Massachusetts lawmakers recently approved five new liquor licenses for the town of Milton as part of a broader $325 million economic development bill, renewing debate over the state’s control of liquor licensing. Under current practice, the state legislature retains authority over the issuance of most liquor licenses, a system that has roots dating back to the period just after Prohibition.
The Senate's economic development legislation includes a provision that would shift control of bar and restaurant liquor licenses from the state to individual cities and towns. This proposal seeks to eliminate existing state quotas, which are generally population-based, and allow municipalities to set local limits following public hearings. However, the bill does not alter state-imposed caps on package store licenses, avoiding confrontation with powerful stakeholders in that industry.
The Massachusetts Municipal Association (MMA) has supported the reform efforts, arguing that local governments are better positioned to assess their own needs. The MMA highlighted that several home rule petitions for additional liquor licenses, including six approved this year, illustrate the difficulties municipalities face in navigating state approval processes. Over the past five years, approximately 80 such petitions have resulted in more than 265 new licenses statewide, not including the 225 licenses authorized for Boston in 2024 alone.
Milton’s recent license approval reflects a model initially developed for Boston, designating licenses for specific economic development zones and stipulating that these licenses must revert to town authorities if the associated establishment closes. Traditional licenses, which can be bought and sold on the open market, often carry high value—sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars—presenting a key source of opposition.
The Massachusetts Restaurant Association (MRA) has voiced resistance to changes that could increase the number of licenses available. MRA President and CEO Stephen Clark expressed concerns about the potential devaluation of existing licenses, which serve as significant financial assets for restaurant owners. Clark emphasized the need for discussions on how such changes might affect the value of pledged licenses tied to loans. The association also disputes the necessity of reform, noting that localities already have some flexibility to upgrade beer and wine licenses to full liquor.
The debate extends beyond licensing, touching on historically contentious issues such as the state’s ban on happy hour drink discounts. Senate lawmakers, including Senator Julian Cyr, successfully included an amendment legalizing happy hours in the recent bill. Massachusetts is one of only seven states that continue to prohibit such promotions, a ban originally enacted in 1984. Supporters of the ban point to low drunk-driving fatality rates in Massachusetts, though the correlation remains disputed.
Despite the Senate’s advances, the House leadership remains closely aligned with the restaurant lobby. House Ways and Means Chairman Aaron Michlewitz cited feedback from local restaurants expressing concern that happy hour discounts could lead to a “race to the bottom” in pricing. MRA leadership echoed these reservations in public statements, indicating the industry’s cautious stance toward changes that might undercut profitability.
As these competing interests continue to grapple over liquor license reform and alcohol regulations, the debate in Massachusetts appears poised to persist into the coming months.