BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    






                                                       Bill No:  AB  
          813
          
                 SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
                       Senator Roderick D. Wright, Chair
                           2009-2010 Regular Session
                                 Staff Analysis

          AB 813  Author:  John Perez
          As Amended:  September 2, 2009
          Hearing Date:  September 8, 2009
          Consultant:  Art Terzakis

                                     SUBJECT  

                   Alcoholic Beverages: tied-house exception

                                   DESCRIPTION
           
          AB 813 is an  urgency measure  that creates a new tied-house  
          exception in the Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) Act  
          authorizing the owner of a venue (Club Nokia) in Los  
          Angeles to accept payment for advertising from an alcoholic  
          beverage supplier. Specifically, this measure:
                                         
           1.  Authorizes a beer manufacturer, holder of a  
            winegrower's license, a California winegrower's agent, a  
            holder of a distilled spirits rectifiers general license,  
            distilled spirits manufacturer, or a distilled spirits  
            manufacturer's agent (these entities will hereafter be  
            referred to as "alcoholic beverage suppliers") to  
            purchase indoor advertising, at Club Nokia in Los  
            Angeles, subject to the following conditions: 

              a. The indoor advertising is purchased exclusively at  
              the Club Nokia venue.

              b. The purchase of indoor advertising is conducted  
              pursuant to a written agreement entered into by the  
              alcoholic beverage supplier and the owner of the Club  
              Nokia venue.

              c. The agreement shall not be conditioned directly or  
              indirectly, in any way, on the purchase, sale, or  
              distribution of any alcoholic beverage manufactured or  
              distributed by the advertising alcoholic beverage  




          AB 813 (John Perez) continued                            
          Page 2
          


              supplier by any on-sale retail licensee. 

             d. The on-sale retail licensee operating at Club Nokia  
              must serve other brands of beer, wine, or distilled  
              spirits distributed by competing beer, wine or  
              distilled spirits suppliers in addition to the brand  
              manufactured or marketed by the advertising beer, wine  
              or distilled spirits supplier.

              e. The total gross sales by the on-sale licensee of  
              wine and distilled spirits brands owned or distributed  
              by the alcoholic beverage supplier that has purchased  
              indoor advertising  shall not exceed 15% of the on-sale  
              licensee's gross sales of all alcoholic beverages  
              during the period within which the licensee has  
              purchased indoor advertising.  

              f. The on-sale licensee must maintain records which  
              reflect separately the gross sales of brands owned or  
              distributed by the alcoholic beverage supplier that has  
              purchased indoor advertising  and  the on-sale licensee's  
              gross sales of all alcoholic beverages during the  
              period within which the on-sale licensee has purchased  
              indoor advertising.  Such records must be maintained on  
              a quarterly basis and made available to the department  
              of ABC on demand. 

          2.  Requires the venue owner to obtain an annual  
            certificate from the department of ABC and pay an initial  
            certification fee of $750 and thereafter pay an annual  
            certification renewal fee of $750 for the privilege of  
            holding this tied-house exception.  

          3.  Also, requires the department of ABC to prepare, as  
            part of its annual legislative report, a listing of the  
            number of certifications and payments made pursuant to  
            these provisions or the absence of any certifications and  
            payments.  In addition, would require the department to  
            recommend repeal of this specific tied-house exception to  
            the Legislature if no certifications and payments have  
            been made for two consecutive years. 

          4.  Makes it a misdemeanor for an alcoholic beverage  
            supplier to coerce or induce, directly or indirectly, a  
            licensed wholesaler to fulfill the contractual  
            obligations entered into pursuant to the above  




          AB 813 (John Perez) continued                            
          Page 3
          


            provisions.  The alcoholic beverage supplier (licensee)  
            would also be subject to license revocation.

          5.  Makes it a misdemeanor for the on-sale retail licensee  
            to solicit or coerce, directly or indirectly, an  
            alcoholic beverage supplier to purchase indoor  
            advertising. The on-sale licensee would also be subject  
            to license revocation.

          6.  Contains language (legislative findings and  
            declarations) relative to the necessity of requiring a  
            separation between manufacturing interests, wholesale  
            interests and retail interests.
                                         
                                  EXISTING LAW

           Existing law establishes the Department of Alcoholic  
          Beverage Control (ABC) and grants it exclusive authority to  
          administer the provisions of the ABC Act in accordance with  
          laws enacted by the Legislature.  

          Existing law, known as the "tied-house" law, separates the  
          alcoholic beverage industry into three component parts, or  
          tiers, of manufacturer (including breweries, wineries and  
          distilleries), wholesaler, and retailer (both on-sale and  
          off-sale).  

          Tied house refers to a practice in this country prior to  
          Prohibition and still occurring in England today where a  
          bar or public house, from whence comes the "house" of tied  
          house, is tied to the products of a particular  
          manufacturer, either because the manufacturer owns the  
          house, or the house is contractually obligated to carry  
          only a particular manufacturer's products.   
          The original policy rationale for this body of law was to:  
          (a) promote the state's interest in an orderly market; (b)  
          prohibit the vertical integration and dominance by a single  
          producer in the marketplace; (c) prohibit commercial  
          bribery and protect the public from predatory marketing  
          practices; and, (d) discourage and/or prevent the  
          intemperate use of alcoholic beverages.  Generally, other  
          than exceptions granted by the Legislature, the holder of  
          one type of license is not permitted to do business as  
          another type of licensee within the "three-tier" system.  

          Existing "tied-house" law prohibits paid advertising by  




          AB 813 (John Perez) continued                            
          Page 4
          


          winegrowers, beer manufacturers and distilled spirits  
          producers in cases where a retail licensee also owns a  
          sports or entertainment venue. Over the years numerous  
          exceptions to this prohibition have been added to the ABC  
          Act encompassing various venues throughout the state (e.g.,  
          ARCO Arena in Sacramento, Raley Field in West Sacramento,  
          Grizzly Stadium in downtown Fresno, California Speedway in  
          Fontana, Indian Wells Tennis Club in Indian Wells, Kern  
          County Arena in Bakersfield, Visalia Oaks Stadium in  
          Visalia, Arrowhead Pond Arena in Anaheim, Oakland Coliseum  
          in Oakland, the National Orange Show event center in San  
          Bernardino, Disneyland in Orange County, Universal City  
          Walk in Hollywood, the Home Depot Center in Carson, the  
          Nokia Theater in Los Angeles, HP Pavilion in the City of  
          San Jose, and others).  

          The ABC Act [Business and Professions Code Section  
          25503(h)] prohibits an alcoholic beverage supplier from  
          paying money, or giving or furnishing anything of value,  
          for the privilege of placing or painting a sign or  
          advertisement, or window display, on or in premises selling  
          alcoholic beverages at retail.  

          The department of ABC has determined that this prohibition  
          applies both directly and indirectly.  Therefore, any  
          alcoholic beverage supplier who pays a fee, or provides any  
          other thing of value, to a multi-media company for the  
          privilege of having its brand advertising placed on or in  
          retail-licensed premises is in violation of the ABC Act.   
          While retailers often receive payments and/or things of  
          value through third-party advertising schemes, the  
          statutory language does not require monetary payments or  
          things of value to be given or furnished to retailers for a  
          violation of this specific provision to occur.

          Existing law (Business and Professions Code Section 23055)  
          requires the director of ABC to prepare and submit to the  
          Legislature, on or before March 1 of each year, an annual  
          report containing the following information on the  
          department's activities for the previous year: (a) the  
          amount of funds allocated and spent for licensing,  
          enforcement and administration; (b) the number of licenses  
          issued, renewed, denied, suspended, and revoked; (c) the  
          average time for processing license applications; (d) the  
          number and type of enforcement activities conducted; (e)  
          the number, type, and amount of penalties, fines, and other  




          AB 813 (John Perez) continued                            
          Page 5
          


          disciplinary actions; and, (f) recommendations for  
          legislation to improve the ability of the department to  
          expeditiously and effectively administer the ABC Act. 
                                         
                                   BACKGROUND
           
          As noted above, the ABC Act prohibits an alcoholic beverage  
          supplier, or any officer, director or agent of an alcoholic  
          beverage supplier, from giving any money or other thing of  
          value, directly or indirectly, to any on-sale retail  
          licensee.  Historically, this prohibition has not applied  
          where the owner of a venue is not the alcoholic beverage  
          licensee.

          The position of the Department of ABC on this issue has  
          recently changed as a result of Business and Professions  
          Code Section 25503(h) and a holding in  Schieffelin &  
          Somerset.   The ABC's position is that an alcoholic beverage  
          supplier cannot pay anyone, even an unrelated third party,  
          for the privilege of placing an advertisement in on-sale  
          retail premises, even if that payment does not amount to a  
          payment or thing of value paid to or received by the  
          alcoholic beverage licensee.

          According to the author's office, the position of the  
          department of ABC has prohibited AEG from engaging in a  
          sponsorship agreement with Club Nokia at LA Live in Los  
          Angeles.  

          AEG, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Anschutz Company,  
          controls a collection of companies worldwide, including  
          sports franchises and facilities such as the Staples Center  
          in Los Angeles and the Home Depot Center in Carson,  
          California. Club Nokia is a fully enclosed venue, which  
          accommodates over 2,000 guests with box office sales and  
          attendance by the public on a ticketed basis.  Club Nokia  
          is located in Los Angeles County within the area subject to  
          the Los Angeles Sports and Entertainment District Specific  
          Plan adopted by the City of Los Angeles pursuant to an  
          ordinance approved on September 6, 2001.

          AEG and its subsidiaries constructed Club Nokia and are  
          responsible for the booking and presentation of events at  
          the venue.  AEG has contracted out the food and beverage  
          operation to Wolfgang Puck who is the alcoholic beverage  
          licensee at the venue (Club Nokia).




          AB 813 (John Perez) continued                            
          Page 6
          



          AB 813 would create a new tied-house exception in the ABC  
          Act applicable to AEG, the venue owner, and not the on-sale  
          retail licensee (Wolfgang Puck), thus enabling AEG to enter  
          into a contractual agreement with an alcoholic beverage  
          supplier interested in purchasing indoor advertising space  
          at Club Nokia.  This measure would, however, require the  
          on-sale licensee to serve other brands of beer, wine, and  
          distilled spirits distributed by a competing beer, wine or  
          distilled spirits manufacturer in addition to the brand  
          manufactured or marketed by the advertising beer, wine or  
          distilled spirits manufacturer.
           
          Also, this measure would require that total gross sales by  
          the on-sale licensee of  wine and distilled spirits brands   
          owned or distributed by the alcoholic beverage supplier  
          that has purchased indoor advertising must not exceed  15%  
          of the on-sale licensee's gross sales of all alcoholic  
          beverages during the period within which the licensee has  
          purchased indoor advertising.   Quarterly record-keeping  
          requirements would also be imposed upon the on-sale retail  
          licensee for purposes of complying with these provisions.

          Additionally, this measure would create an annual  
          certification process whereby the venue owner must pay an  
          initial certification fee of $750 to the ABC and thereafter  
          an annual fee of $750 for the privilege of holding this  
          tied-house exception.  Furthermore, the department of ABC  
          would be required to include in its annual report to the  
          Legislature a listing of the number of certifications and  
          payments made pursuant to this new body of law or the  
          absence of any certifications and payments.  If no  
          certifications and payments have been made for two  
          consecutive years, ABC must include a recommendation of  
          repeal of this particular tied-house exception in its  
          annual report to the Legislature.  

          The purpose of this "use it or lose it" tied-house  
          exception provision is to create a mechanism to keep track  
          of whether this particular exception is in fact being  
          utilized.  Certain alcoholic beverage industry  
          representatives contend that the ABC Act contains numerous  
          tied-house exceptions that are obsolete or unused.  These  
          industry representatives envision this "use or lose"  
          language will become a "template" to be included in all  
          newly created tied-house exceptions.  According to the  




          AB 813 (John Perez) continued                            
          Page 7
          


          sponsor of this measure (AEG), the certification of  
          compliance provision ("use it or lose it" language)  
          reflects a consensus which has been reached by the sponsor  
          and certain alcoholic beverage industry representatives.  

           Arguments in Opposition:   Family Winemakers of California  
          (FWC) has expressed opposition to this measure based on:  
          (1) the inclusion of a 15% limitation on beverage sales  
          tied to gross sales; (2) the exclusion of beer from any  
          limitation; (3) the imposition of a fee for the exception;  
          (4) the inclusion of a repealer provision; and, (5) the  
          inclusion of tied-house separation language.

          FWC points out that tied-house advertising exceptions often  
          contain limiting provisions, which is understandable since  
          these exceptions attempt to balance the competitive forces  
          in the marketplace.  FWC argues that the 15% limitation  
          based on gross sales during the period of the advertising  
          partnership between a supplier and AEG goes well beyond the  
          traditional requirement to offer competing brands of beer,  
          wine or spirits.  FWC believes that such a numeric  
          limitation could prevent suppliers and the on-sale licensee  
          from offering certain promotions.  FWC states that  
          "excluding beer from the 15% limitation puts other beverage  
          types at a distinct disadvantage and creates an  
          inappropriate precedent." 

          FWC also points out that none of the existing tied-house  
          exceptions in the ABC Act require a fee.  FWC believes that  
          the implementation of a new fee, as proposed by AB 813,  
          would set a negative precedent which could adversely affect  
          all existing and future exceptions. Since the ABC Act only  
          allows a licensee to do what is articulated in statute, a  
          tied house exception fee could be considered a pay to play  
          approach. 

          Additionally, FWC notes that current tied-house advertising  
          exceptions contain no repealer provisions and argues that  
          such language contained in AB 813 is another bad precedent  
          that will require the ABC to "waste limited resources on  
          minor matters."  Furthermore, FWC emphasizes that  
          tied-house separation language (which exists to remind  
          everyone that there are legislatively mandated tiers within  
          the alcohol industry as an aftermath of the repeal of  
          prohibition) "should be limited to statutes that deal with  
          cross-ownership exceptions, not simple advertising  




          AB 813 (John Perez) continued                            
          Page 8
          


          exceptions." 

           SUPPORT:   AEG (sponsor)
           
          OPPOSE:   Family Winemakers of California
           
          FISCAL COMMITTEE:   Senate Appropriations Committee