NY: New Lawsuit Challenges Licensing and Fee Schedule Advantages For Women and Minorities; Claims White Men Denied Equal Protection

The Rockland County Business Jnl reports

January 25, 2024 – A lawsuit filed yesterday in the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York challenges the advantages given to women and minority applicants in retail licensing by the Office of Cannabis Management. The plaintiff, Valencia AG, LLC, based in Jamesville, NY is owned by “males of light pigmentation who might best be described as Caucasian or white men,” according to the complaint. Valencia filed an application with OCM on October 12, 2023 seeking a microbusiness cannabis license. Not falling into any of the categories for SEE status, Valencia was unable to request any sort of priority status in its application.

Believing that priority would be given to applicants that attested they either owned or rented space that was immediately ready to open, and relying on representations made by OCM, plaintiff leased a storefront for $2,000 per month, plus utilities and insurance.

In January, when OCM published it list of the hierarchy of applicants based on the “randomized,” but prioritized and weighted selection of applicants, plaintiff ranked 2,042 out of about 2,200 “operationally-ready” applicants. Based on statements made by OCM, plaintiff believes it is unlikely that it will have its application reviewed or receive a license.

The complaint alleges that the preference or priority given to women and minorities, over white men, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. Plaintiff also charges that the higher application fees paid by white men over women and minorities also violates the US Constitution.

For relief, Plaintiff asks for: (1) a preliminary and permanent injunction against the preferences given women and minorities; (2) a prohibition against OCM from processing any applications for cannabis licenses where those applications claim SEE status based on women or minority ownership; (3) the revocation and cancellation of licenses granted to SEE status licensees when based on women or minority ownership; (4) a refund of the higher application fees paid by applicants unable to claim SEE status based on women or minority ownership; and (5) a prohibition against the differing fee schedules based SEE status.

The case was assigned to US District Court Judge Gary L. Sharpe, Case No.: 5:24-cv-00116-GLS-DJS. Plaintiff is represented by Robert Purcell, Esq., of Syracuse, New York.