Allison Margolin, founder and partner of Margolin & Lawrence, spoke on Wednesday about dosing regulations at the State of Cannabis conference in Queen Mary, Long Beach. The maximum dosage is 100 mg of THC for packaged edible products, and each serving can contain no more than 10 mg. This was established in the final re-adoption of the emergency regulations (CCR, Title 17, Division 1, Chapter 13, §40305), and while these limits may frustrate consumers with a higher tolerance, larger doses of concentrated cannabis products are allowed in non-edible forms. Under §40306 of the regulations, topical products, concentrates and other non-edible products (including tinctures and capsules) may be sold in amounts up to 1,000mg per package. a special recommendation to get a larger dose (up to 1,000mg) without medical prescription. Up to 2,000mg per package is also permitted under this provision, but only for medicinal-use customers and with appropriate labelling.
By Raza Lawrence and Allison Margolin
On September 28, 2018, the DEA issued a rule announcing that drugs including CBD with THC content below 0.1% will be taken off of Schedule 1 of the controlled substances schedules, and moved to Schedule 5, which allows CBD products to be sold through traditional pharmacies with a doctor’s prescription, so long as the particular product is first approved by the FDA. The order also disallows any importing or exporting of CBD products without a permit.
It is important to note that the ruling is narrow in that it only applies to CBD products with less than 0.1% THC. However, products with higher THC content could continue to be sold under state law and without federal FDA or DOJ regulation under the Rohrabacher–Farr amendment. Ironically, the new federal policy is to tolerate sales of CBD products with high levels of THC, but to restrict sales of CBD products with low levels of THC by requiring FDA approval, a huge task in itself. Some sources indicate that it can cost more than $1 billion to bring one FDA-approved product to the market, including approximately $50-840 million to bring treatments through the stages of Basic Research/Drug Development and Pre-Clinical/Translational Research, and approximately $50-970 million to complete the Clinical Trials (Phases 1, 2, and 3).
The new ruling is bad news for anyone hoping to sell CBD with no or low levels of THC and without FDA approval. Already, in July 2018, the California Department of Public Health ruled that hemp-derived CBD would not be allowed in food or drinks for humans or pets in California.
CBD products could potentially be sold as edible cannabis products under California state law if the producers obtain commercial cannabis manufacturing licenses from the state and local government, and the products are distributed and sold through outlets with state and local commercial cannabis licenses. Even if everyone involved complied with California state cannabis laws, they would still be subject to enforcement, punishment and being shut down by the FDA, unless they contain over 0.1% THC, in which case they could be sold under state law with no federal interference.
The Rohrabacher–Farr Amendment would not protect any low- or no-THC CBD distributors, even those who strictly complied with state law, from enforcement actions from the FDA, as Rohrabacher–Farr only restricts the DOJ from interfering with state regulation of medical marijuana. The FDA is part of the Department of Health and Human Services, not the DOJ, and thus retains the ability to regulate CBD – its regulations trump any state laws relating to CBD under the supremacy clause of the US Constitution.
It is possible that today’s DEA ruling could later lead to reclassification of all cannabis from a Schedule 1 to Schedule 5 substance, which would mean that all cannabis could fall under the jurisdiction of the FDA and could only be sold through pharmacies with doctor’s prescriptions and must be produced by companies with FDA approval (i.e., large drug companies).
Since 2009, the FDA has had the authority to regulate tobacco products, which are now controlled by only a few large corporations, as are many other drugs regulated by the FDA. The same could happen to cannabis. Individuals and organizations in the cannabis community should lobby the government to prevent this monopolization by ensuring that cannabis is descheduled as a controlled substance.
Earlier this year, the FDA's parent agency stated that CBD has little potential for abuse – hopefully the government's future approach to CBD will follow this lead and remove CBD's schedule 1 classification.
The logistics of running a legal cannabis operation involve many questions that may seem surprising or daunting to both current and aspiring business owners. As a California cannabis law firm, here are a few of the issues that we’ve seen cannabis businesses need answers for. If you’ve found yourself asking any of these questions about your own operation, our lawyers may be able to help.
How much can I expect to spend?
At present, the capital requirements to start a cannabis business are very high; on top of the normal costs of starting a business, like buying real estate and hiring employees, the industry is very tightly regulated, and it’s not possible to get an outside loan. That means your business has to be privately fundraised, so it’s important to figure out exactly how much money you have and how much you’re willing to spend.
The application fees alone for cannabis licensing are often several thousand dollars, and many jurisdictions require both proof of funding and a detailed business plan before they consider a cannabis licensing application complete. A cannabis lawyer can help you find this information in order to start your licensed operation.
Is my property in an eligible location for cannabis business?
Zoning requirements vary widely based on your jurisdiction and which type of cannabis activity you’re interested in, so it’s not always easy to tell whether a given property or address is eligible for a particular activity. In addition to restrictions on which zones a given activity can be located in (for instance, cannabis cultivation might be banned in commercial zones but allowed in industrial ones), many municipalities have setback restrictions that prevent cannabis businesses from being located within a certain distance of schools, parks, residential areas, or other cannabis businesses.
Interpreting the local zoning regulations to determine for what activities your business is eligible is another service that cannabis lawyers can provide.
What information do I need to apply for a cannabis business license?
Applying for a cannabis business license isn’t just a matter of filling out an application form – most state and local licensing authorities will require a large amount of information about the business and its owners, including a complete operating plan describing how your establishment will meet all legal requirements for cannabis business activity.
On top of this information, you’ll also need to have business documents such as a seller’s permit, federal employer ID number, and certificate of good tax standing in order. On top of that, most applications will require you to provide accurate financial information, insurance documentation, and enough personal documentation for each member of your business to pass a full background check.
Finding these documents and preparing them for your final application is just one service that cannabis lawyers can provide for your business.
Should I get a license for medical-use or adult-use cannabis?
At the present moment, many states and municipalities have separate regulatory regimes for medical-use and adult-use cannabis, often with very different legal requirements. For your cannabis business to succeed, you’ll need to decide which license (or combination of licenses) is best for your business, then master the licensing and compliance processes for the type of cannabis business you choose. A cannabis lawyer can help guide you through this process, from choosing the right activity to applying for a license to remaining in compliance with the law once your business is operational.
What cannabis activity should I apply for?
In addition to medical-use and adult-use, cannabis business licenses are broken down into different activities, such as cultivation, manufacturing, and retail. Additionally, many of these categories are split into subcategories such as indoor and outdoor cultivation or storefront and non-storefront retail. As with medical and adult-use cannabis, these different types of cannabis activities often have very different requirements.
Some jurisdictions also offer boutique categories with special requirements such as Microbusiness, impose restrictions on how many licenses can be granted, or limit which types of licenses a single business can hold simultaneously. For your cannabis business to succeed, you’ll need to optimize which activities to apply for – another task that a cannabis lawyer can help with.
How can I ensure that my business is licensed as quickly as possible?
Given that legal cannabis licensing is a complex, highly regulated bureaucracy currently receiving a large number of applications, it can be difficult for a cannabis business owner to predict how long it will take their business license application to be approved, or to optimize their application in order to be licensed and operational as soon as possible.
Some areas offer a fast track to licensing under their Social Equity Program, in order to ensure that business owners who are disadvantaged or disproportionately affected by the War on Drugs have a quicker path to licensed operation than other applicants. Our cannabis lawyers can help you find out whether you qualify for one of these programs.
Whether or not you qualify for a Social Equity Program, the best way to ensure that you’re licensed as soon as possible is to choose the right license for your business and make sure that the information in your application is complete and correct.
What license should I apply for if I plan to expand my operation?
Especially for new cannabis businesses, the size of a cannabis business at the time of initial licensing might not be the same as the size of the business you hope to run in two or three year’s time. However, cannabis license application fees often vary based on the size of the operation in question, and applications often require businesses to provide details that depend on the size of their operation, including what types of equipment they plan to use, their planned hours of operation, and how many employees they’ll hire (including their labor practices and management structure).
Our cannabis lawyers can help you figure out how to reflect your long-term growth plans in your licensing application, including the multi-year pro forma budgeting and income documents that many municipalities require.
Will I need to apply for additional licenses or permits?
For many businesses, the cannabis license itself is only one of a number of licenses you’ll need for a fully licensed operation. To begin with, new cannabis businesses will need to apply for their tax registrations and seller’s permits. Additionally, depending on your activity, you may need to apply for Conditional Use Permit or Land Use Permit from your local planning department before you can apply for a cannabis business license.
For some activities, like outdoor cultivation, this may require further permits, such as for diversion of water, tree removal, or environmental review. On the other hand, businesses located in cities may be required to apply for enrollment in local Social Equity or community benefits programs. Our cannabis lawyers can help you find out what additional permits you need and help you apply for them.
Australia has a state and Federal system of government with many similarities to the
way the US operates. The Australian system, just like the US system exposes
differences between the views (sometimes expressed as laws) between Federal
authorities and bodies acting on the States’ behalves.
One such example was evident in Mid-2018. One state – South Australia – SA –
extended the severity of sentences for drug related crime, calling out Marijuana
specifically for harsher treatment. On the same day, Tasmania, the island State and
home of the cartoon ‘devil’ (there really are Tasmanian Devils you know – they are
small mammals – Google it!) expressed support for the legalization of recreational
South Australia comes down hard on pot smokers
It is still not legal to buy cannabis in Australia for recreational use. However, possession
was decriminalized in South Australia in 1978. As part of its “war on drugs,” and in
something of a reversal of that criminalization, the South Australian Government wants
to increase penalties for possession of marijuana possession as follows:
- Quadruple the maximum fine for cannabis possession to $2,000. The law is for
debate in Parliament.
- A prison sentence of two years maximum, identical to those imposed
possession of ecstasy or heroin and other illegal drugs will be introduced.
The current penalty for possession of fewer than 25 grams of cannabis is $125.
Cannabis possession has been decriminalized since 1987.
According to South Australia’s Attorney-General, Vickie Chapman, marijuana should be
treated in the same manner as the other illegal drugs. She compared the current
treatment of marijuana possession to jaywalking.
The increase in fines for cannabis possession was an election promise as part of the
Liberals’ (an Australian conservative political party) "war on drugs" slogan.
The State government’s actions were not limited to the courts. They have also
suggested the use of drug-sniffing dogs in schools. Ms. Chapman said that they are
trying to treat marijuana in the same manner as they do with other illegal drugs.
Australian National University's Australian Medicinal Cannabis Observatory clinical lead,
Dr David Caldicott asked whether the new laws would lessen the use or negative effects
of marijuana. Dr Caldicott said that maybe the new penalties if for generating revenue
because harsher penalties don’t lessen the use or harm from marijuana.
Greens MLC Tammy Franks considers the proposed laws as "a war on the homeless,
Aboriginal people and the poor;" because they are not able to defend themselves in
court. Ms Franks added that worldwide, “prohibition does not work when it comes to
Luckily, the plan to implement jail sentences for people who are caught in possession of
cannabis is not likely to get through the state’s parliament and find itself manifest as
law. The opposition will oppose the bill for many of the same reasons that the Law
Meanwhile, on the other side of the Australian continent, and on the same day…..
Most Tasmanians support recreational cannabis legalization
A poll in Tasmania showed that the majority of the respondents support the
decriminalisation of recreational marijuana. The telephone poll of over 1,100 Tasmanians found an average of 59 per cent supported the move to decriminalize marijuana while 28 per cent opposed it.
Jarrod Edwards, a federal by-election candidate, said the policy to decriminalize is
centered around marijuana because policing it uses a takes up such a huge amount of
police time, manpower and other resources.
He added that it “greatly impedes and impacts on young people in our community if,
during their formative years, they get drug charges on their record.” The drug charges
can affect an individual’s chances to gain employment, travel abroad as well as
negatively affect the qualification to purchase houses in the future.
The Attorney-General considers the current drug diversion program as too lenient
because it gives the offender the “chance to have treatment instead of a penalty.”
There is hope for Australia amid all this confusion
The very fact that Australia is so schizophrenic about its state and Federal views on
Cannabis could present an opportunity for those who would see it made legal.
Just as in the USA, bold states have taken the step to legalese, ultimately, one
Australian State seems likely to suggest it down here.
If the Federal government is open to allowing these sorts of strong feelings and different
behaviors by the States, when it comes to recreational cannabis use, they will have to
accept a state which wants to legalize it.
Neil Aitken is CEO of Cannabis Express, a website dedicated to providing the facts and information Australians need to decide how to vote on the subject of whether Australia should legalize recreational cannabis for personal use.
The state regulators have released the annual fees for cannabis licensees - manufacturing fees are determined by the CDPH, cultivation by CalCannabis, and testing, microbusiness, retail and delivery fees are set by the BCC. We have compiled all of these fees into a calculator you can use to estimate your costs for the state annual license into one place.
Originally, Senate Bill (SB) 1459 was written to allow the county agricultural commissioners (CACs) to include cannabis among reports about the condition, acreage, production, and value of the county’s agricultural products as submitted to the Secretary of Food and Agriculture. The bill was first introduced in the California State Senate on February 16th, 2018, by Senator Cannella (coauthored by Senators Galgiani and McGuire, Assembly Members Caballero and Wood). The impetus for suggesting that CACs report cannabis as an agricultural product was based on the National Agricultural Statistics Services assessment that “providing crop statistics is basically a way to stabilize the agricultural marketplace." Such action would ultimately facilitate the integration of cannabis cultivation into the marketplace, and moreover encourage unlicensed growers to legitimize their businesses. After passing the Assembly Appropriations Committee 13-4 on August 8th, SB 1459 then received a majority vote upon a third reading on the Senate floor.
California is well underway in the business of commercial cannabis, and now the state has
opened its golden doors to licensing. The state is actively reviewing applications for annual state
licenses. Those who have successfully triumphed over their local jurisdiction are quickly
realizing that was only half the battle and are in process of applying for a state license. The
industry is experiencing some growing pains as it continues to transition into a regulated market,
and if you’ve felt the hurt, here are some things to consider on whether it’s time to hire a law firm
to represent your cannabis business.
Depending upon the activity applied for, the relevant agency regulating commercial cannabis at
the state level – the Bureau of Cannabis Control (BCC), California Department of Public Health
(CDPH), or California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) – will contact the city or
county to verify the validity of the local license and that the business is in compliance with or exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as required by state law. This should be an easy
tick off the checklist. However, we are finding the state is returning responsibility to the applicant
to provide evidence of CEQA. The language in the local ordinances, particularly in the smaller,
rural jurisdictions, can be vague and up to interpretation. Failure to provide evidence of
compliance with the CEQA, or with any of the regulations under state law and associated
governmental bodies, is subject to denial of the state license. As a result, all operations will be
forced to cease. Any operations occurring without a valid local and state license are subject to
heavy fines, as recently seen in Humboldt County, and could result in criminal prosecution. An
attorney will advise in navigating through all local and state requirements to protect your
business from shutting down.
A common issue aggravating many are problems arising due to incorrect zoning that can lead to
costly consequences. Before you sign a lease or purchase a property, verify the zoning. For
example, for those in the market for the City of Los Angeles during its second phase of
licensing, you may have noticed the maps to check zoning against sensitive use areas in each
of the 15 districts are no longer available. At the request of the Department of Cannabis
Regulation (DCR), the maps have been removed due to numerous issues arising from incorrect
zoning. Applicants were relying on the maps not realizing there may have been a school, EMMD,
or other sensitive use within the area. The city is allowing applicants the opportunity to find
another location that is in the correct zoning until at least September 13th , when this phase of
licensing closes. Finding a location in the correct zoning is no easy feat. Have the property
professionally mapped and consider hiring an attorney to negotiate the terms of the lease or
purchase contract, ensuring the property complies with all zoning and land use requirements
under the ordinance, and reducing the chance your license is denied.
If you are an investor looking to buy an existing license, beware of fraudulent deals and false
licenses. Does the license comply with CEQA? Is it in the correct zoning? What is the licensing
authority’s policy on transferring of cannabis licenses? Having an attorney do the due diligence
will help reduce the risk of your investment.
As the industry evolves, there is going to be more need for legal protection for entrepreneurs and
investors, so consider a business investment into a law firm well educated in the field of
cannabis law and protect your success.
This editorial, by Allison Margolin and Raza Lawrence, also appears in the July 25th, 2018 edition of The Daily Journal.
On June 25, the Food and Drug Administration announced that it was approving Epidiolex, a cannabidiol (CBD) oral solution for the treatment of seizures associated with two rare and severe forms of epilepsy. This is the first drug approved by the FDA comprised of an active ingredient derived from marijuana.
The approval is a sign of the growing acceptance of CBD, and cannabis generally, to treat various medical ailments. THC, not CBD, is the primary psychoactive (intoxicating) component of marijuana. But CBD is believed to have its own distinct health benefits for conditions ranging from anxiety to cancer, and has recently exploded in popularity. CBD-based products seem to be everywhere, including Walmart, although the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this year that CBD is properly banned as a controlled substance under federal law, and the FDA warned in its recent press release that it will continue to crack down on “illegal marketing of CBD-containing products with serious, unproven medical claims.”
California’s health department also recently made clear that state law forbids adding CBD products (whether from cannabis or industrial hemp) to any food. Regardless, the FDA’s ruling could open up CBD and cannabis generally to broader acceptance in government and society.
The FDA’s approval contradicts the federal classification of cannabis as a Schedule 1 substance, the same as heroin, which is defined as one with a high potential for abuse and no medical value. The FDA specifically found, as part of its approval of Epidiolex, that CBD has medical benefits that have been supported by rigorous scientific research and clinical studies. Litigants could use the FDA approval to challenge marijuana’s Schedule 1 status in court. Or, reading the tea leaves, the government could re-classify or de-classify marijuana on its own. Under the law, Congress, the president, and the heads of the
Drug Enforcement Administration and FDA would each have the power to remove marijuana from Schedule 1.
What happens next if cannabis is removed from Schedule 1? There are different possible paths. Under one scenario, feared by many in the cannabis industry, cannabis would become regulated by the FDA as a Schedule 2 (or 3 or 4 or 5) controlled substance. Complying with FDA regulations can be extremely expensive and time-consuming, which is why drug companies are all large corporations rather than “mom and pop” operations. The estimated cost of bringing a new prescription drug to market is $2.6 billion.
In California, the cannabis industry has operated for years under an informal system of non-profit “collectives,” with only vague legal guidelines and no regulation. This year, the state is transitioning to a new system of state and local licensing and regulations. California cannabis cultivators, manufacturers, distributors, and retailers are already struggling to comply with the new high taxes and complicated regulations imposed by California. If the FDA were to take over the regulation and licensing, the costs of compliance would likely be much higher, and only those with the deepest pockets would have the resources required to produce and sell cannabis. The costs of compliance would inevitably be passed on to consumers, who would face sky-high cannabis prices similar to those of prescription drugs.
Federal control and regulation of cannabis, however, is not inevitable. Many would prefer the approach taken by proposed federal legislation that removes federal penalties and allows each state to sets its own marijuana policy within its borders, similar to how alcohol is now treated. Under this approach, the FDA would not regulate cannabis like a prescription drug, but could still prevent misleading health claims or misrepresentations on labels, and enforce basic quality standards, as it does for dietary supplements.
Unlike synthetic drugs derived for billions of dollars in corporate labs, cannabis is just a plant. It is not toxic or physically addictive. People who use it for medical purposes can safely and effectively determine and adjust their own doses. States could set reasonable restrictions and regulations on commercial
cannabis as they do with alcohol, but would not need to subject it to the intense scrutiny of prescription drugs.
The approval of Epidiolex is promising to the extent it increases awareness and legitimacy of cannabis as medicine. But it also raises the concerning possibility that all cannabis may soon be regulated like prescription drugs, and controlled by large corporations, rather than by the people and small businesses who grew the industry up from the ground.
Since the Department of Cannabis Regulation opened up Phase II licensing in Los Angeles a couple of weeks ago, questions have been flooding in regarding the differences between state and local licensing. While the requirements set forth in local ordinances usually reflect the laws set forth by state agencies, there are some distinctions in terms of what is required for the purposes of applying for business licensing.
On the heels of the opening of Phase 2 of non-retail cannabis licensing, the Los Angeles Cannabis Regulation Commission convened a Special Meeting yesterday. Law enforcement officers ushered a diverse crowd of lawmakers, business owners, community members into the Civic Auditorium of the Los Angeles Police Administration Building to discuss legal cannabis. People waited for the meeting to start, Hawaiian shirts mingling with suits, a group with brightly colored “resistance” shirt found a seats right in the middle of the auditorium. People rushed to fill out comment cards for 60 seconds to address DCR directly.
by Terry Blevins, President/CEO of Armaplex Security
Many businesses are willing to put a security guard in their cannabis business, but don’t often think about the possible consequences (implications) of that decision.
I often ask business owners: Would you want your security guard to kill or injure an intruder in order to prevent him from taking your cannabis product or cash? The answer should be “no,” because the use of force to protect property is not allowed by security officers and would put you and your business in a precarious position from a liability perspective, not to mention causing a potential reputational issue. If the answer is “no,” then I ask: “Have you had that discussion with your security company and/or the guards that work in your business?” The use of physical force is a serious responsibility, especially if it is done by one of your employees or contractors, and at your request, and should not be taken lightly.
Even more serious is the use of a firearm by security guards, which can bring on a series of additional liabilities and concerns. How would you feel personally if one of your security guards killed or injured someone while trying to protect a small amount of product? How would you feel if an innocent bystander was killed during the incident? If you tell your guard not to draw his weapon in case of an attack, then you are defeating the purpose of having an armed guard and may be creating other liabilities with these instructions.
Are you aware that a security guard is the last measure you should put in place and only after you have secured the site with robust physical barriers, employee procedures and security technology?
You should be suspicious of security companies whose first line of defense is always a security guard. Most shrinkage or loss in the cannabis industry is due to factors that can be controlled by measures other than hiring a security guard. Every cannabis business will suffer some loss of product or cash on a monthly basis and most of the time there is some insider (employee, contractor or partner) involvement in this.
Some examples of measures that can prevent insider theft:
- Employees should not be allowed to have bags or baggy clothing in areas where product or cash is kept. Employee and contractor lockers should be used.
- Employee policies and procedures that require two individuals to be present when accessing large amounts of cash and/or product
- Alarm devices and access control systems that only allow certain employees, into certain areas, during certain hours
- A requirement that all transactions take place on camera can help to prevent theft and may also serve as verification if someone is wrongfully accused
Are you 100% sure that if one of your security guards injured or killed someone, your insurance would cover you? How about if they just touch someone and that person claims assault?
All insurance policies have exclusions, and many have “Assault and Battery” or other exclusions that mean the insurance company would not pay a claim if your security guard used physical force (any bodily contact) on a person, even in the course of his duties. Even if you contract with a licensed security company, its policy may have these same exclusions that place you, and them, at risk of not being properly covered. This exclusion may be as subtle as no coverage for providing security for a business that is involved in illegal activity (cannabis is still a Federal offense).
These are steps you can take to protect yourself and your business:
- If you hire guards directly, your insurance company must know that you are doing this in order for you to be covered in the case of an incident.
- If you contract with a security provider, you should ask this security company to list you as a co-insured on its insurance policy
- Have your attorney review both your policy, and the security company policy, to make sure that cannabis businesses are not excluded and insure that there are no other exclusions, such as “Assault and Battery,” that put you at risk.
Are you 100% sure that your security guards are fully licensed and compliant to perform their duties under local and state laws that regulate security companies, as well as cannabis companies?
All security companies are heavily regulated due to the need for trust and accountability as they are entrusted with our most valuable assets, and sometimes with our lives. Cannabis security companies and guards are even more heavily regulated and scrutinized than other security companies. State and local cannabis regulations require that security companies and/or guards that are used by cannabis companies must be properly licensed and insured.
Things you should do:
- Have your attorney review the contract with the security company and make sure that it meets the BCC and/or local requirements
- Visit, or call, the state and/or city agency that licenses security guard companies to make sure the company is licensed. (In California this site is: https://search.dca.ca.gov )
- Make sure that you have these documents on hand during any compliance check:
- A copy of the security company’s license
- The security guard’s personal card (city of L.A. also requires first aid card)
- Your contract with the security company
- The insurance binder from the insurance company that lists you as a co-insured
- Any other documents required by law or regulation
Were you aware that in most states you cannot hire security guards directly (even if they have guard cards) without your business being licensed as a Proprietary Private Security Employer?
Out of all the cannabis businesses that hire their guards directly, most have no idea that this is required. The supervision of security guards cannot be performed by someone who is not an expert in security. Any company that hires security guards must have a license to do so and must have a manager on staff who has proven experience in security management and completed a written test and background check (California requires this license). Your insurance company will also want to look at the manager’s qualifications in order to ensure the manager is experienced and doesn’t present a risk to the policy.
This is only a partial list: There are many other things that you should consider when hiring security personnel at your cannabis site, and you should do everything you can to be informed and to protect you and your business.
There are many misconceptions regarding security in the cannabis industry regarding what is required under state and local laws and even some security companies don’t fully understand these. The only way for you to protect your company is to be proactive, to work closely with your attorney and to use a reputable security company.
About Terry Blevins:
Terry Blevins has over 30 years of experience in Law Enforcement and Security and has worked as an Industrial Site Security Subject Matter Expert for the U.S. Department of State. With a master’s degree in Security Management and extensive training in conducting threat and risk assessments from private industry as well as the Federal government, Blevins is considered a qualified physical security expert.
Additionally, Blevins is considered one of the foremost cannabis security experts in the U.S. He has studied many cannabis businesses in California and other states, learning what works and doesn’t work, including industry better and next practices and has drawn from those to develop the security strategies that he includes in the numerous cannabis security plans he has completed. He has also studied local and state regulations and understand what must be provided with applications in order to successfully compete for a license.
Bureau of Security and Investigative Services
With a recent study, the state of New York signaled receptiveness to the possibility of legalizing cannabis for recreational use. Specifically, the report, commissioned by Governor Cuomo, recommends that adults be allowed to legally consume marijuana. While the study has yet to be finalized by the New York State Department of Health, its announcement indicates that New York is planning to embrace the marijuana industry to the same extent that states like California and Colorado have, switching from a relatively restrictive medical-only marijuana program to a system which legalizes the recreational use of cannabis. Given the size and influence of New York State’s population and economy, this shift would have major implications for the status of cannabis in the nation at large.
Currently, New York State’s regulations only allow marijuana to be legally used for medical purposes. Additionally, only 10 companies are licensed to operate as medical marijuana suppliers, a restriction with the potential to greatly limit patients’ access to marijuana and drive prices up. Further, patients aren’t even allowed to smoke marijuana – as of December 2017, the drug can only be legally taken in the form of cannabis extracts like oils, tinctures, and chewable tablets. According to the New York Times, these restrictions were initially put in place by Cuomo, out of concern that marijuana would become a “gateway” drug leading to use of other illicit substances. Therefore, this study, with its conclusion that marijuana (even when smoked) is not harmful for adult recreational use, indicates a major pivot on the governor’s part when it comes to legalization.
This shift may be due to the upcoming election for the governorship, where Cuomo’s most prominent challenger, Cynthia Nixon, has made marijuana legalization a central campaign issue. Nixon has positioned herself as even more pro-legalization than Cuomo, calling for a fully regulated and taxed recreational marijuana industry in New York as well as a statewide program to expunge past marijuana convictions. Therefore, whichever candidate wins the governorship, it seems likely that New York State will continue to liberalize its cannabis regulations. Together with New York City moving to limit marijuana arrests, this indicates that, while New York may not have a full recreational cannabis industry for some time, the region’s political climate has shifted significantly against the restrictive laws which are currently in place.
Governor Brown signed Assembly Bill 1810 [Insert link: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB1810] this past week and it is immediately effective. SB 1810 is incorporated through Penal Code section 1001.36, which creates a discretionary pre-trial diversion procedure for any defendant that suffers from most mental disorders listed in the Diagnostic and Statistic Manual [Insert link: https://psychcentral.com/disorders/ ]. PC 1001.36 diversion is available where the mental disorder can be treated, and it played a significant role in commission of the crimes alleged. The diversion program is available only “pretrial,” so it is important to explore this option early. Diversion takes place for less than two years, and can be done either in a residential setting in the community or an outpatient program.
Through the Social Equity Program, Drug War Victims Will Help Build LA’s Green Economy
As of July 2nd, here is the latest news on Phase 2 of cannabis licensing for the City of LA:
- Phase 2 will open August 1st and will be open for 30 business days. This phase is for existing cannabis cultivators, manufacturers, and distributors who were operating in the City of LA before 2016 and were suppliers to an EMMD (a pre-ICO medical marijuana collective in compliance with Proposition D) before 2017.
- Detailed instructions for Phase 2 applications will be released on July 18th, and the full Phase 2 application will be released on August 1st.
- Proof of participation in social equity program, and passing a pre-licensing inspection, will not be required for the provisional approval for Phase 2.
- The City will create a process where Phase 2 delinquent taxpayers can pay their taxes for past years at the same time as they are applying for licensing.
Among the other recent changes to the LA ordinance that take effect today and July 23rd:
- Both Tier 1 and Tier 2 social equity applicants will now receive priority processing for new retail applications on a 2:1 ratio with all non-social equity applicants (i.e., 2 out of 3 new retail licenses will go to Tier 1 and Tier 2 social equity applicants). Previously, only Tier 1 social equity applicants received this priority for new retail licenses.
- Eligibility for Tier 1 of the Social Equity Program is expanded to include applicants with a prior California cannabis arrest, but not a conviction. Previously, the ordinance appeared to require a conviction. The new definition makes anyone eligible for Tier 1 Social Equity who is both low income and has “an arrest or conviction in California for any crime under the laws of the State of California or the United States relating to the sale, possession, use, manufacture, or cultivation of Cannabis that occurred prior to November 8, 2016” (excluding arrests or convictions for violating Proposition D).
- Social equity program “incubators,” which will include everyone applying in Phase 2 who is not a Tier 1 or Tier 2 social equity applicant, will now be given the option to pay into a fund instead of providing 10% of their space to a social equity partner.
Today the Los Angeles City Council held a special meeting, where a passionate and energized public audience made it clear that they want to see the tax revenue collected from the commercial cannabis industry to be reinvested into social equity programs. The specific tax revenues being discussed were the proposed “Cannabis Reinvestment Act,” as well as a provision that would increase tax rates once the cannabis industry within LA reaches an aggregate of $1.5 Billion in total gross receipts.
After numerous iterations, the final regulations officially went into effect on June 6, 2018 and are set to expire on December 4, 2018. These amended emergency regulations were initially released to the public on May 18, and then filed with the Office of Administrative Law on May 25, 2018. The state’s regulatory agencies proposed changes to certain provisions in order to provide greater clarity to licensees and address issues that have arisen since the emergency regulations went into effect. The re-adoption of the emergency regulations have extended the effective period for an additional 180 days. After the California Office of Administrative Law (OAL) posted the proposed emergency regulations on their website, there was a five-day public comment period on the finding of emergency.
Margolin & Lawrence will be holding a FREE Social Equity Clinic this Thursday, May 21, 2018 from 10AM to 5PM at our Beverly Hills office. If you think you are an eligible Social Equity Applicant and would like to come in to verify your eligibility for the program, please bring any or all that apply above.
RSVP to firstname.lastname@example.org.
One day only.
Back in September, we published a blog post titled “Where Can I Get a Distribution License in California.” Now that the ordinances for the majority of jurisdictions in California have been reviewed and somewhat solidified, Margolin and Lawrence presents an updated list on the viable locations for distribution licenses in California.