ADULT-USE CANNABIS PRODUCER LICENSING REQUIREMENTS (REVISED)

167 Comments

1. Sarah Dolk on August 6, 2021 at 4:21 pm

   Thank you for the opportunity to speak on the formation of the proposed rules and regulations. I am grateful.

   I’ve spent a few hours trying to find another industry in New Mexico that has such strict and specific regulations regarding security systems. I couldn’t find any. I do understand the need for security systems in the cannabis industry. Just like other industries that have products on site that are often targeted by thieves, such as pharmacies, banks and jewelry stores, security is important, but the proposed rules and regs with regard to security for the cannabis industry are a bit overboard. For example, please consider that pharmacies have very dangerous prescription drugs on site and yet they are not forced to adhere to such strict security requirements. Is there any other industry that is required to have their security system online where they may be hacked? Does the state monitor security at facilities in other industries as well?

   I know all states with cannabis programs have different requirements for security, but it appears you have just “copied and pasted” rules from the most restrictive programs.

   Let’s be real. Has there been an unusual number of cannabis industry break-ins compared to other industries here in New Mexico? No. And yet, if the proposed rules and regs go into effect as-is, this industry will be subject to very restrictive security rules that no other industry in our state must deal with. That is really unfair. The additional costs this will cause for existing cannabis businesses are hefty, but for the new micro-businesses it will be overwhelming.

   Security is very important, but please consider scaling back the proposed rules and regs on security requirements so that this industry doesn’t have to pay more to play than other industries in our state.

   Thanks again for this opportunity to express my thoughts on this.

2. Kyla Towery on August 6, 2021 at 4:06 pm

   With licenses being issued in less than 30 days, and no definite rules, it makes it difficult for small businesses to have a location in time. We can not afford to gamble on a location that might end up not working. I propose issuing temporary licenses, for microbusinesses, contingent on getting an approved location.

3. Jonathan Towery on August 6, 2021 at 4:05 pm

   It takes 400 gallons per day to water 200 six foot cannabis plants @ 2 gallons each plant per day. It takes 268 gallons per day to water 212 smaller plants needed for a continuous weekly crop cycle of 52 harvests per year.

   It takes a total of 668 gallons of water per day to run a 200 plant micro cannabis business that produces approximately 24 pounds per week of high quality cannabis.

   Estimates vary, but, on average, one person uses about 80-100 gallons of water per day, for indoor home uses. This does not include water usage for lawns, trees, pool evaporation, and plants around property.

   Normally pools see ¼ – ½ inch loss of water per day due to evaporation. This is roughly 2 – 4 inches per week. For a normal sized pool you will loose 25,000 to 50,000 gallons of water per year due to evaporation. Uses 68-137 gallons per day

   It takes about 0.62 gallons of water per square foot (just over a half gallon) to cover your lawn with one inch of water per wk. Average lawn size in America is 10,871 sq. ft. 10,871 x 0.623 = 6740 per wk divided by seven days or 963 gallons per day.

   If a family of four uses approximately 1351-1499 gallons per day with average size lawn and pool, then why would you need water restrictions for a cannabis micro business that only uses approximately 668 gallons per day?

   Note: For high grade cannabis that uses an RO system at 3 to 1, the water usage will be approximately 2004 gallons per day.
   It takes 400 gallons per day to water 200 six foot cannabis plants @ 2 gallons each plant per day. It takes 268 gallons per day to water 212 smaller plants needed for a continuous weekly crop cycle of 52 harvests per year.

   It takes a total of 668 gallons of water per day to run a 200 plant micro cannabis business that produces approximately 24 pounds per week of high quality cannabis.

   Estimates vary, but, on average, one person uses about 80-100 gallons of water per day, for indoor home uses. This does not include water usage for lawns, trees, pool evaporation, and plants around property.

   Normally pools see ¼ – ½ inch loss of water per day due to evaporation. This is roughly 2 – 4 inches per week. For a normal sized pool you will loose 25,000 to 50,000 gallons of water per year due to evaporation. Uses 68-137 gallons per day

   It takes about 0.62 gallons of water per square foot (just over a half gallon) to cover your lawn with one inch of water per wk. Average lawn size in America is 10,871 sq. ft. 10,871 x 0.623 = 6740 per wk divided by seven days or 963 gallons per day.

   If a family of four uses approximately 1351-1499 gallons per day with average size lawn and pool, then why would you need water restrictions for a cannabis micro business that only uses approximately 668 gallons per day?

   Note: For high grade cannabis that uses an RO system at 3 to 1, the water usage will be approximately 2004 gallons per day.

4. Jacob Cade on August 6, 2021 at 3:17 pm

   These rules should not be permanent, they should be under review yearly for effectiveness.

5. Sherry Hammack on August 6, 2021 at 3:17 pm

   Good Afternoon:

   I would like to thank the Cannabis Control Division for hosting the public comment session today and would like to add the following comments. In the interest of the many concerned currently or former residents of New Mexico I would like echo the concerns of allowing large out of state companies to come in unchecked, that have the money to dominate the market would prevent small businesses from being able to start their businesses and sustain in a market dominated by a few large companies. With these concerns in mind I would like to make the suggestion of limiting out of state companies to a 1000-5000 plant count with the limit of 3 licenses that would have to be in different areas of the cannabis industry for example 1 cultivation, 1 concentrate and 1 dispensary. This could help people of New who wish to start up their own cannabis company and those who have moved out of state with the hopes of learning the cannabis industry and would like to return to bring their knowledge back to their home state. I would also like to acknowledge that out of state cannabis businesses can bring knowledge that they have gained in other markets to New Mexico which could help the New Mexico market, however they should be limited to the amount of plants they can grow and the number of licenses they can obtain. In other states that have allowed large cannabis companies to come in without limitations have suffered market crashes due to the price war that will inevitably happen when there are large competing companies, leading to reduced prices in which small companies do not have the capital to sustain. The other concern raised is the limited water resources in New Mexico. I would suggest that limiting large companies plant counts and the number of licenses they can obtain could more evenly disperse smaller business throughout the state and reduce the burden of one area using large quantities of water.

6. Dustin White on August 6, 2021 at 3:08 pm

   Good afternoon

   I would like to start by saying I know cannabis legislation is a long, tedious task and would like to thank you all for your time. There are few things I would like to point out for the community and the longevity of this potentially lucrative market. First I would like to touch on the residency restrictions. I’ve heard both sides concerning the residency issues and the big fear seems to be large corporations coming in a dominating the market. This fear is very understandable, any legislature trying to create and maintain a thriving market to generate revenue for years to come should share this fear. Several states have made this same mistake by allowing big outside corporations to come in hoping for mass profit. What ends up happening though is the big companies come in flood the market with substandard product and start price gouging to compete and shut out other big companies. In the process the price per pound drops to the point no one makes any money, including the state. This has happened every where but Alaska, which has been maintaining its thriving market for 6 years now. While still remaining in the range of $3200-$4000 a lb., generating millions in taxable revenue, all the while having one of the smallest populations. Mean while Colorado’s, California’s, and Washington’s market have all crashed within 4 years, selling at $300-$400 a lb. Generating very little taxable revenue. My name is Dustin White, I was born and raised in Tularosa until I was 23. I’ve been building grow facilities and growing cannnabis in Alaska for 5 years now. So I also understand those who have just been practicing the craft elsewhere and waiting to come home. It’s my belief that a middle ground would be more beneficial for everyone. Maybe implement a residency restriction for larger entities, or only issue a limited amount of microbusiness licenses to anyone from out of state. It would also be more beneficial in that case to up the micro business’s plant count to 400. As this should be a goal for any cultivation looking to sustain reasonable profit margin and product flow. This would still gives plenty of opportunity to anyone out of state but also keep outside entities from coming in and crashing the market, as they have obviously already crashed there own. Quite simply put, you cant tax a market that’s not generating revenue. Just ask Colorado, California, and Washington.

   Again thank you for your time an consideration.

7. RC on August 6, 2021 at 2:52 pm

   This is a direct response to someone who was condemning gifting weed: there’s nothing you can do about gifting without banning personal home growth, which would not be wise for the commitee to do. There are limits to how much one individual can grow at home, but there should never be a restriction on sharing that home grown with friends and family. That would only go to destroy the whole premise of legalization and decriminalization. If you buy something from somebody, and then someone entirely different gifts you bud, that CAN’T be a crime or abuse of the system. If people are afraid of so called “bad actors”, (something that in itself is debatable and questionable terminology), then maybe they should make it easier to go “legit”. Right now, this bill heavily favors those with big money and already established businesses. So if they don’t want people to “cheat” the system, they should make it more friendly for average people to succeed. I have no sympathy for all you people complaining about people gifting weed. They aren’t breaking any rules, and aren’t being given much other options.

8. Eduardo gamboa on August 6, 2021 at 2:37 pm

   If a property in Dona Ana County is zoned as C3 (Regional Commercial) and the Zone permits a wide range of regional commercial activities generating large amounts of employment and traffic, serving a wide region on the County.

   No schools , day cares, churches within 500 feet –

   Q1 : Does cannabis cultivation production, manufacturing , processing , and sales fall under those guidelines?

   C3 zoning allows the following uses:

   (1) Agriculture:

   (Q2: Does Cannabis Production and Cultivation fall under this ? )

   (A) Permitted if assessed as Agriculture for On-Farm Operations only.

   – Agricultural Packaging and Warehousing
   – Greenhouse and Nursery, Commercial

   (2) Education
   ( Q3 : Does cannabis community out reach and education pertain to this ?)

   – College or University
   – Trade School

   (3) C3 SPECIAL USE PERMITS
   (Q4 : Does the compliant Cannabis manufacturing /processing facility fall under this? )

   Agriculture

   – Agricultural Processing Facility

   (4) Retail and Service

   ( Q5: Does licensed compliant sale of recreational and medical cannabis fall under this? )

   Q6 : Would a property that is as Zoned C3 have and issue being permitted for full vertical integrated license?

   Q7: Would a property that is Zoned C3 ,that already has an account with the local Water district/ water provider has access to running water and sewage be permitted to use that water to cultivate cannabis ?

   Q8 : Would a property that is Zoned C3 be allowed to Cultivate Cannabis, Manufacture , and sell cannabis- if not what would be the reason for not allowing a C3 zoned property to host Cannabis business?

   Q9 : Why would a Property that is Zoned C3 which is defined as a Regional Commercial- and the property has the experience, expertise , local team and compliant cannabis cultivation know how in order to be a positive actor within the New Mexico Cannabis Program be kept from accessing fair resources (which are already in place – i.e. pluming, sewer, electrical, etc) to execute on the tasks that need to be done in order to properly execute on the business?

   Thank you for all your time and effort that is going into reading and considering the public comments.

9. Kyla Towery on August 6, 2021 at 2:07 pm

   Not every out of state wanting to pursue a license, is a big company. I currently live in Arizona, where the cannabis laws make it impossible to get a license, without tens of millions. I would like to get a micro license and move to New Mexico. I will be moving with my husband and 2 kids. We want to help the community and improve it for our children. We have already made a plan on ways we can do so. Our profits will stay in New Mexico and we will be hiring local residents. I don’t think ruling out every out of state person is fair. Maybe requiring out of state residents don’t have any licenses in other states for the first year could help rule out big companies, while still allowing small businesses to get started in New Mexico.

10. Jennifer Nobui on August 6, 2021 at 1:49 pm

    Residential requirements
    Residential requirements should be required for a cannabis producer distributor license or any license the CCD issues.
    New Mexico State residency requirements state that a person must reside in the state for a year (12 calendar months).
    There could be an exception to the 12 month requirement to allow for a lesser time for people in the situation they have prior residency in the state and that would like to come back home to cultivate. The state could update it’s requirements.
    Microbusiness producer levels
    Microbusiness producer licenses plant limit count should be increased based on the latest information that there will be a deficit in the market once it is open.
    If you allow this to happen, the microbusinesses (Craft grows and Boutique grows) will fill the need and produce a productive competitive market.
    Consider this licensing structure:
    0 to 100 plants
    100 to 200 plants
    200 to 400 plants
    If the CCD allowed a temporary grow area to the microbusiness while the main facility went up this would help with demand.
    Commercial producer
    Commercial producer levels should be reduced back to their initial levels set forth in part one of the general provisions, especially when commercial producers could apply for multiple licenses with unknown limits on how many licensed premises could be held by the larger commercial operations.
    Also, if big commercial producers are allowed to increase the plant count there is bound to be a ripple effect in the supply and demand sides of things. It behooves New Mexico to keep cannabis at a certain price and not devaluate it like Oregon has. I am all for a free market, but devaluated cannabis means much less tax revenue for the state. Some careful control measures should be put in place to make sure that that does not happen. This in turns cuts out the micro producer.
    Because let’s face it the New Mexican cannabis connoisseur is going to be growing his own cannabis and have multiply harvests done by April 2022.
    So the demand might be over rated by the medical industry to monopolize New Mexico.
    Variances
    Variances written into part 2 of the proposed rules are a step in the right direction, but time limits should be increased from 90 days to 12 months to allow microbusiness to build out their facility.
    Use of commercial contractors
    Building out a simple rudimentary facility requires microbusinesses to use a state licensed contractor or journeyman. The said person would have to pull the permit locally to do the work on a commercial grow facility. Some of these structures that are in question are kit structures with instructions. There is no need to employ a licensed general contractor to erect these simple kit structures. This is an unreasonable financial burden for the microbusiness for such a simple structure.
    Then there are some people who want to obtain a license that have attained all the required skills and the know how, they have a financial means to build out their facility the way that had envisioned and intended to be done. The added expense of contractors putting up simple kit buildings and wiring in simple electrical circuits is overwhelming and overdone.
    I propose that rule be adjusted for microbusiness owners so that they can pull a permit to do work on their facility themselves. All work still must meet local codes and ordinances and be inspected by local inspectors and pass inspections. Local ordinances, county per county, would have to be written for this very special situation. Residential permits can be pulled, work done, inspected and sold after inspections have cleared.
    Water requirements
    Water suppliers in the state are saying that they can sell water to who they want, and they can do what they want with the water (residential or commercial).
    I get why residences and farmers are up in arms about water rights and the cannabis industry.
    But I think there is a happy medium for all when you take into account how much tax revenue this industry is going to bring to the state.
    When using water responsibly and utilizing water absorption and reclamation techniques, it doesn’t take too much water to grow cannabis.
    If a microbusiness proves it is utilizing these types of measures it should be considered for a smaller conversion of residential water rights to commercial water rights. A flourishing microbusiness can function with a minimum amount of water maybe 1/4-acre feet per year or less. If these small businesses could fall in these types of parameters, conversion of residential water rights to commercial on a micro level should be able to be written in at the state engineer’s office as an exemption, as we are talking a lot of tax revenue, for just a little wiggle room.
    I want to end by saying the CCD can make this a great opportunity for its residents of this state. This falls in your lap, please consider your people’s position.

11. Matt Tuttle on August 6, 2021 at 1:43 pm

    I would humbly ask that if the plant count is being increased for large growers it should also be increased for the micro-producers. I propose that the plant limit for the $1000 dollar license be 400 plants and the plant limit for $500 dollar license should be 200. This would also would make taking the risk of starting a new business much more worth while.

    As far as outdoor growers are concerned we will not need a processing facility until fall of 2022 so there could be some exemptions for outdoor growers to some of the requirements in the rules for acquiring the license. There are also companies who will purchase the crop without it being dried or cured so some outdoor growers won’t need a facility at all.

    As it takes time for construction and acquiring water rights the provisional license should take this into account and I would ask that it gives 6 months to a year to fulfill the facility as well as water rights requirements before activating the license.

    Finally I would suggest that a financial grant be created for lower income individuals who are interested in starting a micro-business, this could be funded by some of the taxation from revenue generated from cannabis.

12. Erica Rowland on August 6, 2021 at 1:38 pm

    Hello and thank you for hearing us today .
    My name is erica Rowland and I am a mother of 4, a lifetime farmer and committed medical cannabis advocate .
    I represent farm flourish .

    Regarding commercial water verification: there are multiple entities, ie MRGCD, and Alb water Authority etc that are unaware of what RLD is requesting and requiring for application for cannabis production. For example, section 16.8.2.15 (5) (a) lists options for certification of water rights. The additional request of permission from the water suppliers to agree and admit and allow the water use for “cannabis is compliant with the providers rules” . Every water supplier I spoke with said they do not supply a letter like this and ” they do not discriminate against plant type”. Agricultural use does not have to be specified. Please consider what you are requiring being unavailable by water suppliers, and outside of regular operations for them.

    BY requiring commercial permitting, certificate of occupancy etc you are asking all potential micro growers to find and architect , and general contractor and engineers and pay those additional fees .

    Permitting and zoning in some regions have yet to determine those ordinances .

    Timing is a concern with theses entities as well as they are backlogged and just now educating themselves on proposed rules and regs .

    Commercial water meters are also a concern for those using water from their municipalities . Those range from 6 to 32 thousand dollars .
    Water authorities, and RLD will not allow for residential water meters under these regulations .

    Please consider 90 day provisional licenses being changed to 12 months to allow people that have invested in this process to navigate these huge time consuming hurdles and achieve fair licensure. Ultimately we all just want to grow .
    Thank you

13. Samira Johnson on August 6, 2021 at 1:19 pm

    I think we have forgotten that we are dealing with living systems here- human, plant, legal – I believe that all of these systems can run in a beneficial harmonious manner.

    I implore the CCD to look at the regulations through not only the safety of the consumer, the big business players, and the tax revenue that New Mexico may receive, but also the residents of New Mexico that want to start a small cannabis business AND the Cannabis plants.

    To a certain degree, the regulations depict an industrialized prison. I do not like the idea of ingesting or smoking a beautiful, medicinal cannabis plant that has been grown under so many unnecesary restrictions. We already have enough chem weed in the state. The potential for New Mexican micro businesses to grow cannabis in a good, healthy, and harmonious way with our climate and the Earth we live in relation to is VAST – please don’t squelch that potential with overly burdensome requirements and regulations.

    My fellow New Mexicans and I have outlined again and again issues with the regulations – listen to them and listen to your hearts as well as your mind. This plant is a healing gift on so many levels, please do all that you can to support Cannabis and the growers who love to grow Cannabis.

14. Cid Isbell on August 6, 2021 at 1:19 pm

    for Microbusiness License holders:
    1. Should be allowed to use domestic wells as a water source
    2. Provisional licenses should be allowed for 1 year
    3. Standard accessory buildings should be allowed and not considered commercial greenhouses
    4. Owner permits for microbusiness producers (no need for a contractor)
    5. Ease the boundary for entry into this business for small business entrepreneurs.

15. Timothy C Pitts on August 6, 2021 at 12:42 pm

    1. City of Las Cruces does not appear to have any role in CCD processes. But the City has responsibility for safety and security of its residents. Can a Joint Powers Agreement be used to allow the City to have a role in public safety and security inspections/review?
    2. Cities enforce laws regarding criminal activity. City police will be the first responders regarding complaints. How will CCD interface with local and state law enforcement?
    3. Who is responsible for initial and annual inspections on security systems? How does the local dispatch which monitors security systems interface with CCD and inspections?
    4. If there is more than one microbusiness licensee on a single property, can there be more than 200 plants? Who is responsible for verifying that?
    5. If CCD approves a security lighting system that is not in compliance with a local night-sky ordinance, when the city denies that building permit, will that create a conflict with the cannabis statute?
    6. Will CCD be enforcement entity for underage consumption?

16. Jeffrey Bannowsky on August 6, 2021 at 12:30 pm

    This was supposed to be a law that was supposed to be for the working class with ambition.
    All my felonies are over 15yrs. I’ve changed my life around. But I still can’t apply for a license because of the war on drug.
    Give the citizens a chance. NOT THE RICH.

17. Robert James on August 6, 2021 at 11:26 am

    See attachment.

    comments_8-6-21

18. Joby Elliott on August 6, 2021 at 10:44 am

    I would like to submit a counterpoint to Ultra Health’s comments regarding raising the plant count for large producers.

    An alternative to giving the big businesses even more leeway would be to SIMPLY MAKE MEANINGFULLY DIFFERENT RULES FOR MICROBUSINESSES. There are hundreds if not thousands of potential microbusinesses who would LOVE to fill the coming demand. Simply give regular folks lenient rules for small businesses, rather than using the urgency as an excuse to give the existing big players even more leeway.

    You want to create more supply, and you want to improve the equity of the industry. More microbusinesses does both of those.

    I’m once again begging the CCD to actually consider microbusinesses. As was covered in the meeting today, a microbusiness is around 1/10 to 1/20 the size of a full size business, and 1/50 of what Ultra Health is asking for. That’s a MEANINGFULLY DIFFERENT scale, and it should have MEANINGFULLY DIFFERENT rules.

19. Carlos Abeyta on August 6, 2021 at 10:33 am

    Will small producers address be public as many address will be a home address. This cause issue in WA t the begining of their small producer programs. Problems such as grower competition harassments and public harassments at the homes /growsite

20. Carlos Abeyta on August 6, 2021 at 10:28 am

    Hello I am looking for the applications for growing I dont see them on the RLD website