CVIndependent

Sun09242017

Last updateFri, 16 Sep 2016 12pm

Legalizing marijuana, California voters were told last year, would create a “safe, legal and comprehensive system” allowing adults to consume the drug while keeping it out of the hands of children.

Marijuana would be sold in highly regulated stores, the Proposition 64 campaign promised, and California would gain new tax revenue by bringing the cannabis marketplace “out into the open.”

Voters overwhelmingly bought the message, with 57 percent approving Proposition 64. But as state regulators prepare to begin offering licenses to marijuana businesses on Jan. 1, it turns out that a huge portion of the state’s weed is likely to remain on the black market.

That’s because California grows a lot more pot than its residents consume, and Prop 64 only makes marijuana legal within the state’s borders. It also didn’t give an automatic seal of approval to every cannabis grower: Those who want to sell legally must be licensed by the state and comply with detailed rules that require testing plants, labeling packages and tracking marijuana as it moves from farm to bong.

Exactly how much cannabis circulates in California is unknown, because most marijuana grows—and purchases—have been illegal for so long. But economists hired by the state government estimate that California farms produce about 13.5 million pounds of cannabis each year, while state residents annually consume about 2.5 million pounds. That leaves 11 million pounds of pot that likely flows out of California illegally, according to the economic report commissioned by the California Department of Food and Agriculture, which regulates cannabis farmers. Other analyses have similarly found that roughly 80 percent of California-grown marijuana leaves the state.

Even the 2.5 million pounds of marijuana consumed within California won’t all be purchased through state-sanctioned shops when they open; the economists predict about half of it will probably be sold illegally.

“Those sales opportunities will still be there,” said Hezekiah Allen, executive director of the California Growers Association, which represents more than 1,000 marijuana businesses in the state.

Allen surveyed his members recently and found that 85 percent hope to get a license to sell marijuana legally under Prop 64. But many fear they won’t be able to, because some local governments limit or ban pot businesses, and because prices could drop too low in the regulated market. If they can’t sell weed legally, 40 percent of the respondents to Allen’s survey said they would continue operating the way they always have: on the black market.

Some long-time cannabis growers will likely go out of business, Allen said. But, “at the end of the day, a lot of businesses in general may stay outside of the regulated market.”

That means that despite the passage of Prop 64, California cops will still have plenty of work going after illicit cannabis operations.

“You’re going to see robust enforcement efforts to prevent California from becoming the staging area for drug trafficking nationwide,” said John Lovell, a lobbyist for the California Narcotics Officers Association, which opposed the ballot measure.

A spokesman for the Prop 64 campaign said the measure wasn’t intended to abolish all criminalization of marijuana, but instead to allow opportunities for “operators who want to be responsible and compliant.”

“No one ever promised to completely eliminate the black market—that’s like promising security cameras will completely eliminate shoplifting—but it will be significantly reduced,” spokesman Jason Kinney said by email.

He added that the state’s estimates of marijuana supply and demand are unreliable, because the legal marketplace created by Prop 64 won’t begin to roll out until next year. And he pointed out that some of the tax dollars generated by legal marijuana sales will go toward cracking down on illicit operations.

State officials said they are encouraging marijuana businesses to follow the rules and become part of the regulated system, while also planning how to go after those that remain in the black market.

“We are developing a formal complaint system that will allow anyone to report illegal grows or other concerns, and then we will forward those potential issues to the appropriate (law enforcement) agencies,” said Rebecca Forée, a spokeswoman for the state’s cannabis cultivation licensing office within the Department of Food and Agriculture.

Lori Ajax, chief of the state’s Bureau of Cannabis Control, said her agency is trying to entice marijuana businesses to go legit by crafting rules that aren’t too difficult for them to live by.

“It’s making sure that for those people who want to be in the regulated market … we have made a path for them; we’re not making our regulations so difficult and hard to comply with that you’re discouraging people,” Ajax said.

“First, we’ve got to get those folks in there and … then see what comes after that with enforcement.”

CALmatters.org is a nonprofit, nonpartisan media venture explaining California policies and politics. For more analysis by Laurel Rosenhall, go to calmatters.org/articles/category/california/politics.

Published in Cannabis in the CV

Following the lead of other Coachella Valley cities, Palm Springs has entered the commercial-cultivation game with the approval of the city’s first growing greenhouse.

The city granted the permit to Palm Springs Safe Access, which operates a medical dispensary on Gene Autry Trail. The grow will be located on 14 acres of land that PSSA owns in north Palm Springs, and will be in a 36,000-square-foot greenhouse.

PSSA president and co-founder Robert Van Roo plans to produce organic cannabis using sustainable cultivation methods.

There has been talk among Palm Springs city officials about the possibility of increasing cannabis taxes to alleviate impending pension woes. However, in an interview with the Independent, Van Roo reiterated his commitment to the city.

“This is the first phase of a 14-acre parcel, and we’ll be submitting plans for the next phase to the planning department sometime in the next 45 days or so,” he said. “Palm Springs Safe Access has always been supportive of the city of Palm Springs, and our ultimate goal is to help our community.”

Groundbreaking on the first phase should happen by the end of the year, and Van Roo hopes it will be operational within four months of that.

Meanwhile, neighboring Cathedral City’s City Council has decided the town has reached a saturation point with dispensaries, enacting a ban on new ones south of Interstate 10—but cultivation is another story. In July, the city issued 18 cultivation and dispensary licenses to CP Logistics, a wholly owned subsidiary of Calgary-based Sunniva Holdings Corp. With existing operations in British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan, Sunniva hopes to cash in on the biggest weed market in the U.S. with its foray into the Golden State.

“We are entering the California market with plans for a remarkably efficient and large-scale facility—one that will benefit from California’s abundant natural sunlight to deliver low-cost, high-quality medical products at scale,” said Dr. Anthony Holler, CEO of Sunniva, in a news release. “The award of these licenses and additional acreage puts in place the essential elements for us to move forward with Sunrise Campus as we envision it.”

The company increased its Cathedral City land holdings to 20 acres with the recent purchase of 14 additional acres. The land will be home to a large-scale greenhouse operation producing medical cannabis.

The Cathedral City facility will be constructed in two phases. Phase 1—breaking ground in the next couple of months—is scheduled for completion in the spring of 2018. This first phase is projected to produce around 90 tons of flower product per year. The addition of Phase 2 in late 2018 is projected to add another 49 tons per year.

A conditional use permit (CUP) hearing for Phase 1 is set for Aug. 2. These hearings determine whether a permit is issued to let construction begin. Citizens of Cathedral City have 10 days to file an objection, and if an objection is filed, the decision is made by the City Council.


Dispensaries ARE Good for the Community

We in the Coachella Valley are aware of the financial rewards some local cities are enjoying from the cannabis biz. But what about the effects on neighborhoods and crime?

For years, we’ve heard NIMBY prohibitionists claim dispensaries cause an increase in crime in the surrounding neighborhoods (a claim that has been debunked repeatedly). But what about when dispensaries close—are they such crime deterrents that their absence is actually detrimental? A recent study published by the Harvard Business Review says yes.

Using data collected before and after 2010’s shuttering of more than 400 dispensaries in Los Angeles, authors Tom Y. Chang and Mireille Jacobson of the Harvard Business Center were able to determine the closing of dispensaries led to a marked increase in crime in the immediate area. They found the types of crimes to increase are those typically deterred by foot traffic and bystanders, like car theft and property crimes. In fact, the authors concluded: “Open dispensaries provide over $30,000 per year in social benefit in terms of larcenies prevented.”

Of course, these findings were welcomed by marijuana advocates.

“These conclusions are consistent with prior research indicating that dispensaries contribute to neighborhood safety by hiring doormen and taking other steps to deter local criminal activity,” said NORML deputy director Paul Armentano in an email. “Such well-regulated establishments can play a positive role in the improved safety and wellness of a community.”


Cannabis-Infused Coffee Pods!

In a blatant attempt to take all of my money, San Diego company Cannabiniers has introduced Brewbudz—cannabis-infused coffee, tea and cocoa pods for your Keurig coffee maker.

“What we are aspiring to create is the normalization of cannabis consumption in a way that integrates with consumers’ already established habits and lifestyles,” said Timothy Walters, president of Cannabiniers, in a news release. “Brewbudz is our way of providing consumers with a natural, safe and chemical-free way to consume cannabis’ natural compounds, combined with an everyday behavior—coffee/tea drinking, that is both socially acceptable and discreet.”

But what about all of that packaging? In keeping with its motto—“Good for you. Good for the Earth.”—the company has developed a 100 percent compostable brew pod. The rigid top ring of the pod is made from the skin of roasted coffee beans and other compostable matter, and the lid and mesh are made from fully compostable materials and inks.

For coffee, there’s West Coast Roast, made from “responsibly sourced” 100 percent Arabica beans in regular and decaf. French vanilla and hazelnut are on the way, according the company’s website. For tea-lovers, Cannabiniers offers artisan tea featuring the “most delicious tea leaves and high-quality cannabis to create exhilarating blends that delight the senses,” available in black, green and herbal varieties. Just in case weed-infused tea isn’t mellow enough for you, chamomile is coming soon.

They recommend the Decadent Dark Chocolate cocoa as a weed aperitif, but it sounds like the perfect end to a day of snowboarding, too.

Pods are available in THC contents of 10 mg, 25 mg and 50 mg, and are available in Indica or Sativa. The company claims there is virtually no cannabis smell or flavor in the prepared beverages.

For now, Brewbudz is only available in Nevada, but California and Colorado are on deck! Visit brewbudz.us for more information.

Published in Cannabis in the CV

Dear Mexican: Los Marijuanos played at Seattle Hempfest years ago. Are they the best pro-hemp Mexican band out there? Are there other Mexican hemp-related bands or products out there that I don’t know about?

Inquring Hempsters Want to Know!

Dear Gabacho: Remember Platoon, and how the troops were broken up between the “tweakers”—those who enjoyed the ganga while singing along to “The Tracks of My Tears” by Smokey Robinson and the Miracles—and the angry drunks who were known as “juicers”? The Mexican is definitely the latter: I’m like the old men in the rancho who drink 180-proof sugarcane alcohol and can’t be bothered with herb, so my knowledge of products is limited to whatever my home newspaper plugs on potplus.com.

That said, #respect to those of ustedes who do smoke—Mexican musicians have been on that bit long before “Reefer Man.” “La Cucaracha” has a line about how former President Victoriano Huerta could no longer walk because he lacked marijuana pa’ fumar—to smoke. “El Tírili” (The Reefer Man), by Don Tosti’s Pachuco Boogie Boys, warns people about the dangers of beer, wine and tequila. But el zacatito? The grass? “Ayyyy,” Tosti sighs, before scatting so furiously that he makes Cab Calloway seem as restrained as Paul Robeson.

But the best Mexican musical marijuana masterpiece is “Marihuana Boogie,” by the legendary Lalo Guerrero, who combined the best of Benny Goodman and Cypress Hill to sing about the pleasure of getting lit while dancing your nalgas off. Too bad narcocorridos don’t have as much grace …

Dear Mexican: Do you think legalizing marijuana in Mexico would be a good way to create jobs and better the economy?

Chapo Chupa

Dear Pocho: Mexico just legalized medicinal marijuana nationwide, which will come as news to the abuelitas who have used marijuana-infused alcohol to treat sore joints and muscles for centuries. While the Mexican is in favor of the decriminalization of all drugs everywhere, any economy created by Mexico making marijuana a legal industry will become subservient to the real marijuanos: Americans. And we all know how well NAFTA worked out for Mexico.

Dear Mexican: I’ve heard that marijuana is a made-up name for smokable cannabis. It comes from Maria and Juan. This pejorative term was concocted in the 1930s to stigmatize pot-smoking by linking it with Mexicans in the Southwest. During the 1930s Great Depression, there was a surplus of labor in America, and attempts were made to arrest Mexicans for their smoking habits and then deport them. Any truth to this?

Etymology Edna

Dear Gabacha: Only that there was a Great Depression. No one—not even the Real Academia Española—knows the etymology of “marijuana,” and it’s found in Mexican newspapers going back to the 19th century. Marijuana use in the United States has always been racialized, but gabachos have also stuck the demon weed to Filipinos, blacks and “Hindoos.” As with most illicit, wonderful things, marijuana only became acceptable when white people began using it.

I’d end with a joke, but my marijuana humor begins and ends with a line that once came out in a Cheech and Chong movie: “Hey, that’s a pretty nice car, man. Better get it back to the circus before they find out it’s gone.” Um, yeah …

Ask the Mexican at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.; be his fan on Facebook; follow him on Twitter @gustavoarellano; or follow him on Instagram @gustavo_arellano!

Published in Ask a Mexican

No, Jefferson. Let it go …

Our evil elf of a U.S attorney general is whining about pot again, this time in a letter asking Congress not to renew the Rohrabacher-Farr amendment.

The Rohrabacher-Farr amendment, which became law in December of 2014, prohibits the Department of Justice from spending any federal funds to interfere with state medical cannabis laws. It must be renewed each year—and Sessions is requesting it not be renewed this time around.

“I believe it would be unwise for Congress to restrict the discretion of the department to fund particular prosecutions, particularly in the midst of an historic drug epidemic and potentially long-term uptick in violent crime. The department must be in a position to use all laws available to combat the transnational drug organizations and dangerous drug traffickers who threaten American lives,” Sessions wrote in the letter, first made public by Tom Angell of MassRoots.com.

This comes at a time when an overwhelming majority of Americans (including 65 percent of police officers!) are in favor of some form of legalization, and more and more states are starting to legalize marijuana for recreational use.

One of the law’s namesakes expressed annoyance with Sessions’ letter.

“Mr. Sessions stands athwart an overwhelming majority of Americans and even, sadly, against veterans and other suffering Americans who we now know conclusively are helped dramatically by medical marijuana.” said Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a Republican who represents parts of Orange County, in a statement to the Washington Post.

Opioids are at the center of the worst drug epidemic facing Americans today—while marijuana is decidedly not. However, to Sessions, there is virtually no difference between opioids and marijuana, considering he recently described pot as just “slightly less awful” than heroin. Of course, the American Journal of Public Health published a study in September 2016 citing evidence that opioid use is lower in states with legal medical marijuana, but what do they know with their “statistics?” Pesky facts …

The DOJ actually challenged the amendment under President Obama, but it was upheld by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. This ruling leaves it up to Congress to decide whether to remove Rohrabacher-Farr from the yearly appropriations bill—but the amendment has received strong bipartisan support ever since it became law. Conventional wisdom dictates that Congress would be reluctant to go against the clear will of the people, but how often does conventional wisdom come into play in Washington, D.C., these days?

California is having none of this nonsense, and is making moves to become the first sanctuary state for cannabis. In anticipation of a legal showdown with Sessions’ DOJ, the State Assembly passed AB 1578 on June 1; the bill would prohibit state and local law enforcement from helping the feds enforce federal prohibitions against those adhering to California state law. The bill by Assemblyman Reggie Jones-Sawyer, a Los Angeles Democrat, passed in a close 41-33 vote.

The measure faces stiff opposition by law enforcement and Republicans, for reasons ranging from interference in federal and local interagency cooperation regarding other crimes, to claims that it violates federal law.

“The hubris of California Democrats believing they can flout federal law on immigration and drug policy is beyond words,” said Assemblyman Travis Allen (R-Huntington Beach) during the floor debate.

Jones-Sawyer’s retort: “AB 1578 ensures that our limited local and state resources are not spent on federal marijuana enforcement against individuals and entities that are in compliance with our laws.”

Rep. Rob Bonta (D-Alameda), a co-author of the bill, said: “People who are compliant with California law and operate within the legal cannabis market should not have to fear that a state or local agency will participate in efforts to punish or incarcerate them for activity that the state and its voters have deemed legal,” according to a Los Angeles Times report.

The Tenth Amendment Center, a constitutional-law and states’ rights advocacy group, claims there is solid legal standing for the measure. “Provisions withdrawing state and local enforcement of federal law in AB 1578 rest on a well-established legal principle known as the anti-commandeering doctrine. Simply put, the federal government cannot force states to help implement or enforce any federal act or program,” founder Michael Boldin said in a post on the group’s website.

Jones-Sawyer said the bill could be edited to make it clear that cooperation in moving against illegal operations according to state law could continue. A Newsweek report estimated that 1,400 dispensaries are operating illegally in Los Angeles alone, and Jones-Sawyer would like those businesses shuttered, while protecting those adhering to local and state law.

The bill faces an uncertain future as it moves to the State Senate.


MEANWHILE, HERE IN THE VALLEY…

The City Council of Cathedral City recently passed a moratorium on new dispensaries south of Interstate 10.

The city of 53,000 has 10 licensed dispensaries operating, with another opening soon—that’s around 4,800 residents per dispensary. By comparison, Palm Springs has six dispensaries servicing 44,552 residents (or 7,452 residents per dispensary). The move is designed to help ensure the continued success of existing dispensaries in what is a comparatively saturated market.

Cathedral City dispensaries may also see fewer customers in the future, as Palm Desert and Coachella are slowly moving toward allowing retail cannabis businesses.

The measure passed 3-2, with Greg Pettis and Shelley Kaplan opposing.

Published in Cannabis in the CV

The California Department of Public Health has issued proposed rules for the cannabis industry in anticipation of the Proposition 64 provisions that will take effect next year.

Voters legalized the adult use of marijuana via Prop 64 last year.

The proposed rules require applicants who wish to grow, transport or sell marijuana for medical use to get a license from the state’s Bureau of Medical Cannabis Regulation, and pass a background check. People who transport marijuana between farms and dispensaries would be prohibited from owning said marijuana, and must be at least 21.

The rules establish a track-and-trace system that would monitor cannabis products through the supply chain. Individual plants would be tracked from seeds and buds to processing facilities. Dispensaries would no longer be able to package products in-house or be allowed to give out free samples. Delivery service would be an option if abiding by strict rules—governing everything from volume to the types of vehicles used.

One proposed rule that will surely meet with opposition from the industry is a provision that edibles have no more than 10 milligrams of THC per serving, and no more than 100 milligrams of THC in the total package. There currently is no such limit, and some companies are specializing in ultra-potent edibles; consumers are eating them up. Many would argue that this per-serving limit is impractically small, especially for those with medical needs for higher doses. These complaints, however, will most likely lead to no changes in the rules. Colorado and Washington both limit edibles to 10 mg per serving and 100 mg per package.

Other proposed rules include:

• Packaging must not appeal to children.

• Cannabis may not be infused into alcohol, nicotine or caffeine products.

• Dispensary hours of operation will be limited to the hours between 6 a.m. and 9 p.m.

• 42 percent of electricity for indoor commercial cultivation must come from renewable sources.

• Concentrated products like extracts and tinctures could contain up to 1,000 milligrams per package.

• All cannabis business would need to be at least 600 feet away from schools.

• All products would be required to leave sales points in child-resistant containers.

• Cannabis farms would be limited to 4 acres.

• Licenses for veterans and cannabis businesses in good standing as of Jan. 1, 2016, would receive priority consideration.

Tuesday, June 13, is the last day for the public to submit written comments. More information can be found at cannabis.ca.gov.


California AG Ready to Fight for Cannabis in Jeff Sessions’ Drug War

Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a memo to federal prosecutors calling on them to push for prosecution of the most-serious charges possible in drug cases—especially those with mandatory minimum sentences.

Vanita Gupta, the former head of the U.S. Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, told Yahoo! News that the memo was a “resounding step backwards into the 1980s of failed policies in our criminal justice system that resulted in us having the highest incarceration rate of industrialized nations in the world. It’s a real throwback in a lot of ways, and very troubling.”

Former Attorney General Eric Holder was unrestrained in his contempt for Sessions’ new directive. “The policy announced today is not tough on crime. It is dumb on crime. It is an ideologically motivated, cookie-cutter approach that has only been proven to generate unfairly long sentences that are often applied indiscriminately and do little to achieve long-term public safety,” Holder said in a statement.

Sessions has repeatedly claimed that drug use—including cannabis—is behind a violent crime epidemic sweeping the nation. (For the record, crime rates nationwide remain dramatically lower than they were in the ’80s and ’90s.)

Congress has already limited Sessions’ ability to extend his renewed drug war to legal weed, and has denied federal funding of any efforts to prosecute cannabis businesses that are legal according to state laws, thanks to a rider to the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2017. Section 537 states: “None of the funds made available in this Act to the Department of Justice may be used” with respect to states with legal medical weed “to prevent any of them from implementing their own laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession or cultivation of medical marijuana.”

However, President Trump has the industry and its proponents worried a bit by his signing statement attached to the bill. Among the points of disagreement highlighted by the president was the provision that prohibits the feds from interfering with state-legal medical-marijuana programs. While signing statements are not policy, some worry it could signal future changes in policy where federal enforcement is concerned. This budget bill will be in effect through Sept. 30.

In an interview with Politico California, state Attorney General Xavier Becerra indicated that California is unwilling to yield on its marijuana laws, and would not back down from a battle in the face of a federal crackdown.

“I would love to see Jeff Sessions come to California and tell us we’re not going to move forward on cannabis. Something tells me that it’s not gonna happen,” Becerra said. “I’ll probably be the 1 millionth person in line to fight Jeff Sessions on that.”

He continued: “Cannabis is last century’s argument. We’re beyond that.”

Published in Cannabis in the CV

On March 15, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, while addressing a law enforcement conference in Richmond, Va., said: “I realize this may be an unfashionable belief in a time of growing tolerance of drug use, but too many lives are at stake to worry about being fashionable. I reject the idea that America will be a better place if marijuana is sold in every corner store, and I am astonished to hear people suggest that we can solve our heroin crisis by legalizing marijuana—so people can trade one life-wrecking dependency for another that’s only slightly less awful.”

Yes, the attorney general of the United States just said marijuana is “only slightly less awful” than heroin.

This isn’t a question of being “unfashionable,” but of the AG being factually wrong about the effects of two very different drugs. While some cannabis industry and advocacy groups have forced a smile and tried to paint a green-tinted picture of states’ rights, Trump likes medical cannabis, it’ll all be OK, yadda yadda yadda, how can we not see a difficult future ahead for cannabis when America’s top cop is so glaringly ignorant in his crusade against it?

“With over 600,000 arrests a year, the only thing life-wrecking about marijuana is its prohibition,” said Erik Altieri, NORML’s executive director, in a statement the day of Sessions’ speech.

Sessions spoke with reporters after his speech in Richmond.

“I think medical marijuana has been hyped, maybe too much,” Sessions said, according to various media sources. “Dosages can be constructed in a way that might be beneficial, I acknowledge that, but if you smoke marijuana, for example, where you have no idea how much THC you’re getting, it’s probably not a good way to administer a medicinal amount. So forgive me if I’m a bit dubious about that.”

Steph Sherer, executive director of Americans for Safe Access, countered Sessions’ remarks in a statement issued the same day.

“Statements like these from the Attorney General are factually inaccurate,” Sherer said. “In January, the National Academies of Sciences, Medicine, and Engineering released a report that reviewed over 10,000 research articles, which states there is conclusive, moderate, and substantial evidence for benefits of cannabis in several conditions. Sessions needs to stop spreading unfounded, unscientific theories about medical marijuana and take the time to actually meet the millions of Americans that are benefitting from its use before making comments about it being over-hyped.”

President Trump said he was “100 percent” in favor of medical marijuana during the campaign. But White House press secretary Sean Spicer recently clarified that the president sees a “big difference” between medical and recreational use.

As we’ve seen in the days since the inauguration, things are moving fast on all fronts in the Trump era. Those wishing to preserve and even further legalization must not be reactionary in their activism. There is too much at stake to take a wait-and-see position.

One productive way to be proactive in the defense and progress of legalization is to participate in and support the organizations that have been fighting this battle for decades—and will be on the front lines in the coming years.

National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws

norml.org

Keith Stroup was smoking with Ralph Nader’s legal team in 1970 when someone suggested he ask Hugh Hefner’s Playboy Foundation for a grant to fund his fledgling pro-pot organization. Hefner approved a grant of $5,000, and NORML was born. By the mid-1970s, Hef was donating $100,000 a year to NORML. It was this support that helped make NORML the premier pro-pot organization.

NORML now boasts 135 chapters and a network of more than 500 lawyers. With legalization becoming more of a reality, NORML has edited its mission to “move public opinion sufficiently to legalize the responsible use of marijuana by adults, and to serve as an advocate for consumers to assure they have access to high quality marijuana that is safe, convenient and affordable.”

Americans for Safe Access

www.safeaccessnow.org

The ASA is a medical marijuana advocacy group founded in 2002 by medi-pot patient Steph Sherer. The mission is “to ensure safe and legal access to cannabis (marijuana) for therapeutic use and research.”

ASA is the largest national member-based organization of medical professionals, patients and scientists promoting medical use and research, with more than 100,000 active members in all 50 states.

Brownie Mary Democratic Club of Riverside County

www.browniemaryclub.org

If you’re looking for a way to get involved locally, stay informed on the latest developments, and meet like-minded individuals, check out the Brownie Mary Democratic Club of Riverside County. Founded by activist Lanny Swerdlow, it is believed to be the first political-party-affiliated cannabis advocacy group in California. It is named for Mary Jane Rathbun, who got the nickname “Brownie Mary” for illegally baking and distributing cannabis brownies to AIDS patients while volunteering at San Francisco General Hospital.

Meetings are held the first Saturday of every month at 11:30 a.m. at Crystal Fantasy, 268 N. Palm Canyon Drive, in Palm Springs.

Marijuana Policy Project

mpp.org

Founded in 1995, the MPP deals with lobbying and ballot initiatives. The MPP PAC, founded in 2003, donates to key congressional candidates. The mission is to affect federal law, to allow states enact to their own marijuana policies without federal interference, and to regulate marijuana like alcohol nationwide. In terms of budget, members and staff, the Marijuana Policy Project is the largest national organization working specifically on marijuana policy reform.

Drug Policy Alliance

www.drugpolicy.org

The DPA takes an active role in the legislative process, and its goals include rolling back the excessive laws of the War on Drugs, blocking harmful initiatives, and pushing for sensible drug-policy reforms.

Considering the mixed (or worse) signals we’re getting from the current administration, it is clear that the fight for legalization and acceptance is far from over. We must not rest on recent victories. We must remain vigilant, and we must let our representatives know that we support the legalization of cannabis. When the will of the people is ignored in favor of a self-righteous crusade with no base in science or democracy, we must resist. Joining, supporting, and participating in these organizations shows that we are unified—and that we are not going anywhere.

Published in Cannabis in the CV

The different reactions to marijuana legalization by Coachella Valley’s cities have been varied … to say the least.

Palm Springs has always been forward-thinking where cannabis is concerned, and Desert Hot Springs, Cathedral City and Coachella are now wisely looking to cash in on the green rush. Meanwhile, Palm Desert and Rancho Mirage are going in the other direction by doing their best to slow access—or ban weed altogether.

Now Indian Wells has enacted the most draconian policies yet in the wake of Proposition 64’s November voter approval.

Indian Wells recently passed an ordinance that requires residents who wish to grow marijuana at home for personal use, as allowed by Prop 64, to register with City Hall for a permit—and pay a $141-per-year fee.

Marijuana activists and legal experts alike are attacking the law as unconstitutional, but that didn’t prevent the City Council from passing the ordinance in a 4-1 vote.

Councilman Ty Peabody abstained. Later, according to The Desert Sun, he commented: “I just don’t believe in marijuana,” citing the continuing federal ban.

(What does that even mean? Has he been under a rock the last couple decades?)

In addition to the yearly fee attached to the permit, Indian Wells residents would be required by law to allow city employees to inspect their homes to determine compliance with state and local laws.

While Prop 64 does allow jurisdictions to enact reasonable regulations on a local level, the Indian Wells’ requirements represent a vast overreach, according to multiple experts on the law. In fact, Paul Armentano, deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), said this may the tightest regulation passed in California to date.

“Proposition 64 states: ‘A city, county, or city and county may enact and enforce reasonable regulations to reasonably regulate’ the indoor cultivation of marijuana by adults,” Armentano told the Independent via e-mail. “However, this proposal clearly stretches the idea of what would be considered ‘reasonable.’ We would not expect adults to register with the city or to submit to inspections of their home if they were brewing their own alcohol, and we should not expect adults to give up their civil liberties and privacy rights to engage in indoor marijuana gardening—activity that is now perfectly legal under state law.”

Dale Gieringer, the director of California NORML, also compared home growers of marijuana to home brewers, and questioned the usefulness of such a law.

“We believe the Indian Wells ordinance violates Prop 64,” he said. “Prop 64 authorizes ‘reasonable’ regulations of personal-use cultivation. Why doesn’t it impose the same regulations on indoor growing of all plants, or on home brewing of beer and wine? This is an obnoxious exercise in over-regulation and an affront to personal privacy. Don’t Indian Wells officials have anything better to do?”

“Unconstitutional” and “crazy” are words used to describe the ordinance by attorney and cannabis law expert Omar Figueroa of Sonoma County. In a conversation with The Desert Sun, he cited the 1969 U.S. Supreme Court Case Leary v. United States, which ruled that “self-incrimination” can’t be required by state or local agencies, due to the Fifth Amendment.

“It’s not a constitutionally enforceable law,” he told The Desert Sun. “It would be foolish of them to enforce it.”

Joy Brown Meredith, the founder and president of Joy of Life Wellness Center, Palm Springs’ sixth licensed dispensary, said she’s happy to be located in a less-restrictive Coachella Valley city.

“I’m glad Palm Springs is more progressive than Indian Wells,” she said. “What is the purpose of the permit and all the identification requirements if not to intimidate people to feel uneasy about growing this amazing plant?”

Indian Wells, Rancho Mirage, Palm Desert, Indio and La Quinta have banned dispensaries and cultivation. The city of Coachella allows manufacturing and cultivation in a specific zone of the city, but not dispensaries or delivery.

Rancho Mirage and Indian Wells recently amended their respective bans to include recreational marijuana businesses in the wake of Prop 64.


DEA: CBD and all other cannabis extracts are on Schedule I

Continuing its steady march backward, the Drug Enforcement Administration has lumped all marijuana extracts—including CBD—into marijuana’s Schedule I classification, making every form of the cannabis plant illegal under federal law.

The new code defines extracts as “containing one or more cannabinoids that (have) been derived from any plant of the genus Cannabis, other than the separated resin (whether crude or purified) obtained from the plant.”

The DEA says it’s merely a way to keep better track of research and shipments of extracts versus flowers, by assigning extracts their own code. But the new rule states clearly: “For practical purposes, all extracts that contain CBD will also contain at least small amounts of other cannabinoids. … However, if it were possible to produce from the cannabis plant an extract that contained only CBD and no other cannabinoids, such an extract would fall within the new drug code.”

CBD occurs naturally in cannabis, but unlike THC, it doesn’t get the user high. CBD has been successful in the treatment of tumors, epilepsy, chronic pain and many other ailments. To date, CBD has been legalized in 20 states and Washington, D.C., for medicinal use. While these state laws will not be affected by the new code, those laws will now be more specifically in conflict with federal law.

Congress could still act to reschedule CBD and other extracts. The Cannabidiol Research Expansion Act was introduced in the Senate last year to ease research restrictions on CBD, but stalled—despite support from both sides of the aisle.

Currently, the federal government has a laissez-faire stance regarding state cannabis laws; in other words, the feds are letting states call the shots for their citizens. However, considering the anti-pot crusaders prevalent in the incoming Trump administration—including Vice President-elect Mike Pence and attorney general pick Ken “good people don’t smoke marijuana” Sessions—one must wonder how long that attitude will last.

Published in Cannabis in the CV

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair.

OK, sure, there are one or two issues more important than cannabis legalization. Maybe three. And while the idea of making America great again seems horribly ironic to many right now, cannabis legalization scored unprecedented victories across the country this November.

On the medicinal front: A stunning 63.8 percent of North Dakota voters legalized medicinal use. The state has 90 days from the election to implement the law statewide.

However, Arkansas was the big surprise, as it became the first Bible Belt state to legalize cannabis for medicinal use. Arkansas’ governor, former Drug Enforcement Administration chief and outspoken cannabis opponent Asa Hutchinson, has indicated he will accept the will of the people and allow the law to go into effect without interference.

After failing in 2014 (even though a majority of voters said yes; a 60 percent supermajority was required), Florida voted overwhelmingly to legalize medicinal weed: 71 percent of voters were in favor, but much remains to be seen regarding how Gov. Rick Scott’s administration will implement the law.

As for recreational marijuana, Nevada was a big question mark heading into Election Day, but despite casino mogul Sheldon Adelson’s best efforts (he supplied 97 percent of the opposition funding), 54 percent of Silver State voters ended up in favor of legalization. Nevada was already ahead of the cannabis-tourism game by accepting medical recommendations from other states, and recreational use will surely be a further boon for the travel industry. The personal use and possession components of the law go into effect on Jan. 1, 2017. However, lighting up in public will still get you a $600 fine. Also: Don’t expect pot shops to start popping up on The Strip anytime soon. The state is not expecting to start taking license applications until the beginning of 2018.

Some 54 percent of Massachusetts voters thought legalizing was a good idea, too. Once the law goes into effect in December of this year, adults 21 and older can possess up to 10 ounces of cannabis at home, and 1 ounce in public.

Maine approved legalization in a real nail-biter of an election. The measure passed by just more than 2,600 votes—less than 1 percent. Opponents of the law have already demanded a recount, and anti-pot crusader Gov. Paul LePage has indicated he may challenge the law.

Arizona’s failed Proposition 205 was the low point of the state elections; it was the only cannabis-related state initiative to fail, receiving just 48.5 percent of the vote.

Here in California, Proposition 64 passed by a comfortable margin—surprising no one. The home cultivation, possession and consumption components went into effect immediately.

What’s allowed:

  • Consumption of cannabis in private homes.
  • Possession of up to an ounce of flower and up to 8 grams of concentrate.
  • Growing up to six cannabis plants and keeping the harvested product in a private home. (Product harvested from your own grow is exempt from the one ounce limit.)
  • Giving up to an ounce of flower and up to eight grams of concentrate to another adult.

The first commercial-permit applications are expected around the beginning of 2018, with stores opening a couple of months later. If the Washington and Colorado examples hold true, demand will skyrocket, while newly licensed commercial growers get up and running, resulting in a temporary shortage.

Prop 64 removes virtually all penalties for those 21 and older, and replaces criminal charges with drug education for those younger than 18. You can get busted for smoking in public, and you can still get fired for failing a drug test. In a weird loophole … if you’re 18-20 years old, you got screwed: Possession of more than an ounce can now mean 6 months in jail. If an adult shares cannabis with someone younger than 21, he or she could face six months behind bars and a $500 fine. Something to think about the next time you’re passing a joint around at a concert …

California is the sixth-largest economy in the world, so Prop 64 passing is the brass ring for the legalization movement.

In Colorado, the push toward further legalization received a boost when Denver passed Initiative 300, which allows businesses to permit social consumption of cannabis on their premises. This opens the door to smoking weed in bars, cafes and other public spaces.

While the news regarding legalization was great on the state and local levels (outside of Arizona, that is), the national results were not quite as encouraging: With election of The Donald and Republicans in control of both houses of Congress, don’t expect federal prohibition to end any time soon. While Trump himself has indicated he would defer to the states to set medicinal cannabis law, Vice President-elect Mike Pence’s influence remains to be seen. Pence is a long-time proponent of the War on Drugs and believes in jail time for minimal possession. Pence’s role in leading Trump’s transition team indicates he will have an active role in the administration. This also means the DEA will be under no pressure to remove marijuana from Schedule 1 for at least the next four years—which will complicate cannabis-industry banking and deter major investment in the industry for the foreseeable future due to a continued lack of Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation coverage.

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness …

Published in Cannabis in the CV

The public-opinion news just keeps getting better for the legalization movement.

A recent Pew Research Center poll revealed that 57 percent of Americans favor the legalization of the use of marijuana, while only 37 percent still think it should be illegal. This is fairly amazing, considering that a mere 10 years ago, those numbers were pretty much reversed, with 32 percent in favor of legalization, and 60 percent opposed.

Weed, you’ve come a long way, baby!

Not surprisingly, the youth vote is where the strongest support for legalization is. A whopping 76 percent of millennials (ages 18-35 in 2016) are in favor. That’s up from 34 percent just a decade ago. Baby Boomers and GenXers are showing increasing support as well: Boomers are 56 percent in favor of legalization, up from just 17 percent in 1990, while Generation X sits at 57 percent in favor, up from 21 percent in 1990.

How does this break down across party lines? Predictably: 66 percent of Democrats are in favor of legalization, with just 30 percent opposed, while most Republicans (55 percent) oppose legalization.

Here in California, the numbers tell a similar tale. A recent poll showed that 58 percent of Golden State voters favor Proposition 64, which, if approved in November, would legalize marijuana for some recreational use. The poll (conducted by USC Dornsife and the Los Angeles Times) also showed that support for legalization was strong across “most lines of age, race, income and gender,” the Los Angeles Times reported.

This shift in public opinion all but guarantees passage of Prop 64, which is backed by former Facebook president Sean Parker and Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, despite blowback from pro-marijuana skeptics who think the law doesn’t do enough to protect smaller growers and the rights of medical patients.

Cannabis-industry trade groups like the California Growers Association are deeply divided on the issue. Only 31 percent of the 750 member growers of the CGA are in favor of the bill, while 31 percent are opposed, and 38 percent are undecided. The resistance stems from potentially costly environmental regulations (said to cost around $20,000 to $100,000 per farm), and a lack of long-term protections from an industry takeover by out-of-state interests.

Allowing Big Agriculture into the game is the biggest concern of growers. Some of these growers have been waiting decades for legalization, and now they fear being cut out of the industry they helped create. Prop 64 gives growers five years to establish market dominance in the state before corporate mega-grows can be approved, but many in the industry say this is not enough time, will take industry accessibility away from smaller operations, and will result in a lower-quality product.

The possibility of a lower-quality product is one of the many arguments coming from the medical-marijuana camp. One such voice of dissent is Dennis Peron, a co-author of Proposition 215, which opened the door for medical marijuana in the state back in 1996. He believes cannabis patients will be victimized by law enforcement and the tax code as they are lumped in with recreational users.

“I want the voters to be aware of the situation at hand,” Peron told The Cannabist. “Prop 64 is not legalization. If it were legalizing, that would imply that marijuana is illegal, and it’s not. This law would mean the displacement of cannabis farms in Humboldt. It essentially empowers profit instead of people.”

While these concerns are indeed valid, Prop 64 will most likely become law in our fair state. Even if Prop 64 fails, not much would change; most of the regulations it puts into effect were passed in last year’s Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act, which is now law.

Only time will determine how things shake out. In a strange little twist, the Drug Enforcement Administration may actually help smaller California growers stay in business by refusing to reclassify marijuana from Schedule 1: Until the federal prohibition is lifted, large investors will want to place their money where it can be federally insured, like Canada.


‘High Times’ Launches Marijuana-Themed Clothing Line

Back in 1974, a group of pothead pranksters headed by a publisher named Thomas King Forcade thought a one-off spoof of Playboy Magazine that featured buds instead of babes would be a pretty funny thing to do. That first issue sold more than anyone expected, and the public demanded more.

High Times magazine was born. Since then, the magazine has become the voice of the industry, movement and subculture that is marijuana.

The roller-coaster ride to legalization is finally coming to fruition, and weed subculture has been thrust into the limelight. Stoners across the land are more and more open about their love of cannabis, and cannabis culture is booming. Therefore, High Times has introduced a line of clothing that pays tribute to these connoisseurs, patients, activists and advocates—as well as to their maverick founder.

"The fashion trend in general is about retro and vintage. … You can see it at any show you go to. At the same time, what you’re seeing is this recognition of the legalization of cannabis," says Larry Linietsky, chief operating officer of High Times. "It's a way to support the movement by wearing the clothing. We think it's well-timed. (It’s) vintage, counterculture and authentic."

With the line’s launch, “High Times recognizes the need to celebrate these street soldiers worldwide by giving them banners to fly.” This would be pretty haughty talk for anyone other than High Times … but would you question Rolling Stone magazine’s place in rock ’n’ roll history? Playboy’s place in pinup culture? No, you would not.

The line is available now at shop.hightimes.com.

Published in Cannabis in the CV

In his keynote speech at the Cannabis World Congress and Business Exposition on Sept. 8 at the Los Angeles Convention Center, longtime cannabis advocate Montel Williams announced his entry into the medical marijuana business with the launch of LenitivLabs.

“I’m proud to announce the formation of Lenitiv Scientific and the development of the LenitivLabs product line,” said Williams, according to a news release. “With the issue of full legalization dominating the conversation, it’s critical not to forget patients who have specific needs with respect to cannabis, including strains that might be less-profitable in the marketplace. The mission of Lenitiv Scientific is to ensure that seriously ill individuals—like myself—have access to the medicine they need.”

Williams, of course, is best known for hosting The Montel Williams Show for 17 years; he’s also an entrepreneur, wellness advocate and decorated former naval officer. He was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in 1999.

In 2013, Williams talked about his medical marijuana use with addiction website TheFix.com: “For six months after I was diagnosed with MS in 1999, I was given every prescription under the sun to help relieve some of the pain I was suffering with—Oxycontin, Vicodin, you name it,” he said. “But none of it helped. A doctor suggested a lot of literature to me that discussed the benefits of cannabis on neuropathic pain.”

Not only did he start using medical cannabis himself; he became an outspoken advocate and has offered support to legalization initiatives in several states.

“I experience neuropathic pain 24 hours a day because of my MS,” Williams said at the conference in L.A. “My physicians recommended cannabis as part of my treatment 17 years ago, and I’ve used it ever since. Only someone suffering from a debilitating disease can understand cannabis’ therapeutic value.”

The company will launch a product line of cannabis products, and promises consistent, standardized dosage by utilizing the most-current manufacturing/extraction technology available. LenitivLabs will service all states where cannabis is legal for medicinal use, and will expand to other states as legalization spreads.

LenitivLabs has put together a heavy-hitting—and rather interesting—advisory board that includes retired Vice Admiral Edward M. Straw, former congressman and pharmaceutical lobbyist Wilbert Tauzin, and R. James Woolsey, a former CIA director and ambassador. You may recognize Woolsey’s name from recent headlines after he joined Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.

Wait, what?

This sounds like a potentially scary team—but it is a bunch who would not be afraid to give the Drug Enforcement Administration a ring to ask them to pull their heads out of their collective asses and reschedule weed at last. The DEA certainly isn’t listening to you or me.

Make it happen, Montel.


The Hound Is Coming to Get You!

To date, there has been little to no scientific research to definitely determine at which levels THC impairs driving ability. Law enforcement also has no way to test for marijuana influence beyond blood or urine tests, which would only determine that cannabis had been used some time in the last few weeks. That has made charging someone with driving while stoned difficult.

That’s about to change. (“But Sean, I drive better when I’m stoned!” No. You don’t.)

Introduced by Oakland-based Hound Labs, The Hound was field-tested recently with help from the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office. Drivers pulled over for erratic driving were asked to voluntarily submit to The Hound test for research purposes. The machine reportedly succeeded in detecting not only the presence of THC, but the actual levels of THC—accurately enough to gauge how recent use was. No drivers were charged, but those who had recently smoked were not allowed to drive immediately. One driver tested was arrested for drunk driving.

Dr. Mike Lynn, CEO and co-founder of Hound Labs, Inc., is also an emergency-room doctor and reserve deputy sheriff with the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office. “It is very rewarding, both professionally and personally, to identify the need for a product that will save countless lives, to develop the solution to an incredibly difficult scientific challenge, and then to create the product—the only marijuana breathalyzer that can measure THC in breath with results that match the best laboratory equipment,” said Lynn, according to a news release. “I feel very fortunate that I have been able to use my experience both as an active reserve deputy sheriff and as a practicing ER physician to create a device that affordably solves an escalating public health crisis.

“For the first time, communities across the country will have access to the science and technology required to tackle the growing costs that result from people driving under the influence of marijuana.”


Joy of Life Wellness Center Open for Business

There’s a new dispensary in town! Joy of Life Wellness Center began serving patients in early September. Founded by Crystal Fantasy owner Joy Brown Meredith, it is the sixth dispensary licensed by the Palm Springs City Council.

I had a chance to drop in on a recent Saturday afternoon. Joy of Life is located inside a modest-sized, clean, well-maintained building just off Indian Canyon Drive toward the north end of Palm Springs. There was one other patient waiting when I arrived, and two more shopping in the bud room. (Palm Springs requires a budtender for each patient.) I was greeted with a friendly welcome.

When my turn came, I got a chance to meet budtenders Sara (Joy’s daughter) and Justin. Justin gave me some great recommendations from their stock. The selection of edibles was a bit limited, but that’s to be expected with new shops. The flower, however, was primo. I picked up Khaleesi OG, Bubba’s Gift, Deep Sleep and some good old Hindu Kush, as well as a Bhang Bar for dessert. My first-time-visitor status also earned me a free gift (I took the grinder) and a free pre-rolled joint.

Joy of Life Wellness Center is located at 142 W. Oasis Road in Palm Springs.

Published in Cannabis in the CV

Page 1 of 2