District attorneys form cannabis policy group

A group of 14 district attorneys from across the country have banded together to figure out policy positions on marijuana.

The initial report about the subset of the National District Attorneys Association indicated its recommendations may be taken into account by the new Trump administration, which could potentially signal that a firm stance on cannabis may be emerging sooner rather than later from the new president.

But an NDAA statement to Marijuana Business Daily on Tuesday was unclear on whether the reach of the group’s policy would extend to the new president.

Nelson Bunn, director of policy and government affairs for the district attorneys, wrote in an email that the NDAA had “formed an internal working group made up of prosecutors from around the country to develop association policy on the subject of marijuana. Contrary to other reporting, the working group is not affiliated with any other organization or entity, including the incoming administration.”

The initial report about the policy group, by the Daily Camera in Boulder, Colorado, identified only two members: Boulder District Attorney Stan Garnett and Tom Raynes, executive director of the Colorado District Attorney’s Council.

Garnett told the Camera that district attorneys from California and Oregon are members of the group, but the NDAA could not offer additional information about the other members when contacted by Marijuana Business Daily.

There are also many other unanswered questions about the group:

  • Will it advise President Trump or the Department of Justice at all on marijuana? If so, will the group tackle any other issues?
  • Will its recommendations carry any weight with Trump or the DOJ?
  • Why was the group organized in the first place, and what outcome is the NDAA seeking?

Bunn also wrote that the NDAA will release policy positions on cannabis in general “upon completion of the working group discussions” but did not say when that may be.

Garnett told the Camera he’s already had to push back against several group members who want to crack down on the cannabis industry.

2 comments on “District attorneys form cannabis policy group
  1. Bryan on

    This article is thin, it is saying: they are going to have a policy, when? we do not know. Will it even matter? we do not even know…

    Get back to us when you can answer the 5 questions…who, what, when, where, why.

    Reply
  2. Andrew Collier on

    “Garnett told the Camera he’s already had to push back against several group members who want to crack down on the cannabis industry.”

    I found the last sentence informative to the risk outlook. The industry needs to learn how to make themselves bankable under BSA/AML whatever a bunch of manic political decision makers do in the near future. Read the Safe Harbor Private Banking book. I guess I should stop being so astounded at how clueless people in this industry are when it comes to basic business, corp. governance and compliance. People used to call MJ Freeway saying “run my business for me.” Now MJ Freeway is hopefully saying to some one “run my business for me.”

    It is unethical to think you can sell a technology solution and still try to be an “objective fiduciary advisor” to your client. Would an MJ Freeway consultant really tell a client to use Green Bits or Flow Hub if it was truly in their best interest in their situation?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *