The hearing, held by the Committee of the Whole and chaired by Council Chairman Phil Mendelson (D), focused on B26-0259, B26-0346, B26-0522 and B26-0654. The measures deal with retailer product preparation, conditional license timelines, medical cannabis beverages and how certain location and protest rules apply to licensed businesses.

Much of the testimony was supportive of B26-0259 and B26-0654, with patients, business representatives and industry participants arguing that the proposals would make common-sense improvements to D.C.’s medical cannabis system.

B26-0259 would create a retailer craft preparation endorsement, allowing licensed medical cannabis retailers to prepare certain products at their licensed premises, including edibles, topicals and prerolls. Supporters said the bill would give dispensaries more flexibility while expanding options for patients and caregivers.

Several witnesses, however, asked lawmakers to make changes before advancing the proposal, including increasing dosage limits and allowing solventless mechanical extraction. Others called for refrigerated items to be allowed, arguing that such products can be safely regulated and would give patients access to a broader range of medical cannabis products.

James Kahn, co-chair of the Regulated Cannabis Association of the District of Columbia and operator of Takoma Wellness Center and Cookies DC, spoke in favor of B26-0259, saying independent retailers need more ways to compete and innovate. He urged the council to avoid placing overly restrictive production and inventory limits directly in statute, and said changes such as allowing solventless mechanical extraction and refrigerated products would improve flexibility without compromising safety.

Kahn also supported the beverage legislation, arguing that if patients are going to consume cannabis beverages, they should be able to obtain them through licensed dispensaries where products are tested, labeled and sold by trained staff. He said the goal should be a regulatory framework that works in practice, “not just on paper.”

Caroline Crandall, CEO and co-owner of Green Theory, also supported B26-0654, saying beverages could expand patient options and create new opportunities for collaboration. However, she asked lawmakers to amend the bill’s THC language to include all isomers of tetrahydrocannabinol and THCA, warning against creating a loophole similar to those seen in the hemp market.

Crandall opposed extending conditional licenses under B26-0346, saying D.C.’s medical cannabis market is already saturated. She said continuing to extend licenses that have not become operational “rewards speculation rather than investment.” She also said if lawmakers move forward with B26-0522, they should apply any grandfathering provisions based on the date the bill is enacted, rather than using an earlier cutoff that could impact businesses already moving through the process.

B26-0654, the Medical Cannabis Beverage Product Amendment Act of 2026, would create a medical cannabis beverage production endorsement, allowing certain alcohol manufacturers to produce nonalcoholic medical cannabis beverages for licensed medical cannabis manufacturers. The bill would also create a medical cannabinoids import endorsement, expand courier-related authority and clarify tax provisions related to medical cannabis and medical cannabis products.

Grace Hyde, vice president of manufacturing at Phyto Cultivation, called the beverage proposal a “really creative solution,” saying beverage production lines can require significant capital and physical space that medical cannabis operators may not have. Hyde said the measure would not be required for all beverage production, but would give operators another option.

Hyde also urged lawmakers to tighten language around imported cannabinoids, saying the proposal should clearly prevent the importation of intoxicating THC variants and avoid recreating problems seen in the national hemp-derived cannabinoid market.

A spokesperson for the D.C. Brewers Guild testified in favor of B26-0654, saying the proposal would create new opportunities for local beverage producers while supporting D.C.’s medical cannabis program. Justin Cox, founder of Atlas Brew Works and president of the D.C. Brewers Guild, said local brewers already have canning equipment and experience producing beverages, making the proposal a way to use existing capacity to help the medical cannabis market.

A spokesperson for the D.C. Association of Beverage Alcohol Wholesalers spoke in opposition, raising concerns that the bill could blur lines between alcohol and medical cannabis regulation. Risa Hirao, speaking on behalf of the association, said alcohol and medical cannabis laws should not be considered in isolation as the two areas increasingly overlap.

The proposal also drew opposition from some cannabis manufacturers. Mark Nagib, CEO of Pink Fox, said his company opposes both the craft preparation and beverage bills, arguing that licensed manufacturers have invested heavily in facilities and should not see core business opportunities shifted elsewhere. On the beverage proposal, Nagib told lawmakers, “Let us do what we signed up to do.”

Nagib also raised concerns that allowing retailers to prepare products could place additional pressure on D.C.’s limited testing infrastructure. He said D.C. has only one working cannabis laboratory, and adding the potential for many more product producers could create a bottleneck in testing.

Fred Moosally, director of the Alcoholic Beverage and Cannabis Administration, testified in favor of B26-0346, B26-0654 and B26-0259, saying the bills would continue the medical cannabis program’s positive momentum. He said the craft preparation bill would “help to expand the variety of medical cannabis products offered to patients and caregivers.”

Moosally also recommended changes to B26-0654, including allowing medical cannabis manufacturers to have the option of partnering with a brewery, winery or distillery to make beverages that could be sold only to patients at licensed dispensaries. He also recommended extending the period of time that valid licenses remain in effect from two years to three years.

B26-0346 would give conditional medical cannabis license holders an additional year before their licenses expire. The extension would apply to conditional licenses for cultivation centers, retailers, internet retailers, manufacturers, couriers and testing laboratories.

Some witnesses opposed the bill, arguing that D.C.’s medical cannabis market is already saturated and that extending conditional licenses could worsen competition for existing operators. Others said the extension makes sense, particularly for businesses that have struggled to secure real estate, financing or other requirements needed to move from a conditional license to a fully operational license.

The most divisive testimony centered on B26-0522, the Medical Cannabis Process Improvement Amendment Act of 2025, introduced by Councilmember Charles Allen (D) and co-sponsored by several other councilmembers. The bill would remove the term “daycare center” from current law and add “child development facility” to the list of establishments that trigger a 300-foot location restriction for medical cannabis license holders.

The measure would also allow an Advisory Neighborhood Commission to protest the issuance, renewal or transfer of an internet retailer license.

Several witnesses spoke against B26-0522, saying the location restriction would be unfair to licensed businesses, especially because of its retroactive application. Opponents argued that licensed dispensaries are tightly regulated, rarely if ever sell to minors and that pushing legal operators away from certain areas would do more to benefit the illicit market than protect public safety.

Kahn said that as the father of two teenagers, keeping cannabis away from minors is deeply important to him, but he argued that restricting licensed dispensaries would push consumers toward unregulated sellers with no ID checks, laboratory testing, labeling standards or accountability.

Supporters of B26-0522, including some residents and a representative of anti-cannabis group Smart Approaches to Marijuana, argued that the bill would improve public safety and help reduce youth exposure to cannabis. They said medical cannabis businesses should be subject to clear location rules near facilities serving children.

Martha Fitzgerald, a Ward 6 resident, urged lawmakers to pass B26-0522, saying the current process places too much burden on daycares and neighbors to challenge dispensary applications after businesses have already moved forward. She said residents near a proposed dispensary on a mostly residential street prepared a protest with 43 signatures, but ABCA rejected it because residents did not have standing to protest a cannabis license.

Fitzgerald said she does not oppose dispensaries opening in D.C., but argued the government should care where they locate and how they operate. She said daycares should not be left to protect children from exposure to cannabis marketing and use, saying, “That’s the government’s job.”

Karen Hughes, an ANC 6B09 commissioner, also spoke in support of B26-0522, saying ANC 6B supports a well-regulated medical cannabis market but wants clearer rules to reduce conflict between businesses, neighbors and child-serving facilities. Hughes said ANC 6B has seen cases where a proposed license was across the street from a daycare center and another shared a property line with a Montessori school.

Hughes also backed giving ANCs standing on internet retailer licenses, arguing that those operations can raise traffic and parking concerns similar to storefront businesses. She said aligning cannabis protest rules more closely with alcohol protest rules would create more predictability for applicants and communities.

Will Jones, director of community engagement and outreach at Smart Approaches to Marijuana, testified in support of B26-0522 and criticized the current structure of D.C.’s medical cannabis system. Jones argued that the word “medical” has lost meaning in D.C. because of self-certification and the large number of dispensaries operating in the city.

Children’s National Hospital representatives also testified in support of B26-0522 while opposing B26-0259 and B26-0654 as currently drafted. Dr. Siva Kalia Murthy, medical director of addiction programs at Children’s National, said the hospital is seeing more children and adolescents affected by cannabis, including young children with accidental ingestion, adolescents with cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome and youth with cannabis use disorder and mental health concerns.

Children’s National recommended stronger safeguards if lawmakers move forward with the craft preparation and beverage bills, including child-resistant and opaque packaging, clear THC labeling, warning labels and potency limits. Dr. Alicia Rowland, a pediatric emergency physician at Children’s National, described treating a toddler who had eaten a cannabis edible that appeared to be a regular chocolate bar and later required intensive care.

Moosally said ABCA opposes B26-0522 in its current form, even as the agency supports the other three medical cannabis bills heard Thursday. He said ABCA supports allowing new, renewal and transfer applications for internet retailer licenses to be protested by parties with standing, as well as adding peace, order and quiet as a protest ground for medical cannabis retailers and internet retailers.

However, Moosally said the agency does not support the proposed child development facility buffer as written, saying it would apply retroactively and would make the medical cannabis protest process less consistent with alcohol licensing. He also said a proposed protest ground dealing with proximity or undue exposure to children is legally problematic because of vagueness, and suggested more specific alternative language.

The hearing comes as D.C. continues to make changes to its medical cannabis system while remaining blocked from launching a regulated adult-use marijuana market due to ongoing congressional restrictions. If advanced, the four bills would further reshape the District’s medical cannabis program by expanding product options, adjusting license timelines, clarifying beverage production rules and revisiting how location restrictions apply to licensed operators.