Tag Archives: maryland

Alternatives to Bankruptcy for Cannabis Companies: Part 2

By Brent Salmons, Yuefan Wang
No Comments

Part 1 of this series discussed the lack of bankruptcy protections for cannabis companies, since bankruptcy in the U.S. is an exclusively federal procedure and cannabis remains illegal under federal law and proposed a number of alternative options for businesses struggling in the current environment. Part 2 of this series focuses on one of these alternatives: state law receiverships.

Background

A cannabis operation facing financial difficulties may try to avail itself, on the one hand, of the contractual remedies described in Part 1 of this series, but these remedies may be flimsy given their narrow scope and reliance on voluntary negotiation between parties whose relationship is already likely tense; on the other hand, the statutory remedies described in Part 1 of this series may be too rigid and absolute, necessitating the disposition of a business as a collection of assets, instead of its continued operation as a going concern. An alternative is receivership, a flexible but powerful quasi-judicial approach paralleling federal bankruptcy able to be administered by state courts. Compared to federal bankruptcy, state receivership is both over and under-inclusive: while receivership can be used in many more situations than insolvency, such as a financially healthy business that is nonetheless subject to regulatory action, receivership provides less comprehensive protection for an insolvent business.

Receiverships have their roots in English and Welsh courts of equity, which were seen as offering fairer remedies than their contemporary common law courts, bound as they were by ponderous precedent. In contrast, courts of equity had more discretion to apply remedies which could be more tailored and “equitable” to an individual petitioner, even if such remedies were not codified. While this separation of equitable and common law courts does not generally exist in the modern U.S. legal system (except for a few hold-out states, most notably, Delaware), the legacy remains in the type of civil remedy available: while most remedies are awarded as monetary redress for a past wrong suffered by a plaintiff (e.g. liquidated damages for the discloser of confidential information or the “benefit of the bargain” for the seller of a company), equitable remedies often require prospective action (or forbearance of an action) by the defendant (e.g. an injunction on disclosure by a recipient of confidential information or specific performance by a purchaser of a company). To draw the analogy out, bankruptcy is a “legal” process to address insolvency since it is governed by a comprehensive regime of federal statutes and rules in the Bankruptcy Code (which is, ironically, applied by specialized federal courts), while receivership is the “equitable” side of the same coin: a judicially-created remedy to manage or liquidate a business, among other actions, where it would not be equitable (or, most importantly for cannabis businesses, not possible) for a bankruptcy action.

Some states with legalized cannabis have cannabis-specific receivership statutes, usually providing that the receiver either be temporarily or fully licensed similar to any other operator of a cannabis business.As an equitable remedy used by various states and federal entities, generalizations about the receivership process are difficult to make. However, broadly speaking, a typical receivership process begins with a complaint filed against the entity for which receivership is sought in state court. This filing can be made by a variety of parties outside of the standard debtor-creditor relationship (reflecting the equitable nature of receiverships), including by regulators and disputing owners of a business. After this filing, a motion to appoint the receiver (which is usually but not always a third party) is filed with the court; consent of the opposing party is generally not required in appointing a receiver but can often make the process easier. The complainant must then establish standing and the occurrence of certain events, including insolvency, but also mismanagement of a corporation or a foreclosure. The requirements of such events are fact-specific and may often be governed by statute or the contractual relationship between parties. The order appointing the receiver usually sets out the specific powers the receiver has in any given case to oversee the disposition or operation of the assets subject to the receivership (called the “receivership estate”) for the benefit of its’s creditors.

Receivership laws generally fall into two categories: some states provide for a broad general statute, sometimes accompanied by statutes specific to industries which are heavily regulated, entity types, or process, while in other states the power is an extension of the court’s powers, set forth in the state’s rules of civil procedure. States also differ as to whether a receivership is considered an independent remedy, a standalone legal action which can be pursued in and of itself (e.g. a petition by a creditor to appoint a receiver to resolve settle an unpaid debt), or an ancillary remedy, a legal action that supports a primary claim (e.g. a request to appoint a receiver in connection with a dispute over the ownership of a business). Some states provide for general receiverships, which allows receivers to take control of an entire business, while other states also allow limited receiverships, which allows the receiver take control of a portion of a business, while the owner operates the remainder. Some states with legalized cannabis have cannabis-specific receivership statutes, usually providing that the receiver either be temporarily or fully licensed similar to any other operator of a cannabis business.1

Below is an overview of the laws and rules governing receiverships in certain states which have legalized cannabis.

Arizona
In Arizona, receivership is governed by statute, with a general statute and specific statutes for certain industries and type of receivership. Arizona law recognizes that principles of equity apply to all matters relating to receivers, providing the court overseeing the receivership with additional power to decide the remedies available to the receiver. In addition, Arizona has enacted a specific statutory framework for the appointment of receivers for commercial real property and personal property related to or used in operating the real property. Arizona also uses a separate receivership statute to provide for corporate dissolution receiverships, in which a court in a judicial corporate dissolution proceeding may appoint one or more receivers to wind-up, liquidate, or manage the business and affairs of the corporation.

There are no specific statutes governing receiverships of cannabis businesses, so the general receivership statute applies to cannabis businesses, subject to Arizona’s rules governing the operation of a cannabis business. For example, Arizona cannabis regulations that require anyone volunteering or working at a medical or recreational cannabis dispensary to be registered with the cannabis regulator similarly apply to a receiver appointed over a licensed cannabis business.

California

California does not have significant entity-specific or industry-specific statutes for receiverships; rather a California court’s power to appoint a receiver is granted under the state’s rules of civil procedure. Receiverships in California are solely an ancillary remedy; a receivership is commenced once a complaint is filed and any party to the action may seek to appoint a receiver. Circumstances that allow for the appointment of a receiver are fact-specific and at the discretion of a judge, although contractual provisions for the appointment of a receiver are given weight under the rules. Sales of assets in the receivership estate must be submitted to, and approved by, the appointing court.

While the rules of civil procedure provide for the general powers of a receiver, the specific powers a receiver possesses in any given case is granted by the judicial order appointing the receiver; this appointment order is therefore, along with the court itself, the primary authority for the parties in any given receivership. California explicitly disqualifies certain persons, such as parties to the lawsuit, an attorney of a party, a person interested in an action, or any person related to any judge of the court within the third degree, as receivers.

While California’s receivership rules do not explicitly contemplate cannabis businesses, receiverships for cannabis companies have taken place, but in our experience are less common in California than assignments for the benefit of creditors (which we will address in a later article). Like other licensed businesses in California, cannabis companies must provide notice to the state regulatory agency which granted the license. It is up to the agency’s discretion whether the business may be operated under the existing license or whether the receiver must secure a new or temporary license.

Colorado

Like California, no generally applicable receivership statute exists in Colorado; instead, receiverships are governed by the state’s rules of civil procedure. Under these rules, a receiver can be appointed under a court’s general equitable powers. Appointment of a receiver is an independent remedy in Colorado, but is contingent on a lawsuit having commenced and the court having deemed the receivership as necessary and proper. In addition to the court’s general equitable powers to appoint a receiver, and unlike California, Colorado has receivership statutes that are entity and industry specific. The entity-specific statutes permit the appointment of a receiver for the judicial dissolution of for-profit corporations, non-profit corporations, limited liability companies, and cooperatives, and the industry-specific statutes permit the appointment of a receiver for the windup of failed insurance companies and the closure of long-term care facilities.

Similar to California, the court order appointing a receiver governs the entire receivership process and any disposition of the assets of the receivership estate must be submitted to and approved by the court.

As befitting the first state to legalize adult-use cannabis, Colorado’s cannabis regulations specifically address receiverships: the rules create a notice and application requirement for all court appointees, including receiverships, and require receivers to register with the regulator as a “temporary appointee” of the court.

Illinois

Illinois does not have a comprehensive receivership statute; instead, the state has industry-specific statutes, including for regulated industries such as nursing home facilities and telecommunication carriers. Illinois also provides for “equity receiverships”, which are used as an ancillary remedy in business disputes in order to stabilize a business that is adversely affected by fraud, neglect, waste, dissipation, or other misconduct during the pendency of the underlying proceeding. If the underlying matter is within the general or statutory jurisdiction of the court, then such court has jurisdiction over the receivership.

There are no specific statutes governing receiverships of cannabis businesses, but the governing statute does contemplate operation of a cannabis business by a receiver, so regulations promulgated thereunder should apply to receivers as well, including with respect to licensing.

Maryland

Adult-use cannabis sales only began in Maryland July 1, 2023. Maryland has a general receivership statute.

Receivers in Maryland are generally appointed by the person seeking appointment, including the court, and must meet certain qualifications, such as not having any material financial interest in the outcome of the receivership, and not having any debtor-creditor relationship with or equity interest in any party to the receivership. While the general receivership statute provides for broad powers of the receiver, including general management of receivership property, hiring professionals, and issuing subpoenas, the court may modify or expand the powers of the receiver via the appointment order.

While there is no cannabis-specific receivership statute, Maryland’s medical cannabis rules contemplate and authorize the transfer of licenses to a receivership; similar rules have been proposed for adult-use cannabis licenses as well.

Nevada

Nevada has a broad receivership statute, in addition to both entity and industry specific statutes. Case law is not well-developed and mostly predates the current statutory scheme, but there is support for a receiver being appointed outside of a statutory context, specifically when the situation is governed by contractual agreement.

The general receivership statute provides that a receiver may be appointed in a variety of situations, such as fraudulent property purchases, foreclosure of mortgages, or the dissolution or insolvency of a corporation.

Nevada has a statutory regime for receiverships for cannabis companies. Unlike the general statute, there are significant requirements for who can be a receiver for a cannabis business. A receiver must first secure a cannabis establishment agent registration card for a cannabis receiver issued by Nevada’s cannabis regulator. In addition, the receiver must submit an application to the regulator accompanied by, among other requirements, a statement saying the receiver has not previously had an agent registration card revoked. The receiver must also provide proof that she has (1) experience or knowledge of the cannabis industry, (2) experience as a receiver appointed by a court, (3) knowledge and skills necessary to make reasonable financial decisions, and (4) adequate financial capacity to fulfill the duties of a receiver. If the regulator is satisfied with the receiver’s application, it will issue the receiver an agent registration card which must be renewed two years after issuance. It is worth noting that Nevada’s statute governing the non-transferability of certain agent registration cards for cannabis allows the regulator to adopt regulations that give priority in the processing of transfers of licenses for transferors subject to receivership. To date, however, no such regulations allowing priority for receivership processing have been adopted.

Washington

Washington has a general receivership statute, but not any entity or industry-specific receivership statutes. Washington’s receivership structure with overhauled in 2004 with the passage of a new law, so it is not completely settled whether receivership is now an independent or ancillary remedy; however, the language of the statute language suggests that it is an independent remedy.

To be appointed a receiver in Washington, the individual must meet certain requirements, including not being a party to, or be closely controlled by a party to, the underlying action and not having materially adverse interest to the person against whom receivership is sought. The general statute specifically outlines the powers of the receiver. Certain actions by the receiver require court approval before being finalized, including the assumption or rejection of executory contracts, and sales of property outside the ordinary course of business.

Washington law specifically provides for receiverships for cannabis companies. To be a receiver, the person must satisfy the requirements of Washington’s receivership law, and either be preapproved by the cannabis regulator or else be approved post-application. In order to qualify for the regulator’s preapproved receiver list, or be approved post-application, the putative receiver must (1) submit an application, (2) have been a Washington resident for at least six months prior to submission, (3) submit to and pass a criminal background check, (4) provide financial disclosures as requested by the regulator, and (5) disclose any interests in the cannabis licensees. Once a person is appointed as receiver for a cannabis licensee, she shall not have a financial interest in, or simultaneously serve as receiver for, another licensed cannabis retailer. The receiver may not also serve as a receiver for, or be a party of interest in, more than five cannabis retail licensees or more than three cannabis producer and/or processor licensees at the same time. Finally, any person who files a receivership action involving a cannabis licensee must provide notice to the regulator.

Part 3 of this series on Alternatives to Bankruptcy for Cannabis Companies continue our review of receivership in various states and other bankruptcy alternatives, including assignments for the benefit of creditors.

Reference

  1.  As cannabis legalization continues to spread, more robust industry-specific receivership rules may be promising given the heavily regulated and specialized nature of the business, similar to how a number of states have industry-specific rules for other heavily regulated industries.

Department Stores for Cannabis: The CEOs of Remedy on Cannabis Retail

1 Comment

Remedy currently has two locations, one in Baltimore and one in Columbia, Maryland. The first thing you notice at these dispensaries are the large parking areas. When you step inside, you’re greeted by an entrance that is less like a waiting room and more like a lounge.

Their massive open floor plans offer space for brands to have their own area, akin to branded counters in traditional department stores. Remedy has partnerships with big cannabis brands like Cookies, Curio Wellness, Holistic, Rhythm, Trulieve, Green Thumb Industries and others for this reason: to create the “store within a store” feel.

We met Mitch Trellis and Brandon Barksdale, co-CEOs of Remedy, in Las Vegas last year. After hearing about their ideas and vision for the future of cannabis retail, we followed up with them for an interview.

Cannabis Industry Journal: Give us some brief background on your company. How did Remedy get to where it is today?

Mitch Trellis, Co-Founder & Co-CEO of Remedy

Mitch Trellis: I have been a patient and consumer since 1994. I have always loved and respected the plant. I spent much of my career on Wall Street, but really I’ve been an entrepreneur most of my life. I started looking at the cannabis space for my next venture. 2014 was a very exciting time for cannabis with a lot of other states were coming online around that time. Colorado had legalized adult use and California had been going for a while. I was looking for an opportunity to jump into the space. Maryland wrote a very progressive law legalizing the plant for medical use, marking the first time on the East Coast where cannabis could be prescribed for pain.

I saw some real business opportunities there so I reach out to my business partner, Blaize Connelly-Duggan, whose family has a long history working with alternative medicine. We were both born and raised in Columbia, Maryland. About a year after coming up with the idea, we submitted an application for a fully vertical license. We did not win the growing or processing license, but we found out we had won a dispensary license.

We decided to move forward in late 2016. We opened in December of 2017 and we just had our five-year anniversary of operating a dispensary in the state of Maryland. We have seen over 30,000 individual patients and we’ve done around 45 million retail sales over that time. We are on a good pace right now with our two stores, each of which we call “superstores” with around 10,000 square feet of space. We have built some pretty interesting retail experiences, what we call our in-store ad network. We are a little different than other dispensaries; we’re not going for the Starbucks or corner store model.

Brandon Barksdale: I came from professional services. I was in a management consulting practice and a leader within our cannabis industry advisory group. We were working with clients on performance management, business improvement and organizational maturity that would help drive operational excellence within complex compliance and legislative landscapes.

Brandon Barksdale, Co-CEO of Remedy

The clients that I had spanned over a lot of different states, so I think a lot of my initial experience comes from California in 2015 and 2016. Outside of consultancy, I stepped into operations within a vertically-integrated cannabis operation in Colorado. From there I gained the full breadth of experience in understanding the business from cultivation to manufacturing to retail. We were also operating on both sides of the market, medical and adult use. This put me at a little bit of an advantage for new markets coming online, understanding the economics and how things would play out, you know, history repeats itself, just faster and faster.

I met Mitch and Blaze through a mutual acquaintance and we shared a lot of the same vision and thoughts for where the industry was heading locally in Maryland and nationally. Ultimately, I came on board in an advisory capacity and then joined the team full time.

CIJ: Tell us more about this Nordstrom business model. What brand partnerships are you developing and how is your idea different from the traditional dispensary?

Mitch: We have basically built a platform for the brand and vendors to interact with the patients and the customers. There is a big gap between the two and we operate as a conduit between the two. In that plan, we need to have spaces for each individual brand to interact with the consumer, which is why we have such large floor plans. Brands set up semi-permanent stores within our store, almost like pop ups. Right now, on our floor we have Trulieve, Holisitic, GTI, Curio, Cookies, Sunmed and 2 or 3 more coming. That’s the equivalent of the Sephora and Nike in Nordstrom.

A Curio Wellness pop-up within a Remedy dispensary

We have a handful of our own brands we are working on bringing to the state of Maryland, which is kind of like those generic brands you see, like Nordstrom Rack or a 365 brand in Whole Foods. So, it is a more traditional retail model than what you might think of in the cannabis market.

People ask us, ‘well, what do you do differently?’ And really, we try not to do things differently. We try to do things like regular retail. At the end of the day, it’s about the experience, the price, the convenience, customer service, simple retail stuff.

The Curio product offering

Brandon: The differentiator that separates us from other dispensaries is that retail experience. On our floor, we have a massive amount of brand power coming from the strongest Maryland supplies and household brands entering Maryland from other thriving markets. From there, it’s really just about driving the patient and adult consumer experience, helping them come in and learn about brands, what makes them different, what drives their quality, price, etc. Ultimately it allows brands to present themselves the way they intended. That in itself is enough of a unique experience. Then it’s about execution. What we hope as we come into a new adult use market while we continue to support the medical market is that there will be a way for patients and consumers alike to learn about more products, wider brand selection and learn what best aligns with their values, their experience and the overall value proposition.

CIJ: With Maryland legalizing adult-use and the Virginia market expected to open soon, how do you expect your retail business will fare in the new, larger market?

Mitch: We have very large stores in incredible locations that are very well known with tons of parking and the ability to do tremendous volume. I think we are well prepared and our business is built for a larger volume scenario.

Adult use sales in Maryland are set to launch this year

Brandon: I am personally very optimistic. Maryland is leading the way in the mid-Atlantic market. We will continue to steamroll forward. Different states and neighboring states will be coming online at some point in the future. That potentially advanced runway will really pull us apart. Our strategy around retail is about growth and operational excellence. We’ll continue to find opportunities to support that broader market vision as it comes into view. We’re constantly seeking how we can expand our market footprint. When I think about Maryland in general, it is a pretty unique market. I don’t think we have seen a newer market come online that was as unique as this region, wrapped around this gray market and other states operating in this limbo.

I think we’ll see an increase in cannabis comfortability with the adult population in Maryland. I also believe that and other unique factors will drive a huge jump in the number of consumers and patients in Maryland as we mature into adult-use. There are a significant number of government employees in Maryland. There are other unique sensitivities to cannabis that will also become normalized. As Maryland moves forward with the rollout of the adult use program, that’ll be something that starts to pull uncomfortable stigmas away which will be increasingly favorable to the market.

CIJ: What are you excited about for 2023? Any new or exciting plans you can share with our readers? 

Mitch: We’re definitely watching all of our neighboring states and we’re keeping a close eye on our own state to see how everything shakes out. We will start our adult use sales in the state of Maryland very soon and we are moving forward in that direction. What do we look forward to? The beginning of adult use sales in Maryland. This is the start of our next big chapter and a culmination of a lot of work. 8 years later here we are.

Brandon: Maryland is next up. To Mitch’s point, that is where our main focus remains. We are constantly looking at opportunities within the state and nationally as well. I’d like to think of us as a market leader from a retail perspective. Our primary focus right now is how to capture a lot of the excitement in the Maryland market adult-use program, however, our eyes and ears are always open.

No Green Wave This Time, But Two More States Legalize Adult Use Cannabis

By Brett Schuman, Jennifer Fisher, Jeremy Lateiner, Allyson McCain, Amy Arnelle, Whitney Williams
No Comments

Five states voted on adult-use cannabis legalization. These results increase the number of states that have legalized cannabis for adult-use from 19 to 21. Similar ballot measures failed, however, in Arkansas, North Dakota and South Dakota. The continued expansion of legalized cannabis at the state level, combined with President Biden’s recent initiation of an administrative process to review expeditiously how cannabis is scheduled under federal law, is likely to increase pressure on Congress and the rest of the federal government to either decriminalize or legalize cannabis under federal law.

Here is a snapshot of the cannabis-related election results:

November 2022 Cannabis Referenda Results

Maryland

On November 8, 2022, Maryland voted to pass Maryland Question 4 (the Marijuana Legalization Amendment), by a margin of 65.5% to 34.5%. Maryland Question 4 amends the Maryland Constitution to add a new article, Article XX, which authorizes adults 21 years of age and older beginning in July 2023 to use and possess cannabis, and directs the Maryland legislature to pass laws for the use, distribution, regulation, and taxation of cannabis within the state.

Maryland legalized medical cannabis in 2014.

Interestingly, unlike most other ballot measures, Maryland Question 4 actually originated from the Maryland legislature. On April 1, 2022, the state legislature sent implementing legislation that was contingent upon the approval of the Marijuana Legalization Amendment to Governor Larry Hogan’s (R) desk. House Bill 837 (HB 837) was passed by the state House on February 25, 2022, by a vote of 92-37. The state Senate passed an amended version on March 31, 2022, by a vote of 30-15. The House concurred on April 1, with a vote of 89-41. Governor Hogan decided not to sign or veto the bill, allowing it to take effect upon approval of the amendment.

HB 837 temporarily expands decriminalization from January 1 to June 30, 2023. It decriminalizes the possession and use of up to 1.5 ounces of cannabis with a civil fine of up to $100. Before the passage of the Marijuana Legalization Amendment, the decriminalized amount was 10 grams. It also reduces the penalty for possession of more than 1.5 ounces but not exceeding 2.5 ounces to a civil fine of up to $250.

Beginning July 1, 2023, HB 837 legalizes the personal use and possession of up to 1.5 ounces or 12 grams of concentrated cannabis for individuals 21 years of age or older. It also legalizes the possession of up to two cannabis plants. It changes the criminal penalties for persons found possessing cannabis under the age of 21. The bill also automatically expunges convictions for conduct that is now legal, and individuals serving time for such offenses will be allowed to file for resentencing.

The bill also requires specific studies on the use of cannabis, the medical cannabis industry, and the adult-use cannabis industry. It also establishes the Cannabis Business Assistance Fund and the Cannabis Public Health Fund.

The Marijuana Legalization Amendment does not establish any licensing or regulatory framework for adult-use cannabis sales.

Missouri

On November 8, 2022, Missouri voters passed constitutional Amendment 3 by a margin of 53.1% to 46.9%, legalizing the purchase, possession, consumption, use, delivery, manufacture, and sale of cannabis for anyone over the age of 21. The law also imposes a 6% state tax on all cannabis sales and allows local governments to impose an additional tax of up to 3%. The law will go into effect December 7, 2022.

Missouri legalized medical cannabis in 2018.

Under Amendment 3, private residences may contain no more than twelve flowering plants at one time, and both the plants and any cannabis produced by such plants in excess of three ounces must be kept in a locked space and not be made available to the public. Individuals may obtain a license to cultivate up to six flowering plants, six non-flowering plants, and six clones.

In addition, those individuals currently serving a sentence for certain cannabis-related offenses are now able to submit a petition for release from incarceration and/or expungement of the offense, and those previously convicted of certain cannabis-related offenses may petition for expungement.

Arkansas, North Dakota & South Dakota

Voters in Arkansas, North Dakota and South Dakota rejected adult-use legalization efforts in their respective states. Each state’s ballot measure would have allowed adults to possess up to one ounce of cannabis. In addition, among other things, Arkansas’ Issue 4 would also have expanded the state’s medical cannabis program to permit licensed businesses to sell to cannabis to adults; and North Dakota’s Initiated Statutory Measure 2 would have required the establishment and implementation of a program for the production and sale of adult-use cannabis by October 1, 2023.

Medical cannabis remains legal in Arkansas, North Dakota and South Dakota. Although there has been a trend in a number of states where legalization of adult-use cannabis follows prior legalization of medical cannabis and the establishment of a medical cannabis program in the state, that trend does not appear to hold true in these “red” states. For example, after North Dakota voters passed a ballot measure to legalize medical cannabis in 2016, they have now rejected ballot measures that would have legalized adult-use cannabis in both 2018 and 2022. In South Dakota, voters passed a ballot measure to legalize adult-use cannabis in 2020, which was later invalidated by South Dakota courts in response to a challenge brought by Governor Kristi Noem. Two year later, voter interest dwindled and a similar measure failed.

A Look Ahead to 2023

Oklahoma

On the horizon for 2023 is a second chance for Oklahomans to decide on State Question 820, which would legalize adult-use cannabis for individuals 21 years of age and older after the Oklahoma Supreme Court denied a chance for voters to decide on the measure this November.

Oklahomans for Sensible Marijuana Laws (OSML) petitioned State Question 820 for the November ballot on July 5th, submitting nearly 164,000 signatures one month in advance of the August 1st deadline. Despite the Secretary of State Brian Bringman’s office advising OSML that the counting and verification process for signatures typically takes 2 to 3 weeks to complete, the office took nearly seven weeks to certify that 117,257 signatures were valid – well over the required minimum of 94,911 signatures. The severe delay caused OSML to miss the August 26th deadline for the measure to complete a 10-day protest period, finalize the measure, and print State Question 820 on the ballot. The Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled on September 21, 2022 that the measure would have to be postponed until a future election. “At this point in time, SQ820 is not in full compliance. There is still a possibility of rehearing in two of the protests, which prevents this Court from fully resolving those objections in compliance with [state law]. That, in turn, prevents the Secretary of State and the Governor from taking their final steps in compliance with [state law].” Nichols v. Ziriax 2022 OK 76, ¶14.

On October 18, 2022, Governor J. Kevin Stitt issued an Executive Proclamation declaring a special election to vote on State Question 820 – a proposal to legalize adult-use cannabis, which will take place on March 7, 2023.

Election Results for Cannabis: MD, MO Vote to Legalize

By Cannabis Industry Journal Staff
No Comments

Election Day in 2022 has come and gone and as the dust settles, it looks like voters favored cannabis legalization in some states, but failed to pass muster with other key ballot initiatives. While we wait to see the final tallies for which party will gain congressional power in the United States, we can safely call the cannabis legalization ballot initiatives.

In Maryland, voters overwhelmingly passed a legislatively-referred ballot question to legalize cannabis for adults. Question 4 passed with a clear 65.5% margin. The General Assembly gets to decide a sales tax rate for all cannabis sales following the question’s approval.

With 89% of the votes reported, Missouri’s Amendment 3 appears to have passed muster with a 53.1% margin. Amendment 3 legalizes cannabis for adults and sets a 6% sales tax rate. Notably, it also expunges convictions non-violent cannabis-related offenses.

According to the Marijuana Policy Project and the Associated Press, ballot initiatives to legalize adult use cannabis in Arkansas, North Dakota and South Dakota have all failed.

Arkansas’s Issue 4, which would have legalized adult use cannabis and instated a 10% cannabis sales tax, lost by well over 100,000 votes. With 95% of the votes being reported, it appears that only 45.1% of voters in North Dakota backed cannabis legalization. South Dakota’s population struck down cannabis legalization with a 52.9% majority.

Soapbox

A Look at the Rise Of The East Coast Cannabis Market

By Serge Chistov
No Comments

The rise of the East Coast cannabis market gained another foothold in late March 2021 when New York became the most recent state to legalize adult use cannabis, joining ranks with other Atlantic stalwarts, including New Jersey, Maine, Massachusetts, Vermont, Virginia and Washington, D.C.

In doing so, it opened the door to an industry that many experts agree could exceed $7 billion annually, once the market is fully established. That’s potential the cannabis market hasn’t seen since Washington became the first Pacific state to legalize adult use cannabis, almost 10 years ago (followed shortly after by Colorado, then Oregon in 2014 and California in 2016).

Unfortunately, the leaders of this great country have yet to follow suit, and cannabis remains illegal at the federal level. For those in the cannabis market, this means that state-licensed cannabis businesses must cultivate and sell their products within the confines of the state in which they are licensed. Nothing can cross state lines. Even if a business is licensed in both Vermont and New York, it can’t ship product from one state to the other without running afoul of federal legislation. Most in the East Coast cannabis market view this as a negative.

Virginia became the first state in the South to legalize adult use cannabis

While it certainly makes things more difficult, a small group of forward-thinking investors and entrepreneurs see this for what it really is: an opportunity to get in on the ground floor and establish state-specific grow operations and other supply-chain waypoints, where none or few currently exist. Think of the current state of the East Coast cannabis market as a beachhead. Right now, the industry is defined by state lines. But when the federal government finally legalizes adult use cannabis from coast to coast—and it’s only a matter of time before it does—those state lines will essentially disappear. When they do, the beachheads established now will become the infrastructure for the entire Eastern seaboard.

Take Virginia, for example. It shares its border with five states that have legalized medical cannabis but have yet to cross the bridge into adult use sales (West Virginia, Maryland, Kentucky, Tennessee and North Carolina). A Virginia-based grow operation built now has the potential to serve not just those five states but other contiguous markets including Pennsylvania, Ohio, South Carolina, and even Alabama, Georgia and Indiana. A relatively small investment now could pay huge dividends in just a few years, when the market literally blows wide open.

It’s this incredible potential that makes the rise of the East Coast cannabis market one of the most important developments in the last five years. And while the potential scale of grow operations and other cannabis businesses is certainly essential to the conversation, let’s not forget that “niche products” within the East Coast cannabis market are still very much up for grabs.

If the past decade has taught us anything, it’s that consumers are willing to pay a premium for high-quality, organically grown cannabis. Both new and long-time cannabis enthusiasts will choose — even demand — high-quality, organically grown cannabis that looks, smells and tastes fresh and doesn’t rely on harmful fertilizers, heavy metals or pesticides. They’re also enthusiastic about supporting brands that have a commitment to sustainable, eco-friendly operations.

The demand for high-quality, organically grown cannabis continues to increase

It’s very much like the current trends we see in the grocery store aisles. Manufacturers and consumers alike are seeing the value of “whole foods.” After decades of relying on heavily processed fare, both suppliers and end-users are benefiting from higher-quality ingredients. Consumers want to know what’s in the stuff they’re putting into their bodies. When it comes to cannabis, they want to know that what they’re taking to alleviate their anxiety doesn’t include harmful chemicals. This demand has the capacity to push revenue even higher.

And when the dam finally breaks and businesses can ship product from state to state, the idea is for growers to be well-positioned geographically to become suppliers of high-quality, organically grown cannabis, for every state east of the Mississippi.

Cannabis businesses in states such as Colorado have had the past decade to prepare for the coming boom, but that doesn’t mean it’s too late to join the party. The rise of the East Coast market parallels what Colorado and the other Pacific states experienced in the early-to-mid teens—the potential to become a very real industry, with huge capacity for growth and profit. Get in on that action now!

The East Coast cannabis market—and, indeed, the entire U.S. market—also sits on the verge of another game-changing trend: following in the footsteps of other markets and realizing sooner rather than later that high-quality, organically grown, eco-friendly cannabis is the next stage of the game. Few investors and entrepreneurs see that right now, but the astute businessperson can capitalize on both trends now and position themselves and their businesses for huge returns in the very near future. The rise of the East Coast cannabis market makes that a very real possibility.

Soapbox

COVID-19 & The Hypocrisy of Essential Cannabis Business

By Dr. Leslie Apgar, Gina Dubbé
No Comments

The cannabis industry is fraught with hypocrisy. Cannabis is good medicine as has been established by the numerous patients we have seen who are now off of their opioids, benzos and sleep agents due to the addition of medical cannabis products to their regimen. We see patients using cannabis when nothing else has worked and they tell us about their decreased suffering on a daily basis and thank us profusely for staying open during the COVID-19 shutdown, due to our designation as an essential business in Maryland.

Gina Dubbé (left) and Dr. Leslie Apgar (right), co-founders of Greenhouse Wellness, a medical cannabis dispensary in Maryland

The fact that this essential business has seen an increase in business due to the anxiety surrounding Covid-19 is an indication that our society will be dealing with the ramifications of anxiety, PTSD and depression for a long time to come as we deal with the fallout from the pandemic. Our forced shutdown of the workforce has resulted in the opportunity to look deeply at our basic assumptions and policies. Policing and incarceration for what is now a medically-necessary component to society is the crime. We believe that we have the opportunity to rectify the errors of our past and release those still imprisoned for cannabis possession, use, etc.

Further, as evidenced by our country’s recovery from the great depression, the legalization of alcohol certainly helped to bolster the economy. The US has the same opportunity with the cannabis industry. Tax revenue from the legalization of cannabis nationwide is sure to add a much-needed economic boost to help us recover from the disaster of this pandemic.

Our country has had an unfortunate historical relationship with a plant that has the potential to ease suffering safely and bring about some much-needed economic stimulation. It’s high time we fix the mistakes of our past and create a kinder and more inclusive future.

Cannabis Labs / Food Labs 2020 Agenda Announced

By Cannabis Industry Journal Staff
No Comments

EDGARTOWN, MA, March 11, 2020 – Innovative Publishing Co., the publisher of Cannabis Industry Journal and organizer of the Cannabis Quality Conference & Expo is announcing the agenda release for the Cannabis Labs Conference. The event will address science, technology, regulatory compliance and quality management as they relate to the cannabis testing market. It will take place on June 3–4 at U.S. Pharmacopeia in Rockville, MD.

Two keynotes for the Cannabis Labs Conference are listed in the agenda: Rowing in the Same Direction: The Biggest Safety Issues Facing the Cannabis Industry & How We Intend to Tackle Them – this talk will be delivered by Andrew Kline, Director of Public Policy at the National Cannabis Industry Association (NCIA). The second keynote is titled Cannabis Testing in Maryland: Protecting Patient Safety – this talk will be delivered by Lori Dodson, Deputy Director of the Maryland Medical Cannabis Control Commission.

The event will begin on June 3 with an opening general session with Charles Deibel speaking to both the cannabis and food lab testing industries: The Evolution of the Lab Testing Market: A History of Food and Cannabis Testing & How Far We’ve Come

Other notable presentations include: Building a Comprehensive Analytical Testing Program for Hemp by Grace Bandong, Global Scientific Strategy Leader at Eurofins; FDA Compliance for Cannabis- Stories from a Cannabis Public Health Investigator by Kim Stuck, Founder of Allay Consulting; Evaluation of Cannabinoids Reference Standards by Shiow-Jyi Wey, Reference Standard Scientist at the US Pharmacopeia; and more.

The event is co-located with the Food Labs Conference, which will focus on regulatory, compliance and risk management issues that companies face in the area of testing and food laboratory management. More information about this event is available on Food Safety Tech. Some of the critical topics include a discussion of FDA’s proposed FSMA rule, Laboratory Accreditation Program for Food Testing; considerations in laboratory design; pathogen testing and detection; food fraud; advances in testing and lab technology; allergen testing, control and management; validation and proficiency testing; and much more.

“By presenting two industry conferences under one roof, we can provide attendees with technology, regulatory compliance and best practices that cannabis and food might share but also focused topics that are unique to cannabis or food laboratory industry needs,” said Rick Biros, president of Innovative Publishing Co., Inc. and director of the Cannabis Labs Conference.

To learn more about the agenda, speakers and registration pricing, click here. The early bird discount of $395 expires on March 31.

Innovative Publishing Company, Inc., the organizer of the conference, is fully taking into considerations the travel concerns related to the coronavirus. Should any disruption occur that may prevent the production of this live event at its physical location in Rockville, MD due to COVID-19, all sessions will be converted to a virtual conference on the already planned dates. More information is available on the event website.

The New ISO/IEC 17025:2017: The Updated Standard

By Ravi Kanipayor, Christian Bax, Dr. George Anastasopoulos
No Comments

As state cannabis regulatory frameworks across the country continue to evolve, accreditation is becoming increasingly important. Because it provides consistent, turnkey standards and third-party verification, accreditation is quickly emerging as an important tool for regulators. For cannabis testing laboratories, this trend has been especially pronounced with the increasing number of states that require accreditation to ISO/IEC 17025.

As of 2017 there were nearly 68,000 laboratories accredited to ISO/IEC 17025, making it the single most important benchmark for testing laboratories around the world. ISO/IEC 17025:2005 specifies the general requirements for the competence to carry out tests including sampling. It covers testing performed using standard methods, non-standard methods and laboratory-developed methods. It is applicable to all organizations performing tests including cannabis labs. The standard is applicable to all labs regardless of the number of personnel or the extent of the scope of testing activities.  Developed to promote confidence in the operation of laboratories, the standard is now being used as a key prerequisite to operate as a cannabis lab in many states.

There are currently 26 states in the United States (also Canada) that require medical or adult-use cannabis to be tested as of February 2019. Of those states, 18 require cannabis testing laboratories to be accredited – with the vast majority requiring ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation. States that require testing laboratories to attain ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation represent some of the largest and most sophisticated cannabis regulatory structures in the country, including California, Colorado, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada and Ohio. As a consequence, many cannabis testing laboratories are taking note of recent changes to ISO/IEC 17025 standards.

ISO/IEC 17025 was first issued in 1999 by the International Organization for Standardization. The standard was updated in 2005, and again in 2017. The most recent update keeps many of the legacy standards from 2005, but adds several components – specifically requirements for impartiality, risk assessment and assessing measurement uncertainty. The remainder of this article takes a deeper dive into these three areas of ISO/IEC 17025, and what that means for cannabis testing laboratories.Objectivity is the absence or resolution of conflicts of interest to prevent adverse influence on laboratory activities.

Impartiality

ISO/IEC 17025:2005 touched on an impartiality requirement, but only briefly. The previous standard required laboratories that belonged to organizations performing activities other than testing and/or calibration to identify potential conflicts of interest for personnel involved with testing or calibration. It further required that laboratories had policies and procedures to avoid impartiality, though that requirement was quite vague.

ISO/IEC17025:2017 emphasizes the importance of impartiality and establishes strict requirements. Under the new standard, labs are responsible for conducting laboratory activities impartially and must structure and manage all laboratory activities to prevent commercial, financial or other operational pressures from undermining impartiality. The definitions section of the standard defines impartiality as the “presence of objectivity.” Objectivity is the absence or resolution of conflicts of interest to prevent adverse influence on laboratory activities. For further elaboration, the standard provides similar terms that also convey the meaning of impartiality: lack of prejudice, neutrality, balance, fairness, open-mindedness, even-handedness, detachment, freedom from conflicts of interest and freedom from bias.

To comply with the new standard, all personnel that could influence laboratory activities must act impartially. ISO/IEC 17025:2017 also requires that laboratory management demonstrate a commitment to impartiality. However, the standard is silent on how labs must demonstrate such commitment. As a starting point, some cannabis laboratories have incorporated statements emphasizing impartiality into their employee handbooks and requiring management and employee training on identifying and avoiding conflicts of interest.

Risk Assessment

Both the 2005 and 2017 versions contain management system requirements. A major update to this is the requirement in ISO/IEC 17025:2017 that laboratory management systems incorporate actions to address risks and opportunities. The new risk-based thinking in the 2017 version reduces prescriptive requirements and incorporates performance-based requirements.

Under ISO/IEC 17025:2017, laboratories must consider risks and opportunities associated with conducting laboratory activities. This analysis includes measures that ensure that:

  • The lab’s management system is successful;
  • The lab has policies to increase opportunities to achieve its goals and purpose;
  • The lab has taken steps to prevent or reduce undesired consequences and potential failures; and
  • The lab is achieving overall improvement.

Labs must be able to demonstrate how they prevent or mitigate any risks to impartiality that they identify.To comply with ISO/IEC 17025:2017, labs must plan and implement actions to address identified risks and opportunities into management systems. They must also measure the effectiveness of such actions. Importantly, the standard requires that the extent of risk assessments must be proportional to the impact a given risk may have on the validity of the laboratory’s test results.

ISO/IEC 17025:2017 does not require that labs document a formal risk management process, though labs have discretion to develop more extensive methods and processes if desired. To meet the requirements of the standard, actions to address risks can include sharing the risk, retaining the risk by informed decision, eliminating the risk source, pinpointing and avoiding threats, taking risks in order to pursue an opportunity, and changing the likelihood or consequence of the risk.

ISO/IEC 17025:2017 references “risks” generally throughout most of the standard. However, it specifically addresses risks to a laboratory’s impartiality in section 4.1. Note, the new standard requires that labs must not only conduct activities impartially, but also actively identify risks to their impartiality. This requirement is on-going, not annually or bi-annually. Risks to impartiality include risks arising from laboratory activities, from laboratory relationships, or from relationships of laboratory personnel. Relationships based on ownership, governance, shared resources, contracts, finances, marketing, management, personnel and payment of a sales commission or other inducements to perform under pressure can threaten a laboratory’s impartiality. Labs must be able to demonstrate how they prevent or mitigate any risks to impartiality that they identify.

Assessing Measurement Uncertainty With Decision Rules

ISO/IEC 17025:2005 required (only where necessary and relevant) test result reports to include a statement of compliance/non-compliance with specifications and to identify which clauses of the specification were met or not met. Such statements were required to take into account measurement uncertainty and if measurement results and uncertainties were omitted from the statement, the lab was required to record and maintain the results for future reference.

ISO/IEC 17025:2017 requires similar statements of conformity with an added “decision rule” element. When statements of conformity to a specification or standard are provided, labs must record the decision rule it uses and consider the level of risk the decision rule will have on recording false positive or negative test results. Like the 2005 version, labs must include statements of conformity in test result reports (only if necessary and relevant- see 5.10.3.1 (b)). Now, test result reports on statements of conformity must include the decision rule that was employed. 

Moving Forward

Because many states require ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation for licensing, cannabis testing labs across the country would be well advised to closely monitor the implications of changes in ISO/IEC 17025:2017 related to impartiality, risk assessment and measurement uncertainty. If you run a cannabis testing lab, the best way to ensure compliance is education, and the best place to learn more about the new requirements is from a globally recognized accreditation body, especially if it is a signatory to the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC) for testing laboratories, calibration laboratories and inspection agencies.

References

Facts & Figures

ISO/IEC 17025:2005: General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories

ISO/IEC 17025:2017: General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories 

East Coast Market Update

By Lindsay Engle
No Comments

There are going to be some states that are less progressive in the pro-cannabis movement, the same way there were states that were slow to move past alcohol prohibition. This is normal for any country moving towards change, better economic standing and safer healthcare.

There are only four states that completely ban recreational and medical cannabis altogether, and those states are Idaho, Kansas, Nebraska, and South Dakota. Although, there is no doubt that more and more states are moving towards a pro-recreational and medical cannabis stance. There are some states in the Northeast that are making strides to legalize cannabis.

Most of the states in the Northeast already have some form of medical cannabis law in the books already, but some are moving towards recreational legalization surprisingly quickly. Massachusetts already has legalized recreational cannabis and is setting up their regulatory framework currently while Vermont, New Jersey and New York, all of which already have medical laws, appear to be just steps away from legalizing it recreationally.

Northeast States Moving Towards Legalization

With Canada’s recent recreational legalization, a number of states just south of the border appear to be eyeing the issue for themselves. While some of these states have somewhat strict regulations in place, they look like promising emerging market opportunities.

New Jersey

New Jersey is closer than ever to legalizing recreational cannabis. Governor Phil Murphy built his campaign on the pledge to end cannabis prohibition. Murphy says having recreational cannabis legalized this year is his goal.

Murphy says that he wants legal recreational cannabis to be available because he believes it is a way to improve social justice in New Jersey and to bring the state new tax revenue. The biggest issue is what the legislation will look like and how it can be tied to expanding the states medicinal cannabis program.

New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy
New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy

Their current medical program, while still small in market size, appears to be gaining steam and growing in terms of patients getting access. Six months ago, The New Jersey Department of Health added a number of qualifying conditions patients can get a cannabis prescription for. The program still has its limits, like a 10% THC potency cap, small selection of types of products and other various restrictions.

New York

It was just last year when Governor Andrew Cuomo said cannabis was a “gateway drug” and he was opposed to legalization. After conducting a study on cannabis legalization, the result was a July Health Department report that determined the positive effects of legalization outweighs the potential negative impacts.

The debate between Andrew Cuomo and Cynthia Nixon in the gubernatorial race has highlighted their views of cannabis as well as other important issues; it’s important that New Yorkers vote in the primary election to have the best opportunity for the future.

If New York legalizes recreational cannabis, it could open up a huge new market. Medical cannabis users will likely see a price drop in their medication. Similar kinds of restrictions that plague the New Jersey market are also affecting medical patients in New York. Currently, smoking and edibles are both prohibited even for patients. Back in 2017, the state added chronic pain to its list of qualifying conditions, undoubtedly increasing the number of patients.

Companies with large amounts of capital are planting their flags in New York, like MedMen’s dispensary in Manhattan, even if the medical market might still be in its infancy.

MassachusettsOver the next six months, this market will be one to watch closely

Recreational cannabis became legalin the last couple months for Massachusetts, while the state legalized medical cannabis some time ago. Their medical program is relatively advanced compared to New York or New Jersey. Online registration, a large number of qualifying conditions, and a less restrictive business environment seemed to encourage a much larger number of patients and businesses supporting them.

Regulators in Massachusetts are currently consideringthe option of allowing delivery operations for the recreational market. The roll out for the recreational industry might seem somewhat slow, but regulators are tackling a wide range of issues and making considerable progress towards the highly anticipated recreational market opening. Just last week, regulators issued licenses to two cannabis-testing laboratories, and, according to the Boston Globe, the debut could be just weeks away.

While the industry and regulators get ready for the recreational debut, a recent crackdown on pesticide usehighlighted some of the growing pains that come with it. Over the next six months, this market will be one to watch closely as dispensaries begin selling recreational cannabis and the industry develops.

Vermont

The recent Canadian legalization of recreational cannabis will no doubt put pressure on states sharing a border with them to consider adjusting their laws.

Legalizing recreational cannabis will likely increase tourism to Vermont, the way other states saw an influx in tourism when they legalized. Unfortunately, Vermont has only decriminalized recreational cannabis. You can possess, grow and consume cannabis, but you can’t buy or sell it, which obviously restricts the ability of any business to enter the market.

Vermont Statehouse, Montpellier, VT
Image: Tony Fischer, Flickr

However, their legal medical program is relatively laissez-faire compared to other states in the region. They allow for cultivation at home or through a caregiver and there are a number of small businesses working under the legal medical program.

Maryland

Recreational cannabis isn’t legal in Maryland yet, but medical cannabis has been legal since 2014. It’s illegal for patients and caregivers to grow their own. Attempts have been made to make recreational cannabis in 2016, but the bill didn’t move forward.

Maryland’s industry was off to a rocky start, when the application process for businesses wanting to enter the market slowed to a crawl. This month, the state just approved four new medical dispensaries and one new processor for the market. The latest round of approvals brings the total to 69 dispensaries serving patients, while back in 2016, the state pre-approved 102 dispensaries originally.

Delaware Expect to see another attempt at legalizing via the legislature in early 2019.

Delaware is looking at the possibility of legalizing the recreational use of cannabis for adults over 21 years of age. Even though medical cannabis is legal, recreational use isn’t. Back in June, lawmakers in the state were close to recreational legalization but fell short of the mark by four votes. Expect to see another attempt at legalizing via the legislature in early 2019.

The Delaware Department of Health will continue to accept applications for medical cannabis cards, which is required for patients seeking to obtain their medicine from a compassion center. Patients are not allowed to grow their own cannabis. The state’s program has been operational for quite a while, and a small number of companies have established footprints in the state, like the Israeli brand Tikun Olam.

Pennsylvania

In 2016, Pennsylvania legalized medical cannabis. In contrast to some of the other states discussed earlier, PA is off to a more streamlined start. The second phase of their medical program allowed for more businesses to enter the market, a wider range of qualifying conditions and a larger number of patients registering. The industry is maturing here fast and could make for an exciting opportunity with recreational legalization potentially on the horizon.

A state lawmaker recently introduced legislation to legalize recreational cannabis. The bill would allow adults 21 and older to possess cannabis products such as edibles and up to six cannabis plants, but not more than three mature plants that are flowering.

The bill would call for the immediate release of people jailed for cannabis-related crimes. This would also allow anyone with a criminal history related to cannabis to have that expunged.

If the bill passes, the tax imposed is estimated to generate $500 million a year.

Tikun Olam Expands to Washington, D.C.

By Aaron G. Biros
No Comments

Today, Tikun Olam announced their expansion into the Washington, D.C. market. Partnering with the cultivator, Alternative Solutions, they will license them to grow, manufacture and distribute Tikun-branded products.

Tikun Olam is an international cannabis company with roots in Israel, where they are working in clinical trials to produce strains targeting a handful of medical conditions. The company has made serious investments in the United States market previously, with operations in Delaware, Washington and Nevada, and has plans to enter the Rhode Island, Maryland, Massachusetts and Illinois markets in 2018.

cannabis close up
The Tikun Olam strain Avidekel being grown in Israel.

The five-year licensing deal signed with Alternative Solutions is the latest development in their expansion plans in North America. They also have similar partnerships developing around the world, including in Canada, Australia, United Kingdom and South Africa.

Tikun plans on having their full line of products ready for distribution with Alternative Solutions in the Washington, D.C. market some time in 2018. “Alternative Solutions is thrilled to be Tikun Olam’s exclusive partner in DC,” says Matt Lawson-Baker, chief operating officer of Alternative Solutions. “We look forward to making Tikun’s products available at all DC dispensaries, giving access to these clinically proven strains to the more than 5,600 registered MMJ patients in Washington DC.”

Bernard Sucher, chief executive officer of Tikun Olam, says he is excited to get working with Alternative Solutions. “Its cultivation and manufacturing operations will make it possible for Tikun to serve every single patient in a single jurisdiction–a first for us and something we hope to accomplish within every U.S. state. “