The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

Not At My Table - Political Discussions => Local & State Politics => Topic started by: Nik on August 23, 2011, 10:00:51 am



Title: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Nik on August 23, 2011, 10:00:51 am
Interesting article out of OKC. CostCo has said they will open 6-10 stores in Oklahoma if wine can be sold in stores.

http://newsok.com/chamber-wants-wine-in-oklahoma-grocery-stores/article/3596337

Quote
The issue is one the [Greater Oklahoma City Chamber] has made a priority, with a goal to draft legislation and get it on the ballot in November 2012.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: rdj on August 23, 2011, 10:03:54 am
I expect Tulsa Metro Chamber and TYPros will fall in line with the OKC Chamber.  Be interesting to see if State Chamber gets involved.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on August 23, 2011, 10:05:24 am
Interesting article out of OKC. CostCo has said they will open 6-10 stores in Oklahoma if wine can be sold in stores.

http://newsok.com/chamber-wants-wine-in-oklahoma-grocery-stores/article/3596337


Well of course!  Let a huge retailer throw a carrot out there and maybe we'll see reform.  Makes me wonder if the liquor lobby of Oklahoma has the resources to fight a retail biggie like this one.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on August 23, 2011, 10:10:37 am
Well of course!  Let a huge retailer throw a carrot out there and maybe we'll see reform.  Makes me wonder if the liquor lobby of Oklahoma has the resources to fight a retail biggie like this one.

Whoa whoa whoa...I thought it was because there would be rampant teenaged drinking and mass histeria.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on August 23, 2011, 10:16:29 am
I wonder if Costco realizes they will be dealing with the Black Hand if they try this?
(http://www.empireonline.com/images/features/100greatestcharacters/photos/10.jpg)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Gaspar on August 23, 2011, 11:24:15 am
I will shop at 6-10 Costco stores if wine can be sold there.


Here's how they need to frame their argument so that Oklahoma politicians will respond appropriately.

"If you allow us to carry wine in our stores in Oklahoma, we will give you over $80,000,000 every year!"



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Teatownclown on August 23, 2011, 11:28:48 am
Do you think you should hold your breath?

Costco will not be in Oklahoma for many moons, but meanwhile they do long range planning.

This is, as said here today, about the mobsters who currently control the inventories of legal self medication poisons.

Flatuatorybogie, did you know you can order your wines from out of state and they'll be delivered right to you?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on August 23, 2011, 11:29:51 am
I will shop at 6-10 Costco stores if wine can be sold there.


Here's how they need to frame their argument so that Oklahoma politicians will respond appropriately.

"If you allow us to carry wine in our stores in Oklahoma, we will give you over $80,000,000 every year!"




"...Oh, and lobby for a monument to the ten commandments to be built on the state capital grounds."

They'd squeal like little teenaged girl pigs.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on August 23, 2011, 11:32:30 am
Flatuatorybogie, did you know you can order your wines from out of state and they'll be delivered right to you?

How long's it been since you've given that a shot?

Ever notice "Oklahoma" is not on the drop down?

If you type in "Oklahoma" then the only options you have to purchase are the products with no alcohol in them.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: AquaMan on August 23, 2011, 11:36:08 am
This is cool. Costco makes an offer no decent tax loving, job creating legislator can refuse. Close to an election cycle. The cool thing is that WalMart, who already dominates the state, will have to respond in kind. And of course, the slippery slope argument will emerge from the small package liquor stores and they will make a good argument.

Time to sit back, pop the top on a cold one and enjoy the fights!


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on August 23, 2011, 11:37:23 am
If you can bleed the package retail lobby of some of that money they spread among various politically-active churches to oppose this, then it might have a chance.  These "mom and pop" liquor stores have some deep corporate pockets, though.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on August 23, 2011, 11:39:34 am
This is cool. Costco makes an offer no decent tax loving, job creating legislator can refuse. Close to an election cycle. The cool thing is that WalMart, who already dominates the state, will have to respond in kind. And of course, the slippery slope argument will emerge from the small package liquor stores and they will make a good argument.

Time to sit back, pop the top on a cold one and enjoy the fights!
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dP1f2-7zss[/youtube]


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Teatownclown on August 23, 2011, 11:49:08 am
Townsterminator, some day I will teach you.....if you're nice to me. :D


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Teatownclown on August 23, 2011, 11:52:49 am
If you can bleed the package retail lobby of some of that money they spread among various politically-active churches to oppose this, then it might have a chance.  These "mom and pop" liquor stores have some deep corporate pockets, though.

Not so certain about deep corporate pockets but sucking tits for sure.  ;)

I don't think this will be a big issue.....yet.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Gaspar on August 23, 2011, 12:55:47 pm
This is cool. Costco makes an offer no decent tax loving, job creating legislator can refuse. Close to an election cycle. The cool thing is that WalMart, who already dominates the state, will have to respond in kind. And of course, the slippery slope argument will emerge from the small package liquor stores and they will make a good argument.

Time to sit back, pop the top on a cold one and enjoy the fights!

Good observation.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: custosnox on August 23, 2011, 12:58:06 pm
I just wonder if it will ever get on the ballots without a "you must give up your firstborn" rider on it.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on August 23, 2011, 01:32:06 pm
I think Oklahoma's liquor laws definitley need reforming and I strongly support such a change, but I'm always dubious of claims that this change will create lots of new jobs and generate lots of new taxes.  Everything CostCo sells can currently be purchased in Okla. (Yeah, I know, CostCo has many of its own branded items, but non-CostCo equivalents are available).  While the CostCo stores will add jobs and create tax revenue, the total number of jobs and revenue only goes up if there is no loss of sales or jobs at existing stores.  Unless all of Okla. goes on a drinking binge with the arrival of CostCo, that seems unlikely.  While it doesn't justify our goofy laws, I expect the claim that CostCo will put hundreds of mom and pop liquor stores out of business will resonate with many, not the least because it's probably true (althought not in the numbers opponents will claim).


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on August 23, 2011, 01:37:25 pm
How long's it been since you've given that a shot?

Ever notice "Oklahoma" is not on the drop down?

If you type in "Oklahoma" then the only options you have to purchase are the products with no alcohol in them.

Not directly from wineries, but when title passes to a third party shipper things get a lot easier.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on August 23, 2011, 01:41:18 pm
Not directly from wineries, but when title passes to a third party shipper things get a lot easier.

I guess the laws worked on me.  I never cared enough to try any harder.  I just bought when I was out of state.

Perhaps the "they" should think about the lost tax revenue when people do what I do.  It got us the lott-ry.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on August 23, 2011, 01:42:09 pm
I think Oklahoma's liquor laws definitley need reforming and I strongly support such a change, but I'm always dubious of claims that this change will create lots of new jobs and generate lots of new taxes.  Everything CostCo sells can currently be purchased in Okla. (Yeah, I know, CostCo has many of its own branded items, but non-CostCo equivalents are available).  While the CostCo stores will add jobs and create tax revenue, the total number of jobs and revenue only goes up if there is no loss of sales or jobs at existing stores.  Unless all of Okla. goes on a drinking binge with the arrival of CostCo, that seems unlikely.  While it doesn't justify our goofy laws, I expect the claim that CostCo will put hundreds of mom and pop liquor stores out of business will resonate with many, not the least because it's probably true (althought not in the numbers opponents will claim).

Exactly.  Without a change in population or it stimulates consumer behavior other retailers are incapable of tapping, then it simply cannibalizes the existing base.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: joiei on August 23, 2011, 01:59:09 pm
I have bought several times from Sherry-Lehmann in NYC.  Especially if they have free shipping which they occasionally do. 


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Teatownclown on August 23, 2011, 02:00:41 pm
I have bought several times from Sherry-Lehmann in NYC.  Especially if they have free shipping which they occasionally do. 

pm him...no need to expose the loopholes.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Gaspar on August 23, 2011, 03:10:50 pm
How long's it been since you've given that a shot?

Ever notice "Oklahoma" is not on the drop down?

If you type in "Oklahoma" then the only options you have to purchase are the products with no alcohol in them.

I do.

Order from www.winex.com.

They have an email club and send out notices on good deals, closeouts, etc.  And, the will hold it for free, climate controlled, in situations where you buy now on a deal, but want it shipped in the fall when the weather cools down to avoid heat damage issues during shipping.

Never a problem shipping to OK.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on August 23, 2011, 03:42:23 pm
I do.

Order from www.winex.com.

They have an email club and send out notices on good deals, closeouts, etc.  And, the will hold it for free, climate controlled, in situations where you buy now on a deal, but want it shipped in the fall when the weather cools down to avoid heat damage issues during shipping.

Never a problem shipping to OK.

I appreciate the advice.  I'll put a list together and see how it goes.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: nathanm on August 23, 2011, 03:56:18 pm
I think Oklahoma's liquor laws definitley need reforming and I strongly support such a change, but I'm always dubious of claims that this change will create lots of new jobs and generate lots of new taxes. 
It won't create new jobs, but it will create better jobs. Costco has a long history of paying higher wages because they feel like they get better employees by doing so. That will bring in more tax money, both through increased income tax collections and increased sales tax collections as jobs move in their direction.

And this isn't going to put liquor stores out of business. It will give them a good incentive to have better wine selection. And give them a wider variety of products to sell.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: AquaMan on August 24, 2011, 08:18:13 am
It won't create new jobs, but it will create better jobs. Costco has a long history of paying higher wages because they feel like they get better employees by doing so. That will bring in more tax money, both through increased income tax collections and increased sales tax collections as jobs move in their direction.

And this isn't going to put liquor stores out of business. It will give them a good incentive to have better wine selection. And give them a wider variety of products to sell.

Better pay means better employees?! Heresy!

I agree that if Costco made such an investment that even though at first it is simply slicing the pie into smaller pieces, that is temporary. Eventually the influx of capital from outside the state to build and operate the stores plus the higher wages paid will translate to increased tax revenues, a better standard of living and perhaps even increased population. Those who shop Costco are passionate about them. They might not come here because of them, but they may refuse to move here without them. Sort of like Whole Foods people.

As far as the package liquour stores, don't confuse them with the facts. They like having the population forced into their stores.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: we vs us on August 24, 2011, 09:06:05 am
It won't create new jobs, but it will create better jobs. Costco has a long history of paying higher wages because they feel like they get better employees by doing so. That will bring in more tax money, both through increased income tax collections and increased sales tax collections as jobs move in their direction.

And this isn't going to put liquor stores out of business. It will give them a good incentive to have better wine selection. And give them a wider variety of products to sell.

It might stimulate a little pricing competition with Sam's Club, too. Never a bad thing in my book. 


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on August 25, 2011, 09:01:58 am
It won't create new jobs, but it will create better jobs. Costco has a long history of paying higher wages because they feel like they get better employees by doing so. That will bring in more tax money, both through increased income tax collections and increased sales tax collections as jobs move in their direction.

And this isn't going to put liquor stores out of business. It will give them a good incentive to have better wine selection. And give them a wider variety of products to sell.

Four to six CostCos would seem, at best, to have a marginal impact on total wages and total tax revenues.  CostCo may pay better than average grocery stores, but they're not hiring rocket scientest.  The claim in the article was that the impact would be large.  I just don't see that happening. 

It is also hard not to believe that if the liquor laws are changed and CostCo moves in and with others, such as Wal-Mart and Reasor's, start selling real beer and wine that it will not drive some existing liquor stores out of business.  These large retailers will be able to drive down margins based on volume purchasing/sales, as well as take current high margin sales away from existing stores.  It is no different that what Wal-Mart has done to numerous small stores all across the country.  You can think that is a good thing or a bad thing, but you can't ignore it is one of the tradeoffs to be made in opening up wine and real beer sales to grocery stores.

While some of larger existing liquor stores can fight back with better selection, ultlimately all retailers' selection in Oklahoma is determined by the distributors and what it will sell to the retailer.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Gaspar on August 25, 2011, 09:08:54 am
Four to six CostCos would seem, at best, to have a marginal impact on total wages and total tax revenues.  CostCo may pay better than average grocery stores, but they're not hiring rocket scientest.  The claim in the article was that the impact would be large.  I just don't see that happening. 

It is also hard not to believe that if the liquor laws are changed and CostCo moves in and with others, such as Wal-Mart and Reasor's, start selling real beer and wine that it will not drive some existing liquor stores out of business.  These large retailers will be able to drive down margins based on volume purchasing/sales, as well as take current high margin sales away from existing stores.  It is no different that what Wal-Mart has done to numerous small stores all across the country.  You can think that is a good thing or a bad thing, but you can't ignore it is one of the tradeoffs to be made in opening up wine and real beer sales to grocery stores.

While some of larger existing liquor stores can fight back with better selection, ultlimately all retailers' selection in Oklahoma is determined by the distributors and what it will sell to the retailer.


Each store does about $140 million in sales, and requires massive support infrastructure.  They become an anchor for development, require massive amounts of logistical support and purchase millions in local services.  The jobs creation that takes place, does not just reflect jobs within Costco. 


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: custosnox on August 25, 2011, 11:39:25 am
 

It is also hard not to believe that if the liquor laws are changed and CostCo moves in and with others, such as Wal-Mart and Reasor's, start selling real beer and wine that it will not drive some existing liquor stores out of business.  These large retailers will be able to drive down margins based on volume purchasing/sales, as well as take current high margin sales away from existing stores.  It is no different that what Wal-Mart has done to numerous small stores all across the country.  You can think that is a good thing or a bad thing, but you can't ignore it is one of the tradeoffs to be made in opening up wine and real beer sales to grocery stores.

While some of larger existing liquor stores can fight back with better selection, ultlimately all retailers' selection in Oklahoma is determined by the distributors and what it will sell to the retailer.

If all that changes is the ability to sell beer and wine, then the liquor stores will only loose a small bit of their sales, but in no way be enough to cripple them or put them out of business.  If written correctly, then it might even be a small boost to them if they can sell cold, six point beer, if they are willing to put in coolers.  The only way that the individual liquor stores will really be effected is if the law is changed to allow the full sale of liquor in grocery stores.  If this was to happen, then what would remain of the liquor stores will be the cream of the crop, those that can cater to their customers.  I don't have a problem with this, or do you like the idea of a crappy liquor store on every corner, having to guess which ones actually know what they sale and can make a decent suggestion on things?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: nathanm on August 25, 2011, 11:50:20 am
Four to six CostCos would seem, at best, to have a marginal impact on total wages and total tax revenues.  CostCo may pay better than average grocery stores, but they're not hiring rocket scientest.  The claim in the article was that the impact would be large.  I just don't see that happening. 
Before the last minimum wage increase, CostCo was paying almost twice as much as Wal-Mart to non-management employees. Maybe it's not a huge impact, but it's still a thousand people or so with twice as much money as they can get elsewhere.

Regarding the future prospects of liquor stores in a the contemplated environment, there are still plenty of liquor stores in other states that have strong beer and wine in grocery stores.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Nik on August 31, 2011, 02:53:00 pm
This state.....  >:(

http://soonerpoll.com/poll-finds-voters-overwhelmingly-oppose-liquor-law-changes/


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on August 31, 2011, 03:03:26 pm
This state.....  >:(

http://soonerpoll.com/poll-finds-voters-overwhelmingly-oppose-liquor-law-changes/


I'm guessing the questions were skewed to get that answer and they mostly polled people on landline phones (older folk).


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on August 31, 2011, 03:18:22 pm
I'm guessing the questions were skewed to get that answer and they mostly polled people on landline phones (older folk).

The last question was this (of the three posed):

Quote
Oklahoma’s current laws restrict the sale of wine, beer of 3.3% alcohol
content or higher, and malt liquors of up to 12 percent be sold in liquor
stores where someone must be 21 years or older to enter. Would you
support changing the law so that wine, strong beer, and malt liquor can be
sold in grocery stores, knowing it would include products like Mad Dog 20-
20, Snoop Dog’s Colt 45 Blast, and 4 locos

Why would they include that last part?  To me, that invalidates the entire set of three questions.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on August 31, 2011, 03:39:58 pm
The last question was this (of the three posed):

Why would they include that last part?  To me, that invalidates the entire set of three questions.

It's called "soonerpoll".  It's a bunch of folks who'd beat you up for wearing a Texas hat but who never went to OU?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on August 31, 2011, 07:24:26 pm
The last question was this (of the three posed):

Quote
Oklahoma’s current laws restrict the sale of wine, beer of 3.3% alcohol
content or higher, and malt liquors of up to 12 percent be sold in liquor
stores where someone must be 21 years or older to enter. Would you
support changing the law so that wine, strong beer, and malt liquor can be
sold in grocery stores, knowing it would include products like Mad Dog 20-
20, Snoop Dog’s Colt 45 Blast, and 4 locos

Why would they include that last part?  To me, that invalidates the entire set of three questions.

They forgot the part about being easily accessible to minors.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheArtist on August 31, 2011, 08:00:59 pm
"This is an important, yet complex issue and in order to measure attitudes we went to great lengths to draft the question using the most unbiased language possible,” Bill Shapard, CEO of SoonerPoll.com, said.  "

OMG really? lol



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: jacobi on August 31, 2011, 08:43:21 pm
You know, as much as there is a strong religious presence here, it also seems that there is a long and venerable tradition of beer drinking and outsider culture.  I don't just mean rednecks.  I mean the generation or three of rock and roll kids who grew up under these bullshit rules.  THings have gotten better here (no more liquor by the drink) and I think they continue to do so.  Maybe we have to wait for the boomers (baby, not sooners) to die off.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on August 31, 2011, 08:59:16 pm
You know, as much as there is a strong religious presence here, it also seems that there is a long and venerable tradition of beer drinking and outsider culture.  I don't just mean rednecks.  I mean the generation or three of rock and roll kids who grew up under these bullshit rules.  THings have gotten better here (no more liquor by the drink) and I think they continue to do so.  Maybe we have to wait for the boomers (baby, not sooners) to die off.

There has always been drinking in OK.  Just don't let your neighbors know you drink.  Drink 50 or more miles from home.  You'll be somewhat sober when you get home. (I forego the stereotype jokes.)

Did you mean no more liquor by the wink?  Brown bag clubs?

Some baby boomers may still be the problem but not all of us.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: jacobi on August 31, 2011, 09:05:00 pm
Quote
Some baby boomers may still be the problem but not all of us.

SOrry for being a bit hyperbolic. 


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacks fan on August 31, 2011, 09:28:41 pm
I'm one of those last of the boomers graduated in '81 and was one of those that had been buying beer leagally back in '83 when they changed the age from 18 to 21 and couldn't buy it anymore, and voted for liquor by the drink every time it came up.  ;)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on August 31, 2011, 09:38:49 pm
I'm one of those last of the boomers graduated in '81 and was one of those that had been buying beer leagally back in '83 when they changed the age from 18 to 21 and couldn't buy it anymore, and voted for liquor by the drink every time it came up.  ;)

Seems to me the drinking age changed to 18 about the time I turned 21. 


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: RecycleMichael on August 31, 2011, 09:58:40 pm
I will defend SoonerPoll and pollster Bill Shapard. I have been involved in a handful of projects where they were hired to do the polling, focus groups, etc.

They are by far the best in the state in the polling business. They are one of the few companies that does cell-phone number polling and they have the staff to do very complete work very timely. They predicted the Dewey election and the Fallin election scarily good.

I think the results are representative of the state's population and mentality. That makes me sad.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on August 31, 2011, 10:20:21 pm
Seems to me the drinking age changed to 18 about the time I turned 21. 

And it reverted to 21 literally two months before I turned 18.  So I patiently sat on my hands for three years after that happened.  I mean three years and two months.  Yeah, that's the ticket!


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on August 31, 2011, 10:26:25 pm
The last question was this (of the three posed):

Why would they include that last part?  To me, that invalidates the entire set of three questions.

Okay, I seriously thought you were kidding.

Nah, no way those pollsters were pandering to the worst of the paranoid crowd.  Just say: "Snoop Dogg" and 98% of all Oklahomans head for the storm shelter.

Here, I'll show you who funded this poll (or at least his ghost)
(http://images.wikia.com/mafia/images/2/2f/Gott12.jpg)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on September 01, 2011, 08:25:31 am
I will defend SoonerPoll and pollster Bill Shapard. I have been involved in a handful of projects where they were hired to do the polling, focus groups, etc.

They are by far the best in the state in the polling business. They are one of the few companies that does cell-phone number polling and they have the staff to do very complete work very timely. They predicted the Dewey election and the Fallin election scarily good.

I think the results are representative of the state's population and mentality. That makes me sad.

The fact that SoonerPoll is probably the best in the state indicates to me the question was no goof up and it was pushing for a predetermined outcome with this poll.  The easiest way to skew a poll outcome is through sample selection criteria.  The second way is question phrasing.  If the question was asked as described, that was no accident.  What do you suppose the outcome would have been had the questioned ended "would you support the change in law to create more consumer convenience and choice, price competiton, and the likihood that new sought-after retailers would locate in the State of Oklahoma."  It would be helpful to know who requested/paid for this poll, although I suspect Conan is correct.



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on September 01, 2011, 08:41:08 am
The fact that SoonerPoll is probably the best in the state indicates to me the question was no goof up and it was pushing for a predetermined outcome with this poll.  The easiest way to skew a poll outcome is through sample selection criteria.  The second way is question phrasing.  If the question was asked as described, that was no accident.  What do you suppose the outcome would have been had the questioned ended "would you support the change in law to create more consumer convenience and choice, price competiton, and the likihood that new sought-after retailers would locate in the State of Oklahoma."  It would be helpful to know who requested/paid for this poll, although I suspect Conan is correct.



Here's the wording of all three questions posed:

http://soonerpoll.com/wpcontent/uploads/2011/08/LiquorLawChanges_082611.pdf


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on September 01, 2011, 08:43:53 am
Here's the wording of all three questions posed:

http://soonerpoll.com/wpcontent/uploads/2011/08/LiquorLawChanges_082611.pdf

RM, I'll have to disagree with you on this one.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on September 01, 2011, 08:48:40 am
RM, I'll have to disagree with you on this one.

In SoonerPoll's defense, they're likely simply hired by the focus group wanting to ask the questions.  It's the focus group who's responsible for this here.  They're just doing as they've been tasked.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on September 01, 2011, 08:50:55 am
In SoonerPoll's defense, they're likely simply hired by the focus group wanting to ask the questions.  It's the focus group who's responsible for this here.  They're just doing as they've been tasked.

They've gotta get money somehow but posing questions like these are a good way to ruin a reputation.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on September 01, 2011, 08:51:57 am
They've gotta get money somehow but posing questions like these are a good way to ruin a reputation.

Point taken.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on September 01, 2011, 09:05:10 am
The line of questioning panders to the worst fears.  Aside from the malt liquor and mad dog references in the third question, they also make mention of being able to sell high point alcohol products and wine in establishments where people under 21 can enter.  Again, pandering to fear that 16 year olds can simply walk into Reasor's and walk out with a 40 of OE.  Nevermind that I get asked for an ID to buy 3.2 beer in the grocery store while the liquor stores I frequent NEVER ask for an I.D.

IOW- due to company policies, you are far more likely to get carded at QT or Wal-Mart Market than at an independent liquor store.  It just amazes me that two or three liquor wholesalers and some lobbyists for liquor stores manage to prevent a million-plus who drink from being able to make the same decisions others do around the country.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on September 01, 2011, 09:16:34 am
It just amazes me that two or three liquor wholesalers and some lobbyists for liquor stores manage to prevent a million-plus who drink from being able to make the same decisions others do around the country.

They're the ones getting in the door. 

When it's election time nobody mentions this in the debates/ads.  "I proudly support changing the liquor laws in Oklahoma"  doesn't have the same ring as "Kick the illegals out", "Jesus is my savior", and "family values".


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on September 01, 2011, 03:33:10 pm
It's interesting that as the three questions get more biased, the results track right along with it.  The first question is pretty neutral and the results, while a majority is opposed, the gap is not huge.  Each question gets worse and the gap towards opposed gets larger.  It would also be interesting to see a breakdown of the sample surveyed by age, area, voting history, etc.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: custosnox on September 01, 2011, 06:37:36 pm
It's interesting that as the three questions get more biased, the results track right along with it.  The first question is pretty neutral and the results, while a majority is opposed, the gap is not huge.  Each question gets worse and the gap towards opposed gets larger.  It would also be interesting to see a breakdown of the sample surveyed by age, area, voting history, etc.
I had noticed the same thing.  And if this hits the ballots, I bet I can guess how the distribution companies are going to slant their propaganda against the measure.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on September 01, 2011, 07:34:16 pm
They could have simply phrased the last question as:

"Do you favor young, drunk black males wilding in the streets and having illicit sex (while hyped up on malt liquor) with your white daughters and granddaughters resulting in mulatto grandkids and great-grandkids?"


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacks fan on September 01, 2011, 07:51:36 pm
It's interesting that as the three questions get more biased, the results track right along with it.  The first question is pretty neutral and the results, while a majority is opposed, the gap is not huge.  Each question gets worse and the gap towards opposed gets larger.  It would also be interesting to see a breakdown of the sample surveyed by age, area, voting history, etc.

I had a boss tell us one time "Word your questions, to get the answer you want." We were looking at four different recording systems for the police department and we were told to word the questionaire towards one vendor and eliminate the other three by the way the questions were written.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on September 01, 2011, 07:57:13 pm
I had a boss tell us one time "Word your questions, to get the answer you want." We were looking at four different recording systems for the police department and we were told to word the questionaire towards one vendor and eliminate the other three by the way the questions were written.

And that there, my friends, is why all polls, political or otherwise, don't really pass muster and why I almost NEVER pay any attention to them unless I'm sure they are a straight yes/no question.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacks fan on September 01, 2011, 08:04:26 pm
And that there, my friends, is why all polls, political or otherwise, don't really pass muster and why I almost NEVER pay any attention to them unless I'm sure they are a straight yes/no question.

I imagine those that wrote the questions have resumed the daily duties of "Polishing the Buckle" over the state to make sure it's not tarnished by these thoughts.  ;)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on September 01, 2011, 10:07:55 pm
I imagine those that wrote the questions have resumed the daily duties of "Polishing the Buckle" over the state to make sure it's not tarnished by these thoughts.  ;)

Or polishing their wood.

Sorry, BB has been scarce lately.  Had to add the obvious comment.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DanoDan on September 03, 2011, 12:18:33 am
I will defend SoonerPoll and pollster Bill Shapard. I have been involved in a handful of projects where they were hired to do the polling, focus groups, etc.

They are by far the best in the state in the polling business. They are one of the few companies that does cell-phone number polling and they have the staff to do very complete work very timely. They predicted the Dewey election and the Fallin election scarily good.

I think the results are representative of the state's population and mentality. That makes me sad.
  How much do they charge to do a poll?  About $10,000??


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DanoDan on September 03, 2011, 12:21:53 am
The last question was this (of the three posed):

Why would they include that last part?  To me, that invalidates the entire set of three questions.

Yeah, I think plenty of up tight conservatives would want such oddly named alcohol products to be sold in Oklahoma in grocery stores. 


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: carltonplace on September 06, 2011, 10:21:19 am
The line of questioning panders to the worst fears.  Aside from the malt liquor and mad dog references in the third question, they also make mention of being able to sell high point alcohol products and wine in establishments where people under 21 can enter.  Again, pandering to fear that 16 year olds can simply walk into Reasor's and walk out with a 40 of OE.  Nevermind that I get asked for an ID to buy 3.2 beer in the grocery store while the liquor stores I frequent NEVER ask for an I.D.

IOW- due to company policies, you are far more likely to get carded at QT or Wal-Mart Market than at an independent liquor store.  It just amazes me that two or three liquor wholesalers and some lobbyists for liquor stores manage to prevent a million-plus who drink from being able to make the same decisions others do around the country.

Or that restaurants that sell alchohol do not bar entry of persons under the age of 21.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacks fan on September 06, 2011, 11:57:05 am
Most of the grocery stores that sell wine and beer, and those that sell spirits as well, that I have been to don't even sell MD20/20, Olde English, or any of the other "malt liquors" even the Walgreens and CVS stores don't carry them in the ones with a liquor department.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on September 06, 2011, 12:32:59 pm
QT sells various malt liquors including OE, I think. But it's all the 3.2 versions. My mind is boggled every time I see someone walking out with a 3.2 malt liquor.

What's better than a beer that's not only low in alcohol, but has a vomit-inducing taste?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on September 06, 2011, 12:42:53 pm
QT sells various malt liquors including OE, I think. But it's all the 3.2 versions. My mind is boggled every time I see someone walking out with a 3.2 malt liquor.

What's better than a beer that's not only low in alcohol, but has a vomit-inducing taste?

And exception to the rule is Mickey's Bigmouth..oh wait, I have to buy that in the liquor store, so it's definitely above 3.2 ABV.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Michael71 on September 16, 2011, 03:15:59 pm
If all that changes is the ability to sell beer and wine, then the liquor stores will only loose a small bit of their sales, but in no way be enough to cripple them or put them out of business.  If written correctly, then it might even be a small boost to them if they can sell cold, six point beer, if they are willing to put in coolers.  The only way that the individual liquor stores will really be effected is if the law is changed to allow the full sale of liquor in grocery stores.  If this was to happen, then what would remain of the liquor stores will be the cream of the crop, those that can cater to their customers.  I don't have a problem with this, or do you like the idea of a crappy liquor store on every corner, having to guess which ones actually know what they sale and can make a decent suggestion on things?

Wine is actually where liquor stores make their profit.  There's not much markup on a Crown Royal bottle...primarily because you have to compete with the bigger stores.  The bigger stores will make almost nothing on popular staple items.  But, that $6-$8 bottle of wine that you've never heard of only cost them $3.  Smaller stores have to put much more thought into their selections.  And, because most wines are there because of customer requests/suggestions, their markup is pretty consistent.

The price of a bottle of liquor would increase significantly if it were a liquor stores biggest commodity.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on September 16, 2011, 03:23:57 pm
Wine is actually where liquor stores make their profit.  There's not much markup on a Crown Royal bottle...primarily because you have to compete with the bigger stores.  The bigger stores will make almost nothing on popular staple items.  But, that $6-$8 bottle of wine that you've never heard of only cost them $3.  Smaller stores have to put much more thought into their selections.  And, because most wines are there because of customer requests/suggestions, their markup is pretty consistent.

The price of a bottle of liquor would increase significantly if it were a liquor stores biggest commodity.

How's the markup on craft beer?  It seems like some of the prices have gotten a bit exorbitant. I believe at one time I saw one importer's stated goal was to get the price of beer on par with wine.  That's too much.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Michael71 on September 16, 2011, 03:45:24 pm
How's the markup on craft beer?  It seems like some of the prices have gotten a bit exorbitant. I believe at one time I saw one importer's stated goal was to get the price of beer on par with wine.  That's too much.

Beer is NOT a money maker for most liquor stores...at least small ones like ours.  We also just have a standard markup no matter what type of beer it is.  We carry it for our customers convenience.  As for craft beers, it just depends.  It's already expensive enough.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on September 19, 2011, 02:28:25 pm
Article in today's Tulsa World does not offer a lot of  hope that change will happen soon.  Most of the quoted task force members sound like they have little interest in changing the current system in which each interest group has set up a comfortable nest.

     

Changes to Oklahoma liquor laws compared to high flying act
 
TOM GILBERT / Tulsa World file By WAYNE GREENE World Senior Writer
Published: 9/19/2011  2:22 AM
Last Modified: 9/19/2011  8:23 AM


Oklahoma's liquor laws are like a bear riding a bicycle on a high wire while juggling flaming sticks - balance is everything.

A legislative task force studying the idea of allowing grocery stores to sell strong beer and wine will determine if the state can restring that wire without bringing the whole thing down in a flaming mess that leaves nothing but an angry bear and a broken bike.

"It's complex," said state Rep. Ron Peters, R-Tulsa, and co-chairman of the committee that has its first meeting Monday at the state Capitol.

The task force brings lawmakers and representatives of all the interested parties - liquor stores, grocery stores, convenience stores, wholesalers, wineries, distributors, breweries and several others - to the table.

And everyone's got a stake in the question.

Oklahoma City Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Roy Williams is a member of the committee and an advocate for allowing strong beer and wine sales in grocery stores.

His arguments: It's more convenient for the consumers, brings competition to the market and will help recruit new retail and talented young people to the state.

Thirty-four other states allow wine and strong beer sales in grocery stores, and Oklahoma should, too, Williams said.

Breaking the liquor store monopoly on wine and strong beer would help speed the state's efforts to bring retailers like Costco into the state.

And modernizing the state's turn-of-the-century liquor laws would help change attitudes about Oklahoma, among potential employers and talented young workers.

But, he admits, changing the law is easier said than done.

For one thing, much of Oklahoma's liquor law is written into the state Constitution, so changing it requires a vote of the people. A requirement that constitutional questions only deal with a single subject further complicates the issue.

"The devil's in the details," he said.

Williams said he's convinced a compromise can be worked out that will make all parties happy, but some of the other members of the task force are dubious.

J.P. Richard, owner of Cache Road Liquor and Wine in Lawton, said the idea would take away about a quarter of retail liquor stores' business. The result: many locally owned businesses will go out of business in favor of big out-of-state chain stores.

"I would lose half my wine sales, and I would survive, but I'd have to lay people off," Richard said.

For consumers, it will mean less choice. Big stores will carry only a limited number of brands and distributors will be less willing to bring low-volume products into the state.

Under the current system, liquor stores can only sell wine, liquor and beer. One of the best ways of getting a competitive advantage is to push their distributors to bring in more variety in products: interesting new wine and beer labels that might not have huge sales, but might intrigue some customers.

"Basically, what you get in a grocery store - good ones, bad ones, whatever - is brands that are nationally distributed. What you don't get is what you can find in any good wine shop in the state of Oklahoma."

Oklahoma liquor stores currently have more than 17,000 products available through distributors. In Texas, where grocery stores sell strong beer and wine, there are fewer than 12,000 product lines available, Richard said.

He also predicted the result would be higher prices as distributors try to make up for the higher costs of delivering to more stores and liquor stores look to make up for lost business.

He scoffed at the idea of allowing liquor stores to sell others products - as happens in some other states - as a compensation for their lost wine and beer sales.

Changing the delicate balance of Oklahoma's liquor laws is "dismantling an industry that's not broken," he said.

Richard isn't the only skeptic on the task force.

Task force member Zach Prichard, president of McAlester-based Choc Beer, said broadening the sales of strong beer would definitely put many liquor stores out of business, which would translate into fewer retail outlets for niche-label beers like his own.

"I think a lot of people assume 'Hey, I'm going to get all the beers I can buy at the retail liquor store in Walmart or Whole Foods.' ... and that's not going to be the case," Prichard said "There definitely would be less availability of beer to the consumer."

Task Force member Jim Griffith, CEO of OnCue Express, a Stillwater-based convenience store chain, said convenience stores also are resisting the idea.

Convenience stores fear that the ability to sell strong beer and wine could come with the sorts of restrictions currently on liquor stores - limited hours and days of operations, limited number of stores owned by one person and limited access to minors.

"Every time you start thinking about something, there's questions that come up and nobody has been able to answer any of those questions so far," Griffith said.

He also doesn't like proposals to allow liquor stores to sell chilled beer or other products.

"What else would they be allowed to sell? Would they sell everything else that I sell, too? There's too many questions out there," he said. "In everything I've seen proposed there's winners and losers. I don't know how they're going to get it where there's no losers."

But Williams said he thinks there is a way to restring the high wire without dropping the bear or burning down the circus tent.

"One thing I'm certain of is you have to get consensus among the retailers, the grocery stores, the distributors - the industry, I would call it," he said. "It can't be us against them.

"I'm firmly convinced it's not going to be easy to come up with whatever compromise there is."



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on September 19, 2011, 03:09:00 pm
Quote
Task force member Zach Prichard, president of McAlester-based Choc Beer, said broadening the sales of strong beer would definitely put many liquor stores out of business, which would translate into fewer retail outlets for niche-label beers like his own.

"I think a lot of people assume 'Hey, I'm going to get all the beers I can buy at the retail liquor store in Walmart or Whole Foods.' ... and that's not going to be the case," Prichard said "There definitely would be less availability of beer to the consumer."

How would there be less availability to the consumer?  I've said it before and I'll say it again: grocery stores don't have near enough space to devote to carrying all sorts of micro-brews and wines.  Sure, you might be able to get a six pack of Fat Tire at Reasor's, but I doubt they would carry a Grand Cru from Avery.  Walking through Collins, Ranch Acres, or Parkhill's beer section now is like walking through a library.  It's unbelievable how many micro-brews and imports are out there now.

IOW, I might pick up some good beer or a bottle of wine at the store as a convenience when I'm getting meat or produce, but it wouldn't take away much of my business from the liquor stores I frequent because I do like exotic beers and better wines.  Nobody ever accused me of being a cheap drunk ;)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on September 19, 2011, 03:13:31 pm
There will be so many hands in this everyone on either side will stop, look at each other and say "Wait, what?"  Then it will fail miserably.




Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on September 19, 2011, 03:30:57 pm
There will be so many hands in this everyone on either side will stop, look at each other and say "Wait, what?"  Then it will fail miserably.

I see they have people with commercial interests on the task force.  I wonder if it ever occurred to them to have some citizens on the committee.

And then there's Don Vito...


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on September 19, 2011, 03:33:19 pm
I see they have people with commercial interests on the task force.  I wonder if it ever occurred to them to have some citizens on the committee.


No no no...that's to protect us.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on September 19, 2011, 03:49:05 pm
Sadly liquor in Oklahoma is a pie that has been divided up among the interested parties (save the consumer) and none of those parties has any interest in changing a very cushy arrangement.  No consumer representative is on the task force because we don't matter to the "stakeholders."  Even worse, because so much of the system is enshrined in Oklahoma's constitution, change is nearly impossible.

The argument that Oklahomans have "access" to more product than Texans is laughable.  If a Texan can't find a wine he wants at the local liquor store, he can order it from the winery and have it shipped to his house (and Texas collects its tax).  That's a win/win - liquor store doesn't have to carry less well-known product and the consumer can obtain anything he wants.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on September 19, 2011, 06:03:33 pm
How would there be less availability to the consumer?  I've said it before and I'll say it again: grocery stores don't have near enough space to devote to carrying all sorts of micro-brews and wines.  Sure, you might be able to get a six pack of Fat Tire at Reasor's, but I doubt they would carry a Grand Cru from Avery.  Walking through Collins, Ranch Acres, or Parkhill's beer section now is like walking through a library.  It's unbelievable how many micro-brews and imports are out there now.

IOW, I might pick up some good beer or a bottle of wine at the store as a convenience when I'm getting meat or produce, but it wouldn't take away much of my business from the liquor stores I frequent because I do like exotic beers and better wines.  Nobody ever accused me of being a cheap drunk ;)

I would gladly not give a crap about the ability for grocery stores to sell wine and strong beer if they would just allow the liquor stores to sell it cold!  Why do you think you can't buy Fat Tire in Oklahoma at all?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on September 19, 2011, 10:13:50 pm
I would gladly not give a crap about the ability for grocery stores to sell wine and strong beer if they would just allow the liquor stores to sell it cold!  Why do you think you can't buy Fat Tire in Oklahoma at all?

Here's a hint for you, Hoss.

Ever since Santa Fe Brewing started shipping Nut Brown Ale to Oklahoma, I really don't care to do border runs to Siloam, Ark City, Ks. or even bring Fat Tire back from my excursions to Colorado or NM.  NBA is a superior brew to Fat Tire, but don't tell the New Belgium flaks that. Far richer malt.  Trust me on this one, I know I blew it on Marshall's, but really trust me for once ;)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: jne on September 19, 2011, 10:29:29 pm
+1 to SFNBA

Isn't the obvious compromise to allow liquor stores to sell other items (mixers, limes, corkscrews) and refrigerate.... I'm not buying the the 'fewer products available' story.  When I go to a good liquor store in KS and MO, I wonder what the hell the problem is in Oklahoma.  There is no reason we have to be stuck with what the distributors decide.  I had been trying to find Muchote tequila recently.  When I asked ranch acres if they can order it, they told me that you can't get it in Oklahoma. I'm sure Muchote would like to sell it to me....


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on September 19, 2011, 11:48:08 pm
Here's a hint for you, Hoss.

Ever since Santa Fe Brewing started shipping Nut Brown Ale to Oklahoma, I really don't care to do border runs to Siloam, Ark City, Ks. or even bring Fat Tire back from my excursions to Colorado or NM.  NBA is a superior brew to Fat Tire, but don't tell the New Belgium flaks that. Far richer malt.  Trust me on this one, I know I blew it on Marshall's, but really trust me for once ;)

I'll give that a shot then.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on September 20, 2011, 08:03:23 am
Rich Lenz commented on Ch. 6 this morning that the committee seems "stacked" against this proposal as 9 out of 17 members are against it.  Don't think that was just a little bit of editorializing, do you?   ;D


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on September 20, 2011, 08:29:40 am
Rich Lenz commented on Ch. 6 this morning that the committee seems "stacked" against this proposal as 9 out of 17 members are against it.  Don't think that was just a little bit of editorializing, do you?   ;D

Editorializing, but more cogent than the bizarre bicylcing bear on a high wire juggling flaming tourches metaphpor in the Tulsa World article.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on September 20, 2011, 10:43:52 am
A study needs to be done on the lost sales tax revenues. I know most of my home beer is bought out of state.

From my very unscientific looks at what's in the MET's recycling bins when I drop off my empties, there are a lot more people like me. I saw some Fat Tire in there the other day, some Schlafly in there the previous trip. Neither is available here.

Lost tax revenue just seems like it'd be a stronger argument. And for the record, I don't care whether grocery stores can sell anything. Just allow liquor stores to refrigerate and to be open reasonable hours and seven days a week.

Of these 100 best American beers on ratebeer, only a couple of those breweries distribute in Oklahoma. I can get lots more of them in surrounding states.

http://www.ratebeer.com/Ratings/TopAmerican.asp


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on September 20, 2011, 10:56:08 am
Rich Lenz commented on Ch. 6 this morning that the committee seems "stacked" against this proposal as 9 out of 17 members are against it.  Don't think that was just a little bit of editorializing, do you?   ;D

Of course Rich lived in New Orleans before coming here and I'm pretty sure he got quite the Liquor shock after finding out how backwards our law is.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on September 20, 2011, 11:47:40 am
Interesting, the top beer on Ted's link only has distribution in the Chicago area.  Looks like 3 Floyds had quite a few entries.  I've got to make a mental note to look for it if I'm ever in the windy city.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on September 20, 2011, 12:01:58 pm
Something else not addressed in that article: breweries. Wouldn't it be nice if we could get a growler filled at Marshall's?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on September 20, 2011, 12:04:14 pm
Something else not addressed in that article: breweries. Wouldn't it be nice if we could get a growler filled at Marshall's?

Or Coop, or Battered Boar, or Choc (not a personal fave of mine).

Apparently the parents at ABLE or whichever governing body decided that even brewery tours are verboten.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: carltonplace on September 20, 2011, 12:06:12 pm
Interesting, the top beer on Ted's link only has distribution in the Chicago area.  Looks like 3 Floyds had quite a few entries.  I've got to make a mental note to look for it if I'm ever in the windy city.

I'm mildly irritated that our bureuacracy is preventing me from trying the 100 best rated beers in the comfort of my Tulsa home or favorite Tulsa bar.

ABLE can suck it.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: carltonplace on September 20, 2011, 12:08:11 pm
Or Coop, or Battered Boar, or Choc (not a personal fave of mine).

Apparently the parents at ABLE or whichever governing body decided that even brewery tours are verboten.

I went to the Rahr and Son's brewery in Fort Worth for a "tasting" and there were hundreds of people there. That beer is not even a great beer and people were swarming all over the brewery. I wish we could do that at the Marshall's brewery.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on September 20, 2011, 12:12:35 pm
I went to the Rahr and Son's brewery in Fort Worth for a "tasting" and there were hundreds of people there. That beer is not even a great beer and people were swarming all over the brewery. I wish we could do that at the Marshall's brewery.
I went to their Saturday afternoon tasting once, too. It was great. Tons of people inside and outside, a food cart. And you're right, the beer was mediocre.

But it was a great atmosphere. I think it was like $5-$6 for a pint glass you can keep plus three pints of their beers. It was in a kind of industrial area, big warehouse with not much around. Similar environment as Marshall.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Nik on September 20, 2011, 03:41:41 pm
Or Coop, or Battered Boar, or Choc (not a personal fave of mine).

Apparently the parents at ABLE or whichever governing body decided that even brewery tours are verboten.

But yet allowed at wineries.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on September 29, 2011, 01:27:19 pm
Interesting article that compares the 3-tier system to an extension of Prohibition (and what it calls the Bootleggers and Baptists coalition).  It is a useful reminder than Oklahoma is not alone in its silly laws or the uphill battle we face in bringing about modernization.

http://www.mackinac.org/15789


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: jacobi on September 29, 2011, 03:41:27 pm
In the last tulsa world article they said that the next meeting of the committe would be in Feb.  Does anyone know if there is a way for citizens to sit in on this?  Or is this a closed doors deal?  If it's open doors...ROAD TRIP!  I know I could ge quite a few people to show up for this.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on September 30, 2011, 02:28:46 pm
Here's a hint for you, Hoss.

Ever since Santa Fe Brewing started shipping Nut Brown Ale to Oklahoma, I really don't care to do border runs to Siloam, Ark City, Ks. or even bring Fat Tire back from my excursions to Colorado or NM.  NBA is a superior brew to Fat Tire, but don't tell the New Belgium flaks that. Far richer malt.  Trust me on this one, I know I blew it on Marshall's, but really trust me for once ;)

Conan. I'm going to take your word about Santa Fe Nut Brown Ale. Cause if it is good enough to stop Road trips. I'm in.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on September 30, 2011, 03:18:27 pm
Conan. I'm going to take your word about Santa Fe Nut Brown Ale. Cause if it is good enough to stop Road trips. I'm in.

It rocks.  Pick up a six this weekend, you won't be sorry!


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on October 03, 2011, 09:23:09 am
It rocks.  Pick up a six this weekend, you won't be sorry!

I told the man at the new B&B liquor that I was taking a friends advice about trying this beer and he handed me a six and I told him to go ahead and give me two. He thought that was awesome to take a chance like that.
And it was not a risk at all. Great beer and I was glad I had twelve. Thanks Conan.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on October 03, 2011, 11:08:44 am
I hope these comments cause lots of complaining customers and/or lost business for Mary Stewart of Ranch Acres Wine & Spirits.

Quote
She said customers - especially those from Oklahoma - rarely complain that refrigerated wine and beer aren't available in liquor stores.

The current system may seem odd, but it ensures that strong beer, wine and liquor sales and their profits are controlled by Oklahomans, she said.

Out-of-state corporations would be big winners in a move to loosen alcohol sales, she said, and consumers would be the big losers because fewer wine and beer labels would be available in the marketplace.

"Letting those big superstores into the market is not going to help us here," she said. "The selection would diminish. The prices would certainly not go down on the bulk of things."

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20111001_16_A1_CUTLIN226110

A. I don't go into liquor stores and grumble about backwards laws. I just buy what I want in states where it's actually sold. Before all this hubbub, I assume liquor store owners were, like me, forced to deal with stupid laws. From some comments in these stories, they're very willing participants. Makes me want to go out of my way to avoid them.

If I do end up in an Oklahoma liquor store anytime soon, I'm going to spend more time complaining about stupid smile than buying, because apparently liquor store owners think the status quo is A-OK.

B. How in the hell would we have less selection? That's so far from reality and not even possible.

There's a crowdsourced spreadsheet of brewery availability by state out there.

The number of breweries by state (obviously it's not perfect, but it's close):
Texas 124
Missouri 123
Kansas 113
Arkansas 72
Oklahoma 68


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacks fan on October 03, 2011, 12:26:05 pm
Selection would diminish? What a load of crap! Sounds like she's affraid of open competition. When I lived in AZ there are two large store places and the buyer benefits, and there are plenty of specialty stores as well not including grocery and convenience store, and no one was 'OH MY GOD THE CHILDREN SHOULD NOT SEE THIS FILTH AND SIN IN PLAIN VIEW!!!!!'


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: jne on October 03, 2011, 01:58:30 pm
Interesting, I would expect liquor stores like ranch acres (a quality store IMO) would be big winners.  My experience with the folks employed at that store have been great.  However, I've been disappointed in the already limited selection and just because I'm used to buying hot beer doesn't mean I don't mind - I hate it EVERY time I have to buy a hot premium beer.  While it might hurt sales at stores that don't offer much more than 4 walls and a bunch of booze (god forbid we might lose respected business like say "Bunghole"....)  I'd love for someone to explain to me what would cause a further limiting of selection.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on October 03, 2011, 02:47:06 pm
Interesting, I would expect liquor stores like ranch acres (a quality store IMO) would be big winners.  My experience with the folks employed at that store have been great.  However, I've been disappointed in the already limited selection and just because I'm used to buying hot beer doesn't mean I don't mind - I hate it EVERY time I have to buy a hot premium beer.  While it might hurt sales at stores that don't offer much more than 4 walls and a bunch of booze (god forbid we might lose respected business like say "Bunghole"....)  I'd love for someone to explain to me what would cause a further limiting of selection.

I've been saying this all along: Changing the distribution network to allow high point beer and wine in groceries really won't make much of a dent in liquor store business that they aren't already losing now due to store closing requirements after 9pm and Sundays.  At least well-stocked stores which a large selection of wine and beer shouldn't suffer terribly. 

Based on the way grocers must apportion shelf space, they can't possibly afford to stock obscure microbrews.  Just a guess, but local grocers would offer high point versions of the common Mexican beers, three or four of Choc and Boulevard's offerings, high point versions of Red Stripe, Heineken, and other beers which have been shipping 3.2.  Those are beers I only pick up out of convenience while buying food or if I mis-planned and forgot to get to the liquor store on Saturday and I want something other than American style piss water when I'm working in the yard on Sunday afternoon. 

Case in point: We had a painting project going on at FMC's yesterday.  Nothing is better than a cold brew while painting, but there was nothing in the house.  Only option is 3.2 from the grocer, so I grabbed some Red Stripe and some Boulevard Wheat.  Neither is in my usual taste range, but it beats Miller or Bud Lite.  What I'm getting at is that I don't see convenience or grocery stores cannibalizing large amounts of business from liquor stores.  They will simply sell higher point versions of what they already sell to their patrons.

A grocer isn't going to make a huge investment in upscale wines, they will carry some decent varieties to match with food.  Again, people who appreciate great wine will still visit their local liquor store.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on October 03, 2011, 04:16:07 pm
I hope these comments cause lots of complaining customers and/or lost business for Mary Stewart of Ranch Acres Wine & Spirits.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20111001_16_A1_CUTLIN226110

A. I don't go into liquor stores and grumble about backwards laws. I just buy what I want in states where it's actually sold. Before all this hubbub, I assume liquor store owners were, like me, forced to deal with stupid laws. From some comments in these stories, they're very willing participants. Makes me want to go out of my way to avoid them.

If I do end up in an Oklahoma liquor store anytime soon, I'm going to spend more time complaining about stupid smile than buying, because apparently liquor store owners think the status quo is A-OK.

B. How in the hell would we have less selection? That's so far from reality and not even possible.

There's a crowdsourced spreadsheet of brewery availability by state out there.

The number of breweries by state (obviously it's not perfect, but it's close):
Texas 124
Missouri 123
Kansas 113
Arkansas 72
Oklahoma 68

It's really pretty simply - the status quo is comfortable and designed to benefit the established players.  Any change to our rigged system would mean liquor stores would have to compete harder and better to be successful.  That may mean staying open later or being more creative in how they do business.  I'm not sure when or why some folks came to the conclusion that it's the state's responsiblity to assure Ms. Stewart of a profit selling liquor.  For that matter, why does Okla. protect in-state liquor store owners but allow all this darn out-of-state competition in other areas?  Oklahoma's screwed up liquor laws are so intertwined we need to rescind them all (yes, that means state constitutional amendments) and start fresh from scratch.  I won't be holding my breath until that happens.



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on October 03, 2011, 04:29:24 pm
I'm not sure when or why some folks came to the conclusion that it's the state's responsiblity to assure Ms. Stewart of a profit selling liquor. 

The liquor industry must have used the same lawyers as the electric and natural gas utilities.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on October 03, 2011, 04:32:57 pm
The liquor industry must have used the same lawyers as the electric and natural gas utilities.

Hey, now there's an idea!  Let the Corporation Commission regulate alcohol in the state  :o


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on October 03, 2011, 04:42:20 pm
QT's Mike Thornbrugh is "The Man" ! He is exactly right in that article. And where does she get that one owner can only have one location. B&B Liquor Warehouse(Which is the Bomb) just opened up their third store here in B.A. Are all three different owners ?
Obama did it and so can Oklahoma Liquor Laws. "CHANGE" we need it now.



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on October 03, 2011, 05:02:21 pm
Hey, now there's an idea!  Let the Corporation Commission regulate alcohol in the state  :o

Because they've done so well with everything el...wait, what?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on October 03, 2011, 05:04:07 pm
QT's Mike Thornbrugh is "The Man" ! He is exactly right in that article. And where does she get that one owner can only have one location. B&B Liquor Warehouse(Which is the Bomb) just opened up their third store here in B.A. Are all three different owners ?
Obama did it and so can Oklahoma Liquor Laws. "CHANGE" we need it now.

I've heard that one store / one owner deal too.  I heard that Parkhill's South (at 101st & Memorial just north of the QT) is owned by Mrs. Parkhill, not Mr. (Fred?) Parkhill to keep it legal.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on October 03, 2011, 06:08:10 pm
I've heard that one store / one owner deal too.  I heard that Parkhill's South (at 101st & Memorial just north of the QT) is owned by Mrs. Parkhill, not Mr. (Fred?) Parkhill to keep it legal.

And Parkhill's son is a wholesaler, on the paperwork.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacks fan on October 03, 2011, 06:20:39 pm
I figured Lance was involved somewher with mom & dad.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on October 04, 2011, 07:34:04 am
I've heard that one store / one owner deal too.  I heard that Parkhill's South (at 101st & Memorial just north of the QT) is owned by Mrs. Parkhill, not Mr. (Fred?) Parkhill to keep it legal.

Oh I get it. We love the law so much that we skirt it. That makes since.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: OSU on October 04, 2011, 08:19:11 am
While I`m only a modest consumer of beer (~1.5 per week) I haven`t purchased beer in an Oklahoma liquor store/ grocery since 2006.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on October 04, 2011, 08:24:02 am
I've heard that one store / one owner deal too.  I heard that Parkhill's South (at 101st & Memorial just north of the QT) is owned by Mrs. Parkhill, not Mr. (Fred?) Parkhill to keep it legal.

I thought it was the daughter?  In any event, what other business in Okla. is limited to one location?  Why do we want to stiffle success and the benefits of purchasing power at the retail level yet let the state get carved in half between two primary distributors?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on October 04, 2011, 08:32:37 am
In any event, what other business in Okla. is limited to one location?  Why do we want to stiffle success and the benefits of purchasing power at the retail level yet let the state get carved in half between two primary distributors?

I've been told the "one store per person" thing is to keep large companies from coming in and buying several locations and stifling competition.  Yes, we still have competition stifled all to Hell.

The distributors are crushing us.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on October 04, 2011, 08:36:11 am
I've been told the "one store per person" thing is to keep large companies from coming in and buying several locations and stifling competition.  Yes, we still have competition stifled all to Hell.

The distributors are crushing us.


Exactly!  Let's prevent little monopolies on the retail level while we protect a monopoly on the wholesale level.

I've actually come up with a great solution to our archaic laws: move out of state.  One of these days.... ;)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on October 04, 2011, 11:04:01 am
While I`m only a modest consumer of beer (~1.5 per week) I haven`t purchased beer in an Oklahoma liquor store/ grocery since 2006.
And that's the big missing link in all these discussions. How much tax revenue are we losing? We have quotes from liquor store owners saying nobody's complaining. They're probably doing their complaining at the out of state liquor stores.

I'm looking forward to stocking my shelves with at least $100 worth of good fall/winter beers in the coming weeks. All of that tax will be going to the state of Missouri.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: godboko71 on October 04, 2011, 01:42:39 pm
That is funny all my money goes to Texas right now, granted that would not change if the laws did, however it would when in Tulsa if our laws change.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheArtist on October 04, 2011, 04:46:35 pm
 With a healthy meal and in moderation alchohol has proven health benefits.

Food addictions and "abuse" kill 8-10 times more people in Oklahoma than alchohol addictions and abuse.

Lets ban all restaurants, eating establishements, and grocers within 300 feet of Churches and not allow them to be open on Sundays.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on October 04, 2011, 04:56:03 pm
With a healthy meal and in moderation alchohol has proven health benefits.

Food addictions and "abuse" kill 8-10 times more people in Oklahoma than alchohol addictions and abuse.

Lets ban all restaurants, eating establishements, and grocers within 300 feet of Churches and not allow them to be open on Sundays.

And require all church parking to be at least 1/4 mile from the church.  That will allow the "saved" to come back to earth before trying drive their car.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacks fan on October 04, 2011, 05:43:07 pm
I thought you were going to say so they can learn to walk.......


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on October 04, 2011, 05:47:15 pm
I thought you were going to say so they can learn to walk.......

That too but I'm more concerned about them driving a car.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on October 04, 2011, 09:32:00 pm
That too but I'm more concerned about them driving a car.

Just avoid the ones who went through the communion line three times.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on October 21, 2011, 07:23:12 am
And the task force disbands.
Quote
OKLAHOMA CITY - After hearing dire predictions that more crime and drunkenness would accompany broader availability of wine and strong beer in the state, a legislative task force studying that idea folded Thursday.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20111021_16_A11_CUTLIN263415


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: AquaMan on October 21, 2011, 08:05:09 am
Oh I get it. We love the law so much that we skirt it. That makes since.

I think the picture is clear to all of us.

I recently spoke to a fellow who had a chance to buy a liquor store well located in one of the growing suburbs few years back. He had owned an area restaurant and had closed it up. He relates to me that the only way to compete at the retail level in liqour stores is location. Once the key location is sewed up the economics won't allow much competition. Anyway, just as he makes an offer the store gets snapped up by someone who offered more than twice the asking price. I won't divulge the location or the parties, but it seems one of the wholesalers was concerned that this location, one of his largest customers, might end up using the other wholesaler if a stranger bought the place. So, he used his daughter-in-law to buy the place at the inflated price to secure the future stream of product.

Now, vertical integration is not unusual in the open marketplace, but this is not an open marketplace. The players at the wholesale level are appointed lords of the state and as such should not be allowed to own retail stores using this scam.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on October 21, 2011, 09:22:42 am
I think the picture is clear to all of us.

I recently spoke to a fellow who had a chance to buy a liquor store well located in one of the growing suburbs few years back. He had owned an area restaurant and had closed it up. He relates to me that the only way to compete at the retail level in liqour stores is location. Once the key location is sewed up the economics won't allow much competition. Anyway, just as he makes an offer the store gets snapped up by someone who offered more than twice the asking price. I won't divulge the location or the parties, but it seems one of the wholesalers was concerned that this location, one of his largest customers, might end up using the other wholesaler if a stranger bought the place. So, he used his daughter-in-law to buy the place at the inflated price to secure the future stream of product.

Now, vertical integration is not unusual in the open marketplace, but this is not an open marketplace. The players at the wholesale level are appointed lords of the state and as such should not be allowed to own retail stores using this scam.


Things like that happened with horse racing, too, after the legislature sold out to the Mafia.

As I have harped on interminably, look at who you are voting for!  And stop it!  Vote for someone else!






Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on October 21, 2011, 09:26:32 am
Someone take a look at his campaign contributors, I smell a rat.  Either this guy is the worst kind of fundie, or he's been bought and paid for:

Quote
Sen. Jonathan Nichols, R-Norman, offered the motion for the task force to disband. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote.

If the issue comes up in the Legislature next year, Nichols said he'll be there to fight against it.

"That issue is talking about nothing less than putting 'Everclear in a Can' in the grocery stores, where they've got - according to the testimony of the other side - employees as young as 18 and 16 and even 15 years of age behind the cash registers," Nichols said after the hearing. "I will not support increasing access to alcohol for our youth by putting it in grocery stores. I just will not support that."

During Thursday's hearing, Nichols reacted strongly to statistics presented by Keith Burt, director of the Alcoholic Beverage Laws Enforcement Commission, that in the state of Washington liquor store clerks prevent 97 percent of sales to minors, but 1 in 4 attempts by minors to buy alcohol in convenience stores is successful.

Nichols asked Deputy Mental Health Commissioner Steve Buck if he thought increasing the availability of wine and strong beer would lead to more alcohol-involved accidents involving young drivers.

"I have significant concerns that it will," Buck said.

One study has shown that for every 1 percent increase in the retail density of alcohol, consumption will increase by 2.5 percent and violent crime will increase 0.5 percent, Buck said.

Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20111021_16_A11_CUTLIN263415

Can I get a quadruple face palm here?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacks fan on October 21, 2011, 09:27:46 am
More crime and drunkeness? Seriously? Is that the best they could come up with? I say give it 10 or 20 years and it might happen like finally getting the lottery amidst all the dire problems and fears associated with it. I know thats not the best comparison but these people have their heads in concrete not sand.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on October 21, 2011, 10:00:11 am
Someone take a look at his campaign contributors, I smell a rat.  Either this guy is the worst kind of fundie, or he's been bought and paid for:

Can I get a quadruple face palm here?

Like we seriously thought this was going to happen?  Now really the only way it will is via petition...sad.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on October 21, 2011, 10:48:27 am
CDC report:
"ATLANTA – Health officials say drunken driving has fallen 30 percent in five years, and last year was at its lowest mark in nearly two decades."

It's not a crisis, it's an industry.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on October 24, 2011, 07:59:30 am
I'm still trying see how we can integrate the changing of the law to get the kids more School buses, basketballs, computers etc, etc, etc. Hmmm........ ::)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on October 24, 2011, 09:35:22 am
I'm still trying see how we can integrate the changing of the law to get the kids more School buses, basketballs, computers etc, etc, etc. Hmmm........ ::)

Hey there you go:

"Liquor law reform.  Do it for the children."

And have a bunch of frowning children telling how if liquor laws aren't reformed, they can't ride on shiny new school buses and they won't have paper to write on.  Hey, it's worked for other vices.  Brilliant Dolfan!


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: BKDotCom on October 24, 2011, 10:50:58 am
I find it ironic that the "it promotes drunkenness and underage drinking - we'll have nothing to do with it" announcement came during Octoberfest.   How can we have a big beer fest while at the same time saying beer is bad m-kay.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on October 24, 2011, 10:53:48 am
I find it ironic that the "it promotes drunkenness and underage drinking - we'll have nothing to do with it" announcement came during Octoberfest.   How can we have a big beer fest while at the same time saying beer is bad m-kay.

That DOES suffer from a little irony, doesn't it?



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacks fan on October 24, 2011, 11:01:49 am
I find it ironic that the "it promotes drunkenness and underage drinking - we'll have nothing to do with it" announcement came during Octoberfest.   How can we have a big beer fest while at the same time saying beer is bad m-kay.

This comes from the hypocritical members of the board that enjoy their cocktail parties in their wellstocked liquor cabinets in their homes, and then go to country club for the same, go to church and pose puritanically and then tell everyone else how they should live. The same people who screamed that the passing of liquor by the drink and cutting back the hours of liquor stores was going to increase the number of drunk drivers and deaths related to it. They need to quit polishing the buckle and get out of the positions they are in or have someone jack hammer their heads out of the concrete they are in.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on October 24, 2011, 11:57:09 am
Good thing I just spent ~$200 in Missouri on a winter beer supply. We're flush with cash. The state of Oklahoma has no use for all that tax money going to neighboring states.

That Founders Breakfast Stout is mighty smooth and tasty.

And I ask again, why do grocery store sales have to be the goal?

I don't really care if I can buy actual beer at the grocery store. How about just relaxing laws on the liquor stores? Cold sales. Sales until midnight 7 days a week, etc. Then again I'm not your average Oklahoma beer drinker. I just want to be able to buy good quality beer.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on October 24, 2011, 12:35:18 pm
Like we seriously thought this was going to happen?  Now really the only way it will is via petition...sad.

Given the composition of this task force, the outcome was predetermined.  That said, relying on statements that reform will result in "Everclear in a can" and "promoting drunkeness and underage drinking" show how desparate the beneficiaries of the current system are to maintain the status quo and protect their government sanctioned profits. 

The petition route will be cumbersome and it will be difficult to make much headway given the likely need to amend the Oklahoma constitution, the intertwined complexity of the liquor system and the rules for petition initiatives.  In the meantime, more and more Oklahomans will resort to obtaining wine and beer in a selection and at prices the Oklahoma liquor cartel do not provide.  So lives on the legacy of the so-called Bootlegger and Baptist coalition.



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: godboko71 on October 24, 2011, 04:50:23 pm
Looks like I will have to keep buying from Texas.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on October 24, 2011, 05:15:28 pm
Good thing I just spent ~$200 in Missouri on a winter beer supply. We're flush with cash. The state of Oklahoma has no use for all that tax money going to neighboring states.

You can last all winter on ~$200 worth of beer?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on October 24, 2011, 05:34:28 pm
You can last all winter on ~$200 worth of beer?

Better man than I.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on October 24, 2011, 07:47:27 pm
You can last all winter on ~$200 worth of beer?

He'd be a teetotaler around my house, that's roughly the monthly budget here.  Give or take a thousand. ;)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on October 25, 2011, 07:47:28 am
You can last all winter on ~$200 worth of beer?

It probably wouldnt be hard if you dont have any help.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on October 25, 2011, 10:16:55 am
Those 8-10% ABV stouts last a while. Three of them on a Saturday night is plenty. More than that and I'd be suffering some consequences in the morning.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on October 25, 2011, 10:33:54 am
I hope our Oklahoma breweries are taking note. I'd become an indentured servant at Marshall's if they managed to do something about ABLE.

Quote
Jester King Craft Brewery has announced it is suing the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission. The brewery claims that sections of the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code violate the First and 14th amendments of the United States Constitution.

http://austinist.com/2011/10/24/jester_king_brewery_sues_tabc.php


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on October 25, 2011, 11:39:50 am
Those 8-10% ABV stouts last a while. Three of them on a Saturday night is plenty. More than that and I'd be suffering some consequences in the morning.

That's why you drink a variety.  Have a few lower alcohol brews and maybe only one of the big beers on any given beer night.  That way you have big beers through to the next shopping trip in mid winter.
 
 ;D


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Nik on October 25, 2011, 01:03:34 pm
I hope our Oklahoma breweries are taking note. I'd become an indentured servant at Marshall's if they managed to do something about ABLE.

http://austinist.com/2011/10/24/jester_king_brewery_sues_tabc.php

Straight from the brewery: http://jesterkingbrewery.com/jester-king-craft-brewery-sues-texas-alcoholic-beverage-commission-over-beer-and-consumer-freedom

It's interesting. Texas has the same laws as Oklahoma regarding beer and wine sales; breweries cannot sell their beer directly to someone that visits the brewery, but wineries has sell to visitors of the winery. Should be interesting to see how it turns out. If they win, I can't see how that wouldn't apply to ABLE.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on October 25, 2011, 02:57:51 pm
Should be interesting to see how it turns out. If they win, I can't see how that wouldn't apply to ABLE.

Not necessarily.  Although it appears this lawsuit is filed in federal court in Texas, any ruling would not be binding on federal (or state courts) in Oklahoma, particularly as it would be interpreting a Texas statute.  If Jester King prevails, it could definitely encourage an Oklahoma brewer to file a simliar challenge and the Texas decision could be persuasive, but that does not mean you get the same outcome in Oklahoma.  Of course, that assume Jester King prevails.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on October 25, 2011, 10:19:07 pm
Straight from the brewery: http://jesterkingbrewery.com/jester-king-craft-brewery-sues-texas-alcoholic-beverage-commission-over-beer-and-consumer-freedom

It's interesting. Texas has the same laws as Oklahoma regarding beer and wine sales; breweries cannot sell their beer directly to someone that visits the brewery, but wineries has sell to visitors of the winery. Should be interesting to see how it turns out. If they win, I can't see how that wouldn't apply to ABLE.

Interesting.  I actually have bought wine at an Oklahoma winery and children didn't get drunk and no one was killed by me driving home from the winery with those bottles of wine in my trunk as I'm sure the liquor lobby is convinced would happen from such abhorrent behavior.

Now for the rest of the story:

Those wines were so dreadful, I doubt if I'll ever drink another Oklahoma wine unless it's free.  We simply don't seem to have anyone in this state with wine crafting skills which are on par with other vintners around the globe.  I'm serious. Yellow Penguin is better than most of the crap our vintners come up with.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on October 26, 2011, 06:35:54 am
Those wines were so dreadful, I doubt if I'll ever drink another Oklahoma wine unless it's free.  We simply don't seem to have anyone in this state with wine crafting skills which are on par with other vintners around the globe.  I'm serious. Yellow Penguin is better than most of the crap our vintners come up with.

You clearly need to lower your expectations.
 
 ;D


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: nathanm on October 26, 2011, 09:13:22 am
Those wines were so dreadful, I doubt if I'll ever drink another Oklahoma wine unless it's free.  We simply don't seem to have anyone in this state with wine crafting skills which are on par with other vintners around the globe.  I'm serious. Yellow Penguin is better than most of the crap our vintners come up with.

I thought several of Stone Bluff's wines were decent, but Tidal School's stuff didn't really do much for me.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on October 26, 2011, 09:14:30 am
Interesting.  I actually have bought wine at an Oklahoma winery and children didn't get drunk and no one was killed by me driving home from the winery with those bottles of wine in my trunk as I'm sure the liquor lobby is convinced would happen from such abhorrent behavior.

Now for the rest of the story:

Those wines were so dreadful, I doubt if I'll ever drink another Oklahoma wine unless it's free.  We simply don't seem to have anyone in this state with wine crafting skills which are on par with other vintners around the globe.  I'm serious. Yellow Penguin is better than most of the crap our vintners come up with.

Our hot sun tends to make them too sweet for me.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on October 26, 2011, 11:14:38 am
I thought several of Stone Bluff's wines were decent, but Tidal School's stuff didn't really do much for me.

Last time I had a bottle of the Stone Bluff Cynthiana, it had a really weird whang.  Somewhat like what bottled chrysanthemums would taste like.  GHACK!



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacks fan on October 26, 2011, 11:49:15 am
Last time I had a bottle of the Stone Bluff Cynthiana, it had a really weird whang.  Somewhat like what bottled chrysanthemums would taste like.  GHACK!



NSFW

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMiPjnNF7Dc[/youtube]


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on October 26, 2011, 01:58:58 pm
NSFW

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMiPjnNF7Dc[/youtube]

Can't see the video at work, but my guess is a clip from Hollywood Knights


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on October 26, 2011, 02:01:45 pm
I also liked the one armed Violinist. Great movie.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacks fan on October 26, 2011, 02:08:35 pm
Every time someone says 'It's gotta wang to it' that sceene immediately comes to my mind.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on October 26, 2011, 03:48:29 pm
I doubt the world's great wine makers could do much with Oklahoma's native grapes and the well known varietals simply cannot take Oklahoma's weather (this year being a worse case scenario on both the hot and cold end).  I think most of Oklahoma's wineries use some, if a not a majority, of grapes grown out-of-state.

It is ironic that the legislature has given the Oklahoma wine industry more leeway than local breweries, even though our brewers have a much better chance of making a world class product that could grow in to a real industry and tourist draw.  I suspect Oklahoma's wine industry is doomed to always be a novelty.



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on October 26, 2011, 07:47:21 pm
Every time someone says 'It's gotta wang to it' that sceene immediately comes to my mind.

We are a predictable lot aren't we?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on October 26, 2011, 07:48:12 pm
I doubt the world's great wine makers could do much with Oklahoma's native grapes and the well known varietals simply cannot take Oklahoma's weather (this year being a worse case scenario on both the hot and cold end).  I think most of Oklahoma's wineries use some, if a not a majority, of grapes grown out-of-state.

It is ironic that the legislature has given the Oklahoma wine industry more leeway than local breweries, even though our brewers have a much better chance of making a world class product that could grow in to a real industry and tourist draw.  I suspect Oklahoma's wine industry is doomed to always be a novelty.



Yep, that's correct many wineries in the state import juice to supplement the limitations of their own harvests.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on October 26, 2011, 08:14:28 pm
Yep, that's correct many wineries in the state import juice to supplement the limitations of their own harvests.

I have only been to a very few of our wineries, but the ones I have talked to have either stated outright that they buy from outside sources for a good portion of their juice, or they have skirted around the question, making me suspicious that they do, but don't want to talk about it.

The variable results of our local wineries would seem to be at least partly due to other than grapes.



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacks fan on October 31, 2011, 06:08:48 pm
This story should sound a little familar. At least the liquor stores in OK are not "state" stores. (I use that term loosely)

Quote
Washington currently is one of 18 “control states,” places where the government runs the sale and distribution of liquor. The Evergreen State has had this system since 1933, and officials say it results in lower per-capita alcohol consumption and a reliable stream of tax revenue for government.

It has a “three-tiered” liquor control system, which segregates the manufacturing, distributing and retailing of spirits. The wholesalers say deregulation brought about by privatization would remove checks on selling spirits, and could lead to problems like binge drinking and give retailers too much sway


http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2011/09/07/wholesalers-pour-millions-into-fight-against-costco-booze-measure/ (http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2011/09/07/wholesalers-pour-millions-into-fight-against-costco-booze-measure/)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on October 31, 2011, 06:28:15 pm
This story should sound a little familar. At least the liquor stores in OK are not "state" stores. (I use that term loosely)


http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2011/09/07/wholesalers-pour-millions-into-fight-against-costco-booze-measure/ (http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2011/09/07/wholesalers-pour-millions-into-fight-against-costco-booze-measure/)

Yeah because we all know binge drinking doesn't happen at all in Washington state now, right?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacks fan on October 31, 2011, 06:43:11 pm
Or in Portland and Eugene


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on October 31, 2011, 09:08:26 pm
Or in Portland and Eugene

LOL.  Make it harder for them to get their booze and they will resort to shooting heroin.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on November 04, 2011, 03:58:20 pm
I dislike putting up with ABLE.

From TW post:

Oklahoma ABLE Commission making its presence felt in recent months

Quote
OKLAHOMA CITY - On the day the annual ARTonTAP event was held last month at the Oklahoma City Museum of Art, organizers got the kind of news you never want mere hours before show time.

Whitney Cross, the event's organizer, said the state's Alcoholic Beverage Laws Enforcement Commission called the museum's cafe and told them that some of the beer vendors couldn't provide their services at the event. Cross said the agency threatened to shut down the fundraiser if the problem wasn't fixed.

“It was seven hours before the event,” Cross said. “They gave us a good scare.”

In the end, the problem was resolved, but Cross said the behavior of ABLE Commission officers was odd, at least from her perspective.


Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=12&articleid=20111104_12_0_OLHMIY299510



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: AquaMan on November 05, 2011, 08:55:26 am
T, I wonder if anyone remembers how Oklahoma's dry laws were overturned? IIRC, the governor (Edmondson?) stepped up enforcement of liquor laws that were forcing Oklahoma citizens to drive over the border and buy Kansas beer, paying Kansas taxes and bringing it back to share with friends and businesses. The governor knew we were losing potential revenue and encouraging lawbreakers yet he knew a statewide vote would not overturn existing laws because of our strongly Baptist influence. So, Highway Patrolmen set up on the roads leading to Kansas & Missouri, there were high profile arrests, and prosecutions. It generally motivated the voters to support some change.

Deja vu?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on November 05, 2011, 09:53:52 am
T, I wonder if anyone remembers how Oklahoma's dry laws were overturned? IIRC, the governor (Edmondson?) stepped up enforcement of liquor laws that were forcing Oklahoma citizens to drive over the border and buy Kansas beer, paying Kansas taxes and bringing it back to share with friends and businesses. The governor knew we were losing potential revenue and encouraging lawbreakers yet he knew a statewide vote would not overturn existing laws because of our strongly Baptist influence. So, Highway Patrolmen set up on the roads leading to Kansas & Missouri, there were high profile arrests, and prosecutions. It generally motivated the voters to support some change.

Deja vu?

Maybe our next governor


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on December 17, 2011, 07:44:05 pm
Brian Howe, spokesman for Oklahomans for Modern Laws, said his group is putting finishing touches on a possible ballot language that would allow wine and single-strength beer to be sold in grocery and convenience stores of a certain size.

Howe said his group tried to get the measure pushed through the legislature during the past session, but a task force formed to explore the issue disbanded after meeting only twice.

“Now, the focus is on the initiative effort, and I think it's the only opportunity, to be honest,” he said. “Basically, the liquor lobby lined the task force with our opponents. ... It never really had a chance.”

“We think there's strong evidence this will pass,” he said. “Whether it's next year or 10 years from now, it's going to happen.”

Read more: http://newsok.com/oklahoma-group-puts-finishing-touches-on-liquor-ballot-language/article/3632742#ixzz1gqWPeFhJ


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacks fan on December 17, 2011, 08:42:44 pm
Brian Howe, spokesman for Oklahomans for Modern Laws, said his group is putting finishing touches on a possible ballot language that would allow wine and single-strength beer to be sold in grocery and convenience stores of a certain size.

Howe said his group tried to get the measure pushed through the legislature during the past session, but a task force formed to explore the issue disbanded after meeting only twice.

“Now, the focus is on the initiative effort, and I think it's the only opportunity, to be honest,” he said. “Basically, the liquor lobby lined the task force with our opponents. ... It never really had a chance.”

“We think there's strong evidence this will pass,” he said. “Whether it's next year or 10 years from now, it's going to happen.”

Read more: http://newsok.com/oklahoma-group-puts-finishing-touches-on-liquor-ballot-language/article/3632742#ixzz1gqWPeFhJ
They'll reform it on the 30th anniversary of liquor by the drink passing.   ::)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on December 17, 2011, 10:12:11 pm
Brian Howe, spokesman for Oklahomans for Modern Laws, said his group is putting finishing touches on a possible ballot language that would allow wine and single-strength beer to be sold in grocery and convenience stores of a certain size.

Howe said his group tried to get the measure pushed through the legislature during the past session, but a task force formed to explore the issue disbanded after meeting only twice.

“Now, the focus is on the initiative effort, and I think it's the only opportunity, to be honest,” he said. “Basically, the liquor lobby lined the task force with our opponents. ... It never really had a chance.”

“We think there's strong evidence this will pass,” he said. “Whether it's next year or 10 years from now, it's going to happen.”

Read more: http://newsok.com/oklahoma-group-puts-finishing-touches-on-liquor-ballot-language/article/3632742#ixzz1gqWPeFhJ

Yeah, Eric (Marshall) was talking some of this while I was up at brewery today obtaining some Marshall schwag.  I said something about the arcane Oklahoma alcohol laws and my disdain for ABLE; he said 'there is legislation being introduced as we speak' and he didn't really expound upon that.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on December 19, 2011, 11:46:11 am
The intiative route is the only way these changes will ever happen, but opponentes will way outspend supporters.  The nonsense spouted by those on the recent study committee will only be the tip of the stupid things and scare tactics we wiill hear if this goes to a vote.  Keep in mind, the initiative a few years ago to let liquor stores open on election day passed with only a small majority.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on December 19, 2011, 11:28:39 pm
Is there some legal restrictions on politicking by bars/breweries/liquor store owners?

I would think Marshall's/McNellie's/maybe some non-backwards liquor stores would be all about helping to modernize this stuff. But I see nothing in their stores, no facebook/twitter posts.

I would go out of my way to patronize businesses who are actually on the side of consumers in this matter. Because so many of them (liquor stores in particular) just want to maintain the status quo.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: rdj on December 20, 2011, 09:01:36 am
I visited a liquor store over the weekend that had a sign against putting wine in grocery store.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on December 20, 2011, 11:01:11 am
I visited a liquor store over the weekend that had a sign against putting wine in grocery store.

Which one?  I'll make sure to not visit it...


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on December 20, 2011, 11:45:31 am
Which one?  I'll make sure to not visit it...

Agreed. I'd go as far to go in, pick up a bunch of stuff, "notice" the sign and storm out.

I want the various alcohol sellers to let their colors show so we can separate those who actually want progress from the obstructionists and treat each group appropriately.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on December 20, 2011, 12:22:13 pm
Agreed. I'd go as far to go in, pick up a bunch of stuff, "notice" the sign and storm out.

I want the various alcohol sellers to let their colors show so we can separate those who actually want progress from the obstructionists and treat each group appropriately.

That actually sounds like a good idea, if it wasn't a waste of my time to do it.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: RecycleMichael on December 20, 2011, 01:53:29 pm
You guys are mean. Santa is watching you know.

I don't blame the guy. The liquor industry has been run this way for a long time and these guys have enjoyed a regulatory business advantage their whole business life. Liquor reform has a real chance to kill their businesses. Oh sure, the smart ones who are well located, have loyal customers through good service or are willing to advertise will survive, but others will not.

This guy is probably scared to death because he knows that his customers want convenience over almost anything else on their liquor purchases. Very few of us are going to know the prices of anything except a couple of brands and sizes. Outside of very common purchases, nobody knows the price of anything except unleaded gasoline.

Convenience is king, especially for people who live in urban areas and have many choices. Right now there are, I'm guessing 50 liquor stores in the metro area. I am guessing an equal numbers of groceries and ten times that number of convenience stores.

The guy is only guilty of trying to inform his customers that this law is scaring him and his business may be in jeopardy. He is not running ads lying (see trash issue) or pitching a tent city (see Occupy Tulsa). He has a sign in his business. You would do the same.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on December 20, 2011, 02:07:35 pm
You guys are mean. Santa is watching you know.

I don't blame the guy. The liquor industry has been run this way for a long time and these guys have enjoyed a regulatory business advantage their whole business life. Liquor reform has a real chance to kill their businesses. Oh sure, the smart ones who are well located, have loyal customers through good service or are willing to advertise will survive, but others will not.

This guy is probably scared to death because he knows that his customers want convenience over almost anything else on their liquor purchases. Very few of us are going to know the prices of anything except a couple of brands and sizes. Outside of very common purchases, nobody knows the price of anything except unleaded gasoline.

Convenience is king, especially for people who live in urban areas and have many choices. Right now there are, I'm guessing 50 liquor stores in the metro area. I am guessing an equal numbers of groceries and ten times that number of convenience stores.

The guy is only guilty of trying to inform his customers that this law is scaring him and his business may be in jeopardy. He is not running ads lying (see trash issue) or pitching a tent city (see Occupy Tulsa). He has a sign in his business. You would do the same.

50 liquor stores and 500 churches.

We don't have a drinking problem in Tulsa, we've got a religion problem!


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on December 20, 2011, 02:21:18 pm
50 liquor stores and 500 churches.

We don't have a drinking problem in Tulsa, we've got a religion problem!

Amen


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on December 20, 2011, 02:25:30 pm
Amen

Is it funny I find the irony in that...LOL.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on December 20, 2011, 02:35:16 pm
You guys think if we set up a tax free liquor store in every church in the state we could get some reform done?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on December 20, 2011, 02:45:33 pm
You guys think if we set up a tax free liquor store in every church in the state we could get some reform done?

Great idea Senator Townsend.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Nik on December 20, 2011, 03:21:06 pm
Not necessarily.  Although it appears this lawsuit is filed in federal court in Texas, any ruling would not be binding on federal (or state courts) in Oklahoma, particularly as it would be interpreting a Texas statute.  If Jester King prevails, it could definitely encourage an Oklahoma brewer to file a simliar challenge and the Texas decision could be persuasive, but that does not mean you get the same outcome in Oklahoma.  Of course, that assume Jester King prevails.

Jester King has prevailed.

http://beernews.org/2011/12/judge-rules-texas-abc-regulations-unconstitutional/

So, who's gonna take up the case here in OK?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on December 20, 2011, 04:50:49 pm
You guys are mean. Santa is watching you know.

I don't blame the guy. The liquor industry has been run this way for a long time and these guys have enjoyed a regulatory business advantage their whole business life. Liquor reform has a real chance to kill their businesses. Oh sure, the smart ones who are well located, have loyal customers through good service or are willing to advertise will survive, but others will not.

This guy is probably scared to death because he knows that his customers want convenience over almost anything else on their liquor purchases. Very few of us are going to know the prices of anything except a couple of brands and sizes. Outside of very common purchases, nobody knows the price of anything except unleaded gasoline.

Convenience is king, especially for people who live in urban areas and have many choices. Right now there are, I'm guessing 50 liquor stores in the metro area. I am guessing an equal numbers of groceries and ten times that number of convenience stores.

The guy is only guilty of trying to inform his customers that this law is scaring him and his business may be in jeopardy. He is not running ads lying (see trash issue) or pitching a tent city (see Occupy Tulsa). He has a sign in his business. You would do the same.

Exactly - how many business owners would actively support a change in the law that might put them out of business, or at least shrink their margins and increase their costs?  I think Oklahoma's liquor laws are dumb, archiac, anti-consumer and anti-free market.  But if I had invested my life savings in a business based on the existing system, I would not support radically changing that system in ways that could wipe out my investment.

What angers me are the distortions, half-truths and outright lies that will be used to oppose any change to the laws.  Unfortunately, the individual owners will hide behind industry groups and trade associations to fund the opposition to change and that makes it hard to hold any one individual accountable. 


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: custosnox on December 20, 2011, 06:02:08 pm
Exactly - how many business owners would actively support a change in the law that might put them out of business, or at least shrink their margins and increase their costs?  I think Oklahoma's liquor laws are dumb, archiac, anti-consumer and anti-free market.  But if I had invested my life savings in a business based on the existing system, I would not support radically changing that system in ways that could wipe out my investment.

What angers me are the distortions, half-truths and outright lies that will be used to oppose any change to the laws.  Unfortunately, the individual owners will hide behind industry groups and trade associations to fund the opposition to change and that makes it hard to hold any one individual accountable. 
Other than the corner liquor store that pretty much only exists is to supply the drunks and partiers, the liquor store can benefit just as much from a change in laws.  Just imagine how much they can widen their product if they can sell cold.  The only thing that is going to hurt liquor stores is if the law changes to allow liquor to be sold in grocers and/or convenience stores, and then it will loose the customers who only buy from the bottom shelf.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on January 14, 2012, 04:02:32 pm
Other than the corner liquor store that pretty much only exists is to supply the drunks and partiers, the liquor store can benefit just as much from a change in laws.  Just imagine how much they can widen their product if they can sell cold.  The only thing that is going to hurt liquor stores is if the law changes to allow liquor to be sold in grocers and/or convenience stores, and then it will loose the customers who only buy from the bottom shelf.

Looks like they're starting to push the petition:

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20120114_16_A1_OKLAHO704500

and for those who can't get by the paywall...

http://www.krmg.com/news/news/local/gropu-plans-petition-change-state-constitution-leg/nGMr3/


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: nathanm on January 14, 2012, 04:53:09 pm
The only thing that is going to hurt liquor stores is if the law changes to allow liquor to be sold in grocers and/or convenience stores, and then it will loose the customers who only buy from the bottom shelf.

A good liquor store would be fine even in a scenario where QuikTrip was selling liquor because the liquor store can have a wide selection. People like me will seek out the higher margin products that are only sold at the liquor store. I don't care if it is available 24 hours a day in QT, I'm still not buying Cuervo (or Malibu). ;)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: custosnox on January 14, 2012, 06:01:35 pm
A good liquor store would be fine even in a scenario where QuikTrip was selling liquor because the liquor store can have a wide selection. People like me will seek out the higher margin products that are only sold at the liquor store. I don't care if it is available 24 hours a day in QT, I'm still not buying Cuervo (or Malibu). ;)
And that is why I say they would only loose the customers who only buy from the bottom shelf.  Or actually about mid shelf


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Nik on January 15, 2012, 02:43:34 pm
Looks like they're starting to push the petition:

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20120114_16_A1_OKLAHO704500

and for those who can't get by the paywall...

http://www.krmg.com/news/news/local/gropu-plans-petition-change-state-constitution-leg/nGMr3/

They need a better website (Oklahomans for Modern Laws)...

I am hearing there may be legislation introduced that will allow breweries to give tours and provide samples of their products, a right already afforded to Oklahoma wineries. Here's hoping a small change like this doesn't meet opposition as some of these other larger bills will. A similar bill was tried last legislative session, but didn't go anywhere (although it would have allowed brewers to sell their beer to the public, again, something wineries can do).


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: custosnox on January 15, 2012, 02:52:35 pm
They need a better website (Oklahomans for Modern Laws)...

I am hearing there may be legislation introduced that will allow breweries to give tours and provide samples of their products, a right already afforded to Oklahoma wineries. Here's hoping a small change like this doesn't meet opposition as some of these other larger bills will. A similar bill was tried last legislative session, but didn't go anywhere (although it would have allowed brewers to sell their beer to the public, again, something wineries can do).
When going through the state legislation, any attempt to change the liquor laws will die because there are too many dollars lining too many pockets to allow it to happen.  Petitions like this are our only hope... guess we should call them obi wan kanobi.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on January 15, 2012, 04:30:24 pm
When going through the state legislation, any attempt to change the liquor laws will die because there are too many dollars lining too many pockets to allow it to happen.  Petitions like this are our only hope... guess we should call them obi wan kanobi.

I could almost see a group of legislators quickly cobbling together a "compromise bill" that promises all sorts of reform, if the voters would just forget about this petition... 
Sort of like the bait on the mousetrap.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: custosnox on January 15, 2012, 04:33:48 pm
I could almost see a group of legislators quickly cobbling together a "compromise bill" that promises all sorts of reform, if the voters would just forget about this petition... 
Sort of like the bait on the mousetrap.
Don't give them any ideas


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on January 15, 2012, 07:54:34 pm
Don't give them any ideas

As I've stated many many times before, I wouldn't mind the restriction to the liquor stores if they'd do the following:

1.  Remove the stupid 9pm close and no sale on Sunday restriction.
2.  Allow high point beer to be refrigerated

But as I stated before and so has Costco, allowing retailers to sell wine and strong beer will allow Costco to make their decision to put stores here.  As it stands now, they won't


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: custosnox on January 15, 2012, 08:15:25 pm
As I've stated many many times before, I wouldn't mind the restriction to the liquor stores if they'd do the following:

1.  Remove the stupid 9pm close and no sale on Sunday restriction.
2.  Allow high point beer to be refrigerated

But as I stated before and so has Costco, allowing retailers to sell wine and strong beer will allow Costco to make their decision to put stores here.  As it stands now, they won't
It just irritates me to no end that they can sell all that crap beer in the store, which gets people just as drunk, but I can't pick up a bottle of wine to go with dinner.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Nik on January 16, 2012, 12:17:40 pm
I could almost see a group of legislators quickly cobbling together a "compromise bill" that promises all sorts of reform, if the voters would just forget about this petition... 
Sort of like the bait on the mousetrap.

Pretty much what they did with the "task force" last session.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on January 16, 2012, 12:23:27 pm
It just irritates me to no end that they can sell all that crap beer in the store, which gets people just as drunk, but I can't pick up a bottle of wine to go with dinner.

The large breweries come off as the victim, but it's my understanding they lobby inten$ely to keep it that way.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on January 16, 2012, 01:15:52 pm
Doesn't matter, the legislature will engage in some sort of wrangling to protect the mob er liquor distributors who are in their pants ahem, the status quo because we are too stupid to handle more choices of distribution for liquor and wine.

The Oklahoma legislature sucks.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on January 16, 2012, 02:10:36 pm

The Oklahoma legislature sucks.

Hell yeah they suck


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on January 16, 2012, 03:11:34 pm
Hell yeah they suck

All of them except Sally Kern, ostensibly.

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CJB5V7dLVco/TscXnZVYJiI/AAAAAAAAA3Y/xzXzPLLAlVc/s400/-------%253D%253D%253D%253D.jpg)

(http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/27418_1599302910_6722_n.jpg)

Separated at birth?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Nik on January 17, 2012, 08:30:25 am
Oklahoma for Modern Laws could take a few lessons from a like-minded group in Mississippi.

http://raiseyourpints.com/


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on January 17, 2012, 12:27:00 pm
Oklahoma for Modern Laws could take a few lessons from a like-minded group in Mississippi.

http://raiseyourpints.com/

They look like they have it together,
and they are suffering under ... 5%.... beer.   :o


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on January 17, 2012, 05:55:04 pm
Know what people in other states call "strong beer"?

Beer.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on January 19, 2012, 09:07:15 am
Know what people in other states call "strong beer"?

Beer.

Don't you know?  Alcohol in moderation IS DA DEBBIL in Oklahoma!


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on January 19, 2012, 12:34:56 pm
Pretty much what they did with the "task force" last session.

They were the ones who asserted that children would be buying "everclear in a can", weren't they?  Sounds very objective.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 19, 2012, 12:47:47 pm
I had to resort to buying Everclear when I was a kid - then I got a job and had enough money to afford better.  'Course a little Everclear mixed with wine will get the girlfriend drunker all that much faster....



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on January 19, 2012, 01:35:18 pm
I had to resort to buying Everclear when I was a kid - then I got a job and had enough money to afford better.  'Course a little Everclear mixed with wine will get the girlfriend drunker all that much faster....



We used it with grape juice. Made it much more purdy when it came back up.  :o


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: custosnox on January 19, 2012, 04:30:53 pm
We used it with grape juice. Made it much more purdy when it came back up.  :o
Wait, your allowed to mix it with stuff...?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: nathanm on January 19, 2012, 10:06:46 pm
Wait, your allowed to mix it with stuff...?

An acquaintance of mine says it's not just allowed, but strongly recommended. He has the scars (and the arrest record) to back it up. ;)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on January 19, 2012, 10:14:37 pm
Yeah, but when you mix it, like trash can punch, you really don't taste the alcohol until it's too late.  That stuff is a real creeper.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 20, 2012, 05:50:59 am
Wait, your allowed to mix it with stuff...?

Allows you to "sneak up on" the potential romantic interest, with a reduced level of awareness.  It does creep up on ya.  And mixed with wine gives an impressive rainbow of hues, too.

Everclear straight is ok, I guess, but does NOT have the flavor nuances and character of a good moonshine!  There are some really good 'shines out there and each area of the country has differences.  Oklahoma is different from Arkansas, which is different from Tennessee, which is different from Kentucky,....etc, etc.  Must be from the water sources and differences in technique.  Also whether fermented with corn and malt only, or if sugar or yeast is added.  Sugar is the cheap 'short cut' method...lazy way to make it.



  



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on January 20, 2012, 08:02:01 am
Also whether fermented with corn and malt only, or if sugar or yeast is added.  

Unless you add a known yeast, you are depending on wild yeast which would account for a flavor difference.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on January 20, 2012, 08:13:47 am
Hmm.....Seems you boy's know a bit much about makin that there shine. What wuz your names again ?  ;D


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 20, 2012, 08:17:39 am
Unless you add a known yeast, you are depending on wild yeast which would account for a flavor difference.

Absolutely.  And that comes from the corn and malted corn.  Certain yeasts tend to thrive on certain grains in certain areas.  If we had anything approaching rational thought in this country, I would love to try some home distillation.  Micro-distillery in the workshop would be great!  "Modern" moonshiners seem to take the easy way out too often.  They use sugar (instead of malt) and package yeast.

Wheat has one that is fairly prevalent that makes a great sourdough starter, and that has different strains.  San Francisco is different from Oklahoma for sourdough starters.  (Small packages of yeast makes a good starter, but has different flavor from wild.)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 20, 2012, 08:18:13 am
Hmm.....Seems you boy's know a bit much about makin that there shine. What wuz your names again ?  ;D

Heironymous P. Asparagus.



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on January 20, 2012, 08:23:02 am
Me and my buddies used to go to Seneca Missouri and get gallon jugs of shine and chase the shots with Little Kings beer. I cant even imagine trying that at my, well mature age.
Now that I think of it. We had one crazy teenage life.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on January 20, 2012, 10:32:19 am
Absolutely.  And that comes from the corn and malted corn.  Certain yeasts tend to thrive on certain grains in certain areas.  If we had anything approaching rational thought in this country, I would love to try some home distillation.  Micro-distillery in the workshop would be great!  "Modern" moonshiners seem to take the easy way out too often.  They use sugar (instead of malt) and package yeast.

Wheat has one that is fairly prevalent that makes a great sourdough starter, and that has different strains.  San Francisco is different from Oklahoma for sourdough starters.  (Small packages of yeast makes a good starter, but has different flavor from wild.)


There's nothing to keep you from it.  Just keep it to yourself and your closest friends and don't try to sell it.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on January 20, 2012, 10:33:05 am
Me and my buddies used to go to Seneca Missouri and get gallon jugs of shine and chase the shots with Little Kings beer. I cant even imagine trying that at my, well mature age.
Now that I think of it. We had one crazy teenage life.

Little Kings were one hell of a hangover waiting to happen.  Can't imagine moonshine boilermakers with Kings.  Ouch!


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: RecycleMichael on January 20, 2012, 10:35:30 am
Do you know the difference between moonshine and ethanol? Nothing.

If the feds bust my still,  I'm going with the "fuel for my tractor" defense in court.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on January 20, 2012, 10:38:41 am
Do you know the difference between moonshine and ethanol? Nothing.

If the feds bust my still,  I'm going with the "fuel for my tractor" defense in court.

That will work until they see the "Diesel Fuel Only" placard on the fuel tank ;)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on January 20, 2012, 11:03:46 am
Little Kings were one hell of a hangover waiting to happen.  Can't imagine moonshine boilermakers with Kings.  Ouch!

No kidding.  I used to have those with buddies out at the Midnight Races back in the late 80s.  Up until 4am doing nothing but drinking.  10am rolled around after some sleep and you wished someone had put you out of your misery.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on January 20, 2012, 11:06:35 am
No kidding.  I used to have those with buddies out at the Midnight Races back in the late 80s.  Up until 4am doing nothing but drinking.  10am rolled around after some sleep and you wished someone had put you out of your misery.

They were the perfect size for beer bongs and tasted like cream when you chugged them that fast.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on January 20, 2012, 11:38:50 am
Hmm.....Seems you boy's know a bit much about makin that there shine. What wuz your names again ?  ;D

Beer starts in a very similar manner.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 20, 2012, 12:47:07 pm
Beer starts in a very similar manner.

The interim fermented step is called beer.  Somewhere along the line, someone got in a hurry and just strained it and started drinking, I think.



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 20, 2012, 12:48:33 pm
There's nothing to keep you from it.  Just keep it to yourself and your closest friends and don't try to sell it.

It's still illegal, even for your own use.  One of these days when I reach the guido level of economics, I will just go ahead and buy the tax stamp and make my own.  Until then, will just buy from the store.



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Nik on January 25, 2012, 01:46:36 pm
They need a better website (Oklahomans for Modern Laws)...

I am hearing there may be legislation introduced that will allow breweries to give tours and provide samples of their products, a right already afforded to Oklahoma wineries. Here's hoping a small change like this doesn't meet opposition as some of these other larger bills will. A similar bill was tried last legislative session, but didn't go anywhere (although it would have allowed brewers to sell their beer to the public, again, something wineries can do).

House Bill 2477 has been submitted that would allow breweries to give samples. Hooozzaahhh!!
http://newlsb.lsb.state.ok.us/BillInfo.aspx?Bill=HB2477&Session=1200



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Nik on January 25, 2012, 01:53:25 pm
I'm going through more of the proposed legislation for "Intoxicating Beverages" and found a fun one.

HB3100 would make it illegal to drink on your 21st birthday. You would have to wait until 7AM the next day.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on January 25, 2012, 02:06:31 pm
I'm going through more of the proposed legislation for "Intoxicating Beverages" and found a fun one.

HB3100 would make it illegal to drink on your 21st birthday. You would have to wait until 7AM the next day.

Wow.  Even in the 21st century we can write some asinine stuff into law.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on January 25, 2012, 02:13:18 pm
Wow.  Even in the 21st century we can write some asinine stuff into law.

Oklahoma, Oklahoma.  There, so nice, I said it twice.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on January 25, 2012, 06:16:59 pm
I'm going through more of the proposed legislation for "Intoxicating Beverages" and found a fun one.
HB3100 would make it illegal to drink on your 21st birthday. You would have to wait until 7AM the next day.

I guess we need to make sure you are actually 21 years old and not a few hours less.
 :P


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on March 21, 2012, 08:41:11 am
House kills sampling bill for Oklahoma breweries


http://www.tulsaworld.com/scene/article.aspx?subjectid=39&articleid=20120321_44_D3_CUTLIN755514 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/scene/article.aspx?subjectid=39&articleid=20120321_44_D3_CUTLIN755514)

Quote
     
A measure that would have allowed licensed Oklahoma breweries to provide free samples to visitors was not given a floor vote by the House of Representatives by the required deadline last Thursday, effectively killing the bill.

The measure, House Bill 2477 authored by Rep. Seneca Scott, D-Tulsa, would have allowed a total of 10 ounces of free samples per visitor per day.

"Right now, the law technically does not allow me to sample my own beer, and this is ridiculous," Eric Marshall, CEO of Tulsa's Marshall Brewing Co., said in a news release. "We are proud of what we've built in Tulsa, and when we have visitors to our brewery, we would like to extend a limited amount of hospitality with a very small sample of our product."

The bill made it through the committee process with the support of the Appropriations & Budget committee, and it had no objections from the Oklahoma Alcohol Beverage Laws Enforcement Commission (ABLE), according to Marshall.

"While it is true there are some state leaders who will not vote in favor of any alcohol industry bills, most representatives we met with on both sides of the aisle saw this as a pro-business and pro-tourism bill and signaled their support," Marshall said. "Today, we are scratching our heads. We are going to regroup and start working on our plans for next year."

Oklahoma has five licensed breweries.     





Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: jacobi on March 21, 2012, 09:02:46 am
Quote
House kills sampling bill for Oklahoma breweries


My dad is asking seneca (his neighbour) about this.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on March 21, 2012, 09:05:59 am
Wow ! 10 ounces. That truly is just a taste.
When I worked at a Liquor store back in the early 90s. We would always have a Wine tasting gathering at a Hotel sponsored by Central or Jarboe distributing.
And let me tell you. By the time we left I was good and loopy from all the "Samples" that we all got to enjoy.
They still do these little get togethers for Liquor store owners and staff. So whats the differance ?

As a side note. They do put on a Beer tasting event also.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheArtist on March 21, 2012, 01:03:42 pm
Food "abuse and addiction" kills almost TEN TIMES more people in this state than alchohol.

Do they allow free samples of food?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on March 21, 2012, 01:20:34 pm
Nothing related to liquor is sane or rationale in the State of Oklahoma.  It will take an amendment to the Oklahoma Constitution just to sell cork screws in liquor stores.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=12&articleid=20120315_12_0_OKLAHO910821

That is why any meaningful reform is so daunting - everything requires a constitutional amendment.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: custosnox on March 21, 2012, 01:51:45 pm
Nothing related to liquor is sane or rationale in the State of Oklahoma.  It will take an amendment to the Oklahoma Constitution just to sell cork screws in liquor stores.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=12&articleid=20120315_12_0_OKLAHO910821

That is why any meaningful reform is so daunting - everything requires a constitutional amendment.

And the only way that is going to happen is if we go around the legislation


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on March 21, 2012, 01:57:10 pm
Food "abuse and addiction" kills almost TEN TIMES more people in this state than alchohol.

Do they allow free samples of food?

There is a sample lady at Reasors every time we go shopping.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacks fan on March 21, 2012, 02:05:06 pm
There is a sample lady at Reasors every time we go shopping.

That's how I used to get a free lunch at COSTCO.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on March 26, 2012, 11:34:32 am

The slow death of prohibition

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17291978 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17291978)

(http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/59214000/gif/_59214596_us_drink_map_624.gif)

Quote
But if prohibition is ever to fully die out, it could be down to changes going on within the Baptist churches themselves.

"A lot of younger evangelicals who read the Bible very literally, are nevertheless beginning to question the traditional stance against alcohol. They are beginning to say 'Jesus drank wine and Jesus even made wine so why are we still against moderate consumption of alcohol?'

"Ultimately, I do think the trend is going to be towards relaxing these laws."



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: jacobi on June 21, 2012, 05:19:54 pm
From today's World:

Read the comments from the justices

Quote
Justices eye challenge of wine in grocery stores proposal
 
Sparking wines and champagne. CHRISTOPHER SMITH/ Tulsa World File

By BARBARA HOBEROCK World Capitol Bureau
Published: 6/21/2012  8:24 AM
Last Modified: 6/21/2012  2:07 PM


OKLAHOMA CITY -- Some Oklahoma Supreme Court justices on Thursday took a critical view of a challenge to a proposal to let wine be sold in some grocery stores.

Oklahomans for Modern Liquor Laws is seeking to circulate an initiative petition to put the issue to a vote of the people. But the legal challenge means the measure likely will not be on the Nov. 6 ballot.

Yousef Javadzadeh, an Oklahoma City convenience store owner, and anti-addiction groups filed a protest to the proposal's constitutionality.

If the protest is denied, supporters could then circulate the petition, which needs 155,000 votes to be placed on the ballot.

Protestors allege the ballot measure violates the prohibition against issues containing more than one subject and the equal protection clause of the Oklahoma and U.S. constitutions because it treats similarly situated entities differently.

Justice Noma Gurich said the challenge was about protecting an economic interest on a monopoly, adding that it was purely about dollars and not to keep children from consuming alcohol.

Jon Brightmire, representing Javadzadeh, said his client had a right to protest and the high court is duty bound to review it.

Justice Yvonne Kauger said she considers herself an expert in the single-subject rule.

"I have not seen anything in here that is not one single subject," Kauger said. "This is all involved with the sale of wine."

Kauger said people have a right to make changes to the Oklahoma Constitution if they chose.

Justice John F. Reif said he was having trouble seeing the equal protection violation alleged.

He said grocery stores can say package stores have an unfair advantage because they are selling liquor.

If approved by voters, State Question 763 would let counties of at least 50,000 people consider a limited expansion of retail wine sales. The expansion would require approval by voters in the county.

If approved, grocery stores and warehouse clubs with at least 25,000 square feet of floor space would be allowed to sell wine.

Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?subjectid=53&articleid=20120621_53_0_OKLAHO923249


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on June 21, 2012, 05:46:06 pm
From today's World:

Read the comments from the justices


This is aimed directly at Costco, I bet...specifically that last line.  Although most regular WalMarts are that size.  And I believe Reasors as well.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: jacobi on June 21, 2012, 05:54:13 pm
Quote
This is aimed directly at Costco, I bet...specifically that last line.  Although most regular WalMarts are that size.  And I believe Reasors as well.

Trader joes?  although I think they are really corny, people seem to realy like them.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on June 21, 2012, 05:56:03 pm
Trader joes?  although I think they are really corny, people seem to realy like them.

I do seem to remember a couple of years ago or maybe more...that Costco said they only thing keeping them from putting stores in Oklahoma were the stoopid liquors laws.  Specifically the absence of wine sales in grocery stores.  More specifically the restriction of those sales to liquor stores.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: jacobi on June 21, 2012, 05:57:29 pm
Quote
I do seem to remember a couple of years ago or maybe more...that Costco said they only thing keeping them from putting stores in Oklahoma were the stoopid liquors laws.  Specifically the absence of wine sales in grocery stores.  More specifically the restriction of those sales to liquor stores.

Costco's overtures were more overt.  I think tader joes were more...subvert.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on June 21, 2012, 07:21:12 pm
And yet (as with other topics), even though there is near universal agreement, we as a state keep electing the same clowns that don't change the laws.

Anyone surprised by the results?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on June 21, 2012, 07:23:12 pm
And yet (as with other topics), even though there is near universal agreement, we as a state keep electing the same clowns that don't change the laws.
Anyone surprised by the results?

Yes.  Microsoft has taught me that doing the same thing again and again often leads to different results.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on June 21, 2012, 07:26:43 pm
Yes.  Microsoft has taught me that doing the same thing again and again often leads to different results.


That's Microsoft.  Not the rest of the real world...

We have been this way before Microsoft existed.  Shoot, even before Bill Gates existed.  Just like the idiots that kept electing Gene Stipe, we keep electing you-know-who, plus the state clown club down the road there in OKC.  Sally Kern, et. al.





Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TulsaRufnex on June 22, 2012, 11:12:52 am
Trader joes?  although I think they are really corny, people seem to realy like them.

Problem is, Trader Joes doesn't currently have stores that are over 25,000 sq ft... http://articles.latimes.com/2011/oct/26/business/la-fi-trader-joes-20111027

Quote
"The average Trader Joe's store probably will increase from between 10,000 square feet and 15,000 square feet now to 15,000 square feet and bigger, Flickinger predicts. "Trader Joe's can make double or triple the sales volume per week at a bigger store than at a small store, while checkmating competitors," he said."


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: swake on June 22, 2012, 12:01:07 pm
And yet (as with other topics), even though there is near universal agreement, we as a state keep electing the same clowns that don't change the laws.

Anyone surprised by the results?


We as a state are really, really good at electing clowns. It's one of the few places where we are a national leader.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: swake on June 22, 2012, 12:03:04 pm
Yes.  Microsoft has taught me that doing the same thing again and again often leads to different results.

Einstein said that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, what is doing the same thing over and over and getting different results?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: zstyles on June 22, 2012, 01:51:47 pm
For the L.O.G please let me buy strong beer that's cold, in a grocery store and also give me as many options as they have in other states!  From what I read the opponents of the petition and ballot measure are now being proved wrong in the wording they said was "not allowed"...hope this one works out....


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on June 22, 2012, 02:10:44 pm
I definitely want to see an overhaul to Oklahoma's liquor laws, but letting grocery stores (even if restricted in size) sell wine without allowing liquor stores to sell cold beer (above 3.2%) could be a serious economic blow to liquor stores.  Granted, liquor stores have not exactly been looking out for the customer's interest as they've fought to preserve their protected status.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on June 22, 2012, 03:56:04 pm
Einstein said that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, what is doing the same thing over and over and getting different results?

MicroSofting



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on June 24, 2012, 10:28:47 am
So is this measure a step in the right direction, or is it misguided? It seems awfully narrow, like we're fixing a flat tire on a car with no engine. So is it a start to replacing the engine?

It wouldn't affect me at all, as I'm a beer guy. I want to see more good craft breweries here and have sensible days/hours in which to purchase said beer. I want to be able to visit breweries and drink their beers and get a growler to take home.

I don't personally care whether I can buy at grocery stores. With the exception of stores like Whole Foods, the grocery store beer selection is generally poor in other states.

Having said that, I'd probably be for this measure just because it seems to be a start toward getting us out of the 1950s.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on June 24, 2012, 10:20:44 pm
We as a state are really, really good at electing clowns. It's one of the few places where we are a national leader.


We also do it on a national level.  (Inhofe, Sullivan....)



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on June 24, 2012, 10:21:32 pm
Einstein said that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, what is doing the same thing over and over and getting different results?


Cold fusion.



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on June 24, 2012, 10:25:03 pm
For the L.O.G please let me buy strong beer that's cold, in a grocery store and also give me as many options as they have in other states!  From what I read the opponents of the petition and ballot measure are now being proved wrong in the wording they said was "not allowed"...hope this one works out....


Geez...I guess I thought you were older than that...still living in Disney world!  "Hoping" something rational will happen in this state??  Or this nation???


Again - quit electing the clowns!  (Anybody that is in office today!)



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: zstyles on June 25, 2012, 08:32:27 am
I definitely want to see an overhaul to Oklahoma's liquor laws, but letting grocery stores (even if restricted in size) sell wine without allowing liquor stores to sell cold beer (above 3.2%) could be a serious economic blow to liquor stores.  Granted, liquor stores have not exactly been looking out for the customer's interest as they've fought to preserve their protected status.

Agreed, I think both are out of touch laws that should be reformed and allowed..just had my 6.0 cold beverage BUD Platinum (yes I said BUD) last night that I bought in Missouri and enjoyed it while scouring at Oklahoma Laws....also enjoyed my Flat Tire beer and alcohol included mixers(Bacardi rum mixer packet) over the weekend by the pool I picked up in the grocery store...


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on June 25, 2012, 08:50:02 am
Agreed, I think both are out of touch laws that should be reformed and allowed..just had my 6.0 cold beverage BUD Platinum (yes I said BUD) last night that I bought in Missouri and enjoyed it while scouring at Oklahoma Laws....also enjoyed my Flat Tire beer and alcohol included mixers(Bacardi rum mixer packet) over the weekend by the pool I picked up in the grocery store...

Flat Tire?  Or Fat Tire?  Reminds me; a run to Caney is in my future....


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: jacobi on June 25, 2012, 10:39:22 am
Why do people go crazy for fat tire?  I was deeply disappointed the first time I tried it.  Is it the whole cuban cigar phenomenon?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on June 25, 2012, 10:51:13 am
Why do people go crazy for fat tire?  I was deeply disappointed the first time I tried it.  Is it the whole cuban cigar phenomenon?

It gained notoriety in the age of Coors and Budweiser.  It's less outstanding now that there are so many styles available to us.

Fat Tire remains a well known brand that opened our minds but not our liquor laws.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on June 25, 2012, 11:09:38 am
Why do people go crazy for fat tire?  I was deeply disappointed the first time I tried it.  Is it the whole cuban cigar phenomenon?

Maybe because some people like different beer than you?   ???


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: jacobi on June 25, 2012, 11:22:06 am
Quote
Maybe because some people like different beer than you?   

I recognize. :)  It's just that I think that there are other beers that are in the state that are similar in flavor profile but are just better.  *shrug* de gustibus non disputandum est.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on June 25, 2012, 11:27:36 am
I recognize. :)  It's just that I think that there are other beers that are in the state that are similar in flavor profile but are just better.  *shrug* de gustibus non disputandum est.


In vino veritas


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on June 25, 2012, 11:28:21 am
In vino veritas

Agi quod agis


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on June 25, 2012, 11:33:58 am
Agi quod agis

Credat Judaeus Apella, non ego


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: jacobi on June 25, 2012, 11:39:15 am
Stop trying to be each other's huckleberries  ;D


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on June 25, 2012, 11:39:42 am
Stop trying to be each other's huckleberries  ;D

You're a daisy if you do.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on June 25, 2012, 12:00:54 pm
Stop trying to be each other's huckleberries  ;D

Why, Jacobi, does this mean we're not friends anymore?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: jacobi on June 25, 2012, 12:07:56 pm
Quote
Why, Jacobi, does this mean we're not friends anymore?

Of course we are.  Semper Amici in interneto summus.  But if we go any farther with tombstone references I'm quickly going to remember that I am no Val Kilmer.  Then I'll just be depressed all day.  Oh damn it, Now I'm depressed.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on June 25, 2012, 12:19:06 pm
Of course we are.  Semper Amici in interneto summus.  But if we go any farther with tombstone references I'm quickly going to remember that I am no Val Kilmer.  Then I'll just be depressed all day.  Oh damn it, Now I'm depressed.

Be very glad you aren’t Val Kilmer these days. FWIW, Santa Fe Nut Brown is an outstanding ale.  I quit finding it necessary to bring a trunk load of Fat Tire back from surrounding states after I discovered that one.  New Belgium does have some really great IPA’s though. 

(http://celebritywonder.ugo.com/images/profile/valkilmer.jpg)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on June 25, 2012, 12:31:14 pm
Be very glad you aren’t Val Kilmer these days. FWIW, Santa Fe Nut Brown is an outstanding ale.  I quit finding it necessary to bring a trunk load of Fat Tire back from surrounding states after I discovered that one.  New Belgium does have some really great IPA’s though.  

(http://celebritywonder.ugo.com/images/profile/valkilmer.jpg)

I just like taking the dudes along on a short roadie.  Gives us a chance to stop in B'Ville and harden our arteries at Murphy's.   ;D

Maybe not too soon though, unless later in the evening.  If the temps are going to be this brutally hot, I'll wait until it cools a little.

Wow, he's dressing a little like a portly Ozzy Osbourne these days.

"All aboooaaarddd...hahahahahaha!"


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on June 25, 2012, 12:32:18 pm
He looks more like a Van Zant than a Val Kilmer.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on June 25, 2012, 02:11:24 pm
He looks more like a Van Zant than a Val Kilmer.

No doubt.  Since he’s a New Mexico resident, maybe he’s partaking of too much Santa Fe Nut Brown.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dioscorides on June 28, 2012, 02:57:21 pm
State Supreme Court rules wine petition can proceed

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=336&articleid=20120628_336_0_OKLAHO10971

By BARBARA HOBEROCK World Capitol Bureau
Published: 6/28/2012  3:54 PM
Last Modified: 6/28/2012  3:54 PM

OKLAHOMA CITY -- The Oklahoma Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that an initiative petition seeking a vote on a plan to let some grocery stores sell wine can proceed.


The ruling came following a legal challenge brought by Oklahoma City convenience store owner Yousef Javadzadeh and anti-addition groups.

Supporters must collect about 155,000 votes to get the issue on the ballot.

"I would say we are quite pleased," said Brian Howe, director of Oklahomans for Modern Laws, which plans to circulate the petition. "We are looking forward to moving forward with the petition drive."

He said it is unlikely the petition process can be completed to get the issue on the Nov. 6 statewide ballot. If that can't be accomplished, the measure will be on the 2014 ballot, if enough signatures are gathered and approved, he said.

If approved by voters, State Question 763 would let counties of at least 50,000 people consider a limited expansion of retail wine sales. The expansion would require approval by voters in the county.

If approved, grocery stores and warehouse clubs with at least 25,000 square feet of floor space would be allowed to sell wine.



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on August 03, 2012, 03:22:59 pm
Oklahoma wine in grocery store petition withdrawn

http://www.ktul.com/story/19191688/oklahoma-wine-in-grocery-store-petition-withdrawn (http://www.ktul.com/story/19191688/oklahoma-wine-in-grocery-store-petition-withdrawn)

Quote
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) - Supporters of an initiative petition to allow large grocery stores in Oklahoma's largest counties to sell wine say they're withdrawing the petition from consideration but will re-file it next year.

The attorney for Oklahomans for Modern Laws, Lee Slater, said the initiative petition was withdrawn Friday because legal proceedings surrounding a formal protest delayed the 90-day period supporters had to obtain enough signatures to get it on the Nov. 6 general election ballot.

Slater says that by re-filing the petition in the fall of 2013, supporters hope to obtain enough signatures to get the issue on the general election ballot in 2014.

Currently, wine sales are restricted to licensed retail package liquor stores. The initiative petition proposes a new wine license to permit wine sales by grocery stores and supermarkets.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on August 03, 2012, 03:26:09 pm
Saw that.  You think “the they” got to them?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on August 03, 2012, 03:30:14 pm
Saw that.  You think “the they” got to them?


"They"'re everywhere man.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on August 03, 2012, 07:02:17 pm
So, best case scenario for this:
We vote on it in November 2014.

Then Tulsa County residents would have to vote on actually allowing what the new law allows (wine and beer, but only in certain large grocers). So in 3-4 years, we'd have a very, very small step toward modern laws.

Then we'd have to have more and more votes to move further toward modern laws, like allowing beer in all stores, sunday liquor store hours, cold beer in liquor stores, no more 3.2 beer, etc.

Hopefully I'm still young enough to drink booze by the time actual modern laws arrive.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: nathanm on August 03, 2012, 07:29:41 pm
By the time that happens, modernity will have passed the new modern laws by. That's what happened last time around, isn't it?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on August 03, 2012, 11:00:51 pm
By the time that happens I will be a pile of ashes in the Rockies and/or Caribbean.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: carltonplace on August 06, 2012, 09:11:29 am
By the time that happens I will be a pile of ashes in the Rockies and/or Caribbean.

and/or ha ha


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on August 06, 2012, 04:13:50 pm
no more 3.2 beer, etc.

Thank Anheuser-Busch for resistance to that (when they aren't bankrolling the defeat of marijuana reform).
http://reason.com/archives/2012/04/22/4-industries-getting-rich-off-the-drug-w/1


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on August 28, 2012, 11:23:45 am
TW FB post:

Quote
Costco officials told her that “the chain cannot do business in Oklahoma until some changes occur,” which she said suggested the alcohol laws were part of the problem.

I can't access the story so I'm not sure who "she" is.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on August 28, 2012, 12:16:51 pm
TW FB post:

I can't access the story so I'm not sure who "she" is.

“She” is one of “them”.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacks fan on August 28, 2012, 12:18:46 pm
Quote
By ROBERT EVATT World Staff Writer
Published: 8/28/2012  11:37 AM
Last Modified: 8/28/2012  11:56 AM

Charming Charlie, The Corner Bakery, Potbelly Sandwich Shop and Von Maur are actively looking to open Oklahoma locations, while Neiman Marcus, Nordstrom, Brooks Brothers and Costco have ruled the state out, at least for now.

That was the result of a survey conducted by Katherine Field Boccaccio, senior editor of Chain Store Age magazine, that examined restaurant and retailer attitudes toward the state.

Boccaccio presented her findings during the International Council of Shopping Centers IdeaExchange held Thursday in the Renaissance Oklahoma City Convention Center.

She said that of the 159 companies she interviewed, fewer than 20 percent have plans to enter the state.

Boccaccio said some of the bigger barriers include a lack of suitable locations, a lack of population density or a lack of confidence in the buying power of residents.

“A lot of companies pass on Oklahoma due to the perceived lack of income, even though the cost of living is lower and people have a lot of discretionary income,” she said.

At least for some companies, another stumbling block is the state’s alcohol laws.

Boccaccio said officials at BevMo!, a growing liquor chain, told her they can’t do business in the state due to the laws, though they would be very interested in expanding here should things change.

Costco officials told her that “the chain cannot do business in Oklahoma until some changes occur,” which she said suggested the alcohol laws were part of the problem.

Other stores, specifically The Container Store, are concentrating their growth in bigger areas, and some currently have no or slow expansion plans, Boccaccio said.

However, other companies expressed interest in coming here. She said officials at The Corner Bakery said they very nearly proceeded with plans to open restaurants in Tulsa, though plans with the franchisee fell through. They are now making new plans for a Tulsa entry.

Von Maur officials are interested in opening in Tulsa, although they have had trouble finding a suitable location, Boccaccio said.

H&M officials did not specifically mention Oklahoma, but she said they are looking at smaller cities within the region.

In-n-Out Burger officials told Boccaccio they will consider expanding to Oklahoma after they finish building out in the Texas area, a process that should take another five years.

Sur La Table will also evaluate Oklahoma within the next three to five years. Au Bon Pain would like to open here, although Boccaccio said distribution could be a problem for the eatery, and that they would need to open multiple locations simultaneously to make it worthwhile.

Companies that are looking to expand their existing presence in Oklahoma include Qdoba, Panera Bread, Children’s Place, Whole Foods Market, P.F. Chang’s, Sprouts, Walgreens and CVS/Pharmacy, Boccaccio said.

During her talk, she noted that the state is attractive to many companies because of its strong economy, solid middle-income population, low cost of doing business, the interstate highway system and its proximity to Dallas.

“The majority of businesses I interviewed for this survey consider Oklahoma to be an extension of Texas,” Boccaccio said.

Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?subjectid=53&articleid=20120828_53_0_Charmi357348


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacks fan on August 28, 2012, 12:22:52 pm
Quote
“The majority of businesses I interviewed for this survey consider Oklahoma to be an extension of Texas,” Boccaccio said.

Ouch, that comment kind of stings.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: AquaMan on August 29, 2012, 10:00:45 am
I hope our governor was either attending or had someone summarize and explain these comments to her.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: rdj on August 29, 2012, 12:18:17 pm
She was too busy trumpeting her ability to grow business in our state at the RNC to notice this discussion.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on October 01, 2012, 07:55:21 am
This morning, KJRH mentioned Amazon starting to sell wine.  Amazon would charge the wineries a fee.

They didn't follow up this fun story with "but we in Oklahoma are unable to use this service because of our outdated laws".

How could the person tossing this story in there not mention we can't use the service?  Dammit.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on February 05, 2013, 11:27:11 am
Legislation seeks beer samples at breweries

http://blog.newsok.com/thirstybeagle/2013/02/05/legislation-seeks-beer-samples-at-breweries/ (http://blog.newsok.com/thirstybeagle/2013/02/05/legislation-seeks-beer-samples-at-breweries/)

Quote
With each new legislative session, there are at least one or two beer-related bills.

In 2010, Gov. Brad Henry signed a bill to legalize homebrewing in the state.

In 2011, there was a bill to allow wine and strong beer sales in grocery stores. The bill fizzled out, but did lead to the creation of a task force to look at the issue. Unfortunately, the task force also fizzled out.

Last year, a group aimed to get a state question on the election ballot that would ask voters to decide if wine sales would be allowed in grocery stores in the state’s 15 largest counties. The measure wouldn’t have involved strong beer, which raised a few eyebrows. Either way, the group put the plan on hold, saying they would circulate a petition in 2013 with hopes of having the question on the 2014 ballot.

And that brings us to 2013 and the latest beer-related bill — House Bill 1341. The bill would allow for licensed breweries in the state to provide on-premise samples to visitors.

You can read the text of the bill right here. And you can see a lobbying guide by clicking here.

The bill is set to come up for a vote at 10:30 a.m. Wednesday in front the House Public Safety Committee.

Here are some key issues those who back HB 1341 are pointing out:

-Oklahoma winemakers are already allowed to serve on-premise samples
-The move would be good for local tourism
-The language of the bill is viewed as “very reasonable” by the state ABLE Commission

So how would it work? Licensed brewers would be able to offer up to 12 oz. of beer per day/per visitor. The samples would be free and would only be available from 10 a.m. to 9 p.m. Brewers would have to pay an Oklahoma excise tax on sampled beer.

You can read more details at the above links.

The bill’s backers are asking that you contact the listed legislators and encourage them to approve the bill and send it up the line.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on February 05, 2013, 12:11:32 pm
Legislation seeks beer samples at breweries
http://blog.newsok.com/thirstybeagle/2013/02/05/legislation-seeks-beer-samples-at-breweries/ (http://blog.newsok.com/thirstybeagle/2013/02/05/legislation-seeks-beer-samples-at-breweries/)

Im all for legalized beer sampling.  :P


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on February 07, 2013, 12:44:20 pm
Quote
House Bill 1341, which would allow licensed Oklahoma brewers to offer free samples at their breweries, breezed through a House committee today.

http://blog.newsok.com/thirstybeagle/2013/02/06/hb-1341-flies-through-committee-vote-on-to-full-house/


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on February 07, 2013, 12:52:12 pm

House Bill 1341, which would allow licensed Oklahoma brewers to offer free samples at their breweries, breezed through a House committee today.

http://blog.newsok.com/thirstybeagle/2013/02/06/hb-1341-flies-through-committee-vote-on-to-full-house/

The "they" are building up our hopes to quell the rioting for a few more weeks.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on February 07, 2013, 12:54:05 pm
The "they" are building up our hopes to quell the rioting for a few more weeks.
Maybe if they add some language requiring guns and bibles to be dispensed with the samples, we can get it passed.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on February 07, 2013, 12:57:22 pm
I just went to Mother's Brewing in Springfield, Mo. the other day. Sampled quite a few beers. They had 10-12 on tap. Had a pint of one of them.

Got a growler (64oz glass jug) filled with my favorite to bring home. Sure was nice. I hope we take more cues from Missouri than we do from Texas when/if we modernize our laws.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: carltonplace on February 07, 2013, 01:06:19 pm
I just went to Mother's Brewing in Springfield, Mo. the other day. Sampled quite a few beers. They had 10-12 on tap. Had a pint of one of them.

Got a growler (64oz glass jug) filled with my favorite to bring home. Sure was nice. I hope we take more cues from Missouri than we do from Texas when/if we modernize our laws.

I hope this passes. A local brewery can be an economic development driver for an area if they can host gatherings in their factory. I've been to tastings at Deep Ellum Brewery in Dallas and Rahr Brothers in Fort Worth. Both are located in depressed areas of their town, but the impact of other local businesses (and food trucks) popping up around them is evident.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on February 07, 2013, 02:34:10 pm
I hope this passes. A local brewery can be an economic development driver for an area if they can host gatherings in their factory. I've been to tastings at Deep Ellum Brewery in Dallas and Rahr Brothers in Fort Worth. Both are located in depressed areas of their town, but the impact of other local businesses (and food trucks) popping up around them is evident.
I know what you mean. I've been to both of those places.

But I hope we're not aiming just for that. Because it's still a pretty poor example of how a brewery can be legally allowed to operate. You pay your $5 or whatever for a "tour" that's offered only once or twice a week, and you get three free pints to "sample." No beer to go. No dropping by whenever to taste what they've brewed up.

Whereas in Missouri they're allowed to sell bottles and growlers in addition to basically operating more like a bar as far as selling pints and being open many hours a week.

But sometimes it feels like Texas is the sole frame of reference for most of our population.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on February 07, 2013, 03:19:50 pm

But sometimes it feels like Texas is the sole frame of reference for most of our population.

Whole lotta that going on, ain't there?

If they are so enamored, why are they here??  Rather than trying to send us the way of Texas (and granted, I'm not a big fan) why not just go where "life is good" already?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on February 15, 2013, 10:10:01 am
I didn't realize there would need to be a vote on this:

Okla. Senate panel approves agency merger plan

http://www.sfgate.com/news/crime/article/Okla-Senate-panel-approves-agency-merger-plan-4277361.php (http://www.sfgate.com/news/crime/article/Okla-Senate-panel-approves-agency-merger-plan-4277361.php)

Quote
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — Two state agencies dealing with alcohol and narcotics that have a total of nearly 200 employees and combined annual budgets of more than $21.5 million would be merged under a pair of proposals approved Thursday by a Senate committee.

The Senate Public Safety Committee approved two measures that would merge the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs with the Alcoholic Beverage Laws Enforcement Commission. Consolidating both agencies into the new Oklahoma Bureau of Alcohol and Drug Enforcement would result in cost savings and a consolidate administrative functions, said Sen. Clark Jolley, who sponsored the bill and joint resolution calling for the merger.

"This is something that's been suggested eight times in the past 10 years," said Jolley, R-Edmond. "It may work. It may not."

The proposed merger is part of a broader push by members of the Republican-controlled Legislature to streamline and ultimately reduce the cost of state government. The Legislature last year consolidated a handful of state agencies into the newly named Office of Management and Enterprise Services.

The ABLE Commission has about 50 employees, while the OBNDD has more than 140 state workers. Besides a reduction in some of those positions, Jolley said the agencies also could merge some of the two agencies' existing locations in Tulsa, Oklahoma City and McAlester.

The director of OBNDD, Darrell Weaver, said he was concerned about the potential for his agency's mission of fighting illegal drugs to become "diluted" if the agencies were merged, but that he was working with Jolley on the plan.

ABLE Executive Director Keith Burt said the agency did not have a position on the measure.

"We're law enforcers, not lawmakers," Burt said.

Jolley's plan would require a vote of the people to create the new agency, since ABLE's existence is outlined in the Oklahoma Constitution.

Sen. Ralph Shortey opposed the bills, arguing that OBNDD's function of targeting drug dealers and traffickers was far different than the more administrative functions of ABLE, which generally deals with restaurant and bar owners and compliance with liquor laws.

"The ABLE Commission serves an entirely different function than OBN does," said Shortey, R-Oklahoma City. "The bureau of narcotics is going after the bad guys, the really bad guys."

While Jolley acknowledged ABLE deals primarily with "the nerdy side of crime and law enforcement," he said those functions would be handled by an administrative bureau within the new agency dubbed the Alcohol and Prescription Compliance bureau, which would also oversee the state's prescription drug monitoring program.

Both measures now head to the full Senate Appropriations Committee, which Jolley chairs.

Rep. Jason Murphey, R-Guthrie, the House sponsor of the two proposals, said the state has "far too many" state agencies, boards and commissions, especially when compared to states of comparable size and budgets.

"It's a moral imperative of us to do right by the taxpayer and start reducing the size of government with some commonsense consolidations," Murphey said.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Vashta Nerada on February 15, 2013, 07:21:32 pm

Okla. Senate panel approves agency merger plan

http://www.sfgate.com/news/crime/article/Okla-Senate-panel-approves-agency-merger-plan-4277361.php (http://www.sfgate.com/news/crime/article/Okla-Senate-panel-approves-agency-merger-plan-4277361.php)


ABLE and OBNDD would be near the top of the list of money-wasters whose funds could be better spent by almost any other state agency.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on February 19, 2013, 03:36:58 pm
From Marshall's website:

Beer Sampling Bill Cleared for Full House Vote

Action Needed: Please Contact Your House Rep for Support of HB1341 – Brewery Sampling

http://marshallbrewing.com/2013/02/action-needed-please-contact-your-house-rep-for-support-of-hb1341-brewery-sampling/ (http://marshallbrewing.com/2013/02/action-needed-please-contact-your-house-rep-for-support-of-hb1341-brewery-sampling/)

Beer Sampling Bill Cleared for Full House Vote

HB 1341 seeks to allow licensed Oklahoma breweries to offer samples to the public

Quote
Tulsa, OK.  February 19, 2013 – Oklahoma House Bill HB 1341, introduced by Representative Glen Mulready (R-Tulsa & Creek County), seeks to amend Section 521 of Title 37 to permit licensed brewers of beer in Oklahoma to provide limited free samples to the visitors to the licensed brewery premises. Rep. Mulready worked with Marshall Brewing Co. founders  Eric & Adam Marshall to author HB 1341, which received overwhelming bi-partisan support before the House’s Public Safety Committee on February 6th and was cleared by the House’s Calendar Committee on February 19th to be put forth for a full vote on the House floor in the near future.

HB 1341 is pro-business and pro-tourism legislation and seeks to level the playing field among Oklahoma’s beer and wine producers in that Oklahoma wineries are permitted to offer samples on their licensed premises. “We have effectively been doing our job with one-hand beyond our backs. Few craft breweries have the traditional marketing methods available due to restrained resources,” explains Eric Marshall. “Visitors are typically more impassioned to support small local craft producers when they can experience the products and crafting first hand. The opportunity to explain the business and culture of craft beer and brewing to the public while offering small limited samples will help our industry grow, offer more jobs, pay more taxes, and create a culture of craft beer tourism similar to most other states like Colorado.”

The Oklahoma House Scheduling Committee does not provide an exact date for the House vote. Eric Marshall has been advised that it could be as soon as this week.  “This is good legislation for  business and tourism in Oklahoma, and we need people to voice their support,” Eric says.  Marshall Brewing Co. encourages Oklahoma citizens to contact their Oklahoma House representative and ask for their support on HB 1341.  The public can find their Oklahoma legislative representatives at http://www.okhouse.gov/Members/Default.aspx.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on February 26, 2013, 09:29:34 am
It passed 62-30. Maybe the crazies are finally starting to get outnumbered.

Listening to the opposition is quite the insight into crazy. Talk of the alcohol content of Jesus wine. Talk of drunk driving after drinking their 12oz of free sample beer. Talk of alcoholism. Talk of kids getting drunk. I'm sure the alcoholics are gonna start showing up at Marshall to get 12 free ounces rather than just go to the liquor store for a cheap pint.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on February 26, 2013, 09:50:23 am
It passed 62-30. Maybe the crazies are finally starting to get outnumbered.

More likely that margin reflects the fact the wholesalers and retailers don't see this as a threat to their state protected rackets/business models.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on February 27, 2013, 11:52:15 pm
TYPros Spends Day at Capitol; Discusses How Liquor Laws Could Harm Business:

http://www.ktul.com/story/21417617/typros-spends-day-at-capitol-discusses-how-liquor-laws-could-harm-business

While ABLE came to Tulsa to teach police how to make sure they do:

http://www.fox23.com/mediacenter/local.aspx?videoId=3959150&navCatId=19942


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacks fan on February 28, 2013, 12:13:49 am
TYPros Spends Day at Capitol; Discusses How Liquor Laws Could Harm Business:

http://www.ktul.com/story/21417617/typros-spends-day-at-capitol-discusses-how-liquor-laws-could-harm-business

Love this comment from this article..........
Quote
Terradaloo
 

So tired of hearing these boozers complain about the liquor laws. We need stronger laws preventing the sale of alcohol....Booze is the number one problem with most car accidents...we don't need more access to booze....we need less....keep the drunks out of my state....if you don't like the liquor laws....MOVE!

Quote
While ABLE came to Tulsa to teach police how to make sure they do:

http://www.fox23.com/mediacenter/local.aspx?videoId=3959150&navCatId=19942

"We don't want to embarass anyone, but this store maybe selling to underage people, and here is a closeup of the name of this offending store"


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on February 28, 2013, 09:21:55 am
Is Erik Smoot planning on running for office at some point in time? I've seen that guy on T.V. the last two weeks almost everyday.
I'm not sure what it is about that guy I don't like. He comes off as the power hungry little kid that was bullied in school. Maybe it's the voice or that wanna be a cop look he has going on.
Just wish that he would go back to his desk and let the real cops do their job.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on February 28, 2013, 10:22:46 am
Is Erik Smoot planning on running for office at some point in time? I've seen that guy on T.V. the last two weeks almost everyday.
I'm not sure what it is about that guy I don't like. He comes off as the power hungry little kid that was bullied in school. Maybe it's the voice or that wanna be a cop look he has going on.
Just wish that he would go back to his desk and let the real cops do their job.

I've experienced him going overboard with things I've been involved with. 

He's not the best representative someone could have but he represents ABLE as ABLE should be represented.  Over reaching and too much power.

He was a cop.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: saintnicster on February 28, 2013, 10:25:13 am
Love this comment from this article..........
Quote
Terradaloo
 

So tired of hearing these boozers complain about the liquor laws. We need stronger laws preventing the sale of alcohol....Booze is the number one problem with most car accidents...we don't need more access to booze....we need less....keep the drunks out of my state....if you don't like the liquor laws....MOVE!
"Sent from my iPhone"


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on February 28, 2013, 11:37:02 am
I've experienced him going overboard with things I've been involved with. 

He's not the best representative someone could have but he represents ABLE as ABLE should be represented.  Over reaching and too much power.

He was a cop.

I knew it. I thought that I had seen him before in uniform on the news.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on February 28, 2013, 11:38:48 am
If we really were as puritanical as we pretend to be, then we should treat 3.2 beer like we treat real beer. It's just slightly harder to get drunk on 3.2 beer, so it should be available in 4x as many places for twice as many hours per week.

That makes sense.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on February 28, 2013, 12:13:25 pm
If we really were as puritanical as we pretend to be, then we should treat 3.2 beer like we treat real beer. It's just slightly harder to get drunk on 3.2 beer, so it should be available in 4x as many places for twice as many hours per week.
That makes sense.

Is 3.2 beer still classified as a non-intoxicating beverage?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Gaspar on February 28, 2013, 12:28:05 pm
Is 3.2 beer still classified as a non-intoxicating beverage?

I really hate to, but I can prove that wrong.

Not only is it intoxicating if you do it right, but it's also a powerful laxative.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on February 28, 2013, 12:35:16 pm
I really hate to, but I can prove that wrong.

Not only is it intoxicating if you do it right, but it's also a powerful laxative.

I just remember seeing the license to sell 3.2 beer at a place I used to frequent.  It was a permit/license to sell non-intoxicating beverages.  Of course the joke was to ask how many non-intoxicating beverages it took to get drunk.
 


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacks fan on February 28, 2013, 01:09:17 pm
I just remember seeing the license to sell 3.2 beer at a place I used to frequent.  It was a permit/license to sell non-intoxicating beverages.  Of course the joke was to ask how many non-intoxicating beverages it took to get drunk.
 

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6QSY25cRjU[/youtube]


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on March 01, 2013, 01:48:26 pm
I just remember seeing the license to sell 3.2 beer at a place I used to frequent.  It was a permit/license to sell non-intoxicating beverages.  Of course the joke was to ask how many non-intoxicating beverages it took to get drunk.
 

Apparently Okies arent the only ones drinking watered-down beer:

http://www.stltoday.com/business/columns/lager-heads/anheuser-busch-waters-down-beer-lawsuits-claim/article_aec2ebe3-c13c-5181-b0a7-00058ff83c38.html


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on March 01, 2013, 02:17:22 pm
Apparently Okies arent the only ones drinking watered-down beer:
http://www.stltoday.com/business/columns/lager-heads/anheuser-busch-waters-down-beer-lawsuits-claim/article_aec2ebe3-c13c-5181-b0a7-00058ff83c38.html

Our not to exceed 3.2 beer is intentionally "watered down" (probably actually brewed to 3.2) but it is marked that way (absence of OK+) and we know it.

The gripe in the lawsuit is that the beer is not what it it marked.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on March 01, 2013, 02:47:47 pm
The lawsuit seems bogus to me, considering federal law allows for some deviation.

Quote
    § 7.71 Alcoholic content. (3) (c) Tolerances. (1) For malt beverages containing 0.5 percent or more alcohol by volume, a tolerance of 0.3 percent will be permitted, either above or below the stated percentage of alcohol.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on April 22, 2013, 03:52:32 pm
It’s official: Oklahoma beer sample bill signed into law

http://blog.newsok.com/thirstybeagle/2013/04/22/its-official-oklahoma-beer-sample-bill-signed-into-law/ (http://blog.newsok.com/thirstybeagle/2013/04/22/its-official-oklahoma-beer-sample-bill-signed-into-law/)

Quote
Gov. Mary Fallin today signed off on Oklahoma House Bill 1341, the bill to allow the state’s licensed brewers to offer on-premise beer samples.
The measure will go into effect Nov. 1.


Title: Re: Re: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on April 22, 2013, 04:29:31 pm
It’s official: Oklahoma beer sample bill signed into law

http://blog.newsok.com/thirstybeagle/2013/04/22/its-official-oklahoma-beer-sample-bill-signed-into-law/ (http://blog.newsok.com/thirstybeagle/2013/04/22/its-official-oklahoma-beer-sample-bill-signed-into-law/)

Baby steps.


Title: Re: Re: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: custosnox on April 23, 2013, 12:14:53 am
Baby steps.
Baby steps when you're trying to catch up to the people who are jogging?  Doesn't work for me.


Title: Re: Re: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on April 23, 2013, 04:13:15 pm
Baby steps when you're trying to catch up to the people who are jogging?  Doesn't work for me.

Indeed.  It is also disheartening to consider how long and how much effort was required for this baby step.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: TheTed on April 23, 2013, 07:36:18 pm
On a recent trip to a brewpub out of state, I couldn't help but think of all the different ways in which that would be illegal in Oklahoma.

There was a young couple with an infant (it was a pretty quiet place)
I could buy a pint or three.
I could buy a growler fill.
I could buy a six-pack.
I could visit on Sunday.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Gaspar on July 31, 2013, 06:17:18 am
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msQ_khFmKtU&feature=youtu.be[/youtube]


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on July 31, 2013, 12:30:26 pm
All this PLUS the Caddo County cops stealing people's money...yeah, we're doing fine Oklahoma... got the outside companies just lining up to come set up shop here!



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on August 01, 2013, 01:19:01 am
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msQ_khFmKtU&feature=youtu.be[/youtube]

(https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/2474333952/hD3692A4C/)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on December 08, 2014, 01:16:12 pm
Group Wants Oklahoma's Craft Beer Laws Changed

http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/group-wants-oklahomas-craft-beer-laws-changed (http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/group-wants-oklahomas-craft-beer-laws-changed)

Quote
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — A group wants to make Oklahoma's laws for craft beer the same as state laws for wineries.

Heather Sams of the League of Oklahomans for Change in Alcohol Laws, or LOCAL, says there's several breweries that are restricted by regulations not imposed on other businesses like wineries.

The Journal Record reports the group wants breweries to be able to sell their whole beer portfolios from the tap. They also want liquor stores to be able to sell alcohol mixers, cheeses and other food pairings.

LOCAL is run by 10 craft beer enthusiasts, with another 40 people as members. The organization's leader, Kevin Hall, says it plans to hire a lobbyist to present the issues to state lawmakers.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: carltonplace on December 10, 2014, 09:27:48 am
I wish them luck.

With the price of oil dropping the state of OK should be looking for alternate revenue streams.
Colorado's microbrew industry has annual sales of a billion or more (not to mention the new grass industry). 

Really the only thing keeping us out of the game is our arcane and outdated laws.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on December 10, 2014, 10:04:22 am
Beer tourism is a very real concept.  Any time we travel out of state, I use the opportunity to find and bring back beer we cannot get in Oklahoma.  There are several breweries I have growlers from and I make sure to pack their empties and take them with us when I know we are going to be in that area again.

NW Arkansas has a “Brewery Trail”.

http://www.loopnet.com/ATTACHMENTS/5/A/4/5A4EE44E-C061-4C39-9E00-5F26FBE3B2F6.PDF

A friend of mine was just in Bend, Oregon and tipped me off to this:

http://www.bendbrewbus.com

If we could get full line sales out of breweries, I’d hope it could make nano breweries a reality.  Imagine being able to finish off a day on Grand Lake with a fresh craft beer in the courtyard of a small brewery along the water or making it possible for small operations in smaller towns throughout the state. 



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: carltonplace on December 10, 2014, 11:54:29 am
Last time I was in Fort Worth I went to a party at the local brewey and it was a blast. I want this for Tulsa.

Plus the stuff Conan said; ditto, that too and additionally also as well.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: HSams75 on December 30, 2014, 04:14:55 pm
Beer tourism is a very real concept.  Any time we travel out of state, I use the opportunity to find and bring back beer we cannot get in Oklahoma.  There are several breweries I have growlers from and I make sure to pack their empties and take them with us when I know we are going to be in that area again.
......
If we could get full line sales out of breweries, I’d hope it could make nano breweries a reality.  Imagine being able to finish off a day on Grand Lake with a fresh craft beer in the courtyard of a small brewery along the water or making it possible for small operations in smaller towns throughout the state. 



Exactly this.  Whenever I travel out of state, I make a point of seeking out craft beer that I can't get here, I visit breweries and sample their beers, I visit local restaurants and try local beer on tap.  Over the summer, we spent a week in Texas on a beercation, visited some breweries, and spent a stupid amount of money on beer at breweries, liquor stores, and growler stations.  I have a friend who works out at Prairie who has to tell disappointed out-of-state visitors that she can only sell them low-point beer and they are NOT happy to hear that.  I've seen posts from out-of-staters who would love to visit our breweries but pass us by because of the low-point restriction. 

Certain segments of the population have a knee-jerk negative reaction whenever it comes to the idea of modernizing our liquor laws, but they fail to look at how change will benefit our state, or the ridiculous inconsistencies that exist (i.e. wineries being able to sell at point-of-production up to 24%, while breweries are limited to 4%; wineries can set up shop at *the farmer's market*, but no way would a brewery be allowed - it's nuts).  Our current focus at LOCAL is parity between breweries and wineries, so we have to educate people on the way that will benefit our state.  The momentum that craft beer currently has nationwide will help, I hope.  We already have a nice concentration of breweries in Tulsa and OKC, so when the laws are modernized, we are perfectly situated to establish a couple of ale trails.  There is so much potential here and it drives me nuts that we're not entirely living up it.
 


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Breadburner on December 30, 2014, 07:59:18 pm
Craft beer sucks.....


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: HSams75 on January 05, 2015, 11:08:18 am
Craft beer sucks.....

That's how I feel about macro beer, so to each his own.  ;)  Regardless, I think we can probably both agree that our liquor laws could stand to be modernized.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on January 22, 2015, 05:35:51 pm
Here we go baby steps. This is a good idea but not enough to get me to fall off my wagon just yet. I want strong cold Bud and Coors in grocery stores. Heck I had no problem waiting 10 minutes for a strong beer to get cold in my freezer.  ::)

http://www.tulsaworld.com/scenehomepage3/what-the-ale-could-oklahoma-be-getting-cold-beer-in/article_f005608d-d815-5dbc-8c10-2dee0037c562.html


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on January 22, 2015, 07:59:21 pm
I want strong cold Bud and Coors in grocery stores.

I doubt I would buy strong Bud or Coors even if it were available in Liquor Stores.  Well, maybe just one each in a Mix-a-Six to remind me why I drink Craft Beer.



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on January 22, 2015, 08:23:37 pm
I doubt I would buy strong Bud or Coors even if it were available in Liquor Stores.  Well, maybe just one each in a Mix-a-Six to remind me why I drink Craft Beer.



This IS good though because some brewers will NOT ship to Oklahoma because they won't ship and store their beer refrigerated.  New Belgium is the first one that comes to mind (maker of Fat Tire).  I know RM is with me on this.  I grow weary of driving to Caney just to get my fill of Fat Tire!


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on January 22, 2015, 09:30:40 pm
This IS good though because some brewers will NOT ship to Oklahoma because they won't ship and store their beer refrigerated.  New Belgium is the first one that comes to mind (maker of Fat Tire).  I know RM is with me on this.  I grow weary of driving to Caney just to get my fill of Fat Tire!

I want "less than room temperature" beer in Liquor Stores.  I just don't care for MillerCoorsBud Light.

Fat Tire:
I like it too.  I've gotten the real stuff during some trips to TX.  High Gravity has a pretty good clone kit if you want to brew some of your own to avoid the drive to KS.

FWIW, the ability to keep beer cold doesn't mean the retailers will.  I saw some room temperature Fat Tire at the HEB where I was in TX.  It was summer though and room temp in HEB was still a lot less than outside in July.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on January 22, 2015, 09:38:21 pm
I want "less than room temperature" beer in Liquor Stores.  I just don't care for MillerCoorsBud Light.

Fat Tire:
I like it too.  I've gotten the real stuff during some trips to TX.  High Gravity has a pretty good clone kit if you want to brew some of your own to avoid the drive to KS.

FWIW, the ability to keep beer cold doesn't mean the retailers will.  I saw some room temperature Fat Tire at the HEB where I was in TX.  It was summer though and room temp in HEB was still a lot less than outside in July.

The Caney store I go to (and I'm sure it's the same one RM goes to) always keeps it refrigerated.  Now I guess I should modify that and say the requirement is allowing transport in refrigerated trucks, of which Oklahoma doesn't allow for high point beer.

So it's the same deal.  Oklahoma currently doesn't have it.  And I don't have the time nor inclination currently to home brew.  Maybe in a few months.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: RecycleMichael on January 22, 2015, 10:04:23 pm
I haven't been to Caney to buy Fat Tire for a while, but it is my favorite beer. It would be great to buy a bottle of it cold in Tulsa.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on January 22, 2015, 10:12:30 pm
For anyone who feels Fat Tire deprived until it arrives in Oklahoma, try Santa Fe Nut Brown or Moose Drool.  Not exactly the same as Fat Tire, but really good brown ales which will appeal to the same palate.  I know Hoss has tried SFNB.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on January 22, 2015, 11:32:06 pm
For anyone who feels Fat Tire deprived until it arrives in Oklahoma, try Santa Fe Nut Brown or Moose Drool.  Not exactly the same as Fat Tire, but really good brown ales which will appeal to the same palate.  I know Hoss has tried SFNB.

SFNB is quite tasty.  It's a tad heavier than Fat Tire, but the taste is similar.  And I have tried Moose Drool as a suggestion from a friend while at McNellies.  It's probably closer in taste to it but a little hoppier.  Both beers still tasty.

EDIT: and technically, FT is an amber ale.  Both Moose Drool and Nut Brown are classified as English Brown Ales.  Which gives it a little heavier feel drinking it.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on January 23, 2015, 08:23:55 am
One of these days I'm going to have to try a Fat Tire beer. You guys have never steered me wrong. I know the love of craft beers that most all on here enjoy. C-Man was right about the Santa Fe Nut. I tried it and drank if for a while after his suggestion.

My thing about the low brow big two National beers is that for some reason in my mind. Oklahoma's 3.2 version always made what I have had in Texas taste so much better. And if I would be able to get a strong version of the two at Reasors on Sunday, All the better.
Being able to buy a strong tall boy at a convenience store would also be nice. The whole protect mom and pop liquor store business is ridiculous.
So it comes as no surprise that this law is to benefit them. Like I said. Oklahoma Baby Steps.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on January 23, 2015, 08:35:29 am
Also for those of you who like Marshall Arrowhead Pale Ale, I suggest you try his newer offering, This Machine IPA.  Same citrusy start, but an IPA.  With a kick at 7.80% ABV.  One of their better brews.

I still have a bomber of Bound For Glory I need to finish.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on January 23, 2015, 08:35:50 am
One of these days I'm going to have to try a Fat Tire beer. You guys have never steered me wrong. I know the love of craft beers that most all on here enjoy. C-Man was right about the Santa Fe Nut. I tried it and drank if for a while after his suggestion.

My thing about the low brow big two National beers is that for some reason in my mind. Oklahoma's 3.2 version always made what I have had in Texas taste so much better. And if I would be able to get a strong version of the two at Reasors on Sunday, All the better.
Being able to buy a strong tall boy at a convenience store would also be nice. The whole protect mom and pop liquor store business is ridiculous.
So it comes as no surprise that this law is to benefit them. Like I said. Oklahoma Baby Steps.

Of course, you can now get Bud Light Platinum at any liquor store in the area.  Not sure why AB chose that particular brew to release as a “high point” selection in Oklahoma.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on January 23, 2015, 10:03:10 am
Of course, you can now get Bud Light Platinum at any liquor store in the area.  Not sure why AB chose that particular brew to release as a “high point” selection in Oklahoma.

Never been a fan of light beer. I always thought. If your going to water it down to 3.2 why should I lighten it?  ;D


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on January 23, 2015, 10:13:02 am
Never been a fan of light beer. I always thought. If your going to water it down to 3.2 why should I lighten it?  ;D

My uncle actually gave me one night before last.  It wasn't too bad.  For InBev.  :)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on January 23, 2015, 12:24:43 pm
Also for those of you who like Marshall Arrowhead Pale Ale, I suggest you try his newer offering, This Machine IPA.  Same citrusy start, but an IPA.  With a kick at 7.80% ABV.  One of their better brews.

The wife grabbed some for me the other night.   A bit sweet for me but I'll have more.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on January 23, 2015, 01:13:28 pm
The wife grabbed some for me the other night.   A bit sweet for me but I'll have more.

Belgian is not one of my go-to styles, but it’s an interesting blend between the yeast and hops.  This was a beer designed by Garrick one of the assistant brewers.

Even though I’ve got a fresh stock of Odell and Deschutes from a friend who was in Kansas City last week, I still find myself reaching for an Atlas or This Machine IPA when I’m in an IPA mood.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on January 23, 2015, 01:17:26 pm
Deschutes,  (http://comiendocomida.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/homer_simpson_beer1.gif)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on January 23, 2015, 01:50:55 pm
Deschutes,  (http://comiendocomida.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/homer_simpson_beer1.gif)

Dude, you get all that you want and then some in your neck of the woods. 

Ever hear of Apothecary?  The guy does really unconventional techniques like brewing in hollowed-out logs.

http://beermebend.com/bend-oregon-craft-beer-the-ale-apothecary/


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on January 23, 2015, 02:07:15 pm
Here we go baby steps. This is a good idea but not enough to get me to fall off my wagon just yet. I want strong cold Bud and Coors in grocery stores. Heck I had no problem waiting 10 minutes for a strong beer to get cold in my freezer.  ::)

http://www.tulsaworld.com/scenehomepage3/what-the-ale-could-oklahoma-be-getting-cold-beer-in/article_f005608d-d815-5dbc-8c10-2dee0037c562.html

It’s hard to be optimistic this has much of a chance to pass when even the liquor store owners’ trade association is not supporting it - too many of its members oppose because they don’t want the cost of adding coolers to their stores.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on January 23, 2015, 03:07:39 pm
Dude, you get all that you want and then some in your neck of the woods. 

Ever hear of Apothecary?  The guy does really unconventional techniques like brewing in hollowed-out logs.

http://beermebend.com/bend-oregon-craft-beer-the-ale-apothecary/

Yeah, I know that I need to go there, just hard to get away to do it.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on January 26, 2015, 09:35:43 am
Yes but will it be growlers?

http://www.tulsaworld.com/homepage2/what-the-ale-oklahoma-breweries-could-soon-be-allowed-to/article_7f7006b1-f073-5484-8389-3a3b95979bbd.html


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on January 27, 2015, 01:46:22 pm
Yes but will it be growlers?

http://www.tulsaworld.com/homepage2/what-the-ale-oklahoma-breweries-could-soon-be-allowed-to/article_7f7006b1-f073-5484-8389-3a3b95979bbd.html

This is a bill that likely has a chance to pass.  It would be a small but important step in the right direction.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on January 27, 2015, 03:09:39 pm
Given the precedence set with wineries, I believe this really does have a chance. 

It pains me though when I have to point to Arkansas as a pinnacle of progress we should be following.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on January 27, 2015, 03:57:44 pm
Given the precedence set with wineries, I believe this really does have a chance. 

It pains me though when I have to point to Arkansas as a pinnacle of progress we should be following.

Thanks, my nose burns now from shooting my favorite porter out of it. ;D


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on January 28, 2015, 09:45:47 am
Thanks, my nose burns now from shooting my favorite porter out of it. ;D

You are welcome, any time!

I’m mainly stoked by the possibility of how this could benefit people who dream of opening a nano brewery as a full micro set up is out of their financial means.  Not that setting up a tap room is cheap, but an owner could rely solely on in-house sales and selling growlers (which cuts down on packaging costs) from the front door of their business.  It would also improve brewpub offerings and make life for them less complicated.



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: HSams75 on January 29, 2015, 09:03:58 am
It’s hard to be optimistic this has much of a chance to pass when even the liquor store owners’ trade association is not supporting it - too many of its members oppose because they don’t want the cost of adding coolers to their stores.

Has there been an official statement from them as an organization?  What I've heard from a few friends who own liquor stores is that adding a basic cooler or two isn't prohibitively expensive and they're fine with the expense because they know it will pay for itself.  Further, adding refrigeration is optional under the bill, not mandatory.  It would be incredibly unfortunate if a few naysayers in the biz killed this, especially when many of their consumers DO want this to happen.

This is a bill that likely has a chance to pass.  It would be a small but important step in the right direction.


From what I understand, this one will be less likely to pass as currently written, since Article 28.3 of our constitution states that a brewery can only sell to a wholesaler but passage of State Question 743 allowed wineries can sell directly to the public .  Amending the state constitution will require ballot question and a vote of the people.  Also, it doesn't *quite* put breweries on par with wineries, as we're reading the language - it appears to only allow for breweries to sell packaged product directly to consumers, but doesn't appear to allow onsite consumption beyond the currently allowed tour samples, whereas wineries can do both.  If nothing else, it's raising awareness and getting the subject out there, which is a very good thing. 

A new brewery in Stillwater (Iron Monk) is getting ready to release beer and there is another newcomer in Tulsa (Kolibri Ale Works) that is licensed and working towards releasing beer.  The craft beer scene in Oklahoma is growing in spite of our crappy laws - I'm looking forward to seeing how much better it will be when we get these prohibitive laws changed.   


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on January 29, 2015, 10:04:11 am
Has there been an official statement from them as an organization?  What I've heard from a few friends who own liquor stores is that adding a basic cooler or two isn't prohibitively expensive and they're fine with the expense because they know it will pay for itself.  Further, adding refrigeration is optional under the bill, not mandatory.  It would be incredibly unfortunate if a few naysayers in the biz killed this, especially when many of their consumers DO want this to happen.

From what I understand, this one will be less likely to pass as currently written, since Article 28.3 of our constitution states that a brewery can only sell to a wholesaler but passage of State Question 743 allowed wineries can sell directly to the public .  Amending the state constitution will require ballot question and a vote of the people.  Also, it doesn't *quite* put breweries on par with wineries, as we're reading the language - it appears to only allow for breweries to sell packaged product directly to consumers, but doesn't appear to allow onsite consumption beyond the currently allowed tour samples, whereas wineries can do both.  If nothing else, it's raising awareness and getting the subject out there, which is a very good thing. 

A new brewery in Stillwater (Iron Monk) is getting ready to release beer and there is another newcomer in Tulsa (Kolibri Ale Works) that is licensed and working towards releasing beer.  The craft beer scene in Oklahoma is growing in spite of our crappy laws - I'm looking forward to seeing how much better it will be when we get these prohibitive laws changed.   


It sure has taken Iron Monk a long time to get going.  Glad to hear they are finally about ready to start pouring beer.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: HSams75 on January 29, 2015, 12:05:32 pm
It sure has taken Iron Monk a long time to get going.  Glad to hear they are finally about ready to start pouring beer.

Me, too!  I'm all for anything that continues to add to the craft beer scene here.  Have you seen the pics on their Facebook page yet?  That's going to be a really nice taproom when finished. 


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on February 26, 2015, 03:32:03 pm
Baby steps. One more hurdle.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/homepagelatest/bill-allowing-liquor-stores-to-sell-cold-high-point-beer/article_364e8452-c575-5328-8f9e-b2fb15a00669.html


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on February 26, 2015, 04:10:30 pm
For those who can’t get past the paywall:

Quote
Bill allowing liquor stores to sell cold, high-point beer passes committee

OKLAHOMA CITY – A Senate panel on Thursday passed a measure that would allow liquor stores to sell refrigerated, high-point beer.

Senate Bill 383 by Sen. Stephanie Bice, R-Oklahoma City, advanced from the Senate Business and Commerce Committee by a vote of 10-0 and heads to the Senate floor.

Bice was asked if the measure would create an unequal playing field because some liquor stores would not be able to afford to put in refrigeration equipment.

Bice said refrigeration is optional in the bill, not mandated.

Liquor stores that chose to refrigerate high-point beer could charge more for the product to cover their costs, she said.

Bice said she views the measure as leveling the playing field, because convenience stores and grocery stores are able to refrigerate and sell low-point beer.

Sen. Roger Thompson, R-Okemah, argued for the proposal, saying Oklahoma’s liquor laws are “archaic.”

Sen. Anastasia Pittman, D-Oklahoma City, said she has gotten a number of emails about the bill, adding that her constituents support it.

Sen. Nathan Dahm, R-Broken Arrow, said he did not drink alcohol.

“If you are an adult, you should be able to make that choice for yourself,” he said, adding that he supported the bill.

Bice said the bill was brought after a lot of thought and research to make refrigerated high-point beer a reality.

The panel also passed a measure that would allow craft breweries sell high-point beer on their premises.

Senate Bill 424, by Sen. Brian Crain, R-Tulsa, passed by a vote of 10-0 and heads to the Senate floor.

Crain said the measure has gotten a lot of positive attention.

Barbara Hoberock 405-528-2465


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on February 26, 2015, 04:13:30 pm
For those who can’t get past the paywall:


Quote
Sen. Roger Thompson, R-Okemah, argued for the proposal, saying Oklahoma’s liquor laws are “archaic.”

Hear hear, Roger.

Whoever asked this:

Quote
Bice was asked if the measure would create an unequal playing field because some liquor stores would not be able to afford to put in refrigeration equipment.

needs Sheriff Buford T. Justice to slap his momma in the mouth.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on February 26, 2015, 04:16:18 pm
Hear hear, Roger.

Whoever asked this:

needs Sheriff Buford T. Justice to slap his momma in the mouth.

Wonder if he also got called a 'schnauzer's d**k'?

 ;D


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on February 26, 2015, 04:21:21 pm
Wonder if he also got called a 'schnauzer's d**k'?

 ;D

I just, I just...

Got nothin’ on that.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on February 26, 2015, 04:32:13 pm
I just, I just...

Got nothin’ on that.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uN3c64j2DPE[/youtube]


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on February 26, 2015, 04:36:12 pm
Some brainiac's going to put some stupid assed rider on it and it'll get voted down. 

But it's nice to see it get that far so enthusiastically.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: swake on February 26, 2015, 07:00:36 pm
Add wine in Grocery stores and I will be satisfied.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on February 27, 2015, 09:47:38 am
Add wine in Grocery stores and I will be satisfied.

What. No cold fifths of Jack Daniels?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on February 27, 2015, 12:41:20 pm
I thought I had heard or read that the bill to increase the tax on 3.2 beer by 312% died, did it or not?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on February 27, 2015, 04:16:13 pm
Slightly off topic but:

Black Dolphin is in stores now.



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on February 27, 2015, 04:23:42 pm
Slightly off topic but:

Black Dolphin is in stores now.



Dammit, not at Collin's yet.

BTW, they've moved into their new space.  I like it.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on February 27, 2015, 05:02:46 pm
Dammit, not at Collin's yet.

BTW, they've moved into their new space.  I like it.

I got it at Crossing (101st & Memorial).  A bit of a drive for you, especially looking at traffic on 169 southbound.
 
I got my time in for the pay period so I left work early today.   :D

http://goo.gl/maps/GW3BS
 :(





Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on February 28, 2015, 09:41:12 am


Black Dolphin is in stores now.



Blasphemy! Blasphemy I Say!  ;D


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on February 28, 2015, 10:50:31 am
Still have some of the first edition of this.  Drinks like friggin’ chocolate milk.  One of the best barrel aged beers I’ve had.

Ranch Acres had it yesterday I believe.  Have not figured it was worth venturing to the liquor store in this weather, but it sure is a great day to brew a Deschutes Fresh Squeezed IPA clone and maybe an amber ale.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on February 28, 2015, 12:06:24 pm
Still have some of the first edition of this.  Drinks like friggin’ chocolate milk.  One of the best barrel aged beers I’ve had.

Ranch Acres had it yesterday I believe.  Have not figured it was worth venturing to the liquor store in this weather, but it sure is a great day to brew a Deschutes Fresh Squeezed IPA clone and maybe an amber ale.

Yep, didn't see any at Collin's and by that time yesterday (about 3:30) it was getting bad on the roads and I had to drive from there to the Traffic Circle to get home.

I know some friends that have some; I'll get it eventually.

What I did get to try last week at McNellie's was Big Jamoke out of the cask.  Yum. Mee.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on March 10, 2015, 03:38:34 pm
Craft Beer and LOCAL members keeping the ideas of reform in the news.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/homepage5/oklahomans-rally-for-craft-beer-boom/article_bc5bb99a-9e20-5b81-a5cf-bd50bac02f2e.html


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on March 12, 2015, 12:48:29 pm
Nice seeing everyone last night at the meeting.  Conan (and your better half), CF, RM...good to see you all again.  RM looked more like about 2/3 of the last time I saw him.  ;)  No beard makes you look like you are in your 20s and keep up with the weight loss.

Very informative meeting.  I learned some things last night about the alcohol distribution system in this state that I didn't know.  I like learning new things and like the two speakers, I'm on board for 2 of the 3 new laws.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on March 12, 2015, 01:04:31 pm
What. No cold fifths of Jack Daniels?


Noooooooo....not that!!   Maybe just a tiny little piece of ice to splash it over!  Anything more is sacrilege!!



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on March 12, 2015, 01:28:50 pm
Nice seeing everyone last night at the meeting.  Conan (and your better half), CF, RM...good to see you all again.  RM looked more like about 2/3 of the last time I saw him.  ;)  No beard makes you look like you are in your 20s and keep up with the weight loss.

Very informative meeting.  I learned some things last night about the alcohol distribution system in this state that I didn't know.  I like learning new things and like the two speakers, I'm on board for 2 of the 3 new laws.

One of the better forums I’ve attended.  TN always has really great programming and Carlos is a terrific emcee.

Best part last night was free Marshall’s beer and free brats and kraut provided by Fassler Hall.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on March 13, 2015, 08:08:18 am
This is starting to look promising. Finally the people are being heard about the 50 year old backward Liquor Laws in this State.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/newshomepage2/modernizing-oklahoma-s-liquor-laws-likely-won-t-happen-this/article_4a8d5893-f63d-5b8b-82cf-2992a2c5d9e3.html


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on March 13, 2015, 08:46:57 am
This is starting to look promising. Finally the people are being heard about the 50 year old backward Liquor Laws in this State.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/newshomepage2/modernizing-oklahoma-s-liquor-laws-likely-won-t-happen-this/article_4a8d5893-f63d-5b8b-82cf-2992a2c5d9e3.html

They just keep kicking the can down the road though...they'll use the same excuse in 2016 unless voices are heard now.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on March 13, 2015, 10:34:44 am
This is starting to look promising. Finally the people are being heard about the 50 year old backward Liquor Laws in this State.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/newshomepage2/modernizing-oklahoma-s-liquor-laws-likely-won-t-happen-this/article_4a8d5893-f63d-5b8b-82cf-2992a2c5d9e3.html

This is the key quote and issue:

“Although the measure passed and the cold, strong beer provision remained in the bill, Bice said any changes likely won’t be made until after all parties, such as wholesalers, retailers and others, come to the table for a discussion.”

The game in Oklahoma is rigged with every interested player (except the consumer) getting a carve out.  Changing only one aspect (such as allowing sales of cold high point beer in liquor stores) upsets the carefully crafted balance.  By and large the liquor stores, distributors and convenience/grocery stores are all comfortable and satisfied with the current system, as they each have their protected niche. They see the status quo is starting to be threatened by the building demand for modernization.  The optimist view is that the interested parties realize change is going to happen and they need to get on board to make sure they are protected.  The pessimist view is that they realize the best way to kill any change is to make it too big for the Oklahoma voters to swallow all at once.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on March 13, 2015, 12:03:45 pm
This is the key quote and issue:

“Although the measure passed and the cold, strong beer provision remained in the bill, Bice said any changes likely won’t be made until after all parties, such as wholesalers, retailers and others, come to the table for a discussion.”

You can put that quote on the tombstone of every effort to date.  It always ends with  "Oh, we should see what the mom-and-pop package lobby store has to say, let's set up some meetings."  and it never happens.

http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=15022.msg186883#msg186883


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: carltonplace on April 16, 2015, 07:34:45 am
Baby step: This was voted into law:


http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/ice-cold-beer-high-point-kind (http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/ice-cold-beer-high-point-kind)

"Ice Cold Beer"... The High Point Kind


By Associated Press

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — Legislation that would authorize liquor stores to sell refrigerated, high-point beer has been approved by the Oklahoma House.
 
House members on Wednesday voted 68-21 for the Senate-passed measure. Its author, Republican Rep. Glen Mulready of Tulsa, says the bill will now go to a joint House-Senate conference committee where it may undergo changes before lawmakers seek final passage.
 
High-point beer currently can only be sold in liquor stores and at room temperature. Under the measure, consumers would still have to purchase high-point beer at liquor stores, but it could be refrigerated before being sold.
 
Mulready says Oklahoma is one of only five states that offer only low-point beer under refrigeration. Opponents say the measure could increase youth access to alcohol.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on April 16, 2015, 07:39:32 am
This Tulsa World article mentions sales of high point beer at Liquor, Grocery and Convenient stores.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/homepage2/what-the-ale-oklahoma-is-progressing-in-its-beer-laws/article_dff515a9-8218-5633-9f1f-9bddf722bb0a.html

We would finally come out of the drinking dark ages.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: rdj on April 16, 2015, 07:59:41 am
That is assuming it gets out of committee.  Cross our fingers it does.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on April 16, 2015, 07:59:48 am
Opponents say the measure could increase youth access to alcohol.


Who are these mouth-breathing knuckle draggers?  OMFG!


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on April 16, 2015, 08:30:52 am
Who are these mouth-breathing knuckle draggers?  OMFG!

Oklahoma lawmakers!  Duh!   ;)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on April 16, 2015, 10:22:31 am
Opponents say the measure could increase youth access to alcohol.

Those "youth" would still have to take it up to the register in the liquor store, which is the liquor store lobby implying they do a poor job with the existing law...


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on April 16, 2015, 12:16:02 pm
I saw someone make a hilarious comment in the Oklahoman story on this online today:

"Im just surprised (AG) Pruitt (sic) hasnt decided to sue Kansas and Texas for legally carrying higher point beers in gas stations, grocery stores, etc."

LOL.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on April 16, 2015, 05:30:24 pm
I saw someone make a hilarious comment in the Oklahoman story on this online today:

"Im just surprised (AG) Pruitt (sic) hasnt decided to sue Kansas and Texas for legally carrying higher point beers in gas stations, grocery stores, etc."


He's too busy trying to force bibles into public schools.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/04/oklahoma-ags-bible-defense-may-have-opened-elementary-schools-to-satanist-literature/


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Vashta Nerada on April 19, 2015, 04:59:25 pm
Who are these mouth-breathing knuckle draggers?  OMFG!




When you buy a keg of beer in Oklahoma, your drivers license is scanned and entered into a DPS database, with the information not only going to ABLE but to the highway patrol.  OHP puts a watch on the address, and if they find a party, cops are positioned just out of sight in order to stop guests as they leave. 

Tip:  Have someone else pick up your keg.





Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: swake on April 19, 2015, 05:16:11 pm



When you buy a keg of beer in Oklahoma, your drivers license is scanned and entered into a DPS database, with the information not only going to ABLE but to the highway patrol.  OHP puts a watch on the address, and if they find a party, cops are positioned just out of sight in order to stop guests as they leave. 

Tip:  Have someone else pick up your keg


Is this real?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on April 19, 2015, 07:11:01 pm
Is this real?

Probably as real as Robert Bates training records.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on April 20, 2015, 09:25:14 pm
Probably as real as Robert Bates training records.

Well put.  He/she doesn’t paranoid much. 


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on April 21, 2015, 07:48:30 am
Forget alcohol...!!  Let's get right to the good stuff!!

Willie Nelson's got his own brand.  Guess I may have to make a pilgrimage to Washington and Colorado - the only two true libertarian states in the Union!!

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/willie-nelson-rolls-brand-pot-willies-reserve-30443987


He just HAS to call it "Willie Weed"....there can't be another name for it.

Willie's Reserve just doesn't "roll" off the tongue....



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on April 21, 2015, 10:03:27 am
Is this real?

Seems to be.  Haven't bought a keg in a while so never noticed.

Intoxicating Beverages  37 O.S.,
37-521.1   Keg Identification Label





Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on April 21, 2015, 01:48:48 pm
Seems to be.  Haven't bought a keg in a while so never noticed.

Intoxicating Beverages  37 O.S.,
37-521.1   Keg Identification Label





Yes, it's real, they take a copy of your DL, since you are entering into a rental contract for the keg and the equipment, just like if you rent garden equipment or tools a Home Depot.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on April 21, 2015, 01:56:52 pm
Yes, it's real, they take a copy of your DL, since you are entering into a rental contract for the keg and the equipment, just like if you rent garden equipment or tools a Home Depot.

Maybe I should start using a PO Box on my DL to make it a little more difficult then...   ;)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on April 21, 2015, 02:47:00 pm
Yes, it's real, they take a copy of your DL, since you are entering into a rental contract for the keg and the equipment, just like if you rent garden equipment or tools a Home Depot.

So by the same type reason. I should think they'll be watching my house for a meth lab, because I bought pseudoephedrine from behind the counter twice in one month for allergies.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on April 21, 2015, 02:59:32 pm
So by the same type reason. I should think they'll be watching my house for a meth lab, because I bought pseudoephedrine from behind the counter twice in one month for allergies.

Of course, they are parked down the street with the entry tank disguised as a tree trimming truck and the landscapers are undercover TCSO volunteer deputies.   ;)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on April 21, 2015, 04:22:29 pm
So by the same type reason. I should think they'll be watching my house for a meth lab, because I bought pseudoephedrine from behind the counter twice in one month for allergies.


They are watching you - your information is in the system and they are counting!


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on April 21, 2015, 04:27:05 pm
Guess I better be careful the next time I host a party for a bunch of Edison Sophomores.  :o


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on April 21, 2015, 04:49:10 pm
Guess I better be careful the next time I host a party for a bunch of Edison Sophomores.  :o

Hell I thought it would be Owasso cheerleaders.   ;D


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on September 15, 2015, 04:53:35 pm
Yes. One more step toward bringing me out of retirement. I said I may return to drinking beer if I didn't have to drive out of State to get a strong Bud or Coors. We shall see. This is still Oklahoma. If ever was a State that could mess up common sense. This is it.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/state/cold-beer-at-liquor-stores-strong-beer-and-wine-at/article_31e67d7b-7f4f-5e8b-9fa7-758ae670392e.html


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on September 16, 2015, 11:29:15 am
Yes. One more step toward bringing me out of retirement. I said I may return to drinking beer if I didn't have to drive out of State to get a strong Bud or Coors. We shall see. This is still Oklahoma. If ever was a State that could mess up common sense. This is it.


While I support the changes, I give this a slim chance in Hell.  

Too many times I've seen Oklahoma liquor store workers using a broom to shoo out teams of 4 year-olds trying to buy cold beer.

Sneaky little bastards.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: CharlieSheen on September 16, 2015, 12:34:23 pm
Yes. One more step toward bringing me out of retirement. I said I may return to drinking beer if I didn't have to drive out of State to get a strong Bud or Coors. We shall see. This is still Oklahoma. If ever was a State that could mess up common sense. This is it.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/state/cold-beer-at-liquor-stores-strong-beer-and-wine-at/article_31e67d7b-7f4f-5e8b-9fa7-758ae670392e.html

You can already buy strong Bud in Oklahoma.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on September 17, 2015, 07:28:22 am
You can already buy strong Bud in Oklahoma.

Ya but I cant carry a six pack of Kegs.  ;D


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on September 17, 2015, 07:55:39 am
Ya but I cant carry a six pack of Kegs.  ;D

They sell strong Bud at every liquor store I've seen lately, in six packs.  Bud Platinum is the thing I've seen the most of.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DolfanBob on September 17, 2015, 10:23:16 am
They sell strong Bud at every liquor store I've seen lately, in six packs.  Bud Platinum is the thing I've seen the most of.

No kidding. It's been that long since I've been in one. I read where it was only going to be in Kegs. I'm not so much looking for Hot Budweiser as I am a cold Golden Colorado Coors strong version. And not that light carp everyone around here seems to love.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on September 17, 2015, 06:57:11 pm
No kidding. It's been that long since I've been in one. I read where it was only going to be in Kegs. I'm not so much looking for Hot Budweiser as I am a cold Golden Colorado Coors strong version. And not that light carp everyone around here seems to love.

I would usually take a few cases of Coors back to VA when I was home on leave when I was in the Navy in the early 70s.  I never understood the attraction for Coors beyond the fact that it wasn't available back east.  Back then, I was a Budweiser consumer so it's not like I am comparing Coors to a good, tasty American or German beer of the era.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: rebound on September 18, 2015, 11:10:56 am
I would usually take a few cases of Coors back to VA when I was home on leave when I was in the Navy in the early 70s.  I never understood the attraction for Coors beyond the fact that it wasn't available back east.  Back then, I was a Budweiser consumer so it's not like I am comparing Coors to a good, tasty American or German beer of the era.

East Bound and Down...


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on September 18, 2015, 05:07:15 pm
East Bound and Down...

I wonder how many Trans-Ams they wrecked to make that movie.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on September 18, 2015, 07:15:34 pm
I wonder how many Trans-Ams they wrecked to make that movie.


Quote
According to director Hal Needham in the DVD Documentary, Pontiac gave them three Trans-Ams and two Bonnevilles (Sheriff Justice's patrol car) for the film. Needham says that one of the Trans-Ams was completely destroyed during the famous bridge jump scene and that with all the damages the Lemans sustained, they eventually had to piece all three bodies together to make one Bonneville.

Three Trans-Am cars were used in this movie. Director Hal Needham claims in the DVD documentary that they could barely run towards the end of the film's production.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0076729/trivia (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0076729/trivia)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 19, 2015, 07:45:43 am
I would usually take a few cases of Coors back to VA when I was home on leave when I was in the Navy in the early 70s.  I never understood the attraction for Coors beyond the fact that it wasn't available back east.  Back then, I was a Budweiser consumer so it's not like I am comparing Coors to a good, tasty American or German beer of the era.


That was it.  "Forbidden fruit" syndrome, 'cause Coors always sucked....



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: rdj on September 21, 2015, 08:40:41 am
Give me a good yella belly any day.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on January 08, 2016, 12:30:26 pm
Is this illegal in Oklahoma?

PicoBrew Pico

http://www.wired.com/2016/01/picobrew-pico/ (http://www.wired.com/2016/01/picobrew-pico/)

Quote
Think of PicoBrew like the Keurig of homebrewing: Yes, a lot of purists are mad about it, and yes, it takes the drudgery out of making your own beer at home.

The company has been working on smarter machines that let you create more exact batches (without constantly overheating or otherwise ruining them) for a bit now, and it’s brought its latest product, the Pico, to CES. So if the Zymatic, PicoBrew’s original product, was a Keurig, the new Pico is the ultra-Pico. It’s half the size, a little easier to use, and…available for preorder on Kickstarter for $599 right now.

Don’t let that dissuade you too much; the original PicoBrew Zymatic easily made its Kickstarter goal and the Pico already has over $1.4 million. Also, I’ve tried PicoBrew-made beer and it is delicious.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: cannon_fodder on January 08, 2016, 03:32:35 pm
Is this illegal in Oklahoma?

As long as you hold your OTC homebrew permit and follow those guidelines, I have not read anything that would indicate it would be illegal. And I am probably about as up to date on that knowledge as anyone.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on January 09, 2016, 12:39:38 am
As long as you hold your OTC homebrew permit and follow those guidelines, I have not read anything that would indicate it would be illegal. And I am probably about as up to date on that knowledge as anyone.

And so long as you brew <200 gallons of beer per year, you are golden.  I do have to admit to looking out the window like a crazed tweaker for Smoot and his jackboots every time I start a new batch of beer.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on January 09, 2016, 01:31:48 am
And so long as you brew <200 gallons of beer per year, you are golden.  I do have to admit to looking out the window like a crazed tweaker for Smoot and his jackboots every time I start a new batch of beer.

You mean something like this?

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Kj85FQldFhY/hqdefault.jpg)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on January 09, 2016, 12:14:57 pm
As long as you hold your OTC homebrew permit and follow those guidelines, I have not read anything that would indicate it would be illegal. And I am probably about as up to date on that knowledge as anyone.

I always understood you could produce ethanol (or beer) freely up to a certain, federally-defined limit.  I didnt know OTC ingratiated themselves into hobby brewing.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: cannon_fodder on January 11, 2016, 08:56:02 am
I always understood you could produce ethanol (or beer) freely up to a certain, federally-defined limit.  I didnt know OTC ingratiated themselves into hobby brewing.

You can certainly produce ethanol, so long as you don't refine (distill) it in any way. If you can get magic yeast that survives high alcohol levels, that's fine (there is a limit, I think it is ~20%. I do not recall for sure and am too lazy to pull notes at the moment). But the moment you try to distill the alcohol to a higher level --- DENIED! There is no permit for home distilling and there is no acceptable amount.

Home brewing has only been technically legal in Oklahoma for five (and a half) years. In order to legally do so you need to get a permit, that permit is from the ABLE Commission, not OTC. Previously, you apparently had to get an OTC license, so I was wrong. Here is a good summary:

http://www.homebrewersassociation.org/homebrewing-rights/statutes/oklahoma/

In the commercial realm, there are two separate system of regulation for beer in Oklahoma. Low Point/non-intoxicating beer is regulated by 36 OS 100 et seq. and controlled by the Oklahoma Tax Commission. Strong Beer is regulated by 36 OS 500 et seq. and controlled by the ABLE Commission. In addition to any permits required from the City zoning, County health, US Treasury, and ATF.

No wonder people just sell drugs...


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 11, 2016, 12:08:56 pm
You can certainly produce ethanol, so long as you don't refine (distill) it in any way. If you can get magic yeast that survives high alcohol levels, that's fine (there is a limit, I think it is ~20%. I do not recall for sure and am too lazy to pull notes at the moment). But the moment you try to distill the alcohol to a higher level --- DENIED! There is no permit for home distilling and there is no acceptable amount.




That's just crazy isn't it....

I have looked into it a little bit and separate facilities are required in addition to all the permits/taxes on the Fed level.  Haven't even bothered to look at OK state mess....'cause ya know it's gonna be a mess...


But would love to make a small distillery!  Micro-batch...only a few thousand barrels a year....for personal consumption!









Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on February 04, 2016, 04:38:06 pm
So here's another attempt.

Group Seeks Beer, Wine Sales at Oklahoma Grocery Stores

http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/group-seeks-beer-wine-sales-oklahoma-grocery-stores (http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/group-seeks-beer-wine-sales-oklahoma-grocery-stores)

Quote
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — A group that supports the sale of strong beer and wine at Oklahoma grocery stores, gas stations and convenience stores is launching a petition drive to place the issue on the November ballot.

The group Oklahomans for Modern Laws filed an initiative petition on Wednesday with the Oklahoma secretary of state's office. The proposed language for the ballot now must be reviewed by the attorney general, and if approved, the group can begin gathering signatures.

Telephone messages left Wednesday with the group's chairman and its attorney were not immediately returned.

Under current Oklahoma law, strong beer and wine can be sold only at liquor stores. Refrigerated beer sold at grocery stores and gas stations cannot exceed 3.2 percent alcohol content.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: CharlieSheen on February 05, 2016, 09:57:40 am
This is the Walmart/QT initiative.  Liquor stores hate it because they don't get to sell non-alcoholic items and they don't want anybody but them selling wine.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: cannon_fodder on February 05, 2016, 10:42:20 am
There was some horse trading on the last (and ongoing attempt). With liquor stores getting the right to add refrigeration and other markets getting the right to wine and strong beer. Some liquor store owners were against it: why give up a monopoly when in return you have to add capital investment for a marginal return? Of course some others in the state are simply against change in alcohol laws because Jesus.

Anyway, this newest attempt is some big retail players saying "screw it, we'll just do it our way."


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on February 05, 2016, 12:50:54 pm
Will Scott Pruitt have time to review this while he is working on the case with Nebraska to sue Colorado over legalized pot?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on February 05, 2016, 01:01:53 pm
Will Scott Pruitt have time to review this while he is working on the case with Nebraska to sue Colorado over legalized pot?

If someone promises to add to the Pruitt for Governor coffers, yes.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on February 17, 2016, 04:20:58 pm
AB-InBev isn’t happy.  Neither are the package retailers, though I can’t see any way this would cause package retailers to close.

Quote
Bill that would allow cold, strong beer sales outside liquor stores passes in Senate panel

OKLAHOMA CITY — A Senate panel on Wednesday passed a measure that could lead to a public vote on allowing grocery and convenience stores to sell wine and cold, strong beer.

But the measure was not without controversy.

The Senate Rules Committee passed Senate Joint Resolution 68 by a vote of 12-3 with heavy lobbying for and against the measure.

The measure prompted Anheuser-Busch to take out television and print advertisements saying the measure would cost jobs.

“The bill is intended to be about modernization of alcohol laws,” said Eric James, senior director of sales and marketing for Anheuser-Busch Sales of Oklahoma. “It now includes a provision that kicks our distributorships out of state.”

Meanwhile, Bryan Kerr, president of the Retail Liquor Association of Oklahoma, said the measure will shut down dozens of package stores.

Sen. Clark Jolley, R-Edmond, said the measure was a culmination of years of work.

He said Oklahoma consumers are demanding changes in the state’s liquor laws.

Barbara Hoberock 405-528-2465
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/government/bill-that-would-allow-cold-strong-beer-sales-outside-liquor/article_61484baf-2fdb-5606-becc-9e010c7cf0d5.html


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: swake on February 17, 2016, 04:30:22 pm
AB-InBev isn’t happy.  Neither are the package retailers, though I can’t see any way this would cause package retailers to close.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/government/bill-that-would-allow-cold-strong-beer-sales-outside-liquor/article_61484baf-2fdb-5606-becc-9e010c7cf0d5.html

This is where a bone needs to be tossed to each interest group. Let Bud and company into the liquor stores with refrigeration, allow wine and strong beer to be sold outside of liquor stores. Let liquor stores have more reasonable hours and be open on Sunday.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on February 17, 2016, 04:57:19 pm
Sounds like AB can't be pleased with anything, and is threatening to take their ball and go home.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/retail/beer-battle-brews-between-beer-distributors-of-oklahoma-and-anheuser/article_452df96e-e50e-5f87-8518-825cb02f2e2d.html (http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/retail/beer-battle-brews-between-beer-distributors-of-oklahoma-and-anheuser/article_452df96e-e50e-5f87-8518-825cb02f2e2d.html)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on February 17, 2016, 05:45:43 pm
It’s not just Oklahoma.  Rather than re-tool and make a superior product, AB InBev is attempting to control the market via lobbying, purchasing SABMiller and smaller brewers, purchasing distributorships, and essentially blackmailing their distributors into not carrying product from larger craft brewers. 

Now that there are many good beer variety choices rather than the 20 or 30 different brands of American pilsner beer most of us on TNF grew up with, AB simply is not keeping up with the times.  No matter how much their local distributor pushes Bud Light or Bud, I will keep brewing and drinking real craft beer (Shock Top doesn’t qualify).  If AB was making a product people wanted, their market share would not be dwindling in their flagship brands.

http://consumerist.com/2015/12/10/anheuser-busch-distributor-incentive-program-raises-more-concerns-of-a-stifled-craft-beer-market/

Quote
The new plan is being unveiled while the company seeks Justice Department approval of its approximate $108 billion takeover of SABMiller PLC. To avoid antitrust problems, AB InBev already agreed to sell SABMiller’s stake in U.S.-based MillerCoors LLC to Molson Coors Brewing Co. AB InBev Chief Executive Carlos Brito is scheduled to discuss the merger’s impact on consumers and craft brewers Tuesday before a Senate judiciary subcommittee on antitrust.

That acquisition and other AB InBev moves have stirred up competition concerns. The California Attorney General and Justice Department are investigating AB InBev’s recent acquisition of two California distributors to determine if those acquisitions make it harder for craft brewers to get beer on shelves, The Wall Street Journal previously reported. The brewer also came under fire last month from Senators Angus King (I., Maine) and Jeff Merkley (D., Ore.) who wrote the Justice Department, urging it to ensure AB InBev doesn’t “squeeze out America’s craft brewing industry” and “constrain beer distribution.”

Craft brewers fear AB InBev’s new incentive program could do just that. They say the program encourages AB InBev distributors around the country to drop competing brewers and discourages them from stocking new brewers. They added it could make it impossible to get distribution from some of the nation’s strongest distributors.

The U.S. has a three-tier distribution system in which brewers must sell beer to distributors who then sell it to retailers. The bulk of the nation’s beer distribution is handled by distributors with agreements to sell either AB InBev or MillerCoors beers, according to the National Beer Wholesalers Association.

AB InBev told its distributor network that they could qualify for the incentive program if craft brewers they carry produce less than 15,000 barrels or sell beer only in one state. But Lagunitas Brewing Co. founder Tony Magee said the cap could curb distributors’ motivation to increase craft-beer sales because rising demand could push production beyond the 15,000-barrel threshold.

“It’s a very Machiavellian lever they’re pulling,” said Mr. Magee, who recently sold a 50% stake in his company to Heineken NV.

Mr. Melo said the program is voluntary and nothing “prevents distribution of other brands.” He said distributors could sell 93% of “small craft brewers’ products” and be eligible for rewards. Most of the 4,000-plus craft brewers produce less than 15,000 barrels.


http://www.wsj.com/articles/craft-brewers-take-issue-with-ab-inbev-distribution-plan-1449227668

In some markets, they swooped in and purchased local distributorships right before new laws went into affect which prevent brewers from owning distributorships.

http://www.law360.com/articles/442608/ab-inbev-scoops-up-beer-distributor-ahead-of-new-law

In other words, they are engaging in douchebaggery to try and remain in control of a market where their main product is falling out of favor with consumers.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: RecycleMichael on February 17, 2016, 06:26:04 pm
These guys have an ad running on local news broadcasts...maybe somebody can post it...

http://www.oklovesbudlight.com/


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on February 18, 2016, 03:19:19 am
It’s not just Oklahoma.  Rather than re-tool and make a superior product, AB InBev is attempting to control the market via lobbying, purchasing SABMiller and smaller brewers, purchasing distributorships, and essentially blackmailing their distributors into not carrying product from larger craft brewers. 

Now that there are many good beer variety choices rather than the 20 or 30 different brands of American pilsner beer most of us on TNF grew up with, AB simply is not keeping up with the times.  No matter how much their local distributor pushes Bud Light or Bud, I will keep brewing and drinking real craft beer (Shock Top doesn’t qualify).  If AB was making a product people wanted, their market share would not be dwindling in their flagship brands.

http://consumerist.com/2015/12/10/anheuser-busch-distributor-incentive-program-raises-more-concerns-of-a-stifled-craft-beer-market/

http://www.wsj.com/articles/craft-brewers-take-issue-with-ab-inbev-distribution-plan-1449227668

In some markets, they swooped in and purchased local distributorships right before new laws went into affect which prevent brewers from owning distributorships.

http://www.law360.com/articles/442608/ab-inbev-scoops-up-beer-distributor-ahead-of-new-law

In other words, they are engaging in douchebaggery to try and remain in control of a market where their main product is falling out of favor with consumers.

So if I understand this, it's sweep in and rearrange the deck chairs in your favor and squeeze out the micro brew/regional brew and say that "Join us or be eliminated" and crush the craft brew industry that's beating you at your own game. Explains why I had a blonde moment and bought some Budweiser and from the first sip went "WHAT THE HELL AM I THINKING?"


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on February 18, 2016, 09:34:04 am
So if I understand this, it's sweep in and rearrange the deck chairs in your favor and squeeze out the micro brew/regional brew and say that "Join us or be eliminated" and crush the craft brew industry that's beating you at your own game. Explains why I had a blonde moment and bought some Budweiser and from the first sip went "WHAT THE HELL AM I THINKING?"

Bingo!


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: cannon_fodder on February 18, 2016, 10:37:06 am
The ad I heard this morning said to call and complain to the OK Congressman who is sponsoring the bill to sell in gas stations/grocery stores. No ta quote but essentially...

"Call and tell him you like Budweiser, and you support the jobs it brings to Oklahoma. If this bill isn't destroyed, we will totally leave Oklahoma and you won't have any beer."

NPR did a story on it, apparently they really hate the fact that the new law would require them to have a distributor. AB would then lose the profit and control that having their own distributor brings.  If the news report is right, they sell some 50% of all beer sold in Oklahoma, and Oklahoma consumes 2.5 million barrels, that means AB sells something like 1.25 Million Barrels of beer in Oklahoma.

Most of it in 12 OZ cans. Which is something like 400,000,000 cans. At 50 cents a pop... $200,000,000 in sales. Obviously a lot of dirty math there, bubt lets halve that number to $100mil... I doubt they walk away from that kind of sales volume.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: AquaMan on February 18, 2016, 11:53:33 am
Why do we require a separate distributor in OK? Why can't they be integrated? Is it just our state weirdness or is there some bonafide reasoning there?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on February 18, 2016, 12:09:37 pm
IIRC, mind you this was before all the takeovers and buyouts of US brewers, Coors had a distributor near 11th and Sheridan east of the old Hope Lumber Co., Miller had theirs out in an industrial park near Pine & Hwy 169, and wasn't Budweiser near Apache and Harvard?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on February 18, 2016, 12:17:05 pm
Why do we require a separate distributor in OK? Why can't they be integrated? Is it just our state weirdness or is there some bonafide reasoning there?

I imagine it’s because someone willing to grease plenty of legislators makes tons of money off of it.  Our whole liquor and beer system is reminiscent of a Corleone Family enterprise...*COUGH*


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on February 18, 2016, 02:39:47 pm
Will Scott Pruitt have time to review this while he is working on the case with Nebraska to sue Colorado over legalized pot?

Would be Interesting  since Anheuser-Busch has been financing so much of the fight against medical marijuana.

http://www.businessinsider.com/big-alcohol-donates-money-to-fight-legalization-of-pot-2010-9


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: cannon_fodder on February 18, 2016, 03:19:43 pm
Here is a great write-up on the issue:

http://www.thirstybeaglebeerblog.com/2016/02/budweiser-takes-nuclear-option-on.html


Quote
The key takeaways -- at least when it comes to beer -- from my perspective:

-Cold beer and wine could be sold at liquor stores.
-Full-strength beer and wine could be sold in grocery and convenience stores.
-Brewers could sell their beer out of the brewery for on- or off-premise consumption.
-Liquor stores could sell any item sold at a grocery store, provided those sales don't exceed 20 percent of the store's total sales.
-It would be left up to the Legislature to decide a number of issues, including days and hours for alcohol sales, what constitutes a small brewer, and taxes levied on alcoholic beverages (the taxes especially are not an insignificant item, considering sales tax on strong beer right now is nearly three times that of low-point beer. The question is, where will the tax rate land in a single-strength system?).
-Changes would go into effect on Oct. 1, 2018.
-Oklahoma would move to a three-tier distribution system with a prohibition on ownership interests in more than one tier at a time.

And there's the rub for AB, which right now owns the distribution channels for its low-point beer in Oklahoma. SJR 68 allows five years from date of adoption for companies to divest (read: sell off) their brewery-owned distribution branches.

AB claims in its ads this will lead to severe negative consequences in Oklahoma, including the loss of hundreds of jobs, rising beer prices and Budweiser actually withdrawing from the Oklahoma market altogether.

Not everyone shares these opinions. Zach Prichard, president of Choc Beer Co. in Krebs and of the Craft Brewers Association of Oklahoma, issued this response:

"The CBAO has been anticipating the announcement of SJR 68 for some time now. As small brewers we are focused on advocating for tap room sales and other changes which help reduce the large financial risk small brewers must undertake. Oklahoma is already fortunate to be home to many great breweries. Simple, reasonable changes such as tap room sales will allow brewers to continue to grow their business. They will also provide a great showplace for Oklahoma-made beer and establish Oklahoma as a beer tourism destination...."

To the question of why you cannot own more than one link in the distribution chain -

Back in the day the big brewers would own the brewery, the distributor, and the bar. That's how corner bars across from each other and bar districts started... Schlitz would put in a bar, and AB needed one across the street. The bar sold their beer. Often it was run by a local proprietor under contract.  Neither the distributor nor the bar was much of a business, just vessels to pass along beer.

When prohibition came that obviously all stopped. When it was abolished, states set about to eliminate that model and succeeded. Oklahoma being well behind, we are more messed up than others due to the "non-intoxicating" beverage definitions and separate laws for each. The point is supposed to be to stop all channels from being driven to just sell more product, also to keep ownership small and decrease their power (hence, you can only own one liquor store), and lip service to competition.

In high point beer currently, you can either own a bar, a distributor, or a brewery. You can't own any 2 of the 3 or have any significant involvement therein (own the property, loan them the equipment, etc.).  This rule would bring low-point in line with the high point, in exchange for granting breweries point of sale rights beyond low point beer and toss in the cold/grocery store thing. It is a mixed bag for most players, local brewers appear to be the winners as it gives them almost the same rights as wineries.

Full disclosure: I have not reviewed the actual bill, just the summaries.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on February 23, 2016, 10:35:54 am
Why do we require a separate distributor in OK? Why can't they be integrated? Is it just our state weirdness or is there some bonafide reasoning there?


State instituted restraint of free trade.  Where are all those right wingers who blather so much about "free trade" in this state??  Failin'.

Same place they are when it comes to 'personal liberty' and personal responsibility....as in legalization of marijuana and other so-called moral issues.... 





Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on February 23, 2016, 10:46:20 am

State instituted restraint of free trade.  Where are all those right wingers who blather so much about "free trade" in this state??  Failin'.

Same place they are when it comes to 'personal liberty' and personal responsibility....as in legalization of marijuana and other so-called moral issues.... 





(http://images.easyfreeclipart.com/48/church-family-clipart-panda-free-images-48555.jpg)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: swake on February 23, 2016, 11:34:19 am
These AB ads are upsetting me. I think a boycott is in order.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on February 23, 2016, 12:18:04 pm
These AB ads are upsetting me. I think a boycott is in order.

It would certainly be an opportunity for Oklahomans to sample some better beers than AB offers; many made in Oklahoma.

Choc beer was something I might not have found on my own, for example.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: cynical on February 23, 2016, 03:34:32 pm
Geeky reply: "State action" is exempt from anti-trust laws.


State instituted restraint of free trade.  Where are all those right wingers who blather so much about "free trade" in this state??  Failin'.

Same place they are when it comes to 'personal liberty' and personal responsibility....as in legalization of marijuana and other so-called moral issues.... 






Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on February 23, 2016, 04:08:39 pm
These AB ads are upsetting me. I think a boycott is in order.


You drink that swill...??


Ouch!



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on February 23, 2016, 05:02:07 pm

You drink that swill...??


Ouch!



There are some AB bevs of the higher point variety that I will drink.  Shock Top is one.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: swake on February 23, 2016, 05:15:27 pm

You drink that swill...??


Ouch!



Actually no, never.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on February 23, 2016, 06:23:15 pm
There are some AB bevs of the higher point variety that I will drink.  Shock Top is one.

There are a few that I like too.  Some I knew were AB-InBev, some I didn't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AB_InBev_brands



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on February 23, 2016, 08:36:44 pm
There are some AB bevs of the higher point variety that I will drink.  Shock Top is one.

I won’t touch an AB In-Bev product after this BS propaganda campaign they are running.  I won’t help fund their dishonesty.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on February 23, 2016, 09:52:04 pm
I won’t touch an AB In-Bev product after this BS propaganda campaign they are running.  I won’t help fund their dishonesty.

I am inclined to agree.  Too bad, I like the Leffe Brown.  Although I prefer Celebrator or Salvator, Optimator is good.  Too bad Optimator is in a green bottle.  An occasional Bass Pale is was nice.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on February 23, 2016, 10:20:09 pm
I am inclined to agree.  Too bad, I like the Leffe Brown.  Although I prefer Celebrator or Salvator, Optimator is good.  Too bad Optimator is in a green bottle.  An occasional Bass Pale is was nice.

As am I.  Went to the hockey game tonight and bought two Marshall's instead of my go-to ShockTop pregame beer.

Of course we lost... ;)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on February 24, 2016, 09:10:56 am
Actually no, never.


I am relieved to hear that!  I have always thought much better of you than AB-InBev...

Hoss, you too!  Can't say about Shock Top - will have to try it just so I will know...



Now, after having blasted AB as the swill that it is - I really do enjoy the commercials, so I guess it is good there are 'bottom-drinkers' who do drink it so they will continue advertising!


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: AquaMan on February 24, 2016, 10:03:38 am
THEY WERE TAKIN' ER JIBS....NOW THEY'RE TAKIN ER BEEEER!!

Those ads are like SNL skits. I hope sales suffer.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on February 24, 2016, 11:21:21 am
Breaking:

Quote
Oklahoma liquor store owners start push for state question on alcohol laws

Frustrated with other modernization efforts, an industry group representing Oklahoma liquor store owners has launched its own push to get a state question on the November ballot to change the state's alcohol laws.

The Oklahoma Retail Liquor Association filed documents with the Oklahoma Secretary of State on Tuesday for a ballot measure to get beer and wine in grocery stores.

The Retail Liquor Association's proposed State Question 785 would allow cold, full-strength beer in grocery and convenience stores. The proposal would also allow for grocery stores to obtain wine licenses.

"If it survives challenges from the grocery stores, convenience stores, Walmart and any other group who does not feel it adds to their profit enough, we will gather the necessary signatures to put it on the ballot in November for a vote of the people," the Oklahoma Retail Liquor Association said in a statement.   

Under proposed State Question 785, Oklahoma breweries would gain the ability to distribute their products directly to Oklahoma liquor stores. Brewers in the state also could serve and sell their product at their breweries, regardless of alcohol by volume.

Liquor stores also would be able to hold tastings inside their stores, as well as sell any items sold in a grocery store, with a few restrictions.

Licensing fees from businesses that sell alcohol would go to state efforts to reduce alcohol-related injuries and deaths in Oklahoma.

State Question 785 also would require a distance of at least 2,500 feet between two outlets that sell spirits or wine, but existing stores would be grandfathered in under the proposal.

The liquor store owners' proposed state question would leave laws on the days and hours of operation for retail package stores up to the Legislature to work out. However, the proposal would ban the sale of spirits on Thanksgiving and Christmas.

"We wanted to show Oklahomans that we are interested in evolving our liquor laws sensibly; without sacrificing public safety or the vibrant locally owned system that many people enjoy and support," the Retail Liquor Association said in a statement announcing the initiative petition effort.

There are multiple efforts now underway to get a statewide vote in November on modernizing Oklahoma's alcohol laws, and voters could have to wade through several state questions on the issue if they all make it on the ballot. 

Senate Joint Resolution 68, principally authored by Sen. Clark Jolley, R-Edmond, is the legislative effort underway to get a state question on the ballot that would include wine and strong beer in groceries and convenience stores. 

The group Oklahomans for Modern Laws has also launched an initiative petition effort to get State Question 783 on the ballot, that would also allow for wine and strong beer in grocery and convenience stores.

The Retail Liquor Association has said both Jolley's and Oklahomans for Modern Law's proposals are heavily slanted in favor of grocery and convenience store owners and would put about half of the state's liquor stores out of business.

http://newsok.com/oklahoma-liquor-store-owners-start-push-for-state-question-on-alcohol-laws/article/5480912


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on February 24, 2016, 12:42:01 pm
Liquor store owners, distributors fight proposed Oklahoma ballot question

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/elections/liquor-store-owners-distributors-fight-proposed-oklahoma-ballot-question/article_a83a3387-eae6-567a-a065-57be454cd6c6.html (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/elections/liquor-store-owners-distributors-fight-proposed-oklahoma-ballot-question/article_a83a3387-eae6-567a-a065-57be454cd6c6.html)

Quote
Oklahoma liquor store owners and a group representing two of the state’s largest liquor distributors have filed legal challenges to a proposed state question on whether sales of wine and full-strength beer should be allowed in grocery and convenience stores.

The Oklahoma Retail Liquor Association, which represents package store owners in the state, filed a challenge with the Oklahoma Supreme Court on Friday to Oklahomans for Modern Laws’ proposed state question.

The liquor store owners group argues in its challenge that the proposed state question violates a state constitutional ban against including more than one subject in a single ballot measure, also known as the single-subject rule.

Oklahomans for Modern Laws’ proposed State Question 783 would ask voters to allow sales of regular-strength beer capped at 8.99 percent alcohol by volume in grocery and convenience stores.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on February 24, 2016, 12:56:47 pm
Liquor store owners, distributors fight proposed Oklahoma ballot question

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/elections/liquor-store-owners-distributors-fight-proposed-oklahoma-ballot-question/article_a83a3387-eae6-567a-a065-57be454cd6c6.html (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/elections/liquor-store-owners-distributors-fight-proposed-oklahoma-ballot-question/article_a83a3387-eae6-567a-a065-57be454cd6c6.html)


I think the ORLA’s proposed legislation carries a lot of promise.  If they will get on board, I think we are really close to getting better liquor laws.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on February 24, 2016, 01:00:04 pm
I think the ORLA’s proposed legislation carries a lot of promise.  If they will get on board, I think we are really close to getting better liquor laws.

I'm not even crossing my fingers


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on February 24, 2016, 01:50:41 pm

I am relieved to hear that!  I have always thought much better of you than AB-InBev...

Hoss, you too!  Can't say about Shock Top - will have to try it just so I will know...



Now, after having blasted AB as the swill that it is - I really do enjoy the commercials, so I guess it is good there are 'bottom-drinkers' who do drink it so they will continue advertising!


I started drinking ShockTop before they were bought out by ABInbev.  That was like me saying I'd never do business with AT&T again, although my cell service is through AT&T.  But only because it started out as Cingular and you know what happened after that.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on February 24, 2016, 01:52:31 pm
I'm not even crossing my fingers

Rural areas will be the problem, just like pari-mutuel gambling and liquor by the drink were until they finally passed in the 1980’s but I think it had to go to a county-by-county vote to make it happen.

I believe there are still 20-25 dry counties in Oklahoma.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on February 24, 2016, 03:10:45 pm
Rural areas will be the problem, just like pari-mutuel gambling and liquor by the drink were until they finally passed in the 1980’s but I think it had to go to a county-by-county vote to make it happen.

I believe there are still 20-25 dry counties in Oklahoma.

IIRC Liquor By the Drink had to get voted on twice, first at the state level to make it a county option vote, and then came the counties voting for it. I made a statement that when the counties passed it, they would be along either side of the interstates, and counties with military bases, and every where else would be dry.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on February 24, 2016, 03:13:11 pm
I started drinking ShockTop before they were bought out by ABInbev.  That was like me saying I'd never do business with AT&T again, although my cell service is through AT&T.  But only because it started out as Cingular and you know what happened after that.


We were with Cingular/ATT for 28 years.  SWMBO is a SWB alumni.  Now we have Verizon....for so many reasons!  Crappy service along with the hose job they are doint to retirees!




Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on March 02, 2016, 11:29:10 am
Senate Joint Resolution 68 would allow voters to amend the state constitution to allow for grocery and convenience stores to sell wine and strong, cold beer. The measure passed by a vote of 28-16 and heads to the House for consideration.

Anheuser-Busch dropped its opposition to the bill after a section affecting its business model was altered. Eric James, director of sales and marketing for Anheuser-Busch Sales of Oklahoma, said the objectionable provision would have made the company sell its beer distributorships in Tulsa and Oklahoma City.


http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/capitol_report/senate-passes-measure-to-modernize-oklahoma-s-alcohol-laws/article_220d2889-00aa-5dc4-90dc-b58b9b48af97.html


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on April 04, 2016, 03:48:58 pm
Legislative Tit-for-Tat May Kill Liquor Modernization Bill

http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/legislative-tit-tat-may-kill-liquor-modernization-bill (http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/legislative-tit-tat-may-kill-liquor-modernization-bill)

Quote
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — A bill that would allow beer and wine to be sold in grocery and convenience stores is coming down to the wire in the Oklahoma House.

The Oklahoman reports that the Senate-passed measure to put the issue on the November ballot was scheduled to come up in the House Rules Committee last week, but it got pulled from the agenda. The panel is scheduled to meet again Wednesday, just two days before the deadline for such bills to advance.

Oklahoma Senate passed the bill with a 28-16 vote. It's not clear why it hasn't been taken up in the committee yet, but bitterness between the two chambers has been known to slow down proposals.

Last week, House leaders complained that the Senate didn't take up a House-passed bill on education standards.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: davideinstein on April 04, 2016, 06:01:33 pm
Rural areas will be the problem, just like pari-mutuel gambling and liquor by the drink were until they finally passed in the 1980’s but I think it had to go to a county-by-county vote to make it happen.

I believe there are still 20-25 dry counties in Oklahoma.

That's why only local and federal laws should matter.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: cannon_fodder on April 05, 2016, 07:09:09 am
(http://cdn2.newsok.biz/cache/r960-44e498f10adc1ba32cc5033e9c1da65e.jpg)
As of 2013

http://newsok.com/article/3918950


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on April 06, 2016, 02:11:24 pm
Legislative Tit-for-Tat May Kill Liquor Modernization Bill

http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/legislative-tit-tat-may-kill-liquor-modernization-bill (http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/legislative-tit-tat-may-kill-liquor-modernization-bill)


Rumors of its demise were grossly exaggerated:

Quote
OK House panel clears beer, wine bill

Oklahomans moved one step closer to being able to buy wine and cold, full-strength beer in supermarkets and convenience stores _ like most other states _ under a Senate-passed resolution that cleared a state House committee on Wednesday.

The measure, which now goes to the full House, would ask voters to approve a constitutional amendment to allow the change from the current situation, where only low-point beer may be sold at these retail outlets and consumers must go to liquor stores to get standard beer and wine.

The resolution also specifies that liquor stores for the first time could refrigerate beer and also sell non-alcohol items.

A separate citizens-backed initiative process is underway to bring the issue to a vote if the Legislature does not refer it to the ballot.

Discussion in committee centered on whether it was fair to distributors and wholesalers and the lack of specification on the allowable age for those who would sell the beer and wine.

Backers of the bill said it was fair and that there will be follow-up legislation to specify that those selling beer and wine in retail outlets would need to be at least 18 years old.

http://newsok.com/ok-house-panel-clears-beer-wine-bill/article/5489972


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on April 06, 2016, 03:32:36 pm
Rumors of its demise were grossly exaggerated:

http://newsok.com/ok-house-panel-clears-beer-wine-bill/article/5489972

As all things Oklahoma, I have little trust in anything positive moving forward to reality.

I'm going to guess this will be placed on the November ballot with the largest possible turn-out.  The result - voted down by our stark-raving mad Cruz/Trump-ers.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on April 06, 2016, 06:20:10 pm
As all things Oklahoma, I have little trust in anything positive moving forward to reality.

I'm going to guess this will be placed on the November ballot with the largest possible turn-out.  The result - voted down by our stark-raving mad Cruz/Trump-ers.

I did neglect to add (YET) after my original statement. 

If it becomes a county-by-county measure, I think this will pass in Tulsa County much like liquor-by-the-drink did.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on April 22, 2016, 10:40:01 am

State Rep. Todd Russ, R-Cordell, was in the midst of an emotional argument against the resolution when he suggested that blacks and American Indians should join him in opposition because they have a history of alcohol-related trouble.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/capitol_report/debate-on-alcohol-amendments-takes-racial-turn/article_53738839-d9c3-5ed8-9b42-b599114ca010.html



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on April 22, 2016, 10:54:22 am
State Rep. Todd Russ, R-Cordell, was in the midst of an emotional argument against the resolution when he suggested that blacks and American Indians should join him in opposition because they have a history of alcohol-related trouble.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/capitol_report/debate-on-alcohol-amendments-takes-racial-turn/article_53738839-d9c3-5ed8-9b42-b599114ca010.html



WOW, just wow. Hillbilly values at it's best.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Ibanez on April 22, 2016, 11:52:16 am
State Rep. Todd Russ, R-Cordell, was in the midst of an emotional argument against the resolution when he suggested that blacks and American Indians should join him in opposition because they have a history of alcohol-related trouble.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/capitol_report/debate-on-alcohol-amendments-takes-racial-turn/article_53738839-d9c3-5ed8-9b42-b599114ca010.html



How does he feel about passing out blankets to the redskins....errrr.....homeless.....errr...."those people?"


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Ibanez on April 22, 2016, 11:52:49 am
WOW, just wow. Hillbilly values at it's best.

$20 says there is a bottle of Scotch somewhere in his office.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: swake on April 22, 2016, 11:53:42 am
I don't normally like to criticize someone's religion, but this racist yahoo is trying to force his religion on everyone else. He's a fracking Pentecostal Minister, you know, the speaking in tongues and snake handling people. This is the idiot that also tried to end marriage in Oklahoma so gays couldn't marry. 



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on April 22, 2016, 11:58:11 am
While I was at a meeting at Marshall’s yesterday afternoon, Eric was streaming this nonsense and uttering a few expletives of his own design. 

One of the things I caught was debate over whether or not clerks could be under 21.  What assurance was there that having servers under the age of 21 wouldn’t result in a bunch of underage drinking?

The stooopedz is strong in the OK Legislature.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on April 22, 2016, 12:21:24 pm
$20 says there is a bottle of Scotch somewhere in his office.

$50.00 says he has single malt in a cabinet at his house.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: swake on April 22, 2016, 12:23:18 pm
$50.00 says he has single malt in a cabinet at his house.

No, he's more the cheap bourbon in a coffee cup type drinker.  


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: cannon_fodder on April 22, 2016, 12:30:31 pm
Remember: not being able to force your religion on everyone else by force of law is religious persecution. Unless they try to force their religion on you, then that is religious persecution.  Just wait until the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (may we all be touched by His noodly appendage) takes over and the OK legislature is fully attired in pirate regalia drinking their mandatory pint of rum.  Then sh!t will get done!


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on April 22, 2016, 01:25:59 pm
Remember: not being able to force your religion on everyone else by force of law is religious persecution. Unless they try to force their religion on you, then that is religious persecution.  Just wait until the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (may we all be touched by His noodly appendage) takes over and the OK legislature is fully attired in pirate regalia drinking their mandatory pint of rum.  Then sh!t will get done!

Ramen


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 02, 2016, 12:24:42 pm
Have you looked at the picture of that guy on the link??   Geez....I know I am not the prettiest face around, but that is just wrong on so many levels!!


Townsend - clever...Like!  Incorporated...Doxology.

    Glory be to the Meatball, and to the Sauce, and to the Noodly Appendages.
    As it was in the beginning, and now, and always shall be, pasta without end.  Ramen....Ramen...






I really am hoping God has a sense of humor....



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on May 02, 2016, 12:56:38 pm

I really am hoping God has a sense of humor....


(http://www.pageoneq.com/images/ellen_kerncall.jpg)

He does.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 02, 2016, 02:09:57 pm
(http://www.pageoneq.com/images/ellen_kerncall.jpg)

He does.


I'm counting on it....

Nothing in this old world makes sense if He doesn't.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on May 03, 2016, 11:42:06 am
Oklahoma Supreme Court Invalidates Retail Liquor Proposal

http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/oklahoma-supreme-court-invalidates-retail-liquor-proposal (http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/oklahoma-supreme-court-invalidates-retail-liquor-proposal)

Quote
The Oklahoma Supreme Court has invalidated an initiative petition that calls for a statewide vote on whether to allow wine to be sold in grocery stores.

The Supreme Court handed down the ruling Tuesday and ordered the petition stricken from the November general election ballot.

The petition, filed by the Retail Liquor Association of Oklahoma, was challenged by the Oklahoma Grocers Association, which alleged it unconstitutionally delegates legislative authority and is insufficient and misleading.

In a 7-1 decision with one abstention, the Supreme Court ruled the petition makes significant changes in the state's liquor laws and that the petition's written explanation of its affect does not provide enough information for voters to make an informed decision.

So the grocers were fighting this one?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on May 03, 2016, 02:45:58 pm
Oklahoma Supreme Court Invalidates Retail Liquor Proposal

http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/oklahoma-supreme-court-invalidates-retail-liquor-proposal (http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/oklahoma-supreme-court-invalidates-retail-liquor-proposal)

So the grocers were fighting this one?

Yes, this was the one reform proposal out there that might have made things worse than current law.  The Retail Liquor Association initiative would have allowed wine sales in grocery/convenience stores, but would limit the license to just one location (with the possibility to buy up to 3 more licenses from existing package stores, if they found any for sale).  And the wine selling grocery/convenience store could not be located within 2,500 feet of an existing package store.

Many liquor store owners clearly want to preserve their special arrangement and simply do not want to compete in a free market that would benefit the consumer.  Even SJR 68 preserves some of the special protections to liquor store owners, but it is a huge improvement over this initiative and currently law.

Ultimately, the Okla. Supreme Court struck down the initiative because its description on the signature sheet was deceptive - it did not mention the license or footage restrictions.  Seems like the right decision - this initiative was intended to deceive and confuse voters into thinking they were getting real reform.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on May 03, 2016, 03:25:10 pm
Yes, this was the one reform proposal out there that might have made things worse than current law.  The Retail Liquor Association initiative would have allowed wine sales in grocery/convenience stores, but would limit the license to just one location (with the possibility to buy up to 3 more licenses from existing package stores, if they found any for sale).  And the wine selling grocery/convenience store could not be located within 2,500 feet of an existing package store.

Many liquor store owners clearly want to preserve their special arrangement and simply do not want to compete in a free market that would benefit the consumer.  Even SJR 68 preserves some of the special protections to liquor store owners, but it is a huge improvement over this initiative and currently law.

Ultimately, the Okla. Supreme Court struck down the initiative because its description on the signature sheet was deceptive - it did not mention the license or footage restrictions.  Seems like the right decision - this initiative was intended to deceive and confuse voters into thinking they were getting real reform.


Thank you for the clarification


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on May 04, 2016, 10:04:24 pm
And the wine selling grocery/convenience store could not be located within 2,500 feet of an existing package store.
There are liquor stores closer to each other than that.  The ones that immediately come to mind are The Crossing on the SW corner of 101st and Memorial (in the complex that used to have the Food Pyramid) and Parkhill's South just north of the QT at the NW corner of 101st and Memorial.  Otherwise, there seems to be a liquor store about every mile on Memorial which would make locating a convenience store selling strong beer and wine nearly impossible.  How clever.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on May 04, 2016, 10:47:23 pm
There are liquor stores closer to each other than that.  The ones that immediately come to mind are The Crossing on the SW corner of 101st and Memorial (in the complex that used to have the Food Pyramid) and Parkhill's South just north of the QT at the NW corner of 101st and Memorial.  Otherwise, there seems to be a liquor store about every mile on Memorial which would make locating a convenience store selling strong beer and wine nearly impossible.  How clever.

Growing up there, I remember that it seemed like wherever there was a grocery store, there was a liquor store in the same complex or in the parking lot, like the old McCartney's on Memorial had a liquor store right next to where you drove up to get your groceries. Credit to the grocers for finding that.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on May 06, 2016, 03:43:06 pm
Petition to sell strong beer, wine in grocery stores draws official challenge

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/state/petition-to-sell-strong-beer-wine-in-grocery-stores-draws/article_8c47d7cc-f08c-5b7e-9b79-d0540e96af7e.html (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/state/petition-to-sell-strong-beer-wine-in-grocery-stores-draws/article_8c47d7cc-f08c-5b7e-9b79-d0540e96af7e.html)

Quote
OKLAHOMA CITY — The Retail Liquor Association of Oklahoma on Friday filed a challenge with the Oklahoma Supreme Court to an initiative petition seeking to modernize the state’s liquor laws.

The action came after its own initiative petition, State Question 785, was tossed off the ballot Tuesday by the Oklahoma Supreme Court following a challenge by the Oklahoma Grocers Association.

Oklahomans for Consumer Freedom is seeking to circulate an initiative petition to get State Question 789 on the November ballot. It needs 123,725 signatures to amend the state constitution.

The petition would allow strong beer and wine to be sold in grocery and convenience stores. It would allow liquor stores to sell up to 10 percent nonalcoholic items.

Tom Gruber, an attorney for Oklahomans for Consumer Freedom, said he had not seen the challenge and withheld comment.

The challenge says the petition violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution because it proposes different treatment for similarly situated persons, specifically retail spirits license holders, who can sell spirits, wine and beer, and retail wine and beer license holders, who can sell wine and beer.

The petition also proposes unequal treatment for in-state and out-of-state corporations desiring to hold a wine and spirits wholesalers license, according to the challenge.

It also violates the Equal Protection Clause, according to the challenge, because it limits the number of retail spirits licenses a person may hold and imposes no limit on the number of retail wine and beer license a person may hold.

“Permitting retail wine licensees and beer licensees an unlimited number of licensees unnecessarily, arbitrarily and irrationally discriminates against holders of retail spirits licenses, who are permitted to hold only one license for the sale of wine and beer,” the protest said. “Such a restriction on retail spirits license holders would create an inequitable competitive environment due to the rapid influx of retail wine and beer license holders (which would include but not be limited to, grocery stores, pharmacies, convenience stores and supercenters).

“This inequality would unduly threaten the viability of retail spirits licensees who depend on the sale of wine and beer as well as spirits.”

The challenge says the petition would limit the sale of items other than alcoholic beverages by liquor stores to no more than 10 percent of monthly sales, but there is no limitation on retail wine and beer license holders as to their sale of other retail items.

The challenge says the description or gist of the petition fails to provide sufficient information about the important and far-reaching changes to state law. In addition, it contains misrepresentations about the content of the proposal, according to the challenge.

The challenge seeks to strike the measure from the ballot.

Quote
Recent proposals to change Oklahoma's liquor laws
State Question 783 (Oklahomans for Modern Laws)

• Would allow regular-strength beer capped at 8.99 percent alcohol by volume in grocery and convenience stores.
Status: Petition withdrawn in March after challenges filed.

State Question 785 (Retail Liquor Association of Oklahoma)
• Oklahoma breweries would be able to distribute their products directly to Oklahoma liquor stores.
• Brewers in the state could serve and sell their product at their breweries, regardless of alcohol by volume.
• Would require a distance of at least 2,500 feet between two outlets that sell spirits or wine, but existing stores would be grandfathered in under the proposal.
Status: The Oklahoma Supreme Court invalidated the initiative petition Tuesday.

Senate Joint Resolution 68
• Would include wine and strong beer in groceries and convenience stores.
• Would allow liquor stores to operate two locations
• Would allow Oklahoma liquor stores to have up to 20 percent of their sales come from nonalcoholic items.
• Would allow breweries in the state to operate brew pubs selling full-strength beer.
Status: Currently in a conference committee along with a companion measure, Senate Bill 383, which would change the state's liquor statues.

State Question 789 (Oklahomans for Consumer Freedom)
• Would allow strong beer and wine to be sold in grocery and convenience stores.
• Would allow for liquor stores to sell up to 10 percent nonalcoholic items.
• Backers include large chains including Walmart and QuikTrip.
• Replaces SQ 786, which was withdrawn.
Status: Challenge to initiative petition filed Friday.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on May 06, 2016, 06:36:38 pm
SNAFU. The liquor retailers don't want their monopoly broken up and competition to be the norm. Geeez, ever going to get out of the stone age? Oklahoma liquor retailers, the definition of protectionism.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 09, 2016, 09:01:23 am
SNAFU. The liquor retailers don't want their monopoly broken up and competition to be the norm. Geeez, ever going to get out of the stone age? Oklahoma liquor retailers, the definition of protectionism.


Graft.
Corruption.
Political patronage.
Cronyism.
Oklahoma business as usual.



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on May 09, 2016, 02:59:18 pm
It is unrealistic to expect liquor stores to support any reasonable modernization of Oklahoma’s liquor laws because under any reasonable modernization the liquor stores are going to be the biggest losers.  But that is because the current system is most rigged in their favor:  monopoly on selling high point beer, wine and liquor; equalized wholesale pricing; one-store restriction; no corporate ownership; etc.  I think it is reasonable to assume that lost wine/beer sales at liquor stores will not be made up by sales of sodas, cork screws and other sundry items, and some liquor stores won’t make it under a new system.  That is unfortunate for those individual owners, but, like any other business, liquor stores shouldn’t get a guaranty of survival from the state.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on May 26, 2016, 11:23:10 am
Oklahoma Senate OKs Bill Expanding Sale of Strong Beer, Wine

http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/oklahoma-senate-oks-bill-expanding-sale-strong-beer-wine (http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/oklahoma-senate-oks-bill-expanding-sale-strong-beer-wine)

Quote
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — Oklahomans could buy cold strong beer and wine at grocery and convenience stores under a sweeping overhaul of the state's alcohol laws approved by the Senate that hinges on voters approving a state question in November.

The Senate voted 33-12 on Thursday for the 285-page bill by Oklahoma City Republican Stephanie Bice.

The bill allows strong, cold beer and wine to be sold at grocery stores and convenience stores beginning in 2018.

Currently in Oklahoma, strong beer and wine can only be sold in package stores. The bill would also allow package stores to sell products other than alcohol.

The bill is a companion measure to a proposed state question on the November ballot to loosen Oklahoma's alcohol laws.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on May 26, 2016, 01:46:13 pm
Oklahoma Senate OKs Bill Expanding Sale of Strong Beer, Wine

http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/oklahoma-senate-oks-bill-expanding-sale-strong-beer-wine (http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/oklahoma-senate-oks-bill-expanding-sale-strong-beer-wine)


Now it goes to the unwashed masses who elected the people running our legislature.  I can already picture the ads from fundie groups alleging massive amounts of underage binge drinking and drug use as a result.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on May 26, 2016, 02:06:34 pm
I think the House still has to pass SJR 68 (putting the constitutional changes on the Nov. ballot) and the Senate has to pass SB 383 (making all the statutory changes to implements the modernization).

For what it’s worth, polls show the modernization changes to have wide-spread support.  Of course, state polls seem to be particularly unreliable.  While MADD, liquor stores and some religious conservatives will be against it (the modern “Bootlegger & Baptist Coalition”), those groups don’t seem to have nearly as much sway on these types of issues that they once did.  If it carries in OKC and Tulsa, it will be hard to defeat it.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on May 26, 2016, 02:20:57 pm
I think the House still has to pass SJR 68 (putting the constitutional changes on the Nov. ballot) and the Senate has to pass SB 383 (making all the statutory changes to implements the modernization).

For what it’s worth, polls show the modernization changes to have wide-spread support.  Of course, state polls seem to be particularly unreliable.  While MADD, liquor stores and some religious conservatives will be against it (the modern “Bootlegger & Baptist Coalition”), those groups don’t seem to have nearly as much sway on these types of issues that they once did.  If it carries in OKC and Tulsa, it will be hard to defeat it.


Rural Oklahoma kept killing liquor by the drink for years as a state-wide measure.  Never underestimate the fundies who live in the sticks.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on May 26, 2016, 02:21:16 pm
I think the House still has to pass SJR 68 (putting the constitutional changes on the Nov. ballot) and the Senate has to pass SB 383 (making all the statutory changes to implements the modernization).

For what it’s worth, polls show the modernization changes to have wide-spread support.  Of course, state polls seem to be particularly unreliable.  While MADD, liquor stores and some religious conservatives will be against it (the modern “Bootlegger & Baptist Coalition”), those groups don’t seem to have nearly as much sway on these types of issues that they once did.  If it carries in OKC and Tulsa, it will be hard to defeat it.


I tell you what, in my FB news feed I regularly get posts telling me to contact my representative to pass these bills.  What results in the comments is pure entertainment.  I'm sure trolls for the opposition get on there, because i say comments saying 'it will kill jobs and local liquor stores'...'it will make beer prices jump'.  They're nervous.  I for one am glad to see us incrementally coming into even the 20th century.  This state cracks me up.  People I know from out of state ask me why I still live here.  I tell them, "Don't you know?  Oklahoma!  It's not just OK, it's 'meh'."


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: cannon_fodder on May 27, 2016, 07:25:56 am
All the desired measures past:

2015 SB 424 - allows breweries to do with strong beer basically everything they can do with low point beer. Brings them close to what wineries can do. Supposedly no vote of the people required, may be challenged on that ground.

2015 SB 383 - the big dog. 285 pages that completely re-writes our liquor laws. Makes a single definition of alcohol, allows sales of cold at liquor stores and of alcohol at gas stations. Still keeps vestiges of the past and adds new quarks. But a huge step in the right direction, requires a vote of the people.

SJR 68 - Abolishes the ABLE commissionn and starts over. This is the ballot measure to which 383 is the companion.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on May 27, 2016, 08:02:54 am
All the desired measures past:

2015 SB 424 - allows breweries to do with strong beer basically everything they can do with low point beer. Brings them close to what wineries can do. Supposedly no vote of the people required, may be challenged on that ground.

2015 SB 383 - the big dog. 285 pages that completely re-writes our liquor laws. Makes a single definition of alcohol, allows sales of cold at liquor stores and of alcohol at gas stations. Still keeps vestiges of the past and adds new quarks. But a huge step in the right direction, requires a vote of the people.

SJR 68 - Abolishes the ABLE commissionn and starts over. This is the ballot measure to which 383 is the companion.

So these will go to a vote of the people in November?  Or was I wrong when someone said it would just be SJR 68 that goes?

Edit:


OK, never mind.  I read the article in the Whirled, and it says that 68 gets voted on, but if it passes, then 383 goes into effect in 2018.  As you said, 383 is the big dog, as it would redefine how strong beer and liquor is gauged.  Says it would allow grocery stores/convenience stores to sell beer up to 8.99% ABV and wine up to 15%.


424 has to be signed by the governor; I don't think it requires a vote of the people if I read correctly.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: swake on May 27, 2016, 08:58:45 am
What all does this contain?

I saw an earlier version included liquor stores to be able to sell non-alcohol items so long as they don't exceed 20% of sales and that liquor stores could open on Sundays and Holidays and be open until 2:00 AM? Was all of that kept in the bill?

Just exactly what all is in the final passed versions of these bills?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on May 27, 2016, 09:16:24 am
What all does this contain?

I saw an earlier version included liquor stores to be able to sell non-alcohol items so long as they don't exceed 20% of sales and that liquor stores could open on Sundays and Holidays and be open until 2:00 AM? Was all of that kept in the bill?

Just exactly what all is in the final passed versions of these bills?

I understand that portion (allowing liquor stores to sell non-alcoholic items) was left in so it's part of it.

I'm sure you can find the bills on the Oklahoma gubmint website.

OK, I went ahead and found them.

http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2015-16%20COMMITTEE%20SUBS/SCCS/SB383%20CCS.PDF

http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2015-16%20ENR/SB/SB424%20ENR.PDF

http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2015-16%20SUPPORT%20DOCUMENTS/BILLSUM/House/SJR68%20FA2%20BILLSUM.PDF


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: swake on May 27, 2016, 10:38:09 am
I understand that portion (allowing liquor stores to sell non-alcoholic items) was left in so it's part of it.

I'm sure you can find the bills on the Oklahoma gubmint website.

OK, I went ahead and found them.

http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2015-16%20COMMITTEE%20SUBS/SCCS/SB383%20CCS.PDF

http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2015-16%20ENR/SB/SB424%20ENR.PDF

http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2015-16%20SUPPORT%20DOCUMENTS/BILLSUM/House/SJR68%20FA2%20BILLSUM.PDF

So I skimmed these, and good lord, the title of SB383  is seven pages long.  There’s a good 100 pages defining what Smoot and Company can and can’t do and how they do it.  There are dozens of pages on beer distribution, I’m sure written with the kind assistance of AB InBev. Dozens more on liquor distribution and taxes, taxes, taxes. I did not read all of these pages.

Here’s what I found skimming the other more relevant pages:

•   Package Stores are now allowed to have refrigerated items starting 10/1/2018
•   Brewpubs, Brewers and Winemakers can sell beer for both onsite and offsite consumption and can offer samples, they can also self-distribute their beer and wine up to a certain amount of sales. distilleries can offer samples
•   Out of state brewers can also self-distribute if they can’t find a distributor willing to do so for them
•   No liquor stores or bars within 300 feet of school or churches buildings except for universities inside of improvement districts when the university agrees.
•   Liquor store chains are now allowed, but are limited to TWO stores and only individuals can own stores. I would now expect Parkhill’s to grow to four stores with two owned by the husband and two by the wife.
•   Liquor stores can sell anything a convenience or grocery store can, but those items are capped at 20% of sales
•   Wine makers can directly sell wine to out of state customers by mail, I couldn’t find if the reverse was true where Oklahomans could order wine and have it delivered from out of state.
•   Selling liquor by the drink in counties where it is allowed will be allowed on election days, holidays and Sundays may be restricted by county option
•   It Establishes a Viticulture and Enology Center on the campus of Redlands Community College (what?)
•   You have to be 18 to sell beer and wine, 21 for liquor
•   You can’t win free drinks
•   You can’t sell someone more than two drinks at one time
•   No selling alcohol for less than 6% below cost, so no penny beer nights
•   Happy Hours are back (I think, the wording is odd and I’m no lawyer)
•   No drinking games in bars
•   Liquor stores will be open from 10:00am to Midnight but will be closed on Sundays, Thanksgiving and Christmas
•   You still have to be 21 to enter a liquor store or bar or designated bar area

Now the really fun stuff:
•   You cannot sell liquor and allow “The performance by any person of acts, or simulated acts, of sexual intercourse, masturbation, sodomy, bestiality, oral copulation, flagellation or any sexual acts which are otherwise prohibited by law” nor can you “The actual intentional touching or caressing or fondling by any person of the breasts, anus or genitals” nor “expose to view any portion of the areola of the female breast or any portion of the pubic hair, buttocks or genitals” (nipples are the devil!)
•   Lastly, can’t sell liquor and have “Any person to perform acts of, or acts which simulate, sexual acts which are prohibited by law, or permit any person to use artificial devices or inanimate objects to depict any prohibited activities or permit the showing of films, still pictures, electronic reproductions or other visual reproductions depicting any of the prohibited activities described in this paragraph” (So, movie theaters like Warren that sell liquor can’t show movies with nudity?)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on May 27, 2016, 11:09:33 am
So I skimmed these, and good lord, the title of SB383  is seven pages long.  There’s a good 100 pages defining what Smoot and Company can and can’t do and how they do it.  There are dozens of pages on beer distribution, I’m sure written with the kind assistance of AB InBev. Dozens more on liquor distribution and taxes, taxes, taxes. I did not read all of these pages.

Here’s what I found skimming the other more relevant pages:

•   Package Stores are now allowed to have refrigerated items starting 10/1/2018
•   Brewpubs, Brewers and Winemakers can sell beer for both onsite and offsite consumption and can offer samples, they can also self-distribute their beer and wine up to a certain amount of sales. distilleries can offer samples
•   Out of state brewers can also self-distribute if they can’t find a distributor willing to do so for them
•   No liquor stores or bars within 300 feet of school or churches buildings except for universities inside of improvement districts when the university agrees.
•   Liquor store chains are now allowed, but are limited to TWO stores and only individuals can own stores. I would now expect Parkhill’s to grow to four stores with two owned by the husband and two by the wife.
•   Liquor stores can sell anything a convenience or grocery store can, but those items are capped at 20% of sales
•   Wine makers can directly sell wine to out of state customers by mail, I couldn’t find if the reverse was true where Oklahomans could order wine and have it delivered from out of state.
•   Selling liquor by the drink in counties where it is allowed will be allowed on election days, holidays and Sundays may be restricted by county option
•   It Establishes a Viticulture and Enology Center on the campus of Redlands Community College (what?)
•   You have to be 18 to sell beer and wine, 21 for liquor
•   You can’t win free drinks
•   You can’t sell someone more than two drinks at one time
•   No selling alcohol for less than 6% below cost, so no penny beer nights
•   Happy Hours are back (I think, the wording is odd and I’m no lawyer)
•   No drinking games in bars
•   Liquor stores will be open from 10:00am to Midnight but will be closed on Sundays, Thanksgiving and Christmas
•   You still have to be 21 to enter a liquor store or bar or designated bar area

Now the really fun stuff:
•   You cannot sell liquor and allow “The performance by any person of acts, or simulated acts, of sexual intercourse, masturbation, sodomy, bestiality, oral copulation, flagellation or any sexual acts which are otherwise prohibited by law” nor can you “The actual intentional touching or caressing or fondling by any person of the breasts, anus or genitals” nor “expose to view any portion of the areola of the female breast or any portion of the pubic hair, buttocks or genitals” (nipples are the devil!)
•   Lastly, can’t sell liquor and have “Any person to perform acts of, or acts which simulate, sexual acts which are prohibited by law, or permit any person to use artificial devices or inanimate objects to depict any prohibited activities or permit the showing of films, still pictures, electronic reproductions or other visual reproductions depicting any of the prohibited activities described in this paragraph” (So, movie theaters like Warren that sell liquor can’t show movies with nudity?)


I think the link I provided you may just be slight older than the bill passed.  I remember hearing that the restriction for liquor stores to cap their non-alcoholic sales to 20% was removed.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on May 27, 2016, 11:19:00 am

•   You cannot sell liquor and allow “The performance by any person of acts, or simulated acts, of sexual intercourse, masturbation, sodomy, bestiality, oral copulation, flagellation or any sexual acts which are otherwise prohibited by law” nor can you “The actual intentional touching or caressing or fondling by any person of the breasts, anus or genitals” nor “expose to view any portion of the areola of the female breast or any portion of the pubic hair, buttocks or genitals” (nipples are the devil!)


Well F...there goes Sally Kern Tuesdays at Reasors.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: swake on May 27, 2016, 11:34:49 am
I think the link I provided you may just be slight older than the bill passed.  I remember hearing that the restriction for liquor stores to cap their non-alcoholic sales to 20% was removed.

well hell, I'm not reading that crap again.....


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on May 27, 2016, 12:05:55 pm
Well F...there goes Sally Kern Tuesdays at Reasors.

(http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p309/kallsop2/unsee_zpsil2kybl1.gif)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on May 27, 2016, 06:30:16 pm
So I skimmed these, and good lord, the title of SB383  is seven pages long.  There’s a good 100 pages defining what Smoot and Company can and can’t do and how they do it.  There are dozens of pages on beer distribution, I’m sure written with the kind assistance of AB InBev. Dozens more on liquor distribution and taxes, taxes, taxes. I did not read all of these pages.

Here’s what I found skimming the other more relevant pages:

•   Package Stores are now allowed to have refrigerated items starting 10/1/2018
•   Brewpubs, Brewers and Winemakers can sell beer for both onsite and offsite consumption and can offer samples, they can also self-distribute their beer and wine up to a certain amount of sales. distilleries can offer samples
•   Out of state brewers can also self-distribute if they can’t find a distributor willing to do so for them
•   No liquor stores or bars within 300 feet of school or churches buildings except for universities inside of improvement districts when the university agrees.
•   Liquor store chains are now allowed, but are limited to TWO stores and only individuals can own stores. I would now expect Parkhill’s to grow to four stores with two owned by the husband and two by the wife.
•   Liquor stores can sell anything a convenience or grocery store can, but those items are capped at 20% of sales
•   Wine makers can directly sell wine to out of state customers by mail, I couldn’t find if the reverse was true where Oklahomans could order wine and have it delivered from out of state.
•   Selling liquor by the drink in counties where it is allowed will be allowed on election days, holidays and Sundays may be restricted by county option
•   It Establishes a Viticulture and Enology Center on the campus of Redlands Community College (what?)
•   You have to be 18 to sell beer and wine, 21 for liquor
•   You can’t win free drinks
•   You can’t sell someone more than two drinks at one time
•   No selling alcohol for less than 6% below cost, so no penny beer nights
•   Happy Hours are back (I think, the wording is odd and I’m no lawyer)
•   No drinking games in bars
•   Liquor stores will be open from 10:00am to Midnight but will be closed on Sundays, Thanksgiving and Christmas
•   You still have to be 21 to enter a liquor store or bar or designated bar area

Now the really fun stuff:
•   You cannot sell liquor and allow “The performance by any person of acts, or simulated acts, of sexual intercourse, masturbation, sodomy, bestiality, oral copulation, flagellation or any sexual acts which are otherwise prohibited by law” nor can you “The actual intentional touching or caressing or fondling by any person of the breasts, anus or genitals” nor “expose to view any portion of the areola of the female breast or any portion of the pubic hair, buttocks or genitals” (nipples are the devil!)
•   Lastly, can’t sell liquor and have “Any person to perform acts of, or acts which simulate, sexual acts which are prohibited by law, or permit any person to use artificial devices or inanimate objects to depict any prohibited activities or permit the showing of films, still pictures, electronic reproductions or other visual reproductions depicting any of the prohibited activities described in this paragraph” (So, movie theaters like Warren that sell liquor can’t show movies with nudity?)


So...accidental anal touching is okay then?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on May 31, 2016, 11:57:03 am
So...accidental anal touching is okay then?

That is when the dolphin sounds begin


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on May 31, 2016, 01:50:40 pm
So...accidental anal touching is okay then?

UFIA?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on August 01, 2016, 12:20:25 pm
Judge Denies Plea to Block Oklahoma Alcohol Ballot Measure

http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/judge-denies-plea-block-oklahoma-alcohol-ballot-measure (http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/judge-denies-plea-block-oklahoma-alcohol-ballot-measure)

Quote
An Oklahoma County judge has denied a retail liquor group's request to block a November ballot measure on whether strong beer and wine can be sold in grocery stores.

District Judge Aletia Haynes Timmons denied an injunction Monday that was sought by the Retail Liquor Association of Oklahoma. However, Timmons says she has questions about the constitutionality of the proposal and will schedule a hearing later to decide that issue.

The retail liquor group claims in a lawsuit that the ballot measure's proposed changes are unconstitutional because they would treat liquor-license holders less favorably than supermarkets and convenience stores.

The ballot measure authorizes changes to Oklahoma's alcohol laws beginning in 2018, including allowing the sale of strong beer in grocery stores. Strong beer currently must be sold in liquor stores.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on August 01, 2016, 01:00:47 pm
Judge Denies Plea to Block Oklahoma Alcohol Ballot Measure

http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/judge-denies-plea-block-oklahoma-alcohol-ballot-measure (http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/judge-denies-plea-block-oklahoma-alcohol-ballot-measure)


Good.  Wondered how that turned out when I saw it in my news feeds.

However reading the article left me with the impression that after the judge reviews, there is still a possibility of injunctive relief.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: cannon_fodder on August 01, 2016, 04:26:13 pm
For those interested, the case is here (http://www.oscn.net/dockets/GetCaseInformation.aspx?db=oklahoma&cmid=3427156).  The brief for the injunction (anti-liquor law change) is here (http://www.oscn.net/dockets/GetDocument.aspx?ct=oklahoma&bc=1034068429&cn=CV-2016-1547&fmt=pdf). The response (pro-liquor law change) is here (http://www.oscn.net/dockets/GetDocument.aspx?ct=oklahoma&bc=1034074164&cn=CV-2016-1547&fmt=pdf).

First, an temporary injunction is only granted if 1) the requesting party has a reasonable probability of success, 2) the risk of injury/damage for not granting the injunction is greater than the risk of granting it, AND 3) it is in public interest.

The Retail Liquor Association of Oklahoma, or ReaL donkey Oo (tortured acronyms are fun), argued Equal Protection and Unconstitutionally Vague. Everyone always argues too vague, no fun there. The Equal Protection argument is more interesting.

Under equal protection the government cannot arbitrarily treat similarly situation groups differently for no good reason. Or, more technically, without a compelling governmental interest for protected classes, or, in this circumstance, at least a rational basis for doing so. Rational basis is a fairly easy standard for the government to reach...so they were fighting an uphill battle to start.

ReaL donkey Oo argued it violated Equal Protection by:

1) Limits the number of Retail Spirits Licenses (liquor stores) to 2, does not limited number of licenses for beer and wine vendors.  I.e., QT can have 500 stores but Ranch Acres Liquor and spirits can only have 2.  2) Sales of non-liquor items limited to 20% of total sales for liquor stores, no limited for retail beer or wine stores. 3) Residency and entity type restrictions for liquor stores, none for beer and wine. and 4) Out of State Wholesaler contracts (not real clear on this one).

Unfortunately, all the Court had to find was find that they weren't entitled to an injunction under the three part test, or that the State had a rational basis for treating liquor sales different than beer or wine sales. Given our state's history of legislating morality, and of alcohol being such a vice, that isn't a stretch for the Court to find. In fact, we've been treating liquor stores differently for decades and I suspect they'd be even more upset if it was truly equal (fine, everyone sell whatever you want).

Not a frivolous argument, there are significant differences between groups that are both selling alcohol. But, if you classify the groups as liquor sellers, beer sellers, and wine sellers... no dice. Or if you say the government has a rational basis for treating liquor stores differently, no dice.

Predictably, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, or OK Attorney GraSP, argued the Court lacks jurisdiction (ballot challenges must be filed in OK Supreme Court), the challenge is not ripe (can't challenge unless approved by the People), and they should otherwise fail because 1) the Court has repeatedly upheld the right to treat persons in the alcohol industry different among classes, 2) they don't know what they are talking about, and 3) it isn't vague.

OK Attorney GraSP won the day (I think he's 3 for 42*). No injunction. Ballots print at the end of August. They have to be mailed to service members overseas sometime in September. And Alcohol progress marches on.


The actual ballot question will read:

PRELIMINARY BALLOT TITLE FOR STATE QUESTION No. 792
This measure repeals Article 28 Qf the Oklahoma Constitution and restructures the laws
governing alcoholic beverages through a new Article 28A and other laws the Legislature will
create if the measure passes.
The new Article 28A provides that with exceptions, a person or company can have an ownership
interest in only one area of the alcoholic beverage business-manufacturing, wholesaling, or
retailing. Some restrictions apply to the sales of manufacturers, brewers, winemakers, and
wholesalers. Subject to limitations, the Legislature may authorize direct shipments to consumers
of wine.
Retail locations like grocery stores may sell wine and beer. Liquor stores may sell products other
than alcoholic beverages in limited amounts.
The Legislature must create licenses for retail locations, liquor stores, and places serving
alcoholic beverages and may create other licenses. Certain licensees must meet residency
requirements. Felons cannot be licensees.
The Legislature must designate days and hours when alcoholic beverages may be sold and may
impose taxes on sales. Municipalities may levy an occupation tax. If authorized, a state lodge
may sell individual alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption but no other state
involvement in the alcoholic beverage business is allowed.
With one exception, the measure will take effect October 1,2018.


*not an official tally, a totally made up number actually.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on August 01, 2016, 04:46:04 pm
For those interested, the case is here (http://www.oscn.net/dockets/GetCaseInformation.aspx?db=oklahoma&cmid=3427156).  The brief for the injunction (anti-liquor law change) is here (http://www.oscn.net/dockets/GetDocument.aspx?ct=oklahoma&bc=1034068429&cn=CV-2016-1547&fmt=pdf). The response (pro-liquor law change) is here (http://www.oscn.net/dockets/GetDocument.aspx?ct=oklahoma&bc=1034074164&cn=CV-2016-1547&fmt=pdf).

First, an temporary injunction is only granted if 1) the requesting party has a reasonable probability of success, 2) the risk of injury/damage for not granting the injunction is greater than the risk of granting it, AND 3) it is in public interest.

The Retail Liquor Association of Oklahoma, or ReaL donkey Oo (tortured acronyms are fun), argued Equal Protection and Unconstitutionally Vague. Everyone always argues too vague, no fun there. The Equal Protection argument is more interesting.

Under equal protection the government cannot arbitrarily treat similarly situation groups differently for no good reason. Or, more technically, without a compelling governmental interest for protected classes, or, in this circumstance, at least a rational basis for doing so. Rational basis is a fairly easy standard for the government to reach...so they were fighting an uphill battle to start.

ReaL donkey Oo argued it violated Equal Protection by:

1) Limits the number of Retail Spirits Licenses (liquor stores) to 2, does not limited number of licenses for beer and wine vendors.  I.e., QT can have 500 stores but Ranch Acres Liquor and spirits can only have 2.  2) Sales of non-liquor items limited to 20% of total sales for liquor stores, no limited for retail beer or wine stores. 3) Residency and entity type restrictions for liquor stores, none for beer and wine. and 4) Out of State Wholesaler contracts (not real clear on this one).

Unfortunately, all the Court had to find was find that they weren't entitled to an injunction under the three part test, or that the State had a rational basis for treating liquor sales different than beer or wine sales. Given our state's history of legislating morality, and of alcohol being such a vice, that isn't a stretch for the Court to find. In fact, we've been treating liquor stores differently for decades and I suspect they'd be even more upset if it was truly equal (fine, everyone sell whatever you want).

Not a frivolous argument, there are significant differences between groups that are both selling alcohol. But, if you classify the groups as liquor sellers, beer sellers, and wine sellers... no dice. Or if you say the government has a rational basis for treating liquor stores differently, no dice.

Predictably, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, or OK Attorney GraSP, argued the Court lacks jurisdiction (ballot challenges must be filed in OK Supreme Court), the challenge is not ripe (can't challenge unless approved by the People), and they should otherwise fail because 1) the Court has repeatedly upheld the right to treat persons in the alcohol industry different among classes, 2) they don't know what they are talking about, and 3) it isn't vague.

OK Attorney GraSP won the day (I think he's 3 for 42*). No injunction. Ballots print at the end of August. They have to be mailed to service members overseas sometime in September. And Alcohol progress marches on.


The actual ballot question will read:

PRELIMINARY BALLOT TITLE FOR STATE QUESTION No. 792
This measure repeals Article 28 Qf the Oklahoma Constitution and restructures the laws
governing alcoholic beverages through a new Article 28A and other laws the Legislature will
create if the measure passes.
The new Article 28A provides that with exceptions, a person or company can have an ownership
interest in only one area of the alcoholic beverage business-manufacturing, wholesaling, or
retailing. Some restrictions apply to the sales of manufacturers, brewers, winemakers, and
wholesalers. Subject to limitations, the Legislature may authorize direct shipments to consumers
of wine.
Retail locations like grocery stores may sell wine and beer. Liquor stores may sell products other
than alcoholic beverages in limited amounts.
The Legislature must create licenses for retail locations, liquor stores, and places serving
alcoholic beverages and may create other licenses. Certain licensees must meet residency
requirements. Felons cannot be licensees.
The Legislature must designate days and hours when alcoholic beverages may be sold and may
impose taxes on sales. Municipalities may levy an occupation tax. If authorized, a state lodge
may sell individual alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption but no other state
involvement in the alcoholic beverage business is allowed.
With one exception, the measure will take effect October 1,2018.


*not an official tally, a totally made up number actually.

Wow, two years to implement?  I know many people think Oklahomans are slow, but this slow?  Wow.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on August 02, 2016, 11:54:11 am
Wow, two years to implement?  I know many people think Oklahomans are slow, but this slow?  Wow.

Time for lawsuits


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: swake on August 02, 2016, 12:37:41 pm
Wow, two years to implement?  I know many people think Oklahomans are slow, but this slow?  Wow.

Liquor stores will need time to build out refrigeration, in many cases the stores will need more space and will need to expand or move.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on August 02, 2016, 12:45:10 pm
Liquor stores will need time to build out refrigeration, in many cases the stores will need more space and will need to expand or move.

If they had been smart (like Collins), they'd have already had this.  :)


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on August 02, 2016, 12:57:22 pm
If they had been smart (like Collins), they'd have already had this.  :)

Collins is dead to me. 

A buddy of mine got two 5 gallon kegs from Collins for his wedding.  After the wedding, they took off on a honeymoon for a week and didn’t think twice about the kegs.  Collins pulled the stunt of refusing to refund the keg deposits when it was returned in about 10 days which is a bullshit policy.  Ranch Acres would never do that and I was told by the owner of Ranch Acres there’s no reason to keep the deposit like that, the distributor does not make the retailer forfeit it after 10 days.  I can keep a keg on tap for two months and take it back to RA with no hassle.

Between myself, my family, and some of my closest friends a couple of measly keg deposits has cost them easily a couple of thousand over the last year and a half.

Another time prior to this, we got home with our order, had some wine and beer for a holiday party, there were two bottles of champagne we did not put on the counter, but made it home with us and we were charged for them.  They tried to tell me it was state law they could not take them back and issue a refund.  Again, I doubt this would happen elsewhere.

Collins has very short-sighted business practices.  They are by far, the closest liquor store to my house and I will never set foot in there again.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on August 02, 2016, 02:03:04 pm
For those interested, the case is here (http://www.oscn.net/dockets/GetCaseInformation.aspx?db=oklahoma&cmid=3427156).  The brief for the injunction (anti-liquor law change) is here (http://www.oscn.net/dockets/GetDocument.aspx?ct=oklahoma&bc=1034068429&cn=CV-2016-1547&fmt=pdf). The response (pro-liquor law change) is here (http://www.oscn.net/dockets/GetDocument.aspx?ct=oklahoma&bc=1034074164&cn=CV-2016-1547&fmt=pdf).

First, an temporary injunction is only granted if 1) the requesting party has a reasonable probability of success, 2) the risk of injury/damage for not granting the injunction is greater than the risk of granting it, AND 3) it is in public interest.

The Retail Liquor Association of Oklahoma, or ReaL donkey Oo (tortured acronyms are fun), argued Equal Protection and Unconstitutionally Vague. Everyone always argues too vague, no fun there. The Equal Protection argument is more interesting.

Under equal protection the government cannot arbitrarily treat similarly situation groups differently for no good reason. Or, more technically, without a compelling governmental interest for protected classes, or, in this circumstance, at least a rational basis for doing so. Rational basis is a fairly easy standard for the government to reach...so they were fighting an uphill battle to start.

ReaL donkey Oo argued it violated Equal Protection by:

1) Limits the number of Retail Spirits Licenses (liquor stores) to 2, does not limited number of licenses for beer and wine vendors.  I.e., QT can have 500 stores but Ranch Acres Liquor and spirits can only have 2.  2) Sales of non-liquor items limited to 20% of total sales for liquor stores, no limited for retail beer or wine stores. 3) Residency and entity type restrictions for liquor stores, none for beer and wine. and 4) Out of State Wholesaler contracts (not real clear on this one).

Unfortunately, all the Court had to find was find that they weren't entitled to an injunction under the three part test, or that the State had a rational basis for treating liquor sales different than beer or wine sales. Given our state's history of legislating morality, and of alcohol being such a vice, that isn't a stretch for the Court to find. In fact, we've been treating liquor stores differently for decades and I suspect they'd be even more upset if it was truly equal (fine, everyone sell whatever you want).

Not a frivolous argument, there are significant differences between groups that are both selling alcohol. But, if you classify the groups as liquor sellers, beer sellers, and wine sellers... no dice. Or if you say the government has a rational basis for treating liquor stores differently, no dice.

Predictably, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, or OK Attorney GraSP, argued the Court lacks jurisdiction (ballot challenges must be filed in OK Supreme Court), the challenge is not ripe (can't challenge unless approved by the People), and they should otherwise fail because 1) the Court has repeatedly upheld the right to treat persons in the alcohol industry different among classes, 2) they don't know what they are talking about, and 3) it isn't vague.

OK Attorney GraSP won the day (I think he's 3 for 42*). No injunction. Ballots print at the end of August. They have to be mailed to service members overseas sometime in September. And Alcohol progress marches on.


With one exception, the measure will take effect October 1,2018.
*not an official tally, a totally made up number actually.

The ironic thing is the liquor store owners’ arguments could be used to attack the current liquor/wine/beer regime in Oklahoma as violative of equal protection.  Why should the law tell Fred Parkhill how many stores he can own any more than it limits how many hardware stores I can own.  Instead, let’s get rid of the proposed two-store rule for liquor stores and treat them the same as grocery/convenience stores, i.e. corporations can own, can have as many locations as they want, etc.  The proposal is an improve, but let's not kid ourselves, we will still be a long way from modern liquor laws.

The liquor retailers association is facing a major disruption and, like any government protected cartel, it is seeking to preserve the status quo.  Drive around Tulsa and it is astounding how many small liquor stores there are.  If these changes happen, a number of those small stores will likely go away.  I don’t celebrate an owner losing his or her business.  However, it is hard to mourn the demise of uneconomical businesses that exist only because of anti-consumer and anti-competitive government mandate.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on August 02, 2016, 02:06:21 pm
Wow, two years to implement?  I know many people think Oklahomans are slow, but this slow?  Wow.

Given all the rules and regulations to be formulated to implement this massive change, 2 years is not so long.  Additionally, given the breadth of change that will occur, there will be many glitches and issues that will develop during implementation that will need legislative changes/fixes.  Creating chaos during the transition would not be beneficial to the supporters of further modernization efforts.

Keep in mind some things we currently take for granted are going away without other changes to the law. Consider Mayfest, the Tulsa State Fair and college football games as but a few examples.  Currently, you can buy a low-point beer and walk around the street/mid-way.  After this change, all beer will have to be purchased and consumed within a confined area.  We are all going to be making a lot of adjustments to the way we do things.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on August 02, 2016, 02:49:51 pm
there’s no reason to keep the deposit like that, the distributor does not make the retailer forfeit it after 10 days.  I can keep a keg on tap for two months and take it back to RA with no hassle.

The present system leads to too much make-it-up as you go along, like expired drivers licenses not being valid proof of age.

As for the lobbyists, the liquor store association says the reforms are unconstitutional because they change the constitution.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on August 02, 2016, 03:12:40 pm
The present system leads to too much make-it-up as you go along, like expired drivers licenses not being valid proof of age.

As for the lobbyists, the liquor store association says the reforms are unconstitutional because they change the constitution.

Well if that's the case, then precedent will be set if the voters vote in the change that allows religious monuments to be placed on public grounds.  If the association wins the argument, that is.  That is quite a can of worms there.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on August 02, 2016, 08:31:34 pm
A buddy of mine got two 5 gallon kegs from Collins for his wedding.  After the wedding, they took off on a honeymoon for a week and didn’t think twice about the kegs.  Collins pulled the stunt of refusing to refund the keg deposits when it was returned in about 10 days which is a bullshit policy. 

I hope he kept the kegs.  Are the fittings suitable for home-brew?



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on August 02, 2016, 08:51:01 pm
I hope he kept the kegs.  Are the fittings suitable for home-brew?



Nope.  Sankey.  Those are a PITA to try and clean and sanitize for home brewers.  We could have kept them and used them for targets I suppose.

That presents a problem for the breweries if a retailer pulls that and someone keeps the keg.  On 5 gal kegs, replacement cost is about $65 (if you buy them 1000 at a time).  For half barrel kegs, the cost is over $100 each.  The deposit won’t cover even half that.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: cannon_fodder on August 03, 2016, 07:14:48 am
The only thing I was able to find is that under ABLE Commission Rule 45:20-3-15(e) a keg must be returned within (1) one year or is subject to a $500 fine.
https://www.ok.gov/able/documents/Alcoholic%20Beverage%20Administrative%20Code%20Includes%20Charity%20Games.pdf (page 30)

Failing to return a beer keg is a crime in Oklahoma, a misdemeanor and a $500 fine... because small government.  If the liquor store fails to report failure to return beer keg it too is fined $500 for the first, and second offenses. Ont he third offense the liquor store is shut down for one year.

Also, if someone at your party "damages" the mandated keg sticker it is a $500 fine.

A great example of a law that is probably never enforced (anyone ever heard of it being enforced?). 

37 OS 521.1
http://www.oscn.net/applications/OCISWeb/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=436440

37 OS 163.19  (we need two laws to do this because low point kegs and high point kegs follow different laws and are regulated by different agencies...because small government)




Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: PonderInc on August 19, 2016, 11:16:18 am
Not sure if this deserves its own thread or not.  

But an article in the TW indicates that the (dis)ABLE commission has interpreted a state law in typical "conservative" aka big-government-in-your-business for no reason nanny-state way:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/retail/new-oklahoma-beer-law-might-not-allow-brewers-to-sell/article_1e2c3257-32df-5633-8ae5-0fe11c51fac1.html (http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/retail/new-oklahoma-beer-law-might-not-allow-brewers-to-sell/article_1e2c3257-32df-5633-8ae5-0fe11c51fac1.html)

After going back and forth on the issue, it appears the Oklahoma ABLE Commission intends to block Oklahoma breweries from selling full-strength beer by the pint as part of a new state law that goes into effect next week.

While Oklahoma wineries have long been able to sell their products on-site, craft brewers have been limited so far to selling 3.2 beer on premises. Breweries have been able to provide customers up to 12-ounce samples of full-strength beer. To sell full-strength beer, Oklahoma brewers have had to go through a wholesaler, which then distributes the product to liquor stores.

Some friends and I stopped by Dead Armadillo Brewery last weekend.  They said that they have to sell their beer to a wholesaler, ship it out the back door, have the wholesaler deliver it to the front door, where they buy it back to sell to customers.

If anyone can please explain how this makes any sense at all I would appreciate it.  I know that Oklahoma laws typically impose an affront to credulity and common sense, but this is especially goofy.

Is it notable that the director of the ABLE commission has worked for that body since 1980?  Could this help explain the inbred thinking and lack of intellectual hybrid vigor?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on August 19, 2016, 11:28:22 am
Not sure if this deserves its own thread or not.  

But an article in the TW indicates that the (dis)ABLE commission has interpreted a state law in typical "conservative" aka big-government-in-your-business for no reason nanny-state way:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/retail/new-oklahoma-beer-law-might-not-allow-brewers-to-sell/article_1e2c3257-32df-5633-8ae5-0fe11c51fac1.html (http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/retail/new-oklahoma-beer-law-might-not-allow-brewers-to-sell/article_1e2c3257-32df-5633-8ae5-0fe11c51fac1.html)

After going back and forth on the issue, it appears the Oklahoma ABLE Commission intends to block Oklahoma breweries from selling full-strength beer by the pint as part of a new state law that goes into effect next week.

While Oklahoma wineries have long been able to sell their products on-site, craft brewers have been limited so far to selling 3.2 beer on premises. Breweries have been able to provide customers up to 12-ounce samples of full-strength beer. To sell full-strength beer, Oklahoma brewers have had to go through a wholesaler, which then distributes the product to liquor stores.

Some friends and I stopped by Dead Armadillo Brewery last weekend.  They said that they have to sell their beer to a wholesaler, ship it out the back door, have the wholesaler deliver it to the front door, where they buy it back to sell to customers.

If anyone can please explain how this makes any sense at all I would appreciate it.  I know that Oklahoma laws typically impose an affront to credulity and common sense, but this is especially goofy.

Is it notable that the director of the ABLE commission has worked for that body since 1980?  Could this help explain the inbred thinking and lack of intellectual hybrid vigor?


How long have you lived here....???    Lol...welcome to Okrahoma!



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on August 19, 2016, 11:50:15 am

Some friends and I stopped by Dead Armadillo Brewery last weekend.  They said that they have to sell their beer to a wholesaler, ship it out the back door, have the wholesaler deliver it to the front door, where they buy it back to sell to customers.


I can only think that lobbying by Jarbo/Central et al would cause this kind of thing.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on August 19, 2016, 08:09:08 pm
Can someone please explain to me the difference between the two state questions (791 and 792) now that it seems they are both trying to get a look.  792 is already on the ballot, 791 is petitioning.

http://www.791vs792.com/

Reading this it seems the bills are similar, but have differences and some are actually pretty substantial.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: cannon_fodder on August 22, 2016, 08:01:31 am
791 is sponsored by the Retail Liquor Association, you can guess what it does...

1) The key provision they REALLY want is that 791 is a protectionist bill for the liquor stores (and wholesalers). It prevents anyone from selling liquor or wine within 500 feet of an existing liquor store (property line to property line). For instance, Ranch Acres Wine and Spirits already has a license, so the Walmart, Natural Grocers, and Walgreens nearby wouldn't be able to get one. Midtown liquors near 21st and Yale has a license, so Target and Reasor's wouldn't be able to get one.  Actually...

Off the top of my head, the following Reasor's would be excluded:
- Reasors on Brookside
- 15th and Peoria
- Reasor's at 21st and Yale (ish)
- 51st and Harvard

Probably most of the rest would too. And if one is allowed somewhere, then Reasor's would have to get the license before the neighboring gas station, grocery store, pharmacy or whatever gets it.

The purpose is purely to protect existing business owners. Makes great sense for the business owners, and I am sympathetic because they all "grew up" playing by the stupid made up rules we had for 50 years. Sucks for them to suddenly just have to compete on even ground like every other business. Maybe some kind of phase in where you also have the option of purchasing existing licenses (that is, buying out the liquor stores) would have been more fair. But to me, grandfathering existing businesses in permanently doesn't cut it.

2) Preserves the current wholesaler system.

3) Forbids any out of state ownership.

4) Forbids anyone other than a liquor store from having more than 30% of sales be alcohol.

5) Takes 11 years for the full effect to go into place (retailers can get 2 licenses each year, after 9 years they can get unlimited licenses subject to geographic restrictions. In other words, 2 QTs in the state can sell wine the first year, 4 the next, etc...)

6) Oddly, it also allows alcohol sales any day of the year EXCEPT Thanksgiving and Christmas. Just seems strange to me.

Some other stuff, but those are the low points. And that's off the top of my head, happy to be corrected.


https://www.sos.ok.gov/gov/questions.aspx
https://www.sos.ok.gov/documents/questions/791.pdf



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Dspike on August 22, 2016, 12:08:26 pm
Worth noting that the website http://www.791vs792.com/ is run by the Retail Liquor Association of Oklahoma that is pushing SQ 791. Glad to see folks here wanting to clarify the differences. Here is a Tulsa World article that talked through some of the differences:

Quote
Then, there is SQ 791, the initiative petition that the RLAO (Retail Liquor Association of Oklahoma) has out. This is where I get dazed and confused.

Both of the questions allow for cold beer and wine to be sold in grocery stores and supercenters, but this one would make sure liquor stores and retail grocery wine stores are 500 feet apart, (so grocery stores could not sell wine if there was already a liquor store selling it 500 feet from them.)

SQ 791 holds on to some of the archaic anti-competitive ways that consumers don’t want. Yes, big corporations are going to sell a ton of beer and wine. That’s what they do because consumers want it. So you can’t have it both ways, you can’t modernize and leave others out.

I buy local every time I get a chance, but there shouldn’t be a law forcing you to do that. So don’t be confused.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/blogs/scene/whattheale/what-the-ale-sq-or-sq-both-deal-with-cold/article_8061f43d-c3c8-5ebe-b438-3750d0618491.html


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on August 22, 2016, 12:18:19 pm
Worth noting that the website http://www.791vs792.com/ is run by the Retail Liquor Association of Oklahoma that is pushing SQ 791. Glad to see folks here wanting to clarify the differences. Here is a Tulsa World article that talked through some of the differences:

http://www.tulsaworld.com/blogs/scene/whattheale/what-the-ale-sq-or-sq-both-deal-with-cold/article_8061f43d-c3c8-5ebe-b438-3750d0618491.html

and the lone comment on that article is from none other than the President of the Retail Liqour Association of Oklahoma.  Harhar.  Here was his comment.

Quote
Where Tom's logic is really flawed is that he fails to point out an even bigger restriction on capitalism and competition contained in SQ 792 that SQ 791 does not have. SQ 792 actually establishes a franchise wholesale distribution system that would mandate retail outlets (liquor stores, wine stores, grocery stores, convenience stores, drug stores, restaurants, bars, etc.) buy from just one supplier. It would allow giant out-of-state corporations to buy controlling interest in an Oklahoma wholesaler and designate themselves the sole supplier of the family of products they represent. This takes the wholesale system from a forced, open competitive capitalistic one to a de facto monopoly. It would be akin to telling Tom that he is welcome to buy his craft beer in Tulsa but only from one giant liquor store and that giant liquor store would be protected by law from any other stores opening or, even if they did, they could not carry any of the same products already assigned to that one giant store. If he was truly concerned about "capitalism and competition," he would have come out against SQ 792 long ago. But, of course, that's not his real concern. His real concern is writing editorials that help his paper make ad revenue from big companies like QuikTrip, Reasor's and Walmart. So he'll happily hide the facts and ignore the effects of SQ 792 because that's what's best for the company that feeds his family and gives him beer money.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on August 24, 2016, 08:46:59 am

After going back and forth on the issue, it appears the Oklahoma ABLE Commission intends to block Oklahoma breweries from selling full-strength beer by the pint as part of a new state law that goes into effect next week.



OKLAHOMA CITY — Craft brewers can sell strong beer for consumption on the premises beginning Friday, Attorney General Scott Pruitt has ruled.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/homepagelatest/ag-s-opinion-clears-way-for-oklahoma-brewers-to-sell/article_1e2c3257-32df-5633-8ae5-0fe11c51fac1.html


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: davideinstein on August 24, 2016, 03:14:11 pm
OKLAHOMA CITY — Craft brewers can sell strong beer for consumption on the premises beginning Friday, Attorney General Scott Pruitt has ruled.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/homepagelatest/ag-s-opinion-clears-way-for-oklahoma-brewers-to-sell/article_1e2c3257-32df-5633-8ae5-0fe11c51fac1.html

Cheers to that.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on August 25, 2016, 11:00:19 am
OKLAHOMA CITY — Craft brewers can sell strong beer for consumption on the premises beginning Friday, Attorney General Scott Pruitt has ruled.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/homepagelatest/ag-s-opinion-clears-way-for-oklahoma-brewers-to-sell/article_1e2c3257-32df-5633-8ae5-0fe11c51fac1.html

A good and correct outcome.  AG Pruitt gets a lot of criticism on this forum, but he deserves a hand for quickly putting this issue to rest.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on August 25, 2016, 11:59:16 am
A good and correct outcome.  AG Pruitt gets a lot of criticism on this forum, but he deserves a hand for quickly putting this issue to rest.

He deserves the criticism


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: cannon_fodder on August 25, 2016, 01:29:25 pm
He deserves the criticism

And credit when it doesn't make a stupid mistake. Lets keep the bar low!


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on August 25, 2016, 02:02:50 pm
A good and correct outcome.  AG Pruitt gets a lot of criticism on this forum, but he deserves a hand for quickly putting this issue to rest.


Golf clap.




Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on August 30, 2016, 10:13:27 am
SQ 791 did not make the Nov. 8 ballot, but SQ 792 did:

Quote
Things got a lot less complicated for cold beer and wine drinkers Monday. The Nov. 8 ballot is final, and State Question 792 will be on it.

If it becomes law, it would allow grocery stores, convenience stores and liquor stores to sell cold regular-strength beer and wine.

There was an initiative petition by the Retail Liquor Association of Oklahoma to put its version of modernizing Oklahoma’s alcohol laws on the ballot as SQ 791. That petition didn’t meet the requirements to get on the ballot.

Backers for SQ 792 are locally and nationally owned grocery and convenience stores, and they have been pushing to get information about the question into the voters’ hands.

“We are really excited. Today at 5 p.m., the ballot for this upcoming election cycle will be finalized, and we know that state question 792 is on the ballot,” said Alex Weintz, spokesperson for SQ 792.

“Voters are going to have a chance for the first time in 60 years to update the state’s very outdated beer and wine laws. If 792 passes, it will mean cold, full-strength beer and wine in grocery, convenience stores and liquor stores. We think that is going to be a huge boost to the economy,” Weintz said.

SQ 792 isn’t perfect, but there is time to deal with some of the questions that have come up during the process. I think taking Oklahoma out of the 3.2 ABW (Alcohol by Weight) beer game is the biggest move we can have moving forward. We won’t even be the last state in the union to get rid of 3.2 if we pass this question, but we are the largest consumer of 3.2 beer and when we are gone, I bet 3.2 goes away nationally.

“When this passes, we know there will still be some questions to answer about alcohol modernization and the law moving forward,” Weintz said. “It will give the legislature the freedom to address those questions, rather than locking them in the old system, our constitution now.”

One good thing that people aren’t probably aware of are the tax rates for beers. Because 3.2 beer is taxed at the lower rate than beers in excess of 3.2, that means right off the bat there will be more revenue for the Oklahoma’s general fund.

Maybe a beer can help move our state out of last place for teachers pay?

http://m.tulsaworld.com/blogs/scene/whattheale/what-the-ale-it-is-official-sq-will-be-the/article_042b894e-468d-5a76-a224-75d0db720094.html?mode=jqm

Interesting note: in New Mexico grocery stores and convenience stores appear to make up the bulk of liquor, wine, and beer retail.  Even in a progressive place like Taos, there are NO liquor stores.  Albertson’s has the best wine, beer, and liquor selection, even high end wines.  If you Google a liquor store in say, Angel Fire, chances are the place is a C-store and gas retailer as well.

There are some mega-retailers like Total Wine in Albuquerque and Rio Rancho, but they don’t seem to be in the smaller towns and cities. 


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: cannon_fodder on August 30, 2016, 11:06:02 am
SQ 791 did not make the Nov. 8 ballot, but SQ 792 did:

Interesting note: in New Mexico grocery stores and convenience stores appear to make up the bulk of liquor, wine, and beer retail.  Even in a progressive place like Taos, there are NO liquor stores.  Albertson’s has the best wine, beer, and liquor selection, even high end wines.  If you Google a liquor store in say, Angel Fire, chances are the place is a C-store and gas retailer as well.

I'd say that is the norm in most states that have cut into liquor store monopolies. Tulsa has a dozen in the 8 square miles between Sheridan and Peoria, 11th and 31st. 51st Street has one every intersection between Lewis and Mingo. Ini south Tulsa I'd guess more major intersections have a liquor store than do not have a liquor store. If you're not from here, you notice them everywhere. There 840 liquor stores in Oklahoma are registered. In Iowa there are few liquor stores, in all of Des Moines there are maybe a dozen liquor or "wine and spirit" stores. Springfield Missouri has maybe a dozen (mostly one franchise).

 That's why the liquor stores are fighting so hard, without state protection for their business model - it is hard to sustain. You need to bring something to the table a grocery store does not - selection, knowledge, customer service, price. Something. Or competition (the consumer) will shut you down. No one has explained to me what I consider a true State interest in protecting liquor stores.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on August 30, 2016, 11:21:54 am
I'd say that is the norm in most states that have cut into liquor store monopolies. Tulsa has a dozen in the 8 square miles between Sheridan and Peoria, 11th and 31st. 51st Street has one every intersection between Lewis and Mingo. Ini south Tulsa I'd guess more major intersections have a liquor store than do not have a liquor store. If you're not from here, you notice them everywhere. There 840 liquor stores in Oklahoma are registered. In Iowa there are few liquor stores, in all of Des Moines there are maybe a dozen liquor or "wine and spirit" stores. Springfield Missouri has maybe a dozen (mostly one franchise).

 That's why the liquor stores are fighting so hard, without state protection for their business model - it is hard to sustain. You need to bring something to the table a grocery store does - selection, knowledge, customer service, price. Something. Or competition (the consumer) will shut you down. No one has explained to me what I consider a true State interest in protecting liquor stores.

And here’s why someone like Ranch Acres does not need to worry about competition from Wal-Mart Market around the corner:  Wal-Mart cannot (or will not) afford the shelf space to carry more expensive wines and they will never carry 500 or so different beers or premium spirits.  They want quick turn items not shelf turds that will sit for two or three months.

My experience with grocery store or big box liquor/wine/beer retailers in other states like Texas or Missouri has generally been they might carry up to a $15 bottle of wine and they might carry some of the “craft" beers either owned or distributed by AB InBev or Miller-Coors.  You can find your Bacardi, Jack Daniels, and Smirnoff, but chances are you won’t find premium spirits there.

The system in Missouri works great.  MacAdoodle’s carries many premium items and micro brews the grocers simply cannot or won’t carry and they carry the same lower end or common wine, beer, and spirits and everyone seems to be quite happy with the outcome.  Consumers win in a situation like that.

I can see where some smaller liquor stores with limited selection will end up shutting down, but that is not the market’s fault.  It will be the fault of the store not paying attention to what Reasor’s is carrying and then adapting and adjusting their offerings accordingly. 


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: AquaMan on August 30, 2016, 11:44:38 am
How will they handle late nite and Sunday sales with this expansion? Reasors is open on Sunday and some grocers are 24 hours. If my favorite brands (not exotic by any means- rum with a pirate on the label, wine with hopping kangaroos and Vodka with polish names) are available when I shop groceries it sure seems to me Ranch Acres will be relegated to elite shoppers much like Petty's.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on August 30, 2016, 11:45:14 am
SQ 791 did not make the Nov. 8 ballot, but SQ 792 did:

Interesting note: in New Mexico grocery stores and convenience stores appear to make up the bulk of liquor, wine, and beer retail.  Even in a progressive place like Taos, there are NO liquor stores.  Albertson’s has the best wine, beer, and liquor selection, even high end wines.  If you Google a liquor store in say, Angel Fire, chances are the place is a C-store and gas retailer as well.

There are some mega-retailers like Total Wine in Albuquerque and Rio Rancho, but they don’t seem to be in the smaller towns and cities. 

The other advantages NM, AZ, NV and CA have is there is price competition amongst the retailers. Total Wine and BevMo have the best prices, followed by the grocers then Walgreen's and CVS. C-Stores have the highest prices and smallest selection. Where I lived in Phoenix there was an upscale wine and cigar store, but actual liquor stores are almost unicorn status. I would love OK get into the 21st century in this respect, but I know there are too many ultra conservatives that think children should not see these evil things in the grocery store.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on August 30, 2016, 11:48:59 am
How will they handle late nite and Sunday sales with this expansion? Reasors is open on Sunday and some grocers are 24 hours. If my favorite brands (not exotic by any means- rum with a pirate on the label, wine with hopping kangaroos and Vodka with polish names) are available when I shop groceries it sure seems to me Ranch Acres will be relegated to elite shoppers much like Petty's.

The way AZ, NV, and CA handle it is that they can sell at any time, but there is a mandatory 12:00 AM Sunday morning to 10:00 AM Sunday morning thet can't sell.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: AquaMan on August 30, 2016, 11:51:46 am
One of the liquor store owners here intimated to me that there would be late night and Sunday sales. He may have been in error. It would surprise me knowing the nature of our "blue" laws that the rural communities would allow that. We don't even sell cars on Sunday's.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: joiei on August 30, 2016, 11:54:18 am
If you want to see what a grocery store/big box store wine and beer selection looks like just go check out the selection at Costco. The prices might be cheaper by a dollar here and there. The selection was chosen because that is what moves. And they do not give case discounts. I can find better prices at Deep Discount on 51st.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on August 30, 2016, 12:07:17 pm
If you want to see what a grocery store/big box store wine and beer selection looks like just go check out the selection at Costco. The prices might be cheaper by a dollar here and there. The selection was chosen because that is what moves. And they do not give case discounts. I can find better prices at Deep Discount on 51st.

Check out Total Wine and BevMo.......

http://www.totalwine.com/ (http://www.totalwine.com/)

http://www.bevmo.com/ (http://www.bevmo.com/)



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on August 30, 2016, 02:20:59 pm
One of the liquor store owners here intimated to me that there would be late night and Sunday sales. He may have been in error. It would surprise me knowing the nature of our "blue" laws that the rural communities would allow that. We don't even sell cars on Sunday's.

I’ve been in some places where they either have lockable cases when they are on “off” hours or the liquor and wine department might be in a separate, closed in area area which could be locked off much like the video rental or electronic sections would be when grocery stores still were doing a lot of that business.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on August 30, 2016, 04:40:52 pm
I’ve been in some places where they either have lockable cases when they are on “off” hours or the liquor and wine department might be in a separate, closed in area area which could be locked off much like the video rental or electronic sections would be when grocery stores still were doing a lot of that business.

If I remember correctly,  when I was in Uvalde, TX a few years ago, the H-E-B grocery store person told me I would have to wait until 10:00 (or whatever time it was on Sunday AM) to buy beer.  There wasn't any blockage of access to the aisle.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on August 30, 2016, 04:42:53 pm
If you want to see what a grocery store/big box store wine and beer selection looks like just go check out the selection at Costco. The prices might be cheaper by a dollar here and there. The selection was chosen because that is what moves. And they do not give case discounts. I can find better prices at Deep Discount on 51st.

I stopped in the "Costco" liquor store shortly after they opened. It was disappointing at best.  Dismal beer selection.  They had some wine and spirits but I don't buy much of  them so I didn't spend any real  time looking.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on August 30, 2016, 04:45:26 pm
You need to bring something to the table a grocery store does - selection, knowledge, customer service, price. Something.

I do not anticipate a grocery store bringing much in the way of selection, knowledge or customer service.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: cannon_fodder on August 31, 2016, 07:00:38 am
I do not anticipate a grocery store bringing much in the way of selection, knowledge or customer service.

I meant to say "something a grocery store does NOT..."


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: CharlieSheen on August 31, 2016, 08:24:08 am
I meant to say "something a grocery store does NOT..."

Yeah.. except a lot of the liquor stores are trash. That's why they don't want to compete because they don't think they can.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on August 31, 2016, 09:15:07 am
How will they handle late nite and Sunday sales with this expansion? Reasors is open on Sunday and some grocers are 24 hours. If my favorite brands (not exotic by any means- rum with a pirate on the label, wine with hopping kangaroos and Vodka with polish names) are available when I shop groceries it sure seems to me Ranch Acres will be relegated to elite shoppers much like Petty's.

Liquor is not going to be in grocery stores under the proposed changes.

I skimmed SJR 68 and the bill that will enact the changes and it is unclear to me what the days/hours for beer and wine sales in grocery/convenience stores will be.  Logically, such sales should be treated the same as 3.2 sales are now - pretty much any time.  If so, that will really put liquor stores at a disadvantage.  We could see some of the larger liquor stores with available space create a fixed division of their stores between wine/beer and liquor departments.  Then they can keep the wine/beer store open for longer hours and on Sundays. 


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: AquaMan on August 31, 2016, 10:33:27 am
Liquor is not going to be in grocery stores under the proposed changes.

I skimmed SJR 68 and the bill that will enact the changes and it is unclear to me what the days/hours for beer and wine sales in grocery/convenience stores will be.  Logically, such sales should be treated the same as 3.2 sales are now - pretty much any time.  If so, that will really put liquor stores at a disadvantage.  We could see some of the larger liquor stores with available space create a fixed division of their stores between wine/beer and liquor departments.  Then they can keep the wine/beer store open for longer hours and on Sundays. 

Thank you. That was the concern of the liquor store owner I talked to. That a grocery open 7 days a week, 24 hours a day had a real advantage in sales opportunity. In fact that store is already divided into three areas with two separate openings, so he much figure its going to pass and he's ready. But its unlikely he'll be able to justify being open so many more hours.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on November 30, 2016, 01:13:04 pm
OHP isnt the only DPS entity they could trim to keep their bureaucracy afloat...  A.B.L.E. seems a lot less relevant these days.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/capitol_report/ohp-troopers-given--mile-daily-driving-limit-due-to/article_2244c2ac-5f60-5e6e-be02-aa3b9e9eab03.html


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on December 19, 2016, 07:25:20 pm
Retail Liquor Association of Oklahoma files lawsuit attempting to block SQ 792 stating that it's not constitutional.  Jeez.

http://www.newson6.com/story/34092273/retail-liquor-association-of-oklahoma-files-lawsuit-against-able-commission


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on December 20, 2016, 08:45:08 am
Retail Liquor Association of Oklahoma files lawsuit attempting to block SQ 792 stating that it's not constitutional.  Jeez.

http://www.newson6.com/story/34092273/retail-liquor-association-of-oklahoma-files-lawsuit-against-able-commission


Letters.  Phone calls.  Tell your favorite liquor store what a doushy thing that is to pull.

Perhaps organize a one day rolling boycott of each of the top members just to let them know what a doushy thing it is.  I will be going to the Costco for at least a little while - a very little while - instead of my normal liquor store - and the usual place will hear from me.



  



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: cannon_fodder on December 20, 2016, 08:59:21 am
Retail Liquor Association of Oklahoma files lawsuit attempting to block SQ 792 stating that it's not constitutional.  Jeez.

http://www.newson6.com/story/34092273/retail-liquor-association-of-oklahoma-files-lawsuit-against-able-commission

I was unable to find a copy of the suit, but as I understand it from articles the core legal complaint is that QT and Walmart (and the like) can own as many high-point beer and wine locations as they want, while a resident of Oklahoma can only own 2 liquor stores under the new law.  Also, I think liquor stores are limited in the amount of non-alcohol items they can sell, but I'm not sure Walmart is similarly limited. I believe this is essentially the same challenge they brought before the vote, as described in detail in this July article. (http://newsok.com/article/5510473)  Obviously that failed and the vote went forward, but the judge did indicate that the Court had some "questions" about the constitutionality of new law: http://journalrecord.com/2016/08/01/judge-denies-plea-to-block-alcohol-ballot-measure-law/

So we shall see...


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on December 20, 2016, 09:10:39 am
I want to be able to buy a spray can of wasp and hornet killer at my liquor store.
 
 ;D



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: BKDotCom on December 20, 2016, 10:06:28 am
I want to be able to buy a spray can of wasp and hornet killer at my liquor store.
 
 ;D



Walmart can be your 1-stop shop for booze and ammo (and hornet killer).


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on December 20, 2016, 10:15:30 am
I want to be able to buy a spray can of wasp and hornet killer at my liquor store.
 
 ;D




Good idea!   Sitting on the patio with a glass of wine on a warm-ish spring day seems to draw those little yellow wasp looking things to the 'sweet' aroma!  They are pernicious.



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on December 20, 2016, 10:22:48 am
I was unable to find a copy of the suit, but as I understand it from articles the core legal complaint is that QT and Walmart (and the like) can own as many high-point beer and wine locations as they want, while a resident of Oklahoma can only own 2 liquor stores under the new law.  Also, I think liquor stores are limited in the amount of non-alcohol items they can sell, but I'm not sure Walmart is similarly limited. I believe this is essentially the same challenge they brought before the vote, as described in detail in this July article. (http://newsok.com/article/5510473)  Obviously that failed and the vote went forward, but the judge did indicate that the Court had some "questions" about the constitutionality of new law: http://journalrecord.com/2016/08/01/judge-denies-plea-to-block-alcohol-ballot-measure-law/

So we shall see...


14th Amendment violation is what they were claiming on the news


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Hoss on December 20, 2016, 10:37:26 am
I posted the link to the RLAO and the page with it's 'members in good standing' on my FB page last night.  Evidently they didn't like that (I wasn't the only one that posted it) so all of their pages now go to a 404 not found.  LOL.

That should tell you just about everything you need to know about that outfit.  Ranch Acres is a member.  Collins Midtown is NOT.  B&B is also a member.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on December 20, 2016, 11:26:21 am
Walmart can be your 1-stop shop for booze and ammo (and hornet killer).

The concept reminds me of a store I saw in south Texas.  Big pole sign with LIQUOR and GUNS in large letters at the top.  A little lower were some credit card accepted signs and then a large Marlboro sign. An adjacent portable sign showed the hours, checks cashed, cigars, fax, ammo and gun repair. 


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on December 23, 2016, 10:58:38 am
14th Amendment violation is what they were claiming on the news

Liquor stores have an unfair advantage, they can sell spirits.  I believe "strong" beer in grocery (etc) stores is limited to 8.5%.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: RecycleMichael on December 23, 2016, 02:59:32 pm
http://www.tommygunsvodka.com/products_old.php



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: patric on January 06, 2017, 12:09:10 pm
Arkansas created its own new corruption commission to regulate medical marijuana growers, demanding $100,000 a year to fund the commission.

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/southcentral/2017/01/06/437446.htm


Sort of how we cleaned up liquor laws only to have ABLE make it dirty again.



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: cannon_fodder on January 06, 2017, 01:57:44 pm
Discussion on Arkansas Marijuana laws added to this ongoing thread:
http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=18031.705


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on March 23, 2017, 02:06:58 pm
Oklahoma inches closer to Sunday liquor sales

http://ktul.com/news/local/oklahoma-inches-closer-to-sunday-liquor-sales (http://ktul.com/news/local/oklahoma-inches-closer-to-sunday-liquor-sales)



Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on March 23, 2017, 10:39:47 pm
Oklahoma inches closer to Sunday liquor sales

http://ktul.com/news/local/oklahoma-inches-closer-to-sunday-liquor-sales (http://ktul.com/news/local/oklahoma-inches-closer-to-sunday-liquor-sales)



Ralph Shortey will become governor before we will have liquor sales on Sunday. 

This is Oklahoma, does anyone really doubt me?


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: rebound on March 24, 2017, 11:31:32 am
Ralph Shortey will become governor before we will have liquor sales on Sunday. 
This is Oklahoma, does anyone really doubt me?

Yeah, but gotta keep chipping away.  The walls will fall sooner or later. 

I do think though, that the tides are turning on all of this.  Maybe not this time, but it will happen.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Red Arrow on March 24, 2017, 05:52:17 pm
This is Oklahoma, does anyone really doubt me?

Whata mean "this"?  You're in New Mexico.   ;D

I'd like to doubt you but I find it difficult.  But, if you had told me just a few years ago that brewers would be able to sell their beer at the brewery,  I would have just laughed.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Townsend on May 17, 2017, 11:19:33 am
Hard Liquor On Sunday Clears State Senate

http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/hard-liquor-sunday-clears-state-senate (http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/hard-liquor-sunday-clears-state-senate)

Quote
The Oklahoma Senate has approved legislation allowing retail package liquor stores to sell alcohol on Sunday on a county-option basis.

The Senate voted 26-14 for the bill on Wednesday and sent it to the House.

Oklahoma currently prohibits retail package liquor stores from selling alcohol on Sunday.

The measure by Republican Sen. Stephanie Bice of Oklahoma City would allow voters to decide on a county-by-county basis whether licensed liquor stores can sell alcohol on Sundays. If approved, package liquor stores could sell alcohol between noon and midnight on Sunday, beginning in 2018.

Retail package liquor stores had hoped Sunday sales would be part of an overhaul of Oklahoma's alcohol laws approved by voters last year, but the language didn't make it into that proposal.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on May 17, 2017, 11:33:14 am
Hard Liquor On Sunday Clears State Senate

http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/hard-liquor-sunday-clears-state-senate (http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/hard-liquor-sunday-clears-state-senate)


Step in the right direction. That was the way that liquor by the drink came to be.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on May 31, 2017, 12:26:08 pm
Ralph Shortey will become governor before we will have liquor sales on Sunday. 

This is Oklahoma, does anyone really doubt me?

Several significant liquor reform laws were enacted this legislative session.  Sunday liquor store sales are now a county option (can go into effect October 2018 with other reforms).  Liquor stores can open at 8 am instead of 10.  And brewery tap rooms can operate the same hours as bars.  Good progress and Ralph Shortey is still not Governor.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: Conan71 on May 31, 2017, 12:37:27 pm
Several significant liquor reform laws were enacted this legislative session.  Sunday liquor store sales are now a county option (can go into effect October 2018 with other reforms).  Liquor stores can open at 8 am instead of 10.  And brewery tap rooms can operate the same hours as bars.  Good progress and Ralph Shortey is still not Governor.

These are a few items I’m glad to be proven wrong on.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on May 31, 2017, 01:49:39 pm
These are a few items I’m glad to be proven wrong on.

You could just say it was reverse psychology.


Title: Re: Another stab at liquor law reform
Post by: DTowner on June 07, 2017, 12:56:38 pm
More reform.  Governor Fallen signed bill that allows alcohol sales in movie theaters.