Ld1296

Do you know what LD1296 is? If you are MMJ patient or caregiver in Maine you should. It is a bill that removes the patient registry and clarifies the discrepancies between the current statute and DHHS's rulemaking that theoretically governs the program - things like whether you are limited to six plants total (as the text of the law seems to indicate) or can you legally possess more than 6 plants as long as only 6 are flowering (as DHHS rules clearly indicate). It also removes the 5 patient cap for caregivers and allows caregivers and patients to sell to dispensaries, giving growers a legal way to dispose of excess product without running afoul of the law.

LD1296 received a unanimous "Ought to Pass" recommendation in Committee, meaning it has a very good chance to become law. It still needs support from voters or it may fail in the full legislature. As such i urge you to contact your local legislators and urge them to support this legislation. If you don't know who your legislators are you can find that info here.

You can read the text of the law here. In case you've never read the text of proposed legislation that amends current legislation there are a couple things you need to know:

1) Crossed out text is in the current law but would be removed in the amended law
2) Underlined text are proposed additions or changes to the current law.

Feel free to contact me if you have any questions about any of this. But be warned - i will pester you to contact your legislator while i am answering your questions.

not to be rude, but i suggest you read it again. it does NOT remove the 5 patient cap for caregivers...

Yeah, i did notice that when i read the bill more carefully. It still does do lots of other good stuff.

yes it sure does. it pretty much doubles the amount you can possess at once. plus gives a definition to a "mature" plant, allowing more plants to be cloning/vegging that will not count against the 6 mature you are allowed.

I hope it passes.

Thanks for posting this. Wow...unanimous out of committee? That's great. I haven't read it all yet, but I will. Is there anything bad for us in it?

No collectives.

but we can sell extra to dispensaries and dispensaries can contract out growers, so it would be possible for one to grow for a dispensary without having patients......

Just to bring folks up to speed.

As happened in Rhode Island, when the state proposed to amend the current Medical Marijuana law it was reviewed by the state's U.S. Attorney. When the review came back in RI, conflicts with federal law were outlined and the state backed off from plans to amend the law. A similar report came back from the U.S. Attorney in Maine. Unlike RI however, our legislature has stated its intention to sally forth with the changes, which Maine Brookies has outlined very well for us.

There is an editorial in this morning's Press Herald that recommends holding off, as they did in RI. I hope they don't do that. Federal law does need to change, but don't expect anyone other than Barney Frank willing to do anything with 2012 looming. Rather, I think change will take a different route. State laws will conflict with federal law, and there will a test case ultimately landing in the Supreme Court. Kudos to Maine if they follow through.

Regarding collectives...is this really a big deal for anyone? I wasn't planning on joining one anyway, but just wondered if anyone here cares about it. What's it gain you, if you already have patients? Shared space/infrastructure? Shared inventory/distribution? None of that matters to me personally, but what's the state worried about with collectives?

I have often wondered if legislators realized when they amended the citizen's initiative last year that what they were doing with caregiver provisions is essentially creating lots of little dispensaries. As caregivers, we can grow the same amount per patient as dispensaries do. The only difference is how many patients we can care for and for me five is plenty. I don't even care for five yet, not sure if I will. I guess collectives would, in effect, create more dispensaries but I don't think it's a big deal either way.

I'm thinking that the anti-Washington sentiment amongst the recently elected Repugs is working in our favor with MMJ reform. If Delahanty had said "Go for it, we endorse what you are doing" then i'd be worried...

mdanforth said:

but we can sell extra to dispensaries and dispensaries can contract out growers, so it would be possible for one to grow for a dispensary without having patients......

Click to expand...

I wouldn't get my hopes up on that one. I can see the dispensaries contracting out to the larger collectives because they'll be better able to supply the demand. I wish they would scratch the law that says a caregiver can only provide cannabis to a particular patient(s). You should be able to provide medicine to anyone with a state issued card or Dr.'s rec.

General Anesthetic said:

I wouldn't get my hopes up on that one. I can see the dispensaries contracting out to the larger collectives because they'll be better able to supply the demand. I wish they would scratch the law that says a caregiver can only provide cannabis to a particular patient(s). You should be able to provide medicine to anyone with a state issued card or Dr.'s rec.

Click to expand...

That wouldn't apply to someone who is both a patient and a caregiver though, would it? Patients can provide to patients as I understand it.

General Anesthetic said:

I can see the dispensaries contracting out to the larger collectives because they'll be better able to supply the demand.

Click to expand...

My understanding is that collectives are specifically banned under 1296 although patients who live in the same house would be now allowed to share grow space, which is technically not allowed now.

Maine Brookies said:

My understanding is that collectives are specifically banned under 1296 although patients who live in the same house would be now allowed to share grow space, which is technically not allowed now.

Click to expand...

So help me understand... If 1296 passes, does that mean that collectives such as CCM for example wouldn't be allowed to operate anymore?

I can't find anything in the bill text, but i'm not sure that the current text available online is the current bill as written. My understanding is the sharing of facilities by caregivers is not allowed under the bill that made it out of committee but that is based on word-of-mouth from someone who attended the hearing.

Have they begun debate yet? That it was unanimous out of committee is encouraging, but surely the full legislature will amend it if they haven't done so already. They have the status of bills on the web site, always a day behind. I'll check it out, but I suspect MB has already done so

whats the difference between 2 or 3 caregivers sharing space and a collective? the only advantage of a collective is that the patient has bigger viriety to choose from...I have grow rooms for rent, they are secured ,enclosed separate spaces, would me and my tennants be considered a collective? if its just one $300 fee do we get our money back? who wrote and proposed this bill? who got some patients in central Maine they have to spare , I could use a few more...

Biological Graffity said:

whats the difference between 2 or 3 caregivers sharing space and a collective?

Click to expand...

Nothing.

Biological Graffity said:

the only advantage of a collective is that the patient has bigger viriety to choose from...

Click to expand...

Not necessarily. Collectives could be used to skirt the law - you could set up a "collective" by recruiting a partner after you reach your 5 patient limit that would then allow you to effectively serve as a caregiver for 10 people. It's a minor detail and silly from our point of view but it is apparently important to the folks in Augusta that nobody ever be able to flower more than 30 plants (your 5 as a patient and then 25 more for your 5 patients).

Biological Graffity said:

I have grow rooms for rent, they are secured ,enclosed separate spaces, would me and my tennants be considered a collective?

Click to expand...

That's far beyond my legal knowledge. The bill specifies that you must grow on your own property. I believe rentals are considered to be your own property. My best guess would be that you are OK and as long as your tenant is not sharing his rental space with another caregiver he would also be goo as well. One rental with two caregivers would probably be problematic. I would definitely run it by a lawyer. Greg Braun in Otisfield is the only attorney i know of doing consultations on Maine MMJ program - the last i heard the Maine Bar has advised it's members that doing such consultations would be unethical as they would be advising clients in how to violate federal law.

Biological Graffity said:

if its just one $300 fee do we get our money back?

Click to expand...

Bwahahaha. Doubtful. When i read the bill it seems unclear as to whether or not registration is required to cultivate for a patent. It's entirely possible that you may still need to pay $300 per patient each year to be a cultivating caregiver.

Biological Graffity said:

who wrote and proposed this bill?

Click to expand...

The bill is sponsored by the state rep from Chelsea. I think her name was Deb Sanderson or something along those lines.

Biological Graffity said:

who got some patients in central Maine they have to spare , I could use a few more...

Click to expand...

That's two of us - i have about 3 weeks before i harvest my first crop - Cosmicdawg, Bubba Kush and C99. All looking real good. Once they're in i'll be scouring the countryside for a patient or 5.

Maine Brookies said:

...nobody ever be able to flower more than 30 plants (your 5 as a patient and then 25 more for your 5 patients).

Click to expand...

I question a couple of points here. First, it has never been clear to me whether the 5 patient rule includes oneself or not. Second, it's six plants per, so six for oneself plus 5 x 6 = 30, for a total of 36 right?

The 5-patient limitation does not include yourself if you are a patient and would not under the new law.

And it would be 36 plants total, thanks for pointing that out.