Two competing California bills with potentially costly implications relative to Cannabis product labeling made their way to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk Tuesday.

The two proposed laws are creating a showdown between youth advocacy groups and the Cannabis Industry.

Assembly Bill 1207, known as the Cannabis Candy Child Safety Act, prohibits the sale, distribution or manufacturing of cannabis products with packaging and labeling attractive to children. The bill defines the packaging as promotional material that displays “humans, animals, fruits and vegetables,” the proposed legislation authored by Assemblywoman Jacqui Irwin, D-Camarillo, reads.

It passed Sept. 14, with both Sen. Mike McGuire, D-Healdsburg, and Assemblyman Jim Wood, D-Santa Rosa, voting in favor. With the legislative session ending Friday, McGuire, now the leader in the Senate, was unavailable for comment on the legislation.

Youth advocates and supporters of the bill point to the “recent surge of child poisonings and hospitalizations due to accidental ingestion of cannabis products, many designed to mimic popular children’s candies and snacks,” according to Zack Kaldveer, spokesman for the California Public Health Institute.

The youth safety advocacy group cited a California Poison Control report on annual cannabis exposures indicating exposures rose from “below 200 in 2010 to over 1,600 by 2020,” with half involving children.

But if the bill is signed, the California Cannabis Industry Association estimates most cannabis businesses will each need to pay between $100,000 and $300,000 to create new labels.

Introduced as a counter measure and passed two weeks ago with McGuire and Wood also voting in favor, Senate Bill 540 instructs the California Department of Cannabis Control to revisit packaging and labeling restrictions “in line with evolving science” and to create “a brochure encouraging responsible cannabis use,” statewide cannabis trade groups wrote in a letter to the governor.

Albeit using very different approaches, each side says they want to protect children. But industry advocates contend the broad sweep of icons and art is far too restrictive and hypocritical given these types of labels and images such as the Budweiser Clydesdales and Fat Cat wines are also used by alcoholic beverage companies.

“Yes, we’d like to see more regulation of alcohol advertising too,” said Jim Keddy, executive director of Youth Forward, a Sacramento-based youth advocacy organization.

In response to the industry’s criticism of the bill’s prohibitions as “counterproductive” and “costly” to cannabis businesses needing to take down all its promotional materials, Keddy said this: “In our view, the long-term benefit outweighs the short-term cost.”

Local impact

Businesses such as Sunbright Gardens, a small cottage brand and cannabis grower located 18 miles north of Covelo in Mendocino County, displays the image of a woman on its label. Sunbright grows vegetables on over 64 acres, with an eighth of an acre dedicated to cannabis.

“A veto is our only chance. This is going to be detrimental to our farmers. We’re small, but this is going to cost us at least five to $10,000,” Sunbright Gardens co-owner and operator Monique Ramirez said of her business, estimated to bring in $50,000 in annual revenue by the end of October’s harvest. “First, I’d have to find an artist to switch it. It’s going to take time to go through the process. It could take weeks or months.”

If signed by Newsom, the law would go into effect next year.

The artist that designed the Sunbright Gardens logo is no longer available. Ramirez lamented that her logo and packaging design project was partly funded by a state equity grant because the design displays a woman of color.

“So, all that state money would be gone,” said Ramirez, who helped send hundreds of letters appealing to the governor on behalf of the Mendocino Cannabis Alliance.

“I know we don’t want kids to get into edibles. Where are the children going to see the packaging? They’re not allowed in dispensaries. But my child can walk by alcohol in the grocery store,” she said, highlighting the industry’s argument that alcohol can be just as harmful to children.

“We need to have a reboot in society about what is good for children,” she said, adding that parents need to be more involved in what children consume. “And, we already have regulations in place.”

Ramirez was referring to the current Department of Cannabis Control advertising placement and prohibitions rules that stipulate promotional materials “shall not use any images that are attractive to children.” It defines these images as cartoons, terms and pictures depicting candy and discounts aimed to lure children.

“We’re solving a problem that doesn’t exist,” said Tiffany Devitt, who manages government affairs for CannaCraft, a producer in Santa Rosa. “This undermines responsible players. More concerning is, this dampens creativity (in promotion) and our ability to compete with the illicit market.”

Devitt, a California Cannabis Industry Association board member, joins the board’s state policy advocate and lobbyist Amy O’Gorman Jenkins in asking the governor to only sign the less restrictive labeling bill brought forth by the senate.

Susan Wood covers law, cannabis, production, tech, energy, transportation, agriculture as well as banking and finance. She can be reached at 530-545-8662 or [email protected]