Caregivers, what are you offering patients?

[Greenmopho]

Glad to see everyone getting along again, lets be good stoners...

Skunk, I don't know which scenario is better, but I can tell you, if you are caught with too much medication, they can charge you with possession, but if you are selling excess, and the law turns out that you can't sell excess, then they will charge you with distribution.

I think everyone is kind of dancing around the subject without fully saying it. You are trying to figure out how to legally sell excess meds (or any meds) to patients outside of your 5, am I right? This really is the million-dollar question and none of us know the answer to it. Basically some say yes, some say no...

The main arguments for "YES, it is legal to sell excess meds as a CG to patients outside of your 5" are primarily based on:

A20's loose definition of "medical use"
Implied right of patient-to-patient exchange

While the argument that "NO, its not legal to sell excess meds as a CG to patients outside of your 5" are based on a literal and conservative read of 1284 and A20. Basically, we are the weed liberals vs. the weed conservatives now...hehe...

I would say to minimize risk, you take the more literal and conservative take on the law as a caregiver, that basically says nothing about explicit patient-to-patient exchange (and actually 1284 says something against it), and facilitating only your 5 patients with meds.

On the other hand, you can keep doing what you are doing, you won't technically be minimizing risk, but most, if not all of us have been doing this for a while with considerable risk anyway. That combined with the fact that these laws are vague, confusing, and hard to implement and enforce, will lead to a lot of these finer details to be lost in the cracks, allowing caregivers to take a more liberal approach to the current laws, and even getting away with a few things that the law doesn't complete see fit or clarify.

Now, lets say hypothetically that Matt Cook comes out and says that patient-to-patient exchange is still allowed within the 2 oz rule. What about the restriction on caregivers/patients being able to co-op? Lets say you are a patient and you don't declare a caregiver (and you can't legally declare yourself as your own caregiver), and you are also a caregiver for 5 other patients. You can grow 30 plants for your patients where you are legally allowed, and you can grow another 6 for yourself at home. If you combine the grow of your 6 plants with the 30 for your patients as a total of 36 in one location, aren't you technically co-opping your personal grow with your caregiver grow, since they should be unrelated legally speaking? And based on that conclusion, isn't any excess meds that you grow for your patients that you are selling to outside patients, according to the supposed patient-to-patient exchange right, technically co-opping also and therefore illegal? It’s basically a co-op with yourself, which doesn't sound legal and won't give you a right to sell it to outside patients. Just my own reasoning here...

If you are a MMC employee or partner, you can still be a caregiver, but you HAVE TO keep the two separate. Meds from the MMC can't intermingle with caregiver meds, and vice versa. They will be checking into books about this kind of stuff, I'm sure!

I know people are scrambling and confused, trying to keep up their old business model. I wasn't trying to instigate any negativity here, just an honest debate. I honestly don't know that much, and openly admit to it, which is why I spoke to an attorney. These attorneys try to protect us since we give them money, and they can sometimes have conservative takes on the laws (for our protection) and therefore, these attorneys often tell us things we just don't want to hear. But it is not the attorneys’ fault, they are just reading words on a page doing their best to make sense of it and keep you (or me) out of handcuffs. Honestly, most of the caregiver stuff doesn't really apply to me, I'm an MMC grower (I know, I know, I'm a sell-out...), but I am still an indoor guerilla grower at heart, and have been a soldier on the frontline for a number of years. I do my best to have a full grasp of the law, and you never know, I could get fired as an MMC grower tomorrow, and have to start from scratch as a caregiver, too! This is a reality for me!

This is what I've been told as far as what Matt Cook is doing. You forget, its not just 1284 that is establishing these rules. 1284 created an entire MMJ enforcement division with the Department of Revenue, and the DOR will be in charge of all new regulations and oversight/supervision of the ENTIRE INDUSTRY, not just MMCs, but caregivers too. Supposedly, Matt Cook is busy right now with the MMCs and getting all the regulation in for the owners, employees, etc. By December/January he expects to have all the paperwork and regulations put together for the infused products license part of the law, and by June of next year, he plans to address caregivers and provide some regulation. Don't think that 1284 leaves caregivers with 5 or less total freedom from taxation and regulation, it is coming, its just low priority right now. Matt Cook has to tackle the MMCs first, since they are the ones with the neon signs and ads in Westward, but he hasn't forgotten about caregivers, so don't think you are in some legal wonderland....

Good luck guys, and lets get along in here.... 5 years ago there wouldn't of been much we all would of disagreed on, but now these new laws are creating confusion and division (as they should, from a political perspective) among our "troops". Keep soldiering on...

 

[SnowGro]

but he hasn't forgotten about caregivers, so don't think you are in some legal wonderland....

But we are in a legal wonderland, created by a poorly crafted piece of legislation. Until the specifics are hammered out ( a year from now ) CG's are left hanging in a void that is exploitable by LEO.
The whole thing smacks of 'We couldn't write the law as restrictive as we wanted to or it wouldn't have passed. So we'll do our best to break the system by writing a vague, overarching statement.'

Just a little math, to study the CG situation....
I'll take the optimal situation.
5 patients @ 2oz/mo $225/oz no freebies.
Comes to $27,000 GROSS.
More realistically,
5 patients @ .75oz/mo $200/oz ( priced down to include some subsidization. )
Comes to $9,000 GROSS
Below the federal poverty line.

Take out electricity, nutes, water...
And this piece FORCES CG's below the poverty line.

Not to mention the HazMat fees for disposing of overages. We all know what a horrible, toxic substance this is, and land-filling it is unconscionable.

I'm curious to see other's numbers showing CG as a viable profession, by the book. Leaving out pricing models that account for the 'can't charge more than the production cost'. I think that's another argument altogether.

Disclaimer: Gov't has no obligation to write legislation that makes sense from a business standpoint.

 

[cobcoop]

The main arguments for "YES, it is legal to sell excess meds as a CG to patients outside of your 5" are primarily based on:

A20's loose definition of "medical use"
Implied right of patient-to-patient exchange

If this turns out to be true, then we could legally set up a patient growers coop where legal patients could purchase meds from other patients. I don't know if anyone has been reading about what Good Karma Collective is doing in Cali, but they have set up a system which is beneficial to growers and patients alike, and seems to me to be the "ideal" standard which we should strive towards. Assuming we get some clarity in the laws up in this bitch. I would be very interested in starting/joining a collective/coop along those lines.

 

[SGMeds]

Cob~ that was/is the idea that came about during Balazar's meet... The Emerald Rectangle Exchange.

Nothing has really come of it as of yet, but the idea is to have an online exchange where caregivers & patient growers could list their available services & meds.

Non-growing patients could link directly to the CG's & acquire their meds direct.

The transaction would be entirely between the patient & CG... the ERE is just there as a means to facilitate networking.

My thoughts are to have a distinct sub-forum similar to the breeders do here... each professional CG would set up shop accordingly.


It's a damn good idea.

 

[SprngsCaregiver]

I'm a little confused after reading these boards on the 2oz law. The way my doctor described it was... That is your legal carry amount. So basically I could carry 2oz for me and 2oz for each patient I have. He told me what I have at home is my business. He also made a really good point to back it up.. How can you flower even 1 plant and end up with only 2oz? I average about 3 to 4 a plant with a month of veg under a 4' 4 bulb T5 fixture and a 400w HPS for 2 months of flowering.
My question is who is defining the law right and how in the hell do we get a definite answer before next year?

I feel for the patients that don't know how to grow because CO is about to turn into CA where dispensaries run the game and most of them are only in it for quantity not quality. That's why you see so many crappy meds from Cali. All the good stuff is selling on the BM its those dispensary growers sending their garbage.

 

[cobcoop]

Cob~ that was/is the idea that came about during Balazar's meet... The Emerald Rectangle Exchange.

Nothing has really come of it as of yet, but the idea is to have an online exchange where caregivers & patient growers could list their available services & meds.

Non-growing patients could link directly to the CG's & acquire their meds direct.

The transaction would be entirely between the patient & CG... the ERE is just there as a means to facilitate networking.

My thoughts are to have a distinct sub-forum similar to the breeders do here... each professional CG would set up shop accordingly.


It's a damn good idea.

Wish I had more time to be involved in those meetings, but I was thinking more along the lines of an actual shop, where cg's could showcase their meds whenever they felt like coming by, and patients could purchase from a wide variety of offerings. Basically the shop gets a % of the sales in order to operate, and the cg's set their own prices. This IMHO would truly lead to an equitable situation for patients and growers. Sort of a mini free-market, where if you had over-priced and/or sub-par meds you would not make many sales. And where the friendly in-shop competition would keep prices in check for patients.

Not that the web based coop wouldn't be good as well, just a little different scenario.

 

[Skunkmiester]

I disagree, centers are about to be banned up here in Larimer or loveland anyway which is good for me. And my partner & I have devised a plan to not even worry about this anymore. So we will be set and not worry about breaking any laws nor worry about distribution. ERE would be illegal based on everyones understanding of the law.

 

[Skunkmiester]

Wish I had more time to be involved in those meetings, but I was thinking more along the lines of an actual shop, where cg's could showcase their meds whenever they felt like coming by, and patients could purchase from a wide variety of offerings. Basically the shop gets a % of the sales in order to operate, and the cg's set their own prices. This IMHO would truly lead to an equitable situation for patients and growers. Sort of a mini free-market, where if you had over-priced and/or sub-par meds you would not make many sales. And where the friendly in-shop competition would keep prices in check for patients.

Not that the web based coop wouldn't be good as well, just a little different scenario.

This is the idea I had at the meeting when I was involved with it. But sadly this to would be illegal. We can only charge for cost of cult/services. By just setting out meds to be bought the gov's would be all over it saying we are "selling" pot. IMO

 

[cobcoop]

This is the idea I had at the meeting when I was involved with it. But sadly this to would be illegal. We can only charge for cost of cult/services. By just setting out meds to be bought the gov's would be all over it saying we are "selling" pot. IMO

Assuming portions of HB1284 stand, which I do not think they will. Also how does one quantify "the cost to produce"? My time spent in the garden is one aspect of a cost associated with production. I think the main hurdle now is the MMC bullshit, again, assuming this law stands up in court.

 

[SGMeds]

Assuming portions of HB1284 stand, which I do not think they will. Also how does one quantify "the cost to produce"? My time spent in the garden is one aspect of a cost associated with production. I think the main hurdle now is the MMC bullshit, again, assuming this law stands up in court.

I agree with this a lot... certain things are going to be challenged.


Think the issue w a specific store/location is that a CG isn't supposed to delegate the provision of meds to another person. The CG would have to actually be present to directly deal w the patient.

This assumes the ability to assist patients outside of the core 5 that is.


If we set this up as a farmers type deal... once every weekend, or the like, then CG's could spend the day & vend...?

 

[cobcoop]

Actually I was referring to mofo's post regarding patient to patient transactions as the basis for this type of thing to work. But I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens, I do honestly kind of doubt something like this would work legally, but it's nice to dream

 

[HokuLoa]

my tone is usually off... i am a self-proclaimed prick most of the time! if it came off as hostile, i apologize quite sincerely. but make no mistakes... i appreciate this opportunity to discuss the new law in detail... even if just an exercise between stoners... ;-) thank you!

btw... i respect tr33... good name in the community. don't think u 2 should start off wrong... seem like good peeps all the way around. it's the other fukrs & the law that is the real issue... stirring us all up, no doubt.

No worries. These days I figure peeps are just primed for opposition and anger (not too hard given the ludicrous direction the State is taking). I just figure discussing and understanding the law in detail benefits us al so....

As for TR33, not sure why the "wrong start." I know from posts the intelligence is there, but I don't even remotely know what I did to provoke such a response. Oh well. Suffice to say, I'm not Gard even if my language seems similar. I guess that is the biproduct of years of political/legal education.....

Cheers, and PEACE y'all!!

 

[HokuLoa]

If you wholeheartedly believe in this model as being the right one, well, how are you going to revamp your gig you have had.

Oh HELL no!! I DO NOT think this shift to the Center model is even remotely "right." It empowers businesses w/ no regard for the quality of their medicinal cannabis production (or care for that matter). It simultaneously dis empowers (and legally puts at risk) most longtime cannabis professionals who chose NOT to play the "Center" game. This is the core of my gripe that the new laws seem to take away most of the legal protection and flexibility that allows the non-Center professionals to operate. This hurts the caregivers and more importantly hurts the patients. The restrictions on distribution (as I read in the law) put caregiver businesses like mine out of business. It also seems to make it nearly impossible to now operate a 5 patient business (profitably) AND remain 100% compliant the whole time. In what you wrote below you seem to assume that I'm willing to turn a blind eye to the patient in order to pursue profit but that is TOTALLY false. My contention is that this is what the LAW is forcing us to do if we want to a) be legal, (b) not operate as a charity, and (c) operate with a level of professionalism and scope expected from professionals in our industry.

This is to assume that you as a grower have been flowing with the same cannabis stream that has been running for decades which is, help others with giving them quality herb/meds and they give you dead presidents in exchange. Tell me how you plan on growing for free or how will you sleep when you will be excluding the most important people in this industry because they are unable to pay your fees and that is the needy low income,HIV,Cancer having patient that is transportation less and lives in an area that is less than savory and has to depend on a public transpo system that considers cannabis illegal and does not even come close do a dispensary?

We have always had and will continue to have the right to assist any patient with getting medical cannabis. That will never change.

This is what I was addressing. I personally believe we SHOULD have this right. I believe Amend 20 gave us that legal defense at least with interpretation. However, as I read the law (1284) they have further defined that "right" and have limited it to 5 patients. I hate that but THAT is how the law reads (at least to me). Some lawyers may advise differently but remember that their take on the law is often more based on what they think they can argue in court and less on what the law clearly intends. Take that for what it is...

Also keep in mind by the law that is written even the new one, I have the right to set what I think my cost are for my meds and so do you, since we all grow different and on different levels.

Yes, true to an extent. Costs are cost. We can either account for our cost correctly or try and "fudge" them. Really, that doesn't matter though. IF I'm correct and the courts will only support the legality of our caregiver businesses "right" to sell to ONLY our 5 patients then costs and price setting is a whole different issue. For the time, effort, knowledge, risk, expertise etc we all understand that cost of production is relatively high and somewhat fixed in steady state. However, if we are limited to distribute to 5 patients then there is not much we can do to set prices to recoup costs. Some of my highest need patients cannot pay (I give free), cannot "DIY," and are unable to commute to Centers. Keeping that patient as one of the 5 is impossible from a business/legal standpoint and that's just f*king wrong. To maintain that patient LEGALLY would require me to set prices so that the other 4 patients subsidize the 5th needy one. Now that is wrong as well. So what option does the State leave us but to be either illegal or unethical toward our patients.

That's why I'm looking for a well supported "other" option keeps us legal and able to operate w/o going broke in the process.

 

[HokuLoa]

the last part is what screws w us... 'may cultivate or provide' & 'only for medical use'.

tied to the rest of the sentence... cg to it's 5 & patient for themselves... pretty clear.

K... this is the constitutional challenge #1 regarding CG's & Patients... well, there is the 5 cap too!

this is certainly a problem... that will come down to how we behave/run the biz vs what the DOPHE/DOR decide to do... if anything. but yes, 1284 does seem to have that clause as you pointed out that does appear to directly contradict direct & open sales.

practically speaking, i don't see how they will investigate such person-to-person interactions... unless they use busted ass narcs. make sure you have paperwork & work smart...???

speaking in principle, this clause is a fuk-up & is one of the more important ones to challenge.

Totally! It is inconsistent but clearly defined. I really cannot fathom how they considered this a legal option given the previous ruling allowing more than 5 patients AND the basic rights afforded us in our Constitution.

As for the investigations, well.... OK, reality is investigation will be VERY difficult and most longtime pros will revert to their old black market networks (which we just went to great lengths to normalize and make legal) w/ not much risk. However, it is still appalling that even modest caregivers are now AGAIN at risk of prosecution in the first place. I mean really, penalizing caregivers and patients b/c they want nothing to do with bureaucratic, corporate Center model and would rather acquire from their usual, trusted provider.... F*ing NUT!

 

[HokuLoa]

Well said Greenmopho!

You are right that there IS a split in our community b/w those comfortable being more cavalier with their legal protection and those who really want to minimize as much as possible their legal risk. Many longtime canna-pros broke the seal on their decades long private networks. They came out of the closet and happily joined the "system" and looked forward to not having to be so, well, criminal. Now to have the legal protection seemingly stripped away a lot of folks are worried, betrayed, and have FAR too much to lose to adopt a "liberal" interpretation of the law. It was one thing to be totally clandestine and off the radar. It's a whole other thing to be partly in the "system" (ie on the radar) and know that you may be criminally at huge risk b/c of your "liberal" leaning and desire to be smaller than a "Center."

Hay, bottom line we keep fighting and keep safe!

Basically some say yes, some say no...

The main arguments for "YES, it is legal to sell excess meds as a CG to patients outside of your 5" are primarily based on:

A20's loose definition of "medical use"
Implied right of patient-to-patient exchange

While the argument that "NO, its not legal to sell excess meds as a CG to patients outside of your 5" are based on a literal and conservative read of 1284 and A20. Basically, we are the weed liberals vs. the weed conservatives now...hehe...

 

[SGMeds]

Actually I was referring to mofo's post regarding patient to patient transactions as the basis for this type of thing to work. But I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens, I do honestly kind of doubt something like this would work legally, but it's nice to dream

Sorry Cob... didn't see this post, but the whole premise of a direct sales model for the CG's is that they themselves are Patients. My reasoning is that this would better support of the 'medical use' definition...???

Pie in the sky... i can taste it... ;-)

 

[Skunkmiester]

Oh HELL no!! I DO NOT think this shift to the Center model is even remotely "right." It empowers businesses w/ no regard for the quality of their medicinal cannabis production (or care for that matter). It simultaneously dis empowers (and legally puts at risk) most longtime cannabis professionals who chose NOT to play the "Center" game. This is the core of my gripe that the new laws seem to take away most of the legal protection and flexibility that allows the non-Center professionals to operate. This hurts the caregivers and more importantly hurts the patients. The restrictions on distribution (as I read in the law) put caregiver businesses like mine out of business. It also seems to make it nearly impossible to now operate a 5 patient business (profitably) AND remain 100% compliant the whole time. In what you wrote below you seem to assume that I'm willing to turn a blind eye to the patient in order to pursue profit but that is TOTALLY false. My contention is that this is what the LAW is forcing us to do if we want to a) be legal, (b) not operate as a charity, and (c) operate with a level of professionalism and scope expected from professionals in our industry.



This is what I was addressing. I personally believe we SHOULD have this right. I believe Amend 20 gave us that legal defense at least with interpretation. However, as I read the law (1284) they have further defined that "right" and have limited it to 5 patients. I hate that but THAT is how the law reads (at least to me). Some lawyers may advise differently but remember that their take on the law is often more based on what they think they can argue in court and less on what the law clearly intends. Take that for what it is...


Yes, true to an extent. Costs are cost. We can either account for our cost correctly or try and "fudge" them. Really, that doesn't matter though. IF I'm correct and the courts will only support the legality of our caregiver businesses "right" to sell to ONLY our 5 patients then costs and price setting is a whole different issue. For the time, effort, knowledge, risk, expertise etc we all understand that cost of production is relatively high and somewhat fixed in steady state. However, if we are limited to distribute to 5 patients then there is not much we can do to set prices to recoup costs. Some of my highest need patients cannot pay (I give free), cannot "DIY," and are unable to commute to Centers. Keeping that patient as one of the 5 is impossible from a business/legal standpoint and that's just f*king wrong. To maintain that patient LEGALLY would require me to set prices so that the other 4 patients subsidize the 5th needy one. Now that is wrong as well. So what option does the State leave us but to be either illegal or unethical toward our patients.

That's why I'm looking for a well supported "other" option keeps us legal and able to operate w/o going broke in the process.

Had to do that this morning, no choice, lost 2 patients since they never buy anything ever and are not handicapped but have a valid reason to use cannabis and have incomes. If I want to continue to stay in biz I have to have patients that purchase, needy or not. The state has forced me. My only saving grace is I am a patient as well as cg. The state, in the mission to regulate this industry has shit on the most important folks, the very needy patients. I am no longer allowed to grow with compassion in mind, I am forced to be a greedy blood sucking mongrel. But in turn this does give me the ability to find patients that will appreciate the finest herbs money can buy, because I am dedicated growing freak as well as consumer and I have smoked the shittiest to the best and I have striven to be nowhere near the shitty. So like a tattoo artist,scientist or even a sculpturalist I am being compensated for my skill. Otherwise they can grow themselves.

 

[still2big]

If you aren't smart enough to figure out how to sell your product legally without turning your patients into drug dealers you have no business in this trade.

Had to do that this morning, no choice, lost 2 patients since they never buy anything ever and are not handicapped but have a valid reason to use cannabis and have incomes. If I want to continue to stay in biz I have to have patients that purchase, needy or not. The state has forced me. My only saving grace is I am a patient as well as cg. The state, in the mission to regulate this industry has shit on the most important folks, the very needy patients. I am no longer allowed to grow with compassion in mind, I am forced to be a greedy blood sucking mongrel. But in turn this does give me the ability to find patients that will appreciate the finest herbs money can buy, because I am dedicated growing freak as well as consumer and I have smoked the shittiest to the best and I have striven to be nowhere near the shitty. So like a tattoo artist,scientist or even a sculpturalist I am being compensated for my skill. Otherwise they can grow themselves.

 

[funkfingers]

If you aren't smart enough to figure out how to sell your product legally without turning your patients into drug dealers you have no business in this trade.

you mean compensated for your time and energy, remember you can't "sell" it anymore as a private caregiver..

 

[Skunkmiester]

If you aren't smart enough to figure out how to sell your product legally without turning your patients into drug dealers you have no business in this trade.

Speaking again for everyone I see, when will you stop spewing ignorance. This is place as Hok and Green put it for a general convo about what cgs are gunna do with the new laws and you come in being a fucking dick....again. fuck man it gets way old hearing your bullshit and how u always seem to have the answer yet u are never classy enough to engage others in a civil convo without somehow saying how you are better in someway.