Cannabis reinvestment board

A board member (and ICU physician) who works on the board said members have moved quickly despite no full-time staff and asked the council not to unseat them 45 days after enactment.

Urged opposition unless the council's authority over awards is clarified and the January 1 deadline is made workable.

A community advocate called consideration of the bill 'shameful' amid grant-funding scrutiny and urged the council to vote it down.

ACLU of Maryland policy director said the bill would strip the board's authority and reduce it to advisory, contrary to the 2023 law's intent.

A board member noted Prince George's has 18 of Maryland's disproportionately impacted zip codes and said the board has been ready and diligent since standing up in March 2026.

A District 5 community member asked the council to reject the bill, protect the board's authority, and criticized members for looking at their phones during testimony.

Warned the 90-day deadline could transfer board authority to the council and said she is concerned about how cannabis funds have been handled.

Executive director of the county Community Development Corporation; opposed the 90-day ultimatum as heavy-handed toward the community the fund is meant to heal.

A cannabis board member appointed by Blegay described her personal connection to the drug war and asked the committee to build on, not discard, the board's work.

Advocate with Citizens for Accountability and Governance; urged the committee to leave the board in its original form and give it resources instead of more political control.

Chair of the cannabis board; said most of her recommendations were incorporated but flagged the naming inconsistency and unfilled board vacancies since appointments in 2024.

Spoke for a countywide community coalition in opposition, warning against weakening community voice and board terms.

A social equity cannabis license applicant; wants funds distributed faster with community voice preserved and vacancies filled.

Longtime advocate who angrily accused sponsors Burroughs and Oriadha of a power grab and breaking faith with the advocates who fought for the fund.

Echoed prior opposition, saying the bill unnecessarily weakens the current board and urging the council not to interfere.