In the days of the Armada, a fleet of warships, the scuttlebutt was the rumor or gossip that would spread throughout the ship. Today, Armada Law Corp presents The Scuttlebutt, a daily summery of news articles that people within the cannabis, hemp and plant medicine industries are chatting about along with links to the full articles.
In today’s news:
With respect to the first bucket, these kinds of things are generally fairly obvious. A contract usually will require one party to act a certain way, and the other party will need to consent to departures from these actions. One pretty common approval is the approval of a property lessor to an assignment or sublease. These can be a huge headache for buyers in M&A deals, as I’ve discussed before. The bottom line is that any time a cannabis business wants to take any kind of action that relates in any way to a written contract, it first needs to review the contract.
The second bucket of cannabis contract approvals can be a bit more difficult. These relate to actions that may be unrelated or only somewhat related to a contract. For example, a lender may require that a borrower not secure third party financing even on matters unrelated to the lender’s loan without the lender’s prior written approval.”
Larry Glass, executive director of the Northcoast Environmental Center said three judges who have heard previous appeals of the 8.5-acre project have thus far deferred to the Humboldt County Planning Commission’s decision. NEC is one of the petitioners of the appeal.
“We want the appeals court to set the record straight again — we feel like we’re going to be successful,” he said.
Glass said the groups want to see a full California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, analysis of the project. The appeal is for alleged violation of CEQA and Humboldt County’s General Plan.”
Company Says Deal For Cannabis License Was Lawful: https://www.law360.com/
“If something dramatic doesn’t happen before July 1st, we are all locked out of the legal market,” Kislak says. “For me in particular, due to the zoning of my property, if I lose my license, I may never be able to get licensed again.”
Kislak is referring to a licensing backlog that has formed in Mendocino County, where tight government operating budgets and a failure to act on discretionary authority have left county officials slogging behind on carrying out the environmental reviews required for cannabis cultivators to transition from provisional to annual licensure.
This backlog, which includes more than 96% of Mendocino County’s active cultivation operations that do not have annual licensure, has developed despite the California Department of Cannabis Control (DCC) allocating nearly $17.6 million in grant funding in early 2022 to assist the county with the permitting process.”