Ohio’s cannabis distribution network—built up over nearly six years of medical sales and nearly a year of adult-use—is facing scrutiny: would it support a federally-legal market?
Since the medical program launched in January 2019, Ohio has licensed cultivators, processors, laboratories, and over 400,000 registered patients by mid-May 2025. Recreational sales began August 6, 2024, with 98 dispensaries initially, swelling to 120 dual-use locations within days.
Sales data paint a picture of rapid growth: $11.5 million in adult-use revenue within five days—roughly $842 million on annualized pace. Eight months in, combined medical and recreational sales neared $656 million. Industry analysts estimate Ohio’s cannabis market could stabilize around $2 billion in annual sales as it matures.
Capacity: The Current Foundation
Ohio’s infrastructure is built on a solid base of medical-market logistics: numerous Tier I and II cultivators—standardized 25,000 ft² and 3,000 ft² operations—have expanded under dual-use licensing. Vertically-integrated operators such as Vext Science already run cultivation, processing, and retail facilities; they expect strong margins as adult-use scales.
The Division of Cannabis Control (DCC), established by Issue 2, handles licensing and zoning. It implemented a two-year rolling licensing review to calibrate dispensary density and prevent geographic saturation. This control has helped avoid oversupply while measuring unmet consumer demand.
Logistics: Scaling Challenges and Gaps
The core questions of capacity and logistics loom. Although existing cultivation and processing infrastructure helped kick-start the adult-use market, what happens under full national legalization?
Logistical demands would shift dramatically. Interstate commerce, more diverse product forms, and integrated systems are national-level challenges. Currently, Ohio’s system is lean: state-regulated, internal supply chains, and local processing. It lacks the scale and cross-state wholesale networks seen in mature markets like California.
Also, facility distribution remains uneven. Urban-centered dispensaries and cultivators leave rural areas relatively underserved; national legalization would require balanced access in all counties, and Ohio’s current rollout—while carefully managed—has left rural zones with weaker supply.
Legislative Flexibility: Key to Scaling
Issue 2’s framework mandates a licensing reassessment 24 months post-implementation. This provides a mechanism to adapt infrastructure rules, issue more cultivation permits, or expand geographic limits to match consumption patterns. Moreover, some lawmakers are already proposing adjustments to tax rates and funding appropriations to refine the market.
Inching Toward Readiness
Ohio has made notable progress: a functioning regulatory body, growing cultivation and processing capacity, expanding retail footprint, and strong consumer demand. Yet gaps remain. The absence of interstate logistics, uneven regional supply, and need for expanded processing and distribution networks spotlight structural weaknesses. Unless policymakers accelerate licensing, infrastructure funding, and logistical integration, a federally legalized environment could strain the system.
Bottom line: Ohio’s cannabis infrastructure is prepared for significant growth—but requires deliberate scaling, legislative flexibility, and systemic overhauls to thrive under full national legalization.