Laws In USA: 2017

At 3:30pm PST today, Sen. Ron Wyden will become the first US Senate Co-Sponsor of Sen. Cory Booker’s Marijuana Justice Act (“MJA”). We’ve discussed the content of the MJA before here and as we stated in the Portland Mercury, “Booker’s Marijuana Justice Act is remarkable in its scope. Not only would it remove marijuana and tetrahydrocannabinols (THC) from Schedule I classification, it would remove the federal criminal prohibition on the import and export of cannabis. It would also withhold federal money for the construction of prisons or jails from any state that has discriminatory (race or income) arrest and incarceration rates for cannabis offenses. Such states would also see up to a 10 percent reduction in federal funding for a broad array of crime fighting efforts. These funds would instead be directed into a community reinvestment fund that would go towards communities devastated by the drug war. Finally, and perhaps most ambitiously, it would expunge all old cannabis convictions, and anyone currently imprisoned on federal cannabis charges would have the right to a new sentencing hearing. The hearing judge would have authority to impose a modified sentence as if the Marijuana Justice Act was in effect on the date of the crime.”

Sen. Wyden’s statement on the MJA will be screened live on Sen. Booker’s Facebook page at 3:30pm today.

source https://www.cannalawblog.com/breaking-sen-ron-wyden-d-or-becomes-first-co-sponsor-of-marijuana-justice-act/

TODAY: Free Webinar on California Cannabis Licensing and Compliance

Sunday, December 17, 2017

California’s LATEST Cannabis Tax Regulation – No Free Lunch

Saturday, December 16, 2017

They Said It On Marijuana, Quotable Saturday, Part CLXXXVI

Former Attorney General Gonzales is right; regardless of one’s opinion about cannabis (and we all know how the current administration feels about cannabis!), it simply does not make sense to spend time and resources prosecuting state-legal cannabis businesses. Our country has too much on its plate to waste time and money prosecuting businesses that work hard to comply with state law and that have already been operating successfully for years without issue. Didn’t we learn this from prohibition?

Do you agree?

source https://www.cannalawblog.com/they-said-it-on-marijuana-quotable-saturday-part-clxxxvi/

Friday, December 15, 2017

New Oregon Labor and Employment Laws your Cannabis Business Should Know

Oregon Cannabis Labor Laws The Oregon legislature enacted several significant labor and employment laws in 2017. Some of the laws have already gone into effect while others will become effective as of January 2018. This post discusses several of the new laws that will likely impact your cannabis business.

OSHA Penalties for violations increasing

Senate Bill 92 allows the Oregon Department of Consumer and Business Services (DCBS) to increase civil penalties for any violation of the Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Act. The act removes the previous $7,000 cap on serious violations and repeat or willful violations. DCBS can assess a civil penalty up to the maximum penalties allowed under federal OSHA. This means, every time federal OSHA civil penalties increase, DCBS has the power to assess those same penalties without state-level legislation or rule changes. Review your workplace safety standards to ensure your cannabis business is compliant with Oregon OSHA before January 1, 2018, or you could face hefty penalties.

Oregon Paid Sick Leave

Oregon passed a comprehensive paid sick leave act in 2015. The act was confusing and employers found it difficult to apply. In 2017, the Oregon Legislature amended the 2015 act to clarify accrual requirements. For more information on the Oregon paid sick leave act, check out our blog post on that here.

Changes to EITC Notices

In 2017 the Oregon Legislature passed Senate Bill 398 requiring employers issue Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) notices. Employers are required to provide a written annual notice to each employee about state and federal EITC. The notice must be sent by regular mail or e-mail, contemporaneously with federal form W-2. BOLI issued template notice language is available here.

Fair Work Week Act

The Fair Work Week Act only applies to retail, food service, and hospitality employers with 500 or more employees worldwide. If you are one of the few cannabis businesses to which this applies, you must:

Provide good faith estimates of your employees’ work schedules seven days in advanced
Provide predictability pay when schedules change
Provide a right to rest between shifts
And provide extra compensation for hours worked when there has been fewer than 10 hours between shifts.

Pay Equity Act

The Pay Equity Act went into effect on October 6, 2017. This act extends equal pay protections to people in protected classes, including race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status, disability, age, and veteran status. The Pay Equity Act is sweeping legislation that could negatively impact your cannabis business if you aren’t compliant. For more information about how to comply with this act, see our blog post here.

False Employment Records

It may seem obvious, but don’t falsify employment records and don’t force employees to do so on your behalf. Beginning January 1, 2018, employees have a private right of action if they are compelled, coerced, or otherwise induced by their employer to create, file or sign wage and hour documents the employer knew to have been false.

source https://www.cannalawblog.com/new-oregon-labor-and-employment-laws-your-cannabis-business-should-know/

Oregon Will Make it Easier to Find Cannabis Business Owners

Thursday, December 14, 2017

Marijuana Franchises Revisited

TODAY: Webinar on Rights and Responsibilities of Municipalities Regulating Cannabis

Please join us today from 12 pm to 1:15 pm Pacific for a webinar on the rights, opportunities, and responsibilities of California municipalities regulating cannabis. The webinar will feature Brad Rowe of BOTEC Analysis, a drug and crime policy research and consulting firm, and Hilary Bricken of our LA office, who will present on the information, data, and legal and policy considerations local governments need regarding MAUCRSA and their ability to regulate or ban cannabis.

Topics covered during the webinar include:

How can municipalities balance cultivation, production, sales and use restrictions while staying eligible for funding under MAUCRSA?
What can local governments expect from MAUCRSA funding long term? How and when does MAUCRSA money sunset, and who will be affected?
What are realistic and lawful municipal cannabis tax policies? What groups would be affected and how?
What might taxing by THC content look like? What groups would be affected and how?
How can market measurements help localities model tax revenues and assist in locating dispensaries?
What are the opportunities for communities that have enacted a ban and plan to reverse it down the road?
How can cities leverage unionized cannabis workers (see LA) to create a credit union and a pool of money to support small and minority-owned business?
What are current banking options for operators?
What are the policy considerations of allowing only medicinal versus recreational and what have we learned from other states and local governments about this?
How should municipalities value and reward existing operators without being overly protectionist?
What are the mechanisms for municipalities to communicate effectively with each other and with the state in an environment of ever-changing regulations?

Brad and Hilary will address audience questions both during and at the end of the webinar.

Local governments in California are squarely in charge of who gets to participate under MAUCRSA; they are on the front lines of policing operators while balancing communal impact and concerns. As such, don’t miss this webinar to better educate yourself on the range of policy and tax choices and regulatory and legal oversight mechanisms available to local governments under MAUCRSA. To register, please go here.

source https://www.cannalawblog.com/today-webinar-on-rights-and-responsibilities-of-municipalities-regulating-cannabis/

Tuesday, December 12, 2017

FREE Webinar on What You Need to Know Now to Get Your California Cannabis License on January 1: December 18, Starting at Noon

Monday, December 11, 2017

What Makes Blockchain So Special? And Why Does it Matter (So Much) for Cannabis

Consolidation, Connection and Automation Differentiate Blockchain from Current Technologies

Following my last post about blockchain technology and the cannabis industry, a Canna Law Blog reader commented, “[m]aybe I’m missing something. How is this better than just scanning a barcode when the item changes hands like they do with FedEx?”

Great question. I asked similar questions early on in my work with blockchain technology. What differentiates blockchain from applications like DocuSign, DropBox and Google Drive which already provide a shared, instantaneous and relatively secure system.

Among other things, blockchain connects these isolated applications and consolidates them into one place — enabling faster, more secure, automated transactions. A barcode scan by FedEx is a single event trapped in the FedEx system. When shipping an item, FedEx, the shipper and the recipient can track the package by entering the tracking number on FedEx’s website. Blockchain, on the other hand, reveals all of the steps to all of the parties with permission to view the chain, such as the manufacturer, its suppliers, the seller, the various warehouses and intermediate sales channels (e.g., Amazon’s distributed sales network), the carrier (FedEx), the recipient, any inspectors at stages along the way, the paying bank, the receiving bank, the government taxing and other authorities. All are all linked. In a non-blockchain system, all of the various participants work on their own independent systems, which are arguably insecure and not linked into one, single, immutable ledger.

The FedEx scanning is, as you can see, only one small step in a larger chain of events and participants.

FedEx Scanning and Tracking Does Not Create Self-Executing Smart Contracts

In addition to the linking of participant networks as described above, blockchain technology can also be used to create self-executing “smart contracts,” where automatic and instantaneous responses are triggered by certain pre-defined events. Participants in a smart contract, for example, should get paid at the right time without the need for anyone to issue an invoice, receive an invoice, write a check, make a wire transfer, or execute a credit card transaction. Payment triggers would be written as code into the blockchain. According to Accenture, investment banks alone could save up to $12 billion per year by adopting blockchain and smart contracts. Gartner has estimated that by 2022, defined impact smart contracts will be in use by more than 25% of global organizations.

DocuSign is similarly just one small piece in a larger chain of events and participants. In a blockchain setting, a law firm would not be required to issue an invoice or to continually bug a client about paying a retainer as it would happen automatically. Submitting the engagement document to the blockchain with a digital signature would trigger a series of events. One event would be payment to the firm. The digital signature would be an authorization to the client’s bank to pay the bill automatically, with no additional approval needed from the client. If the payment is subject to conditions, then the “smart contract” would set out those conditions and the method for proving fulfillment. When fulfilled, the payment would be made. Consider the amount of time and friction that would save for a small entity. Then consider the amount of time and friction it would save for a large company and the economy as a whole.

Same with a DropBox type program. Once a document is accepted into a blockchain ledger, it does not just sit there inert as it does in DropBox. The entry into the ledger would trigger other actions: payment of a bill, issuance of a deed or registration of a deed of trust. Isolated transactions would be linked into the chain. If there is no need for this chain, e.g. if no network of participants exists, then blockchain is not required and the dead letter box of DropBox would be adequate.

The Downsides – Implementation Costs, Loss of Privacy and Intrusive Government Surveillance

Blockchain reduces time and friction, but what about the time and friction required to create a blockchain program, adapt old records into the system, program smart contracts with highly specific code language, and maintain the program over time? When blockchain’s benefits outweigh these downsides, we will see mass adoption of the technology.

As discussed in my previous article, blockchain technology has obvious benefits in the cannabis industry as a supply chain tracking mechanism. Regulators and technology companies have already shown interest in implementing a blockchain-based track and trace system. What has not been discussed, however, is how intrusive government participation could be if regulators are included as an authorized party in a blockchain system. Most would feel uncomfortable knowing the government could comb through all of their cannabis transaction histories with just one click. In fact, the Fourth Amendment protects United States citizens against such unreasonable searches. Further, the European Union’s incoming General Data Protection Regulation regarding consumer data privacy and ownership rights and the US Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and the SEC’s “Regulation SP” all require personal financial data be redactable—something not possible on an immutable platform.

It remains to be seen how blockchain systems will strike a balance between privacy rights and the needs of government regulators. We will likely see mechanisms to allow government review of transaction history only upon demonstration of probable cause or upon consent of the participants. We should also expect to see opposition from the cannabis business community to the ability of government to participate in the blockchain ledger at all. I will monitor developments in this space as the technology and regulations evolve and continue to post about them here.

source https://www.cannalawblog.com/what-makes-blockchain-so-special-and-why-does-it-matter-so-much-for-cannabis/

Sunday, December 10, 2017

Is the Supreme Court Gambling on State Cannabis Laws? Christie v. NCAA

Saturday, December 9, 2017

Mesothelioma Lawyers Helping Victims Fight Against This Battle

Mesothelioma Lawyers – Helping Victims Fight Against This Battle

Victims Mesothelioma law offers a helping hand to the sufferers of this kind of cancer. Each US state has special mesothelioma legal services and lawyers. They help in filing lawsuits and help the victims. When filing for claims, it’s vital to go through the most experienced and skilled lawyer or a reliable law firm. These are long drawn and complex cases. An experienced lawyer may get you a great compensation in a short period of time.

Getting the Best Mesothelioma Lawyer

Getting a lawyer who is well-versed with anything related to mesothelioma law is essential for successful claims. While picking a mesothelioma lawyer, you should look into these aspects:

Cost – Always consider your own budget before you hire a mesothelioma lawyer. Keep in mind that the best lawyers may also come at a price. However, you may cut on the costs through doing minor works such as picking, copying, and dropping the documents yourself. Several lawyers also provide contingency service and take a percentage of compensation money. The best thing about the asbestos attorneys is that they don’t charge anything until you get your claim.
Experience – The lawyer must be a pro in terms of mesothelioma law. He must be an expert in understanding the case’s complexities. You should also ask about the cases handled by her or him. The success rate in these cases must govern your decision of hiring mesothelioma lawyers. The attorney must also be able to work as your detective as well. He must find particular evidence against the company at fault.

You may also look over the internet to find for a mesothelioma lawyer who can help you with your case. Different mesothelioma law firms can be found online and you can pick one from the options. Some of the leading West Virginia mesothelioma lawyers work at GPW.

The Importance of Hiring a Lawyer with Expertise and Experience in Mesothelioma Law

Mesothelioma is due to exposure to asbestos particles or dust. More often than not, this rare type of cancer happens in such persons working in factories, construction sites, and factories. Since this cancer might take years to develop, employees might be retired by then. Some of the top indiana mesothelioma lawyers work at GPW. Therefore, it’s important to consider hiring a good mesothelioma lawyer for your case and get compensation. Skilled mesothelioma lawyer can offer you assistance by:

Explaining the case in detail how she or he plans to present your case and will provide you an honest opinion regarding the case.
Working on several aspects of the case to help you acquire a claim successfully.
Helping you know if you can ask for compensation.
Giving your details regarding your legal rights.
Using your tax and employment records as evidence to prove asbestos exposure.

You have to take note that mesothelioma is a rare type of cancer and a lawyer that focuses on cases related to this is highly recommended. Speak with a West Virginia mesothelioma lawyers at GPW. Lawyers who are experienced in mesothelioma law may help you get through these cases. So, make sure to hire the right one to get the best results.

The post Mesothelioma Lawyers – Helping Victims Fight Against This Battle appeared first on Goldberg, Persky & White P.C..

from
https://gpwlaw-wv.com/helping-victims-fight/

source http://gpwlawwv.weebly.com/blog/mesothelioma-lawyers-helping-victims-fight-against-this-battle

Cannabis Businesses Protected From Federal Government. For Now.

Friday, December 8, 2017

Much Ado About RICO and Cannabis, Part 3

Thursday, December 7, 2017

Protect Your Cannabis Business from the Bad Acts of Your Employees

What Does the FDA Really Think About Medical Marijuana?

Everybody knows that because marijuana is a Schedule 1 drug under the Controlled Substances Act, it is illegal to sell under federal law. Last year, the FDA again reviewed the published scientific literature on medical cannabis and recommended that marijuana stay in Schedule 1. The DEA relied upon this finding in its August 2016 ruling upholding the cannabis ban.

What everybody doesn’t know is that the FDA’s website says that it “actively supports the development of drugs from marijuana.”

Some statements are even more emphatic: “FDA needs to do all it can to support the needed scientific research with marijuana to characterize its therapeutic promise.” What? Is the FDA suffering from cannabis cognitive dissonance? Not at all. Under the Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act (FDCA), the FDA has the power to approve drugs, based on scientific evidence.

The reason cannabis hasn’t been rescheduled is because, according to the FDA, there is not sufficient evidence to show a currently accepted medical use.

Where does the FDA get off saying there is no medical use? A look at the FDA’s history is instructive. Modern drug regulation started in the beginning of the last century, when the market was filled with unregulated patent medicines claiming to cure everything from constipation to cancer. Many of these medicines, e.g., Johnson’s Mild Combination Treatment for Cancer, were merely worthless.

But some were poison. Elixir Sulfanimide was marketed in the 1930s as a raspberry antibiotic syrup. Unfortunately, this elixir contained diethylene glycol, a known toxin, and killed over 100 people, mostly children. The manufacturer performed no safety testing–because none was required. This and other tragedies in the 1930s led Congress to pass the Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act, the first comprehensive law requiring that medicines be proven safe and effective. This history shows the importance that the FDA places on its core mission of making sure that drugs are safe and effective, relying on scientific evidence including human and animal trials.

As previous readers of this blog might recall, the FDA will usually treat any substance that is “intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease,” or that will “affect the structure or any function of the body of man or other animals,” as a drug. The FDA’s key decision in approving new drugs is whether the drug is safe and effective for its proposed uses.

So how do you perform scientific research on an illegal Schedule 1 drug to prove safety and effectiveness?

On its website, the FDA tells you how: “The FDA believes that scientifically valid research conducted under an [Investigational New Drug] application [INDA] is the best way to determine what patients could benefit from the use of drugs derived from marijuana.” The INDA is the method that most proposed new drugs begin the approval process. Once the proposed new drug has undergone the (extensive) testing required by the INDA, the test data can be used to file a New Drug Application (NDA). Virtually all prescription drugs sold in the U.S. are approved under an NDA.

The FDA has already approved three products based on cannabis compounds.

Marinol was approved in 1985 to treat nausea caused by cancer chemotherapy, and Sydros, a liquid form of dronabinol, the active ingredient in Marinol, was approved earlier this year. Cesamet (nabilone) was approved in 1985 and 2006 for nausea and neuropathic pain. The active ingredients in all of these drugs are synthetic forms of THC. So we know that cannabis can be approved as medicine.

Why there aren’t more FDA-approved cannabis drugs?

To find out, be sure to read our next installment, in which we will examine what you need to get an INDA and an NDA. Bring lots of paper or its equivalent; you will need to take notes.

For more on the FDA and cannabis, check out the following:

source https://www.cannalawblog.com/what-does-the-fda-really-think-about-medical-marijuana/

Tuesday, December 5, 2017

Cannabis Home Grows in Washington State: The Jury is Still Out

Sunday, December 3, 2017

California’s NEW Cannabis Tax Regulations: The Rules of the Road

Friday, December 1, 2017

They Said It On Marijuana, Quotable Saturday, Part CLXXXV

Representative Cohen’s quote raises a good point about the value of state-level cannabis. Justice Brandeis is right about the benefit of using states as laboratories for trying out new ideas. These state experiments allow us to test what works and what doesn’t before pushing things out nationwide. They also allow each state to tailor its programs to what works for their own citizens and to what their own citizens want.

All this holds true for cannabis too where we see so many of the state-level experimentations working. The states that have legalized cannabis have built up their economies, provided their citizens with access to useful medicine, and offered patients a route out of opioid addiction.

The cannabis “experiment” is working and that bodes well for it to continue rolling out state by state until such time as the whole country wants it.

source https://www.cannalawblog.com/they-said-it-on-marijuana-quotable-saturday-part-clxxxv/

Blockchain and Cannabis: A Perfect Marriage of Emerging Trends

Thursday, November 30, 2017

Our SoCal Cannabis Investment Forum is TONIGHT

Wednesday, November 29, 2017

TOMORROW: SoCal Cannabis Investment Forum

California cannabis events Don’t miss tomorrow night’s Southern California Cannabis Investment Forum, a discussion on investing in Southern California’s newly regulated cannabis industry. Hosted by Harris Bricken’s from our Los Angeles office, the Southern California Cannabis Investment Forum will connect top investors and leading companies in Southern California’s cannabis and ancillary industries.

The Forum will begin at 6:30 p.m. on Thursday with a keynote from Hilary Bricken that addresses the many recent changes to California’s medical and adult use cannabis laws under MAUCRSA. From 6:45 to 8 p.m., I will moderate a panel comprised of Alex Fang, Founder of Sublime CO2; Paul Henderson, CEO of Grupo Flor; Stephen Kaye, COO of Big Rock; Kenneth Berke, President of PayQwick; and Carlton Willey, our own San Francisco-based securities and equity financing attorney.

Panelists will cover:

Cannabis industry investing and fundraising and the outlook for the future
Deal structures (i.e., investment rounds, debt versus equity deals, hybrid structures forced by volatile regulations, and reverse mergers)
Business and financing concerns tied to investing in cannabis
Investor red flags in Southern California’s cannabis industry

Audience questions will be taken throughout the presentation. A cocktail networking session will follow the panel and last until 9:30 pm. Food and drink will be provided.

The Southern California Cannabis Investment Forum will be held at Wanderlust Hollywood. Doors open at 5:30 pm. We’ll have a few tickets at the door, but we expect this event to sell out just as we did a similar event in San Francisco so it’s best to register in advance!

source https://www.cannalawblog.com/tomorrow-socal-cannabis-investment-forum/

Cannabis Home Delivery Matures in Oregon

Tuesday, November 28, 2017

Wage and Hour Laws for Cannabis Businesses Because it Really Matters

Monday, November 27, 2017

Emergency MAUCRSA Regulations: Manufacturing in California

California cannabis manufacturing laws We wrote last week about the California Bureau of Cannabis Control’s (BCC) issuance of their much-anticipated emergency rules to fully implement the Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA) in California. These emergency regulations, including those issued by the Departments of Public Health and Food and Agriculture, can be found here, here, and here.

The emergency rules are similar to the withdrawn rules under the Medical Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MCRSA), but there are some important additions and gap-fillers with which applicants need to familiarize themselves. In the coming weeks, we’ll be summarizing some of the key rules with respect to each category of license, beginning with manufacturing. We will be discussing these regulations a bit at our Southern California Cannabis Investment Forum on November 30 in Los Angeles and it would also behoove you to stay tuned for an announcement setting the date for our next webinar, which will delve into the new regulations in detail.

The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) regulates cannabis manufacturing through its Manufactured Cannabis Safety Branch. The CDPH will issue temporary licenses allowing manufacturers to engage in commercial cannabis activity, effective January 1^st. These temporary licenses will be valid for 120 days and may be extended for additional periods of 90 days if the business has submitted an annual license application.

For manufacturers, there are two license categories and four license types, a departure from the categories specified in SB 94. The two license categories are the A-License for the adult-use market and the M-License for the medicinal market. A single business may hold both an M- and an A- license at the same premises, so long as they submit separate applications for each.

The four license types are as follows:

Type 7: Extraction using volatile solvents (i.e. butane, hexane, pentane).
Type 6: Extraction using non-volatile solvents or mechanical methods (i.e. food-grade butter, oil, water, carbon dioxide). The rules also clarified the definition of “volatile” by expressly excluding ethanol, which is now deemed “non-volatile.”
Type N: Infusions (i.e. using pre-extracted oils to create edibles, beverages, capsules, vape cartridges, tinctures or topicals).
Type P: Packaging and labeling only

*Note that both the Type N and Type P licenses had been eliminated in SB 94, but have been reintroduced.

Each licensee will need to have written SOPs for inventory control, quality control, transportation, security, and cannabis waste disposal and must submit these SOPs with their license application. Extractions using CO2 or any volatile solvent must be conducted with a closed-loop system that has been certified by a California-licensed engineer, and volatile, hydrocarbon-based solvents must have at least 99% purity. Certification by the local fire code official will be required for volatile solvent, CO2, and ethanol extractions.

Many of the product standards from the repealed MCRSA rules have also made their way into the new MAUCRSA regulations. For example, products cannot be infused with nicotine or alcohol, or have added caffeine. Edibles cannot be shaped like a human, animal, insect, or fruit, and potentially hazardous foods like meat, seafood and other products requiring refrigeration are prohibited.

The potency requirements have changed slightly, although edibles are still limited to a maximum of 10 mg of THC per serving and 100 mg of THC per package. Other cannabis products, including tinctures, capsules, and topicals, may contain up to 1,000 mg of THC per package for adult-use products and 2,000 mg per package for medicinal-use products.

The MAUCRSA packaging and labeling regulations will require a significant departure from current practices for many existing manufacturers. Cannabis product packaging cannot resemble traditionally available food packages, and all edibles packaging must be opaque. Cannabis products and their packaging cannot be attractive to children, and packaging must be tamper-evident and child-resistant. Labels must include an ingredient list, nutritional facts, and the CDPH-issued universal symbol. Products cannot be referred to as “candy,” and must include mandated warning statements and the THC content.

Perhaps most promising to many small-scale manufacturers is CDPH’s statement that it is currently developing an additional license type, Type S, which would allow businesses to share facility space. Currently, the rules require a separate and distinct premises for each license, with the exception being that a licensee can hold both an M- and A- license of the same type on one premises. The Type S license would open the door to co-sharing of manufacturing facilities and possibly equipment, which would greatly reduce the barriers to entry for many small companies struggling to secure and build out their own manufacturing facility.

In the coming days, we’ll be delving into the new regulations for cultivation, retail, and distribution as well, so stay tuned.

source https://www.cannalawblog.com/emergency-maucrsa-regulations-manufacturing-in-california/

Sunday, November 26, 2017

California Commercial Cannabis Real Estate and the New MAUCRSA Rules

California cannabis real estate laws California just released nearly 300 pages of new regulations for medicinal and adult-use commercial cannabis businesses. These long-awaited rules follow months of public comment, a substantial environmental impact report on cultivation, and a report from the state Water Resources Control Board on diversion and discharge relating to cannabis cultivation. Though the new regulations do not include wholly unanticipated changes, it does include the following that will impact cannabis businesses when it comes to real estate and land use:

Cultivation aggregate size limits. Though there remains a 5-year prohibition on large (type 5) cultivation licenses for grows of more than 1 acre, and a 5-year limit of one medium grow license (10,001-22,000 sq ft) per person, there is no 1-acre aggregate limit on cultivation, which had been recommended in the environmental report. In other words, there is effectively no limit, other than a company’s monetary resources for license fees, that would prevent a large cultivator from converting an existing mega-farm into a cannabis farm by simply aggregating an unlimited amount of specialty (0-5,000 sq ft) and/or small grow (5,001-10,000 sq ft) licenses. This is a troubling development for small and medium-sized operators, as they had lobbied hard for an aggregate grow limit of one acre.
Premises boundary demarcation. MAUCRSA allows for a person to apply for and obtain more than one cannabis license, provided the licensed premises are “separate and distinct.” We had hoped to get more guidance on this term through the regulations (e.g. does it require a wall? Nominal boundary demarcations? Something in between?), but no explanation appears in the new regulations. This means what does and does not qualify as “separate and distinct” may have to be determined through the licensing process on a case-by-case basis, since applicants all need to submit a premises plan laying out the details of their proposed operation. This could mean many indoor operators in open warehouse spaces may end up having to build extra walls and entrances.
Subletting and Storage. Though we already knew from MAURCSA that California would require each “premises” to be contiguous and occupied by only one licensee, the new rules go slightly further by forbidding a licensee from subletting any portion of its licensed premises and by requiring each location where cannabis goods are stored be separately licensed. This means any licensee subletting a portion of their space must plan out a proper demarcation of their premises and think carefully about using that old garage next door to store product without an additional license.
Concurrent adult-use and medicinal operations. Under the new rules, one licensee can concurrently operate under both an “M” license and an “A” license on the same premises, if certain conditions are met—mainly that there is one licensee that conducts a single type of operation on the premises but keeps labeling and records separate for medicinal and adult-use. Though this seems like a common-sense regulation (why would someone need two licenses to make the same product in the same place?), it was not clear until issuance of the new rules how adult-use and medicinal licenses would interact, and whether they would be treated as truly separate licenses requiring separate premises.
Renewable energy requirements. The prior proposed MCRSA (medicinal) regulations had required 42% of the energy used by indoor or mixed-light grow licensees come from renewable sources. The new cultivation rules require only that the licensee meets the “average electricity greenhouse gas emissions intensity required of their local utility provider” under California’s existing Renewables Portfolio Standard Program. This means that rather than having indoor grows become leaders in renewable energy standards, licensees now only need to fit in with existing requirements, and even if they don’t, they can purchase allowances and offsets under California’s cap-and-trade programs. There had even been talk of increasing the percentage requirement for renewable energy, but that seems to have fizzled out.

Though the new cannabis rules contain some business-friendly updates, some disfavor small operators. It remains to be seen what effect the licensing process and the state’s enforcement of the new rules will have on the market for cannabis and cannabis real estate. We will be discussing these new regulations a bit at our Southern California Cannabis Investment Forum on November 30 in Los Angeles and it would also behoove you to stay tuned for an announcement setting the date for our next webinar, which will delve into the new regulations in detail.

source https://www.cannalawblog.com/california-commercial-cannabis-real-estate-and-the-new-maucrsa-rules/

Saturday, November 25, 2017

The Cannabis Laws of Los Angeles County: The San Gabriel Valley

San Gabriel Valley Cannabis Laws Our Los Angeles cannabis lawyers (of which I am one) are constantly being asked about the cannabis laws of various of the 88 incorporated cities in Los Angeles County.

Because it is both important and difficult to decipher each individual city’s local laws, we thought it would be helpful to provide you with charts to help. We divided the county into 4 regions and we will over the next few weeks trickle out the charts for each of these regions to keep you updated on each of the cities and their current laws. Part 1 was The Cannabis Laws of Los Angeles County: The 24 Cities in the Westside/South Bay Region (310).

This week’s post highlights the cities located in and around the San Gabriel Valley. Here is the chart showing the laws pertaining to cultivation, dispensing, distribution, and manufacturing in San Gabriel Valley Cities.

Before you can receive a California cannabis license you must have proof of local approval. Our charts in this series are intended to help you figure out whether such local approval is possible and, if so, what it takes to get it. Look for additional blog posts on remaining LA incorporated cities over the next few weeks.

source https://www.cannalawblog.com/the-cannabis-laws-of-los-angeles-county-the-san-gabriel-valley/

Friday, November 24, 2017

Cannabis Litigation, Part 6: Dispositive Motions

Thursday, November 23, 2017

Don’t Miss: Black Friday Deal for the SoCal Cannabis Investment Forum!

On Thursday, November 30th, Harris Bricken will host a discussion on investing in Southern California’s newly regulated cannabis industry. Hosted by our Los Angeles office, the Southern California Cannabis Investment Forum will connect top investors and leading companies in Southern California’s cannabis and ancillary industries.

The Forum will begin at 6:30 p.m. with a keynote from Hilary Bricken that addresses the many recent changes to California’s medical and adult use cannabis laws under MAUCRSA. From 6:45 to 8 p.m., I will moderate a panel comprised of the following:

Alex Fang, Founder of Sublime CO2
Paul Henderson, CEO of Grupo Flor
Stephen Kaye, COO of Big Rock
Kenneth Berke, President of PayQwick
Carlton Willey, our own San Francisco-based securities and equity financing attorney

Panelists will cover:

Cannabis industry investing and fundraising and the outlook for the future
Deal structures (i.e., investment rounds, debt versus equity deals, hybrid structures forced by volatile regulations, and reverse mergers)
Business and financing concerns tied to investing in cannabis
Investor red flags in Southern California’s cannabis industry

Audience questions will be taken throughout the presentation. A cocktail networking session will follow the panel and last until 9:30 pm. Food and drink will be provided and are included in the price of the ticket.

The Southern California Cannabis Investment Forum will be held at Wanderlust Hollywood. Doors open at 5:30 pm. If you act now, you can get $10 off a single ticket (SOCALCIF10), $25 off of two tickets (SOCALCIF25), and $45 off of three tickets (SOCALCIF45). These coupon codes end at midnight on Cyber Monday. We plan to sell out this event as we did in San Francisco, so don’t hesitate!

source https://www.cannalawblog.com/dont-miss-black-friday-deal-for-the-socal-cannabis-investment-forum/

BREAKING NEWS on San Francisco Cannabis

San Francisco cannabis lawyers A couple of months ago we covered San Francisco in our Cannabis Countdown series. All up and down the state of California, local jurisdictions are constantly updating or amending their cannabis regulations and San Francisco is no different. There was also an enormous update on the state level as California’s Bureau of Cannabis Control, along with the state’s other cannabis licensing agencies (the Departments of Public Health and Food and Agriculture), just released their emergency regulations.

There’s a lot to digest in these 278 pages of regulations, but don’t fret as you know you can count on the Canna Law Blog to update you regularly on here with posts from our San Francisco and Los Angeles lawyers and with our upcoming Los Angeles Cannabis Investment Forum on November 30 (go here to get your tickets for that before it sells out) and with a new webinar specifically on the new rules coming soon.

What hasn’t changed since California promulgated their rules (now withdrawn) under the Medical Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act is that local jurisdictions still control the types of cannabis licenses they are willing to permit inside their boundaries. Local jurisdictions still rule the roost and staying atop of the jurisdiction in which you want to operate your cannabis business is paramount. Just last week as I was meeting with clients at the MJBizCon conference in Las Vegas, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors (“Board”) released a draft of its new cannabis ordinance, which has significant implications for cannabis businesses looking to operate in San Francisco. The Board proposed amendments to San Francisco’s Planning Code (you can find them here) and the Administrative, Business and Tax Regulations, Health, and Police codes (here you go).

And if those are not enough to keep you busy, if you operate a cannabis cultivation, manufacturing, or distribution business in San Francisco you have until November 30^th to register your business with San Francisco’s Office of Cannabis. In other words, if your cannabis business is eligible, you need to STOP researching Thanksgiving recipes and REGISTER with the Office of Cannabis here. To say that the phone lines in our San Francisco office have been ringing off the hook since this November date was announced would be both a cliché and the truth. Our cannabis lawyers have been representing companies in California, Washington, and Oregon since 2010 and we cannot remember any governmental body providing for such a short deadline!

The below are some of the more important changes to the Board’s proposed amendments:

It creates an equity program that grants priority permit processing for equity applicants and defines an equity applicant as someone who a) lived in San Francisco for at least five years during the time period of 1971-2009; b) lived in a census tract where at least seventeen percent of the households had incomes at or below the federal poverty level; and c) at the time of application, has assets (excluding non-liquid assets and retirement accounts) that do not exceed asset limits established by the Director (of the Office of Cannabis). For the entire list of criteria that defines an equity applicant look to Section 1604(b).
It establishes priority processing for equity incubators. An equity incubator is an applicant that does not qualify as an equity applicant, but that submits with its cannabis business permit application a cannabis equity incubator agreement in which it commits to comply with certain operating requirements (see section 1604(c)) during its first three years in operation as a cannabis business.
It creates a process to issue temporary cannabis business permits for all permit categories other than storefront retailers.
It allows storefront retailers to operate a compassion program that provides medicinal cannabis and/or medicinal cannabis products at no or nominal cost to low-income individuals qualified under California Health and Safety Code sections 11362.7 et seq. to use medicinal cannabis.
It allows for onsite cannabis consumption at dispensaries and microbusinesses so long as they have a valid cannabis consumption permit.
It prohibits delivery of cannabis products by businesses outside San Francisco. Only retailers and delivery-only retailers with a license from the Office of Cannabis can deliver cannabis within the city limits of San Francisco.
And of utmost importance, it provides that only those who fit into one of the following categories can receive a permit from the Office of Cannabis in 2018:
1. You are an equity applicant or an equity incubator.
2. You possess a valid permit to operate a medical cannabis dispensary.
3. You were issued a temporary permit.
4. You can show you operate in compliance the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 and you were forced to discontinue operations as a result of federal prosecution or the threat of federal prosecution.
5. You applied for a medical cannabis dispensary permit prior to September 26, 2017, that required referral to and approval by the planning commission.
6. You registered with the Office of Cannabis as a pre-existing non-conforming operator, as set forth in subsection (k) of section 1605.

We previously covered the importance of reaching out to your local legislator when it comes to the implementation of cannabis policy and that holds true whether you live in a small town or a big international city like San Francisco. If you have issues with the Board’s amendments now is the time to speak up as they are expected to vote on them on November 28^th, so call your district supervisor now!

source https://www.cannalawblog.com/breaking-news-on-san-francisco-cannabis/

Sunday, December 31, 2017

Saturday, December 30, 2017

Friday, December 29, 2017

Wednesday, December 27, 2017

Tuesday, December 26, 2017

Monday, December 25, 2017

Sunday, December 24, 2017

Saturday, December 23, 2017

Friday, December 22, 2017

Thursday, December 21, 2017

Wednesday, December 20, 2017

Tuesday, December 19, 2017

Monday, December 18, 2017