Before a dispensary opens its doors, before a founder secures financing, and before a customer makes their first purchase, government has already shaped much of what the cannabis industry will become. That was the conversation waiting for the State (of) Flower Tour in Boston.
For almost a decade, my work as The Traveling Cannabis Writer has centered on documenting the people behind the cannabis industry, the founders, dispensary owners, cultivators, and communities shaping legal markets from the ground up. Boston invited me to start somewhere different, inside the government offices where cannabis policy becomes economic opportunity.
Hosted by the City of Boston Mayor’s Office of Economic Opportunity and Inclusion, the Massachusetts stop of the State (of) Flower Tour offered a behind the scenes look at how intentional public policy influences an industry before the first license is issued or the first dispensary opens its doors. It was an opportunity to explore how government can do more than regulate cannabis. It can help shape who has access to opportunity in the first place.
Leading both the discussion and our dispensary visits throughout the city was Shekia Scott, Senior Cannabis Industry Manager for the City of Boston. Scott is no stranger to shaping cannabis policy. Before joining the Mayor’s Office, she served as the inaugural Director of Equity and Community Outreach for the Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission, where she developed and launched the nation’s first statewide Social Equity Program. Today, she continues that work by advancing Boston’s cannabis economic development, industry, and equity initiatives through the Mayor’s Office of Economic Opportunity and Inclusion.
For business owners, regulators, and policymakers, Boston offers more than another successful cannabis market. It provides a blueprint for what can happen when government reimagines its role, moving beyond regulation to become an intentional partner in building an industry designed for long term opportunity.
Building a Foundation Instead of a Program
Creating the nation’s first statewide Social Equity Program meant building something that had never existed. There were no case studies to reference, no established framework to improve upon, and no roadmap showing how a statewide equity program should function.
When asked how she approached developing the nation’s first statewide Social Equity Program, Scott said the work began by listening before writing policy.
“There was no blueprint to follow and no model to replicate,” Scott said. “It required both creative, visionary thinking and a deep understanding of the lasting impacts of cannabis prohibition. I spent significant time listening to impacted communities, advocates, entrepreneurs, public health professionals, workforce development experts, and policymakers to understand what meaningful equity should look like in practice, not just in theory.”
Instead of defining equity through business ownership alone, Scott intentionally created multiple pathways into the cannabis industry. The program included opportunities for aspiring business owners, workforce development for individuals entering the industry, leadership training for professionals seeking specialized roles, and support for ancillary businesses, recognizing that attorneys, accountants, marketers, consultants, security firms, and construction companies all play an essential role in a thriving cannabis economy.
For Scott, that bigger approach was intentional.
“From the outset, I rejected the idea that equity should begin and end with licensing,” she said. “Equity is not a single program; it’s a philosophy that should shape every aspect of how an industry is designed, regulated, and supported.”
Building that philosophy into a statewide program wasn’t without challenges.
Funding remained one of the greatest obstacles. Scott envisioned a program that extended beyond licensing assistance to include: workforce development, technical assistance, mentorship, patient support, capital access, and long term business development. Limited resources meant building strategic partnerships while continuing to advocate for sustained public investment, reinforcing her belief that meaningful equity requires meaningful investment.
Looking back, Scott says the accomplishment was never about being the first state to establish a social equity program.
“What matters most isn’t that the program was first; it’s that it proved this work was possible,” she said. “It demonstrated that states could move beyond simply acknowledging the harms of prohibition and begin building intentional frameworks to address them.”
Reimagining Government’s Role
As our conversations continued throughout the day, one theme kept resurfacing. The discussion wasn’t focused on who received licenses or which businesses were succeeding. Instead, it focused on the role government should play after legalization begins. Boston has spent years redefining that role.
In 2019, the city adopted an ordinance that embedded equity and diversity into its local cannabis framework, helping shift the conversation beyond licensing and toward long term economic opportunity. Instead of viewing cannabis as another regulated industry, Boston recognized that local government could actively shape how the market developed and who would benefit from its growth.
When asked why it was important for city government to lead that effort, Scott didn’t hesitate.
“Government has an obligation to do more than regulate a legal cannabis industry; it has a responsibility to intentionally design one that acknowledges those harms and works to undo them,” she said. “It should never be the responsibility of the communities most impacted by prohibition to overcome barriers that public policy created and continued to enforce.”
For Scott, legalization alone does not repair decades of exclusion. Governments created many of the barriers communities continue to face, and should be held responsible for helping remove them. That philosophy helped shape Boston’s approach, encouraging the city to think beyond issuing licenses and instead focus on paving long term roads to success.
Municipal leaders began asking different questions. Instead of focusing on who would receive licenses, they explored how local government could expand workforce development, technical assistance, capital access, and community reinvestment to help businesses thrive after entering the market. Cannabis policy evolved from a regulatory responsibility into an economic development strategy.
One example Scott pointed to was Boston’s approach to technical assistance.
“Rather than limiting support to education or classroom instruction, we emphasized free, project based, hands-on assistance that helped entrepreneurs overcome real world barriers to launching, operating, and growing their businesses,” she said. “The goal wasn’t just to help people enter the industry; it was to give those most impacted by prohibition the tools, relationships, and support they needed to succeed once they got there.”
That distinction stood out during our visit.
Across the country, conversations about cannabis equity often revolve around licenses. Boston’s approach reminded me that a license is only the beginning. Long term success depends on the support systems surrounding entrepreneurs once they enter the industry, and those systems don’t happen by accident. They are intentionally designed.
Building Markets That Last
As more states continue to launch or refine adult-use cannabis programs, Scott believes one lesson rises above the rest: equity cannot be treated as an afterthought. Instead, it must be built into the foundation of a market from the very beginning.
When asked what emerging cannabis markets should understand about Boston’s approach, Scott emphasized that equity should extend beyond a single office, initiative, or licensing program.
“Equity has to be built into the foundation of the market, not added after the market is already operating,” she said. “It should be embedded in the statute, reflected throughout the regulations, incorporated into the mission of the regulating agency, and backed by clear, enforceable accountability measures.”
That philosophy reflects a broader shift in thinking.
Instead of asking how to right the wrongs after markets mature, Boston and Massachusetts focused on preventing those wrongs from surfacing in the first place. Licensing priorities were paired with dedicated funding, free project based technical assistance, and long term business support, recognizing that access alone rarely produces lasting success.
Scott also warned policymakers against relying solely on lotteries, equity caps, or standalone equity license categories to achieve meaningful results. While those approaches may create opportunities on paper, she believes they can unintentionally limit participation by forcing equity applicants to compete against each other for a finite number of opportunities, rather than integrating equity throughout the broader regulatory framework.
Funding, she added, is another lesson states cannot afford to overlook.
“States shouldn’t wait for cannabis tax revenue to materialize before investing in equity,” Scott said. “By that point, the industry is already underway, and the people most impacted by prohibition are often left trying to catch up.”
That perspective reinforces the idea that government has the ability to influence markets long before businesses begin generating revenue. Public investment, workforce development, technical assistance, and community partnerships are not secondary considerations; they are part of the infrastructure that determines whether entrepreneurs can compete and whether legalization fulfills its promise of creating broader economic opportunity.
For policymakers and industry leaders alike, Boston offers more than a successful case study. It demonstrates that reimagining government’s role isn’t simply about writing better regulations; it’s about building stronger systems that allow businesses and communities to succeed together.
Looking Beyond Boston
This stop was unlike any stop I’ve covered on any of my past tours. This tour stop invited me into the rooms where those stories I help share begin.
As a former regulator, business owner, and national cannabis strategist, my tour partner Dasheeda Dawson has spent her career helping governments, regulators, and industry leaders develop the policies, frameworks, and economic development strategies that shape cannabis markets long before the first business ever opens. Her work focuses on building systems that create opportunity.
My work focuses on documenting what grows from those systems.
Together, those perspectives tell a more complete story. Through her book, How to Succeed in the Cannabis Industry, Dasheeda helps explain the policy and regulatory decisions that shape successful markets. Through my reporting and Cannabis Legacy Chronicles book series, I document the entrepreneurs, businesses, and communities living those decisions every day.
That intersection is exactly why the State (of) Flower Tour exists. It brings together two perspectives that are rarely explored side by side, the policies that shape an industry and the people who bring it to life.
Boston demonstrated that the strongest cannabis markets are not built by entrepreneurs or government alone. They are built when thoughtful policy, intentional investment, and community collaboration work together to create lasting opportunity.
This stop offered a reminder that the future of cannabis will be shaped as much inside government offices as it will inside dispensaries and cultivation facilities. Perhaps Scott summarized that vision best.
“Ultimately, the goal shouldn’t be to create an equity program. The goal should be to build an equitable cannabis industry.”
As the State (of) Flower Tour continues, we’ll continue documenting not only the businesses shaping the cannabis industry today, but also the leaders, policies, and partnerships laying the foundation for where it goes tomorrow.