Posted by I’ve heard it said that the greatest enemy of the Good is the Great. With only seven days remaining in our first legislative Session, it appears that the second rule of legislating (after “can we, should we, must we”) should be to avoid letting the Great be the enemy of the Good. As a practical matter, the value of this rule may be best demonstrated in the battle over HB86 and SB192. Through negotiations over these two bills, which Senator Holtzclaw (R-Madison) and I introduced early in the Session, we saw exactly how prioritizing the Good over the Great can lead to the best legislative result. And the best legislative result is not to simply pass your bill, it’s to pass good and necessary legislation.
As discussed elsewhere, the push for reform in our brewery and brewpub laws has been a long time coming, and HB86 and SB192 were the legislative vehicles for addressing that needed reform. SB192, embodied the grassroots push for reform in our brewery and brewpub laws as advocated by Free the Hops. While SB192 included everything Free the Hops wanted, some of its provisions weren’t entirely palatable to other interested parties, including the ABC Board and the wholesalers, to name a few. Specifically at issue was the question of how some of the proposed reforms to the brewery and brewpub laws in this State would impact the three-tiered system, which is sacrosanct in the world of alcohol retail. Some accused one of the major distributors of holding up the bill – not true. All parties involved wanted a good bill, not just a politically expedient one, and we all worked diligently together to accomplish just that.
Last week, some representatives from a major distributor came up to Montgomery, and we sat down with them and representatives from the wholesalers, Free the Hops, and the ABC Board to work out a compromise. Early Tuesday morning, we settled on the compromise legislation, and the following day, the substitute (which included the compromise language) was put on SB192 in the Economic Development and Tourism committee. Senator Holtzclaw and I both advocated for the substitute, which in his words, “accomplishes 80% of what the interested parties want — a good day’s work.” As substituted, SB192 passed out of committee and now awaits to be put on the Special Order Calendar. Once it goes to the House floor and passes, the Senate needs only to concur in the changes in the substitute. Then, it goes to the Governor’s desk for signature, and we will have won a small victory for a small but growing industry in Alabama. Indeed, there will be beer; but more importantly, there will be jobs as small businesses around our State take advantage of the growing tourism and entertainment opportunities that this legislation creates.
This “give and take” is what makes the legislative process so critical to our democracy. Unlike the Executive branch, which can exert (often unchecked) unilateral power, the legislative branch is a deliberative body designed to struggle through difficult issues and to force compromise from disparate interests. That process has been evident in some important legislation, such as the negotiations over SB310 (the Tenure Reform bill), but we would do well to demand that process for every piece of controversial legislation that passes through the Legislature. Otherwise, our Legislature becomes an executive body, not a legislative body. And, no State can handle two Governors, just as no man can live with two wives.
That was a very well written and informative article. Thank you. I came to this post hoping to hear it had been put on the special order calendar but was pleased by the article anyway. Continue fighting the good fight for what needs to be done.
So, what will the bill (if enacted) actually do?
You can see a pretty in depth description of the latest substitution here.
http://www.freethehops.org/blog/2011/05/details-of-the-substitute/
It paid off the Breweries for their donations, protected the failing downtown brewpubs from real competition in the surburbs and showed Free the Hops was not up to the fight.
It’s interesting that the legislators killed the homebrew bill because they didn’t want to make alcohol more readily available in public housing areas, but the only way they’ll allow brewpubs is if they open in an economically distressed area.
I don’t think a single brewpub that opened in “Historic” Birmingham survived.
Location, Location, Location.
So basically, in order to get a brewpub approved outside of an historically significant area/building, locals are encouraged to lie about the area it will be in? Also, “economically distressed area” is a real term, defined relative to a percentage of area median income, is it not?
MtgyAU,
I don’t think“economically distressed area”is a technical term. Itwas intended to allow City Councils to determine where jobs need to be created in their communities (and more specifically, where brewpubs should go). [UPDATED] The term is defined in 11-99-2, relating to tax increment districts.I would argue, as an attorney, that the definition of “economically distressed area” in 11-99-2 does not govern the term in the brewpub bill, as there is no incorporation language. However, to the extent instructive, subsection (e) provides that such an area may include, “Any area … on which are located abandoned or vacant buildings or old buildings, or where excessive vacancies exist in existing buildings …” This language is about as broad as it comes, so the net effect is that a city council has the authority to decide where these businesses will locate.In reality, the term addresses JD’s concerns that brewpubs have been limited to historic buildings in the downtown areas of counties that had brewpubs prior to prohibition. Under this legislation, a city council can decide to put a brewpub anywhere that needs an economic boost, as long as it is in a wet municipality.
May not be perfect, but it’s better than what we had. Brewers from around the State have written to express their gratitude for these much needed reforms, and we are confident this legislation will give a boost to the tourism industry and to local businesses all over the State.
So as long a a city lies about the “economically distressed area” it’s ok?
Remove the location restriction or kill the bill.
I find it interesting that my previous comments show “awaiting moderation” but Joe Hubbard has already contacted me with a reply.
Hi JD,
Any delay in addressing comments that were awaiting moderation is my doing. My apologies for that.
The post author, in this case Rep. Joe Hubbard, can see and read comments that are awaiting moderation. He was quicker in responding to you than I was in removing the comment from the moderation queue.
Danny
I agree with Rep. Hubbard, that this is a good bill for the interested parties.
JD, I responded to your post above in email to give you an opportunity to correct your mistatement, but because you persist with inaccuracies, I will post my response below for the benefit of everyone else.
Alabama beer brewing laws near change, but some say not far enough
Alabama is on the verge of substantial changes to its brewery laws, but that still may not go far enough to make the state competitive with neighbors in the growing industry.
The so-called “Brewery Modernization Act” … compromises are significant, particularly as they pertain to the part of the bill that deals with brewpubs.
Some advocates at Free the Hops… believe too many concessions were made to wholesalers and distributors … not all members of the group are happy with the compromise, with some feeling too many archaic aspects of the state’s brewpub laws remain in place under the proposal.
For instance, the compromise bill still puts restrictions on where a brewpub can be located in Alabama — namely, in an historic district or building, or in what is considered an economically distressed area. The compromise also keeps in place a restriction requiring brewpubs be in a county where beer was brewed before Prohibition began in 1919. Plus, the bill would limit production at brewpubs to 10,000 barrels per year.
Most objectionable to opponents, the compromise bill would allow brewpubs to sell their beer to wholesalers but would not allow brewpub customers to buy beer to take home with them…
http://blog.al.com/businessnews/2011/05/alabama_beer_brewing_laws_near.html