patching...
Update: Like what you see on The Granbys Patch? Click the Facebook 'Like' button just above. Yay!
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Liquor Store Owners Split on Sunday Sales Proposal, Express Concerns

Local storeowners are split on whether allowing Sunday alcohol sales would be beneficial, but the real concern lies in the lesser known changes – or lack thereof – included in the proposed bill.

 


A new legislative proposal could soon bring an end to state restrictions prohibiting the sale of alcohol on Sundays and certain holidays, but liquor store owners across the region are concerned that the bill being presented would have long-lasting negative effects on the economy and liquor industry in Connecticut.

Storeowners in the Granby area remain split on whether it’s a good idea to allow liquor stores to open for commercial sales on Sunday but are united in a concern that changes to minimum pricing regulations and a lack of adjustment to excise and sales taxes will still leave Connecticut’s border towns at a disadvantage.

“I’ve been for Sunday openings with limited hours for a while,” said Scott Wundt, owner of Center Spirits in Granby. “Being a border store, I know that we’re losing sales to stores in Massachusetts. I was much more in favor of it back in July when they increased the excise tax for all stock we had in the store.”

Sergio Castro, general manager at The Liquor Cabinet in East Granby, said he does not see any revenue increase coming if the store were allowed to be open on Sunday. In fact, he is concerned that the current proposal would only lead to additional costs.

Castro and his father, The Liquor Cabinet owner George Castro, said there would be increased costs in electricity, heating and other expenses for the sales to instead be spread over the course of seven days instead of six.

“I’m against the idea. It’s not going to increase revenue. It’s just going to spread out my sales. My Fridays and Saturdays will be less busy,” Sergio Castro said late last week.

The topic of Sunday sales has come up at the legislative level several times in the past decade, including before the legislature's Program Review and Investigations Committee in 2010, but was met with heavy opposition from small business owners across the state.

After hearings, state legislators declined to move forward with an effort to repeal the current restrictions, which prohibit commercial alcohol sales on Sunday outside of bars and restaurant establishments.

Connecticut is one of just two states that still hold restrictions that conform to the old “blue laws” dating back to prohibition. Indiana still has laws on the books, but Georgia repealed their state restrictions in July 2011.

Although the potential sale of alcohol on Sundays grabbed headlines in January, storeowners said it is the lesser-known parts of the proposed bill that have them “extremely concerned.”

The bill, which Gov. Dannel P. Malloy said he intends to present during the upcoming legislative session, would provide storeowners with the ability to open on Sundays and certain holidays. The bill also aims to eliminate mandatory minimum pricing requirements on alcoholic beverages, a provision that Malloy said would provide lower prices and other benefits to the consumer.

“As the years go by and other states modify their laws to reflect modern-day realities, our statutes have collected dust and it has resulted in consumers shopping in bordering states, causing Connecticut retailers to lose $570 million in sales each year to surrounding states by some industry estimates,” Malloy said. “This proposal is pro-consumer, pro-‘mom and pop’ and pro-dollars being spent within Connecticut.”

A nonpartisan study in 2009 suggested that repealing certain restrictions could generate an additional $7 million to $8 million in tax revenues while boosting revenue for stores near the state's borders.

Wundt, a Massachusetts resident, said he’s in favor of allowing stores to open “for limited hours” on Sunday and does believe that those in border towns could see a slight increase in the number of customers over the course of a year.


But local storeowners said they intend to refute the claims during the upcoming session. If left unchanged, storeowners and managers worries that it could lead to anywhere from 300 to 500 stores closing in just the next two years.

Matteo Fagin, wine manager at Southington Wine & Spirits in Walmart Plaza in Southington, said it’s not the Sunday sales that are a problem. The issue lies in eliminating minimum pricing requirements, which would leave the smaller businesses unable to compete and make finding items such as specialty wines far more difficult, he said.

“The Sunday issue is one thing, but there are some things in this bill that, if it goes through, will turn the whole state upside down,” Fagin said. “There are some things cause wholesalers to close and put lot of stress on the industry as a whole.”

By eliminating the minimum purchasing laws, Fagin said he worries that only those stores which usually buy in bulk would be able to compete with the larger chains. Sharmishtel Patel, owner of South Main Liquor and Wine in Plantsville, said they are already struggling to keep customers as stores like Stop & Shop as they offer special sales and fear that would only get worse.

Both also expressed concerns that instead of gaining extra sales in central Connecticut, storeowners would face a challenge of either expending additional revenue to stay open and maintain their current sale levels spread out over several days or even worse, lose sales because they are unable to open on Sundays.

“This isn’t going to increase sales. That’s not a reality here,” Patel said. “What will happen is there will be a shift of when people buy and the current sales pattern will simply shift.”

It’s not just Sunday sales that are holding back these stores either, said both Castro and Wundt, especially given that the state’s excise tax, which went up in 2011 while Massachusetts eliminated its alcohol tax, makes them unable to compete with stores across the border.

“I think the governor is talking out of both sides of his mouth. He says he wants to make us more competitive with Sunday sales, but the excise tax makes us less competitive,” Wundt said.

So where is the line to help make everyone happy?

Storeowners said a solution may lie in a compromise that would provide stores the option to open for a limited number of hours on Sundays and holidays but eliminates the rest of the bill and lowers taxes on alcohol sales.

“There has to be some give and take,” Ambalel Patel, owner of Colonial Spirit Shoppe in Southington. “I’m not against Sunday sales if they keep them to five or six hours, but they need to adjust the tax and other parts of this bill have to go.”

Related Topics: Business, Gov. Dannel Malloy, Small Business, and Sunday alcohol sales
How do you feel about Sunday alcohol sales? Should they be allowed? Should bulk discount purchasing be allowed or will it adversely effect the economy? Let us know what you think. Tell us in the comments.

jrob

10:22 am on Tuesday, February 7, 2012

Nobody is required to open on Sunday. Chick Fil-A does a great business and has a no Sunday policy. If certain stores do not want to open they shouldn't have the right to decide when everyone else is allowed to make purchases.

Reply

Peter Dinella

11:32 am on Tuesday, February 7, 2012

I saw this happen in New Jersey years ago. The result was chaper prices, but only because many small stores had to close and were replaced with a few mega-stores that could easily stay open on Sundays. They made their money on volume, since competition was virtually eliminated resulting in a larger customer base for them.

Reply

Spiff

11:59 am on Tuesday, February 7, 2012

I've always been a proponent of fewer governmental restrictions and more personal freedoms, for both businesses and consumers. Keep in mind, however, the only thing good 'ole Dannel is concerned about is the possibility of increased tax revenue! Didn't he already raise taxes enough last Summer (largest tax increase in CT's history)? Consumers in border towns will still drive to Mass, for example, because everything is cheaper (gas, alcohol, food, clothes, you name it) due to our tax structure. He does not care about CT small businesses nor does he care about consumers. If he did, he would be more concerned with trying to reduce spending and the tax-burden of CT residents. Don't kid yourself.

Reply

Joey D.

12:30 pm on Tuesday, February 7, 2012

The point is mute until alcohol tax rates are on par with the border states. Big business and Malloy are touting the loss of border biz on Sunday's......this happens every day of the week. Our package stores in Connecticut could be open 24 hours a day seven days a week and would still lose sales to our border states because of our higher tax rates on alcohol. An example would be our gas stations; they're open every hour of every day but our gas tax sends people to our neighbor states.....simple economics. We shouldn't let lobbyists and a one term governor looking for a cushy position in 2014 when he's voted out of office decide our future on this or any other matter. This isn't about consumer choice, it's about a future job position for our governor.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Spiff

2:16 pm on Tuesday, February 7, 2012

Hey Joey D, Yeah, I often shop in Mass. In fact, I've often thought that the businesses set up right at the border are a gold mine! There is a gas station that I go to on Route 5 that actually borders CT. Every time I've ever gone I had to wait in line to get gas, and just about every other car has CT tags. Great place to open a business. Not only would you have local costomers, but there is actually a push from CT of consumers to businesses in Mass. The gas station that is about a block down the street in CT never has any customers when I drive by. I kinda feel sorry for the owner. BTW, don't automatically think that Malloy will be a one-term governor. Unfortunately, the electorate in CT isn't too bright; Malloy actually said when he was a candidate that he would raise taxes if elected, and people voted for him none-the-less. I don't get it myself.

jrob

6:53 pm on Tuesday, February 7, 2012

You're right that "We shouldn't let lobbyists and a one term governor looking for a cushy position in 2014 when he's voted out of office decide our future." but the fact remains that CT residents are too often held hostage by restrictions that put business goals over the desires of the residents. I'm not sure how nutmeggers seem to pay the price for bad politics.

Reply

Leave a comment