Karen DeWitt of National Public Radio reported recently that the legislation has changed in the wake of discussions that came up during state budget talks in March. The legislation, A.1617/S.1527, is titled the Marijuana Regulation and Taxation Act. It contains several changes from previous iterations of marijuana legalization bills introduced both in past years and earlier this year. The original legislation and the updated bills are sponsored by Crystal People Stokes, D-Buffalo and Assembly majority leader, and Sen. Liz Krueger, D-Manhattan. Among the changes are:

¯ clarifies that personal cultivation cannot be banned by local jurisdictions,

¯ clarifies that regulating/prohibiting marijuana retail licenses at the local level is vested with cities, towns and villages,

¯ provides public outreach and education on license opportunities and other applicable regulations,

In this April 26, 2019 photo, a sample Greenbox filled with CBD and hemp-based products is shown on a table in Atlanta, Ga. New York entrepreneurs Andrew Farrior and Ethan Jackson plan to launch Greenbox.NYC as a subscription and delivery business for hemp and other legal cannabis-related products. (AP Photo/Elijah Nouvelage)

¯ provides maintenance of efforts related to state education funding,

¯ provides a more robust social equity plan that prioritizes licenses for small minority and women owned businesses,

¯ provides labor peace requirements for businesses with more than 25 employees, and

¯ establishes a revolving loan fund to assist license applicants obtain necessary capital, with a priority to give loans to small, minority and women owned businesses.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo initially wanted a provision legalizing cannabis to be included in the state budget passed April 1. He withdrew it after it became obvious lawmakers couldn’t resolve thorny questions about the details of the legislation.

Now, according to the Associated Press, those same details could prevent a vote before lawmakers wrap up their session June.

“It makes me nervous that they’re saying that because they told me they had the votes and they were going to pass it,” Cuomo said during an appearance with Evan Dawson on WXXI’s Connections with Evan Dawson in New York City. “The legislative leaders said they didn’t want to pass it in what’s called the budget, which we do in April, because the legislature’s point is always let’s separate out policy matters and pass them separate.

“I fought to keep marijuana in the budget because I’m a little dubious about the legislature taking votes on difficult issues where they don’t want to decide outside of the budget. But they’re now saying ‘well we need the governor to weigh in.’ That’s a bad sign, Evan, legislatively. That means they’re having trouble getting the votes. And that’s a different situation that they had said here before.

The Senate said they supported it. And the Senate they had the votes. When they now say “we need the governor to come in to make this happen” that’s a different tune they’re now singing, right? So that has me troubled because they never said that to me. They always told me that they had the votes and it was just a more complicated piece of legislation, which it is by the way. It has to be done right if it’s done. But, that’s a signal that they don’t have the political support and that’s a problem.”

One big question is whether legalization will be paired with a proposal to expunge the criminal records of people arrested in the past for pot possession. Many lawmakers, including Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie, D-Bronx, say it’s essential such a measure be included as a way to address decades of racial and economic disparities in the enforcement of marijuana laws. Through May 15, there hadn’t been any committee votes in the Assembly or Senate.

Lawmakers in Albany point to the experience in New Jersey, where a vote on legislation to legalize marijuana and expunge old pot convictions was put off earlier this year.

Sen. Liz Krueger, D-Manhattan, told Gothamist this week that passage of a legalization bill would require Cuomo to make the issue a priority in end-of-session negotiations with lawmakers.

The new version of the bill also expands the state’s medical marijuana program. It would eliminate the requirement that only New Yorkers with 17 specific diseases could have access to the treatment, and leaves it up to the doctor and the patient to decide whether the drug is appropriate to use.

Cuomo said Friday that he interprets such comments “as legislative code for ‘we don’t have the votes.'”

WHAT’S IN THE LEGISLATION?

The legislation’s text would amend the state Public Health Law to remove marijuana as a schedule 1 hallucinogen on the state’s controlled substances list and allow home cultivation of up to six marijuana plants by those ages 21 and over. The state’s Civil Practice Law and Rules would be amended to exclude marijuana possession from being grounds for assets to be seized as part of a forfeiture action. The state’s Vehicle and Traffic Law would change to add marijuana and concentrated cannabis to the definition of drugs for purposes of driving under the influence.

Changes to the state’s Penal Law would define marijuana and include a definition for concentrated cannabis as a controlled substance. Marijuana paraphernalia would now be excluded from the definitions for the charge of criminal use of drug paraphernalia while seven sections of the penal law relating to illegal possession and sale of marijuana would be repealed.

New sections would be added to the state Penal Law to establish conditions for legal personal use and cultivation of marijuana and penalties for violations of those conditions. Such growing would have to be legal under local ordinances; living plants and any marijuana produced from those plants in excess of two pounds would have to be kept in a locked space and not be visible by normal unaided vision from a public space. A town, village or city could enact and enforce “reasonable regulations” to regulate marijuana growing as long as the violation only results in an infraction and a fine — though no town, city or village would be able to prohibit people from growing their own marijuana.

There would also be prohibitions added to the Penal Law defining first-, second- and third-degree unlicensed sale of marijuana.

Making marijuana legal wouldn’t mean people could smoke marijuana anywhere they please. The law would add a section to the state Public Health Law that includes marijuana on the list of substances subject to the state’s Indoor Clean Air Act while the Alcoholic Beverage Control Law would regulate marijuana products. The state’s Alcoholic Beverage Control Law would be updated to restrict where marijuana can be used. That prohibition would include anywhere tobacco use is banned, such as parks and public spaces, school grounds, smoking or ingesting marijuana while in a vehicle. State law would include a stipulation that bans use of fake identification by those under the age of 21 to buy marijuana products, much like alcohol sales. Those under the age of 21 would not be able to purchase or possess marijuana; those who are found in possession of marijuana could face penalties and be required to complete a drug awareness program.

Much to Speaker Heastie’s approval, Stokes’ and Krueger’s legislation does clear criminal records for those accused of marijuana possession in the past, seals records for those who have already been convicted, suspends court proceedings and adjournments in contemplation of dismissal for exceptional circumstances in current marijuana-related violations, vacates convictions in cases where the offense would no longer be considered a crime and provides for motions to resentence people who have been convicted of marijuana offenses under the state’s Penal Law before the legislation took effect.

Lastly, the legislation would add a new section to the state Finance Law to establish a marijuana microbusiness and marijuana license revolving loan fund while appropriating $5 million to the state Liquor Authority to administer the program. Stokes and Krueger wrote that the Marijuana Regulation and Taxation Act could realize a projected $436 million in tax revenue, while New York City could accrue an additional $336 million in tax revenue. This legislation directs 50 percent of the tax revenue to establish the Community Grants Reinvestment Fund, aimed at giving back to the communities that have been the most disproportionately affected by current marijuana laws. Money would also be set aside for police enforcement of safe driving rules, research, drug prevention and drug treatment.

DO THE CHANGES ADDRESS LOCAL CONCERNS?

Locally, County Executive George Borrello sent a letter to Cuomo with his own list of questions and suggestions about a legalized marijuana policy. Among those concerns is the fact the state may not reach its revenue projections despite the social cost.

“Our communities and businesses are already heavily burdened here in New York,” Borrello said in an open letter to Cuomo in February. “Adding legalized marijuana into the mix will add to that burden and, in my opinion, the potential revenue will not cover the cost to our communities. If this legalization is poorly thought out and rushed through the process we will pay a heavy price both economically and socially.”

Borrello’s other concerns include:

¯ that there should be limitations on how marijuana would be sold as well as when and where it can be used;

¯ marijuana should have its own open container law similar to the way alcohol consumption is currently regulated;

¯ consuming marijuana in any establishment with a liquor license should be illegal;

¯ selling marijuana-laced food products should not be permitted;

¯ the use of marijuana in any public assembly venue should be illegal;

¯ the state should consider reimbursement to train police officers to identify people operating motor vehicles under the influence of marijuana.

“The purpose of this letter is to share my thoughts not only as a countywide elected official but also as a local businessperson on important steps and concerns I believe you and the state legislature should consider as you move forward with the legalization of recreational marijuana,” Borrello wrote. “Although I personally oppose it, I realize that it appears to be inevitable and I want to prepare our county for it.”