Sign
up on our email list to be informed of all upcoming classes.
We have Colorado medical marijuana legal compliance training
classes regularly.
Recorded Teleclass: Marijuana THC/DUI Laws in Colorado with
Attorney Leonard Frieling
If you are a cannabis consumer, this teleclass recording
contains everything you need to know BEFORE you get pulled
over by a law enforcement officer while you are driving a
vehicle.
Fix
the Constitution: Legalize 2012 Help fix the fatal flaws in Amendment 20 by rewriting Colorado's
Constitution to provide more protection for patients and caregivers.
Colorado Medical Marijuana News
Colorado Marijuana Upcoming Events Calendar
Fri., Jan. 27, 2012
Free Bob Crouse Protest
Fri., Jan. 27, 2012
Protest: 12noon to 1:30pm
El Paso County Courthouse, Colorado Springs
Protect Patient Bob Crouse, leukemia patient being prosecuted
for legal medical marijuana use.
***ACTION ALERT*** CALL AND EMAIL THE EL PASO COUNTY DA
District Attorney Dan May
Fourth Judicial District (El Paso and Teller Counties)
Phone: (719) 520-6174
Email (DA's spokesperson): LeeRichards@elpasoco.com
Ask him to drop the charges against Bob Crouse and stop prosecuting
cancer patients.
Extra Credit
Send your letter to the DA as a Letter
to the Editor of the local
newspapers:
Colorado Springs Gazette: opinion@gazette.com
Colorado Springs Independent: letters@csindy.com
Send copies of any letters you send to: info@cannabistherapyinstitute.com
We will forward them to Bob to show him how much support he
has!
ACTION ALERT: Board of Health Patient Rulemaking Hearing
(11/16)
The Colorado Board of Health will hold a rulemaking hearing
on Wed., Nov. 16, concerning changes to the Colorado Department
of Public Health and Environment's rules and regulations regarding
medical marijuana. One of the main topics is a proposal to
lower the patient Registry fee from $90 to $35. The Board
will also discuss modifying the patient indigence standard
and clarifying the definition of "in good standing"
for physicians, in accordance with House Bill 11-1043
1) ATTEND HEARING Board of Health Public Rulemaking Hearing
Wed., Nov. 16, 2011
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
Sabin Conference Room, Building A - 1st Floor
4300 Cherry Creek Drive South Denver, CO
Time: Approx. 10:30am. The agenda says the MMJ rulemaking
hearing will commence at 10:30am, but this is only an estimate,
so if you want to testify in person, please show up early.
Dear Colorado Board of Health:
I support lowering the fees for medical marijuana patients
from $90/year to $35/year. However, I am concerned about the
security of the Registry and its confidentiality. I understand
CDPHE is currently working to make parts of the Registry accessible
online to the DOR Medical Marijuana Criminal Enforcement Division
and other law enforcement agencies. Once any portion of the
Registry is available online to other agencies, it opens the
Registry up to possible compromise. Given that there have
been several unexplained breaches of the Registry security
in the past, I would like to know how you will prevent hackers
from going online and stealing the Registry or parts of it?
What portion of the patient's fees currently goes to making
sure the Registry remains confidential? Patients will only
use the optional state Registry if they are certain their
identity will remain private and secure.
Sincerely,
Your Name
3) COPY AND REDISTRIBUTE THIS ANNOUNCEMENT
Thurs., Oct. 2011, 2011
Free Bob Crouse Protest
Thurs., Oct. 20, 2011
Protest: 12noon to 1:00pm
Court Hearing: 1:30pm
El Paso County Courthouse, Colorado Springs
Protect Patient Bob Crouse, leukemia patient being prosecuted
for legal medical marijuana use.
CTI is launching a THC/DUI awareness campaign based on fact,
not fear. The campaign is based on the FDA warning for Marinol
(synthetic THC). The CTI THC/DUI awareness campaign can be
summed up with these phrases, "Use cannabis responsibly.
If you medicate, then wait." The length of time a patient
will have to wait after they medicate depends on many factors.
But once a patient gets used to the effects of THC, they are
likely to be able to drive safely.
This week, the Cannabis Therapy Institute, along with activists
from the Colorado Coalition of Patients and Caregivers (CCPC),
helped expose a series of secret meetings held by a newly-formed
state sub-committee called the Marijuana Per Se Workgroup,
which will recommend the per se THC levels for a new THC/DUI
bill to be introduced in the legislature in 2012.
Marijuana Per Se Workgroup members are:
- Grayson Robinson, Arap. County Sheriff
- Christine Flavia, Div. of Behavioral Health
- Heather Garwood, Colo. Judicial Dept.
- Rod Walker, Colo. Springs Police Dept.
- Laura Spicer, Drug Addictions Counselor
- Sean McAllister, Private Defense Attorney
- Mike Elliott, Medical Marijuana Industry Group
- Mark Hurlbert, DA, 5th Judicial Dist.
Protect Cancer Patients' Right to Use Cannabis
Medicine
Free Bob Crouse Protest Thurs., Aug. 18, 2011
Protest: 7:30am to 8:00am
Hearing: 8:30am
El Paso County Courthouse
270 S. Tejon, Colorado Springs, CO
Courtroom of The Honorable Judge Tim Schulz, Division 9, Courtroom
S503
Courthouse phone: (719) 448-7700
The article below by the Associated Press details some of
the new regulations going into effect on July 1 regarding
medical marijuana in Colorado. These new regulations have
patients very concerned about their privacy.
MMC-applicants are now required to have video cameras record
every transaction in an MMC or a production facility. MMCs
are also helping the Department of Revenue track every patient
purchase from "seed to sale" in a massive law enforcement
database to ensure that patients do not get "too much"
medicine.
These videos and transaction records will be available to
all law enforcement, including the DEA, on demand, without
a warrant, and without notification to patients that their
information has been released to the police.
The AP story also details a stunning new revelation that
the DOR apparently does not intend on issuing any licenses
to MMCs until July 2012. This means that every dispensary
in the state will continue to operate in a gray area of the
law: MMCs have no state license, and they also have no Constitutional
protection. (MMCs revoked their right to be a caregiver under
the Constitution in order to apply to become an MMC.)
If an MMC is selling marijuana in Colorado without a license,
there is the potential that the DOR will at some point deny
them a license and target them as a criminal enterprise. If
this happens, anyone that shopped or worked at the unlicensed
MMC may be put under criminal investigation as well.
MMC employees are being asked to surrender large volumes
of personal and financial information to the DOR and submit
to an extensive criminal background investigation, including
photographs and fingerprints sent to the FBI. Westword reported
in two articles today about the rush for employees to register
with the DOR. But many are questioning the intelligence of
this, because none of the MMC-employers have been granted
state licenses. This means employees are signing up to work
at UNLICENSED, potentially "criminal" businesses,
for the next year.
CTI encourages all patients and MMC-applicant-employees to
CONSULT AN ATTORNEY before they continue to shop or work at
an MMC after July 1 to make sure that their privacy rights
and 4th and 5th amendment rights are preserved.
The Patient and Caregiver Rights Litigation Project is working
to overturn these laws. Please contribute to: http://www.cannabislawsuits.com/
DENVER - Colorado's marijuana industry will become the nation's
most regulated later this week, and pot shops are scrambling
to comply with new seed-to-sale tracking, shorter business
hours and mandatory video surveillance for growing plants
and finished products.
Some of the requirements, such as a grow-your-own regulation
forcing pot shops to grow 70 percent of the pot they sell,
have already taken effect. But most rules will kick in Friday,
including background checks for everyone working around medical
marijuana to screen out drug felons.
Other rules include video surveillance of both growing marijuana
plants and finished pot products, a move to make sure medical
pot doesn't end up on the black market. The state also plans
to enforce a statewide 8 p.m. closing time for pot shops.
Colorado also is imposing registration requirements on caregivers,
people who grow for up to five patients. Caregivers fought
unsuccessfully in the state Legislature this year to keep
their growing sites and what they're growing private. Some
pot growers vow to drop out of the system rather than face
state oversight.
"I see the caregiver model pretty much evaporating,"
said Adam Mayo, an attorney in Steamboat Springs who advises
marijuana patients, growers and shop owners.
Instead, Mayo said, caregivers may choose to stop growing
plants for patients and instead offer them warehouse space
to grow their own allotment of six plants each. Because patients
are not required to tell the state where they're growing their
pot plants, Mayo said a marijuana collective such as a communal
warehouse wouldn't violate state law.
"You could charge them just like you'd charge a tenant,"
Mayo said of patients.
It's an option a few caregivers and even dispensary owners
are taking seriously.
"I'm not crazy about going on a registry that might
be obsolete in a couple years," said Bret Kantola, a
Denver caregiver who currently raises plants for two people
but said he's getting out rather than register. Kantola cited
shifting signals from the federal government on marijuana
and a confusing state regulatory framework.
"It's been very, very turbulent, and it's been one thing
after another," Kantola said of Colorado's efforts to
regulate the pot business.
The owner of two dispensaries in Lafayette, Veronica Caprio
of 420 Highways, said she plans to close her shops and start
a collective. She decried Colorado's regulations as intrusive
for marijuana patients.
"It's complete unknown territory, this Big Brother tracking,"
Caprio said.
A spokeswoman for the state's Medical Marijuana Enforcement
Division, which oversees many of the pot regulations, said
collectives may be illegal. Julie Postlethwait said a collective
growing site would fall under state regulations if the site
were under a single person or group's control.
Caregivers who want to try collective growing say they're
prepared to test the state. Timothy Tipton, a Denver caregiver,
says he's starting a collective and plans to sublease plots
to patients who won't be allowed to sell or even give away
pot they grow so they can avoid state oversight.
"It allows patients who are upset with all the regulation
going on here to maintain their constitutional rights"
to grow and use pot, Tipton said. "We have the constitutional
right to do this, and we're not giving up."
Maybe so, but not all caregivers are as outspoken as Tipton.
Tipton organizes an annual pot-tasting contest called the
Caregivers' Cup, which planned its final contest in Denver
on Sunday. He said about 1,000 patients a year have shown
up at the celebration to sample and rate pot strains -- but
caregivers are wary of public attention and have said they
won't participate after the registration requirements take
effect.
Marijuana advocates, along with state officials and lawmakers
who approved the rules, are divided about what the oversight
will mean for medical marijuana in Colorado. Sponsors of the
regulatory bill last year boasted that the rules would drive
half the state's 800 or so dispensaries out of business. But
more than 700 of them have applied for state licenses, due
to be issued in July of 2012.
Ryan Cook, general manager of three dispensaries in Denver
called The Clinic, said patients haven't complained as much
as he feared about increased video surveillance, a mandatory
8 p.m. closing time and a requirement that patients' marijuana
registry cards be scanned every time they buy pot.
"I get a sense from patients they're accepting the requirements,"
Cook said. "We'll see how it evolves, but right now,
people just want a safe and affordable way to get their meds."
But at a recent marijuana legalization debate in Denver,
pot advocate Rico Colibri of the Association of Cannabis Trades
warned that increased tracking and surveillance could turn
out badly if the federal government hanges course on deferring
to states that allow medical pot.
"There could be scary things happening to people here
very soon," Colibri said.
Updates on Colorado Medical
Marijuana Legislation
Colorado's Anti-Medical Marijuana Bills
Legislative Wrap-Up 2011
Colorado Patients Win Victories in Legislature
Activists Put Focus on 2012 Legalization Ballot Initiative
Colorado patients won some big victories in the state legislature
this year. Three bills were introduced this year that further
eroded the rights of patients and caregivers under the Colorado
Constitution. With the Cannabis Therapy Institute leading
the way to oppose these bills, patients were able to kill
two of the three bills.
The first bill, HB11-1250, would have banned all edible cannabis
products. This fell relatively quickly, as the entire patient
community spoke out very strongly against a ban on edible
therapy.
HB 11-1261 was a DUI/THC bill. It would have set a limit
of 5 nanograms/millileter of THC in the whole blood. Anything
over 5 ng/mL would automatically be considered DUI per se,
and patients would have faced losing their drivers licenses
in addition to criminal DUI charges. The bill would have eliminated
the requirement for the prosecution to prove that the driver
was actually impaired. Through intense grassroots lobbying
efforts, the bill was watered down to just a study of whether
THC causes impairment. However, 3 days before the session
was scheduled to end, the 5 ng DUI per se language was put
back into the bill. Last minute lobbying by law enforcement
seemed to ensure a victory for this bill. However, when the
final vote was taken, the bill was killed altogether, scoring
a huge victory for patients and justice!
CTI argued that most patients would always be over 5 ng because
of their constant use, but would not actually be impaired.
Local reporter William Breathes, from the Denver alternative
weekly Westword, voluntarily submitted to a blood test for
THC after fasting for 16 hours, and the test returned at 13.5
ng! His physician affirmed that Breathes was totally unimpaired.
This was one of the factors that helped kill the bill. Another
factor was that the sponsor of the bill, Rep. Claire Levy
(D-Boulder) could provide no evidence that THC was the cause
of any accident in Colorado, and admitted that she based the
5 ng on an "intuitive feeling" rather than hard
research.
Unfortunately, the third anti-cannabis bill, HB 11-1043,
passed with no opposition in the legislature. This was the
"cleanup bill" from last years massive legislation,
which created a statutory entity called a "Medical Marijuana
Center" (MMC). HB 11-1043 completed the removal of MMCs
from the protection of the Colorado Constitution, by adding
a line to the statute that said the Constitution did not apply
to MMCs. This is concerning, because the US Attorney's office
in Colorado has indicated that the feds consider the Constitution
to afford greater protection than the MMC statute. Colorado
was among the medical marijuana states that received threatening
letters from the feds, but no MMCs have yet been targeted
for federal raids.
HB 11-1043 also extends the statewide moratorium on new MMC
applicants for another year. Over 1,000 people applied to
become MMCs last July 1, but the Medical Marijuana Enforcement
Division (MMED) of the Department of Revenue has not granted
any licenses.
Another disturbing aspect of HB 11-1043 is the Caregiver Grow
Location Registry. For the first time in the history of Colorado's
ten-year-old medical marijuana law, caregivers will be required
to register themselves, their patients' ID numbers, and the
locations of their grows with the Department of Revenue. This
has many caregivers and patients nervous that their confidentiality
rights will be breached, and that more regulation of caregivers
is on the way.
HB 11-1043 goes into effect July 1, as do 77 pages of new
regulations from the Department of Revenue. MMC applicants
are getting tired of existing in legal limbo. They are forced
to comply with an ever-growing list of restrictions, but they
have no guarantees that they will ever be granted a license
for their efforts.
The MMC law that passed in 2010 was designed to put 80% of
dispensaries out of business. Every week, MMCs shut down because
they can't comply with the pages of new restrictions. No other
industry in Colorado has ever seen this kind of deliberate
over-regulation. Activists with the Patient and Caregivers
Rights Litigation Project are working on an injunction against
all the laws and regulations, to be filed before July 1. (cannabislawsuits.com)
The Legalize2012.com Project is building a grassroots coalition
to bring a legalization initiative to the 2012 ballot in Colorado.
Polls show 50% support for legalization in Colorado, so it's
not a question of when cannabis will be re-legalized, it's
a question of how it will be re-legalized.
HB 11-1043, Caregiver Registration
and Patient Rights Elimination "Cleanup" bill
Some parts of it may be good in that it clarified HB 10-1284,
but none of it addresses patient privacy concerns. It also
continues on the path of separating the medical marijuana
program from the health agency and the Constitution, removing
Constitutional protection for MMCs explicity.
- Eliminates Constitutional protection for the actions of
MMC licensees. Licensees "shall not be subject to the
terms of" Article XVIII, Section 14 of the Colorado Constitution
(Colorado's Medical Marijuana Law).
- Extends the moratorium on new Medical Marijuana Center
applicants in the state for another year, until July 1, 2012.
This harms patients and industry by artificially eliminating
competition.
- Restricts an MMC to sell only 6 non-flowering plants to
a patient every 3 months
- Limits Medical Marijuana Infused Products Manufacturers
to 500 plants
- Allows law enforcement to destroy plants and cannabis
that they seize, in violation of Article XVIII, Section 14
of the Colorado Constitution, which requires law enforcement
to preserve patient medicine.
- If an MMC license is revoked, that MMC's marijuana will
be immediately considered to be a "controlled substance."
Presumably, then immediately the owners and employees would
be subject to criminal prosecution, since the marijuana they
possess would no longer be considered legal medical marijuana.
- Requires caregivers to register the location of their grows
with the Department of Revenue.
- Requires caregivers to surrender the Registry ID numbers
of their patients to the Department of Revenue.
- Allows the Department of Revenue to share locations of
caregiver grows with law enforcement and local governments
with an address-specific request, and exempts them from public
records )?_.
- Appropriates $1 million from the Medical Marijuana Program
Fund to hire 14.5 additional full-time employees (FTE) for
the "Circle Program", an inpatient substance abuse
treatment facility in Pueblo that only has 20
beds.
- Clarifies that residency applies to owners only
- DOR may deny license for good cause
- Felony drug convictions are licensing disqualifiers
- MMC may provide samples to laboratory that has a testing
license
- DOR can promulgate rules for testing
- Procedures for license revocation
- Product may be destroyed or given to indigent patients
- If multiple centers, can grow all mmj at one cultivation
site
- MMC subject to prohibitions on unfair business products
- selling below cost
- Physician who owns a valid license only without condition
or restriction may provide medical marijuana recs
- Indigent patient does not have to pay fee. Changes it to
the federal poverty line
- Land that's used for cultivation cannot be considered agricultural
land for tax purposes
- Medical marijuana are medical records for purpose of theft
HB1261 (THC/DUI) : KILLED
HB1261 sought to ban patients from driving privileges by
setting a limit on THC in the blood that most patients will
always exceed. Any driver with an amount of THC over 5 nanograms/milliliter
in their blood will be considered impaired and guilty of DUI
per se and subject to loss of their driver's license and other
criminal penalties. This will greatly impact patients, because
many of them will test over that limit due to their chronic
use, but not be impaired.
This bill was killed. It will be sent back to the state Commission
on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ) for more study, and
likely brought up again when the Legislature convenes in Jan.
2012.
HB 11-1250, Cannabis Edible Bill
Originally sought to ban MMCs from producing or selling any
edible cannabis product. Amended to only address packaging
requirements. Since the Department of Revenue already has
the authority to set labeling standards, this bill is unnecessary.
SCR001: Super-Majority to Amend
Constitution
If approved by voters, this would require a 60% majority of
voters to amend the Colorado Constitution. This bill would
make it virtually impossible for changes to be made to the
state's Medical Marijuana Amendment.
Fix
the Constitution: Legalize 2012 Help fix the fatal flaws in Amendment 20 by rewriting
Colorado's Constitution to provide more protection for patients
and caregivers.
Colorado Medical Marijuana News
Cannabis Therapy Institute Recent Updates
June 15, 2010
June 15, 2010: UPDATE: These rules all passed
unamended. Thanks to all those who sent in comments.
ACTION ALERT: Board of Health Patient and
Caregiver Rulemaking Hearing
The Colorado Board of Health will hold a rulemaking hearing
on Wed., June 15, at 9am concerning sweeping changes to the
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment's rules
and regulations regarding medical marijuana patients and caregivers.
ATTEND HEARING
Board of Health Public Rulemaking Hearing
Restrictions on Patients and Caregivers Wed., June. 15, 2011
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
Sabin Conference Room
4300 Cherry Creek Drive South Denver, CO
Time: 9am and 12noon (They have inexplicably broken up the
Patient and
Caregiver comments. The hearing on caregiver rules will be
in the morning and the hearing on patient rules will be at
12noon.)
SEND EMAIL COMMENTS
1) Cut and paste the following text, or put it in your own
words.
2) Email it to the two email addresses in the letter.
In regards to the proposed Amendments to Rules and Regulations
Pertaining to Medical Use of Marijuana (5 CCR 1006-2) for
patients and caregivers, please accept these comments for
the official record.
Rules for Patients
1) I object to Regulation 12 (C) (6), which states that a
patient shall not "operate, navigate, or be in actual
physical control of any vehicle, aircraft, or motorboat while
under the influence of medical marijuana." There is no
proof that marijuana causes impairment in operation of a motor
vehicle. This criminalizes patients with debilitating medical
conditions, who must continuously medicate to control their
chronic conditions. The state statutes regarding "driving
under the influence of drugs" (DUID) is already adequate.
The CDPHE does not have the authority to create a new crime
called "DUIMM".
2) I object to Regulation 12 (C) (1), which states that a
patient shall not "undertake any task while under the
influence of medical marijuana, when doing so would constitute
negligence or professional malpractice." This regulation
is vague, unenforceable, and potentially harmful to patients.
It is without any rational basis.
3) I object to Regulation 2 (B) (2), which states that the
Patient Confidential Registry application may now contain
a space for a Medical Marijuana Center to be listed. The CDPHE
has no authority to collect information on Medical Marijuana
Centers (MMC). Article XVIII, Section 14 of the Colorado Constitution,
Colorado's medical marijuana amendment, only authorizes the
CDPHE to collect the name of the patient and the patient's
caregiver, if designated, and to keep this information confidential.
Additionally, the CDPHE has no regulatory authority over
MMCs, which are regulated through the Department of Revenue.
The collection of MMC information by the CDPHE shows their
intent to share this information with the DOR, in violation
of patient privacy guarantees in the Constitution. The Board
of Health shall pass no rules that infringe on patient's constitutional
right to confidentiality or that allow the CDPHE to share
information with the DOR.
4) I object to Regulation 2 (E), which states that a patient
may change his primary caregiver once per month. First, the
CDPHE has no authority to state how often a patient may change
caregivers. Additionally, under DOR rules, a patient cannot
change his MMC more than once every 120 days. The CDPHE Regulatory
Analysis stated that the reasoning behind this was to protect
the investment of the cannabis medicine provider, by allowing
the plants to get through a 3 to 4 month grow cycle. In this
light, this provision is unfair to caregivers, as they will
not have their investment protected for as long as MMCs.
5) I object to Regulation 2 (I), which states that patients
who have been convicted of a criminal drug offense, ordered
by a court to drug or substance abuse treatment, or sentenced
to the division of youth corrections must reapply to the registry
if they wish to continue in an active status on the registry.
This regulation unfairly punishes patients who have been convicted
of, or forced to plead guilty to, any kind of drug offense.
Drug convictions do not have any bearing on a person's right
to use medical marijuana under the Constitution. There is
no rational basis for this regulation.
Rules for Caregivers
1) I object to Regulation J (6), which states that a primary
caregiver shall not "operate, navigate, or be in actual
physical control of any vehicle, aircraft, or motorboat while
under the influence of medical marijuana." There is no
proof that marijuana causes impairment in operation of a motor
vehicle. This criminalizes patients with debilitating medical
conditions, who must continuously medicate to control their
chronic conditions. The state statutes regarding "driving
under the influence of drugs" (DUID) are already adequate.
The CDPHE does not have the authority to create a new crime
called "DUIMM".
2) I object to Regulation J (3), which states that a primary
caregiver shall not "undertake any task while under the
influence of medical marijuana, when doing so would constitute
negligence or professional malpractice." This regulation
is vague, unenforceable, and potentially harmful to patients.
It is without any rational basis.
3) I object to Regulation 9 (C), which states that the CDPHE
is going to start collecting names of people who want to be
primary caregivers, but don't have any patients, and allow
the CDPHE to give names of caregivers to any registered patient.
The CDPHE has no authority to collect names of primary caregivers.
This appears to be another way for the CDPHE to help the DOR
create the database of everyone even remotely interested in
growing medical cannabis in Colorado. There is no authority
for this in the Constitution or in statute.
3) I object to Regulation 9 (L), which states that if patients
do not require caregiver service other than the provision
of medical marijuana, then the patients shall not designate
a primary care-giver. This violates patient's Constitutional
right to use their caregiver of choice. If a patient does
not need additional services, the CDPHE has no authority to
deny the patient the right to use their husband, wife, brother,
sister or anyone from serving as their caregiver. This regulation
is cruel and malicious and has no rational basis.
I respectfully submit these comments.
Sincerely,
----------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------
Click here to read the rules in their entirety: http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/op/bh/index.html
----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------- DONATE TO CTI
Help us hire a staff to get these alerts out to you sooner: http://www.cannabistherapyinstitute.com/donate.html
----------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------
