I don't know where I'm going to go....
"Three firms want marijuana bids to get new look; Seeking to open dispensaries in Allston, East Boston" by Shelley Murphy | Globe Staff May 25, 2014
Three companies seeking to open medical marijuana dispensaries in Allston and East Boston are urging the state to reconsider their proposals, months after they were rejected in favor of two other Boston applicants that have drawn heated opposition.
Two of the losing companies are seeking approval from Boston zoning officials for their proposed dispensary sites in a bid to strengthen their proposals — though they would still require a state license to operate. They are also continuing to lobby neighborhood groups for support.
“No one has a license right now so we feel everyone is kind of in limbo,” said Robert Edelstein, chief operating officer of Centers for Alternative Medicine, which asked the Boston Zoning Board of Appeals in March for a permit to operate a marijuana dispensary at 220 William F. McClellan Highway in East Boston. “We feel we have the perfect location.”
Edelstein said he hopes to garner enough support to convince the state health department to grant his company a license if the two applicants that won preliminary approval to open dispensaries in Boston don’t pass final muster.
And even if they are approved, the state may eventually award up to five licenses in Suffolk County.
Another losing applicant, Compassionate Organics, made a similar request to the Zoning Board this month to open a dispensary at 140-144 Harvard Ave. in Allston. The board has yet to schedule a hearing on the two requests.
Compassionate Organics also recently obtained a letter of support for its site from the Allston Civic Association.
“We are continuing to get community support because we realize that is the variable that’s needed,” said Geoffrey Reilinger, chief executive officer of Compassionate Organics. “I’m optimistic because right now the Department of Public Health is in a really tough place, particularly in Suffolk County.”
The health department has faced a barrage of criticism since it announced Jan. 31 that it granted preliminary approval to 20 of the 100 applicants vying for the first marijuana dispensary licenses to be issued by the state since voters approved cannabis for medicinal use in November 2012. Some of the winning applicants, including the two selected for Boston, were accused of providing false or misleading information to the state that made it appear that they had support from elected officials.
A handful of losing applicants have filed lawsuits against the state in a bid to block the awarding of licenses and have complained that officials failed to thoroughly vet the applications and used a flawed system to grade them.
Boston Mayor Martin J. Walsh, who urged state health officials last month to reject the two winning applicants for Boston if their applications are deemed inaccurate, said during a telephone interview that he believes the state should restart its selection process.
“If we are going to be siting medical marijuana facilities in Boston, at the very least we should make sure they are properly graded and are the right companies for that location,” Walsh said. “There is so much uncertainty, I would like to see this process started over.”
Another losing applicant, MA Care Connect Inc., which had proposed a dispensary at 440 William F. McClellan Highway in East Boston, is waiting for state health officials to respond to its complaints that the company was given low scores for answers on its application that were identical to those that were provided by competitors and received higher scores.
“I don’t even think they know how to go about investigating or justifying any of this stuff because it is not justifiable,” said Johan Pontin, president of MA Care Connect, who said he was shocked that his company’s proposal was rejected and is urging the state to reconsider it.
Pontin said it’s clear that some of the winning applicants are still scrambling to find a location for a dispensary because three companies that were granted preliminary approval by the state approached MA Care Connect about taking over its East Boston site. He said he turned down the requests, and declined to identify the companies.
Representatives of the two companies that won preliminary approval to open dispensaries in Boston say they remain committed to sites they have leased in Roxbury and Boston’s Theater District.
David Kibbe, a spokesman for the Department of Public Health, declined to comment on the Allston and East Boston proposals or whether any of the losing applicants will be reconsidered for a license.
He released a statement saying the department “is committed to striking the appropriate balance between ensuring patient access and public safety, and right now we are focused on verifying all information and operational plans submitted by the applicants currently in the verification phase.”
The two companies granted preliminary approval to open Boston dispensaries, Good Chemistry of Massachusetts and Green Heart Holistic Health and Pharmaceuticals, remain in the verification phase, he said.
“We are confident we will get a license,” said Andrew DeAngelo, chief executive of Green Heart, adding that he hopes to persuade neighbors and elected officials who have opposed the company’s plan for a dispensary at 70 Southampton St. in Roxbury that it “can bring benefits not harm to that community.”
DeAngelo said his company had done preliminary searching of other locations, but was heavily invested in the Southampton Street site and didn’t know whether it could even find another suitable spot for a dispensary. He said the company had not intended to deceive anyone when it told the state it had the support of elected officials who denied giving such support, including Boston City Councilor Tito Jackson. DeAngelo said he has met with Jackson and apologized.
Good Chemistry, which dropped its plans to open a dispensary on Boylston Street after facing stiff opposition from neighbors, is now committed to a site at 57 Stuart St., according to a spokeswoman.
“We continue to work with that neighborhood to share our intentions and our protocols . . . to show the community that we are a good neighbor and understand their concerns,” the spokeswoman, Karen Schwartzman, said. She said the company inadvertently made a mistake on its application about the extent of its support from Boston officials and is hopeful the state will award it a license.
--more--"
I was once if favor of the dispensaries, but am now violently -- well, not violently -- against it.
Related:
"Arrests, fines follow Mass. medical marijuana law; Police cite vagueness in regulations, uncertainty over letters from doctors" by Kay Lazar and Shelley Murphy | Globe Staff May 20, 2014
Nathan Marrin was stunned when West Springfield police seized his marijuana during a traffic stop last month and slapped him with a $100 citation. After all, he had shown them a doctor’s letter indicating that he needed the drug to treat his anxiety.
In Spencer, Andrzej Conner is still furious about his arrest last May for growing 37 marijuana plants in a locked basement utility room. The 27-year-old tractor salesman had a similar letter from his doctor certifying he was approved to cultivate and use cannabis to relieve “debilitating” anxiety.
He better smoke a joint and chill out.
Persistent confusion surrounding Massachusetts’ 18-month-old medical marijuana law has led to criminal charges or civil citations against people who thought they were playing by the rules.
Confusion is what happens when you smoke dope.
It's an arbitrary ca$h grab that keeps the fear of tyranny in you!
While no state agency is tracking the numbers, more than a dozen cases have been described to the Globe by people who have been charged or cited or by the lawyers who represented them.
The medical marijuana law authorizes doctors to give letters to patients certifying them to use, possess, and grow up to a 60-day supply of the drug, defined by state regulators as 10 ounces. But police are in some cases disregarding these doctors’ letters, because the state hasn’t issued a standard physician certification form and the letters can’t be easily authenticated.
“They said your certificate is no good,” Conner said. “They said those are bogus.”
Attorneys and law enforcement officials also complain that regulations issued last May by the state Department of Public Health do not make clear how much marijuana a patient is allowed to grow.
“Most people are saying it’s a messed-up situation,” said Jack Collins, general counsel for the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association. The association is advising police to “walk away” from marijuana arrests if the suspect has less than 10 ounces and a doctor’s letter, he said, unless authorities have what they believe to be a “clear case” of illegality.
“Right now, it’s a guessing game, and that’s an unfair place to put a police officer in,” Collins added.
OMG! The poor oppressive thug. It's so unfair!
Valerio Romano, a Boston lawyer who has represented about a dozen medical marijuana clients in the past year who were cited or arrested, said more training and information is needed for law enforcement, patients, and even the judges he has encountered who did not realize that the law allowed patients to grow their own marijuana.
The health department said it intends to launch an online database later this year for law enforcement to check at any hour whether patients are approved to use medical marijuana. In the meantime, “law enforcement can, at any time, ask to see a physician’s written certification and take action if an individual is not complying with the law,” the agency said in a statement.
Department officials said they are slated to meet with the police chiefs’ group this week.
The 2012 medical marijuana law is silent on how many plants constitute a 60-day supply, and a March memo from the state health department has done little to clear up the confusion.
The department “has not defined a maximum number of plants that may be grown,” health officials wrote to law enforcement groups, “but there should be no more than what is necessary to meet the patient’s individual needs.”
Spencer Police Chief David Darrin decided that Conner’s 37 plants were excessive and the date on his doctor’s letter, indicating it was issued just a week before the police raid, suggested that Conner was growing before he was approved. That was reasonable grounds for an arrest, Darrin said.
“That was our assumption and we are making assumptions because it is such a poorly crafted law,” Darrin said.
You know what happens when you ASSUME, right? You make an ASS of U and ME! Then look at the authority figure blame the law! You can't "assume" the citizen is telling the truth, huh? Must not be wealthy or a Jew.
They arrested Conner, his younger brother, and their roommate on multiple drug charges. All charges were dropped last month against the roommate and Conner’s brother, but a single possession charge was continued against Conner for six months, when it will be dismissed if he has no other legal entanglements.
“I couldn’t drag them through court for another two years,” said Conner, who said he agreed to the plea only because the pending charges were hurting his brother’s military career.
I need a joint.
A specific limit on the number of plants patients are allowed to grow would be difficult to enforce, the health department said in a statement to the Globe.
“Counting the number of plants is not an effective method of limiting amount, as some well-cultivated plants can produce significantly higher yields than others,” it said. “A 60-day supply is measured by ounces of actual marijuana and generally not to exceed 10 ounces.”
Authenticating physicians’ letters has also been a challenge for law enforcement. Police sometimes try to verify the letters by calling doctors, but often they are told patient confidentiality laws prohibit health care workers from confirming whether the letters are legitimate, Collins said.
State Police Colonel Timothy Alben said it is not practical for state health officials to expect police to call doctors to verify the authenticity of letters.
“Does anybody really think that a police officer is going to start calling one of these people at 10 at night or 2 a.m and say, “Did you really give Johnny Jones a prescription for marijuana?’ ” Alben said. “That’s ridiculous.”
Alben said sometimes police have to use their discretion when deciding whether to issue a citation or bring charges.
“I think police are going to err on the side of caution and probably issue a criminal complaint if there is some conflict or question in their mind of whether this is legitimate or not,” said Alben, adding that they will let the courts decide if someone stopped with marijuana is a legally recognized patient. “Police were not meant to be judges on the side of the road.”
Then why are they doing just that?
Marrin, a 32-year-old Wilbraham resident, was issued a $100 citation by West Springfield police last month for possessing under an ounce of marijuana, though he had a doctor’s letter. “It’s not fair,” he said. “The law was passed so they have to abide by it. The gray areas have to be worked out.”
That is what bankrupt government wants; doesn't matter what it is.
West Springfield Police Chief Ronald Campurciani said officers cited Marrin because he told them he obtained the marijuana from a friend and they didn’t know whether the doctor’s letter he provided was legitimate.
After reviewing the citation at the request of Marrin’s lawyer, Campurciani said Monday that police confirmed that Marrin was a patient and plan to return his marijuana and dismiss the citation.
Marrin said his father was driving him home from work the night of April 26 when police stopped the car and an officer said, “I smell marijuana. Give it to me.”
He said he gave the officer a half-ounce of marijuana and handed him a letter from his Springfield doctor indicating that he recommended marijuana for Marrin to treat several conditions.
Marrin said the officer took the letter, and said, “These really don’t mean anything in West Springfield.”
Campurciani said the officer was concerned that the doctor had described the letter as a “medical marijuana recommendation” and he couldn’t immediately verify its validity.
The language used by doctors varies, with some calling the letters certifications and others recommendations. Doctors can’t prescribe marijuana because it isn’t approved by the Food and Drug Administration; so doctors’ letters do not use the word “prescription.”
“Unless we have some sort of standard letter to go by I think this is going to be a continual problem,” Campurciani said. The health department said it intends later this year to issue standardized cards for patients who are approved to use medical marijuana.
You guys had plenty of time to that since we voted it in; WTF were you guys doing other than nothing? I know you didn't like us voting it in, but WTF?
--more--"
The anger spoiled my appetite.
UPDATE:
"U.S. Says Legal Marijuana Growers Can't Use Federal Irrigation Water
By Hasani Gitten
Marijuana growers operating legally in Colorado and Washington state took another hit from the federal government on Tuesday when the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation announced that pot growers are (still) not allowed to use federal irrigation waters.
Since 1902, the bureau has been charged with maintaining dams, power plants and canals in the 17 "western states" — from North Dakota, Nebraska and Texas to Washington, Oregon and California.
As such, the agency also provides irrigation for millions of acres of agriculture in Washington and Colorado, the two states that recently made recreational marijuana legal for adults.
But the bureau wants weed growers to know that, at least at the federal level, the times they aren't a-changing. So, on Tuesday it reclarified a law that has been in place for decades.
"As a federal agency, Reclamation is obligated to adhere to federal law in the conduct of its responsibilities to the American people," Dan DuBray, chief of public affairs, said in a statement to NBC News.
The bureau says it had been fielding questions from all points west on the use of water in pot operations.
On Tuesday, in what's called a "temporary policy" decision, the bureau reiterated that federal law still rules.
"Reclamation will operate its facilities and administer its water-related contracts in a manner that is consistent with the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, as amended. This includes locations where state law has decriminalized or authorized the cultivation of marijuana. Reclamation will refer any inconsistent uses of federal resources of which it becomes aware to the Department of Justice and coordinate with the proper enforcement authorities," it said.
That last line means that the bureau won't actually be enforcing the law so much as letting the Justice Department know when it believes marijuana growers are using federal water. It's also the responsibility of local bureaus and state offices to regulate who gets approved to use federal irrigation.
So when are they going to go after the Mexican drug gangs growing pot on federal land?
The decision is termed "temporary" because a permanent policy decision would require a lengthy process that includes public hearings.
According to the bureau, it delivers water to about 1.2 million acres of irrigated land each in Colorado and Washington.
Still, it remained unclear what sort of penalties legal weed growers who used federal irrigation waters would face.
In a statement to NBC News, Justice Department spokeswoman Ellen Canale said, "The Department of Justice will continue to enforce the Controlled Substances Act and will focus federal resources on the most significant threats to our communities. Our efforts will be guided by the eight factors set forth in the August 29, 2013 guidance memorandum."
Those eight factors (PDF) are: preventing the distribution of marijuana to minors; preventing its revenue from going to criminal enterprises; preventing diversion to states where it is illegal; preventing state-authorized marijuana activity from being used as a cover for other illegal drug activity; preventing violence and the use of firearms in the cultivation of marijuana; preventing drugged driving and other adverse public health consequences; preventing growing of marijuana on public lands; and preventing marijuana possession or use on federal property.
Meanwhile, many in the burgeoning legal marijuana industry saw Tuesday's announcement as more of the same in terms of federal harassment for something that is sanctioned at the local level.
"It looks like another case of public officials acting against the better interests of themselves and their constituency due to a lack of critical thinking," Naomi McCulloch with Green Lion Farms in Seattle, and a member of the Association of Cannabis Breeders and Growers, told NBC News.
But she believed her fellow growers would find solutions to be completely independent of federal water.
"The general feeling is that there are ways to get water, if one source closes, another will open. It takes a lot of fortitude and planning to be a farmer, of any crop. If the government throwing up obstacles to our success stopped us, we wouldn't have made it this far," McCulloch said.
"We're used to this kind of treatment, the federal government looking for one obstacle after another to place hurdles before this industry," Elan Nelson, business consultant for Medicine Man dispensary in Denver, told The Associated Press. "We'll just have to find a way to deal with it and move on."
Since California legalized medical marijuana in 1996, 19 states have followed its lead, and last year Colorado and Washington became the first to allow recreational use of the drug.
But federal authorities from the DEA to the FBI to the IRS have often targeted those businesses who set up shop legally under state laws. And banks, universities and other institutions subject to federal oversight have shunned the legalized pot industry.
"Pretty soon it's going to be air," Nelson said. "They're going to say you can't use the air because it belongs to the federal government. It's just ridiculous."
They are going to call it a carbon tax.
--more--"
