An Ohio House committee on Wednesday took up a bill that would make sweeping changes to the state’s voter-approved cannabis law—by creating new criminal penalties, eliminating equity programs and putting limits on legal products.
Lawmakers on the House Judiciary Committee did vote on the underlying measure—HB 160, from Rep. Brian Stewart (R)—saying they expect to move forward slowly and carefully, though they spent close to 40 minutes discussing the proposal and adopted a six-page amendment.
Stewart was asked by panelists if he expected lawmakers to move quickly or take more time to study the details of the bill. He said no.
He replied: “We would prefer to pass this by the end of June, not within the next few weeks.”
Several other members of the panel said that they still have many questions and want to know more about this bill.
HB 160, one of the many bills that has been introduced so far to amend Ohio’s legalization of marijuana law passed by voters 2023. Reform advocates have, in turn, said that these efforts are an effort to undermine voters’ will.
SB 56 is another bill that has been deemed even more restrictive by Sen. Steve Huffman. The Senate passed that measure in February on a 23–9 vote. The governor has proposed a separate budget. Mike DeWine, a Republican candidate for governor, is another possible vehicle to make changes. As proposed, it would remove local tax allocations of medical marijuana revenue and double the state cannabis tax rate to 20 percent—though legislative leaders have said they will be removing the tax increases.
House Bill aims to make changes in state laws regarding legal cannabis products and activities. It also creates a number of criminal offenses. This bill also would delete provisions for social equality that were approved by voters and alter the awarding of business licenses.
Stewart, the sponsor, said that at the hearing, the proposal would “add more specific guidelines to the sale of cannabis and other similar substances while still maintaining the will of voters who have voted in favor of legalizing adult-use marijuana in Ohio.”
The bill’s author acknowledged that “many of its provisions are taken directly from Senate bills.”
It’s not about him personally, but it is more of a legislative necessity. If we want to pass a bill in both chambers we have to include some things both chambers wanted.
Although the House bill takes a less restrictive approach than the voters-approved legislation, there are a couple of provisions in it that supporters of marijuana reform may find appealing.
For example, it would establish a program allowing individuals to request the expungement of criminal records for past marijuana possession cases—a request that would cost applicants $50. The bill would remove the prohibition against marijuana sellers giving out free samples of their products to customers.
At the hearing on Wednesday, lawmakers adopted an amended that will further remove existing equity provisions in the marijuana tax law and clarify how revenue from cannabis taxes would be allocated to municipalities.
A new provision, which currently mandates that 15% of all business licenses be given to members of economically depressed groups, is being eliminated.
A second clarifies the way business licenses are awarded via a lottery system if the number of applications is greater than the available licenses. Better qualified applicants will have higher odds to win the lottery.
This amendment redirects part of the expungement fee revenue from the state’s treasury and restructures the way a certain portion of marijuana tax revenues would be distributed to local governments. Financial distributions will only be available to cities or towns that at least have one licensed dispensary.
Before the amendment was passed, localities that did not ban or limit marijuana retailing were eligible for a share of funding.
HB 160 limits THC content in cannabis to 70% and forbids state regulators from adjusting THC limitations or eliminating them. Under the legislation, regulators could also not approve new forms of marijuana for adult use.
This would also cap the number active dispensaries on the entire state at 350.
This measure will prohibit the possession and use of cannabis that is not obtained from an authorized retailer, or that has been grown in compliance with local laws. The measure would ban the use and possession of cannabis that was not purchased from a licensed retailer or grown at home in accordance with state law.
Advocates have said the restrictions could put consumers at risk if they don’t have receipts, original packaging or other ways to prove that they obtained their marijuana legally—or if they simply hand a joint to another adult friend at home.
Unlike the Senate Bill, HB160 does not propose to reduce the current 12-plant limitation for home cultivation. The SB 56 bill, on the other hand, would limit this to only six plants.
The House Bill would require drivers to store cannabis and other paraphernalia somewhere that is not easily accessible by the driver. Such as the trunk, or behind back seats.
This measure will repeal the Cannabis Social Equity and Jobs Program. It was created to help license applicants that have suffered adversely from marijuana prohibition. According to current law, this program should receive 36 percent from state cannabis tax revenues.
A provision of the law that currently allocates 25% of revenue to mental and substance-use disorder programs (including a hotline) would be removed under this bill.
The local government would retain funding, but it would come through a five-year temporary program which would distribute 20 percent of the cannabis tax revenues.
General allocations in the bill redirect marijuana taxes into the state general fund.
In addition to adult-use marijuana, this bill prohibits sale of products derived from hemp that are intoxicating in any place other than marijuana dispensaries. This includes gas stations and convenience shops. The Senate would also impose similar restrictions.
Local officials have reacted with concern and opposition to efforts made by the federal government to cut funding for local governments.
In a survey recently conducted of 38 local municipalities in the state, it was found that the majority are “unambiguously opposed” to proposed changes on tax revenue distribution.
Report: “When asked how they planned to allocate the expected revenue from marijuana taxes, most municipalities prioritized law enforcement, infrastructure, fire protection, and parks,” said the report. The report stated that “they indicated this revenue was critical for their ability to improve their lives and maintain public security.”
The report added: “Others expressed the desire to stop recreational sales in their region if revenues were eliminated, or the fact that dispensaries had been created for the purpose of generating revenue.”
DeWine, meanwhile, announced late last month his intention to reallocate marijuana taxes to support local jails, behavioral health and police training. DeWine said that funding police training would be a priority even if it wasn’t part of what the voters approved in 2023.
“We respect voters first and foremost. “They said by a large margin that they wanted marijuana to be legalized in Ohio,” said he. He warned parents to be aware that the THC content of today’s marijuana products is “much greater”.
Earlier this month, Ohio’s Senate president pushed back against criticism of the Senate bill, claiming that the legislation does not disrespect the will of the electorate and would have little impact on products available in stores.
Separately in the legislature this month, Huffman and Sen. Shane Wilkin (R) introduced legislation that would impose a 15 percent tax on intoxicating hemp products and limit their sales to adult-use dispensaries—not convenience stores, smoke shops or gas stations
DeWine has repeatedly asked lawmakers to regulate or ban intoxicating hemp products such as delta-8 THC.
Supreme Court sides with trucker who was fired over THC test following use of CBD product
Side Pocket Images. Image courtesy Chris Wallis.