State liquor officials blast wine-sales ballot question

The top two officials in charge of enforcing Massachusetts liquor laws said yesterday they strongly oppose the ballot question that would allow more food stores to sell wine.

Eddie J. Jenkins , the chairman of the Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission, and Ted Mahony , the agency's chief investigator, issued statements saying that such a law would undermine their enforcement efforts.

The statements were included in a press release issued by the group opposing the ballot question, which consists primarily of package stores and liquor wholesalers regulated by the commission.

``It's sad and shameful that the bureaucrats who are supposed to be overseeing the liquor store industry are doing the industry's bidding," said Kim Hinden , a spokeswoman for the supermarket group sponsoring the ballot question.

Hinden and other officials working for the supermarket group said the statements by the officials raised serious ethical issues, since state employees generally are barred from engaging in political activities during normal working hours.

Hinden also said the commission employees were taking a position on a potential law that they would have to enforce if the measure passes. The agency would be required to approve locally issued wine-at-food-store licenses if the ballot question passes.

In his statement, Jenkins said the ballot question could theoretically allow 2,800 new wine-at-food-store licenses to be issued in Massachusetts with no corresponding increase in funds for enforcement.

``A dramatic expansion of alcohol sales as proposed in Question 1 would undermine the system as a whole and make meaningful enforcement nearly impossible," Jenkins said.

Mahony in his statement said: ``I am opposed to Question 1 because it would make alcohol more accessible to underage persons and will dramatically increase the availability of alcohol in Massachusetts."

Neither Jenkins nor Mahony could be reached to comment yesterday. State Treasurer Timothy Cahill , who oversees the commission, said yesterday he also opposes the wine-at-food-stores ballot question because of the enforcement problems it would create.

Cahill said both Jenkins and Mahony sought his approval before coming out against the ballot question. He said the two officials had a right to weigh in on an enforcement issue affecting their agency, much as some chiefs of police have done in criticizing the ballot question.

Cahill, who has received about $22,000 in campaign contributions this year from package stores and liquor wholesalers, said the political donations had no impact on his view of the ballot question. ``It's an enforcement problem," he said.

Under existing law, corporations or individuals are limited to three licenses to sell alcohol. The ballot question would create a new wine-at-food-store license that could be issued at the discretion of local communities. All communities could issue five of the new licenses, while communities with more than 5,000 residents could issue one additional wine-at-food store license for each additional 5,000 residents.

If every Massachusetts community approved the maximum number of licenses, 2,800 could be issued, but supermarket officials say they believe municipalities would issue only about 1,000.

Under state Ethics Commission rules, public employees are not supposed to engage in political activities, including support of or opposition to a ballot question, during their normal working hours. An advisory opinion issued by the agency also said an appointed state official should not endorse a candidate for public office using their state title.

An Ethics Commission spokeswoman declined to comment on the matter.

Pamela Wilmot, executive director of Common Cause of Massachusetts, said she had reviewed decisions by the Ethics Commission and the Office of Campaign and Political Finance and concluded the statements by the beverages control commission officials were not out of line. She said her opinion would change if they were found to be using state resources to oppose the ballot question. Common Cause is a public interest group that monitors government and political ethics.

The effort to get more food stores to sell wine is shaping up to be one of the most expensive ballot question campaigns. The two sides have raised a combined $7.6 million through Sept. 30, and have pounded the airwaves with TV commercials.

Bruce Mohl can be reached at mohl@globe.com.