YOUR BUSINESS AUTHORITY
Springfield, MO
YOUR BUSINESS AUTHORITY
Springfield, MO
Missouri's marijuana program has received a "fair" rating, the second-worst score possible, in a state audit.
The audit, conducted by Auditor Scott Fitzpatrick's office and released Feb. 18, claims the state's marijuana program launched with a flawed application and evaluation process that led to litigation expenses, according to a news release.
Fitzpatrick said in the release that while he credits the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services "for standing up a program of this enormous scope in such a short period of time," there were issues with the evaluation and scoring of license applications that led to "a shadow over the program" and millions of dollars in expenses to the state.
The audit reviewed 67 facility license applications and found that 12 included unique application identifier numbers that could lead to the applicant's business name being deduced. According to the release, those applications were not penalized for violating redaction rules and instead benefited from the lack of anonymity.
"What was meant to be a blind scoring process was able to be circumvented by applicants who provided indications of their identity throughout their applications, and the numbers show applicants who did that won licenses at a greatly increased rate compared to those who followed the rules and remained anonymous," Fitzpatrick said in the release. "These sorts of issues undermine the confidence applicants and taxpayers have in the legitimacy of the license granting process."
From 2020 through 2023, the state marijuana program incurred more than $12.5 million in costs associated with litigation and administrative appeals, officials with the auditor's office say.
DHSS spokesperson Lisa Cox provided a statement on behalf of the department regarding legal expenses identified in the lawsuit.
"Costs associated were legally required and integral to ensuring fairness and transparency," the statement reads. "Legal and administrative expenses tied to appeals were anticipated and budgeted as part of implementing a constitutionally mandated program. DHSS disputes any implication that these costs represent inefficiency or mismanagement; rather, they reflect compliance with constitutional and statutory requirements as demonstrated by the outcomes of these cases, which were overwhelmingly in favor of DHSS."
The auditor's office additionally found scoring inconsistencies and lackluster documentation, according to the release.
Missouri voters approved medical marijuana in 2018, and the state issued its first business licenses in 2019. Voters gave the green light to recreational marijuana in 2022.
This installment of Springfield Business Journal’s Architects & Engineers Project Report showcases 26 endeavors by area design and engineering professionals.
Longtime employee sues Ozarks Tech, alleges retaliation
Cavender’s opens hat shop in southeast Springfield
Eric Schmitt introduces Modern Skies Act
Caterpillar to acquire John Fabick Tractor Co.
Springfield airport to cut the ribbon on $35M in construction projects
Legacy Bank accused in lawsuit of failing to protect customers in data breach
This should have never happened. If our Legislature was involved with public meetings before legalization was passed state representatives should have researched other state’s licensing structure, deduced what would best practices would be week received here, and apropos requirements set forth to “level the field” for applicants. The following should never have happened: “From 2020 through 2023, the state marijuana program incurred more than $12.5 million in costs associated with litigation and administrative appeals, officials with the auditor's office say.”