3-11-26 Sloan with Scotty Hunter

less than two weeks away. And it seems like those Republicans and the Republican legislative body in Ohio Columbus that often talk about how Republicans are about business and small business and opportunity and growth are very anti business. In this case. Scotty Hunter is here. He's the founder and co owner of Urban Artifact, one of the four Ohio breweries in on this lawsuit against the state. Scotty welcome back, having me yeah, of course, by the way, people hear

this go okay. So it's like one line, you guys have craft beer and all these other things, and how much how much money have you invested in this thing? What's on the line here for you.

business plans moving forward for this year as well. You know, I think people see the headlines, they see the decline and alcohol consumption and keep waiting out and things like this, especially with the economy the way it is, and you know, these these beverages were an opportunity to you know, grow our businesses in a way that we just can't with alcohol, right like you you can, only you don't can do

so much in terms of changing the consumer's mind. And I think we're seeing just you know a little bit of shifts and you know, taste, some preferences nationally, and you know, it happens over time, It ebbs and flows.

bill of fall. So, you know, we still fully expect federal to get some sort of correction and some guidance. It's just they don't. It doesn't move very quickly, right, And so the fact that Ohio would the governor's line with his you know use of the line on in Bido, would take away this opportunity to wind out because maybe he's right, Maybe the federal government doesn't get anything done.

So why why do we need to change anything sooner? Right, there's clearly an established market for businesses, especially businesses that are so key to so many communities across the state that either have gotten into this category, we're getting into

this category. You know, people I know bres across the state that hadn't made a product yet or launched a product and had made a bunch of production, or spent a bunch of money on design and materials and research and development, and that's and that's all for, not with the with the struggle of a pen.

this overturned. I think the Feds would look at that and go, well, we've got time here to debate in the in the legislature and in Congress, and we'll throw some of the stuff out there doing on Ohio, and maybe they overturned the federal ban. I know that's the hope anyway. But this engine, the fact that you're suing right now, I think carries a lot of weight. If lawmakers examine it that way.

It's almost a kind of a constant, constant battle, which I don't think people realize that you don't live outside of the state.

a provision on the tax revenue from recreational marijuana. And that was the justification that the governor was using to line on and veto other sections of this bill. And that's not what the Ohio Constitution says. It says you can line on in veto a item relating to an appropriation of money. He line on and veto sections relating to him defined differently than the state than the marijuana revenue.

That was but fourth and then further than that, the governor has the ability to veto nobody's debating that, right, but he if he doesn't like a billity, he needs to veto the entirety that also goes back to the

legislator to be worked on and addressed. If the governor has allowed this type of unilateral power, then it kind of neuters what the legislature is there for, right because I can tell you, and I'm not going to name names, but we have a lot of politicians at the State House in our corner on this situation or on this issue, excuse me, and they would not have passed this bill without that carbout like this was instrumental and them accepting a deal between all the different folks between the House

and the Senate to put this through and send it over to the governor. So the fact that the governor can say, well, you know, you all agreed as representatives of the people, but I feel a certain way, so I'm going to strike this like that doesn't fly with how the Ohio Constitution is written and how the Ohio people want to be governs.

I mean, I guess the fair way is okay, no more companies can manufacture. But going back and shutting down a business they've already they've already regulated, that seems to be an interesting legal contradiction there.

So like you know that that is is well beyond what the intent of the bill was to do to root out the bad actors, because, like you said, we

were already regulated. We already had a processor's license, suffer comp there's clear testing regulations, labeling regulations, and if the state really wanted to, you know, regulate the retail side, they could have just taken those same rules and regulations and populated them from a retail cell that if you're going to be you know, a hand products sold in the state, you have to abide by these rules and regulations. And nobody would have argued it would have been straightforward.

You know, I'm sure there would have been one or two people in the state House that would have voted against it, but point being, it was a very straightforward way to address the bad actors, so to speak, to get always kind of thrown out there.

two weeks away. And on that these it was sent it Bill fifty six that had the seal through period through the end of the year, and that seemed like a reasonable compromise to give a chance to you guys to you know, retool if you will, or maybe slow down the process. But what the Wine blew past that and moved the deadline to March twentieth. Why the urgency? Any answer from him on that? And also what was his beef with THC beverages? We said, I've yet to

see where he's articulated what his concerns were. Can you address those two things?

they were learning about it. So you know, the notion that those same retailers couldn't handle, you know, these these lotos beverages, it's just kind of crazy to me, Like it's it doesn't make it doesn't jive right if we trust them with you know, full strength spirits, wine, high gravity beer, all these things, we should be able to trust them with with some lotos PhD beverages because we see it there's there's twenty twenty plus states with regulation

on products across this country. Like this is not unique to Ohio. You know, Ohio is not setting some sort of precedence here other than an outright band well before anything's coming down from the federal perspective, it's we already we already know kind of a playbook here nationally, So to ignore that just seems crazy to make. And your on your question about Governor Dwine and is it is beef with the beverage piece specifically I don't know. You know, the only thing that I saw was he made some

comment about confusion, customer confusion. If these were allowed to remain but not other products, then I don't think the people will will I think the people will hire smart enough to differentiate. They can understand why certain things might be legal or not. I mean, we have you know, liquor stores that only carry you know, liquor, and then we have beer and wine a lot more widely customleed. Like there's there's clear delineations that we've already made in

adult products across the state. So I think the people will hire are smart enough. And you know, one other piece on the timeline of this and why that you know, that wind down period as we're referring to it as is so important. You know, Beverage manufacturing is very capital intensive, right you In order to keep your car in a manageable way, you need to buy in large quantities and

manufacturer in larger quantities. So you're always going to have, you know, usually at least a few months of inventory in each piece of the process on him. So being able to thinking someone be able to wind down that aspect of their business and you know, just ninety days is absurd, it's not feasible, it's not reasonable. And that's why that sealth appeared was so critical for you know, so many folks in the state.

the cries, of course, is a drink and driving. And now you add substance in driving, driving buzzed if you will. I'm looking at the numbers from the Ohia State Highway Patrol and we're actually down a little bit here. But this is mainly alcohol abusers, right, people who drink alcohol and drive. But the biggest problem they have when it comes to drinking and driving OVI is recidivous or repeat offenders.

Almost a third of ov I arrests in the last six years involve offenders, and that goes up to about forty percent when you include all the state law enforcement data. So clearly the big problem are people who simply don't care that they're endangering the lives of others. I don't care if it's beer, wine, hard spirits or THHD beverages.

If you have people that don't care what the law is, that's on the state to start locking those people up, versus going after people who are simply enjoying responsibly some beverages like THHG and fused beers or craft beers like you offer it Urban Artifact.

you're landlocked in Columbus. I feel for you there, but there's there's still access and now you're kind of telling people, hey, please leave the state, take your money out of the state, right in order to purchase these products that you want, because like you're not. People aren't suddenly going to decide

Oh well, the governor said, it's back for me. I'm not going to pursue this right, right, and if an individual says I like this, I want access to this, they're going to find a way to obtain it.

voters said we want THH infused beverages. No one's ever We've never voted on something we've essentially whant it's something that's already established and we say thumbs up or thumbs down. That's the dumbest statement I've ever read.

in a category that is still in its infancy phase. Right, we've only been in it for about two years, but in earnest it's only been around for maybe four or five years in a little more widespread manner, and that it's still you know, we're talking if there's twenty thousand alcohol retail licenses in Ohio, I think maybe five six hundred, seven hundred we're carrying these beverages this time. That's such

a small percentage. Like a lot of people still don't even necessarily realize that these products exist, and once they do, you know, it's something that they really enjoy it. You know, a lot a lot of the a lot of the folk and alcohol seat as a threat, but you know it's you're in business as a supplier manufacturer to give the consumers what they want.

not to lean into this thing. Every surrounding state can sell these products, and so as you mentioned earlier, outside of Columbus, that kind of kills us here in Cincinnati. Uh, the other Ohio well, there are four Ohio breweries that are suing. Two in Cincinnati over to fifty Wes. Bobby Slattery, he's a friend of the show, said, and I think it's a great question. Who are we helping by doing this? Have you ever gotten an answer to that?

the way that people have structured it. Uh. And there's I think there's a reason too why you don't see these line on and beatos come up very often because most governors will look at what the constitution says and say, okay, here's where I can apply this, and it generally comes in the form of the budget bill gets passed every one of two years. I don't remember in Junie, that's that's where it gets used, because's where it's appropriate.