Ohio lawmakers won’t be amending the voter-approved state marijuana law this coming year, despite Republican efforts to speed up changes. A Senate committee passed a reform bill, and a House Committee held hearings to discuss a different proposal. However, the state legislature will not send any reform measures to the governor by the time they return home this week for their holiday break.
On Wednesday, the House Finance Committee heard public testimony from Rep. Jamie Callender. This was their third hearing. But members did not vote before adjourning.
Senate Republicans are working to advance a separate package, which has sparked major pushback from stakeholders and advocates who believe it will undermine the voters’ decision who approved legalization in the ballot box last month. This legislation has passed the Senate, but not been taken up by the House.
Reform supporters prefer the House bill because it makes fewer changes than the Senate bill, which originally called for home cultivation to be eliminated and basic legalization provisions to be delayed indefinitely. The Senate legislation was altered significantly last week after criticism, but still faces significant opposition.
Senate President Matt Huffman’s (R) original timeline had him passing the bill as an emergency before legalization took effect last week. However, that did not happen. House Speaker Jason Stephens, meanwhile (R), has said that he does not see the urgency to amend the initiated statute as sales will not begin until 2024.
Both the Senate and House leaders of the Republican Party have expressed disagreements on some procedural questions related to amending marijuana laws, such as timelines for enactment. However, they both support the idea of making certain changes, such as revising tax structures, preventing public use and discouraging impaired driving.
The House Finance Committee heard from stakeholders and advocates who expressed concerns over the proposed revenue allocations in the bill, the potential for increased criminalization of activities such as marijuana sharing, and the impact the legislation would have on the existing hemp and medical cannabis market of the state.
The House speaker announced that the House would not vote on Callender’s proposal on Tuesday, nor will it concur on the separate cannabis law passed by the Senate the previous week. The next scheduled session of the legislature will be in mid-January.
Stephens stated that “it’s a huge change in Ohio law, so we have to be careful and respect the concerns of the Senate and the Administration.” The majority of Issue 2’s provisions won’t be implemented until summer. That’s why there isn’t a sense of urgency.
He stated that there are competing marijuana proposals. “There are provisions that some people like and others don’t, and it’s just trying to work out that process,” he said . “Generally, we are trying to keep the will of people.” Many members of both parties find it extremely important.
The Senate proposal follows a different path. The Senate proposal was attached to a noncontroversial bill passed by the House before it was amended and approved on the Senate General Government Committee, and finally on the Senate floor.
The Senate plan is more concerning to reform advocates. Although it has been significantly modified from its original version in committee – restoring home cultivation for example – reform advocates say that it still undermines voters’ will who approved the legalization initiative last month.
Mike DeWine (R) has insisted that voters only support the fundamental principle of legalizing marijuana, arguing that they didn’t understand some provisions. Mike DeWine, (R), has insisted that voters only support the principle of legalizing cannabis and not necessarily specific policies such as tax revenues.
“I don’t think people voted for the future that we will have if nothing changes.” DeWine stated on Monday that although it is legal to possess and use marijuana, you cannot buy it.
Stephens said that the expedited timeline for sales is “something worth considering” and “not an awful idea.” However, there are questions as to how the administrative changes will be implemented. He said that both chambers agreed with the Senate proposal to allow expungements of prior cannabis convictions. “It’s only a question of how,” he added.
This is how the House Bill from Callender, (HB 354) would change Ohio’s cannabis law:
- Keep the home-grown option up to six plants for each adult and twelve plants for each household.
- Interdiction of sharing marijuana among adults. This includes giving away homegrown cannabis.
- The bill would also impose an additional 10 percent tax to gross receipts of marijuana cultivators, in addition to the 10 percent original excise tax.
- The revenue from the cultivator taxes would be used to create and renovate jails (36%), hire county sheriffs for areas that have at least one cultivator (36%), provide law enforcement training (23%), and fund assistance for crime victims (5%).
- Redirect the tax revenue generated by social equity programs into counties to fund equity grants, a job placement program and “anything else that involves community engagement or economic development.”
- The remaining 36 percent will go to local governments that have cannabis shops. Another 12.5 percent will support the 988 crisis and suicide lifeline. 10 percent will fund mental health treatments in county jails. Three percent is for administrative costs to regulate the cannabis market.
- Adverts for tobacco products and alcohol should be restricted.
This is what the Senate’s revised measure HB86 would do to the state marijuana law:
- Limit the number of plants grown by adults to six, but only six per household instead of 12.
- Legalize only the possession of marijuana purchased from retailers or products grown at home.
- Allow existing medical cannabis dispensaries that are already in operation to begin serving adult users within 90 days after the enactment of Issue 2, rather than the nine-month period under Issue 2.
- Interdiction of sharing marijuana among adults
- Require that the state attorney-general create a system to reimburse individuals for the costs associated with actively petitioning the courts for expungements for prior convictions for possession of up to 2,5 ounces cannabis.
- Remove the social equity revenue funds and redirect large portions of revenue to law enforcement training.
- Raising the marijuana excise to 15% (up from 10%) and allowing local governments to levie an additional tax up to 3 percent.
- Spend $15 million of marijuana tax revenues each year to facilitate expungements.
- The remaining revenue would be used to fund a Department of Public Safety training program for law enforcement (16%), an Attorney General’s Office law enforcement training fund (14%), a drug law enforcement fund (5%) and a poison control fund (2%) as well as substance abuse treatment (9%) and suicide hotline services (9%) and jail construction and renovation (28%) and safe driver training (5%) among others.
- Reducing the THC limit on marijuana extracts for adult use to 50%, instead of 90 percent as per Issue 2.
- Reduced canopy restrictions on cultivation facilities
- Removing anti-discrimination clauses regarding cannabis consumer rights and eligibility for transplants.
- Mandate strict regulations on the transport and storage of cannabis.
- Passengers who smoke marijuana in the car will be sentenced to a minimum of three days imprisonment.
Here’s the difference between Issue 2 and what it would achieve if passed by voters.
- Possession of up to 25 ounces cannabis by adults over 21 years old, along with up to 15 grams marijuana concentrates.
- You can grow up to six plants at home for your own personal use.
- The 10 percent tax on cannabis sales would be used to fund social equity and job programs (36%), localities who allow adult-use marijuana businesses to operate within their jurisdiction (36%), education and drug misuse programs (25%), and administrative costs associated with implementing the new system (3%).
- Create a Division of Cannabis Control within the Department of Commerce. The division would be able to “license and regulate adult-use cannabis operators, adult-use testing laboratories and individuals who are required to have a license, as well as investigate and penalize them.”
- Give existing medical cannabis businesses an early start on the recreational market. Within nine months after the law’s enactment, regulators would have to start issuing adult use licenses to applicants who are qualified and operate medical operations.
- The division will also have to issue 50 adult-use retail licenses, and 40 recreational cultivator licences. This is “with preference given to applicants who are participating in the cannabis social equality and jobs program.” It would also authorize regulators to grant additional licenses for recreational markets two years after first approval.
- Municipalities could opt not to allow new recreational cannabis businesses to open in their region, but existing medical marijuana companies would still be allowed to operate in the same area. Employers can also enforce policies that prohibit workers from using cannabis for adult purposes.
- Require regulators “to enter into an agreement with Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services”, to provide “cannabis-addiction services,” including “education and treatment of individuals with addiction issues to cannabis or to other controlled substances, such as opioids.”
- This measure contains a provision that requires regulators to “study and finance” criminal justice reform initiatives, including expungements.
Some Democratic lawmakers have said they are open to revisions such as allocating certain cannabis tax revenues towards K-12 education. However, supporters of the legalization initiative that was approved by the majority of voters do not want legislators to undermine the will that the majority of voters expressed.
Ohio Rep. Juanita Brent, (D), recently stressed that those who have been criminalized for marijuana, and those with industry expertise , should be included in any efforts to amend Ohio’s voter approved legalization law. She argued that it shouldn’t just be up to the “anti-cannabis’ legislators to revise this statute.
Rep. Gary Click filed a bill earlier this month which would permit individual municipalities to ban the use of and home cultivation cannabis within their jurisdictions. It would also revise distribution of state marijuana tax revenues by, for instance, reducing funding allocated to social equality and jobs programs, and redirecting them instead to law enforcement training.
Rep. Cindy Abrams, (R), also introduced a Bill last month to revise marijuana law. 40 million dollars in cannabis tax money would be used annually for law enforcement training.
Marijuana Moment tracks more than 1,000 cannabis and drug policy bills that have been introduced in state legislatures, and Congress. Patreon supporters who pledge at least $25/month gain access to our interactive charts, maps and hearing calendar.
Discover more about our marijuana bills tracker. Become a Patreon supporter to gain access.
—
The Ohio Department of Commerce published a FAQ guide to inform residents about the new law, including the timeline for its implementation. Regulators have repeatedly stated that policies could change based on the actions of the legislature.
The prohibitionist organizations who campaigned against Issue 2 are now determined to undermine the newly passed law. Some have even described plans to pressurize the legislature into repealing legalization completely before it is implemented.
In September, several Ohio legislators said that they did not believe the legislature would repeal a legalization law passed by voters. The Senate President confirmed that repeal was not on the agenda for the next year.
The issue was only decided by the voters after the lawmakers refused to use the opportunity of passing their own reform during the ballot qualification procedure. The legislature had months to pass a legalization they could have tailored to address any outstanding concerns. However, the legislature deferred this decision to the voters.
The GOP-controlled Senate, which was responsible for the early voting that began in October, passed a Resolution encouraging residents to reject Measure.
Rep. Dave Joyce, the co-chairman of the Congressional Cannabis Caucus said in September he’d vote in favor of this initiative in November. He urged “all Ohio citizens to take part and have their voices heard in this important issue.”
Sherrod Brown, the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee (D-OH), said that he voted for the ballot initiative in late October. He called it a hard decision but one based on the belief that this reform would promote “safety” for consumers.
Vivek RAMASWAMY, a Republican presidential candidate for 2024, has said that he voted against the ballot initiative to legalize cannabis in Ohio, because he is concerned that the federal government may “weaponize criminalization” against people who engage in state-legal marijuana activities under the “fake pretense” they are protected from federal prosecution.
Senate Majority leader Chuck Schumer (DNY) said that Ohio’s decision to legalize cannabis at the ballot was just one of many recent examples of Americans rejecting “MAGA extremeism,”. He added that he is committed to working on a bipartisan level “to continue moving forward on bipartisan marijuana legislation as soon we can.”
Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-OR, co-chairman of the Congressional Cannabis Caucus told Marijuana Moment that “the Ohio vote was a big exclamation mark on the things we have been talking about.”
We’ve been saying this for years, that the issue is gaining momentum and that it is inclusive. He said that it was similar to the success of the [Ohio] abortion rights issue, except this was more pronounced. “We received more votes than abortion.” “We get more votes than anyone on the ballot.”
The White House said separately that “nothing has altered” with President Joe Biden’s stance on cannabis. They declined to state if they supported Ohio’s decision to legalize marijuana or if they support further reforms of federal cannabis laws.
According to preliminary results of county elections, while Ohio voters approved the statewide legalization of marijuana, activists scored a number of small victories to criminalize higher amounts of cannabis in 3 Ohio cities.
Connecticut Marijuana Sales Set New Monthly Records in November
Photo by Chris Wallis // Side Pocket Images.
The post Ohio bills to change voter-approved marijuana law pushed back to 2024 as House committee holds third hearing on GOP proposal appeared initially on Marijuana moment.
