“I’m going to err on the side of a smartly regulated system that protects public health and consumers.”
In an effort to adopt testing and tracking requirements for medical cannabis, lawmakers are trying to strike a balance between protecting consumers without bankrupting growers — a goal the industry said current proposals haven’t yet nailed.
Some legislators want to essentially adopt the rules of the recreational program, while other lawmakers, as well as growers, say doing that would make the small and organic operations that make Maine’s industry unique no longer viable.
The recreational program relies on “batch testing,” where quantities of harvested or manufactured cannabis products are sampled before they can be sold. In contrast, others are advocating for “audit testing,” the random testing of products already on shelves.
“Don’t pass this version of testing that would put us all out of business,” said Lizzy Hayes, an organic farmer and medical cannabis caregiver, the term for anyone licensed to grow and sell medical cannabis. “Just do audit testing to identify concerns and make sure that bad actors aren’t in the program.”
But critics of that proposal argue it doesn’t go far enough to ensure patient safety.
What’s considered unsafe in terms of contaminants is a whole other point of contention, given a lack of research on what’s harmful. And, testing is only one component of the complex bill, which also considers bringing the predominant seed-to-sale tracking software used by state regulatory bodies into Maine’s medical program amid complaints that it’s costly and flawed.
The intricacies of all of these requirements are being debated as the current testing authority and requirements for the medical program remain unclear. It’s also occurring against the backdrop of ongoing investigations into illegal cannabis grows, resulting in some cheaper, sometimes tainted products getting into the state’s medical market.
Varying approaches to testing
There are three versions of testing requirements being considered in LD 1847.
Six members of the Legislature’s Veterans and Legal Affairs Committee backed a proposal that would require growers to submit samples for batch testing, with exemptions for the smallest caregivers as long as they label their products as untested. This amendment was proposed by Malon and Democratic Rep. Anne Graham of North Yarmouth, the bill sponsor.
“I’m going to err on the side of a smartly regulated system that protects public health and consumers,” Malon said, “and also it protects the legal industry, which I want to see succeed and thrive.”
That’s also the view of the Maine Public Health Association, the state’s oldest and largest association for public health professionals, which Rebecca Boulos testified on behalf of during the public hearing.
“It is necessary to reassure patients that the product they are consuming is contaminant-free and has accurate potency,” Boulos said.
Maine law enforcement leaders support the batch testing amendment as a means to counter illegal grows.
“Maine needs to create a bright line between the legal cannabis programs and the illicit markets to better allow law enforcement to do its job,” Department of Public Safety Commissioner Michael Sauschuck, Penobscot County Sheriff Troy Morton, who chairs the Maine Sheriff’s Association, and Cumberland Police Chief Charles Rumsey, who chairs the Maine Chiefs of Police Association, wrote in a letter to the Legislature on March 10.
But Rep. David Boyer (R-Poland), who voted against passage of any version of the bill, called the amendment “a bailout for organized crime” because it’ll raise costs and make the illicit market more lucrative. “We know that bad guys don’t follow the law,” Boyer said.
Emily Baldwin, the owner-operator of Your Maine Plug, a small grow in Aroostook County, echoed Boyer in her testimony against the bill, saying that strict rules mean little if people don’t follow them.
“Overregulation can be as harmful as underregulation, driving product — and patients — into the black market,” Baldwin wrote in testimony against the bill. “While larger labs and cultivators may absorb the cost of new requirements, small businesses cannot.”
That’s why some think audit testing strikes the right balance. Five committee members backed that version, which was proposed by committee co-chair Sen. Craig Hickman (D-Winthrop).
“To me, audit testing is the only thing that matters,” Hickman said. “The only thing that I need anyone to test is the final product.”
His amendment would require batch testing at first but once a provider produces several clean tests, they could then move to audit testing. If he had it his way, Hickman wouldn’t do the batch testing first, but he said he adopted it as a compromise.
The other committee chair, Rep. Laura Supica (D-Bangor), offered another version that would require batch testing for only the largest operations — 2,000 square feet or larger — but instead would use a yearly, multi-step audit testing approach for operations smaller than that.
“I’m really trying to focus on what it is to be a small business,” Supica said.
There is broad support in the medical cannabis industry for audit testing, said Mark Barnett, a registrant of both the medical and recreational programs and lead industry organizer. However, testing is not the only component of LD 1847.
“All of [the amendments] have set essentially no place for a truly small craft cultivator to succeed,” Barnett said. “A ‘no’ vote is the only one that makes any sense.”
Tracking
Another key part of the bill is tracking requirements.
Recreational marijuana businesses currently have to pay fees to an out-of-state company called Metrc to use its inventory system and purchase Metrc plant tags and packaging labels. Metrc has lobbied lawmakers on LD 1847 this session. Several, particularly small operations, testified to the committee that this tracking system is burdensome, costly and often has operational delays.
Along with having the strictest testing structure, Malon and Graham’s amendment would have the most comprehensive tracking structure, keeping up the seed-to-sale plant tracking done in the recreational program. Supica’s again separates out large growers, requiring seed-to-sale for those operations but less strict tracking in a state portal for smaller outfits. Hickman’s would do the less strict version for all.
There’s also a bill this session about recreational cannabis testing that’s passed both chambers, LD 1488, though it doesn’t make any major changes. Instead, as bill sponsor Sen. Mike Tipping (D-Penobscot) put it, the legislation seeks to clarify the original intention of the law in an effort to eliminate redundant testing for some edible products.
Supica, who works in the service industry and watched the Maine beer trail expand, said Maine could similarly become a craft cannabis hub.
If cannabis is legalized federally, it’ll be more profitable to grow in the South where the growing season is longer. Maine could continue to promote its organic farmers, she said, “but the laws that we’re setting up right now are pushing out organic farmers and the only people that can survive the regulations, that can comply with the ‘Malon’ act, will be large growers.”
Hickman also stressed that he doesn’t want caregivers run out of business by legislative action, contending, “that may happen even with my amendment and I don’t like that at all.”
“This is a come to Jesus moment for the medical cannabis program, for sure,” Hickman added.
Concern about implications was apparent in the more than 500 pieces of written testimony submitted largely in opposition to the original bill, including people from nearby states.
“People from other states travel to Maine because our medicine is affordable and it is high quality and you have access to purchase it directly from the person who grew it, which creates a lot of trust,” Hayes told Maine Morning Star.
Out-of-state visitors are in addition to the 112,547 people certified to access cannabis through the medical program in 2025, up from 110,484 in 2024. Unlike other states, Maine’s medical cannabis market has financially outperformed its recreational one, though that gap is narrowing.
“Our program is being pointed out as an outlier and framing that as something that’s bad about the program,” Hayes said of the lack of testing requirements, “but it really has worked very well for patients.”
Contaminants
Studies have found that products sold in Maine’s medical cannabis market would fail the testing standards set for the recreational market, meaning they could be contaminated with pesticides, microbes, yeast and mold. One was conducted by the Office of Cannabis Policy, which concluded that about 42% of the 120 samples they collected for the study had the presence of at least one material banned in the recreational program.
That’s not to say regulation of the recreational market has been perfect. Several recalls have led growers and others to question the state’s standards.
However, there’s also disagreement on the presence of what contaminants should lead to a failed test, given a lack of research on what’s actually harmful. Many growers are concerned current testing standards for recreational cannabis could cut out organic or outdoor farmers whose operations are inherently more exposed than controlled, indoor operations.
A bill sponsored by Hickman that’s set to take effect this summer would, among several things, direct the Office of Cannabis Policy to submit a proposal to the Legislature by January 2026 to implement the medical cannabis research grant program to adhere with existing law.
“If we had research conducted over these eight years, we might also be having a different conversation,” Hickman said.
This article was republished from the Maine Morning Star under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. You can view the original version here.
