T
Tr33
This morning I hope.
I wonder when all the dispensaries start shutting down.
-
ICMag with help from Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest in November! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
Colorado House Bill 1284
- Thread starter snowschool
- Start date
I wonder when all the dispensaries start shutting down.
S
Stinktoe
GOV signed the bill...what a fucktard! laws are made to be broken mr.gov.. you just flushed millions $$ down the toilet and put many mom and pop growers, patients, caregivers, dispensaries out of buisness and many more with out OUR MEDS!
this bill is not good for any1.!
this bill is not good for any1.!
S
Stinktoe
pleanty to be made back east..lol just say the word
with this new law bs being passed there is only one thing to do... IM GOING BIGGER AND BETTER..FUCK THEM!
Easy Skanking
Member
I also wonder how long until LEO intervenes on dispensaries that are currently operating in cities with bans or moratoriums. As far as I have gathered from the bill they are instantly "illegal" in their current locations so I wonder if the cities will shut them down immediately or how that's all gonna roll out.
Greenmopho
Member
SeniorBuzz
Member
I'm certain you are aware that as of yesterday, 439 dispensaries in Los Angeles County are being closed.
T
Tr33
I say this because of the Jult 1st 2010 license fee deadline, many can't afford these fees. Remember, HB1284 actually starts July 2011.
Then these dispensaries could pay all this cash for license fees and get raped by the state refusing to license them due to something like the moral clause, and keep that cash from the fees. Nowhere does it say anything about refunds of fees if not ok'd by the new state license division to be started.
Even at this time they have no set fees for licenes, this is gonna f**k most everyone.
Not true.
SECTION 18. Specified effective date. (1) Except as otherwise
provided in subsection (2) of this section, this act shall take effect July 1, 2010.
http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/cl...6DB1E8872576A80029D7E2?open&file=1284_enr.pdf
T
Tr33
Section 1 - 2(c) ON AND AFTER JULY 1, 2011, ALL BUSINESSES FOR THE PURPOSE
OF CULTIVATION, MANUFACTURE, OR SALE OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA OR
MEDICAL MARIJUANA-INFUSED PRODUCTS, AS DEFINED IN THIS ARTICLE,
SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS ARTICLE AND
ANY RULES PROMULGATED PURSUANT TO THIS ARTICLE.
my bad if I'm wrong
OF CULTIVATION, MANUFACTURE, OR SALE OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA OR
MEDICAL MARIJUANA-INFUSED PRODUCTS, AS DEFINED IN THIS ARTICLE,
SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS ARTICLE AND
ANY RULES PROMULGATED PURSUANT TO THIS ARTICLE.
my bad if I'm wrong
Are you referring to the effective date of the entire bill or the part that applies to dispensaries/grows? Because 2(C) applies only to those.
(c) ON AND AFTER JULY 1, 2011, ALL BUSINESSES FOR THE PURPOSE OF CULTIVATION, MANUFACTURE, OR SALE OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA OR MEDICAL MARIJUANA-INFUSED PRODUCTS, AS DEFINED IN THIS ARTICLE, SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS ARTICLE AND ANY RULES PROMULGATED PURSUANT TO THIS ARTICLE.
Caregivers are not considered 'businesses'.
Section 18 is not a subsection of anything else, therefore I would think it applies to the entire bill. But hey, I hope I'm wrong.
It would keep you legal for one more year, get it?
Chem&M
Member
And to get the actual license to sell Cannabis, you will have to pay the fee, have a building secured, etc. Not gonna work.
Skunkmiester
Member
Actually cg's are not required as disp's are to get a cert. All we have to have is a selling license.
MrWeekend
Member
This is copy & pasted from another site
Matt Cook from Dept of Revenue on 1284
The obvious highlight of tonight's panel discussion was Matt Cook, who finally released some hard numbers regarding licensing fees and compliance dates.
July 1st: Have approval from your local government for whatever license you want.
* For centers, this means complying with existing local regulations.
* For commercial growers, this means being properly zoned and having either a plant husbandry permit(maybe license?) or nursery facility. The difference is mostly semantic between localities.
* For primary caregivers, there is little to no oversight. The most likely conflict would be a local zoning issue.
* For infused manufacturers, you may need your own locally approved OPCL(optional premises cultivation license) and commercial kitchen. No sharing, no use for anything other than making your own infused products. Matt Cook took personal responsibility for this measure being added at the 11th hour, insisting it wasn't the "Cheesecake Lady."
August 1st: State application fees are due. This is a non-refundable, one time fee that is added to the "cash fund." Cook favors this over a general fund, which is appropriations based, because fees paid in excess of the program's operating cost will be used to reduce the application fee in the next fiscal year. The only problem is that leaves over-charged dispensaries footing the bill for the competition next year.
September 1st: All dispensaries must be compliant with the 70/30 growing requirement, where they will be responsible for wholesaling no more than 30% of their on hand, smokeable inventory.
Fees are:
* 0-300 Patients: $7500
* 301-500: $12,500
* 501+: $18,500
Offstage, he said he expected OPCL's to come in at $500-$1000, which is a modest burden for growers considering the hit dispensaries took.
Cook consistently expressed his dissatisfaction with 1284 and reminded everyone that in January there will be an important opportunity to correct some of those issues on the state level. What I took away from the entire panel was that we should treat 1284 as if it was here to stay and that the more we play ball, the more balls they throw us. A tired refrain.
He stressed the rule making process a great deal as well. He can interpret existing law, but can't get close to a reversal. When talking about state residency, he brought up fishing licenses and how many days you need to be in the state before one can be issued. Residency, to him, is a flexible issue... unless the requirements are spelled out so clearly in the house bill. Moral of the story is that he's open to reasonable interpretations.
At one point he talked about a webcam surveillance system, and how he wouldn't need to send inspectors down there all the time when they could check in remotely. Since when did this turn into HB10-1984? It appears the more transparent you are with the inspectors, the better off you'll have it.
When talking about fees, Cook's analogy was always that they were "building a house" from the ground up. He has no way to predict how many applications they'll receive, so he's rounding up. Generously.
That may be unfair, though. He stayed for at least an extra hour after sitting on the panel for three, answering questions from whoever crowded around him. He handed out business cards like he meant it and several times in the night told people he would contact them, because he needed their point of view.
Like him or not, he's come across to me as the most accessible person in this process. Maybe that comes from years of being schmoozed by the gaming and liquor industries. His resume suggests he's had a zeal for whatever they've tasked him with.
He has another Q&A a week from Thursday, what do we really need to know from him?
DISCLAIMER: I'm not a lawyer. I'm not The Releaf Center. I'm a guy named Jake who went to a meeting tonight. I thought I took good notes, but there may be some topics that I misinterpreted. There were a lot of other subjects covered, so if you have a question about any other topic, post it in here and if it was covered, I'll get back to you.
Matt Cook from Dept of Revenue on 1284
The obvious highlight of tonight's panel discussion was Matt Cook, who finally released some hard numbers regarding licensing fees and compliance dates.
July 1st: Have approval from your local government for whatever license you want.
* For centers, this means complying with existing local regulations.
* For commercial growers, this means being properly zoned and having either a plant husbandry permit(maybe license?) or nursery facility. The difference is mostly semantic between localities.
* For primary caregivers, there is little to no oversight. The most likely conflict would be a local zoning issue.
* For infused manufacturers, you may need your own locally approved OPCL(optional premises cultivation license) and commercial kitchen. No sharing, no use for anything other than making your own infused products. Matt Cook took personal responsibility for this measure being added at the 11th hour, insisting it wasn't the "Cheesecake Lady."
August 1st: State application fees are due. This is a non-refundable, one time fee that is added to the "cash fund." Cook favors this over a general fund, which is appropriations based, because fees paid in excess of the program's operating cost will be used to reduce the application fee in the next fiscal year. The only problem is that leaves over-charged dispensaries footing the bill for the competition next year.
September 1st: All dispensaries must be compliant with the 70/30 growing requirement, where they will be responsible for wholesaling no more than 30% of their on hand, smokeable inventory.
Fees are:
* 0-300 Patients: $7500
* 301-500: $12,500
* 501+: $18,500
Offstage, he said he expected OPCL's to come in at $500-$1000, which is a modest burden for growers considering the hit dispensaries took.
Cook consistently expressed his dissatisfaction with 1284 and reminded everyone that in January there will be an important opportunity to correct some of those issues on the state level. What I took away from the entire panel was that we should treat 1284 as if it was here to stay and that the more we play ball, the more balls they throw us. A tired refrain.
He stressed the rule making process a great deal as well. He can interpret existing law, but can't get close to a reversal. When talking about state residency, he brought up fishing licenses and how many days you need to be in the state before one can be issued. Residency, to him, is a flexible issue... unless the requirements are spelled out so clearly in the house bill. Moral of the story is that he's open to reasonable interpretations.
At one point he talked about a webcam surveillance system, and how he wouldn't need to send inspectors down there all the time when they could check in remotely. Since when did this turn into HB10-1984? It appears the more transparent you are with the inspectors, the better off you'll have it.
When talking about fees, Cook's analogy was always that they were "building a house" from the ground up. He has no way to predict how many applications they'll receive, so he's rounding up. Generously.
That may be unfair, though. He stayed for at least an extra hour after sitting on the panel for three, answering questions from whoever crowded around him. He handed out business cards like he meant it and several times in the night told people he would contact them, because he needed their point of view.
Like him or not, he's come across to me as the most accessible person in this process. Maybe that comes from years of being schmoozed by the gaming and liquor industries. His resume suggests he's had a zeal for whatever they've tasked him with.
He has another Q&A a week from Thursday, what do we really need to know from him?
DISCLAIMER: I'm not a lawyer. I'm not The Releaf Center. I'm a guy named Jake who went to a meeting tonight. I thought I took good notes, but there may be some topics that I misinterpreted. There were a lot of other subjects covered, so if you have a question about any other topic, post it in here and if it was covered, I'll get back to you.
StrictlyGateway
Member
nice re-cap weekend!
i may be ridiculed for this, but i thought for a guy that is in charge of auditing this industry, matt cook seems like a very reasonable individual. i couldn't help but notice that he kept clapping when mason tvert was talking about legalization!
i will take exception to the above. the distinction i see is this... by September 1, 2010 dispensaries have to prove that they are connected to a properly licensed grow and that they can produce 70% of their own meds. that's it. meaning....the other 30% can still come from subcontractors and private individuals until july 1, 2011. although i have a feeling dispensaries will move towards the 70/30 soon, they don't technically have to til next year.
