Riverton City Council discusses potential changes to liquor laws

RIVERTON — The Riverton City Council has been rehashing the city’s liquor ordinances in an effort to find areas for improvement and establish rules that would help curb public intoxication, driving while intoxicated and underaged drinking.

Much of the conversation has involved an idea that’s also taking shape in Lander, under which liquor license holders, if convicted of infractions like selling to minors, would rack up points under a demerit-like system that could be considered when their liquor license is up for renewal.

But other areas the council has discussed include banning liquor store drive-thru windows, and requiring liquor license holders to report to police when they encounter intoxicated people — essentially requiring bars and liquor stores to call police when they cut off patrons or refuse to serve them because they are intoxicated.

During a work session focused on these issues last month, the council also reexamined an ordinance that was rejected in 2018 that would make it illegal to sell alcohol to a “habitually intoxicated” person, though city leaders seemed to struggle with how to approach such a ban. 

It’s already illegal to sell to a person who is under the influence, but creating some type of list of people who had, for instance, multiple recent public intoxication citations and ban them from purchasing more alcohol didn’t seem to gain much traction.

Making the call

Requiring bars and other liquor establishments to notify the police when a person is ejected or refused service for being intoxicated did gain a bit more support from city leaders. 

Sheridan has a similar policy, and Riverton Mayor Tim Hancock suggested city staff gain some updates on how that local regulation is panning out.

Intoxicated people who are cut off, kicked out, or refused service, Hancock explained, are likely leaving the establishment in one of three ways: taxi, on foot, or getting behind the wheel. Pedestrians and drivers who are under the influence pose a serious threat to the driving public, he said.

Council member Karen Johnson wondered how such an ordinance might impact liquor establishments, with people hesitant to patronize an establishment if they felt they’d face a police call. 

“I think if somebody is causing a disturbance in their facility or their bar and attempts to leave, [calling the police] is just doing the right thing,” she said. But if a patron who isn’t disturbing anything simply gets cut off, she said she didn’t agree with requiring the bar to call law enforcement because of it.

Drive-thru

One liquor license holder who has a drive-up window told the council that his staff can see more of what’s going on when a customer uses the drive-thru. Kids or already intoxicated people in the car are observed that way, he said. 

When one customer just walks through the doors, staff can’t tell if that person has kids or intoxicated people along for the ride.

Another license holder testified that some people who have mobility challenges use the drive-up window, adding that his business survived the pandemic due to drive-thru service. 

“We don’t serve intoxicated people, and it’s never really been a problem,” he said.

Several council members expressed a desire to examine whether drive-up liquor service should be banned in Riverton, pointing to constituent concerns and other locations that have instituted bans.

Hancock agreed that checking in with Casper to see how such an ordinance was working out would be good research to have as the city continues to discuss whether to change the law on drive-up liquor service.

“I think it would make sense to talk about it,” Hancock said, adding that interested liquor license holders should stay tuned for future opportunities to speak about changes to city ordinances.

This story was published on Nov. 8, 2025.