Questions about CA's upcoming legalization law.

[ContinentalOp]

As far as I can tell the upcoming November proposition, if it passes, will make possession of up to an ounce legal for people over 21, allow individuals to grow in a 5' square area for personal consumption, and allow local governments to tax and regulate sales growing if they desire. This brings to mind several questions though and I was hoping somebody here might have the answers.

- What's an ounce? If say a pound of weed was distilled down into an ounce of some kind of beverage, or made into an ounce of hash, is that legally equivalent to an ounce of weed? Or would food and drink products made from pot be illegal?

- How can the personal cultivation work if you're limited to possessing an ounce? I've never grown, but can't you easily get more than that from a single plant? If you have a plant in your house, will the entire weight of the buds, stalks and leaves all count toward that weight rather than just the buds?

- And why this arbitrary one ounce limit anyway? Are there any limits to how much wine you're allowed to store at your house?

- Presumably licensed growers and retailers would be exempt from this limit in areas where local government allows sales and cultivation, right?

- Will this law release anyone from prison? Possession of up to an ounce is just a $100 fine at the moment right? I suppose the only people whose status might change would be someone who was imprisoned for growing less than an ounce. That seems like it would be a rare case though.

- Any ideas what the next step is from Oakland? How soon after the initiative's passage can we expect to see legal cultivation and sales? What sort of bureaucratic and legislative hurdles stand in the way of actual Amsterdam style coffee shops in CA?

[Journeyman]

1. Haven't a clue on any of your questions, but I'll kick to keep you high on the list. . .

Good questions, though, especially those around the weight issues. It's all craziness, near as I can tell. It's either legal or it's not.

[tridim]

2. Legal medical growers have to deal with this stuff already..

None of the state MMJ laws I've seen deal with the actual realities of growing. (Mothers, seedlings, clones, veg/flower chambers, wet product, drying product, curing product, etc)

But, from what I've seen these small issues aren't pursued legally. If you're close to the limits, you're probably fine, as long as you stay small scale.

[Xithras]

3. This is actually all addressed within the text of the law.

"What's an ounce? If say a pound of weed was distilled..."
The law defines it as any part of the plant, resins, extractions, or products created with any of the above. You can have 1 ounce of pot, or one ounce of pot brownies, or one ounce of pot tea.

"How can the personal cultivation work if you're limited to possessing an ounce?"
Theres a line permitting you to posses, without limit, any amount of marijuana that you have grown. The only limitation is that it MUST remain on the same property where you grow it. You can't even walk a plant across the street.

"And why this arbitrary one ounce limit anyway?"
Because they want voters to approve it, and this appeals to the fence sitters.

"Presumably licensed growers and retailers would be exempt from this limit in areas where local government allows sales and cultivation,"
It's entirely up to the local authorities. The law grants them the power to draft whatever regulations they want, other than prohibition.

" Will this law release anyone from prison? "
It's possible that there are a few repeat offenders and parolees who were busted for simple possession and will get set free, but most of our drug prisoners are locked away for cultivating other drugs, or for possessing/transporting amounts not covered by this proposition. It would have little effect on them.

"How soon after the initiative's passage can we expect to see legal cultivation and sales? "
There's no start date. Barring court intervention, you could have your crops in the ground the day after passage.

"What sort of bureaucratic and legislative hurdles stand in the way of actual Amsterdam style coffee shops in CA?"
The verbiage of the law prohibits all public consumption, except in businesses that are specifically licensed to permit the consumption of marijuana. In other words, Amsterdam-style coffee shops are banned until your local government drafts and implements a licensing process that business owners can sign up for. If your local government declines to implement a licensing process, they will remain banned permanently.

[ContinentalOp]

4. thanks!

"The law defines it as any part of the plant, resins, extractions, or products created with any of the above. You can have 1 ounce of pot, or one ounce of pot brownies, or one ounce of pot tea."

Interesting, thanks.

"Theres a line permitting you to posses, without limit, any amount of marijuana that you have grown."

Ah, I missed that part. That makes sense.

"Because they want voters to approve it, and this appeals to the fence sitters."

Yeah, that was more of a rhetorical question I suppose.

"The verbiage of the law prohibits all public consumption, except in businesses that are specifically licensed to permit the consumption of marijuana. In other words, Amsterdam-style coffee shops are banned until your local government drafts and implements a licensing process that business owners can sign up for. If your local government declines to implement a licensing process, they will remain banned permanently."

Yes, I understand. I was more wondering if anything specifically was being planned in Oakland by Richard Lee, etc. to change their local laws. Or just if anyone had any predictions. Do you think the first commercial establishments will start to pop up within a year if the measure is passed? Does anyone know of any other ballot initiatives being prepared at the local level in case this goes through?