15.04.610.270 - Marijuana/Cannabis Commercial Uses
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Medical Cannabis Cultivation Center Application Illinois Department of Agriculture Springfield, Illinois
Medical Cannabis Cultivation Center Application Illinois Department of Agriculture Springfield, Illinois Schedule 1 – Suitability of the Proposed Facility The following Measures are found in Section 1000.110(b)(1) of the rules: Measure 1: The applicant must demonstrate that the proposed facility is suitable for effective and safe cultivation of medical cannabis, is sufficient in size, power allocation, air exchange and air flow, interior layout, lighting, and sufficient both in the interior and exterior to handle the bulk agricultural production of medical cannabis, cannabis-infused products, product handling, storage, trimming, packaging, loading and shipping. The loading/unloading of medical cannabis in the transport motor vehicle for shipping shall be in an enclosed, secure area out of public sight. Measure 2: The applicant must demonstrate the ability to continue to meet qualifying patient demand by expanding the cultivation facility in a quick and efficient manner with minimal impact on the environment and the surrounding community. Measure 3: The applicant provides an employee handbook that will provide employees with a working guide to the understanding of the day-to-day administration of personnel policies and practices. The following outline is meant as a guide for the applicant to follow in submitting information to meet the above Measures. It is not an all-inclusive list or description of required information. It is the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate compliance with the rules and application instructions. Any engineering drawings, flow diagrams, and descriptions must be adequate to illustrate your plans. 1. Location Area Map (1000.40(e), 1000.100(d)(19), 1000.220(a)) Provide a location map of the area surrounding the facility. -
Williamstown Cannabis Cultivation Business Plan
Williamstown Cannabis Cultivation Business Plan Davis Collison and Rosa Kirk-Davidoff We are on the stolen land of the Stockbridge-Munsee Band of the Mohican. “The legal marijuana industry has the potential to save local farms and repair a broken food system.”- Suehiko Ono, EOS Farms Introduction Averill Cook Davis and Rosa ● Who we are ● Environmental Planning ○ Senior Seminar for Environmental Studies Majors ● This project - Williamstown Cannabis Cultivation ● Questions: Best scale to start? Opportunities for a craft market? Jake Zieminski Our Clients ● Averill H Cook ○ Born and raised in Williamstown. ○ BS degree from University of Vermont ○ Owned and operated a pellet manufacturing business for 12 years ○ Traveled throughout numerous countries consulting in wood energy ○ Maintained an operated Wendling Farm in Williamstown where he grew up ○ Superior land stewardship has been paramount throughout his career Averill Cook Jake Zieminski Our Clients ● Jake Zieminski ○ Born and raised in Cheshire Ma on family dairy farm. Lived in Boston for 20 years and recently moved family back in 2018 to launch cannabis start-up. ○ Cannabis Entrepreneur ■ Current owner of CAVU Hemp, Cheshire Ma- MDAR licensed 2019 ■ 2021- CCC – Marijuana Cultivation Applicant ■ Cannabis Activist, Educator and Advisor since 2014 ○ Prior to transitioning into Cannabis industry in 2018, Mr. Zieminski was a management consultant focused in healthcare. Mr. Zieminski has spent the primary part of his career in client based performance improvement roles at PricewaterhouseCoopers(PwC), -
Gold Rush to Green Rush: Cannabis Cultivation on Yurok Tribal Lands
From Gold Rush to Green Rush: Cannabis Cultivation on Yurok Tribal Lands Kaitlin Reed Ph.D. Candidate, Native American Studies, University of California, Davis Charles Eastman Fellow of Native American Studies, Dartmouth College “The New World is in fact a very old world.” Anderson, M. Kat. Tending the Wild: Native American Knowledge and the Management of California's Natural Resources. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005. 2019 North American Cannabis Summit 2 California Indians “Pre Contact”: over 1 million 1769: ~500,000 Native people living in California 1900: Less than 20,000 2019 North American Cannabis Summit 3 3 Waves of California Genocide Spanish Missionization (1769-1820) Mexican-American War (1821-1845) Gold Rush/Formation of California (1846- 1873) 2019 North American Cannabis Summit 4 2019 North American Cannabis Summit 5 Environmental Impacts of Gold Mining . Food depletion . Impacts to water quantity/quality . Mercury contamination . Destruction of other natural resources, e.g. timber 2019 North American Cannabis Summit 6 Yurok Tribal Lands 2019 North American Cannabis Summit 7 2019 North American Cannabis Summit 8 Gold Rush Green Rush 1. Land Dispossession 2. Indian Removal 3. Cultural Sovereignty 4. Ecological Colonialism 5. Impacts to Water 6. Impacts to Wildlife 7. Prioritization of Profit 8. Generational Impacts 2019 North American Cannabis Summit 9 Rush Mentality The Rush mentality is what founded Humboldt County… people act like that was so long ago and we have just definitely moved on and we’re just this very green friendly place, we’re liberals, we’re leftist. This is how people think of Humboldt County but what founded us is this Gold Rush and we have been rushing ever since, and so after the Gold Rush ‘well, gold didn’t make us enough money, let’s rush any kind of minerals that we can get’ and then after that you have ‘well that didn’t make us enough, let’s rush timber’ and then after – you know what I mean? … And I think we’ve been rushing since 1849. -
1496 Amending Cannabis Zoning Regulations (PDF)
ORDINANCE NO. 1496 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCATA AMENDING ZONING REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO CANNABIS REGULATION The City Council of the City of Arcata does hereby ordain as follows: Section 1. Amendment to Table 1-1 – Zoning Districts: The Zoning Districts as shown in Table 1-1 of Title IX, Planning and Zoning, Chapter 1, Planning and Zoning Standards, Section 9000, Land Use Code, Article 1, Land Use Code Applicability, Section 9.12.020 Zoning Map and Zoning Districts, are hereby amended to replace the words “Medical Marijuana” with “Cannabis” and revise the “:MMIZ” zoning district symbol with “CIZ” as shown in the following strike through and bold double underscore text (unchanged text within the Table is omitted and is shown by “* * *”): Table 1-1 – Zoning Districts Zoning District General Plan Designation Symbol Name of Zoning District Implemented by Zoning District * * * Combining Zones :CD Creamery District Industrial - Limited :HL Historic Landmark All :MMCIZ Medical Marijuana Cannabis Innovation Zone Specific Industrial – Limited and Industrial – General properties - See Section 9.28.130, Figure 2-25. * * * Section 2. Amendment to Allowable Land Uses; Table 2-1. The Allowable Land Uses for the Agricultural and Resource Zoning Districts depicted in Table 2-1 of Title IX, Planning and Zoning, Chapter 1, Planning and Zoning Standards, Section 9000, Land Use Code, Article 2, Zoning Uses, Section 9.22.030 Agricultural and Resource Zoning District Allowable Land Uses, are hereby amended to replace the words “Medical -
Marijuana National Forest
MARIJUANA NATIONAL FOREST : Encroachment on California Public Lands for Cannabis Cultivation ∗ Mark Mallery Marijuana cultivation on public lands has become an increasingly prominent issue affecting natural resources and public safety in California. Cultivators degrade natural reserves by altering land, diverting water, applying chemicals, and inhabiting sites for long periods of time. Clean up and remediation efforts are conducted to reduce the long-term impacts, but these efforts remain hindered by high costs, understaffing, and the remoteness of sites. The primary cultivators are Mexican Cartels that operate in California to exploit the fertile land and lucrative markets for marijuana. Environmental remediation depends on law enforcement agencies’ ability to identify and seize sites. As the issue has become increasingly prevalent, law enforcement agencies have adapted their efforts, but have only had a limited effect. In order to prevent the problems created by remote marijuana production, cultivators must be prevented from utilizing public lands, or the incentive for doing so must be removed. Subject categories: Social science Keywords: marijuana, cannabis, California, drug trafficking, immigration INTRODUCTION annabis is an adaptive and highly successful annual with the ability to grow in most C climates across the globe. Cannabis belongs to the Cannabaceae family, “has a life cycle of only three to five months and germinates within six days.” 1 Cannabis can occur in a wild, reproducing state throughout the California floristic provinces, and is cultivated even outside of areas where it may naturally reproduce. 2 Cannabis planting, growing, and harvesting seasons are similar throughout California and typically take place April through October. “Exposed river banks, meadows, and agricultural lands are ideal habitats for Cannabis” since these ecosystems provide “an open sunny environment, light well-drained composted soil, 1 Booth, M. -
Estimated Cost of Production for Legalized Cannabis
WORKING P A P E R Estimated Cost of Production for Legalized Cannabis JONATHAN P. CAULKINS WR-764-RC July 2010 This product is part of the RAND working paper series. RAND working papers are intended to share researchers’ latest findings and to solicit informal peer review. They have been approved for circulation by RAND but have not been formally edited or peer reviewed. Unless otherwise indicated, working papers can be quoted and cited without permission of the author, provided the source is clearly referred to as a working paper. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. is a registered trademark. Estimated Cost of Production for Legalized Cannabis Jonathan P. Caulkins H. Guyford Stever Professor of Operations Research Carnegie Mellon University Heinz College & Qatar Campus RAND, Drug Policy Research Center Abstract This paper tries to estimate post-legalization production costs for indoor and outdoor cannabis cultivation as well as parallel estimates for processing costs. Commercial production for general use is not legal anywhere. Hence, this is an exercise in inference based on imperfect analogs supplemented by spare and unsatisfactory data of uncertain provenance. While some parameters are well grounded, many come from the gray literature and/or conversations with others making similar estimates, marijuana growers, and farmers of conventional goods. Hence, this exercise should be taken with more than a few grains of salt. Nevertheless, to the extent that the results are even approximately correct, they suggest that wholesale prices after legalization could be dramatically lower than they are today, quite possibly a full order of magnitude lower than are current prices. -
Regulations of the Nevada Cannabis Compliance Board
REGULATIONS OF THE NEVADA CANNABIS COMPLIANCE BOARD Las Vegas, Nevada For consideration and adoption on July 21, 2020 Current as of July 1, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS REGULATION 1 ISSUANCE OF REGULATIONS; CONSTRUCTION; DEFINITIONS 1.000 Title. 1 1.010 Promulgation, amendment, modification and repeal. 1 1.020 Construction. 1 1.030 Severability. 1 1.040 Definitions. 1 1.050 “Act” defined. 1 1.053 “Analyte” defined. 1 1.055 “Analytical portion” defined. 1 1.057 “Applicant” defined. 1 1.058 “Application” defined. 1 1.060 “Batch” defined. 2 1.065 “Batch number” defined. 2 1.068 “Board Agent” defined. 2 1.070 “CBD” defined. 2 1.073 “Chief Medical Officer” defined. 2 1.075 “Combined cannabis establishment” defined. 2 1.080 “Component cannabis establishment” defined. 2 1.085 “Excise tax on cannabis” defined. 2 1.090 “Extraction” defined. 2 1.095 “Fair market value” defined. 2 1.100 “Foreign matter” defined. 2 i 1.105 “Growing unit” defined. 2 1.110 “Imminent health hazard” defined. 2 1.115 “Label” defined. 3 1.120 “Letter of approval” defined. 3 1.125 “Lot” defined. 3 1.130 “Multiple-serving edible cannabis product” defined. 3 1.135 “Packaging” defined. 3 1.137 “Person” defined. 3 1.140 “Pesticide” defined. 3 1.145 “Physician” defined. 3 1.150 “Potential total THC” defined. 3 1.155 “Potentially hazardous cannabis products and ingredients” defined. 3 1.160 “Premises” defined. 4 1.163 “Private Residence” defined. 4 1.165 “Production run” defined. 4 1.170 “Production run number” defined. 4 1.175 “Proficiency testing” defined. 4 1.180 “Proficiency testing program” defined. -
Marinol Cannabidiol C21H30O2 Trade Name
Cannabinoids are a group of terpenophenolic compounds secreted by Cannabis flowers that provide relief from a wide array of symptoms including, pain, nausea, and inflammation. They operate by imitating the body’s natural endocannabinoids, which activate to maintain internal stability and overall health. When consumed, cannabinoids bind to receptor sites throughout the brain (CB1 receptors) and body (CB2 receptors). Different cannabinoids have different effects based on their binding affinity for each receptor. By targeting specific cannabinoids at these receptors, different types of relief can be achieved. Presently, there are at least 113 different cannabinoids isolated from Cannabis—each exhibiting varied effects. THC Tetrahydrocannabinol C21H30O2 Trade name: Marinol Legal Status: US – Schedule I, Schedule II (as Cesamet), Schedule III (as Marinol) OH CA – Schedule II UK – Class B AU – S8 (controlled) H Psychoactive Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is typically the most abundant cannabinoid present in cannabis products on the market today. THC has very high psychoactive characteristics and is associated with the ‘high’ and euphoria experienced when using cannabis products. When smoked or ingested, THC binds to cannabinoid receptors throughout the body and affects memory, O coordination, concentration, pleasure, and time perception. H Medicinal Benefits Analgesic • Anti-nauseant • Appetite Stimulant Reduces Glaucoma Symptoms Sleep Aid • Reduces Anxiety and PTSD Symptoms CBD Cannabidiol C21H30O2 Trade name: Epidiolex OH Legal Status: US – Schedule I CA – Schedule II UK – POM (Perscription only) H AU – S4 (Perscription only) non-psychoactive Cannabidiol (CBD) is a major phytocannabinoid and accounts for up to 40% of the plant’s extract. Due to its lack of psychoactivity and HO non-interference with motor and psychological functions, it is a leading candidate for a wide variety of medical applications. -
Model Healthy Beverage Vending Agreement
Butte County Public Health Department Note Because of limited data available on the safety of high potency Cannabis Products, the Butte County Public Health Department recommends that retailers not be allowed to carry Cannabis Products with THC content in excess of 20%. This is the one recommendation that is different from the original ordinance created by Public Health Institute. Authors Support - Lynn Silver, MD, MPH, Public Health Institute - Alisa Padon, PhD, Public Health Institute Contributors - Ted Mermin, JD - Leslie Zellers, JD - Immigrant Legal Resources Center - James Mosher, JD Getting it Right from the Start A project of the Public Health Institute 555 12th Street, Oakland, CA 94607 www.gettingitrightfromthestart.org Telephone: 510.285.5648 Fax: 510.285.5501 Email: [email protected] Acknowledgement This Model Ordinance was adapted in part from ChangeLab Solutions and the California Department of Public Health’s Model Tobacco Retail License Ordinance and “plug-ins,” which have been adopted by cities and counties across the State of California. We acknowledge and appreciate their important contributions, although they are not responsible for the content. We also thank the many individuals who contributed interview time and comments during the development process. Note The legal information provided in this model ordinance does not constitute legal advice or legal representation. For legal advice, readers should consult an attorney in their state. Table of Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................................... -
Cannabis Business License Screening Applications Top Scoring Applicants
CITY OF WEST HOLLYWOOD CANNABIS BUSINESS LICENSE SCREENING APPLICATIONS TOP SCORING APPLICANTS December 18, 2018 City of West Hollywood California 1984 www.weho.org/cannabis WEST HOLLYWOOD CANNABIS BUSINESS LICENSE APPLICATION PROCESS On November 20, 2017, after significant members with diverse/unique perspectives community outreach, consultation with and a wide breadth of experience in cannabis industry experts, and City Council cannabis, hospitality, design, business, local discussion, the West Hollywood City Council government licensing, social justice, drug adopted a Cannabis Ordinance allowing a policy reform, as well as familiarity with West variety of different cannabis businesses to be Hollywood. In total, the weighting criteria licensed in the City. The ordinance included for each license type consisted of between the following type and number of cannabis 53 and 56 unique categories with a total of business licenses: between 200 and 205 points. ADULT-USE RETAIL: During the month of May 2018, applicants 8 licenses were allowed to submit cannabis screening applications to the City. The City received CONSUMPTION LOUNGE over 300 screening applications from over (Smoking, Vaping, Edibles): 120 different applicants (most applicants 8 licenses submitted applications in multiple categories). The application evaluation CONSUMPTION LOUNGE committee members began their review (Edibles Only): of applications in July and completed 8 licenses their review in late November. In total, each application evaluation committee DELIVERY SERVICES member reviewed over 20,000 pages, and (Located in West Hollywood): individually scored each application based 8 licenses on the weighting criteria. Once all of the application evaluation committee members MEDICAL DISPENSARY: were finished scoring, the five committee 8 licenses member scores for each application were averaged. -
Safe Cannabis Sales Act of 2019
1 2 ____________________________ 3 Chairman Phil Mendelson 4 at the request of the Mayor 5 A BILL 6 ______________________ 7 8 IN THE COUNCIL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 9 10 _______________________________________ 11 Chairman Phil Mendelson, at the request of the Mayor, introduced the following bill, 12 which was referred to the Committee on ________________. 13 14 To amend Title 25 of the District of Columbia Official Code to establish the Alcoholic 15 Beverage and Cannabis Board and the Alcoholic Beverage and Cannabis 16 Administration; to establish that the Chairperson of the ABCA Board may also 17 have demonstrated knowledge in the cannabis industry; to define various terms 18 for new chapters 21 through 30; to prohibit the sale of cannabis or cannabis 19 products without a license; to provide the Board with the authority to issue 20 marijuana licenses for 3 year periods; to prohibit exchanges of marijuana for 21 purchasing another item; to create cultivation, manufacturer, distributor, off- 22 premises retailer, and testing facility license categories; to require the Board to 23 consider within 18 months new off-premises and on-premises retailer’s license 24 categories; to require laboratory agent registration with the ABCA; to require 25 persons volunteering or working at cultivation, manufacturer, distributor, and off- 26 premises retailers to obtain a worker’s license; to require off-premises retailers 27 and medical marijuana dispensaries to obtain a delivery endorsement from the 28 Board to deliver cannabis and cannabis products -
Advantages of Polypharmaceutical Herbal Cannabis Compared to Single-Ingredient, Synthetic Tetrahydrocannabinol
BIORESOURCE HEMP 2000, Wolfsburg 13.-16. September 2000, www.nova-institut.de PRESENTATION FOR NOVA-INSTITUTE “ONLINE PROCEEDINGS” Third International Symposium: Bioresource Hemp. 13-16 September 2000, Wolfsburg, Germany Advantages of polypharmaceutical herbal Cannabis compared to single-ingredient, synthetic tetrahydrocannabinol John McPartland Vermont Alternative Medicine/AMRITA 53 Washington Street Ext. Middlebury, VT 05753 USA Introduction In the United States, marijuana (Cannabis sativa, possibly also Cannabis indica and Cannabis afghanica) is classified by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) as a prohibited Schedule I drug ("no currently accepted medical use"). As a substitute for marijuana, the DEA approved dronabinol (Marinol®). Dronabinol is synthetic delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (∆9-THC). It is formulated in a capsule, designed for oral administration. Because ∆9-THC is the primary psychoactive ingredient in both Dronabinol and marijuana, the DEA considers Dronabinol equal to marijuana in effectiveness, for the treatment of nausea, vomiting, and anorexia. But Dronabinol and marijuana are not equal, according to many reports (Grinspoon & Bakalar 1997). Many patients report that marijuana has better therapeutic activity than Dronabinol, and that marijuana has less side effects than Dronabinol. Dronabinol often causes psychological “overdose” reactions, symptoms such as dysphoria, depersonalization, anxiety, panic reactions, and paranoia. Route of administration These side effects may be secondary to the drug's route of administration — Dronabinol is formulated as a capsule for oral administration. Swallowing THC leads to first-pass metabolism by the liver, resulting in approximately equal amounts of THC and its 11-hydroxy metabolite in the blood stream (Perez-Reyes & Wall, 1981). The metabolite, 11-hydroxy-THC, is about 4 times more psychoactive www.biorohstoff-hanf.de - 1 - www.bioresource-hemp.de BIORESOURCE HEMP 2000, Wolfsburg 13.-16.