2 Caregivers Under One Roof In .....?

[themedicineman]

So under state law, a caregiver must simply keeps his plants in a "locked and secure facility, accessible only by to caregiver".

So in theory, and under 'state law' one could have multiple, separately locked facilities for separate caregivers all in the same main building.

Now under certain city ordinances such as Lansing state that only 1 caregiver is allowed per residence, and no non-residential properties

may be used by caregivers. Since this is a city ordinance, I'm sure things are different in other cities. Do any cities allow multiple caregivers in the same building?

[Timmahh]

this is a great Question. ive not seen much thru the law on it.

 

impo, i would recommend you have 2 seperate facilities to grow in. one for Each CG. that way CG 1 meds are secure from CG 2 meds. if LEO walks in, and only 1 of you are there, and you have 18 plants between you both, boom, the ONE CGis over. by maintaining seperate locked facilities, that each CG only has access too. you are limiting the ability for someone to ASSUME/Claim all plant are a single individuals grow.

[Captain Obvious]

So under state law, a caregiver must simply keeps his plants in a "locked and secure facility, accessible only by to caregiver".

So in theory, and under 'state law' one could have multiple, separately locked facilities for separate caregivers all in the same main building.

Now under certain city ordinances such as Lansing state that only 1 caregiver is allowed per residence, and no non-residential properties

may be used by caregivers. Since this is a city ordinance, I'm sure things are different in other cities. Do any cities allow multiple caregivers in the same building?

 

Read the Law again, a Caregiver and a Patient may have access too the grow room. it does not say the Caregiver or the Patient.

 

BTW, State Law Trumps City Ordinances.

[themedicineman]

so long as they are seperate entities and locked its ok?

for example, one cg1 could have his plants locked in the basement, cg2 has his plants locked up in the garage.

[Captain Obvious]

so long as they are seperate entities and locked its ok?

for example, one cg1 could have his plants locked in the basement, cg2 has his plants locked up in the garage.

 

Please show (POST) where in the act that you see these restrictions that don't exist.

[treehugger]

so long as they are seperate entities and locked its ok?

for example, one cg1 could have his plants locked in the basement, cg2 has his plants locked up in the garage.

 

Liberal interpretations say yes, that should be OK. Unfortunately the enforcing agencies can, and will make a more conservative evaluation at a whim, and that will cost you the whole ten yards...

 

There are no guarantees. proceed at your own risk.

[foxman711]

So under state law, a caregiver must simply keeps his plants in a "locked and secure facility, accessible only by to caregiver".

So in theory, and under 'state law' one could have multiple, separately locked facilities for separate caregivers all in the same main building.

Now under certain city ordinances such as Lansing state that only 1 caregiver is allowed per residence, and no non-residential properties

may be used by caregivers. Since this is a city ordinance, I'm sure things are different in other cities. Do any cities allow multiple caregivers in the same building?

The rules say "a caregiver", not "the caregiver"

[Mememe]

could be a big problem federally if going over 99 plants.

[pic book]

Mememe has the biggest baddest bust in mind. The one by the DEA even if the 2 caregivers have separate, enclosed, locked facilities, but are over 99 plants (and if full up with patients and themselves are patients actually could, under MMMA of 2008, have a total of 144 plants between them) and could both be sentenced to the mandatory minimum of 5 years in federal. Won't have a problem? Never an argument between the 2 CG's? Never anyone mad enuf to drop a tip?

 

Now I stray to unimagined risk. Krustydj (a member on here and a cc organizer) recently reported a case in which a patient of his possessed unrooted cuttings that were charged as plants by LEO and the judge allowed unrooted clones into the count as plants. So while you might think you're under 99 plants, if they count cuttings as in Berrien County, you could be well cited for being over 99 (the Feds "Magic number").

 

Here's where I preach. Regardless of how many caregivers under the same roof do your cloning on the mother. 25 clones still attached to the mother don't increase plant count, and the mother is only 1 plant. In pics they will show as one plant and one only one pot and only one set of roots. Sure beats the question were there roots at the time of the bust and how many of these clones in the evidence pics actually had roots? (They take pics from above, not from the root end). Sorry to ramble, but there is the law (city, county state, federal) on one hand and practical protection of yourself, on the other.

 

By the way, in the Winter 2011 issue of The Midwest Cultivator (available free in some growstores and cc clubs) p7, ther's a list of MI cities with bans, moratoriums, or regulations.