State Supreme Court To Hear Wyoming Medical Marijuana Case Tuesday

[bobandtorey]

On Thursday, the Michigan Supreme Court heard arguments in a case that will decide if all communities can restrict the use of medical marijuana. In 2008, Michigan voters approved the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, but the city of Wyoming created a strict ordinance restricting the application of the law within its jurisdiction.

 

The ACLU of Michigan has challenged the ordinance.

 

 

 

 

 

While the city of Wyoming has packaged the restrictive ordinance as a zoning ordinance, the court asked Wyoming City Attorney Jack Sluiter, whether the results of the zoning ordinance was any different from that of a ban.

 

Sluiter told the media, “We are not trying to ban medical marijuana use by citizens, we are attempting to regulate the cultivation of the growing, distribution, of marijuana in the city of Wyoming.”

 

Presenting a new and innovative take on the issue, Sluiter portrayed a veritable slew of harms arising from the use of medical marijuana.

 

The Wyoming city attorney emphasized, “we’ve had break-ins, home invasions, theft involving medical marijuana …”

 

Highlighting another serious consequence of medical marijuana Sluiter said, “We’ve had fires involving medical marijuana because people are using grow lights and other things that are catching electrical systems and properties.”

 

However, the ACLU Michigan attorney Daniel Korobkin said, “They’re trying to nullify the Medical Marijuana Act within their city, and if they succeed there will be lots of cities that will try to do that but that’s for the same reason the people of Michigan had to go to the polls.”

 

However, Korobkin admitted that the court was clear that state and local authorities and state authorities have the power to take measures for safeguarding risks to public.

 

What remains to be seen is whether the city of Wyoming is successful in establishing that use of medical marijuana constitutes a public risk and to which extent.

 

 

http://www.jdjournal.com/2013/10/10/michigan-supreme-court-hears-wyomings-issues-over-medical-marijuana/#

Edited October 11, 2013 by bobandtorey

[Dr. Bob]

People who own firearms or plasma tv's get robbed.  I can see them make a case for fire codes.  I am glad they asked the question that needed to be asked- is this not a thinly veiled excuse to exclude a community from the MMMA, and if successful what effect will that have on public policy?

 

I think I am just going to wait and see what they say like everyone else.  Whatever the decision is, it will give us a road map to compliance.

 

Dr. Bob

[bobandtorey]

This must be a Big case because the ACLU wouldn't have taken it the first words out of the city Lawyer was the city is not banning medical marihuana nor banning growing it 

 

He also went on to say Mr beek was growing and using Cannabis in his home even as of today but the ACLU Lawyer said it did ban marihuana and it's use  this is a big case IMHO it could open up a door none of us would want opened 

[+Malamute]

It may also slam shut the door they been trying to open.

 

I think we look good and Sec 7(e) will stand firm.

 

From there, it is small cracks that would allow minor infractions such as general nuisances that would violate common law.  Glare, noise, smoke that hinders another property owners enjoyment of property. In which case it is mere civil fines and working it out with your neighbour.

 

 This ruling could incinerate 90%+ of the stupid ordinances passed by misguided municipalities.

[t-pain]

justice young hinted that the medical use of marijuana includes cultivation and cultivation could be limited by other means.

he wants to limit the scope of what cultivation means.

cultivation isnt defined in the MMMA.

the MMMA protects cultivation, but what does cultivation contain and allow?

 

 

the question is would 'cultivation' protect a hydroponic system in your house?

could there be an ordinance against hydroponics in houses?

could there be an ordinance against hps lighting in houses?

could there be an ordinance against using fertilizers indoors?

 

 

sec7e pretty much wins all of that.

 

unless they weave a crazy decision around the definition of cultivation. much like they did with mcqueen and 'a patient' vs 'the patient'.

 

Full Definition of CULTIVATE
1: to prepare or prepare and use for the raising of crops; also : to loosen or break up the soil about (growing plants)
2a : to foster the growth of <cultivate vegetables>
b : culture 2a
 

would be interesting if they somehow said hydro could be banned but dirt was ok.

 

bill shcutte issued an opinion back in 2011

http://www.ag.state.mi.us/opinion/datafiles/2010s/op10340.htm

 

An owner of a hotel, motel, apartment building, or other similar facility can prohibit the smoking of marihuana and the growing of marihuana plants anywhere within the facility, and imposing such a prohibition does not violate the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act, Initiated Law 1 of 2008, MCL 333.26421 et seq.

 

will this ruling prove that opinion wrong?

Edited October 14, 2013 by t-pain

[Celliach]

justice young hinted that the medical use of marijuana includes cultivation and cultivation could be limited by other means.

he wants to limit the scope of what cultivation means.

cultivation isnt defined in the MMMA.

the MMMA protects cultivation, but what does cultivation contain and allow?

 

 

the question is would 'cultivation' protect a hydroponic system in your house?

could there be an ordinance against hydroponics in houses?

could there be an ordinance against hps lighting in houses?

could there be an ordinance against using fertilizers indoors?

 

 

sec7e pretty much wins all of that.

 

unless they weave a crazy decision around the definition of cultivation. much like they did with mcqueen and 'a patient' vs 'the patient'.

 

Full Definition of CULTIVATE

1: to prepare or prepare and use for the raising of crops; also : to loosen or break up the soil about (growing plants)

2a : to foster the growth of <cultivate vegetables>

b : culture 2a

 

would be interesting if they somehow said hydro could be banned but dirt was ok.

 

bill shcutte issued an opinion back in 2011

http://www.ag.state.mi.us/opinion/datafiles/2010s/op10340.htm

 

 

will this ruling prove that opinion wrong?

 

For the most part, the government can't dictate what an individual can and can't do with their property.  In the same vein you don't have freedom of speech on someone else's property.  There are a few exceptions.

[Indica Jones]

Anything new?

[bobandtorey]

Anything new?

IMO we won't here anything until June or July 2014 i also think that we will win this one

[Guanotea1]

MM is a commercial enterprise, often a home business, are you zoned for that?

Lets talk about FIRES

Some portion of our builds, most notably the fire-starting ones, are already illegal. If you want to get tough on fires - just use the codes/laws we already have on the books. {I'm a licensed contractor} to crack down when they happen.

No one wants condos / apartment buildings going up in flames because their neighbor was irresponsible.

No one wants fire department resources getting used excessively, either.

 

Better yet, if what the government REALLY want to do is stop the fires before they start. Introducing a reasonable - grow room specific - set of requirements / permitting process, and roll that into getting a C.G. license. I don't like that or any additional requirement at all, but don't go banning mj over the possibility/actuality of a few fires when it's so easy to fix it.

 

Lets talk about THEFT

Ditto to what the good Doc said.

 

Lets talk about MOLD

Mold happens only when the conditions for mold are present. There is no need for a grow room to have those conditions, it's harmful to both our patients health and profitability, and proper enviro control should be a top item to everyone involved anyway. You could roll some simple requirements (like dehumidification, material selection, etc) into a grow-permitting process as well.

Edited November 24, 2013 by Guanotea1

[Hayduke]

perhaps we need inspections on our Christmas trees and holiday lights as well.  Heck just put a camera in everyone's house and a gps on everyone's cars.

 

After all it's all for homeland protection from the boogie man...

 

Christmas tree fires are far more prevalent than grow room lights fires.  

 

what zap says is the gospel...

 

take a deep breath...

Edited November 23, 2013 by Hayduke

[Wild Bill]

I've been told by firefighters that the two most common causes of home fires are coffee makers and clothes dryers.

[+Malamute]

Common and relative percentages are two different things. ;-)

 

 

But when people have to get a license to plug in a computer, a new tv or a stereo system,.. I would consider licensing a stupid grow light.

 

 

Absurd.

[Chauncy Gardner]

Anyone can overload a home electrical system and cause a fire. Let's just legislate stupidity out of existence and cover all the bases.

 

Aren't wood burning heating systems a major cause of home fires also?

[Guanotea1]

Hey I'm not in favor of any additional regs, I am saying if you want to attack a problem, attack it directly. Don't act as if growing = fires, because if done correctly, there is very little increased risk for fire. It be like saying, hey everyone - all these ovens are starting fires in peoples homes, we just need to get rid of the ovens!

 

Of course not.

 

The rest of this "just as safe as a kitchen appliance.... no evidence of any increased danger.... etc" talk just falls flat on it's face IMO. It just doesn't even pass the straight face test! Maybe if you've got LEDs, or do the whole thing with T5s, maybe then there is no increased danger.

 

Listen,

240V

Plus a bunch of current from grow lights that are usually a minimum of 400W, and draw power for a minimum of 12 hours

Plus a bunch of chinese manufacturers churning out hydro crap that can barely be bothered to get uL listings

Plus a bunch of heat

Plus a bunch of humidity

Plus a bunch of water

Plus enclosed flames in some CO2 burners

Plus a lack of common sense fire safety equipment

 

This is NOT inheritly safe. It does NOT take a genius to figure this out. Plugging in 4 1000W lamps to run on 12/12 is not akin to plugging in a coffee maker. Ludacris!!

 

I'm talking about C.G's with 5 heavy patients here, the guys running more than 2-3000 watts total indoors.

Edited November 24, 2013 by Guanotea1

[t-pain]

In 2011, cooking was involved in an estimated 156,300 home structure fires that were reported to U.S. fire

 

departments. Cooking caused 43% of reported home fires,

 

heating is the #2 reason for fires.

so idiots with space heaters too close to a bed, or kerosene heaters, stuff like that.

 

number 3 is smoking ciggs. make sure you put out that butt!

 

after that its a mix of electrical overloads, appliance failures, stuff like that.

 

grow room fires? sure it happens. more than turkey fryers? i dont know.

there were 62 turkey oil fryer fires (dont know what year) , any numbers on grow room fires?

 

anyone talking about grow room fires is 99% on the prohibition side and not interested at all in actually making things safer. if they wanted safer they would encourage outdoor grows and indoor warehouses with multiple people and building inspectors in industrial sections of town.

Edited November 23, 2013 by t-pain

[trichcycler]

I've seen dozens of dispensaries in our state get closed/raided. I assume most were diligent in making sure their provisions were sold only to patients. None of the ones I'm aware of were philanthropists, but to the contrary, they were definitely in it for the profit. I'd hoped for activism, but they mostly tucked tail and plea out, so scratch the activism cloud.

These businesses were indeed "commercial enterprises" making no secret of their quest for profits. As a commercial enterprise, producing "medicine" for the masses they should be subject to the same if not other regulations as any other business on the block. The fact they often grow hundreds of plants in the back room I believe patients should have a reasonable sense of safety in their medicines from these places, just as food at the store is supposed to afford. Unlike the cottage industries of roadside tomato sales and private patient gardens, these folks should be held to a higher responsibility.

 

The real question would be this. If state regulated inspections were necessary, just like other medical marijuana states, how many of us would be fit to continue growing medicine in our rooms?

 

I've seen great rooms mostly, in my experience. Some lack necessary controls, some are way overboard with safety measures. Patients will differentiate these providers and choose the growers they are comfortable with. Patients are pretty smart, and can quickly ascertain a grower's garden habits, cleanliness, and dedication to their craft. Dealers and stoners wont care either way usually, but generally we're not catering to either hopefully.  I pride myself on my room build, complete with a building permit, professionally wired 200 amp service, and inspections of both by the city. I was told at the city council meetings that the growers among us supplying the dispensaries better have their ducks in order, and fully expect a fire, electrical, inspection in the future. This concerned me enough to get that part out of the way.

with states requiring a 25 thousand dollar raffle ticket, and 2.5 million dollars in an escrow account, just to be considered as a supplier/dispensary, this can be seen as nothing but a commercial enterprise, with many of us operating in the cottage industry. We can sell vegetables all day long at my driveway, but as soon as we are a business doing so, we are expected to comply with all of the above regulations as law. I can imagine the moment we get what we're fighting for, a medicinal recognition, that none but the inspected will be allowed to sell the herb to the public. My local milk farm cannot even transport raw milk without serious permits and inspections, at risk of a real life raid, property confiscation, and massive fines. Why would a medicine production for the sick be any different when it is legally commercialized in our state, a move that is coming soon I suspect, like it has in every other medical mj state.

 

I know during alcohol prohibition many of these same concerns by home brewers were being voiced. We've got those types of regs, or worse yet, the ones we all voted for, medicine production/sales regulations coming.

To speak of progression but be afraid of change is self-repressing. Its coming, we need to brace ourselves for the impact. I don't think that regulations will  further limit the ability of citizens in our state to produce their own needed medicine. Any production beyond that for yourself, is inherently , a commercial endeavor.

 

 

The question arises, therefore, why cannabis is so regularly banned in countries where alcohol is permitted. [...] It may be that we can ban cannabis simply because the people who use it, or would do so, carry little weight in social matters and are relatively easy to control, whereas the alcohol user often carries plenty of weight in social matters and is difficult to control, as the U.S. prohibition era showed. It has yet to be shown, however, that the one is more socially or personally disruptive than the other."

Ph.D. H.B.M Murphy, M.D.
Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Montreal.

Edited November 24, 2013 by grassmatch

[trichcycler]

cali, and Colorado are successfully commercialized  for instance correct ?  if I am understanding it as "designed principally for financial gain; profit-oriented."

 

theres a lot going on in the commercialization of marijuana throughout the whole country. Industrial hemp permits are sought in Oregon, huge corps vying to grow for states. I read the same posts you do right? this is all about commercialization in many states. some of these cities have 550 dispensaries, some are outnumbering starbucks.  do you think these are in business successfully because of their big hearts?   Marijuana has hit wall street, its a billion + dollar industry, and that's not from ma and pop ops.

take a look at the application fees, escrow requirements etc that cities are proposing. This is trend setting, how long before MI catches up ?

 

 

lets see, here's Washington news trix posted recently

Washington State Taking Applications For Marijuana Licenses Starting Tomorrow

 Posted by Johnny Green at 9:55 AM on November 17, 2013  Ending Marijuana Prohibition, Marijuana Business News  Add comments

Nov172013

 

 

The long wait is almost over in Washington State. Applications for recreational marijuana licenses are going to be accepted starting tomorrow. Are you going to be one of the applicants? If so, are you applying to be a grower? Or an outlet owner? An edible company? If you are an applicant, it’s a truly exciting time I’d imagine.

The world is watching how things unfold in Washington (and Colorado) to see what goes right, and what goes wrong. I know my home state of Oregon is watching closely and learning from the mistakes of Washington. When Oregon legalizes, there will be no DUII provision, and home cultivation will absolutely be a part of our effort. Also, unlike Washington, we will keep our medical program untouched. Washington has drawn a lot of criticism lately due to proposals that would limit the medical marijuana program there.

Per the Spokesman:

After nearly a year of studies, hearings, drafts and redrafts, the Liquor Control Board came up with rules that will at least launch a recreational marijuana industry in Washington. It limits the total amount of growing space for marijuana to 2 million square feet statewide. Growers can apply for one of three different sizes in their licenses, but no license will be for more than 30,000 square feet.

How do you feel the process is going in Washington? Do you agree with me that Colorado has the better model? What mistakes do you see either state making? Do you have legalization efforts ramping up in your state? If so, what areas of the Washington model do you hope your state mimics? What areas do you hope are not included?

 

Maryland proposals

Maryland -- Maryland Democratic gubernatorial hopeful Heather R. Mizeur on Tuesday will propose legalizing marijuana and using the tax revenue it generates to fund pre-kindergarten education, according to an advance copy of her plan.

Mizeur, a Montgomery County delegate who faces Lt. Gov. Anthony G. Brown and Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler in next year’s Democratic primary, proposes that Maryland regulate marijuana much like it does alcohol. She estimates that taxing the drug could yield up to $157.5 million in new revenue for the state each year.

Adults ages 21 and over would be permitted to possess up to an ounce of marijuana without violating state law under Mizeur’s plan, a copy of which was shared with The Washington Post. Smoking marijuana would not be allowed in public, and it would be illegal to drive under the influence.

“Marijuana’s time as a controlled, illegal substance has run its course,” Mizeur says in her plan. “Marijuana laws ruin lives, are enforced with racial bias and distract law enforcement from serious and violent crimes. … A Maryland with legalized, regulated and taxed marijuana will mean safer communities, universal early childhood education and fewer citizens unnecessarily exposed to our criminal justice system.”

Mizeur’s position comes as Maryland and other states are rethinking their posture on the criminalization of marijuana — though Maryland lawmakers have not yet shown a willingness to contemplate a plan as far-reaching as Mizeur proposes.

Last November, voters in Washington state and Colorado approved initiatives to legalize, tax and regulate marijuana for those 21 and older. In her plan, Mizeur points to those states as models.

During this year’s legislative session, Maryland lawmakers passed a bill authorizing distribution of marijuana for medical purposes by qualified academic centers. Legislative analysts have said it is unlikely the drug would be legally dispensed before 2016, and it remains unclear how many institutions will participate.

A separate bill passed the Senate this year that would have decriminalized possession of small amounts of marijuana, subjecting those caught to only a civil fine of up to $100. That legislation died in the House of Delegates, however.

Mizeur’s two better-known Democratic opponents reacted cautiously to word of her plan.

“The attorney general recognizes that public sentiment is slowly shifting toward limited, prescribed medicinal use of marijuana and, in some states, even toward decriminalization of marijuana,” said Gansler campaign spokesman Bob Wheelock. “There does not appear to be a groundswell toward full scale legalization here in Maryland, nor does the attorney general feel that unrestrained legalization would be appropriate.”

Justin Schall, Brown’s campaign manager, said Brown “welcomes a continued discussion and analysis on how decriminalizing negligible amounts of marijuana would impact the ability of our law enforcement agencies to focus on more violent crimes and criminals.”

A Goucher poll released this month found that 51 percent of Marylanders support making marijuana use legal in the state, while 40 percent oppose legalization.

When presented with a list of consequences for possessing small amounts of marijuana, 49 percent of residents supported policies that focus on fines, while 34 percent said they favor rehabilitation. Only 6 percent said they prefer measures that focus on jail time.

Under Mizeur’s plan for legalization, marijuana would be subject to an excise tax of $50 per ounce at the point of sale between cultivators and retailers. There would also be a 6 percent sales tax and 2 percent excise tax at the point of sale.

Mizeur estimates that the annual revenue generated could provide 23,675 children with a full day of pre-kindergarten.

Last month, Mizeur laid out a phased-in plan that would offer full-day pre-K programs to 4-year-olds across the state. She would also ensure half-day programs are eventually available to all 3-year-olds in lower-income families.

 

 

west Virginia

Details of WV Medical Marijuana Bill Emerge

Charleston, W.Va. -- The first details about a proposal to legalize the use of marijuana for medical purposes in West Virginia emerged on Wednesday during a legislative committee meeting.

The legislature's Joint Health Committee was told during an interim meeting that a bill allowing the use of medical marijuana is being drafted for consideration in the upcoming legislative session.

The National Conference of State Legislatures says 20 states and the District of Columbia allow the use of medical marijuana, though it's still prohibited under federal law. West Virginia lawmakers have spent time learning about the issue in at least one previous interim meeting earlier this year.

 

Charles Roskovensky, chief counsel for the House Committee on Health and Human Resources, told the joint committee that a bill he's drafting for them would allow people with certain illnesses like cancer and glaucoma to possess up to six ounces of marijuana. If the bill becomes law, registered patients would be able to purchase medical marijuana at five 'compassion centers' throughout the state that would be chosen through a competitive bid process, he said. Registered patients would also be allowed to have a limited number of 12 marijuana plants, he said.

 

Roskovensky said the bill was not in its final form and solicited suggestions from lawmakers who serve on the Joint Health Committee, and directed questions about the proposal to the committee's co-chairmen. It wasn't clear how much support the proposal would have in the committee. No vote was taken and comments were limited, with most questions and discussion being deferred to another time. Still, marijuana legalization supporters celebrated that the discussion was happening at all.

 

"Marijuana has proven medical benefits, and seriously ill individuals should be able to use it without fear of arrest and prosecution," Marijuana Policy Project legislative analyst Matt Simon said in a prepared statement. "We are pleased to see legislators are educating themselves on the issue, and we hope they will move forward with this compassionate and much-needed legislation."

 

Source: Associated Press (Wire)

 

Colorado

Colorado -- The world's first recreational marijuana retail license was granted to a dispensary in Colorado this week -- so start saving up, because the Rocky Mountain High will soon be for sale.

Annie's, located in the mountain and gambling town of Central City, was the recipient of the historic license and posted this on their Facebook page earlier this week to celebrate: The Central City pot shop is owned by Strainwise, which owns eight dispensaries in Colorado and hopes all eight shops are approved for the recreational license, according to Westword.

Erin Phillips, a spokesperson for Strainwise, told The Huffington Post that the dispensary company received a local license for Annie's and are waiting for approval of the state license for the pot shop.

The first recreational marijuana shops in Colorado will open their doors for the first time in U.S. history on Jan. 1, 2014.

"Colorado is moving forward and leaving marijuana prohibition behind," Mason Tvert, communications director for Marijuana Policy Project and co-director of Colorado's marijuana legalizing Amendment 64 campaign, told HuffPost. "For the first time in history, those who sell marijuana are receiving licenses from the state instead of rap sheets. Marijuana will be sold to adults by legitimate, taxpaying businesses instead of drug cartels in the underground market."

"It will not be long before voters and lawmakers in other states decide to adopt similar policies," Tvert added. "Marijuana is an objectively less harmful than alcohol, and it is finally starting to be treated that way."

The Denver Post reported that the state's Marijuana Enforcement Division, the regulatory agency overseeing retail marijuana in the state, accepted 136 applications from from recreational marijuana stores in October. Individuals who submitted applications in the month of October are guaranteed a decision on their application by the end of the year and, if approved, can open doors on Jan. 1.

“If you got your application in, everything done in the month of October, you’re still going to have the benefit of a start date of Oct. 1 and have a decision by that Jan. 1 date," Julie Postlethwait, spokesperson for the marijuana regulatory office, told HuffPost.

State law demands that only businesses who are already licensed for medical marijuana sales and are in "good standing" with the state can apply for a recreational license. Postlethwait said that there is a pool of roughly 550 medical marijuana dispensaries in Colorado that can apply for recreational sales licenses.

Although it has been less than three months since Attorney General Eric Holder made the historic announcement that the Department of Justice will allow both Colorado and Washington's new marijuana laws to go into effect, legal marijuana is already one of the fastest-growing markets in the U.S., increasing at a rate poised to outpace the expansion of the global smartphone market.

"Cannabis is one of the fastest-growing industries," said Steve Berg, a former managing director of Wells Fargo Bank and editor of the report, the second edition of the State of Legal Marijuana Markets. "Domestically, we weren't able to find any market that is growing as quickly."

"Entrepreneurs and private investors are flocking to cannabis markets," Berg said. "Those who really understand market dynamics will reap large rewards."

Colorado voters made the limited sale, possession and growing of marijuana for recreational purposes legal for adults 21 and over in 2012. By law, adults can possess up to an ounce of pot, can grow as many as six marijuana plants at home (with only three flowering at any given time), but home-grown marijuana can only be for personal use and cannot be sold. However, adults can gift one another up to an ounce of pot.

Earlier this month, voters also approved a 25 percent tax on recreational marijuana sales in the state -- the revenue from which will fund public school construction and marijuana regulation. The taxes are expected to generate roughly $70 million in additional revenue for Colorado in 2014.

“Colorado has an opportunity to claim a -- if not the -- leading role in the cannabis industry, if it’s properly financed,” Steve DeAngelo, president of ArcView investment group which supports startup pot businesses, recently said to Bloomberg Businessweek. “It’s an opportunity to build the first big companies and the first big brands."

 

 

Massachusetts -- Worcester trumps Boston for the most popular place in Massachusetts to open a medical marijuana dispensary, according to a list released Friday by state regulators of the 100 applicants vying for a license.

Nine of the nonprofit companies chose Worcester, while six selected Boston. Framingham and Lowell tied for third-most desirable, with five applicants apiece. Northampton attracted three applicants, but Cambridge, with a similarly liberal populace, attracted just one applicant.

 

Connecticut

 

 

 

 

  Companies Vying For Right To Grow Med Marijuana Posted by CN Staff on November 12, 2013 at 14:19:40 PT
By William Weir, The Hartford Courant 
Source: Hartford Courant 

Connecticut -- In the basement of his Bridgeport tank removal business, Joseph Palmieri opens the door to a shipping container. A very bright light pours out and reveals hundreds of tomato plants. Near the beginning of the new year, Palmieri hopes to fill the growing pod, which he says is his own invention, with marijuana plants.

"I always joked about it when I heard that it went legal in other places. I said when it goes legal here, that'll be my new crop and build the business," he said. "Then I got serious about it, and flew out to Colorado."

He's one of several businesspeople in the state who plan to apply for a license to grow medical marijuana. For now, the state has said it will award licenses to three producers and see what the demand is for medical marijuana before awarding more. Those interested in either growing or selling medical marijuana have until Friday to apply. As of last Friday, the state had received one application for a dispensary license, but none for production.

People interviewed for this story estimated that between 10 and 20 companies will apply for production licenses.

Aspiring marijuana growers have had since early September to complete the license application, but by all accounts, it's a laborious process.

"It's extremely arduous," said Erik Williams, chief operating officer for Biltin Advanced Propagation, a company planning to open a production facility in New Britain. "The state Department of Consumer Protection laid out a very strict and highly regulated system. It's a lot of paperwork."

Williams said that Biltin's application is "hundreds of pages," much of it appendices, photos and diagrams of the company's proposal.

And it's a costly process. Applicants must pay a nonrefundable $25,000 application fee. Those who are approved then must pay an additional, one-time fee of $75,000. State regulations also require that each approved company put $2 million in escrow, which gradually will be reduced over a period of five years.

Earlier this year, when the issue of legalizing medical marijuana was still being debated, some potential applicants grumbled about the escrow requirement. Now that it's part of the law, applicants say they agree with the strict financial requirements.

"The competition will be fierce," said Jay Czarkowski of Advanced Grow Labs, a company that has received local approval to open a marijuana production facility in West Haven. The financial requirements mean that the state is "going to be able to pick which groups are the most professional, so it won't be some kid in a tie-dyed T-shirt and dreadlocks dispensing the product."

Besides the state-required costs, there's also the investment in the business itself.

"We estimate that we will require $2.5 million above and beyond our escrow commitment in order to commence operations," said Steven Gdula, executive committee consultant for Danbury-based Integrated Natural Care, which plans to operate a production business in Waterbury. "Our initial investment in our facility, including upgrades and equipment, is estimated to be $1.5 million."

Many hoping to enter the state's medical marijuana industry are Connecticut-based, but several companies also include principals or consultants who have been involved in the business in other states that legalized medical marijuana years ago. Integrated Natural Care's management team includes a master cultivator, Alex Silverman, who honed his pot-growing chops working at the San Francisco Patient and Resource Center, better known as SPARC, which Fast Company magazine described as the "Apple Store of marijuana shops."

Czarkowski, who lives in Colorado, got into the medical marijuana business there in 2009. He said that he and his wife had a long career in real estate before the housing market collapse. When the Obama administration issued a statement that it would take a hands-off approach to states that legalized medical marijuana, Czarkowski said, "we saw an opportunity to reinvent ourselves. Ours was one of the first 10 licenses that Colorado issued."

Czarkowski said his experience in Colorado can help Advanced Grow Labs avoid the missteps that many of the businesses, including his own, made early on in Colorado.

"One of the mistakes I made was I didn't have an understanding that it's not easy money. But if you work hard and create a good, efficient model, you can make money," he said. "It's a myth that it's instant riches; it's not. It's like any other business."

Another misperception Czarkowski said he had was that growing marijuana would be easy.

"It's not easy to cultivate cannabis, at least, to do it well on a commercial scale," he said. "We made mistakes on how to keep [the plants] healthy and pest-free and how to get good healthy yields."

They have a system down now, he said, and they'll bring it to the Connecticut business if they get a license from the state.

Many aspiring producers are wary about divulging too much information about their business plans, but a few talked about what they considered business innovations.

For Palmieri, that includes his growing pod. He built a wooden box to conceal the nutrition-dispensing mechanism of his grow pod when visitors come by.

"It's a design that we came up with. There's growing systems across the country — I've gone and seen 'em — and they don't work as well," he said. "The yields that I get out of these, they're tremendous."

He pounded the insulation on the inside of the pod's door. It's a combination of materials that he said "allows me 100 percent control of the atmosphere so there's no retention of moisture, there's no mold spores."

Gdula, at Integrated Natural Care, said his company has developed an algorithm that can determine in seconds what ratio of chemicals would best treat a patient, based on that person's condition. And to make purchases easy, he said, the company has developed a color-coded system to easily find the right strain of marijuana.

"If a patient has anxiety problems, they can go for 'No. 4' in a red package," he said.

As of last week, 1,243 people in Connecticut have been certified to use medical marijuana and 122 doctors have registered to issue certifications. Williams, of Biltin Advanced Propagation, said this should be enough to sustain three businesses. Like other would-be producers, Williams said he believes the number of certified patients and doctors on board with the program will spike once there's product on the market.

"Once there are dispensaries open and doctors know that patients don't have to go to the black market, you'll see an increase," he said.

So when will certified patients actually be able to buy medical marijuana? Most estimates range between three to six months.

"We'd be able to get seeds in the ground within 24 to 48 hours of getting approval," Williams said, adding that Gaia would have product on the shelves within five months.

Williams said his company would operate out of 73,000 square feet and start with between 30 and 40 employees. If demand increases, he said, the company could have as many as 120 workers.

Gdula said he has more modest expectations.

"You'll hear people say they'll have 100 employees, but that's never going to happen — never, ever," he said. His company hopes to eventually build a production space of about 30,000 square feet, but will start at 10,000 square feet if they get a license. Companies that get too ambitious too fast will be in trouble, he said.

"Anyone doing more than 10,000 to 15,000 square feet is going to be paying for a lot of overhead," he said. "Overproduction and unplanned growth is going to be the death knell of the company."

[trichcycler]

I'm in Michigan, gee I hope you all are too??

[trichcycler]

[GregS]

We told the City of Saginaw, when they tried to pass a moratorium on any and all medical use, to go right ahead and feel free to enforce any and all building codes. To knock themselves out. We also told them that commercial mj ventures were fair game and that we would accept those businesses being duly regulated and zoned in conformance with any other like business, but not beyond that. It was put to them real vocally that we would not sit still while they passed municipal ordinances or moratoria. They agreed and the moratorium was taken out of play altogether.

 

That is the only success story that I have heard regarding municipal meddling. Are there others?

[Guanotea1]

I've got to say - that's a genius move Greg.

Almost a no lose situation (unless they flat out ignored you). I love it!

[beourbud]

I'm in Michigan, gee I hope you all are too??

 

But are you a resident of Michigan?  You might be surprised how many out of state IPs  post here.

 

It would be nice to see members Resident State so as not to let them influence our Good Law.

 

We see the disasters that the republicans have implemented with UnLegalization and Testing.....screw that

 

We will wait untill after the 2014 republican blood letting....then WE will push for Decriminalization.

 

The Power is in ....WE the People

Edited November 24, 2013 by beourbud

[trichcycler]

you question my residency?   ha. yup, for all but my first few years in LA, I have lived and worked in MI.

any questions?

But are you a resident of Michigan?

[trichcycler]

I just don't understand what you are saying anymore. What state are you in? What states have successfully commercialized?

 

did those references clear up what I said? I'm not very good at making stuff up, so I hope the copy/pasta was good?

 

I'm guessing the 25k fee/2.5 million dollar.2.5 million escrow part is what you missed ?  entrance fees=(raffle tickets)?. The application fee is often non refundable, even if a permit is not granted. These types of commercialized marijuana production shows are a common speak in the industry. California is more about commercialization than personal use ! Growers fill the dispensary shelves, and people flock to purchase

and the one commercialized city wants 2.5 MILLION bucks in an escrow, that's wild bunny muffin. Definitely not aimed at the cottage industry I'd say.

these commercial entities have deeper pockets than ma and pa.

I still don't believe it will end up much different than alcohol prohibition. we'll still be able to make it, but not able to sell it, just like spirtis, wine, and beer for personal consumption, with some rules.

[beourbud]

you question my residency?   ha. yup, for all but my first few years in LA, I have lived and worked in MI.

any questions?

 We question everything.....GregS  taught us that....thanks Greg

 

You stated you were a caregiver at one time even offering advice on patient interviews.

 

How many patients have you had?

 

The plant in your pic looks like you need a grain scale to weigh it

 

That all the pics you got?  Surley a farmer so proud would have a photo album ...no?

 

Lets see your work

Edited November 24, 2013 by beourbud