Then came the Kansas Department of Agriculture inspector, who notified the Shawnee brewery that the state no longer permitted dogs inside the taproom. Gone were the days of dogs worn vacation sweatshirts, or mini sports equipment. Signs needed to be installed informing consumers that dogs were no longer permitted.
Brewery owner Mike McVey said the dog restriction harmed his business, affirming in assistance of legislation that would enable dogs in microbreweries throughout a House Committee on Commerce, Labor and Economic Development hearing.
“The economic impact on the business of the brewery is both noticeable and difficult to calculate,” McVey said. “We no longer have families or groups of friends who visit the brewery together to visit one another’s pets. The pets no longer attend holiday parties in their Chiefs or Christmas sweaters.”
McVey, in addition to other microbrewery owners and clients, supports House Bill 2291, which would enable microbreweries to invite dogs within and outside, as long as the dogs avoid of food or beverage preparation locations.
The costs likewise would enable all food facilities to have dogs in outdoors locations, as long as sanitation conditions are fulfilled, such as having the dog stayed leashed and having staff members clean their hands after dog interactions.
Under the present variation of the Kansas food code, nonservice dogs aren’t allowed any food establishment, though certified locations can use to have dogs allowed outside patio area areas.
The Kansas Department of Agriculture is dealing with upgrading this code to enable dogs in outside patio areas without going through the application procedure, however deputy farming secretary Kelsey Olson said the department fixed a limit at permitting dogs within.
In statement opposing the costs, Olson said dogs were unhygienic and might send bacteria to clients. One issue raised by Olson was dog hair, as dogs, unlike human beings, can’t manage their shedding.
“There are not caps or nets which will mitigate the shedding of dog hair,” Olson said. “Allowing dogs in dining areas increases the risk that food may become contaminated with dog hair.”
Last week, the House passed the legislation on a 108-14 vote. The costs now goes to the Senate for factor to consider.
Rep. Jason Probst, a Hutchinson Democrat, explained the costs throughout Feb. 22 dispute on the House flooring as a method to assist microbreweries in the state.
“This, I think, moves us more in line with what we see in other states, where it’s pretty common that you’ll have people bringing their pets to the brewery, bringing their dogs to the brewery,” Probst said. “The environment is pretty welcoming to that.”
Probst likewise presented a costs modification that would alter drink meanings to benefit breweries like one in Hutchinson that almost lost its license in 2015.
Under the modification, any beer including 6% or less alcohol by volume and offered separately by a microbrewery would be thought about a cereal malt drink rather of beer, to navigate Kansas law relating to the balance in between alcohol and food sales.
Some Kansas counties need a drinking establishment to get at least 30% of yearly make money from food sales. Sixty-3 counties in the state run with the 30% food sales guideline, according to Kansas Department of Revenue 2021 information.
For larger drinking facilities, the 30% guideline isn’t a problem, as a lot of have complete kitchen areas and devoted cooking area staff. Small microbreweries, nevertheless, typically battle to satisfy the requirement.
“If you have a cereal malt beverage license instead of a drinking establishment license, you can sell up to 6% alcohol, beer, and it’s not counted as an intoxicating liquor,” Probst said.
Probst pointed out Sandhills Brewing, the Hutchinson microbrewery that almost lost its alcohol license due to the fact that of the food sales requirement. He said he understood of a number of microbreweries that have actually needed to get innovative to remain in business.
“One that I know of reduced the price of their beer to $1 and sold every beer with a bag of chips for $5,” Probst said. “So the total package was $6. Whether you wanted a bag of chips with your beer or not, you were getting it, but they had to do these sorts of creative things in order to comply with the law. And this I think would help.”
The House accepted Probst’s modification prior to passing the costs.
