Colorado House Bill 1284

[tharmer]

>So if you think this bill was passed for any other reason you're crazy.

I don't agree. I recognize your rightness, the taxes certainly sway votes into the 'for' position. So I'll conceed there are at least two reasons for the law.


>"moral" character clause

No argument from me, but I think the fear explanation covers this issue. In 2010 and 2011 I doubt ANY felons will get licenses to own/operate dispenaries. I feel for the brothers and sisters in denver who got sucked in.

>I still stand by my post () any public official should have to disclose...

I don't agree. Dispensary owners can and must be held to a higher standard. A standard like a bank president or a person who makes weapons systems is held to. A thorough background check that looks at all sources of income and determines that you are 'clean'. Personally I think it's all a bunch of BS, but I can certainly understand why the rulemakes declare it so.

A cop is just a hard working guy who gets a weekly paycheck. He shouldn't need to go through a 10 year work history. If he can't handle responsibility he will be found out quickly enough (cough cough) but he's not a Casino Owner who has the potential to control millions of dollars (or a dispensary owner who is controlling a schedule 1 drug).

Politicians? They all suck. The job is well suited only for yes men who are narcicists. But asking them to bend over and cough is not appropriate, they have no power as an individual.

> Also what if we told general mills they have to produce 70%

I agree, it's a crock of shite. But I understand that people are afraid and they (politicians) decided that for now the only way to manage it is to have the dispensary produce all their own medicine. It sucks for people who once grew for a living, but they too could have gotten into a retail space before July 1. There was nothing holding them back, nobody can honestly say 'I couldn't find a spot anywhere'. If that's the argument, then they should have worked harder.

>Point being this bill stomps all over our constitutional rights

This law might just do that. It will be interesting to watch. But maybe, if we get it all right, we might just invent a new industry. Right here at home.

 

[funkfingers]

BTW "moral" character comes into play for every aspect of the business, from my understanding I cannot even work in a grow facility, work at the center.. Because I was convicted of possession with intent of guess what?? marijuana. That might be one of the dumber parts of the bill, because you can sure as shit bet, to brew beer,be a tobacco farmer there is no kind of background (in most cases) why is this different? Is it because I have to have a drs recommendation to use it? If that's the case let's get some people with some kind of background in either medicine or farming to regulate this industry, not people used to dealing with liquor, and gambling..


I don't see why the people who we have in positions of power should be subject to ANY less scrutiny than set forth in the application to own/run a center. I wanna know where all the campaign money comes from..Also would like to see an audit of the police dept gov offices ect..These people are spending OUR money. Plus I would like to see where their(politicians) personal ( and their families) money is invested, what kind of assets do they have, what kind of private ties to businesses do they have ect..I think it would give a much clearer picture of the motivations to pass certain legislature through.

 

[Easy Skanking]

A cop is just a hard working guy who gets a weekly paycheck. He shouldn't need to go through a 10 year work history. If he can't handle responsibility he will be found out quickly enough (cough cough) but he's not a Casino Owner who has the potential to control millions of dollars (or a dispensary owner who is controlling a schedule 1 drug).

You think that a cop doesn't need a 10 year work history check? I think he does. Who do you think takes the schedule 1 drugs that get seized when someone gets arrested for possession back to the station and processed into the evidence room? So actually they are handling and in possession of schedule 1 drugs. Who do you think handles the stacks of cash that are seized and presumed to be drug profits when someone is arrested for a drug crime? The police officer. What about owners or pharmacies and their workers? All day long they handle, process and bag up schedule 1 drugs many of which are actually killing people as we speak. And guess what, they are selling them for mega profits and all the while not having to risk being prosecuted for federal felonies.

I think the point here is that if these rules and regulations are being applied to dispensaries and their workers, they should also apply across the boards to any industry that has any potential to include shady dealings related to drugs, liquor, large sums of money, bribes etc.

 

[cobcoop]

How can the state "regulate" (i.e. profit from) an industry where they have little over-sight? They cannot. Why do you think independent caregivers got the stiff end of the stick? because the state cannot "regulate" all the independent guys and gals out there providing cannabis to people. The rest is simply window dressing. I am a little dismayed that one in our industry could think that these laws were written for the public good. Simply follow the money, just like every other aspect of our corporate government. Look at who stands to profit from these laws, large investors, and the state.

I think it is naive at best to assume that "supporting your local dispensary" will actually benefit anyone but the investors. There are a scant few examples of dispensaries out there doing this for the right reasons, meaning bringing high quality cannabis to those that choose to use it. However the majority are commodity traders.

When it comes to LEO, I believe that some may be hard-working guys trying to do help their communities. But the problem is that the forces that control LE agencies are simply interested bringing in the cash, whether it be from illegal search and seizure, federal funding to eradicate cannabis, or kickbacks from private prisons trying to keep their beds full. Take a look sometime at the boards of directors of these companies that own operate these prisons, guess who makes up these boards? Ex-cops and businessmen.

The wider picture here is that there is a culture war going on, and if the politicians (corporations) can keep you and I focused on the evils of homosexuality, religion, guns, and "dangerous drugs", then they can continue to bleed us dry for every fucking red cent we have. Have you noticed over the last several decades how Americans own less and less of their lives? How much of "your" stuff do you actually own, and how much of it is actually owned by banks, credit card companies, and other corporate interests?


You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to funkfingers again - still can't rep ya holmes...
Sheep is right Funk. Just watch the fuck out for the wolf.

 

[funkfingers]

What he said..K+ cob

 

[Dorje113]

tharmer, you can't use fear to justify anything. Fear is a generic emotion encompassing many other sub-emotions and is the basis for everything one might do that is "harmful" to self and others. If fear were an acceptable defense, no crime would be able to be prosecuted. Your entire line of reasoning isn't reasonable at all. I do however agree that ignorance and aversion to mmj drove 1284, the intent of the law was questionable at best, and here we are dealing with the result, which can't be "good" because the intent of the law wasn't "good".

Your entire position on this makes me cringe, it's one thing to understand other's positions, it's quite another to attempt to justify it and say its ok because people are afraid. Weak.

 

[Dorje113]

I think it is naive at best to assume that "supporting your local dispensary" will actually benefit anyone but the investors. There are a scant few examples of dispensaries out there doing this for the right reasons, meaning bringing high quality cannabis to those that choose to use it. However the majority are commodity traders.

Dispensaries aren't good or bad, it's the people running them that make them what they are. For the average guy dispensaries are great. You get a safe, legal place to buy mmj, with selection and quality that a black market dealer often doesn't have, or if they do it's never consistent. I know many people think disp. don't have the goods but some of them do.

The fact is, I have no need to visit a disp. but I do visit some because they are really good and I enjoy seeing what they have available. Just don't go to the bad ones.

 

[cobcoop]

Dispensaries aren't good or bad, it's the people running them that make them what they are. For the average guy dispensaries are great. You get a safe, legal place to buy mmj, with selection and quality that a black market dealer often doesn't have, or if they do it's never consistent. I know many people think disp. don't have the goods but some of them do.

The fact is, I have no need to visit a disp. but I do visit some because they are really good and I enjoy seeing what they have available. Just don't go to the bad ones.

I agree there are shops out there with quality, and whose main goal isn't to make a shit ton of cash. My point is that within the new constructs of the law the folks who focus on quality cannabis and actually enjoy helping people will be marginalized in favor of mega-mart corporate style environments.

 

[HELLOSMILY]

How can the state "regulate" (i.e. profit from) an industry where they have little over-sight? They cannot. Why do you think independent caregivers got the stiff end of the stick? because the state cannot "regulate" all the independent guys and gals out there providing cannabis to people. The rest is simply window dressing. I am a little dismayed that one in our industry could think that these laws were written for the public good. Simply follow the money, just like every other aspect of our corporate government. Look at who stands to profit from these laws, large investors, and the state.

I think it is naive at best to assume that "supporting your local dispensary" will actually benefit anyone but the investors. There are a scant few examples of dispensaries out there doing this for the right reasons, meaning bringing high quality cannabis to those that choose to use it. However the majority are commodity traders.

When it comes to LEO, I believe that some may be hard-working guys trying to do help their communities. But the problem is that the forces that control LE agencies are simply interested bringing in the cash, whether it be from illegal search and seizure, federal funding to eradicate cannabis, or kickbacks from private prisons trying to keep their beds full. Take a look sometime at the boards of directors of these companies that own operate these prisons, guess who makes up these boards? Ex-cops and businessmen.

The wider picture here is that there is a culture war going on, and if the politicians (corporations) can keep you and I focused on the evils of homosexuality, religion, guns, and "dangerous drugs", then they can continue to bleed us dry for every fucking red cent we have. Have you noticed over the last several decades how Americans own less and less of their lives? How much of "your" stuff do you actually own, and how much of it is actually owned by banks, credit card companies, and other corporate interests?


You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to funkfingers again - still can't rep ya holmes...
Sheep is right Funk. Just watch the fuck out for the wolf.

amen brother....

 

[SGMeds]

tharmer~ you appear a bit enamored with Cook. that's okay... that's understandable... compared to the others players out there, he seems reasonable, polite, considerate & grounded... even impartial. same first impression that i had. but if you see him speak a few times, read his words critically, listen to others that have actually interacted with him...? the shine begins to wear off.

- he becomes impatient with the questions of the people he intends to regulate... even throwing wry smirks to his associate

- he deflects more questions than he intends to address by stating 'that's statutory'... meaning... it's there black & white, read it for yourself, not going to do it for you...

- he believes he knows more than any one else in his spot, more than the DOPHE, more than the silly stoners, more than the self-serving lawyers, more than the insincere advocates, more than the questionable dr's writing these 'scripts'... after all, he's taken the time to 'ask lots & lots of questions'... and he has the experience to regulate

- he does in fact spin to the audience, e.g., though many, many concerns expressed about the application... he deflected & downplayed & delayed... then the bomb drops... no concerted effort to prep the owners despite plenty of time & ability to do so

- he now discusses the industry akin to widgets... impartiality moves to contempt as people & their interests become but inanimate objects that can be manipulated, altered or simply discarded

- he makes no qualms that his interests in the matter only go as far as to regulate per the instruction (& his understanding of intent) of hte legislators... really doesn't give 2cents for any of the other issues surrounding the movement... actually the contempt comes through again as these considerations just complicate his regulating


Just odd to me that the majority of your position rests on your judgment of Cook as being a cool & righteous dude...? I can't even call him a decent & considerate person.

Not to mention that you'r stuck up on being of 'good moral character' yourself yet you also tout a 'bank president' as being one of the highest in industry standards...for good moral conduct???

I fear you are slightly emotional about the whole matter & clouded.

 

[StrictlyGateway]

I agree there are shops out there with quality, and whose main goal isn't to make a shit ton of cash. My point is that within the new constructs of the law the folks who focus on quality cannabis and actually enjoy helping people will be marginalized in favor of mega-mart corporate style environments.

 

[cobcoop]

Not to mention that you'r stuck up on being of 'good moral character' yourself yet you also tout a 'bank president' as being one of the highest in industry standards...for good moral conduct???

I fear you are slightly emotional about the whole matter & clouded.

 

[tharmer]

>I don't see why the people who we have in positions
>of power should be subject to ANY less scrutiny

People who are in power positions are scrutinized. President Obama, the new supreme court judges Kagan & Sotomyer. If you want all small time local politicians to be vetted beyond what is done now we will, if it's even possible, actually have worse politicians. Nobody would run for the job it would not be worth the hassle. But I agree with the sentiment, let's stick it to them too!


>What about owners or pharmacies and their workers

Pharmacies are held to a VERY high standard, they are governed by the DEA. Yes all persons working in a restricted area in a pharmacy are required to pass a background check, and probably random drug tests. They are all held to federal standards, which is what will ultimately happen in the MMJ industry. And pharmacies don't have any schedule 1 drugs, only schedule 2. Remember schedule one drugs "have no medicinal value" according to the fed.


>Why do you think independent caregivers got the
>stiff end of the stick? because the state cannot
>"regulate" all the independent guys and gals out
>there providing cannabis to people.

Yes that is what the legislators who wrote the law believed. However if you look at the man in charge, read Matt Cook's answers in Westword, you'll see that he believes he could have done it either way. Blame the elected for this judgment and vote them out.

Westword: Why only allow dispensary owners to operate a grow facility? Why not allow independent grow facilities?

cook: That was a public-policy decision. From a regulatory standpoint, it's just another widget. Could we regulate a wholesale grow facility? You bet we could. But that's how the legislature decided it was going to be written, and that's how it was written.

http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2010/07/medical_marijuana_regulations_1.php?page=1

>I think it is naive at best to assume that "supporting
>your local dispensary" will actually benefit anyone
>but the investors.

Please understand that most of the 500 people who have taken on the responsibility to own and operate a dispensary are, for the most part, hard working Coloradans. They are most certainly hard working Americans; anyone who is not a Coloradan cannot get a license under the new law. These people are our neighbors not some faceless big corporation. There are few 'investors' in this industry just a lot of people who want to grow and sell pot. Are you that different?


>There are a scant few examples of dispensaries out
>there doing this for the right reasons, meaning bringing
>high quality cannabis to those that choose to use it.

Actually I have personally spoken with more than 30 dispensary owners in Colorado. The one thing that most surprised me was that they all seemed to have the same mission "provide high quality medicine for reasonable prices". That is VERY different than the old school approach where pot dealers sold pot (they bought from Mexico) to "patients" and charged unreasonable markup. During the prohibition it was not uncommon to pay $400 to $600 an ounce for high end weed. These days it's hard to find a dispensary in the state who doesn't have $250 per ounce specials. Dispensary owners are doing this for all the right reasons, those who don't will not be licensed. This is still America and capitalism is our mantra. (I'm not going to argue the nobility of that). Capitalism will force dispensary owners to match their neighbors prices. Prices will, after stabilization, begin to creep toward $0. This fierce competition will benefit the patients. (disclaimer, I expect prices to skyrocket over the next six months and stabilization to start in 18 months).

>the majority are commodity traders.

That is a perfect description for a pot dealer, just add the word 'illegal' before commodity. I'm not getting down on pot dealers, I once was one. Today I'm rooting for the dispensary owners and this growing industry.

>it's quite another to attempt to justify it and
>say its ok because people are afraid.

I'm not trying to justify the law, I think 10-1284 is crap and the industry was doing just fine without it. What I am trying to do is understand why people wanted it to begin with and once I understand their motivation I can better position myself within the framework that is constructed. I'm also posting because I'm trying to learn from others, such as yourself.

>The fact is, I have no need to visit a disp.

Rock on dude. Amendment 20 still protects our right to grow. Though there remain patients who cannot or will not grow their own.

>[re: cook] no concerted effort to prep the owners
>despite plenty of time & ability to do so

To be fair, it's the owners job to prep themselves. AND this law doesn't go into effect until July 1, 2011. I think a year is reasonable.

>Not to mention that you're stuck up on being of
>'good moral character' yourself yet you also tout
>a 'bank president' as being one of the highest
>in industry standards...for good moral conduct???

No. Banks have no morals, capitalism generally has no place for morals. The morals clause is hard to swallow, but again I can understand why those who fear MMJ would require that owners/operators be of high moral character. I am pointing to a bank president only as an example of someone who must be 'clean' so they may be entrusted with millions upon millions of other peoples dollars. I doubt there are any felon bank presidents in Colorado or anywhere else.

>Just odd to me that the majority of your position
>rests on your judgment of Cook as being a cool &
>righteous dude...? I can't even call him a decent
>& considerate person.

Thank you for that SGMeds. I will consider your opinion as I watch Matt Cook over the coming year. I really appreciate your input and I hope against hope that he is not the ogre you portray.

I hope my position is broader than your assessment. I think regulation is good for the industry for those involved and citizens of the state overall. I don't like how it was rushed. I do like that there is another full legislative session before it becomes the law of the land. And my first impression of Mr Cook is that he really wants all parties to be involved in the rule making process. I'm excited to see this play out and to see the unjustified uneducated people's (read "those who don't frequent ICMAG") fear finally go away.

 

[cobcoop]

Yes that is what the legislators who wrote the law believed. However if you look at the man in charge, read Matt Cook's answers in Westword, you'll see that he believes he could have done it either way. Blame the elected for this judgment and vote them out.

Westword: Why only allow dispensary owners to operate a grow facility? Why not allow independent grow facilities?

cook: That was a public-policy decision. From a regulatory standpoint, it's just another widget. Could we regulate a wholesale grow facility? You bet we could. But that's how the legislature decided it was going to be written, and that's how it was written.

http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2010/07/medical_marijuana_regulations_1.php?page=1

Yes I read his interview and posted here on the Co forums, I am aware of his position.

>I think it is naive at best to assume that "supporting
>your local dispensary" will actually benefit anyone
>but the investors.

Please understand that most of the 500 people who have taken on the responsibility to own and operate a dispensary are, for the most part, hard working Coloradans. They are most certainly hard working Americans; anyone who is not a Coloradan cannot get a license under the new law. These people are our neighbors not some faceless big corporation. There are few 'investors' in this industry just a lot of people who want to grow and sell pot. Are you that different?

No disrespect to MSM, but here is just one example of what I am talking about, he has alsomentioned investors from all over Europe and Dubai showing up on his doorstep, thanks to HB1284

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=180070

Explain to me how these types of scenarios, which I do not believe for a second are isolated incidents, are beneficial to the cannabis culture?

>There are a scant few examples of dispensaries out
>there doing this for the right reasons, meaning bringing
>high quality cannabis to those that choose to use it.

Actually I have personally spoken with more than 30 dispensary owners in Colorado. The one thing that most surprised me was that they all seemed to have the same mission "provide high quality medicine for reasonable prices". That is VERY different than the old school approach where pot dealers sold pot (they bought from Mexico) to "patients" and charged unreasonable markup. During the prohibition it was not uncommon to pay $400 to $600 an ounce for high end weed. These days it's hard to find a dispensary in the state who doesn't have $250 per ounce specials. Dispensary owners are doing this for all the right reasons, those who don't will not be licensed. This is still America and capitalism is our mantra. (I'm not going to argue the nobility of that). Capitalism will force dispensary owners to match their neighbors prices. Prices will, after stabilization, begin to creep toward $0. This fierce competition will benefit the patients. (disclaimer, I expect prices to skyrocket over the next six months and stabilization to start in 18 months).

What do you think they are going to say, "um yeah I'm here to rape people and make suitcases full of cash"? Yes I agree there are several disp who are trying to produce quality cannabis, but I fail to see how the regulation of HB1284 encourages anything but profiteering and degradation of quality. If you don't think there are HUGE money interests involved in this then I think you may be mis-informed, no disrespect intended. If you were Monsanto, or Phillip Morris, or XYZ venture capital don;t you think you would be involved in this industry from the get-go.

>the majority are commodity traders.

That is a perfect description for a pot dealer, just add the word 'illegal' before commodity. I'm not getting down on pot dealers, I once was one. Today I'm rooting for the dispensary owners and this growing industry.

I was referring to commodity traders, a la enron etc. When was the last time a commodity trader provided something to a person in need free of charge? I knew of many many patients whom had caregivers provide them free or greatly reduced price meds because they were in dire need. That generosity was flushed down the fucking toilet by our state legislature. I've heard many stories of people whose caregivers bailed for MI because of these laws (not that I agree with leaving your patients holding the bag on the CG's part).

 

[Dorje113]

>The fact is, I have no need to visit a disp.

Rock on dude. Amendment 20 still protects our right to grow. Though there remain patients who cannot or will not grow their own.

You took that out of context.

here's the rest: " but I do visit some because they are really good and I enjoy seeing what they have available. Just don't go to the bad ones."

In that post, I was saying that Disp's have value to many people, not the opposite...

I also agree that many disp's are owned by people who truly care, although some are just profiteers. I've grown weed for nearly 20 years, and the people who don't care about the herb and the people they grow it for won't remain in business for long. I'm not too worried that mega-mart style disp's with poor product will remain and profit, they won't... the general public isn't that educated about good weed yet, but over time it will change and disp's won't be able to sell poor quality meds anymore.

 

[StrictlyGateway]

Actually I have personally spoken with more than 30 dispensary owners in Colorado. The one thing that most surprised me was that they all seemed to have the same mission "provide high quality medicine for reasonable prices".

so they didn't tell you that they wanted to bilk sick people of their hard earned money by offering mite and PM infested 'meds'. wierd.

of course, that is what they say. the problem arises from the fact that most of those owners have no clue what high quality meds are. they beat the grower down on the pricing and have no clue the difference between hydro ak or big bud and organic sour bubble Bx3. why on earth are these people entrusted with somebody's medical condition. just because they got a retail license by a certain date and paid the required fee. is that free market capitalism...no, it's protectionist and protects the opportunists and cali emigrants that were the first to get here.

This is still America and capitalism is our mantra. (I'm not going to argue the nobility of that). Capitalism will force dispensary owners to match their neighbors prices. Prices will, after stabilization, begin to creep toward $0. This fierce competition will benefit the patients. (disclaimer, I expect prices to skyrocket over the next six months and stabilization to start in 18 months).

regarding capitalism...see my comments above.

i used to think this line of thinking was correct. then the legislators did their thing. these laws are not setup to encourage competition at all. competition doesn't have grandfather clauses and distance requirements. prices are not going down, i think they are going up. there will be less dank in the stores b/c they are entrusting the wrong people to grow for them (for the most part, always have exceptions) and they are bringing back the black market...which means higher prices.

 

[GreenintheThumb]

The black market prices will drop and the dispensary prices which are already too high, will rise. Several MMCs I've spoken to believe there's some sort of ban on selling and trading with each other for a month. Most of these MMCs are not set up and prepared to grow their medicine today. There will be a dip in supply, no doubt. And all the old caregiver vendors will have to put their medicine on the black market if they're not affiliated with an MMC; and most of them aren't. I feel bad for the patients which I thought all this was supposed to be about.

 

[milehighmedical]

.

 

[SGMeds]

Think you're correct MHM... pretty damn simple. And not just the outdoor cali, but top-grade CG. Always has moved, always will. ALSO, the cops still need to justify their budget & put people in minimum security work centers to answer phone calls...


I'd be surprised if the prices don't stay the exact same if not move up a little... esp for the higher end dank.

Recent, temp drops have been panic-based... now peeps are wanting their dank again... and the world keeps a spinnin...

 

[HokuLoa]

I'm not going to pick out any one poster because so many are so confused.

Your post is so filled with leaps in logic I almost don't know where to start. I get the impression that you are fairly ignorant about how the cannabis industry in CO actually "works." By that I mean how has quality cannabis been produced in CO for decades by dedicated, knowledgeable individuals. After all, the "pot dealers" you decry are not the core of our industry. The producers (or smugglers) are. They actually provide the product that dealers sling. In fact, many of the more 'dealer" individuals in our industry settled into the dispensary mode because let's face it, they knew little to nothing about cannabis cultivation much less medicinal cannabis cultivation. Yet Matt Cook informed the legislature in such a way as to establish new laws that ignore this fact and set up a system that grants control of the industry (and MAJOR responsibility for patients health/wellbeing) to the dispensaries rather than to the canna-professionals who actually know what they are doing. (yes, I know there are exceptions but a simply tour through dispensaries is enough to confirm the fundamental truth of my assertion)

It's pretty clear to me why this law exists and it's also clear that Colorado is the Avant-garde with this important historical precedent; the other 49 states will follow OUR lead.

YES and THIS is horrifically part of the problem!!! WE in CO are better suited to do this right. We had a FANTASTIC opportunity to craft QUALITY law that recognized the nuanced and varied roles of all participants in any cannabis industry. Matt Cook and the legislatures squandered that opportunity and crafted an illogical law that eliminates the most knowledgable, caring participants, empowers the more business focused (as opposed to health/wellbeing focused) and often newcomer participants, and forces patients to settle for lesser quality and personal focus while Cook et al "figure it out." Not to mention, from a pure economic standpoint the new laws guarantee a black market revival and the obscene pricing structures that that entails (and in most cases a drift in quality of medicine as well). In essence, this benefits "Center" owners, black marketers and few else.

Why does the law exist? Because people are scared

I follow and agree with your take on how the law came to be. However, you leave out one vital component. Pressure/influence from the well-funded business entities that have there profit potential pinned to the success of "dispensaries" or "Centers." In many ways these were the LAST voices to take into consideration when deciding how to regulate an entire industry. Their interests often in complete opposition to the interests of all other participants including patients and caregivers. Center owners/operators should NOT inform Cook etc on the realities of our industry. They should really only have influence over the most public aspect, the retail outlet. (no, I don't demonize all but really their needs are not the needs of the industry and patients as a whole)

They decide the man in the state who is best able to develop rules that interpret the new rushed together law is the head of the department of revenue, Matt Cook. This makes sense to the politicians because Mr Cook has experience in law enforcement, in Colorado politics and in developing rules for complicated crime prone industries like gambling.

Perhaps but they are dead wrong! So why should we who are more informed applaud Matt Cook and justify his "knowledge" and influence??? That makes no sense at all...

Over the next 12 months Mr Cook and his team will interpret the law and develop a set of specific rules that dispensary owners need to follow. He has many issues to address including residency and moral character and how can he visit farms...

Fine, but it was irresponsible and detrimental to our medicinal cannabis program to throw the rest of the industry into a legal lurch while he ponders how best to regulate dispensaries. What he is saying is that it is OK to create and welcome back a whole new set of problems while they try to solve the "problem" of the most public of our program the "Center." How exactly does this serve the public good?? It doesn't. It hurts more people all around including the "pot is evil" crowd that now must endure more residential grows next door as small caregivers who WERE legally housed in commercial spaces are forced back into houses. I mean this is just retarded and it's not like many of us didn't inform Matt Cook of this reality. Does he seem to care when advising public policy? No.

So while I understand the anger from those who are 'not of good moral character' and the need to vent, some of you sound like children. Your desires to 'go back underground' and 'screw leo' and care give for more than 5 people and care give for profit astound me. It's almost as if you think this is a joke, like just because you want it to be a certain way and it isn't you are willing to jeopardize your freedom.

Again, your ignorance astounds me. No, I'm not trying to insult you I just have a strong feeling you really don't understand what is at play here. Sure, some complainers are lamenting the loss of their business for profit reasons but a ton of the old guard of CO's medicinal production are outright pissed because we see a lot of outside interests being given the "keys to the castle" in a way that is really detrimental to the quality of our burgeoning medical cannabis industry, to patients, to REALLY QUALIFIED professional Caregivers (they and the patients are the core of our industry RIGHT...???), an to the image of our industry as a whole. Keep in mind, if the public "Center" is owned/op'ed by a relatively inexperienced grower and must rely on 70% their own wares then the public understanding of "medicinal" "quality" will through exposure be far skewed from the reality now housed in private caregiver relationships and the black market. It's like saying McDonalds and Burger K can produce/sell burgers publicly but all smaller revenue establishment must only serve in their own house and to a limited customer base. We in the "house" may cook world class burgers but the majority of the diners in CO (ie patients) will only eat at McDonalds and will consider that topnotch (or in our case medicinal at all)....

I'm certain Mr Cook has no intention of letting any people of questionable morals own/operate dispensaries. I'm 100% confident that pedophiles and bank robbers will NOT be licensed to operate dispensaries in the state of Colorado. Nor will known drug dealers, this makes sense if you look at it from the other side of the fence.

We are supposed to accept this?? Even if it harms patients AND the public good for ALL Coloradoans?? Face it though, we are not talking about pedophiles or bank robbers. We are talking about people with drug convictions. Let's put it another way; we are talking about the PROFESSIONALS of the cannabis world. These peoples' "moral character" is being judged based on the very laws we are now slowly accepting as unjust and outdated. These are PRECISELY the people we want informing public policy and helping to establish (with regulation) the industry. Even from the other side of the fence this DOES NOT make sense if you critically look at the ramifications of EXCLUDING them. Ever hear the expression "keep your friends close and your enemies closer?" How is regulation effective if the very people needing regulation are forced back into the darkness outside the gaze of government??? I'm mean DUH!!

Disclaimer: you CAN run a dispensary if you are a criminal. you CAN run a dispensary for the next 11 1/2 months.

Well, not true if one is smart. The applications are still due and anyone with a spotty record would be foolish-insane to apply and try to operate for a year. The invasive nature of the application review process makes legal risk VERY likely for all but the squeaky cleanest.

I'd also like to address the untenable position that dispensary owners should not be investigated. This silly idea that dispensary owners backgrounds should not be turned inside out and upside down.

BULL!!! A simple CBI check like that done for people in emergency services is sufficient. What the state wants is total transparency which is ludicrous. As I said before, we all know anyone who knows what they are doing in our industry has w/o a doubt acquired that knowledge illegally. It is enough to determine if we are felons etc w/o the need to pry through our every financial record in search of impropriety. I mean jeezus people, we are cannabis cultivators not nuns and monks!! (OK, bad example maybe...)

Lets not fight, let's support this new priveledged class by showing them some respect and helping them pay the incredible $635 per month they need to pay the state on top of their rent, electric bill, security/alarm bill, consultation fees to remain hippa compliant, overpriced legal fees which can easily beat $1000 per month.

WTF, SCREW that. Were were they supporting US when we tried to be more in step with the law by discreetly setting up small caregiver businesses w/o a retail outlet?? Oh yeah, they were the ones gobbling up our extra meds because most of them were just glorrified pushers who could not produce their own with even close to matching quality. Now we are supposed to applaud and help finance them?? Huh??? Even for the good Centers who fortunately have quality medicinal producers on their staff, why should we "help" them when the result is still inevitably overpriced meds due to everhead and obscene "taxing??" Seriously, this makes no sense to me....

Help our local friends and neighbors build their businesses so we can all enjoy the fruit of their labor at a reasonable price.

First off, what leads you to assume the owners have any longtime investment in CO?? Read the law and open your eyes to reality. Many of these operators are well-funded relative newcomers who came to CO specifically to profit off our patients' rights. In most cases there is no altruism or overriding care for us, our state, or our patients. This is about MONEY for them. This is why loads of real caregivers rejected the "Dispensary" model because they knew true care/compassion comes from a personal relationship with the patients. This is also why PCs generally are the ones able and willing to provide free medicine to patients in need. "Centers" cannot or will not do so on any comparable level. So why are we supposed to support them and hurt patients??? Also, what is a "reasonable price?" How is this determined by a profit-based, retail model that generalizes all patients?? At least we as caregivers with low overhead can give QPs to fixed income, home bound patients who cannot afford their other daily meds much less a "reasonable" $300/oz price for the multiple ounces they consume per month....

Warning, if you do not support your local dispensary you will soon find that pot prices will go WAY WAY up and supplies will dwindle as dispensary owners with little experience and no help from you start to grow their own and fail.

Don't hate dispensary owners, hate the fear.

Again, this makes no sense. By "support," you mean with dollars in this new legal environment. Other means of "support" are cut off to us. We cannot sell them better product and we cannot help them grow better w/o being part of the "Center." All we can do is send our former patients to them (and why would we send them to an inferior provider??) and cheer them from the sidelines. Yes, THEIR prices may rise but with the bifurcation of the industry there will again be a black market absolutely flooded with meds. Their will be tons of black market meds of all quality and a range of price from cheap to tiptop for the best quality. This system ensures a restructuring of quality med distribution that does nothing if not hurt the patients.

So given this reality imposed by the new law, remind me why we are childlike whiners and why we should happily support the new "Center" model that f*cks up much of the beneficial changes we all worked for in the past years???