Law Washington state has legal cannabis

[CarolKing]

The messing with our THC levels has been pushed off to next legislative season. I hope that doesn’t happen. Weed enthusiasts won’t put up with that!

 

[CarolKing]

Since I’m from here. Thought I’d dust off this thread. In Western WA we have very little outdoor growing. They grow outside more in Eastern WA. A lot of Hydroponic growing by companies.


Washington state’s new Marijuana Odor Task Force to tackle issue confronting broader MJ industry
Published September 10, 2020 | By Bart Schaneman

Washington state regulators are believed to be among the first in the nation to take a closer look at an issue that has bedeviled cannabis growers and sparked costly lawsuits targeting the marijuana industry: odor emanating from growers and processors.

The state is forming a Marijuana Odor Task Force and seeking an outside expert to advise regulators on the possible impact of cannabis odors on human health.

Mainstream agricultural businesses, including livestock and poultry producers, have long dealt with public complaints over odor.

The odor task force’s creation comes at a time when Washington cannabis businesses already are chafing under heavy regulations. And many are unlikely to welcome more.

“Unfortunately I think it’s necessary to address all the public outcry,” said Shawn Wagenseller, CEO of Arlington-based cannabis cultivator WA Bud Co. “But I believe the complaints are coming from a very small percentage of opponents to cannabis.”

For instance, Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization (RICO) Act lawsuits have been filed across the country, including in Colorado, California, Massachusetts and Oregon, with plaintiffs alleging that cannabis odor from nearby farms devalues property and harms the owners’ ability to enjoy their land.

“There are certainly grows that are being very unprofessional and not taking care of their odor,” Wagenseller said.

But, she added, the industry has enemies, contending that some people are using smells from cannabis farms to tie up companies in costly lawsuits.

 

[momofthegoons]

​

Washington State Marijuana Homegrow Bill Draws Smooth Reception At Initial Hearing​

A renewed effort in Washington State to allow adults to grow marijuana at home had its first hearing in Olympia last week, with a House committee considering a bill that would permit individuals to cultivate up to six cannabis plants for personal use.

A committee vote on the proposal could come as soon as this Friday.

Though Washington was among the first states in the nation to legalize commercial marijuana, growing the plant at home for recreational use remains a felony. Lawmakers have repeatedly rejected past personal cultivation proposals in the years since voters approved a 2012 legalization initiative, citing obstacles to enforcement and a worry that homegrown cannabis would be sold on the illicit market.

If last Friday’s hearing is any indication, however, this year could be different. Public testimony on the new homegrow bill, HB 1019, was relatively low-key, and most questions from lawmakers focused on minor details, such as how homegrow would compare to home beer brewing and whether landlords should be able to prohibit plants in rental units.

“I was surprised by the reasonableness of it,” said John Kingsbury, co-founder of advocacy group Homegrow Washington, told Marijuana Moment in an email after the hearing. “It isn’t always this way. In fact, it has never been this smooth before.”

The bill, HB 1019, is currently in the House Commerce and Gaming Committee, which is chaired by Rep. Shelley Kloba (D), who is also the lead sponsor of the homegrow proposal. During an executive session later this week, lawmakers could vote to advance the legislation.

“This is a bill we’ve seen a few times before in this committee,” Kloba said at the recent public hearing, noting that momentum for the policy shift has only grown as homegrow has become “a fairly standard part” of marijuana legalization in other states. “Prohibiting homegrow is an antiquated policy, and it is time for us to evolve in this space.”

That point was echoed by homegrow advocates, who noted that nearly every other U.S. state that has legalized marijuana for adults allows home cultivation. Washington, by contrast, allows only registered medical marijuana patients to grow their own cannabis.

“This bill is well in line with the trend from other states, underscoring that we are not in front of this issue but rather coming into harmony with other legal states,” testified Lara Kaminsky, government affairs liaison for The Cannabis Alliance, an industry advocacy group.

The only other state with legal cannabis sales that forbids home cultivation is Illinois, where the offense is treated as a civil infraction rather than a felony. New Jersey, which legalized marijuana in November’s election but has yet to launch legal sales, will also outlaw homegrow under implementation legislation on the desk of Gov. Phil Murphy (D).

Washington activists initially excluded homegrow from their 2012 initiative over worry that the policy might not be embraced by voters. Until that point, no other state had yet legalized marijuana for adult use.

Policymakers have also expressed concerns that letting people grow their own marijuana at home could reduce state tax revenue from commercial cannabis sales or divert homegrown product into the illegal market. But successful homegrow policies in other states, advocates said, have shown those fears to be overblown.

“What’s being proposed here would not be a bold new experiment, but rather a well-worn path,” Kingsbury said. “Crime hasn’t exploded in states that allow home growing, and tax revenues have not suffered.”

Under the new legislation, home growers could be charged with a civil infraction if odors from their plants cause a public nuisance or if plants can be seen from public property. Those provisions, which weren’t included in past Washington homegrow bills, are meant to provide recourse for neighbors and prevent plants from being stolen.

 

[momofthegoons]

Washington Lawmakers Approve Marijuana Homegrow Bill In Committee​

A bill to allow marijuana homegrow in Washington State cleared its first legislative hurdle Friday morning, passing out of the House Commerce and Gaming Committee on a 7–2 vote with a “do pass” recommendation.

Washington voters approved a cannabis legalization initiative in 2012, and retail sales have been ongoing since mid-2014. Cultivating the plant for personal use, however, remains a felony.

“Washington was one of the first states to legalize, with understandable trepidation,” Rep. Shelley Kloba (D), the lead sponsor of HB 1019 and the chair of the House committee, said at Friday’s meeting. Homegrow, she said, “is one area where we’ve taken a more cautious approach and let other states test the waters.”

Of all other states that have begun legal cannabis sales in the years since Washington legalized, only one—Illinois—has outlawed homegrow. But in Illinois, advocates in Washington have pointed out, the offense is a civil infraction rather than felony crime.

Washington’s homegrow bill would allow adults to cultivate up to six cannabis plants at home and keep the marijuana those plants produce. Plants and containers of more than one ounce of cannabis would need to be labeled with the adult’s name, birthdate and address. Households with multiple adults could grow no more than 15 total plants.

While adults could give small amounts of homegrown cannabis to one another, unlicensed sales would remain illegal.

Plants would also need to be out of public view and unable to be “readily smelled” outside of the property. Growers who violate those limits would be subject to a civil infraction that carries a maximum $50 fine. Landlords, meanwhile, could decide whether or not to allow rental tenants to grow cannabis on the property.

The limits on plants being seen or readily smelled by the public, Kloba said, “protects both the grower and the neighbors” by avoiding both possible theft of plants—a concern some have raised about homegrow—as well as nuisance odor from nearby properties.

Opponents of the bill, including the Washington Association of Police Chiefs and Sheriffs, have complained the homegrow limits would be difficult to enforce. A representative of the group noted at a hearing last week that the bill would prevent police from entering a property unless they first obtained a warrant.

Rep. Eric Robertson (R), one of two lawmakers who voted against the bill Friday, said he was concerned that HB 1019 leaves enforcement to police agencies rather than the state Liquor and Cannabis Board (LCB), which regulates licensed cannabis businesses in the state. He described that provision as a “fatal flaw in the bill because there won’t be any reasonable or informed way to investigate this stuff without a huge impact to our cities.”

Kloba replied that LCB has authority over the state’s commercial cannabis system, “and this is clearly outside of it.”

The bill has support from numerous advocacy groups, including state and local drug reform advocates and the Washington Build Back Black Alliance (WBBBA), a group of nonprofit and business leaders lobbying on behalf of the state’s Black communities.

In a letter to lawmakers sent this week, Paula Sardinas of WBBBA noted that 97 percent of the state’s legal cannabis industry remains white-owned. “Assuming an expansion into homegrown would produce more [illicit] activity represents both systematic prejudice and implicit bias,” Sardinas wrote. “This very good bill meets the basic tests of both equity and equality.”

Lawmakers made a single amendment to HB 1019 on Friday before advancing the bill, adding changes meant to harmonize the state’s existing civil forfeiture law with the bill’s proposed homegrow limits. Existing law, for example, allows forfeitures when someone engaged in illegal commercial cannabis activity possesses five or more marijuana plants. The amendment raises that cap to 16 plants and slightly increases the amount of harvested cannabis a person can possess.

Kloba said the amendment, which the committee adopted Friday without objection, is meant “so that we don’t inadvertently allow people to do homegrow and then they get in trouble for doing so.”

Homegrow also won a small victory in Virginia on Friday as a state Senate committee voted to advance a bill to legalize marijuana in that state. Before approving the bill, lawmakers defeated a proposed amendment that would have outlawed home cultivation.

Jenn Michelle Pedini, executive director of Virginia NORML, told Marijuana Moment the group “is pleased that cooler heads prevailed, defeating an absurd motion to remove personal cultivation from the bill.”

Meanwhile, in Washington, the House Commerce and Gaming committee also heard testimony Friday on a separate bill, HB 1210, that would update state law to replace references to “marijuana” with the word “cannabis.”

“The word ‘marijuana’ is a reminder of the history of racism and persecution,” argued the bill’s lead sponsor, Rep. Melanie Morgan (D), while “cannabis” comes from the plant’s scientific name. “I ask for this committee’s support in removing the racist stigma from communities of color.”

Chris Thompson, director of legislative relations for LCB, said the regulatory agency supports the legislation but would like to see a “friendly amendment” that would direct regulators to make the change on their side, too. Such direction would allow LCB to expedite agency rulemaking.

“If you were to make a very long bill just maybe one paragraph longer and direct our agency to do that with our rules,” Thompson told lawmakers, “then that would help us make this change across the board in one fell swoop.”

 

[momofthegoons]

​

Washington Lawmakers Hear Drug Decrim Bill After Supreme Court Strikes Down Prohibition​

With Washington State lawmakers weighing their options after a court ruling that struck down the state’s law criminalizing drug possession, legislation favored by reform-minded lawmakers received its first committee hearing on Monday.

Senate Bill 5476 is one of at least nine measures introduced in response to the state Supreme Court’s February decision, State v. Blake, and is widely seen as among the more likely of the bills to make it across the finish line before the legislative session ends on April 25. If passed, it would represent a shift away from the punitive drug war and toward a public health approach to substance use.

Possession of small, “personal use” amounts of controlled substances by adults 21 and older would remain decriminalized under the bill. Adults found with anything under those amounts—adopted from neighboring Oregon’s voter-passed decriminalization law—could be referred to evaluation and treatment but would see no criminal or civil penalties. Opening or using controlled substances in public would be subject to a $125 civil fine, which would help defray administrative costs resulting from the state’s abrupt decriminalization.

The bill would reinstate criminal charges, however, for activity outside the carveout for simple possession. Adults with more than the personal use amounts would be subject to a Class C felony, while possession by anyone under 21 would be a gross misdemeanor.

The Senate Ways and Means Committee took nearly an hour of initial testimony on Monday but, as planned, did not vote on the bill. Further action has not yet been scheduled.

Sen. Manka Dhingra (D), the proposal’s sponsor, said at the hearing that both the timing and the outcome of the Blake decision were unexpected. Within hours after the ruling, police departments across the state announced they would immediately halt arrests for drug possession. Prosecutors, too, began preparing to drop ongoing cases and file orders vacating past convictions. Courts and the state Department of Corrections are now scrambling to address the consequences.

“There were two questions” in the wake of the decision, Dhingra told the committee. “One was, ‘Does the state need to act?’ Overwhelmingly the response was yes. And the second one was, ‘What should the response be?’”

There’s less of a consensus on the second question so far. While more progressive lawmakers see the ruling as an opportunity to fundamentally rethink the state’s approach to substance use disorders and mental health, more centrist and conservative members have balked at the idea of removing all penalties for drugs, which they say is tantamount to legalization.

A number of competing proposals have also been introduced. Some, including SB 5468, SB 5475 and HB 1560, would more or less return the state’s possession law to how it was before the Blake decision, adding a provision that would require that a defendant “knowingly” possess the drug. A similar bill, SB 5471, would also add a $3,000 civil fine for anyone “unknowingly” in possession. Another, HB 1561, would reinstate felony charges and increase sentences for simple possession.

Some Republican-backed bills offer alternative approaches to the consequences of the court decision. HB 1562 would allow local governments to recriminalize drug possession, while HB 1558 would fund law enforcement training programs around substance treatment disorder. HB 1559 would allow police officers to detain minors for substance possession and refer them to treatment.

 

[momofthegoons]

With State Law Against Drug Possession Overturned, Washington Governor Frees 15 People From Prison​

Fifteen people incarcerated on drug possession charges in Washington State will be released from prison following commutations issued this week by Gov. Jay Inslee (D), nearly two months after the state Supreme Court struck down the state’s felony law against simple possession of controlled substances.

The governor’s office announced the commutations on Tuesday, saying that 13 of the petitions had already been signed, and two more were expected to be finalized later in the day—with even more to come soon.

Lawmakers, meanwhile, are working to pass legislation to respond to the court ruling, State v. Blake, before the legislative session ends later this month.

Inslee’s signing of the commutation petitions, submitted by people currently in prison solely on simple drug possession charges, essentially cuts through the ongoing process of clearing past possession convictions and resentencing people accordingly. It means that the 15 people, already eligible for release following the Supreme Court decision, will be released sooner than they would have through judicial procedures. None of the convictions have been legally valid since the court case was decided in late February.

“While prosecutors and the courts have worked to vacate the convictions of individuals convicted and sentenced under this now-invalidated drug possession statute,” Inslee’s office said in a news release, “the governor has endeavored to use his clemency authority to expeditiously facilitate a more immediate release for other individuals in custody solely on these convictions.”

Fewer than 100 people in the state were estimated to be incarcerated on possession charges alone shortly after the Supreme Court issued its decision. That number has already dropped to about two dozen people, Taylor Wonhoff, deputy general counsel for Inslee, told the Seattle Times. The bulk of the releases were handled earlier by county prosecutors and courts.

Wonhoff said the governor’s office recently created a very simple commutation petition form, then circulated it to people through the state Department of Corrections to people imprisoned for drug possession. “What we did was created a very basic petition,” he said, “which basically says, ‘Here’s my name, here’s my signature, I want a Blake commutation.’”

As of Tuesday evening, the Times reported, 12 of the 13 people whose petitions had already been signed had already been released from state custody. Even people whose sentences are commuted, however, will still need judges to clear the now-invalid convictions from their criminal records.

The Supreme Court decision came unexpectedly for lawmakers, who are now working to decide how to address the fallout of the ruling. While the court said only a narrow part of the law was unconstitutional—the fact that it failed to require that defendants knowingly possess a drug—it voided the possession law completely.

“Although we knew it had been winding its way through the courts,” Rep. Roger Goodman (D) said last month, “with everything else, we forgot about it. Then this earth-shaking opinion comes out right in the middle of the legislative session.”

In addition to weighing how to fund court costs of identifying and resentencing individuals whose convictions are no longer lawful, the legislature is also considering whether—and how—to replace the state’s felony drug possession law. Democrats and Republicans have introduced bills that would reinstate the felony charge for simple possession, but a progressive bloc in the House of Representatives that has grown more powerful in recent years insists that the chamber won’t pass legislation that re-establishes criminal penalties for small amounts of drugs.

Of several bills introduced in the wake of the ruling, one leading proposal, SB 5476, would leave simple drug possession decriminalized. As introduced, the measure would establish “personal use” amounts of controlled substances, and adults found with anything less than those amounts see no criminal or civil penalties, although they could be referred to evaluation and treatment for substance use disorder. Opening or using controlled substances in public would be subject to a $125 civil fine, which would help defray administrative costs resulting from the state’s abrupt decriminalization.

The Senate Ways and Means Committee took initial public testimony on the bill earlier this month, and at a hearing this past Saturday voted to advance the bill without recommendation to the Senate Rules Committee. Little if any debate is expected in that committee before the bill advances to the full Senate floor for what’s likely to be a contentious debate.

Several amendments have already been introduced and are expected to be taken up on the Senate floor. Most are contained in a proposed substitute bill by Sen. Manka Dhingra (D), the sponsor of the original bill, and are relatively minor clarifications. Among the more major changes, the substitute authorizes the presiding judge in any county to appoint commissioners that would assist the court with resentencing and vacating convictions affected by the Blake decision. It also clarifies that anyone under 21 found in possession of controlled substances would be under the jurisdiction of juvenile courts and require the courts to offer diversion to treatment for a person’s first offense. The substitute also eliminates a provision requiring a $125 fine for public drug use to fund court administrative costs.

Two competing amendments would gut the original decriminalization proposal and reinstate felony drug possession charges for drug possession committed knowingly. One was put forward by Sen. Lynda Wilson (R) and would also establish a state legislative workgroup to study further drug reform measures.

“I do think that that’s the direction we need to go,” Wilson said at the Ways and Means Committee hearing. “I think putting knowingly back into the statute is what will be at least a good fix right now, and then we study it later. I’m afraid that if we do too much now that we won’t get it quite right—or right at all.”

The other major amendment, from Sen. Keith Wagoner (R), would temporarily reinstate felony possession charges but also step up SB 5476’s proposed penalties for public drug use to a Class 1 civil infraction, which carries a $250 fine. It would also create some optional programs to divert drug cases to evaluation and treatment, “so you can be diverted once or maybe twice with a prosecutor’s authority,” Wagoner said at the hearing.

“Yeah, I’m not going to pretend to have written the entire amendment,” he told the panel, “but I think the point that we’re trying to do, you’re trying to recognize…first of all, we’ve got a big problem and we’ve got to do something about it now. But this doesn’t have to be a permanent solution.”

Dhingra told the panel that the policy embodied in the competing amendments “actually goes back to about five years ago to where we were as Washington State.”

The Ways & Means Committee discussed the mechanics of the proposed amendments on Saturday but did not act on them, leaving them to be discussed later on the Senate floor. “Rather than going through all of the amendments and motions, we’re going to move that we move that to the rules committee without rec,” said committee chair Sen. Christine Rolfes (D), “and continue in-depth policy discussion in preparation for floor action.”

The panel voted 15–7–3 to advance the bill without amendments, with Wilson and Wagoner voting to kill the measure rather than fight for their amendments on the Senate floor.

On the House side, Goodman, a longtime drug reform advocate who supports ending criminal penalties for simple possession, told Marijuana Moment earlier this month that with the legislative session set to end on April 25, “time is our enemy in this enterprise.”

“The Blake decision is both a blessing and a curse,” he said, “because it’s an opportunity for us to come up with a more effective approach that does less harm, but we don’t have the opportunity to be deliberate and inclusive in conversations with interested parties, so it’s not as well thought-out a proposal as it would be otherwise. It has to be an interim measure.”

“The story to tell of this issue isn’t about drugs,” he added. “This is about helping your loved ones—your neighbors, your friends, your children—who are in trouble. The two big messages are: What we’re doing isn’t working, and we want to help people.”

In February, Goodman’s panel approved a separate bill to decriminalize drug possession and expand treatment services, but it failed to advance further by a key legislative deadline.

Just five years ago, few state legislatures would have dreamed of letting drugs remain decriminalized after a court decision like Blake. Now lawmakers in Washington have the opportunity to be the first to decriminalize drugs through the legislature—and there’s a chance they’ll take it.

“A lot has changed in the past five years. Since our most recent president, there’s an appetite for more radical transformation of our society and to react to retrograde policies of the past century,” Goodman said. “Also those who are active in the political sphere are younger, even over the course of these last several years.”

Oregon voters historically ended prohibition of low-level drug possession at the ballot during last November’s election, which has contributed to the national conversation.

In both Maine and Vermont, lawmakers have also recently unveiled legislation last month to decriminalize small amounts of illegal drugs. Last month, a Rhode Island Senate committee held a hearing on legislation that would end criminal penalties for possessing small amounts of drugs and replace them with a $100 fine.

In New Jersey, meanwhile, Gov. Phil Murphy (D) said last month that he’s “open-minded” on decriminalizing all drugs.

“There’s this phenomenon called discontinuous change,” Goodman told Marijuana Moment, “where nothing happens and nothing happens and nothing happens, and then the Berlin Wall falls down. We’re getting to that place in drug policy where it’s a tipping point.”

 

[momofthegoons]

Drug Possession Is Officially A Crime Again In Washington, But As A Misdemeanor Instead Of Felony​

Nearly four months after the state Supreme Court struck down Washington’s felony drug possession law as unconstitutional, Gov. Jay Inslee (D) signed legislation on Thursday to recriminalize simple possession, this time as a misdemeanor.

The governor did partially veto one section, however.

The new law, which takes effect immediately, reestablishes criminal penalties but requires that individuals be referred to a health evaluation and possible treatment for their first two violations, allowing them to avoid arrest and a criminal record. It also earmarks nearly $100 million for drug use disorder treatment, outreach and recovery services across the state.

At a signing ceremony Thursday, Inslee called the legislation “a much more appropriate and successful way to address the needs that underlie drug abuse.”

“This legislation will help reduce the disparate impact of the previous drug possession statute on people of color,” he said. “It moves the system from responding to possession as a felony to focusing on the behavioral health response.”


Nearly four months after the state Supreme Court struck down Washington’s felony drug possession law as unconstitutional, Gov. Jay Inslee (D) signed legislation on Thursday to recriminalize simple possession, this time as a misdemeanor.

The governor did partially veto one section, however.

The new law, which takes effect immediately, reestablishes criminal penalties but requires that individuals be referred to a health evaluation and possible treatment for their first two violations, allowing them to avoid arrest and a criminal record. It also earmarks nearly $100 million for drug use disorder treatment, outreach and recovery services across the state.

At a signing ceremony Thursday, Inslee called the legislation “a much more appropriate and successful way to address the needs that underlie drug abuse.”

“This legislation will help reduce the disparate impact of the previous drug possession statute on people of color,” he said. “It moves the system from responding to possession as a felony to focusing on the behavioral health response.”

One new program will establish a statewide “recovery navigator” program, designed to connect people with drug use disorder with “continual, rapid, and widespread access to a continuum of care.” Other investments expand outreach programs to unhoused people and provide funding to expand opioid use disorder medications in jails.

After two years, on July 1, 2023, the new law’s criminal penalty provisions will evaporate under the bill as passed by lawmakers, again leaving the state without a law against drug possession. The behavioral health services established by the new law, however, will stay in place.

The expiration date is meant to bring lawmakers back to the table to renegotiate a path forward after experimenting with the new approach. Rep. Roger Goodman (D), who introduced the idea in an amendment, has said he expects lawmakers to be even more open to broader reform once they see the benefits of treatment over criminalization.

“The conversation on the failure of the drug war only keeps going the same direction. We’re almost at the tipping point now where we are at a completely new paradigm,” he told Marijuana Moment last month. “Two years from now, that conversation will mature further and be even more progressive. The voters and the legislators and the public will be moving that direction.”

Lawmakers rushed to pass the legislation, SB 5476, following the state Supreme Court’s unexpected decision in late February, State v. Blake, that threw out the state’s law against drug possession because it failed to require that a defendant actually knew they had the drug.

When the ruling came down in late February, more than halfway through the state’s legislative session, some progressive lawmakers opposed reestablishing criminal penalties at all. As originally introduced by Sen. Manka Dhingra (D), SB 5476 would have formally decriminalized drugs, removing all penalties for possessing small, “personal use” amounts.

State Attorney General Bob Ferguson (D) also eventually came out against reinstating criminal penalties.



Moderates and conservatives, however, insisted that the possibility of penalties was necessary to incentivize people to enter treatment. Others warned that without preemption by a law at the state level, local governments would adopt their own laws against drug possession—creating a patchwork of wildly different approaches across the state.

While Inslee generally praised the new law during his signing ceremony Thursday, he nevertheless vetoed a small portion of the bill that would have created a state fund to reimburse local governments and individuals who incur legal fees as the result of resentencing under the Blake decision.

“I am vetoing Section 21 of this bill,” the governor said without elaborating. His office did not immediately respond to questions from Marijuana Moment about the partial veto.

Washington voters are generally supportive of decriminalization, according to a statewide poll commissioned by reform advocates and released last month. Nearly three in four voters (73 percent) said the state’s approach to problematic drug use has been a failure. Just nine percent called it a success.

Asked about the Blake ruling, 59 percent of those surveyed said lawmakers should use the court decision to “reconsider and replace past drug possession laws with more effective addiction and treatment alternatives.” Only 35 percent favored making a technical change to return to the past system.

So far, neighboring Oregon is the only state in the U.S. to have decriminalized all drugs, the result of voters’ passage of a ballot measure last November.

Organizers at the advocacy group Treatment First WA were also hoping to qualify a similar initiative for Washington’s ballot last year, but that campaign was scuttled after the COVID-19 pandemic interrupted signature-gathering.

Earlier this year, allied lawmakers introduced a bill based on the ballot measure proposal that would have decriminalized simple possession and reinvested in broader treatment and recovery services. That measure passed a House committee but failed to meet a mid-session legislative deadline to advance further.

Treatment First WA did not immediately respond to questions about whether the group planned to pursue another decriminalization measure in light of the new misdemeanor law.

Outside the Pacific Northwest, lawmakers in both Maine and Vermont have recently unveiled legislation to decriminalize small amounts of controlled substances. In March, a Rhode Island Senate committee held a hearing on legislation that would end criminal penalties for possessing small amounts of drugs and replace them with a $100 fine. And in New Jersey, Gov. Phil Murphy (D) recently said he’s “open-minded” on decriminalizing all drugs.

In California, meanwhile a bill that would legalize possession of a wide range of psychedelics passed its second Senate committee last month.

 

[CarolKing]

A trend on the west coast - worry more about rehab and less about throwing folks in prison. That’s a whole another debate!

Are all drugs really legal in Washington state? For now, the ...​

https://www.leafly.com › news › politics › are-all-drugs...




Feb 26, 2021 — Are all drugs really legal in Washington state? For now, the answer is yes ... In a surprising decision handed down on Thursday, Feb. 25

 

[Baron23]

A trend on the west coast - worry more about rehab and less about throwing folks in prison. That’s a whole another debate!

Are all drugs really legal in Washington state? For now, the ...​

https://www.leafly.com › news › politics › are-all-drugs...




Feb 26, 2021 — Are all drugs really legal in Washington state? For now, the answer is yes ... In a surprising decision handed down on Thursday, Feb. 25

I think perhaps they should be worring more about the mental health of these citizens. ALL.....I'm guessing that includes PCP, meth, coke, acid, etc.....great stuff. Love to be around people on the streets who have fried their brains out with this shit.

 

[bulllee]

Washington state ends marijuana seed-to-sale contract, will launch own system​

Published 13 hours ago | By Bart Schaneman

Washington state is scrapping its contract with a third-party, marijuana seed-to-sale traceability provider in favor of a more simplified system developed in-house, a first for any state cannabis program.
The state’s regulatory agency sent out a bulletin last week to notify business owners it will transition away by the end of the year from Akerna’s Leaf Data Systems platform in favor of one developed and maintained by regulators.
This is the first time a state has taken on the job of developing and operating such an important regulatory platform for overseeing the cannabis supply chain, from seed to sale.

It raises the question of whether other states will follow suit, which could deal a setback to private providers.
Cannabis traceability has been a thorn in the industry’s side for years.
Some seed-to-sale programs require workers to undergo training just to work with the software.
The systems can go down and cause business to stall because companies can’t log or make transactions.
Other business owners complain that the programs aren’t accurate.
“In general, this move is a positive one because we have these heavyweight traceability systems in the cannabis space from an overabundance of caution and a lingering stigma of cannabis as the ‘devil’s lettuce,'” said Gregory Foster, who sits on the traceability advisory committee organized by the state regulatory agency, the Liquor and Cannabis Board.
Washington state cannabis business owners have long complained about working with Leaf Data Systems and, before that, BioTrackTHC’s software platform, because it costs them time and money to comply with the track-and-track requirements.
“Four years ago, in partnership with Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board, we built a unique cannabis tracking system that answered the state’s complex regulatory needs and business requirements,” Georgia Jablon, communications manager for Akerna, wrote to MJBizDaily in an emailed statement.
“Since then, Washington’s enforcement and regulatory requirements have evolved into a simplified model that they can support in-house, which we consulted with them to create.”
Cost of traceability
The in-house reporting system, which the state is calling the Cannabis Central Reporting System, is intended to reduce the complexity of traceability reporting, therefore cutting down on errors.
It also could lead to a “reduction in business and compliance costs,” according to the state.
Jeremy Moberg, a Washington state cannabis grower, said he hopes the changes lead to cost savings.
“We’re excited for a simpler system that saves us money,” he added. “We’re wasting so much money on this broken system.”
The new system in Washington state is derived from a workaround that regulators developed in 2017, when BioTrackTHC, which had the traceability contract with the state for three years, failed to reach an agreement with the LCB.
But instead, regulators went with Denver-based Akerna, known as MJ Freeway at the time.
It took Akerna a few months to get Leaf Data Systems up and running in Washington state. In the meantime, the state set up a file-transfer site where businesses were asked to upload traceability information, including via CSV files.
Once it was established, Leaf Data Systems occasionally experienced outages, including during a software update that prevented hundreds of cannabis producers, processors and retailers from conducting business-to-business transactions, costing them thousands of dollars.
Known unknowns
The state has been paying Akerna $50,000 a month in subscription services for the traceability contract.
LCB spokesman Brian Smith said that fee will end when the state completes the transition from Leaf Data Systems.
Foster expects the new system to be less onerous and require less detail from the businesses, though they might still need an employee dedicated to traceability compliance.
“If nothing else, fewer people will have to understand the ins and outs of the traceability puzzle,” Foster said.
Moberg said the state increased licensing fees to pay for the traceability system and would like to see that money returned.
At least one ancillary cannabis business owner, Jim MacRae, who runs a data-analytics firm, isn’t happy about the change.
He had built a business around analyzing the data provided by the business owners through the traceability system.
“Folks all over the state have been using the data to understand this multibillion-dollar market,” MacRae said.
He expects the many CSV and spreadsheet files that are submitted by cannabis companies to “get sucked up into the vacuum hole of the LCB.”
“Now they’re setting up a multibillion-dollar honor system.”
But exactly how this new system is going to work is still vague in the mind of cannabis business owners.
“There are a lot of unknowns,” Moberg said. “It’s quite unclear how we’re going to allow transfers to occur, and we don’t know what the reporting requirements are going to look like.
“If we all have is a reporting system and the state leaves it up to the industry to communicate with each other, that’s potentially problematic.”
To help clear up confusion, the state cannabis board offered a page on its website with relevant information.
The agency also is hosting a webinar on Sept. 8, from 10 a.m. to noon PT, with technical details, information for business owners to prepare for the new system and contact information for technical support.
The LCB is asking that questions be emailed ahead of time, by Sept. 7, to ccrs@lcb.wa.gov.
Bart Schaneman can be reached at bart.schaneman@mjbizdaily.com.

 

[CarolKing]

New Washington rule opens marijuana industry to people with criminal records

Starting Oct. 2, people who have felony convictions on their criminal records will be able to apply for a license to grow, process, or sell marijuana.

www.king5.com

 

[CarolKing]

Where in WA cannabis sales soared most during the pandemic

It's hardly a surprise that marijuana use increased during the pandemic, FYI Guy writes. But you might be surprised at just how much more cannabis Washingtonians are using now.

www.seattletimes.com

 

[Baron23]

Wow, and how were they allowed to get away with NOT testing for pesticides for so very long in WA?

Mandatory pesticide testing begins April 2 for all cannabis products in WA​

Protecting consumers from unhealthy products is key for cannabis growth worldwide​

Several years after Washington's legislature first discussed these requirements, the state has finally approved compulsory pesticide testing for all cannabis products produced and sold in the state. Cannabis manufacturers have a duty to meet the demands of cannabis users in a state. For profit reasons, some of these operators have settled for harmful chemicals to increase the output of their crops. These chemicals include insecticides, pesticides, and inorganic fertilizers. Many of them are unfit for human consumption.

Since the first month of cannabis legalization in Washington, users have found it quite challenging to know the components of the cannabis products sold to them. A lot could go wrong, from cultivation to the final packaging of cannabis products. And these companies, cultivation facilities, and producers rarely come out to explain what goes on behind the scenes.

The Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (LCB) proposed third-party tests to help cannabis users know if the products to be ingested are safe.

Pesticide Testing​

In legal countries and states, cannabis products undergo several third-party tests to ascertain that they're fit for consumption. However, most of these legal areas fail to necessitate pesticide tests for these products. There are different methods for carrying out pesticide tests, but the most common is the use of a liquid chromatography-mass spectrometer. This equipment can detect even the tiniest traces of toxic chemicals used as pesticides. Ensuring that the customer's safety is not compromised.
Washington State's state cannabis regulators noticed the growing use of pesticides in the cannabis and hemp industries months after the state began its medical program. However, the growers claimed that they only use pesticides with zero harmful effects. Yet, feeble tests have proved that these claims are untrue. Cannabis products are starting to become mainstream products, and it would be risky to carry on the medical and recreational cannabis sectors without enforcing these critical tests.

Imagine a chronic patient suffering more because they unknowingly consumed medical cannabis containing toxic pesticides. Or an occasional recreational user developing health conditions due to these poisonous compounds. In fact, the public's safety is far from being guaranteed without these tests. Hence, the recent development is highly commendable.

A long-awaited policy​

Cannabis advocates have lauded this new mandatory requirement as a long-awaited move for the state's cannabis industry. A few pointed out that the states with legal cannabis markets have these regulations and more to guarantee that their residents get only the best and safest products. It is important to note that the state has always mandated that all medical products be tested for pesticides. Although some growers may have found ways to forge the test results or work around the policy. California has also banned pesticides in marijuana growing.

The core aspect of this new policy is that cannabis producers now have to conduct these tests for recreational products. The regulation change is majorly focused on the recreational industry because the regulatory board assumes that all medical products are free from toxic pesticides.
The Liquor and Cannabis Board disclosed that from the moment the new policies were announced, irregular and random tests would be conducted across cannabis manufacturing facilities in the state. They believe this will compel all producers to maintain the new status quo. It is high time recreational users stopped being exposed to unsafe cannabis products.

Starting to Take Effect On April 2​

The WSLCB unanimously voted that the new changes for quality control of recreational cannabis would be effective in less than a month. The pesticide tests will be added to a list of compulsory tests that must be conducted on cannabis products released onto the market.

After about three years of public debates and considerations from various stakeholders, the new stringent regulations were finally approved. Once the law is implemented in a few weeks, every batch of smokable cannabis products produced within Washington state will be tested by state-licensed laboratories. The submitted samples will be critically analyzed for toxic pesticides like Bifenthrin, Daminozide, Permethrin, Spinosad, DDVP (Dichlorvos), Abamectin, Spiromesifen, etc. Cannabis stores and dispensaries will have the results of these tests before the products can be sold. The products that fall short of the accepted standards will be destroyed.
Industry watchdogs and cannabis secret shoppers revealed months ago that at least 1 in 5 cannabis products sold in cannabis dispensaries contain toxic pesticides. The failure of these products to meet quality assurance will decrease in the next few months as farmers will halt the use of these poisonous pesticides to prevent their products from being recalled or destroyed.

Washington-based Confidence Analytics, one of the most OK state-approved cannabis testing laboratories, revealed an updated white paper in February. The White Paper outlined the CEO's plans to take proactive measures to kick-start pesticide tests before the law is enacted. Nick Mosley pointed out that the latest revisions will have massive effects on the state's cannabis sector. In the white paper, Mosley explained that all supply levels would be affected, not to mention the market disruptions and realignments that would follow. Mosley believes that the quality control rule amendments will create new winners and losers in the industry.
In addition, the state legislature would consider other proactive bills that would impact the state's existing cannabis product testing requirements. The measure, named House Bill 1859, would modify the current lab accreditation scheme and standards for these licensed labs. Another bill, Senate Bill 5983, plans to establish a new regulatory committee for the Liquor and Cannabis Board to ensure other cannabis-derived compounds are regulated.

Bottom Line​

Pesticide testing is now more critical than ever in Washington. More regulations will be revised and added to the existing cannabis legislation in the next few months. But for now, the regulatory board is focused on making sure all cannabis products are free of pesticides.

Growers will have to utilize better and safer farming practices to ensure the products' safety isn't compromised while securing their profits at the same time. For now, the United States federal government has not approved any pesticides to cultivate cannabis and hemp. However, some states have approved the use of a few. Meanwhile, more outreach efforts are being organized to educate sensitive growers about the adverse effects of pesticides on consumer health.

 

[ataxian]

Wow, and how were they allowed to get away with NOT testing for pesticides for so very long in WA?

Mandatory pesticide testing begins April 2 for all cannabis products in WA​

Protecting consumers from unhealthy products is key for cannabis growth worldwide​

Several years after Washington's legislature first discussed these requirements, the state has finally approved compulsory pesticide testing for all cannabis products produced and sold in the state. Cannabis manufacturers have a duty to meet the demands of cannabis users in a state. For profit reasons, some of these operators have settled for harmful chemicals to increase the output of their crops. These chemicals include insecticides, pesticides, and inorganic fertilizers. Many of them are unfit for human consumption.

Since the first month of cannabis legalization in Washington, users have found it quite challenging to know the components of the cannabis products sold to them. A lot could go wrong, from cultivation to the final packaging of cannabis products. And these companies, cultivation facilities, and producers rarely come out to explain what goes on behind the scenes.

The Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (LCB) proposed third-party tests to help cannabis users know if the products to be ingested are safe.

Pesticide Testing​

In legal countries and states, cannabis products undergo several third-party tests to ascertain that they're fit for consumption. However, most of these legal areas fail to necessitate pesticide tests for these products. There are different methods for carrying out pesticide tests, but the most common is the use of a liquid chromatography-mass spectrometer. This equipment can detect even the tiniest traces of toxic chemicals used as pesticides. Ensuring that the customer's safety is not compromised.
Washington State's state cannabis regulators noticed the growing use of pesticides in the cannabis and hemp industries months after the state began its medical program. However, the growers claimed that they only use pesticides with zero harmful effects. Yet, feeble tests have proved that these claims are untrue. Cannabis products are starting to become mainstream products, and it would be risky to carry on the medical and recreational cannabis sectors without enforcing these critical tests.

Imagine a chronic patient suffering more because they unknowingly consumed medical cannabis containing toxic pesticides. Or an occasional recreational user developing health conditions due to these poisonous compounds. In fact, the public's safety is far from being guaranteed without these tests. Hence, the recent development is highly commendable.

A long-awaited policy​

Cannabis advocates have lauded this new mandatory requirement as a long-awaited move for the state's cannabis industry. A few pointed out that the states with legal cannabis markets have these regulations and more to guarantee that their residents get only the best and safest products. It is important to note that the state has always mandated that all medical products be tested for pesticides. Although some growers may have found ways to forge the test results or work around the policy. California has also banned pesticides in marijuana growing.

The core aspect of this new policy is that cannabis producers now have to conduct these tests for recreational products. The regulation change is majorly focused on the recreational industry because the regulatory board assumes that all medical products are free from toxic pesticides.
The Liquor and Cannabis Board disclosed that from the moment the new policies were announced, irregular and random tests would be conducted across cannabis manufacturing facilities in the state. They believe this will compel all producers to maintain the new status quo. It is high time recreational users stopped being exposed to unsafe cannabis products.

Starting to Take Effect On April 2​

The WSLCB unanimously voted that the new changes for quality control of recreational cannabis would be effective in less than a month. The pesticide tests will be added to a list of compulsory tests that must be conducted on cannabis products released onto the market.

After about three years of public debates and considerations from various stakeholders, the new stringent regulations were finally approved. Once the law is implemented in a few weeks, every batch of smokable cannabis products produced within Washington state will be tested by state-licensed laboratories. The submitted samples will be critically analyzed for toxic pesticides like Bifenthrin, Daminozide, Permethrin, Spinosad, DDVP (Dichlorvos), Abamectin, Spiromesifen, etc. Cannabis stores and dispensaries will have the results of these tests before the products can be sold. The products that fall short of the accepted standards will be destroyed.
Industry watchdogs and cannabis secret shoppers revealed months ago that at least 1 in 5 cannabis products sold in cannabis dispensaries contain toxic pesticides. The failure of these products to meet quality assurance will decrease in the next few months as farmers will halt the use of these poisonous pesticides to prevent their products from being recalled or destroyed.

Washington-based Confidence Analytics, one of the most OK state-approved cannabis testing laboratories, revealed an updated white paper in February. The White Paper outlined the CEO's plans to take proactive measures to kick-start pesticide tests before the law is enacted. Nick Mosley pointed out that the latest revisions will have massive effects on the state's cannabis sector. In the white paper, Mosley explained that all supply levels would be affected, not to mention the market disruptions and realignments that would follow. Mosley believes that the quality control rule amendments will create new winners and losers in the industry.
In addition, the state legislature would consider other proactive bills that would impact the state's existing cannabis product testing requirements. The measure, named House Bill 1859, would modify the current lab accreditation scheme and standards for these licensed labs. Another bill, Senate Bill 5983, plans to establish a new regulatory committee for the Liquor and Cannabis Board to ensure other cannabis-derived compounds are regulated.

Bottom Line​

Pesticide testing is now more critical than ever in Washington. More regulations will be revised and added to the existing cannabis legislation in the next few months. But for now, the regulatory board is focused on making sure all cannabis products are free of pesticides.

Growers will have to utilize better and safer farming practices to ensure the products' safety isn't compromised while securing their profits at the same time. For now, the United States federal government has not approved any pesticides to cultivate cannabis and hemp. However, some states have approved the use of a few. Meanwhile, more outreach efforts are being organized to educate sensitive growers about the adverse effects of pesticides on consumer health.

Back N da day: Helicopters dropped paraquate 2 eradicate MARIJUANA grown outside in home garden’s!
Having scripted the previous sentence above?
Indoor growing garden become’s popular the world over!
CANNABIS is the classy why 2 call this herb we bipedal inhabitant’s vaporize?
2-B CIVILIZED CANNABIS is 4 living MODERN!

 

[CarolKing]

As armed robbers hit WA marijuana shops, owners say there’s a simple solution

Washington retail marijuana stores have seen a rash of armed robberies in recent months, prompting politicians and industry leaders to call for solutions.

www.seattletimes.com

To be on the safe side i don't go to dispensaries late at night. Our stores are open until 11 or 12

 

[CarolKing]

Proposed bill would increase tax on high-potency cannabis in Washington

A new bill proposed in Olympia would put a higher tax on marijuana sold at dispensaries in Washington state based on how much THC the product contains.

komonews.com

They either want to get higher taxes for higher THC levels or then I hear the legislators want to ban them. I’d rather have higher taxes verses the alternative. When we breathe a sigh of relief something else happens.

 

[momofthegoons]

Washington’s Cannabis Enforcement Officers Face Stiffer Drug Use Restrictions Than Seattle Police​

Enforcement officers at the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (LCB), the agency tasked with administering the state’s alcohol, marijuana and tobacco and laws, can freely drink a beer or smoke a cigarette without risk to their jobs. But nearly a decade after the state legalized cannabis, they’re still forbidden from using it.

The current restriction isn’t just while on the job, or even while employed with LCB. It extends back three years before they apply for an enforcement position at the agency. Candidates are drug tested and subjected to a polygraph test.

That’s the case for now, anyway, as LCB tells Marijuana Moment it is in the process of “reviewing” the cannabis use policy.

“Overarching all of this is the obvious fact that cannabis is illegal at the federal level,” LCB’s communications director, Brian Smith, explained to Marijuana Moment in an email. “This impacts all sectors of state cannabis systems from banking to traceability to commerce to employment restrictions.”

Indeed, it’s common for state and local law enforcement agencies to ban marijuana use by sworn officers, even in jurisdictions where marijuana is legal. Aside from the policy question of whether police should be able to use the drug off the clock, federal law says people who use cannabis can’t own firearms—something law enforcement officers typically do. More permissive marijuana policies at WSLCB might also jeopardize federal funding the agency receives, Smith said.

“We hear this from medical patients too,” he added, noting that, as in other legal states, patients have hesitated to join the state’s medical marijuana registry due to concern over the federal firearm restriction. That said, the ban is being actively litigated, with a federal judge ruling this month that preventing cannabis consumers from accessing guns is an unconstitutional violation of their Second Amendment rights.

In the meantime, as recent Washington State job descriptions make clear, LCB’s enforcement positions are classified as full-fledged police, with applicants required to have peace officer training and experience. In addition to field duties such as surprise inspections and basic education of licensees and the public, they’re expected to respond to emergencies, make arrests and team up with other law enforcement agencies on investigations and enforcement actions

Smith said the agency’s limits on drug use by officers, including past use, are similar to requirements set by other Washington law enforcement agencies. “The determination is made by the hiring authority and most times parallel other law enforcement agencies,” he wrote. “I cannot speak to all law enforcement agencies; but most have similar standards as the LCB.”

In fact, LCB has some of the more restrictive drug-use limits in Washington, setting stricter standards in most cases than either the Washington State Patrol or Seattle Police. For many illegal drugs, including methamphetamine, LSD, psilocybin and cocaine, use within the past decade is a no-go for LCB officers. That’s twice as far back as similar restrictions facing state troopers or Seattle police. Cannabis use, meanwhile, is prohibited among LCB enforcement officers going back three years before employment. That’s three times what the state patrol and Seattle police specify.

Smith acknowledged that LCB’s three-year prohibition on past marijuana use was significantly longer than other agencies’ requirements. “The LCB is reviewing the requirements” he said, “especially regarding cannabis use pre-hire. No decision made yet.”

Asked whether the Washington State LCB’s strict limits on past drug use hurt the agency’s ability to hire the best people—such as the otherwise qualified applicant who tried mushrooms back in college—Smith reiterated that drug use remains illegal and that LCB’s standards are close to those of other agencies.

LCB’s standards apply specifically to law-enforcement positions, not administrative or educational roles at the agency. But not every state’s marijuana regulators employ literal cops. That’s why the Oregon Liquor and Cannabis Commission (OLCC), for example, doesn’t need to impose such strict limits on employees’ past drug use, according to Mark Pettinger, OLCC’s director of communications and education.



The difference is between LCB and OLCC policies is that “they have sworn officers and we don’t,” Pettinger said in an email. “So there’s a different (higher) standard right there.”

Sworn police officers or not, it’s still the case in several legal states that cannabis regulators are barred from consuming the product they oversee, even when not explicitly bound by federal prohibition. As Detroit Free Press reporter Paul Egan recently pointed out—in the context of more applicants failing drug tests for jobs in state government—even the head of Michigan’s Cannabis Regulatory Agency, “whose job involves stimulating the growth of the state’s recreational marijuana industry, must pass a test showing they don’t use the product.”

 

[CarolKing]

Proposed bills pushing to regulate high-potency cannabis products in Washington

One bill would add more taxes on high-potency THC products and another would put restrictions on the sale of products with a THC concentration greater than 35%.

www.king5.com

The state has made it difficult to get a medical cannabis card.
This is really batshit crazy!

Strong words from Rep. Davis who is proposing two bills this legislative session. Right now, buyers pay a 37% excise tax on cannabis products, the first bill would raise that as much as 65% on products with at least 60% in potency. It also requires warning labels for those products and prohibits sales to anyone under 25.

"Research study after research study, particularly in the last several years showing these products cause psychotic disorders, particularly in individuals under the age of 25," said Davis.

 

[Baron23]

Praise the lord and pass the butter beans.


Washington Lawmakers Approve Bill To Allow Home Cannabis Cultivation

A bill to allow Washington State adults to grow marijuana at home cleared its first legislative hurdle on Thursday, passing out of the House Regulated Substances and Gaming Committee on a 7–4 vote.


The proposal, HB 1614, would make it legal for people 21 and older to grow up to six plants for personal use, with a maximum of 15 per household. Plants would need to be labeled, grown out of public view and not “readily smelled” outside the premises.



Washington is one of only a few other states, along with Illinois and New Jersey, where commercial cannabis is legal but home cultivation by consumers remains prohibited—and it’s the only legal marijuana state where the practice is a felony.


The bill’s lead sponsor, Rep. Shelley Kloba (D), said before Thursday’s vote that the legislation “moves us toward an evolution where we can start looking at this plant as a plant.”


“It is legal to purchase products in the store, so it should also be legal to grow it at home with sensible sideboards,” she said.


Kloba also noted that the policy change was a specific recommendation of the state’s Social Equity in Cannabis Task Force, which in a December 2022 report called for the legalization of up to six plants per adult. The report further recommended reclassifying the cultivation of seven to 99 plants as a misdemeanor and vacating past cultivation convictions, though Kloba’s bill does not include those changes.


Thursday’s vote fell largely along party lines, winning approval from all six Democrats on the committee and a lone Republican, Rep. Kevin Waters. Another GOP member, Rep. Greg Cheney, said he’d intended to support the bill but decided to vote against it after Kloba withdrew an amendment that would have required marijuana be grown in locked areas that allow access only by an authorized person.



“I was prepared to vote yes on this bill with some of the safety mechanisms around the amendment,” he said. “Hopefully we can work with the sponsor around some of the security issues if it gets to the floor.”


As approved by the committee, no license would be necessary for adults to grow up to the six-plant limit. Each plant would need to be labeled with the grower’s name, date of birth and address, as well as when it was planted. Containers of more than one ounce of homegrown marijuana would need to be labeled with that information plus the date the cannabis was harvested.


The state already allows registered medical patients to grow six plants at home, or up to 15 with a health professional’s recommendation.



Landlords could prohibit homegrow by renters and lessees under the bill.



The legislation would make it a civil infraction, punishable by a fine of up to $500, if a minor uses or obtains a grower’s marijuana, unless the products were stored in a secured area or container. If a minor is involved in a DUI after consuming unsecured cannabis, the grower would face a fine of up to $750.


State marijuana regulators would have no responsibility or authority to enforce homegrow laws, although they could assist at another law enforcement agency’s request.


Washington State lawmakers have failed to legalize home marijuana cultivation despite a handful of bills being introduced as far back as 2015. Kloba, HB 1614’s lead sponsor, brought a similar bill in 2021 that also passed out of the Regulated Substances and Gaming Committee but then languished.


In an interview this week, Kloba told Marijuana Moment that she’s been working to find ways to secure more of her colleagues’ votes without alienating other members. She considered adding further restrictions to the bill, for example, to win support from law-and-order politicians, but worried those rules could rankle both small-government conservatives as well as progressives concerned about racial disparities in enforcement.


“It’s been a rollercoaster with this bill this year,” she said. The committee was scheduled to vote on the measure last week but held off because supporters weren’t sure they had enough votes.


Struggling to know how to proceed, Kloba said she’s even considered stripping back the new proposal and rerunning last year’s slightly simpler bill.

 

[CarolKing]

Bill to prohibit discrimination against job applicants for cannabis use passes Washington Senate

A bill to limit discrimination against job applicants for cannabis use has passed the Washington State Senate. SB 5123 aims to close the "disconnect between prospective employees' legal activities and

www.khq.com