Senate committee holds public hearing on SB72, sparking opposition from license holders and patients

Senator Nelson, sponsor of Senate Bill 72, told a Senate committee on a public hearing day that the bill would effectively restart Alabama's medical cannabis licensing process and allow previously licensed applicants to reapply under a new review process.

The measure, Nelson said, would "start from scratch" for candidates and permit an independent group to re-evaluate applications with identifying information redacted so that "there wouldn't be any favoritism and partial." He also said the bill would not raise the cap on integrated licenses and that a substitute is expected.

Why it matters: SB72 would alter how Alabama awards licenses to grow, process and dispense medical cannabis after multiple licensing rounds and ongoing litigation stalled the program. Supporters and many of the licensed operators who addressed the committee said the change would likely prolong the delay that SB72 aims to resolve.

Nelson described the proposal as an attempt to move the program forward after what he called inconsistent outcomes across prior licensing rounds. "I'd like to just start from scratch, throw the license out, have them if you apply by the deadline before, you get reevaluated," Nelson said, adding that the commission could not deny licenses to people who had previously been approved and that there would be a path to the Court of Criminal Appeals for disputes.

During the public-comment period, patients and industry participants urged the committee either to kill the bill or substantially amend it. Amanda Taylor, who described serious medical conditions, said SB72 "is vague, filled with poison pills, and will ... only ensure that Alabama patients remain on the sidelines for at least another year." She urged the committee to "kill SB72 and stand behind the AMCC," referring to the Alabama Medical Commission.

Several licensed operators and applicants likewise opposed the bill. Antoine Mordecan, chief executive officer of Native Black Cultivation, argued SB72 "is detrimental to independent businesses like mine" and said it "prioritize[s] large, vertically integrated companies while leaving independent cultivators and processors with no path forward." Mordecan recommended options including lifting a restraining order on dispensaries, creating micro-dispensary or micro-cultivator pathways for small operators, and requiring vertically integrated licensees to source product from independent cultivators.

Sterling Stottmeyer, chief executive officer of Sustainable Alabama, said litigation is an inevitable consequence of limits on licenses and warned that re-running the selection process would likely restart legal challenges. "As long as there are limits on licenses, there's gotta be litigation," he said, urging the committee to consider models used by other states that issued an initial set of licenses and phased in additional authorizations.

Christy Crow of CRC of Alabama, who identified her organization as a licensed cultivator and described herself as a lawyer, said the bill would not get medicine to patients and would prompt new rounds of litigation. Ray French, who said his company invested about $30 million in a purpose-built greenhouse and extraction facility in Alabama, told the committee his operation is "ready to go" and that the bill "would further delay the process."

Representatives of several license holders who had been awarded integrated licenses in multiple rounds also spoke in opposition, saying the commission had developed a record through repeated reviews and that restarting the process would not speed delivery of medicine to patients. Joey Robertson, president and CEO of Ygrene Control MedServe, said the way forward is to support the commission and let the courts resolve outstanding disputes.

Senator Balski and other committee members asked questions and expressed sympathy for investors and patients affected by the program's delays. Committee leadership said a substitute to SB72 is expected and that the committee would not vote on the bill that day. Near the close of the meeting, the committee chairman said, "I'm gonna carry this bill over," indicating the measure will be continued for additional work.

No formal vote was taken on SB72 during the hearing. Committee discussion focused on whether a legislative restart would break the current litigation logjam or simply create new grounds for lawsuits. Several speakers urged letting the Alabama Medical Commission and the courts proceed with the existing record; others asked for statutory fixes to unblock the market.

The committee received extensive public comment over roughly the full hearing period; the sponsor said he wants an independent evaluator to rate redacted application materials and to preserve a path to appellate review for candidates. Committee members signaled they will continue to work with the sponsor and other stakeholders before any formal committee action.

A timetable for further committee consideration or a floor vote was not specified at the hearing's close.