Take the Due Diligence High Road for Cannabis-Related Leases
Katy Young, managing partner of Ad Astra and the current president of the National Cannabis Bar Association, recently shared insights into leasing retail space for cannabis use.
July 08, 2019 at 04:00 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
SAN FRANCISCO—A recent report by Cushman & Wakefield shows that low vacancy combined with continued high levels of demand in Sacramento have led to rapid growth in asking lease rates, closing the first quarter at $0.68 per square foot per month on a triple net basis. The report does call out that the lofty figure is likely inflated by landlords seeking out cannabis-related industries demanding higher rents, but is also due in part to sustained levels of low vacancy.
Indeed, with medicinal marijuana giving rise to legal sales, cannabis is a hot button these days. And, the real estate landscape is no exception. Katy Young, managing partner of San Francisco-based law firm Ad Astra and the current president of the National Cannabis Bar Association, recently shared insights into the ins and outs of leasing retail space for cannabis use, how long before it's widely accepted by the general public, and cautionary tales about cannabis use leasing.
GlobeSt.com: What advice would you give to a cannabis company looking to lease retail space?
Young: Be sure that your landlord understands that your business functions in the cannabis space, and depending on your state's laws, the landlord may have to participate in the licensing process insofar as being disclosed on the application. You should be careful to negotiate exit ramps in the lease, just in case your business does not obtain a license to operate a cannabis business. You'll want to be able to terminate the lease if you can't operate. Be sure to negotiate about the law of fixtures as well, especially for indoor grows, because the equipment that you affix to the property to run your business could become the landlord's property.
GlobeSt.com: What advice would you give to a landlord who has been sought out by a cannabis company?
Young: Do your due diligence on the tenant: Are they licensed? Compliant? What is the corporate structure? Who will be your guarantor? Include a clause in the lease that allows you audit rights to check to ensure that your tenant is licensed and compliant. If the tenant loses its license, you want to be able to terminate the lease immediately to avoid civil asset forfeiture. Include clauses that allow exit ramps if the tenant does not get a license to operate or loses its license.
GlobeSt.com: Do you think we'll see a day where CBD and cannabis products are widely accepted by both shopping center landlords and the general public?
Young: Oh yes. CBD is very popular among seniors and is already widely available despite still largely remaining illegal federally and in many states. CBD is the non-psychoactive form of the cannabinoids in cannabis, so it won't get you high but it does appear to have the therapeutic properties that many medical patients seek. The stigma is worse than anything. As our society grows used to cannabis in the mainstream, shopping centers and the public generally will embrace cannabis use the way we tolerate cigarettes and alcohol.
GlobeSt.com: Is there a case study where a cannabis or CBD retailer was either turned away or had a license revoked as an example of the confusion and resistance remaining in this market?
Young: There are distance requirements that prevent cannabis businesses from being too close to a school, daycare facility, etc. In Oakland, one of my client's had one of the coveted equity permits and was operating in a permitted space, but then a school moved in next door to them, and they lost their license to operate.
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 AllInsurers Dodge Sherwin-Williams' Claim for $102M Lead Paint Abatement Payment, State High Court Rules
California Federal Court Grants CoStar Group's Motion to Narrow Claims in Move Inc. Trade Secrets Case
California Federal Judge to Hear Arguments in Health Care Clinic's Case Against City of Santa Ana
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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