Hey, there! Log in / Register

Boston gets 225 new alcohol licenses; now city officials have to figure out how to dole them out

Gov. Healey last week signed a bill giving Boston 225 new liquor licenses, most to be doled out to restaurants in 13 specific Zip codes - and at prices nowhere near the $600,000 or more that most current licenses go for on the open market.

Now city officials have to come up with a plan on how to alert potential license holders and to decide who gets the new Zip-code-restricted licenses, which will be given out in groups of five every year for three years in each of 13 Zip codes: 02118, 02119, 02121, 02122, 02124, 02125, 02126, 02128, 02129, 02130, 02131, 02132 and 02136. The groups of five will be split between three licenses to serve all types of alcohol and two limited to beer and wine.

Unlike most of the city's current 1,400 alcohol licenses, which can be resold and even used as collateral for loans, the new licenses can't be sold; if a restaurant with one of the new licenses goes out of business or moves, it will have to return its license to the licensing board - which can then only award it to another applicant from the same Zip code.

The City Council today approved a request by Councilor Brian Worrell (Dorchester) for a hearing at which councilors, the Boston Licensing Board and other city officials can discuss the way the new licenses are awarded. Worrell called for an aggressive education campaign that would include fliers and tutorials in several languages and even door-to-door canvassing in city business districts with few if any liquor-serving restaurants to ensure potential applicants learn about the new opportunity.

The licensing board does not sell liquor licenses - and so has nothing to do with the price of licenses on the open market - but it does charge an annual fee to license holders, currently starting at $1,800 for a beer-and-wine license and $2,800 for an all-alcohol license - on top of fees based in part on the size of the restaurant.

The last time the state Legislature deigned to give Boston a large new supply of licenses, in 2014, the licensing board simply threw open the application process, met with applicants and then selected winners. But while those licenses were also limited to certain neighborhoods away from downtown, the North End and the Waterfront, in the end, some areas, most notably Mattapan and much of Blue Hill Avenue, got no new licenses. This year's legislation aims to solve that by reserving 15 licenses for each of the 13 Zip codes - those 15 licenses can only be used in the Zip codes for which they were designated.

Worrell, who spearheaded the successful effort to get Boston its first major infusion of liquor licenses in ten years, called the measure "a truly transformative economic opportunity" for current restaurant owners in the city's outer neighborhoods - and for operators of take-out places that might now have a reason to invest in adding seats - who couldn't compete with well heeled national chains to buy one of the old-style licenses.

By encouraging the growth of restaurants, the measure will also help grow the city's "Main Streets and economic corridors" outside of Boston Proper and the Seaport, he said.

In addition to the Zip-cde licenses, some of the new licenses will be reserved for non-profit groups and 12 will be traditional licenses that can be used as loan collateral and resold. In a nod to state Rep. and House Majority Leader Michael Moran, who had blocked previous efforts to get Boston more licenses, three new restricted licenses are specifically set aside for Brighton's Oak Square neighborhood.

Neighborhoods: 


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

I hope Oak Square is buried in an avalanche of noisy roadhouses.

up
16

Just curious, is The Last Drop a busy place? I don't recall ever going in, I'm just familiar from riding past on the 57 bus a lot. I'm fortunate that I live a short walk from Buff's Pub, which is constantly busy. I'll be interested to see if more good neighborhood spots like Buff's are created from the new licenses.

up
16

Now Magoo wishes that Boston would get 254 and one half licenses requiring people to make silly faces at each other while walking down certain streets. Magoo would call these Silly Streets. Magoo.

up
49

Nobody likes you and your bit. You remind me of Jar Jar Binks i.e., an annoying waste that should have been spaced during the Qui Gon and Co.’s descent to Tatooine. Go away. Anti-Magoo.

up
32

I don't really get including 02118 since much of the South End is very pricey real estate -- if you can afford to operate a restaurant there, you can afford a liquor license. 02125 licenses are more likely to be used at South Bay than in Uphams Corner. An 02128 license can be used at the airport.

But the state is never going to remove the restriction on the number of licenses in Boston because there's too much capital -- close to a billion dollars -- which would be wiped out if the cap went away entirely.

up
31

To maintain a broken system. Anywhere should be able to serve unless they are found to be a problem.

Taxi medallion prices crashing thanks to ridesharing was a universal good to society and the liquor cartel is no different.

Throw it all out and stop the political corruption entirely.

up
54

There are too many people who would scream about their investment in a license being wiped out, and the vested interests would trot out a few token people of color as the potential victims even though most licenses are held by the wealthy and/or large multinational corporations.

The only reason why rideshares took hold was because they moved quickly enough to stay ahead of potential changes to the laws regarding livery operators. By the time the taxi cartel would have been able to move things through the legislature, the rideshare operators were very popular with the public. And it didn't help that the taxi operators generally enjoyed poor public opinion due to a long history of shady business practices.

up
28

1400 liquor licenses in the city.

Realistically held by maybe 650 people.

650 people out of 650,000= .1%

.1% of people = "too many people" ?

up
22

Not everyone operating in the South End is obscenely wealthy.

If someone is able to afford a space in the south end the extra $600,000 might break their back more than if they opened in Grove Hall. It’s such a ridiculous system. That’s a to. If extra money I’m not sure people could afford even if they eek into a spot in the South End.

There are 15 licenses man…I doubt all 15 go to the airport or South Bay. Even if they go to South Bay, that’s not a bad thing! But I’m sure 1 will make its way to Uphams and if that happens that’s HUGE improvement!

Youre also just flat out ignoring how transformative this is for the entire southern 3rd of the city which currently has like 7 restaurants total.

up
17

South Bay is not the neighborhood it once was. That "neighborhood" began to be created in 1845 and by 1870 it was being abandoned.
https://mellonurbanism.harvard.edu/south-bay#:~:text=The%20development%2...'s%20South,towards%20learning%20from%20projects%20past.

South Bay Center now known as South Bay is a commercial development but I guess you could say it began to be a 'neighborhood' where people live again in 2015 which was completed in 2019.
https://www.bostonplans.org/projects/development-projects/south-bay-mixe...

So if the people who live there now want more bars more power to them but they'll be sharing with the people in Uphams Corner.

up
11

That's nice. Everyone from the Governor down can pat themselves on the back and call this a win without actually solving the problem.

If the government really wants to help Main Street restaurants, I think we all know the answer.

And risking sounding like a broken record... Get rid of the artificial scarcity and license cap entirely. Scarcity that directly dictates the sale price.

The fact that licenses are reserved to certain neighborhoods in exchange for votes is proof that the whole enterprise stinks and is not above the board.

Now, they get to pick and choose who get these licenses in what I am sure will be an unchallenged and uncontested process.

up
52

Only limitation should only be zoning and community consent. Places like Tokyo and Barcelona are cooler and safer because there are a lot of bars generating foot traffic at night. Supposedly Tokyo has the most bars per capita of any city in the world. There are multi-story buildings in Tokyo with bars on every floor. Many are very small.

But the reservation to "certain neighborhoods" is a remedy for a decades-long constrained market process in which licenses of neighborhood bars and restaurants in the listed zip codes were bought and transferred to the synthetic Seaport and the Back Bay. Older folks remember the scores of bars like Aga's Highland Tap and Upstairs, Downstairs which closed.

up
26

What a gift. Will mom and pop proprietors who took on that massive burden prior to the influx get a refund?

up
20

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred.

up
36

Why should they? Every investment carries risk; otherwise, there wouldn’t be a return.

up
19

The licensing stuff is public record, go ahead and find them.

Go ahead, right now. Find me a true "mom and pop" restaurant that has bought a full liquor license in a private sale in the city of Boston within the last decade. It doesn't happen and it pretty much can't happen. That's a big part of the reason that the restaurant scene in Boston sucks compared to others.

Those full private sale licenses have all been sold to either corporate restaurants or venture capital backed restaurant groups.

Your crocodile tears are for the pockets behind those places, not your imaginary "mom and pop" restaurant owners.

up
50

I've seen what has happened in South Boston, Dorchester and Charlestown. Take a look at the Seaport. The liquor licenses came from 'mom & pop' local bars. It's nothing for a multinational corporation or some venture capital outfit to layout $500-$600K for a license.
The old neighborhood places in the above neighborhoods are, for the most part, gone. In their place are restaurant groups operating bars that offer food.
In my younger days, there were more bars in the neighborhood then there are now. The (fewer) places are much larger and cater to a younger, more affluent crowd. Time brings changes. With change we see neighborhoods lose their character. It's not always a positive thing.
Pleasant dreams, one and all.

up
26

Add HP to the list. Cappies, the Cottage, HP Pub (aka Flanigans) , Mac n Marion’s ( aka Spike’s), Billy Jacks, all gone (Damata’s was a long time ago). All we got now is the Cavan and Master McGrath. You really lose a lot when these community gathering spots disappear.

up
27

College bars are going as well, it seems, T's Pub, Mary Ann's, Punter's Pub, etc. Allston has lost TITS and the White Horse. I wonder if BU, NU and Wellesley students still rely on the MIT fraternity scene.

up
21

Don’t care

up
14

but I'll say it again: among the many good reasons to support this initiative, the best is that costly liquor licenses are a huge hurdle to would-be chef/owners trying to start their first places of their own. Having to swallow $400-$600K before you even start is a tough nut; most investors won't offer a penny unless you get a full license.

The result of that is that many innovative young chefs have fled Boston for entrepreneur-friendlier suburbs. The resulting void in Boston has been filled with dull national chain outlets with deep pockets and concepts driven by MBAs, not chefs. The Seaport is a prime example, but even the South End has seen a lot of once-thriving spots sit empty or be converted to non-restaurant uses.

I'm relieved we've finally made some progress on this. Here's hoping they don't eff up the implementation!

up
34