Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the S278 Interstate Compacts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate committee reviews amendment to let governor enter interstate cannabis compacts, contingent on federal action
Summary
Committee reviewed draft 1.3 to S278 that would add authority for the governor to enter interstate cannabis compacts if certain federal changes occur; Legislative Council and members discussed safeguards, licensing terms and the Cannabis Control Board’s role in regulating out-of-state licensees operating in Vermont.
The Senate Economic Development, Housing & General Affairs committee reviewed an amendment to S278 that would allow the governor to enter interstate compacts governing cannabis operations, but only after specified federal changes occur.
Tucker Anderson, Legislative Council, told the committee the updated draft (1.3) “adds two sections to S278 such as 27, 27B. 27A explains the intent behind this part of the bill and essentially explains that it is providing for flexibility based on potential changes the federal posture on the cannabis markets at the state level and allows the governor to enter into compacts.” He said section 27B contains the authorizing language and “establishes requirements for compatibility between state laws as members of the compact” and grants regulatory authority to the Cannabis Control Board over what are termed “foreign licencies” operating in Vermont under a compact.
The amendment conditions the governor’s authority on specific federal developments, Anderson said, including congressional or administrative changes to cannabis scheduling, a change in federal enforcement guidance such as a Department of Justice memo, or changes in federal funding or enforcement priorities. Anderson said the language is intended to prepare the state to move quickly if federal policy changes.
Committee members pressed for detail on how compacts would interact with Vermont licensing. One member asked whether the provision would permit an out-of-state retail operator to open a Vermont outlet and compete with existing Vermont licensees. Anderson replied that such an operator would still need to hold a Vermont license and that compact terms would be negotiated so parties understand interstate commerce arrangements.
The committee also discussed terminology in the draft. Anderson said he had cleaned up inconsistent references so the bill uses the defined term “Vermont license” throughout, rather than the ambiguous phrase “state license.” He noted the compact language was modeled on provisions adopted in other states.
The chair invited members to sign on individually to the amendment because, as Anderson and others noted, it must be sponsored by an individual senator rather than by the committee. Committee members indicated informal support for individual sponsorship and asked one senator to carry the amendment to the floor.
What happens next: the committee did not take a formal vote on the amendment during this meeting. Members indicated they would list individual sponsors and present the amendment when the bill is scheduled on the floor; any future changes to the amendment or formal votes will be recorded in subsequent committee proceedings.
