This State Could Be Close To Having Legal Recreational Cannabis

Cannabis laws in Connecticut have slowly evolved over the last few years and today, lawmakers are holding a hearing about recreational weed. The meeting may be a sign that this state could be close to having legal recreational cannabis.

Public Hearing to Discuss Weed

This morning, Connecticut lawmakers will hear arguments for and against the possibility of legalizing recreational weed. The meeting is a public hearing, which means it will be open for comments from the general public.

The hearing will focus on Bill No. 5458, which calls for the following keys changes:

• Anyone 21 and older would be allowed to buy recreational weed from a cannabis retailer.
• The state would allow people to consume weed in lounges.
• People in Connecticut would be allowed to grow up to six plants at their home for personal use.

So far, those in the state who support the idea have focused on legalization as a way to increase tax revenues. In particular, advocates have argued that boosting taxes is important right now when the state is facing serious financial challenges.

Additionally, lawmakers like Rep. Robyn Porter have cited social justice concerns as key reasons for pushing for legalization. In particular, Porter has raised concerns regarding the racial disparity in weed-related arrests.

“This has always been an issue that has impacted communities of color disproportionately and has sent many black and brown people to jail for what I feel are nonviolent offenses,” Porter told the Yale Daily News last year.

“You have people serving time for marijuana charges. With the three-strikes law, you have some people in jail with life sentences, spending more time in jail than people who have done very heinous crimes.”

On the other hand, opponents of the idea include Governor Dannel Malloy. The governor has been clear that he does not support legalization.

Today’s public hearing will give lawmakers and residents a chance to discuss the issue. It will also give lawmakers an important chance to hear arguments directly from the public.

Final Hit: This State Could Be Close To Having Legal Recreational Cannabis

The topic of recreational cannabis in Connecticut has been on the table for at least the last couple years. Weed laws in the state have undergone some important changes, but progress has stalled out when it comes to full legalization.

In 2011, the state successfully decriminalized weed. Then, in 2012, the state launched its medical marijuana program. Since then, advocates have pushed to legalize recreational weed, but nothing has materialized yet.

Interestingly, surveys consistently find that the huge majority of Connecticut residents support legalization. In fact, a study conducted last fall by Sacred Heart University found that a full 71 percent of people in Connecticut support legalizing and taxing recreational weed.

Cannabis advocates in the state are hoping that this popular support will be enough to get a legalization bill on the ballot later this year. If Connecticut does legalize, it will be the tenth state to do so.

Earlier this year, lawmakers in Vermont signed a bill to legalize recreational cannabis, making it the ninth state with legal weed.

This State’s Medical Marijuana Program Might Be Delayed

Montana’s legislature seems to be suffering from some last-minute indecisiveness just weeks before the state implements changes to rules governing legal medical cannabis. Slated to take effect on April 10, now this state’s medical marijuana program might be delayed. The hangup has to do with rules governing the production end of the cannabis industry. The concern from lawmakers is that larger producers can grow so much cannabis, they’ll drive out smaller producers.

Montana Lawmakers Say “Canopy Limit” Rules Are Bad For Small Businesses

Under Montana’s current rules, producers are subject to a “canopy limit” that determines how much cannabis they can grow. The argument from legislators who want to delay the start of the state’s program is that the limits are in fact too high. This, they say, gives an unfair market advantage to large commercial growers.

Specifically, the rules set a 50 square foot limit for each patient registered with the state’s program. In other words, producers cannot grow more than 50 square feet of cannabis per patient registered with the state.

Kate Cholewa, spokesperson for the Montana Cannabis Industry Association, says that amount of canopy space is way too excessive for the state’s medical cannabis program. Cholewa points out that the 50 square feet limit is twice the space allowed for growers in Washington state. Washington has a recreational market in addition to its medical industry.

Legislators in Montana are echoing Cholewa’s concerns. Rep. Tom Jacobson (D-Great Falls) said the current rules leave the door open for larger growers to dominate the market with lower prices.

“That will force small producers out because they won’t be able to compete at that scale,” Jacobson said.

And he’s not alone. State Sen. Jill Cohenour (D-Helena) says the canopy limit decision may have been premature. “I’m concerned that some of this stuff was done quickly and maybe with limited information,” she said.

Both Democratic legislators serve on the Revenue and Transportation Interim Committee of the Montana Legislature. Committee members raised their concerns about cultivation space at a meeting Wednesday.

By the end of that meeting, the committee had approved a motion to draft a letter recommending the health department to change the rules and postpone the effective date.

This State’s Medical Marijuana Program Might Be Delayed

The letter will go under review by the Children, Families, Health and Human Services Interim Committee. This committee conducts the primary oversight of the state’s medical cannabis program.

Erica Johnston, who manages operations services for the state health department, said the committee’s letter is just the latest in the deluge of feedback they’ve received about the grow area limits.

But Johnston also admitted that she wasn’t aware of the reasons for setting the canopy limit to 50 square feet per patient.

The rules, she said, “were made based on what we found in other areas and what we theoretically in design thought would be a good idea,” Johnston said.

Consistent, negative feedback about the limit, however, may compel Montana lawmakers and regulators to revisit the issue. According to Johnston, the health department is already looking at ways to modify the canopy limit rule.

And that’s why this state’s medical marijuana program might be delayed past the April 10 deadline.

In addition to concerns about cultivation space, there’s growing concern the health department isn’t ready for implementation in any case.

With less than a month to go, the Montana Health Department has its work cut out for it. They’re still interviewing facility inspectors. No clear guidelines for product testing are in place. And providers just have to register and get their license by the end of the year, not by April.

In fact, the health department wants to change the rules on how it can change the rules. This way, it will be more prepared to make quicker rule changes in the future.

Montana’s Medical Marijuana Program On Hold

No doubt, Montana is still trying to dial in the right regulations, rules, and procedures for its medical cannabis program. But newness and lack of precedent seem to have gummed up the works.

Indeed, some state lawmakers think Montana should throw the baby out with the bathwater, and start from scratch.

“We’re already in the business,” Rep Alan Refield (R-Livingston) said. “But we don’t have the rules.’

In whatever form legal medical marijuana ultimately takes in Montana, it’s certain that it will come with more rules and regulations. The hope is to set policy that works to the benefit of patients and small producers, not just large-scale commercial growers. Until then, it’s likely that this state’s medical marijuana program might be delayed.

Michigan officials shutter 40 medical marijuana businesses across state

Forty medical marijuana businesses across Michigan got an unpleasant visit Thursday from state officials and the Michigan State Police, ordering them to stop operating.

And those visits are just the beginning. Hundreds more are expected to get cease and desist letters in the coming days.

The state Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs began the process of shutting down medical marijuana facilities that are operating illegally and haven't submitted applications to the state for a license.

"Any business that didn't apply for a license by Feb. 15 isn't in compliance with the emergency rules that were set up," said David Harns, spokesman for the department. "We did 40 today all throughout the state and there will be hundreds more."

Harns wouldn't say what kind of businesses got the cease and desist letters or how the state had identified them, but most were probably dispensaries that have been operating outside of Michigan's medical marijuana laws.

More: Detroit could miss out on millions from medical marijuana

More: Michigan towns poised to become medical marijuana hubs

The emergency rules "permits an applicant for a state operating license to temporarily operate a proposed marijuana facility under certain conditions," the cease and desist letter read. "In order to comply with this rule, a temporarily operating facility must have applied for a state operating license by February 15. ... A person that does not comply with this rule shall cease and desist operation of a proposed marijuana facility."

If the business owner doesn't shut down, he or she risks not being able to get a license at all from the state, the letter said, and could also result in a "referral to local, state, or federal law enforcement and other penalties or sanctions as provided in the MMFLA (Medical Marijuana Facilities Licensing Act) and Emergency Rules."

When LARA and the Michigan State Police visited the businesses, they only delivered the cease and desist letter and did not confiscate any products from the businesses, said Harns.

Michigan voters passed a medical marijuana law in 2008 that allowed caregivers to grow up to 12 plants for each of five patients who had obtained medical marijuana cards. There are more than 277,000 people who have medical marijuana cards in the state.

Some of those caregivers banded together to set up dispensaries, some with the blessing of the communities where they were open for business. Others got busted, including many in Oakland County over the years, by police in towns that were more wary of the medical weed.

In 2016, the Legislature decided it needed to get a handle on the medical marijuana business and passed bills to regulate and tax medical marijuana. It's expected to be a lucrative business with revenues exceeding $700 million a year. That could rise even more dramatically if a proposal to legalize marijuana for adult recreational use gets on the November ballot and is passed by voters.

The state began accepting applications for licenses in December and is in the process of doing background checks on the business owners. The Medical Marijuana Licensing Board is meeting next Thursday and will begin considering some of the applications. But licenses aren't expected to be handed out until the board's April meeting.

The licenses are in five categories: growers, processors, testing facilities, secure transporters and dispensaries.

So far 378 applications have come in to pre-qualify for a license, which means that the business owners are going through the state background check, but still need to get approval from a town that has passed an ordinance allowing medical marijuana businesses. Another 117 applications — including 43 growers, 20 processors, 49 dispensaries, 2 secure transporters and 3 testing facilities — have been turned in that include approval from a local community.

Contact Kathleen Gray: 313-223-4430, kgray99@freepress.com or on Twitter @michpoligal.

Watch: California's marijuana market is expected to be bigger than beer

Recreational cannabis sales began at the start of the New Year in California, and the market is already expected to bring in billions in revenue this year. Veuer's Sam Berman has the full story.Buzz60

Idaho Is Getting Closer To Legalizing Medical Cannabis

Idaho is one of the most staunchly anti-cannabis states in the country. Cannabis advocates have not been able to make much headway inside the generally very conservative state. With lawmakers now considering a new medical marijuana bill, things could be changing. But even if Idaho is getting closer to legalizing medical cannabis, will very much change on the ground for actual cannabis consumers?

Idaho’s Latest Medical Marijuana Bill

Lawmakers in Idaho are once again looking at a proposal to legalize medical marijuana. This most current bill would legalize certain types of CBD oil.

In particular, the bill would let people with qualifying health conditions use CBD oil that contains little to no THC if they received a prescription from a licensed healthcare professional.

As local news source KMVT 11 reported, the bill would also allow parents to legally possess CBD oil for their children.

So far, the bill has fared surprisingly well—especially given that Idaho has remained one of the states most adamantly opposed to any form of cannabis.

In fact, the bill just cleared the Idaho House of Representatives. Members of the House voted 59-11 in favor of the proposal yesterday.

The bill now moves on to the Senate. If it’s approved there, it will be sent to the governor’s desk where it will be either signed into law or vetoed.

A Veto Seems Likely

Unfortunately for patients in Idaho who want to use medicinal cannabis, it seems very unlikely that the bill will succeed. Even if it clears the Senate, Idaho Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter has made it very clear that he does not support cannabis at any level.

On the same day that the Idaho House approved the new medical marijuana bill, Otter spoke at a city hall meeting in Firth, Idaho. Somebody at the event brought up the bill and asked the governor about it.

“It’s never been my design to say I’m going to veto a bill or I’m going to sign a bill,” Otter said. But then, seemingly contradicting that statement, he commented on Idaho’s CBD oil bill by saying: “Well, I vetoed it once.”

From there, he claimed that legalizing CBD would open the door to a more robust medical marijuana program and possibly even full legalization, both of which he explicitly opposes.

“I think it could be just the beginning,” Otter said. “It’s the camel’s nose under the tent. We’ll find ourselves with a camel inside and you’re outside.”

Final Hit: Idaho Is Getting Closer To Legalizing Medical Cannabis

For the medical marijuana community in Idaho, it is certainly a good sign that this latest bill has so far cleared one legislative branch.

Unfortunately, it seems likely that the bill has a long uphill battle before it ever becomes law. Most alarming, Governor Otter has already vetoed at least one medical marijuana bill.

In 2015, Idaho lawmakers approved a proposal to make it legal for parents to possess CBD oil to treat kids with severe epilepsy.

But Otter rejected it. His comments at yesterday’s city hall meeting clearly hinted that he would repeat that veto. Even if this newest bill makes it past the Senate.

Could Drivers Under 21 Lose Their License If Caught With Marijuana?

Both detractors and proponents of legal cannabis can, for the most part, agree on one thing—there should be a set of regulations for driving under the influence of marijuana. However, as it stands, most cannabis-legal states do not have a set of rules, or even, a viable way to accurately test drivers for cannabis consumption. Now, lawmakers in California are considering a set of regulations for one sector of the cannabis consumer community—underage users. Which begs the question: could drivers under 21 lose their license if caught with marijuana?

A New Initiative

California drivers under the age of 21 could lose their license for a year due to new regulations. Getting caught driving with cannabis could result in a year of hitchhiking and public transportation.

Much like alcohol, California residents must be 21 or over to purchase and legally consume pot. State Sen. Jerry Hill (D-San Mateo) explained that the upcoming provisions will also closely mirror pre-existing legislation. Especially when it comes to underage drinking and driving.

He added that “the state will adhere to a strict ‘zero-tolerance'” policy.

“This bill will save lives by making it illegal for drivers under age 21 to drive under the influence of marijuana, just like current law for alcohol,” Sen. Hill said in a statement.

The proposed bill, titled SB 1273, would test drivers suspected of driving under the influence of cannabis for delta-9- THC, the main psychoactive component of marijuana.

However, this remains a challenge as the state does not have a way to measure the plant in the body. Nor do they have a way of determining a unified standard for impairment

“We don’t have a device in the field to measure impairment by cannabis,” said the California Highway Patrol.

Final Hit: Could Drivers Under 21 Lose Their License If Caught With Marijuana?

There are potentially severe implications for underage drivers. Despite this, the bill will take exception to medical marijuana patients.

Provided they have the necessary documents to prove they use the plant for strictly medical conditions. Still, testing those without one still remains in the premature stages of development.

The bill expects officers to perform either an oral swab saliva test or another chemical field test, but no such form of testing has proven to accurately test for cannabis, especially considering the fact that THC can remain in a regular smoker’s system for over a month.

It even shows up in urine tests.  According to some of Hill’s aides, there are currently prototype devices being used in some California jurisdictions under limited use.

Michigan has also undergone a pilot program to test drivers saliva for a variety of drugs, including amphetamine, benzodiazepines, cocaine, methamphetamine, opiates and cannabis.

Airport Sets Up Amnesty Boxes For Flyers To Dispose Their Weed

Visitors to Las Vegas have a new way to help keep them out of trouble, as the local airport sets up amnesty boxes for flyers to dispose their weed or other recreational or prescription drugs, giving new meaning to the adage “what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas. ”

The Boxes

The bright green boxes were installed February 16 at McCarran International Airport as a way for travelers to safely get rid of cannabis or other items that might not be allowed through Transportation Security Authority checkpoints. Recreational cannabis sales were legalized in the state of Nevada on July 1, 2017, but that doesn’t mean it’s legal everywhere.

In October of last year, Clark County, home to Sin City, passed an ordinance outlawing possession of cannabis, marijuana, and THC on  McCarran grounds.

“Marijuana is prohibited on airport property,” said airport spokesperson Christine Crews in an interview with local media. “You could face a citation fine, or you could face arrest depending on what those amounts are,” she added.

The boxes are located just outside the airport terminal so items can be left before entering the building, no questions asked.

The amnesty boxes, as they are called, are about the size of a large trash can and have been bolted securely to the ground. A drawer drop, similar to those on a corner mailbox, prevents anyone from reaching inside and keeps the contents safely inside until they are removed by a contractor.

What Happens After A Drop-Off?

 Travel Weekly

That doesn’t mean a free stash for someone, however.

“They [the contractor] will be collecting whatever’s surrendered and disposing of it appropriately, depending on what contents are in these boxes,” Crews said. “We don’t want your pot; leave it somewhere else, that’d be fine.”

Crews also noted that because cannabis is still illegal under United States laws, the drop boxes will enable the airport to avoid being complicit in smuggling marijuana across state lines.

“Being a federally regulated industry, we want to make sure we are more than compliant with their standards,” Crews said.

The amnesty boxes seem to be getting a positive reaction from travelers. “I think they’re great, said Michael Aldaya, a visitor from Minnesota. “This is probably where you should dispose your drugs.”

Aldaya hedged when asked if he had anything to leave in the boxes. “Uh… I don’t want to disclose that right now,” he joked.

But Shannon, in town from San Francisco, thinks the boxes might not get much use. “I feel like anyone who probably has some sort of cannabis, weed, would probably do it before they threw it away,” she said. “I’d be interested to see how full that gets.”

In the first week of operation, the boxes have collected several vape pens and a plastic bag of pills, according to reports.

Final Hit: Airport Sets Up Amnesty Boxes for Flyers to Dispose Their Weed

So far, 13 of the amnesty boxes have been installed in high-traffic areas of the airport. Ten are located at the terminal, with three more at the car rental complex.

The Clark County Department of Aviation, the airport operator, has plans to install seven more of the amnesty boxes at other sites including the Henderson Executive Airport and the North Las Vegas Airport, bringing the total number to 20.

California Threatens Hundreds of Unlicensed Cannabis Businesses

California’s Bureau of Cannabis Control (BCC) has sent out more than 500 warning letters threatening legal action to unlicensed businesses. The letters were sent last week to retail dispensaries and delivery services who have not yet received licenses to operate under the state’s cannabis regulations that went into effect on January 1. In the letters, California threatens hundreds of unlicensed cannabis businesses.

A Formal Warning

The letters, from Assistant Chief of Enforcement Paul Tupy, warn the businesses that the BCC believes they are participating in commercial cannabis activity contrary to provisions of the Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA). The letters also demand that all such activity immediately cease. Criminal and civil penalties are threatened if violations continue.

MAUCRSA was passed by the legislature in 2017 to reconcile differences in the state’s medical marijuana laws and Prop 64, which legalized marijuana for adult-use in California when it was passed by voters in 2016.

The BCC had previously indicated that enforcement of the new regulations would not begin immediately in 2018. But nearly two months into the new year, the agency and law enforcement have been receiving complaints about businesses who have not yet received licenses but are still operating. Many of those complaints are coming from the more than 3,000 companies who are operating legally after already completing the costly and laborious process of obtaining a license.

Natalia Thurston, a cannabis law attorney with a practice in Oakland, California, told High Times that one of her clients received warning emails from the BCC on February 14 and 20. The anonymous client operated a medical cannabis delivery service in the Bay Area but ceased operations January 1 when the new regulations went into effect.

Thurston noted that the emails did not indicate what her client has been accused of. “There was no evidence or specific factual information provided in the email notices regarding the activity alleged in the emails,” she said.

Powerful Message

It appears advertising by the targeted businesses may have instigated some of the warning letters. At a legislative hearing in Sacramento this week, Assemblymember Evan Low asked BCC Chair Lori Ajax about advertising appearing in a weekly newspaper. The ads, Low said, had missing or falsified license numbers.

“This is a complete disregard and gross negligence of the law,” he said.

According to Ajax, her agency was already aware of the issue, mentioning the warnings that had been recently sent out.

“We are already dedicating a lot of our enforcement staff just on advertising because it is that important,” Ajax said. “It is prevalent, not just in Sacramento but across the state and it is jeopardizing the regulated market. We want to get this right.”

Ajax also said the letters sent a “powerful message” to unlicensed commercial cannabis operators.

Final Hit: California Threatens Hundreds of Unlicensed Cannabis Businesses

It’s not yet clear how many businesses plan to heed the warnings. Attorney Thurston’s delivery service client won’t be back on the road until it obtains local and state licenses.

Here’s the text of the warning letter sent to hundreds of California cannabis businesses suspected of operating without a license.

2/14/2018

RE: Unlicensed Commercial Cannabis Activity

Dear :

The Bureau of Cannabis Control (Bureau) has reason to believe that you may be engaging in unlicensed commercial cannabis activity. Pursuant to the provisions of the Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA), a valid state license from a state licensing authority is required to legally operate a commercial cannabis business within the State of California. If you are in fact engaging in unlicensed commercial cannabis activity, you must cease all commercial cannabis operations until you obtain a valid state license to avoid further violations of state law. Please be aware that such violations may result in criminal and administrative penalties, as well as civil penalties totaling up to three times the amount of the license fee for each violation.

To apply for a license, please visit the Bureau’s website, www.bcc.ca.gov, or contact the Bureau at (833) 768-5880.

Sincerely,

Paul Tupy

Assistant Chief of Enforcement

Here’s What Happens To Violent Crime When Marijuana Is Legalized

The legalization of cannabis sets off a number of far-reaching ripple effects. It touches everything from public health to local economies to law enforcement policies, and much more. The ripple effects of legal weed also impact violent crime. Here’s what happens to violent crime when marijuana is legalized.

Violent Crime and Legal Weed

The short answer to the question, what happens to violent crime when marijuana is legalized, is simple: it decreases. That decrease happens largely because legal weed disrupts the black market. At the same time, legalization places cannabis into the legal economy. That makes it much easier to track and regulate.

Of course, there are tons of other concerns that weed’s move into the legal economy raises. For example, it’s important that a handful of massive corporations doesn’t immediately monopolize the newly legal weed market. Such a development could potentially turn legal weed into the next Big Pharma.

Similarly, it’s crucial that we keep the legal weed economy from repeating the racial inequities that define the War on Drugs. It’s counterproductive if the legal weed industry ends up profiting only wealthy white business owners while millions of people of color continue dealing with the injustices of prohibition.

With all that said, it does appear that legalization helps decrease violent crime. In fact, this is exactly what a study published in November 2017 found. In this study, researchers reviewed FBI crime reports and homicide records. They looked at records from 1994 through 2012.

Researchers found that legal marijuana coincided with noticeable drops in violent crime. These changes were most pronounced in states bordering Mexico.

In these states, violent crime dropped by an average of 13 percent when cannabis was legalized—even if it was only medical marijuana. More specifically, border states saw a 41 percent decrease in the number of homicides directly linked to drugs. Similarly, robbery decreased by 19 percent and murder rates fell by 10 percent.

Shooting Down the Myths

Studies like this help counter many of the stereotypes and negative myths that continue to swirl around the topic of legalization. In particular, these stats help shoot down the myth that legal weed will lead to more crime and more violence.

Interestingly, the fact-checking website Snopes.com has already classified this myth as false. “Although this claim appears to be making its way into political talking points regarding recreational marijuana,” the site states, “no credible evidence has been provided to support it.”

And Snopes is right. Under Attorney General Jeff Sessions, the myth that legal weed leads to more crime is getting new life. One of the first things Sessions did after being appointed AG was start going after cannabis. And one of his main speaking points is the idea that legalization spurs more violent crime.

“I don’t think America is going to be a better place when people of all ages, and particularly young people, are smoking pot,” Sessions said in early 2017. “I believe it’s an unhealthy practice, and current levels of THC in marijuana are very high compared to what they were a few years ago, and we’re seeing real violence around that.”

Unfortunately for Sessions, data doesn’t back up the claim that weed produces more violence. In fact, studies like the one published last November suggest the exact opposite.

Final Hit: Here’s What Happens To Violent Crime When Marijuana Is Legalized

So, what happens to violent crime when marijuana is legalized? From what we can tell so far, it looks like legal weed helps reduce violent crime.

Legalization breaks up the black market. It decreases the need to smuggledrugs across borders. And it significantly cuts down on the likelihood that violence will erupt when people try to buy or sell weed.

For example, just last month DJ Khaled’s future brother in law was shot and killed during a weed deal gone bad. If he could have just gone to a dispensary and purchased weed legally, the entire outcome would probably be different.

Tribes Cut Out of California Pot Market Might Grow Their Own

LOS ANGELES (AP) — American Indian tribes that say they have been cut out of California’s legal marijuana market have raised the possibility of going their own way by establishing pot businesses outside the state-regulated system that is less than two months old.

The tribes floated the idea of setting up rival farms and sales shops on reservations after concluding that rules requiring them to be licensed by the state would strip them of authority over their own lands and their right to self-governance.

The possibility of the tribes breaking away from the state-run system is one more challenge for California as it attempts to transform its longstanding medicinal and illegal marijuana markets into a unified, multibillion-dollar industry.

For tribes to participate in the state-run market, “they have to give up their rights to act as governments, with regard to cannabis,” said Mark Levitan, a tribal attorney.

At issue are legally thorny questions about who governs whom, taxation and the intersection of state marijuana laws with tribes that the federal government recognizes as sovereign nations within the U.S.

Under regulations issued last year, California would retain full control over licensing. Tribes would have to follow state rules, including “submission to all enforcement,” to obtain a license to grow or sell marijuana. Any application must include a waiver of “sovereign immunity,” a sort of legal firewall that protects tribal interests.

Without state licenses, businesses cannot take part in the legal state pot market. California has over 100 federally recognized tribes, the most of any state, and estimates of the number either growing and selling pot or eager to do so varies, from a handful to over 20.

Unlike those that have prospered from casino gambling, some are in struggling rural areas and would welcome a new source of cash to improve schools and pave roads.

After long-running negotiations between tribes and state officials failed to produce an agreement before broad legal sales began Jan. 1, the California Native American Cannabis Association warned state officials that tribes “may engage in commercial cannabis activities through our own inherent sovereign authority.”

If tribes choose to step away from California’s market, “the state will have no jurisdiction to enforce its cannabis laws and regulations on tribal lands,” the group said in a sharply worded letter to Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown’s administration in December.

Tribes “just want to be able to do business in the state of California and elsewhere, just like anybody else,” said Paul Chavez, former chairman of the Bishop Paiute tribe.

The dispute in California differs from another legal pot state, Washington, where seven tribes have marijuana compacts with the state and others are in negotiations or awaiting the governor’s approval. The compacts allow tribal marijuana businesses to participate in the legal system, such as selling tribe-grown pot to retailers off the reservation.

In California, the tribes are circulating a proposal that calls for the governor to strike agreements with them. Those pacts would allow them to participate in the legal market, while the state would recognize a tribe’s “exclusive authority” to regulate commercial marijuana activity on its lands.

Tribes are eager for a settlement, but reaching a deal in the Legislature could take the remainder of the year.

“Everyone agrees conceptually there should be an even playing field, a level playing field,” said state Assemblyman Rob Bonta, a Democrat at the center of the negotiations in Sacramento.

In addition to the problems in Sacramento, tribes are facing uncertainty at the federal level.

Earlier this year, Attorney General Jeff Sessions lifted an Obama-era policy that kept federal authorities from cracking down on the marijuana trade in states where the drug is legal, which also guided enforcement on tribal lands.

The shifting ground has put a chill over development plans — including in an isolated stretch of eastern San Diego County.

Nevada-based GB Sciences Inc. announced last year that it would build and manage a commercial cannabis company on tribal lands, nurturing plants, manufacturing products and distributing them across the state.

The tribe, the Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla and Cupeno Indians, would get an ownership stake, jobs and 40 percent of the profits. GB Sciences would get income for its marijuana research and a foothold in the largest legal pot market in the U.S.

But the projected $8 million project is on hold, with the status of tribes in the pot market unclear.

Issues involving sovereignty touch a sensitive subject for tribes, and they see the predicament with marijuana as part of a history of exploitation.

The state rule “harkens back to the end of the 19th century … when federal and state policies favored extermination or forced assimilation of California tribes,” the tribal group wrote.

Are Olympic Athletes Allowed To Use CBD?

Ae Olympic athletes allowed to use CBD? It’s a question we’re wondering now that the 2018 Winter Olympics are coming to a close. For the past few years, drug use among Olympians has been a controversial topic. Whether it’s allegations of doping or recreational drug use, sports authorities hold these elite athletes to a higher standard than the average sports player. But what about a certain therapeutic non-psychoactive cannabinoid? Are Olympic athletes allowed to use CBD?

Cannabis and Sports

When we talk about drugs and athletes, we almost always think of steroids and other performance-enhancing substances. For many, a connection between professional athletes and cannabis would never be part of the conversation. Even though studies show that cannabis can improve workout sessions and overall fitness.

But in 1998, the Olympic authorities officially added cannabis to the list of banned substances for competing athletes. Ross Rebagliati, a snowboarder from Canada, tested positive for THC, bringing on the change. The World Anti-Doping Agency was established one year later. The issue of Olympians smoking weed was then on the backburner for a decade.

Then, in 2009, a photograph of Michael Phelps went viral. The Olympic swimmer from the United States, who won 23 gold medals over his career (as well as three silver medals and two bronze ones), was once again in the spotlight for the wrong reason.

Did he get another DUI, like he did in 2004? No. This time, Phelps was the center of controversy because someone leaked a photo of him smoking out of a bong.

He verified the picture was real and issued a public apology. Subsequently, USA Swimming suspended him from competition for three months. He also lost a sponsorship with Kellogg.

Media and authority figures catching athletes with weed is nothing new. Most sports leagues ban drugs, including cannabis. These prohibitions are enforced through drug testing.

But the rules for Olympic athletes seem to be a bit different. Back in 2013, the World Anti-Doping Agency quietly raised the tolerated amount of THC in the system of Olympic athletes. And in 2016, the officials tweaked the rules again.

Now, Olympic athletes have permission to smoke weed. Just not during competition season. Fair enough. But what about cannabidiol? Are Olympic athletes allowed to use CBD?

Final Hit: Are Olympic Athletes Allowed To Use CBD?

The answer to the question is a resounding yes. Seemingly in accordance with scientific research and available information about the cannabinoid, the World Anti-Doping Agency updated their banned substance list. They still don’t allow Olympic athletes to use THC during the competition.

But cannabidiol? Totally fine. The proof is right there on the updated list for 2o18. In Section S8, WADA proclaims that “cannabidiol is no longer prohibited.”

It’s definitely a step in the right direction for the Agency and for athletics as a whole. Especially considering the numerous health benefits CBD offers. To athletes and non-athletes alike. Maybe now some athletes will get sponsorships from companies specializing CBD products!