Aaron Smith is stepping down as head of the National Cannabis Industry Association (NCIA), leaving a legacy of forging partnerships to advance reform on what was once seen as a marginalized issue that has now become mainstream over the course of his work. Next, he’ll be pursuing another ambitious project: Helping to dissolve broader partisan gridlock that’s endemic in U.S. politics.

Smith, who got his start in the grassroots advocacy world working with organizations such as the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), has served as the co-founder and executive director of NCIA for the past 15 years. He’s had a front row seat to the rapid evolution of the sector, which he tells Marijuana Moment is now at a pivotal “crossroads” amid competing interests and challenging politics.

But while keenly aware that it will take a stepped-up push from all stakeholders to deliver on the small and large goals of the movement—from banking access to ending federal prohibition altogether—Smith says he’s compelled to take on a new role outside of the industry. He’ll be staying on NCIA’s board, but his time as CEO is coming to an end as he seeks to leverage his experience building bridges and affecting change in a different capacity.

Smith’s message to the industry and advocates? “This is the time to put the pedal to the metal.”

As for NCIA, the board will be taking on the outgoing CEO’s functions in the short-term, spearhead by board chair Adam Rosenberg, as the organization rethinks its strategy to deliver for businesses and consumers alike at this inflection point in state and federal marijuana policy.

Smith is “confident” the board and the association’s leadership are more than up to the task as he departs.

“I really don’t think there are members of the NCIA out there that joined because of me personally. It’s always been about the institution, which is run by the members,” he said. “The members select the board. The board is leading the organization. And I’m confident that the organization is in good hands.”

He added that he’d “really look forward to just seeing continued engagement from the industry,” emphasizing “the need to invest in these reforms.” As he put it, while there are economic pain points for the sector that might limit operators’ ability to aggressively put dollars toward any particular legislation or issue, those cannabis businesses out there that aren’t at least trying to support basic much-needed reforms are sitting idle at their own peril.

“If you’re part of a cannabis industry, you’re part of a social movement—and the movement is not done yet,” he said.

Marijuana Moment spoke to Smith ahead of his departure, scheduled for August 15, discussing his experience with NCIA, remaining challenges within the industry and the future of cannabis policy. This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Marijuana Moment: You got your start in a more conventional nonprofit advocacy world at MPP. What was it like to transition into a more hybrid industry-advocacy role with NCIA?

Aaron Smith: It was a very different time. I mean, it was a time that the industry and the advocacy communities  were essentially one and the same. But we perceived that the industry was beginning to grow beyond that core group, and that’s when we made the decision to start NCIA—we being Steve Fox and myself.

And so the transition was sort of seamless and very logical at the time. It just made sense. It was a natural evolution.

A lot of it was a messaging shift—from talking about the issue just from this sort of broader ‘doing what’s right for the country’ agenda that we had, to just the nuts and bolts of what it takes to run a business and talking about things like taxes and banking and those sort of practical issues.

MM: There are some who worry about the growing influence of industry interests in this space and how that could impact more grassroots, consumer-focused advocacy work. Do you share that concern?

AS: I do. Because I think policy needs to be balanced to ensure it’s serving the interests of all the constituencies.

Of course, I’m representing the business community—but it’s very important that consumers have a stake, and that public health and other interests have a stake, in driving policy reform forward.

I’m also concerned because the industry’s resources seem to be quite limited. And there are those concerned that, as the philanthropic [funding] has kind of moved away, thinking the industry would pick up the slack, the industry hasn’t really been able to. And while the industry is putting in a significant investment—I’m not saying it’s insignificant—we’re not where we should be in terms of the kind of money that you see behind an effort to get this thing over the finish line.

MM: In you opinion, what needs to change to rebalance that dynamic and help the industry obtain the resources to meet the moment?

AS: I know we’re in sort of a catch-22, because a lot of it changes on federal reform—putting 280E [the IRS code blocking marijuana businesses from taking federal tax deductions] in the rearview mirror would make a whole lot of difference in our ability to invest in policy. But of course, that’s not going to happen unless we invest more in policy reform.

But I think that a lot of this, at least when speaking to the industry, comes down to the individual level, where every single person who’s invested in the cannabis industry—whether they’re starting their own business or they’re an investor in another part of the industry—needs to be invested in cannabis reform.

Otherwise it’s frankly foolish to even get involved, because this industry is in a precarious position. Its success hinges upon the success of organizations like ours that are driving reform forward. And to bet your life savings on a cannabis business without putting anything into cannabis reform is just, frankly, foolish. And unfortunately, the vast majority of businesses in the space, that’s exactly the approach they’ve taken.

It’s challenging for me, and I would say, even if for whatever reason these businesses aren’t looking to join NCIA, they should be contributing to another organization or doing something, because doing nothing is essentially guaranteeing the demise of the industry. I feel like we’re at crossroads right there, right now. This is the time to put the pedal to the metal.

MM: What comes next with NCIA as far as leadership and priorities go?

AS: In the short-run, [NCIA is transitioning] the leadership authority to the board as a whole, under the direction of Adam Rosenberg, who’s our board chair—effectively as an acting CEO. But really he’s just going to continue being the chair. The board’s going to to take over the leadership role that was under the CEO. But as part of that, the board’s also promoting our chief strategy officer, Brooke Gilbert to the COO position to handle day-to-day operations, staff management and keeping the trains running on time, so to speak. And Brooke has been well-known. She’s been at the organization for 12 years, is well-known by the members and has been a kind of the driving force behind the scenes for a long time.

My role has been CEO, but a lot of my role has also been the COO sort of function, too, so the board decided to bifurcate it that way, and that’s in the short-run. In the long-run, over the coming months or however long it takes the board—I plan on staying on the board. I’m currently a board member and the CEO, so I’m resigning as CEO, and at the board’s invitation, will be remaining on the board for the foreseeable future.

Then in the long-run, [NCIA will be] reevaluating everything about the organization and evaluating the needs for what’s the best CEO for this membership, for this organization—the best attributes and qualities that it would take to bring the organization to the next level, and then conducting a thorough national search. I can’t really give you a timeline on when it’s going to be complete, but it’s starting effectively now.

And I think, though, in the interim, the interim leadership is strong. You have staff who’ve been here for years and years, and then a board that’s very engaged and energized about the organization. It made it easier. It made it easier for me to step out of my role knowing—just you know how great this board is right now, and that you know how engaged they are.

MM: At a higher level, what do you think might be achievable for the industry and movement under an often unpredictable Trump administration?

AS: I think there’s a lot on the table still. I think federal rescheduling is probably the best bet because it’s something that the president can do with the stroke of a pen and he’s already stated strong support for federal rescheduling and even beyond that. Just today we got a new DEA administrator in place. So I don’t think we’re going to see this happen tomorrow, but I think there’s a real good chance that this could happen by the end of the year.

Then beyond that,  I think [rescheduling] alone would send a signal to Congress that the administration is behind reform. It would make a lot easier to get reforms like the SAFE Banking Act through and other incremental types of reforms.

Then, going into longer term, after that NCIA will be advocating for the legacy operators. While rescheduling to Schedule III will fix 280E for everybody going forward, you have thousands of businesses that have been saddled with the staff tax debt and that needs to be resolved. That’s something that NCIA will be making a priority in the nearest of time.

MM: Do you have a memory or two from your time at NCIA that stands out to you?

AS: I think that one of my favorite things has always been our annual fly-in lobby days—seeing that grow and change over the years. It’s always been my favorite time of year at a lot of levels, because it’s a great time to really engage with our membership in a deeper way than we do at, let’s say, a regular event where we’re just kind of networking and hanging out for two hours. It’s a two-day working experience. But it’s also just a great way to gauge the temperature of Congress. And when I started this, just getting meetings with a member of Congress was really, really hard—and then if you got that meeting, it was like just jokes and poking fun and eye rolls the whole time.

Most of the time today, fast forward, I shouldn’t say we might have the majority of the House on board with legalization, but if we don’t, we’re very close to it and the industry is taken very seriously, even by those who oppose us. It’s really just a great opportunity to kind of see everything on display and connect the members, and I hope to contribute, or I hope to participate, just as a board member next year and knowing to the future,

What about a standout memory with a lawmaker?

AS: We’ve had some great champions over the years. One of the great memorable moments that comes to mind is just meeting with [Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY)] on this issue over the long period of his history—from getting to the point where his office ready to talk to us to where he was open to at least hemp reform. We had a fundraiser that I think you guys reported on. We were trying to keep it secret, but it was leaked. You guys picked it up years ago, but at a golf club in Orange County.

It was great experience, because it gave me some real perspective for him as well. He was very kind of professorial and giving us his whole spiel on what the role of the Senate is from his perspective and at the same time, hearing all of these stories from the cannabis industry. It was clear that was far from the first time that he’d heard that. It was just very powerful, because he talked about 280E and banking, so somebody who’s in a position of authority and that level of authority at that particular time in the industry was pivotal.

What can you share about what you’re doing next in your career?

AS: I’m taking on a role as political director in an organization called Unite America. They work on structural electoral reforms aimed at reducing political polarization and improving functioning government— so things like open primaries, ranked choice-related voting, independent redistricting reform.

As it intersects, anybody who’s looked at this issue can see this incredible progress that cannabis has made over at the state level, usually at the ballot box—but we’re all frustrated because Congress can’t seem to get even the most incremental, modest reform such as the SAFE Banking Act across the finish line. And that’s because the political polarization and the incentives within our system reward gridlock and punish members of Congress who reach across the aisle to try to find solutions.

This is an area I’ve been following kind of since January 6, I guess I could say. I followed this organization and that issue as sort of a systemic solution to many of the nation’s problems, including cannabis reform. And you could look at the SAFE Banking Act a few years ago, where we had Democratic trifecta across government, we all thought we were going to get this thing passed, and you all of a sudden had [then-Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Sen. Cory Booker (D-NY)] talking about, you know, laying down on the tracks and not letting this thing pass unless we can insert all of these social justice provisions, which then turned off the Republicans, dragged the process on past Christmas and it never happened.

That little kind of anecdote that I think everybody in this industry has been following remembers is the primary problem, and it’s because Chuck Schumer is concerned about getting primaried from the left, and so he’s got to pander to that part of the his constituency, rather than the state of New York, which overwhelmingly would like to see him get progress on SAFE Banking rather than just grandstanding on issues that, while I support some of those issues, they’re still sort of niche left wing issues.

So it’s really about trying to get more elected officials in place that are more willing to compromise and achieve progress on this issue and many, many others.