Marijuana: Tamra Ward, repping employers on task force, says there's no "conflict of interest"

Letter from business groups that Ward signed last month.
Department of Justice Letter

Letter from Mark Slaugh to Governor John Hickenlooper's legal counsel.

My name is Mark Slaugh and I work as the membership director for the largest cannabis industry organization in Southern Colorado. We are experienced in working with business owners and governments to ensure responsible implementation of Cannabis policy at the local level.
In reviewing your list of Legal Panel members that will be meeting Monday, a concern came up to an obvious conflict of interest with one of your members. I've attached a letter sent less than one month after the passage of Amendment 64 from a misinformed and reactionary group of business folks requesting the Department of Justice to subvert the will of the voters by enacting the CSA in Colorado.

As you'll see in the letter, Concern Colorado President and CEO Tamara Ward signed off on an invitation for the Federal Government to intervene in Colorado's new law. Unlike letters from your office seeking guidance, this letter attempts to literally throw the Colorado cannabis industry under the federal bus by requesting enforcement of the Controlled Substance Act. Anyone who signed this letter should not be on the Amendment 64 Implementation Task Force.

As a business organization who has represented on panels with HR organizations on hiring practices regarding medical cannabis patients, we feel she is unqualified and misinformed on the cannabis issue. Her representation of employers as outlined in this letter is contrary to the Governor's' purpose of the task force. We have copied the media on this fact and ask that you reconsider Ms. Ward as the ideal representative for employers. Her personal position is not conducive to a productive task force working toward the interests of our members, our society, or the voters of Colorado.

Since small businesses comprise most of the job creation in Colorado, we would suggest a member who represents a small business coalition. These small enterprises account for 52 percent of all U.S. workers, according to the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) and would be more representative of the employers of Colorado. These business people have not attempted to thwart the job creation and economic development of the Colorado Cannabis industry. Additionally, your board could use more representation from Southern Colorado as Dan Nordberg is the only person on the task force from our region. Perhaps the SBDC in Pueblo or Colorado Springs may be able to offer a more ideal representative.

Thank you for understanding this obvious conflict of interest, we look forward to your response.

More from our Marijuana archive: "Marijuana rescheduling not Amendment 64 "silver bullet," says Mason Tvert"

Follow Sam Levin on Twitter at @SamTLevin. E-mail the author at Sam.Levin@Westword.com.


My Voice Nation Help
27 comments
Cognitive_Dissident
Cognitive_Dissident topcommenter

"But after the meeting, Ward told us that there's no conflict."

Oh, okay. The person who has the conflict says there's no conflict. ;-) That makes it all better. Do you want your employer dictating the terms of your pot use? That's what this is about.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

The Washington State Liquor Control Board is in the process of collecting applications from people who want to be certified to be able to grow pot legally. Agency spokesman Brian Smith said Tuesday that some applications so far have come from people who have long been growing marijuana when it was against state law.

"We're getting a lot of interest from people that want to be producers," Smith said. "Some say they have been growing it illegally until now."

Indoor growing operations appear to be the most productive and secure for marijuana, Smith said."But we could have outdoor grows in eastern Washington," he said.

Since no state had previously legalized marijuana possession, Washington must invent a production system from the ground up, Smith said. Colorado did have a licensed system for growing medical marijuana, but that was very tightly regulated and probably more stringent than Washington needs, Smith said.

"We don't need to get to the level of oversight Colorado has in medical marijuana," he said.

http://www.denverpost.com/news/marijuana/ci_22223768/will-cigarette-makers-jump-into-pot-market

Submissive Colorado Stoners LOVE to get REGULATED up the ASS!

Regulation Works! ... Feel that Government REGULATION all up inside you Stoners ... Bück Dich !!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sUOk91PhxQ

Juan_Leg
Juan_Leg

I've been 'toking' since the age of 15. I'm now 43 & the MAIN differences between currently,  and when I began,  is QUALITY,  price, and availability . All of which are of MASS improvement in this day and age . In truth, regardless how so many dissect to identify problematic issues, obtaining QUALITY w/o going to Boulder & paying $300-$380,  IS A FUCKING REALITY,  unlike my 1st fifteen years of usage.

Your arguments are all OVER-PLAYED ! They are the same,  OVER & OVER ! Do any of you amongst those most critical,  EVEN GET HIGH ???!!! Chill and figure out ways to be productive, rather than picking it apart . This IS most definitely a time to regard the " Cup as being half full rather than half empty ...... " 

I'm grateful you have better things to do w/ your time's than follow sports ! I'm enjoying the hell out of this current roster & would HATE HAVING IT RUINED by extremely bored, intellectual minds !!!

CoreyDonahue
CoreyDonahue

Sam don´t go down the road of other reporters.  It is a very important question to ask, WHERE IS THE CONVERSATION BETWEEN NIXONLOOPER AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A64?

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

First order of business for all the Law Enforcement, Big Government and Taxation pigs on the task FORCE is to demand, design and implement the FULL ENFORCEMENT of ALL Marijuana LAWS that fall outside A64's pathetically puny 1 (one) ounce limit -- ZERO ounces for everyone under 21 years old -- since that is what THE PEOPLE have voted for!

REGULATION Works !!

Bück Dich !!

CoreyDonahue
CoreyDonahue

Your Fucked, Enjoy! Should have done your homework and read what you voted for.

Den420ver
Den420ver

Regulate like Alcohol. You stupid prohibitionist Cunt. Her views are exactly why, We the people of Colorado voted for A-64.

Robert_Michaels
Robert_Michaels

Amendment 64 offers no employee protection. It does grant employers the right to fire pot smokers.

The people have spoken.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

The Greedy Big $$ Dispensary Cartels and their Paid Pimps -- aka Marijuana McLawyer Lobbyists -- are in DIRECT CONFLICT with the best interests -- political, legal, personal, etc --  of Individual Marijuana Users and Growers in Colorado.

Stupid Stoners are going to get PLAYED like the Chumps that they are ... once again!

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@Cognitive_Dissident 

A64 SURRENDERED to EMPLOYERS all right and authority over employee pot use.

The People have SPOKEN !! ... REGULATION Works!

D0NKEYH0TAY
D0NKEYH0TAY

@DonkeyHotay Hey troll...You forgot to include in your rant that the laws regarding over an ounce remain the same.  Petty Offense up to two ounces.  Same for the 18-21 year olds.  The law changed nothing for them... Petty Offense as well.  Colorado decriminalized years ago, but again you forgot to mention that..  

If you could have put the bong down for a couple of days maybe you could have got your A70 on the ballot. Oh well, maybe next time...

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@Den420ver ... how much Alcohol are you restricted from purchasing and possessing?

BackOffImStarving
BackOffImStarving topcommenter

@tutonehcc My sound card must not be working... a 4-1/2 minute silent video of a screenshot of a website?  I'd like to buy an eighth or two of what you're smoking, because I need to hear some voices tell me what to do about my dog's bad breath.

D0NKEYH0TAY
D0NKEYH0TAY

@DonkeyHotay LOL  your sour grapes are stinking up the place. For an activist, you sure do cry about working toward legalization a lot!

Go back under your bridge troll.  You are stinking up the place here.

South-Park-Ranger
South-Park-Ranger

@DonkeyHotay Yes sire, if I can have one ounce of low-THC "highly-regulated" cannabis, I would GLADLY pay extra taxes so that the police can ARREST AND PROSECUTE all of my cannabis brethren who have one gram over one ounce. They are all CRIMINALS and I will gladly pay extra taxes on my weed so that they will go to jail. Regulation works, if it's somebody else that is being regulated. Buck dich!

Cognitive_Dissident
Cognitive_Dissident topcommenter

@DonkeyHotay I don't have any problem with what A64 did in that area--it reiterated that an employer can present to you a contract that you may or may not agree with, and can include demanding that you do something or not do something.

That's a whole lot different from lobbying the government as a bloc of employers in an effort to limit everyone's rights. Now you've got one of these fascists on a board deciding what rules to recommend in order to "implement" A64. Concern for how that would turn out is one of the reasons I did not vote for A64.

Cognitive_Dissident
Cognitive_Dissident topcommenter

@DonkeyHotay I support your constitutionally-protected freedom to contract. I made that very clear.

Article I, section 10, clause 1: No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@Cognitive_Dissident "I don't have any problem with what A64 did in that area"

So you support Employer domination and control over Employee marijuana use.

Now Trending

Denver Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...