Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Ex-parte - Solis 03/13/2018
Ex parte Items - Commissioner Andy Solis COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA March 13, 2018 COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS 11.E. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to affirm a zoning verification letter regarding a proposed Medical Marijuana Treatment Center and direct staff to issue a letter of no objection to the proposed location. (Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning Division Director) NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ®Meetings ®Correspondence ®e-mails ®Calls Meetings: 7/7/17 —Alan Weiss, Veora Little 10/13/17 — Rich Yovanovich, David Genson, Francesca Passidomo 12/1/17 — Bill Barton, Veora Little, Lt. John Poling Phone Call: 2/12/17 — Brent Batten, Naples Daily News Correspondence and emails: See attached Ex parte Items - Commissioner Andy Solis COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA March 13, 2018 CONSENT AGENDA 16.A.4. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Maple Ridge Phase 6A PPL, (Application Number PL20170002650) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. ® NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ❑Meetings ( (Correspondence ❑e-mails ❑Calls Ex parte Items - Commissioner Andy Solis COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA March 13, 2018 SUMMARY AGENDA 17.A. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by the Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code which includes the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from a Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district to a Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) zoning district to allow for development of up to 40,000 square feet of commercial development for a project to be known as 15501 Old US 41 CPUD; and providing an effective date. The subject property is located on the west side of Old US 41, approximately one mile north of the US 41 and Old US 41 intersection, in Section 10,Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. [PL20170001083] ❑ NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE (Meetings ❑Correspondence ❑e-mails 7Calls Ex parte Items - Commissioner Andy Solis COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA March 13, 2018 17.B. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by the Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 96- 79,the Eagle Creek Planned Unit Development by expanding the golf course by removing one acre from residential tracts and adding the one acre to golf course Tract H-1; by superseding and repealing prior Ordinance Nos. 81-4, 81-114, 82-53 and 85-8; by amending the Master Plan; and providing an effective date. The subject property, consisting of 298+/- acres, is located southwest of the intersection of US 41 and Collier Boulevard in Sections 3 and 4,Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [PL20170001320] V NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ❑Meetings ❑Correspondence ❑e-mails Calls Ex parte Items - Commissioner Andy Solis COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA March 13, 2018 17.C. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex-parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Recommendation to approve a Resolution renaming a portion of Esplanade Boulevard to Montelanico Loop. The subject street is approximately one third of a mile in length, located within the Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples, approximately one and a quarter mile north of Immokalee Road, in Section 15,Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [SNR-PL20170002424] ® NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE IMeetings Correspondence ❑e-mails ❑Calls GoodnerAngela From: John Agnelli <johna@powercorp.net> Sent: Friday,January 27, 2017 11:25 AM To: SolisAndrew Subject: Cannabis Attachments: 01-10-17-1-a (2).pdf Commissioner Solis, Hoping to visit with you before the February 13 BCC meeting but regardless, sending the enclosed along as an FYI. Regards, John John J. Agnelli Senior Vice President Licensed Real Estate Broker Power Corporation 3050 N. Horseshoe brive Suite 105 Naples, Fl 34104 P: 239-775-2230 F: 239-775-1398 C: 239-285-0345 1 '165t. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT 0 STATE � 1 RICK SCOTT KEN DETZNER Governor Secretary of State January 12, 2017 Honorable Gloria R. Hayward Clerk and Auditor Board of County Commissioners Sumter County Post Office Box 247 Bushnell, Florida 33513 Attention: Ms. Caroline Alrestimawi, Deputy Clerk Dear Ms. Hayward: Pursuant to the provisions of Section 125.66, Florida Statutes,this will acknowledge receipt of your electronic copy of Sumter County Ordinance No. 2017-01, which was filed in this office on January 12, 2017. Sincerely, Ernest L. Reddick Program Administrator ELR/lb R. A. Gray Building • 500 South Bronough Street • Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 Telephone: (850) 245-6270 www.dos.state.fl.us NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS AMENDMENTS TO THE SUMTER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE Sumter County, Florida, by and through its Board of County Commissioners, proposes to enact amendments to the Sumter County Land Development Code through an ordinance entitled as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SUMTER COUNTY. FLORIDA. AMENDING CHAPTER 13 OF THE SUMTER COUNTY CODE OF ORDINANCES; AMENDING THE SUMTER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE; MORE SPECIFICALLY, PROVIDING STANDARDS FOR REGULATING MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES BY NUMBER AND LOCATION; PROVIDING A PROCESS FOR APPLICATION AND APPOVAL OF SUCH FACILTIES; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR RESOLUTION OF CONFLICTS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Proposed amendments to the Land Development Code relate to establishing requirements and standards for Medical Marijuana dispensaries; designating those land use zones where Medical Marijuana dispensaries will be allowed as a permitted or special use and establishing a process for application and approval of such facilities. The ordinance will be heard during the regularly scheduled meetings of the Sumter County Local Planning Agency and Board of County Commissioners as follows: Local Planning Agency 510 Colony Cottage Boulevard The Villages, FL 6:00 P.M., December 19, 2016 Board of County Commissioners Board of County Commissioners Sumter County Courthouse Sumter County Courthouse Historic Courtroom Historic Courtroom 215 E. McCollum Ave 215 E.McCollum Ave Bushnell, FL Bushnell, FL 5:00 P.M., December 13,2016 5:00 P.M.,January 10, 2017 The proposed changes may be inspected by the public in the Development Services Division, The Villages Sumter County Service Center, 7375 Powell Rd, Ste. 115, between the hours of 7:30 A.M.and 5:00 P.M.weekdays. Contact Karl Holley at 352-689-4463 with questions. Interested parties are encouraged to appear at these hearings and provide comments regarding the proposed amendment. Those requiring assistance may call 352-689-4400. APPEAL: NECESSITY OF RECORD Notice is given that if any person desires to appeal any action taken by the Board at the above hearing, a verbatim record of the proceedings may be necessary. The Board assumes no responsibility for furnishing said record; however, the hearings will be audio recorded by the Board for public use. ORDINANCE 2017- 0, AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SUMTER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 13 OF THE SUMTER COUNTY CODE OF ORDINANCES; AMENDING THE SUMTER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE; MORE SPECIFICALLY, PROVIDING STANDARDS FOR REGULATING MEDICAL CANNIBIS DISPENSARIES BY NUMBER AND LOCATION; PROVIDING A PROCESS FOR APPLICATION AND APPOVAL OF SUCH FACILTIES; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR RESOLUTION OF CONFLICTS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS,the voters of the State of Florida have amended the State Constitution to provide for the use of Cannabis for medical purposes; and WHEREAS,the Florida Legislature has enacted legislation legalizing Cannabis for medical uses; and WHEREAS,a comprehensive State licensing and regulatory framework for the cultivation, processing,and Dispensing of Cannabis exists; and WHEREAS the comprehensive State licensing and regulatory framework directs that the criteria for the number and location of, and other permitting requirements that do not conflict with state law or department rule for, Dispensing facilities of Cannabis Dispensing Businesses may be determined by local ordinance; and WHEREAS,Cannabis Dispensing Businesses licensed pursuant to the law have begun cultivating Cannabis for processing and Dispensing; and WHEREAS,potential adverse impacts on the health, safety, and welfare of residents and business from secondary effects associated with the distribution of Cannabis exist,potentially including: offensive odors,trespassing,theft, fire hazards, increased crime in and about the Cannabis Dispensing Business, robberies,negative impacts on nearby businesses, nuisance problems; and WHEREAS,certain of the above potential adverse impacts are accentuated by the current difficulties experienced by Cannabis Dispensing Businesses in obtaining banking services necessitating such businesses to operate on a cash basis; and WHEREAS,there exists the potential for misappropriation and diversion of medical Cannabis to non-medical uses,and; WHEREAS,an overabundance of Dispensing facilities can affect the viability of such facilities, result in compliance issues and increased regulatory costs, lead to the improper diversion of products,and accentuate threats to the public health, safety,and welfare; and ORDINANCE 2017- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SUMTER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 13 OF THE SUMTER COUNTY CODE OF ORDINANCES; AMENDING THE SUMTER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE; MORE SPECIFICALLY, PROVIDING STANDARDS FOR REGULATING MEDICAL CANNIBIS DISPENSARIES BY NUMBER AND LOCATION; PROVIDING A PROCESS FOR APPLICATION AND APPOVAL OF SUCH FACILTIES; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR RESOLUTION OF CONFLICTS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the voters of the State of Florida have amended the State Constitution to provide for the use of Cannabis for medical purposes; and WHEREAS,the Florida Legislature has enacted legislation legalizing Cannabis for medical uses; and WHEREAS, a comprehensive State licensing and regulatory framework for the cultivation, processing, and Dispensing of Cannabis exists; and WHEREAS the comprehensive State licensing and regulatory framework directs that the criteria for the number and location of, and other permitting requirements that do not conflict with state law or department rule for,Dispensing facilities of Cannabis Dispensing Businesses may be determined by local ordinance; and WHEREAS, Cannabis Dispensing Businesses licensed pursuant to the law have begun cultivating Cannabis for processing and Dispensing; and WHEREAS,potential adverse impacts on the health, safety, and welfare of residents and business from secondary effects associated with the distribution of Cannabis exist,potentially including: offensive odors, trespassing,theft, fire hazards, increased crime in and about the Cannabis Dispensing Business,robberies, negative impacts on nearby businesses,nuisance problems; and WHEREAS, certain of the above potential adverse impacts are accentuated by the current difficulties experienced by Cannabis Dispensing Businesses in obtaining banking services necessitating such businesses to operate on a cash basis; and WHEREAS, there exists the potential for misappropriation and diversion of medical Cannabis to non-medical uses, and; WHEREAS, an overabundance of Dispensing facilities can affect the viability of such facilities, result in compliance issues and increased regulatory costs, lead to the improper diversion of products, and accentuate threats to the public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, other jurisdictions have regulated the Dispensing of Cannabis by limiting the number of such Cannabis Dispensing Businesses to reduce threats to the public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS,there is a need to adopt health, safety, and welfare regulations to avoid adverse impacts on the community which may arise from the distribution of Cannabis; and WHEREAS, other jurisdictions that allow Cannabis Dispensing Businesses have implemented effective regulatory and enforcement systems that address the adverse impacts that Cannabis Dispensing Businesses could pose to public safety, health, and welfare; and WHEREAS, an effective regulatory system governing the Dispensing of Cannabis, as provided in this Ordinance,will address potential adverse impacts to the public health,welfare, and safety consistent with Florida law; and WHEREAS, it is not the purpose or intent of this section to restrict or deny access to Cannabis as permitted by Florida law,but instead to enact reasonable restrictions intended to protect the public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has determined it is in the public interest to adopt this Ordinance pursuant to the County's police powers and section 381.986, as well as other applicable state laws and provisions of the Florida Constitution, to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public; NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Sumter County Board of County Commissioners, as follows: SECTION 1.PURPOSE. The purpose of this Ordinance is to establish requirements that regulate Cannabis Dispensing Businesses in the interest of the public health, safety and general welfare and that ease the regulatory burden on the Sumter County. In particular, this Ordinance is intended to regulate the sale and distribution of Cannabis to ensure a supply of Cannabis to patients who qualify to obtain,possess, and use Cannabis, or any other use of Cannabis permissible under state law, while promoting compliance with other state laws that regulate Cannabis.Nothing in this Ordinance is intended to promote or condone the sale, distribution,possession, or use of Cannabis in violation of any applicable state law. Compliance with the requirements of this Ordinance shall not provide a defense to criminal prosecution under any applicable law. SECTION 2. AUTHORITY. Pursuant to Article VIII, Section I of the Florida Constitution and Sections 125.01 and 125.66 of the Florida Statutes, the Sumter County Board of County Commissioners has all powers of local self-government to perform county functions and render county services and facilities except when prohibited by law. 2 SECTION 3.AMENDMENTS TO LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. Section 13-653. Cannabis Dispensaries (Added in entirety). (a) Definitions: (1) The following words and phrases,when used in this Section, shall have the following meanings: a. Applicant shall mean any person or entity that has submitted an application for a Certificate of Approval or renewal of a Certificate of Approval issued pursuant to this Section. If the Applicant is an entity and not a natural person, Applicant shall include all persons who are the managers, officers, directors, contractual agents, partners, and licensors of such entity, as well as all members, shareholders, or Investors holding an ownership interest of 10% or more of such entity. b. Cannabis has the meaning given to it by section 893.02(3), Florida Statutes, and shall include all forms of medical Cannabis or low-THC Cannabis. c. Cannabis Dispensing Business or Business shall mean a business licensed to dispense Cannabis pursuant to applicable law and that is engaged in the retail sale of Cannabis or Derivative Products,but shall not include making deliveries of Cannabis or Derivative Products to the residence or business of an authorized individual, or to a health care facility, as permitted by other relevant ordinances and state law. d. Certificate of Approval shall mean a document issued by the Jurisdiction officially authorizing an Applicant to operate a Cannabis Dispensing Business pursuant to this Section. A Certificate of Approval generally authorizes an Applicant to establish and operate a Cannabis Dispensing Business pursuant to this Section,but does not authorize the Dispensing of Cannabis at any physical location within the Jurisdiction until a Premises Authorization, as defined herein, has been issued for such location. e. Compassionate Use Act shall mean section 381.986,Florida Statutes, and chapter 2016-123, Laws of Florida, as amended from time to time, and any rules or regulations promulgated thereunder. f. Cultivation or cultivate shall mean the process by which a person grows a Cannabis plant. g. Derivative Products shall mean products derived from Cannabis, including but not limited to, Cannabis oil or consumable products containing or derived from Cannabis. h. Dispensing shall mean the retail sales of Cannabis or Derivative Products at a Cannabis Dispensing Business,but does not include making deliveries of Cannabis or Derivative Products to the residence or business of an authorized individual, or to a health care facility, as permitted by other relevant ordinances and state law. 3 i. Investor shall mean any person or entity entitled to share in the profits of the Applicant, or any Lender. The term shall not include any employees who share in the profits of the Applicant pursuant to an employee profit sharing program. j. Lender shall mean any person or entity that has provided funds to an Applicant with the expectation of receiving from the Applicant repayment or the receipt from the Applicant of anything of value. The term Lender shall include any person who owns, directly or indirectly, 20% or more of any entity which qualifies as a Lender, but does not include any bank, credit union, or other financial institution created under federal or state law. k. Jurisdiction shall mean Sumter County. 1. Operator shall mean the person or entity to which a Certificate of Approval has been issued pursuant to this Section. m. Premises Authorization shall mean a document issued by the Jurisdiction to the Operator, authorizing the Operator to conduct Cannabis Dispensing Business operations at a single, specifically approved physical location. No Premises Authorization may be issued to any individual or entity who does not hold a n. Certificate of Approval. Each Certificate of Approval authorizes the issuance of a single Premises Authorization at any one time, and any relocation of operations to a separate address shall require amendment of the Premises Authorization to authorize operations at the new location. o. State shall mean the State of Florida. (2) In addition to the definitions contained in Subsection(1), other terms used in this Section shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Compassionate Use Act, and such definitions are incorporated into this Section by this reference. (b) Certificate of Approval required; term of Certificate of Approval; renewal application. (1) It shall be unlawful for any person or entity to establish or operate a Cannabis Dispensing Business in the County without first having obtained from the State of Florida approval to do so pursuant to the Compassionate Use Act or any other relevant law, and having obtained from the County a Certificate of Approval, and having obtained from the County a Premises Authorization for the facility to be operated in connection with such business. Such Certificate of Approval and Premises Authorization shall be kept current at all times and shall be conspicuously displayed at all times in the premises to which they apply. The failure to maintain a current Certificate of Approval, or to maintain a current Premises Authorization for any location at which Cannabis Dispensing Business is conducted, shall constitute a violation of this Section. (2) Each Certificate of Approval issued by the County pursuant to this Section shall specify the date of issuance, the period of licensure, and the name of the Operator. (3) Any Certificate of Approval issued by the County under this Section shall expire three years after the date of its issuance. 4 (4) Renewal of an existing Certificate of Approval shall be automatic for successive three year periods upon payment of required fees to the County, as provided in the fee schedule adopted by the County from time to time. a. Within 30 days of the expiration date, and upon notice of renewal by the County, each Operator shall pay a nonrefundable fee to the County, as set forth in the fee schedule adopted by the County from time to time,to defray the costs incurred by the County for review of the application and inspection of the proposed premises, as well as any other costs associated with the processing of the application.Notice of renewal shall be provided to each Operator no less than 30 days prior to the renewal date of the Certificate of Authority. b. A notice of intent to revoke shall be issued to all Operators who have not remitted renewal fees within 30 days of the renewal date. Notwithstanding the provisions of Subsection(a), an Operator whose Certificate of Authority has been expired for not more than 90 days will be reinstated upon the payment of a nonrefundable late application fee, as set forth in the fee schedule adopted by the County from time to time. A Certificate of Authority shall be revoked if renewal fees have not been paid within 90 days of the renewal date. (5) Any Premises Authorization issued by the County under this Section shall be deemed to expire on the date upon which the Certificate of Approval pursuant to which it is issued expires. Any Premises Authorization shall be deemed automatically renewed upon the renewal, as set forth herein, of the Certificate of Approval pursuant to which it is issued. (6) In the event a Certificate of Authorization is not renewed, it shall be noticed by the County as available and be subject to a new application process as set forth in this Section. (c) Application minimum requirements;payment of application fee. (1) An Applicant for a new Certificate of Approval, or an Operator seeking to change the ownership of an existing Certificate of Approval,pursuant to the Compassionate Use Act, any other applicable state law, and the provisions of this Section, shall submit an application to the County. At the time of any such application, each Applicant shall pay an application fee to the County, as set forth in the fee schedule adopted by the County Commission from time to time,to defray the costs incurred by the County for review of the application, as well as any other costs associated with the processing of the application. (2) The Applicant shall include the following in its application to the County: a. Payment of the application fee as set forth in the fee schedule established by the Jurisdiction. b. If the Applicant is a business entity, information regarding the entity, including without limitation the name and address of the entity, its legal status and proof of 5 registration with, or a certificate of good standing from, the Florida Secretary of State, as applicable; c. If the Applicant is an individual, government issued identification including name, address and photograph of the individual; d. Evidence of the State of Florida, Department of Health, Office of Compassionate Use's (or any successor agency of the State of Florida's) approval of the Operator to operate a Cannabis Dispensing Business pursuant to the Compassionate Use Act or any other relevant law; e. All documentation necessary to demonstrate compliance with the requirements identified in this Section, including evidence that the Applicant continues to meet all requirements of section 381.986(5)(b)(l),Florida Statutes. f. All documentation the Applicant wishes to have considered for scoring purposes, including documentation demonstrating the Applicant meets the criteria detailed in this Section. (3) Upon receipt of an application,the County shall review and score the application pursuant to the scoring and review process established by this Section. (e) The Application Period and Scoring and Review of Applications. (1) The initial application period shall commence on the effective date of this Ordinance and shall close 30 days after the effective date of this Ordinance. Subsequent application periods shall commence upon certification by the County that additional Certificates of Approval are available and shall close 30 days after such certification. Such certification will be posted in a conspicuous location on a website to be established by the County. (2) The County shall score and review each application pursuant to the criteria, and 100 point scale, detailed below. The County and Applicants may discuss their application at any time during the application process. a. Previous retail dispensing experience in a regulated market in any state: 20 points i. Number of different retail dispensaries operated. ii. Total square footage of retail dispensaries operated. iii. Number of years of operating retail dispensaries. iv. Number of retail dispensary employees managed. v. Gross sales of Cannabis and Cannabis Derivative Products. vi. Number of different Cannabis strains and Derivative Products sold. vii. Retail dispensing licenses held in different states. viii. Previous infractions resulting in the revocation of any Cannabis license. ix. Experience with maintaining chain of custody and tracking mechanisms. 6 b. Quality of Derivative Product offerings: 20 points i. Length of time Derivative Products you intend to dispense have been available in regulated markets. ii. Gross sales number of units of these Derivative Products previously sold in regulated markets. iii. Gross revenue derived from previous sales of these Derivative Products in regulated markets. c. Technical Ability: 10 points i. Review of standard operating procedures, operating manuals, policies,training modules, and procedures. ii. Training process. iii. Online ordering system. iv. Procedures for expediting ordering and/or providing for medically disadvantaged. v. Operational ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) System. vi. Retail delivery system. vii. Point-of-sale systems and solutions. d. Qualifications of Security Team: 15 points i. Years of security experience with Cannabis dispensaries in a regulated Cannabis market. ii. Integration of security procedures and training into your vertically integrated operations. iii. All owners, Investors, and managers have successfully passed a Level 2 background check and have not been convicted of any felonies involving fraud, false representation, or distribution of Cannabis. e. Qualifications of Medical Director: 25 points i. Experience with epileptic patients; ii. Experience with cancer patients; iii. Experience with patients with severe seizures or muscle spasms; iv. Experience with terminal patients; v. Knowledge of the use of medical Cannabis for treatment of cancer or physical medical conditions that chronically produce symptoms of seizures or severe and persistent muscle spasms; vi. Knowledge of good manufacturing practices; vii. Knowledge of analytical and organic chemistry; viii. Knowledge of analytical laboratory methods; ix. Knowledge of analytical laboratory quality control, including maintaining a chain of custody; x. Knowledge of, and experience with,medical Cannabis CBD/low- THC extraction techniques; xi. Knowledge of medical Cannabis,including CBD/low-THC routes of administration; 7 xii. Experience in or knowledge of clinical trials or observational studies; xiii. Knowledge of, and experience with,producing CBD/low-THC products; xiv. Experience with or knowledge of botanical medicines; xv. Experience with dispensing medications. f. Awards: 10 points i. Any awards,recognitions, or certifications received for expertise in Cannabis related businesses. (3) Prior to scoring applications the County shall review applications for compliance with this Section, the Compassionate Use Act, or any other applicable law, and shall reject any application which does not meet such requirement. Rejected applications shall not be scored. The County shall also disqualify any application that contains any false or misleading information. (4) Within 30 days after the County's identified deadline for filing applications,the Applicants shall then be ranked from highest to lowest,with Certificates of Approval issued to the highest scoring Applicant, and proceeding to the next highest scored Applicant until all Certificates of Approval authorized pursuant to this Section have been awarded. (5) Challenges to the County's award decision shall be filed with the County Administrator within ten days of the decision being challenged. The County Administrator shall review the challenge and issue a decision dismissing such challenge or affirming such challenge. Challenges to the County Administrator's decision dismissing or affirming such challenge shall be via a request for administrative hearing pursuant to Florida's Administrative Procedures Act, and must be filed within ten days of issuance of the decision being challenged. Petitions meeting the requirements of Florida's Administrative Procedures Act shall be referred to the Division of Administrative Hearings for a formal hearing, and issuance of a recommended order to the County. Within 15 days of issuance of a recommended order,the County will issue a final order. (f) Issuance of Certificate of Approval. (1) Upon expiration of the challenge deadlines if no challenge is filed, or upon issuance of a final order if a challenge is filed, the County shall issue Certificates of Approval as provided for in this Section. (2) A Certificate of Approval issued pursuant to this Section does not eliminate the need for the Operator to obtain other required permits or licenses related to the operation of the Cannabis Dispensing Business including,without limitation, any development approvals or building permits required by this Code. 8 (3) Amendment of a Certificate of Approval or Premises Authorization, as defined below, solely to change the location of a Cannabis Dispensing Business shall not be denied so long as all other conditions for the issuance of a Certificate of Approval have been met and the new location complies with all premises requirements set forth in this Section and all applicable zoning requirements. (4) A Certificate of Approval or Premises Authorization may be transferred only to an entity which has been approved by the State of Florida,Department of Health, Office of Compassionate Use(or any successor agency of the State of Florida) to operate a Cannabis Dispensing Business pursuant to the Compassionate Use Act or any other relevant law, and who meets all other requirements of this Section. (g) Persons or Entities prohibited as Operators. No Certificate of Approval shall be issued to, held by, or renewed by any Applicant or Operator who fails to comply with the following Mandatory Requirements: (1) Maintain approval as a dispensing organization by the State of Florida, Department of Health, Office of Compassionate Use pursuant to the Compassionate Use Act, or any other applicable law. (2) Ensure no owner, Investor, or manager of the Applicant or Operator has been found guilty of,regardless of adjudication, or entered a plea of nolo contendere or guilty to, or has been adjudicated delinquent, and the record has not been sealed or expunged for, any crime enumerated in section 435.04(2), Florida Statutes, or any felony involving false representations or false statements, fraud, or money laundering. (h) Confidential, Proprietary, Copyrighted, or Trade Secret Material (1) If an Applicant considers any portion of the documents, data or records submitted with its application to be confidential,proprietary, trade secret or otherwise not subject to disclosure pursuant to chapter 119, Florida Statutes,the Florida Constitution or other authority, the Applicant must mark the document as "Confidential" and simultaneously provide the County a separate redacted copy of its application and briefly describe in writing the grounds for claiming exemption from the public records law, including the specific statutory citation for such exemption. This redacted copy shall contain the name of the Applicant on the cover, and shall be clearly titled"Redacted Copy." The Redacted Copy should only redact those portions of material that the Applicant claims are confidential, proprietary,trade secret or otherwise not subject to disclosure. (2) If a request for public records pursuant to chapter 119,Florida Statutes,the Florida Constitution or other authority, is filed,to which documents that are marked as confidential are responsive, the County will provide the Redacted Copy to the requestor. If a requestor asserts a right to the Confidential Information,the 9 County will notify the Applicant such an assertion has been made. It is the Applicant's responsibility to assert that the information in question is exempt from disclosure under chapter 119 or other applicable law. If the County becomes subject to a demand for discovery or disclosure of the Confidential Information of the Applicant in a legal proceeding,the County shall give the Applicant prompt notice of the demand prior to releasing the information(unless otherwise prohibited by applicable law). The Applicant shall be responsible for defending its determination that the redacted portions of its response are confidential, proprietary, trade secret, or otherwise not subject to disclosure. (3) If Applicant fails to submit a redacted copy of information it claims is confidential, the County is authorized to produce the entire documents, data, or records submitted to the County in answer to a public records request for these records. (i) Numerical limit on Cannabis Dispensing Businesses. (1) The maximum number of Certificates of Approval in the Jurisdiction shall not exceed one for every 67,600 residents, as certified in the most recent census or periodic demographic studies conducted by the University of Florida. However, if a census or periodic demographic studies conducted by the University of Florida indicates a resident count of at least 50% of that required for issuance of a new Certificate of Authority, a new Certificate of Approval shall be authorized. For example: Residents Indicated Certificates of Authority Authorized 0 - 101,399 1 101,400— 169,000 2 169,001 —236,599 3 236,600—304,199 4 304,200—371,799 5 (2) A dispensing organization may hold more than one Certificate of Approval,but may not hold all available Certificates of Approval issued by the County if more than one is available. (3) In order to ensure that the population of the Jurisdiction has access to the best qualified dispensing organizations,while likewise maintaining competition in the Cannabis Dispensing industry within the Jurisdiction,when multiple Certificates of Approval are available Applicants shall be entitled to receive,upon request,up to the number of Certificates of Approval set forth in the below table, and shall identify in their application the number of Certificates of Approval that they are requesting: Number of First Ranked Second Ranked Third Ranked Fourth Ranked 10 Certificates Available Applicant Applicant Applicant Applicant 1 1 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 3 2 1 0 0 4 2 1 1 0 5 3 1 1 0 6 3 2 1 0 7 4 2 1 0 8 4 2 1 1 9 5 2 1 1 10 5 2 2 1 11 6 2 2 1 12 6 3 2 1 13 7 3 2 1 14 7 4 2 1 15 8 4 2 1 16 8 4 2 2 17 9 4 2 2 18 9 4 3 2 19 10 4 3 2 20 10 5 3 2 If any Certificates of Approval remain available following the distribution of requested Certificates of Approval to Applicants in accordance with the above table, one Certificate of Approval shall be offered to each remaining eligible applicant, in declining order of rank,until all Certificates of Approval have been distributed. If, following the completion of such process, Certificates of Approval still remain available, one additional Certificate of Approval shall be offered to each Applicant, in declining order of rank, until all Certificates of Approval have been distributed. (4) If additional Certificates of Approval are made available, the County shall provide notice of a new application process conducted pursuant to this Section. (5) Each Certificate of Approval authorizes the holder to operate a single licensed premise pursuant to an approved Premises Authorization. (j) Premises Authorization. After obtaining a Certificate of Approval, and prior to Dispensing Cannabis, an Operator shall select a location from which such Dispensing will occur, and provide notice to the County of the Dispensing location and request issuance of Premises Authorization for such location. Such request shall be provided a minimum of 10 days prior to the Dispensing of any Cannabis from the location, and shall identify the Certificate of Approval at issue, and the location from which Dispensing will occur. 11 (k) Zoning Requirements (1) Cannabis dispensaries shall be a permitted use consistent with the requirements of this Section in the CL, CH, CR and ID zoning districts as established by the Official Zoning Map of Sumter County. (2) No Cannabis Dispensing Business shall be located within 1000 feet of any public or private elementary,middle, or secondary school or house of worship. However, a Cannabis Dispensing Business does not violate this subsection and may not be forced to relocate if it meets the requirements of this section and a school or house of worship is subsequently established within 1000 feet of the business. (3) For purposes of this Section, measurements shall be made from the nearest property line of the school or house of worship to the nearest property line of the Cannabis Dispensing Business. If the Cannabis Dispensing Business is located in a multi-tenant building,the distance shall be measured from the nearest property line of the school or house of worship to the nearest line of the leasehold or other space actually controlled or occupied by the Cannabis Dispensing Business. The Cannabis Dispensing Business shall ensure security for Cannabis activities complies with state requirements. (1) Inspection of approved premises and issuance of Premises Authorization. (1) During business hours and other times of apparent activity, all approved premises shall be subject to inspection by the Fire Chief, the Building Official, County Sheriff, or the authorized representative of any of them, for the purpose of investigating and determining compliance with the provisions of this Section and any other applicable state or local law or regulation. Such inspection may include, but need not be limited to, the inspection of books, records, and inventory. Where any part of the premises consists of a locked area, such area shall be made available for inspection, without delay,upon reasonable request. The frequency of such inspections shall not be unreasonable and shall be conducted in a manner to ensure the operation of the premises is not inhibited. (2) Cannabis may not be dispensed pursuant to a Certificate of Approval until the County has caused the proposed premises to be inspected to determine compliance of the premises with any applicable requirements of this Section and Code, and has issued Premises Authorization. (3) The County shall,within 10 days of receipt of a request for Premises Authorization, and after inspection of the premises to be utilized, notify the Certificate holder that it may begin Dispensing Cannabis at that premises and issue a Premises Authorization to the Certificate holder, or provide to the Operator written notice detailing the reasons the selected location does not comply with this Section. Each Premises Authorization issued by the County 12 pursuant to this Section shall specify the Certificate of Approval pursuant to which it is issued, all information set forth on the Certificate of Approval, and the physical location of the premises approved, once such approval is received. (m) Requirements related to the premises. Cannabis Dispensing Businesses shall be subject to the following additional requirements: (1) All Cannabis or Cannabis Derivative products ready for sale shall be in a sealed or locked container or cabinet except when being accessed for distribution. (2) Only individuals authorized pursuant to Florida law may dispense Cannabis, and such Cannabis may only be dispensed to persons authorized pursuant to Florida law to receive Cannabis. (3) No Cannabis shall be dispensed outside of the hours permitted by Florida law. However, Cannabis Dispensing Businesses may conduct administrative or delivery functions, including making deliveries of Cannabis or Derivative Products to the residence or business of an authorized individual, or to a health care facility, as permitted by other relevant ordinances and state law. (4) No unaccompanied minor may be dispensed Cannabis unless otherwise authorized under state law. (5) The Cannabis Dispensing Business shall employ reasonable measures and means to eliminate odors emanating from dispensing and shall properly dispose of controlled substances in a safe, sanitary and secure manner and in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. (6) After issuance of a Premises Authorization, an Operator shall not make a physical change, alteration or modification of the premises that would not comply with this Section. (n) Nonrenewal, suspension or revocation of Certificate of Approval. The County may suspend,revoke, or refuse to renew a Certificate of Approval for any of the following reasons, after notice and opportunity to cure is given: (1) The Applicant or Operator, or his or her agent, manager, or employee,have violated, do not meet, or have failed to comply with, any of the terms, Mandatory Requirements as specified in this Section, conditions, or provisions of this Section or with any applicable state law or regulation, only if such failure materially impacts the accessibility, availability, or safety of the Cannabis or Derivative Product. 13 (2) The County shall provide notice of any of the above deficiencies accompanied by a 30 calendar day period in which to cure such deficiencies. Within 30 days of receipt of notice a notice of deficiencies, the Operator shall submit to the County a plan to correct such deficiencies. The Operator must execute the plan within 30 days of the date the plan was submitted to the County. If a plan is not timely submitted, or the plan is not timely executed, the County may take appropriate action. If any deficiencies are incapable of being cured, the County shall direct the Operator to take reasonable steps to ensure the deficiency is mitigated and does not pose a material threat to the public health, safety, or welfare. Compliance with such mitigation requirements shall constitute a cure of such deficiencies. (3) A Certificate of Approval shall be revoked and be available for issuance subject to the process outlined in this Section if Dispensing fails to occur within thirty-six months after the Certificate has been issued, except that the County may grant an extension of this requirement upon good cause shown. (4) Notwithstanding the foregoing, upon a finding by the County, for good cause shown, that the continued operation of the business presents an imminent and immediate grave threat to the public health or safety,the County may issue an emergency order directing the Operator to temporarily cease sales at that location pending resolution of the deficiency. (o) No County liability; indemnification; no defense. (1) By accepting a Certificate of Approval and Premises Authorization issued pursuant to this Section,the Operator waives any claim concerning, and releases the County, its officers, elected officials, employees, attorneys and agents from, any liability for injuries or damages of any kind that result from any arrest or prosecution of business owners, Operators, employees, clients, or customers of the Operator for a violation of state or federal laws, rules, or regulations. (2) By accepting a Certificate of Approval and Premises Authorization issued pursuant to this Section, all Operators,jointly and severally if more than one, agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the County, its officers, elected officials, employees, attorneys, agents, insurers and self-insurance pool against all liability, claims, and demands on account of any injury, loss, or damage, including without limitation claims arising from bodily injury,personal injury, sickness, disease, death, property loss or damage, or any other loss of any kind whatsoever arising out of or in any manner connected with the operation of the Cannabis Dispensing Business that is the subject of the Certificate of Approval and Premises Authorization. (3) The issuance of a Certificate of Approval and Premises Authorization pursuant to this Section shall not be deemed to create an exception, defense, or immunity for any person in regard to any potential criminal liability the person may have under 14 state or federal law for the cultivation,possession, sale, distribution, or use of Cannabis. SECTION 4. CODIFICATION. It is the intention of the Sumter County Board of County Commissioners, and it is hereby ordained that the provisions of this ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of Ordinances of the Sumter County, Florida, with the exception of Sections 2, 4, 5 and 6. The word "Ordinance," or similar words may be changed to "section," "article," or other appropriate word or phrase and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered to accomplish such intention. The Code codifier is granted liberal authority to rescind those sections of the Code declared null and void as set forth herein, within Chapter 13 of the Land Development Code. SECTION 5. CONFLICTS AND REPEALER. This Ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of the Ordinances of Sumter County, Florida, except where the provisions of this Ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions of such Ordinances, in which event all Ordinances or parts thereof in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. SECTION 6. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance, or application hereof, is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion or application shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. SECTION 7. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its adoption by the Sumter County Board of County Commissioners. 15 f PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE SUMTER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, SUMTER COUNTY, FLORIDA, THIS 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2017. SUMTER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS z DOUG GILPIN,CHAIRMAN • `�� EST: l BY: CAROLINE AL RESTIMAWI,DEPUTY CLERK 16 GoodnerAngela Subject: Phone call with Brent Batten - medical marijuana moratorium,term limits Start: Fri 2/10/2017 2:00 PM End: Fri 2/10/2017 2:30 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: SolisAndrew 1 GoodnerAngela From: William Tolp <williamtolp69@comcast.net> Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2017 11:51 AM To: SolisAndrew Subject: MMJ Moratorium Vote Attachments: robtolp_1459698146_85 jpg; ATT00001.htm; sig;ATT00002.htm Dear Commissioner Solis, I am writing regarding the vote this coming Tuesday regarding the proposed 6 moth moratorium on medical marijuana dispensaries. I would like for you to stand against the moratorium. The people of Collier County spoke clearly when over 64% of the voters from all political parties and independents stated their desire for more liberty with regard to this issue. It is my opinion that any resistance by local or State Representatives will be viewed by the public as direct resistance to the will of the people. Beyond the former point, it makes no economic sense to propose any kind of moratorium on dispensaries. There is a reason why there is a Walgreens or a CVS on a corner every several blocks. That reason is accessibility. Since medical marijuana is for people with serious medical conditions, then their ease of access should be as easy as it is for me to get a bottle of Musinex when I have a severe cold. Not to mention, but limiting the number of dispensaries, i.e. supply, it will necessarily drive the prices of the product up, which would be completely contradictory to wanting to help people who are suffering. This would be the opposite of compassion. I would greatly appreciate it if you would vote against the moratorium. Thank you very much for considering my thoughts on this matter. Sincerely, Rob Tolp 1 Page 1 of 1 Dear Commissioner, I am writing regarding the vote this coming Tuesday regarding the proposed 6 month moratorium on medical marijuana dispensaries. I would like for you to stand against the moratorium. The people of Collier County spoke clearly when over 64% of the voters from all political parties and independents stated their desire for more liberty with regard to this issue. It is my opinion that any resistance by local or State Representatives will be viewed by the public as direct resistance to the will of the people. Beyond the former point, it makes no economic sense to propose any kind of moratorium on dispensaries. There is a reason why there is a Walgreens or a CVS on a corner every several blocks. That reason is accessibility. Since medical marijuana is for people with serious medical conditions, then their ease of access should be as easy as it is for me to get a bottle of Musinex when I have a severe cold. Not to mention, but limiting the number of dispensaries, i.e. supply, it will necessarily drive the prices of the product up, which would be completely contradictory to wanting to help people who are suffering. This would be the opposite of compassion. I would greatly appreciate it if you would vote against the moratorium. Thank you very much for considering my thoughts on this matter. Marne Gleason, Collier resident http://bccvault01.bcc.colliergov.net/EnterpriseVault/search/ContentView.as... 3/12/2018 Page 1 of 1 Mr. Solis, I live in your district, in Sterling Oaks as a full time resident. I currently have no need for medical marijuana but if and when I do I would like to think access to it would be no more difficult than any other prescribed drug. I am perplexed about the dilemma the commission seems to be having on this issue.The electorate spoke very clearly on this subject with over 70%voting in favor of the amendment. The"black market"concern expressed by some of the commissioners is no more valid than any other pharmacy that dispenses opioids or other controlled substances. Please support the option to allow dispensaries in any area zoned for pharmacy. Thanks, Roger Harper 239-300-1954 rogernharper@gmail.com The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential and may contain privileged information and material. Any review or use of the information contained in this email message by persons other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please notify me immediately by e-mail to rogernharper@gmail.com and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. http://bccvault01.bcc.colliergov.net/EnterpriseVault/search/ContentView.as... 3/12/2018 Page 1 of 1 Dear Commissioners, I am writing you today to urge you to heed the wishes of the 64.3%of Collier County voters who voted Yes on Amendment 2 last year.Please let the patients in our county have safe access to a medicine that gives them the relief they desperately need.Florida(and Collier County)voted for this Amendment because these patients are our neighbors,our friends and our family members.They are our children with epilepsy,whose little bodies are overcome with seizures. They are our elderly who suffer from cancer and glaucoma.They are our veterans who with are afflicted with Post- traumatic stress disorder.They are our friends and neighbors with Crohn's disease,Parkinson's disease or Multiple sclerosis that struggle in excruciating pain just to get through each day. They are the sick and the weak among us.These are our citizens who are crying out for help.The people heard their pleas and voted to change our constitution to allow our friends and family to have access to this medicine.We've stood together across political divides and party lines because this issue transcends age,race and creed.Please stand with us now and vote unanimously to publicly vet a Land Development Code Amendment that will permit medical marijuana dispensaries in the same zoning districts as pharmacies.There are counties all over the country that have been able to achieve this safely and successfully and we can do it here in Collier County. I beg you to think of our citizens that are suffering and not close your hearts to them.This is one the most important decisions you will make as commissioners and I beg you to chose compassion over bureaucracy. Thank you for your time&consideration. Sincerely, Donna Bailey Wolf,MSN,RN http://bccvault01.bcc.colliergov.net/EnterpriseVault/search/ContentView.as... 3/12/2018 Page 1 of I Hello,I am a resident of Collier County and I wanted to ask you to please find other forms of funding rather than increasing property taxes.Our county already gets 70%of its revenue from property taxes despite the state average being 50%.Increasing property taxes would hinder our economic development and create a barrier to homeownership. Thank you, • http://bccvault01.bcc.colliergov.net/EnterpriseVault/search/ContentView.as... 3/12/2018 Page 1 of 1 Hello representatives, I am a collier county resident emailing to let you know that my family supports allowing medical marijuana shops in Collier County. Thanks for your consideration. Manzie Lawfer http://bccvault01.bcc.colliergov.net/EnterpriseVault/search/ContentV iew.as... 3/12/2018 GoodnerAngela From: Cindy Grossman <clgrossman2012@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 11:54 AM To: SolisAndrew Subject: Town Hall and Marijuana Follow Up Flag: Follow Up Flag Status: Flagged I was unable to attend your Town Hall due to medical issues. Is there a way that I can find out what happened? I'm very interested in our community. Also, I sent an email to your assistant recently as, at the time, I only saw her email address and not yours.The subject was medical marijuana. I am 60 years old and I've been in acute chronic pain for 8 years, and recently have been getting much worse. I barely go out anymore, and my home gets dirtier and more disorganized by the week. Commonly used Rx's have not helped me, nor have various procedures. I feel that the next step, and only remaining hope, is marijuana. I'm far too ill to travel across the state for it, and was hoping that you would not vote to delay implementation of the will of the people. The moratorium of a full year is simply excessive. At least Bonita's is 6 months. The Commissioners clearly are not familiar with people who truly suffer and have legitimate need. This is not about getting high. In fact, my 88 year old mother in Connecticut just got a license for medical marijuana due to her acute chronic pain. Neither of us have ever done drugs, or even have used alcohol more than for a social drink. I invite you to visit me, so you can see how I'm forced to live due to my acute chronic pain and accompanying acute chronic fatigue. I live at Lakeside, near the Library HQ, so it would be very convenient for you. I'm here almost all the time -- except for doctors appointments and occasional unavoidable errands. Thank you. Cindy Grossman 239 325 9625 Page 1 of 1 Commissioner, On February 21, when you appeared at the Pine Ridge Comminity Association annual meeting, I spoke with you directly regarding this moratorium, as I had been out of town for the BCC meeting of February 14, and the minutes had not yet been posted online. At that time you informed me that a 6 MONTH moratorium had passed, only to give the commission time to determine appropriate zoning. I have since discovered that the BCC extended the moratorium to ONE YEAR on February 14. Were you deliberately attempting to mislead me? Is the BCC and the county so ineffective that they cannot determine zoning issues in the almost 4 months since the voters overwhelmingly chose to allow medical marijuana dispensaries? Why is a one year moratorium so necessary? I would appreciate your response before the February 28 BCC meeting, because I will attend and make your falsehood public if necessary. Thank you. Joan Ginsberg 7096 Trail Blvd. Naples, FL 34108 239-596-7795 Joan E.Ginsberg 248-761-4403 Linkedln TwitterlFacebook Google+ http://bccvault01.bcc.colliergov.net/EnterpriseV cult/search/ContentV iew.as... 3/12/2018 GoodnerAngela From: Erik Kirk <erik@poolemckinley.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 3:27 PM To: Keith Bell; FialaDonna; SolisAndrew; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Cc: Emily Lee Subject: RE: Medical Marijuana Regulation- Collier County Thank You Commissioners for your time and openness to discuss this sensitive issue with us. We look forward to continuing our work with you and your team in Collier. Please let us know if we can answer any additional questions or if we can provide any documentation to you,your staff or any constituents. Very Truly Yours, Erik Kirk Erik H. Kirk 106 East College Avenue 11th Floor Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Telephone:(850)681-1980 Facsimile:(850)222-1698 Mobile:(850)528-4424 From: Keith Bell [mailto:kbell@clarkpartington.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 2:28 PM To: 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net'; 'andysolis@colliergov.net'; 'burtsaunders@colliergov.net; 'pennytaylor@colliergov.net'; 'billmcdaniel@colliergov.net Cc: Erik H. Kirk; Emily Lee Subject: Medical Marijuana Regulation- Collier County Dear Commissioners, I have had the opportunity to meet some of you, but not all of you. By way of a brief introduction to some and a reminder to others, I am attorney and lobbyist working on behalf of San Felasco Nurseries, one of the 7 facilities licensed to cultivate, manufacture and dispense medical marijuana in the State of Florida. Working with me on this project and copied on this email is Erik Kirk. Erik and I are following the medical marijuana issue closely and are working with a number of local governments, including Collier County, in an effort to promote safe, conservative and effective medical marijuana regulation. The model regulatory ordinance we are promoting is attached. This ordinance has been adopted in whole or in large part in Osceola, Glades and Sumter Counties and is under consideration in a number of other counties throughout the State. Also attached is the research from the Marijuana Policy Group that serves as the rationale for limiting the number of dispensaries operating in any given jurisdiction based on population. As discussed on a couple of occasions with some of you and also with your staff, we believe that this regulatory framework will ensure a structured and effective roll out of the medical marijuana industry. Further, because the structure of the ordinance is based on research gathered from the roll out of the medical marijuana industry in other states, it anticipates and acts as a counter-measure to a variety of potential issues that an unregulated medical marijuana market creates. We are aware that Collier County has passed a moratorium but we also understand that the moratorium is a temporary measure and that eventually, the issue will have to be substantively addressed. When that time comes, we hope to be a resource that you use in determining the direction the county will take. Should any of you ever have any questions about the matter, please do not hesitate to call. In the meantime, I am also attaching for your review a current comparison of the various bills that have been filed relative to medical marijuana that was prepared by the Florida Association of Counties, which you may find useful. Of note is the fact that regardless of which bill or combination of bills passes, the ultimate decision you are faced with now- how to regulate the location and number of medical marijuana dispensaries in your jurisdiction-will remain your decision. Regards, rep KEITH L. BELL, JR. Shareholder 106 E. College Ave., Ste. 600 Tallahassee, Florida 32301 o (850) 320.6838 C (850) 261.0932 F (850) 597.7591 arkpa r ton.com j kbell@clarkoartinaton.com I CLARK PARTINGTON 2 GoodnerAngela From: Keith Bell <kbell@clarkpartington.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 2:28 PM To: FialaDonna; SolisAndrew; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Cc: Erik Kirk; Emily Lee Subject: Medical Marijuana Regulation- Collier County Attachments: Medical Cannabis Ordinance - up to date.docx; Dispensary Allocation Numbers.pdf; MMJ Side-by-Side.pdf Dear Commissioners, I have had the opportunity to meet some of you, but not all of you. By way of a brief introduction to some and a reminder to others, I am attorney and lobbyist working on behalf of San Felasco Nurseries, one of the 7 facilities licensed to cultivate, manufacture and dispense medical marijuana in the State of Florida. Working with me on this project and copied on this email is Erik Kirk. Erik and I are following the medical marijuana issue closely and are working with a number of local governments, including Collier County, in an effort to promote safe, conservative and effective medical marijuana regulation. The model regulatory ordinance we are promoting is attached. This ordinance has been adopted in whole or in large part in Osceola, Glades and Sumter Counties and is under consideration in a number of other counties throughout the State. Also attached is the research from the Marijuana Policy Group that serves as the rationale for limiting the number of dispensaries operating in any given jurisdiction based on population. As discussed on a couple of occasions with some of you and also with your staff, we believe that this regulatory framework will ensure a structured and effective roll out of the medical marijuana industry. Further, because the structure of the ordinance is based on research gathered from the roll out of the medical marijuana industry in other states, it anticipates and acts as a counter-measure to a variety of potential issues that an unregulated medical marijuana market creates. We are aware that Collier County has passed a moratorium but we also understand that the moratorium is a temporary measure and that eventually, the issue will have to be substantively addressed. When that time comes, we hope to be a resource that you use in determining the direction the county will take. Should any of you ever have any questions about the matter, please do not hesitate to call. In the meantime, I am also attaching for your review a current comparison of the various bills that have been filed relative to medical marijuana that was prepared by the Florida Association of Counties,which you may find useful. Of note is the fact that regardless of which bill or combination of bills passes, the ultimate decision you are faced with now- how to regulate the location and number of medical marijuana dispensaries in your jurisdiction-will remain your decision. Regards, CKEITH L. BELL, JR. Shareholder 106 E. College Ave., Ste. 600 Tallahassee, Florida 32301 O (850) 320.6838 C (850) 261.0932 F (850) 597.7591 clarkpartington.com I kbell@clarkpartington.com CLARK PARTINGTON 2 c Coi o CO a) CO a Co > () a) 0 E 0 a) E C v - C 0 =• 0 O O a)0 ° c ui C ° — L > o o ns us w o � 0E0 � 0 (QE C CIS CO D Oin C S T 7 C O� C C C— a) C 0 0 � 4= C 0) 0) a) � a) _0a) a) o .So = C U m -a O aa) E in ° a) c_c -_C Co (i o c ° O •- o c •c c :L = o ct E ' ° o Cl) 0- 0 }' a) ° a) o 0) 8 .0 m c o-) as E .o 0rt3 u) U Cl) N Q-a a)0 O (C6 ° C a`> 0) Cr) N U ° CO 0 — E Co ° LO L � (n cn cn J U O CO L ° a) o Co 0 L u) "- U Cl) >ccs _+ 0 C Q O Ln O > Co • a) O r v) "a :1= C L a) O O U - a) C E Co C 0 m •C Q a) C .E � Q co U) U a) a) o a) a) O 0 C V -a i-c a) 0 L as c Co V)as J o O N o- i_ (I) ' L = a2) ° a) O a) w a) 0 O a) v CO a) L o O a) c a) L al LO .-. Co 0 a) O_ I— _c co = 0 O CO C C . • C N O 0 Co .0 (0 O CO �, ° (6 °c 'C O O -C >, t- >+ 0 "a C t- a) 0 M c O ""' 0 Q ..-' 03 2 _ (n m E (n o 0 O 0 co .0 O -a R) U a) co a C 0 E •5 C -,.7. > C a) 't — :L .a 3 E a) o co 0 � 0 m o m 0 0 � C 0 > asia a) d J U O (6 Q J O Q O a ..� (>6 E Q. • L Co N a) C C E ca >, C c 0) O O a) -.E, O � a0 .� 0 U 0 C (n Co Q ..2 a) co Co N 6 _ C 0 (6 0 a) UO (6 E 0 0 E = o. 0 — C O U N a m Q F (n c >+ U a N L L Q �� 0 a) CO c 0(13 0 ° ' 0 O (6 ° ° "a a) _C a- CD 0 C C C N C CL cn J O co C O — - F ° (a _o L O Co a) le 'E. O a) 0 a) -0 -a u) O a) 'a -a . N a (6C 0 0 (6 C 0 L N L c 4- - m O - uuN •N Ifl> _ 0 (a (o U CN Co 0 C O 4- 0 a) : U 0 0 COaN to U 0 (�6 (C6 0 Q O T • L C E CO 0 U . .Q a) « - O co o � 0 pp 0 a) 12 2CE a) - Ea> Q � OD • O• _0 E O U) a-a) O (B a a) O a`) O-a) 0 (0 a 0 o (B 0 3- U) Co w 0 Co . 0 0) 0 U) Co 4- 0 Co J N 0 00 cf) CZ C X -a o a) a 0 0) C137 as0 a) L C Q V a) U -c) Co C .0 -a 00co O (B E co as 0 > 5 m -p a C C 7 O O C 0 C L 0) 0 RS • U Q (0 CO Q O c c! .� E L O C V) C m 0 O C V 73 E &CO 0) U C a) CL J U CO Q 0 L. C 'C Cl -0 L C -(B 0 C 0) C a) 0E E U Q (7 .1.,' .4=, C C a) 0 C .c O) U co 0 u) O (B C u) N F- 0)H C H ami ;> o0 m 0 c I— c) u`)i � - - c cBU - 2 o � 2 Od Uad Q -a ° = 0 a D 2D C D u) J (B J U Cl) O (/) as (/) -a Q LL • • • a = 6 2 / _ Q ° ° _ % _ \ \ - / [ � ( / ƒ / a) \ k0 C as ) \ / = of & = om 2 \ 0 # / / -/ I o � co e o m a E . ± 2 ) C O - ) § % co - a) IEsa= ƒ > ES0 = \ \ ± Z 0 I Oo .co \ / / k ) % \ £ \ $ C / a \ % .- 2 = = « _ u) '5 _ » (/) Ca) 3 % .@ a) a) e o m = f § \ % § \ ) \ /\ \ % \ w -- o o e C e .- - e o ® _ a = = $ / fe 1 Es- m S % / = n / .\ f O 0 —0 » u = o2 £ = s Z oo � .En Z / a \ 0 (I) c -o - a. 0 ] @e / \ 0 0) = - ge 0 a) a) E .9 •-» ) E E / ƒ c \ @ f 5 O o # r 2 f Z Z O o # .g as Z „6: a \ \ • � — C -0 - - � 00C9 a)' \ \ U) = — ge 0 E a) •- a)2E\ > m m TD w 5 5 0 \ / m -o5 Z Z OoU .En Z @ » m © = 2 \ E H e2 \ $ / - % = 2 / \ a) £ - _ » _ = P ® .= E2 Goo b ° SSS ° = q / � E U) a)C 2 & 2 S �\ -0 � 2 E .2 \ \ \ § ) \ .9 / \ 0C \ G S7 - \\ 4. d # = cam » a= a = 33 ® m 0 oa) a » = 2 \ OCo > k2622 / / SEE 0E \ $ $ \ CD EQ as e $ ± Q ", ._ E R § _ > E r 0 , E o / E \ \ \ \ £ &# �.g22S3a mPa@ = f \ & & m / a 2 0 2 � - E -0 - o_ 00C ± 0 \ r = — pe 0 a) a) g 2t\ @ / n Iac / @ m f 5 0 \ R 2 f Z z O o -V) •E n Z 0 Em _/ » / k % % 7 U a) - 0 _ m CO E w a 0 0 ± _ o \» a) 0 0 0 .o \ 0 a / 2c x / co MPG POLICY Market Intelligence I Policy Design License Allocations—Florida.v5 Municipal Dispensary License Allocation: Florida' Economic and Social Considerations Synopsys:This report describes the benefits and costs that should be considered by Florida's city and county planners as they prepare their cannabis dispensary licensing rules. As cannabis policy and planning experts,the Marijuana Policy Group makes the following recommendations: • Phased Approach: Based upon past experience, municipalities should use an incremental approach to issuing dispensary licenses.This mitigates the cost of early-stage errors in license criteria and processing. In general, it is easier for authorities to issue additional licenses over time, than to revoke licenses from previously issued licensees. • Optimal Number of Dispensaries: The optimal number of dispensaries depends upon the number of patients likely to register,the local area population, and the required scale of operation for dispensaries to remain profitable. The average resident ratio among similar states (with laws similar to Amendment 2) is one dispensary per 67,222 residents (1:67,222). This ratio is found to be"optimal" by the MPG for cities and counties in Florida. • Risks of Unprofitable Dispensaries: Unlike conventional business, cannabis business failure creates risks because the product is still prohibited by federal law. Small and struggling cannabis entities are more likely to sell (or"divert") into illegal markets(e.g., minors and out-of-state smuggling). For example, struggling entities can utilize their license to legally cultivate or purchase cannabis, and then re-sell to illegal markets, if they cannot survive in Florida's legal market. • The Minimum Effective Scale Ratio: As a second rational approach to setting standards for dispensary numbers, it is helpful to note that the minimum effective scale for a dispensary is approximately 600 patients. Under Amendment 2,the minimum population-to-patient ratio in Florida should be no more than one dispensary for each fifty-thousand residents (1:50,000)with the optimal ratio at 1:67,222. • The Failure Rate:The percentage of companies expected to become unprofitable in the regulated market is 61% if the allocation ratio is 1:30,000. Expected failures decline to 32% if the ratio is 1:50,000, and to only 13% if the ratio is 1:67,222. 1 The Marijuana Policy Group(MPG) is a Denver-based economics and policy consulting firm dedicated to cannabis economics and policy. This memo provides a quantitative assessment of the benefits and challenges related to cannabis dispensary permitting and licensing. The MPG is nationally recognized for its role in shaping the Colorado regulated cannabis market.Since 2014,the MPG has served as the lead cannabis economist for the State of Colorado, providing detailed market and economic analysis that informs state legislators and policymakers. MPG experts have also advised private sector clients for location, investment,and operations—this experience helps the MPG to bring private-sector understanding into the public-policy forum in an articulate manner. The MPG now operates in 13 states and two foreign countries. Note:Results and findings are solely based upon MPG research. Quotations or citations of the report findings must include"The Marijuana Policy Group"as the original owner of this intellectual property. 1 F' 1 FG POLICY Market Intelligence I Policy Design License Allocations—Florida.v5 • Upper-Bound Sales: The MPG finds no evidence to indicate an upper-boundary on the ability of dispensaries to service or supply customers. Single storefronts in Washington State,for example, were serving as many as 6,000 patrons in July 2016. It is therefore unlikely that a dispensary would experience "too many" patients to service. • Cole Memo Compliance: Florida regulators should respect the priorities stated in the United States Department of Justice's 2013 Cole Memorandum. This memorandum outlines the position of the federal government, and the conditions under which federal authorities will allow state-level rule on cannabis possession. Two of the eight priorities in the Cole Memorandum are to mitigate diversion to minors, and mitigate diversion out of the state. Proper allocation of licenses should be designed to ensure that licensees will remain compliant with state laws, and with federal guidelines. • Inexperienced Operators: Due to increased risks associated with dispensary failures, regulators should prioritize license applicants who have demonstrated the ability to operate a successful cannabis business in the past. Contents Municipal Dispensary License Allocation: Florida 1 Background 3 State-Level Licensing and Restrictiveness 3 Florida State Estimated Capture Rates 5 Dispensary License Allocations 5 Dispensary Economics—Minimum Effective Scale 8 Dispensary Failure Rates Under Three Scenarios 10 Regulatory Risks from Failing Dispensaries 10 Summary 11 Note:Results and findings are solely based upon MPG research. Quotations or citations of the report findings must include"The Marijuana Policy Group"as the original owner of this intellectual property. 2 lii4I p G POLICY Market Intelligence I Policy Design License Allocations—Florida.v5 Background Florida's medical cannabis program is changing rapidly. The passage of Amendment 2 in November 2016 will increase substantially the size and scope of the program. This ballot measure represents the latest of three measures which altered the state's approach to medical cannabis. Program Evolution:2014-2016 Under the Compassionate Medical Cannabis Act, passed in 2014,the Legislature permitted low- THC/high CBD, non-smokable cannabis to be dispensed and utilized for the treatment of a handful of medical conditions. However, due to the legal restrictions, limiting access and prescriptions, and by forbidding smokable products, few patients have chosen to obtain medical cannabis through legal channels. On March 25, 2016, Florida Governor Rick Scott signed House Bill 307 into law.This law expanded access to medical cannabis, including high-THC products as an efficacious treatment for patients with terminal illnesses.The state has licensed six medical cannabis dispensing organizations,which are vertically integrated and authorized to cultivate, manufacture, and sell medical cannabis. However,the program remains nascent; as of August, 2016,the Florida Department of Health has just 87 registered cannabis patients. The passage of Amendment 2 is likely to expand significantly the number of registered patients and potential dispensaries seeking to serve such patients. State and local authorities must prepare themselves for an onslaught of medical cannabis dispensary applications. Under current law(section 381.986(8)(b), Florida Statutes), each county and municipality is authorized to implement rules and regulations for permitting of retail cannabis dispensaries.The statute specifies that such regulations should be reasonable and tailored to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. Most city or county managers have not faced such a decision, and are uncertain how many dispensaries to permit in a certain locality.This document is designed to help these authorities to understand what has been done elsewhere, and what to expect if too many or too few dispensaries are permitted in specific localities. State-Level Licensing and Restrictiveness The MPG collected state-level medical cannabis program data for 22 states where some form of medical cannabis is allowed. Each state chose a regulatory system that is influenced by local sentimentality toward cannabis. Despite the disparity among different state and county rules, most impose restrictions on medical cannabis programs through 1) Limitations on the scope of medical conditions treatable using medical cannabis and the medical prescription ("recommendation") process; and 2) Rules to limiting dispensary numbers. Restrictions on Condition Types—and the Capture Rate Certain states restrict use by limiting the types of conditions that are allowed to be treated using cannabis. Illinois,for example, has such restrictive conditions that there are only 7,000 approved medical cannabis patients, in a state with 12.8 million residents. The corresponding patient to population ratio—called the "Capture Rate"—is therefore just 5 people per 10,000, or 0.05%. Note:Results and findings are solely based upon MPG research. Quotations or citations of the report findings must include"The Marijuana Policy Group"as the original owner of this intellectual property. 3 MPG POLICY Market Intelligence I Policy Design License Allocations—Florida.v5 Most states have fewer restrictions on allowed medical conditions, and higher Capture Rates,than Illinois. Colorado, Maine, and Oregon allow most types of conditions, including"chronic pain,"to be recommended for treatment using cannabis. As a result, these states have much higher capture rates. The rate in Colorado is 1.94%, in Oregon, it is 1.83%, and in Maine it is 3.42%,the highest in the dataset. Table 1 provides a listing for selected states (22 different states where information was available), of the current patient count, compared to the resident population,to provide a capture rate for each state program. Table 1: Medical Cannabis State Populations and Eligible Patient Populations, based upon allowed medical conditions for medical cannabis. State State population Patient Current Capture (2015) numbers through Ratio Maine 1,329,328 45,520 6/16/2016 3.42% Michigan 9,922,576 203,889 6/18/2016 2.05% Colorado 5,456,574 106,066 5/31/2016 1.94% California 39,144,818 715,133 6/16/2016 1.83% Oregon 4,028,977 73,605 6/6/2016 1.83% Arizona 6,828,065 97,938 5/27/16 1.43% Rhode Island 1,056,298 14,459 6/15/2016 1.37% Montana 1,032,949 13,288 5/31/2016 1.29% New Mexico 2,085,109 24,902 6/3/2016 1.19% Hawaii 1,431,603 14,074 6/1/2016 0.98% Nevada 2,890,845 18,599 5/31/2016 0.64% D.C. 672,228 3,707 6/3/2016 0.55% Vermont 626,042 2,936 6/27/2016 0.47% Massachusetts 6,794,422 25,980 5/31/2016 0.38% Connecticut 3,590,886 10,861 6/12/2016 0.30% Delaware 945,934 1,490 6/15/2016 0.16% Alaska 738,432 1,071 5/31/2016 0.15% New Jersey 8,958,013 7,956 6/15/2016 0.09% New Hampshire 1,330,608 780 7/1/2016 0.06% Illinois 12,859,995 7,000 6/1/2016 0.05% Minnesota 5,489,594 1,486 6/10/2016 0.03% New York 19,795,791 4,688 6/9/2016 0.02% Average: 0.92% Source:MPG Calculations based upon publically-available state patient and population data. Patient data was sourced from the Marijuana Policy Project. Note:Results and findings are solely based upon MPG research. Quotations or citations of the report findings must include"The Marijuana Policy Group"as the original owner of this intellectual property. 4 NipG POLICY Market Intelligence I Policy Design License Allocations—Florida.v5 Florida State Estimated Capture Rates Under HB 307/SB 460 Although HB 307/SB 460 has added access medical cannabis for the terminally ill, it is estimated that the patient-count will remain low given the restrictions that remain. Based upon the new regulations,the MPG estimates that the state's patient Capture Rate will grow from current levels to approximately 12,000 patients. The most binding constraints to access include the low-THC requirement for several of the qualifying conditions, difficulty for doctors to legally recommend the drug, and a cumbersome/costly path to become a registered cannabis patient. In total,the MPG estimates the Capture Rate under existing legislation to be approximately six-tenths of one percent(0.06%). Under Amendment 2 Upon passage of Amendment 2,the number of eligible conditions will expand to include more prevalent indications, and the use of high-THC, smokable products would be allowed, making the Florida law similar to laws in approximately 7 other states. Using these states for guidance,the MPG constructed an estimated capture rate for Florida. The estimated capture rate for the state under Amendment 2 is 1.21%.The results are shown below, in Table 2. Table 2:Florida-Specific Patient Population-Based upon MPG Estimated Capture Rates Florida Estimated Patient Population Sample Average 0.92% Average (Programs similar to Florida): 1.21% Florida Population (2015) 20,271,272 Estimated Florida Patient Count: Using Sample Average (0.92%) 186,575 Using Similar Program Ave(1.21%) 244,472 Using Upper Bound (2.2%) 445,968 Source: MPG Calculations While the overall sample average capture rate was 0.92%,the average for states who have deployed a program that is similar to Florida's, is 1.21%.This higher rate reflects the exclusion of certain highly- restrictive states (e.g., New Jersey, New York, and Illinois). Dispensary License Allocations The passage of Amendment 2 will lead to an onslaught of cannabis dispensary applications, and city and county planners must be prepared to handle such applications. Cannabis dispensaries and storefronts are perceived by many planners to carry increased risks compared to typical merchandise stores.These stores sell products that are prohibited under federal law, and they tend to hold large quantities of cash and high-value products. Accordingly,these stores can become burdensome on law enforcement resources.Additionally, community leaders in other states have expressed concern that numerous Note:Results and findings are solely based upon MPG research. Quotations or citations of the report findings must include"The Marijuana Policy Group"as the original owner of this intellectual property. 5 MPG POLICY Market Intelligence I Policy Design License Allocations—Florida.v5 cannabis dispensaries increase the risk of blight and may reduce property values for neighboring communities. In order to mitigate these risks and the burden on law enforcement, state and municipal authorities have placed limitations upon the number of dispensary operations in a given area. The first and most common limitation is population-based,where a fixed number dispensary licenses are allowed within a specific population center. Experience from Other Industries Rationing and allocation of licenses to certain types of private businesses is not new. Certain states with a more pious outlook continue to limit liquor store licensees. Utah,for example, limits storefronts to 1:44,000 residents.' Other regional limits are often requested by private business due to high startup costs. Hospital developers require a setback that limits competition for a period of time—in order to ensure they can survive and provide medical services. Pure public goods, such as fire stations and parks, are allocated to meet community needs,while balancing the costs and benefits of additional service outlets. Cannabis dispensaries are privately-funded entities that provide services to a specific population segment. Therefore,the benefits of increased access to these entities is balanced against the potential costs of having too many outlets and subsequent failing businesses (along with considerations for the health, safety, and wellbeing of the public including increased risk of crime and burdens on law enforcement). While zoning rules can help to navigate the location of these entities,the number of entities can be directly controlled through license allocations. Experience from Other States Of the 22 states from which MPG collected data,three states place no explicit limit upon the number of dispensing licenses: Colorado, New Mexico, and Oregon. Colorado and Oregon provide licenses to any applicant who can meet the qualifications to be an operator, while New Mexico takes into consideration the need for additional dispensaries on an annual basis.Since two of these states have legalized cannabis for anyone over 21 years of age,their policies should be viewed differently from states with medical programs only. Among medical-only states, there is a gap between two types of dispensary allowances. Many states have systems that allow 1 dispensary for every 60,000 to 80,000 residents.The MPG compared these states with the program in Florida outlined in Amendment 2—the most similar states are Arizona, New Mexico, Maryland, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Hawaii. Those states had an average of 67,222 residents per dispensary. See Figure 0-1 below,for a graphical depiction of dispensary ratios. 2 Most state have liquor store ratios that average 1 for every 3,000 residents. Note:Results and findings are solely based upon MPG research. Quotations or citations of the report findings must include"The Marijuana Policy Group"as the original owner of this intellectual property. 6 MPG POLICY Market Intelligence I Policy Design License Allocations—Florida.v5 Figure 0-1:Ratio of State Resident Population to Cannabis Dispensaries for Selected US States(2015/2016) Dispensary Population Ratios - US States Illinois Maine Vermont - r. .. '- Hawaii Pennsylvania HawaiiPennsylvania Nevada .... �-: Maryland New Mexico Arizona Colorado 03,315 Oregon 0,779 0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 Source: MPG Calculations based upon publically-available state patient and population data. Two states stand out for the extremely"low" population to dispensary ratios: Colorado and Oregon. However these ratios can be misleading because most of these licensees are allowed to sell recreational (adult-use) cannabis from the same location.3 The ability to sell adult-use as well as medical cannabis means that these locations are not relying solely upon patients to sustain their business, as dispensaries in medical-only states do. Case of Oregon Dispensaries The history of Oregon's medical program offers some insights as a medical-only state that converted into an adult-use state. In Oregon, no a-priori limit was placed on dispensary licensing. As a result,the industry faced a "boom/bust" scenario. In 2014 and 2015, some Oregon towns incurred periods of under-supply, and then over-supply, eventually leading to dispensary failures.4 In 2015, pre-existing dispensaries benefitted by an interim law passed by the Oregon legislature, allowing medical dispensaries to sell cannabis to any adult over 21 years of age. At the same time, no recreational retail licenses were issued,giving pre-existing dispensaries exclusive rights to sell recreational cannabis to adults. Starting in January 2017, medical dispensaries must choose whether to sell exclusively to recreational or medical markets. According to an article by the Guardian, Southeast Portland had approximately 12,000 medical card holders, and 136 medical dispensaries during calendar year 2015.This meant there were just 88 patients per dispensary, on average—leading to closures, license transfers, and product diversion. After October 2015, many dispensaries were revived, as their client base was expanded to any adult over 21 years of 3 Stores and dispensaries are allowed to sell both products,so long as the area can be easily distinguished between medical and recreational retail. Most stores have a large orange line down the floor to indicate each section. 4 See for example: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/nov/21/oregon-cannabis-legalization-medical- marijuana-dying-market. Note:Results and findings are solely based upon MPG research. Quotations or citations of the report findings must include"The Marijuana Policy Group"as the original owner of this intellectual property. 7 MPG Poucr Market Intelligence I Policy Design License Allocations—Florida.v5 age. In general,the Oregon program is perceived as one that was fraught with uncertainty, leading to general discontent among industry members. Dispensary Economics—Minimum Effective Scale The Marijuana Policy Group has unique access to operating information for small and large vendors, both for medical and adult-use markets. The MPG can utilize their unique experience and insights to calculate—in a clear way—the so-called "minimum effective scale" required to sustain a medical cannabis operation. Clearly, cities and the state wish to have a well-organized and functional dispensary system, one that does not create negative incentives for failing operators. Approach: We use the State of Florida capture rate that was estimated above (1.21%)to illustrate some basic economics related to the dispensary licensees—and to compute the share of"failing" dispensaries under different scenarios. We find that in Florida under Amendment 2,the minimum effective scale is one dispensary for every 50,000 residents. However,given the risk associated with failing dispensaries, the "optimal" ratios is one dispensary for every 67,222 residents. If the estimated capture rate is used,then on average, each dispensary would serve either 813 patients using the 1:67,222 ratio, or 605 patients using the 1:50,000 ratio. Demand by Patients: Previous demand studies conducted by the MPG show that medical patients typically use cannabis on a near daily basis.Those consumers are estimated to demand 1.6 grams of flower(or its equivalent in non-flower products) per day of use.'The average use rate is 29 days per month.Thus,total demand by weight for these customers is expected to be 1.6 g per day * 29 days per month =44.6 grams of cannabis per month—or 1.66 ounces of cannabis per month. The average price of medical cannabis flower in Colorado is$5.05 per gram. Typically, medical cannabis is purchased in portions of 1 ounce at a time.' If the dispensary ratios are 1:67,222, then a typical dispensary will serve 813 patients, and these dispensaries can be expected to have average revenues of approximately$190,600 per month, under these assumptions. On average,the cost of wholesale cannabis inputs account for 50%of total sales value (i.e.,there is a 100% markup on product).'Thus, net revenues on average would be approximately$95,300 per month. While rent and payroll expenses can vary widely,we can make some basic assumptions in order to provide context and draw a line of profitability. 5 See"Market Size and Demand for Colorado" (2014), produced by MPG and commissioned by the Colorado Marijuana Enforcement Division. This study supplied a deep assessment of market demand (by weight)for cannabis flower. The study found that heavy users consume almost 3 times as much cannabis per day than irregular users. https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/defau It/fi les/Market%20Size%20a nd%20Dema nd%20Study%2C%20J u ly%2 09%2 C%202014%5 B 1%5 D.pdf The price of illicit cannabis,according to"ThePriceofWeed.com"—a crowdsource site for product pricing,equals $7.92 per gram for medium quality cannabis in Florida. This price is expected to decline, as it did in Colorado, under a regulated market. 'The same logic applies to vertically-integrated firms,who grow and sell the product. These firms implicitly pay wholesale prices for their own cannabis, because they could have sold their product at the wholesale price.This is a well-known economic concept regarding implicit versus explicit pricing. Note:Results and findings are solely based upon MPG research. Quotations or citations of the report findings must include"The Marijuana Policy Group"as the original owner of this intellectual property. 8 MPGPOLICY Market Intelligence I Policy Design License Allocations-Florida.v5 Table 3:Example Accounting for Florida Dispensaries-by Population Ratio Cost and Profits: Typical Dispensary Operation Below Minimum Optimal Assumptions/Estimates: Minimum Dispensary Ratio: 1:50,000 1:30,000 1:67,222 Patient Capture Rate: 1.21% 1.21% 1.21% Number of Patients per Dispensary 605 363 813 Revenues and Costs: Total Estimated Revenues I $142,008 $85,205 $190,921 Costs COGS(Cost of Goods Sold) $71,004 $42,602 $ 95,461 Rent(or imputed rent) $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 Payrolls (including payroll taxes &insurance) $25,000 $15,000 $30,000 Utilities,cleaning,internet and other basic services $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 Accounting,legal,consulting,and professional services $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 Total Estimated Costs: $122,004 $83,602 $151,461 EBITA(Earnings before Interest,Taxes,and Amortization) $ 20,004 $1,602 $39,461 Income Taxes (assuming 280E Compliance) $19,881 $11,929 $26,729 Income Taxes (under regular conditions) $5,601 $449 $11,049 Net Profit(Monthly) Under280E $123 ($10,326) $12,732 Under Regular Conditions $14,403 $1,154 $28,412 *Source: MPG Calculations based upon state captures rates and spending profiles. Table 3 shows what a Florida state dispensary license holder can expect financially under various dispensary to population ratios. If there exists one dispensary for every 67,222 residents,then net profits after taxes (assuming the owner somehow maneuvers around certain applicable IRS regulations)8 are $31,896 per month on average, or$382,752 per year. Under Section 280E of the IRS Code, profits would be$211,392 for the year. In contrast, if the ratio were 1:30,000-then the license holder would lose approximately$120,000 under 280E, or earn just$13,212 under normal operating conditions. Profits are "normal" compared to the at-risk capital if the ratio is 1:50,000. In this case, annual after-tax profits would be$1,475 under Section 280E, and would be $172,835 under regular business conditions. 8 Section 280E of the IRS Code prohibits cannabis vendors from claiming any expenses,except for the cost of the cannabis product itself. For more information see: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/18/feds-slap- 70-tax-on-legal-marijuana-businesses.html Note:Results and findings are solely based upon MPG research. Quotations or citations of the report findings must include"The Marijuana Policy Group"as the original owner of this intellectual property. 9 MPGPOLICY Market Intelligence I Policy Design License Allocations—Florida.v5 These profit estimates do not include the initial cost of investment, called "at risk capital".The initial investment expense to open a dispensary is expected to equal approximately$200,000, depending upon the location, building, staff,and licensing process. Dispensary Failure Rates Under Three Scenarios Under an allocation ratio of 1:50,000 residents,the MPG estimates that approximately 32%of the licensees will struggle or become unprofitable, and would present increased risks for enforcement and regulators. An allocation closer to the average among MPG's sample (1:67,222) results in slightly fewer dispensaries, as well as a higher success rate, effectively shifting the failure rate down from 32%to 13% (i.e. only 1 in 8 licensees fail). In contrast, if more licenses are permitted,then assuming the same capture rate, a higher share of those licensees must be failures, since the total spending on cannabis is effectively"capped" by the number of patients. For example, if a ratio of 1:30,000 is used, more than half of the licensees would be expected to fail or be in danger of failing. Under this regime,the average dispensary teeters between a gain of$1,039 per month if they do not comply with 280E,or a loss of $10,379 per month, if they comply. Only 39%of dispensaries are expected to be sustainable under this scenario, and 61%of dispensaries become "high risk"failing entities. Table 4 below shows the relative number of dispensaries under different allocation schemes: Table 4:Number of Dispensaries and Expected Failing Stores under different license allocation schemes. Dispensary Failure Rate Population Number of Failure Number of Ratio Dispensaries Rate Store Failures 1:30,000 676 61% 412 1:50,000 405 32% 130 1:67:222 302 13% 39 *Based upon 2015 Florida population,and MPG fail rate estimates. The expected failure rate is 61% under a 1:30,000 ratio. This rate falls to approximately one-third (32%) if fewer licenses are issued,to bring the dispensary population in-line with the state population (405 stores). Under this scenario,the number of failed stores falls from 412 to 130,for a 68% reduction in failed licensees. Under a ratio of 1:67,222,the failure rate falls to 13%, and the number of failed stores falls from 130 down to 39. The MPG believes that 1:67,222 provides an "optimal" balance between access of store locations and risks of store failures,given the estimated parameters for Florida, under passage of Amendment 2. It is also important to note that, because the six currently licensed organizations in Florida also offer statewide delivery, patients will have additional access to medicine (in addition to retail outlets). This suggests that rural and remote populations can still be served, in some manner, even when store density is not high. Regulatory Risks from Failing Dispensaries In general,the free market system is an effective mechanism that allocates resources to their best use. It rewards efficient operators and it eventually pushes inefficient or ineffective operators out of the market through closures or consolidation. Note:Results and findings are solely based upon MPG research. Quotations or citations of the report findings must include"The Marijuana Policy Group"as the original owner of this intellectual property. 10 MPGPOLICY Market Intelligence 1 Policy Design License Allocations—Florida.v5 The free market system works best for the sale and distribution of innocuous goods and services. But there are special risks and considerations when the market is a "Schedule 1" narcotic. Most of these risks are related to product diversion and crime.An itemized list of considerations is below: • Struggling cannabis vendors have an incentive to divert sales to illegal markets if they cannot compete in the regulated market. In order to survive, struggling operators are more likely to allow sales to unauthorized users or to divert some of their products for sale outside of the region, or outside of the state (ex-state diversion). • The diversion of cannabis to minors or to other states are listed as the Federal Government's "priorities and concerns" in relation to the state-level sale and distribution of cannabis products.These concerns are prominently described in the 2013 "Cole Memorandum." • Struggling vendors are less likely to pay for laboratory testing, for proper packaging, and for proper safety standards in the workplace. Profitable operators have an incentive to maintain their good-standing with state licensing agents, and are more likely to maintain higher levels of safety, quality-control, packaging, and monitoring, compared to poorly-funded organizations. • Tax compliance and promptness of payment for license fees are generally higher for well- funded and well-organized licensees, compared to struggling and near-bankrupt licensees.' Near-bankrupt operators have "less to lose" compared to profitable enterprises, and therefore are therefore less likely to comply with the rules and regulations. This effect has been documented in studies of entrepreneurial behavior and attitudes among small-business owners. • Until federal laws change, almost all cannabis dispensaries are cash-based operations.This raises the risk of crime and burglaries targeted toward dispensary locations.This, in turn, creates an incremental burden for local law enforcement and potential threats to public safety. Summary The passage of Amendment 2 will fundamentally alter Florida's medical cannabis program. City and county planners throughout the state will be faced with a number of decisions that will ultimately determine the success of medical cannabis operations in their respective communities.This report is intended to assist government administrators as they begin to consider cannabis dispensary licensing rules. MPG's recommendations, based on other medical cannabis states' experiences and data-driven economic analysis, provides Florida municipalities with a targeted rulemaking framework that will enable a well-functioning medical cannabis market. MPG's calculated "optimal ratio" of one dispensary per 67,222 residents(1:67,222) has been customized to Florida's specific patient population and regulatory structure. The ratio ensures that the majority of licensed medical cannabis dispensaries in Florida will have a sufficient medical patient customer base, based upon an estimated Capture Rate of 1.21%,to create a profitable business environment for licensed actors. Reducing the number of"at-risk"or failing medical cannabis licensees is imperative for creating a medical cannabis market that mitigates regulatory risk in the form of diversion and crime.The 9 See,for example: Kamleitner, et.al. (2012). "Tax Compliance of Small Business Owners:A Literature Review and Conceptual Framework," International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior&Research 18(3):330-351. Note:Results and findings are solely based upon MPG research. Quotations or citations of the report findings must include"The Marijuana Policy Group"as the original owner of this intellectual property. 11 MPG POuCY Market Intelligence I Policy Design License Allocations—Florida.v5 actions taken and rules enacted by city and county planners must be cautious, incremental, and should reflect the medical cannabis market unique to Florida, as the ultimate success or failure of the medical cannabis program is highly dependent upon the regulatory structure. Note:Results and findings are solely based upon MPG research. Quotations or citations of the report findings must include'The Marijuana Policy Group"as the original owner of this intellectual property. 12 ORDINANCE_-Cannabis Dispensing Businesses PREAMBLE WHEREAS, the Florida Legislature enacted legislation legalizing Cannabis for medical uses; and WHEREAS, future constitutional amendments and legislation may further expand the legal use of Cannabis in Florida; and WHEREAS, a comprehensive State licensing and regulatory framework for the cultivation, processing, and Dispensing of Cannabis exists; and WHEREAS the comprehensive State licensing and regulatory framework directs that the criteria for the number and location of, and other permitting requirements that do not conflict with state law or department rule for, Dispensing facilities of Cannabis Dispensing Businesses may be determined by local ordinance; and WHEREAS, Cannabis Dispensing Businesses licensed pursuant to the law have begun cultivating Cannabis for processing and Dispensing; and WHEREAS,potential adverse impacts on the health, safety, and welfare of residents and business from secondary effects associated with the distribution of Cannabis exist,potentially including: offensive odors,trespassing, theft, fire hazards, increased crime in and about the Cannabis Dispensing Business, robberies,negative impacts on nearby businesses, nuisance problems; and WHEREAS, certain of the above potential adverse impacts are accentuated by the current difficulties experienced by Cannabis Dispensing Businesses in obtaining banking services necessitating such businesses to operate on a cash basis; and WHEREAS,there exists the potential for misappropriation and diversion of medical Cannabis to non-medical uses, and; WHEREAS, an overabundance of Dispensing facilities can affect the viability of such facilities, result in compliance issues and increased regulatory costs, lead to the improper diversion of products, and accentuate threats to the public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, other jurisdictions have regulated the Dispensing of Cannabis by limiting the number of such Cannabis Dispensing Businesses to reduce threats to the public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS,there is a need to adopt health, safety, and welfare regulations to avoid adverse impacts on the community which may arise from the distribution of Cannabis; and 4850-5630-5463.1 WHEREAS, other jurisdictions that allow Cannabis Dispensing Businesses have implemented effective regulatory and enforcement systems that address the adverse impacts that Cannabis Dispensing Businesses could pose to public safety, health, and welfare; and WHEREAS, an effective regulatory system governing the Dispensing of Cannabis, as provided in this Ordinance,will address potential adverse impacts to the public health,welfare, and safety consistent with Florida law; and WHEREAS, it is not the purpose or intent of this section to restrict or deny access to Cannabis as permitted by Florida law, but instead to enact reasonable restrictions intended to protect the public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS,the [City/County] has determined it is in the public interest to adopt this Ordinance pursuant to the [City's/County's] police powers and section 381.986, as well as other applicable state laws and provisions of the Florida Constitution,to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public; NOW THEREFORE,the following ordinance is adopted. Sec._-_-10. -Purpose and intent. The purpose of this Ordinance is to establish requirements that regulate Cannabis Dispensing Businesses in the interest of the public health, safety and general welfare and that ease the regulatory burden on the [City/County]. In particular,this Ordinance is intended to regulate the sale and distribution of Cannabis to ensure a supply of Cannabis to patients who qualify to obtain,possess, and use Cannabis, or any other use of Cannabis permissible under state law,while promoting compliance with other state laws that regulate Cannabis.Nothing in this Ordinance is intended to promote or condone the sale, distribution,possession, or use of Cannabis in violation of any applicable state law. Compliance with the requirements of this Ordinance shall not provide a defense to criminal prosecution under any applicable law. Sec. - -20. -Definitions. (1) The following words and phrases, when used in this Ordinance, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this Section: a. Applicant shall mean any person or entity that has submitted an application for a Certificate of Approval or renewal of a Certificate of Approval issued pursuant to this Ordinance. If the Applicant is an entity and not a natural person,Applicant shall include all persons who are the managers, officers, directors, contractual agents,partners, and licensors of such entity, as well as all members, shareholders, or Investors holding an ownership interest of 10%or more of such entity. b. Cannabis has the meaning given to it by section 893.02(3),Florida Statutes, and shall include all forms of medical Cannabis or low-THC Cannabis. 2 4850-5630-5463.1 c. Cannabis Dispensing Business or Business shall mean a business licensed to dispense Cannabis pursuant to applicable law and that is engaged in the retail sale of Cannabis or Derivative Products, but shall not include making deliveries of Cannabis or Derivative Products to the residence or business of an authorized individual, or to a health care facility, as permitted by other relevant ordinances and state law. d. Certificate of Approval shall mean a document issued by the Jurisdiction officially authorizing an Applicant to operate a Cannabis Dispensing Business pursuant to this Ordinance. A Certificate of Approval generally authorizes an Applicant to establish and operate a Cannabis Dispensing Business pursuant to this Ordinance, but does not authorize the Dispensing of Cannabis at any physical location within the Jurisdiction until a Premises Authorization, as defined herein,has been issued for such location. e. Compassionate Use Act shall mean section 381.986, Florida Statutes, and chapter 2016-123, Laws of Florida, as amended from time to time, and any rules or regulations promulgated thereunder. f. Cultivation or cultivate shall mean the process by which a person grows a Cannabis plant. g. Derivative Products shall mean products derived from Cannabis, including but not limited to, Cannabis oil or consumable products containing or derived from Cannabis. h. Dispensing shall mean the retail sales of Cannabis or Derivative Products at a Cannabis Dispensing Business, but does not include making deliveries of Cannabis or Derivative Products to the residence or business of an authorized individual, or to a health care facility, as permitted by other relevant ordinances and state law. i. Investor shall mean any person or entity entitled to share in the profits of the Applicant, or any Lender. The term shall not include any employees who share in the profits of the Applicant pursuant to an employee profit sharing program. j. Lender shall mean any person or entity who has provided funds to an Applicant with the expectation of receiving from the Applicant repayment or the receipt from the Applicant of anything of value. The term Lender shall include any person who owns, directly or indirectly, 20%or more of any entity which qualifies as a Lender, but does not include any bank, credit union, or other financial institution created under federal or state law. k. Jurisdiction shall mean [the City of / County]. 1. Operator shall mean the person or entity to whom a Certificate of Approval has been issued pursuant to this Ordinance. m. Premises Authorization shall mean a document issued by the Jurisdiction to the Operator, authorizing the Operator to conduct Cannabis Dispensing Business operations at a single, specifically approved physical location. No Premises Authorization may be issued to any individual or entity who does not hold a 3 4850-5630-5463.1 n. Certificate of Approval. Each Certificate of Approval authorizes the issuance of a single Premises Authorization at any one time, and any relocation of operations to a separate address shall require amendment of the Premises Authorization to authorize operations at the new location. o. State shall mean the State of Florida. (2) In addition to the definitions contained in Subsection (1), other terms used in this Ordinance shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Compassionate Use Act, and such definitions are incorporated into this Ordinance by this reference. Sec._-_-30. -Approval authority created. There shall be and is hereby created a Cannabis Dispensing Regulatory Authority hereafter referred to in this Ordinance as the "Authority." Sec._-_-40. - Composition of the Authority. The Authority shall consist of[three] members appointed by the [City/County] [Manager/Mayor/Attorney] for a term of three years each. Sec._-_-50. -Functions of the Authority. (1) The Authority shall be responsible,pursuant to the Compassionate Use Act and this Ordinance, for granting or denying Certificates of Approval and Premises Authorizations, and shall have all powers of a county or municipal government as set forth in the Compassionate Use Act and any other applicable state laws. (2) The Authority shall have the power to: (i)promulgate rules and regulations concerning the procedures for any hearings conducted by the Authority; (ii)require any Applicant or Operator to furnish any relevant information requested by the Authority; and(iii) administer oaths and to require the presence of persons and the production of papers,books, and records at any hearing that the Authority is authorized to conduct. Sec._-_-60. - Certificate of Approval required; term of Certificate of Approval; renewal application. (1) It shall be unlawful for any person or entity to establish or operate a Cannabis Dispensing Business in the [City/County] without first having obtained from the State of Florida approval to do so pursuant to the Compassionate Use Act or any other relevant law,and having obtained from the [City/County] a Certificate of Approval, and having obtained from the [City/County] a Premises Authorization for the facility to be operated in connection with such business. Such Certificate of Approval and Premises Authorization shall be kept current at all times and shall be conspicuously displayed at all times in the premises to which they apply. The failure to maintain a current Certificate of Approval, or to maintain a current Premises Authorization for any location at which Cannabis Dispensing Business is conducted, shall constitute a violation of this Section. 4 4850-5630-5463.1 (2) Each Certificate of Approval issued by the [City/County] pursuant to this Ordinance shall specify the date of issuance,the period of licensure, and the name of the Operator. (3) Any Certificate of Approval issued by the Authority under this Ordinance shall expire three years after the date of its issuance. (4) Renewal of an existing Certificate of Approval shall be automatic for successive three year periods upon payment of required fees to the [City/County], as provided in the fee schedule adopted by the [City/County] from time to time. a. Within 30 days of the expiration date, and upon notice of renewal by the [City/County], each Operator shall pay a nonrefundable fee to the [City/County], as set forth in the fee schedule adopted by the [City/County] from time to time,to defray the costs incurred by the [City/County] for review of the application and inspection of the proposed premises, as well as any other costs associated with the processing of the application.Notice of renewal shall be provided to each Operator no less than 30 days prior to the renewal date of the Certificate of Authority. b. A notice of intent to revoke shall be issued to all Operators who have not remitted renewal fees within 30 days of the renewal date. Notwithstanding the provisions of Subsection(a), an Operator whose Certificate of Authority has been expired for not more than 90 days will be reinstated upon the payment of a nonrefundable late application fee, as set forth in the fee schedule adopted by the [City/County] from time to time. A Certificate of Authority shall be revoked if renewal fees have not been paid within 90 days of the renewal date. (5) Any Premises Authorization issued by the Authority under this Ordinance shall be deemed to expire on the date upon which the Certificate of Approval pursuant to which it is issued expires. Any Premises Authorization shall be deemed automatically renewed upon the renewal, as set forth herein, of the Certificate of Approval pursuant to which it is issued. (6) In the event a Certificate of Authorization is not renewed, it shall be noticed by the Authority as available and be subject to a new application process as set forth in Sec._-_- 75. Sec._-=70.—Application minimum requirements; payment of application fee. (1) An Applicant for a new Certificate of Approval, or an Operator seeking to change the ownership of an existing Certificate of Approval,pursuant to the Compassionate Use Act, any other applicable state law, and the provisions of this Ordinance, shall submit an application to the [City/County]. At the time of any such application, each Applicant shall pay an application fee to the [City/County], as set forth in the fee schedule adopted by the [City/County] Council from time to time,to defray the costs incurred by the [City/County] for review of the application, as well as any other costs associated with the processing of the application. 5 4850-5630-5463.1 (2) The Applicant shall include the following in its application to the [City/County]: a. Payment of the application fee as set forth in the fee schedule established by the Jurisdiction. b. If the Applicant is a business entity, information regarding the entity, including without limitation the name and address of the entity, its legal status and proof of registration with, or a certificate of good standing from,the Florida Secretary of State, as applicable; c. If the Applicant is an individual, government issued identification including name, address and photograph of the individual; d. Evidence of the State of Florida,Department of Health, Office of Compassionate Use's(or any successor agency of the State of Florida's)approval of the Operator to operate a Cannabis Dispensing Business pursuant to the Compassionate Use Act or any other relevant law; e. All documentation necessary to demonstrate compliance with the requirements identified in this Ordinance, including evidence that the Applicant continues to meet all requirements of section 381.986(5)(b)(1),Florida Statutes. f. All documentation the Applicant wishes to have considered for scoring purposes, including documentation demonstrating the Applicant meets the criteria detailed in Sec. - -75 of this Ordinance. (3) Upon receipt of an application,the Authority shall review and score the application pursuant to the scoring and review process established by Sec._-_-75 of this Ordinance. Sec._-_-75.—The Application Period and Scoring and Review of Applications. (1) The initial application period shall commence on the effective date of this Ordinance and shall close 30 days after the effective date of this Ordinance. Subsequent application periods shall commence upon certification by the Authority that additional Certificates of Approval are available and shall close 30 days after such certification. Such certification will be posted in a conspicuous location on a website to be established by the Authority. (2) The members of the Authority shall score and review each application pursuant to the criteria, and 100 point scale, detailed below. Members and Applicants may discuss their application at any time during the application process. Each application will be independently scored by Authority members. a. Previous retail dispensing experience in a regulated market in any state: 20 points i. Number of different retail dispensaries operated. ii. Total square footage of retail dispensaries operated. 6 4850-5630-5463.1 iii. Number of years of operating retail dispensaries. iv. Number of retail dispensary employees managed. v. Gross sales of Cannabis and Cannabis Derivative Products. vi. Number of different Cannabis strains and Derivative Products sold. vii. Retail dispensing licenses held in different states. viii. Previous infractions resulting in the revocation of any Cannabis license. ix. Experience with maintaining chain of custody and tracking mechanisms. b. Quality of Derivative Product offerings: 20 points i. Length of time Derivative Products you intend to dispense have been available in regulated markets. ii. Gross sales number of units of these Derivative Products previously sold in regulated markets. iii. Gross revenue derived from previous sales of these Derivative Products in regulated markets. c. Technical Ability: 10 points i. Review of standard operating procedures, operating manuals, policies, training modules, and procedures. ii. Training process. iii. Online ordering system. iv. Procedures for expediting ordering and/or providing for medically disadvantaged. v. Operational ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) System. vi. Retail delivery system. vii. Point-of-sale systems and solutions. d. Qualifications of Security Team: 15 points i. Years of security experience with Cannabis dispensaries in a regulated Cannabis market. ii. Integration of security procedures and training into your vertically integrated operations. iii. All owners, Investors, and managers have successfully passed a Level 2 background check and have not been convicted of any felonies involving fraud, false representation, or distribution of Cannabis. e. Qualifications of Medical Director: 25 points i. Experience with epileptic patients; ii. Experience with cancer patients; iii. Experience with patients with severe seizures or muscle spasms; iv. Experience with terminal patients; v. Knowledge of the use of medical Cannabis for treatment of cancer or physical medical conditions that chronically produce symptoms of seizures or severe and persistent muscle spasms; 7 4850-5630-5463.1 vi. Knowledge of good manufacturing practices; vii. Knowledge of analytical and organic chemistry; viii. Knowledge of analytical laboratory methods; ix. Knowledge of analytical laboratory quality control, including maintaining a chain of custody; x. Knowledge of, and experience with,medical Cannabis CBD/low- THC extraction techniques; xi. Knowledge of medical Cannabis, including CBD/low-THC routes of administration; xii. Experience in or knowledge of clinical trials or observational studies; xiii. Knowledge of, and experience with,producing CBD/low-THC products; xiv. Experience with or knowledge of botanical medicines; xv. Experience with dispensing medications. f. Awards: 10 points i. Any awards,recognitions, or certifications received for expertise in Cannabis related businesses. (3) Prior to scoring applications the Authority shall review applications for compliance with this Ordinance,the Compassionate Use Act, or any other applicable law, and shall reject any application which does not meet such requirement. Rejected applications shall not be scored. The Authority shall also disqualify any application that contains any false or misleading information. (4) Within 30 days after the Authority's identified deadline for filing applications,the scores awarded by the members of the Authority for each Applicant shall be totaled and averaged for each Applicant. The Applicants shall then be ranked from highest to lowest based on the average scores awarded,with Certificates of Approval issued to the highest scoring Applicant, and proceeding to the next highest scored Applicant until all Certificates of Approval authorized pursuant to this Ordinance have been awarded. In the event of a tie in the rankings, the Authority shall by majority vote break the tie. (5) Challenges to the Authority's award decision shall be filed with the [City/County] Manager within ten days of the decision being challenged. The [City/County] Manager shall review the challenge and issue a decision dismissing such challenge or affirming such challenge. Challenges to the [City/County] Manager's decision dismissing or affirming such challenge shall be via a request for administrative hearing pursuant to Florida's Administrative Procedures Act, and must be filed within ten days of issuance of the decision being challenged. Petitions meeting the requirements of Florida's Administrative Procedures Act shall be referred to the Division of Administrative Hearings for a formal hearing, and issuance of a recommended order to the City/County. Within 15 days of issuance of a recommended order,the City/County will issue a final order. Sec._-_-80.—Issuance of Certificate of Approval. 8 4850-5630-5463.1 (1) Upon expiration of the challenge deadlines detailed in Sec._-_-75(5) if no challenge is filed,or upon issuance of a final order if a challenge is filed,the Authority shall issue Certificates of Approval as provided in Sec._-_-100 of this Ordinance. (2) A Certificate of Approval issued pursuant to this Ordinance does not eliminate the need for the Operator to obtain other required permits or licenses related to the operation of the Cannabis Dispensing Business including,without limitation, any development approvals or building permits required by this Code. (3) Amendment of a Certificate of Approval or Premises Authorization, as defined below, solely to change the location of a Cannabis Dispensing Business shall not be denied so long as all other conditions for the issuance of a Certificate of Approval have been met and the new location complies with all premises requirements set forth in this Ordinance and all applicable zoning requirements. (4) A Certificate of Approval or Premises Authorization may be transferred only to an entity which has been approved by the State of Florida,Department of Health, Office of Compassionate Use (or any successor agency of the State of Florida)to operate a Cannabis Dispensing Business pursuant to the Compassionate Use Act or any other relevant law, and who meets all other requirements of this Ordinance. Sec._-_-85. -Persons or Entities prohibited as Operators. No Certificate of Approval shall be issued to, held by, or renewed by any Applicant or Operator who fails to comply with the following Mandatory Requirements: (1) Maintain approval as a dispensing organization by the State of Florida, Department of Health, Office of Compassionate Use pursuant to the Compassionate Use Act, or any other applicable law. (2) Ensure no owner, Investor, or manager of the Applicant or Operator has been found guilty of, regardless of adjudication, or entered a plea of nolo contendere or guilty to, or has been adjudicated delinquent, and the record has not been sealed or expunged for, any crime enumerated in section 435.04(2),Florida Statutes, or any felony involving false representations or false statements, fraud, or money laundering. Sec._-_-90.—Confidential,Proprietary, Copyrighted, or Trade Secret Material (1) If an Applicant considers any portion of the documents, data or records submitted with its application to be confidential,proprietary,trade secret or otherwise not subject to disclosure pursuant to chapter 119, Florida Statutes, the Florida Constitution or other authority, the Applicant must mark the document as "Confidential" and simultaneously provide the Authority a separate redacted copy of its application and briefly describe in writing the grounds for claiming exemption from the public records law, including the specific statutory citation for such exemption. This redacted copy shall contain the name of the Applicant on the cover, and shall be clearly titled"Redacted Copy." The Redacted Copy should only redact those portions of 9 4850-5630-5463.1 material that the Applicant claims are confidential, proprietary, trade secret or otherwise not subject to disclosure. (2) If a request for public records pursuant to chapter 119,Florida Statutes, the Florida Constitution or other authority, is filed,to which documents that are marked as confidential are responsive,the Authority will provide the Redacted Copy to the requestor. If a requestor asserts a right to the Confidential Information,the Authority will notify the Applicant such an assertion has been made. It is the Applicant's responsibility to assert that the information in question is exempt from disclosure under chapter 119 or other applicable law. If the Authority becomes subject to a demand for discovery or disclosure of the Confidential Information of the Applicant in a legal proceeding,the Authority shall give the Applicant prompt notice of the demand prior to releasing the information(unless otherwise prohibited by applicable law). The Applicant shall be responsible for defending its determination that the redacted portions of its response are confidential,proprietary,trade secret, or otherwise not subject to disclosure. (3) If Applicant fails to submit a redacted copy of information it claims is confidential,the Authority is authorized to produce the entire documents, data, or records submitted to the Authority in answer to a public records request for these records. Sec._-_-100. -Numerical limit on Cannabis Dispensing Businesses. (1) The maximum number of Certificates of Approval in the Jurisdiction shall not exceed one for every 67,600 residents, as certified in the most recent census or periodic demographic studies conducted by the University of Florida. However, if a census or periodic demographic studies conducted by the University of Florida indicates a resident count of at least 50%of that required for issuance of a new Certificate of Authority, a new Certificate of Approval shall be authorized. For example: Residents Indicated Certificates of Authority Authorized 0 - 101,399 1 101,400— 169,000 2 169,001 —236,599 3 236,600—304,199 4 304,200—371,799 5 (2) A dispensing organization may hold more than one Certificate of Approval,but may not hold all available Certificates of Approval issued by the Authority if more than one are available. (3) In order to ensure that the population of the Jurisdiction has access to the best qualified dispensing organizations,while likewise maintaining competition in the Cannabis Dispensing industry within the Jurisdiction,when multiple Certificates of Approval are available Applicants shall be entitled to receive,upon request, up to the number of Certificates of Approval set forth in the below table, and shall identify in their application the number of Certificates of Approval that they are requesting: 10 4850-5630-5463.1 Number of First Ranked Second Ranked Third Ranked Fourth Ranked Certificates Available Applicant Applicant Applicant Applicant 1 1 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 3 2 1 0 0 1 4 2 1 1 0 5 3 1 1 0 6 3 2 1 0 7 4 2 1 0 8 4 2 1 1 9 5 2 1 1 10 5 2 2 1 11 6 2 2 1 12 6 3 2 1 13 7 3 2 1 14 7 4 2 1 15 8 4 2 1 16 8 4 2 2 17 9 4 2 2 18 9 4 3 2 19 10 4 3 2 20 10 5 3 2 If any Certificates of Approval remain available following the distribution of requested Certificates of Approval to Applicants in accordance with the above table, one Certificate of Approval shall be offered to each remaining eligible applicant, in declining order of rank, until all Certificates of Approval have been distributed. If, following the completion of such process, Certificates of Approval still remain available, one additional Certificate of Approval shall be offered to each Applicant, in declining order of rank, until all Certificates of Approval have been distributed. (4) If additional Certificates of Approval are made available,the Authority shall provide notice of a new application process conducted pursuant to this Ordinance. (5) Each Certificate of Approval authorizes the holder to operate a single licensed premises pursuant to an approved Premises Authorization. Sec. - -110.—Premises Authorization. After obtaining a Certificate of Approval, and prior to Dispensing Cannabis, an Operator shall select a location from which such Dispensing will occur, and provide notice to the Authority of the Dispensing location and request issuance of Premises Authorization for such location. Such request shall be provided a minimum of 10 days prior to the Dispensing of any Cannabis from the location, and shall identify the Certificate of Approval at issue, and the location from which Dispensing will occur. 11 4850-5630-5463.1 Sec._-_-115. —Zoning Requirements (1) Premises Authorization shall be granted for any location which complies with the requirements of this Ordinance and in which retail sales of any kind are permitted pursuant to applicable zoning or land use regulations, either as a principal or accessory use. (2) No Cannabis Dispensing Business shall be located within 250 feet of any public or private elementary,middle,or secondary school or house of worship. However, a Cannabis Dispensing Business does not violate this subsection and may not be forced to relocate if it meets the requirements of this section and a school or house of worship is subsequently established within 250 feet of the business. (3) For purposes of this Ordinance, measurements shall be made from the nearest property line of the school or house of worship to the nearest property line of the Cannabis Dispensing Business. If the Cannabis Dispensing Business is located in a multi-tenant building, the distance shall be measured from the nearest property line of the school or house of worship to the nearest line of the leasehold or other space actually controlled or occupied by the Cannabis Dispensing Business. The Cannabis Dispensing Business shall ensure security for Cannabis activities complies with state requirements. Sec._-=120. -Inspection of approved premises and issuance of Premises Authorization. (1) During business hours and other times of apparent activity, all approved premises shall be subject to inspection by the Chief of Police,the Fire Chief,the Building Official, County Sheriff, or the authorized representative of any of them, for the purpose of investigating and determining compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance and any other applicable state or local law or regulation. Such inspection may include, but need not be limited to,the inspection of books,records, and inventory. Where any part of the premises consists of a locked area, such area shall be made available for inspection,without delay, upon reasonable request. The frequency of such inspections shall not be unreasonable and shall be conducted in a manner to ensure the operation of the premises is not inhibited. (2) Cannabis may not be Dispensed pursuant to a Certificate of Approval until the Authority has caused the proposed premises to be inspected to determine compliance of the premises with any applicable requirements of this Ordinance and Code, and has issued Premises Authorization. (3) The Authority shall,within 10 days of receipt of a request for Premises Authorization, and after inspection of the premises to be utilized,notify the Certificate holder that it may begin Dispensing Cannabis at that premises and issue a Premises Authorization to the Certificate holder, or provide to the Operator written notice detailing the reasons the selected location does not comply with this Ordinance. Each Premises Authorization issued by the [City/County] pursuant to this Ordinance shall specify the Certificate of Approval pursuant to which it is issued, all information set forth on the Certificate of Approval, and the physical location of the premises approved, once such approval is received. 12 4850-5630-5463.1 Sec._-=125. -Requirements related to the premises. Cannabis Dispensing Businesses shall be subject to the following additional requirements: (1) All Cannabis or Cannabis Derivative products ready for sale shall be in a sealed or locked container or cabinet except when being accessed for distribution. (2) Only individuals authorized pursuant to Florida law may Dispense Cannabis, and such Cannabis may only be Dispensed to persons authorized pursuant to Florida law to receive Cannabis. (3) No Cannabis shall be Dispensed outside of the hours permitted by Florida law. However, Cannabis Dispensing Businesses may conduct administrative or delivery functions, including making deliveries of Cannabis or Derivative Products to the residence or business of an authorized individual, or to a health care facility, as permitted by other relevant ordinances and state law. (4) No unaccompanied minor may be Dispensed Cannabis unless otherwise authorized under state law. (5) The Cannabis Dispensing Business shall employ reasonable measures and means to eliminate odors emanating from Dispensing and shall properly dispose of controlled substances in a safe, sanitary and secure manner and in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. (6) After issuance of a Premises Authorization, an Operator shall not make a physical change, alteration or modification of the premises that would not comply with this Ordinance. Sec._-=130. - Signage requirements. All signage associated with a Cannabis Dispensing Business shall meet the standards established in this Code for signs. Sec._-_-135. -Nonrenewal, suspension or revocation of Certificate of Approval. The Authority may suspend,revoke, or refuse to renew a Certificate of Approval for any of the following reasons, after notice and opportunity to cure is given: (1) The Applicant or Operator, or his or her agent, manager, or employee, have violated, do not meet, or have failed to comply with, any of the terms, Mandatory Requirements as specified in Sec -_-85, conditions, or provisions of this Ordinance or with any applicable state law or regulation, only if such failure materially impacts the accessibility, availability, or safety of the Cannabis or Derivative Product. 13 4850-5630-5463.1 (2) The Authority shall provide notice of any of the above deficiencies accompanied by a 30 calendar day period in which to cure such deficiencies. Within 30 days of receipt of notice a notice of deficiencies,the Operator shall submit to the Authority a plan to correct such deficiencies. The Operator must execute the plan within 30 days of the date the plan was submitted to the Authority. If a plan is not timely submitted, or the plan is not timely executed, the Authority may take appropriate action. If any deficiencies are incapable of being cured,the Authority shall direct the Operator to take reasonable steps to ensure the deficiency is mitigated and does not pose a material threat to the public health, safety, or welfare. Compliance with such mitigation requirements shall constitute a cure of such deficiencies. (3) A Certificate of Approval shall be revoked and be available for issuance subject to the process outlined in Sec_-_-75 if Dispensing fails to occur within thirty-six months after the Certificate has been issued, except that the Authority may grant an extension of this requirement upon good cause shown. (4) Notwithstanding the foregoing, upon a finding by the Authority, for good cause shown,that the continued operation of the business presents an imminent and immediate grave threat to the public health or safety,the [City/County] may issue an emergency order directing the Operator to temporarily cease sales at that location pending resolution of the deficiency. Sec._-_-140. -No [City/County] liability; indemnification; no defense. (1) By accepting a Certificate of Approval and Premises Authorization issued pursuant to this Ordinance,the Operator waives any claim concerning, and releases the [City/County], its officers, elected officials, employees, attorneys and agents from, any liability for injuries or damages of any kind that result from any arrest or prosecution of business owners, Operators, employees, clients, or customers of the Operator for a violation of state or federal laws,rules, or regulations. (2) By accepting a Certificate of Approval and Premises Authorization issued pursuant to this Ordinance,all Operators,jointly and severally if more than one, agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the [City/County], its officers, elected officials, employees, attorneys, agents, insurers and self-insurance pool against all liability, claims, and demands on account of any injury, loss, or damage, including without limitation claims arising from bodily injury,personal injury, sickness, disease, death,property loss or damage, or any other loss of any kind whatsoever arising out of or in any manner connected with the operation of the Cannabis Dispensing Business that is the subject of the Certificate of Approval and Premises Authorization. (3) The issuance of a Certificate of Approval and Premises Authorization pursuant to this Ordinance shall not be deemed to create an exception, defense, or immunity for any person in regard to any potential criminal liability the person may have under state or federal law for the cultivation,possession, sale, distribution, or use of Cannabis. Sec._-_-150. -Treatment of Existing Cannabis Dispensing Businesses. 14 4850-5630-5463.1 Notwithstanding anything in this Ordinance to the contrary, any Cannabis Dispensing Business operating in the Jurisdiction as of September 1, 2016, may continue operating at any retail locations from which the Cannabis Dispensing Business dispensed medical cannabis on or before September 1, 2016. Such Cannabis Dispensing Business shall be issued a non- transferable Certificate of Approval and non-moveable Premise Authorization, and shall be disregarded for purposes of Section 100 of this Ordinance. Such Certificates of Approval and Premises Authorization shall become void if the Cannabis Dispensing Business ceases retail operations. Sec._=-160. - Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, is held invalid,the invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are declared severable. 15 4850-5630-5463.1 GoodnerAngela From: Keith Bell <kbell@clarkpartington.com> Sent: Monday, May 8, 2017 8:07 AM To: FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Cc: 'Erik Kirk' Subject: RE: Medical Marijuana Regulation- Collier County Dear Commissioners, I wanted to follow up with you and see where the County was with respect to this matter. As predicted,the legislature did not give any guidance with respect to the issue of the number and location of dispensaries. In fact, as I am sure you are aware,the legislature did not even pass a bill. Accordingly,the Department of Health will handle the process of implementing Amendment 2 but nothing the Department does will impact the decisions the County needs to make. We remain steadfast in our belief that tying the number of dispensaries allowed to the number of eligible patients will help communities avoid the numerous pitfalls as laid out in the research I previously provided. Further, there is already a push for full legalization being made by John Morgan. You can read his latest tweets on the issue below. In my opinion,the last thing that the County needs is to have half a dozen medical marijuana treatment centers in the that automatically turn into recreational marijuana stores at some point in the future. This is just another reason why a limited and measured roll-out of the industry makes sense. If there is anything we can do to assist the County in its efforts, please do let us know. .ME 1. 1 ohn MorganVerified account @JohnMorganESQ May 6 One thing this all proves. #Marijuana needs to be legalized in Florida! Next Governor needs to make it a priority. � Ohn MOrganVerified account @JohnMorganESQ Let free enterprise sort this all out. Let freedom ring! ! #TippingPoint #Legalize Regards, Keith cp KEITH L. BELL, JR. Shareholder 106 E. College Ave., Ste. 600 Tallahassee, Florida 32301 0 (850) 320.6838 C (850) 261.0932 F (850) 597.7591 ciarkpartinaton.com I kbell@clarkr artinaton.com CLARK PARTINGTON From: Keith Bell Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 1:28 PM To: 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net; 'andysolis©colliergov.net; 'burtsaunders@colliergov.net'; 'pennytaylor©colliergov.net'; 'billmcdaniel@colliergov.net' Cc: Erik Kirk; Emily Lee Subject: Medical Marijuana Regulation- Collier County Dear Commissioners, I have had the opportunity to meet some of you, but not all of you. By way of a brief introduction to some and a reminder to others, I am attorney and lobbyist working on behalf of San Felasco Nurseries, one of the 7 facilities licensed to cultivate, manufacture and dispense medical marijuana in the State of Florida. Working with me on this project and copied on this email is Erik Kirk. Erik and I are following the medical marijuana issue closely and are working with a number of local governments, including Collier County, in an effort to promote safe, conservative and effective medical marijuana regulation. The model regulatory ordinance we are promoting is attached. This ordinance has been adopted in whole or in large part in Osceola, Glades and Sumter Counties and is under consideration in a number of other counties throughout the State. Also attached is the research from the Marijuana Policy Group that serves as the rationale for limiting the number of dispensaries operating in any given jurisdiction based on population. As discussed on a couple of occasions with some of you and also with your staff, we believe that this regulatory framework will ensure a structured and effective roll out of the medical marijuana industry. Further, because the structure of the ordinance is based on research gathered from the roll out of the medical marijuana industry in other states, it anticipates and acts as a counter-measure to a variety of potential issues that an unregulated medical marijuana market creates. We are aware that Collier County has passed a moratorium but we also understand that the moratorium is a temporary measure and that eventually, the issue will have to be substantively addressed. When that time comes, we hope to be a resource that you use in determining the direction the county will take. Should any of you ever have any questions about the matter, please do not hesitate to call. In the meantime, I am also attaching for your review a current comparison of the various bills that have been filed relative to medical marijuana that was prepared by the Florida Association of Counties, which you may find useful. Of note is the fact that regardless of which bill or combination of bills passes, the ultimate decision you are faced with now- how to regulate the location and number of medical marijuana dispensaries in your jurisdiction-will remain your decision. 2 Regards, cp KEITH L. BELL, JR. ria Shareholder 106 E. College Ave., Ste. 600 Tallahassee, Florida 32301 C3 (850) 320.6838 C (850) 261.0932 F (850) 597.7591 cmckpFirtirciton.com kbell@clarkoartington.com CLARK PARTINGTON 3 GoodnerAngela From: Pat Barton <patbarton.naples@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, May 12, 2017 6:31 PM To: Francis.Rooney@mail.house.gov Subject: Fwd: A Dramatic Change in the Legalization Landscape - AG Sessions' memo to US Attorneys Attachments: Sessions Letter to US Attorneys.pdf Dear Congressman Rooney, In light of our recent conversation (with Drug-Free Collier), I wanted to share this information I just received from a colleague in Drug Watch International, recognizing that you may already be aware of this information. I am sending it also to local county and our state elected officials for the purpose of information. We really appreciate your interest in this shared concern. Most sincerely, Bill and Pat Barton (Naples) Forwarded message From: Monte Stiles< Date: Fri, May 12, 2017 at 5:27 PM Subject:A Dramatic Change in the Legalization Landscape-AG Sessions' memo to US Attorneys To: Monte Stiles Friends, we have all been waiting and praying for something to happen in terms of federal enforcement of federal laws regarding drugs. Today, I am forwarding the best news I could possibly share regarding this issue. On May 10, 2017, Attorney General Sessions sent a memo to United States Attorneys directing them to follow all federal laws regarding charging and sentencing in federal investigations. This is a dramatic reversal from the position of former AG Eric Holder, and a return to rules and policies that reflect the law (including federal statutes and numerous Supreme Court decisions). 1 The attached letter from AG Sessions, is more valuable than I can possibly explain right now, but when you combine this letter with Session's statement to a law enforcement group in New York this morning, you get the following: In 2015, more than 52,000 Americans died from a drug overdose.According to a report by the New England Journal of Medicine, the price of heroin is down, the availability is up and the purity is up. We intend to reverse that trend. So we are returning to the enforcement of the law as passed by Congress—plain and simple. If you are a drug trafficker, we will not look the other way. We will not be willfully blind to your conduct. We are talking about a kilogram of heroin— that is 10,000 doses,five kilograms of cocaine and 1,000 kilograms of marijuana. These are not low-level offenders. These are drug dealers. And you're going to prison. See https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-ieff-sessions-delivers-remarks-sergeants- benevolent-association-new-york Quite simply, the Attorney General is telling federal prosecutors to follow the laws of the land, both in terms of charging decisions and sentencing. Consistent with long-standing Department of Justice Policy before Holder,federal resources will be directed towards the most serious of violators, and there are no exceptions granted to states that have surrendered to the drug culture. Because virtually all of the pot manufacturing operations in the United States, and many dispensaries, fit into a mandatory minimum sentencing framework of 5-10 years in prison, large marijuana operations should be prepared to shut down or go to prison and have their property seized and forfeited. Goodbye tax revenues. Goodbye flagrant violations of law. A new sheriff is in town. This doesn't mean that massive raids will happen immediately, or that smaller pot operations will be targeted by federal resources at the beginning, but it does mean that we now have a clear idea of how this administration is going to deal with the commercial pot industry. Every part of that industry is illegal --from advertising, to distribution, to manufacturing, and all revenue collected through drug sales (even revenue that is conveniently rebranded as "taxes") is considered "drug proceeds" under federal law and is subject to forfeiture. There is much more to this story, and how it all plays out in the next few weeks and months will tell us a lot about specific DOJ plans, but this is awesome news to me. I hope that you will widely distribute this information to people in your circle of influence, including governments officials who currently support legalization in their states, or who are considering joining this ridiculous social, medical, economic, and legal experiment in the near future. More later. Monte www.drugwatch.org drug-watch-international@googlegroups.com You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Drug Watch International" group. 2 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to drug-watch- international+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com Furmoreophons' visithttps://Rvuups.gooA|e.com/d/optout. 3 Office of t4r. 1tterne r �t$I ingtztlt,11.( . 20,5$0 , ,ii i ,1 March 8, 2017 MEMORANDUM FOR ALL FEDERAL PROSECU�s�RS FROM: THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SUBJECT: Commitment to Targeting Violent Crime It is the policy of the Department of Justice to reduce crime in America, and addressing violent crime must be a special priority. With crime rates rising, this is not an easy task as all professionals know. But, we do have strong evidence that aggressive prosecutions of federal laws can be effective in combatting crime. Our Department's experience over decades shows these prosecutions can help save lives. Unfortunately,the most recent crime data available shows a 10.8 percent increase in the number of murders in this country, while federal prosecutions for violent crimes have been declining. This memorandum directs a focused effort by the Department's dedicated public servants to investigate, prosecute, and deter crime. Last week, I established a Task Force on Crime Reduction and Public Safety consisting of law enforcement agencies and Department representatives that will make specific recommendations to me on ways in which the federal government can most effectively combat violent crime in partnership with local, state,and tribal law enforcement. As a next step, I am today directing the 94 United States Attorney's Offices to partner with federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement to specifically identify the criminals responsible for significant violent crime in their districts. Once identified, the United States Attorney's Offices must ensure that these drivers of violent crime are prosecuted,using the many tools at a prosecutor's disposal. To accomplish this goal, in all cases, federal prosecutors should coordinate with state and local counterparts to identify the venue (federal or state)that best ensures an immediate and appropriate penalty for these violent offenders. I know many of you are already employing these strategies, and I ask that you increase this effort to ensure that your process is achieving the results you seek. When it is determined that federal prosecution of these violent offenders is appropriate, federal prosecutors should use the substantial tools at their disposal to hold them accountable and ensure an appropriate sanction under federal law. Oftentimes the criminal statutes specifically Commitment to Targeting Violent Crime Page 2 designed to target violent crime will be most applicable. Those statutes include,but are not limited to: • 18 U.S.C. § 922 (firearms offenses,including possession and straw purchasing offenses); • 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) (possession of a firearm during and in relation to a violent crime or drug trafficking offense); • 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (Hobbs Act robbery); • 18 U.S.C. § 2119 (carjacking); • 18 U.S.C. § 1959 (violent crime in aid of racketeering); and • 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-68 (Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act). Of course, federal prosecutors are not limited to using only these tools, and, in fact, statutes targeting other criminal acts may be equally effective. For example,many violent crimes are driven by drug trafficking and drug trafficking organizations. For this reason, disrupting and dismantling those drug organizations through prosecutions under the Controlled Substances Act can drive violent crime down. I encourage you to employ the full complement of federal law to address the problem of violent crime in your district. Further guidance and support in executing this priority—including an updated memorandum on charging for all criminal cases—will be forthcoming. By consistently identifying the leading violent offenders in our communities and employing all available tools to hold them accountable, we will combat violent crime. Thank you for your commitment to work aggressively toward this goal and for your service to the Department. GoodnerAngela From: Cindy Grossman <clgrossman2012@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday,July 9, 2017 1:00 PM To: SolisAndy Subject: RE: Medical Marijuana MUST be made available Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed I am writing about Medical Marijuana, and specifically, the article in the July 9 Naples Daily News. I have acute chronic pain which has responded to no treatment except for opioids. I want to try legal marijuana, which I know has helped many others. Florida's citizens- including 64%of Collier County citizens, voted FOR medical marijuana to be available. The county's stalling tactics are not acceptable. Cmsr Saunder's comment stating concern about dispensaries that would not be financially viable is absurd. The government is not supposed to pick winners and losers. It certainly doesn't deny permits to any other type of retailer/restaurant/etc out of concern for its success. And pharmacies that are in financial trouble could sell opioids and other drugs to the black market just as much as marijuana dispensaries could - using Saunder's comment. Notably, states with legal medical marijuana sell far fewer opioids than states which ban it. And those states have far fewer opioid deaths. It is long overdue for the County to abide by the will of its citizens and support the health of its citizens, -- and as a bonus, reduce opioid use. 1 Page 1 of 1 Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 at 2:34 PM From: "Daniel Cook" <DanielFrancis1620@gmx.com> To: DonnaFiala@colliergov.net Subject: Medical Marijuana in Collier County To Whom It May Concern, I am writing you today, to urge a vote for OPTION 2 in tomorrow's vote on medical marijuana dispenseries in Collier County. As you know, nearly 2/3rds of Collier County voters joined the millions of other Floridians who voted to legalize medical marijuana. It is my hope that you respect the will of the people on this matter. People in Collier County should have access to medical marijuana, especially considering that pharmaceutical drugs, tobacco, and alchohol are all currently available to the public. The people will be watching this vote closely. Rest assured that a vote against the will of the people will result in a strong grassroots effort against you in your next election. Sincerely, Daniel F. Cook http://bccvault01.bcc.colliergov.net/EnterpriseV ault/search/ContentV iew.as... 3/12/2018 Page 1 of 1 Good Afternoon Commissioners, My name is David Conway, and I am a resident of Collier County. I am also a mental health therapist in Collier County. I began my practice in Kalamazoo County, Michigan and then moved here a year ago. It is my understanding that 64.3% of voters in Collier County voted yes on Amendment 2. I am writing to show my support for those who prefer to have their mental health and physical health related issues treated with marijuana. I have had many clients over the years who have benefited from marijuana and were successfully treated for mental health issues like anxiety, depression, PTSD, and OCD. I have helped clients obtain legal access, under physicians care, to be treated with marijuana with great outcomes. Many of whom have tried the more traditional legal route of using pharmaceutical drugs with no relief, and oftentimes their symptoms increase. I also have family members who could not function without marijuana because their physical pain and emotional struggles are extremely debilitating. Marijuana gives them the quality of life they deserve. In my opinion, allowing people to choose their own medicine for their own bodies is the humane thing to do. I support those who choose to treat with marijuana and I am asking that you do as well. Thank you for your time and I know that this may not be the easiest decision to make, because I assume there will be backlash regardless of the outcome. Regardless of that, I am asking you to do the right thing in order to help people who are in desperate need. Sincerely, David S. Conway, LCSW http://bccvault01.bcc.colliergov.net/EnterpriseVault/search/ContentView.as... 3/12/2018 Page 1 of 1 Good Morning Commissioners, I am writing you today to urge you to heed the wishes of the 64.3% of Collier County voters who voted Yes on Amendment 2 last year. Please let the patients in our county have safe access to a medicine that gives them the relief they desperately need. Florida (and Collier County) voted for this Amendment because these patients are our neighbors, our friends and our family members. They are our children with epilepsy, whose little bodies are overcome with seizures. They are our elderly who suffer from cancer and glaucoma. They are our veterans who with are afflicted with Post-traumatic stress disorder. They are our friends and neighbors with Crohn's disease, Parkinson's disease or Multiple sclerosis that struggle in excruciating pain just to get through each day. They are the sick and the weak among us. These are our citizens who are crying out for help. The people heard their pleas and voted to change our constitution to allow our friends and family to have access to this medicine. We've stood together across political divides and party lines because this issue transcends age, race and creed. Please stand with us now and vote unanimously to publicly vet a Land Development Code Amendment that will permit medical marijuana dispensaries in the same zoning districts as pharmacies. There are counties all over the country that have been able to achieve this safely and successfully and we can do it here in Collier County. I beg you to think of our citizens that are suffering and not close your hearts to them. This is one the most important decisions you will make as commissioners and I beg you to chose compassion over bureaucracy. Thank you for your time. Rebecca Conway Sent from my iPhone http://bccvault01.bcc.colliergov.net/EnterpriseVault/search/ContentView.as... 3/12/2018 Page 1 of 1 Good Morning Commissioners, I am writing you today to urge you to heed the wishes of the 64.3% of Collier County voters who voted Yes on Amendment 2 last year. Please let the patients in our county have safe access to a medicine that gives them the relief they desperately need. Florida (and Collier County) voted for this Amendment because these patients are our neighbors, our friends and our family members. They are our children with epilepsy, whose little bodies are overcome with seizures. They are our elderly who suffer from cancer and glaucoma. They are our veterans who with are afflicted with Post-traumatic stress disorder. They are our friends and neighbors with Crohn's disease, Parkinson's disease or Multiple sclerosis that struggle in excruciating pain just to get through each day. They are the sick and the weak among us. These are our citizens who are crying out for help. The people heard their pleas and voted to change our constitution to allow our friends and family to have access to this medicine. We've stood together across political divides and party lines because this issue transcends age, race and creed. Please stand with us now and vote unanimously to publicly vet a Land Development Code Amendment that will permit medical marijuana dispensaries in the same zoning districts as pharmacies. There are counties all over the country that have been able to achieve this safely and successfully and we can do it here in Collier County. I beg you to think of our citizens that are suffering and not close your hearts to them. This is one the most important decisions you will make as commissioners and I beg you to chose compassion over bureaucracy. Richard Conover ')((((o>{ http://bccvault01.bcc.colliergov.net/EnterpriseVault/search/ContentView.as... 3/12/2018 Page 1 of 1 The referendum clearly indicated, by a substantial majority, that Florida residents want to have medical marijuana legalized. The Governor has created rules for opening dispensaries. The dispensaries are restricted to selling only to those with prescriptions for medical marijuana. It's unfortunate that you can't tax these sales but that is no reason to not approve their opening in Collier County. You have a duty to uphold the law. I hope you will see that this means you should vote in favor of the opening of dispensaries in Collier. Thank you for your consideration. Ronald Diorio 6510 Valen Way Naples, FL 34108 239 248 0078 http://bccvault01.bcc.colliergov.net/EnterpriseVault/search/ContentView.as... 3/12/2018 Page 1 of 1 Mr. Solis Just wanted to weigh in on the medical marijuana issue. It was voted on by the people and now it is time our legislators followed the will of the people. I'm afraid that this issue will have consequences from the voters in the coming elections so you may want to follow the voters direction. Hope all is well with you and your family. Respectfully, Tom Unsworth Unsworth,Marretta&Unsworth, Certified Public Accountants,LLC 3960 Radio Road,Suite 203 Naples,Florida 34104 239-649-8111 Tel 239-649-8214 Fax torn.unsworth@umucpa.com tunsworth3@comcast.net CAUTION:This communication is intended for the sole use of the individual to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged,confidential,and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.If the reader of this communication is not the intended recipient,or the employee or agent for delivering the communications to the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any dissemination,distribution,or copying of this communication may be strictly prohibited. If you received this communication in error,please notify the sender immediately by telephone call,and delete the communication. SECURITY REMINDER -- SECURITY REMINDER--SECURITY REMINDER --SECURITY REMINDER Reminder:E-mail sent through the Internet is not secure. Do not use e-mail to send us confidential information such as credit card numbers,changes of address,PIN numbers,passwords,tax returns,or other important identity sensitive information.Your e-mail message is not private in that it is subject to review by the Firm,its officers,agents and employees-AND ANYONE WHO USES THE INTERNET. http://bccvault01.bcc.colliergov.net/EnterpriseVault/search/ContentView.as... 3/12/2018 Page 1 of 1 Commissioner Solis, I urge you to vote to BAN medicinal marijuana dispensaries in our county at Tuesdays meeting. The fact that Collier officials will not be able to limit the number of dispensaries,not be able to deny zoning to a dispensary,and won't be able to charge dispensaries more fees that a pharmacy,are reasons enough to keep them out of Collier county! With the amount of growth that we have seen in recent years,and looking ahead to future growth,we eventually could see these "pot shops"popping up everywhere!! Just look at other states that already have dispensaries,and ask yourself,is this what you want for Collier county? You have"the whole community at large to think about",not just a few. I've lived in Naples for 43 years,and I'm always very proud to say I live here. Our commissioners have done an amazing job and should continue to strive to keep Collier county the beautiful area that it is.Thank you for your time. Karen Rosen Naples,FI http://bccvault01.bcc.colliergov.net/EnterpriseVault/search/ContentView.as... 3/12/20 1 8 Page 1 of 1 Good Morning Commissioners, I am writing you today to urge you to heed the wishes of the 64.3% of Collier County voters who voted Yes on Amendment 2 last year. Please let the patients in our county have safe access to a medicine that gives them the relief they desperately need. Florida (and Collier County) voted for this Amendment because these patients are our neighbors, our friends and our family members. They are our children with epilepsy, whose little bodies are overcome with seizures. They are our elderly who suffer from cancer and glaucoma. They are our veterans who with are afflicted with Post-traumatic stress disorder. They are our friends and neighbors with Crohn's disease, Parkinson's disease or Multiple sclerosis that struggle in excruciating pain just to get through each day. They are the sick and the weak among us. These are our citizens who are crying out for help. The people heard their pleas and voted to change our constitution to allow our friends and family to have access to this medicine. We've stood together across political divides and party lines because this issue transcends age, race and creed. Please stand with us now and vote unanimously to publicly vet a Land Development Code Amendment that will permit medical marijuana dispensaries in the same zoning districts as pharmacies. There are counties all over the country that have been able to achieve this safely and successfully and we can do it here in Collier County. I beg you to think of our citizens that are suffering and not close your hearts to them. This is one the most important decisions you will make as commissioners and I beg you to chose compassion over bureaucracy. Thank you for your time. Jack S Morris AP http://bccvault01.bcc.colliergov.net/EnterpriseVault/search/ContentView.as... 3/12/2018 Page 1 of 1 Good Morning Commissioners, I am writing you today to urge you to heed the wishes of the 64.3% of Collier County voters who voted Yes on Amendment 2 last year. Please let the patients in our county have safe access to a medicine that gives them the relief they desperately need. Florida (and Collier County) voted for this Amendment because these patients are our neighbors, our friends and our family members. They are our children with epilepsy, whose little bodies are overcome with seizures. They are our elderly who suffer from cancer and glaucoma. They are our veterans who with are afflicted with Post-traumatic stress disorder. They are our friends and neighbors with Crohn's disease, Parkinson's disease or Multiple sclerosis that struggle in excruciating pain just to get through each day. They are the sick and the weak among us. These are our citizens who are crying out for help. The people heard their pleas and voted to change our constitution to allow our friends and family to have access to this medicine. We've stood together across political divides and party lines because this issue transcends age, race and creed. Please stand with us now and vote unanimously to publicly vet a Land Development Code Amendment that will permit medical marijuana dispensaries in the same zoning districts as pharmacies. There are counties all over the country that have been able to achieve this safely and successfully and we can do it here in Collier County. I beg you to think of our citizens that are suffering and not close your hearts to them. This is one the most important decisions you will make as commissioners and I beg you to chose compassion over bureaucracy. Thank you for your time. Elsa Grifoni Marco Island, FL http://bccvault01.bcc.colliergov.net/EnterpriseVault/search/ContentView.as... 3/12/2018 GoodnerAngela From: Jamie Cain <jamiescain@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday,July 11, 2017 12:34 AM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; FialaDonna;TaylorPenny; SaundersBurt Subject: Cannabis Consideration Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed Dear Commissioners, I am writing you to encourage you to continue with the LDC amendment research for appropriate development of MMTC's within Collier County and to discourage you from removing the availability of safe access to cannabis treatment for our aging and ill population through the use of any moratorium. The people have clearly spoken.With all due respect to Ms.Taylor and Mr. Saunders most recent comments in the NDN, it is the act of restricting safe access that will be what plays out in the black market, and representing the 106,027 voters who made known their wishes for safe access is job#1 on this issue. It is always surprising to me the dichotomy in our thinking between lab created medication vs. plant based medication. We have no problem with a pharmacy on nearly every corner and inside every grocery store.We have no problem permitting the availability of alcohol, beer and wine outlets in (generally) at least 5 different establishments on every main street corner around town,or cigarettes inside every gas station,grocery store and dime store, but a plant that has never caused a death is somehow going to ruin the beauty of our neighborhoods, corrupt our children,and destroy the peace of our neighbors. Do we even examine the reasoning behind our beliefs? I could give you tons of stats and over 24,000 medical publications on PubMed, 620 ongoing or recently completed studies on "marijuana"on ClinicalTrials.gov, another 113 studies on cannabidiol and 31 studies on extracts alone, but I will leave you with these few stats to consider: Data from the WHO and many other sources states that cannabis relatively"low dependence liability"compared to other substances or treatment: Caffeine has a 7%dependence liability, Cannabis has a 9%dependence liability, Alcohol has a 15%dependence liability, Tobacco has a 32%dependence liability, and Opioids has a 30%+dependence liability. These same studies show that cannabinoids possess no practical LD50 rating in humans: "The acute toxicity is very low. There are no confirmed cases of human deaths from cannabis poisoning in the world medical literature."World Health Organization What this and all the serious studies are saying is that cannabis possesses a remarkable safety ratio. Not only should Collier County provide the allowable outlets in state law to the citizens of Collier, but cannabis should be removed from all schedules.Why we ban one of the healthiest choices for medicine in the world is far beyond my imagination. All pharmaceuticals possess some very dangerous side effects: Opioids include addiction, overdose death,suicidal thoughts and arrhythmias Acetaminophen include liver damage and death NSAIDS include kidney failure, ED, ulcers, heart attack,stroke and death Benzodiazepines include amnesia, impaired motor control and death SSRI's include seizures, heart disease, liver damage,suicidal thoughts,tremors and tinnitus Cannabis'include dry mouth, dizziness and elevated mood. Cannabis and cannabinoids have the ability to act as both a palliative and a curative (modulating) medication. According to the NAS in 2017 cannabis is palliative in chronic pain, nausea, MS,epilepsy,gastrointestinal disorders and appetite. It is curative in Neurological and Autoimmune disorders, cancer, HIV, MRSA, Neurotoxicity and Neurotrauma. I came to California this summer to be educated on cannabis and to be legally and safely treated.The process was so clearly medical. I walked into a physician's office,gave him my medical records showing the white matter and damage that has occurred in my brain and body as a result of hemiplegic migraines and lupus. Within 2 hours I was on my way to a dispensary with a full recommendation and directions on how to treat myself. Within 4 weeks I went a full week without a brain damaging migraine. In 3 months I have had only 4 migraines and I have not lost the use of half of my body once since treatment began. In contrast, I never went a full day without a migraine in the 6 years previous. I was "intractable status migrainous."The real truth is, the medication I was given to "prevent"migraines(which it never did), Verapamil, caused me to have a heart block!Cannabis doesn't do that,yet it both has acted as a preventative and a migraine abortive for me. I can write again, I can read again,the tinnitus is nearly gone, I don't wake up in the middle of the night with stomach lurching, aura inducing migraine. I don't stand up only to realize my left side is paralyzed and fall on the ground! I don't have tremors, I don't stutter, I have my words back, my blood levels (sugar, cholesterol,disease markers and kidney and liver functions) have all improved, my heart block is gone, I have dropped 4 different dangerous medications, and I am currently on track to be valedictorian of my class. In Florida I had to risk my freedom in order to begin to be healed. In CA there are doctors who have been treating with cannabis for over 20 years. It's normal here and it is understood how to utilize the medication to get better. Oddly enough,you don't have to spend your life high,you get your life back! I will no longer stand quietly by knowing what I know about the capabilities of cannabis to improve the life of the chronically or terminally ill while others still have to go through the fear and the horror of having to be illegally healed. I sincerely hope you won't either. You are all very smart people. Please do the smart thing and do not ignore the wishes of your constituency. Allow cannabis to be a normal treatment for our law abiding patients. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Jamie Cain "Marijuana,in its natural form,is one of the therapeutically active substances known to man. By any measure of rational analysis,marijuana can be safely used within a supervised routine of medical care."DEA Chief Administrative Law Judge Francis Young,1988 2 GoodnerAngela From: Adam Wright <adam.wright@winknews.com> Sent: Wednesday,July 12, 2017 11:43 AM To: SolisAndy Subject: WINK Inquiry Good morning, I'm contacting you because I am interviewing a Collier County resident this afternoon who is very disappointed in the County's vote yesterday to extend the ban on medical marijuana dispensaries. He suffers from a variety of ailments and was hoping to treat them legally with cannabis. He feels that the county is ignoring the will of the more than 70%of Florida voters who approved medical marijuana. What is your response to his sentiments? My deadline is 4pm. Thanks, Adam ADAM WRIGHT I REPORTER I 239.220.7770 I adam.wright@winknews.com 1 GoodnerAngela From: Ellen Fiedler <ellenlahm@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday,July 11, 2017 9:18 AM To: SolisAndy Subject: Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed Dear Sir, 62%of Collier County voters,voted for medical marijuana.We did not intend to travel to another county to purchase our medicine. Do the right thing and vote for dispensaries in Collier County, or expect we will vote you out in the next election. Thank you, Ruth Fiedler 522 Charlemagne Blvd. Naples, FL 34112 Sent from my iPad GoodnerAngela From: Cindy Grossman <clgrossman2012@gmail.com> Sent: Friday,July 21, 2017 9:13 PM To: SolisAndy Subject: question - marijuana vote In spite of the following from the NDN: This is a constitutional right now,"Solis said. "To say that a county can opt out is like saying a county can opt out of free speech or bearing arms." you voted no regarding marijuana dispensaries. I dont' understand. Please explain. You must be aware that in states with legal medical marijuana, opioid use, overdoses and deaths have decreased markedly, and that only marijuana can cure or alleviate certain conditions, and that it's impossible to die from ingesting any amount of marijuana --and that Floridians have spoken, by a wide margin, to make this curative available to those who need it. I look forward to your reply. Thank you. Cindy Grossman 2671 Citrus Lake Dr#E301 Naples 1 GoodnerAngela From: Bill Barton <wlbarton39@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday,July 13, 2017 11:42 AM To: penny@pennytaylor.biz; FialaDonna; Bill Mcdaniel; Burt Saunders; SolisAndy Subject: decisions From the Desk of: Bill Barton July 13, 2017 To: Penny Taylor, Chair Donna Fiala Bill McDaniel Burt Saunders Andy Solis Subject: Commission decisions of July 11, 2017 Dear Commissioners, Just a note to commend you on your thoughtful discussion and action regarding the issue of marijuana dispensaries in Collier County. Certainly,there seems to be unanimity that the current state legislation intended to implement Amendment 2 is confusing and provides local legislative bodies little direction in their decision making deliberations. Delay of a decision was certainly appropriate. Be assured that I and others will continue to work with you and our state legislators/regulators to achieve a method of complying with the intent of Amendment 2 in ways that are best suited to all of our citizens. On another subject, I also commend your decision to avoid adding .25 mils to this years' budget for the purpose providing monies for Conservation Collier. Although I support the concept of continuing to acquire environmentally sensitive lands, your decision to delay the millage increase and direct staff to explore an alternative option of a 1 cent sales tax referendum, which revenues could include new funding for Conservation Collier, was a wise and prudent decision. Sincerely, Bill Barton 106 Moorings Park Drive C-203 Naples, FL 34105 (239) 641-7941 wlbarton39@gmail.com 2 �- R CCIIMG©_ JUL 18 2017 Patricia Bush, PhD By:A4_ C0 Professor Emeritus, Georgetown U School of Medicine I am a pharmacosociologist with my first degree Pharmacy at U. Mich. 1954 Year-rounder in Pelican Bay I want to comment about Medical Marijuana in Collier County. Voters supported it via a referendum. Are concerns about where and by whom it should be dispensed, and it being a "gateway" drug. I should like to dispel the latter immediately. The reason it is a "gateway drug" is because it is illegal. There is nothing anyone can have that can make them crave something they've never had. However, the person who is illegally selling someone marijuana can offer that person another illegal drug, perhaps on sale or even free to try. And that opens the gateway door. My primary concerns about selling medical marijuana are about where and by whom it will be dispensed. As a prescription drug, I think it should be dispensed by a pharmacist. But not just any pharmacist. That pharmacist should have available a computer software system that keeps track of consumer's prescriptions and possible side effects and interactions with other drugs and includes medical marijuana. That pharmacist should also provide a printed package insert (PPI) about the medical marijuana it dispenses as it does about other medicines. That pharmacist should be educated about medical marijuana and trained to be able to counsel consumers about it. Florida requires hours of continuing education for pharmacists to keep their licenses.A course on controlled substances is offered in Florida but I found no evidence on line that it includes marijuana. I am also concerned about efforts to limit medical marijuana to oral use. We know that some health problems, e.g., asthma, are treated best via inhaled medicines. Last year I visited Denver and unlike what I read in a Monday NDN letter, pot shops were not on every main street corner. I visited several. A small medical marijuana dispensing shop was next to a recreational marijuana shop. The one dispensing the medical marijuana was staffed by a well informed pharmacist who was licensed to dispense it. The recreational shop was staffed by a very well informed man who gave excellent advice about all the various marijuana containing items and equipment available. Both shops had printed material to hand out. I visited quite a large recreational marijuana shop. It had a very comfortable room showing a video about marijuana. I inquired and found staff in the adjacent room to be very well educated and informed about their products. Patricia J. Bush, Ph.D. it Professor Emeritus Georgetown University School of Medicine I Consultant&Author 6825 Grenadier Blvd,Apt.1405 Naples,FL 34108-7218 Tel: 239-3847111 bushpjwork@gmail.com GoodnerAngela From: GrecoSherry on behalf of TaylorPenny Sent: Friday,July 28, 2017 2:59 PM To: FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; McDanielBill; OchsLeo Subject: ONE WAY COMMUNICATION - Amendment 2 - Medical Marijuana Attachments: celestephilipfloridasurgeongeneral.pdf Good afternoon, Attached is a letter mailed out from my office to the Florida Department of Health regarding Amendment 2 - Medical Marijuana. Have a good weekend. sicerry &eco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 SherryGreco@colliergov.net Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 1 4,4 r tt. Board of Collier County Commissioners Donna Fiala Andy Solis, Esq. Burt L.Saunders Penny Taylor William L.McDaniel,Jr. District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 July 28, 2017 Dr. Celeste Philip, MD, MPH State Surgeon General Florida Department of Health 4052 Bald Cypress Way Tallahassee, FL 32399 #A01 Subject: Amendment 2, Medical Marijuana Dear Dr. Philip: The citizens of Florida, by amending our state constitution, have determined that allowing the use of medical products derived from the plant marijuana may relieve the pain and suffering of a small percentage of our population afflicted with certain maladies. As one would expect,the Collier County Board of Commissioners is unanimous in their intent to comply with the terms of Amendment 2 and Florida's recently enacted law regulating the conditions under which those marijuana products may be distributed to Floridians whose health may be positively benefited by use of such products. In the same instance, some of my colleagues on the Collier County Commission have indicated a preference to adopt a method of distribution that avoids the need for the placement of medical marijuana dispensaries on the streets of our county. That is,to exercise the legal option to ban dispensaries as certain Florida counties and municipalities have already done. My thought on how to accomplish both of these objectives is through the establishment of a private sector dedicated delivery system, supplying registered patients delivery of their prescribed products directly from one of the State authorized distribution centers located, preferably in Collier County, or in neighboring Lee County. It is my thought that such delivery system will be of great benefit to those patients that are too ill to travel to a dispensary, convenient for others, and by the elimination of the overhead/profit component of local dispensaries, such delivery network would be cost effective to users. I understand that such delivery system is currently in use in parts of the state, specifically deliveries from the approved distribution center Truelieve, located in Pinellas County, with deliveries to recipients in Sarasota County. I am not aware of what rules, if any, regulate those existing delivery systems. 3299 Tamiami Trail East,Suite 303•Naples,Florida 34112-5746.239-252-8097•FAX 239-252-3602 The purpose of this communication is to request FDH to provide to my office any current rules regulating marijuana product deliveries, or, in the absence of such rules,to urge the FDH to promulgate new rules that take into account the recent legislation implementing Amendment 2. to accommodate those counties/municipalities that prefer to choose the legislative option to ban local dispensaries. Having such delivery rules in hand will greatly assist the Collier County Commission in determining the best course of action for Collier County. Your early response to this request will be helpful. Best 'egards, Penny Taylor Board of Collier County Commissioners, Chair District 4 Commissioner Cc: Mr. Christian Bax Office of Medical Marijuana Use 4052 Bald Cypress Way Tallahassee, FL 32399 Leo Ochs BCC Collier County Manager Collier County Board of County Commissioners Commission Donna Fiala, District 1 William McDaniel, District 5 Andy Solis, District 2 Burt Saunders, District 3 Guy Blanchette Drug Free Collier 3003 Tamiami Trail North Suite 303 Naples, Fl 34103 Bill Barton 106 Moorings Park Drive Apt C203 Naples, Fl 34105 Page 1 of 2 Collier County Commissioners, As a full time resident of Collier County I am concerned with the upcoming potential "Ordinance" regarding medical Marijuana dispensaries. I will disclose that personally I am not a user of marijuana either medically or recreationally, however, the law is the law and the citizen's of Florida have spoken. It is clearly a violation of state statutes to use Zoning as a tool to discriminate against legal commerce and the public's right to access to medication and care. This is a very slippery slope that can, and most likely will, invite litigation and cost us the tax payers money. I urge you to follow the law and the will of the people and to allow legal commerce to flow as is legally prescribed. To do otherwise is to allow your personal prejudices and fears to trump the law. Cordially, IE Hector C. Fernandez AIA NCARB USGBC Principal I Architect Miami Office 8950 sw 74 ct. suite 2201 miami, florida 33156 786.206.9895 x120 off Marco Island I Naples Office 950 n. collier blvd. suite 400 marco island, florida 34145 239.330.8124 x120 off 786.513.0686 fax 786.315.6764 direct www.hfarchitect.net http://bccvault01.bcc.colliergov.net/EnterpriseVault/search/ContentView.as... 3/12/2018 Page 2 of 2 www.marcoarchitect.com http://bccvault01.bcc.colliergov.net/EnterpriseVault/search/ContentView.as... 3/12/2018 GoodnerAngela From: Bill Barton <wlbarton39@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, October 6, 2017 4:19 PM To: TaylorPenny; FialaDonna; Burt Saunders; Bill Mcdaniel; SolisAndy Subject: Fwd: Fidelity National Title Co. info Commissioners, I thought this information might be of interest to you. Bill https://mutualfundreform.com/fidelity-title-insurance-to-block-coverage-of- cannabis-properties/ Fidelity National Title Group, a subsidiary of Fidelity National Financial, the largest title insurer in the world, has issued an underwriting bulletin to its agents in 28 states to not insure any land used "for the production or distribution of marijuana." According to the memo issued June 29, 2017 by Fidelity National Title, the company's Chief Underwriting Counsel said that properties in the 28 states "that have in some capacity legalized cultivation, distribution, manufacture or sale of marijuana products" will not be insured by Fidelity. The bulletin instructs its agents and people in company operations to include the following language in every title commitment that the company issues in the 28 states. This underwriting bulletin (coded as Fidelity National Title Insurance bulletin 2017 RC-05) states: "Please be aware that due to the conflict between federal and state laws concerning the cultivation, distribution, manufacture or sale of marijuana, the Company (Fidelity) is not able to close or insure any transaction involving Land that is associated with these activities." On its web site, Fidelity National Financial describes itself as "the nation's largest title insurance company through its title insurance underwriters - Fidelity National Title, Chicago Title, Commonwealth Land Title, Alamo Title and National Title of New York - that collectively issue more title insurance policies than any other title FI DELITY NATIONAL company in the United States." T.I T k E CROUP ai The bulletin recommends that if a title company sends out a "welcome" package or instructions before closing that it should include a similar statement saying the land will not insured. The bulletin also says "the sooner we indicate our unwillingness to insure, the better all around." In effect, the bulletin can affect the purchase and sale of undeveloped land, commercial properties, retail stores, and houses, where marijuana has been used even in states where it is legal. In effect, the bulletin and denial of title insurance means that many properties will not be financeable in a real estate transaction. When a commitment letter is sent to a purchaser, the Fidelity underwriting bulletin means a seller and buyer of real estate have to sign an affidavit attesting that the property was not used for any purposes related to cannabis activities. The bulletin was issued because the company said it did not want to discover at the actual closing event that the property "is used or intended for such purposes," which would then resulting declining the title insurance coverage. If the statement is sent to buyers before the closing Fidelity said "it should make it easier to decline earlier in the transaction and put the burden of disclosure on the parties to the transaction." Impact on Cannabis-Related Real Estate Reaction to the Fidelity underwriting bulletin was strong. One title insurance executive said the memo "sounds like a game changer" in terms of how cannabis- related properties can be bought and sold. He also speculated that the company may have been acting in response to federal pressure to stop the expansion of the cannabis industry in states where it has become decriminalized. The title insurance executive said "this can be a way to shunt this title insurance business to a subsidiary or the re-insurance industry at a much higher cost for title insurance or to use an indemnity policy. In a Linkedln post on March 2017, prior to the issuance of the Fidelity underwriting bulletin, attorney Michael J. Moore, citing an earlier 2016 article written by Vince Sliwoski, wrote "in states that have legalized the plant so far, title insurance companies set up a specific exception in their policies which 2 excludes coverage over governmental actions, such as civil and criminal forfeiture of property under the federal Controlled Substance Act. Failure of the purchaser to disclose its intended use of the property may result in the title insurance company denying liability on a claim relating to property forfeiture because of the marijuana activity on the property. It is recommended that a buyer disclose their intended use of the land. Otherwise, the title company has an argument not to pay on claims." Moore also said "many title insurance companies have refused to act as an escrow agent for those transactions, because of the uncertain legalities involved. They have refused to handle the transfer of funds and closing documents. Some companies will not get involved in any aspect of the closing process, while others may provide a facility for the settlement of the transaction and issue a title insurance policy. Without title companies providing escrow services, the parties to a transaction must locate neutral third parties to perform the service." While the insurance industry, including life, auto, home, have addressed claims and procedures in states where cannabis is legal or decriminalized, the real estate title insurance directive has more significant and expensive implications. The Fidelity underwriting directive, however, takes the decision to not insure title for cannabis-related properties to a new level and one that may have been developed at the behest of federal authorities. www.drugwatch.org drug-watch-international@googlegroups.com You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Drug Watch International"group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to drug-watch- international+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options,visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. 3 GoodnerAngela From: Nick Garulay <nick@myfloridagreen.com> Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2017 7:07 AM To: SolisAndy Subject: Fwd: Upcoming educational symposium for Medical Marijuana Regards, Nick G. MY FLORIDA GREEN 239.307.5307 The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information, including patient information protected by federal and state privacy laws. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. From: Nick Garulay Sent:Wednesday, October 18, 2017 5:44:00 PM To: BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net Subject: Upcoming educational symposium for Medical Marijuana Dear Collier Country Commissioners, I hope this message finds you well. My name is Nick Garulay and I spoke at your last meeting regarding the proposed ban on Medical Marijuana treatment centers (AKA Medical Marijuana Dispensaries). To refresh your memory, I was the extremely animated and passionate individual that spoke about the opioid and heroin epidemic we are facing here in S.W. Florida. I own a Medical Marijuana office here in Naples that facilitates Medical Marijuana cards both qualifying patients and physicians licensed with the Office of Medical Marijuana use. This past August,The Florida Weekly posted a front page article stating there were 607 opioid overdoses in the last 7 months documented in Lee county alone.That's 87 people per month, 3.3 people per day.We all know an article like that would be devastating for Collier County, but we should agree that we have a serious epidemic on our hands in SW Florida and we must work together as a community to be part of the solution and not the problem. According to record, 60%of voters who are registered in Collier County voted YES on Amendment 2. With over half of our residents in favor of Medical Marijuana, I would hope we can work together to enable patient access of this natural alternative to synthetic medicine and that killed NO ONE EVER in history. In efforts to properly educate licensed physicians and qualifying patients, we are hosting an educational symposium for patients and physicians right here in Naples at the Hilton. Please see the link below. Please consider this a personal invitation to our event, Cannabis Speaks!The speakers are some of the industry's leading pioneers and medical professionals who are extremely knowledgeable about medical cannabis (aka medical marijuana). 1 Looking forward to seeing you soon and if you'd like to be in touch with me personally for coffee, I am always available on my personal cell 239 269 7713. Regards, Nick Garulay MY FLORIDA GREEN 239.307.5307 MY FLORIDA MEDICAL MARIJUANA MADE EASY af The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information, including patient information protected by federal and state privacy laws. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. 2 GoodnerAngela From: Cindy Grossman <clgrossman2012@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 27, 2017 10:53 AM To: SolisAndy Subject: Fwd: my Sept letter,thank you. I am beyond dismayed at the new delay in marijuana dispensaries, which you voted for. Below is the letter that I sent to the NDN, and which was published a few days ago, about medical marijuana. Unlike opioids and liquor, it is not possible to die from a marijuana overdose. Marijuana is a legitimate medication which saves lives. I just met yet another person with such a story; due to pain, his mother had been drugged out of her mind from morphine for years, and not able to get out of bed; barely aware of what was going on.Thanks to marijuana, now she is a fully functional person, who has dropped from 400 to 200 pounds. No more morphine. The cultural bias against marijuana is unfounded. Much if it is ginned up by drug manufacturers, which dont' want their opioid profits to drop further as more states legalize marijuana, at least for medical use. The County's ban is unreasonable and unfair to patients who need this medication to be more easily available. Home delivery is expensive. It also makes it much more difficult for patients to adjust their dosage as needed, as doctors only make recommendations; there are no hard rules as there are for other Rx's.Taking marijuana for a medical condition requires a learning curve. CPD or THC or a combination? Tincture or capsules or other form of ingestion? How much? Marijuana already is expensive, as it's not covered by insurance.The County is making it even more expensive, and harder to get, and harder to use. Marijuana is no more harmful than alcohol. It's certainly less harmful than opioids. Given the enormous concern about the opioid epidemic, I would think that the County would be embracing marijuana, instead of fighting it. The State will drag its feet forever.There is a DPH "Guideline" which tries to diminish the statute by eliminating chronic pain as a qualifying illness, even though the statute is crystal clear in naming chronic pain as a qualifying illness. Among other State stalls. I was willing to go along with the last County vote for a "temporary" ban; but at this point, it's time to stop delaying. Florida's citizens spoke, loudly, on this issue. Sheldon Adelson and his ilk lost. Big Pharma lost. I hope that you will change your position on this issue, which affects people in the most personal of ways. Thank you. Cindy Grossman 2671 Citrus Lake Dr#E301 Naples My letter to the editor follows: It's clear to me that writers of letters opposing legal medical marijuana are lucky enough to not know anyone who has needed it. Examples: children suffering from seizures which only marijuana can alleviate; cancer patients suffering from chemotherapy-caused nausea; and people suffering from various types of acute chronic pain which only marijuana can alleviate. While opioids, other drugs, and various non-drug interventions, can and do help many patients, they don't help all patients. And opioids, other drugs, and surgeries, present risks of addiction, death, and other uncomfortable or dangerous side effects. Studies show that marijuana helps many conditions which other drugs don't, and without the adverse side effects. A former cancer patient told me that the "watered-down" marijuana pills provided by his doctors didn't help his unbearable chemotherapy-caused nausea, and he was forced to buy illegal marijuana, which did cure his nausea. No one who is so ill should have to bear such a burden or incur such a risk; nor should his/her family. Studies show that in states with legal medical marijuana, opioid sales have dropped dramatically. Moreover, as opioid sales drop, so do overdoses and deaths from overdoses. And, it's not possible to die from a marijuana overdose. Big Pharmacy opposes medical marijuana because it hurts opioid sales. But more and more patients and their families, who know the truth about the benefits of medical marijuana, continue to fight for the right to use this relatively inexpensive, and relatively harmless, drug. Florida's citizens have spoken, and it's long overdue for our State and local governments to make medical marijuana available to those who want it. Please contact your County Commissioners and State legislators. Cindy Grossman, Naples 239 325 9625 2 GoodnerAngela From: Bill Barton <wlbarton39@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 1:35 PM To: TaylorPenny; SolisAndy; FialaDonna; Bill Mcdaniel; Burt Saunders; BrockMaryJo Cc: Guy Blanchette; Ana Dimercurio; Lisa Gruenloh; Beth Jones; Kimper, Susan;veora little; Allen Weiss; Pat Barton From the Desk of: Bill Barton December 12, 2017 To: Penny Taylor, Chair, Collier County Commission Andy Solis, Vice Chair Donna Fiala Bill McDaniel,Jr. Burt Saunders Leo Ochs, County Manager Subject: Marijuana (MJ) Dispensary delay Dear Commissioners, I and a cadre of other of your Collier County constituents applaud your board's collective action today in extending the moratorium on MJ dispensary approval in Collier County. We, like you, believe that the state legislation enacted in last year's legislative session dealing with this issue was flawed in multiple ways. First, the law virtually eliminates any home rule on the subject of number and location of dispensaries. Second, it appears to create more problems than it solves, i.e. controlling the number of dispensaries allowed within jurisdictional regions which include multiple counties, but no direction as to the distribution of those facilities within those individual counties (cities). Third, the law does not speak to alternative means of distribution of product, such as home delivery.There is a group of individuals interested in this issue that offer our assistance and input on how the state law can be improved, and we are willing to present our thoughts to our local state legislative delegation, as we are sure Collier County intends to do. There is a group of individuals interested in this issue that offer our assistance and input on how the state law can be improved, and we are willing to present our thoughts to our local state legislative delegation, as we are sure Collier County intends to do. To that end, it would seem most effective if we are able to agree on and promote a mutual line of thought when approaching state legislators. Certainly, it would seem most effective if Collier County were to take the lead in such effort, and if invited we are eager to participate in those discussions. Please advise how such a collective effort can best be initiated. Most Sincerely, Bill Barton Email copies: Guy Blanchette, Drug Free Collier Ana Dimercurio Lisa Gruenloh Beth Jones, CCSO Susan Kimper Veora Little Allen Weiss, NCH Pat Barton 2 GoodnerAngela Subject: Rich Yovanovich, Francesca Passidomo, David Genson from Barron Collier, re: medical marijuana moratorium Location: BCC Office Start: Fri 10/13/2017 2:00 PM End: Fri 10/13/2017 2:30 PM Recurrence: (none) Meeting Status: Meeting organizer Organizer: SolisAndy Required Attendees: Andrew I. Solis (ASolis@cohenlaw.com) Categories: Commission Chambers Good morning, Rich, along with David Genson from Barron Collier, would like to meet with the Commissioner to discuss the cannabis moratorium. Available dates: Wednesday October 11th from 3:00-5:00 Thursday October 12th 11:30—3:00 Friday October 13th 9:00, 1:00—5:00 Monday October 16th 9:00—3:00 Thank you. Dianna Quintanilla CYK Legal Assistant to Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34103 P: 239.435.35351 F: 239.435.1218 C O( MA N YOVANOV1CH KOESTER douintanillaAcyklawfirm.corn Visit cvklawfirm.com to learn more about us. 1 .1a s 5,rir`0 Trusted & Verified • Both Dianna Quintanilla and Coleman,Yovanovich&Koester,P.A.,intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This message may contain information that is privileged,confidential,and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,please notify Leanne Formosa immediately at dquintanilla@cyklawfirm.corn or call(239)435-3535,and permanently dispose of the original message. 1 2 GoodnerAngela Subject: Dr. Allen Weiss, NCH &Veora Little, Drug Free Collier Location: BCC Office, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Start: Fri 7/7/2017 11:15 AM End: Fri 7/7/2017 11:45 AM Recurrence: (none) Meeting Status: Meeting organizer Organizer: SolisAndy Required Attendees: Andrew I. Solis (ASolis@cohenlaw.com) Categories: Commission Chambers Re: proposed marijuana ban (on 7/11 agenda) 1 tasimmi 400, i rnr. r aftik [ MARIJUANA" 7.41. „oft. The Myth of "Medical Marijuana" First published 201E In the United States, medications must be FDA-approved. Marijuana is not. More than a dozen states and the District of Columbia have legalized the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes, but under federal law, marijuana remains illegal. So—is marijuana medicine?The short answer is NO. However, some of the chemicals found in marijuana have been developed into medications, and 47. more medications may be on the way. ,� ' fx*ct. To understand why marijuana is not medicine, it helps to know how medications fi . are approved in the United States. - The FDA Testing Process All medicines in the United States must be approved by the Food and Drug ' ,. , 114111.11111114111.11111 Administration (FDA). The FDA is the government agency that is responsible for _ making sure that medications are safe and effective AND that their likely benefits are greater than any possible harmful effects. This requires careful scientific testing. If a drug doesn't meet FDA standards, it will not be approved and cannot be prescribed or sold as medicine in the United States. Why isn't Marijuana an FDA-Approved Medication? Marijuana comes from the plant Cannabis sativa. it contains more than 400 different chemicals—many with unknown effects—which differ from plant to plant. For something to be a medicine, it must have well-defined and measurable ingredients that are the same each time a person takes a dose. That means one pill has to have the same amount of medicine as the next. This way, a doctor can determine what dose to prescribe and how often a patient should take it. Also, marijuana has harmful effects, especially when it is smoked, that must be considered. Smoking marijuana can cause a chronic cough and increased risk o bronchitis and other lung infections. it can also interfere with learning and memory, affect driving (especially if combined with alcohol), make some people anxious and paranoid, and can lead to addiction. Why Do Some People and States Consider Marijuana to Be Medicine? Some of the ingredients in marijuana, such as THC (delta-9•tetrahydrocannabinot), have medicinal effects. And some people get relief from symptoms of their illnesses by smoking marijuana. However, There is no such using marijuana as medicine does not make it medicine. It has not gone through the FDA approval `: thing as "medical- process to show that its benefits outweigh its risks. grade marijuana." The marijuana sold as"medicine"in FDA-Approved Medications Made From THC dispensaries is the Although marijuana is not medicine, there are some medications that do contain THC. Marinol® is same as marijuana synthetic (i.e., human-made)THC made into a pill. It is FDA-approved to relieve nausea and vomiting I sold on the street in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. It is also used to reverse severe weight loss in patients 1 and carries the same with AIDS. health risks. Another medication, Sativex®, is a mouth spray made from a combination of two ingredients from the marijuana plant (THC and cannabidiol). Sativex®has been approved in Canada and the United Kingdom to relieve cancer pain and symptoms of multiple sclerosis and is currently going through FDA testing in the United States. New medications that act on the cannabinoid system (where the THC in marijuana acts)are being developed to treat a variety of symptoms, but with fewer side effects than smoked marijuana. Read "The Science of Marijuana(/articles/the•science-of- marijuana/)" to learn more about THC and the cannabinoid system. Almost everyone has used a prescription medication to help treat or cute an illness.In fact.about 4 billion prescriptions were filled in the United Stales in 2010.Few people.however.know that r it can take more than 15 years and as much as$2 billion for a new drug to go from the research fah to a patient's medicine cabinet.So what's the path front testing to approval? L I • 1 A Drag that �-- GOA qty.-4 its at;proval. rs m,ufe.n a Wttcrata•or a thee the rid casteit e.tratted Irani a plant „,./;:',' t f ,,fit cal be m 1 ieled un alogots a%erica ul testi It ,,,,,,,,i) irittyt and physic/.rs<.+n to had'it!now d*trim ��1 i It/1177 ' t%1'1 r'I Cs c d ty »acre it ails in the twthi, o /,_ I 42,4 to patients wteihtr d Is tat 4'(harntfuti. If • and how tong it iClrCs for the - 4r 7 '5 holy to brral it down „"€ ' ` 8 ' 01111- ih•S warn un three p"+ttre. 1 arA •PHA S£i:the dtuq is tested,n , 20 to 100 ftrailhl.People 1'a t.t+d t out how d affects hurnvn rt it's T e Jn:y ttr.+naaq � sa'r aril at what dosesthensabmits its e .PHASE 2:How Itdint;.s done test res.,-0ts(torn t'-„ but in teverat iwndred peap'e none 01.cai tests and JJ Based on the druq`s w+th the specdi:disease or three phases of ch.,:t: safety and other condi!,on that the drug is tot:•ot test"to the t PA r nf°oration obtained to treat.This is to lind cut 4 the Stud esmust short front rend mien drug is sate and effective,and al the drug+t s de and itstusu inn r nA -,. mhat lancet that ds bine! S ., mar grant ft •PHASE 3:Testing it dose nt thni..gh is h•i;t. {Mem S}+Oa fcr ' i ra:trundled to several Ise f r•at C+rhe the dtuq 10 ! J/ thousand people Adh the Stsccil C 1pptovca / be tested+n irh'`Ziy� Jrease or umthhon HT tlmy n I h mans. '�t({� �7 .rteoded to treat ft,=.it to p•a.t• I1 II 7{t'' yN'J" the drug has the'n!enaed effect. *T���"" ants to MAMA it it Itos t-dr e'fe:tt that would+Tse its i.,e.. For additional facts about marijuana and other drugs, visit teens.drugabuse.gov (http://teens.drugabuse.gov). Important Resources • For immediate help with a crisis, call 1-800-273-TALK. • To locate a treatment center, call 1-800-662-HELP or visit http://findtreatment.samhsa.gov (http://findtreatment.samhsa.gov). : , J t iStockphoto Printables Download a print copy of: NIDA10-INS3_Stu Mag.pdf(http://headsup.scholastic.com/sites/default/files/block/images/NIDA10-INS3_Stu%20Mag.pdf) EFFECTS OF MARIJUANA Marijuana's Effects on the Brain • Learning and memory.The hippocampus plays a critical - role in certain types of learning.Disrupting its normaly functioning can lead to problems studying,learning new /` k �it,, things, and recalling recent events.A recent study z - i,� "` �K< ,, followed people from age 13 to 38 and found that those 0't , who used marijuana a lot in their teens had up to an 8 f. tom . r point drop in IQ. Coordination.THC affects the cerebellum,the area of our brain that controls balance and coordination.These effects can influence performance in such activities as sports,driving,and video games. • Judgment.Since THC affects areas of the frontal cortex involved in decision making, using it can cause you to do things you might not do when you are not under the Effects on influence of drugs. Marijuana's E School and Social Life • Reduced school performance.The effects of marijuana on attention,memory,and learning can last for days or ` weeks.These effects have a negative impact on learning t and motivation. • impaired driving. Marijuana affects a number of skills required for safe driving—alertness,concentration, 4. coordination,and reaction time. Marijuana makes it hard • ,, ` to judge distances and react to signals and sounds on L, 4 +- is . the road. High school seniors who smoke marijuana are 2 iC"Te/ = , z times more likely to receive a traffic ticket and 65%more �, ; f , { " likely to get into an accident than those who don't aP. . smoke. „-" x -- • Potential gateway to other drugs.Those who use tY ,.rte;.:".7,4,E.1..44 marijuana,alcohol,or tobacco during their teen years are ' „ x more likely to use other illegal drugs. Exposure to K' ° �'tt:S " .- addictive substances,including marijuana, may cause changes to the developing brain that make other drugs more appealing. as .,,: ` COALITION yr"F': FOR A DRUG-FREE �: .. .. Marijuana Prevention in Teenagers 11.7%of high school students in Lee County drove a vehicle a er smoking marijuana in the past 30 days and 26%have ridden in a car with a driver under the influence of marijuana in the past 30 days Delta - 9 Tetrahydrocannabinol(THC) is the main chemical component of marijuana.THC affects - 33.6%of high school students have used marijuana in one's thinking, memory, problem solving skills, their life me,and 20.7%have used it in the past 30 days coordination, and perception. • According to research,smoking marijuana can lead to anxiety,panic attacks,depression,paranoia,and suicidal thoughts • Teens who frequently smoke marijuana are 4 times more likely to commit a violent act and 5 times more likely to Short Term effects of Marijuana use: steal • Increased appetite Research shows that when people who regularly use • Light headedness marijuana try to quit,they have withdrawal symptoms including cravings,decreased appetite,nervousness, • Drowsiness irritability,stomach pain,aggression,anxiety • Decrease of inhibitions(common with Marijuana smoke deposits 4 times more tar in the lungs alcohol use as well) and contains 50-70%more cancer causing substances than tobacco smoke • Much of the marijuana marketing done today is aimed at high school students • In Lee County,marijuana can be easily accessed through Long Term effects of Marijuana use: family and friends or is easy to find to purchase • Inability to remember things, multitask,and • In Lee County from 2010 to 2013,arrest charges for pay attention marijuana use have increased by 11% • Fertility issues such as decreased sperm count in men; delayed ovulation in women • During the 2013-2014 school year,25 middle school students in Lee County were arrested for marijuana • May develop respiratory issues(similar to possession at school smoking tobacco)such as mucus build up k The National Institute on Drug Abuse(NIDA)reports that in the lungs,coughing,and bronchitis marijuana affects the part of the brain responsible for • Decrease in the immune system ability to memory,learning,a en on,and reaction time fight off infection According to Opera on Par,the local methadone clinic, 99%of its clients who use marijuana say they began • Increase in depression and anxiety using it as a teenager,many with their parents If you need information on treatment and where you can find it, please visit www.drugfreeswfl.o rg The Doctor Is In:The opioid epidemic: The risks of painkillers far outweighs the benefits Page 1 of 1 The Doctor Is In: The opioid epidemic: The risks of painkillers far outweighs the benefits Allen Weiss,Citizen Contributor Published 12:54 p.m.ET July 6,2016 I Updated 12:54 p.m.ET July 6,2016 The statistics are proof that the country is experiencing an opioid epidemic. •Deaths from prescription-opioid overdoses have quadrupled over the past 15 years. •An estimated 19,000 are dying yearly from narcotic painkillers including hydrocodone,oxycodone,morphine and fentanyl. •Deaths occur across all age groups,socio-economic status and ethnicities. Sadly,opioid abuse is not a new or novel problem.Opioid use for pain management has swung back and forth several times over the past 100 years, with many famous physicians becoming'hooked'or seduced by the addictive properties. There is no other class of medications routinely used for nonfatal conditions that has the potential to kill patients so frequently.One of every 550 patients started on an opioid therapy dies of an opioid-related cause a median of 2.6 years later.The statistics are dose-related and worsen with higher doses. The prevalence of opioid dependence may be as high as 26 percent among patients in primary care receiving opioids for chronic non-cancer-related pain,according to a recent New England Journal of Medicine Perspective.Mental illness patients are at higher risk,but otherwise risk is not predictable. The effect of opioid abuse on the brain and body depends on specific receptors in the brain,spine and other organs in the body.The opioids attach to these receptors and reduce the perception of pain and create a false sense of well-being known as euphoria.However,this class of medications also produces drowsiness,mental confusion,nausea,constipation and other undesirable side effects. The euphoric effects combined with the addictive properties,which mean larger and larger doses to obtain the same results,exacerbates the opioid epidemic we are now experiencing.Patients who are already on opioids are less likely to have good pain control in general.Studies of postmenopausal women with recurrent pain conditions who are on opioids are less likely to have an improvement in pain and have worsening function,presumably due to potentiated pain perception. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention(CDC)has shared three key principles which underline 12 recommendations for using opiods for chronic pain.It can be viewed online at www.cdc.govimediafdpk/2016ldpk-opioid-prescription-guidelines.html. First and foremost,physicians should avoid prescribing narcotics whenever possible except for palliative or end-of-life care.Non-opioid therapy for acute or chronic pain—such as exercise therapy,weight loss,psychological therapies such as cognitive behavioral therapy,nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs,and antidepressants—can all be effective and are much safer. Second,when opioids are used,the lowest possible dose for the shortest time with limited number of pills prescribed is best for all concerned.'Start low and go slow'will avoid problems and save lives. Third,what should be foremost on the minds of both physicians and patients is very close monitoring of patients with a plan to withdraw or at least lower the dose of narcotics while substituting non-addictive therapies. Management of chronic pain is an art and science.For most patients,the serious and too-often-fatal risks of opioids outweigh the benefits. Allen Weiss,MD,MBA,FACP,FACR,is the president and CEO of the NCH Healthcare System. Read or Share this story:http://nplsne.ws/29yzHzl http://www.napiesnews.com/story/news/local/communities/coli i er-citizen/2616/07/06/the-doctor-is-in-the-opioid-epidem ic-the-ri... 7/7/2017 The Doctor Is In:As Florida reconsiders medical marijuana,reflect on Colorado's experience with po Page 1 of 2 The Doctor Is in: As Florida reconsiders medical marijuana, reflect on Colorado's experience with po Allen Weiss,Citizen Contributor Published 12:00 a.m.ET May 5,20161 Updated 12:00 a.m.ET May 5,2016 A proposed constitutional amendment to allow medical use of marijuana in Florida will be back on the ballot in November.A similar measure narrowly failed in 2014.With that in mind,I thought it would be instructive to look at Colorado's experience with marijuana. Physicians,as sources of credible public health information,have a responsibility to share both potential risks and unexpected consequences of legalization of marijuana. Marijuana has had a complex effect on the health of the citizens of Colorado,according to a recent article in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Colorado's state constitution was amended in 2000 to allow the use of medical marijuana by patients with'chronic debilitating medical conditions.' Federal law in place at the same time prohibited the possession or distribution of marijuana until 2009.With the liberalization of the federal laws and the lucrative financial incentives associated with medical marijuana,the number of licensed sellers increased from under 5,000 in 2008 to more than 115,000 in 2014. In November 2012,Colorado's state constitution allowed for the use of recreational marijuana and opened a floodgate of activity.Two classes of sellers were created—medical and retail.Medical sellers have no minimum age for consumers and are restricted to residents of Colorado.Retail sellers can sell to anyone from anywhere over the age of 21. In November 2014,there were 497 medical marijuana dispensaries and 292 retail outlets in Colorado. The easy access to marijuana has led to exacerbations of chronic health conditions,particularly mental health disease.It is difficult to fully quantify the worsening of psychosis,anxiety,depression and other mental health diseases,but easy access to marijuana and other narcotics makes a bad condition worse.Without question,the combination of marijuana plus alcohol increases the risk of motor vehicle accidents more than either substance used alone. Emergency room treatment for marijuana intoxication was rare in Colorado until the laws changed.Now patients appear in emergency departments with anxiety,panic attacks,public intoxication,vomiting and other symptoms of marijuana use. Safer medications are already on the market for all medical uses for marijuana.Ameliorating the side effects of cancer and chemotherapy can be accomplished without medical marijuana.The same is true for glaucoma and seizure disorders. But the financial rewards for marijuana purveyors are astounding,which I'm sure contributes to their tenacity. The unforeseen harm with the increased production and distribution of marijuana includes burns,cyclic vomiting syndrome and potential overdoses by ingesting marijuana in edible forms. The extraction of the active ingredient THC in marijuana(tetrahydrocannabinol)uses butane as a solvent,and many purveyors have experienced significant flash burns.Cyclic vomiting syndrome—which presents with severe abdominal pain,vomiting and unusual sweating*is now also more prevalent. Smoked marijuana reaches a peak between 30 and 90 minutes,whereas the edible form peaks at 3 hours.This delayed effect from the oral form can seduce a user into ingesting additional amounts due to the delayed reaction—and thus can lead to an overdose. One of the worst unforseen negative outcomes is children inadvertently ingesting edible THC in the form of cookies,candy(gummy bears)or baked goods. Overdosing,widespread distribution,impairment of cognitive function,addictive potential,loss of self-control and worsening of mental illness are all negative influences of marijuana. The only reason that I see that medical or recreational marijuana is being pushed by a small group is for financial gain,which can be huge for the producers,sellers and distributors. Let's stay informed as the election approaches and as we consider the welfare of our entire community. Allen Weiss,MD,MBA,FACP,FACR,is the president and CEO of the NCH Healthcare System. http://www.naplesnews.com/story/news/local/comm unities/col l i er-citizen/2016/05/05/the-doctor-i s-in-as-florida-reconsiders-me... 7/7/2017 Canadian Centre • • on Substance Use and Addiction • Evidence.Engagement.Impact. Report at a Glance Collisions i• • Estimating the • Harmss in the CanadianProvindes After alcohol,cannabis is the most widely used psychoactive substance in Canada and cannabinoids are among the most common psychoactive Psychoactive Substances substances found in dead and injured drivers in Canada (Beasley& Psychoactive substances Beirness,2011; Brubacher et al., 2016). In 2012,approximately 10%of are substances that Canadians aged 15 and older used cannabis and just under half of those change brain function reported driving within two hours of using it(Health Canada,2012). and result in changes in However,there remains a lot that we don't know about the extent and how people who take costs associated with driving under the influence of cannabis (DUIC).As them think and feel. Canada is poised to introduce legislation to regulate cannabis,conversations on the harms related to cannabis and driving are becoming increasingly relevant. Purpose This study, "Estimating the Harms and Costs of Cannabis-Attributable Collisions in the Canadian Provinces," is one of the first in Canada to address knowledge gaps about the costs associated with DUIC. Led by CCSA,the study was produced by Ashley Wettlaufer, Roxana 0. Florida, Mark Asbridge, Douglas Beirness,Jeffrey Brubacher, Russell Callaghan, Benedikt Fischer,Gerrit Gmel,Sameer Imtiaz, Robert E. Mann,Anna McKiernan and Jürgen Rehm. It estimates: • The number of people in each province who were killed or injured in a motor vehicle collision (MVC) in which a driver was DUIC, or involved in a property-damage-only(PDO)crash in which one of the drivers was DUIC; and • The total economic and social costs associated with collisions in which cannabis use was involved. The study results will help to inform policies and practices aimed at reducing harms related to DUIC. Description of the Study Roadside Surveys To achieve these goals,data were collected from national self-report To determine the pre- surveys and roadside surveys.The data were used to estimate the valence of driving under prevalence of DUIC by age and province. the influence of drugs, researchers collect The number of people involved in fatal, injury-only or PDO collisions due to voluntary breath and oral cannabis use was estimated using this prevalence data in combination fluid samples from a with information on the risk of a MVC as the result of DUIC.Overall costs random sample of drivers. were determined by applying cost values developed using Ontario data to They test the samples for the number of collisions estimated to have been the result of DUIC. the presence of cannabis and other drugs. . Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction •Centre canadien sur les dependances et l'usage de substances Page 1 ft_ Collisions Attributable to Cannabis:Estimating the Harms and Costs In the Canadian Provinces Key Findings Collisions resulting in fatalities, injuries and property damage were especially high among those aged 16-34: • 16-34 year olds represented only 32%of the Canadian population, but 61%of the cannabis- attributable fatalities; • 16-34 year olds also disproportionately represented 59%of the cannabis-attributable injuries and 68%of the people involved in cannabis-attributable PDO collisions; • Those 34 years old and younger accounted for approximately$658 million (60%)of the total costs attributable to MVCs related to DUIC. The highest costs were associated with fatalities, accounting for more than 58%of the costs.While less than the costs related to fatalities, injury costs and costs related to PDO collisions were also significant. Table 1:Estimates of the number of victims and associated costs of cannabis related collisions for 2012 Deaths,Injuries and Cost per Incident($) PDO victims(n-) Death 75 8,532,200 Injury 4,407 84,600 PDO 7,794 10,700 Estimated cumulative cost$1.09 billion* *Due to rounding this number will not reflect the same number as adding up all the incidents and associated costs. Limitations Costs and harms are likely higher than estimated for the following reasons: • Minor cannabis-related collisions(those resulting in injury not requiring medical attention or in property damage under$1,000)were not included in the analysis. • Only collisions reported to police or requiring admission to hospital were included. • Findings did not account for the dose-dependent effects of cannabis and therefore did not account for the possibly increased risk of MVC when higher concentrations of cannabis are present in the body. Data Limitations • The data used were from a single year(2012),so they do not reflect trends in cannabis use, DUIC or relevant policy and enforcement practices over time. • There is limited data on the provincial prevalence of cannabis use and DUIC, and costs and estimates of DUIC were based on the data that was available. Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction •Centre canadien sur les dependences et l'usage de substances Page 2 • • {• Collisions Attributable to Cannabis:Estimating the Harms and Costs In the Canadian Provinces Implications Cannabis impairs the skills needed to safely operate a motor vehicle(Beirness& Porath-Waller, 2015)and has clear impacts on collision risk. However, many people who use cannabis believe it is safe to drive under its influence.As the Canadian government moves to regulating cannabis, it should consider the harms and cost of cannabis-related collisions Policy • This study can serve as a benchmark estimate of the harms and costs associated with DUIC across the provinces prior to the legalization of cannabis in Canada. • Per se laws specify that it is an offence to operate a vehicle with a concentration of drugs in the body in excess of a specified threshold value. Canada could consider a per se law for cannabis use as legislation is developed to legalize it for non-medical purposes. Research • This study fills the gap for baseline data on the social and economic cost of DUIC; however, jurisdictional roadside data would help refine these estimates. • To conduct future research, cost-estimate data at the jurisdictional level should be more widely available. Prevention • Findings from this study show the highest rates of MVC due to DUIC are among those aged 16- 34, which underlines the need for prevention campaigns targeting this age group. • Prevention efforts should highlight the effects that cannabis has on the body and the brain,and the risk of driving after using. To Learn More Access the full report, published in the peer-reviewed journal, Drug and Alcohol Dependence. Find related reports on the Drug-Impaired Driving page of the Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction website, including the following reports: • Oral Fluid Drug Screening(Policy Brief) • Drug Per Se Laws (Policy Brief) • Drug-Impaired Driving Toolkit Use the Information Request page to ask to be added to our distribution list.Join the conversation online to help create a healthier society,free of the harms of substance use, by following @CCSACanada. ISBN 978-1-77178-397-2 ©Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction 2017 CCSA was created by Parliament to provide national leadership to address substance use in Canadian Centre Canada.A trusted counsel,we provide national guidance to decision makers by harnessing the power of research,curating knowledge and bringing together diverse perspectives. • on Substance Use Oand Addiction CCSA activities and products are made possible through a financial contribution from Health • Canada.The views of CCSA do not necessarily represent the views of the Government of Canada. Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction •Centre canadien sur les dependences et l'usage de substances Page 3 v• Collisions Attributable to Cannabis:Estimating the Harms and Coats In the Canadian Provinces kietereoPCOS Beasley, E.E., & Beirness, D.J. (2011). Drug use by fatally injured drivers in Canada (2000- 2008). Ottawa, Ont.: Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction. Beirness, D.,& Porath-Waller,A. (2015). Clearing the smoke on cannabis:cannabis use and driving—An update. Ottawa, Ont.: Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction. Brubacher,J.R., Chan, H., Martz,W., Schreiber,W.,Asbridge, M., Eppler,J. ... Brant, R.F. (2016). Prevalence of alcohol and drug use in injured British Columbia drivers. BMJ Open, 6(3), e009278. Health Canada. (2012). Canadian Alcohol and Drug Use Monitoring Survey(CADUMS). Ottawa, Ont.:Author. Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction •Centre canadien sur les dependances et 1'usage de substances Page 4 GoodnerAngela Subject: Bill Barton, Veora Little, Lt.John Pulling of CCSO: Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Location: Orange Blossom Start: Fri 12/1/2017 10:00 AM End: Fri 12/1/2017 10:15 AM Recurrence: (none) Meeting Status: Meeting organizer Organizer: SolisAndy Required Attendees: Andrew I. Solis (ASolis@cohenlaw.com) - Confirmed location 11/29/17 - Left message 11/17/17 re: rescheduling this meeting - 641-7941 1 Commissioner Andy Solis, Esq. Scanned Records Cover Sheet Date Material Received: \ 1 Received From: o ---k 1asJ0 VJ 1 • cod \'Or Description: CrV1Med --1)\ 90vv.ccir - S r`*s COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE '; LIEUTENANT JOHN POLING William L. "Bill" Barton,P.E. sl ! J ' 106 Moorings Park Drive t,r + ti ORGANIZED CRIME DIVISION C-203 VICE&NARCOTICS BUREAU Naples,FL 3,4.4-0'2 34 t 05 CANINE UNIT 3319 Tamiami Trail E.,Naples,FL 34112 office 239-252-0443 cell 239-253-4895 239-641-7941 0882@colliersheriff.org wlbarton39@gmail.com www.colliersheriff.org COMMUNITY•SAFETY•SERVICE Thoughts on Medical Marijuana(MJ) Dispensaries in Collier County, FL Bill Barton November, 2017 Background: The FL Constitutional Amendment authorizing the distribution and use of MJ for specific medical conditions does not specify a means of delivery to patients. Subsequent state law provides for the creation of a limited number(12) "Distribution Centers" located throughout the state, for the creation of MJ Dispensaries located within the various counties (number indeterminate),and for mobile delivery of product by either Distribution Centers or Dispensaries. Distribution by any of these means require that the patient be properly registered in the FL Marijuana Use Registry. Question 1: What is the likely number of registered patients to be in Collier County? Attached is current (2017) data provided by the Marijuana Policy Project on number of patients vs.total population in the various states that allow medical MJ. On page 3 of the attachment we find that total registered patients in all states listed =2,354,403, and those states have a total population of 195,792,284. That yields an average of 1.2% of total population. Collier County currently has a population of approximately 360,000 yielding a likely MJ patient population of(0.012 X 360,000) of 4,400+/-. Question 2: What is the likely number of walk-inpatients that will use dispensaries? Although there is not available reliable collected data, it is generally accepted that approximately 50%of MJ patients are too ill to drive or walk any meaningful distance. As a result, only approximately 2,200 patients will physically enter a MJ dispensary. The remaining 2,200 patients will require the product to be delivered by some 3rd party means from either a dispensary or a Distribution Center. Question 3: If Dispensaries are allowed in Collier County,what total number will be permitted? State law appears confusing on the question, but the likely allowable number is 7-8. Question 4: What is the likelihood of 7-8 MJ dispensaries in Collier County being financially viable with only a total of 4,400 users? It is likely that some (1/2) of the 2,200 users unable to visit Dispensaries will choose to use other sources for their delivery, resulting in 3,300 Dispensary users. if we use 7 Dispensaries and presume users are evenly distributed, then each Dispensary would serve approximately 470 consumers. This simply is not sufficient demand to provide profitability for the Dispensaries. The concern then is,what will some Dispensaries resort to,to increase revenue: lax control of State Registration? Back door sales? Etc. Question 5: If dispensaries are banned in Collier County, how will patients be able to acquire product? MJ medical products are already being delivered to Collier County. It has been verified that Curaleaf Florida (.ww.curaleat.c ) currently delivers product to Collier County from their operations in Dade County, and plan to continue to make deliveries to ColliOr County as registered patients request product. There is little question that when/if a Distribution Center is authorized in either Collier of Lee County, or when Dispensaries are opened in Lee County, that there will be multiple delivery options available to Collier County patients. Reasonable assumptions to ponder: 1. If Collier County's total likely MJ users is only 4,400 in 2017, and, 2. If approximately 50% of those users will require delivery of some means, and, 3. If the total number of users are unlikely to provide sufficient cash flow to allow the statutorily allowed number of Dispensaries to be financially viable, and, 4. If there already exists a reliable delivery system in Collier County (Curaleaf), with others likely to become available, then; Is there meaningful reason to allow Dispensaries in Collier County at this time? Would it not be in the best interest of Collier County and potential patients to continue the ban for an additional year to determine if the existing and any new delivery systems provide adequate product delivery? Other prominent Collier County citizens supporting this position: Allen Weiss NCH Susan Kimper NCH Beth Jones Collier County S erriff's office Guy Blanchette Drug Free Collie Lisa Gruenloh Drug Free Collie Veora Little Nurse Anesthetibt (Retired) Ana DiMarco Pat Barton Drug Watch lnt:rnational 11/7)2017 Medical Marijuana Patient Numbers-MPP Marijua a Policy Project 1V Cha ge Laws (Https://W weMpp. rg) NivY,u (https_ r' "'" r:;t'nakt-91rmiiii. awititiYi sO ) About Us Policy " E issues — Newsroom " y Take Action Support „ Search... Q Medical Marijuana Patient umbers (https://www.mpp.org/) » (https://w w.mpp.org/issues/) (https://www_mpp.orglssues/medical-marijuana/1 » (https://www_mpp.org/issues/medical-marijuana -tate-by-state-medical-marijuana-laws/) » Medical Marijuana Patient Numbers State Population P. lent Current Percent of the State population who 2016 umbers Through are patients Alaska 741,204 1042 2/28/17 0.14% Arizona 7,026,629 a 2,487 8/7/17 1.89% Arkansas3 3,000,942 of open California' 39,849,872 ,526,250 est h17 3. 83% Colorado2 5,658,546 :6.8 1 8/7/17 1.53% Connecticut 3,583,134 '9,0 2 9/6/17 0.53% https//www_mpp.orglissues/medical-marijuana/state-by-state-medical-marl ana-lrs/medical-marijuana-patient-numbers/ 1/4 11812017 Medical Mariju na P.tient Numbers-MPP D.C. 697,012 5, 72 8/1/17 0.77% Delaware 965,866 3,192 8/11/17 0.32% Florida 21,002,678 N. op:n Hawaii 1,454,295 1",334 2/24/17 1.05% Illinois 12,815,607 2 ,300 8/2/17 0.18% Maine 1,327,472 4 ,908, 8/10/17 3.31% Maryland3 6,068,511 N•t op-n Massachusetts 6,873,018 31,18• 2/24/17 0.50% Michigan 9,935,116 2 8,5"6 2/24/17 2.20% 1 Minnesota 5,554,532 6,:84 8/3/17 0.12% Montana 1,052,343 1',56 5/30/17 1.48% Nevada 2,995,973 28,30: 5/10/17 0.95% New Hampshire 1,335,832 2,189 2/24/17 0.16% New jersey 8.996,351 1 ,51- 2/24/17 0.14% 1 New Mexico 2,084,193 . :,40 : 6/30/17 2.13% New York 19,889,657 2..09. 8/3/17 0.13% North Dakota3 757,952 Net o.en Ohio3 11,646,273 .at o„en Oregon 4,144,527 6r,86 r 7131/17 1.49% hfnc-/Iwww mnn.nra issues!medical-marijuana/state-by-state-medical-marij ana-l.ws/medical-marijuana-patient-numbers! 2/4 11/7/2017 Medical Marijuana P:tient Numbers-MPP Pennsylvania3 12,819,975 N• op:n Rhode Island 1,059,080 18 155 8/8/17 1.71% Vermont 624,592 4,439 6/28/17 0.71% Washington4 7,384,721 2 .577 8/7/17 0.33% West Virginia2 1,831,102 N•top n Total population in all medical marijuana 195,792,284 states - .Z o, M(..) 11-1. - 5 -�,k� At� . = Estimate of all state-legal patients 2, 54, 03 'This is a rough estimate based on Maine's numbers. ' her"• is a registry, but only a small fraction of California patients are registered. 2 Many families have migrated to Colorado so that pa dent: would be allowed to use medical marijuana, which increases the per capita number of patients. 3 Registry is not open yet. 4 Washington has a brand new patient registry.The fi st cloy for registrations was July 1, 2016. Last updated:August 15,2017 I i (HTTPS://TWITTER.COM/INTEFf/7 3:1/REDDITILI f .U:4 (T.c.r(U(T( V t1M 'tr l'KVINE i( 1FIGEIMIAI1I I https://www_mpp.org/issues/medical-marijuana/state-by-state-medical-mariju.na-la s/medical-marijuana-patient-numbers/ 3/4 GoodnerAngela From: Ellen Fiedler <ellenlahm@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 8:02 AM To: GoodnerAngela Subject: Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Dear Commissioner Solis, Please vote yes for dispensaries in Collier County. As long as we allow opioids to be dispensed on every corner, i.e. CVS, Walgreens, etc., and at every Publix and Walmart,there is no reason a Medical Marijuana patient should have to go out of County, and miles away from their home,to obtain the medication that will relieve their pain. We voted for this in November, and I expect you will honor our vote today. Doing otherwise, is against the will of the people you represent, and we will not forget come re-election. Sincerely, Ruth Fiedler 522 Charlemagne Blvd. Naples, FL 34112 Sent from my iPad Sent from my iPad 1 SUMTER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SUBJECT: Final Public Hearing for the Consideration of Ordinance Adopting Section 13-653 of the Sumter County Land Development Code Related to Medical Cannabis Dispensaries. REQUESTED ACTION: Staff Recommends Approval Meeting Type: Select Meeting. Type DATE OF MEETING: 1/10/2017 CONTRACT: © N/A Vendor/Entity: Effective Date: Termination Date: Managing Division /Dept: Choose a division/department. BUDGET IMPACT: FUNDING SOURCE: Type: Select EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT: impact type HISTORY/FACTS/ISSUES: Approval of 2016 Constitutional Amendment 2 by the voters of the State of Florida in November expanded upon the medical use of cannabis (marijuana)which had been previously approved by the Florida Legislature through the Compassionate Care Act of 2014. This expanded use will likely result in an increased number of requests to establish medical cannabis dispensaries. The proposed ordinance regulates the number and location of such facilities and provides for a process for review and approval of dispensaries and their locations. Significant features of the proposed ordinance include: 1)Regulation of the number of allowable cannabis dispensaries by reference to total County population, providing for an increased number of facilities as the County grows 2)Restriction of facilities to specific commercial and industrial zoning districts 3) Operational requirements for security and accountability 4)Inspection and renewal provisions for approved facilities Prepared by: Karl Holley Grammarly Check Ordinance 17-01 Approved with change of language regarding distance (from 250 ft to APPROVED 1000 ft; see page 12 of ordinance). January 10 2017 Page 1 of 1