Hawaii Lawmakers Host Briefing On Marijuana Legalization Bill Ahead Of Formal Hearing Next Week

A group of Hawaii lawmakers heard presentations from experts and state officials this week about a new plan to legalize adult-use marijuana in the state that would also put all consumable cannabis—including medical marijuana and hemp products—under a single regulatory agency.

Sponsored by House Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs Chair David Tarnas (D) and Senate Health and Human Services Committee Chair Joy San Buenaventura (D), the 311-page companion proposals—HB 1246 and SB 1613—would allow adults 21 and older to possess up to an ounce of marijuana and five grams of cannabis concentrate as of January 1, 2026. Adults could also grow limited amounts of marijuana at home for personal use.

If enacted, the legislation would establish the Hawaii Cannabis and Hemp Office, which would oversee adult-use cannabis, medical marijuana and hemp businesses.

“This really is a one-plant approach,” Tarnas said during what was described as an informational briefing on Wednesday that his panel hosted.

The briefing comes ahead of a committee hearing on the House bill set for Tuesday of next week.

Much of the roughly two-hour event consisted of presentations from legalization advocates, regulatory experts and industry and community representatives. They gave lawmakers an overview of state-level legalization in the U.S. and spoke to how the Hawaii proposal built on lessons learned in other states.

Some of the main issues raised by lawmakers during a Q&A session included how legalization might affect youth use of marijuana and what some described as the widespread availability of hemp-derived cannabinoids, such as vape products containing THC.

“Lots of vape shops currently sell vaping products which they advertise as THC products…there’s delta-8, delta-9 [THC],” said Rep. Diamond Garcia (R). “On those boxes, it says that it’s a legal product per the 2018 Farm Bill. So I think it’s unclear to people here in Hawaii: Is that legal? Is that THC? And so, what’s going on?”

Kaliko Castille, CEO of ThndrStrm Strategies and a former president of the Minority Cannabis Business Association, said one benefit of the new bill is that it would bring regulation of all marijuana and hemp products under one roof.

“You think this is confusing for those of us who are in the policy world or live in the cannabis industry,” he said. “Most voters do not understand the difference. And if they see available on a shelf anywhere, they assume it’s legal.”

Tarnas said that in his conversations with hemp businesses, “they’re looking forward to the proposed legislation, because they felt it would be better to be regulated by an office that is really dealing with all aspects of the cannabis plant.”

One of the most critical concerns he’s heard from fellow lawmakers about legalization, he said, is how it might affect underage use of the marijuana. “We hear from some advocates who are opposing this saying that, you will see a significant increase in use of cannabis by those under 21,” he noted.

Karen O’Keefe, state policy director for the advocacy group Marijuana Policy Project, prepared a handout for lawmakers that included before-and-after data for multiple U.S. states that have legalized marijuana for adults.

“We take the biggest survey that was done in the state for teenagers immediately prior to legalization and then every year up until the most recent year” of available data, she explained, “and in 19 out of the 21 states, we’ve seen a decrease.”

Data from Washington State, one of the first two U.S. states to legalize adult-use cannabis, in 2012, saw meaningful drops across age levels, O’Keefe explained.

“In 2010, 9.5 percent of eighth graders had used marijuana in the last 30 days. Following legalization, “it was down to 3.7 [percent]. That’s about a third of what it was before legalization.”

Among 10th graders, “it was 20 percent in 2010. It went down to 8.4 percent—more than a 50 percent drop. Twelfth graders, it was 26.3 percent pre-legalization, 16.3 percent post-[legalization], in 2023.That’s a 10-point drop.”

“We can’t conclude causation,” O’Keefe acknowledged, “but it was a pretty remarkable drop in every state we’ve observed.”

“And consistent across the board,” replied Tarnas.

“We want to address this in, you know, a very deliberative process here at the legislature, and base it on facts,” the lawmaker continued. “And I think that’s what you have helped us with, is: What are the facts?”

Speakers also briefly discussed how Hawaii’s adoption of a comprehensive cannabis regulatory scheme could better prepare the state for the possibility of legalization at the federal level. For example, Tarnas said regulation could help guard Hawaii from an influx of out-of-state products and protect the interest of in-state businesses.

O’Keefe also pointed out that if a legal industry were up and running once interstate commerce is allowed, Hawaii could be well positioned to export cannabis products to other markets.

Andrew Goff, deputy state attorney general in Hawaii, said the more-than-300-page bill is necessarily complicated, including ownership restrictions, license applicant vetting, provisions to ensure the state’s existing medical marijuana system isn’t unduly affected and rules around consumable versus non-consumable hemp products, such as textiles and hempcrete, a building material.

“The current enforcement is fragmented across multiple jurisdictions, so it’s really difficult to enforce and get everyone who has jurisdiction to enforce to buy in,” he said. “What this bill does, basically, is it creates consistent enforcement from a single agency funded by cannabis use tax sales [and] ensures uniform regulations consistent with medical cannabis. It provides clear enforcement authority for restricted cannabinoids and ensures industrial hemp is not regulated as a cannabis cannabinoid program.”

Here’s what the legislation, HB 1246 / SB 1613, would do:

• Establish the Hawaii Cannabis and Hemp Office, which would regulate adult-use cannabis, medical marijuana and hemp businesses. The office would be housed within the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs and charged with prioritizing public health and safety.
• Regulators would promulgate rules for the state cannabis system, license businesses, register patients, maintain a seed-to-sale tracking system and publish studies and reports on various elements of the program.
• Interim rules would be due by December 31, 2025, with final rules to be adopted by December 31, 2030.
• An 11-person advisory board would study issues around federal law, patient access, equity and other matters, making recommendations to lawmakers and regulators. Members would include representatives of the hemp and marijuana industries, agriculture, public health and safety, Native Hawaiian culture, mental health and substance abuse treatment.
• As of January 1, 2026, adults 21 and older could possess up to an ounce of marijuana and five grams of cannabis concentrate.
• As of January 1, 2026, adults could also grow up to six plants for personal use and store up to 10 ounces of homegrown cannabis in their residence. Households with multiple adults would be limited to a total of 10 plants and two pounds of homegrown cannabis.
• Sales of adult-use cannabis would be taxed at 14 percent, while the medical marijuana tax rate would remain at 4 percent.
• After the costs of administering the program, 30 percent of state revenue would go to a social equity grants program. A public health and education grants program would receive 10 percent, as would a separate public safety grant program. Five percent each would go to a hemp grants program, to counties, to the attorney general’s office for nuisance abatement and to counter money laundering and organized crime.
• Synthetic or “artificially derived” cannabinoid products would be restricted.
• Edibles could not resemble candy or other products aimed at children, nor could they look like people, animals, fruit or cartoons.
• Packaging could not include graphics, pictures or multiple colors. Medical marijuana specifically would need to be in white packaging.
• Labels would need to include a universal cannabis symbol.
• Cultivation could not occur in federal public housing, shelters, on-campus housing or hotels, among other locations, and it could be prohibited by landlords and homeowners associations.
• Landlords could prohibit smoking or vaping marijuana but in general could not ban people from possessing non-inhaled cannabis products.
• Smoking marijuana in public would be a civil violation, with penalties of up to $130 or 10 hours of community service
• Driving under the influence of marijuana would remain a crime. A new penalty would also punish a passenger found smoking or vaping with a petty misdemeanor, carrying a fine of up to $2,000.
• Unless kept in a vehicle’s trunk or other place out of reach of the driver, an open container would be punished by a fine of up to $130 or up to 10 hours of community service.
• Selling cannabis to minors would be a misdemeanor.
• Diverting marijuana from a licensed business to the unregulated market would be a Class C felony.
• Unlicensed extraction of cannabis using butane would be a Class C felony.
• Minors possessing up to five grams of cannabis concentrate could be charged with a petty misdemeanor, as could adults in possession of more than five grams of concentrate.
• State and local government employees in general could not be fired for using medical or adult-use cannabis away from work or for testing positive marijuana metabolites. Employees subject to federal requirements would not qualify for such protections, and exceptions could apply in the case of collective bargaining agreements.
• Regulators would license cultivators, processors, retailers, smaller-scale craft dispensaries and independent testing laboratories. Craft dispensaries could sell only their own cannabis products.
• The first round of licenses under the law would be issued by July 1, 2026, though dual-use licenses allowing medical marijuana businesses to serve adult-use customers would be issued by January 1, 2026.
• Licenses would be awarded based on a randomized lottery provided applicants meet certain minimum standards and qualifications. Participation by small businesses, Indigenous farmers and people from areas disproportionately impacted by the drug ware would be encouraged.
• No person could have an interest in more than nine licenses, up to three per license class.
• People with an interest in an independent testing lab could not have an interest in any other cannabis business.
• People with an interest in a small-scale cooperative or craft dispensary could not have an interest in a business of any other license type.
• All license applicants would need to be residents of Hawaii for at least five years and could not have any felony convictions other than for cannabis-related offenses, pardoned or expunged offenses or sentences completed more than 10 years earlier.
• Regulators could craft rules to allow special event permits, social consumption and certain other activities.
• Medical marijuana dispensaries could transition to dual-use (medical and recreational) retail facilities. Conversion would cost $50,000 per retail location and $25,000 for each production facility.
• State-registered patients and caregivers could possess up to four ounces of marijuana. They could also grow up to 10 plants and possess up to a pound each of homegrown cannabis for personal use, with a maximum of two pounds per household.
• State regulators would license medical marijuana co-ops of up to five patients.
• Regulations would include rules around security, health and safety, advertising and labeling, energy and environmental standards, employee training and various other matters.
• All employees of cannabis businesses would need to be at least 21 years of age. No one under 21 could enter retail stores.
• Businesses would need to be at least 750 feet from schools, parks and public housing complexes.
• Cultivators would be limited to 3,500 square feet of indoor canopy space and 5,000 square feet of outdoor grow space.
• Handouts would need to be included with all sold products. They would need to include a variety of information, including instructions, warnings about safe use, potential adverse effects and the status of federal law—including how the conflict with federal prohibition impacts gun rights, employment and other rights and benefits.
• Pesticide use on cannabis products would be regulated by the state Department of Agriculture.
• Hemp businesses could sell cured cannabis flower provided it meets U.S. Department of Agriculture compliance standards and state rules around testing, packaging and labeling.
• Aerosol hemp sprays would be prohibited.
• Hemp cultivation would be prohibited within 300 feet of schools, childcare centers or playgrounds and could also not be within 100 feet of a residence not owned by the licensee.
• With regard to hemp, regulators could prohibit specific cannabinoid products. Hemp tinctures could contain no more than 30 milligrams of THC per package and could only be sold to adults 21 and older.
• A social equity grants program would assist applicants who’d resided in a disproportionately impacted area for at least five of the past 10 years or businesses with more than half of employees residing in a disproportionately impacted area.
• “Disproportionately impacted area” would refer to areas of persistent poverty, medically underserved communities, and historically disadvantaged communities as determined by regulators.
• Equity applicants would qualify for a 50 percent discount on application and licensing fees for their first five years of operation.
• Equity grants would include financial assistance, technical support and training.
• Funding would also go to community-based organizations to support childcare and youth programs.
• Regulators would hire contractors to develop a public health and education campaign beginning later this year.
• A public health and grant program would award funds to community-based organizations for a variety of health and education programs.
• A separate public safety grant program would award funds to state and county agencies for law enforcement, crisis intervention, and enforcement of nuisance abatement laws, among others initiatives.
• A hemp grant program would assist smaller cultivators with industry training, technical assistance and market research projects.
• Marijuana businesses could deduct business expenses on their state taxes, even though similar deductions remain prohibited at the federal level.

The new proposal comes after lawmakers last year fell short of passing a legalization bill. The Senate approved approved that measure last March, but, as with past efforts to end prohibition, it stalled out in the House of Representatives.

O’Keefe told Marijuana Moment in a recent interview that there’s good reason to believe this year’s effort has a better chance at passage. On top of continued support from Gov. Josh Green (D), she noted that the state’s new speaker of the House, Rep. Nadine Nakamura (D), also favors the reform.

“The hope is that it’ll be able to get through all of the committees that it’s referred to in the House,” she said. “It had the governor’s support. It passed the Senate. So really, the only obstacle is the House.”

O’Keefe and some other advocates had mixed feelings about last year’s proposal, which many saw as over-regulated. That bill, based on a draft from the state attorney general’s office, “had a lot of language that we considered too authoritarian, too restrictive,” she explained, noting that in some cases—such as a non-impaired driver who nevertheless had measurable THC in their system—the proposal would have actually increased criminal penalties.

This past fall, regulators solicited proposals to assess the state’s current medical marijuana program—and also sought to estimate demand for recreational sales if the state eventually moves forward with adult-use legalization. Some read the move as a sign the regulatory agency saw a need to prepare to the potential reform.

Separately, a House panel earlier this week advanced legislation that would protect state-registered medical marijuana patients from discrimination in the workplace.

The bill, HB 325, would prevent employers from using a person’s status as a medical marijuana cardholder against them when making hiring, firing or other employment-related decisions, with some limitations. It would also bar discrimination based on a registered patient’s positive drug test for cannabis or metabolites provided the person is not impaired on the job.

“The ongoing conflict between state and federal medical cannabis laws causes confusion for employers, who are unsure whether state medical cannabis laws supersede their power to enforce drug-free workplace policies against employees,” the measure’s introductory text says. “The courts have consistently ruled in favor of employers when qualifying patients challenge drug-free workplace policies, yet have not entirely foreclosed on the possibility that state medical cannabis laws might operate to protect qualifying patients against employment discrimination.”

“Without explicit statutory guidance,” it continues, “the courts may not properly balance the needs of qualifying patients for employment protections and an employer’s need to provide a safe workplace.”

The protections would apply to both public and private employees, though it would not extend to law enforcement or corrections workers, state and county firefighters, emergency medical workers, lifeguards or swim instructors, people who carry firearms on the job, people who operate vehicles or heavy machinery, emergency management workers, people who work with children or the elderly or people who administer controlled substances, among other carveouts.

Employers could also discriminate against medical marijuana patients if “a failure to do so would cause the employer to lose a monetary or licensing-related benefit under a contract or federal law.”

Hawaii was the first U.S. state to legalize medical marijuana through its legislature, passing a law in 2000.

Nearly two dozen states already have some sort of employment discrimination protections for medical marijuana patients, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

DEA Judge Rejects Veterans Group’s Petition To Participate In Marijuana Rescheduling Hearing

Photo courtesy of Mike Latimer.

The post Hawaii Lawmakers Host Briefing On Marijuana Legalization Bill Ahead Of Formal Hearing Next Week appeared first on Marijuana Moment.