“Given that most patients are too sick, marijuana cultivation is too costly, and that landlords must sign an affidavit giving renters permission to grow marijuana in the home, I do not expect many will be able to actually grow their own medical pot,”
… Chris Lindsey – The Montana Cannabis Industry Association
The questionable logic of the Montana Supreme Court was put on display for all to see yesterday, as they rejected a motion filed by the Montana Cannabis Industry Association. The MCIA were hoping that their constitutional challenge of the state’s medical marijuana law would have had a better outcome. The Montana Cannabis Industry Association was asking the state Supreme Court to reassess a recent decision upending substantial parts of a lower court’s injunction against the states mmj law.
The end result of September 11, ruling was the reversal of the injunction, the requirements in the present medical marijuana laws limit providers to no more than 3 medical marijuana patients, and prohibit them from looking to recoup their marijuana growing costs. Thanks to the new ruling these changes are now in full effect, according to the state’s attorney general’s office. Before the injunction was revised, the average caregiver had 16 medical marijuana patients, with the general production cost being covered by state approved patients. The average cost of the highly sought after medicine runs approximately $240 per ounce.[nggallery id=649]
Montana’s Department of Public Health and Human Services is currently set to notify nearly 5,500 of the state’s 8,849 marijuana patients – withdrawing their license as a medical marijuana provider and stating that they have only 30-days to either find a different provider or begin growing marijuana for themselves.
“Given that most patients are too sick, marijuana cultivation is often too costly, and that landlords must sign an affidavit giving renters permission to grow marijuana in the home, I do not expect many will be able to actually grow their own medical weed,” noted Chris Lindsey, the president of the Montana Cannabis Industry Association. “And since providers are already scarce and they can no longer recoup costs, few patients will be able to find anyone to help them,” he said.
As last year’s session was ending, lawmakers passed a medical marijuana statute that repealed the current voter-approved medical marijuana program and replaced it with a stricter, less friendly law. According to advocates and legislators alike the new law say has been purposefully designed to efficiently end medical marijuana in the state.[nggallery id=650]
The initiative referendum – IR-124 will make an appearance on the ballot this year, which allows the state’s voters to either maintain the present medical marijuana law or start from scratch. If you choose to vote for SB 423, it will maintain the present law in its complete form, conversely a vote against SB 423 reinstates the previous medical marijuana law… along with the many recent rulings by the Montana Supreme Court which created many safeguard restrictions on cultivation activities within the former statute.
Many of the fear mongering politicians which seek the state’s highest office, including Attorney General Steve Bullock, have bloviated their staunch opposition to the current medical marijuana law and have stated that it should be killed like a rabid dog it is.
INITIATIVE REFERENDUM NO. 124
AN ACT OF THE LEGISLATURE REFERRED BY REFERENDUM PETITION
In 2004, Montana voters approved I-148, creating a medical marijuana program for patients with debilitating medical conditions. Senate Bill 423, passed by the 2011 Legislature, repeals I-148 and enacts a new medical marijuana program, which includes: permitting patients to grow marijuana or designate a provider; limiting each marijuana provider to three patients; prohibiting marijuana providers from accepting anything of value in exchange for services or products; granting local governments authority to regulate marijuana providers; establishing specific standards for demonstrating chronic pain; and reviewing the practices of doctors who certify marijuana use for 25 or more patients in a 12-month period.
If Senate Bill 423 is affirmed by the voters, there will be no fiscal impact because the legislature has funded the costs of its implementation. If Senate Bill 423 is rejected by the voters, there may be a small savings to the State.
[ ] FOR Senate Bill 423, a bill which repeals I-148 and enacts a new medical marijuana program.
[ ] AGAINST Senate Bill 423, a bill which repeals I-148 and enacts a new medical marijuana program. A vote against Senate Bill 423 will restore I-148. [Source]