ICMAG Administration endorses The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010

[GanjaAL]

How does it work with the popular vote in Cali? It does say in the bill 'either by a subsequent measure submitted to a vote of the People at a statewide election; or by statute validly passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor'

Sounds like you guys dont even need the state congress or governer... Get out there and get some signitures and start marches. Get active. Then vote locally to change the rules in your cities and counties, propose ammendments for the popular vote. Honestly it sounds to me like prop 19 is giving explicit power to the people of California, while not necessarily taking it out of the hands of our elected officials.

Majority do not support the bill so good luck getting it passed there. YOu need a majority vote of 2/3rds if I am not mistaken.

Like I have been preaching... in order to win people over... mmj laws need to be improved apon, hold elected officials accountable and LE liable... until that happens we will have to inch our way.

 

[GanjaAL]

In fact the language that says use revenue to ENFORCE the mj laws under prop 19 means that CA pigs will have a direct funding source to harass the home grower.

This can't be true! someone on here said they can not do this because of smell... damit... who is lieing here...LOL

Oh wait that was if you are driving.... sorry.

 

[vta]

Yup... the new governor gets to sign in or not sign the new law... I wonder if these people are even in cali somtimes by the things they say...LOL

God help us if she does sign it... as prohibitionists will have a field day with this new bill as it puts them almost in complete control to tax and regulate(prohibit) as they see fit.

lol ok..now I'm not going to bash ya on this one...maybe you will listen this time. The Governor does NOT have anything to do with 19. The Governor does not sign nor ever does he/she have the power to do shit. prop19 is a proposition...a voter initiative. It's not a bill like you say and it's not anything any Governor can stop if voted in. You spew TOTAL misinformation as it was a fact and then lol at other people.

Now...I'll fill you in on a little more...This law allows for the state to amend the law as far as restrictions goes. They can only EXPAND the current minimums and NOT lower ir restrict them. The Governor will have the ability to sign. not sign or just ignore any amendment...that is it. And even then their veto can be overridden...although I doubt it would be for cannabis.

 

[JJScorpio]

Yup... the new governor gets to sign in or not sign the new law... I wonder if these people are even in cali somtimes by the things they say...LOL

.

So must be you're not from Cali? I'm not, and I know the Gov doesn't have to sign a prop if the people pass it.... You should be careful what you LOL about....

 

[dagnabit]

This can't be true! someone on here said they can not do this because of smell... damit... who is lieing here...LOL

Oh wait that was if you are driving.... sorry.

what does any of this have to to with the bullshit you quoted?


hydrosun what language frightens you into believing CA pigs will have a direct funding source to harass the home grower
Each 1oz legal purchase will support the ENFORCEMENT against those bigger than 25sq' and / or having more than an oz?

 

[dagnabit]

Headed down to the town meeting where they are banning any and all sales of marijuana to include dispensories... and guess what... prop19 is going to back them up.

how?

 

[someotherguy]

GanjaAL is a putz guys and so not worth rebutting,
he spews shit and anyone who has read this thread
already knows that.

'my mind is made up, don't confuse me with the facts'
truly applies with he and his ilk!

he's like a fart, ignore the smell for a while and it will
go away.

peace, SOG

 

[Tom Hill]

No no Ganja, if that was the case we'd never get anything done out here. This is a proposition put directly to the people after getting the sigs. I'm pretty sure if it (prop19) passes it becomes mandatory referendum and (law) goes into effect the day after the election - w/no legislative tampering after that (see People vs Kelly) except that which is specifically allowed for in the original writing. In this case local governments are to handle much of the specifics so if San Diego etc wants to continue being a tight-ass, it's gunna cost them while they sit back and watch the northern 101 corridor etc get fat - and let's just see how long they can keep that up for Welcome to California, one of the few places on the planet where we can get this done. Oops, just saw VTA and JJ already dealt with this.

Anyway, most of the "no's" arguments are becoming increasingly weak-ass imo, and their bags once overflowing with bs are running on empty. Even if they can't see this to be true, I'm quite sure that others can. -T

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

Well as I stated prop 19 would not make growing any more legal for me (more than 25sq'), so I would not be fighting the government by supporting prop 19.

In fact the language that says use revenue to ENFORCE the mj laws under prop 19 means that CA pigs will have a direct funding source to harass the home grower.

Each 1oz legal purchase will support the ENFORCEMENT against those bigger than 25sq' and / or having more than an oz.

So in point of fact the average stoner will be paying the police force to hunt ICmagers.

Hunt icmaggers huh? ID suspect the only ones getting "hunted down" will be the ones too ignorant or arrogant to start a legitimate business and pay taxes...

As for the rest of us who will jump on the opportunity to start a completly legal cannabis business, we will be fine.

And if you can't produce enough in a 5x5, you should probably just quit growing.

Like I've said it seems the only ones opposed to this are the growers and dealers who aren't smart enough to open a legitimate business or are too arrogant to think a commodity like cannabis should not be taxed.

Either way good luck, your sure as hell going to need it...

 

[blwd67]

Majority do not support the bill so good luck getting it passed there. YOu need a majority vote of 2/3rds if I am not mistaken.

a 2/3 majority for the popular vote? I've never heard of this, but ok. 2/3 applies to a vetoed bill that then goes back to congress. Popular and legislative voting are completely separate.

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

Funny how everyone I know is voting yes for 19. The only people I've heard that are against it are the few here on icmag and other mj sites. And it's obvious what their REAL motives are, rather they care to admit it or not....

The majority are for 19. It is only a very select few who would rather see the continued persecution of tens of thousands continue....

 

[Tom Hill]

I know a lot of growers/friends (personally) that I'm still working on. They at least are truthful with me, "fuck Tom, I'm worried about me and mine". I get that, I respect that, it's real. Some of these arguments here on the net though, well, they're fucking absurd. -Tom

 

[blwd67]

Making money. Oops Tom got in before me.

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

I know a lot of growers/friends (personally) that I'm still working on. They at least are truthful with me, "fuck Tom, I'm worried about me and mine". I get that, I respect that, it's real. Some of these arguments here on the net though, well, they're fucking absurd. -Tom

Exactly Tom, if they are worried about losing income, just say so. I would respect that stance much more than the bullshit that has been spewing on this thread....

 

[Kwazee Wabbit]

This guy must read ICMAG

http://abcnews.go.com/US/TheLaw/eme...cas-cannabis-capital/story?id=11302182&page=1

Legal Pot: Death of the Emerald Triangle?

How the Legalization of Marijuana Is Destroying the Cannabis Capital of the U.S. and Its One Shot at Survival

Survival of the Fittest

Back in March, the idea that pot legalization could destroy her hometown became lodged in Anna Hamilton's mind. Using her gift for words and local popularity, she began organizing meetings with business owners and county officials that were meant to answer one question: How are we going to survive?

At one of the meetings, Hamilton took a quick survey. How many people believe legalization of recreational pot will improve the local economy? Of the 185 community representatives from various industries, a resounding 95 percent said it would be "a disaster."

"The idea that my generation would let this economic world that we have created for ourselves..." Hamilton said before trailing off in thought. "I started the meetings to try and prepare the county for the impacts on the social services" -- social services that she believes will be strapped when "tens of thousands" of people are driven out of work.

Therefore, many in the Emerald Triangle have taken the seemingly contradictory stance of protesting a law that would legalize their cash crop. Though she is not one of them, Hamilton said the detractors of legalization argue that the way the proposal is structured leads to monopolies on marijuana production and distribution -- a thinly veiled nod to Oakland's impending factory production.

It's an argument many have likened to the way in which super stores infamously run smaller "mom and pop" stores out of business across the country.

"Now the city of Oakland is going to end the marijuana business," Hamilton said. "What's going to happen to us?"

She said if her home town can no longer depend on the marijuana market, it will simply "dry up and blow away."

Desley Brooks, an Oakland City Council member and "longtime supporter of cannabis," told ABC News the super store comparison is off the mark.

"I don't see that," Brooks said. "I think that some people have made a significant amount of money and they don't want anyone else to infringe on that money."

Mass Production Changes Face of Market

Ever since California became the first state to legalize marijuana for medicinal use in 1996 (and approve an expansion in 2003), growers in the Emerald Triangle have faced increased competition in the form of hundreds of dispensaries that popped up across the state. Earlier this month, city officials in Oakland, Calif., gave preliminary approval for four large-scale marijuana production factories, paving the way for unprecedented state-approved mass production of pot.

As a consequence of mass-produced pot flowing into the market, Emerald Triangle growers expect the price of pot to drop -- but not nearly as badly as it will if the state votes to legalize the recreational use of marijuana in November.

A study earlier this month by the RAND Drug Policy Research Center concluded that legalization would throw the price of pot into a freefall -- down as much as 80 percent.

As a result, Emerald Triangle growers, business owners and officials have been thrown into a frenzy to come up with ways to meet the devastating effect such a crash would have on their community and have been divided into two camps of thought.

The first is the hope that the Emerald Triangle can survive on the weight of their "superior product" and emerge as the elite, highly specialized "Napa Valley of pot." Legalization would also allow growers to better cooperate with authorities to curtail violent criminal elements that also have made the Emerald Triangle their home.

The second theory is that the counties are doomed.

The only thing that everyone agrees upon is that nothing will be the same.

Last Hope: Becoming the 'Napa Valley' of Marijuana

But there are others in the Emerald Triangle that welcome legalization as an opportunity.

"They are getting ready big time," a Mendocino county official said, referring to growers who have excitedly brought their scales in to the Agriculture department to make sure they function properly. "A lot of people I've talked to, they're not really worried about it. They're kind of excited about the opportunity to take their expertise and release it."

Humboldt's county supervisor, Mark Lovelace, said he believes his county is up to the challenge posed by mass producers.

"If Oakland decides they want to be the Wal-Mart of marijuana, we can be the Napa Valley of marijuana," he said, "if we want our name synonymous with higher grade, outdoor, quality product.

If this becomes a legal industry in the free market, the way you're going to proceed is with superior product, superior price and with better distribution," he said.

In fact, Lovelace believes the Emerald Triangle already has a step up on the coming competition.

"You go anywhere in the country -- anywhere in the world -- and you mention you're from Humboldt County, you get a nod. That's name recognition to die for. We've lived with that for 30 or 40 years now, treated it somewhat as an embarrassment ... but if this is going to be a newly legitimate industry, shouldn't we be looking for ways to capture the upside?"

Local journalist and photographer Kym Kemp, 50, has lived in the Emerald Triangle all her life -- long enough fear a repeat of the economic devastation the counties suffered when the logging industry collapsed before marijuana took over.

"Humboldt will survive of course," Kemp told ABC News. "[But] things could get ugly. Unless, and this is big, unless local government and growers work together to create rules to foster [marijuana] tourism. Unless the marijuana industry is brought out of the shadows and welcomed -- then Humboldt will not just survive, but could even thrive."

Mendocino County supervisor John McCowen agreed.

"Personally, I can't wait for economic reality to come to the marijuana business," McCowen said. He said after a period of "transition," legalization would drive out criminal elements and in time attract legitimate businesses that have historically avoided the area due to its reputation.

Hamilton is not convinced.

"You're looking at a Wild West scramble. All these people are up in the air. Nothing can tell you what's going to happen," she said.

The image of a Napa-esque marijuana industry brought a chuckle to a Mendocino County official who asked not to be named.

"Can you imagine? People come in to our little boutique shops to try different varieties of pot? We'd have our wine tasting areas and our pot tasting areas," he said with wonder before a more somber thought took over:

"As far as what's going to happen? I haven't the first clue."

 

[localhero]

sorry i just dont see oakland being repeated in humboldt and the northern pot counties.

too many people up there who live and breath green. r lee has big balls but i dont think he has a death wish. tourism hell yeah it will be off the hook up north. no way do i see big business able to lobby out the nor cal growers. i can imagine alot of seed companies from all over the globe setting up shop up north. i see an even bigger gold rush of growers from all over the states jumping all over nor cal acreage.

probably the biggest issue facing the guys and girls up north is keeping the humboldt name clean. i would do this: pass local laws that state only businesses liscensed before nov 2010 may use the terms: humboldt, emerald triangle, nor cal, northern california, etc. that would atleast stop any carpet baggers from coopting a hard earned legacy. and im so cal born and raised 4th generation, growing up if you could get your hands on anything, "humboldt" it was like xmas. it would suck to see that stained.

 

[Batboy]

In fact the language that says use revenue to ENFORCE the mj laws under prop 19 means that CA pigs will have a direct funding source to harass the home grower.

Each 1oz legal purchase will support the ENFORCEMENT against those bigger than 25sq' and / or having more than an oz.

You are off your rocker. I understand being mistrustful of the govt, but you are suggesting that a city govt will legalize the sale and tax of mj under Prop19, and then they will turn around and use those funds for anti-mj LEO operations? I have no love for the elected officials in my locale, but they aren't that stupid (and I have a feeling yours aren't either). Remember, if there is Prop19 revenue, then some type of structure has been established and legalized for the supply, sale and tax of mj. Your politicians want that money, and they don't want it to bust you and your 50 square foot basement.

there are some genuine concerns about the actual effects of this bill passing, but you throwing out the garbage quoted above only serves to weaken your legitimate points.

 

[igrowone]

probably the biggest issue facing the guys and girls up north is keeping the humboldt name clean. i would do this: pass local laws that state only businesses liscensed before nov 2010 may use the terms: humboldt, emerald triangle, nor cal, northern california, etc. that would atleast stop any carpet baggers from coopting a hard earned legacy. and im so cal born and raised 4th generation, growing up if you could get your hands on anything, "humboldt" it was like xmas. it would suck to see that stained.

a genuine concern, brand name carries value if the brand has widespread recognition
it's a tough issue because it is often in the domain of a copyrighted/registered label/name
which falls under the federal umbrella
this is one place the state government could actually be a help to the growers who have so much to lose

 

[localhero]

like how only the region of champagne in france can call their sparkling wine, champagne.

it could get very strict if you let it; no map of north california on any labeling, address font size limited to size 6 font on any packaging, no advertising language alluding to location, lol on and on.

 

[vta]

sorry i just dont see oakland being repeated in humboldt and the northern pot counties.

too many people up there who live and breath green. r lee has big balls but i dont think he has a death wish. tourism hell yeah it will be off the hook up north. no way do i see big business able to lobby out the nor cal growers. i can imagine alot of seed companies from all over the globe setting up shop up north. i see an even bigger gold rush of growers from all over the states jumping all over nor cal acreage.

I see kinda the same thing. I think it will be a tourist area and I vision tons of different types of businesses popping up. You will see some younger types moving there just like 215 but it is hard to tell how much of a 'resident' increase there will be....considering that if it was me moving out here, I would setup shop in the place with the best laws. It might be Humboldt but then again they might limit the commercial end...IMO a full out free for all is not likely. It will definitely be interesting to see how things play out.

There are a ton of small towns dotting our highways all over this state. Over the decades most of these towns have become poor or not as visited as much anymore. I see not tons but definitely a lot of these towns taking advantage of this law, either by setting up the zoning for commercial growers or opening up cannabis themed biz's. Wouldn't you like to go to a cannabis friendly bed and breakfast known for their connoisseur weed, incredible cannabis laced foods and breath taking ocean views? I would!