Cal Growers Announces Position on Budget Trailer Bill

For immediate release: April 20, 2017

(Sacramento) On Wednesday the California Growers Association announced opposition to Trailer Bill Legislation proposed by Gov. Jerry Brown. The governor’s proposal seeks to align differences between the Medical Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act of 2015 and Prop. 64, the Adult Use of Marijuana Act.

Executive Director Hezekiah Allen explained the trade group’s opposition, stating “We realize the Governor is working hard to align medical cannabis regulations with adult-use regulations.

However, the proposal removes a critical section of the medical cannabis regulations. Section 19328 of the Business and Professions Code outlined restrictions on the number and type of licenses a business may hold.

We support changes to these limitations, but erasing them entirely puts our future at risk and erodes the level playing field we have all been working to create.

Without reasonable limits on scale and cross licensure the marketplace could be quickly consolidated and become dominated by a few conglomerates. That’s a mistake we can’t afford.

California will not get a second chance at this and it is imperative that we strike a better balance than the current proposal. We must provide a pathway forward for as many cannabis businesses as possible.”

You can learn more about the proposed amendments and show your support by clicking here

Here’s the full petition: 

Oppose unless amended. 

Dear Governor Brown:

Bridging the gap between the MCRSA and the AUMA is a challenging process with many considerations. The first draft of your proposed trailer legislation demonstrates a solid understanding of the policy issues that must be addressed. We recognize your efforts to develop one unified regulatory system while honoring the decision made by the voters in 2016 with the passage of the AUMA but we urge you to amend the proposal and strike a better balance.

Unfortunately, we cannot support the legislation unless it is amended. Our primary concern is the proposal’s removal of all limitations on vertical integration. Thus, we have taken an oppose unless amended position and offer the attached proposal as a starting point for discussions.

It is imperative that California strike a better balance on cross licensure. As written, the proposal will lead to rapid consolidation of the marketplace, a significant barrier to entry and an even more significant barrier to success. The result is that few cottage, specialty and small businesses (both existing and startup) will remain viable. Under a system of unfettered vertical integration access to capital will become the primary driver of success and most of our members have severely limited access to such resources.

The dramatic negative impact this will have on regional economies across the state is antithetical and counterproductive to the stated goals of regulation to improve public health and safety and protect the natural environment as well as the stated intent of Proposition 64 to:

(a) Take non-medical marijuana production and sales out of the hands of the illegal market and bring them under a regulatory structure that prevents access by minors and protects public safety, public health, and the environment.
(b) Strictly control the cultivation, processing, manufacture, distribution, testing and sale of nonmedical marijuana through a system of state licensing, regulation, and enforcement.

We urge you to support policies that will provide California’s cannabis businesses a pathway forward. Only through compliance will our state be able to achieve the goals and intent of regulated commercial cannabis.

Learn more and sign: