As the cannabis industry continues to grow, demand for insurance products is also increasing. While insurers have been cautious about entering a market that carries the stigma of a Schedule I drug, the cannabis industry is clamoring for insurance coverage options tailored to meet the needs of key players— distributors, growers, processors and retail dispensaries.
The escalating need for insurance products tailored to these cannabis business sectors has not expedited an increase in coverage offerings. The slow entry of insurance carriers into the cannabis sector can be tied to a reluctance to insure an industry with emerging and often unknown risks. This will begin to change as more information becomes available on what loss ratio trends look like in the cannabis industry.
For now, there is a wait-and-see stance held by insurance carriers. This presents a major concern for cannabis-related businesses that are subject to risk at every stage of the supply chain, with particular exposure for theft, general liability, crop loss, and product liability.some degree of crime and theft coverage is needed for these enterprises to help manage the risks associated with a cash-based business
For cannabis companies, the use of paper currency is a huge part of their risk exposure. Federal banking regulations have limited these businesses to dealing mostly in cash, which makes them a prime target for crime and fraud. Currently, only one carrier will insure coverage for cash and theft risk, and the policy is limited to $1 million for most risks. This is inadequate coverage since many operators have more than that amount on-site.
In states with legislation legalizing cannabis, the cannabis sector will be able to move away from operating in cash if Congress passes the Secure and Fair Enforcement (SAFE) Banking Act, which would protect financial institutions from liability for federal prosecution that could arise from servicing cannabis-related businesses authorized under state law. Until banking regulations give the cannabis industry the ability to operate as legitimate businesses with the stability and safety that would deter criminal activity, some degree of crime and theft coverage is needed for these enterprises to help manage the risks associated with a cash-based business.
Cannabis-related businesses need the same general liability coverage as other businesses to protect their premises and operations from lawsuits involving public contact. However, standard general liability policies—which exclude Schedule I substances from coverage—were not created with cannabis businesses in mind. It is still difficult for these businesses to obtain adequate general liability as a result of the legal uncertainty associated with the industry.
Product liability exposures for cannabis businesses encompass a wide range of areas, including edibles, vaporizers, pesticides, mold/fungus, misrepresentation, label claims, breach of warranty, deceptive practices, and failure to warn.
A major area of exposure concerns accidents resulting from impairment. A cannabis cultivator, processor, distributor, or retailer potentially may be considered liable in the event a product defect results in injury after reasonable use or when label defects fail to warn users that a product may have psychoactive effects.
Another area of risk exposure involves products that contain THC, the psychoactive compound that gives cannabis users a high. As the number of THC-containing products such as edibles and tinctures increases, so does the potential exposure to product liability claims for manufacturers and retailers.
The California Cannabis Track-and-Trace (CCTT) system also has implications for product liability. The CCTT is a statewide system used to record the inventory and movement of cannabis and related products through the commercial supply chain. All state cannabis licensees, including those with licenses for cultivation, manufacturing, retail, distribution, testing labs and microbusinesses, are required to use this system. The product liability impact lies in its capacity to determine responsibility along the supply chain from seed to sale.
For example, if a plastic vape pen explodes, a product liability lawsuit could have repercussions for many touch points across the supply chain beyond the manufacturer of the pen–all of which can be identified through CCTT. Entities that touch cannabis products such as soil suppliers or delivery persons also have product liability risk exposure. Personal injury attorneys can find incident-related parties easily and determine liability. This makes it particularly important to add these parties to the policy as additional insureds to help reduce claims exposure.
Another area of concern for risk exposure is crop loss. Crop insurance is generally hard to obtain due to the significantly different nature of cannabis crops compared to traditional crops like corn or soybeans.
An indoor crop insurance policy covers cultivators when there is loss resulting from threats such as fire, theft, and sprinkler leakage. However, crop insurance policies generally do not cover losses resulting from mold, rot, disease, changes in climate, or fertilization issues. Many growers forgo this coverage and instead elect to absorb losses and regrow their crops.
Outdoor crop coverage is generally unavailable, or the cost is prohibitive. Any potential for writing outdoor crop insurance for the cannabis industry essentially disappeared as a result of the recent wildfires in California. These devastating fires highlighted the pressing need for property damage and business interruption coverage for growers and dispensaries and other downstream businesses whose supply was disrupted. This lack of available outdoor crop insurance is one of the more notable gaps in available cannabis business insurance coverage.
While cannabis businesses operating in states that have legalized medical and/or recreational cannabis use have challenges getting adequate insurance coverage, there is some good news on the insurance front for those in California. Last year, California’s insurance commissioner announced approval for carriers to offer insurance coverage specifically to cannabis businesses. The state also approved a cannabis business-owners policy (CannaBOP) program that provides a package policy containing both property and liability coverage for qualifying dispensaries, distributors, manufacturers, processors and storage facilities. Colorado is on the verge of being the second state to approve its version of a CannaBOP program.
While more insurance carriers are beginning to write cannabis coverage, the limited insurance options and policies with restrictive plans currently offered todaydo not meet the needs of the cannabis industry. Insurers must catch up to the coverage requirements of this sector by offering more options tailored to growers, retail dispensaries, processors and distributors with better terms and better pricing.
The Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS) has determined the number of medical marijuana facilities that will soon become licensed in Missouri. The top-scoring 60 cultivation facilities, 192 dispensary facilities and 86 medical marijuana-infused manufacturing facilities will be initially licensed for business in Missouri.
“We appreciate and continue to seek the public’s input on how to bestimplement Article XIV of the Constitution,” said Dr. Randall Williams, DHSS Director. “After careful due diligence based on broad input and other states’ experiences, we are establishing the number of licenses in this first year to be consistent with what is outlined in the Constitution. Moving forward, we will continually reassess to ensure access for patients is adequate.”
Facility license application forms and instructions will be available online June 4, and DHSS will accept completed applications from August 3-17. DHSS and contracted partners will then have until December 31 to review and score applications prior to licensing.
“The blind facility application scoring process will ensure that businesses selected for licenses will be those most capable of providing quality service to patients while adhering to the regulations we are implementing,” said Lyndall Fraker, Director of DHSS Section for Medical Marijuana Regulation.
DHSS will continue accepting feedback on alldrafts of rulesvia anonline suggestion formuntil May 15. All rules must be finalized and available to the public by June 4. Until then, draft rules are subject to change.
The bill repeals the provisions that require limited passive investors to go through an initial background check. The bill repeals the provisions that limit the number of out-of-state direct beneficial owners to 15 persons. The bill repeals the provision that prohibits publicly traded corporations from holding a marijuana license. The bill creates 2 new ownership licenses, controlling beneficial owners and passive beneficial owners. The bill gives the state licensing authorityrule-making authorityrelated to the parameters of, qualifications of, disclosure of, requirements for, and suitability for the new license types. A controlling beneficial owner is a person that is the beneficial owner of 10% or more of the securities of a marijuana business, is an affiliate, or is otherwise in a position to exercise control of the marijuana business. A passive beneficial owner is a person that is not an affiliate of a marijuana business, has no control over the marijuana business, and owns less than 10% of the securities of a marijuana business. The bill requires a person intending to apply to become a controlling beneficial owner or passive beneficial owner to receive a finding of suitability or an exemption from the state licensing authority prior to submitting a marijuana business application. When applying for suitability, a person must disclose all of its officers, directors, and affiliates; all controlling beneficial owners; if a publicly traded corporation, all of its controlling beneficial owners of 10% or more; and, if not a publicly traded corporation, all of its officers, directors, beneficial owners, affiliates, and passive beneficial owners. The bill also requires a marijuana business or controlling beneficial owner that is a publicly traded corporation to complywith various notification, disclosure, notice, and suitability requirements. The bill limits the types of publicly traded corporations that can be marijuana businesses or controlling beneficial owners. Current statutes list areas in which the state licensing authority may adopt rules but does not limit the rules to those areas. The bill limits the state licensing authority’s power to adopt rules to those areas listed in statutes.
Repeals regulations that cap the number of out-of-state owners to 15 people, provisions that have blocked publicly traded companies and many venture capital funds from participating in the market.
Allows publicly traded companies to hold a Colorado marijuana license.
Creates two new kinds of ownership licenses. One license would be for individuals who own at least a 10% stake in a cannabis licensed firm; the other would be for passive investors who own less than a 10% interest.
The legislation also puts in place several safeguards, including a requirement that publicly traded businesses or controlling investors receive a finding of “suitability” from state regulators.
SALEM, Ore. (AP) — The Oregon Senate moved forward with a plan to limit the state’s supply of recreational, legal marijuana.
Lawmakers voted 18-10 Monday to freeze marijuana productions at current levels for the next two years. The state will not issue new production licenses to marijuana growers, but current growers will be able to renew their licenses.
Democrat Sen. Michael Dembrow from Portland said the state produces so much marijuana that Oregon has enough of the drug to last it for the next 6.5 years. That surplus has caused prices to plummet.
Lawmakers shot down another version of this bill earlier this month. Republicans said at the time that the marijuana industry should be regulated by the free market, not the state.
Some Republicans reversed their vote this time around saying the amended proposal is narrower in scope.
The measure now goes to the House for consideration.
If you have wondered over the past several years, why the big Canadian companies (in particular) are following the global strategy they are, there is actually a fairly simple answer: Newly implementing trade agreements, particularly between Europe and North America.
In fact, look at the schedule of the MRA agreements signed between the U.S. and individual EU countries over the last several years, and it also looks like a map of the countries that have not only legalized at least medical cannabis, but where the big Canadian companies (in particular) have begun to establish operations outside of their home country.
But what is going on is actually more than just CETA-related and also will affect cannabis firms south of the Canadian-U.S. border.
All of these swirling currents are also why the most recent MRA to come into full force in July this year, between the U.S. and Europe, is so interesting from the cannabis perspective. Even before federal reform in the U.S. If this sounds like a confusing disconnect, read on.
What Are MRAs?
MRAs are actually a form of highly specialized trade agreement that allow trading countries to be certain that the pharmaceuticals they purchase from abroad are equivalent to what is produced at home. This includes not only ingredients but processing procedures, production plant hygiene, testing, labeling and more.
When it comes to the EU-US MRA agreement, this means that individual states of the EU can now recognize the American Food and Drug Administration (or FDA) as an effective federal regulator of American pharmaceutical production that is equal to the procedures in Europe. US GMP standards, in other words, will be recognized as equal to those of EU states.
This will now also, by definition, include GMP-certified medical cannabis formulations.
What is so intriguing, however, is how this development will actually place certain American (and Canadian) manufacturers in a first place position to import cannabis into Europe ahead of the rest of the American cannabis industry.
What Are Mutual Recognition Agreements All About?
One of the most important quality and consumer safety aspects of establishing a clean supply chain is tied up in the concept of GMPs (Good Manufacturing Practices). These are procedures, established by compliant producers of pharmaceuticals, to ensure seed (or source) to sale reliability of the medication they make. In the cannabis industry, particularly in the advent of Canadian-European transatlantic trade in cannabis, this has been the first high hurdle to accept and integrate on the Canadian side.
If European countries recognize a country’s GMP certifications are equivalent to its own, in other words, and cannabis is legal for export, a country can enter the international cannabis market without facing bans, in-country inspections and the like. In the interim, imported products still have to be batch tested until the agreements are fully accepted and operational.
Israel, for example, already had an MRA with the EU, and medical cannabis is legal in the country. However, Israel was prevented from selling cannabis abroad until a legislative change domestically, passed on Christmas Day.
That is why the MRA agreement between the US and EU with Canadian companies in the middle also put both Israeli and U.S. firms at an extreme disadvantage in comparison. Both in entering the market in the first place, and of course associated discussions, like the German tender bid. That is now changing- and as of this year.
A Specialized Map Of Global Medical Cannabis Exporters
Ironically, what the new US-EU MRA could also well do is create a channel for pharmaceutical cannabis from the United States to Europe (certainly on the hemp and CBD front) just as Israel is expected to enter the international cannabis export industry (later this summer or fall). It could well be also, particularly given the Trump Administration’s tendency to want to not only “put America first” if not pull off “a better deal” in general and about everything, that this is why President Trump offered the delay to Israel’s president Benjamin Netanyahu in the first place.
Regardless of the international individual developments and subtleties however, what is very clear that from the time the first bid stalled in Germany in the summer of 2017 until now, the U.S.-EU MRA has been in the room even if not named specifically as a driver.
For example, the FDA confirmed the capability of Poland and Slovenia to carry out GMP inspections in February of 2019. It was only last fall that Aurora pulled off its licensing news in the former (on the same day licensing reform was announced by the government). Denmark was recognized in November of last year during the first year of its “medical cannabis pilot progam.” Greece was recognized in March 2018. Italy, Malta, Spain and the UK came online in November of 2017.
Overlay this timetable with a map of cannabis reform (and beyond that, cannabis production) and the logic starts to look very clear.
The upshot, in other words, is that while cannabis still may be “stigmatized” if not still “illegal” in many parts of the world, more generalized, newly negotiated and implementing, specialized global trade agreements between the US, Europe and Canada in particular have been driving the development of certain segments of the cannabis industry globally and since about 2013.
The Biggest News?
As of this year, as a result, expect at least from the GMP-certified front at least, that such international trade will also include medical cannabis from the U.S.
The first German cannabis bid may have come to an end more or less, and with a whimper rather than a bang (not to mention the inevitable still-to-be-settled legal challenges). However even as the dust settles, one of the biggest “names” in cannabis and the company formerly expected to win at least a few of the tender lots is looking elsewhere.
Namely Canopy Growth, which was a finalist in the first round of the tender, has not shown up as a finalist firm in Germany this time (at least not so far).
However, it is clear the firm has other intentions afoot, namely U.S. expansion.
In an unprecedented move, Canopy announced its intent to buy the largest U.S. based producer of cannabis, a firm called Acreage Holdings, just before Easter. The conditional deal is being consummated in both cash ($300 million) plus stock swaps, and will not finally close until federal reform has come in the U.S. In fact, the deal makes the bet that the entire issue of U.S. federal reform will be solved within the next decade.
In the meantime, however, what this also does is place one of the world’s largest cannabis companies in the middle of what is largely seen as the world’s most valuable overall cannabis market. Further it does so in an environment where the company benefits from Acreage’s considerable market and political clout. Former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives John Boehner (a fierce opponent of legalization until it was personally convenient and profitable) is on the board of Acreage.
But there are those who might still be confused about why this deal happened. Canopy after all is fond of saying that its first focus is the “more valuable” medical rather than recreational market. And the U.S. market has many challenges still, that stem from a lack of federal reform. In fact, Canopy has frequently said in the past that they would not enter the U.S. until federal reform occurs. What gives?
What The Deal Also Does…
It is not “just” entry into the U.S. recreational market, albeit still on a state level that is significant about the deal. That starts with its timing.
When trying to understand the motivations of Canadian cannabis companies, especially ones who have eschewed the U.S. market in the past (at least until federal reform passes), it is also necessary to understand that they operate in a shifting world of global strategy that is never as straightforward as one might think. And often has nothing to do with cannabis per se.
Namely, while this deal places Canopy in the middle of the U.S. state industry it also does something else. It positions Canopy as a U.S. producer just two months after a new international pharmaceutical trade deal went into force (on February 8) called an MRA.
MRA agreements, also known as Mutual Recognition Agreements, are essentially trade deals between countries to accept the equivalency of their pharmaceutical production and supply chain.
On the cannabis front, the existence of MRAs between existing countries as cannabis has become legal, has also largely dictated the new international cannabis trade (see Canada and Germany as a perfect example) although this has been held as a closely held secret by the largest cannabis company executives (some of whom have previously denied that this was driving their expansion across Europe).
However, thanks to the agreement on this MRA in February, as of July of this year, Europe and the U.S. will formally kick off a situation where the European and therefore German health authorities will formally recognize American GMP processes.
That means that on the pharma front, Canopy has also essentially re-entered the European market, albeit by a bit of a backdoor. It also means that Canopy can immediately start to import cannabis drugs at least, made in the U.S. into the European and by extension, German market.
Cannabis drugs have been going in the opposite direction across the Atlantic to the U.S. for at least a year now (see the GW Pharma’s Epidiolex adventure last year). And further over the U.S.-Canadian border if now only bound for academic research (see Tilray).
It also may mean that they can import medical cannabis itself to be used as “medicine” or processed into one in Europe.
Does This Mean That U.S. Federal Reform Is Imminent?
Not necessarily. In fact, keeping the U.S. market in general out of the global cannabis trade, while allowing the top companies to participate both in the cross-state market and the global pharmaceutical one benefits the biggest companies. Conveniently, this also allows U.S. cannabis “pharmaceutical” producers to enter the EU in force just as Israel is expected to (third quarter this year). This also puts the “deal” U.S. President Trump and Israeli President Netanyahu cut on the subject to delay Israeli sales in an entirely new light (and one that should outrage both Americans and Israelis in the industry on this front even more). Not to mention every European hopeful producer unaware of the larger game afoot.
That said, what federal U.S. legalization will do is drop the operating costs of the larger U.S. entities now engaged in multi-state operations.
Cannabis in other words is not likely to be legalized in the U.S. before the next presidential elections for reasons that have everything to do with the profits of a few – and for that reason will certainly be a major theme in the next national political race.
And in the meantime, the biggest companies, Canopy included, are not only laughing all the way to the bank (although their shareholders are another story), but setting themselves up to be at the ground floor DNA of the global cannabis business as it establishes itself in every country of the world.
Does mixing cannabinoids into tobacco make for a safer cigarette? Multistate medical cannabis producer Vireo Health seems to think it does. Reports Leafly
Making A Spliff
Making A Sandwich
Leafly write. The physician-led company announced on Thursday that it has secured a patent for “tobacco products infused with cannabis,” including cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, and smokeless tobacco products. According to US Patent and Trademark Office documents, Vireo intends to market the cannabinoid-infused products as safer alternatives to traditional tobacco.
Many in the cannabis community view adulterating cannabis with cancer-causing tobacco as an abomination.
“As a physician, I am passionate about finding ways to use cannabis to reduce the harmful effects of tobacco,” CEO Kyle Kingsley said in apress release, “We look forward to collaborating with research institutions and tobacco companies committed to developing less harmful tobacco products.”
To be clear, mixing cannabis and tobacco is hardly a new invention. In many parts of the world, including much of Europe and the Caribbean, consumers regularly roll the two together into what American consumers refer to as a spliff. Another common cannabis consumption method, the blunt, consists of cannabis rolled in a tobacco wrap or leaf.
MINNEAPOLIS,April 25, 2019/PRNewswire/ — Vireo Health International, Inc. (“Vireo” or the “Company”) (CSE: VREO), a leading science-focused, multi-state cannabis company, today announced that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) has issued a Notice of Allowance for its patent application titled, “Tobacco Products with Cannabinoid Additives and Methods for Reducing the Harm Associated with Tobacco Use.”
“This patent is a component of our strategy to disrupt the tobacco industry and help save lives,” said Chief Executive Officer,Kyle Kingsley, M.D. “As a physician, I am passionate about finding ways to use cannabis to reduce the harmful effects of tobacco. We look forward to collaborating with research institutions and tobacco companies committed to developing less harmful tobacco products.”
Vireo’s allowed patent application covers cannabis-based additives that can be formulated into tobacco products to reduce the harm associated with tobacco use. This novel application of cannabis covers the use of one or more carefully formulated cannabinoids as harm reducing agents in tobacco products such as cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco and smokeless tobacco products. A Notice of Allowance is issued after the USPTO determines that a patent can be granted from the application, which was filed inMarch 2017.
Potential benefits associated with cannabinoid additives in tobacco products include the reduction of irritation, inflammation, and carcinogenicity. According to a2016 study, scientific evidence supports that cannabinoids may have substantial anti-cancer effects.
The Centers for Disease Control & Prevention report that the use of tobacco is not only the leading cause of preventable disease in the U.S., but also imposes significant economic costs. Specifically, smoking-related illness inthe United Statescosts more than$300 billiona year, including nearly$170 billionin direct medical care for adults. In 2017, an estimated 14.0% (34.3 million) of U.S. adults were cigarette smokers.
About Vireo Health International, Inc. Vireo Health International, Inc.’s mission is to build the cannabis company of the future by bringing the best of medicine, engineering and science to the cannabis industry. Vireo’s physician-led team of more than 300 employees provides best-in-class cannabis products and customer experience. Vireo cultivates cannabis in environmentally-friendly greenhouses, manufactures pharmaceutical-grade cannabis extracts, and sells its products at both company-owned and third-party dispensaries. The Company currently has operations in ten states includingArizona,Maryland,Massachusetts,Minnesota,Nevada,New Mexico,New York,Ohio,Pennsylvania, andRhode Island. For more information about the company, please visitwww.vireohealth.com.
This news release does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to sell any of the securities inthe United States. The securities have not been and will not be registered under the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “U.S. Securities Act”) or any state securities laws and may not be offered or sold withinthe United Statesor to U.S. Persons unless registered under the U.S. Securities Act and applicable state securities laws or an exemption from such registration is available.
Forward-Looking Statement Disclosure
This news release contains forward-looking information within the meaning of applicable securities laws, based on current expectations. Generally, any statements that are not historical facts may contain forward-looking information, and forward-looking information can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “plans”, “expects” or “does not expect”, “is expected”, “look forward to”, “budget”,“scheduled”, “estimates”, “forecasts”, “will continue”, “intends”, “anticipates” or “does not anticipate”, or “believes”, or variations of such words and phrases or indicates that certain actions, events or results “may”, “could”, “would”, “potentially”, “might” or “will be” taken, “occur” or “be achieved.” Forward looking information may include, without limitation, statements regarding the operations, business, financial condition, expected financial results, performance, prospects, opportunities, priorities, targets, goals, ongoing objectives, milestones, strategies and outlook of Vireo, and includes statements about, among other things, future developments, the future operations, potential market opportunities, strengths and strategy of the Company. Forward-looking information is provided for the purpose of presenting information about management’s current expectations and plans relating to the future and readers are cautioned that such statements may not be appropriate for other purposes. These statements should not be read as guarantees of future performance or results. These statements are based upon certain material factors, assumptions and analyses that were applied in drawing a conclusion or making a forecast or projection, including Vireo’s experience and perceptions of historical trends, current conditions and expected future developments, as well as other factors that are believed to be reasonable in the circumstances.
Examples of the assumptions underlying the forward-looking statements contained herein include, but are not limited to those related to: the achievement of goals, the closing of acquisitions, obtaining of necessary permits and governmental approvals, future market positioning, as well as expectations regarding availability of equipment, skilled labor and services needed for cannabis operations, intellectual property rights, development, operating or regulatory risks, trends and developments in the cannabis industry, business strategy and outlook, expansion and growth of business and operations, the timing and amount of capital expenditures; future exchange rates; the impact of increasing competition; conditions in general economic and financial markets; access to capital; future operating costs; government regulations, including future legislative and regulatory developments involving medical and recreational marijuana and the timing thereto; receipt of appropriate and necessary licenses in a timely manner; the effects of regulation by governmental agencies; the anticipated changes to laws regarding the recreational use of cannabis; the demand for cannabis products and corresponding forecasted increase in revenues; and the size of the medical marijuana market and the recreational marijuana market.
Although such statements are based on management’s reasonable assumptions at the date such statements are made, there can be no assurance that it will be completed on the terms described above and that such forward-looking information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such forward-looking information. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on the forward-looking information. Vireo assumes no responsibility to update or revise forward-looking information to reflect new events or circumstances unless required by applicable law.
By its nature, forward-looking information is subject to risks and uncertainties, and there are a variety of material factors, many of which are beyond the control of the Company and that may cause actual outcomes to differ materially from those discussed in the forward-looking statements. These factors include, but are not limited to: denial or delayed receipt of all necessary consents and approvals; need for additional capital expenditures; increased costs and timing of operations; unexpected costs associated with environmental liabilities; requirements for additional capital; reduced future prices of cannabis; failure of plant, equipment or processes to operate as anticipated; accidents, labour disputes and other risks of the cannabis industry; delays in obtaining governmental approvals, permits or financing or in the completion of development or construction activities; title disputes; claims limitations on insurance coverage; risks related to the integration of acquisitions; fluctuations in the spot and forward price of certain commodities (such as diesel fuel and electricity); changes in national and local government legislation, taxation, controls, regulations and political or economic developments in the countries where the Company may carry on business in the future; liabilities inherent in cannabis operations; risks relating to medical and recreational cannabis; cultivation, extraction and distribution problems; competition for, among other things, capital, licences and skilled personnel; risks relating to the timing of legalization of recreational cannabis; changes in laws relating to the cannabis industry; and management’s success in anticipating and managing the foregoing factors.
Patrick has waged battle on the legal front lines of industrial hemp and general cannabis reform for over two decades. He is based in San Francisco where he served as co-counsel in the seminal HIA v. DEA 2000s cases. In 2005, Patrick helped lead industry efforts for passage of San Francisco’s inaugural ordinance regulating medical cannabis and later served on the city’s Medical Cannabis Task Force. Patrick also led the industry effort with Senator Mark Leno in 2013 to pass California’s Industrial Hemp Farming Act. He sits on Vote Hemp’s board, serves as general counsel for the newly formed California Hemp Council, and is a leader in industry efforts to implement hemp farming and processing in California. Patrick was admitted to the California Bar in 1996 after receiving his J.D. from Lewis and Clark Law School in Portland, Oregon.
“We are delighted to have Patrick join our Advisory Board,” said Andriyko Herchak, CEO of Fincanna Capital. “He is a highly regarded professional, practicing with Hoban Law Group, the foremost full service business-oriented law firm serving the cannabis industry. We are fortunate to have an individual with his depth of knowledge and experience in the legal cannabis industry, join our team. We will, most certainly be drawing on Patrick’s expertise as we continue to build our diversified investment portfolio in creating long term sustainable value for our shareholders.”
FinCanna is a royalty company that provides growth capital to rapidly emerging private companies operating in the licensed U.S cannabis industry. The Company earns its revenue from royalties paid by its investee companies that are calculated based on a percentage their total revenues.
The cannabis industry is lighting up, but at what cost? The social and health implications of cannabis have been hotly debated, but the environmental impacts and opportunities offered by the rapidly expanding cannabis industry have received far less attention, despite calls to add the environment to the conversation on marijuana liberalization.
In recognition of the numerous sustainability challenges linked to cannabis cultivation, the Environmental Law Institute’s Innovation Lab teamed up with pesticide law and cannabis law experts to create multiple educational brochures demystifying the confusing regulatory landscape of pesticide use on cannabis:
These resources, developed in cooperation with the International Cannabis Bar Association, will be distributed at the 2d AnnualNational Cannabis Policy Summitthis Friday in Washington, D.C.
And while the industry does have its challenges, significant opportunities for technological and environmental regulatory breakthroughs exist. “If one is looking for a testbed for experiments in sustainable production, extended producer responsibility, the circular economy, industrial symbiosis, or any of the other post-modern environmental paradigms, the emerging cannabis sector is a leading contender,” explains Dave Rejeski, Director of ELI’sTechnology, Innovation, and the Environment Program.
For example, traditional cannabis cultivation comes with numerous environmental impacts on air, water, waste, and more. But what if you didn’t need the cannabis plant to produce the THC, CBD, or other cannabinoids needed to create novel medicinal and consumer products? In the latest episode of ELI’sPeople Places Planet Podcast, “Environmental Disruptors: Brewing Cannabis with Beer Yeast”, Dave Rejeski talks with Jay Keasling, UC Berkeley professor and synthetic biologist, about his game-changing innovation to advance environmental protection in cannabis cultivation. Keasling and his team engineered yeast—yes, the same yeast used to brew beer—to produce high-quality, low-cost THC and CBD with potentially much lower environmental impact.
Craving more? Be sure to check out these otherpodcast episodeson the cannabis industry:
Environmental Disruptors: Breaking the Grass Ceiling
Environmental Disruptors: Weed Like a Sustainable Cannabis Industry