Notes on the unreasonable regulations and constantly shifting goal posts that Massachusetts cannabis businesses endure
I think a lot about the Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission. Probably more than I should. Of course it is part of my job in covering the agency, but my contemplation goes beyond the merely work-related. It’s more of a psychological spar in which I waffle between pity and contempt—the former since the CCC is overworked by many measures, and the latter because there is nothing sillier than regulating marijuana.
Of course it’s not the fault of regulators that there are so many rules. The blame for our cannabis bureaucracy belongs to prohibitionists and politicians who blocked weed as long as they possibly could and then threw wrenches in the process after voters approved medical and then recreational sales. At the same time, like with any government apparatus, the CCC has certain discretion, and people at the agency deserve condemnation when it isn’t exercised efficiently.
A recent post on social media suggests that the commission isn’t using its limited resources prudently, or at least that is how I interpreted it. It came from Andy Klein, who is an integrated systems consultant with American Alarm in Lunenburg. He works with several Massachusetts cannabis businesses, and wrote that his company has “been made aware from multiple customers that the CCC has been out doing intensive random audits in the last few weeks.” Klein’s team interviewed his clients about these inspections, and what they told him is alarming.
Against the backdrop of the agency pleading with lawmakers for increased funding, it seems the CCC is using the minimal resources it has to haze its licensees to no apparent end. Klein reported that his customers “all said the CCC staff were friendly [and] professional,” but that doesn’t change the fact that they’re inspecting deck chairs on a ship that’s dangerously close to capsizing.
I asked Klein if I could republish his list of areas that agency inspectors are seemingly focusing on. You can read it below. But whereas he wrote the compendium matter-of-factly, hardly passing judgment on the CCC, I implore consumers and direct stakeholders alike to consider the damage this kind of insane oversight is causing in the industry, and how it likely results in much higher prices and far less stability for brands they love.
1) Product in vaults being on top shelves—the tops of containers not being on camera (despite being approved via PPLI already).
2) Fully reviewed Opening and Closing Procedures on camera while reviewing SOPs. They inspectors randomly chose days and watched the full process to ensure adherence to SOPs.
3) Reviewed time stamps and the ability for cameras to display a time stamp on video or still footage.
4) CBD products were reviewed heavily (especially looking for proper labeling from MDAR).
5) Heavy review of expired products.
6) METRC tags (one customer was under the impression that you cannot give away product—so they were doing samples to staff at a penny value through METRIC—the CCC found this problematic).
7) A full review of the product destruction process (reviewed camera footage with the logs and SOPs in front of the inspectors). The inspectors looked at logs, and had customers go to the time stamp to make sure destruction, logs, and cameras all matched.
8) SKU to METRC tag total (customers are holding METRC tags after product sale for 30 days due to customer money back guarantee—and they need the tag open if they take a bad product back).
9) All training certificates for staff needed to be printed—not stored digitally.
10) CORI Checks. At least a couple of customers stated that CORI checks are required to be printed. All 36 some odd pages of the report. The same report the CCC already has through their system (apparently).
11) Inspectors actually audited Access Control (which is unusual—so make sure you can log into your access control system and show how it works and tracks use of codes/fobs/cards).
12) An inspector stated that the staff should be auditing their security systems daily … which is interesting considering their regulations require an audit every 30 days.
