Regulate Marijuana Like Wine CA 2012

[DoobieDuck]

Seamaiden thank you for he support.

Gaius I have this link for you to consider but I'll continuing Googling to find others..peace..DD
http://regulatemarijuanalikewine.com/legal-and-political-analysis-of-regulate-marijuana-like-wine/

 

[vta]

so does anyone have the analyses of this new law?

I'll just post the whole thing here

The Initiative

REGULATE MARIJUANA LIKE WINE

A California Voter Initiative - 2012

In Short - This California Voter Initiative for 2012 intends to:

Repeal prohibition of marijuana for adults
Strictly regulates marijuana, just like the wine industry
Allows hemp agriculture and products
Does not change laws regarding

medical marijuana
impairment
workplace
vehicle operation
use by minors under 21 years old

Provides specific personal possession exemptions
Requires dismissal of pending court cases
Defense against all related litigation
Prevents California from supporting federal enforcements that conflict with this law and requires the State to petition the Feds to remove marijuana from Schedule One
Prohibits commercial advertising of non-medical marijuana
Generates new revenue from sales taxes, while creating no new taxes

THE INITIATIVE LANGUAGE | Updated: SEPTEMBER 2, 2011
The Regulate Marijuana Like Wine Act 2012
_____________________________________
The People of the State of California do enact as follows:

Section 1. Findings, Declarations, Purpose, Directives, and Orders

Section 11420 is added to the Health and Safety Code as Chapter 6.8 Regulation and Taxation of Marijuana. This section shall be known as and may be cited as the "The Regulate Marijuana Like Wine Act of 2012," known hereinafter as the "Act."

(a) The People of the State of California find and declare all of the following:

(1) Outlawing marijuana has created illicit markets, empowered gangs, drug cartels and terrorists, resulted in violence, corruption and violations of rights against search and seizure, and contributed to the highest incarceration rate in the world.

(2) Marijuana is an untapped revenue source for the State of California. The best way to tap that source for the benefit of all Californians is to regulate and tax marijuana just like wine.

(3) The regulation of marijuana will benefit the People of the State of California by reducing criminal gang and cartel activity, promoting agriculture, creating jobs by reestablishing a hemp industry, and reducing the fiscal and incarceration overpopulation burdens on law enforcement, and courts.

(b) This Act does all of the following:

(1) Repeals California Health and Safety Code sections 11357, 11358, 11359, 11360, 11361, 11485, Vehicle Code section 23222(b). Marijuana is removed from Health and Safety Code sections 11364 through 11375, 11366, 11366.5, 11469 through 11495, 11532(b)(7), 11590, 11703, and 11999. Adults 21 years of age and older, and approved business entities shall no longer be prohibited from association, use, possession, trade, processing, packaging, gifting, vending, sales, distribution, storage, transportation, production, or cultivation of marijuana. This Act establishes rights not defenses.

(2) Establishes that the following shall be punishable by a fine of, up to $2,500.00 per occurrence.

(A) The sale or distribution of marijuana by or to any individual under 21 years old, or;

(B) The sale or commercial activity authorized herein, when outside the commercial and regulatory system established herein.

(3) Removes “marijuana,” “THC,” and “CBD,” explicitly or by inference as a controlled substance, from Health and Safety Code section 11054.

(4) This Act does not control, repeal, modify, or change statutes pertaining to:

(A) Operating a motor vehicle;

(B) Using marijuana or being impaired while in the workplace or in public;

(C) Medical marijuana statutes as set forth in Proposition 215 (H&S11362.5) and its progeny.

(5) For persons under 21 years of age it is an infraction punishable by a fine up to $2,500.00, for any one of the following:

(A) Possession of over one ounce of marijuana.

(B) Cultivation of marijuana.

(C) Gifting, sharing, distributing, sales, storage, transporting over one ounce of marijuana.

(D) Possession of one ounce or less of marijuana, in this class shall be an infraction with a $100 fine.

(6) This Act enjoins the search, arrest, prosecution, property seizure, asset forfeiture, eradication costs, and/or any criminal or civil penalty, or sanction, for activity authorized herein.

(7) No later than February 1, 2013, the state Department of Alcohol Beverage Control shall adopt regulations and procedures, provide and accept forms for the implementation of commercial activity under this Act. Such regulations shall not prohibit marijuana farming, the operation of marijuana establishments or point of sale outlets, either expressly or through regulations that make their operation different than wine or beer regulations and fees, or unreasonably impracticable. Should the Department of Alcohol Beverage Control fail to have procedures in effect by this date, it shall use forms presently used for wine and beer, and replace the words wine, beer, alcohol, with the word marijuana, and accept and process those forms within sixty days of submission or approval is automatic. Localities may not adopt higher or extra fees, limits, site plans, zoning, regulations or procedures for commercial activity which are different than those which regulate grape farms, wineries, distribution and sales of wine and beer. Commercial cultivation, infused-product manufacturing, and distribution licenses, consistent with the declarations, purposes and goals of this section may be issued if fees are equal to or less than any such fees charged for similar wine industry activity. Should the Department of Alcohol Beverage Control fail to enact regulations, a person or business acting commercially, shall not be subject to the penalty provided in 11420 (b)(2)(B).

(8) All pending state court actions under said amended statutes which conflict with the provisions of this Act, shall be dismissed with prejudice.

(9) The state and/or local jurisdictions may regulate the processing, distribution, sales, and outdoor use within 600 feet of a school, and in residential zones.

(10) Experimentation, development, research, testing, cultivation, sales, or possession of genetically-modified (GMO) marijuana, hemp, and its seeds, shall be banned throughout the state of California.

Section 2. Provisions

(a) This Act adopts the definitions of marijuana, concentrates, and THC as they presently exist in Health and Safety Code Sections 11018 and 11006.5. However, those definitions shall be broadly interpreted to include the species Cannabis Indica, Ruderalis, and Americana, as well as any plant part, form, derivative, interspecies hybrids or cross-breeds, and all non-genetically-modified strains of the Cannabis genus and plant.

(b) State taxes and regulations which may be similar and apply to the grape farming and wine industries, produce and processed agricultural products and brokerage industry, distribution, wholesale and retail sales, and transactions of agricultural crops and products shall apply to marijuana, regardless of THC level, using the grape farming and winery industry as an example, so long as the results support these declarations, purposes and goals.

(c) All wholesale and retail products with a final THC level below 0.3 percent shall be authorized for sales as hemp products. All marijuana or hemp products with a final THC level of 0.3 percent or above shall be restricted for sales to persons 21 years of age or older and regulated in a manner similar to wine, so long as the results support these declarations, purposes and goals. Both hemp and marijuana are declared agricultural crops.

(d) The State of California, and all branches of its government, shall liberally construe the meaning and implementation of this Act to favor and benefit this class of adults, and business entities as follows:

(1) No taxes, fees, laws, rules, regulations, zones, local city or county zoning requirements may be adopted or enacted to defeat, deny, or prohibit the purposes of this Act, or to defeat, deny, or prohibit this adult class or, associations, organizations, commercial, agricultural, or industrial businesses authorized herein, from engaging in the activities authorized and protected by this Act.

(2) Adults 21 years and older may produce up to 6 mature outdoor flowering plants, or up to 12 mature indoor flowering plants per person; or a total number of plants cultivated per household not to exceed 12 mature flowering plants outdoors or 24 plants indoors. The cultivation shall take place in an indoor or outdoor space or area not visible to the public. These plants and their produce may not be made available for sale.

(3) Nothing in this section shall prevent a property owner from prohibiting conduct that damages their property.

(4) This Act creates and requires statewide standards and preempts and nullifies any and all conflicting local regulations, while allowing local jurisdictions limited regulation under Health and Safety Code 11570 over cultivation in residential and school zones only. Local regulations cannot decrease plants in (d)(2) above but may allow a greater number of plants instead.

(5) No regulations, taxes, or fees shall be enacted or imposed upon marijuana for qualifying business entities, which are more severe or restrictive than those comparable and reasonable in the commercial wine grape farming and winery regulations of the alcohol industry model.

(e) State, local, elected, appointed, hired employees, officers, and officials shall not directly or indirectly cooperate with or assist federal, state, local officers or officials, volunteers, or employees who eradicate marijuana, act for seizure or forfeiture, or to defeat any liberally construed purpose of this Act, nor may any state or local agency contract to eradicate marijuana that is being grown, manufactured or stored under the provisions of this Act.

(f) Within 30 days of passage of this Act, the offices of both the state Attorney General and the Department of Public Health shall inform the United States Department of Health and Human Services, the United States Attorney General, Congress, Drug Enforcement Agency, and Food and Drug Administration that in 1996 the state of California recognized the current medical use of marijuana in treatment in the United States, and since 1996 has approved a state-regulated physician medical marijuana practice. Physicians have recommended the use of marijuana to thousands of patients. For that reason diligently demand or petition as is appropriate (see 21 CFR 1308.43, 21 USC 811-812) that marijuana and tetrahydrocannabinols as defined in §21 USC 802(16) be removed from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, 21 USC 800 et seq., where it is currently listed as an addictive drug with no accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.

(g) The State of California is ordered to protect and defend all provisions of this Act from any and all challenges or litigation, whether by persons, officials, cities, counties, the state or federal governments.

(h) This Act prohibits all commercial advertising for sales, distribution, and use of marijuana, except for medical marijuana and products that contain less than a final THC level below 0.3 percent. This provision shall be enforced hereafter by penalties to be set forth by the Legislature.

(i) This Act shall become effective immediately upon passage.

Section 3. Severability

If any of the provisions of this Act, or any part thereof, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, the remaining provisions shall not be affected, but shall remain in full force and effect, and to this end the provisions of this Act are severable.

 

[vta]

Cool

(10) Experimentation, development, research, testing, cultivation, sales, or possession of genetically-modified (GMO) marijuana, hemp, and its seeds, shall be banned throughout the state of California.

 

[vta]

so does anyone have the analyses of this new law?

I just found this on their site...

Compare California Voter Initiatives

Regulate Marijuana Like Wine ~ Repeal Cannabis Prohibition ~ Prop 215 ~ Prop 19

Compare Initiatives RMLW RCP PROP 215 PROP 19

Word Length
1735 725 452 3009

Repeals ALL Adult Pot Laws
YES NO NO NO

Specifically Prohibits Arrests
YES NO NO NO

Protects Your Civil Rights
YES NO NO NO

Creates NO NEW Taxes
YES YES YES NO

Prohibits Special Taxes
YES YES NO NO

Forbids Co-operation w/ FEDS
YES NO NO NO

Prohibits Enforcing FED Laws
YES NO NO NO

Prohibits FEDERAL FUNDS
YES NO NO NO

Creates No New Crimes
YES NO YES NO

Removes From State Schedule I
YES NO NO NO

Demands Federal Re-Scheduling
YES NO NO NO

Anti - GMO Clause
YES NO NO NO

Exempts 12 Plants for Adults
YES NO NO NO

Legalizes Marijuana for ADULT USE
YES YES NO NO

Legalizes HEMP
YES YES NO NO

Forces Calif AG to DEFEND ACT
YES NO NO NO

Creates CAPS on Regulations
YES YES NO NO

Limits Local Zoning
YES YES NO NO

Limits Local Taxes
YES YES NO NO

 

[trichrider]

Good luck in that there proposal. Best of Wishes.

I support, but cannot lend my vote, not for lack of want, but geographically speaking i'm out the picture.

for all that hope that 'where cali goes, there goes...' a quick audit of the facililties that support prohibition show the opposite. not to rain on this parade, but the rest of the nation has little clue of where cali goes.

 

[Yes4Prop215]

not a fan of the limits....there is no limit for cultivating wine grapes. i can buy 30 acres and put 1000 vine cuttings or i could grow 2-3 vines in my backyard..

(2) Adults 21 years and older may produce up to 6 mature outdoor flowering plants, or up to 12 mature indoor flowering plants per person; or a total number of plants cultivated per household not to exceed 12 mature flowering plants outdoors or 24 plants indoors. The cultivation shall take place in an indoor or outdoor space or area not visible to the public. These plants and their produce may not be made available for sale.


a better limit would be something along the lines of mendo or butte county. 25 plants for parcels under 5 acres. 50-99 for any other parcel.

even though i will still support this because its a step in the right direction, but just not a fan of any limit.

if this limit is for anyone without a commercial license or something thats understandable. but that means they must make commecial cultivation licenses available for people who want to grow for profit just like most vineyards.

vineyards arent growing grapes for the owners to drink, this is business, in order to generate profits and pay taxes on those profits these limits must be expanded..

please correct me if i missed anything...

 

[Hammerhead]

There's no verbiage in there about commercial growing ??

 

[trichrider]

There's no verbiage in there about commercial growing ??

"(1) Repeals California Health and Safety Code sections 11357, 11358, 11359, 11360, 11361, 11485, Vehicle Code section 23222(b). Marijuana is removed from Health and Safety Code sections 11364 through 11375, 11366, 11366.5, 11469 through 11495, 11532(b)(7), 11590, 11703, and 11999. Adults 21 years of age and older, and approved business entities shall no longer be prohibited from association, use, possession, trade, processing, packaging, gifting, vending, sales, distribution, storage, transportation, production, or cultivation of marijuana. This Act establishes rights not defenses."


i think it is all about commercial...

 

[monkey5]

Doobieduck, Great! Thank you for posting up this thread! Some very good info to know about here! I hope to be there in time for voting on this issue! Thank you again! monkey5

 

[redbudduckfoot]

ya, it seems like the limits are for private growers(backyard, closet, the like) and not for "for profit" commercial peeps. good to hear though. might make the move out there, will just have to grow 10lb a month...............

 

[el bee]

I'm seriously excited about the popularity of the proposal and I hope that it passes so no one goes to jail anymore and everyone who wants to grow can. Less taxpayers money going towards persecution of responsible users and growers.

BUT.....I really dislike the association of alcohol (wine, beer, other) and cannabis. Two different substances. Though the verbiage and rhetoric make it out to be the best legislation we've seen in a while for responsible adults and commercially minded entrepreneurs, it still could be better. What couldn't right. But it certainly is better than last years 5'x5', right? This is an example of why pro-cannabis users vote against legislation. Politics is crazy.

I hate plant limits. I hate the association with alcohol. I hate reckless, bold, irresponsible, selfish profiteers who become the poster children for prohibitionists. I hate that cannabis costs money, despite the talent, experience, effort, and equipment that go into producing it.

I love everyone who has ever made any effort to advance the cause. I love that forums like this exist to introduce cannabis growing to newcomers. I love that there is so much passion for taking care of people, both medical and socially. I love that this latest measure has so much support.

I WILL NEVER BUY YOUR COMMERCIALLY PRODUCED PRODUCT. Why? I can grow copious amounts of gear specific to my needs and wants from all the great knowledge I've gained here. I've got tons of respect for growers, breeders, and entrepreneurs and I'll continue to pay for good genetics, but at some point bartering, trading, co-ops, and experimenting will take the place of anything hyper-commercial. That's a reality.

I wish all good luck as they pursue their happiness. I don't want mine limited, even if that's the best way to ensure popular support from voters.

 

[el bee]

Just the opinion of one guy who likes to get high.

 

[DoobieDuck]

Great input my friends..thank you.

Great input my friends..thank you.

Good to see all the discussion on the previous page, great to see some Peeps comming out and whipping out some opinions. Thank you VTA for your posting up more facts for us to consider.

.....I really dislike the association of alcohol (wine, beer, other) and cannabis. ...

el I am not a fan of that as I consider those two the most costly and dangerous drugs in our society. But yet I'm readyy to compromise and vote yes as the money saved, and the livelyhoods, from just what will be saved by reducing the encarceration of people for having and using a harmless plant should off set that. Peace...DD

 

[gaiusmarius]

ok now that's a law that reads like sense, maybe a bit too much common sense? i really hope this regulate cannabis like wine act is passed. i was pleasantly surprised not 1 negative aspect in there. they even forbid genetic manipulation of the dna of cannabis plants. awesome, it really reads like a people's law, from, by and for the people.

 

[SeaMaiden]

Here's David Malmo-Levine's take on the initiatives that are out for consideration and signatures at this time: http://www.cannabisculture.com/v2/node/28992

This second blog link also has links to the text of the proposed regulation: http://www.cannabisculture.com/v2/c...le-Marijuana-Bills-Why-Regulate-Better-Repeal

After spending the morning reading through what he's had to say both through his blog and via email correspondence, I'm landing on RMLW. I agree that we cultivators and consumers of Mary must come together and push serious support for this piece of legislation, as it addresses some key issues, especially with regard to certain portions of the California H&S code that must be ratified or eliminated for true peace of mind.

 

[Terpene]

Those in favor, spread the word by adding it to your sigs!

 

[Hammerhead]

Great info DD im all over this one.. Keep the info flowing ..

 

[SeaMaiden]

I received notice from the planning department along with a draft ordinance. No outdoor cultivation of any more than 12 plants TOTAL. No distinction between mature or immature, or anything else, any size legal parcel is limited to 12 plants.

This is a draft ordinance, and we'll have a chance to speak on February 14th during the planning commission meeting @ 7pm, but at this moment I'm not very hopeful that anything we may have to say will change what's been drafted up.

 

[guest86120975]

I'd like to offer my perspective, as someone who lives outside California and in a non-friendly state. Don't pick this apart and put it down. I read the whole thing, and it is GREAT. I would give up my left ball for this to pass where I am. You guys need to go into this thing united 100%. We are all united in our desire to free the leaf. Don't become a victim of divide-and-conquer techniques which are attempted by special interests, or those who live in a fantasy land in that you can go from total prohibition to growing 1000's of plants in the blink of an eye. The bill is about personal use, and 12 plants is entirely reasonably for that if you're being honest. I know it would be nice to have more so you could grow more strains, but you will have a prop 215 recommendation if you're that serious about weed anyway, right? To recap, the numero uno thing that you should be prepared for are the saboteurs which will inevitably show up in order to find something "wrong" with the bill, to scare you, and to incite your participation in their deceit. Do not fall for it. This is a GREAT bill, and it has a much higher chance of passing this year for a couple reasons... this is a Presidential year, and, the psychology behind "like wine" is easy to get people behind, people like familiarity and are afraid of the unknown, and it is very likely to bring over the needed additional 5%. In 2010, I was hopeful but doubtful. This year, I'm just hopeful...this is the big year. 52% - 48%

 

[DoobieDuck]

I received notice from the planning department along with a draft ordinance. ...

Sea Maiden are you speaking of the RMLW planning people? Please clarify for us?

I'd I would give up my left ball for this to pass where I am.

4Sure buddy..I like your take on this. I agree....DD