Pages tagged "California"
California's Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act (Proposition 65) requires that the state maintain a list of substances known to cause cancer or birth defects. The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) added cannabis smoke to that list in 2009. ASA holds that the inclusion of cannabis smoke is inappropriate and should be reevaluated.
Businesses in California are required to post warning signs if a customer might be exposed to a substance on the Proposition 65 list. This requirement is intended to protect consumers from being exposed to a harmful substance without their knowledge. Unfortunately, lawyers sometimes use Proposition 65 indiscriminately to demand big settlements from businesses.
Hundreds of medical cannabis dispensaries have been targeted by a handful of attorneys seeking large settlements under Proposition 65. These complaints and lawsuits do nothing to protect legal patients who rely on dispensaries for safe access to their medicine. However, these unreasonable financial demands can drive up costs for patients or even force dispensaries to close.
ASA is talking with lawyers, policy makers, and other experts about the process for having cannabis smoke removed from the Proposition 65 list and about how to protect medical cannabis businesses and organizations targeted by inappropriate complaints and lawsuits.
Your membership helps support efforts like these. Be sure to keep an eye on the ASA email announcement list for news about Proposition 65 and more.
Medical cannabis businesses and organizations should contact an experienced attorney if they receive a notice alleging a violation of Proposition 65 or want to evaluate their compliance.
You can contact ASA at firstname.lastname@example.org or (202) 857-4272.
California voters approved Proposition 64, the Adult Use of Marijuana Act, on November 8, 2016. The initiative reduces or eliminates most penalties for the non-medical use, possession and cultivation of cannabis, within certain limits, by adults aged twenty-one and over. It also creates a state licensing and regulation program that is similar to the one that the state legislature adopted for medical cannabis in 2015.
Our mission at Americans for Safe Access (ASA) is focused exclusively on medical cannabis; and therefore, the organization generally does not take positions of support or opposition regarding adult-use cannabis laws. However, Proposition 64 makes beneficial changes to the state’s medical cannabis laws related to personal cultivation, taxation, and patients’ rights.
- Personal Cultivation – Proposition 64 prohibits cities and counties from banning personal indoor cultivation of up to six plants. This overrides existing bans on medical cannabis cultivation in many jurisdictions in California. Proposition 64 is the first real check on local authority to ban cultivation in California.
- Taxation – Proposition 64 exempts medical cannabis patients who have a Medical Marijuana Identification Card (MMIC) issued by a county health department from sales tax. It also caps the cost of those cards at $100. Patients on MediCal can get a card for half price, and cards are for the indigent are free. That is good news for patients. Unlike prescription medicine, medical cannabis is currently subject to sales tax of 7.5% to 10%, depending on where you buy it. Unfortunately, the initiative imposes a new 15% excise tax on cannabis and medical cannabis beginning January 1, 2018. Taxation of medical cannabis will be lower than non-medical cannabis, which will still be subject to sales tax. However, the new excise tax will be an undue burden on some patients.
- Patient Privacy – Many patients are reluctant to obtain an MMIC because they fear legal, professional or other consequences for being identified as a medical cannabis patient in state records. Preposition 64 says that “No identification card application system or database… shall contain any personal information of any qualified patient, including but not limited to, the patient’s name, address, social security number, medical conditions, or the names of their primary caregivers.” In combination with the sales tax exemption and lower fees, this enhanced privacy will make it possible for many more patients to enjoy the legal protection offered by a MMIC.
- Parental Rights – The imitative will prevent discrimination in parental rights against patients. Proposition 64 says that no one can “restrict or abridge custodial or parental rights to minor children in any action or proceeding under the jurisdiction of family or juvenile court,” so long as the patient is in compliance with the Compassionate Use Act (Proposition 215). This is a huge step forward in protecting the rights of patients and something for which the state legislature has had no appetite.
Some patients in California are worried about the effects of Proposition 64 on patients. The language of the initiative does not abridge any rights granted under the voter-approved Compassionate Use Act (Proposition 215). Patients and caregivers will still be immune from penalties and entitled to cultivate medicine for their own use, subject to the existing limitations in the Medical Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MCRSA).
Many of the provisions in Proposition 64 related to commercial licensing and regulation of adult use in cannabis are complicated. There is likely to be additional legislation related to the initiative and possible litigation. As always, there is the chance of unexpected and unintended consequences.
With the passage of Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act (MMRSA), California’s medical cannabis industry is now moving into a state licensing program. Voters will also be deciding on yet another major regulatory bill, Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) in November. Both laws include robust product safety protocols as well as a new licensing program.
Patient Focused Certification, a project of Americans for Safe Access is hosting an educational tour for the California medical cannabis industry to help demystify the regulations that will come from Bureau of Medical Cannabis Regulation (BMMR) and give practical advice for business to meet and exceed these requirements.
Our mission is to help companies surpass regulatory compliance. PFC staff have been working with governments for over 14 years to develop laws and regulations for the the medical cannabis industry. As well as with the American Herbal Products Association and the American Herbal Pharmacopoeia to create industry standards. Which have now been adopted in 16 states.Read more
The California Weekly Roundup will be on summer vacation until Monday, August 15. In the meantime, look for important announcements about upcoming events in California and other news on this list.
Get all the news, events, action alerts, & more...
Medical cannabis patients scored a huge victory in California last week, when the Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee rejected SB 987. That bill by Assembly Member Mike McGuire (D-Healdsburg) would have imposed a statewide excise tax of 10% on medical cannabis. The tax would have been in addition to existing sales tax, any new or existing taxes imposed by cities and counties, and any other taxes adopted by the state legislature.
Americans for Safe Access (ASA) opposed SB 987 because it would have placed an unfair burden on legal medical cannabis patients. Thousands of ASA members sent emails, signed petitions, and made phone calls opposing the bill in response to our action alerts. Hundreds visited legislative offices in person to oppose the bill as part of our California Citizen Lobby Day in March. Those efforts paid off last Monday, when the committee voted 4 to 5 to kill SB 987.