New Medical Marijuana Rules Up for Public Comment

February 5th, 2014 by Will Humble Leave a reply »

Last summer a Superior Court judge decided that a portion of our medical marijuana regulations are unreasonable because our regulations didn’t have a process for dispensary registration certificate holders to renew their dispensary registration certificate if they didn’t earn their approval to operate within 1 year.  

This week we posted new draft rules (and an Online Survey to get public comment) to comply with the Judge’s Order.  We’re also using this opportunity to refine the regulations- basically to close some loopholes we’ve found in physician certifications and delivery by dispensaries among other things.  Here’s a summary of some of the modifications to our current rules that we’re proposing: 

  • Adding a process by which dispensary registration certificate holders, who don’t earn their approval to operate within 1 year due to individual circumstances, may renew their dispensary registration certificate;
  • Removing the prohibition of an individual who was a principal officer or board member of a dispensary that failed to get an approval to operate within 1 year from being a principal officer or board member of a new dispensary;
  • Revising the method of selecting future dispensaries to match the method we used in 2012… removing the allocation on the basis of locations with the highest number of qualifying patient residents;
  • Clarifying what is required of a dispensary to be considered open, operating, and available to dispense;
  • Clarifying the policies and procedures for inventory control and the transportation of marijuana to a dispensary’s cultivation site or to other dispensaries, and delivering to qualifying patients and designated caregivers;
  • Clarifying that a dispensary agent delivering marijuana for a dispensary is required to have a registry identification card issued under the registration certificate;
  • Clarifying where a dispensary may dispense medical marijuana to a qualifying patient or designated caregiver;
  • Clarifying where a dispensary agent may transport medical marijuana, plants, or paraphernalia;
  • Clarifying what a trip plan needs to include;
  • Limiting dispensary donations by patients and caregivers to 2.5 ounces of useable marijuana every 2 weeks;
  • Adding seniors, veterans, and folks that receive Supplemental Security Income or Social Security Disability Insurance benefits to the list of folks that qualify for discounts on patient registration cards; and
  • Amending the meaning of “25 miles” to by road rather than as the crow flies. 

This is “regular” rulemaking, so we’ll be holding oral proceedings during the formal rulemaking period.  We think we’ll be able to work through the process and establish the modified rules by early 2015.

Advertisement

65 comments

  1. In 1996 Arizona citizens by passed lawmakers; and won the “voter initiative measure” legalizing medical marijuana. Though it passed by a margin of 65% our State Legislature voided that law. This forced citizens to again battle and bypass lawmakers to pass Prop 105 in 1998: “Arizona Voter Protection Act”. Though this law was a specific reaction to the governments refusal to accept the 1996 medical marijuana law, Prop 105 generally prevents adversarial government from vetoing or obstructing laws that citizens initiate and voters approve.
    In 2010 citizens again forced a vote for Medical Marijuana in Arizona and prevailed. This is why when you read the language of Prop. 203 you will repeatedly see this warning in captions: (Caution: 1998 Prop. 105 applies)
    Even after the “Arizona Voter Protection Act” and “Arizona Medical Marijuana Act” became law Governor Brewer and Will Humble (Department of Health Services) are still waging a litigious and complicated campaign that obstructs medical marijuana patients and the law that was meant to protect them. An ambush of oppressive restrictions and frivolous litigation prevents medical marijuana patients from having safe, legal and affordable access. The following is the first in a long and costly taxpayer paid parade of lost and pending lawsuits:
    January 17, 2012 (MARICOPA COUNTY CV 2011-011290 01/17/2012) Judge Gama Ruled: In construing a statute adopted by initiative, the Court’s primary objective “is to give effect to the intent of the electorate.” “The voters passed Proposition 203 informed of marijuana’s therapeutic value in treating a wide array of debilitating medical conditions. Prop. 203, at § 2(B). The voters intended to protect patients with those debilitating medical conditions (and their physicians and providers) “from arrest and prosecution, criminal and other penalties and property forfeiture if such patients engage in the medical use of marijuana.” Id. at § 2(G). The voters contemplated this be done in 120 days.”
    Arizona Revised Statutes Section: 36-2803.-Rulemaking (Caution: 1998 Prop. 105 applies) “Not later than one hundred twenty days after the effective date of this chapter, the department shall adopt rules: Establishing the form and content of registration and renewal applications submitted under this chapter.”
    On July 29, 2013 Maricopa Superior Court Judge Randall Warner ruled that Will Humble (ADHS) had failed to meet a set deadline and ordered him to rewrite rules 3 years after the legal mandate. Judge Warner: “Predictably, the implementation of medical marijuana in Arizona has met resistance. There have been legal challenges, political challenges, and a reluctance or unwillingness on the part of many public officials…” Will Humble admits in his ADHS blog that another Superior Court has ruled against him and it will take an additional year to rewrite new rules. http://directorsblog.health.azdhs.gov/?tag=medical-marijuana
    Judge Warner’s recent ruling confirms that the form and content of registrations and renewals are still unresolved and in violation of the law. However, the controversy over Medical Marijuana Dispensaries and the 25-Mile Cultivation Interpretation will be the “tsunami of crippling and costly lawsuits”.
    Will Humble is well aware of his “25-Mile as the Crow Flies Controversy” and foreseeable storm of litigation that will follow.

    Mr. Humble states: “ The law says that patients who live within 25 miles of an operating dispensary cannot grow their own medical marijuana. This was part of what voters passed, and ADHS cannot change it.”
    “As the Crow Flies” is not mentioned in Prop 203 and nowhere in Prop 203 does it say: “patients who live within 25 miles of an operating dispensary cannot grow their own medical marijuana”.
    Original Ballot Format version of Prop 203: “If the qualifying patient’s home is located more than 25 miles from the nearest nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary, the patient or designated caregiver may cultivate up to 12 marijuana plants in an enclosed, locked facility.”
    Arizona Revised Statutes Section 36-2804.02 – Registration of qualifying patients and designated caregivers (Caution: 1998 Prop. 105 applies) “A designation as to who will be allowed to cultivate marijuana plants for the qualifying patient’s medical use if a registered nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary is not operating within twenty-five miles of the qualifying patient’s home.”
    This 25-Mile Cultivation Designation by the patient offers a patient living excessive distance from an urban area protection from adversarial municipalities and private entities that don’t want medical marijuana dispensaries or patients in their communities. There is nothing in the language of Prop 203 that authorizes the Arizona Department of Health Services to force patients to buy their medical marijuana from a dispensary on a grid or precludes patients from growing their own marijuana. There is nothing in Prop 203 that says: “patients who live within 25 miles of an operating dispensary cannot grow their own medical marijuana”. The language is simply not there. I fear Will Humble’s interpretation of Prop 203 will continue to create unnecessary litigation, expense, pain, suffering and death while the ADHS focuses on Behavior Health Medications.
    I would respectfully ask Mr. Humble to clarify his interpretation of the language of his 25-Mile Rule and admit that it does not address or include medical marijuana patients living inside a designated dispensary area.
    Respectfully Submitted,
    Arlin Troutt

    • Will Humble says:

      The voter approved Arizona Medical Marijuana Act states in 36-2804.02 (f) that the patient will designate who will cultivate if a registered dispensary is not operating within 25 miles of the patient’s home.
      36-2804.02. Registration of qualifying patients and designated caregivers
      A. 3 (f) A designation as to who will be allowed to cultivate marijuana plants for the qualifying patient’s medical use if a registered nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary is not operating within twenty-five miles of the qualifying patient’s home.
      It was also clarified in rules, legislative council analyzed the law and the interpretation is clear: “A qualifying patient who is registered with DHS (or a registered designated caregiver on behalf of the qualifying patient) may obtain up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana in a 14-day period from a registered nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary. If the qualifying patient’s home is located more than 25 miles from the nearest nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary, the patient or designated caregiver may cultivate up to 12 marijuana plants in an enclosed, locked facility.”

      We encourage people who are interested to read at the new rules and make comments on issues we can change. Remember we cannot change things that are written in the law.

      • K. Goodman says:

        Where can I find the clarification in rules or a written opinion from the legislative counsel? Designating individuals to cultivate outside of the 25 miles is NOT the same as stating nobody within 25 miles may do so. This was a very misleading statement to voters.

      • Arlin Troutt says:

        Mr. Humble, we can’t make up language that does not exist in the law. The 25-Mile “clause” only addresses individuals living a distance from a medical marijuana dispensaries. Since the stated purpose of Prop 203 was to protect medical marijuana patients and doctors from a hostile government, the most reasonable interpretation of this clause would be to confer extra protection for patients that might be victimized by rural municipalities rich ranchers, HOA’s etc,. The Arizona Medical Marijuana Act will not allow the ADHS to escape reality.

      • Doug says:

        Maybe not, but a judge sure can

      • John says:

        One simple question how are going to keep track of the qualifying patients and designated caregivers distance. Say one patients of the caregiver moves closer than 25 miles of a register dispensary and the caregivers does not know this. Or a few Patients of the caregiver move out of state while the caregiver has a grow. Your setting yourself for disaster.

      • John says:

        Just what type of regulation are you doing? If your collecting revenue for marijuana through taxes. What type of testing on all forms of marijuana, including:
        concentrates, raw marijuana, tinctures and Oils and Waxes that may have butane extraction. Also what types of monitoring of where the cannabis is grown and where it comes from by tracking purchases and audits. We have a liquor control board here monitoring that. So just how are actually monitoring this industry? Just like a Bank. You must have regulation in place. Please explain.

  2. Tyler says:

    The 25-mile rule was written into the the original proposition by lawyers working for the same entities that went on to open dispensaries. This qualifier was tacked onto the law for the sole reason of making more profit for dispensary owners (through creating monopolies- oligopolies at best.). The 25-mile rule stifles an open marketplace because it forces patients to pay for their medicine from particular providers, which is strictly in conflict with Arizona’s stance on keeping an open healthcare marketplace. There is no reasonable social benefit to maintaining this 25-mile rule. Furthermore, there would not be the slightest of detriments caused by repealing this un-American (and probably unlawful) legal provision. It is inevitable that the 25-mile rule will be axed, though maybe not before marijuana is legalized by the federal government. Why not be on the right side of history ADOHS?

  3. Amber White says:

    I think there should be some rules to check the type and condition of the marijuana that they are offering. This should be helpful in determining its quality and standards can be set for different quality levels then.

  4. MA says:

    You realize that you are basically asking AZ DHS to break the law? The 25 mile rule is in place so that there are no home grows with poor odor control next to schools, churches and other protected facilities.

    • Booze Radley says:

      That’s actually not true as dispensaries are only limited from operating 500 feet from a schools, churches etc ONLY. That means that an actual dispensary can grow marijuana 500 feet away from a school, church, etc.. yet 500 feet IS NOT 25 miles. How does that achieve anything you referred to? You are clearly only arguing against home-growers because of personal bias as your logical premise is completely flawed.

  5. K. Goodman says:

    Regarding Dispensary applications, I do not see how these new guidelines change anything. It still favors the wealthy and there is no indication how the certificate holders will be “randomly selected” in the event that more than one application meets all of the criteria. In addition, the information that I have received from several individuals in the industry is that the CHAA system is ineffective. These “new” guidelines do nothing but increase the monopoly the corporate wealthy have on the dispensaries and in no way help to protect the rights of the patients. A free market of cultivators and dispensaries should be in place to ensure that patients have access to safe and effective medicine at reasonable prices. Without competition there in no incentive for dispensaries to improve the quality of their medicine or prices.

  6. Steve says:

    Specifically, my concerns are the fact that you are requiring medical marijuana users to go to the dispensary that you tell us to go to. Why are you creating a 25-mile monopoly for these businesses? It seems extremely unreasonable to require patients with arthritis and cancer to have to drive 50 miles round trip to get their medication. Beyond the monopoly and the extremely large range of dispensaries, it seems unfair to not let patients grow their own medicine, regardless of where they live with respect to a dispensary. How else will a person be 100% confident of the method used to grow and the strain they need?

    First of all, let anyone that wants to cultivate do so. There is no reason to FORCE people to buy from a store if they would prefer to grow their own. Nutrients used, exact strain for their condition, these thing are important to people. Just because there is a dispensary IN THE SAME CITY does not mean I should be REQUIRED BY LAW to purchase medicine there. Am I required by law to use one CVS over another? Or maybe I am required by LAW to use Walgreens at such and such exact address? NO, I am not. Therefore, why are you punishing patients of mmj unlike patients of white pills?

    • Bill Hayes says:

      no one is required to go to a dispensary in their town or anywhere else for that matter. I live in PHX and just went in Greenhouse of Flagstaff while on vacation up north over the weekend.
      Great meds and good prices.

      And why not talk about those two things for just a second or two.

      Med quality: expect it to be kinda crappy in the early stages folks. many dispensaries have hired growers from out of state that are unfamiliar with the environment and the variances and subtle nuances in flavor and aroma will take some time for these newbs.
      Next, concerning meds, if you don’t ask, they won’t tell. It is YOUR responsibility to MAKE your local dispensary follow the rules (granted there is a lot of “looking the other way” going on isn’t there) and play by the book. Demand to know how it was grown and what was used. Chemical fertz? Don’t panic it’s organic? Demand to know, you have the right.

      Next, let’s talk pricing, I brought this up a long time ago and Will agreed with me then and I am sure he still does.
      If I own a dispensary and I sell my OZ’s for $200 and the current street price is $300-400, then have I become part of the problem? A “cog in the drug trafficking machine”??
      I am enabling the street or “black market” sales by selling my meds at such a low cost am I not. Of course the “bad” is on the part of the patient re-selling the meds, not the dispensary owner right?!
      If dispensary prices reflect street prices the black market will dwindle and eventually fade.

      Full recreational legalization legislation has already been drafted and introduced by Ruben Gallegos, spread the word because it will solve a majority of the problems I see being complained about, STILL.

      One last thing, for those of you that want the “25 Mile Rule” gone, why not take it into court and just handle it?! I presented the correct/winning argument to Judge Bolton but she was bound to dismiss my case based on the fact that it was “theoretic” as my cultivation rights had not yet been revoked per the law. Those that filed the state level case presented the incorrect argument and it got tossed, however the judge DID affirm that the “dual classes of citizenship” created by the 25 mile rule “appears unconstitutional” at face value.

      go figure, I WAS right!! lol, duhhh!

      Just take a look at the AZDHS page where “all the lawsuits regarding the AMMA can be found” (< Will Humble, you said this lol) and see if you find my No 25 Mile Rule FEDERAL case ;)

      The winning argument was swept under the rug folks, that or it was just a big "oopsie" on AZDHS's web departments behalf when they forgot to list my case with all the others.

      For info on the case I filed (Pro Se) check my facebook page… https://www.facebook.com/billybhayesjr in the "notes" section or go to …
      https://www.facebook.com/No25MileRule
      for more info on what you can do.

      I filed my case "Pro Se" which means without aid of an attorney, just like ANY of you CAN DO. If you need help writing the motions just contact me, "ghost writing" of motions is protected and upheld by the courts over and over, Faretta v. California (1975) McKaskle v. Wiggins (1984) Rock v. Arkansas (1987) Martinez v. California Court of Appeals (2000) Indiana v. Edwards (2008) It is also your RIGHT, under the sixth amendment.

      You want it gone? make it so.

    • Will Humble says:

      The voter approved Arizona Medical Marijuana Act states in 36-2804.02 (f) that the patient will designate who will cultivate if a registered dispensary is not operating within 25 miles of the patient’s home.
      36-2804.02. Registration of qualifying patients and designated caregivers
      A. 3 (f) A designation as to who will be allowed to cultivate marijuana plants for the qualifying patient’s medical use if a registered nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary is not operating within twenty-five miles of the qualifying patient’s home.
      It was also clarified in rules, legislative council analyzed the law and the interpretation is clear: “A qualifying patient who is registered with DHS (or a registered designated caregiver on behalf of the qualifying patient) may obtain up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana in a 14-day period from a registered nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary. If the qualifying patient’s home is located more than 25 miles from the nearest nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary, the patient or designated caregiver may cultivate up to 12 marijuana plants in an enclosed, locked facility.”

      We encourage people who are interested to read at the new rules and make comments on issues we can change. Remember we cannot change things that are written in the law.

  7. marc says:

    repeal the unconstitutional 25 mile rule
    those who want to grow their own plant medicine should not be interfered with
    most people can not afford $350. + an ounce when most use more than 2 per month
    lots of people on disability & ssi income
    lets be reasonable
    big business will recoup their investment if people grow or not.
    if rules for dispensaries can be changed so can parts that benefit the patients who this law is meant for.

  8. Bill Hayes says:

    in case anyone needs a copy for updating things like court cases, mmj web sites, public health websites, you know, for any reason what so ever…here you go folks…

    https://www.facebook.com/notes/billy-hayes/hayes-v-arizona/1416359585277678

    ^how to get rid of the 25 Mile rule

  9. Bill Hayes says:

    NOW, every patient that has a complaint about the 25 Mile rule has the ability to remove it thanks to AZDHS posting my comments in full.

    If you are still complaining to Will about the 25 mile rule and our pricing, you can kill 2 birds with one motion., you just have to file it. All the info you need is listed above, just copy and paste.

    Be ready for war though, because you’ll get it.

  10. Will Humble says:

    Just so you know, the 25 mile standard regarding cultivation has been approved by court order.

    During the summer of 2013, qualifying medical marijuana patients filed a lawsuit against the State of Arizona and the Arizona Department of Health Services (Maricopa County Superior Court Cause No. CV2013-011447).

    The Plaintiffs sought an order permanently enjoining the State and the Department from enforcing the AMMA provision which precludes a patient from cultivating marijuana if his or her home is less than 25 miles from a licensed medical marijuana dispensary.

    On November 12, 2013 Judge Katherine Cooper found that the 25 mile rule was not an unconstitutional limitation on patient health care rights and ordered the complaint dismissed.

    • Arlin Troutt says:

      The other side of Mr. Humble’s story:

      A medical marijuana (MMJ) patient named (name removed by editor) hired Michael Walz who has advertised himself as: “ThePotLawyer.com for many years in Arizona. Mr. (x) then filed suit against Mr. Humble and the ADHS over the 25-Mile Cultivation Clause in the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA).

      Mr. Walz did not want to address Mr. Humble’s misinterpretation of the language of the 25-Mile Clause because Mr. Walz convinced Mr. (x) that he could win his lawsuit and a lot of money if Mr. (x) agreed with Mr. Humble’s interpretation of his 25-Mile Rule. Mr. Walz’s strategy was to render the 25-Mile Clause Moot because Proposition 106 that was passed in 2012 gave Arizona Citizens the right to avoid 3rd party healthcare providers and Mr. Walz claimed this exempted MMJ patients from having to go to State Dispensaries for their MMJ.

      Judge Cooper is a Governor Jan Brewer appointee. Mr. (x) was defeated in court and instead of looking at the language and realizing that it says nothing about MMJ patients being prohibited from growing MMJ inside the State Dispensary areas Judge Cooper conspicuously stated in her ruling that both parties agree with Mr. Humble’s interpretation of the 25-Mile Rule.

      Mr. (x) went to work trying to get people to donate to his legal fund for an appeal but Mr. Walz has a very bad reputation with the Arizona Cannabis Community that has fought so hard for so many years to put an end to the billions of dollars that cross our borders with the violence that surrounds the deadly high prices of marijuana.

      It is true Judge Cooper conspicuously stated in her ruling that both Mr. (x) and you agreed on your definition however, nowhere in the language of the AMMA does it say that you can’t grow Medical Marijuana “No Where”. Would you please be gentleman enough to admit this? And of course print my comment if you don’t mind.

    • Bill Hayes says:

      Yes Mr Humble, that case was tossed, like I said, they had the wrong argument. The newest attempt will not be.
      We didn’t want to get another dismissal so this time, we made sure there was nothing “theoretic”. Par the course sir, you will undoubtedly be named. A new twist or three has been added in the interest of justice.
      The 25 Mile-Rule was doomed from the minute the people realized they had been duped. The “monopoly” created over production of medicine, aka cannabis, is unconstitutional for several reasons but AZ Const. Article 14 section 15 is goping to be a serious fact that would be hard to deny in a court of law concidering Tom Horne said it in a motion.
      I could cite multiple cases where the prosecution confirms this fact, and the prosecution has always been the state.
      Dust of your lights AZ, your going to need them again soon.

    • Tetonmoon says:

      This was true. I spoke to the attorney via email prior to the filing of the case and suggested he find other means to over turn as for there are several. The first is both federally and state legislation that no law shall create a dual citizen making a criminal of one over another based on income, race or geographic. The second is the monopoly clause. We know whose (obscene language deleted) Humble.. I am sure your not interested in the well being of the patients. But hey, you have so many loopholes in the dispensary guidelines you can drive a plane through them. I could have gotten a dispensary even if I was from fricking Germany. You sir, don’t belong running this program. You are just another bought politician. Your interests only lie in whose pockets you line.

  11. Chris says:

    There needs to be some clarification concerning the rights of Medical Marijuana card holders pertaining to being denied and discriminated against being hired due to testing positive for THC. There seems to be a fine line here. It has been determined that Marijuana is a medicine for legal card holders. Being a medicine should mean it is no different than ANY other prescribed controlled substance. With that said new hepa privacy laws challenge whether “legal” card holders should be tested at all by employers. I have been denied employment now 8 times in a year and am being forced out of the work force due to employers STILL discriminating against my choice in pain management. So now I have to apply for food stamps, housing, etc. when I am perfectly able to work. I would never use a drug that would impair me at work marijuana included. I take pride in my job and I should be respected to properly medicate only when at home and do not operate a vehicle while using any drug that may impair.me. Under NO circumstances should ANY employer deny or discriminate against hiring ANYONE for medical Marijuana use. What is being done to stop this from happening? I respect Mr. Humble and appreciate all he has done with this program. However this issue needs to be addressed ASAP as the number of people being denied employment is growing. And so is the tax payers money going toward supporting us now that we can not be hired. Thank you so much for your time here. Please help get us back to work Mr.Humble :)

  12. Will Humble says:

    The Arizona Medical Marijuana Act states that an employer will not be able to penalize a qualifying patient with a registry identification card for a positive drug test for marijuana, unless the patient used, possessed, or was impaired by marijuana on the employment premises or during hours of employment.

  13. Concerned says:

    Hello Mr Humble,

    How am I to interpret this as I should not be fired for being a mmj patient for having a positive marijuana test?

    As long as i: not having used,possessed or was impaired during hours of employment or on premises. Should I follow these guidelines and still be fired, would litigation need to be sought? Would I even be correct in doing so?

    What about this case in Michigan where MMJ is also legal but a patient was fired from a Walmart? (http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/20/court-rules-wal-mart-can-fire-legal-medical-marijuana-user/)

    I know this was a different state but how am I can I be assured AZ is any different? How can I know I am interpreting the law correctly as this patient, in the link above, thought he was interpreting the law correctly as well?

    After I register with the state as a MMJ patient I shouldn’t have to consult with a lawyer as if I would be fired or not depending on the interpretation of the law.

    I payed you guys, I went to the doctor, i registered with the state. I should not be fired if not having used,possessed or impaired with marijuana on property or during hours of employment.

    Thanks Mr. Humble

  14. Will Humble says:

    Here is the precise Statutory Language in the Act (below). Pay particular attention to Section B.

    36-2813. Discrimination prohibited

    (Caution: 1998 Prop. 105 applies)

    A. No school or landlord may refuse to enroll or lease to and may not otherwise penalize a person solely for his status as a cardholder, unless failing to do so would cause the school or landlord to lose a monetary or licensing related benefit under federal law or regulations.

    B. Unless a failure to do so would cause an employer to lose a monetary or licensing related benefit under federal law or regulations, an employer may not discriminate against a person in hiring, termination or imposing any term or condition of employment or otherwise penalize a person based upon either:

    1. The person’s status as a cardholder.

    2. A registered qualifying patient’s positive drug test for marijuana components or metabolites, unless the patient used, possessed or was impaired by marijuana on the premises of the place of employment or during the hours of employment.

    C. For the purposes of medical care, including organ transplants, a registered qualifying patient’s authorized use of marijuana must be considered the equivalent of the use of any other medication under the direction of a physician and does not constitute the use of an illicit substance or otherwise disqualify a registered qualifying patient from medical care.

    D. No person may be denied custody of or visitation or parenting time with a minor, and there is no presumption of neglect or child endangerment for conduct allowed under this chapter, unless the person’s behavior creates an unreasonable danger to the safety of the minor as established by clear and convincing evidence.

    • Concerned says:

      Thank you Mr. Humble for the fast response and for having an open discussion blog like this, it provides a place for patients and residents of Arizona a nice format.

      Another question or two regarding apartments non-smoking policy and edibles/concentrates.

      1. Apartments non-smoking policy. -The Statute says a Landlord cannot discriminate to lease to a cardholder. A Cardholder is a patient who was authorized to use marijuana (is smoking not using?)

      As how am I to medicate otherwise? The only other two options I see would be vaporize or consume the cannabis orally.

      The first option (vaporizing) brings undue expenses upon the cardholder (having to purchase a vaporizer) and the second option may not be viable for some of us who have a resistance to orally active cannabis.

      How is this to be interpreted?

      2. Some edibles don’t work on patients (any dispensary staff or prescribing doctor will tell you) but perhaps concentrates of strong hash oil as seen in some patients with resistances to just ground flower mixed into baking.

      Any progress regarding concentrates?

      Thanks Mr. Humble!

      • Will Humble says:

        When we developed our regulations we included a pretty good definition of where medical marijauan can be smoked (we did not address vaping). We used the smoke free arizona act regulations as our guide. We prohibited smoking marijuana in any “public place” and then defined public space as described below. Note that our prohibitions do not include private residences. I don’t know what to tell you regarding rented apartments. Smoking tobacco (and even things like pets) are probably addressed in the up-front lease agreement. I don’t know whether smoking marijuana in an apartment is standard fare in lease agreements these days- you’d need to check your individual lease I think.

        24. “Public place”:
        a. Means any location, facility, or venue that is not intended for the regular exclusive use of an individual or a specific
        group of individuals;
        b. Includes, but is not limited to:
        i. Airports;
        ii. Banks;
        iii. Bars;
        iv. Child care facilities;
        v. Child care group homes during hours of operation;
        vi. Common areas of apartment buildings, condominiums, or other multifamily housing facilities;
        vii. Educational facilities;
        viii. Entertainment facilities or venues;
        ix. Health care institutions, except as provided in subsection (24)(c);
        x. Hotel and motel common areas;
        xi. Laundromats;
        xii. Libraries;
        xiii. Office buildings;
        xiv. Parking lots;
        xv. Parks;
        xvi. Public transportation facilities;
        xvii.Reception areas;
        xviii.Restaurants;
        xix. Retail food production or marketing establishments;
        xx. Retail service establishments;
        xxi. Retail stores;
        xxii. Shopping malls;
        xxiii. Sidewalks;
        xxiv. Sports facilities;
        xxv.Theaters; and
        xxvi.Waiting rooms; and
        c. Does not include:
        i. Nursing care institutions as defined in A.R.S. § 36-401,
        ii. Hospices as defined in A.R.S. § 36-401,
        iii. Assisted living centers as defined in A.R.S. § 36-401,
        iv. Assisted living homes as defined in A.R.S. § 36-401,
        v. Adult day health care facilities as defined in A.R.S. § 36-401,
        vi. Adult foster care homes as defined in A.R.S. § 36-401, or
        vii. Private residences.

  15. Concerned says:

    Hey again Mr. Humble.

    I have another question regarding the DUI laws in Arizona and metabolites of marijuana being in the bloodstream (http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2013/05/how_to_avoid_a_marijuana_dui_i.php)

    Do we know the progress on the Supreme Court ruling? I read as it stands now, that having consumed marijuana more than 2 weeks ago and driving today could land me a DUI charge even if I was not impaired.

    Again I registered with the state to avoid these hassles and I shouldn’t have to answer “no I am not a cardholder” to an officer versus “yes I am” because the latter indicates a user of marijuana and would assume they would have marijuana metabolites in their system.

    Thanks Mr Humble you are doing a great job!

    • Will Humble says:

      I’m afraid I can’t be of much help here. While we regulate the MM system- we are not a law enforcement agency nor are we prosecutors of Arizona’s Title 13 Criminal Code.

      This is a question better addressed to law enforcement or county prosecutors.

  16. Insecure says:

    I have a couple of questions and a revision to propose concerning Medical Marijuana and i am wondering if they are planning to be implemented or already are implemented.

    1. My first questions is of concerns of privacy and protection of marijuana card holders and state licensed dispensaries. If their will be more measures to keep patient information private from police,business,. This is due to the reasonable fears that cops may raid dispensaries and might release information on those that have legitimate problems planning to enter into innocent peoples homes and potentially harm them.

    I would ask if there is a law in place or if there will be a law potentially put in place much like California’s HIPAA act or similiar language as to make sure there is no central database to easily look up marijuana card holding patients from raided and prosecuted. If you dont get my question here is the sites from which im talking about

    http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/the-truth-about-medical-marijuana-card-privacy/Content?oid=3426638

    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130615101957AAfTjjD

    1B On the 36-2813. Discrimination prohibited part of the marijuana act, does this apply for colleges(such as University and Community Colleges) can not take away scholarships,grants if said disabled person has a medical marijuana card and was being discriminated against for having the smell of marijuana and is not possessing and using said medicine on campus? this needs clarification because it can be any kind of school institution.

    1C Will the same also apply to police as well, that they can not arrest a marijuana card holder if said card holder does have the smell of marijuana residue, but the police find that the person is not possessing or selling said marijuana?

    2. An expansion to the list of qualifications for a marijuan card, Such as epilepsy,Autism,PTSD(veterans have been needing this including my grandfather), Acid Reflux(GERD), certain neurological and esophogus problems being added to the list of disability’s to be able to apply for a medical marijuana card, as there have been studies showing that certain strains of marijuana have actually helped children and adults dealing with these lifelong problems.

    3.One last thing i would like clarification is, what happens if a marijuana card holder, is caught using their medicine out in public when it is against the rules of the law on the books, will there be a fine of 150$? or will it result in a felony much like the law we have now for those that do not possess a marijuana card that both will be treated the same way regardless? If both get treated the same i would like to see a new rule of a fine being implemented as the legislature may not be able to pass this on their own.

    Thanks. Mr.Humble i hope to hear back from you soon.

    • Will Humble says:

      The confidentiality provisions in the law are extensive- but there are some exemptions in Section E (below).

      36-2810. Confidentiality

      (Caution: 1998 Prop 105 applies)

      A. The following information received and records kept by the department for purposes of administering this chapter are confidential, exempt from title 39, chapter 1, article 2, exempt from section 36-105 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 of the department pursuant to this chapter:

      1. Applications or renewals, their contents and supporting information submitted by qualifying patients and designated caregivers, including information regarding their designated caregivers and physicians.

      2. Applications or renewals, their contents and supporting information submitted by or on behalf of nonprofit medical marijuana dispensaries in compliance with this chapter, including the physical addresses of nonprofit medical marijuana dispensaries.

      3. The individual names and other information identifying persons to whom the department has issued registry identification cards.

      B. Any dispensing information required to be kept under section 36-2806.02, subsection B or department regulation shall identify cardholders by their registry identification numbers and not contain names or other personally identifying information.

      C. Any department hard drives or other data recording media that are no longer in use and that contain cardholder information must be destroyed. The department shall retain a signed statement from a department employee confirming the destruction.

      D. Data subject to this section shall not be combined or linked in any manner with any other list or database and shall not be used for any purpose not provided for in this chapter.

      E. This section does not preclude the following notifications:

      1. Department employees may notify law enforcement about falsified or fraudulent information submitted to the department if the employee who suspects that falsified or fraudulent information has been submitted has conferred with the employee’s supervisor and both agree that the circumstances warrant reporting.

      2. The department may notify state or local law enforcement about apparent criminal violations of this chapter if the employee who suspects the offense has conferred with the employee’s supervisor and both agree that the circumstances warrant reporting.

      3. Nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary agents may notify the department of a suspected violation or attempted violation of this chapter or department rules.

      4. The department may notify the Arizona medical board, the Arizona board of osteopathic examiners in medicine and surgery, the naturopathic physicians medical board and the board of homeopathic and integrated medicine examiners if the department believes a physician has committed an act of unprofessional conduct as prescribed by the appropriate board’s statutes because of the licensee’s failure to comply with the requirements of this chapter or rules adopted pursuant to this chapter.

      F. This section does not preclude submission of the section 36-2809 report to the legislature. The annual report submitted to the legislature is subject to title 39, chapter 1, article 2.

  17. Insecure says:

    Thank you for clarifying confidentiality. But i noticed you did not answer my question on discrimination involving College Universities and Community Colleges.

    Here is part of the law im questioning

    “36-2813. Discrimination prohibited
    (Caution: 1998 Prop. 105 applies)

    A. No school or landlord may refuse to enroll or lease to and may not otherwise penalize a person solely for his status as a cardholder, unless failing to do so would cause the school or landlord to lose a monetary or licensing related benefit under federal law or regulations.”

    On the subject of penalize. Does this mean that there will be no penalization such as taking away of pell grants(FAFSA) and scholarships if a person has a medical marijuana card or is a known medical marijuana card holder due to information given to the university on the premises?

    This is important as i have read numerous cases in the news and court cases, where ordinary college students that have a scholarship or from FAFSA(aka Pell Grants) have been discriminated against, by denial of scholarship and grant money; All because a student had tested positive for marijuana and owns a marijuana card, despite not possessing marijuana or has shown no impairment at all.

    Is there any rules updating on this will there be any updates on the medical marijuana card rules regarding this?

    Thanks again Mr.Humble :)

    • Will Humble says:

      Our rulemaking statutory authority doesn’t extend to interpreting these statutory protections. Our regulatory authority is limited to the registration cards, dispensaries, and certain definitions.

  18. Bobby Price says:

    Hello Mr. Humble first off thanks for adding Veterans to the discount list i will be glad to save money when i renew my card again. Now my question is regarding Ptsd since learning that you have declined adding it to the list of qaulifications due to not enough evidence. Well i believe your wrong for doing that because im sure there was not enough evidence for the original disabilities that are on the list now escpecially 3 years ago when there was almost no studies done then . But if you need evidence or help ill be glad to help you. To be honest i dont think you tryed hard enough to get evidence its all around you just look . I myself got medically retired from the army in july of 2012 for severe PTSD and i also have had a neck surgery and multiple arm,shoulder surgerys .When i was in the army all they did was pump me full of pills at one time i was taking 27 pills a day and the last year and a half i was in was horrible i was a drugged up zombie. I was in and out of mental health hospitals 5 times in that span i lost my family my wife left me and took my daughter i was a mess i almost took my own life multiple times i was miserable and didnt want to live. Then when i got out i decided to give medical marijuana a chance and wow it has changed my life after 6 months of using it in multiple ways smoking,vaporizing,edibles,and concentrates iwas able to get off everything no more pain pills or crazy pills i got off all of my pills and i will say ive never felt better it was a little hard at first but once i got my tolerence for the marijuana its been awesome it helps me control all my problems . I feel like a new person even my family was against marijuana at first but after they seen what it did for me they have changed there opinions . To be honest with you sir 2 years ago when i was on all those pills i was a danger to society now im the complete opposite im a happy friendly person to be around and if you met me you would agree and you wouldnt even know i was high on marijuana . You can believe any doctor or scientist if you want but im telling you this stuff can save the lives of many people battling PTSD including lots of veterans .Good thing i have multiple reasons to get my card but its not fair because there are so many veterans battling PTSD alone and because you didnt approve PTSD as a qualifying condition they either have to get marijuana illegally or they dont get help at all and thats not ok .So many soldiers kill them self everyday fighting PTSD and thats wrong you people are in positions to help us better our lives and you say no because of the lack of evidence wow there is no evidence because our government has been hiding and ignoring the benefits of this plant the last 50+ years. Ive personally helped hundreds if not over a thousand patients in the last year turn to marijuana and get off pills and help people live better lives and ive helped all kinds of patients with many different conditions and its the same result this plant can save lives. I hope you can do something about it i believe its your responsability at least before saying no maybe you can try a little harder to get evidence ecspecially on PTSD because theres lots of veterans who can benefit from this and i think us veterans deserve any kind of help we can get we put are life on the line for this country so how about you do a little something for us. And by the way if you want ill release all my medical records and medication history to you to show you the evidence that there are other alternatives to all these deadly pharmecutical pills that is ruining our country so someone can put money in there pocket thats why marijuana is illeagal because when it becomes legal all those big pharmecutical companies are gonna go bankrupt! Well thank you for your time hopefully one day PTSD will be added as a qualifying condition

  19. Mark Epler says:

    Where does AZDHS stand on marijuana concentrates?

    I realize that they neither enforce nor revise the criminal codes in Arizona, but do they intend to sit idly by as pockets of “criminal” behavior are created to fulfill demand?

    40k+ patients and millions of dollars in annual revenue, isn’t it time to see AZDHS do more for the community than just “close loopholes” ?

    • Will Humble says:

      The discrepancy between the definitions of marijuana in Title 36 (AMMA) and Title 13 (criminal code) will hopefullyu be resolved in the courts. The next hearing date is April 21.

      • Johnny Hammond says:

        Didn’t the courts JUST decide that in AZ vz Watts “The state concedes that counts 3 and 4 (called counts 2 and 3 by state) be dismissed under the Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA) A.R.S. Sections 36-2801 et seq. In the court’s view the defense has a better argument with respect to remaining count 2 (called count 1 by the state) possession or use of narcotic drugs, a class 4 felony, with respect to an ambiguous AMMA, especially since it is apparently conceded that the only medicinal value of marijuana when prepared as food or drink is if the THC has just been extracted and concentrated. This makes doubtful the state’s argument that AMMA’s protection does not extend to the extracted resin which is cannabis.” -Honorable Robert L. Gottsfiled; CR2013-108390-001 DT

        All charges were DISMISSED…..so what now Will?

  20. Michelle Napier says:

    The social stigma surrounding medical cannabis is a roadblock to potential relief for people suffering from pain, chronic nausea, anxiety, insomnia, etc. It’s a viable medical option and ironic the puplic is told it’s safe to take the cornucopia of prescription drugs heaped on us yet use of a non lethal plant is dangerous. There are several different delivery methods for medical cannabis that don’t require smoking the plant and it has few side effects. It’s a safter option than the majority of over the counter medications available and I strongly believe it’s ridiculous for our government to continue this farce. Marijuana needs to be legalized…PERIOD.

  21. Bill Hayes says:

    Mr Humble,
    Please use the correct terminology in your rule package.
    Regarding the use of the word “cannabis” the narcotic/criminal code you are referencing is horribly inaccurate. The statute dates back to 1960 which actually predates the discovery of THC in 1964. That is a medical fact not a legal fact sir. We wont even address the botanical side of this discussion lol.

    Next don’t worry about the legal repercussions of your statements regarding the use of the word “cannabis” in its correct form, as you should “hash” “tinctures” “concentrate” “extraction” etc etc.
    We all got a gift on Valentine’s Day that isn’t being talked about, but it should be getting screamed at the top of everyone’s lungs.
    Arizona vs. Watts “The
    state concedes that counts 3 and 4 (called counts 2 and 3 by state) be dismissed under the
    Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA) A.R.S. Sections 36-2801 et seq. In the court’s view the
    defense has a better argument with respect to remaining count 2 (called count 1 by the state)
    possession or use of narcotic drugs, a class 4 felony, with respect to an ambiguous AMMA,
    especially since it is apparently conceded that the only medicinal value of marijuana when
    prepared as food or drink is if the THC has just been extracted and concentrated. This makes
    doubtful the state’s argument that AMMA’s protection does not extend to the extracted resin
    which is cannabis.” -Honorable Robert L. Gottsfiled; CR2013-108390-001 DT

    All charges were DISMISSED.

    The courts have decided and the word will spread quickly, be on the right side of the fence in case it falls over sir, be on the medical side, where you belong sir.

    1 <3 AZ!

    • AZMedicalBud says:

      Thank you Bill. Just wanted to remind you that your efforts are MUCH appreciated by all.
      Please Mr. Humble, respond to the recent Judges ruling. As all other mmj states recognize ALL forms of medical marijuana and it’s REAL medicinal values, why would you attempt to deny those of us that depend on the lotions, balms and tinctures. What about the juveniles who’s ONLY cure for the seizures that will KILL them is potions with high CBD content ? Why would you seek to deny these patients the medicinal values of medical marijuana ? Please explain your position now that the Honorable Robert L. Gottsfiled has ruled.

  22. Dugger MMJ says:

    Wow…

    ADHS is just full of people who have absolutely no knowledge of Cannabis/MMJ use, treatment, & medical value. Not to mention the fact that ADHS contradicts itself on every page of every news letter. Pretty much everything written is NOT based on fact, but more of a political agenda!!! Quite frankly, I haven’t heard anything intelligent at all!!!

    I can’t believe that ADHS does absolutely nothing for patients, caregivers, our communities, etc., other than set them up for failure.

    This is what’s known as TREASON!!! ADHS does NOT look out for the best interests of the people!!!

    Get it together!!! I invite all of you to visit my site… http://duggermmj.com. Maybe you will learn something, if you can actually retain the information provided!!!

    Either help the people or remove yourselves from office, so someone who will, can take your place. Thanks!!!

    • Tetonmoon says:

      Thank you for getting this opinion actually printed since most any who even dare to question the Great Humble is monitored to cyberspace. This man is a joke and only works for those who line his pockets as does every dispensary in this state. There are so many holes in the dispensary qualification laws you cna drive a bus through them, but for the patient its Pay or Pay.. Please leave Humble, you are not an honest man. We all see it.

  23. Bobby Price says:

    Hello Mr.Humble i have some more facts for you about PTSD did you know right now on average every 65 min. A united states veteran commits suicide thats about 22 veterans every day that take there own life . Im blessed im not in that category i almost was a few times but ever since i got off of all the pills and switched to medical marijuana my life has changed for the better so since you never responded to my last post i will flat out ask you .Mr.Humble do you care about the people who have served for this country ???

  24. Darrell says:

    I wish there was more education associated with az medical marijuana laws. you see a Dr. Get your card, Than its up to you to find what works for you. Which for me is creams and tinctures. Unfortunately I discovered they are illegal after being arrested. And making them myself means manufacturing narcodics just like running a meth lab

    • AZMedicalBud says:

      Darrell,
      The case below was dismissed recently. Now there is case law which (finally) allows the patients of Arizona to enjoy ALL of the medical benefits that medical marijuana can provide, such as tinctures, lotions, creams and edibles (just to name a few).
      The AZDHS and Attorney General lack REAL education as to the REAL benefits this simple but amazing plant provides. The “claim” only the flower and leaves of the plant were covered in the AMMA has been ruled AGAINST. See below:
      We all got a gift on Valentine’s Day that isn’t being talked about, but it should be getting screamed at the top of everyone’s lungs.
      Arizona vs. Watts “The
      state concedes that counts 3 and 4 (called counts 2 and 3 by state) be dismissed under the
      Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA) A.R.S. Sections 36-2801 et seq. In the court’s view the
      defense has a better argument with respect to remaining count 2 (called count 1 by the state)
      possession or use of narcotic drugs, a class 4 felony, with respect to an ambiguous AMMA,
      especially since it is apparently conceded that the only medicinal value of marijuana when
      prepared as food or drink is if the THC has just been extracted and concentrated. This makes
      doubtful the state’s argument that AMMA’s protection does not extend to the extracted resin
      which is cannabis.” -Honorable Robert L. Gottsfiled; CR2013-108390-001 DT

      All charges were DISMISSED.

      • Darrell says:

        Thanks for reply axmedicalbud
        hopefully things get worked out.
        My charges were dismissed with out predudice, meaning they can still file charges. I contacted the detective in charge about getting my vehicles and things back but he said they are still evidence. so we will see

  25. mac says:

    I moved to Arizona from Wisconsin to get my mmj card I just can’t take pills for my back pain anymore. I got my card and truly the only thing that has helped. I was told by the doctor that got me my card that I couldn’t be turned down for a job for a failed drug test. That is simply not true. I have been turned down twice for failed drug test. Walmart and a temporary employment agency both told me that they follow federal law and basically the card didn’t mean anything. Now I need to wait at least a month to clean my system out to get a job. Is there anything else I can do? Please help! Thank you.

  26. AZMedicalBud says:

    No, unfortunately this is a “right to work” state. Been living here almost 20 years and still do not fully understand the meaning. But an employer can fire an employee here without reason or warning. The AMMA law does provide some protection, but I think the only entities that will be forced to recognize these protections will be state or local government related jobs.

  27. Rebecca says:

    Mr Humble,
    In 2012 I was convicted of a mister-meaner DUI and felony endangerment that was alcohol related. I obtained my medical card after my conviction. As I am now in the “Project Safe” program, which requires me to have my urine examined for “drugs” and alcohol. I use mm for degenerative arthritis of my spine. I have been jailed for violating my probation for using mm. The judge told me in open court that I am not entitled to use mm and if I need to use medication I need to take pharmaceuticals. I do not wish to go down that road for the rest of my life. In the mean time I suffer each and every day with the pain from the arthritis. What laws are out there to protect me and people like me?

  28. You are not interested in public comments! says:

    Mr. Humble,

    Why don’t you just resign and let someone else run the MMJ program? You are using a government informant for the police as your head of the program, you have a non-lawyer who can’t even pass the bar running your rules, and you are not qualified one iota to even talk about cannabis but there you are at the top of the heap dictating science and you are a fool!

    As long as you are a puppet for Big Pharma the program is a disgrace and charging $150 to patients is obscene and beyond the pale but you don’t care! One day you will be fired and the truth will be revealed about your gross incompetence!

  29. AZMedicalBud says:

    With all due respect, and believe me I understand the frustrations as I have been in the battle for almost 2 decades. Please do not take out your hostility on Mr. Humble. He is our only resource at this time. Let’s please work with him instead of using him as a sounding board.
    Of course it would help if you did respond to the posted questions Mr. Humble.

  30. Darrell says:

    25 mile as crow flies
    I live with in 25 miles as crow flies but is 37 mile drive to closest dispensery
    any work on that?
    Ive been very leary of mmj after being busted and all my plants as a care giver being destroyed.
    charges were dismisased but that didn’t make up for my losses. vehicles grow equipment and plants.
    I strongly believe in mmj but am gun shy.

  31. Chris says:

    The same government and government agencies that have told us forever that marijuana is harmful and detrimental to the fetus during pregnancy are the SAME geniuses that made cannabis a SCHEDULE 1 NARCOTIC. This is a narcotic class that prevents medicinal or scientific research on these narcotics by federal law as they have ZERO medicinal value or properties… If you can’t study something how can you be so positive of the effects???? You cant! So Dr Melanie Dreher did. Watch and see for yourself. I wish you could see this and do the research. The citizens of your state look to you for guidance. This is what the spirit of cannabis is about. This is the ideology our medical marijuana program should embrace. Not fight. We, humanity, arizonans, need reform. We need this plant. Please do what’s right.

    http://Www.Youtu.be/K9WorlM0Rha

  32. Robert Clark says:

    I have a couple of questions, 1.) If a homeless person can get a card were can the smoke? At one point in time it was against the law as you see it to make or use other forms of cannabis. Where is their protections.
    2.) How does medical necessity fit into the rules?

  33. Brett Daley says:

    I would like to suggest a possible compromise to settle the 25 mile rule pleasantries. It is apparent that the reason for the rule is guaranteeing business to the dispensaries and in turn tax revenue for the State. Since there is no (other) conceivably just reason for the State to funnel/guarantee customers and therefore profits to any business at all, and that is what dispensaries are- businesses- I make this assumption in favor of the State. My suggested compromise is to charge patients for the ability to cultivate. It is simple and guarantees the state more revenue from the program; dispensaries will obviously still get their cut since this does not disable the patients from patronizing them. I feel that this will also orient the State more with the intent of proposition 203; which was not profit for the State, nor for private businesses, but in fact the more comprehensive medical care for it’s citizens. While what I propose is not ideal (I’m sure patients will demand the right to cultivate for free), that is why it is a compromise, and it should at least satisfy everyone for the time being.

  34. Brett Daley says:

    The most important part of the rules is missing. There is no stated intent of the program, no mission or vision statement. Although this may immediately seem strange and unnecessary, it will serve to protect the citizens and government. These things will allow rule making officials a quick way to check the validity of the program rules and statutes (as well as proposed changes), will do the same for judges hearing MMJ cases in Arizona, and will provide the citizens with the governmental transparency they deserve. I understand that this program is still young here in AZ, but I believe a statement of intent and vision/mission statement of the AZ MMJ program will benefit everyone, allowing us to more comprehensively work together instead of creating animosity between the government and private citizens.

  35. Bill says:

    Mr. Humble,
    Did every licensed dispensary that has submitted therir dispensary renewal package meet AZDHS mandatory rules by submitting:

    4. A report of an audit by an independent certified public accountant of the annual financial statement required in subsection (B)(3)?

  36. Farrok says:

    One of the serious problems I find with the dispensary system is that you can find the type of Cannabis you need for your illness. These plant strains are just like any other medication. They differ from one another in structure and chemical makeup. The 25 mile rule needs to be abolished due to the following reasons:

    1. The expense; it’s too expensive when purchased from a Medical dispensary. Many Arizona’s can’t afford the price of these medications!
    2. You Can’t get the strain you need for Your illness. A common problem.
    3. These plants are all different in their medical aspects and one does Not fit all!
    4. Why in the world would the State of Arizona care if medical patients grow their own medicine? When you grow your own plants You know what you have and what environment they have been grown in and how they were treated. This prevents adulteration and poor quality.
    5. It’s none of the States business if you grow and use the medication yourself and adhere to the Law. Why would the State of Arizona even care as it would be grown and used by you and you alone?

  37. Young says:

    I think that some rules are necessary to check the marijuana’s condition and type. This should help determine its standards and quality.

  38. ben says:

    The 25 mile rule is not just, it allows a monopoly for dispensaries to set high prices most can not afford. It also creates a shortage of medicine. High levels of fungicides and chemicals are present on a lot of the dispensary medicine coming out. There still is no standard in testing. I worked at a dispensary that allowed powdery mildew etc. This in turn went on to patients with compromised immune systems and other ailments. While no system is perfect! The state needs to seriously make some amendments to the law. Collectives/co-ops should be written into the law, as far as revising the 25 mile rule. Just skip a step and remove it.

  39. Gino says:

    Great blog!

    Thank you Mr. Humble for allowing a place on the azdhs.gov website for so many great MMJ debates.

    Thank you Bill Hayes, and everyone else on here who are passionately engaged in MMJ patient rights.

    Mr. Humble, instead of making a case for our right to cultivate our own plants, like others have already done so elegantly, I’d like to ask you for your personal opinion on why that would be so bad.
    I read somewhere else where you said Arizona would become a “free for all” if everyone was allowed to grow.
    Do you still feel that way, especially after seeing some of our neighboring states like Colorado (http://www.regulatemarijuana.org/s/regulate-marijuana-alcohol-act-2012), who have allowed their residents to grow their own marijuana, and haven’t experienced any of the hypothetical problems some have feared would happen here?

    What if I live within 25 miles of a dispensary (roads or by flying crows), but want to cultivate my own for personal, financial, and health reasons; Would it be legal to buy a small plot of land to grow on, use someone else’s land with permission, or use a storage unit, etc., and then bring it back home to use?

    Regardless of your current stance Mr. Humble, thank you for being open to positive changes in prop 203, and again for opening up this blog for public discussion.

  40. Gino says:

    I found an answer to my last question:

    “What if I live within 25 miles of a dispensary (roads or by flying crows), but want to cultivate my own for personal, financial, and health reasons; Would it be legal to buy a small plot of land to grow on, use someone else’s land with permission, or use a storage unit, etc., and then bring it back home to use?”

    Since I am the patient, and I live within 25 miles of a dispensary, then I’m not permitted to grow anywhere, or have a caregiver grow for me – even if they live outside the 25 mile boundary.

    I’m really hoping that the “25 mile rule” gets amended, or the proposition to legalize recreational use gets passed in 2016.
    In my opinion marijuana is in the same class as alcohol, and the same laws that govern alcohol should be used for weed too.
    People who brew their own beer aren’t told they must live more than 25 miles away from a grocery store in order to legally do so.
    It sounds silly when I even say that.

Leave a Reply