Commissioners introduce emergency cannabis bill

DENTON – Complying with a provision of the Maryland’s 2024 cannabis legislation would be easier if state officials would provide timely guidance, the Caroline County Commissioners discussed at their weekly meeting Dec. 10.

Nevertheless, the three commissioners introduced emergency legislation as they await specific specific guidance for how to spend more than $367,000, allocated to the county from the State Community Reinvestment and Repair Fund.

Legislative Bill 2024-008 establishes the Caroline County Community Reinvestment and Repair Fund (CCCRRF) as a nonlapsing special revenue fund.

In accordance with the Maryland General Assembly’s Cannabis Reform Act of 2023, which legalized marijuana for adult use, the state funds were distributed to each county, “in an amount that, for the period from July 1, 2002, to January 1, 2023, both inclusive, is proportionate to the total number of cannabis possession charges in the county compared to the total number of cannabis possession charges in the State.”

A 9% sales and use tax on the sale of adult-use cannabis is included in the state law. Of the proceeds, 35% is allocated to the state Community Reinvestment and Repair Fund.

“Our portion of the money that is in the state fund is .838%, less than 1%, and the 2024 collection for us was 367,496.78,” County Attorney Stewart Barroll said. The General Assembly required each county to set up a fund, and the bill introduced Dec. 10 establishes that fund.

The bill states that “revenue paid into the CCCRRF shall be used only for funding community-based initiatives intended to benefit low-income communities, and community-based initiatives that serve disproportionately impacted areas.”

“‘Disproportionately impacted area’ means a geographic area identified by OSE that has had above 150% of the State’s 10-year average for cannabis possession charges,” according to the fiscal and policy note attached to the state’s Cannabis Reform Bill.

Caroline County is one of four counties that have no disproportionately impacted areas, according to the state statue. The other are Kent, Queen Anne’s and Garrett counties.

Commissioner Frank Bartz did the math for the 21-year span from 2002 to 2023. He said Caroline County had 2,121 cannabis charges out of a population of about 30,000 – .84% or 100 charges per year. He questioned how the county was supposed to know where to allocate the funds. Porter pointed out that the state was supposed to figure that out.

The state law established an Office of Social Equity, an independent office that functions within the administration; the governor appoints the executive director.

Among other duties, the OSE is tasked with “promoting and encouraging full participation in the regulated cannabis industry by people from communities that have been disproportionately impacted by the war on drugs in order to positively impact those communities.”

Because the OSE has been organized only about six months, no specific guidance has been given to the county. Deputy County Administrator Daniel Fox had sent a “long email” to the OSE for guidance as to how and where the county can spend its funds. He said he had suggested five or six ways the county might be able to allocate the funds.

A month and a half after his original email, Fox said he received a response, “and essentially, the email that I got back was no response on any of the prior stuff, just hey, more items will be coming about your reporting,” Fox told the commissioners. Meanwhile a statute-mandated Dec. 1 reporting deadline has passed.

“So, as we sit here today, and we're talking about introducing this legislation, we don't know where the money can be spent in the county,” Commission Vice President Larry Porter said.

“I mean, we're already past the reporting date that we're supposed to be reporting on spending money that they haven't told us where it can be spent,” Porter said.

Commission President Travis Breeding pointed out that Fox had gotten “a little bit of guidance.”

Fox said that guidance was via a phone call. “The guidance was, you guys can certainly interpret how you want to self-identify disproportionately impacted areas.” Several people in the meeting room laughed. Fox said he asked what would prevent the OSE from “pull(ing) the rug out from under us” if the county reported spending the funds in a way that didn’t comply with the statute’s expectations.

“I'm not going to be big on self-interpreting when it comes to its money,” Porter said.

Barroll explained the bill “tracks the language from the statute, … and it's not tying your hands to anything that down the road may be later identified as a place where you would invest some of this money – mental health and substance abuse services, education, after-school programs, housing and homelessness prevention services,” he said. “These are the kind of ideas that have been floated out there in most of the other counties.”

“We need to have the funds set up so that, … if they do give us further guidance in this next (General Assembly legislative) session, we at least have everything up and running,” Barroll said.

“I don't have a problem with introducing the legislation,” Porter said. “I'm just going to be really leery to start spending money and then find out that we spent it in an area that wasn't approved or program that wasn't approved.”

After a half-hour discussion, the commissioners unanimously approved the legislation. A public hearing on the bill is scheduled for Tuesday, Dec. 17, during the Commissioners’ 9 a.m. meeting, with the third reading and possible enactment Tuesday, Jan. 7, 2025. If passed, it would become effective immediately.