In this episode, Dr. Dominic Corva interviews Nicole Elliot, Director of the California Department of Cannabis Control. Elliot describes her beginnings in politics and as a Sociology major during her undergraduate years. She shares insights from regulating cannabis in the fifth largest economy of the world and talks about the challenges in implementing policies that go beyond mere regulation and promote environmental stewardship.
Join us at the Cannabis Studies Lab for some substantive conversation on cannabis, the subsistence crop.
Subsistence Crop Podcast Season 1 Episode 2: Nicole Elliot, Department of Cannabis Control, Interview Transcript
Jada Morrison 0:00
Hi everyone and welcome to subsistence crop, a podcast cultivated by the cannabis studies lab at Cal Poly Humboldt, where we talk about human cannabis relationships beyond commerce and prohibition.
Dominic Corva 0:12
Welcome to the cannabis studies podcast. We’re calling it subsistence crop. to reference the the notion that when we study cannabis, it’s not just about cash and money. It’s about society. And so we’ve called decide to go with subsistence crop as a as a title. And this, this particular interview is really for students that are in the major or interested in the major and sharing about really your background and your professional pathway, as well as you know, what’s the job about? What do you do? And maybe some things about it? Yeah, well, good.
Nicole Elliot 0:57
That sounds good. And I understand you’re gonna be interviewing the deputy directors as well, as I write well, oh, man.
Dominic Corva 1:06
Yes. And we have I think two books right now, but then then we’ll do more. You actually have Jeff. Jeff from Nevada County. I’ve forgotten his last name as you’re comparing that Merriman as your compliance director. I worked with him on Nevada County Executive assessment. Oh,
Nicole Elliot 1:25
cool. Yeah. He, he always stood out as a rock star. So we were very excited. He was willing to take on that very tough division work of compliance.
Dominic Corva 1:34
So yeah, well, he’s perfect for it, I think. Yeah,
Nicole Elliot 1:37
he really is the needle in the haystack. We found them. Excellent.
Dominic Corva 1:41
Well, we’re hoping to provide you more needles in the future of our program, so. So let’s start with your backgrounds. I’ve seen your undergraduate degrees in sociology. I believe we had that conversation before. But I guess, start there, basically, like, how did your background in sociology prepare you for this professional pathway that ends up as Director of the Department of Cannabis Control?
Nicole Elliot 2:17
Yes, well, so to be clear, my background started, I think, in politics, I started studying government and politics and then shifted to sociology, when I understood how that was so relevant to the space of government and politics. And how did it lead me to here, woof. I don’t know if I could draw one line, one straight line. But I had a lot of, I had a lot of opportunity in particular at the University of San Francisco, to work with some very brilliant professors, and also work in some programs that made lasting impacts on me and my impression of the organization of our world. In particular, I worked in one program at San Quentin at the time, as I was studying criminology, and understanding the impacts of our criminal justice system of economic and community development on the expectancy of outcomes for individuals. In the context of criminology it was a very moving program, I worked with a lot of what they called it the time lifers. And the goal of that program was to intervene with individuals who were just coming into San Quentin to reduce recidivism once they left. That was a really noteworthy part of my background was but honestly, there was a lot of other lived experience that informs how I landed here, starting first with my internship in City Hall in San Francisco, and then obviously, the past the professional path I took from there. So I’ll stop there, see if that sort of helps answer your question. And then of course
Dominic Corva 4:23
it does because it my students are definitely going to want to understand how it’s not just the curriculum, they get it at the university, but also the experiences that they’re able to have, like internships, for example. And I am hoping that perhaps we’ll be able to work out an internship program with DCC at some point. I do. Maybe you can elaborate a little bit more on your internship in City Hall and how that helped shape your professional pathway.
Nicole Elliot 4:52
Yeah, absolutely. So when I started at City Hall, it was 2009 I interned for then Mayor Gavin Newsom. I was provided the opportunity to work as an assistant in the mayor’s budget office for a woman by the name of noni Colorado who now holds a very senior level position at OMB at US OMB. And I viewed it as a an extraordinary opportunity to have access to very smart, motivated individuals, and to learn about government in a really hands on way. And that’s exactly what it was. But it was because I was motivated to make it that and was provided the opportunity to make it that I also bartended in the evenings and on weekends, which I find also very relevant to my job in other ways, which I’m happy to touch on later. But from that internship opportunity, I was able to turn it into a paid job. And when I was able to make that transition, I was being paid less than what I was being paid as a bartender, but I had health benefits. And I was very excited about that. And I was able to work from that first paid job through a variety of other jobs in the executive rise in the administration, including for the late mayor, Ed Lee, who took over after Mayor Gavin Newsom became Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom. And under Mayor Ed Lee and his chief of staff who I view as a very important mentor in my life, I was provided with an ever expanding portfolio of work. And that culminated in managing hundreds of appointees who were community volunteers who sat on commissions that, you know, sort of help set policy for all of the city and county departments. I managed the mayor’s policy agenda as it relates to the Board of Supervisors. And I helped move that agenda throug h the board of supervisors legislative process and engage with the board on that, on that. I also managed our state and federal lobbying contracts. So the policies is they go through state level machinations and federal as well. So I was able to really see every layer of government that San Francisco had available to it, created or had available to it. And I was able to operate within each layer. And so that was really, really impactful in equipping me with the tools necessary to do this job. And it translated most immediately to my transition to project manage, standing up San Francisco’s local program, local cannabis program in anticipation of prop 64 commercial activity going into effect, I had six months to do it, I knew every layer of government it needed to get through, and I was able to work that process really quickly and efficiently to get that implemented. And now here, it’s serving me quite well, in on the state side, where I understand sort of the state process and how to how to move policy through the state process. I understand the impacts the local government process has on our state process, and they also understand, you know, what’s happening at the federal level, and what that could mean for us here at the state level, and vice versa, you know, what we’re doing at the state level, and how that sort of fits into or does not fit into what the federal government is doing. And, and so, you know, that’s a quick version of how those tools really helped serve me. And each of the roles that I’ve major cannabis roles that I’ve taken on since serving in that executive branch administration.
So of Whoa, I would love to hear about how like the content of like cannabis, as a as a subject regulation, how you develop that kind of expertise as well. So you’re moving through and learning how government works. You seem to have a more sophisticated grasp of the subject of cannabis than maybe let a lot of what put run anybody under the bus but you have a sophisticated understanding of cannabis as as subject matter and its relationship with people beyond it being a potential harm or threat. So I’m kind of wondering, you know, like, how did you learn about cannabis basically?
Well, first of all, thank you. That’s an enormous compliment and I had I’ve tried to work really hard to to enhance my understanding of cannabis, as a plant, as well as sort of culturally, what cannabis represents to, in particular, the people of the state of California. I have to tell you, I didn’t have a lot of experience, you know, learning about cannabinoids, or terpene profiles or extraction processes prior to being in a regulatory role. But one really important thing that I did early on was engage from a place of trying to build trust, engage members of the industry, so that I could learn, and that I could learn from individuals who are practicing who are whose use who are using this plan and practicing these processes every day is a part of their their daily work. And that is how I have learned a significant amount. But I will also add that, you know, I think it’s really important as as a leader as on the government side to acknowledge to be very aware of acknowledge and mitigate any sort of gaps of knowledge that you might have in the work that you’re doing. And so we lean very heavily on subject matter experts in this department in particular, and actually in partner departments across the United States to inform our gaps in knowledge, where we can’t or in addition to learning from the industry. And so, you know, that’s where I’ve, I’ve done a lot of my work a lot of my education, but that’s one reason why I really love this space is because it presents a continuous opportunity to learn. There’s always more to learn in this space, there’s always a lot of challenges, and that presents learning opportunities.
Dominic Corva 11:54
Oh, indeed
Nicole Elliot 11:56
I also will say I’m a California native, I was born in Placer. County and meadow VISTA. And I, you know, then grew up, I like to say, in the Bay Area. And so I’ve, from a cultural standpoint, I think I definitely appreciate the differences in communities experiences with this plant, and have used what I’ve learned from those communities to inform my work to inform the way that I approach the plant the regulation of the plant, the individuals who we are licensing and regulating and those who are choosing not to participate in the licensed market. It is definitely a major component, it presents different lexicon, right for depending on different regions, it, it presents, you know, a different understanding of what equity means in urban areas versus rural areas. And I think all of that is really important to have a thoughtful approach to regulating this plant, and the communities that the plan exists within the consumers that that they utilize the plan in their everyday life. Those I think it’s really allows you to be comprehensive in your approach. And it’s really, really important. And I think that’s a big part of obviously, my, my academic background going through.
Dominic Corva 13:19
Well, I love how you basically just said geography matters, as as a geographer, the the context in which you are growing up and developing your awareness of the world matters quite a bit. And here in California, obviously, it’s it’s distinct from other places in the Bay Area, a special format, given that, you know, the way that medical cannabis history developed in that area, and especially the context, I think of the HIV AIDS crisis, which is just, I’m not sure other parts of the country, and this may be one of the issues. You experienced, that’s, you know, the development of communities of care around the planet that were acknowledged and engaged with by public sector.
Nicole Elliot 14:09
And now we will hear that in San Francisco. It was a real honor to be able to engage with with individuals from a community who had that experience. That’s not so historic, historical, right, that that we can tap into that knowledge now. And so there were a lot of people who were able to share with me directly that the experience of what this plant meant to them during the AIDS crisis, and that was, you know, obviously very touching but very important for us to consider in our work.
Dominic Corva 14:45
Fabulous on. So, with that said, What does California bring and us as sort of that Representative that’s unique to the National regulatory conversation. I know you’ve been starting to participate in camera right than the national regulatory organization. But first of all, ask you What does California bring its unique in that conversation?
Nicole Elliot 15:15
Well, we bring a lot. To them. One reason why I really love working for the State of California, is we’re just an absolute sort of massive state, we are the fifth largest economy, soon to be, I think, the fourth surpassing Germany, I’m not mistaken. And we have an incredibly old industry in this state. Not so touching on the cultural but also just the general activity like this is a very long established. industry in California. We also have, so setting aside all of that we have a governor who is just a pleasure to work for and really pushes the boundaries when it comes to innovation. He himself is us a small business owner. So you know, you have somebody who understands what it means to be in business and be regulated. And he can approach it from that standpoint, but he also really pushes the boundaries on, you know, environmental policy, climate policy things that I really identify with. And so that in itself, I think makes us unique, we obviously hold a significant number of individuals in Congress. So in talking on the federal level, we have really strong representation. And that’s exciting. And I think there’s a lot of space to, you know, engage in, in that area of war. And it’s something that we’re doing. But that’s also why we are so heavily involved in CANNRA. As you mentioned, CANNRA is a compilation of states throughout the United States and territories who have medical order, adult use and adult use, enhance regulation. And that’s really a space where, you know, we’ve been able to come together and discuss ideas, discuss experiences, other states have had practices other states have deployed, to educate the work, we’re doing to sort of expedite some of these decision making processes, because we’re able to look at how that played out in other state and really stress test our ideas. One thing I I would say is noteworthy is as California, you know, we have such a massive undertaking that that we’ve taken. Other states also have have large exercises they’re undergoing, but nowhere near the scale of what California is experiencing. And so there are some things that we know very well. And then there are some things that other states have time and energy to pursue, that we haven’t yet had the time and energy to pursue. So it really is a beneficial organization, to tap into to gain experience, to commiserate some time. And to really strategize about how best to do the work that we’re all trying to do. I think we all share a lot of common ground. And it’s really an extraordinary group of individuals that I’m honored to be a part of.
Dominic Corva 18:37
Very cool, um, just kind of, for the record, what is it 58 counties, and we’re getting, like 500 cities roughly in California, right?
Nicole Elliot 18:49
I don’t know, I don’t off the top of my head. I should probably never know the number of cities, but it is definitely 58 counties and hundreds of cities. Yes.
Dominic Corva 18:56
Right, and so when I think about what you bring to CANNRA is also a preview of what like the federal, you know, challenge is going to be in terms of complexity. Say that it said that?
Nicole Elliot 19:13
Yeah, I think there are other states that do too. And depending on how any organization, any entity, any government entity approaches regulating cannabis, you know, that experience is gonna be bumpy. We’ve seen it. We’ve seen it in California. We’ve seen it every state that’s followed. We’re seeing it in New York now. Right. So I think we can show our experience and there are policy decisions that get made and market rollouts that will impact what that looks like how that’s experienced by businesses, by consumers by the community. And it’s really hard to to know exactly how that will play out and to do it perfectly. That is what we have seen so far.
Dominic Corva 19:56
So this is you know, I’m going from the the messiness of local particularities and lessons that can be learned because of that, too. I’m, you know, what are common lessons being experienced, you know, across the United States? I mean, let me let me throw out, for example, you know, lab shopping or THC inflation, which was something we noticed in Washington State immediately. And then it seems like every state that pops up, like it takes them a while to figure out that that’s what happens. So that’s kind of one example of like, what are the things you guys are finding most in common? I guess? For as
Nicole Elliot 20:37
Well, yeah, that might be one really good example. I mean, one of the things that really struck me when I was reading about Oklahoma, a year or so ago, right, is the you were seeing a huge influx of cultivators heading into Oklahoma, because they had such a low bar, right for licensing requirements. And the cost of a license was very, very low there. And I know that that was, initially the approach was really embraced. As you know, we are less regulation, less barriers to licensure. And so, you know, our markets really successful. And I think what we saw there were similar challenges to what we see here in California, right, we see operators who sometimes are using a license to hide behind while they do have some nefarious activity that that presents serious harms to consumers and to communities. Not everybody, right. But there are actors in the space that do that. And one thing that really struck me was a comment I saw in an article that talked that it was a quote from a cultivator acknowledging their interest in seeing track and trace implemented because they felt like it would really help define who’s in and who’s out who’s willing to play by the rules and who’s not. And that struck me because we know in California, there are a number of cultivators who do not like utilizing Track Trace. So the way I really thought of it is we have, you know, perhaps some might argue the state of California over here, which is, you know, hyper regulated, very expensive, right. And then you have another example over here, which is Oklahoma less regulated, less expensive, and we are starting to move towards each other. And so I think you can see a lot of these experiences throughout state in a variety of other examples, Take CAMP, for example, that’s a very timely issue. Or cannabis, I like to call it take cannabis. So, so those are issues that we are seeing play out, we do talk about labs quite a bit at CANNRA, because it is such a specialized area that requires certain expertise, scientific expertise. And so we we like to bring in our experts from across states to talk about what that what those policies and practices look like to help shore up that space and ensure integrity across our licenses on in a really regulatory, like rigorous regulatory space. But, but there are plenty of others. Again, I would point to New York is a really good example. They really tried to create a market there that’s that served equity. And there were a lot of pain points. There are a lot of pain points. That are it’s experiencing along the way. And you know, some of that is pain points that we’ve experienced in the state of California. I joke. And I think I’ve said this to them. So I hope they would not find this offensive. But New York has received the same headlines California has received just in a shorter period of time, right. So we’ve seen so many of the head, I mean, so many of the headlines that otherwise were attributed to California, come out of New York in the last year, maybe even less, and so that just speaks to me that we had all experienced similar hiccup, um, some of them can be avoided. Some of them are just the nature of rolling out a regulated market and are unavoidable.
Dominic Corva 24:22
Yeah, so that does lead me to a specific question. What are the some of the challenges that are unavoidable I guess, in the sense that they’re not just about cannabis, they’re about like rolling out regulations. I mean, if that makes sense to you?
Nicole Elliot 24:46
yeah. it to some extent and press me here if you feel like I’m not giving you enough, but so some things that are unavoidable you know, we are all starting with pre existing market. So transitioning those, those actors into a licensed and regulated space comes with complications, including an illegal market that exists, and that will continue to exist until there is sufficient access at a price point that consumers at ease and a price point that consumers identify with. That takes time period, full stop, it is not a day one, year one, maybe even your five, depending on the size of your market exercise. And so I think acknowledging that going into the process is really important. And making sure there’s a shared understanding about that is really important. That’s one, I’m trying to think I just had another one at the the regulation, there are no industry enjoys being regulated. It creates challenges, it’s costly. So you will always receive pushback on regulation, you need to be prepared for that. And you need to really feel really confident that the regulation that you’re imposing and justifiable. And will will help you further the mandate that you’ve been given by your policymakers, by the people, in this instance, the people of California. And, you know, really contemplating how to best do that to meet your objectives. But nobody likes regulation, we will hear until our dying day that this is probably we will probably hear till their dying day that this is over regulated, I think accepting that and then charging forward with your mandate in mind is really important. But I don’t think we’re ever going to have an industry that says, you know, this is perfect. So that’s important to keep in mind. It doesn’t mean you need to lose sight of how to lower barriers and create reasonable regulations. But it does, I think it’s important to acknowledge that just because you’re regulating doesn’t mean you’re wrong. So that’s, that’s an important component as well. Those are sort of the main ones that stick out, I would say litigation, like, always be prepared for litigation, sometimes it comes out of left field, you know, this is a litigious space. And being comfortable with that, again, being confident in the decisions you’re making and why you’re making them. And following the letter of the law, I think is really important. But litigation, it happens, it will happen, it will continue to happen. People have the right to do that. And so that’s a thing that we can expect to always see.
Dominic Corva 27:43
So let me just do a quick time check with you. Do we have you till four can we do for 10? More? 10 is fine. Right? Thank you, generous, generous with your time really appreciate that. I think that these are pretty interesting questions to me and to my program, because we have two tracks campus and social equity, and environmental stewardship. And so I’m going to ask kind of one question related to each of those. What are the biggest challenges to defining and implementing cannabis and social social equity policies that you’re encountering?
Nicole Elliot 28:18
Well, I know you’re eventually going to have our deputy director of Equity and Inclusion, Eugene Houseman on so I would strongly point to him as the conveyor of response on here, because that is one route, he has a really rich background in this space. And I am excited for you guys to have that discussion with him. But there are consistent challenges across localities across the state and across states in general, that I can say we’ve experienced and, you know, we know about in my time in San Francisco, in my time here at the Cal State of California and in conversations with our counterparts counterparts at CANNRA. So there are things we’ve done well, but let’s talk about the challenges first, right? The challenges are one, first and foremost, and we touched on this earlier defining equity. What does equity mean? Who was harmed? How do we define that harm? Is that harm justifiable in the context of these programs? Right. It is a it is a intense debate, a good one, but an intense one. And in a state the size of California where you have communities that had such different experiences with the war on drugs, it is hard to say whether or not that could be reconciled, you know, from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. When you bring California in the mix. I think what we’ve tried to do, yes, we have a state definition but what we have tried to do is really capture the fact that that there are differences across jurisdictions across regions and foster discussion. Um, between impacted individuals and communities in those regions to try and create a shared understanding, we do not represent one region in the state, we represent the whole state. And we take that task very seriously here at the Department of Cannabis Control. And so that creating that definition, respecting individual definitions, trying to focus those definitions on actually defining if those jurisdiction who was meaningfully impact impacted. That’s, that’s the challenge, right? We see a lot of exploitation of equity individuals, right. Or what I expect is and doing the due diligence in that space is extremely important. As a local regulator in San Francisco, that was one of the early things we did. And we did that in large part because we could lean on our partner jurisdictions like Oakland to tell us what their experiences were, we were talking to LA, we created a program where we really started to vet our equity ownership documents, and really require the application, the applicant and the owners on that application, to convince us that the individual who was the equity individual identified on that license actually had every piece of ownership that they deserved. Under the letter of the law. I don’t think every jurisdiction does that. And I think it’s important that they do to create equity programs with integrity. And one of the constant drumbeats I’ve had just to go on a side tangent for a minute, is the state of California, you know, there’s a lot of duplication of licensing across localities in the state. And one of the things I would love to see the legislature and, you know, jurisdictions do is defer some of those licensing duplications to the state because we’re already doing it, and instead focus their time and energy on time, place and time, place and manner, and implementing their equity programs, then we’ll be happy to do the rest and share the rest. But, but I really think it’s important that locals dive in there and create some guardrails to the individuals in their, in their communities who are trying to realize ownership. I think it’s a challenge. Another challenge that we’ve experienced, I’ve talked a lot about challenges, right? Was the perception created? And and, you know, embraced by some that this was like the tickets. Running a business is hard. It’s hard in any jurisdiction harder in some jurisdictions and challenging in the state of California. And, and so it is not an automatic payday, right. And I don’t think that every equity individual necessarily thinks that, but I do think some of the narrative supporting entry into the system perpetuated that, and that is tough. I think it’s tough. Because of that, we saw a lot of individuals, we see individuals pouring life savings, you know, any liquidity into this space, and you want to see individuals be successful, and not lose everything in this process. So those are challenges. Those are all very, very big challenges that we’re all still sifting through. But successes, you know, we’ve created some programs that have been meaningful, like, by all accounts, from equity operators. And I think that those are types of the types of things we’ll want to see continued and expanded upon. First and foremost, I would say our fee waiver program, our licensing fee waiver program, and a lot of credit goes to the team here, including Eugene, who helped create a program that was direct, simple, easy to navigate, and benefited a lot of businesses by waiving their licensing fee and allowing them to take that saved capital and invest it back into their business. That was huge. The creation of the tax credit programs. During the tax reform conversation was also great. We’d love to see an uptick in participation with those, but that’s those are really great programs that provide capital. The vendor compensation program, for instance, means that equity retailers can keep thousands of dollars in their pocket instead of remitting those taxes to the state and that is direct capital that doesn’t have to flow through a government entity to provide them with support doesn’t require additional, you know, paperwork, you know, and all of that. So, I think there are are some really good things that we’ve done, we are constantly learning. And that is the task of Eugene’s division is to lift up best practices so that local jurisdictions are not equity businesses and investors learn those things. And it’s a constantly evolving space that we will be building out until the end of time. I think. So.
Dominic Corva 35:24
Awesome. Thank you. And then the second question here is on the environmental stewardship side. And let me throw this out there, even though I am not sure how to phrase it, great, but and you can ask me to try to try to be clear, but one of the biggest challenges defining and implementing policies that incentivize environmental stewardship, rather than just regulating environmental impacts. So you’ve been up here, you see, seen, you’ve seen farms that are trying to practice you know, more than sustainable practices, regenerative practices. And, you know, because culturally, it’s been important up here actually, is that, yes, we had a green rush, and there was a whole terrible impacts from that environmental impacts. And we also had a culture, you know, from the 1970s, were cannabis cultivators were like, you know, environmental warriors, you know, like, they were out there, in the timber wars, they were, you know, donating money and putting their time into protecting the environment. And it’s kind of the duty legacy, I think of this region, especially Humboldt is that we both got that kind of industrial impact culture, which our Enviromental Regulations now are just justifiably don’t want to ever happen again, in the culture that was already, like, they don’t even need regulations, they’re like, you know, either, like beyond sustainable so, I wonder if you can just reflect a little bit on on your challenge, I think maybe incentivizing and helping folks with those kinds of practices, stay in, and then maybe even, you know, teach everybody else what they’re doing. So maybe, you know, we can spread the spread the the regenerative practices, gospel.
Nicole Elliot 37:17
Yeah, so I definitely acknowledge what you’re saying and have seen it right, when I’m going up there and talking to cultivators, in the Emerald triangle, in particular, I will say that those practices are reflected in other regions throughout the state. But I get your sort of the historical context of what that means for the region that you are in and agree with you. And I think that we have a system, we have a regulatory framework that is really robust, to put it generously. And I think that that creates, sometimes a really a level of sort of toxic distrust between operators and government for, you know, no pun intended. And I think so one, tackling that, and doing that alongside licensees to make sure that we understand one another in that in that discussion as we collaborate on how to lower those barriers. But that is, to your point, you’re talking about incentives. So I do think starting from a place of trust, and collaboration is really important. Because you can create incentives, and people just might not trust you. Right. So with that said, in creating incentive programs, the state has done a little bit of that, I think you’re aware of some of those programs. I’m trying to create programs like OCAL, that, that create a baseline so that when one day, we have the flip of the switch and this goes federal, we’re able to really easily fold that into existing state programs that support that type of activity from the federal perspective. Same goes with Appalachians, except obviously, that’s unique to cannabis and not one that will easily fold into a federal program that doesn’t exist, right. But you get my point, I think, you know, incentives beyond that. What I have seen are a lot of programs in the Department of Food and Ag. that that support and create incentives either through capital or through through community sharing. And those are the programs that I would like to see replicated or or tapped into, I would even say in this space for cannabis cultivators. There is a lot of information that I think is already available to the state that we should be using to support entry of cultivation and more rigorous entry of cultivation. those programs. But beyond that I’m all ears is to other ideas to incentivize that type of engagement. I think it’s, you know, it’s definitely an area that is of interest to a number of stakeholders in Sacramento. And I think that there’s a lot of opportunity there. But right now, what we have our, you know, some challenges, even in the regulatory space that create a bit of a turn off for a lot of our licensees that I think we need to tackle as well to establish this discussion and the engagement from place of trust.
Dominic Corva 40:36
I think you’re absolutely right on. Being able to start from place of trust is absolutely necessary for anything. And also, I was given the space to shout out some some of the things going on already. But also, in terms of, you know, yours open, obviously, you know, our team is working on the legacy genetics grants. And I’m also involved in a number of other things related to CDFA and Appalachians. But we are going to have a symposium in the spring and this is just to let you know enviromental stewardship symposium that resources Legacy Fund is granted a canvas studies major to put on and I, that is going to be the, the general topic instead of regulators and also, you know, the practitioners that are from that cultural economy that is, you know, environmental stewardship, broadly speaking, to get in the space and listen to each other. So hopefully, we’ll we’ll be able to report back to you and then we’ll, we’ll send you an invitation for sure.
Nicole Elliot 41:40
That’s wonderful. I’d love to come up there and this spring.
Dominic Corva 41:45
We’d love to have with your it’d be great. Well, thank you so much for your time, Nicole, we’re at a close to 45 minutes now. Now, I don’t want to keep it much longer and hope this isn’t the beginning of a number of conversations. Hopefully that will be allowed. And thank you so much for also helping me schedule some your department chiefs. You I think that’s gonna be great for the kids to see.
Nicole Elliot 42:07
Yeah, absolutely. My pleasure. Thanks for having me. Thanks for all you’re doing to create the next generation of subject matter experts. Really looking forward to engaging with you guys more along the next couple of months and months and years ahead. Appreciate what you’re doing.
Dominic Corva 42:22
Thank you, Nicole. All right. You have a great day.
Kaiden Chapman 42:30
Thank you for growing with subsistence crops, a podcast by the cannabis studies lab at Cal Poly Humboldt.
0 Comments