Cannabis influencers and celebrities came to celebrate the NY Cookies store opening in Manhattan. Here are the unforgettable images from the historic weekend.
The post New Cookies store lights up downtown NYC [Photo gallery] appeared first on Leafly.
SAFE Banking plus expungements planned for the lame duck.
The post Congress will move on legalization after election, Sen. Chuck Schumer says appeared first on Leafly.
Dr. Max Jones and Dr. Gale Bozzo, two professors at UG’s Ontario Agricultural College (Department of Plant Agriculture), received a Health Canada “dealer’s license” on Oct. 25. The license permits the cultivation of psilocybin mushrooms, and is one of the first universities in Canada to be permitted to do so.
“We are very excited about this approval as it will allow us to study these psychedelic mushrooms to better understand their biology and genetics, examine what other functional compounds they might contain, and provide well-characterized and chemically consistent material for preclinical and potentially clinical evaluation,” Jones said. He previously received a license to study cannabis back in November 2018 as well.
According to Jones, there are more than 200 species of mushrooms that can produce psilocybin. “Those species aren’t that closely related; they’re diverse,” Jones said in a press release. “So that makes scientists like me wonder: what else are these mushrooms producing? If you have 200 species producing a compound that affects the human brain, it’s likely they are producing other interesting compounds, too.”
Psilocybin therapy has become a popular treatment for conditions such as depression, addiction, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder. According to Dr. Melissa Perreault, Professor in Ontario Veterinary College’s Department of Biomedical Sciences and another researchers involved with the study, there’s a specific function that they’re hoping to examine. “There are many already working with psilocybin, but we’re interested in the potential biological activity of some of the other compounds in these mushrooms and whether they have any therapeutic value alone or in combination with psilocybin,” Perreault said.
Perreault’s experience has previously involved studies of the molecular and cellular mechanisms associated with medical conditions like depression or autism spectrum disorders. Her plan is to examine the signaling pathways that psilocybin might affect. “If there is any potential therapeutic value in these compounds, we would then bring them into some of the models I work with, such as those used to study specific aspects of depression or autism, to examine their therapeutic effects,” Perreault said.
In conclusion, Jones said that he believes increased access to mushrooms will allow more studies to be conducted. “There is a real need for a public supply of these mushrooms,” Jones said. We aim to create a supply of mushrooms to be used for preclinical and perhaps clinical trials in which the genetics and cultivation methodologies will be fully disclosed to researchers and the public.”
The press release also notes that the researchers plan to develop a synthetic mushroom growing method to make it easily reproduced. Typically, mushrooms are grown on grains or manure.
Psilocybin mushrooms are continuing to grow with interest among the medical community. Earlier this year in January, one organization presented evidence of mushroom’s therapeutic qualities and announced its intention to have the substance rescheduled in the United Nations 1971 UN Convention on Psychotropic Substances Act. In August, a study published in the journal JAMA Psychiatry showed how psilocybin has the potential to treat alcohol addiction. In mid-September, the University of Copenhagen began examining the effects of psilocybin to treat obesity. Just last week, Johns Hopkins University announced a study to analyze how psilocybin can help patients quit smoking. The substance has even become the muse for numerous high-profile musicians, such as Björk, Ellie Goulding, Kid Cudi, and Lil Nas X.
The state of Oregon is planning on finalizing its rules to regulate psilocybin by December 2022, while a few other states are presenting psilocybin allowances on the November ballot.
The post Canadian University Granted License To Study Psilocybin Mushrooms appeared first on High Times.
The attorney general of New Jersey last week issued a new directive on drug testing requirements for law enforcement agencies, a necessary update following the launch of the state’s legal cannabis market earlier this year.
Matthew Platkin, who was confirmed as the state’s AG last month, said that following the opening of the regulated marijuana industry in April, “many law enforcement agencies delayed the random drug testing of officers under the AG Drug Testing Policy to allow time for additional guidance and clarity.”
Under the directive that Platkin issued last Tuesday, law enforcement agencies “must conduct at least two random drug tests during the period from April 1, 2023 to December 31, 2023.”
In each of those two tests, the agencies must test “at least 10 percent of the total number of sworn officers within the agency, and every officer must have an equal chance of selection during each test.”
Those same testing requirements are in place for the period from January 1, 2022 until March 31, 2023, with Platkin’s directive noting that the “two random tests … conducted during the ‘calendar year’ of 2022 shall be extended and interpreted to include the period January 1, 2022 to March 31, 2023,” and that the “two random tests … conducted during the ‘calendar year’ of 2023 shall be amended and interpreted to include the period April 1, 2023 to December 31, 2023.”
The directive continued: “If a law enforcement agency has conducted two random drug tests during calendar year 2022, and then conducts a test during the period, January 1, 2022 to March 31, 2023, that third test may count toward the 2023 requirement of two tests. To summarize, law enforcement agencies must conduct a total of at least four random drug tests between January 1, 2022 and December 31, 2023.”
Platkin said that in March 2020, the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, the state AG’s office “sought to ease the administrative burden on New Jersey’s law enforcement agencies by suspending or delaying certain statewide reporting, training, and certification deadlines.”
Voters in the Garden State approved a ballot measure in 2020 that legalized adult-use cannabis. In April, New Jersey launched the regulated retail marijuana market.
With the new changes in effect, state regulators have been forced to tweak certain rules and practices, including workplace drug testing.
Last month, the New Jersey Cannabis Regulatory Commission, which oversees the state’s legal marijuana program, announced updated guidance for drug testing, saying effectively that employers still have the right to test their workers.
“The purpose of this guidance is to clarify and explain the NJ-CRC’s understanding of the existing legal requirements under the governing law,” the commission said in the announcement at the time. “This guidance does not impose any additional requirements that are not included in the law and does not establish additional rights for any person or entity. Please note, however, that adverse employment actions may impact employees’ protected rights under various laws including, but not limited to, state and federal anti-discrimination laws. When incorporating this guidance, employers should ensure compliance with all state and federal employment laws.”
The commission said that “employees cannot be acted against solely due to the presence of cannabis in their body, but employers have the right to drug test on reasonable suspicion of impairment.”
Jeff Brown, the executive director of the New Jersey Cannabis Regulatory Commission, said in the announcement that it was important to show that striking “a balance between workplace safety and work performance and adult employees’ right to privacy and to consume cannabis during their off hours is possible.”
The post New Jersey AG Issues Fresh Guidance on Drug Testing for Law Enforcement appeared first on High Times.
On Friday, October 28, 2022, with no announcement, publicity or advance warning, the Office of Cannabis Management (OCM) released its “Guidance for Adult-Use Dispensaries” (the Regulations). Although not expressly referenced in the title, the intent of releasing these regulations is to provide guidance for Conditional Adult-Use Retails Dispensary (CAURD) licensees and applicants.
All CAURD applicants should learn the details and requirements of the Regulations. Despite the repeated references to “guidance” in the Regulations, make no mistake, these are Regulations that both licensees and applicants are required to follow:
[CAURD] applicants may be asked to submit the records and plans described in this guidance on the CAURD application and at the request of the [OCM]. Failure to submit, or refusal to submit, required materials may subject CAURD applicants to denial or non-selection of the applicant for a CAURD license.
This is a clear sign that the OCM is gearing up to issue CAURD licenses and consistent with Governor Hochul’s statement that adult-use retail dispensaries will open in 2022, as well as Cannabis Control Board Chairwoman Tremaine Wright’s statement at the Luxury Meets Cannabis Conference that at least one dispensary will be open in 2022.
The information contained in the Regulations is a mix of substantive requirements, operational guidance and insight into the OCM’s plans for the issuance of licenses and operation of New York’s cannabis industry. As put by the OCM:
[T]his guidance document serves to provide the framework that will assist [CAURD] licensees to plan for how to operate their dispensary before regulations are formally adopted. . . . This guidance document provides clarity on what the [OCM’s] expectations are in relation to those regulations and laws currently in place and the regulations that will be promulgated in the future.
There is a LOT to unpack here. To provide actual insight into the Regulations’ various categories, we’ll be publishing a five-part series on the Regulations:
The Regulations were posted on the CAURD licensing section of the OCM website, so obviously the Regulations were drafted with CAURD licenses in mind. But it is also apparent that the Regulations will be the framework for all adult-use retail dispensaries in New York given that the physical requirements track the Marijuana Regulation and Taxation Act.
One significant development that we just cannot wait to comment on: the OCM appears to be moving away from its mandate that CAURD licensees operate in State-leased locations. Section 23 of the Regulations, titled “Location of Licensed Premises,” provides:
Certain retail dispensary licensees may be permitted to select the location of the licensed premises or relocate the location of the licensed premises.
The State-leased location requirement has been picked apart by us here. We suspect that the difficulty and delay in leasing and building out dispensary locations is forcing the OCM to consider loosening the initial requirement that CAURD licensees operate only in State-leased locations.
Clearly New York’s cannabis industry is developing quickly, including with New York’s self-imposed deadline to begin retail sales by the end of 2022. Stay tuned for Part 1 of our series on the Regulations and further developments in New York’s cannabis industry!
The post New York’s Cannabis Retail Dispensary Regulations Are Here! appeared first on Harris Bricken Sliwoski LLP.
San Francisco’s staple cannabis brand is debuting a new store in NYC this weekend. Here’s what you need to know about the Herald Square Cookies store’s grand opening.
The post No you can’t buy weed at Cookies’ New York store, yet (and other FAQs) appeared first on Leafly.
The US just can't kick its fear of tainted Halloween candy. Leafly spoke with experts to find out why the myth endures and how to debunk it.
The post No, your kid’s Halloween candy hasn’t been tainted with THC appeared first on Leafly.
A Clark County, Nevada judge ruled on Wednesday that the state pharmacy board does not have the authority to regulate cannabis and cannabis derivatives under state law and ordered the agency to remove marijuana from the state’s list of controlled substances. In the decision, Clark County District Court Judge Joe Hardy wrote that if the Nevada State Board of Pharmacy “designates a substance as a ‘controlled substance’ but the designation falls outside the authority delegated by the Legislature, the designation is invalid.”
The ruling stems from a case brought against the pharmacy board by the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada (ACLUNV) on behalf of Antoine Poole and the Cannabis Equity and Inclusion Community, an organization that assists entrepreneurs in launching businesses in Nevada’s legal cannabis industry. ACLUNV attorneys argued that the Schedule 1 classification of cannabis was unconstitutional because voters had legalized medical marijuana with the passage of a constitutional amendment in 1998. Last month, Hardy ruled that the Schedule 1 classification was unconstitutional.
“The constitutional right to use marijuana upon the advice of a physician does establish that marijuana has an accepted medical use and treatment in the United States,” Hardy ruled in a September decision cited by the Las Vegas Review-Journal.
The new ruling this week is focused on the pharmacy board’s authority to regulate cannabis. ACLUNV attorneys argued that despite the legalization of medical marijuana and the availability of regulated medicinal cannabis in Nevada since 2000, the pharmacy board continued to list cannabis similarly to illicit substances including heroin and methamphetamine. Lawyers for the pharmacy board countered that the listing was warranted because of the continued listing of marijuana as a Schedule 1 substance under federal law, an assertion rejected by the plaintiffs’ counsel.
“The notion that a state agency is able to engage in unlawful actions because it’s happening at the federal government – it’s just not the way it works,” Athar Haseebullah, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada (ACLU), said on July 15 after the first hearing in the case. “They don’t work for the feds. We didn’t sue the DEA here. We sued the State Board of Pharmacy because this is a state action.”
In his ruling, Hardy wrote that “the Board exceeded its authority when it placed, or failed to remove marijuana, cannabis, and cannabis derivatives on its list as Schedule I substances.”
After the ruling, ACLUNV noted that the decision means the pharmacy board does not have the authority to regulate cannabis under any schedule. Legal director Chris Peterson praised the judge’s ruling, saying that there has “been an ongoing inconsistency with how Nevada categorizes cannabis.”
“For some people, it’s a medicine or a good time on a Friday night, and for some people it was a felony,” Peterson said in a statement from the civil rights organization. “We’re glad that we’ve now resolved this inconsistency to prevent further injustice, and we’ll continue our work to ensure that the promise of cannabis decriminalization is realized in Nevada.”
Shawn Hauser, a partner at the cannabis and psychedelics law firm Vicente Sederberg LLP, said that Hardy’s ruling “is a positive development in cannabis reform, in line with recognition by federal lawmakers and the public that cannabis has known medicinal value, can be safely regulated, and is not properly classified as a schedule 1 controlled substance that has no accepted medical use.”
“Like Colorado, Nevada legalized cannabis through its constitution and developed a robust state regulatory system governing cannabis businesses,” Hauser said. “This case is important precedent confirming that state agencies cannot take action in conflict with state constitutional and statutory provisions, despite the illegality of cannabis under federal law.”
Ashley Dodson, the president and co-founder of Cannabis Equity and Inclusion Community, said that the court’s ruling on Wednesday will help foster social equity in Nevada’s regulated cannabis industry.
“Cannabis has been legal in Nevada for decades, but that hasn’t stopped law enforcement from treating Black and Brown people like criminals. We’re grateful for the ACLU of Nevada for taking this case on and for Judge Hardy for hearing it with fairness and dignity,” Dodson said in a statement. “As far as social equity is concerned, we’ve seen businesses act strategically to keep Black and Brown people out of the unlicensed market by preventing pathways to ownership. CEIC is hopeful that as the last loopholes allowing for the criminalization of cannabis fall by the wayside, we can get back to our original mission of assisting the communities harmed the most by the failed War on Drugs find a way into the industry.”
The post Nevada Judge Orders Cannabis Removed From State’s List of Controlled Substances appeared first on High Times.
President Joe Biden announced on Oct. 6 that he would be pardoning people across the country who currently have cannabis convictions on their record. According to the official White House press release, this means the pardon covers “…all current United States citizens and lawful permanent residents who committed the offense of simple possession of marijuana in violation of the Controlled Substances Act…”
The statement also made it clear that only “simple” convictions would be pardoned. “My intent by this proclamation is to pardon only the offense of simple possession of marijuana in violation of Federal law or in violation of D.C. Code 48–904.01(d)(1), and not any other offenses related to marijuana or other controlled substances,” Biden said.
Since the announcement was made, there has been no further announcements about the number of people who are to be pardoned, or their names. However, estimates provided by the U.S. Sentencing Commission provides insight into how many people could potentially receive a pardon.
Founded in 1984, the U.S. Sentencing Commission was created “to reduce sentencing disparities and promote transparency and proportionality in sentencing.” As an independent agency, its purpose is to collect and analyze data in regard to information related to federal sentences, and creates guidelines for crime policy in multiple branches of government.
In a report published on Oct. 13, the commission shows a chart featuring “The number of federal offenders convicted only of 21 U.S.C. § 844 Involving Marijuana” which covers the range of years between 1992-2021. An analysis of each year breaks down the number of U.S. citizen offenders, with a total of 6,577. The report notes that no offenders are in Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP), as of Jan. 29, 2022.
In a total of all of these offenders who have at least one count of simple possession (as defined by 21 U.S.C. 844) 78.5% of offenders were male, and 21.6% were female. In regards to race, 41.3% were White, 31.8% “Hispanic,” 23.6% Black, and 3.3% Other.
Another chart shows that offenders with convictions “Involving Marijuana and Other Drugs” includes a total of 415 people within the same time frame, and an additional chart shows 555 offenders “Involving only marijuana who also have other convictions.”
A breakdown of each Court of Appeals Circuit and its respective jurisdiction shows that the highest percent of regional offenders came from “Virginia East” at 9.7% (covering courts in Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia), “Texas West” at 8.8% (covering courts in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas), “Arizona” at 16.7% and “California South” at 15% (both of which are included in United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which includes courts in Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington State). All other district percentages range from 0.1% to 4.3%.
Many states have already created programs to assist residents in expunging, vacating, or sealing cannabis convictions. According to Reuters, these efforts have helped over 2 million people clear their records.
In June, the American Medical Association adopted a cannabis expungement resolution. Expungement clinics also recently were held in Buffalo, New York in August. The U.S. House Judiciary Committee advanced two pieces of legislation in September that would provide relief for individuals with cannabis convictions.
Biden’s initial pardon announcement urged state governors to issue pardons as well. Most recently though, Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb stated that he would not be pardoning anyone for cannabis convictions, and instead recommended that people seeking expungement use state programs that are already in place.
The post U.S. Sentencing Commission Estimates That 6,577 People Could Receive Pardons appeared first on High Times.
Cannabis remains a hot button issue with politically-driven fanfare in the U.S. territory of the Virgin Islands. Two bills were introduced in the Virgin Islands on Oct. 24: One that would legalize cannabis for adult use and another that would expunge eligible cases of cannabis convictions.
Bill No. 21-0160 would legalize cannabis for adults 21 and over, and Bill No. 21-0137 would pave a way to expunge eligible cannabis convictions. After at least two previous attempts, government officials continue to push forward a workable bill.
Both bills were sponsored by Sen. Janelle Sarauw, who has been working on cannabis reform for some time. “It has been a very cumbersome process to get these bills to where they are today,” she wrote in a press release, which she also posted on Facebook, referring to past promises to get legislation going on the islands.
“Although there have been many politically driven false narratives about this cannabis legislation, I am proud of the work done to ensure that locals and minorities are not locked out of the industry and have an opportunity to participate in the economic potential of the industry — from farming, to dispensaries, to incentives for boutique labs, and micro energy providers,” Sarauw wrote.
“To ignore those lessons would be foolish,” Sarauw continued. “As a political scientist, but most importantly as an elected representative of the people, it is my job to do the due diligence to protect the masses and the best interest of our residents by creating equity in opportunity.”
The 69-page legalization bill covers just about any provision that you’d expect in a U.S. state bill. Under the legalization bill, an Office of Cannabis Regulation (OCR) would issue business licenses, oversee the industry, and set rules on advertising, packaging, and labeling. Edibles would be capped at 100 mg THC with 10 mg doses. Licensing fees would be imposed and a potential 50 cent per gram tax would be imposed on cultivators who sell cannabis to other licensees. The bill would include several equity components.
Under the expungement bill, people with past cannabis convictions can petition the courts to clear convictions for violations of up to two ounces of cannabis.
On Aug. 10, the V.I. Cannabis Advisory Board (VICAB) in the U.S. Virgin Islands unanimously approved draft regulations for the territory’s medical cannabis program. On Aug. 12, the Office of Cannabis Regulations posted the draft publicly. Long story short, the timeline didn’t adhere very well. Gov. Bryan’s administration was blamed by Sen. Sarauw for delaying the rollout of medical cannabis earlier on the islands.
Virgin Islands Governor Albert Bryan Jr. proposed an earlier version of the Cannabis Use Act in 2019, and introduced another version in 2020. Recently, Bryan’s re-election campaign fired back and slammed Sen. Sarauw for failing to fulfill promises to legalize cannabis, which she said in 2021. But it was the pressure put on by the governor that may have contributed to Sen. Sarauw’s recent actions to release the new pieces of legislation.
Sen. Sarauw herself and fellow candidate Sen. Kurt Vialet, who is against cannabis legalization, are both running to de-seat Gov. Bryan and Lt. Gov. Tregenza Roach in the upcoming election on November 8.
The Virgin Islands is a hotbed for Caribbean music like reggae, so it’s safe to say a lot of tourists go there to smoke. But despite an active medical cannabis program, tourists are warned that public consumption of cannabis is still forbidden in the Virgin Islands. Even with a medical cannabis card, you can not smoke weed in any public space.
The post Virgin Islands Inches Closer to Adult-Use Cannabis, Expungements appeared first on High Times.
According to UMass Memorial Medical Center, 27-year-old Kai Chen and his 63-year-old mother Kam Look were poisoned from eating mushrooms, known as “death caps,” which they found growing near their home a few weeks ago in Amherst, Massachusetts.
The two survived, and one of their doctors recently told the Boston Globe it was thanks to the help of Legalon, an experimental drug flown in from Philadelphia made from an extract of the milk thistle plant. Kam did, however, require a liver transplant and the two suffered kidney damage as well.
“The treatment involved getting special permission from the FDA to provide an antidote that’s currently an investigational drug – and then to get that antidote emergently cured from Philadelphia” said Dr. Stephanie Carreiro, from the Division of Toxicology at UMass Memorial Medical Center in a press conference. “We had tried many methods to try to remove the toxin from their bodies. And ultimately, for Kam, it also required liver transplantation.”
Death caps, known amongst nerds as Amanita phalloides, are a mushroom that grow pervasively throughout California and most of the world. According to Mushrooms of the Redwood Coast by Noah Siegel and Christian Schwarz, the mushrooms are all white from top to bottom and commonly grow on wood chips but can be found more or less anywhere in North America. The fatality rate for those who consume death caps varies depending on the source from 25 to 50%.
Death caps and a handful of other particularly prolific and toxic species of mushrooms cause fatalities in people who ingest them every year, largely because the symptoms do not set in immediately after consuming. By the time people seek help, it is often too late and the liver damage has already begun. Kai Chen did, however, tell CBS Boston that they felt something was off pretty quickly.
“This should be a very big cautionary tale,” Kai Chen said in a press conference. “Be careful of what you find out there in the woods, especially mushrooms.”
Levon Durr, owner of a mushroom cultivation business called Fungaia Farms in Eureka, CA, told High Times that death caps have actually just as of this year been recorded in places they have otherwise not yet been found, which could indicate climate change has allowed them to gain more ground, so to speak.
“Amanita phalloides (death cap) has officially been recorded in Humboldt County last year and seems to have been migrating north over the last decade. They have been recorded in the Bay Area for years now and then became more common in Mendocino County and now Humboldt,” Durr said. “The theory is the warming, drying climate has opened up new habitats for them to move north. So, it begs to hypothesize we will, unfortunately, see more poisonings as it expands its habitat into areas where people are less familiar with the death cap.”
Mushroom foraging season is upon us and despite all the most grim warnings I can think of, people will still inevitably go out and mistake one thing for another every year. Mushroom experts have collectively warned the community at large for decades that proper mushroom identification is extremely difficult and requires much more extensive legwork than simple photo comparison. For instance, one of the most commonly hunted psychedelic mushrooms known as “Wavy caps” (Psilocybe cyanescens) have a deadly look-alike called Galerina marginata that oftentimes are virtually impossible to distinguish between without proper training.
“When collecting wild mushrooms for food, one rule supersedes all others. When in doubt, throw it out. If you are not sure that your mushroom is edible, don’t eat it.” – Excerpt from Mushrooms of the Redwood Coast.
The post Mother, Son Survive Brush With ‘Death Cap’ Mushrooms Thanks to Experimental New Drug appeared first on High Times.
The Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (“WSLCB”) published an industry update on October 25 detailing a recent increase in complaints by cannabis producers and processors of “pay to play” terms.
Apparently, some cannabis producers and processors have been paying retailers to acquire shelf space for their cannabis products. These arrangements have become prominent enough that some retailers are asking processors to pay for shelf space as if it is common practice.
Like many other cannabis business activities that Washington prohibits, this is the kind of thing that an ordinary businessperson might not think twice about. Nonetheless, pay to play arrangements are unlawful under the state’s cannabis laws. Washington law prohibits producers and processors from having a direct or indirect financial interest in a licensed cannabis retailer.
The WSLCB’s position is that a pay to play arrangement between a producer or processor and a retailer violates that rule. Moreover, the WSLCB stated that these deals violate Washington law that prohibit a cannabis industry member from entering into an agreement that results in one member having undue influence over another. The WSLCB’s position on pay to play arrangements is not off the mark based on the text of the rules.
Unfortunately, we see issues like this in the cannabis space more than we would like to. Too often, cannabis operators get their licenses but fail to keep up or operate in compliance with the regulations. Washington has some of the strictest laws governing cannabis operators in the country and many run afoul of the rules without ever knowing it.
To make matters more complicated, the WSLCB is understaffed and from our experience extraordinarily busy so both education (the WSLCB’s preference in most if not all instances of minor violations) and violation enforcement are often outpaced by what is happening in the market.
Ultimately, when licensees offer the assets or equity of the business for sale, regulatory violations almost always come to light whether they were caught by the WSLCB or not. If licensees don’t heed the WSLCB’s word, these pay to play arrangements may become the newest skeleton in the closet to emerge down the road in Washington cannabis acquisitions.
The WSLCB deserves some credit here for keeping its ear to the ground and posting a well-written article in an attempt to curb this behavior by notifying the market. Given how busy the WSLCB is, publishing notices like it has for pay to play arrangements is precisely the right way to go about dealing with emerging market trends that violate the rules.
To be sure, licensees are in a difficult position because the regulations are complex, change often, and in many instances are unclear about what they require or prohibit. With that being said, ignorance of the law is no defense and the burden for ensuring regulatory compliance is and always has been on licensees.
If a pay to play arrangement is memorialized in a written agreement, licensees should contact counsel for advice on how to terminate it. Generally speaking, contracts usually contain a termination provision allowing the parties to terminate the contract if its substance is unlawful. If no such provision exists in the contract, common law contract defenses may also be available.
Even though Washington’s adult use cannabis market has been around for many years, as the WSLCB’s post indicates it’s still somewhat of the wild west. Licensees are well advised to pay attention to the WSLCB’s posts about regulatory issues taking place in the market.
If you’re in a pay to play deal, the WSLCB is offering both a life raft and a warning– get out of those deals now, or else. Where the WSLCB is giving a public warning about business activities it views as unlawful, one can be sure it won’t be sympathetic to an uncured violation down the road.
The post Washington Cannabis: Beware “Pay to Play” Arrangements appeared first on Harris Bricken Sliwoski LLP.
The most recent data available from the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (LCB) shows that among all of the cannabis business owners in Seattle, Washington, only 4% are Black-owned. A new report from King5 News interviews minority business owners who lost their place in the industry when Washington State legalized adult-use cannabis, and how a Seattle task force is working on change.
Former cannabis business owners Peter Manning and Mike Asai recall what it was like living in Seattle decades ago. “I know that we use the War on Drugs to go after Black and Brown people,” entrepreneur and Seattle-native Peter Manning told King5. “You guys punish us for years for cannabis. And now it’s okay. Now you’re doing it. Now it’s okay.”
“Growing up in Seattle, in the ‘80s, [if you] just simply had a joint you would get five years in prison,” said Mike Asai, co-founder of the Emerald City Collective. “[I’ve] seen that happen with family and friends and acquaintances, you know, for just that.”
Washington State legalized medical cannabis in 1998, which led both Manning and Asai to pursue a role in the industry. In the 2000s, both of them joined a medical cannabis collective, which brought together growers and retailers in a way that was beneficial to the community.
“To be on the bad end, when it comes to cannabis and then revert to be on the good end was very empowering,” Asai said of the collective. “Because of growing up and just seeing the War on Drugs was really the war on African Americans, the war on Black men and Black women in this country.”
In 2015, the state legalized adult-use cannabis, which forced cannabis business owners to shut down their businesses and re-apply for a license—but many Black and Brown business owners were not able to secure one. “To be legitimate and then all of a sudden now being criminalized…It’s been very traumatizing,” said Asai. “It’s been very depressing and painful to see, especially to see all the money that’s been made since the last six years since we’ve been closed. I’ve had to figure things out. I had to do Uber for about a year, just to stay afloat.”
LCB data from 2021 shows that out of the state’s 558 available licenses, only 19 have been given to Black applicants. “There is zero African American ownership in the city of Seattle, and to be supposedly this progressive state, this liberal state, it’s not showing,” Manning said.
In recent years, both Manning and Asai have spoken with the press and attended city meetings to speak out about this injustice. Recently, they both attended a Seattle City Council meeting on July 20 as public commenters urging the council to address the issue.
The Social Equity in Cannabis Task Force was created in 2020 to establish a social equity program, and to issue and reissue retail licenses. It’s first set of recommendations were submitted on Jan. 6. 2022, with a deadline that a final report be submitted to the state legislature and governor by Dec. 9, 2022.
LCB Board Social Equity in Cannabis Task Force member Ollie Garret told King5 that change needs to happen now. “Yes. I mean…what’s the saying? A day late, and a dollar short. Now the community is screaming, ‘What about us? What about us?’ Garrett said. “We go, ‘Oh, we need to fix this.’”
Garret describes the situation as a “failure” and a “missed opportunity.” “Could it have been done different in the beginning? Yes. But this was a new industry. Who knew, who thought about inclusion and Blacks being left out,” Garret said.
According to King5, the Social Equity in Cannabis Task Force is setting aside 38 licenses for people of color. Unfortunately, over half of the licenses are for business locations in areas that currently ban cannabis. “Where we’re at right now, the LCB cannot move licenses out of the areas that they’re in or create new license[s] without legislation,” Garrett said. “We are going to introduce [that] in this upcoming session.”
Manning questions the task force’s view on equity. “What are you giving me?” Manning said. “A license that says I have the right to sell cannabis? But I can’t sell cannabis because I can’t open up in this location because it’s banned. How’s that equity?”
He also suggests that consumers be conscious about where they choose to buy their cannabis. “There’s white-owned stores in our Black neighborhoods,” Manning said. “Ten years ago, you were locking us up for the same thing. White people were making millions of dollars. You’re taking that money out of our community, and they’re putting it in the white community. We want our Black-owned stores in our communities.”
The post Only 4% of Cannabis Businesses in Washington State are Black-Owned appeared first on High Times.
Medical marijuana and gun ownership are topics that continue to evolve in the United States. Benzinga explains where we are now.
The post Why do medical cannabis and gun ownership rights conflict so often? appeared first on Leafly.
Idaho’s ban on CBD and hemp-derived products only harms animals even more, because people give it to them regardless of regulations, according to a national group devoted to the wellbeing of animals and pets.
It’s a complicated issue that oscillates between the urgent need for CBD oil for dogs and cats that have seizures and other issues, and the need to prove CBD is beneficial in those areas before making medical claims and eventually getting the blessing from the FDA.
Idaho is home to some of the least tolerant cannabis laws seen anywhere in the U.S. Only Idaho and a handful of other states have been resistant to allow even CBD sales. Last July, the Idaho State Department of Agriculture (ISDA) announced a ban on CBD products and other hemp-derived products intended for pets and farm animals, set to go into effect November 1.
“Idaho Code 25-2712 (1) states that it is unlawful to “manufacture or distribut[e] any commercial feed that is adulterated or misbranded.” Therefore, pursuant to state law and consistent with the FDA and AAFCO [Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO)], the ISDA has not approved hemp or hemp-derived products for animal use,” Department officials wrote.
But members of the National Animal Supplement Council (NASC) believe that Idaho’s ban puts animals in even more danger because CBD products need certificates of analysis and need to be vetted under a regulatory program.
So the NASC called people to action on the Council’s website and launched a petition on Change.org. Nearly 3,000 people have signed the petition at the time of writing.
“The Idaho State Department of Agriculture intends to stop the sale of dosage form pet products (animal health supplements) that contain hemp and CBD, beginning on November 1, 2022,” the petition reads.
“This decision will likely harm animals whose owners will no longer be able to access the products their pets rely on for a variety of health and wellness reasons. It will also have a serious economic impact on Idaho businesses that manufacture and sell these products.
Removing CBD pet products from the marketplace paves the way for a black-market industry of unscrupulous suppliers selling questionable products that could end up harming animals. It may also lead to pet owners turning to human products that aren’t formulated for pets or marijuana products that contain high levels of THC.”
The NASC has a very specific twofold mission: “to promote the health and wellbeing of companion animals and horses that are given animal health supplements by their owners, and to protect and enhance the animal health supplement industry.”
Viral videos show CBD oil stopping seizures in dogs in real time.
Professional British Boxer Anthony Fowler, for instance, posted a video of a dog having a seizure and how fast CBD oil stopped the dog from shaking. Another viral video shows CBD oil stopping a seizure in another dog in less than one minute.
But despite these anecdotal reports coming out of the woodwork, other national organizations say there is not enough known to say CBD products are safe for pets.
Not everyone’s onboard, however, which includes the FDA. The Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) and several other organizations wrote a joint open letter earlier this year warning about health concerns regarding hemp and CBD in animal feeds and pet food.
Click here to sign the petition.
The post National Animal Group Urges Idaho To Lift CBD Pet Ban appeared first on High Times.
In less than two weeks, voters in Missouri will decide on an amendment to legalize recreational pot in the state, a prospect that has some established medical cannabis businesses eyeing expansion.
The St. Louis Business Journal has a report out this week on the ballot proposal, known as Amendment 3, which is “projected to create a significantly larger market for the companies that have already emerged as major players in the state’s legal medical marijuana market.”
The outlet highlighted “Proper Cannabis, a St. Louis-based medical dispensary that opened a $20 million facility in Rock Hill last year, operates three dispensaries in the St. Louis region,” which has recently expanded “its existing facility by 25,000 to 30,000 square feet in preparation for a drastic increase in demand.”
“It’s both exciting and needed,” Proper Cannabis CEO John Pennington told the Business Journal. “What you have in Missouri is two to three times the number of people who are likely already consuming, who will now have safe, compliant and enjoyable places to shop with reliable quality products and medicine.”
Medical cannabis opened for business in Missouri in the fall of 2020 after voters there passed a measure legalizing the treatment in 2018.
A year after the medical marijuana program launched, the state reported that the industry had grown to more than 140 dispensaries employing about 5,000 people.
The St. Louis Business Journal also reported on “BeLeaf Medical, an Earth City-based medical cannabis firm, made a notable change as it prepares for the possibility of a market expansion into recreational cannabis.”
According to the outlet, the company recently hired Jason Nelson as its new CEO. Nelson “joined the company three and a half months ago from Chicago-based Cresco Labs, where he was the cannabis firm’s senior vice president of horticulture,” and where he “helped the company expand into 10 states, including five that made the transition from medical to recreational sales.”
Amendment 3 officially qualified for the Missouri ballot in August, when Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft said that the group behind the proposal, Legal Missouri 2022, had submitted a sufficient number of valid signatures.
“Our statewide coalition of activists, business owners, medical marijuana patients and criminal justice reform advocates has worked tirelessly to reach this point, and deserves all the credit,” Legal Missouri campaign manager John Payne said in a statement at the time. “Our campaign volunteers collected 100,000 signatures, on top of paid signature collection. That outpouring of grassroots support among Missourians who want to legalize, tax and regulate cannabis made all the difference. We look forward to engaging with voters across the state in the coming weeks and months. Missourians are more than ready to end the senseless and costly prohibition of marijuana.”
If it is approved by voters, Amendment 3 will allow “Missourians 21 years and older to possess, purchase, consume and cultivate marijuana,” and “Missourians with nonviolent marijuana-related offenses to automatically expunge their criminal records.”
The initiative would also create a legal marijuana market that would impose a six percent sales tax on weed.
“Beyond covering administrative expenses and the costs to process automatic expungements, any remaining surplus will be split equally between veterans’ healthcare, drug addiction treatment, and Missouri’s underfunded public defender system,” Legal Missouri explains on its website.
In addition, it would allow local governments in Missouri to levy their own sales taxes of up to three percent. According to the group, state officials “project additional annual revenue of at least $40.8 million and additional local government revenues of at least $13.8 million.”
The amendment’s prospects are difficult to gauge, with polling on the proposal all over the map.
The post Recreational Pot Presents Opportunities for Missouri’s Medical Cannabis Biz appeared first on High Times.
Some of the details of German marijuana legalization were given over to the German press last week. Yesterday though, the government’s plan for German marijuana legalization was approved by the Federal Cabinet.
We’ve blogged about Germany’s steady progress to legalization a few times now (see here and here), and it appears that the Germans are staying true to their promise of implementing legalization in the near future. Our overall prediction is that a legalization wave is coming to Europe, and Germany will be a key player.
In any event, we now have some of the high level details of the German legalization plan. This plan will next be sent to the European Commission for a review before it goes to German lawmakers to actually put together the operative legislation.
Back in July, Germany concluded a series of public hearings around legalization with stakeholders, countries that already have legalization, industry experts, and those groups opposed to legalization. In the hearings, it sounded like the German government was hugely concerned with eliminating its illegal market. Also during the hearings, other nations attested to how their legalization experiments suffered under illegal markets.
The hearings also focused on the significant amount of tax revenue Germany could net if legalization is successfully implemented. And like all countries dealing with the issue, Germany will also need to grapple with the social cost of legalization – namely, how to prioritize safety and education amongst its youth. This topic also has been a large focus of Germany’s hearings.
The German government is proposing that anyone 18 years old and up may purchase and possess up to 20-30 grams (i.e., .7 ounces to approximately 1 ounce for those of us on this side of the pond) of marijuana. And individuals will be able to conduct home grows of up to three female plants. Not a ton, but at least some form of home grow is permitted.
A super interesting limitation (which we do not see here in the states for flower) that was apparently previously proposed was that the THC in all products would be capped at 15%, and if you’re 18-21 years old, you were only allowed to buy products containing up to 10% THC. However, the official German plan released yesterday doesn’t contain those limitations except for customers 18-21. Note though that the key issues paper (discussed below) is a bit vague on this point and says that the upper limits for persons under 21 are TBD.
Similar to the states, marijuana businesses will need to have minimum distance buffers between them and schools and youth facilities. Unlike our state setups here, no amount of advertising, promotions, or marketing will be allowed around cannabis products, and packaging and labeling will have to be relatively plain (and will have heavily regulated disclosure requirements).
While German marijuana businesses will need to pursue licensing to make and sell adult use marijuana, the government is also contemplating allowing for the sale of marijuana in existing pharmacies. Consumption lounges and online sales are also being considered in an effort to stamp out the illegal market in order to increase access and convenience.
Regarding taxes, which is a major pain point in America, it looks like there will be both a sales tax and a “cannabis” tax that will be based on THC content but that cannot be so high as to exceed illegal market prices. And even if Germany legalizes, its plan is not to permit foreign imports–the expectation is that marijuana will be grown in Germany.
Karl Lauterbach, the country’s Health Minister, released a “key issues paper” yesterday, and the world can expect to see an actual copy of the draft law probably sometime in the new year.
It’s clear from the above that Germany is truly concerned about the illicit market within its borders and about the health and safety of its people. However, concepts like capping THC content so severely and prohibiting advertising really don’t lend themselves to successfully competing with the illegal market.
I think Germany gets it regarding the issues of access and convenience; if you make cannabis too hard to go and buy, you’re going to fuel the illegal market (and bully for them for also contemplating the use of pharmacies as well as consumption-focused locations). At the same time, Germany needs to be mindful of the applicable taxes to ensure that businesses can remain competitive while balancing the social cost of this experiment. Also, to ignore the power of international trade around cannabis is also curious. Germany can easily take a page from Canada and Uruguay to assess the actual risks of cannabis import and export despite existing international laws and treaties.
The legalization plan will now go to the European Commission for review and approval (or rejection and a re-write), and we’ll definitely be blogging about that draft legislation once it’s released next year.
The post A Peek at German Marijuana Legalization appeared first on Harris Bricken Sliwoski LLP.
Oregon cannabis operators and their employees are now required to report suspected instances of human trafficking to the state, or potentially face legal consequences.
Per the language of the order from the Oregon Liquor and Cannabis Commission, “Employees or workers at a marijuana licensed premises must report to a law enforcement agency or the OLCC if the employee or worker has a reasonable belief that sex trafficking or other human trafficking is occurring at the premises. Employees or workers must also report if they have a reasonable belief that a minor is employed or contracted at the premises in a manner that violates OLCC rules.”
Mouthful as that may be, it actually makes it a Category 2 violation for cannabis employees to not report any suspected instance of human trafficking. A violation of such a degree in Oregon is subject to maximum penalties of 30 days in jail and/or a fine of just under $5,000.
As a person who has spent the last decade or so around cannabis grows as an employee, journalist, and visitor it seemed odd to me to specifically include employees in the language of the order because any employee of a cannabis grow is typically—though not always—in a remote location far away from fast police response times or sometimes even working phones.
I asked Bryant Haley at the OLCC if employees who neglected to report something of this nature would be subject to fines or jail time.
“Likely not,” Haley said. “It would be the egregiousness of every case. Was the person partaking in some sort of illegal activity? That’s a different situation. Were they turning a blind eye to it on purpose? That’s a different situation.”
According to Haley, the OLCC received the directive to enact this order from legislation passed at the state level enacted to address rampant labor and sex trafficking on southern Oregon marijuana farms—A lot of people sleeping in greenhouses and living in deplorable conditions, a lot of “hemp farms” that were just cannabis farms using forced labor, and a big enough problem to cause the state legislature to direct the OLCC to require this reporting from its license holders.
According to Mark Pettinger, another OLCC spokesperson, this essentially turns anyone that works in the cannabis industry into a “mandatory reporter.” It would come down to the police to actually pursue jail time for employees; the OLCC does not have that ability. The OLCC can, however, impose fines.
When asked if the OLCC planned to impose fines on employees who worked for cannabis operators found to be involved in trafficking, specifically employees who neglected to report such crimes, Haley was not able to give me a firm answer because such a case has not happened yet, but he said their office’s main directive is taking action against the permit holder.
Regardless, human trafficking in the cannabis industry is a huge issue and I would be remiss to not include the following attempt at helping combat it with what little power has been vested in me:
If you or someone you know has been involved in human trafficking, call the U.S. Department of Homeland Security directly at 1-866-347-2423 or report it online here.
If you work for or own a cannabis business in Oregon and suspect human trafficking or child labor has occurred, you are now legally required to report it using their online tool here.
The post Oregon Now Requires Cannabis Employers, Employees To Report Suspected Human Trafficking appeared first on High Times.
The new legalization rules, expected to debut in 2024, could be a model for all of the European Union.
The post Guten tag! Germany unveils plan to legalize marijuana nationwide appeared first on Leafly.
Vic and his team took Leafly under the hood of his new legal cannabis venture, 93 Boyz, which happens to be Illinois’ first licensed Black-owned cannabis brand.
The post How Vic Mensa brought premium legal gas to Chicago dispensaries appeared first on Leafly.
Acknowledge Farms offers you the entourage effect from the ground up in their single-source CBD extracts. Organic & hand-grown in Maryland.
The post These single-source CBD extracts let the plant shine appeared first on Leafly.
German legislators have officially presented plans for the country to decriminalize cannabis sales and possession. According to Health Minister Karl Lauterbach who spoke at a press conference in Berlin on Oct. 26, the legalization proposal will next be sent to the European Union (EU) Executive Commission to ensure that it meets current EU standards, followed by final approval by the German Bundestag. If it passes muster, the legislation proposal will proceed “on this basis” if it is approved, according to Associated Press.
Lauterbach described the current legislation “could be a model for Europe,” although it wouldn’t take effect until at least 2024. It is expected that a revised draft will be presented sometime within the first quarter of 2023.
The proposal requires cannabis to be grown by licensed cultivators, and sold only through licensed storefronts in order to deter black market sales. Residents can grow up to three plants at home and may purchase and possess up to “20 to 30” grams of cannabis.
Lauterbach explained the nature of this proposal in comparison to preexisting cannabis legislation in other European countries. “This would be, on the one hand, the most liberal cannabis legalization project in Europe, and on the other hand it would also be the most tightly regulated market,” he said. Among many of the driving factors is consumer safety. “We don’t want to expand cannabis consumption but to improve the protection of youth and health,” he said, according to The Guardian.
Although the health minister previously opposed legalization, he recognized that current laws were working. According to Lauterbach, the country is home to 83 million people, and approximately 4 million of them consumed cannabis in 2021. Among the population, a quarter of young adults between the ages of 18-24 have consumed cannabis before as well.
Lauterbach also brought up that Germany is taking a drastically different approach to legalization in comparison to its northern neighbor, the Netherlands. “What we have learned from the Dutch experience is that we don’t want to do it that way,” he explained. “We want to control the entire market.”
Ultimately, there are no plans to allow consumption on site at cannabis retailers. Other restrictions for dispensaries would include not being located near schools, and stores that cannabis cannot also sell alcohol or tobacco. Quality requirements are also expected for German cannabis products.
Lauterbach said the government hasn’t decided if it wants to require a tax on top of the normal sales tax, stating that the product shouldn’t be more expensive than black market products.
According to business owners such as SynBiotic Chief Executive Officer Lars Mueller, the reform plan is “like winning the lottery,” he said, as stated by Bloomberg. “When the time comes, we’ll be able to offer franchise-like models for cannabis retailers, in addition to opening our own stores.”
In May, the German Bundestag put pressure on its Health Department, threatening to reduce its funding if it did not begin to work on a legalization draft proposal.
In June, the German government held hearings on recreational cannabis reform where more than 200 people participated. On Oct. 19, Lauterbach announced the country’s plans to create a reform bill, and an early draft of German cannabis legislation was leaked by the RND newspaper group. According to the early draft, products would be capped at 15% THC for adults over 21, and 10% for those between 18-21, and residents would be permitted to grow two plants at home.
The country of Malta became the first in the EU to legalize adult-use cannabis in December 2021, and Germany could become the second to follow suit (medical cannabis has been legal in Germany since 2017).
The post German Health Minister Announces Details of Legalization Draft appeared first on High Times.
More than two-thirds of Americans are in favor of legalizing small amounts of cannabis for personal use, according to the results of a poll released on Monday. The new Monmouth University poll also showed broad support for President Joseph Biden’s recent executive order to pardon federal convictions for low-level marijuana possession and found that most Americans believe that cannabis is safer than alcohol.
“Polling from a variety of sources shows that support for marijuana legalization has been increasing consistently over the past twenty years,” said Patrick Murray, director of the independent Monmouth University Polling Institute.
The poll found that overall, 68% of respondents support legalizing small amounts of marijuana for personal use. Cannabis legalization was supported by 76% of Democrats, 73% of independent voters and 52% of Republicans. Young people showed the strongest support for legalizing marijuana, with 87% of those under 35 years old, while just over a majority (53%) of those aged 55 and older support legalization.
The Monmouth poll also showed strong support for Biden’s announcement on October 6 that he would pardon federal convictions for simple marijuana possession, with 69% of all respondents saying that they backed the president’s move.
“Biden’s action is in line with how the vast majority of Americans feel about this issue,” Murray said.
However, most were unsure about the scope of the pardons. An analysis by The New York Times determined that the pardons will affect about 6,500 people who were convicted of marijuana possession under federal law and thousands more in the District of Columbia. A quarter (25%) thought the number of convictions pardoned was less than 1,000, while a fifth (21%) thought the total was more than 10,000. One-fourth (26%) said the number was in the actual range of 1,000 to 10,000 convictions, while 29% declined to estimate.
More than half of Americans (54%) said that legalizing marijuana will have no impact on the number of crimes related to other drugs. A quarter (25%) said they believed legalizing marijuana would increase the number of other drug crimes, while 16% said that other drug crimes would decrease as a result of cannabis legalization.
Most respondents (54%) said that they believed alcohol is more dangerous than weed, while only 7% said marijuana is more dangerous and 38% said they thought the two substances are equally dangerous. A plurality of respondents (45%) also thought pot is safer than tobacco. Only 13% said marijuana was more dangerous than tobacco and 38% said they were equally dangerous.
More than half (54%) of American adults said that they had tried marijuana, including 54% of Democrats, 51% of Republicans and 56% of independents. Those who had tried marijuana were more supportive of legalization, with 87% of those with personal experience with the plant favoring legalization and less than half (47%) of those who have never tried pot in favor of legalizing small amounts of cannabis.
Brian Vicente, founding partner of the cannabis and psychedelics law firm Vicente Sederberg LLP, believes that the strong support for marijuana legalization revealed by the new poll is likely to be reflected in next month’s midterm elections, when five states will be voting to legalize adult-use cannabis.
“This poll is a milestone in cannabis policy, with a stunning 68% of Americans now supporting legalization. Importantly, we now have a majority of both major political parties and a broad swath of Americans regardless of age now supporting reform,” Vicente wrote in an email to High Times.
“This research, combined with the overwhelmingly positive response to President Biden’s recent actions to pardon marijuana convictions is creating the most energized climate around cannabis reform that our country has seen in a decade,” he added. “This climate is likely to contribute to another 4 or 5 states legalizing cannabis on November 8th. All these factors will provide a boost to cannabis reformers in DC, which makes significant federal reform a real possibility this year.”
The Monmouth University Poll was conducted by telephone from October 13 to 17, 2022 with 808 adults in the United States. The results have a margin of error of +/- 5.2 percentage points for the full sample.
The post New Poll Shows Two-Thirds of Americans Support Legalizing Weed appeared first on High Times.
We have been reviewing a raft of Oregon Liquor and Cannabis Commission (OLCC) proposed rules that could significantly affect the Oregon marijuana industry. These proposed rules have implications for licensees, potential licensees and even people doing business with industry like landlords and lenders. Everyone, really.
You can find the first three posts in our series at the links immediately below, each by Jesse Mondry here in our Portland office:
Today, I’ll wrap up the series with the omnibus post Jesse promised, covering everything else of note. Before I dive in, please note: OLCC held a public hearing on the proposed rules yesterday, October 25, but the public comment period won’t close until 12 p.m. PST on October 31. So, get your thoughts in! You can email comments directly to OLCC Rules Coordinator Nicole Blosse.
I’m on record opining that services agreements are a problem in the Oregon cannabis industry. In that post, I offered that services agreements a.k.a. management agreements are a “compliance and litigation hazard” and I mentioned that “we have witnessed an alarming number of compliance issues and outright litigation in the context of services agreements over the years.” OLCC now proposes to regulate these agreements out of existence.
Specifically, the proposed rule provides that a “proposed licensee or laboratory licensee may not operate the licensed business until the Commission approves the change in ownership application and grants a license.” That’s straightforward and significant. At least one of the largest players in Oregon cannabis built its footprint largely on the backs of service agreements in the purchase and sale context. Going forward, all compliant buyers are going to have to wait for OLCC approval to commence operations at a site.
From a buyer perspective, concerns with waiting for formal OLCC approval may include any or all of the following: (a) lag times with OLCC processing and approval; (b) seller failure to continue to operate its business in the ordinary course during the buyer’s application period; (c) seller compliance issues that could jeopardize a transaction in the pre-closing window. We lawyers would continue to tailor our forms for these considerations if this rule passes as written.
Arguments against the rule change include that OLCC already prohibits the addition of undisclosed “applicants” and “ownership interests” on a license. If two parties wish to enter into a services agreement or other form of transition agreement, a seller can simply disclose a buyer to OLCC while the change in ownership application is pending. This is true in theory, although in practice people tend to trip on (or ignore) the ownership interest rules in the services agreement period. On balance, I like the rule provided that OLCC timely processes applications.
This one is a headscratcher for me and I hope OLCC backs up here. The proposed rule requires that a seller:
“transfers all marijuana items and hemp items to another licensee [a licensee other than the buyer in a transaction]… or destroys any marijuana items and hemp items remaining on the licensed premises…”.
OLCC may be proposing this rule to obviate some logistical headaches for its staff. I doubt the proposal stems from concerns about product diversion or anything related.
In any case, the proposed rule could result in certain sellers losing significant income in concert with business sales. Many change-in-location sales have an inventory component: a seller forced to liquidate inventory on the open market would generally receive less in return than if selling to a buyer in the context of a business sale agreement.
I should note that this proposed rule also dovetails with the problematic “change in location” proposal previously covered by Jesse Mondry, which requires a seller to forfeit its license “even if the change in ownership application is not completed.” OAR 845-025-1170(6)(a). I can only think that these rules are a part of a persistent push by OLCC to cull licenses. The proposals make sense from that perspective. Otherwise, these are pretty arbitrary new strictures.
Sounds dull; could be costly for certain licensees. The proposed rule provides:
“When audit testing for potency pursuant to this rule, the Commission may require any portion of a batch with a compliance test for potency on or after November 1, 2022, to be relabeled with the mean average result from laboratories conducting audit testing if the Commission determines that there is a statistically significant difference at a 99 percent confidence interval between the audit testing result of samples from the batch and the original compliance testing result of the same batch.”
Here, OLCC proposes to make a testing lab’s problem everyone else’s problem. If a lab gives bad results, then the relevant producer, processor or wholesaler would be forced to relabel its products— an exercise OLCC itself estimates would cost between $10,000 and $30,000 per occurrence.
Let’s hope this rule also falls by the wayside, or that OLCC crafts a replacement rule to allow audits on products that already have undergone testing but not yet been packaged or labeled.
If you are interested in any aspect of these rules — including those covered in prior posts in this series — I again encourage you to submit your comments prior to the October 31 deadline. OLCC reviews and considers those submissions.
We will follow up once final rules are adopted, whatever those may be.
The post Oregon Proposed Cannabis Rules: Mixed Bag appeared first on Harris Bricken Sliwoski LLP.
Is Taylor Swift making a sneaky weed reference with her new song, "Lavender Haze"? We investigate her new music and its meaning.
The post Taylor Swift sparks new album’s mood with ‘Lavender Haze’ appeared first on Leafly.
Pardons are still a hot topic after President Joe Biden announced on Oct. 6 that he would be pardoning citizens who have federal convictions for cannabis, and asked that state governors do the same to provide relief for people in their regions. However, Indiana Gov. Holcomb recently stated that he would not be pardoning simple cannabis convictions.
“The president should work with Congress, not around them, to discuss changes to the law federally, especially if he is requesting governors to overturn the work local prosecutors have done by simply enforcing the law,” Holcomb said, according to ABC57. “Until these federal law changes occur, I can’t in good conscience consider issuing blanket pardons for all such offenders.”
Holcomb added that his state already offers expungement programs. “What Indiana has done, is act proactively, not reactively, by creating an opportunity for those who have maintained a clean record since a conviction of simple marijuana possession and a number of lower-level offenses, to apply for—and receive—an expungement which seals their record,” Holcomb said.
However he did confirm that many people who currently hold cannabis convictions on their record deserve to have an opportunity to have it removed. “I do agree that many of these offenses should not serve as a life sentence after an individual has served their time,” Holcomb added. “Expunged convictions cannot be disclosed to employers, to those who grant licenses, or when seeking housing.”
At a luncheon on Oct. 12, Holcomb shared his opinions on favoring expungement over pardons. “If you are busted for simple possession of marijuana and stay clean for a number of years, five years, then you can pursue expungement. That is never disclosed and that will never be in the way. If you do the crime and pay the time, then you can move on,” Holcomb said, adding that he does not believe cannabis should be in the same Schedule category as substances such as heroin or morphine. “But that’s Congress’s job.”
In December 2021, Holcomb began ramping up for the legislative session which began in January 2022. Although at the time, the Indiana Democratic Party stated that adult-use cannabis legalization was a top priority, Holcomb explained his support for medical access instead. “The law that needs to change is the federal law,” said Holcomb in December 2021.
News outlet WSBT asked Indiana legislators about Biden’s recent pardons, and many were supportive, but leaned toward federal descheduling. “I think this does reveal that legalization is inevitable in our future and whether or not Indiana wants to set that up at the state level or wait for the federal government to do that,” said Rep. Maureen Bauer. “So, for us, it’s still [a] schedule one drug. And I don’t see the state of Indiana changing the legalization of the drug until federally it’s descheduled,” added Sen. Mike Bohacek.
Possession of cannabis is a misdemeanor in Indiana, as of 2014. Currently, the state of Indiana has not legalized adult-use or medical cannabis. According to The Indiana Lawyer, over 94,000 people were charged with a cannabis possession misdemeanor between 2018-2021.
A pardon isn’t enough to release people from prison, partially because many people’s sentences are more complicated. According to Marion County Sheriff’s Office Captain Mitch Gore as of Oct. 13, the Indianapolis Adult Detention Center only had one inmate who was convicted for cannabis possession, while 320 others were convicted both because of possession as well as other non-cannabis related charges.
Allen County Sheriff’s Office Captain Steve Stone also confirmed that not very many people could be released immediately. “It would be a very, very low number. We wouldn’t even arrest you because you’d be out before we were even done doing the paperwork,” Stone said.
The post Indiana Gov. Will Not Be Issuing Pardons for Cannabis Offenses, Favors Expungement appeared first on High Times.
The US Olympian’s lawyer said no honest judge would agree that the 9-year punishment fits the crime of possessing less than one gram of cannabis oil.
The post Breaking: Russian Court Upholds Brittney Griner’s Sentence appeared first on Leafly.
More Arizonans with federal convictions for marijuana possession will benefit from the pardons recently announced by President Joseph Biden than past offenders from nearly every other state, according to a report from azcentral.
An analysis from the United States Sentencing Commission found that more than 1,450 people from Arizona were convicted of federal marijuana possession charges between 1992 and 2021, representing more than 20% of the estimated 6,500 such convictions affected by the pardons. California is the only state with more people who will be pardoned under the executive action, with about 1,550 federal convictions for low-level cannabis possession. The only other state with more than 1,000 such convictions was Texas, with 1,015.
It is not clear how many of those with federal marijuana possession convictions also had other convictions that were not covered by the pardons. However, Arizona had the highest number of convictions for simple marijuana possession than any other state since 2015, according to Sentencing Commission information. Approximately 93% of the 500 convictions during that time resulted in prison sentences, the data show.
“For a lot of people out there, I imagine this is a really welcome relief,” said Jonathan Udell, an attorney with the Rose Law Group and acting co-director of Arizona NORML.
“I think there’s a lot of people out there that really feel the sting of being branded a non-law-abiding citizen,” he continued. “And this sends a very big message to those people that you’re not a bad person because you smoked a plant one time that grew out of the ground or possessed some grass in your pocket.”
On October 6, Biden announced that he had issued an executive order to pardon all federal convictions for simple marijuana possession. The pardons will affect about 6,500 people who were convicted of marijuana possession under federal law and thousands more with similar charges in the District of Columbia, according to an analysis by The New York Times.
“As I often said during my campaign for President, no one should be in jail just for using or possessing marijuana. Sending people to prison for possessing marijuana has upended too many lives and incarcerated people for conduct that many states no longer prohibit,” Biden said in a statement. “Criminal records for marijuana possession have also imposed needless barriers to employment, housing, and educational opportunities. And while white and Black and brown people use marijuana at similar rates, Black and brown people have been arrested, prosecuted, and convicted at disproportionate rates.”
Biden also called on state governors to take similar action in their jurisdictions, where the vast majority of cannabis possession charges are filed and prosecuted as state offenses. Additionally, the president directed Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, Attorney General Merrick Garland and the Justice Department to review the continued classification of marijuana as a Schedule 1 substance under the Controlled Substances Act. According to the legislation, the Schedule 1 classification is meant for drugs with no medical value and a high risk of abuse.
Although many marijuana policy reform activists and representatives of the cannabis industry hailed Biden’s pardons as a historic step, others were unsatisfied with the limited scope of the action, which offers no relief for other federal marijuana-related convictions and resulted in no federal prisoners being released from prison. On Monday, activist groups including Students for Sensible Drug Policy, D.C. Marijuana Justice, the Last Prisoner Project and Maryland Marijuana Justice demonstrated outside the White House, calling on Biden to take more significant action on cannabis clemency.
“It was a failed opportunity to make real change. The president could have done so much more than he did,” Steve DeAngelo, co-founder of the Last Prisoner Project, told the Washington Post. “He really only did the bare minimum thing that he could do to generate a positive-sounding press release.”
Featuring speakers including hip hop icons Redman and M1 of Dead Prez, a 50-foot inflatable joint and the arrest of at least one protester for passing through a security gate without authorization, the demonstrators urged Biden to release all federal prisoners with nonviolent marijuana-related convictions. Cannabis activist Adam Eidinger, co-founder of D.C. Marijuana Justice, said the protestors’ demands include releasing 100 prisoners immediately and all 2,800 by Christmas.
“The greatest civil rights tragedy of the modern era is putting people behind bars for cannabis,” said Eidinger. “If we get any kind of interest from the White House, and they are willing to schedule meetings with representatives of those protests, then I imagine that we’ll call off civil disobedience and declare victory.”
The post Arizonans Benefitting From Biden’s Weed Pardons appeared first on High Times.
