Virginia 2026 1st Special Session

Virginia House Bill HB642

Caption

An Act to amend and reenact §§ 2.2-2499.8, 2.2-2818, 2.2-2905, 2.2-3114, 2.2-3711, as it is currently effective and as it shall become effective, 2.2-3802, 2.2-4024, 3.2-4112, 3.2-4113, 3.2-4116, 3.2-4126, 3.2-5145.1, 3.2-5145.2:1, 3.2-5145.4, 4.1-103, 4.1-105, 4.1-352, 4.1-600, 4.1-601, 4.1-603, 4.1-604, 4.1-606, 4.1-607, 4.1-611, 4.1-614, 4.1-621, 4.1-1100, 4.1-1101, 4.1-1121, 4.1-1402, 4.1-1500, 4.1-1501, 4.1-1502, 4.1-1600 through 4.1-1603.2, 4.1-1604, 5.1-13, 9.1-1101, 15.2-912.4, 16.1-69.40:1, 16.1-260, 16.1-273, 16.1-278.9, 18.2-46.1, 18.2-247, 18.2-248, 18.2-248.01, 18.2-251, 18.2-251.03, 18.2-251.1:1, 18.2-251.1:2, 18.2-251.1:3, 18.2-252, 18.2-254, 18.2-255, 18.2-255.1, 18.2-255.2, 18.2-258, 18.2-258.02, 18.2-258.1, 18.2-265.1, 18.2-265.2, 18.2-265.3, 18.2-287.2, 18.2-308.012, 18.2-308.4, 18.2-371.2, 18.2-460, 18.2-474.1, 19.2-66, 19.2-81, 19.2-81.1, 19.2-83.1, 19.2-188.1, 19.2-303.01, 19.2-386.22 through 19.2-386.25, 19.2-389, as it is currently effective and as it shall become effective, 19.2-389.3, 19.2-392.02, 19.2-392.6 and 19.2-392.12:1, as they shall become effective, 22.1-206, 22.1-277.08, 23.1-1301, 46.2-105.2, 46.2-347, 48-17.1, 53.1-231.2, 54.1-2903, 54.1-3401, 54.1-3443, 58.1-301, and 59.1-200 of the Code of Virginia; to amend the Code of Virginia by adding in Subtitle II of Title 2.2 a part labeled D, containing a chapter numbered 61, consisting of a section numbered 2.2-6100, by adding in Chapter 6 of Title 4.1 sections numbered 4.1-629 and 4.1-630, by adding in Title 4.1 chapters numbered 7 through 10, consisting of sections numbered 4.1-700 through 4.1-1010, by adding sections numbered 4.1-1102 through 4.1-1105, 4.1-1106, 4.1-1106.1, 4.1-1113, 4.1-1114, 4.1-1115, 4.1-1117, 4.1-1118, and 4.1-1119, by adding in Title 4.1 a chapter numbered 12, consisting of sections numbered 4.1-1200 through 4.1-1206, by adding in Chapter 13 of Title 4.1 sections numbered 4.1-1300, 4.1-1301, and 4.1-1303 through 4.1-1309, by adding in Chapter 14 of Title 4.1 sections numbered 4.1-1403 through 4.1-1407, by adding a section numbered 4.1-1602.1, by adding in Title 4.1 a chapter numbered 17, consisting of sections numbered 4.1-1700 through 4.1-1705, by adding in Article 2 of Chapter 1 of Title 6.2 a section numbered 6.2-108, and by adding in Chapter 44 of Title 54.1 a section numbered 54.1-4426; and to repeal Article 4 (§§ 3.2-4122 through 3.2-4126) of Chapter 41.1 of Title 3.2 and §§ 3.2-5145.4:1, 4.1-1101.1, 4.1-1105.1, 18.2-248.1, and 18.2-251.1 of the Code of Virginia, relating to cannabis control; retail market; penalties.

Summary

HB642 is a comprehensive cannabis-control substitute bill that would overhaul Virginia’s marijuana and hemp regulatory framework. It creates and empowers the Virginia Cannabis Control Authority and its Board to regulate the possession, sale, transport, distribution, delivery, testing, labeling, packaging, and taxation of retail marijuana, marijuana products, and regulated hemp products. The bill also establishes licensing categories for marijuana businesses, sets application and renewal requirements, creates a seed-to-sale tracking system, authorizes inspections and enforcement actions, and adds detailed rules for product testing, advertising, public health warnings, and consumer education. The bill also legalizes and regulates adult possession and home cultivation. Adults 21 and older could possess up to two ounces of marijuana and cultivate up to four plants at home, subject to restrictions on visibility, access by minors, and no home production of marijuana concentrate. It creates criminal and civil penalties for unlicensed cultivation, sale, transport, public consumption, underage possession, and other prohibited conduct, while also establishing forfeiture, nuisance, and injunction remedies. In addition, it creates a cannabis equity loan fund, social equity licensing preferences, and labor peace agreement requirements for licensees, and it authorizes dual-use privileges for certain pharmaceutical processors and cannabis dispensing facilities. The bill would significantly affect state law by repealing older hemp and cannabis provisions and replacing them with a new, broader retail cannabis market structure in Title 4.1. It also amends numerous other statutes to conform to the new system, including provisions on public health, criminal procedure, local government authority, financial services, and tax administration. Localities would be largely preempted from regulating marijuana and marijuana products, except for limited zoning, distance, and hours-of-sale authority, while the state would collect cannabis taxes and distribute revenue according to a statutory formula that includes pre-kindergarten, equity reinvestment, behavioral health, and public health programs. The general sentiment reflected in the bill materials is that the proposal is intended as a major legalization-and-regulation package with strong public-health, equity, and enforcement components. The substitute text appears to reflect a gubernatorial proposal, suggesting executive support for a structured retail market rather than an unregulated or piecemeal approach. However, the bill was ultimately vetoed by the Governor according to the voting history provided, indicating that despite the broad regulatory framework, it did not become law in this form. The main points of contention are likely to have centered on the scope and pace of legalization, the size and structure of the retail market, local control, and the balance between commercial expansion and public safety. The bill contains detailed limits on licenses, advertising, product potency, and public consumption, but it also preempts many local ordinances and creates a statewide retail framework that could draw opposition from local governments, law enforcement, public-health advocates, or those concerned about youth access and impaired driving. Social equity provisions, labor peace requirements, and the inclusion of hemp-derived products and dual-use facilities also suggest additional policy debates over market access, competition, and regulatory complexity.

Impact

HB642 would substantially rewrite Virginia’s cannabis laws by creating a new statewide retail marijuana market and a parallel regulated hemp-product retail regime, while repealing prior cannabis-control provisions that no longer fit the new structure. It establishes the Virginia Cannabis Control Authority, new licensing and enforcement powers, tax collection rules, civil and criminal penalties, local preemption limits, and detailed product-safety and labeling requirements. The bill also amends related statutes governing health insurance, open meetings, administrative hearings, financial services, criminal penalties, and local regulation to align them with the new cannabis framework.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have been framed as a major, policy-driven restructuring of cannabis law with support for regulation, public health safeguards, and equity-based market participation. The presence of a House substitute proposed by the Governor suggests executive involvement and some level of policy support for a regulated retail model. At the same time, the bill’s final status as vetoed indicates that it did not ultimately secure enactment, reflecting unresolved concerns or insufficient agreement around the proposal’s scope and implementation.

Contention

Likely areas of contention include whether Virginia should create a full retail cannabis market at all, how much authority localities should retain, and how tightly the market should be controlled through licensing caps, advertising restrictions, and potency limits. The bill’s social equity licensing preferences, labor peace agreement mandate, and market-concentration controls may have been controversial with business interests, while public-health and law-enforcement stakeholders may have focused on youth access, impaired driving, public consumption, and the inclusion of hemp-derived intoxicants. The bill’s broad preemption of local regulation and its detailed tax-and-enforcement structure also suggest tension between statewide uniformity and local control.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

No similar bills found.