Top

blog

Stories

 

Marijuana: Boulder official calls for dual licenses on pot shops


In proposing the dual licensing program, Boulder is referencing a model in which private merchants can open shops -- as opposed to one in which the state has sole ownership and control. And some of the original backers of A64 argue that the amendment is written in such a way that lawmakers cannot establish a system where only the state runs the industry.

A64 - first task force.jpeg
Sam Levin
First meeting of the Amendment 64 task force.
Some counties, however, are working to avoid these concerns altogether -- by passing outright bans on retail pot establishments through local ordinances. Douglas County was the first to implement such a policy last month, even though it will be at least a year before any shop can open its doors, since the legislature must create the regulatory framework.

In the push for a dual licensing program, Boulder officials also argue that the city has successfully responded to medical marijuana applications -- processing over 125 applications, 117 of them within eleven months of November 2010. The city has completed renewals on all but three of the licenses and the Boulder Police Department has inspected each licensed location for compliance at least three times, Brautigam says.

"Our regulatory activity does not appear to have limited their business," she writes in the letter. "The dispensaries reported taxable sales in 2011 of approximately $20 million. We have achieved what we believe is an appropriate balance between protection of our community and execution of state law in enabling medical marijuana businesses."

Here's the full letter.

Enabling Legislation for Amendment 64

More from our Marijuana archive: "Marijuana: Colorado Springs owes $3.3M-plus after dispensary prosecution fails, attorney says"

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


Sponsor Content

My Voice Nation Help
25 comments
Corey Donahue
Corey Donahue

Keep the Feds out all we have to do is shut it down in ht estate

CoreyDonahue
CoreyDonahue

Just wondering why Boulder has a City Manager not respondent to the public overseeing a constituional right, Jane Bratiguan?  

Deborah Watts
Deborah Watts

The mostly UNETHICAL and PREDATORY medical and/or marijuana businesses are BUSINESSES. THEY need to have the same business laws and rule as ANY OTHER BUSINESS. IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL TO GIVE ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO SPECIAL PRIVILEGES. This only continues, perpetuates discrimination and oppression of the marijuana community minority! HELL..O WE ARE STILL SECOND CLASS CITIZENS TO EVEN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS aka CRIMIGRANTS!

Stephen At Half Aspen
Stephen At Half Aspen

The state should license and have sole jurisdiction. That's not saying the that the local jurisdictions can not tax the product, just that the state will manage it as they do other entities.

Harold Robbins
Harold Robbins

Total BS having both! The voters have spoken get on with it.

Wayne Lee DeNucci
Wayne Lee DeNucci

Yup! everyone wants a piece of the pie ....No bureaucracy ! its all about the old mighty dollar $$$$

Daniel Wetteland
Daniel Wetteland

its just a way that every one can have their piece of the pie. ..and on top of that its too much bureaucracy.

Monkey
Monkey

Boulder wants a slice of weed pie too. Why? Because they don't have to do anything except collect money. Whatever the state charges for licenses, Boulder wants to charge too. Boulder is weed friendly, as long as you pay for their friendliness. They have to pay for their ego somehow. If they can't collect fines from the kids anymore, they better get their revenue loss from the stores...right? Weed might be considered "legal" in Colorado, but it's still the focus of power hungry governments who seek control of the plant.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@Medicinal Colorado ... the Feds didn't show up until the Greedy Big $$ Dispensary Pigs arrived circa 2008 ...


DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@Deborah Watts ... sucks to be an ignorant racist without any socially viable skill sets, doesn't it?


DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@Harold Robbins ... The VOTERS have spoken! ... the Voters SURRENDERED TOTAL CONTROL of Marijuana over to BigGovernment REGULATORS via the absurd A64!

Reap what ye have sown, suckers!

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@Heidi Hilgenberg ... so why did the ignorant Stoners and Voters surrender TOTAL CONTROL of marijuana over to BigGovernment Regulators and the Insatiable Dept. of Revenue by passing A64 ?

You got what you voted for.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@Wayne DeNucci ... fortunately the Voters were STUPID enough to SURRENDER TOTAL CONTROL of Marijuana over to BigGovernment Bureaucrats and the Insatiable Dept. of Revenue via the festering turd that is Amendment 64.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@Daniel Wetteland ... so what depraved stoners would have been pig-ignorant enough to have voted to surrender TOTAL CONTROL of marijuana over to power-hungry financially insatiable Government Bureaucrats via A64 ?

CoreyDonahue
CoreyDonahue

@MonkeyBoulder is weed friendly, as long as you pay for their friendliness.  The government is like the mafia you pay for protection.

bongsucker
bongsucker

@Monkey Regulation works!!!!.

Voters gave control of marijuana to the power hungry government.

bongsucker
bongsucker

@CoreyDonahue @Monkey

Unlike the mafia, no protection is given by the government extortionists.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@bongsucker 

A64 supporters = pro-government regulation, pro-huge taxation retards.



Now Trending

Denver Concert Tickets

Around The Web

From the Vault

 

Loading...