Payton Shubrick | CEO | 6 Brick’s
“Speaking specifically to Massachusetts, the regulations around marketing and advertising are counterintuitive to the heavy tax burden each cannabis company carries. The fact that we are treated very differently from alcohol makes customer acquisition and retention an expensive game to play, with many companies spending money and only sometimes having a solid return on investment. The restrictions in Massachusetts require that more than a certain percent of your audience is over the age of 21, making it more difficult to advertise, especially for smaller groups with little to no marketing budget to launch.”
Sarah Lee Gossett Parrish | Founder and President | Sarah Lee Gossett Parrish PLLC
“The residency requirement imposed by numerous states, including my home state of Oklahoma, should be abolished as it unconstitutionally prohibits non-residents from receiving cannabis business licenses and in many states, from owning more than a certain percentage of any company that holds a cannabis business license.
Indeed, federal district courts across the country have started to invalidate residency requirements for cannabis business licensees on the basis that such protectionist statutes violate the dormant Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, by explicitly and purposefully favoring state residents over non-residents. This would seem to be the intended purpose of every residency requirement relative to cannabis business licensing and ownership matters.
This position is supported by the June 26, 2019, decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Tennessee Wine and Spirits Retailers Association v. Thomas, where the court struck down a two-year residency requirement as to initial applicants for retail liquor store licenses and a 10 consecutive year residency requirement for renewal applicants, in Tennessee. In pertinent part, our nation’s highest court relied on the dormant Commerce Clause, which provides, “if a state law discriminates against out-of-state goods or nonresident economic actors, the law can be sustained only on a showing that it is narrowly tailored to advance a legitimate local purpose.” In the Thomas case, the Supreme Court reasoned that, since the residency requirement for liquor retail sales licensees had little, if any, relationship to public health and safety, and blatantly favored Tennessee residents, it violated the dormant Commerce Clause and was unconstitutional.
The same can be said for residency requirements in the cannabis space, which also have absolutely no relationship to public health and safety, and blatantly favor in-state residents versus out-of-state residents. Thus, it seems that these residency requirements violate the dormant Commerce Clause and are unconstitutional.”
David Brookshier | Operations Director | Confidence Analytics
“One state regulation that should be abolished is the ban on home growing in Washington state. Every year we see a new push to allow adults to grow a handful of cannabis plants at home that inevitably gets shot down for one reason or another, most of which are nonsense. Some parties are worried if folks turn to home growing that product sales in licensed retailers will slow down, resulting in less tax revenue for the state. This is a personal anecdote, but I imagine it holds true for many others as well: My friends and family who brew beer at home typically spend more on drinking out at bars than those who don’t. I believe allowing passionate hobbyists to engage with their interests at home will only drive further engagement with those interests outside of the home as well. Depending on how it is regulated, it could also open up a new revenue stream for producer/processors or retailers through the sale of clones and seeds to the public. There are also the social justice and equity factors to consider as well: people of color are far more likely to be convicted of crimes related to home growing, so legalizing it would remove an avenue for them to be disproportionately targeted. It also allows those without the financial means or access to start their own companies the opportunity to learn and build experience and skills in a safe environment that they control. For these reasons, I believe that abolishing the ban on home growing would be a huge benefit to Washington’s cannabis industry and residents.”
Steve Levine | Partner | Husch Blackwell
“Most states have various problems, but I would say California’s system because of the unfair tax burdens placed by state, city and municipalities on operating entities.”