Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Alcohol Retail Display topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate committee advances bill restricting placement of co‑branded alcoholic drinks
Summary
The Senate Committee on Regulatory Affairs advanced Senate Bill 68 to prevent co‑branded alcoholic beverages from being displayed adjacent to nonalcoholic products and items marketed to children; large retailers would face placement restrictions while smaller stores may use signage instead. The committee voted 9‑0 to report the bill to the floor.
Senate Bill 68, which would prohibit certain off‑premise retailers from placing co‑branded alcoholic beverages immediately adjacent to nonalcoholic drinks and youth‑oriented items, was advanced to the Senate floor by the Senate Committee on Regulatory Affairs in a 9‑0 vote.
The bill’s sponsor, Senator Paul Henke, told the committee the measure responds to growth in co‑branded alcoholic products and concerns about consumer confusion. “Co branded means any alcoholic beverage that has the same or similar brand name, logo, or packaging as a non alcoholic beverage,” Henke said, giving examples such as “Hard Sunny D, Simply Spiked Fruit Juices, and Spiked Dunkin' Donuts coffee drinks.”
The bill would require off‑premise retailers with a retail sales floor of 2,500 square feet or more to avoid displaying co‑branded alcoholic beverages immediately adjacent to soft drinks, fruit juices, candy, toys, or snack foods with cartoons or youth‑oriented images. Smaller retailers would have an alternative compliance option: clearly visible signage stating the co‑branded product is an alcoholic beverage and is available only to persons 21 years of age or older.
Brett Visner of the Michigan Beer and Wine Wholesalers Association echoed the sponsor’s testimony, saying the measure is important “for consumer, protection, as well as protecting our kids and making sure the industry operates in a responsible, manner.” The committee clerk read in additional stakeholder positions: the Michigan Beer and Wine Wholesalers Association (support), Shelly Stahl (Anheuser‑Busch, support), Scott Graham (Michigan Brewers Guild, neutral), Dave Martin (Michigan Liquor Control Commission, neutral), and Jerry Griffin (Midwest Independent Retailers, mixed positions reported for the package).
The committee’s roll call on the motion to report the bill produced nine affirmative votes and no dissent. The clerk recorded the result as “9 yeas, 0 nays. The bill is reported.” The committee chair noted the bill and related measures had passed the Senate in the prior session by wide margins; Henke said the prior Senate vote on this measure was 35‑3.
If passed by the full Senate and enacted, the bill would affect how larger retail stores in Michigan display co‑branded alcoholic beverages and give smaller retailers a signage‑based compliance alternative. The committee did not take up any amendments during the hearing.
The committee advanced SB 68 to the floor with a recommendation that it pass.
