Smoking out the truth at the Cannabis Control Commission
Shannon O’Brien’s suspension — and potential firing — is only one of multiple leadership changes in recent months at the agency, which appears to be in serious disarray.
For the sake of fairness and transparency, the public deserves to know why Shannon O’Brien was suspended from her position in September as chairwoman of the Cannabis Control Commission, the state’s regulator for the fledgling legal marijuana industry, and what the strength of the evidence against her is.
As a general matter, personnel policies are best decided in private. But this case is different. O’Brien’s suspension was public, and information about the charges against her has already trickled out, through rumors, public statements, and filings in a lawsuit O’Brien filed challenging her suspension.
Additionally, O’Brien’s suspension — and potential firing — is only one of multiple leadership changes in recent months at the agency, which appears to be in serious disarray. The public deserves a fuller picture of just what is going on at the agency responsible for implementing the marijuana legalization law voters approved in 2016.
The next step in the O’Brien case is for Treasurer Deborah Goldberg to hold a hearing on O’Brien’s suspension and potential termination, the details of which are being worked out by the judge overseeing the Suffolk Superior Court case. Making that hearing public, as O’Brien has requested, would provide transparency. But if the judge orders that the hearing remain private, as Goldberg wants, it will be important for Goldberg’s office to publicly release detailed findings from the hearing. Ideally, details of two investigative reports involving O’Brien would also be made public in some form, with redactions where appropriate to protect the privacy of other agency employees.
In seeking to have a public hearing, O’Brien argues that her suspension, along with Goldberg’s public justification for it, already harmed her reputation. If it is upheld in a hearing that lacks guarantees of fairness, “it will not only result in the loss of her job, but would ensure that she will never get another one,” O’Brien’s attorneys wrote in a court motion. O’Brien argued in the brief that she is “entitled to due process in a ‘name clearing’ hearing.”
Goldberg responded in a court brief that the hearing is a chance for O’Brien to present her case to her appointing authority, who is the treasurer. Goldberg said having a public hearing could impair her ability to obtain witness cooperation. Goldberg accused O’Brien of seeking “political theatre” and attempting to embarrass commission employees about matters disclosed during a confidential internal investigation.
One reason for increased transparency is that O’Brien has raised questions about Goldberg’s ability to be an impartial fact-finder. In court briefs, O’Brien cites Goldberg’s commitment to removing O’Brien and Goldberg’s closeness with Shawn Collins, the Cannabis Control Commission’s former executive director who used to work in Goldberg’s office and whose clashes with O’Brien are being investigated. Goldberg maintains in her court brief that she can be impartial.
Another reason is the incomplete evidence presented so far to disqualify O’Brien from holding office.
Goldberg’s letter suspending O’Brien cites an investigation that found that O’Brien made “racially, ethnically, culturally insensitive statements.” Yet the examples cited by O’Brien in a court brief are open to interpretation. The complaint against O’Brien was made by Commissioner Nurys Camargo, a Black woman who applied for the chairmanship that O’Brien got. Camargo said O’Brien called Camargo and another Black employee “buddies” and suggested that Camargo might know former state senator Lydia Edwards, who is Black. Camargo felt there were racial overtones to these comments, which O’Brien denies. O’Brien also admits quoting a Black real estate developer who allegedly said he organized “black, brown, and yellow” investors, thus repeating the use of the offensive term “yellow” to refer to Asian Americans.
There is a second investigation regarding O’Brien’s interactions with Collins, including her revealing in a public meeting that Collins planned to leave the commission when his parental leave ended. That investigation had not been completed when Goldberg suspended O’Brien, and its details have not been made public.
There are additional allegations about O’Brien creating a “hostile work environment.”
O’Brien’s suspension appears to be just the tip of the iceberg in terms of leadership challenges facing the Cannabis Control Commission. The agency lost virtually its entire top leadership in recent months, including Collins, chief financial officer Adriana Leon, chief operations officer Alisa Stack, General Counsel Christine Baily, chief of investigations and enforcement Yaw Gyebi, and director of human resources Justin Shrader. Chief communications officer Cedric Sinclair has been suspended for undisclosed reasons, according to WBUR.
At the same time, there are many serious issues the commission needs to deal with. New reports are emerging of potential data manipulation and potency inflation in cannabis lab testing. The industry is contracting as marijuana prices drop. The commission has new authority to oversee agreements signed between cannabis businesses and their host communities. Regulators are considering what rules should govern social consumption sites, a new type of business that could include marijuana bars and restaurants. They are continuing efforts to create more opportunities for diverse entrepreneurs and those disproportionately impacted by prior enforcement of drug laws.
O’Brien deserves a transparent hearing with appropriate due process. This should happen soon so the commission can move forward and rebuild its leadership without further distraction and carry out its regulatory duties.