 calling the meeting of the public safety health public and the public health all right the public health subcommittee calling that to order and this is for anybody's recording this is Monday October 4th and we'll take the roll now on the committee members Tim Wessel here Igor Jonas here Julie Holberg Tanika Scott here Gina Kramlickle and Mark Gorman here sorry I didn't identify myself Mark Gorman do we have any public comments that need to be shown or reviewed right here at the beginning of the meeting we did not receive public comments for this week for today and there are also no minutes to approve today yet Mark yeah okay well I'm gonna hand the ball up to you Gina and let's let's see what we have in the store this week good morning everyone and thank you so much for joining us we are officially switching our gears just a little bit away from warning symbols and warning language as we've turned that over to Dr. Levine's team so that they can see the work that's been done to date and give their input and weigh in we did ask for feedback by next week to give them ample time to look at it since we have our first and only milestone due on October 20th so that will coincide with everything here and so I'd like to point out that the two things we're going to talk about today have to do with food products and food labeling and then also to go back to a discussion on limiting youth exposure for those under 21 to cannabis and just some considerations there and also share a tiny bit of research on some of this as it relates to a couple of things in those areas so Gina was kind enough to help us this week by doing some research with us on what Vermont requires for food products so before we take a look at this and just look at a basic labeling of Vermont food products one of the things that we have been in discussion with the CCB on is to get experts in for this committee from the Agency of Agriculture and also the Department of Health as it relates to food products that will be containing cannabis. Julie did I say that correctly? Yes I think so. Excellent so in Vermont there is a little bit of oversight from each committee on different I mean each agency on different areas so getting folks in that could speak to the committee on that as an expert testimony will be probably immensely helpful to all involved especially as recommendations are put forth for the CCB so in Vermont and this is from the Agency of Agriculture they have a guide to food labeling that basically if there's food products in Vermont it has to identify it and identify it by the common name of the food what the quantity is weight volume or number of products or pieces the responsible party for the food the list of ingredients and then also nutritional labeling so here's where this gets interesting and this is similar for me in Texas is that if you are a food manufacturer for say a cottage food and you make less than $50,000 a year it falls into a no label required you can basically sell things that mean as long as they don't require refrigeration so it appears that Vermont has something similar with those who make less than $50,000 a year don't have to provide a nutritional label which one of the things that we think could be in consideration with some of the other newer states such as Illinois or Michigan not looking at their specific requirements they're all very new states so there may be some item that kept them from having to put a nutritional label on some of the packages whereby California has been doing this for so long or it could just be an actual requirement so the subcommittee can make the recommendation you know as it relates to food labeling as long as we stay within the confines I would assume of what the the law says but at the same time this is a cannabis food product so we'll definitely would like to get some expert opinion weigh in on that Julie or anybody else on anything anybody'd like to add to this and then I'm going to show a quick label or Tim or Ingrid okay and then Julie I didn't ask do we have members of the public today we do we have two members of the public today okay fantastic so the FDA did an update to their nutritional label and so they did it a few years back but this is what the label should look like and what the expectation is from the FDA there is one of the California packages for sure I know had the calorie count on it and incidentally so did one from Maine that Julie shared with us so they did have a nutritional label for both of those so what we'd like to have is some understanding from the respective agencies on what the expectation may be for food labeling of a cannabis product such as an edible or a drink or something of that nature any questions on this this is truly an intro to what's coming next so please you know feel free so as I just mentioned there are two departments there is the agency of agriculture which is responsible for labeling and then the Department of Health which is responsible for say retail food establishments and I'm pretty sure manufacturing possibly as well and if not then it would be under the agency of agriculture so we are the expert advisors to talk about this and specifically what we would need from the subcommittee on this to provide ample recommendations as it relates to this area any questions are we ready to and today may be a shorter meeting depending upon how much everyone you know has to say so I'm going to move over to limiting youth exposure public health and safety and some considerations so Mark and I had a discussion this morning and there was some interesting elements where I believe there is going to be some crossover between compliance and enforcement and what might limit youth exposure meaning one of the recommendations that we've seen and this happened in California is where they require no dispensaries within a thousand feet of a school a daycare center a playground or a youth center and so Mark and I were talking and he said some of that may be compliance and enforcement but then there is an advertising element because there is still a logo or a dispensary name or something that would be seen and then one of the ones I read today was very interesting and that is limit or no curbside service if children are in the vehicle again that may be more compliance and enforcement but the advertising of that as a service may fall under public health and safety because of the advertising element or at least the considerations of a disclaimer or a warning so I definitely put that in there and then what I am unclear on is what the towns may be able to do or say and if we need to take that into consideration so Tim I'd love to hear some of your thoughts on a couple of these areas especially because you representing Brattleboro would that be now I know I'm putting you on the spot that's okay I you know there's still in my mind a little unclear on the zoning aspects of this like what powers that the towns have it doesn't it looks like it's pretty locked in on zoning at the moment from my understanding but it occurs to me you know something like if if the state of Vermont sets a rule of no curbside service if children are in the vehicle I mean that's not a that's not observed as far as I know maybe there's you know it's a completely unenforced thing which happens all the time in towns and on the state level can you pull up to when I pull up to my local pizza joint that serves me margaritas nobody is going to check to see if my son is in the backseat so as far as like parody at least with something like alcohol delivery which as you may know have been pretty much lifted since COVID started I would just advocate for it would be another example of something that local police force if any would certainly not be enforcing in the statute just so you know that was one of I read today I'm saying that I wouldn't even support it including it unless there is an existing rule for alcohol and then we should just talk about whether it's you know even makes any sense to include more regulations versus less regulations yeah got it Ingrid anything you want to add not at this time okay thank you so I would just just but in here I think what Tim just had to say is a lot of wisdom to it having looked at it from a long time from both the alcohol and the cannabis perspective I think parody is really what this whole thing has been about in terms of legalizing and availability and so forth so you know there may be circumstances where alcohol or cannabis ought to be subject to more rigorous standards but in general I think parody is a good good direction to go in excellent so the other one of the other important items is age-gating on websites there's a lot of information statistical information out that age-gating doesn't necessarily work but is really a requirement Texas A&M just did a study that I'll share with everyone on age-gating and what what their research showed but there are there are a couple of different kinds of age-gating opportunities this particular first one from freshly baked is an actual website for a place in Massachusetts so they have a are you over 21 years of age yes or no and then Jim Beams has hey you know are you of legal drinking age please enter your birthday so it's not a yes or no question it does require you to think just a little bit more but that's what you're looking at in terms of age gating to to make someone say they're 21 or not and we all know there's realities where everybody can get around anything but in parody with other states and everyone else I would say that this would be something that you would want to require of any dispensary because it is a 21 or older product does anyone have any thoughts on that or agree that that should be there or disagree so I just want to ask I've seen those before it's basically just the question of are you over 21 you click the box yes and then there's and that's it and that's it correct let's win extra step and then the second way is the extra step like I see more often than not in alcohol and I went to several different websites with the Massachusetts Cannabis Retailers Association or something like that and almost every one of them was clicking a yes or no actually they all work all the ones that I saw and I hit like four of them to see so I think that's something that I did want to put forth and if you know if you too would like to make your recommendation on you know which your preference would be we can certainly put that forth in the recommendation I mean again having no public real expertise in this area but I think having the need to enter your birth date is the minimum catch if you're if you're trying to gate anything it certainly is makes one a little more nervous if you're trying to get away with something if you need to enter your birth date I think that's very fair and it makes you think you have to anger thoughts no I totally agree I'd like again no experience whatsoever but in the websites where I've seen this it seems like at least that extra step of having to do the math before you lie about your age sorry you know we looked at that when I was at the still spirits council and it's obviously you know voluntary it's not it's not foolproof but there is some inhibiting factor that that does help keep underage people out of the out of this and just even the thought that maybe what you say here could be cross-referenced with what some other people know is you know that's also part of the that inhibiting factor yes okay so the subcommittee members agree that for age-gating we want them to input a birthday and these are plugins on websites that can go either way will is that a yes for both of you will put that okay fantastic so I'm gonna go back here as well and talk about some other areas that I think are very important and would love your feedback and it may be even some decisions on as it relates to things you've seen even in the packaging so this is dispensaries may not for advertising or logo development use things like toys inflatables movie characters cartoon characters visuals of appealing foods and bright colors names that might appeal to minors or any other display depiction or image designed in any manner to be appealing to anyone under the ages of 21 to promote cannabis or the dispensary and where this comes into play truthfully as we all know there is a massive amount of subjectivity in this in terms of what someone may determine is subjective or not which is why the CCB being able to review materials is so important in here and then there to be some guidelines so again this is a list we've looked at a while back but if anybody has anything you think that is missing we certainly would like to to know that as well I can't think of anything that's missing I do have a quick personal observation is that yesterday we were my son really has no interest in television or movies which is very great he's three and a half but he loves commercials so during the Red Sox game there's this alcohol commercial that involves you probably have seen it if you've watched any of the playoff games but it's a bunch of fruits flying up in the air and kind of smashing against each other and it's an alcoholic beverage but it's just nothing but fun and deliciousness and it's very attractive to a three and a half year old so that kind of I mean that's covered by these bullet points if that's the intention then it makes you think you know as far as parody is concerned you know has that gotten through on the alcohol thing or not you know because they were definitely visuals of appealing foods in bright colors it's basically all the commercial was just throwing that out there as an anecdotal I think that's important because I am seeing more and more of that mark you want to comment yeah well professional sports games are as I understand overwhelmingly adult you know programs and so they probably pass the 85% threshold for a Red Sox game but but you know there are these other rules and Danika has sort of laid them out here and and if it is designed to appeal to young people then it's it's not legal so it's an interesting conundrum there yeah it absolutely is and I think where it's also important for the group to consider I mean just the sheer nature of most edibles the word often used as gummies and gummies is you know so that's that's a decision or something that has to be considered but at the same time where there's an interesting element of here is the common name of the food comes into play with labeling so there's definitely needs to be some consideration you know to the board on on recommendations with things such as that as I think we all remember the fruit goobies that was from Illinois that was a real name of a product and I seen plenty like that and then some that are non-descript so it's definitely worth your consideration as the subcommittee members to think about some of that stuff and and how we could reduce the attractiveness of it with some of the names so I'll go back to this piece and I shared early on and I tried to find the article and it's just in somewhere hanging out on my multiple windows of Google Chrome that are open but there was a case written in a and it was Canada but at a hockey rink a dispensary had used a strawberry in their logo and it was bright and friendly and very appealing and was at a hockey rink where kids were playing hockey so the parents you know requested that that come down so I think that's why using the second list over here is important and also with some of the CCB oversight to ensure that it doesn't look like a strawberry shortcake dog or something along those lines is going to be important and I think that's also going to come into play with the food products themselves and what that package looks like I welcome any conversation or thoughts or feedback so that I can take some notes as we're putting these recommendations forward. I would just add I know that in some of the packaging that you showed us over the weeks that and I don't know this is subjective but font different types of font I think are more your eye is drawn to it as a child versus an adult and I don't know how we I just want to put that out there that I noticed in some of those packages that some of it looked just like what would it just wouldn't appeal to a child because it doesn't have you know goofy looking font or I just put that out there for I don't know how we decide but I think certain fonts appeal to kids. That's very fair and one of the fonts that I even put on a fake package when we were doing it I had a similar look it almost had that coca-cola scripty style look and so there is going to be you know anything that's visual is always subjective so you're absolutely correct on that but it's definitely something that I think has to be taken into you know consideration with these. Tim thoughts? No just you know it's a pretty good starting point and then as you said it's just so subjective. You get into the gray area of personal responsibility responsibility and parental responsibility as well so you just couldn't possibly address every parental concern when it comes to dangers for youth but you have to try to hit the highlights. The general themes of not making it appealing to those under 21 is a good one. Agree. I think it wouldn't hurt to put in here also resembling television shows. I'm sure you're well you said your kids not interested in TV but we've all seen Nickelodeon and we've all seen the way some of those things look and I think that that is that's an important element as well. Possibly we add you know not just cartoon characters but television characters or television shows or something along those lines and again it's not to try to necessarily over regulate but it might make someone think when they're designing something if we enough you know or some additional items so I would welcome any additional feedback on this you know for our next subcommittee if anybody feels like there's something that we're missing. Yeah I mean on the cartoon line cartoon or popular culture characters or something like that. I think that's broadens the idea a little bit. Yeah I think we all remember that you know the government called Aniser Bush on the carpet for using frogs and camel cigarettes for using camels and boy if you want to invite the government into your business you got to be careful about things like that or use an organization like control board or NACB to sort of stand in judgment of a self-regulate you know in a self-regulatory way try to keep the industry in line. I also agree that and I know this from my own career and working in marketing and advertising that when I had branding guidelines given to me by whomever I was working with they often would put a visual a do and a don't. They would say this is okay and something like this is not and so I think there is an opportunity to provide examples as well that might set good standard good graphic examples of what maybe not to do and then at least again designers or others may have it at least gives them that subjective opportunity to say maybe maybe this is the path we don't go down. It's just about to raise my Mickey cup as I so that's coffee by the way. Very good so if does anyone have anything else they'd like to add on the age gating or limiting youth exposure I know we've talked about you know an additional education you know expanding on the Department of Health's educational website about cannabis especially now that adult use is legal they may be able to put some additional information in there that will help educate parents on talking to their kids about cannabis and I'm sure they have some considerations the FDA has some great stuff on that even alone but does everyone agree that that's probably something they'd like to see expanded or for parents to be able to talk to their kids about cannabis. OK excellent. OK very good. I did add those couple of additional items over here and I do think that one of the recommendations as well would be the do's and don'ts and it doesn't have to be onerous but just enough to help folks to know when they're putting forth their their packaging or advertising or anything else so that they have enough information to come out with possibly the better thing in the beginning versus being rejected by the CCB or whoever is doing reviews and having to go back and do it again. And that's what guidelines are definitely designed for. So with that ladies and gentlemen we actually because we have so much stuff with the Department of Health right now there's not much more to cover today until we get the experts in and I know Julie is working on that. So I'd like to ask if either so committee member has anything else they'd like to add before we move on to public comments and then we'll circle back with Julie on on the expert piece now this time. I don't have anything. I just want to make a quick it falls into public comment note and I don't know if I'll need to follow up because some folks have been contacting me with concerns about warning labels and I've just been encouraging them over and over again to make a public comment. You sent them the link etc. So I think it's not really my job to comment for people and I don't really want to sway things by saying that I it really is my view but I was just contacted by a group of some of them are physicians. It's a Dr. Catherine Antley and I don't know if you have a record of having heard from that person. But if so it would be a duplicate comments and I just wanted to let you know that I am receiving the occasional because I'm fairly high profile and I show up in newspaper articles for the for the committee. So Tim are there are they wondering if you know like warning labels have any effect. I mean are they one of the other just know it's it's really they're pushing for a more expanded list of warnings that include things like psychosis and suicide attempts. So the I haven't and I don't really intend to go into the evidence of all this because I just don't have the time. But I think it should be entered in the public record that they are advocating for a more forceful warning label than it looks like the direction that we're heading in just for what it's worth. Some of them line up with what we've already talked about and others have links to I don't know if it's good science or not. So it would be something that I think Dr. Levine has also received this email. So it might be something that's on his radar and I'll I'll follow up maybe a subsequent reading just to see if there's been any reaction from his office. So Julie I know the last time Tim received a public comment. I know Nellie we did officially log that. But that's is that procedure. If if something comes through or should we the advisors maybe collect those emails from Tim and put them into one document and share them with the CCB what's the right answer there. Unless there's more detail Tim that you think needs to be shared. I feel like the comment that was just made should be captured in the minutes as part of the public comment. And we we can certainly that way bring it up again. Danique are you talking about like at the beginning of the next meeting where we discuss the public comments. Yes. So I'm if you'd like. Yeah I think in that way if it's captured somewhere then we can then we can bring it up at the beginning of the next meeting where we typically review those submitted public comments. Although I think what Tim is also saying is that he's asked the Dr. Antley to to make a public comment so that we can we can review the details of it. And I was just trying to look and see if I've seen that I haven't seen it yet doesn't mean it hasn't isn't in process somewhere. I think what I'll do is I'll just I'll forward it to the group with no comment and just so it's out there and and you can handle it. OK. Whatever way you'd like to if that's OK. Absolutely. So Julie we will probably finish early today. But do we have any public comments. We do not. OK. Very good. Well I would like to remind everyone because this is being recorded. If you would like to make a public comment you may do so by visiting ccb.vermont.gov and using the public comment input form very easily found on the website. With that mark I believe we're ready to before we adjourn. Julie have you have not heard back from our experts yet. Correct. I have not. OK. OK. We'll advise if we'll have the experts for Thursday as we really are getting to a point where a lot of the stuff needs to be wrapped up and put into reporting format to share. And so hopefully we can get someone in on Thursday. And if not I'll circle back with the CCB Mark and I will on Thursday's meeting for anybody making public comments. We do they are they are referred to the appropriate subcommittee and we do we all see them and we log them. Yes. So with that I believe everybody's going to get 20 minutes of their day back today. Mark if you'd like to. There being no there being no further discussion. I entertain a motion to adjourn. I make that motion. All right. I'll second it. Thank you. Thank you everyone. We are adjourned.