H.B. 597 Alcohol Amendments: transcript

Okay, thank you, Mr. Chair and Committee. Um, each year, uh, we, we grapple with, uh, alcohol policy as our our, uh, state, uh, evolves, becomes more urbanized and populations change. And, uh, we urbanize, we, we find, uh, things in code that we need to fix this bill attempts to do, uh, some of that. Um, there is an amendment online, amendment four. Um, I'm hearing from, uh, some stakeholders, we might need to tweak that even further. But I do need to, to move that amendment and then we can, we can handle any additions later. Okay. We don't see amendment four online. There's amendment three. It's amendment three. Amendment three. I apologize. Okay. That amendment, uh, took one and two and combined them. Uh, so three is the only one that I need to move, and I'll, I'll speak to that. Okay. Amendment three, uh, clarifies punishments for serving a minor alcohol for, for knowingly doing that. It also clarifies, uh, identification that can be used to as proof of age. Uh, you may recall the bill that was run recently by, uh, Representative Eliason, the a hundred percent Id check, bill. Uh, there have to be a few caveats to the bill because the technology doesn't scan international driver's licenses. It doesn't scan passports, and it currently doesn't scan, um, mobile IDs. And so those are visual checks, uh, based on the, the, uh, viewing of the license to see that the age is right, and then looking at the individual and, uh, then their permitted service. The, the bar or, uh, tavern would keep a record of those, those people that they allowed in that had a foreign, uh, ID that couldn't be scanned. Um, you know, to the bill. Uh, uh, this bill does a couple of things. Many of you, if you're tracking what's going on out there, uh, we had several municipalities who, who, uh, were trying to avoid code, current code, uh, because they've become urbanized and they, they wanted to say, build a hotel. And the hotel was, uh, less than 300 feet from a city park, for instance. And some of those municipalities got quite creative and, and wanted to do things like change the name of the park to, uh, green space so that they could go ahead and build that hotel. Uh, we felt like that was bad policy and that we needed to fix that. So what this bill does is it, uh, allows a local authority, a city, uh, for instance, to, to, uh, assess that situation. If they want to build a, a full service hotel in a location like that, they could, uh, run a public hearing and, and make the decision to do that. And then they would send that, uh, that application, if you will, or that request to the state, uh, alcohol commission for approval. Um, in this way, we won't have people trying to manipulate the code, and, uh, we want people to follow the code. So that's the first and probably the largest part of this bill. The other thing we did, and, and, uh, I am the last person that, uh, to, to, like, uh, land authorities and organizations, uh, that are put together, that don't have elected officials on them. But in the case of the point of the Mountain State Land Authority, we have a couple of elected officials that, that are on that board. Um, decisions that are going to be made out there about development of the state Land Authority will be heard in, in public hearings with the City of Draper. And those decisions once approved, will be applied. And so we gave the state land authority some, some power to, uh, to bring those kinds of decisions forward. In no way do we want the public not to have a role in this. And that's, uh, that went on with discussions with prevention groups. Uh, we added that part, uh, to the bill. Uh, the, it's the other things very quickly. Uh, it, it changes the, the number of hotel rooms from 40 to 30 to qualify as a hotel. It, uh, provides criminal penalty and it increases those for selling furnishing alcohol to a minor. Um, in the case of restaurants, full service restaurants, we look at the data. We don't see a lot of, uh, drunk driving coming out of, uh, full service restaurants. And so in order to not impede commerce too much, uh, we require the, uh, the 30 5-year-old rule. So if you go to a full service restaurant and, and want to order a drink, if you, if you appear to be 35 or younger, you will be checked. Your ID will be checked. But as you recall from the Elon Bill, if you go to a bar, it's a hundred percent check and you will be scanned, uh, to, to ensure that you're part of the, uh, real ID program and to catch interdicted persons that shouldn't be drinking. Um, let's see what else I need to cover here. Uh, the, uh, the Department of Alcohol Beverage Control, just like every, or service, I mean, just like every organization has this problem of no pennies now. And so when people pay, uh, excuse me, by cash, this bill, uh, provides a, a methodology whereby they round up a round down, uh, on the, uh, change back. And it's, it's consistent with what other state agencies are doing. Um, the other thing it does, it places audit control under the director of the department so that she can, uh, in this case, examine her department, look at what needs to be audited and build that audit plan. It also has the alcohol commission, uh, available to, in, uh, recommend changes to the division's audit plan. Uh, and it helps, uh, with the commission, uh, because we added language in there where they can deny licenses, uh, based on certain criteria. Um, I'm not gonna waste your time with all of this. You can scan the bill. Um, there, there's also some language that allows, if you are in a, in a facility, for instance, where there's a, a restaurant, uh, and a banquet area or restaurant in a bar, um, and, and you're within, uh, 30 feet of the other facility, you can, you can move your drink into that other facility within 30 feet. Uh, the, probably the next big thing, and then I'll stop for, for questions is the 70 30 rule, 70 30 rule, if you're not familiar with it, is, uh, the requirement to sell 70% food, 30% alcohol. Uh, we looked at that, that formula. Uh, some, some, uh, uh, agencies or, or sales, uh, facilities, were having a hard time with that. For instance, uh, takeout food doesn't count in that. And so a lot of them do a lot of takeout food. And, uh, they were having a hard time with it. So we, we just looked, simply looked at the 70 30 rule. And for instance, if you, if you have a mixed drink and it's an $8 mixed drink and $2 of that drink or, or actual alcohol that you bought from the state, and $6 of that drink or flavorings and the additives, those don't count toward the alcohol. So, so you pull that out and put it in the food column. Anyway, that, that, uh, formula was worked and, and shared with the, with the groups that we met with. And we think it, we think it's a better formula overall. And then finally, I'll just say, uh, we increase signage for, uh, for off-premise beer retailers, uh, that, uh, indicate that alcohol is a harmful product. And, uh, and they're fairly large signs. And finally, uh, the reception center licenses we're halfway through the year, and we're just about out of them. And this bill would offer four more of those from 15 licenses to 19 to finish the year. And so I would just, uh, uh, make sure my colleagues understand that this bill is very important for the governance of, uh, of alcohol sales. I feel very blessed. The state of Utah is a control state. We're one of 17. Uh, we sell the alcohol as a state. We control it. Uh, we use the proceeds to correct some of the ills, the product causes. And as a state, we need to guard that very carefully. Uh, states that have lost that ability would love to put the monkey back in the, in the barrel. And once you've opened it, you can't get it back. So we try to be as pragmatic as we can with this bill, while wanting to keep Utah, Utah, wanting to keep our kids safe. And it's a very difficult, uh, trade off. But I would tell you, we need this, this bill passed for, for governance purposes for the next, uh, year. And with that, I'm open to questions.

Thank Mr. Chair. I have a clarifying question, but before I do that, I wanna make a motion that we adjourn at five 50. Is set a time to adjourn at five 50. Okay. That, uh, motion is in order. Any discussion to that motion? It's non debatable.

there have been some conversations about the state liquor store selling non-alcoholic spirits. Um, and so I'm wondering if that's something that has come up in your conversations, or if that's something that I could maybe bend somebody's ear and we can maybe talk about if that requires statutory authority, adding that to the list of things.

So you said non, non-alcoholic, right? Uh, that has not come up in, in my, within my earshot. Uh, Eric is here. I think the director of the dabs would probably be willing to talk to you. Yeah, let's About that. Let, yeah, we'll take it offline. We'll talk about it later, but just, I just wanna put that out there. Thank you. Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, so I live in a small town, the church, the hotel, the park, they're all ki the library, they're all within very, they're very close together. Does this look like it's, those are a community location, right? The community locations, the church school, or a library, or park, I, I believe is what it's listed. Is this giving, saying that with consent, uh, maybe that hotel could carry alcohol with consent of the, the town? Is it, is that how, how I read it?

Yeah. If the town decides they wanna build a hotel, uh, but be, be, to be clear, churches are not on the table. They have to comply with the distance from a church or a school. Okay. The only thing we're saying is, and thanks for asking the question because it helps me clarify, is that that parks and libraries, those kinds of things, uh, we might consider a hotel closer. Uh, if it's a full service hotel, we do not consider bars or anything like that. But full service restaurants where you might go to have a nice meal, uh, that would be considered, uh, if the city wanted to push that for the alcohol commission. But churches and schools are not on the table, we're gonna continue to have those distances. And we think that's fair. Even with urbanization, you, you can keep that, uh, clean. Uh, the parks are becoming a challenge, frankly.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yeah. I had the same question as our vice chair. I, I found I was looking online, uh, 1020 and, and saw that same, that same thing, you know, churches in schools. But in my district, we have the same, we have the same issue. We have an Episcopal church, uh, on 24th Street in Ogden. And across the street. We have a, a restaurant there that I know has had to do some renovations, and they've got a, an awkward entrance going through a parking lot. Um, I, I understand the, the, uh, the desire to keep it away from schools and, and the distance there. I, I would prefer to see that we could have still some negotiation with, with cities to try and figure out these different areas. 'cause while I agree that it's becoming more difficult to keep this with parks, I just think as we continue to grow, churches and schools will still become a part of the problem. So I think it's something we still need to address. I don't want alcohol to get anywhere near schools. Um, but I, I do think there are some instances in Utah, uh, that, that need a little bit more discussion on this. But I appreciate you bringing this bill, working on this. Yeah. So thank you.

We, we haven't seen a lot of trouble with existing churches. What we've seen is pop up churches, like in a street mall, in a strip mall. We've seen that as a problem. Uh, not, not existing churches. I mean, we're talking 300 feet. Nobody's going to, in the right mind's gonna build a bar 300 feet from an existing church. But, but, but strip mall, churches that pop up, those have been a problem. Frankly, I don't see that changing. And this is, this is a church that I looked it up. It was built in 1875. Uh, so it's extremely old. Uh, but again, appreciate what you're doing and

Thank you. I'm Art Brown. I represent myself. Uh, I am concerned about the proximity, especially, uh, in regards to playgrounds where we talk about parks, but where kids play, I think it's a, uh, an issue to put an alcohol outlet near it. Uh, they're very impress pressable. If it looks pleasurable to them, they're more likely to try it. So I like to see some more accommodation too, for not just schools and, uh, churches, but where kids play, young kids play in the playgrounds. So that's why I would not, uh, I really would not support the bill without some more accommodation. Accommodation where kids play. Thank you.

Members of the committee. Thank you. Uh, my name is Kate Bradshaw. I serve as the Mayor of Bountiful, Utah, and as president of the League of Cities and Towns this year. And I am here in support of the bill. And I wanna speak to provisions that you've already noted in the bill dealing with, um, uh, what's known as local consent for proximity. Uh, this has been an issue that the League of Cities and towns and cities across the state have raised for the last several years. And we're happy to see this provision included. Uh, these are conversations, um, that take place in our communities as we're working on economic development opportunities, on recreation opportunities, and of course, on the important issue of public safety. In my city of Bountiful and our 1.2 mile stretch on our historic main street, I have a school, two parks, a library that is undergoing a renovation, but we're calling a Twig library, which is the temporary branch of the library that is now in a temporary location for 18 months, um, and a junior high. And so that historic main street keeping that vibrancy that my community wants and is asked for is our historic commercial center. And where we find our cultural identity and community gathering points needs to balance all of those interests. And in at the local government level, we're happy to have this ability using the process that is outlined, the notice provisions of 30 days and public comment, and a public vote, to have those discussions and find that right balance, particularly where you, this bill proposes to grant us that authority related to parks and libraries. In that list I gave you there, there's also a Bountiful historic tabernacle, the longest, uh, operating, religious, uh, building in the state of Utah. And, um, we're happy to have those discussions around those different points and make sure that we strike that balance, particularly where you've granted it in this draft around libraries and around parks. Thank you.

Great. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, Liam Thrill Hill on behalf of Utah Food, retail, and, uh, retail merchants. Um, just had, uh, one, one quick thing here. We thank Representative Burton for working with us. He's always great to work with. We have one small concern on the, uh, signage and language requirements for the off-premise beer retailers. Um, we've been, we brought that to his attention. We're working with him there, and I, I think we'll be able to, to work that out, uh, in the future. But just wanna say thanks to Representative Burton for all the work that he is done on this. Thanks.

Thank you so much for the time. My name is Julie Anderson. I'm here representing myself as well as the Utah Prevention Coalition Association Advocacy Chair that represents 74 coalitions, youth coalitions. Within the state of Utah. Utah has spent several years building some of the strongest protections in the nation to prevent early alcohol exposure Among youth, shifting proximity decisions to individual municipalities weakens the consistent statewide standards upheld by the Alcohol Beverage Service Commission. When each city sets its own rules, alcohol serving establishments can move closer to Parks, playgrounds, and other youth spaces eroding the safeguards that keep children's environments safe. Thus, the safeguards designed to keep alcohol away from children daily environments become, becomes uneven and easier to erode. Maintaining a clear statewide statewide standard helps preserve safe community spaces and ensures that youth protections remain strong and consistent across Utah. Our youth are ignored sometimes in these alcohol debates. We need to remember and keep our youth continually safe. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Heidi Baxley. I am a prevention specialist for the Southwest Behavioral Health Center. And I'm here to respectfully urge you to keep alcohol proximity restrictions, consistent statewide proximity restrictions or prevention tools that create predictable boundaries around schools, parks, and other youth centered spaces. Consistency across the state makes our laws easier to understand, easier to enforce, and more fair for businesses and communities alike. When standards vary by municipality, it creates confusion, uneven enforcement, and ultimately pressure on our local leaders. A clear statewide policy ensures that every community, rural or urban, operates under the same expectations and protections. Thoughtful proximity standards are one way to reduce unnecessary exposure of alcohol for our youth. Keeping these restrictions consistent statewide supports public safety, protects our youth, and provides clarity for everyone involved. Thank you for your time.

Yes. Sorry. There you go. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, every Sunday I drive to, when I drive to church, I pass the shooting star saloon that is right in our, in back, in our parking lot. Um, we, it's been there longer than the church. I think so, uh, I I think it, I think it'll be fine. It's also right across from the park and we will be also been fine. I think this is, is, I think this will work out. So I, uh, uh, yeah, I'm, I'm, I forgot to make the motion, but I guess someone else can do that, but I'm, I'm good with it, so.

I'm sorry. We did, we have, I just lost my screen. Uh, just a reminder, we need to adopt a, a substitute or amendment. I mo make a motion to adopt the first Amendment. Third. Third amendment. Third amendment. Sorry, I lost my screen here. Motion to adopt the fir third amendment.

I'll, I'll waive. I explained what it was, so Thank you Mr. Chair.

I'll waive. Okay.

Yeah, I appreciate the amendment. Uh, anybody who knows me knows this is a very difficult bill for me to run Mr. Chair. Um, I've spent hundreds of hours over the interim meeting with prevention folks and, uh, also with, uh, with folks that create and distribute and sell the beverages. This is the United States of America. Uh, people should have availability, but they're not free from the consequences of, of over consuming. And so, I think personal responsibility is key here. I love children like everyone else, and I wanna keep them safe. Uh, I believe though that local governance is the best methodology. They're elected and they can be fired by the people that elect them if they make the wrong decisions. So I would appreciate your support on this bill.

Well thank you for hearing this bill. It, uh, should be fairly non-controversial. It's not really political, it's administrative in nature. Uh, many of you know that Utah's one of 17 states that is part of the control model option. We love that model because it allows the state to regulate alcohol sales and the proceeds go to cover public expenses associated with the use of the product. Um, for instance, in the last, uh, three or four years, we've hired 18 additional state troopers using alcohol funding, uh, to, to put people, more people on the DUI and drug interdiction teams. Um, alcohol sales brings about $102 million annually to the general fund. Uh, this bill is a governance bill and, uh, part of the first, uh, seeing it, it addresses is the point of the mountain and the development there and how that's gonna be done. One of the things we, uh, changed in this was to ensure that everything that the point of Mountain Land Authority does is, is involves a public hearing. Uh, the mayor of Draper sits on that point of the Mountain Land Authority and, uh, there'll be public hearings for, for anything that, uh, is done out there with regard to planning. Um, I will point out, there's a first sub, and I'll speak to that if I may. Uh, we essentially just went back to the original language in code, in reference to folks who, uh, supplied alcohol to minors. It's easier for our law enforcement officers to enforce. And so that's the, the first, uh, change. Um, we made a change labeling. You're speaking to the first sub? Yes, sir. Okay. So we haven't adopted it, but we wanna know and then we'll take care of it afterwards Then. Yes, sir. Thank you. We also made a change in the original bill. We had a, uh, a requirement to have very large signage in off-premise beer sales. Uh, we decided that that needed to be studied over the interim. It was that these, the, the letters were like a half inch big on those signs. And so we're gonna study that over the interim and this sub takes that out. Um, and essentially, let's see, and then the other, the final thing in the sub is it takes effect upon the signature of the governor. So the, that's the sub, uh, the rest of the bill. Um, if, if I just get through it real quick, we did attack, uh, something that's been a problem for some time, and that is the proximity issue. Uh, as we urbanize as a state, it becomes much more difficult for municipalities to, to, uh, comply with some of the, uh, rules we had in code. Uh, case in point, we'll look at sugar house, uh, park area and, uh, we had cities put in a position where they were trying to rename park so they didn't violate our code, uh, so they could build a hotel. Uh, this bill allows, uh, cities, uh, we believe in, you know, empowering local government. So cities get to have an opinion and, and make, uh, a recommendation, uh, to say put in a hotel near the, near the park and, uh, then take that to the state, uh, alcohol commission for licensure. Um, and we think that's a, a positive move. We also handle some conveyance, uh, in hotels in past, if you have a drink that you've taken from the, from the, the bar in the hotel and you want to take that to your room, you had to follow a little dotted line conveyance area. This bill says that's kind of ludicrous. Let's take the fastest route to the elevator to get back to your room. Uh, and so again, a lot of it's just governance. We, uh, we went back to this notion in, uh, in full service restaurants that you're not, uh, idd unless you appear to be 35 or younger. Uh, so we didn't impede commerce in that way. Uh, house Bill 59 is a companion bill, and that's the one that requires a hundred percent ID in bars and having folks, uh, driver's license scanned, uh, so that, uh, we can see if they're an inter interdicted person using the real ID that all 50 states, uh, uses. The other thing we put in here is we didn't wanna impede commerce when it comes to international travelers. We listed international driver's licenses adequate, uh, identification. And we also have procedures for folks that are coming here with just passports to get into and, and get service at our bars. Um, let's see. And, and that I think is, is kind of a nutshell of the bill. I'm really, uh, open to question. Oh yeah, one last thing I apologize. Um, the 70 30 rule, if you look at that, uh, every state has something a little different. The 70 30 rule essentially says, uh, you have to sell 70% food to your 30% alcohol. Uh, we found in the code that it was very clunky. And so we essentially just, uh, rephrased some of the language so that, a good example is if you bought a mixed drink and it was $8 and $2 of that was alcohol and the other six was flavorings and, uh, colorings or whatever else goes in there, those, those, that part of the drink is added into the food and the only the alcohol that is in the drink goes toward the 30%. This, uh, is better for vendors. It's easier for them to figure the 70 30 split. And, uh, after a lot of negotiation and back and forth, we felt like this was the, the most appropriate way to go. And so with that, uh, open to questions.

Yeah, thank you. Uh, being naive on this, so does the 70 30, is that based on dollars or what's that based on?

Yeah, it's, it's based on, essentially it's, it's, uh, you can, you can say dollars or quantity. So it's, you, you, in the past that mixed drink for $8 went straight to the alcohol and, and it wasn't, it was kind of skewed if you follow my logic. Okay. And so now they, they take that part out that isn't alcohol and that goes to the food. Okay. Some of our vendors, especially up in the ski areas, they they do a lot of takeout and the takeout wasn't permitted to be used in the 70 30 split and it made it very diff difficult for some of them to meet the code.

Yeah, thank you. There's a actually a lot I like in this bill, so it's a welcome change from some of the other bills we've heard today. Um, anything on the, uh, the per capita, the, you know, the number of licenses we give out in this one didn't look like it this year, but is that all staying the same? There

Was, uh, an adjustment, uh, to the, I believe it was the, uh, the licenses for, uh, reception centers. We found that were about it at capacity with what we gave them. And so we added very conservatively, we added four more licenses in this bill for those to get us through the year.

Great. I think, uh, hope, hopefully that's enough. And, uh, that's, that's good. I appreciate the work on the proximity issues. And, and the, the, the piece you mentioned about, uh, you know, renaming parks and that sort of thing, I think at least one of those was, you know, in, it was Millcreek I think where they zoned something differently. So thank you for helping out with those issues. And then the sugar House park issue as well. I'm, I'm glad to see that moving in the right direction. I hope we can keep the bill, keep that in the bill this year.

Yeah, and I, I need to point out that churches and schools are not included in this. Churches and schools will remain, uh, 300 feet from any of these facilities. Uh, this just makes it a little more relaxed for cities to handle the urban sprawl near parks and libraries. And again, it's a public, uh, process where it has to go through public consent and then to the liquor commission for licensing so the public will get their say in this.

Uh, I appreciate you addressing, uh, the ID situation 'cause we had a problem with that, with our outta state or outta the country visitors and there was a lot of comments in my district about, we made it very difficult for 'em. Yeah. So thank you for addressing that. Alright.

I, I'd make a motion that we delete entitled and Body House 5 97 replace with first sub.

Thank you Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. Cameron di, executive Director of the Utah League of Cities and Towns, and we support this bill, Senator Blue, and you referenced to Millcreek, but there are plenty of examples from St. George to Hebrew, from Bountiful to Magna, where you have historic main streets where there was a park or the playground or a library that's part and instrumental in that community that then precludes the opportunity for a restaurant to open nearby. And this language provides a path forward for that sort of conversation and communities all over the state. So as a result, uh, we're supportive of the bill. Thank you.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Members of the committee, Lincoln shirts here on behalf of the Salt Lake Area Restaurant Association.

Uh, I think we were the problem child when it came to the park, uh, in Sugar House. Uh, and we brought this to the attention of the sponsor. Appreciate his attention to the issue is, uh, Mr. Deal just mentioned, uh, as we continue to evolve and, uh, develop here, oftentimes municipalities are requiring, uh, mixed use developments, which includes parks, open space, and other sorts of recreational areas that are gonna conflict with restaurants. And so the idea that's being addressed in this bill, I think will help with the economic activity in some of our most urbanized areas as well as our small communities as well. In terms of the broader bill, uh, very supportive of what the sponsor is attempting to do here. I think he has done a great job of making sure that we keep our finger on the pulse of what makes Utah, Utah, but also recognizing that we are welcoming more international travelers, uh, trying to accommodate those who do, um, indulge in a drink, uh, at the same token, making sure Utah stays in Utah. So With that, Mr. Sponsler, happy to answer any questions.

I, I should have asked this earlier. Um, yeah. In the bill this year, is there anything done with the packaging agencies, the, the ones that are more like rural Utah and that,

Um, I could phone a friend, but I'll tell you that we've been working on that nonstop all summer. Uh, you recall the court case, uh, that was, uh, levied against dabs. None of those were founded, but Dabs has been working on the, uh, the model to administratively to pay the package agency folks. You may recall when we, when we took the 5% beer out of the, uh, package stores, they were paid by bottle sales and their income went down. So I can tell you we've made a lot of progress, but I can phone a friend. I've got the dabs director here if you'd like more detail. I know that they've been working on it.

Administrative, I just wasn't sure if there's anything in legislation, so that's fine.

I can talk offline. There's Nothing in here. No. Yeah.

Thanks. Um, thank you.

Yeah, I can make a motion to favorably recommend HB 5 97 for sub to the full Senate.

I just wanna quickly thank everybody. We, we spent a lot of time, uh, with both, uh, sides of the equation, the prevention folks, uh, and, and also the producers and distributors. This is very sensitive space and I just wanna thank everybody for the professionalism and everybody gave, and everybody took a little bit on this bill, but I think it's, uh, a good outcome. So thank you.

Yeah, I, I guess a way of explaining my vote of which is yes, but I just wanna express appreciation to you and Senator Stevenson for the, the work you do. And, and I know how much it takes to get a bill like this. I know that you've been working on it since the session ended a year ago. That's sir. And it takes, and it takes a lot of work. There's a lot of stakeholders, a lot of people that have very high, high, uh, interest in this. And, uh, so I appreciate the work coming forward, but I wanna recognize that because this, I this is not, uh, just a simple bill, this Thank you taking a lot. Thank you.

Just thank you for the hard work. I think this is in a good spot.

Madam Marine Clerk House Bill 5 97 Alcohol amendments by Representative Burton. This bill was served in business, labor and commerce with the vote. 10 0 6

Thank you Ms. Speaker. Uh, for those who are not aware, this is our annual Alcohol Omni Bill. Uh, Utah has one of 17 states that has the alcohol control model. Uh, it allows us to regulate the alcohol sales and, uh, the proceeds from alcohol sales, uh, cover public expenses for the ills associated with the use of the product. Uh, these sales bring in over a hundred, $2 million annually to our general fund, and this bill is, is simply designed to help us govern that space in the most judicious and appropriate way for the state of Utah. We strive to keep Utah, Utah while, uh, understanding changes in demographics and, uh, uh, future challenges we have with urbanization. Uh, so this bill has, uh, many parts and portions to it, uh, including, uh, developing out the point of the mountain, uh, as we proceed with, with that large tract land in Salt Lake County. Uh, this bill also, um, uh, we had several cities, uh, skirting our code by changing the names of their parks to green space. This closes that loophole, uh, in the code. Um, it, uh, in conjunction with, with Representative Lyon's, bill supports the idea of a hundred percent Id check and scanning and bars, uh, for all those entering and, uh, checks for interdicted persons, uh, so that they aren't served alcohol and makes, uh, many other changes. I will point out in the last three years, we've hired 18 additional state troopers, uh, to, uh, with alcohol funds to, uh, work on the DUI uh, enforcement team and the drug interdiction team. And, uh, so with that, I'll, I'll stop for questions. Mr. Speaker.

Thank you. I just wanna rise in support of this bill. You know, when, um, I first came into the legislature and the speaker at the time asked me to work on alcohol policy, I asked him what I'd done wrong. Um, because this is a complicated space. There are a lot of stakeholders, there are a lot of interests in this space. And, um, navigating through making sure that we keep our state like we want. We wanna hold Utah values and we want to make sure we're, um, thinking about prevention and thinking about, um, the impacts of alcohol at the same time of allowing good commerce and economic development opportunities in our state and making sure that we can, um, thread that needle every year is a huge challenge. And, um, so I always appreciate, uh, I don't know that people realize the amount of work that goes into getting a bill to a compromise and, and a good position. And, and specifically to this bill, there has been a long, outstanding issue around, um, our, um, economic development opportunities when we have parks everywhere in our communities, which are incredible and amazing. Um, but some of those parks are in very commercial locations at this point. And so thinking about, um, what opportunities might be there for full service restaurants to come a little bit closer to our parks, uh, it's going to be really important for our cities and our counties and our state moving forward. So this is a really, um, important bill. It's a really important policies that are happening in this bill, and I just wanna express my appreciation to the sponsor for getting us to this spot. So thank you.

Thank you and thank you my colleague for the comments. Um, this is a solid bill and it will help, uh, govern this space, uh, moving forward, uh, to help you to function properly and to ensure that there are funds available for, for those who suffer from, uh, misuse of this product. I'd appreciate your support. Thank you.

Thank you, uh, Mr. President. Um, this is the long awaited alcohol bill that we seem to find every year. And, uh, let me just kind of give you a, a, first of all, I, I think it needs an amendment, uh, in my name. Edward, you would you like me to explain the amendment first?

Thank you. Uh, what the, what the, uh, amendment does is it takes out, uh, an addition to the definition of beer that has been introduced as a sub, uh, was sub introduced as a sub this afternoon and committee. And it, uh, it preserves a list of, uh, products that can be rec or can be categorized as beer in the code today. It removes the language that would've allowed driving privilege cart to be used, uh, as acceptable proof of age from the bill. Um, it says right on the, they cannot be used as age. Uh, that was a request of DABC or DAB dabs. I guess it's not dabs. I think it's, uh, um, anyway, it has something to do with hospitality. Uh, that's on line six, uh, six 60 and 6 62, uh, corrects the, uh, the type of, of, uh, it corrects a typo on, uh, 10 27 and it changes the distance that a patron may transport a beverage from a bar to a restaurant. Uh, you can understand, if you could understand this gets a little punitive at times, but it changed it from 30 feet to 35 feet. Um, so that, that kind of takes care of what that, what the, uh, amendment does. And then I'd like to talk to the bill.

Thank you. Um, this year's Bill has got some things in it. A lot of 'em deal with proximity issues. We've had a lot of partners as we've gone through this process and, uh, there's been quite a few iterations. We started on this process back in June. Um, what the, what the bill does is it, um, it, it changes the, um, well under the bill that, uh, people, it, it changes the way you ID if they appear to be younger than 35 years old. When they're producing an alcohol, alcohol purchasing an alcohol product, it is dispensed, uh, in a dispensed area of restaurants and hotels. They can be idd regardless of age, uh, when they're entering a bar or a tavern or purchasing, uh, from a, uh, off-premises retailer, they can be idd. Only a Utah's driver's license will be, uh, checked as a, as a for an interdicted status. Last year, we, we, we came up with a process, they call them interdicted. People that are, have been arrested several times for DUIs or drunkenness. And, uh, they can actually have a, an interdicted person identification of Interdicted person on their driver's license. And it helps, uh, keep track of where they are and, uh, limits the alcohol that they can purchase. Yes, only a Utah's driver's license will be checked, uh, for the interdicted status. The proximity exceptions, uh, uh, we have a, uh, accepted restrictions. We've added that the point of the Mountain Land use authority is part of an entertainment area. And, uh, but we also added that a licensee, a person looking for a license for a bar restaurant would have to go through Draper City and also the point of the Mountain Authority. Uh, and both would have to hold a hearing considering the granting of a license to a hotel or restaurant. Uh, uh, in the process of allowing the, uh, proximity exceptions, um, we have, this would be the third entertainment district we have in the state of Utah. There's one up west of Jordan, l and one, uh, west of the City Creek Mall. Estimates are limited provisions under the, under which a patron may carry their alcoholic beverage between a bar and a restaurant. And I mentioned that earlier. Um, it's changed now. It goes from 30 to 35 feet. Uh, it, it allows, uh, a, b, C to round cash payments with a shortage of pennies. Uh, we actually have to go through a process of, of being able to, uh, and audit adjustments. We have to be able to round rounding. Cash payments was not allowed and it will now be alcohol vendors may round up or down to the nearest 5 cents after ac um, acceptable taxes, uh, this is, uh, this is, uh, uh, it is to address the penny shortage. As I mentioned, auditing, uh, division is to put under, uh, dabs control with provisions to required dabs to respond. Uh, do formal requests by the governor, legislative, uh, auditor and general in the Legislative management committee. And, um, there's a few minor adjustments. No longer requires liquor, uh, storage con, uh, areas to remain locked at all times. Reception center licenses a capsim at 15 and it changes, uh, the 2030, uh, requirement so that, uh, a 30%, that's 20%, uh, 70% of your purchase has to be food, 30% alcohol. Um, and also, uh, that 30% is the only amount a license pays, uh, dabs for an alcohol product. Uh, again, I said this is very complicated process. I'd be more than happy to take questions. I think our alcohol law is over, over 3000 lines. That would conclude my presentation.

Okay. So I, I am just gonna speak in favor of this bill, and I think this, this could be Senator Stevenson's last alcohol Bill. I I actually think that this is the, I'm gonna call it a calling. I think this is probably the worst calling in the legislature, and I just appreciate Senator Stevenson working on this issue for years and years and years. I can't think of a worse assignment than being kind of the alcohol czar. And just thank you for your work on this issue. I know this is a job that, that is not fun and I'm glad that you've been willing to do it. With that, I'd urge the body, let's Recognize Senator Stevenson for his work on alcohol.

Yeah. Thank you. I would thank you. I would, I would second that bill or second that motion to that may, this may be the worst job in the legislature, so, okay.

Need, thank you. If I might just make a, I've had some amazing partners in the house that we've worked on the last several years. I had this on my own a few years, and it was, it's really tough. A lot of people, a lot of different, uh, a lot of different spectrum that we work with, uh, as we go through this. So I do appreciate, uh, the opportunity I've had to work with good people on this. Made a lot of friends on both sides of the issue. And, uh, with that I would move that, uh, that, uh, I lost a number on it.

First substitute 5 97. There we go. Uh, as amended pass.

Thank you Mr. Speaker. Motion to concur with Senate amendments.

Yes, I would. Uh, simply the amendments were to adjust the, the code, uh, from a Class A to a Class B misdemeanor for serving alcohol to minors. And finally on line 10 38, it makes this bill effective upon the signature of the governor.