Committee advances bill to create Community Reinvestment and Repair Fund Commission to direct cannabis tax revenue to impacted neighborhoods

The Government Operations and Fiscal Policy Committee unanimously recommended that the full Montgomery County Council consider Bill 4-24, which would establish a Montgomery County Community Reinvestment and Repair Fund Commission to advise on local spending of cannabis tax revenues designated for communities harmed by the war on drugs.

Council Member Mink, the bill’s lead, said the state Maryland Cannabis Reform Act of 2023 requires that “funds from the taxes from the sale of cannabis needs to go to the community that was most impacted by the ‘war on drugs,’” and urged the county to align local rules with the law so those tax dollars reach Black, brown and low-income neighborhoods.

Miss Rollins, council staff, told the committee the draft bill would create a 13-member commission of appointed county residents to determine uses of the funds and to advise on grants for community-based initiatives serving disproportionately impacted areas. “The funds may not be used for any law enforcement agencies or law enforcement activities,” Miss Rollins said, noting that language mirrors the state statute and staff would insert a clarifying provision in the bill text.

Monica Martin Ecken, chief of behavioral health and crisis services at the Department of Health and Human Services, said the department supports the commission and “very much looks forward to supporting this commission” as it helps communities direct repair and reinvestment.

Committee members considered a suggested amendment from Council Member Balcom that would expand the kinds of knowledge or experience applicants demonstrate. The original bill lists areas such as the history of resistance of people of African descent to white supremacy, the impact of disproportionate drug-law enforcement, needs for people returning after incarceration and methods for delivering community investment. Balcom had proposed adding youth engagement, job training and placement programs, and housing and homelessness-prevention services; the committee agreed to include those items as illustrative specialties for commission membership rather than mandatory application requirements.

Council Member Mink said preserving the bill’s core requirement—that members demonstrate foundational knowledge of the history and harms related to drug law enforcement—remained important even as the committee allowed broader examples of member experience to be listed. Council Member Katz moved the amendment; Council President Friedson seconded; the committee approved it by voice/hand and directed staff to draft the text as a new illustrative subsection.

Staff also reported two other clarifying edits requested by the county attorney: labeling a $1,000 stipend in the bill as an annual stipend and providing a workable, flexible definition of “demonstrated knowledge” (staff cited Prince George’s County and Baltimore City examples of how jurisdictions have defined that term). The committee agreed with the clarifications and to broaden the bill’s recipient language so that funding may go to a wider set of community-based organizations rather than limiting awards to nonprofits only.

After the amendments and clarifications were adopted for drafting, the chair asked for a committee recommendation to send the bill to the full council. The committee raised hands in favor, and the chair announced the recommendation was unanimous. The committee adjourned and staff will present the revised bill language to the full council for consideration.