fbpx
Massachusetts recreational cannabis now a $2 billion industry

Massachusetts recreational cannabis now a $2 billion industry

Massachusetts recreational cannabis sales top $2 billion

BOSTON — The Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission this week released numbers revealing sales of recreational marijuana has topped $2 billion dollars in the first three years of legalization.

The first Massachusetts recreational cannabis dispensaries opened for business in November 2018.

Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, which has negatively impacted other businesses, cannabis sales remains strong.

At Seed Recreational Dispensary in Jamaica Plain, which opened in March 2021, Assistant General Manager Bobby Driscoll is not surprised.

“I’m not surprised. It is definitely moving a little quicker than I think some of us in the industry had anticipated,” Driscoll said. “I think it was something we were waiting for, for a long time. A lot of people sacrificed a lot to get us to this point.”

Driscoll anticipates demand will remain strong, even as new dispensaries are approved and open for business.

Massachusetts to allot 70K acres for cannabis, hemp production

Massachusetts to allot 70K acres for cannabis, hemp production

Massachusetts hemp gets ok for land use

The Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources released updated guidance on Wednesday making way for more than 70,000 acres belonging to its Agricultural Preservation Restriction and Farm Viability Enhancement programs to be used to grow cannabis and hemp.

The APR program was established in 1977 and offers to pay farmland owners the difference between fair market value and the agricultural value of their farms in exchange for permanent deed restrictions which preserve farmland for agricultural use in the future, according to the department website.

The Farm Viability Enhancement Program, in turn, provides business and technical assistance to established farmers through grant funding, in exchange for signing an agricultural covenant on the farm property to keep it in agricultural use for a five-, 10- or 15-year term, per the state website.

Under the new guidance released last week, both hemp and cannabis production will now be allowed on APR and Farm Viability Enhancement lands, so long as the land in question isn’t federally funded, because cannabis remains illegal at the federal level.

Although the DAR did not say how many APR lands are beholden to federal restrictions, the guidance noted nearly all recently acquired APRs were purchased with federal financing.

Still, the new guidance effectively opens options for APR farmers interested in adding or transitioning to the cannabis and hemp markets.

“The department looks forward to working with APR and Agricultural Covenant landowners and the farming community on the implementation of this new interpretation and has prepared the following guidance,” the department said in its announcement.

New Massachusetts bill would legalize cannabis lounges

New Massachusetts bill would legalize cannabis lounges

Cannabis lounges could be legal as soon as 2022 in Massachusetts

Buying legal marijuana has become a convenient reality in Massachusetts but finding someplace to legally smoke it is a different story.

A bill aims to address that predicament by authorizing licensed cannabis lounges.

State Sen. Julian Cyr, who represents the Cape and Islands, proposed the bill that he believes is a practical concept.

Cyr told Boston 25 News the current situation is comparable to the state allowing liquor stores but banning bars. He said it makes sense for the state to come up with a solution that would give marijuana users designated places to legally smoke or consume cannabis.

“If we don’t address it, it’s going to become a really big headache for law enforcement and for business owners in places like Provincetown or near Fenway,” Cyr said.

Cyr said the concept particularly applies in areas that attract a lot of visitors. His district includes Provincetown. The tourist destination on the tip of Massachusetts is home to three dispensaries, and more are set to open there soon.

“I think of folks getting off the ferry, going to a dispensary and then really being faced with a conundrum that they’re not able to use the substance anyplace legally,” Cyr explained. “So, you got a problem of people ducking into alleyways, going to the beach, really creating a nuisance.”

If the bill passes, it would start as a pilot program. Licensed cannabis lounges would only be authorized in a maximum of six communities. The state would potentially consider expanding it further based on feedback from local leaders, residents and businesses.

“In those communities, I think it benefits everyone to have a place where people can gather and consume cannabis,” said Mike Ross, former Boston city councilor and attorney. “I think people have to start thinking of it and get ahead of it.”

Communities in several other states, including Colorado and California, have already moved forward with permitting social consumption venues.

It’s unclear how long it will take for the bill proposed by Cyr to move through the Massachusetts legislature. He predicts the earliest it will see traction is in the second year of the legislative session in 2022.

Cannabis dispensary association drops suit over delivery rules

Cannabis dispensary association drops suit over delivery rules

Massachusetts Cannabis association pulls lawsuit against delivery option

Stung by an exodus of members since it filed suit to block new cannabis industry rules permitting home delivery, the business group that represents most of the state’s brick-and-mortar marijuana shops announced Monday morning that it is dropping the legal challenge.

The Commonwealth Dispensary Association and its attorneys from Foley Hoag argued in a suit that the new delivery-only license types created by the Cannabis Control Commission violated the state’s marijuana law, which they said gives the retailers the right to deliver cannabis under their existing licenses.

“Simply, the CCC overstepped its authority and disregarded state law, radically upending the established rules that hundreds of small businesses and their host communities operated in accordance with since 2016,” the CDA said in a statement when it filed its suit earlier this month.

The lawsuit was seen by some as an attack on the disadvantaged entrepreneurs and small businesses that the CCC’s new delivery model was intended to help and a number of retailers publicly broke from the CDA as news of the suit spread. Delivery-only licenses with the ability to buy marijuana wholesale will be available exclusively to participants in the CCC’s social equity program and economic empowerment applicants for the first three years.

“We are leaving because of our belief in creating economic opportunity for social equity applicants,” Cultivate, which has shops in Leicester and Framingham and was one of the first two non-medical retailers to open in the state, said. New England Treatment Access, one of the state’s largest marijuana firms with shops in Northampton and Brookline, and about 10 other companies also left the CDA in recent days, the Boston Globe reported.

The CCC’s new regulations create two delivery license types: a “marijuana delivery operator” that can buy products wholesale from growers and manufacturers and sell them to their own customers, and a “marijuana courier” that can charge a fee to make deliveries from CCC-licensed retailers and dispensaries. Advocates have argued that delivery-only licenses will help level the playing field between large corporations and small businesses because the barriers to entry for delivery are less burdensome than those for retail licenses.

The CDA said the “difficult decision” to sue the CCC over the delivery rules was “supported by the vast majority of members” and “reflected our concerns on the negative impact these regulatory changes might have on the industry as a whole.” Still, CDA leaders said they decided “it is in the best interest of the industry and our members to drop the lawsuit.”

“We all need to be working together on achieving our many shared objectives, including increasing the participation of a diverse set of entrepreneurs in the industry,” the group said as it pledged to work with groups like the Massachusetts Cannabis Association for Delivery (MCAD).

Weed delivery coming to Masschusetts

Weed delivery coming to Masschusetts

weed delivery in massachusetts

Home delivery of recreational marijuana in Massachusetts is on track to begin in 2021, after the state Cannabis Control Commission moved to lock in detailed regulations for the service.

On a 3-1 vote at a meeting Tuesday, the agency affirmed among other policies that it would issue two types of weed delivery licenses. Officials said they should help cut into the unregulated pot delivery market — while also fulfilling the commission’s legislative mandate to create a more equitable playing field for Black and brown entrepreneurs who have so far struggled to enter the capital-intensive legal marijuana business.

“We’ve shown we can regulate this industry safely and fairly,” commission chairman Steve Hoffman told reporters. “I believe this is a necessary, imperative step to create equity in this marketplace . . . and minimize the illicit market.”

Two weed delivery licenses

One license, a more limited “courier” permit under which drivers would pick up individual orders on demand from brick-and-mortar marijuana shops and bring them to customers’ doorsteps for a fee, is already available to businesses; so far, 37 companies have received initial certification and are pursuing local and state approval.

The second is a new category of expanded “warehouse” weed delivery licenses (formally, “marijuana delivery operator” licenses) that essentially allow companies to operate like retailers without physical storefronts, buying marijuana products in bulk from suppliers and reselling the inventory online via home weed delivery. Applications for the expanded licenses should become available in the first half of 2021.

Entrepreneurs in the commission’s social equity and economic empowerment programs — largely Black and brown entrepreneurs affected by the war on drugs — will have exclusive access to both types of delivery licenses for three years, beginning when the first marijuana delivery operator opens for business.

Brick and Mortar dispensaries opposed

The addition of the expanded retailer-like delivery licenses to the commission’s proposed regulations in August drew howls of protest from many existing brick-and-mortar marijuana stores, which had been poised to serve as the source of all home pot deliveries under the earlier, courier-only model.

Dispensary owners argue the expanded weed delivery operations will unfairly undermine their main street businesses and, in turn, deprive municipalities of tax revenue. The Massachusetts Municipal Association and a handful of state legislators allied with the dispensaries also weighed in against the new licenses, saying in part that more time was needed to review the change.

Critics further questioned whether the warehouse-type businesses, which are subject to the same intensive security regulations as other marijuana facilities, would be affordable for disenfranchised entrepreneurs; a selling point of the original courier-only model was that it required only a van with security cameras and a small dispatch office where no cannabis was stored.

“We’re very disappointed,” David Torrisi, president of the Commonwealth Dispensary Association, said in an interview. “The public, municipalities, and legislators haven’t had enough time to digest this proposal, and I don’t think the commission has done enough analysis to determine the impact on the supply chain and the marketplace.”

He added the association was weighing possible legislative or legal action in response.

More social equity in weed delivery in Massachusetts

Proponents of the expanded licenses counter that the courier licenses are financially unviable. And, they argued, white-owned recreational dispensaries that emerged from the existing medical marijuana program — which gave no consideration to equity when awarding licenses — have already had the cannabis business mostly to themselves for years.

Besides, they said, weed delivery services in other states with legal cannabis account for perhaps 20 to 30 percent of the market, hardly an Amazon-style retail armageddon.

“This is a huge step forward,” said Christopher Fevry of the Massachusetts Cannabis Association for Delivery. “Couriers are at the mercy of the retailers. If they don’t give you orders, you die, and when the exclusivity period ends, they’ll just say, ‘we don’t need you anymore.’ Now we’re in control of our own destiny.”

Regulators did take steps to address the concerns raised by critics, including limiting the number of weed delivery licenses any company can own to two.

The commission also voted to ban third-party marijuana delivery technology platforms — such as Eaze and Lantern, an offshoot of alcohol delivery firm Drizly — from having a “financial interest” in more than one cannabis delivery licensee. The policy is meant to prevent the popular websites from preferentially steering consumers to delivery companies they’re invested in while freezing out independent operators; it could also help assuage brick-and-mortar dispensary owners who feared a large Amazon-like platform would back numerous delivery firms and dominate the market.

Commissioners further opted to ban what they deemed the “ice cream truck” model, under which weed delivery operators might have prepositioned vans loaded with packaged pot products in strategic locations to fulfill anticipated orders. Instead, every order must originate from the company’s warehouse. And they left in place earlier security restrictions, including a mandate that two workers must ride in every delivery vehicle and a prohibition on delivering recreational marijuana to cities and towns that have banned retail marijuana storefronts. (Medical marijuana deliveries have long been allowed anywhere in the state.)

Commissioner Jen Flanagan, who has long opposed launching delivery operations on public safety and health grounds, made a last-ditch attempt to delay the program’s launch until 2023.

However, her motion failed 3-1, with Hoffman noting that the commission had originally planned to launch deliveries in 2018 before pulling back under pressure from Governor Charlie Baker and others who urged the agency to “crawl before it walks.” Outgoing Commissioner Britte McBride, who conceived of the original courier-only model, also opposed a delay.

“I don’t think we can wait [to address] equity or the illicit market any longer,” she said.

SOURCE ARTICLE