California is Fighting a Losing Battle with Cannabis Enforcement, Now What?

California, often regarded as the birthplace of the modern cannabis movement, has experienced a tumultuous journey since the legalization of recreational cannabis in 2016. While the state set out to create a regulated and safe cannabis market, it now faces significant challenges in enforcing its laws against illegal cannabis operations. This article explores the complexities of cannabis enforcement in California, examining the effectiveness of current measures, the factors contributing to the persistence of illegal operations, and potential pathways forward.

The Landscape of Cannabis Legalization in California

A Pioneering Move

California made history in 1996 by becoming the first state to legalize medical cannabis through Proposition 215. This landmark decision laid the groundwork for subsequent legalization efforts, culminating in Proposition 64 in 2016, which legalized recreational use for adults aged 21 and older. The primary goals were to regulate the market, generate tax revenue, and reduce criminal activity associated with cannabis.

Initial Optimism

Initially, there was optimism about the potential benefits of legalization. The state anticipated significant tax revenue projected at over $1 billion annually which could be allocated to public health, education, and infrastructure. Additionally, legalization was expected to diminish the illegal market and associated criminal enterprises.

 The Rise of Illegal Cannabis Operations

Despite these optimistic projections, California’s illegal cannabis market has remained robust. Estimates suggest that unlicensed growers account for approximately 80% of the state’s cannabis production. This thriving black market poses a direct challenge to licensed operators, undermining their ability to compete due to lower prices and fewer regulatory burdens.

Factors Contributing to Illicit Growth

Several factors contribute to the persistence of illegal cannabis operations:

• High Taxes and Fees: California imposes some of the highest taxes on cannabis in the nation. These include a state excise tax of 15%, local taxes that can reach up to 10%, and additional cultivation taxes. For many licensed operators, these costs make it difficult to compete with unregulated growers who do not bear such financial burdens.

• Complex Regulatory Environment: The regulatory framework governing cannabis in California is intricate and often confusing. Local municipalities have the authority to regulate or ban cannabis businesses entirely, leading to a patchwork of regulations that can stifle legitimate businesses while allowing illegal operations to flourish.

• Limited Access to Licenses: Obtaining a license can be a lengthy and expensive process. Many aspiring entrepreneurs are deterred by high application fees and stringent requirements, leading them to operate illegally instead.

• Cultural Attitudes: In some areas of California, there remains a cultural acceptance of cannabis use that complicates enforcement efforts. Communities may be more tolerant of illegal grows, viewing them as part of a broader acceptance of cannabis culture.

Enforcement Efforts: A Double-Edged Sword

 State Initiatives

In response to the growing challenges posed by illegal operations, California has implemented various enforcement measures:

• Cannabis Administrative Prosecutor Program (CAPP): Launched in 2021, CAPP aims to expedite legal actions against unlicensed operators by providing resources for local jurisdictions to pursue enforcement more effectively.

 Mixed Results

Despite these efforts, results have been mixed:

• Seizures vs. Production: While enforcement actions have led to significant seizures over $1 billion worth of illegal cannabis seized since legalization the scale of these operations often dwarfs enforcement efforts. For instance, in 2023 alone, authorities reported seizing over 1 million plants from illegal grows; however, this represents only a small fraction of total illicit production.

• Resource Limitations: Law enforcement agencies often lack adequate resources or personnel dedicated solely to cannabis enforcement, hampering their ability to conduct sustained operations against illegal growers.

The Impact on Licensed Operators

Licensed cannabis businesses are feeling the pinch from both high taxation and competition from illegal operators. Many have reported significant declines in sales and profitability since legalization:

• Job Losses: In 2024 alone, thousands of jobs were lost within the legal cannabis sector as companies struggled to remain viable amidst fierce competition from unlicensed growers.

• License Reductions: The number of cultivation licenses has also decreased significantly as businesses close or consolidate due to financial pressures.

Calls for Reform

In light of the challenges facing California’s cannabis market, licensed operators are increasingly calling for reforms to create a more sustainable and equitable environment. Key proposals include:

Community Perspectives on Cannabis Enforcement

Public opinion on cannabis enforcement is varied across California:

• Support for Legalization: A majority of Californians support legalization; however, there is growing frustration over the inability of law enforcement to effectively tackle illegal operations.

• Concerns About Safety: Residents express concerns about safety issues associated with illegal grows, including environmental degradation and crime linked to unregulated operations.

Local Government Responses

Local governments are taking different approaches:

Environmental Concerns

Illegal Cultivation’s Impact

Illegal cannabis cultivation has raised significant environmental concerns:

Regulatory Solutions

To address these environmental impacts the following can be done:

Strategies for Improvement

As California grapples with its ongoing battle against illegal cannabis operations, several strategies may help improve enforcement effectiveness:

1. Comprehensive Policy Review

A thorough review of existing policies could identify areas needing reform:

Enhanced Collaboration

Collaboration among various stakeholders is crucial:

Conclusion

California’s ongoing struggle with illegal cannabis operations highlights broader challenges in navigating legalization complexities. Despite progress since 2016, issues like high taxation, complex regulations, community attitudes, and environmental impacts hinder effective enforcement. To combat illicit activities, California needs a multifaceted strategy involving policy reforms, better collaboration among stakeholders, community engagement, and public education campaigns. Such comprehensive approaches are essential not only to address the black market but also to foster a thriving legal cannabis industry that benefits all residents. California’s experience will likely serve as a critical case study for other states facing similar challenges in cannabis regulation.

LEGAL CANNABIS VS. BLACK MARKET WEED, READ ON…

HOW DO YOU GET PEOPLE TO BUY LEGAL WEED BASED ON PRICE??

Last Thursday, we learned that the DEA’s marijuana rescheduling hearings are delayed until early next year. We also saw the list of 25 participants invited by the DEA to testify at those hearings. The takeaways here are: a) we will not have a substantive hearing on marijuana rescheduling until a new President takes office, and b) most of the hearing participants “represent law enforcement and anti-marijuana lobbies” as stated by MJBizDaily. Many people online didn’t like this at all, but I’ll humbly submit that it’s closer to a nothingburger.

The sky is not falling; delays are normal (and expected)

Anyone who has been around litigation or other court proceedings knows that delays are typical. You don’t have to be an administrative law expert (I’m not) to appreciate that. In this respect, it is puzzling why some of the industry folks, including cannabis lawyers, were howling at last Thursday’s news. It’s like complaining about the color of the sky.

Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) John Mulrooney’s Preliminary Order (“Order”) strikes me as a typical housekeeping exercise. He notes that the DEA hasn’t clarified which of the rescheduling hearing’s 25 participants support rescheduling, and which don’t. The Order gives a November 12 deadline (pretty tight!) for clarification on this point, and on related important issues– including disclosures of any known participant or DEA conflicts of interest. The Order also gives the DEA until November 12^th to designate its counsel of record.

The Order is also clear that the previously scheduled December 2^nd hearing remains on the docket. Participants must come prepared with “January-February 2025” dates for the big show. Lest you believe that the question of cannabis rescheduling will be fully and finally resolved at that time, I’m here to tell you otherwise. The hearings may drag on for any number of reasons, and once concluded, the ALJ will likely take his time arriving at a decision. Moreover, that decision could be litigated.

In short, people need to take a breather and understand that things are going as expected. Back on May 1, the day after the DEA agreed to initiate Schedule III rulemaking, I wrote that “I doubt cannabis will be on Schedule III” by Election Day. In the bigger picture, and long before that, I highlighted how Biden “passed the buck, putting us on an uncertain, circuitous path” by kicking off this rescheduling inquiry. For the 1,000^th time, Congress needs to act.

The participant list isn’t a huge deal; could even be helpful

The ALJ is presiding over a rulemaking process and making a record. A “record” in judicial proceedings is a technical term: it means the written account of all documents, evidence and proceedings in a matter. The record has already begun to accrete in this one, by way of the 42,925 comments on marijuana rescheduling submitted prior to the July 22 deadline (69.3% of them in support of rescheduling). The early 2025 hearings will continue to build out the record.

I mentioned above that the ALJ’s rulings may be litigated. If I were in the Judge’s chair, I’d make every possible effort to hear, on the record, from participants opposed to rescheduling. This is a useful way to insulate the Judge’s likely decision to follow the DEA’s Schedule III recommendation: all are fully and fairly heard.

No matter how much “evidence” or persuasive testimony opponents may conjure and enter into the record, it should not be enough to unseat the findings from FDA/HHS. That 250 page script considers the eight factors that determine control of a substance under 21 U.S.C. 811(c)– including that marijuana has a currently accepted medical use (CAMU). The report also contains favorable relative findings on abuse liability, with respect to other scheduled and unscheduled drugs (fentanyl, ketamine, alcohol, etc.). I just don’t see the naysayers getting there.

What’s next for marijuana rescheduling

Obviously, tomorrow’s elections are a pretty big deal. They don’t bear directly on these proceedings, but the composition of Congress and the Presidency for the next few years could potentially obviate the need for this rulemaking, or lessen its impact. Beyond that, a few interesting breadcrumbs may fall from the December 2^nd hearing, including which witnesses will testify on behalf of the 25 selected participants (a few are associations with yet-undesignated reps), whether any conflicts of interest arise, and anything else.

Stay tuned for December 2^nd if you’re a very process-oriented person. Everyone else can probably take a breather. This is what Biden signed us up for, after all, instead of following through with his campaign promises to decriminalize marijuana. (I couldn’t resist.)

For more on this topic, check out the following posts:

The cannabis Industry has undergone a remarkable transformation over the past few decades, evolving from a largely illegal substance to a multi-billion-dollar legal market in many regions. As this industry continues to expand, understanding the purchasing behaviors of different consumer segments becomes increasingly important. Two primary categories of cannabis consumers are medical users and recreational users, each with distinct motivations, preferences, and buying patterns. This article delves into the nuances of these purchasing behaviors, exploring why medical cannabis users tend to buy larger quantities while recreational consumers buy more frequently.

Understanding the Cannabis Market

The Rise of Medical Cannabis

Medical cannabis refers to the use of cannabis for therapeutic purposes, often prescribed to alleviate symptoms associated with various medical conditions. These can include chronic pain, anxiety, epilepsy, and multiple sclerosis, among others. As research continues to unveil the therapeutic benefits of cannabinoids like THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) and CBD (cannabidiol), more patients are turning to medical cannabis as an alternative or complement to traditional medications.

In many jurisdictions where cannabis has been legalized, patients must obtain a medical card or prescription from a licensed healthcare provider. This process not only legitimizes their use but also often provides access to higher-quality products and a wider range of options tailored for specific health needs.

The Growth of Recreational Cannabis

On the other hand, recreational cannabis is used primarily for enjoyment and relaxation rather than for medical reasons. With legalization sweeping across various states and countries, recreational users have access to a plethora of products designed for leisure consumption. This includes not just flower but also edibles, concentrates, and infused beverages.

Recreational consumers often seek out cannabis for its psychoactive effects, social experiences, or simply as a means to unwind after a long day. The motivations behind recreational use can vary widely—from social bonding and creativity enhancement to relaxation and stress relief.

Purchasing Patterns: A Comparative Analysis

Quantity vs. Frequency

One of the most significant distinctions between medical and recreational cannabis users lies in their purchasing patterns specifically, the quantity of product purchased per transaction versus the frequency of purchases.

Medical Cannabis Users: Larger Quantities

Medical cannabis users typically buy larger quantities during each transaction. This behavior can be attributed to several factors:

• Consistency in Treatment: Many medical users require consistent access to their medication to effectively manage chronic conditions. For instance, patients dealing with severe pain may need to consume cannabis daily or multiple times a day. Buying in bulk ensures they have enough supply on hand without frequent trips to dispensaries.
• Cost-Effectiveness: Purchasing larger quantities often leads to cost savings per unit. Medical users are often budget-conscious due to ongoing health expenses and may prefer buying in bulk to minimize costs over time.
• Product Variety: Medical users might also purchase various strains or products (e.g., tinctures, oils) that cater specifically to their health needs. This diversity allows them to experiment with different formulations until they find what works best for them.
• Legal Limitations: In some regions, legal restrictions dictate how much cannabis can be purchased at once. Medical users may maximize their allowable purchase limits during each visit.

Recreational Consumers: More Frequent Purchases

Conversely, recreational consumers tend to make more frequent purchases but buy smaller quantities each time. Several factors contribute to this behavior:

• Variety Seeking: Recreational users often enjoy experimenting with different strains and product types. Frequent purchases allow them to try new products regularly without committing to larger quantities that they may not enjoy.
• Social Consumption: Many recreational consumers use cannabis in social settings or during specific events (e.g., parties or gatherings). This leads them to buy smaller amounts that fit their immediate needs rather than stockpiling products.
• Changing Preferences: The preferences of recreational users can change frequently based on mood or occasion. They may opt for lighter strains during daytime activities and more potent options for evening relaxation, leading them to buy more often.
• Accessibility and Convenience: As dispensaries become more widespread and accessible, recreational consumers may find it easier to make spontaneous purchases rather than planning ahead for larger buys.

Motivations Behind Purchasing Behavior

Medical Users’ Motivations

The motivations behind medical cannabis purchases are deeply rooted in health concerns:

• Therapeutic Needs: Medical users prioritize finding products that effectively address their specific symptoms or conditions. Their purchasing decisions are often guided by recommendations from healthcare providers or peer-reviewed research.

• Reliability: Many medical consumers seek out brands known for their consistency in product quality and efficacy. Trust in the source is crucial; thus, they may develop loyalty toward certain dispensaries that meet their needs reliably.

• Education: Medical users often invest time in educating themselves about different cannabinoids and terpenes that may benefit their conditions. This knowledge influences their purchasing decisions significantly.

Recreational Users’ Motivations

Recreational consumers are driven by different motivations:

• Experience Seeking: Recreational users view cannabis as a means of enhancing experiences whether it’s enjoying music, art, or socializing with friends. Their purchases are often influenced by trends in consumption methods (like edibles or vape pens).

• Social Influence: Peer recommendations play a significant role in shaping recreational consumers’ choices. They may be swayed by what friends are using or what’s popular on social media platforms.

• Brand Loyalty: While brand loyalty exists among recreational users, it is often less pronounced than among medical users due to the wide variety of products available and the desire for novelty.

 Implications for Dispensaries and Brands

Understanding these purchasing behaviors has significant implications for dispensaries and brands operating within the cannabis market:

 Marketing Strategies

1. Targeted Promotions: Dispensaries can tailor promotions based on consumer segments offering bulk discounts for medical users while providing loyalty programs or limited-time offers for recreational consumers seeking variety.

1. Education Initiatives: Providing educational resources can help both consumer segments make informed decisions about their purchases—medical users may benefit from information on therapeutic benefits while recreational users might appreciate insights into new strains or consumption methods.

1. Product Diversity: Offering a wide range of products can cater to both segments effectively ensuring that medical users find what they need while also providing recreational consumers with exciting new options regularly.

Inventory Management

1. Stocking Strategies: Dispensaries should consider stocking larger quantities of popular medical products while maintaining a diverse array of smaller items aimed at recreational consumers who prefer variety.

1. Sales Forecasting: Understanding these purchasing patterns allows dispensaries to forecast sales more accurately—ensuring they have sufficient stock on hand during peak buying times.

Conclusion

The cannabis market is complex and multifaceted, shaped by diverse consumer needs and preferences. Medical cannabis users tend to purchase larger quantities due to their ongoing health requirements, while recreational consumers favor frequent smaller transactions driven by a desire for variety and experience.

As the industry continues to evolve, recognizing these distinct behaviors will be crucial for businesses aiming to thrive in this competitive landscape. By tailoring marketing strategies, product offerings, and educational initiatives accordingly, dispensaries can better serve both medical and recreational consumers alike—ultimately contributing to a more informed and satisfied customer base within the burgeoning world of legal cannabis.

CANNABIS PURCHASES WITH INFLATION, WHAT WE KNOW…

CONSUMERS CHOOSE QUANTITY OVER QUALITY WITH INFLATION!