On June 10, 2016, Governor Hickenlooper signed bill 16-040 which removes the Colorado two year residency requirement to obtain a marijuana business owner license, ultimately easing the burden for prospective out-of-state investors to become owners. The Colorado General Assembly’s intent in creating this bill was to provide marijuana businesses with the economic capabilities to grow
Regulatory Issues
Cultivation loses license in Denver – is this a trend?
The City of Denver licensing director, Stacie Loucks, agreed with a hearing’s officer’s findings that a cultivation’s odors and other effects conflict with the neighborhood plan for Elyria-Swansea and denied the renewal of a cultivation license. This is an unprecedented action taken and surely the owner of the cultivation will appeal this decision to…
SOTU – Obama’s new war on drugs. Hint, it’s not cannabis…
, President Obama cited areas where Democrats and Republicans may be able to work together, including criminal justice reform and prescription drug abuse. Prescription drug overdoses, which now kill 44 people each day, have turned into an epidemic on a national scale.
Obama’s speech to a Republican-controlled Congress to work out a bi-partisan approach…
2016 Federal Budget Approved – State MMJ Programs and Industrial Hemp Provided Protection
President Obama approved the 2016 federal budget and it contained a prohibition that none of the funds made available to the Department of Justice may be used, with respect to any of the States that have state-legal medical marijuana programs, to prevent any of them from implementing their own laws that authorize the use, distribution,…
US Government Files Brief For SCOTUS to Refuse Colorado Marijuana Lawsuit
The US Government has urged SCOTUS to pass on hearing the dispute among Nebraska, Oklahoma and Colorado over Colorado’s law legalizing the recreational use of marijuana. In a brief filed late Wednesday night, U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli Jr., stated that Nebraska and Oklahoma have not sufficiently alleged that Colorado has inflicted direct injury…
DEA Polices on Medical Marijuana “Defies Language and Logic” as Ruled by Federal Court in California
This ruling is a definitive win for medical marijuana business that are operating consistent with state regulations. The Rohrabacher-Farr amendment to last year’s spending bill lists the states that have medical marijuana laws, and mandates that the DOJ is barred from using federal funds to “prevent such State from implementing their own State laws…
Cannabis Derivative Market Value to Grow Over $20.7 Billion by 2020
BIS Research has published the North American Cannabis Market – Analysis and Forecast Through 2015-2025 estimating “the cannabis derivative market value to grow over $20.7 billion by 2020 at an estimated CAGR of 29.80% from 2014 to 2020.”
So what does this mean?
There is an old adage that it wasn’t the gold miners that…
California Finally Develops Regulations for Medical Marijuana
California has had laws on its books since 1996 allowing marijuana use for medical reasons, however, it has failed to adopt any regulations for the state and local licensing of marijuana cultivations and dispensaries. After seeing states like Colorado and Washington reap millions in taxes, California has finally developed new regulations. Today, California law makers…
New Rules Proposed by MED for Public Comment
As a last minute reminder, the MED has posted newly revised medical and retail rules for public comment. The proposed rules cover a wide range of topics, though the largest changes are related to the following:
- Process and qualifications for Permitted Economic Interests (see the 200-series in both medical and retail rules);
- Plant counts, including
…
10th Circuit Rules Bankruptcy Code Does Not Protect Marijuana Businesses
The 10th Circuit court ruled on August 21, 2015, that neither Chapter 7 nor 13 is available to a marijuana business owner. The court stated that because of “the federally illegal marijuana based income stream, the debtors cannot fund a plan without breaking the law, and are therefore ineligible for relief under Chapter 13.”…