WA SECTF - Work Group - Licensing - Public Meeting
(March 17, 2022) - Summary

Tetra Lounge - Social Consumption
[ Event Details ]

A Denver cannabis club owner and a consumer representative shared ideas and policies on social use of cannabis before the group discussed what might work in Washington.

Here are some observations from the Thursday March 17th Washington State Legislative Task Force on Social Equity in Cannabis Licensing Work Group (WA SECTF - Work Group - Licensing) Public Meeting.

My top 3 takeaways:

  • Dewayne Benjamin, owner of Tetra Lounge in Denver, talked about his experience from years of operating a members-only cannabis consumption venue and contributing to the establishment of that city’s social equity program, which led to many questions from work group members.
    • Work Group Co-Lead Micah Sherman noted that cannabis consumption lounges and events were among the license types under consideration by the full task force as part of their mandated legislative recommendations (audio - 2m).
    • Benjamin said Tetra Lounge would be among “the first licensed consumption lounges in the country” after beginning as “a private membership club” in 2018. The venue offered a “safe hospitality space” and area for events with cannabis use, he explained, and promised to talk about what he’d encountered in the industry in addition to his experience “marketing cannabis hospitality, and the growth potential” (audio - 8m).
      • The first cannabis lounge in the U.S. was the Bulldog Coffeeshop in Oakland, California, opened after voters in the city approved Measure Z, which made cannabis the lowest enforcement priority of Oakland police in 2004. The neighborhood, which had a history of serving medical cannabis patients, became known as Oaksterdam, in reference to the cannabis coffeeshops of Amsterdam. The Oaksterdam area became a sort of regional test case for cannabis legalization, including social use, before federal officials took action against several businesses in 2012.
      • Sherman asked about the timeline for licensing Tetra Lounge in Colorado. Benjamin responded that he’d used a “private membership model” for his business beginning in February 2018, as state cannabis law had a  "little gray area" in reference to consumption as the state legalization law barred use “conducted openly and publicly.” He described how private businesses were considered “your private property,” and he’d wanted to “show the city and the state” that he could create “a safe place for people” to consume the plant.
      • Benjamin stated there’d been a tourist appeal to Denver’s cannabis sector, “they wanna come here, smoke weed, [but] there’s really no safe place" once tourists procured cannabis. He observed that some were spending “hundreds of dollars” on cannabis, but “can't really smoke in your hotel rooms, rental cars” and that use in public spaces was “illegal” and “more of a trap here.”
      • Benjamin believed “Tetra Lounge is the answer” to consumption concerns, with membership options offered at daily, monthly, and yearly rates catering to the needs of consumers. He aimed to set up a “social, educational platform,” which he asserted had been missing from the sector, saying someone couldn’t “go into a college and be like ‘I wanna take the Effects of Cannabis.’” Benjamin hosted cannabis business representatives, "the scientists and the doctors" who were experts on the plant, in a social setting.
      • Benjamin said cannabis had grown to be “Colorado’s 3rd biggest tourist attraction” and that his lounge allowed consumers to enjoy cannabis while meeting “people from across the country and around the world.” He compared the atmosphere of his establishment to many other bars and restaurants, but with “like minded people that are experiencing” cannabis - some “for the first time.” Benjamin acknowledged facing issues like local regulations and “undercover vice units” checking compliance, but his venue had “never had a problem” compared to “the 15 bars around me” which had been the target of complaints and calls to emergency services.
      • Benjamin mentioned how he had “proved the model” for officials establishing hospitality rules for the city, and was applying to the Denver Marijuana Social Equity Program, which had only become available in January. He remarked that his business’s model wasn’t expected to change after he obtained a cannabis hospitality license, though it would give him a legal “foundation” from which to “grow the hospitality portion of the cannabis industry.” 
    • Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) Member Ollie Garrett, the agency appointee to WA SECTF, asked what kind of regulations Benjamin’s business had to follow, mentioning “ventilation systems, or anything for the smoke.” She was also curious about whether Tetra Lounge could sell liquor or food. Benjamin replied that when the lounge opened there’d been “no regulations” on ventilation, though “dual consumption” of cannabis and alcohol was prohibited in businesses by state law. A hospitality licensee could obtain a “food handler’s license where coffeeshops, restaurants, will be able to have consumption areas,” he said, but such a business couldn’t “infuse food” themselves or sell cannabis on site due to state “testing regulations.” Benjamin reiterated that he’d worked with city officials to make a “plan that’s going to be sustainable for the city and county of Denver.” It had been “simpler” for Tetra Lounge not to offer food, he asserted, and to begin as a “bring your own bud” establishment (audio - 3m).
    • Work group member Jim Buchanan, Washington State African American Cannabis Association (WSAACA) President, wanted to know what “profit line item[s]” Benjamin’s business had in addition to collecting membership dues. He answered that the hospitality rules for cannabis clubs in Denver allowed for “micro sales” constrained to “two grams of flower per customer, per day, [and] .25 grams of concentrate per day, and 50 miligrams of edibles per day.” But Benjamin found, “with taxes and things like that,” the sales limits impacted the viability of that hospitality model, so he’d opted not to pursue cannabis retail. He focused on being the “biggest business-to-consumer marketing platform for cannabis,” and giving cannabis companies a space to “socialize with its end consumers.” Beyond membership collection, Benjamin said his business offered sponsorship opportunities, arranged “popups, we sell apparel, so under my business model we have a few different streams of revenue” (audio - 2m).
    • Work group member Crystal Oliver, a Washington Sun and Craft Growers Association (WSCA) board member and former licensed producer, said she’d heard the service limits had been “difficult to manage from a business perspective.” Benjamin told Oliver that had been a top concern of his when considering hospitality licensing as his impression was that lounges selling cannabis were supposed to be similar to going into a bar, where someone could “buy as many beers as you want.” Given daily limits on what can be sold to consumers, Benjamin asserted he’d “lose money on every transaction” whereas competitors could sell cannabis in greater quantities at a lower price. Instead, the point of Tetra Lounge was to be an “environment that is welcoming, and people want to come” to consume cannabis. Benjamin felt the sales limits meant other businesses hoping to organize “mass events” would struggle to “track these things” because you couldn’t “sell it like beer." He voiced doubt that a “return on investment” would be feasible under his city’s rules. He’d partnered with existing cannabis retailers to promote Tetra Lounge, so being “in competition with those people…wouldn’t work for my business model,” as on-site sales meant guests couldn’t bring in their own cannabis products. And since “80% of my guests are tourists,” Benjamin didn’t find it worthwhile to sell cannabis himself (audio - 4m).
    • Mike Asai, Co-Founder of Emerald City Collective Gardens (ECCG), asked Benjamin whether tobacco use was allowed in his lounge. Benjamin responded that tobacco use was prohibited (audio - 1m).
    • Buchanan asked what Benjamin would consider the “perfect” license type to have for social consumption. Benjamin replied that he’d been fortunate to be involved in the creation of Denver’s hospitality license, “so my business model” had been used by officials to “stabilize the hospitality” sector for cannabis. Additionally, he’d helped draft “portions of the social equity plan” which made hospitality licensing exclusive to social equity applicants “until 2027.” He said his ideal license would be “pretty much market-to-market” as well as “cultivating a culture within the industry” and community where the business was situated. Benjamin believed that Colorado officials had looked for an “inclusive” market where “everyone feels safe.” Buchanan asked what other hospitality businesses there were in the city, with Benjamin mentioning The Coffee Joint as another hospitality business in Denver that was exclusively a “vape and edible lounge” and didn’t have to function as a private members-only venue. He indicated that the Colorado Clean Air Act prohibited indoor smoking of tobacco but had exceptions for “cigar bars and cabarets,” and that he’d focused on having similar smoking exceptions for cannabis hospitality (audio - 5m). 
    • In the chat box, Noah Goldman asked what “the insurance and liability requirements” were for Tetra Lounge. Benjamin said he had to have “general liability and property insurance” (audio - <1m).
    • Co-Lead Monica Martinez, Owner of The Calyx Co., asked if hospitality licenses included vertical integration of cannabis, a feature of cannabis retail under Colorado’s initial legalization law. Benjamin answered that vertical integration wasn’t required anymore, and that hospitality lounges selling cannabis, along with most retailers, bought their inventory wholesale (audio - 1m).
    • Paul Brice, Happy Trees Owner and WA SECTF Community Advisory Member, asked what the membership costs were for Tetra Lounge. Benjamin said the options were “$20 [for] full day access, or monthly is $50, and our yearly is $350” (audio - 1m).
  • Bailey Hirschburg, Board Member for the Washington chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (WA NORML), provided an overview of possible benefits of enacting social use policies and his experience lobbying for the issue (audio - 12m, presentation).
    • Hirschburg told the group that he represented cannabis consumers on the WSLCB Cannabis Advisory Council (CAC) as part of his broad experience with cannabis policy and tourism. “I’m a White guy, I know that privilege has impacted my experiences,” he stated, “hopefully, my perspective can further equity efforts.”
      • He was initially scheduled to present at a work group meeting in September 2021.
    • Hirschburg first highlighted the Principles of Responsible Cannabis Use, which the national board of NORML adopted in 1996 to articulate what kinds of cannabis consumption should be socially acceptable, urging the group to “keep them in mind when you’re making your recommendations.”
      • “Adults Only - Cannabis consumption is for adults only. It is irresponsible to provide cannabis to children.
      • No Driving - The responsible cannabis consumer does not operate a motor vehicle or other dangerous machinery while impaired by cannabis, nor (like other responsible citizens) while impaired by any other substance or condition, including some medicines and fatigue.
      • Set and Setting - The responsible cannabis user will carefully consider his/her set and setting, regulating use accordingly.
      • Resist Abuse - Use of cannabis, to the extent that it impairs health, personal development or achievement, is abuse, to be resisted by responsible cannabis users.
      • Respect Rights of Others - The responsible cannabis user does not violate the rights of others, observes accepted standards of courtesy and public propriety, and respects the preferences of those who wish to avoid cannabis entirely.”
    • As for types of social use policies, Hirschburg acknowledged that consumption lounges were the most commonly discussed “whether they’re a patient collective, members-only club, restaurants, or anything else. Some sell cannabis directly, others allow for consumption of cannabis procured elsewhere.” He then offered other policy options:
      • Sampling / Tasting - “Comparable to a winery or brewery, producers or processors directly sell and provide samples in a social consumption area to guests, usually their own products.”
      • Temporary Event Permitting - For “limited activities: concerts, banquets, trade shows, farmers markets…cannabis cup competitions, where social use is temporary.” 
      • Special Licensing - Allowances for “limited consumption under specific circumstances. LCB licenses day spas and bed and breakfasts to include alcohol in their services, so why wouldn’t we consider cannabis equivalents?”
      • Public consumption - Which would give “cannabis consumers rights tobacco users have had for decades, even after our state regulated indoor smoking.” The goal wasn’t to have cannabis consumed “anywhere freely, but sensible use of shared spaces to reduce the risks, and to be in parity with existing designated smoking areas.”
    • Looking at social use policies in other jurisdictions, Hirschburg noted that “Washington is the oldest legal cannabis state not to enact them.” Sharing a factsheet comparing state and some other nation’s social use policies, he pointed out that some timelines for enacting policies were “impacted by the [coronavirus] pandemic.” The other resource document had more information, “news links, and links showing the region’s cannabis laws,” added Hirschburg, highlighting some specific policies:
    • Hirschburg went over what would need to change in Washington state law for social use policies to be implemented, highlighting several statutes:
      • RCW 69.50.465 stopped businesses from operating “for the primary or incidental purpose of providing a location where members or other persons may keep or consume marijuana.” He said he’d been told by WSLCB staff this “even restricts events without consumption,” like auctions or raffles. 
      • RCW 69.50.445 “restricts opening and consuming cannabis in public, not even allowing it in areas where tobacco use is allowed.”
      • RCW 70.160 and 70.345 “deal with indoor smoking, restricting tobacco in most areas, and restricting cannabis even more.” He specified this applied to smoked or vaped products, but not other items like infused food or drinks. 
      • Hirschburg reminded the group that since “cannabis has been zoned by municipalities…they may keep or modify existing bans and moratoriums to cover consumption lounges.”
    • Next, Hirschburg discussed HB 1945, 2019 legislation he’d drafted which would have set up “every type of consumption I’ve mentioned, except for public use.” He commented that the bill had included restrictions on sales and ventilation, and allowed limited special licensing/permitting.
      • Hirschburg tried to incentivize responsible use “by not allowing simultaneous alcohol/tobacco sales, incorporating supports for designated drivers, a right to…refuse service by the business, and mandating that there be non-cannabis food and beverage options for any establishment selling infused cannabis food or drinks.”
      • He claimed the bill’s sponsor, retiring Representative Steve Kirby, had told him that Washington Democrats would “never, ever, ever” modify the state’s indoor smoking law to allow cannabis.
      • Hirschburg pointed out that the bill text “required LCB to set fees to administer the bill, though the fiscal note they made skipped this, and resulted in lopsided expenditures not reflective of the bill, in my opinion. However, you can use the fiscal note to inform your recommendations.”
      • According to Hirschburg, several stakeholder groups expressed interest.
        • Existing Licensees. Hirschburg suggested some were concerned one license type would end up getting the better end of the deal.
        • Local lawmakers, whom he said could “make or break social use” in their areas. He encouraged outreach both in crafting legislation and after social use was in law if applying for lounges or events in a municipality.
        • NIMBY (“not in my back yard”) citizens opposed to cannabis broadly. Hirschburg said the issue was “not whether there is social consumption of cannabis, but rather how safe that consumption will be when it occurs.”
        • “Prevention advocates have voiced concerns about perception and youth access, but youth access hasn’t come from most licensed retailers,” he asserted, and society should spell out “what kind of use is good and then [expect] adults to model that behavior.” Conversely, treating any cannabis use as de facto negative increased a community’s “apathy towards really risky behaviors like poly-drug use or drugged driving,” remarked Hirschburg.
    • Contemplating the equity ramifications of social use policies, Hirschburg offered several considerations.
      • “You know that communities of color and the economically disadvantaged face disproportionate odds of being cited for public cannabis use,” he reasoned, based on racially disparate policing of cannabis that remained pervasive. The class 3 civil infraction included monetary penalties which “can be significant for impoverished persons, and has no consequence for anyone wealthy.”
      • As federal housing law prohibits cannabis use on the premises, he stated that consumers there were “motivated to use cannabis in public or maybe a car. Moving social use into regulated locations helps quality of life, both for the consumers and the public while also reducing stigmatization in areas that have gotten stereotyped by public use.”
      • Hirschburg noted that consumption areas could encourage consumers to “stay in a business or in a neighborhood, meaning they spend money on other businesses. The economic benefit from this consumer engagement can’t be easy quantified, but won’t be limited to equity licensees.”
    • Hirschburg noted he concluded his presentation with a picture of a licensed beer and wine stand in Millersylvania State Park, but as he was presenting on St. Patrick’s Day he called attention to the WSLCB mission of “safe communities for Washington State” because he believed “safe communities regulate social use.” He suggested the alcohol consumption associated with the holiday was a sign that standards on recreational substance use still had to evolve, and that this included cannabis regulation to “further public health, social equity, and responsible use.” 
  • A discussion among the work group members covered what they wanted to see in a recommendation on social use to the task force, including whether to allow dual consumption of cannabis along with alcohol or tobacco.
    • Sherman asked for initial thoughts or questions from members, with Buchanan commenting that any license type needed to be “equitable and profitable.” Benjamin felt that was “great to say,” but starting a business carried risks whether an individual was an equity applicant or not. He encouraged people to look at “market research, creating a brand, and finding something that’s going to be sustainable for your community and the industry.” He advised applicants to look at becoming “a necessity to the community" and not solely consider profitability. Buchanan felt that depended on the customer base, and could vary between serving tourists versus locals. His view was that “the consensus” in prior discussion was that on-site cannabis sales should be allowed and permit sales of more than “three or four grams.” And it would also be more profitable, he speculated, to “have a liquor license there also” and “offer more services” like music (audio - 4m).
    • WSAACA Vice President Philip Petty shared his sense that government officials nationwide had fallen behind “the movement of cannabis.” The result was "kinda archaic" restrictions compared to alcohol, which he alleged often “creates more violence, creates a lot more issues,” while cannabis “has more of a calmer effect in society than alcohol does." Petty found state law was “very behind” and seemed intended “more to stifle and create ways to get money” instead of helping consumers. He lamented that his grandson saw liquor for sale in grocery stores while officials blocked “a lot of the new ways we could go forward with cannabis" (audio - 3m). 
    • Oliver noted the “felonization of cannabis clubs took place after the passage of HB 2136 in 2016,” creating a new criminal offense even after cannabis had been legalized in Washington. She explained the bill had focused on taxation and enforcement of cannabis regulations, but the ban on clubs had been “slipped in” (audio - 3m).
      • Oliver knew of clubs that had been impacted, as well as warnings issued to cannabis businesses against consumption at venues, impacting “my community's ability to gather." She called for both "permanent venues" and “special event” permits to allow consumption at “outdoor venues, like…a beer garden,” which she said could bypass indoor air regulations.
      • Sherman agreed, saying it supported Petty’s comments on “continuing normalization” of cannabis which was “extremely safe and that its presence” in society wouldn’t hurt public safety. 
    • Buchanan returned to the possibilities of consumption venues offering not just cannabis sales, but alcohol and food as well as “live entertainment and event licenses.” He wasn’t against educational events “but the bottom line is a lot of cannabis has been around for thousands of years” and social use could be safe. As equity licensees "gotta make money," Buchanan opposed caps on product sales and wanted to offer as much as possible (audio - 2m). 
    • Petty asked Benjamin through the chat box about diversity in the Colorado cannabis industry. He said "not very many" licensees were Black, pointing out "in my district there are two of us" and there were probably “three dispensaries” total in the state (audio - 1m). 
    • Sherman mentioned producer sampling areas at a lounge "would be very valuable" for his business as it would facilitate direct consumer engagement. He commented that HB 1945 had offered “a lot of opportunities to bring social consumption in a variety of different ways simultaneously” to emphasize that their recommendations didn’t have to be for a single lounge or event type (audio - 3m).
      • Noting the involvement of Denver officials in setting local standards for hospitality licensing, Sherman didn’t want task force recommendations “to limit what the City of Seattle or the City of Tacoma might be able to do with social consumption.” He expected some jurisdictions would embrace new possibilities while others would “recoil from it in horror,” and preferred an approach that would allow “places to take it as far as they want" while others would restrict.
    • Brice was wary of allowing dual consumption of alcoholic beverages and cannabis products, feeling “a lot of people are going to fear” the possibility as “a lot of violence already happens in the bars.” He thought a membership model would allow access to be revoked “if they happen to over-consume alcohol” or become disruptive. Brice anticipated some would advocate for limiting consumption lounges to cannabis, but it would be “more popular to combine them both” (audio - 2m). 
    • Hirschburg stated that cannabis coffeeshops in Amsterdam were no longer allowed to sell alcohol, though bars not selling cannabis could choose to allow consumption (audio - 4m).
      • While selling both alcohol and cannabis had previously been permitted, he said “it did seem to be a problem to sell drinks and pot, with no particular restrictions, side-by-side.” Over time, coffeeshops selling both either picked one or set up separate, though sometimes adjacent, businesses, he added.
      • Hirschburg was dubious that legislators would approve a social use proposal allowing dual consumption, “and I don’t think you’ll have the LCB backing up that position very much unless you’ve got a really good idea what the limits are going to be.” He agreed that wanting a variety of services and entertainment beyond cannabis consumption made sense, “but [consumption venue owners were] going to be ambassadors for what this looks like in the state” and would be expected to be “accountable” for their venue’s impact on consumers and their neighborhood.
      • Benjamin said his venue had “been the safest social lounge in the area,” and that “combining the two will just create more liability.” His view was that not serving alcohol had allowed his business to differentiate itself from bars which had experienced fights and “drugged driving issues.” Opponents to social use would likely fixate on this possibility, presumed Benjamin, and it would “deter” some places from permitting lounges. Overall, he felt not allowing alcohol sales had been “very beneficial” for his business.
    • Andre Felton, Herbal Help Center Owner, saw a liability issue for lounges overserving both alcohol and cannabis. “Lawsuits can be detrimental to a new business or a small business,” he observed, adding “if you’re a minority business, you’re going to get a bit more scrutiny" on liability matters (audio - 2m).
    • Petty commented that restaurants served alcohol or “have a cigar lounge,” and Amersterdam used to allow people to “get a sandwich, a drink, and a sack of weed from the same place." Petty wondered about allowing consumption in restaurants “in the same building” with a small storefront acting as a “middle man” between a retailer and a restaurant or bar (audio - 2m).
    • Buchanan felt problems around dual consumption were because “it's foreign here in the United States.” When he’d visited in the 1990s, Amsterdam’s Bulldog Cafe had allowed the practice and “there's been no incidences of folks going around and acting unruly and crazy." He felt cannabis had been “around for a long time,” and there wasn’t need to be “fearful” about people drinking and consuming cannabis (audio - 2m).
    • Brice found that in Tacoma “there hasn't been able to be one successful night club that has drinking” without having “murders, deaths, and everything else.” He didn’t see how that pattern would improve by adding cannabis sales to a venue, even though he knew granting equity businesses consumption privileges “will provide a competitive edge” and “increase sales.” Brice pointed to Dank’s Wonder Emporium, a retailer who got in trouble for allowing cannabis sampling at their Lacey store, claiming the business’s social media showed on-site consumption. He wanted “that competitive edge alone without trying to bring all the liquor, especially on a rollout” of social use amongst an “all minority community.” He argued that starting with cannabis lounges and then adding allowances for alcohol after lounges were established would be preferable (audio - 3m). 
    • Abinnet Ainalem returned to the possibility of a “popup license” which she felt could scale better to startup businesses, allowing easier approval at first, and subsequent expansion to a fixed location or other services. She worked in “tech and retail, so when we try out a new brand, we have a popup” and allow staff to meet, or even “partner with a particular group of people or brand.” Ainalem speculated this could even lead to a “mobile license" that operated out of other cannabis-licensed premises with lower costs. Oliver responded that she was receptive to the idea of an event license covering a business setting up in multiple locations, as greater flexibility allowed for “more potential for success” (audio - 2m). 
    • Hirschburg followed up on Ainalem’s idea and returned to the idea of a lounge that didn’t sell cannabis directly (audio - 3m).
      • He noted that California regulators had a dedicated event organizer license, and those holding one were permitted to apply to organize individual consumption events. These licensees took “on levels of responsibility, and I guess liability, for ensuring” their events complied with state and local rules.
      • Non-retail lounges would sidestep some compliance needs, he stated, like being a cash-only business, or potential insurance and security costs. Hirschburg argued a new cannabis license might not be “required to meet the same things in the same way,” and could have other revenue streams like ticket or membership sales. “Ideally,” he said, people “should want to come in and stay a while,” rather than only for the time it took to “smoke a joint or do some dabs, and then just go back out” in public, finding that might not “be a great look” for a lounge.
      • Hirschburg reiterated that coffeeshops in the Netherlands weren’t allowed to sell alcohol anymore and then pointedly said, “they have had problems in Amsterdam, and the problems have almost always come from western tourists who do not have any context” or “social history using cannabis” and can approach cannabis consumption as a time “the rules don’t apply.” Hirschburg said the best policy would foster “responsible use” along with consumption areas, “it won’t just be enough to say ‘you can go here and do this,’ there should be consequences when there’s bad behavior.”
        • A February 19th news story looking at pandemic impacts on Amsterdam coffeeshops noted that although “the lockdown has ended, strict rules remain in place for the entire Dutch hospitality sector.” This included showing proof of vaccination “to buy cannabis in a coffee shop,” wearing masks, and maintaining social distance while ordering. “Coffee shops must stop serving at 10 p.m., but are allowed to stay open until midnight for takeout.” It stated the “rules make it difficult for coffee shops to accommodate a large number of customers and encourage people to stay inside, instead of buying takeout.”
        • The cannabis retail and consumption sector in the country was also dealing with “a possible ban on foreign tourists…Amsterdam Mayor Femke Halsema has proposed a policy that could see foreign tourists banned from the city's coffee shops” and follow other cities use of a wietpas (weed pass) “to prevent cannabis tourists traveling across the border from Germany and Belgium.” The city of Amsterdam had struggled “with mass tourism for years, alongside increasing discontentment among residents about loud noise, littering and unruly behavior from tourists…’We do not want to go back to what we saw before the pandemic, where massive crowds in the Red Light District and the city's entertainment areas caused a nuisance to residents,’ the city council said in a statement.”
        • One website purported to have mapped out coffeeshops in Amsterdam still selling to foreigners, and claimed that some cities have chosen to reverse their bans.
    • Sherman encouraged those with opinions on the work group’s social use recommendations to email their feedback to staff as the group began deliberations on a recommendation (audio - 1m). He said next steps would include compiling the information they’d received and drafting a recommendation to WA SECTF, as well as “our existing recommendations for licenses.” He promised to follow up with the group and “get an update out” in the near future (audio - 1m). 
      • The work group’s next meeting was scheduled for April 7th.

Information Set