Oregon activists are no longer working to put an initiative to legalize cannabis social lounges on the state’s 2026 ballot.
After filing two versions of the proposal and going through the steps to receive a certified ballot title for one of them, the Oregon Cannabis Cafe Coalition (OCCC) formally withdrew the measure on Monday.
OCCC founder Justyce Seith, who served as the chief petitioner for the Oregon Cannabis Social Lounge Act, told Marijuana Moment that the decision to end the current effort was a “difficult but necessary” one.
“Ultimately, a review of the current signature-gathering schedule and strategic planning led me to conclude that our resources and time would be better spent focusing on the next, more robust version of this proposal,” she said. “This is not the end of the road for public consumption lounges, it is simply a strategic pause to ensure the final measure is fully equipped for success.”
“I want to deeply thank the volunteers and petitioners who dedicated their time to this important cause,” she said. “The widespread interest confirmed that cannabis consumption lounges is a vital conversation we must have in Oregon.”
In September, Oregon’s attorney general issued a certified ballot title for the now-withdrawn measure, which came roughly a month after an initial draft ballot title for the marijuana initiative was circulated. That received only one public comment in response.
OCCC—a Portland-based group that advocates for the legalization of marijuana smoking lounges and cafes where consumption of infused edibles would be permitted—first needed to collect least 1,000 validated voter signatures in order have the state attorney general prepare the ballot title and summary. The campaign in June submitted more than 1,400 signatures, which were then verified by the Secretary of State Office’s Elections Division prior to the issuance of the draft title.
The sole public comment on the draft said that “the word ‘lounges’ is too ambiguous to be contained in a ballot Title. The electorate would be better served by using an objective, legally relevant term like ‘business establishments.’”
But state officials said they disagreed with the comment.
“‘Lounge’ is commonly used to describe public rooms in hotels or bars, and is a neutral descriptor,” Dena Dawson, director of the Elections Division of the Secretary of State’s Office, wrote. “Further, any ambiguity in the definition of ‘lounge’ is appropriately captured by the quotation marks, which signals to voters that the measure specifically defines that term and uses it in that specifically defined sense.”
The person who filed the sole comment had an opportunity to petition the state Supreme Court for review, but they did not do so.
If OCCC had pursued the measure, it would have needed to collect just over 117,000 valid voter signatures to put the initiative on the ballot.
The certified ballot title and summary for the now-withdrawn measure read:
Allows “lounges” open to public for consumption of cannabis products; requires licensing process, government outreach
Result of “Yes” Vote: “Yes” vote allows “microbusiness” operated “lounges” open to public (21 or older) for consumption of cannabis products; creates licensing process; local oversight; mandates government outreach.
Result of “No” Vote: “No” vote retains current law prohibiting public consumption of cannabis products.
Summary: Currently, federal/state law prohibits the public consumption of cannabis products. Measure amends state law, requires Oregon Liquor and Cannabis Commission (OLCC) to establish/issue licenses to qualified applicants for operation of “social lounges” where adults may consume certain cannabis products in public. Only “microbusinesses” (undefined) eligible for license; cannabis retail dispensaries may not operate under license and legal entity name. Adults must bring own cannabis for consumption, no on-premises cannabis sales allowed. Operator may sell non-cannabis food/beverages if certified by local health department; may sell products containing hemp-derived CBD. Alcohol/tobacco products/consumption prohibited on premises. Local governments may issue permits, impose additional limitations/restrictions. Requires OLCC/public health authorities provide “educational materials and outreach programs” regarding purpose and rules governing lounges.
Seith initially filed the initiative petition in March, a little more than a month after submitting a separate, similar proposal that would legalize cannabis cafes. The later initiative, which refers to the facilities as “social lounges,” is the measure the campaign went through the process of receiving a certified ballot title for.
If passed, it would have legalized and regulated state-licensed cannabis consumption lounges, offering what the initiative described as “a safe, legal environment for adults to consume cannabis” in compliance with state law.
“These lounges will operate in a manner that ensures public health and safety, while providing adult-use cannabis consumers with a designated space to enjoy cannabis in social settings, and allowing the sale and consumption of unmedicated food and beverages,” the petition’s purpose section said.
It specified that cannabis social lounge licenses would have been available only to small cannabis business licensees, known in the state as microbusinesses.
Under the proposal, cannabis social lounges could have allowed adults 21 and older to consume cannabis and sell “unmedicated food and beverages,” but they could not “sell, distribute, or provide cannabis for sale on the premises” of the business.
Consumption of marijuana “must be limited to smoking, vaping, and the consumption of non-edible products,” the proposal said.
Alcohol and tobacco—including nicotine vape products—would have been strictly prohibited at the businesses. They would have also needed to close by 2 a.m.
It’s unclear whether local governments could have prohibited the establishments under the measure. The petition said they could “regulate the number of cannabis social lounges” and set further restrictions, but it didn’t address outright bans. Local governments would also have been able to inspect the lounges to ensure compliance with state and local law.
Regulators at the Oregon Liquor and Cannabis Commission (OLCC) would have oversee the new businesses. The petition outlined a license application process for lounges as well as basic penalties, noting, for example, that violations of any provisions in the act could result in fines and/or license suspension or revocation. It also said unlicensed operation of a lounge could carry civil and criminal penalties.
As for public education, lounges would have been required to post “signs or other visual aids…to inform patrons about the risks of cannabis consumption and the lounge’s operating rules,” the proposal said.
OLCC would have also worked with public health authorities ” to provide educational materials and outreach programs to ensure that Oregon residents understand the purpose and rules governing cannabis consumption lounges.”
If passed by voters, it would have taken effect on January 1, 2027.
Marijuana Moment is made possible with support from readers. If you rely on our cannabis advocacy journalism to stay informed, please consider a monthly Patreon pledge.
