Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Commerce topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee pauses bill to let local governments opt into hemp 'board' structure; sponsors say measure is permissive
Summary
House Bill 962, which would allow local governments to set up local hemp oversight boards modeled on beer boards, was discussed at length and rolled one week for further drafting; sponsors emphasized the bill is permissive and would require state approval and an agreement before local enforcement authority applies.
House Bill 962, presented to the House Commerce Committee by Chairman Hall, would permit — but not require — local governments to establish local boards to participate in enforcement of state hemp regulations, using a mechanism the sponsor compared to local beer boards.
Sponsor remarks said the bill is permissive and would leave regulatory primacy with the state entity that oversees hemp ("whether that be the Department of Agriculture, which it is currently, or should a bill go forward ... the ABC"). Chairman Hall said the proposal would require a formal agreement with the state enforcement agency before a locality could participate.
Members asked whether local boards could deny initial permits, how appeals would work, and whether local governments could charge a local fee. Chairman Hall and the sponsor explained that initial permitting would remain at the state level and that, under the bill, a permit could be pulled upon a third offense. He also said a local participating jurisdiction could charge a $250 permit fee to cover enforcement costs.
Committee members raised concerns about clarity on appeals, relationships between state and local enforcement, and possible local fees and signage/appearance issues. Several members urged more precise statutory language to avoid confusion; without objection, the committee rolled the bill for one week to permit additional drafting and language changes.
Votes at a glance: the item was not voted out; committee postponed consideration for one week by unanimous consent.
Ending: The sponsor said he will work with members to "wordsmithe" the bill; the committee will consider the revised language at a subsequent meeting.
