The Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission on Friday asked a Montgomery County Circuit Court judge to reconsider an order allowing depositions and other discovery in a long-running lawsuit over the commission's handling of the medical marijuana licensing process. I have filed a request.

Judge James Anderson granted the plaintiffs, a group of cannabis companies that were denied licenses, the right to dismiss up to six people and obtain numerous documents to find out what happened during the process. . However, AMCC argues in its filing that the plaintiffs do not meet certain requirements under the law and is asking Anderson to reconsider.

Consider this my submission to the court. Judge, you don't do that.

On behalf of all the people of this state, everyone who cares about the media and good government, don't give it a second thought. Because the only thing you acknowledged was what should have happened in the first place.

open process.

I have a problem with state employees, people who are paid by all of us taxpayers, to sit in front of lawyers and answer questions about how a public proceeding under the laws of this state was conducted. There is no acceptable reason why there is. . That's all your command.

Let's also remember that the only reason this process is questionable is because AMCC (its commissioners and staff) flatly refuse to follow state law and conduct this process in an open and transparent manner. not.

So even though the actual judges are on this committee, for some reason they decided it was OK to have a full deliberation (in public) in executive session and then vote by secret ballot. is. And everyone else acted like they were crazy for accusing them of blatant violations of the Alabama Open Meetings Act.

But before that, there was a problem. From strange workarounds for some requirements handed out to certain companies to allowing editing of almost any application, including facility location, something…troublesome is happening. It was clear from Just to be clear, has anyone heard that you are allowed to hide your business location on state bids?

This was insane.

And I haven't even touched on the numerous, and I do mean numerous, strange connections between certain staff/commissioners and people associated with some of the applicant companies. . Let's start with someone associated with the filing company who literally helped create Alabama's filing process.

See what I'm saying? It was crazy from the beginning.

And now these companies are just asking the court to force AMCC to do what it was supposed to do: force it to account.

Please explain the mistakes and coincidences. Please explain the strange connection. Please explain why you violated the open meeting law. Please explain if they have repeated violations. Please explain why this is so secret and mysterious rather than a simple and open process for awarding state licenses.

Honestly, that doesn't seem like too much of a question. And it would appear that AMCC wants to respond to the allegations contained in the court filing.

In one of those filings, the two plaintiffs allege that AMCC commissioners met in secret to decide which companies to select and how to vote, again violating the Open Meetings Act. are doing. AMCC disputes this, arguing that there is no evidence and that there are procedural flaws in the application.

But the evidence is there.

First, there were two blatant violations of the OMA early in the process that amply demonstrate the commission's intent to ignore the law. And second, there is the fact that the AMCC has repeatedly refused to hold public deliberations, despite clear instructions from the courts to be more open. So far, no committee members have publicly explained or discussed their votes, company preferences, the most important factors, or any deficiencies or pass/fail items.

We are holding public meetings for these discussions. These discussions are based on public servants, directors, and commissioners making good faith efforts to follow laws, guidelines, and regulations, and making decisions based on those guidelines to select companies with which to contract that best match their qualifications. I assure the people of this.

That never happened during this process.

The deposition will very likely be the only chance the public will have to find out why.