Stephanie McClintock — Praised for bringing the bill forward and proposing amendments.
Stephanie McClintock — Thanked for being willing to amend the direct-to-consumer provisions.
Stephanie McClintock — Met with association members the day before and was open to addressing concerns.
Stephanie McClintock — Stephanie McClintock is referenced twice in her role as the ranking member, first by the chair and then in a subsequent acknowledgment, with both mentions serving to identify her position in the meeting.
Stephanie McClintock — Stephanie McClintock is repeatedly addressed as Ranking Member McClintock during a continuous segment of the meeting, with no substantive change in topic or context.
Stephanie McClintock — Thanked as the Republican leader for her attention to the bill.
Stephanie McClintock — Votes nay, do not pass.
Sean DeWitts — Sean DeWitts is invited to testify, then speaks on behalf of the Washington Hospitality Association in support of the bill. He is later asked a follow-up question about LCB restrictions and requirements and responds that, to his understanding, the bill maintains those requirements and continues to emphasize public safety.
Sean DeWitts — The chair calls Sean DeWitts to testify again as the final witness.
Nancy West — Nancy West is introduced as a remote witness joining from Leavenworth Adventure Park, and the committee repeatedly tries to hear her testimony. Multiple speakers note that she is muted or still cannot be heard, and they continue asking her to work on her sound while acknowledging that she has been waiting to testify.
Kristine Reeves — Raises concerns about violation rates and whether the facilities are more controlled than bars.
Kristine Reeves — No follow-up question after the response.
Kristine Reeves — Referenced as buying time and as the colleague to the left raising concerns about alcohol expansion.
Kristine Reeves — Her concern is paraphrased as asking whether the bill is an expansion of alcohol service.
Kristine Reeves — Questions whether the proposal is an ongoing expansion rather than a limited, event-specific authorization.
Kristine Reeves — Referenced as the member whose comparison to another bill is being rejected.
Kristine Reeves — Her point is being refuted in the exchange.
Kristine Reeves — Representative Kristine Reeves raises a repeated committee concern about whether the bill constitutes an expansion of alcohol access, asking how the proposal should not be construed that way.
Kristine Reeves — Representative Kristine Reeves asked staff to clarify the bill’s procedural history, including the order of operations and whether the committee had previously advanced a proposed substitute. She confirmed that the committee is now considering the underlying bill rather than the prior substitute, then acknowledged the explanation and noted that her follow-up question was not for staff.
Kristine Reeves — Representative Ryu explains and supports the amendment/bill, stating that it restores current law regarding the board’s name and was introduced to address concerns from professional engineers and land surveyors. The sequence then concludes with the roll-call vote, in which Representative Reeves votes aye and Representative Ryu also votes aye.
Leavenworth Adventure Park — Leavenworth Adventure Park is cited as the model example for the bill: a controlled, fully gated setting operating under specific standards, used to illustrate how liquor consumption can be managed through clear guardrails.
Melanie Morgan — Asks whether there is a fiscal note on the bill.
Melanie Morgan — Melanie Morgan welcomes Representative Stone, noting it is unusual and special to see him appear in the Consumer Protection and Business committee, and the exchange continues with a brief acknowledgment of Representative Waters as being 'number two' in the hearing sequence.
Melanie Morgan — Votes aye.
HB2207 — The committee opens the public hearing on House Bill 2207 and receives a staff briefing explaining that the bill would create a bonded beer warehouse license, including related fee provisions tied to the existing bonded wine warehouse license.
HB2207 — The public hearing on HB 2207 is closed.
HB2207 — The committee reopened the public hearing on House Bill 2207 and invited testimony. Supporters described the bill as providing breweries needed flexibility by allowing off-premise warehouses for storing product away from production locations. Subsequent testimony raised concerns about direct-to-consumer shipping, bonded warehouse provisions, and federal compliance, asking that the bill be amended to clearly prohibit direct-to-consumer shipping and address guardrail issues before moving forward.
HB2207 — The chair closed the public hearing on HB 2207.
Amy Walen — The chair is addressed in thanks for hearing the bill.
Amy Walen — Thanked as chair for hearing the bill.
Amy Walen — The chair was addressed as Chair Walen.
Amy Walen — Addressed as Chair Walen.
Shelley Kloba — Representative Shelley Kloba asks for clarification about a bill provision that would allow customers access to any area of the premises, expressing concern that this seems inconsistent with the controlled-access nature of a bonded warehouse and asking whether customers could roam the warehouse.
Shelley Kloba — Representative Shelley Kloba was recognized to ask whether the bill’s removal of the 120-seat requirement applies only to 21-plus theaters or more broadly, including theaters that allow minors and serve alcohol.
Shelley Kloba — Votes aye.
Mr. Carroll — Identified as the warehouse owner and expected to testify to answer questions about access and operations.
HB2536 — The committee opens the public hearing on House Bill 2536 and explains that the bill would allow licensed domestic wineries to hold spirits, beer, and wine restaurant licenses, or beer and/or wine restaurant licenses, at additional winery locations. Members then briefly discuss whether the measure should be considered an expansion of alcohol access, and the public hearing on the bill is ultimately suspended.
HB2536 — The committee reopened the public hearing on House Bill 2536 and heard testimony describing the bill as a practical, economic-development-oriented measure for wineries. Witnesses from the Washington Wine Institute and others strongly supported the proposal, explaining that it would reduce administrative and financial burdens, streamline winery operations, and provide more flexibility without increasing access to alcohol. Several speakers asked for the committee’s support, and the chair ultimately closed the public hearing on the bill.
Megan Mulva Hill — Committee staff provides the briefing on HB 2536 and explains the current winery and restaurant licensing framework.
Daniel Olson — Daniel Olson, Executive Director of the Washington Brewers Guild, was invited to testify and then presented testimony in support of House Bill 2207. He explained that the bill would give breweries flexibility to use off-premise warehouses to store their own product, and argued that this change would provide parity with wineries and help support small business growth. He thanked Representative McClintock for bringing the bill forward.
Scott Hazelgrove — Scott Hazelgrove testified on behalf of the Washington Beer and Wine Distributors Association. He said the bill may be workable but raised concerns about complexity and federal restrictions, including federal tax/code issues. He suggested that a narrower first step, such as focusing on domestic brewer licenses, might be a more practical approach.
Scott Hazelgrove — Scott Hazelgrove testified on behalf of beer distributors, first arguing that lease information should be filed with the Liquor and Cannabis Board to improve transparency and help enforce liquor laws through the complaint system, rather than requiring the LCB to request the information later. He was then recalled to continue discussing House Bill 2536, explaining the purpose of Washington’s three-tier system to prevent monopoly control between suppliers and retailers, noting that an exception was created for winery owners to invest in restaurants, and emphasizing that existing legal guardrails already provide a path for the policy goal being discussed.
Sam Miller — Sam Miller testified on behalf of R&C, a spirits and wine distributor with a warehouse in Auburn, Washington. He argued that the bill weakens existing guardrails for bonded warehouses and could create unclear or expanded consumer access. He asked the committee to amend the bill to restore clear statutory protections and limit access to licensees and other regulated parties.
Brooke Davies — Brooke Davies, speaking for the Association of Washington Spirits and Wine Distributors, testified in opposition to House Bill 2207 and raised concerns that the bill would create problems with age verification, tracking, and related warehouse guardrails.
James Carroll — James Carroll was called to testify and introduced himself, stating that he owns and operates Child Logistics, a warehousing and logistics business in Richfield, Washington.
HB1701 — The committee opened the public hearing on House Bill 1701 and received a staff briefing explaining the bill’s background and substance. Staff noted the committee had heard the bill in the prior session, described how it would allow multiple liquor licensees to operate within a single facility, and clarified tied-house/PRA-related language and why the original bill, rather than the substitute, was back before the committee. Representative Steele then began sponsor testimony and explained that the bill is intended to resolve a leasing issue for a facility with multiple liquor-related operations.
HB1701 — House Bill 1701 is discussed as part of the hearing process, with support requested and the public hearing then closed. The bill is later described as a narrower approach that could address the issue by allowing separate legal entities at a common location, and as a possible pathway to accomplish the broader goal of the bill under discussion.
Peter Clawfelter — Peter Clawfelter, committee staff, was introduced to provide the staff briefing on HB 1701. He then delivered the briefing, noting the bill had been heard previously by the committee and summarizing its background, before concluding the staff report. The chair then opened the floor for questions for Mr. Clawfelter.
Cindy Ryu — The chair asked whether Representative Ryu had a question.
Cindy Ryu — The sponsor anticipated a question from Representative Ryu about expansion concerns.