Senator Jones, the legislature’s leader in receiving campaign contributions from the medical marijuana industry, has finally authorized the hearing of a trio of medical marijuana bills in the Michigan Senate Judiciary Committee. Well, he sort of granted them a hearing.
A notice for the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Tuesday, Dec. 8 at 1:00 PM listed the three bills passed by the Michigan House- HBs 4209, 4210 and 4827- as being on the agenda for amendment, debate and voting. But don’t get too excited about the opportunity to tell the Senate what a crappy piece of legislation this current version of HB 4209 is, or how unnecessary a seed-to-sale tracking system is in Michigan.
Senator Jones ALSO scheduled 14 other bills for consideration on the same day, in the same session, per the notice sent on December 3 at 11:56. On Dec. 4 at 2:12 an updated Agenda was sent out redefining the bills into two categories: those taking testimony only, and those bills which are available for amendment, debate or voting. 8 bills are testimony only; the dispensary bills are not. These Committee sessions typically last a single hour.
Over the last two months, the Senate Judiciary Committee has conducted three sessions where testimony was taken from out-of-state commercial interests, in-state dispensary operators, prosecutors and law enforcement agencies- but not from actual citizens or medical marijuana patients. Sen. Jones will finally call the medical marijuana bills for a potential vote, but with no reasonable expectation of public participation.
Perhaps that’s politically expedient for Jones and the Senate Republicans but it’s not the way to create good law. But, maybe he doesn’t care; according to a new report from Fox 2 News in Detroit, Sen. Jones recently received more registered contributions to his PAC from the marijuana industry ($16,000) than any other legislator, including bill sponsors Rep. Michael Callton ($12,000) and Rep. Lisa Lyons (less than $2,000).
Apparently, it pays better to be a stick-in-the-mud Committee Chair than it does to be a sponsor of progressive legislation. Ask the reptilian Rep. Klint Kesto ($11,000 in donations) who chairs the House Committee in which the dispensary and concentrates bills were snagged up in earlier this year. He cashed the checks, too.
One of those groups granted an opportunity to testify was the National Patients Rights Association (NPRA), and their Chairman Adam Macdonald is worried about behind-the-scenes manipulation of bill language by outside interests.
“We (the NPRA) have spent several years working to provide patients with safe access to their medicine. We had reached an agreement on bill content with both law enforcement and the patient advocacy groups involved, but it appears a new amendment for the alcohol industry is being added to HB 4209 (via amendment on Dec. 8),” Macdonald revealed.
“This is a new development and a drastic change that we, as a pro-patient organization, will not be able to support. It’s unlikely the bills will pass if the three-tiered recreational alcohol model is added.”
Even without knowledge of this sophisticated Senate betrayal, marijuana community advocates expressed their anger over the current bills- and the legislative manipulation that changed them during the 2015 session.
“I’ve totally lost faith in the integrity of the legislature to make positive changes in these restrictive, overbearing bills,” said Jamie Lowell of Michigan ASA and the MILegalize campaign. “I don’t see these bills being significantly improved while in the Senate; if anything, Sen. Jones is going to make them more restrictive and raise the taxes.”
“Although I am incredibly excited at the prospect of the bills being heard in the legislature I am extremely apprehensive about the potential amendments that could be made to the language,” said Jim Powers of Michigan Parents for Compassion.
That sentiment was echoed by Southfield attorney Michael Komorn. “I think most people in the medical marijuana community have lost faith in Michigan’s legislature,” he told TCC.
“We know these bills do not have patients and caregivers in mind. They have been warped into bills that favor the law enforcement community. I think 3.3 million Michigan voters were pretty clear when they said they did not want law enforcement policing medical marijuana patients.”
Two other medical marijuana bills are making a Senate Judiciary appearance on Dec. 8: SB 140 and the tie-barred companion bill SB 141, which were introduced in February. SB 140 is the Senate version of the House concentrates bill, and SB 141 is a technical correction in law mandated by language contained in SB 140.
The prospect of the bills being amended and voted on was the subject of great discussion on the Planet Green Trees Radio Show broadcast of Dec. 3; listen to the podcast at www.planetgreentrees.com
The official notice of the meeting appears below.
**AMENDED**
NOTICE OF SCHEDULED MEETING
**PLEASE NOTE TIME AND LOCATION**
COMMITTEE: Judiciary DATE: Tuesday, December 8, 2015 TIME: 1:00 p.m. PLACE: Senate Hearing Room, Ground Floor, Boji Tower, 124 W. Allegan Street, Lansing, MI 48933 PHONE:Corey Woodby (517) 373-1721
Committee Clerk
AGENDA
SB 20 Sen. Shirkey Criminal procedure; other; default standard for mens rea in criminal statutes; establish.
SB 140 Sen. Shirkey Health; medical marihuana; marihuana-infused products; allow and regulate.
SB 141 Sen. Young Criminal procedure; sentencing guidelines; sentencing guidelines for selling marihuana in violation of registry identification card restrictions; update.
SB 551 Sen. Schuitmaker Probate; wills and estates; designation of a funeral representative to make disposition arrangements for decedent; provide for.
HB 4209 Rep. Callton Health; medical marihuana; state and local regulation of marihuana provisioning centers; provide for.
HB 4210 Rep. Lyons Health; medical marihuana; marihuana-infused products; allow and regulate.
HB 4680 Rep. Pagel Corrections; other; authority for correctional industries to engage in certain private manufacturing or service enterprises; extend sunset.
HB 4713 Rep. McBroom Criminal procedure; other; default standard for mens rea in criminal statutes; establish.
HB 4827 Rep. Kesto Marihuana; administration; seed-to-sale tracking system for commercial marihuana; establish.
Testimony Only:
SB 629 Sen. Jones Children; parental rights; termination of parental rights to a child; expand to include forcible rape where child results.
HB 4476 Rep. Santana Civil procedure; other; mediation; limit in certain domestic relations actions.
HB 4477 Rep. Kesto Civil procedure; appeals; service of papers; provide for alternate service if party is protected by a protective order.
HB 4478 Rep. Kosowski Civil procedure; personal protection orders; acts that may be enjoined; include harming animals owned by petitioner.
HB 4479 Rep. Price Crimes; assaultive; assault of a pregnant woman; increase penalties under certain circumstances.
HB 4480 Rep. Heise Children; protection; factors determining best interest of child; modify in cases of domestic violence.
HB 4481 Rep. Lyons Family law; child custody; custody or parenting time for certain parents of a child conceived through sexual assault or sexual abuse; prohibit under certain circumstances.
HB 4788 Rep. Price Criminal procedure; sentencing guidelines; sentencing guidelines for crime of assault and battery of a pregnant individual; provide for.
And any other business properly before the committee.
Posted by Rick Thompson at 7:30 AM on December 7, 2015
In November 2013, Michigan lawmakers revealed the lengths to which they’d go to maintain the state’s secret system of funding election campaign activities.
A Senate committee was meeting in the Capitol to discuss and approve a bill that would double the maximum amount that individuals could contribute to legislative, executive and judicial candidates. The senators were told that the higher limits were unnecessary because 99 percent of Michiganians never give the maximum amount.
Then something puzzling happened. In a rare move, the legislators called a recess midway through the session. A lobbyist in the audience who was friendly with the committee chairman, it was later learned, received an urgent phone call warning that Secretary of State Ruth Johnson had just announced new administrative rules requiring the disclosure of campaign donors in all circumstances.
When the committee reconvened, an amendment was hastily attached to the legislation, which would override Johnson’s decision and preserve Michigan’s “dark money” campaign practices. House and Senate approval of the bill soon followed, as did Gov. Rick Snyder’s signature.
“We don’t have full public disclosure and it’s not because good people failed to do the right thing, it’s because those bastards did the wrong thing. It was a hostile action,” said Rich Robinson, the state’s top campaign watchdog at the nonpartisan Michigan Campaign Finance Network. “And the fruits of those actions were tens of millions of dollars of undisclosed campaign cash.”
The shadowy aspects of Michigan’s money-driven politics serve as a key reason why the state ranks last among the 50 states with a grade of F and a numerical score of 51 out of 100 from the State Integrity Investigation, a data-driven assessment of state government transparency and accountability by the Center for Public Integrity and Global Integrity. Michigan received an F in 10 of the 13 categories of government operations that were examined.
The first State Integrity report, released in 2012, gave Michigan a similar score – 58, an F, though the state ranked 44th that time. The two scores are not directly comparable, however, due to changes made to improve and update the project and its methodology.
Stealth campaigns standard procedure
A significant factor in Michigan’s 2015 ranking is its lack of effective disclosure rules for officials in nearly all facets of state government. Conflicts of interest and potential public corruption remain buried in an honor system with no honor.
Thanks to loopholes created by the legislature, big spenders representing special interests can dramatically influence an election without leaving a trace.
Campaigns increasingly rely upon shadow groups that independently pay for so-called issue ads. Those ads praise or demonize a candidate in a manner that’s virtually indistinguishable from a traditional TV spot. But the commercials avoid the magic words — “vote for” or “vote against” — that would require disclosure of the money behind the sales pitch.
The 2013 doubling of Michigan contribution limits set the maximum gift to a gubernatorial candidate at $6,800 for an individual, $68,000 for political action committees and $136,000 for state party central committees. But that’s just a starting point in this multi-layered political parlor game. Unregulated funding for those dominant issues ads derives largely from PACs, super PACs and political party groups that can accept unlimited amounts of campaign cash from across the nation.
At the same time, the office of the secretary of state, Michigan’s top election official, operates as a record-keeping agency, not an enforcement unit. It enjoys no subpoena powers and generally does not initiate investigations.
Former Michigan Democratic Party chairman Mark Brewer recently concluded that Michigan’s political system is “the Wild West … with no sheriff in town.”
Dark money means justice denied
High-rollers in many states exert undue influence over legislation and executive orders. But in Michigan, campaign cash also taints the judicial system.
Supreme Court justices, are merely “politicians in black robes.”
The independent Michigan Campaign Finance Network reported that since 2000, state Supreme Court campaigns have been awash in nearly $40 million worth of television political advertisements, with the donors kept off the books. A similarly veiled process dominates campaigns for attorney general. In a state where candidates for the judiciary face virtually no professional standards or performance evaluations, critics say the judges, particularly Supreme Court justices, are merely “politicians in black robes.”
The State Bar of Michigan has engaged in attempts to fix this system by demanding full disclosure, to no avail. Jules Olsman, an attorney who serves on the State Bar board, said his clients routinely question the fairness of the state’s judicial process given the steady stream of campaign ads at election time.
“If the judge hearing my case received $10,000 from opposing counsel or their clients, I should have a right to know that,” Olsman said. “At this point, it’s more than a suspicion. It happens all the time.”
Weak or non-existent disclosure laws
The dark money that dominates Michigan politics takes on another definition in the daily workings of state courts, the legislature, the governor’s office and cabinet members. That’s because the state doesn’t require officials to disclose their financial holdings and outside income.
A judge may hear a case involving a lawsuit aimed at a corporation in which he has a financial interest, but the attorneys involved – and the jury – would have no way of knowing. Legislators can influence the outcome of bills that will directly affect businesses back home in which they serve as silent partners.
Recusals remain rare in Michigan courts, and they are even rarer in the state House and Senate. When apparent conflicts of interest arise due to a lawmaker’s occupation, it’s nearly unheard of for a fellow legislator to publicly call for an abstention.
In Michigan, the cozy relationships between well-heeled lobbyists and pliable lawmakers also remain largely in the dark. Under the weak disclosure rules, lawmakers can accept nominal gifts. But it is the duty of the lobbyist, not the lawmaker, to report these gifts.
In addition, state law requires those in the lobbying business to report their activities in such a vague format that the public cannot determine who is influencing whom. Lobbyists do not have to report which legislator or executive branch official they wined and dined unless they spent more than $59 in a month, or $375 in the calendar year, on that individual. Advocates of greater transparency say the top recipients of a lobbyist’s largesse benefit from considerably more than what’s disclosed.
Worse yet, lobbying firms also do not reveal which issues and legislation they advocated for or against.
Robert LaBrant, a veteran business lobbyist, concedes that the disclosure reports essentially “have no meaning.”
Details of scandal kept secret
Another example of the lack of transparency in Michigan government is that the Legislature long ago exempted itself and the governor’s office from the state Freedom of Information Act.
When a sex scandal involving two House members emerged in August, including an elaborate cover-up that allegedly involved misuse of tax dollars, an internal investigation concluded the couple had engaged in misconduct. A public records request by The Detroit News to obtain the investigative report was denied. Instead, the House speaker chose a private law firm to write a 7 ½-page summary of the findings for public consumption.
This lack of openness permeates all levels of state government.
The state lacks a strong “revolving door” law that prevents elected officials and key executive branch administrators from going directly out of a government post and into a job at a lobbying firm. The only restriction in the books prohibits lawmakers from lobbying immediately if they resign before the end of their terms in office.
Cronyism and favoritism are essentially accepted practices in the Legislature, the judiciary and the governor’s office, as all staffers are political appointees – at-will employees who can be hired or fired for no reason at all. Top officials at each state department also are afforded no civil service protections.
The state Ethics Board serves largely as an obscure, toothless agency that does not investigate wrongdoing and, when it does find a violation, merely recommends a punishment to the guilty employee’s department.
State Sen. Steve Bieda has introduced bills since 2003 seeking mandates for personal asset disclosures, campaign finance transparency and the reporting of all gifts. He never came close to success.
“Michigan is an embarrassing outlier on openness in government,” Bieda said. “We need to step up to the plate.”
MIRS-Michigan Independent Source Of News and Information Friday Nov 6, 2015
Maxwell LORINCZ, of Spring Lake, says a fingerprint of oil on an empty plastic container led to his arrest on a drug charge on Sept. 24, 2014. Now, a year later, the case that might have started with a fingerprint has spurred a defense attorney to question the state’s protocol for handling some marijuana-related crimes. The attorney is also alleging that the current system allows some cases to incorrectly be heightened to felonies when they should be misdemeanors.
Lorincz says that because of what happened to him, the lives of he and his wife have been destroyed and his 6-year-old son has been in foster care for a year.
“There couldn’t have been a more terrible thing to happen in my life,” Lorincz said in an interview this week.
Lorincz’s attorney is Michael KOMORN, who specializes in medical marijuana cases. Through investigating Lorincz’s case, Komorn has called in laboratory experts and obtained internal Michigan State Police (MSP) emails between laboratory workers and an employee of the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan (PAAM).
The debate focuses on THC, the chemical responsible for many of marijuana’s psychological effects.
The documents show an internal debate between MSP employees about how cases involving THC extracts that contain no visible marijuana plant matter should be handled. And they show a PAAM employee providing guidance to MSP workers on the subject.
The findings, Lorincz’s legal team alleges, show that law enforcement authorities have made a concerted effort to “bend the science.”
The way the science has been bent, the team says, allows THC oils or solids where no plant matter is visible to be considered synthetic, meaning they could bring a felony charge under Michigan law.
Normally, if the THC clearly came from a plant, it would bring a misdemeanor charge.
The allegation is that in some instances where law enforcement isn’t certain whether the THC came from a plant, authorities have been able to use the MSP protocol, which some outside forces had input on, to go ahead and pursue the synthetic felony crime. That’s what Komorn says happened to Lorincz.
But both the MSP and the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan (PAAM) deny any concerted effort to heighten criminal penalties has taken place.
Shanon BANNER, spokesperson for MSP, said in a statement that the department “wholly refutes” the claims being made by Komorn.
“Turning an internal debate among colleagues into a multi-level conspiracy is a diversionary tactic used to distract from the facts of the case,” Banner said. “The bottom line is the professionals of MSP-FSD (Forensic Science Division) would never allow politics to trump science.”
Some medical marijuana users prefer to consume marijuana in oil form or in solid foods, involving THC extracts. However, the items aren’t considered usable drugs under the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act.
The question that Komorn is focused on is how the MSP crime lab and prosecutors decide whether the THC in those forms is synthetic or from a plant.
In some cases, no plant matter is visible, and, according to emails obtained by Komorn, there’s been a disagreement among MSP lab workers about how to define the drugs in reports in those instances.
In an October court filing, Kormon pointed to an email from Ken STECKER, an employee of PAAM. Stecker advised MSP workers, “That in my opinion, THC is a schedule 1 drug regardless of where it comes from.”
However, one MSP worker, Bradley CHOATE, wrote in 2014 that simply saying that THC was found “without any other statement” would lead a prosecutor to the synthetic portion of state law because that’s the place where THC is listed in state law.
“This could lead to the wrong charge of possession of synthetic THC and the ultimate wrongful conviction of an individual,” Choate wrote. “For the laboratory to contribute to this possible miscarriage of justice would be a huge black eye for the division and the department.”
Eventually, after the internal debate, the department settled on the idea of listing the origin as unknown in situations where no plant matter was visible and the origin couldn’t proven.
That has essentially left the decision up to prosecutors to draw their own conclusions, according to lawyers.
“The new reporting procedures implemented in 2013 ensure that MSP-FSP is only reporting what it can scientifically prove,” Banner said in a statement.
According to a statement from Michael WENDLING, president of PAAM and St. Clair County’s prosecutor, PAAM has already met with staff from the Senate Judiciary Committee to request changes to a medical marijuana bill in the Legislature.
“The change requested by PAAM would decrease the penalty for synthetic marijuana to equal that for plant marijuana,” the statement said. “This request was made prior to recent press coverage on this issue.”
That change would likely settle the dispute.
Wendling also stated that PAAM didn’t direct MSP to change its policy to increase potential charges, as some have alleged.
On why Stecker was emailing MSP workers about the issue in the first place, Wendling said Stecker, a marijuana expert, was simply responding to requests about his opinion.
“It is common practice to consult with prosecuting attorneys to ensure compliance with state law,” Banner said.
Stecker did email from what was apparently an Attorney General (AG)-based email address, according to the documents. But according to the AG’s office, he’s never worked there.
Questions about why he had the email address were referred by the AG’s office to the Department of Technology, Management and Budget.
Komorn himself has questioned why Stecker advised MSP on the subject.
“I’m a lawyer. He’s lawyer. I want to talk to the lab. I want to tell them how I want the results reported,” Komorn said.
As the debate continues, other prosecutors have taken note of what’s happening with the ongoing Lorincz case.
Chris BECKER, chief assistant prosecutor in Kent County, said his county has decided to treat oil cases where there is no plant material visible as plant marijuana, not synthetic.
Counties that see it differently aren’t necessarily doing anything wrong, Becker said.
“There’s different ways to interpret it,” he said. “Different counties can interpret it differently.”
As for the allegation that PAAM was working with MSP to change the policy, Becker said nothing could be further from the truth.
“The state lab is its own entity,” he said. “There is no grand conspiracy.”
A series of papers in the Journal of the American Medical Association is starting to correct the shameful legacy of drug war politics over cannabis science. But a research catch-22 persists.
The nation’s top medical organization released a major series of papers on medical cannabis last week in the Journal of the American Medical Association, in a move that constitutes a small step for the AMA, but a giant leap in cannabis medical history.
In five key papers, teams of researchers systematically reviewed dozens of clinical studies of marijuana, speaking in clear language that the “use of marijuana for chronic pain, neuropathic pain, and spasticity due to multiple sclerosis is supported by high-quality evidence.”
The review validated what doctors and patients in California have risked their freedom to say for twenty years. The findings also directly refute critics who maintain that “marijuana is not medicine.”
“They concluded cannabis is useful,” said Dr. Frank Lucido, a Berkeley physician who specializes in cannabis. “I don’t think a single study didn’t show benefit. … I think it was very positive.”
“What’s driving this is a tremendous cultural shift that’s preceding the political shift,” said Martin Lee, of author Smoke Signals. The AMA is acknowledging “what’s been known for 5,000 years.”
The AMA actually opposed federal cannabis prohibition in 1937. After losing that round, most doctors have toed the Drug War line ever since. “It’s great that they have finally acknowledged there’s some medicinal value in cannabis, but the whole thing is so pathetic,” Lee said.
Most major news media outlets, however, have spun the JAMA papers negatively, embracing the narrative that many uses for medical pot are still based on poor science. News reports noted that of one of the JAMA studies found that “there was low-quality evidence suggesting that cannabinoids were associated with improvements in nausea and vomiting due to chemotherapy, weight gain in HIV infection, sleep disorders, and Tourette syndrome.”
News outlets also pointed to another review that found that “there is some evidence to support the use of marijuana for nausea and vomiting related to chemotherapy, specific pain syndromes, and spasticity from multiple sclerosis. However, for most other indications that qualify by state law for use of medical marijuana, such as hepatitis C, Crohn disease, Parkinson disease, or Tourette syndrome, the evidence supporting its use is of poor quality.”
Cannabis experts say the problem with some of the conclusions in the JAMA studies, and the reporting about them, is that they fail to own up to the main reason why study quality has often been poor: the systematic blockade on pot research. For decades, the federal government has refused to authorize research on the medical benefits of cannabis. As a result, the inconclusiveness of some of the research is more a reflection of the federal ban than of the medical effectiveness of pot. “You know how incredibly hard it is to do research that is intended to confirm benefits of cannabis?” said Warner. “It’s impossible. We still have a huge catch-22.”
Experts also say that the decision by AMA researchers to ignore the research blockade shows their bias. “It’s a national embarrassment. The federal designation that cannabis has no medical value is like saying the moon is made of green cheese,” Lee said. “It seems the AMA can’t say, ‘No, the moon is not made of green cheese.'”
The AMA researchers also fail to acknowledge the real world benefits reported by patients. For example, about one in twenty California adults (1.4 million) have used medical cannabis for a “serious” condition and 92 percent of them have reported that it worked. “We have plenty of evidence that it helps for a lot of things,” Lucido said. “We should always do more research. But we shouldn’t stop people from using it in the meantime.”
The AMA researchers also listed the side effects of cannabis without providing context. “Adverse Effects included dizziness, dry mouth, nausea, fatigue, somnolence, euphoria, vomiting, disorientation, and hallucination,” one of the reports concluded.
But the AMA researchers didn’t compare the adverse side effects of cannabis to those of competing analgesics and anti-inflammatories. Painkiller overdoses are America’s leading epidemic. Ibuprofen, for example, regularly causes kidney failure. But those facts were not mentioned in the JAMA studies. “A full third of the Physician’s Desk Reference is adverse effects, including death,” Lucido said. “Cannabis has about ten adverse effects, at least two of which are often desired.”
The AMA researchers’ statements about cannabis addiction also lacked context. “I imagine sleeping pills probably have a much bigger dependency ratio,” Lucido said.
Still, as half-hearted and equivocal as the JAMA papers were, they contributed to a rising tide of mainstream validation for cannabis that’s washing away its prohibition.
“Culturally, the fight is over. We won,” Lee said. “The pro-cannabis side has conquered the culture. Now politics is catching up.”
A blog article from the Metro Times by Larry Gabriel features a quote by Attorney Michael Kormorn.
Some excerpts from the article…
Last week the Detroit Medz shop on Detroit’s west side was raided for “selling marijuana outside the provisions of the state medical marijuana act,” says Sgt. Cassandra Lewis of the Detroit police media relations department. News reports said police found two guns, 4,100 grams (about 9 pounds) of marijuana, and arrested one person — although Lewis says two individuals were arrested that evening.
Lewis says that there were complaints from the community and that police previously had made undercover buys there, although it’s not clear if those undercover buys were made by people with state cards (or fake ones as has been done in the past) or by folks who just walked in with nothing to show.
So far no charges have been announced.
Tate has had Winfred Blackmon and his Metropolitan Detroit Community Action Coalition (MDCAC) riding his ass for several months regarding dispensaries in the city. I went to a couple of meetings early on and have been receiving Blackmon’s email alerts since then. Early on, it was obvious that MDCAC members didn’t want to see marijuana, medical or otherwise, in their neighborhoods. They have an old-school attitude. Early on, their complaints included the fact that most dispensary locations painted their storefronts green — as if that matters.
MDCAC has been pushing Tate, who represents District 1, to do something about what they call “illegal marijuana provision centers.” They’ve been riding city attorney Butch Hollowell too.
Truthfully, the city has been slow to address the issue. I’ve noticed a distinct tendency to avoid talking about marijuana by city officials while places such as Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti, Lincoln Park, and elsewhere have set up rules regarding dispensaries. Now those cities have not been going through their mayor being indicted and convicted, switching from an at-large to a district city council system, having an emergency manager, and a bankruptcy. However, it would be good from a number of viewpoints to set the rules about dispensaries.
That said, the MDCAC model is not a liberal one. Although over time, as they have come to accept that medical marijuana is not going away, they have lightened up some. Originally, they wanted only one dispensary per council district, which would mean only seven in the entire city. Their current proposal seeks to limit the number of dispensaries and limit their locations to industrial zones, mandates that they cannot be near a church, school, daycare or nursery, and proposes a number of inspections and permits before they can open.
This may be a case of the squeaky wheel getting the oil.
“They chose this very uncivilized manner to try to make an example of this one particular facility,” says Southfield-based attorney Michael Komorn, who heads the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association. “There is no rule prohibiting [a location near a school], no rule. … Maybe that’s something they should think about doing — regulate this in a way that satisfies the community.”
Maybe the Detroit Medz folks were selling to people who aren’t registered patients, but the rest of this seems to be pure political theater.
Larry Gabriel writes the Stir It Up and Higher Ground columns for the Detroit Metro Times.
