The Cannabis Alliance Recaps Aug. 20 LCB Cannabis Advisory Council Meeting: Advocacy on Cannabis Testing, Zoning Rules, Uniform Pricing, and Stakeholder Input
In attendance: Cannabis Alliance Executive Director Caitlein Ryan, PhD., and Alliance members and licensed operators Micah Sherman (Raven Grass), and Paul Brice (Happy Trees).
The Return of the Cannabis Advisory Council
On August 20th, the Liquor and Cannabis Board (LCB) reconvened the Cannabis Advisory Council (CAC) after nearly five years. First established after the passage of I-502, the CAC once served as a forum for cannabis stakeholders, including industry groups, patients, and tribal representatives, before going dormant during the pandemic. With live public comment eliminated from LCB meetings earlier this year, the CAC has now been revived as one of the only remaining channels for stakeholder engagement.
How members were chosen was not especially transparent. The Board settled on a six-seat structure, giving multiple seats to some trade groups while leaving social equity licensees only as guests and without permanent representation.
The Cannabis Alliance advocated for a more balanced structure: one seat for each industry association and dedicated seats for both a social equity representative and a patient representative.
Social Equity Challenges
The first portion of the meeting was devoted to social equity licensees. We heard about challenges such as barriers in the licensing process, ongoing struggles with capital and access, and structural issues that have been raised for years now. Providing the space to share these realities is important, but it is not enough on its own. The value of the council must be measured by whether it drives concrete change, not just conversation.
There was some discussion about zoning and local bans or moratoria. In a follow-up conversation, Director Lukella confirmed that LCB is working with the Association of Washington Cities and doing direct outreach to jurisdictions to encourage lifting prohibitions. While that effort is appreciated, we expressed frustration that the recently closed buffer rulemaking could have unlocked many new potential retail locations across the state, an opportunity that was missed. The Cannabis Alliance is already supporting existing legislation for the upcoming session to revisit buffer reform.
Rulemaking: Advertising, SB 5403, and Uniform Pricing
Upcoming rulemaking will address retail advertising rules and the implementation of SB 5403 (retail management agreements). During the discussion, LCB’s Justin Nordhorn announced that the agency is also considering uniform pricing as part of this process, citing concerns about undue influence in the Vancouver area and feedback from licensees over the years.
LCB’s consideration of uniform pricing indicates they are approaching this rulemaking with a willingness to explore new strategies. That makes it especially important that everyone share their experiences in the marketplace, whether you are on the retail side or the producer-processor side. As these rules are written and eventually enforced, it is vital that they reflect the lived experiences of those who actually operate in this industry.
Testing, Enforcement, and Remediation
A major discussion point was non-mandatory testing (R&D testing). Enforcement staff insisted nothing has changed, yet for nearly a decade LCB explicitly created and promoted non-mandatory testing workflows outside the required testing schedule in WAC 314-55-102.
For nearly a decade, the LCB itself created and promoted non-mandatory testing workflows. These workflows were explicitly designed to allow producers and processors to conduct additional quality assurance and product development testing outside of the required testing schedule in WAC 314-55-102, without those results being uploaded into the traceability system. The WAC is clear not only about what must be tested (pesticides, heavy metals, microbiological contaminants, moisture content, etc.) but also when those tests must occur in the production process. Non-mandatory testing was meant to exist outside that regulatory schedule.
In February 2025, however, the LCB abruptly directed labs to begin uploading non-mandatory test results, retroactive to September 2024, without a public rulemaking process. At the Advisory Council meeting, enforcement acknowledged concerns from labs about this shift but maintained that they were simply ensuring compliance with long-standing requirements. The Cannabis Alliance continues to press the agency to follow the law and move through the accepted rulemaking project before engaging in enforcement actions that conflict with previous practice or the rule as it is currently written.
The council also touched on pesticide remediation. LCB stated that remediation is not allowed in Washington and claimed no other state permits it. This is not entirely accurate: Oregon allows limited pesticide remediation under narrow conditions, while states like Kentucky prohibit pesticide remediation but allow remediation for other failures (e.g., solvents, microbes). Washington should carefully examine whether more flexible, science-based approaches are warranted.
The Cannabis Alliance’s Advocacy at the CAC
Council Representation: Advocated for one seat per trade association, plus seats for social equity and patient representatives.
Zoning and Buffers: Voiced frustration that buffer rulemaking was closed without expanding retail opportunities.
Uniform Pricing & SB 5403: Stressed the importance of stakeholders sharing lived marketplace experiences to shape fair rules.
Testing Enforcement: Challenged LCB’s new enforcement posture on non-mandatory testing and pushed for rulemaking clarity before enforcement.
Cannabis Hospitality: Recommended discussing social consumption, a Cannabis Alliance led initiative, at the next CAC meeting
Why This Matters
The CAC is at least a forum to voice concerns, but it does not replace public comment and represents a chilling step away from meaningful stakeholder engagement.
As we move forward, it is essential that every conversation with policymakers—and even with one another—be used to highlight how the LCB is steadily reducing opportunities for industry input. From eliminating live public comment to limiting representation on the CAC, there is a clear trend toward minimizing how often the agency hears about industry pain points.
We must continue to raise these issues at every opportunity to ensure the lived experiences of licensees and stakeholders remain central to cannabis policy in Washington.
For those who want to dig deeper, Cannabis Observer has the full audio recordings, including sections not captured on TVW.
Ways to Get Involved
Subscribe to The Cannabis Alliance newsletter for timely updates on rulemaking, legislative priorities, and advocacy opportunities.
Join The Cannabis Alliance as a member to ensure your voice is heard and to strengthen the only PAC-free organization in Washington fighting for a vital, ethical, equitable, and sustainable cannabis industry.