Zuber Lawler:  The Future of Marijuana Legalization in Minnesota 


Article by: Partner Christopher Parrington

In 1964, Minnesota music legend Bob Dylan warned the world that “the times they are a-changin.” Sixty years later and this lyric is true with regard to Minnesota’s cannabis industry. Within the first few days of the 2023 legislative session, a bill was introduced for the legalization of recreational cannabis in Minnesota (the “Bill”). Although a lot still needs to be done, recent comments from Governor Walz along with the democratic control of the legislature means legalization is no longer a question of “if,” but “when,” with months being the most likely answer. The Bill serves as a great guide to what legalization will look like in Minnesota even though it will definitely undergo plenty of changes before it becomes law.

The Bill proposes the issuance of 13 cannabis-related licenses including recreational and medical cultivation and manufacturing; recreational, medical and lower potency edible[1] retail sales; wholesale; transportation; testing; delivery; event organizing; and microbusinesses. Cultivation licenses are broken down into 2 categories: craft cultivators limited to 10,000 square feet of plant canopy; and bulk cultivators limited to 30,000 square feet of plant canopy. Anyone holding a cultivator license would also be able to hold a manufacturing and event license, but not a license for retail sales. Anyone holding a manufacturing license would also be restricted from holding a retail sales license, but not cultivation. Manufacturers will have to obtain a separate endorsement for extraction or an “edible cannabinoid product handler endorsement” for edible products. Anyone who holds a retail license would be banned from holding cultivation and manufacturing licenses as well. The Bill provides for the separate licensing of retailers of lower potency edible products, but does not allow for them to hold any other cannabis licenses; however, anyone holding such a license may also hold liquor licenses and sell lower potency edible products including beverages intended for on-site consumption, thereby opening the door for the sale of cannabis products in bars and liquor stores.

The Bill is clearly against vertical integration in Minnesota’s cannabis industry unless the Office determines that the issuance of multiple licenses to a single applicant is “necessary to ensure a sufficient supply of cannabis flower and cannabinoid products” during the first year of cannabis sales. The Bill’s clear intent is to separate cultivation and manufacturing from retail sales, requiring owners to decide their level of involvement in the cannabis industry prior to applying. However, the Bill does provide for some limited vertical integration under a cannabis microbusiness license that allows for limited cultivation, product manufacturing, retail sales, and operation of an on-site edible consumption establishment.

Under the Bill, there will be a competitive application process for licenses with minimum requirements such as disclosure of entity ownership and control; bankruptcy and criminal background checks; proof of legal possession of the premises for the business’s operation; adequate security measures; trade name registrations; a detailed business plan; and labor organization attestation. The Bill requires that at least 75% of the licensed businesses be owned by Minnesota residents. The Office will be responsible for establishing the application process and required materials, with points being awarded for social equity applicants; veteran applicants; security and record keeping; employee training; business plan and financial situation; diversity; labor and employment practices; cannabis knowledge and experience; and environmental plan. Additional points may be awarded if the license holder would expand to an underrepresented market such as Minnesota’s medical cannabis program and social equity status must account for at least 20% of the total available points, which will take into consideration “the number or ownership percentage of cooperative members, officers, directors, managers, and general partners who qualify as social equity applicants.”

Local governments will not be allowed to prohibit the operation of a licensed cannabis business under the Bill, but could adopt reasonable restrictions on the time, place, and manner of the operation of a cannabis business. More significantly, the Bill that provides that “[a] city or county may establish, own, and operate a municipal cannabis store” subject to the same restrictions as commercially owned cannabis retailers, creating a model similar to Minnesota’s municipal liquor stores.

The Bill recognizes that entry into the cannabis industry contains numerous financial barriers and, therefore, proposes the establishment of numerous financial ways to assist businesses in the cannabis industry. Specifically, the Bill proposes the establishment of cannabis grant and financial assistance programs as follows:

  • CanRenew: designed to award grants to eligible organizations including educational institutions, nonprofits, private businesses, community groups, local governments and partnerships, for investments in communities where long-term residents are eligible to be social equity applicants.
  • A program for the issuance of substance use disorder treatment and prevention grants.
  • CanGrow: establishing a revolving loan account for loan financing of cannabis grower grants designed to help farmers expand into the legal cannabis industry.
  • CanStartup: designed to award grants to nonprofit corporations to fund loans to cannabis businesses focused on job creation in communities consisting of social equity eligible applicants.
  • CanTrain: designed to award grants to organizations training people for work in the cannabis industry and individuals eligible to acquire such training.

Finally, the Bill is also focused on correcting the wrongs that have occurred as a result of prior cannabis prohibition through an expungement and felony resentencing section that includes automatic expungement of certain cannabis offenses as well as implementation of cannabis and substance use education programs directed at youth, pregnant and breastfeeding women, and home visiting programs for homes with infants and young children. The future of cannabis legalization is here and the Bill gives existing medical and potential cannabis businesses and their owners a great insight into what that future may look like in Minnesota.

[1] Under the Bill, “lower potency edible products” are defined as servings that contain no more than 5 milligrams of Delta-9 THC per serving, 25 milligrams of cannabidoil per serving, and not more than a combined total of 0.5 milligrams of all other cannabinoids. Id. § 342.01, subd. 45.

Christopher Parrington, Partner

Christopher Parrington represents cannabis companies in respect of deals, regulatory work, and litigation. He has represented cannabis clients located in many of the states that have passed legislation legalizing cannabis (whether at the medical or recreational level). Mr. Parrington has the knowledge, understanding, and experience necessary to advise clients through the myriad challenges of navigating state laws and local government rules and regulations relating to cannabis. He has also represented clients attempting to navigate through the regulatory landscape that resulted from the federal government’s legalization of hemp under the 2018 Farm Bill including continuing hemp operations under the 2014 Farm Bill, creation of compliance policies and procedures under the 2018 Farm Bill, and issues related to the interstate transportation of hemp.

About Zuber Lawler


Zuber Lawler is one of the most selective law firms in the United States, representing clients throughout the world from offices in Chicago, Denver, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, Phoenix, New York, and Silicon Valley. In addition to representing a list of Fortune companies, as well as funds and government entities, Zuber Lawler represents leading companies in emerging industries and technologies, including blockchain, crypto, NFTs, the metaverse, cleantech, eSports/virtual reality, and legalized cannabis. Zuber Lawler focuses on M&A, finance, and other deals; IPOs; intellectual property; antitrust, data/privacy, FDA, anti-corruption, and other regulatory work; and litigation. Zuber Lawler’s attorneys work in languages covering 90% of the world’s population. www.zuberlawler.com.

Top 200 Cannabis Lawyers

We Support

Cannabis Law Journal – Contributing Authors

Editor – Sean Hocking

Author Bios

Matt Maurer – Minden Gross
Jeff Hergot – Wildboer Dellelce LLP

Costa Rica
Tim Morales – The Cannabis Industry Association Costa Rica

Elvin Rodríguez Fabilena


Julie Godard
Carl L Rowley -Thompson Coburn LLP

Jerry Chesler – Chesler Consulting

Ian Stewart – Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP
Otis Felder – Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP
Lance Rogers – Greenspoon Marder – San Diego
Jessica McElfresh -McElfresh Law – San Diego
Tracy Gallegos – Partner – Fox Rothschild

Adam Detsky – Knight Nicastro
Dave Rodman – Dave Rodman Law Group
Peter Fendel – CMR Real Estate Network
Nate Reed – CMR Real Estate Network

Matthew Ginder – Greenspoon Marder
David C. Kotler – Cohen Kotler

William Bogot – Fox Rothschild

Valerio Romano, Attorney – VGR Law Firm, PC

Neal Gidvani – Snr Assoc: Greenspoon Marder
Phillip Silvestri – Snr Assoc: Greenspoon Marder

Tracy Gallegos – Associate Fox Rothschild

New Jersey

Matthew G. Miller – MG Miller Intellectual Property Law LLC
Daniel T. McKillop – Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC

New York
Gregory J. Ryan, Esq. Tesser, Ryan & Rochman, LLP
Tim Nolen Tesser, Ryan & Rochman, LLP
Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP

Paul Loney & Kristie Cromwell – Loney Law Group
William Stewart – Half Baked Labs

Andrew B. Sacks – Managing Partner Sacks Weston Diamond
William Roark – Principal Hamburg, Rubin, Mullin, Maxwell & Lupin
Joshua Horn – Partner Fox Rothschild

Washington DC
Teddy Eynon – Partner Fox Rothschild