BeerBorg

FedoraDave wrote:Good points, Skunk, but you're preaching to the choir, obviously.

It's extremely troubling to me how short-sighted these politicians are, creating legislation that benefits only the Big Guy and themselves, through campaign contributions.

Politics is such a dirty business any more. But therein lies the solution: call them out. Make it public how venal and self-serving they are. And don't shut up about it. Keep holding the flame to their feet, because eventually they'll either modify their stance, if only for the sake of Public Relations, or else they'll get voted out, which would serve them right (and serve the public better).

Find out what they DON'T want the public to know and then let the public know. These people are weasels.

1,000% agree, Dave. I know I along with other brewers and breweries have done that very thing. There is a representative in Florida [Jack Latvala (R)] I have written and received responses from that as of right now, seems to be in our corner on these issues.

The funny thing about the proposed bill is that it would not even have the distributors pick up the kegs from the brewery and haul them off to be purchased and brought back, known as "come to rest" in Florida's law. The brewery would simply just have to pay the distributor for pretty much doing nothing except pocketing the money from the brewery.

Funky Skunk Brewing wrote:The funny thing about the proposed bill is that it would not even have the distributors pick up the kegs from the brewery and haul them off to be purchased and brought back, known as "come to rest" in Florida's law. The brewery would simply just have to pay the distributor for pretty much doing nothing except pocketing the money from the brewery.

Otherwise known as a Protection Racket.

Eddie,

Hopefully this thing dies in the Florida legislature, because NC politicians are not above bowing down to big lobbyist either.
The Automotive Dealership Lobby was dangerously close to getting NC to pass regulations that would have kept Tesla from being able to sell cars there. Luckily common sense prevailed, but it highlights the problem of big money being able to drive legislative action.

Not sure how it is in FL, but for the most part in MI a brewpub can only sell beer it makes. So the "mobster" comment makes no sense. If I can only sell what I make on site, who am I hurting since I couldnt bring other beers in house even if I wanted to. The purpose and spirit of the law was to make sure InBev didnt buy up all the watering holes and liquor licenses and then refuse to sell anything but their beer as is common in Europe. It was not to make the monkey in the middle rich.

Update:

Yesterday was not good news on this front according to Florida Beer News. SB 1714 moves forward. The Florida Senate had a room full of voices in opposition to this bill, and it still moved through Rules Committee.

I have continued to write our Florida reps locally and state wide who are involved in this to convey our issues with this potential bill. Though it making it through the rules committee is not a good sign as of right now.

Just read about it on faceplace. Not looking good at all.

I've been following this bill since it's inception as SB7120 which was authored by Don Gaetz himself the Senate President.
The rules committee senators who voted for this bill are:
http://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/S40
http://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/S26
http://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/S24
http://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/S3
http://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/S23
http://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/S29
http://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/S10
http://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/S33
http://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/S6

http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/20 ... Record.PDF

Call them! This bill goes to the senate floor next, and it will still need a house companion to pass. There is still time to fight, and 9 to 4 is better than the 8 to 1 vote it received at the CA committee vote, so we are gaining ground.

Don't just send e-mails, actually call these people. Let them know it's doing nothing to support small business. Ask them what benefit will it provide small breweries?
If they mention the clause where it allows breweries under 2000 kegs to sell directly, tell them that 2000 kegs in sales isn't enough to sustain a canning/bottling line, so it's a useless clause.
Ask them why should a brewery be forced to buy their own product back from distributors to sell them on premise?
If they mention growlers and draft sales are available without this restriction, mention how special bottle releases generate a significant amount of revenue for these breweries, not to mention bring in tourism. Look at the Funky Buddha Maple Bacon Porter release party....

It's also interesting to note that Don Gaetz is good friends with Lewis Bear who owns a distribution company, and was quoted saying he would support his good friend Lewis Bear.

If any of you run blogs or something I'd urge you to post about this issue.

Thanks for posting those links jivex. I know I will be calling each and every one along with passing this on to the breweries and breweries I know here in Florida.

SB 1714 gets a Sunday amendment .... Which after reading, may benefit myself and smaller breweries moving forward. As well as treating the bigger craft brewers better than the original bill was leaning towards.

http://floridabeernews.com/2014/04/28/s ... amendment/

If I am reading it correctly, it may allow breweries with under 2,000 kegs of sale to self distribute. That is HUGE for nano (and smaller) breweries like what we are planning here now. This is the portion I am referring to from the amendment:

All breweries could sell up to 2,000 kegs (31,000 gallons) of their own beer in pre-packaged containers from their own taprooms without involving a distributor.

Note: They consider a keg at 15.5 gallons, not to be confused with barrels at 31 gallons. Just an FYI.

Funky Skunk Brewing wrote:SB 1714 gets a Sunday amendment .... Which after reading, may benefit myself and smaller breweries moving forward. As well as treating the bigger craft brewers better than the original bill was leaning towards.

http://floridabeernews.com/2014/04/28/s ... amendment/

If I am reading it correctly, it may allow breweries with under 2,000 kegs of sale to self distribute. That is HUGE for nano (and smaller) breweries like what we are planning here now. This is the portion I am referring to from the amendment:

All breweries could sell up to 2,000 kegs (31,000 gallons) of their own beer in pre-packaged containers from their own taprooms without involving a distributor.

Note: They consider a keg at 15.5 gallons, not to be confused with barrels at 31 gallons. Just an FYI.

It's still bad. Prohibits brewpubs from selling growlers, and any limit on sealed containers for off premise consumption is bad IMHO.
They can do what you said above already with no restriction at all. Why add some bs restriction?

jivex - Yeah, I don't understand that portion of the "new" amendment to this bill actually. It states:

Growlers: Breweries could fill growlers with their own beer. Full liquor bars could fill growlers with anyone’s beer. Brewpubs couldn’t fill growlers with anyone’s beer. Growlers would be limited to 32 oz, 64 oz, or 128 oz. The bill provides for regulations for filing and sealing growlers.

So I assume, and where know where that can lead .... But I assume this means no one's beer, including their own then? So are they saying ALL growler sells would be gone at this point for breweries with tap rooms then? A Brewpub as I know it and have seen it defined is basically as listed below:

1. Revenue from food sales shall constitute more than 50 percent of the total business revenues.

2. No more than 50 percent of the total gross floor area of the establishment shall be used for the brewery function including, but not limited to, the brewhouse, boiling and water treatment areas, bottling and kegging lines, malt milling and storage, fermentation tanks, conditioning tanks and serving tanks.

3. Where permitted by local ordinance, state and federal law, retail carryout sale of beer produced on the premises shall be allowed in specialty containers holding no more than a U.S. gallon (3,785 ml / 128 US fluid ounces). These containers are commonly referred to as growlers.

4. Brewpubs may sell beer in keg containers larger than a U.S. gallon (3,785 ml / 128 US fluid ounces) for the following purposes and in the following amounts:

a. An unlimited number of kegs for special events, the primary purpose of which is the exposition of beers brewed by brewpubs and microbreweries, which include the
participation of at least three (3) such brewers.

b. An unlimited number of kegs for city co-sponsored events where the purpose of the event is not for commercial profit and where the beer is not wholesaled to the event
co-sponsors but is instead, dispensed by employees of the brewpub.

So with this definition it seems only if they are selling food would the growler portion of SB 1714 be applied, the way I read it anyway. Although a brewery with a tap room (to me) would still be able to do so. However, I do agree with you as well that this will not be good for all (perhaps some) but overall, it is not a good thing to have happen to the craft beer industry and Florida may just be the beginning for other states to follow.

On the contrary, other states like Michigan are passing laws that eliminate the restriction of direct from brewery sales. FL, as usual, is lagging behind. There is exactly one good thing about this bill: 64 oz growlers. Everything else is a restriction to a system that is already working to promote growth. The laws have been the same since 1964 if I recall correctly, only now that they see massive growth are they trying to restrict it. The allowance of the direct from brewery sales is written in an exception to the rule designed originally for busch gardens. It's been the exception around most of the country, Michigan just made it no longer an exception.

We try to get a 64 oz growler like the rest of the country, as is the industry standard growler size, so they put a poison pill in the damn bill. Problem is a lot of people took notice so now it's right in the spotlight. Keep your damn 64oz growlers, I'll get two 32 oz and be happy that I still have the option to go to bottle releases like Nib Smuggler, Marianna Trench, and Hunahpu Day, and that I can stop at CCB Brewpub and take home a growler of peanut allergy.

Just look at how much debate is happening over the medical thc right now...it's so far behind the rest of the country. While two states have it entirely legal for recreational use, and are showing increases in economic viability, here these senators are fighting over low thc liquid drops for medical use only....

One day I'm just going to move to Colorado and enjoy the beer and marijuana nirvana I deserve.

Believe me, we have thought very long and hard about the brewery even being in Florida at all to this point. I have family in North Carolina and would much rather it be there than in Florida. Florida, where it is a good state to live in (from my point of view) is still as you stated, lagging behind the times on a lot of issues. I do like (very much) the cost of living, no snow and no state income tax. And the fact I am less than 100 yards from the Gulf of Mexico doesn't stink either.

However, while nice, it' not putting money into my pockets. Beer on the other hand may just do that very thing. I am MORE than willing to set up shop in another state if need be to realize that dream to reality. To be honest, it's not just this one deal in Florida. There are other legal issues that are not as prevalent that are hindering to breweries as well. I understand anything with alcohol has loads of legal red tape. However, other states (such as NC & Washington St.) are much more lax and "easier" to get going than Florida ever thought about being.

We'll see how this ends up going and make some decisions from there. There are other plans in the work right now that could determine our direction for the future.

Wilmington, NC is awfully nice you know. And I bet it would support a fine brewery like yours quite nicely. I would visit you at least once per year if you were in Wilmington!!!

BlackDuck wrote:Wilmington, NC is awfully nice you know. And I bet it would support a fine brewery like yours quite nicely. I would visit you at least once per year if you were in Wilmington!!!

Nice!!!

It would be closer to Franklin, NC as that is where my family is and they know that area nice and the closest brewery is in Sylva which is not near anything other than, well Sylva. But we'd be on the opposite side of the state as Wilmington I'm afraid. But I would MORE than welcome the yearly visit, BlackDuck!!!