A major policy battle is brewing in Massachusetts over H. 4206, officially titled An Act Modernizing the Commonwealth’s Cannabis Laws. The proposed cannabis bill is now before the Senate Ways and Means Committee, which, under newly adopted joint rules, must issue a final report within 60 days unless granted an additional 30-day extension.
For Adrienne D. Dean, a partner in the cannabis law practice at Cogent Law Group, the stakes could not be higher. She fears that if passed without revision, the cannabis bill could do “irreparable damage” to small and minority-owned cannabis businesses already struggling to survive in a competitive and volatile marketplace.
Among the bill’s more controversial provisions is the proposal to raise the cap on dispensary licenses an entity can hold from three to six. Additionally, it would increase the allowable equity stake an investor can take without public disclosure from 10 percent to 34.99 percent. Dean argues that these changes could tilt the playing field heavily in favor of large, multi-state operators with deep pockets, effectively pushing out local “mom and pop” shops.
Supporters of the cannabis bill, including the Massachusetts Cannabis Coalition, counter that lifting the cap could give failing businesses a lifeline through acquisition by stronger companies. At an April hearing, industry leaders such as Tito Jackson of Apex Noire and Payton Shubrick of 6 Bricks voiced support, emphasizing that capital is hard to come by in the cannabis sector and that many owners have personally guaranteed loans.
Still, Dean warns that the economies of scale created by the cannabis bill could allow large operators to dominate marketing budgets, squeeze suppliers, and control up to nine licenses when combining recreational and medical allowances. Her research shows that two-thirds of companies lobbying the Legislature this year are multi-state operators.
She testified that the current license limits have been among the most effective safeguards for small businesses, promoting equity and preventing corporate misconduct. Title noted that $7.2 million has been spent lobbying Massachusetts policymakers over the past five years, underscoring the intense influence behind the cannabis bill.
Proponents of the changes say new investment is badly needed in the Massachusetts market, but Dean attributes the investment slowdown to earlier regulatory choices—particularly the lack of limits on cultivation licenses, which has led to oversupply.
As the Senate Ways and Means Committee considers its report, the cannabis bill remains a flashpoint in the broader debate over how to balance industry growth with fairness, competition, and public accountability. For small cannabis operators, the outcome of this cannabis bill could determine whether they can keep their doors open in the years ahead.
by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly