Speaker 1: Do you want to be an American? Scott Sloan back
Speaker 1: on seven hundred WLW so Dwine had his State of
Speaker 1: the Union address or I guess State of the State
Speaker 1: address to be what are called. I'm still in Trump
Speaker 1: mode here because he's coming to town. So four Ohio breweries,
Speaker 1: including two right here in Cincinnati, are taking the governor
Speaker 1: to court over his ban on th drinks. The governmor
Speaker 1: not mentioned this in yesterday State of the State address.
Speaker 1: We've got jobs on the brink and the deadline now
Speaker 1: less than two weeks away. And it seems like those
Speaker 1: Republicans and the Republican legislative body in Ohio Columbus that
Speaker 1: often talk about how Republicans are about business and small
Speaker 1: business and opportunity and growth are very anti business. In
Speaker 1: this case. Scotty Hunter is here. He's the founder and
Speaker 1: co owner of Urban Artifact, one of the four Ohio
Speaker 1: breweries in on this lawsuit against the state. Scotty welcome back,
Speaker 1: having me yeah, of course, by the way, people hear
Speaker 1: this go okay. So it's like one line, you guys
Speaker 1: have craft beer and all these other things, and how
Speaker 1: much how much money have you invested in this thing?
Speaker 1: What's on the line here for you.
Speaker 2: Yeah, quite quite a lot, you know, not only from
Speaker 2: what we've invested, but what we have projected in our
Speaker 2: business plans moving forward for this year as well. You know,
Speaker 2: I think people see the headlines, they see the decline
Speaker 2: and alcohol consumption and keep waiting out and things like this,
Speaker 2: especially with the economy the way it is, and you know,
Speaker 2: these these beverages were an opportunity to you know, grow
Speaker 2: our businesses in a way that we just can't with alcohol,
Speaker 2: right like you you can, only you don't can do
Speaker 2: so much in terms of changing the consumer's mind. And
Speaker 2: I think we're seeing just you know a little bit
Speaker 2: of shifts and you know, taste, some preferences nationally, and
Speaker 2: you know, it happens over time, It ebbs and flows.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Before his veto, the Wind's veto Senate Bill fifty
Speaker 1: six allowed THG drinks to remain legal in Ohio throughout
Speaker 1: the end of through this year or through last year anyway.
Speaker 1: Eventually you know they're gonna become federally illegal anyway, And
Speaker 1: someone asked, well, why why are you fighting this. It's
Speaker 1: going to become illegal in the future by federal edict
Speaker 1: as opposed to state.
Speaker 2: Yeah no, and that's and there's a great point there.
Speaker 2: You know, part of the language that was also vetoed
Speaker 2: was a note from the legislature that you know, federal
Speaker 2: law were to change on the subject, that they were
Speaker 2: to revisit this and address it, and that that fight
Speaker 2: is still ongoing. And you know, President Trump with his
Speaker 2: executive order a couple of months ago on on cannabis,
Speaker 2: you know, had a section in there about HEMPT and
Speaker 2: addressing that band language that got slipped into the spending
Speaker 2: bill of fall. So, you know, we still fully expect
Speaker 2: federal to get some sort of correction and some guidance.
Speaker 2: It's just they don't. It doesn't move very quickly, right,
Speaker 2: And so the fact that Ohio would the governor's line
Speaker 2: with his you know use of the line on in Bido,
Speaker 2: would take away this opportunity to wind out because maybe
Speaker 2: he's right, Maybe the federal government doesn't get anything done.
Speaker 2: So why why do we need to change anything sooner? Right,
Speaker 2: there's clearly an established market for businesses, especially businesses that
Speaker 2: are so key to so many communities across the state
Speaker 2: that either have gotten into this category, we're getting into
Speaker 2: this category. You know, people I know bres across the
Speaker 2: state that hadn't made a product yet or launched a
Speaker 2: product and had made a bunch of production, or spent
Speaker 2: a bunch of money on design and materials and research
Speaker 2: and development, and that's and that's all for, not with
Speaker 2: the with the struggle of a pen.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it feels that way. I think it's there's a
Speaker 1: couple of things going on. Number one is it just
Speaker 1: doesn't seem right. It seems punitive. It's simply up and
Speaker 1: pull the carpet out from this thing with the federal
Speaker 1: band loombing. But I think what happens is that the
Speaker 1: federal lawmakers look at this and go, wow, look at
Speaker 1: the uprising in Ohio. Look how upset Ohio is in
Speaker 1: a pretty red state. If you will that they want
Speaker 1: this overturned. I think the Feds would look at that
Speaker 1: and go, well, we've got time here to debate in
Speaker 1: the in the legislature and in Congress, and we'll throw
Speaker 1: some of the stuff out there doing on Ohio, and
Speaker 1: maybe they overturned the federal ban. I know that's the
Speaker 1: hope anyway. But this engine, the fact that you're suing
Speaker 1: right now, I think carries a lot of weight. If
Speaker 1: lawmakers examine it that way.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no, I agree. I think it's definitely a signal.
Speaker 2: And there's there's you know, there's fights that go on,
Speaker 2: you know, in terms of have products in states all
Speaker 2: the time, Ohio is pretty unique and that our legislature
Speaker 2: is almost always in session. They take breaks, but you
Speaker 2: know a lot of legislatures are only in session for
Speaker 2: a few months of the year and then they're they're done. Ohio.
Speaker 2: It's almost a kind of a constant, constant battle, which
Speaker 2: I don't think people realize that you don't live outside
Speaker 2: of the state.
Speaker 1: Scott, your statement said, this is an unwarned executive overreach.
Speaker 1: Make the legal case in plain english for me. Why
Speaker 1: you believe the governor didn't have the authority to do this?
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, So it's you know, it goes back to
Speaker 2: the Ohio Constitution and the governor has granted the power
Speaker 2: for a line on and b know, for an item
Speaker 2: of appropriation. And for folks that don't you know, understand
Speaker 2: legald are not in before you know this whole situation.
Speaker 2: An item of appropriation is like addressed, taking like tax
Speaker 2: moneies and dispersing them. Right. So in this bill, there's
Speaker 2: a provision on the tax revenue from recreational marijuana. And
Speaker 2: that was the justification that the governor was using to
Speaker 2: line on and veto other sections of this bill. And
Speaker 2: that's not what the Ohio Constitution says. It says you
Speaker 2: can line on in veto a item relating to an
Speaker 2: appropriation of money. He line on and veto sections relating
Speaker 2: to him defined differently than the state than the marijuana revenue.
Speaker 2: That was but fourth and then further than that, the
Speaker 2: governor has the ability to veto nobody's debating that, right,
Speaker 2: but he if he doesn't like a billity, he needs
Speaker 2: to veto the entirety that also goes back to the
Speaker 2: legislator to be worked on and addressed. If the governor
Speaker 2: has allowed this type of unilateral power, then it kind
Speaker 2: of neuters what the legislature is there for, right because
Speaker 2: I can tell you, and I'm not going to name names,
Speaker 2: but we have a lot of politicians at the State
Speaker 2: House in our corner on this situation or on this issue,
Speaker 2: excuse me, and they would not have passed this bill
Speaker 2: without that carbout like this was instrumental and them accepting
Speaker 2: a deal between all the different folks between the House
Speaker 2: and the Senate to put this through and send it
Speaker 2: over to the governor. So the fact that the governor
Speaker 2: can say, well, you know, you all agreed as representatives
Speaker 2: of the people, but I feel a certain way, so
Speaker 2: I'm going to strike this like that doesn't fly with
Speaker 2: how the Ohio Constitution is written and how the Ohio
Speaker 2: people want to be governs.
Speaker 1: Is there any essence and I don't know if it
Speaker 1: applies here or not, Scottie Hunter, that you should be
Speaker 1: grandfathered into the sense is that the Ohio had no
Speaker 1: problem I guess collecting tax revenue from the sale of
Speaker 1: these beverages in the first place they found offensive the
Speaker 1: Health Department. It's all regulated. There's government regulation, federal and
Speaker 1: state in what it is you do. And then after
Speaker 1: you know, a period of a couple of years of
Speaker 1: doing this, they pulled the carpet out underneath from you.
Speaker 1: I mean, I guess the fair way is okay, no
Speaker 1: more companies can manufacture. But going back and shutting down
Speaker 1: a business they've already they've already regulated, that seems to
Speaker 1: be an interesting legal contradiction there.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I agree, And that was the most shocking portion
Speaker 2: of me. You know, the retail cell pieces is one aspect,
Speaker 2: and we see this in the number of states, but
Speaker 2: to disallow for the manufacturer and even you know, we've
Speaker 2: we've heard some rumblings from different agencies that even storage
Speaker 2: in the state will be deemed illegal and that you know,
Speaker 2: anyone with these products, you know, maybe maybe charged as
Speaker 2: it they view it as you know, marijuana at that point.
Speaker 2: So like you know that that is is well beyond
Speaker 2: what the intent of the bill was to do to
Speaker 2: root out the bad actors, because, like you said, we
Speaker 2: were already regulated. We already had a processor's license, suffer
Speaker 2: comp there's clear testing regulations, labeling regulations, and if the
Speaker 2: state really wanted to, you know, regulate the retail side,
Speaker 2: they could have just taken those same rules and regulations
Speaker 2: and populated them from a retail cell that if you're
Speaker 2: going to be you know, a hand products sold in
Speaker 2: the state, you have to abide by these rules and regulations.
Speaker 2: And nobody would have argued it would have been straightforward.
Speaker 2: You know, I'm sure there would have been one or
Speaker 2: two people in the state House that would have voted
Speaker 2: against it, but point being, it was a very straightforward
Speaker 2: way to address the bad actors, so to speak, to
Speaker 2: get always kind of thrown out there.
Speaker 1: He's a founder and co owner of Urban Artifact Bring
Speaker 1: in Cincinnati. Scottie Hunter on the Scott Salon Show seven
Speaker 1: hundred Wow, one of four or Ohio breweries taking Governor
Speaker 1: Mike de Wine to Courtover's ban on THHC infused drinks
Speaker 1: and jobs are on the brink with the deadline now
Speaker 1: coming up on the twentieth of March, so less than
Speaker 1: two weeks away. And on that these it was sent
Speaker 1: it Bill fifty six that had the seal through period
Speaker 1: through the end of the year, and that seemed like
Speaker 1: a reasonable compromise to give a chance to you guys
Speaker 1: to you know, retool if you will, or maybe slow
Speaker 1: down the process. But what the Wine blew past that
Speaker 1: and moved the deadline to March twentieth. Why the urgency?
Speaker 1: Any answer from him on that? And also what was
Speaker 1: his beef with THC beverages? We said, I've yet to
Speaker 1: see where he's articulated what his concerns were. Can you
Speaker 1: address those two things?
Speaker 2: You know, I'm not I'm not really sure because you know,
Speaker 2: for ninety five or more percent of these beverages, they
Speaker 2: were being sold to and through licensed alcohol. Chillers there
Speaker 2: already know how to age date and check for you know,
Speaker 2: levels of intoxication in our time in this category, and
Speaker 2: talking to retailers, especially you know, bars, restaurants, they all
Speaker 2: played this category very conservatives as it was new and
Speaker 2: they were learning about it. So you know, the notion
Speaker 2: that those same retailers couldn't handle, you know, these these
Speaker 2: lotos beverages, it's just kind of crazy to me, Like
Speaker 2: it's it doesn't make it doesn't jive right if we
Speaker 2: trust them with you know, full strength spirits, wine, high
Speaker 2: gravity beer, all these things, we should be able to
Speaker 2: trust them with with some lotos PhD beverages because we
Speaker 2: see it there's there's twenty twenty plus states with regulation
Speaker 2: on products across this country. Like this is not unique
Speaker 2: to Ohio. You know, Ohio is not setting some sort
Speaker 2: of precedence here other than an outright band well before
Speaker 2: anything's coming down from the federal perspective, it's we already
Speaker 2: we already know kind of a playbook here nationally, So
Speaker 2: to ignore that just seems crazy to make. And your
Speaker 2: on your question about Governor Dwine and is it is
Speaker 2: beef with the beverage piece specifically I don't know. You know,
Speaker 2: the only thing that I saw was he made some
Speaker 2: comment about confusion, customer confusion. If these were allowed to
Speaker 2: remain but not other products, then I don't think the
Speaker 2: people will will I think the people will hire smart
Speaker 2: enough to differentiate. They can understand why certain things might
Speaker 2: be legal or not. I mean, we have you know,
Speaker 2: liquor stores that only carry you know, liquor, and then
Speaker 2: we have beer and wine a lot more widely customleed.
Speaker 2: Like there's there's clear delineations that we've already made in
Speaker 2: adult products across the state. So I think the people
Speaker 2: will hire are smart enough. And you know, one other
Speaker 2: piece on the timeline of this and why that you know,
Speaker 2: that wind down period as we're referring to it as
Speaker 2: is so important. You know, Beverage manufacturing is very capital intensive,
Speaker 2: right you In order to keep your car in a
Speaker 2: manageable way, you need to buy in large quantities and
Speaker 2: manufacturer in larger quantities. So you're always going to have,
Speaker 2: you know, usually at least a few months of inventory
Speaker 2: in each piece of the process on him. So being
Speaker 2: able to thinking someone be able to wind down that
Speaker 2: aspect of their business and you know, just ninety days
Speaker 2: is absurd, it's not feasible, it's not reasonable. And that's
Speaker 2: why that sealth appeared was so critical for you know,
Speaker 2: so many folks in the state.
Speaker 1: One of his concerns always has been, he said, do
Speaker 1: Wain has always had something about marijuana. He just absolutely
Speaker 1: hates it and doesn't like anyone should use it. And
Speaker 1: of course, you know, the people spoke up and he
Speaker 1: goes along with it, which you know, okay, it's not
Speaker 1: your personal interest, but again, you don't represent the voters
Speaker 1: and the constituents of Ohio. But it's another way for
Speaker 1: him to work around I think, and go after something
Speaker 1: a lot of people enjoy. And you know, one of
Speaker 1: the cries, of course, is a drink and driving. And
Speaker 1: now you add substance in driving, driving buzzed if you will.
Speaker 1: I'm looking at the numbers from the Ohia State Highway
Speaker 1: Patrol and we're actually down a little bit here. But
Speaker 1: this is mainly alcohol abusers, right, people who drink alcohol
Speaker 1: and drive. But the biggest problem they have when it
Speaker 1: comes to drinking and driving OVI is recidivous or repeat offenders.
Speaker 1: Almost a third of ov I arrests in the last
Speaker 1: six years involve offenders, and that goes up to about
Speaker 1: forty percent when you include all the state law enforcement data.
Speaker 1: So clearly the big problem are people who simply don't
Speaker 1: care that they're endangering the lives of others. I don't
Speaker 1: care if it's beer, wine, hard spirits or THHD beverages.
Speaker 1: If you have people that don't care what the law is,
Speaker 1: that's on the state to start locking those people up,
Speaker 1: versus going after people who are simply enjoying responsibly some
Speaker 1: beverages like THHG and fused beers or craft beers like
Speaker 1: you offer it Urban Artifact.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, And honestly, you know it kind of incentivizes
Speaker 2: people to leave the state for these products. If you know,
Speaker 2: our lawsuit isn't successful. Right, if you're in the greater
Speaker 2: Cincinnati area, you can go over to Lawrenceburg, you go
Speaker 2: over to northern Kentucky. If you're in southeast Ohio, you
Speaker 2: can go over to West Virginia. You know, you know
Speaker 2: you're landlocked in Columbus. I feel for you there, but
Speaker 2: there's there's still access and now you're kind of telling people, hey,
Speaker 2: please leave the state, take your money out of the state,
Speaker 2: right in order to purchase these products that you want,
Speaker 2: because like you're not. People aren't suddenly going to decide
Speaker 2: Oh well, the governor said, it's back for me. I'm
Speaker 2: not going to pursue this right, right, and if an
Speaker 2: individual says I like this, I want access to this,
Speaker 2: they're going to find a way to obtain it.
Speaker 1: The governor's office said, no, Ohio voter ever approved THHD
Speaker 1: drinks being sold at breweries. I would look at that one, Well,
Speaker 1: what kind of argument is that. I don't know if
Speaker 1: we ever approved a lot of the things that we
Speaker 1: do or that are part of the law. Generally, someone
Speaker 1: develops a product, did you regulate it. It's not like
Speaker 1: voters said we want THH infused beverages. No one's ever
Speaker 1: We've never voted on something we've essentially whant it's something
Speaker 1: that's already established and we say thumbs up or thumbs down.
Speaker 1: That's the dumbest statement I've ever read.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, I mean the voters didn't know that that
Speaker 2: was a thing, quite honestly at that point in time
Speaker 2: when that was going on, and if they did, they
Speaker 2: absolutely would have said they would wanted access to that
Speaker 2: right like this, you know, we're talking about an industry
Speaker 2: in a category that is still in its infancy phase. Right,
Speaker 2: we've only been in it for about two years, but
Speaker 2: in earnest it's only been around for maybe four or
Speaker 2: five years in a little more widespread manner, and that
Speaker 2: it's still you know, we're talking if there's twenty thousand
Speaker 2: alcohol retail licenses in Ohio, I think maybe five six hundred,
Speaker 2: seven hundred we're carrying these beverages this time. That's such
Speaker 2: a small percentage. Like a lot of people still don't
Speaker 2: even necessarily realize that these products exist, and once they do,
Speaker 2: you know, it's something that they really enjoy it. You know,
Speaker 2: a lot a lot of the a lot of the
Speaker 2: folk and alcohol seat as a threat, but you know
Speaker 2: it's you're in business as a supplier manufacturer to give
Speaker 2: the consumers what they want.
Speaker 1: One hundred percent. Yeah, exactly. And people like it, They enjoyed,
Speaker 1: drink it responsibly, They feel better after they consume it
Speaker 1: as opposed to alcohol. But some people still, I mean,
Speaker 1: alcohol is still king. But this offers people, especially those
Speaker 1: who are of drinking age or newly turning to drinking age.
Speaker 1: Is they like THC infused products they really really enjoyed
Speaker 1: and that is the new and growing trent for Ohio
Speaker 1: to be this this island of stupidity, in my opinion,
Speaker 1: not to lean into this thing. Every surrounding state can
Speaker 1: sell these products, and so as you mentioned earlier, outside
Speaker 1: of Columbus, that kind of kills us here in Cincinnati. Uh,
Speaker 1: the other Ohio well, there are four Ohio breweries that
Speaker 1: are suing. Two in Cincinnati over to fifty Wes. Bobby Slattery,
Speaker 1: he's a friend of the show, said, and I think
Speaker 1: it's a great question. Who are we helping by doing this?
Speaker 1: Have you ever gotten an answer to that?
Speaker 2: No, and I don't. I don't think that's one of
Speaker 2: those comments will ever be addressed directly, Right, That's one
Speaker 2: of those that'll get brushed to the side because I
Speaker 2: don't think there's a good answers.
Speaker 1: Yeah, this is something that's driven by the lawmakers or
Speaker 1: particularly Mike Delinic. No one is saying, you know, established
Speaker 1: good petition to trying to stop people from SELLINGDHC beverages.
Speaker 1: This just like came off the top of his head.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Yeah, it's very questionable. The justification for it really is.
Speaker 2: I really wish the Portraite governor would Yeah, he would
Speaker 2: speak to it and just give us a direct answer
Speaker 2: as to why right, because nothing is adding up.
Speaker 1: Well, the time is short. Of course your less than
Speaker 1: two weeks here? Are you optimistic at least get in
Speaker 1: an injunction here?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm optimistic. Again. I think the Ohio Constitution is is,
Speaker 2: you know, pretty well defined, and you know what the
Speaker 2: governor did was lawless over each and he just doesn't
Speaker 2: he doesn't have the authority to do it. And that's
Speaker 2: the way that people have structured it. Uh. And there's
Speaker 2: I think there's a reason too why you don't see
Speaker 2: these line on and beatos come up very often because
Speaker 2: most governors will look at what the constitution says and say, okay,
Speaker 2: here's where I can apply this, and it generally comes
Speaker 2: in the form of the budget bill gets passed every
Speaker 2: one of two years. I don't remember in Junie, that's
Speaker 2: that's where it gets used, because's where it's appropriate.
Speaker 1: Yep, one hundred percent out of time, but appreciate yours
Speaker 1: as always. Scottie Hunter over at urban Artifacts, he see
Speaker 1: a cone owner and and CEO suing the state of
Speaker 1: all hiover this thch drink band. Hopefully they press the
Speaker 1: time out button here and uh, maybe more thoughtful and
Speaker 1: cooler heads will debate this thing and we'll continue on,
Speaker 1: continue on. All the best, man, good luck with us.
Speaker 1: Appreciate you checking.
Speaker 2: In, Thanks that for having me. Have a great day.
Speaker 1: You two be well his best day that you can have.
Speaker 1: We've got lots going on. We got the president town,
Speaker 1: we got weather moving in full, updated news here seconds away,
Speaker 1: and then the Snort Report right afterwards on seven hundred
Speaker 1: w Finding great candidates to hire can be like well,
Speaker 1: trying to find a needle in a haystack. Sure you
Speaker 1: can post your job to some job board,