The chair of a New Hampshire House Subcommittee, which was discussing a marijuana legalization measure during a Wednesday work group meeting, gave the bill’s sponsor a choice. Either work to amend the proposed legislation into something that would win Gov. Chris Sununu, a Republican who supports a state-controlled store system, had two options: either amend the bill to win the support of the governor or pass it through the House and then see it fail in Senate.
Rep. John Hunt, who chairs the House Commerce and Consumer Affairs Committee said that he prepared an amendment in order to bring the bill in line with what the Senate Republicans and Governor’s Office would support. He described a legal market where marijuana would be sold by adults via a franchise system controlled by the state, similar to the one discussed last year, but did not reach a consensus.
Rep. Erica Layon, the Republican sponsor of HB 1633 and the bill’s author, has said that she could not sign legislation making New Hampshire the exclusive franchisee for the cannabis sector. She warned that this novel approach would expose the state to expensive legal liability.
Layon spoke against the amendment. “Quite honestly, if I see my name on a bill that talks about franchising and the state will be sued, then I have to speak out,” Layon said.
A second member claimed that Hunt “hijacked” Layon’s bill by amending it.
This meeting, in which some lawmakers became visibly frustrated, was the latest chapter of New Hampshire’s efforts to reach consensus on marijuana legalization. After more than one hour of debate, the lawmakers decided to keep trying to resolve policy differences and revisit Layon’s Bill at a second meeting next week.
The meeting of the workgroup continued on Wednesday, and it was clear that not everyone in the room agreed with Hunt’s changes.
Civil rights activists and representatives of the existing medical marijuana industry in the state pointed out that Hunt’s proposal omitted certain provisions they believed were widely agreed by the previous legalization commission. These included annulling of past cannabis convictions, and allowing current medical operators to get dual-use licensing and sell to all adults.
The amendment was not available to the other members of the panel when the meeting started, even though Hunt had distributed a draft the day before.
One member of the panel inquired about the document received by a speaker referring to the amendment draft. “I was just curious as to why the committee did not get that.”
Hunt said, “It’s what I received from the commission and I’m sorry I didn’t send it out.” I thought I had sent it to everyone.”
Layon, in response to Hunt’s warnings that her bill would not pass the Senate in its current form, departed from the conventional sales model she had introduced in HB 1633 in order to offer an alternative.
She said: “I understand that there is a lot interest in having a model run by the state, but there are many ways to do this.” I believe that we can find a solution that will meet the needs of most people while minimizing risks for the state.
She proposed to do away with the franchising model, and borrow a mechanism that New Hampshire uses for its state-run alcohol system: agency shops. In the case of liquor, agency stores allow privately-owned businesses to sell alcohol in areas that are not serviced by state-run retailers. This is a kind of exception to government-only sale model. Three such stores are located in the state.
Layon suggested that a similar approach to cannabis could be used. He argued the change would better protect New Hampshire’s tax revenue and the state itself from lawsuits, by separating the state from the day-to-day operations of cannabis retailers who touch the plant.
Hunt, however, said that the proposal would not work. He noted that the liquor sold in agency stores comes from other areas of the state-run alcohol industry. He said that the plan is too different from the strategy discussed by the state’s legalization commission last year.
He told Layon: “Let me walk you through it so you understand where we came from,” explaining that the commission’s franchise model is intended in part to be a cheaper version of the state-run alcohol model, which the governor has indicated he prefers.
Hunt asked, pointing out the cost of building state-run alcohol stores. “That’s when the franchise model was created.”
He continued that with the agency-store approach, “you are trying to take a template and say, Oh, let’s try this here’, which is not at all what your bill is.
Hunt claimed that he did not believe the move away franchises was needed at all. He called the idea at one point a “redherring”. Layon, on the other hand, insisted that the state can still use its health and safety power to limit marijuana advertising if they so choose.
Hunt told Layon that “if you think you would like to change this bill so that the individual entities are free to advertise themselves, to free the market, to be able to use their own names,” then you’re going against what the governor wanted.
Rep. Jane Beaulieu, the clerk of committee (D), accused Hunt of “demeaning Layon”.
Beaulieu said that the sponsor of the bill, an economist who was a former medical device analyst, “has a great history”.
Layon said that his job was to assess risks for companies, industries, devices, and surgeries, then determine how to mitigate them to make a profitable investment. “My job on Wall Street was to be paranoid and they paid really well for that–and to not be too paranoid because I would lose money and people would punishe me,” Layon told the panel.
Hunt struggled to understand the goal of the new proposal. He asked “What do you want other than to call it an agency rather than a franchisor?” and said he looked forward to the revised version being presented at the next group meeting. “I’m certainly open to this suggestion. “I just can’t imagine what you think you’re releasing.”
After some heated exchanges between speakers and committee members, the panel decided to revisit the bill the following week.
Layon has committed to creating an analysis of the competing plans and possible ways to combine them in a way which is palatable. She believed that it was possible for the legislature to address concerns of the Senate Republicans and the Governor about state control, public safety and legal risks while also protecting the state.
In recent sessions, the House has passed multiple marijuana legalization legislations only to have them fail repeatedly in the Senate. The governor has laid out a plan for what he will sign, which advocates hope could lead to something being enacted in this session.
Stakeholders who spoke during the meeting on Wednesday emphasized the dysfunctional state commission which met last year. They seemed to question Hunt’s choice to defer findings to which members had never agreed. Some participants said that they believed some of the members were against legalization while others claimed they were restricted by what Governor Hunt would allow.
Matt Simon, director of public relations and government affairs at GraniteLeaf Cannabis in New Hampshire, said: “I believe there is another major reason.” The study commission spent over two months reviewing a franchise model draft. We didn’t receive a second version of this draft at the last study commission meeting. The second draft we were given did not include half of what the study commission had agreed upon over the past two months. It was a very frustrating experience.”
(Disclosure – Simon supports Marijuana Moment with a Patreon monthly pledge.
Hunt, who was himself a member but missed a number of meetings due to travel and illness, claimed he had no idea there was so much frustration surrounding the work of the body. He sometimes appeared to be unaware of the effects his own amendment would have.
He said at one time to Simon, “I’m confused,” about dual-use licensing for medical marijuana operators. “I missed the second meeting because I was in Amsterdam for one meeting, and then had COVID.” When I returned, you told me that everything had been solved.
Simon responded that, while the members of the commission agreed to add certain provisions to a draft bill; many of those changes agreed upon were not included in a revised copy.
Other people asked Hunt why his amendment did not include the annulment of previous cannabis convictions. This provision seemed to be widely supported in the study committee but was also absent from a revised version unveiled at the final meeting.
The lawmaker responded, “Annulment was supposed to be included in this bill.” “I don’t understand, what happened, if that’s the case, you’re telling me it was removed?”
He continued, “I agree that annulment should be included in this bill.” “That’s what Rep. [Brian] Sullivan requested, and I don’t have any problem putting annulment in.”
Simon is still hopeful that despite the sometimes rocky discussions at the meeting on Wednesday, lawmakers will be united, able to negotiate, make concessions, and eventually pass a law.
“People are ready to legalize.” “We just want a bill which makes sense in New Hampshire,” said he. “This committee could be the best chance to achieve that.”
Karen O’Keefe is the Marijuana Policy Project’s state policy director. She said that the House Commerce Committee should “advance a bill which includes annulment, protections against discrimination, ample opportunities for small businesses, and avoids poisonous bills that decriminalize consumers or create prohibition 2.0.”
She added, “New Hampshire finally has the opportunity to legalize marijuana.” It’s important that the legislature take advantage of this opportunity to send a bill to the governor which he will not veto. The General Court has a number of policy questions it can decide, within the parameters set by the Governor.
The state commission, led by Sen. Daryl Abbas(R), charged with examining how to legalize cannabis in New Hampshire released its final report in Decembre. This concluded months of meetings in which the members were unable to agree on the way forward in terms of cannabis policy for the state.
The new report states that “the Commission ultimately voted to not recommend legislation for 2024 Session.” The Commission failed to reach consensus due to a number of unresolved questions.
The group was unable to reach an agreement on a number of issues, including the THC level allowed in legal cannabis products; penalties for public consumption; rules governing the operation of motor vehicle, creation of a body to approve Liquor Commission rulings; measures to prevent minors from accessing the product, the number and location of retail stores across the state, as well as whether home cultivation should be permitted or prohibited.
The Commission to Study With the Goal of Proposing Legalization of State Controlled Sales of Cannabis, and Cannabis Products, conducted line-by-line reviews of the draft legislation that Abbas submitted in October. His staff stressed this was meant to be a starting place. After weeks of often heated debate between members the body voted to not recommend the bill to legislators.
Sununu’s list of demands at the last minute was the deciding factor for some members of the committee. The governor stated that he would only support 15 licensed marijuana retail outlets in the state and wanted to include clauses specifying that cannabis business cannot lobby or make political contributions.
Commissioners, who were assigned the task of studying the feasibility and drafting legislation for a cannabis-run state model under the legislation which created the study group.
- Permits the state control distribution and access
- Keep marijuana out of the schools and away from children
- Controls the marketing of marijuana
- Prohibit “marijuana Miles” or oversaturation in marijuana retail establishments
- Municipalities can choose whether to restrict or prohibit marijuana retail establishments
- Multi-drug abuse is reduced
- Has no additional tax to stay competitive
Hunt’s Committee worked extensively on marijuana issues during the last session. They tried to reach a consensus to legalize marijuana through a system with multiple levels, including state-controlled shops and dual licensing for medical cannabis dispensaries.
The panel however, came to a deadlock on the complex legislation that was being considered after Sununu announced his surprise support for state-run legalization. The Senate , however, defeated a more traditional legalization bill, called HB 639, in spite of its bipartisan support.
In May, a separate marijuana legalization bill that was proposed in conjunction with a Medicaid expansion measure was defeated by the House.
The Senate also moved to introduce another piece of legislation in the same month, which would have allowed designated caregivers and patients to grow up to 12 seedlings, 3 immature plants, and three mature plants for their own therapeutic use.
After the Senate rejected reform legislation in 2022 the House included legalization as an amendment to separate criminal-justice-related legislation, but this was also stricken down in the opposing chamber.
Florida Senate Committee Passes Bill Unanimously to Restrict Hemp Derived Products with New THC Limits
The post New Hampshire Lawmakers Clash over Competing Marijuana Legitimization Proposals with Revisions Planned in The Week Ahead first appeared on Marijuana Moment.
