Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Medical Cannabis Verification topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board deadlocked on petitioner’s request to change medical cannabis verification rules; staff recommends denial
Summary
A petition from John Kingsbury asking the board to clarify verification requirements for medical cannabis excise-tax exemptions prompted a lengthy staff presentation and board discussion; staff recommended denial citing existing WAC and enforcement limits, and the board did not reach a final decision and will seek an additional meeting to include an absent board member.
Kevin Walder, policy and rules manager, recommended denying a January 12 petition from John Kingsbury that sought amendments to WAC 314-55-090 to require retailers to verify medical cannabis recognition cards in the Department of Health database before applying the medical excise-tax exemption. Walder said the rule and overlapping DOH requirements already require verification and that the evidence of misuse has been limited: "the small handful of complaints that we've received since that time alleging misuse of the exemption by licensees seem to indicate that licensees who failed to verify a patient's status in the DOH medical cannabis authorization database clearly understand that the rules require verification in the database, but simply choose not to follow the rules," he said.
Board members questioned whether denial could embolden noncompliant retailers and whether accepting the petition (CR-101) would create public expectations even if it did not guarantee rule adoption. Walder stressed that the core issue appears to be enforcement capacity: "if no one's checking is in fact the issue here, that's a matter of enforcement capacity, which is not a problem best addressed by rule amendments," he said, and noted that changing rule language alone would not increase audit or enforcement power. Board Member Garrett M. Holmes moved to deny the petition in deference to the rules team but the chair did not concur and the motion did not pass because a third board member was absent. The board directed staff to coordinate timelines and consider an extra meeting so the absent member can participate before responding to the petitioner under the Administrative Procedure Act 60-day deadline.
Walder said staff will send a "friendly reminder" to medically endorsed retail cannabis licensees reiterating verification requirements, resources for training, and how to report complaints, and will continue monitoring audit data and enforcement referrals to determine whether further action is needed.
