State Senator Michael O. Moore Says Independent Oversight of Cannabis Control Commission Needed

"There’s a question of conduct in terms of some of the investigators."

Feb 23, 2023

In an interview with Burn After Reading, the Senator expressed concerns regarding the way that staff are handling investigations into license holders, and said that SD.1900 would help ensure that the Commission is conducting itself appropriately.

Moore stated that his concerns with the Commission originated with how they handled an investigation into a prospective cannabis license holder who — until recent redistricting — was a constituent of his office. He stated that the applicant had purchased some clones that had unknowingly been contaminated with pesticides, and it took several months and multiple conversations with both the Cannabis Control Commission and the Department of Agricultural Resources (MDAR) to get the matter resolved.

In the meantime, the company was waiting for the final approval from the Commission to commence operations. They eventually had to lay off 10-12 workers as finances began to dry up, according to the senator.

Moore said he was frustrated by the lack of communication.

“I worked for the State Environmental Police for 22 years, with 18 of those years spent working out of the Attorney’s General office doing criminal investigations into environmental law violations. We had far more communications with businesses or individuals who we were investigating criminally than this company has had for a regulatory violation,” he said.

“They were getting very little feedback from the CCC. No matter how you look at it, there’s a structural deficiency here.”

Eventually, the company ended up receiving their final license. It was later revealed that while all this was going on, MDAR was in the process of formulating a list of approved pesticides. It’s unclear if the pesticide found in the clones would have been allowed under the new rules that were recently implemented, but Moore found it particularly frustrating that his (now former) constituent was stuck in limbo with little communication while all of this occured.

While this experience was the catalyst for crafting the bill, Moore said that a number of other incidents and news stories that have developed over the past few months had also influenced his decision to introduce this legislation.

“We have the whole issue with [product] labels that can’t be trusted. We’ve got the story of what happened with Greenfield Greenery and the farmers. Obviously, we had an employee death,” he said.

(Moore was referring to Lorna McMurrey — a worker at Trulieve’s Massachusetts cultivation facility who died last January in an incident that remains under investigation by the Cannabis Control Commission.)

Who’s In Charge?

Moore also noted that there have been at least nine closed door executive sessions in recent months between Commissioners and staff. The Commission’s website has stated that these meetings are “for [the] purpose of finding common ground and obtaining buy-in from all parties, in its efforts to establish a durable and effective governance structure.”

Another one of these closed door meetings is planned for today (February 23rd).

Moore suggested that these mediations are evidence that there’s debate within the Commission over who’s actually in charge of oversight.

“To me, it's horrendous that we have to have [the Commission and staff] sitting down and negotiating out who has an oversight role,” he said, “This started a year ago in April and we still don’t have it resolved.”

The Senator stated that conversations with staff at the Commission left him feeling that they did not understand the financial pressures that prospective cannabis businesses were under as they waited for license approval.

He also questioned whether the Commission’s investigation department are conducting themselves in an appropriate manner.

“There’s a question of conduct in terms of some of the investigators,” he said, “We think there’s a deficiency in how they did these investigations and that they clearly don’t know the difference between a regulatory and criminal [violation].”

Proposed Special Audit Unit Would Have Complete Oversight

S.D. 1900 would establish an Inspector General Special Audit Unit within the Cannabis Control Commission that would be modeled after similar existing units within the State Police, the Department of Transportation and the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. This Special Audit Unit would have comprehensive access to all the Commission’s records, reports, data, devices, and documents, and would report directly to the Inspector General.

The bill outlines a number of areas that the Special Audit Unit would focus on, including Host Community Agreements, investigation/audit procedures, organizational structure, and management functions.

In an attempt to eliminate potential confusion between the Commission and MDAR, the bill also requires that a strengthened memorandum of understanding be established between the two agencies in an attempt to further clarify how they interact with one another.

Moore said that the Commission's recent request for an increased budget makes adding more oversight even more critical.

“We know that the Commission is seeking a very large increase in their budget. As a policy maker and someone who deems their role as a guardian over the taxpayer’s dollar — when we have this many issues — how do we give them more money without some sort of additional oversight?”

Commission Response

A spokesperson from the Cannabis Control Commission issued the following statement in response to Senator Moore’s comments and the introduction of SD.1900:

In Chapter 180 of the acts of 2022, passed by the Legislature and signed into law last August, the Cannabis Control Commission (Commission) was given greater oversight of the Host Community Agreement process and municipal efforts to ensure equitable opportunities for individuals and communities that have been disproportionately harmed by the War on Drugs. The agency is working to fulfill its new mandates outlined in the sweeping reform law and beginning its fourth regulatory review at a time when the adult-use marketplace just surpassed $4 billion in gross sales since the first two retailers opened their doors in November 2018. There are nearly 500 adult-use licensees that have commenced operations since then, in addition to 100 operational Medical Marijuana Treatment Centers.
The Commission, as always, is monitoring the legislative process and is grateful for the Legislature’s collaboration over the last five years. As the agency continues its build out to meet the demands of the booming licensed cannabis industry, we will seek to continue that deep collaboration with our Legislative partners. Per the Commission’s legislative outreach policy, the Commission does not weigh in on specific bills, but rather, may advocate for general policies to support an industry that protects public safety, health, and welfare, and that promotes an equitable and fair marketplace.
Additionally, Massachusetts' public health, safety, and ownership and control regulations are some of the strongest in the nation, and the Commission stands by its investigatory policies and procedures that have proven to ensure compliance by its licensees. With regards to certain referenced investigations that remain ongoing, the agency will not comment at this time.
The Commission has continued to evolve and grow since its inception nearly five years ago. At this point in the agency’s maturity, the Commission is reviewing its governance structure to solidify and refine agency processes and procedures that will outlast the individuals who have been instrumental in getting the organization off the ground and building upon its foundation. To comply with the Open Meeting Law, which protects mediation sessions, Commissioners voted in April 2022 to “have the Commission participate in mediation between the Commissioners and staff leadership, for the purpose of finding common ground and obtaining buy-in from all parties, in our efforts to establish a durable and effective governance structure.” Since then, three different Chairs have engaged in this process. The Commission continues to meet in Executive Session to make progress on this matter and meets again as soon as tomorrow for further discussion.

This is a Burn After Reading special report, where I occasionally provide additional coverage of important stories to subscribers for free. Become a paid subscriber to support independent cannabis media and gain access to all of my work.