Connect with us

Cannabis News

Virginia Governor Proposes Amendments To Budget Containing Marijuana Legalization—Without Suggesting Cannabis Changes

Published

6 hours ago

on

Virginia’s governor has proposed changes to the budget legislation passed by lawmakers this week, but those changes do not include changes to provisions to legalize the sale of recreational marijuana.

They have also failed to respond to the concerns of advocates who called for a section to be dropped significantly increase the penalties for public consumption of cannabis– as they say, according to the new state data obtained, it will be established in a discriminatory race.

Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger (D) sent her proposed budget amendments to lawmakers on Friday, which will require the House and Senate to reconvene before enacting the general legislation and its marijuana provisions before the July 1 budget deadline. Lawmakers hope to do so on Monday.

Budget project approved by the Parliament It has provisions that allow for the legalization of the sale of recreational marijuana— but the current $25 fine for using cannabis in a public place would also rise 900 percent to $250 — an increase that advocates call a “poverty penalty.”

A coalition of advocacy groups led by Marijuana Justice this week released new enforcement statistics obtained through Virginia’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that show that “legalization has not ended racially biased marijuana policing.”

Analysis of state data shows that since the commercial legalization of cannabis took effect in Virginia in 2021, 185 whites and 179 blacks have been charged with public consumption, meaning that, based on the state’s population, blacks are three times more likely than whites to face such marijuana charges.

Spanberger did not change the penalty increase in the proposed amendments, and he did not suggest any changes to the marijuana section of the bill.

Marijuana Justice and the ACLU of Virginia, the National Organization for Marijuana Law Reform, the Marijuana Policy Project, the Drug Policy Alliance and the Latino Cannabis Alliance, among others, recently sent a letter. asking lawmakers and the governor not to increase the punishment for cannabis“saying it will deepen racial and economic inequality.”

“Increased fines and penalties for low-level marijuana offenses are not neutral,” the organizations wrote in a letter to Spanberger and lawmakers. “They are imposed disproportionately against black and brown communities, create unaffordable debt for low-income people, and can cause significant damage to immigration, housing, education and employment.”

Spanberger last month vetoed an earlier measure to legalize the sale of recreational cannabis, after lawmakers rejected proposed amendments to the plan. Later, with Sen. Lashrecse Aird (D) and Del. He negotiated a deal with Sen. Paul Krizek (D), who sponsored the previous measure, that was included in the budget legislation passed this week.

The new plan differs significantly from the previous legislation in several ways.

For example, it sets the start date for the sale of recreational marijuana to July 1, 2027, compared to the Jan. 1 date proposed by Spanberger and passed by lawmakers.

It also limits public possession and purchase of marijuana to 2 ounces per transaction, above the legal limit of one ounce. Legislation approved by lawmakers earlier this year would allow adults to have 2.5 ounces.

The bill also gives Spanberger language to raise the tax on marijuana from 6 percent to 8 percent after two years of legal sales.

As a compromise, the new deal would punish public marijuana use with a civil penalty of $250, a significant increase from the current law’s $25, but harsher than the Class 4 felony called for in the governor’s proposed changes to the previous bill.

Legislators In March he approved the initial bills for the sale of cannabisbut the governor then proposed changes to the legalization proposal—including delaying the start of sales by six months, increasing taxes and introducing new criminal penalties for cannabis users. The the April legislature refused to adopt the amendments when reassembled in a one-day session, however, effectively excluding them. Spanberger then vetoed it.

Spanberger said this month that he was “Really productive” and “incredible” conversations with lawmakers about working on a compromise approach to legalizing the sale of adult cannabisand Marihuana Moment reported on the ongoing talks.

The governor, on the other hand, has tried to explain his veto publicly, including saying that it is his opinion. “Taking a bit longer” to get to market is not something he sees as a “negative”. because getting the details right is more important than getting it done quickly.

A recent survey found that A bipartisan majority of Virginia voters wanted Spanberger to sign the cannabis legislation become law, and that they did not particularly agree with the desire to slow down the period for the launch of legal sales.

The governor recently acknowledged this in a separate interview “A lot of people are not happy” with the veto of cannabis legislation. “Friends and family are also upset,” he said.

Spanberger has answered it repeatedly Criticism of the cannabis amendments from bill sponsors and advocates saying that the suggested changes came after him He spoke with leaders of other states that have already established adult marijuana markets.

However, a spokesman for Spanberger declined to name any other governors who spoke about cannabis in response to a question from Marihuana Moment.

The governor tried to explain his veto in a previous interview, reiterating that he supports the launch of a legal cannabis market but worried about what he called a “fast-track timeline” and “a lot more stores across Virginia” than he thought were appropriate.

Personal possession of marijuana and growing marijuana at home has been legal in Virginia since 2021, but then the govt. Glenn Youngkin (R) twice vetoed bills to provide consumers with a way to legally purchase adult cannabis.

Here are the key details of the new cannabis plan the budget and how it compares to the legislation Spanberger vetoed…SB 542 and HB 642-Also the previously proposed changes to these measures:

  • Adults would be able to purchase up to 2 ounces of marijuana in a single transaction, or up to an equivalent amount of other cannabis products, as determined by regulators. That would mean going over the current legal limit of 1 ounce. Lawmakers previously proposed setting the limit at 2.5 ounces, and the governor wanted only 2 ounces.
  • Legal sales can begin on July 1, 2027. Lawmakers had previously set a date of Jan. 1, 2027, but the governor wanted to push it back to July 1.
  • A 6 percent excise tax would be imposed on the sale of cannabis, as well as 5.3 percent on retail sales and use, and municipalities would impose an additional local tax of up to 3.5 percent. Starting July 1, 2029, the state excise tax would increase to 8 percent, in line with the governor’s previously proposed amendments.
  • Proceeds would be distributed to the Cannabis Equity Reinvestment Fund, early childhood education, the Department of Behavioral and Developmental Health Services and public health initiatives. The measure previously approved by lawmakers would have allocated specific percentages to each, but the new language does not specify what share of the revenue will go to each program. The governor, in his amendments, wanted to put all revenue into the general fund “for purposes such as early childhood education, behavioral health, public health awareness, prevention, treatment and recovery services, workforce development, reentry, indigent criminal defense and targeted reinvestment in historically disadvantaged communities.” His amendment also sought to eliminate support for the Cannabis Equity Reinvestment Fund.
  • The Virginia Cannabis Control Authority will oversee licensing and regulation of the new industry, and will also take over oversight of hemp, which falls under the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. A five-member board of directors appointed by the governor would lead the body, and the bill previously approved by lawmakers called for a seven-member body, four appointed by the governor, two appointed by the Speaker of the House and one appointed by the Senate Rules Committee.
  • The definition of what constitutes a legal hemp product would be narrowed by removing a provision that contains more than 2 milligrams of total THC per package if they contain a CBD to THC ratio of 25:1 or greater.
  • 350 retail marijuana shops would be allowed to operate statewide, the same number approved by lawmakers and more than the 200 proposed by the governor.
  • Local governments should not allow marijuana businesses to operate in their area.
  • Delivery services would be allowed.
  • Serving sizes would be limited to 10 milligrams of THC, with no more than 100 mg of THC per package.
  • Public use of marijuana would be a civil violation punishable by a $250 fine. That’s ten times the $25 fine under current law, but more severe than the governor’s proposed Class 4 felony. Possession of cannabis by anyone under 21 would be subject to a $25 fine and mandatory participation in a substance abuse treatment or education program or both. The governor suggested treating possession by minors as a Class 1 felony, punishable by a mandatory minimum fine of $500 or 50 hours of community service, as well as a driver’s license suspension of at least six months.
  • Existing medical cannabis operators could enter the adult-use market if they pay a $10 million license conversion fee.
  • Cannabis businesses should implement peaceful labor agreements with their employees.
  • A legislative committee would direct the addition of local consumer licenses and micro-enterprise cannabis event permits that would allow licensees to hold sales at farmers markets or pop-up locations. This provision was also included in the legislation approved by the former legislators, but the governor proposed to delete it.

Meanwhile, the governor signed several other reform bills this session, including measures Resentment relief for people with past cannabis convictions, protecting the parental rights of marijuana users and giving patients access to medical cannabis in hospitals.

Marijuana Moment is made possible with the help of readers. If you rely on our pro-cannabis journalism to stay informed, consider a monthly Patreon pledge.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Cannabis News

RAND estimates Indiana adult-use cannabis could yield $180M in annual revenue

Published

6 hours ago

on

June 28, 2026

By











Two new RAND reports commissioned by the Richard M. Fairbanks Foundation outline the policy options and financial commitments facing Indiana as the state debates whether to change its cannabis laws amid restrictions across the country.

Reports show that 44% of Indiana residents live within 50 miles of a licensed dispensary in a neighboring state, and 96% live within 100 miles, as three of Indiana’s four states have legalized adult-use cannabis. At the same time, intoxicating hemp products containing the same psychoactive compound as marijuana are available at gas stations, convenience stores and grocery stores throughout Indiana with limited oversight.

Cannabis use in Indiana has doubled in the past decade, with a significant increase among adults 26 and older. RAND estimates that 1.3 million Hoosiers used cannabis in 2024 and spent $1.8 billion on marijuana products that year. Indiana recorded more than 13,000 cannabis-related arrests in 2024, with more than 90% for possession and more than 75% for non-cannabis related charges. The state spends $10 million to $20 million annually on cannabis law enforcement.

Rather than recommending a specific policy, the RAND reports outline four broad options: maintaining prohibition, reducing criminal penalties for possession, legalizing medical cannabis, or legalizing the adult recreational use market. Legalizing adult-use cannabis would generate about $180 million in annual state revenue, roughly 1 percent of the state’s general fund, well below some previous projections and less than half of the $385 million in combined cigarette and alcohol tax revenue Indiana will collect in 2025, according to the Indiana Department of Revenue.

Legalization would also entail significant upfront costs, and ongoing regulatory costs could reach the low tens of millions of dollars annually, outweighing the savings from reduced criminal justice spending. RAND identifies 14 policy considerations important to establishing legal markets, each with its own public health and state economic implications.










Continue Reading

Cannabis News

Village Farms International leads B.C. cannabis producers in global export push

Published

1 day ago

on

June 27, 2026

By

Village Farms International, one of the world’s largest cannabis production facilities located in Delta, BC, increased its export volumes by more than 500 percent by the end of 2025, with international sales reaching US$37.9 million, or just over 20 percent of total cannabis revenue of US$188 million. The main export markets are Germany, Australia, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Israel.

The company is also expanding, developing an additional 550,000 square feet of greenhouse space across the street from its main facility, designed to support both domestic and international cultivation. Orville Bovenschen, VFI’s global president of operations, points to the excise burden as a permanent strain on the domestic economy: “If you look at how much we paid in excise last year, it’s astronomical,” he says, although VFI declined to provide specific figures.

Walker Patton, one of the founders of the BC Cannabis Alliance, which represents about 50 licensed growers in the province, frames the domestic regulatory environment in stark terms: “With the rules that this industry was set up for, it’s like doing business right out of the gate.” Canada’s excise tax structure charges by weight instead of market price, meaning that since wholesale prices have fallen to roughly half of initial projections, effective tax rates for producers have risen.

© This is Holland

Sweetgrass Cannabis, a micro-farm located in the Kootenay region, now derives 60 to 70 percent of its sales from international markets after retreating from provinces such as Ontario and Alberta. Company CEO Gemma Hayes says: “Margins, as well as export opportunities, drove our decision.” Ontario’s wholesale markup of up to 25 per cent, layered with excise taxes, spurred what Hayes described as a “race to the bottom.”

Rubicon Organics, a Vancouver-based publicly traded company, entered international markets last year and recently opened a 47,500-square-foot facility in Hope in part to meet overseas demand. Speaking from the International Cannabis Conference in Berlin, Mathieu Aubin, director of marketing and new business, said: “Canada is very well positioned to access international markets for reliable and safe cannabis,” noting that reliability and product integrity are key to gaining access to the medical market.

Not all producers have equal access to these markets. Alex Rumi, founder of grower Good Buds out of Salt Spring Island, said established export markets are structured around an indoor pharmaceutical-style model that hurts sun-grown cannabis, and that Canada’s export system “works for big growers and doesn’t work for craft.” Julia Cameron, president of Cannabis Cultivators of BC and chair of communications and corporate affairs for the VFI, added that growers must secure permits for each shipment while navigating different rules across countries, creating a prohibitive barrier for small operators.

BC has more than 200 licensed growers and accounts for roughly a quarter of Canada’s legal cannabis production, but represents only 14 percent of national exports. Lana Popham, B.C.’s Minister of Agriculture and Food, points to the FIFA World Cup games in Vancouver as a near-term possibility: “It will be interesting to see how many people engage with what is a great product here in B.C.”

Continue Reading

Cannabis News

Congressman And Other Media Outlets Join Marijuana Moment’s Push For DEA To Livestream Rescheduling Hearing

Published

1 day ago

on

June 27, 2026

By

The momentum of the Marijuana Moment request for direct public and media access to historic federal cannabis rescheduling hearings they are being joined by a member of Congress and other reporters starting next week.

Representative Steve Cohen (D-TN) sent a letter to the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) on Friday, calling the ongoing marijuana rescheduling process “historic.”

“I am writing to request that the hearings be made available to the public in real time,” Cohen wrote to DEA Administrator Terrance Cole. “Live streaming technologies have become ubiquitous and a common way for Americans to interact with the government. In late 2024, in a similar effort, your agency authorized live streaming of proceedings ‘due to the public interest in this matter’ and continued your agency’s ‘commitment to procedural transparency.’

“I see no reason why that reason wouldn’t hold today, especially when it comes to such an important and impactful issue,” the congressman wrote. “I have long been an advocate for transparency in court proceedings and I believe this is a rare opportunity to inform the public about rulemaking and administrative litigation.”

Cohen’s letter follows a couple Marijuana Moment’s attorney presented the petitions to Cole and DEA Chief Administrative Law Judge Derek Julius. to request access to a live stream of the hearing on the proposal to move cannabis from Schedule I to Title III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) — which includes only opponents of the reform as participants.

Also on Friday, an attorney from Portfolio Media, Inc., which publishes Law360, sent Cole a letter saying it “agrees with Marijuana Moment’s request” for streaming access.

“This approach is consistent with DEA’s prior approach to this hearing and the compelling public interest in rescheduling marijuana under the CSA, a policy change with profound social, legal, and regulatory implications,” the letter states.

Requiring observers to attend in person “limits real-time information about a consequential policy development to the press and a small audience in attendance, and removes the ability of the press to report on that development,” he says. “Live streaming is a safe, continuous and fair way to ensure meaningful public access and advance the DEA’s stated commitment to transparency.”

Separately, an attorney representing the cannabis publication Cultivated Media and also on behalf of New York Times reporter Ashley Southall sent a letter to the DEA administrator saying they “want the ability to monitor the proceedings in real time, to provide readers with reports on the progress and perspective of testimony and evidence during the hearing.”

“Cultivated Media, Ashley Southall and Marijuana Moment and all the other media because of this access to the live stream can simultaneously report on issues of important public concern related to a historic hearing,” he said.

The DEA announced Thursday that it would make the transcript available at the end of the multi-day hearing, but Marijuana Moment attorney Joseph A. Bondy wrote in his letter Thursday that it would not help the public follow the proceedings in real time on a daily basis.

“The final transcript is useful, but not a substitute for access to a live broadcast. A live broadcast allows the public and the press to observe the hearing as it unfolds without contesting admissions, filling the courtroom, or disrupting the proceedings,” the letter to Cole says. “After reviewing, correcting and releasing the transcript weeks after the testimony, the opportunity for real-time observation, timely reporting and public information response has passed.”

“For a large public audience seeking serious coverage of federal cannabis policy, Marihuana Moment is an important channel through which the public can understand these proceedings.”

“To the extent that the DEA now believes that live streaming is inappropriate, despite the DEA’s prior directive in this rulemaking, Marijuana Moment respectfully requests a written explanation identifying the specific basis for that conclusion, including why the public interest and transparency that previously warranted live streaming are being overridden here,” Bondy wrote.

—
Marijuana Moment’s journalism is made possible by readers like you, who value this work enough to support us monthly pledges on Patreon. If you rely on our reports to stay informed of important developments in cannabis, please help us do this becoming a permanent subscriber today.

Backing us at the $25/month level, you’ll have access to our Bill Tracker so you don’t miss any important marijuana legislation in your state.
—

Separately, cannabis advocates sent a letter Thursday to Julius, the DEA judge, saying he would not consider submissions from outside parties, also requesting access to the live stream.

“Many of the patients most interested in this procedure cannot travel to Arlington, Virginia. Many are disabled, immunocompromised, elderly, financially limited, or managing serious medical conditions,” states the letter from Americans for Safe Access, Veterans Initiative-22, US Pain Foundation, Realm of Caring, Montel Williams and others.

“Patients and advocates who can travel will also be unable to physically wait in line for an uncertain chance of admission, only to be turned away when limited seats are filled,” they wrote. “So the audience may technically be open to the public, but virtually inaccessible to most.”

Meanwhile, the DEA said in a new filing that its witness list for the hearing includes a doctor. Testify on “How Medical Marijuana Provides Medical Benefit to Pain Patients.”

Separately, the opponents who are participating in the trial have presented their declarations this week anticipate the anti-marijuana arguments they intend to make during the procedure.

The hearing it will start on June 29 and end before July 15.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche in April He issued an order that immediately reclassified the state’s licensed medical cannabisas well as marijuana products approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under Schedule I through Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).

According to a separate order signed by the acting attorney general, the upcoming hearing will include Class III marijuana.

Preliminary hearing process on the marijuana redistricting process initiated by the Biden administration It was halted last year amid allegations of improper communications and witness selection.

the current The marijuana redistricting process is being challenged in several ways which have been upheld by a federal Court of Appeals. those pieces of State attorneys general have filed lawsuits against cannabis reform, Opponents of marijuana legalization and a a cannabis-based biopharmaceutical corporation.

Meanwhile, the reorganization of state-licensed medical cannabis is already having a major impact.

The Congressional Research Service published a report on the current rescheduling of cannabis Certified patients with medical marijuana from state licensed dispensaries are now eligible for Class III. “The order appears to allow end users to use marijuana medically without a CSA prescription,” he says.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has published a Draft update to a gun purchase form to recognize the legal status of medical marijuana in the reprogramming. The revised section of the question states that only the “recreational use or possession of marijuana” is federally prohibited, omitting the prior form’s mention of medical cannabis.

The US Treasury and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) said they plan to issued new tax guidelines for the marijuana industry after reprogramming. The reform will benefit state-licensed marijuana businesses by allowing them to take federal tax deductions that are currently prohibited under IRS Code Section III, known as Section 280E.

Even the DEA, which has long opposed cannabis legalization and accused the Biden administration of stalling the initiative in the reorganization process, has done so. It launched a registration process for legal marijuana businesses in the state to take advantage of the federal benefits that come with the reform.

The Department of Transport, on the other hand, issued guidelines stating this use Legal medical cannabis in the state is still no excuse for truck drivers to test positive for drugspilots and other safety-sensitive personnel.

A congressional committee recently Federal officials voted to block further steps to reschedule cannabis.

read it the letters About DEA admin access to live streaming:

Marihuana Moment is made possible with the help of readers. If you rely on our pro-cannabis journalism to stay informed, consider a monthly Patreon pledge.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2021 The Art of MaryJane Media