WA Senate LC - Committee Meeting
(January 22, 2024) - SB 6220 - Public Hearing

2024-01-22 - WA Senate LC - Committee Meeting - SB 6220 - Public Hearing - Takeaways

Testimony on a Senate bill on cannabis concentrates was similar to the House counterpart, but some new points were made after the sponsor raised the specter of Reefer Madness.

Here are some observations from the Monday January 22nd Washington State Senate Labor and Commerce Committee (WA Senate LC) Committee Meeting.

My top 4 takeaways:

  • Senior Staff Coordinator Susan Jones gave the background on SB 6220, “Concerning high THC [tetrahydrocannabinol] cannabis products” (audio - 1m, Video - TVW).
    • The measure was introduced as a companion bill after HB 2320, which had a public hearing in the Washington State House Regulated Substances and Gaming Committee (WA House RSG) on January 18th. At time of publication, that measure was scheduled for executive session on Monday January 29th.
    • Jones referred to the bill analysis, and relayed that the legislation:
      • Provides legislative intent related to high-THC cannabis policy and funding.
      • Requires the Department of Health to develop optional training for retail cannabis staff about health and safety impacts of high THC cannabis products.
      • Increases the minimum legal age of sale of cannabis products with a THC concentration greater than 35 percent, to be age 25, with an exception for qualifying patients and designated providers.
      • Requires, subject to funding, the University of Washington Addictions, Drug & 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 to provide reports to the Legislature.
    • After the committee meeting began, a revised fiscal note was posted with estimates from the University of Washington (UW) that costs under SB 6220 for six full time equivalent (FTE) staffers, as well as “professional service contracts,”“travel,” and “goods or other services,” were expected to run up to $2,955,000:
      • $655,792 through fiscal year (FY) 2025
      • $1,315,584 between FY 2025 and 2027
      • $982,688 between FY 2027 and 2029
  • Senator Jesse Salomon described his intentions in sponsoring the bill, aiming to reduce the negative health consequences for minors and young adults through education and intervention strategies, along with restricting sales of cannabis concentrates (audio - 2m, Video - TVW).
    • Calling SB 6220 the "second crack at this concern that I've had," following another companion bill he sponsored in 2020, Salomon shared his concern over the “real specific issue of youth using high potency cannabis and having mental health ‘slash’ schizophrenia psychosis triggering.”
      • Salomon spoke about his work with his House colleague for the 32nd Legislative District, HB 2320 prime sponsor Representative Lauren Davis, at a UW ADAI symposium on “High-[tetrahydrocannabinol] THC Cannabis in Legal Regulated Markets,” in September 2022.
    • Salomon told committee members he could “remember back in the day, there was some video from the 50s, what was it—Reefer Madness—that I thought was absolutely ridiculous showing, like, somebody smoking pot and getting high and losing their mind.” He compared the effects of cannabis as portrayed in the film, “when the THC [tetrahydrocannabinol] concentrations were…a couple, few percent - to this day where you can buy a hundred percent THC concentration.” Salomon raised the issue of the mental illness depicted in the film, and argued “you do have that effect on the high end.”
    • While his 2020 legislation to limit cannabinoid content “didn't go anywhere...out of that was sort of a bigger stakeholdering effort that you're seeing the results of here,” Salomon said. Referring to some of the effects of SB 6220, he added, “I’m not trying to make the statement that marijuana is bad for everybody. I'm just trying to protect kids. There's evidence that this is happening, and I think we need to be responsible and move this forward.”
    • Vice Chair Steve Conway inquired whether the bill had been developed in consultation with officials at the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB). “I have not specifically,” Salomon said, but insisted there’d been a “broader stakeholdering process that you're going to hear about” (audio - 1m, Video - TVW).
      • Conway appreciated Salomon’s effort, but noted that the legislature had recently re-defined cannabis products in a law passed in 2023, remarking that it had “been a critical issue here of evaluating products and concentration” for the committee. Chair Karen Keiser agreed lawmakers had been looking at many new product types. Salomon suggested that during Initiative 502 (I-502), campaign voters “thought we were legalizing a plant, and now there's been all these…lab-created products that I didn't even know were gonna come on the market.”
    • Keiser commented that she’d heard anecdotes, but not “any verifiable clinical evidence,” and related this to difficulties in conducting cannabis research. Salomon said he’d reviewed a “comprehensive academic study from Europe” on the topic, which Keiser asked him to forward to the committee (audio - 1m, Video - TVW).
  • Public health interests testified to the expected benefits of developing new guidance materials for medical practitioners for treating or intervening in the use of high THC products, as well as raising the purchase age to 25.
  • Several speakers from the cannabis sector and a consumer advocate didn’t see the product restriction aspect of the bill as helpful in reducing youth or young adult cannabis use.
    • Testimony included most of those who offered remarks opposed to the bill in the House.
    • Ezra Eickmeyer, Producers Northwest Founder (audio - 1m, Video - TVW)
    • Lukas Hunter,Harmony Farms Director of Compliance and Government Affairs (audio - 1m, Video - TVW)
      • Hunter hadn’t seen sufficient engagement with cannabis stakeholders before the legislation was introduced, and wanted officials to do “a much better job, instead of allocating funds towards” only UW ADAI studies. He noted, “the JAMA [Journal of the American Medical Association] network looked at 63 million participants [between 2003 and 2017, and] didn't find an association between cannabis consumption and uptick in” schizophrenia.
    • Bailey Hirschburg, Washington Chapter of  National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws and consumer advocate on the WSLCB Public Education Work Group (audio - 1m, Video - TVW)
    • Vicki Christophersen, Washington CannaBusiness Association (WACA) Executive Director (audio - 1mVideo - TVW)
    • Caitlein Ryan, The Cannabis Alliance Executive Director (audio - 1m, Video - TVW)
    • Micah Sherman, Raven Co-Owner and Washington Sun and Craft Growers Association (WSCA) Board Member (audio - 1m, Video - TVW)
      • “This bill relies on a non-standardized, self-selected, industry-performed testing program to create the threshold that it determines is safer or unsafe,” Sherman explained. He didn’t think this approach was “based in science…and it's completely inadequate to build the foundation that this bill seeks.”
      • Besides not agreeing with the assessment of proponents, he regarded SB 6220 as too “underdeveloped in its conceptualization to actually try to achieve its claims.” He called the measure a “messaging type bill, and we would suggest that it die in the committee.”
    • Joshua Rutherford, Dutch Blooms Owner (audio - 1m, Video - TVW)
      • Feeling like his business was already “struggling, mostly due to regulations,” Rutherford called out results in California supposedly finding “testing methods for current cannabis was off by almost 10 points” and wanted a more reliable testing process.
      • Rutherford was skeptical there were the same risks of byproduct contamination in “solventless” concentrates which didn’t utilize “butane, alcohol, all sorts of things to extract.” He worried that “those heavy metals that are left behind, those are a big issue” and that studies on test results were “totally inaccurate” with regards to measuring the compound. Rutherford wanted changes so that solvent-free concentrate products were separated from those restricted under the bill.
    • Nine people signed up to testify against the bill, and 13 individuals signed in opposed (Testifying, Not Testifying).
    • The committee had scheduled an executive session on Tuesday January 30th to consider amendment and passage of the bill ahead of the policy committee cutoff. At publication time, there were no potential amendments.

Information Set