MEETING SUMMARY: Cannabis Advisory Board | Cannabis Industry Subcommittee| Approved Reccomendations
[CONTINUED FROM LAST MEETING 11/21/2017] #LawEnforcement and onsite consumption:
REFERENCE OR WATCH THE LIVESTREAM VIDEOS: 11/21/2017 https://www.facebook.com/MassRecCouncil/videos/1492648327439013/
11/27/2017 https://www.facebook.com/MassRecCouncil/videos/1497915203578992/
VOTES BELOW ARE FINAL APPROVED RECOMMENDATIONS
AGENDA
1. INTRO
2. Review Recommendations for votes on 11/27
Committee Chair: Chris Harding, Commissioner/Massachusetts Department of Revenue
Committee Members: Ray Berry, Chris Harding (chair), John Lebeaux, Jaime Lewis, Shanel Lindsey, Kim Napoli, Norton Arbalaez, Michael Latulippe, Michael Dundas, Mary Ann Pesce, Horace Small, Lydia Sisson
_______________________________________________________________
1. INTRO
Approved last week meeting notes (minutes)
2. Review Recommendations for votes on 12/1
Today: Reviewing recommendations for votes on 12/1
Documents can be found here. ( CCC may not have updated yet)
APPROVED RECOMMENDATIONS BELOW
ISSUE 1: What limits should be placed on consumption per individual?
ISSUE 2: How would such limits be monitored?
ISSUE 3: What routes of delivery/ types of consumption should be allowed on-site?
ISSUE 4: What should municipalities’ role be in governing social consumption?
ISSUE 5: What elements should be considered at the state level
ISSUE 6: What elements should be considered at the state level?
ISSUE 7: Should it be narrower, broader, or the same as the ability to regulate time/location/manner of operations that municipalities have over other marijuana establishments?
ISSUE 8: What are the minimum essential components of social consumption regulations that need to be addressed initially in order to have a functioning program?
ISSUE 9: Creating a packaging protocol that ensures safety and properly educates consumers.
ISSUE 1: What limits should be placed on consumption per individual?
We found serving size limitations were the easiest to accomplish through packaging and dosage standards that creates no tracking and confidentiality issues, allows for the largest variety of onsite consumption business models, and ensures maximum revenue for the state and the retailer. Recommendation 1: The Commission should develop state limits on “Serving Size” as well as the maximum amount of servings allowed per immediate use package. APPROVED
Recommendation 2: The Commission should implement a Daily Maximum Exposure up to 0.35 ounces (or combination equivalent) in onsite retailers based on current Department of Public Health laboratory protocols. APPROVED
Recommendation 3: The Commission should set how many servings are allowed per immediate use container but allow municipalities to raise or lower that limitation to suit their own public health and safety concerns. APPROVED
ISSUE 2: How would such limits be monitored?
Confidentiality is extremely important and the statute does not allow the state to collect any information but the age of the consumer.
Recommendation 5: Onsite consumption retail agents should be trained in detecting impairment in consumers so that they can cut anyone off who is becoming visibly intoxicated similar to how bar tenders manage alcohol intoxication. APPROVED
ISSUE 3: What routes of delivery/ types of consumption should be allowed on-site?
Recommendation 1: The Commission should develop onsite consumption retailers in tiered licensing for every type of consumption possible (Inhalation, Ingestion, Dermal) as well as one onsite retailer license that encompasses all types of onsite marijuana consumption.This should be done similar to how alcohol licenses are regulated with combinations of wine and beer or hard alcoholic liquors. APPROVED
ISSUE 4: What should municipalities’ role be in governing social consumption?
Recommendation 1: We recommend municipalities role in governing social consumption should be similar to how municipalities regulate any other marijuana establishment. APPROVED
ISSUE 5: What elements should be considered at the state level?
Recommendation 1: Develop a minimum threshold for a business to apply to become an onsite consumption marijuana retailer. We propose that businesses can apply to become an onsite consumption marijuana retailer in cases where at least 51% of the business will be marijuana sales with APPROVED
Recommendation 2: Recommend the Commission provide framework for special exceptions possible for clubs, hotels, restaurants and any other applicant the Commission feels is appropriate. APPROVED
ISSUE 6: What elements should be considered at the state level?
Recommendation 6: The Commission should develop reusable packaging standards and cleaning standards for onsite usage. APPROVED
Recommendation 7: The Commission should develop Strong Air Quality and Ventilation Standards as well as employee protections based on tobacco bars and existing businesses requiring ventilation. APPROVED
Recommendation 8: The Commission should work with experts and other stakeholders to develop onsite consumption retail agent training standards to detect impairment. APPROVED
Recommendation 9: The Commission should develop with law enforcement impairment standards for OUI and also require OUI warnings and educational materials within onsite consumption retailers. APPROVED
ISSUE 7: Should it be narrower, broader, or the same as the ability to regulate time/location/manner of operations that municipalities have over other marijuana establishments?
Marijuana establishments = lawful, non-medical
Broader municipal control could lead to bottlenecks and municipalities regulating out the possibility of these businesses. Narrower municipal control risks inflaming the municipalities against these businesses coming into their communities. Simplifying this for municipalities by keeping it similar to how they regulate other establishments will prevent confusion and allow a faster roll out.
Recommendation 3: The Commission should develop guidance for municipalities on developing short term event permits for offsite consumption similar to an alcohol consumption permit given by a municipality. APPROVED
ISSUE 8: What are the minimum essential components of social consumption regulations that need to be addressed initially in order to have a functioning program?
APPROVED Recommendation 1: Minimum essential components include the following:
• Onsite consumption marijuana retailer license categories and fees
• As a part of the education of staff, we recommend including Maximum Suggested Daily Exposure in onsite retailers based on standards set in the laboratory protocols
• Security protocols (i.e. ensuring not serving people under 21)
• Employee training to detect impairment
• Zoning guidance for municipalities including what they can request of applicants and also what they can prohibit
• Serving size and amount of servings per onsite use package requirements
• Point of sale system with revenue tracking
• Law enforcement and public safety guidance
• Labeling menu and re-usable packaging standards that differ from traditional cannabis package stores
• Public health limitations and inspections
• Air quality and filtration standards as well as odor control requirements
• Equipment safety, cleaning, and inspection requirements including prohibitions on some equipment that maybe dangerous to public safety. i.e. blow torches
• Disposal/Recycling requirements
• Kitchen inspections including local municipal guidance
• Providing guardrails for professionals and licensed businesses so they don’t lose their license allowing onsite consumption
Recommendation 2: The Commission should require all cannabis used in any licensed onsite consumption retailer must come from the regulated market including but not limited to licensed adult use cultivation centers, manufacturers, cooperatives, or medical marijuana treatment centers that are colocated. APPROVED
Recommendation 4: The Commission should require reusable containers for onsite consumption retailers to alleviate any environmental issues, children home access, and state to state drug trafficking concerns. APPROVED
Recommendation 5: The Commission should keep financial barriers to entry low for obtaining an onsite consumption retailer license to ensure local level interest. APPROVED
Recommendation 6: The Commission should give priority to onsite consumption marijuana retailer license applicants that are proposed for areas of the state heavily impacted by the drug war. APPROVED
Recommendation 7: The Commission should not require small gatherings of adults within onsite consumption retailers to acquire a special event license. The retailer is already managing state and local compliance so events under the maximum capacity of the retailer should not require special attention from the state. APPROVED
ISSUE 9: Creating a packaging protocol that ensures safety and properly educates consumers.
Recommendation 1: Use current DPH regulations as a starting point; Require MIPs to disclose what kind of cannabis material was used to produce. • Proposed regulations included as an Appendix Page 44 APPROVED
REFERENCE OR WATCH THE LIVESTREAM VIDEO
11/27/2017 https://www.facebook.com/MassRecCouncil/videos/1497915203578992/
VOTES ARE FINAL APPROVED RECOMMENDATIONS
