Ban on mini bottles of booze returns to City Council for debate

A proposal to ban mini bottles of alcohol took a lurching step again in City Council chambers with both strong support from some public officials and opposition from local business owners.

“I think that this is one of those issues where we get the ability to do some good,” said Councillor Ricardo Arroyo, the sponsor of the hearing, referencing the bottles’ connection to issues like alcoholism and littering. “I think that the public safety, public health, public good is worth whatever that trade-off is financially.”

The discussion, introduced a couple of weeks prior, could lead to a ban of the sale of 50 ml and potentially 100 ml bottles of liquor — the more colloquial name for the bottles was nixed from the meeting due to its alternative meaning as a slur used against Japanese people — in the city if it were reviewed and approved through Boston’s Licensing Board. If it moves forward, the proposal will face several more hearings.

Proponents of the move, including public health officials, community representatives and others, argued the small bottles are littered by the thousands around the city — and are unable to be recycled in Massachusetts — and lead to more problem drinking and alcoholism by people concealing or even driving with the bottles.

“In 2021 and 2022, we challenged ourselves to collect 10,000 miniatures that were littering our neighborhood to show appreciation for our endeavors,” testified Victoria Gaul, a Keep Hyde Park Beautiful volunteer. “We easily did this each time in a few months.”

The ban discussion follows a handful of similar bans in nearby regions like Chelsea and Newton, both of which had public officials testify in favor of the ban Monday.

“When we put this ban in, we saw immediate impact our first day,” said Chelsea Licensing Board Commissioner Roy Avellaneda, reporting that the number of alcohol-related emergency calls steadily dropped from 720 in 2015 before the ban to 216 in 2020.

Chelsea and Newton officials reported a wide number of positive impacts of their bans, including public cleanliness and a “pro-business” impact on other stores in the area.

“Chelsea’s no reflection of Boston,” said Carlos Castillo of Dearborn Wine in Roxbury, one of several local business owners to testify in opposition.

The opponents represented a large area of liquor stores, largely calling for more conversations and compromise on the matter.

“Right now I can tell you for one of our stores, (singles are) almost 30% of sales, and it will cost us three to four employees,” Castillo argued, responding to Arroyo’s claim the con of the ban was just business’s profit margins. “I hope that we can have a further discussion and maybe meet somewhere in a middle ground.”

Business owners tossed around several alternatives and compromises, including anti-littering initiatives, public-private partnerships to raise costs of the bottles and the state Legislature’s efforts to expand the Bottle Bill.

“This is not going to vote next Wednesday,” Councilor Brian Worrell stated. “This is just the start and middle of a conversation.”

In a related topic, at-large City Councilor Michael Flaherty said any discussion of littering should also include needles being tossed on the streets. That issue, others agreed, needs to come back up before the council soon.