Colorado: End the ‘war on patients’ access to marijuana

[HossCartwright]

From what I've read, I dont think she was a patient or had "legal" caregiver rights. Im not sure, but thats the vibe im getting. However, If this is the case then im pissed that Rob Corry would even use the "primary caregiver" defense! This is really gonna be a thorn in the paw of the colo mmj scene.
If simply supplying marijuana isnt enough to be a caregiver then EVERY SINGLE dispensary will have go get rid of 90% of what they have!! Right? Our "day passes" and "just while your here" caregiver forms or whatever will hold no more ground.
Please chime in and lets all get as much info as possible, as this IMO is a BIG deal. Hope everyones got they're paper work!
PS. I love snow daze!

I think you're right man. From the wording it doesn't even appear she was a caregiver, she was just growing and selling to dispensaries. Keep in mind the article was written by the media and we don't have all the facts. But if she was just growing under her license, or less, and used the caregiver defense, that sucks! This is a major step back. But, maybe we shouldn't be fair weather fans. Rob Corry has successfully defended some high profile cases that brought the movement forward too. There is still the supreme court.

Does anybody have more facts on this case?

 

[cobcoop]

From what I've read, I dont think she was a patient or had "legal" caregiver rights. Im not sure, but thats the vibe im getting. However, If this is the case then im pissed that Rob Corry would even use the "primary caregiver" defense! This is really gonna be a thorn in the paw of the colo mmj scene.
If simply supplying marijuana isnt enough to be a caregiver then EVERY SINGLE dispensary will have go get rid of 90% of what they have!! Right? Our "day passes" and "just while your here" caregiver forms or whatever will hold no more ground.
Please chime in and lets all get as much info as possible, as this IMO is a BIG deal. Hope everyones got they're paper work!
PS. I love snow daze!

Ha just got back from the sled hill!! Good times.

I believe you are right, she was not a patient or a registered care giver, but she was supplying patients, but they did not have proof of that, and they would not allow the patients to testify.

 

[cobcoop]

But if she was just growing under her license, or less, and used the caregiver defense, that sucks!

I think she had like 45 plants running...

 

[pikes peak 69]

I'm just guessing here, but I thought that this was a case of a disp assigning patients to her but she never met the patient. She was growing under patients cards but didn't know the patients at all.

If I were working with a disp and they were assigning patients to me, I would at least meet the patient on a monthly basis and quiz if there's anything I could do for them.

I think that supply meds would be good enough if you knew your patient, I don't think she did.
In my opinion Caregiving would be talking to the patient and getting an idea of their conditions to treat with certain strains, also a way for patient and cg to communicate even outside the disp.
I don't agree with a disp signing up patients and assigning to a cg/grower and the patient and cg never meet.

pp69

 

[Surrender]

How can caregivers make sure their opinions in this are heard? They have to get their shit together or the backlash will be hard from the legislature.

The walk-in dispensaries are on life-support at this point; They're done. Closed-door private operations will need to step up to the plate and fill the gap.

Can't the board of health simply track caregivers in the registry and tighten up the rules ever-so-slightly?

Currently a patient could designate the Governor their caregiver if they wanted to; So require notarized paperwork on the part of the caregiver as well, and a paperwork fee for each caregiver change after the first one. Also let caregivers register with the board and possess a small amount of medicine and plants, without any patients--to encourage startups!

And let's be realistic, why would anyone person need over, say, 100 patients or even 100 plants? So many seem willing to jump whole-hog into Federally-Fucked territory. I know this is a touchy issue with the community. The whole thing with limited licensing and license hoarding etc is not a healthy thing for the community.

Just some thoughts. Seems like non-profit managed co-ops of caregivers and patients will be the way to go.

 

[BowlPacks]

I'm just guessing here, but I thought that this was a case of a disp assigning patients to her but she never met the patient. She was growing under patients cards but didn't know the patients at all.

If I were working with a disp and they were assigning patients to me, I would at least meet the patient on a monthly basis and quiz if there's anything I could do for them.

I think that supply meds would be good enough if you knew your patient, I don't think she did.
In my opinion Caregiving would be talking to the patient and getting an idea of their conditions to treat with certain strains, also a way for patient and cg to communicate even outside the disp.
I don't agree with a disp signing up patients and assigning to a cg/grower and the patient and cg never meet.

pp69

Im with you. If I was assigned patients from a disp I would do a weekly email update. My patients would have my phone number, and I would meet with them once a month at a minimum, but as needed.
I think the man is trying to put into effect the new Pres. "But continue to prosecute people who use medical marijuana as a cover for illegal activity" thing. Lets not forget that Colo is a RED state (well except for this past election) and i assume the longmont court system is conservative. UGH Is there any feedback on how this effecting disp's around town? Is it business as usual?

 

[funkfingers]

I think everyone is on edge not knowing what the state's stance on the issue is. My question is why are docs that write prescriptions, for potentially addictive and dangerous drugs, not held to this same standard? Why isn't walgreens and rite-aid required to provide the services that they expect out of a caregiver? Are the caregivers expected to foot the bill for massages, chiropractors, ect, or can they just refer you to someone who provides these services like doctors do? Sorry that's a lot of questions, but it just seems they are adding even more grey area to an already un-clear law.

 

[Aeroguerilla]

I gotta get out there.

 

[pikes peak 69]

I don't feel as a cg you have to pay for any services a patient may need. Just help get it done if need be.
As a cg go to their home, if they want you to, and look around if they need any work done. Maybe another patient through the disp or another one of your patients does that type of work. CLICK!.Offer Dr rides if needed. May be a meal at a joint close to their home or close to disp they are coming to. Contact info between patient and cg. Personal time, sit and visit. Similar to visitiing a family member in hospital or nursing home. Just give a shit about the patient.

pp69

 

[Spacecadet01]

Not to rain on anyone's parade...but here is some Leading attorneys opinion on that ruling...If you are growing or caregiving and not supplying wellness services..you can be prosecuted! Be safe people.

Its looking like after that ruling that vendors to dispensaries are not protected form prosecution unless they somehow become part of the patients care. Meaning that they have to do more for the patients then just sell there herb to said dispensary. Wellness centers wont be touched by this..but store fronts that just sell MMJ are in fact prosecutable.

quote from WARREN EDSON ::

I am just saying that if you do not offer wellness services as part of your "caregiving" package, you could be arrested tomorrow if you grow or distibute to others. The DA's could start filing cases tomorrow using the new definition without any legislation at all.



Warren Edson, Esq.
1490 Lafayette St., Suite 407
Denver, CO. 80218
(303) 831-8188
warrenedson.com


QUTOE FROM BRETT BARNEY ::

I concur with Warren on this matter. I think the decision is clearly indicative of the collective mind of the appellate panel, and how they will treat any future appeals, at least until the legislature acts. The Court?s specific holding in Clendenin was that ?to qualify as a ?primary caregiver?, a person must do more than merely supply a patient who has a debilitating medical condition with marijuana.? Unfortunately, or fortunately, the Court does not go on to say exactly how much more is required to be a ?primary caregiver? and therefore does little to help us understand to what extent one must be involved in the patients care regimen to be protected by the affirmative defense. What is clear is that those whose only service provided to a patient involves supplying medicine will be subject to prosecution, and will be unlikely to be permitted to avail themselves of the benefit of the affirmative defense in a manner that will be successful. This may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction at the trial court level, but on appeal, one can expect this result. At the trial level, the court acts as the finder of fact, and based on the facts presented, determines whether the defendant is entitled to present the affirmative defense at trial. The Appeals panel found no error in the Boulder trial court?s conclusion that Clendenin?s lack of personal relationship with her patients precluded her from asserting the defense, so from this decision, we can take away two pieces of knowledge; 1) caregivers should know their patients personally, and 2) they should be involved in the patients care in a way that involves more than ?merely supplying a patient ?with marijuana.?



I think this decision will have little bearing on those caregivers who are providing a ?wellness center? approach to caregiving (as Warren has indicated, ?Mentch like wellness service?). This will, however, likely have repercussions for those who have storefronts, whose only function is to dispense medicine. I am more concerned for those vendors who have ?subcontracted? with patients, through another caregiver, for the production of the medicine. While these individuals are, in essence, making the great majority of the medicine easily available to patients, I fear that they have little protection after this decision, unless they have a greater role in the patient?s care than most I have encountered.

 

[HossCartwright]

Lets not forget that Colo is a RED state (well except for this past election) and i assume the longmont court system is conservative.

Actually, this was prosecuted in Boulder County Court. WTF right?

 

[cobcoop]

More info today, decent articles. I wouldn't mind them putting some language in there that says in order to open a disp you need to be a Co resident for at least a year, that would stop the flood of these Cali guys, which is what has fucked us in the eyes of the public. Just like Rep Romer stated, they were walking around offering cash for buildings to open dispensaries.

Denver to regulate dispensaries

A pretty good op ed, considering all the bad press of late

 

[BudGood]

I don't feel as a cg you have to pay for any services a patient may need. Just help get it done if need be.
As a cg go to their home, if they want you to, and look around if they need any work done. Maybe another patient through the disp or another one of your patients does that type of work. CLICK!.Offer Dr rides if needed. May be a meal at a joint close to their home or close to disp they are coming to. Contact info between patient and cg. Personal time, sit and visit. Similar to visitiing a family member in hospital or nursing home. Just give a shit about the patient.

pp69

Spot on pp69, especially the last sentence, sums it up quite nicely.

 

[Spacecadet01]

More info today, decent articles. I wouldn't mind them putting some language in there that says in order to open a disp you need to be a Co resident for at least a year, that would stop the flood of these Cali guys, which is what has fucked us in the eyes of the public. Just like Rep Romer stated, they were walking around offering cash for buildings to open dispensaries.

Denver to regulate dispensaries

A pretty good op ed, considering all the bad press of late

good articles...especially like the last one. Soo true about pain pills and such!

 

[Spacecadet01]

Just received this from Sensible Colorado.
Please be there.
pp69

https://app.e2ma.net/app/view:Campai...f13c3259b641e6

CO Health Board to vote on Tuesday (11/3) to Weaken Medical Marijuana Law


**EMERGENCY ALERT-- PLEASE FORWARD WIDELY**

In an underhanded move, the Colorado Board of Health will be voting to weaken the medical marijuana law at an "emergency" meeting on Tuesday, November 3 at 10:30am in Denver. At this stealth meeting the Board will be voting to redefine what a "caregiver" is to require such individuals to provide supplementary-- and often unnecessary-- services beyond simply providing sick patients with medical marijuana.

"This is like requiring my pharmacist to give me a massage or make me a sandwich," said Dan Pope, muscular dystrophy patient and medical card holder. "I can do those activities myself. I need a caregiver to give me medicine. End of story."

This meeting, which was announced in a late afternoon email to a small handful of patient advocates, is another example of the state engaging in underhanded tactics in their effort to undermine the medical marijuana law and the will of the Colorado voters. Please help hold them accountable.

Here's How You Can Help:

(1) Attend the Meeting. This meeting will occur at 10:30am on Tuesday, November 3 in the Snow Room, 1st Floor Building A of the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment, 4300 Cherry Creek Dr. South, Denver CO.

(2) Call-in to the Meeting. While we strongly prefer that you attend in person, you can also call-in at 1-866-899-5399 1-866-899-5399, conference code *3529725*

(3) Spread the Word. Please tell friends and family to attend the meeting and forward this alert widely!

 

[BowlPacks]

So does the current decision (while we wait till Dec. 16) say that supplying a legal patient with MMJ is enough to satisfy the law? Or is it saying that one must provide MORE services?

 

[Bud Spleefman]

Horrible decision today, hopefully it gets overturned.

Health Board Redefines Medical Marijuana Caregiver

Health Officials Hold Emergency Meeting On Medical Pot Rules

Lance Hernandez, 7NEWS Reporter

POSTED: 11:47 am MST November 3, 2009
UPDATED: 6:57 pm MST November 3, 2009

http://icmag.com/rss/javascript:popUp('/print/21509644/detail.html','width=460,height=400,scrollbars');javascript:popUp("http://cf.thedenv...1509644/detail.html","width=450,height=250");

DENVER -- State health officials called an emergency meeting Tuesday to reverse a decision made last summer on the definition of a medical marijuana caregiver. And their decision isn't going over very well with medical marijuana users or providers.

Last summer state health officials broadened the description of caregiver to include anyone who was providing medical marijuana to patients with debilitating conditions. But last week, the Colorado Court of Appeals ruled that a caregiver has to be someone who must have personal contact with clients and does more than provide medical marijuana.

So on Tuesday the board of health changed its rules to conform.


The executive director of the Colorado Department of Health and Environment said that means medical marijuana providers may have to prove that they do more for their clients' welfare, such as grocery shopping or taking them to a doctor's office.

"If someone is confronted by police that is providing medical marijuana, that person may have to prove that he or she is doing more than providing marijuana, that they're providing other services, they're providing groceries, taking them to a doctor's office, something like that," said Jim Martin, the executive director of the Colorado Department of Health.

Medical marijuana patients say that's hogwash.

"I don't need somebody to run to the store for me. I don't need somebody to give me a bubble bath. I need someone to grow good quality marijuana that helps me with my medical condition," said Tim Martin, a medical marijuana user.

Users say the decision is going to make it more difficult and more costly to purchase medical marijuana.

"They're forcing me to go to the black market to buy a product that I know nothing about and that I have no input on," said Roger Ronas.

Ronas, 51, said he suffers from end stage renal disease and that medical marijuna has allowed him to avoid dialysis and to cut back on regular medication.

An attorney who has represented many marijuana patients says he may file a lawsuit seeking to stop the state from enforcing its new rule.

"I think it's going to add to the cost and the burden of supplying the patients with their medicine. It's going to decrease the amount of people who go into the business of caregiving," Attorney Robert Corry said.

He said he will ask the Supreme Court to overturn the appeals court ruling that led to Tuesday's decision.

Marijuana advocates say not only is the decision wrong, so is the way it came about -- during an emergency meeting, called with less than 24 hours' notice.

Robert Chase used a bullhorn beforehand to call for Martin's resignation and the resignation of the state's Chief Medical Officer Ned Colange.

"I believe they committed gross misfeasance. They knew full well there was not an emergency basis for holding this meeting," Chase said.

The state constitution defines a caregiver as an adult who "has significant responsibility for managing the well-being of a patient who has a debilitating medical condition."

In August, the health board of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment tried to clarify the rules by defining "significant responsibility" as simply supplying marijuana. But the Court of Appeals ruling last week prompted the state health board to suspend its August definition of "significant responsibility."

"What we came up with is a definition that is now not legal," said board member Kindra Mulch. "We tried to clarify it, and it seems like we muddied the waters."

The board will decide Dec. 16 whether to eliminate its "significant responsibility" definition. And although the board will take public comment before the vote, it doesn't appear the board has much of a choice but to make its decision final.

"We're falling back on the (state) constitution because at this point, we don't have anywhere else to go," Martin said.

Corry criticized the health board for not allowing public comment Tuesday.

"This is a secret meeting," he said shortly after a board member told him he was out of order for insisting on speaking. "The people are not being allowed to participate. This is illegal, Mr. Chairman. And I'll see you in court!"

The board said the public comment portion of the hearing is slated for its December meeting.

Pierre Werner, president of the DrReefer dispensary, said if the ruling sticks it will increase his expenses.

"This is going to force me to hire more people to provide these (additional) services to the patients, and in the long run, those costs are going to be passed down to the patients," said Werner.

 

[Marshmello]

You should post this in the CDPE Emergency thread Bud. Good Find.

 

[Spacecadet01]

LETS THE PHONES BEGIN TO RING!!! LETS LET THEM KNOW THAT OUR VOICES MATTER! TIME TO SPEAK UP IN A POLITE WAY COLORADO!!

Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Contacts

Executive Director
James B. Martin
Phone 303-692-2000
TDD Line 303691-7700

Chief Medical Officer
Ned Calonge, M.D., M.P.H
303-692-2011

Office of Communications Director
Mark Salley
303-692-2013

CDPHE Main Phone
303-692-2000
800-886-7689

Board of Health
303-692-3464

Board of Health Administrator
Karen Osthus
303-692-3464 ex 3466

State of Colorado Board of Health Contact info here

 

[Muleskinner]

The govt's criminal justice system is working for the alcohol industry. Along with the prison complex and law enforcement.

Patients deserve to have a wide range of dispensaries competing against each other and for profit. That will yield the best medicine and lowest prices.

Can you imagine telling Merck or Pfizer they had to be non-profit and have a limited number of patients? Imagine all the whining - we can't afford to do research!

Sick people do not deserve one iota of persecution from the medical system. Look at this urine testing of people walking around with broken spines and nervous systems. It's medieval; it's a national disgrace

The criminal justice system feeds on the most vulnerable like a scavenger. It's unbelievable - we've actually figured out a way to be worse than the Nazis - instead of persecuting the Jewish people we scapegoat the sick and dying