Washington Liquor and Cannabis Board Advances Petition for Medical Verification Certificates

State regulators agreed to consider a new rule that would certify licensees' medical cannabis status, despite a staff recommendation to reject it.

FILE — statehouse · B.D. Gilfry / CC BY-SA 2.0

Washington's Liquor and Cannabis Board (LCB) voted on October 7, 2026, to accept a rulemaking petition that would create a formal state process for verifying the medical cannabis activities of licensed cannabis businesses, according to MMJDaily.

The Petition

The petition was filed August 13, 2026, by Caitlein Ryan and The Cannabis Alliance, MMJDaily reported. It asks the Board to issue Medical Cannabis Verification Certificates to retailers, producers and processors that participate in state-authorized medical cannabis activity under chapters 69.50 RCW and 69.51A RCW.

According to the petition text cited by MMJDaily, the goal is to give licensees 'accurate state-issued documentation' they could use 'when seeking protections, rights, or registrations available under federal law,' while 'leaving federal legal determinations to the appropriate federal agency.' The petitioners said the certificate would not create a new license or endorsement category and would not require additional LCB staffing.

Staff Pushback, Board Approval

LCB Director's Office staff recommended denying the petition, MMJDaily reported, warning that the certificate program would likely depend on licensee self-reporting to fill gaps in existing Board and Department of Health records, could create administrative burdens, and would conflict with the Legislature's intent to run a combined recreational-and-medical three-tier market. Staff also argued that because certified licensees would still be allowed to sell recreational cannabis, the certificate would likely not satisfy federal medical cannabis standards or help businesses qualify for federal registration programs.

Despite that recommendation, Board Chair Jim Vollendroff and members Ollie Garrett and Pete Holmes voted to accept the petition, moving it into the formal rulemaking process, according to MMJDaily. The vote does not itself create the certificate; it opens a rulemaking docket under chapter 314-55 WAC where the proposal will be developed and subject to further Board review.

Context: A Large, Shifting Market

The petition surfaces amid a Washington cannabis market that state licensing records show remains one of the largest in the country, with 482 open retail licenses, 973 cultivation licenses, 1,009 manufacturing licenses and four labs as of early October. Separate reporting from The Business Journals, noted in Cannabis Newz's related coverage, found that the state's largest retailers by volume operate outside Seattle, pointing to a market whose commercial weight is spread across many jurisdictions rather than concentrated in one city.

State licensing records reviewed by Cannabis Newz also show a steady churn of license closures in recent months, including businesses operating as The Green Shelf, Point Edmund Retail Holdings, Stickys, Fillabong and Evolve Cannabis, all marked no longer active as of mid-August. It is not clear from available records whether any of these closures relate to medical-cannabis activity specifically, and no connection to the verification petition has been reported.

What's Unsettled

Neither MMJDaily's account nor the petition language establishes that federal cannabis rescheduling has formally occurred; the petitioners instead frame their request around federal law 'evolving,' a phrasing that leaves open exactly what federal change, if any, has prompted the filing. The Board's acceptance of the petition means a rulemaking process will now proceed, but the staff objections on administrative burden and alignment with the state's combined-market structure remain on the record and could shape, or stall, the eventual rule.

It is also unclear how long the rulemaking process will take or whether the final rule will resemble the petitioners' original request. Cannabis Newz will continue to track the docket as the LCB develops draft rule language and solicits further public comment.