Cannabis Cashier’s Post

🌿 Addressing Ontario's Unlicensed Cannabis Stores: A Call for Cohesion 🌿 At Spiritleaf Scarborough, we are closely monitoring Ontario's latest efforts to tighten regulations around the growing number of unlicensed cannabis stores. With $31 million earmarked for enforcement, the province is stepping up to safeguard the integrity of our industry and ensure consumer safety. This push highlights the need for more synchronized efforts between local and provincial authorities to maintain a fair and regulated marketplace. As part of the Ontario cannabis community, it’s essential we stay proactive and involved in shaping a compliant industry landscape. Explore the full discussion on Ontario's strategy here: https://lnkd.in/gJQNkZDk What are your thoughts on these developments? How do you see them impacting our industry? Share your insights below. #CannabisRegulation #OntarioCannabis #SpiritleafScarborough #CommunityEngagement

Our latest study, published in the International Journal of Drug Policy, found that equity provisions in local cannabis licensing & hiring (i.e. which is a critical way to support communities most harmed by the War On Drugs and some of the injustices of marijuana criminalization) have been distributed inequitably. In fact, statewide, only 37.5 % of those living where cannabis retail was allowed were covered by any local equity provisions. In general, and comparing within subgroups, a higher percentage of advantaged neighborhoods were covered by local equity provisions. Black individuals in advantaged neighborhoods had the highest coverage (57.2 %) and white individuals from disadvantaged neighborhoods had the lowest (21.0 %). As noted in the study, how these disparities in legalization and protective policies will affect disparities in cannabis use and related adverse health outcomes, as well as socioeconomic conditions in communities impacted by discriminatory law enforcement practices, remains unclear and merits future research. https://lnkd.in/gW8m-mjn #Cannabis #Equity #Marijuana #WarOnDrugs #Criminalization #Legalization

A new set of criteria for qualifying for a public convenience and advantage waiver was proposed at today’s Cannabis Control Board meeting. The criteria include the following: 1. Distance from Other Retail Dispensaries: The proposed location must be at least: - 1,000 feet from any existing retail dispensary in jurisdictions with a 1,000-foot minimum distance requirement. - 2,000 feet from any existing retail dispensary in jurisdictions with a 2,000-foot minimum distance requirement. 2. Geographic, Structural, or Topographic Barriers: The existence of barriers (such as waterways, major roadways, highways, or significant travel distances) that separate the proposed location from existing dispensaries. 3. Travel Distance: The actual distance between the proposed location and existing dispensaries, as measured by pedestrian or vehicle routes. 4. Unique Factors of the Proposed Location: Factors that may justify the location, such as: - High consumer demand for additional retail dispensaries or microbusinesses. - The presence of illicit or former illicit cannabis dispensaries near both the proposed and existing locations. - Other relevant factors that may support the need for greater access to adult-use cannabis in the area. 5. Notification to Local Authorities: The licensee must send a notification to the local municipality or community board, informing them of their intention to request a waiver from the Board for not meeting the 1,000-foot or 2,000-foot minimum distance requirement. The municipality or community board will have 45 days to respond before the Board considers the application. Mr. Kagia mentioned that the Board would consider more than this information alone when deciding to grant a waiver and that it would be up to their discretion. Chairman Wright raised concerns about the 45-day period, and the Board voted to approve the criteria with an amendment for licensees who have already received municipal support.

A federal judge has allowed New York City to continue closing unlicensed cannabis shops. The issue of unregulated intoxicating cannabinoids has implications on the local, state, and federal levels. In this case, it is reassuring to see the alignment between local and federal law and order on this issue that has been complicated because of a federal loophole related to hemp. #cannabis #equity #publicpolicy #regulation #federal #publichealth #piblicsafety https://lnkd.in/eCswUZK6

...and, if you were surprised by this, you were also caught unaware that there was a total eclipse yesterday (how is life under that rock?)... ...I am sure this happens a lot - it happens with bars and even with the government retailers in bev-alc, and in traditional grocery - the way it's done is more Trumpian-Cohenian, in a code that gets the point across, without being overt - but when the LCBO or LCL want you to do something, they get their point across. Legal cannabis is a dirty business - heck, most industries still have their share of dirt. It's just that legal cannabis seems to have more than its fair share. This won't make it go away - it will (a) reduce it a bit, but more so (b) make the retailers a bit more savvy in how they speak the code. https://lnkd.in/g3Ttp8C5

🌿 Addressing the Shadow: The Challenge of Illicit Online Cannabis Sales 🌿 As Canada’s cannabis market matures, illicit online sales continue to challenge the balance, outpacing efforts to curb their spread. These operations not only undercut legal businesses with unchecked product offerings and aggressive online marketing but also pose significant risks to consumer safety and public health. At Spiritleaf Scarborough, we are dedicated to promoting a safe, regulated environment that prioritizes quality and transparency. Our efforts go beyond merely competing; we aim to educate and advocate for stricter enforcement and smarter regulations to protect and advance the legal market. 🤔 How can the industry and regulators collaborate more effectively to outpace illicit markets and ensure the integrity of our legal cannabis framework? Please leave your thoughts below and support your local legal dispensary! #SpiritleafScarborough #CannabisIndustry #RegulatoryChallenges #CannabisCommunity https://lnkd.in/ghdCk-we

Classic example of the debate on where to #locate new dispensaries. They should be able to set up shop in highly #visible retail locations like #pharmacies are —not relegated to #industrial zones near strip clubs. Cannabis is a medicine & should be #available #everywhere. This example reveals the broader #disagreement over the potential for Cannabis to empower communities—or damage them #Cannabis

[As submitted to First Selectman Matt Hoey] December 15, 2024 To: The Board of Selectmen, Town of Guilford Regarding Section 3 of the document titled “PROHIBITION OF RETAIL AND HYBRID CANNABIS ESTABLISHMENTS AND USE OF CANNABIS ON TOWN PROPERTY” (sixth draft) While I applaud the board’s apparent decision to allow non-retail licensed #cannabis businesses in #Guilford, I would like to point out that it is already trivial to purchase intoxicating hemp-derived THC products from at least two existing retailers in town: ·      Puff City (1250 Boston Post Road Unit 1-3) ·      Sunshine Daydream (2941 Boston Post Road) Neither of these businesses is licensed by the state as required by Section 3. Guilford’s Puff City store is also a plaintiff in an active federal lawsuit alleging the state’s redefinition of THC violates federal law. Gov. Ned Lamont, Attorney General William Tong, Chief State’s Attorney Patrick Griffin and Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection Commissioner Bryan Cafferelli are named as defendants. Puff City and its investors clearly have no qualms about litigating, and one could reasonably assume that any action taken against their operations by the Town of Guilford might meet with a similar response. With unlicensed de facto retail sales already occurring in town, wouldn’t it make more sense to permit licensed retailers rather than banning them? How would the board explain to residents a #policy position that bans licensed retail while simultaneously permitting unlicensed #retail? All the risk that the board is hoping to mitigate by banning licensed retailers has already been assumed, whether the board realizes it or not. I sincerely hope that logic and reason will prevail in this matter. I humbly make myself available to the board to answer any questions or clarify any points raised in this letter. Sincerely, Louis J. Rinaldi https://lnkd.in/eEXWti3G

The state of New York must compel towns to follow the law where cannabis is concerned. It is nonsensical for towns that allow liquor stores and smoke shops in plazas in every commercially zoned area to deny cannabis businesses the right to operate in the same places. You practically trip over a smoke shop everywhere you go on Long Island! Alcohol and tobacco are demonstrably more poisonous substances than cannabis, and drunk driving (and driving unsafely while smoking cigarettes) is common everywhere, but somehow the rules for selling liquor and cigarettes are more loose than for cannabis? Anyone who claims that cannabis abuse is somehow worse than alcohol abuse is trying to sell you something (and probably has a law enforcement budget they want to pork up). If New York State Office of Cannabis Management were able to push for this change, they should ask the state to compel towns to allow dispensaries to operate anywhere they have allowed a smoke shop to open, or otherwise forbid smoke shops AND dispensaries from operating in their town at all. Then we'd see some progress!

Health Canada | Santé Canada owns this problem because the cannabis being sold in unlicensed dispensaries comes from unlicensed growers. Public Safety Canada | Sécurité publique Canada owns this problem because BILL BLAIR himself told me that the Cannabis Act would be enforced. One of the many inducements the federal government made to WIISAG to invest in the legal market a their pilot project partner. Solicitor General | Solliciteur général Ontario Provincial Police Law Society of Ontario Toronto Police Service Attorney General | Procureur général in Ontario ALL own this problem. So does Office of the Premier of Ontario as one of their officials told us that the retail laws would be enforced when we were contemplating investing in the legal market. I CAN NOT IGNORE THIS ISSUE UNTIL WIISAG STAkEHOLDERS GET THEIR INVESTED CAPITAL BACK !!!!! Pressing for government accountability and justice is an issue of honour and respect towards those who believed in our vision to me. LACK OF ENFORCEMENT RESOURCES is no excuse. All levels of government, and their proxies like OCS Ontario Cannabis Store Finance Canada / Finances Canada are making BILLIONS. Enforcement would pay for itself and expand the market so that excise taxes can be lowered. LACK OF WILL IS NO EXCUSE, BUT SEEMS TO BE THE POSTURE . In my area of focus, outdoor farms on First Nations reserves with NATIONS as partners, the benefits were communally shared. I have confirmed that the First Nations in Ontario with the largest unlicensed cannabis operations have not made money, operators have made and kept it all. (Where does that money go? Laundry?) The same goes for the illicit shops on main streets off reserve that keep coming, operators pointing to 'Sovereign Rights' keep all the money, with no money flowing to First Nations. Having lived this dreadful experience and thought about it every day for 5 years I have potential solutions that should be considered. Hon. Mark Holland, PC, MP is too busy I guess. Maybe Greg Orencsak will take up the honour of the Crown when he gets into HC role? The Cannabis Regulation bureaucrats in HC today don't seem to have any sense of equity, justice or accountability for those in charge in 2019 (even though some of them were there then) Where are Canopy Growth Corporation Tilray Brands, Inc. Organigram Inc Aurora Cannabis Inc. and the legal industry? Their shareholders deserve market integrity. https://lnkd.in/drDs3jji