doomed
2 days ago
Trudeauâs departure is a turning point for Canadaâs cannabis industry
By Deepak Anand, Guest Columnist
January 24, 2025
As Canadaâs cannabis industry stands at a pivotal crossroads, the impending departure of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau marks the end of an era that reshaped Canadaâs relationship with the plant.
Trudeauâs bold decision to legalize recreational cannabis in 2018 not only transformed the nationâs social and economic landscape but also established it as a global pioneer in marijuana reform: Canada remains the only G7 nation to have federally legalized the plant both for medical and adult-use purposes.
The impact of cannabis legalization on Trudeauâs legacy is undeniable.
Recent polls indicate that 62% of Canadians support cannabis legalization, a testament to the policyâs enduring popularity and success.
In fact, when asked about Trudeauâs top accomplishments, the largest proportion of Canadians point to the legalization of recreational cannabis, according to a survey by Leger, a North American market research company based in Montreal.
Justin Trudeau started advocating for a legal adult-use market in Canada only a month after he was elected prime minister in 2015. (Photo courtesy of Government of Canada)
However, as we look toward the future, storm clouds are gathering on the horizon.
The prospect of a Conservative Party government led by Pierre Poilievre raises concerns for the industryâs trajectory.
One of the most pressing issues is the potential downsizing of Health Canadaâs Controlled Substances and Cannabis Branch.
This critical department, currently employing more than 200 staff members, plays a vital role in regulating and overseeing our industry.
A Conservative government focused on reducing federal spending could target this department for cuts, potentially creating bottlenecks in licensing processes, amendments and export license approvals.
The CBD file, long emphasized as a priority in Health Canadaâs forward-looking regulatory agenda, risks further stagnation under a potential Conservative government.
Such delays could result in missed opportunities to expand sales channels into pharmacies, health food stores and other traditional retail outlets beyond cannabis stores.
Additionally, it could prevent Canadian cannabis businesses from fully leveraging the rapidly growing global CBD market.
The industry has been eagerly anticipating regulatory reforms to address challenges such as marketing restrictions and limitations on THC content in edibles.
These much-needed changes could now be put on hold indefinitely, leaving licensed Canadian cannabis businesses struggling to compete with both the illicit market and international competitors.
At a minimum, the Liberal Party government should prioritize advancing proposals already in progress before the next election - or risk being blamed by a potential Conservative government for creating a financially unsustainable and unviable industry.
Cannabis reform and revenue at risk
Over the past six years, a multibillion-dollar cannabis industry has taken shape in Canada, creating thousands of jobs and generating substantial tax revenue.
Any rollback or stagnation of cannabis policies could threaten these economic gains, compromise patient access and stall Canadaâs position as a global leader in the sector.
It could also risk positioning the country as a cautionary example of the challenges surrounding cannabis legalization.
As we navigate this uncertain terrain, itâs crucial that the industry unite and organize effectively.
It must engage proactively with policymakers across the political spectrum, educate the public about the benefits of a well-regulated cannabis market and continue to demonstrate the positive impacts of legalization.
Trudeauâs cannabis legacy
To maintain its position at the forefront of this rapidly evolving global industry, the Canadian cannabis industry must advocate for continued support and refinement of the regulatory framework.
Cannabis legalization should be viewed as an ongoing process that requires continuous improvement, not as an event having come and gone.
As we bid farewell to the Trudeau era, letâs remember that the Canadian cannabis industry has become an integral part of the nation's economy and social fabric.
Itâs incumbent upon industry participants to ensure that any current or future government recognizes this reality and works to build upon the foundation laid thus far.
Only through collective effort can Canada hope to preserve and expand upon Canadaâs first-mover advantage in the global cannabis industry.
Canadian consumers do not care for government weed as survey claims that they are well served and happy with illicit cannabis offerings.
doomed
3 days ago
GTA
âWhat are we living in â a wild west?â: Pot shop owners left fuming by cityâs lax rules
Owners of licensed cannabis shops are accusing authorities of turning the industry into an unregulated âwild west,â after the city said it would stop investigating unlicensed pot retailers.
Doomed
Jan. 23, 2025
Clifford Tindall, the owner of Spiritleaf Cannabis in Little Italy, says the lack of enforcement of cannabis licensing rules has left he and other legal operators at a disadvantage.
I
A visitor to the plain-looking coffee shop near Harbord Street and Spadina Avenue would need to look closely at the menu on its patio to realize it sells anything stronger than caffeine.
But inside the minimalist facade beneath a criminal law office, the store, called CAFE â which stands for Cannabis and Fine Edibles â offers a selection of cannabis-infused coffees and teas from 8 a.m. to 11 p.m. A patron cautions the Star that even a low dose could cause the imbiber to walk around for hours in an aimless haze.
No smokable pot products are visible on the first floor of the store, one of CAFEâs five locations across Toronto. Upstairs, there is a smoking lounge that costs a fee to enter. CAFEâs website allows people to purchase several varieties of combustible cannabis and associated paraphernalia for pickup at the Harbord location.
The only thing missing: a required sticker in the window indicating a licence from the province to sell cannabis.
The continued operation of CAFE and dozens of other unlicensed Toronto cannabis shops is at the heart of what licensed pot retailers charge is a regulatory free-for-all that threatens public safety and undermines the legal industry.
Their anger over what they say is an uneven playing field was reignited last week by the cityâs surprise announcement that its bylaw officers will no longer investigate storefronts that sell weed without a licence.
A senior city official asserted that the work is too dangerous and the municipality has no money to do it. And while he argued that cracking down on unlicensed outlets is a job best left to the police, the force has suggested it has more pressing problems to deal with.
The gap in enforcement has left Clifford Tindall, owner of the Spiritleaf franchise in Little Italy, fuming. âItâs insane. Like, what are we living in, a wild west here?â he said in an interview.
He said owners of legal shops like his pay thousands of dollars in licensing fees, and are required to buy bunk inventory from the governmentâs Ontario Cannabis Store at higher prices than on the unregulated market. Licensed retailers are also limited by rules about how much THC â the active ingredient in cannabis â can be in products like oils that are cut with 90% vegetable oil.
Unlicensed shops donât have to follow those rules, so have a competitive advantage that allows them to undercut licensed sellers, Tindall argued. He also said products sold in unlicensed stores can contain harmful chemicals.
Behind its minimalist exterior, CAFEâs Harbord Street location offers a selection of cannabis-infused coffees and teas.
âWeâre being regulated up the aâ. But there is no regulation taking place against these businesses. How can they expect us to survive, for one, and have any trust in the system?â said Tindall, who believes the police should do more to shutter unlicensed shops.
CAFE didnât return a request for comment.
According to city estimates, there are 372 licensed cannabis retailers operating in Toronto, and 77 unlicensed ones.
The Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (AGCO) is responsible for licensing cannabis stores, but the responsibility for enforcing rules against storefronts that sell pot without a licence is left to local authorities.
City licensing officials can issue closure orders, conduct seizures, bar entry to storefronts and lay non-criminal charges under the Cannabis Control Act. According to the city, since 2019 its licensing division has secured 116 convictions against illegal operators and property owners.
But the city says itâs not aware of any other Ontario municipality that uses bylaw officers â who donât have arrest powers and arenât permitted to use force â to enforce the Cannabis Control Act.
At a meeting of the budget committee last Wednesday, Carleton Grant, the cityâs licensing director, said investigating illegal pot shops put his bylaw officers at risk, and police, who are responsible for enforcing criminal laws against illegal drug peddling, should step in to do the job.
âIt is criminal, it is organized crime, and it is not appropriate for me to send my staff into these locations where there are weapons and thereâs criminal activity taking place,â said Grant.
Grant also stressed that the cash-strapped city has no money for enforcement. The $9 million Queenâs Park allocated to Toronto between 2019 and 2021 for enforcement and other costs associated with legalization ran out at the end of last year, and wasnât replaced in the proposed 2025 city budget Mayor Olivia Chow unveiled last week.
âWe no longer have funding for cannabis enforcement,â Grant told the committee.
In a statement, Toronto Police Service (TPS) spokesperson Stephanie Sayer said the force investigates reports of illegal dispensaries and lays charges when warranted. According to Sayer, the TPS âworks closelyâ with the city on the file, but was ânot informedâ about its concerns about employee safety or its decision to stop enforcement.
She said that if âthere is a desire for TPS to take the lead in this area,â the force âcan collaborate with the city to discuss the resources that would be required.â
But speaking to reporters at city hall last Thursday, police Chief Myron Demkiw pointed out that recent police reform efforts have focused on relieving the force of responsibilities, like bylaw enforcement, that can be performed at lower cost by civilians.
He suggested shutting down unlicensed pot shops wasnât an urgent issue for the TPS, which he said was âlaser focused on our core duties,â such as responding to shootings and other violent incidents.
A spokesperson for the Ontario ministry of the attorney general warned in a statement that retailers who donât secure a licence through the AGCO âare operating illegally and will face the consequences.â They said the province âwill continue to ensure there is integrity in the regulated market by working with all partnersâ
In 2024, the Ontario government announced $31 million over three years for the Provincial Joint Forces Cannabis Enforcement Team to fight illegal cannabis production, sale and distribution.
âWe are just no longer effectiveâ: Toronto bylaw officers to stop cracking down on illegal pot shops
GTA
âWe are just no longer effectiveâ: Toronto bylaw officers to stop cracking down on illegal pot shops
A spokesperson for the Ontario Provincial Police, which leads the enforcement team, said it will advise local police forces about illegal storefronts âupon requestâ and if an investigation is connected to organized crime or a broader probe into drug distribution, production or trafficking. Last year the team shut down 22 illegal cannabis storefronts in Ontario and seized $1.1 million in illegal dried cannabis from dispensaries across the province, including in Toronto.
In an emailed statement, Chow didnât directly answer questions about who she thinks should be responsible for closing unlicensed weed stores, but said enforcement âneeds to happen, no one should walk away from this responsibility.â
Ken Hughes, founder of the unlicensed Medicine Wheel cannabis shops, said that as an Anishnaabe and member of the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation he has the right to sell cannabis outside of provincial regulations. A Medicine Wheel location was raided last year but continues to operate.
He rejected the claim that stores like his are dangerous or connected to organized crime. âThereâs no weapons at any of my stores,â he said. âIâm a businessman ⌠Iâm the furthest thing from being a criminal.
When asked, customers all agreed that government weed is bunk.
doomed
4 days ago
Home / Legal
Trumpâs choice as interim DEA leader is marijuana rescheduling skeptic
By Doomed
January 22, 2025
A former top U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration official who cast doubt on marijuana rescheduling last year is President Donald Trumpâs interim choice to oversee the DEA â and, potentially, the agencyâs historic rescheduling process.
The Trump administration on Monday tapped Derek Maltz to take over as DEA administrator on an interim basis, Bloomberg News reported.
Maltz, whose 28-year DEA career included 10 years as special agent in charge of the agencyâs Special Cannabis Operations Division, assumes control from the agencyâs previous chief, Anne Milgram.
Maltz will inherit from Milgram an ongoing and contentious process to reclassify marijuana under federal law.
Trump is pro-rescheduling; his DEA pick, not so much
In a September post on his Truth Social platform, Trump signaled support for downgrading marijuanaâs status under the Controlled Substances Act, a process that former President Joe Biden launched in October 2022.
That process is in temporary limbo pending an appeal that seeks to remove the DEA as overseer of the process.
Trump loyalists, including Texas Republican U.S. Rep. Chip Roy praised the selection of Maltz, pointing to the former agentâs resume that includes successes against international ânarco cannabis terrorismâ and the capture of Sinaloa cartel leader Joaquin âEl Chapoâ Guzman.
Malts also has cast doubt on the marijuana rescheduling process that heâll now inherit.
It all started in May 2024, when the U.S. Justice Department published the âinterim proposed ruleâ that reclassified marijuana as a Schedule 3 drug, down from Schedule 1.
It was former Attorney General Merrick Garland â not Milgram â who signed off on the finding of âsubstantial evidence that marijuana does not warrantâ its present Schedule 1 status.
An additional memo from the DOJâs Office of Legal Counsel that cites DEA objections to reclassifying marijuana indicates the agency fought the decision to pursue rescheduling, a process it now is overseeing.
Maltz: Rescheduling is âpolitics over public safetyâ
Maltz, then retired from the DEA and working as head of government relations for a software company, also had strong words after the May ruling became public.
âItâs crystal clear to me that the Justice Department hijacked the rescheduling process, placing politics above public safety,â he told the Associated Press.
âIf thereâs scientific evidence to support this decision, then so be it. But youâve got to let the scientists evaluate it.â
According to one analysis, such scientific evaluation already had been done: In August 2023, the Department of Health and Human Services found that cannabis has a âcurrently accepted medical useâ in the United States.
However, as the DOJâs Office of Legal Counsel memo indicated, the DEA questioned the process used to make that determination.
Thereâs no clear timeline as to when or if Maltz might entertain the appeal that has temporarily halted the marijuana rescheduling process.
A hearing before Chief Administrative Law Judge John Mulrooney II was to begin in earnest Jan. 21.
But that process has been paused indefinitely after an appeal from cannabis interests that accused the DEA of âbiasâ against rescheduling.
doomed
2 weeks ago
Bunk weed has no tractionâŚ😂
Nationâs oldest marijuana retailer facing multiple lawsuits related to unpaid bills
Doomed
January 15, 2025
Berkeley Patients Group (BPG), the nationâs oldest operational marijuana retailer, is embroiled in several lawsuits alleging the operator failed to pay invoices to vendors, landlords and service providers.
The Northern California retailer is facing at least three lawsuits that claim it owes various businesses more than $250,000 in unpaid bills, according to Berkeleyside, a nonprofit digital news outlet.
The lawsuits include:
A December 2023 civic claim by BGP vendor Event Horizon Technologies, which does business in California as Flow Cannabis Co., alleging itâs owed $60,605 for goods, merchandise and other services. Flow Cannabis â often referred to by its flagship brand, Flow Kana â has had financial struggles of its own.
A February 2024 filing by Oakland-based ABC Security Service claiming that BPG failed to pay $73,864 for security services.
A claim early last year by AZ DV Real Estate alleging the cannabis retailer owes $127,160 in rent and other costs. AZ DV owns a Berkeley property at 1101 University Ave. that BPG intended to move to but didnât.
BGP denied all these allegations in a July 9 court filing, Berkeleyside reported.
The company first opened its doors in 1999 with a mission to serve the sick and dying, especially by providing medical marijuana to those with HIV and Cancer.
Growing at scale not working.
doomed
2 weeks ago
Go Tilray!
Home / Legal
Marijuana rescheduling process paused indefinitely after judge cancels hearing
author profile pictureBy Chris Roberts, Reporter
January 14, 2025
President-elect Donald Trumpâs choice to lead the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration will wield a heavier hand than expected over the ongoing marijuana rescheduling saga after the agencyâs chief administrative law judge canceled hearings scheduled for next week.
DEA Chief Administrative Law Judge John Mulrooney II issued a ruling late Monday that included the cancellation of a hearing scheduled for Jan. 21 pending the outcome of a yet-to-be-filed âinterlocutory appealâ to the agencyâs eventual administrator.
Anne Milgram currently holds the role of DEA administrator, but sheâs likely to be replaced once Trump takes office and appoints a new leader for the drug-enforcement agency.
Trumpâs initial nominee to head the DEA, Chad Chronister, abruptly backed out, and the president-elect hasnât identified another choice.
Judge reacted to pro-rescheduling participants
Mulrooneyâs ruling Monday came in response to a Jan. 6 request from two pro-rescheduling âdesignated participantsâ that Milgram and her agency be removed from the proceedings for demonstrating what they argue is bias.
In their filing, the participants â Village Farms International, a Florida-based agricultural firm that produces cannabis in Canada under a federal license there, and Texas-based Hemp for Victory â requested that Mulrooney allow them to file an appeal âto the Administratorâ should Mulrooney refuse to take action.
And thatâs what Mulrooney did, according to a copy of the ruling obtained by MJBizDaily.
âNotwithstanding the pleas of the Designated Participants that they are anxious for action on the proposed rescheduling of marijuana, the (filers) ⌠are apparently eager to trade a timely disposition and recommended decision for the dubious advantage of piling on moreâ participants, Mulrooney wrote in part.
In his ruling, Mulrooney noted that he must find that granting such permission âis clearly necessary to prevent exceptional delay, expense or prejudice to any party, or substantial detriment to the public interest.â
Doing so now might help avoid a future lawsuit challenging the validity of the whole process, he noted.
âWere my analysis to be reviewed on appeal and determined to constitute prejudicial error, a remand would clearly result in significant delay and expense to the Designated Participants and the process,â Mulrooney added.
Federal law grants the next administrator leeway to consider briefs or schedule oral arguments.
âThe matter is on stay here, and the Administrator will issue a briefing schedule, entertain oral argument if he/she desires, and issue a binding, written decision on this tribunal,â Mulrooney added, in part.
Mulrooneyâs shock choice to pause the long-awaited rescheduling hearings follows the Jan 6 allegations that the DEA is demonstrating a sharp âbiasâ against rescheduling marijuana as federal health regulators recommended it do in August 2023.
âDEA has corrupted this hearingâ
In an email to MJBizDaily on Monday, Robert Head, the chair of Hemp for Victory, said only the DEA is to blame for any delay in downgrading marijuanaâs status under federal law from Schedule 1 to Schedule 3 of the Controlled Substance Act.
Schedule 1 puts marijuana in the same category as heroin and LSD with no medical value.
âThe DEA has corrupted this hearing,â Head said, adding that ensuring the hearing is fair is more important than a rapid resolution.
More on rescheduling
Marijuana rescheduling judge blasts DEA for âunprecedented, astonishingâ behavior
Colorado shut out of marijuana rescheduling hearings by âbiasedâ DEA, filing alleges
Finance experts mixed on prospects of marijuana capital infusion post-rescheduling
âBiggest thing, everâ: Marijuana rescheduling recommendation hailed
âWe owe it to the tens of thousands of activists who have worked on this issue over the past 50 years.
âWe owe it to the veterans who overdosed and committed suicide because all they had was pharmacotherapy from the VA. We owe it to the people of this country to call out this corruption.
âIf this new administration is really concerned about rooting out corruption, they should look into why the DEA is afraid of reclassifying marijuana to Schedule 3, and I donât think it has to do with public safety.â
doomed
2 weeks ago
Home / Finance
Opportunities abound with distressed marijuana businesses â but use caution
Omar Sacirbey
January 9, 2025
Because there is a dwindling number of states that havenât legalized medical and/or recreational marijuana, it is easy to be fooled into believing opportunities to get a cannabis business license would likewise be shrinking.
Opportunities abound, however.
The question is, where?
Often in mature markets such as California, Colorado, Michigan, Oregon and Washington state, many marijuana businesses that initially thrived are now struggling.
The owners of distressed businesses often put their licenses up for sale, presenting opportunities to entrepreneurs and investors aspiring to break into or expand in the marijuana industry.
While many cannabis businesses with potential can be had on the cheap, others might pose significant risk to their new owners.
How do you distinguish between a diamond in the rough and a disaster?
Seattle-based Heidi Urness and New Orleans-based Rudy Cerone, attorneys with the McGlinchey law firm, walk the MJBizDaily audience through the process:
How do businesses end up getting âdistressedâ in the first place?
Rudy Cerone: The main reasons businesses become distressed is because they donât know the market. It is easy to grow bunk and fall flat.
They spend too much money on capex (capital expenditures), on fixed expenses, on operating expenses, but they donât know what their revenue streams are going to be.
Theyâre scaling up, and their revenue stream canât support their ongoing operations.
So, they donât know their market.
Itâs probably the biggest reason why a business would start to fail.
Heidi Urness: A lot of folks in the cannabis industry spend a lot of money without understanding what the return is going to be.
We see astronomical amounts spent on build-outs and similar things before you even see any revenue at all in some cases.
ADVERTISEMENT
Where can aspiring license buyers find distressed businesses for sale?
Heidi Urness: When it comes to the licenses, itâs a state-specific and municipality-specific game.
There are some websites that will list licenses for sale, but thatâs not the same as just listing a property for sale.
Itâs very difficult to find a distressed license.
Some folks will make Craigslist ads or go on various platforms that are starting to advertise this, because itâs hard to find a purchaser for a license because of all the nuance and due diligence that needs to go into it.
Folks do get desperate and will post their licenses on various platforms, especially ones that are popping up, which are really no more than just website frames someone puts up.
Otherwise, you really have to have your finger on the pulse of the industry.
Are there some states where you are more likely to find distressed assets more than others?
Heidi Urness: We see a lot in Oregon and Michigan.
That is largely born of the fact that when they first stepped into the cannabis industry â the state as a whole â they had unlimited numbers of licenses.
So there was just a huge amount of licenses, a huge amount of competition, and a lot of people were just squeezed out by economic factors, not by anything that they did wrong, no violations on the licenses.
So, where you see that oversaturation of licenses and then the attrition, youâll know that thereâs probably some licenses hitting the secondary market.
What are the most important things that someone seeking to buy cannabis business licenses needs to know about that permit?
Heidi Urness: Thereâs all sorts of things that you need to know about it, in terms of the obligations that it already has on it, contractually, but also its enforcement history.
You can give me a license that otherwise would be worth a million dollars, but in some states if it has two violations in the last two years, a third violation means I forfeit the license. That thingâs probably worth $10,000.
Every state has some sort of threshold where when you commit a certain amount of violations, you will eventually lose the license.
Every asset will have its own kind of unique considerations of the risks associated with it. The license is just one of them.
What you want to see from these folks is that there is no litigation. That thereâs been no threat of litigation. Thereâs been no cease-and-desist. Thereâs no challenge to the intellectual property.
Because that is a risk that comes along with that particular asset, that someone could challenge.
And, ultimately, that IP could be worth nothing if itâs found that thereâs superior user.
How do you vet distressed businesses that are for sale?
Rudy Cerone: If youâre looking to buy a business in distress, they would be setting up a virtual data room which has all the documents that you would need to be informed about the business.
They should hire what we call the chief restructuring officer, or someone thatâs a third party whoâs not emotionally invested in the business and is skilled at putting together all of the information thatâs needed.
You do an NDA (nondisclosure agreement) with any prospective purchasers.
When you are vetting financials, what are you watching for?
Rudy Cerone: I like to see audited financial statements to the extent that theyâve got them.
If theyâre big enough, theyâre going to have audited financial statements from their CPA that says this is the profit-and-loss statement, this is the cash-flow statement, this is the balance sheet â and get those as up to date as soon possible, so you see the raw numbers.
And then you get all of the documents necessary to operate the business and licenses and that kind of stuff.
Vendor contracts are essential.
2024 MJBiz Factbook â now available!
Exclusive industry data and analysis to help you make informed business decisions and avoid costly missteps. All the facts, none of the hype.
Featured inside:
Financial forecasts + capital investment trends
200+ pages and 49 charts highlighting key data figures and sales trends
State-by-state guide to regulations, taxes & market opportunities
Monthly and quarterly updates, with new data & insights
And more!
Get the Facts
If youâre looking to get into cannabis, how safe or not is it to get into it by buying a distressed license?
Rudy Cerone: As far as getting free and clear, thatâs the primary way.
Youâre buying assets, and not necessarily, in most cases, an operating business.
Youâre buying the land, the assets to grow, the lease at which the dispensaries are operating, the inventory.
Youâre bringing your own expertise in order to operate those assets as a thriving business.
Youâre not acquiring the business as a going concern.
Youâre usually acquiring the assets that are necessary to operate a going concern business.
If you know your market, you know your competition, you donât overspend, and youâre experienced, and you just need the assets to expand on in a particular place, itâs probably not risky at all.
But if youâre a novice, and youâre looking to pick up mom and popâs distressed dispensary, youâre probably going to have trouble.
doomed
3 weeks ago
D.E.A. Is your friendâŚ😂
Colorado shut out of marijuana rescheduling hearings by âbiasedâ DEA, filing alleges
author profile pictureBy Chris Roberts, Reporter
January 8, 2025
The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration rejected a September request from Colorado officials to participate in the United Statesâ historic marijuana rescheduling process.
Thatâs one example of the âbiasâ that should disqualify the agency from overseeing the hearings, according to claims made in a filing submitted Monday to the DEAâs chief administrative law judge, John Mulrooney II.
The decision to exclude Colorado, where sales of adult-use marijuana began more than a decade ago, but include authorities from states without regulated cannabis such as Nebraska and Tennessee demonstrates why the agency should be removed from the proceedings, the filing claims.
Mondayâs filing is the latest effort by designated participants Village Farms International and Hemp for Victory to disqualify the DEA, which has âobstructed the rulemaking process at every turn.â
The two companies are among the 25 parties selected by the DEA in October to participate in hearings before Mulrooney.
Bias and conflict of interest claimed at DEA
Village Farms, with headquarters in Florida and British Columbia, and Hemp for Victory, based in Texas, claim to have found evidence of bias and âundisclosed conflicts of interest and extensive ex parte communications by DEA that must be disclosed and made part of the public record.â
According to the filing, the evidence includes:
An â(u)ntimely, biased, and legally-improperâ filing made by the DEA on Jan. 2 that âechoes anti-rescheduling talking pointsâ such as âmarijuana has a high abuse potential and no currently accepted medical use,â and denies other participants adequate time to review and respond, in violation of federal procedure.
Concealment of âroughly 100 requestsâ to participate in the hearings that were rejected, including Coloradoâs, and its âcommunication and coordination with at least one anti-rescheduling DP, the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation.â
Reliance on the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America, a DEA ââpartnerâ on matters related to fentanyl,â which is a âpotential conflict of interest.â
The DEAâs Jan. 2 filing includes evidence and testimony that its two witnesses intend to introduce in future hearings, which are scheduled to resume Jan. 21 and extend into March.
The 66-page, undated and unsigned DEA document bears âan unmistakable resemblance to the positions the anti-reschedulingâ witnesses have taken, according to Mondayâs filing.
âThis new evidence confirms that DEA has worked to stack the deck against the Proposed Rule by favoring anti-rescheduling parties in its selection of hearing participants and obstructing a balanced and thoughtful process based on science and evidence,â Mondayâs filing noted.
Colorado governor requested role in hearing
Mondayâs filing â written by attorney Shane Pennington, the witnessesâ counsel and a partner at Porter Wrightâs Washington, D.C., office who specializes in administrative law, attempts to show in greater detail how the agency âdisfavored pro-rescheduling parties, including DEA researchers, doctors, scientists, and the State of Colorado, which has competently regulated a medical marijuana program for over a decade.â
Colorado Gov. Jared Polis requested in a Sept. 30 letter to DEA Administrator Anne Milgram that the state be allowed to present ârelevant, unique, and non-duplicativeâ data that shows âmarijuana having medical utility and abuse potential far below opioids.â
In his letter â a copy was attached to Mondayâs filing â Polis expressed a fear that any federal rescheduling decision made without considering Coloradoâs position âwill introduce significant risksâ to state-regulated marijuana frameworks, including the ability to regulate sales as well as collect tax revenue.
But, according to Mondayâs filing, Milgram âbarred Colorado from presenting that dataâ by ignoring Polisâ letter and declining to extend the state an invitation.
Instead, the DEA mentioned Colorado 27 times in its Jan. 2 filing, part of an effort âto cast doubt on the success of the decade-old state-regulated program,â according to Mondayâs claims.
âYet DEA makes no attempt to engage with the positive evidence from Colorado and summarily rejected Coloradoâs request to participate in this hearing,â the filing continued.
âAnd now, secure in the knowledge that the Administratorâs secret selection process has guaranteed that Colorado will not be able to respond or defend itself, DEA reveals its plan to smear the stateâs successful regulatory program in these historic and very public proceedings.â
The DEA also allowed the state of Nebraska, which is attempting to thwart a medical marijuana ballot initiative approved by its voters in November, and the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation to participate in the proceedings.
Both states are opposed to rescheduling, according to their filings.
A âsham orchestrated by the DEAâ
These revelations show âthese proceedings are a sham orchestrated by the DEA to stonewall cannabis from being transferred to a Schedule III designation,â Village Farms founder and CEO Michael DeGiglio said in a statement Monday.
As MJBizDaily has reported, both the initial roster â selected by Milgram â as well as further decisions by Mulrooney appear to tilt the list toward witnesses who oppose moving marijuana from Schedule 1 of the Controlled Substances Act to Schedule 3.
Mulrooney, who rejected a Nov. 18 motion by Village Farms and Hemp for Victory to remove the DEA from the rescheduling hearing based on agency employeesâ communications with another anti-cannabis designated participant, has yet to respond to Mondayâs filing.
The motion asked Mulrooney to delay the hearings until communications between the DEA and witnesses are released and, potentially, further action taken.
It also asks Mulrooney to compel the DEA to âto declare whether it supports or opposesâ marijuana rescheduling.
âAt a minimum, (Mulrooney) should postpone the upcoming hearing to allow for an investigation into DEAâs conduct, including its ex parte and undisclosed communications with anti-rescheduling organizations and other entities,â Mondayâs filing adds.
News
Market Data
Customized watchlists with full streaming quotes from leading exchanges, such as NASDAQ, NYSE, AMEX, OTC Markets Small-Cap, LSE and more.
Lawncare1
2 days ago
BottomBounce
4 days ago
EarningsCentral
1 week ago
Can'tSparTheGhost
1 week ago
Monksdream
2 weeks ago
MoneyMaker111
3 weeks ago
