Deadline to apply for License?

How do you interpret this?

NEW SECTION. Sec. 1201. (1) The legislature recognizes that there
4 are cannabis producers and cannabis dispensaries in operation as of the
5 effective date of this section that are unregulated by the state and
6 who produce and dispense cannabis for medical use by qualifying
7 patients. The legislature intends that these producers and
8 dispensaries become licensed in accordance with the requirements of
9 this chapter and that this licensing provides them with arrest
10 protection so long as they remain in compliance with the requirements
11 of this chapter and the rules adopted under this chapter. The
12 legislature further recognizes that cannabis producers and cannabis
13 dispensaries in current operation are not able to become licensed until
14 the department of agriculture and the department of health adopt rules
15 and, consequently, it is likely they will remain unlicensed until at
16 least July 1, 2012. These producers and dispensary owners and
17 operators run the risk of arrest between the effective date of this
18 section and the time they become licensed. Therefore, the legislature
19 intends to provide them with an affirmative defense if they meet the
20 requirements of this section.
21 (2) If charged with a violation of state law relating to cannabis,
22 a producer of cannabis or a dispensary and its owners and operators
23 that are engaged in the production or dispensing of cannabis to a
24 qualifying patient or who assists a qualifying patient in the medical
25 use of cannabis is deemed to have established an affirmative defense to
26 such charges by proof of compliance with this section.
27 (3) In order to assert an affirmative defense under this section,
28 a cannabis producer or cannabis dispensary must:
29 (a) In the case of producers, solely provide cannabis to cannabis
30 dispensaries for the medical use of cannabis by qualified patients;
31 (b) In the case of dispensaries, solely provide cannabis to
32 qualified patients for their medical use;
33 (c) Be registered with the secretary of state as of May 1, 2011;
34 (d) File a letter of intent with the department of agriculture or
35 the department of health, as the case may be, asserting that the
36 producer or dispenser intends to become licensed in accordance with
37 this chapter and rules adopted by the appropriate department; and
p. 35 E2SSB 5073
1 (e) File a letter of intent with the city clerk if in an
2 incorporated area or to the county clerk if in an unincorporated area
3 stating they operate as a producer or dispensary and that they comply
4 with the provisions of this chapter and will comply with subsequent
5 department rule making.
6 (4) Upon receiving a letter of intent under subsection (3) of this
7 section, the department of agriculture, the department of health, and
8 the city clerk or county clerk must send a letter of acknowledgment to
9 the producer or dispenser. The producer and dispenser must display
10 this letter of acknowledgment in a prominent place in their facility.
11 (5) This section expires July 1, 2012.

Does this mean all Producers must try and register by May 1?????

I interpret this in a couple ways. The State wants a list of the growers to "provide affirmative defense" in the instance of them being busted. Well if the Feds get hold of that list, every grower is dead meat.

I do not like this at all. If there were no way (ya right) that the Feds could get their hands on that list, then okay.

But this in turn lets the authorities know who is growing in their jurisdiction.

Is this actually law yet?

Thats the funniest part...It is not law yet but will be the excuse not to let others in...Guess I could apply and not grow till they pass it, just watch and see what happens to others...

Does this mean all Producers must try and register by May 1?????
Only if they want to be covered under the affirmative defense in court. Which they already are covered. The way the dispensaries have been operating does meet the original description of the original law. They only serve one patient at a time, so thats covered. There is no stipulation in the original law about how long a care taker has to be used. So whether its 5 minutes or 5 months its covered.

But it is kind of hard to supply a dispensory at 15 plants. I would assume a licensed grower would have to do 500+. None of it really makes a lot of sense or very well thought out...

Its just typical of our legislature. Rather than just trying to help sick people they make it more difficult. Take it out of there hands and pass the intiative.

I don't think producers that aren't nonprofit or corporate have the May 1 deadline. The reason is sole proprietors and partners don't register with the secretary of state as only nonprofits and corporations do that. The stae deparment of licensing registers trade or dba names for sole props and partners. The legislation sofar only says register with sec of state and not the state. But the other points of letter to deparment of ag and local government apply but not under the deadline.

:bump2:
I am concerned that no one else seems concerned about being on a list the feds can get their hands on.

Is that because you have no fear or feel safe?

Was on a list in California for 2 years.....And I am sure they know me anyway....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WashougalWonder

:bump2:
I am concerned that no one else seems concerned about being on a list the feds can get their hands on.

Is that because you have no fear or feel safe?

---

The feds are going to have to have a consistent approach in all states. One big thing I notice is they expect a producer to be in compliance with state law. My decision is based on being in compliance with state law. That said, it appears prudent to remain small potatoes...say under 50kilo year small...under 30 outdoor plants and under a 100 or so indoor capacity at any one time. That's a big jump anyway from the 15 plants at any one time limit I now work under. As already mentioned, 15 plants isn't going to do much for supporting a dispensery.

And even if they pass this bill they're also saying it maybe a couple years before its put into place so that the can address the federal laws. Its all a joke. Just pass the intiative. There's no logical reason this plant should be under any more controls than a tomato plant.

Feds have a "give a F#%" quotient.... If you have less than 99 plants, they don't give a F$%#$....

Also, fear is usually in the mind, and our own worst enemy...

Whether or not they can "get you" for "being on a list" is less relevant to me than whether or not I'm willing to base my actions on vague maybes....