Las Vegas Approves Cannabis Consumption Lounges
In a vote held this week, Las Vegas’s City Council approved marijuana consumption lounges. The vote was specifically to decide whether to approve or deny a motion from one council member who wanted to ban the lounges. But the Council denied the motion in a 5-1 vote, clearing the way for the regulation of these businesses. Las Vegas’s decision to move forward with consumption lounges comes on the heels of Nevada marijuana officials finalizing the regulatory framework to allow the state’s legal cannabis market to include public consumption spaces. Including such businesses is expected to boost the state’s tourism industry.
Denver Bill Makes Cannabis Delivery Easier
A recent decision from Denver’s City Council will make it easier to own and operate a cannabis delivery business in the city. The bill would significantly reduce the fees necessary to run a cannabis delivery business. If the measure is signed by the mayor, it would reduce the fee for retail delivery licenses from $2,000 to $25. The costs for other necessary permits and licensing would also be far less. The legislation also protects social equity applicants seeking access to the cannabis delivery market as it would prevent retail locations from creating their delivery services. The hope is that the bill will reinvigorate cannabis delivery while paving the way for more social equity in the industry.
Oklahomans Won’t See Cannabis on November’s Ballot
Oklahoma voters will not see a question regarding cannabis legalization on the ballot this November. The group behind the campaign for State Question 820, Oklahomans for Sensible Marijuana Laws, asked the state Supreme Court to instruct the Election Board to include the adult-use legalization question on November’s ballot after the secretary of state’s office failed to complete the signature verification process on time. The Supreme Court denied the advocate groups’ request. In prior years, the secretary of state’s office only had to count the signatures. However, they were tasked with the verification and failed to complete it on time. According to the ruling, there was an issue with the company that the office hired to outsource the verification process.