Medical Cannabis Process Improvement Amendment Act of 2025

1

November 25, 2025

Nyasha Howard, Secretary
Council of the District of Columbia
1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20004

Dear Secretary Howard:

Today, alongside Councilmembers Anita Bonds, Christina Henderson, Brooke Pinto, Matthew
Frumin, Janeese Lewis George, and Zachary Parke r, I am introducing the “Medical Cannabis
Process Improvement Amendment Act of 2025 ”. Please find enclosed a signed copy of the
legislation.

Before 2024, illegal and unlicensed cannabis shops proliferated across the District, primarily due
to congressional interference with the District’s ability to safely tax and regulate recreational
cannabis. These unlicensed shops posed serious public health and safety risks to District
residents, and the Council stepped in by passing legislation to encourage them to move toward
becoming safe, regulated medical cannabis retailers. The Council’s legislation also empowered
the Alcoholic Beverage and Cannabis Administration (“ABCA”) to enforce against unlicensed
shops, which, in turn, has right sized the District’s medical cannabis program. ABCA’s new role in
supporting and regulating the medical cannabis industry, combined with these stronger
enforcement tools against unlicensed shops, have protected patients and the community by
removing dangerous, untested products from the shelves, fostering business opportunities for
prospective legitimate retailers, and creating a process for community and Advisory
Neighborhood Commission (“ANC”) feedback on new retailer applications.

However, implementation of the Council’s legislation and ABCA’s experience in practice have
revealed several opportunities for clarification and continued process improvements to ensure
community safety and provide more meaningful opportunities for feedback on retailer
applications.

For example, current law prohibits proposed retailers from locating within 300 feet of a
preschool, primary or secondary school, or recreation center. But the term “preschool” is left
undefined, which has led to legal interpretations that have allowed proposed retailers to locate
within 300 feet of “ child development facilities ”, as defined by the Office of the State

2
Superintendent of Education and not the cannabis code . As a result of this lack of clarity in the
law, prospective retailers have applied to locate next to education al facilities serving young
children, and the technical interpretation of that facility’s licensure – rather than the applicant’s
potential impact on children – has been the deciding factor as to whether it has been barred by
the radius location requirement. This bill attempts to clarify the Council’s intent that proposed
retailers should not be locating near educational facilities serving young children, which includes
the facilities covered under the now defined term “child development facilities”.

Second, current law provides daycare centers with standing to protest a proposed medical
cannabis licensee and requires the Alcoholic Beverage and Cannabis Board (“ABC Board”) to
consider the proposed licensee’s proximity to a daycare center when issuing a license. However,
current law limits the daycare center’s grounds for initiating a protest to three grounds, none of
which concern the effect that a proposed licensee would have on the daycare, children, or its
clientele. This legislation would p ermit an ANC or any person with standing to protest on the
basis of the effect of the applicant on peace, order, and quiet , which are grounds currently
available in the alcohol code, and the inability of existing law or rules to prevent proximity or
undue exposure to children.

Lastly, my office has been made aware of a potential discrepancy as it relates to who has standing
to protest internet retailer licenses. Current law only permits those with standing to protest
retailer licenses, not internet retailer licenses. As internet retailer licenses could similarly impact
vehicular and pedestrian safety in neighborhoods, this legislation permits an ANC to protest the
issuance, renewal, or transfer of an internet retailer license.

Please feel free to reach out to me or my Legislative Director, Antonio Nunes, with any questions
or for additional information.

Sincerely,

Councilmember Charles Allen, Ward 6
Chairperson, Committee on Transportation & the Environment

1
________________________________ ________________________________ 1
Councilmember Anita Bonds Councilmember Charles Allen 2
3
4
________________________________ ________________________________ 5
Councilmember Christina Henderson Councilmember Brooke Pinto 6
7
8
________________________________ ________________________________ 9
Councilmember Matthew Frumin Councilmember Janeese Lewis George 10
11
12
________________________________ 13
Councilmember Zachary Parker 14
15
16
17
A BILL 18
19
______________ 20
21
22
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 23
24
_____________________ 25
26
27
To amend the Legalization of Marijuana for Medical Treatment Initiative of 1999 to repeal the 28
definition of daycare center, to add child development facility to the list of establishments 29
within 300 feet of which a medical cannabis license holder may not locate, to permit an 30
Advisory Neighborhood Commission to protest the issuance, renewal, or transfer of an 31
internet retailer license, and to improve the Advisory Neighborhood Commission protest 32
process for medical cannabis licenses by permitting the Advisory Neighborhood 33
Commission or any person with standing to protest on the basis of the effect of the applicant 34
on peace, order, and quiet and the inability of existing law or rules to prevent proximity or 35
undue exposure to children. 36
37
BE IT ENACTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, That this 38
act may be cited as the “Medical Cannabis Process Improvement Amendment Act of 2025”. 39
Sec. 2. The Legalization of Marijuana for Medical Treatment Initiative of 1999, effective 40
February 25, 2010 (D.C. Law 13 -315; D.C. Official Code § 7 -1671.01 et seq.), is amended as 41
follows: 42

2
(a) Section 2(5A) (D.C. Official Code § 7-1671.01(5A)) is repealed. 43
(b) Section 7(q) (D.C. Official Code § 7-1671.06(q)) is amended as follows: 44
(1) Paragraph (1) is amended as follows: 45
(A) Subparagraph (A) is amended by striking the phrase “ preschool, 46
primary or secondary school, or recreation center; except, that a license holder or an applicant who 47
has applied prior to December 17, 2024 shall not be permitted to locate within 300 feet of a 48
preschool, primary or secondary school, or recreation center ” and inserting the phrase “child 49
development facility, as defined in section 2(3) of the Child Development Facilities Regulation 50
Act of 1998, effective April 13, 1999 (D.C. Law 12 -215; D.C. Official Code § 7 -2031(3)), 51
preschool, primary or secondary school, or recreation center; except, that a license holder or an 52
applicant who has applied prior to December 17, 2024 shall not be permitted to locate within 300 53
feet of a child development facility, as defined in section 2(3) of the Child Development Facilities 54
Regulation Act of 1998, effective April 13, 1999 (D.C. Law 12 -215; D.C. Official Code § 7 -55
2031(3)), preschool, primary or secondary school, or recreation center” in its place. 56
(B) Subparagraph (B) is amended by striking the phrase “ preschool, 57
primary or secondary school, or recreation center where the main entrance to the preschool, 58
primary school or secondary school, or recreation center ” and inserting the phrase “child 59
development facility, as defined in section 2(3) of the Child Development Facilities Regulation 60
Act of 1998, effective April 13, 1999 (D.C. Law 12 -215; D.C. Official Code § 7 -2031(3)), 61
preschool, primary or secondary school, or recreation center where the main entrance to the child 62
development facility, preschool, primary school or secondary school, or recreation center” in its 63
place. 64

3
(2) Paragraph (2) is amended by striking the phrase “ preschool, primary or 65
secondary school, or recreation center subsequently locates within 400 feet of its facility ” and 66
inserting the phrase “ child development facility, as defined in section 2(3) of the Child 67
Development Facilities Regulation Act of 1998, effective April 13, 1999 (D.C. Law 12-215; D.C. 68
Official Code § 7 -2031(3)), preschool, primary or secondary school, or recreation center 69
subsequently locates within 400 feet of its facility” in its place. 70
(c) Section 7g(a) (D.C. Official Code § 7–1671.06g(a)) is amended by striking the phrase 71
“medical cannabis retailer license” and inserting the phrase “medical cannabis retailer or internet 72
retailer license” in its place. 73
(d) Section 7i(a) (D.C. Official Code § 7-1671.06i) is amended as follows: 74
(1) Paragraph (2) is amended by striking the phrase “; or” and inserting a semicolon 75
in its place. 76
(2) Paragraph (3) is amended to read as follows: 77
“(3) The effect of the establishment upon residential parking needs and vehicular 78
and pedestrian safety;”. 79
(3) New paragraphs (4) and (5) are added to read as follows: 80
“(4) The effect of the establishment on peace, order, and quiet; and 81
“(5) The inability of the provisions of this act or rules issued pursuant to section 14 82
of this act to prevent proximity or undue exposure to children.”. 83
Sec. 3. Fiscal impact statement. 84
The Council adopts the fiscal impact statement in the committee report as the fiscal impact 85
statement required by section 4a of the General Legislative Procedures Act of 1975, approved 86
October 16, 2006 (120 Stat. 2038; D.C. Official Code § 1-301.47a). 87

4
Sec. 4. Effective date. 88
This act shall take effect following approval by the Mayor (or in the event of veto by the 89
Mayor, action by the Council to override the veto), a 30-day period of congressional review as 90
provided in section 602(c)(1) of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, approved December 24, 91
1973 (87 Stat. 788; D.C. Official Code §1 -206.02(c)(1)), and publication in the District of 92
Columbia Register. 93