How many medical marijuana businesses want to get licensed--#'s released

According to the CBS 4 Denver and The Denver Post:

More Than 2,000 Want Colo. Marijuana Licenses - cbs4denver.com

2059 TOTAL


717 Dispensaries

1071 Growers

271 Product Makers


Over $7,000,000 in Fees Paid

to the State of Colorado

This really hurts large scale now-illegal caregivers. Kind of hard to remove the 5 patient cap when those who 'pay to play' (non caregivers) have put 7 million bucks into their cause.

Have large scale caregivers 'united' and done anything similar? Is there a way to show that caregivers have paid more than 7 million in taxes from revenues from 'caregiving'?

Isn't the biggest reason for the 5 patient cap is to remove the large scale, for-profit caregivers? It basically moves the large scale grows into the light, ensuring tax revenue for the state?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackmmjpot

According to the CBS 4 Denver and The Denver Post:

More Than 2,000 Want Colo. Marijuana Licenses - cbs4denver.com

2059 TOTAL


717 Dispensaries

1071 Growers

271 Product Makers


Over $7,000,000 in Fees Paid

to the State of Colorado

---

from westword:
Every Colorado dispensary and associated business had to apply for a state license by August 1 -- which means we finally have a total number of Colorado pot shops willing navigate the state's new rules and fees. The tally: 717 dispensaries, 271 marijuana-infused product manufacturers and 1,071 grow facilities -- in total earning the state $7.34 million in fees.

Considering there's roughly 105,000 medical marijuana patients in Colorado, that breaks down to about150 patients for every dispensary in the state.

When the dust settles, the number of dispensaries may actually be slightly higher, says Department of Revenue spokesperson Mark Couch, since there's roughly one-hundred mail-in applications that have yet to be processed. In total, the department received slightly more applications than it expected, since it figured about half of the 1,100 or so dispensaries officials had guessed had opened shop would actually go through with the application process.

The numbers also shed light on the size of most Colorado dispensaries. All but 35 of the 717 dispensaries applied for a "Type 1" medical marijuana center license, meaning they serve 300 or fewer patients. Only fifteen applied for a Type 2 license, meaning they work with 301 to 500 patients, and twenty applied for Type 3, reserved for behemoths with 501 or more customers.

What's interesting is that there are more grow-facility license applications than the total number of dispensary and product-manufacturer applications, even though only dispensary owners or product manufacturers can own a grow facility. That's because several business owners appeared to own more than one grow facility, says Couch. "It protects them," he says. "If they have blight on a grow at one facility, they will still have another source for their crops."

Still, other questions remain, such as: How many businesses will make it through the application process and actually be granted the all-important state license.

So the vast majority of MMC's are actually smaller scale, that's interesting. With all the anti-dispensary hate around here, you'd think all the apps would be type two or three, not type one.

You can go up in license any time, so lots of centers went for smaller licenses.

I wouldn't consider 300 patients small scale.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boulderbud5525

I wouldn't consider 300 patients small scale.

---

Why not? It's only 1800 plants! :eek: [/sarcasm] :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SprngsCaregiver

Why not? It's only 1800 plants! :eek: [/sarcasm] :D

---

that's what i call jungle love!!!:jointsmile:

So this anti-MMC, 'their quality is crap' mentality is based on the fact that you guys are assuming they are growing exactly six plants for every one of their patients? I guess your argument is that if you're growing that many plants then quality will suffer?

That's like saying small scale growers can't grow more than X amount of plants because quality suffers, or something.

I guess I don't understand all the anti-MMC hate around here, and I wish someone could explain it to me.

Wouldn't small scale, high quality growers (the typical anti-MMC person) have larger grows if money wasn't an issue? If small grows can grow top quality medicine, then why can't those growers scale up and increase inventory and volume? At what point does your anti-MMC-shitty-quality argument start applying to small scale growers such as the typical person reading this site? Do you understand what I'm saying? The argument that MMC's can't possibly grow quality medicine is wrong. What do you think?

SprngsCaregiver: I know you dislike me from past comments, but you seem to be adamantly anti-MMC. Do you think it's possible for an MMC to grow on a large scale and still have small grow quality? Or is it impossible to take small grow knowledge and scale it up? Don't you have experience with small and larger home grows? I am not sure and feel free to correct me. You just seem like you have experience on this subject.

I don't think there is a typical anti-MMC person. The issue doesn't divide so neatly as that. People and groups fighting retail marijuana sales fall into a lot of different categories. The lines between them are very messy and shift often.

A better question is what is the motivation of someone being anti-caregiver/pro dispensary?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zedleppelin

A better question is what is the motivation of someone being anti-caregiver/pro dispensary?

---

Is there anyone like that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HighPopalorum

Is there anyone like that?

---

Yep (wasnt referring to you).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zedleppelin

A better question is what is the motivation of someone being anti-caregiver/pro dispensary?

---

Are you saying that someone who is pro-MMC (like an MMC owner) can't also be pro-caregiver?

Aren't we just talking about the 5 patient max? Isn't that why large scale, now illegal home grows are pissed? They are blaming MMC's for the language in the bills?!?

If we didn't have the 5 patient cap, then large scale private caregivers wouldn't be so angry. It's weird that they don't seem to understand how much revenue the state saw it was losing. They know there are many, many barkowitz' out there. This new legislation just ensures revenue. It has nothing to do with MMC's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zedleppelin

Yep (wasnt referring to you).

---

Who?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

So this anti-MMC, 'their quality is crap' mentality is based on the fact that you guys are assuming they are growing exactly six plants for every one of their patients? I guess your argument is that if you're growing that many plants then quality will suffer?

That's like saying small scale growers can't grow more than X amount of plants because quality suffers, or something.

I guess I don't understand all the anti-MMC hate around here, and I wish someone could explain it to me.

Wouldn't small scale, high quality growers (the typical anti-MMC person) have larger grows if money wasn't an issue? If small grows can grow top quality medicine, then why can't those growers scale up and increase inventory and volume? At what point does your anti-MMC-shitty-quality argument start applying to small scale growers such as the typical person reading this site? Do you understand what I'm saying? The argument that MMC's can't possibly grow quality medicine is wrong. What do you think?

SprngsCaregiver: I know you dislike me from past comments, but you seem to be adamantly anti-MMC. Do you think it's possible for an MMC to grow on a large scale and still have small grow quality? Or is it impossible to take small grow knowledge and scale it up? Don't you have experience with small and larger home grows? I am not sure and feel free to correct me. You just seem like you have experience on this subject.

---

The problem is a bunch of people have just bought their way in not knowing the first thing about growing marijuana. They are just planting seeds and watching them grow. They have lobbied to have the laws shifted in their favor so they can have their little monopoly. Why do you think caregivers are no longer able to sell overages to dispensaries even though that is where the best meds in the state were coming from?
Then lets take a look at the caregiver 5 patient law. They say it is to limit the amount of plants in a residential grow. I say BS if you wanted to limit the number of plants in a resedential grow you would do just that, not limit the ammount of business a caregiver can do. What if a caregiver wanted to move their business into a commercial building?

I can only answer your question about quality to the best of my knowledge... I know there is a huge difference between growing 10 plants and growing close to 100. So, I would imagine that difference would be amplified the higher your counts get.
Is it possible? Of course it's possible. The problem is most of the people who bought their way in only care about turning the money around as quickly as possible. They are what we in the business call "commercial growers".

I don't dislike you. I dislike your attitude towards caregivers and favoritism towards MMC's. It seems every comment you make you are in some way trying to criminalize/bash caregivers.
Also, I'm not anti MMC and I have never said I was. I'm anti government limiting my legal business because they got lobby $ to do so. No I dont have proof of politicians receiving lobby $ but read between the lines. Why else would there be such a drastic shift and a whole new entity (the MMC) created under 1284?

I'm not anti-mmc either.

I am anti-1284 and sb109, but, I gotta live with what it is for now.

hey shouldbegrowing420 - how about popping a few seeds, or stop down and pick upa half dozen clones. You would be fine with just 1 600 watt switchable. If you keep it small, it stays cheap.

It would be cool to set up a website, just for new growers, how to get started cheap. It would be cool to see more people taking care of themselves.... and, by growing the plant..

there is enlightenment. look into the grow light.

it is needed.

its all about the money brah! :mad:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackmmjpot

According to the CBS 4 Denver and The Denver Post:

More Than 2,000 Want Colo. Marijuana Licenses - cbs4denver.com

2059 TOTAL


717 Dispensaries

1071 Growers

271 Product Makers


Over $7,000,000 in Fees Paid

to the State of Colorado

---

And here's the latest

Every Colorado dispensary and associated business had to apply for a state license by August 1 â?? which means we finally have a total number of Colorado pot shops willing navigate the stateâ??s new rules and fees. The tally: 717 dispensaries, 271 marijuana-infused product manufacturers and 1,071 grow facilities â?? in total earning the state $7.34 million in fees.

Considering thereâ??s roughly 105,000 medical marijuana patients in Colorado, that breaks down to about 150 patients for every dispensary in the state.

The numbers also shed light on the size of most Colorado dispensaries. All but 35 of the 717 dispensaries applied for a â??Type 1″ medical marijuana center license, meaning they serve 300 or fewer patients. Only fifteen applied for a Type 2 license, meaning they work with 301 to 500 patients, and twenty applied for Type 3, reserved for behemoths with 501 or more customers.

Iâ??m thrilled that Colorado is seeing revenue from cannabusiness. Money talks and even if some lawmakers donâ??t like marijuana, they have to like the easy money the dispensaries bring.

What I find notable about the story, however, is the estimated number of Colorado patients. The stats from the Colorado Medical Marijuana Registry were last updated at the end of November 2009. They indicated then that there were 30,919 Colorado patients. Has Colorado really added another 75,000 patients in the span of eight months?

It is not unprecedented to see this huge increase in patient rolls. Montana saw patient registrations double from March to September of 2009, rising from a little over 2,000 to a little under 4,000. Six months later, then number has risen to over 12,000.

The catalyst for these rapid increases in patient numbers? Dispensaries. The election of Barack Obama in late â??08, followed by the Holder Promise of â??09 to allocate federal law enforcement resources away from those obeying state medical marijuana laws, has led to explosive growth of dispensaries in Colorado, Montana, and California, plus an initiative for dispensaries in Oregon, as well as state-run dispensary operations finalized or in progress in Maine, Rhode Island, New Jersey, DC, and New Mexico.

Itâ??s a simple application of the laws of supply and demand. There is a huge demand for medical marijuana, but in most states there is far too inadequate a supply. Who wants to go to the trouble of collecting medical records (in every medmj state but California) that verify a specific condition, then spending money to see a medical marijuana clinic doctor, then spending more money to register with the state, if the result of all that hard work and money is to continue buying the same street weed youâ??re already getting?
Montana has about a million people, so 12,000 patients represents 1.2% of the population. Colorado has about 5 million, so about 2.1% of their population are cardholders. If these numbers hold true for Oregon (pop. 3.9 million) and that state passes its dispensary measure, the number of registered patients would increase from the current 36,000 to between 46,800to 81,900 within a year.

Opposing Views: Colorado Earning $7 Million Off Marijuana Dispensaries

I guess now--we'll see how many survive the licensing application approval by the state--and if 150 patients per dispensory is enough to keep doors open?

I think a bunch of these noobs are going to get a huge wake up call from the Feds very soon. (new 2X penalties for edible manufacture, anyone?)

IMO, they are just waiting long enough for folks to get it all set up and running and for MAX IMPACT by taking down those who have forgotten that buying a license from the Dept of Revenue to grow an unlimited # of plants DOESN'T erase the Federal penalties for such a crime. the Fed will TIME this to coincide with the Nov election for legalization in Cali and with the GREED MODEL in place here in Colorado and follks acting as if no one cares/is watching their shennanigans, it won't be too hard for the average American to see that our "medical" program has become a drug-dealing sham in less than a year and vote any/all MMJ legislation down in their State.

blackhash

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SprngsCaregiver

The problem is a bunch of people have just bought their way in not knowing the first thing about growing marijuana. They are just planting seeds and watching them grow. They have lobbied to have the laws shifted in their favor so they can have their little monopoly. Why do you think caregivers are no longer able to sell overages to dispensaries even though that is where the best meds in the state were coming from?
Then lets take a look at the caregiver 5 patient law. They say it is to limit the amount of plants in a residential grow. I say BS if you wanted to limit the number of plants in a resedential grow you would do just that, not limit the ammount of business a caregiver can do. What if a caregiver wanted to move their business into a commercial building?

I can only answer your question about quality to the best of my knowledge... I know there is a huge difference between growing 10 plants and growing close to 100. So, I would imagine that difference would be amplified the higher your counts get.
Is it possible? Of course it's possible. The problem is most of the people who bought their way in only care about turning the money around as quickly as possible. They are what we in the business call "commercial growers".

I don't dislike you. I dislike your attitude towards caregivers and favoritism towards MMC's. It seems every comment you make you are in some way trying to criminalize/bash caregivers.
Also, I'm not anti MMC and I have never said I was. I'm anti government limiting my legal business because they got lobby $ to do so. No I dont have proof of politicians receiving lobby $ but read between the lines. Why else would there be such a drastic shift and a whole new entity (the MMC) created under 1284?

---

I sincerely appreciate your response, and I think over time, you'll come to realize that we are going to agree on most fronts, except for the semantics/words we each use to define what's going on in this industry as a whole, but who cares about that stupid stuff?

I only have a 'dislike' for those who are non-compliant. I have lots of 'pothead' buddies and co-workers who would love for me to re-sell my meds to them. But fuck them, I am not about to break the law for some random asshole, friend or not. I am interested in remaining compliant moving forward.

That same negativity I will also direct at those who are breaking the law post 1284/109. Those who bitch and moan but can't show evidence that they lobbied or did anything to support their movement have no excuses, and those are the ones who I show 'dislike' for. I think this is why you have a problem with the wording of my posts. The non-compliant assholes will be treated as such moving forward, and until the for-profit growers come together, it is what it is.

I was lucky enough to recently visit a 'commercial grow' as you describe MMC's moving forward. 3 owners, small industrial space, roughly 50 patients. Perpetual grow, harvesting 10-25 plants per week, I won't get into specifics, but their product is as good or better than anything I've found in 99% of MMC's. However, I'd like to note that the bigger MMC's such as wellspring/releaf/cannamart, always have similar top 1% quality product. My point is that there are compliant home growers who paid the license fees, submitted the app with personal info etc, and are operating larger scale grows but still growing quality medicine. Maybe you haven't visited the right MMC. I have been to roughly 100 dispensaries/MMC's, and this is the first truly legitimate grow that I've seen. However, I can't fault any MMC for not showing me (as a patient) their grows. That's ridiculous.

It's silly for you to lump all MMC's together. I visited a newly opened MMC north of the tech center, and it's a total amateur shop. Those are the MMC's who you should hate, not the ones who actually carry good meds and are knowledgeable about the product from start to finish. That's the point/distinction that I feel that you are missing when I post pro-MMC things. For every good MMC, there are ten bad ones. But it seems to me that you fail to acknowledge that there are actually legitimate MMC's operating, which undermines your credibility. That's not an insult to you, I would be offended at those who want to buy in to make a buck as well. Those who move here to open MMC's/grows etc.

Regarding these MMC's lobbying for the 5 patient cap. Until you or someone else can provide proof otherwise, I will continue to blame this legislation on the fact that the state department of revenue(cook and company) realized
how much revenue they were NOT collecting, and acted accordingly. When barkowitz went on 9news and bragged about making a half million the year before, cook probably looked into it, saw the taxes the asshole wasn't paying, and called in the feds. And that was a single grow. In my opinion, if he doesn't get busted, we don't have a 5 patient cap. 1284/109 has NOTHING to do with MMC's, it has to do with the dept of revenue collecting taxes on for-profit caregivers, and nothing more. As long as you're willing to 'pay to play', you're fine. The feds will be busy busting non-compliant grows before bothering to bust compliant MMC's.

Regarding selling overages. As I understand it, patients can still sell meds to each other, right? So as far as 'selling overages', as long as you're not selling more than 2 ounces at a time you'll be fine right? I would take the position that if you have a lot more than 2 ounces of overage, then you are probably closer to a commercial grow and should be licensed etc. Do you disagree? Again, I don't have any experience with large scale grows etc, I only have experience as a patient. That's slowly changing.

Sprngscrgvr: I can't edit after ten minutes, the phone rang.
edit: I don't dislike caregivers, I dislike non-compliant assholes. If that includes some home growers, fine. I'm not 'pro-MMC', I just haven't found a private caregiver who can supply the same quality top 1% as some MMC's can. It's as simple as that. I am interested in obtaining the best quality medicine that I can, and my experience has shown me that in this industry, it's hard to find good quality. But it's easy for me to get quality meds from a select few MMC's, those are the ones who I am in favor of. I'm not really into trashing bad MMC's either, so you only really hear about the ones I like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by copobo

I'm not anti-mmc either.

I am anti-1284 and sb109, but, I gotta live with what it is for now.

hey shouldbegrowing420 - how about popping a few seeds, or stop down and pick upa half dozen clones. You would be fine with just 1 600 watt switchable. If you keep it small, it stays cheap.

It would be cool to set up a website, just for new growers, how to get started cheap. It would be cool to see more people taking care of themselves.... and, by growing the plant..

there is enlightenment. look into the grow light.

it is needed.

---

I don't see any reason for the name calling. It's juvenile, and you post here enough that you should know better, and be above such childish behavior. You can look down your nose and judge me all you want, but please don't degrade yourself to sophomoric insults.

I'll clarify for you because you're acting like an ass. I chose my 'handle' for several reasons, and I won't get into all of them. When I was in college in 2000-2001, I sold drugs in the dorms, and my clientele included my RA. As such, he allowed me to have a pot plant. I got some mid grade 'bc beasters' that had a seed, and put it in the bathroom under the 2 floro's. It was even hydro, a little soil pot in a rubbermaid container, so the roots could grow down into the aerated water. I was browsing overgrow everyday. I had to clip and flush at semester break when the dorms got tossed, I never even tried to flower it or anything like that. I still have a fan leaf from that plant.

Since then, I haven't had the opportunity to grow again, for reasons that I probably won't discuss. Recently, my living situation changed and I moved in with a friend for a bit, and she let me get a plant. I bought two clones off craigslist, one soil and one hydro, sour diesel. The hydro one took off, so I practiced taking cuttings from the soil plant. I got about 50 from the soil plant, I have the best 12 on a 2x4tray. I'm totally compliant btw. The other plant, the hydro one, is a beast. I topped and supercropped and FIMed my way into an awesome plant, which is now in day 15 of flower under a 400w hps light in a 4x4 tent, full nute schedule. There are 6-8 main colas, and I'm considering upgrading to a 600w light because the lower growth isn't getting enough light.

So don't sit there on your pedestal and judge me like I don't know what I'm talking about. I might be new, but I'm eager to learn and this is a great place to do so. Go ahead and view me as an amateur. I'm not trying to make money, I'm trying to get the best medicine for myself as possible, and I have the feeling that's why you smoke as well. So at the end of the day, even though you'll probably never admit it, we're on the same team.

I even bought a 90watt LED ufo light, because the asshole at some hydro shop said it would 'replace' a 300w hps. Bought it, set it up, fucking laughed my ass off when I bought a 400w hps the next week. But, I could have saved the time and effort of investing in that stupid LED light if people such as yourself weren't so adversarial to people who are new to growing. It should be obvious that people entering this business are patients, not 'for-profit' types.

I don't expect a response from you, and that's okay. I'm glad you are good about posting current events.

It seems like you read my posts looking for me to catch myself in a lie or something like that. I don't have anything to hide, and I would argue that I give as much or more disclosure than anyone who posts in these colorado threads aside from MMC's. If you doubt anything I have posted, then please address it, because I am not a liar and you seem to imply as much with your dismissive remarks etc.

What experience do you have growing? Is there a reason you choose to ignore that aspect and instead attack me as a liar/amateur/whatever? I don't doubt anything you might say, but you should probably let people (me) know where you come from before you criticize me like you have done.

all wannabeagrower420 does is start a thread, people post on the topic, then he starts his instigating crap to get people riled up and once again plays the innocent "I'm just trying to understand" card.
He condemns people who aren't compliant with the money backed law that was passed. This is about the freedom to partake in a plant that was put on this earth to help us. Don't condemn people who still have to smoke with the threat of arrest over their head. Most of us have lived with that threat our entire lives, and thanks to the wisdom of the colo voters many of us can now legally partake. Have some compassion for those who can't qualify legally to smoke and must remain illegal because you were once one of those that you now condemn!!!:wtf:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

I don't see any reason for the name calling. It's juvenile, and you post here enough that you should know better, and be above such childish behavior. You can look down your nose and judge me all you want, but please don't degrade yourself to sophomoric insults.

---

Just had to laugh.

You're scolding him for being childish and, at the same time, you're insulting him right back.

:wtf:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boulderbud5525

all wannabeagrower420 does is start a thread, people post on the topic, then he starts his instigating crap to get people riled up and once again plays the innocent "I'm just trying to understand" card.
He condemns people who aren't compliant with the money backed law that was passed. This is about the freedom to partake in a plant that was put on this earth to help us. Don't condemn people who still have to smoke with the threat of arrest over their head. Most of us have lived with that threat our entire lives, and thanks to the wisdom of the colo voters many of us can now legally partake. Have some compassion for those who can't qualify legally to smoke and must remain illegal because you were once one of those that you now condemn!!!:wtf:

---

I don't wish to break the law, and I don't want anyone else to break the law, either. If you don't like the law, then take actions to change it, don't sit and complain.

If you don't like me 'condemning' people who are non-compliant and BREAKING THE LAW, fine. I don't really care. Feel free to ignore my posts.

I don't buy your argument that people somehow 'must remain illegal'. Are you talking large scale grows? Are you talking sick people seeking medicine? How can a sick person NOT have chronic pain associated with their sickness? How can someone who is as sick as you say NOT qualify for a red card?

I have compassion for those who get compliant. There are places that will subsidize the cost of the application process, so please feel free to point out to me a good reason why someone would remain illegal. Only lazy potheads are upset about being compliant.

Are you referring to patients or caregivers? It's an important distinction.

You're right, I was illegal at one time. But now that it's legal, I don't have any tolerance for the lazy asses who want to keep doing whatever they want, and not pay to play.

How many of your grower buddies ever paid any taxes on the revenue you generated? You were cheating the system, and the only people who should be mad moving forward are the people who still want to cheat the system. Screw those guys, and apologies if it includes you or your non compliant stoner buddies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by COzigzag

Just had to laugh.

You're scolding him for being childish and, at the same time, you're insulting him right back.

:wtf:

---

Making an observation on how I perceive someone's behavior is a little different than actually insulting someone. I'm sure it's semantics though. Feel free to report me to the mods. If I have broken the posting rules than I'll be reprimanded. I don't feel that my post is in ANY way a personal insult or attack. Feel free to explain to me how I'm wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

I sincerely appreciate your response, and I think over time, you'll come to realize that we are going to agree on most fronts, except for the semantics/words we each use to define what's going on in this industry as a whole, but who cares about that stupid stuff?

I only have a 'dislike' for those who are non-compliant. I have lots of 'pothead' buddies and co-workers who would love for me to re-sell my meds to them. But fuck them, I am not about to break the law for some random asshole, friend or not. I am interested in remaining compliant moving forward.

That same negativity I will also direct at those who are breaking the law post 1284/109. Those who bitch and moan but can't show evidence that they lobbied or did anything to support their movement have no excuses, and those are the ones who I show 'dislike' for. I think this is why you have a problem with the wording of my posts. The non-compliant assholes will be treated as such moving forward, and until the for-profit growers come together, it is what it is.

I was lucky enough to recently visit a 'commercial grow' as you describe MMC's moving forward. 3 owners, small industrial space, roughly 50 patients. Perpetual grow, harvesting 10-25 plants per week, I won't get into specifics, but their product is as good or better than anything I've found in 99% of MMC's. However, I'd like to note that the bigger MMC's such as wellspring/releaf/cannamart, always have similar top 1% quality product. My point is that there are compliant home growers who paid the license fees, submitted the app with personal info etc, and are operating larger scale grows but still growing quality medicine. Maybe you haven't visited the right MMC. I have been to roughly 100 dispensaries/MMC's, and this is the first truly legitimate grow that I've seen. However, I can't fault any MMC for not showing me (as a patient) their grows. That's ridiculous.

It's silly for you to lump all MMC's together. I visited a newly opened MMC north of the tech center, and it's a total amateur shop. Those are the MMC's who you should hate, not the ones who actually carry good meds and are knowledgeable about the product from start to finish. That's the point/distinction that I feel that you are missing when I post pro-MMC things. For every good MMC, there are ten bad ones. But it seems to me that you fail to acknowledge that there are actually legitimate MMC's operating, which undermines your credibility. That's not an insult to you, I would be offended at those who want to buy in to make a buck as well. Those who move here to open MMC's/grows etc.

Regarding these MMC's lobbying for the 5 patient cap. Until you or someone else can provide proof otherwise, I will continue to blame this legislation on the fact that the state department of revenue(cook and company) realized
how much revenue they were NOT collecting, and acted accordingly. When barkowitz went on 9news and bragged about making a half million the year before, cook probably looked into it, saw the taxes the asshole wasn't paying, and called in the feds. And that was a single grow. In my opinion, if he doesn't get busted, we don't have a 5 patient cap. 1284/109 has NOTHING to do with MMC's, it has to do with the dept of revenue collecting taxes on for-profit caregivers, and nothing more. As long as you're willing to 'pay to play', you're fine. The feds will be busy busting non-compliant grows before bothering to bust compliant MMC's.

Regarding selling overages. As I understand it, patients can still sell meds to each other, right? So as far as 'selling overages', as long as you're not selling more than 2 ounces at a time you'll be fine right? I would take the position that if you have a lot more than 2 ounces of overage, then you are probably closer to a commercial grow and should be licensed etc. Do you disagree? Again, I don't have any experience with large scale grows etc, I only have experience as a patient. That's slowly changing.

---

I don't believe I have lumped all MMC's together, just the majority.
Yes, there are a handful of good dispensaries. The problem I have is, it doesn't have to be like that.

Well you can see a small glimmer of proof, of lobbing, if you look at the Westword article exposing the man, forgot his name, who was appointed to represent the patients on the advisory committee.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

1284/109 has NOTHING to do with MMC's, it has to do with the dept of revenue collecting taxes on for-profit caregivers, and nothing more.

---

False. I don't see how you came to this conclusion even including "and nothing more" as if you're certain.
1284 created MMC's and limits caregivers. Read it.
There will be no more caregivers climbing the ranks and having the opportunity to open a dispensary because they are producing good meds. There will be plenty of rich kids droping 50k thinking "how hard could it be". Thats my problem. 1284/109 has everything to do with MMC's, its what created them. Its also what is forcing MMC's to be out of federal compliance and at the same time making them sign away all their rights and power of attorney.

As far as overages go 1284 says this..

Quote:

---

(2) IT IS UNLAWFUL FOR A PERSON TO BUY, SELL, TRANSFER, GIVE
AWAY, OR ACQUIRE MEDICAL MARIJUANA EXCEPT AS ALLOWED PURSUANT
TO THIS ARTICLE.

---

Another way they are trying to put caregivers out of business.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

I would take the position that if you have a lot more than 2 ounces of overage, then you are probably closer to a commercial grow and should be licensed etc. Do you disagree? Again, I don't have any experience with large scale grows etc, I only have experience as a patient. That's slowly changing.

---

About this... If I grow 1 plant correctly I generally get about a QP (4oz) So I'm over at harvest from 1 plant.
So yes, I strongly disagree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SprngsCaregiver

I don't believe I have lumped all MMC's together, just the majority.
Yes, there are a handful of good dispensaries. The problem I have is, it doesn't have to be like that.

Well you can see a small glimmer of proof, of lobbing, if you look at the Westword article exposing the man, forgot his name, who was appointed to represent the patients on the advisory committee.

False. I don't see how you came to this conclusion even including "and nothing more" as if you're certain.
1284 created MMC's and limits caregivers. Read it.
There will be no more caregivers climbing the ranks and having the opportunity to open a dispensary because they are producing good meds. There will be plenty of rich kids droping 50k thinking "how hard could it be". Thats my problem. 1284/109 has everything to do with MMC's, its what created them. Its also what is forcing MMC's to be out of federal compliance and at the same time making them sign away all their rights and power of attorney.

As far as overages go 1284 says this..

Another way they are trying to put caregivers out of business.

---

Let's talk taxes for a moment, and perhaps you'll see where I'm coming from.

You see guys like mattcook, in charge of the department of revenue. You see our struggling economy, and you also see other states such as California struggling to survive.

Then, you see reports of large scale home growers such as barkowitz bragging about making a million bucks. Do you really think the department of revenue ignored that story? Don't you think it's feasible that they checked his income, it didn't match his story, they saw he was breaking federal drug laws, and busted him?

How can you ignore this? It seems apparent to me that this legislation maximizes the revenue generated for the state. It transfers the enforcement to the dept. of revenue instead of health (right?), it ensures revenue generation via licensing fees (right)? Seems to me, the large scale, for profit caregivers were not paying their fair share of taxes on the revenue generated. I don't remember every paying a drug dealer sales tax. Don't you see that the dept. of revenue saw all of these large scale private grows, realized how much money those growers were making (and the sales taxes they WEREN'T paying), and that the wording of this legislation ensures that?

I don't understand how you can possibly take the position that MMC's had something to do with this. MMC's/dispensaries/whatever term you want are spending money to remain compliant. I don't understand how you can say that they had a say or whatever anti-MMC argument you hold. It's just weird, and I still haven't heard a good reason to hate the good MMC's. It seems that you'd rather judge them all as bad instead of paying attention to the good ones.

Assuming you are correct and the 'rich kids' are the only ones opening MMC's moving forward, then hopefully no one buys their low quality product. Maybe they get lucky and hire the right grower, and it's the next releaf or wellspring. I don't have a problem with someone like that opening an MMC, assuming THEY FOLLOW THE LAW. What's wrong with competition if you're so sure of your quality? That's what I don't get about this seemingly adversarial relationship between home grows and dispensaries. It just seems that MMC's are the easiest target. It's been said before, there are VERY few people who are in this industry without blood on your hands.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SprngsCaregiver

About this... If I grow 1 plant correctly I generally get about a QP (4oz) So I'm over at harvest from 1 plant.
So yes, I strongly disagree.

---

If you are a caregiver, then you should only be providing medicine to your patients. If you are growing over on purpose, than you are for profit, that's the bottom line.

I will readily admit that at harvest time, most growers could easily be out of compliance. But unless your door gets busted down at that moment, it's pretty much a non-issue right?

I'm not saying it's wrong to disagree like you are, I'm just saying is it worth the trouble to get pissed over? Keep your 5 patients, don't flower more than 3 plants, and watch your yield if your crop is large.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

If you are a caregiver, then you should only be providing medicine to your patients. If you are growing over on purpose, than you are for profit, that's the bottom line.

I will readily admit that at harvest time, most growers could easily be out of compliance. But unless your door gets busted down at that moment, it's pretty much a non-issue right?

I'm not saying it's wrong to disagree like you are, I'm just saying is it worth the trouble to get pissed over? Keep your 5 patients, don't flower more than 3 plants, and watch your yield if your crop is large.

---

are you gonna pop some seeds soon? do a first timers grow log?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

Let's talk taxes for a moment, and perhaps you'll see where I'm coming from.

You see guys like mattcook, in charge of the department of revenue. You see our struggling economy, and you also see other states such as California struggling to survive.

Then, you see reports of large scale home growers such as barkowitz bragging about making a million bucks. Do you really think the department of revenue ignored that story? Don't you think it's feasible that they checked his income, it didn't match his story, they saw he was breaking federal drug laws, and busted him?

How can you ignore this? It seems apparent to me that this legislation maximizes the revenue generated for the state. It transfers the enforcement to the dept. of revenue instead of health (right?), it ensures revenue generation via licensing fees (right)? Seems to me, the large scale, for profit caregivers were not paying their fair share of taxes on the revenue generated. I don't remember every paying a drug dealer sales tax. Don't you see that the dept. of revenue saw all of these large scale private grows, realized how much money those growers were making (and the sales taxes they WEREN'T paying), and that the wording of this legislation ensures that?

I don't understand how you can possibly take the position that MMC's had something to do with this. MMC's/dispensaries/whatever term you want are spending money to remain compliant. I don't understand how you can say that they had a say or whatever anti-MMC argument you hold. It's just weird, and I still haven't heard a good reason to hate the good MMC's. It seems that you'd rather judge them all as bad instead of paying attention to the good ones.

Assuming you are correct and the 'rich kids' are the only ones opening MMC's moving forward, then hopefully no one buys their low quality product. Maybe they get lucky and hire the right grower, and it's the next releaf or wellspring. I don't have a problem with someone like that opening an MMC, assuming THEY FOLLOW THE LAW. What's wrong with competition if you're so sure of your quality? That's what I don't get about this seemingly adversarial relationship between home grows and dispensaries. It just seems that MMC's are the easiest target. It's been said before, there are VERY few people who are in this industry without blood on your hands.

---

If all they wanted was taxes then they would have just required CAREGIVERS to pay taxes and regulated caregivers, not created a new entity the MMC.

Compitition? LOL To me it seems that's what Matt Cook and his buddies are trying to get rid of. I have nothing against compitition but why do I need to have +/- 50K to compete? To me it sounds like they are the ones afraid of compitition. Hence the put the caregiver out of business strategy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by copobo

are you gonna pop some seeds soon? do a first timers grow log?

---

I already know that I'm not doing it 'right'. I have a texas controller topping off a single bucket. It's absurd the amount of equipment I have invested. I'm your typical white boy who has the money to spend to get the best equipment. I've been trolling craigslist and caregivers and old friends for equipment.

Most growers would argue that the best stuff comes from soil. I got two clones from a guy, one soil and one hydro, and the hydro just took off. Seems easier to me to use hydro for the first time. I think I over fed the soil plant.

I didn't want to spend the money on seeds ($100-$300 for ten), so I bought a clone.

I am not interested in making a thread for you all to come and make fun of my grow. I am only interested in spending less money on medicine, and growing my own will help with that. It's pretty cool to be able to eventually smoke my own herb. It's going to be fun and interesting to deal with problems/pests/curing/harvesting etc. I took that soil plant and practiced clones, I got about 50. I have the best 12 in grodan cubes, waiting to see what the hell I am going to do next.

So no, I won't be starting a grow log. I have enough of a journal to keep track of at home.

I'm having trouble seeing the differences between nutrient deficiency versus over feeding, so I need a tds meter. For one plant. That's absurd, but it's an upgrade I'll need eventually, so might as well get it now. But any large scale grower would say, 'wtf are you doing with one plant, a texas controller, and a tds meter?' Or something.

I'm happy to answer any questions if you have them, I just don't wish to start a thread that's about me. That seems selfish, and I'm not trying to brag, I'm only trying to not kill my plant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

If you are a caregiver, then you should only be providing medicine to your patients. If you are growing over on purpose, than you are for profit, that's the bottom line.

I will readily admit that at harvest time, most growers could easily be out of compliance. But unless your door gets busted down at that moment, it's pretty much a non-issue right?

I'm not saying it's wrong to disagree like you are, I'm just saying is it worth the trouble to get pissed over? Keep your 5 patients, don't flower more than 3 plants, and watch your yield if your crop is large.

---

Non issue? For who? What if?

LOL yeah you're right, who cares if the government keeps taking our freedoms. [/sarcasm]
Hell yes it's worth getting pissed over. I'm an American its my job to keep the government in check. Anymore people with your point of view and we'll be living in China.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SprngsCaregiver

If all they wanted was taxes then they would have just required CAREGIVERS to pay taxes and regulated caregivers, not created a new entity the MMC.

Compitition? LOL To me it seems that's what Matt Cook and his buddies are trying to get rid of. I have nothing against compitition but why do I need to have +/- 50K to compete? To me it sounds like they are the ones afraid of compitition. Hence the put the caregiver out of business strategy.

---

They did require caregivers to pay taxes, because the old system didn't work. There weren't enough honest for-profit caregivers. There were too many barkowitz's operating and not paying taxes.

This has nothing to do with competition, and nothing to do with marijuana. It has everything to do with revenue generation for the state. Show me otherwise. You think mattcook cares about MMC's? He doesn't. His job is to generate revenue for the state of Colorado, and 1284/109 go a long way to create that revenue. I still don't understand why you don't think this is a tax issue.

If you take the license fee away, then MMC's are caregivers, right? So, can't we assume that the purpose of 1284/109 is revenue generation? Does it really change anything for patients? Not really, but it changes things for the growers who didn't pay taxes. That's my point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SprngsCaregiver

Non issue? For who? What if?

LOL yeah you're right, who cares if the government keeps taking our freedoms. [/sarcasm]
Hell yes it's worth getting pissed over. I'm an American its my job to keep the government in check. Anymore people with your point of view and we'll be living in China.

---

I'm saying it is what it is, nothing we can do now but vote and deal with it, educate those among us who aren't educated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

They did require caregivers to pay taxes, because the old system didn't work. There weren't enough honest for-profit caregivers. There were too many barkowitz's operating and not paying taxes.

This has nothing to do with competition, and nothing to do with marijuana. It has everything to do with revenue generation for the state. Show me otherwise. You think mattcook cares about MMC's? He doesn't. His job is to generate revenue for the state of Colorado, and 1284/109 go a long way to create that revenue. I still don't understand why you don't think this is a tax issue.
If you take the license fee away, then MMC's are caregivers, right? So, can't we assume that the purpose of 1284/109 is revenue generation? Does it really change anything for patients? Not really, but it changes things for the growers who didn't pay taxes. That's my point.

---

No If you take the license fee away they are illegal growers. Look at the new aps. They have a section to assign a caregiver and a seperate section to assign a MMC. The purpose of 1284/109 was not revenue generation. Yes, you can try to spin it that way but if all they wanted was the tax money they would have just cracked down on regulating caregivers not created MMC's.

I think revenue generation was probably a major reason for this new legislation. Another reason was to give local authorities guidelines for regulating MMCs in their communities. Consumer protection, health and safety concerns, concern about fraud, and the public perception of the industry as "out of control" also contributed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

They did require caregivers to pay taxes, because the old system didn't work. There weren't enough honest for-profit caregivers. There were too many barkowitz's operating and not paying taxes.

This has nothing to do with competition, and nothing to do with marijuana. It has everything to do with revenue generation for the state. Show me otherwise. You think mattcook cares about MMC's? He doesn't. His job is to generate revenue for the state of Colorado, and 1284/109 go a long way to create that revenue. I still don't understand why you don't think this is a tax issue.

If you take the license fee away, then MMC's are caregivers, right? So, can't we assume that the purpose of 1284/109 is revenue generation? Does it really change anything for patients? Not really, but it changes things for the growers who didn't pay taxes. That's my point.

---

During the 1284 fiasco I spoke to Romer for over an hour and presented a plan to him about issuing ID cards with barcodes to caregivers and any dispensary transaction would require the card be swiped and the transaction would be recorded, that way they could keep track of all meds coming in and the caregiver would pay taxes. I explained the state would make a lot more taxing 10,000 growers than a few hundred dispensaries, not to mention keeping more people employed and more money being pumped into the economy. He flat out told me he wasnt interested in any plan that included caregivers surviving and his intent is to put them out of business.

I don't know why you constantly defend the actions of these tyrants but I can only surmise that you are out of touch with the reality of the situation or you have an agenda.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HighPopalorum

I think revenue generation was probably a major reason for this new legislation. Another reason was to give local authorities guidelines for regulating MMCs in their communities. Consumer protection, health and safety concerns, concern about fraud, and the public perception of the industry as "out of control" also contributed.

---

So you dont think they could have made more money & took care of public concerns if they required a caregiver over x ammount of patients to be licensed through the state and move into a commercial zone?

[edit] Or the example from ZedLeppelin above would probably work even better

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zedleppelin

During the 1284 fiasco I spoke to Romer for over an hour and presented a plan to him about issuing ID cards with barcodes to caregivers and any dispensary transaction would require the card be swiped and the transaction would be recorded, that way they could keep track of all meds coming in and the caregiver would pay taxes. I explained the state would make a lot more taxing 10,000 growers than a few hundred dispensaries, not to mention keeping more people employed and more money being pumped into the economy. He flat out told me he wasnt interested in any plan that included caregivers surviving and his intent is to put them out of business.

I don't know why you constantly defend the actions of these tyrants but I can only surmise that you are out of touch with the reality of the situation or you have an agenda.

---

I'm not defending them, and I feel that's important to point out. 1284/109 limit my access to medicine, and I don't like that. I will likely be in a better position to grow in 6 months to a year, and I don't like the idea of keeping track of plant counts, wondering when my cuttings are considered plants etc. Please don't say that I am defending 'these tyrants'. I'm not out of touch either, please explain yourself if you're going to criticize me. Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SprngsCaregiver

So you dont think they could have made more money & took care of public concerns if they required a caregiver over x ammount of patients to be licensed through the state and move into a commercial zone?

[edit] Or the example from ZedLeppelin above would probably work even better

---

It seems like you are saying that this industry needed reform, but the reform we got wasn't the right kind. I would agree to that I guess. That doesn't change that it's still on the books moving forward.

You (the proverbial one) seem to criticize dispensaries/MMC's and those who were willing to pay to play and actually get recognized as a legit business under the eyes of Colorado law, regardless of what's going on at the federal level.

Grandma and Mom and Dad and the general voting public saw the barkowitz arrest, they saw the undercover stories on how easy it is to obtain a card etc, and they called their legislators. It's my opinion that this legislation was created to reform the industry, and put the state in a better position to collect the revenue it was 'missing out' on. I'm sure there are lots of reasons for the language that this legislation carries, but I'm just sharing my opinion, and people are happy to point out if my logic is flawed.

I will absolutely agree with you that this legislation sucks, but it's just weird to me that you seem to be blaming large scale bankrolled MMC's for this legislation, and I fail to see the connection between those large MMC's (or whoever you seem to hate) and the 5 patient cap, for instance. I have yet to see any MMC's taking the position that they are 'in favor' of it. If you use the logic that since they don't have a cap then they are responsible for those who are affected by the cap, then I counter that they paid for that right, what did caregivers do? I don't feel that growing for profit, and not paying taxes, is a fundamental 'right', and a patient. I don't mind that there are rules and regulations in place. I vote, and I regularly contact my elected officials (and the unelected ones) if I have an issue on something. I can't do much more than that. Complaining on an internet forum is useless, instead we should be discussing how we can remain compliant moving forward. Calling this new legislation 'bad' doesn't change it, let's work on dealing with it until it changes.

Or something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

It seems like you are saying that this industry needed reform, but the reform we got wasn't the right kind. I would agree to that I guess. That doesn't change that it's still on the books moving forward.

---

First off let me say that I'm done trying to respond to your long posts without breaking them up into manageable sections.
Im saying if they were going to reform it they could have included the caregivers, who the people of Colorado voted in place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

You (the proverbial one) seem to criticize dispensaries/MMC's and those who were willing to pay to play and actually get recognized as a legit business under the eyes of Colorado law, regardless of what's going on at the federal level.

I will absolutely agree with you that this legislation sucks, but it's just weird to me that you seem to be blaming large scale bankrolled MMC's for this legislation, and I fail to see the connection between those large MMC's (or whoever you seem to hate) and the 5 patient cap, for instance. I have yet to see any MMC's taking the position that they are 'in favor' of it. If you use the logic that since they don't have a cap then they are responsible for those who are affected by the cap, then I counter that they paid for that right, what did caregivers do? I don't feel that growing for profit, and not paying taxes, is a fundamental 'right', and a patient. I don't mind that there are rules and regulations in place. I vote, and I regularly contact my elected officials (and the unelected ones) if I have an issue on something. I can't do much more than that. Complaining on an internet forum is useless, instead we should be discussing how we can remain compliant moving forward. Calling this new legislation 'bad' doesn't change it, let's work on dealing with it until it changes.

Or something.

---

If you can't see the typical politics as usual I don't know what to tell you other than WAKE UP!!!!
Thats because I'm sure "large scale bankrolled MMC's" lobbied money to our wonderful politicians to have the law crafted this way or some politicians have intrests in this somehow.
Why would they come out and say that they agree with the caregiver 5 patient cap? What would be the benifit of that?
There is a reason they are tryoing their best to put caregivers out of business. What would you say that reason is?