 Okay, just letting a few people in. So my name is James Pepper, I'm the chair of the Cannabis Control Board. Today is the second of our kind of after-hours public comment meetings. So today is a meeting of the board dedicated exclusively towards public comment. You know, we can just really get started just letting folks in admitting them right now. If you'd like to come join us in person, I'm over at our Cannabis Board Office at 89 Main Street in Montpelier. This is our physical location. Otherwise it looks like most people have joined by the link. So if you would like to make a public comment and you've joined by the link, please feel free to raise your virtual hand. And Francis, you've got the honor of going first. Alright, well thank you Commissioner Pepper. I'll allow two of the rest of the commission. Thank you for having this session for all your hard work. The last number of months I know it hasn't been easy. I have a few basic comments tonight. The first thing I'd like to tell you is we did vote for retail in Jamaica, Vermont. And we did vote against integrators, but that is not because we don't want to have integrators in the future. That was a consensus amongst the residents and voters about the limited licensing. So just to make that clear, that's the definition of that vote. But I'd like to shift for a moment to the medical program. And I've made these comments to you before, but I'm going to reinforce them one more time in the hopes that we can advance this program. And first of all, I see no reason why there's a fee for cards, especially for low income individuals. I had been through this myself two years in a row where my doctor signed my paperwork, but technically I was not a medical patient, which I demonstrated to my legislators and it was fine. But if we could do that, that would be great. I read the article that Seven Days put out and that you pushed to us on Twitter and it was informative. And I noted that the dispensary is going to be able to basically grow what they need to, whether it's for retail or for medical. I have been an advocate, of course, and I believe I said this before, for an increase in the plan count. But if they're going to be able to grow what they need to, I think we need to really look at loosening all the restrictions around any medical patient, especially those who need to make coils and that kind of thing, which requires a good amount of plant material and also requires multiple cultivars. So no disparity on that. Let's keep it equal. If they get to do it, if the goose gets to do it, the game does too. I don't think we'll have a problem with any issues on that. I think that will work out fine for people. It will help a lot of people out, especially those who can't afford to go to a dispensary. For those of you who don't know, I'm actually the gentleman who carried a first plan into Vermont Patient's Alliance, and I'll feel you're smart. Not anti-dispensary, but I am forward on the idea of expanding the role of the caregivers in Vermont. I was able to get one patient for one caregiver and for another patient a long time ago. I think it's time we expand that. It's a very important thing and give those caregivers the increased plan count that anyone in a dispensary or as a patient would have, either way. Going on from there, I'd like to see that program expanded in the way that the main program had been up to about 2020 is what I'm recollecting. It was a good model. It's worked out well for them. They have several thousand caregivers that help many, many people. I know some of them personally over there, I've worked with labs that produce a clean, effective and affordable cancer royal, also for Parkinson's and other severe disease. So that is something that I think we seriously need to look at so that we can provide the life-saving, sometimes life-saving, and certainly improving quality oils that happen enough and present in this program since it's inception due to whatever recent cost or whatever it was at that time. So that's that. And then one more thing. I spoke to Senator Ballas and Representative Payala and I believe we had spoken to Senator Benning about possibly getting the votes for farm to table. And there's a number of reasons for that. The medical program would be enhanced by that. Let's say a farmer became a caregiver. And then the farmers that are now producing our food safely could produce cannabis and increase their income with even an acre of cannabis or even a smaller grown depending on what they were doing. And that would lift all of the small business people in the state, all the people that really need it, and would provide jobs that are better than a $15 an hour trending job somewhere in grown. And so that would be my comments for today. If anybody had any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. And if you've already covered any of these issues, I do apologize. I haven't been able to attend every meeting in the cycle. I've been doing all the medical meetings and I think we've made some progress there. So thank you very much for taking my comments. Thanks Fran. Next on my list is Paul Shannon. Paul, feel free to unmute yourself and join us by video if you'd like. Comments are there are many fold. I've done some research and it has a lot of questions come to mind. I know this isn't the form for questions. I didn't come with that. But what I'd like to know is, do I send it the questions to 89 Main Street to you folks there and hope to get some answers in return? I mean, my daughter and I have raised the funds between us for the oil and license saying as her debt was cost a couple of times for cannabis and paid a pretty steep price. But the point being is we're looking to make a sincere investment in this. And I mean, we're not interested in a storefront, but more like a destination. And there are questions regarding, I just heard that gentleman say that he answered one of them as to how much the dispensaries are going to be allowed to grow. And if it's enough so that we would have sufficient inventory, that's great. But I mean, questions regarding clumps. Do I go to the dispensaries? Do they have to be licensed? Can I go out of state? I mean, there are a hundred questions that I need to answer in order to draw up a proper and appropriate business plan. So I'm just curious as to I send it to the Montpelier address and as a list of questions. And I mean, is it something you folks, I just don't understand what the protocol is. Okay, thanks. Thanks, Paul. So yes, any questions you're more than willing to write in a, you know, a traditional, you know, letter to the cannabis board. We have a public comment portal through our website where you could submit them that way. And then also, you know, our kind of director of outreach, Nellie Marvel is also kind of can field some questions as well. And that's Nellie, N-E-L-L-I-E dot Marvel at Vermont.gov. Next on my list is Ben Mervis. Hi, everybody. Thank you for having me today. Thank you for having this session. I think I had a couple of comments I wanted to make the first, as always, is that just to thank you for your work on this. In case people who are on this call aren't paying attention. The website was recently updated for the CCB with a font of new information and better records keeping. So really you all are one of the best jobs I've seen in a state in terms of transparency and clear communication with everybody. I was unable to make yesterday's social equity meeting, subcommittee meetings. So I just wanted to add on to the topic of the diversity, equity and inclusion group that I was hoping to see. And I know you had planned on discussing the queer community, LGBT inclusion in there, but also on to be sure that one thing we've been hearing out in the real world is a question about where people who are not Black or Indigenous fall in, whether or not they count as people of color in the BIPOC inclusion on the social equity side, or whether or not there would be clear language regarding people of Latinx background or any other ethnicity, any other non-white ethnicity, Asian and Pacific Islanders, and folks who are just wondering whether or not they'll fall in social equity or diversity, equity and inclusion. I often have been saying the discussion on social equity is disproportionate impact, but if that is the case, definitely making sure that those folks are by group represented in the diversity, equity and inclusion category. I also thought I'd share a little anecdote with you because I made it to Portland, Maine on Sunday, and I went with a friend who's been going up there every couple of months just to see what's going on with the dispensaries. And I thought it was very interesting that that friend of mine there, impression was that a lot of the medical offerings in the stores had disappeared, in part because the state allows medical patients to shop at any dispensary and just have the tax waived, I believe is how they do it and that's how we're discussing doing it. I just wanted to note that there was a decrease in medical products, which mostly was a focus on dosing and price breaks. A lot of that has to do with why make the specialty products just for medical, but as it pertains to us in our market here in Vermont, I know there's a lot of discussions about caretakers and growers. In that world, I think we might lose them in the adult use market, but with edibles, specifically with edibles, we really need to address that 50 milligram per package cap because what I heard from the folks in the stores in Maine is that even just their regular customers they've had on the medical side who are still in medical and want to support the stores, they're having a really hard time buying these multiple packages of things. So addressing that 50 milligram cap, I know that's on a lot of people's mind. I just want to bring it up. I will also add, as you know, I am our boost out so I can person so far about social consumption. There's nowhere to consume legally in Maine if you're visiting and it made me think about our 13 million tourists to Vermont and the fact that they will also not have a legal place to smoke or consume the cannabis that we're hoping that they buy unless they have, of course, a cannabis-friendly arrangement. And so it could result in a lot of public nuisance that we're not looking for, a.k.a. my friends who wanted to smoke outside of the dispensary, and I said, please don't, please don't, but they don't listen. So just thought I'd share that with you all. Thank you. Thank you, Ben. So just once again for the people that have joined, this is our cannabis control board meeting dedicated exclusively to public comment. So I've got a list of people with their hand raised and I'm just going to go through them one at a time. If you would like to make a public comment, please raise your virtual hand and we'll move in just a little bit to folks that are on the phone. Next on my list is Jesse Lynn. Everyone doing. Thanks for having us. I appreciate you guys doing these public comments. So a couple of things I wanted to mention, of course, usually has to do with the medical program, but as I try to reiterate often that there are a lot more patients using cannabis that are necessarily in the medical program per se. So when we look at our consumers and consumption overall, we have to remember that a lot of those adult use retail consumers are going to be patients. The question I guess comment I have is just being a little bit surprised at the advisory committees and are the subcommittees. I'm sorry, not the advisory committees specific to the medicinal subcommittee. You know, I would love to just either see that committee continue with more people involved or understand a little bit more as to why that committee didn't have as many meetings as other folks. I would like to mention that my understanding is that we had a medical professional who is no longer on the committee who was, you know, high in that perspective, which was great, but they're no longer a part of that committee. Dr. Mary Clifton and the people in the committee right now are all representatives from the medical dispensary specifically one dispensary. In my mind, I do see that as a conflict actually unfortunately several see several of the appointments to the advisory and subcommittees as conflicting roles in some way. Just just really wanted to bring that up in a public way and address that. You know, I started this with by mentioning expanding the caregiver program. I would love to continue and have more of those conversations. I know you guys have and are entertaining that and some of that will be during legislative session. But just to mention how important that is, you know, during this public meeting, I constantly hear from people who are traveling to me rather than using the Vermont medical dispensary. And I think we want to avoid that for sure. The company subcommittee from medical specifically that worries me a little bit is they from each representative that they don't actually hear from patients themselves. So a lot of the information and feedback the subcommittee is giving as advice is not coming from patients that's coming from patient representatives. And I think that's important for the public to be aware of and just understand what I'm asking for is exactly what you guys are doing tonight. I love this. This is what should be happening through the marijuana for symptom relief oversight committee as well and open forum. So patients understand there is a way to voice their opinion just like tonight. I don't think that until now the symptom relief oversight committee or the dispensaries themselves have put much effort into reaching out to patients to hear their voices and to get that collective feedback rather than just using their own feedback. So I think that's really important to know and to work to make a better program. I also will continue to advocate for education. I think we recognize here everything that's brought up can be quelled through education. Education rather than prohibition. So with that we need medical professionals or at least medical professionals educating the people in the medical dispensary system. We need medical professionals helping with the caregivers. And let me see what else I wrote down in my notes. I think that's about it. But then a couple other things I want to mention is I hope to work with the cannabis control board or the advisory committees or legislative session advocates and see what we can do to continue advancing this program. There are there is a state out west in California that now allows cannabis in the hospitals and in retirement homes for end of life care. I'd like to see Vermont be the East Coast leader in that. I think we have that unique ability and I think we need to make some bigger changes to look towards the future of cannabis medicine where this is headed instead of trying to keep it so prohibitive as Vermont has. Tends to have one of the most medically prohibited prohibitive and kind of tight programs across the country. So I just wanted to throw that out there as far as along this process. I think the cannabis control board especially you know you three and the advisory committees have tried to be open but I do feel there is a difference between the medicinal committee the amount of meetings they've had the information and the feedback that's coming back and understanding why that committee lost a committee member and also who is the medical expert advocate on that on that advisory committee. And you know if we have somebody on that committee medical degree that is giving us support and advice that the committee doesn't agree with you know how do we work that from a larger level rather than removing that person from the committee is something I would just like to put out there and see as we move forward. So again thanks for your work and thanks for letting me share. Thank you Jesse Lynn. Next on my list is a phone number 802-399-4471. I see your hand is raised if you are joining by phone. I think you can unmute by hitting star six. Yeah we can hear you very. First of all you know I want to thank you for all your hard work. It's been a while since I've been able to join you live. Been trying to catch up on all of the videos and stuff you guys posted that really really really appreciate everything. I just want to talk a little bit about slang. You know the law clearly states that the medical dispensaries are only supposed to have one vertically integrated license each you know it's well known that you know this multi national multi state organization with hundreds of and millions of dollars assets as well as the crafters here so whatever they're calling themselves these days that two retail locations and those two retail locations have two satellite locations so that six satellite locations are six retail locations to dispensaries and those six retail locations and you know their facility in Milton is going from 20,000 square feet to 70,000 square feet and it's also well known that they're running around the state trying to acquire more places to produce. Just wanted to make it clear they're violating the law they're running roughshod over us and it shouldn't be like this. That's it thank you very much for your work I appreciate it. Thanks Barry. Next on my list Sam Brunberg. Hi everybody good evening thank you very much for having another one of these meetings and first to echo some of the words that have already been said tonight thank you guys very much for the work you all for the work you're doing and clearly transparently promptly punctually producing everything that you have it's really great to see and to see that there are really considerations being made for farmers and small aspiring businesses who aren't the aforementioned multi state operators. It's really great to see so thank you very much for all that work. I really wanted to take a second tonight to I'm sure I'll raise my hand again but the first time around to talk about terroir in cannabis or what it's being called in Oregon or northern California appellations of origin. In the wine industry terroir is defined as having three main principles the location where the grapes are grown the variety of the grape itself and the farmer or farmers who are responsible for growing the grapes and processing it into wine. And I think that Vermont has enough micro climates and a diverse enough set of growing regions that terroir or localized appellations of origins would be something that would be very beneficial to those wishing to have a unique way of advertising their products whether it is something that is grown like flour or processed into something like hash. Really that that was my only comment is that I think it's something that would be great for all of us and I think it might have to come through the cannabis control board. And that's it. Thank you very much. I appreciate the opportunity to share some thoughts with you today. Thanks Sam. Next on my list is Ann Gilbert. Vermont New Directions for the Youth Prevention Coalition in the very district of the Vermont Department of Health that we serve all of Washington County. Just wanted to express, you know, the focus of prevention and all the work that you're doing and how important it is to really helping prevent youth use and early use. And a few of the ways of doing that is really strengthening the buffer zone that would be not only around schools but also playgrounds and parks and childcare centers and really taking a look at where recovery centers are and being sensitive to that population as well. There are some areas where there has been growing or processing or retail stores that are right near and that, you know, that makes it difficult. Also thinking about labels on the warnings that should be on labels. Even if it's a lot of information, the high THC levels can be such a problem on so many of these developing brains. And I think there's people who don't really, you know, understand the impact that it can have on them in the short term and in the long term. And then thinking about advertising. We know from the tobacco industry how strong the advertising was for so many years and it took a long time to really roll that back. And I'd just like to see Vermont getting it right from the start and, you know, not having any cartoon images like Joe Camel and making sure that at, you know, when kids are walking down the street. You know, in my area on Main Street in Montpelier, the middle school is nearby and the high school and the elementary school. But that downtown is their hub. It's their community and it is their pathway to school. And just making sure that there are signs in every store, window or sandwich boards out on the sidewalk. So thank you for taking my call. Thank you, Ann. Next on my list is Carolyn P for Caroline. Hello, how are you doing? Hi. I just, first of all, thank you all again for the time you're spending and an opportunity to voice our opinion. I really just wanted to comment about Jesse Lynn Dolan, which she brought up has actually been a concern of mine as a medical patient. I am not able to attend those meetings and not having them remote is quite a detriment. There's not a chance I live in the southern part of the state. And with my medical conditions, it's not realistic for me to be able to get to those meetings and I would love to have my voice heard. So perhaps we could move to some sort of zoom or like this platform to be able to be heard. And that's really it for now. And I would like to also just agree with Barry as well. And really like to try to make this focused on small businesses, Vermonters, people who are here doing the right thing in Vermont. And let's reward them by not giving this opportunity to large corporations. Thank you. Thank you. So I'd like to, I see a few more hands up I see a few people that are raising their hand for the second time I would like to pause just briefly and let anyone who's joined by phone, give them an opportunity to make a public comment. There's about, you know, five or six of you who have joined by phone and if you'd like to comment, you can do so by hitting star six to unmute yourself. Well, then we'll move back to the people that have joined via the link. Next on my list is Dr. C. Ansley. Hi. Thank you for taking my for calling on me. So I'm a physician in Vermont and I'm here and our concerns include we have a very high rate of marijuana use in Vermont. It's the highest in the nation and past month use and the United States has a very high rate in the world. So we're starting from a point of extremely high use among adults and children. So as we launch and begin a commercial system, if that becomes a higher rate, especially with the high concentrates, the fallout that we're seeing in the mental health system, and also in the ERs will probably intensify. So psychosis, acidity, cannabis hyperemesis syndrome, you know, problems on the on the highways and addiction, all these things will will worsen. And so therefore a couple of groups of physicians that I am a member of have the following concerns. We would join and Donahue in opposing, you know, advertising, since its aim is to increase dependence. And Vermont, you know, has done wonderful things with billboards and there's no reason we can't continue that pattern. We were proactive public health wise with our response to COVID. And so an innovative and pro health stance towards advertising is is is recommended. The warning labels should have the following. Psychosis, addiction, not habit forming addiction, cannabis hyperemesis syndrome, driving. And those that's not too much to put on on the label and we feel like that's important. One thing that's not been talked about a lot, we hear a lot about vertical integration, but vertical integration, you know, historically has cultivated addiction. And when this started in England, that the houses, I mean, the reason that they got rid that they create that they outlawed vertical integration is because of the damage that did in the in the way that it, it cultivates. It increases addiction. So I think that we would warn the committee to not to facilitate any more vertical integration than we already have. Shop density is a problem is an issue. You know, we're we have very high use rates, as I said, and places like Colorado and California have half of their half of their municipalities municipalities or communities have opted out. So therefore with low shop, that level of low shop density, we have, you know, higher use rates than they do even. So as you increase shop density, you will increase, you know, the evidence is you will increase use and you will increase use in underserved BIPOC and needy, perhaps communities. So, you know, we would warn you to not or to encourage you, I guess, to limit shop density to less than one in 15,000 people. We also as Anne mentioned, we think it's important to limit THC content what we're seeing, especially in Colorado with the new bill that came out. A lot of evidence of high THC that means greater than 10% concentration is really linked to the adverse effects like addiction, like suicidality, like psychosis. So it would be our recommendation to limit THC to 15% or less 10 would be better. We don't have any drug that's an FDA approved drug and THC is an FDA approved drug that we sell in sweeteners or with flavors. And so we our recommendation would be to not allow THC in sweeteners or flavors. We think it's important to measure the effectiveness of the advertising regulations and prevention activities that you put in place. And lastly, I think it's important, we think it's important to recognize that we need to make it explicit that Chapter 13 of Title 7 does not displace the Consumer Protection Act with regard to cannabis marketing. So that a victim of deceptive marketing has the right to bring suit under the Consumer Protection Act and clarify that the act does not displace or supersede the Consumer Protection Act with regard to false or deceptive marketing of cannabis. Basically, what we're saying is people who've been injured by false or deceptive marketing should be able to use the Consumer Protection Act to obtain a redress. And thank you very much for listening. Thank you, Dr. Analy. So I see just on my list a couple of names that have reappeared. I'm just going to go to the one person that hasn't spoken yet before I move back around. So Joe, you're listed as Joe Guest. If you'd like to make a comment, please feel free to unmute yourself. Oh, hey. Hey, this is Joe. Hey, Joe. Thanks for doing the meeting tonight. And I just had a couple of things I wanted to mention that you guys could keep your eyes on. You know, Vermont is based on small farmers and cannabis needs to be grown. THC is produced by a farmer. So I think the doctors need to stay out of this one, leave the farm into the farmers. And I think that we need to look into the effectiveness of the cure of cancer that THC has provided for a lot of individuals. Rick Simpson Oil. And a lot of us farmers are standing for this to be legal so we can continue to heal people that aren't able to get to it in the medical industry. And the vertical integration is the only way some of these small farmers are ever going to be able to survive and succeed with all sorts of sharks out there in the corporate world, as we know. So I just like Vermont to maintain the local crap mentality that we always have had at the state and keep that in the foresight of this whole operation. And that's pretty much it. Thank you. Thanks, Joe. So just giving the folks on the phone one more opportunity to chime in. If you join via the phone and you'd like to make a public comment, please feel free to hit star six to unmute yourself. Okay. Well, let's go back around. Fran, do you have another public comment? Yes, Chairman Pepper. I'm just going to stand up again to speak because I want to back up that gentleman who was talking about the activities of the integrates that were less than proper. And I would back him up because I heard the trepidation in his voice. And I am witness to some of these instances. And everything I speak about, I can back up. So first of all, one of the integrates took moldy dried cannabis that they couldn't sell at one location, brought it back to the headquarters and put it through a supercritical CO2 machine. Now anybody that knows that the supercritical CO2 machine is not going to clean that up, it's going to concentrate any issues that that mold may bring. And of course, these oils that were made from this were given to people with possible compromised immune systems such as cancer patients and others. And then there was another incident which was reported by an employee. By the way, that first incident was reported by an employee. He was literally admitted to by another employee during HempFest in 2018. The first incident report was on 420 2018 in Brattleboro. And the second incident would have been at the HempFest in Burke Mountain, which was then confirmed by the gentleman who, while he had to the duty of reprocessing those oils decided that he couldn't do it. So he quit his job. Those, that incident was reported to legislators who then reported it to the DPS. And evidently they didn't think it an issue. The second one, I'm sorry. The other one is having to do with a lot of materials going out the back door of one of the integrates. And it was reported by an employee. That's the one that went to the DPS. I'm sorry. And that was shoved under the rug as well. So those things did occur. We have a history of that. There was not a lot of supervision in the situation. And I believe I called that out in the medical meeting. So I'll leave it at that. Thank you. I just wanted to stand up for that gentleman. Thanks, Fran. Sam Rumberg, do you want to make a comment? Hi. Thank you again. This time I would like to talk about THC caps as a percentage for concentrates and also the proposed of a 50 milligram packaging limit for edibles. 60% is a number that is going to be difficult for a high end concentrate maker to stay under. So talking about a solvent list method of making hash or mechanically separating the resin containing trichome heads from the cannabis flower and trim. And using an ice wash hash method of processing and then heat pressing it into rosin, which is common practice for what is available in retail stores in every other legal or medical market state. It will be almost impossible for it to be under 60%, which means these products will not be allowed in the retail market, which means that consumers who want them will be forced to purchase them in an illicit market, which will continue to support the existence of an illicit market. These are products that are currently on market in Massachusetts. They are not limited by that THC cap and the customers here are going to get them somewhere or another. The next concern about the milligram limits per packaging is for products that like tinctures and alcohol extract of cannabis in a half ounce bottle will contain anywhere from 150 to 350 to 500 milligrams and a half ounce bottle where a single dose would be a single drop for anywhere from one milligram to five milligrams. Again, depending on the concentration, but if somebody to step back, a tincture is one of the oldest forms of plant medicine. It is a straight alcohol whole plant extraction. So for somebody who wants to make a product like this, a 50 milligram limit would not allow them to bottle it appropriately and to dilute it down would be wasteful of either ever clear corn alcohol, whatever it is that's being used as the alcohol. So please consider that there are some sort of non-traditional products that are more medical products that will be entering the market that the current rules really don't help. It's not like a candy. It's not like something that has small serving packaging. The final thing that I will mention during this comment since it'll be my last is to really thank you again. It's really great to have this opportunity in this forum and I would urge you to please consider what everybody is saying about the importance of access to medical marijuana in the state of Vermont. There are a lot of patients out there who don't have good access to what would really help them have a more high quality and comfortable day-to-day life. And it is unfortunate because the medicine is out there. So thank you very much. And I hope that you have a great one. Thank you, Sam. So I see phone number 802-399-4471 has unmuted. Do you have a comment you'd like to make? Yeah. Can you hear me? Yep. I just wanted to reiterate the gentleman who spoke up for the farmers and we need to be able to sell to the public. You know, if you guys look at the political article back a couple days ago about California and how pounds are going for $300, you know, there's just two things that are going to happen for those guys out there. Bankruptcy or they're going to declare their crops losses, you know, and ship them east into the black market to try to recoup. We need to be able to reach the end consumer somehow. If we are, you know, to succeed, we cannot rely on brokers. That's all. Thank you very much. I really appreciate you guys. I really appreciate what you're doing. Thank you. Thank you. Jesse Lynn. All right. Thanks. Thanks for having me again. So I just wanted to kind of, from medical professional to medical professional, just mention a few things quick. So hopefully other docs and medical professionals hear some of this. I didn't introduce myself before. I'm a nurse. I specialize in opioid use and multi substance use disorder with comorbid mental health disorders in the maternal child health population and was working at UVM and research for quite a while. I'm also the president of the American Nurses Association here in Vermont. And we've created an education program or worked with an organization to have access to an education program for Vermont medical professionals because we recognize and hopefully a lot of other medical professionals speaking today are listening to this. Recognize that the medical programs don't have cannabis education. So doctors and nurses and other medical professionals don't have any of this information on cannabis. What we do have is years and years and years of prohibition and stigma and a great example. We got a research study published seven, eight years ago through UVM on cannabis and human milk feeding. We've repeated the same study two years ago. No one will publish our study because it is two pro cannabis according to them. So what we know is the research and the information doctors have and are using is the research that has been purposely funded to show the negative uses of cannabis. What we also know is that we are seeing some research that is promising and showing us a reduction in the use of opioids or a reduction in the use of fatal overdoses in states that have cannabis. So my I guess what I'm saying is basically I'm encouraging all medical professionals to recognize that they don't have all the information that they might need and that at a state level or somehow we need to be encouraging one another to get the education so that we have the appropriate information. Because again, education is better than prohibition. We are going to have adult use and a lot more consumers and consumption of cannabis happening. Absolutely. We're going to have more yard missions from eating too many edibles. We are going to have more people who struggle possibly with substance use disorder based on cannabis being more accessible. So we do know not in an extreme rate, but absolutely these things are going to happen if we don't have a system and we don't have medical professionals recognizing that that wasn't part of their education and seeking that education out. Then we're doing a disservice to not only medical patients, but consumers because I will continue to reiterate and I'll tell any medical professional to lumb blue in the face. I've heard from way too many veterans who will not get a medical card because they worry about their VA benefits. I've heard from way too many single parents from nurses and other doctors and people who are concerned to put their name in the medical dispensary system. And with that, those people will be accessing the adult use so that feeds right into the concentrates. We want a veteran to be able to access high concentrates and high dose medicine. But we don't have want to absolutely insist that they have to be a medical patient in the medical dispensary system and support a corporate conglomerate from out of country instead of a local farmer. We want our veterans to be able to support a local farmer and have access to the concentrates that they want. So the gentleman that spoke to that from the medical perspective, I would absolutely reiterate that and so many medical professionals listening to this are probably doing what I initially did a couple years ago and said, no way are concentrates medicinal. That's not okay. We got to keep that out of people's hands. It took me educating myself, breaking my own stigma, listening to anecdotal information and having other doctors reach out to me and say, huh, let's talk about this to really understand why we want and need this. So wrapping it all right back into education instead of prohibition and really pushing that would be something that I hope to see happen. Amongst all medical professionals amongst the cannabis control board, the advisory committees need to take a cannabis education course because we put people on the committees who might not have the education they also need. So I would really hope to see this part of the Vermont program moving forward, please. And I love, you know, I would love to offer any medical professionals or, you know, Chair Pepper, if you can arrange something, a meeting like this, an open meeting specifically for Vermont medical professionals. Let's have questions. Let's have conversations. Let's bring in doctors that have the actual training from cannabis, not just doctors who were in med school 20, 30 years ago, but rightfully so, have only read and heard the negative fear-mongering information around cannabis because that's what they were fed. So we were fed that opioids were great for a long time. We're finally now waking up and realizing they're not and we're seeing cannabis help with an opioid reduction. So same thing, we need people to be open-minded and maybe having some of these open meetings like you're doing specifically for medical professionals in Vermont will help to address some of that because we are going to see more issues come up and we need to get ahead of it. And with all that, we just need education to make it for everyone. So thank you. Thanks, Jesse Lynn. Keith Walsh, would you like to unmute yourself? First, let me say thank you all for some time here tonight. It's been quite educational to watch the process that you all have gone through from afar. I do want to say that I believe that cannabis legalization for Vermont is very much a good thing. That open access is very much a good thing for our population. That some of the struggles that we're seeing in these more mature states is because of the limited access to adult use cannabis, California in particular. As you all may be aware is selling close to twice as much in the non-ledger market as they are in the ledger market. Part of that has to do with the fact that more than 50% of the municipalities do not allow access to retail sales. So there is already a significant market in the state of Vermont as has already been pointed out. And I think that we will do best by the entrepreneurs, by this fledgling industry, by the plant itself and certainly by the consumers. If we continue to provide access, not just at the retail point, but also as other members of this group have pointed out to the full array of cannabis products that are available. Because otherwise we will absolutely see the non-ledger market continue to proliferate throughout the state, which unfortunately provides access to medicine that may not be clean. So thank you again for the time. Thank you for taking in everyone's perspective and wish you all the best of luck going forward. Thanks Keith. Next on my list, Paul Shannon. Yeah, I just wanted to say that to back up on the medical thing, I'm an honorably discharged 100% disabled veteran. I was wounded overseas in 75. Because I get all my care at the VA, I have no idea how to access any medical professional that would be willing to write me a recommendation for the list. It never has been to my knowledge. And I did check with the state house and complained about it that the DPS doesn't publish a list. If you're not from Vermont and you don't know a primary care provider, A, who understands a cannabis as medicine and B, is willing to deal with somebody like me. Part of the problem is as a 100% disabled vet, I go to a doctor and they think I'm trying to double doctor and get medicine. I mean opioids and stuff. I've never found a way to get into the medical market, which is why both my daughter and I made the decision to jump into this. With both feet, I mean go for the full banana. The stuff is medicine for me. When I got off the opioids that were free, they were prescribed by the Department of Veterans Affairs. They had me consuming 120 milligrams of morphine SO4 and 60 milligrams of oxycodone per day for damn near a decade. And I mean, I'm 6'1", I weigh 200 pounds. Even at that size, I couldn't function on that level of medication. Cannabis has saved my life. And I mean, that's what I'm doing here. And I wish more people would understand that the medical end of cannabis in Vermont seems to me to be a very closed place. I mean, it doesn't seem to accept outsiders like myself, even though I lived in the kingdom for 30 years. I have no idea. I mean, before a doctor will even talk to you, if you call up and make an appointment, you have to pay an office visit fee just to walk in the door. And nine times out of 10, they say, no, we don't even deal with that. So it's a losing proposition. And it's a very difficult thing as a vet to deal with. Again, that's why my daughter and I are getting into this big time. We would very deliberately not only provide this stuff to veterans who are having difficulty getting on the medical thing, but I mean, we'd give them some percentage of discount, 10% off. Maybe we'd kick in 10 bucks towards the taxes just to make it affordable for them. It's a terrible thing that when you're facing, hey, you're getting this free medication from the VA, but you don't like its effects and it's doing bad things to you. And you don't really have a medical alternative. So you turn to the market. It's just, it's a difficult thing. And I thank you for taking my comment and you all are doing a wonderful job. And thank you for listening to me because that's been a pet peeve. Well, almost nine years now. Thank you. Thanks, Paul. Dr. Ansley, is that a new hand? Or is that from before? Yeah, it's a new hand. I just thought, gosh, I'm hearing a lot of voices talking about high THC in medicine. We have no evidence-based medicine. We have no evidence that THC greater than 10% or 15% is good for any medical condition. We practice evidence-based medicine. And following the evidence, this is not a helpful concentration. It's harmful. It's harmful because it increases the risk of psychosis in people who have no history of mental illness. It increases the risk of schizophrenia in people who have no history of schizophrenia. And this is not conjecture. Study after study after study has shown this. I know you're all aware of this. I know you've heard from the medical, Dr. Levine. I know that this has been talked about in your committees. This is a serious risk as is suicidality. And the idea that this high THC is helpful is very troubling and very problematic. Cannabis has been around, let's say, for thousands of years. It's only since we've had it commercialized that we've had these super powerful doses of THC. And the concentrations, as you know, have skyrocketed in the last couple of years, decade or so. And not only does it increase suicidality, psychosis, schizophrenia, it also increases addiction. And what we're learning from Colorado and California is that the shops are not safer. In other words, there was a study in Denver. They did a randomized sampling of the shops and the cannabis. 80% of the cannabis had mold. In Oregon, the Secretary of State did an audit. And only 3% of the product that was on the shelves had been tested. So this high THC has got significant risk, not only to children, but also to adults. There's a recent study that was done not too long ago where they took normal people in the laboratory, cohort controlled for mental illness and other risk factors, and gave them THC. And they developed psychotic symptoms in the laboratory. This is a risk, and it's important that we follow the science. It's important that we not follow anecdotal reports. I mean, the other thing that we're seeing is that it's quite addictive. There's a new study by Norovokov that came out in March. It's very well done, and it points to it being this concentrated or whatever THC the kids are using is actually more addictive for them or as addictive as opiates in that 13 to 19 age group. And then Alan Budney reported to us a couple of weeks ago that in his studies, looking at treating cannabis addiction a year later, only 10% of the youth were able to be abstained. So not only is it really addictive, not only does it have carry significant risk factors, but it's also really difficult to break the addiction. Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Anley. Next, International House of Green. Well, hello, thank you. And once more, you're like everybody was insane. Thank you for your work. A couple of things to to back up friend, Jess and Paul and so many that talked about their medical program. I believe there is a huge need for the K-pakers, not only for to educate the public on use, but to educate the public on product. Like the doctor said, yes, there carries a huge risk having those high potency tinctures or extracts. But the thing is, there's a double sort with that. When you start putting caps on tinctures and extracts, that means that the lower the concentrate of THC, the higher concentrate of other contaminants or other additives put into or allowed to be into the concentrate. The higher the purity of the concentrate, the lower the amount of those things in the concentrate. Wax is one of them. So this, again, it's a double-edged sword. One of the things with the higher concentrates, though, is that you, again, you lower the risk of allowing producers to say, OK, I have a product they went over. They went over the percentage. I have a product that went 65%. Oh, gosh, I have to lower it to 60. I have to add something to it to be able to meet that cap. Instead of just being able to say, OK, I'm going to label it as a 65% and with a warning, 65% concentration of THC. Again, iterating what Jess said is education. Caregivers are the first step in education, I would say, for patients, because there isn't a doctor or there isn't a nurse out there who is easily accessible to be able to educate the public. You're talking about both tenders now in a dispensary. Both tenders are not really educated to let people know what a concentrate will actually do to their body. Think of the first time you ever had an alcoholic beverage versus now that you're used to that alcoholic beverage. Whoa, we got kicked out. We can still hear you. All right, you can see it. Oh, perfect. Oh, there you are. Anyways, the first time you had an alcoholic beverage versus the last time you had it, it's going to be a different impact. A person who smokes for the first time or takes in a concentrate for the first time is going to have a different experience than a person who has been taking it for years, who needs an up on dose because the THC level no longer has an effect on their illness. That's the thing with CACs and caretakers. I do agree that caretakers should also be able to take in more than one or a few clients. The reason being it's because if a caretaker falls off the grid, for say his plants die, power dies, for whatever reason, this patient should be able to go to a different caretaker and be able to pick up from where he left off. But also caretakers should be able to take in more than the cap because if, say, I'm a caretaker and I know Joe, he's a caretaker, and all of a sudden all his clients are unable to get product from him because he can't produce it, I should be able to say, well, Joe, I know your clients, at least send one or two over to me. I should be able to take care of them. Again, options on not only how many caretakers I can have, but also how many patients I can have. The last thing I have is on lab license fees. That's the only thing I did not see a secondary column for. Everything has a A column and a B column except a lot of lab fees. They remain at 1500, no matter across the board. That's all the comments I have. Thank you very much. Thank you. Let's see, Brian Armstrong. Good evening, everyone, and thank you very much for everybody's time and letting me speak. I'm Brian Armstrong, born and raised in Vermont. I also have my hand in a couple of different small businesses, and I've been a cannabis user since I was 15. I use very little, if any, alcohol and no other substances. It has been a calming force and a productive force in my life, but that's not actually what I was going to mention. Unfortunately, I lost my first wife to cancer a little over five years ago. For six months, I was her caretaker. I gave her shots. I gave her opioids, fentanyl patches. For the longest time, she simply would not try edibles because she didn't want to get stoned. Here's a guy who's loving on his wife and losing her cancer. When I finally got her to try a strong edible, she had the best night's sleep that she had in months. I am a firm, firm believer that the cannabis control board and their wisdom should allow for high-concentrate products. Just like high-concentrate alcohols, I think with the right people, adults, and obviously this is an adult product, it can be used responsibly, intelligently, and for very, very productive purposes. The other thing is, I'll be very candid with you. In the summer, I enjoy joints. But in the winter, windows are closed. I just assume put less smoke in my body and less smoke in any other inhabitants of my household. So I'm absolutely a belief that high-concentrates have their place in a responsible market. The other thing I'd like to plug and ask for the commission to consider is I understand there's movements under the way that suggest we possibly slow this process down and make it better. As a small business owner who's really worked hard to put Vermonters to work and provide for their family, one of the greatest challenges that I think is happening right now to smaller entrepreneurs like myself is where I expected to go out and create jobs, create, you know, buy locations, put millions of dollars into infrastructure. I'm hoping to bootstrap it for a heck of a lot less than that, as it is Vermonter. And I think if you stall this, you're only going to create opportunity for bigger companies to weather the startup storm. And for example, we're looking to purchase real estate for a cultivation license. We're trying to time it in a hot real estate market to buy it early enough that we're not left out, but also, you know, we have to be carrying costs, the debt service. So I'm working hard to put Vermonters to work. And I would love the cannabis, you know, control board to move reasonably quick as they propose to get us to market next year so we can invest in our communities, generate taxpaying jobs and support local communities in a healthy and responsible way. And I do believe that also includes high concentrate cannabis products for adult responsible use. Thank you very much. Thanks, Brian. So it looks like we're almost out of time for tonight. Barry, your hand is up. You got the last comment of the night? Maybe not. 802-399-4471. Okay. Just a double check. No one else on the phone has a public comment. If you do, please hit star six to unmute yourself. Yeah. Yeah, we heard you for a second there. You're muted. It's muted. I don't see if I can hear me. Yeah, we can hear you now. Can you hear me now? We can hear you now. Yep. All right. Sorry. You're muted again. This is so funny. I'm so sorry. Can you hear me now? I can hear you now. Yeah. Thank you. I just want to speak to the good doctor for a second. Thank you for your point of view. You know, I really appreciate this forum. And I think, like Jesse Lynn said, more forums like this are necessary so that opposing point of views can be brought together and educate each other. I would encourage her to go into the public comments on the CCB website and post those studies. And I would gladly read them if she goes, if she posts them. And I would also encourage her to take a moment, 20 minutes per time and learn about using her words, what the kids use today, which is, you know, ice water extraction, which has been around for thousands of years. So hash has been around for thousands of years, as long as cannabis has been around, you know, just take 20 minutes and Google ice water extraction versus ethanol or butane extraction. You know, I think it's really important that we have open forums like this to educate each other. And I appreciate you guys bringing us together tonight. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. And thanks to everyone who joined today. You know, we really do take every one of these comments very seriously. And, you know, we're moving at a very quick pace right now. And so now is really the best time to get in touch, to speak through our open public comment portal on our website. We are having, we're going to start having two meetings a week, you know, on Wednesdays and Fridays, where we're going to make a lot of decisions. Those will be streamed and you can join remotely. There'll be public comment periods throughout both of those. So, you know, feel free to join there and appreciate everyone joining us today. Julie, Kyle, do you have anything you want to add? I'm good. Thank you everyone for your comments. It's always interesting to hear. Thank you. Ditto. Thank you everybody for joining. As Julie said, it's great that you're a lot of different opinions and thoughts and bringing some of those together. And hopefully folks can join us tomorrow at 10 a.m. Okay. Great. Well, I'm going to call this, adjourn this meeting for the night and see you both tomorrow at 10 o'clock, 10 a.m. Thank you. Thanks everybody. Have a good night.