A year after marijuana possession and use became legal in Minnesota, updated law bans smoking or vaping cannabis in multifamily housing for all but medical users as of July 1.
OG Article: here
View our Fair Use Policy: here
Minnesota has some of the nation’s most permissive rules for smoking and vaping cannabis, being one of just a handful of states that allows public consumption. Aside from some local ordinances that are more restrictive, those 21 and older generally can smoke and vape wherever tobacco smoking is allowed.
But a date change in the state’s recreational marijuana and hemp law passed in May imposed a new restriction on private consumption that started July 1: Owners of multifamily housing must now ban smoking and vaping of cannabis. The restriction was contained in 2023’s House File 100 but it wasn’t to take effect until March of 2025.
There is a significant exception to that apartment ban, however. Medical cannabis users who are registered with the program and have a medical card must be allowed to use smokable and vapable cannabis, even in multifamily housing.
The ban was pushed last year by Sen. Ron Latz, DFL-St. Louis Park, as one condition for his support for HF 100. Because there were no GOP votes for the bill, every DFL member’s support was needed. As a compromise with bill sponsors, the effectiveness date was set for next March. That was the same time other provisions of the recreational law were to take effect and coincided when sponsors estimated the first recreational dispensaries would open for business.
This year it was determined that the March, 2025 date was unworkable for various reasons. First, in order to enforce restrictions on sales of raw cannabis flower being marketed as hemp, the Office of Medical Cannabis needed to be merged with the Office of Cannabis Management sooner. Second, so as to allow some cannabis cultivators to begin growing this fall, OCM needed to have jurisdiction over the rules governing medical cannabis cultivation right away, not next spring.
Changing the effectiveness dates of those provisions had the coincident effect of advancing the ban on smoking and vaping in multifamily housing. Existing clean indoor air laws and ordinances ban smoking of tobacco or cannabis in common areas of buildings — lobbies, hallways, laundry rooms and common outdoor areas. But until this month, apartment owners and managers could ban smoking in individual units but weren’t required to. Now they are, at least for cannabis.
Residents can still possess marijuana in multifamily housing and can likely grow plants under limits in the law. And they can use products such as edibles that don’t require combustion via smoking or vaping.
“Except for the use of medical cannabis flower or medical cannabinoid products, the vaporizing or smoking of cannabis flower, cannabis products, artificially derived cannabinoids, or hemp-derived consumer products is prohibited in a multifamily housing building, including balconies and patios appurtenant thereto,” the law states.
“A violation of this paragraph is punishable through a civil administrative fine in an amount of $250.”
Latz said he wasn’t involved in moving the date of the ban to this month. He said he pushed the original restriction because he thinks there are health and nuisance issues with having cannabis smoking in a multifamily building.
“Cannabis smoke seems to have a particular potency in terms of getting into and throughout spaces in an enclosed building, more so that regular tobacco,” Latz said. “It is particularly troubling to other residents of a building from a health standpoint and from a nuisance standpoint. So I thought it was important to include that language.”
While the impacts on neighbors are the same, whether smoked by a recreational user or a medical user, Latz said he agreed to the exemption as a compromise.
Sen. Lindsey Port, the Burnville DFLer who has been the prime sponsor of the Senate versions of the law both in 2023 and 2024, said she wanted to protect medical patients who use cannabis like any other medication. Some patients can get the relief they need from edibles or other methods, some require smoking or vaping of flower.
While she worried that the language in HF 100 and that became effective July 1 might not be enough to protect medical cannabis patients in multifamily settings, she now believes it is.
“Some medications need to be particular strains, given in particular ways,” she said. “There are medical reasons why they give flower versus a vape versus an edible versus a serum. It just really depends on the treatment, and we want doctors to make that decision.”
Port said that while cannabis is unique in that consumption as a medicine could impact neighbors, it is too early to know what conflicts it might create in buildings.
“We just don’t know how big of a problem this is gonna be,” Port said. Minnesota has a relatively small medical cannabis population and only some live in multifamily buildings and only some rely on cannabis flower, she said.
“We think it’s not as big of a number as people are fearing,” Port said. State law does limit medical cannabis consumption “where the vapor would be inhaled by a nonpatient minor or where the smoke would be inhaled by a minor.”
According to the Medical Cannabis Division of the Office of Cannabis Management, there are 47,616 patients on the registry. That is an increase from 41,140 at the end of September 2023.
The revisions to the program adopted this year allow doctors to make the determination whether a patient would benefit from medical cannabis, although the state still maintains a list of allowed medical conditions that are eligible.
In addition to being exempt from smoking and vaping restrictions in multifamily housing, medical card holders are also exempt from paying the 10% cannabis products tax.
“It might go up here for the next few months but in every other state that has legalized, once recreational is legal, medical cannabis numbers drop significantly,” Port said.
Maren Schroeder, an advocate for medical cannabis patients and the director of advocacy and public affairs for the cannabis consulting firm Blunt Strategies, said the vagueness of the law raises concerns. For example, would a patient have to be using cannabis purchased from medical cannabis dispensaries and labeled to be covered?
“If a patient is using homegrow, are they going to have to prove that what they’re smoking came from the medical program or is it enough to show that they’re a patient?” she asked. “I can see a number of problems coming up.”
Moving the date from next March to July 1 means those problems can start to show up now.
“There hasn’t been any messaging about it. There hasn’t been any outreach about it,” Schroeder said. “Moving that date up probably wasn’t intentional but it definitely will have some ripple effects as we see how this plays out.”
Apartment owners and managers fear they will be in the middle of medical cannabis users who want to smoke in apartments and their neighbors who don’t want to smell it or have their own health issues.
“Condos, apartment buildings, you cannot smoke or vape cannabis unless it’s medical cannabis,” said Cecil Smith, the president and CEO of the Minnesota Multi Housing Association. “In a multifamily building you have folks with competing interests. It creates inter-resident conflict, and we have to be the arbitrators of that.
“When you have people who are intolerant of those things for medical reasons, a person who has allergies or respiratory sensitivities, How do you reconcile that with someone who needs to use medical marijuana?” Smith asked. “Where is my reasonable accommodation?”
He said the conflicts might be more intense in condos than apartments because apartment dwellers can move at the end of the lease.
One type of housing poses special issues — low-income housing funded by the federal government such as Section 8 housing vouchers. Because cannabis remains illegal under federal law, housing agencies must prohibit cannabis in those buildings, whether medical cannabis or recreational cannabis. That is also the one area where possession of any product is not allowed whereas possession of cannabis products and use of non-combustible cannabis is protected in multifamily housing under state law.
What is multifamily?
Legislative staff has pointed out that there is not a single definition in state law of multifamily housing — there are three. One statute says five or more units, one statute says four or more units and still another says more than a two-family dwelling, suggesting at least three.
The recreational cannabis law does not pick one as it relates to smoking and vaping. Latz said he presumes the lowest standard — three or more units — would be the most likely measurement.
And what about enforcement?
The law is vague about which agency would enforce the ban and impose the “civil administrative fine in an amount of $250.”
“It is enforceable only by the Office of Cannabis Management,” Port said of the ban for other cannabis users.
Latz said he thinks it would be local health departments and local police agencies but said OCM may have jurisdiction. OCM did not respond to MinnPost’s questions about the provision and how — or if — it would enforce it.
One other provision of the recreational law implicates smoking and vaping in multifamily housing. The law says “any use of adult-use cannabis flower which is injurious to health, indecent or offensive to the sense or an obstruction to the free use of property so as to interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property is a nuisance.”
It allows civil nuisance actions against landlords or homeowners associations and creates a different civil action if the same landlords or associations do not “enforce the terms of a lease, governing document, or policy related to the use of adult-use cannabis flower on the premises or property.”
But the law is unclear as to what happens if the nuisance is caused by a medical cannabis user.
“I think you might still have a claim,” Latz said. “There’s no limitation as to medical in the nuisance action.”
Schroeder said that, too, concerns her.
“Anytime if you’re giving neighbors a cause to go to court, it’s not a good thing,” she said. “Oftentimes it is used as harassment.”
Comments