"Bottle shop burning but everyone is ok."

I got a text message from Iron Hill brewer Larry Horwitz while I was in Montreal for the Mondial de la Bière last week (might have something on that for you, might just let Jack tell it and then correct what he gets wrong): "Just talked to keith @ fx matt. Bottle shop burning but everyone is ok." I had my phone turned off, and didn't actually get the message for a while, and what with one thing and another, didn't get the whole story till I got home on Saturday.

I won't re-tell it here, but a fire started in the bottling building. The canning line is destroyed (most of what they do there is Utica Club, but I think they do some contracts, too), the bottling line is down for at least a few weeks...maybe more. The building is old -- though not as old as the main brewery building -- and there was apparently not a sprinkler system. The age of the building kept that from being a problem, but re-construction will have to bring it up to code; much safer, but very expensive, as will be new canning equipment. The company's insurance position was unclear; there has been speculation that the lack of sprinklers probably meant that they were self-insured, but I don't know about that. Lotsa money.

Overall, this sucks. There is, however, some good news. First, the brewery, cellar, and kegging line were not affected, so draft Saranac continues to flow unchecked (get your butts out there and drink it). Second, there has been an outpouring of offers of help from New York's breweries, and it appears that a deal to tanker beer to a relatively nearby canning and bottling facility will be worked out quickly.

This brewery means a lot to me. Saranac 1888 was one of the first 'craft' beers I drank regularly, and I've been a fan ever since. F.X. Matt gave me one of my first significant interviews as a writer, and was always available for an interview, as are Nick and Fred Matt. The folks at Matt have been more than fair to me at all times. I've toured the brewery on many occasions, enjoyed the beer with friends all over the east coast...it's had almost as big a part in my beer-drinking evolution and memory as Yuengling; bigger in some ways. The thought that they might go down was tough to take.

But I should have known they'd survive. I asked F.X. once why he fought to keep the brewery open when the family trust that owned it wanted to sell out in 1989. "I have a stock answer when I’m asked why I fought for the brewery," he told me. "Family pride, stubbornness, and stupidity!" I'm proud to see that the Matt family is still proud, stubborn, and stupid. I would not have it any other way. Cheers, Nick and Fred, best of luck, and we'll keep drinking it as long as you make it.

Elysian Avatar Jasmine IPA

Ahhhhh.... Hippy chick.

Elysian is not just an amazing set of brewpubs in Seattle; they're doing bottling, too. God bless 'em, they sent me a sample of their Avatar Jasmine IPA, and I finally felt de-allergized enough to try it tonight; a beautiful late afternoon/early evening that is just begging for a fire out back, and I'm gonna give in, me and my gal and some whiskey.

But that's later. Right now, we're grilling up some vegetables and a mustard-glazed pork roast (Temeraire Mustard, damn, get some, and it's great slow-roasted on the grill), and I figured, let's get some of that Avatar going.

It's an IPA that's been dry-flowered with jasmine flowers. What the hell? I'm not sure what it might go with, other than cheese and maybe fruit, but it's striking. The jasmine hippy character gets some firmness from the solid bitterness, and it all works out by the end...mostly. Cathy likes it, though she's "not sure why I like it." I find the flower and the bitter together a bit jarring. The aroma's great, with the flower floating through the malt smell, but that contrast of bitter and flower is not doing it for me.

I'm looking for something crisper in an IPA; the base may be, but the flowers blunt it. Still, it's different enough that those who like it will like it. Worth a try, if only for the mind-expansion it may bring.

New poll at PLCB blog

I've got another poll up at Why the PLCB Should Be Abolished (as well as an explanation of why my blogging has been rather sparse lately). This time it's a question of what you would change first about the Pennsylvania Liquor Code. Priorities, people.

Cooks for Cops "good turn-out"

Just got an e-mail from Michael Naessens about yesterday's Cooks for Cops benefit for the family of slain Philadelphia City police Sgt. Stephen Liczbinski.

"Despite the rain we had a good turn out at all Old City restaurants and will be sending a helpful contribution to the officer's family. It's great when we can use our love of beer to help a worthwhile cause.

Cheers, Mike"

Thanks to everyone who turned out!

Good cause in Old City tomorrow

Just got this from Mike "The King" Naessens (hey, Mike, I'm kidding!), and it looks like a good thing if you're going to be in Philly tomorrow.


Old City Merchants Team Up To Help Fallen Officer’s Family

“Cooks for Cops” Event Set for May 20th

Old City restaurant and bar owners are banding together to raise money for the family of fallen Philadelphia police officer Sgt. Stephen Liczbinski.
“Heroes like Sgt. Stephen Liczbinski who are willing to face the ultimate sacrifice daily to keep Philadelphia a great city are the ultimate examples of people living the eulogy they’d like to be remembered by,” said Eulogy owner Mike Naessens. “We are proud to support our heroes.”

On Tuesday, May 20, participating Old City businesses will donate 10% of their proceeds to the trust fund set up to help Sgt. Liczbinski’s family. More than 30 businesses are scheduled to participate in what is being called “Cooks for Cops.”

Participating businesses include: Beneluxx Tasting Room, Eulogy Belgian Tavern, Philadelphia Fish & Company, Mexican Post, Karma, Buffalo Billiards, Mad River, Triumph, Cebu, Brownies, Plough, Serrano, Sassafras, Penn’s View, Bookbinders, National Mechanics, Nick’s Roast Beef, Positano Coast, Rotten Ralph’s, Triada, Marmont, Anjou, Mizu, Pizzicato, Fork, GiGi, Panini, Lucy’s Hat Shop, Swanky Bubbles, Spasso, Amada, Patou and Campo’s. The money raised by the “Cooks for Cops” event will go directly to the Stephen Liczbinski Family Memorial Trust.

“We are proud to support our police officers and hope you do the same by attending this event,” said Naessens.

Would you like a CD with that?

In case you missed hearing about it... One Guy Brewing (date-sensitive link) in Berwick is giving away CDs this Saturday. Really, giving them away, and they're real music. Between brewing jobs, Guy bought and sold CDs in a big way at eBay and flea markets (ask him about the Amish girl at the stand next to his...), and he's got a bunch of them left. Last time I was up I skimmed them and got a Patty Benatar compilation for my daughter, Fallout Boy for my son, and The Radiators "Law of the Fish" for me. Free. Like you can, this Saturday. He might have some of the Chinese flower petal art left, too: ask him.

Oh, and he's supposed to have more cask ale (dry-hopped with EKG this time), pilsner, Berwick Lager, and stout. All that, pizza from King's, and free CDs? Get your asses to Berwick!

The PLCB (and Sheetz) vs. PA Beer Distributors

Yesterday, there was a Pennsylvania Supreme Court hearing on the lawsuit the Pennsylvania Malt Beverage Distributors Association (MBDA) brought against the PLCB for granting a 'deli license' to a Sheetz 'convenience store' ('quotes' used because this place is huge, and includes a 60-seat restaurant with 4,000 sq. ft. of floor space).

Some interesting points:

Sheetz currently sells only takeout beer in Altoona. The distributors' association contends that the store also should have to serve beer to restaurant patrons for consumption on the premises. (from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)

The MBDA's attorney argued that by granting the license to a retailer that did not intend to serve on-premise, ‘‘The [liquor board] authorized venues to sell beer that the Legislature never intended,’’ Robert Hoffman, attorney for the distributors’ group, told the justices. (from the Altoona Mirror)

Mr. Wolowski (the lawyer representing Sheetz) told the justices that Sheetz is willing to serve beer in the Altoona store if that is required. A lawyer for Wegmans, which was not a party to the Sheetz case, signaled a similar willingness. (Post-Gazette)

Liquor board attorney Rodrigo Diaz said liquor licensees are granted the privilege to sell alcoholic beverages, but not required to sell them. "You get a license from us, you don't have a duty to sell," Mr. Diaz said. (Post-Gazette)

Some justices debated the merits of allowing alcoholic beverages to be sold by businesses that not so long ago were not even considered. When Justice Seamus McCaffery called the Sheetz store "a gas station," Justice Debra Todd asserted that it is more than that. "They sell creme brulee," she said.

Fascinating. Where is the justification for finding that these two businesses cannot hold a license? Is it because Sheetz sells gas? So what? If a store that currently operated as a deli decided to start selling gas, would that invalidate its deli license? If it did, why? People -- legislators and judges -- seem to have this bizarre idea that if beer is sold in gasoline stations, where people drive in to get gas in their cars, they will automatically drive away sucking on a cold longneck. As opposed to driving to a restaurant or bar, where they will suck on the cold longneck before they drive away? If a supermarket has a license to sell beer, how is that different from a tavern or deli with the same kind of license to sell beer?

Note to the PA legislature: look at how the wind's blowing. People want sixpacks. Don't bobble the sixpack sale legislation still being considered.

What I like about you...

I've got a new poll up on my "Why the PLCB Should be Abolished" blog:

"What I like most about the PLCB."

No, really. There's gotta be something, right? Go vote.

Uh. Sell Beer. Joe and Jane Sixpack. Uh. Beer.

Beer gets Op-Ed attention in the Inquirer today; the Sheetz case goes to the State Supreme Court tomorrow. The editorial gets the general idea right, which is good: Pennsylvanians should be able to buy beer in six-packs, like everyone else in the United States. As the Inky says, "Beer must be purchased mostly by the case. Six-packs are available at bars and restaurants - at sky-high prices. The system is tailor-made to restrict competition and choice, and to artificially inflate prices."

So far, so good, although the average reader could easily infer that this "system" was put in place by the taverns and beer distributors, rather than put in place by the State and enforced by its booze law goon squad, the PLCB. But they miss the point. The Sheetz case is not about selling beer at a convenience store; if they win their case -- and they should -- it will not mean that every WaWa will be selling sixers of Coors Light. It's both more and less complicated than that.

What Sheetz wants is to be able to use the license they bought for their big Altoona store, a store that, like many in the chain, is so big that they've included a seating area for their large food menu. Other delis/pizza joints have the same thing, and there's no problem. That's the less-complicated part.

The more complicated part is mostly, pardon me, bullshit. The rub with Sheetz, supposedly, is that the company doesn't want to allow on-premises consumption of the beer; you can't drink it there, you have to get it to go. This is what has brought the case to the courts: a company policy that most Pennsylvanians could care less about if it means they can buy a sixer of Bud Light at a convenience store (Didja see that word? Convenience. Something the PLCB oughta look into).

What's it really about? Well, the Inky bellows about "surly beer sellers who now maintain a monopoly." Get it right: the beer sellers are surly because either the State won't let them sell six-packs (the distributors), or because the State set up rules that led them to base their business model on a monopoly on selling six-packs (the tavern owners).

The taverns are going to have to roll over on this. Places like The Sixpack Store, Suds, Quick Six, and The Foodery have built a business around giving us what we want: sixpacks to go, a good selection, in and out. They see a heavily bankrolled chain moving into their business, they're probably going to fight it. But when the dust settles, it's going to be the same scene, just more competitive. There are only so many licenses; business will go to the stores that best serve the variety of consumer needs.

But the beer distributors are the ones getting screwed, and we're getting it right along with them. They've got the expertise, the selection, the space, the cold rooms...let them sell sixpacks. Please! If you're going to level the playing field, level the whole thing.

Some of you will probably think I'm being too hard on the Inquirer. They are calling for sixpacks for the citizens, after all. But this is a complicated issue that goes to the heart of the problems with the PLCB: interpretation of arcane, archaic laws that would be better off being completely replaced, rather than tinkered with. If I'm dealing with a 'major daily,' I expect the full story.

PLCB Blog: Reason #5

We already discussed how the PLCB has a personality split. One side of the agency wants to sell you booze (gotta make money at the State Store!), the other side wants to control how much you buy and how you drink it. Brilliant idea for a state agency.

But there's another two-sided bedevilment going on at the PLCB. The PLCB always says that they don't make the liquor laws in Pennsylvania, they just enforce them. Yes, that's true...to an extent. Because when they enforce them, they also interpret them. So you'll get interpretations on just what a "case" of beer is, and about how licenses can be apportioned within a county, and ... and what constitutes a State Store, apparently. Because while the PLCB is currently "enforcing" laws that make it illegal to sell beer or liquor at a grocery store, they are also currently considering an "interpretation" that will justify them putting 100 wine vending machines in grocery stores. Really.

Reason #5:

The Liquor Code serves the PLCB, not the citizens of the Commonwealth.