The Michigan Medical Marihuana Provisioning Act Hb5580 (dispensary Bill)

[jamieuke]

Bob- What is distributed at the Provisioning Center, is provided for by caregivers, participating in the existing caregiver system, mainly growing in residences. There are no specific designations for a caregiver to bring overages to the centers, other than being a caregiver. The Centers that would be recognized by this bill, are very similar to models that have been in operation since early on, and continue today, but would be recognized entities on a state level.

 

What is typically referred to as "dispensaries" and "farmers markets" do not have a huge distinction, other than using the same interpretation of law and carrying it out with different organizational systems. If the potential operators of a provisioning center under 5580, wanted to make the model more akin to a farmer's market, they probably could.

 

There are varying degrees of positives and negatives to all distribution systems from individual caregivers to home networks and clubs to farrmer's markets and what some people call dispensaries. All of these things work for getting medicine and information to patients. All of these systems can be awesome, and all can be corrupt.

[Dr. Bob]

This is not my area of expertise. I just put up a couple of thoughts, but this needs to be hashed out better by those in that field. My only real interest in the distribution system is to make sure some method (hopefully several methods) exist to allow my patients to obtain their meds safely and affordably. I think that if we toss a bone to the state in way of provisions for taxation and licensing of commercial distribution centers, that can only help us by giving them a vested interest in having them around.

 

Michigan residence need jobs, this will provide many, along with some needed tax dollars. Even if growers don't pay taxes (lot of cash) they are using that money to buy things from the local economy. And you can bet the state will make sure the distribution center pays its taxes. Win all the way around in an economically depressed state.

 

Dr. Bob

[Restorium2]

Bob- What is distributed at the Provisioning Center, is provided for by caregivers, participating in the existing caregiver system, mainly growing in residences. There are no specific designations for a caregiver to bring overages to the centers, other than being a caregiver. The Centers that would be recognized by this bill, are very similar to models that have been in operation since early on, and continue today, but would be recognized entities on a state level.

 

What is typically referred to as "dispensaries" and "farmers markets" do not have a huge distinction, other than using the same interpretation of law and carrying it out with different organizational systems. If the potential operators of a provisioning center under 5580, wanted to make the model more akin to a farmer's market, they probably could.

 

There are varying degrees of positives and negatives to all distribution systems from individual caregivers to home networks and clubs to farrmer's markets and what some people call dispensaries. All of these things work for getting medicine and information to patients. All of these systems can be awesome, and all can be corrupt.

You keep saying 'caregivers' and leave out 'patient growers'. Is this intentional?

 

So you give the potentially currupt ones less of a 'foot in the door' with the language. If they can't grow then there is less 'wondering'. I agree, even a dispensary can be awesome. For some it would come naturally, for others, they need to be pointed in the right direction. They both will have the same rules.

[Dr. Bob]

You keep saying 'caregivers' and leave out 'patient growers'. Is this intentional?

 

So you give the potentially currupt ones less of a 'foot in the door' with the language. If they can't grow then there is less 'wondering'. I agree, even a dispensary can be awesome. For some it would come naturally, for others, they need to be pointed in the right direction. They both will have the same rules.

 

No it was NOT intentionally left out. Reviewing back you will see I have specifically listed both caregivers and growing patients. Was just not specified there.

 

I agree that brokerage (grain elevator) verse commercial farm has less potential for federal intervention and abuse.

[Restorium2]

No it was NOT intentionally left out. Reviewing back you will see I have specifically listed both caregivers and growing patients. Was just not specified there.

 

I agree that brokerage (grain elevator) verse commercial farm has less potential for federal intervention and abuse.

I quoted Jamie. That question was for him. I believe it was intentional. I want to confirm that and get a reason for it.

[restlesslegs]

That would simplify things to simply say Michigan Grown by Caregivers and Patients, with no growing by the distribution center. Make them strictly brokerages to redistribute overages to those that need it.

 

These were my thoughts also, think I said something like that wayyyyyyy back in this thread lol.

Edited May 9, 2012 by restlesslegs

[restlesslegs]

Bob- What is distributed at the Provisioning Center, is provided for by caregivers, participating in the existing caregiver system, mainly growing in residences. There are no specific designations for a caregiver to bring overages to the centers, other than being a caregiver. The Centers that would be recognized by this bill, are very similar to models that have been in operation since early on, and continue today, but would be recognized entities on a state level.

 

What is typically referred to as "dispensaries" and "farmers markets" do not have a huge distinction, other than using the same interpretation of law and carrying it out with different organizational systems. If the potential operators of a provisioning center under 5580, wanted to make the model more akin to a farmer's market, they probably could.

 

There are varying degrees of positives and negatives to all distribution systems from individual caregivers to home networks and clubs to farrmer's markets and what some people call dispensaries. All of these things work for getting medicine and information to patients. All of these systems can be awesome, and all can be corrupt.

 

Can you be more specific on how this would or could include a Farmers market model?

[Restorium2]

Can we get some actual edits Restorium?

Can you post what you have as a starting point? Then we can mark it up, like Schuette does.

[Restorium2]

Can you be more specific on how this would or could include a Farmers market model?

They are the same thing if you make the rules in such a way that makes it so. That's where I'm headed.

[Restorium2]

I'm sure not going to assume that. lol

[jamieuke]

This is not my area of expertise. I just put up a couple of thoughts, but this needs to be hashed out better by those in that field. My only real interest in the distribution system is to make sure some method (hopefully several methods) exist to allow my patients to obtain their meds safely and affordably. I think that if we toss a bone to the state in way of provisions for taxation and licensing of commercial distribution centers, that can only help us by giving them a vested interest in having them around.

 

Michigan residence need jobs, this will provide many, along with some needed tax dollars. Even if growers don't pay taxes (lot of cash) they are using that money to buy things from the local economy. And you can bet the state will make sure the distribution center pays its taxes. Win all the way around in an economically depressed state.

 

Dr. Bob

 

 

I agree with this.

[Restorium2]

I agree with this.

What about PATIENT GROWERS?

[restlesslegs]

They are the same thing if you make the rules in such a way that makes it so. That's where I'm headed.

This bill could work if it was amended. Needs somethings taken out completely and other things defined more clearly.

[restlesslegs]

What about PATIENT GROWERS?

Yep!

[jamieuke]

"Can you be more specific on how this would or could include a Farmers market model?"

 

The farmer would become an agent of the provisioning center and have his or her own table with his or her own meds on it, if that is how it was set up and worked out with the municipality. The medicine may have to be tested if the municipality wants it that way, and there is no smoking on the premises. However, the model of the actual farmer doing direct distribution in the space provided for by the center is certianly possible. Some people whom I have discussed with this, have suggested that. I am fine with it, but I would assume that if it were a business meant for daily operation, it would eventually adapt into more of what the compassion centers do now.

 

An individual patient may participate in bringing overages to a provisioning center if the municipality does

not disallow it. I believe that Callton is fine with the caregivers bringing in overages because they have

been screened by the state to have no drug related felonies, which may not be the case for an individual

patient, so he wanted the municipality to be able to limit that activity for that reason.

 

 

I want to add that Zap asked for possible coherent changes to bring to Callton and others. This is where the focus should be and these proposals should be submitted in the near future.

 

So far, removing cultivation or further defining it, and making it clear that 5580 is not involved with residences are good ideas that have come from these boards and elsewhere. What other coherent ideas do others have? There is a real chance in the process to shape things here.

Edited May 9, 2012 by jamieuke

[Restorium2]

Which brings up another thing;

Municipalities need LESS control, or no control. They are known to be crooked at times and also need a push in the right direction. You need to make some rules and then the municipalites need to follow them. They don't get a menu, that's just trouble. We need uniformity across the state. Write something least objectionable to most municipalities and let it fly. If they hate it then they can fight it on their home turfs. While other, more receptive, municipalities show them how it works great for them.

Edited May 9, 2012 by Restorium2

[restlesslegs]

It needs to be written to allow the type of FM you or others have suggested so it is clear and can not be disputed. I think allowing each county and/or city the right to decide what is lawful concerning this bill and MMJ is leading to problems down the road and should be taken out of the bill.

[jamieuke]

Reslesslegs- Fair enough in terms of language you would like to see. Perhaps Zap can help with that. However, this bill does not give counties or cities the right to decide what is lawful. This bill does not displace the MMMA or change it.

Edited May 9, 2012 by jamieuke

[Restorium2]

I am good on the no cultivation part, but the 5 ounce limit is something I could never support. It would lead to shortages or lower quality medicine.

OK. Is some limit acceptible? I'm curious about something though. How does a caregiver, or patient grower, end up with huge overages so they can bring more than 5 ounces a month to the dispensary? At some point you have to draw the line for certain reasons like flooding the market with illegal supplies, outsourcing. Where's the line?

[Restorium2]

I believe that Callton is fine with the caregivers bringing in overages because they have

been screened by the state to have no drug related felonies, which may not be the case for an individual

patient, so he wanted the municipality to be able to limit that activity for that reason.

 

I think he needs to back off the drug felons here. There is no practical purpose for this, unless I'm missing something? It feels like bashing to me.

[Restorium2]

I think it is pretty easy for a cultivator to set up their grow to generate excess supply if they choose to, without running afoul of any MMMA restrictions. The main issue with this plan before was no legal outlet for that supply. Provisioning Centers solve this problem by creating a legal market for excess.

 

It seems your main issue is that you want these provisioning centers to be forced to buy from anybody with a card and five ounces. I don't think that will really do what you want it to do. I am not sure there is a perfect way to guarantee that nobody ever buys or sells imported cannabis, or buys or sells "too much" cannabis, other than collectively producing what the provisioning centers need at a price they, and therefore the end patients, can afford.

I saw what happened before here and want a 'fix'. Clicks of growers dominate at one dispensary. That leaves a lot of growers, great growers, outside looking in. Can you think of another way to fix that? Why can't there be a limit? Start with what you think wouldn't cause any damage to the dispensary and see if that would help the 'fix'.

[dirt_jump]

It is obvious they are trying to milk us by creating a large commercial grow. Call me a conspiracy theorist all you want, but this article popped up a 2 weeks before the bill.

 

 

http://www.freep.com/article/20120422/NEWS15/204220533/Company-wants-to-grow-quality-medical-marijuana-in-old-mine?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

[jamieuke]

If anyone is in or near the Gaylord area tonight, please come out to , 611 N. Center Ave. for the VGIP meeting. Local politicians, business owners and activists will be there. I believe that Northern Lab will be there, Drew Driver is hosting it, local elected officials and some running for office will be there as well. I will also be attending and happy to, more personally, discuss 5580 or any pertinent mmj issue. The meeting is 6:30-8:30. There is a story in the News forum about it.

[Restorium2]

There is no doubt that this concept is waiting in the wings. The critical piece to make it a reality is the Federal rescheduling of marijuana. I truly don't know what the current status is on that.

Limiting how much a dispensary can accept from any one grower kills all these 'Pie In The Sky' ideas. Kill it and we don't have to deal with it daily.

[restlesslegs]

Reslesslegs- Fair enough in terms of language you would like to see. Perhaps Zap can help with that. However, this bill does not give counties or cities the right to decide what is lawful. This bill does not displace the MMMA or change it.

My apologies I stated that incorrectly. In the bill it gives them the right to decide if they will allow it. I have to read it again but off the top of my head that stuck out and I do feel it can lead to trouble down the road.

 

Zap can you help put something together?