Pot legalization work is proving to be a big job
The Washington state Liquor Control Board is running behind one part of its work. And it has received a wider variety of testimony than expected.
Tom James/Crosscut
A legal market for recreational marijuana is one tiny step closer, but the pace of progress is proving hard to predict. And you might not have as many chances to talk about it.
After wrapping up an initial round of public meetings on Friday, Washington's Liquor Control Board announced it might not hold any more comment periods until after proposed rules for legal pot in the state are drafted. While the initial comment period is technically open for another week, and two more forums had been scheduled, written comments may be the only option for now.
"I think that we're probably done," said board spokesman Brian Smith, who confirmed that the board is tentatively cancelling the rest of its public forums until it releases its first drafts of the marijuana rules, likely sometime mid-April.
The move is a change to a tentative plan the liquor board published at the start of the year, which called for three early rounds of public forums, so that the public could give input on the three areas the board was charged with regulating. Those areas are the growing, processing, and sale of marijuana.
Washington's marijuana legalizing Initiative 502 charged the liquor control board with setting rules for growing and selling recreational marijuana by Dec. 1.
"The only hard and fast date is December first," Smith said. With a long list of steps to complete before then, Smith said, "The timeline was always a way of 'how do we fit in all those other things in in linear fashion.' "
One reason for the change, Smith said, was the volume and variety of comment the board had already recieved. While the first comment period was supposed to be about producer rules, people talked about all facets of the market, from growing to selling. With so much general testimony already in hand, Smith said, it was hard to see the need to go through two more rounds of forums.
The change came as the board fell two weeks behind schedule on another key part of the process — choosing a consultant to help it understand the marijuana market as it exists today in the state. In previous interviews, Smith and others at the agency made much of the importance of the future consultant, and said that the board was depending on a partner to answer key questions about the market, including exactly how much marijuana to supply.
Smith stressed that the schedule the board had established was flexible. But, he acknowledged regarding the consultant job, "I'm regretting some of the timelines we put out. I don't think we were anticipating 112 bids."
Last Monday was the deadline the board had set for finding a partner, but the deadline came and went without a selection. Friday Smith said the agency still had not begun in-person interviews for the job, and that deciding on a candidate would take at least until the end of this week.
The last public forum — for now, at least— was held Friday in Bremerton. About 125 showed up, making it one of the smallest of the eight held around the state so far, but many of the concerns brought up were similar to those raised elsewhere, including whether the board would make a place for small businesses in the new market, the difference between medical and recretational marijuana, how purity and standards for organic pot would be established and how many licenses would be issued.
For exclusive coverage of the state Legislature, check out Crosscut's Olympia 2013 page.
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds
Comments:
Posted Mon, Mar 11, 11:35 a.m. Inappropriate
Anyone who thinks legalizing Pot is a good idea, is naïve at best. Not only will legalizing pot lose us money in the long run, it’ll dumb down the ability of students to think.
Read the article: Drug Testing Company Sees Spike In Children Using Marijuana March 6, 2013 http://denver.cbslocal.com/2013/03/06/drug-testing-company-sees-spike-in-children-using-marijuana
Posted Thu, Mar 14, 7:59 a.m. Inappropriate
How do you figure it will lose more money than is spent on the failed War on Drugs© ?
Posted Mon, Mar 11, 2:22 p.m. Inappropriate
“Clearly, the world is watching the states of Colorado and Washington as their initiatives are implemented. We intend to do it right,” Gov. Jay Inslee has sent a five-page letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder that outlines how Washington’s new legal marijuana system, wrote, “to minimize diversion and the illicit market.”
Inslee listed 21 separate ways in which the state will carry out the law in a thorough and disciplined manner, “with public safety being our paramount responsibility.
Posted Mon, Mar 11, 2:29 p.m. Inappropriate
Ex-DEA Chief Lobbying Against Pot Legalization Owns Drug Testing Company,urged Attorney General Eric Holder to sue Colorado and Washington state in order to block implementation of marijuana legalization approved by the voters in both states.
Marijuana legalization opponent Peter Bensinger, former head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, now runs a drug-testing lab… which — surprise, surprise! — profits greatly from marijuana prohibition
Former DEA chief Peter Bensinger and business partner, Dr. Robert DuPont, is a former White House drug czar. Both Bensinger and DuPont are up to their necks in sleazy, industry-controlled lobbying groups like the “Drug & Alcohol Industry Testing Association,”.
Bensinger and his cohorts in the drug testing industry represent just one of the many industries that are lobbying to keep the failed war on drugs alive, as they’re willing to subvert democracy and the Constitution to do it.
Posted Mon, Mar 11, 3:43 p.m. Inappropriate
Sad to say, it appears widespread. Like a cancer.
Posted Thu, Mar 14, 8:05 a.m. Inappropriate
Actually some claim that it cures cancer.
Posted Tue, Mar 12, 6:10 a.m. Inappropriate
The State is not bright enough to run an effective, profitable Marijuana Program. The Liquor Control board has proven this and yet they are "in charge" of the process.
The State is not willing to do what will be necessary for a profitable program to be developed. For instance, will the State allow for a wavier to the indoor smoking ban? No? It might be difficult to develope a meaningful Marijuana tourism industry without the ability to sit down in a social setting in public and try different types of pot. Without secure public venues that will allow for on site consumption, the program will fail to produce the revenues necessary to cover the overhead that the State will place on the product. With "State approved" pot being priced out of the market and possession for personal use decriminalized, the existing "alternate channels" will flourish.
Posted Tue, Mar 12, 11:07 p.m. Inappropriate
I am for legalization; but I do not want Marijuana Tourism. I have been to Amsterdam, and Marijuana Tourism is disgusting. A bunch of people ingesting all the pot they can, and bumbling around. It sucks. It makes persons act and look pathetic. No to any promotion of a Marijuana Tourism.
Posted Wed, Mar 13, 6:35 a.m. Inappropriate
The problem with the "No Marijuana Tourism" model is that the volume of revenue necessary to sustain the State program cannot be supported by the consuming public native to Washington. It also points out the failed mindset of the State Liquor Board, this is supposed to be a revenue generating business for the State, not a hobby grow operation who product is to be consumed in your mom's basement.
Either get serious about taking advantage of the early adoption of the legalization of Marijuana or give up now and save the taxpayers Millions of dollars in infrastructure costs.
Posted Thu, Mar 14, 2:30 a.m. Inappropriate
No, this was supposed to be the legalization of marijuana use in Washington State; not Marijuana Inc.. The Citizenry voted to legalize pot, not to create industries. Marijuana tourism is obnoxious.
The idea was to legalize pot, not glamorize pot.
Posted Thu, Mar 14, 6:54 a.m. Inappropriate
Anytime you ask the State to control growing, distribution and sales, you have defacto created Marijuana Inc. Like it or not the overhead is going to be just like any other Government Operation. It will never generate enough revenue to cover the costs and deliver the promised taxes.
Posted Thu, Mar 14, 8:17 a.m. Inappropriate
This will be interesting to see IF the state can manage to do as good a job as the MedMJ has done in getting product to consumer.I line in a rural community and within 10 miles of my house I can buy MerryWanna from two dispensaries, each store has a large selection, all grown locally. Why doesn't the state just offer these existing sources the chance to go legit?
Posted Sun, Mar 17, 9:54 a.m. Inappropriate
I never thought that this fight would be anything less than an uphill battle. Some things are worth fighting for, however. We've been fighting against marijuana for so long it's hard to convince people that it just hasn't been worth it.
Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.