You’ll be able to get wine in the future whether Prop 124 passes or not, but will your small local wine merchant still be in business?
At its simplest, Proposition 124 would allow retail companies to increase the number of liquor licenses they could have in Colorado gradually over time as described below, but after the year 2037 it would be an unlimited number. Currently, retailers as defined in Prop 124 can only have up to three liquor licenses in Colorado. This is a statutory measure, not Constitutional, and this citizen-initiated measure will only need a simple majority to pass.
If Prop 124 passes, the number of allowable liquor licenses would increase as follows:
- On or after January 1, 2022, and before January 1, 2027, (retailers could add) up to SEVEN additional retail liquor store licenses, for a maximum of EIGHT total retail liquor store licenses; and
- On or after January 1, 2027, and before Jan. 1, 2032, up to TWELVE additional retail liquor store licenses, for a maximum of THIRTEEN total retail liquor store licenses;
- On or after Jan. 1, 2032, and before Jan. 1, 2037, up to NINETEEN additional retail liquor store licenses, for a maximum of TWENTY total retail liquor store licenses;
- On or after Jan. 1, 2037, an UNLIMITED NUMBER of additional retail liquor store licenses.
The proponent’s campaign committee is named “Coloradans For Liquor Fairness.” However, as of early September it has been very clearly bankrolled by the national Total Wine & More chain, as reported in the Colorado Sun and on the state’s “Colorado TRACER” campaign finance reporting system. The Total Wine and More owners, Democratic Congressman David Trone of Maryland and his brother, Robert, had each given about $1 million to the supporting committee. Total Wine & More is at least a $5 billion corporation, according to this Shanken News Daily story from 2021.
From the same Colorado Sun story: “The Colorado Licensed Beverage Association, a trade group representing smaller, independent liquor stores across the state, opposes (what was then known as) Initiative 96. The organization’s leader, Chris Fine, said the measure would put his members out of business since Total Wine, which has a store each in Denver and Centennial and a third opening soon in south Lakewood, has bigger buying power and therefore can sell its products for cheaper.”
The committee Keeping Colorado Local is opposing Prop 124 and other liquor-related 2022 ballot measures. It had raised just less than $200,000 as of its Sept. 6 report, including $100,000 from Hazel’s Beverage World in Boulder.
Could The State Change The Number of Liquor Licenses Without Prop 124?
Why yes! Yes, it could. State legislative proposals to change Colorado’s liquor laws have been reasonably common in recent decades, and proposals are very frequently aimed toward issues similar to what voters will see on their 2022 ballots with Prop 124 and Prop 125 (regarding selling wine in grocery stores).
For the most recent example, Colorado Senate Bill 21-134 was actually very similar to the liquor license increases proposed in Prop 124. The bill passed the Senate Business, Labor, and Technology Committee 4-3, with an unusual voting result since there was both bipartisan support and bipartisan opposition. The bill also had bipartisan prime sponsorship in both the House and Senate. Testimony in the Business committee hearing included a number of opposition speakers representing smaller liquor outlets, and support from Total Wine and Applejack Wine & Spirits. After SB 21-134 passed the Business committee, it was defeated by a unanimous vote in Senate Appropriations.
But Prop 124 is statutory, and should it be defeated at the ballot box, the state legislature could run bills in any future session to attempt altering the allowable number of liquor licenses, and it wouldn’t have to use the numbers laid out in either SB 21-134 or Prop 124.
PRO
- There’s no logical reason to have limits on store ownership that’s set at any one number, and Prop 124 allows for gradual expansion over the course of 15 years, though limits would go away after 2037.
- Prop 124 would allow some corporations to expand in Colorado at the same level as “grocery stores with a pharmacy,” which was set under the 2016 bill SB 16-197.
- Store expansion can give consumers access to lower prices, and consumers might be able to use some of the savings to buy other products in Colorado.
- Business is competitive, and we shouldn’t use protectionism to prop up smaller players.
CON
- An out-of-state $5 billion corporation is bankrolling this initiative, and it surely stands to gain financially if it passes.
- Expansion of large corporate retail will almost certainly harm smaller businesses or even put some out of business. This could include family-owned businesses who are finding it tougher to operate in our era of very large corporate dominance.
- If any one corporation dominates retail markets, their procurement practices might influence what types of products will actually be bought or sold in Colorado.
- Out-of-state ownership might move some quantity of retail profit out of Colorado, instead of possibly having local owners spend their earnings with other businesses in Colorado.
Richard’s Take
Vote NO. I have followed Colorado legislative “alcohol wars” for more than a decade now, and I’ve always been troubled about how large corporations have lobbied for alcohol laws that would almost certainly boost their bottom lines. Success in these efforts would more than likely come at the expense of smaller businesses, whether it’s just a reduction in business or a fatal blow. The large corporations lobbying for state bills have often been large retail chains hoping to expand their beer and wine businesses, but with Prop 124, one specific out-of-state corporation is bankrolling a Colorado initiative that would benefit their business. There’s nothing illegal about this, but it bothers me morally and I hope readers will give this some serious thought.
One of my personal values is that family-owned or smaller businesses need to survive in Colorado and in America if we are to have any hopes of maintaining what we once knew as a middle class. Small business owners at least have the opportunity to earn enough money to own a home in the community where they do business, plus they will spend money with other businesses in that community, while local ownership and income will generate tax revenue to support better communities. By allowing large corporations to overrun small businesses, we’re potentially making middle-income earning small business owners into the low-paid clerks and shelf-stockers of the future. Call me Bernie Sanders here if you will, but this ballot measure is literally written for “the 1%” and not for our middle class.
In general, we now live in a world in which the likes of Amazon, or Walmart before it, have been steamrolling over smaller businesses. Total Wine & More is by no means even close to Amazon in revenue, and in fairness we aren’t reading about the Trones taking vanity flights into space like Jeff Bezos. But it is a $5 billion business, and the Trones are spending big so they can use Colorado’s initiative process to enable its expansion in Colorado, even if other large chains might also benefit. I’ll say don’t reward Total Wine’s out-of-state spending with your Colorado vote.
