• Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer
Eco Friendly CBD OIL

Eco Friendly CBD OIL

The Best Eco Friendly CBD Oil

  • Home
  • CBD Health
  • Cannabis News
  • Contact

Articles

Cannabis Business Times, Cannabis Dispensary, Hemp Grower Announce New Hires Anthony Lange and Andriana Ruscitto

February 16, 2021 by CBD OIL

Editor’s Note: There is no denying that the cannabis industry is rapidly growing and evolving, leaving many in the industry to have to continuously adapt to the ever-changing landscape.  I interviewed three professionals with a well-built background in cannabis, who share their experiences, lessons learned, insights and tips on working in the cannabis industry.

Tips from Crystal Oliver, executive director for the Washington Sungrowers Industry Association (WSIA) and co-founder and former owner of Washington’s Finest Cannabis. Oliver shares her personal experiences and lessons learned as a small business owner in the cannabis industry with Cannabis Business Times.

RELATED: 6 Cannabis Business Lessons We Learned Too Late

I wish I knew..

1. The value of hiring a professional lobbyist compared to the price you pay for bad policy.

The saying, “If you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu,” comes to mind when I reflect on the evolution of cannabis policy in Washington. Early on, other farmers and I focused on community organizing and advocating for ourselves. What we lacked in experience, we made up for in passion, but this did not always translate to policy wins. We often knew why a policy proposal would hurt our businesses but getting legislators and regulators to listen to us and modify their approach was incredibly challenging.

Washington’s independent cannabis farmers suffered through several legislative sessions, where bills passed damaged our business prospects before the WISA held its first Sun Cup competition/fundraiser in 2018 and hired contract lobbyist Bryan McConaughy. The difference in having a professional, experienced lobbyist made our ability to block bad bills from becoming law and favorably amend other bills cannot be overstated.

Had I fully understood how impactful being represented by a professional would be, I would have done whatever it took to fund a lobbyist immediately. I would have considered it a cost of doing business rather than a nice-to-have. As an emerging industry, the winners and losers are often decided in government agency meeting rooms and state capitals. You must be effectively represented in those spaces if you want to secure your future.

2. The challenges of living without access to affordable and traditional financing.

When I first started my farm, I knew I could not access small business startup funding from my bank. So, I chose to use my savings and income from my corporate day job. I later left my day job to focus on cannabis farming full-time, not realizing that relying solely on cannabis-related income would render me ineligible to secure any loan from a traditional funding source. It was a little shocking when I discovered that my credit union would not issue me a loan to purchase a new vehicle despite having good credit, low debt and sufficient income. As a result, I have had to save and pay cash for vehicles purchased since becoming a cannabis farmer. In hindsight, I should have worked harder to maintain a non-cannabis-related income stream.

3. The reluctance of policymakers to address inequities in the marketplace.

For example, allowing direct farm sales would better distribute the industry’s economic benefits throughout the supply chain by empowering small independent craft producers. Still, policymakers hesitate to distribute power away from those who already hold it. On more than one occasion, I have been advised that I need to get buy-in from those who benefit from the existing inequities in the marketplace to secure policy reform.

It is impossible to reach those who benefit most from an unfair system to agree to changes that would help others. In Washington, we have been fighting for direct farm sales for several years now https://www.cannabisbusinesstimes.com/article/washington-cannabis-growers-direct-sales-customers/> without much progress due to our legislators’ fear of disrupting the status quo. I naively believed that legislators would place greater value on fairness and thought we would secure farm-direct sales after a few years. I remain hopeful that direct farm emphasis on equity for BIPOC communities may lead to reassessments of our marketplaces’ overall structure, which centermost of the market power in the hands of a few well-capitalized interests.

Courtesy of Crystal Oliver

Oliver and her daughter

4. The difficulties of owning and operating a small business when your children are not permitted to step foot on the premises.

I was pregnant when I planted my first state-legal cannabis plant in 2014, and my daughter was born one month before our first state-legal harvest. When we decided to have a child shortly after applying for licensure, I envisioned tending my cannabis field with my baby in a sling or back carrier like the other organic farmers I knew. I understood that farming would be hard work and knew that working where I lived with my family in rural Washington would be a dream come true. Unfortunately, the rules surrounding marijuana cultivation in Washington prohibited individuals under 21 from setting foot on the licensed premises. My children were not allowed to enter the building or the fenced-in area of our property, where our cannabis business was located. Over the years, this created many challenges for our family. My husband and I had to alternate who was working so that one of us could supervise the children, causing long days for us both. Our children grew to resent our business because it took up so much of our time and separated us from them.

It was not until the COVID-19 pandemic shut down schools that we could convince the Washington Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) to grant leniency and allow children and grandchildren of licensees under 16 to be in the licensed premises, as they did not engage in any work. It has been a blessing for farmers to have their children allowed on site, but it is a painful reminder of the time we have missed out on over the last six-plus years. I regret not considering how impactful it would be not to bring my children to work with me as a small business owner.

Tips from David Holmes, founder and CEO of Clade9. Holmes entered the cannabis industry nearly 20 years ago, back when cannabis was just starting to become medically legal in a few states. His self-starter and self-educating attitude helped guide him; however, he tells Cannabis Business Times that there are a few things he wishes he would have done differently before entering the ever-changing cannabis industry.

I wish I knew…

1. The advantage of having an education in business.

I am a trained mathematician, as I have a master’s degree in math, but I never took traditional business courses. Others have mentored in business and learned things, but I kind of had to learn everything on my own. I wish I had more support; that would have been super powerful. Especially having been in cannabis in the late ’90s, I have never really had a huge advantage having both skill sets; learning how to grow cannabis and have business training. 

I had to learn over the years, and I have picked up a lot. The first time I had to formally negotiate a contract to cannabis entrepreneurs to negotiate a business deal was when I thought, “I wish I were trained formally in business.” I think everyone learns by doing it but having said that, having formal training or maybe just being in another business industry would have been very valuable.

Courtesy of David Holmes

Holmes

2. The value of having a background in agriculture as a cultivator.   

Being a cultivator, I wish I would have gone to school. I am glad I got a degree in math, there is no question about it, but I also wish I would have studied agriculture, precisely controlled environment agriculture, as my focus is cultivation breeding. It took me many years to learn controlled environment agriculture in Canada, without any formal training, so I self-taught.

For example, I did not understand all the variables that I needed to look at to grow consistent crop quality, like thinking to myself, “Oh, shoot, next time I should look at humidity, I wasn’t looking at that the first time.” A lot of failures led to light bulbs going off, saying, “Hey, I need to know more about that because that’s what hurt me last time.” Doing that for over 15 to 20 years, you learn a lot, but if I had formal training, I would have thought of those things all together right away instead of learning over time.

3. The benefit of entering the industry with a different mindset.

I wish I would have known cannabis was going to be an industry because when I got into it, it really was not an industry. If I had known it would be where it is, I would have approached it a lot differently. It was medical in California, but it was a total gray area, and it stayed that way until 2017 or 2018. Most cannabis entrepreneurs in California have been in the industry for a lot longer than other states, especially on the east coast. In a lot of their minds, they are probably thinking, “I wish I would’ve known this was going to be this big of a deal nearly ten years ago.”

Tips from Loren Picard, CEO of High Desert Flower Inc. in Oregon. Picard started as a financial and corporate operational consultant in the cannabis industry nearly four years ago. Within a couple of months, he was asked to be his client firm’s CEO. He shares what he is learned throughout his last four years in the industry with Cannabis Business Times. 

RELATED: 6 More Lessons We Learned From Our Cannabis Business

I wish I knew…

1. How underprepared states were for cannabis legalization.

I have been around a little over four years in the industry, starting in late 2016, with other states having legalized before and since, and I did not have a long runway to get up to speed. It takes a year or so after each state legalizes to implement its enabling regulations. That seems to be plenty of time for states to learn from other states’ successes and failures and should lead to some semblance of consistency across state jurisdictions. Unfortunately, the result has been a patchwork of rules and regulations within and between the states resulting in most states woefully underprepared when their respective licensing processes began. We had an operation in California, which we sold, and then grew a vertically integrated operation in Oregon, and how the two states’ regulators looked at the cannabis world was completely different.

Courtesy of Loren Picard

Picard

2. The difference between the economics of capped and un-capped states.

Oregon started as an uncapped state, but in June 2018 they just stopped taking applications, and it suddenly became a capped state. In hindsight, I should have thought about the whole idea of licensing as a way a firm could build value before June 2018. You could have created a lot of value by getting control of one small location (leased or purchased) and applying for multiple licenses and just put the licenses into operation when it made sense; some may not have been put into operation at that location. You would then have the flexibility to move the licenses to an optimum location with or without bringing in partners.

Obviously, there are nuances to this strategy that need to be thought through to make it worthwhile, but it was a viable long-term strategy. That would be a strategy I would do today in an uncapped state if the license costs are reasonable. If they are a hundred thousand apiece, no, but if they are a couple of grand, it could be worth it. Even if a state never caps their license issuances, there are only so many good qualified real estate locations in any state for a cannabis business. Eventually, licenses will be capped by a lack of suitable sites.

3. How little economic taxing authorities understand.

The whole idea that you cannot put up to 50% combined tax rates, including at the local level, on top of cannabis retail prices and expect to make any movement on shrinking the [illicit] market, I think, was a mistake. I think there should have been a long ramp-up of minimal taxes to pay the regulatory and enforcement agency’s overhead on top of the already collected application and license issuance fees; then start ramping up over time as the black market shrank in size.

Filed Under: Cannabis News

How Rare Cannabinoids Will Impact Investing

February 16, 2021 by CBD OIL

There is a significant increase in demand for all cannabinoid products across the board—including CBD, THC, CBG and THCV—from recreational users, consumer packaged goods and pharmaceutical companies. And the next great race is on for the hottest arrival to scientific cannabis therapeutics: rare cannabinoids.

Research shows rare cannabinoids are poised to be the future of cannabis investing, providing better health benefits in addition to impacting the pharmaceutical, CPG, nutraceuticals, cosmetics and pet care markets significantly. According to recent reports, the biosynthesis of rare cannabinoids will be a $25 billion market by 2025 and $40 billion by 2040.

The companies that will revolutionize this market are ones with the highest quality and lowest prices, which means that biosynthetic cannabinoid companies will be the leaders in investment and capturing market share. We will also see a major consolidation in this market amongst the grow, harvest and extraction companies, increasing efficiencies and driving down costs.

What are rare cannabinoids and why should we care?

Tetrahydrocannabivarin (THCV)

Rare cannabinoids such as CBG, CBN, THCV, THCA and others have significantly better and more specific health benefits than just CBD on its own. Biotech companies like ours, Biomedican, which has a patent-pending biosynthesis platform, can produce pharmaceutical grade, non-GMO, bioidentical, synthetic cannabinoids with 0.0% THC at 70-90% less cost. Producing 0.0% THC means that rare cannabinoids can be added into nutraceuticals, CPG and cosmetics/lotions with zero changes in current cannabis regulations. Also, we produce the same exact product every time (not possible through plants), which is extremely important for pharmaceutical companies conducting clinical trials.

Why are rare cannabinoids important?    

The human body contains different cannabinoid receptors that help regulate critical processes, including learning, memory, neuronal development, appetite, digestion, inflammation, overall mood, sleep, metabolism and pain perception. This considerable involvement of cannabinoid receptors, critical to many physiological systems, underscores their potential as pharmaceutical targets.

Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), just one of hundreds of cannabinoids found in cannabis.

Pharmacological research has uncovered several medical uses for cannabinoids, which bind to cannabinoid receptors. They’ve been shown to help with pathological conditions such as pediatric epilepsies, glaucoma, neuropathic pain, schizophrenia and have anti-tumor effects as well as promote the suppression of chemotherapy-induced nausea. This ongoing research is becoming more prevalent and has the potential to uncover therapeutic uses for an array of cannabinoids.

In addition to the medical field, other prominent sectors have adopted the use of cannabinoids. There is an increasing demand for cannabinoids in inhalables, the food industry and in hygienic and cosmetic products. Veterinary uses for cannabinoids are also coming to light. The use of naturally occurring cannabinoids reduces the need for synthetic alternatives that may produce harmful off-target effects. 

So how does this affect the investing market?

Where there is demand, significant and growth investments follow. All the major players from nutraceuticals, CPG, cosmetics and pet care companies are driving the demand for rare cannabinoids. We are seeing a major investment shift from commodity-based prices for cannabis and CBD to the new biosynthesis technology which offers significantly better health benefits and higher profit margins. Those unique qualities of rare cannabinoids open an enormous opportunity to create new drugs and food supplements for treating various medical conditions and improving the quality of life. This creates a massive global opportunity for all companies in these categories differentiating their products from competitors.

The structure of cannabidiol (CBD)

There will be big winners and losers in these markets, but at the end of the day, the highest quality and lowest cost producers will capture most of these markets. Biomedican has the highest quality, highest yields and lowest cost of production in the industry. Which we believe will make us the clear leader in the biosynthesis rare cannabinoid markets.

Which rare cannabinoid to invest in first?

Early reports indicate THCV (not to be confused with THC) could contain a variety of health benefits: it may help with appetite suppression/weight loss, possibly treat diabetes as well the potential to reduce tremors and seizures caused by conditions like multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease and ALS.

There has been an explosion of interest in THCV due to its potential health benefits. We are seeing major players in the nutraceutical, health food and pharmaceutical industries clamoring to add THCV to their product lines. Companies can now produce THCV through biosynthesis, creating a pharmaceutical-grade, organic, bioidentical compound at 70-90% less than wholesale prices. This is exactly what the largest players in the market want: a pharmaceutical-grade, consistent product at significantly less cost. The current prices and quality have limited THCV production, but new breakthroughs in biosynthesis have solved those issues, so we expect a tsunami of orders for THCV in 2021.

Filed Under: Cannabis News

Your State-by-State Guide to Cannabis Cultivation Business Application and Licensing Fees

February 16, 2021 by CBD OIL

Finding out what any particular state is charging prospective cannabis growers to get into the business can be daunting at times. Some states make their fees easy to find and easy to digest. Others can take some time digging through page after page on various websites.

Note, too, that some states are not always accepting any new marijuana cultivation business license applications. Those windows of availability open and close at different times in each state.

With that, here are the cultivation business application and licensing fees for the 33 states that allow medical cannabis and, in some cases, adult-use cannabis businesses. We will update this post as fee structures change in U.S. state-regulated markets; let us know what additional application and licensing information you’d like to see on this post.

 

RELATED: Interactive Marijuana Legislation Map

 

Editor’s note: This post was originally published in 2015. It was last updated in February 2021.

Alaska 

New application fee: $1,000

Standard cultivation facility license: $5,000 (Renewal: $7,000)

Limited cultivation facility license (500 square feet or less): $1,000 (Renewal: $1,400)

Product manufacturing facility license: $1,000

Concentrate manufacturing facility license: $1,000

 

Arizona 

Application fee: $5,000 ($1,000 of which is refundable if unsuccessful in the application process)

Initial registration fee: $5,000

Annual registration renewal fee: $1,000

In Arizona, medical marijuana nonprofit dispensary licensees are permitted to grow marijuana. The fee for medical marijuana nonprofit dispensary licensees to move into the new adult-use market is $25,000. 

 

Arkansas 

Annual cultivation license fee: $100,000

Performance bond: $500,000

 

California 

Annual license application fees:

Specialty Cottage Outdoor $135

Specialty Cottage Indoor $205

Specialty Cottage Mixed-Light Tier 1 $340

Specialty Cottage Mixed-Light Tier 2 $580

Specialty Outdoor $270

Specialty Indoor $2,170

Specialty Mixed-Light Tier 1 $655

Specialty Mixed-Light Tier 2 $1,125

Small Outdoor $535

Small Indoor $3,935

Small Mixed-Light Tier 1 $1,310

Small Mixed-Light Tier 2 $2,250

Medium Outdoor $1,555

Medium Indoor $8,655

Medium Mixed-Light Tier 1 $2,885

Medium Mixed-Light Tier 2 $4,945

Nursery $520

Processor $1,040

Annual license fees:

Specialty Cottage Outdoor $1,205

Specialty Cottage Indoor $1,830

Specialty Cottage Mixed-Light Tier 1 $3,035

Specialty Cottage Mixed-Light Tier 2 $5,200

Specialty Outdoor $2,410

Specialty Indoor $19,540

Specialty Mixed-Light Tier 1 $5,900

Specialty Mixed-Light Tier 2 $10,120

Small Outdoor $4,820

Small Indoor $35,410

Small Mixed-Light Tier 1 $11,800

Small Mixed-Light Tier 2 $20,235

Medium Outdoor $13,990

Medium Indoor $77,905

Medium Mixed-Light Tier 1 $25,970

Medium Mixed-Light Tier 2 $44,517

Nursery $4,685

Processor $9,370

 

propagation

Interested in getting into the cannabis industry?

Check out our Startup & Expansion Guide!

Colorado 

New application fee: $4,000

New application for converting medical cultivation facility to adult-use: $1,750

Annual renewal fee (1,801 to 3,600 plants): $1,100

Annual renewal fee (3,601 to 6,000 plants): $1,800

Annual renewal fee (6,001 to 10,200 plants): $3,300

Annual renewal fee (10,201 to 13,800 plants): $5,300

 

Connecticut 

Initial application fee: $25,000

Cultivation license registration fee: $75,000

Annual cultivation license renewal fee: $75,000

 

Delaware 

Application fee: $5,000

Certification fee: $40,000 (paid every two years)

 

Florida 

Application fee: $60,830

In Florida, medical marijuana treatment centers (MMTCs) are authorized to cultivate, process, transport and dispense medical marijuana. A “supplemental licensing fee” of $174,844 was rescinded in 2018.

 

Hawaii 

Application fee: $5,000

Annual licensing fee: $75,000

In Hawaii, medical marijuana dispensary licensees are permitted to grow, process, transport and dispense marijuana. The state does not offer a cultivation license.

Illinois 

For early approval adult-use: Non-refundable permit fee: $100,000;

Cannabis business development fund fee: 5% of total sales between July 1, 2018 to July 1, 2019 or $500,000, whichever is less.

For new entrants to the market: Craft growers have to pay a non-refundable application fee of $5,000 and a license fee of $40,000

 

Louisiana 

No cultivation licensing process. Two cannabis companies have successfully placed bids for growing permits awarded to Southern University and Louisiana State University.

 

Maine 

Application fee: $300 per patient (caregiver model)

Annual cultivation license fee: $300 per patient

 

Maryland 

Application fee: $6,000

Annual cultivation license fee: $125,000

 

Massachusetts 

 

Michigan 

State license application fee: $6,000

Class A license fee (500 plants): $150,000

Class B license fee (1,000 plants): $300,000

Class C license fee (1,500 plants): $500,000

Processor license fee: $300,000

 

Minnesota 

Application fee: $20,000

Minnesota requires vertical integration, and has thus far licensed two companies.

 

greenhouse cannabis

Interested in greenhouse cultivation?

Check out our Greenhouse Design ebook!

 

Missouri 

Cultivation license application fee: $10,000

Missouri began accepting medical marijuana business license applications in January 2019. As of early 2021, the state is no longer accepting applications.

Read more about Missouri’s medical marijuana industry regulations from Reynolds and Gold here.

 

Montana 

Annual caregiver license fee (up to 10 patients): $1,000

Annual caregiver license fee (11-49 patients): $2,500

Annual caregiver license fee (50 or more patients): $5,000

 

Nevada 

Application fee: $5,000

Annual license fee: $30,000

 

New Hampshire 

Application fee: $3,000

Annual licensing fee: $40,000 or $80,000 (depending on geographic area)

In New Hampshire, alternative treatment centers (ATCs) are authorized to grow, process and dispense medical marijuana.

 

New Jersey 

Application fee: $20,000 ($18,000 refundable to unsuccessful applicants)

In New Jersey, alternative treatment centers (ATCs) are authorized to grow, process and dispense medical marijuana.

 

New Mexico 

Application fee: $10,000 ($9,000 refundable to unsuccessful applicants)

Annual license fee: $30,000 for first 150 plants, and $10,000 for each additional 50 plants (up to a 450-plant limit)

 

New York 

Application fee: $10,000

Initial registration fee; $200,000

 

North Dakota 

Application fee: $5,000

Annual licensing fee: $110,000

 

Ohio 

Application fee: $2,000 (up to 3,000 square feet of cultivation area for a Level-I cultivator license), $20,000 (up to 25,000 square feet of cultivation area for a Level-II cultivator license)

Initial license fee: $18,000 (Level I), $180,000 (Level II)

Annual license renewal fee: $20,000 (Level I), $200,000 (Level II)

 

Oklahoma 

Application fee: $2,500

 

Oregon 

Application fee: $250

Annual licensing fees:

Micro Tier I – $1,000

Micro Tier II $2,000

Tier I $3,750

Tier II $5,750

Medical Canopy: $100

 

Pennsylvania 

Application fee (nonrefundable): $10,000

Application fee (refundable if application is not successful): $200,000

Annual license renewal fee: $10,000

Proof of funds: $2 million, with $500,000 liquid in applicant’s bank account

 

Rhode Island 

Application fee: $5,000

Annual license fee:

Micro-license (up to 2,500 square feet): $5,000

Class A (2,501 to 5,000 square feet): $20,000

Class B (5,001 to 10,000 square feet): $35,000

Class C (10,0001 to 15,000 square feet): $50,000

Class D (15,001 to 20,000 square feet) $80,000

Utah 

Application fee: $500

 

Vermont

Annual fee of $25,000 after the first year of operation

 

Washington 

Application fee: $250

Annual license fee (Tier 1, 2, 3): $1,480

 

West Virginia 

Application fee: $5,000

Annual license fee: $50,000

 

Filed Under: Cannabis News

THC Remediation of Hemp Extracts

February 16, 2021 by CBD OIL

Remediation of delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (d9-THC) has become a hot button issue in the United States ever since the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) released their changes to the definitions of marijuana, marijuana extract, and tetrahydrocannabinols exempting extracts and tetrahydrocannabinols of a cannabis plant containing 0.3% or less d9-THC on a dry weight basis from the Controlled Substances Act. That is because, as a direct consequence, all extracts and tetrahydrocannabinols of a cannabis plant containing more than 0.3% d9-THC became explicitly under the purview of the DEA, including work-in-progress “hemp extracts” that because of the extraction process are above the 0.3% d9-THC limit immediately upon creation.

The legal ramifications of these changes to the definitions on the “hemp extracts” marketplace will not be addressed. Instead, this article focuses on the amount of d9-THC that is available in the plant material prior to extraction and tracks a “hemp extract” from the point it falls out of compliance to the point it becomes compliant again and stresses the importance of accurate track-n-trace protocols at the processing facility. The model developed to support this article was intended to be academic and was designed to follow the d9-THC portion of a “hemp extract” through the lifecycle of a typical CO2-based extract from initial extraction to THC remediation. A loss to the equipment of 2% was used for each step.

Initial Extraction

For this exercise, a common processing scenario of 1000 kg of plant material at 10% cannabidiol (CBD) and 0.3% d9-THC by weight was modeled. This amount, depending on scale of operations, can be a facility’s total capacity for the day or the capacity for a single run. 1000 kg of plant material at 0.3% d9-THC has 3 kg of d9-THC that could be extracted, purified, and diverted into the marketplace. CO2 has a nominal extraction efficiency of 95%, meaning some cannabinoids are left behind in the plant material. The same can be said about the recovery of the extract from the equipment. Traces of extract will remain in the equipment and this little bit of material, if unaccounted for, can potentially open an operator up to legal consequences. Data for the initial extraction is shown in Image 1.

Image 1: Summary Data Table for Typical CO2-based Extraction of Phytocannabinoids

As soon as the initial extract is produced it is out of compliance with the 0.3% d9-THC limit to be classified as a “hemp extract”, and of the 3 kg of d9-THC available, the extract contains approx. 2.8 kg, because some of the d9-THC remains in the plant material and some is lost to the equipment.

Dewaxing via Winterization and Solvent Removal

Dewaxing a typical CO2 extract via winterization is a common process step. For this exercise, a wax content of 30% by weight was used. A process efficiency of 98% was attributed to the wax removal process and it was assumed that 100% of the loss can be accounted for in the residue recovered from the equipment rather than in the removed waxes. Data for the winterization and solvent recovery are shown in Image 2 and 3.

Image 2: Summary Data Table for Typical Winterization of a CO2 Extract
Image 3: Summary Data Table for Solvent Removal from a CO2 Extract

Two things occur during winterization and solvent removal, non-target constituents are removed from the extract and there is compounded loss from multiple pieces of process equipment. These steps increase the concentration of the d9-THC portion of the extract and produce two streams of noncompliant waste.

Decarboxylation & Devolatilization

Most cannabinoids in the plant material are in their acid form. For this exercise, 90% of the cannabinoids were considered to be acid forms. Decarboxylation is known to produce a mass difference of 87.7%, i.e. the neutral forms are 12.3% lighter than the acid forms. Heat was modeled as the primary driver and a process efficiency of 95% was used for the conversion rate during decarboxylation. To simplify the model, the remaining 5% acidic cannabinoids are presumed destroyed rather than degraded into other compounds because the portion of the cannabinoids which get destroyed versus degrade into other compounds varies from process to process.

Devolatilization is the process of removing low-molecular weight constituents from an extract to stabilize it prior to distillation. Since the molecular constituents of cannabis resin extracts vary from variety to variety and process to process, the extracts were assumed to consist of 10% volatile compounds. The model combines the decarboxylation and devolatilization steps to account for complete decarboxylation of the available acidic cannabinoids and ignores their weight contribution to the volatiles collected during devolatilization. Destroyed cannabinoids result in an amount of loss that can only be accounted for through a complete mass balance analysis. Data for decarboxylation and devolatilization are shown in Image 4.

Image 4: Summary Data Table for Decarboxylation and Devolatilization of a CO2 Extract

As the extract moves along the process train, the d9-THC concentration continues to increase. Decarboxylation further complicates traceability because there is both a known mass difference associated with the process and an unknown mass difference that must be calculated and justified.

Distillation

A two-pass distillation was modeled. On each pass a portion of the extract was removed to increase the cannabinoid concentration in the recovered material. Average data for distilled “hemp extracts” was used to ensure the model did not over- or underestimate the concentration of the cannabinoids in the distillate. The variables used to meet these data constraints were derived experimentally to match the model to the scenario described and are not indicative of an actual distillation. Data for distillation is shown in Image 5.

Image 5: Summary Data Table for Distillation of a Decarboxylated and Devolatilized Extract

After distillation, the d9-THC concentration is shown to have increased by 874% from the original concentration in the plant material. Roughly 2.2 kg of the available 3 kg of d9-THC remains in the extract, but 0.8 kg of d9-THC has either ended up in a waste stream or walking out the door.

Chromatography – THC Remediation Step 1

Chromatography was modeled to remove the d9-THC from the extract. Because there are several systems with variable efficiency rates at being able to selectively isolate the d9-THC peak from the eluent stream, the model used a 5% cut-off on the front-end and tail-end of the peak, i.e. 5% of the material before the d9-THC peak and 5% of the material after the d9-THC peak is assumed to be collected along with the d9-THC. Data for chromatography is shown in Image 6.

Image 6: Summary Data Table for d9-THC Removal using Chromatography

After chromatography, a minimum of three products are produced, compliant “hemp extract”, d9-THC extract, and noncompliant residue remaining in the equipment. The d9-THC extract modeled contains 2.1 kg of the available 3 kg in the plant material, and is 35% d9-THC by weight, an increase of 1335% from the distillation step and 11664% from the plant material.

CBN Creation – THC Remediation Step 2

For this exercise, the d9-THC extract was converted into cannabinol (CBN) using heat rather than cyclized into d8-THC, but a similar model could be used to account for this scenario. The conversion rate of the cannabinoids into CBN through heat degradation alone is low. Therefore, the model assumes half of the available cannabinoids in the d9-THC extract are converted to CBN. The entirety of the remaining portion of the cannabinoids are assumed to convert to some form of degradant rather than a portion getting destroyed. Data for THC destruction is shown in Image 7.

Image 7: Summary Data Table for THC Destruction through Degradation into CBN

Only after the CBN cyclization step has completed does the product that was the d9-THC extract become compliant and classifiable as a “hemp extract.”

Image 8: Summary Data Table for Reconciliation of the d9-THC Portion of the Hemp Extract

Throughout the process, from initial extraction to the final d9-THC remediation step, loss occurs. Of the 3 kg of d9-THC available in the plant material only 2.1 kg was recovered and converted to CBN. 0.9 kg was either lost to the equipment, destroyed in the process, attributable to the mass difference associated with decarboxylation, or was never extracted from the plant material in the first place. All of these potential areas of product loss should be identified, and their diversion risk fully assessed. Not every waste stream poses a risk of diversion, but some do; having a plan in place to handle waste the DEA considers a controlled substance is essential. Without a track-n-trace program following the d9-THC and identifying the potential risk of diversion would be impossible. The point of this is not to instill fear, instead the intention is to shed light on a very real issue “hemp extract” producers and state regulators need to understand to protect themselves and their marketplace from the DEA.

Filed Under: Cannabis News

Virginia Is Moving Quickly on the Governor’s Cannabis Legalization Proposal. But What Happens Next?

February 16, 2021 by CBD OIL

Virginia, once a conservative stronghold, positioned itself to make history this month by becoming the first traditionally “Southern” state to legalize cannabis, possibly as soon as this summer. On Feb. 5, both chambers of the state’s General Assembly passed their own legalization bills that would also establish a state-run market and licensing system.

But Virginia is running into some of the same challenges as other states pursuing legalization: disagreements over license types, penalties for minors and the timing of the law’s implementation. Industry advocates are also concerned that more conservative elements of the state legislature will prevent equitable legalization in Virginia.

What’s happened so far?

Part of the state’s decriminalization bill signed by Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam in May 2020 directed the legislature to create a work group to study the possibility of legalization. Last month, Northam unveiled a legalization bill co-sponsored by multiple state legislators.

Two separate state legislative bills to legalize cannabis—HB2312 in the House and SB1406 in the Senate—have already passed. But the differences between the two bills must be resolved into a single resolution for Northam to sign. And that’s where things get tricky.

Where are things now?

“We’re at crossover. … The next thing that comes is conference,” said Chelsea Wise, founder of advocacy group Marijuana Justice, in a phone interview with Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary.

She explained that the conference stage will involve private meetings between delegates from both the House and the Senate to resolve issues between the two bills, as well as changes to Northam’s initial legislation.

“We have two different versions of the bills and they are very different,” Wise said. She highlighted the ideological contrasts between the state’s relatively progressive House and its more conservative Senate. “[The State Senate] thinks we are moving too fast too soon.”

Wise and others have highlighted several key issues that need to be addressed for the state to achieve equitable legalization.

Social equity funding

Under the bill’s current structure, 30% of tax revenue from legal cannabis sales in Virginia would go to the state’s Cannabis Reinvestment Fund, a program to provide scholarships, training and workforce development opportunities in areas hit hardest by prohibition. Wise and other advocates like the ACLU of Virginia believe that figure is not high enough.

“We have taken livelihood from people, and that means we owe people money. … Only allocating 30% of the tax revenue to our reinvestment fund is an offensive offer,” she said. “We are pushing for 70% of those tax revenues to go back into the communities for grants, loans, for programs. … If we can’t even allocate at least a majority of the tax revenue to the people we have harmed now for generations, we are not actually serious about reconciling anything with Black people here in Virginia.”

Underage penalties

Early versions of the bill required that people who are under 21 and caught with cannabis must pay a fine and attend mandatory substance abuse classes. Some believe that the penalty for underage possession should be in line with the state’s penalties for underage possession of alcohol, currently punishable by a Class 1 misdemeanor. Other legislators believe that type of alignment is too harsh.

“We need to get that kid into some help, into some counseling—not jail,” said State Sen. Creigh Deeds, speaking about minors who are caught with cannabis.

State oversight of the industry

Northam has been vocal about wanting to achieve legalization during his term, which ends in January 2022. But the clock is ticking: State law in Virginia mandates that governors cannot serve consecutive terms, giving Northam less than a full year.

Northam’s plans are complicated by state senators calling for extra time to create a new commission specifically to regulate Virginia’s cannabis industry. Under Northam’s initial proposal, that role would fall to the state’s Alcoholic Beverage Commission (ABC), which regulates and operates Virginia liquor sales through state-run stores.

“I think we’re taking a responsible course. This is something that won’t happen overnight,” said State Sen. Adam Ebbin, sponsor of the Senate’s legalization bill.

“This thing is a 1,000-pound monster with tentacles that reach everywhere,” agreed State Sen. Scott Surovell during a subcommittee hearing. 

“We are supportive of the idea of an independent agency versus the ABC,” Wise said. “Our ABC is mostly law enforcement, like many others, … but the fact that it’s going to take so long is an issue.”

Legalization start date

Both the House and Senate bills wouldn’t allow recreational sales in Virginia until 2024. But Marijuana Justice and other advocacy groups are asking the General Assembly to speed up the legalization of simple possession in order to cut down on the number of Virginians getting arrested for cannabis. Virginia passed a decriminalization bill last year reducing the penalty for possessing an ounce or less to a $25 fine. Under legalization, that same amount would be completely legal, while possessing between an ounce and five pounds would result in a fine.

Like many other states, people of color in Virginia—particularly African-Americans—are arrested for cannabis far more frequently than other races.

Data from Virginia State Police indicates that while Black people comprise less than 20% of the state’s population, they account for over 45% of first-time cannabis arrests and nearly 53% of all subsequent offense arrests for possession of marijuana.

“If this legislation is to prioritize stopping the harm of arresting Black Virginians four times the rate of white Virginians for marijuana crimes—if we really want to stop that, we need a July 1 enactment date of legalization,” Wise said.

Vertical integration

Under the vertical integration model, a single company owns every part of the cannabis business, including grows and dispensaries. Supporters of vertical integration generally argue that it keeps costs down for consumers, adds efficiency to the market and upholds capitalistic principles. Opponents say vertical integration shuts out small operators who can’t afford to spend six or seven figures in licensing fees and overhead.

In Virginia, Northam’s initial proposal allowed for vertical integration, which is currently mandated in the state’s limited medical cannabis program. The House bill limits the practice by restricting companies to only one type of license. The Senate’s version allows for vertical integration but charges a $1-million licensing fee to help support the state’s cannabis equity programs.

Wise said that the debate doesn’t have to be black and white. She believes the state can benefit from vertical integration in the industry’s early stages, while providing opportunities to small entrepreneurs as things grow.

“What we’ve been really talking to the legislators about is yes, banning vertical integration—with some exceptions,” she said. “The medical industry is setting up, they could be the first providers, with some guardrails … [like] a sunset provision that once adult-use sales start, the would be backed out of the market.”

What happens next?

Once the General Assembly is able to work out the issues between the two versions of the bills, a final version will be created and voted upon. After approval, it will be sent to Northam’s desk to be signed into law.

Last week, Marijuana Justice and 23 other organizations—including prominent groups like the ACLU of Virginia, Minorities 4 Medical Marijuana, and the Drug Policy Alliance—sent a letter to governor Northam and state legislators laying out specific criteria to “legalize in a way that rights the wrongs of the disparate impact the War on Drugs has had on Black and Brown communities.”

“I would say that we would probably know more at the end of February, at least where the bills are [after] conference,” Wise said. “From there, we’ll decide if this bill is what we want or not what we want. I think we are going to see a big fight, just like every other state.”

 

Filed Under: Cannabis News

The Green Lady Dispensary Navigates First Year in Nantucket in the Age of Social Distancing: The Starting Line

February 16, 2021 by CBD OIL

Virginia, once a conservative stronghold, positioned itself to make history this month by becoming the first traditionally “Southern” state to legalize cannabis, possibly as soon as this summer. On Feb. 5, both chambers of the state’s General Assembly passed their own legalization bills that would also establish a state-run market and licensing system.

But Virginia is running into some of the same challenges as other states pursuing legalization: disagreements over license types, penalties for minors and the timing of the law’s implementation. Industry advocates are also concerned that more conservative elements of the state legislature will prevent equitable legalization in Virginia.

What’s happened so far?

Part of the state’s decriminalization bill signed by Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam in May 2020 directed the legislature to create a work group to study the possibility of legalization. Last month, Northam unveiled a legalization bill co-sponsored by multiple state legislators.

Two separate state legislative bills to legalize cannabis—HB2312 in the House and SB1406 in the Senate—have already passed. But the differences between the two bills must be resolved into a single resolution for Northam to sign. And that’s where things get tricky.

Where are things now?

“We’re at crossover. … The next thing that comes is conference,” said Chelsea Wise, founder of advocacy group Marijuana Justice, in a phone interview with Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary.

She explained that the conference stage will involve private meetings between delegates from both the House and the Senate to resolve issues between the two bills, as well as changes to Northam’s initial legislation.

“We have two different versions of the bills and they are very different,” Wise said. She highlighted the ideological contrasts between the state’s relatively progressive House and its more conservative Senate. “[The State Senate] thinks we are moving too fast too soon.”

Wise and others have highlighted several key issues that need to be addressed for the state to achieve equitable legalization.

Social equity funding

Under the bill’s current structure, 30% of tax revenue from legal cannabis sales in Virginia would go to the state’s Cannabis Reinvestment Fund, a program to provide scholarships, training and workforce development opportunities in areas hit hardest by prohibition. Wise and other advocates like the ACLU of Virginia believe that figure is not high enough.

“We have taken livelihood from people, and that means we owe people money. … Only allocating 30% of the tax revenue to our reinvestment fund is an offensive offer,” she said. “We are pushing for 70% of those tax revenues to go back into the communities for grants, loans, for programs. … If we can’t even allocate at least a majority of the tax revenue to the people we have harmed now for generations, we are not actually serious about reconciling anything with Black people here in Virginia.”

Underage penalties

Early versions of the bill required that people who are under 21 and caught with cannabis must pay a fine and attend mandatory substance abuse classes. Some believe that the penalty for underage possession should be in line with the state’s penalties for underage possession of alcohol, currently punishable by a Class 1 misdemeanor. Other legislators believe that type of alignment is too harsh.

“We need to get that kid into some help, into some counseling—not jail,” said State Sen. Creigh Deeds, speaking about minors who are caught with cannabis.

State oversight of the industry

Northam has been vocal about wanting to achieve legalization during his term, which ends in January 2022. But the clock is ticking: State law in Virginia mandates that governors cannot serve consecutive terms, giving Northam less than a full year.

Northam’s plans are complicated by state senators calling for extra time to create a new commission specifically to regulate Virginia’s cannabis industry. Under Northam’s initial proposal, that role would fall to the state’s Alcoholic Beverage Commission (ABC), which regulates and operates Virginia liquor sales through state-run stores.

“I think we’re taking a responsible course. This is something that won’t happen overnight,” said State Sen. Adam Ebbin, sponsor of the Senate’s legalization bill.

“This thing is a 1,000-pound monster with tentacles that reach everywhere,” agreed State Sen. Scott Surovell during a subcommittee hearing. 

“We are supportive of the idea of an independent agency versus the ABC,” Wise said. “Our ABC is mostly law enforcement, like many others, … but the fact that it’s going to take so long is an issue.”

Legalization start date

Both the House and Senate bills wouldn’t allow recreational sales in Virginia until 2024. But Marijuana Justice and other advocacy groups are asking the General Assembly to speed up the legalization of simple possession in order to cut down on the number of Virginians getting arrested for cannabis. Virginia passed a decriminalization bill last year reducing the penalty for possessing an ounce or less to a $25 fine. Under legalization, that same amount would be completely legal, while possessing between an ounce and five pounds would result in a fine.

Like many other states, people of color in Virginia—particularly African-Americans—are arrested for cannabis far more frequently than other races.

Data from Virginia State Police indicates that while Black people comprise less than 20% of the state’s population, they account for over 45% of first-time cannabis arrests and nearly 53% of all subsequent offense arrests for possession of marijuana.

“If this legislation is to prioritize stopping the harm of arresting Black Virginians four times the rate of white Virginians for marijuana crimes—if we really want to stop that, we need a July 1 enactment date of legalization,” Wise said.

Vertical integration

Under the vertical integration model, a single company owns every part of the cannabis business, including grows and dispensaries. Supporters of vertical integration generally argue that it keeps costs down for consumers, adds efficiency to the market and upholds capitalistic principles. Opponents say vertical integration shuts out small operators who can’t afford to spend six or seven figures in licensing fees and overhead.

In Virginia, Northam’s initial proposal allowed for vertical integration, which is currently mandated in the state’s limited medical cannabis program. The House bill limits the practice by restricting companies to only one type of license. The Senate’s version allows for vertical integration but charges a $1-million licensing fee to help support the state’s cannabis equity programs.

Wise said that the debate doesn’t have to be black and white. She believes the state can benefit from vertical integration in the industry’s early stages, while providing opportunities to small entrepreneurs as things grow.

“What we’ve been really talking to the legislators about is yes, banning vertical integration—with some exceptions,” she said. “The medical industry is setting up, they could be the first providers, with some guardrails … [like] a sunset provision that once adult-use sales start, the would be backed out of the market.”

What happens next?

Once the General Assembly is able to work out the issues between the two versions of the bills, a final version will be created and voted upon. After approval, it will be sent to Northam’s desk to be signed into law.

Last week, Marijuana Justice and 23 other organizations—including prominent groups like the ACLU of Virginia, Minorities 4 Medical Marijuana, and the Drug Policy Alliance—sent a letter to governor Northam and state legislators laying out specific criteria to “legalize in a way that rights the wrongs of the disparate impact the War on Drugs has had on Black and Brown communities.”

“I would say that we would probably know more at the end of February, at least where the bills are [after] conference,” Wise said. “From there, we’ll decide if this bill is what we want or not what we want. I think we are going to see a big fight, just like every other state.”

 

Filed Under: Cannabis News

New Mexico House Health and Human Services Committee Passes Equity-Focused Legalization Bill

February 15, 2021 by CBD OIL

<![CDATA[

Gathered before a legislative crossroads, the New Mexico House Health and Human Services Committee made its intent clear on cannabis legalization: Social equity is going to be part of the process.

Today, the committee advanced House Bill 12 to the House Tax Committee, while ultimately tabling a similar legalization bill (House Bill 17) that did not include specific equity language. It was a clear signal to advocates and residents that the state is getting serious about developing a robust cannabis program.

The Drug Policy Alliance has regularly cited H.B. 12 this year as a favorable bill that might usher in a more progressive state marketplace. 

“Legalization must be responsive to the lives of New Mexicans, not solely business interests, and that means centering social justice, as the H.B. 12 introduced by Rep. Martinez, Rep. Andrea Romero and Rep. Deborah Armstrong does,” Emily Kaltenbach, senior director for Resident States and New Mexico for the Drug Policy Alliance, said in a public statement. “New Mexicans are absolutely ready to see marijuana legalization become a reality in the state, but they have made it clear that repairing the damage done by the drug war is non-negotiable. Any legislation considered this session must reinvest back into communities most harmed by drug prohibition, particularly Hispanic/Latino, Black and Native populations in New Mexico.”

According to the Drug Policy Alliance, “nearly three out of four New Mexicans approve of cannabis legalization with provisions in place to ensure tax revenue is reinvested back into communities, including 94% of Democrats, 93% of Independents and 46% of Republicans.”

]]>

Filed Under: Cannabis News

NORML Calls Upon President Biden to Pardon Non-Violent Federal Cannabis Offenses

February 15, 2021 by CBD OIL

Vertically integrated, multistate operator (MSO) Cresco Labs and its co-founder Joe Caltabiano have ended a multifaceted dispute in a Canadian court after Cresco alleged in a lawsuit that Caltabiano engaged in inappropriate behavior and created a “toxic work environment” while working at Cresco and breached his contract with the company, which he left last year.

On Jan. 29, Cresco filed a civil suit in British Columbia’s Supreme Court against Caltabiano, who was Cresco’s president and a member of its board of directors, and against Ken Amann and Choice Consolidation Corp. (Though it operates in the U.S., Cresco has an office in Vancouver, B.C., and is publicly traded on the Canadian Securities Exchange.)

By Feb. 4, the case was discontinued.

“The claims outlined in the lawsuit have been resolved through a mutual settlement agreement and Cresco has successfully mitigated the regulatory issues referred to in the complaint,” Cresco spokesperson Jason Erkes told Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary in a Feb. 11 email. “The lawsuit has been discontinued in the Supreme Court of British Columbia.”

“This lawsuit was quickly dismissed on Feb. 4,” Shawna McGregor, a publicist who represents Caltabiano, told CBT and CD in a Feb. 12 email. “Had it proceeded, Mr. Caltabiano and Choice Consolidation Corp would have denied the allegations as untrue. Like all legitimate organizations, Choice Consolidation Corp. has every right to exist and operate within the U.S. cannabis marketplace.” 

In its suit, Cresco claimed that Caltabiano bullied and intimidated female employees at the company and “sought to embarrass his female employees at every turn.”

The company also alleged that Caltabiano and Amann, Cresco’s former chief financial officer and a former senior employee, “misused confidential information belonging to Cresco, including information about existing Cresco investors, and information about Cresco’s business plans and M&A targets” to benefit a separate, competing venture, the special purpose acquisition corporation (SPAC) Choice Consolidation.

RELATED: SPACs Are Changing the Cannabis Market M&A Landscape

In addition, Cresco alleged, “Caltabiano routinely directed subordinates to act without proper regard for regulatory compliance, and he personally showed disregard for regulatory compliance.” Cresco stated that it had to spend large sums of money to remedy a regulatory issue in Illinois that occurred because of “Caltabiano’s misconduct,” though the suit did not specify what the alleged misconduct was. Illinois regulators could not be reached for comment by CBT and CD‘s deadline.

The lawsuit also claims that when Cresco attempted to remove Caltabiano from various licenses, he “refused to cooperate, and advised Cresco that he would assist with such process only if he received substantial compensation for doing so.”

“In the face of Caltabiano’s intransigence, Cresco took steps to remove Caltabiano from various of its licenses in the absence of Caltabiano’s cooperation,” it states. “Aware that this was happening, Caltabiano actively intervened with applicable state authorities in Ohio and Arizona in an effort to retain or reinstate his position on Cresco’s licenses in those states. His active interference occurred as recently as January 22, 2021.” Regulators from both states declined comment for this story.

The Jan. 29 filing stated that Caltabiano “also enabled inappropriate, harassing and abusive language by male employees under his direct supervision towards female employees of Cresco.”

Female employees came forward with “numerous complaints,” which Cresco “confirmed through internal and externally led investigations, of harassing conduct by male employees within Caltabiano’s area of responsibility,” according to the complaint.

“Caltabiano repeatedly engaged in inappropriate, abusive, harassing and misogynistic conduct directed towards female employees of Cresco,” the lawsuit alleged. “While Caltabiano ‘managed’ … many of the employees through fear, bullying, and intimidation, he repeatedly belittled female employees for minor performance issues, made demeaning remarks about female employees’ appearance and personal characteristics, and sought to embarrass his female employees at every turn.”

Cresco planned to terminate Caltabiano for cause and, in February 2020, placed him on administrative leave, according to the suit, which then states that he resigned on March 2, 2020.

“Caltabiano continued as a director of Cresco until June 2020,” the complaint states. “He resigned as a director immediately before Cresco published its management information circular, knowing that the circular would disclose that he was not being nominated for re-election as a director of Cresco.”

 

Filed Under: Cannabis News

Cresco Labs Ends Lawsuit Against Co-Founder Joe Caltabiano

February 15, 2021 by CBD OIL

<![CDATA[

Vertically integrated, multistate operator (MSO) Cresco Labs and its co-founder Joe Caltabiano have ended a multifaceted dispute in a Canadian court after Cresco alleged in a lawsuit that Caltabiano engaged in inappropriate behavior and created a “toxic work environment” while working at Cresco and breached his contract with the company, which he left last year.

On Jan. 29, Cresco filed a civil suit in British Columbia’s Supreme Court against Caltabiano, who was Cresco’s president and a member of its board of directors, and against Ken Amann and Choice Consolidation Corp. (Though it operates in the U.S., Cresco has an office in Vancouver, B.C., and is publicly traded on the Canadian Securities Exchange.)

By Feb. 4, the case was discontinued.

“The claims outlined in the lawsuit have been resolved through a mutual settlement agreement and Cresco has successfully mitigated the regulatory issues referred to in the complaint,” Cresco spokesperson Jason Erkes told Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary in a Feb. 11 email. “The lawsuit has been discontinued in the Supreme Court of British Columbia.”

“This lawsuit was quickly dismissed on Feb. 4,” Shawna McGregor, a publicist who represents Caltabiano, told CBT and CD in a Feb. 12 email. “Had it proceeded, Mr. Caltabiano and Choice Consolidation Corp would have denied the allegations as untrue. Like all legitimate organizations, Choice Consolidation Corp. has every right to exist and operate within the U.S. cannabis marketplace.” 

In its suit, Cresco claimed that Caltabiano bullied and intimidated female employees at the company and “sought to embarrass his female employees at every turn.”

The company also alleged that Caltabiano and Amann, Cresco’s former chief financial officer and a former senior employee, “misused confidential information belonging to Cresco, including information about existing Cresco investors, and information about Cresco’s business plans and M&A targets” to benefit a separate, competing venture, the special purpose acquisition corporation (SPAC) Choice Consolidation.

RELATED: SPACs Are Changing the Cannabis Market M&A Landscape

In addition, Cresco alleged, “Caltabiano routinely directed subordinates to act without proper regard for regulatory compliance, and he personally showed disregard for regulatory compliance.” Cresco stated that it had to spend large sums of money to remedy a regulatory issue in Illinois that occurred because of “Caltabiano’s misconduct,” though the suit did not specify what the alleged misconduct was. Illinois regulators could not be reached for comment by CBT and CD‘s deadline.

The lawsuit also claims that when Cresco attempted to remove Caltabiano from various licenses, he “refused to cooperate, and advised Cresco that he would assist with such process only if he received substantial compensation for doing so.”

"In the face of Caltabiano’s intransigence, Cresco took steps to remove Caltabiano from various of its licenses in the absence of Caltabiano’s cooperation,” it states. “Aware that this was happening, Caltabiano actively intervened with applicable state authorities in Ohio and Arizona in an effort to retain or reinstate his position on Cresco’s licenses in those states. His active interference occurred as recently as January 22, 2021.” Regulators from both states declined comment for this story.

The Jan. 29 filing stated that Caltabiano “also enabled inappropriate, harassing and abusive language by male employees under his direct supervision towards female employees of Cresco.”

Female employees came forward with “numerous complaints,” which Cresco “confirmed through internal and externally led investigations, of harassing conduct by male employees within Caltabiano’s area of responsibility,” according to the complaint.

“Caltabiano repeatedly engaged in inappropriate, abusive, harassing and misogynistic conduct directed towards female employees of Cresco,” the lawsuit alleged. “While Caltabiano ‘managed’ … many of the employees through fear, bullying, and intimidation, he repeatedly belittled female employees for minor performance issues, made demeaning remarks about female employees’ appearance and personal characteristics, and sought to embarrass his female employees at every turn.”

Cresco planned to terminate Caltabiano for cause and, in February 2020, placed him on administrative leave, according to the suit, which then states that he resigned on March 2, 2020.

“Caltabiano continued as a director of Cresco until June 2020,” the complaint states. “He resigned as a director immediately before Cresco published its management information circular, knowing that the circular would disclose that he was not being nominated for re-election as a director of Cresco.”

 

]]>

Filed Under: Cannabis News

Byers Scientific Announces New Company Structure to Deliver Innovative and Sustainable Industrial-Scale Odor Mitigation Solutions

February 15, 2021 by CBD OIL

Name: Philip Goldberg

Location: Frederick, Md.

Title: CEO, Green Leaf Medical

One word to describe your cultivation style: Intelligent

Indoor, outdoor, greenhouse or a combination: Indoor

Can you share a bit of your background and how you and your company got to the present day?

Green Leaf Medical was formed in 2014 by myself and my brother, Kevin Goldberg. I had been running an advertising agency I started from the ground up in 1998 and Kevin was working at a law firm he founded shortly after graduating from Catholic University School of Law in 1995. After forming the company in 2014, we spent the next two years positioning Green Leaf to secure one of a limited number of licenses to cultivate medical cannabis in Maryland. In August of 2016, we were notified that our application had been approved and that we had received the highest score out of 146 applicants for cultivation. We then began the arduous task of raising capital to construct our 42,000-square-foot cultivation facility. We raised approximately $9 million through the sale of equity. The construction took 12 months and when it was completed, we had a state of the art, fully automated cultivation facility. We began cultivating in September 2017 and had our first harvest in January of 2018. At this point, we developed the gLeaf brand that is associated with all our products. The facility currently produces approximately 1,000 pounds of dry cannabis per month. From there, we acquired the first extraction and dispensary licenses issued in the state.

While working to build our brand in Maryland, we submitted an application for one of the limited number of cannabis licenses being issued in Pennsylvania. We won a license in the South-Central region, where we had purchased the former Seaton Leather manufacturing facility. This facility had been the largest employer in the area and economically devastated the community when it shut down nearly a decade prior. We raised an additional $13 million to convert the first 100,000 square feet of the 275,000-square-foot facility into a state-of-the-art cultivating and extraction facility. The facility became operational in April of 2019 and currently produces approximately 1,700 pounds per month of dry cannabis. In late 2019, we sold the facility to Innovative Industrial Properties for $13 million in a sale-leaseback transaction that would free up capital to continue expansion.

With Pennsylvania and Maryland operational, we turned our focus to Ohio. We were successful in winning a dispensary license in Warren, Ohio, where we serve hundreds of patients per day.

Next, we applied for one of five vertical licenses being issued in Virginia. We were successful in winning a license in Richmond, Va., and used the proceeds of the sale-leaseback in Pennsylvania to fund the buildout of an 82,000-square-foot cultivation, extraction and retail facility. Ultimately, we executed on a $20 million sale-leaseback with Innovative Industrial Properties, which completed the construction of the Richmond facility and provided us with growth and operational capital. The Richmond facility can produce 2,200 pounds of dry cannabis per month.

Finally, we recently began construction of the remaining 175,000 square feet of space in our Saxton, Penn., facility. Again, we funded this expansion through an additional sale-leaseback with Innovative Industrial for $30 million. We are building a triple stacked LED grow that will add 5,000 additional pounds per month to the existing 1,600 we are currently producing in Pennsylvania.

All told, our operations in the Mid-Atlantic region reach a population of approximately 34 million. Our facilities and current buildouts will allow Green Leaf to produce nearly 10,000 pounds of cannabis per month.

What tool or software in your cultivation space can you not live without?

Automated irrigation and environmental controls are definitely important, along with our proprietary inventory control and gLeaf live marketplace.

What purchase of $100 or less has most positively impacted your business in the last six months?

Buck boosters for our grow lights. Buck-boost transformers are small, single-phase transformers designed to reduce (buck) or raise (boost) line voltage up to 20%. These units boost the wattage of our grow lights from 1,000 watts to 1,150 watts. The units cost around $125 retail; however, our in-house engineers, Alan and Glenn Mountain, were able to build our own buck boosters for around $40. This has had a measurable, positive impact on our yields.

What cultivation technique are you most interested in right now, and what are you actively studying (the most)?

We are currently migrating to LED in flower so that we can stack our production and lower our energy costs. We are also focusing on perfecting tissue culture.

How has a failure, or apparent failure, set you up for later success? Do you have a “favorite failure” of yours?

It seems like every day there are new lessons to learn, whether it is undersized dehumidification, improperly placed floor drains, rolling benches that weren’t properly leveled or a hundred other things. One of my favorites would be the time a water line ruptured in one of the first flower rooms we constructed, flooding the floor. We thought it was no big deal because we were “smart” enough to include trench drains in our design. It wasn’t until we started pushing water toward the drains that we realized the floor was not sloped appropriately to move the water to the drain, rendering the “smart” trench drains useless. You can bet that on every construction project after that we made sure the slope was correct!

What advice would you give to a smart, driven grower about to enter the legal, regulated industry? What advice should they ignore?

Ignore nothing. There is always something to learn from other operators. Having said that, trust your instincts and develop your own style. There is no one “right” way to grow. Be prepared to get up early and stay late. Appreciate that producing construction plans, raising capital, growing quality cannabis and reducing your cost per pound is only part of running a successful operation. Even if you do everything else right, if you aren’t focused on your employees and corporate culture, it can all fall apart. At the end of the day, your success and happiness will in large part depend on the success and happiness of your employees.

How do you deal with burnout?

I try to keep a good balance between work, family and friends.

How do you motivate your employees/team?

The interaction and communication between our managers/leads and our employees is critical to motivating the team. We also have employee appreciation parties, we offer matching 401k, 90% health care coverage, free mental health services and more.

What keeps you awake at night?

Everything! Employee health due to COVID, plant health, financial well-being of the company, status of pending applications, compliance audits, inventory audits, etc.

What helps you sleep at night?

Having faced so many challenges over the past six years, I have come to realize that there is no problem that can’t be fixed. I may need to bring in someone smarter than me to think through the issue, but with the right people, we can overcome just about anything.

Editor’s Note: This interview has been edited for style, length and clarity.

 

Filed Under: Cannabis News

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 69
  • Go to page 70
  • Go to page 71
  • Go to page 72
  • Go to page 73
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 117
  • Go to Next Page »

Footer

  • Home
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service