WA House RSG - Committee Meeting
(January 29, 2024)

Here are some observations from the Monday January 29th Washington State House Regulated Substances and Gaming Committee (WA House RSG) Committee Meeting.

My top 3 takeaways:

• Legislators incorporated an amendment on HB 2182, “Creating a data dashboard to track use of regulated substances,” before unanimously advising passage.
  • The legislation was heard by committee members on January 16th.
  • Committee Counsel Matt Sterling reviewed the bill analysis, stating the bill required the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) to “annually publish on its website specific information related to compliance rates, citations, information reported to the LCB by other agencies, and the amount of taxes and penalties that are collected” (audio - 1m, video - TVW):
    • Sterling described Amendment STER 047, which changed the bill to mandate that WSLCB staff:
      • Separately identifies all required information for each regulated substance;
      • Does not include any personally identifiable information related to compliance rates and citations; and
      • Identifies the occurrences and economic impact of the inversion and diversion of cannabis and cannabis products.
  • Representative Kristine Reeves moved to include her amendment (audio - <1m, video - TVW).
    • Reeves addressed the change, telling her colleagues the modification "strengthens the underlying bill” by avoiding "potentially negative ramifications" of showing data in aggregate, or by disclosing personal information. She thanked Representative Kevin Waters “for his good work on the inversion and diversion of cannabis [legislation],” and had felt “compelled to proactively include that…information into this dashboard” (audio - 1m, video - TVW).
    • Representative Greg Cheney backed the amendment, indicating that his caucus wanted general information to respect business owners’ privacy and not “embarrass folks” (audio - 1m, video - TVW)
    • The amendment was unanimously approved by a voice vote of the committee (audio - <1m,  video - TVW)
  • In her final remarks on the amended bill, Reeves explained that it was "odd that we don't have a publicly accessible way for consumers, for constituents, for licensees to really see transparently how they are being regulated.” She wanted to “see the results of that regulation, both positively and negatively and so the bill before you is really about trying to crack that nut” and have WSLCB, which “we have tasked to regulate these substances, to hold folks accountable, including our licensees.” “Transparently publishing that information” would lead to better public understanding, and choices by lawmakers, she argued (audio - 1m, video - TVW)
  • Cheney concurred with Reeves’ assessment, “that information [was] critical to effective policy making,” and should be available “not only to the public, but to us as legislators so that we can better inform our decision making”  (audio - 1m, video - TVW).
  • The amended version of SB 2182 was unanimously recommended for passage. Given the fiscal impact of creating the dashboard, the bill would likely need consideration by the Washington State House Appropriations Committee (WA House APP) before passage by the House (audio - 1m, video - TVW).

• An amendment lowering the plant count under HB 2194, “Legalizing the home cultivation of cannabis,” was adopted prior to a divided vote on passage of the bill out of committee.
  • Committee Counsel Peter Clodfelter went over the bill, which the committee hosted a public hearing on January 16th. He mentioned the bill legalized “adults aged 21 and over to produce and possess up to six cannabis plants, and the cannabis and cannabis products drive from those plants, on the premises of the housing unit occupied by the person.” Clodfelter mentioned that the bill included a civil infraction or class C felony for plants beyond specified limits, and changes to seizure and forfeiture provisions, as well as adding a definition for “commercial activity” (audio - 3m, video - TVW).
    • Clodfelter also went over Amendment CLOD 277 by Cheney which would lower the legal plant count under the bill.
      • (1) Revises the proposed cannabis home grow authorization to allow the production and possession of no more than four plants, instead of no more than six plants.
      • (2) Revises the proposed limit on the number of cannabis plants that may be produced at any one time on the premises of a single housing unit with multiple residents, to set a limit of 10 plants, instead of 15 plants.
      • (3) Revises the proposed class 1 civil infraction so it would penalize a person who produces and knowingly possesses more than four plants but fewer than 11 plants, instead of more than six plants but fewer than 16 plants.
      • (4) Revises the proposed class C felony so it would apply (or continue to apply) to a person who produces and knowingly possesses 11 or more plants, instead of 16 or more plants.
      • (5) Authorizes an investigating law enforcement officer or agency to seize and summarily destroy any plants in excess of four plants, if the person is not authorized to produce and possess the additional plants under a commercial cannabis producer license or the Washington State Medical Use of Cannabis Act.
      • (6) Revises the proposed changes to real property seizure and forfeiture provisions, so a safe harbor for cannabis possession activities could cease applying if the amount possessed is 11 or more plants, instead of 16 or more plants.
    • Co-Chair Shelley Kloba spoke favorably about Cheney’s prior amendments CLOD 266 and CLOD 265, calling them “a good stop on the way to compromise” (audio - <1m, video - TVW).
    • Co-Chair Sharon Wylie wondered how authorized patients would verify a larger plant count with law enforcement. Clodfelter replied that while the bill didn’t address that point, it didn’t modify laws around law enforcement investigation into medical gardens (audio - 2m, video - TVW).
  • Vice Chair Chris Stearns moved for the committee to recommend HB 2194 (audio - 1m, video - TVW), at which point Cheney indicated he was withdrawing his prior amendments (audio - <1m, video - TVW).
  • Stearns next moved for Amendment CLOD 277 by Cheney to be added into the bill (audio - <1m, video - TVW).
    • Cheney was appreciative of Kloba’s willingness to lower the plant count under HB 2194, as he’d “heard back from a few folks who thought that six plants or more for personal home consumption might be a little too high.” He relayed that seizure limits were also revised so “if folks are growing more than four or ten, they could be seized [by law enforcement] to make sure they're not being sold on to the black market.” He regarded this as a “great compromise” on the bill (audio - 1m, video - TVW).
    • Kloba thanked Cheney for being open to amending the measure (audio - <1m, video - TVW).
    • Amendment CLOD 277 was then adopted by a unanimous vote (audio - <1m, video - TVW).
  • Stearns moved the now-amended legislation be recommended for passage by WA House RSG (audio - 1m, video - TVW).
  • Kloba believed home grow had been "a long time coming,” stating that “our dear, departed Representative [Sherry] Appleton had this bill originally.” She suggested the limits in the bill, along with the criminal penalties for cultivating in excess, showed “this is for personal use only…this is something that many other states have done and it is time for us to do it as well” (audio - 1m, video - TVW).
  • Reeves still perceived "a lot of unanswered questions in this bill with serious unintended consequences.” She appreciated the “continued work in this space, and in cannabis in particular, to focus on addressing the systemic harms that the war on drugs have played in this space…and in this particular bill, trying to address the challenges that have been wrought to the medical cannabis community.” Reeves went over a litany of concerns, some of which she’d raised in the hearing (audio - 3m, video - TVW):
    • “As we work to address housing needs and homelessness in our state this bill is silent on how we would potentially impact consumers who are currently living in motels or hotels as extended stay facilities.”
      • The bill references the definition found in RCW 69.51A.010(13), which states “‘Housing unit’ means a house, an apartment, a mobile home, a group of rooms, or a single room that is occupied as separate living quarters, in which the occupants live and eat separately from any other persons in the building, and which have direct access from the outside of the building or through a common hall.”
      • Under the Residential Landlord-Tenant Act, a ‘tenant’ was defined to include “any individual residing in transient lodging, such as a hotel or motel or camping area as their primary dwelling, for 30 days or more.” As the Washington State Department of Revenue rules in WAC 458-20-118 expressly state, “It is presumed that the sale of lodging by a hotel, motel, tourist court, etc., for a continuous period of thirty days or more is a rental of real estate,” a hotel or motel housing individuals for periods longer than 30 days may meet the definition of a residence.
    • “It doesn't currently cover the question that I asked…how we would regulate multi-family housing to ensure that we don't end up with [a] 270 unit facility all with four plants in their homes,” as she’d voiced concerns that runoff from numerous cannabis gardens could have negative environmental impacts.
    • “It puts the burden for enforcement on local law enforcement when we consistently have heard that our local law enforcement community is feeling pinched as it is. And in my community, we actually have a moratorium on cannabis, and so now asking folks without a consumer education component to this bill, to do the work to try to understand whether it's legal in Federal Way or not…adds an onus to them.”
      • In 2023, Reeves shared her concerns with how local restrictions had negatively impacted minority-owned cannabis business owners trying to get established in her district.
      • The ordinance adopted by Federal Way in 2015 specified the restriction was for “Marijuana - related businesses, both medical and recreational, such as marijuana production, processing, or retail sales,” leaving little evidence the ordinance could target private residences.
    • Although the bill defined ‘commercial activity’ as not allowed, it was “also silent on a sales plan, on whether or not there needs to be one…relative to Representative Cheney’s comments about size of plants.”
    • “I'm a little worried that in my community where our waste management team is responsible for disposing of yard waste and we've heard from constituents that they put cannabis, they would just throw cannabis in the yard waste,” without specific plans for “how we best protect our waste management folks.”
      • With home cultivation outlawed in Washington, officials have had no reason to outline or encourage cannabis waste handling and disposal practices, like Colorado directing home growers to use a household hazardous waste collection facility, or composting guidance by regulators in Michigan.
      • There was established guidance for waste handling by cannabis businesses from the Washington State Department of Ecology. Additionally, the department has resources on “Household hazardous waste & moderate risk waste” which feature a page to locate disposal sites.
    • “There are a lot of things that we legalize…that even with our best of intents to right size the equity element, still end up feeling an undue burden to Black and Brown communities…commending the bill sponsor for her effort to understand the intensity and the extent of that challenge, I still think that this bill falls short on addressing our equity concerns.”
      • As noted by a University of  Washington (UW) review of arrest data in 2018 after removal of criminal penalties, “disparity in marijuana possession between African American/Blacks and whites was reduced slightly after legalization.” However, disproportionately for “African American/Blacks were even larger for arrests for marijuana cultivation (2.5 times the arrest rate for whites)” and other cannabis offenses.
      • The most recent analysis of racial disparities in small-scale cannabis cultivation was completed for the Washington State Legislative Task Force on Social Equity in Cannabis (WA SECTF) in 2022, with work group member discussing how African American populations had “five times the chance” of arrest for a home growing offense, and the rate for Hispanic individuals was “2.4 times more likely than a White person for the same activity.” Legalizing home growing was included in the final task force recommendations, which stated the change “would reduce arrests and felony convictions that disproportionately harm Black people,” and “could work to reduce structural racism and poverty through institutional change.”
      • A September 2023 technical report on “Initiative 502 and Cannabis-Related Convictions” from Washington State Institute for Public Policy (WSIPP) staff noted of possession arrests, “after legalization, conviction rates are essentially zero across all populations.”
    • Reeves supported a prior homegrow bill, HB 1614, when the committee voted on it in February 2023. That measure had specific restrictions on youth access and public visibility, though none of the other provisions Reeves highlighted.
  • Ranking Minority Member Kelly Chambers expected a mixed result from her caucus, specifically when it came to having cannabis plants in homes with children in addition to the “Pandora's Box" of topics just described by Reeves (audio - 1m, video - TVW).
    • Kloba added that the current medical program had allowed patients to have cannabis gardens, “regardless of whether there are children or not, and this…doesn't treat cannabis differently with that regard” (audio - <1m, video - TVW).
  • The bill was passed, though Chambers, Reeves, Assistant Ranking Minority Member Eric Robertson, and Representative Michelle Caldier voted not to recommend it. The bill was likely to be referred to WA House APP for fiscal consideration (audio - 2m, video - TVW).

• A proposed substitute significantly changing HB 2320, “Concerning high THC [tetrahydrocannabinol] cannabis products,” including removal of the age restriction for sale of products with over 35% THC, was passed despite a few ‘no’ votes.
  • The bill received a public hearing on January 16th. Clodfelter reviewed the implications of the proposal, which tasked the Washington State Department of Health (DOH) “to develop optional training for retail cannabis staff about health and safety impacts of high THC cannabis,” along with raising the “minimum legal age of sale of cannabis products with a THC concentration greater than 35% to be age 25.” He added that the bill “directed the Governor to consult with federally recognized tribes about also raising the minimum age in tribal compacts,” and required the “University of Washington Addictions, Drug and Alcohol Institute to develop and Implement guidance and health interventions for health care providers and patients at risk for developing serious complications due to cannabis consumption and had several reports to the legislature” (audio - 3m, video - TVW):
    • Clodfelter then reviewed a proposed substitute by Wiley:
      • “Changes and removes intent language.  Adds representatives of licensed cannabis businesses to the people who the Department of Health (DOH) must consult with when developing the optional training for cannabis retail staff.
      • “Adds a requirement for cannabis retailers to post a conspicuous notice at the point of sale with information about:  (1) the potential health risks and adverse health impacts that may be associated with the consumption of high-THC cannabis; (2) the potentially much higher risks that may be present for younger persons under age 25 as well as for persons who have or are at risk for developing certain mental health conditions or psychotic disorders; and (3) where to find help in case of negative effects and resources for quitting or reducing cannabis consumption.  Requires the DOH to develop the content for the notice to be provided to cannabis retailers and specifies minimum content requirements.
      • “Removes the increase of the minimum legal age of sale of cannabis products with a THC concentration greater than 35 percent, and removes references to penalties for violating that proposed requirement.  Removes…the Governor's proposed authorization to consult with federally recognized Indian tribes regarding raising the minimum legal age of sale of cannabis products with a THC concentration greater than 35 percent.
      • “Removes the University of Washington from leading the development, implementation, testing, and evaluation of guidance and health interventions for health care providers and patients and for use by state poison control and recovery hotlines.  Directs the Health Care Authority to issue a request for proposal to contract with an entity for this work (subject to appropriation).  Adds data gathering on adverse health impacts to the scope.”
    • Stearns clarified the amendment’s impact on tribal consultation. Clodfelter told him the provision had been removed, as “in the context of the original bill the State was increasing the minimum age at state stores, and directing the governor to consult with tribes about similarly increasing the age…this proposed sub strikes out the age increase in state stores, and then it also strikes out the direction to consult with tribes” (audio - 1m, video - TVW).
  • Stearns moved for the proposed substitute of the bill to be recommended for adoption (audio - 1m, video - TVW).
  • Representative Tina Orwall observed, “having worked 20 years in behavioral health, and hearing from my colleagues and some of the experiences that they're hearing about young adults and first breaks and, and the use of this product,” she appreciated the goal of HB 2320. She was especially supportive of the educational aspects, though she believed “the underlying bill had a stronger education piece and so hopefully we can keep looking at that.” Orwall also wanted to see more research, finding “there's always that tension between people that do the work clinically and what they're seeing, versus the years we might have to research it” (audio - 1m, video - TVW).
  • Chambers liked the proposed substitute’s focus on education and signage, having long thought required signage in legal cannabis stores was "relatively weak.” She anticipated some ‘no’ votes “regarding the necessity and, and cost of the study” (audio - 1m, video - TVW).
  • Wylie explained that “this was a hard one for me,” as she felt the studies on the impacts of high THC items “made note of some of the same things, and others…weren't as strong, and so my purpose in the language that I chose here was to have strong work to be done, and gathering data to…as quickly as possible put up very strong language next to the point of sale about the possible harm to…younger people or people with preexisting mental illnesses” (audio - 3m, video - TVW).
    • She welcomed more feedback on the subject, and highlighted that “when I was a lot younger…mental illness was usually blamed on mothers. There was a real movement to blame schizophrenia on vitamins, and there was a whole movement of doctors prescribing vitamins to mothers who felt very bad about how they were treated by the psychiatric institutions. They were hoping that it was vitamin[s] that could cure schizophrenia.”
    • Wylie said, “I don't want anybody's child to be harmed by this and I'm very eager to have more information,” so that officials could “do the responsible thing.” She regarded the revised HB 2320 as honoring “the hard work of a lot of different people who don't always agree with each other.”
  • A vote on the proposed substitute resulted in all members recommending passage, except for Robertson and Cheney who voted ‘without recommendation’ (audio - 2m, video - TVW).