“I think that there is an appetite for the House to express its opinion on it,“ bill sponsor Rep. Brian Stewart, R-Ashville, told reporters at a Thursday press conference. ”Our goal is to allow members to legislate on this issue while acknowledging that we have had the advantage of seeing two years' worth of debate on this.”
His bill has a few high-level differences from a measure the Senate approved in February as Senate Bill 56.
- Where the Senate looked to cap home-grow plants at six per household; H.B. 160 would maintain Issue 2’s 12-plant cap.
- Where the Senate looked to prohibit consumption to “only in a private residence;” H.B. 160 would allow consumption on any residential parcel but not in public spaces.
- Where the Senate looked to cap edibles at 100mg per package; H.B. 160 contains no such language.
- Where the Senate looked to prohibit all sharing of any kind; H.B. 160 would allow the sharing of home grown marijuana within the household to Ohioans of legal age.
Perhaps the biggest difference between the two chambers comes in H.B. 160’s proposal to move all intoxicating hemp products — marketed to minors and readily available at gas stations and convenience stores — to dispensaries.
“If it gets you high, it goes through a dispensary — period,” Stewart said.
The Senate’s proposal does not mention intoxicating hemp at all.
But there are significant changes H.B. 160 proposes compared to Issue 2, which Ohio voters passed with 57% approval.
Like Senate Bill 56, H.B. 160 looks to cap the potency of THC extracts at 70%, with the intention to give the Ohio Division of Cannabis control the rule-making authority to increase the cap.
And, while H.B. 160 would maintain the state’s 10% excise tax on recreational sales, it changes where the state puts those funds. Issue 2 set it up to give communities with dispensaries tax kickbacks and direct a portion of the revenues into a social equity fund. H.B. 160 would sunset similar local kickbacks after five years, eliminate the social equity fund, and divert the rest of the revenue to the state’s general fund.
In comparison, S.B. 56 initially looked to raise the tax to 15% and direct all revenues to the state’s general fund, but all tax-related language was taken out before it was approved. The governor, meanwhile, has moved to double the tax to 20% and reroute the revenues.
H.B. 160 mirrors S.B. 56 in several ways, including mutual aims to create an expungement protocol for Ohioans who have low-level marijuana possession offenses. Both the House and Senate proposals would require a $50 filing fee from the individual.
Both bills also look to block the cannabis industry from marketing to minors; grant employers the explicit authority to enforce a drug-free workplace; and create specific legal penalties for driving under the influence.
Adrienne Robbins, deputy executive director of the Ohio Cannabis Coalition, told reporters Thursday that the advocacy organization is still combing through H.B. 160’s provisions and taking the pulse of its industry members.
“However, we do think this is a really positive step forward,” Robbins said. “When you look at the Senate bill and the different iterations of it that came out, I think this is another step forward and it does make us feel like lawmakers are listening to us, but then maybe more importantly, listening to consumers' concerns as well.”
Robbins characterized the bill as a reasonable guardrail that would help Ohio maintain its competitiveness with other states' recreational markets and the illegal market.
For more stories like this, sign up for our Ohio Politics newsletter. It’s free, curated, and delivered straight to your inbox every Thursday evening.
Avery Kreemer can be reached at 614-981-1422, on X, via email, or you can drop him a comment/tip with the survey below.
About the Author
