Letter from Nichole Snow, 190 Bridge Street, Massachusetts Patient Advocacy Alliance, in opposition to the proposed amendments to the Cannabis Business Permitting Ordinance submitted by Councillors Siddiqui and Zondervan

Massachusetts Patient Advocacy Alliance Advocating for Safe Access to Medical Marijuana One Beacon Street, 15th Floor Boston, MA 02108 [phone removed] Massachusetts Patient Advocacy Alliance [email removed] compassionforpatients.com June 23, 2019 City of Cambridge City Council, Ordinance Committee 795 Massachusetts Avenue, 2nd Floor Cambridge, MA 02139 Chairs Carlone and Kelley, The Massachusetts Patient Advocacy Alliance (MPAA) represents the coalition of patients, caregivers, family members, medical professionals, and public health representatives that drafted and successfully passed the 2012 ballot initiative that legalized and gave access to medical marijuana to the thousands of medical patients facing debilitating medical conditions. Since the medical-use law was passed, MPAA has worked tirelessly across the Commonwealth with stakeholders and government-both state and municipal to ensure the faithful implementation of the state law by advocating for patient access and rights through educational events and materials, advocacy, and research. From our successful efforts to ensure patient protections in the state's new adult-use laws to fighting back misguided policies too often driven by continued societal stigma, we continue this work each and every day, in communities like Cambridge, ensuring that the Commonwealth's nearly seventy thousand certified patients have access to the compassionate and de-stigmatized care the law demands. First, on behalf of MPAA, let me commend the City Manager, the City Council and the Ordinance Committee for their thoughtful and transparent approach in developing a Cannabis Business Permitting ordinance. The draft submitted to the Council by the City Manager, as well as the amendments adopted to-date have largely represented sound policy that support patients' rights.

However, we wish to bring to your attention Councillors Zondervan and Siddiqui's proposed amendment, titled "Establishing the Equitable Regulation of the Cannabis Industry in the City of Cambridge." This amendment, while undoubtedly well intentioned, would only allow Economic Empowerment applicants—applicants who are not required to participate in the Commonwealth's medical-use program and patient registry —a two (2) year exclusivity period, whereby they are the only applicant-type allowed to be issued Cannabis Business Permits. The proposed amendment also explicitly bans existing Medical Marijuana Treatment Centers (MM'IGs) from converting to co-located medical and adult-use retail facilities, subverting the state law. If adopted, this proposed amendment will enact an illegal and unconstitutional policy that will punish medical patients, the Commonwealth's medical-use program, and the very MM 1 Cs that over seventy thousand patients rely on each and every day to legally and compassionately obtain their medicine. Councillors Zondervan and Siddiqui's proposed amendment renders state law, specifically M.G.L. 94G, Section 3(a) (1) meaningless. Section 3 of M.G.L. Chapter 94G, as amended by Chapter 55 of the Acts of 2017, outlines the "reasonable safeguards on the operation of marijuana establishments" that communities may take through zoning, by-laws and ordinances. However, such efforts may not be "unreasonably impracticable" and cannot conflict with M.G.L. Chapter 94G or the Cannabis Control Commission's (CCC) regulations or guidance. Specifically, Section 3(a)(1)(i) states that local zoning ordinances or by-laws shall not: "prevent the conversion of a medical marijuana treatment center licensed or registered not later than July 1, 2017 engaged in the cultivation, manufacture or sale of marijuana or marjuana products to a marijuana establishment engaged in the same type of activity". Simply put, Cambridge may not prevent a MMTC from converting into a co- located medical and adult-use marijuana establishment conducting the same type of activity as was permitted under medical, provided that the MIMTC had obtained—consistent with CCC regulation—a final certificate of registration or a provisional certificate of registration from DPH not later than July 1, 2017. Cambridge may still pass reasonable "time, place and manner" restrictions on 1 "Unreasonably impracticable", that the measures necessary to comply with the regulations, ordinances or by-laws adopted pursuant to this chapter subject licensees to unreasonable risk or require such a high investment of risk, money, time or any other resource or asset that a reasonably prudent businessperson would not operate a marijuana establishment.

these MIMTGs, but cannot outright prohibit, cap, or otherwise delay these MMTCs' conversion. Councillors Zondervan and Siddiqui's proposed amendment is Unconstitutional. Section 6 of Article LXXXIX of the Massachusetts Constitution states: "Any city or town may, by the adoption, amendment, or repeal of local ordinances or by-laws, exercise any power or function which the general court has power to confer upon it, which is not inconsistent with the constitution or laws enacted by the general court." Simply, Cambridge may seek to add lawful requirements that are not unreasonably impracticable and that are within their existing authority to M.G.L. 94G, but Constitutionally, Cambridge may not ignore or render meaningless a provision of state law. Councillors Zondervan and Siddiqui's proposed amendment violates the CAC's ban on discounts. Chapter 94G(4)(a1/2)(xxix)(6) requires the Commission to promulgate regulations including "a prohibition on advertising, marketing and branding through certain identified promotional items as determined by the commission, including giveaways, coupons or "free" or "donated" marijuana". CCC regulation 935 CMR 500.105(4)(b)6 prohibits recreational marijuana establishments from offering "gifts, giveaways, coupons, or "free" or "donated" marijuana. As currently implemented and enforced by the CCC, this includes any patient discounts. Councillors Zondervan and Siddiqui's proposed amendment seeks to violate these carefully crafted provisions provisions MPAA fought to include with the support of CCC Commissioner Flanagan—by requiring all recreational facilities to certify that they will sell products with "discounts" to medical patients. Such a policy will seek to undermine patients' carefully crafted approach to protecting the medical market, while forcing medical dispensaries to choose between compassionately serving patients and maintaining compliance with state law. Councillors Zondervan and Siddiqui's proposed amendment harms patients. This proposed amendment seeks to punish those MMTGs that have compassionately cared for medical patients by ensuring employee training and education, strict adherence to the state's medical patient registry, implementation of physical plant and operational processes that are sensitive to the unique and specific needs of medical patients, and community outreach and engagement that has supported the medical community and its advocacy efforts. This is exactly why the Massachusetts Legislature purposefully included Section

3(a)(1)(i) in the law—to ensure continued patient access and respect, and to ensure that an adult-use market was quickly stood up by those who paved the way for this new law in a manner that was consistent with medical-use. Patients have fought far too long and hard to be treated with basic dignity and compassion. Unfortunately, Councillors Zondervan and Siddiqui's amendment seeks to ignore state law through an unconstitutional about-face, leaving patients and their caregivers on the sidelines. Cambridge has long been a hub of medical innovation, attracting and transforming small start-ups to household institutions that develop high-quality therapies for the local and global communities. The MMTGs in Cambridge have contributed robustly and proudly to this tradition. Restricting companies from accessing adult-use markets is antithetical to this tradition and runs counter to a progressive, forward-looking policy dialogue in Massachusetts. On behalf of the nearly seventy thousand patients across the Commonwealth who face debilitating medical conditions from chronic intractable pain, PTSD, cancer, ALS, severe pediatric seizures, and more, MPAA STRONGLY OPPOSES Councillors Zondervan and Siddiqui's well intended, but illegal amendment and, again, urges the Council to strongly consider the very real impacts its policy decisions have on the medical care of patients. Thank you, Whole Snow Nichole Snow President & Executive Director Massachusetts Patient Advocacy Alliance Cc: City of Cambridge City Council City Manager Louis D. DePasquale, City of Cambridge Nancy Glowa, City Solicitor, City of Cambridge Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey Chairman Steven J. Hoffman, CCC

Commissioner Jennifer Flanagan, CCC Shawn Collins, Executive Director, CCC