A Big Why? Local Liquor Store Questions Proposed License Transfer

Wednesday’s Town Council meeting is expected to include a David and Goliath contest between a business unit of Big Y stores that sells alcohol, and wants to expand its offerings, and at least one of the town’s local liquor stores that would rather they not.

Massachusetts has many peculiarities, one is the regional euphemism: ‘package store.’

That’s a throwback to the post-Prohibition era when consumption of alcohol still retained a stigma. “Package” referred to the fact that sealed containers were sold for consumption elsewhere and the fact that the were required to be bagged or wrapped before leaving the store.

With laxity the order of the day in 2022, things have certainly changed. But licenses to sell liquor or beer and wine for consumption elsewhere, the focus of the package store industry, have remained limited in number and exist under other strict rules, such as the number of licenses an individual or company can hold across the whole state.

These regulations, gradually relaxed by degrees over the years, have kept the sale of higher proof liquor and even wine and beer in the Bay State, mostly as a kind of cottage industry.

But the rest of the US has mostly moved on. Outside companies want in, and larger retail establishments already operating in Massachusetts have wanted a bigger slice of the action, while the more conservative elements of society, worried about too much retailing of intoxicants and the region’s existing package stores have lobbied hard for the status quo.

Here in Franklin, a fight is in progress. On the one hand, Village Mall Liquors, which has operated for many years adjacent to Stop & Shop, wants to transfer their license to Table & Vine (a Big Y business collocated within their grocery stores). This would move control from an alcohol-only store to a supermarket. On the other hand, Franklin Liquors, located at 333 East Central St., nearly across the street from Big Y, sees the transfer as detrimental to them as well as the town.

Family owned since 1978. Mark and Mike Lenzi are the owners, full time employees, and lifelong Franklin residents.

In the past, they note, they have fought and lost in an effort to keep Big Y from getting a beer and wine license. “At that time, we were told a business can’t use competition, distance, or public need for a town to deny a license,” they wrote, in a letter to the town administration shared with Observer.

The Lenzi’s state, “Table & Vine (Big Y) will tell you they want an upgrade to a full liquor license, as their customers are asking for it. In our opinion, this request is because they can’t compete without it. You may recall, recently the council received a request from Dacey’s Market to also upgrade to a full liquor license. The market is changing; if Franklin Liquors cannot object to a license on grounds of competition, how can Table & Vine (Big Y) be approved for saying they can’t compete without it?

“You may ask, why does this matter? For that you must think of the safety of the community. People that don’t drink, those affected by alcoholism, and those who don’t want to expose their children to alcohol don’t need to, and won’t go into a liquor store such as Franklin Liquors. Those same people must go into a supermarket to purchase essential daily supplies. This will increase exposure. Please also think about workers in these stores- many underage employees will now be exposed significantly more. “

In addition to the local issues, the Lenzis said they are also watching the fate of Ballot Question 3. Mark Lenzi explained that the question was designed as a compromise by the state’s package store industry, with their big company rivals. While it includes many technical details, its fundamental feature is a significant increase in the maximum number of licenses that may be held by a single entity. But there are still limits. This compromise, he believes, is fair because it is gradual and allows a further increase in competition without entirely pulling the rug out from under the small businesses of the state.

The “compromise” seemed to please most businesses in the state, large or small. But then giant, Maryland-based Total Wine, with 243 superstores in 27 states, came in, guns blazing, with a commitment to defeat Question 3 with $2 million in advertising. And that advertising, upsetting to the Lenzis, tries to portray a “No” vote as a vote for small, family businesses rather than a vast empire of stores....However, Total Wine, which remains family owned, insists it is true, or at least not untrue.

For the resolution of that question, we must all await the voters’ pleasure on November 8. But in the meantime, the Council meeting on Wednesday, Nov. 2 should produce plenty of sparks.