New York’s Cannabis Advisory Board – which is tasked, as its name suggests, with advising the state’s cannabis regulators on myriad policy issues – is urging regulators to be more inclusive.
On Tuesday, the full Advisory Board met, as did two of its subcommittees: the Cannabis Industry and Market Subcommittee, and the Community Grant Reinvestment Subcommittee.
One theme that came up multiple times throughout the day was frustration that the Advisory Board isn’t being consulted for input before regulators make decisions. One recent example: the adult use home cultivation rules that were recently released for public comment.
“The Cannabis Control Board is not regularly seeking the input of the CAB on its regulations and activities. The most recent example is the regulations regarding home growing, which were not provided to us prior to being voted on. We had no ability to comment on them,” said Joseph Belluck, chair of the Advisory Board. “The level of knowledge that exists among CAB members is significant. And, it’s a real shame that we’re not being allowed to fulfill our statutory function.”
During the Advisory Board meeting, Chris Alexander, executive director of the Office of Cannabis Management, and John Kagia, senior policy director of OCM, gave high-level updates, most of which were presented at the CCB’s meeting earlier this month.
Alexander did add that more licenses will be awarded at the CCB’s next meeting, in March, and that the next queue, which will be for applications submitted in December, is coming “any day now.” The licenses that began rolling out at the CCB meeting in February were from the November application queue.
During Kagia’s update, he noted that there are “over 250 brands in the market.” He also spoke about brands during the Cannabis Industry and Market Subcommittee meeting that preceded the full Advisory Board meeting, saying that OCM is “very bullish about brand diversity in this market.”
But brands became a bit of a flashpoint during the day’s meetings. While there’s excitement over the Type 3 processor license, which is for cannabis brands, there’s rising concern about out-of-state brands. Specifically, some of the products showing up in unlicensed shops, which may be crossing state lines, come from the same brands that appear in licensed shops.
“I understand there may be some difficulty in figuring out if the product is actually from out of state, but I don’t understand why we’re not speaking very clearly that that is an automatic loss of license. You’re out of the game,” Belluck said during the Cannabis Industry and Market Subcommittee meeting. He reiterated his concerns during the full Advisory Board meeting.
Alexander said that the current presence of out-of-state brands in the state “has created confusion.”
“The brand license is a mechanism for brands to come in, both out-of-state brands as well as previous legacy brands and just brands that folks create. But if that product moves across state lines, and we’re aware of it, action will be taken, 100%,” Alexander said.
In the coming months, regulators will require licensees to connect to a seed-to-sale tracking system, which is expected to become available in March. Licensees will have 60 days from its availability to connect.
Another issue that arose during the day’s meetings was finding qualifying locations. Cannabis shops cannot be too close together, nor can they be within a certain distance from schools and playgrounds, for example. What this means is that applicants further down the licensing queue are worried that they will get squeezed out.
“The priority has been getting those licenses out, getting communications out regarding whether the location is viable or not,” Alexander said during the full Advisory Board meeting, adding that the staff at OCM “fully understand and receive” the concerns and that “the goal has been to move as quickly as possible.”
During the Cannabis Industry and Market Subcommittee meeting, Kagia noted that more than 500 locations have been reviewed for “proximity protection,” and most have been preliminarily “cleared.”
Dasheeda Dawson, founding director of Cannabis NYC within New York City’s Department of Small Business Services, flagged during the public comment period of the Feb. 16 Cannabis Control Board meeting that location concerns are particularly strong in New York City.
“The absence of a map or list and scarcity mindset has made a perfect storm for anxiety, hostility, and even predatory behaviors among licensees,” Dawson said. “We’re calling on the state to publish a map, or at the very least, release the list of addresses with protection. And also consider potentially looking at that 1,000 foot buffer being reduced for highly populated cities such as New York City.”
Looking ahead, the highly-anticipated event license is expected to roll out in the “first half of this year,” Kagia said during the Cannabis Industry and Market Subcommittee meeting, adding that the Growers Showcase program, which ended in December and allowed for pop-up style sales, will inform the shape of the event license. However, Kagia continued, as with so many areas of cannabis policy, “the devil is in the details.”
Advisory Board member Allan Gandelman brought up the possibility of a recompense fund for growers, which Assemblymember Donna Lupardo and Senator Michelle Hinchey have championed in the legislature. Gandlemann suggested that fee waivers could be part of that conversation.
“We’ll take that back and have that conversation,” Alexander said.
“It’d be a nice win,” Gandelman said, “across multiple sides.”
The focus of the Community Grant Reinvestment Subcommittee meeting was determining where to spend the tax revenue that is starting to flow in from sales. The current “pot” of revenue for grants is $5 million, Alexander said, adding that it is growing every day.
Alexander was particularly excited about this meeting, he said, because “the biggest fight, the biggest sticking point in getting legalization across the finish line, was what was going to happen with the money.”
OCM conducted a survey of the Advisory Board on funding priorities, and they held roundtable discussions with community members. OCM’s goal, he said, is to announce the release date for the grant Request for Applications by April 15. As OCM drafts the RFA, Alexander said, the Subcommittee needs to weigh in on whether to cap funding amounts and when, who can apply, and what the money can be spent on.
During the meeting, top priorities that emerged include: youth, workforce development, housing, and mental health. And members generally agreed that the first round of grants should be between $50,000 and $250,000, and should go to entities that have been operational for several years rather than start ups.
