Posted by First, I want to thank Danny for the honor and privilege of posting my thoughts, here. I look forward to working with Senators Keahey and Ward and Representative Merrill to provide readers of the Parlor with timely and insightful feedback on our legislative process.
Week One certainly got off to a fast start in the House. The number of prefiled bills was cut in half (in large part due to Sen. Ward moving up to the 7th floor), but we have some very good legislation working its way through our chamber. The big issues right now are obvious: balancing the budgets and creating jobs. Other important issues are working their way into the mix as well, such as immigration reform and the renewal of Forever Wild, both of which are generating a good bit of buzz amongst the membership.
I want to also take a moment to comment on the political mood in the House right now. Perhaps the happiest surprise for me as a Freshman was to see how ready most of my colleagues are to put partisan election-year politics behind us. Many of us are working together across the aisle to craft timely and necessary legislation. For example, I introduced a campaign finance reform bill in the House yesterday after visiting with Sen. Ward about his efforts on campaign finance reform. Sen. Ward committed to helping me with the bill in the Senate, and he suggested co-sponsors from his own Caucus in the House. In the end, a number of my colleagues across the aisle co-sponsored the bill with Sen. Ward’s support. Sen. Ward also discussed the bill with the Speaker, who commended the legislation, describing it as “much needed” and “a long time coming.”
This is the kind of cooperation the people in my District expect of me, and I dare say the people of Alabama expect no less cooperation of all of us in the Legislature. We would all do well to remember that the pressing challenges of the day are not Democratic or Republican issues; they are people issues. If we continue to work together and put the needs of the people above the politics of the day, I do believe that we will see a new day in Alabama politics.
Will you consider a Sub for your Brew Pub bill (HB86) … one that helps Montgomery’s Brew Pub without hurting other cities?
HB161 is the only brewery reform bill supported by Free the Hops.
OC,
HB86 incorporates much of HB161 and is not specific to any city or any brew pub. This legislation merely corrects some antiquated requirements of the old brew pub act. I have spoken with Michael Sullivan, and he supports HB86. I would hope that HB86 would be the first step in modernizing our brew pubs in Alabama, and I would hope that Free the Hopes would support such an important first step.
Free the Hopes?
Glad you’re posting here, Joe, and glad that you’re feeling good about across-the-aisle participation. Of course, it’s early in the season.
I’m all for the Montgomery Brewpub and hope like heck it re-opens … soon.
***
Is HB86 designed to soley benefit the Montgomery Brewpub at the expense of any other brewery in Alabama?
Why does it maintain the historic building requirement of the Alabama Brewpub Act?
Why does it maintain the county requirement (the arbitrary requirement that a brewpub must be located in a county that had a licensed brewery prior to 1918)?
OC,
This bill does not show preference to any brew pub in any particular city. It merely modernizes the Brew Pub laws in three ways that help brew pubs open and stay open.
First, it removes the restaurant requirement, allowing a stand-alone brew pub. Second, it eliminates the 80 seat minimum seating capacity. Finally, it allows brew pubs to sell their beer to wholesalers for distribution. These are necessary modifications that will help every brew pub in the state, irrespective of location.
With respect to the historic building requirement in the original law, that was intended to foster downtown redevelopment, which helps ever city in the state, big or small. The wet/dry distinction was put there to prevent brew pubs from opening in wet counties. If that prejudices a presently wet county, let me know and we can make further modifications.
Joe, “prevent brew pubs from opening in wet counties?”
Did you mean “dry counties?”
Out of all the breweries currently operating in Alabama, HB86 would not be helpful to any of them.
The goal of the Brewery Modernization Act is not only to benefit new business, but to legalize additional revenue streams for existing ones. The only brewery that might be in a historic building is Good People. However, your bill specifically allows the new “brewpub” licensees to only sell kegs to wholesalers. So Good People Brewing Company would not be able to have an on-site tap room unless they decided to give up their new canning line.
The language: “sale of beer manufactured or brewed by the brewpub in original, unopened keg or barrel containers to certain licensed wholesalers”
So we have:
Straight to Ale – moving to a newer building
Back Forty (brewing in Alabama soon) – in the wrong county (not sure if they are in a historic building)
Yellowhammer – in a newer building
Blue Pants – in a newer building
Good People – currently sells cans to wholesalers
So as it is, HB86 will only support the Montgomery Brewpub in their plans to reopen without a restaurant and to sell to wholesalers.
Technically, any new brewery that met the strict requirements that the Montgomery Brewpub has in its pocket could also benefit.
OC, I appreciate your interest in this legislation. As you know, a brew pub is a separate and distinct legal entity from a brewery.
The breweries you mention would not be impacted by any changes to the Brew Pub Act. I believe Free the Hops is working on that bill, and I look forward to seeing that proposal.
Joe,
I’m glad you’re posting to the best political blog in Alabama, and I thank you for engaging questions about HB86. I really do appreciate what you’re doing.
I agree that HB86 is better than the status quo regarding brewpubs in our state. There may even be a way for one or two other businesses beyond the Montgomery Brewpub to benefit if HB86 were to be passed and signed into law.
But my concerns are that 1) In these challenging economic times, it seems self-evident that we should strive to help as many small businesses as we can when we have the chance to remove archaic restrictions that are almost universally viewed as harmful and inhibiting the growth of respected businesses in our state. And 2) I fear that passing a bill this year that does only very little in the way of reforming brewpub regulations will actually make it *more* difficult to finish the job later. If HB86 passes this year in its current form, lots of legislators in Montgomery are going to believe they have “fixed” the brewpub issue. Then when we in Free The Hops re-introduce our bill next year, the response from some may be “Didn’t we already deal with that last year?” And it will be harder to gain traction.
It only makes sense to push a bill that helps ALL of Alabama’s young breweries, and if things come down to the wire and something has to be amended to ensure passage before the end of the session, then we consider making changes. But you don’t begin a negotiation by offering to give away the farm…
I’m a bit confused about the brewpub bill, although I haven’t read it.
I think it essential that any “brewpub” or even a brewery with a bar, serve food as well as beer, etc. Drinking on an empty stomach is a no-no.
I miss the Montgomery Brewpub!
And, Joe, I agree that you’re giving us one of the best political blogs in the state. Thank you!
Why does the brew pup have to market their beers to distributors instead of being able to sell it straight to customers?
Alabama Wholesale Beer Association
Donna Alexander (Lobbyist)
334-649-4455
125 S Ripley St
MGM AL 36104
in other words, the beer distributors want to maintain their state granted territorial monopolies. Ghu forbid they should have to compete for business.
Saw you on Capitol Journal this evening (Thursday). Very good explanations of the bills you’re supporting!
Where’s Joe response to this? Does Donna support your bill Joe? Wouldn’t adding a distributor raise the price, and therefore make the bill harder to sell?
Confused, the beer distributors have well-funded lobbyists.
‘Nuff said.
Confused,
I apologize for not getting a more timely response to your question. We have had our hands full this week in the Legislature dealing with some important issues.
The 21st Amendment to the US Constitution prohibits anyone from manufacturing and selling their own alcohol. (Remember prohibition and moonshine stills?) As a result, federal law has set up a three teir system for the sale of alcohol, from the manufacturer, to the wholesaler, to the retailer. Whether we like it or not, state law must conform to that system.
Hope this helps.
Who’s talking abot busting the 3 tier system?
HB86 would give certain priveleges to the Montgomery Brewpub building only. Yes, technically, any brewery that meets the red tape required could benefit from the change in the law. Effectively, however, as OC pointed out, only one premise with brewing equpiment in Alabama would benefit. They have the strict requirements in their pocket. No existing brewery in Alabama does.
That’s the only issue. HB86, if passed, would give an unfair legal advantage to one brewery in Alabama.
I like the Montgomery Brewpub – I almost always went there when visiting Montgomery and hope it reopens under the new ownership. I’ll go there if HB86 is passed. But I don’t like that the bill is written to benefit a single business. There’s this term called “rent seeking” that comes to mind.