TOPEKA, Kan. (KAKE) - Another swing and a miss for state lawmakers looking to legalize medical marijuana. This time some supporters brought forward a proposal for a temporary pilot program just to show skeptical lawmakers how legalization would work. But, they couldn't even get Kansans who've been pushing for legalization on board.

In some ways, the complaint was that this new limited legalization idea was just too limited and opponents were perfectly happy to put off the debate for another session.

"I was very sad that I never dreamed I was going to come out in opposition," said Cheryl Kumberg, Kansas Cannabis Coalition.

Kumberg has been pushing for legalization of medical marijuana for the last six years because of the good she believes it can do for patients. But the proposal that brought a standing-room-only crowd to a statehouse committee room Thursday just didn't pass muster with her.

"This bill completely left out the patients, the things that they needed. It was more of a monopoly setup," she said of SB 555.

"Our goal is to provide relief for patients," said Samuel Jones, Kansas Natural Remedies. "While also balancing the concerns of legislators and conservative Kansans. So Kansas is one of 10 states that doesn't have a medical program. I don't know if you noticed, but Texas has a medical program."

Jones' company is one of a handful who worked with lobbyist and former state senator Michael O'Donnell to come up with the bill.

The five year pilot program idea would let up to four Kansas companies that already have hemp licenses grow, process and sell medical marijuana under strict controls, such as requiring the plant be grown in what hemp growers call greenhouse conditions with no windows. Something small hemp growers like Nate Hiatt say would keep them out of the running.

"I'm a firm believer that a bill shouldn't be set up to just let one person win or a group of people win," Hiatt, High Point Pharms, said. He added, "I know, like two or three other farmers that have been doing it for the last six years and...really, none of them are set up to be able to jump into the market like that. It's just such a high barrier to entry for us."

Which had supporters of legalizing medical marijuana siding with law enforcement against this bill, even though they don't agree on why.

KBI Director Tony Mattivi told lawmakers he believes legalization would increase opioid overdoses, general violence in the community and mental illness in our youth as well as invite organized crime into the state.

"Experts believe there is substantial evidence implicating the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) indirectly supporting illicit marijuana grow operations across the United States," Mattivi said. "Most of these properties were acquired after recreational marijuana sales became legal in Maine. In Oklahoma, a state with over 2300 Medical dispensaries, over 2000 Marijuana farms are linked to China."

"You can't compare Kansas to Oklahoma because we are not Oklahoma, and our program would be managed properly," Kumberg disagreed.

In the end, the committee tabled the idea until the beginning of the next session, January 13, 2025. That would be after this November's elections.

Senate President Ty Masterson, R Andover, issued a written statement supporting the hold on action in this case.

"I have consistently indicated that the issue of medical marijuana has matured to a point it warrants serious discussion. This is particularly true given the federal government is considering rescheduling or even descheduling the drug. In the legislative process, hearings are the appropriate way to have those discussions so any proposal can be vetted thoroughly, and I appreciate Senator Thompson for being willing to conduct the hearing on SB 555," he wrote.

"It has been my hope to have sincere discussions about a policy framework that combines meaningful regulation with legitimate and safe delivery of medical benefits to the people who need it, thereby avoiding the mistakes made by several of our neighboring states who are now facing severe consequences from which they may never emerge."

"Unfortunately, the hearing demonstrated there were concerns with the bill presented and approaches that deviate from that framework. As such, it was appropriately tabled and I thank the committee for its work. Discussions will no doubt continue in future sessions, especially if and when the federal government acts."