Well, to begin, my attorney comment(s) above were quite genuine. I think it irresponsible for a (most likely) attorney to comment and advise, specifically regarding an investment matter, beyond the scope of their expertise. There are endless ways to structure participation if an interest that would/will/can limit any individuals exposure. Their response is not one I personally would find acceptable. An acceptable response would be "This is not within my area of expertise, I would advise you seek counsel regarding this matter/these questions from someone who specializes in this/these specific areas", similar to what would be expected of an M.D. (To make a determination on something, instead of referring to a specialist to confirm". Personally? That statement would make me find another attorney, as I would then question what other matters are they commenting/advising upon that is also beyond their scope of expertise.Hey there neighbors!
Julian, you mention changes being made along the way if passed.
Do you think there is a possibility of allowing personal production under the current program? If so, how would we go about it?? I'm not too optimistic the 22/60 plan will be able to provide sufficient medicine and would think this might be a stepping stone. Proving that the system is incapable of working the way it was designed could be grounds for an amendment, I would hope... Whether it's patients in rural areas that do not have the population to sustain a dispensary and therefore access medicine, or the inability to keep quality medicine in stock...
But I'm not too well versed in the law. Could patients bring a suit against the state lobbying for personal cultivation based on something like this?
Surely a seasoned MMJ attorney would be able to tell me more
Agreed. Definitely.There are also groups voicing their protestThe Gov has his hands full with pension reform and getting re-elected. My 2 cents is he has his people running the numbers as we speak. Checking public opinion crossing T's and dotting i's. He's not going to rush this its a huge political challenge and this will make national news.
I would not be surprised if majority of dispensaries end up in Chicago metro (Plainfield to the West, Gurnee to the North, Tinley to the South), which also leads to what is/will be the process if the first 60 approved applications fall in a certain location(s), as above. What is a patient to do when no dispensary within certain distance, as surely will, indeed, be the case. Can a dispensary in Peotone be maintained financially? What will a patient in Galena do if Rockford (2 hours?+/-) is the nearest dispensary, and so on....I dont have any educated response to the 22/60 but I would agree geographically speaking this is going to be a challenge. You have Chi town and the next biggest city is around 200K population.
One area which is addressed, which could be a problem, and many are not aware of as of yetSo even if this passes the implementation for this will be messy to say the least. Getting local government to jump on board will not be easy in many of these smaller cities. It would make sense to me that the ones to jump on board first will most likely be the ones who are in financial trouble much like Chicago.
Have my fingers crossed.
Sup, who knows if he will sign it or not. Doesn,t really matter if you crunch the numbers its a diaster waiting ti happen! 60 despensaries, 22 growers, and peeps get up to 2.5 oz every 2 weeks. With just 50k patients thats 250,00 oz each month. thats 11363 oz every grower has to produce each month. DEA will go nuts and raid everyone. I have a business man that wanted to get into it and his attornies ask how he felt about life in jail!
Ty
Well, to begin, my attorney comment(s) above were quite genuine. I think it irresponsible for a (most likely) attorney to comment and advise, specifically regarding an investment matter, beyond the scope of their expertise. There are endless ways to structure participation if an interest that would/will/can limit any individuals exposure. Their response is not one I personally would find acceptable. An acceptable response would be "This is not within my area of expertise, I would advise you seek counsel regarding this matter/these questions from someone who specializes in this/these specific areas", similar to what would be expected of an M.D. (To make a determination on something, instead of referring to a specialist to confirm". Personally? That statement would make me find another attorney, as I would then question what other matters are they commenting/advising upon that is also beyond their scope of expertise.
I don't think the attorney's advice went much beyond: still illegal federally, can do up to life if caught growing huge amounts, it's your ass if you want to risk it.
Which is true, and the reality that all the large-scale growers in Cali, Colo, etc live under. If the DEA comes knocking, they can rip all of your plants and take all of your equipment, and count yourself lucky if they decline to charge you later...
For those that are charged, from what I'm reading the vast majority end up pleading rather than risk a trial, and usually get something under 10 years, around 5 or so. Which quite obviously still sucks, but in comparison to what one could get if you lose a trial...
I would think it takes a year or two to reach that many patients...I think the 50K patients number is too high, IL's mmj bill is pretty restrictive as to authorized ailments.
All cultivation centers and dispensaries will be privately owned. It appears thus far that cultivation centers no specific requirements (C corp, S corp, LLC, sole proprietor, etc), but dispensary a hint in bill of non profit.hamstring said:Where does the state go to get help incorporating the grow/dispensary? Its not like they can lean on some boiler plate that the feds have for help when putting this altogether. Is this a bunch of bureaucrats just throwing things against the wall to see what sticks?
4. No. Each and every state of course different set of rules, regs, guidelines. Each state lightly different in their requirements. IL just another med state with another set of specific requirements.1.How do you start something like this up?
2.Who do you turn to pick the grow locations/ dispensaries?
3.This isn't a simple business start-up you have to navigate through all the federal BS so you don't end up looking foolish or worse.
4.This seems very different from all other med states structure.
That addresses a different set of questions:It cant be easy for the state to make these choices. I may be way off base but the red tape to open one of the 22 grow locations or 60 dispensaries could take a year or more.
I'm a big concealed carry guy (throughout country, multiple state permits held). IL CC/CCW fairly straightforward, and similar, as above to many other states. Background check, training verified/verification, etc. (Looking forward to that one btw)If that's true then you are in the same position as IL is for concealed carry.
Seems standard CCW so far, as above. Background check, training, and saw a mention this week of (I believe, iirc) not honoring other state permits (as most states do in one form or another), and was something along the lines of will grant non residents IL permits. Again, just an issue of the review and process.Because IL lawmakers have been dragging their feet on releasing the concealed carry details you see townships stating they are going to allow concealed carry to anyone with a FOID card. Their reasoning is they don't want to later get sued because they are suppressing someones rights.
They have been for quite a while. (years) That is how proposed were established to begin with.DO you think, much like our own Julian who is trying to be on the leading edge of this, that lawmakers are already sitting down with wannabe applicants discussing how to make this happen?
1. Forget the CC issue. Your complicating the process/thought process. CC will be very simple. (I hold several in several states). Not a problem. Nothing special. Simply a matter of them releasing the license app. Will probably be, like most, submit photo, prints, fee(s), and copy of training (per guidelines), and, your good. Permit issued.If this goes through on Jan 2014 I cant see how they put this altogether before people begin to sue for legal rights to medicine. I keep going back to how screwed the implementation of concealed carry seems to be or at least from the outside looking in.
I pose all these question out of ignorance and the fact i would like to see how and where a person like myself fits into what I believe is a opportunity to those who can grasp the whole situation.
Knowledge is power!!