A Guide to Act 166 (2024)

The first section is about hemp and what constitutes a hemp product. It defines hemp using guidance from federal regulations, specifically a product with <0.3% THC by dry weight basis. It clarifies that any product regulated by the CCB cannot be a hemp product, but licensees may possess such product if they have the appropriate hemp license. Note that CCB Rule 2.17 bans synthetic and hemp-derived cannabinoids.

Section two lays out the advertising restrictions and repeals a previous restriction on “prizes, awards, or inducements” for purchasing cannabis products.

We support this relaxing of advertisements. This change will allow deals such as BOGO, as well as creative new methods for retail stores to sell products. This may encourage a more varied and creative retail experience and better customer outcomes.

This section allows the new Medical-Use Endorsed (MUE) retailer licensees to buy, possess, and sell cannabis and cannabis products otherwise prohibited under the THC caps. For example, a gummy that is 25mg, or bubble hash or rosin that tests 90% THC. Only state-registered patients and caregivers can purchase these products from MUE retailers.

We support increasing access to cannabis for medical patients and removing the THC caps from the law in their entirety.

Section 4 includes two distinct sections.

The first section charges the CCB with developing rules to implement performance standards to relegate a cultivator to a smaller tier and to grant a licensee a larger tier of production.

The second section covers the regulatory details for the Medical-Use Endorsement retailer license. It charges the CCB with creating rules regarding patient privacy, delivery, training, record keeping, patient access for those under 21, and other health and safety requirements.

The changes to cultivation licensing present a unique mechanism for managing production for the market, such that it has the potential to create a universal entry-point for growers to enter the market at the Tier 1 level with the option to demonstrate an ability to increase production, and similarly allows the agency to scale a licensee down to a lower tier of production – a scale-appropriate system we would support.

This section represents a significant new policy that creates a new Medical-Use Endorsed (MUE) retailer license comprised of the benefits medical dispensaries have, including delivery, curbside pickup, sales and excise tax-free sales to patients and caregivers, increased quantity limits per transaction, and the allowance to sell products impacted by the THC caps.

This new retailer license goes into effect on July 1, 2025. Before it does, the CCB must first develop rules for the license, including protection of patient privacy and confidential records, enhanced training and educational requirements for employees who interact with patients, and the segregation of cannabis products that are otherwise prohibited for sale to non-medical customers.

This section creates a new annual licensing fee of $10,250 for the MUE retailer license – that's $250 added onto the $10,000 annual license fee for retailers.

Note that we advocated for this new license fee to be less than a retailer license fee to help incentivize retailers to participate in the medical cannabis community and to support local patients and caregivers.

This section includes ulcerative colitis as an eligible medical condition for the medical cannabis program.

Note that we advocated for Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) or associated symptoms, a broader category of conditions that includes ulcerative colitis.

This section increases all medical patient card renewals to three (3) years, no matter the condition.

This section reduces the license fee for medical dispensaries from $25,000 to $5,000 and their one-time application fee from $2,500 to $1,000.

Section 10 repeals the rule allowing the CCB to charge fees for advertisement review.

This is a technical section that gives greater power of what constitutes cannabis in a cannabis-infused product from the Department of Public Safety to the CCB.

This section requires the CCB to work with the Vermont Department of Health, the Vermont Medical Society, Green Mountain Patients Alliance, and the Cannabis Retailers Association of Vermont to assess the efficacy of the Vermont Medical Cannabis Program. Doing so with the goals of improving: the process of evaluating and qualifying conditions, communicating with patients on how to use cannabis, and defining appropriate regulations regarding vape devices.

This section amends the rules to exclude some buildings used in outdoor cultivation as public buildings. This should lower some of the burden on small season farms, who need a trim crew during the fall.

This section exempts MUE retailers from paying the cannabis excise tax and mandates that businesses record those transactions and report them to the Department of Taxes.

This section exempts MUE retailers from paying the state sales tax and mandates that businesses record those transactions and report them to the Department of Taxes.

This section transfers $500,000 from the Cannabis Regulation Fund to the Cannabis Business Development Fund. It also appropriates $500,000 from said business development fund to the Agency of Commerce and Community Development to fund “technical assistance and provide loans and grants.”

This section includes additional parameters for the agency's biannual statutory report on equity in the market.

It charges the CCB to work with local stakeholders such as the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board, the Vermont Land Access and Opportunity Board, the Vermont Racial Justice Alliance, the Office of Racial Equity, and the Agency of Commerce and Community Development to determine a percentage of Cannabis excise tax dollars to appropriate to the Cannabis Business Development Fund.

Section 16 establishes new restrictions on cultivators regarding minimum setback. A minimum setback is a distance between the edge of the plant canopy and the edge of a property boundary or road. The section lays out the rules regarding setbacks, with the largest setback allowed being 50 feet and the minimum setback allowed being 10 feet.

This section is regressive and problematic, it will harm the market and especially outdoor cultivators, and it conflicts with the original intent of the enabling statute, Act 164 (2020), to transition Vermont's legacy market equitably. This policy was also enacted through undemocratic means, such that, VGA and our Coalition spent much time in committee during the 2024 legislative session fighting back against this effort to impair the ag-related protections we earned for outdoor growers by bringing the voices of the industry, which was a clear majority of licensees, and the reason why we advocated for the Outdoor Siting legislative report in Section 18 to revisit the issue in 2025 with a greater body of evidence to remove the setbacks from the law.

This section establishes that municipalities are allowed to adopt a bylaw that identifies cannabis cultivation districts preferred for outdoor cultivation on January 1, 2025. However, cannabis cultivation in the designated area should blend in and not change the aesthetics of the area. Also, the bylaw cannot be intended to prohibit outdoor cannabis cultivation in the municipality.

For cultivators operating in a designated cultivation district, the setback shall be no greater than 25 feet. For cultivators operating in a town with a designated cultivation district but outside the cultivation district, the setback shall be no greater than 50 feet. If a town does not have a cultivation district, the setback shall be no greater than 50 feet. If a town has no zoning, the setback shall be no greater than 10 feet. This means, by default, a town will automatically inherit 50-foot setbacks for outdoor cultivators on January 1, 2025. There is no clear understanding of how to measure the setbacks, and what could happen if a licensee is not within the setbacks.

Similar to the setbacks in Section 16, this section is regressive and it will harm the market, especially outdoor cultivators, and stands in conflict with the original intent of the enabling statute, Act 164 (2020), to transition Vermont's legacy market equitably. We hope to remove these to remove the cultivation districts from the law in 2025.

This section requires the CCB to work with local stakeholders to assess the impact of Act 166's setbacks, cultivation districts, and rebuttable presumption for outdoor cultivators.