California 2019-2020 Regular Session Status: Passed Senate

SB 627 — Cannabis and cannabis products: medicinal use on an animal: veterinary medicine.

Last action — August 20 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Senate
  4. 4
    Passed Assembly
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2019-2020 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

The California Uniform Controlled Substances Act classifies controlled substances into 5 designated schedules, and places cannabis and cannabis products under Schedule I. The act prohibits prescribing, administering, dispensing, or furnishing a controlled substance to or for any person or animal, unless otherwise specified. This bill would create an exception to the above-described prohibition for medicinal use of cannabis on an animal pursuant to the provisions of the bill described below. Existing law, the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, an initiative measure enacted by the approval of Proposition 215 at the November 6, 1996, statewide general election, authorizes the use of cannabis for medical purposes and provides certain protections to a physician and surgeon who recommends the use of medical cannabis to a patient. The Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act of 2016 (AUMA) , an initiative measure approved as Proposition 64 at the November 8, 2016, statewide general election, authorizes a person who obtains a state license under AUMA to engage in commercial adult-use cannabis activity pursuant to that license and applicable local ordinances. The Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA) , among other things, provides for the licensure and regulation of commercial medicinal and adult-use cannabis activities and states that the purpose and intent of MAUCRSA is to establish a comprehensive system to control and regulate the cultivation, distribution, transport, storage, manufacturing, processing, and sale of both medicinal cannabis and medicinal cannabis products for patients with a valid physician recommendation and adult-use cannabis and adult-use cannabis products for adults 21 years of age and over. MAUCRSA defines various terms for these purposes, including "medicinal cannabis," "medicinal cannabis products," "physician's recommendation," and "primary caregiver." MAUCRSA authorizes a licensed medicinal cannabis retailer to sell or transfer cannabis, cannabis products, and cannabis accessories to a person 18 years of age or older who possesses a valid government-issued identification card and either a specified valid county-issued identification card or a valid physician's recommendation for themselves or for a person for whom they are a primary caregiver. MAUCRSA provides that information contained in a physician's recommendation and received by a licensee is deemed medical information for purposes of the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act and prohibits a licensee from that information, except as specified. The Veterinary Medicine Practice Act provides for the licensure and regulation of veterinarians and the practice of veterinary medicine by the Veterinary Medical Board, which is within the Department of Consumer Affairs. The act authorizes the board to revoke or suspend the license of a person to practice veterinary medicine, or to assess a fine, for specified causes, including discussing medicinal cannabis with a client while the veterinarian is employed by, or has an agreement with, a MAUCRSA licensee and distributing advertising for cannabis in California. The act prohibits the board from disciplining a licensed veterinarian solely for discussing the use of cannabis on an animal for medicinal purposes, absent negligence or incompetence. The act requires the board, on or before January 1, 2020, to adopt guidelines for veterinarians to follow when discussing cannabis within the veterinarian-client-patient relationship. The act prohibits a licensed veterinarian from dispensing or administering cannabis or cannabis products to an animal patient. The act makes a violation of its provisions a crime. This bill would authorize a veterinarian to discuss the use of medicinal cannabis or medicinal cannabis products on an animal patient. The bill would require the board, on or before January 1, 2022, to adopt guidelines for veterinarians to follow when recommending cannabis within the veterinarian-client-patient relationship. The bill, on and after the date that the board adopts the guidelines described in the previous sentence, would authorize a veterinarian to recommend medicinal cannabis or medicinal cannabis products on an animal patient for any condition for which cannabis or cannabis products provide relief, subject to specified requirements, including that the recommendation include, at a minimum, the condition for which the recommendation is issued, the name of the client, as defined, and the name of the animal patient. The bill would prohibit a veterinarian from recommending medicinal cannabis or medicinal cannabis products on an animal patient without an appropriate examination and a medical indication. The bill also would prohibit a veterinarian from recommending medicinal cannabis or medicinal cannabis products on an animal patient while the veterinarian is employed by, or has an agreement with, a person or entity dispensing medicinal cannabis or medicinal cannabis products. The bill would prohibit the board from disciplining or denying, revoking, or suspending the license of a veterinarian solely for recommending the use of cannabis on an animal patient, and would provide that a veterinarian who makes a recommendation pursuant to these provisions is entitled to the same protections as a physician and surgeon under the Compassionate Use Act of 1996. The bill would prohibit a veterinarian from advertising that the veterinarian offers recommendations for medicinal cannabis. Because a violation of that prohibition would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would expand the purpose and intent of MAUCRSA to control and regulate those above-mentioned activities for medicinal cannabis for animal patients with a valid veterinarian's recommendation, as defined, and for medicinal and adult-use cannabis for medicinal use on an animal by adults 21 years of age and over, and would make conforming changes, including revising the definition of "cannabis products" to include cannabis products intended for medicinal use on an animal, and revising the definitions of "medicinal cannabis" and "medicinal cannabis product" to include cannabis and a cannabis product, respectively, intended to be sold for use on an animal patient pursuant to a veterinarian's recommendation, or intended to be sold for medicinal use on an animal by adults who are 21 years of age and older for purposes of MAUCRSA. The bill would authorize a person to purchase cannabis or cannabis products for use on an animal patient that the person owns if the person is 21 years of age or older. The bill would require cannabis or cannabis products for use on an animal patient to have cannabis as the primary active ingredient. The bill would authorize a licensed medicinal cannabis retailer to sell or transfer cannabis, cannabis products, and cannabis accessories to a person 21 years of age or older for medicinal use on an animal that the person owns. The bill would require that information contained in a veterinarian's recommendation remain a confidential part of an animal patient's record, as specified. The bill would make related findings and declarations. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. AUMA authorizes legislative amendment of its provisions with a 23 vote of both houses, without submission to the voters, to further its purposes and intent. This bill would declare that its provisions further the purposes and intent of AUMA.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. August 20 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

  2. August 18 set for second hearing. Placed on suspense file.

  3. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  4. August 21 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author.

  5. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  6. (Received at desk July 17 pursuant to JR 61(a)(10)).

  7. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 17. Noes 2.) (July 9).

  8. Referred to Com. on B. & P.

  9. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  10. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 33. Noes 0. Page 1243.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  11. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  12. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 4. Noes 1. Page 1105.) (May 16).

  13. Set for hearing May 16.

  14. May 13 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  15. Set for hearing May 13.

  16. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  17. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 0. Page 770.) (April 22).

  18. Set for hearing April 22.

  19. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on B., P. & E.D.

  20. Referred to Com. on B., P. & E.D.

  21. Read first time.

  22. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 27.

  23. Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

  • Galgiani · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 1 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Galgiani

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

Passed 17 Yea · 2 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 12200
Democratic 4000
Republican 1000
Total 17200
% of votes cast 89%11%0%0%
How each member voted (19)
Member Party Vote
Gloria — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Fong — Yea
Brough — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Low — Yea
Medina — Yea
Ting — Yea
Holden — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Cunningham — Nay
Obernolte — Nay
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Yea

Official roll call →

3rd Reading

Passed 33 Yea · 0 Nay · 5 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 24003
Democratic 9000
Republican 0002
Total 33005
% of votes cast 87%0%0%13%
How each member voted (38)
Member Party Vote
Rubio — Yea
Monning — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Beall — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Hill — Yea
Roth — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Moorlach — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Allen — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Glazer — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Chang — Yea
Pan — Yea
Borgeas — Not Voting
Bates — Not Voting
Morrell — Not Voting
Mark Stone — Yea
Archuleta, Bob Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Not Voting
Jones, Brian W. Republican Not Voting

Official roll call →

Do pass

Passed 4 Yea · 1 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 4001
Republican 0100
Total 4101
% of votes cast 67%17%0%17%
How each member voted (6)
Member Party Vote
Hill — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Bates — Not Voting
Jones, Brian W. Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Placed on suspense file

Passed 6 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 1000
Unaffiliated 5000
Total 6000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (6)
Member Party Vote
Wieckowski — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Bates — Yea
Hill — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

healthcare labor technology
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 627 do?
The California Uniform Controlled Substances Act classifies controlled substances into 5 designated schedules, and places cannabis and cannabis products under Schedule I. The act prohibits prescribing, administering, dispensing, or furnishing a controlled substance to or for any person or animal, unless otherwise specified. This bill would create an exception to the above-described prohibition for medicinal use of cannabis on an animal pursuant to the provisions of the bill described below. Existing law, the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, an initiative measure enacted by the approval of Proposition 215 at the November 6, 1996, statewide general election, authorizes the use of cannabis for medical purposes and provides certain protections to a physician and surgeon who recommends the use of medical cannabis to a patient. The Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act of 2016 (AUMA) , an initiative measure approved as Proposition 64 at the November 8, 2016, statewide general election, authorizes a person who obtains a state license under AUMA to engage in commercial adult-use cannabis activity pursuant to that license and applicable local ordinances. The Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA) , among other things, provides for the licensure and regulation of commercial medicinal and adult-use cannabis activities and states that the purpose and intent of MAUCRSA is to establish a comprehensive system to control and regulate the cultivation, distribution, transport, storage, manufacturing, processing, and sale of both medicinal cannabis and medicinal cannabis products for patients with a valid physician recommendation and adult-use cannabis and adult-use cannabis products for adults 21 years of age and over. MAUCRSA defines various terms for these purposes, including "medicinal cannabis," "medicinal cannabis products," "physician's recommendation," and "primary caregiver." MAUCRSA authorizes a licensed medicinal cannabis retailer to sell or transfer cannabis, cannabis products, and cannabis accessories to a person 18 years of age or older who possesses a valid government-issued identification card and either a specified valid county-issued identification card or a valid physician's recommendation for themselves or for a person for whom they are a primary caregiver. MAUCRSA provides that information contained in a physician's recommendation and received by a licensee is deemed medical information for purposes of the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act and prohibits a licensee from that information, except as specified. The Veterinary Medicine Practice Act provides for the licensure and regulation of veterinarians and the practice of veterinary medicine by the Veterinary Medical Board, which is within the Department of Consumer Affairs. The act authorizes the board to revoke or suspend the license of a person to practice veterinary medicine, or to assess a fine, for specified causes, including discussing medicinal cannabis with a client while the veterinarian is employed by, or has an agreement with, a MAUCRSA licensee and distributing advertising for cannabis in California. The act prohibits the board from disciplining a licensed veterinarian solely for discussing the use of cannabis on an animal for medicinal purposes, absent negligence or incompetence. The act requires the board, on or before January 1, 2020, to adopt guidelines for veterinarians to follow when discussing cannabis within the veterinarian-client-patient relationship. The act prohibits a licensed veterinarian from dispensing or administering cannabis or cannabis products to an animal patient. The act makes a violation of its provisions a crime. This bill would authorize a veterinarian to discuss the use of medicinal cannabis or medicinal cannabis products on an animal patient. The bill would require the board, on or before January 1, 2022, to adopt guidelines for veterinarians to follow when recommending cannabis within the veterinarian-client-patient relationship. The bill, on and after the date that the board adopts the guidelines described in the previous sentence, would authorize a veterinarian to recommend medicinal cannabis or medicinal cannabis products on an animal patient for any condition for which cannabis or cannabis products provide relief, subject to specified requirements, including that the recommendation include, at a minimum, the condition for which the recommendation is issued, the name of the client, as defined, and the name of the animal patient. The bill would prohibit a veterinarian from recommending medicinal cannabis or medicinal cannabis products on an animal patient without an appropriate examination and a medical indication. The bill also would prohibit a veterinarian from recommending medicinal cannabis or medicinal cannabis products on an animal patient while the veterinarian is employed by, or has an agreement with, a person or entity dispensing medicinal cannabis or medicinal cannabis products. The bill would prohibit the board from disciplining or denying, revoking, or suspending the license of a veterinarian solely for recommending the use of cannabis on an animal patient, and would provide that a veterinarian who makes a recommendation pursuant to these provisions is entitled to the same protections as a physician and surgeon under the Compassionate Use Act of 1996. The bill would prohibit a veterinarian from advertising that the veterinarian offers recommendations for medicinal cannabis. Because a violation of that prohibition would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would expand the purpose and intent of MAUCRSA to control and regulate those above-mentioned activities for medicinal cannabis for animal patients with a valid veterinarian's recommendation, as defined, and for medicinal and adult-use cannabis for medicinal use on an animal by adults 21 years of age and over, and would make conforming changes, including revising the definition of "cannabis products" to include cannabis products intended for medicinal use on an animal, and revising the definitions of "medicinal cannabis" and "medicinal cannabis product" to include cannabis and a cannabis product, respectively, intended to be sold for use on an animal patient pursuant to a veterinarian's recommendation, or intended to be sold for medicinal use on an animal by adults who are 21 years of age and older for purposes of MAUCRSA. The bill would authorize a person to purchase cannabis or cannabis products for use on an animal patient that the person owns if the person is 21 years of age or older. The bill would require cannabis or cannabis products for use on an animal patient to have cannabis as the primary active ingredient. The bill would authorize a licensed medicinal cannabis retailer to sell or transfer cannabis, cannabis products, and cannabis accessories to a person 21 years of age or older for medicinal use on an animal that the person owns. The bill would require that information contained in a veterinarian's recommendation remain a confidential part of an animal patient's record, as specified. The bill would make related findings and declarations. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. AUMA authorizes legislative amendment of its provisions with a 23 vote of both houses, without submission to the voters, to further its purposes and intent. This bill would declare that its provisions further the purposes and intent of AUMA.
Who sponsors SB 627?
SB 627 is sponsored by Galgiani.
What is the current status of SB 627?
This bill died with 2019-2020 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track SB 627?
Track SB 627 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 627

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of SB 627

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →