For the past few years, thirsty tourists visiting Castle Danger Brewery in Two Harbors have been asking the same question.
"All day long, it's a continuous: Why can't I buy a growler? Why can't I buy to-go?" said co-owner Lon Larson.
But a change to Minnesota's liquor laws — and an end to customer confusion — may be on the horizon.
A package of liquor-related bills before the Legislature this session includes changes to state laws that prevent breweries from selling beer to-go once they've reached a certain level of production. Under a proposal years in the making, the statutory limit — which applies to just five breweries in the state — would increase. The bill would also allow distilleries to sell bottles on-site.
Legislators say the measure stakes out a middle ground that liquor manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers can all live with.
"Everyone maybe isn't totally thrilled with it; it doesn't accomplish what everyone wants," said Rep. Zack Stephenson, DFL-Coon Rapids, the bill's chief House sponsor. "But it is a good step forward towards modernizing our state's liquor laws and allowing our craft breweries and distilleries to grow and thrive, while still protecting consumer choice and consumer protection and safety regulations that are important."
Currently, the five Minnesota breweries that produce more than 20,000 barrels of beer annually — Surly, Summit, Schell's, Fulton and Castle Danger — cannot sell their product to-go. The bill would raise that cap to 150,000 barrels, and allow brewers to sell up to 128 ounces, or one gallon, of beer per customer, per day. Distilleries would be allowed to sell up to 750 milliliters of spirits, or a standard liquor bottle, per customer per day.
The measure, which will cost $250,000 for additional enforcement staff, would also impose a 2.5% tax on wine shipped into the state and allow municipalities to issue wine and beer licenses for amateur baseball games.
The bill cleared House committees with strong bipartisan support, and is expected to pass the full House. Stephenson and Rep. Jim Nash, R-Waconia, who's carried the proposed liquor law changes in years past, said they believe the compromises in the bill will also satisfy the Senate.
If the bill doesn't pass, Nash said, he's concerned that brewers and distillers might leave for neighboring states with fewer restrictions.
"That is something that I can't stand by and allow to go by quietly," he said.
Larson, who's advocated for these changes for years, said he's "cautiously optimistic" about the bill's chances this session.
"What we have here is we have peace in the valley," he said. "Let's make some progress here, let's take a step in the right direction that will benefit a lot of parties."
