Matt Cook from Dept of Revenue on 1284

[throatstick]

*stirring the pot*

You expect growers to pay the OPCL fees even though the licenses will be in your name? As employer and licensee, that responsibility is yours. Say you go out of business a week after signing up five growers who each put up $500 for your OPCL licenses. Those growers are now out their cash and without legal protection, and must then begin negotiations anew with another MMC who might also charge them for OPCL fees. You should pay those fees, not them.

i have to agree with you on that...

[rightwinger]

Thanks for the info Jake. Much appreciated!

Thanks for the iinfo Jake--very much appreciated. My question is: When is Mr. Cook's statements aka the department of revenue going to put this in writing? Fees--requirements, etc.

I also question the "non-refunable" license fee. I don't believe the state has ever before been able to refuse an applicant a license--yet still keep the money? Were you under the impression that if a license is granted to an applicant--the licensee can't come back later after approval to get their fee back. That would make sense.

Also--you stated that application fees will be due every year. I believe with liquor license and other professional state regulated licenses they are renewed every two years--not every year.

And finally--when is the state going to have these forms? Under 1284 it specifically states:

"Develop such forms, licenses, identification cards, and applications as are necessary or convenient in the discretion of the state licensing authority for the administration of this article or any of the rules promulgated under this article."

It seems to me that they have enacted a deadline of July 1--yet have not produced the form yet--which they are required to do.

[TheReleafCenter]

Thanks for the iinfo Jake--very much appreciated. My question is: When is Mr. Cook's statements aka the department of revenue going to put this in writing? Fees--requirements, etc.

I also question the "non-refunable" license fee. I don't believe the state has ever before been able to refuse an applicant a license--yet still keep the money? Were you under the impression that if a license is granted to an applicant--the licensee can't come back later after approval to get their fee back. That would make sense.

Also--you stated that application fees will be due every year. I believe with liquor license and other professional state regulated licenses they are renewed every two years--not every year.

And finally--when is the state going to have these forms? Under 1284 it specifically states:

"Develop such forms, licenses, identification cards, and applications as are necessary or convenient in the discretion of the state licensing authority for the administration of this article or any of the rules promulgated under this article."

It seems to me that they have enacted a deadline of July 1--yet have not produced the form yet--which they are required to do.

GREAT questions. Cook said that the forms would be available in July, and that they won't be rushing to get them out until he "builds the house." He doesn't want to put them out there, have diligent MMC's turn them right back in and have no capacity to process them. I'm guessing their defense in regards to the deadline is that they're not administering the article on 7/1, but simply asking licensees to be compliant with local law.

I believe he also said it was a one time application fee and then MMC's would just have to renew their licenses every year. The application fee (up to 18.5K) is NOT refundable, but any license fees are (Page 19, final paragraph of HB1284).

[throatstick]

GREAT questions. Cook said that the forms would be available in July, and that they won't be rushing to get them out until he "builds the house." He doesn't want to put them out there, have diligent MMC's turn them right back in and have no capacity to process them. I'm guessing their defense in regards to the deadline is that they're not administering the article on 7/1, but simply asking licensees to be compliant with local law.

I believe he also said it was a one time application fee and then MMC's would just have to renew their licenses every year. The application fee (up to 18.5K) is NOT refundable, but any license fees are (Page 19, final paragraph of HB1284).

then would'nt it have been better to have made a better date for everyone to get their ducks in a row mainly them?i would have asked why such a rush on everything?let me guess they had to push this bs through as fast as they could b4 election day?

[rightwinger]

GREAT questions. Cook said that the forms would be available in July, and that they won't be rushing to get them out until he "builds the house." He doesn't want to put them out there, have diligent MMC's turn them right back in and have no capacity to process them. I'm guessing their defense in regards to the deadline is that they're not administering the article on 7/1, but simply asking licensees to be compliant with local law.

I believe he also said it was a one time application fee and then MMC's would just have to renew their licenses every year. The application fee (up to 18.5K) is NOT refundable, but any license fees are (Page 19, final paragraph of HB1284).

So I guess we can assume that nothing gets done until the Dept. of Revenue comes up with the forms.

The next problem I see--is many of the smaller cities and counties in this state have not adopted ordinances or regulations as yet on dispensories. Many were waiting on the state to pass this bill--and have put off to the future time to study this bill--arrange for zoning ordinances-regulations-fee's etc.

Yet, right there on page one of 1284 it states that: "The state licensing authority grants, refuses, or renews a medical marijana center license "after" the licensee has received "local" approval.

If it's like the county I live in--whom the county commissioners only meets once a month--that's a real problem. Then once they meet--you have to be on their docket for discussion--otherwise it is put on for a future date and then they vote. This puts many dispensories in this state--in the unincorporated areas of counties--currently open-under a major crunch time that they have absolutely no control over. Counties and municipalities would have to enact their own regulations immediately-in order to sign off for an existing dispensory-.

The state should allow for temporary waivers of existing dispensories in this circumstance until these counties and municipalities have their ducks in a row.

As far as my other question the non-refundable license fee: Page 19 of 1284.

"All applications submitted for concurrent review shall be accompanied by all applicable state license and applications fees. Any application that are later denied or withdrawn may allow for a refund of the license fees only. All application fees provided by an applicant shall be retained by the respective licensing authority.

Is there something I am missing here? So where is the definition in this bill for what is the application fee and what is the license fee?

Boy, I tell you my eyes are literally going cross-eyed over this bill--and much of it makes no sense what-so-ever.

[TheReleafCenter]

then would'nt it have been better to have made a better date for everyone to get their ducks in a row mainly them?i would have asked why such a rush on everything?let me guess they had to push this bs through as fast as they could b4 election day?

Cook said there was a big push to get things done before the DEA really started going after growers.

@rightwinger: There should be an exception for set ups in places with moratoriums, but there isn't. They said you pretty much need to move somewhere they want you.

The application fee is the $7500-$18,500, the license fees are the OPCL's, infused products, etc, I believe.

[CannnaLady]

I don't understand having to have a grow facility before july 1st. denver, where i am looking, doesn't have a grow licence available...so why would it matter?
also, everything but the fee/application on august 1st and the 70/30 on sept. 1st goes into effect on july 1st 2011? so dispensaries don't have to change their hours etc. until july 1st of next year?

[TheReleafCenter]

I don't understand having to have a grow facility before july 1st. denver, where i am looking, doesn't have a grow licence available...so why would it matter?
also, everything but the fee/application on august 1st and the 70/30 on sept. 1st goes into effect on july 1st 2011? so dispensaries don't have to change their hours etc. until july 1st of next year?

There isn't a grow license, but you can apply for a plant husbandry license, which (according to Edson) is all you need to prove local approval.

From what I've heard in regards to the second question, you're right. It's unfortunate because a few places changed hours as a reactionary measure.

[rightwinger]

There isn't a grow license, but you can apply for a plant husbandry license, which (according to Edson) is all you need to prove local approval.

From what I've heard in regards to the second question, you're right. It's unfortunate because a few places changed hours as a reactionary measure.

It just seems to me that many are just chasing their tails right now--until a lot of this is settled. Again--the city/county issue--the non-refundable application fee--.

It's like all dispensories are suppose to hurry up and jump too--when the state hasn't even got the forms produced--nor have cities or counties done anything yet for approval or disaproval.

[rightwinger]

There isn't a grow license, but you can apply for a plant husbandry license, which (according to Edson) is all you need to prove local approval.

From what I've heard in regards to the second question, you're right. It's unfortunate because a few places changed hours as a reactionary measure.

I am not certain where your at--but there is no such thing as a plant husbandry license in this county?