Jump to content

Shut Out? Restrictive Local Ordinances


Recommended Posts

Mal has generously offered to post local goverment prohibitions and restrictions that patients and caregivers are saddled with. He starts with the following, and I expect there are more than he has to offer. Please do what you can to keep any reports or content as brief and to the point as you can. I can see this becoming long winded and difficult to track, given the volume of information that may posted. Your contributions are more than welcome.

Breitung Twp.

Well, you should start a Ordinance thread i can start posting some. I mean,.. i really do have over a hundred.

Anyhow, Here is a very recent one from my area. This is a direct response to someone trying to open a dispensary:

Breitung Township Medical Marijuana Ordinance

Kinda rough aye? Likely to be proven unenforcebale on a few of the points,.. but to find out the enforceability of it, it needs to be enforced on someone first. ;-)

Anyhow,... theres the first one i will post and most recent in my area. Moratorium renewals continue.

I should also add, this is newer model language than i am used to(updating model language recommends) and is coming from Michigan Townships Association. Much of this model language has come from people like Hubbard Law Firm, Andrea Ditschman, Gerald Fisher, Matt Newburg, Michigan Municipal League... etc etc.

Edited by zapatosunidos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kalamazoo

 

 

I will post these slowly.

 

Todays Ordinance is Kalamazoo. Random pick. This ordinance establishes Caregivers as "Home Occupations" and are forbidden within 1000 ft of schools etc etc.

 

Kalamazoo Medical Marijuana Ordinance for Home Occupations

 

This ordinance was a result of reaction to the opening of a couple Dispensaries and Kalamazoo recieved advice from Michigan Municipal League, Hubbard Law Firm and a couple other entities using an example of the Grand Rapids Ordinance.

 

p.s. Gregs, can you edit your first post to say "Breitung Township" at the top just like this post. Thanks. At some point in the future, we will appreciate it. Size 18/bold/underlined :-)

 

p.p.s. Can you change the name of the topic? Or add to it. At least have the word Ordinances in the title. :-)

Edited by Malamute
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huntington Woods

 

 

Huntington Woods Ordinance prohibiting Caregivers as Home Occupation

 

This ordinance prohibits Caregivers without a special land permit. (none have ever been issued)

 

This ordinance was influenced by Michigan Municipal League and Hubbard Law Firm. They ended up adopting only the Home Occupation language from those entities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kalamazoo

 

 

I will post these slowly.

 

 

 

 

Todays Ordinance is Kalamazoo. Random pick. This ordinance establishes Caregivers as "Home Occupations" and are forbidden within 1000 ft of schools etc etc.

 

Kalamazoo Medical Marijuana Ordinance for Home Occupations

 

This ordinance was a result of reaction to the opening of a couple Dispensaries and Kalamazoo recieved advice from Michigan Municipal League, Hubbard Law Firm and a couple other entities using an example of the Grand Rapids Ordinance.

 

p.s. Gregs, can you edit your first post to say "Breitung Township" at the top just like this post. Thanks. At some point in the future, we will appreciate it. Size 18/bold/underlined :-)

 

p.p.s. Can you change the name of the topic? Or add to it. At least have the word Ordinances in the title. :-)

 

 

How do you know what you are asserting about dispensaries and the Hubbard Law Firm?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jamie just wants to resume an argument we had 3 years ago about Hubbard Law Firm and Matt Newburg writing and peddling restrictive Ordinance language all over the state.

 

As always,... i was right and Jamie was just full of BS.

 

If you have something positive to add please do jamie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grand Haven

 

 

Grand Haven Ordinance Restricting Caregivers

 

This ordiance declares caregivers as a minor home occupation, requires registering, inspection, forbiddance 1000ft of school library etc, and several other issues. Model language originated from Michigan Municipal League and Hubbard Law Firm. There are other ordinances that are by Michigan Townships association and some other avenues as well. So,.. not all are MML and Hubbard by a long shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is great info. Thanks!!

 

I was thinking that if these restrictions could be roughly catagorized, we could present an overview using a map of the state and say 6 or 7 categories/colors.

 

I'll admit that I've not read through all of these. Are the ordinances similar enough that one could organize them into a reasonable number of categories?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jamie just wants to resume an argument we had 3 years ago about Hubbard Law Firm and Matt Newburg writing and peddling restrictive Ordinance language all over the state.

 

As always,... i was right and Jamie was just full of BS.

 

If you have something positive to add please do jamie.

 

Once again, while you may believe this, you continue to be incorrect.

 

The Hubbard Law Firm is a municipal law firm. They advise their clients of their choices, then represent them as their clients wish.

They don't advocate for a particular strategy. It is incorrect and misleading to say that they caused any policy that may be disagreed with.

Edited by jamieuke
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Hubbard Law Firm is a municipal law firm. They advise their clients of their choices, then represent them as their clients wish.

They don't advocate for a particular strategy. It is incorrect and misleading to say that they caused any policy that may be disagreed with.

 

How about we settle on "greatly contributed to"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK. I get it. Hubbard is a hired gun, just as are other firms. This one, however, is not at all bashful about specializing in practice that supports clients who have demonstrated a clear and distinct bias against caregivers and in favor of dispensaries. When we look to their client list, and consider their motives and actions, we understand completely. Mal's listing, and any solicited from other members, demonstrates this in spades.

Edited by GregS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

How about we settle on "greatly contributed to"?

 

I understand, but it would be akin to giving grief to a defense attorney for defending a client you may not like. The law firm is good at what they do.

 

In their seminars, they talked about warning their clients of the possible conflicts and liability for taking certain positions, but they ultimately carry out what their clients pay them to do.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand, but it would be akin to giving grief to a defense attorney for defending a client you may not like. The law firm is good at what they do.

 

In their seminars, they talked about warning their clients of the possible conflicts and liability for taking certain positions, but they ultimately carry out what their clients pay them to do.

 

...as long as they are trying to put limits on us that are contrary to the MMA, and that restrict our protections under that law. We might just want to get some movement going toward corresponding with these people and let them know where we stand. You know, write cease and desist letters from CC's and the MMMA, attend council meetings to argue in our behalf, and work with the press. We are putting together something that might even make a feature story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that the SC has spoken to clarify cg rights (and they are rights) we must dig in harrd to eliminate these foul infractions on those rights. Any and all prohibitions that do not comply with the MMA are illegal and unenforceable.

 

I'm pizz'd. My foot is tapping, and YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE the tapping Greg foot.

Edited by GregS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that the SC has spoken to clarify cg rights (and they are rights) we must dig in harrd to eliminate these foul infractions on those rights. Any and all prohibitions that do not comply with the MMA are illegal and unenforceable.

 

I'm pizz'd. My foot is tapping, and YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE the tapping Greg foot.

 

if i were you and the ity comes down on you i would just get a Lawyer and maybe file a Law suit

Edited by maxmax
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once again, while you may believe this, you continue to be incorrect.

 

The Hubbard Law Firm is a municipal law firm. They advise their clients of their choices, then represent them as their clients wish.

They don't advocate for a particular strategy. It is incorrect and misleading to say that they caused any policy that may be disagreed with.

 

You take me a fool.

 

Of course i know exactly what Hubbard did and does. Direct contact and correspondance allows that, even after Matt left. CPU has its tentacles everywhere mon'. The problem is, Hubbard offered false choices and corrupted model language as a starting point for municipalities. Yes the municipality was given basicly 3 choices of ordinances to follow. The language was pre-written by Hubbard though with Michigan Municipal League and Gerald Fisher and Ken Stecker even skulking around int he background. They offered ordinances under false pretenses and with recommended language that was flawed. Some cities increased the "yuckiness" of the model language, but the horrible outline to start from was simply a horrible outline and damaging. They then went around and peddled their language to individual municipalities around the state.

 

Ahh yea,, i am very very closely familiar about this "game of ordinances". Unlike most, i have found the local issue to be the most troubling honestly. They have and are building ALOT of momentum to get municipalities the power they want to regulate medical cannabis locally. I personally feel this "local Control" angle is just begging to be hijacked.

 

I mean, why do you think MML and MTA et al have been passing dozens and dozens of local ordinances? The same reason we try to pass local decrim and LLEP ordinances. We got 4 ordinances last year, they got 47. Who has the momentum to get what they want?

 

*shrug*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...