Last year the state’s Medical Cannabis Commission issued six licenses for applicants to grow marijuana adhering to tight state regulations to treat defined illnesses and conditions. Cannabis oil from the marijuana would then be sold to suffering patients. It was thought that this licensing process would be the end of the matter. But not so fast.
Various losing applicants have raised serious criticisms of the seven-member Medical Cannabis Commission, its responsibilities and the process in grading the applicants.
Protestors allege that the licensing process lacked basic due process. While you would expect the non-winners of any competitive bidding process to claim unfairness, some of the allegations have found some willing ears at the General Assembly. Most of the protesters say that when the cannabis panel was created by state law, and the members were appointed (by the governor, the lieutenant governor and state House speaker,) there was little or no expertise on how to create a fair and objective scoring system.
State Rep. Alan Powell
State Rep. Alan Powell, R-Hartwell, is the House regulated industry panel chairman. He seeks to possibly modify the existing state law. Powell spoke with InsiderAdvantage and said, “I am a believer that anything that God lets grow naturally has got to be better than anything that is manufactured in a laboratory, and I think everybody knows the positive effects it has on certain illnesses, most predominantly children’s seizures.”
At a recent committee meeting, Powell and others on the House committee expressed grave concern about the confidentiality language in the bill and the lack of information that has been provided to the protesters and the members of the General Assembly.
After realizing the flaws in the process, Powell decided to correct it. “The cloak of confidentiality and secrecy needs to be removed other than for specific trade secrets. Trade secrets are already covered under another code in Georgia law, so nobody needs to know anybody’s trade secrets. But they do need to know the process of what went on. Now in the legislation, any of those who were not chosen had an opportunity to file a protest, then after the protest they can file litigation.”
He continued saying, “I spoke to several lawyers who say there is a case in standing that any of these protestors can possibly file for an injunction under the clause that there was no due process in the application process.”
The issue is compounded because the law grants broad and sweeping confidentiality regarding the selection process and grading of applications. The reality is the protestants claim that under the law the commission cannot provide fundamental information to understand and assess the applications. Add to this fact that during the selection process, the General Assembly did not include adequate funding to hire an objective and professional organization to handle the grading and analysis of literally thousands of pages of highly technical information.
When discussing the cannabis panel, Powell told this writer that “commissioners needed to provide professional advice that could have judged them all, and of course they made six choices. I am not sure who they are, but I know there is a hold up– and the delay is that now, because of the way this process was done and judging from the licensees, there is a flaw. And that needs to be dealt with. If not, then we have potential that injunctions could be filed and granted, and we are then talking about another year and a half or more of delay when it needs to be in the process right now. We have to get this product in the hands of people most in need of it.”
There was also concern expressed about the objectivity of the process itself because commission members had little, if any, expertise on the subject matter. The problem was compounded in that there was little if any money available to the Cannabis Commission to hire consulting expertise to ensure consistent grading of the applicants.
Critics say that by modifying the existing law limiting confidentiality and creating additional licensees, this would ensure that those who receive licenses do so by a more objective process so that there are no questions unanswered.
This can help our state create the most competitive market for these products, while bringing relief and treatment to Georgians who need medical cannabis now.
Charles Clay is a staff writer for InsiderAdvantage Georgia.
