Monday, the Minnesota House passed a bill that would end the ban on Sunday liquor sales. The bill allows for limited hours of off-sale liquor sales between 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. and prohibits liquor deliveries on Sunday. It was passed with a bipartisan vote with 85 ayes and 45 nays;a distinct turnaround in support compared with a vote of 70-56 opposing the repeal of the ban just last year. Rep. Rick Hansen from South St. Paul, stated that he has always voted against Sunday off-sale liquor sales but feels this year was different not just because of the overwhelming change in sentiment seen over the years, but because work is now underway to dedicate revenue from the sale of alcohol to treatment programs. He and Representative Loon were able to discuss the importance of treatment programs during the debate and committed to working together on a companion bill, HF 1091, to dedicate additional tax revenue from Sunday off-sale alcohol sales to these important treatment programs.
The discussion in the Senate is scheduled for Wednesday, but there is no word on when to expect a vote. Estimates of between 10 and 15 million dollars in potential taxes would be collected to benefit programs ranging from alcohol treatment to education and community support. The Minnesota Licensed Beverage Association released statements that this move would unduly affect small establishments who would be pressured to open on Sundays to stay in competition with larger stores. With border towns telling of strong Sunday sales in Wisconsin, South and North Dakota and Iowa, Minnesotans have voiced their wish to buy their beer and spirits in their home state.Craft brewers and local independent distilleries are also hoping that more than a dozen bills aimed at loosening the age old restrictions on when and where spirits and beer can be sold are in line to be debated as well. Those could affect tap rooms, the size of bottles that can be sold and other criteria that allow full access to distributing their product for residents and tourists alike. At least one House member voiced his concern that other, more critical decisions are being delayed in this debate, citing the ineffectiveness of last year’s session to implement a bonding bill.
