into another, about 400 strong.” At the beginning of the forum, Board members took time to briefly explain the new law to attendees and describe the steps in the rulemaking process that WSLCB will take over the coming months to implement I-502. They also emphasized the importance of public input.

Following that introduction, there were comments directed specifically at the taxes the new law intends to impose. Some urged that the 25% excise tax that will be applied at each level of the licensing system that will eventually be created – producer to a processor, processor to a retailer, and retailer to the customer – is too high. Others countered that the tax was necessary. WSLCB officials noted that they do not have the authority to change the taxes that were voted for by the public. Instead, a change to the tax structure would have to come from the legislature. During the first two years a change to the initiative would require a two thirds majority.Continue Reading Initial Public Forums on Washington’s Initiative 502 Draw Large Crowds