A hemp plant bathed in sunlight.

North Carolina Hemp Grower Secures Early Buyer for Next Year’s Crop

10/31/2016

by

Industrial Hemp Manufacturing, LLC has signed a Letter of Intent to purchase the 1,000 acre-plus hemp crop planted by BioRegen Innovations Cooperative  in North Carolina, the company announced in a press release. The crop is among the first planted in the state and is expected to be harvested toward the end of 2017. Industrial Hemp Manufacturing is a wholly owned subsidiary of Hemp, Inc.

“I believe this will be a turning point for not only our company, but for the state of North Carolina and America,” Davis Schmitt, COO of Industrial Hemp Manufacturing said in the release. “We already have the infrastructure to grow industrial hemp in the short run. The NC Industrial Hemp Commission is now able to define the rules and regulations for growing industrial hemp. This industrial hemp crop is part of history in the making and I believe it will be a very lucrative venture for both parties.”

Hemp, Inc. CEO Bruce Perlowin called the agreement “momentous” indicating that the crop will be processed  at the company’s facility in Spring Hope.

“…We can process millions of pounds of hemp fibers and stalks to be incorporated into thousands of products used for clothing, plastic composites, construction material such as hempcrete, paper, biofuel, absorbent materials and more,” he said. “Instead of leaving the stalk in the fields to be wasted, or in some cases burned thereby polluting the environment, we have the infrastructure in place to take that wasted fiber and process roughly forty million pounds per year.”

Additionally, some of the hemp processed in the facility will be used for CBD-only medical products.

End

Country music icon Willie Nelson, founder of cannabis brand Willie's Reserve, signing an autograph.

Understanding Celebrity Cannabis Licensing

10/28/2016

by

Celebrity product licensing is nothing new — Michael Jordan has sneakers, Elizabeth Taylor has perfume — but the practice is beginning to permeate the cannabis space with the introduction of celebrity-branded cannabis products, such as Leafs by Snoop from the hip hop superstar and Willie’s Reserve, a line featuring the country music icon Willie Nelson.

Wiz Kahlifa, Wu-Tang’s Ghostface Killah, and Melissa Etheredge join the estates of counter culture icons Bob Marley and Jimi Hendrix as musicians either already involved in, or seeking to enter, the cannabis industry. Actor and director Kevin Smith partnered with a dispensary to create two strains to help promote his horror flick “Tusk,” and Tommy Chong, who was once jailed for nine months for his role in Chong’s Glass company, has launched his own brand Chong’s Choice. Whoopi Goldberg has also entered the fray with Whoopi & Maya, a line of bath soaks, balms and tinctures targeted toward women.

How celebrity licensing deals work

According to Olivia Mannix, co-founder and CEO of the Denver-based marketing company Cannabrand, the celebrities are the ones responsible for coming up with a brand and they work with industry partners to find cultivators and distributors in different markets in states where the product will be sold. The celebrity plays an “integral role in the development process,” meeting with potential growing partners and (of course) trying the product to “make sure it is something that that they like” and are willing to stake their reputation on, she said.  

“They’re the last and most important people to sign off because it’s them, it’s their brand, and they want it represented in the best way possible,” Mannix said in an interview with Ganjapreneur.

Unlike traditional products, cannabis products must be sourced from the state in which they are sold — so while a customer will have an option for a celebrity-branded product in both California and Colorado, those products will not come from the same grower, Mannix explained. If the brand is tainted in one state — tests positive for a banned substance for instance — it could negatively impact the brand in both states even though it doesn’t have the same source.

“Quality control is huge in really making sure the partners and the people they’re working with have their [standard operating procedures] so that the consistency and the quality of their products are streamlined across all markets,” said Mannix, adding that if news breaks that a branded product in California has an issue, such as a pesticide alert, it would not affect the product in another state because it doesn’t come from the same source. However, the consumer might not necessarily understand that and “it could be detrimental to the entire brand,” she said.

The benefit for dispensaries carrying celebrity-branded products

For dispensary owners, celebrity-branded products are a way to drum up business and elevate the company’s profile. Both the cannabis-centric and mainstream media lights up (no pun intended) when a celebrity releases a cannabis product because, on one hand, it’s normalizing cannabis, but on the other hand it can be controversial — either way, customers get curious and want to experience the product for themselves.

And while cannabis tends to sell itself, dispensary owners are still competing for a market share.

Southwest Patient Group, a dispensary in San Diego, California, carries Chong’s Choice and according to its manager Alex Scherer, celebrity endorsements tend to carry some weight by helping to legitimize a product and, in most cases, bring mainstream attention to the benefits of cannabis therapies. As the industry grows, so does demand for high-quality products, he said.     

“Right now branding is a really important part of the retail segment of this industry,” Scherer, who also serves as the president of the United Medical Marijuana Coalition, told Ganjapreneur. “In the past it wasn’t so critical… now days there is a bit more sophistication to the industry.”

Scherer said that customers tend to buy products that “appear of higher quality” and that celebrities are able to give that appearance due to their deep pockets and ability to hire world class designers and partner with top-flight manufacturers. Goldberg, for instance, partnered with Maya Elisabeth, founder of Om Edibles and winner of seven High Times Cannabis Cup awards.

“The product that stands out more on the [sales] floor will sell better,” Scherer said. “You just can’t get into a legitimate shop with poor packaging, no strategy, and expect to compete against companies with those things.”

Chong’s Choice sells well at Southwest because it lives up to the packaging. “It’s a high-quality product,” Scherer said, because if it wasn’t the dispensary would stop selling it — Tommy Chong’s endorsement or not. “If it doesn’t do the job and we have customer complaints, we wouldn’t keep it long-term.” It might help that Chong’s Choice doesn’t boast a price premium over its competitors, making it even more enticing to Scherer’s customers.

Celebrity trademarks in the cannabis space

Unlike traditional products — sneakers or perfumes — cannabis products are not afforded the same trademark protection by the U.S. Trademark and Patent Office (USTPO) due to marijuana’s Schedule I status. However, according to Neil Juneja, founder of Gleam Law, a firm specializing in marijuana law, celebrities are protected under personality rights law in the state in which they reside if that state has laws on the books for personality rights protections, such as California or New York. Personality rights allow individuals to control commercial uses of their name, image and likeness.

In a hypothetical scenario in which a new variety of cannabis was created and named after a celebrity, that product might also be afforded some protections even without a trademark in place. Courts can employ a test, called the Sleekcraft factors, to determine if there is a likelihood of consumer confusion which would violate a trademark and the plaintiff could also prove dilution through tarnishment, for which there is a different test, Juneja explained.

“You could prevent people from using that name or anything confusingly similar,” he said in an interview. “So that means if anyone was confused about the source of the goods you couldn’t use any name.”

Rebeccah Gan, a partner at Wenderoth, Lind & Ponack LLP, who specializes in trademark and patent law, said that companies can seek trademark protections on a state level but in many cases, such as the Washington Redskins trademark case, courts have determined that if a trademark “is not capable of being registered at the federal level at the time of the use, the use doesn’t give you common-law rights,” meaning that just because a celebrity has common-law trademark rights it doesn’t necessarily allow that person to claim rights to a product not allowed to be trademarked by the USTPO.

Gan suggests that if the company is selling non-cannabis products, such as clothing and hemp products, they would be able to apply for a trademark for those items, but because the federal government opposes legalization, the USTPO refuses to grant or even consider trademark protections for cannabis.

“They say, ‘When it comes to our registration system or common-law rights we are going to take this hard stance,’” she said in an interview with Ganjapreneur. “Which is ‘people rip each other off, oh well,’ because this is illegal commerce and we are not going to get involved in playing umpire.”

The celebrity effect

The marketing rules in states with cannabis markets, whether medicinal or recreational, do not permit marketing toward children and most television networks will not air cannabis commercials — although there is currently no official ban on such advertising under FCC rules. But as more states end cannabis prohibition, it’s likely that those marketing rules will evolve — in much the same way tobacco advertising was banned from television and radio in 1971. However, it’s unlikely that celebrity-branded products will be outlawed as several alcoholic beverages carry the names of celebrities — Marilyn Manson has an absinthe called “Mansinthe” and Stone Farking Wheaton w00tstout carries the name of Wil Wheaton, who helped create the brew, among others — and many of the rules governing the industry mirror those for alcohol and tobacco.

According to a 2013 study by Ace Metrix outlined by Marketing Charts, celebrity endorsements that had “little apparent connection” to the brand underperformed compared to those endorsements that had a strong connection to the brand. It’s safe to say that celebrities like Snoop Dogg, who is not just famous but famous in part because of his cannabis use, and Whoopi Goldberg, who has a long history of cannabis advocacy, have strong connections to their brands — making them no-brainer choices as brand ambassadors. It remains to be seen whether or not celebrities without a public history with cannabis will enter the market and, if they do, how the market will respond.  

“Celebrities have a voice and they are able to get behind these brands, they are able to get behind the cannabis industry and they are able to have people listen to them,” Mannix said. “Celebrities are entrepreneurs — they have their own brand, their own backing, their own following — so they are really advocating for [the cannabis space] to be able to get that insight and the messaging and education out there, which is crucial to the industry.”   

End

Report: Legal Cannabis is Boon to CO Economy

10/28/2016

by

According to a report by the Marijuana Policy Group, Colorado’s legal cannabis market has generated $2.39 billion in state output, created 18,005 new full-time-equivalent jobs, and was the second largest excise tax revenue source in 2015, with $121 million in combined sales and excise tax revenues.

“Marijuana tax revenues were three times larger than alcohol, and 14 percent larger than casino revenues. The MPG projects marijuana tax revenues will eclipse cigarette revenues by 2020, as cigarette sales continue to decline,” the authors said in the report. “Marijuana tax revenues will likely continue increasing as more consumer demand shifts into the taxed adult-use market.”

Cannabis spending creates “more output and employment per dollar spent than 90 percent” of other state industries, and demand is projected to grow 11.3 percent annually through 2020, the report says. The analysts expect state demand for cannabis will be 215.7 metric tons of flower equivalents by 2020, during which total sales value will peak near $1.52 billion.

The study found that the largest spending category for Colorado retailers is the cannabis itself, followed by payroll, rent, security, compliance, and consulting services. For cultivators, electricity and HVAC represent the largest spending categories, followed by fertilizers, pesticides, “other agricultural inputs,” and payrolls. Many of those services and products are handled by businesses operating in ancillary markets; and as the industry has become “structured, organized and competitive” a growing need for specialized law firms has developed, the researchers said.

“As the need for analysis and advice grows within the private sector and government agencies, so has the legal and consulting segment of the marijuana industry,” the report states. “Investment banking and business valuation services are additional examples of ancillary demand that are related to the marijuana industry.”

Additionally, the study shows that from 2014 to 2015 the US legal cannabis industry has grown 42.4 percent, reducing the informal market 36.2 percent. Colorado’s economy grew at 3.5 percent – double the national average of 1.75 percent. The report suggests that by 2020 Colorado’s market “will be fully saturated” but will still grow at 2 percent to 3.1 percent per year.

End

The Australian flag flying on a windy day.

Australian MMJ Cultivation License Applications Open on Monday

10/28/2016

by

Australia’s Office of Drug Control will start accepting applications for cannabis cultivation licenses on Monday, one day after the federal medical marijuana legislation takes effect, according to a report from the Australian Broadcasting Company. The applicants must show that they will be supplying either a researcher or licensed manufacturer in order to be considered for the program.

MGC Pharmaceuticals, AusCann and Bedrocan Australia, which has ties to the Dutch company of the same name and Canada’s Tilray, all indicated they would apply for licenses.

Elaine Darby, AusCann managing director, said the company hopes to have its first crop planted the middle of next year, with products available toward the end of next year.

“Initially AusCann’s products will be used in some of our clinical studies as well as provided to clinicians who wish to provide from the outset and the key demand areas at this point seem to be chronic neuropathic pain and treatment-resistant epilepsy,” she said in the report.

The Motley Fool Australia’s Tom Richardson estimates Australia’s medical cannabis market could reach $75 million per year, but suggested that investing in the nascent market was not a sure bet due to the many unknowns of the industry including the fact that the government could choose to shut it down at any time.

“Some of Australia’s largest healthcare companies — such as Cochlear that make hearing aids, CSL that make emergency hospital products, or Resmed that makes sleep treatment products — these are all multi-billion dollar markets, so $75 million a year is really a drop in the ocean,” he said.

One of the most prominent medical cannabis activists in the country, Lucy Haslam, said that she had bought a farm with the intention of growing cannabis as soon as the government allowed, but that due to the high-powered corporations making their way in and its potential as “a cut-throat industry” she will not apply for a license.

“We’re seeing large companies that are very cashed up looking to come to Australia so it is at risk of being all about money rather than all about patients,” she said.

Haslam is also concerned that a “convoluted and complicated” system will just force people to stick with the informal market. So, for now, she plans on focusing her efforts on education.

End

Humboldt State University Panel Debates Pros and Cons of Prop. 64

10/28/2016

by

Some California growers have already voiced their concerns over the Adult Use of Marijuana Act, and during a Humboldt State University panel discussion, one researcher called marijuana  the “last small farm industry in California.”

In the Times-Standard report, Fred Krissman, a research associate with the HSU Anthropology Department and Humboldt Institute for Interdisciplinary Marijuana Research, pointed out that Proposition 64 allows for large-scale grows five years after the law’s passage which could allow large companies to take over the industry as it has in other agricultural markets.

“This is a major threat to small scale grows,” he said in the report. “Most best practice growers that I have met oppose AUMA on that issue alone.”

Kristin Nevedal, a local cultivator and consultant to Americans for Safe Access who appeared on the panel, said that the law doesn’t allow grows larger than 1 acre during the first five years and prevents non-California residents from securing a business license for the first two – which allows smaller operators a “small window” to carve out their market share. She said that the language of the law provides strong anti-monopoly language and farmer protections.

“It does prohibit the act of selling a crop below the cost it takes to produce it,” she said.

According to the report, most members of the panel said the tax issue, which provides for total taxes of 10 percent on retail sales, is worth scrutinizing. Sequoia Hudson, member of the True Humboldt cooperative, said that if the retail prices are not competitive with the informal market, the latter will continue to thrive.

Another HIIMR member, Tony Silvaggio, noted that until the drug is decriminalized on a federal level the informal market would still compete with legal sales, and that Prop 64 doesn’t make it any easier for researchers to study cannabis.

“Without federal prohibition being removed, we’re going to have pressure on our ecosystems here as every year it gets worse and worse,” he said.    

End

Alaska’s Plan for Marijuana Handler Permits Would Shut Out Host of Applicants

10/28/2016

by

New proposed permit requirements for potential cannabis industry workers in Alaska are so onerous that they are “unreasonable impracticable,” with one industry hopeful saying they limit employment opportunities “without any tangible benefit to the state or city,” the Peninsula Clarion reports.

The proposal would force employees to pass a training course to obtain a marijuana handler’s permit, for which the requirements would be the strictest in the nation and inconsistent with similar permits required for people employed in the alcohol industry.

Under the plan, individuals would not be eligible for a marijuana handler’s card if they have been convicted of a felony or of selling alcohol without a license over the last five years, or have ever been convicted of a misdemeanor crime that included “violence, weapons, or dishonesty” or a controlled substance conviction other than a Schedule VI violation.

Steve Cehula, one of the industry hopefuls, called the occupational licensing proposal “incongruent with the voice of the people and unfair” and that the plan would disqualify cannabis workers for something that doesn’t preclude them from working in the tobacco or alcohol industries.

The alcohol industry equivalent in the state, Training for Alcohol Professionals, has no criminal restrictions at all. Kristen Myles, vice-president of operations for the Cabaret, Hotel, Restaurant and Retail Association, said the proposal “doesn’t make any sense.”

“It’s hard enough to find good employees for any business,” she said in the report.

So far, there have been over 300 licenses issued to canna-businesses in the state but it’s not yet clear how many employment opportunities that will lead to.

End

Arkansas' state flag flying before a cloudless sky.

Arkansas Supreme Court Disqualifies One of the State’s Two MMJ Measures

10/27/2016

by

One of Arkansas’ competing measures to legalize medical cannabis — the Arkansas Medical Cannabis Act — has been disqualified from the ballot by the Arkansas Supreme Court, according to a 40/29 News report. The other legalization measure, the Arkansas Medical Marijuana Amendment, remains on the ballot and will be appearing before voters in the November 8 general election.

According to the court, the AMCA — which was set to appear as Issue 7 on the ballot — was disqualified due to a number of mistakes made in the petitioning process. In the court’s written opinion, five reasons were given for dismissing some of the signatures:

  1. Some petition gatherers did not comply with state requirements laid out for political canvassers.
  2. Some signatures listed only a P.O. box number and not a home address.
  3. Some canvassers had verified their petitions before they were signed by a voter.
  4. Some canvassers made errors filling out the form.
  5. Canvassers did not always explicitly witness the signing of the petition.

In total, the Arkansas Supreme Court threw out just over 12,000 signatures, lowering the total number of valid signatures to 65,412 — insufficient for making the ballot.

The AMCA, which enjoyed a NORML endorsement, was considered by many marijuana advocates to be superior to the AMMA, for it allowed cannabis treatment for a wider variety of ailments and included home grow provisions for patients.

On the bright side, however, narrowing things down to only one MMJ option on the ballot means that Arkansas is less likely to split the pro-cannabis vote between two measures, which means that legal cannabis may now be a more likely outcome.

Three other states will be voting on medical marijuana measures this November.

End

Pennsylvania Health Department Releases Medical Cannabis Draft Rules

10/27/2016

by

The Pennsylvania Health Department has released the draft regulations for the state’s medical marijuana program, expecting to begin accepting applications from would-be cultivators, processors, and dispensaries early next year, the Inquirer reports. Secretary of Health Karen Murphy said the department expects sales to begin in 2018.

Additionally, Murphy indicated that more than 100 parents and caregivers have been granted “safe harbor” letters that allow them to acquire medical cannabis from out-of-state sources for children suffering from a qualifying condition, but that no adults have been granted such permission.

The draft regulations include input from “nearly 1,000 comments” from community, industry and legislative members.

“This is a program we are starting from the ground up,” Murphy said in the report. “We feel this type of engagement is incredibly important for the integrity of the program.”

Under this version of the draft regulations, growers would be permitted to import seedlings during the program’s first 30 days, and the definition of person under the rules includes limited liability companies and corporations. Medical marijuana delivery personnel no longer have to hold a Pennsylvania drivers license, and the age to work in a grow house is reduced from 21 to 18.

The rules also divide the state into six geographical regions, up from three, for grow house and dispensary license distribution. The number of permits granted in a region will be determined based on a variety of factors, including population, number of potential patients and access to public transportation, and regions with economic development needs will get special consideration. In all, there would be 25 grower-processors and 50 dispensaries with three locations each permitted in the state.

End

Indoor cannabis plants being grown in a licensed Washington state marijuana production facility.

Ohio Patients Unlikely to Have MMJ Access Until 2018

10/27/2016

by

Patients in Ohio are unlikely to have access to medical marijuana until 2018, despite the law taking effect on Sept. 8, according to a Columbus Dispatch report. Policy makers still have to draft rules for the program, adopt policies, and implement a plan for certification and licensing – under the law those rules, which have to be approved by two oversight agencies, don’t have to be completed until next year.

Robert Giacalone, a medical board member, suggests that the board “is in no way prohibiting the recommendation of medical marijuana now that HB523 is effective” but a provision of the law bars doctors from recommending medical marijuana until the rules are written and products are cultivated and sold in the state.

“If any physician wishes to recommend medical marijuana before the rules are in place, we strongly recommend that they contact a private attorney,” he said in the report.

The Ohio Patient Network’s Rob Ryan said there is “no doubt” people with approved qualifying conditions should be able to access medical marijuana in the state, but that anyone seeking to do so should be “very careful going out of state to do so.” He said that until the state program is in place, patients could obtain cannabis “from a family member or friend, or a dealer as a last resort,” noting that patients could opt to grow their own medicine.  

Patients could travel to a neighboring state that allows out-of-state cardholders to purchase the drug at dispensaries, such as Michigan, but they would be running the risk of being charged with trafficking for carrying cannabis across state lines. Those charged could assert an “affirmative defense” until medical marijuana is available in Ohio, but it would be up to a judge to accept it.

According to Dan Tierney, spokesman for Attorney General Mike DeWine’s office, it would be “very difficult” to legally obtain medical marijuana until the infrastructure is in place.

“Everybody knows there’s significant lead time built into this statute,” he said. “We don’t have the specific rules in place at the medical board or the pharmacy board.”

Even after the program is set up, it might still prove difficult for patients in more than 40 cities who have passed moratoriums on the cannabis industry, and for patients in Hamilton and Butler Counties, which have passed permanent bans.

End

A member of the Georgia National Guard force searches for illegal marijuana plants.

Feds Request Report on DEA Cannabis Eradication Program

10/27/2016

by

Seven congressional Democrats along with one Republican have written a letter to U.S. Comptroller General Gene Dodaro requesting the Government Accountability Office to “produce a report on the cost effectiveness of the DEA’s Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program,” calling into question the “necessity” of the program.

The lawmakers cite an Oct. 7 Washington Post report that discovered the DEA spent $73,000 on the program in Utah, “but did not find a single plant to eradicate.”

“Over half the states have now legalized marijuana in some form, yet the DEA continues to funnel millions of tax dollars every year into marijuana eradication,” the letter reads. “As Congress evaluates how to allocate government funds over the next fiscal year, it is critical that we have an accurate picture of what the DEA’s DCE/SP funds are being spent on, where and how effectively.”

Specifically, the congressmen want the agency to report:

  • The cost per plant per state and the total program cost over the last three to five years.
  • How the states have used those funds
  • How the DEA measures the program’s success
  • How many states had zero eradications
  • The “mean, median, and mode” of plants destroyed at each source
  • The total amount of cannabis that has been eradicated or suppressed by the program in the past three to five years, and how much of that was in states with medical or recreational cannabis laws.
  • What types of levels of coordination happen between the DEA the U.S. Department of Agriculture and US Forest Service.

According to the Post report, the DEA spends $14 million annually on the eradication program and 12 members of Congress have proposed eliminating the program altogether.         

End

The fountain outside of the Bellagio Resort & Casino in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Polling Close on Nevada’s Question 2

10/27/2016

by

According to a poll by Bendixen & Amandi International commissioned by the Las Vegas Review-Journal, the majority of respondents support Question 2, which would legalize cannabis for recreational use in the state, but only by a slim 47 percent to 43 percent margin with 10 percent undecided or declining to answer.

The Journal is owned by the family of Sheldon Adelson, the casino mogul who has donated $1 million each to the anti-campaigns in both Massachusetts and Nevada.

Democrats favored the measure 54 percent to 34 percent, along with 51 percent of independents with 34 percent opposed. The majority, 58 percent, of Republicans oppose the initiative, with just 35 percent in support. The percentage of respondents backing the initiative has not changed from a poll conducted last month by the same firm, and opposition lost three points to the undecided camp. However, according to Anthony Williams, special projects director for Bendixen & Amandi, with no increase in pledged support, and still trending below 50 percent, advocates should be “nervous.”

“At this late day, it’s usually unlikely to convince a bunch of people to vote yes,” he said in the report. “That 10 percent could easily vote no or skip the question entirely.”

Due to the stark contrast in opinion between voters registered with the major parties, the success of the measure will likely depend on voter turnout on Election Day. According to the report, 24,000 more Democrats have voted in the first four days of early voting in the state than Republicans.

Nevada joins California, Maine, Massachusetts, and Arizona with voter-backed recreational cannabis legalization initiatives on general election ballots.             

End

Medical cannabis being displayed at the Clio, Michigan Cannabis Cup 2016.

Study Suggests MMJ Programs Not Being Abused

10/26/2016

by

According to a study published in the Drug and Alcohol Dependence journal, children who live in states with medicinal marijuana programs are not more likely to use cannabis. The study did find, however, that people over the age of 25 did use the drug more after the laws were enacted.

The study’s lead author, Dr. Silvia Martins, an associate professor of epidemiology at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, said that despite the fears expressed by some researchers, physicians and laypeople, medicinal cannabis is not easily available — and is not being diverted — to young people. The authors reviewed the results of national surveys in Illinois, Arizona, Delaware, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Rhode Island and New Jersey, which included more than 53,800 people ages 12 and up, between 2004 and 2013.

“The laws seem to be working as expected with little unintended consequences for youth and young adults to date,” she said in a HealthDay report. “It’s harder for [young people] to access it for recreational purposes and most of the medical indications of marijuana are for ailments that typically affect a larger proportion of older adults.”

The researchers found that 26 to 39-year-olds who reported using cannabis within the past month grew, but not significantly, after the laws were passed — from 9 percent prior to the enactment of the laws to 10 percent after the law’s passage. The percentage of people aged 40 to 64 who used cannabis within the month after reforms were passed climbed slightly higher, from 4.5 percent to 6 percent. Less than 1 percent of people over the age of 65 said they used cannabis within the last month after medical marijuana laws were passed.

Four more states will voting on medical cannabis programs in next month’s general election.

End

Yellow envelope full of $100 bills.

IRS Targeting ‘Top 100’ CO Cannabis Companies

10/26/2016

by

The IRS has opened an “aggressive” round of audits on some of the largest and most successful Colorado cannabis growers and retailers, according to an Inc. report. James Thorburn, a Colorado-based tax attorney who represents cannabis clients, says “it’s now just a matter of time” before the agency audits “pretty much everyone in the industry.”

The audits are focused on the taxable year of 2013 to 2014 and are being conducted on businesses using the 280E tax code — the regulation created for businesses participating in illegal trafficking of Schedule I or Schedule II substances. Under the code, businesses are not allowed to take any deductions besides the costs of goods sold. According to Thorburn, in order for the IRS to impose a 280E penalty they must prove that the taxpayer had been “illegally trafficking in a controlled substance” under state and federal law — so the taxpayer must have been convicted of a federal or state drug crime in order for 280E to apply.

The businesses being audited have neither violated state laws nor been federally charged with any drug crime, but Thorburn said the businesses might be being targeted for “political” or “enforcement” reasons. He said if the IRS implements 280E, “the taxes are so severe that the industry couldn’t withstand the taxes that are imposed.”

According to a Denver cultivator, who wished to remain unnamed in the report, “most of the top 100 marijuana companies in Colorado are being ‘randomly’ audited.” His company is one of them — the IRS claimed he misfiled Form 8300, reserved for cash deposits over $10,000, and under 280E.

According to an earlier report from INC., 30 other canna-businesses were being audited back in July for not properly filling out form 830 for the tax year 2014 to 2015.

End

Colorado Florist Relishing Cannabis Space with “Weed Weddings”

10/26/2016

by

A Colorado-based florist has expanded her business to include cannabis bouquets and infused weddings, filling a gap that remained two years into state legalization, CNBC reports. The company motto is “Straight from your bouquet to your bowl.”

“You can literally take it out and smoke it,” Bec Koop, owner of Buds & Blossoms, said in the report.

According to Koop, many venues don’t want people consuming cannabis on-site because of legal restrictions; however, she sought out cannabis friendly venues that allow her to host the weddings and receptions. Those events usually include a “bud bar” which can run up to $85 an hour. Along with two partners, she started the Cannabis Wedding Expo, where vendors, venues and couples can connect to plan the perfect cannabis-infused wedding.

“One day as I was working at the dispensary up in Alma, Colorado, I happened to have some extra flowers left over from an event,” she said. “I decided to cut down my own personal [cannabis] plant out of my garden, put some red roses around [the] plant and said, ‘Oh, my God! Weed weddings!’”

She started the business with a 35-page business plan and $1,500. Her first ‘weed wedding’ — Alice in Wonderland themed — was held on April 20, 2014. She has already performed 12 weddings this year after just six in 2015. Additionally, she hosts other events such as yoga brunches, bachelorette parties, and food pairings.

“I’ve dealt with many ‘bridezillas’ on the traditional side, and all of my cannabis couples are so cool and comfortable and relaxed,” Koop said. “If they start to get worked up, I’m like, ‘Smoke this joint, you’re going to feel better in a minute, trust me.’”

Koop’s clients provide the cannabis and gift it to her; she then incorporates into different packages. She cannot directly purchase the cannabis because then she would need to obtain a cannabis retailer license. Additionally, under state law, one cannot drive with more than 2 ounces of cannabis, which forced her to make several trips for larger events.

She eventually aims to franchise the business and has already begun phasing out her traditional florist business.       

End

The Governor's Mansion in Nevada.

Nevada Gov. Pens Letter Urging a ‘No’ Vote on Question 2

10/26/2016

by

Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval is opposing the ballot initiative to legalize recreational cannabis use in the state, alleging that legalization “would only set [the state] back.” The resistance came in the form of an email, shared by the Las Vegas Review-Journal, from the Republican’s campaign office. The letter cites increased traffic deaths after legalization in Colorado and Washington, claims legalizing cannabis would “harm children” and negatively affect public safety and increase government spending on social services.

“We have learned from the experience in other states that have legalized marijuana that we will likely see more abuse of the drug by teenagers, a substantial increase in emergency room visits for small children who have accidentally ingested the drug, increased traffic accidents and fatalities, and an even greater strain on our government social service agencies,” Sandoval wrote.

He suggests that legalization could have a negative impact on businesses in Nevada, or those interested in moving to the state, “because of concerns recreational marijuana would raise regarding their workforce.”  

“Finally, there is a tremendous grassroots effort rejecting this measure,” the letter states. “Law enforcement, the medical community, chambers of commerce, the tourism industry, educators and the faith-based community have all joined together to oppose Question 2.”

Sandoval claims that the status of cannabis in the state is reasonable in that the possession penalties have been reduced and patients already have access to medical cannabis.

Nevada is one of five states voting on a recreational cannabis measure during next month’s general election.

End

Danielle Keane: Marijuana Legalization Opportunities in the 2016 Election

Danielle Keane: The 2016 Cannabis Legalization Opportunity

10/26/2016

by

Danielle Keane is the Political Director of NORML, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. She recently joined our podcast host TG Branfalt for a discussion about the upcoming election season and the unprecedented opportunity that it presents for the cannabis legalization movement. In the upcoming election season, nine states will be voting on a cannabis legalization measure. Recreational initiatives will be on the ballot in California, Nevada, Arizona, Maine, and Massachusetts. In Florida, Arkansas, Montana, and North Dakota, voters will have an opportunity to pass medical initiatives.

In this interview, TG and Danielle discuss the specific details of many of the laws that will be determined by voters in November, including what NORML’s position is on the parallel ballot initiatives in Arkansas. Danielle also discusses some potential reasons why pro-legalization forces have out-fundraised prohibitionists in many areas this year, the bittersweet but unavoidable process of passing flawed legislation and working to improve it once it has passed, as well as the fact that going forward, most states will have to pass legalization measures via the legislature and not via the voters due to how their laws are written.

Note: this interview was recorded before the recent revelations about some Florida ballots omitting the medical cannabis initiative. Please spread the word if you live in Florida or know anyone who does!

Listen to the podcast below, or keep scrolling for a transcript of the interview.

Subscribe to the Ganjapreneur podcast on iTunes, Stitcher, SoundCloud or Google Play.

Listen to the podcast:

Read the transcript:

TG Branfalt: Hey there, I’m TG Branfalt and you are listening to the Ganjapreneur.com Podcast. The Ganjapreneur.com Podcast gives us an opportunity to speak directly with entrepreneurs and experts who are working on the front lines of the industry to normalize cannabis through responsible business, education, and activism. As your host, I will do my best to bring you actionable information to help you plan, grow and manage your cannabis business.

Today, my guest is Danielle Keane, political director for the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws better known as NORML. Keane has served as the political director for NORML since 2015. In that role, she manages local, state and federal lobbying efforts and promotes the organization’s political outreach efforts. Welcome to the show. Thank you for joining us today. How are you?

Danielle Keane: Thank you so much, TG. I’m doing great. Happy to be here.

TG Branfalt: Today we’re going to touch on a lot of different states that were voting on cannabis measures this election cycle. In total, there are 5 states up for recreational legalization and 4 states will be voting on medical cannabis initiatives. I want to start with Maine which is voting on recreational because they’re taking a somewhat unusual approach by creating the new industry under the Department of Agriculture instead of the Department of Liquor or an entirely new cannabis department. What is your take on this approach?

Danielle Keane: There isn’t too much significance in treating cannabis as an agricultural product and having industry oversight through the Department of Forestry versus another state department. This situation is sometimes more voter friendly. People feel more comfortable if marijuana isn’t being associated with a liquor or alcohol control board which we often see in other states. They’ll feel better if it’s in a separate regulatory framework.

That’s a decision that the voters should decide, but when it comes down to it, there’s still going to be a licensing process for businesses and administrative rules for the recreational program the same way if it were to be treated agriculturally or not, but the polling in Maine looks really strong. I believe there’s a margin of support of about 53 to 38% according to a September poll. Treated agriculturally or not, I think we’re going to see that passed.

TG Branfalt: How does this set up with the Department of Forestry, does it differ at all from its national counterparts?

Danielle Keane: It doesn’t really. Again, not in too significant of a way. Again, many of those administrative and regulatory duties are the same despite its classification. Limits on cultivation, allowing municipalities to regulate the number of dispensaries, and licensing — they’re all responsibilities of whatever department oversees the program, forestry or not.

TG Branfalt: If Maine were to pass, which other states could that influence or encourage to pass similar measures?

Danielle Keane: Hopefully other states in New England, but specifically following suit treating as an agricultural product or not, I’m not sure too many.

TG Branfalt: Okay. On the opposite side of the country we have California who’s recreational industry is estimated to be worth about 1.3 billion by 2018 and about 4 billion by 2020. What does legalization in California, the country’s most populous state mean to legalization efforts nationally?

Danielle Keane: California is absolutely, no doubt about it, definitely the state everyone will be looking at to move into a fully legalized and regulated market come November. Just as you mentioned, it is the most populous state in our country. I think something like 1 in 6 Americans lives in California. They have largely lead reforms in the marijuana movement in the past.

They were the first state to pass a medical marijuana law back in 1996, which sparked modern medical marijuana programs that we see around the country today. You are correct in that if California approves AUMA or the Adult Use of Marijuana Act or proposition 64 then it could definitely inspire a wave of other reforms just as we’ve seen California do in the past.

That’s not only on the state level. Realizing that because California is so large, they have the most representation on the federal level and in Congress. Hopefully, we’ll have an even larger representation in Washington DC of law makers with home states that have legal regulated adult use markets. I think you’ll find that they will be more open to protecting these state laws when that comes up in federal law. Of course we already know actually from NORML’s congressional score card that California has already the most friendly federal delegation in Washington DC.

TG Branfalt: So, still despite kind of the trajectory of the industry if California does legalize it recreationally, the proposition itself has drawn the ire of some pro-cannabis activists. Some say we’ll dismantle the medical marijuana program and what is your take on what it would do to the medical program as well what might you say to those activists?

Danielle Keane: Of course. As we all know, California has been involved in the marijuana industry both legally and not for quite some time and so because of that, we have so many different stakeholders that have been participating in this for longer than any of us have seen these reforms come about. This diverse set of interests, there’s no surprise that an initiative like this doesn’t please everyone. It would be impossible to draft a marijuana legalization initiative in a complicated state such as California that hits the perfect compromise on every possible negotiation.

The first thing activists should now is that AUMA, or Prop 64, is not the last word. There will be continued further changes in state and federal law that will guarantee affordable medical access, protect employment and housing rights, facilitate banking and allow interstate commerce. The second note is that AUMA’s regulatory provisions are largely patterned on the Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act which was the package of bills that was recently passed by the California legislature and became effective January 1st of this year.

These provisions are sorely needed. California’s medical marijuana program was unregulated and often the example for other states reforming their laws on what not to do. I think California is in an important time right now of hopefully ushering in full legalization and adapting those new laws to the regulation of the medical program. Things are changing.

I think in the next few years local municipalities will be figuring things out. The state will too and I encourage activists to be a part of that conversation. Get into contact with your local municipalities, join up with other activists that feel the same way you do. NORML has a number of California chapters around the state and I encourage you to try to make these laws work for you. Like I said, part of AUMA or Proposition 64 in California allows for most provisions to be modified by the legislature. This isn’t the end of changes for California.

TG Branfalt: In many states, there seems to be legislative changes happening. In Michigan for example, they just overhauled their medical marijuana infrastructure. In Florida, they’re trying to do the same via an amendment. Do you think that this is a smart way to legislate cannabis and marijuana as to kind of put something out there that gets the ball rolling and then go back and make the necessary changes?

Danielle Keane: I don’t think it’s an ideal way but I think it’s unavoidable. I think that it’s a compromise between having the legislature enact the laws that they believe are necessary. Then on the other side, having citizen driven ballot initiatives pick up the slack and enact policies that the legislature isn’t acting on. I think it’s a balance that us being played out through states around the country. Not everywhere, because not every state has the ability to have a citizen ballot initiative, but a lot of these states, I think it’s a successful way to find compromise between voter opinion and legislative action.

TG Branfalt: On that note, we’re going to take a short break. You are listening to the Ganjapreneur.com Podcast.

Being a cannabis entrepreneur comes with a lot of stress, and while you are busy developing and running your business, managing a team of loyal employees, and working to build a sustainable venture, the last thing you should need to worry about is your personal finances.

With Latitude Financial Group, you will have the tools you need to manage your finances efficiently and easily, without all the hassle. Latitude Financial Group provides a platform that shows you everything you have, all in one place, and that stays current without time-consuming updates and synchronizations. You’ll gain access to a free one-hour consultation and an award-winning financial management software suite that will empower you to better visualize and manage your finances.

With Latitude, you can form a relationship with an unbiased, fee-based, objective, professional personal advisor who understands your unique concerns, who listens to your needs, and who has years of experience applying financial solutions to the most complicated of financial scenarios.

Based in Denver, Colorado, the Latitude Financial Group team will work with you in ways that fit YOUR life. Whether you prefer a face-to-face meeting with an advisor at one of their TWENTY metro Denver area locations, a phone call, Skype meeting, or chat, they can help you work to achieve your financial goals.

So, if your personal or business finances are causing you stress, if you are losing sleep wondering if your financial future is secure in the career path you have chosen, or if you want to work with a financial advisor who is interested in helping you become successful in your business endeavors, give Latitude Financial Group a call and start being proactive about your financial future today.

Don’t wait: Latitude is offering the first 10 listeners one year of free access to their award-winning software platform. Go to RollingInGrass.com, that’s RollingInGrass.com, to get latitude in your financial life.

*Securities offered through Securities America, Inc., a Registered Broker/Dealer Member of FINRA / SIPC. Advisory services offered through Securities America Advisors, Inc., an SEC Registered Investment Advisory Firm. Scott Cody, Daniel Grote Representatives, Latitude Financial Group, and Securities America are unaffiliated. Latitude Financial Group and the Securities America companies are unaffiliated.

TG Branfalt: Welcome back. You are listening to the Ganjapreneur.com Podcast. I’m your host TG Branfalt talking to Danielle Keane, political director for NORML. Before the break, we were discussing the AUMA, the Adult Use of Marijuana Act in California but now we’re going to move back to the East Coast to Massachusetts where so far seems like the ballot initiative vote could go either way. According to our poll aggregates, the majority approve of the measure but it still has less than 50% of voter support. We’re here talking to Danielle Keane, political director for NORML. What do you think that this polling data says about the initiative’s chances in Massachusetts and are the opinions of powerful lawmakers such as Governor Charlie Baker and Boston Mayor Marty Walsh having any impact on the opinions of voters?

Danielle Keane: I definitely think this is going to be a close one come election day. I think the latest polling datta at I looked at which was a September WBZ-UMass Amherst Poll put support at a 53 to 40% lead with about 7% still unsure. However, within that poll support for the measure was found in all age groups except of course for voters over 55 years old. I believe the measure could pass if voter’s turnout to the polls, mainly millennial voters that typically don’t turn out to the polls. If they do turnout and hopefully they do, I think this measure could be successful but like you mentioned.

Unfortunately, there is a well organized opposition group in this state with endorsements from powerful lawmakers like the governor and the mayor of Boston but Massachusetts is used to having a marijuana related amendment on the ballot. In 2008, they voted to decriminalize possession of marijuana and in 2012, they legalized medical marijuana. Both of those measures passed by significant margins, I think about 30% which the legalization initiative definitely does not have that margin. It may just be that Massachusetts voters are still warming to the idea of a legal market. It’s a wonder why though. With decriminalization in place. it’s a shame for a state not to benefit from the tax revenues associated with the regulated above ground market.

I think as we get closer to the election, if we have any listeners living in Massachusetts, now is the time to get active in supporting the initiative. Reach out to friends and family and make sure they are aware of the question and let them know why you’ll be supporting the measure. Voters and marijuana activist definitely need to mobilize in Massachusetts if we want to see it succeed.

TG Branfalt: You had mentioned millennial voters who very strongly supported Bernie Sanders in his run for the Democratic nomination. Do you think that it will be the millennial voters that are going to make a difference in whether or not some of these initiatives pass?

Danielle Keane: Absolutely. I think the millennial voters are the ones that are going to be the deciding factor. They’re the ones that typically do not show out to the polls. Obviously in mid-term election years, you’ll see elections sway way more Republican. You hardly see any marijuana related initiatives on ballots during those years because it’s just not a good strategy. We absolutely need millennial voters to come out and support these marijuana related initiatives if we want them to succeed.

TG Branfalt: Back west, we’re going to talk a little bit about what’s going on in Nevada. This is actually the first appearance for legalization on the ballot in that state. Some might consider Sin City a slam dunk for legalization, but Oregon didn’t successfully pass their legalization measure on its first try in 2012. Do you think that the voters are going to take the leap on the first shot that they have or do you think that they’ll be trying again in 2018?

Danielle Keane: That is hard to say. I definitely don’t want to discount voters by saying it won’t happen until 2018 just yet, before they get a chance to vote on it. I believe polling in Nevada is putting support at around 52%. Again, pretty close and I think it’s clear to everyone how fitting marijuana legalization would be for Nevada and to be honest I personally think that it’s going to pass.

For what it’s worth, the state’s largest newspaper, the Las Vegas Review Journal did endorse this question during the petition collecting process. Unfortunately, since then Sheldon Adelson who is a casino mogul and anti-marijuana advocate purchased the Las Vegas Review Journal and forced the editorial board to reverse their support.

I think the paper’s first position really signifies where voter sentiment is. Also looking at how close Nevada is to states like Oregon and Washington, and there’s just one state between them and Colorado, they have to be watching these other states flourish with their legalization programs and want to get their fair share. I think this is something we’re going to start seeing happening around the country as more and more states move forward with these legalization initiatives. Other states are going to have to move forward with their on reforms.

TG Branfalt: You had mentioned Adelson, the casino mogul who’s actually … I mean you know this, he’s been funding prohibition pretty much every chance he gets. He just gave a million dollars to the anti-campaign in Florida. However, from what I’ve seen, the pro-camps are largely out fundraising the anti-camps even with billionaire casino moguls getting involved. I mean why do you think that this shift is happening to where the proc-campaigns are out funding the anti-campaigns?

Danielle Keane: That’s a great observation and a really sure sign that the time is now to legalize marijuana. I think people around the country are starting to see the dollar signs in their eyes. For better or for worse, There is just money to be made in the marijuana market. I think that is luckily taking shape in people investing in these ballot initiatives.

They’re not waiting until it’s legal to invest their money. They want to be the first ones in and so therefore they’re going to start investing in getting it legal. I think it’s a great thing for the marijuana movement. I think it comes with a number of pros and serious cons that people need to be aware of and evaluate after these states reform their laws and they start to establish markets. For now, I welcome all of the help and financial help from these investors to get these laws changed first.

TG Branfalt: I’m TG Branfalt, here with Danielle Keane, political director for NORML. We’re going to take one more short break and when we get back, we will discuss the medical initiatives on the ballot.

At Ganjapreneur we have heard from dozens of cannabis entrepreneurs who have encountered the issue of “Canna-bias”, which is when a mainstream business — whether a landlord, bank, or some other provider of vital business services — refuses to do business with them simply because of their association with cannabis. We have even heard stories of businesses being unable to provide health and life insurance for their employees because the insurance providers were too afraid to work with them.

We believe that this fear is totally unreasonable, and that cannabis business owners deserve access to the same services and resources that other businesses are afforded, that they should be able to hire consultation to help them follow the letter of the law in their business endeavors, and that they should be able to provide employee benefits without needing to compromise on the quality of coverage they can offer.

This is why we created the Ganjapreneur.com Business Service Directory, a resource for cannabis professionals to find and connect with service providers who are cannabis-friendly and who are actively seeking cannabis industry clients. If you are considering hiring a business consultant, lawyer, accountant, web designer, or any other ancillary service for your business, go to Ganjapreneur.com/businesses to browse hundreds of agencies, firms, and organizations who support cannabis legalization and who want to help you grow your business. With so many options to choose from in each service category, you will be able to browse company profiles and do research on multiple companies in advance, so you can find the provider who is the best fit for your particular need.

Our business service directory is intended to be a useful and well-maintained resource, which is why we individually vet each listing that is submitted. If you are a business service provider who wants to work with cannabis clients, you may be a good fit for our service directory. Go to Ganjapreneur.com/businesses to create your profile and start connecting with cannabis entrepreneurs today.

Welcome back. You are listening to the Ganjaprenueur.com Podcast. I am your host TG Branfalt talking to Danielle Keane, political director for NORML. I want to talk to you a bit about the medical initiatives. First, I want to start with Arkansas where voters are in a particularly unique position due to the fact that they will have 2 initiatives to choose from in November. According to a September 25th,

According to a September 25th, poll by Talk Business & Politics and Hendrix College, 49% said they would support the amendment which does not include grow your own provisions. 43% were opposed. While 36% said they would support the act which includes grow your own provisions for those with hardship certificates, compared to 53% opposed. If both are passed, the one with the more votes supersedes the other.

Do you guys have a preference on which measure is enacted here?

Danielle Keane: We do. Last month, NORML’s board of directors did vote to endorse the 2016 Arkansas Medical Cannabis Act, which is the measure that does include grow your own provisions. For full disclosure, the attorney representing the Arkansas Medical Cannabis Act is a long-time NORML legal committee member, John Wesley Hall from Little Rock.

It comes down to this. NORML is a marijuana consumer rights group. We represent the interests of the marijuana consumer. The other initiative, the Arkansas Medical Marijuana Amendment is far more restrictive than the first in terms of the list of conditions for which marijuana could be recommended and obviously it does not permit personal cultivation. As a result, the NORML board felt the Arkansas Medical Cannabis Act is a more consumer friendly proposal and did elect to endorse it.

TG Branfalt: Why do you think that voters are supporting the amendment more so than the act at this point.

Danielle Keane: That’s a really good question I have myself. I’m not sure if it comes down to voter education, if one campaign is doing a better job getting their message out to the voters and is truly informing them honestly about their initiative. I don’t have an answer for that. It would seem to me that more people, marijuana consumers would support the Arkansas Medical Marijuana Amendment. I’m just not sure.

TG Branfalt: The act supporters for Arkansas Compassionate Care have said that if both initiatives make the ballot, it’s almost certain that both will fail. Do you see this as the likely scenario in the state?

Danielle Keane: Unfortunately it’s a possible outcome. Essentially when you have 2 competing initiatives on the ballot you’re going to split the vote in half forcing neither of the measures to pass. What we do know in Arkansas is that support for the measures is really, really high when voters are asked about one or the other when faced with just one marijuana initiative they absolutely no doubt it support it. However, when voters are asked about both at the same time, support for those is significantly lower. It’ll be interesting to see how this one turns out.

TG Branfalt: According to your political score card, Arkansas doesn’t have a lot of legislative friends regarding medical cannabis.

Danielle Keane: You are correct. Arkansas’ delegation is not good whatsoever. It would be really, really great for them to take some action this election day by passing one of these initiatives.

TG Branfalt: North Dakota’s medical marijuana proposal would require the compassionate care centers to operate as not for profits. It would establish a compassionate care fund that comprise of donations fees and civil penalties which would provide funds for the program’s operations. What is your opinion on this model, is it viable? Are there downfalls?

Danielle Keane: Often times this requirement for medical marijuana dispensaries to operate as not-for-profits is related to the need for transparency. It’s also used to keep the price of medical marijuana down and accessible for a patient no matter their ability to pay. For that reason, I think it’s a good model. It does however need to be sustainable and obviously not at the expense of others in the state.

For example, using civil penalties to fund it. We don’t want to see an increase in civil penalties related to marijuana possession or use in a public place just so that the compassionate care centers can operate. I don’t believe it’s the perfect model and I think the state will have a warming period where overtime they’ll learn exactly how this is going to work out but we’ve seen it in other states and I think it’s a good place to start.

TG Branfalt: Have those other states evolved their programs into operations that make money?

Danielle Keane: Yes. A not-for-profit doesn’t necessarily mean that they cannot make a profit, it just means they need to be transparent about it and they have a cap for those but we have seen successful nonprofit medical dispensaries.

TG Branfalt: A not-for-profit model will certainly provide a lot of job opportunities and medicine for people who need it. That sounds like it would be a good place to start for North Dakota. Let’s jump topics again and talk about Florida. Florida is unique. Their program is very limited medical marijuana program, just took effect essentially and the centers just began to open in the summer. Can you outline Florida’s constitutional amendment proposal and how it differs from the current system implemented this year and what impact might it have on patients who are presently enrolled?

Danielle Keane: Absolutely. You’re correct in that Florida’s medical law that is currently in place and just took action is very, very restrictive. It’s a medical CBD law that allows for patients who are suffering from only cancer, muscle spasm, seizures, amd terminal illness to access CBD products that essentially don’t have any THC in them. These patients, they do not have access to the full marijuana plant and therefore they don’t have access to the full therapeutic potential found in marijuana.

This constitutional amendment, Yes on 2, Would essentially just expand upon the current Charlotte’s Web law. It would allow significantly more patients with a variety of ailments access to an increased variety of marijuana, most notably it allows for people suffering from chronic pain which is a really common ailment and obviously they’ll expand upon the marijuana that they’re currently growing to include high THC strands.

I’m not sure it would have any detrimental effect on patients that are presently enrolled in the program. These patients are already accessing their medicine. If Yes on 2 were to pass, it would simply expand upon who is eligible for the program, what marijuana products patients will have access to, and obviously an increase to accessibility with more growers and distributors.

TG Branfalt: It would put a little more on par with, say, New York program which while still limited … Actually New York is a really bad example. More of a Michigan type system.

Danielle Keane: Yes, exactly. With NORML, we classify medical marijuana programs to 2 degrees, a regular medical marijuana program where there is a variety of qualifying conditions and there’s a variety of marijuana products and potencies available for the patients. Then the other programs, we classify as CBD programs where patients only have access to CBD products, CBD standing for cannabidiol which is the non-euphoric part of cannabis plant. If Yes on 2 were to pass, Florida’s medical marijuana program would go from a CBD medical program to more of a general medical marijuana program that you find around the country.

TG Branfalt: In Montana if I remember correctly, they went from originally having a full medical cannabis market to a much tighter CBD only market after the state crackdown on them. Is that accurate?

Danielle Keane: Not exactly. The situation in Montana is a very confusing scenario for medical marijuana users and supporters. For the past 5 years, a certain bill that was passed by the legislature was involved in a number of legal issues and therefore while it was undergoing all of this legal attention, key provisions of that bill went unenforced. Earlier this year, 2016, a court ruled in favor of upholding that law that was under this legal scrutiny.

What that law does is it limits medical marijuana providers to selling marijuana to a maximum of 3 patients. Prior to this obviously there was no limit on the number of patients a provider could sell to. Before this ruling, this year, this provision was obviously not being enforced and patients had readily access to medical marijuana. Luckily after the ruling, advocates in the state jumps into action and started immediately collecting signatures to place medical marijuana initiative on the ballot.

That is now known as I-182 or the Montana Medical Marijuana Initiative. All the initiative seeks to do is to repeal that limit of 3 patients per each license provider. It allows a number of other things. It allows providers to hire employees, to cultivate, dispense, and transport — all of that good stuff. Essentially the program as it was once known can go back to that if voters in the state approve this initiative.

TG Branfalt: How do I want to put this nicely? It’s a unique rebellion against them decimating that system.

Danielle Keane: Yes, absolutely. It’s a very impressive feat that advocates in Montana got together, organized quickly after this court ruling in February of this year to get this back on the ballot and I really hope that it passes because they definitely deserve it.

TG Branfalt: Here we are, it’s October 2016 and we have 9 marijuana ballot initiatives at one time. A court ruled that the federal government can no longer use federal funds to crack down on cannabis businesses, legally operating under state-run programs. The FBI reports that possession arrests or at their lowest point nearly a decade, but at 574,641, that number is still greater than 0 which is still too many. Is the tide shifting here? Does 2016 — are we shifting getting to a more normalized cannabis culture?

Danielle Keane: Absolutely. There is no doubt that the tide is definitely shifting and it actually has been for a number of years already. About 68% of millennials sau marijuana should be completely legal and 50% of baby boomers also favor legalization. 1 in 8 Americans or 13% now report that they currently smoke marijuana according to a recent Gallup poll which is nearly double the number of current users or 7% found by Gallup just 3 years earlier.

43% of Americans acknowledge that they have tried marijuana at some point in their lives and 1 in 5 adults under 30 years of age regularly use marijuana. There’s just no doubt that as millennials are aging and our older comrades are dying, voter opinion is so in favor of marijuana legalization. I do however want to point one thing out about the recent court ruling that you mentioned, the court did uphold a budgetary amendment that prohibits the Department of Justice from cracking down on cannabis businesses that are legally operating under state run programs.

However this was an annual budgetary amendment approved by congress, but it has to be passed through the budget every single year. So that one little protection for these legal businesses has to be reauthorized every year and unfortunately that provision which was passed the past 2 years has not yet been reauthorized for next year.

NORML has an easy to use take action tool on our website that you can contact your federal lawmakers and tell them that they need to pass this protection again this year. If you want to take action on that you can visit our website but there’s no doubt that the tide is shifting. In 2016, it’s such an exciting year for marijuana law reform,

TG Branfalt: Despite the shifting tide the only 2 presidential candidates talking about legalizing cannabis federally are both third-party candidates, Jill Stein from the Green Party and Gary Johnson from the Libertarian Party. Is marijuana still a fringe issue when it comes to politics? You have progressive Democrats who haven’t discussed at all legalizing on a federal level. Then you have the Republicans who are obviously just going to keep doing nothing. I’m wondering what is your take on that?

Danielle Keane: I’m not sure it’s a fringe issue. Both Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump, the nominees for president have been asked about their stance on marijuana legalization a couple times. You are correct though that neither of them endorse a full federal legalization. But more importantly will they allow, if either of them were to be in office, will they allow states to move forward with their own reforms free from federal interference?

Luckily, both candidates have said that they would allow that. Of course Clinton has doubled down on her positions endorsing medical marijuana and calling for more research into its effects but to be honest, Trump has been a little bit all over the place on the issue. He said that he would let states move forward free from federal interference, however he associates himself with a number of high profile politicians such as Chris Christie that have been very opposed to marijuana reforms.

It’s a little but unsettling if Trump were to be in office. He could appoint someone such as Chris Christie to an important cabinet position, but in general they’re in the same position which is, again, they’ve acknowledged marijuana as an issue. They’ve stuck their foot in the sand in terms of their position, but I do give them credit in acknowledging it and taking a position.

TG Branfalt: You had mentioned Chris Christie and now in New Jersey a lawmaker has proposed legislation that would regulate marijuana like tobacco. First of all, I’ve been covering public policy for several years and bills like this sometimes get stalled in committee or they get voted in one house and not the other. Do you see this proposal in New Jersey having any chance on getting to the governor’s desk passed?

Danielle Keane: The key words were what you just said at the end. Not only does the measure need to pass both chambers, the house and the senate but it eventually ends up on the governor’s desk who has to sign it in order to become law. Obviously with Chris Christie as governor. I can pretty surely say that if legalization bill were to end up on his desk, he would not sign it whatsoever.

With that being said, the measure is a really common sense proposal that was actually introduced by arguably one of the most conservative members of New Jersey’s delegation which is pretty ironic but of course welcomed. We are supporting that legislation on our website if you want to contact your members in New Jersey to tell them to support it, check that out.

We will do our best to support it however, this proposal actually makes it two legalization pending proposals in New Jersey. The first one has been through the chambers for quite a while. No action has been taken so it’s tough for me to say if the other one will be successful, chances are unfortunately not. Again even if it were, it would end up on, unfortunately, Governor Christie’s desk which doesn’t bode well either.

TG Branfalt: If just the ballot initiatives pass, we would have 9 states plus DC. With legal cannabis, we’d have 27 states with some form of medical marijuana available. If legalization did run the table in November, do you think we could expect any more states in 2018 and 2020 or are those remaining states just not ready?

Danielle Keane: That’s a good question. It’s hard to gauge where some states are in this process. It obviously takes a state a number of years to prepare for this move. This is not something where voters in the states just wake up on election day and now they’re faced with a legalization question. It has to build up. I think even more exciting rather than more ballot initiatives in 2018, in 2020 is the idea of a state legalizing marijuana through the legislature rather than the ballot.

This is very, very important in the coming years because only 18 states allow voters the right to amend their state constitution through the ballot initiative process. Most states will have to legalize through legislative means.

TG Branfalt: Peer into your crystal ball for me. Which state might possibly be next to legalize it legislatively?

Danielle Keane: That’s a good question. I’m going to have to say Vermont. Vermont has come very, very close, several times over. They’ve been having this conversation for years. Unfortunately, it hasn’t happened yet but they have the support of their governor which is really important obviously and they’ve tried it over and over. It’s just a matter of finding that consensus through both chambers and through both parties. I’m really keeping my fingers crossed for Vermont.

TG Branfalt: Now, before we wrap up, I just want to touch base on the congressional scorecard from NORML  because I know that you put a lot of time and effort into it personally. Was there anything that you discovered when you were researching these members of congress that was particularly shocking and what is the overall goal of the project?

Danielle Keane: Absolutely. NORML did just release an updated 2016 Congressional Scorecard. This is essentially a voter tool that provides a letter grade, A through F to every single member of congress. These are your federal lawmakers, not your state lawmakers and essentially we graded them on a couple of things. We looked at whether or not they introduced or sponsored marijuana related legislation, whether they co-sponsored and supported marijuana related legislation, whether they had the opportunity to vote on any marijuana related amendments or bills and then of course any public comments that they’ve made on the subject.

We gathered all of that information for all 535 members of congress and according to that provided them a letter grade. You know the most surprising thing to me in doing this project was really just looking at where voter sentiment is. I just rattled off a bunch of statistics to you a few minutes ago where it’s very clear that voters are ready for legal marijuana whether that’s on the state level or either reclassifying or preferably declassifying marijuana from the Controlled Substances Act or passing legislation like the CARERS Act which would allow for a significant amount of research to be done on marijuana.

Whatever it is Americans and voters are absolutely ready for the federal government to take some sort of action and yet we just don’t see that. I mentioned earlier describing the score card whether or not any members had had the opportunity to vote on a marijuana related bill. That’s a no for everyone because despite there being about 25 to 30 marijuana related pieces of legislation pending at the congressional level, not one has ever been heard before a committee, not one.

We’ve only ever seen progress in terms of annual budgetary amendment that are related to marijuana. It’s really time that these members of congress looked at who they’re representing. Look at how they feel about these reforms and take some action because there’s just no doubt about it. The voters are ready.

TG Branfalt: I’ve always maintained that the failure to act by our federal government is because that would be them admitting fault — that they were wrong year after year, after year about marijuana legislation. Do you think that this is responsible for this inaction?

Danielle Keane: I think that’s a good idea, but quite frankly I don’t care if they think that they were wrong. It’s time to be aware that you’re not representing yourself in Washington DC or what you want. You’re representing thousands, hundreds thousands, millions of voters in the state that you represent and it’s really, really clear of where the voter stand on this issue. It’s getting to a pretty unacceptable point for inaction.

TG Branfalt: Is there one final message that you would like to give to those constituents in states with initiatives on the ballot?

Danielle Keane: Absolutely. My message is simple and that is just to educate yourself and your friends and family and go out and vote. We need you to vote. NORML has outlines and information on all of the pending ballot initiatives on our website. You can just go to the homepage, norml.org and you’ll get all of the information you need there.

You’re also going to be voting on your members of Congress and your state-elected officials. We can help you learn about your congressional members with our score card. Otherwise you can look up a NORML chapter near you and your state that hopefully has information on your state elected officials. Just please pay attention to what’s on the ballot and vote. That’s it.

TG Branfalt: Danielle, I’d like to thank you very, very much for being on the Ganjapreneur.com Podcast.

Danielle Keane: Thank you so much for having me.

TG Branfalt: You can find more episodes of the Ganjapreneur.com Podcast in the podcast section of Ganjapreneur.com and in the Apple iTunes store. On the Ganjapreneur.com website, you will find the latest cannabis news, product reviews and cannabis jobs, updated daily along with the transcripts of this podcast. You can also download the Ganjapreneur.com app in iTunes and Google Play. I have been your host, TG Branfalt.

 

End

A cannabis sample being prepped for processing by a cannabis testing facility in Michigan.

Alaska’s First Cannabis Testing Lab Opens, Rec. Market Poised to Launch

10/25/2016

by

Alaska’s first cannabis testing laboratory opened up for business on Monday, launching the state further toward its official, finalized recreational marketplace.

CannTest LLC — located in an Anchorage industrial zone — is Alaska’s premier cannabis testing lab. The lab opened on Monday and is now accepting cannabis products from cannabis retailers, manufacturers, and commercial and private growers.

“It’s been a long road and I’m happy to see it finally starting to move,” CannTest’s CEO Mark Malagodi told Alaska Dispatch News. “We get to play a real part and (provide) a real service to people.”

The launch of the recreational marketplace has essentially hinged on CannTest’s opening: like most other state laws allowing the commercial sale of marijuana products, Alaska’s new cannabis infrastructure requires that all products sold to consumers must first be tested for potency and harmful microbials.

There are two other cannabis labs hoping to open this winter: AK Green Labs LLC, which in September announced plans to open sometime in November in Anchorage; and Southeast Alaska Laboratories LLC, a Juneau-based lab whose application remains under review by state officials.

With retailers and growers now submitting products to CannTest for inspection, it could be just a matter of days — depending on how long the tests take — before retailers are buying bulk orders of recreational cannabis and opening their doors to consumers. Stay tuned for more coverage as Alaska’s recreational cannabis market, which was first approved by voters in 2014, makes its official launch.

End

Canadian Medical Investment Firm Enters Letter of Intent to Purchase Stake in Cannabis Testing Lab

10/25/2016

by

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada-based Invictus MD has entered into a Letter of Intent for an option to acquire 49 percent of Zenalytic Laboratories for more than $224,600 in issuance of common shares of Invictus stock based on the price three days before closing the deal, the company announced in a press release. The cannabis testing lab is a wholly owned subsidiary of GreenTec Bio-Pharmaceuticals.

The Letter of Intent allows Invictus to exercise the option within 45 days after the lab obtains a Section 56 Class Exemption Dealer’s license from Health Canada. The license, already confirmed in writing by the Office of Controlled Substances, is required under the Narcotic Control Regulations in order for Zen Labs to become an authorized cannabis tester under the Access to Cannabis for Medical Purposes Regulations and the Marijuana Access Regulations. Zen Labs’ application was confirmed on July 27 and is expected to be issued within 180 of that date.

Dan Kriznic, Invictus CEO, said that the federal testing regulations put the laboratory sector in a position to emerge rapidly and that they will be able to serve both individual and corporate clients. Kriznic noted that the acquisition will be a complement to their Future Harvest Development program which is located about 5 miles from the site of the testing lab.

“This will open doors and opportunities to promote FHD’s fertilizers and also enables FHD’s existing clients to have a reputable analytical laboratory confirm that their final product will be low in heavy metals and urea-free,” he said in the release.

Invictus will pay Zen a $45,000 deposit in common stock shares at the deal’s close.

End

TG Branfalt: Cannabis Journalism and Reporting On What Matters

10/25/2016

by

TG Branfalt has been writing for Ganjapreneur for the past two years, covering cannabis policy updates and business developments around the country and worldwide every single day. TG has worked as a reporter for Reuters and other media outlets, and he has written extensively on public policy. He developed our comprehensive guide to the nine state-level ballot initiatives that voters will decide this election season and has produced several breaking-news stories that were shared thousands of times.

Going forward, we are excited to announce that TG will also be the new host of our cannabis industry podcast. His first interview will be published tomorrow: be sure to check your email and/or subscribe to our podcast channels on iTunes, Stitcher, and SoundCloud!

Want to get to know the man behind so much of our daily news coverage? Below you will find an interview with TG about his experience as a cannabis journalist and his thoughts on prohibition.

Ganjapreneur: So, when did you decide to pursue journalism as a career, and what led you to it?

TG Branfalt: I pursued journalism for a couple of reasons. A few years before I enrolled in college, I was interviewed by a newspaper about O.J. Simpson making his first public appearance at the mall I was working at outside of Hartford, Connecticut since his acquittal. When I read the article the next day, my quote was incomplete – that didn’t sit well with me. I understand it now, but in my teens this was a great injustice and that’s about when I became interested in being a journalist – some part of me needed to right this “wrong” (even though, looking back it really wasn’t a big deal).

Sitting in the registrar’s office at Herkimer County Community College I still didn’t quite know what I was going to major in (I also considered philosophy and political science) but that reporter popped into my head, and in the span of seconds I remembered that you could make a living with a journalism degree – more so than either philosophy or poli-sci, at least. So I enrolled in journalism and it wasn’t long before I knew I had found something I was passionate about. I just kept on the path when I transferred to UAlbany. My master’s degree in communications from The College of Saint Rose was very journalism-centric, and it was during that program that I really was able to sink my teeth into the craft, not just the practice.

Not to mention I read a lot of Hunter S. Thompson and Gay Talese; and was, for a time, sort of obsessed with the Watergate story and all of the brilliant reporting that came out of that, so that, too, might have something to do with it.

What do you think makes journalism different than other forms of writing?

You’re telling the story of people – that’s really what journalism is. Even if you are covering the mundane – a school board meeting or profiling a crossing guard – there are still stakeholders and people at the core of every story. I still write some fiction as a hobby – but it’s not real. You control what happens to the characters… I’ve covered some very, very strange stories as a journalist – I covered a guy who tried (and with the help of the FBI nearly succeeded in) building a “laser” that shoots radioactive waves – we referred to it as a ‘death ray.’ The guy wanted to be a supervillain – it was lunacy. Sure, that could all be made up, but this is reality, the so-called “fourth branch,” the first draft of history.

You also need to know a little about everything. I have covered the car wash industry, political protests, homicides, court cases – you never know what tomorrow will bring, really – so it’s more exciting to be a news reporter than, say, a poet or novelist, in my opinion.

Having covered the issue of cannabis (and particularly the cannabis industry) extensively yourself as an independent journalist, what do you have to say about how the mainstream media tends to cover it?

It’s truly horrifying. For my master’s thesis I studied how the media uses various biases when reporting on third-party and ‘outsider candidates’ (such as Jill Stein and Gary Johnson) and I have a keen eye for what these biases are and how they occur.

The term ‘marijuana’ elicits negative bias; within insider circles, the term ‘cannabis’ is preferred. The word ‘marijuana’ is associated with reefer madness. In most public policy, it is referred to as ‘marijuana.’ That’s, like, the term used by “the man” – it’s like ‘pot,’ ‘weed’ etc. – these are not normalizing terms to most folks, especially many advocates.

The mainstream media doubles down on reefer madness any chance it gets. The headlines read ‘More Colorado Kids in Hospital for Marijuana since Legalization’ and so few people read past the headline that they miss the meat of these stories. Pharmaceuticals and household cleaners are responsible for more childrens’ hospital visits in Colorado than cannabis – but that’s not the headline. We had Sanjay Gupta on CNN praising the medical benefits of cannabis, but that came years after public opinion had swayed in its favor.

They’ve been toeing the prohibitionist (and government) line and effectively distributing propaganda for so long it’s hard for them to admit that they’ve been wrong all these years.

To what extent do you think mainstream cannabis coverage has shaped public opinion? What has been the outcome?

People have been glued to their televisions for decades and that television has always told them cannabis is a ‘gateway drug,’ “only criminals smoke pot!” People forget that the US ran a Hemp for Victory campaign during World War II – we’re taught and told a revisionist version of the history of cannabis. Many people believe whatever that television tells them and very few seek independent information.

It’s hard to quantify what the outcome has been because, despite all of my negative opinions on the mainstream media and to how it affects its audience, I feel like we (the advocates) are winning – at least legislatively through voter-backed initiatives. But at the same time people are still getting arrested for possession, Malia Obama getting stoned at Lollapalooza is still national news – many people still have that prohibitionist attitude. Perhaps now that more people are Internet-literate they are starting to do some research and realize prohibition is unjust, but you still have a swath of Southern states without even a limited medical cannabis program, so there is still a lot of work to be done to change the hearts and minds.

What has been your most profound experience or revelation while writing about cannabis over the past few years?

Man … prohibition might be the most ludicrous sham ever enacted by a civilized society. I mean, we have people shooting elephant tranquilizer, we have children being able to live normal lives – imagine a world without prohibition. How many people have lived with a lifetime of seizures that could have lived a better quality-of-life if they had access to cannabis? Cannabis has helped many people I know get clean from hard drugs and alcohol – and there are studies that back this up. Prohibition ruins lives – it’s that simple.

I’m not even from the ‘legalize and regulate’ camp. I’m from the ‘our government owes every citizen one pound a month for life’ camp because they kept it from us (all the while holding a marijuana-as-medicine patent).

The government jails people over a plant, the government regulates a plant – it’s maddening. Cannabis isn’t dangerous – that’s it, plain language. Hemp could help eliminate our reliance on fossil fuels – but that, too, is unjustly outlawed.

So I went from being a passive supporter of legislation to sort of a radical who believes that the government should straight up end prohibition and let people grow cannabis and use it as they see fit. It’s, literally, never killed anybody, and any responsible parent is going to keep it from their kid.

What do you think is the most important issue facing the cannabis industry as a whole, and people who are starting businesses in state markets where it is legal?

Lawmakers. I think the regulations are too much – too far reaching. I think individuals should be able to grow their own. But as far as the industry goes, I think the federal government, and its Big Drug, Big Tobacco, Big Booze donors, are going to do everything in their power to get their piece of the pie – and I fear that piece is going to get larger than the piece current operators have. If cannabis is rescheduled it allows it to be put in the hands of pharmaceutical companies – the very same companies that are at least partially responsible for the opioid epidemic. If the drug companies get seriously into the market, not with a synthetic here or there, but if they get their claws in – you are going to see small operators pushed out or even outlawed – I’m serious. If the feds allow drug companies, tobacco companies and alcohol companies to grow, process and sell cannabis it spells the end for any company not operating as such – the independent operators are cooked. They’re already doing this sort of thing in New York and Minnesota – those programs offer an insight into how the government would operate both the medicinal and recreational market – and those programs are ineffective with just a handful of operators.

This is less likely to be the case if it were removed entirely from the Schedule.

People getting into the industry need to find a way to be prepared if the industry is co-opted by these bad actors – or work on finding ways to prevent that from happening.

The only way this would be possible is by electing candidates (from city councils to Congress) who are pro-cannabis and also pro-small business. Because I don’t foresee the feds just removing cannabis from the Schedule list – there will always be regulations – but we need people in government to say ‘no’ to the Big Corporations that don’t usually have the best interest of the community in mind.

What role do grassroots & independent media outlets play in society?

Unfortunately, grassroots and independent media don’t get the respect they deserve, but in the same breath, I want whoever I am getting my news from to be trained. Not saying I want them to have to get a license or anything – but I’d hope that they completed a degree or an internship or worked under a seasoned reporter. Information is important – but the source is everything. Too often am I contacted by someone who has a “scoop” but it’s really a hunch – usually that person is a blogger or “independent journalist” trying to promote themselves or their cause.

I’m not saying that to be an elitist or anything, but one bad experience with a reporter and a whole community can lose a source. I’d like to see people in official capacities give more deference to respectable independent and grassroots outlets and I’d like to see more sites like The Intercept become the “mainstream media.” I freelance for a multi-national media outlet, I’ve worked for a Fortune 500 publisher – I read local and independent news primarily because it’s often less bias; however I sometimes cringe because too often the indy author makes their bias known – to me that’s when you stop being as credible – when you interject your opinion in a piece that does not call for it – and that’s JRN 101. Without independent news sources all we have are the Big Three TV outlets (Fox, CNN, MSNBC), and newspapers and websites owned by conglomerates. You rarely see any visible outlets using Democracy Now as a source – but Amy Goodman is one of the preeminent reporters of our time. We need more quality independent voices because too many people are reliant on “info-tainment” sources.

What is the weirdest cannabis-related story you have ever covered?

The Michigan Cannabis Cup was the weirdest experience I’ve ever had, at least from a culture shock standpoint. The piece I wrote about Malia Obama getting high was weird in that it was actually revered as national news. Recently, the introduction of legislation in New Jersey to legalize cannabis by a Republican struck me as odd, because the sponsor was once referred to as the most conservative legislative member and because Gov. Christie will never go for it.

But the Dan Riffle story really sticks out because there was so much back-biting and whispers, and to Dan it didn’t seem like that big of a deal at all. It seemed that some outlets had really wanted this to be a big deal – they were taking shots at the Marijuana Policy Project – it was a strange moment of disharmony because, in my experience covering the industry, even if you don’t agree with the guy on the other side of the table, you are still sitting at the same table. It just seemed like a lot of unnecessary in-fighting and everyone was more interested in speculation than talking to the players – and this goes back to my critique of some independent news outlets – you have to pick up the phone or knock on a door if you want to be taken seriously. No one seemed interested in talking to Riffle but everyone was putting words in his mouth.

What niche of the cannabis industry do you find the most interesting, and why?

I’m starting to get really interested in the science. As more testing labs open, and more research emerges it’s truly fascinating – there are discoveries being made right now about the endocannabinoid system. The cannabis plant is as old as this planet and we are just now figuring out how our bodies are affected by cannabinoids – it’s remarkable. When I toured PSI Labs I interviewed two people who were as passionate about the science as I was interested in it – and they see it every day, which tells me there are more and more discoveries to be made.

Long before medical cannabis was a thing, I had read that Kurt Cobain had smoked pot to ease the pain of a stomach ailment (likely undiagnosed Crohn’s disease). In high school I suffered a pretty serious knee injury and painkillers always made me sick, so that’s about when I started using cannabis as a pain management therapy – because of what I had read about Cobain – but it’s also when the science of cannabis piqued my curiosity. Now, 15-or-so years later, I have the opportunity to see this research emerge that helps to answer why cannabis has improved my quality of life.

It’s also super-interesting to see cannabis legalized. Despite my personal beliefs, I never thought I would see this happen in my lifetime and I’m starting to believe that I will see prohibition ended on an almost global scale before I’m dead.

If you could share a joint with anyone you have written about, who would it be, and why?

I have always wanted to get high with Woody Harrelson – I wrote about him once when Hawaii was licensing growers. He seems like he’d be a great conversationalist, he’s funny – just strikes me as a rad dude. I’ve always wanted to talk to him about his role in “Natural Born Killers” and how much of that persona was based on his own father, who was a hit man. I’d also want to ask him about growing that hemp plant and calling the cops on himself – it’s such a beautiful act of civil disobedience and, I think, made some people really evaluate prohibition back in 1996.

But of the people I have interviewed or met – the guys at PSI. We chatted for hours when I toured their lab and they knew so much about the science – and they could explain it in layman’s terms which makes it more exciting, vivid. I, obviously, enjoy getting stoned and just shooting the breeze and I could talk to those two about terpenes and chemical compounds for hours. So, Ben, Lev, if you’re reading this hit me up. I did smoke a joint with Dickie Betts of the Allman Brothers. I hung out with him on his tour bus after a festival and I was, somehow, the only guy with papers on the bus.

End

British Sugar to Grow Cannabis Plants for GW Pharmaceuticals

10/25/2016

by

British Sugar has signed a long-term deal with GW Pharmaceuticals to grow non-psychoactive, CBD-rich cannabis plants in an 18-hectacre facility currently used to cultivate tomatoes, according to a report from the Telegraph. The plants will be used for the manufacture of GW’s childhood epilepsy treatment Epidiolex.

Paul Kenward, managing director of British Sugar, said that every year the company tries to work out the “best commercial assets” for the greenhouse, noting that it is “very well suited” for growing the specific strain used in the creation of Epidiolex and that the “return will be better than on tomatoes.”

“We had always been interested in looking at pharmaceutical crops but never quite found the right partner,” he said in the report. “We recently did in GW.”

According to Kenward, sugar production produces electricity, heat, steam and fertilizer — all required for growing cannabis plants and available from a nearby British Sugar factory.

The plants should provide enough raw materials to treat 40,000 children per year globally. The first seeds are expected to be planted in January and harvested in April.

GW plans on filing the drug with the Food and Drug Administration in early 2017. Justin Gover, GW chief executive, indicated that if it is approved by U.S. regulators, Epidilox could be available in the states by the end of next year.

End

Texas MMJ Program Could be Decimated Under DPS Rule Changes

10/25/2016

by

The Texas Department of Public Safety is considering raising fees for licensed dispensaries and growers from $6,000 to $1.3 million, according to a report by NPR-affiliate Texas Public Radio. The fee increase proposal is due to a DPS plan to reduce the number of businesses licensed under the state’s narrow medical marijuana program from 12 to just three.

The fee increase and dispensary reduction is part of a scheme to overhaul the state medical cannabis program, which also proposes that a DPS Trooper provide security at dispensaries at all times. The agency has until the summer of 2017 to finalize and adopt the rules — which Marijuana Policy Project Executive Director Heather Fazio says will make it nearly impossible for businesses to operate, severely limit patient access, and could require cultivators to incriminate themselves with regard to disclosing where their seeds come from.

“They’ve amended some of the rules, which have been rather alarming for those who are both interested in accessing this medicine and for those who are interested in opening up a cannabis business to provide the medicine for these patients,” Fazio said in the report, suggesting that nobody in the state would have access to plants with high CBD levels without importing them — a violation of federal law.

The public comment period for the proposed rules changes is open until Nov. 28.

End

The historic Beacon Hill neighborhood in Boston, Massachusetts.

Mass. House Speaker Already Eyeing Changes to Question 4

10/25/2016

by

Massachusetts House Speaker Robert DeLeo is already pushing to make legislative changes to Question 4 if it is approved by voters next month, according to a report by Masslive. During an interview on WCVB’s “On the Record,” the Democrat said that while he would “obviously accept the will of the voters,” the legislature should consider addressing the driving under the influence issues and raising the tax on cannabis products.

DeLeo publicly opposes Question 4 but avoided the debate when voters decriminalized cannabis in 2008 and legalized medical use in 2012.

The changes would be made “in terms of what further regulations may be necessary, what further changes would have to be made to make it work more efficiently,” DeLeo said in the interview.

As written, the measure would impose a 3.75 percent excise tax on cannabis sales in addition to the 6.25 percent state sales tax, bringing the total tax on cannabis purchases to 10 percent. Municipalities are permitted to tack on another 2 percent sales tax.

Jim Borghesani, spokesman for the legalization campaign, urges the legislature to hold off on making changes to the measure until they are able to evaluate the work of the Cannabis Control Commission that would be created under the law.

“The concerns raised by Speaker DeLeo will likely be addressed by the Cannabis Control Commission when they write these regulations, so I would suggest that the Legislature wait and see what regulations are actually written,” he said in the report. “And then if they want to address it at that point they certainly can.”

Massachusetts is one of five states voting on legalizing cannabis for recreational use in the general election.

End

Tall indoor cannabis plants in a Colorado legal grow room.

Oregon Health Authority Issues High Alert over Pesticide-Tainted Cannabis

10/24/2016

by

The Oregon Health Authority has issued a health alert regarding two strains sold at a McMinnville dispensary that “may have been tainted” with high levels of pesticide, the agency announced in a press release. OHA says about 130 customers purchased the tainted strains between Oct. 17 and Oct. 19.

The batches of Dr. Jack and Marion Berry, sold at New Leaf CannaCenter, failed pesticide tests for high levels of spinosad. The OHA “action level” for the pesticide is .2 parts per million; Dr. Jack contained 42 ppm, and Marion Berry had 22 ppm.

“There is no level of spinosad that has been shown to be safe in cannabis that is smoked,” David Farrer, OHA public health toxicologist, said in the release. “Our action levels serve as a pre-market screen, but should not be considered ‘safe levels.’”

The tainted batches came from one grower and were available only at the one location. According to the release, the cannabis had failed a test by an accredited laboratory, but the grower sent it to the dispensary anyway. The name of the grower is being withheld because it is confidential under state law.

The agency suggests returning the product to the dispensary or disposing of it. Other strains with similar names at other dispensaries are not affected by the alert.

End

Skyscraper in Docklands, Melbourne, Australia.

Creso Shares Strong in First Week of ASX Trading

10/24/2016

by

Creso Pharma shares are up more than 70 percent in less than a week since hitting Australia’s ASX, trading as high as 34.5 cents on Monday morning, according to a FinFeed report. The stock closed at 29.5 cents when trading ended on Friday.

In an investor presentation released Monday, the biotech firm outlined its strategy to potential investors – the document included information already publicly available.

The company says they are poised to grow with the success of the global cannabis industry, estimating that recreational sales in the US would outpace medical sales by 2018; however, the medical sector would still be worth $3.8 billion — just shy of the estimated $4 billion recreational market.

The firm is predicting that its growth will be buoyed by the “recession-resistant” animal health products industry and that a large segment, 41 percent, of health owners have tried alternative therapies for pets suffering from pain, metabolic diseases, and behavioral-based disorders such as anxiety, noise phobias and aggression.

Of its four major competitors — GW Pharmaceuticals, Zynerba Pharmaceuticals, MGC Pharmaceuticals and MMJ Phytotech Ltd. — Creso is alone in developing products aimed at animal health.

Creso expects the first two products, one based on its INNUtri Soft Gum drug delivery method and a second focused on animal health, to be available in late 2017. A third product, based on the BioLingus tablet, is estimated in mid-2018. The company anticipates its maiden profits to be realized in 2019.

End