Posted on

Reading the Cannabis Leaves: California’s Bureau of Cannabis Control Releases Responses to Summarized Public Comments

22Rules_and_Regulations...Threshing_Committee_of_the_U.S._Food_Administration_for_Knox_Co.22_-_NARA_-_512713-740x512.jpg

Last week, California’s Bureau of Cannabis Control (“BCC“) finally announced the withdrawal of the MCRSA retailer, transporter, and distributor rules in light of the passage of the Medicinal and Adult Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (“MAUCRSA” a/k/a SB 94) this past June. With that announcement also came some insight from the BCC on what we can expect in the emergency MAUCRSA rules that will drop this November. Specifically, the BCC posted on the California Cannabis Portal website that:

The three cannabis licensing authorities are in the process of drafting emergency regulations based on the new law for the commercial medicinal and adult-use cannabis industries. The licensing authorities will consider the public comments received on the draft medical cannabis regulations and use the feedback to inform the draft emergency regulations. The emergency regulations are expected to be published in November 2017.

And with that website post, the BCC also included a “high level” stakeholder-focused summary telling the public what it learned from the public comments to the MCRSA rules and how it will address those comments in the forthcoming retailer, microbusiness and distributor MAUCRSA rules.

Ultimately, it appears that the majority of public comments will be squared away automatically by MAUCRSA. For example, one summarized public comment was that specialty licenses for “delivery only” or “special events” should be created under the MCRSA (Medical Cannabis and Recreation Act). MAUCRSA takes care of both of these by allowing delivery for only retail and by providing “a state temporary event license at a county fair or district agricultural association event in local jurisdictions that authorize such events.”

There were though some summarized public comments where the BCC’s responses tell us what to expect in the future:

  1. One summarized public comment was that “The regulations should specify which party in the supply chain of transactions (manufacturer, transporter, or dispensary) bears the risk of loss and how much liability should attach.” And the BCC’s response was that liability pretty much has to be negotiated between licensees, which is 100% the right answer. We’ve blogged multiple times about the dangers of product liability (and Prop. 65 violations) in the industry and how to prepare for and shift that risk in your goods and services contracts.
  2. There were several comments about changing the definition of “owner,” lowering the 600-foot buffer requirement, and removing the mandatory labor peace agreement if you have 20 or more employees, dropping the minimum bond requirement, and other MAUCRSA-mandated operational standards, but the BCC made clear that its hands are tied because they must follow SB 94 as written.
  3. The public requested the BCC convene a hotline for assistance with applications, and the BCC replied that “The Bureau will have a call center available to help answer applicant’s questions, as well as materials on its website with information to assist applicants, licensees, and the public.”
  4. Another comment was that “The regulations should provide applicants a streamlined process for converting a business from a not-for-profit business to a for-profit business,” and the BCC punted in its response by stating that MAUCRSA doesn’t require any particular business structure for operation (again, the old collective model is not mandatory for compliance with MAUCRSA, so, if your local jurisdiction permits it, you should begin to think about corporate conversion as application time ramps up).
  5. Colocation of multiple licenses at the same “premises” is still up in the air and the BCC will address it in the emergency rules. Helpfully, AB 133 removed the “separate and distinct” requirement for multiple licenses and licenses of different types.
  6. Regarding comments about continued operations to ensure no disruption of services and goods to qualified patients, the BCC’s response is that temporary licensing should serve to prevent that disconnect.
  7. The public commented that licenses should themselves be transferable and the BCC responded that “By law, each owner must meet certain requirements to hold a license, therefore, a new application is needed. The Bureau is evaluating if a notification, rather than a new application, is appropriate when changes in persons with a financial interest in the business do not include a new owner, who is required to submit fingerprints.” Given that the withdrawn MCRSA rules rendered licenses non-transferable, we’re likely to see that again in the MAUCRSA rules, which means business purchases will likely be the only way to get a hold of a license — as long as you notify the BCC beforehand and the BCC approves that ownership change request. In any event, you should be aware of California’s M & A red flags.
  8. Summarized public comment wanted the distributor license eliminated or small businesses be able to self-distribute. The BCC responded it can’t get rid of the distributor license because it’s required under MAUCRSA, but that it is considering creating another distributor license for transportation only. Not to worry folks, you can self-distribute and you don’t need to contract with a distributor anymore to make a sale to a retailer.
  9. The BCC is reviewing whether cannabis licensees will be able to engage in “other [non-cannabis] activities.” This review came from a summarized public comment that distributors should be able to store and distribute non-cannabis related products. In all other states, licensees are restricted to only commercial cannabis activity for their license type so it would be groundbreaking if California were to go against that norm by allowing California cannabis licensees to take on other lines of business.
  10. The BCC isn’t going to allow for delivery or transport of cannabis other than by enclosed motor vehicle with sufficient GPS tracking despite summarized comments that the BCC should relax restrictions to allow for bike couriers and other modes for transporting cannabis product.
  11. On delivery, public comments asked that the BCC allow delivery by third party contractors or couriers. The BCC batted back, citing to MAUCRSA, which only allows delivery by “an employee of a licensed retailer, microbusiness, or non-profit.”
  12. Summarized public comments also leaned towards asking BCC fees for licenses be set according to a sliding scale of total net revenue. In response, the BCC stated that “Business and Professions Code section 26180 requires that fees are set on a scaled basis based on the size of the business. The Bureau is examining what method is most appropriate to determine the scaled fee, including total net revenue.”

All in all, the BCC has its work cut out for it as it goes back to the drawing board on the MAUCRSA regulations. Many issues will be out of the BCC’s control because MAUCRSA requires certain unchangeable operational standards and restrictions. November will fill in many of the outstanding “don’t knows” that still remain for California cannabis rule-making, so stay tuned.

Posted on

BREAKING NEWS: California Will Begin Issuing Temporary Commercial Cannabis Licenses by January 1st

549765696_1280x720-740x416.jpg

Yesterday, at the California Cannabis Business Conference in Anaheim (attended by our Southern California cannabis attorneys), the California Bureau of Cannabis Control (the “Bureau”) released information regarding temporary license applications under the Medicinal and Adult Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (“MAUCRSA”), which we now know will start to issue on January 1, 2018–see the Bureau’s brochure on temporary licensing details here. The Bureau will likely begin accepting applications prior to that date, but no temporary license application will be effective before January 1, 2018. Additionally, the Bureau expects that the next round of draft (temporary) rules pursuant to MAUCRSA will issue sometime in mid to late November, coinciding with the release of the temporary license application.

A temporary license is a conditional license that will allow a business to engage in commercial cannabis activity for a period of up to 120 days (i.e., 4 months). Within that 120 day period, the business with a temporary license must apply for their full state license. If the operator is unable to finalize their state license within that period (through no fault of their own), the state will grant extensions to the temporary licensee until the full license is issued.

The requirements for obtaining a temporary license to engage in commercial cannabis activity are as follows:

  1. Local jurisdiction authorization. Applicants must provide a copy of a valid license, permit, or other authorization to operate issued by the applicable local jurisdiction that allows the applicant to conduct commercial cannabis activity at their proposed location.
  2. Name. Applicants must indicate the name of the individual(s) or business entity applying.
  3. License type requested. Applicants must specify which of the license types (Distributor, Retailer, Manufacturer, Etc.) they are applying for.
  4. License designation. Applicants must indicate whether they are applying for an adult use (A-license) or medicinal (M-license) license.
  5. Contact information. Applicants must provide a designated primary contact including first and last name, title, address, phone number(s) and email address(es).
  6. Owners. Applicants must provide the name, mailing address, and email address of each “owner” that meets the criteria of Business and Professions Code Section 26001 (i.e., you own 20% or more of the company, you’re the CEO, you’re a director on the board of a non-profit, or you exercise any direction, control, or management of the company).
  7. Physical address. Applicants must provide the physical address of the location at which they intend to operate.
  8. Authorization to use location. Applicants must provide a copy of the title or deed to the land where the proposed premises is located, or a document from the landowner, such as a lease agreement, stating that the applicant has the right to occupy the property and may use the property for commercial cannabis activity.
  9. Premises diagram. Applicants must provide a diagram of the business’s layout at the proposed location.

It is important to note that local approval still reigns supreme–without the necessary city or county permits and/or licenses, applicants will not be able to obtain temporary or actual state licenses.

Posted on

Washington Considers Recreational Homegrown Cannabis

Cannabis_Baby-740x555.jpg

Unlike other states with recreational cannabis, Washington does not allow for home cultivation of recreational cannabis. However, that could change soon as SB 5131 requires the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (LCB) to study the viability of home cultivation. The LCB will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, October 4, 2017, at 10:00 AM on whether the State should allow home grows of recreational marijuana.  Written public comments may be submitted through October 11 at rules@lcb.wa.gov or hard copy at PO Box 43080, Olympia, WA 98504.

The LCB will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, October 4, 2017, at 10:00 AM on whether the State should allow home grows of recreational marijuana.  Written public comments may be submitted through October 11 at rules@lcb.wa.gov or hard copy at PO Box 43080, Olympia, WA 98504.

The LCB must consider home cultivation in light of the Cole Memorandum, the Obama-era policy statement from the Department of Justice that tacitly permits states to legalize marijuana so long as those states enact strong and effective regulations. The Cole Memo outlines eight enforcement priorities:

  1. Preventing the distribution of marijuana to minors;
  2. Preventing revenue from the sale of marijuana from going to criminal enterprises, gangs, and cartels;
  3. Preventing the diversion of marijuana from states where it is legal under state law in some form to other states;
  4. Preventing state-authorized marijuana activity from being used as a cover or pretext for the trafficking of other illegal drugs or other illegal activity;
  5. Preventing violence and the use of firearms in the cultivation and distribution of marijuana;
  6. Preventing drugged driving and the exacerbation of other adverse public health consequences associated with marijuana use;
  7. Preventing the growing of marijuana on public lands and the attendant public safety and environmental dangers posed by marijuana production on public lands; and
  8. Preventing marijuana possession or use on federal property.

The LCB has opposed home cultivation in the past. In 2015, Washington lawmakers considered a bill that would have allowed cultivation of up to six cannabis plants. In response, the LCB sent a letter outlining the Board’s concern that unregulated home grows would increase the occurrence of all eight enforcement priorities outlined in the Cole Memo.

The LCB worries that home cultivation will lead to diversion. Washington producer, processors, transporters, researchers, and retailers must all use “seed-to-sale” traceability software. As the name suggests, a cannabis plant is monitored throughout its life to prevent cannabis from being diverted to other states, to minors, or to the black market.

The LCB is seeking public input on three proposed options:

  1. Tightly Regulated Recreational Marijuana Home Grows. This option would impose a strict regulatory framework. Home cultivators would need a permit to grow legally. Permit holders could then purchase plants from licensed producers. Each household would be allowed four plants and all plants would be tracked in the same traceability system used to monitor commercially grown cannabis.  The LCB would impose requirements to ensure security, preventing youth access, and preventing diversion. Both the LCB and local authorities would monitor home grows. Cannabis processing would be subject to the same restrictions as apply to medical cannabis (e.g., no combustible processing).
  2. Local Control of Recreational Marijuana Home Grows. Like Option One, this option would require a permit, require safeguards to prevent diversion, limit each household to four plants, and allow permit holders to purchase plants from producers. Option Two would not require home cultivators to use the State’s traceability system. It also would give greater authority to local jurisdictions to create more restrictions and to authorize, control, and enforce the home grown program.
  3. Recreational Home Grows are Prohibited. The third option is to maintain the status quo and prohibit home cultivation.

The LCB must report its findings to Washington’s legislature by December 1, 2017. Lawmakers provided the LCB with no additional funds, meaning the Board must conduct its study without expanding its budget. There is no guarantee that anything changes but this is could be the beginning of recreational home cultivation in Washington.

Posted on

California Hashish Countdown: Alameda County

300px-Map_of_Alameda_County_1878_LARGE.jpg

California has 58 counties and 482 included cities throughout the state, every with the choice to create its personal guidelines or ban marijuana altogether. On this California Hashish Countdown collection, we cowl who’s banning hashish, who’s ready to see what to with hashish, and who’s embracing California’s change to legalize marijuana — permits, laws, taxes and all. For every metropolis and county, we’ll talk about its location, historical past with hashish, present regulation, and proposed regulation to provide you a clearer image of the place to find your California hashish enterprise, the best way to maintain it authorized, and what you’ll and gained’t be allowed to do.

Our final California Hashish Countdown submit was on Oakland and earlier than that San Francisco, Sonoma County, the Metropolis of Davis, the Metropolis of Santa Rosa, County and Metropolis of San Bernardino, Marin County, Nevada County, the Metropolis of Lynwood, the Metropolis of Coachella, Los Angeles County, the Metropolis of Los Angeles, the Metropolis of Desert Scorching Springs, Sonoma County, the Metropolis of Sacramento, the Metropolis of Berkeley, Calaveras County, Monterey County and the Metropolis of Emeryville.

At present’s publish is on Alameda County.

Welcome to the California Hashish Countdown.

Location.  Alameda County is the seventh most populous county within the state of California. Its county seat is in Oakland and it occupies a lot of the East Bay area. It’s house to the Alameda County Truthful and the Alameda County Fairgrounds, which may boast to being the residence of the oldest one-mile horse racing monitor in America. Hope that tidbit is useful on trivia night time.

Historical past with Hashish and Present Hashish Legal guidelines. Again in 2005, Alameda County (this submit is addressing solely Alameda County and never the Metropolis of Alameda) started regulating hashish by passing a medical hashish dispensary ordinance. Although we’re all the time completely satisfied to see cities and counties embrace hashish companies with smart and affordable laws, Alameda’s first foray ought to be described as a really timid one. Alameda’s ordinance solely addressed medical hashish dispensaries and it capped the variety of dispensary licenses at three and it additionally restricted the quantity of hashish a dispensary might carry on its premises.

With friendlier laws in Oakland, Berkeley, Richmond, and Emeryville, this primary ordinance put Alameda at a aggressive drawback with potential hashish companies when in comparison with these cities. With the passage of the Medical Hashish Regulation Security Act (MCRSA), Alameda County (together with a lot of different California jurisdictions) determined it was time to amend their hashish ordinance. In June of 2016, the Alameda County Group Improvement Company and the Castro Valley Municipal Advisory Council held a gathering to start the method of updating Alameda’s hashish ordinance. In case you’ve ever adopted a hashish ordinance because it winds its means via your native jurisdiction you’re nicely conscious that after one assembly comes many others – supervisor conferences, planning fee conferences, citizen advisory committee conferences, and interdepartmental working group conferences, simply to call a number of. Like Gremlins, the conferences simply proceed to multiply. Let me not be too harsh on Alameda as a result of sluggish progress is best than no progress and undoubtedly higher than these options.

Proposed Hashish Legal guidelines: On August 1, 2017, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors carried out the primary studying of its proposed amendments to their hashish ordinance and on September 12th of this yr (we wish to maintain you updated right here on the Canna Regulation Weblog) the Board held a second studying of their hashish ordinance. Right here’s an inventory of the a number of the highlights of Alameda’s hashish ordinance:

  • Will increase the variety of dispensaries allowed from three to 5.
  • Permits supply of medical hashish from permitted dispensaries inside the county and from outdoors jurisdictions from 9:00am to 9:00pm.
  • Permits the sale, distribution, and supply of edibles.
  • Removes the 100-pound restrict on the quantity of hashish that may be saved by a dispensary on its premises.
  • Implements a two-year pilot program authorizing medical hashish cultivation. This pilot program will authorize as much as six cultivation permits – as much as two indoor cultivation operations and 4 mixed-light operations. Outside cultivation is prohibited.
  • Nurseries could also be permitted the place cultivation is permitted.
  • Cultivation websites should be a minimum of one thousand ft from any pre-Okay to 12th grade faculty, licensed youngster or day care facility, public park or playground, drug or alcohol restoration facility or public recreation middle.

Though the caps imposed on medical hashish dispensaries and cultivators will restrict the innovation, funding, and tax income generated by Alameda County hashish companies, that is nonetheless a step in the suitable path and we should always not let good be the enemy of the great. We’re additionally optimistic that Alameda County will proceed on its path in the direction of elevated legalization – maybe with fewer conferences subsequent time.

Posted on

California Hashish Processors: You Requested, We Proceed To Reply!

maxresdefault-740x416.jpg

Three of our California hashish legal professionals just lately did a webinar on the Medicinal and Grownup-Use Hashish Regulation and Security Act (“MAUCRSA”) and the way it repealed the Medical Hashish Regulation and Security Act (“MCRSA”) whereas consolidating a few of MCRSA’s provisions with the licensing provisions of the Grownup Use of Marijuana Act (“AUMA”). In the event you missed the webinar don’t you are worried, we’ve received you coated proper right here. In the course of the webinar we acquired so many nice questions from our attendees (near 1,500 individuals signed up!), we determined to deal with them right here on the Canna Regulation Weblog. Final week we mentioned the longer term and unknowns surrounding onsite consumption in California. This week we’re going to debate California hashish processors.

If you end up considering you by no means learn something about about hashish processors within the MAUCRSA, go forward and provides your self a pat on the again as a result of it does the truth is nowhere point out processors, neither is there any point out of processors within the California meeting and senate payments that made up the MCRSA. Upon passage of the MCRSA, the California Division of Meals and Agriculture (“CDFA”) held eight public workshops to solicit suggestions from the general public and stakeholders. After the workshops, the CDFA revealed a scoping report detailing a few of their findings. When the CDFA launched its proposed laws for the medical hashish cultivation program it additionally launched a companion Preliminary Assertion of Causes (“ISOR”) and it’s within the ISOR the place we’re first launched to processors.

Within the ISOR, the CDFA states “it was delivered to the Division’s (that’s the CDFA) consideration that some cultivators ship untrimmed, uncured, or unpackaged hashish to places off-site for processing” and determined so as to add the processor as a brand new license sort. Beneath the proposed laws, a processor also can maintain several types of cultivation licenses however wouldn’t be allowed to develop hashish crops on the processing facility. The proposed annual license payment for processors was $2,790 – which was on the decrease finish for cultivation license sort charges. The CDFA went on to outline a processor within the proposed medical laws as a cultivation website that conducts solely trimming, drying, curing, grading or packaging of hashish and non-manufactured hashish merchandise.

What caught many individuals’s consideration is how CDFA categorised pre-rolls as a kind of non-manufactured hashish product. Although shopper suggestions on the standard of pre-rolls varies, there’s additionally a burgeoning market for hashish companies that promote high quality and model themselves accordingly. The CDFA additionally envisioned an elevated curiosity in processor licenses as they assumed roughly 20% of California’s hashish manufacturing can be processed via California licensed hashish processors. As you’ll be able to think about, our hashish attorneys have been getting a boatload of inquiries relating to this license sort, however then California Governor Jerry Brown signed MAUCRSA into regulation and identical to Keyser Söze, it was gone.

However is the processor license sort gone for good right here in California? Will these with cultivation licenses underneath MAUCRSA be allowed to conduct hashish processing on their premises or will the CDFA deliver again from the lifeless the processor as a separate license sort in California? We’ll have to attend till the CDFA publishes its new proposed laws within the fall underneath an emergency rule-making course of in order that the state will have the ability to problem hashish licenses starting on January 02, 2018. Because the processor license sort was so short-lived, even when the CDFA does re-create it as a license sort it can in all probability take a while for cities and counties so as to add processors to their licensing construction.

We’ll maintain you posted on any new developments.

Posted on

Washington State’s New Hashish Homegrow Guidelines

Immature-Plants-copy-288x320.jpeg

In 2015, Washington handed Senate Invoice 5052, which allowed medical marijuana sufferers and their designated suppliers to develop hashish crops for private medical use and band collectively to type medical marijuana cooperatives. That invoice didn’t present a authorized pathway for cooperatives, medical marijuana sufferers, or designated suppliers to accumulate crops. It additionally didn’t permit retail gross sales of crops on to shoppers. In 2016, the Washington Legislature handed laws permitting cooperatives to buy crops from licensed marijuana producers, however failed to deal with the power of different sufferers to accumulate crops.

Washington lawmakers just lately addressed this concern with Senate Invoice 5131, which permits qualifying sufferers and designated caregivers to buy hashish crops immediately from licensed marijuana producers. A “qualifying affected person” is an individual who has been beneficial medical marijuana by a healthcare skilled and a “designated caregiver” is an individual the qualifying affected person designates in writing as approved to acquire medical hashish. Qualifying sufferers can enter right into a medical marijuana authorization database and obtain a recognition card from the state. Not all qualifying sufferers enter the database and so some qualifying sufferers don’t maintain recognition playing cards. Carrying a recognition card brings benefits, similar to tax reductions and the correct to buy bigger portions of marijuana in a single transaction.

All Washington marijuana sufferers can develop marijuana for his or her private use, in contrast to leisure customers, however qualifying affected person cardholders can develop extra. Cardholders might domesticate six hashish crops at house (as much as fifteen crops if their doctor recommends it) which may yield a most of eight ounces of useable marijuana. Cardholders may also be a part of state-registered medical marijuana cooperatives to domesticate marijuana with 4 different sufferers. Sufferers who will not be cardholders might develop as much as 4 hashish crops and possess as much as six ounces of useable marijuana produced from these crops, however can’t be a part of a cooperative.

SB 5131 additionally permits qualifying affected person cardholders to buy immature crops and clones:

Qualifying sufferers and designated suppliers, who maintain a recognition card and have been entered into the medical marijuana authorization database, might buy immature crops or clones from a licensed marijuana producer as outlined in RCW 69.50.101.

The Washington State Liquor and Hashish Board (LCB) just lately issued an interim coverage assertion that describes how members of cooperatives, cardholder, and cardholder’s designated suppliers can buy hashish crops and seeds however makes no point out of how sufferers with out qualifying affected person playing cards should purchase seeds. The LCB is mandating that Washington State hashish producers obtain documentation earlier than promoting crops or seeds. Members of a cooperative should present a legitimate recognition card and a replica of the letter from the LCB confirming the individual is a part of a registered cooperative. Qualifying sufferers should present a legitimate recognition card. It seems that there nonetheless is not any means for sufferers who don’t enter the database and obtain a recognition card to legally acquire seeds to develop their very own medical hashish.

The LCB’s coverage assertion supplies further steerage on the sale of crops and seeds. Immature crops or clones are outlined as crops that haven’t any flower, are lower than 12 inches in peak and fewer than 12 inches in diameter. Producers should abide by safety and traceability necessities together with a 24-hour ready interval imposed on all hashish transfers. Sufferers and suppliers should notify a producer 24 hours earlier than choosing up crops or seeds. All transfers should happen on the producer’s licensed property and deliveries are prohibited. Cooperatives, sufferers, and caregivers usually are not permitted to buy extra crops than they have been approved to develop by a doctor or beneath Washington regulation. The affected person or caregiver should purchase the plant in individual and producers can’t promote to anybody aside from those that referred to as in on a product. Gross sales tax applies to the sale of crops or seeds, however the state’s marijuana excise tax doesn’t.

You will discover extra on SB 5131 on the following hyperlinks:

Posted on

California Hashish Countdown: Metropolis of Oakland

Greetings_from_Oakland_California_74131-320x204.jpg

California has 58 counties and 482 included cities throughout the state, every with the choice to create its personal guidelines or ban marijuana altogether. On this California Hashish Countdown collection, we cowl who’s banning hashish, who’s ready to see what to with hashish, and who’s embracing California’s change to legalize marijuana — permits, laws, taxes and all. For every metropolis and county, we’ll talk about its location, historical past with hashish, present regulation, and proposed regulation to provide you a clearer image of the place to find your California hashish enterprise, find out how to hold it authorized, and what you’ll and gained’t be allowed to do.

Our final California Hashish Countdown publish was on San Francisco and earlier than that Sonoma County, the Metropolis of Davis, the Metropolis of Santa Rosa, County and Metropolis of San Bernardino, Marin County, Nevada County, the Metropolis of Lynwood, the Metropolis of Coachella, Los Angeles County, the Metropolis of Los Angeles, the Metropolis of Desert Scorching Springs, Sonoma County, the Metropolis of Sacramento, the Metropolis of Berkeley, Calaveras County, Monterey County and the Metropolis of Emeryville.

Right now’s submit is on the Metropolis of Oakland.

Welcome to the California Hashish Countdown.

Location. With a burgeoning nightlife, lovely Lake Merritt, and a barely extra affordable value of dwelling than San Francisco, there’s a lot to like about Oakland. However sure, dropping the Raiders and the Warriors goes to harm – maybe one other class for persistent ache and struggling?

Historical past with Hashish and Present Hashish Legal guidelines. Ever because the voters of California handed the Compassionate Use Act in 1996 (Proposition 215), Oakland has been on the forefront of legalizing hashish use. In 1998, the Oakland Metropolis Council handed Decision No. 72516 C.M.S. in help of the Oakland Hashish Consumers Collective when the federal authorities sued the collective (and 5 different entities) looking for an injunction to get the collective to stop distributing and manufacturing hashish. By attempting to return to assistance from a medical hashish collective, Oakland firmly signaled it will struggle for Oakland residents’ proper to medical hashish. In November of 2004, Oakland residents handed poll measure Z. Poll Measure Z was a continuation of Oakland’s dual-pronged strategy to hashish: specializing in social justice reform and correct regulation. The poll measure made citations and arrests of personal grownup hashish use Oakland’s lowest regulation enforcement precedence and set the groundwork for establishing a system to license, tax, and regulate hashish. Oakland adopted up Measure Z by enacting Ordinance No. 12694, which established a group oversight committee with the position of aiding the town council in fulfilling the goals of Measure Z.

Medical hashish dispensaries in Oakland are presently regulated beneath Title 5, Chapter 5.80 of the Oakland Municipal Code, which turned efficient in July of 2011 and was most lately amended on March 28, 2017. The Metropolis of Oakland — greater than most California jurisdictions — has proven a willingness to help these most deprived by the disparate enforcement of hashish legal guidelines. When Chapter 5.80 was amended in March of this yr, the Metropolis Council sought to treatment the disadvantages confronted by residents by way of an fairness allow program, which supplies as follows:

  • Defines an fairness applicant as one whose possession has an annual revenue at or lower than 80 % of Oakland’s medium revenue adjusted for family measurement and has both lived in any mixture of Oakland police beats 2X, 2Y, 6X, 7X, 19X, 21X, 21Y, 23X, 26Y, 27X, 27Y, 29X, 30X, 30Y, 31Y, 32X, 33X, 34X, and 35X for at the least 5 of the final ten years or was arrested after November 5,1996 and convicted of a hashish crime dedicated in Oakland;
  • Permits Oakland’s Metropolis Administrator to problem not more than eight new brick and mortar dispensary permits per yr, with half of these dispensary permits going to fairness candidates;
  • Permits candidates to use for an onsite hashish consumption allow;
  • Permits for delivery-only hashish dispensaries;
  • Requires purposes for hashish dispensaries be topic to a public listening to.

Medical hashish cultivation, distribution, testing, and transportation are presently regulated underneath Title 5, Chapter 5.81 of the Oakland Municipal Code, which turned efficient in July of 2010 and was additionally amended on March 28, 2017. Chapter 5.81 additionally included an fairness allow program. Different of its highlights embrace the next:

  • A collective or cooperative of certified sufferers or main caregivers might domesticate medical hashish overlaying an space of not more than 250 sq. ft inside a residential unit or if in a nonresidential constructing on one parcel of land and not using a allow (topic to quite a few working requirements);
  • Permits for utilization of each risky and non-volatile solvents in manufacturing medical hashish merchandise;
  • Permits amenities that rent and retain previously incarcerated Oakland residents to use for a tax credit score or license charge discount based mostly on standards established by the Oakland Metropolis Administrator;
  • Mandates that no hashish or hashish odors shall be detectable by sight or odor outdoors a permitted hashish facility;
  • Permits for multiple medical hashish operator to situate on a single parcel of land, nevertheless, every such hashish operator should acquire a allow for its relevant allow class; and
  • Requires hashish cultivation and manufacturing candidates to acquire approval from the Alameda County’s Division of Environmental Well being and its Division of Agriculture.

Proposed Hashish Legal guidelines: On July 20th of this yr, Oakland’s Hashish Regulatory Fee met to debate the continued implementation of the Fairness Allow Program to see if it is undertaking its objectives. The Fee can also be within the means of aiding the Metropolis Council with adopting a regulatory construction for the grownup use of hashish. A number of the points the Fee highlighted for the Metropolis Council to evaluation are the next:

  • Whether or not Oakland will create a licensing class for micro-businesses. Underneath California’s Medicinal and Grownup-Use Hashish Regulation and Security Act (MAUCRSA), a micro-business operator might act as a cultivator, retailer, distributor, and non-volatile producer.
  • Whether or not the Oakland Metropolis Council will restrict or cap the variety of grownup use hashish dispensaries?
  • Whether or not to permit hashish dispensaries to function as each a medical and an grownup use dispensary?

That will help you higher perceive what’s going on with California hashish and what MAUCRSA means on your hashish enterprise, three of our California attorneys shall be internet hosting a free webinar on August eight, 2017 from 12 pm to 1 pm PT. Hilary Bricken from our Los Angeles workplace will average two of our San Francisco-based attorneys (Alison Malsbury and me) in a dialogue on the main modifications between the MCRSA and MAUCRSA, together with on vertical integration and possession of a number of licenses, revised distributorship requirements, and what California hashish license candidates can anticipate extra usually from California’s Bureau of Hashish Management as rule-making continues by way of the rest of the yr. We may even tackle questions from the viewers each throughout and on the finish of the webinar.

To register for this free webinar, please click on right here. We look ahead to your becoming a member of us!

Posted on

California Hashish Countdown: San Francisco

the-golden-gate-bridge-1956459_1280-320x180.jpg

California has 58 counties and 482 included cities throughout the state, every with the choice to create its personal guidelines or ban marijuana altogether. On this California Hashish Countdown collection, we plan to cowl who’s banning, who’s ready, and who’s embracing California’s change to legalizing marijuana — permits, laws, taxes and all. For every metropolis and county, we’ll talk about its location, historical past with hashish, present regulation, and proposed regulation to provide you a clearer image of the place to find your hashish enterprise, the right way to hold it authorized, and what you’ll and gained’t be allowed to do.

Our final California Hashish Countdown publish was an replace on Sonoma County and earlier than that the Metropolis of Davis, the Metropolis of Santa Rosa, County and Metropolis of San Bernardino, Marin County, Nevada County, the Metropolis of Lynwood, the Metropolis of Coachella, Los Angeles County, the Metropolis of Los Angeles, the Metropolis of Desert Scorching Springs, Sonoma County, the Metropolis of Sacramento, the Metropolis of Berkeley, Calaveras County, Monterey County and the Metropolis of Emeryville.

Welcome to the California Hashish Countdown, the place at the moment I write about my residence metropolis and the situation of our Northern California workplace: San Francisco.

LocationSan Francisco is likely one of the most lovely cities on the planet and residential to many iconic landmarks. Within the span of a few hours you possibly can cross the Golden Gate Bridge, take a look at the Palace of Wonderful Arts, seize a tacky shirt at Fisherman’s Wharf, experience a cable automotive, and tour Alcatraz. Followers of late of 80’s sitcoms can (and too typically do) take selfies in entrance of The Full Home residence. And For those who’ve discovered your self within the monetary district these days, there’s no option to miss the development growth happening. San Francisco, my type of city.

Historical past with Hashish and Present Hashish Legal guidelines. Although San Francisco (the town and county) is understood for its progressive and ahead considering insurance policies, San Francisco’s Medical Hashish Act (“MCA”) didn’t come into impact till December of 2005. Initially the MCA (regulated by San Francisco’s Division of Public Well being) was not an aggressive push by the town of San Francisco to embrace the multifaceted advantages of all elements of California’s medical hashish business. Most individuals can be stunned to seek out that San Francisco lags behind Oakland, Sonoma, and Sacramento relating to progressive hashish laws. As an alternative of taking the lead and being a beacon for the remainder of California, the MCA targeted solely on medical hashish dispensary collectives. Because it stands now, San Francisco doesn’t presently difficulty stand-alone licenses or permits for hashish cultivators or manufactures (or another non-dispensary operator) however as an alternative permits dispensaries to fabricate and domesticate hashish topic to sure laws. Right here’s an inventory of a number of the MCA’s necessities:

  • Medical hashish dispensaries shall be operated solely as non-profit collectives or cooperatives.
  • Dispensaries can keep as much as 99 hashish crops in as much as 100 sq. ft of complete backyard cover space on the dispensary website and their cultivation have to be carried out indoors.
  • Dispensaries can domesticate at an offsite location as long as they get approval from the San Francisco Planning Division and the Division of Constructing Inspection.
  • You can’t mix booze and bud. A medical hashish dispensary shall not maintain or keep a license from the State Division of Alcohol Beverage Management to promote alcoholic drinks or function a enterprise that sells alcoholic drinks. Nor shall alcoholic drinks be consumed on dispensary premises or within the public right-of-way inside fifty ft of a medical hashish dispensary.
  • No edible hashish merchandise requiring refrigeration or hot-holding shall be manufactured on the market or distribution because of the potential for food-borne sickness (you’ll be able to apply for an exemption although); and
  • Packaging that makes hashish product engaging to youngsters or imitates sweet is just not allowed. Any edible hashish product made to resemble a typical meals product have to be in a correctly labeled opaque (non see-through) package deal earlier than it leaves the dispensary.

In 2015, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors created the Hashish State Legalization Activity Drive (“Activity Pressure”) to advise the town’s Board of Supervisors and different metropolis businesses on issues referring to legalization of grownup use hashish. The Activity Pressure held its first assembly in January of 2016 and has held quite a lot of conferences since, overlaying every thing from social justice initiatives to land use necessities. An entire listing of the Activity Drive’s conferences might be discovered right here.

Proposed Hashish Legal guidelines: At present San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors has proposed an ordinance to create an Workplace of Hashish whose director can situation permits to hashish associated companies. The director of San Francisco’s Workplace of Hashish should suggest to the Board of Supervisors a schedule for hashish allow purposes and annual license charges. Although this proposed ordinance is strictly administrative in nature, our San Francisco hashish legal professionals foresee substantive (and useful) laws on the horizon. The Activity Pressure has additionally made the next draft suggestions to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors (which isn’t an entire record):

  • San Francisco ought to permit hashish gross sales as an adjunct use — the place promoting promoting hashish is not the situation’s main use — and will develop laws specifying how hashish merchandise ought to be separated from non-cannabis merchandise and the way accent hashish ought to be outlined;
  • San Francisco ought to set up a hashish “restaurant/meals” license, with tips to stop cross contamination;
  • San Francisco ought to scale back the space new hashish retailers can function in proximity to delicate makes use of to lower than the MAUCRSA-required 600 ft; and
  • San Francisco ought to permit present permitted medical hashish companies and hashish companies which were closed (so long as they closed in good standing with the town) to have precedence consideration within the grownup use hashish approval course of.

We’ve had various medical hashish producers find their hashish companies within the cities and counties round San Francisco and our California hashish legal professionals (like these hashish producers) are assured the San Francisco Board of Supervisors will handle and formulate a hashish licensing regime comparatively quickly. Our San Francisco workplace can also be seeing a big  improve in curiosity from present hashish companies in addition to new entrants into the sector in anticipation of San Francisco granting licenses to hashish enterprise past simply dispensaries.

Hashish companies which have their company construction so as might be properly positioned to achieve the profitable San Francisco market and that is, normally, the very first thing you need to do to prepare. We’re nonetheless in a interval of large transition in California with the passage of MAUCRSA, however San Francisco won’t be left behind with regards to complete native regulation, so keep tuned to make certain you’re up-to-date on the place the town is headed.

That will help you higher perceive what’s going on with hashish in San Francisco and the remainder of California, with a concentrate on what MAUCRSA means on your hashish enterprise, three of our California attorneys will probably be internet hosting a free webinar on August eight, 2017 from 12 pm to 1 pm PT. Hilary Bricken from our Los Angeles workplace will average two of our San Francisco-based attorneys (Alison Malsbury and me) in a dialogue on the main modifications between the MCRSA and MAUCRSA, together with on vertical integration and possession of a number of licenses, revised distributorship requirements, and what California hashish license candidates can anticipate extra usually from California’s Bureau of Hashish Management as rule-making continues by way of the rest of the yr. We may even handle questions from the viewers each throughout and on the finish of the webinar.

To register for this free webinar, please click on right here. We sit up for your becoming a member of us!

Posted on

California Hashish Manufacturing Restrictions Beneath MAUCRSA (SB 94)

California_marijuana_template-320x304.jpg


California hashish manufacturing

We wrote about hashish edibles laws underneath the proposed manufacturing guidelines issued pursuant to the MCRSA, however shoppers have been asking about what, if something, has modified on account of passage of Senate Invoice 94. Right here’s what SB 94, aka “MAUCRSA,” has to say, usually, about edibles:

MAUCRSA mandates edible hashish merchandise should meet the next necessities:

  1. Not be designed to attraction to youngsters, or be simply confused with commercially bought sweet or meals that don’t include hashish;
  2. Produced and bought with a standardized focus of cannabinoids to not exceed 10 mg of THC per serving;
  3. Delineated or scored into standardized serving sizes if the hashish product incorporates multiple serving;
  4. Homogenized to make sure uniform disbursement of cannabinoids;
  5. Manufactured and bought beneath sanitation requirements that comport with California State Division of Well being laws;
  6. Offered to shoppers with adequate info to allow knowledgeable consumption of the product, together with the potential results of the hashish product and instructions for its consumption; and
  7. Marked with a common image that might be set by the California Division of Well being.

However as for the opposite guidelines promulgated by the California Division of Well being pursuant to the MCRSA? They’re not relevant, and we should wait for an additional set of proposed guidelines to drop earlier than we all know precisely what the laws will seem like. In the event you weren’t proud of the primary algorithm underneath the MCRSA, you shouldn’t get your hopes up for giant modifications as the chances are good that the majority of those guidelines will stay the identical beneath MAUCRSA as it’s extensively anticipated the California Division of Well being will situation a brand new algorithm similar to the primary. As a refresher, listed here are a few of the hashish merchandise NOT allowed beneath the primary algorithm that would change, however in all probability gained’t:

  1. Hashish-infused alcoholic drinks;
  2. Hashish merchandise containing any non-cannabinoid additive that will increase efficiency, toxicity or addictive potential, or that might create an unsafe mixture with different psychoactive substances, together with nicotine and caffeine;
  3. Hashish merchandise that have to be held under 41 levels Fahrenheit to be protected for human consumption;
  4. Vacuum packed hashish merchandise;
  5. Canned hashish merchandise;
  6. Hashish-infused juice;
  7. Perishable bakery merchandise that have to be held at temperatures under 41 levels Fahrenheit, together with cream or custard-filled pies, pies or pastries which consist in entire or in a part of milk or milk merchandise, eggs, or artificial fillings, or meat-filled pies or pastries;
  8. Dairy merchandise of any sort (sure, this seems to incorporate butter);
  9. Meat merchandise;
  10. Seafood merchandise.

Additionally notice that the preliminary set of proposed guidelines prohibited licensees from manufacturing hashish merchandise by making use of cannabinoid focus or extract to commercially out there snack sweet or meals gadgets, also called “re-manufacturing.” Although MAUCRSA (SB94) doesn’t converse to this challenge, the California Division of Well being will probably take the identical stance as they redraft the subsequent set of proposed guidelines. These hoping to safe manufacturing licenses pursuant to the MAUCRSA might want to keep tuned, and pay shut consideration to the revised guidelines as they develop.

That will help you higher perceive what MAUCRSA means on your hashish enterprise, three of our California attorneys can be internet hosting a free webinar on August eight, 2017 from 12 pm to 1 pm PT. Hilary Bricken from our Los Angeles workplace will average two of our San Francisco-based attorneys (Habib Bentaleb and me) in a dialogue on the key modifications between the MCRSA and MAUCRSA, together with on vertical integration and possession of a number of licenses, revised distributorship requirements, and what California hashish license candidates can anticipate extra usually from California’s Bureau of Hashish Management as rule-making continues by way of the rest of the yr. We may also tackle questions from the viewers each throughout and on the finish of the webinar.

To register for this free webinar, please click on right here. We sit up for your becoming a member of us!

Posted on

Catalonia Spain Legalizes Hashish

810px-Flag_of_Catalonia.svg_-320x213.png

The Parliament of Catalonia simply accredited by a 118 to 9 vote a brand new regulation that (Ley de asociaciones de consumidoras de hashish) that establishes authorized requirements for hashish golf equipment. Up till now, hashish golf equipment in Catalonia have been protected solely by municipal laws they usually need to a big extent been working in authorized limbo. This new regulation provides higher authorized certainty to Catalonian hashish golf equipment.

The regulation might nonetheless face authorized challenges by Spain’s central authorities in Madrid or in entrance of Spain’s Constitutional Courtroom, however for now it’s the regulation of the land for Catalonia (which consists of 4 provinces: Barcelona, Girona, Lleida, and Tarragona. The regulation is meant to regulate leisure and therapeutic makes use of of hashish as a method to enhance public well being requirements, whereas additionally curbing the unlawful market and hashish tourism. Listed here are a number of the new legal guidelines key factors:

  • The regulation will regulate the consumption, cultivation, and transportation of hashish.
  • The hashish golf equipment have to be self-sustaining non-profit associations.
  • The regulation will impose necessities on how, who, and by what means hashish may be delivered to a hashish affiliation.
  • To fight “hashish tourism,” members of hashish golf equipment should wait 15 days after becoming a member of an affiliation to acquire hashish.
  • The regulation will set up limits on promoting.
  • Hashish golf equipment might not promote alcohol, cannabis-infused meals, or another drug.

Catalonia’s new hashish regulation additionally imposes the next limits, however not for these using hashish for therapeutic functions:

  • You have to be 18 years or older to hitch a hashish membership.
  • Hashish membership members between the ages of 18 to 20 years previous can be restricted to acquiring 20 grams of hashish per 30 days.
  • Hashish membership members 21 years previous and above are restricted to 60 grams of marijuana per 30 days.
  • The portions of hashish allotted to membership members have to be precisely logged in a ledger.
  • Every hashish non-profit affiliation can produce not more than 150 kilograms of hashish per yr.

For extra of our articles on hashish in Spain (written principally by our legal professionals in Barcelona) go right here.