Governor Signs HB 10: Cannabis Enforcement Bill Raises Support—and Skepticism—in New Mexico

Some are excited for this huge change, while others remain skeptical.

On April 8, 2025, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham signed House Bill 10 (HB 10) into law, establishing a cannabis enforcement bureau within the New Mexico Regulation and Licensing Department (NMRLD). This new bureau will oversee investigations into violations of the Cannabis Regulation Act (CRA), expanding the state’s enforcement reach and aiming to preserve the integrity of New Mexico’s regulated cannabis industry.

Importantly, this bill applies to anyone who violates the CRA—not just licensed operators.

Support for HB 10

Supporters of the bill say it’s a necessary step to address increasing concerns about unlicensed operators, illegal products, and widespread noncompliance. The Cannabis Control Division (CCD) has struggled to manage violations due to limited resources and unclear jurisdiction. HB 10 gives NMRLD the power to hire certified peace officers focused solely on cannabis-related enforcement—something proponents argue is critical for maintaining a fair and safe market.

Representative Doreen Gallegos, one of the bill’s sponsors, emphasized the importance of evolving regulation alongside the growing industry. Ben Lewinger, Executive Director of the New Mexico Cannabis Chamber of Commerce, also expressed support, stating that bad-faith actors directly harm compliant businesses. For many advocates of HB 10, the bill offers a way to balance the playing field and enforce regulations with more strength.

Industry Feedback Shifted During the Process

As someone who has been involved in this industry for over a decade and helped transform New Mexico from one of the most closed markets to one of the most accessible in the nation, I helped organize and conduct a series of statewide town halls to gather direct feedback from cannabis operators. These events were critical to the early development of HB 10. During those town halls, many license holders—especially smaller, locally owned businesses—expressed strong interest in enforcement to protect their investments from unlicensed actors and underground operators.

However, once the actual language of HB 10 was released and the bill advanced through the legislature, feedback changed. Concerns grew around the bill’s scope, lack of clarity, and potential for overreach. What began as broad support shifted dramatically, eventually dividing the cannabis industry almost down the middle. While some felt enforcement was overdue, others feared it could be used unfairly or become another tool of state pressure.

Concerns From Within the Industry

Multiple business owners have voiced fears that the bill, if implemented improperly, could lead to over-policing of compliant businesses, alienating operators who are trying to do the right thing. There’s also growing concern that patients and consumers could become unintended targets and that enforcement resources could be wasted on low-level infractions instead of being directed toward true public safety issues.

In my conversations across the state, some license holders have even voiced that if enforcement becomes too aggressive or burdensome, they will simply allow their licenses to expire and return to the traditional market—something that would only worsen the cat-and-mouse dynamic and increase unregulated activity.

Andrea Love, owner of Rollin' Love dispensary in Las Vegas, NM, acknowledged the importance of addressing bad actors but warned that expanding enforcement authority might create a “catch-22.” She noted that fear of state overreach could discourage transparency and cooperation within the industry.

Duke Rodriguez, CEO of Ultra Health, questioned the need for an entirely new enforcement bureau. He argued that existing law enforcement agencies already have the tools to handle criminal operations and that this new effort may be redundant.

Jurisdictional Confusion Has Compounded the Problem

A significant part of the enforcement gap has stemmed from ongoing confusion over who actually holds authority to address illegal cannabis activity. For years, local law enforcement and the Cannabis Control Division (CCD) have passed the responsibility back and forth, with neither agency fully stepping in to claim jurisdiction. This lack of clarity made it increasingly difficult to act on violations.

As a result, unlicensed farms, illegal dispensaries, and untaxed products have flourished across the state. These underground operations have directly contributed to the oversaturation of the market, undercutting licensed businesses and skewing market dynamics. The challenge became clear: how could the state shut down illegal operators when no agency had clearly defined enforcement power—or adequate resources—to act?

With HB 10, the state aimed to resolve this problem. Beginning July 1, 2025, a new cannabis enforcement bureau within the Regulation and Licensing Department (RLD) will be responsible for overseeing investigations and regulatory violations under the Cannabis Regulation Act. This new bureau is intended to centralize enforcement, remove ambiguity, and give the state a singular point of authority to address noncompliance in the industry. Whether that solution works as intended remains to be seen.

Looking Ahead

As the state prepares to implement HB 10, both supporters and critics agree: the rollout will determine its success. The legislation has the potential to stabilize the market and restore confidence—but only if it is enforced thoughtfully and fairly.

The government must remember that while cannabis is legal in New Mexico, trust in government oversight remains fragile. Many in the community remain wary of enforcement, and if it is rolled out in a way that feels punitive, inconsistent, or focused on low-hanging fruit rather than real violations, some operators will disengage entirely. Others will leave the regulated market and return to the traditional one—something I’ve heard time and time again.

As enforcement begins after July 1, 2025, we may or may not see an immediate increase in inspections—but what we will see for certain is a learning curve. Mistakes will happen on both sides, and lawsuits may follow as the state and industry navigate this transition. With any new system, there will be friction.

At best, this new enforcement approach will focus on those who shouldn’t be in this space at all—those operating with disregard for public safety, product quality, or basic compliance. That alone would be a meaningful improvement. But ultimately, I hope we see thoughtful progress that benefits everyone: consumers, patients, and the businesses working hard to do things right.

For HB 10 to succeed, enforcement must target those truly harming the market—not those who missed a compliance sticker or made an honest mistake. Enforcement that feels arbitrary or overly punitive will only widen the rift between the state and the operators working hard to stay afloat.

This is an opportunity to do enforcement right. But it requires careful listening, community input, and a focus on fixing real problems—not creating new ones.