Committee reviews proposal to relax some cannabis retailer signage rules, public health groups warn of youth exposure

The Consumer Protection & Business Committee took public testimony on Engrossed Senate Bill 5206 on Wednesday, a measure that would change state limits on cannabis retail signage and clarify the roles of state and local regulation.

Peter Clodfelter, committee staff, explained the bill by describing current law: licensed cannabis retailers may display two exterior signs that identify the business and its location, each no larger than 1,600 square inches, and cities and counties may adopt more restrictive outdoor-advertising rules. Clodfelter said the bill would authorize four cannabis-related advertising signs on the licensed retail premise, allow separate trade-name signs that would be regulated by local governments, exclude some small informational signs (under 512 square inches) from the four-sign limit, and require advertising to include text stating that only people 21 and older may purchase or possess cannabis products.

Clodfelter also described other changes in the bill: trade-name signs "may not contain cannabis products or cannabis product names" and local governments would enforce size and placement of trade-name signs; the bill would prohibit cannabis advertising by businesses licensed to sell alcohol or tobacco; and it would bar cannabis licensees from advertising or selling product at less than acquisition cost except for medical cannabis sales to qualifying patients.

Public-health witnesses and researchers testified in opposition or requested amendments. Sarah Ross Files, youth cannabis-prevention manager at Public Health — Seattle & King County, said: "Limiting exposure to promotion is a key strategy to prevent cannabis use by young people, and this bill will significantly increase that exposure." She cited research showing youth notice retail signage frequently and that industry packaging and promotional features increase youth interest.

Scott Waller of the Washington Association for Substance Misuse and Violence Prevention urged tighter limits and proposed an amendment to restrict trade-name signs and localize advertising to the side of the retailer that houses the main entrance. Waller also noted a Senate amendment to delay implementation until January 2026 to allow local governments time to align ordinances.

Industry and retailer groups, including the Washington Cannabis Licensee Association, the Cannabis Alliance, and trade representatives, testified in favor. Retailers argued current rules are inconsistent, difficult to enforce, and create operational uncertainty; proponents said local governments are better placed to regulate size and placement while the Liquor and Cannabis Board (LCB) retains authority over advertising content.

The committee heard a broad range of testimony from local public-health officials, academic researchers (who cited unpublished and published studies linking retailer exposure to youth use), media representatives, small retail owners, and industry associations. No committee action was taken at the hearing; the public hearing was closed after testimony.

Ending: Committee staff and witnesses said they would submit additional materials and proposed amendment language for members to review.