With one amendment from Senator Chambers which would reduce the yearly limit from 21,000 gallons to 10,000.
That prob sounds like a bummer, but at least it will allow micro distilleries to get going here in NE. They can always bring it back up in the future to amend the bill to allow for more.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
A person with ubuntu is open and available to others, affirming of others, does not feel threatened that others are able and good, for he or she has a proper self-assurance that comes from knowing that he or she belongs in a greater whole and is diminished when others are humiliated or diminished, when others are tortured or oppressed.
theme from Viajes, modified by beerorkid. Copyright © BEERORKID
What’s with the amendment? Does Ernie not want people to sell 21,000 gallons of their own stuff? That would be like someone telling a barber how many haircuts they can give.
Comment by Gene — February 6, 2007 @ 6:27 pm
I 1/2 paid attention to it.
Well even the microbrewery bill had a limit on it when enacted, which I believe was altered later. They based LB549 off of the current micro brewery law factoring in the less volume of distilled spirits.
Senator Chambers wondered why the amount was so high. He notoriously questions alcohol bills. And rightfully so considering the effect alcohol has on his district. “how will introducing 21,000 gallons of hard alcohol benefit the people?” Got to admit he has a point.
Senator Chambers agreed to not fight the bill if his amendment was passed.
It is still a victory, cuz I doubt Upstream will produce anywhere close to 10,000 gallons of spirits and it can be amended in a later session.
Comment by beerorkid — February 6, 2007 @ 7:04 pm