How many restaurants in Tisbury should be allowed to serve beer and wine?

Half the town’s populace, the last time they were counted, thought none should be allowed. Now the state is suggesting it might allow just five licenses. But the Tisbury selectmen are asking for 19.

And even that number represents a winding back of their previous position. Originally, when they filed the home rule petition with the state legislature, they sought permission for an unlimited number of beer and wine licenses.

And that is what brought them into unexpected conflict with state officials.

Here’s how it happened. Last April’s town meeting voted to allow the town to petition the state so that beer and wine might be sold in restaurants. It was not the first time they had done this.

Two years previously, another town meeting also had voted to allow such a home rule petition, which the state approved. But then the matter had to come back to the town for a vote. And when it came to that vote in April 2008, the measure was defeated, 692 votes to 690.

Undaunted, the pro-beer and wine lobby began pushing the issue again. Town meeting duly voted to allow another petition, identical in wording to the previous one, to go to the state.

But there was — pardon the expression — a hiccup.

While the petition was the same, the reaction of counsel at the state senate was not.

They did not like the way it was written, in particular the reference to licensing year-round restaurants to sell alcohol “without quota.”

The town was informed that they had to nominate how many establishments they wanted to be allowed to sell beer and wine. If they chose not to include a number, the state would allow five — its default position, based on the town’s year-round population.

And this has created quite a problem for the beer and wine proponents, and the selectmen. They reckon there are about 19 establishments in town big enough (the minimum size is 30 seats) to qualify for a license.

But they realize that the opposing forces would be strengthened by the prospect of so many licenses. The “no quota” wording in the petition was conveniently vague; opponents would have no number to campaign against.

The state’s demand for specificity has blown their cover.

And so on Nov. 10, the selectmen decided they must bite the bullet and comply. Or else content themselves with five.

The town has since been working on a press release about the issue. As of late yesterday, there still was disagreement on the wording.

And much hinges on how they phrase things. If they say they plan to issue 19 licenses, they risk giving the anti-beer and wine forces a weapon. Even if they say they plan to hand out fewer licenses, say seven or eight, the question becomes, why ask for 19?

Had they sought fewer than 19, though, they risked upsetting the beer and wine proponents.

If the state grants the petition as now worded, it seems inevitable it will only heighten the controversy about beer and wine sales.

And what if the state does not grant it, or decides on a lower number? Controversy appears to be a likely outcome of the ruling by senate counsel.