Michigan Cannabis Updates

[dropcap class=”kp-dropcap radius”]A[/dropcap]fter almost seven years of inaction by the Michigan legislature and with the rapid growth of collectives, then closure of many after a Michigan Supreme Court decision and then the slow but steady reopening of collectives in the face of inaction by governments state and local, things are finally heating up. The state legislature had moved collective legislation all the way to the final day of the Senate session, when weak-willed Republicans, who caved to pressure from law enforcement’s opposition of the bills, pulled the bills at the last minute.

Now, the House has passed a package of three new bills, which differ greatly from the earlier drafts. Caregivers now growing for patients would be excluded from this system, with all of the collectives being supplied by holders of commercial growing licenses to be issued allowing gardens of 500, 1,000 or 1,500 plants. The licenses would be recommended by the local municipality, but issued by a state board comprised of five members appointed by the governor. Many current caregivers are upset by this proposal, having spent time and money perfecting their craft to be able to compete in the commercial market. Now, to participate in growing for the commercial market they would have to obtain a commercial A, B or C growing license, and give up their caregiver cards. This restriction on purchases by collectives would be enforced by means of the seed-to-sale tracking system passed by the House in the form of HB-4827.

In addition to the growing licenses, the law would authorize municipalities to recommend separate licenses for facilities for processing, testing laboratories, retail and secure transporters. All transport from one facility to another would be required to be by means of the secure transporters, who may charge fees, and also store cannabis and cannabis products.

HB-4210 would authorize the production, possession and use of cannabis-infused products, whose sale would be allowed by collectives under HB-4209. There is little opposition to the infused products bill, but its passage is tied to the collective legislation, which is tied to the seed-to-sale tracking legislation.

The word on the street is that these bills are now primed to pass, possibly before the end of the year. Action in the Senate Judiciary Committee is expected soon. The environment for passage is now much improved, as the law enforcement community apparently has moved their position from being opposed to now being neutral on the bills.

A three percent tax (plus the 6 percent Michigan Sales Tax) is to be applied to medical cannabis sold at Michigan collectives, with the 3 percent tax to be allocated: 40 percent to the state of Michigan, 30 percent to the county where the facility is located, 25 percent to the municipality where the facility is located and 5 percent to the Sheriff Department in the county where the facility is located.

Meanwhile, the City of Detroit finally is moving to license and regulate the approximately 150 collectives in the city. When the dust settles, there likely will be perhaps only fifty which will exist, based on the proposed zoning regulations. A leading example of what other Michigan cities could be doing to move forward with regulation of this emerging industry.

Finally, it is both concerning and heartening that so many people believe that legalization automatically will be on the 2016 ballot in Michigan. MILegalize needs to keep raising money to obtain the signatures to assure that happens. Marijuana is not going to legalize itself.