Bill to Curb Cities’ Liquor Controls Gains

Legislation curbing the power of local governments to ban the simultaneous sale of gasoline and alcoholic beverages at gas stations won its first legislative test Tuesday in a key Assembly committee.

Billed as a compromise by its supporters, the measure would prohibit cities and counties from enacting blanket bans that forbid the sale of both alcohol and gasoline. The bill would wipe off the books at least 30 local bans enacted by cities since Aug. 1, 1985, including six in Orange County--Costa Mesa, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, Laguna Beach, Los Alamitos and San Juan Capistrano.

Ordinances in Fountain Valley, Newport Beach, Orange and Seal Beach would stand, because they were passed before Aug. 1, 1985.

At the same time, the legislation would allow all local governments to retain their power under zoning laws to restrict such simultaneous sales on a case-by-case basis.

The bill, which has the backing of the politically powerful gas station and convenience store industries, was approved by the Assembly Governmental Organization Committee by a vote of 11 to 1.

Together, gas station and convenience store businesses contributed more than $700,000 to legislators’ election campaigns during the 1985-86 session.

In recent weeks, the bill has also gained the formal endorsement of the California League of Cities, whose lobbyists helped draft the measure, and from officials in the cities of Gardena, Mill Valley and Vallejo, who have used their zoning power to regulate the sale of alcoholic beverages and gasoline. They say the bill would shield their cities from legal challenges from the industry by spelling out the permit process in the law.

“The bill is a compromise measure . . . “ said Assemblyman Gary Condit (D-Ceres), who is the author of the measure and the chairman of the committee. “(It) doesn’t take away or jeopardize local control.”

However, cities such as Glendale, whose bans on concurrent sales would be eliminated by the bill, have registered strong opposition to the measure as an infringement of their local control.

In addition, representatives of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors and the California PTA told the committee that the legislation would erode the principle of home rule by removing one option that local governments have for restricting joint sales.

Cities have sought to ban or restrict the sale of alcoholic beverages and gasoline at the same time on the grounds that it contributes to the problem of drunken driving.

But industry leaders, including Atlantic Richfield Co., which operates AM-PM Mini-Marts, and the Southland Corp., which operates 7-Eleven stores, argue there is no proof that simultaneous sales cause drinking and driving. Bars, restaurants and home parties put far more drunken drivers on the road, they say.

By eliminating the power of local governments to ban simultaneous sales, the legislation would require cities and counties to review on an individual basis all applications from businesses seeking to sell both alcoholic beverages and gasoline.

Under the bill, local governments seeking to eliminate concurrent sales would have to rely on the conditional use-permit procedure that they now use to regulate land use, control zoning and impose specific conditions on businesses and property owners.

This process would allow a city or county to deny an application to a store for the simultaneous sale of alcohol and gasoline only after holding a hearing and gathering evidence to show why such a store would not be in the public interest.