Massachusetts advances recreational cannabis diversity plan

Massachusetts regulators have approved a draft proposal that would give priority review in the recreational marijuana licensing process to business applicants from economically disadvantaged communities.

The state’s Cannabis Control Commission will vote next week to finalize those and a slew of other regulations the group has been working on in recent weeks.

Adult-use license applicants must meet two of the following requirements to be eligible for priority review, according to the State House News Service:

  • A majority of the entity’s ownership belongs to people who have lived in economically disadvantaged areas for five of the past 10 years.
  • At least 51% of current employees or subcontractors live in economically disadvantaged areas, and that number will increase to 75% by the beginning of business.
  • At least 51% of employees have a prior drug-related conviction.
  • A majority of owners can demonstrate significant, past experience of economic empowerment.

Qualified applicants will enter the review process ahead of others, potentially allowing them to open before competitors.

Regulators haven’t yet defined what the thresholds for economically disadvantaged will be.

Los Angeles’ marijuana regulations include a similar program that requires the city to license applicants that were adversely affected by the war on drugs.

2 comments on “Massachusetts advances recreational cannabis diversity plan
  1. Lar on

    The Mad Hatter’s have taken over Wonderland. run Alice run. This country is indeed down the rabbit hole. Or maybe it’s just a hole in the head of these legislators. You get preference if half of the people in your company have been convicted on a drug bust. Minority empowerment. LMFAO Are prisons considered an economically disadvantaged location. As usual logic and common sense is completely absent from the liberal mind.

    Reply
    • Muhammad Ali on

      This appears more like criminal empowerment than minority empowerment. Others may view it as an effort to restrict crime to minority areas. And yet others may proclaim it is nothing more than big money using minorities for their benefit and to avoid charges of minority discrimination!

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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