Washington Marijuana Enforcement Disputes Advance Toward Formal Hearings at More Than Four Times the Alcohol Rate

Washington marijuana businesses that enter the state’s informal enforcement settlement process have been substantially more likely than alcohol businesses to leave that process without an agreement and have their cases forwarded toward formal administrative hearings, according to a Marijuana Herald analysis of Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board data.

Across three reporting periods for which LCB publishes usable annual or year-to-date figures, the agency recorded 143 marijuana settlement conferences or requests and 24 cases forwarded from the settlement process toward formal hearings.

For alcohol businesses, LCB recorded 879 settlement conferences or requests and 34 cases forwarded.

Relative to the number of settlement conferences or requests reported, marijuana cases were forwarded at more than four times the rate of alcohol cases across the periods examined.

The disparity appears separately in each reporting period with available figures.

In 2022, LCB recorded 29 marijuana settlement conferences and four cases forwarded to formal hearings, equal to about 13.8% of the number of settlement conferences reported. Alcohol businesses had 283 settlement conferences and 13 cases forwarded, or about 4.6%.

The difference was larger in 2024. Marijuana businesses had 61 settlement conferences and 12 cases forwarded, equal to about 19.7% of the number of settlement conferences reported. Alcohol businesses had 381 conferences and 15 forwarded cases, or about 3.9%.

Through August 2025, LCB reported 53 marijuana settlement conference requests and eight cases forwarded from settlement toward formal hearings, equal to about 15.1% of the number of settlement conference requests reported. Among alcohol businesses, there were 215 settlement conference requests and six forwarded cases, or about 2.8%.

LCB’s 2023 archive includes monthly settlement records but leaves the agency’s annual summary table blank, so that year was excluded from The Marijuana Herald’s calculations.

More recent 2026 figures suggest the disparity has continued, although changes in how LCB reports the data make direct comparisons with earlier years inappropriate.

Through July, LCB reported conducting 68 informal hearings involving marijuana cases and forwarding 19 cases to the Washington Attorney General’s Office. For alcohol, the agency conducted 282 informal hearings and forwarded 18 cases.

Relative to the number of hearings conducted, the figures equal about 27.9% for marijuana and 6.4% for alcohol. However, those should not be treated as precise case-resolution rates because hearings conducted and cases forwarded during the same reporting period do not necessarily represent the same group of cases. Some proceedings can cross reporting periods.

Still, the raw 2026 numbers are notable: LCB conducted more than four times as many alcohol informal hearings as marijuana hearings through July, yet slightly more marijuana cases were forwarded to the Attorney General.

Under Washington’s enforcement system, businesses accused of violations have several options.

A licensee can accept the recommended penalty, request a formal administrative hearing or request an informal settlement conference. During a settlement conference, the LCB hearings examiner and the licensee discuss the case and can negotiate a compromise.

If the two sides reach an agreement, the hearings examiner prepares a settlement agreement. If they do not reach a compromise, LCB says the case is forwarded to the Washington Attorney General’s Office. The matter can still be settled at that stage; if a settlement is not reached, it can proceed to the independent Office of Administrative Hearings for a formal administrative hearing.

The figures therefore show that marijuana enforcement disputes entering that process have historically been considerably less likely than alcohol cases to be resolved during informal settlement.

They do not, by themselves, establish why.

One possibility is that marijuana violations reaching settlement conferences involve different or more serious conduct than alcohol cases. Marijuana regulations also differ substantially from alcohol regulations, making a simple comparison between the two industries imperfect.

Licensees themselves may also approach enforcement disputes differently. Marijuana businesses could be more willing to reject proposed settlements and pursue formal proceedings, for example, particularly when a suspension or other penalty could significantly disrupt operations.

Another possibility is that marijuana licensees and LCB are simply less likely to find mutually acceptable compromises.

Determining whether enforcement officials are actually treating comparable businesses differently would require examining individual violations, proposed penalties, settlement offers and final outcomes rather than aggregate totals alone.

The settlement conference is also only one stage of Washington’s enforcement system. Before a case reaches that point, LCB officers can respond to regulatory violations in different ways.

The agency says officers can issue verbal or written warnings for minor violations and Administrative Violation Notices for more serious or repeat offenses. Businesses receiving formal violations can face fines, temporary license suspensions or other sanctions.

That creates several points at which otherwise similar cases could ultimately produce different outcomes, beginning with whether a problem results in education or a formal violation and continuing through the penalty recommendation, settlement process and formal hearing system.

LCB currently publishes downloadable datasets covering marijuana enforcement visits, violations and compliance checks, along with monthly settlement conference records. Those records make it possible to examine individual cases more closely, including the type of violation, location and enforcement outcome.

The agency’s broader enforcement operation covers alcohol, marijuana, tobacco and vapor products statewide. Officers conduct premises visits, compliance checks, undercover operations and complaint investigations in addition to providing technical assistance and education to businesses.

The Marijuana Herald’s analysis does not establish that Washington regulators impose harsher penalties on marijuana businesses than alcohol businesses for comparable violations.

It does reveal a persistent difference in what happens after marijuana and alcohol businesses enter LCB’s informal settlement process.

In 2022, marijuana cases were about three times as likely as alcohol cases to be forwarded from settlement toward a formal hearing. In 2024, they were about five times as likely. Through August 2025, they were more than five times as likely.

Combined across those three reporting periods, the rate for marijuana cases was more than four times the alcohol rate.

And through July 2026, LCB’s newer reporting system shows marijuana cases continuing to account for a disproportionately large number of matters forwarded to the Attorney General relative to the number of informal hearings conducted.

What the aggregate data cannot answer is the most important question: whether that difference reflects the types of violations being contested, decisions by marijuana businesses to fight their cases, differences in settlement offers or differences in how regulators exercise discretion.

The Marijuana Herald reviewed violation summary data published by the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board for 2022 through 2026. The analysis compares the number of cases LCB reported as forwarded from the settlement process with the number of settlement conferences or requests reported during the same period. LCB’s 2023 annual summary contains no totals and was excluded. Because the agency changed its reporting categories in 2026, those figures were analyzed separately and were not included in the combined 2022, 2024 and 2025 calculation.