►
From YouTube: Senate Standing Committee on Licensing and Occupation
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Occupations
to
order
as
a
reminder
to
members,
please
turn
on
your
microphones
when
you're
speaking
and
be
sure
to
mute.
When
you
are
finished,
there
are
the
one
of
you
that
are
tending
on
zoom.
Please
go
through
the
chair.
We
have
a
full
agenda
today,
very
important
legislation.
C
A
A
All
these
items,
which
you're
going
to
hear
today
on
the
agenda,
have
been
talked
about
during
the
interim,
some
of
them
numerous
times.
So
none
of
this
is
new
to
anybody.
The
first
item
on
the
agenda-
we're
gonna,
I
don't
think
it'll-
take
much
time
we'll
be
senate
bill,
70.
A
an
act
relating
to,
or
it's
not
the
first
item
on
agenda.
It's
the
second
item
on
the
agenda,
but
we'll
be
taking
it
first.
It's
a
senate
bill
70
an
act
relating
to
diabetes,
educators.
This
is
simply
a
name
change.
We
have
larry
brown
with
the
previous
administration
on
remotely
welcome
larry.
Do
you
want
to
tell
us
what
this
does
in
about
two
sentences?.
C
C
For
this
group,
the
board
is
a
five-member
group
made
up
of
a
physician
registered
nurse
a
pharmacist
and
a
dietitian,
a
certified
nutritionist
and
myself
as
a
citizen.
The
name
change
simply
better
reflects
the
ongoing
certification
process
and
certificates
that
this
organization
in
dc
will
be
providing
them.
The
big
concern.
A
A
And
a
second
from
senator
thayer,
we
have
a
motion
from
senator
nemes
and
a
second
from
senator
thayer.
Any
discussions
or
questions
about
this
legislation.
A
A
B
A
A
A
Senator
you're
welcome
to
welcome
as
a
committee
member
welcome,
and
this
is
surely
not
a
topic
that
we've
not
heard
about.
It
seems
like
we
talk
about
it
every
session,
so
it's
great
to
have
you
and
your
people
with
you.
If
you
would
introduce
yourself
and
you
have
your
guests-
introduce
themselves
for
the
record
and
proceed
with
your
testimony.
We
will
be
hearing
10
minutes
of
testimony
10
minutes
of
testimony.
G
We
have
bipartisan
support
for
senate
bill
78
from
our
co-sponsors
senator
hornbach,
and
I
strongly
support
this
legislation
because
of
our
concern
that
kentuckians
across
the
commonwealth
do
not
have
access,
they
need
to
quality
health
care.
I
know
that
advanced
practice
registered
nurses
provide
that
kind
of
health
care,
because
I
have
seen
a
nurse
practitioner's
care
firsthand.
G
As
all
of
you
all
know,
we
have
been
dealing
with
the
coven
19
pandemic
since
last
march
and
we
are
still
not
out
of
the
woods.
One
of
the
things
that
this
pandemic
has
brought
to
light
is
the
inequity
in
our
health
care
system,
both
here
in
kentucky
and
across
the
nation.
If
we
ever
had
any
doubts
about
the
importance
of
access
to
quality
health
care,
this
pandemic
has
emphasized
and
underscored
that
access
is
critical
and
the
easier
it
is
to
get
care.
G
The
closer
it
is
to
home
the
more
likely
that
kentuckians
will
go
to
see
their
health
care
provider.
We
also
know
that
the
loss
of
jobs
here
often
means
a
loss
of
employer
sponsored
health
insurance.
We
have
seen
that
medicaid
has
frequently
provided
a
healthcare
lifeline
to
many
kentuckians
and
their
families,
so
we
need
quality
providers
who
are
willing
to
take
medicaid
patients,
and
we
need
them
in
underserved
areas,
both
rural
and
urban,
and
we
have
that
workforce
in
kentucky
and
they
are
called
advanced
practice
registered
nurses.
G
It
only
then
will
they
be
given
final
approval.
Like
all
of
you,
I'm
very
concerned
about
the
opioid
epidemic
and
our
commonwealth,
and
I
would
not
be
bringing
this
bill
if
I
thought
for
any
reason
that
there
should
be
that
concern
that
this
bill
would
add
to
that
problem.
The
casper
data
shows
aprns
to
be
prudent,
prescribers
of
controlled
substances,
including
opioids.
G
G
The
casper
data
has
good
news
about
the
prescribing
of
opioids
by
dentist,
physicians
and
aprns
from
2015
to
2020.
The
average
number
of
scripts
written
by
all
three
provider
groups
has
decreased.
The
percentage
of
decrease
in
prescribing
opioids
by
dentist
is
38
percent
by
physicians
is
19
percent
and
by
aprns
34.
G
However,
because
of
the
kappa
cs
requirement,
we
have
trained
providers
who
could
help
address
our
opioid
crisis
and
they
are
unable
to
provide
that
much
needed
care.
So
the
kentucky
board
of
nursing
has
a
responsibility
to
oversee
and
regulate
the
practice
of
all
nurses,
including
aprns
senate
bill.
78
has
language
that
suggests
by
senator
gibbons
last
session,
which
strengthens
the
already
strong
regulation
and
vigilance
around
prescribing
that
the
nursing
board
has
in
place
instead
of
an
automatic
withdrawal
of
the
kappa
cs
requirement
after
the
aprn
has
had
it
for
four
years.
G
The
bill
calls
for
a
review
of
the
aprn's
license
by
the
kentucky
board
of
nursing
to
make
sure
that
everything
is
in
order
with
no
outstanding
complaints
or
problems
before
that
aprn
is
authorized
to
prescribe
without
a
kappa
cs.
The
bill
strengthens
the
ability
of
the
kentucky
board
of
nursing
to
oversee
aprm
prescribing,
and
then
I
want
to
emphasize
that
senate
bill
78
does
not
increase
the
number
of
aprm
prescribers
of
controlled
substances
or
opioids.
H
Okay,
well
I'm
wendy
fletcher
and
I'm
a
doctorally
prepared
nurse
practitioner
for
morehead
kentucky
and
for
the
last
22
years
I've
been
serving
patients.
I'm
sorry,
I've
been
serving
patients
in
the
northeastern
kentucky
area
after
22
years
and
5
000
patients.
I
can
tell
you
that
this
is
a
good,
safe
and
prudent
bill.
I'm
here
today
to
answer
any
questions
on
behalf
of
over
2000
nurse
practitioners
represented
by
the
kentucky
association
of
nurse
practitioners
and
nurse
midwives
senate
bill.
78
is
not
unique.
H
It
is
in
fact
senate
house
bill
286
resurrected
from
the
coveted,
restricted
legislative
session
of
2020,
where
it
had
over
40
co-sponsors
in
the
house
and
bipartisan
support
in
the
senate,
because
it
was
well
recognized,
as
it
is
again
this
year
as
a
bill
that
centers
on
improving
patient
access
to
research,
proven
quality
health
care,
and
it
supports
what
a
year
in
coveted
world
has
taught
us
all.
Aprns
have
worked
without
collaborative
agreements
under
the
emergency
orders
at
the
federal
and
the
state
level,
and
the
proverbial
sky
has
not
fallen
senate
bill.
H
78
is
not
an
expansion
of
the
scope
of
practice
of
aprns,
as
it
does
not
change
in
aprn's
ability
to
continue
to
provide
independent
clinical
judgment
or
independent
decision
making
in
their
clinical
practices.
We
have
always
under
both
federal
and
state
law
practiced
independently.
Only
prescribing
has
been
collaborative
senate
bill.
78
does
not
change
the
hard
stops
already
in
kentucky
law
restricting
schedule.
2
drugs
like
oxycodone
and
long-acting,
morphine
to
72
hours.
These
limits
have
been
in
place
since
2006
and
with
this
bill
will
remain
senate
bill.
H
Senate
bill
78
does
not
interfere
with
any
employer
or
hospital's
contractual
agreement
with
any
aprn
who
chooses
to
sign
such
an
agreement.
It
also
does
not
change
the
collaboration
between
mps
and
other
professionals
who
need
to
be
involved
in
a
patient's
care
senate
bill
78
does
not
increase
access
to
opioids,
but
it
does
increase
access
to
np
care
care
by
professionals
who
have
proven
knowledge
evidenced
by
their
education
and
board
certification,
their
experience
and
their
actions
to
exercise
great
caution
and
great
care
in
their
prescribing
practices.
H
H
H
A
We're
over
the
time
limit,
which
means
we're
gonna,
have
to
go
over
with
the
other
group
also,
but
please
please
introduce
yourself
and
proceed
I'll.
E
Be
very
brief,
thank
you,
senator
schickel
and
committee
members
for
allowing
us
to
speak
today.
My
name
is
dr
beth
parton,
I'm
a
family
nurse
practitioner,
I
practice
in
rural
adair
county
and
I
own
a
practice
and
it's
a
health
provider
shortage
area.
My
practice
saw
about
7
000
visits
last
year
and
72
percent
of
my
practice
is
made
up
of
medicare
and
medicaid
patients.
E
Nurse
practitioners
who
have
opened
a
practice
have
invested
their
own
money
or
have
taken
out
significant
small
business
loans.
To
start
a
business,
I
had
to
borrow
125
000
to
open
my
practice,
it's
expensive
to
purchase
medical
equipment
and
it
can
take
up
to
three
months
before
insurance
companies
begin
reimbursing
for
services.
E
Nurse
practitioners
live
in
fear
that
they
will
lose
their
kappa
cs,
because
the
physician
withdraws
charges
a
fee
they
can't
afford
or
moves
out
of
state
or
passes
away.
I
can
honestly
tell
you
that
these
things
have
happened
to
nurse
practitioners.
I
know
losing
the
kappa
cs
means
losing
the
practice.
It
means
patients
will
not
get
the
care
they
need.
It
means
an
economic
loss
to
the
community,
because
staff
who's
been
hired
by
the
nurse
practitioner
lose
their
job,
and
I
can
also
tell
you
if
I
lost
my
kappa
ces.
E
E
It
also
also
you're
required
to
have
a
dea
number
in
order
to
order
flu
vaccine
injectable
antibiotics
syringes,
oxygen
and
other
necessary
supplies
to
run
a
practice.
You
also
need
a
dea
number
for
some
mail-order
non-scheduled
drugs
for
out-of-state
prescriptions
under
current
law
kentucky
nurse
practitioners
must
have
a
kappa
cs
in
order
to
get
a
dea
number
senate
bill.
78
would
allow
nurse
practitioners
after
the
four
year
period
to
retain
their
dea
number
and
order
supplies
that
they
need.
E
My
last
point
is
that
in
the
states
that
have
granted
nurse
practitioners
authority
to
practice
to
the
full
extent
of
their
education
and
training,
none
of
these
states
have
rescinded
that
or
have
changed
their
laws
to
require
a
collaborative
agreement.
So
I
ask
you
to
please
vote
for
senate
bill
78.
A
Thank
you
for
your
testimony,
senator
hornbach.
Would
it
be
all
right
if
we
would
let
the
other
group
testify
and
then
do
the
questions
then,
or
do
you
need
to
ask
a
question
right
now?
A
Think
they're
remote
actually
so
it
doesn't
make
any
difference
and
so
to
be
fair,
let's
see
who
do
we
got
here?
We
have
dr
ron
waldridge
and
kerry
meadows.
Neither
of
them
are
strangers
to
here
both
of
them
to
this
committee.
Both
of
them
are
on
zoom.
A
To
be
fair,
we
will
give
you
15
minutes
of
testimony.
However,
gentlemen,
you
get
bonus
points
if
you
do
not
use
all
your
time,
because
we
we
have
a
lot
on
the
agenda
and
we
have
people
that
want
to
ask
questions.
I
would
suggest
that
you
limit
your
testimony
to
you
know.
We've
heard
a
lot
of
testimony
over
the
years
about
this,
but
this
is
really
about
the
cap
agreement
and,
I
think,
there's
some
disagreement
over
prescriptive
authority
and
effects
this
would
have
so.
I
Thank
you,
chairman
schickel,
I'm
dr
ron,
waldridge.
I'm
a
board
certified
family
physician
practiced
in
shelbyville
for
over
20
years,
served
as
the
coroner
here
in
shelby
county
for
10
years
and
remain
as
the
medical
director
for
ems
services
here
in
shelby
county
and
that's
what
I'm
basing
my
testimony
on
today.
I
I
We
went
back
through
2011,
so
we
went
from
2011
to
2020
and
looked
at
prescribing
by
apr
ends
during
that
time.
From
2011
to
through
20,
there's
been
a
393
percent
increase
in
doses
of
schedule,
2
through
schedule,
5
controlled
substances
during
that
same
time,
aprm
prescribing
of
schedule,
two
through
schedule
or
schedule,
threes
through
schedule,
five
controlled
substances
increased
by
478
percent
and
aprn
of
schedule,
two
opioids
also
increased
by
251
percent.
I
The
continued
rise
in
aprn,
controlled
substance,
abuse
or
controlled
substance.
Prescriptions
throughout
2020
is
especially
concerning,
as
has
been
mentioned
before
in
march
2020.
Due
to
the
covid19
pandemic,
we
had
a
number
of
healthcare
providers
throughout
the
commonwealth,
who
had
significantly
reduced
patient
volumes
and
even
closing
of
offices
as
well
as
many
medical
facilities.
I
I
I
Removal
of
the
kappa
cs-
we
must
point
out,
does
nothing
to
increase
access
to
health
care
for
underserved
areas.
In
fact,
the
kappa
ces
does
not
prohibit
or
impede
aprn's
ability
to
bring
their
health
care
expertise
and
care
to
kentuckians
who
live
in
our
state's
health
professional
shortage
areas.
They
have
had
the
ability
to
treat
and
diagnose
independently
and
prescribe
with
a
collaborative
agreement
for
many
years
in
any
area
of
the
state
they
choose.
I
However,
research
shows
that
eight
periods
largely
practice
in
the
same
general
area
as
physicians,
regardless
of
this,
making
it
easier
to
prescribe
controlled
substances
would
not
be
considered
as
a
reason
to
get
any
practitioner
group
to
underserved
areas.
Senate
bill
78
strictly
pertains
to
the
prescribing
of
controlled
substances,
not
comprehensive
access
to
care
senate
bill.
78
also
phases
out
this
kappa
cs
over
time,
but
it
also
removes
the
current
wait
period
of
one
year
before
newly
licensed
aprons
can
prescribe
controlled
substances.
I
I
This
bill
also
increases
the
number
of
psycho
stimulants.
Certainly,
p.
Irons
can
currently
prescribe
from
a
30-day
supply
with
no
refills
to
a
30-day
supply
with
two
refills.
This
is
problematic
because
this
was
testified
before
legislative
committee.
During
the
2019
interim
by
representatives
of
the
kentucky
office
of
drug
control
policy,
the
number
of
prescriptions
for
psychostimulants
is
increasing
at
an
alarming
rate.
I
The
impact
on
our
most
vulnerable
citizens
should
also
be
considered
when
making
changes
that
allow
more
prescriptions
for
controlled
substances.
Thousands
of
children
and
families
across
the
commonwealth
have
been
directly
and
indirectly
impacted
by
the
effects
of
the
opioid
crisis,
as
addiction
to
prescription,
painkillers
and
heroin
has
swept
the
state
oddly
senate
bill.
78
proponents
acknowledged.
The
number
of
prescriptions
is
increasing.
I
You
know
this
number
we
feel
like
is
at
least
about
300
aprm
prescribers
per
year,
that
has
to
equate
into
increased
opioid
prescriptions
because
there's
no
limit
on
the
number
of
aprns
that
can
practice
in
the
state.
I
A
C
Is
excellent
testimony,
mr
chairman,
and
for
the
record
I
am
corey
meadows
with
the
kentucky
medical
association.
I
will
allow
dr
waldridge's
comments
to
be
our
comments
and
I'm
happy
to
assist
with
any
questions
that
the
committee
members
have.
A
Thank
you
for
being
so
gracious
and
we
do
have
some
questions
and
I
wanted
to
get
to
them
because
that's
the
important
part,
that's
why
we're
here
senator
hornback.
J
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
senator
abbott.
I
appreciate
you
and
your
guests
being
here
today
and
introducing
this
bill,
because
I
do
think,
contrary
to
my
own
doctor,
dr
waldrich
who's
been
my
doctor
him
and
his
dad
for
a
long
long
time,
and
I
very
much
respect
their
views
and
opinions.
J
I
do
think
that
this
does
fill
a
void
in
the
in
kentucky
for
those
places
that
don't
have
proper
access
to
care
that
we
need,
especially
during
these
pandemic
times.
You
know
this
is
beth.
As
you
said,
it's
it's
more
than
about
scheduled
drugs.
J
There
are
a
lot
of
other
things
that
that
are
in
this
too,
and
I
think
in
in
order
for
for
our
nurse
practitioners
to
properly
treat
their
patients
to
to
be
able
to
do
it
in
a
a
very
I
guess,
a
time
when
we
have
a
lot
of
problem
with
finances
and
other
things
that
people
being
able
to
do
it
and
what
nurse
practitioners
fill
in
that
void,
I
think,
is
very
good.
J
The
one
question
I
had
are
a
couple
questions
and
I
want
to
make
sure
everybody
understood
this
is
that
you
know
in
no
way
does
this,
and
I
know
it's
of
interest
to
hospitals
and
individual
practices
in
no
way
did
this
impede
any
individual
practice
or
hospital
from
requiring
a
cap.
Kappa
cs
of
that
practitioner
is
that
true.
G
J
And
this
does
not
increase
the
scope
of
practice
in
any
way.
All
this
is
is
a
barrier
that-
and
I
appreciate
senator
givens
for
his
request
to
put
in
the
addition
this
year
that
they
would
be
reviewed
by
the
board
of
nursing
before
they
could
have
that
kappa
removed,
and
I
appreciate
that
so
I
think
it's
a
very
a
very
good
bill.
I
think
when
in
the
commonwealth
we
need
more
access
to
care.
J
I
think
this
is
is
the
thing
we
need
to
do,
and
I
know
that
beth
you
had
mentioned
a
lot
of
times.
There's
you
know
the
reasons
why
somebody
may
not
sign
a
kappa.
Some
doc
may
not
sign
a
capital,
and
I
think
you
said
that
very
well.
Why
sometimes
that's
not
done
so.
I'd
encourage
all
members
to
vote
for
it,
and
I
fully
support
this
speech.
D
Mr
chairman,
I
want
I've
heard
the
doctor
online's
testimony.
I
want
to
hear
from
you
guys.
Are
we
creating
a
quicker
path
to
prescribing
authority
without
oversight
on
page
12,
subsection
g1
by
removing
the
one
year
is
the
is?
Are
we
creating
a
quicker
path
to
prescriptive
authority
for
aprns
than
mds.
H
A
Thank
you.
Mister
you're
welcome,
senator
thomas.
K
Thank
mr
chairman,
my
question
is
for
senator
adams,
senator
adams.
You
testified
that
nurse
practitioners,
you
know,
have
not
increased
their
prescription
of
opioids
at
the
same
rate
that
doctors
and
other
healthcare
professionals
had.
I
think
you
mentioned
that
that
there
that
they
were
prescribing
at
about
a
34
right.
You
use
that
term.
I'm
just
curious
as
to
what
was
the
source
of
your
data.
When
you
gave
your
testimony.
G
Sure,
thank
you
in
it's
from
casper
and
we've
both
analyzed
the
2020
numbers
of
dentists,
doctors
and
aprns,
and
we've
also
gone
back
to
2011..
G
The
one
thing
that
wendy
and
I
were
discussing
up
here
is
when
he
used
the
data,
and
I
forget
the
exact
percentage
increase.
It
was
a
little
misleading,
and
so
I
do
want
to
shed
some
light
on
that.
The
data
that
he
showed,
but
the
data
that
I
show
from
2020.
You
have
1961
dentists,
the
number
of
scripts
those
dentists
have
written
is
a
hundred
and
seventy
two
thousand
approximately.
G
G
A
Thank
you
and
the
last
question
is
going
to
go
to
senator
nemes.
C
I
They
are
currently
they
have
a
capital
cs
that
would
govern
the
prescribing
of
the
scheduled
substances.
Our
the
house
of
medicine
in
years
past
have
brought
forth
recommendations
to
change
the
kappa
ces
to
make
it
a
more
a
minimal
document
to
provide
oversight.
Unfortunately,
we've
not
been
met
with
any
success
at
improving
the
kappa
ces.
H
A
A
By
senator
howe,
we
have
a
motion
in
a
second
let
the
record
reflect.
We
have
a
lot
of
business
to
still
do
and
so
I've.
This
is
one
of
those
issues.
When
I
talk
to
members,
I
it
seems
like
most
members
pretty
well
know
where
they're
at
aren't
too
confused
about
it.
So
I
think,
if
there's,
unless
there's
a
question
or
comment,
we
should
maybe
can
go
ahead
and
vote.
D
F
D
D
The
financial
cost
the
societal
cost.
The
the
impact
on
families
is
absolutely
unstated
and
there's
not
a
soul
here.
Who
can
look
me
in
the
eye
or
look
anybody
else
in
the
eye
and
reasonably
argue
that
it
was
motivated
by
anything
other
than
greed
at
multiple
levels?
And
I'm
not
accusing
you
guys
of
that,
and
I'm
not
accusing
these
doctors
of
that,
but
that's
where
it
started
and
it
came
through
a
prescriptive
process,
and
I
say
that
to
say
to
you
guys
as
the
as
these
are
lifted.
D
The
state
in
our
society
will
count
on
you
to
not
let
this
go
down
that
road
again,
we
will
still
be
decades
cleaning
up
the
mess.
That's
been
prescription
pain,
pills
in
this
state
and
in
this
nation
and
mr
chairman,
I
appreciate
the
indulgence
we
could
go
on
and
on
and
on
but
understand,
there's
a
tremendous
responsibility.
C
I'd
like
to
explain
my
vote,
my
vote
vote
and
explain
I'm
voting,
because
I
think
this
needs
to
go
to
the
floor.
There's
a
lot
of
things
wrong
with
this
situation,
not
necessarily
the
bill.
First
of
all,
there's
too
many
prescribers
and
I'm
very
very
concerned
with
that.
That's
why
I
was
going
to
vote
no
in
a
may
on
the
floor.
The
doctors
have
not
done
their
job.
C
A
A
A
Hey
we
got
to
get
going
here.
We
got
another
very
important
bill.
That's
a
the
first
thing
on
the
agenda
at
senate
bill
15
and
act
relating
to
micro,
breweries,
senator
julie,
rocky
adams.
Welcome
again
introduce
yourself
for
the
record
and
proceed
with
your
testimony
and
we
are
going
to
go.
You
know
we
have
to
vote
before
if
we're
going
to
vote-
and
I
think
everyone
does
want
to
get
this
behind
us-
we're
going
to
have
to
be
very
tight,
because
we
only
have
20
minutes
go
ahead.
G
As
you
know,
this
is
not
new.
We've
been,
I
had
a
similar
bill
last
session,
but
we
ran
out
of
time,
and
we
also
presented
before
this
interim
committee
in
november-
kentucky
micro,
breweries
or
craft
breweries
having
a
growth
industry
in
kentucky,
and
there
are
over
80
of
these
small
businesses
and
communities
across
our
state,
they're,
all
local
entrepreneurs
who
have
invested
to
create
new
business
and
jobs
in
our
communities,
senate
bill
15
addresses
industry
issues
between
the
craft
brewers
and
their
distributor
partners.
G
Why
is
this
something
that
the
general
assembly
needs
to
fix
and
it's
because
of
the
problems
we
face
that
are
created
by
and
only
arise
because
of
existing
statutory
language?
This
statutory
language
primarily
was
imposed
in
2004
and
I
felt
like
it
was
time
to
take
a
modern
look
at
what
we
have
been
dealing
with
since
2004.
G
So
again
you
will
hear
the
general
assembly
does
not
need
to
get
involved
in
that
it
should
be
left
to
two
private
entities.
So
why
is
this
general
assembly
needing
to
fix
this
because
it
is
a
problem
that
was
created
by
us,
and
so,
unfortunately,
we
are
the
ones
who
have
to
fix
it.
Senate
bill
15
addresses
issues
that
have
arisen
by
this
outdated
statutory
language
and
the
imbalance
of
power
that
is
created
in
this
new
craft
industry.
G
So
it
amends
krs,
243
157
to
enable
microbreweries
to
have
limited
self-distribution
privileges
that
39
other
states
already
enjoy,
and
senate
bill.
15
addresses
the
inequitable
imbalances
and
limited
free
market
that
currently
is
the
result
of
our
statutory
provisions.
So
what
this
sub
does
is.
It
creates
a
new
section
to
address
the
inequities
that
existed
in
the
current
statutory
required
arrangements.
It
specifies
it
makes
equal
the
circumstances
in
which
either
party
can
terminate
a
distribution
agreement.
G
It
addresses
a
rising
issues
for
microbrewers
being
stuck
in
statutorily,
mandated
contractual
relationships
in
perpetuity,
it's
called
evergreen
contracts
and,
lastly,
it
establishes
a
fair
process
by
which
a
distributor
is
compensated
for
the
value
of
the
brand.
They
have
helped
develop
when
a
distribution
agreement
terminates
prior
to
its
stated
term,
so
it
is
my
and
lastly
senate.
Bill
15
contains
many
concessions
and
adjustments
that
have
been
made
in
attempt
to
address
distributors
requests.
This
has
been
a
long
process.
G
We
have
gone
to
great
lengths
to
try
to
partner
with
each
side,
because
you
know,
as
anything
goes
in
this
general
assembly,
it's
it's
better
to
dance
than
it
is
to
go
on
either
side.
So
hopefully
we
can
continue
to
make
progress
in
this
outdated
status.
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
senator
and
you're.
Exactly
right,
everybody
has
worked
hard,
a
bunch
of
meetings
and
you're
adam
good
to
see
you,
I
I
I
know
you
have
testimony,
but
who
else
has
testimony
beside
you
adam,
mr
chairman,
david
guilds,
general?
Okay?
Well?
Why?
Because
that
I
want
to
get
the
other
side
on
and
then
because
I
know,
there's
a
lot
of
questions
so
go
ahead.
If
you
could
just
real
briefly
give
some
testimony.
Welcome.
F
A
F
F
This
is
not
a
zero-sum
game
and
we're
not
trying
to
diminish
our
distribution
partners.
Fairness
and
equity
grow
the
pie
for
everyone.
The
existing
statute
already
picks
winners
and
losers
and
as
the
statutorily
selected
loser,
I'm
telling
you
this
bill
is
a
better
and
fairer
way,
and
it's
done
surgically
rather
than
just
blowing
everything
up.
This
gives
us
tools
to
make
craft
beer
better
for
everyone.
F
Every
change
we've
brought
before
the
general
assembly
has
been
vigorously
opposed
by
our
distribution
partners,
but
once
enacted
has
grown
kentucky
beer
along
with
their
share
of
kentucky
beer.
This
will
be
no
different,
so
on
behalf
of
kentucky's
80
plus
brewers,
who
wish
they
could
be
here
packing
the
room
today,
as
well
as
the
thousand
plus
employees,
amongst
them
the
80
plus
employees.
I've
had
to
let
go
in
the
last
year,
as
well
as
all
their
families,
depending
on
this
bill.
Thank
you
for
considering
it.
A
A
Jennifer
welcome
good
to
see
you,
I
am
going
to
say
we're
going
to
take
five
minutes
of
testimony.
That's
between
you
two
because
I
know
we
have
a
lot
of
members
biting
at
the
bit
to
ask
questions
so
welcome,
introduce
yourself
for
the
record
and
proceed
with
your
testimony.
L
L
You
there
you
go,
I'm
the
general
manager
at
chas
seligman
distributing
in
northern
kentucky.
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
speak
to
you
about
this
legislation
on
behalf
of
the
beer
and
wholesalers
of
of
kentucky.
First
and
foremost,
let
me
tell
you
that
we
are
fully
supportive
of
the
craft
brewers
desire
to
self-distribute
their
own
products.
We
understand
how
difficult
this
past
year
has
been.
L
Many
of
our
partners
have
been
affected
by
what
has
happened,
and
we
are
not
here
to
stand
in
the
way.
We
certainly
don't
dispute
that
there
have
been
issues
between
distributors
and
we
have
oftentimes
worked
to
rectify
those.
We
have
been
meeting
with
kgb
for
the
last
two
years
and
addressing
business
industry
and
relationship
issues.
L
A
M
M
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
on
this
legislation.
On
behalf
of
kentucky
beer,
wholesalers
and
distributor
tier.
I
echo
all
of
the
open
remarks
that
jennifer
has
made.
M
M
We
support
kentucky
brewers
in
their
quest
to
be
able
to
self-distribute
under
the
law.
If
that
is
their
goal,
we
have
offered
language
to
many
of
you
who
have
asked
for
compromised
language.
That
would
do
that.
We
would
work
with
our
brewer
partners
to
help
identify
the
area
and
accounts
that
they
would
like
to
distribute
in.
M
This
is
not
too
different
from
other
states
and
states
around
us.
What
is
being
offered
in
senate
bill
15
specific
to
self-distribution
is
not
allowed
anywhere
in
the
country.
Let
me
repeat:
no
state
allows
a
brewer
to
compete
and
sell
beer
to
the
same
accounts
and
retailers
as
their
contracted
designated
beer
distributor
partner.
M
The
language
in
senate
bill
15
would
allow
a
micro
brewer
to
sell
up
to
30
000
cases
of
beer
a
year
to
any
licensed
retailer
at
any
time.
Statewide.
There
are
all
kinds
of
issues
that
is
that
it.
This
causes
from
keg
deposits,
picking
up
breakage
confusion
in
the
marketplace
chain
of
custody,
a
product
for
recalls
and
selling
the
beer
at
a
lower
cost
from
the
local
partner
distributors
to
just
to
name
a
few.
M
M
M
A
Thank
you
you're
very
welcome.
Now
it
gets
interesting
julie
or
I'm
sorry,
senator
adams.
You
want
to
stay
there.
You
won't
go
to
the
table.
Oh
okay,
senator
buford,
you
had
a
question
or
comment.
N
Yes,
thank
you
very
much,
mr
chairman.
Now
I
see
that
2
500
barrels
from
what
you
said
equates
to
30
000
cases.
Am
I
correct?
That's
correct.
I
mean
I've
been
in
the
distribution
business
before
that
seems
like
a
large
number
of
cases,
especially
if
some
micro
breweries
are
kind
of
limited
in
where
they
do
their
products
are
being
sold.
N
If
we
permit
the
you
know
the
breweries
to
do
this,
I
think
we
have
opened
the
gate
for
distilleries
and
wine
producers
to
also
come
in
to
the
courtrooms
and
say
we
should
have
the
same
abilities
here
to
treat
distributors
as
this
other
alcoholic
product
does,
and
thus
you
could
have
the
the
manufacture
of
brands.
Let's
say,
george
dickel
makers
mark
other
large
brands
if
they
want
to
make
some
distribution
they
may
be
able
to.
I
don't
know
how
you
balance
out
the
amount
of
money
on
this
30
000
cases.
N
Is
the
brewery
going
to
send
you
some
re-enumeration,
for
how
are
they
going
to
give
you
dollar?
On
the
case,
three,
I
mean
okay,
so
that's
that's
just
going
in
that
direction.
Well,
I
I
think
in
the
three-tier
system
we
may
be
dissolving
that
with
the
next
court
case
should
this
pass,
because
I
think
we've
got
to
treat
distilleries
the
same
as
we
do
the
breweries.
I
don't
see
any
way
out
of
that
as
they
get
into
a
court
challenge.
So
for
that
I
have
concerns.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
A
Yeah
you're
welcome,
senator
adams
described
her
committee
substitute
and
you
all
received
that
committee
substitute.
It
was
committee
substitute
number
one.
It
was
in
your
packet
and
since
that
time
a
lot
of
the
stakeholders
have
been
talking,
and
I
will
I
want
to
move
forward.
I
want
to
get
this
behind
me.
A
I've
been
doing
with
it
for
two
years,
and
so
I
proposed
a
committee
substitute,
which
was
also
in
your
packet,
and
it's
committee
substitute
number
two,
so
you
have
before
your
members
committee
substitute
number
one,
which
is
the
original
committee
substitute
from
senate
bill
from
senate
bill
15,
and
then
you
have
senate
committee
substitute
number
two.
A
A
What
my
committee
substitute
does
and
staff
has
assured
me
of
this-
is
it
leaves
everything
the
way
it
is
in
the
committee
substitute
number
one,
with
the
exception
of
the
fair
market
value
of
the
brand
and
it
lets
if,
if
they
cannot
come
to
agreement
on
that,
it
goes
to
arbitration,
and
I
guess
I'll
leave
now,
stop
my
comments
and
see
if
number
one
anybody
agrees
with
my
assessment
of
it
and
number
two.
If
there's
any
further
discussion,
I
was
hoping,
maybe
as
a
compromise,
that
we
could
do
that.
C
Mr
chairman,
senator
nemes,
is
it
appropriate
to
move
to
accepts
committee
substitute
too.
E
A
Second,
to
accept
committee
substitute
number
two
and
the
motion's
been
made
by
senator
nemes
is
second
by
senator
thayer.
A
Oh
buford,
I'm
sorry,
okay,
thank
you
for
correcting
me,
the
second
by
senator
buford,
all
those
in
favor
use
voting
sign
of
I
I
all
those
opposed.
No
okay.
We
will
do
a
roll
call
on
senate
committee
substitute
number
two.
K
Mr
mr
I'd
like
to
explain
my
no
vote
voting
explain.
Thank
you,
mr
and
I
realize
I
I
have
three
minutes.
I
took
this
this.
This
was
my
last
night's
homework
and,
as
I
was
reading
this
I
really
felt
like
I
was
reading
a
a
typical
commercial
contract
as
part
of
my
law
practice.
K
It
was
the
first
time
in
my
eight
years
here
that
that
the
I
wasn't
sure
whether
I
was
reading
statutory
language
or
or
contract
language,
because
the
language
in
both
substitutes
really
read
like
something
I
would
read
in
a
contract,
and
I
just
don't
think
that
we
should
be
writing
contracts
in
such
a
statutory
language.
K
My
feeling
is
this:
I'm
supportive
of
senate
bill
15..
I
do
think
we
ought
to
reduce
barriers
to
entry
for
business.
We
talk
about
marketplace
a
lot
in
this
body
and
I
believe
in
the
free
market
system,
and
I
think
the
little
guy
ought
to
have
a
chance,
and
so
that's
why
I'm
supporting
senate
bill
15..
K
I'm
sympathetic
to
senate
bill
two,
but
we're
only
talking
about
those
situations
where
the
amount
of
product
that's
being
distributed
by
the
distributor
on
behalf
of
microbrewery
is
less
than
five
percent.
That's
a
very
small
amount,
and
since
that's
being
the
case,
you
know,
if
we
can,
you
know,
put
some
kind
of
cap
on
that
500
percent,
as
in
senate
bill
one
now.
K
I
think
that
that
seems
okay
with
me,
since
it's
such
a
small
amount
of
the
overall
distributors
gross
revenues,
and
so
that's
how
I
come
down
opposed
to
the
second
senate
committee,
substitute
in
favor
of
senate
bill
one,
because
I
do
think
at
the
end
of
the
day
we
have
to
give
the
small
microbrewery
a
chance
to
succeed
a
chance
to
be
in
business
and
prosper.
They're
from
so
I
don't
know.
A
A
Okay,
on
senate
bill,
15
senate
committee
substitute
number
two
we
have
seven
years
and
three
nays,
so
it
is
adopted.
So
now
we
have
before
us
senate
bill
15
senate
committee
substitute
number
two.
A
A
No
further
discussion:
anybody
you
want
to
tell
your
story,
somebody
want
to
tell
a
story.
We've
got
a
few
minutes.
Okay,
madam
secretary
called
the
roll.
N
C
C
C
My
hope
is
is
that
both
sides
are
so
dissatisfied
with
what
we've
done
today
that
they'll
actually
sit
down
and
talk
through
the
real
issues,
because
I
don't
think
that
they've
addressed
the
real
issues
yet
and
that
they'll
go
and
address
their
real
issues.
And
maybe
we
can
address
this
in
the
floor
amendment.
So
I'm
hoping
that
that
is
something
that
will
come
about
from
this
for
them
to
finally
sit
down
and
talk
up
their
issues.
But
I'm
going
to
vote
eye
to
move
it.
A
Yeah
cash,
your
vote
and
explain
briefly.
D
D
I
also
am
here
to
recognize
we're
in
the
middle
of
a
pandemic
and
we're
going
to
argue
about
how
we
stock
beer
on
shelves
I'm
going
to
vote.
I
because
this
has
now
been
framed
as
you're,
either
for
the
little
guy
who's,
bootstrapping
or
you're
for
the
people
who
grew
their
business
within
the
side
of
the
law.
I'm
gonna
vote.
I
because
I'll
amend
this
on
the
floor
to
get
rid
of
the
three-tier
system
for
microbrewers,
and
we
can
have
that
discussion
because
it's
time.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
A
K
You
again,
I
do
believe
that
we
ought
to
eliminate
artificial
barriers
to
business.
I
mean,
as
I
said,
this
body
talks
a
lot
about
the
free
market
system,
but
but
this
vote
today
is
not
for
the
free
market
system.
I'll
tell
you
you're,
creating
artificial
barriers
that
prevent
little
people
from
from
getting
into
business
and
trying
to
to
adhere
to
the
free
enterprises,
as
we
ideally
think
about
in
america.
K
A
I'd
rather
vote
I
and
I'd
like
to
explain
my
vote.
I
some
of
the
comments
that
have
been
made.
I
want
to
try
to
balance
those
out.
I
and
I
often
point
this
out,
but
our
disagreements
in
the
in
the
three-tier
system
and
the
micro,
breweries
and
all
that
are
a
result
of
successes,
not
failures.
If
the
if
the
industry
was
contracting,
we
would
be
having
a
totally
different
disagreement.
So
I
think
these
disagreements
are
good.
A
It
fell
a
little
short
in
one
area
and
so
that
debate
will
go
on.
I
I
happen
to
to
favor
the
resolution
in
that
one
area,
but
but
we
we've
had
a
lot
of
successes,
a
lot
of
great
jobs,
micro,
breweries
and
all
across
this
industry.
A
So
I
I
think
it's
important
to
point
that
out
senate
bill
15
has
10
years
zero,
zero
nays,
as
amended
by
promote
proposed
committee
substitute
number
two
is
passed
with
favorable
expression
as
same
should
pass
and
we're
done
right
on
time
there
being
no
further
business
this.
If
there's
no
objections,
this
committee
stands
adjourned.