On election day, an amendment legalizing marijuana failed in Florida. Even though the majority of voters there supported the constitutional amendment, their numbers fell short of the 60% supermajority needed for such a change. Nebraska, meanwhile, approved twin measures legalizing the medical use of marijuana and calling for regulation over the process. 

That said, heading into the election, most Americans live in one of the 24 states and Washington D.C. where marijuana has been legalized while 38 allow its medical use.

In many cases, oversight of the industry has been called for. But as an audit from the Washington State Auditor found in late October, marijuana data tracking systems still fall short of promised oversight.

One recommended approach from the auditor’s office, in a 2018 report, called for automated tracking as a straightforward tool for enforcement of the state’s laws governing the sale of marijuana. This task was the province of the Liquor and Cannabis Board (LCB).

 According to the new performance audit, however, “when we prepared to conduct a follow-up audit to see how the agency fared at implementing our recommendations, we learned that it currently lacks a data-tracking system that easily and reliably tracks cannabis products.”

As a result, according to the audit, “officers lack real-time tracking information, and limited data input protections mean the agency relies heavily on licensees to report accurate and complete information. Additionally, licensees cannot easily access or correct their data after they upload it, and the lack of a single identification number makes it difficult to track products for quick product recalls.”

There was some positive news in the audit, but it was tempered by negative findings. For example, “Recent steps such as regularly conducting proactive “premises checks” and updating processes to triage complaints have helped LCB more strategically address risks. Additionally, LCB implemented some automated alerts, but they do not fully address the previous performance audit’s recommendations. Enforcement efforts were also limited by reduced staffing.”

Will the state have an automated tracking system soon? Not likely. As the audit pointed out the “LCB does not expect to fully implement a more efficient tracking system until 2031 – nearly 20 years after the legal recreational cannabis market was authorized by voters.”

Though the LCB acknowledged that it lacked this kind of tracking system, William Lukela, director of LCB, pointed out that “There is more to regulation of the cannabis industry than traceability.”

For example, a response to the audit noted that: 

• “The Enforcement and Education Division has taken action to prioritize public safety and be responsive to legislative and industry changes” 

• “The examiners unit is responsible for evaluating cannabis licensee data to prioritize collaborative investigative work with a focus on identifying and addressing diversion and inversion of cannabis.” 

• “The LCB’s education team, initially focused on the cannabis industry, works with licensees to achieve compliance in all areas of cannabis regulation.” 

#StateandLocalGovernmentManagement #StateandLocalPerformanceAudit #MarijuanaLegalization #StateOversightLegalizedMarijuana #OversightRecreationalMarijuanaUse #WashingtonLiquorControlBoard #MarijuanaOversight #StateMarijuanaPerformanceAudit #WashingtonStateAuditor #MarijuanaDataTrackSystem #StateandLocalGovernmentData #MarijuanaDataManagement #StateDataManagement #LegalizedRecreationalMarijuanaRisks #LegalizedMarijuanaPerformance #StateandLocalGovernmentOversight #StateandLocalGovernmentAccountability #OversightMarijuanaLicensees #MarijuanaElectionResult2024  #BandGWeeklyManagementSelection #StateandLocalManagementNews #BarrettandGreeneInc