Strategic Enforcement Deborah Berry State Representative Jeffrey D. Lester City of Des Moines Sergeant Greg Fangman Waterloo Police Department Frederick Mahony National Liquor Law Enforcement Association
Class E Liquor License • Class "E" liquor control license authorizes Class E licensee to purchase alcoholic liquor from the State and to sell liquor and high alcoholic content beer for consumption off the licensed premises and to other liquor control licensees.
Class E Liquor License • Before July of 2011, Iowa Code Section 123.30 had a very simple, one sentence restriction that prohibited a Class “E” liquor license from being issued to any premises “where gasoline was sold.” • In 2011, the Legislature passed a bill that made gasoline selling establishments legitimate premises for the issuance of Class “E” Liquor Licenses.
Class E Liquor License • According to a March 9, 2012 Des Moines Register Article, 258 Class E liquor licenses for convenience stores were issued statewide: • A 33 percent growth in retail liquor businesses • The increase netted the state roughly $2.8 million in new revenue • Roughly one in four places that sell liquor in Iowa is now a convenience store • Of the new licenses state-wide, fifty-one percent of the licenses were issued to convenience stores in Iowa’s 10 most populous counties (Polk, Linn, Black Hawk, Dallas, Dubuque, Johnson, Pottawattamie, Scott, Story and Woodbury)
Unintended Consequences from Legislative Amendment • Increased Alcohol Density • The City of Des Moines has experienced more dramatic increases than the State of Iowa since July of 2011. • Des Moines now has 72 Class "E" Liquor Control Licenses • Prior to removal of the “gasoline” restriction, Des Moines had 44 Class “E” Liquor Control Licenses. • With the 28 additional licensees, that is an increase of nearly 65% (63.64%).
Unintended Consequences from Legislative Amendment • Greater Concentration of Class E Liquor Licensees near other licensees • Other Licensees Contemplating New locations near other licensed locations
Unintended Consequences from Legislative Amendment • Council Reports Significantly Increased Neighborhood Complaints Concerning Liquor Licensed Establishments • Increased Loitering Activity at Troublesome Licensed Locations • Greater Numbers of Police Calls • Issues with Lighting and Trash • Citizen Safety Concerns Repeatedly Vocalized
Historical Issues • Problems with small “grocery” stores morphing into liquor stores • Using sale of tobacco & gas to meet the 50% threshold for gross receipts • At inappropriate sites • Inadequate management and operational controls by some businesses • Associated nuisance problems
Summary of Problems Encountered • Proliferation and density of businesses selling liquor for off-premises consumption • Inadequate site standards allowing detrimental impacts on nearby uses • No limit under state law for liquor license density and attendant problems • State gains the benefits of revenue; local government hit with the attendant costs
Proliferation And Density Council had goal to limit the proliferation and density of class E liquor licensees Believe Ordinance Changes will help City staff to meet that goal
Initial Ordinance Changes Defined a liquor store as a business deriving more than 40% of its gross revenue from the sale of wine, beer, alcohol or tobacco (applies to existing businesses after 12/31/2013) • Continued to allow gas sales to be counted as merchandise
Impact of Initial Changes The impact will not be fully realized until 2014 • Existing limited food/retail stores will be required to change business model/operation to comply with the 40% limitation, or • Obtain a conditional use permit and be designated as a liquor store
Class E Liquor License • Iowa Cities are largely pre-empted from regulating alcohol under the Iowa Code • Cities can, however, enact zoning regulations to exert limited control over uses of property
Liquor Code Amendment • Amendment focused on “good moral character” as provided in State and City Code • Analyzed definition for opportunities to enhance Council review of licensee’s record • Amendment Permits Council to take better stock of Applicant’s: • Financial Capability • Misdemeanor Record • Alcohol Related Offenses
Liquor Code Amendment • Applicant’s Recent Misdemeanor Convictions may now be considered as one element of granting license (Examples) • Theft Assault Disorderly Conduct • Public Intoxication Fraud • Applicant’s Recent Alcohol Related Offenses may now be considered as one element of granting license
Basis of Zoning Regulation • Zoning regulations must be rationally tied to use of the land • Zoning cannot distinguish between identical uses of land by different owners and tenants – any such distinction must be tied to differences in the use of the land and not to conduct unrelated to land use
General and Large food and retail sales stores (over 12,000 square feet) must: - maintain current 75’ separation from church, school, daycare and park - no ¼-mile separation from other Class E licenses
Imposed Separation Between Class E Liquor Licenses Require new liquor stores, gas/convenience stores, and limited food or retail stores (under 12,000 s.f.) to have a minimum ¼ mile separation from any like business holding a class E licensee
Expanded Separation Requirements From Family Oriented Uses Any liquor store, gas/convenience store or limited food or retail store selling liquor must now have a 500’ separation from any church, school, park or day care
Impact of Increased Separation Requirements • Decreases the potential maximum future density of class E liquor licensees • Existing businesses would have legal non-conforming rights
Improve ZBOA Review Standards • Required compliance with minimum design and operational standards, such as: • Minimum standards to prevent theft • Prominently display 24-hour contact information for a manager or owner
Liquor Code Comparison AfterAmendments • CURRENT* • Conditional Use Permit Required for more stores • Applies to less than 12,000 s.f. alcoholic liquor seller • 500 feet of separation from family oriented uses • ¼ Mile separation from most other class E licenses • PREVIOUS** • Conditional Use Permit Required for smaller stores • Formerly applied to10,000 s.f. alcoholic liquor seller • Previously only 150’ of separation • Previously NO separation from other sellers * Similar Restrictions Apply to Gas Station/Convenience Stores and Liquor Stores ** Fewer Restrictions Applied Under Previous Code
Liquor Code Comparison AfterAmendments-Conditional Use Permit • CURRENT • Increased exterior lighting and eliminate hiding places • Require Posting of “No Loitering” signs • Prohibit any outside speakers or amplified sound without sound permit • Clearly impose burden of proof on applicant to show percentage of sales • Minimum standards to prevent theft • Prominently display 24-hour contact information for a manager or owner • PREVIOUS • Less stringent lighting restrictions in place • No requirements regarding loitering signs • Ambiguous regulations concerning sound in place previously • Burden of proof remained on City to show percentage of sales • No standard concerning theft prevention • No requirement for manager, owner or operator contact at any time
Alcohol Compliance Checks • C/I between the ages of 17-20 • Normal appearance • Photograph C/I prior to checks • Photocopy of actual license • Photocopy buy money
C/I Directions • C/I is to use his actual license • C/I is to only use money PD supplied • Enter business and select an alcohol product and go to checkout • If asked by clerk, C/I to verbally give actual age or actual license • C/I is not to attempt to persuade clerk to sell if denied
C/I Directions • If retailer sells alcohol to them, they are to leave alcohol and the change on the counter and exit the store
Officer • Will be either inside or outside of the business • If violation occurs, officer will make contact with the clerk
Evidence • Observations by the officer at time of sale • C/I testimony • C/I may have had a recording device on his person at time of check • Store security system • Money used to purchase alcohol
Alcoholic Beverage Control and Enforcement Chief Frederick Mahony Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission National Liquor Law Enforcement Association October 3, 2013
State Alcohol Law Enforcement Overview Underage Enforcement and Prevention Sales to Intoxicated Persons Enforcement and Prevention Criminal Investigations (Gambling, Narcotics, Prostitution, Gang activity) Nuisance Abatement Retail Licensee Training
Massachusetts • 14000 Retail outlets -15 Investigators • 300 Reports – 1200 Violations in 2011 • Primary Enforcement Objectives: • Impaired Driving Prevention • Underage Drinking Prevention • Alcohol Related Crime Prevention
Massachusetts Enforcement Strategy Baseline Enforcement: Compliance Checks The objective of this operation is to educate licensees and to increase the vigilance of bars & liquor stores in the checking of identification. Targeted Data Driven Enforcement: Problem Bars Data based, intensive enforcement at bars seen as the source of impaired driving arrests and alcohol related crime. Enhanced Enforcement Operations Seasonal enforcement programs to address problem times and locations.
Data Driven – Targeted Enforcement Data helps guide decision making, enhances your purpose, and improves performance management
Data Driven – Targeted Enforcement Data Sources • Internal Tracking • Inspection frequency • Violation trends by type of license or offense • Compliance rates • Partner Agencies • Local law enforcement • WA State Patrol • Department of Revenue • Department of Health • Research and Trends • OJJDP • NHTSA • NLLEA
Data Driven – Targeted Enforcement Public Safety Risk Factors • Time of day • Day of week • Activity • Time of year • Police calls • Citizen concerns • DUI data • Frequency of checks • Youth survey • Social culture (college)
Massachusetts Place of Last Drink Top 25 Worst Offenders
Washington Place of Last Drink Top 20 Worst Offenders
Massachusetts SIP Enforcement There are over 2,400 Operating Under the Influence (OUI) reports filed with the ABCC annually. In 2007 the ABCC developed a report on the 30 “worst offenders”; 24 of these bars were charged. The 2008 data clearly demonstrated a dramatic reduction in the number of OUIs originating from the bars that had been subject to intensive liquor enforcement and charged with SIP. SIP enforcement known as “Operation Last Call” is conducted during strategic periods throughout the year.