Monday, January 12, 2015

Text of Medical Marijuana Bill Kentucky 2015 , SB 43/LM/CI (BR 287) - P. Clark, W. Blevins Jr., D. Harper Angel, R. Thomas

 AN ACT relating to medical cannabis.
     Create various new sections of KRS Chapter 218A to establish a comprehensive system for medical cannabis in Kentucky, including provisions for medical verification of need, persons allowed to cultivate, use, and possess the drug, organizations allowed to assist in providing the drug, regulation by the state Department for Public Health, interaction with state and local governments, including law enforcement, with persons and entities coming within the purview of the Act, and the establishment of required reporting and review procedures; amend KRS 218A.040 to conform; name the Act the Cannabis Compassion Act.

     Jan 7-introduced in Senate
     Jan 13-to Licensing, Occupations, & Administrative Regulations (S)

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

AN ACT relating to medical cannabis.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky:

âSECTION 1. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

The General Assembly finds that:

(1) Cannabis’s recorded use as a medicine goes back nearly five thousand (5,000) years. Modern medical research has confirmed the beneficial uses for cannabis in treating or alleviating the pain, nausea, and other symptoms associated with a variety of debilitating medical conditions, including cancer, multiple sclerosis, and HIV/AIDS, as found by the National Academy of Sciences' Institute of Medicine in March 1999;

(2) Studies published since the 1999 Institute of Medicine report have continued to show the therapeutic value of cannabis in treating a wide array of debilitating medical conditions. These include relief of the neuropathic pain caused by multiple sclerosis, HIV/AIDS, other illnesses and injuries that often fail to respond to conventional treatments, and relief of nausea, vomiting, and other side effects of drugs used to treat HIV/AIDS and hepatitis C, increasing the chances of patients continuing on life-saving treatment regimens;

(3) Cannabis has many currently accepted medical uses in the United States, having been recommended by thousands of licensed physicians to more than five hundred thousand (500,000) patients in states with medical cannabis laws. Cannabis's medical utility has been recognized by a wide range of medical and public health organizations, including the American Academy of HIV Medicine, the American College of Physicians, the American Nurses Association, the American Public Health Association, the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, and many others;

(4) Data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Reports and the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics show that approximately ninety-nine (99) out of every one hundred (100) cannabis arrests in the United States are made under state law, rather than under federal law. Consequently, changing state law will have the practical effect of protecting from arrest the vast majority of seriously ill patients who have a medical need to use cannabis;

(5) The states of Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, Rhode Island, and Washington, as well as the District of Columbia, have removed state-level criminal penalties from the medical use and cultivation of cannabis. Kentucky joins in this effort for the health and welfare of its citizens;

(6) States are not required to enforce federal law or prosecute people for engaging in activities prohibited by federal law. Therefore, compliance with Sections 1 to 25 of this Act does not put the state of Kentucky in violation of federal law; and

(7) State law should make a distinction between the medical and nonmedical uses of cannabis. Therefore, the purpose of Sections 1 to 25 of this Act is to protect patients with debilitating medical conditions, as well as their practitioners and providers, from arrest and prosecution, criminal and other penalties, and property forfeiture, if such patients engage in the medical use of cannabis.

âSECTION 2. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

For the purposes of Sections 1 to 25 of this Act, unless the context otherwise requires:

(1) "Bona fide practitioner-patient relationship" means that:

(a) A practitioner and patient have a treatment or consulting relationship, during the course of which the physician has completed an assessment of the patient's medical history and current medical condition, including an appropriate personal physical examination;
(b) The practitioner has consulted with the patient with respect to the patient's debilitating medical condition; and
(c) The physician is available to or offers to provide follow-up care and treatment to the patient, including but not limited to patient examinations;

(2) "Cannabis" means all parts of the plant Cannabis sp., whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of the plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the plant, its seeds orr resin or any compound, mixture, or preparation which contains any quantity of these substances. The term "cannabis" does not include industrial hemp as defined in KRS 260.850;

(3) "Cardholder" means a qualifying patient, visiting qualifying patient, or a designated caregiver who has been issued and possesses a valid registry identification card;

(4) "Compassion center agent" means a principal officer, board member, employee, or agent of a registered compassion center who is twenty-one (21) years of age or older and has not been convicted of a disqualifying felony offense;

(5) "Cultivator agent" means a principal officer, board member, employee, or agent of a registered cultivator who is twenty-one (21) years of age or older and has not been convicted of a disqualifying felony offense;

(6) "Debilitating medical condition" means:

(a) A terminal illness, peripheral neuropathy, anorexia, cancer, glaucoma, positive status for human immunodeficiency virus, acquired immune deficiency syndrome, hepatitis C, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Crohn's disease, agitation of Alzheimer's disease, post-traumatic stress disorder, diabetes, narcolepsy, fibromyalgia, autism, ulcerative colitis, injuries that significantly interfere with daily activities, or the treatment of these conditions;
(b) A chronic or debilitating disease or medical condition or its treatment that produces one (1) or more of the following: cachexia or wasting syndrome; severe, debilitating pain; severe nausea; seizures; or severe and persistent muscle spasms, including but not limited to those characteristic of multiple sclerosis; or
(c) Any other medical condition or its treatment added by the department, as provided for in Section 6 of this Act;

(7) "Department" means the Department for Public Health or its successor agency;

(8) "Designated caregiver" means a person who:

(a) Is at least twenty-one (21) years of age;
(b) Has agreed to assist with a patient's medical use of cannabis;
(c) Has not been convicted of a disqualifying felony offense; and
(d) Assists no more than five (5) qualifying patients with their medical use of cannabis;

(9) "Disqualifying felony offense" means:

(a) A felony offense that would qualify the person as a violent offender under KRS 439.3401; or
(b) A violation of a state or federal controlled substance law that was classified as a felony in the jurisdiction where the person was convicted, not including:
1. An offense for which the sentence, including any term of probation, incarceration, or supervised release, was completed five (5) or more years earlier; or
2. An offense that consisted of conduct for which Sections 1 to 25 of this Act would likely have prevented a conviction, but the conduct either occurred prior to the enactment of Sections 1 to 25 of this Act or was prosecuted by an authority other than the Commonwealth of Kentucky;

(10) "Enclosed, locked facility" means a closet, room, greenhouse, building, or other enclosed area that is equipped with locks or other security devices that permit access only by the cardholder allowed to cultivate the plants or, in the case of a registered cultivator, the cultivator agents working for the registered cultivator. Two (2) or more registered qualifying patients or registered designated caregivers who reside in the same dwelling and have a registry identification card that removes state penalties for cannabis cultivation may share one (1) enclosed, locked facility for cultivation;

(11) "Mature cannabis plant" means a cannabis plant that has flowers;

(12) "Medical use" includes the acquisition, administration, cultivation, or manufacture in an enclosed, locked facility or the delivery, possession, transfer, transportation, or use of cannabis or paraphernalia relating to the administration of cannabis to treat or alleviate a registered qualifying patient's debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the patient's debilitating medical condition. It does not include cultivation by a visiting qualifying patient or cultivation by a registered designated caregiver or registered qualifying patient who is not designated as being allowed to cultivate;

(13) "Practitioner" has the same meaning as in KRS 218A.010, except that if the qualifying patient’s debilitating medical condition is post-traumatic stress disorder, the practitioner shall only be a licensed psychiatrist. In relation to a visiting qualifying patient, "practitioner" means a person who is licensed with authority to prescribe controlled substances to humans in the state of the patient’s residence;

(14) "Qualifying patient" means a person who has been diagnosed by a practitioner as having a debilitating medical condition;

(15) "Registered compassion center" means an entity registered pursuant to Section 14 of this Act that acquires, possesses, manufactures, delivers, transfers, transports, sells, supplies, or dispenses cannabis, useable cannabis, paraphernalia, or related supplies and educational materials to registered qualifying patients;

(16) "Registered Cultivator" means a business entity registered pursuant to Section 15 of this Act that grows, processes, and delivers cannabis to a compassion center in accordance with Section 15 of this Act;

(17) "Registry identification card" means a document issued by the department that identifies a person as a registered qualifying patient, visiting qualifying patient, or a registered designated caregiver;

(18) "Registered safety compliance facility" means an entity registered under Section 16 of this Act by the department to provide one (1) or more of the following services:

(a) Testing cannabis produced for medical use, including for potency and contaminants; and
(b) Training cardholders, cultivator agents, and compassion center agents. The training may include but need not be limited to information related to one (1) or more of the following:
1. The safe and efficient cultivation, harvesting, packaging, labeling, and distribution of cannabis;
2. Security and inventory accountability procedures; and
3. Up-to-date scientific and medical research findings related to medical cannabis;

(19) "Safety compliance facility agent" means a principal officer, board member, employee, or agent of a registered safety compliance facility who is twenty-one (21) years of age or older and has not been convicted of a disqualifying felony offense;

(20) "Seedling" means a cannabis plant that has no flowers and is larger than eight (8) inches tall;

(21) "Usable cannabis" means the flowers of the cannabis plant and any mixture, concentrate, resin, or preparation thereof, but does not include the seeds, stalks, and roots of the plant. It does not include the weight of any non cannabis ingredients combined with cannabis, including ingredients added to prepare a topical administration, food, or drink;

(22) "Verification system" means a telephone-based or Web-based system established and maintained by the department that is available to law enforcement personnel and compassion center agents on a twenty-four (24) hour basis for verification of registry identification cards;

(23) "Visiting qualifying patient" means a person who:

(a) Has been diagnosed with a debilitating medical condition;
(b) Possesses a valid registry identification card, or its equivalent, that was issued pursuant to the laws of another state, district, territory, commonwealth, insular possession of the United States, or country recognized by the United States that allows the person to use cannabis for medical purposes in the jurisdiction of issuance; and
(c) Is not a resident of Kentucky or who has been a resident of Kentucky for less than thirty (30) days; and

(24) "Written certification" means a document dated and signed by a practitioner, stating that in the practitioner's professional opinion the patient is likely to receive therapeutic or palliative benefit from the medical use of cannabis to treat or alleviate the patient's debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the debilitating medical condition. A written certification shall affirm that it is made in the course of a bona fide practitioner-patient relationship and shall specify the qualifying patient's debilitating medical condition.

âSECTION 3. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

(1) A registered qualifying patient shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or denial of any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a court or occupational or professional licensing board, for the medical use of cannabis pursuant to Sections 1 to 25 of this Act, if the registered qualifying patient does not possess more than:

(a) Twelve (12) ounces of usable cannabis at the site where it is cultivated or three (3) ounces elsewhere; and
(b) Twelve (12) mature cannabis plants and twelve (12) seedlings at the site where the cannabis is cultivated, if the qualifying patient has not specified that a designated caregiver will be allowed under state law to cultivate cannabis for the qualifying patient.

(2) A registered designated caregiver shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or denial of any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a court or occupational or professional licensing board for:

(a) Assisting a registered qualifying patient to whom he or she is connected through the department's registration process with the medical use of cannabis if the designated caregiver does not possess more than:
1. Twelve (12) ounces of usable cannabis at the site where it is cultivated or three (3) ounces elsewhere for each qualifying patient to whom the registered caregiver is connected through the department's registration process; and
2. Twelve (12) mature cannabis plants and twelve (12) seedlings at the site where the cannabis is cultivated for each registered qualifying patient who has specified that the designated caregiver will be allowed under state law to cultivate cannabis for the qualifying patient; or
(b) Receiving compensation for costs associated with assisting a registered qualifying patient's medical use of cannabis if the registered designated caregiver is connected to the registered qualifying patient through the department's registration process.

(3) All mature cannabis plants and seedlings possessed pursuant to this section shall be kept in an enclosed, locked facility, unless they are being transported to a permissible location, including because the cardholder is moving, the registered qualifying patient has changed his or her designation of who can cultivate, or the plants are being given to someone allowed to possess them pursuant to Sections 1 to 25 of this Act. The three (3) ounce limits established in subsections (1) and (2) of this section may be exceeded during transportation under this subsection.

(4) A visiting qualifying patient shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or denial of any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a court or occupational or professional licensing board, for the medical use of cannabis pursuant to Sections 1 to 25 of this Act, if the visiting qualifying patient does not possess more than twelve (12) ounces of usable cannabis.

(5) A registered qualifying patient, visiting qualifying patient, or registered designated caregiver shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or denial of any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a court or occupational or professional licensing board for:

(a) Possession of cannabis that is incidental to medical use, but is not mature cannabis plants, seedlings, or usable cannabis;
(b) Selling, transferring, or delivering cannabis seeds produced by the registered qualifying patient, visiting qualifying patient, or registered designated caregiver to a registered compassion center;
(c) Transferring cannabis to a registered safety compliance facility for testing; or
(d) Giving cannabis to a registered qualifying patient, a registered compassion center, or a registered designated caregiver for a registered qualifying patient's medical use where nothing of value is transferred in return, or for offering to do the same, if the person giving the cannabis does not knowingly cause the recipient to possess more cannabis than is permitted by this section.

(6) (a) There shall be a presumption that a qualifying patient is engaged in, or a designated caregiver is assisting with, the medical use of cannabis in accordance with Sections 1 to 25 of this Act if the qualifying patient or designated caregiver:

1. Is in possession of a valid registry identification card, or, in the case of a visiting qualifying patient, its equivalent; and
2. Is in possession of an amount of cannabis that does not exceed the amount allowed under this section.
(b) The presumption may be rebutted by evidence that conduct related to cannabis was not for the purpose of treating or alleviating the qualifying patient's debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the debilitating medical condition in compliance with Sections 1 to 25 of this Act.

(7) A practitioner shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner, or denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by the Kentucky Board of Medical Licensure or by any other occupational or professional licensing board, solely for providing written certifications or for otherwise stating that, in the practitioner's professional opinion, a patient is likely to receive therapeutic or palliative benefit from the medical use of cannabis to treat or alleviate the patient's debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the debilitating medical condition, except that nothing in Sections 1 to 25 of this Act shall prevent a practitioner from being sanctioned for:

(a) Issuing a written certification to a patient with whom the practitioner does not have a bona fide practitioner-patient relationship; or
(b) Failing to properly evaluate a patient's medical condition.

(8) No person may be subject to arrest, prosecution, or denial of any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a court or occupational or professional licensing board, for:

(a) Selling cannabis paraphernalia to a cardholder upon presentation of a registry identification card in the recipient’s name that has not expired or to a compassion center agent or registered safety compliance facility agent upon presentation of an unexpired copy of the entity’s registration certificate;
(b) Being in the presence or vicinity of the medical use of cannabis as allowed under Sections 1 to 25 of this Act; or
(c) Assisting a registered qualifying patient with using or administering cannabis. For purposes of illustration and not limitation, this includes preparing a vaporizer for a registered qualifying patient’s use or brewing tea for a registered qualifying patient. It does not include providing cannabis to a patient that the patient did not already possess.

(9) A registered compassion center shall not be subject to prosecution under state or local law, to search or inspection except by the department pursuant to Section 20 of this Act, to seizure or penalty in any manner, or be denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a court or business licensing board, for acting pursuant to Sections 1 to 25 of this Act and the department's administrative regulations for:

(a) Selling cannabis seeds to similar entities that are registered to dispense cannabis for medical use in other jurisdictions; or
(b) Acquiring, possessing, manufacturing, delivering, transferring, transporting, supplying, selling, or dispensing cannabis, usable cannabis, related supplies, and educational materials to registered qualifying patients, visiting qualifying patients who have designated the compassion center to provide for them, registered designated caregivers on behalf of the registered qualifying patients who have designated the registered compassion center, or to other registered compassion centers.

(10) A registered compassion center agent shall not be subject to prosecution, search, or penalty in any manner, or be denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a court or business licensing board, for working for a registered compassion center pursuant to Sections 1 to 25 of this Act and the department's administrative regulations to acquire, possess, manufacture, deliver, transfer, transport, supply, sell, or dispense cannabis or related supplies and educational materials to registered qualifying patients who have designated the registered compassion center to provide for them, to registered designated caregivers on behalf of the registered qualifying patients who have designated the registered compassion center, or to other registered compassion centers.

(11) A registered cultivator or cultivator agent acting on behalf of a registered cultivator shall not be subject to prosecution under state or local law, to search or inspection except by the department pursuant to Section 20 of this Act, or to seizure or penalty in any manner, or be denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by court or business licensing board, for acting pursuant to Sections 1 to 25 of this Act and the department's administrative regulations for:

(a) Selling cannabis seeds to similar entities that are registered to cultivate cannabis for medical use in other jurisdictions; or
(b) Acquiring, possessing, cultivation, manufacturing, delivering, transferring, transporting, supplying, or selling usable cannabis and related supplies to other registered cultivators or registered compassion centers;

(12) A registered safety compliance facility and registered safety compliance facility agents acting on behalf of a registered safety compliance facility shall not be subject to prosecution, search except by the department pursuant to Section 20 of this Act, seizure, or penalty in any manner, or be denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a court or business licensing board, solely for acting in accordance with Sections 1 to 25 of this Act and the department's administrative regulations to provide the following services:

(a) Acquiring or possessing cannabis obtained from registered cardholders, registered cultivators, or registered compassion centers;
(b) Returning the cannabis to registered cardholders, registered cultivators, or registered compassion centers;
(c) Transporting cannabis that was produced by registered cardholders, registered cultivators, and registered compassion centers to or from those registered cardholders, registered cultivators, and registered compassion centers;
(d) The production or sale of educational materials related to medical cannabis;
(e) The production, sale, or transportation of equipment or materials other than cannabis to registered compassion centers, registered cultivators, registered caregivers, or cardholders including lab equipment and packaging materials, that are used by registered compassion centers, registered cultivators, and cardholders;
(f) Testing of medical cannabis samples, including for potency, pesticides, mold, and contamination;
(g) Providing training to cardholder, prospective cultivator agents, and prospective compassion center agents, provided that only cardholders may be allowed to possess or cultivate cannabis and any possession or cultivation of cannabis must occur on the location registered with the department; and
(h) Receiving compensation for actions allowed under this section.

(13) Any cannabis, cannabis paraphernalia, lawful property, or interest in lawful property that is possessed, owned, or used in connection with the medical use of cannabis as allowed under Sections 1 to 25 of this Act, or acts incidental to such use, shall not be seized or forfeited. Sections 1 to 25 of this Act shall not prevent the seizure or forfeiture of cannabis exceeding the amounts allowed under Sections 1 to 25 of this Act, nor shall it prevent seizure or forfeiture if the basis for the action is unrelated to the cannabis that is possessed, manufactured, transferred, or used pursuant to Sections 1 to 25 of this Act.

(14) Mere possession of, or application for, a registry identification card or registration certificate shall not constitute probable cause or reasonable suspicion, nor shall it be used to support the search of the person, property, or home of the person possessing or applying for the registry identification card. The possession of, or application for, a registry identification card shall not preclude the existence of probable cause if probable cause exists on other grounds.

(15) For the purposes of Kentucky law and any provisions to the contrary of Sections 1 to 25 of this Act, the medical use of cannabis by a cardholder or registered compassion center shall be considered lawful as long as it is in accordance with Sections 1 to 25 of this Act.

(16) No law enforcement officer employed by an agency which receives state or local government funds shall expend any state or local resources, including the officer’s time, to effect any arrest or seizure of cannabis, or conduct any investigation, on the sole basis of activity the officer believes to constitute a violation of the federal Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. secs. 801 et seq., if the officer has reason to believe that such activity is in compliance with state medical cannabis laws, nor shall any such officer expend any state or local resources, including the officer’s time, to provide any information or logistical support related to such activity to any federal law enforcement authority or prosecuting entity.

(17) An attorney shall not be subject to disciplinary action by the Kentucky Bar Association or other professional licensing association for providing legal assistance to prospective or registered cultivators, compassion centers, or safety compliance facilities or others related to activity that is no longer subject to criminal penalties under state law pursuant to Sections 1 to 25 of this Act.

âSECTION 4. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

This chapter does not authorize any person to engage in, and does not prevent the imposition of any civil, criminal, or other penalties for engaging in, the following conduct:

(1) Undertaking any task under the influence of cannabis, when doing so would constitute negligence or professional malpractice;

(2) Possessing cannabis, or otherwise engaging in the medical use of cannabis:

(a) In a school bus;
(b) On the grounds of any preschool or primary or secondary school; or
(c) In any correctional facility;

(3) Smoking cannabis:

(a) On any form of public transportation; or
(b) In any public place;

(4) Operating, navigating, or being in actual physical control of any motor vehicle, aircraft, or motorboat or personal watercraft while under the influence of cannabis, except that a registered qualifying patient or visiting qualifying patient shall not be considered to be under the influence of cannabis solely because of the presence of metabolites or components of cannabis that appear in insufficient concentration to cause impairment; or

(5) Using cannabis, if that person does not have a debilitating medical condition.

âSECTION 5. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

(1) Except as provided in Sections 1 to 25 of this Act, a registered qualifying patient who uses cannabis for medical purposes shall be afforded all the same rights under state and local law, including those guaranteed under KRS Chapter 344, as the individual would have been afforded if he or she were solely prescribed pharmaceutical medications, as it pertains to:

(a) Any interaction with a person's employer;
(b) Drug testing by one's employer; or
(c) Drug testing required by any state or local law, agency, or government official.

(2) (a) The rights provided by this section do not apply to the extent that they conflict with an employer’s obligations under federal law or regulations or to the extent that they would disqualify an employer from a monetary or licensing-related benefit under federal law or regulations.

(b) No employer is required to allow the ingestion of cannabis in any workplace or to allow any employee to work while under the influence of cannabis. A registered qualifying patient shall not be considered to be under the influence of cannabis solely because of the presence of metabolites or components of cannabis that appear in insufficient concentration to cause impairment.

(3) No school or landlord may refuse to enroll or lease to, or otherwise penalize, a person solely for his or her status as a registered qualifying patient or a registered designated caregiver, unless failing to do so would violate federal law or regulations or cause the school or landlord to lose a monetary or licensing-related benefit under federal law or regulations.

(4) For the purposes of medical care, including organ transplants, a registered qualifying patient’s authorized use of cannabis in accordance with Sections 1 to 25 of this Act is the equivalent of the authorized use of any other medication used at the direction of a physician, and shall not constitute the use of an illicit substance or otherwise disqualify a qualifying patient from needed medical care.

(5) A person otherwise entitled to custody of or visitation or parenting time with a minor shall not be denied such a right, and there shall be no presumption of neglect or child endangerment, for conduct allowed under Sections 1 to 25 of this Act, unless the person's actions in relation to cannabis were such that they created an unreasonable danger to the safety of the minor as established by clear and convincing evidence.

(6) No school, landlord, or employer may be penalized or denied any benefit under state law for enrolling, leasing to, or employing a cardholder.

âSECTION 6. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

Any citizen may petition the department to add conditions to the list of debilitating medical conditions listed in Section 2 of this Act. The department shall consider petitions in the manner required by administrative regulations promulgated by the department, including public notice and hearing. The department shall approve or deny a petition within one hundred (100) days of its submission. The approval or denial of any petition is a final decision of the department subject to judicial review. Jurisdiction and venue are vested in the Franklin Circuit Court.

âSECTION 7. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

(1) Nothing in Sections 1 to 25 of this Act requires:

(a) A government medical assistance program or private insurer to reimburse a person for costs associated with the medical use of cannabis; or
(b) Any person or establishment in lawful possession of property to allow a guest, client, customer, or other visitor to smoke cannabis on or in that property.

(2) Nothing in this chapter prohibits an employer from disciplining an employee for ingesting cannabis in the workplace or working while under the influence of cannabis.

âSECTION 8. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

(1) The department shall issue registry identification cards to qualifying patients who submit the following, in accordance with the department's administrative regulations:

(a) A written certification issued by a practitioner within ninety (90) days immediately preceding the date of an application;
(b) If the patient is not a visiting qualifying patient, documentation required to reasonably establish proof of residency in Kentucky;
(c) If the patient is a visiting qualifying patient, a copy of his or her registry identification card or its equivalent that was issued pursuant to the laws of the jurisdiction of the person’s residence;
(d) The application or renewal fee;
(e) The name, address, and date of birth of the qualifying patient, except that if the applicant is homeless no address is required;
(f) The name, address, and telephone number of the qualifying patient's practitioner;
(g) The name, address, and date of birth of the designated caregiver, if any, chosen by the qualifying patient, except that a visiting qualifying patient may not have a designated caregiver;
(h) The name of the registered compassion center the qualifying patient designates, if any;
(i) If the qualifying patient designates a designated caregiver, a designation as to whether the qualifying patient or designated caregiver will be allowed under state law to possess and cultivate cannabis plants for the qualifying patient's medical use;
(j) A statement, signed by the qualifying patient, pledging not to divert cannabis to anyone who is not allowed to possess cannabis pursuant to Sections 1 to 25 of this Act; and
(k) A signed statement from the designated caregiver, if any, agreeing to be designated as the patient’s designated caregiver and pledging not to divert cannabis to anyone who is not allowed to possess cannabis pursuant to Sections 1 to 25 of this Act.

(2) The application for qualifying patients' registry identification cards shall ask whether the patient would like the department to notify him or her of any clinical studies needing human subjects for research on the medical use of cannabis. The department shall notify interested patients if it is notified of studies that will be conducted in the United States.

âSECTION 9. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

(1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, the department shall:

(a) Verify the information contained in an application or renewal submitted pursuant to Section 8 of this Act, and approve or deny an application or renewal, within fifteen (15) days of receiving a completed application or renewal application;
(b) Issue registry identification cards to a qualifying patient and his or her designated caregiver, if any, within five (5) days of approving the application or renewal. A designated caregiver must have a registry identification card for each of his qualifying patients; and
(c) Enter the registry identification number of the registered compassion center the patient designates into the verification system.

(2) The department shall not issue a registry identification card to a qualifying patient who is younger than eighteen (18) years of age unless:

(a) The qualifying patient's practitioner has explained the potential risks and benefits of the medical use of cannabis to the custodial parent or legal guardian with responsibility for health care decisions for the qualifying patient; and
(b) The custodial parent or legal guardian with responsibility for health care decisions for the qualifying patient consents in writing to:
1. Allow the qualifying patient's medical use of cannabis;
2. Serve as the qualifying patient's designated caregiver; and
3. Control the acquisition of the cannabis, the dosage, and the frequency of the medical use of cannabis by the qualifying patient.

âSECTION 10. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

(1) The department may deny an application or renewal of a qualifying patient’s registry identification card only if the applicant:

(a) Did not provide the required information or materials;
(b) Previously had a registry identification card revoked; or
(c) Provided false or falsified information.

(2) The department may deny an application or renewal for a designated caregiver chosen by a qualifying patient whose registry identification card was granted only if:

(a) The designated caregiver does not meet the requirements of Section 2 of this Act;
(b) The applicant did not provide the information required;
(c) The designated caregiver previously had a registry identification card revoked; or
(d) The applicant or the designated caregiver provides false or falsified information.

(3) The department may conduct a background check of the prospective designated caregiver in order to implement this section.

(4) The department shall notify the qualifying patient who has designated someone to serve as his or her designated caregiver if a registry identification card will not be issued to the designated caregiver.

(5) Denial of an application or renewal is considered a final department action, subject to judicial review. Jurisdiction and venue for judicial review are vested in the Franklin Circuit Court.

âSECTION 11. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

(1) Registry identification cards shall contain all of the following:

(a) The name of the cardholder;
(b) A designation of whether the cardholder is a designated caregiver or qualifying patient;
(c) The date of issuance and expiration date of the registry identification card;
(d) A random ten (10) character alphanumeric identification number, containing at least four (4) numbers and at least four (4) letters, that is unique to the cardholder;
(e) If the cardholder is a designated caregiver, the random ten (10) character alphanumeric identification number of the qualifying patient the designated caregiver is receiving the registry identification card to assist;
(f) A clear designation as to whether the cardholder will be allowed under state law to possess the cannabis plants for the qualifying patient's medical use, which shall be determined based solely on the qualifying patient's preference;
(g) A photograph of the cardholder, if the department’s administrative regulations require one; and
(h) The telephone number or Web address for the verification system.

(2) (a) Except as provided in this subsection, the expiration date shall be one (1) year after the date of issuance;

(b) If the practitioner stated in the written certification that the qualifying patient would benefit from cannabis until a specified earlier date, then the registry identification card shall expire on that date.

(3) The department may, at its discretion, electronically store in the card all of the information listed in subsection (1) of this section, along with the address and date of birth of the cardholder, to allow it to be read by law enforcement agents.

âSECTION 12. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

(1) The following notifications and department responses are required:

(a) A registered qualifying patient shall notify the department of any change in his or her name or address, or if the registered qualifying patient ceases to have his or her debilitating medical condition, within ten (10) days of the change;
(b) A registered designated caregiver shall notify the department of any change in his or her name or address, or if the designated caregiver becomes aware that the qualifying patient has died, within ten (10) days of the change or of becoming aware of the qualifying patient's death;
(c) Before a registered qualifying patient changes his or her designated caregiver, the qualifying patient shall notify the department of the change;
(d) When a registered qualifying patient changes his or her preference as to who may cultivate cannabis for the qualifying patient, the qualifying patient shall notify the department of the change; and
(e) If a cardholder loses his or her registry identification card, he or she shall notify the department within ten (10) days of becoming aware the card has been lost.

(2) When a cardholder notifies the department of items listed in subsection (1) of this section, but remains eligible under Sections 1 to 25 of this Act, the department shall issue the cardholder a new registry identification card with a new random ten (10) character alphanumeric identification number within ten (10) days of receiving the updated information and a twenty dollar ($20) fee. If the person notifying the department is a registered qualifying patient, the department shall also issue his or her registered designated caregiver, if any, a new registry identification card within ten (10) days of receiving the updated information.

(3) If a registered qualifying patient ceases to be a registered qualifying patient or changes his or her registered designated caregiver, the department shall promptly notify the designated caregiver. The registered designated caregiver's protections under Sections 1 to 25 of this Act as to that qualifying patient shall expire fifteen (15) days after notification by the department.

(4) A cardholder who fails to make a notification to the department that is required by this section is subject to a civil infraction, punishable by a penalty of no more than one hundred fifty dollars ($150).

(5) A registered qualifying patient shall notify the department before changing his or her designated registered compassion center and pay a twenty dollar ($20) fee. The department shall, within five (5) business days of receiving the notification, update the registered qualifying patient’s entry in the identification registry system to reflect the change in designation and notify the patient that the change has been processed.

(6) If the registered qualifying patient's certifying practitioner notifies the department in writing that either the registered qualifying patient has ceased to suffer from a debilitating medical condition or that the practitioner no longer believes the patient would receive therapeutic or palliative benefit from the medical use of cannabis, the card shall become void. However, the registered qualifying patient shall have fifteen (15) days to dispose of or give away his or her cannabis.

âSECTION 13. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

(1) Except as provided in Section 4 of this Act and this section, an individual may assert a medical purpose for using cannabis as a defense to any prosecution of an offense involving cannabis intended for the patient’s medical use, and this defense shall be presumed valid and the prosecution shall be dismissed if the evidence shows that:

(a) A practitioner states that, in the practitioner's professional opinion, after having completed a full assessment of the individual's medical history and current medical condition made in the course of a bona fide practitioner-patient relationship, the patient is likely to receive therapeutic or palliative benefit from cannabis to treat or alleviate the individual's debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the individual's debilitating medical condition; and
(b) The individual and the individual's designated caregiver, if any, were collectively in possession of a quantity of cannabis that was not more than was reasonably necessary to ensure the uninterrupted availability of cannabis for the purpose of treating or alleviating the individual's debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the individual's debilitating medical condition; and
(c) The individual was engaged in the acquisition, possession, cultivation, manufacture, use, or transportation of cannabis, paraphernalia, or both cannabis and paraphernalia, relating to the administration of cannabis to treat or alleviate the individual's debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the individual's debilitating medical condition; and
(d) Any cultivation of cannabis occurred in an enclosed, locked area that only the person asserting the defense could access.

(2) The defense and motion to dismiss shall not prevail if either of the following are proven:

(a) The individual had a registry identification card revoked for misconduct; or
(b) The purposes for the possession or cultivation of cannabis were not solely for palliative or therapeutic use by the individual with a debilitating medical condition who raised the defense.

(3) An individual is not required to possess a registry identification card to raise the affirmative defense set forth in this section.

(4) If an individual demonstrates the individual's medical purpose for using cannabis pursuant to this section, except as provided in Section 4 of this Act, the individual shall not be subject to the following for the individual's use of cannabis for medical purposes:

(a) Disciplinary action by an occupational or professional licensing board; or
(b) Forfeiture of any interest in or right to non cannabis, lawful property.

âSECTION 14. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

(1) Compassion centers may only operate if they have been issued a valid registration certificate from the department. When applying for a compassion center registration certificate, the applicant shall submit the following in accordance with the department's administrative regulations:

(a) A nonrefundable application fee in an amount not to exceed four thousand dollars ($4,000);
(b) The proposed legal name of the compassion center;
(c) The proposed physical address of the compassion center and the proposed physical address of any additional locations, if any, where cannabis will be packaged, labeled, or otherwise prepared for distribution by the compassion center;
(d) The name, address, and date of birth of each principal officer and board member of the compassion center, except that all such individuals shall be at least twenty-one (21) years of age;
(e) Any instances in which a business or not-for-profit entity that any of the prospective board members managed or served on the board of was convicted, fined, censured, or had a registration or license suspended or revoked in any administrative or judicial proceeding; and
(f) Any information required by the department to evaluate the applicant pursuant to the competitive bidding process described in subsection (2) of this section.

(2) The department shall evaluate applications for compassion center registration certificates using an impartial and numerically scored competitive bidding process developed by the department in accordance with Sections 1 to 25 of this Act. The registration considerations shall consist of the following criteria:

(a) The suitability of the proposed location or locations, including compliance with any local zoning laws and the geographic convenience to patients from throughout the Commonwealth to compassion centers should the applicant be approved;
(b) The principal officer and board members’ relevant experience, including any training or professional licensing related to medicine, pharmaceuticals, natural treatments, botany, or cannabis cultivation and preparation and their experience running businesses or not-for-profit entities;
(c) The proposed compassion center’s plan for operations and services, including its staffing and training plans, whether it has sufficient capital to operate, and its ability to provide an adequate supply of medical cannabis to the registered patients in the state;
(d) The sufficiency of the applicant’s plans for recordkeeping;
(e) The sufficiency of the applicant’s plans for safety, security, and the prevention of diversion, including proposed locations and security devices employed;
(f) The applicant’s plan for making medical cannabis available on an affordable basis to registered qualifying patients enrolled in Medicaid or receiving Supplemental Security Income or Social Security Disability Insurance; and
(g) The applicant’s plan for safe and accurate packaging and labeling of medical cannabis, including the applicant’s plan for ensuring that all medical cannabis is free of contaminants.

(3) No later than one (1) year after the effective date of this Act, if at least five (5) applications have been submitted, the department shall issue compassion center registration certificates to the five (5) highest-scoring applicants, except that the department may divide the state into geographical areas and grant a registration to the highest scoring applicant in each geographical area.

(4) No later than two (2) years after the effective date of this Act, the department shall issue registration certifications to at least one (1) compassion center registration certificate for each one hundred thousand (100,000) residents of Kentucky of the highest-scoring applicants not already awarded a registration certificate, if a sufficient number of additional applications have been submitted. The need to ensure an adequate geographic distribution may supersede the requirement that the approved applicants be granted registration certificates based solely on which applicants receive the highest scores. If the department determines, after reviewing the report issued pursuant to Section 23 of this Act, that additional compassion centers are needed to meet the needs of registered qualifying patients throughout the state, the department shall issue registration certificates to the corresponding number of applicants who score the highest.

(5) (a) At any time after two (2) years after the effective date of this Act that the number of outstanding and valid registered compassion center certificates is lower than the number of registration certificates the department is required to issue pursuant to subsections (3) and (4) of this section, the department shall accept applications for compassion centers and issue registration certificates to the corresponding number of additional applicants who score the highest, or that score the highest in given geographic areas.

(b) Notwithstanding this subsection, an application for a compassion center registration certificate shall be denied if any of the following conditions are met:
1. The applicant failed to submit the materials required by this section, including if the applicant’s plans do not satisfy the security, oversight, or recordkeeping administrative regulations promulgated by the department;
2. The applicant would not be in compliance with local zoning regulations issued in accordance with Section 18 of this Act;
3. The applicant does not meet the requirements of Section 20 of this Act;
4. One (1) or more of the prospective principal officers or board members has been convicted of a disqualifying felony offense;
5. One (1) or more of the prospective principal officers or board members has served as a principal officer or board member for a registered compassion center that has had its registration certificate revoked; or
6. One (1) or more of the principal officers or board members is younger than twenty-one (21) years of age.

(6) After a compassion center is approved, but before it begins operations, it shall submit a registration fee to the department in the amount determined by the department’s administrative regulations and, if a physical address had not been finalized when it applied, it shall submit a complete listing of all its physical addresses.

(7) The department may issue a registration certificate to a compassion center without regard to its score and the population formula specified in this section if the center's activities are limited soley to manufacture and distribution of usable cannabis to other compassion centers.

(8) The department shall issue each compassion center one (1) copy of its registration certificate for each compassion center location. Registration certificates shall include the compassion center’s identification number. The department shall also provide each registered compassion center with the contact information for the verification system.

âSECTION 15. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

(1) Registered cultivators shall:

(a) Only grow, process, and deliver cannabis to a compassion center for fair market value and subject to applicable taxes for the transfer of agricultural products;
(b) Be subject to the same rights, responsibilities, and protections as a compassion center; and
(c) Supply the amount of cannabis required by the registered compassion centers.

(2) Registered cultivators may only operate if they have been issued a valid registration certificate from the department. When applying for a registered cultivator certificate, the applicant shall submit the following in accordance with the department's administrative regulations:

(a) A nonrefundable application fee in an amount not to exceed four thousand dollars ($4,000);
(b) The proposed legal name of the registered cultivator;
(c) The proposed physical address of the registered cultivator and the proposed physical address of any additional locations, if any, where cannabis will be cultivated, harvested, packaged, labeled, or otherwise prepared for distribution to a compassion center or a registered safety compliance facility;
(d) The name, address, and date of birth of each principal officer and board member of the registered cultivator, except that all such individuals shall be at least twenty-one (21) years of age;
(e) Any instances in which a business or not-for-profit entity that any of the prospective board members managed or served on the board of was convicted, fined, censured, or had a registration or license suspended or revoked in any administrative or judicial proceeding.

(3) The department shall evaluate applications for registered cultivator certificates using an impartial process developed by the department in accordance with Sections 1 to 25 of this Act. The registration considerations shall consist of the following criteria:

(a) The suitability of the proposed location or locations, including compliance with any local zoning laws;
(b) The principal officer and board members’ relevant experience, including any training or professional licensing related to medicine, pharmaceuticals, natural treatments, botany, or cannabis cultivation and preparation and their experience running businesses or not-for-profit entities;
(c) The proposed registered cultivator's plan for operations and services, including its staffing and training plans, whether it has sufficient capital to operate, and its ability to provide an adequate supply of medical cannabis to compassion centers in the state;
(d) The sufficiency of the applicant’s plans for recordkeeping;
(e) The sufficiency of the applicant’s plans for safety, security, and the prevention of diversion, including proposed locations and security devices employed; and
(f) The applicant’s plan for safe and accurate packaging and labeling of medical cannabis, including the applicant’s plan for ensuring that all medical cannabis is free of contaminants.

(4) An application for a registered cultivator certificate shall be denied if any of the following conditions are met:

(a) The applicant failed to submit the materials required by this section, including if the applicant’s plans do not satisfy the security, oversight, or recordkeeping administrative regulations promulgated by the department;
(b) The applicant would not be in compliance with local zoning regulations issued in accordance with Section 18 of this Act;
(c) The applicant does not meet the requirements of Section 20 of this Act;
(d) One (1) or more of the prospective principal officers or board members has been convicted of a disqualifying felony offense;
(e) One (1) or more of the prospective principal officers or board members has served as a principal officer or board member for a registered cultivator that has had its registration certificate revoked; or
(f) One (1) or more of the principal officers or board members is younger than twenty-one (21) years of age.

(5) After a registered cultivator is approved, but before it begins operations, it shall submit a registration fee to the department in the amount determined by the department’s administrative regulations and, if a physical address had not been finalized when it applied, it shall submit a complete listing of all its physical addresses.

(6) The department shall issue each registered cultivator one (1) copy of its registration certificate for each registered cultivator location. Registration certificates shall include the registered cultivator’s identification number. The department shall also provide each registered cultivator with the contact information for the verification system.

âSECTION 16. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

(1) Safety compliance facilities may only operate if they have been issued a valid registration certificate from the department. When applying for a safety compliance facility registration certificate, the applicant shall submit the following in accordance with the department's administrative regulations:

(a) A nonrefundable application fee in an amount not to exceed four thousand dollars ($4,000);
(b) The proposed legal name of the safety compliance facility;
(c) The proposed physical address of the safety compliance facility;
(d) The name, address, and date of birth of each principal officer and board member of the safety compliance facility, except that all such individuals shall be at least twenty-one (21) years of age;
(e) Any instances in which a business or not-for-profit entity that any of the prospective board members managed or served on the board of was convicted, fined, censured, or had a registration or license suspended or revoked in any administrative or judicial proceeding; and
(f) Any information required by the department to evaluate the applicant pursuant to the competitive bidding process described in subsection (2) of this section.

(2) The department shall evaluate applications for safety compliance facility registration certificates using an impartial and numerically scored competitive bidding process developed by the department in accordance with Sections 1 to 25 of this Act. The registration considerations shall consist of the following criteria:

(a) The proposed principal officers’ and board members’ relevant experience, including any training or professional licensing related to analytical testing, medicine, pharmaceuticals, natural treatments, botany, or cannabis cultivation, preparation, and testing and their experience running businesses or not-for-profit entities;
(b) The suitability of the proposed location, including compliance with any local zoning laws and the geographic convenience to cardholders and registered compassion centers from throughout the Commonwealth to registered safety compliance facilities should the applicant be approved;
(c) The sufficiency of the applicant’s plans for safety, security, and the prevention of diversion, including proposed locations and security devices employed; and
(d) The proposed safety compliance facility’s plan for operations and services, including its staffing and training plans, and whether it has sufficient capital to operate.

(3) The department shall issue at least one (1) safety compliance facility registration certificate to the highest-scoring applicant within one (1) year of the effective date of this Act.

(4) (a) The department may issue additional safety compliance facility registration certificates to the highest-scoring applicant or applicants, or to the highest-applicant or applicants in a given geographic area. If the department determines, after reviewing the report issued pursuant to Section 23 of this Act, that additional safety compliance facilities are needed to meet the needs of cardholders and registered compassion centers throughout the state, the department shall issue registration certificates to the corresponding number of applicants who score the highest overall or in a geographic area.

(b) Notwithstanding subsections (3) and (4) of this section, an application for a safety compliance facility registration certificate shall be denied if any of the following conditions are met:
1. The applicant failed to submit the materials required by this section, including if the plans do not satisfy the security, oversight, or recordkeeping administrative regulations issued by the department;
2. The applicant would not be in compliance with local zoning regulations issued in accordance with Section 18 of this Act;
3. The applicant does not meet the requirements of Section 20 of this Act;
4. One (1) or more of the prospective principal officers or board members has been convicted of a disqualifying felony offense;
5. One (1) or more of the prospective principal officers or board members has served as a principal officer or board member for a registered safety compliance facility or registered compassion center that has had its registration certificate revoked; or
6. One (1) or more of the principal officers or board members is younger than twenty-one (21) years of age.

(5) After a safety compliance facility is approved, but before it begins operations, it shall submit a registration fee paid to the department in the amount determined by the department's administrative regulation and, if a physical address had not been finalized when it applied, its physical address.

(6) The department shall issue each safety compliance facility a registration certificate, which shall include an identification number for the safety compliance facility. The department shall also provide the registered safety compliance facility with the contact information for the verification system.

âSECTION 17. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

(1) The department may, on its own motion or on complaint, after investigation and opportunity for a public hearing at which the compassion center, cultivator, or safety compliance facility has been afforded an opportunity to be heard pursuant to KRS Chapter 13B, suspend or revoke a registration certificate for multiple or serious violations by the registrant or any of its agents of Sections 1 to 25 of this Act or any administrative regulations promulgated pursuant to those sections.

(2) The department shall provide notice of suspension, revocation, fine, or other sanction, as well as the required notice of the hearing, by mailing the same in writing to the compassion center, cultivator, or safety compliance facility at the address on the registration certificate. A suspension shall not be for a longer period than six (6) months.

(3) A registered cultivator may continue to cultivate and possess cannabis plants during a suspension, but it may not transfer or sell cannabis.

(4) A registered compassion center may possess cannabis during a suspension, but it may not dispense, transfer, or sell cannabis.

âSECTION 18. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

Nothing shall prohibit local governments from enacting ordinances not in conflict with Sections 1 to 25 of this Act or with the department's administrative regulations regulating the time, place, and manner of registered compassion center operations and registered safety compliance facilities, except that no local government may prohibit registered compassion center operation altogether, either expressly or through the enactment of ordinances which make registered compassion center and registered safety compliance facility operation unreasonably impracticable in the jurisdiction.

âSECTION 19. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

(1) Each registered compassion center, registered cultivator, and registered safety compliance facility shall conduct a background check into the criminal history of each person seeking to become a principal officer, board member, agent, volunteer, or employee before the person begins working at the registered compassion center, registered cultivator, or registered safety compliance facility. A registered compassion center, registered cultivator, or registered safety compliance facility may not employ any person who:

(a) Was convicted of a disqualifying felony offense; or
(b) Is under twenty-one (21) years of age.

(2) A registered compassion center, registered cultivator, or safety compliance facility agent shall have documentation when transporting cannabis on behalf of the registered safety compliance facility, cultivator, or compassion center that specifies the amount of cannabis being transported, the date the cannabis is being transported, the registry identification certificate number of the registered compassion center, cultivator, or safety compliance facility, and a contact number to verify that the cannabis is being transported on behalf of the registered compassion center , cultivator, or safety compliance facility.

âSECTION 20. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

(1) The operating documents of a registered compassion center, or a registered cultivator shall include procedures for its oversight and procedures to ensure accurate recordkeeping.

(2) A registered compassion center, cultivator, and safety compliance facility shall implement appropriate security measures to deter and prevent the theft of cannabis and unauthorized entrance into areas containing cannabis.

(3) A registered compassion center, cultivator, and safety compliance facility shall not be located within five hundred (500) feet of the property line of a pre-existing public or private school.

(4) A registered compassion center is prohibited from acquiring, possessing, cultivating, manufacturing, delivering, transferring, transporting, supplying, or dispensing cannabis for the purposes of distributing cannabis to any person except registered qualifying patients directly or through their designated caregivers.

(5) All cultivation of cannabis for registered compassion centers shall be grown by registered cultivators and take place in an enclosed, locked location at the physical address or addresses provided to the department during the registration process, which can only be accessed by registered cultivator agents working on behalf of the registered cultivator.

(6) A registered compassion center shall not acquire usable cannabis or mature cannabis plants from any person other than another registered cultivator, a registered qualifying patient, or a registered designated caregiver. A registered compassion center may only acquire usable cannabis or mature cannabis plants from a registered qualifying patient or a registered designated caregiver, if the registered qualifying patient or registered designated caregiver receives no compensation for the cannabis.

(7) Before cannabis may be dispensed to a designated caregiver or a registered qualifying patient, a registered compassion center agent shall make a diligent effort to verify each of the following:

(a) That the registry identification card presented to the registered compassion center is valid, including by checking the verification system if it is operational;
(b) That the person presenting the card is the person identified on the registry identification card presented to the registered compassion center agent, including by examining government-issued photo identification; and
(c) That the registered compassion center for whom the compassion center agent is working is the designated compassion center for the registered qualifying patient who is obtaining the cannabis directly or through his or her designated caregiver.

(8) A registered compassion center shall not dispense more than three (3) ounces of cannabis to a registered qualifying patient, directly or through a designated caregiver, in any fourteen (14) day period. Registered compassion centers shall ensure compliance with this limitation by maintaining internal, confidential records that include specific notations of how much cannabis is being dispensed to the registered qualifying patient and whether it was dispensed directly to the registered qualifying patient or to the designated caregiver. Each entry shall include the date and time the cannabis was dispensed.

(9) A registered compassion center or registered compassion center agent may only dispense cannabis to a visiting qualifying patient if he or she possesses a valid registry identification card and if the procedures in this section are otherwise followed.

(10) No person may advertise medical cannabis sales in printed materials, on radio or television, or by paid in-person solicitation of customers. This shall not prevent appropriate signs on the property of the registered compassion center, listings in business directories including telephone books, listings in cannabis-related or medical publications, or the sponsorship of health or not-for-profit charity or advocacy events.

(11) A registered compassion center shall not share office space with nor refer patients to a practitioner.

(12) A practitioner shall not refer patients to a registered compassion center or registered designated caregiver, advertise in a registered compassion center, or, if the practitioner issues written certifications, hold any financial interest in a registered compassion center.

(13) No person who has been convicted of a disqualifying felony offense may be a registered compassion center agent or a registered cultivator agent.

(14) Registered compassion centers, cultivators, and safety compliance facilities shall display their registration certificates on the premises at all times.

(15) The department may issue a civil fine of up to three thousand dollars ($3,000) for violations of this section.

(16) The suspension or revocation of a certificate is a final department action, subject to judicial review. Jurisdiction and venue for judicial review are vested in the Franklin Circuit Court.

(17) Any cardholder who sells cannabis to a person who is not allowed to possess cannabis for medical purposes under Sections 1 to 25 of this Act shall have his or her registry identification card revoked and shall be subject to other penalties for the unauthorized sale of cannabis.

(18) The department may revoke the registry identification card of any cardholder who knowingly commits multiple or serious violations of Sections 1 to 25 of this Act.

(29) Registered compassion centers and registered cultivators are subject to reasonable inspection pursuant to the department's administrative regulations. The department shall give reasonable notice of an inspection under this subsection.

âSECTION 21. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

(1) The following information received and records kept pursuant to the department's administrative regulations for purposes of administering Sections 1 to 25 of this Act are confidential and exempt from the Open Records Act, and not subject to disclosure to any individual or public or private entity, except as necessary for authorized employees of the department to perform official duties pursuant to Sections 1 to 25 of this Act:

(a) Applications and renewals, their contents, and supporting information submitted by qualifying patients and designated caregivers, including information regarding their designated caregivers and practitioners;
(b) Applications and renewals, their contents, and supporting information submitted by or on behalf of compassion centers, cultivators, and safety compliance facilities in compliance with Sections 1 to 25 of this Act, including their physical addresses;
(c) The individual names and other information identifying persons to whom the department has issued registry identification cards;
(d) Any dispensing information required to be kept under Section 20 of this Act or the department's administrative regulation which shall only identify cardholders, registered cultivators, and registered compassion centers by their registry identification numbers and shall not contain names or other personal identifying information; and
(e) Any department hard drives or other data-recording media that are no longer in use and that contain cardholder information shall be destroyed.

Data subject to this section shall not be combined or linked in any manner with any other list or database and it shall not be used for any purpose not provided for in Sections 1 to 25 of this Act.

(2) Nothing in this section precludes the following:

(a) Notification by the department's employees to state or local law enforcement about falsified or fraudulent information submitted to the department or of other apparently criminal violations of Sections 1 to 25 of this Act if the employee who suspects that falsified or fraudulent information has been submitted, conferred with his or her supervisor, and both agree that circumstances exist that warrant reporting;
(b) Notification by the department's employees to the Kentucky Board of Medical Licensure or other appropriate licensure board if the department has reasonable suspicion to believe a practitioner did not have a bona fide practitioner-patient relationship with a patient for whom he or she signed a written certification, if the department has reasonable suspicion to believe the practitioner violated the standard of care, or for other suspected violations of this act by a practitioner;
(c) Notification by compassion center agents to the department of a suspected violation or attempted violation of Sections 1 to 25 of this Act or the administrative regulations issued thereunder;
(d) Verification by the department of registry identification cards pursuant to Section 23 of this Act; and
(e) The submission of the report required by Section 23 of this Act to the General Assembly.

(3) It shall be a misdemeanor punishable by up to one hundred eighty (180) days in jail and a one thousand dollar ($1,000) fine for any person, including an employee or official of the department or another state agency or local government, to breach the confidentiality of information obtained pursuant to Sections 1 to 25 of this Act.

âSECTION 22. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

(1) The department shall maintain a confidential list of the persons to whom the department has issued registry identification cards and their addresses, telephone numbers, and registry identification numbers. This confidential list shall not be combined or linked in any manner with any other list or database, nor shall it be used for any purpose not provided for in Sections 1 to 25 of this Act.

(2) Within one hundred twenty (120) days of the effective date of this Act, the department shall establish a verification system. The verification system shall allow law enforcement personnel, compassion center agents, registered cultivator agents, and safety compliance facility agents to enter a registry identification number to determine whether or not the number corresponds with a current, valid registry identification card. The system shall only disclose whether the identification card is valid, whether the cardholder is a registered qualifying patient or a registered designated caregiver, whether the cardholder is permitted to cultivate cannabis under Sections 1 to 25 of this Act, and the registry identification number of the registered compassion center designated to serve the registered qualifying patient who holds the card or the registry identification number of the patient who is assisted by the registered designated caregiver who holds the card.

(3) The department shall, at a cardholder’s request, confirm his or her status as a registered qualifying patient or registered designated caregiver to a third party, such as a landlord, employer, school, medical professional, or court.

(4) The department shall disclose the fact that a registry identification card was revoked to a prosecutor or court personnel in any case where the prosecutor or court personnel inquires about a specific person who is seeking to assert the protections of Section 13 of this Act. The prosecutor or court personnel shall provide the department with the person’s name and date of birth.

âSECTION 23. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

(1) (a) The department shall appoint a nine (9) member oversight committee composed of: one (1) member of the House of Representatives; one (1) member of the Senate; one (1) representative of the department; one (1) physician with experience in medical cannabis issues; one (1) nurse; one (1) board member or principal officer of a registered safety compliance facility; one (1) individual with experience in policy development or implementation in the field of medical cannabis; and three (3) registered patients.

(b) The oversight committee shall meet at least two (2) times per year for the purpose of evaluating and making recommendations to the General Assembly and the department regarding:
1. The ability of qualifying patients in all areas of the state to obtain timely access to high-quality medical cannabis;
2. The effectiveness of the registered compassion centers, individually and together, in serving the needs of qualifying patients, including the provision of educational and support services, the reasonableness of their fees, whether they are generating any complaints or security problems, and the sufficiency of the number operating to serve the registered qualifying patients of the Commonwealth;
3. The effectiveness of the registered safety compliance facility or facilities, including whether a sufficient number is operating;
4. The sufficiency of the regulatory and security safeguards contained in Sections 1 to 25 of this Act and adopted by the department to ensure that access to and use of cannabis cultivated is provided only to cardholders;
5. Any recommended additions or revisions to the department's administrative regulations or Sections 1 to 25 of this Act, including those relating to security, safe handling, labeling, and nomenclature;
6. Any research studies regarding health effects of medical cannabis for patients; and
7. The effectiveness of the registered cultivators individually and together, in serving the needs of the registered compassion centers, the reasonableness of their fees, whether they are generating any complaints or security problems, and the sufficiency of the number operating to serve the registered compassion centers of the Commonwealth.

(2) The department shall submit to the Legislative Research Commission an annual report that does not disclose any identifying information about cardholders, registered compassion centers, registered cultivators, registered caregivers, or practitioners, but does contain, at a minimum, all of the following information:

(a) The number of applications and renewals filed for registry identification cards;
(b) The number of registered qualifying patients who are residents of Kentucky at the time of the report;
(c) The number of registry identification cards that were issued to visiting qualifying patients at the time of the report;
(d) The nature of the debilitating medical conditions of the qualifying patients;
(e) The number of registry identification cards revoked for misconduct;
(f) The number of practitioners providing written certifications for qualifying patients;
(g) The number of registered compassion centers;
(h) The number of registered cultivators at the time of the report; and
(i) The number of registered caregivers at the time of the report.

âSECTION 24. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

Not later than one hundred twenty (120) days after the effective date of this Act, the department shall promulgate administrative regulations:

(1) Governing the manner in which the department shall consider petitions from the public to add debilitating medical conditions or treatments to the list of debilitating medical conditions set forth in Section 2 of this Act, including public notice of and an opportunity to comment in public hearings on the petitions;

(2) Establishing the form and content of registration and renewal applications submitted under Sections 1 to 25 of this Act;

(3) Governing the manner in which it shall consider applications for and renewals of registry identification cards, which may include creating a standardized written certification form;

(4) Governing the following matters related to registered compassion centers and registered cultivators, with the goal of protecting against diversion and theft, without imposing an undue burden on the registered compassion centers or registered cultivators or compromising the confidentiality of cardholders:

(a) Oversight requirements for registered compassion centers;
(b) Recordkeeping requirements for registered compassion centers and registered cultivators;
(c) Security requirements for registered compassion centers and registered cultivators, which shall include, at a minimum, lighting, video security, alarm requirements, on-site parking, and measures to prevent loitering;
(d) Electrical safety requirements;
(e) The competitive scoring process addressed in Section 14 of this Act;
(f) Procedures for suspending or terminating the registration certificates or registry identification cards of cardholders, registered compassion centers, cultivators, and safety compliance facilities that commit multiple or serious violations of the provisions of Sections 1 to 25 of this Act or the administrative regulations promulgated thereunder; and
(g) Labeling requirements for cannabis and cannabis products sold by compassion centers; and

(5) Establishing application and renewal fees for registry identification cards, caregiver registration, and application and registration fees for compassion center, cultivator, and safety compliance facility certificates, according to the following:

(a) The total fees collected shall generate revenues sufficient to offset all expenses of implementing and administering Sections 1 to 25 of this Act, except that fee revenues may be offset or supplemented by private donations;
(b) The department may establish a sliding scale of patient application and renewal fees based upon a qualifying patient's household income; and
(c) The department may accept donations from private sources to reduce application and renewal fees.

âSECTION 25. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 218A IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

(1) If the department fails to promulgate administrative regulations to implement Sections 1 to 25 of this Act within the times provided for in Sections 1 to 25 of this Act, any citizen may commence an action in the Franklin Circuit Court to compel the department to perform the actions mandated pursuant to the provisions of Sections 1 to 25 of this Act.

(2) If the department fails to issue a valid registry identification card in response to a valid application or renewal submitted pursuant to Sections 1 to 25 of this Act within twenty (20) days of its submission, the registry identification card shall be deemed granted, and a copy of the registry identification application or renewal and proof of receipt of the mailing shall be deemed a valid registry identification card.

(3) If, at any time after one hundred forty (140) days following the effective date of this Act, the department has not established a process for accepting and approving or denying applications, a notarized statement by a qualifying patient containing the information required in an application pursuant to Section 8 of this Act, together with a written certification issued by a practitioner within ninety (90) days immediately preceding the notarized statement, shall be deemed a valid registry identification card for all purposes under Sections 1 to 25 of this Act.

âSection 26. KRS 218A.040 is amended to read as follows:

The Cabinet for Health and Family Services shall place a substance in Schedule I if it finds that the substance:

(1) Has high potential for abuse; and

(2) Except for marijuana has no accepted medical use in treatment in the United States or lacks accepted safety for use in treatment under medical supervision.

âSection 27. This Act shall be known and may be cited as the Cannabis Compassion Act.

 

Wednesday, January 7, 2015

we petition the obama administration to: Remove the Whole Cannabis Plant from Schedule 1 for Medical Research & Patient Access

 

1408045981533

 

 

Research & experience suggest medical cannabis helps with Alzheimer's, Diabetes, epilepsy, cancer, Multiple Sclerosis, HIV, GI disorders, PTSD, eczema, Autism, arthritis, and other conditions.

Please remove the whole cannabis plant from the federal government's banned Schedule 1 list.

Extensive research into various whole plant medicinal strains must be allowed to identify the full potential of this therapeutic plant. Research, mostly from other countries, already suggests the compounds in whole plant cannabis strains work synergistically to produce medicinal effects and help reduce side effects. Therefore, limited rescheduling of individual components for cannabinoid-based synthetic drugs alone will not work. Please allow the various strain options for research and medical access.

Published Date: Jan 05, 2015

LINK HERE:  WHITEHOUSE.GOV

Link to:  FACEBOOK GROUP:  SAFER KENTUCKY

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

141 House Members Flunk Drug Policy Report Card But conservative Republicans are among the 49 who earned an A+.

Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., left, earned an A+ in a report on House drug policy votes. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., earned an F. The report looked at House votes on hemp, medical marijuana, DEA funding and banking rules.

Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., left, earned an A+ in a report on House drug policy votes. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., earned an F. The report looked at House votes on hemp, medical marijuana, DEA funding and banking rules.

By Steven Nelson Oct. 29, 2014 | 2:37 p.m. EDT

Each seat in the U.S. House of Representatives is up for grabs when Americans go to the polls Tuesday, and the Drug Policy Alliance wants voters who care about drug policy to check out a new report card for incumbent members.

The pro-reform organization’s advocacy arm, Drug Policy Action, issued the report card Wednesday, and scores don’t neatly match partisan affiliations.

Hard-line conservatives such as Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas, are among the 49 House members who earned an A+, while Democratic National Committee head Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., is among the 141 members who earned an F.

[READ: Va. Congressman Pushes 'Conservative' Plan for Pot at Pharmacies]

The grades are based on an analysis of seven House votes – one in 2013, six in 2014 – including three votes on hemp, two on banking rights for marijuana businesses, one that would have cut Drug Enforcement Administration funding and another to protect medical marijuana in states that allow it.

Members who voted consistently for more liberal policies received an A+. The 116 representatives who voted in favor of reform in six votes earned an A. Those who voted for reforms in either one or none of the votes earned an F.

In a press release, the Drug Policy Action noted 56 percent of House members – 179 Democrats and 64 Republicans – earned a C or better, meaning they voted for reform in at least three of the votes.

[WATCH: McCain Says 'Maybe We Should Legalize' Marijuana]

"Unprecedented support now exists on both sides of the aisle in Congress for ending the federal war on drugs and letting states set their own drug policies,” Grant Smith, deputy director of national affairs for Drug Policy Action, said in a statement. “Drug policy reform is a winning issue for elected officials.”

The highest-profile vote tabulated in the report was on an amendment offered by Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., that would have blocked the Department of Justice –  including federal prosecutors and DEA agents – from spending funds to go after medical marijuana in states where it's permitted.

Editorial cartoon on pot

See Photos

Editorial Cartoons on Pot Legalization

The Rohrabacher amendment sailed through the House in a 219-189 vote in May that blurred party lines, but the Senate didn’t consider a companion amendment from Sens. Cory Booker, D-N.J., and Rand Paul, R-Ky., and it wasn’t enacted into law.

The drug policy organization didn’t grade senators, citing a paucity of drug policy votes in the chamber.

Read the full report card:

TAGS:
drugs
politics
medical marijuana

CONTINUE READING…

LINK TO FULL REPORT IN PDF HERE…

NORML, Feds Agree On Benefits Of Cannabis

By: Jeremy Daw

NORML, Feds Agree On Benefits Of Cannabis, Source: http://www.tokeofthetown.com/800px-Colorado_Supreme_Court_courtroom.jpg

The third day of hearings on the constitutionality of cannabis’ federal Schedule I status presented further bizarre twists, as both federal prosecutors and NORML’s defense team appeared at times to agree on the medical benefits of cannabis.

In one early incident, Assistant US Attorney Richard Bender, in continued cross-examination of Dr. Philip Denney, failed to rebut Denney’s testimony that plant-based cannabis effectively treated chronic pain. Instead, Bender attempted to show a marginal benefit to using dronabinol (AKA Marinol, which is synthetic THC taken orally in pill form) compared to cannabis and at one point seemed to get a little carried away with his line of questioning. Directing Denney’s attention to the results of a study which showed that both cannabis and Marinol proved effective in treating chronic pain but that the effects of Marinol lasted longer, Bender asked, “So, both smoked marijuana and oral THC were effective, but Marinol was a little better because it lasted longer?”

Denney answered yes, and Bender continued, apparently unaware that he had just admitted that cannabis has medical value.

Later in the same cross-examination Bender slipped again, making a similar admission in a more humorous way. Asking Denney about research showing the ability of cannabinoids to protect brain cells from damage during traumatic injuries, Bender asked, in a somewhat mocking tone, “So, if you’re going to have a traumatic brain injury, you’d better do it under the influence of marijuana?” Denney responded with an emphatic “yes,” provoking laughter in the courtroom.

But perhaps the greatest damage to the government’s case came as a result of an apparent lapse of attention on the part of the prosecution. NORML attorney Zenia Gilg managed to elicit numerous responses from Denney on the nature of the US government’s Investigative New Drug (IND) program, under which US patients receive free tins of government-grown cannabis every month to treat severe illnesses, before Bender seemed to stir, stand and state a valid objection.

It was apparently too late. Calling the objection “belated,” Judge Kimberly Mueller overruled it.

This blunder proved crippling for the prosecution, as Gilg was then able to elicit further testimony from Denney about the IND program, and in particular the results of a study conducted by Dr. Ethan Russo and others in 2002 which showed remarkable long-term success treating severely ill patients who had proven resistant to traditional therapies, and with a minimum of undesirable side effects – all at the behest of the US government.

Because the hearing also concerns the question of whether the medical use of cannabis is “currently accepted” in the US, Denney also testified regarding polls conducted of physicians about their professional opinions of cannabis. While Bender quibbled over details of a poll by the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine showing 76% approval of a medical marijuana recommendation in a hypothetical patient, he left entirely uncontested testimony about another physician poll conducted by WebMD which showed 69% support for the medical use of cannabis – again apparently conceding a point which is logically central to the question of whether cannabis belongs in Schedule I.

Leaf co-founder Chris Conrad also took the stand as an expert witness, cross-examined by prosecutor Samuel Wong, who attempted to contradict the notions that cannabis had a known and reproducible chemistry and that it could be subjected to quality controls. Evoking the use of pesticides and other chemicals, Wong tried to suggest that use of such chemicals would lead to cannabis patients inhaling toxic substances. But Conrad pointed out that that was not necessarily the case, as many such sprays were designed to break down over time. Wong erred even worse when he tried to imply that quality control standards for cannabis didn’t exist, which opened the door for Conrad to introduce the medical cannabis quality control standards recommended by the American Herbal Pharmacopeia.

Still, it was ultimately Dr. Denney who most succinctly summarized the tenor of the day. “I am perplexed,” he testified, “as to why there’s even a debate. Cannabis does have medical value.”

CONTINUE READING…

Wednesday, August 6, 2014

U.S. Marijuana Party

By Christina CrapanzanoMonday, Mar. 29, 2010

dek Andrew Holbrooke / Corbis

Long before Loretta Nall campaigned on her cleavage, the activist's cause was cannabis. The Alabama resident gained national attention during her 2006 gubernatorial campaign when she produced T-shirts with the caption "More of these boobs ..." (with a photo of Nall in a low-cut shirt) "... And less of these boobs" (next to photos of her opponents). But the write-in candidate's political roots date back to 2002, when a misdemeanor arrest for possession was the spark behind her forming the U.S. Marijuana Party (USMJP). The group — which demands "an end to the unconstitutional prohibition of marijuana" — has official party chapters in seven states, including Colorado, Illinois and Kentucky. While Nall left the USMJP to be a Libertarian Party governor nominee, the group continues to back candidates in local, state and national elections under the leadership of Richard Rawlings, who is currently running for Congress in Illinois.

CONTINUE READING….

 

THE ABOVE WAS WRITTEN IN ‘TIME MAGAZINE’ ON MARCH 29, 2010.

Saturday, June 21, 2014

Attorney says marijuana wrongly classified as dangerous drug, federal prosecution unfair

 

 

By John Agar | jagar@mlive.com
Follow on Twitter
on June 20, 2014 at 7:53 AM, updated June 20, 2014 at 11:20 AM

GRAND RAPIDS, MI – A West Michigan man facing federal marijuana charges has filed a constitutional challenge based, in part, on disparate federal prosecution in different states.

Shawn Taylor, the alleged leader of a marijuana grow operation, also argues that marijuana has medicinal value and should not be classified as a Schedule 1 drug – the designation for the most dangerous drugs.

Taylor is seeking an evidentiary hearing on the issues before U.S. District Judge Robert Jonker in Grand Rapids.

“We’re raising arguments that have really never been raised before in a federal marijuana case,” former Kalamazoo attorney John Targowski, now practicing in Santa Monica, Calif., said on Thursday, June 19, after he filed an 86-page brief on behalf of his client.

“We’re arguing that cannabis is wrongly scheduled – it has medicinal value,” Targowski said.

Related: DEA uses search warrants, wire taps and sources in arrests of 37 in medical marijuana 'ruse'

Related: Michigan's medical marijuana law no defense in multi-county marijuana case, attorney says

Taylor is one of 37 people arrested for alleged roles in grow operations in Kent, Muskegon, Oceana and Ottawa counties and Traverse City.

Targowski said that a U.S. Supreme Court decision invalidating the Defense of Marriage Act should have bearing on marijuana cases.

“Recognizing the historical support for defining marriage as between one man and one woman, the court determined that it was the duty of the judiciary to rectify past misperceptions which result in constitutionally unsound legislation,” Targowski wrote in court documents.

“Like the long held beliefs regarding the marital relationship, the long held beliefs about the effects of marijuana have evolved. While the former evolution has been the result of societal ideologies, the latter is predicated on scientific evidence, and therefore, can be more readily established through an evidentiary hearing.”

Targowski has asked that Jonker consider declarations of three experts, including a former FBI supervisor and a physician, to establish there is no rational basis to treat marijuana as a controlled substance. Medical science has documented that “marijuana has a notably low potential for abuse,” Targowski wrote.

He said the Supreme Court has acknowledged its medical value.

“Compared to other over-the-counter substances, cannabis has the lowest potential for abuse, as it is impossible to die from an overdose: further, no studies have proven that the use of cannabis causes harms similar to those caused by the use of common over-the-counter medications, even at recommended dosages,” he wrote.

“In effect, the facts upon which marijuana was scheduled as one of the most dangerous narcotics in 1970 have been disproven.”

He also said that the government’s policy of not prosecuting those who comply with their state’s medical marijuana laws amounts to unequal prosecution based on where people live.

“The policy statement presented in the memorandum to U.S. Attorneys from Deputy Attorney General James Cole, issued on Aug. 29, 2013, by Attorney General Eric Holder has resulted in a discriminatory application of federal law, in that it protects similarly situated individuals from criminal sanctions for actions identical to that alleged to have been conducted by the defendant, and therefore violates the Equal Protection Clause,” Targowski wrote.

The government contends Taylor ran a large-scale drug operation that sold marijuana in Michigan, Indiana and Ohio. He worked with a doctor for “certification clinics” for alleged patients, police said.

The government said Taylor used the state’s medical marijuana law as a ruse.

The government said that the state’s medical marijuana law is not a defense in federal court, and Taylor’s operation was not in compliance with state law, records showed.

John Agar covers crime for MLive/Grand Rapids Press E-mail John Agar: jagar@mlive.com and follow him on Twitter at twitter.com/ReporterJAgar

CONTINUE READING…

Marijuana food safety new frontier for officials

By Kristen Wyatt   | Associated Press   June 21, 2014

DENVER — The marijuana in those pot brownies isn’t the only thing that can potentially make consumers sick. The industry and regulators are taking a closer look at how marijuana-infused edibles are made.

The thriving edible marijuana industry in Colorado is preparing for new testing requirements — due to take in effect in October — to make sure the products are safe to eat and drink.

While consuming too much of an edible has been connected to at least one death and a handful of hospital visits since retail recreational sales of marijuana began in January, officials say there have been no reports of anyone getting a food-borne illness from edibles.

Still, activists, producers, and officials agree that safety testing is long overdue for a sector of the new marijuana market that, according to one industry estimate, has seen the sale of at least 8 million pieces this year.

Food safety testing is necessary ‘‘to building any sort of credibility for the industry . . . to create that public confidence that we’re not just a bunch of stupid kids throwing marijuana into cookies and putting them on the market,’’ said Jazzmine Hall-Oldham, general manager of Bakked, which makes cannabis concentrates and marijuana-infused chocolate bars.

With federal help in regulating production nonexistent because the drug is illegal under federal law, state and local governments have had to assemble a patchwork of health and safety regulations for foods with cannabis.

The agency that regulates Colorado’s marijuana industry, the state Department of Revenue, requires marijuana manufacturing facilities to meet the same sanitation requirements as retail food establishments, including adequate hand-washing and refrigeration.

But the question of whether the state’s 51 licensed recreational edible-marijuana makers meet those standards is left to local health departments, said agency spokeswoman Natriece Bryant. State regulations requiring them also to pass tests for common food contaminants — such as E. coli and salmonella — don’t take effect until the fall.

In Washington state, where retail sales are expected to begin the week of July 7, regulations call for samples of all marijuana sold for consumption to clear a ‘‘microbiological screening,’’ whether it’s in edible, smokeable, or concentrate form.

CONTINUE READING…

Pope Francis Speaks Out Against Legalization of Marijuana and Other Drugs

By Kira Bindrim

Pope Francis April 10

 

Filed Under: World, Pope Francis, Marijuana, Religion

After a several-week absence from the media spotlight, Pope Francis emerged on Friday as a speaker at the International Drug Enforcement Conference in Rome, where he said he was opposed to the legalization of drugs—including marijuana—for recreational use.

"The scourge of drug use continues to spread inexorably, fed by a deplorable commerce which transcends national and continental borders," Francis told conference participants. "Attempts, however limited, to legalize so-called 'recreational drugs,' are not only highly questionable from a legislative standpoint, but they fail to produce desired effects."

While Francis has sometimes surprised constituents with his progressive views—on homosexuality, atheism and capitalism, for example—his stance on marijuana legalization, at least, is at odds with a growing push for it. In December, Uruguay became the first country to legalize the drug (Francis is from nearby Buenos Aires, Argentina). That law included regulation of the cultivation, production, storage, sale and distribution of marijuana, as well as an official registry of users' consumption.

"We will be able to get more information about the consequences of different alternatives," Beau Kilmer, co-director of the RAND Drug Policy Research Group, told Newsweek at the time.

Earlier this month, Jamaica said it would legalize medical marijuana, and allow possession of up to two ounces of the drug for recreational use. In the United States, two states—Colorado and Washington—have legalized marijuana. Alaska could vote on legalization in November, and Oregon may vote on a similar measure later this year. Twenty-two states have legalized the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes—New York is poised to become the 23rd—and 16 have decriminalized it, according to the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML). In October 2013, a Gallup poll found that for the first time, a majority of Americans believe the drug should be legalized: 58 percent, compared with just 12 percent in 1969, the first time the question was asked.

Marijuana is still illegal under federal law, but in May the House voted to restrict the DEA from using funds to go after state-legal medical marijuana outfits. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) introduced a similar amendment in the Senate this week.

Pope Francis has spoken out against drug legalization in the past, and has visited with addicts both as Pope and when he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires. "A reduction in the spread and influence of drug addiction will not be achieved by a liberalization of drug use," he said during a speech at a hospital in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil last year. "Rather, it is necessary to confront the problems underlying the use of these drugs, by promoting greater justice, educating young people in the values that build up life in society, accompanying those in difficulty and giving them hope for the future."

CONTINUE READING…

Tuesday, June 17, 2014

30 Members Of Congress Demand Increased Access To Marijuana For Research Purposes

 Matt Ferner

 Become a fan

 Matt.Ferner@huffingtonpost.com

 

MEDICAL MARIJUANA

Thirty members of Congress, led by Reps. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), H. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.), Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) and Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), sent a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell on Tuesday demanding an end to the federal monopoly on marijuana research so that more studies can be done by scientists around the nation.

"We write to express our support for increasing scientific research on the therapeutic risks and benefits of marijuana," the letter reads. "We ask that you take measures to ensure that any non-National Institutes of Health (NIH) funded researcher who has acquired necessary Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Institutional Review Board (IRB), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and appropriate state and local authority approval be able to access marijuana for research at-cost without further review." (Read the full text of the letter below.)

The letter comes about two weeks after the House voted to block the Drug Enforcement Administration from using funds to go after medical marijuana operations that are legal under state laws, a measure that Rohrabacher sponsored.

And just last week, a scathing joint report from the Drug Policy Alliance and and the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies blasted the DEA, arguing that the agency has repeatedly failed to act in a timely fashion when faced with petitions to reschedule marijuana.

The drug is currently illegal under federal law, and remains classified as a Schedule I substance, a designation the DEA reserves for the "most dangerous" drugs with "no currently accepted medical use." Schedule I drugs, which include substances like heroin and LSD, cannot receive federal funding for research. On three separate occasions -- in 1973, 1995 and 2002 -- the DEA took years to make a final decision about a rescheduling petition, and in two of those cases the DEA was sued multiple times to force a decision.

Last week's report criticized the DEA for overruling its own officials charged with determining how illicit substances should be scheduled. It also accused the agency of creating a "regulatory Catch-22" by arguing there is not enough scientific evidence to support rescheduling marijuana -- while simultaneously impeding the research that would produce such evidence.

"Two weeks ago, we took a very important vote in the House to stop the DEA from interfering in states' medical marijuana programs," Blumenauer said in a statement Tuesday. "Now we need the Administration to stop targeting marijuana above and beyond other drugs when it comes to research. By increasing access for scientists who are conducting studies, we end the Catch-22 of opponents claiming they can't support medical marijuana because there's not enough research, but blocking research because they don't support medical marijuana."

The U.S. government grows marijuana for research purposes at the University of Mississippi in the only federally legal marijuana garden in the U.S. The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) oversees the cultivation, production and distribution of these crops -- a process through which the only federally-sanctioned marijuana studies are approved.

Federal authorities have long been accused of only funding marijuana research that focuses on the potential negative effects of the drug. Since 2003, more than 500 grants for marijuana-related studies have received federal approval, with a marked upswing in recent years, according to McClatchy. Only 22 grants were approved in 2003 for cannabis research, totaling $6 million, but in 2012, 69 grants were approved for a total of over $30 million.

Despite these numbers, NIDA has reportedly conducted only about 30 studies to date on the potential benefits of marijuana, according to The Hill.

Currently, 22 states and the District of Columbia have legalized marijuana for medical use. Eight other states -- Alabama, Iowa, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah and Wisconsin -- have legalized CBD oil, a non-psychoactive ingredient in marijuana that is frequently used to treat epilepsy, for limited medical use or for research purposes.

A number of studies in recent years have shown the medical potential of cannabis. Purified forms may attack some forms of aggressive cancer. Marijuana use has also been tied to better blood sugar control and may help slow the spread of HIV. One study found that legalization of the plant for medical purposes may even lead to lower suicide rates.

Read the full letter below:

CONTINUE READING….

Saturday, June 14, 2014

A Beginner's Guide to Hemp Oil, the Cannabis Product That's Legal Right Now

 

 

By Hannah Sentenac Thu., May 29 2014 at 7:00 AM

With medical marijuana on everyone's lips (in more ways than one), people are buzzing about weed, hemp, cannabis, THC, CBD, and all kinds of other related terms that you might or might not understand. It's OK -- this is confusing stuff.

Leave it to Cultist to offer a little clarity about one such topic you're probably hearing a lot about: hemp oil. From "cannamoms" to Whole Foods salespeople, lots of folks are touting the benefits of this product. But what is it, exactly, and what does it do?

See also: How to Become a Medical Marijuana Millionaire in Ten Easy Steps

So what is this stuff?
Let's start with what hemp oil is not. It is not marijuana. It does not get people high. Both originate from the same plant, but marijuana is cultivated for the buds (which have to be carefully raised for that specific purpose). They're also grown differently.

The oil has only trace amounts of THC, the psychotropic component in weed. Instead, it has higher concentrations of cannabidiol, or CBD, which is the medicinal boon people are all atwitter over.

"You'll see two kinds -- hemp oil drawn from the plant and hemp oil drawn from the seeds. Ours is drawn from the mature stalks of the hemp plant," says Andrew Hard, director of public relations for HempMeds, a California company whose hemp oil products are sold all over the world. The stalk and seeds don't fall under the definition of what the U.S. government dubs marijuana, he says; that's why the products are legal in all 50 states.

Aw, man. So it won't get me stoned?
Sorry, man. Let's put it this way: The medical marijuana bill that recently passed the Florida House would allow patients with cancer and conditions that result in chronic seizures or severe muscle spasms to use marijuana pills, oils, or vapors that contain 0.8 percent THC or lower and 10 percent CBD or higher. Right now, those things are illegal.

HempMeds' Real Scientific Hemp Oil (RSHO), as a comparison, has 15.5 to 25 percent CBD by volume but only trace amounts of THC.

1 | 2 | Next Page >>

SOURCE LINK

Thursday, June 12, 2014

Judge Henry Latham's ruling was filed. "I'm not allowed to give proof why I was using. Now, there is no fair trial."

           

Since his arrest last summer, Benton Mackenzie has maintained he grew marijuana to treat terminal cancer.

Now, just days ahead of going to trial Monday on drug conspiracy charges, a Scott County District judge has ruled he won't allow Mackenzie to use his ailment as a defense.

"I'm not allowed to mention anything," Mackenzie said Thursday, the day Judge Henry Latham's ruling was filed. "I'm not allowed to give proof why I was using. Now, there is no fair trial."

The 48-year-old, who shared his story with the Quad-City Times last September, was diagnosed with angiosarcoma in 2011. It's a cancer of the blood vessels, in which tumors appear as skin lesions.

He says the lesions have grown enormous since sheriff's deputies confiscated 71 marijuana plants from his parents' Long Grove home last summer. He needed all those plants just to be able to extract enough cannabis oil for daily treatments, he says.

Mackenzie wants to be able to tell jurors why he grew marijuana. He wants to show them pictures of his cancerous lesions.

"If I'm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and the court doesn't let me tell the truth, they're making me a liar," he said.

Assistant Scott County Attorney Patrick McElyea, who is prosecuting Mackenzie, filed a motion earlier this month to limit any testimony regarding medical marijuana. He has declined to comment on the case.

McElyea based his motion on the 2005 Iowa Supreme Court decision in State v. Bonjour, a case similar to Mackenzie's. Lloyd Bonjour, an AIDS patient, was convicted of growing marijuana, and the Supreme Court upheld the conviction.

Latham sided with McElyea's motion, stating, "The court is not aware of any legislation or been provided with any legislation which provides for such defense."

The judge states he is aware Mackenzie has angiosarcoma. He also is aware Iowa lawmakers recently legalized oil concentrated with cannabidiol, or CBD, with "specific restrictions."

The pending law, expected to be signed today by Gov. Terry Branstad, only applies to those suffering severe epileptic seizures.

Mackenzie says he thinks state government is the "bigger criminal," because it's practicing medicine without a license in deciding who can and who cannot possess medical marijuana.

"At least the state is now recognizing, with a law, that marijuana has medicinal value," he said, adding his plants were from a strain rich in CBD, which in other states is associated more with medical use than recreational use.

Without the medical necessity defense, Mackenzie said his fate is "completely in the Lord's hands."

Sitting through several hours of hearings over the past 11 months has been hard enough on someone with lesions covering his legs and rear, he says. He can't imagine sitting through an entire trial, which is scheduled to begin Monday with jury selection.

He says he may show up to court wearing a kilt, so jurors can see for themselves. But he wouldn't want his lesions oozing and bleeding all over the courtroom furniture.

"That shows how much of a criminal I'm not," he said.

At one point during a phone conversation with a reporter Thursday afternoon, he reacted because one of his larger lesions opened up and bled onto the chair and floor at home, he said.

"I'm sitting in a pile of blood," he said a moment later.

He wants to request a nurse or a medical provider be allowed to sit in the courtroom with him. He says the judge is allowing breaks, but he expects he'll have to take a break every few minutes just to replace the large, disposable underpad for furniture.

He anticipates that with his failing health and the number of co-defendants, the trial will come across as a "circus."

Mackenzie is charged with felony drug possession along with his wife, Loretta Mackenzie. His 73-year-old parents, Dorothy and Charles Mackenzie, are charged with hosting a drug house, and his son, Cody, is charged with misdemeanor possession. His childhood friend, Stephen Bloomer, also is charged in the drug conspiracy.

All six defendants are being represented by a different attorney.

Lately, Mackenzie's health has been "touch and go," he says, with episodes of vomiting, cold sweats and extreme pain. He almost always feels tired.

He raised enough money from family and friends to travel twice this spring to Oregon, which has legalized medical marijuana.

Each trip was a week long. During the first trip, he met with a physician, who approved him for a state medical marijuana identification card. On the second trip, he was able to purchase oil in an amount equivalent to a pound and a half of marijuana, which he couldn't by law bring back to Iowa.

The little bit of relief is nothing compared to the daily treatments prior to his arrest, when he was shrinking his skin lesions, he said. He claims the oil in Oregon also stopped the growth of the lesions, but only temporarily.

Mackenzie said he hopes jurors will show compassion in deciding his future.

"No matter what, if I'm found guilty, I'll do at least three years in prison, which is a death sentence for me," he said. "If I'm found guilty at all, I'm a dead man. I'm lucky I'm not dead already."

Copyright 2014 The Quad-City Times. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Tags

Benton Mackenzie, Iowa, Henry Latham, Medical Cannabis, Cannabidiol, Cannabis, Iowa Supreme Court, Mackenzie, Patrick Mcelyea, Cannabis Oil, Lloyd Bonjour, Legalized Oil, Cancer, Marijuana, Medical Marijuana

CONTINUE READING…

Wednesday, June 4, 2014

Big Tobacco Planned Big Marijuana Sales in the 1970s

 

Rich001

June 3, 2014

Documents buried deep in tobacco company archives reveal a hope and a plan to sell marijuana as soon as legally possible

Tobacco executives anticipated the legalization of marijuana as early as the 1970′s — and they wanted a piece of the action, according to newly discovered documents from tobacco company archives.

Public health researchers scanned 80 million pages of digitized company documents for keywords such as, “marijuana,” “cannabis,” “reefer,” “weed,” “spliffs,” and “blunts.” The results, published Tuesday in the Milbank Quarterly, reveal a long history of maneuvers toward marijuana-laced products.

“The starting point must be to learn how to produce in quantity cigarettes loaded uniformly with a known amount of either ground cannabis or dried and cut cannabis rag,” read one memorandum from British American Tobacco’s adviser on technical research, Charles Ellis.

A hand-written letter from Philip Morris president George Weissman read, “While I am opposed to its use, I recognize that it may be legalized in the near future…Thus, with these great auspices, we should be in a position to examine: 1. A potential competition, 2. A possible product, 3. At this time, cooperate with the government.”

Philip Morris even went so far as to request a marijuana sample from the Department of Justice for research purposes, promising to share its findings with the government so long as the company’s involvement remained strictly confidential. “We request that there be no publicity whatsoever,” wrote a Philip Morris executive. The Justice Department drug science’s chief Milton Joffee obliged with a promise to deliver “good quality” marijuana.

While tobacco executives missed the mark on legalization by several decades, they did lay out a persuasive case for vigilance. In early 1970, an unsigned memorandum distributed to Philip Morris’ top management read, “We are in the business of relaxing people who are tense and providing a pick up for people who are bored or depressed. The human needs that our product fills will not go away. Thus, the only real threat to our business is that society will find other means of satisfying these needs.”

The study authors said the documents provide proof of tobacco companies’ intent to enter the marijuana trade, despite their claims to the contrary. They urged policymakers to prevent tobacco makers from entering the nascent market for legal marijuana “in a way that would replicate the smoking epidemic, which kills 480,000 Americans each year.”

CONTINUE READING…

Thursday, May 15, 2014

Kentucky: CBD-Only Marijuana Oil Bill Won't Help Patients For Years, If Ever

Submitted by steveelliott on Thu, 05/15/2014 - 17:53

CBDCannabidiol

By Steve Elliott
Hemp News

In the past few months, a wave of "CBD-only" marijuana oil bills has passed, particularly in more conservative states where an actual medical marijuana bill might have found it difficult going. But unfortunately, many of these hastily passed pieces of legislation were so poorly crafted as to help no patients at all for months, years, or maybe ever, and Kentucky's new law is one of those.

Rita Wooton of Louisville's story of her son Eli, who has frequent seizures, and the promise of CBD (cannabidiol) oil to treat it, helped convince the Kentucky General Assembly to pass the bill, reports Gregory A. Hall of the Louisville Courier-Journal. But now doctors and researchers are telling Wooton and other parents that it could take years to even begin trials treating children such as Eli with the oil.

"We're really, really heartbroken," Wooton said. "It's just really sad that everyone put that much time and effort and energy into it and now it's going absolutely nowhere."

"For people like us and Eli, who have intractable epilepsy, seizures that are nearly impossible to even control or get a handle on, our hope is gone," Wooton said.

Some of the many issues surrounding implementation of the bill include the availability of CBD oil, the possible need for FDA approval, and the expense of studies, which preliminary estimates indicate could be $10,000 per patient.

But some doctors hoping to conduct the trials are still hopeful.

"I am extremely excited about it," said pediatric epilepsy specialist Dr. Karen Skjei of the University of Louisville, citing anecdotal reports of the oil reducing seizures when traditional pharmaceuticals can't.

According to supporters, the oil can provide relief to children who have severe epilepsy. It contains low levels of THC, the main psychoactive component of cannabis. CBD isn't psychoactive and therefore doesn't get the kids high.

Senate Bill 124, sponsored by Sen. Julie Denton (R-Louisville), allows "trials" of the CBD oil at the University of Louisville and the University of Kentucky's medical schools or through FDA trials. But passing the bill is "just the initial part of the puzzle," according to Dr. Christopher Shafer, who specializes in adult epilepsy at the University of Louisville.

"Dr. Skjei and I want this for our patients, probably, almost as badly as the patients want it themselves," Dr. Shafer said. "And it's really discouraging for us to not be able to tell them that we have it available. It's going to take some time."

"While there is certainly an interest in this initiative, there are significant issues that remain to be addressed," said spokesman Jay Blanton of the University of Kentucky. "Additional research, the securing of funding and support, as well as support from the appropriate regulatory body, all would be required before a trial could be conducted.

"That process could likely take months, if not years," Blanton said.

Currently, the oil isn't being legally manufactured in Kentucky, and shipping it across state lines violates federal law. Discussions are ongoing with one "West Coast businessman" about setting up a Kentucky dispensary, Skjei said.

"As of right now, there's really nowhere to get it," she said.

"I feel their desperation," Shafer said of the patients, adding he wishes he could start prescribing it tomorrow. "Everybody who asks me about it, I'm keeping a list and I have a long list already."

"I still have patients that are talking about moving to Colorado, because they understand it's going to be awhile before this is up and running," Skjei said.

What's Up With CBD?

Cannabidiol, or CBD as it's more popularly known, is the new darling of lawmakers in conservative states who sense the rising tide of popular support for medical marijuana -- and would love to appear to be "doing something" -- but lack the political courage or will to advocate for an actual medical marijuana law.

CBD is politically safe because, as a non-psychoactive component of cannabis, it doesn't get anyone high, and better yet, it helps to quell seizures of the kind often found in pediatric epilepsy. So the combination of "helping kids" and "it doesn't get you high" has proven an "in" for medical marijuana in what would otherwise have been quite forbidding places, such as the halls of power in Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Florida and now Kentucky.

The disquieting fact about these no-political-risk types of laws (Alabama's passed unanimously in both chambers, amidst much self-congratulation) is that (a) they are written so narrowly as to help only a handful of children, or perhaps none at all, according to some critics; and (b) all of the dozens of cannabinoids found in marijuana work most effective in a synergistic fashion, potentiating each others' medical benefits in what Dr. Sanjay Gupta has called the "Entourage Effect."

Additional important information of which the legislators seem to be unaware is that, as first reported on Toke Signals, it doesn't even have to be a high-CBD strain to treat pediatric seizures without getting kids high. THC which hasn’t been decarboxylated -- that is, THC acid (THCA) which hasn't been exposed to heat -- is also effective against seizures, and it isn't psychoactive, either.

That's important information for struggling parents who may not be able to afford the sky-high prices of CBD oil which are unfortunately occurring due to the media frenzy over cannabidiol; THC-rich strains of marijuana are much more affordable.

- See more at: http://hemp.org/news/content/kentucky-cbd-only-marijuana-oil-bill-wont-help-patients-years-if-ever#sthash.ihqsdrBt.dpuf