Sponsored by

VGoodiez 420EDC
  • Welcome to VaporAsylum! Please take a moment to read our RULES and introduce yourself here.
  • Need help navigating the forum? Find out how to use our features here.
  • Did you know we have lots of smilies for you to use?

Law California



Tribes cut out of California marijuana market might grow their own


California tribes say rules requiring their marijuana businesses to be licensed by the state would strip them of authority over their own lands and their right to self-governance.


By Michael R. Blood, Associated Press

LOS ANGELES — American Indian tribes that say they have been cut out of California’s legal marijuana market have raised the possibility of going their own way by establishing pot businesses outside the state-regulated system that is less than two months old.

The tribes floated the idea of setting up rival farms and sales shops on reservations after concluding that rules requiring them to be licensed by the state would strip them of authority over their own lands and their right to self-governance.

The possibility of the tribes breaking away from the state-run system is one more challenge for California as it attempts to transform its longstanding medicinal and illegal marijuana markets into a unified, multibillion-dollar industry.

For tribes to participate in the state-run market, “they have to give up their rights to act as governments, with regard to cannabis,” said Mark Levitan, a tribal attorney.

At issue are legally thorny questions about who governs whom, taxation and the intersection of state marijuana laws with tribes that the federal government recognizes as sovereign nations within the U.S.

Related: Tribes urged to consider boosting revenue via cannabis industry

Under regulations issued last year, California would retain full control over licensing. Tribes would have to follow state rules, including “submission to all enforcement,” to obtain a license to grow or sell marijuana. Any application must include a waiver of “sovereign immunity,” a sort of legal firewall that protects tribal interests.

Without state licenses, businesses cannot take part in the legal state pot market. California has over 100 federally recognized tribes, the most of any state, and estimates of the number either growing and selling pot or eager to do so varies, from a handful to over 20.

Unlike those that have prospered from casino gambling, some are in struggling rural areas and would welcome a new source of cash to improve schools and pave roads.

After long-running negotiations between tribes and state officials failed to produce an agreement before broad legal sales began Jan. 1, the California Native American Cannabis Association warned state officials that tribes “may engage in commercial cannabis activities through our own inherent sovereign authority.”

If tribes choose to step away from California’s market, “the state will have no jurisdiction to enforce its cannabis laws and regulations on tribal lands,” the group said in a sharply worded letter to Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown’s administration in December.

Tribes “just want to be able to do business in the state of California and elsewhere, just like anybody else,” said Paul Chavez, former chairman of the Bishop Paiute tribe.

More tribal lands news
The dispute in California differs from another legal pot state, Washington, where seven tribes have marijuana compacts with the state and others are in negotiations or awaiting the governor’s approval. The compacts allow tribal marijuana businesses to participate in the legal system, such as selling tribe-grown pot to retailers off the reservation.

In California, the tribes are circulating a proposal that calls for the governor to strike agreements with them. Those pacts would allow them to participate in the legal market, while the state would recognize a tribe’s “exclusive authority” to regulate commercial marijuana activity on its lands.

Tribes are eager for a settlement, but reaching a deal in the Legislature could take the remainder of the year.

“Everyone agrees conceptually there should be an even playing field, a level playing field,” said state Assemblyman Rob Bonta, a Democrat at the center of the negotiations in Sacramento.

In addition to the problems in Sacramento, tribes are facing uncertainty at the federal level.

Earlier this year, Attorney General Jeff Sessions lifted an Obama-era policy that kept federal authorities from cracking down on the marijuana trade in states where the drug is legal, which also guided enforcement on tribal lands.

The shifting ground has put a chill over development plans — including in an isolated stretch of eastern San Diego County.

Nevada-based GB Sciences Inc. announced last year that it would build and manage a commercial cannabis company on tribal lands, nurturing plants, manufacturing products and distributing them across the state.

The tribe, the Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla and Cupeno Indians, would get an ownership stake, jobs and 40 percent of the profits. GB Sciences would get income for its marijuana research and a foothold in the largest legal pot market in the U.S.

But the projected $8 million project is on hold, with the status of tribes in the pot market unclear.

Issues involving sovereignty touch a sensitive subject for tribes, and they see the predicament with marijuana as part of a history of exploitation.

The state rule “harkens back to the end of the 19th century … when federal and state policies favored extermination or forced assimilation of California tribes,” the tribal group wrote.
 
Once again our various governments in the USA are the kings of unintended consequences. Shame, really.


They used to get free or low-cost marijuana to help with their cancer. Not anymore



The Wo/Men’s Alliance for Medical Marijuana survived a raid by federal agents and other existential threats while providing free and low-cost cannabis to seriously ill patients. In operation for the past three decades, the Santa Cruz-based collective is the oldest example of a compassionate care" program in the nation.

Now, the program and others like it could be forced to close due to an unlikely reason: legalization.


Under state regulations that went into effect Jan. 1, compassionate care programs must collect taxes on the market value of cannabis that they give to patients. Many of these programs say they cannot afford the taxes nor the cost of state and local permits required to obtain cannabis from legal growers.

The threat of closure due to the requirements of legalization is a painful irony for the state’s compassionate care programs. Images of AIDS patients receiving free weed in San Francisco and cancer patients subjected to the federal raid in the Santa Cruz mountains helped build public support for medical marijuana, and laid the groundwork for today’s commercial cannabis market.

“Victory was built on the backs of human suffering,” said Valerie Corral, a Wo/Men’s cofounder. “Unfortunately, compassion is not financially appealing in this market.”

Ralph Trueblood of Wo/Men’s added: “We’re saving lives. Do not tie our hands.”

Officials at the Bureau of Cannabis Control last week said they were busy with public meetings in Sacramento and Ukiah and unable to respond to questions about compassionate care programs. However, the bureau and two other state agencies responsible for cannabis regulation -- the Department of Food and Agriculture and the Department of Public Health -- are expected to consider recommendations to help the programs.

Compassionate care programs often run as freestanding organizations dedicated to the treatment of a specific illness or group of people. For instance, the Caladrius Network was founded by a Placer County resident who wants to help children like his son who suffer from a life-threatening form of epilepsy.

Weed for Warriors provides cannabis to military veterans across the state who cannot pay for it themselves. Members say cannabis helps with post-traumatic stress disorder, pain and other problems while avoiding highly-addictive opioids prescribed by doctors in the federal health-care system.

“Cannabis gave my vets hope back,” said Sean Kiernan of Weed for Warriors. “The state of California has taken that hope away.”

Some dispensaries, including A Therapeutic Alternative in Sacramento, also have compassionate care programs. Like the freestanding programs, dispensary-based compassion programs provide cannabis to low-income patients with serious illnesses.

Dispensary programs also face obstacles to donating weed, including taxes. Those taxes include a 15-percent state excise tax, local sales taxes that are about half that amount, and other local, pot-specific taxes.

Figuring out a way to make donating pot economically feasible “needs to be a top priority,” said Kimberly Cargile of A Therapeutic Alternative. “We need to take care of this right now.”

Many compassionate care programs have closed, stopped providing cannabis or gone underground since Jan. 1, according to members of the California Compassion Coalition, which recently was formed to fight for change in state laws and regulations.

“What is holding us back is the current taxation on donated medicine,” said Josef Airone of Sweetleaf Collective, which treats Bay Area AIDS and cancer patients. “We gave away approximately 120 pounds of cannabis last year. To do that this year, we will need to pay $200,000 In taxes. This is not feasible.”

The California Compassion Coalition has asked that taxes be charged on the actual cost of goods, not the market value, or waived altogether. They made that and other requests last week in Sacramento during subcommittee meetings of an advisory body of the state’s three cannabis regulatory agencies.

Subcommittee members stressed that taxation likely falls out of the regulatory authority of the agencies and would have to be taken up by the Legislature. A recommendation was made that the agencies ask for legislative help.

One area where the agencies can act without legislation is the need for compassionate care program participants to have a state medical marijuana recommendation card. Advocates say relatively few people have obtained the cards because of the long wait needed to get them through county health departments and asked that a regular doctor’s recommendation suffice.

The Bureau of Cannabis Control regulations require patients receiving free pot to have a state-issued medical marijuana card. The cards allow patients to get a break on sales taxes, 8.25 percent in Sacramento, but they also cost as much as $100, depending on the county.

The coalition also wants the state to create an affordable license for compassionate care programs. Currently, cannabis donations can only be made by holders of business licenses that cost thousands of dollars, depending on the type of permit and where the program is located.

Shirley Stewart, who treats her cancer with cannabis, told subcommittee members last week that people like her need help desperately.

“People with serious medical needs are being pushed aside,” she said. “We need your help and we need it now.”


Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/health-and-medicine/article203196174.html#storylink=cpy
 
I'm rather sympathetic to Weedmaps as it seems that one of the great unanswerable philosophical questions currently facing mankind is "what the fuck is a legal shop in CA these days?" LOL


California threatens Weedmaps over promotion of illegal cannabis shops


California’s cannabis czar issued a cease and desist order to Weedmaps, directing the Irvine internet company that maps marijuana dispensaries to immediately stop promoting businesses that don’t have state licenses.

“You are aiding and abetting in violation of state cannabis laws,” states the letter from Lori Ajax, chief of the Bureau of Cannabis Control.

If the company doesn’t immediately drop advertisements for unlicensed businesses, Ajax said Weedmaps could face criminal and civil penalties, including civil fines for each illegal ad.

The warning is the only cease and desist letter sent by the state to an advertising company, according to bureau spokesman Alex Traverso. But it’s one of more than 900 such letters sent by his agency to unlicensed marijuana businesses since recreational weed sales were allowed to start and licensing requirements kicked in Jan. 1.

Traverso said many of those 900-plus black market shops were discovered on Weedmaps.

Tustin resident Justin Hartfield founded Weedmaps in 2007 with company CEO Doug Francis. The site and its app help visitors find dispensaries and browse their menus, with shops rated much like other businesses are rated on Yelp.

Weedmaps has grown into an international juggernaut, with offices from Denver to Berlin. But much of that business has been built on ad revenue from unlicensed dispensaries. For example, on Wednesday, the app included 20 ads for marijuana dispensaries in Anaheim, even though all cannabis businesses are banned in that city.

Weedmaps didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on the letter. But during a February interview, company president Christopher Beals remained defiant on the issue of accepting ads from black market shops.

“The thing is, at the end of the day, we’re an information platform,” Beals said. “We’re showing the same information that Google and Yelp and Craigslist and 30 other websites are showing.”

Beals said he believes it’s up to states and cities to put in a solid regulatory framework and to permit enough licensed marijuana businesses to meet demand. That’s the only way to control the illegal market, he said.

“To sort of say, ‘Let’s pretend an illegal market doesn’t exist’ or that people can’t just type ‘dispensary’ into Google and find this information… isn’t really realistic.”

A Weedmaps competitor, Leafly.com – which also maps dispensaries along with ranking strains and offering other cannabis-related information – announced it was ditching ads from unlicensed shops as of March 1.

“The California state government has made clear that only licensed retailers and delivery services may advertise via technology platforms,” stated a Feb. 7 press release from Leafly announcing the decision.

Ajax sent Weedmaps the cease and desist letter on Feb. 16. Industry news site Marijuana Business Daily first reported the news Wednesday.

The letter explains that, under Senate Bill 94, any ads for marijuana retailers must include a California license number showing they’re permitted by state and local authorities. The number also ensures that, when regulations are fully in place later this year, all cannabis sold by that retailer has been tested for safety, properly labeled and more.

“This differs in no way than requiring a contractor to list their state contractor’s license number or a real estate broker to list their license number,” said Aaron Herzberg, a cannabis industry attorney who’s part owner of two licensed shops in Santa Ana.

Herzberg pushed to have the advertising language written into state law after personally seeing how difficult it was for legal shops to compete with the gray market while companies like Weedmaps made no attempt to help shoppers distinguish between the two.

“We’re starting to see more and more licensed cannabis businesses that invest millions of dollars and go through the process to do things the right way and to pay their taxes — which they have to pay a lot of — those businesses are demanding that individuals who don’t follow the law be put out of business,” Herzberg said.

Of the more than 900 cease and desist letters sent to California businesses, Traverso said around 375 were in response to complaints his agency has received.

Herzberg sees the lack of compliance by Weedmaps as ironic, considering the Irvine company was one of the biggest financial backers of legalizing and regulating marijuana in California through Proposition 64. The company also supports regulation efforts throughout the country and overseas.

Before Prop. 64 fully kicked in Jan. 1, Herzberg said Weedmaps may have had somewhat of a leg to stand on, since there was no licensing system in place to readily distinguish between illegal shops and dispensaries that were arguably allowed under California’s medical marijuana laws. That’s akin to the argument used in the past by companies like Backpage.com when it was pressured to police prostitution rings using its website to front as escort services.

But now that all marijuana businesses in California are required to provide their state license numbers, Herzberg said the only justification for continuing to run ads without them would seem to be a financial one.

“I think that Weedmaps is being a very poor corporate citizen,” he said. “It just undermines under the system of regulation that Weedmaps was a proponent for in the first place.”

Sacramento officials also wrote a letter in early February calling for both Weedmaps and local newspaper Sacramento News & Review to stop promoting unpermitted shops in their city, the Sacramento Business Journal reported. A city official there told Marijuana Business Daily that they hadn’t heard back from the company as of Wednesday.

Ajax has said that her agency planned to give companies time to adjust to the state’s new marijuana laws before it started enforcement proceedings.

“As of right now, like with the unlicensed operators, we’re communicating with Weedmaps,” Traverso said. “There is no immediate action planned.”

In the meantime, it looks like business as usual at Weedmaps.com, with hundreds of dispensaries listed throughout the state even though our database of local policies shows they’re permitted in fewer than 20 percent of California cities.
 
California Bureau of Cannabis Control Issues Cease-and-Desist, Weedmaps Replies

Last week, it was reported that the California Bureau of Cannabis Control issued a cease-and-desist to Weedmaps, Marijuana.com’s parent company, on the grounds that the website and smartphone application advertises cannabis dispensaries and delivery services that are unlicensed by the state.

Weedmaps responded to the notice from bureau chief Lori Ajax on Monday, stressing the importance of lifting local bans and calling into question the bureau’s “authority to make the company stop running advertisements for unlicensed pot retailers,” as reported by The Sacramento Bee.

The company’s CEO Doug Francis and president Chris Beals wrote a letter to Ajax pointing out that the business doesn’t fall under the Bureau’s jurisdiction.

“Weedmaps is a technology company and an interactive computer service which is subject to certain federally preemptive protections under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act and is also not a Licensee subject to the Bureau’s purview,” the letter stated, citing the Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA) and California regulations.

Bureau chief Ajax contends that Weedmaps is “engaging in activity that violates state cannabis laws” when it allows illegal businesses to advertise to the public. The bureau compared Weedmaps listings to license records on file with the state to determine whether the platform was violating California cannabis law.

Pursuant to the provisions of the Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA), a valid state license from a state licensing authority is required to legally operate a commercial cannabis business within the State of California. This includes the retail sale and delivery of cannabis and cannabis products. Your website contains advertisements from persons offering cannabis and cannabis products for sale that are not licensed to conduct commercial cannabis activity; therefore, you are aiding and abetting in violations of state cannabis laws.

Bureau chief Ajax received complaints from licensed facilities who were unhappy with the leg-up unlicensed shops enjoy because they don’t pay taxes or regulatory fees, and those complaints prompted the letter to Weedmaps.

“The legal businesses in the regulated commercial cannabis industry face higher costs than those who do not comply with the law,” Ajax said. “Unlicensed businesses are openly advertising on technology platforms and print media. Further, unlicensed activity puts the public at risk as the health and safety provisions, such as testing, are not in place.”

Beals told the Los Angeles Times, “We were under the impression that the bureau would focus on getting people licensed before they moved on toward attempting enforcement.”

In their response, Weedmaps pointed to widespread ignorance of voter will by local governments across the state for the unlicensed status of most dispensaries and deliveries.

“Nearly 85% of California cities and counties do not permit licensure for cannabis business operators. In many cases, the operators who have not had the opportunity to obtain licensure are the only ones providing access for medical patients in large parts of the state, and this is only compounded by the fact that local governments are continuing to place restrictions on home cultivation that run contrary to California law.”

Though marijuana officially became legal in California on January 1, the language of the state’s recreational cannabis laws places the responsibility of implementing regulatory framework on local bodies of government. The state is currently operating under emergency regulations that have resulted in 85 percent of cities and towns in the state not permitting cannabis business licenses to be issued.
 
San Francisco embraces Amsterdam-style marijuana lounges

SAN FRANCISCO — The smoke was thick and business brisk at the Barbary Coast Dispensary’s marijuana smoking lounge, a darkened room that resembles a steakhouse or upscale sports tavern with its red leather seats, deep booths with high dividers, and hardwood floors.

“There’s nothing like this in Jersey,” said grinning Atlantic City resident Rick Thompson, getting high with his cousins in San Francisco.

In fact, there’s nothing like the Barbary Coast lounge almost anywhere in the United States, a conundrum confronting many marijuana enthusiasts who find it increasingly easy to buy pot but harder to find legal places to smoke it.

Only California permits marijuana smoking at marijuana retailers with specially designed lounges. But it also allows cities to ban those kids of shops.

Unsurprisingly, San Francisco is the trailblazer. It’s the only city in the state to fully embrace Amsterdam-like coffee shops, the iconic tourist stops in the Netherlands where people can buy and smoke marijuana in the same shop.

San Francisco’s marijuana “czar” Nicole Elliot said new permits will be issued once city health officials finalize regulations designed to protect workers from secondhand smoke and the neighborhood from unwelcomed odors. The lounges are required to install expensive heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems to prevent the distinct marijuana odor from leaking outside.

Other California cities are warming to the idea. Oakland and South Lake Tahoe each have one smoking lounge.

The city of West Hollywood has approved plans to issue up to eight licenses; the tiny San Francisco Bay Area town of Alameda said it will allow two; and Oakland and South Lake Tahoe each have one lounge. Sacramento, Los Angeles and other cities are discussing the issue but have not authorized any lounges.

Jackie Rocco, the city of Los Angeles’ business development manager, said residents and cannabis businesses complain there is “no safe place, no legal place, to use it.”

Rocco said Los Angeles officials envision smoking lounges set up like traditional bars, but for now the idea is more concept than plan.

Meanwhile, lawmakers and officials in other states are dithering over the issue.

Massachusetts marijuana regulators considered approval of “cannabis cafes.” But the proposal came under withering criticism from Republican Gov. Charlie Baker’s administration and law enforcement officials, who claimed among other things that opening such businesses would lead to more dangerously stoned drivers.

The five-member Cannabis Control Commission ultimately yielded to pressure by agreeing to put off a decision on licensing any cafes until after the initial rollout of retail marijuana operations, expected this summer. Members of the panel, however, continue to support the idea.

“Those who wish to consume cannabis are going to do so whether social sites exist or not, and are going to make driving decisions regardless of where they consume,” said Jim Borghesani, spokesman for the Massachusetts chapter of the pro-legalization Marijuana Policy Project. “Social sites will simply give cannabis users the same options available to alcohol users.”

In Colorado, one of the first states to broadly legalize, lawmakers failed in a close vote to make so-called “tasting rooms” legal. However, cities may do it, and Denver has authorized lounges where consumers bring their own marijuana, issuing a single permit so far.

Nevada has put off a vote on the issue until next year, while lawmakers in Alaska and Oregon have considered and rejected legislation.

San Francisco has allowed medical marijuana patients to smoke in dispensaries for years, though there was uncertainty over whether the practice was authorized when California voters in 1996 made the state the first in the nation to legalize cannabis use with a doctor’s recommendation.

The Barbary Coast, which received its state license in January, first opened as a small medical dispensary in 2013. It expanded and opened its smoking lounge to medical users last year. On Jan. 11, the shop opened to all adults when it received its California recreational use license. The state started issuing those on Jan. 1 and continues to approve dozens of applications a month since voters broadly legalized the use and sale of marijuana.

Thompson traveled from Atlantic City to celebrate his 27th birthday with his cousins, who live in Oakland. They decided to celebrate in style, getting as high as they could in San Francisco.

The three 20-somethings bought a variety of buds and the quick-acting “wax,” a potent pot concentrate, and settled into a booth with all the accoutrement they needed. After customers purchase at least $40 worth of product, the Barbary Coast will supply bongs, joint rollers, “rigs” for wax smoking and just about any smoking tool desired.

They smoked and debated the merits of smoking buds versus wax. The verdict: There’s something innately satisfying about smoking buds, but wax gives a quicker high even if it requires a hotter flame and more elaborate setup to smoke.

Barbary is in a once-rundown neighborhood that is gentrifying. Two other dispensaries with smoke lounges are three blocks away. Three flat-screen televisions tuned to sports hang on the lounge’s brick walls. Outside the enclosed room, customers line up at the dispensary’s glass counters to buy marijuana.

General manager Jesse Henry said Barbary’s owners plan to open a bigger store and smoking lounge about a mile away, across the street from a popular concert hall, after city health officials finalize regulations for on-site consumption.

“This city is built for tourists,” Henry said. “We put a lot of work into giving them a San Francisco experience.”
 
I live in a legal state (WA state). We.had a bar that wanted to implement this. He had a separate area upstairs for a cannabis lounge. He refused to shut down so the county and the state shut him down and cost him thousands of dollars. A lot of cannabis users would like this but the lawmakers have sabotaged it at every turn in WA. Lounges aren’t allowed in OR either. Something the cannabis advocates have been working on. Lawmakers are really against this. They are afraid folks will be driving while buzzed. It’s pretty rediculious.

CA good luck.
 
California considers lower taxes on pot to help new legal industry compete with black market

Alarmed that California's fledgling legal marijuana industry is being undercut by the black market, a group of lawmakers proposed Thursday to reduce state taxes for three years on growing and selling cannabis to allow licensed sellers to get on their feet.

With many California license holders claiming they can't compete because of high state and local taxes, the new legislation would cut the state excise tax from 15% to 11% and suspend a cultivation tax that charges $148 per pound.

"Criminals do not pay business taxes, ensure consumers are 21 and over, obtain licenses or follow product safety regulations," said Assemblyman Tom Lackey (R-Palmdale), one of five legislators pushing the bill. "We need to give legal businesses some temporary tax relief so they do not continue to be undercut by the black market."

California voters approved the 15% tax when they passed Proposition 64 in 2016, allowing legal growing, distribution and sales of marijuana for recreational use and requiring state licenses for the continued sale of pot for medical purposes. License holders began growing and selling pot on Jan. 1.


California's licensed pot sellers want the state to crack down on illegal competitors >>

Legal growers say the excise and grower's taxes are a burden on top of local taxes adopted by cities and counties, as well as a sales tax that is as high as 9.2% in some counties. Combined, taxes can raise the price of marijuana sold legally by up to 45%, according to the Fitch credit rating agency.

That is a major disadvantage, industry leaders say, especially when the state soon will begin charging a $1,000 license processing fee.

The temporary suspension of state taxes will "help level the playing field," between the legal and underground marijuana markets, according to Hezekiah Allen, executive director of the cannabis trade group California Growers Assn.

"This a huge step in the right direction," Allen said. "Right now, thousands of California businesses are struggling with one-time costs of regulatory compliance. These businesses are at a significant disadvantage to unregulated operators who are continuing to operate in the unregulated market and are not incurring their costs."

California's pot regulator warns 900 marijuana shops that they must stop operating without a state license >>

Although the 15% tax was set by Proposition 64, the Legislature is not required to go back to the ballot to reduce the assessment. The ballot measure allows the Legislature to amend the tax by way of a two-thirds vote as long as it furthers the intent of the proposition, which Lackey and others say their proposal will do by reducing the black market.

The tax reduction should give the legal pot industry new vigor, said Beau Whitney, senior economist at New Frontier Data, a data analytics firm focused on the cannabis industry.

The new legislation "will lower the overall price for consumers at the register, which will also reduce the differential between illicit and legal prices," he said.

Updates from Sacramento »

Financial experts have estimated the legal industry could bring the state coffers $1 billion annually in tax revenue, though Gov. Jerry Brown's estimate for the fiscal year beginning July 1 is $643 million.

While the new legislation could blast a hole in the governor's budget projections, a spokesman for Brown declined Thursday to comment on the bill, saying the governor typically does not comment on pending legislative proposals.

Companies getting state licenses to grow, distribute and sell marijuana under tough regulations are making significant investments in establishing operations and deserve help, said Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Oakland), another leading author of AB 3157.

The bill, Bonta said, would lower tax burdens during the current transition period, "keeping customers at licensed stores and helping ensure the regulated market survives and thrives."
 
Interesting article from WaPo with some great pics.


Outlaw weed comes into the light
Humboldt County, the heart of California’s dark marijuana economy, is facing a new market force: legalization.


The quaint town plaza here is lined with locally owned stores, their names and products recalling the post-Flower Power migration from San Francisco decades ago: Moonrise Herbs, Heart Bead, Hemp Recycled Solutions.

The shops trade largely in cash with customers who are paid in cash — the marijuana growers, distributors and “trimmigrants,” seasonal workers who cut back the flowering plants for market each autumn. But business is stalling as marijuana’s dark cash economy comes into the light, pushed by the state’s legalization of the drug earlier this year.

Humboldt County, traditionally shorthand for outlaw culture and the great dope it produces, is facing a harsh reckoning. Every trait that made this strip along California’s wild northwest coast the best place in the world to grow pot is now working against its future as a producer in the state’s $7 billion-a-year marijuana market.

A massive industry never before regulated is being tamed by laws and taxation, characteristically extensive in this state. Nowhere is this process upending a culture and economy more than here in Humboldt, where tens of thousands of people who have been breaking the law for years are being asked to hire accountants, tax lawyers and declare themselves to a government they have famously distrusted.

“We’re at that moment in the movie ‘Thelma and Louise’ when they have driven the car off the cliff,” said Scott Greacen, a longtime Humboldt resident and environmentalist who is both a supporter and critic of the marijuana trade. “We’re just waiting for the impact.”

Fewer than 1 in 10 of the county’s estimated 12,500 marijuana farmers are likely to make it in the legal trade. Growers who have anticipated legalization are preparing for a shift from badlands to boutique, a cultural transformation they hope will make this county a destination to visit for its rich history, artisanal strains of cannabis, and matchless natural beauty.

The shift, already underway with property values falling and growers departing, will be painful and unfamiliar. Marketing and consulting operations are appearing, along with logos branding various marijuana strains. Even the local terminology is changing. “Cannabis” is now the preferred public term for “marijuana,” though in casual conversation it is still just “weed.”

imrs.php
Basil Tolson lights up in Arcata, Calif. Tolson, who lives in Kentucky, said he appreciates the medical benefits of cannabis and hopes it will become legal in his home state.
Once prized, Humboldt’s remoteness is a drawback in the age of legal pot, and the industry is moving to meet California’s population. Places to the south that have never been known for marijuana production — such as Santa Barbara and Salinas — are licensing hundreds of greenhouse growers to take advantage of proximity to roads, rails and airports for distribution.

But the state licensing process is slow, threatening a fledgling legal marijuana economy by failing to eliminate a stubborn illegal one quickly enough. Of the state’s projected $4 billion legal marijuana market, industry experts say at least that much is still being supplied by illegal growers who can charge lower prices.

Less than 1 percent of the estimated 69,000 growers statewide have received a permit to farm marijuana since the beginning of the year. Thousands more are in the works, but nowhere near the total number of those now cultivating cannabis; any cannabis farmer operating without a license is cultivating illegally, and government officials could begin enforcing the law when the growing season begins in the next six weeks.

The state has issued more than 2,000 licenses to about 600 growers this year, some of whom hold dozens of them. These already-licensed growers will produce about 4.1 million pounds of marijuana annually — almost double the demand for legal weed, with tens of thousands of farmers still deciding what to do. Growers in Humboldt County, an area the size of Connecticut, produce enough marijuana each year to supply the state’s entire legal market.

The glut in legal and illegal supply has kicked the bottom out of prices at a time when small growers most need the money to begin complying with California’s stiff regulatory demands. At the same time, the state’s licensing of retail shops has been slow, leaving a lot of legal product without a legal place to be sold.

Marijuana from Humboldt that used to sell for $1,200 a pound three years ago is now selling at a 75 percent discount. State officials and many growers predict the vast overproduction will be curtailed by the new rules, likely by consolidating cultivation among large agriculture companies that can afford the regulations.

“The future of weed in Humboldt County will not be in its production,” said Mikal Jakubal, who owns a cannabis nursery in the south end of the county. “We’ll become the Napa Valley of weed. But we’re going to see a rough transition for a lot of people, and then this place will gentrify.”

imrs.php
A creek flows into the Eel River in Humboldt County. Humboldts economy first relied on once-plentiful salmon.
‘In it for the money’
Before pot, there were fish and timber.

Humboldt’s economy first relied on the salmon that ran in the Mattole and Eel rivers, so plentiful once that canneries lined the Eel’s mouth as it emptied into the Pacific Ocean and the shores of Humboldt Bay just to the north. Then came the logging of the pines, firs and redwoods. Lumber mills, disused for years, sit along the roads and streams that run through Humboldt’s thickly forested hills.

The population grew and changed in the 1970s, when disaffected hippies migrated north, a “back to the land” exodus from the Bay Area that brought a contempt for government ethos here. Marijuana emerged as the county’s next-generation commodity.

There is no reason people chose Humboldt to grow marijuana other than that Humboldt, as a society, allowed it to be grown. The same was true for neighboring Trinity and Mendocino counties. Collectively, the three are known as the “Emerald Triangle,” a globally renowned pot paradise.

imrs.php
imrs.php
imrs.php

CLOCKWISE FROM TOP LEFT: The Eel River shines beyond a canopy of redwoods. Environmentalists are concerned about the effects of cannabis cultivation. In California’s dry summer months, which is the cannabis growing season, farms draw down the Eel and Mattole rivers to dangerously low levels. Lumber was once part of a boom economy in Humboldt. Some speculate that cannabis legalization will lead to the end of the cannabis boom here.
Swami Chaitanya has been growing marijuana on a farm in Mendocino County for 15 years, drawing water from the Blue Rock Creek, a tributary of the protected Eel River.

He called the traditional marijuana economy one of “shared risk,” where everyone on the farm-to-joint supply chain could be busted if just one were caught. He felt protected by that shared risk in a way he no longer does after declaring himself to the state.

“The location of the farm was the one thing no one could mention; it was the biggest secret in the business,” said Chaitanya, who has spent nearly $40,000 in the permitting process. “Our whole attitude toward the government has always been ‘Come and get me.’ ”

Chaitanya arrived along with thousands of other growers after state voters approved Proposition 215 in 1996, which made marijuana legal for medical use. The law opened a gray market for pot that made it virtually impossible to crack down on illegal “grows.”

The farms moved farther into the forests, and with them came the environmental damage from illegal road-building and water consumption driven by a water-intensive, unregulated crop.

“Marijuana was just something you didn’t talk about openly,” said Mark Lovelace, referring to the political climate when he joined the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors in 2008.

imrs.php
imrs.php
imrs.php

CLOCKWISE FROM TOP: A worker is silhouetted by grow lights in a cannabis barn at Winterbourne Farm in Honeydew. Marijuana from Humboldt that used to sell for $1,200 a pound three years ago is now selling at a 75 percent discount. | “The free market is going to drive people out of those hills,” Mark Lovelace said. “They won’t be able to make money there anymore.“
The huge spike in cultivation drew public concerns about rising crime and environmental impact, which was increasingly obvious. Many of the cannabis migrants were far less back-to-the-land than in-it-for-the-money, and the politics around pot began to shift.

“The grows and the people doing them became very in your face,” Lovelace said. “Now, though, the free market is going to drive people out of those hills. They won’t be able to make money there anymore.”

Greenhouses made growing anywhere possible, and many of those more recently cultivated places have required makeshift roads and hilltop grading to connect them with markets. Aerial shots show once-pristine ridgelines pocked with bald patches, grows that more closely resemble mining operations than agriculture.

But local law enforcement was ill-equipped to take on what even marijuana enthusiasts could see as an industry running wild. Medical marijuana use had given many farmers a legal cover to grow — it was nearly impossible to prove they were not producing for the medical market — and local law enforcement agencies have never been big enough to police Humboldt’s armed and hidden industry.

Sheriff William Honsal, a police officer’s son known locally as Billy, grew up in Humboldt as the county cannabis industry exploded.

“You had people coming here, many in organized crime, that just wanted to suck as much out of this county as they could,” he said.

Local law enforcement carried out raids by helicopter — tactical teams fast-roping down onto pot farms — backed by long police convoys that churned up the dirt roads. Those operations were more symbolic than substantive, numbering roughly 100 a year in a county with more than 10,000 growing operations.

Now Honsal has state law and more effective tools to use — civil penalties rather than criminal. No longer is there a gray market for marijuana; growers either have a permit to cultivate or they do not. If they do not, a $10,000-a-day fine can be levied against them for each violation and, after 90 days, a lien attached to the property.

“We are very happy that the lines are drawn as black and white,” Honsal said. “There’s too much risk and not enough reward, and in years past here, it was the opposite.”

imrs.php
Stephanie Tidwell, executive director of the nonprofit Friends of the Eel River, paddles the Eel.
‘Lost Boys’ and lost fisheries
The south fork of the Eel River, protected by state and federal law, runs through Humboldt’s marijuana heartland. The color of dull copper, it flows swiftly after a recent storm despite an ongoing drought, snow appearing auspiciously on the top of Rainbow Ridge.

But the river’s color is a problem, even if the depth of its channel this time of year is where it should be. Silt clouds the current as it runs through valleys heavy with marijuana cultivation, which both draws water from the river and fills it with runoff that stifles the once-thriving Coho, Steelhead and Chinook salmon populations.

Greacen, the environmentalist, works for the nonprofit Friends of the Eel River. With the group’s executive director, Stephanie Tidwell, the two guided a few kayaks down the south fork recently, through giant redwoods and invisible cannabis plantations, like those in Panther Gap that Greacen said hold “more weed than you’ve ever seen.”

“They’re like the ‘Lost Boys’ up there,” he said, citing Peter Pan’s clan to characterize the oddball collection of Brazilians, Spaniards, Portuguese and others who have grown up high in the hills for decades.

Greacen first arrived in Humboldt nearly 30 years ago to participate in the fight over commercial logging in the Headwaters Forest, ancient and now protected. The demonstrations marked Humboldt as a hive of environmental activism.

But as marijuana cultivation grew exponentially in the “green rush” following Proposition 215, pot and environmental protection have come into conflict. The consequences of growing marijuana where it should not be grown have been devastating.

In California’s dry summer months, which is the cannabis growing season, farms draw down the Eel and Mattole, along with their tributaries, to dangerously low levels. “You could walk this whole thing in the summer,” Greacen said of the south fork.

The larger problem is the sediment that runs off the illegally graded farms and into the rivers.

Along the south fork of the Eel, it is easy to see the contrast. The kayaks loop around a bend and, where Bull Creek empties into it from a thick stand of forest, the water is as clear as vodka. As salmon run upstream, they must increasingly find these creeks, cold and clear, in place of the Eel itself to spawn successfully.

“Salmon Creek no longer has any salmon in it because there is so much dirt at the bottom,” Greacen said. Regarding Coho salmon, Greacen said, “If we lose them in the south fork, then we lose them in the Eel, and if we lose them in the Eel, then we lose them in the region.”

imrs.php
Water from a stream merges with the sediment-dense Eel River, clogged by runoff from illegally graded pot farms.
New state regulations seek to address water use, at least for those growers who decide to become legal. Runoff will be measured now, and growers fined sharply for violations.

Growers eventually will be required to build water tanks or ponds that will allow them to store water in the wet winter months and use it, rather than rivers, in the dry growing season.

“With water here, it’s feast or famine,” said Cris Carrigan, director of the Office of Enforcement at the State Water Resources Control Board. “The focus here is to help cultivators take advantage of the times of feast so they do not have to exercise their diversion rights in times of famine.”

On the banks of Redwood Creek, which feeds the Eel’s south fork, Jakubal has been preparing his nursery for legalization for several years.

Bald, wiry with a buzzing energy, Jakubal listed several pending projects that he said will make him more competitive in the legal economy.

In front of his property, the creek has been slowed by fallen trees and roots, intentionally placed with the assistance of an environmental consultant to form a natural pool. The slowed stream creates a salmon habitat and a water source from which Jakubal can draw in wet months.

He rarely needs to, and never in the summer. He built a 250,000-gallon catchment pool at the foot of his property, which he uses to fill several large storage tanks near his greenhouses at the top of it. But across the creek are two other farms, neither of which has made any water storage preparation.

imrs.php
Mikal Jakubal examines a diversion on Redwood Creek, an important habitat for salmon, in Humboldt County.
Jakubal’s business, Plant Humboldt, sells strains of young cannabis plants to growers, and the economics, even in this changing market, are good. There will be a retail side soon, with legalization allowing every adult to grow as many as six plants without a license.

Inside his greenhouses sit hundreds of inch-high plants in small plastic trays, which bear handwritten labels identifying strains such as “Pineapple MG” and “Dream Queen.” With little overhead, apart from the $22 an hour he pays his small crew of workers, Jakubal sells thousands of plants each year for as much as $50 each.

Meeting the new state regulations and paying taxes will cut into that by a sizable chunk. But Jakubal said that in his niche market he could increase business fivefold as Humboldt’s industry shifts from mass production to specialty items.

“We’re providing an experience here, a place people can come and pick their own plants,” he said. “There’s a history here, a culture here, and an incredible knowledge base. People will come to Humboldt County to get Humboldt strains from Humboldt growers.”

imrs.php
imrs.php
imrs.php

CLOCKWISE FROM TOP: Flowers bloom in Humboldt County. “People will come to Humboldt County to get Humboldt strains from Humboldt growers,” said Mikal Jakubal, who owns Plant Humboldt nursery. Inside Plant Humboldt nursery sit hundreds of inch-high plants with labels such as “Pineapple MG” and “Dream Queen.“
Innovation, and an enduring black market
“It’s important to acknowledge that this did not happen overnight,” said Scott Davies over a plate of sashimi at one of two sushi restaurants this town of 18,000 people supports on its thriving, if still largely illegal, economy.

Davies is the face of modern Humboldt cannabis: close-cropped graying hair, stylish glasses, a grandfather pot farmer whose business already complies with environmental regulations. For years, he has been preparing for his thriving family business to be legal.

Yes, the new regulations, or any regulations at all, appear overwhelming to many of his colleagues. But surprise, including surprise from state officials that more growers are not complying, is no excuse for not being ready for what is unfolding.

Related
“Cannabis will be everywhere”
“At every level in this process, the learning curve is at its steepest right now,” said Davies, 50, who moved to southern Humboldt County three decades ago to farm marijuana.

Davies’s main business is Winterbourne Farms, which spreads out along 40 acres next to the Mattole River. The operation produces as much as 1,500 pounds of cannabis a year and now employs his four children and son-in-law.

He has remade his business over the years. Where once he had to house and feed seasonal workers to harvest the crop, today he has turned manufacturing space in this city’s designated “Cannabis Innovation Zone” into a distribution hub.

His marketing of Humboldt marijuana, which he described traditionally as a mix of “dude bro” and “reggae” messaging, is as polished as a product from an elite craft brewery. “Humboldt Legends” comes in logoed bags containing a small pack of five joints inside, sealed with the commercial stamp of a state-regulated product. The retail cost for the pack is $26.

What Davies fears is the resilience of the illegal marijuana trade. He said until the state licenses enough cannabis shops — and cracks down on those selling illegally — retailers will continue buying from the black market “because it’s cheaper and because they can.”

“I don’t expect the black market to go away,” Davies said. “But I do expect not to have to compete with it in the regulated retail channel. In a world where all trade is in the black market, my skills mean nothing.”

imrs.php
Redwoods tower over Avenue of the Giants in Humboldt Redwoods State Park.
 

Humboldt County may reopen licensing for local cannabis businesses


One of the most well-known marijuana counties in the United States might soon be restarting its permitting system for local cannabis growers and other businesses that want to enter the legal market.

The board of supervisors in Humboldt County began discussion Monday about whether to reopen the licensing process for MJ companies, the Eureka Times-Standard reported.

Humboldt County, part of Northern California’s famed Emerald Triangle cannabis-growing region, stopped accepting license applications in December 2016.
No decision was expected immediately, according to a Times-Standard tweet, but the move could provide a path to licensure for thousands of growers.

And that, in turn, could have a major impact on the state’s cannabis supply chain.

The board of supervisors is also considering limiting the number of licenses to about 5,000, as well as an acreage cap of 1,250 per farm.

Although nothing has been finalized, the state Department of Fish and Wildlife recommended that the county cap the number of licensed marijuana farms at 4,792, though there are thousands more growers estimated to be already operating in Humboldt.
 
With Growers in the Shadows, California Faces Cannabis Shortage

It’s the opening chapter of California’s new era of regulated cannabis, and already a market disruption is underway.

Generally, retailers have ample product on store shelves for both adult use and medicinal cannabis consumers, but some brands are now in short supply. Prices are mostly stable, though new state taxes on legal purchases have meant sticker shock for customers.

Meanwhile, the black market appears to be thriving anew—invigorated by dissuasive taxes on growers, plus licensing fees and frustrations over difficulties of entering the legal economy. If more cultivators aren’t licensed by the state, manufacturers for cannabis concentrates for vape pens, waxes, and infused edibles fear they may run short of their critical production component – leafy cannabis trim – by summer.

“If more local jurisdictions don’t get their acts together and start licensing quickly, we’re going to have an issue with supply.”
Bryce Berryessa, cannabis business owner
Some state lawmakers, led by a pro-cannabis Republican, want to eliminate cultivation taxes to convince growers that the state-permitted cannabis economy is the way to go. But taxes aren’t the only obstacle. Cannabis industry advocates say a glut of local government bans on cannabis sales, cultivation and business, particularly delivery services, isn’t helping market stability.

“I would say in general, the manufacturers are very impacted, and the amount of farmers that don’t have licenses is a big change,” said Kenny Morrison, president of the California Cannabis Manufacturers Association and a licensed edibles and concentrates manufacturer and distributor. “And that is only a small part of the overall problem.”

To understand the early-onset confusion in America’s largest cannabis economy is to know this: Many old friends in the industry are now having trouble doing business with each other.


RELATED STORY
California’s High Cannabis Tax Could Doom Legalization. Here’s a Fix

At Canna Care, a medical-only dispensary in Sacramento, purchasing manager Don Davies used to rely on a stable of medicinal growers registered as cultivators for the dispensary’s collective. Now one of his most loyal growers—a friend who consistently provided him with potent, high-grade cannabis for $2,500 a pound—hasn’t been able to get a state cultivation license.

Other former Canna Care growers have had trouble partnering with licensed cannabis distribution companies, Davies said.

“We have lost people that we have literally worked with for years,” Davies said. “They are now off the list because they are no longer state-certified.”


RELATED STORY
Report: 99% of California Cannabis Growers Are Still Unlicensed

Instead, soon after the Jan. 1 dawn of California’s regulated era, a cannabis distribution company came offering Davies similar quality cannabis compared to what he used to buy from long-time business partners. He says the distributor “wanted $3,200 to $3,600 a pound,” telling him it needed to cover state taxes and fees accumulating along the supply line.

Davies balked at the prices. But good fortune followed. The distributor found few buyers and came back with a decidedly better offer: $2,300 a pound, a market godsend to help stabilize the dispensary’s prices.

“Right now, we don’t have any clones. Normally, we have several racks of them.”
Katie Rabinowitz, Magnolia Wellness
Still, at retailer Magnolia Wellness in Oakland, which is licensed for medical and adult-use sales, there are frustrations. General manager Katie Rabinowitz says the dispensary’s normally ready supply of cannabis clones for at-home cultivators have virtually disappeared due a supply disruption from nurseries still navigating the state permitting process.

“Right now, we don’t have any clones,” Rabinowitz said. “Normally, we have several racks of them, each with six-plus trays with 40 to 50 per tray.”

Magnolia Wellness has maintained its supply of cannabis flower, albeit working with some different cultivators than before amid the slow march to state licensing. Rabinowitz says the dispensary has cut prices of some brands to ease consumers’ added burden of multiplying taxes, including a 15% excise tax on sales.

With Oakland as a major manufacturing center, Magnolia Wellness has maintained supplies of many popular cannabis foods and vape products. But overall, its concentrate selections are down 10% to 15% in terms of choices offered.

“For some of our patients who have loyalty to a certain brand or company, that’s where we’ve had some negative sides to this,” Rabinowitz said of the shortages. “But overall, we were able to stock up with inventory, and some of our top-selling brands have their licenses.”


RELATED STORY
California Bill Would Temporarily Cut State Cannabis Taxes

In Southern California, Chris Francy, operator of the Bud and Bloom and OC3 retail stores in Santa Ana, says his shelves are packed with products for medical and adult-use consumers. There is no shortage, he said, but significant changes in what’s available.

“It is still easy to fill up a big store with products,” Francy said. “But it is just that not all of the brand names have been able to move forward yet” into the regulated era.

Francy says his dispensaries are carrying more pre-packaged cannabis flower from branded producers over boutique buds from smaller farmers. Many of his edible and concentrate selections are also different than last year.

“We’re definitely in flux. Some of our brands haven’t been able to jump the gap with licensing or strike a deal with distributors,” he said. “Certain brands have gone offline.”

Overall, the state’s Bureau of Cannabis Control says it isn’t hearing of any significant shortages for California cannabis consumers so far.

But Morrison of the Manufacturers Association says the Golden State is plagued with “cannabis deserts”—vast regions with few retail offerings, particular due to a crash in the cannabis delivery economy as hundreds of unregulated delivery drivers haven’t found cities willing to license them.


RELATED STORY
This Map Reveals California’s Hidden Prohibition Problem

Hezekiah Allen, executive director of the California Growers Association, says local bans on cannabis cultivation could take a toll on the market.

While Allen says currently “there is no shortage of regulated flower out there,” he worries that long-term supply problems could loom because cultivators in more than two-thirds of California “are unable to get a permit because of local bans.”

He said a dramatic political change of heart in one county alone—Calaveras—to ban commercial cultivation after widely licensing cannabis farms may alone have removed 10% of cannabis flower and leaf from the regulated market.


RELATED STORY
How a Cannabis Ban Turned One California County Into ‘Ground Zero for Chaos’

Meanwhile, Tom Lackey, a Republican Assemblyman from Palmdale and former California Highway Patrol captain, says California is in serious danger of taxing itself into potentially severe market shortages of cannabis product by summer.

“There is no gray area on this issue. You either help people who are trying to get into the regulated system or you’re supporting the black market.”
Assemblyman Tom Lackey
Along with Oakland Democrat Rob Bonta, Lackey has introduced legislation to eliminate state cultivation taxes on cannabis farmers for three years and cut the excise tax on sales from 15% to 11% to entice more producers into the legal market.

Due to state levies on farmers of $148 per pound for cannabis flower and $44 per pound for leaf, Lackey says many growers are remaining in the illegal market—or worse, fleeing to it.

“The small growers will be the first ones to be eliminated,” Lackey said. “It is difficult enough for them in trying to follow the rules and we’re choking them out. … There is no gray area on this issue. You either help people who are trying to get into the regulated system or you’re supporting the black market.”


RELATED STORY
California’s Limit on Big Growers Just Vanished. Here’s Why

Bryce Berryessa, owner of the TreeHouse dispensary in Santa Cruz and La Vida Verde, a Watsonville cannabis foods and concentrates company, is unnerved in different ways by California’s regulatory launch.

In Santa Cruz, he has lost business relationships with farmers still unable to get local licenses and is now importing flower for growers in other counties. His licensed manufacturing company stocked up on plant trim and accelerated production in anticipation of the new regulated era. But he worries supplies may soon run thin.

“I think a lot of manufacturers stockpiled oil in anticipation of a possible glut in the marketplace,” Berryessa said. “So we haven’t felt an impact yet. However, if more local jurisdictions don’t get their acts together and start licensing quickly, we’re going to have an issue with supply.”
 
"California law mandates that cannabis consumers pay a city tax, sales tax, cultivation tax and state excise tax. In some places, this means a 45 percent tax on marijuana.

But even Berkeley’s lowered tax seems excessive. As marijuana shopper Robert Fracisco told CBS, “A 35% tax is pretty excessive for anything.”

Wow, IMO CA is busy making a complete mess of the transition from quasi-legal to regulated market....not the least of which is the very high taxes they are imposing which will not aid in ending illegal grows and the black market.

Also, these tax rate data points only reaffirm that the only thing that got our professional political class to more forward with what the electorate wants is the promise of more public money for them to spend on their interests groups who re-elect them. Its so fucked up.



California City Lowers Its Sales Tax on Recreational Cannabis
This California city lowers its sales tax on recreational cannabis to keep buyers away from the black market.

This week, a California city lowers its sales tax on recreational cannabis to compete with the black market. Officials in Berkeley, California argue that tax-abiding marijuana dispensaries aren’t able to offer the same low pricing as black market dealers due to the state’s heavy tax program.

Details About The Tax Cut
The tax on recreational marijuana went from 10 percent to 5 percent this week. This tax reduction is only on the city-level. Including state taxes, the total tax on marijuana in Berkeley will be 30 percent. While this might seem high, it’s actually one of the lowest tax rates in the country.

California law mandates that cannabis consumers pay a city tax, sales tax, cultivation tax and state excise tax. In some places, this means a 45 percent tax on marijuana.

But even Berkeley’s lowered tax seems excessive. As marijuana shopper Robert Fracisco told CBS, “A 35% tax is pretty excessive for anything.”

Why Berkeley Lowered Their Tax On Marijuana
Legal cannabis sales in California are dwindling while the black market is experiencing a boom in business. A few months after legalization, people are less excited about legal weed and more interested in lower prices. Illegal marijuana sold online can be $20 less than what you find at a dispensary.

Fracisco explains why people aren’t buying at dispensaries as much, “The taxes I think are what’s driving people not to come to the club anymore. I know a lot of my friends who used to come to the clubs are going back to the black market.”


Marijuana Taxes Are Hurting Legal Weed Businesses
Many are concerned that these taxes cut too deep for marijuana dispensaries’ clientele. Not only does this put businesses in danger, but the state doesn’t make as much in tax dollars as expected.

In Colorado, marijuana sales top a billion dollars of taxable revenue. With a 15 percent tax rate in most places—higher in some!—Colorado has had plenty of funds to spend on education and other social endeavors.

California hoped that its 35 percent taxation would give the state the revenue it needs, but consumers are going back to black market.

Sabrina Fendrick, who works for dispensary Berkeley Patients Group, explains, “Everybody wants to generate revenue, we all want to serve our communities, but if everyone is going to the illicit market then nobody is generating revenue and nobody is being helped.”

For that reason, this California City lowers its sales tax on recreational cannabis.


Why Black Market Marijuana Abounds in California
Before you could buy recreational weed in California, we predicted that the state’s considerable cannabis tax would encourage black market sales and dissuade legal buyers.

This is due to the massive amount of weed grown in California, and the state’s strict pesticide regulations. Since many farmers don’t necessarily qualify, or can afford, a permit saying that they follow the state’s environmental regulations, they can’t sell their product at dispensaries. This means that a lot of weed has to be sold on the black market, which lowers its price.

Final Hit: California City Lowers Its Sales Tax on Recreational Cannabis
Berkeley’s decision to lower its city tax on cannabis from 10 to 5 percent is one of a few measures Californian officials are taking to combat high pricing. Currently, state officials are working on legislation that would lower the excise tax from 15 to 11 percent statewide.

Now that recreational cannabis is legal in California, let’s hope that Californian lawmakers can make it accessible.
 
I found this to be very interesting:

"The average age of our customers has gone from about 40 to about 50.”
As I look at new vapes, read discussions on vape boards, look at "life style snob appeal" in vape advertisements, and talk about what is/is not desirable in a vape design, etc, I often reminded that while there are a lot of young ballers out there hammering the MJ, there is a fast growing segment of the market that is late middle aged or older and many of these people have very different views on what is suitable in a vape.

I think the Puffco looks to address this market segment with its highly integrated, kitchen appliance looking, Peak. People who would blanch at torching a quartz banger (or even an enail oil rig) may well find a product like this much more attractive.

It seems that most of the advertisements and marketing in the industry is still targeting "the young, beautiful, and stoned", I believe that this will shift as the market goes more mainstream.


Recreational marijuana sales brisk, problems few in San Diego 3 months into legalization
“There’s been a change in the culture,” said Will Senn, who operates two Urbn Leaf marijuana stores in San Diego


SAN DIEGO — Three months after recreational marijuana went on sale in California, San Diego retailers say business has been brisk and the customer base diverse, including older people who use a private shuttle bus to reach one dispensary.

“There’s been a change in the culture,” said Will Senn, who operates two Urbn Leaf marijuana stores in San Diego and is about to open a third.

“Cannabis is becoming more accepted. Now that adult-use marijuana is legal, people are giving it a try. The average age of our customers has gone from about 40 to about 50.”

One of his stores is pulling in about 1,000 customers a day, a figure that would probably be higher if parking was more plentiful.

No one is sure exactly how much marijuana is being sold; the state says that it will be May before it releases figures for the first three months of the year.

But analysts indicate that marijuana sales for that period could surpass $1 billion statewide. And it appears that many of the California cities and counties that outlawed the sale of marijuana are going to change their mind, including some in San Diego County.

Pot sales are generating a lot of tax revenue. There have been comparatively few problems associated with adult-use cannabis, making it a less volatile subject politically.

And public acceptance of marijuana continues to grow — something that was evident in February when an unnamed Girl Scout began selling cookies near a marijuana store in San Diego’s Bay Park neighborhood.

The girl sold 312 boxes of cookies in two days, a story that went viral when it hit social media. Some people were outraged. But the story mostly generated jokes, and praise for the Girl Scout’s business savvy.

The story soon died, even though a few more Girl Scouts later showed up to cash in on the munchie madness.

Rocky Goyal agrees with Senn that a cultural shift is going on.

“Three months in, the sky is not falling,” said Goyal, who operates the Apothekare marijuana store in Mission Valley.

“Motorists aren’t getting into higher rates of accidents. Children aren’t dropping dead at school. We’re seeing a lot of older people coming out to give this a shot.”

That doesn’t mean he believes that everyone is embracing the use of marijuana.

“A Girl Scout wanted to sell cookies outside my store,” Goyal said. “I told her, ‘Absolutely not. America isn’t ready for that.'”

There’s reason for caution. The full effect of recreational marijuana sales isn’t known.

UC San Diego Health says that it has not experienced a spike in patients who consume too much marijuana. Police are not seeing large numbers of cannabis delivery workers being robbed. And the California Highway Patrol hasn’t issued public statements saying that adult-use marijuana has led to a statewide surge in accidents.

But it’s still early. These institutions are just beginning to understand how the freer flow of marijuana is affecting society.

There’s already confusion about whether the sale of recreational marijuana has affected the demand for black market cannabis.

“The overall biggest surprise is that there is not enough supply to meet the legal market demand,” said Dallin Young, executive director of the Assn. for Cannabis Professionals in San Diego.

“We have seen that many consumers would prefer to visit a licensed retail location, but because of the lack of licenses for additional dispensaries and the rest of the supply chain, many consumers are being forced into the black market.”

San Diego police say they have not witnessed a rise in black market marijuana sales.

One thing is clear: The legal sale, cultivation and distribution of marijuana is going to become more widespread in San Diego County.

Oceanside officials decided Wednesday that it will allow for the commercial cultivation of medical marijuana, a plan strongly supported by local farmers. Chula Vista is preparing for the sale, cultivation and manufacture of cannabis. And La Mesa and Lemon Grove are clearing the way for licensed medical marijuana shops. La Mesa’s first shop will open in July.

It’s also possible that the San Diego County Board of Supervisors might be forced to change its ban on the sale of marijuana in unincorporated areas.

The local cannabis industry is pushing to elect candidates in two supervisorial districts who are pro-pot.

“Adult-use cannabis is here to stay and local governments, both cities and counties, would be foolish to ignore or attempt to countermand this,” said Lincoln Fish, chief executive of Outco, a wholesaler that cultivates cannabis and sells medical marijuana at a site near El Cajon.
 
"legal cannabis producers pay 77 percent more to conduct business than do those who have remained on the illegal black market.
And that’s without counting ongoing compliance and packaging costs, in addition to the cost of licensing, and paying other ancillary fees."


Reduce state cannabis taxes to level the field for licensed growers


Now that adult-use cannabis is allowed by law in California, it’s clear that the promise of the free market that thrived before legalization has been badly damaged. It can be fixed. In fact, it must be.

I launched San Francisco Patient Resource Center nearly 10 years ago in order to serve the HIV-affected community. As a farmer and businessman who had thrived in the natural capitalism of the black market, I chose to make a statement as a contributing citizen in the emerging legal world of cannabis.

We all knew that Proposition 64, the measure that made cannabis legal in California, was malformed and full of problems. That’s why most cannabis professionals were against it. I don’t believe the state understood our industry, or that the cannabis community understood the barrier to acceptance that we would face with legalization.

Analyzing the burden of a 15 percent state excise tax, as well as multiple local taxes and regulations, a new study by the Arcview Group in Oakland released last week estimates that legal cannabis producers pay 77 percent more to conduct business than do those who have remained on the illegal black market.

And that’s without counting ongoing compliance and packaging costs, in addition to the cost of licensing, and paying other ancillary fees.

All of this begs what has become the bottom-line question in cannabis: Why would any grower or entrepreneur bring his or her black market business into the light? It’s getting harder to justify, let alone simply understand.

Troy Dayton of Arcview said of his new report, “It’s clear that every additional penny of price increase on legal cannabis products only serves to boost the attractiveness of purchasing from the illicit market, which has flourished in the state for decades.”

There is a glimmer of hope. There are some 40 bills newly introduced to the California Legislature to redress Prop. 64’s errors. On March 15, lawmakers proposed Assembly Bill 3157 to reduce state taxes on growing and selling cannabis in order to even the playing field for licensed growers and providers.

Co-authored by five legislators, including Assembly member Jim Wood, D-Healdsburg, from my district, as well as Assembly members Tom Lackey, R-Palmdale (Los Angeles County), and Rob Bonta (D-Alameda), AB3157 would reduce state tax on the growing and selling of cannabis for at least three years to give our emerging industry a chance at success.

The proposed legislation would reduce the excise tax to 11 percent from 15 percent, and additionally suspend the $148-per-pound cultivation tax that is inherently regressive for small, sun-grown and greenhouse cultivators who already receive a lower per-pound price than do indoor growers.

This is real money.

In Sonoma County, on Jan. 1, 2018, the price, including taxes, of an eighth of an ounce of flower was 42 percent higher than the previous day, Dec. 31, 2017. AB3157 would lower the price to 33 percent higher than the 2017 price. It’s not perfect, but it’s better.

“Criminals do not pay business taxes, ensure consumers are 21 and over, obtain licenses or follow product safety regulations,” Lackey, a former CHP officer, said last month. “We need to give legal businesses some temporary tax relief so they do not continue to be undercut by the black market.”

This is one law-abiding American farmer fairly pleading: Pass the bill. Let’s keep this business growing.
 
California testing labs expect marijuana ‘bottleneck’ in July

Marijuana testing labs are going to be the gatekeepers for California’s legal cannabis industry come July 1, when only lab-tested products may be sold by licensed retailers.

And that means this summer could become a pain for any licensed cannabis company in the Golden State since most labs are predicting a shortage of testing services, long waits for results and, of course, delays in getting approval to sell the products.

While the state’s fully regulated industry has been operating since Jan. 1 in a transition period that allowed businesses to sell untested cannabis, the labs have been awaiting the impending testing deadline.

During their wait, lab owners have gotten both concerned and excited as they’ve mulled an expected rush of marijuana demand this summer.

Among the expected outcomes of the July transition are:

  • Longer-than-usual wait times for testing product.
  • A probable – albeit temporary – supply shortage.
  • A big spike in business for licensed labs.

“Everyone knows that testing is already the bottleneck,” said Swetha Kaul, chief scientific officer at Cannalysis Labs, which is still going through the local licensing process in Santa Ana.
“We’ve seen this repeated in Colorado and in Oregon,” she continued.

“They had (multiple) testing labs, and still they had these huge turnaround times, a lot of lag in trying to get samples processed.”

Kaul estimated that the average California lab will be able to process 100-120 samples per day during full-compliance testing.

During the process, she noted, labs will check for:

  • Potency
  • Pesticides
  • Heavy metals
  • Microbial contamination
  • Residual solvents
Asked what California will need to ensure a smooth, uninterrupted supply chain, Kaul said, “I would think at least 50 labs that are running at that capacity would be what’s needed. And we’re nowhere close to that.”

The situation

As of March 27, the Bureau of Cannabis Control had issued 26 temporary licenses for testing labs.

Some of those labs are already operational and testing cannabis for clients, many of whom are prepping to ensure their businesses are compliant come July. Those companies’ goals are to be able to get product to market without having to wait weeks for test results.

But many labs aren’t yet ready and aren’t sure when they will be.

“Most of the labs, by far, are not able to do the testing as required. Some of them don’t even exist yet,” said Sam David, president of Coastal Analytical, a licensed lab in San Diego.

It’s likely there won’t be enough labs to keep up with testing demand.

Industry sources say many cannabis growers, edibles makers and distributors are putting testing compliance on the back burner for now simply because they have more pressing issues to deal with.

So, labs that are ready to perform compliance testing probably will experience a rush of business in June or July.

“We’re bracing ourselves for maxing out capacity,” said David, adding that he expects a sixfold increase in testing business.

“The rest of the licensees are probably worried. But us maxing out capacity is a good thing.

“But if we want to keep the market really undisturbed, it’ll be difficult.”

Waiting game

While that’s great news for the few labs that are likely to be operational – David estimated only about a dozen are currently testing product in California – it also means wait times for product results and, therefore, waits before retailers can sell product.

“If the question is, is there adequate capacity, the short answer is no,” he said, “especially with the current licensees.”

Asked how long he thinks the testing-results turnaround in July will be for companies waiting to ship product to retailers, David noted that Coastal Analytical’s tests currently take about three days.

However, that time frame could increase exponentially this summer.

“I definitely can’t speak to July,” he said. “I get that question all the time from potential customers who are calling around and trying to figure out what they’re going to do.”

Samia Arram, co-founder and chief operating officer of Oregon-based PacLab Analytics, possesses three lab licenses in California and hopes her company will eventually have 20 labs scattered around the state.

She said she views this summer as “an opportunity” that she plans to pursue “very aggressively” in coming years.

However, none of PacLabs’ three locations are up and running yet.

Arram said PacLab Analytics plans to have at least one lab operational by July 1, and she’s shooting for a testing turnaround time of less than a week.

“The ability to turn around between seven and 10 days seems to be an acceptable timeline in Oregon,” Arram said.

“The goal would be to be able to be able to beat that (in California).”

However, she said, a bottleneck for testing demand and getting product to market is inevitable based on how many companies will be clamoring for access to retail shelves.

“Testing isn’t just at the end of the life cycle of the product,” Arram said. “One single product may be tested multiple times.

“From a flower stage to an oil stage to an edibles stage, testing is going to be something that’s needed throughout the life cycle.”

Labs face problems too

Besides the uncertainty about how many of the 26 lab licensees may be operational by July, also in question is how many more labs will be able to obtain permits – or how long it will take them to do so.

For instance, Kaul said Cannalysis has been waiting for Santa Ana officials to sign off on the required local paperwork so the lab can get a temporary state permit.

Without local authorization, facilities can’t legally begin testing.

Because of the local-government bureaucracy, there’s no guarantee Cannalysis and other testing labs will be operational by July 1.

“Now you have labs that are willing and able and have the funding to start testing, but they can’t get that local city approval,” Kaul said.

“If all the labs that were able to do testing were (allowed) to do testing, we’d still have a bottleneck.

“The problem is they haven’t even gotten to that point yet.”
 
"That dichotomy has led to a crazy quilt of policies across the state"

The balkanization of our country continues....sigh

As far as I can tell, this and some other features of Prop 64 will only guarantee the continuation of the black market.



Marijuana laws for every city and county? Our database shows California slow to accept Prop. 64

Fewer than one in three California cities (144 out of 482) allow any kind of cannabis business to operate in their borders. And just 18 of the state’s 58 counties permit cannabis businesses in their unincorporated areas.

Also, fewer than one in five California cities welcome medical marijuana dispensaries, while fewer than one in seven allow recreational cannabis stores, where anyone 21 and older has been able to shop for legal weed since Jan. 1.

These are some of the findings in a first-of-its-kind investigation, tracking and compiling the cannabis ordinances in all 540 city and county jurisdictions in California, a study conducted by Southern California News Group and other Digital First newspapers.

The information opens a window into how the industry is taking shape three months after California began licensing marijuana businesses and permitting the sale of recreational marijuana.

The study is needed because of a simple rule in California: While Proposition 64 (approved by 57 percent of state voters in November 2016) makes it legal for people to carry up to an ounce of marijuana and to grow it at home and consume it for pleasure, the law also gives cities and counties a strong say in how that law is implemented within their jurisdictions.

That dichotomy has led to a crazy quilt of policies across the state. Some towns are cannabis friendly, allowing a wide range of businesses related to a product that residents are free to use at their discretion. Other cities are less enthusiastic, with some blocking virtually every type of marijuana-related enterprise and, in some cases, passing ordinances that seem aimed at regulating personal use as much as possible.

Last year, to help everyone from pot consumers and would-be pot entrepreneurs to people who simply are curious about the progress of a new state law, we began gathering details on local marijuana policies. In January, we launched a database with some of that information, offering cannabis rules from about half the cities in the state. Today, we’ve upgraded that work, with rules from every city and county in California.

The information is included in our online database, where readers can search policies by location or by business type. And, based on an analysis of that data, we’ve ranked each community on our 100-point scale of marijuana friendliness.

The data reveals some interesting trends, conflicts and anomalies. It also shows that leaders in some communities are far less enthusiastic (or, in some cases, more enthusiastic) about cannabis than the residents who voted for or against Prop 64. That’s one reason the database shows city-by-city voting results, too.

Today’s story is the first in a three-part series. Next up is a story about how some city laws seem to paint cannabis as a barely-legal product, and after that will come a story about how a few cities are particularly eager to make money off the cannabis industry.

We’ll continue exploring and expanding the data so, down the road, we can offer more insights about the multi-billion-dollar world of legal cannabis in California.

California hasn’t gone green
Many people seem to think it’s a free-for-all when it comes to cannabis in California now that recreational marijuana is legal. But that’s far from the case, as many cities are setting up strict rules on what types of cannabis businesses — if any — can open in their town.


Click for a larger image.
And even the numbers that seem to indicate where the cannabis industry is being welcomed can paint an overly enthusiastic picture. A couple dozen cities on the chart — places such as Moreno Valley and Davis — have passed rules to allow marijuana businesses. But that data doesn’t show how those cities have yet to fully develop the regulations, or issue permits, to let those businesses start.

That’s why even though 61 cities and nine counties have ordinances on the books that allow recreational marijuana stores, as of April 6, 2018, the state Bureau of Cannabis Control had licensed recreational shops in only 34 cities and five unincorporated county areas of California.

Here’s a map of shops licensed to sell recreational cannabis.

Most cannabis-friendly cities in California
A couple dozen cities are leading the pack for the most points we’ve doled out so far, meaning they’re the most lenient cities in the state when it comes to cannabis policy.

(If the graphics with this story are unresponsive, refresh this page.)

Riverside County has by far the highest number of permissive cities, with six that score above 96 points on our scale. A few other counties have two 96-point cities each, including Los Angeles and Sonoma.

Four counties are also racking up points when it comes to their lenient policies for unincorporated areas: Humboldt, Inyo, Del Norte and Monterey.

To get above 96 points, cities and counties must allow every type of marijuana business licensed by the state. That means permitting medical and recreational licenses for cannabis sales, cultivation, manufacturing, distribution and testing. They would also have to allow their residents to grow marijuana at home, both indoors and outdoors.

No one yet has a score of 100 is because we reserved a few points in our scale for cities that go a step further and allow, say, cannabis lounges or festivals. We’ll be incorporating these factors as we continue to build out the database, with cities such as Palm Springs and San Francisco — which permit cannabis lounges — expected to jump even higher.

(Note: We don’t mean to imply that “high” scores are better or worse than “low” scores. If you support cannabis rights, you’ll likely see a high score as a good thing. If you oppose them, you’ll likely see a low score as preferable. Our scoring system is simply a mathematical way to compare city and county policies.)

Least cannabis-friendly cities in California
More than five dozen cities score a zero on our scale of cannabis friendliness.

These cities are spread over 26 counties. The highest number is predictably in the county with by far the most cities: Los Angeles. But just 19 percent of L.A. County cities are super strict on cannabis, while every city in the tiny counties of Madera and Sutter have passed the toughest rules possible.

Perhaps the biggest surprise is in Humboldt County, which is famous for cannabis production. Despite the region’s reputation as a cannabis hotbed, and despite having a couple cities where cannabis ordinances are lenient, four of the seven cities in Humboldt County earn zero points on our scale.

To get a zero score, a city has to ban all marijuana businesses, block residents from growing marijuana for personal use outdoors and require them to get a permit to grow it inside their homes.

County policies sometimes conflict with cities
So far, counties have been slightly more likely than cities to welcome marijuana businesses.

The gap is most pronounced when it comes to shops and cultivation. More than 15 percent of California counties allow recreational stores in unincorporated areas, for example, compared with 12 percent of cities. And 27 percent of counties allow medical marijuana cultivation, compared with just 20 percent of cities.

In some places, county policies contrast sharply with some of the rules passed by cities within that county.

Imperial County, for example, permits all types of marijuana businesses in its unincorporated areas, mostly near the Arizona and Mexico borders. Yet most cities in Imperial County (the three biggest are El Centro, Calexico and Brawley) have banned the industry, and none allow recreational shops.

There are also state-licensed marijuana stores that claim addresses in Carmel and Monterey, even though both of those cities block all marijuana businesses.

The shops are technically in unincorporated Monterey County, which allows all types of marijuana businesses. Same goes for a recreational shop “in Crescent City” that’s actually in unincorporated Del Norte County, and another with an address “in Fort Bragg” though it’s officially in unincorporated Mendocino County.

Local policies vs. voter wishes
In some cities and counties, cannabis industry rules contrast sharply with how residents there voted on Prop. 64.

In the top left corner of the chart you’ll find cities and counties where local leaders have passed liberal marijuana policies even though most of their constituents voted against Prop. 64.

Imperial County again stands out. Only 45 percent of unincorporated county residents there voted in favor of legalizing recreational marijuana. But the Imperial County Board of Supervisors voted in November to welcome every type of cannabis business, giving the area a score of 95.9 on our scale of permissiveness.

Oakdale and Riverbank, in Stanislaus County, are the only two cities in the state that welcome every type of recreational marijuana business even though a majority of residents in both cities voted against Prop. 64.

The opposite can be seen in the bottom right corner of the chart, which shows cities and counties where local leaders are sticking with strict cannabis policies even though more than two thirds of the voters in their communities were in favor of Prop. 64.

In Sausalito, in Marin County, 77 percent of voters supported legal weed, but city council members there have blocked all businesses and outdoor home gardens. The numbers are similar in the Bay Area city of Albany.

In other places, local policies are very much in line with voter wishes.

West Hollywood and Berkeley voters, for example, tied with a high of 83 percent of residents approving Prop. 64. Both cities also have liberal cannabis policies, just missing the leader board for most permissive cities in the state because they block commercial cultivation and other behind-the-scenes businesses.

Kingsburg, in Fresno County, also has policies that align with election numbers. Residents of the farming town opposed Prop. 64 more than anywhere else in California, with only 35 percent favoring marijuana legalization. And city council members have taken a similar stance, with policies that earn Kingsburg 0.5 out of 100 points on our scale of marijuana friendliness.
 
This should not come as any surprise given the hash CA has made of implementing prop 64.

California’s legal weed sales are lagging behind expectations, analysts say

With the Golden State’s temporary canna-business licenses set to expire at the end of the month, high taxes and limited local access have created a slow transition out of the black market.

It's only been four months since California opened its doors to what is expected to be the world's largest legal adult-use cannabis market, but the transition hasn't been seamless.

Despite many predicting that the state will see upwards of $4 billion in legal sales by the end of 2018, new research suggests that the start to this new, verdant era is moving slower than expected.

According to the Sacramento Bee, Colorado-based marijuana data crunchers at BDS Analytics have dug through California's first two months of adult-use weed sales and found that business wasn't quite as booming as industry insiders had predicted before January's retail cannabis kick-off.

With around $339 million in total cannabis product sales in January and February combined, the Golden State is 13% behind BDS' originally estimated $383 sales total. To understand why the marijuana market hasn't swelled as quickly as many assumed, we have to consider a number of factors.

Beginning on New Year's Day and continuing through April, California pot consumers have complained about the state-approved industry's hefty state and local tax rates.

Compounding those pricing issues with recent reports of a still-thriving black market, as well as huge swaths of legal weed access deserts, the semi-underwhelming start to retail sales begins making a little more sense.

"Medical marijuana killed the black market. This is bringing it back," an anonymous customer told reporters from Marijuana Business Daily on January 1st after leaving a Bay Area dispensary with a $13 gram of hash that he said cost only $10 before recreational taxes. "I almost didn't even buy this," the customer said.

Those sentiments were reiterated by Kristi Knoblich, the board president of the California Cannabis Industry Association. "Sales are happening but they're not happening in the regulated market," Knoblich told the Sacramento Bee this week.

But before potential ganjapreneurs and legal weed investors pull their funds from California's green rush, BDS analysts were quick to hedge their dark cloud predictions, suggesting that warm weather months and continued licensing could right the ship before the fiscal year is out.

"I'm not overly concerned at this point," Greg Shoenfeld, vice president for operations at BDS, explained to the Bee.

And in some parts of the state, like San Diego, observers are still confident about the success of the nascent market. Plus, with only 600 or so licensed cannabis operators serving nearly 40 million California residents, it's expected that increased access to legal weed will spread throughout the Golden State as regulators continue granting permits.

Next month, the California Bureau of Cannabis Control will begin handing out permanent canna-business licenses, ending four months of limited temporary permitting.

By the end of the current fiscal year, BDS Analytics still expects California's legal weed businesses to rake in over $1.15 billion in total sales. Not too shabby, Cali.
 
Yep, just another money grabbing and ill thought out program roll out by government. What a surprise.


Growing like a weed? California marijuana market off to slow start

Sales at California dispensaries were just $339 million through February, a figure well below the state’s expectations.


So far, it’s been quite a year for weed: California’s foray into legal recreational use began in January, former House speaker John Boehner said his views on the drug had “evolved” and joined the board of cannabis company Acreage Holdings, and New York Senator Chuck Schumer announced on Friday (yes, on 4/20, for those keeping track of these details) a plan to try and decriminalize marijuana at the federal level.

But like the crop itself, cultivating a mature market takes an investment of time and resources. California’s legalization of recreational marijuana hasn’t been without growing pains, with industry experts saying a clunky rollout, local resistance and burdensome tax and regulatory requirements are keeping the industry from hitting its stride.


Marijuana consumers hit dispensaries on unofficial pot holiday
04:43
“The launch of the California market has been a total mess, and not entirely unexpected,” said Troy Dayton, CEO and co-founder of cannabis market research firm Arcview Group. “This is the most complex, onerous and far-reaching regulatory scheme that’s ever been tried. Every time you add a level of complexity, you add a level of uncertainty,” he said.

According to research firm BDS Analytics, 2018 sales at dispensaries licensed to sell for recreational use in California were $339 million through February, a figure below the state’s expectations. Greg Shoenfeld, vice president of operations at BDS Analytics, said initial projections could have been overly optimistic.”Whenever there’s a proposal to move to a legalized market, the best case scenarios are laid out in terms of revenue expectation, but typically, implementation moves a bit slower,” he said.

Experts suggest that much of the industry is still operating underground. “We estimate that 85 to 90 percent of the industry that existed last year is not licensed,” said Chris Beals, president and general counsel for Weedmaps.

Although some faulted the state for its pace of issuing licenses, Beals said the bottleneck was happening at the municipal level. “The biggest problem has been that there’s been a complete failure of local governments to issue licenses,” he said, adding that 85 percent of cities and counties in the state have bans on recreational marijuana retailers.

The thinking goes that, without legal storefronts from which to purchase their cannabis products, people will continue to rely on the black market.

“If you take the location of adult-use licenses and do mapping over it, you get this incredibly small part of the state that has geographic coverage,” Beals said. “In a nutshell, I think that’s the problem in California.”

Even if they live near a dispensary licensed to sell to recreational users, regular marijuana users who are brand-loyal to a specific grower or strain might not find their product of choice in stock.

Related
Pot: Where it's legal, where it's not
Taxes are also a hurdle in that they raise prices all along the supply chain, making it tough for retailers to turn a profit and end up giving customers an incentive to seek out cheaper, illegal alternatives.

“What the official estimates failed to address is local governments are layering taxes onto each level of the local supply chains,” Beals said. On top of state sales tax, excise tax and other levies, some dispensaries could be facing effective tax rates of nearly 80 percent, he said. “I think it’s really bordering on the crisis level.”

Industry experts pointed out, though, that while California’s rollout might be unwieldy, it benefits from the groundwork laid by states that legalized recreational marijuana use earlier — offering case studies that serve as both road maps and cautionary tales.

“I’m not nearly as alarmist — I think we saw the same situation in Colorado,” Shoenfeld said. “Estimates of tax revenues collected came in below projections for the first year before stabilizing. Every year since, we’ve exceeded them.


Legalization of recreational marijuana gaining support on 4/20
01:30
Chris Walsh, vice president of editorial and strategic development at Marijuana Business Daily, also pointed to Colorado as an example both of early stumbles and an ultimately successful transition. “It took the recreational market a while to mature and it took people a while to get used to the concept of it,” he said. “It took a while to take root and for people to understand how everything was going to work.”

And the industry’s supporters are still bullish about its long-term numbers. Research released jointly by BDS Analytics and the Arcview Group predicts that the market for legal cannabis in the United States will grow from $16 billion last year to $40 billion by 2021, a 150 percent jump, and those in the industry says interest from investors remains high.

Rosalie Liccardo Pacula, director of the BING Center for Health Economics and co-director of the Drug Policy Research Center at RAND Corporation, argued that four months into the opening of the recreational market was too soon to draw conclusions about its long-term viability.

“This is very much a dynamic situation, and it is just far too early to make decisive comments on performance,” she said. “Much of the relevant data on which to evaluate this is not even in.”

Local elected officials will come around when they see the financial benefits, Dayton predicted. “They’re going to have to see that they’re missing tax money and missing good jobs,” he said. “I suspect it’ll take about a year before things start to even out and you’ll start to have a really well-functioning market.”
 
What a mess.....SOP for government programs. sigh

Marijuana growers, manufacturers have yet to get the green light from L.A.


Months after California legalized the marijuana business, pot growers and manufacturers lament that they are still locked out of the legal industry in Los Angeles.

More than 100 shops have already gotten city approval in Los Angeles, but not the companies that have historically furnished them with cannabis, which were supposed to be second in line under a complex set of city regulations passed in December.

L.A. had originally planned to finish processing their applications by April but has not even started accepting that paperwork. As 4/20 rolled around Friday — the informal holiday for pot enthusiasts — there was no official word on when that would happen.

That has aggravated marijuana growers, manufacturers and other cannabis companies seeking to do business legally in Los Angeles. Under California law, they cannot get state licenses if they do not have local authorization. And if they don't have a state license, it is illegal for newly licensed shops to buy their products.

"If people don't get their licenses in the very near future, their businesses are tenuous," said Aaron Herzberg, founding partner of Puzzle Group, a law firm specializing in cannabis licensing and real estate. "Maybe those businesses are driven into the black market entirely."

Marijuana companies that had lined up business locations are being "bled dry" as they hang on to costly leases, said Adam Spiker, executive director of the Southern California Coalition, a cannabis industry group. Ryan Jennemann, manager of the cannabis cultivation company THC Design, said his firm has cut dozens of employees in recent months.

"It's an unsettling feeling," Jennemann said. "We're in a state where cannabis is legal. The 4/20 holiday used to be an underground thing — now they're talking about it on MSNBC. And we don't have permits."

The delay has also prevented any new operators, including shops, growers and other marijuana enterprises, from getting into the legal industry in L.A.

Under the regulations, they would get a shot at city approval in a third phase of applications, after L.A. grants approval to marijuana growers and manufacturers that had been supplying existing shops.

City officials have chalked up some of the delay to short staffing as the newly formed Department of Cannabis Regulation started poring over business applications. The department currently has only four staffers and has relied on workers loaned to it from other city agencies. Council members voted to hire more employees in February, but those positions have yet to be filled.

3NBDBTZE3BCHBOZ5WL3QG4OBWY.jpg

“The shift from cannabis prohibition to regulation — in the largest cannabis market in the world — is complex,” said Cat Packer, who heads L.A.’s Department of Cannabis Regulation. "Getting it right will take time."

As of Friday, the department had granted approval to 139 pot shops that had been operating in line with an earlier set of city rules — the group of businesses that were first in line for approval. But before other marijuana businesses can apply, the city has been trying to work out remaining details for its "social equity" program, which is intended to help people and communities hit hardest by the war on drugs.

To be eligible for the second phase of licensing, longtime growers and manufacturers that supplied the existing shops must also qualify for that program. If not, they would have to seek licenses in the third phase along with all other kinds of applicants.

Eligible social equity entrepreneurs include poor applicants who either have been convicted of some marijuana crimes or have lived in areas disproportionately affected by pot arrests, as well as firms providing space or other assistance to disadvantaged applicants.

But city officials say they are still figuring out how to proceed.

This year, council members asked to reexamine whether additional communities in the San Fernando Valley, Boyle Heights and parts of downtown might have been disproportionately affected by the war on drugs, potentially allowing people who had lived in those areas to qualify for the program.

L.A. also needs to fund and set up the outreach and assistance programs that are supposed to be provided under the program — or decide whether to press ahead with licensing social equity applicants before the city can offer such benefits, city officials said. That decision would be made by council members.

A spokeswoman for City Council President Herb Wesson did not provide comment Friday.

"The shift from cannabis prohibition to regulation — in the largest cannabis market in the world — is complex, and involves a broad range of stakeholders," Cat Packer, who heads L.A.'s Department of Cannabis Regulation, said in a written statement Friday. "Getting it right will take time."

California Minority Alliance Chairman Donnie Anderson, whose group advocated for the social equity program, said that "we definitely wanted the city to be farther along, but I understand that the city has to make sure things are right." He added that the city needs to ensure businesses don't find ways to "scam the system" meant to benefit poor and marginalized applicants.

The proposed budget released last week by Mayor Eric Garcetti includes $3.7 million for the cannabis department next budget year, more than four times as much as this year, and provides for 28 staffers.

In his budget, Garcetti also estimated that the city would get $30 million from taxing the marijuana industry, a crucial infusion that will help bankroll city services. The delay in marijuana licensing has already cost the city this year: It had been anticipating $16 million from taxing cannabis businesses this budget year, but is now expecting to pull in only $4.4 million, according to the mayor's office.
 
Nope, not accurate. CA's regulated legal market is about to get bottlenecked. But there is still plenty (too much, maybe?) MJ still available.


California's cannabis supply chain is about to get bottlenecked

The recent spate of new recreational legal cannabis markets has inspired mostly jubilant scenes: cannabis tourists gleefully entering dispensaries, state treasuries fattening up at astonishing rates, your parents asking if you can buy them some edibles, writes Tess Barker.

But this rapid influx of legal cannabis has also brought with it a string of regulatory issues that have proved challenging for growers, distributors, and dispensary owners alike. High-ranking among these concerns is the problem of a bottleneck in the cannabis supply chain: when a state legalizes cannabis, the scores of suppliers who had previously sold cannabis with little to no regulatory influence, suddenly must be prepared to test their product for sale on the open legal market.

This is especially the case in California, where sellers on the United States' longest-running and most profitable “gray market” must be prepared to meet government standards by July of 2018. In anticipation of this situation, Evio Labs, which already has testing facilities in large markets like Colorado and Oregon, has done major hiring of personnel and setting up of large-scale facilities in the state.

“Prior to January 1st of this year, it was in the 5-10% of (cannabis) product that was actually being tested,” Evio Exec William Waldrop told Civilized recently.

ellen1.jpg


In order to help meet the surge in demand for testing, Evio has set up an 8,000 square foot testing facility, and is currently hiring personnel — from samplers, to “chemists, microbiologists, toxicologists, sales reps, and couriers.”

The large-scale facility is, according to Waldrop, already equipped to handle testing of oils and flower for all of the bay area and central California. Evio will be ready for testing of edibles in about a month.

Evio works with clients of all sizes, but says it specializes in testing for smaller farmers and product manufacturers. The key to a smooth testing process for an operation of any size, says Waldrop, is communicating with your testing facility early on. “It’s all about communication to ensure that we can scale up to meet your needs.”

Included in the new personnel are a number of seasoned professionals who have recently come over to the cannabis sector after spending extensive time in fields like pharmaceuticals and medical testing.

“We’re bringing people in from, I don’t want to say ‘traditional,’ because I want to think of cannabis as traditional, but mainstream industries,” says Waldrop. “Perhaps three or four years ago, it wouldn’t have been their first choice of career path, but they’re really seeing the medical benefits of cannabis. People are coming over from pharmacy with open eyes, saying, ‘How do we make this a mainstay solution for many people?’”
 

Sponsored by

VGoodiez 420EDC
Back
Top