Sb783 Would Make It A Crime For Pt To Possess On Private Property

[bobandtorey]

LANSING, MI -- Michigan landlords could restrict the use or cultivation medical marijuana on private property under a new proposal up for debate this week in the Legislature.

 

 

Senate Bill 783, sponsored by Sens. Rick Jones (R-Grand Ledge) and James Marleau (R-Lake Orion), would make it illegal to smoke or grow medical marijuana on private property if the owner prohibits it.

 

 

"When you grow marijuana, it puts moisture in the walls, and it sometimes destroys the property," said Jones, a former Eaton County sheriff. "We've had lights tip over and cause fires, endangering other residents. And obviously, if the smoke is traveling throughout the apartments, it can bother other residents."

 

Jones, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, has scheduled a public hearing on the legislation Tuesday afternoon.

 

Michigan is home to more than 115,000 medical marijuana patients and 27,000 registered caregivers, according to the most recent numbers from the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs.

 

 

The Michigan Medical Marihuana Act, approved by voters in 2008, allows patients to grow up to 12 plants for personal use. Caregivers can grow for up to five patients in an enclosed, locked facility on property they own, lease or rent.

 

Matt Able, an attorney who heads the Detroit-based Cannabis Counsel, called the proposed legislation a "hostile" and "unnecessary" update to Michigan's medical marijuana law.

 

"It would end up so some people couldn't even use it in their own residence," he said. "People who can afford their own home don't have to worry about it but people who are less fortunate and rent would be subject to the predilection of their landlords. It's discriminatory."

 

 

Tim Beck, who helped spearhead Michigan's medical marijuana law and owns a handful of rental properties in the Detroit area, said he generally supports the legislation, which he does not believe would prevent a patient from vaporizing the drug or consuming an edible version.

 

"I don't think it's anything outrageous or absurd," Beck said. "There's people that are doing damage. They're borderline criminals. For some of these people, their lease may as well be a piece of toilet paper, and things get wrecked. This will put some teeth in place, and if they don't get permission, there will be serious consequences."

 

 

Removing the criminal exemption for renters could have a marginal increase on the number of violations, according to the Senate Fiscal Agency. Unsanctioned possession of marijuana is a misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in prison and/or a fine of up to $2,000. Use is punishable by up to 90 days in prison and/or a fine of $100.

 

The Michigan Senate has taken a harder-line stance on medical marijuana than the House, which recently approved GOP-backed legislation that would allow for thereturn of regulated dispensaries and expand the definition of edible products usable under the law.

 

Senate Majority Leader Randy Richardville (R-Monroe) referred both House bills to his own Senate Government Operations Committee. He told reporters last week that he remains wary of dispensaries but plans to schedule a public hearing on the legislation this month or next.

 

"My number one concern is playgrounds, neighborhoods and school yards where we could have leakages," Richardville said, "and I want to make sure we have a chance to explore that in great detail before we move anything."

Edited February 20, 2014 by bobandtorey

[t-pain]

the flower is wrong with tim beck?

 

 

 

(2) Possess marihuana, or otherwise engage in the medical use
of marihuana at any of the following locations:

 

(D) On private property, in violation of a prohibition
established by the property owner. This subparagraph does not apply
to a lessee of private residential property except as to the
owner's prohibition against smoking or growing marihuana.

 

right there, this would ban a medical marijuana patient from posessing marijuana on private property.

 

do you understand what this means?

you could posess in public places and if you touched a private property with a ban, you would lose sec4 and sec8 protections.

[Kingdiamond]

Rick Jones enemy #1 of the medical marijuana community.

[trichcycler]

as the property owner I believe I have the right to disallow an indoor marijuana garden, or even smoking indoors. I don't believe I would do so.

[GregS]

as the property owner I believe I have the right to disallow an indoor marijuana garden, or even smoking indoors. I don't believe I would do so.

It is really not much different from municipalities prohibiting use. Just as in Ter Beek, we "shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner, or denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau, for the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act, provided that the qualifying patient possesses an amount of marihuana that does not exceed 2.5 ounces of usable marihuana, and, if the qualifying patient has not specified that a primary caregiver will be allowed under state law to cultivate marihuana for the qualifying patient, 12 marihuana plants kept in an enclosed, locked facility. Any incidental amount of seeds, stalks, and unusable roots shall also be allowed under state law and shall not be included in this amount. The privilege from arrest under this subsection applies only if the qualifying patient presents both his or her registry identification card and a valid driver license or government-issued identification card that bears a photographic image of the qualifying patient."

 

The same holds for caregiver protections.

 

Jones is overstepping his prerogatives. He is trying to make a crime out of something that was clearly decided at the polls to be legal. Any agreements between lessor and lessee are rightly enforceable under contract law as a civil issue, with eviction and judgment for damages the lessor's ultimate remedy at law.

Edited February 19, 2014 by GregS

[trichcycler]

exactly ! ^^^^

[bobandtorey]

the flower is wrong with tim beck?

 

 

 

(2) Possess marihuana, or otherwise engage in the medical use

of marihuana at any of the following locations:

 

(D) On private property, in violation of a prohibition

established by the property owner. This subparagraph does not apply

to a lessee of private residential property except as to the

owner's prohibition against smoking or growing marihuana.

 

right there, this would ban a medical marijuana patient from posessing marijuana on private property.

 

do you understand what this means?

you could posess in public places and if you touched a private property with a ban, you would lose sec4 and sec8 protections.

 

[bobandtorey]

Thanks 

And why shouldn't we be surprised by them not passing those Bill's they have our ##

[bobandtorey]

Tim Beck does not care about patients or their caregivers. People should stop expecting him to do so. It's not his thing. He is straight-up working for tax and regulate, and the MMMA is simply a means to his end.

 

 

And i agree 

[bobandtorey]

The Cannabis Haters and the nay saying are still at it

[MiMedical]

It's crap that it would make it a criminal charge, from one extreme to another. I personally don't think this will go through, anyone know how long it will be till we get word on it?

[t-pain]

depends if it gets voted on today in the committee. and how that vote goes.

then it gets a recommendation or not from the judiciary committee for the senate vote.

then it can do anything it wants in the senate. they can make ammendments, table it, vote on it. up to the senate leader guy what happens.

[+Malamute]

Yea.

 

 I am trying to get the committee hearing aired on Senate tv.

 

 For some reason they weren't airing it, only the joint committee in the same room at 3:00, and this hearing is at 2:30.

 

 

 We will see.  I spoke with Sen Jones' office and they are looking into it.

 

*shrug*

[GregS]

Is anyone testifying on our behalf?

[+Malamute]

CPU is not testifying directly at this point.  We are seeking changes/opposition elsewhere than the current hearing. 

[GregS]

CPU is not testifying directly at this point.  We are seeking changes/opposition elsewhere than the current hearing. 

It is a real stretch to believe it is possible to get anywhere with the Committee. I think testimony when it goes to the House Committee has at least an even chance.

[+Malamute]

I am sure a few people will testify.  No question there.

 

But yea,... hopefully I can get this hearing aired. :-)

 

 Not likely, but hey,... I hate when they don't air committee hearings.

[+Malamute]

They just called me back and said too short of notice.

[GregS]

They just called me back and said too short of notice.

And I'm calling bullschit.

[+Malamute]

Well, I have called and gotten them aired before,... but it was usually with several days notice/request.   I didn't realize it wasn't being aired until like noon. *shrug*

[+Malamute]

Oh,,, but I do agree, it is BS because all they have to do is turn the camera on 30 minutes earlier.

[William Hayes]

Can someone bring their own camera ?

[GregS]

Can someone bring their own camera ?

Sure can. I don't know that the committee can refuse to allow them.

[+Malamute]

As long as it doesn't interfere.

[phaquetoo]

as the property owner I believe I have the right to disallow an indoor marijuana garden, or even smoking indoors. I don't believe I would do so.

I dont think they need to alter the law for this, You already have a lease when you rent from your landlord (property owner) if you dont have a lease land lords loss, renters gain, but we dont need that to be in the law, it already is between the property owner and lesse, what are they gonna do not let people rent their buildings to distrabution centers? well that would be the building owners loss!

 

I under stand some one renting a home, putting in the lease no pets, no smoking, no indoor growing operations, etc!

 

It is the land owners property, if they dont want you to mess up their house that is their investment and they have the right, if you want to get around that problem,  find a landlord that will put on the lease that you can have an indoor garden --- and so on,,or buy your own property!  if you can afford rent, i bet if you try hard enough you can get a land contract with the same or lower monthly payments, if you think im wrong tell me what you pay in rent and I will find you a property with 10% down and a 1% monthly payment or lower! taxes not included lol!

 

so bottom line, we realy dont want them to put this in our law, they are just putting a back door in the law to screw us pts and c.g's

 

How many of you live in rentals that says on your lease no pets? no smoking?

 

Peace