 We'll get started that thanks Nellie my name is James Pepper I'm the chair of the Vermont Cannabis Control Board today is September 21st 2022 it's 1pm and I call this meeting to order a few brief remarks this morning or this afternoon sorry first thing we're going to need to do an executive session there is a perspective licensee that has a presumptively disqualifying conviction in their criminal history but based on the facts and circumstances surrounding the conviction staff has recommended that they have overcome the presumptive disqualification and should be eligible to receive a license so we'll talk about the staff recommendation and executive session which I anticipate that we will hold after Brynn reviews all the applications and social equity statuses and before we take a vote on the recommendations no new retailers this week I think you'll see in the register that there are six in resubmitted status it is my understanding that these applications are either very near completion or need a final site visit before they are recommended for approval barring some issue in the site visit I anticipate those applications should be ready for next week's meeting inventory tracking we're going to do some additional trainings in walkthroughs of our inventory tracking system our plan is to do also kind of a Q&A at the end of those so that licensees can just kind of interface with the board and Kerry Jigar our director of compliance about how those track documents work and maybe some of the any questions that you have about definitions or what it is that we're actually asking for you know in the meantime just please continue to send your questions to the board you know they're very helpful and you know identifying areas of confusion and things that we might need to clarify packaging we know that packaging is a complicated area of our rules we are the first and only state that has moved away from acquiring child resistant packaging for cannabis flower of course flower does not pose the same risk if it's accidentally ingested as say inedible we ask the legislature to do this so that we don't have to rely on heavy-duty non recyclable non reusable single-use plastic jars and lids for flower the legislature is willing to accommodate this request but they didn't say that this could be a free for all they required child deterrent packaging this is a term of art that has a statutory definition but there are no state or federal certifications or registries for child deterrence like there are for child resistance you can't for instance Google child deterrent packaging and find an index of products that have been approved by the consumer product safety commission we don't need to approve every child deterrent package we'd like people to use some common sense here is your packaging difficult for a child under five to open in a reasonable amount of time does it have characteristics like a latch a latching mechanism or tear resistance we did add a new tear resistant non plastic mylar pouch with a zip lock for flower to our website under approved packaging so there is kind of an alternative to glass jars of people that are looking for that we are also are going to have a supplemental one-pager guidance document on packaging up on our website by the end of the week that will more clearly delineate what products need to be child resistant versus child deterrent and some basic tenants on how to achieve each that's it for my comments this week to the Kyle yet a chance to review the minutes last week yes yes they're a motion to approve so moved seconded all in favor hi hi hi okay I'm brain I will turn things over to you to review the staff recommendations for the week here is your register for this week starting with the medical cannabis program here as we always do with the numbers of our new patient applications and renewal applications that we've received and patient cards issued in caregiver applications received and renewal applications received so numbers are staying pretty consistent week to week medical staff are currently processing applications received on or after August 15th so we remain I for six days behind still working on getting up to date with our backlog I'll move on to our adult use license application these numbers are current as of yesterday and I highlighted a few you know I know this is really kind of a wall of numbers that I present to you each week staff is working on a number of reports like fine-tuning some reports that give a little bit more detailed information and I think that once we start to meet a little less frequently and the next several months your board meeting reports will look a little bit different but in the meantime I tried to highlight a few areas of interest you the board has before it seven applications that staff is recommending for licensure but there are a number of applicants in resubmitted status as the chair mentioned at the outset we've got several manufacturers tier one two and three in resubmitted status six retailers and four wholesalers and the folks that are in resubmitted status could either be waiting for a final review from our licensing team of the materials that they resubmitted or they could be waiting for a site visit from our compliance team but my understanding is that the majority of these applicants are very close to being ready for the board to approve for licensure so you can see that we've got a number of those important parts of the supply chain getting very close to being ready for licensure and just highlight the testing labs that we have licensed to and we have two more in the queue so I will move on to our list for this week as I mentioned we've got seven that are up for approval this week all of these applicants have demonstrated compliance with the requirements for their license that are contained in board rule and in statute we have friendly gardens applying for indoor tier one cultivation license can able farms indoor tier one cultivation license heavy right on indoor tier one cultivation license all truck and indoor tier one cultivation license Vermont select a mixed tier two cultivation license green valley cannabis a mixed tier one cultivation license and lastly extract Vermont seeing a manufacturing tier three manufacturing license so that is your list for this week we hear our numbers for license amendments we've got five issued and six dismissed those are all part of the work that our licensing team is doing each week and then we've got our social equity information here this is a little bit of new information for you in the social equity status determination pending table so staff is working on creating a report that gives some more information about our social equity applicants as they're moving through that early part of the process before they come to the board for a status approval or denial so these are the numbers of those folks and where they are in the review process and just to be clear we the staff recommend social equity status approval or denial to the board as soon as we have all the information we need to make that recommendation so we don't wait until their license application is complete or until it meets a certain status as soon as their interview is done and we have all the information we need we go ahead and make that recommendation to the board but this does just provide a little bit of information about how many social equity applicants we have kind of in the queue waiting for their determination and finally we have two staff recommendations on social equity status this week both our recommendations for a denial so we have submission 1272 and submission 1165 and staff are recommending that the board deny social equity status for both of these applicants because they don't meet the criteria for social equity individual applicant as defined by board rule and that's it for this week as the chair mentioned we do have an application pending that is from an applicant who has some presentably disqualifying offenses on the record and we are I suggest we go into the session to discuss that application right why don't we do that then is there a motion to enter into executive session I move that the CCP going to executive session to consider confidential any client communications need for the purposes of providing professional legal services to the body and that the executive session is required because premature general public knowledge regarding such communication would clearly place the board a substantial disadvantage are we having guests I apologize in our executive session today. Susanna Davis and Jay Green are both invited. So I further move that the board invites Susanna Davis and Jay Green from the racial equity office for the state of Vermont into executive session. I will second. All favor. Hi. Hi. OK. OK then I will resume. Again James Pepper. This is the Vermont CCB meeting on September 21st 2022. It's 1.26 in the afternoon. We just left executive session. Again just for the record we discussed a perspective applicant who had a presumptively disqualifying offense in their criminal history. Records and there was a staff recommendation that the overcome overcame their presumptive disqualification and should be eligible to receive a license. And we discussed kind of the individual facts of the case and already I think to take a vote on that recommendation as well as all the others. I move that the board accept each of the recommendations for social equity status and license to us by staff in this meeting. A second. All in favor. Hi. Hi. OK. I believe all we have left to do today is public comment. We'll do this the same way we always do. If you joined via video and would like to comment please raise your virtual hands. Do our best to call on you in the order that your hand was raised and then we will move to people that joined by the phone. Why don't we start with Marissa. Hi there. Thank you. So my main reason for wanting to comment there was my company is all education. We are responsible vendor trainers and I have found that Vermont is not following a lot of the same guidelines in terms of application and process to become what Vermont calls an authorized vendor for to serve the cannabis industry. So that's one concern. We were coming from Massachusetts and I noticed that there are other two other Massachusetts companies that have already been authorized. I feel that the lack of transparency on this issue is a bit concerning. We are and we also here in Massachusetts suggestion for the Vermont Cannabis Control Board is they produced a wonderful guideline document so that we really understand what's needed to bring forth in order to get credentialed and authorized. So yeah these are just things that I wanted to speak on. I think the process is abstract and again that lack of transparency is very concerning. So my company is going to move forward. We will be submitting our essentially what is an email with our information shortly. But I think I think this process can be improved. Thanks Marissa. Chris is next. Hi this is Chris Picker as a root cannabis. I chimed in a couple of weeks ago and I was talking about manufacturing and trying to roll that into tier one. And after giving more thought I realized that all cultivators are manufacturers. That's what we do. And it's it's it's kind of frustrating to have this all separated out and have another application fee and go through the whole processing again and more time more energy when I know your goal is to try and bring people into the fold make them an easier process for them to be a part of this system. We as cultivators are manufacturers now I understand that if you want to bring it if you want to be a manufacturer of other people's products that that requires a different kind of license. I understand that. But if you want to process your own material and do things with it that should be included in the application in the original cultivation license. And I believe that a lot of other cultivators feel the same way as me. And I would kind of ask other cultivators to kind of chime in right now and raise their hand. They agree with that because having to jump through our hoops and having to pay another application fee is frustrating. Thank you. Thanks Chris. Marie. Hi. Thank you again. I just want to make a comment about something I don't know if it can be revisited. I don't know for a fact how this I know that it is in a part of compliance and getting your license. But it's something that I don't know if the regulation for it can be revisited because here's my situation is a manufacturer tier two. I am a sole owner. I'm only a tier two because I didn't want to be limited to what I could receive as income for a year to 10 grand or under. So I opted for tier two based on that solely. But the thing is I am a very very small manufacturer. I'm a sole owner and sole employee. So with that I will be responsible for every part of the process of manufacturing for my business until hopefully if I grow which is my goal. But in the meantime it's really a hardship for me to be basically scrounging from the dirt to create something here which I'm sure a lot of people are. But I am not blessed with I mean I've cleared out my 401 and I've done everything I can to try and make this move forward. But the thing that I'm most concerned about is the fact that I have to have twenty five hundred dollars for a cessation of operations and for an escrow and that money for a small person but a small operation is money that could go toward my license or toward materials packaging advertisement not advertisement but like you know anything. And there's all kinds of things I could do with that twenty five hundred especially starting out so small. I'm hoping and wondering if there's any possibility that could be looked at again just because if you look at the process as a manufacturer I won't be dealing with customers and I don't have like they don't have a need for me so to say so to speak to be in business. I don't have employees that are counting on me. So why this cessation of operations escrow for me. If anyone if I stop if I cease to exist then it's my my it falls on me and nobody else has affected directly. So I guess that's my comment. I'm hoping that could be reconsidered. Thank you. Thanks very Alice. Okay unmute. Hi I'm Alice Peel. I'm the chair of the weights field planning commission. And I've been a number of these sessions and routinely update the planning commission on the activities and rules of the cannabis control board one thing we kicked around last night relates to this rule. It's in your violations document and it's under 4.5.3 Category 3 violations and penalties. And we started looking at allowing consumption by any person of alcohol cannabis or other intoxicant intoxicants on the premises of the cannabis established or dispensary or in areas adjacent to the premises of the cannabis establishment or dispensary that are under the licensees control except disauthorized by the board. And the scenario we have or we discussed is that potentially we have a cannabis retailer coming in to one of the vacant shops in our small one of our small shopping areas will be located right in the middle of a row of stores. So the scenario we were looking at is someone comes out of this shop in a rental in a shopping area with other stores. A parking lot with a significant number of cars that come out. Persons that come out leave that front door and window which would be the area right outside that shop. They could move down to in front of another shop or they could you know wander off to their car in the parking lot or to one of the restaurants there and immediately light up and smoke some of the do you get. The question is and they do yeah and the question is who then is responsible. I mean I don't envision a cannabis shop owner running across the parking lot to tell somebody not to light up. My sense was more that the municipality or the town of Waitsfield would be more responsible in that scenario. But is this a violation a reportable violation of the retail shop owner. So that's kind of more of a question. But I'd point out that that's the scenario we're looking at. Like somebody smoking across the parking lot. Does that person does the retail shop warrant a violation and a notice. Thank you for the question. Alice and we don't generally do question and answer during the public comment period. However, I think it's a good point. And I think that someone can probably be in touch with you. I'm just we did a municipal training last week and tried to take some questions in that venue. I believe we have been working with the league to develop municipal guidance around some of these concerns. But it sounds to me just based on your position that we can find you relatively easily and we can just be in touch about that. Jeffrey. Good afternoon everyone. Can you hear me OK. Yep. Excellent. Thank you board for all that you are doing. We understand you are spinning many lights still. So thank you for all of the due diligence and work that you've been doing up to today. Congratulations to the applicants that were approved today. I have two quick points that I want to raise. By the way, Jeffrey Pizzatello executive director and co-founder of the Vermont Growers Association. We are the state's trade association for our cannabis professionals. Two quick points. But I wanted to actually if I can take a moment to address Chris Vickers if you are listening. Heard about the manufacturing allowance for the tier one cultivator. It is something that we have been proposing for nearly two years now. I urge you to reach out to us and others as well that are interested in this subject matter. We have developed extensive market structure that includes these sorts of allowances. So I just want to take a moment to say that and thank you those cultivators for raising that. So I want to impart on the board that as a trade association for the state, we are hearing more and more from licensed cultivators and licensed manufacturers, albeit there are a few of them. Concerns about pricing, concerns about price control, concerns about leverage. And we are talking about now the formation of a market. So as we're all aware, these conversations are beginning. And that is retailers are approaching producers and wholesalers are approaching producers and they're negotiating and talking about price points. I mentioned this because and I am aware that the board is also aware of these issues. We've expressed this in the past. This really is beginning to drive home really intimately the importance of some degree of direct to consumer allowances. Now we understand that as an agency, you guys cannot develop on your own. But I want to take this moment to urge you guys in your capacity either through legislative reports or what have you that come 2023 that we make an effort that the board makes an effort to arrive at some form of direct to consumer. It is currently our market structure and you guys, you heard us talk about this. It very much is a race to the bottom. When it comes to pricing, we would like to prevent some of the issues we see in other states. And we we've all talked about this. We realize that some degree of direct to consumer is the solution here. That being said, very briefly mentioned that we are very proud to announce that Vermont producers and small cultivators now have a voice in Washington, DC. The Vermont gross association is part of a national craft cannabis coalition. We've introduced a federal bill last week. It is called the ship act introduces direct to consumer allowances for small farmers and producers. And I just urge the public to check that out. And I thank you board and attendees for your time. Have a good day. Thanks, Jeffrey. You know, everybody, I just like to quickly agree with Chris Vickers. After growing flower, we have to do something with it, whether it's putting in a jar or rolling into a joint. It feels like pressing rosin should also be part of that doesn't feel like we should have a separate license for that. Maybe the bar moves a little bit so that you need a manufacturing license if you're using solvents, for example, down the road, but it would be nice to see that line move and see basic manufacturing simply included with everyone's girl licenses. Thank you. Thanks to you. Peace. Oh, CCB. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Okay, thank you, Mr. Pepper. My question is my comment this week is in regards to you guys were been working at this for 18 months. We were seated in April and it was Brunhair that there is no executive director report on the progress that you guys have done in the last 18 months in other jurisdictions and other states. Most executive directors put out a once a month report on what the what the campus control board is doing. I have yet to see in that I watched one the other day down in Massachusetts where they're very direct of board gave a six hour executive director YouTube channel presentation on what they're what they're doing down there. They also down in other jurisdictions. I'm one of my other comment is I know it's a board meeting, but is this board meeting meant for you guys or is this more be board meeting meant for the stakeholder's because some of the things you do in this board meeting like your executive decisions of licensing and stuff can not be done on your own on a different time that this platform could be utilized for us to have a question and answer session. And can you space time for question and answer because there's a lot of people out there they're asking questions and answers and they're not getting them. And I feel that they're not being heard in that way. And I'm sure a lot of people could agree with me that there's a lot of questions that will be answered that are not on the website. I viewed the website recently and last week you said there would be safety vendor training information on the website. I didn't find it. I didn't find anything on the website about the track and trace that Kerry posted last week. So that's like running a week behind that people have questions about and supposedly we'll be able to open in 11 days, 10 days or whatever on the first. But I guarantee you nobody's going to be open that day because there's not enough product out there right now anyways. It's still going to drag care and everything else. And I'm just curious why there's no executive director report and why there's that could be done on this platform or a question and answer session weekly because it give at least two or three hours for everybody to come on here like we are now to be able to get our questions answered that we're not. And my other question is who is running the medical my other comment is who's running the medical section right now out of the three board chair chairperson right there between you Mr. Paperman, Julie and and Kyle because I assume looking on the website recently that Lindsey Wells is only an administrator now and she's not the director and I still believe there should be a director and I want to know where you guys are going to go. My comment is with the medical process. I know you have two round tables. I know you're probably speaking to legislatures and the upcoming session and the fact that Sears Med now has a adult loose license are they going to do away with their medical program. That's my other comment is that just go by the wayside are you guys trying to do away with the medical program because in the 18 months I've only seen two round tables and very little discussion on the medical program and there's a lot of questions that the medical program needs work and I feel without a medical director my comment is that you are focusing on the adult use and your answer tied overseeing your staff members overseeing other people bringers overseeing hiring people overseeing other legal administrative duties that she has to deal with along with your co-counsel there from this from the Attorney General's office and I want to focus on that because there's only three of you and that's also a quorum in the state of Vermont under Vermont meetings laws. There should be five of you because the quorum is only voted on two of you and only two of you vote on any of this stuff not three of you not five of you. So there's Julie and Kevin to Kyle normally voting on most everything that you agree upon and that's a quorum under Vermont state meeting laws and I'm just commenting on that because those are things I noticed and I'm sure a lot of other people can agree and where's your media relations person as my other comment and the other comment who's the chief financial officer for the CCB because I know you're running you're basically running a business and I'd like to have that comment put in there too. And I do like the comment from Bristol from Massachusetts some things on the CCE board here is a little difficult to read and Massachusetts is much more and they've had five years to talk about their stuff too but thank you for your time today and I appreciate your work. Thank you. Richard. Oh hi first off thanks to the board for all the work that you've done and congratulations to to everybody that's been approved. My comment is probably pretty low on your list of priorities I know you got bigger first of all but as a Vermont you're looking at this opportunity and wanting to get involved in legal cannabis in Vermont. I looked at the licensing and the tier one manufacturing license looks like it was designed for somebody like me who wants to get involved but after putting a pencil to it it just doesn't make sense with the $10,000 revenue cap when it looks like to a lay person in a way that all the other requirements are the same as a a tier two, a tier three the license application the license fee the product fees the banking requirements the insurance requirements and by the time you put in the cost of the other raw materials it just doesn't make sense so I would encourage the board to take a look at and modify the tier one manufacturing license requirements or the or the limitations that you put on it so that it would make a financial sense for Shavor Monti who wants to participate in this industry thank you much yeah thanks Richard Dave Hey guys thank you for the work today and especially for approving an at scale manufacturer that's very important from our launch appreciate it I want to just ring the alarm bell on testing the I found out yesterday from Bia which I understand is the only testing lab that is able to do pesticides and pathogens testing that their machine is down and they're not able to do them right now and they hope that they'll be able to start doing them next week I don't need to show you the calendar I think we're all well aware that that is really cutting things extremely close and I'm not aware much if any product that has already passed all that required training so a couple of thoughts there one is your rules have a waiver for pesticides testing for folks who are approved pesticides free pesticide free by independent third parties but you've yet to designate any third parties as approved to provide that certification I think that at this point in the calendar might be a rather urgent priority and you know if there's anything else that we can do to speed up that testing it would be greatly appreciated we are taking inventory at flora we have a nice variety of inventory in and coming in do a quick plug if anyone has packaged eights and quarters we'll love to talk with you but you know it's really difficult without all that testing done and with everything on hold over there at bea so would appreciate anything that you guys can do on that front thank you thanks Dave LB farm maybe go to the next person we'll get back to the LB farm if they unmute it looks like they just lowered their hands there is not currently anybody else with their hand raised alright well if if you would like to make a public comment you join by the video raise your virtual hands and we'll also open up to people that joined by the phone you can hit star six to unmute yourself if you joined by the phone Matt just raised his hand Matt L oh hey hello um I wanted to chime in on the pesticide testing that David Silberman had brought up as a third-party certifier through clean green your rules explicitly state that a third party that tests for pesticides and if someone follows and fulfills those obligations under that certification they are not required to test for pesticides I personally don't believe any third parties need to be approved by you folks because I believe it's not written in the rules as such but I'm worried about the testing component as brought up that bea is having issues and so how can a market open in less than ten days when product hasn't passed testing is that not a liability for the consumer so I think this market is extremely inequitable I think it's been extremely unfair on how the licenses have rolled out for a few while so many are sitting in the queue and I'm not really happy with well I'll leave it at that thank you yeah thanks Matt the phone number ending in five two three zero has unmuted yeah hello my name is a Zeb Overton license grower hopefully licensed retailer just wondering what what is the I know I understand it's not a q&a I just wanted to make a couple comments just wondering if it's realistic that we're opening on time and I just wondering on my application wondering where it's at I've submitted it we can have to go to get being beautified with somebody we can have to go still waiting I mean I'm a remaner I got everything in this I'm ready to open I just you know I'm just wondering if we could move on the retail getting approved thank you exit Louie or Lewis not sure if your name is press Louie or Lewis but uh either way you have your hand raised can you hear me now yes okay sorry it wasn't alright so yeah it's Lewis from good harbor cannabis insurance so this was in regards to the comment that the woman made earlier about the funds that need to be set aside for cessation um this is just more sort of a statement that anybody out there if they don't have the funds to set aside uh a bond can be purchased and so if folks you know don't have that twenty five hundred the five thousand whatever it is the bonds are fairly inexpensive and I don't know if the board was going to do anything about what she had said but that is an alternative that we've helped a lot of clients with so people are welcome to contact us or anybody who you know helps them that where they can get a bond to uh to cover that cessation that's just what I wanted to mention thanks Lewis okay anyone else for a public comment I will close the public comment window then thank you all for your comments uh we do listen uh we try and um address these issues and when we see common issues we try and write guidance around them we do talk about them in between meetings um so thank you for raising all of those excellent points um and uh if there's nothing else from Julie or Kyle and I will um adjourn the meeting thank you thank you