The topics that got the most airtime at the latest meeting of California’s Cannabis Advisory Committee weren’t on the agenda: the sprawl of intoxicating hemp products, and the unlicensed cannabis market.
While the hemp conversation came up mostly during public comment, the aim of quashing unlicensed or unscrupulous cannabis operators undergirded the items that the Committee itself discussed: labs and events.
The role of the Committee is to provide recommendations to the Department of Cannabis Control (DCC), which can then craft regulations if it so chooses. Still, even though the Committee does not make policy, its meetings provide a clear window into the issues vexing industry stakeholders. Late last year, for example, as Cannabis Wire reported at the time, problematic unions were top-of-mind.
Thursday’s meeting started with the selection of a new vice chair, as Kristin Nevedal joined the DCC as public engagement manager. The Committee selected Paul Tupy, northern division deputy chief of the state’s Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.
From there, nearly an hour of public comment focused largely on intoxicating hemp and unregulated cannabis.
“Hemp products are sold at gas stations and almost everywhere. Everywhere you can purchase hemp products, even your supermarket. These hemp products are just as powerful as THC products. They can be sold to anybody without a driver’s license, without an I.D.. They can be sold anywhere, except for dispensaries,” said Deanna Garcia, chief financial officer at Modesto Cannabis Collective.
“The regulated cannabis businesses’ products are receiving a bad name due to the hemp products and the unregulated cannabis market,” she continued. “We are paying the heavy fees. We are paying the outrageous taxes. We are dotting our i’s and crossing our t’s. But yet we still continue on being blamed for children being intoxicated by the unregulated market and the hemp market.”
The Committee then moved on to discuss four recommendations from the Lab Subcommittee, which met in February to discuss SB 544, a bill signed into law in 2021 that required DCC to “establish one or more standardized cannabinoids test methods to be used by all testing laboratories.”
One thing that was part of the Subcommittee’s conversation, but not in the recommendations, was a call for more “transparency” regarding embargoed cannabis and recalls, said Subcommittee chair Antonio Frazier.
“One thing you’re not seeing with this information is: what lab tested it? And what exactly was the issue? If it was pesticides, are they saying that pesticides were found on the shelf, but not in the lab sample?” he said, adding that these details are necessary so “brands can figure out how to evaluate their risk for dealing with certain labs. As we know, embargoes and recalls can be fatal to some people’s brands.”
The four recommendations adopted by the Committee broadly aim to eliminate inefficiencies that cost time and money, and to give labs some flexibility in methodology. They are: remove the requirement to run the initial extraction or filtrate or remove the dual dilution requirement; adjust the LCS requirement to not require every analyte or move strictly to a matrix post dilution spike; increase the minimum sample weight to 500 mg and include an acceptable range for the mass; and set an equivalency criteria so that labs may use their own methods while honoring the intent of SB 544.
“Would these recommendations create loopholes for bad actors to operate?” asked Committee member David Woolsey.
“These recommendations are trying to actually bring standardization tighter. But ultimately all this comes down to enforcement and oversight,” Frazier said. “It’s more about coming behind the labs, ensuring that the numbers that they put out are truly numbers that they were able to calculate honestly in the lab.”
He added that the state’s lab enforcement has “picked up” in recent months, and called out flower products labeled as having 50% potency. “These things just need to go away. They don’t exist.”
The conversation then turned to cannabis events. Jacqueline Campion, DCC’s deputy director for policy and research, said the department is “interested in discussion and feedback regarding temporary cannabis events.”
Committee chair Ali Jamalian added that the goal of the conversation was to identify recommendations “to enable smaller size events.”
“Because that’s,” he continued, “in the spirit of our whole meeting today. We see that the illicit activities really cut into consumer safety, profits for licensed operators. And these events are a big driver of that, probably more so than illegal retail stores.”
The conversation included discussion about whether it was localities or state regulations posing certain hurdles, and navigating Clean Indoor Air law requirements. A bill making its way through the legislature right now would allow for food and music in cannabis consumption spaces, though a version of the bill was vetoed last year due to air quality concerns. The bill’s author told Cannabis Wire this year that those concerns have been “heard” and will be resolved with the latest air filtration technology.
The Committee ultimately decided to vote to recommend the creation of a “task force comprised of local jurisdictions and counties, cannabis event organizers, DCC policymakers, with a goal to create a streamlined pilot project with the participating counties and jurisdictions.”
During public comment, representatives from the city of Santa Rosa and the county of San Diego said they welcome this conversation.
“We scramble kind of around the time of 4/20,” said Cassidy Anderson, a senior code enforcement officer in Santa Rosa, adding that she attended the day’s meeting specifically to hear what was discussed about events.
“I’d like to be a part of the conversation. I’d like to hear what other jurisdictions are doing,” she continued. “How we can better facilitate this for one day events to help out, you know, the economic cannabis industry and just be more collaborative about it.”
The meeting ended with a conversation about potential agenda items for the next meeting, and Committee member Robin Christensen suggested “enforcement.”
“We talked about this at the last meeting, but I think I just want to state it again, for the record: it would be nice to have an update on what’s going on in terms of enforcement,” she said. “There’s so much that we heard today from so many people. And I know that the DCC is doing a lot of work in this space, and it might be nice to hear from DCC on sort of an update on the enforcement side of things.”
Woolsey seconded that suggestion. Committee member Sara Payan-Pehrson suggested a “hemp report to see how much is grown versus how much is sold,” and some insight into when licenses “go dark.”
