In honor of California NORML’s Director Dale Gieringer, and 4/20, Cal NORML is awarding four scholarships courtesy of Oaksterdam University.
Choose from two self-paced online courses:Home GrowValue $295Learn to successfully grow and harvest high-quality cannabis plants from your own garden or tent.BudtendingValue $486Get in on the ground floor at a dispensary and share your passion for the plant with a focus on health, wellness, and customer service.Submit the complete form below by 5/20/2023 to be considered for selection of one of four single course scholarships. One scholarship per person.All entrants will be added to California NORML’s email list; you may unsubscribe at any time; we do not sell or share our email list. In your submission, please address these questions:Specify which course you’d like to receive a scholarship to attend.Tell us a bit about yourself and your background.Why are you interested in this course?How would this scholarship impact your future?
Error: Contact form not found.
The post Dale Gieringer Scholarship at Oaksterdam University appeared first on CaNorml.org.
Join Cal NORML and ASA (Americans for Safe Access) at Lobby Day 2022 as a citizen lobbyist for your rights as a cannabis consumer in California!
Buy your tickets for Lobby Day and the Afterparty
Sponsor Lobby Day!
This year’s Lobby Day will be held on Monday, May 8, 2023. We will meet in the morning at the Capitol Events Center, where you will learn about pending bills and get lobbying tips. In the afternoon, you will meet with lawmakers or their staffs at appointments we will set for you once you sign up to attend. The day will end with an afterparty and reception on the patio at Cafeteria 15L.
Some of the bills on which we expect to be lobbying include:
• SB 302 (Stern) 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 to patients 65 and over with chronic diseases. Write A Letter to Your State Senator in Support of SB 302.
• AB 374 (Haney) and SB 285 (Allen), which seek to expand on the activities that cannabis retailers 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. Tell Your Assemblymember to Support AB 374 and Tell Your State Senator to Support SB 285.
• AB-1094 (Wicks) would prohibit medical personnel from performing a drug or alcohol test or screen on a pregnant person, perinatal person, or newborn without the prior written and verbal informed consent, and would require the test or screen to be medically necessary to provide care.
• 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. Tell Your State Senator to Support SB 51.
And others, as they are introduced or amended. Read more about this year’s proposed cannabis bills.
SCHEDULE
MORNING
Capitol Event Center – 1020 11th St. (between J and K Streets)
10 AM – 12 PM; doors open at 9:15
Gather for training/legislative overview; pick up your afternoon appointment information
LUNCH BREAK (on your own)
AFTERNOON
1 PM – 5 PM
Attendees will go to the Capitol for appointments with your elected representatives or their staffs.
EVENING
Afterparty / Reception
5 PM – 7 PM
Cafeteria 15L (UNCONFIRMED)
Lobby Day Ticket 2023
$25.00 – $50.00
Buy now
Sponsor Lobby Day!
To learn more, write here.
The post Join Us at Lobby Day on May 8, 2023 in Sacramento! appeared first on CaNorml.org.
BECOME A SPONSOR TODAY!
California NORML and ASA (Americans for Safe Access) are pleased to announce Citizen Lobby Day, taking place May 8, 2023 in Sacramento, CA. Our members and coalition partners will host a lobby day and training in support of state legislation to better regulate cannabis and protect consumers in California.
The California Citizen Lobby Day offers an exciting and unique opportunity to reach out to the medical and adult-use cannabis community. Becoming a sponsor of the Citizen Lobby Day is an excellent way to maximize your visibility to full or targeted groups of conference attendees. We offer a variety of options to suit every budget and marketing strategy.
Becoming a sponsor is a great way to help get legislation passed that is beneficial to cannabis consumers and the legal cannabis industry. It is also a great way to position and brand your business or organization as one that is helping solve problems and move the cannabis issues forward.
SPONSORSHIP LEVELS
• $5,000 Platinum
• $2,500 Gold
• $1000 Silver
• $500 Bronze
WHAT YOU GET
$500 Bronze
• Text listing in Lobby Day Materials
• Logo with link on the Lobby Day Website
• Thanked on Event Facebook page and Cal NORML LinkedIn page
• Corporate Materials placement on or near the Registration table
• Two free tickets to the event
$1000 Silver
• All of the above, plus:
• Thanked on Cal NORML Twitter account (15K followers)
• One Cal NORML eblast sponsorship (33K followers)
$2,500 Gold
• All of the above, plus:
• One-year Business Marketplace listing on CaNORML.org
$5,000 Platinum
• All of the above, plus:
• One year banner ad on CaNORML.org; any page of your choice
If you have any questions, please email us.
Sponsor Cal NORML Lobby Day 2023
$500.00 – $5,000.00
Buy now
The post Sponsor Lobby Day – May 8, 2023 in Sacramento appeared first on CaNorml.org.
Under California state law, cannabis retailers can open on-site cannabis consumption spaces, with local approval. Some locals allow vaporizing only indoors (e.g. Oakland). Others, like Los Angeles and Berkeley, have resisted consumption rooms altogether, as anti-tobacco forces have falsely conflated cannabis smoke with tobacco. (Prop. 64 said cannabis smoking must be banned where tobacco smoking is.) Groups like PHI show up at local meetings to fight off our rights. Help us fight them and make cannabis consumption allowed across California!
NEWS:
2/9/2023 – Ukiah Planning Commission Unanimously Passes Ordinance Allowing Cannabis Consumption
2/8/2023 – Palm Springs’ weed lounge game is hot right now — especially compared to L.A.
ONSITE CANNABIS CONSUMPTION ROOMS IN CALIFORNIA
JUMP TO: Coalinga, Eureka, Lompoc, National City, Ojai, Palm Springs, Port Hueneme, San Francisco, Santa Rosa, West Hollywood
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO
Moe Greens
1276 Market St
Mission Cannabis Club
2441 Mission St.
Barbary Coast
952 Mission Street, San Francisco
Website
Instagram
Union Station San Francisco
2075 Mission St
Website
Urbana Geary
4811 Geary Blvd
EMERYVILLE
Ohana Cannabis
5770 Peladeau Street
Black-owned
OAKLAND
FLYT
Website
(415) 407-2593
Rose Mary Jane (drinks only)
2340 Harrison St. Oakland CA 94610
Website
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
WEST HOLLYWOOD
The Studio Lounge at The Artists Tree
8625 Santa Monica Blvd 2nd Floor, West Hollywood, CA 90069
(310) 362-1004
Website
The Woods
8271 Santa Monica Blvd
(844) 484-3966
Website
CATHEDRAL CITY
Vault Dispensary Lounge
(760) 866-9660
website
instagram
35871 Date Palm Drive , Cathedral City, CA 92234
PALM SPRINGS
Coachella Valley Green Dragon
353 S. Palm Canyon Drive, Palm Springs, CA 92262
(760) 438-9333
Website
OG Arabian Nights
232 N. Palm Canyon Drive, Palm Springs, CA 92262
(760) 656-0109
Instagram
Four Twenty Bank
A consumption lounge plus two 800-square-foot VIP rooms that can be rented for special occasions plus a fully functioning, 555-person-capacity venue that hosts live music, DJ sets, puff-and-paint events and wellness-weekend drum circles and sound baths.
296 S. Palm Canyon Drive, Palm Springs, California 92262
(760) 318-6877
website
instagram
Holland Pharms
Palm Springs’ first social equity dispensary, on the city’s main drag.
150 N. Palm Canyon Drive, Palm Springs, California 92262
(760) 656-0420
website
instagram
Reefer Madness Dispensary & Lounge
This LGBTQ-owned dispensary and lounge with an Alice in Wonderland theme is one mile from the Palm Springs International Airport.
4693 Ramon Road, Palm Springs, California 92264
(760) 424-8588
website
instagram
The post Onsite Cannabis Consumption Lounges in California appeared first on CaNorml.org.
Last night, the Ukiah Planning Commission unanimously passed an amendment to city code allowing for cannabis consumption at licensed retailers in the city. The amendment is limited in that it would allow for smoking or vaping only at outdoor sites, due to the city’s anti-smoking ordinance. It will allow for edibles or drinks to be consumed indoors.
At the meeting during the staff report, a slide was shown indicating that cities currently allowing on-site consumption include San Francisco, Oakland, Santa Rosa, West Hollywood, Palm Springs, Ojai, Port Hueneme, Coalinga, Lompoc, and National City.
Monique Ramirez of the Mendocino Cannabis Alliance, a business group with 100+ members, read a memo in support of the measure, noting, “This amendment will incentivize customers to frequent retail locations, which in turn will create a benefit for everyone, including local farms that supply products to retailers in our County.”
She continued, “Customers having places to consume cannabis safely should be promoted. Just as there are designated places for alcohol consumption, cannabis businesses with the proper zoning should have the same opportunities. Giving tourists a real taste of what Mendocino County producers have to offer will help promote our small businesses across the county and promote economic development. Medical patients especially need safe places to consume cannabis, whether for dried flower, edibles or cannabis drinks. Some patients do not have the ability to smoke/vaporize cannabis in the comfort of their own homes because they may be renters and their landlords disallow it.”
As did Cal NORML, MCA recommended that the Planning Commission expand the indoor use to include inhalable products. Paul Hansberry of Loving and Legally spoke in support, have been to SF where have inside consumption lounges have been “a savior for businesses, and for medical patients esp. because of smoking ordinances.” In a letter to the commission, Cal NORML wrote, “Inhalation is a safer mode of consumption than ingestion for on-site consumption areas. This is because inhalation acts promptly, allowing users to calibrate their dosage in accordance with its effects. There is no reason to believe that indoor smoking or vaping of cannabis presents an undue public safety hazard.”
The Ukiah ordinance was advanced by Kyle Greenhalgh of Heritage Mendocino, who spoke as the meeting, as did a representative from Cannavine. Todd Harp of Fish Peddler, the nearest business to Heritage Mendocino, also testified in support, saying that the business has beautified the neighborhood, increased his business.
Local farmer Susan Tibbon spoke in support, as did farmer John Casale, who said he has a tourism license. Casale spoke about being helped by Heritage Mendocino, where it’s explained and demonstrated, “Why the Emerald Triangle farmers are the Napa Valley of weed.” Nick Caston, director of public policy for Solful, a partner with Heritage Mendocino, spoke of the ability of consumption rooms to innovate and connect with producers, and prevents lawlessness, due to restrictions on places where people can consume cannabis. The sole opponent speaking was an elderly MD concerned about the effect of cannabis on drivers, and the brain.
Public comment was re-opened for a question from commissioner Michelle Johnson for questions about the ventilation system in the ordinance. Greenhalgh clarified that he was not intending to allow indoor consumption, but was open to allowing it elsewhere. Johnson said she could see both sides of the issue, noting that many parts of the city smell like weed these days, and she understood the need for having spaces to consume in “a regulated, safe environment.”
Commissioner Rick Johnson tried to compare it to a tasting room at winery. Greenhalgh said that California has a strict guideline that everything consumed must be purchased, so no sampling is permitted, unlike with wine. It was clarified that under state law, someone can’t bring in cannabis purchased from another sort, like you can pay a corkage fee at a restaurant. (Yet another way that cannabis businesses are penalized in CA.)
Commissioner Alex de Grassi fretted that despite public noticing and an article in the UDJ, and pending city council approval, the public might not be fully aware of the proposal. He proposed an amendment requiring that any modifications to existing businesses for the purposes of consumption be reviewed by the planning commission. Johnson asked about the difference in cost between taking modifications to the planning administrator and taking it before the commission; was told that the cost was $900 to go before the administrator and $2000-$3000 for a planning commission review, to pay for staff time, and possibly more (at $100/hour) due to heavy regulations, e.g. security requirements, for cannabis businesses. The development director can always defer projects to the planning commissioner. DeGrassi’s motion then died for lack of a second.
The original motion that passed with aye votes from all four commissioners present. It will now head to Ukiah City Council for approval.
The post Ukiah Planning Commission Unanimously Passes Ordinance Allowing Cannabis Consumption appeared first on CaNorml.org.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.