Spanberger’s marijuana bill changes rejected by Virginia legislature

The sponsor of Senate legislation that creates a retail marijuana market in Virginia by the beginning of next year said she hoped Gov. Abigail Spanberger now will sign the legislation sent back to her minus her amendments.

In a statement after the General Assembly used a parliamentary process April 22 to offset the need for a supermajority vote to overturn Spanberger’s substitute bill, state Sen. Lashrecse Aird said the action “reflects our commitment to a framework that expands access to a safe, legal market” instead of tacking on additional requirements that could hinder it.

Aird, D-Henrico County, said she knew that Spanberger agreed with lawmakers about the importance of having a regulated market, “there are clear differences in approach” that prompted the governor’s substitute legislation.

During the reconvened session in Richmond, both the Senate and House of Delegates agreed that Spanberger’s substitute should be “passed by for the day” and reconsidered at another time. Since the session was only a day long and there are no subsequent meetings planned, passing it by essentially killed Spanberger’s amendments and restored the legislation to its original form as passed earlier this year.

The move was significant because under Virginia law, a vote to pass a bill by requires a simple majority for passage rather than a standard two-thirds majority had the bill been debated. It also reinforces the appearance of party peace between Democrat Spanberger and the Democratic-controlled General Assembly.

Democrats hold 21 seats in the Senate and 64 in the House. A two-thirds majority would have required six GOP senators and three Republicans in the House join the Democrats in voting against the amendments. During the regular session, Republicans stood united behind opposition to the retail market.

“This decision reflects our commitment to a framework that expands access to a safe, legal market, supports small and equity-focused businesses, and protects the progress made on criminal justice reform,” Aird said. “The governor now has the opportunity to respond to the outpouring of concern and sign the bill in its enrolled form.”

The House of Delegates agreed to passing by the measure on a voice vote. In the Senate, the 21-18 vote was along party lines and happened after Senate Republicans sought clarity on what the pass-by meant.

“If the motion to pass these bills by for the day is granted, that means that the governor’s amendments or recommendations on each of the bills will be rejected. Is that accurate?” asked Senate Minority Leader Ryan McDougle, R-Hanover County.

After a few moments, Hashmi said it would. She also confirmed McDougle’s inquiry about the options Spanberger has.

What did the governor want?

Spanberger’s suggestions would have rolled back the start of the retail market from Jan. 1, 2027 to July 1, 2027, restrict the number of stores allowed to sell marijuana from 350 in the original legislation to 200 before January 2029, drop the per-transaction size from 2.5 to 2 ounces, and maintain a 6% cannabis state sales tax that would jump to 8% in 2029. It also calls for local governments to have authority to impose 1-3.5% taxes – all in addition to existing retail sales and use taxes.

The sponsors of the measure – Aird, and Del. Paul Krizek, D-Fairfax County – opposed Spanberger’s amendments, saying in a joint statement her substitute essentially watered down the original intent of the legislation, They also said the amendments undercut extensive work by the Joint Commission to Oversee the Transition of the Commonwealth into a Cannabis Retail Market, a panel Krizek and Aird lead that did all the legwork for the legislation.

“These changes reduce the number of available licenses, delay the launch of retail sales and impose high barriers to entry, resulting in revenue losses, delayed economic opportunity for market participants and the elimination of investment to small businesses. These barriers do not eliminate demand; it simply redirects it back to the illicit market,” their statement read.

“The governor’s substitute represents a significant departure from the framework passed by the General Assembly, raising serious concerns about fairness, access and public safety,” it continued. “By making the legal market harder to access, this proposal allows the illicit market to continue to thrive in every corner store in our commonwealth. That undermines the core goals of legalization and increases the likelihood of untested products, inconsistent potency, and lacks consumer protections.”

What’s next for the Virginia cannabis legislation?

Under Virginia law, Spanberger has seven days to act on what the Assembly sent her. She has the option to sign it, veto it or let it become law without her signature.

Aird said April 22 that she hoped to work with the Spanberger administration to enact the legislation.

The bill was part of a bloc of legislation that the Senate pulled from the daily calendar for action. Included in that bloc were amendments to an assault weapons ban, prescription drug affordability, paid sick leave and a statewide collective bargaining standard for local government employees.

A message left with a Spanberger spokesperson seeking comment on the action has not yet been returned.

Bill Atkinson (he/him/his) has won numerous awards during his 40-year journalism career. A Petersburg native, Bill is a 1984 graduate of Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond with a degree in mass communications. He specializes in coverage of breaking news, crime, government, and local/state/national politics. He is an avid history buff and a lifelong Washington Commanders fan. Reach him at [email protected] with news tips and story suggestions.

This article originally appeared on The Progress-Index: VA governor’s marijuana bill changes rejected by Assembly

Reporting by Bill Atkinson, Petersburg Progress-Index / The Progress-Index

USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect