hb10-1284 set to be voted on tomorrow

[HighPopalorum]

I think a lot about regulation, legislation and government and I agree with you that it initially hurts small businesses. It's easier for larger firms, or firms with more capital to adapt to new regulations - and in new industries, all regulations are new! Meanwhile, the little guys are shut down because they can't afford to conform, or because their business model is different. On the other hand, I know from experience that most of our [Democratic] legislators and elected officials are not effecting these regulations to fuck with us or to shut down retailers but because they are legitimately trying to fit dispensaries into the state's legal system.

[MMDInsuranceCo]

I think a lot about regulation, legislation and government and I agree with you that it initially hurts small businesses. It's easier for larger firms, or firms with more capital to adapt to new regulations - and in new industries, all regulations are new! Meanwhile, the little guys are shut down because they can't afford to conform, or because their business model is different. On the other hand, I know from experience that most of our [Democratic] legislators and elected officials are not effecting these regulations to fuck with us or to shut down retailers but because they are legitimately trying to fit dispensaries into the state's legal system.

I would love for members of our Government to go out and start a business in this country. There are so many rules, regulations and requirements that it's quite overwhelming.

[MMDInsuranceCo]

HB10-1284: Medical Marijuana Reform Bill Moves
Posted on 23 March 2010
Tags: HB10-1284, Marijuana, Medical Marijuana
By Gene Davis, DENVER DAILY NEWS
Local municipalities would have a more difficult time banning retail medical marijuana dispensaries from operating within city limits under an amended medical marijuana reform bill passed by a House committee Monday.
The amended billâ??s passage was a victory for medical marijuana activists who argued that allowing cities to ban dispensaries, as described in the original bill, would force sick patients to travel great distances for their medicine. But the amendmentâ??s passage also sparked the ire of several conservative lawmakers on the House Judiciary Committee. Rep. Bob Gardner, R-Colorado Srprings, who originally planned on voting in the favor of the bill, changed his vote to no after the amendment passed.
Brian Vicente of Sensible Colorado, a medical marijuana lobbying group, said that as he understands it, a city could still ban dispensaries through a citizen-initiated ballot item. A city could also heavily restrict where dispensaries are located through zoning.

PTSD amendment fails
The medical marijuana community was less enthusiastic about the narrow defeat of an amendment directing the Department of Health to conduct a hearing on whether Post Traumatic Stress Disorder is a condition that could be treated with medical marijuana. The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment publicly opposed the measure, saying in a press release â??There is no evidence of efficacy of marijuana for treatment of PTSD in the medical literature.â?� But supporters of the amendment pointed to a New Mexico medical committee advisory saying medical marijuana can be used to effectively treat PTSD.
â??Itâ??s unfortunate that legislators are hanging veterans out to dry and denying them access to a medicine that has been proved to be effective,â?� said Mason Tvert of Safer Alternative for Enjoyable Recreation, a pro-medical marijuana group.

Other amendments voted on Monday include:
â?? An amendment banning the smoking of medical marijuana by patients was killed;
â?? An amendment allowing the consumption of food with medical marijuana within an area of a dispensary where marijuana isnâ??t being sold passed;
â?? An amendment allowing a caregiver to serve up to 16 patients in municipalities that have banned dispensaries passed;
â?? An amendment dedicating the first $2 million in tax revenue every year generated by medical marijuana towards substance abuse issues passed;
Levy said over the weekend that the multiple amendments should make the reform bill â?? which would create a medical marijuana licensing authority within the department of revenue, and allow for the creation of medical marijuana centers that, if they comply with a local jurisdictionâ??s zoning requirements, could sell medical marijuana to multiple patients â?? more palatable to the medical marijuana community.
Vicente agreed Monday that â??the bill is heading in the right direction.â?� But he remained opposed to the billâ??s requirement of having medical marijuana centers grow most of their own medical marijuana themselves.
â??We need to have a number of growers providing for dispensaries, not just one,â?� he said. â??We think that would help protect the supply of medicine for patients to ensure there is still diversities.â?�
Colorado Attorney General John Suthers, district attorneys and doctors earlier this month voiced their opposition to the bill during a committee hearing. They argued that the measure would legitimize the retail dispensary model, which they see a backdoor way to legalize marijuana.
Levy said on Friday that the new amendments donâ??t address the law enforcement communityâ??s concerns.
â??Theyâ??re opposed to the very concept of the bill, so none of these amendments will remove their objections,â?� she said.
HB 1284 is the second medical marijuana reform bill to make its way through the Legislature this session. The first bill from Sen. Chris Romer, D-Denver, requires patients under the age of 21 to get a second doctorâ??s opinion before being able to obtain a medical marijuana card and forbids doctors from receiving money from medical marijuana dispensaries.
Denver City Council in January unanimously approved a bill that limits where dispensaries can be located, who can run them, and what safety measures dispensary owners must have in place. All of the bills seek to clarify Amendment 20, the measure approved by voters in 2000 that allows for seriously ill Coloradans to use medical marijuana.

[HighPopalorum]

I went to a three-hour forum today on MMJ and current CO law. A good bit of it was spent on question and answer regarding this bill. There were a lot of angry growers in the meeting. Brian Vicente, head of Sensible CO quoted liberally in this thread, explained that this was because dispensaries have an organized lobby in Denver while growers do not; this bill will protect dispensaries, but not growers. He pointed out that caregiver-to-caregiver sales (i.e. caregivers selling to a dispensary) is now a legal gray area. There have been prosecutions already. In his view, the bill is likely to pass in nearly its current form before May, and may become law in July. He hopes they will also add a cultivation license, by which growers could supply dispensaries, but he doesn't think it will happen. He said bluntly, that if you want to sell marijuana to a dispensary, you will need to become their employee, start a dispensary yourself ($5000+ fee), or possibly write some really creative contracting agreement that is likely to be disputed in court.

I also asked him if there were any provisions in the bill that would limit the rights of patients to use, grow or possess. He said that all the provisions that would have done so have now been removed, and that the bill couldn't do that anyway since our MMJ law is a constitutional amendment. He noted one exception that still needed to be removed: if you are a patient and have assigned someone else to be your caregiver, then a third party may not assign you as their caregiver. Brian said this was unconstitutional and would be removed or challenged.

[CannnaLady]

I went to a three-hour forum today on MMJ and current CO law. A good bit of it was spent on question and answer regarding this bill. There were a lot of angry growers in the meeting. Brian Vicente, head of Sensible CO quoted liberally in this thread, explained that this was because dispensaries have an organized lobby in Denver while growers do not; this bill will protect dispensaries, but not growers. He pointed out that caregiver-to-caregiver sales (i.e. caregivers selling to a dispensary) is now a legal gray area. There have been prosecutions already. In his view, the bill is likely to pass in nearly its current form before May, and may become law in July. He hopes they will also add a cultivation license, by which growers could supply dispensaries, but he doesn't think it will happen. He said bluntly, that if you want to sell marijuana to a dispensary, you will need to become their employee, start a dispensary yourself ($5000+ fee), or possibly write some really creative contracting agreement that is likely to be disputed in court.

that is confusing. because wouldn't it be legal if a card holder sold to a cardholder now matter if they are growing or a dispensary or whatever, especially if both sides are paying taxes and have the correct number of patients for quantity sold?

what's really frustrating is you can't find any information that walks you through what passed on the internet. if you see another group meeting/forum meeting could you post about it? i'd love to attend

[HighPopalorum]

I don't think there's any language in the Amendment that allows MMJ registry cardholders to sell medicine. It's my understanding of the law that unless you are a designated caregiver, selling marijuana remains illegal. Speaking in a general context and not to that issue, Brian today said that most of the commercial MMJ business is operating in a "spectrum of legality." He said that caregivers selling to their designated patients are at one end of that spectrum, and everything else is in a legal gray area. I gather that one reason for further legislation is to clarify unresolved issues.

[TheHighCountryM]

The session was helpful, but also leaves questions dangling about whether or not small independent growers can be expected to get squashed by well financed dispensaries which can afford to rent big--excuse me-huge spaces (which they will have to be to grow enough to distribute to an estimated 100,000 patients statewide by year's end). Even with a 70/30 program, those dispensary ops will be big, unless they just start buying their grower's homes, heh.
As an experienced gardener, no kids or schedule , I'm in position to be part of this legitimately, really just having trouble finding a rental with an informed & "on board" landlord has been my only hangup in the cgiver dept. **Hint-looking for a place to rent in SW CO people, llord first patient on my cgiver list even better...
MJ has been a theraputic part of my life for over twenty years, and is a treasure to this world. Why is the Legislature so bent on making it so hard for independents, like me, to do something they love for a living? Oh, because I can't afford my own lobby group. Great. Let's hope for the best folks.

[TheHighCountryM]

HPplrm, you have good points. What I got out of this was, there are still more questions every day that they have to reformulate amendments or strikes to answer. And the other thing I got was, the independent caregivers are seriously lacking a voice on that Hill in Denver!

[HighPopalorum]

HPplrm, you have good points. What I got out of this was, there are still more questions every day that they have to reformulate amendments or strikes to answer. And the other thing I got was, the independent caregivers are seriously lacking a voice on that Hill in Denver!

x2 to both points. I wanted to ask Brian about where the bill is heading and what the chances are for more amendments, but I didn't get the chance. The entire MMJ supply chain is a legal Bermuda Triangle. Regarding growers, it's frustrating because the anonymity that protects them makes them unable to organize a lobby and communicate their wishes to lawmakers, who are receptive at the moment. We need a cultivator's lobby, no doubt.

One other thing that came up multiple times in the forum was always, always, always pay your state and federal taxes on revenue from med sales.

FYI, High Country, our rep is on the health committee. I think this bill will go there, if it hasn't already.

[GratefulMeds]

[quote=HighPopalorum]x2 to both points. I wanted to ask Brian about where the bill is heading and what the chances are for more amendments, but I didn't get the chance. The entire MMJ supply chain is a legal Bermuda Triangle. Regarding growers, it's frustrating because the anonymity that protects them makes them unable to organize a lobby and communicate their wishes to lawmakers, who are receptive at the moment. We need a cultivator's lobby, no doubt.

I spoke for the Small Growers when the Judiciary Committee took public comments, I have also voiced my concerns to my Representative Claire Levy in private. I have been pissed about the Lobbyist that took control saying they represent the dispensaries when in reality it was a small group that has tried to manipulate the law to fit their business model. They sold out the small growers as well as the very small Mom & Pop dispensaries, for shame! How do I know this, because I was approached to be part of this effort but I declined and decided we would represent ourselves and the dozen or so small growers we work with on a daily basis.