NJ's Amended Medical Marijuana Law: Permits Needed for Alternative Treatment Center
Amendments to the Compassionate Use Medical Cannabis Act create new opportunities for applicants to who wish to operate an alternative treatment center.
September 26, 2019 at 12:00 PM
5 minute read
On July 2, 2019, Governor Phil Murphy signed the Jake Honig Compassionate Use Medical Cannabis Act into law. This law amended the New Jersey Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act, N.J.S.A. 24:6i-2 et seq., which is now known as the Jake Honig Compassionate Use Medical Cannabis Act (CUMCA).
The amendments to CUMCA create new opportunities for applicants to apply to operate an alternative treatment center (ATC). Previously, New Jersey law only permitted applicants to apply for vertically integrated licenses. Under CUMCA, the permit process includes three different permit types, and three categories of permits. The new permit types are medical cannabis cultivator, dispensary and manufacturer permits, and are to be applied for individually. The vertically integrated ATC will continue to be able to cultivate, manufacture and dispense. The categories of permits are traditional, conditional and microbusiness permits.
An applicant would apply for a permit to operate an ATC and simultaneously apply for a permit endorsement authorizing the ATC to cultivate, manufacture or dispense usable marijuana.
Should an applicant be selected to operate an ATC, the applicant will be deemed to hold the permit only for the activity it was authorized to conduct (cultivate, manufacture or dispense), and a vertically integrated ATC will be deemed to concurrently hold a medical cannabis cultivator, manufacturer and dispensary permit.
At the time that an applicant applies for a permit, it will be able to select the appropriate application for a traditional, conditional or a microbusiness permit.
|The Conditional Permit
A conditional permit allows local (at least one significantly involved person in the organization applying for the permit has to have resided in New Jersey for at least two years as of the date of the application), non-experienced and not significantly capitalized applicants entry into the cannabis market. It provides groups with less capital, and who cannot immediately demonstrate that they meet all the requirements of the application, a period of 120 days after submission of their application to satisfy the requirements of the application, such as to obtain financing, secure property, or establish site security. It should be noted that at least one-third of the total permits issued for each type of permit endorsement will be conditional permits.
|The Traditional Permit
An applicant applying for a traditional permit needs to satisfy all of the requirements of the application upon submission and does not require a New Jersey resident to be significantly involved.
|The Microbusiness Permit
A microbusiness requires 100% of the ownership interest to be held by current New Jersey residents who have resided in New Jersey for at least the past two consecutive years, and at least 51% of the owners, directors, officers,or employees of the microbusiness be residents of the municipality (or a bordering municipality) in which the microbusiness will be located. At least 10% of the total permits issued for each type of permit are designated for and only issued to microbusinesses, and at least 25% of the total permits issued will be issued to microbusinesses.
CUMCA also creates the Cannabis Regulatory Commission (CRC) to be the new governing body of the medical marijuana program. Until such time as the CRC is appointed, the New Jersey Department of Health (DOH) will retain the authority. Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 24:6I-24(b)-(c), the CRC will consist of a five-member panel appointed by the governor, with one member upon the recommendation by the Senate President, one member upon the recommendation of the Speaker of the General Assembly, and three members (including the chair) without any recommendation. A vice chair is to be elected by majority vote (including the Senate President's recommended commission member or the Speaker's recommended commission member) at the first meeting called by the chair.
The CRC (or the DOH if the CRC is not in place) will, for each request for application, determine the number of permits and permit endorsements to be issued in a manner that ensures adequate patient access to medicinal marijuana in each region of New Jersey.
As of the date of this article, no nominees of the CRC have been publicly identified by the Governor, Senate President or the Speaker of the General Assembly; therefore, as indicated above, the DOH remains the governing body.
CUMCA also provides that the governing body will begin accepting and processing applications for new medical cannabis cultivators, manufacturers and dispensaries no later than 90 days after the effective date of CUMCA, which is Sept. 30, 2019, or upon adoption of the rules and regulations by the CRC, whichever occurs later. N.J.S.A. 24:6I-16(c) requires that the CRC promulgate rules and regulations to effectuate its purpose by Dec. 29, 2019 (180 days after the effective date of CUMCA). As such, we anticipate that there would be a new request for applications prior to Dec. 29, 2019.
For more information on any of these permits, or the overall application process, refer to the governing statute and regulation, which can be found at N.J.S.A. 24:6I-1 et seq. and N.J.A.C. 8:64-1 et seq.
Michael F. Schaff is a shareholder and co-chair of the Cannabis Law, Health Law and Corporate teams at Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer in Woodbridge. He is co-chair of the NJSBA's Cannabis Law Committee. Lisa Gora is an attorney with Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer. Her practice is focused on corporate, health and cannabis law. She is secretary of the NJSBA's Cannabis Law Committee.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All$10 Million Settlement Reached for Baby Injured by Disconnected Ventilator
3 minute readJury Awards Horizon $2.4 Million for Fraudulent Billing Against 3 NJ Health Care Providers
2 minute readVirtua Drug Tests Pregnancy Patients Without Consent, NJ Attorney General Alleges in New Suit
3 minute readNJ Supreme Court Considers Ability to Add Nonparty Doctors to Med Mal Verdict Sheets
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1AI: An Enhancement, Not a Replacement for Attorneys
- 2Fowler White Burnett Opens Jacksonville Office Focused on Transportation Practice
- 3Auditor Finds 'Significant Deficiency' in FTC Accounting to Tune of $7M
- 4'A Mockery' of Deposition Rules: Walgreens Wins Sanctions Dispute Over Corporate Witness Allegedly Unfamiliar With Company
- 5Call for Nominations: TLI's Pennsylvania Legal Awards 2025
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250