This is just a glimpse. Want to receive every issue of Cannabis Wire Daily, our newsletter that is sent to subscribers each weekday morning, and unlimited access to cannabiswire.com?
Some meaningful rescheduling chatter.
Like us, you’re probably inundated with rescheduling noise. But this is where we come in, to sift through all of that and bring you some updates that are truly noteworthy.
We’ll start with a Congressional Research Service report on rescheduling, which was updated last week to incorporate the news about the DEA’s next steps. The report doesn’t break new ground on what rescheduling would bring, but it’s worth bookmarking for when you have questions like “what can Congress do again?” (they can totally reschedule or deschedule) or “will rescheduling actually have industry implications?” (yes, from taxes to bankruptcy proceedings). Here’s the report.
Next up is a letter from the National Conference of State Legislatures. While lots of CEOs and coalitions have issued statements and letters urging reform, there is a certain weight that a group like the NCSL holds. Last week, they wrote to DEA Administrator Anne Milgram to “urge” her “to prioritize the removal of cannabis from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act.” You can read it here.
Now, if you want a rescheduling skeptic’s take, you can read this “reality check” from Robert Mikos, a professor at Vanderbilt Law, and someone who has actually been working on cannabis policy for a long time (more than a decade), and not one of these overnight “experts.” In the essay, Mikos argues that “the expectations surrounding rescheduling are highly inflated” and that “advocates should eschew the false promise of administrative rescheduling and focus instead on convincing Congress to enact reform legislation.”
Lastly, just a small item that caught our eye: the president of the Medical Society of the State of New York felt compelled to put out a statement about the news last week, writing: “Given the political climate, I expect that this regulatory matter will pass, and we will be hearing more about this as the Presidential election draws near.”
The good and bad in LA’s cannabis budget.
The cannabis industry in Los Angeles is bigger than in some states. Since 2018, licensees have spurred more than $4.5 billion in “local economic activity,” according to the city’s Department of Cannabis Regulation, and the city has pulled in more than half a billion in tax revenue.
So, their regulators have a big job to do, and they rely on the city budget to get it done. Today, DCR will respond to Mayor Karen Bass’ budget during a hearing held by the LA City Council’s Budget, Finance, and Innovation Committee.
In its latest newsletter to stakeholders, DCR summarized the good and the bad:
The good: “DCR received an overall 10% increase in funding from the Department’s special funds, as well as 2 new positions to support the Compliance and Enforcement Division.”
The bad: “DCR’s sole General Funded position (TLH Admin Clerk) was eliminated- this position supports the City’s Cannabis Complaint Portal. Losing the position dedicated to maintaining the City’s Cannabis Complaint Portal may result in delays in routing and addressing complaints of any unlicensed locations throughout the city.
Unfortunately, the Proposed Budget does not include funding for the Social Equity Program which currently provides City Council mandated wrap-around services to verified Social Equity Individuals. The loss of this funding might mean an end to vital training and learning materials, business development coaching, and Pro Bono/Low Bono legal services- services that struggling equity applicants need right now and that DCR contracts with a vendor to provide as City staff is precluded from providing much needed business and legal advice.”
If you want to get more granular, you can read DCR’s formal response to the proposed budget here.
