Articles

Cannabis was meant to burn—but not like this. 

A heat dome trapped over the Pacific Northwest has broiled much of the region, with record-setting triple-digit temperatures being felt from Whistler, British Columbia, all the way to Northern California. Cannabis cultivators in the area are hard-pressed to keep operations going as they try to protect both their crops and their teams from the potentially deadly heat.

“We are roasting both in Ellensburg and Seattle,” Jade Stefano, co-founder and CEO of Washington-based Puffin Farm, told Cannabis Business Times in a June 28 email. Stefano reported temperatures of 105 degrees Fahrenheit, with a weekly high of 112 degrees expected in the coming days.

Per The Washington Post, a heat dome is a pocket “of slow-moving hot air under higher pressure that blocks new weather systems from moving in.”

Stefano, who operates both an indoor extraction facility in Seattle and greenhouse operation in Ellensburg, added that conditions weren’t much improved in the greenhouse—even with shade cloths and swamp coolers, the structures remain above 80 degrees. While that is an improvement on the outdoor temperature, it remains elevated for ideal cannabis cultivation (which typically is set in the mid-to-high-70s).

Alex Cooley, co-founder of Solstice, which cultivates indoors, outdoors and in greenhouses in Seattle, Ephrata and Trinidad, Washington, said the company has moved shifts up earlier in the day, with some starting at 4 a.m. In addition, he noted they have increased irrigation frequency but decreased volume, and water right before the lights go out.

And, like Stefano, one of the primary tools Solstice using to beat the heat is “shade cloth, shade cloth, shade cloth,” Cooley said in an email sent June 29.

In British Columbia’s Okanagan Valley, Cannasol Farms owner Jeremy Moberg said that the most shocking aspect about the heat is how early it arrived this year. While he has experienced triple-digit temperatures in past years, “it was like one day in August. … It wasn’t prolonged,” he said in a phone interview with CBT.

Moberg said he has yet to see any outsized negative impacts from the heat on the crops but remains vigilant for the health and safety of his team, especially when working under light-deprivation structures where he estimates the air to be approximately 130 F (or roughly 55 degrees Celsius). He has stocked up on popsicles for staff to keep cool, as well as shifted work schedules to 5-10 a.m. so his team would not be working under the direct sun or during the peak heat.

As temperatures rocketed to 104 degrees in the Emerald City over the weekend, Stefano is allowing staff at the Seattle extraction lab to start and finish work earlier, or simply not come in. That’s because the warehouse is not equipped with air conditioning (the farmhouse in Ellensburg does have A/C for the team members to cool off).

In Southern Oregon, Takilma-based East Fork Cultivars saw temperatures peak at 115 this past weekend. Aaron Howard, co-founder of East Fork Cultivars, said in an email to CBT on June 29 that the company was able to plant its crop a bit earlier this year (thanks to warm and dry temperatures), allowing the plants to acclimate to the outdoor conditions over a longer period before the heatwave hit, minimizing heat-related plant stress. “I imagine if we had only just planted, the plants would have struggled,” he said.

To keep his recently planted crops alive through the heat, Moberg has been using roughly twice the amount of water he would normally be using at this time. “I have two of my own wells, and I’m a little bit worried about them going dry,” he said. “We are lucky enough to have a big, massive aquifer that dates back to the ice ages. But we’re essentially mining [water]. It’s not being replaced at the same rate.” Stefano also increased irrigation frequency in addition to running sprinklers through the crop.

Moberg said farmers who typically plant later in the season might want to consider waiting a few extra days to ensure clones and smaller plants don’t get overwhelmed by both the transplant shock and heat stress, the combination of which could lead to total crop loss.

One benefit of the heat, according to Moberg, is that he has not experienced the same pest pressures as in years past—although that is likely to be short-lived. Once the temperatures drop to optimal conditions for pest development, he expects insects such as russet mites to make their presence felt as they return to their normal lifecycles. “Be on top of the pest pressure,” he advised, “’cause it’s going to follow the heatwave.”

Cannabis Business Times editor Michelle Simakis contributed to this story.

Cannabis is more potent but fewer young people view it as harmful. Those two points of interests are underlined in a 2021 World Drug Report released June 24 by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), which suggested a worldwide ban on cannabis advertising.

From UNODC World Drug Report

The percentage of delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the main psychoactive component in cannabis, rose from about 4% to 16% in the U.S. between 1995-2019, and from about 6% to 11% in Europe between 2002–2019, according to UNODC findings outlined in the five-booklet report.

According to the report, delta-9 is responsible for the development of mental health disorders in long-term, heavy users of cannabis, yet the percentage of adolescents perceiving cannabis as harmful has decreased by as much as 40% during the same period—the latter finding is supported by surveys of schoolchildren and young adults in the U.S. and Europe, according to the UNODC.

“Lower perception of drug use risks has been linked to higher rates of drug use, and the findings of UNODC’s 2021 World Drug Report highlight the need to close the gap between perception and reality to educate young people and safeguard public health,” UNODC Executive Director Ghada Waly said in a statement.

From UNODC World Drug Report

The UNODC did not cite where it derived its conclusion regarding mental health disorders being linked to cannabis use in the section of the report it was mentioned. Cannabis Business Times reached out to UNODC for a comment, seeking clarity of a study or scientific entity supporting that claim, but has not yet received a response.

A team of researchers writing in the July 28, 2007, edition of the British peer-reviewed general medical journal The Lancet stated that consuming cannabis could boost one’s risk of a psychotic illness later in life by 40% or more.

As the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) revealed the week after that edition was published, the authors of the study affirmed that the association “does not necessarily reflect a causal relation” between consuming cannabis and triggering psychotic behavior. In other words, there could be a spurious, or third-party, relationship responsible for the correlation.

Paul Armentano, who was a senior policy analyst for NORML in 2007, said there were several explanations for the observed correlation.

“Individuals suffering from mental illness such as schizophrenia tend to use all intoxicants— particularly alcohol and tobacco—at greater rates than the general population,” he said in 2007. “Not surprisingly, many of these individuals also use cannabis.”

Also in the 2021 World Drug Report’s findings and conclusions, UNODC stated that aggressive marketing of cannabis products with high THC content by private firms as well as promotion through social-media channels can worsen what the UN’s office calls a perception-versus-reality problem among young people.

As a result, the UNODC is calling for a comprehensive ban on cannabis advertising, promoting and sponsoring, which “would ensure that public health interests prevail over business interests,” as stated in the report. Such a ban would need to apply across all jurisdictions, and the measure could work in a way similar to the provisions of the World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, according to the report.

That 2003 WHO treaty collected 168 signatures, including the U.S., although the U.S. is one of six signees that has yet to ratify it. In 2019, the largest cigarette and smokeless tobacco companies spent $8.2 billion on advertising and promotional expenses in the U.S., according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. However, the U.S. does have certain restrictions and regulations in place for advertising and promoting tobacco, according to the Food and Drug Administration.

An advertising ban for the cannabis industry would work opposite of public health interests, Rosie Mattio said in a June 24 tweet, following the release of the UNODC report. Mattio is the founder and CEO of New York-based Mattio Communications, a public relations firm serving more than 50 cannabis clients.

“Advertising is one of the most effective ways regulated companies can educate consumers and patients,” Mattio said. “This will ultimately hamper the industry’s efforts to bring safe and accessible cannabis to adults around the world.”

According to the World Drug Report, more investment is needed for research into the harm that the non-medical use of cannabis poses to health and to better define the range of health conditions for which cannabis products may be an effective treatment.

Global monitoring of the impact of laws that allow for the medical and non-medical use of cannabis is key, the UNODC report stated.

“This will need to go beyond the trends in cannabis use in a single country to assessing the frequency and patterns of cannabis consumption, health and socioeconomic consequences and market developments in both the licit and the illicit sectors around the world,” it said. “One important aspect to evaluate is the impact of cannabis legalization on the perception of risks associated with cannabis use, particularly among young people, beyond the countries where this legalization is taking place; it would also be critical to assess the risk perceived by young people in low-income countries.”

Underlying findings outlined in UNODC’s 2021 World Drug Report, as it relates to cannabis, include:

• Roughly 200 million people used cannabis in 2019, representing 4 percent of the global population. The figure is highest in North America (14.5 percent) and lowest in Asia (2 percent).
• The number of cannabis users has increased by nearly 18 percent over the past decade
• Between 2009–2019, quantities seized fell by 35 percent, largely because of dramatic declines in North America partly linked to legalization of non-medical cannabis in some jurisdictions.
• Excluding North American data, global seizures were 36 percent higher in 2019 than in 2009.
• Diverse cannabis products have become more potent yet the number of adolescents regarding the drug as harmful is declining rapidly, a trend that risks increasing the negative impact of cannabis on younger generations.
• An increase in cannabis use has been observed in many countries during the pandemic.

The full report is available here: https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/wdr2021.html

With a stroke of his pen last week, Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont finally brought to fruition a goal that activists have been chasing for years: legalizing cannabis statewide. The newly signed bill allows adults to carry up to an ounce and a half and store up to five ounces at home or in their car’s trunk or glove box. 

Advocates for cannabis equity are satisfied with the final legislation, but the road to get there was a bumpy one. And while the passing of legalization in Connecticut is a significant victory, there’s still a long way to go toward ensuring the state creates a fair industry. 

Industry lobbyists closely involved in the state’s legislative process talked to Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary about the bill’s winding path to becoming law and the debate between the legislature and Lamont over the definition of equity.

How We Got Here

Despite Connecticut passing decriminalization in 2011 and establishing a medical program in 2012, efforts to pass adult-use legalization had stalled in recent years. In 2018, a legalization bill passed a House committee vote but failed to advance further. The next year saw another legalization bill and even more debate, but lawmakers ultimately failed to drum up enough votes – despite the support of Lamont, then the newly seated governor.

In 2020, Lamont proposed a legalization framework that was gaining legislative support until the coronavirus pandemic forced the session to end early. This year, with tri-state neighbor New York passing legalization in March and the effects of COVID-19 lessened by vaccine rollouts, cannabis advocates were confident they’d finally make it across the finish line.

It wouldn’t be easy. After running out of time in the regular session because of a lack of Republican support in the House, lawmakers had to return for a special session on June 16. But a late amendment added by the Senate during the special session put the entire effort at risk after Lamont threatened a veto over the prioritization of cannabis licenses, bringing up a debate on who should be prioritized in the adult-use market.

Who should be considered an equity applicant?

According to Jason Ortiz, Executive Director of Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) and longtime Connecticut cannabis advocate, the veto threat came about after a disagreement over qualifications for equity licenses. “We fought to include those who had criminal histories and the governor refused to allow them into the program. He really didn’t understand the point of equity programs,” said Ortiz in an email to Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary. “It got particularly twisted when he tried to say inclusion of those with criminal histories would benefit the wealthy.”

Lamont’s office put out a statement opposing the amendment, which would have prioritized applicants convicted for any cannabis crime: “This last-minute amendment creates equity in name only by allowing these individuals expedited opportunity to obtain access to the marketplace.” The statement went further, claiming the new amendment would allow “just about anyone with a history of cannabis crimes” to be prioritized as an applicant, even if they came from a background of wealth.

Despite the governor’s disapproval, prioritizing industry access for those with cannabis convictions is a standard practice. Illinois, Michigan, New York, and California are just a few of the states that include a cannabis arrest as part of the criteria to qualify as an equity applicant. 

After some debate and pushback from equity advocates, the amendment was ultimately shelved. The updated legalization bill passed both chambers of the legislature and was signed into law. Adult-use dispensary sales aren’t projected to begin until late 2022 at earliest, but the new possession limits will go into effect July 1.

What happens next for cannabis equity in Connecticut?

No one knows for sure. Despite Lamont reiterating the importance of social justice measures in the upcoming industry, details are still scarce on exactly how that will happen. We do know that 50% of all licenses will be set aside for social equity applicants, who will also be eligible for special grants and training. Under the law, a new 15-person Social Equity Council will create guidelines on how those harmed by cannabis prohibition should be prioritized in the state’s legal industry.

And though activists viewed the removal of the special session amendment as a setback, they were overall happy with the end result. 

“We had a list of seven key components we wanted,” said Ortiz. “Home grow for all, equity license set-asides, inclusion of tribal nations, protections for students and parents, labor peace agreements, funds dedicated for community investment, jobs programs for the formerly incarcerated. We got all seven. So, on that front, it’s a complete success.”

Whatever comes next, it’s likely that equity advocates will be heavily involved—as they were in the runup to legalization. 

“Advocates for equity—not even just cannabis advocates, but larger organizations like the NAACP in Connecticut—they were very involved in standing up for what we demanded in terms of legalization, so it had to be equitable,” said Shanita Penny, an advisor to the Coalition for Cannabis Policy, Education and Regulation (CPEAR) and member of its in-house Center of Excellence think tank. “We at no point were willing to accept legalization in any way—it had to address and repair the damage from the War on Drugs.”

Connecticut, a state of roughly 3.6 million people with a population almost 80% Caucasian, will need to face the dual challenge of rapidly scaling its industry while prioritizing those harmed by prohibition. Currently, its medical program supports only four licensed cannabis growers. Nevada, a state with about 500,000 fewer residents, has over 130 licensed cultivators in its adult-use industry. 

For now, attention turns to the formation of the new social equity council and the state’s Department of Consumer Protection, which will be responsible for issuing licenses.

“We have to be adamant that the people appointed to the social equity commission are knowledgeable and also focused on empowering the communities most impacted,” said Ortiz. “We won a battle, but the war is far from over.”

 

With a stroke of his pen last week, Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont finally brought to fruition a goal that activists have been chasing for years: legalizing cannabis statewide. The newly signed bill allows adults to carry up to an ounce and a half and store up to five ounces at home or in their car’s trunk or glove box. 

Advocates for cannabis equity are satisfied with the final legislation, but the road to get there was a bumpy one. And while the passing of legalization in Connecticut is a significant victory, there’s still a long way to go toward ensuring the state creates a fair industry. 

Industry lobbyists closely involved in the state’s legislative process talked to Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary about the bill’s winding path to becoming law and the debate between the legislature and Lamont over the definition of equity.

How We Got Here

Despite Connecticut passing decriminalization in 2011 and establishing a medical program in 2012, efforts to pass adult-use legalization had stalled in recent years. In 2018, a legalization bill passed a House committee vote but failed to advance further. The next year saw another legalization bill and even more debate, but lawmakers ultimately failed to drum up enough votes – despite the support of Lamont, then the newly seated governor.

In 2020, Lamont proposed a legalization framework that was gaining legislative support until the coronavirus pandemic forced the session to end early. This year, with tri-state neighbor New York passing legalization in March and the effects of COVID-19 lessened by vaccine rollouts, cannabis advocates were confident they’d finally make it across the finish line.

It wouldn’t be easy. After running out of time in the regular session because of a lack of Republican support in the House, lawmakers had to return for a special session on June 16. But a late amendment added by the Senate during the special session put the entire effort at risk after Lamont threatened a veto over the prioritization of cannabis licenses, bringing up a debate on who should be prioritized in the adult-use market.

Who should be considered an equity applicant?

According to Jason Ortiz, Executive Director of Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) and longtime Connecticut cannabis advocate, the veto threat came about after a disagreement over qualifications for equity licenses. “We fought to include those who had criminal histories and the governor refused to allow them into the program. He really didn’t understand the point of equity programs,” said Ortiz in an email to Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary. “It got particularly twisted when he tried to say inclusion of those with criminal histories would benefit the wealthy.”

Lamont’s office put out a statement opposing the amendment, which would have prioritized applicants convicted for any cannabis crime: “This last-minute amendment creates equity in name only by allowing these individuals expedited opportunity to obtain access to the marketplace.” The statement went further, claiming the new amendment would allow “just about anyone with a history of cannabis crimes” to be prioritized as an applicant, even if they came from a background of wealth.

Despite the governor’s disapproval, prioritizing industry access for those with cannabis convictions is a standard practice. Illinois, Michigan, New York, and California are just a few of the states that include a cannabis arrest as part of the criteria to qualify as an equity applicant. 

After some debate and pushback from equity advocates, the amendment was ultimately shelved. The updated legalization bill passed both chambers of the legislature and was signed into law. Adult-use dispensary sales aren’t projected to begin until late 2022 at earliest, but the new possession limits will go into effect July 1.

What happens next for cannabis equity in Connecticut?

No one knows for sure. Despite Lamont reiterating the importance of social justice measures in the upcoming industry, details are still scarce on exactly how that will happen. We do know that 50% of all licenses will be set aside for social equity applicants, who will also be eligible for special grants and training. Under the law, a new 15-person Social Equity Council will create guidelines on how those harmed by cannabis prohibition should be prioritized in the state’s legal industry.

And though activists viewed the removal of the special session amendment as a setback, they were overall happy with the end result. 

“We had a list of seven key components we wanted,” said Ortiz. “Home grow for all, equity license set-asides, inclusion of tribal nations, protections for students and parents, labor peace agreements, funds dedicated for community investment, jobs programs for the formerly incarcerated. We got all seven. So, on that front, it’s a complete success.”

Whatever comes next, it’s likely that equity advocates will be heavily involved—as they were in the runup to legalization. 

“Advocates for equity—not even just cannabis advocates, but larger organizations like the NAACP in Connecticut—they were very involved in standing up for what we demanded in terms of legalization, so it had to be equitable,” said Shanita Penny, an advisor to the Coalition for Cannabis Policy, Education and Regulation (CPEAR) and member of its in-house Center of Excellence think tank. “We at no point were willing to accept legalization in any way—it had to address and repair the damage from the War on Drugs.”

Connecticut, a state of roughly 3.6 million people with a population almost 80% Caucasian, will need to face the dual challenge of rapidly scaling its industry while prioritizing those harmed by prohibition. Currently, its medical program supports only four licensed cannabis growers. Nevada, a state with about 500,000 fewer residents, has over 130 licensed cultivators in its adult-use industry. 

For now, attention turns to the formation of the new social equity council and the state’s Department of Consumer Protection, which will be responsible for issuing licenses.

“We have to be adamant that the people appointed to the social equity commission are knowledgeable and also focused on empowering the communities most impacted,” said Ortiz. “We won a battle, but the war is far from over.”

 

With a stroke of his pen last week, Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont finally brought to fruition a goal that activists have been chasing for years: legalizing cannabis statewide. The newly signed bill allows adults to carry up to an ounce and a half and store up to five ounces at home or in their car’s trunk or glove box. 

Advocates for cannabis equity are satisfied with the final legislation, but the road to get there was a bumpy one. And while the passing of legalization in Connecticut is a significant victory, there’s still a long way to go toward ensuring the state creates a fair industry. 

Industry lobbyists closely involved in the state’s legislative process talked to Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary about the bill’s winding path to becoming law and the debate between the legislature and Lamont over the definition of equity.

How We Got Here

Despite Connecticut passing decriminalization in 2011 and establishing a medical program in 2012, efforts to pass adult-use legalization had stalled in recent years. In 2018, a legalization bill passed a House committee vote but failed to advance further. The next year saw another legalization bill and even more debate, but lawmakers ultimately failed to drum up enough votes – despite the support of Lamont, then the newly seated governor.

In 2020, Lamont proposed a legalization framework that was gaining legislative support until the coronavirus pandemic forced the session to end early. This year, with tri-state neighbor New York passing legalization in March and the effects of COVID-19 lessened by vaccine rollouts, cannabis advocates were confident they’d finally make it across the finish line.

It wouldn’t be easy. After running out of time in the regular session because of a lack of Republican support in the House, lawmakers had to return for a special session on June 16. But a late amendment added by the Senate during the special session put the entire effort at risk after Lamont threatened a veto over the prioritization of cannabis licenses, bringing up a debate on who should be prioritized in the adult-use market.

Who should be considered an equity applicant?

According to Jason Ortiz, Executive Director of Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) and longtime Connecticut cannabis advocate, the veto threat came about after a disagreement over qualifications for equity licenses. “We fought to include those who had criminal histories and the governor refused to allow them into the program. He really didn’t understand the point of equity programs,” said Ortiz in an email to Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary. “It got particularly twisted when he tried to say inclusion of those with criminal histories would benefit the wealthy.”

Lamont’s office put out a statement opposing the amendment, which would have prioritized applicants convicted for any cannabis crime: “This last-minute amendment creates equity in name only by allowing these individuals expedited opportunity to obtain access to the marketplace.” The statement went further, claiming the new amendment would allow “just about anyone with a history of cannabis crimes” to be prioritized as an applicant, even if they came from a background of wealth.

Despite the governor’s disapproval, prioritizing industry access for those with cannabis convictions is a standard practice. Illinois, Michigan, New York, and California are just a few of the states that include a cannabis arrest as part of the criteria to qualify as an equity applicant. 

After some debate and pushback from equity advocates, the amendment was ultimately shelved. The updated legalization bill passed both chambers of the legislature and was signed into law. Adult-use dispensary sales aren’t projected to begin until late 2022 at earliest, but the new possession limits will go into effect July 1.

What happens next for cannabis equity in Connecticut?

No one knows for sure. Despite Lamont reiterating the importance of social justice measures in the upcoming industry, details are still scarce on exactly how that will happen. We do know that 50% of all licenses will be set aside for social equity applicants, who will also be eligible for special grants and training. Under the law, a new 15-person Social Equity Council will create guidelines on how those harmed by cannabis prohibition should be prioritized in the state’s legal industry.

And though activists viewed the removal of the special session amendment as a setback, they were overall happy with the end result. 

“We had a list of seven key components we wanted,” said Ortiz. “Home grow for all, equity license set-asides, inclusion of tribal nations, protections for students and parents, labor peace agreements, funds dedicated for community investment, jobs programs for the formerly incarcerated. We got all seven. So, on that front, it’s a complete success.”

Whatever comes next, it’s likely that equity advocates will be heavily involved—as they were in the runup to legalization. 

“Advocates for equity—not even just cannabis advocates, but larger organizations like the NAACP in Connecticut—they were very involved in standing up for what we demanded in terms of legalization, so it had to be equitable,” said Shanita Penny, an advisor to the Coalition for Cannabis Policy, Education and Regulation (CPEAR) and member of its in-house Center of Excellence think tank. “We at no point were willing to accept legalization in any way—it had to address and repair the damage from the War on Drugs.”

Connecticut, a state of roughly 3.6 million people with a population almost 80% Caucasian, will need to face the dual challenge of rapidly scaling its industry while prioritizing those harmed by prohibition. Currently, its medical program supports only four licensed cannabis growers. Nevada, a state with about 500,000 fewer residents, has over 130 licensed cultivators in its adult-use industry. 

For now, attention turns to the formation of the new social equity council and the state’s Department of Consumer Protection, which will be responsible for issuing licenses.

“We have to be adamant that the people appointed to the social equity commission are knowledgeable and also focused on empowering the communities most impacted,” said Ortiz. “We won a battle, but the war is far from over.”

 

With a stroke of his pen last week, Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont finally brought to fruition a goal that activists have been chasing for years: legalizing cannabis statewide. The newly signed bill allows adults to carry up to an ounce and a half and store up to five ounces at home or in their car’s trunk or glove box. 

Advocates for cannabis equity are satisfied with the final legislation, but the road to get there was a bumpy one. And while the passing of legalization in Connecticut is a significant victory, there’s still a long way to go toward ensuring the state creates a fair industry. 

Industry lobbyists closely involved in the state’s legislative process talked to Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary about the bill’s winding path to becoming law and the debate between the legislature and Lamont over the definition of equity.

How We Got Here

Despite Connecticut passing decriminalization in 2011 and establishing a medical program in 2012, efforts to pass adult-use legalization had stalled in recent years. In 2018, a legalization bill passed a House committee vote but failed to advance further. The next year saw another legalization bill and even more debate, but lawmakers ultimately failed to drum up enough votes – despite the support of Lamont, then the newly seated governor.

In 2020, Lamont proposed a legalization framework that was gaining legislative support until the coronavirus pandemic forced the session to end early. This year, with tri-state neighbor New York passing legalization in March and the effects of COVID-19 lessened by vaccine rollouts, cannabis advocates were confident they’d finally make it across the finish line.

It wouldn’t be easy. After running out of time in the regular session because of a lack of Republican support in the House, lawmakers had to return for a special session on June 16. But a late amendment added by the Senate during the special session put the entire effort at risk after Lamont threatened a veto over the prioritization of cannabis licenses, bringing up a debate on who should be prioritized in the adult-use market.

Who should be considered an equity applicant?

According to Jason Ortiz, Executive Director of Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) and longtime Connecticut cannabis advocate, the veto threat came about after a disagreement over qualifications for equity licenses. “We fought to include those who had criminal histories and the governor refused to allow them into the program. He really didn’t understand the point of equity programs,” said Ortiz in an email to Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary. “It got particularly twisted when he tried to say inclusion of those with criminal histories would benefit the wealthy.”

Lamont’s office put out a statement opposing the amendment, which would have prioritized applicants convicted for any cannabis crime: “This last-minute amendment creates equity in name only by allowing these individuals expedited opportunity to obtain access to the marketplace.” The statement went further, claiming the new amendment would allow “just about anyone with a history of cannabis crimes” to be prioritized as an applicant, even if they came from a background of wealth.

Despite the governor’s disapproval, prioritizing industry access for those with cannabis convictions is a standard practice. Illinois, Michigan, New York, and California are just a few of the states that include a cannabis arrest as part of the criteria to qualify as an equity applicant. 

After some debate and pushback from equity advocates, the amendment was ultimately shelved. The updated legalization bill passed both chambers of the legislature and was signed into law. Adult-use dispensary sales aren’t projected to begin until late 2022 at earliest, but the new possession limits will go into effect July 1.

What happens next for cannabis equity in Connecticut?

No one knows for sure. Despite Lamont reiterating the importance of social justice measures in the upcoming industry, details are still scarce on exactly how that will happen. We do know that 50% of all licenses will be set aside for social equity applicants, who will also be eligible for special grants and training. Under the law, a new 15-person Social Equity Council will create guidelines on how those harmed by cannabis prohibition should be prioritized in the state’s legal industry.

And though activists viewed the removal of the special session amendment as a setback, they were overall happy with the end result. 

“We had a list of seven key components we wanted,” said Ortiz. “Home grow for all, equity license set-asides, inclusion of tribal nations, protections for students and parents, labor peace agreements, funds dedicated for community investment, jobs programs for the formerly incarcerated. We got all seven. So, on that front, it’s a complete success.”

Whatever comes next, it’s likely that equity advocates will be heavily involved—as they were in the runup to legalization. 

“Advocates for equity—not even just cannabis advocates, but larger organizations like the NAACP in Connecticut—they were very involved in standing up for what we demanded in terms of legalization, so it had to be equitable,” said Shanita Penny, an advisor to the Coalition for Cannabis Policy, Education and Regulation (CPEAR) and member of its in-house Center of Excellence think tank. “We at no point were willing to accept legalization in any way—it had to address and repair the damage from the War on Drugs.”

Connecticut, a state of roughly 3.6 million people with a population almost 80% Caucasian, will need to face the dual challenge of rapidly scaling its industry while prioritizing those harmed by prohibition. Currently, its medical program supports only four licensed cannabis growers. Nevada, a state with about 500,000 fewer residents, has over 130 licensed cultivators in its adult-use industry. 

For now, attention turns to the formation of the new social equity council and the state’s Department of Consumer Protection, which will be responsible for issuing licenses.

“We have to be adamant that the people appointed to the social equity commission are knowledgeable and also focused on empowering the communities most impacted,” said Ortiz. “We won a battle, but the war is far from over.”

 

While delta-8 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) continues to be a hot topic in the cannabis industry, the conversation surrounding the cannabinoid has shifted to state talks of regulation.

As previously reported by Hemp Grower, 15 states have already issued bans on delta-8, while six additional states have pending legislation on the cannabinoid and other related THC isomers. 

RELATED: More States Take Action Against Delta-8 THC

Ohio is the next state to follow in the footsteps of those regulating delta-8, as the Ohio Department of Commerce released a set of regulations on delta-8 in medical cannabis products on June 15.

Before the release, the content of delta-8 in medical cannabis products did not have to be accurately depicted on the label. Now, under the new guidance, the exact amount of delta-8 must be listed on the product label, and “Delta-8 THC” must be entirely written on the packaging; “Delta-8” or “D8” are not permitted.

Cultivators, processors and testing laboratories must now test for delta-8 or any related THC isomers and analogs and report the results to the department’s inventory tracking system, the guidance states.

The new regulations also require licensees to provide the Ohio Medical Marijuana Control Program (MMCP) with a standard operating procedure (SOP) that describes how delta-8 will be used in compliance with the state code.

Additionally, licensees must now maintain a delta-8 supply chain record of purchases and production of delta-8, cannabidiol (CBD) or any other ingredient used in the production of medical cannabis.

While some of these regulations are straightforward, some caused confusion among medical cannabis businesses, Cincinnati.com reported.

Under the new regulations, the total THC content in medical cannabis products must not exceed 70%, including a combination of delta-9 THC and any other isomer—a change from the department’s initial classification of “total THC” just including delta-9, the news outlet reported.

However, the department argues that the state regulation cap refers to “tetrahydrocannabinol,” which includes all types of THC, and a spokesperson told Cincinaati.com that the department would soon change its definition in the rules to reflect that.

Furthermore, the release states that all regulations are effective immediately for the use of delta-8 in medical cannabis products; however, the guidance does not specify what will happen to the products already in inventory or those on store shelves, the news outlet reported.

MMCP stated in the guidance that its top priority is product safety. The control program will continue to monitor delta-8 and other THC isomers as they develop, as well as prohibit product ingredients and provide guidance as necessary.