420 banner 1

Cannabis Central

Grid List

POT BUSINESS--The state’s working group on marijuana and banking has finally issued its report on the litany of banking challenges facing California’s legal marijuana industry. And while it does recommend a number of measures to alleviate the industry’s difficulties, it ultimately concludes that real improvement will require some change at the federal level. 

420 FILE--Under a plan passed Tuesday by the City Council, Los Angeles could provide a grace period for some marijuana growers and manufacturers — allowing them to avoid prosecution and continue operating while they seek city licenses.  

UPDATE April 2017 - California's Bureau of Medical Cannabis Regulation has released a notice of rule making with hearing dates starting June 1 and draft regulations for retailers, distributors, and labs. The California Department of Food and Agriculture has proposed regulations for cultivation, nurseries, and processing. The Department of Public Health has proposed rules for manufacturing, including extraction, processing and infusion.

THIS IS WHAT I KNOW--Driving through West Hollywood, it’s hard not to notice the billboard for Zen Dispensary with its trendy Buddha icon. Medical marijuana dispensaries are no longer solely the provenance of dicey strip malls. And last November California voters supported Prop 64 which legalized recreational marijuana and establishes certain sales and cultivation taxes, passed by 56 percent. The sale and taxation of legalized marijuana will go into effect on January 1, 2018. 

POLICING THE POLICE-News reports last week suggest the city of Oakland may be ready to settle a civil lawsuit filed by the teenage woman at the heart of a sex-abuse scandal that rocked Oakland’s and other nearby police departments since 2015. 

All things considered, the city is fortunate. The reported settlement is just under $1 million, far below the $66 million she had originally sought. 

CONNECTING CALIFORNIA--Dig deep enough into any of California’s biggest problems, and you’ll eventually hit upon a common villain: our court system.

California’s housing shortage, its poverty, its poor business climate, and its failing infrastructure all are explained in no small part by the failure of our underfunded, delay-prone courts to provide anything resembling timely justice. But in public narratives of what’s wrong with the state, we have mostly let the courts dodge responsibility for their many crimes against California’s future.

This is, in part, because, our courts have been broken for so long that we’ve stopped expecting them ever to work. In the meantime, we have become lazily addicted to blaming our favorite perpetrators—our regulators, our politicians, our media, our unions, our businesses, and, more recently, President Trump—for our collective failure to build a state that meets its population’s needs.

But the biggest reason why we’ve allowed the courts to skate responsibility involves a public lack of understanding of the courts, and a resulting underestimation of their importance. State government has been treating the courts, which account for less than 3 percent of state spending, as a small problem, distinct from the state’s other maladies. But the courts’ impact is far larger than their budget imprint, making them a dangerously faulty foundation for our state’s economy and government.

If you want to block a project in California, your best bet is to get it into the courts, where you can delay for years until the project’s supporters can no longer afford to go forward. This happens regularly in California’s housing battles. But rather than blaming the courts, real estate types routinely blame a law—CEQA, the abbreviation for the California Environmental Quality Act—for the state’s struggles to build sufficient housing and infrastructure.

At a recent conference at Chapman University in Orange County, Emile Haddad, the chairman and CEO of FivePoint, the largest developer of mixed-use communities in coastal California (from the Great Park Neighborhoods in Irvine to Candlestick Point in San Francisco), pointed to the courts instead.

“I’m one of those probably odd developers who say they love CEQA,” he said, praising environmental laws that protect communities and add to quality of life and the value of housing.

The real problem, he said, is “the entire legal system.” He recounted a project that got local government approval in 2003, but still hasn’t happened, as his company is now litigating the project’s 30th lawsuit.

With each challenge or problem with permits, he loses even more years, Haddad said, because “I have to go through the same courts that have approved me already … because I cannot go directly back to the Supreme Court or the appellate court and tell them that I’ve done what they needed me to do.”

Such legal delays bear a heavy responsibility for our historic housing shortage and add to housing costs that are more than twice the national average. In turn, costlier housing is a huge factor in California’s highest-in-the-nation poverty rate and its high incidence of homelessness.

Poverty is now highest in coastal areas with the most development restrictions, which produce more litigation and costlier housing. And the clogged courts make it harder for poor people to challenge evictions from housing, or mistreatment by people and financial institutions that prey on the poor.

Such legal delays bear a heavy responsibility for our historic housing shortage and add to housing costs that are more than twice the national average. In turn, costlier housing is a huge factor in California’s highest-in-the-nation poverty rate and its high rate of homelessness.

The same court-related delays and resulting costs also plague any number of transportation and water projects, and of countless attempts to launch new businesses. The most high-profile example is the state high-speed rail project. While the state authority in charge of the project has drawn withering coverage for its mistakes—construction remains at an early stage, nearly nine years after voters approved the bonds for it—most of the delays involve the courts.

The state itself has a long history of using the courts to delay meeting even its meager funding obligations to schools and health programs. The state courts so utterly failed to resolve California’s prison overcrowding problems that federal receivers and the U.S. Supreme Court had to step in.

Meanwhile, the courts are being asked to do more with less. Newer reforms on criminal justice resources (Governor Brown’s realignment), sentencing (Propositions 47 and 57), and recreational marijuana (Proposition 64) have created new questions and petitions that boost court workloads.

At the same time, the Great Recession and budget crises were particularly tough on the courts. Thousands of court staffers have lost their jobs in the last decade, and more than 50 courthouses and 200 courtrooms have been shuttered. Delays have more than doubled; it now can take more than five years to have your civil complaint heard by a judge or jury. (One prominent lawsuit, by California local governments against lead paint manufacturers, is now 17 years old.)

Flat pay and a heavy workload have led to walkouts by court workers, and sparked bitter infighting among state judges. Court officers in 49 of 58 counties warned in a February letter to Gov. Brown that without more money in this year’s budget, they’ll need to cut existing levels of service.

The pressure on the courts would be even worse if the total number of court filings hadn’t declined by 25 percent over the last decade. But that may be bad news. Almost all the decline has been in small claims, challenges to infractions, and minor civil cases. Regular Californians have simply given up on seeking justice in our courts.

“Inadequate funding and chronic underfunding of the courts is just one way a justice system can become unjust,” warned California Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye in a recent speech, noting that since 2011 the state has added 6,408 laws while the judiciary budget lags.

I recently walked three blocks from my office to the Stanley Mosk Courthouse, the state civil courthouse in downtown Los Angeles. Like other central courthouses in California’s increasingly glittery city centers, the court building stands out as an eyesore, its exterior scars clashing with the new park and federal courthouse next to it.

Inside, nothing—from bathrooms to Wi-Fi—works particularly well. Lawyers receive trial dates that are usually more than two years in the future, court reporters are scarce, and overworked clerks scramble to keep things from breaking down. A lawyer acquaintance who took me around quoted Charles Dickens’ Bleak House, a 19th-century novel about the delays and injustice of England’s Court of Chancery.

Broken courts, Dickens wrote, promote a crippling fatalism through a society, “a loose belief that if the world go wrong, it was, in some off-hand manner, never meant to go right.”

It’s way past time for California to pull itself out of this Dickensian muck. Yes, fixing our court system—making it the fastest and most efficient in the country—would be challenging politically. But it also would be relatively cheap, just a couple billion more dollars a year in a state with a $150 billion budget and a $2.5 trillion economy.

Justice delayed is justice denied. This budget season, let’s return timely justice to the courts, and stop this crime against California’s future.

(Joe Mathews is Connecting California Columnist and Editor at Zócalo Public Square … where this column first appeared. Mathews is a Fellow at the Center for Social Cohesion at Arizona State University and co-author of California Crackup: How Reform Broke the Golden State and How We Can Fix It (UC Press, 2010)

-cw

THE POLITICS OF RACISM-I wanted to believe that Jeff Sessions is not a racist. I wanted to believe that even if he was a racist as a young man that he has since converted to a higher plane of thinking. I wanted to believe that he is a changed man because I believe that anyone is capable of redemption. After-all, St. Paul hunted down early Christians. Tolstoy was a slave owner. And Nelson Mandela almost blew up a school bus as a terrorist. We are all capable of undergoing unfathomable transformation if divine grace and luck have their way. 

We are also capable of remaining the same for our entire lives. Like the calcium that never gets discovered, we can remain locked in sediment forever. As much as I wanted to believe Attorney General Jeff Sessions is no longer an old fashioned bigot from another time in our nation's history, his public words once again reveal a belief system that blatantly denigrates minorities and belittles the “other.” 

Most recently, he said that he was “amazed” a judge in Hawaii could halt President Trump’s order blocking people from six predominately Muslim countries from entering the U.S. 

As first reported on CNN, Trump’s top lawman said on The Mark Levin Show: “I really am amazed that a judge sitting on an island in the Pacific can issue an order that stops the President of the United States from what appears to be clearly his statutory and constitutional power.” 

The judge he is referring to is U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson, a Hawaii native, who issued an order March 15 that put a stop to Trump’s second attempt at an unconstitutional and immoral travel ban. Sessions’ Department of Justice is challenging this before the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, based in San Francisco.

There are several aspects to Session’s flub that I find disconcerting as an American citizen. First, what is Sessions doing on “The Mark Levin Show?” How is this a sign of good sense, common decency, and legal impartiality? As the nation’s most influential broker of crime and punishment, and as the supreme arbiter of social justice, Jeff Sessions should know that Mark Levin is a media personality who makes a living inciting impassioned feelings that verge on hate speech. The very act of showing up on his program is a violation of his ethical duties. 

Second, Sessions is “amazed” that a judge in Hawaii could halt the president because he has never held genuine respect for people of color. He has done everything that is required of him to not ruin his political career -- and he has been careful to strategically amend his views with the passage of time -- but Jeff Sessions has always held a derogatory opinion of minorities in this country. He has been especially brutish to African-Americans. 

In 1986, a Senate committee denied Sessions, then a 39-year-old U.S. attorney in Alabama, a federal judgeship. His former colleagues testified Sessions used the n-word and joked about the Ku Klux Klan, saying he thought they were “okay, until he learned that they smoked marijuana.” 

That should have ended his rise to power. That is to say, if we lived in a non-racist society, those words would have stopped him cold in his tracks. We obviously live in a thoroughly racist society because the author of those words not only survived, he kept going all the way to the U.S. Capital. 

Third, what difference does it make that it was a judge from an island? What if we replaced the word “island” with “judge from the ghetto?” What if we replaced the word “island” with “judge from Islam,” or “judge from the LGBTQ community?” What if the word “island” was replaced with “judge from the opposite sex?” We would think that he was out of touch, demeaning, uncouth, and politically stupid. We would say that he is not equipped for the role of United States Senator. He certainly is not capable of leading the nation's law enforcement apparatus in the 21st century. His ideas are outmoded. His worldview is archaic. His way of using power is both obsolete and ineffective. 

The ideas that Sessions represents are dinosaurs that should have gone extinct as a result of the meteorite that was the Civil Rights Movement. Like a bridge between two eras, the Attorney General represents the reason we need to cross over into the promised land of a dream no longer deterred.

 

(George Cassidy Payne is a writer, photo journalist, SUNY Adjunct Professor of Humanities and a CityWatch guest contributor.) Prepped for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.

 

ALPERN AT LARGE--Seriously?  No foolin'?  Is "California Dreamin’" really doomed to devolve into one big marijuana-hazed April Fools Day joke, with those still sober stuck with the choice of living in, or fleeing from, the California Twilight Zone? 

As exemplified by the many former and current patients I see who have fled, are fleeing, or will flee the once-Golden State, those who are tired of being overtaxed are running for their lives (their economic lives, at least) to the World of the Sane.   

The World of Math and Economics.  You know ... Texas. Or Arizona.  Or Someplace Other Than California. 

Remember when Jerry Brown was elected and re-elected to be the sane voice of fiscal reason? To be the voice of the "guy who grew up and was no longer Moonbeam Brown"? Who understood the need to keep crime low and the economy high? 

Gone. 

The temporary tax on the rich?   

Not temporary at all--and the money went off to the Never-Satiated Maw of the education unions and their lobbyists (with barely a dime going to the benefit of the students).  Oh yes, and the definition of "rich" is rather peculiar in a high-cost-of-living state such as ours.   

The pension crisis that's the "Inconvenient Truth" that we are happy to ignore while focusing on environmental issues to a state that's gotten overpopulated, with insufficient water and woeful infrastructure? 

To hell with that! Pension, shmension.  Nerd talk, and just don't bother me.

Well, along comes the gas/transportation tax that probably would have been fine if we hadn't already spent that money, and would be fine if we knew it would be spent well. 

But it appears that "the rich" (whoever they are, considering they're bailing from the state and/or doing anything they can to hire foreign workers to reduce Californians' wages) won't tolerate any more taxes. 

So now Governor Brown, and the Democratic majority leaders who run Sacramento, want to throw a gas tax so that EVERYONE will pay for the mess in our state capitol, and for the fact that we now pay former state workers as much or greater a percentage of our state budget than our current, tax-supported state public sector workforce. 

What do they think we ARE, stupid? 

Oh yeah, that's right.  We are, because we elected them.  And said yes to tax after misspent tax.  Or fee. Or bond measure. 

LA County did tax itself with a couple of carefully-designed transportation measures (Measure R in 2008, and Measure M in 2016) to make sure transportation money went to...transportation! That was good policy, and transparent taxation, in action, and I'm proud to have played a very small part in promoting those measures. 

But any new "transportation money" to Sacramento will just be made moot by taking that same amount for something else.  And something else is anything but building new universities, fixing our infrastructure, etc. 

So if you want the gas tax, then fine.  At least you're putting your money where your mouth is.

Yet there is a GOP alternative to the Democratic transportation plan, and its backers claim it involves no taxes, allows for transportation-related revenue to fund only transportation, and allows more road repair projects Caltrans can bid out to private contractors to get more out of each dollar, and even provides more money for transportation than the Governor's proposal. 

But hey, it's proposed by the GOP, and we all know that to become a Republican you have to swear fealty to Satan, Hitler, Bashar Assad, and ISIS, right?  So it's gotta be bad. 

Yet either way, the concept of responsible taxation in Sacramento, with THIS governor and with THIS group of legislative leaders, has devolved into a big joke. 

And therefore we can all choose whether or not we should laugh our way to higher gas prices than any other state in the nation ... and let out a big guffaw of laughter knowing that at least those higher gas prices are going to a great cause! 

That cause being the favored and higher life forms in Sacramento.

 

(Kenneth S. Alpern, M.D. is a dermatologist who has served in clinics in Los Angeles, Orange, and Riverside Counties. He is also a Westside Village Zone Director and Board member of the Mar Vista Community Council (MVCC), previously co-chaired its Planning and Outreach Committees, and currently is Co-Chair of its MVCC Transportation/Infrastructure Committee. He is co-chair of the CD11 Transportation Advisory Committee and chairs the nonprofit Transit Coalition, and can be reached at alpern@marvista.org. He also co-chairs the grassroots Friends of the Green Line at www.fogl.us. The views expressed in this article are solely those of Dr. Alpern.)

-cw

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Does medical cannabis (aka marijuana) really do all the things that I’ve been hearing about lately? It sounds more like snake oil to me. I’ve heard it helps cancer patients, it helps insomnia, it helps kids with autism….REALLY? I think it just gets people high and they forget about their problems. What’s the real story about “medical” cannabis?
Curious about Cannabis

Read more ...

 

We Recommend

  


 

 

California Marijuana Laws

420 File News

UPDATE April 2017 - California's Bureau of Medical Cannabis Regulation has released a notice of rule making with hearing dates starting June 1 and draft regulations for retailers, distributors, and labs. The California Department of Food and Agriculture has proposed regulations for cultivation, nurseries, and processing. The Department of Public Health has proposed rules for manufacturing, including extraction, processing and infusion.

WARNING: Non-citizens should beware about carrying medical marijuana through US airports. Although TSA and local poliice have generally been tolerant of medical marijuana in airline baggage in legal states like CA, this may no longer be the case when dealing with non-citizens. If you are not a U.S. citizen, think about whether you should carry your medical cannabis recommendation with you. Reports are that ICE is asking if people have their cards and/or use medical marijuana, and using that as grounds for deportation on grounds that they are in violation of the federal Controlled Substances Act. This means permanent residents, Visa holders, and those who are not naturalized nor are a natural born citizen.


California Marijuana Laws
Pursuant to Prop 64 as of Nov 9th, 2016

On November 8, 2016 California voters approved Prop. 64, also known as the Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA), by a margin of 57-43%. Prop 64 makes the following changes to California law:

(1) Legalizes possession and use of up to one ounce of marijuana (or 8 grams of concentrates) and personal use cultivation of up to six plants per residence by adults 21 and over.
(2) Reduces penalties for most illegal cultivation, sale, transport, and possession for sale offenses from felonies to misdemeanors, with possible exceptions for repeat or violent offenders or other aggravating circumstances.
(3) Allows prior offenders to file to have their criminal records changed to what they would have been if Prop 64 had been in effect.
(4) Establishes a licensed regulation system for commercial production and sale of adult use cannabis beginning in Jan 1, 2018.

(5) Levies a production tax of $9.25/ ounce of flowers plus an additional 15% excise tax on retail sales of marijuana both adult-use and medical, effective Jan. 1 2018.
(6) Exempts medical marijuana patients with state-issued ID cards from the existing 7.25%+ sales tax effective immediately.
(7) Legalizes agricultural production of industrial hemp effective Jan 1, 2017.

Prop 64 prohibits (1) smoking or consumption of marijuana in any "public place" or while driving, (2) possession on school grounds, (3) possession of an open container of marijuana while driving or riding in a motor vehicle.

Commercial sale, cultivation, and production of marijuana are allowed only by licensed providers. Illegal sale, transport, manufacture, cultivation, or possession with intent to sell are generally punishable as misdemeanors, with felony enhancement allowed for special circumstances and three-time offenders. Minors under 18 are in no case subject to imprisonment, but may be punished by drug education and community service.

Prop 64 does not apply on federal property. Possession in national parklands is still illegal. Marijuana, including both THC and CBD, remains an illegal Schedule One substance under the U.S. Controlled Substances Act. Federal charges are typically brought only in large cases where commercial distribution is suspected (e.g., cultivation of several hundred plants).Text of the Controlled Substances Act

Click for more details on Prop 64

Beginning in 2018, Prop 64 will allow the sale of marijuana for adult use in licensed stores under regulations to be established by the state Dept. of Marijuana Control (DMC) in conjunction with local governments. In the meantime, medical marijuana remains available in dispensaries for patients with a California doctor's recommendation in accordance with Prop. 215 and state law SB 420. Prop. 64 in no way affects or limits existing rights or protections of medical marijuana users under Prop 215. However, beginning in 2018, all marijuana, both adult use and medical, will be subject to new state taxes under Prop. 64. In addition, as of 2018, existing commercial medical marijuana providers will have to have state and local licenses pursuant to the Medical Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MCRSA), passed by the legislature in 2015. Under Prop 64, commercial sales and production of adult use marijuana will be separately licensed by the same agencies under similar, but different regulations. The DMC has overall responsibility for regulation and licensing of sales outlets. The Cal. Dept. of Food and Agriculture is in charge of regulating cultivation, Dept. of Public Health of manufacturing and testing; the Board of Equalization of tax collection, etc.

CA Marijuana Laws Pursuant to Prop 64 (the Adult Use of Marijuana Act) effective Nov 9, 2016 under Health and Safety Code Division 10, Uniform Controlled Substances Act Chapter 6, Article 2. Marijuana (11357-11362.9)

HSC 11018: Marijuana defined
HSC 11357: Possession of marijuana
HSC 11358:
Planting, Harvesting or Processing [Cultivation]
HSC 11359:
Possession for Sale
HSC 11360: Unlawful Transportation, Importation, Sale or Gift
HSC 11361: Employing minors or giving to minors 14 or under.
HSC 11361.5, 11361.7 and 11361.8 Destruction of Arrest and Conviction Records
HSC 11362.1 Lawful activities for adult users under Prop. 64
HSC 11362.2 Restrictions on personal use cultivation
HSC 11362.3 and 11362.4 Restrictions on use in public places, at schools & while driving, and manufacture using volatile solvents.
HSC 11362.45 Restrictions regarding minors, employee rights, use on private property

 

CA Medical Marijuana Laws Pursuant to the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 (Prop215)

HSC 11362.5 Prop 215 - Text of Prop. 215 Initiative (can't be amended by legislature)
HSC 11362.7 - 11362.85 CA Medical Marijuana Program Act (SB 420)
- implementing legislation re: state ID card program, caregivers and collectives
HSC 11362.9 California Marijuana Research Program

Medical Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (2015)

Business and Professions Code, Division 8, Chapter 3.5 Sec. 19300-19360
Licensing rules for commercial medical cannabis businesses under regulations to take effect Jan 1, 2018.

BPC 2525 - 2525.5 Recommending medical cannabis - Physician conflicts of interest and advertising

Prop 64 Regulations for Adult Use Providers

Business & Professions Code, Diviison 10, Sec. 26000-26211

Licensing rules for adult-use cannabis businesses under regulations to take effect Jan 1, 2018.

Marijuana Taxes

Revenue & Tax Code Division 2, Part 14.5 Sec. 34010-34021.5
Applicable to both adult use and medical cannabis effective Jan 1, 2018. Proceeds allocated to California Marijuana Tax Fund and disbursed to specified programs.

Industrial Hemp

HSC 11018.5 - Industrial hemp defined
Food & Ag Code 81000-81010 - Industrial hemp regulations (effective Jan 1, 2017)

Miscellaneous Laws

HSC 11379.6 and HSC 11362.775 : Manufacture of concentrates with chemicals and volatile solvents.

WC 13276 Water discharge requirements

FGC 12029 Environmental damage - fines and penalties

Labor Code 147.6 - Study on second-hand smoke exposure by employees

Driving under the influence: It is unlawful to drive while under the influence of marijuana (or alcohol or any other drug) by Vehicle Code 23152. "Under the influence" is not specifically defined in the statute, but is interpreted to imply some degree of impairment. Therefore the mere fact of having taken a toke of marijuana does not necessarily mean one is DUI. For evidence of impairment, officers may administer a field sobriety test. Arrestees may also be required to submit to their choice of a urine or blood test under Vehicle Code 23612. Since marijuana is detectable for much longer periods in urine than in blood (several days vs. several hours), a positive urine test constitutes much weaker proof of recent use and impairment than a positive blood test. If you haven't smoked marijuana recently and are not under the influence, you are better off to choose a blood test, since you will probably pass it. However, if you are a chronic smoker or have smoked recently, you are better off to choose a urine test; even though you can expect to test positive, the question will at least remain open as to whether you were actually "under the influence" at time of arrest.

Forfeiture: Unlike federal law, California law requires a conviction for forfeiture of property involved in a drug crime. Also unlike federal law, state law does not permit forfeiture of personal real estate for marijuana cultivation. Vehicles may be forfeited only if 10 pounds or more of marijuana is involved. Health and Safety Code 11470

California Law search full text of codes: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov