Amendment 20 seems to have been designed to favor patients growing their own medicine and care-giver/growers, not a wholesale/grower retail/care-giver arrangement. Therefor most growers end up as outlaws and care-givers who aren't also growers can't get enough product to sell. What would be the situation, I wonder, if I had 30 patients for whom I was growing and who had designated me, then the cops show up at my door with a warrant, and find 90 veg plants and 90 flowering plants. Then suppose they call the CDPHE and check the records of all of my patients, only to find that half have changed their care-giver with NO notice to me.
At this point, any grower with half a brain is going to stay as far under the radar as possible, in fact acting exactly as they would have prior to amendment 20. The risks aren't even all that different, and the retail price of medicine reflects that. Now the City of Denver and the State legislature have raised the hue and cry for more regulation, which they are going to find very difficult. Growers who have to stay underground in order to not risk jail are not going to comply with any attempts to regulate them or even the barest attempt to have some form of registration/certification if it requires disclosing what they are up to, at least I wouldn't.
senorx12562 Reviewed by senorx12562 on . Patient collaboration and Grower certification The question to Sensible Colorado (in response to their request for public input on regulations): Does Sensible Colorado have an opinion regarding growers? Many of the dispensaries rely upon growers (who are separate from dispensaries) to help supply the meds due to supply and demand, but growers are restricted in what they can grow based upon their number of patients. Both the growers and the dispensaries have to show enough patient load (if you will) to justify the amount of product on Rating: 5