A conservative legal organisation says it will file a lawsuit challenging a sweeping overhaul of state liquor regulations signed into law this week by Governor Tony Evers.
The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, or WILL, said it has spoken with wedding barn owners who claim they’re being forced out of business by the changes.
The liquor law signed by Evers on Wednesday creates a new division of the Department of Revenue to enforce violations. It expands retail options for breweries, wineries and distilleries and clarifies the definition of “public places” that cannot sell alcohol without a permit.
Under the new law, the definition includes spaces available for rent for social gatherings, such as wedding barns, but excludes hotel rooms, vacation rentals, campgrounds and tailgating areas at sports facilities. Before the change, wedding barns were considered private venues.
The legislation was supported by groups ranging from the state’s Tavern League to craft brewers and distributors, who argue the changes modernise archaic alcohol regulations and put everyone on a level playing field.
But Jean Bahn, of the Wisconsin Agricultural Tourism Association, argues that lawmakers made a conscious decision to exempt some public places and not others when it comes to alcohol consumption. She believes it was done to limit competition from wedding barns like the one she owns.
“I just feel like it’s a big change to go from being a private property with private events and renting space to suddenly becoming a public place,” Bahn said.
Under the new law, wedding barn owners have two options. They can get a new “no-sale event venue” permit, or they can get a liquor licence.
The no-sale permit would allow guests to provide their own alcohol as before, but the venue would only be allowed to operate once a month, with a maximum of six events per year.
If wedding barn owners opt for a liquor licence instead, they’ll be able to sell alcohol at their venues as often as they like.
Bahn said she plans to opt for the no-sale permit rather than find out how a liquor license might affect her local zoning permit and insurance. Her organisation has been talking to the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty about legal options.
WILL Deputy Counsel Lucas Vebber told WPR that the current law is poorly drafted and “leaves itself open” to legal challenges from a number of angles.
“But I think it’s safe to say that we intend to challenge it in court,” Vebber said.
Veber says the new definition of public place, as it relates to new rules on the consumption of alcohol, is “very broadly worded”.
“So if you want to rent an Airbnb and have a family reunion, have some friends over on a Saturday night when you’re up north, you can’t serve alcohol at that event without a liquor licence that falls under Chapter 125,” Vebber said.
Vebber also notes that the liquor law has been amended to give wedding barn owners two years to decide how to proceed with licensing, which he said is a “good thing”.
Bahn said the new liquor law raises a lot of questions at the local level. She said wedding barn owners often operate under conditional use permits issued by small towns, and it’s unclear whether selling alcohol directly would be allowed under those existing agreements.
“We have a member in our organisation who lives in a dry township,” Bahn said. “So if he wants to continue and the state says, ‘Well, here, we’re going to give you a liquor licence’. What good is that?”
While Bahn has been a vocal critic of the liquor overhaul from the moment it was introduced, the measure enjoyed bipartisan support in the Legislature, passing the Senate 22-11 and the Assembly 88-10.
In signing the plan into law, Evers said the modernisation would help the state’s regulations keep pace with an ever-evolving industry.
“Ensuring that our state’s regulations and policies are modernised and updated to keep pace with this ever-evolving industry remains a priority for the safety of consumers, producers and Wisconsin as a whole,” Evers said in a written statement.
In a press release accompanying the statement, Evers’ office noted the two-year delay in the marriage barn plan, calling it a “notable exception” to the new law.