we need patients + caregivers advocacy

Quote:

---

It would be difficult for legislators to deny mmj caregivers access to this same business model.

I've assisted a few Ag co-ops.

---

what do you think a working model of this would like like in Colorado?

cripes. I wish we could edit longer...

what do you think a working model of this would look like in Colorado?

I think a patient /caregiver marketing co-op could be run like a regular Ag co-op. These are democratically run orgs, requiring input and agreement by members. Some, not all, caregivers and patients might flourish in this type of atmosphere, i.e.; help raise the education level of the membership on issues from patients needs (anyone made mmj suppositories?) to beating down mites to campaign and legislative politics.

"The mission of Cooperative Services Program is to promote understanding and use of the cooperative form of business as a viable organizational option for marketing and distributing agricultural products." (From USDA website) How to Start a Cooperative There's lots of info on Ag co-ops on the www

There are some built in advantages that members of an mmj co-op could exploit, like the ability to deliver mmj to sick patients. MMCs can't make deliveries.

Basically, everything allowed under the Constitution can be taken advantage of by a mmj co-op, if it's also within the limits of the new laws (i.e.; can't grow together, plant and patient limits.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter

Listen, I think you're one of the people who have a clear idea of what needs to happen in this industry and I agree with you wholeheartedly on a lot of subjects. My only point is that I think caregivers PRE 1284 could have done more to protect themselves.

I've never heard a center say anything pro the 5 patient limit. Most of the ones that are well run have tremendous respect for independent growers and frankly depended on them to get to where they are today. I don't think they were intimidated by them as competition, either, so I'm not sure how that provision made it into 1284. But it was a mistake, and a mistake that needs to be fixed.

---

I know a lot of caregivers were mislead by there super high priced mmj lawyers. Warren Edson is a total slimebag who made a lot of money misadvising caregivers , and then sold them up the river to the dispensaries under 1284. A lot of caregivers believed they would easily be able to negotiate contract with multiple dispensaries, wrong! By the time most people realized was about to happen, it was too late. I tried to warn several people who kind of brushed it off, now they are fucked scrambling around trying to save the ship before 1284 sinks everything.

I would love to join a caregivers union.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by michaelnights

Caregivers in Michigan are limited to 12 plants per patient and only allowed 5 patients - total 72 plants. They've created marketing co-ops, i.e.; they pool their patients. This gives patients assess to a greater variety of available produce and expands a caregiver's limited market.

MI caregivers are using this co-op model and stretching it into a new type of dispensary business model. CO and CA caregivers came to dispensaries from a different model, one unrestricted by a patient cap.

While "joining together" to grow is no longer allowed in CO, the law does not address caregivers joining together to market. Using the traditional agricultural co-op model, were each farmer grows their own produce and the co-op assists in marketing, CO caregivers could benefit, as could their patients.

Ag co-ops are a hugely important business model here in CO. By coming together under the co-op model it also gives small farmers a much greater voice in political matters, which they press hard.

It would be difficult for legislators to deny mmj caregivers access to this same business model.

I've assisted a few Ag co-ops. I could see that model working well for the type of org copobo suggests is needed.

---

Michigan is where Colorado was about three years ago, ready for an explosion of caregivers and dispensaries. We have started grows in MI. and hope to have a dispensary up by the end of the summer, luckily both Mike and I have family and freinds there we can trust to do this right. I am going with Marc Emery's strategy "Overgrow the Government"!
:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter

Listen, I think you're one of the people who have a clear idea of what needs to happen in this industry and I agree with you wholeheartedly on a lot of subjects. My only point is that I think caregivers PRE 1284 could have done more to protect themselves.

I've never heard a center say anything pro the 5 patient limit. Most of the ones that are well run have tremendous respect for independent growers and frankly depended on them to get to where they are today. I don't think they were intimidated by them as competition, either, so I'm not sure how that provision made it into 1284. But it was a mistake, and a mistake that needs to be fixed.

---

I think dispensaries quietly approve of this 5 patient limit, because it pretty effectively cripples large scale home grows, which are their direct competition pre-1284.

Now, MMC's are most definitely the large scale producers and providers of medical marijuana, and that's not going to change. I don't think this was an accident.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

I think dispensaries quietly approve of this 5 patient limit, because it pretty effectively cripples large scale home grows, which are their direct competition pre-1284.

Now, MMC's are most definitely the large scale producers and providers of medical marijuana, and that's not going to change. I don't think this was an accident.

---

I guess we'll just agree to disagree. Large scale home grows aren't scaring anyone. Centers are the future, not buying meds out of someones house or car.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter

I guess we'll just agree to disagree. Large scale home grows aren't scaring anyone. Centers are the future, not buying meds out of someones house or car.

---

I think we are on the same page.

I was saying that prior to 1284, your biggest competition would be a large scale home grow. I'm thinking of the guy in highlands ranch, or something on an even larger scale. There were no patient limits before so theoretically as long as you had the patients and paperwork, you could grow unlimited amounts of medicine right? Correct me if I am wrong. If that large scale home grow had better, higher quality than you, you'd likely be obligated to carry that medicine, probably at a premium cost. For example, wellspring's house strain is ingrid, and it's okay, but it's no pre98 bubba.

With 1284, that large scale home grow now has to either marry up with a dispensary and grow there, or pay to have the optional premesis license. Right? So it effectively crippled and ruined that large scale home grow. In my eyes, this legislation rewards you as a dispensary for becoming legit and paying your taxes. I would venture that large scale home grow isn't paying taxes anywhere along the line, and neither are the people he's providing medicine to. This legislation makes sure that the state gets tax revenue on as much of these transactions as possible.

I guess it's not really a move designed to protect MMC's and I can believe that they weren't responsible for it's being included. I have a feeling that the department of revenue wanted to make sure they got as big a piece of the pie as possible.

So, here we are. These large scale home grows, who are now operating outside the law, are the only ones who are really upset with 1284, or those growing for friends, etc. The rest of us will simply deal with it. I think. Maybe.

Those large scale home grows were where dispensaries were getting a majority of their meds. What sense does it make to try to eliminate them? It was a symbiotic relationship because most large scale grows can't sell the volume they grow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter

Those large scale home grows were where dispensaries were getting a majority of their meds. What sense does it make to try to eliminate them? It was a symbiotic relationship because most large scale grows can't sell the volume they grow.

---

I agree, I guess my point is, the only ones who are really, genuinely upset with these new regulations are those large scale grows that we are talking about, who didn't get compliant and are now illegal. Those people who didn't want to pay the licensing fees to get legal etc. Those large scale guys who didn't marry up with dispensaries like yours, are the ones who are affected.

I'm okay with that. I am glad that dispensaries like yours are getting together with large scale grows, hopefully these smallish super high quality grows will replicate on a larger scale now that they are coming out from the underground.

I think this legislation will be difficult to navigate short term, but I think it's pretty crucial if we want to be around and legit long term.

Regarding eliminating home grows. In the eyes of the government, and the department of revenue, anyone not paying taxes has to go. The department of revenue understood that large scale home grows likely don't pay enough in taxes, hence this legislation. Obviously the legit, smart growers married up and paid up to remain compliant. That's a good thing. That's how it makes sense to eliminate those who are now non-compliant.