The Definitive Insider’s Guide to New Hampshire Cannabis Legalization History 2013 – 2025 Chapter One (of 8)

Limited Therapeutic Cannabis is Legalized

On July 23, 2013, now NH US Senator and then NH Governor Maggie Hassen signed legislation legalizing the state’s current Therapeutic Cannabis Program (TCP) after the majority Democratic NH House passed it 221-179 and the roughly evenly divided Senate passed it 18-6 with all Democratics voting in favor together with 7 Republicans joining them. The first of now seven medical cannabis dispensaries opened in 2016. It was a highly restricted program with qualifying patient conditions mostly limited to serious or terminal illness, significant obstacles to patient qualification, prohibitions on licensee advertising and outdoor cultivation, strict personnel and compliance guidance, and requiring each licensee to operate an insular, vertically integrated operation barring sale of cannabis or hemp products not produced in-house.

Relaxing Personal Restrictions

In July 2017, possession of three-quarters of an ounce of flower or the equivalent in manufactured products such as hashish and tinctures was decriminalized from a felony carrying jailtime and heavy fines to a violation carrying a maximum $100 fine. Possession and sale above this modest amount, except for registered medical cannabis patients (who may possess up to two ounces) remain a serious offense to this day.

In 2019, Republican Governor Sununu signed legislation providing annulment of misdemeanor marijuana convictions.

Adult-Use Legalization Gains Traction After Five Years

Despite the NH House approving adult-use commercial legalization numerous times between the commencement of legal medical sales in 2016 and 2021, the NH Senate rejected all these often substantially in anticipation of the Governor’s publicly stated intention of vetoing any such bills that might reach his desk. But then in 2022 this annual political kabuki theater took a promising turn.

In April, the University of NH published the results of a poll of NH residents showing 74% public support for recreational legalization across the state.

In June of that year, the NH Cannabis Party was founded to advocate for and endorse and support candidates for statewide office supporting common-sense cannabis legalization with myself as its first executive director. During this election year 2022, the NH Cannabis Party ultimately endorsed nearly 200 candidates with their active consent, each represented on the Party’s website with their photos, capsule write-ups about each candidate, and links to the candidates’ websites. Support was from across the political spectrum – about 40% Republicans, some Libertarians, and the rest Democrats including candidates for governor, senate, state rep, executive council and other state offices.

In a phone interview at the time with the local newspaper Conway Daily Sun, I said legalization wouldn’t just create jobs for growers, dispensaries and such, but that it could also spur innovation in pharmaceuticals and be a boon for New Hampshire’s tourism industry. The website also contained a lengthy list of businesses that stood to benefit from legalization and included legal, finance, general contractors, public relations and regulatory compliance. I added that common-sense reform would involve legalization for adults over 21 years old, and there would also still be prohibitions on driving while intoxicated.

During the campaign, senate candidate Dr. Bill Marsh stated: “My website clearly says I support legalization provided we pay attention to public health concerns. My opponent clearly stated at the Tamworth event that he opposes legalization, which he has done over the years. So, I believe it’s entirely logical the NH Cannabis Party would do this.”

State rep Anita Burroughs was also endorsed stating: “Nathaniel Gurien of Sandwich is the mover and shaker behind this movement. He would like to see cannabis move from the black market to the mainstream. As part of this, he is championing the legalization of cannabis in New Hampshire. I support this effort, and NH would be following in the path of 19 other states, plus D.C. Our neighbors Massachusetts and Maine have legalized marijuana. Cannabis has been demonized as a dangerous drug, a notion that has been widely debunked. It’s time to make it legal in NH and reap the entrepreneurial and tax benefits that it will bring to our state.”

Michael Costable was the lone Carroll County Republican to get an endorsement. He was running (and ultimately won) in House District 8. “The real reason we don’t have legal weed rests with the liquor commission and police union, said Costable. Look at what happens to alcohol sales post legalization (spoiler: they drop). And on that note, I will not support any bill that gives the Liquor Commission monopoly on weed as well.”

Democrat Peaco Todd of Tamworth, running in House District 3, was endorsed as well. “I’ve been a longtime supporter of medical marijuana and am firmly in favor of legalizing cannabis for recreational and other therapeutic uses as long as it’s carefully regulated”, said Todd, calling New Hampshire an island in a sea of legalization. “Failing to regulate it will not prevent its use. What we will be preventing, if legalized and regulated, is, among other things, marijuana that’s been contaminated with other substances, one of the most deadly being fentanyl. Legalized cannabis also has the potential to be a revenue producer for the state. Of course, marijuana, like alcohol, has the potential for abuse and regulations would need to address that issue. But overall, I think legalized cannabis is a win-win for N.H.”

Common Sense Cannabis Legalization Gains Further Momentum

In December 2022, following the 2022 midterm election, NH House Majority Leader Jason Osborne submitted legislation for smart, common-sense cannabis legalization with four of his Republican and three Democratic house colleagues (including House Minority Leader Matthew Wilhelm), as well as one Republican senator and two Democratic senators as original co-sponsors. Many other legislators from across the political spectrum subsequently signed on as cosponsors.

This legislation was crafted by a broad coalition of legalization advocacy groups who had been working on this issue for several years, including NH Cannabis Association, ACLU-NH, Americans for Prosperity, Marijuana Policy Project, NH Cannabis Party and Prime ATC (one of the four current medical cannabis licensees and which changed their company name a couple years ago to: ‘Granite Leaf Cannabis’).

The bill included legalized possession for personal use and home cultivation, extending the 8.5% rooms and meals tax (New Hampshire otherwise has no sales or personal income tax) to include cannabis sales to support property tax relief, education, pension funds, substance abuse prevention, distressed farmers, veterans, impacted communities, municipalities with at least one licensed cannabis retailer and public safety agencies for hiring and training. Also included were low application and license fees, wiping out criminal records for past cannabis offenses, allowing transitioning current medical dispensaries to adult-use and to be able to accept out-of-state medical cards, and exclusive opportunity for all New Hampshire residents with no artificial cap on licenses.

Remarkably, the lead sponsor of this bill, House Majority Leader Jason Osborne, commented on the record that he “hated” his own bill on his belief that legal cannabis as an agricultural crop should be no more overseen by government supervision and regulation than “tomatoes.” However, as a practical legal matter, he understood that at least while cannabis remains illegal under federal law as a dangerous narcotic, some regulatory oversight on the state’s part was necessary in order to protect the program from federal interference Just as when the hemp variety of cannabis was more or less legalized federally in 2018 and much of the suffocating regulatory framework was lifted, many New Hampshire policymakers expressed concern that unnecessary regulation and restrictions would be lifted as soon as possible following eventual federal legalization to keep a level playing field for all New Hampshire residents and licensed operators.

At the time, Sen. Keith Murphy (R-Manchester) was steadfastly opposed to any cap on the number of licenses available to New Hampshire residents but also conceded that that goal might need to be phased in to assure an orderly rollout and avoid the market chaos experienced by other states that moved too quickly on this, largely due to the fact their legalization programs prohibited interstate commerce resulting in oversupply, market pricing below the cost of production, and diversion of excess goods to illegal markets.

Sen. Donovan Fenton (D-Keene) was “all in” for common-sense cannabis legalization and believed as did many of his colleagues that the upcoming session of the New Hampshire legislature represented the most favorable for passage of smart cannabis legalization in 2023.

Lessons Learned and Good Public Policy Applied

Amid growing excitement that 2023 would the year New Hampshire finally passed an inclusive and thoughtful adult-use program, the NH House Commerce and Consumer Affairs committee chaired by Rep. John Hunt held a public hearing on two pending cannabis legalization bills. The first, as previously described, HB639 was crafted by a broad coalition of legalization advocacy groups and industry stakeholders who had been working on this issue for several years with broad bi-partisan support, including sponsorship from both the House majority and minority leaders. The second, HB544 was sponsored by Democratic state reps Richard Eaton and Christine Siebert, et.al. which sought to create monopoly control over the entire New Hampshire cannabis economy by the state owned and operated NH Liquor Commission in a manner like its exclusive sales of liquor and higher alcohol content wine and spirits.

My testimony during this hearing in support of HB639 primarily urged that gun rights, interstate and international commerce, and incentivizing public/private partnerships be considered for inclusion in the “coalition” bill (HB639), and that by contrast

HB 544 would suffocate a vibrant cannabis economy, limit opportunity to a privileged few, and squander a generational opportunity for boosting the overall economy of New Hampshire.

Several opponents of cannabis legalization testified about increased threats to public safety in other currently cannabis legal states largely based upon one-sided surveys showing elevated DWI arrests supposedly involving cannabis. However, upon questioning from committee members, these opponents were unable to identify whether alcohol was also or primarily involved in these incidents, whether the cannabis was derived from the legal or illegal market, or whether cannabis intoxication was actually a factor since a sobriety test for cannabis intoxication is not yet commercially available.

Subsequently, I interviewed Rep. Hunt for an upcoming column in the local Conway Daily Sun newspaper who explained that he was supporting HB544 to establish New Hampshire as a “control state” for cannabis commerce with the Liquor Commission owning 20 retail dispensaries throughout the state operated by one or more selected third-party contractors, unlimited cultivation licenses, existing medical dispensaries prohibited from transitioning to add recreational sales, and no specific provision for cannabis-related taxes or revenue other than undefined “fees.”

I pointed out that a severely restricted number of retail outlets combined with unrestricted cultivation that could only be wholesaled to the Liquor Commission was a prescription for oversupply of product thus incentivizing the black market among other serious defects in the proposal.

Nonetheless, he was adamant that this bill was the only framework that might garner the approval of the New Hampshire Senate and Governor’s office in the face of their overall opposition to enact cannabis legalization at all.

Right after that I called Liquor Commissioner Joe Mollica’s office for an appointment to discuss this issue and cannabis policy in general, and not an hour later state rep Hunt called me back to retract nearly our entire interview stating that he had just been in contact with the Commission who expressed the view that they had no intention or ability of taking such an extensive role in the proposed cannabis economy as contemplated by HB544.

Rep. Hunt went on to say that he apparently misunderstood their intentions and interest and had inadvertently “gotten ahead of his skis” in supporting this initiative. He was therefore going back to supporting the original “coalition” bill (HB639) without significant further revision.

At the following week’s subcommittee and full committee meetings, there was agreement that annulment of previous cannabis convictions would not be included in the final bill, that the Liquor Commission would be the designated regulatory body to be renamed the NH Liquor & Cannabis Commission, and that the issue of independent product testing laboratories would be settled at the regulatory level via rule-making following passage of the legislation.

The consensus of the committee and from further conversation with Rep Hunt after the meeting, the simplest, competitive, optimal and future-proof revenue model to emerge was a retail tax of 5% (lowest in the nation) combined with a 10% tax on commercial cultivation or future imported product (when interstate or international commerce is authorized). This would substitute for extension of the current 8.5% rooms and meals tax to retail cannabis sales as originally included in HB639 as a concession to policymakers who generally oppose enacting any new statewide taxes.

The committee then favorably reported out their final version of the bill which then headed to a full floor vote by the House including these revisions:

Testing was proposed to be done by labs that are independent from companies that produce cannabis.
Provisions to allow home grow and annulment of prior cannabis convictions were removed as a compromise to improve the bill’s chances of enactment this year.
Creation of a new advisory board to the Commission was removed as an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy.
There would be no retail (sales)tax.
Growers were to be taxed at 15 % of their monthly gross revenue and likely extended to importers when interstate and international commerce is authorized.
80% of tax revenue would support an education trust fund, 10 % would fund substance misuse treatment programs, 5% would go to localities that have at least one operational retailer and 5% (up to $1 million) would support public agencies like police and fire departments.
Application, registration and renewal fees would not be capped by the legislation but determined by the Commission nor would there be any statewide cap on the number of businesses that could be licensed.
Existing medical cannabis dispensaries would be permitted to apply for dual licenses to start serving adult consumers.