H.B. 389 Cannabis Amendments: transcript

We'll start off first today with HB 3 89 Medical Cannabis Amendments representative Provo Haley, Provo. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Committee. I am grateful for the opportunity to be here. I am co-presenting with Dr. Brandon Forsyth from Utah Department of Agriculture and Food. I'll kick it off and then hand it over to Dr. Forsyth and then excited for the opportunity to answer questions. So, HB 3 89 is a continuation of work in our medical cannabis, um, program, which is, as you know, a labor of love. And, um, this is a program that I have a lot of, um, confidence in and have enjoyed working a space that I've enjoyed working in, especially in as much as that we are doing our very best to make sure that patients have access to high quality medication and opportunities, um, to avoid other more dangerous medications. Um, to that end, it is an iterative process and we are continually learning and adapting to new science and to markets. And so a couple of things that have come up over the last year in our continued work on this, um, that are addressed in this bill. There was an audit by the Office of Legislative, the Office of Legislative, uh, legislative auditor ola, um, that demonstrated that there are some, there were some issues with the licensing board that, um, could be addressed in order to make, um, important improvements in the program. And so this bill does, um, reconstitute and redefine the licensing board instead of a large volunteer board. It professionalizes the board creates efficiencies, it does draw some much of the work that is now being conducted in the Department of Health and Human Services moves those, um, activities over to Utah Department of Agriculture and Food, because it was just recognized that having those dis disparate activities in two different departments was creating, um, disconnects and inefficiencies in the program. And so, um, department of Agriculture and food with through the new licensing board would take over much of that work, um, with the exception of the things that UAF just cannot do, uh, things like, um, HIPAA and, and whatnot. And, uh, in the bill, the Department of Agriculture and Food would have the ability to contract with Department of Health and Human Services for those, those things that they needed in order to run the program efficiently. Um, one of the critical things that did come up over the interim was the need to make sure that low THC products, so these are 0.03% or less, THC also often referred to as CBD or hemp products that are processed in our medical, our licensed medical cannabis processors. So there's a big difference here. This is really, really important. And one of the reasons I like our program so much, all of the processors that are licensed in our medical cannabis program undergo strict regulation testing, transparency, accountability through the Department of Agriculture and food that includes THC products and low THC products. Um, given a lot of the changes at the federal level with regard to low THC products and changes in federal law and past statutory decisions here in the state of Utah, we wanna make sure that patients still have access to those low THC products that are processed in our licensed facilities. And so in order to make sure that patients know which are the tested safe products versus the everything else, we're defining those low THC products as medical cannabis products. And so that, that definition becomes really important because, um, a lot of, and there's a bill here on the legislature, um, restricting low, uh, flavored CBD products. And we wanna, and those are to keep dangerous products out of the reach, especially of children. We wanna make sure that we're not mixing up our safe tested low THC products with everything else. And we wanna make sure that patients still have access to those low THC products. Um, I do have a concern that if they're not available, then we will inadvertently drive patients to high THC products when they're finding relief with those low products. And so that definition is really critical. And I would argue one of the most important, um, aspects of this piece of legislation. Um, we are implementing a small transaction fee on, on products because Department of Agriculture and Food is tasked with regulating this industry and they just don't have the resources. We're still still trying to make sure that they have adequate resources to do the job that we statutorily require of them. Um, it's not ideal of course to add a fee to a transaction, but given the alternative and patients not having access to high quality products, um, we felt like the dollar 50 transaction fee was a good balance. It does present more opportunities for healthcare providers to engage with their patients via telehealth and combines the two funding. Pro Pro, uh, there are two funding mechanisms in medical cannabis. There's a qualified production enterprise fund and the Qualified Patient enterprise fund. We're combining those two again for efficiency because having the two different, um, funding streams, um, really confuses matters and creates inefficiencies and siloed work inside, um, the inside the program. And then finally to the, the new board, I just, you know, one of the, one of the great things that I like about the new iteration is that it provides, um, better, uh, transparency and access for license holders to address any concerns with citations. Creates, um, an objective body to, um, mediate some of those, you know, if, if there are any licensing hearings. Um, and also allows for the new board to collaborate with Department of Agriculture and Food on rulemaking, which I think is really important, um, for transparency and accountability. With that, I will hand it over to Dr. Forsyth and then we'll take questions.

Go ahead. Dr. Brandon Forsyth, director of the Specialized Products Division with the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food. We appreciate Representative Dailey-Provost for running this bill. Um, every year we come back here with more changes to the cannabis program, and I think every year the program gets a little bit better. And so I appreciate the committee's consideration here. It really does make a difference to patients, especially this year where we're making sure that they have access to these low THC products and pharmacies. That is something a lot of patients really rely on. And if they're not available in pharmacies, they would need to go to vape shops or other similar places in order to get these. And knowing that they come in clean at the pharmacy is important to patients and it also keeps people engaged with their doctor as they're treating their conditions. We also appreciate the work that the licensing board has done over the last couple years. They work really hard for a volunteer board, but it is a lot to ask of them. They had to give up quite a bit of free time recently to review the licenses that were going to be issu well, the license that was going to be issued, um, this past year. And it ended up being quite a bit of work reviewing those applications. And so moving towards a professional board, we do think we'll, um, both, not that the current board didn't do a great job, but it'll enable those individuals to do a more thorough job on reviewing these applications and making correct decisions going forward. Um, we, we really did appreciate the audit and thought it brought out some great insights into the program. And we think that these changes in this bill will address most of those concerns. Um, and I think that's it. Thank You. Thank you. We're open for questions.

Yeah. Thank you Mr. Chair. I just, uh, got a question, uh, representative you mentioned that, uh, you wanted these low THC products available so as not to drive folks to the high THC products Unnecessarily. If they're receiving relief from the low THC products, we want to make sure that they maintain access to those other without the redefinition. The only products that are available in the pharmacies are high THC products. So should we be limiting the THC

and the other products? High THC? No, I do not think that's the case because there are patients that do need high THC products and that is a conversation between the patient and their healthcare provider. But we wanna make sure absent this bill, patients don't have access to low THC products in the pharmacy.

Okay. Thank you. Uh, one other question. I, I guess, uh, there I'm a little concerned about reducing the board down to just three versus looks like there was a lot of representation on different areas in the board. And I also noticed that it only takes two to make a quorum. So that's a lot of power and just a couple of people. Well, and also, uh, as part of that is, is there, can you explain reasons it just for convenience in the process As far as the three person board?

So this, the three person board was actually in response to feedback that I got last year because if you remember last year we had created an ombudsman position to mediate some of these issues between the regulatory agency and the licensees. And that one person board, that one person position in the office of the ombudsman was not something that was broadly supported. And so in working with those stakeholders and industry, um, it was recognized that a three person board, um, allows for the commissioner to appoint people that still capture all of those requirements that are represented on the volunteer board. Um, but it professionalizes the board. These are professionals that will spend time on this, um, full-time, have all the accountability. They still report to the commissioner at the Department of Agriculture and Food. It's still a public board that has open and public meeting requirements. Um, but, you know, if, if we're gonna have a professional board, a three person board is what is financially feasible and responsible and accountable to both, to one another and to the agencies, you know, the agency that they're working with. And so this three person board was, is the compromise that that expands that.

Thank you. And who, if I can ask a couple more questions. Go ahead. Who is it that, uh, appoints the board?

The commissioner of Department of Agriculture and Food. Okay. With the approval of the governor. Okay. With the approval of the governor.

And also in regards, uh, to that, um, one of the other questions I had was, as far as the three people on the board, it says that they, uh, cannot be, uh, replaced at will. Can you explain why we don't allow them to be replaced at will? Um, every employee is still an at will employee in the state of Utah. I think it mentions that they can't replace it with it. Only certain circumstances can that happen. Can they be replaced?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, may I ask a few Questions? Go ahead. Um, I actually really like what you're doing. Um, I, I don't think anybody needs to apologize for changes 'cause we're still new in, in this arena. And, um, we're doing it very different than a lot of places. So I think we're rocking it. I'm just telling you. But I, I do have a question on the low THC product, which I certainly applaud. I think that's great. Do I still need to have a card just to get those, To get those at the pharmacy? Yes. Oh, So there are, there are some, there are some that I don't Like. Well, and, and I mean, that's, that's the rub, right? So, um, and this was a policy discussion that we've, we've had extensively, um, there are low TTHC products that are still available in the state, you know, that anybody can get from, you know, where they're that're still getting them. But, um, this was a recognition that a CBD product that's pro that's processed by a licensed Okay. Processor and sold in a pharmacy is considered a medical cannabis product. Okay. Yeah. It doesn't eliminate availability outside the pharmacies. Oh, others.

Question. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Is it all? Thank you, chair. Oh, But well, we'll get the right mic. There we go. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Um, to Representative Ship's question, I believe it's line 3 81 where it discusses a director may only be terminated for just cause. Um, do you mind speaking to that, just to clarify?

Sure, yeah. Thank you. So, uh, we wanted to make sure that, um, recognizing that this board has a potential to create, there could be some friction between the agency and the board itself in the decisions that were being made. And so we wanted to make sure that the board has the ability to make hard decisions, to have those conversations with their boss, the commissioner, um, without being in, you know, fear of reprisal, um, for making those decisions.

That makes sense. Thank you. Thank you.

Vickers. Okay.

Yes. Oh, I'm sorry. Thank you. Sub two is the one that we're talking and we'll need to move that substitute.

My name's Walter Plum. I'm the President of Drug Safe Utah. And I want to address, um, an issue in the bill. When the marijuana, uh, legislation came in, it envisioned going to a doctor or a doctor equivalent and getting a card and getting permission to go into dispensary with a pharmacist. There. This bill on line 9 42 provides for a virtual visit. Utah already has a tele telemarketing, uh, telehealth, uh, act, and that's 26 B uh, 4, 7 0 4. It seems to me that providing a virtual visit is not enough, especially since these pharmacies are still, uh, selling very tight, uh, high THC products that can end up in some fashion with youth. I'm gonna give the reasons why. In America today, this is astonishing. One out of 10 alcohol, uh, people are using alcohol on a daily basis With marijuana, it's now exceeded alcohol use. One out of 10. If you took off cross usage about 25% that use both alcohol and marijuana, that would mean that 17% of Americans are using either alcohol or tobacco. That's an astonishing, uh, excuse me, alcohol or marijuana. That's an astonishing amount. The New York Times recently, after years since 2014, advocated for legalizing marijuana. On Monday of this week, they walked back back and said, the US has recently gone too far in accepting and even promoting its use. In the piece. The editorial board conceded that some of the past positions on legalization and other issues no longer hold up, including the initial assessment that marijuana addiction and dependence are relatively minor problems, especially compared with alcohol and tobacco. Totally untrue From addiction today. So, get to your point, Mr. Plum. Excuse me.

From addiction, today in December of 2025, after thousands of studies, medicinal cannabis and cannabinoids are unproven for most medical use. Regulation needs to be tighter, not virtual visits in the state of Utah. Thank you.

Um, yeah, thank you. Just a couple of things and, um, I, I do appreciate Mr. Plums passion on, on this issue. Um, we are not having a debate about whether or not we have a medical program, that we have a medical program, and this program does not, um, address his underlying concerns. And that is that of recreational use. And yes, everybody, every legislator to a person, I could almost, I I feel confident in saying that if not all, most legislators don't want kids using recreational cannabis. There is zero evidence that children are accessing any medical, any cannabis program through the medical program. It just, it doesn't make sense. It's too expensive for kids to be, you know, and, and cardholders that are getting their product in the medical cannabis program are not making a profit by selling this to kids. It's just, it's, it's nonsensical. Um, they wouldn't risk their access to their medication by doing something like that. And so, yes, there are absolutely issues in this country with alcohol use. This has nothing to do with that. There are issues with children accessing illicit substances of all kinds. That is a concern. What we're trying to do here is to continue to refine and improve our medical cannabis program, which is running well. As Representative Watkins said, I think it's the best model in the country. I really do. And I think that if we don't continue to get our medical cannabis program right, we will, we do run the risk of a full rec being a full rec state. And I don't want see that happen.

Um, Desiree Hennessy. I'm with the Utah Patients Coalition. Just quickly, I just wanna address the, um, telehealth. We just, in this piece, it's just looking to address some rural patients that are struggling to find doctors that understand medical cannabis and that can work with them to work with the pharmacist. And so, um, that's just, it's simply just to, to make sure that they have the access, um, if they're shut in or they're too disabled or they're in a rural area. And then, um, I just wanna point out with the teen usage exactly right, nobody is interested in getting kids recreational cannabis, but I can say since the inception of our program, Utah has, has, um, reported that we have a 58% decrease in teen usage. So we're trending in the right way.

Nope. Just need to get her done.

Yes, please. Um, Mr. Speaker or Mr. Chair? Gimme a little bump there. Um, I, I'd like to make a motion that we, uh, move out house bill 3 89 second sub with a favorable recommendation.

I, I think they're doing great work. I, I really do. So thank you.

Uh, thank you Mr. Chair. I just wanted to address, uh, the rural effect on, uh, telehealth. So is the telehealth only gonna be for rural or is it anywhere in the state? Can you use telehealth instead of meeting face to face with a far with a doctor?

So there are still restrictions on when and where telehealth can be used. This just broadens it a little bit and it is, it ha will have the most outsize effect on people in rural communities. But it is available for other people who have access issues who may be home bound, um, severely disabled, et cetera, if it's not necessarily a proximity issue. But it was intended to especially address the fact that many in rural communities have very limited access, But they don't have to be home bound in order

to use it in urban areas. Is that correct?

The, um, that's correct. Okay. Thank you Mr. Chair.

Would really, um, appreciate the, your support. I'm grateful for the motion. Thank you, representative. Um, just grateful for the opportunity to continue to refine what I believe to be a very good program and have, uh, just wanna send out my appreciation to everybody in the industry, to patients, to license holders, to all the stakeholders for being so engaged on, um, and especially our regulatory agencies. The Department of Agriculture and Food has been fantastic to work with. Um, and, you know, just recognize that this is a, a very collaborative, intentional process. And I wish I could say this is the last time I'll run a medical cannabis bill, but I would like to retire from this for a couple of years. So if we can get this right this year, that'd be great. You can always retire from the legislature. I'm not gonna be here forever, but thanks for the invitation representative. Just kidding. Okay. Uh, to the maker of the motion, I'll waive. Thank you.

three eighty nine third substitute Cannabis Amendments. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Committee. It's great to be back with you again today. Uh, so today we're talking about our Next, um, annual update on our medical cannabis and industrial hemp, uh, bills. And I am really pleased to be joined by Dr. Brandon Forsyth from, uh, Utah Department of Agriculture and Food, um, to help present and to answer any questions. So, as you know, we work really closely with our medical cannabis industry and our industrial hemp industry and our regulatory agencies, primarily the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food throughout the year to address, um, updates and changes that are, um, deemed necessary in our medical cannabis and industrial hemp programs to make sure that we are doing our best to meet the needs of patients, um, and, and customers throughout the state. So a couple of substantive, really substantive changes, um, came this year after Olag did an audit of our medical cannabis industry and found it to be, um, I'm sorry, our, our agency and found it to be, uh, overall a really great program. But one finding, um, did stand out and that was that the, um, licensing board that as it currently exists at in the medical cannabis program, um, was one that could benefit from some updates and changes. Right now it's a, it's a seven person board made up of volunteers. And given the work and the scope of decisions that they're asked to make, uh, it was recommended that we take a look at that. And so this bill addresses that by eliminating the volunteer board and replacing it with a professionalized three person board that whose full-time jobs will be to work with the agency and with stakeholders, with license holders, with patients, to really make sure, uh, that the needs are being met. And to offer that, um, that sort of in-between body that offers some, um, objectivity and, and, um, sort of middleman, peacemaking entity, um, to lend, um, accountability and transparency and gives u DAF the opportunity to make sure that the decisions that they're making in collaboration with the board are, are, you know, well-suited and, and open and transparent and to, to everybody who's involved. And so I think that this change is a good one. Um, it also allows for Department of Agriculture and Food to implement a small transaction fee for medical cannabis programs to help fund their, um, regulatory activities, which right now are we underfund. So in statute we require a lot of regulatory activity, but we don't give them the necessary resources. And so this is a way that we're, we'll be able to address that. One thing that did come up in over the last year was a concern that there are low THC products that are processed and manufactured by our licensed camp me medical cannabis processors. Um, low THC means anything that's, um, below at or below 0.03% THC, we wanna make sure that any of those products that are manufactured by our licensed producers are defined as medical cannabis products so that they are, number one, they can be sold in the medical cannabis pharmacies, and then also to distinguish them from all other low THC products in the state. Because as, and the biggest difference there is that they are stringently carefully tested where many products aren't. And we need patients to know the difference. And we wanna make sure that those low THC products are available in the pharmacy so that patients don't have to get only high THC products at the pharmacies that they have if they get relief and have, and like those low THC products that those are available in our safe reg, um, regulated spaces in our pharmacies. Um, department of Agriculture and Food asked for a couple of provisions including, um, hazardous waste and disposal compliance and then re removing previously past legislation, the to do with, um, security cameras that turned out to be not have the effect or positive benefit that they hoped they would and, um, ended up being, um, burdensome on, especially on our veteran veterinarians. Um, and so we wanted to make sure that that was corrected in statute as well. Um, it does move most of the activities that were covered at the Department of Health and Human Services over to Department of Agriculture and Food, which I think is a critical efficiency piece. 'cause having the program regulated in two different agencies just created inefficiencies and disconnects that did not benefit patients or our licensed holders. And with that, I'll give, uh, a little bit of time to Dr. Forsyth to share, um, anything that I missed. Um, and also perspective on from the Department of Agriculture and Food. And then we'll take questions.

Dr. Brandon Forsyth, director of the Specialized Products Division at the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food. We appreciate Representative Daley Pro for running this bill. Um, and the input from other members of the cannabis working group. Um, every year we do this, and this bill's no different than it contains many small but very important changes to the program. Um, things like repealing the video surveillance for the hemp retailers might seem like a small thing, but it really did create quite a challenge to implement. Um, other things like allowing the pharmacies to carry these low THC products in there explicitly is very important to the patients of Utah. These products are very popular in the pharmacies and they're the kind of products that we should be encouraging pre patients to take. They're not the ones that tend to get people high, they're really just for treatment. And so ensuring that those are available is critical for the program. Um, we also appreciate the additional funding that's being dedicated to the program. It's a expensive program to run, especially with the, um, data costs associated with developing a new system, those costs of, um, and a substantial burden to the department this past year. And we appreciate the help that we're getting from the legislature in fulfilling our role in the medical cannabis program. I'll close with that. Thank you. That's it. That's our presentation. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, make a motion that we favorably recommend third substitute HB 3 89 Senate. That's an order. Um, this is our annual, uh, Christmas bill. Thank you representative. It was your turn, and we appreciate you taking, uh, the responsibility and it, it's a effort of a whole year. I just wanna recognize the staff as well. I know Seth spends a lot of time with us and our executive branch staff in the different departments, HHS as well as the department, agriculture, um, and all the people involved. So thank you for keeping this program, um, where it needs to be, and we're always moving in that direction. Thank you.

Uh, thank you for the motion. And I would echo, um, senator's comments. We, this is the, the work of, uh, a lot of hard work from our amazing staff and our regulatory agencies, and also the other members of our oversight committee, including Senator Escamilla, Senator Vickers, Representative Brooks, Senator Owens, Representative Ward, um, this, we all, um, remain grateful for the opportunity to do the work and, um, and, and having a lot of input and careful thought on this legislation.

I move that we, uh, approve the minutes from February 24th.

Second substitute House Bill 3 89 Medical Cannabis Amendments by Representative Daley Provo. This bill was heard in Natural Resources, agriculture and Environment with the vote of 8 1 5 Representative Daley Provo.

Thank you Mr. Speaker proto, I'd like to move third substitute house bill 3 89. The motion is to adopt third substitute house bill 3 89.

Um, would you like me to speak to the bill now, Mr. Speaker pro tem or move the sub and then speak to it, The changes in this substitute. Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro Tim. So h this third substitute of HB 3 89 is the result of careful negotiation and collaboration. Um, with my good colleague from Cedar City who just presented a bill whose name may or may not rhyme with trip. Um, he and I have had the opportunity to work on some concerns that he had and in the process, I think have, um, come up with a better bill. And we, and I'm excited to present the entire bill with those changes included.

Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro tem. So this year's version of medical cannabis amendments, um, is an ongoing attempt to make sure that our state statute reflects the best regulatory framework to support patients in our medical cannabis program and to also support the license holders, um, in the state who provide medication to our patients. Um, there are some important updates this year that have been the result of many years of collaboration. First of all, um, a couple of requests from Utah Department of Agriculture and Food that we, um, continue whom, who is responsible for most of the regulation and, um, support for our medical cannabis program, uh, work very closely with us to provide us information on what they need to do their jobs well. And so some of the things that are included in this at their request include clarification on hazardous waste disposal for CBD products. That just means that when vape carts, for example, are disposed of, they are hazardous waste. And these carts tend to have a, a portion with a, with the CBD in it and a portion with a battery, they can't be recycled at the same time. And so we need to make sure that they're able to regulate that hazardous waste appropriately at their request. We've, they've asked for us to repeal legislation that came that we passed last year that implemented video surveillance requirements. They found that that was expensive, onerous, and did not re, um, result in good oversight or effective, um, outcomes as intended. And so they've asked for that change. Um, so those are the requests from Department of Agriculture and Food. Other substantive policy areas include, um, a, a change in the, the licensing board at the Department of Agriculture and Food over the medical cannabis program. Currently the board is made up of seven volunteer members. When, um, an audit was conducted by Olag this last year, one of the primary findings was that the board, while well intended to not function as a, an effective oversight board, and so we have, um, we have proposed with the support of industry and regulatory bodies, instead professionalizing that board. It will now be three full-time board members who are supported by financially, by the medical, the enterprise fund, um, which is why we're able to professionalize that board without triggering a fiscal note or cost to the taxpayers. This bill also implements a trans a uniform transaction fee, which is desperately needed by the Department of Agriculture and Food, so that they have the fi financial resources to appropriately regulate to make sure that all of our medical cannabis products are safe, uh, for patients. This also clarifies that in medical cannabis pharmacies, any low THC product, that's products that are 0.3% or lower that are manufactured by a licensed processor in the state are defined as medical cannabis products. This is really important because we wanna make sure that if patients find relief in a low THC product, that they're able to distinguish which of those, um, meet the very high rigor of the testing that is required of our medical cannabis pro um, products. And we need to clarify in statute, because right now the statute is not clear, just double ch or clarify that those low THC products can in fact be sold in the medical cannabis pharmacies. There are updates to label labeling and packaging requirements to streamline and decrease costs for our processors and pharmacies. And also ensures that any processor who already has a medical cannabis processing license also has the legal ability to process industrial hemp products. With that Mr. Speaker, I'm open to questions.

Did we, it's been so long. I forgot representative, so I'm sorry. I'll try, I'll be more concise.

Uh, I would appreciate the support of the body. Thank you. Thank

Thank you Mr. Speaker proto, I'd like to move third substitute house bill 3 89. The motion is to adopt third substitute house bill 3 89.

Um, would you like me to speak to the bill now, Mr. Speaker pro tem or move the sub and then speak to it, The changes in this substitute.

Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro Tim. So h this third substitute of HB 3 89 is the result of careful negotiation and collaboration. Um, with my good colleague from Cedar City who just presented a bill whose name may or may not rhyme with trip. Um, he and I have had the opportunity to work on some concerns that he had and in the process, I think have, um, come up with a better bill. And we, and I'm excited to present the entire bill with those changes included.

Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro tem. So this year's version of medical cannabis amendments, um, is an ongoing attempt to make sure that our state statute reflects the best regulatory framework to support patients in our medical cannabis program and to also support the license holders, um, in the state who provide medication to our patients. Um, there are some important updates this year that have been the result of many years of collaboration. First of all, um, a couple of requests from Utah Department of Agriculture and Food that we, um, continue whom, who is responsible for most of the regulation and, um, support for our medical cannabis program, uh, work very closely with us to provide us information on what they need to do their jobs well. And so some of the things that are included in this at their request include clarification on hazardous waste disposal for CBD products. That just means that when vape carts, for example, are disposed of, they are hazardous waste. And these carts tend to have a, a portion with a, with the CBD in it and a portion with a battery, they can't be recycled at the same time. And so we need to make sure that they're able to regulate that hazardous waste appropriately at their request. We've, they've asked for us to repeal legislation that came that we passed last year that implemented video surveillance requirements. They found that that was expensive, onerous, and did not re, um, result in good oversight or effective, um, outcomes as intended. And so they've asked for that change. Um, so those are the requests from Department of Agriculture and Food. Other substantive policy areas include, um, a, a change in the, the licensing board at the Department of Agriculture and Food over the medical cannabis program. Currently the board is made up of seven volunteer members. When, um, an audit was conducted by Olag this last year, one of the primary findings was that the board, while well intended to not function as a, an effective oversight board, and so we have, um, we have proposed with the support of industry and regulatory bodies, instead professionalizing that board. It will now be three full-time board members who are supported by financially, by the medical, the enterprise fund, um, which is why we're able to professionalize that board without triggering a fiscal note or cost to the taxpayers. This bill also implements a trans a uniform transaction fee, which is desperately needed by the Department of Agriculture and Food, so that they have the fi financial resources to appropriately regulate to make sure that all of our medical cannabis products are safe, uh, for patients. This also clarifies that in medical cannabis pharmacies, any low THC product, that's products that are 0.3% or lower that are manufactured by a licensed processor in the state are defined as medical cannabis products. This is really important because we wanna make sure that if patients find relief in a low THC product, that they're able to distinguish which of those, um, meet the very high rigor of the testing that is required of our medical cannabis pro um, products. And we need to clarify in statute, because right now the statute is not clear, just double ch or clarify that those low THC products can in fact be sold in the medical cannabis pharmacies. There are updates to label labeling and packaging requirements to streamline and decrease costs for our processors and pharmacies. And also ensures that any processor who already has a medical cannabis processing license also has the legal ability to process industrial hemp products. With that Mr. Speaker, I'm open to questions.

I'll try, I'll be more concise.

Uh, I would appreciate the support of the body. Thank you. Thank

to the substituted bill. Thank You. This is the companion bill to SB 1 21 that we run. Kind in parallel with, uh, working with the medical cannabis program. This, the, the bill that we had passed earlier dealt with some individual things, dealing with some of the, some of the program. This is some other changes that are going on. They're proposing, uh, coming out of our working group. Uh, it does. We've had a, uh, bifurcated, um, management system where we have DHHS doing some and, and u DAF doing others. This is moving most of the, the relevant programs out of DHHS into the Department of Agriculture and Food. We've had a, a volunteer seven person licensing board. We're proposing to move that and, and replace that with a three person full-time professional board that would have some oversight over the program. Moving to more of a more central to like governance program. Uh, that board would be appointed by the UDAF commissioner. Um, and one major flaw that we saw from last year is that, uh, somehow and, and, and really was inadvertent but low THC products, some that you might equate to hemp products were not allowed to be carried or processed or manufactured to be sold in a cannabis pharmacy. Realizing that was an error. This, this bill corrects that. Um, and with that it, those are the major changes that are going on. And then, and like in the substitute, I mentioned that the medical cannabis program is funded internally from the fees coming from the, from the license holders. And they were proposing to use some of that money to, we set up the research center and we're proposing to put some money into that, some additional money into that research center so they can carry out the studies that are needed on medical cannabis. With that, I'd be open for any questions.

Thank you. Under suspension of the rules, I would move that four substitute house bill 3 89 pass.

Thank you Mr. Mr. President ProAm. Motion to encircle. Uh, motion to encircle. Which bill? Third substitute house bill 5 0 8. Third substitute house bill 5 0 8.

of the president. Madam Reading Clerk For substitute house Bill 3 89 Cannabis Amendments by Representative Daley Provo, representative Daley Provo. Thank

You Mr. Speaker Motion to concur with the Senate amendments.

That motion is in order. Would like to speak to her Briefly. Um, a couple of years ago the legislature saw it to create legislation forming the Utah University of Utah, well, I'm sorry, Utah Center for Medical Cannabis Research located at the University of Utah. Um, and we in that bill, we put some statutory guidance on the research that we wanted conducted and have struggled to find funding. And so this creates a funding mechanism that draws on the patient enterprise fund in the medical cannabis program so that we can get that research funded without taxing, uh, taking any money from the general fund so that we are not relying on the taxpayers for that, uh, funding. So this just creates that mechanism and all the policy in the bill stays the same.

Sorry, Mr. Speaker, um, was sponsor yield to a question. Representative Daley Provo, will you yield to a question?

If it's a good question, I will try my best as I always do.

Uh, could you just explain to us just a little bit about the, the funding source for the research institute?

Absolute Abso absolutely. Thank you for the question. So, um, the, the u the medical cannabis program in the state of Utah is fully self-sustaining and self-funded through, um, licensing fees on our, you know, our medical cannabis pharmacies, um, production growth growth sites, et cetera, but also through a patient transaction fee that's paid at the time when, when patients fill their, um, their prescriptions at the pharmacies. And so that portions of that funding will be used, um, in a four year cycle. So the total funding for the research center will be pulled out of that patient enterprise fund, um, to fund the medical Cannabis research center because again, they have a statutory, they have things that they are required to do as per the statute when we created the center that they don't have the funding to do. And so in order to support them in their statutory requirements without pulling from the general fund, um, we've created this funding mechanism to pull from that patient enterprise fund. So we can do that without using taxpayer money in the general fund.

Thank you Mr. Speaker.

I'll waive. Thank you. Submission has been waived.