‘Long process that is nowhere near perfect’: Q&A with California cannabis czar Nicole Elliott

(This is the first of a two-part series. Part 2 looks into what the California governor’s administration is doing to counter the state’s illicit cannabis market.)

When Nicole Elliott was appointed senior adviser on cannabis in California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s Office of Business and Economic Development in February, many in the state’s marijuana industry cheered.

Elliott had already developed a reputation among industry watchers as a thoughtful regulator during her tenure with the city of San Francisco, as head of its Office of Cannabis the previous two years, and those in the marijuana trenches were happy to have a liaison with Newsom’s office who was already sympathetic to many of the obstacles they faced.

Since her appointment, Elliott has spent time crisscrossing the state, speaking with industry stakeholders and working quietly behind the scenes on big-picture issues and legislation such as Assembly Bill 97, a state budget trailer bill that Newsom signed into law last month and which she says reflects the governor’s policy priorities for the newly legal cannabis trade.

Marijuana Business Daily spoke with Elliott to pick her brain on what California’s cannabis industry can expect from the Newsom administration going forward.

What are the governor’s top priorities with regard to the newly legal cannabis industry? What does he have in mind for changes and what are the issues he thinks need attention?

The way he really looks at it is three pillars, and they’re very broad. The first is access to licensure – making sure that we’re doing all that we can that’s feasible to ensure you’re seeing operators obtain and maintain licensure.

The second is around thoughtful enforcement. There are a lot of entities that have enforcement capabilities – some of those are state, some of those are local, some of those are federal. How are we using our resources efficiently, and how are we doing it in a thoughtful way that gets to the outcomes we all want to get to?

Last is equity. This is one of his main focuses: What are we doing to support not just individuals who have been impacted by the war on drugs (and) help them participate in this marketplace? And how are we supporting communities that have been impacted by previous bad policies?

What’s the governor’s strategy for getting California to fully realizing the state’s marijuana market potential? 

I think the governor has been very honest about the challenges that we all knew California would face in transitioning a very old, very large, very unregulated medical market. That will take time.

He’s been quoted as acknowledging five to seven years for the first path of what that time would be, and I think we’re in month 20 now, so less than two years in.

There’s obviously some level-setting we all need to have around the fact this is a long process that is nowhere near perfect right now, but it definitely is progressing. If you look at some of the other states that legalized, those states are still working with unregulated markets four years later.

So it’s a process, and we are definitely aware that process is going to take more time.

But overall, the general goal is being committed to tracking what’s happening on the ground, trying to pull in the best data that we have available to inform decision-making – including on enforcement – and trying to iterate how we go about enforcing that meet the overall objectives.

What more is the governor prepared to do to lower barriers to entry for small cannabis companies? Will he use the bully pulpit to persuade more cities and counties to legalize and regulate?

There is a recognition that barriers to entry need to be lowered. Period. Full stop.

That said, we all know that once bureaucracy is built, it’s really challenging to undo.

So, right now, where a lot of the focus is going … is really looking at the licensing process and the regulations package and trying to understand where in those two things we can do more streamlining, shave off the edges and try to create access to licensure by removing barriers within those two things.

That’s obviously one area where there’s plenty of area for improvement.

Beyond that, there’s a plethora of things we can try and do and should try and tackle, and those are big-policy issues that take a bit more time to establish. There are limitations on what we can do via administrative action, versus where everybody needs to buy into that process.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

John Schroyer can be reached at [email protected]

4 comments on “‘Long process that is nowhere near perfect’: Q&A with California cannabis czar Nicole Elliott
  1. mike on

    fascinating but not unexpected that someone has to be hired to fix something that started with a clean slate and is already (messed) up by bringing in self admitted Gov ignoramuses about the mj licensing and business. maybe by design to shake out many legit people that thought they had a chance to participate in a new industry by becoming legal and serving especially needs in the medical side. nicole will dink around, accomplish nothing but encourage more legit people to hang on a little longer till they go broke waiting and either walk or fade back underground to earn a living. then the big corps will have less competition when the govs state and locals decide the only answer is let big businesses run it like with liquor bizs do now.

    Reply
    • Brad Big Business on

      Hit the nail on the head mike!!!
      This is all part of the plan, legalize for big corps and make illegal for legacy operators.
      Nicole says “The first is access to licensure – making sure that we’re doing all that we can that’s feasible to ensure you’re seeing operators obtain and maintain licensure.” Absolute BS when operators are waiting a yr to receive licensure. BCC needs to hire more people to process licenses. CA should of followed CO suit and not allowed out of state business or investment in for the first 5 years allowing those who built the industry time to scale to compete with big corp. Instead the opposite happened allow established out of state businesses and Canadian investment in before the small CA owned and operated businesses can get on there feet.

      “The second is around thoughtful enforcement. There are a lot of entities that have enforcement capabilities – some of those are state, some of those are local, some of those are federal. How are we using our resources efficiently, and how are we doing it in a thoughtful way that gets to the outcomes we all want to get to?”

      Yep using fear tactics of multiple agency banging down doors and flying overhead small operators trying to make a living. make legal to make illegal. not to mention the absolutely asinine weed wise campaign and now fake news of black market carts on a killing spree.

      “Last is equity. This is one of his main focuses: What are we doing to support not just individuals who have been impacted by the war on drugs (and) help them participate in this marketplace? And how are we supporting communities that have been impacted by previous bad policies?”

      no comment…. what equity ? to who? big corps and lobbyists….
      CA and its departments have failed miserably at an obvioulsly corrupt power grab. Black market accounts for 80% of CA cannabis sales and its not going to change.

      Reply
  2. Chris Churchill on

    It’s great the article was written and it’s nice to know Nicole Elliott is working behind the scenes. I am looking forward to part 2 of the interview. Hopefully, part 2 will have more sustenance to it about how the state is addressing the illegal market and banking.

    Reply
  3. Don't smoke but buy dem stocks on

    Nicole Elliot did not answer anything relevant in my opinion. Nothing. Zilch. Month 20 according to the Govs plan and it’s still Horse Manure for these MJ businesses being bullied by California. Newsome and Nicole Elliot are simply waiting for BIG BUSINESS to come in, stake their claim, squash the small Cannabis businesses out, and THEN California can squash the Black Market. Our taxes are so Gott Damn high here that Elliot & Newsome both know a regular Joe cannot function and make a profit here in California with Cannabis. Whoever finally comes in and sets up shop that is a huge Market Capital Company, Gov Newsome will have some kind of red tape cutting ceremony for them because they can desecrate the meaningless people, like you and me, and our small Cannabis company. I’m willing to bet that California/Newsome/Elliot will subsidize these big companies when they arrive (whoever wins the Cannabis race is what I mean) so they put out of business the small guys/girls and then subsidize them more to rid CA of Cartel Weed. Subsidizing isn’t a bad idea, but, I believe the Gov will do it to get rid of the small guy too. Plus, it’s the only way I can see CA getting rid of the Black Market since our Taxes are so Gott Damn high. It would have to be Federally Legal at that time as well due to the fact it will be “a lot” of subsidizing and Mr Trump and the White house has that kind of LOOT. Loot because they steal our money with taxes, but that’s another complain LOL

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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