Colo. Issues First Medical Marijuana Business Licenses in Nation

By Jeralyn, Section Colorado News
Posted on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 08:35:00 AM EST
Tags: medical marijuana (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Another first for Colorado: The Medical Marijuana Enforcement Division of the Department of Revenue has issued its first licenses to medical marijuana businesses. 11 businesses received the licenses and 7 have been notified they are next. 467 are in the final application phase.

Colorado is the first state in the nation to license marijuana dispensaries and infused-product businesses.

Medical-marijuana advocates say Colorado's regulations for cannabis businesses are the most comprehensive in the nation, and they credit the rules' thoroughness with shielding the businesses from federal raids.

[More...]

There's still a problem with banks closing accounts of medical marijuana business. The Bank of Denver is the latest to do so. What now? Some legislators are considering legislation that would establish a medical marijuana credit union.

The rules are here.

< An Atticus Finch Afternoon | Judge Denies John Edwards' Motions to Dismiss Charges >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Colo. Issues First Medical Marijuana Business Licenses in Nation | 22 comments (22 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

How do the Colorado regulations (none / 0) (#1)
by Edger on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 08:43:52 AM EST

get around or avoid what happened in California where U.S. Attorneys claimed dispensaries were violating federal drug laws, regardless of whether they are in compliance with California law?

: Stay tuned. Should help the feds (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by oculus on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 10:22:32 AM EST

quickly locate the dealers.

: California's law (5.00 / 2) (#8)
by Jeralyn on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 01:22:12 PM EST

has a "not for profit" provision that Colorado's doesn't.

If it helps.... (none / 0) (#2)
by kdog on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 09:01:13 AM EST

keep John Law Fed off everybody's back, that's great...but 73 pages of rules for plant seed, tend seedling, pick buds, cure buds, sell buds and "MIP"'s? Overkill much? Even strict regs for the security systems at the dispensaries...not exactly "pro business" is it?

I'm going down to the MMC for some delicous MIP, hopefully the MMED don't bother me.

Is all this really necessary? Especially considering there is no guarantee the DEA won't show up with a battering ram and automatic weapons to rob the MMC.

Learned recently CA farmers are leasing (none / 0) (#4)
by oculus on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 10:24:46 AM EST

their land to MJ growers. Crop is worth a lot more than almonds or peaches. But the landowner isn't making any more $$ than if leased land to a more trad. grower. May have something to do w/rising food prices however. Plus ethanol.


Well if we ever... (none / 0) (#6)
by kdog on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 10:39:38 AM EST

wised up and scratched the whole prohibition nightmare, the price of reefer crops should be more in line with peaches and almonds...it's all just dirt and seeds, sunlight and water.

Don't forget fuel costs effecting food prices, and of course taxes taxes taxes to help pay for the prohibition that makes reefer so much more valuable than peaches.

If you're sharp enough not to get caught, you'd have to be a fool of a farmer to grow anything but reefer, if making a buck is your goal. Same for a Colombian farmer in regards to coca, Afghan farmer in regards to poppy.


The economics of what you describe elude me. (none / 0) (#7)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 01:21:24 PM EST

Why would MJ be so much less expensive if there were no prohibition?

Perhaps denny would be marginally cheaper than it already is, but I don't see the good stuff being any less expensive.

Note that I sling the word "denny" around like a hip cat.


Duly noted:)... (none / 0) (#9)
by kdog on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 01:38:58 PM EST

The dank, though usually grown indoors to insure optimal growing conditions, is no more expensive to grow than anything else, indoors or outdoors. Indoor would cost more...electricity, renting/buying a space, lights, timers and a watering system if you aren't tending manually. But no way it would be so costly to produce that you'd have to charge 350-600 an oz...thats all prohibition costs, making it worth your while to justify the risk of imprisonment and asset forfeiture.

I dunno, the dank wines are a heck of a lot more (none / 0) (#11)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 01:57:45 PM EST

expensive than peaches and almonds and also Gallo's denny wines, and it's really not much more expensive to grow the good grapes than it is to grow low quality grapes for Gallo.


Ha, I said dank wines. (none / 0) (#12)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 02:05:19 PM EST

See your point... (none / 0) (#13)
by kdog on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 02:15:37 PM EST

Consumers will pay a premium for high quality, and though the production cost maybe only marginally higher the retail price can be significantly higher. Also mass production can decrease quality as well as reducing costs.

Sounds like an opportunity for producers of quality smoke or drink to undercut high sticker price competitors...once our vices are treated equally under the law:)


Some consumers only want the dank, (none / 0) (#15)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 03:19:22 PM EST

whether it's dank wines, dank cars, dank homes or dank dank, etc.

I don't see dank dank being significantly cheaper if MJ were legalized, but who knows.

Dank dank!


If it is priced at cost of production... (none / 0) (#16)
by kdog on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 03:34:39 PM EST

plus 20-40%, it will be much cheaper....well, depending on the taxes and how many middlemen in the distribution chain.

Though as you just taught me, actual cost of production matters less than I thought. It can't cost that much more to make Air Jordans than the 20 dollar kicks that Starbury was selling, no accounting for the sticker price of prestige.


Yep, those kicks are made side by side (none / 0) (#17)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 03:41:44 PM EST

in the same Chinese factory, probably...


"It can't cost much more" (none / 0) (#18)
by me only on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 04:14:19 PM EST

I guess that cost of advertising doesn't count?

Middlemen? Yeah, those people who transport the stuff from one location to another, what did they do to get paid? I mean other than the obvious.


: Freight companies... (none / 0) (#22)
by kdog on Fri Oct 28, 2011 at 08:32:34 AM EST

get paid to transport merchandise.
Middlemen don't do much, I should know I work for a middleman who sells to another middleman who sells to another middleman before selling to you and I. We deal with the middlemen down the line so the manufacturer doesn't have to...aka eat their sh*t for a fee:)

Well, there is the fact (none / 0) (#19)
by me only on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 04:16:25 PM EST

that aging wine does have a cost. Especially if you like it aged in Hungarian casks.


it's a weed! (none / 0) (#21)
by fiver on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 06:22:09 PM EST

that you could easily grow yourself.


Will (none / 0) (#5)
by lentinel on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 10:39:26 AM EST

the crusaders, Holder and Obama, try to override this as they did in California?

Is this the reason Obama is losing (none / 0) (#10)
by loveed on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 01:50:59 PM EST

Colorado?

: There are 50 States (none / 0) (#14)
by NYShooter on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 03:04:49 PM EST

There will be 50 reasons.

god (none / 0) (#20)
by fiver on Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 06:18:41 PM EST

these banks and feds are such assholes. denying sick people medicine just because others use it recreationally? really pisses me off, of course their mind changes real quick when it's them or a loved one that needs it...