Legislature(2021 - 2022)ADAMS 519
03/30/2022 09:00 AM House FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB9 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 9 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 9(FIN)
"An Act relating to alcoholic beverages; relating to
the regulation of manufacturers, wholesalers, and
retailers of alcoholic beverages; relating to
licenses, endorsements, and permits involving
alcoholic beverages; relating to common carrier
approval to transport or deliver alcoholic beverages;
relating to the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board;
relating to offenses involving alcoholic beverages;
amending Rule 17(h), Alaska Rules of Minor Offense
Procedure; and providing for an effective date."
9:04:41 AM
Co-Chair Merrick OPENED public testimony.
9:05:06 AM
SARAH OATS, PRESIDENT AND CEO, CHARR, JUNEAU, spoke in
support of the legislation. She had spoken with many
legislators over the previous 2 years about the bill. Many
of their concerns along with the concerns from others had
to do with limiting new businesses. The bill actually
provided significant growth opportunities for new and
existing businesses. She did not think there was anything
wrong with trying to help the existing hospitality
industry, as it had suffered immeasurably over the past 2
years. There were several things in the bill that would
help the industry to recover and provide opportunities for
the current industry to grow.
Ms. Oats continued that she had worked for the Alcohol and
Marijuana Control Office (AMCO) for 7.5 years. Trying to
get things done there was extremely challenging, as
Representative Wool could attest. The bill would help AMCO
streamline the processes that helped existing businesses.
She urged members to focus on the current industry and the
way in which the bill could help it recover. There were
things in the bill that constituents did not like. She
encouraged members to pass the bill as it was currently
written. She thought there would be an opportunity to make
adjustments in the future.
Representative Wool asked that if the bill were to pass,
whether it would be difficult to change the law later.
Ms. Oats responded that she had been part of the project
since its inception 10 years prior. She reported working
for the regulatory agency at the start of the process
providing an impartial view. The participants tried to look
at how to expand opportunities for new businesses. They
also looked at existing industry, public health, public
safety, and how to make improvements. The participants
looked to an omnibus bill, SB 9. There were things in the
bill that each of the participants would want to change,
but SB 9 was a compromise bill. She thought it was a good
piece of legislation since everyone disliked portions of it
but were not completely unhappy with it. She noted that
there were specific pieces of the bill that people had
expressed concerns about, mainly relating to how it might
limit future businesses. She highlighted the importance of
focusing on the current industry that was still suffering
rather than the future industry.
Representative Wool supported the current industry and was
concerned about it losing footage.
9:11:07 AM
PAUL THOMAS, ALASKA CACHE LIQUOR, JUNEAU, spoke in support
of the bill. There had been a need to update Title 4 for a
significant amount of time. The bill was a good package in
which all sectors and license types in the industry had
contributed. Passing the bill would provide stability for
the industry. It would provide confidence to people looking
to get into the industry knowing that the rules would not
change as soon as they invested. Long-term licensees would
be afforded the confidence to move forward with new plans
inside a cleaned up and easier-to-follow set of rules that
supported all kinds of licenses. It would not just satisfy
individual one-off desires for expansion.
Mr. Thomas continued that every segment of the industry got
something new in the new stable environment. It would
encourage new business, investment in existing businesses,
new ideas, and give confidence to all license types in the
industry to follow through in their plans that were
currently on hold. It was something that had been sorely
missing in the previous 10 years. His segment, package
stores, would get new opportunities and much needed clean-
up of operations. New sampling endorsements would allow for
his customers to sample products. New package store tasting
permits would allow his business to have special tasting
events. Endorsements for shipping, delivering, and
repackaging would help clean-up language allowing him to
function inside the rules more easily. It would also allow
for trying out new aspects of the industry. Online sales
would get some new regulations which were needed. Up to the
current point allowing out-of-state businesses to operate
freely without paying taxes, unlike Alaskan businesses, had
crippled Alaskans. He asked members to support the current
version of the bill, with its more than 10 years of
refinement.
Representative Rasmussen asked if there was a law in place
that would disallow a sale if 2 people came into a store
and only 1 of them had an I.D.
Mr. Thomas replied that he would sell to the person with
appropriate identification.
9:13:55 AM
STANLEY FILLER, OWNER, ERNIE'S BAR, SITKA (via
teleconference), had owned his bar since 1965. He had seen
significant changes to Title 4 over the previous 50 years.
He supported SB 9 as written. Bars and restaurants in Sitka
had experienced a difficult time during the pandemic. The
changes in SB 9 would provide stability and consistency for
his industry and streamline processes that helped
businesses. He urged members to support moving the bill
from committee to the House Floor for passage.
Co-Chair Merrick indicated Representative Rasmussen and
Vice-Chair Ortiz had joined the meeting earlier.
9:15:21 AM
DARWIN BIWER, OWNER, DARWIN'S THEORY BAR, ANCHORAGE (via
teleconference), spoke in support of SB 9. He noted the
compromises by all stake holders to the Title 4 rewrite. He
commented that it had been difficult to obtain the
compromise bill and noted how fragile it was. There were 9
categories of participants that were included in the bill:
law enforcement, public health departments, municipalities,
breweries, wineries, distilleries, package stores, liquor
distributors, liquor licensing members of Alaska CHARR.
Getting all of the different factions to agree was a major
factor in the 10-year legislation project. Each aspect of
the bill was vigorously debated. The mindset was to plan
for 30 years rather than today. He was chairman of the
board for Alaska CHARR during the crafting of the bill and
was greatly involved in the discussions related to Title 4.
He discouraged any amendments to the bill. He asked members
to pass the bill in its current form, as it was too fragile
to make changes.
9:17:33 AM
ELIZABETH RIPLEY, MAT-SU HEALTH FOUNDATION, WASILLA (via
teleconference), spoke in strong support of SB 9. She
commented that it was well past time for Alaska to update
its alcohol laws. For more than ten years her organization
had worked hard with many partners, including the alcohol
industry. Senate Bill 9 represented compromises that were
good for all Alaskans. Research and data were core to the
work of the foundation. She reported that more than 40
percent of the arrests in the state involved alcohol or
other substances, and 60 percent of Alaskans reported being
negatively affected by someone else's drinking. Year-after-
year the foundation heard the same story: Alcohol and
substance misuse were ranked by the community as the most
critical health issue to address in the Mat-Su.
Ms. Ripley continued that the bill supported responsible
alcohol use by adults, reduced under age consumption, and
supported better enforcement of Alaska's alcohol laws.
While the foundation's interest was primarily public
health, the bill also had many benefits for local
businesses. A sound economy was an important aspect of
every community. The bill as currently written supported
growth and flexibility while continuing to regulate outlet
density because more outlets meant more harm in a state
that already paid a high cost for alcohol misuse. She urged
members to move SB 9 forward for the benefit of all
Alaskans.
9:19:27 AM
SHERRY STEAD, GLACIER RIDGE BREWING, HOMER (via
teleconference), asked for an amendment to keep the current
statutes, AS 04.11.130, AS 04.11.140, and AS 04.11.170 for
brewery, winery, and distillery licenses with 1 per 3000
population (1 license for 1 manufacturer with a tasting
room) and all current restrictions. She opined breweries
were tap rooms. Current statutes had allowed a thriving and
successful business model for Alaska craft industry growth.
She asserted there was more room for more growth. Senate
Bill 9 would allow hundreds of new business opportunities
in every community in Alaska. She urged local control over
the current remaining licenses and discouraged legislating
out new opportunities for future business growth. A
community had to approve a new license application before
going before the state board. If a community did not want
an additional license, they could protest an application.
Ms. Stead advocated focusing new business growth for "Made
in Alaska" where locals and tourists could purchase locally
made products to keep Alaska's economy growing. Alaska had
over 6,000 liquor licenses. Only brewery, winery, and
distillery license fees were being increased. She reported
that 97 percent of the beer manufactured in Alaska was
distributed. Only 3 percent was sold through a tap room,
yet the related future growth opportunity was being
removed. The amazing opportunities SB 9 offered to
breweries were already available. She indicated 20
breweries had purchased Beverage Dispensary Licenses
(BDLs), Brewpub, or Restaurant Eating Place Licenses
(REPLs). The additional licenses allowed breweries not to
be restricted by the current tap room limitations. Tap
rooms were family-and-friends-gathering spots for locals
year-round and brought value to their communities. Senate
Bill 9 would legislate out new growth that would strictly
benefit current alcohol-serving establishments and
distributors. It also set up monopolies in small
communities, limited competition, and stopped future
business growth across Alaska.
9:22:04 AM
JED WADE, BEARPAW RIVER BREWING COMPANY, WASILLA (via
teleconference), spoke in support of SB 9. He thanked
Senator Micciche for his sponsorship of the bill and to the
many individuals and entities who had been steadfast in
working to modernize Alaska's alcohol laws. After 11 years
and countless hours of work, it was time to pass the
critical updates to Title 4. The bill would create new
opportunities for his business to grow in the Mat-Sut
Valley. It would allow further investment in the community
of Wasilla by creating more jobs. Operating a brewery
manufacturing business in Alaska was extremely challenging
for several reasons. Alaska's restrictive beer laws only
served to exacerbate the challenges. The bill created more
avenues to get products to consumers in the local market
and would improve his business's ability to compete with
breweries out-of-state. It would also have an immediate and
sustaining positive impact on his business. He encouraged
the committee to move SB 9 forward.
Representative Wool asked Mr. Wade to provide examples of
restrictive beer laws.
Mr. Wade responded that opening times were restrictive in
terms of the times of day he was allowed to sell his
product to consumers. Time of day was a significant
restriction. He noted the extended daylight hours in Alaska
and how customers might want to have a beer beyond
8:00 p.m.
9:24:56 AM
GEORGE TIPTON, CHARR, KETCHIKAN (via teleconference), owned
several establishments in Ketchikan. He fully supported
SB 9. He noted watching the progress of the bill and found
it to be a good compromise for all parties within the
industry. The bill provided funding and legal authority for
online license applications, thus saving months or
years-worth of time in processing delays and expensive
attorney's fees from both the state's side and the
stakeholder side. It also created clear, consistent, and
fair penalties for violations, most of which would be
monetary tickets rather than misdemeanor crimes. It
mandated pro-active education of laws and expectations by
AMCO versus a long-standing system of education through
enforcement. He encouraged members of the committee to
forward the bill to the House Floor for passage.
9:26:48 AM
PATRICK LEVY, SELF, FAIRBANKS (via teleconference), owned
the distillery in the old city hall in downtown Fairbanks.
He supported SB 9 and hoped the committee would as well. He
thought it seemed like there was controversy around the
population limits. He implored members not to let such
issues impede the passage of the many needed fixes to the
state's antiquated liquor laws. As a distillery owner, he
had watched events take place year-after-year downtown such
as the Midnight Sun Festival where streets were closed off
and thousands of locals and tourists gathered. His business
was required by law to be closed by 8:00 p.m. and,
therefore, not allowed to participate in the festival. It
did not make sense. The extended hours in the bill would
allow him to stay open and participate in his local
festival.
Mr. Levy also suggested direct-to-consumer shipping in the
bill would allow his business to finally sell his products
direct to Alaskans. Alaska's current laws prevented him
from shipping his products to other Alaskans. Senate Bill 9
would fix the issue. In the early days of the pandemic he
could ship 180 proof hand sanitizer, a class 3 flammable,
directly to consumers across the United States using the
U.S. Postal Service (USPS). He indicated that while he
would not be allowed to ship his alcoholic beverage product
through the USPS, being able to ship his product using
Federal Express or UPS would be a new market for his
business. He asked the legislature to allow his business to
have the new market that would help him to recover from the
pandemic. He asked members to vote for the passage of SB 9.
9:29:03 AM
JEANNE REILLY, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), was a
business owner of Riley's Pub in Anchorage. She supported
SB 9 and encouraged members to pass the bill as it was
currently written. She had worked with several stakeholders
on the language. After many years and many compromises SB 9
was drafted. Title 4 was first written in 1959 and amended
sometime between 1980 and 1982. She opined the law was
dated. The language in the bill cleaned up many confusing
and frustrating questions as to what all of the
participants in the industry could do and how to operate
within clear and fair parameters. She urged members to pass
the bill.
9:29:54 AM
ANA FISK, VICE PRESIDENT, BROWN JUG, ANCHORAGE (via
teleconference), reported that Brown Jug started as a
family-owned business in the Mid-1930s. Brown Jug was
currently Alaska's largest chain of package stores and was
acquired by Afognak Commercial Group in 2020. Since
acquiring Brown Jug, the company had endeavored to be
responsible community members in the areas in which it
operated. The company was proud to have donated $2 million
to Covenant House in the prior year in addition to the
$150,000 raised by Brown Jug for a variety of non-profits
including Food Bank, ASPCA, and the Sea Life Center. Brown
Jug most recently completed a fundraiser for a $15,000
donation to Dollars for Dogs which would fund a new police
dog for the Anchorage Police Department.
Ms. Fisk continued that the company had also made major
investments in renovating and updating its stores in
Alaska. On the operational side, the company had also
installed patron scan systems in four stores in 2021 with
additional installations in 2022. A patron scan system was
an exterior-mounted I.D. scanner which kept the front
entrance to a store locked until a valid I.D. was scanned.
The installation of the systems had helped to reduce crime
in the stores by 92 percent and prevented under age,
expired, or fake I.D.s from being used at the company's
locations.
Ms. Fisk continued that while Afognak just became involved
in the industry less than 2 years ago, it had seen a
growing concern with untasked and largely unregulated state
internet sales coming into Alaska. Through an unforeseen
and growing loophole, the out-of-state online sellers were
not subject to Alaska's state alcohol excise tax. State
regulators like AMCO could not track how much out-of-state
alcohol was ordered through them each year. The untaxed and
largely untracked out-of-state online sellers were not
making any capital investments in Alaska. Also, they were
not investing in state-of-the-art systems like patron scan,
employing Alaskans, or making donations to community
organizations. Brown Jug appreciated the legislature's
consideration of SB 9 and strongly supported its passage to
address the loophole through Section 13 of the bill and to
update Alaska's alcohol statute more broadly. Brown Jug
looked forward to continuing to work with the legislature
and local leaders in finding policy solutions that
positively impacted Alaskan communities.
Representative Rasmussen thanked the testifier for all of
Brown Jug's philanthropy in Alaska.
9:32:48 AM
JASON DAVIS, SELF, HOMER (via teleconference), was a city
council member in Homer and an owner of a small winery. He
suggested that SB 9 was a strong bill that only did good
things for existing breweries such as himself. However, he
was calling in to ask that the committee to amend the bill
keeping the current population limits in place. His request
was not for himself or other brewers but for future
entrepreneurs who wanted to be a part of the local industry
that had significant growth potential.
Mr. Davis elaborated that Homer was a thriving tourist
town. Many people who visited Homer came, in part, to enjoy
the products of the five craft brewers in the area. If SB 9
passed in its current form, Homer's population would have
to grow to 36,000 from the 6,000 population presently in
order to have one more brewery or one more winery tasting
room. The mayor of Homer, the Chamber of Commerce, other
city council members, and four of the five craft brewers
were also supporting the amendment of SB 9 to maintain the
current population limits.
Mr. Davis commented that in a previous hearing, committee
members asked all the right questions. The Brewer's Guild
had stated their dislike of the population limits in the
the bill. He asked members to continue asking the hard
questions. He suggested asking the Brewers' Guild why they
disliked the limits. He thought they would respond that the
limits were imposed on them by powerful lobbyists, some of
whom favored imported factory beer over locally made
products in Alaska. If bill supporters tried to distract
members by talking about how many amazing opportunities the
bill created for future entrepreneurs that wanted to open
breweries, he suggested pressing them on why they also
believed lobbyists would kill the bill if the small
amendment he was suggesting maintained the status quo in
place for decades. The answer would be that the bill was
only tolerated by lobbyists because it killed the future
expansion of craft brewing around the state for the
foreseeable future. He asked members to amend the bill
before passing it from committee.
9:35:05 AM
EVAN WOOD, DEVIL'S CLUB BREWING COMPANY, JUNEAU (via
teleconference), spoke in support of SB 9. The legislation
clarified how breweries were supposed to operate. He asked
members to support the passage of the bill.
9:36:19 AM
ANDREW ROE, LAT 65 BREWING, FAIRBANKS (via teleconference),
opened a new brewery and made a $2.5 million investment
including a $400,000 brewhouse. When he and his partner
first opened, they quickly became concerned that there was
not enough revenue to support the business. They had about
$1500 per day in expenses for things such as labor, cost of
materials, debt service to the bank, fuel, taxes, and
electricity. They looked at things they could do to improve
the number of customers that walked in the door. They
continued to make the best product possible and to create
the best atmosphere for their customers. However, they were
limited by state law. They were not allowed to put up dart
boards, have a T.V. up to host games on Sundays, or invite
their favorite blue grass bands to play. He indicated SB 9
would serve a real life-breathe to his brewery. Being able
to stay open later and being able to have 4 live events
each year would help. There were many people, including
locals and tourists, who preferred the brewery and tasting
room scenes. He spoke of having to close his doors each day
at 8:00 pm in the land of the midnight sun. He urged
members to pass the bill.
Representative Wool asked Mr. Roe whether he was aware of
the existing law when he opened his business.
Mr. Roe responded that he was aware of the law. However, he
did not know what kind of revenue could be generated, as it
could only be estimated. He and his partner took a chance
with their investment. It appeared he would be making money
in 2022. His business lost a significant amount of revenue
in 2021.
Representative Wool reiterated there was existing statute
when Mr. Roe made his investment. He suggested that some of
Mr. Roe's revenue was from the wholesale beer market. He
thought Mr. roe was trying to focus on the retail portion
of his business. He asked if his business model reflected a
percentage of revenues from retail and wholesale. He also
thought Mr. Roe might need a BDL. He asked him if he had
considered a BDL before opening.
Mr. Roe responded to the first part of Representative
Wool's question. He anticipated about 10 percent of outside
sales. He wanted to focus on the tasting room. When the
numbers started coming in after opening, he rapidly tried
to expand the tasting room. Most of his business' revenue
came from the tasting room which was the reason the
extension of hours would make a significant difference.
Regarding a BDL, he was not interested in becoming a bar,
serving hard alcohol, or staying open late at night. He
would be paying for many things he did not need for his
business with a BDL.
Representative Wool commented that a BDL would allow for
many of the things Mr. Roe had mentioned. He noted the Tap
House in downtown Fairbanks which had a BDL.
Mr. Roe responded that it was an added expense that he
could not afford.
9:42:16 AM
KEVIN PRESTEGARD, OWNER, TWO SEASONS MEADERY, ANCHORAGE
(via teleconference), disagreed with specific language in
the bill which would inhibit future businesses from
opening. His business would not be affected, rather, it
would greatly benefit from the passage of the bill. He
urged members' support.
9:43:20 AM
BROOKE IVY, VICE PRESIDENT OF POLICY AND ADVOCACY, ALASKA
CHILDREN'S TRUST, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), was in
strong support of SB 9. All Alaska children deserved to be
safe and healthy. Alcohol played a major role in many of
the social and behavioral issues communities faced everyday
which included child abuse and neglect. A primary tool that
could be used to help address current trends was
prevention. One form of prevention was to minimize alcohol
consumption among Alaska's youth. Youth grew into adults
and research showed that when consumption of alcohol was
reduced at a young age, negative impacts later in life were
also reduced. She reported that over 80 percent of
substantiated child abuse and neglect cases involved
substance misuse which usually involved alcohol. In 2018,
the Alaska Office of Children's Services (OCS) estimated
that child abuse and neglect cases where alcohol misuse was
a factor totaled nearly $40 million or .25 percent of OCS
spending. She noted that the version of SB 9 before the
committee was a collaborative process which included input
from hundreds of stakeholders from numerous sectors and had
taken years to reach an agreement. She urged support for
the bill in its current form.
9:45:21 AM
CYNTHIA DRINKWATER, OWNER, CYNOSURE BREWING, ANCHORAGE (via
teleconference), supported SB 9 and its important updates
to Title 4. She was hopeful that the changes in SB 9 that
directly affected her small business such as the later
closing time, the opportunity to have 4 live entertainment
events per year, and the clarification of the statute
governing the activities of tasting rooms would help her
business and other brewery tap rooms to grow. She argued
that the bill was good for the brewing and hospitality
industries and well as for Alaskans. The bill was a
representation of the hard work of many people from a
diverse group of participants over several years. She urged
members to pass the critical update to Title 4.
9:46:56 AM
SALLY JEFFERSON, WINE INSTITUTE, VENTURA, CALIFORNIA (via
teleconference), had submitted written testimony. A great
deal of thought and compromise had gone into the winery
direct shipping provision that had been in the omnibus bill
since the beginning and were agreed to by the stakeholder
group. The provisions were consistent with safe programs
that had been safely operating for more than 30 years and
that wineries were already required to comply with across
the country. When SB 9 was recently amended, the
stakeholder-agreed-upon-12-case-limit was drastically cut
to 3 cases annually with a unique prohibition of no more
than 1 case per transaction. The deep reduction in the wine
quantity limit appeared to have gotten caught up in the
unrelated issue of spirits bootlegging. It was unfair to
penalize wine consumers and products due to such concerns.
Ms. Jefferson reported that 46 other states permitted
direct wine shipping with all allowing a minimum of 12
cases annually. A number of states allowed 24 cases or
more. If a 3-case annual limit were to be enacted, it would
impose the second most restrictive quantity limit of the
states allowing direct shipment. The 1 case restriction per
transaction would also limit Alaska consumers from joining
wine clubs which offered unique access to limited
production wines not available at retail. Also, winery
direct shipments to Alaska consumers in relation to the
state's total wine retail sales in 2020 were less than 1
percent of sales by volume. Even with most of the United
States population having access to direct wine shipments,
97 percent of wine was still sold through whole sellers and
retailers and would not change with a 12-case quantity
limit on direct shipments. She urged the committee to
restore the wine quantity limits agreed to by the
stakeholder group.
9:49:14 AM
NATASHA PINEDA, ALASKA PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION, ANCHORAGE
(via teleconference), expressed the board's support of
SB 9. She indicated the Title 4 re-write began more than 10
years prior. At the time, she worked for the state in the
Division of Behavioral Health and was the chair of the
State of Alaska Committee to Prevent Underaged Drinking.
The committee documented its recommendations to adopt
appropriate changes to Title 4 in their 2013 publication,
"Alaska Strategies to Prevent Underaged Drinking." The work
on the legislation had been ongoing by many stakeholders.
She opined that it was time to pass the bill in its current
form. She expressed her support and the board's support for
SB 9. Her organization supported the inclusion of
evidence-based public health practices to reduce alcohol
misuse and harms included in SB 9.
Representative Wool asked which items in the bill would
help to reduce the harm caused by alcohol.
Ms. Pineda wondered if the representative had finished his
question.
Representative Wool asked Ms. Pineda to point out one or
two items that would most help in reducing the harm caused
by alcohol. He had received calls from public health
entities who identified the alcohol problems in the state.
Ms. Pineda responded that the important items included
internet sales and population limits.
9:52:34 AM
AT EASE
9:53:13 AM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Merrick indicated the committee would resume
hearing public testimony at 10:00 a.m.
9:53:28 AM
AT EASE
10:01:32 AM
RECONVENED
BEN MILLSTEIN, KODIAK ISLAND BREWING COMPANY, KODIAK (via
teleconference), spoke in support of the compromise bill
which had been worked out over many years and involved many
stakeholders. He argued that there was not a perfect bill
to satisfy all stakeholders. The last time the bill was
before the legislature it did not pass because of an
amendment offered disturbing a delicate balance. He
addressed the BDL comment made earlier. He indicated that a
BDL was population limited and was not an option for many.
He thanked the committee.
10:03:16 AM
ALLISON BIASTOCK, ALASKA MENTAL HEALTH TRUST AUTHORITY,
ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), testified in support of
SB 9. The bill contained provisions that would directly
impact the health and wellness of Alaskans and more
specifically beneficiaries of the Trust. As an organization
that had been active in efforts to reform Title 4 for many
years, the Trust was proud of the collaborative work
amongst the diverse stakeholders to arrive at the
compromise that was SB 9. The bill controlled internet
Alcohol sales, limited youth access to alcohol, and
promoted responsible alcohol use. At the Trust, people knew
that alcohol misuse had a human and economic cost.
Ms. Biastock relayed that a McDowell report commissioned by
the Trust estimated the cost of alcohol misuse in Alaska in
2018 at $2.4 billion. It was more difficult to estimate the
significant impacts to health and quality of life that
alcohol misuse had on those who experienced it as well as
their loved ones. The Trust was opposed to changes to the
existing rules regulating outlet density in the bill. She
suggested that limiting outlet density was a proven
strategy in reducing alcohol misuse. She thanked Senator
Micciche for sponsoring the legislation. She respectfully
asked members to pass the bill.
Representative Wool noted the previous speaker had
mentioned outlet density. He noted that tasing rooms were
allowed in distilleries since 2014 and in breweries some
years prior. He wondered if she considered them outlet
density increases. He asked if she had supported the
changes when they came forward in the past.
Ms. Biastock did not know the position of the Trust at the
time but could find out and respond in writing.
10:05:58 AM
MIKE HEALY, PRESIDENT, SKAGWAY BREWING COMPANY, SKAGWAY
(via teleconference), had been in business since 2007. His
business was a small batch brewery and the cost of ounce
per beer was relatively high compared to breweries in
Washington. He had a Brewpub license and in order to
distribute beer anywhere via a distributor, he had to have
a beverage dispensary license to do so. He thought it was
odd and argued that a business should not be forced to have
a license that allowed a business to pour liquor in order
to distribute beer products. He thought the rule was
antiquated. He had a BDL but had to go through a
distributor. There was not a distributor in the town of
Skagway. In order for him to bring beer into his own
restaurant, he had to go through a distributor and pay a
distribution fee despite him having to do 100 percent of
the work minus filing out a piece of paper.
Mr. Healy offered that he had also tried to get his beer
into some of the other bars around town and would have to
do it via distributor. However, the extra cost of
distribution for a small batch brewery was not worth the
effort. He noted having placed his beer in one of the local
restaurants in the previous summer to test it out in a
non-profit arrangement. He noted that the bar carried many
Seattle and Portland tap beers. All of those taps
contributed money to out-of-state breweries because
Alaska's current system did not allow for the small batch
in-state breweries such as his business to be profitable to
distribute. The changes in SB 9 would allow him to
self-distribute his beer to his own restaurants and other
bars and tap rooms around town and potentially in other
parts of Southeast Alaska. It would open up a great
opportunity for his business and extinguish some of the
existing antiquated laws.
Representative Wool was sorry to hear of Mr. Healy's
predicament. He wondered about distribution to other bars
and entities. Mr. Healy had indicated he had to have a BDL.
He wondered if a manufacturing license would allow him to
distribute. He thought a manufacturing license would be of
more help.
Mr. Healy responded that he had looked into a manufacturing
license but went the route of a brewpub. Due to the
population limits, there was only one manufacturing license
which was already taken. He had spent a significant amount
of money on attorney fees trying to navigate through the
state's antiquated laws for more information.
Representative Wool appreciated Mr. Healy's answer and felt
bad for his predicament.
10:10:23 AM
TYLER JONES, GENERAL MANAGER, BROKEN TOOTH BREWING,
ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), supported SB 9 in its
current form. His business mainly supplied the Moose's
Tooth and Bear Tooth restaurants. However, the business
also did some distribution. Passing SB 9 would do away with
the current wholesale caps, thus, allowing him to
distribute more beer. The beer was taxed and would be
revenue positive for the state. The change would also
afford him to hire additional employees. He urged the swift
passage of SB 9.
Representative Wool asked what differentiated Broken Tooth
Brewing from Alaska Brewing Company. He wondered if each
business had a different type of license.
Mr. Jones responded that he had a Brewpub license with a
15,000 barrel production cap which had not been an issue.
However, there was a 1,200 barrel wholesale cap on brewpubs
instituted by the state.
10:12:55 AM
REID MCDONALD, OWNER AND OPERATOR, ODD MAN RUSH BREWING,
EAGLE RIVER (via teleconference), supported SB 9 because of
the positive impact and opportunities it would provide for
current and future breweries. He realized the bill was a
compromise and wished it went further in terms of brewery
taps rooms. He wanted to see the bill pass to correct the
antiquated laws regarding tap rooms needed to change. He
purchased a regular BDL recently to provide him a level
playing field. He indicated that as a small neighborhood
craft brewery and an owner of a BDL, he had the ability to
stay open later, have a television, and provide live music
which had all helped tremendously in being able to generate
a profit. He reiterated that to truly compete he was forced
to spend big money on a BDL which he did not think should
be the case. He thought some of the laws in place boiled
down to competition. He thought consumers should be left
with the decision of where to frequent. The update to Title
4 was long overdue. He supported the bill.
10:15:11 AM
JOSH HEGNA, OWNER, GIRDWOOD BREWING COMPANY, GIRDWOOD (via
teleconference), urged members to support SB 9. He thought
the bill would help his business and others in the
hospitality industry. It would be good for a myriad of
reasons across Alaskan communities. Businesses were
desperately trying to rebound from the pandemic and SB 9
would open up some much needed opportunities for struggling
Alaskan companies and their employees. He indicated that
the extension of hours until 10:00 p.m. was critically
important to his business. He opined that responsible
adults should have the freedom to enjoy a beer in a tasting
room after 8:00 p.m. especially in a healthy community like
Girdwood. Tourists and locals liked to night ski and hike
until after 8:00 p.m. Additionally, many people who lived
in Girdwood commuted to Anchorage for work. After a long
day of work and a family dinner, they could not make it out
until after 8:00 p.m. He thought it was an unfair and
unnecessary obstacle for a tasting room. After a decade, it
was time to pass the update to Title 4 contained in SB 9.
10:16:45 AM
JEFF JESSEE, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
indicated that 15 years prior when he was the CEO of the
Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority and Bob Klein was the
long-time chair of the Alcohol and Beverage Control (ABC)
Board, they had a number of public disputes over the
application and enforcement of the current alcohol beverage
control statutes and the workarounds that the board was
forced to make. Eventually he and others realized the only
long term solution was a comprehensive rewrite of the
state's Title 4 statutes. The only way to achieve such a
change was for the parties to sit down, listen to each
other, and forge a partnership to develop a compromise for
the future. It was imperative to find common ground to
advance public policy. He responded to Representative
Wool's earlier question. It was always understood that once
a comprehensive bill was passed, it would be up to the
various interests to pursue any further amendments or
changes as the industry and public health evolved. It was
just part of the process. However, the first giant step of
compromise needed to occur. He urged the committee to pass
the bill. He invited them to bring more targeted bills
forward to deal with changes in the future. He approved of
the compromise reached in the bill.
Representative Wool asked what the Alaska Mental Health
Trust Authority's position was on previous stand-alone
bills having to do with brewers and distillery tasting
rooms. He had asked the question of an earlier testifier.
He also wondered about the Trust's previous position on
increasing outlet density.
Mr. Jesse could not recall a specific position on the bills
the representative mentioned. He did not believe the Trust
had taken a position.
10:20:17 AM
JACK LAU, OWNER, DOUBLE SHOVEL CIDER COMPANY, ANCHORAGE
(via teleconference), supported SB 9 as written without
amendment. The bill helped the entire industry, including
new and existing businesses. It provided businesses the
opportunity to recover and grow with immediate and
sustainable impacts on revenue. The bill was the result of
give and take and the balance of the bill was fragile. The
changes were much better than what was in existing statute.
The bill was a stakeholder compromise. He had been a part
of helping to create the legislation. The bill removed
overbearing restrictions and allowed access to BDLs. He
elaborated that cideries, wineries, and distilleries could
not currently purchase a BDL. He spoke of the unfair
advantage for breweries in the craft area prior to SB 9. He
noted that the bill removed the restriction of hours of
operation for tasting rooms. Most of his clientele lead
healthy lifestyles which meant they were hiking and biking
later in the evening. The change in hours of operation
would allow access to his tap room. He also spoke of the
immediate benefit of allowing him to compete with out-of-
state distributors which would lead to more investment in
his company. He urged members to pass the bill as written.
10:22:19 AM
SASSAN MOSSANEN, OWNER AND OPERATOR, DENALI BREWING,
TALKEETNA (via teleconference), called in support of the
current version of SB 9. He had served as the vice
president of the Brewers' Guild of Alaska and was on the
CHARR governmental affairs committee during the
foundational period of the Title 4 rewrite. He spoke of the
numerous hours spent drafting the current drafting of the
bill. The fragile balance of the bill included public
safety, enforcement, and multiple other stakeholders. SB 9
created clarity for license holders and co-staff. The bill
paid for itself. He could commiserate with people who had
amendments they wanted to see in the bill. However, the
bill struck a delicate balance which he did not want to see
disrupted. He stressed that the manufacturer was important
to him that the bill did not prevent manufacturers from
opening. There was nowhere in the bill prevents people from
obtaining a manufacturing license. It created additional
retail opportunities that never existed before and also
presented opportunities for retailers to get into
manufacturing. He encouraged legislators to pass the bill
without amendments.
10:24:36 AM
ZACH ANDERSON, CO-OWNER AND GENERAL MANAGER, HARBOR
MOUNTAIN BREWING, SITKA (via teleconference), spoke in
support of SB 9 as written. He agreed with the previous
testifier. He wanted to continue to open up later. He added
that some of the changes to his local community in terms of
staying open later had not advanced. Many of the tasting
rooms provided an outlet for local artists and created a
hub for his small community. Changing the current limits
would allow for connection and community needed since the
past couple of years of the pandemic. He hoped the
legislature would pass the bill.
10:26:14 AM
AT EASE
10:26:35 AM
RECONVENED
TOM MANNING, SELF, JUNEAU (via teleconference),was an owner
of a package store in Juneau and had different types of
licenses since 1980. He called to support the bill about a
week prior. However, he was concerned with a portion of the
bill which he thought might need to be amended. He had
participated in the internet sales stakeholder group. The
issue was around internet sales from out-of-state vendors.
He did not think the issue was dealt with in the bill. He
provided some examples. He thanked the committee.
10:29:26 AM
DANA WALUKIEWICZ, CHAIRMAN, ALCOHOL BEVERAGE CONTROL BOARD,
ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), reported that the board
unanimously supported SB 9. He spoke of the benefits of the
bill. The bill also provided funds to the Alcohol and
Marijuana Control Office (AMCO) to modernize its licensing
application process which was currently time consuming,
paper based and error prone. The funding would be used to
create an online system that would increase staff
productivity and reduce the time to approve and issue
licenses and permits. The bill would also provide
additional options for enforcement. The board had struggled
with fair application of the law. He provided detail about
the current enforcement options. The bill would provide a
more applicable fine schedule for violations.
Representative LeBon asked why it was critical to the board
that the population limit be increased from 3000 to 12,000
for breweries and tasting rooms.
Mr. Walukiewicz replied that the board had previously
stayed out of the discussions concerning population limits.
However, he noted that change in the law before the
committee would provide opportunities for smaller
communities that were currently limited out. He provided an
example where two companies had applied for a brewery
license in the City of Cordova. The population limit would
only allow for one application to be approved. The board,
after deeming both applications adequately sufficient, had
to pull a name from a hat to make the decision about who
would receive the license. The changes under the current
bill would allow for additional opportunities. If another
license type was available in the community, the brewery
license applicant could pursue a straight manufacturing
license and sell through another retail means such as a
restaurant or BDL. The board had not taken a position on
population caps but believed the bill would be beneficial
and would provide clarity.
Representative LeBon asked Mr. Walukiewicz to comment on
the number of public nuisance complaints the board received
regarding breweries, wineries, and distilleries versus full
bars with BDLs.
Mr. Walukiewics did not have specific statistics on public
nuisance complaints. In his 18 months of service on the
Alcohol and Marijuana Control Board, he was not aware of
any public nuisance complaints related to tap rooms. He was
a co-owner of the King Street Brewing Company in Anchorage
and held a brewery license and a winery license holder. The
business had operated a tap room for 10 years without
having any public nuisance complaints. His business is
limited to the 36 ounces that they could serve on site
which was not changing in the bill. However, the bill would
allow the brewery to stay open to 10:00 p.m. He did not
believe the extended hours would lead to any complaints.
Breweries were generally located in a commercial or
industrial area and tended to be away from neighborhoods.
Representative Wool asked if Mr. Walukiewicz was calling on
behalf of the ABC Board or his brewing business.
Mr. Walukiewicz responded that he was speaking on behalf of
the ABC Board. The board fully supported the bill. He was
responding to Representative LeBon's question. He did not
have any formal board statistics to provide on public
nuisance complaints.
10:37:34 AM
IAN LAING, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), spoke in
opposition to portions of the bill and advocated for an
amendment. He spoke of the values associated with the
freedom to enter the market and compete creating better
lives. He believed the values should be protected. He
argued that the new restrictive rules on tasting rooms went
directly against such values. He suggested that the only
reason government should interfere would be to protect
public safety. He thought the provision should be removed
from the bill. He specified that, in general, he supported
the bill.
Representative Wool asked the testifier to specify which
limits he wanted to see removed from the bill.
Mr. Laing responded that he was referring to the population
limits on tasting rooms.
Representative LeBon asked if the testifier was calling on
behalf of himself or an entity.
Mr. Laing indicated he was calling on behalf of himself.
10:40:26 AM
JEROME HERTEL, CEO, ALASKA STATE FAIR, PALMER (via
teleconference), spoke in support of SB 9. A few years
prior the Alaska State Fair's alcohol license was in
jeopardy of not being renewed. It was determined that the
fair did not meet the definition of a recreational site
license category - a license category the fair had been
operating under for the past 39 years. The matter was
temporarily resolved with the passage of SB 16 in 2019.
That bill grandfathered the Alaska State Fair under the
recreational site license until a new fair license category
could be adopted in the Title 4 rewrite.
Mr. Hertel continued that the current version of SB 9 was a
result of many hours of hard work and compromise among
stakeholders and a solution to the state's problems. The
bill cleaned up language and provided clarity. Senate Bill
9 allowed the fair to continue operating as it had in the
past. It allowed the fair to host over 300,000 people each
year and 70 events each year. I also allowed the fair to
continue being an economic engine for the state with over
$26 million in economic impact. Without SB 9, the fair
would be faced with the same things it had faced in the
past. He requested that members of the committee support
the current version of SB 9.
10:42:41 AM
GRAHAM DOWNEY, ALASKA PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP,
ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), provide information
regarding his research group which represented the
consumer's interest. He recognized the hard work over
several years in crafting SB 9 and broadly supported the
bill. He opined that the bill provided clarity and
simplification of the rules. He had heard from bars and
breweries about the positive changes the bill would make
for the regulatory environment. He also appreciated the
advocacy of entities to make sure that vulnerable Alaskans
were protected by the bill.
Mr. Downey continued that the group was concerned with the
population limits. He was worried that the high limit of 1
per 12,000 citizens would have anti-competitive effects
that would harm consumers by reducing choices and
increasing prices. He argued that a less competitive market
was not good for anyone. He encourage members to address
the concerns he spoke of but would support the bill.
10:45:06 AM
MICHAEL JEFFERY, SELF, UTQIAGVIK (via teleconference),
joined the many others who had honored the compromise that
resulted in the current form of Ms. Brawley 9. He
particularly approved of the provisions around ordering
liquor online. He appreciated all the hard work that went
into crafting the legislation.
10:46:50 AM
TOM CHARD, CEO, ALASKA BEHAVIORAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION,
FAIRBANKS (via teleconference), submitted written testimony
and would keep his testimony short. The association
supported SB 9 in its current form and appreciated the
collaboration between parties to craft the bill.
10:48:00 AM
ERICK HEIMBIGNER, SELF, JUNEAU (via teleconference), called
in opposition of the population limits on the tap room
licenses. He thought it would prohibit the opportunity for
competition. However, he did appreciate the revamping of
Title 4. He reiterated that the tap room limit restricted
opportunities to other businesses and advocated amending
the bill. He thanked the committee for hearing his
testimony.
10:49:38 AM
JOHN BLASCO, ALASKA BREWING COMPANY, JUNEAU (via
teleconference), supported SB 9. He had been part of the
stake holder group that helped to craft the legislation. He
urged support for the bill.
10:50:43 AM
DAVID CALDWELL, BROKEN TOOTH BREWING, ANCHORAGE (via
teleconference), spoke in support of the bill and hoped it
could be passed as soon as possible. He thanked Senator
Micciche for all of his hard work on crafting SB 9.
10:51:29 AM
Co-Chair Merrick CLOSED public testimony.
SENATOR PETER MICCICHE, SPONSOR, commented on a remark made
by a wine maker. It was exemplary of changing one item
without considering the whole picture and the delicate
balance struck by the legislation. He further elaborated
that he had worked for many years with all of the
stakeholders. Some of the items in the bill offset the
balance because there had not been the opportunity to
balance the cause and effect of the changes. He thought it
was important to consider all of the benefits of the bill
before condemning certain portions of it. He noted the
number of new customers going to tasting rooms. There were
things that were extremely valuable to tasting rooms,
breweries, wineries, and distilleries while still
recognizing the value of the traditional licensee. If a
business wanted to be similar to a bar, they would be
subject to population limits. Many of the folks being
called to testify were not aware of the entire picture of
how the bill worked.
Senator Micciche also wanted to discuss a couple of things
including legislative intent language. He had spoken with
Director Klinkhart about items of concern. The first
concern had to do with the recreational site license that
would be converted to a new sporting activity or event
license. A previous bill was passed to save the Alaska
State Fair and several other business types. There were
about 4 remaining. The language in Section 168 on page 122
of the bill intended to grandfather the remaining
recreation site licenses into a sporting activity or event
activity license. He explained that he was protecting
previous license holders. There were only a few left. He
believed those existing businesses should be protected with
another license type. Director Klinkhart thought it was
important for the senator to clarify the issue on the
record. He wanted the remaining 4 entities would
grandfathered into another license type.
Senator Micciche also wanted to address direct wine
shipments. There was a small group of Alaskans purchasing
wines from wine collections outside of Alaska. It had never
been regulated before and would not be regulated in SB 9.
He clarified that private collections came from estate
sales and would continue to be unregulated. If an Alaskan
legally purchased from an auction house, they could
continue to purchase and ship legally as long as the sale
was licensed in Alaska or another state. It was not a large
market and was an unregulated transfer of a private
collection to an individual in Alaska. He thanked members
for their time and was available for questions.
10:57:53 AM
Representative LeBon asked if the senator thought there
should be an element of local control over the issuance of
a brewery and tasting room license if a community wanted to
exceed the population limit proposed in the bill.
Senator Micciche responded that there was an element of
control in the bill. If a brewery tasting room chose to go
into the REPL business and the municipality was already
capped, the bill would allow a municipality to petition the
ABC Board for additional REPLs.
Representative LeBon asked what avenue a business would
have if it did not want to upgrade its license to include
food service, wanted to remain a brewery with a tasting
room, and the population restriction was capped. He
wondered if there would be an appeal process within their
community or the ABC Board.
Senator Micciche indicated there was not an appeal process
but there were many other options. They would have 2 years
to consider the option. If the bill were to pass, some
current tasting rooms would go into the brewery,
distillery, and winery business because population limits
would no longer apply. As a result, tasting room licenses
would be freed up. Some would move into the REPL or BDL
models which would also free up tasting room licenses. For
the communities that were currently limited, such as
Cordova, they would have other options that would become
available with the passage of SB 9.
11:01:16 AM
Representative LeBon provided a hypothetic scenario because
of the Fairbanks area having both a borough and a city. A
business would likely want to establish a business within
the city rather than the borough due to the flow of
traffic, but the city was limited out by population. He
wondered if there should be an avenue to appeal to the
local government for a waiver.
Senator Micciche appreciated the question. There could
always be an appeal to the legislature. He would continue
to speak to the compromise and the tens of thousands of
hours it took to reach a compromise. It did not mean the
number was the perfect number. It might happen that the
legislature would make specific changes, but not in an
omnibus bill. He asked for the legislature to see how the
bill played out. There were very few issues with
stakeholders that could not be addressed with the bill.
11:05:25 AM
Vice-Chair Ortiz noted that through the public input
process the one item of contention was the population
limit. He wondered about how it was balanced.
Senator Micciche explained that without the limit, the
tasting rooms would not be contributing to the overall
benefits of the bill. He thought it was a fairness issue.
Human beings were admittedly self-serving. He had tried to
have give-and-take in the bill. All of the contributors
were Alaskans and were all intimately involved. He saw
Alaskans at the table who cared about a better outcome. He
reiterated the balance reflected in the bill.
11:09:54 AM
Vice-Chair Ortiz thanked the senator for his answer. He
suggested that the other opportunities included
significantly higher levels of investment. He did not
believe the other opportunities would actually be
opportunities for new entrepreneurs. He thought staring up
a new business was already a large lift. He appreciated
that there would be other opportunities but they would
require significantly more investment of entrepreneurs. He
asked if he was correct.
Senator Micciche responded that he disagreed with
Vice-Chair Ortiz. He provided a hypothetical scenario. He
mentioned the progression of a business growing into
another form of business. Some businesses would choose to
stay little while others would choose to expand.
11:13:09 AM
Representative Wool suggested that a population cap was the
topic of the day. He spoke of a previous cap of 1 per 9000.
He asked if the change was to 1 per 12,000 in exchange for
the expanded hours and live music. He wondered if the
change was an exchange in order for the BDL owners to agree
to the other two changes. In other words, if the BDLs
agreed to the expanded hours and additional live music
events for breweries, the cap would be raised resulting in
fewer new breweries with tasting rooms in communities.
Senator Micciche responded that under no condition would
there be fewer breweries because the existing ones were
grandfathered. There was still room for growth in most
communities. There were other business models that brewers
would be able to move into. He replied that the cap was 1
in 9,000 before all of the opportunities were agreed upon
in the balance of SB 9 along with things breweries could
not do before. He did not want to see a clamp placed on
expansion of breweries and a more successful business
model. Amendments would play into squashing additional
opportunities in the brewery, distillery, and winery
businesses. He had posed the question as to what would make
a business want to expand.
11:16:40 AM
Representative Wool noted a caller who mentioned he had a
brew pub license but could not distribute. There was a brew
pub distribution cap of 1200 barrels. The caller wanted the
cap expanded. The caller state he had to get a BDL to
distribute. He did not know BDLs could distribute under
current law. He asked for clarification.
Senator Micciche thought the caller might have cited the
wrong license type. The bill allowed a business to have an
offsite brewery so that it could sell without a cap.
Currently breweries, distilleries, and wineries were
capped. Some people were in the tasting room business
because they could not distribute enough to make money.
They offset the cost with some additional revenues from
their tasting room. Some of the existing tasting rooms
would move into being a brewery that just distributed
without having a tasting room.
Co-Chair Merrick informed the committee she planned to
adjourn at 11:30 p.m.
Representative Wool wanted to comment that the caller from
Fairbanks who just opened a brewery knew what he was
getting into regarding restrictions under existing law. The
caller also reported that his business model was to have 90
percent of revenues from on premise sales (beer by the
glass) and 10 percent from wholesale. He understood the
caller wanting to expand his hours helping out his
business. However, he did not see the caller getting rid of
his tasting room. He thought it was a tough market and
could see where a tasting room would be solvent. He
applauded the changes that would allow them to convert to a
REPL. He suggested breweries could easily expand to an
REPL. He applauded the REPL and BDL additions to
manufacturing licenses. He understood the deal that was
struck. He argued that once something was expanded it would
be difficult to change. He was afraid to expand too much at
once. He was cautious of the bill. He pointed out that in
the last 3 legislatures in the previous 6 years the Title 4
rewrite bill had adopted 36 amendments.
11:21:57 AM
Representative Josephson referred to Section 167, Section
168, and Section 169 regarding the transition. He talked
about a 2-year window of being grandfathered. He asked for
further explanation.
Senator Micciche appreciated the question. He indicated
there were 31 tasting rooms in the state since 2007.
However, people in Cordova would have to wait, as the
community was capped out. Homer was also capped out. He
thought there would be the normal flow of new breweries,
distilleries, and wineries. He noted there had been several
changes to the legislation. He believed the industry and
public safety had suffered immensely because of the delays
with passing the bill. He commented that through the years
of the bill not passing he had moved the industry, public
safety, and public health backwards.
Co-Chair Merrick thanked Senator Micciche for being in the
meeting. She announced that amendments were due by
6:00 p.m. on Saturday, April 2, 2022. She reviewed the
agenda for the following meeting.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 9 Public Testimony Rec'd by 032922.pdf |
HFIN 3/30/2022 9:00:00 AM |
SB 9 |
| SB 9 Support AMHTA 033122.pdf |
HFIN 3/30/2022 9:00:00 AM |
SB 9 |
| HB 60 Amendments 1-7 032922.pdf |
HFIN 3/30/2022 9:00:00 AM |
HB 60 |