Committee advances AG-backed fixes to restore penalties for large-scale illegal marijuana grows

The House Regulatory Reform Committee on Tuesday advanced substitute versions of House bills 5105 and 5107 after testimony from the Michigan Attorney General's office that a court interpretation of recent marijuana law unintentionally limited penalties for large, illegal commercial grows.

Ashley Steffen, legislative director for the Michigan Attorney General, and Scott Teeter, division chief for the department's financial crimes division, told the committee that a court decision read the marijuana-authorizing statute as superseding parts of the state's Controlled Substances Act. That interpretation reduced the penalty for a range of large grows to a $500 fine, they said.

Teeter said the substitutes would reinstate a multi-tier penalty scheme and refine penalty tiers so prosecutors can charge large-scale commercial operations as felonies when appropriate. "We've seen 5,000, 10,000 and 15,000 plant grows," Teeter said, arguing the existing gap left prosecutors without the tools to deter and pursue criminal enterprises.

The committee discussed tier thresholds and potential impacts on caregivers and patients. Cassin Coleman, who identified himself as a caregiver and industry worker, urged lawmakers to consider patients who rely on larger quantities for medical use and asked the committee to revisit lower-tier possession limits.

Representative Wozniak moved the adoption of substitute H-1 for HB5105; the clerk recorded the substitute as adopted (roll call recorded 15 yays, 0 nays). The committee then voted to report HB5105 as substituted H-1 with a recommendation (clerk recorded 14 yays, 0 nays, 1 pass). Representative Tisdell moved to adopt substitute H-1 for HB5107 and Representative Nyer moved to report HB5107 as substituted H-1; the committee adopted the substitute and reported the bill.

The AG's office framed the bills as a technical legislative fix following a court instruction that lawmakers, not judges, should correct statutory conflicts. Committee members asked follow-up questions about where tier thresholds should be set and whether the substitutes preserve authorized personal-use allowances.

The committee packet included a letter from the Attorney General's office explaining court background and recommended statutory language. Next steps will move the bills from committee toward floor consideration according to House rules.