Does the Cannabis Control Commission need legislative intervention? | State House News / NBC 10 Boston

Lawmakers heard a litany of complaints about the business and regulatory environments for marijuana companies Wednesday as a key committee mulls whether and how it should intervene legislatively to address chronic problem spots in the industry and with the Cannabis Control Commission…

Donahue asked several of the people and groups that were invited to testify Wednesday (the CCC was not invited to testify) whether they thought that the statutory structure of the CCC contributed to the issues they raised. He asked about how other state cannabis oversight agencies are structured and whether moving the CCC under an executive office might make sense.

That idea would be a non-starter for Kevin Gilnack, the policy co-chair for Equitable Opportunities Now, though he did agree that “recent events obviously have highlighted the need for some potential clarification and enhancements of the CCC’s authorizing statute.”

“I’m here to emphasize the importance of preserving the quasi-independent nature of the CCC, with five commissioners appointed by three constitutional officers,” Gilnack told lawmakers. “Concentrating the power and responsibility of overseeing cannabis policy under one officer puts an unfair burden on them and their bureaucracy, and often leads to opaque and politicized decision making with limited opportunity for public comment, for debate. While the CCC deliberations are often very slow and messy, they also prioritize debate, including different perspectives from different commissioners of different backgrounds, and they encourage stakeholder input.”