►
From YouTube: Cannabis Crosses the Country
Description
This session was held Aug. 8, 2017, at NCSL's 2017 Legislative Summit in Boston.
Lawmakers from states that recently legalized recreational marijuana at the ballot box have plenty to learn from the pioneering states when it comes to taxation, product regulation and other issues. But no one is certain how all this may change with the Trump administration. Explore the complexity and uncertainty of state cannabis laws.
A
Cannabis
crosses
the
country
I'd
also
like
to
welcome
our
online
viewers,
as
this
session
will
be
a
strained
live
on
the
NCSL
website,
so
everybody
ways:
I'm
Carmen,
Hansen
program
director
at
the
National
Conference
of
State,
Legislators,
Health,
Program
and
I
track
state,
medical
and
adult
used
cannabis
laws.
This
is
the
third
of
three
cannabis
related
sessions
this
year
at
our
legislative
summit,
and
it
is
truly
a
reflection
of
the
vast
amount
of
questions
that
NCSL
receives
on
this
issue
from
legislators
and
legislative
staff.
A
Those
questions
cross
at
least
four
different
topic
areas
at
NCSL,
financial
services,
criminal
justice,
environment
and
health.
It
really
does
take
a
village
to
track
the
various
policy
angles
of
this
issue.
In
case
you
miss
any
of
the
other
sessions.
Information
and
related
materials
may
be
found
on
the
NCSL
app
sunday
sessions
covered
financial
services
issues
and
the
interesting
play
between
state
and
federal
laws.
A
Monday
Session
looked
at
the
federalism
and
states
rights
issues
and
this
final
session
is
really
geared
at
the
most
common
question
that
we
get
asked
by
legislators
and
legislative
staff,
and
that
is
what
can
be
learned
from
Colorado
and
Washington
and
other
early
legalization
states,
with
the
newer
states
like
California,
Maine,
Massachusetts
and
others,
because
inquiring
legislators
and
staff
want
to
know.
We
hope
today's
session
will
do
just
that.
This
session
is
not
about
whether
a
state
should
or
should
not
legalize
or
taking
any
position
on
specific
related
state
policy.
A
A
So
a
a
quick
housekeeping
item,
we'll
probably
be
using
the
words,
marijuana
and
cannabis
interchangeably
and
we'll
try
to
do
our
best
to
avoid
any
unnecessary
jargon
or
acronyms
or
puns,
but
they
sneak
in
kind
of
can't
help
it.
And
today
we
have
three
panelists
with
extensive
Colorado
experience
in
different
areas
and
one
legislator
from
Maine
who
will
share
a
variety
of
lessons
learned
and
we
have
and
I'm
just
going
to
do
a
quick
introduction.
Then
they'll
have
additional
statements.
A
We
have
representative
Don
Pope
Dan
Pabon
from
Colorado,
who
is
deeply
involved
with
the
initial
legalization
and
implementation
legislation.
We
have
representative
Teresa
purse
from
Maine
and
she
has
co-chair
of
the
Maine
Joint
Select
Committee
on
marijuana
legalization
and
implementation
and
she's
hot
off
a
fact-finding
mission
to
Colorado.
We
also
have
a
couple
recorded
pieces
from
other
legislators
from
Maine
who
are
unable
to
join
us.
Today.
A
B
B
C
Great
well
this
these
are
my
friends
from
Colorado
and
from
Maine.
We've
all
been
on
this
journey
together
for
at
least
five
or
so
years.
Well,
I
just
want
to
understand
who's
in
the
audience
today.
If
you
would
be
so
kind
as
to
raise
your
hand
if
you
already
have
a
medical
or
recreational
system
in
your
state,
okay,
so
that's
virtually
almost
everyone
and
then
for
those
of
you
who
don't
have
that
system.
I
assume
that
you're
here
to
either
learn
what
to
do
or
what
not
to
do
raise
your
hand
on
that
front.
C
So
that
includes
everyone
in
the
room
all
right.
Well,
you
know
one
of
the
one
of
the
things
that
I've
learned
over
the
last
five
years
and
the
questions
I
get
of
course
is
what
would
you
do
differently
if
you
have
to
do
it
over
again
or
what
have
you
learned
from
your
experience
if
you're
thinking
about
coming
online
with
the
system,
whether
it's
medical
or
recreational,
or
if
you're
from
a
state
or
and
the
politics
or
such
that
you
say,
there's
no
way,
we
will
ever
bring
such
a
system
into
our
jurisdiction.
C
And/Or
provide
consumers
with
the
product,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day,
because
this
is
a
federally
illegal
substance,
the
proliferation
of
a
black
market
has
existed
for
a
hundred
years
and
many
of
the
users
that
you
have
in
your
state
account
for
a
large
quantity
of
consumption
and
and
purchase,
but
most
folks,
generally
speaking,
unlike
alcohol,
don't
consume
cannabis.
And
so
the
question
that
you
have
to
answer
to
most
folks
is
I,
don't
use
cannabis
I,
don't
have
a
medical
or
debilitating
condition
that
requires
it
or
I'm
not
interested
in
consuming
it
recreationally.
C
D
Good
morning,
I'm
Theresa
purse,
I'm
the
state
representative
from
main
and
in
full
disclosure
I'm,
a
native
Colorado
and
I
was
actually
born
in
Colorado,
has
nothing
to
do
with
the
implementation
of
marijuana
in
Maine,
but
I
am
from
there
originally
and
I
proudly
call
Maine
my
home
now
and
happy
to
be
here
today
to
join
you
all.
We
legalized
medical
marijuana
in
Maine
in
1999
and
just
last
November,
legalized,
adult
used
marijuana,
and
in
doing
so
we
realized
that
the
referendum
which
barely
passed
it
was
52.
D
D
So
this
committee
is
17
members,
I
am
the
chair
of
it
of
the
house,
chair
you'll,
see
on
the
screen
and
a
little
while
some
of
other
members
of
our
committee
who
couldn't
be
here
and
we
represent
all
facets
of
the
legislature.
So
there's
a
member
of
Taxation
there's
a
member
of
judiciary,
there's
a
member
of
criminal
justice.
D
There's
a
member
I'm
on
my
standing
committee
is
the
Education
Committee
and
so
I
bring
that
perspective
to
the
table
in
addition
to
like
appropriations
or
on
this
committee,
and
we've
been
working
with
the
referendum
language
in
order
to
clean
it
up
and
maybe
learn
some
lessons
from
other
states
and
then
in
order
to
implement
something
going
forward.
We
have
put
a
moratorium
on
retail
use
until
February
of
18,
but
you
can
have
personal
use
right
now,
legally
in
the
state,
so
we're
a
little
bit
of
a
in-between
stage.
D
Right
now
it's
been
a
fascinating
experience.
I
was
neither
Pro
nor
con
on
the
passage
of
the
referendum,
I'm
delighted
to
be
part
of
the
process,
because
it's
quite
interesting,
but
it
does
a
lot
of
challenges
for
states
going
forward.
We
did
recently
have
a
trip
to
Colorado
to
get
lessons
learned
and
Andrew
Friedman
of
Lewis's
consulting
firm
did
come
and
speak
to
our
legislative
committee
as
well.
So
I
look
forward
to
sharing
some
of
that
information
a
little
later
on.
But
that's
who
I
am
and
I'm
delighted
to
be
here.
E
Hi
I
am
Jordan
Wellington
I
am
an
associate
attorney
with
the
law.
Firm
Vicente,
Cedarburg
I
focused
mostly
on
regulatory
compliance
and
government
affairs
and
public
policy
work.
I
cut
my
teeth
as
a
build
rafter
in
the
office
of
legislative
services
in
New
Jersey.
Actually,
the
guys
started
as
in
the
crowd
mic
over
there
on
the
same
exact
day.
Almost
seven
years
ago,
I
then
relocated
and
moved
with
my
family
to
Denver
Colorado
and
was
an
aide
in
the
house
majority
office.
E
When
our
legislative
director
told
me
that
I
was
now
going
to
be
the
staffer
assigned
to
handle
the
implementation
of
marijuana,
legalization
I
assumed
that
that
meant
there
was
like
an
army
of
people
that
I
would
be
working
with
and
all
these
other
things,
but
unfortunately
in
Colorado,
there's
like
literally
no
legislative
staff
anywhere
and
so
I
ended
up
being
kind
of
the
guy
that
did
all
this
stuff.
With
representative
Pabon
through
our
Joint
Select
Committee
I,
guess
I
just
can't
stay
away
from
the
puns
and
then
so.
E
I
carried
the
bill
through
the
house
together,
and
then
they
kicked
me
over
to
the
Senate
and
I
carried
the
bills
through
the
Senate.
So
by
the
end
of
the
legislative
session,
oh
and
I
always
like
to
tell
people
in
rooms
like
this.
That
representative
Pabon,
the
legislature
myself.
We
got
the
bills
through
both
houses
of
the
Colorado
Legislature
in
13
working
days
and
didn't
have
to
go
to
conference
committee.
So
it's
like
my
one
of
my
most
proudest
achievements
of
all.
It's
pretty
dorky,
whatever
I
like
that
stuff.
After
this,
the
session
ended.
E
I
then
was
hired
by
the
marijuana
Enforcement
Division
and
got
to
work
with
get
son
Lou
over
there
and
I
was
their
policy
nerd
as
well,
and
handled
stakeholder
engagement
and
drafted
a
lot
of
the
regulations
that
govern
medical
and
adult
use
cannabis
in
Colorado.
Today,
I
eventually
left
public
service
and
join
sent
a
Cedarburg
where,
as
I
mentioned,
I
run
the
firm's
compliance
department
advising
clients
all
over
the
country
on
how
to
operate
in
compliance
with
a
very
complex
web
of
regulations.
E
I
also
work
with
these
strategies,
advising
government,
clients
and
private
sector
clients
on
government
affairs
issues
and
through
the
council
and
responsible
cannabis
regulation,
I
get
to
meet
with
legislators
from
really
all
over
the
world
on
how
to
do
this
responsibly
as
well
as
get
to
do
my
favorite
thing.
There's
just
lots
of
pro
bono.
E
A
A
We've
been
in
Boston
a
few
days,
it's
quite
a
patchwork
across
the
country,
all
that
four
states
currently
have
some
sort
of
cannabis
access
law
and
that
ranges
from
the
cannabidiol
only
or
the
CBD,
only
or
low
THC
products,
to
a
traditional
medical
program
to
full
on
adult
youths
legalization
and
as
a
reminder,
cannabis
does
remain
a
Schedule
one
product,
seeing
as
having
no
medical
use
federally,
deeming
it
illegal
in
all
forms.
So
just
a
quick
history
recap
of
the
eight
states
in
DC
that
have
adult
youth
legalization.
A
They
also
have
marijuana
medical
programs
and
two
western
states,
legalized
in
2012,
that's
Colorado
and
Washington,
and
then
in
2014
DC
came
on
with
two
other
states,
Alaska
and
Oregon,
and
then
just
last
November.
We
had
four
states
California
Nevada,
Massachusetts
and
Maine,
which
were
all
done
at
the
ballot
box.
29
states,
DC
and
two
other
territories
currently
allow
for
medical.
Only
in
17
states
have
those
low,
THC
or
cannabidiol
only
product
laws
and
all
of
the
adult
youth
legalization
efforts
were
citizen
driven
valve
initiatives.
A
No
state
legislature
has
yet
to
pass
legislation
to
legalize
adult
use
cannabis
and
have
it
signed
by
the
governor.
I
hear
you
Vermont
I
know
you're
here,
Vermont
did
pass
that,
but
again
the
they
did
not
hold
something
to
try
to
veto
the
governor
after
that.
So
now
we'll
start
the
discussion
portion
of
the
session
and
I'll
kick
it
off
with
representative
Pabon,
you
sponsored
some
of
the
initial
enacting
legislation
in
Colorado,
as
we
were
already
discussing.
How
would
you
say
those
regulations
have
changed
from
those
initial
efforts
in
2013
to
today?
C
In
2013
we
were
pretty
conservative,
being
one
of
the
first
states
in
the
country
and
therefore
the
world
to
regulate
cannabis.
We
started
out
very
parochial,
I
guess,
I
would
say
we
did
things
like
made
sure
that
no
out-of-state
residents
could
have
essentially
ownership
or
part
of
any
type
of
cannabis.
Business
is
very
thoughtful
approach.
We
wanted
Colorado
to
sort
of
stay
insulated
from
out
of
state
interest
and
and
and
so
what
happened.
C
Almost
by
definition
is
the
out
of
state
interest,
went
to
other
states
and
started
their
own
programs
and
and
so
what
we're
seeing
now
fast
forward
of
2017
2018.
There
is
a
large
interest
of
public
companies
being
involved
in
the
cannabis
industry.
It's
just
like
any
other
industry.
It
just
happens
to
regulate
a
federally
illegal
system,
but
with
that
minor
point,
the
the
the
ideas
back
then
and
I
think
it's
come
true
to
fruition.
Today
is
we
were
really
reliant
on
the
free
market
system
to.
C
Practices
would
be
relevant
enough
or
obvious
enough
that
the
marijuana
enforcement
division
or
the
DEA
or
whomever
we
might
be
could
go
in
and
and
root
out.
Those
bad
actors
and
that's
happened.
We've
had
very
well-known
busts
recently
in
the
state
of
Colorado,
primarily
due
to
a
gray
market
issue
that
extent
from
our
home
grow.
Caregiver
operations,
we've
tamp
down
on
that
recently,
with
with
some
very
good
success
and
so
now
fast-forward
to
2017
we're
looking
at
potentially
allowing
public
companies
to
own
operations
in
Colorado
at
the
beginning.
C
We,
if
you
were
a
tourist
to
Colorado
I,
won't
ask
anyone
if
you
did,
but
if
you
were
tourists
five
years
ago
you
could
only
purchase
a
quarter
ounce
at
a
time
now
you
can
come
to
Colorado
and
purchase
a
full
ounce
and-
and
that
again
was
a
conservative
measure
to
make
sure
that
folks
weren't
accumulating
a
lot
of
cannabis
as
tourists
and
then
taking
it
back
to
their
state.
No
other
state
frankly
adopted
that
provision,
and
so
in
many
ways
Colorado
has
had
to
adjust
to
the
nationalization
of
cannabis
regulation.
C
But
again
most
folks
do
come
to
us,
because
we
have
learned
lessons:
we've
made
adjustments,
we've
changed
ownership
structures
and
purchasing
requirements.
We
we
also
outlawed
the
use
of
animal
shapes,
fruit,
shapes
or
human
shapes
in
our
edible
products.
That
was
something
that
we
had
started
out
with
allowing
completely,
and
it
just
got
too
confusing
for
for
many
of
the
kids
in
Colorado
we
saw
an
uptick
in
emergency
room,
accidental
ingestion,
and
so
we
went
back
and
said.
Okay,
that
was
a
bad
idea.
We
should
prohibit
the
those
types
of
shapes
in
our
edible
format.
C
A
B
A
lot
for
us
I
think
the
biggest
challenge
in
Colorado
was
being
first
right.
We
actually
had
just
this
complete
blank
slate
to
work
with
in
a
lot
of
ways
to
make
the
implementation
of
both
constitutional
amendments
and
then
laws
that
were
coming
down
to
the
regulators
from
the
General
Assembly
we
had.
We
had
really
no
other
jurisdictions
to
to
go
off
of
I
mean.
F
B
Of
the
ways
we
solved
for
that
problem
was
we
borrowed
from
other,
similarly
regulated
industries.
So
in
a
lot
of
ways,
our
background
investigations
work.
Some
of
our
field
enforcement
was
designed
off
of
what
casino
gambling
regulators
do
and
for
background
investigations
and
in
vetting
of
individuals
and
companies
to
make
sure
they're
in
compliance
with
all
the
laws
and
then
on
the
field
enforcement
side.
We
borrowed
a
lot
from
liquor
enforcement,
especially
as
it
relates
to
underage
compliance
and
those
types
of
things.
B
Reality
was,
and
we
and,
as
things
came
more
into
focus
to
us,
that
marijuana
is
very
unique
in
itself
and
a
lot
of
times
it's
not
just
as
easy
as
being
able
to
borrow
from
another,
similarly
regulated
industry
to
get
you
where
you
need
to
be
to
really
address
some
of
the
issues
that
are
unique
to
marijuana
legalization,
so
that
was
that
was
one
of
the
biggest
challenge.
I
think.
B
The
second
biggest
challenge
for
us
was
that
there
were
some
incredibly
tight
timeframes
that
were
put
into
the
constitutional
amendment
for
adult
use,
and
it
gave
the
regulars
very
little
time
to
be
able
to
actually
create
this
brand-new
set
of
regulations
where
one
hadn't
existed
before
and
and
I
have
actually
a
whole
new
appreciation
for
policy
nerdness.
That
I
picked
up
from
Jordan
as
we're
going
through
that
process,
but
we
actually
spent
like
like
evenings
almost
at
the
office
until
2
or
3
o'clock
in
the
morning
working
on
getting
those
regulations
done.
B
So
we
could
get
them
done
in
time,
so
we
could
get
rules
promulgated
and
actually
get
businesses
licensed
by
the
time.
Retail
sales
were
intended
to
be
started
just
a
little.
Over
a
year
after
the
the
constitutional
amendment
was
passed
and
then
again,
the
third
biggest
challenge
was
how
divisive
this
was.
Even
though
marijuana
legalization
in
in
through
amendment
64
had
a
hundred
thousand
more
votes
than
President
Obama
did
that
year
it
was
still
a
divisive
issue.
B
55
percent
voted
in
favor
45
voted
against
it,
so
you
can
see
the
battle
lines
are
drawn
almost
immediately,
and
so
we
had
to
work
up
divisive
policy
issue,
so
challenges
issued
though
I
would
say
or
chant
how
the
challenges
changes.
Things
came
more
into
focus.
There's
really
I
think
this
is
still
true
today.
B
A
You,
and
also
in
case
anyone
in
here
might
have
a
copy
of
governing
magazine,
there's
a
great
story
about
Louis's
firm
now
on
talking
about
the
history
of
both
P
and
Andrews
work
and
the
Colorado
level,
so
pick
up
a
copy,
shameless
plug
I'm,
not
part
of
governing
magazine.
If
this
next
questions
for
Jordan,
as
you
mentioned
before,
you
joined
the
law
firm,
you
were
a
policy
wonk
and
still
are
a
policy
wonk.
E
Mean
first
I
think
I
ripped
off
something
representative
Pabon
mentioned,
which
is
and
and
as
well
as
Lou
is
kind
of
like.
First
and
foremost,
you
know
what
are
the
precedents
for
this?
You
know
cannabis
is
kind
of
unique
in
the
sense
that
it's
federally
illegal
and
people
kind
of
stick
it
in
every
single
thing.
E
You
could
possibly
imagine,
but
it's
going
to
react
like
a
commodity
and
like
any
other
commodity,
so
the
laws
of
supply
and
demand
and
and
all
of
these
basic
things
that
you
would
do
in
any
business
regulatory
structure
will
be
applicable
for
cannabis.
So
I
just
wanted
to
kind
of
get
that
out
there
I
think,
first
and
foremost,
you
know,
I
would
tell
them
to
get
ready
to
drink
from
the
fire
hose.
E
You
know
for
me
being
able
to
work
on.
This
is
like
been
kind
of
a
dream.
Come
true,
because
it's
one
of
the
most
interesting
and
fascinating
policy
subjects
I've
been
able
to
work
on.
It
just
covers
a
tremendous
amount
of
ground
from
agricultural
regulation
and
regulations
of
farming
and
things
like
that.
All
the
way
to
complex
manufacturing
sales,
testing,
I,
never
thought
I
would
have
to
understand
the
federal
government's
process
for
certifying
child-resistant
packaging.
I.
E
Never
thought
I'd
have
to
understand
the
process
for
approving
different
types
of
pesticides
and
and
how
that
works
now
I'm
an
expert
in
both
of
them.
Unfortunately,
but
you
know
it
basically
is
this,
like
never-ending
series
of
rabbit
holes,
that
you
have
to
run
down,
because
whether
it's
federal
prohibition
that
kind
of
makes
it
so
that
the
FDA
or
the
pa
is
not
actively
doing
the
role
that
they
are,
or
literally
just
within
one
agency.
E
The
marijuana
Enforcement
Division
regulating
agricultural
production,
complex
manufacturing
and
extraction
infusion
into
everything,
from
edible
products
to
sexual,
lubricant
and
suppositories,
and
every
other
weird
thing
you
could
possibly
imagine.
I
got
to
have
a
conversation
with
someone
at
the
marijuana
Enforcement
Division
about
whether
infused
sexual
lubricant
was
an
edible
product
or
not.
That
was
one
of
the
more
fascinating
days
of
my
career.
E
You
know,
and
then
you
know
with
that
open
mind,
you
kind
of
never
really
know
where
the
most
important
ideas
are
going
to
come
from.
We
have
a
particular
stakeholder
in
Colorado
that
will
go
unmentioned
that
can
be
quite
challenging
from
time
to
time,
but
in
one
particular
working
group
meeting
she
mentioned
concentrate
production
as
being
a
very
dangerous
and
unregulated
part
of
the
industry,
and
that
really
led
us,
Lou
and
I
to
create
the
first-ever
set
of
kind
of
concentrate
production
regulations
for
cannabis,
which
really
mirror
just
basic
fire
code
and
building
safety
stuff.
E
But
it
wasn't
ever
done
before
and-
and
it
wasn't
until
this
random
offhand
comment
in
a
meeting
that
we
thought
about
it,
and
you
know
that
kind
of
that
thread
of
being
able
to
pay
attention
and
keep
your
mind
open,
runs
from
these
basic
ideas
about
how
you're
going
to
regulate
things
all
the
way
through
kind
of
the
efficacy
of
medical
cannabis.
The
latest
stuff,
that's
really
interesting,
around
potential
applications
and
dermatology,
and
things
like
that
are
things
that
I,
don't
think
anybody
ever
thought
of
when
we
started
going
down
this
road.
E
A
Thank
You
representative
purse,
as
we
mentioned,
some
of
the
main
Joint
Select
Committee
members
were
just
in
Colorado
last
week
and
you
were
there
to
learn
from
the
legislators
in
regulators
firsthand,
as
well
as
folks
from
the
Colorado
Department
of
Public,
Health
and
Environment.
How
did
that
experience
inform
your
upcoming
duties
to
create
initial
regulations
in
May
and
what
was
maybe
some
of
the
most
surprising
things
or
useful
things
you
learned
about.
Thank.
D
You
yeah,
it
was
for
members
of
the
committee,
took
a
reconnaissance
trip
to
Colorado
for
lack
of
a
better
word
and
representative
Pavone
and
a
few
other
representatives
there
and
ncsl
organized
it
for
us.
So
if
your
state
I
think
is
embarking
on
this
and
hasn't
voted
in
in
yet
or
isn't
all
the
way
through
or
even
if
you're
in
the
middle
of
it
I
highly,
encourage
you
to
take
a
trip
or
invite
people
to
your
state
for
the
conversation,
because
we
certainly
learned
a
lot.
D
Our
committee
decisions
are
just
a
couple
things
number
one:
the
personal
use
issue
people
who
want
to
play
in
the
regulated
market
by
their
licenses
and
play
in
that
market,
but
we
found
through
Colorado
that
they
had
a
loophole
in
the
personal
use,
that
things
could
be
growing,
not
regulated
at
all
and
have
a
lot
of
plants
on
sites,
and
that
was
causing
a
lot
of
problems
in
Colorado.
Our
law
is
similar
to
that.
D
As
it
stands
now,
so
we're
looking
to
amend
that
to
change
it
to
limit
the
number
of
plants
that
you
can
have
on
a
parcel.
What
was
happened
in
Colorado
is
residential
areas,
we're
becoming
populated
because
of
this.
This
personal
use
that
then
escalated
along
with
the
medical
use
and
we're
trying
to
learn
from
that
and
move
forward
in
a
better
manner.
There's
lively
conversation
our
committee
about
this,
because
it's
all
about
your
personal
liberty
to
use
it,
and
the
law
says
that
you
can,
while
also
taking
into
consideration.
D
About
those
two
things,
the
other
real
big
component
had
to
do
with
pesticides,
I
think
Colorado
setup
that-
and
other
people
have
mentioned
this
before-
has
set
up
their
testing
sort
of
later
in
the
game.
We're
trying
to
get
earlier
in
the
game,
analysis
done
of
that
and
get
our
testing
sites
up
and
going
because
we
want
the
product
to
be
safe
when
it
goes
to
product.
But
if
you
don't
allow
testing
facilities
to
come
online
earlier,
sometimes
that
can
bottleneck.
It
happened
couple
of
other
states
as
well
and
then
what
pesticides
and
how?
D
What
you're
measuring
in
the
contaminants?
If
you
do
that
upfront
and
people
can
expect
it
that's
a
little
easier
transition.
The
data
collection
has
come
up
before
as
well.
Data
collection
is
expensive
to
do,
but
it
informs
future
policy
decisions
and
we
learned
a
lot
from
our
counterparts
in
Colorado
around
what
the
black
market
looks
like
currently,
so
that
you
can
measure
that,
but
also
other
things
like
you
mentioned,
visits
to
emergency
rooms
and
things
that
might
fluctuate.
D
Or
you
can
show
pattern
that,
then
you
can
have
informed
policy
decision
going
forward
to
change
and
improve
the
safety
of
the
use
of
the
product
and
then
the
other
great
thing
that
I
think
Colorado
did,
but
it
took
them
multiple
times
that
try
and
maybe
get
the
right
voice
out
there.
They
have
a
great
public
health
campaigns
around
this
issue.
They
have
the
good
to
know
campaign
which
is
for
adults
and
adults,
use
and
tourism,
which
you
don't
really
think
about.
D
When
you
get
involved
in
this
I
always
thought
people
might
come
to
Maine
to
use
to
use
pot,
but
I
wasn't
really
I
really
think
of
the
water
and
the
ocean
is
being
the
first
thing
that
you
come
to
Maine
for,
but
but
people
I
guess,
do
travel
and
when
they
show
up
they
do
this,
but
they're
not.
Maybe
experienced
users
and
problems
can
ensue
as
you
can,
as
you
can
find,
and
then
also
with
the
campaigns
that
they
used
around
youth
and
youth
prevention.
D
D
So
that's
just
a
couple
things
we
took
away.
It
was
a
great
visit.
Ncsl
did
a
fantastic
job,
organizing
our
trip
out
there
and
we
had
great
people
showing
us
around
and
I
know
a
lot
of
you
in
Floss
Fenway
last
night
that
thanks
to
represent
well
I,
got
to
see
course
filled
and
behind
the
scenes
there.
So
that
was
quite
a
treatise,
we'll.
A
F
Think
I've
learned
that
that
you
know,
despite
the
best
efforts
of
everybody
involved,
there's
still
two
thirds
of
the
the
counties
in
Colorado
which
is
chosen
not
to
participate
in
the
legal
market
that
is
chosen
not
to
license
cultivators
or
production
facilities
or
retail
facilities.
I
think
we
all
have
an
interest
in
wanting
to
make
sure
that
this
legal
market
actually
is
out
there
in
all
parts
of
our
state
so
that
we
don't
have
these
vast
deserts
where,
where
people
are
have
no
alternative
if
they
want
to
buy
than
to
go
through
the
illegal
market.
F
As
I
mentioned
earlier,
we
we,
we
don't
want
to
end
up
with
a
situation
where
a
high
tax
is
is
setting
people
to
the
black
market.
On
the
other
hand,
we
have
all
sorts
of
needs
in
Maine,
as
every
state
does
is
extent
that
this
new
tax
revenue
can
help
us
with
some
of
our
general
fund
programs,
where
we
have
an
appetite
for
that.
For
sure.
We
have
decided
that
a
portion
of
the
tax
is
going
to
go
back
to
the
municipalities
where
the
marijuana
activity
took
place.
F
We're
also
going
to
devote
a
small
portion
of
the
taxation
to
public
safety
issues,
particularly
helping
to
Train
law
enforcement
officers.
More
in
in
good
what
recognition
practices
for
the
highways
and
we're
also
going
to
devote
a
portion
of
them
to
public
safety
campaigns.
Excuse
me,
public
health
campaigns
particularly
related
to
youth
use,
but
most
of
the
remaining
money,
probably
going
into
the
general
fund.
A
G
Work
on
it
by
part
of
it,
it's
really
in
1999,
when
I
was
a
sheriff,
I
led
the
campaign
for
medicinal
marijuana
and
I
went
first
to
the
Capitol
to
see
if
we
could
do
it
as
a
bill
and
I
remember
addressing
Republicans
and
trying
to
underscore
that
this
was
a
state
rights
issue,
so
they
would
join
the
fray
and
to
the
Democrats
I
told
him
was
compassionate
liberalism
and
I
tried
to
broker
marriage
also
long
ago.
Well,
ironically,
those
two
themes
remain
in
place.
G
My
Republican
colleagues
recognize
that
the
state's
responsibility
to
implement
the
will
of
the
people
I
think
my
Democratic
colleagues
are
cognizant
that
we
have
a
mature
medicinal
marijuana
community
and
they
want
to
protect
those
in
trust,
and
it's
been
very
collaborative
I
mean
it's
not
I.
Think
leadership
of
both
parties
made
good
selections
as
to
committee
membership,
and
we've
really
tried
to
address
this
as
a
community
issue
and
that
there
isn't
a
Republican
way
or
a
democratic
way
to
solve
this.
It's
going
to
have
to
the
a
unified
consensus.
G
As
a
matter
of
fact,
our
two
chairs
are
committed
to
consensus
and
that's
they
drive
our
efforts
and
as
individual
members
we
try
to
satisfy
that.
Interestingly,
it's
been
new
themes
like
libertarianism
and
what
that
means
to
this
kind
of
discussion
and
the
idea
of
civil
liberties.
It's
been
on
policy
and
not
on
party
and
I'm
real
part
of
that
real,
proud.
A
So,
as
we
just
heard
from
from
the
additional
state
Maine
legislators,
taxes
seem
to
be
one
of
the
most
important
issues
that
is
talked
about.
When
you
talk
about
marijuana,
regulation
and
legalization,
and
this
is
for
representative
Pabon,
can
you
tell
us
a
bit
about
Colorado's
experience
with
the
tax
issue
and
how
much
they
play
a
role
to
fund
regulation
or
other
specific
items
like
enforcement?
Yeah.
C
C
First
and
foremost,
we
we
intentionally
put
in
an
excise
tax
of
15%
to
make
sure
that
one
we
met
our
constitutional
requirements
of
dedicating
forty
million
dollars
to
the
construction
of
rural
school
buildings,
and
we
have
done
that
for
the
first
time
it
takes
a
while
to
build
up
your
sales
to
that
level.
We
have
collected
forty
million
dollars
for
the
construction
of
school
wreaths
of
rural
schools.
C
We
wanted
to
make
sure
that
our
tax
structure
was
not
set
up
as
a
disincentive
to
consumption,
so
not
a
sin
tax,
but
rather
a
tax
that
would
allow
us
to
do
two
things,
one
to
fully
pay
for
the
regulatory
system
that
has
caused
us.
Many
many
millions
of
dollars
through
the
marijuana,
Enforcement
Division
Lewis
Koska
got
a
raise
out
of
all
this
I.
Don't
know
if
that's
actually
true,
but
it's.
C
But,
but
to
pay
for
lawyers
like
Jordan,
Wellington
and
many
many
other
regulators
in
this
space,
unlike
what
we
do
in
Colorado
and
I'm
sure
this
is
true
of
your
states
as
well.
Alcohol
is,
in
part,
funded
by
the
general
fund,
the
oversight,
the
licensing
the
regulation
is
all
funded
by
the
general
fund
in
Colorado.
That
is
not
true
for
cannabis.
It
is
pays
for
itself.
So
one
of
the
criticisms
that
that
we
can
all
get
is
why
are
using
my
taxpayer
dollars
to
pay
for
the
system
that
I
have
nothing
to
do
with?
Well.
C
That's
all
paid
for
by
our
excise
and
sales
tax
revenue
as
well,
and
then
we
move
into
the
next
tier
of
public
health
campaigns,
youth
use,
educating
consumers,
Public,
Safety
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
And
what
are
the
issues
that
I
think
is
it's
sort
of
bubbling
up
in
Colorado
is
we
did
have
this
campaign
to
fund
education
and,
as
I
said
before,
forty
million
dollars
to
our
rural
school
funds?
C
But,
what's
interesting
and
and
you
know,
voters
are
savvy
in
many
ways
but
oftentimes,
you
know
forget
the
we
are
going
to
fund
education
in
rural
Colorado
and
just
here
we
are
going
to
fund
education,
and
so
they
have
you
know:
3.5
million
students
or
Coloradans
live
in
urban
areas,
which
is
a
lot
of
which
is
roughly
70%
of
the
population,
and
so
what
they're
saying
is
I,
don't
see
any
tax
benefit
from
the
regulation
of
cannabis?
How?
C
C
The
media
loves
this
topic
by
the
way
and-
and
we
have
a
whole
industry
of
publications
in
Colorado
that
talk
about
this
every
day,
the
Denver
Broncos,
the
weather
and
cannabis
of
the
top
three
stories
in
and
in
that
order.
Basically,
so
you
know,
but
but
what
what
we
don't
do.
A
good
job
about
is
talking
about
the
positives
that
are
produced
from
the
regulation
of
cannabis,
which
again
the
media
is
less
interested
in.
C
B
Thanks
I,
so
I
think
a
lot
of
times.
I've
spent
my
whole
adult
life
in
law
enforcement
and
I
think
a
lot
of
times.
We
view
law
enforcement.
Is
this
monolithic
group
that
advocates
for
the
same
things
that
their
their
interests
are
always
aligned
and
and
I'm,
not
sure?
That's
true,
I
think
generally,
when
it
comes
to
marijuana
legalization,
certainly
it's
safe
to
assume
that
for
the
most
part,
law
enforcement
really
questions
the
wisdom
behind
marijuana
legalization.
B
B
But
I
think
what
law
enforcement
looks
for
more
than
anything
again
with
a
broad
generalization
is
they're
looking
for
some
clarity
and
that's
not
necessarily
an
easy
thing
to
achieve
so
getting
engaged
in
that
process
of
the
policy
making
both
at
the
legislature
and
the
regulatory
side
is,
is
really
is
really
critical
and
we
did
this
in
a
couple
of
different
ways
in
Colorado.
One
one
is
we
actually
created
and
we
helped
facilitate
this
meeting
with
the
Chiefs
Association.
Was
we
created
a
law
enforcement
working
group
where
it
was
an
opportunity?
B
When
we
started
that
workgroup
on
the
medical
side,
law
enforcement
saw,
at
least
in
Colorado
saw
medical
as
a
kind
of
a
wink-wink
nudge-nudge
for
legalization,
because
chronic
pain
was
one
of
our
ailments
and
it
was
also
the
most
popular
ailment
that
you
could
get
a
medical
license
or
medical
registration,
patient
card
for
and
was
relatively
easy
to
get
as
we
transitioned
out
of
the
medical
side
and
into
the
retail
side.
Where
we're
having
a
real,
honest
argument,
adult
uses,
so
adults
can
use
marijuana
and
get
high.
B
It
actually
kind
of
eased
some
of
that
tension
with
law
enforcement
because
they
saw
it
as
a
real,
honest
argument.
This
is
exactly
what
we're
doing.
You
guys
want
to
use
it
to
get
high
great
and
they're
a
little
bit
more
inclined
to
participate
in
the
policy
process
because,
because
it
was,
it
was
out
there
in
the
open.
B
It
was
just
a
real,
honest
or
even,
whereas
before
they
were
little,
sometimes
a
little
reluctant
to
get
involved
in
that
process,
because
they
almost
saw
it
at
like
giving
it
saying
it's
a
thumbs
up
to
and
kind
of,
were
afraid
it
was
gonna.
Be
viewed
as
an
advocating
for
for
legalization,
so
the
other
thing
that
we
did
just
real,
quick
in
Colorados.
We
we
saved
places
on
the
public
workgroup.
B
So,
as
we
talked
through
some
of
the
most
difficult
policy
issues
like
production,
management
and
edibles
and
those
types
of
things,
we
made
sure
that
we
had
reserved
places
on
those
public
workgroups.
So
we
could
get
members
of
law
enforcement
community
at
the
table
and
advocating
for
things
that
they
thought
were
important
within
the
policy.
A
G
So
my
work
on
the
implementation
committee
I've
tried
to
make
sure
that
we're
going
to
address
that
by
directing
revenues
towards
training
and
equipment
modifying
our
impaired,
drunk
driving
laws
to
incorporate
the
threat
that
overindulgence
or
inappropriate
indulgence
of
cannabis
might
pose
to
the
motoring
public.
That
said,
we
all
agree.
We
know
the
questions.
The
answers
will
take
some
time
to
develop
so
I
think
that's
what
I
bring
to
the
table.
Give
my
career
history.
A
Okay,
the
next
question
I
have
is
for
Jordan
and
right
now,
you're
more
in
the
role
of
advising
cannabis
based
clients
and
in
other
state
governments
on
regulation
issues.
What
can
you
share
with
us?
Obviously,
without
breaking
any
attorney-client
privileges?
What
are
those
new
states?
Learning
from
the
old
states
like
what
are
the
most
major
themes
that
you're
coming
across
yeah.
E
Thanks
for
the
question
so
to
kind
of
general
things
and
then
some
specific
questions,
so
you
know
first
there's
kind
of
questions
about
where
we
can
learn
things
from
and
I
think
lessons
try
not
to
invent
new
policy.
I
mentioned
child
resistant
packaging
laws.
The
federal
government
has
them
just
use
them.
My
favorite
example
is
the
universal
symbol.
It's
a
concept,
we
kind
of
I
think
started
in
Colorado,
where
there
would
be
one
symbol
on
all
cannabis
products.
E
Lots
of
other
states
were
like
wow,
that's
a
great
idea,
and
then
they
made
up
their
own
universal
symbol,
making
it
not
Universal.
So
if
there's
going
to
be
a
universal
symbol,
use
the
same
one
across
the
country.
Second,
something
that
we've
seen
a
lot
of
is
kind
of
ratcheting
up
regulation
for
political
purposes.
You
know
it's
kind
of
good
politics
to
say
we
have
the
most
restrictive
regulatory
system
in
the
country,
the
advice
there
is
essentially
pretty
straightforward.
E
It
leads
to
bad
policy,
and
what
I
like
to
say
is
that
every
dollar
and
every
second
spent
complying
with
a
regulation
that
doesn't
actually
protect
public
health
or
safety,
is
a
dollar
and
second
that
is
not
being
spent
on
a
regulation
that
actually
does
protect
public
health
and
safety.
Bad
regulations
are
not
they're
a
net
negative
they're,
not
a
some
right
to
be
really
specific
people
ask
a
lot
about
edible
regulation.
I
think
Colorado,
for
the
most
part,
has
done
a
very
good
job.
E
E
Oregon
has
done
a
great
job
with
the
implementation
and
importation
of
new
strains
into
the
system,
so
that,
if
there's
a
particularly
popular
strain
in
the
black
market,
there's
a
way
to
bring
it
into
the
regulated
market
supply
and
demand
right.
You
want
the
consumers
to
go
to
the
regulated
market.
California
is
in
a
great
job
with
environmental
regulation.
Massachusetts
and
Oregon
have
done
work
on
micro
cultivation
to
allow
a
kind
of
indigent.
E
We
hear
kind
of
all
over
the
country
when,
in
fact,
when
I
was
in
Delaware
about
two
months
ago
to
testify
at
their
legalization
hearing
about
a
dozen
people
before
me,
testified
about
the
hellscape
that
Colorado
had
become
and
all
these
terrible
things
about
our
state
and
none
of
them
had
ever
been
there
before.
So
you
know
come
visit
Colorado
if
Colorado
is
a
hellscape
and
probably
be
on
the
evening
news
around
the
country.
It's
not
it's
a
beautiful,
wonderful
city
like
every
other
city
in
America.
E
E
The
initial
kind
of
educational
campaigns
were
very
disrespectful
to
people
in
the
cannabis
community
and,
if
you're,
trying
to
message
to
people
who
consume
cannabis,
starting
out
by
insulting
them
and
calling
them
stupid
and
and
making
jokes
about
rat
cages,
probably
wasn't
the
best
way
to
start,
and
then
I'd
also
like
to
point
out
that
there's
a
lot
of
concern
about
diversion
and
diversion
out
from
Colorado.
You
know
I
like
to
think
about
things
from
a
very
realistic
and
economic
perspective.
E
If
there
is
black-market
cannabis
from
Colorado
ending
up
in
another
state,
it
is
likely
because
that
state
does
not
have
a
regulated
system
with
production
and
distribution
of
its
own.
You
know,
essentially,
it's
not
Colorado's
fault.
This
is
basic
supply
and
demand
and
economics.
People
are
going
to
go
to
places
where
there's
less
kind
of
potential
punishment,
and
if
there
is
a
demand
for
Colorado,
grown
cannabis
in
New
York
and
they
are
willing
to
pay
top
dollar
for
it.
E
A
Thank
you
for
that.
This
last
question:
that's
going
to
be
addressed
for
the
whole
panel.
You
all
can
chime
in
as
you're
interested
in
answering
it
based
on
what
we
currently
know
about
federal
agencies
looking
closely
at
states
with
legalized
cannabis
programs
and
other
interests
at
the
federal
level.
How
do
you
see
States
reacting
to
any
change
in
federal
law
enforcement
practices
and
I
will
I'll
start
with
the
represent
of
Pabon
if
he
has
any
thoughts?
First,
yeah.
C
You
know
I
mean
I
Colorado
received
a
letter
from
Jeff
sessions
about
ten
days
ago,
which
frankly
was
copied
and
pasted
from
a
letter
he
sent
to
Washington
and
a
couple
of
other
jurisdictions,
citing
statistics
that
were
maintained
by
the
high
intensity,
drug
task
force
that
is
relevant
to
each
region
in
the
country
and
here's.
Here's
the
challenge
and
here's
the
thing
about
all
these
different
statistics,
anecdotes
stories
that
you
hear
about
every
jurisdiction.
C
You
know
you
can
you
can
you
can
make
up
any
conclusions
about
any
data
you
want
anytime,
you
want,
and,
and
so
you
can
manipulate
change,
not
change
but
manipulate
the
the
overall
statistical
significance
of
pretty
much
anything
and
to
suit
your
political
needs
and
background
and
I.
Think
that's
what
we're
seeing
right
now.
You
know.
One
of
the
one
of
the
big
questions
is
about
youth
use
increase
in
Colorado
and
statistically,
you
have
seen
a
flatline,
no
increased
youth
use
in
Colorado.
C
Since
the
advent
of
legalization,
Jeff
session
sent
a
letter
saying,
we've
seen
an
increase
in
youth
use
based
on
our
reports,
but
the
problem
is
we're
all
looking
at
the
same
reports
and
and
so
I
think.
The
challenge
here-
and
this
is
kind
of
higher
level-
is
that
good
policy
makes
good
politics
and
engrained,
and
we've
spent
a
lot
of
time
talking
about
regulation
and
regulation,
how
to
regulate
a
system,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day,
which
still
we're
still
doing
so
within
a
political
system.
C
And
there
are
folks
folks
who
are
against
the
proliferation
of
either
a
medical
or
recreational
cannabis
system,
including
you
know,
a
lot
of
overtures
from
the
current
administration.
And
so
what
do
we
do?
In
response
to
that?
The
answer
is
we
keep
doing
what
we've
always
been
doing,
which
is
to
use
the
Cole
memo
as
our
points
of
reference,
which
means
keeping
this
out
of
the
hands
of
kids
criminals
and
tells
preventing
youth
access,
ensuring
that
we
have
a
well-regulated
tracking
system
that
we've
always
had
from
the
beginning
and,
frankly,
I.
C
Don't
think
that
there's
a
lot
that
we
could
do
from
a
regulatory
point
of
view
to
deal
with
the
political
reality
of
of
this
conversation
and
so
I
from
a
from
a
policy
point
of
view.
Colorado
is
certainly
ready
and
willing
and
able
to
have
a
discussion
about
if
there
are
further
policies
that
are
needed
to
again
cut
the
black
market,
prevent
youth
access,
but
from
a
political
point
of
view
that
that's
something
that
can't
be
resolved
without
you
know
some
changes
in
the
politics
of
this
substance.
A
B
So
I
think
I
think
a
lot
of
times
of
everybody
is
concerned
with
what
the
federal
government's
next
step
under
new
administration.
What
what
they're
going
to
do
and
I
think
a
lot
of
times
they
focus
on
whether
or
not
a
new
enforcement
policy
is
going
to
be
directed
right
at
the
industry
and
I
think
if
it
was
I,
think
they'll
be
really
concerning
I.
Think,
there's
good
reason
for
people
to
be
concerned
about
what
direction
that's
going
to
head
at
the
federal
level.
B
From
my
background,
which
is
an
enforcement
background,
I
think
there's
also
some
opportunity
there
for
states
that
actually
work
a
little
bit
more
closely
with
the
federal
government
on
this
issue,
because,
even
though
we
call
it
legalization,
there's
still
a
lot
of
potential
criminal
activity
that
could
be
happening
within
a
state,
whether
it's
diversion
of
marijuana
outside
of
the
regulatory
system
and
into
other
states,
or
it's
there's
a
large,
unregulated
population
where
criminals
can
operate
without
the
normal
enforcement
risk
that
they
would
have.
There's
opportunities
there
for
the
federal
government
to
relook.
B
D
Will
just
say
in
Colorado:
this
came
up
because
we
are
about
ready
to
try
to
go
online
and
you
know
what's
going
to
happen.
It
was
our
referendum
happened
at
the
same
time
as
the
election
and
I
think
we
just
decided
that
the
Cole
memo
was
a
good
way
to.
You
know
be
an
outline
to
how
we
would
pursue
things
and
until
something
actually
happened,
we
weren't
going
to
spend
there's
so
much
other
other
items
and
other
areas
to
spend
time
and
energy
on
as
a
committee
and
as
a
state
that
to
worry
about
what.
D
If,
while
we
were,
you
know
trying
to
get
our
own
system
up
and
going
that
it
felt
like
that
was
not
good
energy
to
spend,
and
so
we
do
follow
the
Cole
memo
pretty
pretty
clearly
and
use
that
sort
of
as
our
barometer
at
the
moment.
Obviously,
things
change
we'll
have
to
adjust
course,
but
at
this
point
I
don't
who
knows
what
will
happen
right.
F
D
E
Would
just
add
very
briefly,
you
know
if
this
is
something
that
your
state's
doing
don't
make
it
easy
on
them
to
come
in
and
intervene.
So
you
know
this
letter
came
out
all
of
these
states
and
it
had
all
these
allegations
of
facts
that
you
know
we're
kind
of
very
dissimilar
to
a
lot
of
the
other
data.
E
Think,
if
you
can,
you
know,
don't
allow
you
know
a
group
of
people
that
kind
of
have
their
minds
made
up
before
they
look
at
an
issue
to
control
the
data
to
control
the
narrative
and
and
states
have
collected
their
own
data
and
the
proof
is
kind
of
in
the
pudding.
You
know
show
the
work
that
we've
done
show
the
tax
revenue
Colorado
between
taxes
and
fees
just
broke.
The
five
hundred
million
dollar
mark.
E
A
You,
okay,
now
is
the
fun
time
for
QA.
We
have
two
microbrews
in
the
audience:
the
lovely
Margaret
and
the
mr.
Eric
handsome
Eric,
okay,
fine,
and
if,
if
you
have
a
question,
just
raise
your
hand
and
they'll
run
the
mics
to
you.
So
just
we
ask
that
you
be
patient,
we'll
take
as
many
questions
as
we
can,
but
then
we
will
have
one
last
quick
bonus
round
question
at
the
end
for
the
panelist
I.
C
Okay,
we
have
patient
advocates
on
pretty
much
all
the
working
groups
that
we
have
in
Colorado
and
you
know
frankly,
I
think
the
medical
refugee
issue
is
becoming
less
and
less
so
as
more
states
come
online
with
the
medical
system.
I
think
the
challenge
that
we
have
as
a
country
is
when
strains
are
unique
to
a
particular
state
and
there's
not
access
in
other
states.
Then
folks
have
to
come
to
Colorado
and
I.
Think
I
think.
That
is
why
one
amongst
many
reasons,
the
federal
government
should
decriminalize
and
potentially
D
scheduled
cannabis
for
everyone.
B
From
that
we
started
accepting
applications
for
new
businesses
that
didn't
necessarily
have
to
have
a
medical
marijuana
license
that
transition
actually
was
pretty
smooth
for
us.
In
fact,
it
really
enabled
us
to
meet
some
of
those
really
tough
deadlines.
That
I
talked
about
earlier
Washington
State.
Did
it
a
little
differently
where
they
started
with
a
brand
new
recreational
marketplace?
B
Well,
I
think
I
think
what
was
a
less
regulated
industry
and
the
medical
side
was
on
boarded
into
the
regulated
system,
I
think
a
year
or
so
down
the
road
and
I
think
they
may
have
experienced
some
the
same
challenges.
We
did
initially
licensing
medical
businesses
because
they
were
already
operational
and
so
the
I
guess
the
the
take
home,
for
that
is
to
the
extent
that
a
state
can
start
fresh
with
brand
new
licensees
and
you're,
not
regulating
a
industry.
B
That's
already
been
operating
in
an
unregulated
the
try
and
do
that
because
it's
exponentially
harder
to
bring
on
a
operating
industry
into
a
regulated
environment
than
it
is
starting
from
scratch.
I
think
we'll
see
that
play
out
a
little
bit
in
California,
where
they
have
a
very
large
industry.
That's
already
operating
there,
that's
regulated
at
the
local
level,
primarily
and
they're
onboarding.
All
of
those
businesses
into
a
state
system.
Now-
and
this.
C
Initially,
they
argued
for
three
years
before
any
new
licensees
could
enter
into
the
market,
and
that
was
in
tension
with
the
idea
of
the
free
market
system,
basically
allowing
us
to
ferret
out
the
bad
actors.
If
we
had
given
the
medical
cannabis
industry
three
years
instead
of
nine
months,
then
it's
easier
to
have
an
anchor
in
andorra
monopolies,
essentially
in
a
particular
state
and
more
difficult
than
to
ferret
out
the
good
and
bad
actors
using
a
free
market
system.
So
we
dialed
that
back
significantly
to
nine
months.
C
E
It's
worth
mentioning
that
that
you
know
this
wasn't
done
for
protectionist
purposes.
From
the
Legislature's
perspective,
it
was
really
the
idea
that
that
nine
month
window
really
allowed
the
marijuana
Enforcement
Division
to
ratchet
up
and
resolve
problems
right
it
dealt
with
a
known
population.
First
dealt
with
licensing
for
those
individuals
got
all
of
those
background.
Investigators
and
everyone
else,
much
more
custom
to
the
new
regulatory
structure
and
then
allowed
it.
So
it
was
much
more
of
a
you
know,
good
government
type
of
policy
than
just
you
know,
economic
protectionism
and.
D
In
Maine,
where
we're
going
to
we're
opening
up
the
market
to
to
both,
but
if
you
want
to
move
from
character
Medical
into
adult
rescue,
apply
into
it
and
go
through
that
criteria
based
and
that
will,
if
you're
a
good
player
in
the
medical
and
you
want
to
move
up,
your
your
application
will
be
easier
and
you'll
move
forward,
and
we
sort
of
learned
a
little
bit
from
that.
So
we're
taking
a
little
different
approach
to
that.
Thank.
J
The
legacy
of
the
war
on
drugs
is
going
to
lead
to
mass
incarceration
and
a
lot
of
black
and
brown
communities
across
the
country.
How
do
we
make
sure
that
communities
of
color
will
kind
of
suffer
the
brunt
of
the
criminal
justice
kind
of
burden
of
of
marijuana?
How
do
we
make
sure
that
they
share
the
economic
benefits
of
legalization
and
then
how
do
we
also
look
at
those
low-level
nonviolent
drug
offenders
and
consider
whether
or
not
we
resentence
or
rujuta
gate
their
their
offenses
and.
C
That's
exactly
the
right
question
to
ask
right
before
this
I
was
with
the
National
Hispanic
Conference
of
State
Legislators,
passing
a
resolution
advocating
for
the
inclusion
of
communities
of
color
in
the
legalization
process,
primarily
that
issue
comes
down
to
capital
access
and
and
the
ability
for
states
to
essentially
look
at
state
interest
first
over
out
of
state
interest
in
Colorado.
Honestly
did
that
so
we
have
I
think
per
capita
higher
ownership
amongst
community
of
communities
of
color
than
most
other
states.
C
Many
other
states
require
you
know
large
bond
or
capital
requirements,
1
million
to
5
million
dollars.
By
definition,
that's
going
to
tend
to
give
more
weight
to
well
financed
individuals
on
the
on
the
criminal
justice
piece
we
are
advocates.
Bannock
Conference
of
State
Legislators
are
advocating
for
decriminalization
at
both
the
federal
and
the
state
level.
C
Once
a
program
is
adopted
and,
as
importantly,
a
systematic
record
sealing
policy
in
place
so
that
behavior
that
was
previously
illegal,
that
is
now
legal.
Those
records
can
be
sealed
almost
as
a
matter
of
course
not
having
to
file
a
petition
and
go
through
a
very
lengthy
and
expensive
process.
I
think
there's
many.
Many
different
lenses
through
which
to
look
at
this
issue.
C
We
have
not
talked
about
the
civil
rights
issue
very
much
on
this
panel
because
it's
focused
on
the
regulatory
piece
but
I
think
bigger
picture
civil
rights
issues,
medical
access
and
patient
issues
and
efficacy.
Taxation
issues
are
all
different
lenses
that
everyone
can
come
to
the
same
conclusion
that
the
regulation
of
cannabis
is
good
for
a
particular
state
or
community
I.
Think.
E
Fervent
development
we've
seen
some
some
kind
of
policy
development
in
California
around
this,
but
it's
really
focused
on
the
idea
that,
like
licenses
are
going
to
be
issued
on
a
one-to-one
basis
for
different
kind
of
census,
tracts
or
different
kind
of
specific
communities,
I
think
it's
led
to
a
lot
of
kind
of
the
use
of
straw,
men
and
things
like
that,
and
we
feel
very
strongly
that
there's
another
way
to
go
about
doing
this,
and
that
is
I.
Think,
as
representative
Pabon
alluded
to
removal
barriers
to
entry.
This
is
largely
an
economic
issue.
E
If
you
look
at
cannabis
regulation,
you
know
there's
kind
of
a
lot
of
drivers
of
cost.
So
a
lot
of
the
East
Coast
states
have
state
limitations
on
the
number
of
licenses
that
can
be
issued
and
it
costs
millions
and
millions
of
dollars
to
simply
apply
for
a
license
by
the
time
you're
done
paying
your
consultants
and
your
lawyers
and
your
everybody
else,
and
so
obviously
you
know
that's
going
to
create
a
massive
barrier
to
entry
in
other
states
where
the
state
doesn't
limit
licenses
and
the
locals.
Don't
limit
licenses.
It's
just
a
zoning
issue.
E
The
lower
end
of
the
socio-economic
scale
to
run
a
cannabis
business
and
you
know
the
thing
that
needs
to
be
done
to
resolve.
That
is
the
same
thing
that
we
would
do
in
any
other
industry:
removal
of
barriers
to
entry.
We've
been
working
with
a
couple
of
different
states,
as
well
as
some
US
territories,
on
a
policy
that
we
like
to
call
micro
cultivation,
where
you
allow
a
more
de
minimis
amount
of
cultivation
to
occur
than
you
would
at
a
large
commercial
facility.
E
You
know
essentially
something
that
you
could
feed
a
family
of
four
or
five
on,
and
then
you
ratchet
down
all
of
these
incredibly
expensive
regulatory
requirements,
because
they
are
not
cultivating
a
large
scale
of
cannabis
and
without
those
removals
of
barriers
to
entry,
I
think
it's
going
to
be
very
hard
to.
You
know
resolve
this
issue.
It's.
D
You
still,
you
know
they're,
it's
not
it's
a
it's
an
industry,
it's
not
your
local
farm
stand,
and
although
some
there
are
comments
in
my
state
of
is
God's
plan,
just
have
it
at
the
farm
stands
and
then
you've
course
get
the
complete
opposite,
like
you've
got
to
have
a
fortress
around
it.
So
it's
an
interesting
policy
decision
and
it's
a
very
interesting
political
conversation.
D
A
K
C
Your
local
law
enforcement
can
certainly
share
either
anecdotally
or
statistically.
You
know
the
number
of
arrests
that
have
occurred
for
you
know,
marijuana
possession,
cultivation
etc.
That's
a
good
start
to
sort
of
building
a
base
for
a
statewide
data,
but
if
New
Hampshire's
anything
like
Colorado,
we're
really
good
at
keeping
very
local
specific
jurisdiction,
specific
data,
but
building
it
into
a
bigger
statewide
database.
That
would
allow
us
to
really
you
know,
analyze
and
and
run
some
regression.
C
Analysis
is
not
as
good,
so
we
we
spent
on
the
front
end
around
two
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollars
to
put
together
a
statewide
system
so
that
all
these,
this
jurisdictional
data
could
be
combined
and
put
into
a
report.
There
are
a
couple
of
consultants
in
the
world
who
to
do
regression.
Analysis
for
you
as
well,
so
you
can.
You
know,
there's
a
consultant
for
everything
in
the
world
right,
so.
F
C
This
is
you
study
black
market
activity
or
you
know
doing
well
right
now,
but
but
that
gives
you
a
really
good
basis
for
for
understanding,
and
then
you
know
if
you're
going
to
go
ahead
and
do
that
you
might
as
well
look
at
what
your
current
youth
youth
race
rate
is
in
New
Hampshire.
We
have
a
Colorado
kids
count
healthy
study.
C
That
sort
of
gives
us
a
lot
of
that
data,
but
again
combining
it
into
and
and
putting
it
into
a
series
of
reports
or
information
that
everyone
can
look
to
and
point
as
a
point
it
used
as
a
point
of
reference.
It
doesn't
have
to
be
the
end-all
be-all,
but
it
certainly
can
serve
as
a
useful
guide
for
you,
because
maybe
you
look
at
the
data
and
you
say
you
know
what
our
black
markets,
just
not
that
big
folks
are
coming
from
Rhode,
Island
or
Maine
or
wherever
else
Vermont,
and
so
we
don't
need
to.
C
You
know
regulate
this.
That's
that's
the
perfectly
acceptable
conclusion,
but
you
don't
know
what
you're
dealing
with
until
you
actually
measure
the
size
of
the
problem
that
you
have
and-
and
you
know
again,
no
state
has
really
done
that
super
well,
but
as
states
are
getting
more
and
more
sophisticated
in
their
data
collection
process,
they
are.
A
All
right
so
in
closing,
I
have
what
I
like
to
call
the
bonus
round
and
we're
just
going
to
ask
each
speaker
to
give
their
top
nugget
of
wisdom,
which
they
haven't
already
mentioned,
or
if
they
just
really
want
to
emphasize
one
particular
point
of
their
best
advice
for
other
legislators
and
regulators
working
on
this
issue
so
and
then
for
represented
Pearce.
She
can
also
just
chime
in
for
the
for
the
newer
legislators
on
this
issue
too.
So
go
ahead.
Look
I.
B
So
some
signs
that
implementation
is
going
to
go
well
and
one
of
the
primary
ones
is
support
and
some
level
of
cooperation
amongst
the
elected
officials
in
that
state,
whether
it
be
the
governor's
office
or
the
state
legislators,
the
more
they
work
closely
together,
the
more
they
take
on
the
task.
That's
been
giving
to
them,
oftentimes
from
a
voter
initiative
of
some
sort,
the
more
likely
there
is
going
to
be
success.
B
Another
big
indication
is
the
ability
of
government
to
really
honestly
engage
with
the
public,
not
just
because
they
think
it's
a
checkbox
that
they
have
to
mark
on
their
way
to
implementation,
but
actually
facilitating
really
good
conversations
to
arrive
at
balanced
policy
and
so
just
kind
of
going
back.
The
elected
official
support
is
where
all
of
that
starts.
So
if
you
have
that
tier
working
together
or
taking
action,
even
if
it's
not
the
perfect
Policy
Alternatives
right
now,
they're
not
in
focus
still
acting
on
it's
better
than
not.
C
So
a
panel
of
this
sort,
let
alone
three
panels
dedicated
to
cannabis
at
a
NCSL
conference
five
years
ago,
would
have
been
unheard
of,
and
all
of
us
would
have
been
laughed
offstage
and
Carman
might
have
been
fired
for
suggesting
it.
The
world
is
changing
around
us.
We
I
can
tell
you
in
in
Colorado.
C
Louis
alluded
to
the
fact
that
it
legalization
was
more
popular
than
Barack
Obama
in
2012.
I
voted
no
on
the
amendment
in
most,
in
most
part
because
being
a
guinea
pig
in
this
particular
area,
wasn't
something
I
wanted
Colorado
than
necessarily
be,
and
I
grew
up
in
the
state
and
I
loved
my
state
and
so
I
want
it
to
be
known
more
for
mountains
and
an
outdoorsman
ship
than
marijuana,
but
now
we're
known
for
both
and
so
and
but
but
but
my
my
thoughts
and
my
feelings
on
this
issue
have
evolved
tremendously
and
I.
C
Think
that's
probably
the
key
takeaway
to
two
key
takeaways
from
this
one.
Your
constituents
are
generally
much
more
open
to
this
proposition
than
you're
the
near
legislated
bodies.
By
definition,
we
are,
we
are
a
more
conservative
body,
not
in
the
Republican
sense,
but
in
just
you
know,
we
don't
want
to
get
too
far
out
in
front
of
our
constituencies,
and
I
can
tell
you.
Your
constituencies
are
already
far
out
in
front
of
you.
National
polling,
local
jurisdiction
polling.
C
Tell
you
that,
but
either
a
medical
recreational
system
is
something
that
many
of
your
constituencies
want
and
to
I.
Think
the
evolution
of
this
policy
happens.
By
definition
over
time
you
will
meet
children
who
are
suffering
from
epilepsy
in
your
state
who
tell
you
they
either
came
to
Colorado
or
using
the
black
market,
because
a
cannabis
strain
or
a
CBD
strain
stops
those
a
thousand
seizures
in
a
given
time
period,
two
three
or
four,
and
that
the
quality
of
life
has
changed.
C
You
will
hear
from
those
who
suffer
from
cancer
or
other
debilitating
pain
diseases
who
have
found
a
alleviation
of
their
pain
and
chronic
conditions.
Through
this
product
you
will,
you
will
hear
from
communities
of
color
talking
about
it
being
a
civil
rights
issue,
and
so
the
topic
itself
is
much
broader
and
much
more
interesting
than
then
certainly
hi
ever
thought
it
would
be,
and,
and-
and
my
newest
focus
is
on
the
research
and
the
science
development
around
cannabis.
C
Let
me
just
say
one
quick
thing:
I
realized
that
I
left
my
cards
in
my
hotel,
so
I'm
just
going
to
say
this
for
all
of
you
and
the
people
at
home,
my
email
is
Dan
dot
Pabon.
My
last
name
PA
Bo,
n
dot
house
at
state,
co
us
and
please
send
me
an
email
come
out
to
Colorado,
take
a
visit
and
we'll
help
you
learn
about
what
we
did.
D
So
saw
it's
great
to
go
third,
because
the
first
thing
I
was
going
to
talk
about
is
the
intersection
between
the
executive
and
the
legislature
in
order
to
get
this
up
and
running,
which
is
what
my
good
colleague
or
my
friend
down
the
road
said,
and
then
I
was
going
to
talk
about
the
lack
of
research
done
in
this
field
at
the
federal
level
and
how
that
really
impairs
our
ability
to
keep
it
safe
and
understand
it
at
its
highest
level.
I
think
that
so
what
I'll
talk
a
little
bit
about
is
change
is
coming.
D
I,
think
that
Senator
Booker
and
his
act
I
think
it's
the
marijuana
justice
act
that
he's
putting
forward
at
the
federal
level.
The
conversations
are
happening
so
I
think
if
you
think
it's
going
to
go
away
or
states
shouldn't
participate
or
you
shouldn't
be
involved
that
to
me,
wouldn't
be
a
prudent
way
to
go
about
this.
It's
to
look
at
what's
done
and
do
it
well
and
then
that
I'll
just
say:
don't
reinvent
the
wheel.
D
You
know
we're
learning
a
lot
from
the
other
states,
particularly
from
Colorado
and
a
lot
of
and
Washington
and
Oregon
as
well.
We
look
to
Massachusetts
who's,
trying
to
get
it
up
and
running
as
well.
Canada
is
in
the
process
of
looking
at
it.
New
Hampshire
Vermont,
the
New
England
states,
so
I
think
that
they're
good
minds
out
there
doing
good
work
to
be
safe
and
appropriate
and
comprehensive
for
an
adult,
regulated
market
and
I
think
that
that's
the
best
way
to
approach
this
again.
I
wasn't
a
huge
proponent
of
it.
D
E
Everybody's
taken
just
about
everything
to
say
so:
I'll
keep
mine,
light
and
I
guess
a
little
bit
of
fun,
so
I
mean
my
message
is
really
simple.
Like
don't
be
afraid,
you
know
in
Colorado
we
rolled
up
our
sleeves.
We
didn't
really
have
the
chance
to
fight
about
whether
we
should
or
shouldn't
legalize.
We
just
focused
on
good
government,
good
policy.
We
had
a
lot
of
working
groups
and
had
people
talk
about
how
things
should
be
done,
we
didn't
do
town
halls
and
let
people
kind
of
fight
about
whether
legalization
should
or
shouldn't
be
done.
E
We
focused
on
how
to
do
this
correctly
and
that's
a
very
important
part
of
the
conversation
to
have
you
know.
The
bottom
line
is
pretty
simple:
people
are
using
cannabis
in
every
single
state
across
the
country.
This
is
not
a
question
about
whether
people
should
or
should
not
use
cannabis.
That
question
is
kind
of
irrelevant
at
the
moment.
The
question
is
really
straightforward.
Question
is
where
is
this
cannabis
that
they're
using
going
to
be
coming
from
and
who
is
going
to
be
in
control
of
it
and
that's
just
about
it?
So
really
simply.