{"id":85429,"date":"2026-02-18T12:23:38","date_gmt":"2026-02-18T20:23:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/2026\/02\/18\/nebraska-lawmakers-approve-tweak-to-change-medical-cannabis-commission-rules\/"},"modified":"2026-02-18T19:46:11","modified_gmt":"2026-02-19T03:46:11","slug":"nebraska-lawmakers-approve-tweak-to-change-medical-cannabis-commission-rules","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/2026\/02\/18\/nebraska-lawmakers-approve-tweak-to-change-medical-cannabis-commission-rules\/","title":{"rendered":"Nebraska Lawmakers Approve Tweak To Change Medical Cannabis Commission Rules"},"content":{"rendered":"<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s a small step. At least it\u2019s not a step backwards.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

By Zach Wendling, Nebraska Examiner<\/strong><\/p>\n

A legislative committee unanimously advanced small tweaks Tuesday to the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission, presenting a unified front that was a first for legislation on the topic.<\/p>\n

The eight-member General Affairs Committee voted to advance an amended version of its\u00a0Legislative Bill 1235. The amended bill would be three pages, down from 28, and would give the group\u2019s five commissioners a salary of $12,500, create a state cash account to help fund commission work, allow the commission to charge fees for applicants up to $50,000 and require fingerprinting for applicants.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt doesn\u2019t make really much progress in terms of getting us to where we need to be in providing available, accessible, safe medical cannabis, but it is not hurting that goal,\u201d said State Sen. John Cavanaugh of Omaha, committee vice chair.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s a small step,\u201d Cavanaugh added after the committee vote. \u201cAt least it\u2019s not a step backwards.\u201d<\/p>\n

Addressing a \u2018few holes\u2019<\/h4>\n

Voters created the commission during the November 2024 election with\u00a0overwhelming support. Voters in that same election legalized possession of up to 5 ounces of medical cannabis with a recommendation from any health care provider.<\/p>\n

State Sen. Rick Holdcroft of Bellevue, committee chair, said after ballot measures are passed, there are typically a \u201cfew holes\u201d that need to be filled. In this case, that included funding and the ability to raise fees in a specific account.<\/p>\n

Holdcroft said the changes would help the commission move forward. Lawmakers last year balked at a more comprehensive legislative framework meant to fund and help the commission do its work.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf down the road it looks like there\u2019s something the Legislature needs to do, then we\u2019ll take another look at it,\u201d Holdcroft said of future legislation.<\/p>\n

LB 1235<\/a> would also include two bills related to alcohol in a committee package\u2014LB 1085<\/a>\u00a0from State Sen. Stan Clouse of Kearney and\u00a0LB 1128<\/a>\u00a0from State Sen. Rob Dover of Norfolk.<\/p>\n

The package will receive one of the committee\u2019s \u201cpriority\u201d designations, increasing its chances of reaching the legislative floor for debate. Last year, a\u00a0more comprehensive medical cannabis framework\u00a0fell short\u00a023-22.\u00a0It needed 33 votes.<\/p>\n

Provider protections<\/h4>\n

LB 1235, as introduced on behalf of the Medical Cannabis Commission, would have expanded the commission\u2019s power to patients.<\/p>\n

Voters \u201cexclusively\u201d gave the commission the power to regulate \u201call phases\u201d of possession, manufacture, distribution, delivery and dispensing of medical cannabis. Commissioners, too, would have been granted control over testing facilities, which patients and industry leaders supported.<\/p>\n

Commissioners are meant to regulate the new medicine and, eventually, license dispensaries to get the drug to patients.<\/p>\n

The original bill, which the committee would replace with the scaled-back version, would have restricted health care providers\u2019 recommendations to only in-state doctors, carving out Nebraskans who went to other states in the meantime.<\/p>\n

The commission has similarly proposed restricting access to licensed dispensaries. Under\u00a0proposed regulations, patients would need an in-state provider. Those providers would need to register as part of a commission-created directory, and providers would submit patient information to the commission. Participating providers would need to complete annual education on medical cannabis.<\/p>\n

Advocates have said few, if any, Nebraska medical providers have issued recommendations due to fear of professional or legal consequences.<\/p>\n

Cavanaugh will present his\u00a0LB 933<\/a>\u00a0at a hearing Thursday before the Health and Human Services Committee. That bill would protect providers who recommend medical cannabis from criminal, civil or disciplinary action solely for making such a recommendation.<\/p>\n

Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers (R) opposed that section during the attempt to pass the broader legal framework bill in 2025.<\/p>\n

Commission requested funding<\/h4>\n

So far, commissioners have licensed three cultivators and anticipate licensing a fourth next month. The commission delayed discussing a timeline for other application types\u2014product manufacturers, transporters and dispensaries\u2014until its next meeting, March 16, to see how LB 1235 proceeded.<\/p>\n

Commissioner Lorelle Mueting of Gretna, interim commission chair, said at a February 2 meeting that it would be important to delay, if the commission could generate some revenue from fees.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere\u2019s no medical cannabis state in this country that has no money to work with,\u201d Mueting said at the time.<\/p>\n

Holdcroft said Commissioner Bud Synhorst of Lincoln indicated that the commission would not charge $50,000 for fees right away. A higher cap would allow flexibility year over year, so commissioners don\u2019t have to go to the Legislature frequently to ask for increases.<\/p>\n

Also on Tuesday, the legislative committee unanimously advanced the three newest members for the regulatory commission for full legislative confirmation.<\/p>\n

The Medical Cannabis Commission consists of up to two at-large members and the three members of the Liquor Control Commission. All three Liquor Control members receive salaries of $12,500 for their separate duties. Due to resignations in 2025 at Gov. Jim Pillen\u2019s (R) request, all three members are up for confirmation this year.<\/p>\n

Liquor Control members would get $25,000 each year with their dual roles.<\/p>\n

Patients, families opposed original bill<\/h4>\n

At LB 1235\u2019s public hearing, also February 2, patients, families and most industry advocates opposed the original bill. Representatives for the state\u2019s new licensed cultivators and a new industry group to represent licensed medical cannabis operators supported the bill.<\/p>\n

Michael Johnson, who was born and raised in Lincoln but worked as a cannabis executive the past 15 years, including in Oregon and Colorado, said it wasn\u2019t right to award an \u201cincredible amount of power\u201d to the commission. He described the commission as \u201cdoing everything you can to constrict the industry, to limit patient access, to put up barriers and roadblocks, restrict what products can be sold, to limit what providers can recommend.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s strangling the industry before it gets off the ground,\u201d Johnson testified.<\/p>\n

John Cartier, attorney general for the Omaha Tribe of Nebraska, described the original LB 1235 as a \u201cpoison pill\u201d that wasn\u2019t about small technical choices. He said the bill was a path for \u201ca program on paper that is not usable for a large portion of Nebraska patients.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Omaha Tribe has legalized medical and recreational marijuana on its land. It is focusing on medical cannabis at this time, Cartier has said.<\/p>\n

Under LB 1235 as introduced, patients, caregivers and providers would have needed to register with the commission to legally access medical cannabis. That would have more than likely stifled the Omaha Tribe\u2019s desire to give Nebraskans seeking the medicine an alternative route.<\/p>\n

Holdcroft, as chair, had been working with commission representatives and the Nebraska Attorney General\u2019s Office on a way to pare back LB 1235. He said testimony led to scaling back and that the commission already had some authority without the Legislature needing to step in.<\/p>\n

Some industry groups in favor<\/h4>\n

Nancy Laughlin-Wagner, CEO of Midwest Cultivators Group, the state\u2019s first licensed cultivator, said the original bill would have provided the commission \u201cthe authority it needs to fully operationalize this program.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThis bill establishes several critical operational infrastructures that must be in place before medical cannabis can be responsibly made available to the patients who so desperately want and need it,\u201d Laughlin-Wagner testified.<\/p>\n

Laughlin-Wagner said patient and provider registries would be \u201ctruly foundational\u201d to a program. The bill would have explicitly excluded such registries from public records laws.<\/p>\n

Robert Wagner, executive director of the new Nebraska Cannabis Trade Alliance, said industry leaders support \u201cclear, stable rules\u201d to allow the industry to be \u201ceconomically viable.\u201d He said that requires high standards, but not so high that \u201cgood actors\u201d are pushed out.<\/p>\n

\u201cEvery industry needs certainty, and the medical cannabis industry is no different,\u201d Wagner said.<\/p>\n

A second commission vision<\/h4>\n

The same day the General Affairs Committee heard LB 1235, the committee also considered Cavanaugh\u2019s\u00a0LB 934<\/a>, which would have made the commission\u2019s seats elected rather than appointed by the governor.<\/p>\n

No one testified against the bill, though some committee members questioned the idea.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhat you\u2019re asking for is for us to defy the will of the people and take a different course,\u201d said State Sen. Bob Andersen of Sarpy County.<\/p>\n

Cavanaugh responded that it might not follow the \u201cletter\u201d of what voters passed but that it was \u201cfaithful\u201d to their \u201cwill.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThe question really is not whether it\u2019s a change in what the voters voted for but whether or not the change is respectful to the spirit and the desires of the voters,\u201d Cavanaugh said.<\/p>\n

The committee did not discuss the election-related bill Tuesday.<\/p>\n

\u2018Got what you voted for\u2019<\/h4>\n

At LB 934\u2019s hearing, Holdcroft and State Sens. Jared Storm of David City and Barry DeKay of Niobrara had also honed their resistance to Cavanaugh\u2019s election bill on one supporter, Amy Burgess, a cannabis business owner since 2020.<\/p>\n

Burgess had said the commission had been \u201cset up for failure,\u201d noting the up-or-down election and lack of legislative support after the vote. Storm argued the \u201cmarijuana industry\u201d wrote the ballot measures; they were written by families and other local advocates after years of legislative stalling.<\/p>\n

\u201cThat\u2019s why we voted for the one option that we have, and now we are saying this option was compromised,\u201d Burgess said.<\/p>\n

Storm responded, \u201cBut you got what you voted for.\u201d Burgess reiterated the current commission wasn\u2019t working as imagined.<\/p>\n

Holdcroft, at one point, told Burgess she wrote the ballot initiatives. Burgess responded that she didn\u2019t.<\/p>\n

\u201cSomeone here did,\u201d Holdcroft responded. \u201cAnd you cannot sit there and say, \u2018That was all we were given, that\u2019s what the people voted for,\u2019 because that\u2019s what the people put forward in the referendum.\u201d<\/p>\n

DeKay said conversations should have taken place sooner to iron out language\u2014legislative proposals had been nearly annual endeavors since 2016. Nebraskans for Medical Marijuana, the nonprofit that led the successful 2024 ballot measures, made two earlier petition attempts in 2020 and 2022. The group opposed the original version of LB 1235 but supported Cavanaugh\u2019s LB 934.<\/p>\n

Burgess told DeKay it \u201cdoesn\u2019t always work that way.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cWell,\u201d DeKay responded, \u201cthat\u2019s part of life then.\u201d<\/p>\n

This story was first published by Nebraska Examiner.<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

Photo courtesy of Mike Latimer.<\/em><\/p>\n

The post Nebraska Lawmakers Approve Tweak To Change Medical Cannabis Commission Rules<\/a> appeared first on Marijuana Moment<\/a>.<\/p>\n


\n
\nRead More: Nebraska Lawmakers Approve Tweak To Change Medical Cannabis Commission Rules<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u201cIt\u2019s a small step. At least it\u2019s not a step backwards.\u201d By Zach Wendling, Nebraska Examiner A legislative committee unanimously advanced small tweaks Tuesday to the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission, presenting a unified front that was a first for legislation on the topic. The eight-member General Affairs Committee voted toContinue Reading<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":457,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"false","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[81],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/85429"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/457"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=85429"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/85429\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":85430,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/85429\/revisions\/85430"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=85429"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=85429"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=85429"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}