On Monday I’m driving to Lincoln to sit in on the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission. I’m publishing my questions now, before I go, so you can check afterward whether I asked them and what came back. The Commission already answered my email. Two out of three questions.
Everything on this site so far came off a screen: court opinions, filings, spreadsheets, news reports. Monday is the first time a page here gets sourced to a room I was standing in. That deserves a little more care, so I’m writing down the plan while I can still be held to it.
| When | Monday, September 14, 2026, 1:00–3:00 PM |
| Where | 301 Centennial Mall South, 1st Floor Hearing Room, Lincoln |
| Public comment | Yes. No sign-up needed in advance. (The Commission, by email, 2026-09-10) |
| Agenda | Not posted yet as of Friday. It goes up at least 24 hours before, at mcc.nebraska.gov/meeting-information. |
| Same day | The application window for manufacturing licenses closes at 11:59 PM CDT. |
Meeting details and the application deadline read from mcc.nebraska.gov on 2026-09-11. The Commission also has two later meetings listed, October 19 and November 16.
A meeting held hours before an application deadline isn’t a housekeeping meeting.
Nebraska voters approved medical cannabis in November 2024: Initiative 437 with 71%, 438 with 67%. The last legal challenge ended on September 4, 2026, when the Nebraska Supreme Court rejected it in Kuehn v. Evnen. Then the Legislature rewrote the rules with LB1235, signed on April 7, 2026. As reported by the Legislature, it restructured the Commission, let it set fees up to $50,000, and removed the patient registry entirely.
That leaves two halves moving at different speeds:
Moving. License applications are open, and the manufacturing window closes Monday night.
Stalled. A patient needs a written recommendation from a health care practitioner, and the bill protecting practitioners who write one, LB933, was passed over in April while an amendment on a different subject was pending. The full sequence, with both sides, and Sen. Kauth’s own statement, is on the dates page. (Corrected 2026-09-11. This sentence originally said “after an unrelated amendment was attached.” The amendment was offered, not attached; it was never voted on, and it survived a germaneness challenge.)
So the Commission is the only body currently building anything. That’s why I’m going.
On September 9 I wrote to the Commission and to both senators whose names are on the LB933 story. Here is where each one stands today:
| Who | Asked | Status, 2026-09-11 |
|---|---|---|
| The Commission | Public comment? Where is the agenda? Did LB1235 remove the patient registry? | ANSWERED 09-10 |
| Sen. Kathleen Kauth | The intent behind her amendment to LB933, and whether our page is accurate | STATEMENT 09-11 |
| Sen. John Cavanaugh | Will he reintroduce LB933? Is our summary of his reasoning fair? | No response as of 09-11 |
Senator Kauth replied in about ninety minutes and asked to see the whole section. I sent it, word for word, the same day. Her statement arrived on September 11, a few hours after this post went up. It is on the dates page in full and unedited, and one point in it led me to correct my own timeline there. Senator Cavanaugh’s office has had it for two days, and legislative offices run thin between sessions, so his silence doesn’t mean anything yet.
The Commission’s answer to my third question is the part worth reading slowly:
That isn’t a yes and it isn’t a no. It is a state agency saying that telling a resident whether a registry exists would be interpreting the law. I’m not going to read anything into it. What it means for this site is simple: our finding that there’s no registry stays sourced to the Legislature’s own reporting, and the Commission’s website still says nothing about a registry either way.
Next time I ask it differently: “Where does the Commission publish what a patient needs?” That asks for a document, not a legal opinion, and a document is something an office can hand you.
One sentence each. Ask, don’t argue. If I only get one turn, it’s the first.
A number I won’t say out loud: news reports around April 2026 said no Nebraska patient had received a recommendation yet. That is five months old. Repeating it to the one body that would know better is how you lose the room. So I’m asking for the count, not stating it.
Next week’s post will take these four questions, one at a time: did I ask it, what was the answer, and who gave it. If I didn’t get to ask, it will say so. If an answer was “we don’t know,” that goes in too.
Would you believe me if I told you I’m nervous about a public meeting? That’s the whole point of publishing the questions now. On Monday I don’t have to be brave. I just have to read.