Cannabis News

Besides pesticide use, another recurring issue in investigations and enforcement, and a far more serious one, is diversion. A company that adequately protects against diversion should regularly review both its seed-to-sale tracking system and its security system. The company must be able to demonstrate that every plant is on camera and in the seed-to-sale system, and that every person or package is searched.

During an audit, a regulator expects to be able to select a plant on the company’s system, see where it is in the facility, and go to that room and find the plant. This seed-to-sale software must be up to date (capturing all plants in the facility), and employees must be properly trained on it. Similarly, every employee must be searched coming into the facility and coming out of a greenhouse. Every plant must be within view of a camera. Any exceptions to these rules will raise suspicions of diversion and prompt further investigation.

Why Are Investigations So Perilous?

Any regulatory investigation is potentially devastating for at least three reasons.

First, there is always a risk that the investigation will lead into areas of federal concern. Any finding that presents as a red flag for potential diversion of product to the black market could bring federal scrutiny. Security failures, plant tracking failures, plants growing in an area where the cameras fail to reach, all could raise questions about diversion and end up triggering a federal criminal investigation.

Second, there is always a risk that a hold will be placed on the product pending the investigation. If the investigation concerns pesticides or other contamination, the state could issue a hold without warning on the basis of a possible harm to public health. A single-product company with a perishable product that is sitting on the shelf indefinitely can suffer devastating financial harm. Even if the suspension is later lifted and the company is cleared of the allegations, the company might have difficulty rebounding financially.

Third, an investigation under a new state regime will obviously lack the protocols and policies that guide a U.S. Department of Justice investigation. In a federal investigation, for instance, there are policies governing filing suit or bringing charges against a company, giving credit to a company that cooperates with an investigation, and deciding how to resolve an investigation. An investigation by a new state cannabis commission may have none of these things, so counsel needs to have a frank conversation with the investigators early on to set expectations about how the investigation will proceed, how cooperation will be treated, and what questioning will be off limits. Ultimately, however, counsel can use the absence of policies and protocols to propose a more creative, favorable resolution, especially if the company has been proactive in its own investigation and already implemented compliance improvements.

Final Thoughts

If despite the company’s best efforts, an aggressive investigation hits, don’t go it alone. Seek a qualified and experienced counsel to help you navigate the process and advocate for you. Your initial steps in responding to an investigation are critical, can affect your credibility with the investigators, and shape the outcome. Being proactive and having a credible actor on your side is key. But if you do your own review and investigation, maintain cooperative dialogue with the investigators, shut down any potential areas of federal criminal interest, and promptly remedy any issues that are identified, you can steer the company to a favorable and profitable outcome. 

A bill to decriminalize
cannabis in Louisiana went into effect on Aug. 1.

House Bill 652, which Gov. John Bel Edwards signed into law on June 15,
removes the threat of jail time and reduces the maximum penalty to a $100 fine
for first-time offenders who possess up to 14 grams of cannabis. 

As previously reported by Cannabis Business Times, under
the state’s previous legislation, individuals who possessed an ounce of cannabis or less
could be charged with 15 days in jail and a $300 fine for the first conviction.
Following that, penalties would increase for the second, third and fourth
convictions.

RELATED: Louisiana Gov.John Bel Edwards Signs Cannabis Decriminalization Bill Into Law

Now, Louisiana has joined
several other states that have implemented decriminalization bills, and made
history by becoming one of few Southern states to pass similar legislation, Lafourche
Gazette reported.

State Rep. Cedric Glover, who
sponsored the bill, said, “When I saw two city council members in my
hometown of Shreveport—one conservative and one progressive—find the common
ground needed to come together and find the way to decriminalize personal-use
marijuana possession there, I knew it was time to take this reform to the state
level. Criminalizing marijuana possession is harmful to the people of Louisiana
in so many ways, but it’s been particularly harmful for black and brown
communities, lower-income folks, and young people. My fervent hope is that this
new law will finally bring some relief and a feeling of freedom to those
communities.”

Policy and Advocacy Director
at Louisiana Progress,
Peter Robins-Brown, also weighed in on the legislation, stating it’s “the
first step in modernizing marijuana policy in Louisiana, and it’s another
milestone in the ongoing effort to address our incarceration crisis, which has
trapped so many people in a cycle of poverty and prison.”

“Now it’s time to make
sure that everyone knows their rights under this new law and that law
enforcement officers understand how to properly implement it,” Brown
added.

As sales of Delta 8 increase, hemp and cannabis industry infighting increases right along with it. Some hemp leaders say they object to Delta 8 simply because it’s intoxicating: “Hemp is nourishing….hemp is not intoxicating,” the president of the U.S. Hemp Authority President told Hemp Grower (apparently cannabinoids can only be one or the other). Others claim that Delta 8 itself is unsafe: “Very little is known about the health effects of Delta 8,” warned the media relations director for the National Cannabis Industry Association. The U.S. Cannabis Council called Delta 8’s growing popularity “a rapidly expanding crisis” in a report that includes the heading “The Health Risks of Delta-8 THC” and claims Delta 8 “presents a public health risk of potentially wider impact than the vape crisis.”

As a cannabis and hemp industry veteran and a long-time maker of numerous hemp-derived formulations (including Delta 8 products) I have to ask: who exactly is Delta 8 a crisis for, and why? I agree that we need to address the legitimate issues with Delta 8 manufacturing and create regulatory oversight that ensures consumer safety. But some Delta 8 critics may be more concerned with their own bottom line than with protecting public health. No one wants another vaping crisis, but demonizing a newly popular cannabinoid or trying to get it banned doesn’t solve the problem of an unregulated space—and it won’t end the demand for Delta 8, either.

John Kagia of New Frontier Data points out that the Delta 8 boom is “a phenomenon that has taken the industry quite by storm”—and while that storm’s rising tide saved many hemp farmers from financial ruin, it has not lifted every boat. Some cannabis leaders consider Delta 8 an incursion into “their” market. Indeed, Delta 8 can be sold in some states where cannabis remains illegal: “Unregulated Delta 8 risks becoming a competitive threat to [cannabis companies’] existing offerings, sold in states they can’t get into,” reported Tiffany Kary at the Chicago Tribune. But the threat here for cannabis operators isn’t Delta 8: it’s Prohibition. In states where cannabis is illegal, Delta 8 (which is remarkably similar in molecular structure to its federally illegal chemical cousin Delta 9) is being purchased as an alternative. Rather than villainizing a cannabinoid, let’s address retrograde, reactionary state legislatures that refuse to listen to the will of their constituents, and outdated federal laws that equate THC with heroin.

Many see Delta 8 as a threat to the licensed cannabis industry’s profit margins, not only because it can be sold in prohibition states, but because its unregulated status makes it far easier and cheaper to make and sell. Cannabis companies have to navigate an overwhelming and burdensome maze of regulatory red tape to maintain compliance, so industry-wide frustration with the total lack of oversight for Delta 8 is both understandable and justified. But calling for statewide bans on a product that competes with yours is not the solution. That’s not how markets work. (Of all people, cannabis industry professionals should know that banning cannabinoids doesn’t make them go away.) Regulating Delta 8 manufacturers and requiring rigorous product testing are reality-based measures that will make the playing field fairer for cannabis while also safeguarding public health. In the meantime, we can strongly encourage Delta 8 consumers to seek out products made by ethical operators that are transparent about their manufacturing process and provide third-party testing results—the exact same protocol we recommend for buying CBD.

The safety of Delta 8 products is another legitimate concern that’s unfortunately been distorted. Some alarmist headlines seem to equate the actual cannabinoid itself with hazardous material. One East Coast CBD manufacturer issued a press release announcing “a warning for consumers and manufacturers about potentially harmful chemicals within Delta 8 THC” with the cable-newsworthy headline “Dangerous Delta 8?” Smearing Delta 8 as an inherent health menace is both misleading and unhelpful. As Rick Trojan, vice president of the board of directors of the Hemp Industries Association points out, “Cannabinoids themselves have never in the history of humanity caused a death by themselves.” Once again, the problem here isn’t the actual cannabinoid: it’s the lack of regulation that allows Delta 8 products to be produced with no oversight or testing. But given Delta 8’s widespread popularity, short-sighted bans like the ones that have been passed in 17 different states will only increase the risk to public health. Retailers nationwide sold at least $10 million worth of Delta 8 products last year. I guarantee that demand will continue, and that these bans will simply empower an illegal market full of bad actors.

Finally, I remain shocked at the contempt aimed at Delta 8 because it’s psychoactive, and at those who consume it for just “wanting a cheap high.” As with all cannabinoids, we need more clinical research into Delta 8’s properties—but the research we do have indicates that Delta 8 actually has therapeutic properties very similar to Delta 9 THC, just with less psychoactivity. Anecdotal reports indicate that Delta 8 offers many of the health benefits of Delta 9 (help with sleep problems, stress, and pain management) without THC’s less-enjoyable side effects, like paranoia. As cannabis specialist and medical doctor Peter Grinspoon told Insider, “I can’t tell you how many patients I have who say, ‘I’d love to use medical cannabis instead of opiates for pain, except it makes me anxious.’ Delta-8 might be a very good option for people like that.” Believe it or not, there are plenty of people who are using Delta 8 for its therapeutic effects—which, in a nation where 136 citizens die from opioid overdoses daily, I think should be encouraged rather than derided.

With more than 140 known cannabinoids, it makes no sense for us as an industry to brand some of them as “bad” and others as “good.” Are we going to have these tugs-of-war and calls for bans over every single cannabinoid that becomes popular? Instead of arguing amongst ourselves, we could instead focus our efforts on legalizing all of these plant compounds, studying them to determine their capabilities, and creating standardized, evidence-based regulations and testing regimens to ensure consumer safety and adult use. Delta 8 is popular because it serves a need. Consumers want it, and it’s here to stay—the sooner that we as an industry recognize those facts, the better.

A bill to decriminalize
cannabis in Louisiana went into effect on Aug. 1.

House Bill 652, which Gov. John Bel Edwards signed into law on June 15,
removes the threat of jail time and reduces the maximum penalty to a $100 fine
for first-time offenders who possess up to 14 grams of cannabis. 

As previously reported by Cannabis Business Times, under
the state’s previous legislation, individuals who possessed an ounce of cannabis or less
could be charged with 15 days in jail and a $300 fine for the first conviction.
Following that, penalties would increase for the second, third and fourth
convictions.

RELATED: Louisiana Gov.John Bel Edwards Signs Cannabis Decriminalization Bill Into Law

Now, Louisiana has joined
several other states that have implemented decriminalization bills, and made
history by becoming one of few Southern states to pass similar legislation, Lafourche
Gazette reported.

State Rep. Cedric Glover, who
sponsored the bill, said, “When I saw two city council members in my
hometown of Shreveport—one conservative and one progressive—find the common
ground needed to come together and find the way to decriminalize personal-use
marijuana possession there, I knew it was time to take this reform to the state
level. Criminalizing marijuana possession is harmful to the people of Louisiana
in so many ways, but it’s been particularly harmful for black and brown
communities, lower-income folks, and young people. My fervent hope is that this
new law will finally bring some relief and a feeling of freedom to those
communities.”

Policy and Advocacy Director
at Louisiana Progress,
Peter Robins-Brown, also weighed in on the legislation, stating it’s “the
first step in modernizing marijuana policy in Louisiana, and it’s another
milestone in the ongoing effort to address our incarceration crisis, which has
trapped so many people in a cycle of poverty and prison.”

“Now it’s time to make
sure that everyone knows their rights under this new law and that law
enforcement officers understand how to properly implement it,” Brown
added.

A group of cannabis advocates in Ohio has launched efforts to “regulate marijuana like alcohol” in the Buckeye State after the COVID-19 pandemic stalled the campaign’s push to place adult-use legalization on the state’s 2020 ballot.

The Coalition to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol submitted summary language of an initiated statute to legalize and regulate adult-use cannabis to the Ohio Attorney General’s Office last week, and will find out whether the language is approved by Aug. 5.

The proposed law would legalize and regulate adult-use cannabis cultivation, manufacturing, testing and sales to adults 21 and older, as well as allow adults to grow six plants at home for personal use, with a maximum of 12 plants per household.

The proposal would levy a 10% tax on adult-use cannabis sales, on top of regular state and local sales taxes. The tax revenue generated would be allocated to very specific areas, including:

• 36% for a Social Equity and Jobs Fund to create a program to support social equity applicants in the adult-use business licensing process;
• 36% for a Host Community Cannabis Fund, to support communities that host adult-use dispensaries;
• 25% for a Substance Abuse and Addiction Fund, to support substance abuse education and treatment; and
• 3% for a Division of Cannabis Control, which would oversee the adult-use cannabis industry.

It replaces prohibition with a sensible framework for regulation and taxation,” Tom Haren, a spokesman for the Coalition to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol, told Cannabis Business Times and Cannabis Dispensary, adding that the proposed law will generate an estimated $400 million in new tax revenue. “It utilizes the existing medical marijuana infrastructure to provide a quick path to legal sales to adults that will provide an alternative for Ohio consumers to the unregulated market or spending their money out of state.”

The proposal allows Ohio’s existing medical cannabis operators to expand their cultivation footprint and open additional dispensaries to serve the adult-use market. Level I cultivators would receive three adult-use dispensary licenses, Level II cultivators would receive one adult-use dispensary license, and each medical cannabis dispensary that is not vertically integrated with cultivation operations would also receive one adult-use retail license.

“We wanted to make sure that this was a program that wouldn’t take three or four years to get up and running, so this way we can ensure that we can provide an alternative to the unregulated market as quickly as possible,” Haren said.

The proposed law also authorizes new licenses, including 40 Level III cultivation licenses and 50 retail licenses, with a preference to social equity applicants.

“We wanted to make sure that we were really focused on the restorative justice concept and righting the wrongs of the drug war, while at the same time ensuring that we have inclusion and participation within the industry itself,” Haren said.

The proposal also aims to bolster social equity in Ohio’s adult-use cannabis industry through the creation of a Social Equity and Jobs Program.

Under the proposal, the Ohio Department of Development would establish criteria and certify applicants for participation in the Social Equity and Jobs Program. Possible criteria could include residing in a low-income community or having past cannabis-related offenses, Haren said.

“Also, you can qualify based on social disadvantage,” he added. “A business owner or person can demonstrate membership in a racial minority group or show disadvantage due to color, ethnic origin, gender [or] physical disability.”

The Social Equity and Jobs Program would provide financial assistance, such as loans and grants, as well as technical assistance to applicants certified by the Department of Development.

“It would encourage diversity hiring practices within the cannabis industry, including plans of action to inform and educate minorities, women, veterans [and] disabled people,” Haren said. “But it would also study and fund judicial and criminal justice reform efforts, like bail, parole, and sentencing reform; sealing and expungement of records; and legal aid in community policing. It would study and propose policy reforms to address the social and economic impacts of the enforcement of marijuana laws. Perhaps most importantly, it would fund direct investment in disproportionately impacted communities to advance entrepreneurism, education, legal aid, youth development, violence prevention and the arts.”

If Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost approves the summary language of the initiated statute, the Coalition to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol will need to collect more than 130,000 signatures to send the proposed legislation to the Ohio General Assembly, which would then have four months to consider the bill.

If lawmakers ultimately decide not to pass the proposed legislation, the Coalition to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol can collect an additional 130,000 signatures to place its proposed law before voters on the November 2022 ballot.

However, Haren is optimistic about the proposal’s chances in the Ohio Legislature .

“We’re laser focused on the General Assembly,” he said. “We think this is an issue that’s popular in Ohio. Any recent poll will tell you that. We think this is an issue that’s popular across political lines, geographic lines [and] social economic lines, and we think it’s something that the Legislature will recognize. We think this is good policy. … Our expectation is we’re going to have a vigorous debate in the General Assembly, but ultimately, we’re optimistic that it will be passed and signed into law.”

The General Assembly is already considering separate adult-use legislation filed July 30 by Reps. Casey Weinstein and Terrence Upchurch, and Haren said this shows that it’s the right time to consider cannabis policy reform in Ohio.

“It shows that this is an issue that has the attention of the Legislature, and so we think it really sets the stage very well for consideration of our proposal,” he said.

In 2002, Dale Katechis revolutionized craft beer. A seemingly simple packaging decision, putting craft beer in a can, sparked an international movement and put craft beer on the map.

Before the craft beer market really gained steam, consumers associated good beer with glass bottles and larger brands selling cheap beer with cans. Through education, creative marketing and a mission to put people over profits, Dale helped the craft beer market expand massively while sticking to his roots. He also managed to convince people to drink good beer from a can.

When Dale founded Oskar Blues about twenty years ago, he didn’t just succeed in selling beer. Through collaboration and information sharing, Dale propelled craft beer as a whole and lifted all boats with a rising tide. He’s hoping to achieve similar results with his new role in the cannabis space.

Veritas Fine Cannabis, the first craft cannabis cultivator in Colorado, announced that Dale joined the company’s leadership team. Jonathan Spadafora, partner and head of marketing and sales at Veritas, told us that he’s excited about working with Dale. He says Dale is already helping them open a whole world of branding and marketing opportunities. “This is our Shark Tank moment – we’ve got someone who’s been through the fire before and will help us keep differentiating, finding new avenues and new ways to solve problems,” says Spadafora.

His colleague, Mike Leibowitz, CEO of Veritas, shares the same sentiment. “Dale maintained company culture and quality as he grew Oskar Blues into a household name,” says Leibowitz. “Maintaining our unique company culture is paramount as we work to build Veritas Fine Cannabis into the same.”

Dale’s role in the leadership team at Veritas is about sticking to his roots. Through raising industry standards in the best interest of quality products and consumers, the team at Veritas hopes to expand the brand nationally, just like Oskar Blues did, while instilling a culture of disruption and innovation without compromising quality.

We caught up with Dale to learn more about his story and what he hopes to bring to Veritas, as well as the cannabis industry at large. And yes, I had a couple of Dale’s Pale Ales (his namesake beer) later that evening.

Aaron Biros: Your success with Oskar Blues is inspiring. Taking an amazing beer like Dale’s Pale Ale and putting it in a can sounds simple to the layperson, but you launched a remarkable movement to put craft beer on the map. How do you plan to use your experience to help Veritas grow their business?

Dale Katechis: I am hoping that I can apply some of the lessons that I’ve learned through making mistakes of growing a business from the ground up. There’s obviously a lot of road blocks in cannabis and that is certainly one of the qualities of Veritas – how they’ve grown and how they had to do it in an environment that is much more challenging than the beer space.

My experience in small business development could potentially help them navigate this next renaissance of the space. I’m going to help them compete and bring the industry to a level that helps everybody win. I certainly felt that way in the craft beer movement. It was very important to us to bring the whole industry along because we were educators, we weren’t salesmen. In doing that, lifting everyone to a level where the industry benefits as a whole is a part of small business growth. To me that’s the most fulfilling part. It wasn’t just about the Oskar Blues ego at the time, it was about the craft beer scene. And what’s happening in cannabis now is very similar to what happened in the nineties with the craft beer scene.

Aaron: How did you get interested in joining the cannabis industry? What made you choose Veritas?

Dale: Most of my life, I’ve been an enjoyer of cannabis. Very recently, in the last two years, I’ve been intrigued by getting involved in the space. I’ve been shopping around for opportunities and nothing really excited me until I met Jon Spadafora and Mike Leibowitz.

It was really the two of them, the comradery and how they treat their staff that was so similar to the culture at Oskar Blues. Call it a “passion play” if you will, but this was the best opportunity to get involved with a small company and hopefully be a value add for them being in the room and sharing ideas.

Aaron: As a pioneer and leader in the craft beer space, do you notice any commonalities between the growth of the craft beer market and the legal cannabis market?

Dale: It is kind of crazy how many similarities there are. Not just the industry as a whole, but specifically the commonalities between my business, Oskar Blues, and Veritas. Overall, that’s really what allowed me to want to lean in a bit more. I wasn’t in the place where I wanted to start anything on my own. I didn’t want to be involved in fixing anything. I’ve been involved in those situations before and I’m at a point in my life that I don’t want to fix anything. Thankfully there’s nothing that needed to be fixed at Veritas. That was an exciting piece of the equation for me.

Back to your question, how the consumer looks at cannabis versus how the consumer looks at beer in the craft beer space is very similar. There is a bit of an educational piece that’s happening where it’s almost a requirement in the cannabis industry and Veritas is leading that charge out front.

That’s what’s going to catapult Veritas and other companies if they follow suit. It’s their mentality and their philosophy of bringing the industry along as a whole, and I think it’s going to end up boding well for the consumer. The craft beer space was the same.

We had to educate people on a beer can and why we felt like a can of beer was important and exciting. The industry and the consumer associated cans of beer with large, industrial lagers and the can got a bad rap as a result. Not because it wasn’t a great package, but because they were putting bad beer in a good package. So, we had a long road of educating the consumer on the benefits of the can and I think what Veritas is doing with packaging now, how they use quality as such a fundamental pillar of their business, how they focus on the employee experience and the consumer experience sets them up for success, instead of just looking at the bottom line.

I’ve said it throughout my entire career, and at Oskar Blues, we never focused on the profits. You do the right thing for the biggest group of people moving the ball forward and the bottom line takes care of itself. Jon and Mike understand that so I don’t need to fight that battle. It’s another big similarity to the craft beer space.

Aaron: How can cannabis companies keep their craft? How can we, as an industry and as individual businesses, celebrate craft cannabis and follow in the footsteps of independent craft beer?

Dale: I believe that we’re starting to see some of that consolidation [that has been taking place in the craft beer market]. We’re at a time in the market right now where companies with such a solid foundation like Veritas don’t need to go that route to grow. I think we’ll start to see a lot more consolidation in the cannabis industry soon.

Back to the point of bonding together as an industry and as a whole. Championing some of the regulatory hurdles that are coming and sticking together is crucial. One company can’t do it. There’s going to have to be some comradery in the industry among everyone trying to hold the bar up high instead of racing to the bottom. You die by a thousand cuts. I’ve lived that life in craft beer and we saw what happened 6-7 years ago when the industry overexpanded because of exponential growth. A lot of egos got in the room, and a lot of breweries spent a lot of money building out capacity and then that same year the market popped out. Everyone who didn’t have a solid foundation, got washed out of the industry.

That’s why I appreciate what Jon and Mike are doing and how they built Veritas. It’s very similar to how we built Oskar Blues. We had humble beginnings; we didn’t spend money on things outside of our core competency. We focused on quality, employee experience, morale and holding on to the culture of Oskar Blues. That’s what Jon and Mike are doing with Veritas and I think that’s really important.

Montana’s medical cannabis licensees will soon be subject to new advertising limitations and requirements.

The Montana Department of Revenue announced proposed rule changes for advertising last month and plans to hold a public hearing Aug. 13 to consider the adoption of the rules, which are slated to take effect Jan. 1, 2022—coinciding with the start of adult-use sales.

Some of the notable provisions proposed by the department include:

• Licensed businesses would be limited to two outdoor signs, which must be affixed to a building or permanent structure—billboards, banners and flags would be prohibited.
• Each outdoor sign is limited to 1,600 square inches (or roughly 11 square feet) and must include required warning language.
• A licensee may use the terms “marijuana” or “cannabis” in its signage or its electronic advertising, but may not use colloquial terms (e.g., pot, reefer, ganga, weed) or contain depictions of cannabis plants or paraphernalia.
• All advertising must be in black font with white background and include licensing, age restriction and warning statements.
• Businesses would not be allowed to advertise on social media platforms, TV, radio or in print, such as newspapers or magazines.
• Businesses would not be allowed to sponsor a charitable, sports or similar event, nor offer promotional items, giveaways, coupons or merchandise. 
• A business that advertises via webpage must utilize appropriate measures to verify that individuals visiting the webpage are over 21 years of age.

As passed under provisions of Initiative 190—the state’s voter-approved ballot measure to legalize adult-use cannabis—the Department of Revenue is now responsible for administering the entirety of Montana’s cannabis regulatory framework for both medical and adult use.

On the heels of the voter-approved measure, the Montana Legislature passed House Bill 249, which allowed medical cannabis businesses to engage in some electronic advertising activity that was previously prohibited, such as by website, as long as they didn’t show cannabis use, make health claims or target under-age consumers.

According to the notice of proposed rule changes released by the Department of Revenue last month, “H.B. 249 also confirms the Legislature’s desire to severely curtail forms of advertising pertaining to the sale, cultivation or manufacture of marijuana.”

Meanwhile, Montana’s adult-use legislation—H.B. 701—prohibits advertising of adult-use cannabis and cannabis products in any medium, including electronic media.

However, prior to passage of H.B. 249, the Montana Medical Marijuana Act did not adequately address activities that constitute as prohibited advertising for medical cannabis businesses, according to the Department of Revenue’s release.

J.J. Thomas, who owns The Higher Standard, a chain of dispensaries in Missoula, Helena, Butte and Dillon, told NBC affiliate KTVH he’s concerned the proposals are putting too many obstacles in front of providers.

“We’re already limited on things we can say, images that we can use, the way websites are accessed, signage on your buildings and all this stuff,” he said. “We’re already following a very strict guideline for all of those things that already makes it really hard on businesses to succeed in general. It sounds like they’re basically taking it down another level to make it even harder than it already is—to the point where we don’t really know, is there anything you can do?”

Concerned persons may submit their data, views or arguments, either orally or in writing, at the Department of Revenue’s hearing at 10:30 a.m. Aug. 13 in the auditorium of the Department of Public Health and Human Services Building, 111 North Sanders St., Helena, Montana.

Written data, views or arguments may also be submitted to the Department of Revenue through Aug. 23:

• By mail, Todd Olson, Department of Revenue, Director’s Office, P.O. Box 7701, Helena, Montana 59604-7701
• By phone at (406) 444-7905, or fax at (406) 444-3696
• By email, to todd.olson@mt.gov

Stated in its July notice, the department contends that providing businesses until January to comply “is necessary and is advisable because it allows a reasonable period of transition for the industry to modify or terminate non-compliant advertising or wind down contractual advertising obligations with third-party advertising sources.”