CA Norml – Page 3

Coming Events: Inaugural Meeting of Medical Use Subcommittee of CAC on 2/13/23, and more

The DCC Cannabis Advisory Committee (CAC) will be holding the inaugural meeting of its Medicinal Use subcommittee on Monday, February 13th at 1 pm. The public is invited to testify at the meeting, which will be held virtually. The meeting will be devoted to defining the subcommittee’s scope, and identifying and prioritizing of topics for discussion in 2023. See meeting notice and agenda.
This is a chance for patients, doctors and medicinal cannabis advocates to express their views about what should be done to improve medicinal cannabis regulation in California. Expect for the committee to allow two minutes per speaker at the meeting. Written comments can also be submitted in advance by emailing CAC@cannabis.ca.gov
California scored only a C+ on Americans for Safe Access’s yearly “State of the State” report, scoring states on their medical marijuana laws.
We were given credit for passing SB 1186 (requiring locals to allow medical marijuana delivery services) and AB 2188 (protecting employment rights), while noting those reforms don’t reflect in our grade this year since the laws aren’t in effect yet (and won’t be until 1/1/2024).
Our state scored 0/10 in “allow patients to medicate where they choose” and 0/5 in “independent or third-party” laboratory operations; we’re penalized 10 pts. out of 20 on “gives regulatory preference for adult use.” Respondents noted the lack of available medicinal grade products, and that dispensary products are overly focused on THC content to the detriment of more therapeutic chemical profiles.
Other coming events:
Wednesday, February 15 – 9 a.m.
CAC Cultivation Subcommittee meeting
The subcommittee will hear presentations from the California Craft Brewers Association and California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control on opportunities and regulatory structures within the alcoholic beverage industries that support small producers.
Thursday, February 16 – 9 a.m.
CAC Laboratory Subcommittee meeting
Thursday, February 16 • 6:00 p.m. to 7:30 PM
Cannabis Law in California—An Overview of Federal and State Laws
The Witkin State Law Library, part of the California State Library, will explore the history of federal and state cannabis laws with guest speaker Robert Solomon, professor of law at the UC Irvine. Topics of this webinar will discuss the history of legal and illegal cannabis, and the agencies, laws, and regulations that govern cannabis in California.
Webinar Registration
The post Coming Events: Inaugural Meeting of Medical Use Subcommittee of CAC on 2/13/23, and more appeared first on CaNorml.org.

Cannabis Bills Introduced in California for 2023

We will update this page as more bills are introduced, and alert supporters when it is time to take action on them as they advance through committees to floor votes, etc. The bills’ language may change as they move through the legislature, Cal NORML will be watchdogging!
Please support Cal NORML with a personal or business membership to help us advance cannabis consumers rights in California!

With the looming deadline of February 17 to introduce bills in California’s legislature, cannabis-related bills have begun to be proposed.
So far the top human rights proposal is SB 302 (Stern), which would extend Ryan’s Law, requiring specified health-care facilities to allow terminally ill patients to use nonsmoked (or vaped) forms of cannabis with a doctor’s recommendation. The Stern bill, if passed, would extend these protections to patients 65 and over with chronic diseases. Write A Letter to Your State Senator in Support of SB 302.
Two bills, AB 375 (Haney) and SB 285 (Allen), seek to expand on the activities that cannabis consumption lounges may engage in. The Haney bill states that a local jurisdiction may allow activities including, but not limited to, selling non-cannabis-infused food, selling nonalcoholic beverages, and selling tickets for live musical or other performances. The Allen bill would authorize a local jurisdiction to allow for the preparation or sale of noncannabis food or beverage products by a licensed retailer or microbusiness in the area where the consumption of cannabis is allowed.
AB 420 (Aguiar-Curry) would clear the way for licensed cannabis businesses to manufacture, distribute, or sell products that contain industrial hemp or cannabinoids, extracts, or derivatives from industrial hemp, if the product complies with all applicable state laws and regulations. The law would build on Asm. Aguiar-Curry’s prior hemp bills, one of which required the DCC to prepare a report on integrating hemp products into cannabis supply chain.
AB 471 (Kalra) would authorize the DCC to issue a state caterer license authorizing the licensee to serve cannabis or cannabis products at a private event approved by a local jurisdiction. A similar bill from Asm. Kalra stalled in committee last year.
SB 51 (Bradford) would allow the DCC to issue a provisional license for a local equity applicant for retailer activities, indefinitely, if the applicant meets specified requirements.
AB 351 (Chen) would allow for cannabis business license transfers.
Two budget bills, AB-221 (Ting) and SB-72 (Skinner) address the allocation of cannabis tax income, as does the Governor’s budget proposal. Read more.
Please support Cal NORML with a personal or business membership to help us advance cannabis consumers rights in California!
The post Cannabis Bills Introduced in California for 2023 appeared first on CaNorml.org.

Can You Protect Your Business by Trademarking Your Cannabis Brand?

By Arbana Lika and Hannah Stitt, Tectonic, LLP

Ideas, inventions, processes, original works of authorship and trademarks are eligible for protection through the United States government – even for cannabis industry operators! In this blog, we focus on trademark rights and how trademark applications for cannabis goods and services are treated.
WHERE THE LAW CURRENTLY STANDS
Trademark rights begin to accrue under California common law wherever a business sells goods or services on a county by county basis. If, for example, a company named “ABC Delivery Service” makes sales in San Francisco, San Mateo and Los Angeles counties under the trademark “Indicativa Delivery”, then that business is accumulating rights in each of those counties.
California State trademark registrations provide the mark holder with rights to the trademark throughout California, regardless of where sales actually occur. The State of California began issuing state trademark registrations to the cannabis industry in 2018. If ABC Delivery Service obtained a California State trademark registration for “Indicativa Delivery”, then it would not only have rights to the mark in San Francisco, San Mateo and Los Angeles, but throughout all of California.
Federal trademark rights are considered superior to either common law or state level because, once granted, the mark holder has rights in the trademark throughout the United States. Unfortunately, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) currently refuses to register marks for goods or services that are illegal under federal law, such as those involving marijuana or cannabidiol (“CBD”). It does not matter if the goods or services are legally sold under a specific state’s law.
The federal prohibition on cannabis and CBD trademark registrations is controlled by two federal acts: the Controlled Substances Act (“CSA”) and the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”). The CSA prohibits manufacturing, distributing, dispensing, or possessing certain controlled substances, including marijuana, and the associated “drug paraphernalia”. CBD is a chemical constituent of the cannabis plant that is encompassed within the CSA’s definition of marijuana.
The 2018 Farm Bill removed cannabis plants and derivatives that contain less than 0.3% THC (on a dry-weight basis) from the list of controlled substances found in the CSA. The 2018 Farm bill also technically permitted the USPTO to begin registering eligible cannabis industry trademarks. In 2019, in reaction to the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill, 7,623 new trademark applications were submitted to the USPTO for cannabis goods and services!
Unfortunately, however, CBD remains unlawful for human physical consumption under the FDCA. The 2018 Farm Bill did not affect the Food and Drug Administration’s authority under the FDCA to regulate products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds. The USPTO continues to interpret the FDCA as prohibiting the USPTO from registering trademarks for cannabis goods designed for human ingestion even though such goods are lawful under the 2018 Farm Bill.
As a result, new trademark application submissions for cannabis goods and services reduced down to only 4,105 in 2021. As of May 2022, that number was down to 955 new applications.
BRAND STRATEGIES SHIFT WITH CHANGING POLITICAL WINDS
In the recent past, cannabis industry companies were successful in obtaining federal registration of trademarks for “ancillary” goods and services that do not touch the plant such as education services, and merch. For example, the marks FOUR TWENTY ONE (US Serial No. 88168130) and BAKED BY THE RIVER (US Serial No. 90119173) are both registered trademarks for “education services” related to cannabis products. In essence, companies have been trademarking aspects of their business that are clearly lawful.
However, this strategy was called into question in recent California case law. In December 2021, the Northern District of California issued an opinion in Wunderworks, Inc. v. Dual Beverage Co., stating that the plaintiff’s federally registered trademark WUNDER (US Serial No. 88667500), for light beverages (not containing cannabis), “is likely to be invalid because plaintiff’s [other] products [sold under the same WUNDER mark] encompass products illegal under federal law, and thus lawful use in commerce cannot be established”. 21-cv-04980-SI, 6 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 6, 2021). This decision is bad news for the industry generally.
Fortunately, a significant bill introduced two years ago could alter the cannabis trademark registration landscape considerably if it becomes law: the Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act ( “MORE Act”). This act proposes to decriminalize and remove marijuana from the list of scheduled substances in the CSA. If removed from the list of scheduled substances, the criminal penalties associated with individuals who manufacture, distribute or possess marijuana would also be removed. The MORE act passed in the US House of Representatives in April 2022 and is currently in the US Senate Committee on Finance. If it passes the Senate, then non-human ingestible cannabis goods and services would become lawful and trademarks for those goods and services—that do not violate the FDCA—should be processed like any other type of application by the USPTO and proceed to registration.
Also helpful for the industry, in May 2022, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held in AK Futures LLC v. Body Street Distribution, LLC, that: “the plain and unambiguous text of the Farm Act compels the conclusion that delta-8 THC products [] are lawful” and may accrue federal trademark rights.” The combination of the MORE Act passing, and the Ninth Circuit continuing to establish law in favor of the industry, may lead to stability regarding cannabis industry trademarking.
Where does that leave California operators in terms of trademark rights? For the time being, common law rights and state level registrations should be utilized. Federal trademark strategies should be pursued, but with intention and caution.
Tectonic, LLP is here to help with your intellectual property strategy and asset management. Call (628) 203 – 8479 or email us today to learn more about how we can support your growing business.
Techtonic, LLP is a California NORML business member, see their listing here.
Guest blog posts are a free benefit for Cal NORML business members. Read about the benefits of membership here and join us today!
The post Can You Protect Your Business by Trademarking Your Cannabis Brand? appeared first on CaNorml.org.

California Legislature, Governor Issue Budget Proposals

Budget proposals from the California legislature and Governor spend cannabis tax money, and up enforcement against illegal operations

Last week, the California Assembly and Senate released budget bills for FY2023-24, including several items being funded by taxes paid by California’s cannabis consumers, including:

$163 million for the Department of Cannabis Control
$10 million to the CDTFA for the Cannabis Taxes Program
$3.2 million for the Cannabis Control Appeals Panel

Also included in the identical legislative proposals are:

$10.7 million to Fish and Wildlife ($5.9 million for biodiversity and $4.8 million for enforcement)
$10.7 million to Water Resources Control ($7.4 million for water quality and $3.3 million for water rights).
$1.7 million to the CA Dept. of Food and Agriculture, for marketing and general agricultural activities
$1.7 million to the The Department of Pesticide Regulation, with another $1 million for local assistance
$1.6 million for the Employment Development Department
$600K for the California Dept. of Public Health
$489K for the Controller

The Controller would be authorized to transfer up to $30 million to the Cannabis Tax Fund to assist with license relief for equity businesses (under Section 2649 of the Business and Professions Code). A Sustainable California Grown Cannabis Pilot Program would be funded to the tune of $8.5 million, but only if there is a budget surplus, which is looking highly unlikely this year.
Another $1.25 million is earmarked for the CDPH from the Industrial Hemp Enrollment and Oversight Fund, with up to $913K of that appropriated to “implement the regulation of industrial hemp products.” Cal NORML issued an alert about psychoactive hemp-derived product last week, and the Governor, upon signing a group of cannabis reform bills last September, said he has “directed the California Department of Public Health to convene subject matter experts to survey current scientific research and policy mechanisms to address the growing emergence of high-potency cannabis and hemp products.”
THE GOVERNOR’S PROPOSAL
In the Governor’s budget proposal, a backfill of $95.4 million would be made available should the cannabis tax revenue fail to bring in $670 million to fund:

Education, prevention, and treatment of youth substance use disorders and school retention ($401.8 million);
Clean-up, remediation, and enforcement of environmental impacts created by illegal cannabis cultivation ($133.9 million);
Public safety-related activities ($133.9 million)

The percentages of funding to these entities were set in Prop. 64, the voter measure that legalized marijuana for adult use in 2016. The backfill was a compromise reached to end the cannabis cultivation tax last year, after groups receiving cannabis tax funds objected to a tax reduction. Last year’s cannabis trailer bill AB 195 requires that, beginning on May 2025, the state cannabis excise be increased from 15% to as much as 19% to cover the lost revenue from the cultivation tax, if needed.
Among the new cannabis laws that took effect on Jan. 1 is AB 2925 (Cooper), which requires the State Department of Health Care Services, on or before July 10, 2023, to provide to the Legislature a spending report of funds from the Youth Education, Prevention, Early Intervention and Treatment Account paid for by the Cannabis Tax Fund for the 2021–22 and 2022–23 fiscal years, and requires the department, on or before July 10, 2024, and annually thereafter, to provide that spending report for the prior fiscal year.
Enforcement is highlighted in the Governor’s Budget Summary, which mentions the California Unified Cannabis Enforcement Task Force, a partnership among the Office of Emergency Services, Department of Cannabis Control, and the Department of Fish and Wildlife, which “has convened several state, federal and local entities to strengthen enforcement coordination statewide utilizing existing resources.” To “further reinforce enforcement efforts,” the proposed budget includes $1.9 million to establish a Department of Cannabis Control office in Fresno, plus cannabis tax funding for the following:

Board of State and Community Corrections Grants – $83.9 million
Water Resources Control Board – $6.4 million, increasing over time to $13.1 million
Department of Fish and Wildlife – Cannabis Regulatory and Enforcement Program – $3.8 million

For a total of $112 + million in new enforcement funds.
“It’s discouraging that California’s budget proposal, rather than offering tax relief to licensed cannabis businesses that would allow them to compete against illicit providers, proposes instead to spend millions more on enforcement against unlicensed marijuana operations, something that has never been more than an expensive, failed policy,” said Ellen Komp, Deputy Director of California NORML. “While we sympathize with licensed operators who are attempting to compete with unlicensed ones, we would rather see a lowering of the bar to get licensed for smaller operators, and tax relief for all, especially for medical patients.”
MORE ENFORCEMENT, BIGGER CULTIVATION LICENSES ON THE WAY
In October 2022, AG Rob Bonta announced the state CAMP (Campaign Against Marijuana Planting) program seized nearly one million illegally cultivated cannabis plants and more than 200,000 pounds of illegally processed cannabis. This is somewhat less than 2021 CAMP eradication numbers, which have remained relatively flat since 2012. Meanwhile, the DEA announced last June that it seized nearly 5 million plants from California on 2021 as part of its Domestic Cannabis Suppression / Eradication Program, a significant increase from 2020’s figure of 3.7 million plants.
The AG also announced that DOJ will be phasing out CAMP in favor of a year-round multiagency program, EPIC (Eradication and Prevention of Illicit Cannabis), aimed at human trafficking and environmental crimes at illicit cannabis grows. No funding was announced for the EPIC program. The announcement came after a series in the LA Times and national reports on NBC News reported human trafficking and other crimes taking place at large-scale, illicit cannabis cultivation sites in California, and AG Bonta toured the Inland Empire region in a flyover and was interviewed on NBC.
The LA Times, High Times, and others have also published stories about the challenges facing small California cannabis farmers in the wake of legalization. This year, outdoor cannabis cultivators can get licensed for over one acre, something that was written into Prop. 64 anticipating that federal legalization may have taken place by now (it hasn’t). Since cultivators have been permitted to “license stack” up until now, any protections for small growers were negligible up until now anyway.
Nicole Elliott, head of the CA Dept. of Cannabis Control, told the LA Times she believes California’s licensed crop is about 3.6 million pounds, in a state that consumed less than 2 million pounds. Natalynne DeLapp, executive director of the Humboldt County Growers Alliance, told High Times, “Currently, there are 1,775 acres of cannabis licensed by the state, which conservatively produces more than six million pounds of cannabis. CDFA [California Department of Food and Agriculture] has estimated in its Standard Regulatory Impact Analysis in 2017 that California likely consumes 2.5 million pounds of cannabis. Not all cannabis consumed in California is purchased at legal retailers, so a very conservative estimate is that we’re producing twice what the legal market can consume, but in reality it’s probably worse than that.”
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION OPPORTUNITIES
The CA Cannabis Advisory Committee (CAC), which sends recommendations to the DCC for regulations, has two subcommittee meetings this week: The Cultivation Subcommittee will meet on Thurs., Jan. 19 at 9 a.m. and the Public Health and Community Impact Subcommittee will meet on Fri., Jan. 20, also at 9 a.m. The public is invited to attend.
The post California Legislature, Governor Issue Budget Proposals appeared first on CaNorml.org.

Cal NORML Safety Warning: THC-O Acetate and Psychoactive Hemp Products

A new study by Benowitz et al. [1] raises safety concerns about THC-O acetate, a potent psychoactive cannabinoid derived from hemp that is being marketed on the internet and unlicensed stores. The authors warn that THC-O acetate could potentially cause EVALI lung disease when vaped or smoked. THC-O acetate, which is chemically synthesized from hemp CBD, has never been tested for safety in human studies. It is said to be three times more potent than delta-9 THC, the psychoactive ingredient of natural cannabis.
THC-O acetate shares structural similarities with Vitamin-E acetate, an additive in unlicensed vape cartridges linked to the 2019-20 outbreak of EVALI lung disease, which sickened 249 Californians, five of them fatally. When heated in a vape pen, both substances produce ketene, a “highly potent lung toxicant” and likely cause of EVALI. According to the authors, toxicity could be acute or chronic depending on the dose and duration of use. Vape cartridges containing THC-O acetate are readily available on the internet from various unlicensed sources.
THC-O acetate is one of several novel, psychoactive cannabinoids derived from hemp that are now available on the national unlicensed hemp market, among them THC-P, THCjd. THC-H, THC-B, HHC, and Delta-10 THC. Unlike THC and CBD, the primary cannabinoids in natural cannabis, none have been tested for safety in human subjects. Some are reported to be much more potent than THC.
Another popular hemp-derived cannabinoid, Delta-8 THC, although weaker than Delta-9 THC and thought to be safe in humans, has generated FDA health warnings following hundreds of consumer complaints and poison cases. Concerns have been raised about impurities and contaminants in Delta-8 hemp products introduced by the conversion process from hemp CBD. Safer, tested Delta-8 products are available from California’s licensed cannabis manufacturers and dispensaries.
The sale of psychoactive hemp derivatives was recently deemed legal under federal law by a Ninth Circuit Court decision (AK Futures v. Boyd Street Distro). Legal experts have questioned the decision, noting that synthetic cannabinoids are illegal under the Federal Analogue Act. Under the 2018 federal Farm Bill, cannabis with less that 0.3% THC is legal to grow, and its products can be sold nationally. Despite this limit, some companies are selling hemp-derived products with enough total delta-9 THC to produce a psychoactive effect in consumers.
California’s industrial hemp law, which is overseen by the California Department of Public Health (CDPH), currently disallows the sale of hemp products with active cannabinoids other than CBD [2]. However, enforcement is spotty, and unlicensed products remain widely available via internet and retail outlets like gas stations and smoke shops in California. “It’s ironic that the federal government has opened the door wide for untested and potentially toxic new synthetic cannabinoids, but still bans natural cannabis despite its millennia-long record of safe human use,” says Cal NORML director Dale Gieringer.
Cal NORML strongly advises consumers to avoid hemp products with psychoactive cannabinoids, especially novel ones stronger than THC, whose safety is particularly suspect. CBD products may be safely obtained from state-registered industrial hemp product manufacturers, whose products must be tested for safety and cannabinoid content. Under state law, hemp products should have a batch number and a label, website, QR code or barcode linking to the laboratory test results that state the levels of cannabinoids, total THC, and presence of contaminants, as well as the address and phone number of the manufacturer. Violations can be reported to CDPH.
CBD products may also be safely obtained from state-licensed cannabis dispensaries, typically in combination with THC. Dispensaries also offer other, less common cannabinoids that are deemed safe for human use, among them CBN, CBG, CBC, THCV, THC-A, CBD-A, and Delta-8 THC.
California NORML, the state chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, has advocated for the rights and safety of cannabis consumers in California since 1972. More at: www.CaNORML.org
[1] Benowitz et al., “Vaping THC-O Acetate: Potential for Another EVALI Epidemic” Journal of Medical Toxicology, 12 Dec 2022.
[2] CBG, a non-psychoactive cannabinoid common in immature marijuana plans, is also permissible.
The post Cal NORML Safety Warning: THC-O Acetate and Psychoactive Hemp Products appeared first on CaNorml.org.

New California Cannabis Laws for 2023

TAKE THE 2023 CAL NORML SURVEY. WE WANT TO HEAR FROM OUR SUPPORTERS ABOUT YOUR PRIORITIES FOR NEXT YEAR.

PLEASE SUPPORT CAL NORML IN 2023
Now is the time to build on the progress we made in 2022. Please support Cal NORML with a membership donation. Click Here to Donate or see our Cal NORML store and become a member.

New cannabis laws protecting California cannabis users’ medical rights, parental rights and more took effect on January 1, 2023.
California NORML is committed to the implementation of these reforms, and would like to hear from anyone with questions about their rights under the new laws, or who is continuing to experience discrimination against cannabis consumers that is now illegal in California. Contact us here.
Download Cal NORML’s updated pamphlet California Consumers’ Guide to State Marijuana Laws (printable on 8 1/2 x 14″ paper).
Pain Patients and Other Cannabis Users’ Medical Rights Protected
AB 1954 (Quirk) to protect the right of patients to medical treatment if they use marijuana, and the right of physicians and clinics to treat them, is now Section 2228.5 of the California Business and Professions Code.
“Many physicians are under the mistaken impression that they can’t prescribe medication to patients who test positive for cannabis,” said Dale Gieringer, Director of Cal NORML, which sponsored AB 1954. In California, many health plans, health systems, and hospitals require patients to sign agreements not to use illicit or controlled substances for the duration of their prescribed opioid treatment and agree to drug testing, and deny them prescription drugs if they test positive for THC.
The new law clarifies that physicians cannot be punished for treating patients who use cannabis, notwithstanding its illicit status under federal law and states that “the use of medical cannabis that has been recommended by a licensed physician shall not constitute the use of an illicit substance” and that “a physician and surgeon shall not automatically deny treatment or medication to a qualified patient based solely on a positive drug screen for THC or report of medical cannabis use without first completing a case-by-case evaluation of the patient that includes, but is not limited to, a determination that the qualified patient’s use of medical cannabis is medically significant to the treatment or medication.”
Parental Rights of Cannabis Consumers Expanded
AB 2595 (Jones-Sawyer), requiring the State Department of Social Services to treat a parent’s use of cannabis in the same manner as alcohol or legally prescribed medication, is now Section 328.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, which states, “The State Department of Social Services shall update all regulations, all-county letters, and other instructions relating to the investigation of a minor who may be described by Section 300 to ensure that, when a social worker is investigating an alleged case of child abuse or neglect, a parent’s or guardian’s use or possession of cannabis is treated in the same manner as a parent’s or guardian’s use or possession of alcohol and legally prescribed medication.” We have been assured that DSS is in the process of producing these updates to inform case workers of the new policy.
The law expands on protections in Prop. 64, the Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) that was passed by California voters in 2016, which codified CA H&SC 11362.84 stating, “The status and conduct of a qualified patient who acts in accordance with the Compassionate Use Act [Prop. 215/medical marijuana] shall not, by itself, be used to restrict or abridge custodial or parental rights to minor children in any action or proceeding under the jurisdiction of family or juvenile court.” Those rights are now extended to recreational cannabis users in California.
Terminally Ill Patients’ Right to Use Cannabis Protected in Health-Care Facilities
SB 988 (Hueso) to address “Ryan’s Law” allowing terminally ill patients to use cannabis in healthcare facilities, amends CA Health and Safety Codes 1649.1-1649.5, clarifying that marijuana’s continuing illegal status under federal law does not interfere with the state mandate, first passed as SB 311 (2021-22), to allow hospice and other terminally ill patients to use non-smoked forms of cannabis, if self administered. “Terminally ill” is defined to mean “a medical condition resulting in a prognosis of life of one year or less, if the disease follows its natural course.”
Health care facilities are defined to include any “health facility specified in subdivision (a), (c), (f), (i), or (n) of Section 1250,” meaning general acute care hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, special hospitals, congregate living health facilities, and hospice facilities. Chemical dependency recovery hospitals, state hospitals, and emergency departments are excluded from the law, which states that all facilities must “prohibit smoking or vaping as methods to use medicinal cannabis.” Health care facilities are required to “develop and disseminate written guidelines for the use and disposal of medicinal cannabis within the health care facility pursuant to this chapter.”
Expungement for Past Cannabis Crimes To Be Expedited
AB 1706 by Assemblymember Mia Bonta (D-Oakland) amended Section 11361.9 of the Health and Safety Code to ensure that Californians with old cannabis-related convictions will finally have those convictions sealed. This law expands on AB 1793 (2018) by Rob Bonta, imposing new deadlines on county courts and the state Department of Justice to implement expungement or resentencing of past cannabis crimes now made legal or lesser crimes. It requires county courts to issue an order recalling or dismissing the sentence, dismissing and sealing, or redesignating the conviction no later than March 1, 2023, and requires the court to update its records accordingly, and to notify the Department of Justice. And it requires the Department of Justice, on or before July 1, 2023, to complete the update of the state summary criminal history information database, and conduct an awareness campaign so that individuals that may be impacted by this process become aware of methods to verify updates to their criminal history. Until June 1, 2024, the DOJ is required, in consultation with the Judicial Council, to produce a quarterly joint progress report to the Legislature.
Read more about cannabis record expungement.
Cannabis Business Bills
Several bills regulating cannabis business bills have passed into law. Among them:
• AB 2210 by Assemblymember Bill Quirk (D-Hayward) expands access by allowing venues with liquor licenses to host cannabis events. It prohibits the DCC from denying an application for a state temporary event license solely on the basis that there is a license issued pursuant to the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act for the proposed premises of the event.
• AB 2155 (Villapudua) defines the term “cannabis beverages” as a form of edible cannabis product. The law does not change the current requirements for beverages, which still must abide by edible cannabis product regulations. Rather, it could open the door for future delineation between solid versus liquid edible products for regulation. AB 1646 (Chen) allows cannabis beverages to be packaged in clear containers.
• AB 2568 (Cooley) creates a ”safe harbor” by stating that an individual or firm providing insurance or related services to a state legal cannabis business does not commit a crime under California law solely for providing that insurance or related service.
• AB 2925 (Cooper) requires the State Department of Health Care Services, on or before July 10, 2023, to provide to the Legislature a spending report of funds from the Youth Education, Prevention, Early Intervention and Treatment Account paid for by the Cannabis Tax Fund for the 2021–22 and 2022–23 fiscal years, and requires the department, on or before July 10, 2024, and annually thereafter, to provide that spending report for the prior fiscal year.
Veterinary Bill
AB 1885 by Assemblymember Ash Kalra (D-San Jose) prohibits the Veterinary Medical Board from disciplining a veterinarian who recommends the use of cannabis on an animal, unless the veterinarian is employed by or has an agreement with a cannabis licensee. The law requires the board to adopt guidelines by January 1, 2024 for veterinarians to follow when recommending cannabis. It also requires that cannabis products intended for animals comply with concentration and other standards adopted by regulations of the department, and requires the Department of Cannabis Control to promulgate regulations for animal product standards no later than July 1, 2025. It prohibits the marketing or sale of those products before the regulations take effect.
Laws Taking Effect in the Future
Laws taking effect in 2024 or later are:
• AB 2188 (Quirk), Cal NORML’s sponsored bill to protect employment rights of cannabis consumers. The new law, which will go into effect on January 1, 2024, will ban most California employers from discriminating against workers or job applicants based on drug testing for inactive cannabis metabolites—in particular, urine tests, which can detect a worker’s cannabis use days or weeks before they show up for work and have no correlation with on-the-job impairment. The California Chamber of Commerce requested delaying implementation of the bill for one year, in order to give employers time to phase out urine testing in favor of more scientifically accurate methods like performance testing or oral swabs.
• SB 1186 by Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) preempts local bans on medicinal cannabis delivery, expanding patients’ access to legal, regulated cannabis products and will take effect on January 1, 2024.
• SB 1326 by Senator Anna Caballero (D-Merced), which creates a process for California to enter into agreements with other states to allow cannabis transactions with entities outside California, passed this year but will only take effect when the federal laws change.

CAL NORML’S PLANS FOR 2023

Watchdog implementation of AB 1954 (pain patients’ rights) and other bills
Inform public and employers about AB 2188 (employment rights), taking effect in 2024
Push for federal rescheduling and legalization
Support cannabis industry efforts towards public education on high-potency cannabis products
Advance greater access and less taxation for medical patients
Support local activists in opening more cannabis retail outlets and consumption lounges, while fighting off smoking/vaping bans in apartments
Support parental rights for cannabis users, and end drug testing of newborns and their mothers
Watchdog AG Bonta’s new EPIC program against illegal cannabis grows

PLEASE SUPPORT CAL NORML IN 2023
Your support is crucial to our efforts going forward. Join Cal NORML with a personal or business membership and keep our advocacy efforts going in 2023.
The post New California Cannabis Laws for 2023 appeared first on CaNorml.org.

2023 California Cannabis Regulations Update: 6 Big Changes for Dispensaries

By Meadow

As of January 1, 2023, the state of California will require several changes from its cannabis supply chain in response to the adoption of the Department of Cannabis Control’s (DCC) new consolidated regulations and passage of AB-195. These changes include updates to the calculation and point of excise tax collection, delivery trunk limits, making curbside pickup permanent, new inventory discrepancy thresholds, increased restrictions on providing non-cannabis goods for free as part of a business promotion, as well as allowing retailers (with local jurisdiction approval) to sell prepackaged non-cannabis infused and non-alcoholic food and beverages.
Overall, the changes to California’s cannabis operations going into 2023 are designed to improve the industry’s regulation and compliance, as well as generate additional revenue for the state. By implementing these changes, California is aiming to take steps that ensure its cannabis industry is sustainable and responsible, while also meeting the needs of its consumers. For retailers, the changes are yet another case of needing to adapt, but also a great opportunity to review and strengthen your operations.
1. AB-195 – Excise Tax Collection at the Point-of-Sale
One of the major changes under AB-195 is the implementation of the cannabis excise tax at the point-of-sale. Beginning in 2023, buyers of cannabis or cannabis products in California will be subject to a 15% excise tax on their gross receipts. This tax is intended to generate additional revenue for the state, which can be used to fund programs related to public safety, research, and education. Previously it was collected by distributors and remitted quarterly to CDTFA for arm’s-length transactions (taking place between independent parties).
Calculating the excise tax correctly, as well as compounding the sales tax and the variations of taxation on cannabis and non-cannabis products, is critical. Also, calculating 2022 inventory vs 2023 inventory to make sure the taxes are reported correctly is the only way to make sure you can claim the full credit you are eligible for from CDTFA.
It’s essential that all cannabis retailers review their tax settings, collections, and CDTFA payment schedule with a tax professional to ensure they’re remaining compliant.
At Meadow, our cannabis POS system is already set up to make it easy to see what excise has already been paid and what’s left to remit. We’re ready for this regulatory change and launched an easy way to see which products were received before January 1 and have excise already paid, and which products were received after January 1 and are not eligible for a credit.
2. §15402: Customer Access to the Retail Area via Curbside Pickup
Under the new regulations, storefront retailers will also be allowed to permanently offer curbside delivery as an option for their customers and clarifies the requirements for curbside delivery. This change is designed to improve customer access to cannabis products and make it more convenient for people to complete their purchase.
3. §15034: Significant discrepancy in Inventory at any point in time
Another key aspect of the consolidated regulations is the inclusion of new methods for enforcing inventory discrepancy thresholds. Specifically, the regulations specify that retailers may not have an inventory discrepancy of 5% or higher. This will now be measured by comparing your physical inventory to your inventory in Metrc.
This change is meant to help ensure that retailers are accurately tracking their inventory and preventing any potential loss, theft, diversion, or inversion.
This also means that if your POS does not accurately reflect your physical inventory, and if your Metrc account does not accurately reflect your POS inventory, you have no way of knowing if you are in compliance.
Meadow’s integration gives our partners the confidence that Metrc and POS inventories are an accurate reflection of one another.
4. §15040.2. Prohibited Business Promotions.
Additionally, the regulations include new restrictions on the provision of free non-cannabis goods and business promotions. Under the new rules, licensed retailers are now additionally prohibited from providing free non-cannabis goods to any person, and they are also prohibited from allowing individuals who are not employed by the retailer to provide free cannabis goods on the licensed premises. As before, licensees are prohibited from giving away any amount of cannabis or cannabis products as part of a business promotion.
5. §15407 – Sale of Non-Cannabis Goods
This allows retailers operating a consumption area to sell prepackaged non-cannabis-infused and non-alcoholic food and beverages if allowed by the local jurisdiction.
We see this as a move in the right direction; consumption lounges should encourage lounging. Customers are more likely to spend time in a consumption lounge and have a positive experience when given the ability to purchase non-medicated food and beverages alongside their joints and dabs. Hydrating and eating are simple ways consumers can manage their high, and we see no reason why local jurisdictions should ban this new state-approved measure.
6. §15418: Cannabis Goods Carried During Delivery
From our perspective, the most significant operational change under the consolidated regulations is the increase in the value of cannabis goods that may be carried during delivery to $10,000. Previously the limit was set at $5,000, with at most $3,000 of which could consist of unordered inventory. But in the new regulations, this limit will be increased to $10,000 and does not contain any restriction on the amount of that total which must be pre-ordered.
This means cannabis delivery operators have significantly more flexibility in the number of products that they’re able to load into their delivery vehicles, eliminating the back-and-forth trips between the inventory hub to pick up orders, saving time and gas money when they deliver into their busiest spots or cannabis deserts without dispensaries nearby.
Using Meadow’s advanced dynamic delivery system in California (also called ice cream truck or trunk-by-trunk delivery), each vehicle becomes its own inventory hub with a designated service area and customized menu offerings, making it possible to deliver to quickly customers within custom delivery zones. The new increased value of available inventory in the vehicle means this sales channel has the potential to help dispensaries become much more efficient and increase revenue potential. And with Meadow’s auto-dispatch functionality, delivery orders are automatically assigned to vehicles within that zone without manual labor. It’s never been easier to set custom delivery regions, analyze sales by ZIP code for smarter inventory stocking, send geo-targeted SMS marketing to former customers in that area with discount codes or special offers to drive sales, and then deliver within minutes. Within Meadow, it’s easy to set up taxes by zones to ensure you’re accounting for different sales and local cannabis tax rates everywhere you deliver.
(We dove deep into the benefits of Dynamic Delivery in the first Meadow Memo).

The post 2023 California Cannabis Regulations Update: 6 Big Changes for Dispensaries appeared first on CaNorml.org.

Cal NORML’s 2022 Accomplishments and Plans for 2023

TAKE THE 2023 CAL NORML SURVEY. WE WANT TO HEAR FROM OUR SUPPORTERS ABOUT THEIR PRIORITIES FOR 2023.

It was a banner year for cannabis reform measures in 2022, in no small part due to the efforts of California NORML and our supporters.
LEGISLATIVE GAINS
Cal NORML lead a successful legislative effort to protect the employment rights of California’s cannabis consumers, along with a second bill to protect medical marijuana patients against discrimination by their doctors. The bills were part of a group of reform bills that Cal NORML advocated for and activated our members to support, through several committees and floor votes in both houses of the legislature, all the way through their signing by the Governor. These laws will help protect parental rights, expunge past marijuana convictions, expand local access for medical patients, allow terminally ill patients to use cannabis in hospital settings, permit veterinarians to recommend cannabis for pets, among other reforms. Read more.
In May we held our first post-COVID Lobby Day in Sacramento, bringing dozens of citizen lobbyists from around the state to meet with lawmakers and their staffs and advance our reform bills. Through our email network and social media alerts, we generated over 5200 letters to lawmakers on eleven different bills, most of which were signed into law.
Allied with industry groups and others, our efforts towards tax relief for California cannabis businesses bore fruit when legislation to eliminate the cannabis cultivation tax passed into law. We testified for tax reform and worked with the Governor’s office and legislators to advance this measure.
OTHER ACTIVITIES

Cal NORML issued two election guides in 2022, one for the June primary and a second for the November general election, publishing candidates’ positions and records on cannabis reform, and letting our members know about propositions on local ballots, as well as deadlines to register to vote.
In July, Cal NORML participated in the historic first-ever cannabis exhibit and competition at the California State Fair in Sacramento. We did outreach to attendees from a Cal NORML table and hosted panels on Sustainability and Equity, as well as the Past, Present and Future of Cannabis Reform in California.
In August, we hosted an online webinar for attorneys and the public, “Leading Issues in Cannabis Law and Policy” featuring our new board members Lauren Mendelsohn and Hirsh Jain as part of our commitment towards keeping Californians informed of current cannabis laws and regulations.
In September, Cal NORML director Dale Gieringer picked up a “High Achievement” award from Oaksterdam University, which announced it would be establishing four home-grow yearly scholarships in his name.
We wrapped up the year in November by sponsoring a party celebrating the 50th anniversary of the ballot measure that kicked off marijuana reform in California and beyond, and lead to the founding of Cal NORML. The California Marijuana Initiative of 1972 was funded by the sales of hemp rolling papers and sponsored by Amorphia, the grass roots organization that morphed into Cal NORML in 1974.
As always, Cal NORML works to inform the public about developments in cannabis. We publish an informative website, www.CaNORML.org and put out a weekly email blast summarizing the week’s state, local and federal news stories along with Action Alerts and notices of Coming Events. We regularly publish updates on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and Instagram.
PRESS COVERAGE
Cal NORML’s Deputy Director Ellen Komp was interviewed on KNX radio in LA and CBS’s Channel 8 in San Diego about the announcement from President Biden that he would be pardoning anyone convicted under federal law for pot possession, and calling for HHS and DOJ to review the scheduling status of cannabis.
Dale was quoted in Marijuana Moment about DOT’s move to switch from urine testing to more scientific oral swabs for truck drivers. He was interviewed on KRON-TV about the pain patients’ rights bill, and in LA Weekly when we worked to fight off a bill that would have re-felonized the cultivation of more than 6 marijuana plants.

CAL NORML’S PLANS FOR 2023

PLEASE SUPPORT CAL NORML IN 2023!
Now is the time to build on the gains we made in 2022! Please support Cal NORML with a membership donation. Click Here to Donate or see our Cal NORML store and purchase merchandise.
The post Cal NORML’s 2022 Accomplishments and Plans for 2023 appeared first on CaNorml.org.

50th Anniversary Presentations

Hear the stories from the activists from the 1972 California Marijuana InitiativeTickets to view the Zoom recording of the 11/12 program are available! Visit this link and click on the Zoom option. You will then be sent a link to view the 2-hour, informative and fun program featuring Keith Stroup, John Sinclair, Gordon Brownell, Michael & Michelle Aldrich and more.

The post 50th Anniversary Presentations appeared first on CaNorml.org.

CA Voters Pass 25 Local Cannabis Measures, Reject 10

Thirty-five local ballot measures in 30 California cities or counties address cannabis licensing and/or taxation on the November 8, 2022 ballot (or the 10/19 ballot – Redondo Beach). Of those, 20 cities or counties passed a total of 25 cannabis measures, and 10 cities or counties failed to pass 10 measures, including Sacramento County where a majority of voters (53%) approved a taxation measure that required a supermajority vote.

Results
City or County
County
Title

PASSED
South Lake Tahoe
El Dorado
Measure G

PASSED
McFarland
Kern
Measure O

PASSED
Avenal
Kings
Measure C

PASSED
LA County
Los Angeles
Measure C

PASSED
Claremont
Los Angeles
Measure CT

PASSED
Cudahy
Los Angeles
Measure BA

PASSED
Lynwood
Los Angeles
Measure TR

PASSED
Santa Monica
Los Angeles
Measure HMP

PASSED
Monterey
Monterey
Measure J

PASSED
Pacific Grove
Monterey
Measures O &P

PASSED
Huntington Beach
Orange
Measure O

PASSED
Laguna Woods
Orange
Measure T

PASSED
Montclair
San Bernardino
Measure R

PASSED
Encinitas
San Diego
Measure L

PASSED
San Diego County
San Diego
Measure A

PASSED
Healdsburg
Sonoma
Measure M

PASSED
Exeter
Tulare
Measure B

PASSED
Tulare (city)
Tulare
Measure Y

PASSED
Woodland
Yolo
Measure K

PASSED/FAILED
El Segundo
Los Angeles
Measures Y & W

PASSED/FAILED
Hermosa Beach
Los Angeles
Measures M & T

PASSED/FAILED
South El Monte
Los Angeles
Measures CM & X

FAILED
Lassen County
Lassen
Measure S

FAILED
Susanville
Lassen
Measure R

FAILED
Baldwin Park
Los Angeles
Measure CB

FAILED
Manhattan Beach
Los Angeles
Measures MB & V

FAILED
Redondo (10/19)
Los Angeles
Measure E

FAILED
Sausalito
Marin
Measure K

FAILED
Sacramento County
Sacramento
Measure B

FAILED
Red Bluff
Tehama
Measure E

Los Angeles County saw the greatest number of cannabis ballot measures, leading with Measure C to tax and allow businesses in unincorporated parts of the county carrying with nearly 60% of the vote. The tax rates in that measure are relatively modest compared with other cities and counties, starting at 4% for retail businesses (on top of 15% state excise taxes and sales and use taxes).
Several cities in LA county had competing measures either proposed by business interests some said aimed for monopolies, versus measures put on the ballot by city councils. Both cannabis measures failed to advance reform in Manhattan Beach; in South El Monte Measure CM to allow one adult-use/medical with option of up to three total after the measure’s first year passed, while Measure X to allow five dispensaries plus other businesses failed. In Hermosa Beach, Measure M to end the city’s existing ban on cannabis businesses earned only 27% of the vote, while Measure T to tax such businesses carried with 66%. Similar results were seen in El Segundo, where the tax measure passed by 72%. Taxation/licensing measures carried in Claremont, Cudahy, Lynwood, Santa Monica while Baldwin Park voters nixed cannabis businesses in their city.
Elsewhere, Orange County voters in Huntington Beach and Laguna Woods passed cannabis measures, as did voters in the city of Monterey and Pacific Grove, where both an advisory licensing measure and a tax measure passed. Cannabis measures carried in South Lake Tahoe, McFarland, Avenal, Healdsburg, Exeter, Tulare, Woodland, Encinitas, and San Diego county. They failed in Lassen County, Susanville, and Red Bluff. Sausalito’s failed measure was seen as a vote against a monopoly.
Read more about the measures and all Nov. 8 election results.
The post CA Voters Pass 25 Local Cannabis Measures, Reject 10 appeared first on CaNorml.org.

Blog