MEETING OF THE CANNABIS COMMISSION 2180 Milvia Street Thursday, March 7, 2019 Redwood Room (6 th Floor) 2:00 PM AGENDA I. Call to Order A. Roll Call and Ex Parte Communication Disclosures B. Changes to Order of Agenda II. Public Comment III. Approval of Minutes A. February 7, 2019 Draft Action Minutes IV. Planning Staff Report V. Chairperson’s Report VI. Subcommittee Report VII. Discussion and Action Items A. Discuss and vote on representative at upcoming Council and Community Health Commission meetings. B. Discuss, draft and vote on Council communication restating Commission recommendations for cannabis ordinance to be considered by Council at March 12 th meeting. 1. 3/12/19 Council item - Staff report and draft ordinances. (Click here for a link to the complete Council item with all attachments: https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2019/03_Mar/Documents/2019-03- 12_Item_21_Cannabis_Ordinance_Revisions.aspx) NOTE: Alternative language proposed by Commissions is called out in the staff report and highlighted in the ordinances. C. Discuss cooperatives/collectives and vote on sending a letter to Council urging changes to State law. Eight attachments: 1. Draft letter to Council 2. Draft letter to Bureau of Cannabis Control (BCC), Option 1 3. Draft letter to BCC, Option 2 4. Previous City of Berkeley collective regulations 5. MAUCRSA collective regulations 6. MAUCRSA and City of Berkeley regulations 7. History of Cannabis Commission discussion re collectives 8. Commissioner Pappas letters to BCC re collectives D. Work Program: Discuss items to be included on draft work plan. One attachment: 1. 2016-2017 Final Work Plan 1 of 93
93
Embed
AGENDA - Berkeley, California...2019/03/07 · AGENDA I. Call to Order A. Roll Call and Ex Parte Communication Disclosures B. Changes to Order of Agenda II. Public Comment III. Approval
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
MEETING OF THE
CANNABIS COMMISSION
2180 Milvia Street Thursday, March 7, 2019 Redwood Room (6th Floor) 2:00 PM
AGENDA I. Call to Order
A. Roll Call and Ex Parte Communication Disclosures B. Changes to Order of Agenda
II. Public Comment III. Approval of Minutes
A. February 7, 2019 Draft Action Minutes
IV. Planning Staff Report V. Chairperson’s Report
VI. Subcommittee Report VII. Discussion and Action Items
A. Discuss and vote on representative at upcoming Council and Community Health
Commission meetings.
B. Discuss, draft and vote on Council communication restating Commission recommendations for cannabis ordinance to be considered by Council at March 12th meeting. 1. 3/12/19 Council item - Staff report and draft ordinances. (Click here for a link to the complete Council item with all attachments: https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2019/03_Mar/Documents/2019-03-12_Item_21_Cannabis_Ordinance_Revisions.aspx)
NOTE: Alternative language proposed by Commissions is called out in the staff report and highlighted in the ordinances.
C. Discuss cooperatives/collectives and vote on sending a letter to Council urging changes
to State law. Eight attachments: 1. Draft letter to Council 2. Draft letter to Bureau of Cannabis Control (BCC), Option 1 3. Draft letter to BCC, Option 2 4. Previous City of Berkeley collective regulations 5. MAUCRSA collective regulations 6. MAUCRSA and City of Berkeley regulations 7. History of Cannabis Commission discussion re collectives 8. Commissioner Pappas letters to BCC re collectives
D. Work Program: Discuss items to be included on draft work plan. One attachment:
Page 2 Agenda - Continued Cannabis Commission February 7, 2019
E. Ideas for next meeting.
VIII. Information Items (In compliance with the Brown Act, no action may be taken on these items; however, they may be discussed and placed on a subsequent agenda for action): A. Letter from Cannabis Commission to Council asking for appointments to be made to Commission.
IX. Correspondence
A. Communications: 1. Letter from Courtney Allen-Gentry re. Equity
B. Late Communications: None.
X. Adjournment Cannabis Commission Secretary: Elizabeth Greene, 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor, Berkeley CA 94704 Phone: 510-981-7484, Email: [email protected]
Communications to Berkeley boards, commissions, or committees are public records, and will become part of the City’s electronic records, which are accessible through the City’s website. Please note: e-mail addresses, names, addresses, and other contact information are not required, but if included in any communication to a City board, commission, or committee, will become part of the public record. If you do not want your e-mail address or any other contact information to be made public, do not include that information in your communication – you may deliver communications via U.S. Postal Service, or in person, to the Commission Secretary. Please contact the Commission Secretary for further information. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Commission regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection at the Department of Planning and Development, Zoning Counter, at the Permit Service Center, 1947 Center Street, 3rd Floor, Berkeley, and at the Reference Desk, of the Main Library, 2090 Kittredge Street, Berkeley, California, during regular business hours. Please contact the Commission Secretary for further information.
This meeting is being held in a wheelchair accessible location. To request a disability-related accommodation(s) to participate in the meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, please contact the Disability Services specialist at 981-6418 (V) or 981-6347 (TDD) at least three business days before the meeting date. Please refrain from wearing scented products to this meeting.
2180 Milvia Street Thursday, February 7, 2019 Redwood Room (6th Floor) 2:00 PM
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
I. Call to Order – 2:09 pm
A. Roll Call and Ex Parte Communication Disclosures
Commissioners present: Cooper, Pappas, Rice, and Xango Eyeé (substitute for Brewster)
Absent: Brewster (excused), Cable (unexcused)
Staff Present: Secretary Elizabeth Greene, Mark Sproat, and Claire Kostohryz.
Ex Parte Communications: Cooper about Item A to staff and separately to Commissioner Brewster, Pappas spoke with Councilmember Bartlett and Rice talked to Councilmember Hahn.
B. Changes to Order of Agenda
Motion/second to move B to after Item E (Cooper/Pappas). The motion carried 4-0-0-1. (Ayes: Cooper, Rice, Eyeé, Pappas. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: Cable.)
Public Comment: One comment. Pam Speich introduced herself and said that she would be attending the Cannabis Commission meetings on behalf of the Community Health Commission.
II. Approval of MinutesMotion/second to approve the January 10, 2019 minutes (Cooper/Rice). The motion carried4-0-0-1 (Ayes: Cooper, Rice, Eyeé, Pappas. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: Cable.)
III. Planning Staff Report
Molly Jones has resigned leaving only 5 members and 4 vacancies so the quorum fortoday’s meeting is 3. Vice Chair Cooper volunteered to write a letter to council requestingappointments to fill the vacancies. Staff mentioned the late items.
IV. Vice Chairperson’s Report
We are sorry to see Molly go and we wish her the best. Commissioner Rice discussed therefocusing of their mission which is to implement what the voters approved. Need more dataregarding Berkeley High usage and the effect of legalization in Colorado.
V. Subcommittee Report
No report.
Item III.A Cannabis Commission
March 7, 2019
3 of 93
VI. Discussion and Action Items
A. Election of Chairperson and Vice ChairMotion/second to elect Cecily Brewster to be Chair of the Commission (Cooper/Rice).The motion carried 4-0-0-1 (Ayes: Cooper, Rice, Eyeé, Pappas. Noes: None. Abstain:None. Absent: Cable.)
Motion/second to elect Michael Cooper to be Vice Chair of the Commission(Rice/Pappas). The motion carried 4-0-0-1 (Ayes: Cooper, Rice, Eyeé, Pappas. Noes:None. Abstain: None. Absent: Cable.)
Public Comment: None.
C. Review next steps for cannabis regulations in Berkeley, with estimated timeline.
Discussion regarding how the estimated timeline doesn’t capture how long theCommission and the City have been working on cannabis regulations, specificallyregarding delivery-only. There is a frustration with the lengthy process and how it hasaffected possible revenue from cannabis delivery-only transactions in the City.
Public Comment: None.
D. Discuss and vote on possible next steps related to Equity Program, M-districtcultivation expansion, Delivery-only dispensing, consumption location, specialevents, advertising concerns, interaction with other commissions,subcommittees to facilitate tasks above, increased commission membership,more input from local cannabis businesses, especially dispensaries.
Staff clarified that the Equity Program discussion can be moved to the next meetingbecause of the more pressing group of ordinances being presented to council sooner.The commissioners discussed the feasibility of the proposed buffers by the Staff and bythe CHC. They will be writing a letter to City Council to advocate for their regulationsregarding security, neighborhood compatibility, buffers, quotas etc. They will push therest of the conversation until after Item B, and decide what to put in the letter.
Public Comment: One comment. Berkeley is losing out because cannabis businesses willgo to different municipalities.
Item III.A Cannabis Commission
March 7, 2019
4 of 93
Page 2
E. Discuss and vote on representative at upcoming Council and Community HealthCommission meetings.Commission reached a consensus that there is no purpose of speaking as the public atthe February 19 and February 26 Council meetings. Xango Eyeé volunteered to go to theCHC meeting.
Public Comment: One comment. It’s a good idea to go to the CHC meeting.
B. Discuss cooperatives/collectives and vote on sending a letter to Council urgingchanges to State law.Pappas will work with Cable to revise letters to Council and the BCC in support of state
legislation to regulate cooperatives and collectives. He will bring them back to theCommission next month.
Public Comment: One comment. No new temporary licenses are being given out and places with temporary licenses are not going to the next level. This is discriminatory against collectives.
D. Continued Discussion.A written letter will have to come back for approval at the next meeting and it will advocatefor the ordinance language that the Cannabis Commission recommended which ishighlighted in Item VII under Action Item E. The letter will discuss buffers, security guards,safe consumption sights, delivery requirements and retail buffers.
Public Comment: Three comments. Security guards are a large financial burden for non-retailers that don’t hold cash in space. Lounges are a positive way to safely smoke for people in Section 8 housing and could keep smokers off the streets. The definition of equity should be more inclusive, rather than only people who have criminal records related to cannabis.
F. Ideas for next meeting.
Focus on the state law regarding equity businesses.
X. AdjournmentAdjourned at 4:08 P.M.Four late items were distributed at the meeting.Commissioners in attendance: 4 of 5Members of the public in attendance: 4Public comments: 7Length of meeting: 1 hour and 59 minutes
APPROVED: __________________________________________________ Elizabeth Greene Cannabis Commission Secretary
Re: Bureau of Cannabis Control – Collective/Cooperative Legislation Recommendation/Request
Dear Mayor and City Council, Your cannabis commission unanimously recommends your consideration for contacting the state Bureau of Cannabis Control regarding collective/cooperative cannabis cultivation, sharing and distribution. Locally for many years, various groups in Berkeley, not all, but some licensed, have operated mostly problem free without neighborhood complaint. “Caretaking” was an integral part of Prop 215 language (1996); collectives were addressed several years later (2004) in SB-420 legislation - “Recognizes the right of patients and caregivers to associate to collectively or cooperatively to cultivate medical marijuana.” Additionally, 2007 CA AG (Jerry Brown) Guidelines' language clarified acceptable larger scale cultivation and distribution- “...Collectives and cooperatives should acquire marijuana only from their constituent members, because only marijuana grown by a qualified patient or his or her primary caregiver may lawfully be transported by, or distributed to, other members of a
collective or cooperative.” Only these previous measures provided statewide legitimacy, regulation and possible
reasoning for curtailing federal scrutiny and intervention. The cannabis commission believes these practices could be continued after the legalization of cannabis and should be recognized and reasonably regulated
according to existing operations and suitable public safety. Perhaps, an additional consideration for continuing cooperative operations (with adjusted state and local regulations) is a more successful and inclusive transition into cannabis legalization by California's long existing underground cannabis business. Unfortunately, after 2018, perhaps not until 2020, such associations will no longer have state legitimacy ...“MAUCRSA amended Health and Safety Code section 11362.775, the provision in SB 420 affording
legal protection to cannabis collectives and cooperatives. This protection will end one year after the Bureau of Cannabis Control (Bureau) posts notice on its website that the state commercial cannabis licensing authorities have commenced
issuing licenses. Once the one-year period tolls, all cannabis collectives and cooperatives that continue to engage in
commercial business will need to be licensed, except for: (a) individual patients; and (b) caregiver gardens serving no
more than five patients.
The Bureau posted the notice on its website on January 9, 2018. Thus, the protection against criminal sanctions for
cannabis collectives and cooperatives ends January 9, 2019. At that time, cannabis collectives and cooperatives that
seek to continue their operations will need to obtain a state license and comply with any local requirements...”
“...Existing collectives and cooperatives may continue to operate if the legal requirements for operating a cannabis
collective or cooperative are observed. Cannabis collectives or cooperatives must:
• Only acquire and provide cannabis to members and assure that no cannabis transactions occur with nonmembers.
• Only receive monetary reimbursement from members in an amount necessary to cover overhead costs and operating
expenses (e.g., not operate on a for-profit basis).
• Possess, cultivate, and transport amounts of cannabis that are consistent with the aggregate limits provided for
member patients and may be required to produce documentation to support the amounts of cannabis possessed,cultivated, or transported. Specifically, they may possess:
- 8 ounces of dried cannabis per patient - 6 mature plants per patient
- 12 immature plants per patient
- An amount of cannabis consistent with the patient’s needs as recommended by a physician
• Satisfy fire, safety, and building code requirements.
• Obtain a seller’s permit from the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration.
• Comply with all applicable local rules and ordinances for operating a cannabis collective or cooperative in that localjurisdiction.”
The Berkeley Cannabis Commission has also prepared a draft of a simple letter on behalf of the city council to send to the state BCC encouraging them to allow expanded collectives / cooperatives.
The Berkeley Cannabis Commission has brought to our attention changes regarding cannabis collective/cooperative operations amended from protective Prop 215, SB-420, and 2008 CA AG
medical cannabis guidelines language. These measures all attempted to facilitate the cultivation and distribution of medical cannabis, and to avoid federal scrutiny and prosecution based on the Controlled Substances Act.
We recognize your diligent efforts in the difficult task of drafting and deciding the best possible
regulations for the medical and adult use of cannabis in California. However, due to continued discrepancy in state and federal marijuana laws, a certain number of patients and adult users will
most likely continue private collective operations.
In Berkeley, collective/cooperative organizations, not all but some licensed, have for many years
operated practically without complaint. We hope the Bureau will successfully continue and review appropriate collective/cooperative regulations in the best interests of past/current/future medical
cannabis patients/adult users, citizen, community, and statewide public safety.
FYI, we have attached current Berkeley municipal code pertaining to cannabis collective/cooperative organization, many existing presently and likely to continue (licensed/regulated or not) future operations.
The Berkeley Cannabis Commission has brought to our attention ideas for possible code regulation
changes regarding cannabis collective/cooperative operations, soon to be illegal statewide and locally
as well.
Our Cannabis Commission makes the case that since the legalization of medical cannabis in 1996,
qualified patients and their caregivers only legal protections (authorization and expansion for
cultivation, distribution to collective members) are located in, prop 215, SB-420, 2007 AG Guidelines
language. Only these previous measures provided statewide legitimacy, regulation, and possible
reasoning for curtailing federal scrutiny and intervention.
From 2009 – 2013 different US AG memos guided local US attorneys. The most recent memo (US
AG Cole memo 8/2013) recommended priorities for enforcement of the Control Substances Act to
consider “state and local government strong, regulatory enforcement efforts, including public safety,
public health”.
We recognize diligent Bureau of Cannabis Control efforts in the difficult task of drafting and deciding
the best possible regulations for the medical and adult use of cannabis in California. In Berkeley,
collective/cooperative organizations have for many years operated practically without complaint, but
along with any state approved collectives, would also require code regulation revision, reinstatement
after January 2019. Considering federal cannabis prohibition, Berkeley Cannabis Commissioners
unanimously believe patients and adult users fearing exposure, possible federal charges will continuum,
locally and statewide, collective cultivation distribution operations and therefore deserve further
licensing discussion.
We ask the Bureau to continue successfully their efforts and to consider, review possible new
appropriate collective/cooperative regulations in the best interests of past/current/future medical
cannabis patients/adult users, citizen, community, and statewide public safety.
FYI, we have attached existing Berkeley municipal code pertaining to cannabis
collective/cooperative operations, again whose future continuation we believe most likely, whether
licensed/regulated or not. Thank you for your attention and consideration.
Respectfully,
Berkeley Mayor and City Council
Item VII.C.3 Cannabis Commission
March 7, 2019
73 of 93
74 of 93
Berkeley Municipal Code – Cannabis Collectives
12.27.120 Limitations on Collective operations
As a use that is incidental to the residential use of property in residential zoning districts, Collectives shall comply with the following operating limitations:
A. A Collective may not generate more than 5 Member trips per day per location,
excluding trips by residents of the Collective location.B. Cash on hand shall be minimized, and no more than $1000 may be retained
overnight per location.
C. Collectives may not operate at more than four (4) locations in Berkeley, and maynot store or maintain at any site at any time more than a combined total of 10
pounds of dried Medical Cannabis and concentrates, of which no more than 1
pound may be concentrates.D. Collectives may not have Member visits to obtain Medical Cannabis except
for social purposes before 8:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m
E. No alcohol may be served for consideration.F. No consideration may be charged for entry into the Collective or any part of the
residence in which the Collective is located, no live entertainment may be provided,
and no entertainment of any sort may be provided for consideration.G. Smoking of Medical Cannabis by non-residents is prohibited in all exterior areas
of Collectives and within 50 feet of Collectives on the public right of way.
H. Collectives may not have any exterior display identifying them as such.I. Establishment and maintenance of a Collective may not involve any changes in
utility service or exterior modifications beyond those that would be customary for a
residence.J. Collectives may not have any impacts on adjoining properties, such as, but not
limited to, excessive noise, glare, smells, smoke, etc., beyond those that are normal
for residential use. (Ord. 7360-NS § 1 (part), 2014)12.27.130 Operating standards for all Collectives Collectives shall comply with the
following provisions of this Chapter.
A. Section 12.27.050, subdivisions A, B and C.B. Section 12.27.070 subdivisions A-F. Subsection 12.27.070.C shall only apply to
collectives with 25 or more members.
C. Section 12.27.090, subdivisions B and D. Subsection 12.27.090.B.2 shall onlyapply to collectives with 25 or more members.
D. Section 12.27.110, to the extent applicable.
E. Before it may obtain a business license pursuant as required by Chapter 9.04, aCollective must obtain an inspection from the City that any cultivation or processing
of Medical Cannabis that it intends to undertake at a given site will not pose a fire
MAUCRSA amended Health and Safety Code section 11362.775, the provision
in SB 420 affording legal protection to cannabis collectives and cooperatives. This protection will end one year after the Bureau of Cannabis Control (Bureau) posts
notice on its website that the state commercial cannabis licensing authorities have
commenced issuing licenses. Once the one-year period tolls, all cannabis collectives and cooperatives that continue to engage in commercial business will need to be
licensed, except for: (a) individual patients; and (b) caregiver gardens serving no
more than five patients. The Bureau posted the notice on its website on January 9, 2018. Thus, the
protection against criminal sanctions for cannabis collectives and cooperatives ends
January 9, 2019. At that time, cannabis collectives and cooperatives that seek to continue their operations will need to obtain a state license and comply with any
local requirements...”
“...Existing collectives and cooperatives may continue to operate if the legal requirements for operating a cannabis collective or cooperative are observed.
Cannabis collectives or cooperatives must:
• Only acquire and provide cannabis to members and assure that no cannabistransactions occur with nonmembers.
• Only receive monetary reimbursement from members in an amount necessary to
cover overhead costs and operating expenses (e.g., not operate on a for-profit basis).• Possess, cultivate, and transport amounts of cannabis that are consistent with the
aggregate limits provided for member patients and may be required to produce
documentation to support the amounts of cannabis possessed, cultivated, ortransported. Specifically, they may possess:
- 8 ounces of dried cannabis per patient - 6 mature plants per patient
- 12 immature plants per patient- An amount of cannabis consistent with the patient’s needs as recommended by a
physician
• Satisfy fire, safety, and building code requirements.• Obtain a seller’s permit from the California Department of Tax and Fee
Administration.
• Comply with all applicable local rules and ordinances for operating a cannabiscollective or cooperative in that local jurisdiction.
Item VII.C.5 Cannabis Commission
March 7, 2019
77 of 93
78 of 93
MAUCRSA Cannabis Collectives Cooperatives Caregivers – 1/9/18 Amending Health & Safety Code sect 11362.775, (redacted, important highlights)
SB 420 provision- legal protection to cannabis collectives & cooperatives. Protection ending 1 year- Bureau of Cannabis Control (Bureau)- website notice, state begins commercial cannabis licenses issuing. 1-year period ends, cannabis collectives & cooperatives in commercial business need licensing, except:
(a) individual patients;
(b) caregiver gardens serving no more than 5 patients.Bureau posted website notice- January 9, 2018.
cooperatives continuing operations need state license & comply with local requirements...” “...Existing collectives & cooperatives continue operating- legal requirements observed. Cannabis collectives/cooperatives Requirements: • Acquire, provide cannabis- members only, no cannabis transactions with nonmembers.
• Monetary reimbursement from members, amount- overhead costs & operating expenses (not for profit).
• Possess, cultivate, transport- amounts cannabis, consistent- limits for member patients/requireddocumentation, support amounts cannabis possessed, cultivated, transported.
Possession requirements:
- 8 ounces of dried cannabis per patient
- 6 mature plants per patient
- 12 immature plants per patient- Amount, cannabis- the patient’s needs, recommended by physician
• Satisfy fire, safety, & building code requirements.
• Obtain- seller’s permit from California Department of Tax & Fee Administration.
• Comply- local rules & ordinances, operating cannabis collective/cooperative in local jurisdiction.
Berkeley Municipal Code – Cannabis Collectives 12.27.120 Limitations on Collective operations Use incidental- residential property use in residential zoning districts,
Collectives- operating limitations: A. Collective -5 Member trips per day per location, excluding residents of Collective location.B. Cash, minimized, up to $1000 overnight per location.C. Collectives- only (4) locations Berkeley, not store/maintain per site up to 10 pounds of dried MedicalCannabis, concentrates.D. Collectives- no member visits, Medical Cannabis, except social, before 8:00 a.m., after 9:00 p.mE. No alcohol may be served.F. No Collective entry charge, part of Collective residence, no live entertainment, no other entertainment.G. Smoking Medical Cannabis by non-residents prohibited- exterior areas Collectives, within 50 feet ofCollectives on the public right of way.H. Collectives- no exterior display identifying them as such.I. Collective- establishment, maintenance- no changes, utility service, exterior modifications, residential.
J. Collectives- no impacts adjoining properties- excessive noise, glare, smells, smoke, etc., residential use.(Ord. 7360-NS § 1 (part), 2014) 12.27.130
Operating standards Collectives Collectives provisions Chapter. A. Section 12.27.050, subdivisions A, B and C.B. Section 12.27.070 subdivisions A-F. Subsection 12.27.070.C only- collectives with 25 or more members.C. Section 12.27.090, subdivisions B, D. Subsect 12.27.090.B.2 only- collectives with 25 or more members.D. Section 12.27.110, to the extent applicable.E. Before obtaining business license required by Chapter 9.04, Collective- City inspection cultivationprocessing Medical Cannabis, undertake at site, not fire hazard c. (Ord. 7360-NS § 1 (part), 2014)
Item VII.C.6 Cannabis Commission
March 7, 2019
79 of 93
80 of 93
COOP DISCUSSION HISTORY DEBATE
C. Discuss cooperative/collectives. One attachment: (agenda Berkeley Cannabis Commission6/7/18) State handout re collectives-1.WHAT DOES MAUCRSA AND ITS IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS MEAN FOR
COLLECTIVES AND COOPERATIVES?MAUCRSA amended Health and Safety Code section 11362.775, the provision in SB 420
affording legal protection to cannabis collectives and cooperatives. This protection will end oneyear after the Bureau of Cannabis Control (Bureau) posts notice on its website that the state
commercial cannabis licensing authorities have commenced issuing licenses. Once the one-yearperiod tolls, all cannabis collectives and cooperatives that continue to engage in commercialbusiness will need to be licensed, except for: (a) individual patients; and (b) caregiver gardens
serving no more than five patients.The Bureau posted the notice on its website on January 9, 2018. Thus, the protection against
criminal sanctions for cannabis collectives and cooperatives ends January 9, 2019. At that time,
cannabis collectives and cooperatives that seek to continue their operations will need to obtain a
state license and comply with any local requirements.WHAT LEGAL REQUIREMENTS MUST BE SATISFIED TO CONTINUE OPERATING ACANNABIS COLLECTIVE OR COOPERATIVE?
Existing collectives and cooperatives may continue to operate if the legal requirements foroperating a cannabis collective or cooperative are observed.
Cannabis collectives or cooperatives must:• Only acquire and provide cannabis to members and assure that no cannabis transactions occur
with nonmembers.• Only receive monetary reimbursement from members in an amount necessary to cover overheadcosts and operating expenses (e.g., not operate on a for-profit basis).
• Possess, cultivate, and transport amounts of cannabis that are consistent with the aggregatelimits provided for member patients and may be required to produce documentation to support
the amounts of cannabis possessed, cultivated, or transported. Specifically, they may possess:- 8 ounces of dried cannabis per patient
- 6 mature plants per patient- 12 immature plants per patient- An amount of cannabis consistent with the patient’s needs as recommended by a physician
• Satisfy fire, safety, and building code requirements.• Obtain a seller’s permit from the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration.
• Comply with all applicable local rules and ordinances for operating a cannabis collective orcooperative in that local jurisdiction.
C. Discuss cooperatives/collectives. (approved minutes Berkeley Cannabis Commission 6/7/18)Staff presented the State’s information document on cannabis cooperatives and collectives. TheCommission discussed this issue and asked staff to research if caregivers should count themselves
as patients for caregiver gardens. The Commission agreed for Commissioner Pappas to write twoletters for the Council: 1) a letter to the State from the City Council requesting that caregiver
gardens increase the maximum patients from 5 to 25; 2) a cover letter requesting Council send thefirst letter to the State. The Commission will review drafts of these letters at the next meeting.
B. Discuss cooperatives/collectives.(approved minutes, Berkeley Cannabis Comm 9/13/18)Commissioner Pappas explained the letter he drafted to send to the Council regardingcooperatives and collectives. The Commission decided that Commissioners Pappas and Cable,
and staff, will research what is allowed by the state and what the maximum number of patients isfor caregiver gardens.
Item VII.C.7 Cannabis Commission
March 7, 2019
81 of 93
B. Discuss cooperative/collectives. 4 att:(agenda Berkeley Cannabis Commission 11/8/18)
1. Draft letter from Commission to Council (9-13-18 version) 2. Draft letter from Council to Bureau of Cannabis Control (BCC) (11-8-18 revision)
3. MAUCRSA language regarding collectives (11-8-18 revision) 4. BMC language regarding collectives (11-8-18 revision)
-3.MAUCRSA Cannabis Collectives Cooperatives Caregivers – 1/9/18 MAUCRSA amended Health and Safety Code section 11362.775, the provision in SB 420 affording legal protection to cannabis collectives and cooperatives. This protection will end one year after the Bureau of
Cannabis Control (Bureau) posts notice on its website that the state commercial cannabis licensing authorities have commenced issuing licenses. Once the one-year period tolls, all cannabis
collectives and cooperatives that continue to engage in commercial business will need to be licensed, except for: (a) individual patients; and (b) caregiver gardens serving no more than five
patients. The Bureau posted the notice on its website on January 9, 2018. Thus, the protection against criminal sanctions for cannabis collectives and cooperatives ends January 9, 2019. At that
time, cannabis collectives and cooperatives that seek to continue their operations will need to
obtain a state license and comply with any local requirements...” “...Existing collectives and cooperatives may continue to operate if the legal requirements for operating a cannabis collective
or cooperative are observed. Cannabis collectives or cooperatives must: • Only acquire and provide cannabis to members and assure that no cannabis transactions occur with nonmembers. • Only
receive monetary reimbursement from members in an amount necessary to cover overhead costs and operating expenses (e.g., not operate on a for-profit basis). • Possess, cultivate, and transport amounts of cannabis that are consistent with the aggregate limits provided for member patients
and may be required to produce documentation to support the amounts of cannabis possessed, cultivated, or transported. Specifically, they may possess: - 8 ounces of dried cannabis per patient -
6 mature plants per patient - 12 immature plants per patient - An amount of cannabis consistent with the patient’s needs as recommended by a physician • Satisfy fire, safety, and building code
requirements. • Obtain a seller’s permit from the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration. • Comply with all applicable local rules and ordinances for operating a cannabis collective or cooperative in that local jurisdiction.
4 Berkeley Municipal Code – Cannabis Collectives 12.27.120 Limitations on Collective
operations As a use that is incidental to the residential use of property in residential zoning
districts, Collectives shall comply with the following operating limitations: A. A Collective may not generate more than 5 Member trips per day per location, excluding trips by residents of the Collective location.
B. Cash on hand shall be minimized, and no more than $1000 may be retained overnight per location. C. Collectives may not operate at more than four (4) locations in Berkeley, and may not
store or maintain at any site at any time more than a combined total of 10 pounds of dried Medical Cannabis and concentrates, of which no more than 1 pound may be concentrates.
D. Collectives may not have Member visits to obtain Medical Cannabis except for social purposes before 8:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m E. No alcohol may be served for consideration.
F. No consideration may be charged for entry into the Collective or any part of the residence in which the Collective is located, no live entertainment may be provided, and no entertainment of
any sort may be provided for consideration. G. Smoking of Medical Cannabis by non-residents is prohibited in all exterior areas of Collectives
and within 50 feet of Collectives on the public right of way. H. Collectives may not have any exterior display identifying them as such. I. Establishment and maintenance of a Collective may not involve any changes in utility service or
Item VII.C.7 Cannabis Commission
March 7, 2019
82 of 93
exterior modifications beyond those that would be customary for a residence.
J. Collectives may not have any impacts on adjoining properties, such as, but not limited to, excessive noise, glare, smells, smoke, etc., beyond those that are normal for residential use. (Ord.
7360-NS § 1 (part), 2014) 12.27.130 Operating standards for all Collectives Collectives shall comply with the following
provisions of this Chapter. A. Section 12.27.050, subdivisions A, B and C.
B. Section 12.27.070 subdivisions A-F. Subsection 12.27.070.C shall only apply to collectives with 25 or more members. C. Section 12.27.090, subdivisions B and D. Subsection 12.27.090.B.2 shall only apply to
collectives with 25 or more members. D. Section 12.27.110, to the extent applicable.
E. Before it may obtain a business license pursuant as required by Chapter 9.04, a Collective must obtain an inspection from the City that any cultivation or processing of Medical Cannabis that it
intends to undertake at a given site will not pose a fire hazard. (Ord. 7360-NS § 1 (part), 2014)
2018 Cannabis- Related Legislative Update - relating to Collectives / COOPs AB 2810, as amended, Levine. Cannabis: cultivation licenses: Sun-Grown Cannabis Commission
and Indoor-Grown Cannabis Commission This bill would create the Sun-Grown Cannabis Commission, the Indoor Grown Cannabis
Commission, would additionally authorize, as a Type IC, or “specialty cottage,” license, a licensee to engage in cultivation of 2,500 square feet or less of total canopy size for outdoor cultivation In committee: Set, first hearing. Testimony taken.
Item VII.C.7 Cannabis Commission
March 7, 2019
83 of 93
84 of 93
Public Comment For Bureau of Cannabis Control Bureau comment November 5, 2018
MAUCRSA Cannabis Collectives Cooperatives Caregivers Health & Safety Code sec. 11362.775 Since the legalization of medical cannabis in 1996, qualified patients and their caregivers only
legal protections (authorization and expansion for cultivation, distribution to collective members) are located in, prop 215, SB-420, 2007 AG Guidelines language. Only these previous measures
provided statewide legitimacy and possible reasoning for curtailing federal scrutiny and intervention. From 2009 – 2013 different US AG memos guided local US attorneys. The most recent memo
(US AG Cole memo 8/13) recommended priorities for enforcement of the Control Substances Act to consider “state and local government strong, regulatory enforcement efforts, including
public safety, public health”.
Recognition to diligent Bureau of Cannabis Control efforts in the difficult task of drafting and
deciding the best possible regulations for the medical and adult use of cannabis in California. In Berkeley, collective/cooperative organizations have for many years operated practically without complaint, but along with any state approved collectives, would also require code regulation
revision, reinstatement after January 2019. Considering federal cannabis prohibition, Berkeley Cannabis Commissioners unanimously believe patients and adult users fearing exposure, possible
federal charges will continuum, locally and statewide, collective cultivation distribution operations and therefore deserve further licensing discussion.
I ask the Bureau to continue successfully their efforts and to consider, review possible new appropriate collective/cooperative regulations in the best interests of past/current/future medical cannabis patients/adult users, citizen, community, and statewide public safety.
Therefore please consider size and amount changes to your above mentioned regulation section
11362.775 e.g. changes underlined, keep highlighted...
Once the one-year period tolls, all cannabis collectives and cooperatives that continue to engage
in commercial business will need to be licensed, except for: (a) individual patients; and (b)
caregiver gardens serving no more than five patients. (20-50) Protection against criminal sanctions for cannabis collectives and cooperatives ends January 9, 2019. At that time, cannabis collectives and cooperatives that seek to continue their operations will
need to obtain a state license and comply with any local requirements...”
“...Existing collectives and cooperatives may continue to operate if the legal requirements for
operating a cannabis collective or cooperative are observed. Cannabis collectives or cooperatives must:
• Only acquire and provide cannabis to members and assure that no cannabis transactions occur
with nonmembers.
• Only receive monetary reimbursement from members in an amount necessary to cover
overhead costs and operating expenses (e.g., not operate on a for-profit basis).
• Possess, cultivate, and transport amounts of cannabis that are consistent with the aggregate
limits provided for member patients and may be required to produce documentation to support
the amounts of cannabis possessed, cultivated, or transported. Specifically, they may possess:- 8 ounces of dried cannabis per patient - 6 mature plants per patient- 12 immature plants per patient
- An amount of cannabis consistent with the patient’s needs as recommended by a physician
• Satisfy fire, safety, and building code requirements.
• Obtain a seller’s permit from the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration.
Item VII.C.8 Cannabis Commission
March 7, 2019
85 of 93
Bureau Public Comment Page 2
• Comply with all applicable local rules and ordinances for operating a cannabis collective orcooperative in that local jurisdiction.
In solidarity, Charley Pappas- district 6, Berkeley Cannabis Commissioner;
co-founder, chairman Divinity Tree Patients Wellness Coop SF
founder, chairman, Community Partnership 4 Health (Berkeley) Previous Bureau Public Comment- General Comments, Consumer Regulatory Problems- August 20, 2018
- Dispensary pressure- IDs & drivers licenses every time upon entering, should be like drug stores or bars.- Hard to open, non-recyclable packaging required for every purchase.- Expensive testing requirements, beyond what needed- protect consumer health, more stringent thanrequired- agricultural food products- tomatoes & apples consumed in far higher quantities.- Likewise seed to sale tracking, rather inspections, not a new industry like Co. & Wa.- Local delivery bans, need fixing BCC’s proposed regs, Cal NORML strongly supports - especially MMJ
Serious Problems- following- beyond a regulatory fix & will require legislation: - Medical Cannabis excessive taxation- Employment rights for users- Excessively stringent rules against public consumption- locals should be allowed to permit MJ useelsewhere than just licensed dispensaries and private residences- Patient "compassionate use" issues concern- distribution, amounts, continuation etc.- Indeed, considering the "medical cannabis horse" beginning the ride to legalization, thanks to DennisPeron, Brownie Mary, Tod Mikuriya, Jack Herer, Valerie Corral, Dr. Donald J. Abrams & other heroes.- Compassionate use programs- Cal NORML working with Sen. Weiner on SB 829, allow tax-freedeductions to compassionate use providers. Jan. 2019 termination- collective cultivation defense formedical patients troubling, but politically very difficult to address in the immediate future, as it was part ofthe deal with MMRSA and AUMA.- CBD & THC continued schedule 1, federal status.
Changing federal law is the 500 pound gorilla, everything should loosen up - One or eightounce limit on personal possession and purchases, - Lack of financial services and the 280Erule. - NORML’s & ASA’slobbying in Washington, growing bipartisan consensus in DC legalize or states regulate themselves. What is needed is new leadership in Congress. - Republican leadership currently right-winged dominated- ideologues from Deep South. Dems must win Congress, control key committees with friends. Still Dem Congress forging any agreement unlikely with Administration, but ball rolling with hearings, setting up reform after 2020 when Democrat gets elected.
CA State Considerations re Federal cannabis scheduling- 500 lb gorilla, forgotten; - Amidst state regulation frenzy & local jurisdiction lack of political oversight/retardation;- Continuing banking limitations/cannabis business landlord fear & reluctance;- Simply speaking, while the state schemes for taxes;- Cannabis entrepreneurs salivate;- Local jurisdictions scramble willy nilly;- Legal prices soar/under ground market undiminished;- Small cannabis businesses existing for years struggle or close;- Worst- diminished focus & attention to continuing & increasing applications of MMJ;
Without increasing consideration for cannabis operations past and present and their further statewide regulatory inclusion; indeed, it is certainly difficult to predict the level of success Bureau of Cannabis Control statewide regulations will have for California cannabis cultivation production distribution legal sales and consumption. In solidarity, Charley Pappas- district 6, Berkeley Cannabis Commissioner;
founder, chairman, Community Partnership 4 Health (Berkeley) co-founder, chairman Divinity Tree Patients Wellness Coop
Previous Bureau Public Comment- Cannabis Collectives Cooperatives Caregivers – 1/9/18 MAUCRSA Cannabis Collectives Cooperatives Caregivers Health & Safety Code sec. 11362.775 Previous comments- December 2017
1. Unlimited amount of 5 acre cultivation licenses will jeopardize smaller quality farmers,discourage sign ups for licenses, continue large scale underground market, reinvent the wheel
instead of inclusion of long existing previous cultivations.2. Eliminating small collectives / cooperatives (especially medical) seems unnecessary and against
groups of individuals previously organized when no state and few local regulations existed. Nowwith legality cannabis operations existing privately / residentially should have some less restrictedpermitting considering the amount of regulations / taxes about to be implemented.
3. Prepackaging should be limited to recreational / commercial cannabis. Medical patientsdeserve time, explanation, decision making. For adult uses there could be some kind of similar
process as "wine tasting".Thank you for your time and attention,
Charley Pappas- vice chairman, Berkeley Cannabis Commission founder, chairman, Community Partnership 4 Health (Berkeley) co-founder, chairman- Divinity Tree Patients Wellness Coop (SF)
Item VII.C.8 Cannabis Commission
March 7, 2019
87 of 93
88 of 93
TO: Medical Cannabis Commission
FROM: Elizabeth Greene, Secretary
SUBJECT: Final 2016-2017 Work Program
DATE: July 21, 2016
In accordance with Chapter V.A of the City of Berkeley Commissioners’ Manual, the Commission voted 4-0-0-4 at the June 2, 2016 meeting to adopt the following work plan:
1. Cultivation regulationsa. Develop a selection process, as needed, for cultivation businessesb. Advocate for passage of BMC Chapter 12.25 and related changes to the medical
cannabis ordinances in the BMCc. Advocate for expanding the areas where cultivation is permittedd. Consider equity access in any selection process
Products:
• Draft a selection process for Council consideration (if deemed necessary)
• Develop information for Planning Commission and Council as necessary.Timing: Short term (selection process and BMC Chapter 12.25, July 2016 – October
2016) and On-going (expansion beyond the M District, June 2016 – June 2017)
2. Delivery servicesa. Research how delivery services are regulated in other citiesb. Discuss options with City Attorneyc. Develop ordinance to forward to Councild. Consider equity access in any selection process
Product:
• Draft recommendations to staff for incorporation into an ordinance (12.27)
• Forward proposed ordinance to Council for considerationTiming: Moderate (July 2016 – January 2017)
3. Cottage cultivation industrya. Research how the State will regulate these businessesb. Discuss options with City Attorney and staffc. If necessary, draft ordinance to forward to Councild. Consider equity access in any selection process
Product:
• Draft recommendations to staff for incorporation into an ordinance (12.25)
• Forward ordinance to Council for considerationTiming: Long range (October 2016 – April 2017)
Item VII.D.1 Cannabis Commission
March 7, 2019
89 of 93
4. Consider ways to support patients in Federal housinga. Research how whether other states have raised this issue with the Federal
governmentb. Determine the best way to communicate about this issue with the federal
governmentProduct:
• Letter to federal representative?Timing: Long range (May 2017 – July 2017)
Item VII.D.1 Cannabis Commission
March 7, 2019
90 of 93
1
Greene, Elizabeth
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2019 8:12 AMTo: Greene, ElizabethSubject: Public Input for cannabis commission meeting 2/19Attachments: Cannabis4Seniors.pdf; PastedGraphic-3.tiff
Dear Members of the Cannabis Commission,
Happy New Year greetings for this new lunar year of the Earth Pig. May you make huge strides in your effort and duties as public servants to represent the voice and will of the people you represent.
It is my hope as a public health nurse that the commission will consider the issue of Equity to include more than those with criminal records, but also the community members, families and children who have been impacted by high crime and the War on Drugs.
Within the context of public health, it is clearly understood that individual health is a community production. We know that children growing up in high crime areas are at greater long term risk for the negative impact of community violence, neighborhood poverty, environmental pollution and unjust policing. The war on drugs has done more than just create criminals - it has also created innocent victims who suffer higher rates of anxiety and stress related illnesses due to the circumstances of living with the war on drugs their neighborhoods.
As well, we can see from the history of many community agencies providing mental health and community primary care services that they have been ineffective past a certain point in moving the mark on health disparities in the City of Berkeley and surrounding community. Therefore, I express my concern, as a public health nurse, community advocate and private citizen over the continued funding of community based programs that have not actually created continued and measurable positive health outcomes in the community.
This concern comes from the knowledge that funds, earmarked for health education, and community benefit are now in the preliminary process of application approval at the State level. These guidelines coming from the State Cannabis Commission, already create standards by which only established agencies can apply for funds, thereby creating an uneven playing field for smaller business and new startups in the creation process right now.
Also, there is still the unresolved issue of the City of Berkeley Senior Center, disallowing me to teach educational classes to seniors on enhancing wellbeing by cultivating the endocannabinoid system. I was refused with a clearly inadequate response which basically implies the City of Berkeley office on Aging or Seniors is censoring relevant and important cannabis information. As an advanced public health nurse and board certified holistic nurse, specializing in the integration of cannabis science into public health, I am an expert in my field. I have more than enough qualifications and credentials to prove my expertise, yet I was denied the opportunity to teach Seniors for no seemingly good reason.
I would like the board to address this directly.
Communications Cannabis Commission
March 7, 2019
91 of 93
2
1. Why is the City of Berkeley allowed to censor relevant education? Especially in light ofthe brand range of education deemed acceptable by the Senior Director? When will completelyqualified experts and health professionals like myself be allowed to teach classes on cannabisthrough the City of Berkeley recreation programs and who decides? Again I enclose a copy of myeducational program for greater understanding.
2. The commission would also help citizens by clarifying how they intend to address the handlingof micro businesses in cannabis by community members impacted by the war on drugs without acriminal record?
Berkeley residents like Kinshasa Taylor, who have applied for business licenses, spent a tremendous amount of investment to get their business started only to be thwarted by the Cannabis Commissions inability to take forward and progressive action on the issue of cannabis equity. Ms. Taylor is literally being punished for NOT being a criminal although she endured years of community policing, violence and disruption due to the war on drugs.
One must wonder if the commission and the City of Berkeley in earnest cares about citizens like Ms. Taylor? She is an active, involved and ambitious young business woman who Equity would truly benefit, as opposed to appear to benefit. I urge you to consider the imposed limitations on micro business as limiting when they come to the war on drugs, as many people were impacted without criminal records.
I implore the commission to consider the impact that feet dragging, unneeded delays and other slow downs have on the lives of citizens. Your work is not benign and at this point there are many livelihoods depending on ACTION by the commission, therefore I cannot encourage you enough to be bold and make sound policy that will help even the extreme disparities now present in the once great city of Berkeley.
Courtney Allen-Gentry, MSN RN PHN AHN-BC HWNC-BC, is an Advanced Holistic and Integrative Public Health Nurse Coach, Independent Cannabinoid Nurse Scholar, Thought Leader, Educator, Advocate and Author.
Communications Cannabis Commission
March 7, 2019
www.cincs.org
92 of 93
Cannabis Therapy for SeniorsGet Healthy, Not High, While
Cultivating Wellbeing
Cannabinoids are produced in our bodies naturally? Cannabinoids regulate all physiological functions? Cannabinoids maintain cellular and systemic balance? Cannabinoids can alleviate suffering and improve health? Cannabinoids are neither toxic or addictive and have no known dangerous side effects? Cannabinoids, added to a healthy lifestyle regime, have great benefits for an aging population?
DID YOU KNOW?
Discover how to use cannabis to cultivate wellbeing without ever going into a Dispensary. Discover how to relieve pain, increase cognitive function and relieve anxiety with cannabis.Discover how to Improve sleep with cannabis medicinals.
In this workshop participants will:
Featuring :
Courtney Allen-Gentry, MSN, RN, PHN, AHN-BC, HWNC-BC
Advanced Holistic and Integrative Public Health Nurse