Dispensary Application Update

July 23rd, 2012 by Will Humble Leave a reply »

Most of the applicants for medical marijuana registration certificates have been able to correct deficiencies in their applications…  and 460 of the 486 applications we received are now complete.  Five applications have been withdrawn, 3 have been denied, 15 are pending, and 3 are on the clock to respond to requests for additional information.  

The complete applications are currently being evaluated to determine which will be eligible and move on to the random selection process on August 7th.  At least 25 applications will be allocated certificates without going through the random selection process because they’re the only application in their district (CHAA).  We’ll be providing more information about the August 7th agenda in the next couple of weeks.  We’ll probably be issuing 95-99 dispensary registration certificates in about 3 weeks.

Advertisement

25 comments

  1. Ryan says:

    So 32 thousand dollars in the bank already from the dispensary process?

    • Will Humble says:

      Much of that money is being spent on setting up the Dispensary inspection program and vetting the applications, and the program as a whole. Also to pay for the U of A for help in finding studies.

  2. CAROLYN JOINTER says:

    I am look for and dispensary.
    I would like verry much to get you help.
    I have just gotten my ID card.

    • Will Humble says:

      Carolyn,
      Currently, there are no licensed dispensaries in the state of Arizona. We do not give reccomendations as to where you can get your medicine.

  3. Adam says:

    Will, so what is the next criteria to “be eligible to move on?” Adam

    • Will Humble says:

      Adam,
      Complete and compliant with the statutes and rules and if there are multiple applications in a CHAA, ADHS will look to determine which applicants provided documentation of $150K. The ones that are complete and compliant and provide documentation of $150K (as described in the rules), will be eligible to move on to the “random selection.”

      • Doug says:

        Mr. Humble,

        Will the Department be providing an updated list including which complete applications will be moving on to the “random selection” process?

        If so, will that list include a break-down by CHAA?

      • Den says:

        Mr humble,
        Will this compleate and compliance check also include verifying “documentation of compliance with Local Jurisdiction Zoning”?

        • Will Humble says:

          Den,
          During the administrative and substantive review process, we verified that the zoning compliance documents submitted from the local jurisdictions were in compliance with R9-17-304(C)(6).

          • Den says:

            I’m somewhat concerned about an applicant’s ability to forge this document. Did your review process include calling each city/ jurisdiction to verify which applicants are in compliance with the local jurisdiction zoning?

          • Will Humble says:

            Den,
            We reviewed all applications in a similar manner and looked into complaints, yet there is potential for fraud or misleading information in any application and if ADHS determines that an applicant submitted fraud or misleading information, ADHS may deny or revoke an application or license.

          • Vin says:

            Mr. Humble,
            I like Den have an interest into which applications did not pass the substantive review process. Are you going to post the new/ updated CHAA report. Will Arizonan’s be able to see this before the lottery? I was reading through your Medical Marijuana blog and noticed a statement you recently made “we’ll need to randomly select successful applicants in 75 of the CHAAs (we’ll be posting an updated summary of how many complete applications there are by CHAA in a few weeks).” Will you be allowed to put clarity into this situation for potential dispensary applicants? The citizens are not asking for a report that names or identifies anyone, only an update to which CHAA’s will be having a lottery.

          • Phil says:

            Did you verify the authentisity of each local jurisdiction letter with each city/ jurisdiction? How did you verity this document was not forged? Are there any checks and balances in place to counteract a forged document?

          • Will Humble says:

            Phil,
            We reviewed all applications in a similar manner and looked into complaints, yet there is potential for fraud or misleading information in any application and if ADHS determines that an applicant submitted fraud or misleading information, ADHS may deny or revoke an application or license.

  4. sal says:

    I think what many people are wanting to know is how they might be able to find work at dispensaries without knowing where they are.

  5. Jerry says:

    How is it possible that 460 of the 486 applications were deemed substantively complete? Did the Department really do a substantive review of the applications? It seems very hard to believe that 460 applicants submitted business plans, security plans, inventory plans, and operations plans that demonstrated a high level of competency and ability to operate a dispensary at a level professional and secure enough to be granted a permit.

    Did DHS set any standards to ensure that those who move on to random selection are actually competent enough to be a good operator? Not setting a high standard leaves open a serious risk that unethical or unprofessional operators will be granted permits, increasing the risk of major security breaches or diversion to the black market. What did DHS do to ensure that only those with robust security and operations plans make it through to random selection?

    • Will Humble says:

      Jerry,
      Each dispensary applicant had to follow a certain criteria that had been written into the rules and in order for an application to move forward, that criteria had to be met. Please visit our website for more information.

      • Jerry says:

        The criteria states that they have to have security plans, business plans, inventory plans, etc that are complete and in compliance with the regulations. Involved in that has to be a real substantive review to determine if these documents are actually any good, and can prove that the applicant will be a responsible operator. As it stands, it looks like just about everyone who submitted a plan was deemed substantively complete, with no regard to the quality of the applications.

        Does DHS really think it is wise to entrust control of a dispensary permit to someone who hasn’t proved they can be a responsible operator? Doesn’t this basically guarantee that permits will be given to people who will inevitably set up substandard security and/or divert product to the black market? How is it possible that 460 of 486 applications were deemed to be of high enough quality to be substantively complete?

        • Will Humble says:

          Jerry,
          The Department reviewed all required documents (including, but not limited to policies and procedures and business plans) during the administrative and substantive reviews. The applicants were notified about any deficiencies and were given an opportunity to correct these deficiencies. Failure to correct deficiencies during the administrative and substantive reviews could result in the withdrawal or denial of the application.

  6. Matthew says:

    Mr. Humble,
    When can applicants expect to recieve their code for the random drawing?

  7. Adam says:

    Will, How do you say that the applicants are ‘substantively complete’ without even verifying the $150,000.00 capital required until, as you mentioned above, the last week of review? It would seem that the department should have verified the capital requirements first, since on your ‘flow chart’ that was the first criterial after determininng if any other applicants were in the CHAA.I certianly don’t know any banks or financial institutions that operate very quickly, much less, with in a week’s time.

    • Will Humble says:

      Adam,
      Dispensary applicants were not required to submit documentation showing they had $150, and therefore failure to submit this documentation would not make an application incomplete or out of compliance during the administrative or substantive reviews, but may have made an application ineligible for the random selection process in a competitive CHAA.

Leave a Reply