WSLCB - Board Meeting
(January 3, 2024)

Here are some observations from the Wednesday January 3rd Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) Board Meeting.

My top 3 takeaways:

• Staff briefed on several cannabis rulemaking projects and a couple of petitions for rulemaking under review, indicating interim due dates continued to slip.
  • See our observation of the rulemaking update on December 5th.
  • SB 5367 Implementation (audio - 1m, Video - TVW, Video - WSLCB, Rulemaking Project)
    • Policy and Rules Manager Cassidy West projected that officials would have “a survey going out next week as a follow-up to the stakeholder engagement that was held in December,” and responses would be “used to inform the draft rule language.” She said additional stakeholder outreach would be scheduled “to review proposed draft rule language,” and anticipated a CR-102 would be offered to board members “at the end of February, and there will be a lot of stakeholder engagement from now and then to finish that up.”
      • When the project was approved by the board in June 2023, West anticipated having a CR-102 “on or after October 25th.” By that date, however, the work had been postponed and in early November she framed the lack of draft conceptual rules as an effort to include Research Unit input to ensure “rules [were] consistent as lab standards and accreditation standards are transitioned” from WSLCB. Staff then expected that conceptual rules would be available and “a stakeholder engagement session… would be scheduled “sometime after Thanksgiving, [in] early December.” By December 2023, West had pushed back the work even further, and announced a “second round of stakeholder engagement probably in early January.”
  • SB 5080 Implementation (audio - 1m, Video - TVW, Video - WSLCB, Rulemaking Project)
    • West remarked that her staff would “extend the informal public comment period through February,” but maintain a “tentative time, for…public engagement sessions to be held in February and March. And so this is just potentially pushing” a CR-102 back one meeting, “instead of April 10th to the board meeting after that.” This extra time allegedly provided opportunity for “a little bit more commenting,” she said.
      • When presenting the CR-101 in November 2023, West had already had to correct dates, as SB 5080 was among rule implementation efforts being delayed following staffing challenges.
    • The new delay would likely hold back a CR-103 to finalize changes until “June 6th, with an effective date of the rules on July 21st.”
  • Product Samples (audio - 1m, Video - TVW, Video - WSLCB, Rulemaking Project)
    • Though still “on pause,” West noted the last action was a stakeholder event in October 2023. She intended to “resume working on the project in February and then next steps will be holding stakeholder engagement to review draft proposed ruling language.” After that, a CR-102 would be presented “in March or April.”
  • Minors on Wholesale Licensed Premises (audio - 1m, Video - TVW, Video - WSLCB, Rulemaking Petition)
    • Originally submitted in August 2022, West mentioned that they were accepting public comment “to see if we should initiate rulemaking or not” until February 3rd.
  • Rulemaking Petition Update (audio - <1m, Video - TVW, Video - WSLCB)
    • West stated there were two petitions being reviewed by staff. The first involved making “heavy metal testing required,” she said, and a second “regarding shared equipment and surveillance for facilities that are owned by the same entities.” Both petitions were scheduled for presentation to the board “on January 31st.”
    • Board Chair David Postman asked to be sent a copy of the shared equipment petition (audio - 1m, Video - TVW, Video - WSLCB), and Policy and Rules Coordinator Daniel Jacobs subsequently promised to get a copy for Postman (audio - <1m, Video - TVW, Video - WSLCB).
  • Retail Medical Cannabis Endorsements (audio - 1m, Video - TVW, Video - WSLCB, Rulemaking Project)
    • Jacobs also noted the project was pushed back from January 31st, and the “tentative timeline for the medical cannabis endorsement would have us filing the [CR-]102, February 28th.” Under the new schedule, he commented there would be a “public hearing April 10th, and then the rules filed April 24th, and in effect by the end of May.” 

• Two public commenters brought up issues around the social equity program; both called for changes to improve applicant licensing, and one saw lapses in agency transparency and accountability.
  • Sami Saad (audio - 4m, Video - TVW, Video - WSLCB)
    • Saad last spoke to board members in November 2023.
    • Calling the new year “a new page,” Saad hoped that in 2024 officials changed the scoring rubric for equity applicants, as he felt some “weren’t lucky” when it came to prioritization for license allotments. Speaking to people like himself who had been involved in “medical cannabis since day one,” he said he’d lost his dispensary under a WSLCB board composed of different members. Saad wanted current members “to work out harder to get those people acknowledged, like Kevin Shelton, and Levi [Lyon], and those people.” He’d been in the cannabis sector for a long time, and while he didn’t like losing his dispensary named 12Green, he had decided to “never take it personal with anyone. I wish you guys the best.”
    • Saad recognized he’d spoken many times (“I was not even nice with all the board members”) but felt he’d been treated fairly in the equity licensing process to that point. He had “been kind of hard in speaking” about the board, however he stressed it “wasn't about me, it’s about my community.” Saad came from Sudan, and he explained their people had battled hardship and a revolution, but were “very united and from that…background perspective” he drew comparisons with “everyone who fought for the right of, to get their license back.” He felt there’d been progress, but wanted 2024 to be a year for “people that will work with people, that's what I wish and that's what I hope.”
    • While he’d been confrontational at times, Saad was grateful there’d been “no favoritism” or bias when it came to his application, though he wanted others to get licenses sooner as well.
  • Christopher King (audio - 5m, Video - TVW, Video - WSLCB)
    • King most recently spoke to board members in December 2023.
    • King began by “returning to pesky issues with journalists because all the other journalists now around this area seem compromised. Nobody ever challenges you on anything anymore.” He referred to a 2019 Seattle Stranger article on Washington CannaBusiness Association (WACA) Executive Director and Lobbyist Vicki Christophersen’s background, titled “The Woman Who Runs Weed Policy in Washington State,” where King summed up Lester Black’s coverage of Christophersen as “working closely with the agency.” He said the members at that time, former Chair Jane Rushford and Board Member Russ Hauge along with current Board Member Ollie Garrett, had discussed Christophersen in a January 2018 meeting—months before Cannabis Observer began covering the board—with King reading quotes from Black to infer Christophersen met with members on policy issues individually to avoid “Open Public Meeting [Act] exposure on some of the things.” King added that Garrett had been part of the board and hadn’t sought a retraction from Black on his story, so King felt comfortable inferring it was accurately reported, alleging this was “a violation of open records act.”
    • He felt this was “going on at the same time with your clandestined [sic] meetings that you paid $192,000 to Arthur West [in 2015] to go away,” and as WSLCB “goon squads were going into these minority neighborhoods, and running them up, and threatening people and all that.”
    • King next claimed, “I think you guys have violated HIPAA, too,” finding the federal health privacy law was in conflict with RCW 69.51a.230 which permitted law enforcement access to medical information through the Secure Access Washington (SAW) portal. He remarked that activist John Novak had contacted staff at the Washington State Department of Health (DOH) about a medical cooperative and been told, “to date, we have not received requests for state or federal access to the database” under that statute. But King understood that Shannon Angell, DOH Deputy Director of Drug Systems, “on July 25th [sent] out email information talking about [a] medical cooperative, which I now find out to be” the coop Novak had requested information on. King insisted this information was sent out in “violation of HIPAA, that's a six year statute right there.”
    • King also mentioned that Cultiva Law, “they have this pro bono program that they were talking about” involving “state money to mentor selected individuals” in the equity licensing process. He claimed attorney Aaron Pelley said “the State of Washington had chosen to hand select mentors, and to allocate funding to pay for those mentors.” King said he’d submitted a public records request because he “need[ed] to know…how were these mentors chosen and, and furthermore, how did the mentors choose their mentees?” He understood that Kevin Shelton had written to the firm “asking for help and [Pelley] didn't say boo back.” King disagreed with allowing a private firm to get state dollars and “people acting under color of law,” and assessed in his lifetime, “I have never seen a more corrupt agency than the LCB.”
      • Mentorship for the equity program has been managed by the Washington State Department of Commerce (WA Commerce), and receives only two mentions in an enacting statute largely focused on a technical assistance grant program.
        • In September 2021, the Washington State Legislative Task Force on Social Equity in Cannabis (WA SECTF) Technical Assistance and Mentorship Work Group offered recommendations on the mentorship program with task force appointees questioning the structure of how professionals like attorneys would be reimbursed.
        • In June 2022, former WA Commerce Social Equity in Cannabis Program and Contract Manager Brandi Yanez Garcia described mentor selection as “an open application process” with mentors providing “learning experiences in addition to any mentorship.” She indicated legal help was part of the Topic Specialist Mentorship.
        • In December 2023, WA Commerce Life Science and Global Health Sector Lead Alison Beason explained how the mentorship roster had been made available to applicants through an online portal, and confirmed that legal guidance was one of the most requested mentor services.

• Cannabis Observer Founder Gregory Foster highlighted two recent State-funded research documents he felt were stigmatizing of cannabis and cannabis sector perspectives (audio - 4m, Video - TVW, Video - WSLCB, written comments).
  • Speaking in his personal capacity, Foster called out the use of State funds “for research which perpetuates the stigmatization of cannabis and anti-cannabis sector points of view.”
  • Washington State Institute for Public Policy (WSIPP): Licensed Non-Medical Cannabis Retail Access and High School Outcomes in Washington State
    • Foster pointed out the new report wasn’t yet published on the WSIPP current project page for cannabis, so he hoped WSLCB staff were aware of it. He commented that the study had looked at “the influence of advertising or even mere proximity to a retailer having an influence on outcomes in school,” and seemed designed for “establishing correlations, not even necessarily whether the student [was] actually using cannabis, but like, the entire high school outcomes…just the mere visual sight of cannabis having impacts on your child's performance.”
      • The summary included with the study found “school proximity to a non-medical cannabis retailer relates to both a modest increase in the average number of monthly absences, and a small decline in the average probability of four-year high school graduation. We also find that a higher number of nearby retailers predicts more unexcused absences.”
    • Foster remarked that several limitations in the data were acknowledged by the authors. Researchers “wanted more data on the mitigating impacts of school-based cannabis prevention strategies,” and Foster agreed such information would be useful “evidence as far as the effectiveness of our prevention strategies.” He anticipated hearing from the Washington State Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee (JLARC) on Thursday January 4th regarding “expenditures from the dedicated cannabis account where they're going to say that we've spent [9]% of all dedicated cannabis account funds…$284 million that we have spent on prevention and education and [treatment], the most of any state. Foster felt that meant “it'd be good to know that some of those strategies are working.”
    • As Initiative 502 had left WSIPP tasked “with evaluating the long-term public health, safety, and economic impacts of 502” for the subsequent 20 years, “that's a pretty broad mandate, so it's not clear to me how they choose what they're going to actually research and study, and create correlations that have an impact” and “are then recited as the official state perspective on these things."
  • University of Washington Addictions, Drug, and Alcohol Institute (UW ADAI): Identifying policy options to regulate high potency cannabis: A multiple stakeholder concept mapping study in Washington State, USA
    • Running out of time to comment, Foster was concerned by the paper “funded by half a million dollars budget proviso in 2021,” and encouraged board members to take a look at the findings by UW ADAI Cannabis Education and Research Program (CERP) Director Beatriz Carlini and others.
    • The paper concluded that support for regulating highly concentrated cannabis items “varied by stakeholder group. Consistent with how other health compromising industries have historically acted, cannabis industry stakeholders rejected regulation of their products. Future studies should explore non-cannabis industry stakeholders’ willingness to work towards minimizing the influence of the cannabis industry in policy development processes to assure public health regulations prevail.”
      • The study notes the “cannabis industry” subgroup self-identified as 18 consumers, 17 industry members, and one “other.”
    • The University of Washington researchers specifically called out the influence of WACA members and claimed that “government agencies in WA have embraced cannabis industry representatives as key stakeholders in every decision process, and the discussion around conflict of interest is almost non-existent.”
    • The authors suggested “four main mechanisms for addressing and/or managing the influence of corporations on public health policy, research, and practices: 
      • a) transparency;
      • b) management of interactions with industry and of conflicts of interest;
      • c) identification, monitoring, and education about the practices of corporations and associated risks to public health; and
      • d) prohibition of interactions with industry.”
    • The researchers concluded with a call for funding further research to determine “which set of approaches have the most support and potential in WA state as it is related to the cannabis industry.”
    • Carlini previously spoke about concept mapping regulations among different stakeholder groups in September 2022, and with state lawmakers that December. She acknowledged combining industry and trade group members with consumers and civil liberties groups supportive of legal cannabis under the designation “cannabis advocate,” and that the subgroup supported certain regulations for the products. She also talked about a history of unsuccessful legislative attempts to tax or restrict products based on cannabinoid concentration in April 2023.
      • At publication time, an additional $500,000 proviso remained in the Washington State 2024-25 biennium operating budget in Section 606(61). The money was allotted from the workforce education investment account for UW ADAI staff “to develop resources regarding the connection between first episode psychosis and cannabis use.”