Power Grab at the PGC County Council: Why CB-093-2026 Threatens Community Oversight of Cannabis Revenue
When Maryland legalised adult-use cannabis, the central promise made to communities hit hardest by historical over-policing was simple: reinvestment. Local dollars would be guided by local voices to repair real harm.
The creation of the citizen-led Cannabis Reinvestment and Restoration Board was meant to be the cornerstone of that promise. Yet today, as the Prince George’s County Council’s Government Operations and Fiscal Policy (GOFP) Committee considers CB-093-2026, that community mandate is under direct threat.
Sponsored by Council Member Krystal Oriadha, CB-093-2026 purports to streamline procedural timelines. In reality, it inserts a glaring "council bypass" mechanism that consolidates power in the hands of elected officials at the direct expense of grass-roots public oversight.
A Calculated Breach of Public Trust
Under CB-093-2026, the Cannabis Reinvestment and Restoration Board is given a strict 90-day deadline following the start of the fiscal year to submit its methodology and distribution recommendations. If the board misses this window for any reason—be it administrative bottlenecks or the time-consuming work of gathering genuine public feedback—the legislation grants the County Council the explicit right to move forward independently, bypassing the board entirely to set funding criteria and allocate millions in cannabis tax revenues.
This isn't an efficiency measure; it is an ultimatum.
Citizen-led advisory boards exist precisely to insulate community dollars from political jockeying. By holding a 90-day clock over the head of a newly formed board, the Council creates a system rigged for failure. If a citizen board takes the time required to conduct thorough outreach and ensure equitable distribution, they risk being stripped of their authority altogether.
Voters Want Community Governance, Not Centralised Control
Prince George’s County residents did not support cannabis equity programs simply to watch a $12.9 million pot of reinvestment funds turn into another political slush fund controlled by Council chambers.
Voters overwhelmingly favor accountability, transparency, and grassroots direction when it comes to social equity dollars. Stripping the advisory board of its leverage setting up a legislative back-door directly contradicts what the public expects from local governance. It sends a clear, troubling message to residents: Your input is welcome only as long as it fits our schedule; otherwise, the Council will take it from here.
The Council Must Reject CB-093-2026
If the County Council truly values community partnership and equity, it should be strengthening the capacity of the Cannabis Reinvestment and Restoration Board—not writing legislation designed to sidestep it.
The GOFP Committee must recognise CB-093-2026 for what it is: an inappropriate concentration of power that disenfranchises the very stakeholders the board was established to represent. The Council should vote down this proposal and reaffirm its commitment to true, uncompromised community oversight.