The deadline to submit comments to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) on proposed regulations for hemp was Wednesday—and advocates, stakeholders and lawmakers had a lot to say.
In the three months since USDA published an interim final rule for hemp, which was federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill, more than 4,600 individuals and organizations took the opportunity to weigh in, with many recommending certain revisions before rules for the crop are finalized.
On Wednesday alone, more than 1,000 comments were posted—a significant number considering that the public comment deadline was initially set for the end of last month until USDA extended it based on the volume of responses.
Here’s what lawmakers, stakeholders and advocates had to say about USDA’s proposed regulations:
While many celebrated the department’s commitment to quickly developing rules for the crop, there have been widespread, bipartisan concerns about select provisions that the industry and its supporters say could hamper its growth and create unnecessary burdens for farmers.
Several members of Congress, including entire congressional delegations representing Virginia, Maine, Colorado and Connecticut, have sent letters to USDA outlining requests for changes to the rules. Most inquiries identify the same specific concerns: 1) the negligence threshold for the allowable amount of THC is too low and doesn’t account for factors such as drought that can cause potency levels to spike, 2) the 15-day testing window before harvest is too short and 3) requiring testing to be conducted at Drug Enforcement Administration-licensed laboratories is onerous and will cause delays.
“Colorado continues to see tremendous growth in this industry and we are excited for the economic potential of this new crop,” the state’s congressional delegation wrote in a letter sent on Tuesday. “Therefore, it is critical the USDA establish a regulatory structure that allows our farmers to succeed.”
Colorado is a leader in every step of the hemp supply chain, maintaining a careful balance of regulatory oversight and economic support.
It is critical that the USDA establish a regulatory structure that allows our farmers to succeed. https://t.co/Isqausxc7l
— Rep. Joe Neguse (@RepJoeNeguse) January 30, 2020
“While the [interim final rule] begins to formulate a much needed regulatory structure, there are key provisions that are unnecessary, burdensome, and could hurt Colorado’s hemp industry,” they said.
The Connecticut congressional delegation made similar points in a letter sent to Agriculture Secretary Sonny Purdue on Wednesday.
As the @USDA continues to create a path forward for #hempfarming, I joined my colleagues from CT & @bryanhurlburt in sending a letter to @SecretarySonny advocating for a system that ensures farmers have the flexibility they need to enter the hemp industry. https://t.co/Pm7qUWa3Mq
— Rep. Joe Courtney (@RepJoeCourtney) January 30, 2020
“While [the proposed rules] help define the path forward for our farmers who wish to grow hemp, they contain a number of restrictive requirements that may prevent these very people from even taking advantage of the new agricultural opportunity,” the lawmakers said. “Our state’s hemp farmers want an opportunity to grow hemp, and have it treated the same as any other agricultural commodity. The rule as currently written assumes hemp is a controlled substance until it is proven otherwise.”
USDA also heard from Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D) and the state’s attorney general and agriculture commissioner, who submitted comment on Wednesday identifying eight areas in the proposed rules that they argue need “modification.” Those areas include issues with regulations around sampling periods, lab certification requirements, THC thresholds and disposal protocol.
“As an early mover state in hemp, we understand the pivotal role a workable regulatory structure plays in allowing a new industry to flourish and we appreciate the hard work your staff has undertaken to construct a framework for states to operate their own hemp programs,” the letter, a hard copy of which was submitted on Colorado-grown hemp paper, states. “We understand that establishing a regulatory framework is a difficult task and we appreciate your willingness to consider the alternative approaches to regulating hemp as well as the legal issues set forth in this document.”
In a press release, Polis said “Colorado is the top state for hemp production, and we are proud of our work to increase good jobs and honored to help the Department of Agriculture figure out what we already know about hemp in Colorado.”
“We want to unleash this industry to grow and innovate. The proposed interim final rule, as currently written, does not support best practices in hemp production at a critical time in the development of this important industry,” he said. “The recommended changes we’ve put forward will support the hemp industry while establishing appropriate guidelines.”
The advocacy group Vote Hemp sent its comments on Wednesday, stating that it “believes the USDA has taken steps in the right direction in drafting the [interim final rule], however certain provisions do raise serious concerns for our stakeholders, hemp producers, processors and manufacturers.”
The negligence threshold, sampling protocol, testing and disposal requirements and laboratory restrictions were among the group’s chief concerns.
“We appreciate that the Agency also wants to get feedback after the 2020 growing season,” Vote Hemp said, adding that it recommends that USDA hold “another comment period in the 2nd half of 2021 and issue a final rule in the fall of 2021 after having more time to see how the new [interim final rule] has been working.”
“We sincerely appreciate your consideration of these comments and look forward to working with the Agency to ensure a strong and successful hemp industry,” the group said.
On Monday, Vermont’s agriculture department submitted comments to USDA, expressing similar concerns about the regulations.
Again, the top problems the state agency identified concern the THC threshold, sampling protocol and laboratory certification requirements.
“We believe our suggestions will improve the hemp program making it better for small growers while creating more opportunities for those making a living from hemp,” Vermont Agriculture Secretary Anson Tebbetts said in a press release. “I hope the USDA will consider providing States with the necessary flexibility to be able regulate hemp production while providing Vermont farmers with greater certainty and less risk.”
Michigan’s agriculture department said in comments submitted Wednesday that it “looks forward to working with USDA to develop and implement a strong industrial hemp program that’s compliant with the intent of the Hemp Farming Act of 2018 and is economically viable for Michigan hemp growers and processors.
The letter focused primarily on the THC threshold, with the department arguing that the “regulatory fear that hemp could potentially exceed a 0.3 percent concentration of THC and the unfair suspicion that it will be grown and used for illicit purposes must be balanced with the reality that all but three states have legalized Cannabis sativa L in at least some form or fashion.”
“Throughout North America, the combined legality of hemp at the federal level, and marijuana at the state level, has resulted in many positive outcomes including, but not limited to, new business opportunities, job creation, increased state sales tax revenue, and improved quality of life,” the letter states. “These positive outcomes far outweigh the perceived negative consequences of growing hemp that marginally exceeds 0.3 percent.”
The National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA) sent in its comments on Tuesday, reiterating that the proposed testing window is too short, the THC threshold is too low and the laboratory requirements are unnecessary, among other concerns.
“On behalf of NASDA state and territorial members, we are grateful for your dedicated work in establishing a federal program that facilitates the growth of a promising new industry while accommodating the diverse needs and challenges of farmers across our country,” the organization wrote. “Given their own diverse resources and challenges, our members will benefit from greater clarity from USDA in meeting the requirements of the 2018 Farm Bill. We ask that you incorporate these concerns, as well as the feedback from our individual members, as you advance a final rule.”
Outside of the practical, agriculture-specific provisions, others have raised questions about finance implications. The American Bankers Association (ABA) said in comments submitted Wednesday that it sees three possible problems with the interim final rule.
In a letter sent today to the @USDA, ABA recommended several changes to an interim final rule that would facilitate banks offering services to hemp growers and hemp-related businesses. Read the letter: https://t.co/ZhIiMGeK3U
— American Bankers Association (@ABABankers) January 29, 2020
Federal guidances stipulates that hemp businesses are entitled to financial services, but it requires them to be licensed—and currently, USDA’s rules only allow federal, state and local enforcement officials to access the licensing database, so ABA wants to expand access to banks. ABA also said licenses should be able to be automatically renewed to avoid uncertainty. Finally, it is seeking clarification on what happens to licenses when “unanticipated events, such as a death or illness, occur between planting and harvesting.”
“ABA appreciates the opportunity to comment on the USDA interim final rule on domestic hemp production. We believe that, with important changes to the rule, farmers will be encouraged to consider a crop which has a great deal of promise for a variety of uses, including clothing, construction, and as a replacement for plastics,” the letter concludes. “However, some of the practical limitations, as discussed above, must be addressed to ensure that risks are appropriately mitigated and that farmers and their lenders feel comfortable supporting this industry.”
Of course, these comments represent just a small fraction of the more than 4,600 that have been submitted. Many individuals engaged in the hemp industry also shared their thoughts and concerns, though many echoed the same points about excess restrictions and requirements.
“Enforcing these regulations will be impossible to uphold and will create an extra stress on farmers who already have so many variables to contend with in a new emerging industry,” one commenter wrote. “Free the industry, move out of the small farmers way. Stop favoring large corporate interest.”
Another person wrote that the “0.3 percent THC requirements are not founded in any science and just downright silly.”
“These strict requirements will do nothing but hurt the farmers as well as the end product that is produced,” they said. “I recommend at least a 1 percent THC threshold, which would allow farmers to focus on producing quality CBD biomass without the added worry of losing everything because of a meaningless percentage.”
A commenter based in Kentucky expressed frustration over the rule’s proposed 10-year ban on participation in the hemp industry by certain people with prior felony drug convictions.
“I believe that it is hypocritical, and cruel to restrict these persons from the hemp/cannabis industry,” the comment states. “We love our neighbors and family members—we need them to have every opportunity to get their lives back. Judicial consequences have failed tremendously in the war on drugs.”
It remains to be seen how much stock USDA will put into the public comments, but in any case, it’s clear that not only is interest in the regulations strong and widespread, but recommendations on changes are largely consistent.
This story has been updated to include comments from the Colorado congressional delegation.
Photo courtesy of Brendan Cleak.
New Mexico Governor Pushes For Marijuana Legalization In State Of The State Address
New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) on Tuesday reiterated her commitment to legalizing marijuana in the state in 2021.
During a State of the State address, the governor again discussed cannabis reform as a means to generate needed tax revenue amid the coronavirus pandemic and create jobs.
“A crisis like the one we’ve experienced last year can be viewed as a loss or as an invitation to rethink the status quo—to be ambitious and creative and bold,” she said. “That kind of thinking includes, of course, recreational cannabis and the tens of thousands of jobs and hundreds of millions in new revenue it will bring to our state.”
Watch the governor discuss marijuana reform below:
“I have no interest in another year of thousands of New Mexicans eager to get to work and make their future in this industry being told ‘no,’ just because that’s easier than doing the hard work to get to ‘yes,'” the governor said. “When we emerge from this pandemic, we can have the same old economy, with the same old boom-and-bust future, or we can roar back to life, breaking new ground and fearlessly investing in ourselves, in the limitless potential of New Mexicans. I know which future I prefer, and we can begin building it this year.”
We’ll avoid extended economic stagnation only if we’re forward-thinking about the future & keep our eyes on what new industries we can bring into the fold – that includes recreational cannabis, and the tens of thousands of jobs & hundreds of millions in new revenue it will bring. pic.twitter.com/ErkFAd9Tw0
— Michelle Lujan Grisham (@GovMLG) January 26, 2021
Also during the speech, the Lujan Grisham touted the fact that her administration has issued nearly 700 hemp business licenses over the past two years.
New Mexico is creating new jobs in the outdoor recreation industry 10 times faster than the national average.
In two years we have issued almost 700 brand-new hemp licenses, covering 15 million square feet of indoor growing space and almost 10,000 outdoor acres. pic.twitter.com/SAz6Gn3XuV
— Michelle Lujan Grisham (@GovMLG) January 26, 2021
The governor also included cannabis legalization as part of her 2021 legislative agenda that she released earlier this month. She said in a recent interview that she’s “still really optimistic about cannabis” this session.
That optimism is bolstered by the fact that several anti-legalization Democrats, including the Senate president pro tem and the Finance Committee chair, were ousted by progressive primary challengers last year.
Additional pressure to end cannabis prohibition this year is coming from neighboring Arizona, where voters approved legalization in November and where sales officially launched last week.
New Mexico shares another border with Colorado, one of the first states to legalize for adult use. Cannabis is also expected to be legalized across the southern border in Mexico, with lawmakers facing a Supreme Court mandate to end prohibition by April 2021.
A bill to legalize cannabis for adult use passed one Senate committee last year only to be rejected in another before the end of the 30-day session. Earlier, in 2019, the House approved a legalization bill that included provisions to put marijuana sales mostly in state-run stores, but it later died in the Senate.
At least five pieces of marijuana legalization legislation are being prepared in the legislature this year, according to a top lawmaker, and so what the program might ultimately look like is an open question.
Senate Majority Leader Peter Wirth (D) said last week that he’s been having conversations with lawmakers about what needs to be prioritized in reform legislation. That includes ensuring that it promotes social equity and protects the state’s existing medical cannabis system.
Rep. Javier Martinez (D), who has consistently sponsored cannabis reform bills in past sessions, said recently that the “biggest change you’ll see in this bill, which is one of the main points of contention last year, was the creation of a number of different funds, earmarks, tax coming in from cannabis.”
In any case, there’s economic urgency to pass and implement a legal cannabis program. And while no bills have been introduced so far this session, lawmakers expect several to be released as early as this week.
Polling indicates that voters are ready for the policy change. A survey released in October found that a strong majority of New Mexico residents are in favor of legalization with social equity provisions in place, and about half support decriminalizing drug possession more broadly.
In May, the governor signaled that she was considering actively campaigning against lawmakers who blocked her legalization bill in 2020. She also said that she’s open to letting voters decide on the policy change via a ballot referendum if lawmakers can’t send a legalization bill to her desk.
Lujan Grisham isn’t the only governor who’s made a point to highlight marijuana policy in their annual address.
The governor of Nevada stressed during his State of the State speech last week that his budget proposal contains provisions to keep marijuana tax revenue flowing to schools in the state.
In his address this month, New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy (D) reaffirmed his commitment to passing legislation to get a legal marijuana market up and running after voters approved a legalization referendum in November.
Also, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) discussed the need to legalize marijuana in 2021 during his State of the State address.
In Connecticut, Gov. Ned Lamont (D) similarly talked about his intent to work with lawmakers to enact legalization during his State of the State address.
Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear (D) said in his annual address that “it is time to legalize medical marijuana.”
In Virginia, Gov. Ralph Northam (D) said during his State of the Commonwealth speech that cannabis criminalization was intentionally set up “generations ago” to discriminate against people of color, and he called for legalization.
Photo courtesy of WeedPornDaily.
Police In New Jersey’s Largest City Continue Marijuana Arrests At Pre-Legalization Rate
New Jersey voters approved a referendum to legalize marijuana in November and the state attorney general is instructing prosecutors to suspend low-level cannabis cases—but the number of marijuana-related arrests in the state’s largest city have remained largely unchanged compared to last year.
That’s according to a recent analysis of crime report data in Newark by Justin Leiby, an associate professor of accountancy at the University of Illinois.
The Newark Police Department made a total of 57 marijuana-related arrests in the first 20 days of this year, compared to 63 arrests made for the same period in 2020. But more notably, that trend is driven by a spike in arrests for simple possession alone, which grew from 39 last year to 48 this year—a 23 percent increase.
This is despite the fact that state Attorney General Gurbir Grewal (D) issued guidance in November telling prosecutors not to take on low-level cannabis cases as lawmakers work to develop regulations for a regulated market. His office also recently circulated a follow-up notice extending that policy until March 31, NJ Advance Media reported.
Meanwhile, cases of possession with the intent to distribute in Newark declined 63 percent, from 24 in the first days of January 202 to just nine in the same time period this year. That activity would not be legalized under the vote-approved referendum.
What makes these statistics all the more troubling from advocates’ perspective is that the overall arrests for all crimes in Newark were lower in the first 20 days of this year compared to 2020. The numbers of busts dropped from 631 to 347, or 45 percent. Yet police are still managing to find new cases where cannabis is involved.
It should be noted that some arrests included in Leiby’s analysis are for marijuana as well as other illicit drugs. But it remains the case that people are still being criminalized and possibly getting records for possessing cannabis when the plant was legalized via referendum and legislation is actively being considered to allow for retail sales.
It’s also the case that cannabis busts may be understated in the data, as some law enforcement descriptions of the arrests generally refer to drugs but do not specify the substances.
When asked about the cannabis arrest data, the Newark Department of Public Safety (NDPS) conducted its own analysis and found that arrests for possession alone were seven percent lower in the first 20 days of January 2021 compared to 2020 (55 versus 59 arrests).
That’s based on the department’s “preliminary numbers for possession of marijuana.” It’s unclear why there are minor discrepancies in the figures provided by Leiby, which is based on publicly available city data, and those from NDPS.
Either way, a minor single-digit reduction in cannabis arrests is probably not what most voters had in mind when they approved legalization at the ballot box in November.
Newark Public Safety Director Anthony Ambrose defended the enforcement actions in a statement to Marijuana Moment.
“The state of New Jersey has laws that are currently in place that make marijuana a criminal act,” he said. “The current law does not reflect the referendum. Until the laws are changed, we have to abide by the current law. Also, most of the people arrested were given summonses. They were not a criminal matter.”
Leiby said the departments defense of the arrests “is pretty thin given that the New Jersey Attorney General has told prosecutors to stop prosecuting possession cases and delay cases in which there are other pending charges in addition to marijuana possession.”
“What’s the point of arresting people for something prosecutors have been ordered to ignore?” he said. “Note that I am not criticizing the officers doing the arrests, or really even the Newark Police Department. Officers are doing their jobs. If you tell them it’s not their job to arrest people for marijuana possession, then most if not all of them would stop the arrests.”
This analysis may come as an unwelcome surprise to Newark Mayor Ras Baraka (D), who is a strong proponent of cannabis reform with an eye toward racial justice.
In 2019, he and several other New Jersey mayors called for automatic expungements of low-level marijuana possession and distribution convictions if the state ultimately moved to legalize cannabis. The previous year, he criticized legalization legislation that was in the works because he felt it didn’t do enough to ensure social equity.
Baraka’s office did not respond to Marijuana Moment’s request for comment for this story.
For police departments that are waiting on enabling legislation for legalization to be enacted before easing off cannabis cases, it may still be a while, as lawmakers have been stuck in a back-and-forth with the governor over a bill that they began crafting after the voter referendum was approved.
Both the legislature and Gov. Phil Murphy (D) are in favor of legalization, but there’s been disagreement over a particular provision related to penalties for underage people who violate the law. The governor wants underage possession to continue to be met with some penalty, but leading lawmakers say it is not their intent to criminalize such activity.
A “clean up” bill was expected to get a floor vote this month, but it was postponed after key legislators pulled their support.
“The continued arrests of New Jersey residents, overwhelmingly people of color, for marijuana possession represents a moral and political failing of state lawmakers,” NORML Executive Director Erik Altieri told Marijuana Moment. “If the leadership of the Garden State is truly as concerned with justice, the governor would immediately sign the depenalization bill into law and end the draconic policy of putting otherwise law-abiding citizens in handcuffs for the possession of a plant that 67 percent of the voters say should be legal.”
DeVaughn Ward, senior legislative counsel for the Marijuana Policy Project, told Marijuana Moment that the Newark arrest numbers “represent the unfortunate reality of the delay in effectuating legalization in New Jersey.”
“It’s disheartening to see that despite the overwhelming support of New Jersey voters for ending prohibition and cannabis-related arrests, in addition to the majority of legislators supporting cannabis reform legislation that people are still being arrested for cannabis,” he said. “It makes need for action by the Gov. Murphy and the legislature all the more direr.”
Murphy pledged in a State of the State address earlier this month that “we are on the verge of passing an innovative and groundbreaking set of laws to reform our historically unjust approach to marijuana and cannabis.”
He also recently said that he remains “optimistic” that he can reach a deal with lawmakers to revise the enabling legislation they sent him last month, but Senate President Steve Sweeney (D) said that “the ball’s in his court,” referring to the governor.
Top New York Official Responds To Marijuana Advocates’ Criticism Of Governor’s Legalization Plan
New York activists are ready for 2021 to be the year that the state finally legalizes marijuana. But one little-noticed provision of the cannabis reform proposal introduced by the governor in his budget request last week has become a major source of contention.
That said, Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s (D) second-in-command told Marijuana Moment that the policy at issue—an increase in penalties for certain cannabis-related offenses—could change as the administration and lawmakers negotiate the finer details of the proposal.
While marijuana would be legal to purchase and possess for adults 21 and older under Cuomo’s plan, the legislative text he released also contains a section that would make it a class D felony—punishable by up to 2.5 years in prison—to sell cannabis to anyone under the age of 21.
That’s a significantly more serious penalty that what’s currently on the books. As it stands, an illicit sale to an underage person is a misdemeanor.
Advocates say this proposal runs counter to the stated intent of the legalization measure, which is to end marijuana criminalization and promote social equity. Cuomo has repeatedly recognized that people of color are disproportionately targeted by police when it comes to cannabis enforcement—and there’s no reason to believe that would be any different if this policy were to go into effect.
Lt. Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) told Marijuana Moment in a phone interview on Tuesday that the administration remains “very concerned about making sure that no one under the age of 21 is participating” in the marijuana market, and the intent of the section at issue is deterrence.
But while the provision was included in the governor’s budget plan, she also left room for further revisions, stating that “much of it is going to be negotiated with the legislature, and all these details can be resolved with their input as well.”
Eli Northrup, a New York public defender and member of the reform coalition Smart START NY, ignited a conversation over the youth penalty provision last week, arguing on Twitter that legalization “cannot mean increased criminalization.”
Under @NYGovCuomo marijuana “legalization” proposal, released Tuesday, selling ANY amount to a person under 21 is a class D felony which carries the potential of 2.5 yrs in prison. This same behavior is currently a misdemeanor. Legalization cannot mean increased criminalization.
— Eli Northrup (@EliNorthrup) January 21, 2021
The text of the proposal at issue states that a “person is guilty of criminal sale of cannabis in the second degree when he knowingly and unlawfully sells…any amount of cannabis or concentrated cannabis to any person under twenty-one years of age” and that such an offense is “a class D felony.”
Here’s the provision in the Governor’s revenue proposal for those interested pic.twitter.com/DACDpTwhw4
— Eli Northrup (@EliNorthrup) January 21, 2021
Melissa Moore, New York state director for the Drug Policy Alliance, told Marijuana Moment that “if we’re going to legalize, that needs to mean not creating new marijuana crimes.”
Cuomo has “really acknowledged the fact that the harm of marijuana criminalization has fallen disproportionately on communities of color in New York, and we need to move out of that scenario and get it right this time,” she said.
“He said too many black and brown New Yorkers have been the target of enforcement—that there’s been this exaggerated injustice of the justice system,” Moore continued. “If that’s the case, then as we’re turning the page in the playbook and moving into a legalization framework, then why on earth would you establish really harsh penalties and create new crimes, as he’s done in his proposal?”
Hey @NYGovCuomo we watching you 👇🏿 @startsmartNY coalition member @EliNorthrup of @BronxDefenders with the truth – legalization does not mean increased criminalization. Stay focused yall, are people are worth more than talking points. cc: @FABNEWYORK @oldmanebro @MichaelSkolnik https://t.co/OaQcQvI9B3
— Kassandra Frederique (@Kassandra_Fred) January 21, 2021
One of the goals of taxing and regulating cannabis sales for adults is to disrupt the illicit market and prevent youth use by ensuring that marijuana is sold at licensed facilities where there are policies in place to stop underage people from accessing those products. And to that end, there should be business-level penalties for dispensaries that violate the law such as revoking a license, Moore said.
But what the governor’s language threatens to do is further criminalize individuals over marijuana even as the state moves to establish a regulated market, advocates argue. Hypothetically, a police officer would be able to arrest a 22-year-old college student for selling a joint to a 19-year-old classmate, for instance, and giving police that latitude could lead to a continuation of discriminatory enforcement.
Beyond the underage provision, advocates also have outstanding concerns the Cuomo plan’s omission of a home cultivation option for medical patients or recreational consumers.
The lieutenant governor told Marijuana Moment that while such activity would not be allowed under the budget proposal as submitted, “everything is always on the table” as the administration works with legislators to enact legalization.
“It’s certainly something that has been brought to our attention,” she said. “I can’t say that there’s a change in that at this point, but I also have to ask advocates to recognize that this is a major societal, cultural shift for a state like New York, that we view ourselves as very progressive, but much of New York State is not New York City. There are very conservative areas of our state.”
“I know these these areas are hesitant philosophically, and in order to get their buy-in and acquiescence and acceptance of what is, in their mind, really dramatic shifts in the state policy, we have to take smaller steps,” she added.
Meanwhile, advocates have also expressed frustration over the limited amount of funding for social equity grants that’s included in the governor’s proposal.
The administration says it expects the state to bring in about $350 million in marijuana tax revenue, and the plan allocates $100 million of those funds to social equity grants over the course of four years, followed by a recurring $50 million annually.
“The parameters of that [grant program] have not been established yet,” Hochul said. “This is where we want to have input from those communities to determine, does this help businesses set up retail operations in order to be in the communities legally selling marijuana? Does this create other opportunities to address job training?”
“We want to make sure that these communities also have access to the jobs and the job training,” she added. “There are many ways that we can address this, and we’re not going to say the answers—I think the answers lie in those communities themselves.”
Activists have also pointed out that Cuomo’s proposal “seeks to enhance criminal penalties for driving under the influence of marijuana and creates new criminal penalties for growing and selling marijuana without a license.”
The Governor's proposal also seeks to enhance criminal penalties for driving under the influence of marijuana and creates new criminal penalties for growing and selling marijuana without a license.
— Brooklyn Defender Services (@BklynDefender) January 22, 2021
All that said, the governor’s budget plan—which includes legalization language for the third year in a row—is not the finished product, as Hochul pointed out. Rather, it represents a starting point for negotiations with his office and the legislature, where other reform bills have been introduced for this session.
And unlike in past sessions, the legislature will have more influence this year after Senate Democrats secured a supermajority in the November election. If the governor were to veto any bill over details he didn’t like, they could potentially have enough votes to override him.
Advocates are confident that lawmakers will recognize the potential consequences of provisions they see as problematic and will work to remove or revise them as the legislature takes up the issue.
To that end, New York’s legal cannabis market could end up looking more like what’s outlined in a bill introduced by Sen. Liz Krueger (D) and 18 cosponsors at the beginning of this month. The legislation would make it so adults 21 and older would be able to purchase cannabis and cultivate up to six plants for personal use.
It would also provide for automatic expungements for those with prior cannabis convictions and it also includes low- or zero-interest loans for qualifying equity applicants who wish to start marijuana businesses.
In any case, there’s growing recognition in the state that legalization is an inevitability.
The top Republican in the New York Assembly said last month that he expects the legislature to legalize cannabis this coming session.
Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins (D) said in November that she also anticipates that the reform will advance in 2021, though she noted that lawmakers will still have to decide on how tax revenue from marijuana sales is distributed.
Cuomo also said that month that the “pressure will be on” to legalize cannabis in the state and lawmakers will approve it “this year” to boost the economy amid the health crisis.
The push to legalize in New York could also be bolstered by the fact that voters in neighboring New Jersey approved a legalization referendum in November.
Separately, several other bills that focus on medical marijuana were recently prefiled in New York, and they touch on a wide range of topics—from tenants’ rights for medical cannabis patients to health insurance coverage for marijuana products.