POLISCOPE
Back to bills

The civic record

Read. Follow. Verify.
Passed

Senate Bill 600 Updates Medical Marihuana Facilities Oversight and Hemp Testing Rules

Original title: Marihuana: other; cross-references to industrial hemp research and development act within the medical marihuana facilities licensing act; amend.

Last action · December 17, 2025: referred to Committee on Regulatory ReformSponsors: Sam Singh and 4 others

Introduced
Committee
Floor Vote
Passed
Law

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

Public stanceCommunity reactions are separate from the official record and reporting.

What This Bill Would Do

Medical marihuana processors and safety compliance facilities are permitted to handle, process, market, broker, or test industrial hemp under updated statutory provisions. State regulatory references are officially updated to designate the cannabis regulatory agency rather than prior boards, and safety compliance facilities must now meet specific staffing and accreditation requirements.

Why it matters

Licensed medical marijuana operators and hemp businesses face updated agency oversight, accreditation mandates, and staffing rules contingent upon the passage of related legislation.

Who It Would Affect

Groups the bill's text would affect if enacted, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.

Directly affected

medical marihuana facilities

State-licensed growers, processors, provisioning centers, secure transporters, and safety compliance facilities are subject to updated regulatory terminology and administrative oversight provisions.

Key Facts

  • Replaces references to the advisory panel and board with the cannabis regulatory agency throughout the act.
  • Permits processors and safety compliance facilities to handle, process, market, broker, or test industrial hemp pursuant to the industrial hemp research and development act.
  • Requires safety compliance facilities to be accredited by an entity approved by the board within one year of license issuance or be a vendor in good standing with state drug testing services.
  • Mandates that safety compliance facilities employ at least one staff member with a relevant advanced degree in a medical or laboratory science.
Show all 5 facts
  • Enacting section 1 states the bill will not take effect unless Senate Bill No. 599 of the 103rd Legislature is enacted into law.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does the bill allow processors to handle industrial hemp?
Yes, the act does not prohibit a processor from handling, processing, marketing, or brokering industrial hemp.

What else do you want to know?

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Where This Stands

Currently passed chamber. The next step in the legislative lifecycle is Law.

Procedural history

12 actions
  1. Dec 17, 2025HouseCommittee
    referred to Committee on Regulatory Reform
  2. Dec 17, 2025HouseIntroduced
    read a first time
  3. Dec 17, 2025House
    received on 12/17/2025
  4. Dec 16, 2025SenateFloor
    PASSED ROLL CALL # 340 YEAS 27 NAYS 8 EXCUSED 2 NOT VOTING 0
  5. Dec 9, 2025Senate
    PLACED ON IMMEDIATE PASSAGE
  6. Dec 9, 2025Senate
    RULES SUSPENDED
Show 6 earlier actions
  1. Dec 9, 2025Senate
    PLACED ON ORDER OF THIRD READING
  2. Dec 9, 2025Senate
    REPORTED BY COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FAVORABLY WITHOUT AMENDMENT(S)
  3. Dec 2, 2025SenateCommittee
    REFERRED TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
  4. Dec 2, 2025SenateCommittee
    REPORTED FAVORABLY WITHOUT AMENDMENT 11/13/2025
  5. Oct 2, 2025SenateCommittee
    REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON REGULATORY AFFAIRS
  6. Oct 2, 2025SenateIntroduced
    INTRODUCED BY SENATOR SAM SINGH

Version history

Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.

View official text →

Lobbying Activity

No state lobbying filings in our records match this bill. Federal lobbying reports (LDA) cover Congress, so they are not listed on state bills.

Full breakdown

Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.

Sponsors

Connected Entities

Sue Shink, Dayna Polehanki, Sam Singh and 2 more
PersonSue Shink“Cosponsor of Senate Bill 600”Map →
PersonDayna Polehanki“Cosponsor of Senate Bill 600”Map →
PersonSam Singh“Primary sponsor of Senate Bill 600”Map →
PersonRosemary Bayer“Cosponsor of Senate Bill 600”Map →
PersonJeremy Moss“Cosponsor of Senate Bill 600”Map →

Sources

Open source document

legislature.mi.gov

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance40
    How much this matters to a regular citizen
  • Controversy10
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment5
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz25
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record