House Bill 343, the cannabis production amendments, cleared the Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment Standing Committee on Feb. 14, 2025, after the sponsor and industry and local officials described community odor problems tied to indoor cultivation.

Sponsor Representative Mike Cutler presented the measure, saying the bill will make explicit that cannabis license holders are subject to local nuisance ordinances, require odor‑mitigation plans be included in producers’ operating plans, and direct the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food (UDAF) to use patient‑account funds to purchase monitoring equipment and conduct a roughly nine‑to‑12‑month study to evaluate whether objective odor standards are feasible and enforceable.

The bill’s nut graf: supporters said the changes aim to reduce odor impacts on neighboring businesses and residents while allowing regulated medical cannabis production to continue. Representative Cutler told the committee the bill applies only to cultivation and processing in industrial zones and not to growers in agricultural zones.

Industry and local officials told the committee they have invested in mitigation and welcome measurable standards. JD Lawrence, head of legal compliance and government affairs for WholesomeCo Inc., said his company has spent more than $200,000 on odor‑mitigation measures and is prepared to invest more and work with UDAF on objective measurement standards. Doug Shipley, co‑tenant at the same building as the WholesomeCo facility, described ongoing odor that has affected employees and customers at adjacent businesses and said the smell has permeated vehicles.

Committee members debated specific language in two proposed amendments. Amendment 2, adopted at the hearing, removed a previous requirement that producers operate in standalone buildings after sponsors said that language would unintentionally cover testing labs and other licensees. The amended bill also requires UDAF to consult municipal and county officials while conducting measurements.

Representative Covert moved the committee recommendation to pass the bill as amended. There was a voice vote and the committee voted unanimously to pass HB 343 out of committee as amended.

The bill requires producers to document odor‑mitigation practices — materials, equipment and maintenance — as part of an ongoing operating plan rather than a one‑time submission. UDAF will report on the measurement study and any recommendations for objective standards following the evaluation period.

Supporters said the approach balances community concerns about objectionable odors with the reality that reaching zero odor is unlikely. Opponents in public comment were not recorded in opposition at this hearing; two neighboring business representatives described nuisance effects and urged enforceable mitigation. The committee adopted Amendment 2 and gave the bill a favorable recommendation to the House as amended.

Votes at a glance: The committee adopted Amendment 2 and then passed HB 343 as amended by voice vote; transcript records the outcome as unanimous but does not list individual vote counts.

The bill now moves toward the House floor process; any enforcement changes or objective standards would depend on the outcome of UDAF’s measurement study and local nuisance enforcement.