Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Alcoholic Beverages topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances omnibus alcoholic beverages bill after counsel cites drafting changes
Summary
Legislative counsel reviewed small drafting edits to the committee's omnibus alcoholic beverages bill — including changing an additional licensed-manufacturer count from 5 to 7, clarifying direct-sale language for fourth-class licensees, and moving a tasting-permit notice from 1 day to 1 business day — and the committee voted the draft favorable, 11-0-0.
Legislative counsel reviewed a handful of drafting changes to an omnibus alcoholic beverages bill and the Government Operations & Military Affairs Committee voted the measure favorable on a roll call, 11-0-0.
Tucker Anderson, legislative counsel, told the committee that most edits were in Section 2 and were largely cleanup to ensure consistent terminology. Anderson said he corrected the count of additional licensed manufacturers in Subdivision C(1)(B), striking '5' and replacing it with '7' additional licensed manufacturers and made the section consistent in its use of the terms 'licensed manufacturer' or 'rectifier.' "If you look at line 9, it strikes 5 and replaces it with 7 additional licensed manufacturers," Anderson said.
Anderson also described a clarification in Subdivision C2 that narrows the exception to the three-tier distribution model: the draft now explicitly states that a licensed manufacturer may sell its product to any fourth-class licensee. He told the committee that this wording was intended to clarify the scope of direct sales under the draft and to avoid confusion with first- or third-class licensing.
On another change, Anderson said the draft revises the notice period for retail alcoholic beverage tasting permits from "1 day" to "1 business day" in the draft's section on retail tasting permits.
A committee member raised a question about numbering on page 8 that made it look as if there were duplicate "section 11" headings. Anderson explained that reader-assistance headings and the bill's amendments — which amend provisions in a prior act that were subject to prospective repeal — can make the printed draft appear to repeat section numbers; he described the layout as a drafting artifact rather than a substantive change.
After brief discussion and expressions of appreciation for the drafting work, a member moved "That we accept draft 2.2 of DR 26-0551." The motion was seconded and the committee took a roll-call vote. The clerk recorded the affirmative votes and announced the final tally as 11-0-0, finding the draft favorable.
The committee recessed and said it would reconvene at 2:00 p.m. for the final quarter of business.
