WSLCB - Board Meeting
(May 7, 2025) - Summary

The board accepted a petition recommendation on lab test terminology, then heard about agency rulemaking projects, implementing new laws, and activities at other agencies.

Here are some observations from the Wednesday May 7th Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) Board Meeting.

My top 3 takeaways:

• Policy and Rules Manager Kevin Walder presented a successful recommendation for the board to accept a petition for rulemaking clarifying cannabis testing terminology and reporting requirements (audio - 8m, video - WSLCB, video - TVW, Rulemaking Petition).
  • Walder told board members the petition was submitted on March 19th by Stephanie Riley, the General Counsel for accredited and certified lab Confidence Analytics, and called for amending sections of WAC 314-55. He said Riley sought to define existing terms more clearly, establish a new definition for "mandatory state compliance testing," differentiate mandatory and non-mandatory testing—also known as research and development (R&D) testing—and clarify such testing was not subject to seed-to-sale tracking requirements. The petitioner asserted that "current rule language is not clear, and that this ambiguity creates confusion among the regulated community that can result in compliance issues.” Walder acknowledged the “concerns highlighted in this petition also closely align with comments that we received by many stakeholders during the comment period for the lab accreditation rule last month, and we signaled at that time that we would be opening up rules to address that issue.” He confirmed there was no single defined term in statute nor regulations for required cannabis testing, but instead, "a few different terms are used in different WAC sections to address compliance testing.”
    • During the Product Samples rulemaking project, the subject of R&D samples was brought up but deemed out of scope for work on that project.
  • Agency Enforcement and Education staff had encountered violations where test results and certificates of analysis were not entered into the Cannabis Central Reporting System (CCRS), and Walder conveyed concerns regarding "potentially hazardous products not being identified, and possible diversion of samples that exceed limits for pesticides, solvents, and so forth.” Staff had witnessed standard operating procedures at laboratories which he suggested allowed licensees to review results before reporting, which could lead to failed tests not being reported and potentially "unsafe products entering the retail marketplace.”
    • Walder didn’t elaborate if Enforcement staff presented evidence of cannabis being sold in stores without test results. At time of publication, this would already be a violation of end product rules in WAC 314-55-102(4)(d), regardless of whether the cannabis had been part of an R&D lot.
  • Walder stated that the Director’s Office supported rule development to clarify language and reporting requirements around mandatory and non-mandatory testing, including internal quality control samples. He recommended that the board "accept the petition to…define cannabis testing terminology…and reporting requirements.”
  • Board Chair Jim Vollendroff acknowledged receiving communications on the issue and stated the recommendation "makes a lot of sense” (audio - <1m, video - WSLCB, video - TVW).
  • The Board then accepted the staff recommendation following a motion from Board Member Ollie Garrett and a second from Board Member Pete Holmes  (audio - <1m,  video - WSLCB, video - TVW).

• Walder provided updates on several active rulemaking efforts at the agency, specifically on lab authority transfer, minors on wholesale licensed premises, and acceptable forms of identification; he also mentioned legislative implementations, previously accepted rulemaking petitions, and situations at other state agencies.
  • Lab Authority Transfer (audio - <1m, video - WSLCB, video - TVW, Rulemaking Project)
    • Walder provided an update stating that the rulemaking project had reached completion, transferring responsibility for third-party lab accreditation to the Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA). He stated that the approved rule was "taking effect on May 23.”
  • Minors on Wholesale Licensed Premises (audio - 1m, video - WSLCB, video - TVW, Rulemaking Project)
    • Walder indicated the project was in an open public comment period “and we’ll hold a public hearing on June 5, at 10am and I wanted to note that this will be our first rulemaking public hearing, since these have been decoupled from the board meetings.” He indicated those wanting to speak at the hearing could register via a new email address, publichearings@lcb.wa.gov, and details about the hearing were on the WSLCB rulemaking page.
  • Identification Reform (audio - <1m, video - WSLCB, video - TVW, Rulemaking Project)
    • According to Walder, work on the acceptable forms of ID rulemaking project was ongoing, "based on feedback that we received.” He projected that "additional stakeholder engagement efforts…will likely be announced later this month.”
  • Walder gave an overview of the rulemaking projects required following the 2025 legislative session which highlighted the need to strategize around simultaneous rule changes, and develop interim guidance in the event laws took effect before rules implementing them were finalized (audio - 3m, video - WSLCB, video - TVW).
    • He established there were "several bills that will require rulemaking" covering alcohol subjects as well as "cannabis retail management agreements,” "retailer advertising,” along with "various licensing and fee updates.” Walder remarked that agency staff were assessing which rule sections would need revision and developing "tentative timelines, inter-divisional project teams, and how to best distribute that work among the rulemaking team.” One challenge he identified with rule implementation was that the agency wasn’t allowed to “have a rule section open up for multiple different rule making projects at the same time.” Walder also mentioned that staff were considering the possibility of utilizing "expedited rulemaking with the CR-105 process" for some projects, and were also looking into "the feasibility of incorporating or combining these new projects with existing or pending rules projects, if and where possible.”
      • Walder made clear the priority for staff was implementing HB 1515, which related to expanded outdoor alcohol service at major event venues and would necessitate issuing interim guidance.
    • Walder stated that CR-101s opening projects to implement the "remaining six bills will need to be filed within the next month to six weeks.”
  • Walder said staff had looked at a “backlog” of petitions accepted by the board and intended to file five CR-101s to start rulemaking “in the next couple of months.” He noted that focus on already active projects remained the priority, but this would allow them to get the accepted petitions “on the books” (audio - 1m,  video - WSLCB, video - TVW).
    • At publication time, the following petitions had been accepted by the WSLCB Board:
      • Batch Tracking (Rulemaking Petition)
      • COA Expiration Dates (Rulemaking Petition)
      • Harvest or Processing Date (Rulemaking Petition)
      • Heavy Metals Testing (Rulemaking Petition)
      • Transporter Fulfillment Hub (Rulemaking Petition)
  • Additionally, Walder reported that WSLCB staff continued to coordinate with the Washington State Department of Health (DOH) regarding their rulemaking on the medical cannabis program. Agency representatives continued to “monitor and provide feedback” to DOH colleagues to "ensure consistency and alignment with our rules.” However, he conveyed that a CR-102 proposal from the department “will not likely be ready until September at this point” (audio - <1m, video - WSLCB, video - TVW).
  • Walder had also "learned that [WSDA Cannabis Program] funding has been drastically reduced, and there is a potential for service delays as a result." Their team was "keeping in close contact with our counterparts over there to determine if there will be any impacts on our licensees,” he said (audio - 1m, video - WSLCB, video - TVW).
    • Vollendroff complimented Walder, saying, "if I didn't know better, I'd say you've been doing this for a number of years. Great job. Thank you very much” (audio - <1m, video - WSLCB, video - TVW).

• Board Chair Jim Vollendroff reflected on the first written general comment they’d received following the elimination of verbal comments earlier in the year.
  • The board decided to only accept general public comments in writing as part of several “board efficiencies” Vollendroff proposed and his colleagues approved on March 12th.
  • In the meeting, Vollendroff acknowledged having received the first comment since removing the option for spoken testimony before the board, “related to shipment of cannabis-slash-Washington State that will be attached to the minutes of this meeting when [they]’re posted” (audio - 1m, video - WSLCB, video - TVW).
    • Meeting minutes must be approved by the Board during a public meeting where actions are taken. As board meetings had been switched to a monthly cadence---another "efficiency"---the earliest minutes with attached public comments could be approved for release would be at the following month's board meeting. It usually then takes up to a week for the approved minutes to be published on the WSLCB website.
    • However, written public comments become public records when they are received by the Board and the Board has no authority to withhold written public comments from public release, although law necessitates review for protected information and potential redaction. The decision to pair the release of written public comments with approval of the meeting minutes more than one month after receipt is a questionable choice.
    • Cannabis Observer regularly requests all materials associated with all WSLCB public meetings, and has committed to publishing written comments received. They will be linked under "Information" on each event's details screen.
  • Cannabis Observer reviewed all Board Meetings from the fall of 2019 through the board’s adoption of the change in spring of 2025, and prepared a chart showing cumulative changes in written and verbal general public comments received (both in-person and remote).
    • There was a notable gap in 2020 related to the suspension of in-person meetings due to the coronavirus pandemic lockdown, after which remote meeting access was made available.
    • In 2021, community engagement as measured through general public comments increased when the board learned that synthesized cannabinoids had been proliferating in the 502 market.
    • The highest point of engagement was in April 2023, when cannabis stakeholders raised concerns over proposed emergency rules related to legacy pesticides present in the soil of a region in central Washington.
    • In 2024, an increase in verbal comments from the LGBTQ+ community was observed in response to WSLCB Enforcement participating in raids on night clubs in Seattle.
    • At publication time and since the implementation of "board efficiencies," members had received one written general comment across three board meetings.