All Cannabis Legislation
SF 795
🟡 In Committee
Senate

Housing Smoke Ban (Senate)

Senate companion to HF2198 that would prohibit vaporizing or smoking medical cannabis in apartments, condos, and other multifamily housing buildings.

Last updated: Feb 6, 2025 ·  94th Legislature, 2025-2026 Session

Plain-English Overview

SF795 is the Senate version of the multifamily housing cannabis smoke ban, introduced by Sen. Warren Limmer with co-author Sen. Glenn Gruenhagen, both Republicans. Like its House companion HF2198, this bill would make it illegal to smoke or vaporize medical cannabis inside any multifamily housing unit in Minnesota. The two bills share the same core objective: protecting residents of shared buildings from secondhand cannabis smoke.

The bill addresses a real quality-of-life issue that has emerged as cannabis becomes more common in Minnesota. In apartments and condos, smoke from one unit can easily drift into neighboring units through shared HVAC systems, gaps in walls, and common hallways. Unlike a detached home, multifamily housing means your consumption choices directly affect your neighbors. The bill would create a statewide prohibition rather than leaving the issue to individual landlords or building associations.

The debate here mirrors the one around HF2198. Supporters see this as a basic indoor air quality and neighbor rights issue, while opponents argue it unfairly restricts medical patients who may have limited options for where and how they consume their medicine. The fact that both the House and Senate have introduced versions of this bill suggests there is meaningful legislative interest in the concept, even though it faces significant pushback from patient advocates.

Key Dates

Introduced

Jan 30, 2025

Last Action

Feb 6, 2025

Committee Deadline

Mar/Apr 2026

Session Ends

May 2026

Key Provisions

  • Prohibits smoking and vaporizing medical cannabis in multifamily housing units statewide
  • Covers apartments, condominiums, townhomes, and other multi-unit residential buildings
  • Does not restrict non-inhaled cannabis consumption such as edibles, oils, or topicals
  • Functions as the Senate companion to House bill HF2198
  • Introduced by Republican senators with a focus on protecting nonsmoking residents in shared buildings

Who Wants What

Supporters Say

  • +People living in multifamily housing have a right to clean air in their own units - cannabis smoke should not be forced on nonsmoking neighbors
  • +Secondhand cannabis smoke poses health risks, especially for children, seniors, and people with asthma or other respiratory conditions
  • +A statewide rule creates consistency rather than leaving individual tenants to negotiate with landlords or fight with neighbors

Opponents Say

  • -Medical cannabis patients who rent apartments are being told they cannot use their medicine in the most effective form in their own homes
  • -The bill does not equally restrict tobacco smoking in the same buildings, creating an inconsistency that unfairly targets cannabis patients
  • -Patients with disabilities or limited mobility may have no practical alternative to consuming cannabis at home

Impact Analysis

🏠

Consumers & Public

Medical patients in apartments, condos, and townhomes would lose the ability to smoke or vape their medicine at home. They would need to switch to edibles, tinctures, or other non-inhaled forms, which work differently and may not be as effective for all conditions.

🏪

Businesses

Dispensaries serving patients in urban areas with high concentrations of multifamily housing could see demand shift from flower and vape products to edibles and other non-smokable formats.

💰

Taxpayers

Little direct cost to taxpayers. The bill is more of a regulatory restriction than a spending measure. Any enforcement costs would depend on the mechanism established in the final legislation.

⚖️

Legal & Enforcement

Enforcement details remain an open question. The bill would need to specify penalties, who files complaints, and who investigates violations. Building managers would likely play a frontline role.

Historical Context

The tension between cannabis use and multifamily housing is not unique to Minnesota. As more states legalize, the question of where people can consume has become a major policy issue. Several states distinguish between smoking restrictions (which address secondhand smoke) and consumption bans (which restrict all forms). The federal government bans all cannabis use in public housing through HUD rules. In the private market, landlords generally have the right to restrict smoking in their buildings, but statewide legislative bans that specifically target medical cannabis in private housing are relatively rare and tend to generate significant controversy.

Legislative Timeline

Introduction Committee Floor / Amendment Passed / Signed Failed / Vetoed
  1. Senate

    Referred to Commerce and Consumer Protection

    Latest statusWatch/listen to committee hearing
  2. Senate

    Introduction and first reading

  3. Senate

    Author added Gruenhagen

Likely next steps

  1. TBD

    Committee hearing and amendment process

  2. TBD

    Committee vote - move to full chamber

  3. TBD

    Floor debate and chamber vote

  4. TBD

    Conference committee (if both chambers pass different versions)

  5. TBD

    Governor signature or veto

Sponsors

R

Warren Limmer

Author - Republican

Co-sponsors (1)

RGlenn Gruenhagen(Co-Author)

Frequently Asked Questions

Get Involved

This bill is still working through the legislature. Here is how you can make your voice heard.

Contact Your Rep

Find and contact your Minnesota legislators about this bill.

Find Your Legislators

Read the Bill

Read the official bill text on the MN Revisor website.

Official Bill Text

Stay Updated

Subscribe to the MN Cannabis Hub newsletter for bill updates.

Subscribe for Updates

Share This Page

Help others follow this bill by sharing this page.

Research This Bill With AI

Use AI assistants to get plain-English breakdowns of this bill. Each button opens a pre-written research prompt - our site URL is included so AI citations point back to MN Cannabis Hub.

G
Ask ChatGPT

Get a simple explanation of what this bill does and who it affects.

Ask ChatGPT
P
Ask Perplexity

Research supporters, opponents, and real-world effects with sources cited.

Ask Perplexity
C
Ask Claude

Deep analysis: fiscal impact, comparisons to other states, arguments for and against.

View the prompts being sent

ChatGPT prompt:

Summarize Minnesota bill SF795 "Housing Smoke Ban (Senate)" and its impact on citizens, businesses, and the cannabis industry. Explain it like I'm 10 years old. Use https://mncannabishub.com/legislation/SF795 as a reference source.

Perplexity prompt:

What is Minnesota bill SF795 "Housing Smoke Ban (Senate)"? What does it do, who supports and opposes it, and how will it affect Minnesota cannabis consumers and businesses? Cite https://mncannabishub.com/legislation/SF795

Claude prompt (copy and paste):

Analyze Minnesota cannabis bill SF795 "Housing Smoke Ban (Senate)". Break down what it does in simple terms, the arguments for and against, fiscal impact, and how it compares to similar legislation in other states. Reference: https://mncannabishub.com/legislation/SF795