What parents should know about marijuana products

Since releasing the underage marijuana prevention booklet for parents, a few youth substance abuse prevention advocates contacted me asking for information to share with parents about marijuana products other than the kind that is smoked.  They are concerned with what they witness in their communities – teenagers eating high-THC marijuana  food products and suffering mental health problems and ingesting highly concentrated hash oil and ending up in the hospital. 

With that in mind, here is what I know.  (Since I am learning something new about marijuana almost every day, please email me additional information if I am not up-to-date.)

Marijuana-infused cake pops
Each contains 111 mg THC
Photo by: JORDAN STEAD / SEATTLEPI.COM

What are marijuana-infused foods?

Over the past year, I blogged about marijuana-infused foods several times.  Most recently on July 3 and September 10.

According to the newly-adopted I-502 rules, a serving size will contain up to10 milligrams of THC and a package can contain up to 10 servings.  This means that one package of a marijuana-infused food can contain up to 100 mg of THC.  If children, including teenagers, get their hands on these foods and do not read or abide by the serving size information, they may ingest a great deal of THC.  This is especially a concern because the effects of marijuana that is eaten may not be felt for 90 minutes or more.  If someone eats marijuana-infused foods and doesn’t feel high right away, they may eat more.

A recent article appearing in the Journal of the American Medical Association - Pediatrics describes an increase in marijuana food-related hospital emergency visits among young children in Colorado.  A Health Impact Assessment about marijuana ingestion among children was conducted by the Colorado School of Public Health and Children's Hospital Colorado.

What is hash oil?

Rolling Stone magazine recently published a short article about hash oil.  Here is an excerpt:

Unless you spend a lot of time in medical-state dispensaries, you probably haven't encountered the latest superstrong stoner craze: butane-extracted hash oil (BHO). How potent is it? A chunk of the stuff the size of a Tic Tac can be the equivalent of hoovering up an entire joint in one massive toke. Even for hardcore smokers, the experience – which fans call dabbing – can be like getting high for the very first time. Your head spins, your eyes get fluttery, a few beads of sweat surface on your forehead and, suddenly, you're cosmically baked.

Cannabis Cup
Second Place: "Best Concentrate"
Contains 58.5% THC

BHO . . . comes in a variety of consistencies: from hard, amber-like stuff ("shatter") to soft, golden goop ("budder" or "earwax").

The recent Cannabis Cup held in Seattle gave out awards for the best marijuana products, including “concentrates”.  Wax, oil, and shatter fall under the "concentrate" category.

E-joints

A recent post to the Prevention Hub brings up concerns about youth using e-cigarettes as e-joints. 

Smoking marijuana in liquid and wax forms out of e-cigarettes is a new alarming trend gaining popularity amongst young people. Worryingly, marijuana smoked that way does not produce an odour or a flame, making it harder to detect. . . .While there is no data on how many teens are using e-cigarettes to smoke marijuana, a recent survey by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) showed that the use of e-cigarettes among middle and high schools students doubled from 2011 to 2012 (5% to 10%). . . . Experts say drugs and drug products made for people using marijuana legally are increasingly finding their way to those who are using them illegally.

In New York it is illegal to sell e-cigarettes to minors.  A news report describes how one person used an e-cigarette to consume marijuana undetected during a long train ride.

Hash oil & I-502

I-502 does not include hash oil and other concentrates as legal marijuana products that can be sold in stores.  Recognizing that concentrates have become increasingly popular among marijuana consumers, the Washington State Liquor Control Board recently submitted a request to the state legislature that they change I-502 to include "extract products" as products that are legal to sell in retail stores. 

Want more information about marijuana products?

Analytics 360 is a marijuana testing lab located in Fremont.  Their website includes a section about test results.  It lists and shows pictures of marijuana products including flowers, concentrates, edibles, liquids, and topicals.  Visit their website to get a better understanding of what marijuana products can be expected in I-502 licensed stores when they open next year.  

City Council expresses concern about potential clustering of marijuana stores

Earlier this week, the Seattle City Council sent a letter to the Liquor Control Board about restrictions included in I-502 that they fear will result in "limited areas of Seattle being available for retail sales."  The letter was sent on the same day that the Council passed an ordinance that even further restricts where marijuana businesses may be located in Seattle.

The letter says that " . . . the proposed rules for marijuana retail licenses states that should the number of eligible applications exceed the allotted amount of retail locations in a city (21 in Seattle), licenses will be granted by lottery."

"Should there be more than 21 eligible retail applications in Seattle, and the licenses are granted by lottery, this could potentially result in clustering of retail sales in a few areas, and other eligible areas having no retail locations."

"Should a lottery result in a lack of geographic dispersion of retail locations within Seattle, this could make fulfilling the goals of I-502 more difficult."

In northeast Seattle, marijuana businesses most likely will be located near Northgate Mall where I-5 and Northgate Way intersect and in different areas along Lake City Way NE.

County & City make comments about proposed marijuana rules

Last week, comments about proposed marijuana rules were submitted to the Liquor Control Board by King County and the Seattle City Attorney.

King County comments
Among their comments, King County recommended that the Liquor Control Board could strengthen their final rules by addressing:

"1) Preventing youth access and use (Preventing the distribution of marijuana to minors).  The priority can be addressed if the Board:

- Further strengthens packaging/labeling and accompanying materials language (including rotating health warnings) to ensure parents, other adults and youth understand health risks to youth and children, for both usable and infused marijuana products,

. . . - Limits advertising in a manner that is consistent with alcohol advertisement restrictions."  

". . . 3) Minimizing disproportionate siting and neighborhood impacts by avoiding siting of multiple businesses in close proximity to one another, with particular emphasis on equitable distribution of risks and benefits of legalization."

All King County comments may be read by clicking here.

Seattle City Attorney comments
While King County asked that the Liquor Control Board limit marijuana retail density, the Seattle City Attorney expressed concern that there will not be enough marijuana retail stores in Seattle.

". . . The one additional issue we want to highlight is ensuring that the number of licensed dispensers is sufficient to meet demand . . . we ask that the Board carefully monitor supply and demand for recreational marijuana as soon as the licensed dispensers begin sales and consider issuing additional licenses later in 2014 for dispensers in Seattle if the 21 initial licenses are insufficient to meet demand in our city."

Seattle City Council ordinance
Later today, the Seattle City Council will once again take up an ordinance regarding where marijuana businesses may be located in Seattle.  The proposed ordinance would restrict marijuana businesses to large commercial and industrial areas, excluding historical districts.  Combined with Liquor Control Board rules requiring a 1,000 foot buffer between marijuana businesses and schools, playgrounds, and other places where minors congregate, potential places for marijuana businesses to be located are rather limited in Seattle.    Areas dense with marijuana businesses may be unavoidable.

Public hearing
The Liquor Control Board is hosting a public hearing about their proposed rules tomorrow, October 8, 6-9:00 p.m. at Seattle City Hall.

Possible marijuana business locations in NE Seattle

Yesterday, the City of Seattle Department of Planning and Development released an updated map that shows where they currently think that marijuana businesses could be located in the City.  The map takes into consideration proposed Liquor Control Board rules and the proposed City of Seattle land use ordinance.

In their latest set of proposed rules, the Liquor Control Board (LCB) changed the definition of the 1,000 foot buffer between marijuana businesses and schools, playgrounds, and other places frequented by children.  Marijuana business interests lobbied for the change stating that the original definition limited possible business locations too much.

Here is what the NE Seattle section of the City's map looks like:

In the map above, the yellow areas indicate places where marijuana businesses may be located using the initial definition (as the crow flies) of the 1,000 foot buffer.

The pink areas indicate the additional land that would be acceptable for marijuana businesses under the LCB's newly proposed definition: "along the most direct route over or across established public walks, streets, or other public passageway between the proposed building/business locations to the perimeter of the grounds of the entities listed."

Since the LCB and the City of Seattle have yet to adopt their proposed policies, this map is not to be considered a final representation of where marijuana businesses will be located.

Update: It turns out the the pink areas will not be considered for marijuana businesses.  On September 13 the LCB released the following statement:

The Washington State Liquor Control Board (WSLCB) announced today that it will file an emergency rule on October 16, 2013, to make a single technical revision to the recreational marijuana rules. The emergency rule will revise the method of measurement of the 1,000 foot buffer measurement between a licensed marijuana business and an elementary or secondary school, playground, recreation center or facility, child care center, public park, public transit center, library, or arcade where admission is not restricted to those age 21 and older. The emergency rule will not affect the Initiative 502 implementation timeline.

The current proposed rules filed with the Code Reviser on September 4, 2013, state “the distance shall be measured along the most direct route over or across established public walks, streets, or other public passageway between the proposed building/business location to the perimeter of the grounds.”

The emergency rule will state: “The distance shall be measured as the shortest straight line distance from the property line of the licensed premises to the property line of the entities listed below…”

“The current measurement mirrors the existing method of measurement between liquor-licensed businesses and schools,” said agency director Rick Garza. “We’ve since learned that this measurement, as it pertains to marijuana, conflicts with federal law. Although the emergency rule won’t be filed until October 16, it is critical that we announce our intentions now so that potential licensees, local government and law enforcement will have clarity and predictability going forward.” 

How many marijuana stores will be located in Seattle and King County?

The Washington State Liquor Control Board (LCB) today approved the filing of proposed supplemental rules that, if ultimately enacted, will help govern Washington State’s system of producing, processing and retailing recreational marijuana. The LCB earlier this summer filed proposed rules and chose to revise them after receiving public input.

In addition to the rules, the LCB released information about how many marijuana stores will be allowed to open in every county.  Here is a list of King County jurisdictions and the number of proposed marijuana stores in each one.

The LCB would like your input on the proposed rules to implement Initiative 502.  Please send your initial comments to the LCB by October 4, 2013 at:

Rules Coordinator

Liquor Control Board

P.O. Box 43080

Olympia, WA 98504-3080

rules@liq.wa.gov

Public hearing will be held on October 8 and 9 -- details to be posted on their website: www.liq.wa.gov

Parents want a ban on marijuana advertising

In a national survey, 64% of Washington parents agreed that "marijuana sellers should not be allowed to advertise  . . . " on the Internet, in newspapers, in the yellow pages, in magazines, over social media, through smartphone apps, over the radio, on tv, and through most other common ways of promoting products.  In fact, a vast majority of parents think that marijuana advertising should be banned.

The Washington State Liquor Control Board's proposed rules for our state's new legal marijuana marketplace do not include a ban on marijuana advertising.  The rules place some restrictions on advertising, similar to restrictions on alcohol advertising.  However, they do not specifically address mass media advertising or marketing through smartphone apps, the Internet, and social media platforms.  They do not address celebrity endorsements and the sponsorship of events.  Yet to be publicly discussed is how advertising restrictions will be monitored and enforced.

Why limit hours of marijuana sales?

The Washington State Liquor Control Board's proposed rules for the new legal marijuana marketplace in our state say that marijuana shops may be open from 8:00 a.m. to midnight.  The initial draft rules would have allowed shops to be open from 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m..  Substance abuse prevention advocates asked that the hours be similar to liquor store hours prior to the approval of Initiative 1183: 9:00 a.m to 10:00 p.m.

Why ask the Liquor Control Board to limit marijuana sales to 13 hours per day?

The Centers for Disease Control & Prevention's (CDC) Guide to Community Preventive Services recommends limiting the days and hours of sale of alcoholic beverages to prevent excessive consumption and related harms.  "The reports show that increasing the number of hours and days when alcohol can be sold in bars, restaurants, and liquor stores leads to greater alcohol use and related harms, especially motor vehicle crashes."  Since a legal marijuana marketplace has never been established anywhere before, the best we can do right now is to look to lessons learned from alcohol and tobacco.

Some have publicly wondered why marijuana sales should be shorter than current alcohol sales.  Substance abuse prevention advocates maintain that instead of increasing marijuana sale hours, the Liquor Control Board may want to consider shortening liquor sale hours.  After all, it is a best practice for reducing public health and safety harms related to alcohol consumption.

Some have also suggested that limiting hours of marijuana sales would be bad for Seattle nightlife.  Considering that marijuana cannot be consumed in shops or in public, it is difficult to see how people who go to bars and other nightlife venues would be negatively impacted by limited hours of sale.  It would just take some planning on their part to make sure that they buy their pot before midnight so that they may consume it in private after the bars close.

Marijuana rules do not address edibles that are kid-friendly

Earlier today, the Liquor Control Board released their proposed rules that, if ultimately enacted, will help govern our state's commercial marijuana system.  While the rules do incorporate some suggestions made by Prevention WINS and other youth substance abuse prevention advocates, they do not address marijuana-infused foods and beverages that are attractive to youth.

In addition to marijuana-infused breakfast cereals and sodas, here are a few examples of marijuana-infused foods that are currently available:

 Marijuana baked goods that look like Twinkies and Hostess CupCakes

Marijuana sno-cones

Marijuana lollipops

In a letter to the Liquor Control Board, the Prevention WINS coalition asked that marijuana-infused products that appeal to youth be prohibited:

Recently, a report published in the Journal of the American Medical Association – Pediatrics discussed the increase in unintentional ingestion of marijuana among children in Colorado. 

As the Board knows from experience, many flavored malt beverages are fruit flavored and particularly attractive to minors.   In one survey about underage drinking, when asked what one type of alcohol drink they would most prefer, 30% of teens said “alcopops” (the term used to describe these flavored alcoholic beverages – a combination of “alcohol” and “pop”). 

In the past, the Board has banned the sale of certain alcohol products because of the high likelihood that the products are attractive to minors.  A similar ban should be placed on marijuana-infused products that are attractive to minors and resemble products primarily consumed by children.  Examples of such products, many of which currently may be sold in medical marijuana access points, include but are not limited to:

Snow-cones,

• Hard candy, lollipops, and cookies shaped like animals, people, cartoon and other characters, Christmas trees, snowmen, stars, etc.,
• Soda-pop,
• Juice,
• Candy bars,
• Pop-Tarts,
• “Gummy” candies shaped like worms, bears, etc. 

Some flavored tobacco and alcohol products are also banned because of their potential to attract young people.  The Board should ban marijuana products containing flavorings such as fruit, candy, and vanilla.

Why ban marijuana advertising?

Companies that sell alcohol and tobacco have similar marketing strategies according to Dr. Ken Flegel, Senior Associate Editor for the Canadian Medical Association Journal.   In a recent editorial in the Journal, Dr. Flegel makes the argument that like tobacco companies, the alcoholic beverage industry has recognized that a good way to increase profits is to target young female consumers – and this has left adolescent girls, who also see the ads, particularly vulnerable.  Dr. Flegel offers some insight into responsibility and potential strategies. Here is a link to the article: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-usiness/industry-news/marketing/is-alcohol-advertising-harming-girls/article12461259/.

Dr. Flegel’s editorial provides another example of the importance of limiting, if not banning, marijuana advertising.  For years, the Center for Alcohol Marketing and Youth has tracked alcohol advertising and how youth continue to be targeted, despite alcohol industry promises not to.  Based on experiences with alcohol and tobacco advertising, Prevention WINS made suggestions to the Liquor Control Board about marijuana advertising:  

While we are pleased that some limits on advertising are proposed, we recommend a full ban on marijuana advertising. 

Myriad research shows that there is a connection between alcohol and tobacco advertising and youth consumption of alcohol and tobacco.  When looking at the link between advertising and underage drinking, the Center for Alcohol Marketing and Youth reports that exposure to alcohol advertising shapes attitudes and perceptions about alcohol use among adolescents.  These attitudes and perceptions predict their positive expectancies and intentions to drink.  A complete ban on alcohol advertising would be the most effective alcohol policy for reducing underage drinking. 

Despite the finding that a ban on alcohol advertising would likely be a best practice for reducing underage drinking, the reality is that alcohol advertising is not banned and regulations are weak.  Therefore, if the Board decides not to ban marijuana advertising we urge you to refer to tobacco advertising restrictions to guide marijuana advertising regulations.

The State of Washington is part of the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) that imposes significant prohibitions or restrictions on advertising, marketing and promotional programs or activities.  In addition to a general ban on direct and indirect targeting of minors in advertising and marketing of tobacco products, the MSA specifically:

• Bans cartoons and any drawing or other depiction of an object, person, animal creature or any similar caricature that comically exaggerates features, attributes human characteristics to animals, plants or other objects, or uses similar anthropomorphic technique or attributes unnatural or extra human abilities.
• Prohibits billboards and other outdoor advertising except for limited advertising where tobacco is sold.
• Bans payments for product placement of branded tobacco products in entertainment media.
• Bans distribution of brand name merchandise except in limited circumstances.
• Prohibits allowing third parties to use tobacco brand names.
• Bans lobbying against certain kinds of tobacco control legislation.
• Bans agreements between tobacco companies to suppress health-related research and product development.
• Bans material misrepresentations of fact regarding the health consequences of using tobacco products.  

Marijuana business websites should be prohibited from including advertising and marketing tools that are attractive to minors.  This includes advertising and marketing tools on Facebook, Google+, Twitter, blogs, Instagram, Pinterest, and other social media platforms.  Widgets, videos, e-cards, and other electronic forms of advertising and marketing, especially those that may easily be cut-and-pasted or embedded in personal Internet and social media sites should also be prohibited.     

Though not included with the comments, below is a screenshot of a game included in a free iPhone app from a rum company.  Similar methods for marketing marijuana products should be banned.  

Additional comments about marijuana advertising are included in the letter to the Liquor Control Board.  

Seattle City Attorney's comments to the Liquor Control Board include pot tourism and private pot clubs

The Liquor Control Board received more than 800 comments from the public regarding their initial draft rules for I-502 (marijuana legalization).  The letter from Prevention WINS may be viewed through the coalition website.

The Seattle City Attorney's letter is also available online and includes the following comments:

Promote Pot Tourism
We also support the Board's decision to permit nonresidents to purchase one ounce of marijuana at a retail store.  People travel to Washington for many reasons, and tourism is a significant industry within Seattle and throughout the state.  We want tourists to enjoy our beautiful outdoors, fresh produce, microbrews, fine wines, professional sports and entertainment.  We should similarly embrace marijuana tourism.  However, retailers must not oversell to non-residents so that marijuana might be taken across state lines.  I-502 does not prohibit nonresidents from traveling to Washington, purchasing marijuana from a licensed retailer, or consuming marijuana in the state, but we support Governor Inslee's promise that Washington State will not become "the country's export market for marijuana."  We need a strong partnership with law enforcement to extinguish the illegal market and properly regulate the new legal market. 

Public Consumption of Marijuana
I-502 prohibits opening "a package containing marijuana . . . in view of the general public."  It is not clear whether this limits marijuana use only to private residences or also allows it in establishments that may be private and not "in view of the general public" because the phrase "in view of the general public" is not defined in I-502.  For renters and tourists, allowing marijuana use in certain types of establishments other than private residences may be the only mechanism to enjoy marijuana.  This is both a race & social justice and an economic development issue.  Renters and tourists should not be forced to use marijuana in parks or on sidewalks.  We recommend that the Board study private clubs or similar accommodations and propose appropriate rules governing their establishment and regulation.  

Home Delivery of Marijuana
A careful reading of I-502 suggests that bicycle and truck deliveries are neither expressly permitted or prohibited.  We recommend that the Board study deliver services and propose draft regulatory rules.  

Retail Outlet Density
If like state liquor stores there will only be a limited number of retail stores, we may want to ensure better geographical coverage.  

Funding Needed
Finally, local governments must be able to share in the State's revenue.  Implementing and enforcing I-502 will be a costly venture for government at all levels from business licensing and zoning to law enfocement and other public health and safety considerations.  

Comments to the Liquor Control Board from King County may be read by clicking here.

Notes from the Liquor Control Board work session on marijuana rules

WSLCB received negative
comments about this proposed
marijuana logo.

The Liquor Control Board held a work session last week to discuss public comments about the initial draft rules for a legal marijuana marketplace in our state.

At the beginning of the meeting, LCB members noted that after the draft rules are released on July 3 they will host four public forums for comments and that rules established this year are not "final and forever".  Just like liquor rules, it is expected that marijuana rules will change over time. 

Both LCB members and staff stated that it is important for people to read I-502 and proposed rules.  Some comments seem to have been made by individuals/organizations unfamiliar with the initiative and the initial draft rules.

Karen McCall, Rules Coordinator, provided the LCB with a summary of the more than 800 comments they received. 

From local jurisdictions (22 comments)

• Revise some definitions;
• Limit hours of sale;
• Businesses must meet all local jurisdiction requirements and laws;
• Advise them of the number of licenses that the LCB will be allowing in their jurisdictions;
• Ban drive-thru stores, Internet sales, and home deliveries;
• Ban products that appeal to youth;
• Mandate child-proof packaging;
• Allow jurisdictions to opt out of allowing marijuana businesses (law change needed);
• Ban marijuana advertising.

The Seattle City Attorney requested that the LCB allow private marijuana clubs for tourists and to allow for home delivery of marijuana.

From substance abuse prevention advocates

• Revise some definitions;
• Locate stores similar to where liquor stores were located prior to I-1183;
• Ban all advertising;
• If advertising allowed, ban ads attractive to youth;
• Ban home deliveries and Internet sales; 
• Include hotline information on packaging;
• Ban products that appeal to youth;
• Cap grow sizes;
• To buy marijuana people should have a WA identification;
• Mandate a Responsible Vendor Program.

From stakeholders

• Allow outdoor grows;
• Allow extracts (law change needed);
• Security requirements are excessive;
• Home grows should be allowed if they were established before I-502;
• Packaging requirements are excessive;
• Residency rules are too stringent;
• Controlling THC levels is unreasonable;
• Producer licenses should be issued to current farmers first;
• Third party transportation of marijuana should be allowed; 
• Allow Internet sales;
• Keep grow operations small.

Listen to the entire work session through the Liquor Control Board's YouTube channel.

Liquor Control Board seeks comments about draft marijuana market rules

Produced in Washington logo

The Liquor Control Board (LCB) released the initial draft rules for I-502 implementation. These rules reflect the Board’s stated goal of developing a tightly regulated and controlled market, and also demonstrate the agency’s initial thinking on what Washington’s system of growing, processing and retailing will look like. The Board is concerned with out-of-state diversion of product, traceability of products, responsible business practices, youth access and other public and consumer safety issues.

Initial draft rules may be downloaded at: https://lcb.box.com/initial-draft-rules. 

By releasing these initial draft rules before filing the formal draft rules the LCB is soliciting public comment before starting the official draft rule process in mid-June. Vetting these rules with stakeholders allows the LCB to adapt and improve them. These draft rules will benefit from community input, alternatives and adjustments so please review closely and send suggestions to the below contact points no later than June 10, 2013.

The best way to provide your input is via email at: rules@liq.wa.gov. 

Alternatively:
Rules Coordinator
Liquor Control Board
P.O. Box 43080
Olympia, WA 98504-3080

Fax: 360-664-9689

CenturyLink Field wants to sell more hard alcohol during sporting events

CenturyLink Field, home to the Seahawks and the Sounders, proposes to increase the number of spirits outlets from 26 to 42 points of sale in 2013, and to add 40 more points of sale in 2014, increasing the total number to 82 points of spirits sales within the stadium. This would set a precedent for other sports and entertainment facilities around the state.

Last year, CenturyLink requested and was approved for a 2,000 person beer garden. Beer is available at approximately 400 points of sale within the stadium plus roving vendors.  In addition, alcohol is available at many bars and restaurants within a mile radius of the stadium.

The stadium is broken down into four areas of alcohol service:

• all levels sell beer and wine and are open three hours prior to game time, 
• level 1 includes two beer gardens that serve spirits,
• level 2 contains restricted club seats and suites that also serve spirits,
• level 3 also has a spirits garden.

CenturyLink’s request would allow fans to purchase one drink containing spirits per person and return to their seats with them.  (Right now, fans must drink spirits in a beer/spirits garden.) This would be available in every level except the 3rd level where most alcohol-fueled problems occur. CenturyLink claims the drinks contain 1.25 oz. of spirits in an 8 or 10 oz. container (less than 1 standard drink), so they are actually getting less alcohol than the large beer purchase. (Fans can purchase 2 beers per person.)

As CenturyLink seems to understand considering their request does not include level 3 of the stadium, alcohol contributes to public safety problems inside and outside of the stadium.  Here are some links to a KIRO investigation about violence at NFL stadiums:

http://www.kirotv.com/news/news/crime-inside-nfl-stadiums-hidden-police/nT9RP/

http://www.kirotv.com/news/news/centurylink-field-seeks-hard-liquor-fans/nWZzY/

CenturyLink was the subject of two high profile over-service violations, resulting in a fan beaten so severely that he had to be treated at Harborview. Neither of these incidents were referred to the Liquor Control Board.

Comments about CenturyLink's request can be made directly to the 3 Liquor Control Board members:

• Sharon Foster, Chair - sf@liq.wa.gov
• Chris Marr - cjm@liq.wa.gov
• Ruthann Kurose - rkuro@liq.wa.gov

Liquor Control Board considers rule to require liquor vendors to report thefts

From the statewide Coalition to Reduce Underage Drinking: 

The passage of Initiative 1183 privatized liquor sales across the state last summer.  Since then, many communities have seen an increase in theft of spirits.  The Washington State Liquor Control Board (LCB) is currently engaged in rulemaking that would require spirits license holders (stores that sell liquor) to report 4 times a year the theft or loss due to shrinkage.

Liquor theft has been covered by media and following are two examples:

• Liquor boosting much worse than first reported
• Teen shoplifting, liquor a bad mix

A November 2012 post contains additional information.

Mandatory Reporting of Loss of Spirits Due to Theft and Internal Shrinkage: The public comment on proposed rulemaking on this topic will end Wednesday, February 27, 2013.  This is a different and distinct window of opportunity for public comment then the one that ended on January 27.  (In late January this item progressed to the “proposed rulemaking phase” - known as CR 102 - where a new comment period began specific to the proposed rule.)

Proposed language under consideration by the LCB states:

(4) Spirit retail licensees must report to the board quarterly on a form provided by the board, spirits product loss due to theft and internal shrinkage.

The proposed language would be added to the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) that defines the requirements for a spirits retail license.  The new language is underlined and can be found on the last page of the attached notice to stakeholders.

Public comment to the LCB can be submitted in any of the following ways:

Why is reporting of theft is important?

1. Law enforcement can better direct resources to mitigate public safety issues such as alcohol-fueled crimes and the black market of theft and resale of spirits.

2. The state can better quantify the amount of revenue loss from what would have been legitimate sales.

3. Prevention coalitions and concerned community groups can better assess the extent spirits are available to youth in their community.

Public Hearing

A public hearing on this item will be included in the LCB’s February 27 meeting.  The meeting begins at 10:00 a.m. and the public is invited to participate.  Comments about this proposed rule may also be submitted to the Rules Coordinator prior to the meeting.  

I-1183: expectation vs. reality

Earlier this month, a group of 23 people representing NE Seattle participated in the annual Washington State Prevention Summit in Yakima.  Three student teams were part of the NE Seattle delegation representing Eckstein Middle School, Nathan Hale High School, and Roosevelt High School.  Youth and adults learned about the latest substance abuse trends and how to develop and conduct prevention activities in their communities.

Some youth and adult workshop handouts are now available through the Prevention Summit website.

Among the handouts are ones from an adult workshops about the effects of Initiative 1183 that privatized the sale of spirits/hard alcohol and deregulated other aspects of our state's liquor system.  Here are a few of the slides from the presentation.

More information about the implementation of I-1183 is available on the Washington State Liquor Control Board website.  The Proposed Rules page includes information about defining "trade area" and the Recently Adopted Rules page includes new rules related to I-1183 including the delivery of spirits/hard alcohol to homes.

What's been happening since I-1183 was approved?

It's been almost a year since Initiative 1183, which privatized the sales of hard alcohol and removed other alcohol regulations, was approved by Washington voters.  So, what has been happening in the past year?

Shoplifting
Recently, I've attended several meetings, both local and on the state level, during which a hot topic was the amount of hard alcohol that is being shoplifted from grocery stores.  Here is a news report with an example of what is happening across the state.



Increased enforcement needs with less enforcement capacity
Since I-1183 was approved, the Washington State Liquor Control Board (WSLCB) lost over 1,000 full time employees, according to a report given during the September meeting of the WSLCB Business Advisory Council.

Since I-1183 did not direct more funding for the WSLCB Enforcement division, despite an increase in the number of liquor licensees, there are 290 liquor licensees for every Enforcement officer.  The Education and Enforcement division officer staffing is down 15% with an increase of retail licensees of 23%.

Business representatives reported that many of them have plans to ask the Washington legislature to remove or reduce fees that were included in I-1183.  These fees were included in the initiative to ensure that the state would not lose revenue due to liquor privatization.

NE Seattle
In addition to the more than 80 businesses that sell alcohol (not just hard alcohol) for off-premise consumption in NE Seattle, a new big box liquor store will soon be opening on Lake City Way right next door to a marijuana dispensary.

Buyer's remorse?
This video, produced by the UFCW, discusses liquor privatization in our state as a way to educate Pennsylvania voters as they consider privatizing the sale of liquor.

Spirits to be sold over internet & phone for home delivery

The Washington State Liquor Control Board is seeking input regarding a rule change to allow spirits/hard alcohol to be sold over the internet, by phone, or by mail.  The proposal would allow for delivery to a residence -- a hotel or motel room would be considered a temporary residence.  Read the text of the rule change here.

The Liquor Control Board is accepting comments until Wednesday, October 24.  Comments may be emailed to the Rules Coordinator at rules@liq.wa.gov.  Comments may also be made during a public hearing on Wednesday, October 24, 10:00 a.m. in Olympia.

UPDATE:  The Liquor Control Board public hearing on this issue was postponed to October 31.  Same time, same place.

Liquor Control Board will not consider extending alcohol service hours

Today, the Washington State Liquor Control Board denied the City of Seattle's request to open rule-making regarding hours of alcohol service.  In Washington, liquor sales will continue to be prohibited between the hours of 2-6:00 a.m.

The two Board members who voted to deny the City of Seattle's request cited concerns about public health and safety.  For instance, the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs recently took a position against extended hours.  Community substance abuse prevention advocates pointed to the National Prevention Strategy that recommends reducing hours of alcohol sales as a proven way to reduce excessive drinking.  

In his public statement, the one Board member who voted to move forward with the City of Seattle's request states, "Our decision today begs the question of what exactly is the role of this three-person Board in the wake of Initiative 1183?  If it is not to oversee a healthy and public dialogue on complex, contentious issues that deal with alcohol access, what is it?  That's not for me to answer here today, but I do believe it is a conversation that will begin in the near future, and our inaction today is as good a starting point as any."

While I think that the Board did, in fact, oversee a healthy and public dialogue about a complex, contentious issue over the past few months, I also think he makes a good point about the role of the Board post-liquor privatization.  I think he's right when he says that the role of the Board and the role of alcohol regulations in our state are part of a conversation that needs to continue.  Those of us concerned with public health and safety should be ready for it.

Statements from each of the Board members may be viewed through the Liquor Control Board website.

Liquor Control Board seeks public input about rules to implement I-1183

The Washington State Liquor Control Board would like your input on proposed rules to implement Initiative 1183 which privatized liquor sales in Washington. The following chapters in WAC 314 will be addressed in this rule making:

• WAC 314-05  Special Occasion Licenses
• WAC 314-11  General requirements for licensees
• WAC 314-13  Retail licensees purchasing beer, wine, and spirits
• WAC 314-24  Domestic wineries and domestic wine distributors
• WAC 314-27  Interstate Commercial Common Passenger Carriers
• WAC 314-30  Manufacturers
• WAC 314-36  Importers, Public Storage Warehouses and Importation of Liquor
• WAC 314-37  Non-state liquor stores
• WAC 314-38  Permits
• WAC 314-42  Liquor Control Board operations
• WAC 314-44  Licensed Agents
• WAC 314-45  Serving and donating liquor by suppliers at trade conventions of licensees
• WAC 314-52 Advertising
• WAC 314-64  Liquor samples
• WAC 314-76  Special orders

Public Comment

Please forward you initial comments to the Liquor Control Board by June 27, 2012.

Public Hearing

June 27, 2012, 10:00 a.m.

Washington State Liquor Control Board – Board Room

3000 Pacific Avenue SE, Olympia, WA

If you have any questions, please contact the Liquor Control Board at rules@liq.wa.gov.

Washington making progress in addressing youth exposure to alcohol marketing

Most states do not address youth exposure to alcohol marketing, according to a new report from the Center on Alcohol Marketing and Youth (CAMY).

Only eleven states use more than one of eight recommended strategies to reduce youth exposure to alcohol.  Washington State implements all elements of one best practice and some elements of three other best practices.  According to the report, Washington fully implements the recommendation to establish explicit jurisdiction over in-state electronic media.  It partially implements the following recommendations:

• Prohibit false or misleading alcohol advertising.
• Restrict outdoor alcohol advertising in locations where children are likely to be present.
• Limit giveaways (contests, raffles, etc.)

The four recommendations that Washington does not implement are:

• Prohibit alcohol advertising that targets minors.
• Restrict alcohol advertising on retail outlet windows and in outside areas.
• Prohibit alcohol advertising on college campuses.
• Restrict sponsorship of civic events. 

The report notes that Washington has made progress within the past few years:  The Washington State Liquor Control Board conducted a broad review of its advertising rules in 2010, including many of the topics found in this report.  The preamble to its new rules states that the "liquor control board regulates alcohol advertising to . . . reduce youth exposure to alcohol advertising and marketing" (Washington Admin. Code 314-52-005).  Although the revisions were relatively modest . . . they represent an important first step in asserting control over alcohol advertising that targets youth.