PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Testimony by Nadia Kahnauth, Attorney at Kahnauth Law Group PLLC, on Enforcement of Cannabis Laws
2:34:57
·
4 min
Nadia Kahnauth, an attorney representing convenience stores, bodegas, and smoke shops, testified about concerns regarding the enforcement of cannabis laws in NYC. She highlighted issues with asset recovery, lack of documented sales to minors, and questioned the effectiveness of current enforcement methods in solving the problem of unlicensed cannabis sales.
- Emphasized the absence of documented cannabis sales to minors among her clients, contrary to allegations
- Raised concerns about significant cash removals from stores without proper documentation or recovery process
- Suggested reconsidering the licensing approach, proposing conditional licenses for convenience stores and Bodegas
Nadia Kahnauth
2:34:57
Good afternoon.
2:34:58
Nadia Kanath, an attorney as well.
2:35:00
I also represent many convenience stores, Bodegas, and smoke shops.
2:35:06
Also conducting the hearings on the defense side at oath.
2:35:12
There are there are two points that I wanted to address that were not addressed.
2:35:17
We're not asked by the sheriff.
2:35:19
The products that were laid out on all were products that he alleges were directed towards children.
2:35:26
As a mother myself, of course, that's a concern for any parent.
2:35:31
However, there was absolutely no questioning of him of how many stores have documented sales of cannabis to minors.
2:35:39
I maintain it.
2:35:40
In my in my office, we've had absolutely not a single one of a documented sale of cannabis to any minor.
2:35:48
And there is also allegations of people reporting it to 311 of persons getting sick adults and children getting sick.
2:35:55
What are the numbers of those that what what are the numbers looking like for those?
2:35:59
Again, in all of the cases that I've done, absolutely none of those allegations.
2:36:05
And those are the fronts that are being purported, and and and being brought in front of the city council and the public to appear as though these closures are not somehow otherwise targeted or based.
2:36:21
We maintain that they definitely are.
2:36:24
With respect to asset recovery, that's my main point here today is that in each and every sort, I believe the question was asked and not really properly answered also that in each and every location, there is significant cash being removed from registers.
2:36:39
I even have a client who had a $10,000 certified check being removed.
2:36:43
It was not until I filed internal affairs investigation against NYPD that there was ever any record of that certified check being removed along with $7 or $8000.
2:36:55
I have other stores where there's $25,000 being removed absolutely no documentation.
2:37:00
All of the property is being invoiced by the NYPD except cash.
2:37:05
And when we report into internal affairs to NYPD, that there we wanna know where is the cash, especially in a case where that where there's a dismissal, where there's a a a a dismissal of no violation found.
2:37:16
The store can be reopened.
2:37:18
Where is the money?
2:37:19
There is absolutely no method to locate the money, and we're being directed that it is is it is the sheriff who has the money.
2:37:25
So we then have to open 2 different claims with internal affairs and the sheriff's department.
2:37:31
Each agency going like this, the other one took it, or the other one vouchered, and other one's responsible for it, and no method to recover all this money.
2:37:38
But we maintain that there's many stores here that what is the process for forfeiture?
2:37:43
What is the basis for forfeiture?
2:37:45
Why is the cash being not held at safekeeping, especially in businesses where there's more than, like, Mister Lazar said, 99% of lawful activity These are not criminal proceedings.
2:37:54
And when we offer any criminal case law, they they knock it down patently saying these administrative hearings, and any criminal case law is not relevant.
2:38:02
So what's the basis for the forfeiture?
2:38:05
For a product product that's legal in New York State.
2:38:08
I I maintain that that it's unlicensed, but the characterization of some of these sales has been illegal drug sales is just not accurate and not correct.
2:38:18
So that's one of the issues we want to address here today.
2:38:21
And also that this city council should really look at the purpose of the statute is to the closure of the stores, is it accomplishing what we're looking to do?
2:38:32
Is it just driving cannabis into the streets?
2:38:34
Is that many of you have cited here today that it is driving cannabis to the corners?
2:38:39
It is increasing gang violence and and other types of violence?
2:38:43
You're driving cannabis to the cars.
2:38:45
If the market supported 4 or 5 shops in One Street, where did that consumer appetite go?
2:38:52
I I maintain it didn't go away.
2:38:54
So the the the are we solving the issue here in New York City?
2:38:58
I I don't believe that we are.
2:38:59
I believe that all we're doing is punting it.
2:39:01
We're demonizing certain businesses.
2:39:04
We're closing them down.
2:39:05
We're affecting it, but we're not really solving the problem.
Gale A. Brewer
2:39:08
You need to wrap up.
Nadia Kahnauth
2:39:09
Thank you.
2:39:09
We're not really solving the problem.
2:39:10
The problem.
2:39:11
The way to solve the problem is to give a conditional license to the convenience stores of Bodegas, who have been historically the ones who sold tobacco, who sold vapes, who sold cigarette.
2:39:22
Any type of smoking product is to give some type of conditional license.
2:39:26
Instead of saying that this needs to be shut down, absolutely not marketed at all, maybe we need to relook at how we do the licensing.
