The New Smart Electric Meters

[calbunn]

1-13-12 Gov Brewers letter to US Dept of Justice where she makes it clear that unless this case is heard in a US Federal Court there is no safe harbor from prosecution of state employees who administer AMMA licensing.

 

[calbunn]

1-13-12 Gov Brewer issues a statement that the state will not refile the federal lawsuit since the courts dismissal of the case on procedural grounds and in her ruling went as far to note that should the state refile the case she doubted there was any basis to 'substantiate a credible specific warning or threat to initiate criminal proceedings against state employees in Arizona if they were to enforce the AMMA'.

So based on that decision by Judge Bolton, Gov Brewer will not refile the suit and is now full swing of implementing the licensing of dispensaries under the strict provisions as defined within prop 203.



Gov Brewer never supported 203. I predict she will be a HAWK in assuring the letter of the law be followed and 'won't hesitate to halt State involvement in the AMMA if I receive indication that State employees face prosecution due to their duties in administering this law.'

 

[calbunn]

It's these words "restrictive" that bother me, sounds the same as Don Duncan's A.S.A.'s "Restrictive Permitting" holding the grapes above your reach, yet close enough to keep you jumping to get it.

If by 'restrictive permitting' you mean 'limited to one dispensary to every ten pharmacies' this bill does just that as a restriction under line item 20;



Once this thing gets adopted and settles in a bit it very well may be the 'legitimate' dispensaries who work behind the scenes to shut down personal grows through the use of every heavy handed technique these fucks can come up with.

 

[pistone1971]

Interesting thread. I thought I'd just be looking at metering issues but I see wider implications which I thought may be of interest.

To my knowledge CA doesn't have any agencies to enforce a statewide licensing program like CO and CO still got the shutdown letters. I don't think the Obama administration cares about enforcing fed policy in CA since they have this state sewed up and any enforcement looks like they're tough on drugs. CO I was sort of surprised to see get these notices since I also heard Holder two step the issue when he was testifying at Fast and Furious but he did say that the Fed would not focus their limited resources on an acceptable statewide MMJ program.

Why didn't he just recite the Jan 2011 DEA position paper on MMJ?

The campaign to legitimize what is called “medical” marijuana is based on two propositions: first, that science views marijuana as medicine; and second, that the DEA targets sick and dying people using the drug. Neither proposition is true. Specifically, smoked marijuana has not withstood the rigors of science–it is not medicine, and it is not safe. Moreover, the DEA targets criminals engaged in the cultivation and trafficking of marijuana, not the sick and dying. This is true even in the 15 states that have approved the use of “medical” marijuana.

On October 19, 2009 Attorney General Eric Holder announced formal guidelines for federal
prosecutors in states that have enacted laws authorizing the use of marijuana for medical purposes. The guidelines, as set forth in a memorandum from Deputy Attorney General David W. Ogden, makes clear that the focus of federal resources should not be on individuals whose actions are in compliance with existing state laws, and underscores that the Department will continue to prosecute people whose claims of compliance with state and local law conceal operations inconsistent with the terms, conditions, or purposes of the law. He also reiterated that the Department of Justice is committed to the enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act in all states and that this guidance does not “legalize” marijuana or provide for legal defense to a violation of federal law.

While some people have interpreted these guidelines to mean that the federal government has relaxed its policy on “medical” marijuana, this in fact is not the case. Investigations and prosecutions of violations of state and federal law will continue. These are the guidelines DEA has and will continue to follow.

Within the Ogden memo the Fed determines that indeed it will not direct it's 'limited resources' towards the medical patient or properly functioning dispensary however that is not consistent when it the same memo it states:

Of course, no State can authorize violations of federal law, and the list of factors above is not intended to describe exhaustively when a federal prosecution may be warranted.
Accordingly, in prosecutions under the Controlled Substances Act, federal prosecutors are not
expected to charge, prove, or otherwise establish any state law violations. Indeed, this
memorandum does not alter in any way the Department's authority to enforce federal law,
including laws prohibiting the manufacture, production, distribution, possession, or use of
marijuana on federal property. This guidance regarding resource allocation does not "legalize"
marijuana or provide a legal defense to a violation of federal law, nor is it intended to create any
privileges, benefits, or rights, substantive or procedural, enforceable by any individual, party or
witness in any administrative, civil, or criminal matter. Nor does clear and unambiguous
compliance with state law or the absence of one or all of the above factors create a legal defense
to a violation of the Controlled Substances Act. Rather, this memorandum is intended solely as a
guide to the exercise of investigative and prosecutorial discretion.

Both DOJ position papers I reference may be found @;

 

[sky high]

I won't defend what is going on.....but I have said it before and I still believe it to be true.... if you notice in the Ogden memo it says they will not involve themselves with >>>>existing<<<< MMJ law....

Can't speak to the actions in Cali.....but here in CO......the only >existing< law we had in Oct 2009 when the Holder memo came out was Amendment 20. HB1284, which 'legitimized" the dispensaries and changed the flavor in CO from a patient-driven program to State/TAX-driven program in JULY 2010 had NOT been thought of when the Ogden memo was dropped.

So the program we have now (1284) was enacted AFTER the memo came out...and went FAR beyond any scope A20 ever envisioned (right or wrong) and far beyond the >existing< law we had on the books.

So IMO.....no position has changed...it's more that the State fell prey to the same greed the Center/dispensary owners did when they nthought they could make an easy buck and forgot WHO the law was written for.

wot a mess...

s h

 

[pistone1971]

'wot a mess' is an understatement!

Are you familiar with the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs? Fascinating history behind the member UN countries who signed up for this international treaty. Interesting to see Brazil dropped out due to the restrictions being placed on coca leaf chewing which I presume to be an inalienable right in that country.

How does the US ever maintain their moral high ground within this international treaty if the fed starts setting standards that allow states to function under federally accepted and state licensed distribution of MMJ? I don't see how they ever possibly do so without violating the provisions of this treaty.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Convention_on_Narcotic_Drugs

 

[chazbolin]

Interesting day yesterday. Obama told the the media that The Supreme Court of the United States is composed of 'unelected officials' who should not overturn the will of the people with the Affordable Health Care Act that was signed into law with a major arm twisting by Fancy Nancy.

Unfortunately for patients the same 'will of the people' does not apply when applied to state law re MMJ dispensaries....

Last Sentence:

'None is Immune from the Federal Government'

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/04/02/MNBJ1NTK9T.DTL

stay low low low

 

[chazbolin]

Stopped by Oaksterdam yesterday. Day after deer in the headlights was the mood at the now closed university. Not a dispensary at all but a learning institute. I guess the premier institute on learning successful techniques for proven results, having attracted thousands of students to it's classes, was too much to pass up and this led to it's highly published shutdown on Monday. All those student records are now gone. With these records and if so inclined a quick peek at unusual high wattage consumption patterns through the new time of use metering is effortless.

Solar is great! Don't store the energy in batteries but instead put if to use on the electrical panel feeding the room circuits. I don't recommend selling solar generated power back to the utility since they don't pay shit for any excess power you put back on the grid anyway. With just 1-2K watts of solar panels feeding a grow room you create irregular load patterns while reducing the monthly utility bill. Reducing high wattage/temperature lighting and HVAC systems make the solar contribution go even farther.