Committee members heard testimony in favor, opposed, and ‘other’ while seeking suggestions on THC levels for hemp products after the Senate decided any amount of THC was too much.
Committee members heard testimony in favor, opposed, and ‘other’ while seeking suggestions on THC levels for hemp products after the Senate decided any amount of THC was too much.
Here are some observations from the Monday March 13th Washington State House Regulated Substances and Gaming Committee (WA House RSG) Committee Meeting.
My top 4 takeaways:
- Staff briefed on SB 5367, "Concerning the regulation of products containing [tetrahydrocannabinol] THC," in the first hearing since the bill was amended and unanimously passed by the Senate (audio - 3m, video).
- The Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) request legislation was first heard by Washington State Senate Labor and Commerce Committee (WA Senate LC) members on January 30th, who then proposed a substitute bill on February 13th.
- The Washington State Senate Ways and Means Committee (WA Senate WM) heard the bill next on February 18th, amending it further on February 23rd.
- When considered by the full senate on March 2nd, the legislation was changed by amendment S-2098.1, bringing in new language that ended the definition of ‘hemp consumable,’ classifying “any product with any amount” of THC as ‘cannabis products.’ The result was the engrossed second substitute version of SB 5367.
- Amendment sponsor Senator Ann Rivers remarked on the Senate floor “what we're saying here is it doesn't matter how much…THC is in a product. That product should only be sold in regulated cannabis stores.”
- In the hearing, Committee Counsel Peter Clodfelter explained the bill was companion legislation to HB 1612, which received a WA House RSG hearing on February 7th, and provided impacts from the bill analysis:
- Modifies definitions in the Uniform Controlled Substances Act (UCSA) and hemp statutes, including amending the term "cannabis products" in the UCSA to include any product intended to be consumed or absorbed inside the body with any amount of [THC].
- Prohibits the manufacture, sale, or distribution of cannabis or cannabis products without a state-issued license.
- Modifies authorized activities of licensed cannabis producers and processors regarding enhancement of [CBD] concentration in cannabis products.
- Requires the label on a cannabis product package to include the amount of any synthetically derived CBD in the product sold or provided to the ultimate user.
- Clodfelter emphasized that the proposal differed significantly from HB 1612, which he noted had allowed “one milligram of THC per unit or three milligrams of THC in a package…this current senate bill defines a product with any amount of THC in it as a ‘cannabis product.’” He indicated the bill would “modify the currently authorized activities of licensed cannabis producers and processors regarding the enhancement of the CBD concentration of cannabis products to specify the CBD additive to a cannabis product must not meet the definition of ‘cannabis’ or a ‘cannabis product’ instead of specifying that an additive must have a THC level of 0.3% or less on a dry weight basis.” SB 5367 also included language declaring “nothing in the bill may be construed to require an agency to purchase a liquid chromatography mass spectrometry instrument.”
- The purchase of additional testing instruments led to some friction over the costs of implementation between WSLCB leaders and Washington State Patrol (WSP) staff who submitted a costly initial fiscal note for SB 5367.
- The latest fiscal note included input from Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) officials who predicted 75% of hemp licensees in the state may choose not to renew their annual license next year because the bill as written mandated "cannabis products with any amount of THC (including products previously defined as hemp) must be sold through the I-502 regulatory channel."
- The day before the hearing, Cannabis Observer identified challenges to implementing the bill as written.
- The Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) request legislation was first heard by Washington State Senate Labor and Commerce Committee (WA Senate LC) members on January 30th, who then proposed a substitute bill on February 13th.
- Representatives of public health and prevention organizations; some cannabis industry and trade group leaders; and staff of the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) all lobbied for the bill as written in an effort to keep items with THC from being available beyond licensed cannabis retailers.
- 20 individuals registered their support for the bill (testifying, not testifying).
- Sponsoring Senator June Robinson testified that as the measure was passed unanimously in her chamber, “I thought we had a well-worked bill," but she recognized that "folks still continue to have concerns with the approach that we’re taking here." Her goal was to “get this right; I want to get a bill out that…takes a public health approach, and a consumer protection approach to products containing THC…for the sake of youth” along with “anyone that might be consuming these products” without an awareness of the THC content (audio - 2m, video).
- Representative Jim Walsh asked Robinson to elaborate on what she meant by a “public health approach.” She described how “people should know and have information about what they're consuming.” Cannabis had been “regulated for a reason, so that as people use substances that have impairing effects on their body…they understand that when you go to a [Initiative] 502 store you're expecting to purchase something that is going to have an effect on your body.” Robinson thought that people buying “something at a gas station or a convenience store, you probably aren't thinking that. So I'm thinking broadly about the public's health and what I believe is our duty to protect that” (audio - 1m, video).
- Representative Melanie Morgan commented on the labeling on other types of items with “different effects for different people;” reiterating her “motivation is primarily around youth access” (audio - 2m, video).
- Ranking Minority Member Kelly Chambers asked about “some issue on the definition, or whether it's dry weight.” Robinson replied that she didn’t believe that definition had changed since introduction (audio - 1m, video).
- Several representatives of substance prevention and public health organizations backed the bill, finding that as the "cannabis industry continues to innovate" more needed to be done to protect minors and educate the broader public about products with THC content. Additionally, keeping all items with THC in the legal cannabis market "will also bring more funding to the dedicated cannabis account."
- Cora Breuner, Washington Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics Member (audio - 2m, video)
- Walsh asked whether the child’s cannabis use cited in testimony by Breuner had been purchased through illicit means and would be impacted by the bill. She responded that products with THC content sold in any legal market could have “long term ramifications forever in a developing brain” (audio - 2m, video).
- Amy Brackenbury, Washington State Public Health Association (WSPHA) Public Health Roundtable (audio - 2m, video)
- Representative Kristine Reeves brought up WSPHA focusing on the “consumables” and noted that she’d used cannabis topical products with THC content she believed to be in excess of the limits in SB 5367 but didn’t feel they could be considered ‘habit forming.’ With a “labeling requirement saying that it may be habit forming,” Reeves was trying to understand if products with low levels of THC would have that effect. Brackenbury responded that on previous versions of SB 5367 “we were cautiously supportive and know that getting to zero might be complicated…but from a public health perspective what we're saying is products that are…impairing should not be available to kids to purchase” (audio - 2m, video).
- Morgan asked about theft of CBD products in 502 retail stores. Brackenbury was not concerned as such items were already available in the open market (audio - 1m, video).
- Cannabis products that are CBD-dominant have been sold in legal retail stores, but not hemp CBD items, which were expressly prohibited by a 2021 interpretive statement.
- Chambers wanted to know if Brackenbury could support a ratio of CBD to THC in products. She told the representative "our preference would be zero,” even as she recognized challenges to reaching that standard (audio - 1m, video).
- Scott Waller, Washington Association for Substance Misuse and Violence Prevention Board Member (audio - 3m, video)
- Cora Breuner, Washington Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics Member (audio - 2m, video)
- Three representatives from the cannabis industry felt the bill would keep THC content from the commercial market, encouraged amendments to allow federally legal CBD items like Epidiolex to keep being sold, and argued measuring THC content through a dry-weight basis still allowed for too much cannabinoid content.
- Vicki Christophersen, Washington CannaBusiness Association (WACA) Executive Director and Lobbyist (audio - 2m, video).
- Reeves asked whether the definition for THC in the bill “only really talks about” delta-9-THC, “and if I remember testimony that has been previously provided, we've been talking about how to try to get around some of these other” cannabinoids, curious “about why those other numbers or a general term wasn't included in this language.” Christophersen claimed there had been a definition of “THC concentration” introduced by I-502 “that only contemplated delta-9 and that is the loophole by which people have been able to sell delta-8[-THC]...and so in this bill, it corrects that,” stating the issue was “super complicated, but yeah simple at the same” (audio - 2m, video).
- The initiative did define THC concentration in relation to delta-9-THC, however use of synthesized cannabinoids in cannabis products became an issue for regulators based on a 2018 law on CBD importation as an additive for cannabis items.
- Reeves asked whether the definition for THC in the bill “only really talks about” delta-9-THC, “and if I remember testimony that has been previously provided, we've been talking about how to try to get around some of these other” cannabinoids, curious “about why those other numbers or a general term wasn't included in this language.” Christophersen claimed there had been a definition of “THC concentration” introduced by I-502 “that only contemplated delta-9 and that is the loophole by which people have been able to sell delta-8[-THC]...and so in this bill, it corrects that,” stating the issue was “super complicated, but yeah simple at the same” (audio - 2m, video).
- Adán Espino, Craft Cannabis Coalition (CCC) Executive Director (audio - 2m, video)
- Lukas Hunter, Harmony Farms Director of Compliance (audio - 2m, video)
- Vicki Christophersen, Washington CannaBusiness Association (WACA) Executive Director and Lobbyist (audio - 2m, video).
- Testifying for WSLCB, Director of Legislative Affairs Marc Webster suggested it was important to close a federally created “loophole” since there was stakeholder agreement "no one wants synthesized cannabinoids" or “unworkable" testing requirements (audio - 2m, video). Director of Policy and External Affairs Justin Nordhorn stressed the goal of agency leaders was to "regulate the unregulated sales" of items with THC and “protect youth." He pushed back on any suggestion SB 5367 allowed chemically synthesized cannabinoids and commented that the intention of the board was not to disrupt the industrial hemp industry (audio - 3m, video).
- People from the hemp sector, a testing laboratory representative, and a concerned citizen spoke in opposition to the bill on a variety of grounds, from the legislation’s impact on businesses and use of synthetic cannabinoids, to doubts over whether ensuring no THC in hemp products was even “scientifically possible.”
- 40 individuals registered their opposition to the bill (testifying, not testifying).
- Members of the hemp industry and trade groups lined up against the legislation, preferring products be required to have a high CBD ratio as a way to dampen the ability of THC compounds to interact with the endocannabinoid system. Others highlighted the fiscal note analysis suggesting three quarters of hemp licenses wouldn’t renew their annual license were the measure to pass, impacting consumers without addressing the "chemically transformed synthetic aspect.”
- Patrick Hylund, Nextraction President and Co-Founder (audio - 2m, video)
- Azmyth Kaminski, Science Under Nature Co-Creator (audio - 3m, video)
- C.J. Montgomery, Wheeler, Montgomery and BoydCo-Founder (audio - 3m, video)
- Chambers followed up to ask whether Montgomery had other metrics on which to base a limit on products with THC. He asserted that “for every milligram of finished dry weight product of an industrial hemp product, if you've got 22 milligrams (mg) of CBD in it, you're probably right about one milligram of THC.” He recognized this ratio of cannabinoids was a “little bit harder to put into a legislative language, but I think it's an excellent rule of thumb” (audio - 2m, video).
- Bonny Jo Peterson, Industrial Hemp Association of Washington (IHEMPAWA) Executive Director and Washington State Hemp in Food Task Force (WA Hemp in Food Task Force) Member (audio - 3m, video)
- Morgan asked what serving amount would THC cause intoxication. Peterson claimed a 5mg serving, adding that the WA Hemp in Food Task Force had recommended allowing hemp products with both a limit of 2.5mg per serving and a required 20:1 ratio. She was confident "there's no way these products would get you high" (audio - 1m, video).
- Chambers asked if the task force had presented their findings and recommendations to a legislative committee. Peterson answered that the group’s scientific literature review had been delayed by a “holdout” and that some of their members had requested to present to lawmakers, but hadn’t gotten on any committee schedules (audio - 2m, video).
- Co-Chair Shelley Kloba pointed out that federal authorities had yet to allow hemp cannabinoids in food. Peterson suggested this meant state level regulations were needed on products which "don't get you high" (audio - 2m, video).
- Joshua Schneider, Association of Western Hemp Professionals (audio - 2m, video)
- Jared Stanley, Charlotte's Web Chief Operations Officer (audio - 3m, video)
- Dylan Summers, Lazarus Naturals Vice President of Government Affairs (audio - 2m, video)
- Kloba questioned Summers about the labeling on his products. He acknowledged that CBD content was indicated, but "there is no disclosure on the labels" about THC and consumers were expected to know hemp consumables had low levels of the compound. When asked, Summers said he wasn’t opposed to further labeling requirements (audio - 3m, video).
- Citizen John Worthington told the committee that the 0.3% THC by dry weight was a “figure set by the treaty" through the Washington Uniform Law Commission (WULC). Rather than the percentage representing a “psychoactive figure,” he claimed the amount was “something that law enforcement wants so they can get conviction levels. It's not an impairment level; it's not backed by science.” Worthington called on the committee to reject the “heinous” changes made by the Senate, and “appoint an organization to develop” the level of THC which would cause an individual to experience impairment (audio - 2m, video).
- Amber Wise, Medicine Creek AnalyticsScience Director and WA Hemp in Food Task Force Member, said that analytically confirming a "zero level of THC" is "not scientifically possible.” There were levels of compounds below which testing equipment "can't detect,” and this level wasn’t consistent across different kinds of cannabis products. She seconded the suggestions others had made on regulations requiring a ratio of 20 CBD to 1 THC, saying CBD had a “mitigating effect on those intoxicating factors of THC.” Wise called for different THC limits in SB 5367 as a way to help labs “ensure that the labels are correct and accurate” (audio - 3m, video).
- Kloba asked about the smallest amount of THC which labs could reliably detect. Wise figured that lab equipment could reliably detect 1mg of THC in a can of infused liquid, and “anything less than one milligram in a product like that is going to be hard for us to say definitively if it's there or not” (audio - 1m, video).
- Reeves inquired whether the legislation might impact the capacity of labs to complete tests. Wise related their challenges less to capacity, and more to the “liability issue" of any business confirming there was no THC in a sample. If another lab reported different results, Wise’s team wouldn’t have state guidelines or standard methods to challenge the other lab’s results (audio - 2m, video).
- Chambers followed up to ask about “less than that 0.3 amount per serving and more than the 0.1” of THC as a standard could be suitably low while remaining detectable by labs. Wise argued that by being based on product weight, 0.3% was very small for flower material, but still high for an infused beverage. She added, “we could absolutely set also other values of…very low or, not intoxicating and the idea behind the hemp in food task force was to have non-intoxicating levels present” (audio - 3m, video).
- Vice Chair Chris Stearns asked about testing products “further upstream in a larger volume.” Wise answered that was possible, but “then you're not necessarily testing the final product that the consumer is getting exposed to,” though she felt testing in larger volume could work for infused beverages prior to being bottled (audio - 1m, video).
- Walsh raised the issue of testing reliably for THC. He talked with Wise about what amounts could lead to intoxication and agreed to gather more information after the hearing (audio - 3m, video).
- Arthur West signed in opposed to the bill, but wasn’t available when called to testify by committee staff.
- Three people offered more nuanced positions of ‘other’ rather than support or opposition to the “tricky bill" as written, concerned about impacts the measure might have on the Washington state hemp industry, or the presence of synthetic cannabinoids in regulated cannabis products.
- Four individuals registered a position of ‘other’ on the bill (testifying).
- Ezra Eickmeyer, Producers Northwest Executive Director, remarked that although the initial THC threshold may have been too high, the “language as it came out of the Senate, however, taking the number of THC to zero…we're concerned may have gone a little too far.” Speculating the bill could prohibit hemp seed oil, or “other products that in no way, shape, or form could ever be used for intoxicating purposes,” he hoped amending language “fine tune[d] this bill even further” to ensure legislators “banned synthetic products” and “prevent[ed] there from being intoxicating products on the shelf outside of the 502 system” (audio - 2m, video).
- Walsh asked what level of THC they could identify and measure “in a way that is practical.” Eickmeyer called for exempting federally approved products like Epidiolex and hemp seed oil, and raising the THC limit up, but “measure it micrograms.” He clarified there were two amendments “being worked on, not by our group, but by other interests,” he was confident would “address the issue in a technical fashion that would ensure that we don't ban things that are that we don't intend to ban” (audio - 2m, video).
- WSDA Policy Advisor to the Director and Legislative Liaison Kelly McLain explained that department leadership was neither pro, nor con, on the bill. But as they regulated “production of hemp through a fee-for-service program that is similar in many ways to programs for other agricultural commodities,” she aimed to make clear their opinion that the “version of the bill before you is likely to reduce hemp production by as much as 90% in Washington state.” McLain confirmed that the fiscal note anticipated a 75% reduction in license renewals, diminishing “funding for the hemp program” that would “render our program insolvent” (audio - 2m, video).
- Additionally, McLain found that although hemp licensees would be allowed to “sell their final product in the only available market space for products containing any THC, which would be the 502 market,” there was no “pathway to do that without either some temporary bridge between hemp production and that market, or an age gate restriction outside of the 502 space.”
- She pushed for lawmakers and “interested parties to work together and identify pathways to protect the public and restrict access to compounds containing THC while also finding ways for hemp to continue to exist.”
- Micah Sherman, Washington Sun and Craft Growers Association (WSCA) Board Member and Raven Co-Owner, seconded concerns he’d heard around the potential to allow synthetic compounds in cannabis products through the new definition for THC: “it's a sloppy approach and we would really like to see that definitional change revised.” He called out how “converted cannabinoids are synthetic. They've been illegal at the federal level; the [U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration] just clarified on February 13th that those compounds are not allowed. They are synthesized. They are not hemp” (audio - 3m, video).
- “Those things are going to continue to be in stores because they are currently illegal and this is not going to actually change the reality on the ground in the way that it's constructed,” Sherman said, and would instead “create a back door for these synthesized compounds to come into the 502 regulated space whether that's the intention of the bill or not.”
- Sheman wanted to see “substantial changes to this bill to get it to actually do what it says that it intends to do,” otherwise he felt the language “confuses more than it clarifies.” He added that he’d submitted potential amending language in an effort to keep officials from going “down some of the confusing roads we're going with hemp and hemp extractions.” Sherman testified that legislators should “move the more confusing and confounding parts related to hemp, and those limits for another day to be done when there's more time to do it well.”
Information Set
-
Announcement - v1 (Mar 8, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Agenda - v1 (Mar 10, 2023) [ Info ]
-
SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Positions - Testifying - v1 (Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Positions - Not Testifying - v1 (Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Complete Audio - Cannabis Observer
[ InfoSet ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 00 - Complete (1h 29m 31s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 01 - Welcome - Shelley Kloba (1m 42s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 02 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing (8s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 03 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Staff Briefing - Peter Clodfelter (2m 59s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 04 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Introduction - June Robinson (1m 52s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 08 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony (26s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 09 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - Lukas Hunter (1m 57s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 10 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - Arthur West (14s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 11 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - Azmyth Kaminski (2m 41s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 12 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - Ezra Eickmeyer (2m 15s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 14 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - C.J. Montgomery (2m 45s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 16 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - Dylan Summers (2m 32s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 18 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - Cora Breuner (1m 53s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 20 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - John Worthington (2m 16s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 21 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - Bonny Jo Peterson (2m 41s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 25 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - Joshua Schneider (2m 22s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 26 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - Amy Brackenbury (1m 56s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 30 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - Adán Espino (1m 34s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 31 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - Amber Wise (2m 35s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 37 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - Scott Waller (2m 35s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 38 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - Vicki Christophersen (2m 17s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 40 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - Kelly McLain (1m 48s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 41 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - Jared Stanley (2m 34s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 42 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - Patrick Hyland (1m 44s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 43 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - Marc Webster (2m 26s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 44 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - Justin Nordhorn (2m 54s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 45 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Testimony - Micah Sherman (2m 48s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 46 - SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Wrapping Up - Shelley Kloba (25s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 47 - SB 5405 - Executive Session (22s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 48 - SB 5405 - Executive Session - Staff Briefing - Peter Clodfelter (50s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 51 - Caucus (23s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 52 - SB 5405 - Executive Session - Postponed (38s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Audio - Cannabis Observer - 53 - Wrapping Up - Shelley Kloba (4s; Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
-
WA Legislature - 2023-24 - SB 5367
[ InfoSet ]
-
WSLCB - 2023-24 - Agency Request Legislation - THC Regulation
[ InfoSet ]
-
Announcement - v1 (Aug 4, 2022) [ Info ]
-
Bill Text - v1 (Aug 4, 2022) [ Info ]
-
Summary - v1 (Aug 4, 2022) [ Info ]
-
Announcement - v2 (Sep 16, 2022) [ Info ]
-
Summary - v2 [ Info ]
-
-
Introduction Report - Day 5 (Jan 12, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Text - Z-0106.1 (Jan 12, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Analysis - WA Senate LC - v1 (Jan 27, 2023) [ Info ]
-
SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Positions - Testifying - v1 (Jan 30, 2023) [ Info ]
-
SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Positions - Not Testifying - v1 (Jan 30, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Text - S-1282.3 - Proposed Substitute (Feb 10, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Text - S-1282.3 (Feb 14, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Analysis - WA Senate WM - v1 (Feb 16, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Amendment - S-1615.3 (Feb 17, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Text - S-1836.1 (Feb 24, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Report - WA Senate WM - v1 (Feb 24, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Amendment - S-2098.1 (Mar 2, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Text - E2SSB - v1 (Mar 2, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Report - WA Senate - v1 (Mar 3, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Analysis - WA House RSG - v1 (Mar 9, 2023) [ Info ]
-
SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Positions - Testifying - v1 (Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Positions - Not Testifying - v1 (Mar 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Text - H-1678.2 - Proposed Substitute - v1 (Mar 17, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Text - H-1678.2 - Proposed Substitute - v2 (Mar 22, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Text - H-1678.2 - Proposed Substitute - v3 (Mar 22, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Text - H-1678.2 - Proposed Substitute - v4 (Mar 22, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Report - WA House RSG - v1 (Mar 22, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Fiscal Note - 68373 (Mar 31, 2023) [ Info ]
-
SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Positions - Testifying - v1 (Mar 31, 2023) [ Info ]
-
SB 5367 - Public Hearing - Positions - Not Testifying - v1 (Mar 31, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Report - WA House APP - v1 (Apr 4, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Amendment - H-1877.1 - v1 (Apr 6, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Amendment - H-1877.1 - v2 (Apr 7, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Text - H-1678.2 - Proposed Substitute - v5 (Apr 7, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Report - WA Senate - v2 (Apr 7, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Text - H-1678.E - v1 (Apr 7, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Report - WA Legislature - v1 (Apr 17, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Text - PL - v1 (Apr 18, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Report - WSLCB - v1 (Jul 3, 2023) [ Info ]
-
WA Legislature - 2023-24 - SB 5405
[ InfoSet ]
-
WSLCB - 2023-24 - Agency Request Legislation - Subpoena Authority
[ InfoSet ]
-
Announcement - v1 (Aug 4, 2022) [ Info ]
-
Bill Text - v1 (Aug 4, 2022) [ Info ]
-
Summary - v1 (Aug 4, 2022) [ Info ]
-
Announcement - v2 (Sep 16, 2022) [ Info ]
-
Summary - v2 [ Info ]
-
-
Introduction Report - Day 8 (Jan 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Text - Z-0190.1 (Jan 13, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Text - S-0947.1 - Proposed Substitute - v1 (Jan 26, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Analysis - WA Senate LC - v1 (Jan 27, 2023) [ Info ]
-
SB 5405 - Public Hearing - Positions - Testifying - v1 (Jan 30, 2023) [ Info ]
-
SB 5405 - Public Hearing - Positions - Not Testifying - v1 (Jan 30, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Text - S-0947.1 - Proposed Substitute - v2 (Jan 26, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Report - WA Senate LC - v1 (Jan 30, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Text - S-0947.1 (Feb 1, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Report - WA Senate - v1 (Feb 28, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Analysis - WA House RSG - v1 (Mar 7, 2023) [ Info ]
-
SB 5405 - Public Hearing - Positions - Testifying - v1 (Mar 9, 2023) [ Info ]
-
SB 5405 - Public Hearing - Positions - Not Testifying - v1 (Mar 9, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Amendment - CLOD 236 (Mar 24, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Report - WA House RSG - v1 (Mar 28, 2023) [ Info ]
-
Bill Text - H-1768.1 - Proposed Substitute - v1 (Mar 29, 2023) [ Info ]
-
WA House RSG - Committee Meeting - General Information
[ InfoSet ]
- No information available at this time