Marijuana: The million dollar pot questions Denver City Council hasn't answered

marijuana.on.plate.205x205.jpg
Big photos below.
Yesterday, a Denver City Council committee further refined a draft ordinance related to retail marijuana sales, and marijuana attorney Warren Edson says one of the changes, related to the coexistence of medical and recreational weed, represents a step forward.

Yet he's also puzzled about why a couple of "million dollar questions" have yet to be addressed.

What are they? And what else happened yesterday? We'll fill you in on the details below.

According to Edson, the committee's achievement at its afternoon session involved "virtual separation" -- allowing merchants to sell both recreational marijuana and medical pot in the same location without having to build walls or otherwise physically separate the two enterprises.

"To me, that's one of the few times when it's almost an all-around win," he maintains. "For the merchants, it allows them to serve the recreational world without having to do a huge store redesign, which frankly would have been impossible in some of those places."

Still, there is at least one drawback. Since the stores will be restricted to adults age 21 and over, medical patients younger than that won't be able to go inside. As such, they'll have to rely on parents or caregivers to purchase items for them until they come of age.

denver.city.council.group.photo-thumb-565x364.jpg
Denver City Council.
"That's a bummer," Edson concedes. "But I did get a kick out of council praising the home-grow aspect of Denver and Colorado's law. They talked about how it allowed folks to grow for themselves, while the rest of the world is passing state and local ordinances prohibiting home grows, and how it allows 18-21 year olds to grow their own, so they won't need to go to the stores."

In addition, Edson is pleased that the committee lined up behind what he calls "a lower cellar" for city sales taxes on recreational marijuana: 3.5 percent, as opposed to the 5 percent rate Mayor Michael Hancock endorsed. Of course, the current language would allow council to raise the rate to as high as 15 percent without a vote of the people should taxes not cover costs. But Edson says by starting at 3.5 percent, "it at least opens things up to a more sensible discussion of the rates based on actual sales and not mythical numbers."

In the meantime, Edson notes tweaks in the format of public hearings that must take place before a medical shop can transition into a recreational one. During the first wave of applications, from 2014 to 2016, these sessions will mainly focus on "the track record of the business that's been there, the track record of the owner coming in, as well as any potential issues in the future," Edson says. After 2016, however, the rules add what Edson calls a "needs and desires" aspect similar to the approach used in alcohol-related hearings.

Here's an excerpt from page fifteen of the latest draft rules, which we've included below in their entirety:

(1) The reasonable requirements of the neighborhood and the desires of the adult inhabitants as evidenced by petitions, remonstrances, or otherwise;

(2) The number and availability of other retail marijuana stores in or near the neighborhood under consideration;

(3) Whether the issuance of such license would result in or add to an undue concentration of the same class of license and, as a result, require the use of additional law enforcement resources; and

(4) Whether the issuance of the license will adversely impact the health, welfare or public safety of the neighborhood in which the retail marijuana store of the neighborhood.

This expansion of the rules adds what Edson considers to be "the weirdness of having local citizens coming in and saying, 'It's my need and desire to have a store where I can come in and buy marijuana in my neighborhood' -- which, after all, is still against federal law.

"The awkwardness of that was discussed, and how it's not a fair requirement for these groups. But it becomes a requirement in 2016." And because the definition for who can comment about store transitions beginning in 2014 is broader than the one pertaining to alcohol, "there are going to be a heckuva lot of hearings," Edson says -- and they could last a long, long time.

Continue for more about the million dollar pot questions Denver City Council hasn't answered.



Advertisement

My Voice Nation Help
6 comments
Cognitive_Dissident
Cognitive_Dissident topcommenter

Allowing home grows: the one thing they did right (too bad for the ridiculous six-plant limit, which interferes with an efficient cloning process.)

Mane Rok
Mane Rok

They've stated where the money goes in fact.

Steve Holmberg
Steve Holmberg

That would make them responsible for answering what they are doing with all that money they are taking in.

stuka1
stuka1

" the current language would allow council to raise the rate to as high as 15 percent ***without a vote of the people***"

 AN EXCELLENT reason for the People to vote the whole thing down come November.

Monkey
Monkey

"what plant count will be put in place for each license tier -- and what will be the limit on the top one?"

Plant numbers is a stupid way of regulating the size of an operation. It's stupid with MMJ, and it's stupid with regular weed. Regulate it like alcohol, and there is no limit on ingredients, it's how much end product you produce. How many barrels a brewery produces and sells determines their size, so how many cured/processed pounds of weed produced and sold should determine a weed business size, not plant numbers, which are basically the ingredients to produce buds.

And why does Edson think it's funny people praise home grows? That's the best part of all our weed laws. No city or municipality in Colorado can take that away, and we're not limited to our home, we can grow it anywhere we want, as long as it's in an enclosed locked space. That's right kids, you can grow your weed at your friends house, and your friend is just "assisting" you by providing the space. The industry hates that, and would love to remove that right to provide for yourself and force you into their store. But that wont happen, unlike other states, it's a constitutional right here in Colorado. We the people will always grow better buds than the commercial industry, and that's pretty unique. Plus, it's nice knowing what you put in your body, instead of trusting big industry to label their contaminants honestly. I'm sure it's not hard to pay off a "weed testing lab" to exclude certain test results or to bring in samples grown by someone else, who doesn't use the poisons commercial growers use.

Now Trending

Denver Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...